LAFRAGUA 18-5º PISO
MEXICO 1, D. F.

ERICH KOENIG

December 8, 1976

566-11-77
5 LINEAS

THE HONORABLE MR. HENRY A. KISSINGER,
SECRETARY OF STATE
DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20520

Dear Mr. Secretary:

It was indeed a great pleasure for my wife and I to have had the opportunity of meeting you and Mrs. Kissinger at the dinner given by President Miguel Alemán, during your recent visit to Mexico City. I hope you will recall, that that evening we discussed our dear and departed friend, Taft Schreiber. Taft and Rita spoke of you so often and with such deep affection that we honestly felt that we knew you before we ever had the opportunity of actually meeting you. My wife, Della, also spoke to you about the admiration our young son, Bernard has for you. He is a Junior at Harvard University and is majoring in Economics, and needless to say, you have been his idol for many years.

We are delighted that you have a great affection for Mexico and of course our divine Acapulco. It would indeed be a joy to have you and Mrs. Kissinger as our house guests in our Acapulco villa. You will recall I mentioned to you that we are located above the Yacht Club on the second highest hill in Acapulco proper. The villa on the highest hill was formerly the Jenkins property and now belongs to the Alarcón family. How lovely it would be if you could perhaps get away for a few days during the holidays. In any case, we plan to spend most of the winter there and you will always be more than welcome. Our telephone number in Acapulco is 220-31, and our address is Casa de la Cima, Avenida de la Cima No. 9, Acapulco, Gro. Our home address in Mexico City is Paseo de la Reforma 1675, Lomas de Chapultepec, México 10, D. F., and the telephone number is - 540-33-45.

In closing, may I express the hope that this letter finds you, Mrs. Kissinger and your entire family enjoying the best of health. My wife joins me in sending you and Mrs. Kissinger our warmest, personal regards. I am,

53 Bonn, Konrad-Adenauer-Haus, Telefon (0 22 21) 20 21, Fernschreiber 886 804

DER VORSITZENDE

8. März 1974

Mr. Secretary of State
Professor Dr. Henry Kissinger
Department of State

2201 C Street N.W.
Washington D.C. 20520

Sehr geehrter Herr Prof. Kissinger,

ich darf mich bei Ihnen noch einmal für das offene und anregende Gespräch bedanken, das ich mit Ihnen in Washington führen konnte.

Da die Probleme zwischen den Vereinigten Staaten und Europa nicht nur zunehmen, sondern auch immer komplexer werden, halte ich solche Gespräche nicht nur für nützlich, sondern sogar für notwendig. Nur wenn sich auch in Zukunft alle relevanten politischen Kräfte unserer Länder gemeinsam um die Probleme bemühen, werden wir sie lösen können.

Ich würde mich deshalb freuen, wenn wir das Gespräch bei gegebener Gegenheit fortsetzen könnten und darf meine Einladung zu einem Besuch

- 2 -

Blatt 2

wiederholen. In diesem Zusammenhang danke ich Ihnen für die Grüße, die Sie anläßlich Ihres jüngsten Aufenthaltes in Bonn über Herrn Carstens an mich haben ausrichten lassen.

Ich habe mir erlaubt, Ihnen mit diesem Brief eine Kiste Wein aus Rheinland-Pfalz zuzusenden, den Sie bitte auf Ihr persönliches Wohl trinken mögen.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Dear Professor Kissinger:

Let me express my appreciation to you for the open and
stimulating conversation we had in Washington.

As the problems between the United States and Europe not
only increase, but become more complex, I consider such
conversations not only useful, but indeed essential. We
will succeed in solving these only if all relevant political
forces in our respective countries address themselves to
these problems in concert.

It would please me therefore if we could continue this
dialogue as opportunity presents itself and, in the re-
gard, I wish to repeat my invitation for a visit from you.
In this context, may I thank you for the greetings which
you sent to me by Mr. Carstens on the occasion of your
most recent stop off in Bonn.

I have taken the liberty of sending you, with this letter,
a case of wine from the Rhineland-Palatinate which I
hope you will drink to your own personal well-being.

Peter Köhr

5030 Hürth, den 18.10.1976
Berrenrather Str. 489
Federal Republic of Germany

Your Excellency

It is my hobby to collect the autographs of statesmen and politicians from all over the world. Until now I was able to collect more than 1000 autographs of about 70 countries of the world.

Added to this letter you find a photograph showing you and the chancellor of the Federal Republic, Helmut Schmidt. The photograph was signed personally by Mr. Schmidt.

I ask you, your Excellency, to sign this photograph too and send it back to me.

I thank you in advance for your great kindness and send you my best wishes for yourself and your country.

Yours most respectfully
Peter Kott

## Between Issues

IT IS perhaps symptomatic of the year now coming to an end that when Britons were asked recently by the Gallup Organization to name the woman they most admire, they abandoned their consistent choice on three previous occasions, Queen Elizabeth II, and chose instead someone for whom their government has been exhibiting a distinct distaste, Premier Golda Meir of Israel. But 1973 has been topsy-turvy in far more significant ways, and a look at our Index beginning on page 26 quickly reveals the areas of severest distress and disorder.

Among the categories related to the international scene, for example, the three largest are U.S. Foreign Policy (23 listings), USSR (18) and Israel (18), reflecting both the debate triggered by the ramifications of a supposed relaxation of American-Soviet tensions, and the anxiousness caused by the Arab-Israeli fourth round. Of the pieces in these pages over the last 12 months, none has received more widespread attention than Hans J. Morgenthau's tough-minded analysis of the first topic, "The Danger of Détente" (NL, October 1)—the subject of two articles in the New York Times, another in the Washington Post, an editorial in the New York Daily News, two major radio talk shows, William F. Buckley Jr.'s Firing Line television show, and considerable coverage overseas. We would not be surprised, though, if even greater attention were accorded Morgenthau's hard look at the second topic, "The Geopolitics of Israel's Survival," beginning on page 4.

That is also the focus of "EuroVista," our new column launched on page 7 by an old NL hand who writes under the pen name Ray Alan. The author of a mystery novel set in the Levant, My Bonnie Lies Under the Sea, and the biographical Spanish Quest, published in this country by Macmillan, Alan regularly roves the Continent, Africa and the Middle East for the Economist. Except when travel interferes with deadlines, "EuroVista" will alternate with Andrew J. Glass' "Washington U.S.A."

Which brings us to the domestic scene, where the slide down the heady political hill started, you will recall, with Richard Nixon's final inauguration in January. Unhappily, it has since proceeded at a pace that continues to defy the nation's ability to cope with it. Small wonder, then, that by far the largest single category in our Index is U.S. Politics (29); other predictable national heavyweights are U.S. Economy (11), followed by U.S. Society (9).

Gloomy as the picture at home and abroad remains, however, for the Fourth Estate 1973 has of course been a hectic, exciting, sometimes even satisfying period. And that has been especially true in our own case—1973 being the year we marked our 50th Anniversary with subscribers and friends who demonstrated their appreciation of what Daniel Bell, in his essay beginning on page 9, describes as "The Moral Vision of 'The New Leader.'" But with you, we look forward to a happier New Year.

OUR COVER drawing is by Sam Kweskin.

THE NEW LEADER: Published biweekly—except twice in July and once in August—by the American Labor Conference on International Affairs, Inc. Editorial and executive offices: 212 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10010. Telephone 889-6316. (Postmaster: Please send change of address on form 8579 to THE NEW LEADER, 212 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10010.) National distributors: Eastern News Company, 155 West 15th St., New York, N.Y. 10011. Indexed in the Public Affairs Information Service. Price this issue: 50 cents. Subscription $12 per year. Canadian $13, foreign $14. Second-class postage paid at New York, N.Y. Copyright © 1973 by the American Labor Conference on International Affairs, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without written permission prohibited.

2

## THE New Leader

VOLUME LVI, NUMBER 25
DECEMBER 24, 1973

Correspondents' Correspondence 3

Mr. Charlie's Town/PHILIP SPARKS

The Geopolitics of Israel's Survival/

HANS J. MORGENTHAU 4

EuroVista/RAY ALAN 7

The Moral Vision of 'The New Leader/'

DANIEL BELL 9

An Appeal from Death Row/RICHARD J. MARGOLIS...13

### Writers & Writing

Fidgety Feminism/PEARL K. BELL 15

Revolutionary, Statesman, Monster/

LEOPOLD LABEDZ 17

Settlers and Savages/JOSEPH E. ILLICK 19

On Stage/ALBERT BERMEL 21

On Art/VIVIEN RAYNOR 23

Dear Editor 25

Index for 1973 26

Executive Editor: MYRON KOLATCH

Associate Editor: CHARLES CREESY

Assistant Editor: BARRY GEWEN

Assistant to the Editor: JOSEPHINE P. MEGRATH

Art Director: Herb Lubalin. Regular Critics—Literature:

Pearl K. Bell; Kingsley Shorter, Isa Kapp. Film: John Simon.

Television: Marvin Kitman. Art: James R. Mellow.

Regular Contributors—Daniel Bell, Theodore Draper,

Milton R. Konvitz, Irving Kristol, Robert Lekachman,

John P. Roche. Regular Columnists—Andrew J. Glass,

Walter Goodman, Richard J. Margolis.

Signed contributions do not necessarily represent the views of The New Leader. We welcome a variety of opinions consistent with our democratic policy.

Unsolicited manuscripts cannot be returned unless accompanied by a stamped, self-addressed envelope.

The New Leader

BRIEF TAKEOUTS OF MORE THAN
PERSONAL INTEREST FROM LETTERS
AND OTHER COMMUNICATIONS
RECEIVED BY THE EDITORS.

Mr. Charlie's Town

KANNAPOLIS, N.C.—This community of 36,000, located 15 miles northeast of Charlotte, bills itself as “the world’s largest unincorporated town.” But its real distinction is that it is the headquarters of Cannon Mills, the fourth largest textile company in the United States and the leading producer of towels and bedsheets in the world. The employer of 12,000 workers here and the owner of a solid square mile of the central business district, the corporation dominates every facet of public life.

Kannapolis was laid out in 1906 by James W. Cannon, founder of the dynasty that has run the company throughout its 86-year history. Today the mill holds title to 40 per cent of the total assessed real estate in town, including 1,600 residential buildings. Garbage collection, electricity, sewer and maintenance services for Cannon properties are dependent upon the company. The offices of the local newspaper, owned by Cannon in-laws, rests on land leased by the com-

pany, as do all the town's churches. The bank lists members of the Can-
non family as its principal share-
holders, and its employes come un-
der the mill's retirement plan.

Because of its unincorporated status, Kannapolis does not have elections for local political offices. Indeed, a 1970 Nader study found "no visible form of government" here. The only elected state legislator from the area is a supervisor for Cannon. The school board, too, is controlled by the company. And, as the Nader report noted, "The policeman is just as much an employe [of the corporation] . . . as is the weaver." In 1971, for example, Cannon contributed $214,000 toward the salaries of the police force, enough to pay 22 of its 35 officers.

Until 1971, Charles A. Cannon ruled the company and town alike with an iron hand. During his 50-year reign, he built a fledgling mill and a little village into major enterprises, though most of the company buildings were constructed before 1927 and the work-force has not increased much since the early '30s. Even today, many stories

about "Mr. Charlie"—as he was
always called by nearly everyone in
these parts—continue to be told in
the present tense.

Cannon is one of the largest employers in North Carolina, but its workers are among the lowest paid in the nation. In addition, both the company and the town are still touchy about race relations. As late as 1968 a contingent of Ku Klux Klansmen headed the local Christmas parade. Four years ago Attorney General John Mitchell filed suit against Cannon for discriminatory hiring and housing practices. Despite the fact that blacks represented 15 per cent of Kannapolis' population, they occupied only 50 of the 1,600 residences rented by the company. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 has increased black voter registration, yet as one complained, "How are we ever going to elect black officials with no elections?"

A key element in Cannon's success has been the absence of other industry in the area to compete for the Kannapolis workers. Since it controls the town water supply, the company has been able to prevent outside firms from locating here. "Mr. Charlie don't want nobody coming in and running up wages," observed one resident, alluding to the problem that some textile firms are now encountering in other parts of the South. Nor has there been much pressure for fringe benefits: William A. Freedman, a Cannon employe for 61 years, recently retired with a pension of $16 a month.

What Charlie Cannon has left behind is an anachronism in modern America, a perfectly preserved company town on the New England model of the 1800s. Ironically, he did not choose to live here himself, preferring to commute every day in a limousine from the family home in nearby Concord, named "For Pity's Sake." The phrase would be better applied to the conditions of the workers employed by his mill.

—PHILIP SPARKS

December 24, 1973

3

AN INTRICATE WEB

# The Geopolitics of Israel's Survival

BY HANS J. MORGENTHAU

THE SITUATION in the Middle East has been drastically transformed by four interconnected consequences of the October War: (1) the destruction of the belief in Israel's military invincibility; (2) the suggestion of armed involvement by the USSR; (3) the Arab use of oil as a political weapon; and (4) a change in U.S. policy.

The aim of a succession of Israeli governments has been simple—to create and, if need be, to show so incontestable a military superiority that the Arab world would be forced to reconcile itself to the inevitable and accept Israel in its midst. That policy would have worked had it not been for outside intervention. Four times the Arabs tried to eliminate Israel by war, four times they were beaten and three times—in 1948, 1956 and 1973—they were saved from complete defeat by a timely cease-fire that was imposed by the United States and the Soviet Union, acting under cover of the United Nations.

But the October War differs significantly from its predecessors, for the initial stages of the fighting demonstrated that under certain conditions Israel could be challenged on the battlefield. The demonstration has destroyed the foundations of Israel's foreign policy. The Arabs now feel that since the Israelis were successfully taken on once, they could be still more successfully taken on again.

That possibility has been greatly

enhanced by the policies of the USSR, which has clearly indicated its resolve not to allow the Arabs to lose another war, and in fact seems willing to risk using nuclear weapons to assure this. The intelligence at the disposal of our government provides evidence that the Russians either had placed nuclear arms in Egypt or were in the process of doing so when the U.S. military alert made them retrace their steps. In any event, the Soviet nuclear threat—even if it were checked by an American or Israeli deterrent—is an effective counter to Israel's military superiority. Were it actually to be carried out, Israel would be annihilated.

The most powerful new factor in the Middle East situation, however, is the Arab use of oil for political ends. Directed at an industrial nation, this can be a deadly weapon. We might remind ourselves that during

HANS J. MORGENTHAU, Leonard Davis Distinguished Professor of Political Science at the City University of New York, often analyzes international affairs in these pages.

4

The New Leader

ing the 1935 Italo-Ethiopian conflict, Great Britain and France refrained from imposing an oil embargo against Italy, despite the call for sanctions by the League of Nations, because they were afraid Mussolini would have to go to war over it; and that the American oil embargo against Japan in 1940 launched the United States on the road to Pearl Harbor. The withholding of oil from a modern nation means economic strangulation, with incalculable social and political dislocations.

Facing such disastrous prospects, the victim of an embargo has only two options: to fight with every means at his disposal or to give in to the demands of the oil-producer. In the present instance, to give in is by far the easier choice, especially because those primarily affected are not suffering in defense of their own interests, but for the interests of a small, dependent, widely unpopular third nation. Paradoxically, though, Japan and Western Europe, who are most in need of Mideast oil, have no direct way of satisfying the Arab demands, whereas the United States, the country least susceptible to oil blackmail, is the only one able to exert virtually irresistible pressure on Jerusalem.

We are thus witnessing the development of an intricate network of forces, all working to Israel's disadvantage. For the reduced Arab oil shipments threaten America's two principal allies, Japan and the Federal Republic of Germany, with a catastrophe they cannot combat themselves. Hence the United States, faced merely with the prospect of considerable yet tolerable inconvenience, is obliged to pressure Israel to accede to the main Arab demands.

As the October War newly and drastically revealed, there is a direct relationship between the level of pressure the U.S. is capable of exerting and the extent of Israel's dependence upon Washington for military aid. The Jewish State is today

almost completely isolated diplomatically and politically, and can turn nowhere except to its American ally for assistance. The Administration, meanwhile, has decided to use its monopoly position to enforce what is being called an "even-handed" policy but is really an open switch from "counseling moderation" without applying strong pressure to putting the American foot down.

THIS COURSE of action, albeit triggered by the new Arab oil diplomacy, has long had its advocates among U.S. policy

makers. The enthusiastic pro-Israel rhetoric that politicians have indulged in for obvious domestic political reasons has always been received with private misgivings by officials who felt that our making common cause with Israel was both alienating the Arabs and opening the door to preponderant Soviet influence in the Middle East. In the light of the developments flowing from the October War, that view has come to dominate the inner councils of the government. It is

supported, too, by the desire of the Nixon Administration to preserve the appearance of détente by avoiding an open confrontation with the Kremlin. Therefore, although the United States and the Soviet Union found themselves supporting opposite sides in the war, their visions of a peace settlement tend to coincide.

The immediate goals of the new U.S. policy are the retreat of Israel to its 1967 borders (with minor modifications), international supervision for the Arab holy places in Jerusalem, and some sort of agreement on the Palestinian refugees. In

return for its concessions, Israel would be recognized by the Arab governments as a legitimate sovereign state; more specifically, it would be compensated for its withdrawal to the 1967 lines by an international guarantee of those borders—probably involving the UN.

A settlement of this kind assumes that the sole issue at stake between Israel and the Arabs, aside from the status of the refugees, is the restoration of the territorial status quo prior to 1967. That assumption, in

December 24, 1973

5

turn, rests on another assumption: that the Arab leaders have changed their fundamental attitude toward the continued existence of the State of Israel.

Yet it is an undisputed historic fact that none of the violent encounters in the Middle East between the Arabs and the Jews—from the '20s to the Six Day War—had anything to do with the boundaries of the Jewish State. They concerned first the presence of Jewish settlers in Palestine, and then the existence of a Jewish state in the midst of the

ence of all Arab governments on “the restoration of the legitimate rights of the Palestinians.”

IT IS HARDLY necessary to point out that had the October War started at the 1967 frontiers, Israel would have been in mortal danger, even if it had avoided its initial military mistakes. And given the unfavorable geopolitical configuration, if it is in mortal danger, it is likely to be doomed. Foreign intervention on its behalf, assuming it were available, would come too late

force to protect them from a ground attack either: Is it likely that foreign governments would allow their soldiers to die for a nation with which most of them do not even maintain diplomatic relations?

But the crucial issue for Israel's future is the meaning of the demand for "the restoration of the legitimate rights of the Palestinians." Let us imagine for a moment that in the aftermath of World War II, the millions of Germans fleeing from the East were condemned by the Bonn government to the misery of refugee camps, with the stipulation that their "legitimate rights" had to be restored. Would the Soviet Union and Poland have been eccentric to assume that the West Germans were insisting on the right of the refugees to return to their original homes? The same logic, applied to the Arab stipulation, would mean the right of the Palestinians to return to what is now Israel. That is to say, it would mean the destruction of the Jewish State.

Political circumstances may suggest different interpretations, and political expediency may well make it advisable to play down this one. Still, both the artificial preservation of more than a million Palestinians in the status of refugees, to be used as political pawns, and the defenselessness of an Israel with 1967 borders, give this interpretation plausibility. In the end, Israel's fate may well hinge upon the credibility of Egyptian President Anwar el-Sadat's commitment to the Jewish State's peaceful existence.

When Neville Chamberlain went to Munich, he had no intention of destroying Czechoslovakia; he thought instead that he had assured peace in our time. On his deathbed, the former Prime Minister remarked that everything would have turned out all right if Hitler had not lied to him. Let us hope Henry Kissinger will not have occasion to assert that everything in the Middle East would have turned out all right if Sadat had not lied to him.

Arab world. What is more, the issue continues to be defined in these terms by the governments of Libya and Iraq, as well as by the Palestinian organizations.

Of course, the other Arab governments may have had a change of heart and reconciled themselves to Israel's survival. But in order to base policy upon this possibility, one still must disregard three things: the indefensibility of Israel within the 1967 borders, implicitly recognized by the tender of international guarantees; the proven worthlessness of such guarantees; and the insist-

—and its availability is moot. In 1957, the United Nations induced Israel to withdraw from Sinai in exchange for an Anglo-French-American guarantee of open passage through the Straits of Tiran; when Egypt closed the Straits in 1967, Israel had to wage war by itself to reopen them.

Similarly, a UN peace-keeping force stationed at the 1967 borders would not be able to protect Israel from the Russian missiles at the disposal of the Egyptians, with their range of up to 180 miles. Indeed, the Israelis could not expect such a

6

The New Leader

SCHEDULE OF EVENTS

June 9, 1974

CITIZENS' CONGRESS
Shoreham Hotel

Washington, D. C.

Sponsored by
NATIONAL CITIZENS' COMMITTEE FOR FAIRNESS TO THE PRESIDENCY

1221 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D. C. 20036

202/347-6597

Sunday, June 9

8:30-10:00 a.m. REGISTRATION of Delegates to CITIZENS' CONGRESS

10:00 a.m. - 1:00 p.m. SEMINARS (1 hour each)
A. The Constitution and the Presidency
B. The Three Co-Equal Branches of Government
C. The Presidency - From Washington to Nixon
D. War and Peace (1776-1974) and the Role of the President

1:15 p.m.

LUNCHEON

Guest of Honor: Mrs. Richard Nixon

*Honored Guests:

Vice President Ford Secretary Weinberger
Secretary Kissinger Secretary Lynn
Secretary Simon Secretary Brinegar
Secretary Schlesinger Senator Goldwater
Secretary Callaway Senator Tower
Sec'y. Des. Middendorf Senator Hugh Scott
Secretary McLucas Senator Edward J. Gurney
Attorney General Saxbe Congressman Rhodes
Secretary Morton RNC Chairman Bush
Secretary Butz Mr. and Mrs. David Eisenhower
Secretary Dent Mr. and Mrs. Edward F. Cox
Secretary Brennan

3:00-4:00 p.m.

GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Subject: A People-to-People Program to Preserve the Presidency

5:00-7:00 p.m.

INTERDENOMINATIONAL WORSHIP SERVICE ON SOUTH LAWN OF WHITE HOUSE
Worship Service to include a greeting from the President;
reading of scripture selections by 5 clergymen representing
all denominations; sermon by Chief Justice Burger; selections
by local choir; three well-known hymns in which congregation
will participate; prayer for God's guidance in challenges
facing the United States.

7:30p.m.-Dawn

ALL-NIGHT PRAYER VIGIL (in Lafayette Park by youth of CITIZENS' CONGRESS)

Monday, June 10

7:00-8:30 a.m.

PRAYER BREAKFAST (for participants in all-night vigil and CITIZENS' CONGRESS delegates wishing to attend.) Possible speaker: Sen. Hughes on Religious Values and American Society

*Note: All of the above named dignitaries have been invited to attend.

TIMMONS AND COMPANY, INCORPORATED

1776 F STREET, N.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 (202) 331-1760

WILLIAM E. TIMMONS
President

TOM C. KOROLOGOS
Vice President and
Director of Legislative Affairs

STANLEY EBNER
Vice President and
General Counsel

W. EUGENE AINSWORTH
Vice President and
Secretary-Treasurer

1-7-75

Dear Henry -

Now that I've safely departed, I wanted to write and express my own personal thanks and appreciation to you for your friendship, guidance and - really - the privilege of being on your White House team.

You honored me greatly by asking me to work for you and one of the most difficult decisions I've ever made was to continue instead my route to the private sector. Under other circumstances I would have gladly jumped aboard. (We probably would have killed each other - But it would have been great.)

You're a good 'un' Henry and a great patriot. alla beat to you -

Tom Korologos

P.S. (Now get us some clients!)

WILLIAM E. TIMMONS
President

January 20, 1975

Dear Henry:

A hasty note of resounding thanks to you for taking
the time from what I know is an impossible schedule
to see Marquita Maytag for us. She was thrilled
to death over the opportunity and you made us all
look like geniuses.

Thanks again, suh.

With warm regard,

Honorable Henry A. Kissinger
Secretary of State
c/o The White House
Washington, D. C. 20500

WILLIAM E. TIMMONS
*President*

January 5, 1976

Dear Henry:

1. Happy New Year and all manner of good things in 1976.

2. Good work on your Angola position. I hear nothing but good reports on your efforts on the Hill and you should know that we are privately lobbying for you as well.

3. High commendations on your dogged determination on the Law of the Sea position. We've been doing some work on that too.

4. Hang in there on SALT. You're on the right track.

5. The other day somebody mentioned the meeting of the Association of Trial Lawyers in Las Vegas at the end of this month and it occurred to me that it might be an excellent forum for you for a major pitch for Law of the Sea where you can articulate your position to a bunch of lawyers. At any rate, I enclose their official invitation to you and would hope you give it every consideration.

6. Hang in there. The whole world needs you.

With warm regard,

Honorable Henry A. Kissinger
The Secretary of State
Washington, D. C. 20520

Enclosure

Ambassade de France
aux Etats-Unis

L'Ambassadeur

Washington, November 20, 1973

Dear Mr. Secretary,

You told me once that you were obliged to decline
invitations from Embassies, except for some special occasions.
It is quite understandable.

However, on Tuesday December 11, a very exceptional
event will take place at my residence : a farewell dinner in the
honor of Lord and Lady CROMER.

I know that Rowley and Esmé would feel particularly
honored by your presence. I feel moreover that it would not be
without significance after so many rumours widespread about the
troubled partnership of United States and Europe to celebrate, with

The Hon. Henry KISSINGER
Secretary of State

WASHINGTON D.C.

II/12/72
2:3am

Paris.
Mme. Georges Pompidou,

Henry V. Klaasinger

With warm regards,

to me.

Thank you for your kindness in sending them

given me will have an eminent place in my library.
The three volumes of his writings that you have
and I have many warm memories of our association.
and for his accomplishments in public service,
for President Pompidou, for both his personal dual-
As you know, I always had the highest regard
et sequtae and Le Noendigien.

works by the late President Pompidou, *Entretiens
Koacinsko-Morizet your very gracious gift of two
I have just received from Ambassador*

Dear Mme. Pompidou:

[lc]

Madame Georges Pompidou

PARIS, le 25 septembre 1975

Monsieur le Secrétaire d'Etat,

Je m'autorise des bonnes relations que
mon mari avait entretenues avec vous pour vous faire
parvenir le livre qu'il avait écrit et qui constitue une
réflexion sur l'Homme et la politique.

J'y joins deux autres volumes dans
lesquels sont rassemblés des extraits de ses discours.

Je vous prie d'agréer, Monsieur le
Secrétaire d'Etat, l'expression de mes sentiments les
plus distingués.

S. Exc. Monsieur Henry KISSINGER

DRAFT

Dear Mr. Kosciusko-Morizet:

Thank you very much for delivering to me the
three volumes of writings of the late President
Pompidou, which Mme. Pompidou so thoughtfully sent.

I was very pleased to receive this gift and
request that you convey my appreciation to Mme.
Pompidou by way of the attached letter.

With warm regards,

Henry A. Kissinger

Drafted: EUR/WE:JVSmith:cbp

11/7/75:21726

DRAFT

Dear Mme. Pompidou:

I have just received from Ambassador Kosciusko-Morizet your very gracious gift of two works by the late President Pompidou, *Entretiens et discours* and *Le Noeud gordien*.

As you know, that I have always had a high regard for Mr. Pompidou for his qualities and his accomplishments in public service, and I have warm memories of our personal and professional relations. The volumes of his writings that you have given me will have an eminent place in my library.

Thank you for your kind consideration in sending this gift to me.

Drafted: EUR/WE:JVSmith:cbp

11/7/75:21726

TOAST DE L'AMBASSADEUR AU DINER DONNE EN L'HONNEUR DE
M. KISSINGER.

Le 6 janvier 77

Mr. Secretary,

First of all, allow me not to call you "My
dear Henry"; that's a little bit too reminiscent of the
preferred form of address at the Quai d'Orsay, "Cher
ami". As one long-time diplomat, Maurice Paléologue,
explained, "Cher ami", That just means "Sir". In fact,
I'm always suspicious when someone calls me "cher ami"
when I'm not his friend and certainly not his "dear"
friend; it makes me wonder what he's got up his sleeve.

You, Mr. Secretary, have our genuine friendship.
I am not saying this just on my own account; I am also
speaking on behalf of the President of the French Republic
and the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Once, during a difficult time, you said to me,
"I'm the only person in the State Department who is still
pro-French". And I replied that for that matter I was pro-
bably the only pro-American at the Quai d'Orsay at the time.

[LC]

2.

Our positions were not based solely on sentiment, although you can't underestimate the role sentiment plays in politics; rather they were based on a rational vision of relations between our two countries, their tradition of alliance and friendship, and their shared interests in a world we both want to see free, peaceful and prosperous.

So we were able to surmount temporary differences, knowing full well that it is sometimes easier to settle the big problems than the little ones.

I would not venture, Mr. Secretary, to appraise the work you have done as the leader of American diplomacy. It is difficult, as the painter Degas said, to size up one's contemporaries. History will have to debate, and for a very long time at that, what you were, what you thought, what you counted for. But I can attest to one thing :

- that you are a very great Statesman, one your country can be proud of.

I never left you office sad or discouraged. The level on which you spoke, your grasp of the most complex problems, and your penetrating assessment of men and events were all mixed with a healthy dose of humor that inspired optimism.

.../...

[Lc]

3.

You had the courage -- the stuff of which
statements are made -- to be reasonable. Circumstances
did not always allow for you to be understood and heeded.

I don't think that your successor, whom you rightly
praised, can complain about the legacy he has inherited
from you. In many areas you paved the way for new initiatives.
As you are so fond of saying, "You made the
difference".

And so you will write books -- if the reports
are to be believed -- but books will also be written about
you. Perhaps I will write a chapter about you myself, if
only to do justice to your most gloriously controversial
venture, the Year of Europe.

It is you we are honoring here tonight, with
friends surrounding you and Nancy -- notice that, with
women I always take the opportunity to use their first
name. But I would not want to miss the chance to praise
all those in the White House and the State Department
who worked so closely with you and so diligently and
effectively with us: General Brent Scowcroft, Charles
Robinson, Helmut Sonnenfeldt, Larry Eagleburger, William
Rogers, Winston Lord.

I would also like to mention Mrs Hills and my
young, old friend, George Bush.

.../...

[LC]

4.

Allow me to express our special admiration and gratitude to a great American who is fair-minded and universally respected, William T. Coleman, Secretary of Transportation. And the spotlight naturally falls to Vice President and Mrs Rockefeller, faithful friends of our country, our culture and our language.

When people speak of you, Mr. Secretary, they like to cite Metternick and Castlereagh. Well, even though I am a convinced European, you will pardon me if I prefer Talleyrand, and not out of excessive chauvinism. But his words, in my opinion, express eloquently what you have been, what you are, and you will be tomorrow : "un homme qui a de l'avenir dans l'esprit", a man with a future in his mind.

BOARD OF EDUCATION
THE CITY OF NEW YORK
---
GEORGE WASHINGTON HIGH SCHOOL

192ND STREET, AUDUBON AVENUE
NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10040

SAMUEL KOSTMAN, PRINCIPAL

ACTING ASSISTANT PRINCIPALS
CHARLES SCOTT
JUDITH LIGHT

January 20, 1975

The Honorable Secretary of State
The State Department
Washington, D. C.

My Dear Dr. Kissinger:

George Washington High School celebrates its fiftieth anniversary in its present building and as an independent high school in February, 1975. As part of a term-long series of events to commemorate the occasion we plan to have a dinner on Wednesday, May 21, 1975 at a mid-town hotel to which we hope to attract many of our distinguished alumni, faculty, parents, students and community leaders.

In order that we may succeed in our efforts to make the dinner a success we need the endorsements of distinguished alumni such as you to convince people to attend the dinner. If you would be willing to lend your name to a sponsors' committee for the dinner that might spur many people to join us for the evening.

Kindly fill out the enclosed form and place it in the stamped, self addressed envelope and return it as soon as possible.

Thank you.

New York, New York,
103rd Street and Audubon Avenue,
George Washington High School,

Principal,
Mr. Samuel Koaman,

Personei Vaaletant
Suzanne 2. McFarlane

Sincerely,

Incheon and reunion will be an outstanding success.
on this occasion, however, and he hopes that the
immuni of George Washington his very warm regards
He would like to send the administration and s-
that date.

had a long-attending commitment to be in Europe on
the schedule is not firm this far in advance, he has
George Washington High School. Although normally
50th anniversary celebration of his alma mater,
his sincere regrets that he will be unable to attend the
Secretary Kissinger has asked me to convey

Dear Mr. Koaman:

October 19, 1976