MEDIA ROUNDUP:

LATIN AMERICA & THE CARIBBEAN

2 JULY 1985

GENERAL LATIN AMERICA

WASHINGTON TIMES

1 JULY 1985

Pg. 4D

Washington cool to Kissinger debt plan

By Roger Fontaine
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger's proposal to resolve the growing debt problem in Latin America by creating a new long-term, low-interest international credit facility has been greeted with both cautious approval and polite criticism in Washington political and economic circles.

Latin America's foreign debt of more than $400 billion is likely, in the view of most experts, to stall its economic growth for at least the rest of the decade.

The proposal, which first appeared in The Los Angeles Times last week and then was reprinted in The Washington Post, outlines the stark nature of Latin America's external debt problem, and its potential impact on the region's political stability.

To "our neighbors to the south, the issue is nothing less than the survival of their political institutions" — institutions that in recent years have become increasingly democratic, it declared. Indirectly criticizing the Reagan administration for congratulating itself on the revival of democracy in the region, and doing little beyond that for Latin America as a whole, Mr. Kissinger stated, "The key question remains whether these new democracies can survive in the face of dramatically falling standards of living that appear to be imposed from the outside."

Mr. Kissinger also charged that Fidel Castro has already taken advantage of the situation by "taking up the cause of Latin American debtors," which gives him "respectability in Latin America," while remaining "a revolutionary in undermining U.S. relations with its southern neighbors."

To counter the threat that rising indebtedness poses to liberal economies and democracies, Mr. Kissinger called for "the modern philosophical equivalent of the Marshall Plan," in the form of a "Western Hemisphere Development Program."

Asking for a multilateral "common approach," Mr. Kissinger proposes the creation of a new credit facility — a "Western Hemisphere Development Institution" to supplement the efforts of the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and other multilateral agencies.

But unlike the latter, the proposed new institution, open to creditors and debtors alike, would have a terminal date of five

to seven years, the critical period that many of the Latin American nations will endure in respect to their external debt.

Mr. Kissinger's article did not make clear whether such an institution would be wholly independent or part of an existing facility. A close associate of Mr. Kissinger's told The Washington Times that neither possibility had been ruled out.

The new institution's function would be to lend — not give — funds at a fixed low rate of interest to stretch out the period of servicing foreign debt while Latin American states take the appropriate free-market steps to achieve self-

sustaining growth in the 1990s.

"Longer-term and larger-scale public financing, as I propose, would ease the shock," he wrote.

Latin American governments have so far, in general, refrained from comment, but most observers here believe the proposal will meet with their general approval.

Mr. Kissinger, despite his reputation for concentrating on global issues—U.S.-Soviet relations and the Middle East in particular — has in recent years increasingly focused on the problems of the Western Hemisphere.

Last month, he outlined similar ideas on Latin American debt in a speech given in Nassau, the Bahamas.

Two years ago, he assumed, at President Reagan's direct request, the chairmanship of a bipartisan commission on Central America. Known as the Kissinger Commission, six months later it recommended an equally bold set of proposals that included the expenditure of $8 billion in economic aid in the region over the next five years.

Buried within that report, now for the most part languishing 'on Capitol Hill despite an early endorsement from the Reagan administration, is a forerunner of the current proposal.

Addressing Central America's external debt problem as a key factor in the region's economic decline, the report recommended that Central American countries "seek multilateral debt renegotiation," and at the same time said that the United States and other creditor nations "should urge private lenders, especially commercial banks, to renegotiate existing debt at the lowest possible interest rates."

It also recommended "a task force of key public and private creditors, as well as debtors ... to facilitate these debt renegotiations and to encourage new

lending."

Reaction to Mr. Kissinger's proposal in Washington was mixed. Sources contacted by The Washington Times found positive and negative elements in the proposal. Virtually all cited the importance of the former secretary of state highlighting a serious problem — a problem that is both "systemic and structural" in nature, according to one financial observer.

Although White House officials were not available for comment, one State Department official praised the proposal for emphasizing "growth and not adjustment," predicting that there would be little growth for most of Latin America for the rest of the decade.

But he added that nothing would happen for the moment along the lines of Mr. Kissinger's proposal while the administration awaits congressional approval for replenishment of the World Bank's resources.

IMF officials would not comment either, but one source indicated that the fund would continue to be guided by the communique issued after the April meeting of the interim committee, which reaffirmed the principle of meeting the debt problem on a case-by-case basis.

This effectively rules out any multilateral approach.

Norman Bailey, formerly the senior director of international economic affairs for the National Security Council staff, said Mr. Kissinger's proposed solution would not would be practical because it would require congressional funding.

According to Mr. Bailey and others, there is no support in Congress or within the administration to appropriate funds for any such effort.

Other sources argue that the proposal fails to distinguish between Latin American governments, some of which have made "heroic efforts," in the words of one business observer, such as Argentina, and others that have not.

Echoing that view, one congressional staff aide said Argentine President "Alfonsin has not only bitten through the bullet, he's gone through the whole cartridge belt."

Critics of the proposal would rather expand existing facilities and make the International Monetary Fund's lending guidelines more flexible.

CONTINUED NEXT PAGE

1

MEDIA ROUNDUP:

LATIN AMERICA & THE CARIBBEAN

2 JULY 1985

## PLAN...Continued

Supporters of Mr. Kissinger's proposals, while welcoming these measures, point out that a long-term, low-interest facility for debt repayment does not, in fact, now exist, and they add that the facility outlined in the Kissinger proposal could be part of one of the existing international financial institutions, such as the World Bank.

Other supporters, including a congressional aide who declined to be identified, argued that if more is not done, a number of Latin American countries will, in the near future, find themselves "repudiating once and for all their single effort at liberal economics."

But they add that the solution of more and easier credit had its downside too. "Latin American governments are not good at self-discipline," the aide said, pointing to the example of Mexico in the 1970s.

"With all that oil and available credit, [President Jose] Lopez Portillo set the country back 10 years," he said.

Another expert agreed, and pointed out that the Kissinger proposal, while

telling Latin Americans what they wanted to hear, says nothing about "the ingrained habits of Latin governments" that need to be changed.

Some administration sources, while unenthusiastic over the multilateral approach or the feasibility of seeking new funds from Congress, not only shared Mr. Kissinger's concern for the seriousness of the problem, but also acknowledged that the Reagan administration has not engaged in a serious political dialogue with the Latin American countries on the debt problem.

"It's a bad mistake if we don't," said one official, who characterized administration reaction to the proposal so far as "an insider shrug." He added that such discussion should advance the administration's own agenda on related issues, such as freer trade and better investment opportunities in the hemisphere.

He said the administration's policy should be to draw them into the "responsible world" of the developed, democratic states.

"You can't do that if you treat them like mini-states in the Caribbean," he said.

That approach, which was endorsed early in the first Reagan administration in the president's Philadelphia speech, was carried out in a meeting of selected nations several months later at Cancun, Mexico, in October 1981, where Mr. Reagan emphasized the need for real dialogue between the rich and poor nations while forcefully advocating his own "magic of the market place" approach.

Although the president said at the time that "our common resolve will not disappear with our jet trails," critics argue that that approach seems to have been abandoned in recent years.

As for the criticism of the Kissinger debt proposal, a close associate of the former secretary of state told The Washington Times that accepting the "wrong political equation is the worst possible reason not to do so.... Somebody has to start leading on this."

FINANCIAL TIMES

27 JUNE 1985

Pg. 4

## Canute James previews next week's Caribbean economic summit

# Caricom looks for trade life-line

THE HEADS of Government of 12 Caribbean countries will meet in Barbados next week in an effort to breathe life into the faltering Caribbean Economic Community (Caricom).

Many of the community's Prime Ministers are frustrated at the lack of progress on economic co-operation which has been compounded by the failure of most countries to introduce trade agreements agreed at last year's summit.

The last summit in the Bahamas ended with what some leaders described as a breakthrough in efforts to integrate the Caribbean's weak economies.

Since then, however, continuing differences and open rows about trade policy have done little to encourage confidence in the viability of the 12-year-old community, which has a market of 5m.

High on the agenda next week will be the row between Trinidad and Tobago and other community members about trade restrictions: in essence, the Caribbean community aims to liberalise commerce between members, giving preferential access to goods produced in Caricom countries.

Amid continuing charges and

counter charges of violations of the "spirit and letter" of the community treaty, Trinidad and Tobago recently imposed an 18-month ban on garment imports.

Mr Bernard St John, Prime Minister of Barbados, is expected to put the issue bluntly to Mr George Chambers of Trinidad and Tobago. Several Barbadian garment factories have had to close or reduce operations because of Trinidad's policies.

Trinidad and Tobago, in order to protect its dwindling hard currency reserves, had earlier put all imports on licence. This move was followed with the imposition of a 12 per cent stamp duty on imports.

In the face of falling trade within the community, the political leaders had agreed on a common external tariff on imports from outside the group. Trade between community members has been falling, from $555m (£437m) in 1982, to $481m in 1983.

The community had agreed on a list of "sensitive goods" which needed protection, including steel, cement, fertilisers, automotive parts, processed food, and a range of consumer durables.

It is indicative of the problems which Caricom faces that the common tariff was to have been implemented last January 1. It was not. Trade ministers later decided to implement the measures at the beginning of June, but there has been no movement by most countries.

The aim of the measures, decided by a Caricom summit in the Bahamas last July, is to halt a slide in regional commerce which is hitting business sectors in several member countries. St Lucia, for example, has made no move towards operating the common external tariff.

Jamaica, the largest market in the community, has dismantled all import restrictions, but the country is suffering a chronic shortage of hard currency to finance imports.

The Prime Ministers will find little comfort in the fact that there has been agreement on an agricultural protocol which allows free trade in farm products within the community. But there has been little progress on a similar arrangement for garments.

The community has also failed to find ways of rehabilitating a $100m trade payments

facility, which has financed significant quantities of regional commerce.

The facility has been moribund for the past 18 months because it needs new financing. There apparently has been no reward for the community's efforts to attract financial support from international agencies.

Much hangs on the success of the summit in solving the outstanding problems. The Caricom countries — the Bahamas, Jamaica, Antigua, St Kitts, St Lucia, Dominica, Montserrat, Grenada, St Vincent, Barbados, Trinidad and Tobago and Guyana—have been experiencing growing economic difficulties as the traditional pillars of their economies have run into trouble.

Light manufacturing such as the production of garments and footwear, food processing and some industrial chemicals, has been the backbone of efforts to expand economic bases. The incentive of preferential access to a neighbouring market has given birth to hundreds of small factories, employing an average of 200 workers. For them, success next week must be more than a diplomatically-worded communique.

2

On the Trail
of
Kissinger

By
Richard Lee

Seymour Hersh

Two years ago, Simon & Schuster editor Jim Silberman picked up the phone and called *New York Times* investigative reporter Seymour Hersh: "I want to say just one word to you, but you have to come over to my office to hear what it is."

Hersh went over and heard the word, and the word was Kissinger. Silberman wanted Hersh to write a book about Henry Kissinger.

And why not? Hersh had the credentials. Who better to ferret out the real story of Henry Kissinger's uses, and abuses, of power during the Nixon years than the man oft described as the "toughest reporter in America," the man who broke the My Lai massacre story and won a Pulitzer and other prizes, the man who revealed the truth about domestic CIA spying, the secret bombing of Cambodia, and Kissinger's wiretapping his closest aides in the State Department.

Seymour Hersh wasn't all that keen about the idea. Not initially, anyway. "I thought Kissinger was finished," Hersh admits. "I thought he would just sort of fade from public view. Nobody really knows about that, do they?"

But Kissinger's unexpected staying power as a public figure was just one of the reasons Hersh finally agreed to do the book. His growing frustration at the *Times* was another. Everybody who knew Hersh was surprised when he signed on there in 1972. He was not the *Times* type. His aggressiveness contrasted sharply with the genteel, above-it-all tone of the place. Hersh is generally credited with "saving the *Times's* ass," as one colleague put it, on Watergate, a story they were reluctant to pursue because they didn't know how to go about it. Hersh showed them the way, and gave Woodward and Bernstein a good, competitive run for several months. "A world unto himself . . . sui generis . . . and he always delivered," David Halberstam says of Hersh's *Times* tenure in *The Powers That Be*. "His work was like a paper within a paper . . . I.F. Stone's newsletter." But, inevitably, Hersh got restive. Months spent working on complicated white-collar crime stories resulted in libel threats, many changes in the stories, and little impact. Byzantine power plays among editors, some of whom resented Hersh's special status on the paper, took their toll. Even last year's move back to Washington, his preferred city, to a $300,000 house on Newark Street in Cleveland Park, his preferred neighborhood, didn't help much.

Hersh had to resign from the *Times* to do the book. "They don't have a leave policy, and there are no exceptions," he says. "It was a wrench, especially for the

kids, who thought it was the end of the world, my leaving the *Times*. My nine-year-old daughter was very upset." For all that, Hersh does not particularly want to bad-mouth the *Times*. "I had a marvelous time there," he says gamely. But there's professional pride at stake: "Abe Rosenthal was *crazy* . . . out of his *mind* to let me go," he says. "He could've had me on a leash for *two years*. . . ."

Hersh now works out of a small, unmarked, bare-walled, beige-colored office in the National Press Building. And out is the right word. He expects to log 20,000 miles flying around the country this year, interviewing sources, an expensive undertaking that will cut into his $200,000 advance for the book. "It's a good contract. It's not financial security, but so what, it ain't bad, huh, folks?" he adds insouciantly.

Will he try to interview Richard Nixon? "Absolutely," he replies. He's on the phone now, talking in staccato bursts to another man in California, a man he won't identify, setting up an interview for the following week. The fast, feisty telephone manner is part of

Hersh's persona, along with the scruffy, Brooks Brothersy clothes. He's been a character in Doonesbury. He's played tennis with Robert Redford. He's in demand for speeches on college campuses. He's something of a maverick media star, and he enjoys it—even the hate mail, and being vilified in print by right-wing California columnists. "They still think I'm an enfant terrible," he notes with some amusement. "I'm forty-two, for Christ's sake."

But getting the goods on Kissinger involves more than cross-country interviewing. "The big thing is to read," Hersh says, "read all the books, read all the testimony." The book will concentrate on 1969 to 1972—"really essential years," he says. He once called Kissinger "the prime liar of Washington," an opinion he still holds: "Saying Kissinger is a liar is like saying we breathe air."

His desk is strewn with papers, magazines, and books, including Richard Nixon's memoirs, Frank Snepp's *Decent Interval*, the William Shawcross book about Kissinger and Cambodia, which he thinks fairly well of, and NBC correspondent Richard Valeriani's *Travels With Henry*, which he calls "revolting. . . It makes me want to vomit." And there's another book, just arrived, an advance copy of his friend William Styron's new novel, *Sophie's Choice*. Hersh, a "voracious" reader, is eager to get into it, but knows he hasn't got time. "I'll let Liz read it," he says resignedly, referring to his brunette wife who just finished medical school at NYU and is now interning at Georgetown. What about Kissinger's own memoirs, scheduled for publication this fall? "I think his book will be like *RN*," he says. "I'm not even worried about it.

"Henry will write his memoirs," Hersh says, "and then I'll write the truth." ☐

July 1979 THE WASHINGTONIAN 113

LAWTON, OKLA.
CONSTITUTION
D. 16,500

JUN 26 1979

Let Us Now Praise Famous Men

EL FAMOSO Dr. Henry Kissinger has retired from his position as secretary of state in name only. His incessant foreign policy views, incessantly given, get more prominence than those of the man who holds Henry's job, that nondescript Wall Street lawyer with the crushed fedora personality.

Not that the famous Kriégsdoktor has anything against Wall Street. He also works for the stockjobbing firm of Goldman Sachs and Company for an alleged quarter of a million a year.

This isn't his only income. There is the 3 to 5 million for his memoirs, the many thousands he gets from Georgetown University, the University of Southern California, the Chase Manhattan Bank, NBC and the Aspen Institute. In Washington, Henry developed a minor reputation as a food glutton fressing down the last cookie on his hostess' table. And now it appears his appetite for money is no less wolfish.

HENRY'S FRIENDS defend this rapacity for unseemly bunches of money by explaining that he has unusual needs. He must pay his five bodyguards. They accompany him most everywhere and obviously are more expensive to maintain than what would better suit his roly-poly, public persona — an attack dachshund.

If it were the producers of ABC-TV's "Love Boat" who were reported to have five bodyguards you could understand their fear that a member of the-public, driven 'round the bend by years of bad taste and odious sentimentality, had decided to do them in. But what is Henry afraid of? A long apprenticeship in lapdoghood with the Rockefellers taught him how to behave on camera and in the company of newspaper reporters.

A man with five bodyguards must have more than the ordinary apprehensions of a person in the public eye. Five bodyguards means you have a special and particular reason to think someone wants to shoot you.

Yet if Henry had any evidence to this effect he could have gone to the police or the FBI or Congress or somebody and gotten protection free. Then he wouldn't have to work so hard, he'd have longer and have more time to kibitz at the person presently holding down HIS job at the Department of State.

MAYBE OUR Dr. Kissinger has a generalized guilty conscience. Maybe he puts himself in the position of

Nicholas Von Hoffman

KING FEATURES SYNDICATE

someone from the former nation of Crete, or from Angola or from Chile and he imagines what he would do in their place. Or could he be remembering the Kurdish tribesmen of Iraq whom he encouraged to revolt, only to cut off their military supplies with the result that 35,000 of them were killed? They also may have some friends or relatives still left alive.

The Doctor of Diplomacy was once quoted as saying, jocosely I trust, "The illegal we do immediately, the unconstitutional takes a little longer." The former government officials accusing him of being in cahoots with the FBI's wiretapping their phones apparently don't have his sense of humor. But since they're suing him to prove their suspicions in open court, they won't resort to gunplay, at least until they lose their case.

Incidentally, one of the reasons that it is supposed Henry needs so much dough is to pay his lawyers and, should the case go against him, the damage award which might even be large enough to force him to lay off a bodyguard or sign up for another five-million-buck-book.

THE PEOPLE with the best motive for taking a shot at him are the Cambodians. (For a first rate description of the ruin of that nation, see William Shawcross' recent book "Sideshow:

Kissinger, Nixon, and the Destruction of Cambodia," Simon & Schuster, 1979, $13.95. It should be required reading in the history of diplomacy courses taught at all the schools Henry is associated with.)

Of all the misadventures, miscalculations, missteps and mistakes of the Kissinger era nothing compares to what was done to Cambodia and its people. Against all good advice, Kissinger and Nixon ordered saturation bombing which dwarfed allied and Nazi air attacks on civilians during World War II, and they did it in secret, causing people in the Air Force and the Pentagon to lie to their superiors, Congress and the public.

Next, these same two men ordered the invasion of Cambodia, setting off a chain of events which destroyed the non-communist government there. Without meaning to, this wrong-headed foreign policy virtuoso — who at age 56 doesn't understand the difference between brains and wisdom, between being clever and being right — installed the communist government of Pol Pot, who celebrated his Kissinger-assisted ascension to power by murdering a third of his fellow countrymen.

The same infallible Henry is now about the business of selling the SALT treaty to the Republican Party and the nation.

But do you think the good doctor brings his bodyguards to his university seminars? A trifle gangsterish for Gothic walls and ivy, don't you think?

14

July 6-13, 1979

Henry and Nancy:

WASHINGTON — Although Henry Kissinger has retired from shuttle diplomacy, he and Nancy are still leading a nomadic life. In some respects it is even more rugged than the old days when it seemed as if he ran the world from his plane.

"I never thought I'd be so peripatetic," Nancy sighs, as she perches on a couch, surrounded by cardboard cartons. After three years overseas, the owners of the Georgetown house the Kissingers have rented are returning, and Nancy is searching for a place with a one-year lease. "At one time it never occurred to me that there wouldn't be one place I'd consider home," she muses.

Since Henry Kissinger's departure from public office a year and a half ago, the couple has been in constant motion. On this day, he's jetted in from Los Angeles. Tomorrow, they're off for a weekend with Lady Bird Johnson at the LBJ ranch.

The telephone rings. It's CBS chairman Bill Paley, inviting them to his new Long Island digs. "We'll be in the Middle East then," Nancy declines. "But why don't you come with us?" she suggests.

Although the Kissingers' whirlwind schedule continues unabated — complete with bodyguards and large entourage — the focus for all that energy is somehow missing. The political power of public office has ebbed, and in its place is a barrage of lawsuits, a spate of anti-Kissinger books and the inevitable question of what to do for an encore.

"I have no idea what I'll do next," says the former Secretary of State, passing through the room with several aides bearing Vuitton suitcases and garment bags. "I'm certainly not planning my life around the 1980 elections," he says emphatically. "I've never planned my life, in fact."

Kissinger picks up the phone to re-

Henry and Nancy Kissinger in their Georgetown house with dog, Tyler

YOUR HAIR.
IT'S ALL
WASHED UP.

If you think all shampoos are alike, you may be in trouble. Because the wrong shampoo can make dry

Since your wet hair needs all the help it can get, all Shampoos de Pantene begin with a low pH and an exact balance of vital conditioners.

But it's just the beginning. The formula includes Pantyl and Phytantriol, two exclusive Swiss conditioners developed and patented by Pantene.® Together, they give your hair added bounce, new resilience. At the same time, they maintain your

Not for Pantene. Lift out which one? Only with it. Rinses and s.

July 6-13, 1979

# Nancy: Still on the move

their Georgetown house with their

turn a call from Bob Strauss, President Carter's Middle East troubleshooter. "With that accent, Bob, you cannot fail in Saudi Arabia," Henry quips in those familiar guttural tones, before withdrawing to finish the call in private.

With a cola drink in hand, Nancy setles down to chat about the presidential race. "I think President Carter may be reelected," she says. "But then," she adds, "I have a pessimistic streak. I'm always prepared for the worst." She pauses, then qualifies her prediction, saying, "A lot depends on what the economy does next year, of course." And that's as close as she'll come to laying a glove on the Carter administration.

Asked who she thinks might replace Cyrus Vance, who says he will resign as Secretary of State at the end of Carter's first term, Nancy ticks off several possibilities. "Brzezinski, of course, is a candidate," she says. "George Ball. Under Secretary of State Warren Christopher. And Bob Strauss is a possibility."

Asked to evaluate Brzezinski's political stance, she says, "I agree with some of his anti-Soviet statements — although sometimes he overdoes it."

Where the Carter team is concerned, Strauss is a clear Kissinger favorite. "He's very bright, able, very good at dealing with people. He'd be a good representative of American interests," she says. Then, with a smile, she explains: "I have a weakness for Texans in general. They're so full of energy — and they think in enormous terms!" She illustrates with an expansive wave of her arm.

But when asked about Texan John Connally's chances of securing the Republican presidential nomination in 1980, Nancy begs off. "I'm not naming anyone because whatever I say, people will think I'm voicing Henry's viewpoint," she demurs. Still, she can't resist one observation. "Ronald Reagan and John Connally are both controversial," she

points out. "The convention could turn to Sen. Howard Baker."

In some liberal circles, a Kissinger endorsement could be read as a political death knell. Despite his exit from the seat of power, Henry Kissinger remains a target for attack by the liberal Establishment for his role in the Indochina War and, more recently, for his dogged efforts to convince the Carter administration to allow the Shah of Iran to settle in the United States.

Nancy attributes the newest round of criticism to her husband's personal friendship with the Shah. "And also because Henry has this non-retiring personality," she wryly observes.

Although Henry has reacted indignantly to William Shawcross' attack on his foreign policy decisions (calling "Side-show," Shawcross' book, "McCarthyism...an inaccurate and distorted book") Nancy seems more philosophical about Shawcross' attack, plus the upcoming Seymour Hersch critique of Kissinger's policies, as well as a growing number of lawsuits seeking access to Henry's private papers.

Of the lawsuits, she says: "These things don't bother him much. In an academic atmosphere, you become used to people picking on one another."

But she doesn't discount the growing appetite of the public, especially members of the intellectual community, for historical analyses that cast Kissinger in an unfavouring light.

"I don't remember as much envy in other periods as now exists — this reduction of complex issues to an individual personality. It's like the references to 'Mr. Madison's War' in 1812. It wasn't Mr. Madison's war. But it's much easier to blame a person than to deal with complex forces that influence events."

Nancy relaxes as the conversation turns to less controversial topics. In New York, she says, she enjoys entertaining in her new, navy-blue-laquered dining room. "It seats 32 for dinner, which is about all anyone would want," she notes. Her most recent party was to celebrate Henry's 56th birthday. "Isaac Stern couldn't come, so he played 'Happy Birthday' on the telephone," Nancy recounts.

Her list of other New York friends includes Kitty Carlisle Hart, Peter Glenville, Penelope Gilliatt, Zubin and Nancy Mehta, Sen. Jacob Javits, and Bill Paley.

ur wet hair needs to get cut, all of Pantene begins to lose its balance.

The beginning. The forces include Pantyl andatriol, two exclusive conditioners developed and patented by their, they give your face, new resilience. Although they maintain your

Not for a second! Shampoo de Pantene has the gentlest of lathers to lift out dirt, instead of ordinary suds which strip your hair of natural oils. Only one time around is necessary with the rich Pantene lather. Then, it rinses out, leaving no film. Just clean and shiny hair.

As you can see, a lot goes into Shampoo de Pantene. Years of research. Years of development. More years of testing. Because Pantene is part of Hoffmann-La Roche Inc.

As you can see, a lot goes into Shampoo de Pantene. Years of research. Years of development. More years of testing. Because Pantene is part of Hoffmann-La Roche Inc., one of the world's largest laboratories devoted to good health.

Shampoo de Pantene is available for Dry, Oily and Normal hair at fine drug and department stores.

With Shampoo de Pantene, you'll find your washed up hair can make a brilliant comeback.

countn't come, so he played Happy Birthday' on the telephone," Nancy recounts.

W photos by GUY DELORT

### Nancy in her Trigere dress

The Kissingers clearly haven't recovered from the death of their mentor, Nelson Rockefeller. "He represented an aristocratic tradition, and I'm not sure that role can be filled," Nancy says mournfully. "Nothing ever replaced the British aristocracy of the 19th century."

When she is in New York, Seventh Avenue continues to be a favorite Nancy Kissinger haunt. She reports on the results of some recent forays. "John Anthony's suits are dazzling, with such beautiful wools and pretty colors," she says.

Other favorite designers include Trigere (she's planning to wear a Trigere dress on this evening), Bill Blass (with special kudos for his green lizard jacket trimmed in sable with matching suede skirt), and Oscar de la Renta, of whose beaded jackets she says: "They're gorgeous! If you have one, you have it for the rest of your life."

Nancy recently returned from China with the distinct impression that U.S. businessmen are still overestimating prospects of buying Chinese consumer products. She dismisses Chinese silks, saying, "They're just not the quality of the French or Italian fabrics."

With all the traveling and managing of households, Nancy manages to lavish special care on Henry. She is clearly proud of his new, trimmer silhouette. "Instead of rich desserts, I cut up an orange, sprinkle it with coconut, and serve it to him with a cookie," she confides.

Is it a specially difficult transition to private life for a man who's no longer running the world? "Don't tell him that," Nancy laughs. "Anyone with that much energy is fine, as long as they have stimulation of a high caliber. I think very bright people are easier to take care of, because they're interested in everything."

Nancy herself is interested in some-day returning to work possibly as a re-

W photos by GUY DELORT

## Nancy in her Trigere dress

Nancy herself is interested in someday returning to work, possibly as a researcher, or a college instructor. "Oddly enough, I was brought up always to work," she remarks. "When Henry's finished his book and knows what he wants to do, I'd like to go back to work — if only for the normal routine that a day-to-day job imposes."

— SUSAN WATTERS

COMMENTARY

# Henry the K fails his big screen test

## Kissinger's TV analysis of hostage crisis a bust

By Fred Kaplan
Globe Staff

WASHINGTON - Let us now consider the political obituary of Henry A. Kissinger.

It was the TWA hostage crisis that finally did the former guru of foreign policy in. Called upon by the television networks to deliver sage commentary concerning the nation's diplomatic predicament, Kissinger unloaded a pile of cliches so historically inaccurate, so politically irrelevant and obtuse, that it is doubtful any TV news producer would, in a sane moment, want to hoist him before a camera during a crisis ever again.

Indeed, if his name were Henry Alfred instead of Henry Alfred Kissinger, the man in his present state could not sensibly be appointed security adviser to the mayor of Stowe, much less to the president of the United States.

One hardly need go further than his own words to reach this verdict. Here is Kissinger, the veteran diplomat, on ABC's "Nightline" June 17, three days after the crisis began, outlining what he would do if he were still in power: "I'm saying no concessions, no negotiations, and retaliation when this is over."

Quite a bargaining position. Sort of like, "Take that gun away from my head."

off to the gas chambers, would it be appropriate news coverage to cover that?

This remark was so bafflingly silly that even Koppel, who is known to socialize with Kissinger, expressed his bewilderment: "Absolutely, we should have shown it. Can you imagine what the outrage of the world would have been? I can't imagine that you would think otherwise."

**What's that again?**

In fact, throughout the hostage crisis, Kissinger, the former Harvard professor, was surprisingly unimpressive whenever he tried to display prowess as a historian and political analyst.

Consider his analysis, on NBC's "Today" show June 18, of why the United States should refuse all negotiations and take some sort of "action" if the crisis were to drag on for too long: "The [1979] hostage crisis in Iran sparked a whole series of attacks on Americans - institutions all over the world. President Reagan had restored respect for American determination. There have been no attacks on Americans for four years. Now, it's starting again."

Wait a minute. No attacks on Americans for four years? This broad-brush analysis conveniently forgets the 239 US Marines killed by a truck-bomb at Beirut

AP PHOTO

According to White House officials, Henry Kissinger was never consulted by the administration during the hostage crisis. That must be a first. Maybe the TV networks ought to follow suit.

give me the gun, and then I will shoot you." Lots of room for successful maneuvering with that line.

### Negligent with homework

Warning terrorists that they "cannot force the American government into negotiations by grabbing Americans," Kissinger told host Ted Koppel, "You exert pressure by making him pay a price he's unwilling to pay."

Koppel asked, "Which is?"

Kissinger replied (this is taken directly from the ABC transcript), "Which is that - this would have to be - this would have to be studied."

It was not the last time Kissinger would have to confess he had failed to study before pontificating. Eight days later, again on "Nightline," Kissinger expressed virulent opposition to the idea of asking Israel to satisfy the hijackers' demands by returning 700 Shiite prisoners to Lebanon. Koppel then pointed out that Vice President George Bush had said

International Airport, American runs and workers killed in El Salvador, the US

Embassy bombed in Kuwait, the seven Americans kidnapped in Lebanon (the seven whom Reagan tried, but failed, to get returned along with the 39 hijacked passengers).

These attacks were, in most cases, far more serious than the random embassy sackings and building burnings that occurred under Jimmy Carter's watch. [In-cidents, by the way, that were not "sparked" by the Iranian hostage crisis, since several of them occurred prior to that event. Moreover, the only "action" Reagan took, in retaliation to the Beirut truck-bombing, was to crater the landscape of the Beirut suburbs with shells fired offshore from the battleship New Jersey - a campaign that accomplished absolutely nothing except the alienation of hundreds of Shiite families.

Kissinger's whole approach to using

give me the gun, and then I will shoot
you." Lots of room for successful maneu-
vering with that line.

Negligent with homework

Warning terrorists that they "cannot
force the American government into ne-
gotiations by grabbing Americans," Kiss-
singer told host Ted Koppel, "You exert
pressure by making him pay a price he's
unwilling to pay."

Koppel asked, "Which is?"

It was not the last time Kissinger
would have to confess he had failed to
study before pontificating. Eight days lat-
er, again on "Nightline," Kissinger ex-
pressed virulent opposition to the idea of
asking Israel to satisfy the hijackers' de-
mands by returning 700 Shiite prisoners
to Lebanon. Koppel then pointed out that
Vice President George Bush had said
these Shlities had been illegally moved
from Lebanon into Israel and, therefore,
should be moved back. What about that?

Kissinger's reply: "Whether these pris-
oners should be released, if this were two
weeks ago before there were any Ameri-
can hostages, I don't know what my view
would be: I haven't studied that issue."

This line should have been a show-
stopper. The matter of the Shiite prison-
ers in Israel was central to the whole hos-
tage crisis: It was the reason why the Hez-
bollah extremists hijacked the TWA
flight; and Henry Kissinger says, "I
HAVEN'T STUDIED THAT ISSUE"?

Another case in point: On this same
June 25 broadcast, Kissinger proposed
"that the media should never show the
terrorists making demands or carry any-
thing that includes pictures of the terror-
ists, interviews with terrorists or any-
thing that gives the terrorists a plat-
form." Kissinger seemed to think this
could be done easily: Simply sit the execu-
tives of the three networks together and
get them to agree to it.

Instantly, this idea was trashed and
shredded by Koppel and the other guest
on the program, former State Department
spokesman Hodding Carter. There are
thousands of radio and TV stations, even
more newspapers and magazines, inde-
pendent satellite dishes, they said. Was
this idea practical? Further, was it wise?
The American public's resolve would
hardly be strengthened, Carter noted, by
being kept "in the dark like a bunch of
mushrooms."

The beleaguered Kissinger at this
point said he still thought something
ought to be done about the problem, but
he acknowledged, "Now, I have no good
answer to this problem because I haven't
thought it through."

The exchange over the behavior of the
media. Incidentally, was the occasion for
the famous no-cameras-at-Buchenwald-
please incident. This was where Kis-
singer, in a startlingly misguided attempt
to prove his point about the dangers of
TV cameras hovering over terrorists,
said, "if the Nazis had invited networks
to Auschwitz to watch people marching

International Airport, American rilns
and workers killed in El Salvador, the US

Embassy bombed in Kuwait, the seven
Americans kidnapped in Lebanon the
seven whom Reagan tried, but failed, to
get returned along with the 39 hijacked
passengers).

These attacks were, in most cases, far
more serious than the random embassy
sackings and building burnings that oc-
curred under Jimmy Carter's watch "in-
cidents, by the way, that were not
"sparked" by the Iranian hostage crisis,
since several of them occurred prior to
that event. Moreover, the only "action"
Reagan took, in retaliation to the Beirut
truck-bombing, was to crater the land-
scape of the Beirut suburbs with shells
fired offshore from the battleship New
Jersey - a campaign that accomplished
absolutely nothing except the alienation
of hundreds of Shiite families.

Kissinger's whole approach to using
force against terrorists seemed abstract,
a bit divorced from reality. On "Night-
line," he said, "Whether the terrorists kill
people depends on the reaction they fear
from the American government." On the
"Today" show: "If the people who do the
hijacking fear that the cost to them is
greater than any possible gain, that in-
deed, there cannot be any gain because
the United States never yields to hi-
jackers, then the hijacking will stop."

Tell that to the Israelis, who have a
firm policy of not negotiating with tor-
ists but who continue to face terroris-
nearly every month. Do terrorists, espe-
cially those of a fanatically religious bent,
perform cost-benefit calculations before
they engage in some action? Doubtful.

Even on the specifics of Middle East
politics, Kissinger, the master of Middle
East shuttle diplomacy and nuanced am-
biguity, displayed a coarse and mislead-
ingly black-and-white perspective. On the
June 18 "Today" show, Kissinger urged
no talking with Amal leader Nabih Berri
in particular: "I wouldn't trust anybody
who colludes with hijackers... I wouldn't
talk with him."

Had Kissinger's advice been followed,
the hostages might still be in Lebanon,
for, in retrospect, it was Berri who - as
Lebanese source put it to the Globe's Cur-
tis Wilkie - "hijacked the hostages from
the original hijackers" and assured their
safety.

Nowhere in Kissinger's remarks does
there appear to be any recognition of the
quite sharp distinctions between Berri
and the more extremist faction of the Hez-
bollah movement, or of the many reasons
why it might be in Berri's (and Syria's) in-
terest to free the hostages as soon as
possible.

Fortunately, Reagan administration
officials did have a deeper understanding
of these distinctions, these possibilities,
and that is one reason why the hostages
were released.

Incidentally, according to White House
officials, Henry A. Kissinger was never
consulted by the administration during
the entire run of the crisis. That must be
a first. Maybe the networks ought to fol-
low suit.

Good night, Henry.