FIRST LINE REPORT - WTOP
WITH DAN RATHER

FEBRUARY 9, 1972

DAN RATHER: First Line Report, News Analysis, Dan Rather, CBS News, The White House. Good morning.

The President's State of the World report -- out today. Some thoughts after this.

(Announcement)

DAN RATHER: The President of the United States makes a nationwide address this morning, shortly past 11:00, Eastern Time. Subject: The President's State of the World Report.

One of the better reported innovations of the Nixon years so far is that of this annual State of the World Report. It comes out in printed form each February. It purports to be, and in some ways is, a fairly detailed account of where the President thinks we, as a Nation, have been in foreign policy, where we appear to be headed, and where he wants to take us.

Example: Last year's State of the World Report clearly indicated, for anyone with foreign policy experience who read it closely, that some new initiative toward China was in the works. The President does not personally write the State of the World Report. Some detractors in Congress and in the press doubt that he even reads it all. Dr. Henry Kissinger is the report's principal author.

But careful analysis of past State of the World writings shows that the opinions and conclusions are clearly those of the President; that where Mr. Nixon and Dr. Kissinger are known to differ, on the basis of past statements or writings, the State of the World Report reflects the President's opinions.

Dr. Kissinger's brief is to articulate what President Nixon wants. In other governments, and in the United States Government during most administrations, any undertaking such as this would be under supervision of the Secretary of State, with heavy input from the Department of State.

- 2 -

President Nixon, as must be clear to all by now, believes basically in making foreign policy formulation a two-man show: he and his in-house private foreign policy aide. The Secretary of State, and to a lesser extent those under the Secretary in his department, are, to be sure, consulted. William Rogers has been and continues to be one of the President's closest personal friends. But the big foreign policy decisions are made by, and State of the World reports are written by, the President and Kissinger.

It is hard to find anyone who questions Kissinger's brilliance or his competence. The questions are, and they are raised all over again by issuance of this latest State of the World report: Over the long run, is it healthy to formulate and execute foreign policy in this manner? Does Kissinger, for all of his acknowledged brilliance and competence, have too much to do -- chief of foreign policy, secret negotiator, coordinator of all intelligence operations? How can any one man, over an extended period, keep so many chess games going simultaneously? Are the risks of error, miscalculation, and overloooking things increased or decreased?

There are no ready answers. The short-run track record of the Nixon-Kissinger operation is, by most objective, analytical accounts, excellent. In the Vietnam war, in the problems with the Soviets and Europe, and perhaps to a lesser extent in the Middle East, many diplomats and foreign journalists give the dynamic duo high marks. Handling of the India-Pakistan War is widely considered to be their worst mark.

But it must be the long, not the short, overall record that determines if the Nixon foreign policy decision-making process has been to the Nation's best interest. The answer to that is not in today's State of the World Report. Many answers to what has been decided, and perhaps more importantly, why, are in it.

The President will make a brief statement, 10 to 15 minutes, about his State of the World Report in his nationwide broadcast this morning. You, as a citizen, can get a full copy of the report by addressing the White House.

# # # # # #

# The Evening Star
With Sunday Morning Edition

Published by THE EVENING STAR NEWSPAPER CO., Washington, D. C.

CROSBY N. BOYD, Chairman of the Board

JOHN H. KAUFFMANN, President

NEWBOLD NOYES, Editor

A-12 **

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 1972

## State of the World

For those of us who are likely to look on American foreign policy as a series of more or less unrelated fits and starts, improvised responses to fortuitous happenings and a generally myopic groping toward undefined and unattained goals, President Nixon's own views of his conduct of foreign policy make reassuring reading. In his latest voluminous report to Congress on his stewardship in foreign affairs, almost everything that happened in the past year appears, with the aid of hindsight, to have been part of the President's personal grand design in the shaping of history to his will.

It is a pity, therefore, that so relatively few people will have the opportunity or take the time to read Mr. Nixon's own account of what he describes as the "watershed year" in redefining the role of the United States in the world in terms of our relations with both our friends and our adversaries. For while the major events of the year are familiar enough, the President's evaluation of these events and what they portend for the future provides illuminating insight into workings of the presidential mind.

He is, for the most part, understandably upbeat in reviewing the accomplishments and minimizing the failures. The former are the natural fruits of Mr. Nixon's New American Philosophy in foreign affairs, careful planning and skillful diplomacy. The latter, without exception, are somebody else's fault.

Listed high among the accomplishments "of historic scope and significance" are, of course, the President's forthcoming summit meetings in Peking and Moscow — an opening to the People's Republic of China and the beginning of a new relationship with the Soviet Union. On both counts, Mr. Nixon is cautiously optimistic. In the case of China, he seems confident of the outcome ("a giant step toward the creation of a stable structure of world peace") without promising much in the way of concrete results. In the case of the Soviet

Union, there is little doubt about the results in terms of progress toward strategic arms limitation, rather more reserve about the long-range implications of expanding Russian power.

Almost equal ground for self-congratulation is found in the development of our relations with our European allies and Japan which is seen in the context of forging a more "mature" political relationship with these countries and removing the economic threat to allied unity. Admittedly, our allies did not regard the drastic unilateral steps taken by the Nixon administration last August as an unmitigated blessing and the initiatives tended to get a little out of phase with each other. But by the end of the year, "it was clear that our initiatives toward both our friends and our adversaries were in basic harmony."

On the minus side of the ledger, the course of events was less harmonious. The failure to negotiate peace in Vietnam or obtain release of American war prisoners, the war between India and Pakistan, the continuing stalemate in the Middle East all have resulted from the intransigence of others and despite the most strenuous efforts by the administration in the cause of peace and reconciliation. Similarly, our continuing problems with Latin America and Africa and the expulsion of Taiwan from the United Nations were not the fault of the administration. You can't, as they say, win 'em all.

Some, we suspect, may be moved to see Mr. Nixon's report on the State of the World as a self-serving document, a kind of blueprint for the major arguments and justifications on which the President expects to run for re-election next fall. We prefer the more charitable view that it represents a reasonably accurate picture of how Mr. Nixon sees his conduct of foreign affairs over the last three years—a record on which the voters will have ample opportunity to pass judgment in the months to come.

'-and in the center ring . . .!'

# Key Democrats Assault Nixon

## DISSENT WILL CONTINUE

## MIX OF POLITICS, POLICY

Associated Press

President Nixon's personal call for caution in criticizing his Vietnam policy has been blasted by leading Democrats as an attempt to use Americans' anxiety about the war to silence dissent.

Democratic National Chairman Lawrence F. O'Brien said today it would be "injurious to the nation" if the administration continued to "blatantly attack" critics of Nixon's Vietnam policy.

"I feel that continuance of this on the part of the administration is injurious to the nation and detrimental to every American," he said. "This

cannot go on. It need not go on."

Mayor John V. Lindsay of New York, one Democratic hopeful, accused Nixon of reviving the tactics of the late Sen. Joseph McCarthy. Lindsay labeled the President's State of the World message "a scurrilous attack upon the honor of his critics and an absurdly pollyannaish caricature of the international scene."

The attack on Vietnam dissenters," Lindsay added, "revives the character assassination which was banished from American politics 20 years

See POLITICS, Page A-6

By GEORGE SHERMAN

Star Staff Writer

President Nixon's presentation of his annual report on foreign policy has again demonstrated the blend of politics and policy in election year 1972.

On radio to the nation yesterday he took the high road of presidential statesmanship. But right in the middle of his outline of superpower successes with the Russians and Chinese, he inserted a little lecture on the threat of partisanship at home to Vietnam negotiations.

Unlike his White House chief of staff, H. R. Haldeman, several days earlier, Nixon said he did not question "the sincerity or patriotism of those who disagree with my policies to bring peace." Nor did the President single out with harsh words the leading Democratic presidential contender, Sen. Edmund S. Muskie, as did his lieutenants last week.

But he did remind Muskie

and everybody else that "We have only one President at a time," and that only he can negotiate an end to the Vietnam war. As Nixon says he acted as a candidate in 1968, so now did President Nixon want his opponents to act in 1972.

"A candidate for president," said the President, "has a

### Interpretation

higher responsibility than the ordinary critic. A candidate should make any criticism he believes would contribute to bringing an honorable peace.

"But I would hope that anyone seeking the presidency would examine his statements carefully to be sure that nothing he says might give the enemy an incentive to prolong the war until after the election."

Last night, to make the point

See POLICY, Page A-6

# State Welfare Aid

United Press International

With the biggest one-year jump in welfare costs in history causing a financial pinch across the country, the administration has decided to give states a $1 billion advance that could put thousands back on the welfare rolls this year.

As it stands now, the states are drawing about $1 billion a month from the Treasury for the federal share of such programs as benefits for the aged, blind, disabled, dependent children and the medically needy. The federal contribution is about 52 percent, with the states paying the rest.

But last year welfare costs jumped nearly 27 percent, and 19 states and the District of Columbia had to cut back the level of payments.

## Must Be Repaid

To ease the crunch, the government has decided to let the states draw an extra $1 billion from the Treasury starting June 15 — meaning that some states would have twice as much money available for that month.

Those states which elect to take the extra money would

the amount back in full at some point.

This is the first time the administration has allowed an advance on welfare payments. It always has required that the withdrawals be made for the current month only.

## Total Cuts Unknown

Welfare officials said there was no way of knowing how many had been cut from welfare rolls or suffered reduced payments in the crunch. The states, officials added, could use the extra money in a number of ways, including restoring people to the welfare rolls, increasing aid to those who were cut, adding people to the rolls or just catching up on costs.

The District of Columbia and 20 states have trimmed the level of payments to recipients in the largest federally funded welfare program, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, just to keep up with costs.

Jurisdictions that have cut back the level of payments to needy families are Alabama, California, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Georgia, Kansas, Ken-

na and Helsinki negotiate further on how far an offensive curb should go.

According to informed sources, Moscow is resisting American efforts to include the submarine-based, Polaris-type missiles in this first agreement. The Russians are currently trying to catch up with the United States in these sea-based missile systems, and do not want this effort interrupted.

## Sub Fleet Sought

The President's report said that Russia now has in operation or under construction more modern missile-firing submarines than the 41 owned by the U.S. To offset this rising threat, the report said, Congress has been asked for funds to build a new fleet of huge submarines able to fire missiles 6,000 mmiles.

The report cited this possible Soviet thrust for a "first-strike capability" from submarines against U.S.

mounting debt goes through the present $430 billion ceiling, an event forecast for early March.

The House voted, 248 to 147, yesterday for the bill. President Nixon had asked for $50 billion more in borrowing authority, which would have taken care of Treasury needs until February 1973.

The Democrat - controlled Ways and Means Committee instead approved the interim increase, which automatically will bring the administration back before Congress for a fiscal discussion before the presidential campaign.

LEARN

SOLID STATE

TELEVISION—RADIO

ELECTRONICS

Day or evening classes

BASIC and
ADVANCED COURSES

EARN

WHILE YOU LEARN

ENTER CLASS NOW

PHONE—WRITTEN FOR IN

CALL

POLICY

# Nixon Blends Politics With View of World

Continued From Page A-1
in noticeably less noble terms, presidential communications director Herbert G. Klein told a South Carolina meeting of broadcasters that presidential aspirants, "perhaps unwittingly," have become "a funnel through which propaganda from Hanoi seeks to further divide us over the situation in Vietnam."

Klein specifically claimed that Sen. George McGovern and others "seem to parrot Hanoi's public line," thereby raising the question of who is more credible — "Xuan Thuy (North Vietnamese negotiator) or Richard Nixon?"

The tone of the White House public relations man was again in marked contrast to the almost scholarly criticism of McGovern provided earlier in the day by the presidential adviser on foreign policy, Henry A. Kissinger. He told newsman that McGovern put the issue between the administration and its opponents in its clearest and sharpest form, but that the senator had held these views on immediate, unconditional withdrawal from Vietnam "with integrity, sincerity and patriotism all his public life."

Nixon went out of his way to present a case for his foreign policy which does not rest on pure partisan ship. His 236-page State of the World report and its capsulized version on radio recited the many achievements and few disappointments which had made 1971 a "watershed year" in the Nixon remolding of the U.S. role in the world.

"Three years ago, we stopped reacting on the basis of yesterday's habits and started acting to deal with the realities of today and the opportunities of tomorrow," was his rhetorical way of putting it in the radio address.

The report dwelled on those four power centers with which, in the Nixon view of the world, the United States is to have a combination of creative rivalry and friendship in a new "generation of peace." The four are the Soviet Union, China, Japan and Western Europe.

In the President's mind, as no doubt in that of his public, the forthcoming Nixon trips to Peking and Moscow held center stage. Perhaps the report was most remarkable in the different approach it took toward the Soviet Union and China.

Toward the People's Republican the tone was almost soothing. Nothing concrete, nothing dramatic, no earth-shaking reversals of American commitments were promised from the sojourn later this month. Over and over the President repeated that he was making "a beginning"—opening communication, ending mutual isolation—in the hope that later agreements might materialize from the budding dialogue.

Toward Moscow the message was a mixture of hopes and dangers posed by the long-standing Soviet-American rivalry around the world. The President saw optimistic signs that Washington and Moscow are close to their first agreement on the limitation of strategic nuclear weapons, and that economic cooperation between the industrial giants was on the horizon.

But he also saw the dangers of continuing Soviet militarism and expansion.

The continuing Soviet buildup of offensive missiles, Soviet arms supplies to the Middle East, Soviet support of Indian moves which amounted to the dismemberment of Pakistan—these were all evidence that the Russians still had not deserted their old ways.

NANA-12. LASKY-ANDERSON (COLUMN)
SAY IT STRAIGHT!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

THE ANDERSON PAPERS CASE:
WHO LEAKED THE DOCUMENTS?

BY VICTORY LASKY

NORTH AMERICAN NEWSPAPER ALLIANCE

WASHINGTON, JAN. 12 (NANA)--THERE'S VERY LITTLE ABOUT THE DISCLOSURES IN THE SO-CALLED ANDERSON PAPERS THAT TROUBLES THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION. ALL THAT THOSE DOCUMENTS BASICALLY DEMONSTRATE IS THAT THE WHITE HOUSE DESPERATELY SOUGHT TO PREVENT A WAR ON THE INDIAN SUBCONTINENT.

WHAT IS OF UTMOST CONCERN, HOWEVER, IS THE FACT THAT SOMEONE WITHIN THE FEDERAL BUREAUCRACY, FOR WHATEVER REASONS, BETRAYED HIS TRUST BY ILLEGALLY PROVIDING A COLUMNIST WITH COPIES OF "SECRET-SENSITIVE" MINUTES OF THREE WHITE HOUSE MEETINGS DEALING WITH THE INDO-PAKISTAN WAR.

THE WHITE HOUSE HAS EVERY RIGHT TO KEEP ITS CONFIDENTIAL IN-HOUSE DELIBERATIONS FROM BEING PUBLICLY SPREAD ON THE RECORD. YOU JUST CAN'T HAVE TELEVISION CAMERAS INSIDE THE SITUATION ROOM TAPING HIGH-LEVEL DISCUSSIONS FOR USE ON THE 7:00 P.M. NEWS SHOWS. IF YOU DO, THE GOVERNMENT WILL CEASE TO FUNCTION.

THE NEW YORK TIMES, FOR EXAMPLE, USED TO UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR UTMOST SECRECY IN SUCH GOVERNMENT DELIBERATIONS. BACK IN DECEMBER 1962, THE "TIMES" COMMENTED ON A MAGAZINE ARTICLE REPORTING TO TELL WHAT WENT ON IN THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL" DURING THE CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS.

--HAMPERS THE PRESIDENT--

ALLEGING THAT "THE SECRECY OF ONE OF THE HIGHEST ORGANS OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT HAS BEEN SERIOUSLY BREACHED," THE "TIMES" ASKED:

"HOW CAN ADVISERS TO THE PRESIDENT BE EXPECTED TO GIVE ADVICE FREELY AND EASILY AND AT ALL TIMES HONESTLY AND WITH COMPLETE INTEGRITY IF THEY HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT WHAT THEIR ARGUMENTS WILL LOOK LIKE IN PRINT A FEW WEEKS LATER?

"WHAT KIND OF ADVICE CAN THE PRESIDENT EXPECT TO GET UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES? HOW CAN THERE BE ANY REAL FREEDOM OF DISCUSSION OR OF DISSENT; HOW CAN ANYONE BE EXPECTED TO ADVANCE POSITIONS THAT MAY BE POLITICALLY UNPOPULAR OR UNPROFITABLE? DOES NO ONE IN WASHINGTON RECALL THE MCCARTHY ERA AND THE MCCARTHY TECHNIQUE?"

OF COURSE, THE "TIMES" HAS CHANGED ITS POSITION COMPLETELY IN RECENT YEARS. TODAY, SCOTTY RESTON AND JOHN OAKES ARE ALL FOR PUBLICATION OF ANYTHING THAT WILL LEAD TO THE POLITICAL DESTRUCTION OF RICHARD M. NIXON. THEY'RE CURRENTLY HAVING A FIELD DAY WITH THE ANDERSON PAPERS.

(MORE)

NANA-13. LASKY-ANDERSON

ADD ONE

--PROVES WE'RE FREE--

IF ANYTHING, PUBLICATION OF THE DOCUMENTS PUTS THE LIE TO REPEATED LEFTIST-LIBERAL CONTENTIONS THAT FREEDOM OF THE PRESS IS IMPERILLED IN THIS COUNTRY. IN NO OTHER FREE COUNTRY WOULD PUBLICATION OF SUCH MATERIALS HAVE BEEN PERMITTED.

ANDERSON SAID HE WAS DISCLOSING THE DOCUMENTS, SLIPPED TO HIM BY A DISLOYAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE, BECAUSE, HE CLAIMED, DR. HENRY KISSINGER HAD "LIED" TO NEWSMEN IN A BACKGROUND BRIEFING WHEN THE PRESIDENT'S NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER HAD STATED THAT THIS COUNTRY'S POLICY WAS NOT "ANTI-INDIAN."

BUT IN THE SAME BRIEFING, KISSINGER HAD ALSO STATED--AND THIS HAS BEEN DELIBERATELY OVERLOOKED BY MOST OF THE CRITICS--THAT THE UNITED STATES, "WHICH IN MANY RESPECTS HAS HAD A LOVE AFFAIR WITH INDIA, CAN ONLY WITH ENORMOUS PAIN ACCEPT THE FACT THAT MILITARY ACTION WAS TAKEN IN OUR VIEW WITHOUT ADEQUATE CAUSE...."

IN OTHER WORDS, KISSINGER WAS NOT BEING ANTI-INDIAN IN GENERAL; BUT ONLY ON A SPECIFIC INDIAN POLICY, NAMELY, ITS LONGSTANDING DESIRE TO WREAK HAVOC ON NEIGHBORING PAKISTAN. IT IS DIFFICULT TO COMPREHEND CONTENTIONS THAT THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION SHOULD HAVE SUPPORTED INDIA'S MILITARY ADVENTURE.

--ALWAYS ANTI-U.S.--

ANOTHER ARGUMENT OF THE CRITICS SUCH AS RESTON IS THAT THE UNITED STATES HAS LOST INFLUENCE IN INDIA TO THE RUSSIANS. NONSENSE! PRIME MINISTER GANDHI HAS LONG PLAYED THE SOVIET GAME, FIGURING THAT, NO MATTER WHAT SHE DOES, THE AMERICAN SUCKERS WILL KEEP PAYING INDIA'S EXORBITANT BILLS. MRS. GANDHI HAS NEVER MADE ANY SECRET OF HER ANTI-AMERICANISM. THUS, ARTHUR SCHLESINGER, JR., IN HIS ACCOUNT OF THE KENNEDY YEARS, "A THOUSAND DAYS," RECORDED A VISIT MRS. GANDHI MADE TO THE WHITE HOUSE WITH HER FATHER, PRIME MINISTER NEHRU, IN NOVEMBER 1961. "DURING DINNER," WROTE SCHLESINGER, "INDIRA GANDHI ASSAILED THE PRESIDENT ABOUT AMERICAN POLICY, PRAISED KRISHNA MENON, THE PROFESSIONAL ANTI-AMERICAN OF NEW DELHI, AND OTHERWISE ELEVATED THE MOOD OF THE EVENING."

AS PRIME MINISTER, MRS. GANDHI HAS DONE NOTHING TO ELEVATE THE MOOD OF INDO-U.S. RELATIONS. SHE HAS REPEATEDLY KICKED US IN THE TEETH, ALL THE TIME KEEPING HER HAND OUT FOR MORE U.S. AID MONEY.

THE TIME HAS COME TO TELL HER TO FORGET IT; THAT UNCLE SAM DOESN'T INTEND TO PLAY SUCKER ANY MORE.

END-LASKY-ANDERSON-NANA-72

EM&P

TRANSLATION

AMERICAN EMBASSY - ROME
TRANSLATION UNIT - GSO

Serial N° 6377
Translated by O.Pela
Date January 4, 1972

from: LA STAMPA

December 31, 1971

KISSINGER, THE MAN OF THE YEAR

We shall remember 1971 as the China year. Among all the important events of these twelve months, the dialogue which has been set up between China and the United States with the announcement of Nixon's visit to Peking is certainly the most important and unexpected one. After twenty years of refusal, "mainland China exists again as part of our world", wrote Life; and Henry Kissinger, the President's adviser, who prepared the big turn, says: "Twenty years from now the Vietnam war will be considered as a marginal episode and our opening to Mao as a revolution". His secret visit to Peking in July inaugurated the new era: this is sufficient to make him the man of the year.

For half a century the President's "personal assistants" may have been more important in U.S. foreign policy than the Secretary of State: Colonel House with Wilson, Harry Hopkins with Roosevelt, McGeorge Bundy with Kennedy and then Walt Rostow with Johnson. But among all these "eminences grises", Kissinger is an unusual figure, unprecedented in the United States and unthinkable in modern Europe. He is a German Jew, born in Bavaria in 1923, an immigrant in 1938, naturalized in 1945. He graduated at Harvard with a scholarship for demobilized military personnel and became professor in that same University in 1962. They say he has not lost his German accent; he knows that not all the American society would be ready to him. Some of his colleagues say that "he can hardly hide his insecurity with his intellectual arrogance" (and with an intense, almost indiscreet social life). But he is the most powerful man in the U.S. Government, and after Nixon, the first maker of U.S. strategy and diplomacy, in his apparently modest capacity of Executive Secretary of the national security council.

He entered into politics after having started with theoretical studies and always remained consistent in his interests. In his first important book, "Nuclear arms and foreign policy" (1957) he said that the "Bigs" cannot use unlimitedly the nuclear potential and remain vulnerable notwithstanding their overwhelming strategic superiority. This is why he suggested to Nixon(who agreed) to seek "nuclear sufficiency" but not a useless atomic superiority over the Russians and to abandon some of the diplomatic positions of his predecessors. In his degree thesis he examined the European equilibrium after the Napoleonic experience. As the assistant of the White House he prepares the plans for the construction

Orlando Sentinel

Wednesday

Jan 1997

# Kissinger's Reputation Beats Him To Moscow

By DOROTHY McCARDLE

Washington Post Dispatch

WASHINGTON — Henry Kissinger, top foreign policy adviser to President Nixon, and Ekaterina Furtseva, top woman in the Soviet government, traded light-hearted verbal jabs last week, including some fast-paced banter on Kissinger's way with women.

"I heard you had so much success with Hollywood stars," Mrs. Furtseva told Kissinger in the impromptu sparring match at the Soviet Embassy.

"IS THAT TRUE?"

"I won't explain my relationship with the movies," Kissinger retorted with a grin.

"Will he be as great a success with the ladies in

Russia as he is in America?" another guest asked Mrs. Furtseva.

"More so," she predicted. "You will have even more success with the women when you come to Moscow — that's dangerous. I don't envy the women you'll be with."

KISSINGER glanced at the golden-haired Mrs. Furtseva in mock dismay and quipped:

"I hope you have a good heart specialist in Moscow."

"Of course, we do," she said. "Don't worry."

Then she eyed him up and down and said:

"I thought you were taller . . . yes, much taller," and a mischievous smile crinkled her yes.

"Why are you blushing?" a guest asked Kissinger.

JUST THEN, Mrs. Furtseva proposed a toast — he drinking Vodka neat and she a tall glass of water.

"I will propose this toast, but we should not let the press know about it," she said. "Let's drink to the success of the May visit. Let's drink to real friendship."

She was referring to the summit conference in May when Kissinger will accompany President Nixon to Moscow. She will welcome him there in her capacity as Soviet minister of culture.

BEHIND THE banter there were some overtones as the two eyed one another like a pair of boxers in the ring.

After Kissinger left, Mrs. Furtseva gave her Russian associates a dramatic account of the match, jabbing one arm this way and another that way to illustrate how they had poked at each other in their verbal jesting.

"I love to banter," she said, and added a Russian saying: "They say that out of conflict the truth is born."

Asked if she had ever met Kissinger before, she said it was the first time and added, "I hope it's not the last time I see him."