KISSINGER, HENRY A.

AUG 6 1971

Dear M. Radoux:

Thank you for your letter of August 2. It
has been a long time since we last met
and I was pleased to hear from you again.

Your words of encouragement and support
for the President's recent China initiative
and the part I played in it were very wel-
come and I appreciated your taking the
time to write.

M. Lucien Radoux
Rue Belliard, 35
Brussels, Belgium

jlp:8/5/71

Grausamste
Unmenschlichkeit

Wenn schon der Sachverhalt, der einer Sühne des deutschen Volkes zugrunde legt wird, mehr als fragwürdig ist, so gerät die Überlegung in noch größere Unbereimtheiten, wenn sie sich mit den Sühnemaßnahmen ausandernetzt, als die hier die Vertreibung von mehr als 10 Millionen Deutschen aus ihrer angestammten Helmat im eigenen Vaterlande, ihre Beuraubung von aller Habe, die Annexion deutschen Staatsgebiets und dessen Entdeutschung gelten sollen.

Wohl treffen diese Maßnahmen das gesamte deutsche Volk insoweit, als die ganze deutsche Nation dadurch geschändet und der deutsche Staat in seinem Gesamtbestand getroffen wurde. Aber von der Not, den Grausamkeiten und den Unmenschlichkeiten der Vertreibung wurden nur die unmittelbar Geschädigten in Mitleiden-

chismus
g

schaft gezogen. Wie soll von einer Sühne des deutschen Volkes die Rede sein, wenn nur über einen Teil dieses Volkes das Unhell verhängt wurde?

Zudem war diese Sühnemaßnahme selbst ein Verbrechen und ging unter den grausamsten Unmenschlichkeiten vor sich. Es ist eine Blasphemie, den sittlich fundierten Gedanken der Sühne mit einer Maßnahme in Verbindung zu bringen, die selbst schwerster Verstoß gegen die Sittlichkeit ist und selber eine Sühne erheischen würde, sofern eine solche anwendbar wäre. Die Volksvertreibung wurde dem nationalsozialistischen Regime von der Anklage im Nürnberger Prozeß als eines der schwersten Verbrechen angelastet!

Wenn die Ankläger Deutschlands, die den Verzicht auf Ostdeutschland als Sühne fordern, auch bestreiten, daß das Verbot der Volksvertreibung völkerrechtlich gesichert sei, so liegen doch genügend deutige international gültige Erklärungen und Vereinbarungen vor, die eine solche Vertreibung als völkerrechtswidrig brandmarken.

Nicht anders bietet sich die Rechtslage hinsichtlich des Raubes von fremdem Staatsgebiet dar. Der Verzicht, den eine deutsche Regierung ausspräche, wäre selbst ein Unrechtsakt, weil die moderne internationale Rechtsauffassung seit mehr als einem halben Jahrhundert dahin geht, daß ein Wechsel der Staatshoheit nur unter Berücksichtigung des Willens der davon betroffenen Bevölkerung erfolgen darf. Angefangen bei den 14 Punkten Wilsons, über den Briand-Kellog-Pakt von 1928, dem als Rechtsgrundlage der Nürnberger Prozesse grundsätzliche Bedeutung für die Beurteilung dieses Sachverhalts zukommt, über die Stimson-Doktrin vom Jahre 1932 bis zum Potsdamer Protokoll, durch das die Grenzen des Deutschen Reiches von 1937 ausdrücklich als weiterhin gültig für jede Erörterung anerkannt wurden, kann ein Teil des deutschen Staatsgebiets nicht Gegenstand eines Sühneaktes sein, selbst wenn ein Verzicht sich zu solcher Sühne widersinnigerweise bekennen sollte.

● DER CHRISTLICHE GLAUBEN-

GRUND findet sich bei Fechner zwar nicht als besonderer Gegenstand behandelt. Das herausfordernde Drängen gewisser Kreise, einen Verzicht „um Jesu Christi willen“ auszusprechen, erfordert indes eine Stellungnahme.

KISSINGER, HENRY A.

OCT 1 1 1971

Dear Mr. Raina:

Thank you for your letter of September 29 and for your invitation to me to contribute to the birthday gift for Rix Loewenthal. I appreciate your thinking to include me and wish that I were able at present to spend the time required to write something.

As I am sure you can understand, however, my time is completely consumed with the demands of my office, and I would not be able to make a thoughtful contribution.

Please extend my greetings and best birthday wishes to Mr. Loewenthal.

Mr. Peter Raina
1 Berlin 38
Dofsdamer Chaussee 31-33
Haus 22
West Germany

jlp:10/8/71

RECEIVED
OCT 1 2 1971

GENERAL FILES

D. K. Raina, M. A., D. Phil.

Fellow of Osteuropa-Institut
Freie Universität Berlin

1 Berlin 38
Polsdamer Chaussee 31-33
Haus 22
Tel.: 84 32 71 Ex. 31

29 September 1971

Professor Henry Kissinger
Special Adviser to the President
of the United States of America
White House
Washington D.C.

Dear Professor Kissinger,

Rix Loewenthal's 65th birthday falls on 15 April 1973. His friends and colleagues intend to honour him with a Festschrift, which I have the honour to edit. This volume will be published by S. Fischer Verlag, Frankfurt and will cover Weltpolitik und Ideologie in the 70s. Among others who have agreed to write for this Festschrift are Chancellor Brandt, Brzezinski, Kenneth Younger, W. Griffith, Victor Zorza etc.

You have known Loewenthal and I wonder if you would be willing to write for this volume. I realize how busy you are. And we would the more appreciate your contribution.

G. A. SAXTON & CO., INC.

Members of the New York and American Stock Exchanges

100 Wall Street, New York, N.Y. 10005 • (212) 483-1600

Cable: GASAXTON, New York • TWX 212-571-0232 • ITT-Telex 423470

July 27, 1971

KISSINGER, HENRY A.

Dr. Henry A. Kissinger
The White House
Washington, D. C.

Dear Henry:

Your China exploits have done much to brighten my daily reading of the New York Times.

Congratulations on a brilliant maneuver with magnificent execution.

DJD:jp

GENERAL

KISSINGER, HENRY ▲

JUN 1 1971

Dear Gustav:

Many thanks for your letter of May 21 inform-
ing me of Dr. Islam's visit to Washington
and suggesting that I might see him. I ap-
preciate your thinking of me and am sorry that
my unusually heavy schedule has prevented me
from seeing him during his visits here.

I will pass along to my staff the information
contained in your letter and they may be get-
ting in touch with Dr. Islam.

Professor Gustav Ranis
Yale University
Department of Economics
Economic Growth Center
Box 1987, Yale Station
New Haven, Connecticut

RECEIVED

JUN 12 1971

CENTRAL FILES

HK:jlp:6/10/71

Yale University New Haven, Connecticut

DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

GUSTAV RANIS, Director

May 21, 1971

Mr. Henry Kissinger
Executive Offices
The White House
Washington, D. C.

Dear Henry:

Thank you for your response to my recent note on Pakistan.

The Director of the Pakistan Institute of Development Economics in Dacca, Dr. Nurul Islam, an economist of international repute, is now with us at Yale for the current academic year. In my view, he is a very able and acute observer of the scene, well known to people like Ed Mason and Hollis Chenery, and currently not politically active. He could, I think, be very helpful in assisting the United States government to obtain as full and balanced a review of past events and future probabilities as possible. I wonder whether, in this connection, you would be willing to talk with him.

He will be in Washington, May 25, and would be available any time except lunch on that day. Perhaps your secretary could call mine if you can find the time on that day, or one of the adjoining days.

GR:p1

January 11, 1971

Mr. Patrick J. Buchanan
Assistant to the President
The White House Office
Washington, D. C.

Dear Mr. Buchanan:

I am enclosing a letter I have sent to the Editor of
the New York Times, reacting to your letter published January 8.

It is clear that the White House authorized disclosure
of the President's posture during the Mid-East crisis last
summer. His words: "I did not want the hot words of tele-
vision," etc., were widely quoted, and that he was getting
his own news summaries was publicized. So I admit that
my own first paragraph could be misleading; certainly not
intentionally so.

But I do consider you and your office to be part of the
intelligence bureaucracy, broadly defined. I failed perhaps
to define my terms with adequate precision.

My essay was not an attack on any particular President.
But I would not recommend that any President rely on any one
system's summaries or condensations. And this is no accusa-
tion of your deliberately shaping the pictures in the Presi-
dent's mind.

You are right in describing my sometimes "isolation."
But I have learned to be pessimistic about getting interviews
about intelligence resources for top decision makers.

I had assumed that you or my old friend, Henry Kissinger,
could not discuss freely such matters with me.

VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY

NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE 37203

TELEPHONE 322-7311 AREA 615

Department of Political Science • Direct phone 322-2461

January 9, 1971

The Editor
The New York Times
229 W. 43rd Street
New York, N.Y. 10036

Dear Sir:

Patrick J. Buchanan, Special Assistant to President Nixon, asserts in a letter published January 3 that my Op-Ed article of December 26 contains false statements about the President's sources of information.

Mr. Buchanan's letter has not entirely convinced me of having erred. I confess to some lack of clarity in my essay about whom I would include under the term intelligence "establishment" or "bureaucracy." As Mr. Buchanan explains his role, I would include him as part of the intelligence "bureaucracy" although he is not a member of the intelligence "community."

I apologize to readers for possibly misleading assertions in my essay, but I stick to the thrust of my argument. In detailing the President's sources of information, note that Mr. Buchanan stresses that his office supplies the President with summaries and condensations from newspapers, radio and TV, and periodicals. Part of my argument is that those in the intelligence bureaucracy who select and digest information and opinions can shape the presidential picture of the outside world.

But Mr. Buchanan concerns himself only with my first paragraph which was merely illustrative of the "intelligence establishment" problem as I define it. The more important part of my argument dealt with the dangers of an intelligence system operating outside of legitimate policy controls.

Events of recent months, especially disclosures of improper armed service intelligence surveillance of domestic politics, seem to authenticate my concerns. I am disappointed that Mr. Buchanan had not a word to say -even if to correct my information- about the main thrust of my argument.

KISSINGER, HENRY A.

JUL 2 1971

Dear Harry:

Thank you for your letter and for the news
of your most recent undertaking. I am sor-
ry not to have gotten back to you sooner, but
as I am sure you understand, my schedule is
always bad and has recently been worse than
usual.

Your project sounds like an interesting one
and I am sorry I missed you while you were
in Washington. Will you be coming here
again? Please stay in touch and let me know
how you are progressing.

Professor Harry Howe Ransom, Chairman
Department of Political Science
Vanderbilt University
Box 1817, Station B
Nashville, Tennessee 37203

jlp:6/29/71

VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY

NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE 37203

TELEPHONE 322-7311 AREA 615

May 28, 1971

Dr. Henry A. Kissinger
Special Assistant to the President
The White House
Washington, D. C.

Dear Henry:

I write to inform you of a research project I have
undertaken this summer described in the brief enclosed
statement.

Would it be possible for you to grant me a personal
interview to discuss this undertaking? I am of course aware
of the sensitivity of this subject matter and of your current
position. My primary concern is with research feasibility
outside classified information and your advice would be highly
valued.

My present plans are to be in Washington June 12-15
if you could see me during that period. If some other date
is more feasible, I could probably arrange to be there.

With best personal regards,

HHR:erm

enclosure

VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY

NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE 37203

TELEPHONE 322-7311 AREA 615

THE UNITED STATES INTELLIGENCE SYSTEM--
SURVEY OF FRONTIERS FOR RESEARCH

June, 1971

With support from Russell Sage Foundation of New York
I am undertaking a survey this summer of the "research frontiers"
of questions relating to the intelligence systems and activities
of the United States government.

My objectives are to draft a concise catalogue of
questions on this topic needing scholarly investigation and to
make a preliminary assessment and analysis of the research
feasibility with regard to such topics.

In a recent book, *The Intelligence Establishment* (Harvard Press, 1970) I describe the vast intelligence bureaucracies that have evolved since 1947 and I identify some problems of purpose, policy, organization and control. A great amount of scholarly work remains to be done in this relatively unexplored frontier for social science research. Because of government security "classifications" the question of research feasibility is a serious one.

I am now making a survey of this research frontier.
My objectives are (1) to develop an inventory of feasible
topics for research, (2) to compile a list of individuals
currently interested in this field of research (3) to outline
a research agenda. I intend to prepare for publication a
brief report on my survey.

Some of the topical questions to be explored are:

1. Is the concept of intelligence "community" a myth?

2. What is the effectiveness of policy controls within the system? (Executive, Legislative and Judicial)

3. What statutory and administrative authority exists for current assignments of intelligence roles and missions?

KISSINGER, HENRY A.

9

Tel.: HYacinth 3-9251

PPresident 8-4270

TZEIREI AGUDAS CHABAD
LUBAVITCH YOUTH ORGANIZATION

Under the Auspices of
The Lubavitcher Rabbi

Central Office לשכה המרכזית
770 EASTERN PARKWAY • BROOKLYN 13, N. Y.

צעירים אגורת חב"ד
תתת נשיאות
כ"ק אדמיר שליט"א מליובאַוויטש

Tishrei 11, 5730

September 23, 1969

Hon. Dr. Kiesenger
Advisor to the President
The White House
Washington, D.C.

Dear Dr. Kiesenger:

On Monday, September 29, the 17th day of Tishrei, we will be hosting the 14th Annual Convention of the international Lubavitcher movement to be attended by over 600 Rabbinic and lay leaders from many parts of the free world.

This gathering will endeavor to strengthen the ties between our American institutions and our affiliated units throughout the world. Some countries to be represented are: Israel, England, France, Belgium, Denmark, Morocco, Tunisia, Canada, Mexico, Brazil and Argentina, South Africa, and Australia.

The Lubavitcher movement, founded 200 years ago, is the largest Hassidic movement in the world, focusing on the areas of Torah education and welfare of world Jewry. Headed by the illustrious world Jewish leader, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson, the Lubavitcher movement, in addition to its structured institutions which serve thousands of young and old, maintains its own unique "Peace Corps" which reaches out into "spiritually deprived" Jewish communities.

The Convention Committee, respectfully invites you to send your greetings to be read to the delegates and into the records.

May we have the honor of receiving your greetings.

DR/ac

RECEIVED
OCT 2 2 1969

CENTRAL FILES