U.S. foreign policy: Demands of the next; Within the Communist World

So I think that there are a number of ways in which we need to revise our policies toward catalyst were one of these is to develop a little traders or you will never be very big but every little bit would help educate yourself of their future leaders who are about to be top of the party and just with a group that will give us a will also remove the assumption now held by the Soviet people that we want to see them fail we want to see them weak you poor and since that's not really in our interest we should remove the propaganda the impression that we leave you with what is in the factory trade what we have to do much more to help the countries of the central Europe in their trade with the West. Increasing here real independence from Soviet dictation improving your bargaining power. They certainly are not blamed for being under capitalism and that they are trying to make to reshape it in their own national power to make it more livable and to achieve important national goals and even undercut it. And we are too much war with that. We should

rethink our cause you China and decide whether it really is you know our interest to have one there. That and he 5 still convinced that we're trying to keep them out of the group community to deny their right to exist rules and somehow to prepare a war to destroy. It is time for us to become a little more imaginative and flexible to accept the fact that changes are occurring within the tundras were other very important that there is deep just unity with this world and that our present policies are designed to restore the unity rather than to extend it and to people and we was of our way of thinking of any one country and one regime as a perpetual enemy and others are perpetually forever. Of course I live up to the kind of the friends Britain Australia and so on their perpetual friends but turning to the other the the these

parts of the world who are so intimately connected I would say that we should not assume that that China or that Sunday we need our strength against the Soviet Union will so you might be our strength which was thrown against it. Chinese government intervention is and so we should just hire stuff so rigidly. We should try to relate here constantly updated analysis of our real interests and then carried out by flexible means using the very last instruments of power and enjoys that we have a good record. Question With the first question yes please stand up and cheer them when you were talking about your real life when you stated your views it was used between a king and personnel which it is with you this is lovely.

This is about the use of the hard line in the crisis of your 1967 highlight issues between Washington and Moscow. There is a hotline between Washington and Moscow out there is not love between parents and must go out. But it had apparently been used very much. There is not only no hard line between picking a mask is a question whether he will order a telephone service. There really are very very better terms with each other. The question was whether this is likely to be are the images we are. A pilot who apologized to you kind of this nation I've ever read his work in the paper and I don't know the latest stage of this letter or so-called letter from the crew of the way but I do I can say that it would be quite right without the our prestige if we make a conditional apology. If we said that particular part of examining ourselves independently

largely on the other records of the paper we by the head of either the standing orders got to penetrate territorial waters that we we could actually apology our strength rests upon our being the strongest power in the world today all the relevant powers going to apply the next 20 or 30 years I think to a conditional apology conditional upon establishing the facts securing the release of the crew would cause a sense of relief among our allies and any friends it would as a way of relaxing tension and conditional largely because it will be based on one factor we don't have. As far as I understand the situation were quite ripe and have the flavor of the still very low key. This was not inspired by the Russians. It is to their credit. So it happened and they would like to tear it up. They don't control or think of the most of the career work they can enjoy as a sub they don't

control whether we control the gov the stuff your gods by the beings who have it and others it would be to that rather the rather blather that of union as and as to the answer is the United States under any foreseeable circumstance it will not be willing to serve British political system and its sovereignty in the guise of better the way that relation with other states. And while I sympathize I believe in the setting of straw of the other letter cooperation and I believe it's very important to keep the nature of being and when the time comes to bear. As a standby organization to help keep the out and the Soviet pressure or ambition. Like you say the United States would be just about the last country to enter a real that regime which is the power to make decisions to tax them to drive the levers of power

and to use our very great resources will be transferred to a wider bottom and I cover the sort of dagger would be only in this danger desperation immediately after the war the idea that a Federation was quite popular and oneself was a western Europe because they really felt quite hopeless against the great pressure of the Soviet Union. Now there is no more interested in Western Europe and back to Europe is interested rather than build its own European grouping in Western Europe and then he was invited to Cuba. Britain Norway Denmark and others. But there is less interest today in Western Europe in the sort of Atlantic country operation than there was to when there have been many times and you know it was then and you can back in those traces policy of active military action doing search and destroy in the south of our of the

north. Doesn't this hinder they talk about as a matter of fact it makes the kind of countries more eager for to target underneath. Then they would be otherwise healthy. There are two wars where the get up was a civil war that would gather a lot of time without it began back in the 20s and 30s as you can be gathered to say with the French Kind of us to the area and never wholly ceased and it nearly led to a victory by the kind of US led forces in 1945 again in 1954 over all of Vietnam and there's really no strong basis for trying to keep a divided internal horribly. This was going very badly for our side the side of which we are live. There's another side of that is a war to restrain kind of those who made it clear the United States has no interest in Asia in restricting cause expansion and that we can get a nation great great sacrifice.

For a long time. Tragic sacrifices to try to establish this certainty in the eyes of kindness. The fact is that 0 3 so you need to know the reason and which I was kind of just really disappointed with the way it was go it was respect because they had a she would all be over several years ago with Brother Russia and the United States would be out of your blood because China is building play inhibited from taking any direct part of the war. Contrary to what it did in the Korean War it is a power a very cautious policy while screaming at the Soviet Union about its failure to supply luxury may military troops are to the north their needs were separated by several thousand miles from the rest of your territorial disputes between Russia and China have been deeply intensified by the Vietnam War and by the fact I don't know quite how to cover them. We had our them as they have theirs. The

These are the reasons for the character of the world. I don't want to have a recipe for ending it either by victory or by will drop. I think the there will be some several months up before we get the full appraisal of the effects of this great offensive unleashed with the respect of power by the commanders. And rather than these on January 30th it will take several months before we can say that all was lost or that this represented a peep of the Congress effort. And Grassley overnight who doesn't have a definite whether the death of Formula One saw with the end our struggle will say off the record I was strongly opposed as a consultant by is when I give people what you are getting involved. Oh because I thought that was another kind of a situation where we could operate effectively. That nationalism had another layer of communism and that we would never be able to separate the two very recently and the U.S. forces. I do not cover the

side were extremely weak divided and uncertain and I doubt that we should make a very vigorous effort to strengthen Thailand the Philippines are tied up in Tunisia halt work or constructive role but more as per get up get out. We haven't bought such great resources and the lives of its different that I don't have the data to a solution for a couple of other visible actions in the Russian leadership into these related policy I think that one can say that in general the party the military leadership is always striving for more resources for military partly with feel better able to stand up to the world as they have more. How are they always want more. That's true of other places too. Just as in those days and then there's the other the party the industrial people would rather he would run the economy and they would like to be able to do less work provide incentives to give people greater willingness to work well and

prove viciously all that takes money. Agriculture is like you hire them to hear from the Soviet Union and their own and are going to make investors who will bring it up to a proper level eventually. And those people must walk walk the walk resources so there's a conflict over resources. I would say that the top leadership of the party there is probably very little sharp division along any stable life. The different leaders in the police bureau as again and they probably agree on some things other times disagree and different groups with I think just as in any big corporation or any big decision making body they are likely to be very lives of. Difference rather than the original. We do know that there are differences of opinion about long range policy toward the United States and that this is tied up with the question of how much to put into the strategic forces of Iraq build up more of our forces.

They could be used at a distance from Soviet territory. They've been deeply impressed by the girl the United States to project over half a million dead with greater firepower than we used in the invasion of Europe in World War 2 and just 7000 miles away. And to respond sometimes in that a few days with a terrific a terrific amount of power this is a this is made a deep impression reinforced a sense of caution and the feeling that it's better that it's better to see kind of the peril of interest for the cat and not assume that there's an inevitable clash of the Holocaust. The question is the image held of Russians or Soviet cover this and of the Chinese. Just in the hottest parts of Asia the Chinese are widely regarded by their no other kind with his neighbors in Asia as praising them. Who if they really did what they say they want to deal with

will be committing national political suicide. And the same time they have been dragging the world into the Basques sea of destruction with the Russians by comparison seem reasonable cautious they have a sense of humor. They go out of their way to be quite sure they cultivate it Weschler people wherever they are they change their whole image a great deal in the past 10 years and have to go to great efforts to that and it is reflected back to Soviet thinking too. They you know they they have a much more sophisticated idea about American politics for example. They had 10 years ago. And so I think that our hope about the Russians is that to have it has to divide and become one of two great powers having become vulnerable to attack because of their strategic nuclear power they will take

that up with a greater sense of responsibility certainly to show up. Try to take the West Berlin again or starve the bear and he didn't get as far even as dark blue shark tried to achieve a strategic advantage for the Soviet Union by putting his business in you Cuba and he had to pull back and that was one of the reasons why it was dismissed two years later by the cold hearted and all so we can hope that over time so get to the image and understanding of the US our growth will be improved by good research by closer contacts and I sucked up to voters who are more than 3000 hours in the past 12 years to promoting cultural relations and exchanges with the Soviet Union. Up to this year in university who goes Asians would have brought over 400 young Saudi discover to the United States in the past 10 years and similar number of Americans. Soviet Union

and I helped and tonight it goes heated exchange and exchange program for professors and 1961 when the Academy of Sciences which it didn't pass were too poor to run because of the high level of the people involved in their vote freely as advisors to their government. So I practice what I preach. I believe our recognizing the. Ideological hostility of the Soviet Union was remember this regime has been going under and up until he hears that ideology is only one of the factors that leads him to make certain decisions. They have never sacrificed a bit of their own security or prosperity for the sake of ideology for the sake of promoting the interests of some other part of this part. And today there are even less likely to do so because of what the Soviet people are told is their first duty to demonstrate to promote a better kind of US and throughout the world is

to make the Soviet Union the wealthiest nation in the world with the highest bad weather. Well that's part of the point of view of our very Soviet people because well they are busy raising their standard of living to surpass rather than distaste they will be a very seriously expanding cardless in some mystical way. And so that's that's why I think that we can welcome that because if they ever did up the theoretical timetable for the spread of communism they would never overtake the United States for many human and geographical and natural resources and other many other reasons so that they would be locked into a go. But that's not the real issue I really joking there. And the problem is that in dealing with the Soviet Union and the kind of this child we must try to reach people smugglers who was trying to give them a better understanding. The outside world including ourselves and over that are leading to make more sensible decisions. The greatest danger today is that anyone choosing a nuclear war.

I don't think there's anybody here in the world that would want us to choose that but the danger is a series of this charged with nations a serious misunderstanding and they poke again which could lead to a spasm of fear and use of the bugs. Just that in my opinion is why we was to not only try to get into us a Soviet thinking by admitting that we have power of policies and subfields power of interests that are saying that others they diverged but Peter the British which is within the control and committed the Soviet Union to raising the standard of living at home to making large expenditures to help the developing countries and to let them see that coexistence is necessary for the sake of mankind and that just as a tactical gadget out of which they had hoped in the past to make gains for themselves and the loss of others. As of late President Kennedy said to push

off at Vienna. If you mean by coexistence as you stay within the boundaries now of our fathers and we do not cross those and vice versa. That that is going to distance. If you mean by the coarsest insisted we will do nothing but you will do everything in the choir or terribly that isn't coexistence and that was a very. But like you stated you don't wait and wait because the stuff is getting better to understand as they themselves have a higher proportion of real knowledge about the outside world at least as hard up as quickly as you know Geneva because it will be reassembled. Which in 1954 dealt with conflict and with this lead was certain that it is impossible to go into a negotiation turn and already want to come out. So until we know about we are going to achieve in very revealing 5:07 there's always going to negotiation. No one else is going to answer that. Question for us because we are are the strongest power in the world

and we are the only our site are fighting India and therefore we will have to decide as I said I have it in my own life. Therefore I label offer a formula I think myself the negotiations for a seller would be better to carve out informal and behind the scenes and maybe it was so good mediation the Soviet government would serve the stage serve as a messenger between those in the United States and many other countries are willing to do the same. But to I think your public utterances which should the United States either imposed its will against to it and that is it nor the movies for which we accepted their demands. I will add to tensions in the world and would over dramatize what would be in any case a very difficult situation. This has been the second in a series of seven programs about United

States foreign policy entitled demands of the next decade. Our guest today was Dr. Philip Mosley professor of international relations and director of the European Institute at Columbia University. He spoke and responded to questions on the general subject of within the Communist world. This program series is based on presentations from the foreign policy associations traveling foreign policy conference. These programs are designed to stimulate the thinking of an informed American public about some of the issues to be faced by the nation during the coming decade. Today's program was presented in cooperation with the World Affairs Council of Oregon the Oregon great decisions Council the Foreign Policy Association and TIME magazine. This has been a public affairs presentation of Oregon educational broadcasting.

This program was distributed by the national educational radio network.