The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

MR. MacNeil: Good evening. Leading the news this Friday, George Bush named Former Sen. John Tower to be his Defense Secretary. U.S. and PLO officials had their first meeting in Tunisia. Israeli troops shot dead four Palestinians on the West Bank. We'll have details in our News Summary in a moment. Jim.

MR. LEHRER: After the News Summary, we look at the selection finally of former Sen. John Tower to be Secretary of Defense, we get the views of Republican Sen. William Cohen, Democratic Congresswoman Pat Schroeder and Journalistic Analysts Mark Shields and Fred Barnes. Then comes a News Maker Interview with the new Prime Minister of Pakistan, Benazir Bhutto and we close with an A.C. Greene essay about high-tech Christmas presents. NEWS SUMMARY

MR. LEHRER: John Tower was put out of his misery today. President-elect Bush announced that he had chosen the former Texas Senator to be his Secretary of Defense. The selection had been the subject of rumors and counter rumors for six weeks concerning Tower's personal and financial life. Bush told a Washington News Conference the FBI background check on Tower had left him with no doubts about the choice.

PRESIDENT-ELECT BUSH: The investigation was extensive and I am totally satisfied in that regard and yes, he has not only my full confidence, but it is strengthened, if anything, by the process it has gone through.

MR. LEHRER: Tower said he was also satisfied with the process and he understood an investigation was necessary.

JOHN TOWER, Defense Secretary Designate: In my particular instance, there were a number of rumors and the innuendos, allegations, and it was incumbent on the Vice President to order the FBI to check out each one of these very carefully, regardless of how off-the-wall they might have been. And in most instances, there wasn't even anything in the way of circumstantial evidence to support these things.

MR. LEHRER: Bush said to stay tuned when asked he planned to select Congressman John Kemp to be Secretary of Housing & Urban Development. There were a score of news media leaks about that this morning. Kemp opposed Bush for the Republican Presidential nomination. Robin.

MR. MacNeil: The United States and the Palestine Liberation Organization had their first official meeting in 13 years today in Tunisia. In the Tunis suburb of Carthage, U.S. Ambassador Robert Pelatro talked for 90 minutes with Yasser Abad-Arabo, a member of the PLO Executive Committee. Looking at the 10 foot expanse of tables separating them, Pelatro joked, "We are still too far away.". He said afterwards that for the U.S. there would be a period of reflection and assessment before the talks resumed. In Bukharest, PLO Leader Yasser Arafat was quoted as saying the U.S. decision to hold the talks was an important step towards convening an international peace conference. In Jerusalem, a spokesman said Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir is preparing a new peace move to be announced when a new government is formed. On the West Bank, Israeli troops shot and killed four Palestinians. More than 20 others were wounded in clashes which grew out of the funeral of a youth who died after being shot by soldiers. Israeli security forces said they were anxious that the incident would trigger a new wave of violence in the occupied territories after a period of relative calm. Israeli Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin said today's killings were necessarily. He said Palestinian violence would be kept in check with an iron fist.

MR. LEHRER: President Reagan talked about the United States PLO meeting today. He did it in a speech on foreign policy to students at the University of Virginia. He said the recent shift of position by the PLO and other changes in the region were a direct result of his administration's policies.

PRESIDENT REAGAN: Where we're strong, steadfast, we succeed. In the Persian Gulf, the United States made clear its commitment to defend freedom of navigation and free world interest, and this helped hasten an end to the Gulf War and the country stood firm for years, insisting that the PLO had to accept Israel's right to exist, sign under Resolutions 242 and 338, and renounce terrorism, and now that resolve has paid off.

MR. LEHRER: In Lebanon, there were three hostage takings and one hostage released today. Gunmen seized three Irish soldiers of the United Nations Peacekeeping Force in South Lebanon. The kidnappers reportedly demanded the release of a guerrilla leader being held by the Israeli army, and in the City of Sidon, a Swiss official of the International Red Cross was freed. Peter Winkler had been held for one month. He told reporters he was kept in a windowless room but said overall he was well treated by his captors.

MR. MacNeil: American rescue teams pulled out of the Armenian earthquake zone today as Soviet authorities prepared to demolish the most damaged cities to rebuild from scratch. We have a report from Louise Bates of Worldwide Television News.

LOUISE BATES: This French rescue team was one of the last to leave the disaster scene at Spitak. Throughout the night, they drilled into the rubble of a housing hoping to find survivors, but with temperatures well below freezing, they knew the chances would be slim. By the following night, they'd gone back home to France, without finding anyone else alive. In the previous 24 hours, just one survivor had been rescued. The government then announced plans to begin raising the city at the weekend. The remaining survivors, less than half of Spitak's population of 25,000, are to be evacuated over the next few days. In nearby Leninakan, survivors still searched in vain for lost relatives. Bulldozers arrived to begin the task of clearing the debris. Thousands of bodies remain buried under the rubble. Trucks distributed soup, milk, bread and other foods to survivors. Soldiers also gave out clothing to those people camping out in the cold. More heavy equipment arrived for the monumental task of clearing the area. Health officials say there's a real danger of typhoid, cholera, and dysentery breaking out. They saythe water supply may already be contaminated. Sacks of lime were seen being brought into the town apparently to be spread over corpses to reduce the chances of infection spreading.

MR. MacNeil: In the Armenian capital of Yerevan, Soviet Premier Nikolai Rischkov was sharply critical of his country's efforts to help relief worker. Rischkov publicly rebuked a Soviet Ministry official for what he called a lack of proper coordination and logistical support.

MR. LEHRER: In economic news, wholesale prices rose .3 percent in November, said the Labor Department today. The increase was prompted mostly by jumps in gasoline and home heating oil prices. And finally, political extremist Lyndon LaRouche was convicted this evening on 13 counts of tax and mail fraud conspiracy. The federal charges included failure to pay income tax and cheating his political supporters. And that's it for the News Summary. Now it's on to the John Tower selection, the Prime Minister of Pakistan and high-tech Christmas presents. FOCUS - CONTROVERSIAL CHOICE

MR. LEHRER: John Tower is our lead story tonight. George Bush finally spoke the magic words about the former Texas Senator today.

PRESIDENT-ELECT BUSH: It is with pride and a sense of solemn responsibility that I am announcing this morning my intention to nominate a man of great experience, expertise, and commitment to peace and freedom to be the next Secretary of Defense.

MR. LEHRER: Tower had been twisting slowly in the public wind for six weeks. Would he or would he not be chosen as Secretary of Defense? There were stories quoting various transition and Bush sources at the beginning that said, yes, Bush would go with his longtime political and personal friend from Texas.

PRESIDENT-ELECT BUSH: [November 9, 1988] I will for the most part bring in a brand new team of people from across the country, and in my view, that will reinvigorate the process.

MR. LEHRER: But there were more stories and more appointments, but not that of Tower. And there were more statements from Bush.

PRESIDENT-ELECT BUSH: [December 14, 1988] I've expressed my confidence in Sen. Tower, my belief that if I decide to go that route, he would make an outstanding Secretary, and if that's the decision, I will discuss it more fully at that time.

MR. LEHRER: And the dangling of Tower continued. So did an extensive FBI check of Tower's background, as did stories about what was being checked out and why the appointment was being delayed if not scrubbed. Rumors surfaced that Tower's 1987 divorce had been caused by affairs with three different women. Reports followed that Tower, a heavy smoker, was also a heavy drinker. Another report revealed that Tower was on retainer with five top defense contractors as a paid consultant. Some began to question Tower's ability to manage, even scale back massive Pentagon spending. Today both the President-elect and his nominee were questioned extensively and asked if Tower had been damaged by the delay.

PRESIDENT-ELECT BUSH: No, I don't think so. I think he's stronger. Any time you get subjected to a lot of rumors out there and then receive a clean bill of health, why I think you're stronger.

REPORTER: To follow that up, sir, this is the only one of your nominees who some of your own people in a sense have dragged through the mud both in terms of where he stands on issues and his ability to handle questions such as defense procurement, as well as his personal life. This public spectacle has gone on for weeks now. Why have you allowed this to happen?

PRESIDENT-ELECT BUSH: Because the process was set forward and the process looked into a lot of rumors that proved to be groundless. And it seems unfair, but I had to be a part of a very thorough process. In terms of what my supporters feel, they're entitled to their opinion, but they weren't elected and I was, and, therefore, this is a decision that will have wide support abroad and at home, and it has the strong support of the President-elect.

REPORTER: Did it have to be so public, sir?

PRESIDENT-ELECT BUSH: Maybe you're in a better position, Owen, to answer that than I am. I wasn't out there talking about it. Maybe we could get a little seminar going on that after I leave and you could tell me. I don't know why it had to be so public. I don't expect John Tower welcomed that and I don't because I'm a fair play kind of guy.

REPORTER: Sen. Tower, the process, as everybody knows, that led to today's announcement was very long, very public. Could you tell us in a given way what you went through and how you feel about it.

JOHN TOWER, Defense Secretary Designate: Oh, gee, I woke up every morning and laughed myself silly over what I was reading in the newspapers. No, it was not comfortable, but I understand the process and I understand that the process has to work its way. The investigation was very careful. I underwent very close scrutiny, an intensive investigation, and the Vice President was satisfied as to my fitness as a result of the conclusion of the process. And so I feel quite happy about it.

REPORTER: President-elect Bush said during the campaign that he wanted to essentially give the conventional arms talks a greater priority and perhaps take longer on the START talks. Do you think that's wise for us?

JOHN TOWER, Defense Secretary Designate: Well, anything the President says is wise I say is wise -- I think you should begin the conventional arms negotiating process. Now the Vice President, himself, knows and has said that this is a very complex process. It is probably the most difficult of all the negotiating processes and the matter of verification becomes of monumental proportion when you talk about conventional forces. But I think that we should proceed in that direction and I think we should perhaps test the efficacy of Mr. Gorbachev's apparent intentions and his unilateral reduction small in terms of proportions of his conventional forces by saying, all right, let's talk seriously about conventional arms reductions.

MR. LEHRER: Now to some reaction to an analysis of the Tower announcement. First, two different views from Congress, those of Sen. William Cohen, Republican of Maine, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee who served on it also when Tower was Committee Chairman and Congresswoman Pat Schroeder, Democrat of California, a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee and a frequent critic of current defense policies. Sen. Cohen, has the delay in the rumors hurt John Tower?

SEN. WILLIAM COHEN, [R] Maine: I think it was temporary perhaps, but I don't believe it'll in the long-term prove to be harmful to him at all. He derives his authority and power from the President of the United States, not from me or anyone else in the Congressional committees, and I think that that's the person he has to satisfy and once he is named and I believed confirmed rather quickly by the Armed Services Committee and the Congress, then I think his power will be as strong as ever.

MR. LEHRER: Do you agree, Congresswoman?

REP. PATRICIA SCHROEDER, [D] Colorado: Well, I think he'll be confirmed quickly, but I think there will be an awful lotof criticism of his policy unless we see a different kind of John Tower than we saw when he was in the Senate. I think America is really ready to deal with what I call the welfare queens of the 80's, the militarily industrialized complex. And what we really see in John Tower is we call him "Old Turnstile Tower". You know, he rotates out of the Senate Committee into the industrial world out there for all the people who have been feeding and then right back into the Pentagon. And people are going to be very upset if he isn't much more aggressive. Maybe he'll use that information to really go after them, but if he doesn't, I think you'll see both the House and Senate move on them.

MR. LEHRER: So your problem is what he believes, not so much his background --

REP. SCHROEDER: Absolutely.

MR. LEHRER: -- the rumors about him, is that right?

REP. SCHROEDER: Absolutely.

MR. LEHRER: You're not concerned about that, Senator?

SEN. COHEN: Well, I think we've heard a great deal of hyperbole here. As a matter of fact, John Tower probably favored cutting more programs than Gov. Dukakis favored constructing weapons systems, and I can point to system after system, the A-6, the A-10, in which the House Armed Services Committee on which Congressman Schroeder serves, adamantly insisted they stay in the budget when John Tower was trying to cut them out. I can point to a $1.9 billion he removed from the budget on MX, because the Pentagon had not decided upon a proper facing load. I can point to a Trident that he eliminated during one of the budget cycles. I can show a number of areas in which John Tower has been the forefront of reform. As a matter of fact, when we talked about reforming the Department of Defense, it was Tower who created the staff commission to investigate the entire Department of Defense that was responsible in the long run for the reformation of the Joint Chiefs and the DOD, itself.

MR. LEHRER: Are you talking about the same man?

REP. SCHROEDER: I don't think so. I don't so. I must have missed all of that.

SEN. COHEN: Well, I served with him. I served with him on the committee.

REP. SCHROEDER: Well, I did too. We sat on the other side.

SEN. COHEN: Exactly.

REP. SCHROEDER: And basically we never saw a weapon system he didn't like. Now he may have chiseled away at some. We basically called it the Lone Star Air Show. If it was made Texas, you tripled the order and if it wasn't, you went after it. Now maybe that's the Congressional way of doing things and that's wrong. And the way to deal with the Congress when they want to deal with a defense budget as a public works budget is to have a very strong Secretary of Defense, which I hope he will be, and make sure that we're getting what we need and not what people think will help get him re-elected.

MR. LEHRER: The question of strong Secretary of Defense. He said and we just heard him say it at his news conference, that I will do what the President wants. So should we look for a Bush defense policy or a Tower defense policy?

SEN. COHEN: Obviously, we look for a Bush defense policy. He is the commander in chief. He is going to set the tone. He is going to be submitting the budget, he's going to call upon Sen. Tower to serve as his Secretary of Defense and whoever is the Deputy Secretary to help formulate that budget. But it's going to be the Bush administration budget, not the John Tower budget. I think John Tower takes his orders from the top, he will carry them out, and I believe you will see John Tower exercising responsible cuts and not a meat ax approach to the defense budget.

MR. LEHRER: So if George Bush wants a weapons system cut, John Tower is going to cut it, right?

SEN. COHEN: Absolutely.

MR. LEHRER: Any reason to think otherwise?

REP. SCHROEDER: No, I think he probably will. The real question is is whether he can bring his judgment to bear and what that judgment is to engage George Bush on what should be cut and what shouldn't be cut, when his record was one where he really kind of liked everything. You see, I think we're going to have to make some very hard choices. We've got to merge four lanes of weapons into about two lanes of funding and really tough choices ahead, and John Tower probably knows a lot more about the defense budget because of his experience than George Bush. So I hope he's not just sitting with his hands folded, waiting for orders, but that he's also actively involved in input because we're going to really need to know the President backs him up.

MR. LEHRER: You mentioned, you used the term "turnstile" a moment ago. Are you concerned about the stories that he was consultant to several major defense contractors during the interim?

REP. SCHROEDER: I am. I mean, I'm the one who put in the whistleblower protection bill. We didn't have one vote against it in the House and Senate, but Reagan vetoed it. I'm the one that worked very hard on the revolving door legislation, because I think it's shameful when you revolve right out of Congress or the Pentagon into those companies and then right back into the Pentagon again. That's why I call him "Old Turnstile" rather than revolving door. "T" goes with Tower better, "Turnstile Tower", I guess, a little more literation, but that troubles me and I think that's why people are losing a lot of confidence in government, so I think we ought to put it out there, and I hope he rises above it because that will be best for America and that is what I really want to see.

MR. LEHRER: No problem for you?

SEN. COHEN: Not a problem for me. I think we have to point out the fact that Frank Carlucci, who served as a Deputy Secretary of Defense, went out to the private sector, came back in, and served very commendably as the Secretary of Defense. No one complained about that. The fact that John Tower had consulting arrangements with a number of defense contractors should not diminish one iota from his integrity. And let me give you one example of what I'm talking about. President Reagan raised over a million dollars one evening at a fund-raiser that I attended on behalf of John Tower. That did not preclude John Tower from coming back several years later, being appointed to a very high position, namely to investigate the President of the United States and his involvement in the entire Iran-Contra Affair.

MR. LEHRER: The Tower Commission.

SEN. COHEN: The Tower Commission. And John Tower carried out that responsibility without any favoritism shown, so I believe John Tower is a man of integrity. Whatever his past association, the defense contracts in terms of his serving as a private citizen at that time entirely consistent with the laws and ethical provisions of our system, I believe that John Tower is a man of integrity and that will shine through.

MR. LEHRER: Congresswoman Schroeder, what about the other part of the last six weeks? There have been those stories. There have also been the stories about his alleged heavy drinking, his womanizing while he was married, et cetera, et cetera. Does that give you any problem?

REP. SCHROEDER: Well, obviously, I assume the FBI looked into that and I think maybe we've gone so overboard, it's almost like we're into National Enquirer than we are into really what's happening. That doesn't trouble me as much as just I want to see that he really is his own person. There's the old thing about he who pays the fiddler calls the tune, and I certainly hope the good Senator here is absolutely right in predicting what John Tower will do. I want to see that, but I think we've lost a lot of ground. David Stockman said it, in the last eight years, the hogs have been feeding, and there's been no question who the hogs were. They were the military industrial complex, and I really think people want a strong defense and they define that as getting something for your money, and so if Tower comes in and is tough and does that, terrific, I'll be the first to stand and applaud. And I certainly hope that's what we see. But right now, he looks very comfortable in the process as it's been. Sure it's not illegal, but I think it should be illegal.

MR. LEHRER: On the other things, Senator, do you think the American public should be concerned about having a Secretary of Defense with these rumors about his personal life? Is that a problem? Should it be a problem?

SEN. COHEN: Well, we're looking at a Secretary of Defense. He was not running for the Presidency and perhaps we've had a much higher standard there as it should be than for Secretary of Defense. I've known John Tower. I have not ever seen him in a situation that would compromise his position when he was serving in the Senate and to my knowledge at least since that time. One final point, we have Mikhail Gorbachev recently submitting a very dramatic proposal to the United Nations. We're having calls coming from Congress for us to do something. It seems to me rather ironic that the voices who are most critical towards John Tower are also calling for the Bush administration, the Bush-elect administration as such, to come forward with proposals. It's going to take someone like John Tower with his expertise in both roles, missions and weapons systems who understands the complexity of all of them in order to put together the kind of proposal that will serve the Bush administration's interest in the countries.

MR. LEHRER: Thank you. Now we have the perspectives of two journalistic analysts, Fred Barnes, a Senior Editor of the New Republic, and Mark Shields, Syndicated Columnist for the Washington Post and one half of our own Gergen & Shields political analysis team. Mark Shields, how badly has Tower been hurt by all of this?

MARK SHIELDS, Washington Post: Tower's been hurt. There's no two ways about it. I think that the Bush transition has gone well. It hasn't evoked any -- none of the nominees have evoked any outrage from any constituent groups or threatened revolts within the Congress, but this has been bad. I mean, John Tower, and let's be very blunt about it, an awful lot of the negative stuff on John Tower came from people in the Bush camp, and that doesn't enhance his stature or his authority as Secretary of Defense at a tough time, Jim. The consensus is gone on national defense. No more do we want to continue spending to the degree that greeted Ronald Reagan when he came to office. And we've lost our enemy. We lost Mikhail Gorbachev and the Russians, who were really the raison d'etre for spending more. So he comes at a tough time and he doesn't need to have his stature diminished or his reputation sullied.

MR. LEHRER: Fred, how did this happen? How did the six weeks of turmoil and twisting in the wind of John Tower come about?

FRED BARNES, The New Republic: Well, the fact is George Bush wanted to name his national defense team very early on. He picked Brent Scowcroft weeks ago and then balked when John Tower, who was the only name ever seriously considered as Defense Secretary, when all these rumors and stories, questions about his ability to manage, questions about whether he was enough of a strategist in GO politics and military affairs, questions about his personal life arose, and Bush balked. And most of the stuff, I would say all of the stuff, Mark, that came out negatively about John Tower came form people in the transition or Republicans or people who have worked with Bush in the past.

MR. LEHRER: Why? What was their motive?

MR. BARNES: Well, a lot of them don't like Tower, for one thing, and this inevitably happens when there's a hit in a nomination. Everybody knew he was No. on the list and then it didn't come through. Reporters start asking questions and one of the thing that always happens, Jim, or happens sometimes when reporters ask questions is they get answers and they write stories, and that what happened.

MR. LEHRER: Go ahead.

MR. SHIELDS: The only thing I'd say is that one of the real knocks that was made, which I think was totally unfair, was the one that he ought to be disqualified because he had been a part- time short-term consultant for defense contractors, and the people who were being urged in his place were people who were full-time, long-term defense --

MR. LEHRER: I noticed that myself.

MR. SHIELDS: How did the short-term, you know, eliminate somebody and the other, you know, becomes a hell of a reference.

MR. BARNES: The other thing though about Tower being weakened when he's Defense Secretary, I think he will be. Look what happened when in 1981, throughout 1981, when there were battles between Dave Stockman as Budget Director against Caspar Weinberger, the Defense Secretary. Stockman wanted to cut. He lost every argument when they went before President Reagan. Now when we have arguments, if John Tower wants to expand defense spending or not cut it as much and he's arguing with Richard Darman, the Budget Director, I think Tower is going to lose all those arguments.

MR. LEHRER: Well, what about Sen. Cohen's point that he speaks for the President of the United States, that this is a whole new ball game as of today, he's no longer John Tower the man with a background, he's John Tower with a Presidential mandate?

MR. SHIELDS: I think Sen. Cohen is right. I think that Sen. Cohen was excessively charitable toward Sen. Tower. He is not a very likeable man, John Tower, and that really came out in this whole process. There are a lot of people who want to settle a lot of scores on John Tower and it wasn't ideological in nature.

MR. BARNES: Including his former wife.

MR. SHIELDS: Including his former wife. But including a lot of other people. He has had great loyalty among many of his staff members, but there are other people who found him to be just an unpleasant sort during his time in the Senate, a man very mindful of own his prerogatives and power.

MR. LEHRER: Do you agree with Fred though that he may have to pay a price for this when it comes down to some nitty gritty, working things out in the administration?

MR. SHIELDS: I think he's got to immediately start re- establishing a rapport with the Congress, I mean, more so than most new cabinet officers do, and he's going to probably have to eat a little humble pie along the way.

MR. BARNES: Yeah. The rapport that he's lost though I think is mainly going to be inside the administration. Other figures in the administration are not going to regard him the way they say, the way they might regard Jim Baker or other figures. I mean, this has shown that Bush has a certain lack of confidence in him and Tower, I don't see how he can really overcome that.

MR. LEHRER: I was going to ask you, what does this say about George Bush and how he goes about his business?

MR. BARNES: Well, it shows that he didn't consider the guy I thought was a guy with a perfect resume to be Defense Secretary and that was Donald Rumsfeld. He was Defense Secretary under Gerald Ford. He had managed a big company that actually was not a defense company so he wouldn't have had that problem. He does - - he is a hard liner on defense and they want a hard liner so they can sell some cuts in the defense budget to the conservatives, but Don Rumsfeld did one thing he shouldn't have. He endorsed Bob Dole last February.

MR. SHIELDS: The other thing is that you see the splits within the conservative movement now. Some of the criticism of John Tower was on his lifestyle and his alleged philandering. Other was criticism of him from some of the real hard right military types who said he hadn't been hawkish enough and I think that Don Rumsfeld faced the fact that the problem was that he, his company mixed condoms and I think that was a little bit of a problem.

MR. BARNES: I don't think that was really it, Mark.

MR. SHIELDS: I heard it. I heard some of your ideological compatriots say --

MR. BARNES: I think the Dole endorsement had a little more to do with it.

MR. LEHRER: I've heard just today that this shows George Bush is a man who understands loyalty and has stayed with this guy through thick and thin.

MR. SHIELDS: I think that argument can be made.

MR. LEHRER: They go back 20 years, Texas politics.

MR. SHIELDS: But he was twisting and Fred's point is a good one, that if you're inside and you get a call from Baker or there's a cleavage within the administration, there's going to be in every administration on policy, and you've got Baker on one side and Darman on the other, and Tower over here, if you're just kind of thinking of your own political survival and well being which unfortunately is a factor in Washington occasionally, then you're going to say who's got the power, who's got the clout, who's got the President's ear, and I think that John Tower starts off at a disadvantage.

MR. LEHRER: Fred.

MR. BARNES: And there's another disadvantage and that is John Tower -- Mel Laird, a former Defense Secretary, told John Tower don't take the job unless you're going to be able to pick all your own people. He's not going to be able to. He's not going to pick his people. The Bush transition has their own people in mind, people who they think can push through cuts and a reorganization of the military.

MR. LEHRER: Have either one of you guys considered what we'd be sitting here, talking about tonight, if John Tower had not been chosen in terms of what this would have done to John Tower?

MR. BARNES: It would have done, it would have been a bigger story actually, because everybody expected him to be named, and it would have been a story where people would have raised doubts about how could George Bush do this to a guy who had been so loyal to him. I mean, it would have been a crushing defeat for Tower.

MR. LEHRER: You agree?

MR. SHIELDS: I agree totally and that Tower Commission Report was crucial during the 1988 Presidential campaign for George Bush. I mean, it was a letter of recommendation for him at a time when he needed it badly.

MR. LEHRER: Let's bring the Senator and the Congresswoman back into this. Sen. Cohen, you just heard what Mark and Fred said, that in the nitty gritty, when it comes right down to it, John Tower is going to pay a price for this terrible problem he's had the last six weeks. You disagree.

SEN. COHEN: I disagree. First of all, I think one thing that has not been touched upon here, there has been a debate within the transition team or those who will serve in the administration as to whether they wanted a policy maker at the top level or they wanted a manager. I think that contributed to some of the delay in addition to the allegations about John Tower, himself. That was resolved by President-elect Bush saying he wanted a policy person. They'll get a Deputy Secretary of Defense and I believe John Tower will pay a major role in selecting that Deputy and not having them superimposed by the Bush administration.

MR. LEHRER: What's your view of this, Congresswoman?

REP. SCHROEDER: I really agree with what our journalists were saying. What we can't say enough is the main damage done by Tower was by his own, which means that there's a real split inside that Republican caucus or in that transition team and in among all the Bush insiders, and so if he hasn't solidified that and he doesn't have Tower people in there, that's troubling to him, I think, and to his future and to whether he gets to pick his staff or set a policy or whatever. I think also people are going to begin to wonder can anyone apply for the cabinet that isn't from Texas. I mean, Texas is really having a terrific tilt. I mean, we may sink toward Texas before -- you're a little biased there -- have you applied for a cabinet position? Maybe you should.

MR. LEHRER: No, no.

REP. SCHROEDER: I think there's some of that too, there's some geographical pull in there. People are saying wait a minute.

MR. LEHRER: Senator, let me ask you as the only Republican here, Republican office holder. Does it appall you to have one of your - - a man who's just been elected President --

SEN. COHEN: From Maine.

MR. LEHRER: From Maine, okay, right -- trying to pick a cabinet and his own people go out and leak stories to Fred Barnes and Mark Shields and the rest of us cutting these people up right and left?

SEN. COHEN: Welcome to Washington, D.C. Tell me one person who left out there -- in this administration or any other administration -- for longer than 24 hours would not be picked apart by the barracudas who exist in and out of this town. There is no one that can survive that kind of scrutiny that John Tower has gone through without taking a beating so it does not trouble me to that extent as it's troubling the other two.

REP. SCHROEDER: Remember what Harry Truman said, "If you want a friend in this town, buy a dog.".

MR. BARNES: There is an interesting story there, because when Bush told John Sununu he was going to pick him as his White House Chief of Staff, and maybe we'll do it a week from now, I'll announce it, Sununu went back and told his friends and they said, wait a minute, a week, that's too long, you'd better get him to announce you a lot sooner or you'll get picked apart.

MR. LEHRER: Which brings me to the subject of Jack Kemp. Okay, Jack Kemp's picture is on the front page of the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the whole world today, today he is going to be selected as a member of the cabinet, Chairman of -- Secretary of Housing & Urban Development. It didn't happen. Is he going to get cut up now?

MR. SHIELDS: No, I don't believe he will be cut up. I think the plan has always been that it wouldn't be out until Monday or Tuesday, that Tower when it did come and was ready would be a solo, but I'd return to something Sen. Cohen took and not to choose an issue with him, but he said that John Tower was going to have a major input in the selection of his deputy. Now I don't think that Jack Kemp when he is named, if he is named Secretary of HUD and I hope he is, Yeutter over at agriculture is going to have a major input in the selection of his deputy, he picks his deputy, and that's what you expect a secretary to do, and so John Tower is coming through this process with his authority diminished. When he can't pick his own deputy --

SEN. COHEN: You may recall, Mark, there were rumors floating that they were going to announce a team.

MR. SHIELDS: That's right.

SEN. COHEN: That, of course, turned out to be incorrect.

MR. BARNES: But, Senator, really the reason the team was just so Bush could build up Tower.

REP. SCHROEDER: That's right. The team is coming.

MR. BARNES: A team is being picked by the transition.

REP. SCHROEDER: The team is coming and it's going to be running the Pentagon by committee.

MR. BARNES: And not by Bush, it's coming --

SEN. COHEN: And it will not be anyone that John Tower doesn't have the full confidence in as well as President-elect Bush.

MR. LEHRER: Do you know that for a fact?

SEN. COHEN: I'm satisfied of that.

MR. SHIELDS: Do you think it's somebody that's on his Christmas card list?

MR. LEHRER: What is the word? Have you heard any word, Fred, as to who the No. 2 is going to be?

MR. BARNES: No. They've talked to a number of people about it, Paul O'Neil who is with Alcoa, and Norm Augustein with Martin Marietta; they don't want to be No. 2. They might like to be No. 1, but No. 2 isn't as attractive.

MR. LEHRER: Back to Kemp. What have you heard on Jack Kemp? Is it locked?

MR. BARNES: It's locked. Bush has talked to him; he's said yes. He's going to see Bush Monday and it'll probably be announced Monday or Tuesday. But because Tower had been hanging out there for so long, Bush wanted to give him his day alone.

MR. LEHRER: So there's nothing that we should read into that, that the barracudas in Washington are going to go after Jack Kemp now?

SEN. COHEN: Not enough time.

MR. LEHRER: Have you heard that too?

REP. SCHROEDER: I don't know, they work pretty fast.

MR. LEHRER: Have you heard that too, that Jack Kemp is now locked in?

SEN. COHEN: Yes.

MR. LEHRER: He won't have any problem being confirmed, will he?

SEN. COHEN: He should not.

MR. LEHRER: And you think that John Tower will have no problems?

SEN. COHEN: No.

MR. LEHRER: And you agree with that, Congresswoman?

REP. SCHROEDER: I don't think he'll have any trouble getting confirmed. He may have a lot of trouble selling his program.

MR. LEHRER: Fred Barnes wrote a piece in The New Republic two or three weeks ago that said the Senate will roll over no matter what comes out on Tower, they will -- I'm paraphrasing Fred --

MR. BARNES: You've got it pretty close.

MR. LEHRER: But they will confirm him but they will be left to the news media to bring John Tower down if he's brought down.

MR. BARNES: Well, you know there have been some stories about rumors and so on, but we haven't had the deep investigative reports that the Washington Post and the New York Times can do and now that Tower is in a different status, he's not just a rumored nominee, he is the nominee, I think we're going to see some of these. And what the FBI may dismiss as not important or not criminal or not whatever, the press maythink is important.

MR. LEHRER: It might look awful at a front page.

MR. BARNES: It might.

MR. SHIELDS: Well, Lt. Gen. Don Graham retired and a leader in the SDI effort said that what the FBI approves, just a follow-up on Fred's point, wasn't enough to keep Ed Meese from his appointment as Attorney General, but it was enough to put him on the defensive consistently in office and that's something that they've got to consider.

MR. LEHRER: So the Tower story is not over?

MR. BARNES: Not by a long shot.

MR. LEHRER: All right. Congresswoman, gentlemen, thank you all very much.

MR. MacNeil: Still to come on the Newshour, Pakistan's new Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto, and an A.C. Greene essay. NEWS MAKER

MR. MacNeil: Next tonight, a News Maker Interview with Benazir Bhutto, the new Prime Minister of Pakistan, the strategically placed Moslem nation that has played a key role in supplying the anti-Soviet side in the Afghan War. Two weeks ago, Benazir Bhutto took power and became the first woman ever to lead an Islamic country. Being first and unique is something Bhutto is familiar with. Now 35, she was born into a privileged Karachi family. She attended Radcliffe College here in Massachusetts, and after graduation went to Oxford. There she became President of its famed debating society, a first. She studied economics and politics, but she learned firsthand about her own country's political life from her father, Zufikir Ali-Bhutto, who held a number of cabinet posts, including foreign minister, before becoming prime minister in 1972. Ms. Bhutto returned home in 1977. Within days, her father was ousted from power by the army chief of staff Gen. Mohammad Zia Al-Houck. Two years later, Ali-Bhutto was convicted of conspiracy to murder a political opponent and was hanged. Zia consolidated his power and along with the military seemed firmly in control. After a stay in London, Benazir Bhutto returned to Pakistan in 1986 to try and oust Zia from power and avenge her father. It seemed an almost impossible battle until last August when Gen. Zia, along with key generals and the United States Ambassador were killed in a still mysterious plane crash. With Zia gone, a political vacuum was created that allowed Bhutto and her Pakistan People's Party to win a plurality in the National Assembly. She is now Prime Minister and has won her first vote of confidence. but she finds herself leading a country on the brink of bankruptcy. Poverty, unemployment and illiterate are massive, along with a large budget deficit, and she faces a military and political system skeptical of her ability to govern. I spoke to Prime Minister Bhutto yesterday by satellite from Islamabad.

MR. MacNeil: With so many problems facing you, which do you consider most important?

BENAZIR BHUTTO, Prime Minister, Pakistan: I think that the question of creating a greater sense of national unity, strengthening constitutional rule and giving a sense of social and economic justice to the people are the main aims of the Pakistan People's Party Government.

MR. MacNeil: Let's talk about Afghanistan, if we might, as we go through these issues. What is your government's policy going to be now regarding Afghanistan?

MS. BHUTTO: Well, we considered this issue carefully and our government felt that it should not be reopened. It is in its final stages and we should go through with the agreement as it has already been arrived at. That is one of the reasons why we retained as foreign minister Sahib Sadi-Yahukan, who had previously been foreign minister and was in the knowledge of the entire Afghan situation.

MR. MacNeil: Does that mean your government will continue support for the Mujahadeen until the fighting stops?

MS. BHUTTO: Yes, the People's Party Government is committed to seeing not only the withdrawal of Soviet troops but the establishment of an independent government which reflects the aspirations of the people there and creates the conditions under which our refugees can go back because the main issue is the question of 3 million refugees who are not going to return to Afghanistan while there is civil war and blood shed. Therefore, we're interested in the formation of a government which an provide stability and enable the refugees to return to their homeland.

MR. MacNeil: Are you confident that the Soviets will complete their withdrawal by the February 15th deadline?

MS. BHUTTO: We feel that Mr. Gorbachev has given a new dimension to the Soviet Union and therefore, are confident that the withdrawal will take place as agreed.

MR. MacNeil: Over the last six years and during those years of the Afghan War, your country has received a lot of aid from the United States, about $4 billion over that period. Do you fear that American interest in Pakistan might wane a bit when the Afghan War is over?

MS. BHUTTO: It's important for democratic Pakistan that interest not wane and that aid be continued. We did receive a large amount of aid, unfortunately, there's not much to show for it. The infrastructure has been depleted during the Zia years. The country is mortgaged. There are hardly any foreign exchange reserves and as soon as we took over, we were confronted with the challenge of a very large wheat shortage, wheat being the staple food of the poor people of our country. In this condition, if the interest slackens, it would create an economic situation which would not be good either for the development of our people or for democracy. We're interested in seeing that the aid levels continue and can be used this time efficiently and honestly to develop Pakistan economically. We would also like to encourage economic growth and are anxious for investment, particularly from foreign countries who can bring with them both capital and technology. And we in Pakistan have the skill labor. In the past, Pakistanis went abroad whether it was to the Middle East or to Europe or North America to earn a living. We would like to see a situation where the investment takes place here, contributes to Pakistan's growth, and provides an outlet of employment for our people.

MR. MacNeil: President Zia was a very close ally of the United States in the Reagan years. Will you want to maintain as intimate relations with Washington as he did?

MS. BHUTTO: I think that Gen. Zia benefited tremendously because of the strategic concerns arising out of the Afghanistan situation. Now that the Afghan issue seems about to be resolved, I hope that we have support and strength from a different perspective and that is the perspective of a third world country trying to make democracy a success.

MR. MacNeil: What kind of relations will you be keeping with the Soviet Union?

MS. BHUTTO: Well, the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan opens the way for an improvement in bilateral relations and we do not feel that good relations with one country need necessarily preclude good relations with another. We would be looking towards exploring the possibilities following the Soviet withdrawal.

MR. MacNeil: In the new Bhutto era that you represent, will Pakistan be more non-aligned than it has been?

MS. BHUTTO: Well, we would certainly like to see the emergence of Pakistan as an independent and self-reliant nation, but in this endeavor, we need the help of our friends and the United States has been one of the longest friends of Pakistan.

MR. MacNeil: Speaking of independence and self-reliance, some people suggest that with the Afghan War over, the Congress will be looking, scrutinizing much more carefully, your nuclear development in its interest to prevent proliferation of nuclear weapons. Does that give you any anxiety?

MS. BHUTTO: Well, we are conscious of the concerns on the nuclear issue. These are not new concerns. They've been there for some time but with the withdrawal they're certainly going to be emphasized once again, but I don't really feel that anxious because I think that our policy is very clear. We're committed to a peaceful energy program. We don't have any weapons policy. In fact, we'd like to see the whole region emerge as a weapons free, nuclear weapons free region.

MR. MacNeil: It is, it has been reported that Pakistan, as some reporter put it, is only a screwdriver's turn away from having its own nuclear weapon, is that true?

MS. BHUTTO: Pakistan doesn't have any intention to get a nuclear device or a nuclear weapon.

MR. MacNeil: Much is made, Prime Minister, of the fact that you are the first woman Prime Minister of a Moslem state. Let's discuss how that is going to affect things. For instance, what is that going to mean to Pakistani women?

MS. BHUTTO: I think it's given all women in Pakistan and even in other Moslem countries a sense of pride. And I think that this is going to be a government which is going to be responsive to the particular kind of sufferings that Pakistani women undergo and it will be our opportunity, our attempt to provide economic opportunities for women, given our own traditions and cultures, because for us an individual's dignity is best maintained through economic independence. If you don't have economic independence, you can't really make your own choices.

MR. MacNeil: How will your partly western education be used to - - I mean, the fact that you spent your college years in the United States and Britain -- how will that be used to shape your society?

MR. MacNeil: I think it's important to have a respect for universal values, representative government, freedom of expression, human rights. These are universal values and it will be our effort to try and promote a world which has a greater understanding and to try and build bridges with the west and the east.

MR. MacNeil: Under President Zia, there was a certain momentum in Pakistan towards making it a more thoroughly Islamic state. Is that momentum now going to be halted as a matter of policy by you?

MS. BHUTTO: Gen. Zia's Islamization was always a matter of great controversy because many of us felt in Pakistan that it was really a brutalization of society and that to gain a kind of legitimacy, he exploited the name of religion. Our government wants to make it clear amongst the people of Pakistan that Islam is the religion of the state but that the values of Islam are the values of tolerance and brotherhood, not of fanaticism and inflexibility.

MR. MacNeil: Some commentators have suggested, Prime Minister, that given your family history, that you have been more interested in vindicating the Bhutto name, perhaps even avenging your father, than you have been in seeking power for policy reasons. What is your comment on that?

MS. BHUTTO: I think that if it was a matter of vindication, I perhaps might not have continued after August 17th, when the Ziaera ended, or perhaps even earlier, when I returned from exile and hundreds of thousands turned out to receive me. It was a commitment to a democratic order, to respect for law, and for the emancipation of our people from the absolute poverty in which they live that really drove not only me but so many Pakistanis on during those years of dictatorship.

MR. MacNeil: As you sit now in the office your father, your late father, held, do you consider in a way that that avenges him?

MS. BHUTTO: I think he was vindicated many times over by the love and the respect the people of Pakistan showed to him. He belongs to history and he belongs to the people. I'm really going to be judged on what I do and that's my main concern now, to be able to have a record which the people of my country awarded me, who gave me the honor of this high office can be proud of. It's not going to be easy. We can't move as fast as we would like because of the legacies of the Zia years, but all of us who struggled against dictatorship are determined that by the end of our term we will be able to go back to the people and say we fulfilled some of what we said we would and we did the best of what we could.

MR. MacNeil: Well, Prime Minister, thank you very much for joining us this afternoon.

MS. BHUTTO: Thank you. ESSAY - HI-TECH HOLIDAY

MR. LEHRER: There are eight shopping days left until Christmas. This year, A.C. Greene, our man in Dallas, decided to let his fingers do the walking.

A.C. GREENE: I think Santa Claus has moved his workshop from the North Pole to Silicon Valley or to some other electronic El Dorado, some place these hi-tech fantasy machines are being produced that are offered as Christmas presents through the futuristic catalogues of companies like the Sharper Image, Life Force, Be Ingenious, A to Z, and Mark Line. Maybe I need a telephone that quacks like a duck, or rings in neon, or barks like a dog, or fits in a lady's shoe. Maybe I'm outdated. Maybe I need a machine that can pick up human speech through a 12 inch wall and magnify it 20,000 times, a voice changer, giving me a telephone voice the catalogue says even my mother wouldn't recognize might do me more good, maybe get rid of my West Texas accent. Of course, mother hasn't been able to recognize any of my voices for several years now. As for recognition, check your list for a voice scrambler to attach to the telephone so jealous rivals or the IRS can't decipher secret conversations, but don't mention my name, please. And a lot of us must be having trouble with wives or husbands or somebody around the house. There is mail stripper spray -- note that's m-a-i-l, not m-a-l-e -- you can use to snoop through other people's mail and a stress analyzer, otherwise called the portable truth machine, to determine if someone is lying. It works in plain sight or hidden. Some hi-tech gifts have been around for a few seasons, but I've threatened to cut anybody out of my will who gives me a talking scale. [Talking Scale]

A.C. GREENE: Some gifts you just don't need to give this Christmas, like these solar powered gold plated oil derricks and pumps, not to my Oklahoma and Texas oil friends, please. On the other hand, or elbow, a punctureless acupuncture device moves yin and yang energizing from China to the United Kingdom, where this clever contrivance is made. Then there's this phantom chess player that takes on anybody or plays itself. It can defeat 95 percent of the world's chess players. I'd like it better maybe if it played poker. Well, some of you are saying, you're just hard to buy giftsfor. Oh, no, I'm easy. Take this crystal ball. They say all you have to do is ask it a question, pass your hand over its surface and it'll give you an answer. That's try. Is '89 going to be my year for fame and fortune? But my very favorite hi-tech gift, in case Santa has his long range hearing device on, is advertised as the first parrot that can say anti- disestablishmentarianism or anything else you say to him first. I'm informed it loves to chant, "Go, Dallas Cowboys." I'm afraid this football season we'd better not take that chant to its ultimate destination. Merry Christmas and have a nice day. RECAP

MR. LEHRER: Again, the major stories of this Friday, President- elect Bush finally chose former Sen. John Tower to be his Secretary of Defense, a U.S. diplomat met with officials of the Palestine Liberation Organization in Tunisia, and Israeli soldiers shot and killed four Palestinian demonstrators in the occupied territories. Good night, Robin.

MR. MacNeil: Good night, Jim. That's the Newshour for tonight and for this week. Have a nice weekend and we'll see you on Monday night. I'm Robert MacNeil. Good night.