The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer

JIM LEHRER: Good evening. I'm Jim Lehrer. On the NewsHour tonight: A summary of today's news; then, excerpts from Senate hearings that drew fire upon U.S. Iraq policies; a look at the fight over downloading music from the Internet; a report from Mali on the world trade struggle surrounding subsidized farm exports; a conversation with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger about his new book, "Crisis"; and some obituary thoughts about an infamous propaganda filmmaker who made history glorifying Hitler.

NEWS SUMMARY

JIM LEHRER: Some 20,000 U.S. Army reserve and National Guard troops will stay in Iraq and Kuwait for up to a year. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff confirmed today their tours of duty would be increased. At a Senate hearing, General Richard Myers acknowledged it's hard on reservists, but he said they play key support roles in engineering and civil affairs work.

GEN. RICHARD MYERS: We've got to put predictability in the lives of our reserve component, for that matter our active component. But we also have to realize we are a nation at war, and we have to do what it takes, in this case, to win. So that is what's happening. We need that combat support, combat service support to be with our active forces as long as they're in Iraq.

JIM LEHRER: We'll have more from today's Senate hearing on Iraq in just a moment. In Iraq today, three U.S. soldiers were wounded west of Baghdad. Their Humvee hit a land mine near Fallujah. Another soldier was wounded yesterday in a mortar attack north of the capital. A pair of suicide bombings rocked Israel today. The first bomber struck at a bus stop crowded with soldiers outside Tel Aviv. At least seven people were killed, more than a dozen wounded. Hours later, a second attack killed six people and wounded more than thirty at a cafe in West Jerusalem. Hamas claimed responsibility for both bombings. Last weekend, the Israelis tried to kill the group's founder. Earlier today, two Hamas militants died in a fight with Israeli forces in Hebron. A 12-year-old boy was also killed by flying shrapnel. The Catholic archdiocese of Boston agreed today to pay $85 million to settle claims of sexual abuse. More than 550 people had filed suits alleging they were abused by priests. Each of them will receive from $80,000 to $300,000. Lawyers for the plaintiffs said they welcomed the outcome.

RODERICK MAC LEISH, JR.: I think when we stand here today, we have to remember that this isn't even just about the church. This hopefully... what we've accomplished in Boston, where we are at the epicenter, will be something that will resonate literally for generations, so that children will never again be knowingly exposed to people who desire to commit deviant acts on them.

JIM LEHRER: The Boston settlement is the largest made public so far by the Catholic Church in the United States. MCI reached a new agreement with creditors early today to help it emerge from bankruptcy. The former WorldCom agreed to pay between 44 cents and 52 cents on the dollar. That's an increase from the initial plan. But even so, the long-distance carrier would repay just a fraction of the $41 billion it owes. The settlement now goes to a federal bankruptcy court for approval. On Wall Street today, the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 79 points to close at 9507. The NASDAQ fell 15 points to close at 1873. Republican Peter Ueberroth dropped out of the governor's recall race in California today. The former baseball commissioner did not immediately endorse anyone. He had just 5 percent in the latest field poll released today. Democratic Lieutenant Governor Cruz Bustamante led with 30 percent . Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger had 25 percent . Indiana Governor Frank O'Bannon was in critical condition today after surgery for a brain hemorrhage. He was stricken Monday in Chicago. Doctors said there was evidence of brain damage, but it was too soon to tell the extent of the damage. Indiana's lieutenant Governor, Joe Kernan, has assumed some of the duties of governor. The woman who made Adolf Hitler's propaganda films, Leni Riefenstahl, died last night at her home in Germany. She offered her services to Hitler in 1932 after hearing him speak. Her most famous work was "Triumph of the Will," a documentary of the Nazis' mass rally in Nuremberg in 1934. Leni Riefenstahl was 101 years old. We'll have more on her at the end of the program tonight. Between now and then: Senate challenges over Iraq; downloading music; the world's farm subsidies argument; and former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.

FOCUS - IRAQ CHALLENGE

JIM LEHRER: The Bush administration's Iraq policies came under heavy fire before a Senate committee today. Kwame Holman reports.

KWAME HOLMAN: Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and joint chiefs of staff chairman Richard Myers received a cordial welcome this morning from members of the Senate Armed Services Committee. But within minutes they were on the defensive, responding to pointed questions and some criticism over decisions made by the Bush administration within the last week marking important shifts in U.S. policy toward postwar Iraq. There was last week's announcement that the United States now would go to the United Nations Security Council to request formation of an international security force in Iraq. On Sunday night, the president said he would ask Congress for an additional $87 billion to continue military and rebuilding operations in both Iraq and Afghanistan. And then this morning's report that tours of army reservists and national guard units on the ground in Iraq would be extended to a year. General Myers said there was one simple reality that underlies all of those decisions.

GEN. RICHARD MYERS: I think we need to take a moment and pause and just think about what this is all about. We are a nation at war. We've been a nation at war for almost two years. The stakes could not be higher. The stakes could not be higher. Certainly in my 38 years of service, the stakes have never been higher. You may have to go back to the Civil War to find a time when the values that we hold dear have been threatened like they have been threatened today.

KWAME HOLMAN: Myers said it would take patience and commitment to get the job done. But the committee's top Democrat, Michigan's Carl Levin, a leading critic of the administration's postwar policy, chastised the pentagon for poor planning, beginning with the cost.

SEN. CARL LEVIN: And Mr. Wolfowitz, you told Congress in March that "we are dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon." Talk about rosy scenarios. Before this committee, when senior military leaders tried to give us realistic estimates that Iraq will require substantial numbers of U.S. troops for the foreseeable future, they were contradicted and at times ridiculed by the civilian leadership of the Defense Department.

It has been clear from the beginning that the United States cannot do all of this alone. The administration only belatedly and begrudgingly now has gone back to the United Nations for an explicit mandate-- a mandate that many countries, such as Pakistan, Turkey, and India, have said for months that they needed if they were going to send troops to Iraq. The administration's task is now more difficult because it delayed so long. Their go-it-alone chickens are coming home to roost.

KWAME HOLMAN: Wolfowitz responded, crediting the U.S. Military commander in Iraq, General John Abizaid, for requesting an international force be sent to Iraq, rather than more U.S. troops.

PAUL WOLFOWITZ: General Abizaid and his commanders have said repeatedly that they not only don't need more troops, they don't want more American troops. What they do want are more international troops to share the burden of providing stability forces. But most of all, what they want are more Iraqi troops, because it is their country that we have liberated, and it is they who need to take over the main security tasks.

The future is not in the military, but in getting control back in the hands of the Iraqi people. And we are making rapid progress in that area. We've gone from no Iraqis fighting with us when Baghdad fell, to currently more than 55,000, 55,000, Mr. Chairman, serving with us and providing security for their country. And that makes Iraqis the single largest member of the coalition after the United States.

KWAME HOLMAN: Most of the committee questions, however, centered on the president's decision to request help from the United Nations. Committee chairman John Warner of Virginia:

SEN. JOHN WARNER: The resolution could give various nations the basis on which to bring troops, and I hope contribute financially, to this. Do you have a supplementary comment?

PAUL WOLFOWITZ: Absolutely. All three things of those things: Help on the troops front, help on the political front, and help on the economic front. We have no desire to own this problem or to control. Our only desire is what will get things fixed most rapidly. And you have to look at these pragmatically case by case. More resources are great. Too many hands on the steering wheel, especially in the military area, is not great. But I think we've reached a very good understanding with the secretary-general.

SEN. JOHN WARNER: You are prepared to make a sharing of the responsibility and the authority in the direction on that side? Is that... do I understand that?

PAUL WOLFOWITZ: It's completely pragmatic, and whatever works best, we will do.

KWAME HOLMAN: Senator Levin followed.

SEN. CARL LEVIN: What specific commitments have we asked of other nations for the reconstruction effort financially?

PAUL WOLFOWITZ: You know, the more other countries are prepared to contribute, the more they are absolutely entitled to share in control over how resources are used. When countries are giving money, they're certainly entitled to saying how that money is spent.

KWAME HOLMAN: But Arizona Republican John McCain, who has argued for a stronger U.S. Military presence in Iraq, challenged Wolfowitz to explain what role a U.N.-Sponsored force would play.

SEN. JOHN McCAIN: It's been mentioned a couple of times, Secretary Wolfowitz, that there may be more casualties if we send in additional American troops. The General just referred to supply convoys that would be open to attack. Is that an accurate depiction of what you said?

PAUL WOLFOWITZ: Depending on what you send them for, I think that's right, senator.

SEN. JOHN McCAIN: So we're going to send in... we're going to ask for international troops to come in, in all due respect, general, who will also need supply convoys, and we'll tell them they'll take the casualties, Americans won't take the casualties? I don't get the logic there.

PAUL WOLFOWITZ: Senator, the kind of thing, if I may...

SEN. JOHN McCAIN: Go ahead, please.

PAUL WOLFOWITZ: The kind of thing I meant... as a vivid example, we had three Americans killed and one very badly wounded when someone threw a bomb or a hand grenade out of the top floor of a hospital they were guarding. We're training Iraqis to guard hospitals. We're not talking about bringing in international troops to do that either. I mean, there are a lot of dangerous...

SEN. JOHN McCAIN: What are we asking the international troops to do?

PAUL WOLFOWITZ: Well, the truth is, on the whole with, I'd say, the exception of the British in Basra, the international troops are going into areas that are relatively stable.

KWAME HOLMAN: Texas Republican John Cornyn expressed his frustration that most of the news about postwar Iraq is focused only on the negative.

SEN. JOHN CORNYN: The American people are seeing the drip, drip, drip of criticism from the armchair generals and the pundits who want to criticize everything that happens that does not happen in a perfect or desirable way. And I really worry that we are not doing everything we might do to get the positive message out to the Iraqi people.

PAUL WOLFOWITZ: And I think it's very important, as I said earlier, that we be open to criticism, that we learn the lessons we need to learn, but not to send out a message to our enemies that we're weak or that we're lacking in resolve, or that we don't recognize what we've accomplished or how strong we are, because believe me, they do know we're strong. We need to show that we believe it.

KWAME HOLMAN: As for the president's $87 billion request to continue operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, West Virginia's Robert Byrd, the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, said he won't rubber stamp it.

SEN. ROBERT BYRD: Congress is not an ATM. We have to be able to explain this new, enormous bill to the American people.

KWAME HOLMAN: However, there seemed to be general agreement among members that the money would be approved in the coming weeks, but only after administration officials answer more questions about how that money will be spent.

UPDATE - DOWNLOADING MUSIC

JIM LEHRER: Now the battle over online music, and to Ray Suarez, who starts with some background.

RAY SUAREZ: Since the late '90s, more and more people have been getting their music for free off the Internet.

YOUNG MAN: Music is like an art form. Why should I have to pay money to, like, view art?

RAY SUAREZ: Yesterday the music industry took another step to stop it, for the first time going after people downloading and swapping music online. The Recording Industry of America, or RIAA, filed 261 lawsuits against people who shared copyrighted music over the Internet.

While the largest group of music swappers are college students, the lawsuits targeted all walks of life, including parents, bankers, and bus drivers, who had all copied an average of 1,000 songs into files. Record companies have blamed the 31 percent drop in CD music sales over the past three years mostly on the online music piracy, and sued many of the online file- sharing networks. RIAA President Cary Sherman said yesterday's lawsuits were aimed at keeping people from stealing music.

CARY SHERMAN: We want people to stop engaging in the theft of music so that people can go on making it. This is a terrible thing where people are biting the hands that make the music and destroying the very music that they want to continue to be created.

RAY SUAREZ: In April, the industry settled lawsuits against four college students accused of making thousands of songs available on campus networks. Now the recording industry is offering an amnesty deal for file-sharers who turn themselves in before being subpoenaed and promise to stop sharing music. Under copyright law, music companies can sue for up to $150,000 per song. This week's lawsuits are expected to be followed by thousands more.

RAY SUAREZ: Some reactions now to the lawsuits and the industry's actions from two men who are writing and making the music. John Flansburgh is a singer and guitarist for the rock-pop duo They Might be Giants. Their web site features songs by the band that can be downloaded for free. And Chuck Cannon is a songwriter in Nashville whose work has been recorded by such artists as Willie Nelson, Dolly Parton, and Trisha Yearwood. He is the president of the music publishing company Wasissa River Music.

Chuck Cannon, let's start with you. What is your reaction to the RIAA's decision to sue individual down-loaders?

CHUCK CANNON: I think it's sad that the RIAA has had to do that to basically serve as a deterrent for people who are stealing music online.

RAY SUAREZ: Do you think that will stop people who were doing it regularly, doing it commonly, once they see that, a sort of cautionary warning?

CHUCK CANNON: Well, I'm not certain that it will entirely stop it. I know that there are speed limits on the freeway, and it doesn't entirely stop speeders. But the threat of a ticket slows people down.

RAY SUAREZ: You say you regret that the RIAA had to do it, but when you watch them move ahead with these suits, do you feel they're protecting you, as someone who writes songs?

CHUCK CANNON: Well, I think that they've tried everything else, and it seems that nothing else has worked. And I do believe that if someone is faced with the likelihood that they will, that they may face a fine or face some prison time, I'm sure that will serve as a deterrent for a lot of people.

RAY SUAREZ: John Flansburgh, what is your reaction to the RIAA's move?

JOHN FLANSBURGH: It seems kind of bizarre to me, actually. I think it's very strange for a company that, an organization that represents such a schmoozey business to be kind of running for grinch the way the RIAA has been for the past five years or so.

RAY SUAREZ: But it says, the industry says, and individual companies that are members of the RIAA say that people have been getting for free what they're trying to sell in stores and their options on how to stop it are pretty limited. What is your reaction to that?

JOHN FLANSBURGH: Well, I mean people hear the radio for free as well. And in some ways I think a lot of artists have realized that the MP-3 format is a great way to promote what they're doing, especially if they don't have unlimited access to the radio or MTV. It's a way for people to stay in touch with recording artists. I think the RIAA has a valid point. They're losing a lot of business. But I'm not entirely sure that it's a battle that they're really going to be able to win. I think they're losing valuable time catching up with technology and figuring out where the industry really needs to go next.

RAY SUAREZ: Well, where do you cross the line between promotions... and as you say, I mean, the radio has been seen as a tool for getting people to like new artists since there has been radio. Where do you cross the line between promotion and forgoing people who would otherwise go into a store and buy a recording of yours?

JOHN FLANSBURGH: It's a very blurry line. And it's been blurry for a long time. I think the reality is, the challenge of the Internet is trying to figure out where ownership starts; you know -- in some ways, what's the difference between broadcasting and publishing if there is no actual thing. If you have on-demand music in your house that you can just play from what appears to be a radio, what's the difference between that and owning a CD?

RAY SUAREZ: Chuck Cannon, over the years, I've spoken to performers who have given their music away for free on the web, and they see it as a way of garnering more interest in the touring and performing they do. Are they in an objectively different spot from someone like you who writes material for other artists and doesn't tour?

CHUCK CANNON: Of course there are. You know, first of all, radio music is not for free. All radio stations have to pay blanket license to BMI, CSACR and ASCAP in order to use that music. The music you hear on the radio, the songwriters do get paid for that music. And, you know, I think it's exciting that someone would want to give their music away for free. If that works for your business model, that's fine. But this is a business model that's been foisted upon people who make their-- whose livelihood is making music, making up music and not necessarily going out on the road to promote it.

There's a long history of professional songwriters in America. And what this does is basically foists this business model on us without our permission. I make 8 cents... well, a song will make 8 cents for a songwriter who wrote the song that is on an album that sells. If he co-writes that song, he makes 2 cents. If he is published, he is going to make 2 cents. If I want to give my music away for free, I would do that.

But it doesn't... I'm confused a bit here about what the business model might be that will compete with free. And if you want to give your music away for free, that's your choice. If you own it, you ought to have that choice to be able to do that. The problem with that is that no one's asked me. No one's asked me if it's okay to take my music for free. And in fact it's not okay for people to take my music for free.

I've taken out a mortgage. I support my family. I'm not any different than anyone else who has a job. I just happen to make up songs that millions of people want to own. Typically what has heretofore been the case, I have been paid by anyone who wants to get one of my songs. I get a small royalty. And what this does is basically, when you download one of my songs without my permission or without paying for it, you have, in essence, intercepted my paycheck.

RAY SUAREZ: Let me go right to John Flansburgh at that point and ask him if he could envision a business model where someone like Chuck Cannon is protected, where his intellectual-property rights are protected, and people still get to bypass the music shelf?

CHUCK CANNON: I'm definitely interested in a business model that competes with free. That would be really interesting. I'd like to hear John address that.

JOHN FLANSBURGH: Well, I think your point about business models changing is really well taken. I think in some sense, the business model might have already changed. I think there is a real generation gap between the record industry and record consumers. The kids who are downloading MP-3s don't even feel as guilty as they would if they were stealing penny candy. They feel so alienated from the music business and all the money related to the music business.

And there are a lot of organizations intercepting paychecks besides fans. I think it might actually be too late for...

CHUCK CANNON: Such as?

JOHN FLANSBURGH: Record companies. It's a strange business, the music business, um, and I think there's... the point here is that the technology is already here and we haven't come up with a solution to figure out a way to get songwriters royalties to them. And it might just be too late.

RAY SUAREZ: John Flansburgh, the first attempt was to try to make places like NAPSTER into legitimate businesses that paid royalties to artists. Has that worked, or is the RIAA trying to stuff the genie back into the bottle and try to just not work with this technology?

JOHN FLANSBURGH: Well, I don't think you're going to solve the problem by suing 12 year olds and 72 year olds for downloading too much free MP-3. I think the Apple site is probably a good example of what could work, but there is a generational shift. You know, most college students today have downloaded an extraordinary amount of MP-3s. It's very common behavior. I think people get used to it; they're already used to it. And in some ways I think it's very possible the record industry might already be on its way out.

RAY SUAREZ: Is the Apple site an encouraging development for you, Chuck Cannon, where people do pay 99 cents and download a single song?

CHUCK CANNON: Of course it is. I'm not a Ludite. I'm quite interested in people getting my songs. That's my object. I write a song. I hope a recording artist records that song, then I hope that people really enjoy that song enough to go out and get it. I want people to get it. As a matter of fact, I think that downloading is probably the wave of the future. It's the best distribution model I've ever seen for distributing songs. But the problem is that... there is not a generation gap. I have to take issue with that. There is not a generation gap about stealing.

If you take something that doesn't belong to you without paying for it or without permission, that's stealing -- any way you look at it. We haven't invented technology that makes the concept of it being wrong to steal, we haven't invented technology that makes that concept go away. I'm encouraged by people who want to give their music away to generate more support for their tours, generate more support... but they're able to go out and sell T-shirts. They're able to go out and sell tickets. They're able to still have a business model that is viable in a world where they give their music away for free.

RAY SUAREZ: We are going to end it there. Chuck Cannon, John Flansburgh, thank you gentlemen both.

JIM LEHRER: Still to come on the NewsHour tonight: The struggle over farm subsidies, Henry Kissinger, and a propaganda filmmaker.

FOCUS - SUBSIDY STRUGGLE

JIM LEHRER: Now the looming fight over farm subsidies. Tomorrow, world trade ministers will meet in Cancun, Mexico, to consider charges that rich- nation subsidies are hurting farmers in developing countries. Fred de Sam Lazaro of Twin Cities Public Television reports on what's at stake.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: The day of cotton's dominance may be long past in the American South, yet the 25,000 or so U.S. cotton growers continue to earn profits, even though world cotton prices are at historic lows. The reason is federal subsidies, which guarantee farmers a minimum price. So growers like John Lindamood, who plants 5,000 acres in Tennessee, can sell cotton below his cost of producing it.

JOHN LINDAMOOD: In years of historically low prices, which is where we are currently, and have been for the last couple years-- we're producing for prices that my father received when I was in grade school-- these government supports are essential to us staying in business.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: But critics, notably leaders of some West African nations say those U.S. Government supports, subsidies, are depressing world cotton prices and devastating African farmers and economies, which depend heavily, in some cases almost entirely, on exports of cotton.

One of the four countries bringing a complaint against U.S. subsidies at the World Trade Organization is Mali. This former French colony, with a per capita income of just $270 a year, is one of the world's ten poorest nations. Most of its 12 million citizens live near the Niger River. And most, like Hamidou Coulibaly, are subsistence farmers. They grow corn and millet, mainly for their own needs, and cotton for income.

HAMIDOU COULIBALY: (Translated): We are growing cotton, but we have some difficulties. Our difficulties are that our cotton doesn't get a good price. Also, that fertilizers and insecticides are expensive.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Last year, after covering all costs and expenses, Coulibaly's seven-acre cotton crop brought in just $500.

HAMIDOU COULIBALY: What I get is not enough. We have to pay taxes, and I have to pay for clothes and medicine. I have children who go to school. I have to pay for their clothes and their school supplies.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Coulibaly has had to resort to borrowing money to support his extended family of 40 members. Many neighbors are even worse off. Kalifa Coulibaly, who's not related, has had to sell some of his cattle used to plow his fields. On this day, he borrowed the equivalent of $30 to buy medicine. That's more than 10 percent of his earnings last year.

KALIFA COULIBALY (Translated): I just borrowed 15,000 C.F.A.S. They'll take it our of my cotton income. All of my family has been sick, and I took this money to pay for medicine.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Mali's president, Amadou Toure, has won praise and aid from Washington for promoting democratic and free market policies. But he complains Washington itself is violating free market principles by subsidizing American farmers.

AMADOU TOUMANI TOURE, President, Mali ( Translated ): We studied the impact of these subsidies and found that if there were not subsidies, we would increase the income of our producers by more than 30 percent . The losses we're sustaining are more than the aid we receive from the United States, and we find this unjust, because the population who produce cotton are powerless rural people.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: The U.S. Ambassador here, Vicki Huddleston, says farm subsidies are a fact of life.

VICKI HUDDLESTON, U.S. Ambassador to Mali (Translated): Obviously in the United States, as a democracy, we have cotton farmers. Cotton farmers see the price of cotton go down. They can't produce at that price, so they go to their representatives and say, "we need to be subsidized so we can continue to produce cotton." The problem in developing countries like Mali is, the government can't afford to subsidize cotton.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Moreover, she said, subsidies and higher prices alone won't solve Mali's problems, which go much deeper. To begin, there's just one cotton company in Mali, called CMDT, a monopoly jointly owned by the government and a large French company. CMDT dominates farmers' lives. It's the only place to get seeds, fertilizers, insecticides, or a loan. CMDT is also the only place farmers can sell their cotton.

HAMIDOU COULIBALY: ( Translated ): The problem we have is, even if we grow good quality cotton, CMDT says "your cotton is second or third class." They make the rules: First, second, third. They tell us the price. We don't know the price. So if we don't know something, we will trust whatever they say, even if we don't believe them.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: CMDT Officials insist they do their best for Mali's cotton growers. But Ambassador Huddleston says an even bigger problem for both is that almost all of Mali's cotton is exported as raw material.

VICKI HUDDLESTON: Mali produces cotton, but they don't produce any t-shirts. They really need to diversify. They need to be making thread, they need to be making T-shirts; they need to be making trousers. This then will really give Mali the opportunity to develop.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: President Toure says he's committed to changing the cotton business and building new industries to develop raw materials-- not just cotton, but gold and livestock. But these are long-term prospects that require money and know-how Mali does not have. For now, he says cotton remains key to building a stable democratic nation.

AMADOU TOUMANI TOURE (Translated): The best way to prevent conflict and terrorism is to struggle against poverty. Cotton is a critical strategic product in the struggle against poverty. Cotton for us builds hospitals and schools. It buys medicines, roads-- therefore, social development. We're asking simply that our cotton get the same chance to be sold as American cotton, European, or Chinese.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Besides the removal of cotton subsidies, Mali will ask for compensation in the WTO for losses the president says they have caused.

AMADOU TOUMANI TOURE (Translated): We have a proverb here which says "the hand that gives is always higher than the one that receives." We're only asking for our rights.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: For their part, the group representing U.S. cotton producers says a myriad of world economic factors, not subsidies, affect world cotton prices. President Mark Lange says subsidies have been in place in times of low and high prices.

MARK LANGE, National Cotton Council of America: The United States has had a 60-year history of Congress saying to the citizens of this country that it will engender programs that provide safe, affordable, and abundant food and fiber supplies to the U.S. citizens. Is that distorting world markets? Not really. Is that harming foreign producers? I don't believe so.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: Lange says he's not opposed to negotiating new trade agreements, but says these must happen with other major producers whose subsidies are even greater.

MARK LANGE: In fact, the U.S. spends less on a per-crop or per-acre basis than several other major agricultural exporters in the world, in particular the EU and Canada. And so, when we think about these things, I think the appropriate place to discuss should there be further disciplines on agricultural subsidies is in the WTO. We've said that, and we continue to say that, that the U.S. would be foolish to, in a sense, unilaterally disarm.

FRED DE SAM LAZARO: In August, U.S. and EU officials agreed to work together to reduce agriculture subsidies, which throughout the developed world total about $1 billion per day. Many experts called it at best a small first step in the difficult task of reaching an agreement acceptable both to poor farmers in the third world and their politically more powerful counterparts in the West and Japan.

CONVERSATION

JIM LEHRER: Now a conversation with Henry Kissinger about his new book. Titled "Crisis," it looks back at two major events when he was secretary of state: The 1973 Middle East war and the 1975 American withdrawal from Vietnam. Mr. Secretary, welcome.

HENRY KISSINGER: Pleasure to be here.

JIM LEHRER: Why did you choose those two events?

HENRY KISSINGER: The Middle East War, with all its difficulties, was a great American success. We protected an ally, we reduced the Soviet role in the Middle East, we avoided nuclear war, and we began a peace process, which, for a number of years, brought about three major agreements. The withdrawal from Vietnam was an American tragedy. It was the culmination of five administrations' efforts. It was caused in part, in large part, by the divisions in our own country. And I wanted to illustrate what the final outcome was and what the mood was, when all you could do is try to preserve a minimum of dignity and save as many lives as you could of the people who had relied on us.

JIM LEHRER: Now, the way you handled these two stories is by transcripts of telephone conversations you had as secretary of state. Now, where did these transcripts come from?

HENRY KISSINGER: Well, I had these transcripts made so that when I was talking to people, I did not then afterwards have to dictate a memorandum so that we could follow it up. And if you read the book, you will see sometimes I had made, like, ten phone calls in an hour in a fast-moving situation.

JIM LEHRER: For instance, just to stop you there, you were on the phone with Dobrynin, who was the Russian ambassador, the soviet ambassador, and trying to find out what was going on in the Middle East. And you made a comment that this war could be over by the time you...

HENRY KISSINGER: By the time I finished saying what I'm saying. We got word there was a war. This was 6:00 in the morning. We got word that there was a possibility of conflict. So I called Dobrynin to pass on assurances, which I had been authorized to give by the Israelis, that they weren't going to attack. So if it was caused by a fear of an Israeli attack....

JIM LEHRER: The Syrians and Egyptians...

HENRY KISSINGER: Syrians and Egyptians were attacking, so I tried to pass this on to him, whom I had awakened and who was a little slow. But we did not know when the war started, who had started it, and we spent about two hours on the telephone understanding which side had started it. I was pretty sure that Israel would not start a war on its holiest holiday.

JIM LEHRER: So the recordings were made by your secretary. She was listening in?

HENRY KISSINGER: They weren't recordings; they were sort of transcripts.

JIM LEHRER: You had a secretary listening in to the phone conversation.

HENRY KISSINGER: Right.

JIM LEHRER: Did the people who were talking to you through all these things, did they know they were beingrecorded?

HENRY KISSINGER: They were not told explicitly, but it was a fairly common practice. What was not a common practice was that these things would then be preserved.

JIM LEHRER: You preserved them. You went back and chose the excerpts for this book.

HENRY KISSINGER: I took every conversation that took place so that the reader can tell exactly what we knew and what we said. There were no deletions of conversations. In some places where there was a repetition of the same point, I would take out the repetition. But this is all the conversations on that subject that happened: Middle East War and Vietnam, in the one month that I'm covering.

JIM LEHRER: We'll go to Vietnam in a minute. On the Middle East, it's 30 years now obviously since the 1973 war, and there's still no lasting peace in the Middle East. Why not?

HENRY KISSINGER: Because the passions-- it's not just the passions, it's the perceptions of themselves-- of the contending parties are so different. The Israelis want security. The Arabs want dignity. And they consider the demands of each other as incompatible. So in my period, we proceeded in a step-by-step approach, and we got a number of agreements as a result of that. But the fact is that today we've run out of little steps or medium-sized steps you can take. And we have to head for either a final agreement or none. And also in the meantime, there has been so much additional bloodshed, that there's....

JIM LEHRER: More today, suicide bombings. Two more Hamas people killed by the Israelis. Yeah.

HENRY KISSINGER: Then the international... when I was in office, there was the Soviet Union that could inflame matters. Now you have states not as powerful as the Soviet Union, but states like Iraq, like Iran, and to some extent Syria, having made it possible for some of these groups to operate. So it is a very difficult situation. But I think we have to bring it to a conclusion within a reasonable period of time now.

JIM LEHRER: Does the United States of America have the power to do that?

HENRY KISSINGER: The United States of America doesn't have the power to do it, but at some point, they have to put forward their idea, our idea of what it is that the Palestinians can reasonably expect... what the Israeli contribution has to be, and to tell the Palestinians that they cannot have in the back of their mind a negotiation which is a process of attrition in which they eliminate the Israeli state. And they will have to... by now, I think both sides have to understand that you cannot impose your will on the other by force. And at some point, you know, I often think back of the 30 years... I don't think back... I'm getting old enough. 30-year war. It started about imposing the religion on the Protestant and Catholic religion of the opponent. And it ended 30 years later with an agreement to tolerate each other's religion and to take religion out of politics.

JIM LEHRER: So maybe it could happen again.

HENRY KISSINGER: I think at some point, yes.

JIM LEHRER: Now, quickly, on Vietnam. A lot of people are now beginning to say, uh-oh, Iraq is beginning to smell like Vietnam all over again. Does that smell like that to you?

HENRY KISSINGER: Guerrilla wars, in a sense in that guerrillas dictate 95 percent of the electricity in Iraq. That's hard to cover in your program. Blowing up a building-- which may happen very rarely-- nevertheless attracts a lot of attention. People who defend the existing order have to succeed nearly 100 percent of the time, the guerrillas only 1 percent or 2 percent. That's the same.

But in Vietnam there were special circumstances. There were jungles in which to hide. There was an outside source of supply from the Soviet Union, which supplied almost all of the equipment. There were North Vietnamese divisions that were in the country, so that the forces that were used to defend the government had to fight both regular troops and guerrilla troops.

So in all these circumstances, the conditions in Iraq are more favorable. We have to remember, this is only the fourth month after military operations ended. I was in the occupation of Germany-- which is not a great comparison necessarily, but there wasn't a police force in Germany. We ran the whole thing for months.

JIM LEHRER: For a long time. Well, back to the theme of your book, "Crisis," what do you want people to know as a result of reading your book, which is, as I say, mostly transcripts of your telephone conversations, which is very dramatic at times? But what should they know about handling crisis? Is there a message in the book or that you would like to say about... is there some special thing that people should bring to the table when they're in the middle of a crisis like that?

HENRY KISSINGER: I think they should develop some almost compassion, or at least understanding for the decision maker that he doesn't have a very clear idea what is going on. But the major task of the decision makers have to be first to find out what's going on; then to define an objective; then to define a method by which to reach his objective; and then to convince a whole bunch of constituencies, foreign governments, congressional people, media people. And all of this has to be handled simultaneously with having all these balls in the air at the same time. So sometimes when a decision maker slips, when he says something that doesn't turn out exactly as he predicted, that means that he was, on some level, as confused as everybody else.

JIM LEHRER: In fact, I read a review of your book that said that that is its underlying message in a way, that there is a fog that goes with every crisis; that nobody ever really knows... in fact, in your section on Vietnam, you spent hours on the phone just trying to find out how many Americans were still there to get out.

HENRY KISSINGER: That's right. And at the end, after having spent a month on handling the evacuation and planning it and calling up and saying there are 800 left, and you get all the helicopters you need plus two for emergencies, 123 marines were left behind. And I had already had a press conference announcing, in good faith, that everybody had left. I come back to my office, and it says, well, they didn't take out the marine guard battalion, or the guard unit, so we had to go back with three more helicopters and get them out.

JIM LEHRER: So information is crucial to anybody who is running a crisis.

HENRY KISSINGER: Information and a sense of direction, some understanding of what you are trying to do.

JIM LEHRER: And that has to come from the president, if you're secretary of state, in most cases, right? And it did in both cases with you? Did you know exactly what the president wanted you to do in both those cases?

HENRY KISSINGER: As you see in the book, I had a major role, but I checked every major decision. I kept the president informed.

JIM LEHRER: President Nixon, in the first case.

HENRY KISSINGER: And President Ford in the second.

JIM LEHRER: Right. Dr. Kissinger, good to see you. Thank you for being with us. Good luck on your book. Next week, we'll have another book conversation with a former secretary of state, when Madeleine Albright talks about her just-published memoirs.

FINALLY - HITLER'S FILMMAKER

JIM LEHRER: Finally tonight: The death of a Hitler filmmaker, and to arts correspondent Jeffrey Brown.

JEFFREY BROWN: In 1934, a year after becoming chancellor of Germany, Adolf Hitler flew to Nuremberg for a mass political rally. A young filmmaker named Leni Riefenstahl accompanied him, and shot what would become one of the most famous and controversial films in history. "The Triumph of the Will," with its innovative and influential techniques, became known as political propaganda at its best, and worst. A dancer and actress who turned to directing in the early '30s, Riefenstahl became a favorite of Hitler. In addition to "The Triumph of the Will," she would also make a film of the 1936 Olympic Games held in Berlin. Leni Riefenstahl died yesterday at her home near Munich, at age 101. In her long life after World War II, she was a photographer, a scuba diver, and wrote an autobiography. But the controversy over how she used or misused her art in the service of fascism stayed with her to the end.

For more, we're joined now by Claudia Koonz, a professor of German history at Duke University. Welcome to you. Let's try to understand what was going on here. Leni Riefenstahl didn't just show up in Nuremburg, she was trying to do something that was crafted image making.

CLAUDIA KOONZ: Absolutely. She was... she showed up at Nuremburg with an extraordinarily talented crew of cameramen. She had orders to make a film that would cover over the dissent, the bloody purge that Hitler had ordered just a few months before and show a Germany revived, unified, and utterly loyal to Hitler. And she delivered.

JEFFREY BROWN: So that was the intention. This was part of the Nazi rise to power, to consolidate power.

CLAUDIA KOONZ: Absolutely.

JEFFREY BROWN: And she had her orders.

CLAUDIA KOONZ: She had her orders. She had her commission-- not a direct order. She could have said no.

JEFFREY BROWN: We have a short clip that we could look at. This is from Hitler's speech during the nighttime rally at Nuremburg. Why don't we play that?

CLAUDIA KOONZ: Okay.

(FILM SEGMENT)

JEFFREY BROWN: You know, we looked at a lot of that film today, and there were many scenes to depict. I like the forest of flags that seemed to be cheering for Hitler.

CLAUDIA KOONZ: Cheering and in perfect order. What Riefenstahl did so well with camera angles, with soundtracks, with her editing was to move very quickly between scenes of utter order and then spontaneity, frolicking, close-ups, distances. Nobody had done that before Riefenstahl.

JEFFREY BROWN: Now she herself said later in life that she had supported Hitler, but that she approached her work as an artist, not as a propagandist.

CLAUDIA KOONZ: It is true she was not political. She had a career behind her. She saw herself as a documentary maker, not as a propagandist. But what she understood so much before anyone else is that the best propaganda is invisible. It looks like a documentary. Then you realize all you're seeing is glory, beauty and triumph, and you don't see the darker side.

JEFFREY BROWN: But she could never escape the controversy, could she?

CLAUDIA KOONZ: It dogged her, depressed her for 20 years after the end of the Second World War. She was accused of being a propagandist, and she always admitted she admired Hitler. The last time she saw him was 1944. And she insisted that because she was so good, and because she was a woman, she got closed out of her profession.

JEFFREY BROWN: Now,one of the interesting things is how her work influenced political image making afterwards.

CLAUDIA KOONZ: You can see it, actually, even in these few clips. You see the focus on the leader, the close-up, making leaders who you usually see from a great distance, human beings who you see up close.

JEFFREY BROWN: And from a technical aspect, the angles, the shadows, the close-ups, the moving camera, those things are very much with us now as we watch candidates, as we watch politicians.

CLAUDIA KOONZ: Absolutely. This is Leni Riefenstahl's great contribution.

JEFFREY BROWN: I was even thinking... it was interesting. I was watching "Monday Night Football" last night, and the camera that moves down the sideline, we saw the same thing, the same shot of Hitler on the podium.

CLAUDIA KOONZ: Right. She put her cameramen on train tracks and had them moving back and forth. She had them climbing up flag poles to get a special angle.

JEFFREY BROWN: Now, she was never put on trial as a Nazi or as a sympathizer.

CLAUDIA KOONZ: No.

JEFFREY BROWN: How did she live out the rest of her days? She spent a lot of time trying to explain herself.

CLAUDIA KOONZ: She spent about 40 years. She lived long enough, so she had plenty of chance to do it. She wrote an autobiography, and then she dominated a film made about her life called "the wonderful horrible life of Leni Riefenstahl," in which she explained over and over again that she was apolitical. She was just ambitious, and Nazism was the frame for her ambition.

JEFFREY BROWN: Claudia Koonz, thank you for telling us about this.

CLAUDIA KOONZ: Thank you, Jeff.

RECAP

JIM LEHRER: Again, the major developments of this day. The U.S. Military confirmed some 20,000 Army Reserve and National Guard troops will stay in Iraq and Kuwait for up to a year. A pair of suicide bombings in Israel killed at least 13 people, wounded more than 40. And the Catholic archdiocese of Boston agreed to pay $85 million to settle claims of sexual abuse. We'll see you online, and again here tomorrow evening, when we'll have an extended Newsmaker interview with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. I'm Jim Lehrer. Thank you and good night.