The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

MR. LEHRER: Good evening. Leading the news this Friday the Bush administration dropped Japan from a hit list of countries with unfair trade practices, and the lens cover of the Hubble Space Telescope was opened after some problems. We'll have the details in our News Summary in a moment. Robin.

MR. MacNeil: After the News Summary, Charlayne Hunter-Gault has an exclusive interview with Ethiopian President Mengistu [NEWS MAKER], Elizabeth Brackett updates the politics of abortion [FOCUS - ABORTION POLITICS], we have our weekly political analysis from Gergen & Shields, and essayist Penny Stallings [ESSAY - SINGULAR SENSATION] notes the closing of a chorus line. NEWS SUMMARY

MR. MacNeil: Pres. Bush today dropped Japan from a list of unfair trade partners. Last year Japan was cited along with Brazil and India as having the worst barriers to U.S. trade. But today the President said Japan had made a promising start towards opening its markets. Brazil was also taken off the list, leaving India the only country named. At a Washington news conference, U.S. Trade Rep. Carla Hills called recent negotiations with Japan a success.

CARLA HILLS, U.S. Trade Representative: Perhaps Japan had the furthest to go, but it moved farther and faster than any other trading partner in the past 12 months, however, as Pres. Bush has said, we will continue our efforts because we will not be convinced until we see concrete results. Given our recent successes, we believe that the most effective way to achieve such results is through cooperation, not confrontation. We want to build on the good will of the Japanese people which we have so carefully fostered.

MR. MacNeil: Several members of Congress criticized the decision. Republican Senator John Danforth called it a serious mistake. Democratic Senator Carl Levin said the U.S. should not reward a country which accounts for almost half its trade deficit. In other economic news, the Commerce Department reported that the Gross National Product grew at an annual rate of 2.1 percent during the first quarter of 1990. That's almost twice as fast as the previous quarter's rate. Jim.

MR. LEHRER: There were some problems this morning with the Hubble Space Telescope. Ground controllers at the Goddard Space Center in Maryland had difficulty getting the lens cover off the giant telescope. But they finally got it open and NASA Mission Control took the Shuttle Discovery astronauts off standby rescue duty and told them the Hubble is open for business. The world's strongest telescope is expected to transmit its first test picture next Tuesday. The five person crew aboard Discovery is scheduled to return to earth on Sunday.

MR. MacNeil: Lithuania today appealed for Western aid to help overcome the Soviet blockade. In the republic's capital, Vilnius, truck drivers who support Moscow blocked rush hour traffic to protest against independence. About 50 truckers participated, most of them ethnic Russians. There was a much greater show of force though from independence supporters. We have a report from Vilnius by Robert Moore of Independent Television News.

MR. MOORE: This afternoon young Lithuanians burned the uniform of a red army officer as well as their own conscript cards, a sign that whatever political leaders in Vilnius, in Moscow, or in the West may decide, on the streets here there is little mood to compromise. There's anger and growing impatience with the economic blockade. It's seen as clumsy and vindictive. It's the Lithuanian President Vytautas Landsbergis who is maintaining that the country's historic destiny cannot be negotiated. Urged by both France and West Germany to consider compromise, he today repeated his position that independence is not for sale.

PRESIDENT VYTAUTAS LANDSBERGIS, Lithuania: There are no propositions about suspending of declaration of independence.

MR. MOORE: Local hospitals are reporting the blockade has met some medical equipment is not getting through. The supply of drugs may last for no more than six weeks. There are also fears that financial transactions that rely on the Soviet banking system will be stopped, crippling the local economy. Lithuanian leaders now meet twice a day in crisis session in a bid to outmaneuver Moscow in this political and economic battle. They say the Soviet Union is pulling the noose ever tighter around their small republic. Any hopes of a political solution still appear premature. On the one key issue, that of national sovereignty, the Lithuanians are refusing to compromise.

MR. MacNeil: Another Soviet hot spot was also back in the news. Soviet troops opened fire on rock throwing demonstrators in the Southern republic of Azerbaijan last night. Two civilians and seven soldiers were injured. The protest took place in the Armenian enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh, where there's been ongoing ethnic unrest.

MR. LEHRER: A powerful earthquake in China was reported today. It hit yesterday in an area near the Tibet border known as Qinghai Province. It measured 6.9 on the Richter Scale. More than 100 people were killed, more than 1,000 homes collapsed. Most of them were made of brick and mud. The area is one of the least populated in the country.

MR. MacNeil: In Israel today, Christian leaders closed all their holiest sites for the day to protest a new Jewish settlement in the Christian part of Jerusalem. It was believed to be the first closure in 800 years of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, recognized as the site of Jesus's crucifixion. The Jewish settlement is in a building near the church. The group moved in without permission from the Greek orthodox church which claims it owns the building.

MR. LEHRER: And that's it for the News Summary tonight. Now it's on to the leader of Ethiopia, abortion politics, Gergen & Shields and the chorus line. NEWS MAKER

MR. LEHRER: We begin tonight with a rare interview with the President of Ethiopia, Mengistu Haile Mariam. His embattled African Country has been in the news for years because of war and because of the starvation of its people. This week there was a battle that is blocking relief aid to millions more who are on the verge of starving. Western donor and humanitarian groups are pressing the government to guarantee the safe passage of relief workers. Earlier this week Charlayne Hunter-Gault had an interview with Mengistu. His first ever on American television. Here is her report.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Ethiopia is one of Africa's oldest independent nation states. Though the country was briefly occupied by Italy its sovereignty was established in 1942 as was exiled Emperor Haile Salis claim to the throne. The U.S. was then Ethiopia's main ali. U.S. aid helped sustain the country which has endured one of the longest and most brutal civil wars in the history of the continent. The 28 year old war is being fought on several fronts with each group perusing different objectives. The main opposition group is in the Northern part of the country known as Eratria. There the Eratrian's People's Liberation Front the EPLF is fighting for its independence from Ethiopia on the grounds that it was illegally incorporated in to the country after World War II. In the arid highlands south of Eratria lays Tigre. The Tigre People's Liberation Front TPLF are fighting to gain more political power for their people and to establish what they have described as a Albanian style Marxism. For many years the World took little note of these conflicts but in 1984 the eyes of the World focus on Ethiopia following reports that thousands of people were dying from a severe drought. The Government refused to allow relief food and other supplies in to the area. Officials said they were concerned that the supplies would end up in rebel hands. An unprecedented international effort helped end the crisis but only temporarily. Once again now drought and war threaten the lives of millions. A key figure in all of this is Ethiopia's controversial President Mengistu Haile Marian. a 47 year old Lt. Colonel who came to power following a coup in 1974.Mengistu introduced a Soviet style Marxist, Leninist economic program that brought most business under state control. His policies also forced relocations of millions of Ethiopians from land that they had farmed for generations. They were assigned to collective farms where most of the profit went to the State. Some of the reforms yield positive results, increased agricultural production, literacy and local participation in the Government. But other problems cropped up. In the mid 70s relations between Ethiopia and the United States broke down. The Carter Administration canceled billions of dollars in aid over alleged human rights violations. The government was accused with perusing a red terror campaign, arrest, torture and execution aimed at rooting out dissent. Human rights groups charged that these violation continue to this day. With the U.S. under increasing attack from Mengistu the Soviet Union became Ethiopia's major backer providing some ten billion dollars in military and other assistance over the next 13 years. Cuba also provided troops. With problems of its own the Soviets are now pressing the Mengistu Government to find a political solution to the conflict. In an interesting turn of events Jimmy Carter invited the two main parties to Atlanta last fall for peace talks but they ended with no substantial progress. last month the Soviets pulled their military advisors out of the fields and announced that all military assistance will be terminated by 1991. Meanwhile the military situation is said to be deteriorating rapidly and the Soviets have refused to allow the Mengistu Government to use Soviet Military aircraft in key battles. There are widespread but unconfirmed reports that the Israelis are now providing both military advice and weapons to the Government forces including cluster bombs. The rebels have reportedly maid major gains against Government troops in the last few months. The largest being the seizure of Ethiopia's only access to the sea the port city of Massowa. As the battle for Massowa rages both the EPLF and the Government forces have been bombing the area destroying tens of thousands of tons of food on the docks. Food intended for the drought stricken peasants. Despite different objectives the rebels are said to be united in getting ready for a final offensive against the Government. Against the back drop of a deteriorating military situation President Mengistu last month made a dramatic proposal. Seeming to concede that socialism had failed he announced plans to move to a mixed economy. The plan was short on details but overnight the symbols of the revolution that had adorned much of the landscape around Adis ceased to exist. Under a fresh coat of paint the archway to the city lost its socialistic symbol and the billboard affectionately known as the three Marx brothers disappeared altogether. Only one visible symbol of the old order remains. As does wide spread confusion and skepticism about the dept of Mengistu's commitment to reform. This past Sunday as the sound of a morning church service floated over the walls of the Presidential compound I asked President Mengistu to respond to that skepticism and to other questions about where his regime has been and where it is headed. He spoke in Amhirik. Mr. President welcome and thank you very much for being with us today.

PRESIDENT MENGISTU: May I say how happy I am to have had this opportunity to meeting you here this morning.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Mr. President the widely held view perpetuated by reports in the media that this war has your government up againstthe wall. Is that wrong.

PRESIDENT MENGISTU: This situation in the north this fighting is a situation that we inherited. It is not our situation. One should ask what the origin of this is what is the genesis of this. Of course the purpose of the revolution to provide a solution to a problem in the North. Of this long running struggle and immediately on the triumph of the revolution we approached the dissidents in the North and they asked us to recognize their right to secede from Ethiopia. How can a government representative of the Ethiopian people allow this demand and to allow the secession of this part of Ethiopia would be really to commit national suicide. We do not want to do that. This is an endemically a drought stricken area in our country and we have been approached by international donor organizations to provide food to them. So we said okay food may come through the Port of Massowa and precisely as we are letting ourselves provide food for the hungry they tried to encumber international passage. This is the second time that they capture the Port of Massowa precisely timing it with drought situation in our country.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But how do you respond to the criticism that both sides are putting military objectives before consideration of starving people. They as you say keep capturing the Port and you in turn keep bombing the Port and including dozens and hundreds of tons of food, gets bombed as you attempt to recapture this Port.

PRESIDENT MENGISTU: It wasn't we who first bombed the city of Massowa. It was they in their effort to capture this Port of Massowa they have destroyed the Port facilities and destroyed the who city. That this capture of the Port of Massowa should come precisely at this very moment when the Port was most needed for the supply of food for the hungry is something that international public opinion should have condemned. Why should the international donor community insist on the Port of Massowa for the transport of food when there is an alternative route accepted by the United Nations and a feasible one we have used it in the past and we are using it now. So to insist that this food must go through the Port of Massowa is really an effort to legalize the illegal capture of the Port of Massowa something which we can not allow.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: I talked to many people in your country since I have been here and one, I should say even highly placed Ethiopian told me this. We can not win and they can not win and all of us as becoming so exhausted and war weary that all we have built up on the last 50 years is on the verge of being destroyed. Is he wrong?

PRESIDENT MENGISTU: He is quite right there can not be anything more lamentable than this. But the question is what to do about it.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: There are many observers who are saying the situation on the battle field has deteriorated to the extent that a military solution is close to impossible. Do you disagree with that?

PRESIDENT MENGISTU: Our option had never been military and we firmly believe that the solution lies in a peaceful dialogue. So our opponents thought they would be forth coming. The most anomalous thing in this they have began to harden their position. The talks got stalled because they did not want to continue.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: So you are saying there are no new elements now in the equation?

PRESIDENT MENGISTU: There are no new elements because of their inflexibility.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: The overwhelming impression is of a country that is impoverished, people who are starving, and political forces who really don't care. How do you counter that image? Does that worry you.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: The perception the World has of Ethiopia is not really not the real perception that it ought to have given the mass media and communications facility. In the first place let me say we are night fighting only with these people who are directly opposing us with all the sophisticated weapons and all the medicine it needs where does it get it from. Definitely it must be from strong forces behind it that are driving it and we are fighting against these forces.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Which country are you specifically referring to?

PRESIDENT MENGISTU: Well some of these countries have far reaching plans to de-stabilize it is some of the Arab countries of the region. It is not all of them. For example Libya is spearheading this and others. Some of them are providing arms and the others are providing funds and so they are involved in this hostile act in one way or another.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But in that connection there is a whole new concern arising with the Soviets pulling out of Ethiopia and ending its support to you there are reports now that Israel is now stepping in to fill that breach and that because Israel is stepping in to fill the breach in your country the Arabs are responding to appeals from the opposition forces?

PRESIDENT MENGISTU: This allegation is entirely baseless. There is no truth in that we are trying to replace the Soviet Union with Israel and that we have entered in to a military pact with Israel there is absolutely no ground for that.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Your recent dramatic announcement of a new economic reform program which moved away from Marxism came as a surprise to many people. What was the objective of the socialist revolution in the first place and what went wrong?

PRESIDENT MENGISTU: Ethiopia has been basically a mixed economy and to give you a figure 70 percent of the Ethiopian economy is privately owned and 30 percent of that is owned jointly by the state and cooperative sectors. On the whole agriculture in our country can be said be very primitive so. We thought only by meetings one prerequisite can we introduce a degree of modern agriculture in the country. That is first of all to settle the people to regroup peasants in a specific area that we can get thing easily through to them. It is was a none ideological approach to introduce modern agriculture and modern technology rapidly in the rural area. Of late we have discovered this did not help productivity.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But specifically what are you planning to do. People are waiting, you know, for what is the next step because as I said they remain skeptical that you have announced reforms but that they specifics of how you plan to implement that are still the source of some confusion?

PRESIDENT MENGISTU: Quite honestly in the past there is nothing that we did to promote the private sector but now we've come out in grand style to provide all types of assistance that the private sector would wish to have in order to develop agriculture and legal protection and so on. As far as some of the cooperatives this law would provide that if the peasant farmers would wish to go on as cooperatives they may do so and if they don't the law would provide that they could disband and set up as private peasant farmers.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: How would you rewrite this chapter of Ethiopian history, I mean, a chapter which says, which often refers to you as the cruel dictator Mengistu, a man who refuses to allow political expression, who has brutally suppressed dissent and who is indifferent to human life. How would you rewrite that chapter?

PRESIDENT MENGISTU: A man of made in this image in the first place would not be qualified to come to power in Ethiopia. My personality, my nature is judged by the Ethiopian people. What is paramount for me as it is for the Ethiopian people is the unity of the country, the sovereignty of the country and I am not ready to compromise on that. So I personally do not want to see anything die not even an insect but the truth is that I am not ready to compromise on the supreme interest of the Ethiopian people.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: How soon do you plan to put your government before the people. Do you plan as you proceed with the economic reforms to open up your system so that the people can vote?

PRESIDENT MENGISTU: The armed forces elected me to come and assume power precisely at the moment when the country was deeply in anarchy. It was a time when the country was encircled by enemy forces. So it days for disintegration we numbered. So I was elected to take over power. To start off we did not start of a military junta but what we did as soon as we came in just to go to the people and find out what they want to give us a mandate and what they want. So we put ballot boxes everywhere for people to give their views. So the people gave us their guidance they told us what to do. So on the basis of this guidance given us by the people we set up a provisional military government and saved the country from the danger that was hovering over it at that moment.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: So do you expect, do you envision anytime in the foreseeable future there will be opposition parties able to contest every one participating in a process like that?

PRESIDENT MENGISTU: What any one must realize is the unity and the social security of the country is paramount. This is one of the most ancient countries in the World you know that. And this long past Ethiopia never knew a party line and the first party in Ethiopian history was set up by us. So this party is still in an initial stage so it has yet to go a long distance to mature and progress. It is we this government that for the first time introduced a Republican form of government in this country a Republic and all this by the will of the people. So in the future the need arises, situations actually justify the emergence of multi parties naturally we are flexible to allow them to exist.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Finally Mr. President let me just ask you as you reflect on all the things that we have talked about the war, the famine, the economic conditions in your country, the perception outside. Do you yourself at this point looking back at all of that have any regrets about the past 15 years of your administration, anything you wish you can change?

PRESIDENT MENGISTU: We have planned in the past for the social and economic betterment of our people and I must say our performance in the past has been really good and I don't really regret. There are no areas where I say our performance was poor so I have no bad conscience at all. But of course the most lamentable thing in this is that we do not have peace. My grandparents did not know peace. my father did not know peace in this country and I don't know peace and who knows my children may also never experience peace.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Well Mr. President thank you very much for being with us.

PRESIDENT MENGISTU: Thank you very much Charlayne for this interview.

MR. LEHRER: Still to come on the Newshour tonight abortion politics, Gergen and Shields and the Chorus Line. FOCUS - ABORTION POLITICS

MR. MacNeil: In Washington tomorrow thousands of marchers will gather at the Washington monument for what organizers hope will be the largest anti-abortion demonstration in history. The Rally for Life is sponsored by the National Right to Life Committee. The anti-abortion movement received a boost last summer when the Supreme Court gave states more leeway in restricting abortion. But as Elizabeth Brackett reports, the court decision did not lead to the changes in abortion law that many people expected.

MS. BRACKETT: State capitals have been under siege. Activists have been on the march. Lawmakers have been running for cover, the issue, of course, abortion. Forty-two state legislatures have introduced bills restricting abortion since the Supreme Court gave the states that option in last year's Webster decision. Both sides let out their strategy early. Anti-abortion groups took a two- pronged approach, push through any legislation that would restrict access to abortion, and pass at least one law that would challenge the Roe vs. Wade decision, the decision that legalized abortion 17 years ago.

BURKE BALCH, National Right To Life Committee: Our strategy was to present legislation that would better balance the current extreme situation on abortion by preventing the use of abortion as a means of birth control and that is an approach that we believe there is a very good chance that the current Supreme Court would uphold.

MS. BRACKETT: On the other side, Kate Michelman heads a national abortion rights actions league.

KATE MICHELMAN, National Abortion Rights Action League: Our goal has been to maintain the status quo. Roe vs. Wade is a good decision. It was a compromise. It works for the majority of the public and for the majority of women and our goal is to prevent erosion of the right at the state level now. That has been our goal. Our goal hasn't been to introduce legislation but to hold fast to the laws that protect a woman's right to choose.

MS. BRACKETT: The battle to restrict abortion rights began in Florida. Hoping to be the first state to act after the Webster decision, anti-abortion supporter Gov. Bob Martinez called a special legislative session last October.

GOV. BOB MARTINEZ, Florida: You have given us time and effort and paved your way for a great cause. I stand with you.

MS. BRACKETT: A dozen bills were introduced, but all were defeated in committee. Abortion rights leaders saw national implications in the early Florida decision.

ELEANOR SMEAL, Abortion Rights Activist: What we have done here in Florida has already helped the rest of the nation. That Floridians said no to Gov. Martinez, that Floridians allowed him to climb out on a limb and then proceeded to saw it off has sent a message to the rest of the governors of this nation.

MS. BRACKETT: As the legislative season wore on, abortion rights forces did block legislation in most states across the country. Only three states have passed laws that restrict access to abortion. The biggest victory for anti-abortion forces was in Pennsylvania, where the legislature passed a major package of bills restricting abortion, but abortion rights group challenged the new law and most of the provisions have been enjoined by a federal court until their constitutionality can be determined. Less stringent restrictions were passed in two other states, South Carolina and West Virginia. While lobbying for laws that would restrict access to abortion, anti-abortion groups were also working on legislation that would overrule Roe and ban abortion altogether. The key, they thought, was to write a bill that Justice Sandra Day O'Connor could live with.

MR. BALCH: At our October strategy conference, the National Right To Life Committee had set forth model legislation in eight different areas. The bill that would prevent abortion as a means of birth control is, you might say, a centerpiece bill.

MS. BRACKETT: Now is this bill crafted specifically for Justice O'Connor?

MR. BALCH: It was crafted in order to be upheld by the current Supreme Court and that naturally includes the five person majority after Webster and people recognize that Justice O'Connor is the swing vote.

MS. BRACKETT: Anti-abortion groups in six states persuaded legislators to introduce the model bill. In five of those states, the bill never made it out of committee. Here in Idaho, anti-abortion activists came close to getting a bill that would provide a direct challenge to Roe vs. Wade, but the surprise veto by pro-life Gov. Cecil Andrus left even anti-abortion activists admitting that they had suffered a major setback. State Sen. Roger Madsen co-sponsored the Idaho bill.

ROGER MADSEN, Idaho State Senator: Well, the national implications are that it'll be at least a year longer before a serious effort can be made to overturn Roe Vs. Wade and of course, that's very costly to the right to life effort.

MS. BRACKETT: The Idaho defeat revealed a serious split in the anti-abortion ranks. Because the bill made no exceptions for the mother's mental health and had tight restrictions on rape and incest, many in the movement felt it was too extreme. Law Professor and anti-abortion supporter Richard Wilkens urged Gov. Andrus to veto the bill because he felt it would not be found constitutional.

RICHARD WILKENS, Brigham Young University: I thought several provisions of the bill were simply too strict to withstand the scrutiny that a majority of the court would apply under its latest decision in Webster. You have Justice O'Connor where she said states can't unduly burden the abortion choice, so we'd better have a statute that withstands scrutiny under an unduly burdensome type analysis.

MS. BRACKETT: The governor called the bill bad legislation and signed his name to the bill.

GOV. CECIL ANDRUS, Idaho: I'm advised by legal scholars of both political parties that in their opinion there is not the remotest chance of this legislation being found constitutional by the Supreme Court.

MS. BRACKETT: The national groups were furious.

MR. BALCH: We won the legislature and what destroyed the bill was the political treachery of one man, Gov. Andrus. We put together a bill that was the most moderate possible, while still having the prospect of some effectiveness. And to take the Wilkens-Andrus position would be the equivalent of making no change at all in the number of abortions that are performed.

MS. BRACKETT: Anti-abortion supporters say their bill should not be watered down but Prof. Wilkens says if those forces are going to succeed, they must devise more moderate legislation.

SPOKESMAN: I think it's possible to draft effective abortion regulation which would essentially require or permit abortion only in circumstances where it was necessary for maternal health reasons or in rape, cases of rape or incest, or profound fetal deformity. I think a bill that reflected medical and sociological reality along those lines could well be upheld by a majority of the current court as not an undue burden.

MS. BRACKETT: Despite the disappointment over Idaho, there was one place where anti-abortion supporters kept their hope of overturning Roe alive; the tinyterritory of Guam passed a law banning abortion altogether.

KATE MICHELMAN, National Abortion Rights Action League: We never thought that we had to worry about the territories in addition to the 50 states and the District of Columbia but it seems we do. And Guam is a very serious threat.

MS. BRACKETT: The Guam law makes it a crime to either have or perform an abortion. The only exception is to save the life of the mother. There are no exceptions for rape, incest or fetal deformity.

SPOKESMAN: I am now signing Bill 848.

MS. BRACKETT: The law is a direct threat to Roe Vs. Wade but it has been enjoined by a federal court and most legal scholars do not think it will be found constitutional. Even so, Michelman says it could still be a threat to Roe.

MS. MICHELMAN: Even a case that could go before the Supreme Court that is clearly unconstitutional in its design could provide the court with the opportunity to examine the very principles established in Roe, open the question of whether there's a fundamental right, and even if the court were to say this particular law, this Guam law is unconstitutional, it could also use that opportunity to overturn Roe by saying there's no fundamental right. So we're not out of the water yet.

MS. BRACKETT: With most states now winding up their legislative sessions, both sides say they will now turn their attention to the 1990 election.

MS. MICHELMAN: Until we elect pro-choice legislators and pro- choice members of Congress and work to elect a pro-choice President, we are going to see this right in serious jeopardy.

MS. BRACKETT: Balch also looks to the fall.

MR. BALCH: There's no question that Andrus's active political treachery has energized the pro-life movement, has galvanized it much in the same way that the Webster decision was said to galvanize the pro-abortion forces. Clearly the legislators who supported abortion as a means of birth control and the governors who did so are going to be held to account in the November elections.

MS. BRACKETT: In addition to an electoral strategy, in eight states, anti-abortion activists and abortion rights groups are now gathering signatures to get the question of abortion on the ballot in November. It is clear that abortion is no longer an issue that either politicians or voters can avoid. FOCUS - GERGEN & SHIELDS

MR. LEHRER: Now per usual on Friday night some Gergen & Shields to close down our week. David Gergen is Editor at Large of U.S. News & World. Mark Shields is a Syndicated Columnist for the Washington Post. There's a Washington angle, another Washington angle on this abortion story, Mark. Senate Democrats have tacked a funding for abortions amendment in the District of Columbia onto this Panama/Nicaragua funding bill. What's going on there?

MR. SHIELDS: Well, I think two things are going on. Our politics have reached, they're at a sad point, where the Democrats, the only thing they can really do is embarrass the Republicans, and the Republicans, the only thing they can do, neither party really has an idea of its own right now and the Republicans do the same to the Democrats. When the Democrats come up with an idea or proposal, the Republicans say, tax. There's the old tax issue again. So the Democrats have stumbled onto this abortion issue in which the Republicans, since the Webster decision, have been doing kind of a double dip and a double back off and there have been very few Republican voices, including that of the President, speaking strongly in favor of the pro-life position, which, of course, had been written into the Republican platform since 1980, and so what the Democrats did, have tied this, put this on, so that the President is now forced to veto his request for aid to Panama and Nicaragua.

MR. LEHRER: Which he wants very badly.

MR. SHIELDS: Which he wants very badly and which is needed very badly and which is going to cause a delay, by vetoing the authority of the District of Columbia to use its own tax money to pay for abortions under Medicaid. Now it's a little tricky for George Bush in two respects. The Democrats are really just embarrassing him on it. One is George Bush has flipped on the issue before. He has changed his position. He was a Planned Parenthood Republican. He became somebody who didn't want to tamper with the Roe V. Wade decision, then he became a constitutional amendment embracer, and secondly, the other problem that George Bush has on it is that this is a local autonomy. It's a decision, the Webster decision, the Supreme Court decision, which returned it to the states, it is the District of Columbia trying to make up its own mind, so he's kind of caught betwixt and between.

MR. GERGEN: I'm not sure there's much left to be said.

MR. LEHRER: You can say you agree with everything Mark said?

MR. GERGEN: Well, Jim --

MR. LEHRER: Do you see it the way Mark does, that this is just an attempt by the Democrats to embarrass the President, and is it working if Mark is right?

MR. GERGEN: I think that the people are pushing that, see it as more than simply a political gimmick, or embarrassment question. You know, I think they sincerely believe that they're on the right side of a public policy question. They see this as the first battle in a much larger war that's going to go on. I think what they're probably going to do is pass this amendment that would repeal the prohibition on D.C. funding of abortions. The President will veto it, but I think he'll sustain the veto and they'll go ahead and get the Panama funding and the Nicaragua funding, but what this is pointing to, Jim, is this is a much earlier fight than anybody expected over this issue. We're going to have a series of fights like that in the Congress over the next few months. The reason it's particularly sensitive now of course is we're in an election year. There are a number of pro-choice Republicans who are trying to run for office, two of them the President would very much like to see elected, Lynn Martin in Illinois.

MR. LEHRER: In Illinois.

MR. GERGEN: A woman who's pro-choice, a Republican, and Claudine Schneider in Rhode Island, another pro-choice Republican, when the President vetoes this bill, when he vetoes other bills down the road, it makes their campaigns more complicated, more difficult.

MR. LEHRER: And as the pro-life man in Elizabeth's piece said that he thinks or at least he says this is going to be a big issue in November. Is it really going to be that big an issue in November in these local races, governor, Senate, Congress?

MR. SHIELDS: I think it is an issue when there aren't other great issues. I mean, we're going into a campaign.

MR. GERGEN: That's very true.

MR. SHIELDS: We're going into a campaign in 1990. I mean, I don't know what George Bush's proposals are or his plan for America beyond maintaining 70 percent in the polls, which is done expertly, but I mean if one would sit here and say, what is it that George Bush really wants done in 1990, or conversely, what is it the Democrats want, so in the absence of that, then we get into character issues, then we get into cultural issues. Abortion, prohibition, school prayer, cultural issues. Other people from other countries can't understand why we do these politically. America does not have a dominant culture. Our politics in large part defines our culture, so we have to do this that other nations don't do.

MR. GERGEN: Jim, I think abortion is going to build as an issue and I think there is possibly an interesting coalition that's starting to form and that is the people who are pro-choice are starting to gather or gain forces and get themselves together with the environmentalists we saw on the streets last week.

MR. LEHRER: Earth day.

MR. GERGEN: The Earth Day, people who supported Earth Day, and the strong environmentalists. The strong environmentalists are arguing now that the world's population has become a critical environmental issue and therefore, the United States ought to be getting back into a position of supporting the UN and international family planning, something which the Reagan administration cut off. They're going to push that as an environmental issue. It's going to bring the right to lifers out against them on that issue. Cardinal O'Connor, who's going to be speaking tomorrow at the Right to Life rally here in Washington, is very outspoken in his opposition to any change in U.S. policy. I think we're going to see a building controversy over abortion, over population control, in which we're going to have unusual coalitions forming our politics.

MR. SHIELDS: Let me just say that's a prescription for political disaster I would suggest.

MR. LEHRER: For whom?

MR. SHIELDS: For the people who are trying to put it together, and it's very simple. Abortion is not an issue on which to build a national political party. I think there's no doubt --

MR. LEHRER: Either side you mean?

MR. SHIELDS: Either side. It just isn't.

MR. LEHRER: Why? Because it's too personal?

MR. SHIELDS: It is. Let me just say. I think the pro-choice people have done a superb job so far on the argument. They are on the offensive, there's no doubt about it, because they have made the emphasis and the focus who decides rather than what it is decided, and that is what really quite frankly bothers people. People don't want to think about abortion. I mean, abortion is not an appealing or attractive subject to deal with.

MR. LEHRER: To anybody?

MR. SHIELDS: To anybody. The Republicans, by contrast, on the anti-tax, anti-tax is something you can build a national political movement on, and I think what letting the individual woman decide with no government involvement has really, politically it's an appealing message. It's intellectually quite inconsistent with the liberal position, which is that the government involves itself in all kinds of decisions. It's basically a National Rifle Association argument and it's a legalization of marijuana, legalization of heroin argument.

MR. GERGEN: You're really on tonight. Yes, I think you cannot build a national campaign out of right to lifers.

MR. SHIELDS: National political party.

MR. GERGEN: National political party. I think you can begin to build a national political party if you can get the environmental movement front and center. Environmentalism today is a winning issue in this country right now and it's going to be a growing issue in the '90s.

MR. SHIELDS: It is not a position issue.

MR. GERGEN: It is a position issue. You can distinguish yourself from this.

MR. SHIELDS: There's no other side. Who's going to argue for dirty air?

MR. GERGEN: A lot of people are going to argue against population control. There are a lot of corporations that are eventually goingto argue against some of the things that the environmentalists want. There are going to be some hard fights ahead on the environmental question.

MR. LEHRER: Let's talk about Lithuania. Mr. Bush decided not to impose sanctions against the Soviet Union. Is that a tough decision to make when it finally came down to it, David, do you think?

MR. GERGEN: Jim, I think it's a temporary decision. I think it's a decision that may change. The administration feels very strongly that they're not trying to save Gorbachev now. They would like to save Gorbachev's maneuvering room, his capacity to make decisions which would be helpful to the United States and Europe with regard to arms control, perhaps with regard to unification. But there's a feeling within the administration in some very high quarters that Landsbergis, the head of the Lithuanian effort, will not back down, that there will be no compromise and that within the next couple of weeks --

MR. LEHRER: They called Gorbachev Hitler.

MR. GERGEN: That's right. He's gone very far out. There are some people underneath him, of course, are ready to compromise with Gorbachev, but Landsbergis apparently is not. And there's a feeling within the administration that within the next couple of weeks, the Soviets, Gorbachev may really have to ratchet it up another notch, and seriously ratchet it up.

MR. LEHRER: Like do what?

MR. GERGEN: Well, the troops could be much more active, you could throw Landsbergis out of office, you could occupy the buildings, and at that point the United States would have to act. In other words, what I'm saying is what we saw this week is not the last chapter in this saga.

MR. SHIELDS: Hey, the administration was really tough this week. They said no sanctions, no actions, and then they gave most favored nation status to the Soviet Union, which is going to be bestowed at the summit, I mean, something that the Soviet Union has been looking for for half a century, something that Dick Gephardt, the Democratic Majority Leader in the House proposed two months ago as was excoriated by every partisan voice on this panel.

MR. GERGEN: That's a misstatement of facts.

MR. SHIELDS: He proposed most favored nation under certain circumstances. I would say gasoline is at $20 a gallon now in Lithuania. They are really feeling it. There is no political opposition in this country against the President's policies.

MR. LEHRER: In other words, stay with Gorbachev.

MR. SHIELDS: There really isn't, there really isn't, and there's no developed lobby, there's no really articulated position on the other side, but there is almost an overlay of uneasiness about it as we see this little country go. I mean, there's --

MR. GERGEN: I'm glad you've come around on this issue.

MR. SHIELDS: There is a sense of uneasiness that nothing is being done. But you were tougher a couple of weeks ago. Where are you now?

MR. GERGEN: I disagree with the administration's policy. I'm just telling you what the thinking is. I would like to see them be much tougher than they've been.

MR. LEHRER: What could they do, David?

MR. GERGEN: I think we should have said right from the beginning we stand with the Lithuanians.

MR. LEHRER: They've said that.

MR. GERGEN: We're going to be consistent. No, no. I think George Bush has issued some very strong statements before this all happened about the importance of the Baltics and Baltic independence. He just had to reissue those statements and I think they could have forced these people to the table. Hal Sonenfeldt, who's one of the most respected scholars and analysts of East-West relations, has a theory.

MR. LEHRER: Worked for Kissinger.

MR. GERGEN: Yes.

MR. LEHRER: National Security Council.

MR. GERGEN: Yeah. He has a theory that the Bush administration while it may not have seemed to have a lot of options may have unwittingly be encouraging Gorbachev to move to the right to become a more authoritarian figure, that the stance we have taken has, in effect, encouraged Gorbachev to turn the screws more and more and in the long run this may complicate our foreign policy more. Gorbachev may, in fact, be less willing to do some of the things that we would like him to do. This may delay, for instance, an agreement with the Soviets with regard to German unification and those negotiations, theory.

MR. LEHRER: Does that make sense to you, Mark?

MR. SHIELDS: Yeah. I subscribe to a more simplistic approach to politics, which is all business is local. I mean, I think Gorbachev has serious problems at home and I think this is one of them. I think Landsbergis, the Lithuanian leader, has not helped his own cause by comparing him to Hitler. I mean, Hitler was on the offensive. He was an imperialist. Gorbachev is just the opposite. He is dismantling an empire. He is bringing troops home, so I think that analogy or that comparison is totally overdrawn.

MR. GERGEN: There is an analogy in Munich in a way the West has responded.

MR. SHIELDS: That is open to debate. But let me just say the French and the Germans bailed, pulled George Bush's chestnuts out of the fire this week by asking Landsbergis --

MR. LEHRER: I'm pulling our chestnuts out of the fire. Good night, chestnuts. See you next week. ESSAY - SINGULAR SENSATION

MR. MacNeil: We close tonight with an essay. Tomorrow night after 15 years and more than 6,000 performances, the musical, "A Chorus Line", will ring down its curtain for the last time. It departs in triumph, the longest running Broadway show ever. Essayist Penny Stallings has some thoughts about it.

MS. STALLINGS: "A Chorus Line" was born out of frustration over the sad state of the Broadway theater. And while the show didn't address that issue head on, it provided the subtext of the show in a format that fused group therapy jargon with 42nd Street schmaltz, the hopefuls let loose with the longings that lie behind the smiling faces that glide anonymously behind the main star. Of course, once the glittery facade was stripped away, an even more glittery facade emerged. ["A CHORUS LINE" SEGMENT]

MS. STALLINGS: So when all is said and done, "A Chorus Line" is a repackaged showbiz fable. If that's all it is, why did it touch so many people on so many different levels? Well, for people like me who grew up on raw, reality-based movies and the stripped down esthetics of rock concerts, it was the first musical theater to acknowledge the tough, cynical real world. For one thing, there was its sassy and sophisticated form. There were no harem girls, no surreys with the fringe on top. [SONG FROM "A CHORUS LINE"]

MS. STALLINGS: Nonetheless, beyond all the hip asides, any ingenious staging, lay a soft and sentimental core. Ultimately, each member of the anonymous chorus line emerged as an individual alone and vulnerable, just as we who watched were alone and vulnerable. The Chorus Line's legacy was more than a matter of clever theatrical style and content. It was a Godsend to dancing, giving it new life on Broadway and providing work for hundreds of dancers all over the world, and most significantly, 75 percent of Chorus Line's $1/4 billion gross bankrolled a New Yorkpublic theater and its trail blazing boss, Joe Papp, one of the few producers really serious about keeping the theater alive in New York. Still, for all its positive effect, "A Chorus Line" couldn't bring Broadway theater back to health. That fabulous invalid is in more dire financial straits than it was when the show premiered in 1974. Nowadays, musicals are required to provide spectacle on the order of that seen in Las Vegas or Ringling Brothers' Barnum & Bailey if they expect to attract the tourists and theater parties that keep shows alive long enough to recoup their multi-million dollar costs. More and more both serious and musical theater is being produced outside of New York. The fact that August Wilson's new play, "The Piano Lesson", comes to Broadway after having already won the Pulitzer during a two year out of town run demonstrates how dramatically Broadway's influence has waned. Everywhere you look in the Broadway area, there are empty theaters. Now even the marquis at the Schubert Theater will go dark. But "Chorus Line" will remain alive as long as there is summer theater or an ambitious college or high school drama coach willing to tackle it and as long as performers and audiences long for total immersion in fantasy and the magic in the mirror. RECAP

MR. LEHRER: Again, the major stories of this Friday, the Bush administration removed Japan from its unfair trade practices hit list and there was a problem with a lens cover aboard the Hubble Space Telescope, but it was fixed and the mission is proceeding. Good night, Robin.

MR. MacNeil: Good night, Jim. That's the Newshour for tonight. We'll be back on Monday night. I'm Robert MacNeil. Good night.