On February 3, 1972, President Richard M. Nixon, H. R. ("Bob") Haldeman, Ronald L. Ziegler, Henry A. Kissinger, Yevgeny Yevtushenko, and Demitir Zarechnak met in the Oval Office of the White House from 2:25 pm to 4:10 pm. The Oval Office taping system captured this recording, which is known as Conversation 665-008 of the White House Tapes.
Transcript (AI-Generated)This transcript was generated automatically by AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Do not cite this transcript as authoritative. Consult the Finding Aid above for verified information.
He said it would be most harmful for the United States, but he also reported a plan which amounts to total defeat of the U.S. Air Force in Saudi Arabia.
Their personal relations period pulled out slightly, so he did not suggest he must be a suggestive partner for the defeat.
He said there were parts of Muskie's speech that were unclear, but he said it's a copy of the data that the Saudi-Indian government gave us of the United Kingdom would mean a total defeat and would be a black page in the history of the United States.
Roger simultaneously praised the Vietnams and said that Senator Mansfield, he said, was responsible.
He added that he had no fault in finding the original cautious approach to Vietnam.
He said it must be true.
He said, I thought it was the Secretary of State.
He said, I thought it was the Secretary of State.
He said, I thought it was the Secretary of State.
Those State Departments were very good, can I tell you that?
Yeah.
As a matter of fact, they came up to him afterwards at the State Department.
There was a press at the State Department.
They came up to him afterwards and said, that is great stuff.
You see, they followed me through his brawling, and even Eddie Porter likes to apply that.
I like that.
We have time to write version.
Yeah.
You know, they write this, and he blacks it.
And they make the point.
And he said, uh...
He said, I went a little further than I intended to, but he said, I got fired up.
I got mad.
And so I threw a few more on.
And that's good.
And Scott deserves a lot of credit.
He worked a little over, you know, getting him teamed into this.
And to start, you've got a question now, which is, you'll see what our Democrats do, whether they rally or are musky.
That's what's good to go with that landscape.
They're in a hell of a spot now.
Get somebody to use the edge and sabotage.
Now, he's working on it.
Now, his theory is that... That's a nine.
No.
His theory is that the major speech will not be effective.
By one of our regulars.
Dolan Gore.
Somebody like that.
Won't do any good.
But he's arguing that we should get him.
No.
Who?
I don't know.
He wants it from the middle or the left.
He's arguing.
Get Cooper.
or if he can't get Cooper, try to get Percy.
And one of them might take it on, so we're working on that.
I got a tag.
Taps would be good.
No, Taps is sort of a block.
Taps is not toughie.
No, Sackie.
Sackie would, Sackie is, can be rough if he wants to.
He's rough when he's tough.
I mean, Sackie doesn't, doesn't, doesn't, doesn't, Taps falls in that, Sackie falls in that, Cooper doesn't, Percy, Cooper or Percy would be toughies.
Yeah, that's right.
Rockefeller might come to the thing.
He might want to do it.
I wonder if he'd get it for us.
One thing we've got to watch, or maybe we don't, but the Nixon administration has been mounting a counterattack, which must be speech Wednesday at the United States Senate.
I guess we can't call them favorites, it's true.
Now, that's a nice line, and a hell of a good story.
Well, Walter Mears kind of took to him the story where he quoted all of the comments from yesterday, you know, from all of the people on the Hill, and all those guys, and they were really just cutting a living, cutting down the pieces.
What did they have inside the house?
Yeah.
I mean, they really did their dumps on it.
I just wonder what the chemist says about that.
Because they all say it's not a good job.
I don't know.
Rogers had a good time with the Democrats, to take him on.
I agree.
Well, one Democratic candidate, Scoop Jackson, on the day of the revival of Scoop, he kept going in place, hanging.
He was in control.
He was hawkish.
The detainee stated, let me be hawkish, or it is.
Scoop is from all heart and face.
He is.
Now, that's what I look for, I guess.
I mean, all you can do is take your son to church.
He's got to think that the way that, you know, he made news is to be popular and so forth.
It's just not the same thing.
You don't have to be a jackass.
You don't have to be the truth.
You've got to say something.
The reason that most of our numbers have not gotten across is that it doesn't say it directly.
With a cutting edge, they cut straight down, right?
Can't be, can't be, can't be, can't be.
Cut it.
This is good, too, because he does love it on the network Sunday.
It's one win.
It's one win.
Yeah.
We've got a half hour on the blunders, and a half hour is one tweet.
And he's fired up for this now.
He said he didn't want to look too prepared on this.
He used everything they had given him.
Now, on Sunday, he'll be prepared.
But he'll follow up on this.
This does a couple things, too, because it's a good thing.
Second day.
Oh, well, yeah.
We've got this on us.
Because now you've said this, and you can say, you know, well, this is on Muskie's hands now.
But he followed it.
They didn't turn it down until Muskie started battling it out.
It's like a lot of reasons.
There are many Americans that don't agree with it, but that is what privacy is.
Just shut it down.
Come down and throw it to those Americans.
That's what I'm saying.
I think we want to put a dot, a square, on those who didn't heed the President's call, even for a few days, to the United Front in this country while he attempted to bring these negotiations on.
I mean, it's a thing that people react to.
Well, I understand that.
Yeah.
This is a little focus away from the proposal.
They take the focus on the president.
Well, their proposal is that if you step down immediately, then they will be prepared to talk directly with the Saigon government, they say, about working on, well, the existing government.
It's all propaganda, but I just didn't touch the force of it.
But their proposal is, please step down, and then we set a withdrawal date, and they would release all of the prisoners.
They've never said that before.
They would release all of the prisoners immediately.
At the date all of our troops are out.
Our proposal is all prisoners in exchange for all withdrawals.
So that's not a thing.
Of course, they have said before, the only thing they've done, except it appears, because the only thing they've said before is that we would just
Well, they've said it now, but it's the right of however they're convicted to still not be sued.
Because that's the Viet Cong.
That's the Viet Cong.
If you out, then the Viet Cong would be prepared to step.
You set the date.
The United States set a date, and when that six-month, when the period is over, we'll give you all your prisoners back at once when you get all of your troops out and all of your equipment out and dismantle all your bases and stuff like that.
So they're trying to drive the debate to...
the ceasefire question and two, two emotions, what they consider to be two emotional elements.
No, no, but they're not focusing on the ceasefire.
Their strategy, I would assume, is to have the critics say, well, why do you have a ceasefire in one?
And then number two, why do you keep a two in?
Because they're ready to solve it.
The two would resign.
And if the United States were to just set a date to get your prisoners back, that's it.
You know, the way it's, it would appear to be their propaganda strategy.
No credit gets picked up on that.
So that's, I'm sure that's what they're doing.
That's the reason why they're...
Roger, today, reflects that and keeps the focus on it.
But at the same point in my opinion, we have to realize that what we're talking about will become a subject of a lot of late debate, and I say it on my own behalf.
This is what I've been agreed that we're trying to control, and deal with it.
Well, they're elliptical, but they say, Q should step down.
If Q resigns now, that they would be prepared to discuss with the Saigon government, you know, working out a coalition government and so forth.
See, they go to that.
Then the next part of it is, if
The United States sets a withdrawal date, you know, like June the 6th or whatever, and it begins to withdraw our forces.
When all of our forces are out, when all of our forces are out, that's just very political.
It sounds from that point of view a complete hoax.
Well, what they want to suggest, with no government at this level, it appears what they want, you know, domestically,
They don't want to be left behind.
They want to take over the impression to be.
Well, therefore, it's true, because it's just a matter of cue, and they're willing to work out a reasonable gun.
We'll give you prisoners back if you set a date.
Well, that makes it so that they're probably going to realize that some people will get out.
People will say, well, why not?
And the thing that festers up out of that is to see fire going.
See, and cue, which is obviously their motive.
Why do we insist on C-STAR and why do we insist on just one man?
Out of order handling.
The way order handling went out apparently today was that it was a frantic kind of offer and that we'll have to take a look at it.
My direction here this morning was to say we haven't seen all of the material.
It appeared that there was some new language in it.
We'll have to study that.
We'll study what's tabled in Paris as well.
We left the impression from the briefing standpoint that, well, we're going to take a look at this.
We'll want to negotiate.
If there's something new, we're going to study it and see where we go.
Without getting into it.
They don't say that you set it up.
Well, what they say is you set it up.
and they'd begin to talk about a coalition government that would reign before them.
They do have the word election in the way later on down there.
I'm not the one who should be doing that.
No, what I mean, seriously, no, no.
If they say that, we said there should be an international level commission which they would participate in.
And we said two will resign before the election.
And we're not participating in the international election commission.
What the hell does it mean?
You could say that there's some ceasefire and only missing ingredient.
Let's see if we can spot it.
At least we got a ride resolved before they said that.
This bill seems damn good.
It's good for him to get him out of crime.
Richardson did a good job today, too.
Okay.
Did he announce a compromise?
Well, the attack, the question of compromise, the fact that it was a compromise, he said, you know, there is no compromise.
It's enough to get all the death centers moved to common ground.
You know, we're not giving a huge thing on H.R.
1.
Our objective is to do welfare reform, and we've never been against testing or pilot programming.
That is one step that can get welfare reform moving, but...
A good deal of his attack was against the fact that we had bowed the pressure, or that there was...
They bound the right little bit of that.
He had touched that purpose.
That's all value.
On the Vice President's thing today, Rogers talked around it.
He asked about that again.
Well, he asked a number of questions about it.
Why?
Well, they see an opportunity to drive the wedge between you and the Vice President.
About what?
Legal services?
Well, about the question.
About the question.
Does the president feel, as the vice president seems to indicate, that the legal services should not represent the poor in cases against elected officials?
Well, the only thing that is – the way we see it, we have the legislation on the Hill to set up a legal service corporation directed by a board of governors who you would select.
your positions outlined when that legislation went up.
And then when they tried to get to the other thing, I said, that's something the president's never, I've never heard the president discuss that matter.
It's never been a matter before.
Legal services is over there, and they're operating under law.
Yes, very much.
See, we have a local Congress at the present time.
See, when the vice president does this, they always go to the question, well, did the president order this?
The president directed Moshe to do that.
Did anybody else?
No.
I doubt it.
Moshe did.
And we're in a bad time to take that shit.
I could say that.
I don't think so.
I don't think so.
I told a couple of people the question, doesn't it?
Moshe did that and he's going to lose the play.
You can follow the news.
It's amazing how the TV has so much time for crap.
Oh, Leonard Goldson and Elton Rowe got us from all sides today.
Today?
Yeah, they came into my office the day after they had been over with Chuck and with Flanagan, apparently.
When I walked in the office, they said, please, please don't raise him.
I said, well, I was just about to.
You guys should have had him.
I said, all right.
What did they say?
Well, you know, they're saying, well, I didn't follow the news last night, you know, because, you know.
Well, listen, it's true.
I'm not involved.
It's the health rule, and Colton's not involved.
I have to tell you to go back to Madison.
Do they work?
Goddamn.
They work at Colton's.
Well, and by Flanagan.
That's right.
That's what it is.
I would just wish someday I'd be asked something like that in a briefing.
I wouldn't hesitate at all, you know, on a thing like that.
I wouldn't have to write how she'd do it.
That's right.
That's a curiosity you just can't understand.
No, it is, because they, for example, they didn't ask me about Shore, you know, what Shore had said.
Well, there, because, you know, you'd have a fairly powerful audience to come by.
No, no, I won't.
I could raise that, but if they had asked about Schor, where Schor said that this administration had taken steps to make a man in the news profession, make the news profession an unworthy profession, well, you know, you could really hit that.
You could hit it and just take the hot road and just cut the living hell out of him.
Based upon what you have said, you know, where are the examples?
Where is he?
He said he's still being faced with the FBI investigation.
How?
under a broad sweeping statement like that.
What were the examples?
How is that still effective?
Well, it's done pretty well.
Unfortunately, the one that's effective is maybe not twice as well as it used to be.
there who did
I think that struck me as a good shot to do.
I have a question for you, Mr. Thayer.
It'll get a little bit of a human interest thing, but it'll also get those guys fired up.
And we have June and Roselle, guys that
And it shows some appreciation for people who do something we ask of them.
Makes them feel worthwhile.
You know, you gave them a good crowd.
That one makes them feel very good because they get kicked around a lot as athletes and docs and stuff like that.
And for you to make the point, that's an impressive thing for the president to say what you can do is more effective than a preacher can do or than a politician can do or than a teacher can do because they look up to you.
They want to be like you.
You know, when you tell somebody that, that's, that's, and especially with white there and all that, that's, that's pretty sad.
That's true.
You know, it really is true, too.
That's true.
How all my young men and women of my age, you know, all of them wanted to be with our teachers, preachers, politicians.
No question.
That's why they use athletes in commercials.
They never use preachers or teachers.
It is true.
Or politicians.
That was half black crowd.
And I feel where blacks are able to compete very, I mean, they're there on their merits.
They're at the top of that business because they're better than anybody else.
I wonder if a small change at some point should be made gracefully.
The introduction, ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, you know, he's under the military aid to do it.
Some do it verb, some do not.
And I think it should be a first step, basically, an announcement with a strong voice.
I noticed that today, and I didn't want to give it up, and I can't blame him.
Obviously, you know, he's just very good, but a lot, most of them don't know how.
They really don't.
They do it all right, but it should be done with, uh,
Well, maybe we should just have an announcer.
We might want somebody to...
He's got to go.
And you know, we do the same thing as you know.
We go to the various meetings and so forth.
We have the military.
He thinks he knows.
Usually, we have a different guy.
Normally, we have a single guy that does have a good voice.
And he does pretty well.
But we don't bring him to things like this.
And that's what we need, is a trained announcer.
that has a little MC kind of character in his voice.
Well, so that's impressive, ladies and gentlemen.
Yeah.
You know, he's got to pay attention with everybody.
Strong voice.
And so, you know, the president of the United States of America.
They ought to say America, too.
Yeah.
That's good.
I think you can do it that way.
I think it's that.
Then you don't have to.
If you announce the state, you ask the same thing.
It should be so that it comes with a booming, strong voice.
I noticed that, for example, in the British system, you know, for dinner, they always have a professional announcer.
He gives a speech, I mean, any dinner, and I mean, I probably have dinner with some guys from the 60s.
And the professional announcer gets up there and announces to people.
Wow.
So you hear it?
You know, it's like I didn't see, but she does it.
She does it brave, and we listen to it.
Yeah.
Well, we should do that.
We've got a couple of witches that are good, that have good voices, and are having some professional training.
Yeah.
By the way, Captain Corpus was extremely good the other night.
I'm going to use them more than anything.
Particularly, they're good when they sing upbeat songs.
Their first song about being a winner could be a mighty, mighty pickup for the campaign.
Someone's used that.
This is a different one.
This is one that came out of one of the musical companies that they used.
I didn't know if that was yours.
This is one that's come out that, you know, like, British was one of their, oh, the American people.
Well, I think in the campaign, too, that's something we want to— You've got to get us all.
Well, but we want to go back—we want to go to some unabashed patriotism and to create some flying stuff and the up-with-America-type kids and not try to be sophisticated and slick and moderate.
and Jesse and all that.
Well, frankly, it is like those, let's face it, let's go back to the 1960 Bushes.
It's a hell of a goddamn thing.
You know, it's like the Billy Graham choirs.
So you get all those people up there singing it.
And I think that Bushes prediction thing is a hell of a thing.
It is.
and have our, play the emotions off, play the dramatic songs, and the, you know, people could get along, but that, closing that prayer breakfast with the second verse of America's Father's God Today, you know, there's people, you affect people emotionally with that.
Sure, and the other night after the incident at the White House, they sang God Bless America, so everybody cried.
It's a song that appeals to people, that has emotional impact.
John, you couldn't be more right.
That's what appealed to me about the Army Corps.
They signed up the, in fact, they signed, they went down here, they signed a road to Mandalay.
Well, come to think about it, that's a hell of a good song.
You know, we just need songs that are booming up.
John Fulks, you know, that kind of stuff.
Yeah.
Instead of the Brittle South.
Instead of, what do you mean?
Look, we're not wrong.
You look foolish to try to beat that.
Because it doesn't matter.
It doesn't appeal to the people that are basically our people.
What it does is the stuff that Meredith Wilson kind of says.
The stuff that Disney does.
And that thing he did at the Florida Open, in Paris, he had Meredith Wilson there with a thousand-piece band.
Filled two blocks, entire street, just solid, massed, bank road, thousand people marching down with 76 trombones.
And playing 76 trombones with Meredith Wilson leading it.
Boy, it was, everybody did.
It was real, a team thing, you know, because it... Do some of that.
Disney makes the same mistake.
They've tried to lease in some modern stuff and all that.
It just falls flat.
It doesn't fit.
It doesn't fit.
Everybody's trying to do it.
Even the churches are.
Well, they have to think they're with it.
Well, even the churches are.
Like, for example, at the thoroughbreds, they have those two black girls with their guitars.
Oh, it's terrible.
Yeah, it was a song they did in the evening.
They just wandered around.
Well, I'd knock it around and it'd go the kind of correct way it was.
I think it was better and more effective if that was done on the people.
If that had been old temple waters, you know, one of her basic spirituals.
I don't know.
Incredible.
Gotta do the prep the way they ain't getting it.
I have something to say.
Why, so few of them managed to survive so long, with everybody against them, I guess.
A few more days, and then... New York, Andy.
Good job.
All right.
If they, if she's ready to go, I think it would be nice if they would come down and say... Why don't they give her a call and see if she wants to try and work it out?
Yeah, I would like to go down and pick her up.
She could come down and she could have dinner on a Friday night.
No, it's just kind of the departure would fit there.
Oh, exactly.
Now, if we've got a plane there, anybody can bring them back up and sit in the sun, which we did.
Right.
We have a plan there.
Good.
If you'd like to come, you say this, we might do less power to this.
Just because he's got a plan anyway, if they want to come, there's no problem.
And it's not a command.
She can come out for dinner on Friday night and stay the whole way Saturday.
Okay.
Yeah.
It's a whole thing for them to come into the White House, isn't it?
And another thing is, it's a whole thing for them to come into the White House and get a briefing from two of the five apothecaries.
It shows them, and it shows, demonstrates
and evaluate their importance in other than simply brawn and speaking directly that you really care about.
I suggest people who can do something other than that, so they can get their reputation going.
Well, that's very much what it was.
Mr. Rogers?
I just met you the other day, didn't I?
Pleasure to meet you.
Secretary of State Rogers, an extraordinary press conference blasted Senator Edmund S. Muskie today for his Vietnam position.
I will tell you a speech that was inappropriate and heartless for the national interest.
I am dismayed that we have a rejection of President Nixon's Vietnam position by a project that was made before the enemy was rejected.
Roger said.
Good.
I think every man who is running for public office, and I'm speaking particularly about the presidential office, should consider whether any statement he makes will serve the national interest.
Terrific.
Then he says it would be most harmful to the United States for a candidate to put forward a plan which, quote, amounts to a total defeat of U.S. secrets in South Vietnam.
Correct.
Said a stoppage of aid to the South Vietnamese government and the takeover of South Vietnam by the communists in a precipitate U.S. disengagement would mean a total defeat and would be a black page in the history of the United States.
Rogers simultaneously praised the Vietnam position of Senator Manske, of which he said was responsible.
He added that he had no fault to find with Muskie's original cautious approach to Vietnam.
He thought Muskie could change his position.
But he stressed he believed President Nixon's position on January 25th represents the outer limits beyond which we should not go.
Perfect.
Let me ask this.
I was going to ask you, Ron, to give you the VC proposal today.
is one of the herons and others may seek upon her to be accepted.
Sure.
Now, the proposal, however, if you know it, comes away from where they've been previously.
It's a movement.
Do you agree or not?
Absolutely.
Because basically they say, first, well, of course, you know, they're making the prisoners to withdraw, which I'm clear they would.
You know, together with Jews or...
I know, but they're making that...
But they're making presidential withdrawal and Tu's resignation.
But the interesting thing is, Tu's resignation says then that further down the road, the North Vietnamese would go, or the BC would negotiate with the government of the South Vietnam to set up an election.
Now that's pretty close to our proposal.
It's pretty close.
Except for the fact that they say now and we say a month before the election.
But have you studied it?
Do you agree with it?
I agree.
Isn't it a movement?
It's not pretty close, but it's a movement.
No.
I know.
It is a movement.
It certainly is a rejection of our proposal.
No, it's a movement towards our proposal.
First of all, it makes them mention the word election.
Uh, secondly...
I just said it's Q and not Q and... And everyone else.
Well, now, what is it that...
It reads out ceasefire.
No, no, no, Mr. President.
In this negotiation...
I know what the arguments are, but I'm just... No, no, no, but Mr. President, what we must not submit is to get trapped into the ceasefire argument in this proposal.
in which there's a political settlement together with a military settlement there is no debate about ceasefire everyone will agree to it the only time there's an issue about a ceasefire is when you talk about military separately so the ceasefire on the vhs vc proposal is not an obstacle because obviously how can you have an election with a war going on
So whenever they call for a political settlement, they are calling for a ceasefire.
They did not contest.
In fact, as I told Mansfield this morning, our ceasefire is almost the same as their ceasefire proposal.
I wonder if Mansfield may jump on this and say, except... Yeah, but...
i think mr president how do we handle this proposal you say we are not going to negotiate this in the press we've put a proposal forward we have said we'll be flexible if they're serious let them enter secret talks with us or restricted talks with us we are perfectly willing to consider their plan together we cannot why do you think they've done it because mr president my smell of the whole thing all along was
that when they didn't turn down our first proposal in October, I kept it open.
And when they didn't turn it down last week, they're under heat.
And this is the year in which we're going to have a settlement.
I was looking at this year's event.
I'm keen to hear our conviction that
I wonder if there's a way that we can do it without where we don't have hot faces through.
Oh, that we can do.
I do.
I do.
Very good.
Are you?
Are you?
I can see you.
Well, I can take a picture of all of you.
I can take a picture here and one over there, too, so that's good.
I'm most excited about this.
It's a very good chance to be able to hear you.
This is so tough.
You're a lot better than I was in the first time I've seen you, but the time, I don't know.
I just don't want to go through with that.
It's a general policy.
Oh, no.
On an ad hoc basis.
We may just say we're not going to change our policy on an ad hoc basis.
Okay.
I said, I don't want to have a camera.
Oh, no, let's sit over here.
Hello, by all means, let's sit right there in that chair.
That's where Robito sat.
Look, when he was here, Robito, he sat here in this chair.
That's his seat.
Right, right.
I know you are here and I've got a good reception here.
Yes, I like that.
I think myself completely free.
Do you?
Yes.
I'm usually, but I usually see myself.
Where did you get that?
Where did you get that?
I was at my first performance.
It was in Carolina, in California.
It was about 5,000 young students.
It was wonderful reception.
After it was in Madison Square Garden.
After I was, I gave my meeting in Pittsburgh.
It was wonderful reception.
Do you really read an animation?
.
And then you have a translation, and you .
First in English, Portuguese, many of the poems.
After I decided my poetry, I started translation.
How long have you written?
How many years?
I was about seven years old.
And you grew up with, I actually know all of this, but what part of the country did you come from, from the Soviet Union?
I was born in the C-MAS station in the eastern part of the Soviet Union.
It's a green tower.
The name of this station is Jackson, Jackson, Jackson.
It's a green tower.
It's near a place like our city.
Oh, that's very good.
And that's first class.
Notice that we're experimenting.
This is the best part of the facility.
We do the same thing here.
California, we say, is the best.
North Carolina is the best.
Very, uh... We do the same thing.
That's right.
It means look and growl.
Right, right, right.
Well, you know the interesting thing, when Henry, Dr. Kissinger suggested you come in, when I was in college, I read a, well, like most collegiates in the United States in the 30s, all of Tolstoy, and some of the Russian classics, you
But the tradition, and this goes far beyond politics, but the tradition of the Russians and the people of poetry and literature is fantastic.
Great tradition.
It's hard to keep our old tradition.
Yeah.
But it's interesting, it's not, if you, it's difficult to keep it, of course, because the politics is different, but I think, you know, of course, everybody in this country, because of the motion picture, is equated with Dr. Zhivago, but the most prominent scene there was the last.
where the people went on to put flowers on the grave, you know.
And that was a little dialogue, how the people, they said, everybody in Russia loves a poet.
Almost everybody else.
This is true, isn't it?
Yes, absolutely.
You know what's happened in Russian literature.
In Russian literature, the poet is a second world man.
Second world man.
Absolutely.
Right, right.
And so, I remember you, I remember you as maybe it was your first visit to, you know, to, my God, I miss United States.
Yes, sir, right?
In 59.
Good honor.
In 59?
Yes, it was during the exhibition.
Sure, sure.
Yes, you know what I like as many Russians do that?
No, I never did tea, I never did coffee.
I know what it feels for me, I know what it feels for me.
But you know what I like in your speech?
I like your sincerity.
Because your speech was not strident, but enough of a pleasure for some of our brothers.
But we, the three of us, we like you very much for your sincerity.
Sometimes,
Forgive me, please, but I'm one of the street thieves.
Sometimes it seems to me that you didn't understand the Russian language.
You didn't have a complete understanding of the Russian condition.
And that's why I think that some of the conditions were violated.
So I think that his speech on the exhibit, some points of attack were wrong again.
I felt this.
So for this reason, I liked it in the same time.
I had mixed feelings.
Because it was a real, concrete expression of your own feelings.
And we Russians really like the expression of force when it is expressed in a fair way.
And this is the way it seemed in my generation at that time.
Then, I want to say that when I found out that Mr. Keith was in Beijing, that Mr. Keith had already agreed to your appointment, I did not sleep all night.
Because my life is not just a life of faith.
My life is not just a life of poetry.
I wrote once in my poetry session, Russian poet is more than a poet.
And so that means that we both need to be more responsible in just ordinary practice for the life in our country.
There's a lot of questions which we made as far as deciding questions, Mr.
Governor.
And by the way, by the way, by the way, this is what happens in some parts of the mutual understanding between the governments of our writers.
Why does it happen?
Why does it happen?
Because, but here everything is different.
Because here
No writer can ever be more popular than a political figure.
Not that people hate it or despise it.
Just maybe not enough.
That's the only thing our people really trust.
It's our people, our people.
And that's why I want, as a person, I've been to 48 countries.
So what is the person I've been in 48 countries?
It's a big experience, almost like yours.
Almost like yours.
I said before my performance at Mason Square Garden, what is for you one big, straight, glamorous village?
I finished my small speech, this one, modest.
I was really, I was really without to sleep that night when I heard information about your injury.
I thought as a Russian and as a citizen of the world.
What did your trip bring?
What will your trip to Kenya bring about?
I also thought it was a very strange boat.
I think there's much more you can do.
You know what it is.
Yes.
When I was in Chile in 1968, before my big appearance,
On one, they burned me in Abyssinia.
These were the also left.
I was just in the spot, and I had to move here.
Mr. McNamara, who was an American, was there in defense.
And I was reading a lyric poem with my hand.
And the Chinese published this picture.
The American pion of Soviet origin is asking if the U.S. will receive a loan from them.
And the captain on the picture said, an American spy, a Soviet bird, asked his boss if there was a salary.
So that night, when I found out the news, to be honest, I found out the news of your visit the day before.
And I thought for a long time, I didn't sleep at all.
And I understood that this was a great step.
And I understood that it was your great victory.
And not only your personal victory, but the victory of the entire humanity.
This is not because you are here.
I spoke to many people in Russia and in many countries.
I spoke even in Vietnam.
It was especially difficult for me to speak.
Because they were very good.
Because they were very intelligent.
Because attorneys are not even consulted.
And as you know, the Vietnamese president hasn't even given any small information about your meeting.
But why do I think this is a great step if you're interested?
Of course, I'm not Russian, but I'm a slightly nationalist.
But also, like most kind of the Russians or Japanese, I'm also a kind of nationalist in this respect.
I took from a position of a man who, when the Soviet attacks entered Prague, wrote a protest against it.
I did it as a nationalist.
Because I thought this move was against the interests of Russia.
And also against
Why not?
I mean, is that very important?
In our country, no one, on any level, is not strongly committed to your country.
This is absolute truth.
I believe in my child.
I swear on my side.
So what happens if you really are impressed about the answer?
It seems to us that we have a lot of extreme tendencies.
Why does it come down?
First of all, it's just inertia.
Because Stanley said it very well.
He said in his book, Travels with Charlie, he said that if the Americans did not exist, the Russians would invent them, so that they would go back to the shortcomings of their own life.
He said in his book that if America did not exist, the Russians would bring them up in order to justify the bad things which he could see around his body, the lack of them.
But Steinbeck was smart.
But he also said that if Russia did not exist, the Americans would bring them up in the same way.
Well, we think that our anti-American propaganda is so strong.
First, because we have a great inertia of the past, which has tended to quicken the development of time.
But don't forget that his speech about Stalin was not published.
And that's what I think the opposition is doing.
And now a new generation is growing up that doesn't know about it.
And now the new generation which does not know this.
It's very dangerous.
So the people who have been left out in that time can hold it now, not because they are talented, but because they're always screaming about the danger, which is what I'm saying.
As Julia has also said, superficial hatred is the last recourse of the country.
That's one.
And the second reason is that people who see the United States as American people are very political.
They often cannot express this to one's employees.
They conceal their feelings with anti-American propaganda without actually not having anti-American feelings and such.
Because there is a great ultralight movement in our world to attack our government for collaborating, for joining with Europe.
And when I was in South America,
I've asked this question many times, but who gave it to you?
Why does your government have diplomatic relations with the United States?
Why do you trade with the United States?
And so on.
So, I think that your visit to Pekin leads to the fact
I take care of this to begin as quickly as possible.
Because if Mr. Mao and other leaders of the left movement
If they come together, and we take a picture together, and it will be popular all over the world, it will allow us, the Americans, who want to be closer to the United States, to really be closer.
And this will force those of us who want close relations with the United States really to be closer to the United States.
And this will knock weapons out of the arms of the ultra-leftist propaganda.
So I personally consider you should speak.
as a great step to unification with our people.
If I'm wrong, I'll be very unhappy.
I've often been wronged by that.
And I repeat, I'm talking so much only because I know you've heard this.
Because I think the first time you're meeting with an official Russian.
And before you ask your questions, perhaps turn back here.
And I'll ask all your questions absolutely sincerely.
Because we are speaking for faith.
This is the first meeting of the American president with the Russian right.
I would very much like to ask you, during your visit to Moscow, about the policy thing.
I said, uh, start to fight.
President, uh, apparently the only enemy has this right.
I would just simply like to ask you guys to try who likes my country and also your country.
I would like to ask you, I would like to ask you, I would like to ask you, I would like to ask you, I would like to ask you, I would like to ask you, I would like to ask you,
You want me to give you a heart?
Yes.
Why don't you do it?
It's just not this regard.
You can give us a big heart.
All right.
I think that during this trip, as far as I know, you'll be there one week.
Are you interested in what the Russian intelligence is?
The Russian intelligence, like Kennedy.
He was a big snowman with great charisma.
You did everything right until the end of your life.
I like one thing that you have.
that you do not attempt to get into the favor of the intelligentsia.
But I'm asking not to think too little of the role of the intelligentsia, especially when you come to Russia.
Because, as I said, the intelligentsia is the second government in Russia.
I would very much like you to take your trip with you to some highly cultured people.
So I very much want you to take some of the cultured people.
For example, I want very much one of the famous American writers.
At least one.
Just give your different ones that will be fine.
I know that your wife said that you have a very classic ballet.
And your wife said that you liked the classical ballet.
And the music.
And I would like very much that we let this be kept among ourselves.
That you make one gesture.
We have a tremendous theater.
The theater is on Tecán.
First of all, this is the best theater in the world.
You'll drive great pleasure from seeing this theater.
This level of theater does not exist.
And if this theater is the most popular among the intelligentsia, if this theater is the most popular among the Soviet youth,
It is the progressive revolutionary in the best sense of the word.
Drama or...
Yes, they do.
If you come to this theater, you'll get rich.
I understand what you're doing.
And I would very much like, and I would very much like, and I would very much like to be invited not only by major political leaders, but also by our best writers and artists.
This is very important.
And that they are being invited now, and the important political people would also write this?
This is very important.
If you want to go with Mr. Kissinger, we already talked about Mr. Kissinger.
If you want to go with Mr. Kissinger, we already talked about Mr. Kissinger.
We already talked about Mr. Kissinger.
I asked Mr. Yanukchenko to arrange a reception for me while I was there to meet him.
Sounds rather good.
But in Soviet Union we have seven days.
We can be sure that, you know, they'll go see about what the child would like to do.
But I think going to the state of .
And we can pick it up because I don't have to see what they're doing.
I've seen the modern day.
I've seen what they're doing in Russia.
And I would ask you very much about women.
And the thing is that I, because of the specific fact of life in Russia, because of the specifically important value which art has,
I would ask you during your discussions on a high level to focus on cultural exchange.
I know that America is dumb, Mr. Washington.
And I know that dumb Americans in this respect have the right to run.
But a big deal here depends on our middle bureaucratic level.
Because when Americans invite this or that writer, or this or that scientist,
Our middle bureaucratic people start to think about this.
They start to go through their files and smell it and see if they can find something.
And who does not have success?
And often our side tries to sound completely other people other than those that we invited.
And I expect you that you can go for this sometimes.
But I think to me that if you stress the importance of this on the highest level, that if you stress the fact that sometimes when certain people are invited, other people are sent, not just to be very important,
Excuse me, I'm speaking so long, but I'd like to say one thing.
I'd like to explain one thing about Russia.
Russia was the last country in Europe to do away with serfdom.
In Russia, there has never been a tradition of freedom.
The only little piece of freedom which we had was before the October Revolution.
During some periods of the Tsarist war.
When the Tsar was sleeping.
And during the temper of the ancient Roman government.
And in the first court of England.
In the first year of the Soviet Union.
The censorship was done with it.
And then Gorky wrote letters critiquing the revolution.
Gorky, who had supported the revolution.
And after this, Lenin brought in the censorship again.
And I said this was temporary.
Temporary.
But it never ceased after that.
Your country was born in the 19th century.
At the same time, of course, it was mixed in with slavery.
This is the greatest confrontation of your nation, which you are facing now.
This is the biggest confrontation of the past.
And what Russia is experiencing now is also the same.
And we resemble people, a man who we have taken from a very poor hut and put him in a new house.
You bring in all these insects, bugs and everything into the house from which he had to hunt.
He had to do it because we hastened the development at the time.
And all the insects of bureaucratism, bureaucracy, police, we drag into our house.
This is the tragedy of our country today.
The fact that our ideas don't correspond.
I ask you to understand this very well.
I ask you to understand this.
When you speak with people on a high level in our country, if you want my opinion, it's the best that I'll have.
Yeah.
This man has touched my heart.
Yes.
He loves poetry very much.
His hobby is to read poetry out loud and serve all his friends.
Can you represent the middle party level?
But he has certain advantages.
Because he's from the same dough, but a bigger pie.
And this man has no inner aggressiveness.
No, no, it's peaceful there.
Because of course he was very afraid of this church.
Because of the events in Czechoslovakia, it was still a long-lasting movement.
He was afraid of demonstrations.
The French government did everything they could.
And by the way, he cried many times.
And he was at a house of my friends, after he had been transferred to the Soviet Union, and was great, hearing told, crying told about his reception.
Because it was the first time that he had been to Thistler to visit on such a level.
And I think that in as far as I'm ready, he wants to visit the United States.
Because I'm his character.
My character is a man who likes to show himself.
And I'll tell you now a little bit about an interesting story.
The president of our region, the president of our region, the president of our region, the president of our region, the president of our region, the president of our region,
He said, I've never been there, I don't know what to say.
But I have to say that I'm not a terrorist.
But I have to say that you know that, for example, Mr. Nixon did it.
He did it in his speech.
Ah, but then I told him about his next address, which was in Kansas.
That's right.
But if Mr. Nixon did it, then I did it too.
In short, I think that you will meet there a friendly reception.
You will feel sometimes, I'm sure, you will feel yourself as one man who is swimming in the dole.
Do you understand it?
Swimming in the dole.
But you are a business-like man and I respect that.
You have a pragmatic way of approaching things.
Good.
And although I read this book for you, I think you will get yourself out of this job.
I know Russian very well, because I am the most Russian.
And if you will not allow me to make a certain amount of dough, still...
So if you are a little bit of warm, tell people, Russian people, if you believe me, speak to freedom.
And I expect a great deal from both of you.
And the Soviet Union also expects.
This is all that I wanted to say.
Now I'm ready to answer any questions.
I'm sorry.
You're talking to me?
Right, right, right.
You couldn't be there last.
And when we get back, I'll come back to you.
I'll come back to you.
I'll come back to you.
I'll come back to you.
I'll come back to you.
Very nice to see you again.
Good to see you.
I haven't seen you in a little bit.
I think I'll need it now.
You know, this guy goes to Dr. O'Connor.
But, uh, Craig.
Very nice to see you.
First, I'd like to say that we will, uh,
We will have in mind your recommendations on the schedule.
And, uh, when I have, uh, kids to talk to the rent, uh, prior to our visit, uh, the idea, for example, of visiting the theater, the idea of, uh, meeting some of the, uh, you know, the intellectual leaders.
Also, your suggestions with regard to that business on cultural exchange.
Very good.
Uh, I have, uh,
Although I had no mission in all matters, and I had earned the reputation of being a very strong anti-communist, on the other hand, throughout my career, I had been for exchange.
I've always said music and poetry are the international language.
They cross all borders.
They cross all philosophies.
And I feel that, of course, we have to do what our forces will allow us to do, but we will work on this, and it was a very good choice.
The other point I would like to make, though you can take it with you, is this, that in my business with the Soviet Union, and no other country,
totally by as big as the Soviet Union in just a few days.
But I have had many Russian people
My last visit, I went as a private citizen in 1967.
That's when I was in Moscow, Samarkand, Alamantan, etc.
And as a private citizen, I did meet some Russian people.
I feel very strongly that it would be a great tragedy for civilization
If the two superpowers, Russia and the United States, were unable to develop the policy together, which would use their power to make the world more peaceful rather than more warm,
Now, that does not mean that the two people will have the same kind of government or the same kind of philosophy.
Because the kind of government... Because what the Russians have as a government, that's their way, but we have our way.
But we all, we both have a common interest in...
and avoiding mutual suicide.
We both have a common interest in building a more peaceful world.
The second thing I would say with regard to the tenets of
These are very practical.
I'm sure some people at the Soviet Union look with suspicion on my visit to China.
You do not, of course.
I know some people in China look with suspicion on my visit to the Soviet Union.
The point that I make is that one is in this room not very long, maybe four years, maybe eight years, never longer than eight years.
But in that period, in this room, it is my philosophy that one, whoever he is here as president, must not miss the opportunity to use the great power and influence of this office to attempt to bring the world a little closer together.
Now, I am very pragmatic and very practical.
and not soft and fuzzy.
I would say instead of crying outside, I may cry inside.
But the point is that, on the other hand, emotion is not always best measured by the quantity of tears that you see.
It may be measured by other factors.
But the important thing is that it is my conviction that this year, credit to China and then credit to Russia, while neither will solve all the great outstanding differences we have with both countries, that both countries
can and must serve the cause of a better communication and a, in the long run, a more peaceful world.
Now, overriding all that, of course, is that what you were referring to, the people-to-people contact.
We must break down.
as best we can, those artificial barriers which do not allow the people who speak and sing, the international languages, the musicians, the intelligentsia, as you call them, to communicate with science, with everything.
That's why I pour it all out to China and Russia.
I don't care.
So, it's in that spirit that we approach these terms.
As far as the meeting with Mr. Gresham, I met him only once before he was first shot, but in a capacity, or in a capacity, I have not met Mr. Gresham.
But you can be sure that I will bear with complete determination to attempt to go
even halfway to try to discuss arms limitation, trade, and all these other things, mainly to try to get back if we can.
And we will not do it one step.
Try to get back if we can to the time when the Soviet Union and the United States were allies, World War II.
We worked together.
And as a matter of fact, it's significant to note
The Soviet Union and the United States have never been enemies.
Never.
But we must to cross the U.S. You must to cross the U.S. That's right.
That's right.
We have never been enemies there except in Korea, where Chinese volunteers, but not officially.
So, I would leave with this final thought.
The problems of the world are infinitely more complex, more difficult, and we would wish, those of us who wish, that we could have issues of peace and get to know each other, perhaps.
But I think that we're at, perhaps, what we would call one of those historic watersheds.
a watershed, and after a little bit of a watershed, you know, you know the place in Russia, you have where you go to the top of the mountain there, where if you go from Spurge Watch over to Montclair, you drive down the road, and there is the divide, where the water goes down both sides of the other.
It's a piece, it's supposed to be the middle of the berth, the piece in there, the piece that I remember seeing.
Anyway,
It's a watershed and that this year might mark the beginning of a new relationship.
A new relationship which could perhaps make the world much safer.
Maybe much more safe.
And certainly could bring people to the world a little closer together.
Because it will be good for Americans to see on their television the Russian leaders.
It will be good for Americans to see on their television the Chinese leaders.
It will be good for us, as the leaders of America, to go there.
And we look forward to, for the time being, saying to Russia, we'll come here.
That will come, too.
Because it would be good for him to see this country, too.
And we want him to.
And so that, of course, will be something that we worked on in the future.
So thank you.
I appreciate your time.
I'm sorry.
I don't understand my brother.
Read your poetry.
I'll read your English someday.
Someday.
OK.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Suggestions.
Yes, sir.
I think, first one, please, two quick suggestions.
First one, I think we must look at one's speech like TV.
In Russian?
I think it's very important.
I think if you, in your speech, you use one word, spirit of error,
I think it would be very important because if you, the United States, you will have one special man
I don't know.
Are you ready?
Because you can't know now.
I know.
But you have wonderful people, many from professors of colleges, for example.
It's not fun, I really think you see.
It's not fun.
You know, I am a big friend of many actors, American actors.
Sure.
You know, they tell you what I will come to you.
You know, they ask me.
They tell you.
They tell me.
They ask me.
They tell me this one thing.
How we need an army permanent, national, American, around the city.
What?
Permanent.
Permanent.
Permanent.
State.
National.
Drama.
Drama.
But we have a new office now, you know, under Nancy Hench.
Did you meet Nancy Hench?
Yes, sir.
She's been 40 years.
But the job seems almost unneccessary.
Let me tell you about Spirit of the Elf.
Interesting thing.
I got it.
I got it.
I know about the suggestions.
Spirit of the Elf in 1967, when I was in...
I went into the market, you know, very early in the morning, and people were mad.
I was by myself with my friend who was a translator from the embassy.
And somebody recognized me.
I mean, nobody, they didn't know I was coming.
My trip was not advertised.
The man recognized me.
And he had lost one leg.
He had a son, you know, an artist boy from World War II.
He came up to me, and he said to you, Nixon, ask again.
He said, he said,
I was at the Oval.
I know the Americans.
He said, we don't want to fight the Americans.
I said, we don't want to fight you either.
He said, but I know the Americans because I saw them at the Oval.
I never forgot them.
I can do a memento.
These are the presidential copies.
Do you see the seal?
Yes.
It's in here.
There it is.
Thank you.
Oh, thank you very much.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Good luck.
Your first days will be very important.
We'll do our best.
We'll do our best because it will be a great tragedy for these three great countries.
and peoples, because there are more governments.
As you say, there are peoples with many governments.
But the main point is that these three great peoples, the American people, the Russian people, the Chinese people,
that at a time that they, and it's a fleeting time, that any people exerts any influence on civilization.
When you read history, it goes, comes and goes from five to 50 or something like that.
But at this time, these three people now have a chance.
Yeah.
Thank you.
Goodbye.