Basic HTML Version
PASTOR GE NERAL'S REPORT, JANUARY 27, 1984
PAGE 9
It is just such a "moral crusade" that infuriates many Europeans when they
look at U.S. foreign policy toward the Soviet Union.
Nevertheless, Dr.
Kissinger, former U.S. secretary of state, said the European governments
would have only themselves to blame if they were "engulfed by creeping
pacifism and neutralism."
Mr. Schlesinger, a former defense secretary, lectured the European NATO
allies on what he said was their lack of support for the Alliance. He also
said it was time for the European allies to read a bit of American history,
which gives a warning against "entangling alliances"--advice offered to the
fledgling American republic by its retiring first president, George
Washington.
In conclusion to what has been revealed publicly about this remarkable
conference, Mr. Francois-Poncet said there was "a strange but uncomfortable
feeling of drifting apart between the United States and Europe. The mood is
bad
o
II
Five Fingers on Europe's Defense
The verbal cross fire in Brussels adds yet more fuel to the growing trans
atlantic disputes and the dangerous feeling of "let's go our separate
ways."
Let Europe defend Europe, is the growing mood in the u.s.--our future lies
in Asia anyway. (One little-known fact proves this point succinctly: In
1982-83, for the first time in history, overall U.S. trade with the Pacific
rim nations exceeded that with the Atlantic nations.) Let Europe deal with
the Soviets any way they want to, seems to be the U.S. attitude. If you
need nuclear weapons to defend yourselves, we'll even sell them to you.
(See "On the World Scene," Dec. 16, 1983.)
In this light, an amazing article appeared in the December 11, 1983 NEW YORK
TIMES, written by Melvyn B. Krauss, a senior fellow at the conservative
Hoover Institution in California. He argued for what he called the "de
Americanization" of European defense. It would be better, he said, for the
new missiles now going to Europe to be controlled by the Europeans them
selves. He feels there would be less public reaction in Western Europe
against them.
"Such a 'de-Americanization' of European
Western security," said Mr. Krauss. "Better
States than the existing arrangement under
controls European military capability."
defense would be better for
for Europe and for the United
which America subsidizes and
But would it be good for American security in the future? Continued Mr.
Krauss:
Far more credible to Moscow and the American nuclear umbrella
would be for Europe to have its own nuclear deterrent.
The
obvious problems raised by a nuclear West Germany could be cir
cumvented by the establishment of a European defense force so
that instead of a single finger there would be a single hand with
five fingers� the crucial red button.
�� ��