Basic HTML Version
RUSSIA?
(Continuedfrom page
7)
by high U.S. State Department offi–
cials. that unless all parties to dis–
pu tes- C::ommun ist-backed guerrillas
included- come to negotiated settle–
ments, then war in which the Russians
and Cubans are invited in by the
militants is inevitable.
Former Secretary of State Henry
Kissinger lashed out agains t this
reasoning in a major address to a
gathering of international radio and
television executives in New York
City this spring:
" lt
is time," said
Kissinger, "that one overcomes the
ridiculous myth of the invincible
Cubans. Who has ever heard of Cu–
bans conducting a global foreign
pol icy? We cannot conduct our for–
eign policy under the threat of the
possible intervention of Cuban
troops.
It
is a sign of the decline of
our world position that we have in–
flicted upon ourselves through Viet–
nam, the collapse of executive
authority produced by Watergate
and our own interna] disputes.
"Twenty years ago this would
have been considered absurd ....
Let us justify our foreign policy by
arguments other than the fear of
Cuban military intervention."
lgnoring Reality
The younger U.S. State Department
bureaucr-ats, conditioned by the
trauma ofVietnam, would undoubt–
edly quarrel with Dr. Kissinger's
analysis. Many simply cannot or do
not wish to fathom the intention of
Soviet leaders: a doctrinal
dedication to achieving world domi–
nation. In the words of Paul Nitze,
former U.S. Deputy Secretary of
Defense, they aim to ach ieve "a
world controlled by regimes fash–
ioned on the scientific socialist
model - a world in which they, be–
cause of their longer experience,
their years of effort and sacrifice on
behalf of the Communist move–
ment. and their preponderan!
power, will be the unchallenged
hegemonic leaders."
Many in America seem to want to
wish away the reality of power poli–
tics; to treat, in the words of pol iti–
cal analyst George Will, "the
U.S.S.R. as if it were just like any
The
PLAIN TRUTH August 1978
other state, in the hope that it will
finally behave that way."
Dreaming of a man-made utopía
based upon the "brotherhood of
man," "those things that unite us."
or "human rights" doesn ' t change
reality. "Power politics," says one
expert, Dr. Dirk ,Kunert, "is the en–
during condition of international
politics."
How true. And it will remain so
until J esus Christ returns with
unchallengeable power to put down
warring mankind. "We give thee
thanks. O Lord God. sovereign over
all, who art and who wast, because
thou hast taken thy great power into
thy bands and entered upon thy
reign. The nations raged, but thy
day of retribution has come.... the
time to destroy those who destroy
the earth" (Rev. 11:17, 18,
The New
English Bib/e).
Allies Speak Harsh Words
Getting back to the present, it is no
wonder that key allies around the
world are having doubts about the
ability of the United States to de–
fend the free world against the rap–
idly mounting Soviet challenge.
What the leaders of America's al–
líes are saying about the current ad–
ministration in Washington, in fact.
is hardly ftattering. But it refiects the
growing frustration they feel over
t'he demise of American world lead–
ership: over a country that seem–
ingly has lost its bearings.
The respected West German
newsmagazine
Der Spiegel,
in its
cover story of April 1
O,
1978, re–
ported that Chancellor Helmut
Scbmidt sees Presiden! Carter as
"an unfathomable amateur who
tries lo stamp his prívate morals on
world politics. but in reality is in–
capable of fulfilling his role as
leader of the West."
Chancellor Schmidt )"las also de- .
livered strong words to
~ashington
about a major sore point with the
Germans in particular: the Carter
Administration's prolonged neglect
to come to the aid of the sinking
U.S. dollar.
Opposition leader Franz Josef
Strauss was, as expected. extremely
vocal in his reaction to Mr. Carter's
decision to postpone development
of the neutron bomb.
"J
n my knowl–
edge of American history:• Strauss
said, "this is the first time since
World War U that an American
Presidcnt openly and perceptibly
!ay down before a Russian czar." He
used the German word
gekuscht
for
"lay down," the past tense of "to
líe," as in lying down like a dog at
its master's feet.
The Germans are not the only
ones reacting negatively to curren !
U.S. policy. The French press (with
the exception of the Communist
newspapers) almost unanimously
condemned the neutron bomb deci–
sion\
Pre,sident Giscard d'Estaing is
known to think that the U.S. should
be much tougher on the Soviets for
their African adventurism; that
Washington should "punish': the
Soviets by halting sales of grain and
sophisticated technology. The
French sense a power vacuum in the
Westero alliance. especially con–
cerning Africa, and have decided to
fill it themselves for the time being.
On the other side of the globe, the
Communist Chinese, who con–
sistently advocate a strong Europe
and NATO to counterbalance the
Soviets, denounced the Carter deci–
sion on the neutron bombas a "grave
error." The Chinese also reacted
strongly to the Moscow/Havana-en–
gineered ftare-up in Zaire. Peking's
Foreign MinisterHuang Hua made a
hasty visit to Kinshasa to show sup–
port for embattled Presiden! Mo–
butu. The Chinese leader promised to
send military advisors.
The Japanese, too, are showing
signs of anxiety about the overall
U.S.-Soviet power balance. Specifi–
cally they are worried about the grow–
ing might of the Soviet Union's Far
East fteet and the corresponding
shrinkage of the U.S. Pacific fteet. If
the sea-lanes to Japan were ever cut,
her economy could barely last a
month.
The lack of confidence in Amer–
ica 's comm'itment to defend Japan
was revealed recently in a public
opinion poli taken by a Japanese
newspaper. "Do you think that the
United States would really defend
Japan in the case of emergency?"
was the guestion asked. Th irty-eight
percent replied no, and only 21 per–
cent said yes.
The chairman of one of Japan's
big chemical companies said:
39