home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac 1990s
/
Time_Almanac_1990s_SoftKey_1994.iso
/
time
/
021389
/
02138900.044
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-03-25
|
6KB
|
150 lines
<text id=89TT0447>
<title>
Feb. 13, 1989: Interview:James Baker
</title>
<history>
TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1989
Feb. 13, 1989 James Baker:The Velvet Hammer
</history>
<article>
<source>Time Magazine</source>
<hdr>
NATION, Page 30
"I Want to Be the President's Man"
</hdr><body>
<p>By Michael Kramer, John Stacks, Christopher Ogden, James Baker
</p>
<p> Shortly before his confirmation, the new Secretary of State
spoke to chief of correspondents John Stacks, special
correspondent Michael Kramer and diplomatic correspondent
Christopher Ogden. Excerpts:
</p>
<p> Q. Do you agree with National Security Adviser Brent
Scowcroft that Mikhail Gorbachev's "peace offensive" is
designed to make trouble for the Western Alliance?
</p>
<p> A. We ought to recognize that the Soviet Union remains a
very heavily armed power with interests that are adverse to the
U.S. I don't think it has departed from what has been Soviet
policy for a long, long time, and that is to test the Alliance,
to probe, to look for weaknesses.
</p>
<p> Q. But should we encourage Gorbachev's efforts?
</p>
<p> A. I'm not one of those who believe we should hope for
failure, that somehow failure will result in a weaker Soviet
Union and that will be better for the U.S. It's a case of our
wanting to see that experiment succeed in opening up that
society and seeing the Soviets recognize that Communism has not
succeeded. At the same time, I don't think success or failure
depends on what we do. We must continue to approach this
relationship with prudence, realism, and to be reserved and not
go overboard here just because we see a change.
</p>
<p> Q. Should the Soviet Union be included in a Middle East
peace conference?
</p>
<p> A. The policy of the outgoing Administration was to support
the concept of an international conference provided -- big
proviso -- it was properly structured and provided its purpose
was to lead to direct negotiations between the parties. I see no
reason why we would depart from the policy with those provisos.
We don't oppose categorically a Soviet role. But we do think
it's important that any such role be a constructive one, and we
would like to see them demonstrate this through action, not just
words. One way would be to restore full diplomatic relations
with Israel, to continue to permit greater emigration and to
stop supporting states that support terrorism, such as Libya.
</p>
<p> Q. What leverage does the U.S. have in the Middle East?
</p>
<p> A. The U.S. is and can be the most influential player. But
it is important that we not permit the perception to develop
that we can deliver peace, that we can deliver Israeli
concessions. If there is going to be lasting peace, it will be
the result of direct negotiations between the parties, not
something mandated or delivered by anybody from the outside,
including the U.S. We must do whatever we can to enhance the
prospect of the parties negotiating the problem out among
themselves. It is not the role of the U.S. to pressure Israel.
At the same time, it is in Israel's interest to resolve the
issue. Both sides have got to find a way to give something.
</p>
<p> Q. In Nicaragua how will you continue to support the
contras? A. You will have to continue to support them through
humanitarian assistance. It also seems to me that we should not
just march in and disband the contras. We need to at least
leave open the prospect they could be re-established as a
fighting force if Ortega continues to thumb his nose at his
neighbors.
</p>
<p> Q. Can you leave the contras in Honduras?
</p>
<p> A. There are some problems with that.
</p>
<p> Q. Where might you base them?
</p>
<p> A. I don't have any recommendations right now.
</p>
<p> Q. How about putting them on your Texas ranch?
</p>
<p> A. Actually, there's some pretty good remote country down
there where we could hide a bunch of them. Contra country.
</p>
<p> Q. Might you talk to the Soviets about cutting their
commitments to the Sandinistas?
</p>
<p> A. It's pretty much been policy not to negotiate with the
Soviets on matters affecting this hemisphere. (But) my own view
is that we ought to recognize facts. The Soviets are putting in a
billion dollars a year supporting a regime that doesn't believe
in the things we believe in. So we shouldn't automatically
exclude the possibility of talking to them.
</p>
<p> Q. How do you feel about the possibility of the (right-wing)
ARENA party coming to power next month in El Salvador?
</p>
<p> A. The test should be: Was the election open, free and fair?
If it was, then we should recognize the government that results.
We can't pick the winners of elections in all countries around
the world, but we can be in favor of democracy and do what we
can to promote openness, democracy, pluralism and human rights.
</p>
<p> Q. What is your philosophical attitude about pre-emptive
strikes against terrorists?
</p>
<p> A. I have absolutely no problems with that philosophically.
Sometimes such strikes are not only justified but almost
required.
</p>
<p> Q. Are you satisfied with the way the European allies are
sharing the burden of Western defense?
</p>
<p> A. They are beginning to do more and more. The Japanese are
as well. What I can't say is they're doing all now that they
should (be doing) for the next four years.
</p>
<p> Q. Are you concerned about Europe's plans for unification of
its markets in 1992?
</p>
<p> A. It has the potential to go in a beneficial or detrimental
way. It could be very beneficial if, in the process of breaking
down internal barriers, it doesn't erect external barriers to
the U.S., Japan and other non-European countries. It's up to us
to manage the relationship properly so it goes the right way.
</p>
<p> Q. In your senior thesis at Princeton, you wrote that
Britain's Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin was hobbled by relying
too heavily on permanent advisers. Is that a problem for you at
the State Department?
</p>
<p> A. This is one department, I'm told, that tends to capture
you if you're not careful. I hope to be very careful. I want to
be the President's man at the State Department, instead of the
State Department's man at the White House.
</p>
</body></article>
</text>