General Alexander Haig Show Segment

General Alexander Haig, Former Secretary of State Given: May 22, 1996 at the AARP Biennial Convention - Denver, Colorado The US As A World Leader: What it means today Legislation/Public Affairs “America covets its place as a global leader. Has the role changed and what does it mean as we approach a new century?”

PRESS CONFERENCE

A: I'm General Haig and I'll speak at about this level. Is it good enough for you?

Q: Could you briefly summarize the points that you're looking to make in your talk this afternoon. A: Sure. Take me about an hour and a half.

Q: That's why I put in the briefly. A: OK. All right. Well I'm here at the convention of the AARP Biennial Convention as a card carrying member of the AARP and so I come here with a great deal of enthusiasm. My subject today is going to be primarily foreign policy from the standpoint of the changes that have taken place in the world since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. Those changes demand some modifications in American State craft which we have yet, it seems to me, been able to understand and the risk of not adjusting our state craft to these changes can affect the quality of life in America as we go into the next century, can affect very importantly the relevance of the United States as a world power and if we fail to finally understand the nature of these changes, I'm afraid we're going to be not only irrelevant but the very vital role of the United States as a force for peace and stability in the world will be lacking. Now the changes I'm talking about, of course, are a new multi-polar world. A world of new standards of power. Secondly a world that is increasingly inner dependent and that's a product of many things but most importantly the explosion in information science. It's changed the nature of state craft and not for the better in most cases. And thirdly, it's the misunderstanding of what caused the Soviet Union to collapse and who should get credit. And in the United States we have Reaganomics seeking the credit, we have Strobe Talbot types seeking the credit and more recently we've had Neonomics looking for the credit and non of them deserve it. The Soviet Union collapsed as a result of its own internal contradictions. So these are some of the things I'll be talking about today but most importantly I will talk against what I call Modern Populism in the conduct of our foreign policy and that's the production of leaders who get up every morning, put their finger to the wind to decide what's going to make them popular today and then pursue that policy for a matter of weeks or months only to change it when the press and the American people seem to tire of that particular popular point of view and this, of course, is a devastating, has a devastating impact on our credibility around the world. We are viewed as inconsistent, unreliable, and unpredictable and I'm very sorry to say that our last two administrations failed in grasping the changes I speak of and in adjusting our policies accordingly.

Q: How would you label President Clinton and Senator Dole? A: Well I would label President Clinton as an inexperienced populus who seems to bounce from point of view to point of view. Now, he's been pretty good and pretty intelligent about ending up on the right track, but in the process of getting there, he's created major problems. Take, for example, our relationship with China, the Peoples Republic of China, we've put in jeopardy, the work of five American Presidents of both parties and almost rupturing that relationship. Now the President's come out in favor of MFN and which I think is the right position but getting there was a torturous, inconsistent, unpredictable route. Now Mr. Dole, of course, is an experienced legislature. I've known him for many years, I supported him in 1988 so I have a bias in his favor but I think he's an individual who characterizes the most important asset for the American Presidency and that is character, patriotism, experience in state craft and a, a firm set of principal which serve as anchors for him in making decisions along the way. If I sound like a pro Dole advocate, you're right, I am.

Q: Do you have any recommendations for the senior population. A: Yes well I think the American people are a lot smarter than sometimes they get credit for. They can be deceived by the immediate reporting in the new world of instantaneous real time communications. You know, they can develop a mood like we did in Somalia a few years ago where night after night of seeing the dreadful hardships that they young people, starvation, etceteras being exposed to, American people demanded action. Well within a matter of weeks, as soon as an American got hurt over there, they would demand that we withdrew, withdraw. Now, I think we have to be very , very careful of that and what I would urge Americans to do is to get the facts, read the press, the responsible press, and think very intensely about these issues. In the day of modern communication there's a tendency to believe that everything, every crisis is a problem that needs an immediate solution. Bosnia is a good case at hand. This is not necessarily so. Sometimes a crisis is brought about by the emergence of facts and facts require a different kind of treatment than, than a crisis or a problem demanding a solution. For example, in Bosnia we've had historic animosities, religious, political, ethnic that have existed for years and years and the only way we could prevent them from overwhelming us was the rule of the bayonet, under Tito before that and other Marxist leaders now, the President has suggested to the American people that we can solve this based on the Ohio formula in a year. Let me tell you, that's hogwash and as the year draws to a conclusion, there's going to be some red faces in the White House in explaining why we can't pull our troops out for risk of another blood bath. Why the provisions of the agreement in Ohio are not being carried out and even in today's press, the Bosnians are threatening not to participate in an election in September. So all of these things are the product of our lack of understanding of modern communications and confusing problems to be solved with facts to be dealt with.

Q: You mentioned referencing the reliable press. Mr. Neumann was here yesterday, Edwin Neumann was here yesterday speaking about the press in America today. Would you care to offer up a definition of responsible press? A: Well Mr. Neumann is a very old friend. I've worked with him year after year on the so-called Secretaries of State Conference which the Southern Center in Atlanta sponsors every year. I have, hold him in the highest regard. I think it's a bum rap to blame bad policy on the American press. I used to say that during Vietnam when everybody said, "Well the press cost us the war. The press is what made us lose the war." That was nonsense. It was bad policy that lost the war and to the press' everlasting glory, it had enough sense to know that it was bad policy. Where I would have taken exceptions to a number of them was some of them misunderstood why it was bad policy and drew all the wrong conclusions with respect to that. So that was the responsibility of the press but it doesn't mean that our press is a counterproductive element of our society. I don't know what we would do without a free press. Protects us from the scoundrels of this world and there are many of them, especially in politics.

Q: Thank you.

General Alexander Haig, Former Secretary of State Given: May 22, 1996 at the AARP Biennial Convention - Denver, Colorado The US As A World Leader: What it means today Legislation/Public Affairs “America covets its place as a global leader. Has the role changed and what does it mean as we approach a new century?”

PRESS CONFERENCE

A: I'm General Haig and I'll speak at about this level. Is it good enough for you?

Q: Could you briefly summarize the points that you're looking to make in your talk this afternoon. A: Sure. Take me about an hour and a half.

Q: That's why I put in the briefly. A: OK. All right. Well I'm here at the convention of the AARP Biennial Convention as a card carrying member of the AARP and so I come here with a great deal of enthusiasm. My subject today is going to be primarily foreign policy from the standpoint of the changes that have taken place in the world since the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. Those changes demand some modifications in American State craft which we have yet, it seems to me, been able to understand and the risk of not adjusting our state craft to these changes can affect the quality of life in America as we go into the next century, can affect very importantly the relevance of the United States as a world power and if we fail to finally understand the nature of these changes, I'm afraid we're going to be not only irrelevant but the very vital role of the United States as a force for peace and stability in the world will be lacking. Now the changes I'm talking about, of course, are a new multi-polar world. A world of new standards of power. Secondly a world that is increasingly inner dependent and that's a product of many things but most importantly the explosion in information science. It's changed the nature of state craft and not for the better in most cases. And thirdly, it's the misunderstanding of what caused the Soviet Union to collapse and who should get credit. And in the United States we have Reaganomics seeking the credit, we have Strobe Talbot types seeking the credit and more recently we've had Neonomics looking for the credit and non of them deserve it. The Soviet Union collapsed as a result of its own internal contradictions. So these are some of the things I'll be talking about today but most importantly I will talk against what I call Modern Populism in the conduct of our foreign policy and that's the production of leaders who get up every morning, put their finger to the wind to decide what's going to make them popular today and then pursue that policy for a matter of weeks or months only to change it when the press and the American people seem to tire of that particular popular point of view and this, of course, is a devastating, has a devastating impact on our credibility around the world. We are viewed as inconsistent, unreliable, and unpredictable and I'm very sorry to say that our last two administrations failed in grasping the changes I speak of and in adjusting our policies accordingly.

Q: How would you label President Clinton and Senator Dole? A: Well I would label President Clinton as an inexperienced populus who seems to bounce from point of view to point of view. Now, he's been pretty good and pretty intelligent about ending up on the right track, but in the process of getting there, he's created major problems. Take, for example, our relationship with China, the Peoples Republic of China, we've put in jeopardy, the work of five American Presidents of both parties and almost rupturing that relationship. Now the President's come out in favor of MFN and which I think is the right position but getting there was a torturous, inconsistent, unpredictable route. Now Mr. Dole, of course, is an experienced legislature. I've known him for many years, I supported him in 1988 so I have a bias in his favor but I think he's an individual who characterizes the most important asset for the American Presidency and that is character, patriotism, experience in state craft and a, a firm set of principal which serve as anchors for him in making decisions along the way. If I sound like a pro Dole advocate, you're right, I am.

Q: Do you have any recommendations for the senior population. A: Yes well I think the American people are a lot smarter than sometimes they get credit for. They can be deceived by the immediate reporting in the new world of instantaneous real time communications. You know, they can develop a mood like we did in Somalia a few years ago where night after night of seeing the dreadful hardships that they young people, starvation, etceteras being exposed to, American people demanded action. Well within a matter of weeks, as soon as an American got hurt over there, they would demand that we withdrew, withdraw. Now, I think we have to be very , very careful of that and what I would urge Americans to do is to get the facts, read the press, the responsible press, and think very intensely about these issues. In the day of modern communication there's a tendency to believe that everything, every crisis is a problem that needs an immediate solution. Bosnia is a good case at hand. This is not necessarily so. Sometimes a crisis is brought about by the emergence of facts and facts require a different kind of treatment than, than a crisis or a problem demanding a solution. For example, in Bosnia we've had historic animosities, religious, political, ethnic that have existed for years and years and the only way we could prevent them from overwhelming us was the rule of the bayonet, under Tito before that and other Marxist leaders now, the President has suggested to the American people that we can solve this based on the Ohio formula in a year. Let me tell you, that's hogwash and as the year draws to a conclusion, there's going to be some red faces in the White House in explaining why we can't pull our troops out for risk of another blood bath. Why the provisions of the agreement in Ohio are not being carried out and even in today's press, the Bosnians are threatening not to participate in an election in September. So all of these things are the product of our lack of understanding of modern communications and confusing problems to be solved with facts to be dealt with.

Q: You mentioned referencing the reliable press. Mr. Neumann was here yesterday, Edwin Neumann was here yesterday speaking about the press in America today. Would you care to offer up a definition of responsible press? A: Well Mr. Neumann is a very old friend. I've worked with him year after year on the so-called Secretaries of State Conference which the Southern Center in Atlanta sponsors every year. I have, hold him in the highest regard. I think it's a bum rap to blame bad policy on the American press. I used to say that during Vietnam when everybody said, "Well the press cost us the war. The press is what made us lose the war." That was nonsense. It was bad policy that lost the war and to the press' everlasting glory, it had enough sense to know that it was bad policy. Where I would have taken exceptions to a number of them was some of them misunderstood why it was bad policy and drew all the wrong conclusions with respect to that. So that was the responsibility of the press but it doesn't mean that our press is a counterproductive element of our society. I don't know what we would do without a free press. Protects us from the scoundrels of this world and there are many of them, especially in politics.

Q: Thank you.