Kissinger; Dire Consequences if Congress Erects Trade Barriers Against USSR

Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger warned today of the collapse of detente and the increased possibility of nuclear holocaust if Congress does not eliminate barriers to U.S.-Soviet trade proposed because of Russia’s restrictive policies toward Jewish emigration.

But he indicated that he would welcome a compromise that would retain the intent of the Jackson and Mills-Vanik legislation while providing the Soviet Union with trade benefits. He also said he was “meeting regularly” with Jewish leaders and “there is a possibility of getting a compromise from the Jewish groups, but they must speak for themselves.”

Kissinger made those points in his prepared statement and in reply to questions before the Senate Finance Committee today which is considering the Trade Reform Bill. The measure as it now stands embodies the House approved Mills-Vanik legislation which is identical to the Jackson Amendment.

Kissinger said he did not oppose the objectives of those in Congress who view trade policy as a tool to change Soviet internal practices. But “they have chosen the wrong vehicle and context,” he said. He declared that he spoke with “some anguish” as both a historian and a Jew who is “particularly conscious of the plight of minority groups.” But, he continued, the U.S. seeks detente with the Soviet Union for one over whelming reason–“both countries have the capability to destroy each other and most of the rest of the world in the process.”

SOME DISSATISFACTION WITH USSR EMIGRATION

Kissinger conceded that the purpose of the Jackson-Mills-Vanik legislation is not to prevent Soviet-American trade or prohibit all U.S. credit to the USSR “but to assist those whose wish to emigrate from the Soviet Union has been frustrated.” Nevertheless, he added, if the Jackson Amendment is adopted it will “almost certainly prove counterproductive,” he warned. “It will not enhance emigration. It may stop it altogether.”

Kissinger acknowledged some dissatisfaction with the present Soviet emigration policies which he said “is not as bright as we would like.” He charged that Soviet emigration policy “often seems arbitrary” and noted that some 1300 individuals are currently being denied permission to leave for Israel. On the other hand, Kissinger said, emigration from the USSR has increased from a “sporadic trickle in the 1960s to a relatively steady flow of some 2500 a month in the 1970s.”

In another reference to the Soviet Union, Kissinger appeared to soft-pedal Moscow’s role in the Yom Kippur War. When Sen. William V. Roth (R. Del.) raised suspicions about the Soviet government’s intentions in that region, Kissinger replied that while Moscow was allied with the countries that attacked Israel. “the Soviet Union did not have substantial advance warning” of the Egyptian-Syrian attacks on Yom Kippur day. “Egypt and Syria essentially were acting on their own.” he said.

MEETING REGULARLY WITH JEWISH LEADERS

Kissinger referred to his contacts with Jewish leaders when he was asked by Sen. Robert’ Dole (R. Kan.) if there had been any changes in attitude to meet the Administration’s position. Kissinger replied: “I am meeting regularly with the leaders of the Jewish community to explain the U.S. policy in the Middle East and the degree of cooperation between the U.S. and the Soviet Union to bring about a moderate evolution. I have the impression that they have listened with sympathy to these arguments. There is a possibility of getting a compromise from the Jewish groups. But they must speak for themselves.”

Jerry Goodman, executive director of the National Conference on Soviet Jewry, said today in New York that “no meeting has been held with the Secretary of State on the subject of Soviet Jewry and no discussions have taken place with regard to the Jackson Amendment in over four months.” A NCSJ spokesman told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that there have been discussions by Kissinger with prominent individual Jews as well as with Jewish organizations on a variety of issues including peace in the Middle East and that while the subject of the Jackson Amendment did come up it was not in the context of reformulation or compromise.

Herman Edelsberg, director of the B’nai B’rith International Council, said in Washington that the American Jewish community has not been told by Kissinger that the Soviet Union is prepared to bring about “specific and constructive improvements” in its emigration policy and therefore the community cannot be expected to compromise on the issue. He added, “it is utterly unrealistic to expect any suggestion of compromise from the Jewish community before the Soviet Union ends its harassment of Jews who wish to leave and comes forward with some specific and constructive improvement.”

Kissinger said that in addition to meeting with Jewish leaders he has also met with Sen. Henry M. Jackson (D. Wash.) and other Senators in attempts to bring about a compromise. The Secretary, however, did not propose any specific com promise before the Finance Committee between the views of the Mills-Vanik-Jackson supporters and the Administration. But, he said, “We are prepared to talk with those concerned (with emigration from the Soviet Union) if we can strike a balance between our objectives and their needs.”

He acknowledged as “one direction in which a compromise can move” a proposal by Sen. Gaylord Nelson (D. Wise.) who suggested inclusion in the trade bill of a one-year trial period during which either House of the Congress could with draw trade benefits granted the Soviet Union if its conduct was offensive with regard to emigration. Earlier, Sen. Vance Hartke (D. Ind.) suggested a similar compromise with a 120-day trial period. Kissinger thought that was too short a time.

Kissinger gave ambiguous replies when he was asked if he would recommend a Presidential veto of a Trade Reform Bill that contained the Mills-Vanik and Jackson proposals. At one point he said, “I would think very seriously about recommending a veto.” At another point, he declared, “If the President asked my opinion today, I would be inclined to recommend a veto.”

Answering Kissinger, Jackson said that the resolution of differences between Congress and the Administration over Soviet emigration policies must start in Moscow. “To make his case to the Senate, the Secretary of State must make our case to Moscow,” Jackson said.