Ronald Reagan Presidential Library Digital Library Collections
This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections.
Collection: Cobb, Tyrus: Files Folder Title: Canada 1985 (03/06/1985- 03/07/1985) Box: RAC Box 1
To see more digitized collections visit: https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library
To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit: https://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection
Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected]
Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing
National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/ 1414 :\[£:\fORA~DC\1
~ATIO~AL SECCRITY COC~CIL
March 6, 1985
\ \ MEMORANDUM FOR ROBERT SIMS I FROM: ROBERT.. M. RIMM!TT \30 ~ ! SUBJECT: MkLean's Magazine Interview with J President
At '!uh A is the ~tate departmeri.t prepared text jof the Pr.esidP.nt' s interview wj~h Z.WLean's magazine. We c0ncur w~th the text, as amenn~d. Speechwriters has cleared the text, ~s well.
Attachment: Tab A Interview, as amended VIA LDX 1414 ACTION(EUR) N•\ TIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL WASHINGTON, D.C. 20506 COPIES TO: s D p E February 25, 1985 c S/P EB OE3 PM S/S MEMORANDUM FOR NICHOLAS PLATT S/S-S Executive Secretary TMC Department of State RF (rs) SUBJECT: Written Interview with Maclean's Magazine
The White House has approved a written interview with Maclean's magazine for publication prior to the President's visit to Quebec on March 17-18, 1985. Please provide draft responses to the attached questions to the NSC by March 1.
~~·((~ Robert M. Kimmitt Executive Secretary
Attachment Tab ! - Questions Questions for President Reagan from Maclean.' s Magazine:
1. Canadians long have suffered from a national inferi ority complex in regard to our great neighbor to the south. How do you think of Canada and what do you see as Canada's importance to the United States? 2. How do you see Canada's role--as a smaller power--in international affairs? For instance, external affairs minister Joe Clark will be in Moscow next month as arms control negotiations resume in Geneva. Is there a part we can play in conjunction with that--or with the Contadora process in Central America?
3. What do you see as Canada's role in defen~~? How did you feel when the new government had to cut $154 million from military spending, for example, contrary to what they had promised during the election campP.ign? Is Canada doing its fair share in NATO and will you be pressuring us to do more? 4. In recent weeks, there has been an uproar over the news that contingency plans exist to deploy nuclear weapons- specifically B-57 nuclear depth charges--in Canada in case of an emergency. In your view, is Canada bound to accept these weapons, especially when · the government never wns notified of such plans? And what sort of emer~ency would prompt such a deployment? S. If Canada suddenly balked at going along with such ··ant-ingency plans--or refusecl to allow the furth""r testL1g u ~ Cruise missile:-:: ~r .barred an Americ-..u uattleship from our ports as New Zealand recently did--would .the United States respond in the same way that it did to New Zealand, that is, threatening a broad .r.~"1ge of counter-meas~~s including economic sanctions?
6. The Canadian government h~s said it supports t~e Strategic Defense Izitiative, but there has been an uproar each time it has been suggested that defense cooperation could lead to our actual involvement in the program. In your view, should Canada have a role in SDI research? And why?
7. The federal and provincial governments hav~ just taken substantial measures to control the contributions to Page two
acid rain on our side of the border. What is the United States prepared to do for its part? a. What do you think the prospects are for negotiating a free trade agreement with Canada during your second term? Will the obstacles come from Congress or from Canadian nationalists? 9. Much has been made of the warmer relations that now exist between Canada and the United States. What particularly irked you about the previous government's actions? Now, having made concessions to Canada to signal the warmer relationship, what do you expect of Canada in return? And what would you tell Canadian nationalists who fear that a warmer =~lationship means that we sell out our independence? 10. How important is a warm personal relationship among leaders? And what aspects of Mr. Mulroney's personality contribute to the chemistry reported between the two · of you? THE WHITE HOUSE DRAFT
Office of the Press Secretary
RESPONSES BY THE PRESIDENT TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MACLEAN'S MAGAZINE
t,,iJEBEC I CANADA
March 6, 1985
Q: Canadians lonq have suffered from a national inferiority complex in reqard to our qreat neiqhbor to the south. How do you think of Canada and what do you see as Canada's importance to the United States?
THE PRESIDENT: No other country in the world is mo~:e important to the United States than Canada, and we are blessed to have such a friendly neiqhbor on our northern border. A~~ I am conv·' ,. ed that's exactly what the future has in st1're fui: us. Canada is a friend, a neighbor, and a trusted ally. We may hav.. a larger population, and a larger GNP, but we're also d~~endent on you. You consume a fifth of our exports, and that's more thnn any other nation. You use more of our capital than other nations anti, :Jf course, our mutual security interests are close~ . y intertwined. Now it's up to both of us to make this partnership continue to wc=k in both our interests.
Q: How do you see Canada's role -- as a smaller power -- in international affairs? Fo~ instance, External Affairs Minister Joe Clark will be in Moscow next month as arms control negotiations resume in Geneva. Is there a part we can play in conjunction with that -- or with the Contadora process in Central Airlerica?
THE PRESIDENT: Canada has played a significant role in international affairs ever since World War II, a role which has reflected the talents of Canadian statesmen and the democratic values of its peoples. It has been an activist in the United Nations -- indeed, Canadians were amongst the founders in San Francisco 40 years ago and has shown time and time again that
it is prep~red to back up its convictions on peaceful settlement of disputes with courageous participation in peacekeeping operations in such hotspots as Cyprus and the Middle East. But I also note that your Prime Minister recently quoted Dante to the effect that the •hottest place in hell is reserved for those who in times of morai crisis strive to maintain their ·neutrality." Canadians are not neutral -- they believe in democracy and wJrk hard to protect it.
To get down to specifics, I am convinced that the unity and solid support of Western leaders on arms control were the principal factors that brought the Soviets back to the negotia;ing table. Prime Minister Mulroney has been very helpful, and we feel certain that Mr. Clark will convey to the Soviet leaders our
'· . continuing resolve to achieve significant, verifiable, '"~ ·1·· equitable arms reductions. Wi~ to the Contado.~ p~u~ess, we value Canadian assistance, and I would note ~t~~ your I suggestions on the verification process have been most helpful.
Q: What do you see as Canada's role in defense? How did you feel when the new government had to cut $1J4 million from milit&ry spending, for example, contrary to what they had
promised during the election campaign? Is ~anada doing its fair share in NATO and will you be pressuring us to do more? THE PRESIDENT: When Prime Minister Mulroney was here last September, he expressed his personal commitment to enhancing Canada's role in the Atlantic Alliance and to carry its full share of the allied defense burden. But he and I recognized !a!nI !ifii9~·BFf!ft Ae~!§ft~Y iftai§~ca~ ~•a9i~ctona(Racttb~~Gc=•s. \/ no reasonable alternative but to work to protect freedom and democracy.
I understand Canada is now conducting a major review of its defense policy and I believe that the review will conclude that the only meaningful defense question facing both our nations is
how to u~~t the challenge now before us. And that challenge has nothing to do with pressure from Canada's allies, but rather, how best to defend freedom and democracy.
Q: In recent weeks, there has been an uproar over the new£
that contingency plans exist to deploy nuclea~ weapons - specifically B-57 nuclear depth charges -- in Canada in case of an emergency. In your view, is Canada bound to accept these weapons, especially when the government never was notif:.ed of such plans? .,.,d what sort of emergency would prompt such a deployment?
v·t::,:-'> ~I" . THE PRESIDENT: I know t~at stories have 'f~P~ > ea~:!d concerning \I 1.\.i3Y-·h~e.. contingency plans in wartime.. +. There havt- "'lso been alleqations \, t h at America. i s pressuring. ~' 3 allies to accept nuclear weapons. v "
I have two comments to make on these reports. First, NATO has NATO~ over the years" worked out various def'!nse plans designed to !,,./ strengthen deterrence.~Jder these plans, any deployments would v'°" ... It+ ~ involved. Second, 10* me S'Y th• it is ~on~4ary to the interest ~+a.-es of the AlJ..i.ance and to the individual member cuaulszies to talk publicly about confidential contingency planning. Such , sh.a...-ed / discussion would not serve our aQlllQi1 security interests. v Q: If Canada suddenly balked at going along with such contingency plans -- or refused to allow the further testing of cruise missiles or barred an American battleship from our ports as New Zealand recently did -- would the United States r~spond in the same way that it did to New Zealand, that is, threatening a broad range of counter-measures including econ~mic sanctions? ;c. \..• . THE PRESIDENT: Let me start by stressing that United States \ ,.. , . . / ' v·/ defense cooperation with our allies begins with a common 1."l.nderstanding of our shared security interests, and a o'\iW'~+,~ .+!,,-t11.,.+. determination to protect those interests~ Each of us entered into e... alliances whether ANZUS, or NATO or NORAD -- as fully sovereign nations, of 0 n- lldii ""zzcc -.122.• ii •-.-r1C"'i..!.., h~c~"sie..- ic..e i,,.e""e p,-e~s-."e.d +c d{; Se. point out that we are not . . : ~w le -~la....O ~ ~ ; . "•\:; .: ..;~ -- ~~;r~\~·;,~ taking economic sanctions against•• enJa221st•!I'· (Jfe are ·:~ii ./. 1'1atters . );~~l,, reviewing ~ cooperation iJ\'n e•• icfcnsc security ~ in light .. of New Zealand's decision to reduce cooperation with~ in t~e ANZUS Alliance. Our long-standing and excellent defense coo~eration with ~anada is grounded in our partnership in NORAD and our joint membership in NATO. Clearly, we share common ob·. . Canada's "'!LSSWEHL ts- cooperatlP. " in th · te1H. .1.ng of cruise missiles, which we greatly vaJn..: ... nd appreciate, was, I am sure, a recognition by the Canadian government that this missile plays an important role in NATO's deterrf;mt posture and is directly related to Canada's own security. Q: The Canadian government has said it supports the Strategic .•. ! Defense Initiative, but there has been an uproar each time it has been suggested that defense cuoperation could lead to cur actual involvement in the program. In your view, should Canada have a role in SDI research? And why? i - THE PRESIDENT: The United States is a world leader for a cleaner environment. We take pride that our Clean Air and Clean Water Acts, and our other comprehensive environmental· leqislation, have helped to set international standards. We have invested $150 billion, yes that's billions, under our Clean Air Act, and as a result the air today is r.le~ner than in many years. Emissions of sulphur dioxide, a major concern, are down nearly 30 percent in the last decade. This trend is continuinq: down 10 percent since I became President, includinq 2 ~ percent in 1983. •'.. We strictly control nitroqen oxides, which come mainly !rem auto emissions, and their level has also been droppinq in recent years. For the future, I believe it is a question of doinq what is reasonable land responsible, after qetting all the facts. Q: What do you think the prospecta are for negotiating a free trade agreeJllP.nt with Canada during your second term( Wil_l the obstacles come from Congress or from Canadian nationalists? THE PRESIDENT: As I understand it, t~e Canadian Government is reviewing its trade pol i.cy riqht now .:.nd hasn't yet decided whether to propose any negotiations. In our Congress, I believe -t~e'f"e \s a deep· cu-ted I// &11115 Q1a92css appreciatee that trade between the United States and 10"\ Canada -- the larc;rest trade vo 1 ume between any two coun·c.ries on earth -- is beneficial to both countries and should b... fostered. Of course, there are sensitive trade areas, Pnd the Congress artv "41~~4'1 vf'\Cle.r.sta ...J•~'ID. I// would want to be sure that 'Ir' n'"'W il!••••a•t was in the"" interest of the United State • So would I, and I'm sure Canada woul~ do the same. What is important is that we continue to work together to reduce trade barriers. Perhaps we can set an example for ot"ers to follow. We are not interested in building a North American island7 rather I We WOUld like tO e~tabliSh a trend tOWard f...-ade:.. v' liberalization that others can emulate. THE PRESIDENT: We have absolutely no intention of pressing any of our allies to participate in this program. It will be entirely up to Canada to decide the extent to which, if at all, it wishes to share in the research efforts. Should Canada decide such participation is in its interests, we would ·be delighted to work with you in thi~ i~portant undertaking. And allow me to take this opportunity to say a few words about the Strategic Defense Initiative. For more than ~generation, we have believed that no war will begin as long as each side knows the other can retaliate with devastating results. Well, I believe there could be a better way to keep the peace. The Strategic Defense Initiative is a research effort aimed at finding a non-nuclear defense against ballistic missiles. It is the ~ost hopeful possibility of the nuclear age. Nuclear ~eapons _.h ... ~~ en+we. P~"'fatio..s. ~u 11 kall pe1pla; The SDI seeks to end that po~sibility forever. And I was extremely heartened by .the understanding and support for this research effort by Prime Minister Mulroney and External Affairs Minister Clark. It may take a long time, but now we have started. Q: The federal and provincial 9overnments have just taken substantial measures ~o· control the contributions t~ acid rai... on our side of the border. What is the United ~~ates prepared to do for its part? Q: Much has been made of the warmer rel~tions that now exist between Canada and the United States. What particularly irked you about the previous government's ar.tions? Now, having made concessions to Canada to signal the warmer relationship, what do you expect of Canada in return? And what would you tell Canadian nat.i.onalist::' who fear that a warmer relationship means that we sell out our independence? THE PRESIDENT: You're right to suggest that relations between our two countries are in good shape. But rather than talk about concessions, I believe that what has happened is that ~-t we've come to recoqnize4 warm, close relations that serves br~~ """ our interests. As a result, we both have become a lot more attentive to each other's concerns, we talk with each other more often, and I don't believe that means either nation becomes less independent. Q: Row important is a warm personal relationship amonq leaders? And what aspects of Mr. Mulroney's personality contribute to the chemistry report~d between the two of you? THE PRESIDENT: All people respond more warmly to some persons than ~o others. We're all human. And I confe~~ that I like Brian Mulroney very much. Re iQ a true Canadian patriot. He is honest, hardworkinq, intelliqent a~d articulate -- in two lanquaqes at that! · ..;. ! Questions and Answers for President Reagan from Maclean's Magazine: 1. Canadians lcng have suffered from a national inferiority complex in regard to our great neighbor to the south. How do you think of Canada and what do you see as Canada's importance to the United States? No other country in the world is more important to the to both of us to make -2- 2. How do you see Canada's role--as a smaller power--in international affairs? For instance, External Affairs Minister Joe Clark will be in Moscow next month as arms control negotiations resume in Geneva. Is there a part we can play in conjunction with that--or with the Contadora process in Central America? Canada has played a significant role in international affairs ever since World War II, a role which has reflected the talents of Canadian statesmen and the democratic values of its peoples. It has been an activist in the UN--indeed, Canadians were amongst the founders in fi"'...... ,"'- San Francisco 40 years ago--and has a~~onsttated. time and . k time again that it is prepared . to back up its convictions on peaceful settlement of disputes with courageous participation in peacekeeping operations in such hotspots as Cyprus and the Middle East. But I also note that your Prime Minister recently quo/ted Dante to the effect that the "hottest place in hell is reserved for those who in time~ of moral crisis st~ive to maintain their neutrality." i\1'\91 he aaae9, iP'l regard to the £1::mda .. 1el!CCH co11cept:9 of freeeem aR'1 j\ie&iile+ Canadians are not • ~~~ nP.utral~-;/hey believe in democracy and ~A ehe· eelleetive · pre6eeeie~ o'r~~:=-"!y~A~e~ ll- · " w-i6a tbat clear statement of Canadian poliey as.;. b~k9EO'lRei 1 lee me 6£' iefl.y aaei!·ee:! '.! 01:1! qaes LiottS a boat .t.he specific ~olQ C•i::iaaa migbt play in cel"ljtll'tetieA wi~ Geneva ans and control were the principal factors that brought the Soviets back t~~... ~~~.. Prime Minister Mulroney has been" very helpfu_;,iR bis statements . . Q.~ . eo11csttn119 these 11egot1atiol'l3' We feel certain that Mr. Clarkp iR Wosc~will convey to the Soviet leaders our continuing resolve to achieve significant, verifiable, and w; ~ ~ U"d. ""-t. equitable arms r~ductions • .....Qn Contadoraf'\"° w~_1'm¥e value~ . C.~~ ~~ct_t' l I NIL~·~ l hrghl)I !!he assistance ea!"la~ ~~~~ prev1Ei1R~ ~ ~ ~ ) . constrUctlve suggest ions on l:e:: es MilllQ the ver if ica ti on ..... ~. prOCeSS W'&f i(aBle I ~-... r- world find conse - -4- 3. What do you see as Canada's role in defense? How did you feel when the new government had to cut $154 million from military spending, for example, contrary to what they had promised during the election campaign? Is Canada doing its fair share in NATO and will you be pressuring us to do more? ~ \oi!Jf ~d When 'tfte Prime Minister was here ~ Septemb:s,, he 'ftlt!d:e it ~ -vefy cleat La UC that he i9' personall\ commit~" enhancing Canada's role in the Atlantic Alliance and to ka·+·iPI! GaAaea. carry its full share ·of the ~lied defense burden. -S?~!;'-P~t~i~~~f a~a I h~,:;~ol ""-~ foll weM that t~ere will iilway o be st rg~omestic 4>&t~t...D pressures ~:9~~~g~' essentia:l tn" ~~c.t.cl ~~...... ~ecJ I ~aoW-t+tat your Governmeri!. is CWF!!'ef'ltlyA t::onducting a majorl--fef~s.a:folicy ~ •* also know that the r::i~w ~JL.&::L.LJIJilfUU:-J~;i...... ~Qe-a~~'"Y-~~t:-ft'.H-~-t:r--aa+pLI:pur:..a...a..i___s_q._l_Q_f_ _~he -5- 4. In recent weeks, there has been an uproar over the news that contingency plans exist to deploy nuclear weapons--specifically B-57 nuclear depth charges--in Canada in case of an emergency. In your view, is Canada bound to accept these weapons, especially when the government never was notified of such plans? And what sort of emergency would prompt such a deployment? I know that e ~~mbet &i stories have· appeared concerning contingency plans iet the dEploymezd! e:5 nqcl ear qgapons i.n t+~~ ""' wartime. 'l'here have: a.lso been allegations that ~f'e /\ pressuring our alli~~ to accept nuclear weapons.'ij>I have two comments to make on these reports. First, we and our NATO allies have over the years worked out various arrangements designed. · toces~~ deterrenc:_r '£hese- ~~~ad'.A . . arrangemen t s wel!e encerea iRee =g.y:-so.Jereign nations I\ sharing a common perception of the threat ~bCJ\.to t.he1:!- ~.no.a-I~ ex j steRee and :;ah1N. ·Any deploymen t~f nuclear" weapons carried out under these arrangements would, in full conformity with NATO plans and procedures, be executed o~Ly with the prior agreement of the states invc~~=~· Second, let me say that it is &ifivie't!ls]y c'J·"trary to the interest of the Alliance as a wbg 1 e and to the individual member countries to talk publicly about confidential contingency planning.~ the Wi aaa ic& alliee. Such ~en- tt&t' •"-"' co'MM a~ sa o-U.~ discussion would .e"'lY serve ~interests ief e~r p tisl " f\... -6- s. If Canada suddenly balked at going along with such refused to allow the further testing ~~..-.,.._,,~arred an American battleship from recently did--would th~ United States respon n tne same way that it did to N~w Zealand, that is, threatening a broad range of counter-measures including economic sanctions? ai££e~es witfi.tae Ge11er1tmel'\t of New ZealaRa, let me - -'-~ stress that us-· c~oeer a t;ion with our allies ~A EiefensQ - ~- _ l.._ &I /\. IM ('?11\cthc~ AtHrnS, or NA'fA 21 H8Mi8 as fully sovereign nations. Canada's agreement to cooperate in the testing of cruise missiles, which we greatly value and appreciate, was, I am sure, a recognition by the Canadian g0vernrnent that the cruise missile plays an important =~:~ in NATO's deterrent posture andr= Lhae, ~ directly related to Canada's own security. -7- 6. The Canadian government has said it supports the Strategic Defense Initiative, but there has been an uproar each time it has been suggested that defense cooperation could lead to our actual involvement in the program. In your view, should Canada have a role in SDI research? And why? intention of pressing any of our allies to participate in this program. It will be entirely up to Canada to decide the extent to which, if at all, it wishes to share in t~e .I j research efforts. Should Canada decide such participat: )n is in its interests, we would be 6elighted . "'\CM..C.. Y... ~~ ~~.a with 1-e-:- ~- , /\ -8- 7. The federal and provincial governments have just taken substantial measures to control the contributions to acid rain on our side of the border. What is the United States prepared to do for its part? I know ekat tAis iss11e has attr:acted wide attention ~ CaRaEiaa I ~!ft eeAeen1ed efiat CaAad•aRs may :r:iot f1111 y United States is a world leader for a cleaner environment. ~ .. _.W8. tak~r ide ia Ute fact that our Clean Air and Clean Water Acts, :tnd our other comprehensive environmental legislation, have helped to set international standards. ~ ~.S ~~l""'s~ We have invested $150 billion~und~r our Clean Air Act, and . ~ as a result the air today is cleaner than in man~ years. Emissions of sulphur dioxide, a major concern, are down nearly 30% in the last decade. This trend is continuing: down 10% since I became President, ircluding 2 and a half percent in 1983. We strictly contcol nitrogen oxides, which c6me mainly from auto e~i~~inns, and their level has also been dropping in recent years. For the future, I believe it is a question of doing what is reasonable and responsible, after getting all the facts. -9- 8. What do you think the prospects are for negotiating a free trade agreement with Canada during your second term? Will the obstacles come from Congress or from Canadian nationalists? As I understand it, the Canadian Government is reviPwing its trade policy right now and hasn't yet decided whether to propose any negotiations. Statesr~ eeaf'lEi !'eadi ca Iod:C co11str acE!"vely a'i aRY idegs iit:J:aee ae ~ ~ . .., ....£tutber trad"e I16eral1zatlgn. In our Congress, I ~nk\:..l~ 9 gu,\f l V'vt:':re i 'i '3ilRere:l appreciat~ that trade between the United States and Canada -- the largest trade volume between any two countries on earth -- is beneficial to both countries and should be fostered. Of ~ourse, there are !dwa3 s sensitive trade areas, and r am sate the -tobc...~4- -- - Congress would want Qg 1 aak cJ~sely at any deal tg see ... ~~~ .. that ~was~ and.~~8 e~Pteete:!LS". ! NeJia:r , aLL- ~ l"" ~ ~~ 81 f k.C.. ~ Sl'tt1 t • So wu•• cl I Q..~ l~~~ Canada~~ samE:. ~ .. What is. important ht• ehi9 l!egard i:! that •":anada and Lite us- \J.11&.C..O~ Q.- ~ work~;._~:,reduc~ trade barriers, cR a time when , 'iO many OtAil~C.3 ape SOiRg in just t;.lP oppac:::j te - 0 .. ditecton. Perhap.; we can set an example for others to follow:- ~ are not interested in building a North American islan~.i' rathe~we would like to establish a trend toward liberalization that others can ~-~ -10- 9. Much has been made of the warmer relations that now exist between Canada and the United States. What particularly irked you about the previous government's actions? Now, having made concessions to Canada to signal the warmer relationship, what do you expect of Canada in return? And what would you tell Canadian nationalists who fear that a warmer relationship means that we sell out our independence? -~ · ~~ ~ -to ~l,__.' You ~re right)'..~elations beween our two countries are in __,, pz et.~y good shape. Btte I del"l' t. ehink th~when yOU really ~~.,.~ ~ ~ 4'i•d I ~tt.~ ;ft~ ~~ay ~:~~we h~ve rna4.; {h~~cessions/ "" dus& ciXA 04+a Ui RatRer >•we've come to recogni. -.c, serves both A our interests. 50 make ~be CaRaaa UQ felat.iOFUiAip l'Qfk. -be -- ().,o Cl w.sc.\Ak ~ '! we both have become a lot more attelntive to each other's A i O.~ concerns 1 ~ we talk with each other more often, I . ~ bit t\u·.. ~ W\.I.~ .e,( ~ "'~" ,,, ~on't ~ ~l')O!~Mi becomes less independent,~aing ehae, I' " ~Rd I'm s~Fe my friel"ld B~iaa Mul~GR9¥ faels the same w~y ~~ l --·------. -11- 10. How important is a warm personal relationship among leaders? And what aspects of Mr. Mulroney's personality contribute to the chemistry reported between the two of you? ceaeiers a;Q RO aiffQte~t ftom otAQE ~e~ea As All oa-·~ hteli o ieidals we d?l respond more warmly to some per sons We!~~ ~~OV\..• than to others. Ami such "ehemi:stry" a!l lyew Gia, 1 it,. I\ i-R,fl11•rnc 0 s the way we QQill. 111itA tAQ J?Eee18ms tbat - ~"evi tably arise be tween court tr ±es, rto mat Ler how fr ie11dly ti1ey me:y eti"lefwise be. ~~eiLR,.G~ like Brian Mulroney very much. He is a true Canadian""' patriot. He is honest, hardworking, intelligent and articulate -- in two languages at that! -6- (f~'.Jit~~) s. If Canada suddenly balked at going along with such contingency plans--or refused to allow th~ further testing of cruise missiles or barred an American battleship from our ports as New Zealand recently did--would the United States respond in the same way that it did to New Zealand, that is, threatening a broad range of counter-measures including economic sanctions? ~ · ,~.' · .,' ...J.,.•• - ·J.., t ,t_-- Let me st~rt by st,essing that U~cooperation with our allies "Y~, I'\ e.. M. ft...,' I. - 1~ /'' .•. . .'., ·7" . -., I • • , - 19, ~ IL...,;I W ...... ,;_ ..,, ....J .• , . • '- ... - ·. ~ j n -de£e..nse matte~s-st:'ems from a common awa-£-e-Ae~-E:threat •1 . ), .~ 1.,. ,.\ >. t-rJ<...· .. .c. .:-ir-•' ~our. :18_~ securityA ~nd a ~-determination to take steps Yr~_,_f 1'fv. ?If! I l\,~i,,-[ . ) f.S • ~neer that threat. Each of us entered into .enese-- CJ.~ alliances--whether ANZUS, or NATO or NORAD--as fully sovereign ~ 01-V'-" C.'J{.1~{ ..,,W..J'_t, IV~I A ~j> • ~ nations,t bec. ~u.s&~.e..r..e~pressured ·to -do- ·so.- Wi tha-tJt getting into a-f.ul.-l-di~c.ussion-;-0f - -0u-r~ur-ren~ /~ ..__ - • " I . - ~.,.. 1 \-.. · ' .~ :l..,/ c : -·.,.. .·r t .. i dif.fer.ene-6 w1tn-tlle~r.nme~ (ew Zealand, I want to point out that we are not taking economic sanctions against that country. W~ are, rather, reviewing our cooperation in the \ . - ~'2A51&i)fQ ' defense-~ecurity area in light of New Zealand'j\reduce;,J coop~rat f on with us in the ANZUS Alliance. Our long-standing and excellent defense ~ooperation with Canada ia grounded in our par · ~nership in NORAD and our joint /l j ;; /J • I" t, "1 /, . · 1... I VJ· ~ V;/ . . I ~ ...... ' ._._ ...... · J membership in NATO. We have-lno.... ·nee · to-threaten-ea~h-o.tlle.~ ~ch1@ve common objectives. For example, Canada's agreement to cooperate in the testing of cruise missiles, whic~ we greatly value and appreciate, was, I,am sure, a recognition by the -".f,I~. rvv...... Canadian government that the~..,cruise missile plays an important role in NATO's deterrent posture and,,;.-thust_is directly related / to Canada's own security. - 5 - ( 1 e· 1 IS ~J.) 4. In~recent weeks, there has been an uproar over the news that contingency plans exist to deploy nuclear weapons--specif ically B-57 nuclear depth charges--in Canada in case of an emergency. In your view, is Canada bo~nd to accept these weapons, especially when the government never was notified of such plans? And what so·· t of emergency would prompt such a deployment? I know that a 11umbet=:o:r stories have appeared concerning contingency plans fot -.the deploy~-~01le-le:ar=weapeft&- in ·- - f4,,u~./r "- ""' wartime. There have also been allegations that we are pressuring our allies to accept nuclear wea~ons.9I have two comments to make on these reports. First, NATO has over the years worked out various defense ·plans designed LJ.frt-::..<, tl... f4 ,,__ to/n:~nferce deterrence. ' ~~untries to talk publicly about confidential.contingency planning, Q.£-the-1.JScrrr-d' its al:ttes. Such op>\A.-discussion Mt 01A.Jt_ U'>t 4. · In~r.c:ent weeks, there has been an uproar over the news that contingency plans exist to deploy nuclear weapons--specifically B-57 nuclear depth charges--in Canada in case of an emergency. In your view, is Canada bound to accept these weapons, especially when the government never was notified of such plans? And what sort of emergency would prompt such a deployment? ... I: • h . . I k now t h a t a R••saa ae stories aveW2~d appeare concerning f ; • contingency plans.£0~ tne ciepl.Qy11eR•" gf Aw.eleat weatmrw • iPl 11 'I Lne. · There have also been allegations that • a,e · • f's pressuring~ allies to accep·t nuclear weapons. : I haqe I\ two comments to make. on these reports. First, ~t•EERE•Slllliiil9t'l;;.o- ' over the_yea~worked-- out various defense plans designed ~~'\a:ii\ _:-. ~ to peeft9e7ee deterrence. An eployments of nuclear a-I 1 I\ ! '\ M "5L. ff.pt.Q..' I ~"""" ~ weapons er these plans ould be carried out onl~Awith the prior agreement of the states involved. Second, ~ m,_ say 9fta& it is •1•t~:•'.. 9lly contrary to the interest of (~ the Alliance •• z !iMla and to the individual member ~ v / countsi91r to talk publicly about confidential contingency planning .ae Ctle us. and ies alli@ 5 77 " ·'\ d 111 •• d ~ • t\ • -6- (re.."JiU>d) s. If Canada suddenly balked at ~oing along with such contingency plans--or refused to allow the further testing of cruise missiles or barred an American battleship from our ports as New Zealand recently did--would the United States respond in the same way that it did to New Zealand, that is, threatening a broad range of counter-measures including economic sanctions? ~ Let me start by stressiqg ~hat .US cooperation with our allies bft(1a,~ u.> l.~ u:KdJL'.Z5l~ ill Beftl!LC :naliita:a at:e1aw::ne111 a common ...areAesa _t\f •he •••aat ~~ ·~ I\ Y\ v>"-~ 11\'0s&-. to oar m~ttsal security and a.js;zt determination to tails step&~ • ~ ... ~ ~~Q..~ AMA " l~Q.-Q~.autezTix:il'O"threat. Each of us entered into -... .-..--- alliances--whether ANZUS, or NATO or NORAD--as fuiiy sovereign nations, not because we were pressured to do so. • Witi"ettt gettiftg iftt:o a fall discas:siol'l ef QYE GYEr~t w-~ ..-:: difierences with tne Govetmuent of Hew i!lealal'la, I want t:e point out that weJre not taking economic sanctions against~" \\.l..UJ Z~J..cc..M ~ ll . ~ &~ eottn try. JIA "Plr ~the r, reviewing our cooperation in th r ~~ - aeiense security area in light of New Zealand's reduced cooperation with" us in the ANZUS Alliance. Our long-standing and ~Acellent defense cooperation with Canada is 1rounded in our partnership in NORAD and our joint membership in NATO. We have ft& fteea &e 685ea•eR aaah gkaa~ te ~.common objectives. For example, Canada's a.greemeAt t:e tCl-" cooperate-in the testing of cruise missiles, whi~h we greatly value and appreciate, was, I am sure, a recognition by the Canadian government tha~ cruise mis~i~play~n important role in NATO's de~errent posture and, thus, is directly related to Canada's own security. 1414 :\ 1E:\10R.\XDC :\I XATIOXAL SECCRITY COGXCIL I : . _... ~. ...-. ., -·· March 6, 1985 ACTION MEMORANDUM FOR ROBERT M. KIMMITT FROM: NICHOLAS KLISSAS / TYRUS COBB SUBJECT: President's Interview with McLean'3 Magazine State has drafted answers to the questions put forward by McLean's magazine of Canada for publication in an issue featuring his March 17-18 visit to Quebec. We concur with State's answers, as modified. Speechwriters' office has approved the package. Bob Sim~'s office needs your approval COB todav (March 6, 1985). Doug '-1cMinn, Kai::na Small, and Roher.tfrr.d concur. RECOMMENDATION That you sign the memo to Bob Sims (Tab I) approving the attached interview (Tab A). Approve Disapprove Attachme"'-f:S Tab I Memo to Sims Tab A Interview Tab II Incoming, with bac".ground papers kimmitt to Platt 1414 ).1£:\fOR.\~DC:\1 March 6, 1985 ACTION MEMORANDUM FOR ROBERT M. KIMMITT FROM: NICHOLAS KLISSAS I TYRUS COBB SUBJECT~ President's Interview with ~~Lean's Magazine State has drafted answers to the que~tions put forward by McLean's magazine of Canada for publication in an issue featuring his March 17-18 visit to Quebec. We concur with State's a n swers, as modified. Speechwriters' office has approved the package. Bob Sim~'s office needs your approval COB today (March 6, 1985). Doug McMinn, Karna Small, an·l Robert Linhci.rd concur. RECOMMENDATION That you sign the memo to Bob Sims (Tab I) approving the attached interview (Tab A; • Approve Disapprove At+-"'.~hments Tab I Memo to Sims iab A Interview TE.b II Incoming, wi4 h background. papers kimmitt to Platt VIA LDX 1414 N•\TIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL WASHINGTON. D .C. 20506 February 25, 1985 MEMORANDUM FOR NICHOLAS PLATT Executive Secretary Department of State SUBJECT: ·written Interview with Maclean's Magazine The White House has approved a written interview with Maclean's magazine for publication prior to the President's visit to Quebec on March 17-18, 1985. Please provide draft responses to the ~ttached questions to the NSC by March 1. ~~·((~ Robert M. Kimrnitt Executive Secretary ').. Attachment Tab A - Qv~stions Questions for President Reagan from Maclean.' s Magazine: 1. Canadians long have suffered from a national inferi ority complex in regard to our great neighbor to the south. How do you think of Canada and what do you see as Canada's importance to the United States? 2. How do you see Canada's role--as a smaller power--in international affairs? For instance, external affairs minister Joe Clark will be in Moscow next month as arms control negotiations resume in Geneva. Is there a part we can play in conjunction with that--or with the Contadora proce~~ in Centra~ America? 3. What do you see ~s Canada's role in defense? H~~ did you feel when the new government had to cut $154 million from military spending, for example, contrary to wh~t they had promised during the election campaign? Is Canada doing its fair share in NATO and will you be pressuring us to do more? 4. In r~cent weeks, there has been an uproar over the news that contingency plans exist to deploy nuclear weapons- specifically B-57 nuclear depth charges--in Canada in case of an emergency. In your view, is Canada bound to accept these weapons, especially when -the government never was notified of such plans? And what sort ~f emer~ency would prompt such a deployment? 5. If Canada suddenly balked at going along with such contingency plans--or refused to allow the ~,~;;:....t"'ier i;esti.ng of Crul.se missiles or .!::3.'~.l'ed an Am>:1ric:..n battleship from our ports as New Zealand recently did--would the United States respond in the same way that it did to New Zealand, that is, threatening a broad range .:J:P counter-measm.:es includ;i.ng economic sanctions? 6. The Canadian government has sajd it Hupports the Strategic Defense Ir:itiative, but there has been an uproar each time it has been suggested that defense cooperation could lead to our actual involvement in the program. In your view, shculd Canada have a role in SDI research? And why? 7. The federal and provincial governments have jus~ taken substantial measures to control the contributions to t):..;e two acid rain on our side of the border. What is the United States prepared to do for its part? 8. What do you think the prospects are for negotiating a free trade agreement with Canada during your second term? Will the obstacles come from Congress or from Canadian nationalists? 9. Much has been made of ·the warmer relations that now exist between Canada and the United States. What particularly irked you about the previous government's actions? Now, having made concessions to Canada to signal the warmer relationship, .what do you expect of Canada in return? And what would you tell Canadian nationalis~s who fear that a warmer relationship means that we sell out our independence? 10. How important is a warm personal relationship among leaders? And what aspects of Mr. Mulroney's personality contribute to the chemistry reported between the .two of you? . . .: "·. ~~::... .11· . . . rJ · , ·. .. WASHF AX -iiECEIPT. . . .., . , . rHl "·M1Tr. ··Hol·s1. · ..·. ·.... ; ;, ·. .· .. . ·.. ~ ,·· .· \•':· {01e( ...... i.: ' .;. . . -· ~. .. ' ...... · / ______,,.. ~i.______..... _ _,,.., llr... . • -~--- - _ ___..;...... ! ..... : - ·W\if_. - . tMAM!I . . . . .. ------.-----.-. ··. ~: .. .. ·...... ------.. - . . . .: ~ ------~ . . . :< . - -·- . . - ·. . . . . ~ ·. . . • . . : . . . . - . . . ~----~ · . . ·- ----~ ... aau•a___ _...;... ______-_ ._. ___.._. ... · _,,_ · ·--....-...---.....;._--~--- - ... . . · .. , . ..· ·· ...... •: .. .• ··.·. . .· .. -· ...... - . . . . ...... ' . ·. . .. . ·.' ~------.-.----...... WASHF AX RECEIPT THE WHITE HOL'SE r:· .;) . LI ., <:'I"""• · V i l ._, MESSAGE NO. !)S~ CLASS IFICATION _ _.f,/M~~~~"-~;._____ PAGES ;;_ FROM ROBERT KIMMITT 456-2224 Gfl/WW (NAME) (EXTENSION) (ROOM NUMBER) ' . . MESSAGE DESCRIPTION {)J~ '2~~ {,).)a_)_ '-n;~~ '-ffkg.~ NSC LOG # /t//'/ TO (AGENCY) DELIVER TO: . DEPT/:POOM NO. EXTENSION d ~&-2 /Jdf J?t~c=. SU..__ 1414 '.\1E'.\10RA:\'DC'.\I NATIOI\AL SECURITY COU~CIL ACTION February 22, 1985 MEMORANDUM FOR ROBERT C. MCFARLANE FROM: TYRUS W. COBB~ SUBJECT: Written Interview with Maclean's Magazine RECOMMENDATION That you sign the self-exp~ . anatory memo to Platt a.t Tab I. Approve IL Disapp,...ove °'""' M.1~ Attachments Tab I Memo to Platt Tab A - OuP~tions THE: WHITE HOUSE: 1414 WASHINGTON February 19, 1985 MEMORANDUM FOR: TY COBB FROM: ~ SUBJECT: WRITTEN INTERVIEW WITH MACLEAN's MAGAZINE Attached are the questions submitted by Maclean's Magazine for their interview with the President. Larry Speakes has submitted a schedule request for a photo op to complement the written interview. Could you pass these on to State fo ~ draft responses. If NSC/SpeechwritP.r approved draft answers reach me by March 4, I'll . obtain approval and provide to Maclean's by their deadline. Anticipated publication of the interview is the week of March 11, in advance of the President's visit. We'll release the text to the White House press corps after it is published in Canada. cc: Karna Small Bob Kimmitt ..... 8506641 . • .. l ~ : :\! :.:. · i r1..,.. . . D (" ") - ... i \2~~:.?J~;?' , U$i?!il,C!o/i. • -· · _ i,.;_~, March 5, 1985 MEMORANDUM FOR MR. ROBERT C. MCFARLANE THE WHITE HOUSE Subject: President's Written Interview with Maclean's Magazine (Canada) Attached are revised responses to questions four and five (pages 5-6) for the Maclean's interview for the President's March 17-18 visit to Quebec. The original set of draft responses was sent over under my memorandum on this subject dated March 1 (attached). -.,._;iNicholas Platt Executive Secretary Attachments: As stated UNClASSIFIED -5- 4. In recent weeks, there has been an uproar over the news that contingency plans exist to deploy nuclear weapons--specif ically B-57 nuclear depth charges--in Canada in case of an emergency. In your view, is Canada bound to accept these weapons, especially when the government never was notified of such plans? And what ~ort of emergency would prompt such a deployment? I know that a number of stories have appeared concerning contingency plans for the deployment of nuclear weapons in wartime. Th~re have also been allegations that we are pressuring our allies to accept nuclear weapons. I have two comments to make on these reports. First, NATO has ever the years worked out various defense plans designed to reenforce deterrence. Any deployments of nuclear weapons under these plans would be carried out only with the prior agreement of the states involved. Second, let me say that it is obviously contrary to the interest of · the Alliance as a whole and to the individual member countries to talk publicly about confidential contingency ~lanning of the US and itL allies. Such o~~n discussion would only serve the interests of o•:r potential adversaries. -6- 5. If Canada suddenly balked at going along with such contingency plans--or refused to allow the further testing of Cruise missiles or barred an American battleship from our ports as New Zealand recently did--would the United States respond in the same way that it did to New Zealand, that is, threatening a broad range of counter-measures including economic sanctions? Let me start by stressing that us cooperation with our allies in defense matters stems from a common awareness of the threat to our mutual security and a joint determination to take steps to counter that threat. Each of us entered into these alliances--whether ANZUS, or NATO or NORAD--as fully Sv¥ereign nations, not because we were pressured to do so. Without getting into a full discussion of our cucrent differences with the Government of New Zealand, I want to point out that we are not taking economic sanctions against that country. We are, rather, reviewing .2..!:!.£ cooperation in the defense-security area in light of New Zealand's reduced cooperation with us in the ANZUS Alliance. Our long-standing and excelJ~i.t defense cooperation with Canada is grounded in our partnership in NORAD and our joint membership in NhiO. We have no need to threaten each other to 3chieve common objectives. For example, Canada's agreement to cooperate in the testing of cruise missiles, which we greatly value and appre~iate, was, I am sure, a recognition by the Canadian government that the cruise missile plays an important role in NATO's deterrent posture and, thus, is directly related to Canada's own security. 1414 :>.IE:\10RA:\DU:>.1 I XATIO ~ AL SECU RIT Y COU XCIL March 6, 1985 ACTION MEMORANDUM FOR ROBERT M. KIMMITT FROM: NICHOLAS KLISSAS / TYRUS COBB SUBJECT: President's Intervie~ with McLean's Magazine State has drafted answers to the questions put forward by McLean's magazine of Canada for publication in an issue featuring his March 17-18 visit to QuebRc. We concur with State's answPrs, as modified. State and Speechwriteis' office has approved the final text. Bob Sims's office needs your approval COB today (March 6, 1985). 5 Jack .M;;· t'io<:;~k:., Do~~ ' ~~~inn, i RECOMMENDATION That you sign the memo to Bob Sims (Tab I) approving the attached interview (T~b A) • Approve Disapprove Attachments 'i'ab I Memo to Sim<:' Tab A Interview (Dr~ft Press Release) Tab II Incoming from Stat~ Tab III Background papers Office of the Press Secretary REMARKS OF THE PRESIDENT IN A MEETING WITH MACLEAN'S MAGAZINE March 7, 1985 The oval Off ice Q and thank you for accepting to give MacClean's an answer -- questions that you did -- THE PRESIDENT: -- let's go over and I think we'll -- (inaudible) conversation did get warm. (Laughter.) Q (Inaudible)? THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Q You don't expect any hot topics in Canada? THE PRESIDENT: Any -- expect Q Hot topics in Canada. THE PRESIDENT: No, I think Q The hottest seems to be acid rain. Is that THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Q Is that a problem for you? THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think it's a problem for all of us. And we're working on it, very definitely. And I think that Mr. Mulroney and I will probably be talking about that. Q Is he phoning you this week? THE PRESIDENT: We've had a couple of conversations, generally, on the subject. And I think we're -- there are large areas of agreement between us, and -- of course, you know - (inaudible) neighbor (inaudible) -- Canada. Q That's right. Do you follow his advice and wake· up every morning and thank God for good neighbors? (Laughter.) THE PRESIDENT: Well, I can see myself doing that. My first trip abroad -- when I say "abroad," I mean to another country -- when I was -- became President was to Canada. And now it will be the first visit in this second administration. Q (Inaudible)? THE PRESIDENT: No, as a matter of fact, I have seen something of Canada, and -- Q Unofficial? THE PRESIDENT: and you might be -- yes -- and you might be interested to know that probably the largest colony of Canadians outside of Canada are in California. THE PRESIDE~T: And so, I was the Governor there for eight years. MR. SIMS: Thank you, Mr. President. Q Thank you very much. I hope you enjoy your tour. THE PRESIDENT: All right. END ...... ,-?' ll iinittd ~tatts ~mate '.... ·· t· WASHINGTON. DC 20510 March 7, 1985 ...~ Dear Mr. President: In your meeting later this month with Prime Minister Mulroney and his Cabinet colleagues, the subject of acid rain is certain to be at the top of the Canadian agenda. In August 1980~ the Governments of Canada and the United States signed a Memorandum of Intent committing both parties "to develop a bilateral agreement which will reflect and further the development of effective domestic control programs and other measures to combat transboundary air pollution," and, as an interim action, committing both parties to "promote vigorous enforcement of existing laws and regulations" and "to develop domestic air pollution control policies and strategies, and as necessary and appropriate~ seek legislative or other support to give effect to them." We also note that the Government of Canada just yesterday announced that it plans to reduce Eastern emissions of sulfur and nitrogen oxides by fifty percent by 1994. A~ ~embers of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee~ we believe it is important that the United States carry out the Memorandum of Intent and respond constructively to the Canadian action in order to maintain.the historically close relationship between the United States and Canada. We therefore urge you to place a high priority on the acid rain problem in your discussions with Prime Minister Mulroney~ We urge that the Administration prepare an American proposal concerning sulfur and nitrogen oxide . emissions to be presented expeditiously to the Government of Canada. The President The White House - 2 / 1 / l ./' · I l. \ Claiborne Pell -- Daniel ACID RAIN POLICY BACKGROUND I. Major Internal Administrat i on Policy Review and Decisions 1983-84 o More than a dozen Cabinet Council and ad hoc working group sessions reviewed all aspects of acid rain issue in late 1983 o President approved "No new so control policy" and opted for stepped-up research 2 program on basic scientific issues scheduled for 1987-89 completion; reflected in 1984 State of the Union. o Since then the case for no action has been strengthened. II. Policy Review Conclusions 0 Does not involve human health effects -- latter already protected by primary health standards and costly so control program. 2 0 Case for additional massive SO? control program based on alleged lake damale in Adirondacks and Northeast. Canadian claims simi ar. 0 Administration review of 206 allegedly damaged lakes out of 2,800 in Adirondac~showed that: o 49 were ponds {less than 10 acres); 159 less than minimum census lake definition rnr acres); total accounted for less than 4% of Adirondack lake surface area; most are inaccessible and at high mountain elevations. o Since then, the New York Environmental Department which first made the "206 dead lakes claim" has backed down to 65 documented lakes -- half of which are smaller than the Tidal Basin. o Anti-acid rain forces have now switched arguments to forest damage -- but lab studies on sulphur-related acid effects show mixed picture: some helped {Douglas Fir); some harmed {pines); some no effect {maples, oaks). III. Acid Rain Cost Control Implications o Administration estimates ranged from $20-300 billion over two decades -- on top of existing massive cost for so 2 health standards compliance o $18,000 per fish-pound protected o No reduction plan possible under existing "user so 2 ~"policy for polution control. Would require massive national tax and regional cross-subsidies to fund compliance costs -- a dangerous departure from existing policy.