Office of the Historian

185. Message From the President’s Assistant for National Security Affairs (Kissinger) to the Ambassador to Germany (Rush)1

Washington, February 22, 1971.

Had long talk with Dobrynin.2 I told him that if access principles were acceptable some formulation or unilateral Soviet declaration [Page 558] could be considered. Dobrynin suggested that I give him an illustrative text. With respect to principles themselves Dobrynin suggested that he was prepared to operate on the basis of the four power note though it would help greatly if we could include some Soviet formulations. Could you suggest a draft text of a Soviet declaration and also of an acceptable list of principles including perhaps some Soviet phraseology.

With respect to Federal presence Dobrynin pressed hard for some indication of our thinking, claiming it would ease their problem on access. How much of your thinking can I give him on an informal basis?3

Dobrynin tells me that Abrasimov has instructions to discuss some limitation on Committee and Party group meetings though you should make the first move. This implies that they no longer want them banned. Is this the time for it or should we wait? Please let me know before you move on it.

I am seeing Dobrynin again on Friday4 and would appreciate your answer before then.

The President is most grateful for your cooperation.

  1. Source: National Archives, Nixon Presidential Materials, NSC Files, Kissinger Office Files, Box 59, Country Files, Europe, Ambassador Rush, Berlin, Vol. 1 [2 of 2]. Top Secret; Exclusively Eyes Only; Limited Distribution. The message was sent through the special Navy channel in Frankfurt; no time of transmission or receipt appears on the message. Kissinger sent a nearly identical message to Bahr; the divergence in text is noted in footnote 3 below. (Ibid., Box 60, Egon Bahr, Berlin File [3 of 3])↩
  2. See Document 183.↩
  3. After this point, the message to Bahr concludes: “With respect to your recent messages could you clarify two points: (1) What did you have in mind with the formula regarding parliamentary groups? Were you suggesting they could eventually be banned or limited and if limited, how? (2) What did you mean by liaison office to the three powers and the senate? Is that something other than the Federal plenipotentiary? How would it operate? I am seeing Dobrynin again on Friday [February 26]so an answer would be helpful. Warm good wishes.”↩
  4. February 26. For an account of this meeting, see Document 190.↩