43. Editorial Note
On June 6, 1977, Secretary of State Cyrus Vance addressed the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe in order to discuss the administration’s approach to the forthcoming CSCE Review Conference, scheduled to take place in Belgrade, Yugoslavia, in October 1977. Vance asserted that he wanted to underline the “continuing importance” the Carter administration placed on the implementation of the Final Act of the Helsinki Conference (see footnote 7, Document 4):
“You are fully aware of this Administration’s interest in promoting more stable and mutually beneficial relations between the peoples of East and West. The Helsinki Final Act provides one framework for such cooperation.
“You are also aware of our commitment to honor and promote the rights of individuals, the human rights of all peoples, no matter what their political or social origins and affiliations. The Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe has provided a multilateral mechanism through which to pursue these aims.”
After praising the continued cooperation between the executive and legislative branches concerning the multiple issues related to the Helsinki Accords, Vance then stated the administration’s objectives for the upcoming meeting:
“—We seek full implementation of all the commitments contained in the Helsinki Final Act. None can be called more binding, more vital, than others. All three of the so-called baskets are important.
“—We seek incremental improvements in relations between East and West on all the fronts surveyed at Helsinki: political, economic, scientific, cultural, security, and humanitarian.
[Page 183]“—We seek to move forward on all these fronts simultaneously: the freer flow of people and ideas is as important to long-term security and cooperation as, for example, advance notice of major military maneuvers; the humanitarian pledges at Helsinki are as important as, say, the promises of greater commercial cooperation.
“—There will be consideration of new proposals. But we must not be diverted from assessment of how fully the specific undertakings of Helsinki have been carried out by all the signatories.”
Vance referenced the ambitiousness of the agenda, conceding that differences in “understanding and priority” might exist among participants. Although discussion of differences would be desirable, he asserted that such discussions could not “serve as a diversion or a cloak for inaction” in terms of reviewing progress made and anticipating subsequent implementation of other goals. He then continued:
“At Belgrade we will assess on the spot how best to be effective and persuasive in pursuing our objectives. Between public diplomacy and quiet diplomacy, we will strive for maximum practical impact. We will avoid grandiose new proposals that have little chance of being acceptable. Propaganda ploys, debating points have no place in our strategy. We will state our goals and our assessments clearly, without polemics. It would serve no one’s interests if such serious and far-reaching questions were dealt with in anything other than a serious and straightforward manner.”
Vance concluded his remarks by noting that the administration’s report on the implementation of the Final Act, a copy of which he had provided to the Commission, detailed and assessed the steps the United States had taken. He underscored the reality that no nation’s record “is perfect,” and added that the United States would accept “constructive criticism” of its own policy. Referencing his April 30 Law Day address, which he delivered at the University of Georgia (see Document 37), Vance stated that action in the cause of human rights “is a matter for informed and careful judgment. No mechanistic formula produces an automatic answer.” He concluded:
“So it will be in our decisions about working for implementation of the commitments contained in the Helsinki Final Act, those dealing with our political, economic, and military relations, as well as those affecting human rights.
“Respect for the undertakings solemnly accepted at CSCE is an effort to which our government is firmly committed, in the full knowledge that the pursuit of security and cooperation in Europe poses a test of our perseverance as much as of our ideals. I am confident that we will, together, persevere.” (Department of State Bulletin, June 27, 1977, pages 669–670)