Foreign Relations of the United States, 1981–1988, Volume I, Foundations of Foreign Policy

184. Memorandum From Donald Fortier of the National Security Council Staff to the President’s Assistant for National Security Affairs (McFarlane)¹

Washington, January 24, 1984

SUBJECT

• State of the Union Message²

I reread the State of the Union draft late last night after the JPMG talks ended. I was a little disappointed the speechwriters had not taken more of what we suggested at the outset. I wish I had had the presence of mind to have had successive drafts cabled to me on my trip. Perhaps these comments come too late to have any use. The speech is important enough, however, that I will make them anyway.

My basic reaction is that we sell ourselves a little too short in the foreign policy section. A few additions would give the section much greater concreteness and—hence—persuasiveness:

1. We ought to make more of the theme of counter-terrorism. We almost need the equivalent of a Reagan doctrine. We should note that State-supported terrorism is a fundamentally new phenomenon that goes far beyond Lebanon. If we don’t reiterate this point strongly, our position on the Long Commission report³ will appear to be more of a momentary invention than a durable goal. We also need a sentence that links the theme of counter-terrorism to the defense of democracy: nothing is more corrosive of existing and aspiring democracies than terrorism. Third, yet another sentence could show how terrorism is, in effect, a kind of confirmation of the success of our other policies: our restored strength has driven adversaries into the back alleys in a last ditch effort to maintain their momentum. I know this clashes to some extent with the theme of the world becoming a safer place, but I think this can be handled by projecting a sense of optimism about our ability to curb terrorism by making sponsors accountable.⁴

2. A few additional sentences should also be devoted to the theme of the successful rebuilding of American strength. We have “planted the seeds” for increasing success in the years ahead. We have brought continuity and purpose back to foreign policy. This is not mere rhetoric. It is our fundamental achievement and the condition for all others.

3. Our approach to arms control is too limp and abstract. Why not say that this Administration has gone to the core of the arms control problem. “Rather than trying to achieve trivial reductions in numbers, we have forced both parties to face up to the issues of vulnerability and stability. This approach will, because of its boldness, take more effort to effect; but once it is adopted its impact will be dramatic.”

4. Why not say, too, that Premier Zhao’s speech in the U.S. on non-proliferation⁵ was “a major example of what our quiet but results oriented non-proliferation policy can achieve.” In addition to strategic arms control, “This Administration has done more than any other to reawaken the nuclear supplier states to the need for comprehensive safeguards.” (In March or April, we can follow up on this with our surprise announcement of the first meeting in years of the nuclear suppliers group, convened at our initiative.)

5. Finally, we need two sentences in the resources problem—identifying it as “the single greatest remaining obstacle to a more robust diplomacy.” “Dollar for dollar, American foreign and security assistance buys us more protection than any other program.”

1. Source: Reagan Library, Executive Secretariat, NSC Subject File, Speech File, Presidential—Presidential Speeches (January 1984). Confidential. Sent for information. Fawn Hall initialed for Fortier. A stamped notation in the top right-hand corner of the memorandum reads: “RCM has seen.”
2. See footnote 2, Document 177.
3. Reference is to Report of the DOD Commission on Beirut International Airport Terrorist Act, October 23, 1983 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1984). The Commission was chaired by Admiral Robert L.J. Long, USN (ret.).
4. In the left-hand margin next to this paragraph, McFarlane wrote: “Maybe a separate speech.”
5. Zhao visited the United States January 7–16, and met with U.S. officials, January 10–12. Documentation is scheduled for publication in Foreign Relations, 1981–1988, vol. XXIX, China, 1984–1988. While in New York on January 16, Zhao addressed a luncheon at the Hilton Hotel in Manhattan, sponsored by the Foreign Policy Association and the National Committee on U.S.-China Relations. (Richard Bernstein, “Zhao Emphasizes Taiwan’s Role as Main Block to U.S.-China Ties,” New York Times, January 17, 1984, p. A1)