CABLE TO ELLSWORTH BUNKER FROM HENRY A. KISSINGER

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: Library of Congress
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): LOC-HAK-490-7-8-2
• Release Decision: RIFLIM
• Original Classification: T
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: January 11, 2017
• Document Release Date: October 3, 2012
• Sequence Number: 8
• Publication Date: September 10, 1972
• Content Type: CABLE

?
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2012/10/03: LOC-HAK-490-7-8-2
..up
....? ???
ON-FILE NSC RELEASE
INSTRUCTIONS APPLY
TO? SECRET SEIN'ilfi
DOS Review
Completed.
MIMEi912 SEP io gM 1 47
MORI/CDF C05081241
49,4
0 P S E 'C R E T mama SIE_12_SENSITIVE EXCLUSIVELY EYES ONLY
VIA BURKER_SJUALUS_SECTION 1 OF 2
FROM: EEMRY A. KISSINGER ? ?
TO: AMBASSADOR BUNKER, SAIGON-
CITE: WHS2159
SEPTEMBER -9, 1972
DELIVER OPENING OF. BUSINESS
TO AMBASSADOR .BUNKER
'FROM HENRY. A 1CISSINGER '
REF: 0153 AND 0154
1. WE HAVE CAREFULLY REVIEWED THE GUN'S COMMENTS AND COUNTER .
.PROPOSALS ON THE POLITICAL AND PROCEDURAL DOCUMENTS, NOTING THAT -
ALL OTHER POINTS IN SUBSTANTIVE PROPOSAL ARE NOW AGREED.
2. BY WAY OF GENERAL COMMENT, YOU SHOULD TELL THE GVN THAT WE
FOUND SPIRIT OF THEIR SUGGESTED CHANGES HELPFUL AND CONSTRUCTIVE
AND WE HAVE ACCEPTED MOST .OF - THEM. THERE ARE ONLY A FEW
SUGGESTED MODIFICATIONS WHICH, WERE WE TO ACCEPT THEN WOULD DEPRIVE
OUR PLANS OF %MY NOVELTY, WND ENABLE THE OTHER SIDE TO REJECT THEM
OUT OF HAND OR PUT .US ON THE DEFENSIVE WITH PUBLIC OPINION.
AS WE HAVE POINTED OUT IN PREVIOUS MESSAGES, WE BELIEVE WE
HAVE GONE A LONG WAY TO MEET GVN CONCERNS, WE HAVE NOT
COME ALL THIS WAY IN 3 AND ONE HALF YEARS TO SEE IT UNDONE
IN THE FINAL MONTHS OF OUR FIRST TERM AND IT IS IN THIS
SPIRIT THAT WE HOPE THE GVN WILL TAKE OUR FEW REMAINING
COMMENTS. FOLLOWING ARE OUR COMMENTS ON GVN RESPONSE,
FIRST LISTING THOSE SUGGESTIONS WE ACCEPT AND THEN THOSE
ON WHICH WE STILL DIFFER:
?
In ?
?
????
? No Objection to Declassification in *Full 2012/10/03: LOC-HAK-490-7-8-2
I.
?
II
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2012/10/03: LOC-HAK-490-7-8-2
11,
WHAT WE ACCEPT: SUBSTANTIVE PROPOSAL
3. IN FIRST SENTENCE OF THE POLITICAL POINT, POINT 4, WE
ACCEPT ADDITION " FREE FROM ANY OUTSIDE INTERFERENCE."
4. WE AGREE TO NEW SECOND SENTENCE IN SECTION 4(B), ALTHOUGH
YOU SHOULD NOTE THAT OUR LANGUAGE WAS PRECISELY WHAT WAS USED
IN US?GVN AGREED JANUARY PLAN.
5. WE AGREE TO, SUBSITUTION OF WORD "VARMS" FOR " THE
EXECUT IVE,LEGISLATIVE AND JUDICIAL " IN SECTION 4 (D) ALTHOUGH WE CON
SIDER THIS STRICTLY COSMETIC; THE MEANING DOES, NOT . CHANGE IN OUR
VIEW.
6. REGARDING SECTION 4(F), WE ACCEPT THE NEW NEUTRAL
FORMULATION THAT YOU PROPOSED AND THIEU ACCEPTED. WE Apo ASSUME YOU
CONVERSATION ON THIS POINT WITH THIEU OVERTAKES GVN MEMORANDUM
PROVIDED TO YOU EARLIER AND WE WILL THEREFORE RETAIN PHRASE "REVIEW
-OF THE CONSTITITION" IN SECTION 4(A).
WHAT WE ACCEPT : PROCEDURES
7. WE ACCEPT GVWS SUGGESTIONS IN REGARD TO PROCEDURAL POINT
1, NAMELY, DELETION OF " IN DETAIL" IN THE FIRST SENTENCE OF LAST
-PARAGRAPH. AND -SUBSTITUTION OF. " FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION"'
IN PLACE OF "-"FOR DETAILED DISCUSSION" IN LAST SENTENCE OF LAST
PARAGRAPH. - ? ? -
S. WE AGREE TO DELETION OF WORDS " IN DETAIL" IN SECOND
SENTENCE OF PROCEDURAL POINT 2.
9. WE ACCEPT GVN CHANGES ON PROCEDURAL: POINT
AREAS OF REMAINING DIFFERENCE': SUBSTANTIVE -
10. WE BELIEVE THE GVN REWRITE OF FIFTH PARAGRAPH OF SECTION
4(A) ON THE COMPOSITION OF THE CNR IS EXTREMELY UNWISE. ON THE
ONE HAND IT IS MORE SWEEPING THAN OURS PERHAPS UNINTENTIONALLY
UP THE VETO. -ON THE OTHER HAND GVN CHANGE OBVIOUSLY
WOULD REMOVE ONE OF THE FEW NEW ELEMENTS OF OUR PROPOSAL
SINCE JANUARY 25 PLAN. WE HAVE ALREADY AGREED TO DROP REFERENCE
10 EQUAL PROPORTIONS -IN THE COMPROMISE YOU BROUGHT BACK FROM
.HAWAII. WITHOUT OUR ALREADY WATERED DOWN VERSION WE WOULD BE BACK
c.104i
TO THE JANUARY 25 PROPOSITION AND WOULD NOT HAVE A VEHICLE FOR
OUR STRATEGY FOR THE NEXT FEW MONTHS. FOR REASONS CITED
IN OUR 2157 AND PREVIOUS MESSAGES WE BELIEVE GVN HAS AMPLE
SAFEGUARDS IN NEGOTIATIONS WHICH COULD LEAD EITHER TO EFFECTIVE ..01
GVN MAJORITY ON CNR OR AT WORST A STALEMATE. qt1R4
6
TOP SECRET SENSITIVt ACLUSIVE
4.?
' ? " No Objection to Declassification in Full 2012/10/03: LOC-HAK-490-7-8-2
A
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2012/10/03: LOC-HAK-490-7-8-2
IP ? ' IIP
?
a?TOP SECRET SENSITIVE
? ,?
,
' 1972 SEP 10 IA t 59
11111tiqi 08 ONLY
OPSECRET 100311Z SEP 72 SENSTTIVE.EXCLUSIVELY EYES ONLY
VIA BUNKER CHANNELS SECTION 2 OF 2
FROM: HENRY A. KISSINGER
TO: AMBASSADOR BUNKER, SAIGON
CITE: -WH2153-
? ? ?
REMAIN/NG AREAS OF DIFFERENCE: PROCEDURES
?
11. BEFORE COMMENTING ON SPECIFIC AREAS OF DIFFERENCE, I
. .
CANNOT EMPHASIZE TOO STRONGLY THAT WHAT WILL DETERMINE THE
OUTCOME IS NOT WHAT IS IN THE PROCEDURAL DOCUMENT BUT THE
_FORUMS OPEN AND WHAT HAPPENS WITHIN THEM IF AND WHEN THEY ARE. AS
-LONG AS GVNRETAINS VETO IN WHATEVER FORUM IT PARTICIPATES, WE
VIEW PROCEDURAL QUESTIONS AS ESSENTIWLLY'SECONDARY AND DO NOT
WANT TO OVERDIGNIFY THEM BY EXCESSIVE QUIBBLING WITH MM. ANY
ANALYSIS OF THE COMPLEXITY OF THE ISSUES SUCH AS CEASEFIRE AND
COMPOSITION OF VARIOUS BODIES MAKES IT omous THAT THEY
CANNOT BE SETTLED IN THE FIRST FORUM AND WILL HAVE TO BE
REFERRED FOR CONSIDERATION IN THE OTHER.FORUMS...
12. ON THE SPECIFICS; IN RESPECT TO THE SECOND PROCEDURAL
- POINT, WE. DO NOT AGREE TO THE FIRST TWO .GV SUGGESTIONS AND
ARE NOT -CERTAIN WE EVEN UNDERSTAND THEIR_ RATIONALE., IF, IN
PROPOSING-DtLETION OF "THE AGREEMENTS ON": IN FIRST SENTENCE,
GVN IS APPREHENSIVE ABOUT LEGAL IMPLICATIONS OF WORD "AGREEMENTS",
WE COULD LIVE WITH SUBSTITUTION OF WORDS "WHAT HAS BEEN AGREED".
SENTENCE WOULD THEN READ; " THIS FORUM WILL DEAL WITH WHAT HAS
BEEN AGREED ON THE MILITARY QUESTIONS.. 4. ."
?
13. SECOND PROPOSED GVN CHANGE IN RESPECT TO PROCEDURAL .POINT
2 STRIKES US AS INCONSISTENT WITH POINT 1 WHICH ALREADY
PROVIDES FOR DEALINGS ON SVN POLITICAL QUESTION AS WELL AS
MILITARY QUESTIONS IN U.S./DRV FORUM. LANGUAGE WHICH GVN
PROPOSES TO DELETE FLOWS LOGICALLY FROM PREVIOUS POINT AND WE
THEREFORE PROPOSE TO RETAIN IT. SUGGESTED DELETION WOULD ALSO
MAKE NEXT SENTENCE VIRTUALLY MEANINGLESS.
i . ? . .
No Objection to Declassification _in Full 2012/10/03 : LOC-HAK-490-7-8-2 -
?
INo Objection to Declassification in Full 2012/10/03: LOC-HAK-490-7-8-2
14: JE CANNOT ACCEP Vk PROPOSED CHANGE ON PO 3 . WE
,UNDERSTAND GVN CONCERN AND YOU CAN ASSURE THEM THAT WE HAVE
ABSOLUTELY NO INTENTION OF RECOGNIZING TWO SEPARATE GOVERNMEMTS
IN SOUTH VIETNAM. AT THE SAME TIME, AS PART OF OUR STRATEGY OF
BEING CONCILIATORY ON ESSENTIALLY PERIPHERAL ISSUES, WE DO NOT
WANT TO REJECT OUTRIGHT HANOI'S CONCEPT OF W THREE WAY VIETNAMESE
FORUM. WE HAVE ALREADY MET IMPORTANT GVN CONCERNS ON THIS POINT,
FIRST BY EARLIER DELETION OF WORD "TRIPARTITE* AND SECONDLY BY
CHANGING NAME OF PRG TO KLF. IF FORUM WERE EVER TO ACTUALLY
BECOME OPERATIVE, GVN WOULD HAVE VETO AND TREAT NLF HOWEVER
IT WISHED. IN EXPLAINING OUR POSITION, THIS MAY PROVIDE
CONVENIENT POINT AT WHICH TO EMPHASIZE WE CANNOT AFFORD
BLOW-OUT OVER A PROCEDURAL QUESTION.
ADDITION COMMENTS
?
15. IN ADDITION TO THE FOREGOING COMMENTS, PLEASE INFORM THIEU
THAT WE HAVE ADDED A FINAL SUBSECTION TO POINT 4 CONCERNING THE
U.S. ATTITUDE. IT IS THE STANDARD LANGUAGE WE. HAVE USED IN
SPEECHES AND IN OUR JANUARY 25 PLAN. IT READS AS FOLLOWS:
QUOTE FOR ITS PART, THE .UNITED STATES DECLARES THAT IT
RESPECTS THE SOUTH VIETNAMESE RIGHT TO SELF DETERMINATION; IT
WILL REMAIN COMPLETELY NEUTRAL WITH RESPECT TO THE POLITICAL
PROCESS IN SOUTH VIETNAM; AND IT WILL ABIDE BY THE OUTCOME OF
ANY POLITICAL PROCESS SHAPED BY THE SOUTH VIETNAMESE PEOPLE
THEMSELVES. UNQUOTE. .
IT WAS IN THE JANUARY- 25 PLAN AND IS ADDED ONLY BECAUSE .WE
? WANT TO AVOID QUESTIONS WHICH ITS OMISSION WOULD RAISE.
?
?
16. SECONDLY, ANOTHER MINOR POT NT, YOU SHOULD MENTION THAT
.WE HAVE DECIDED TO USR WORDS "DEAL WITH" RATHER THAN "DISCUSS"
IN THIRD POINT OF OUR PROCEDURAL PROPOSAL TO MAKE IT CONSISTENT
WITH REMAINDER OF TEXT-. WE NOTE GVN TEXT RETAINS PHRASEOLOGY USED
IN OUR EARLIER DRAFTS. - ? - ?
17. IN'YOUR oIscusiroNs YOU SHOULD potNi OUT THAT AFTER THE
LONG DISTANCE WE HAVE TRAVELLED AND THE EFFORTS WE HAVE MADE
WHAT WORRIES US NOW IS THAT WE ARE EDGING TOWARD A PLAN THAT
ftwrteost-te41(E,4.-TRAN6PARENT RECASTING OF THE JANUARY
PROPOSAL. THIS WOULD UNDERMINE OUR STRATEGY AND JOINT US-
GVN
OBJECTIVES. THAT IS WHY WE FEEL WE MUST HOLD FIRM ON
THOSE FEW REMAINING-AREAS OF DIFFERENCE LISTED ABOVE.
PLEASE SEE WHETHER WE CAN NOW GET A SPEEDY RESOLUTION.
; '
WARM REGARDS." ,
.11nrimemi.par ..ww.??????????aom-ww.o.A.4.10................-...,-...-
c. . .
1 ?
Oiv.4
IQ? SE. CREt SOSITIVE
? ? .
,
No Objection to Declassification in Full 2012/10/03 : LOC-HAK-490-7-8-2
EXCLUSIVE
EYES DRY