SENATOR BARRY GOLDWATER

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 10
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 6, 2010
• Sequence Number: 87
• Publication Date: March 28, 1982
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
..RADIO IV REPORTS, IN ..
4701 WILLARD AVENUE, CHEVY CHASE, MARYLAND 20015 656-4068
PROGRAM Face the Nation STATION WDVM-TV
CBS Network
DATE March 28, 1982 11:30 A.M.
SUBJECT Senator Barry Goldwater
Washington, D.C.
GEORGE HERMAN: Senator Goldwater, the people of El
Salvador are voting today, with the possibility of a victory by
the extreme right. What do you feel should be the United States
policy towards whoever wins the election in El Salvador?
SENATOR BARRY GOLDWATER: I think we ought to try to
get along with them. I think we should do whatever we can in a
noncombatant way to help the country. Central America is as im-
portant to us, I think, as any part of the world, probably. And
I wouldn't want to see us go down there with armed forces if
there's a chance of getting the whole thing to work. And I think
maybe we can do it.
ANNOUNCER: From CBS News, Washington, a spontaneous
and unrehearsed news interview on Face the Nation with Senator
Barry Goldwater of Arizona, Chairman of the Senate Intelligence
Committee.
Senator Goldwater will be questioned by CBS News con-
gressional correspondent Phil Jones; by Jack Germond, syndicated
columnist for the Baltimore Evening Sun; and by the moderator,
CBS News correspondent George Herman.
HERMAN: Senator Goldwater, it was your opinion in your
first answer that we should get along with whoever wins the elec-
tion in El Salvador. But supposing it should turn out to be the
extreme right wing,.Major D'Aubuisson, who says his first action
would be to hang President Duarte, a man who's been -- D'Aubuisson
has been called a psychopathic butcher. Should we get along with
him, or should we put him in some kind of quarantine?
OFFICES IN: WASHINGTON D.C. ? NEW YORK ? LOS ANGELES ? CHICAGO ? DETROIT ? AND OTHER PRINCIPAL CITIES
Mateikrl supplied by Rodb N Reports Inc. may be used for file and reference ptxposes only. It may not be reproduced, sold or t ry demonstrated or exhibited.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
SENATOR GOLDWATER: I think we have to wait and see.
But we have to get to the deeper part of this whole problem.
HERMAN: Very well.
SENATOR GOLDWATER: El Salvador is just a little part
of it. We have to get at the fact that Cuba is now supplying
Nicaragua with armament, and Nicaragua is supplying El Salvador
with arms. Now, we have to stop Cuba In her Intervention through-
out Central America, and eventually South America.
How to do it? I've advocated -- and I know it won't be
popular -- tell Castro that if he doesn't stop it, we'll start
shooting down his supply planes and we'll start sinking his sup-
ply ships. That's going to be the real problem in that whole
part of the world. Not just El Salvador and who wins the elec-
tion or what's going on In Nicaragua, but what Castro is doing.
And that's the serious part.
JACK GERMOND: Senator, in your first answer, you said
we should do what we could to get along In a noncombatant way.
Are there any circumstances under which we should send troops
into El Salvador?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: I can't conceive of any at this
moment. I don't think It would ever amount to another Vietnam,
because we happen to have different leadership in Washington now
than we had in the Vietnam days. And if any decision was made
to use our military down there, it would be accompanied by a
deci.sion to win whatever we set out to do. But I just -- I'm
just opposed to sending our troops down there. I think it can
be worked out by conferring with Mexico -- I think they have a
good idea there -- by talking to our friends that we have in that
part of the world, and taking care of Castro and Cuba. That's
going to be a real thorn In the side of free countries all over
this hemisphere.
PHIL JONES: Senator Goldwater, you said earlier that
we should tell Castro if he doesn't stop supplying arms to Nicar
agua, we're going to start shooting down his supply flights.
SENATOR GOLDWATER: Yes.
JONES: Now, that's tough talk. But what about tough
talk to the Russians, that are sending supply planes into Cuba
that bring this equipment on its first leg? Should we be doing
anything to Russia?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: I'm not worried about Russia and
what she would do in this case. I think if we ever took action
to stop Cuba, Russia would back away from Cuba. Russia, in my
opinion, is not looking for a war. If Russia were looking for
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
a war, she could blackmail us any day she wants to, because she
has far superior armed forces than we have. And I don't think
she wants to go to war, particularly with us. She never has
and I don't think she ever will.
JONES: Well, let me follow up on that. Just in the
last day or so, a senior Soviet general has indicated that if
the United States puts new nuclear weapons into Europe, that this
may bring a new nuclear threat closer to the United States. Now,
the implication of that is that they would have nuclear weapons
in Cuba. At the same time, you're saying the Russians don't want
war.
I don't see how these two things play.
SENATOR GOLDWATER: Well, that statement has been made,
or a statement like it, so many times in the past 30 years or
since World War II by top-ranking generals of Russia that I don't
pay any attention to them. I look on Russia as being interested
in Russia. And as far as pushing communism, there's no mono-
lithic structure of communism in this world. Every country that
has communism has a little different concept of it.
So, Russia has no real interest in Cuba other than using
Cuba to infiltrate the other countries. There's no question of.
what Russia's ultimate aim is, and that's world domination. But
I don't think now is the time that she feels it's ready.
HERMAN: Do we know that there are -- do we know, one
way or another, that there are or are not any Soviet nuclear
weapons in Cuba?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: No, I can't tell you that we do.
And I'm not trying to duck any highly classified information.
If they're there, they were never removed after the incident
during President Kennedy's presidency.
HERMAN: So what you're saying by that, I take it, is
that we know no new weapons have been flown in or brought in on
ships.
SENATOR GOLDWATER: I think we're safe in saying that.
JONES: But they do have the facilities. Since 1962
and that crisis, Isn't it correct that the Cubans have built a
number of facilities that would take care of nuclear weapons if
the Russians wanted to send them in?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: Well, you have to keep in mind
that using .a nuclear weapon,against the United States from Cuba
doesn't take much of a weapon. It only has to travel 90 miles.
It only has to travel about 1800 to hit the big cities of the
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
United States. And that's a very medium- or small-range missile.
It can be launched from a mobile unit. It doesn't take holes in
the ground or anything like that.
Now, whether Russia removed those missiles in '62, I'm
not sure that we've ever been sure that they did it.
GERMOND: Senator, let me ask you about a different
aspect of this. One thing that's apparent in public opinion
polls and otherwise, through demonstrations and votes in town
meetings In New Hampshire and places like that, is that there's
a great deal of concern in this country right now, popular con-
cern, about the Administration's attitude In Central America
and toward the communists or our adversaries in general. Is
this change in public opinion or this fear in the public a pro-
duct of some real change? Are the Russians becoming more mili-
tant and aggressive? Or Is it that this Administration Is res-
ponding in a different way and hyping these fears?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: No. I think it's pretty much a
normal reaction of the American people against nuclear weapons.
I don't think they're opposed to conventional weapons. And I
think we can understand the opposition to nuclear. The average
American thinks of nuclear as that great bomb exploding out in
the Pacific or over in Japan. We have a lot of opposition in
this country to the manufacturing of electricity by nuclear force,
and yet it's the only way we can produce electricity.
I can understand these people. Frankly, I'm not too
strong on building MX's or adding to our arsenal. We have enough
warheads now to do all the damage that has to be done. They have
all the warheads they need. 1, personally wish there were s
way we could sit down with the Soviets and,say, "Look, this Ism,
rather silly. Neither one of us will use these weapons, in all
probability. Why don't we get together and Instead of talking
about limiting our future manuf.acture, let's talk about elimin-
ating those that we've already manufactured?" I would be in
favor of that, and also in favor of going farther than that and
having a multilateral understanding with the countries of the
world, not just as to the production of nuclear weapons, but to
the production of all weapons.
GERMOND: Are you satisfied that the Administration
is Interested In achieving the kind of goals you were just
talking about?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: Yes, I'm convinced of that.
GERMOND: Why isn't the public convinced of it? Why
don't people have that feeling?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: Well, there's still a little feeling
In this country about Vietnam, understandably. Vietnam was a
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
5
badly run war by President Johnson, President Kennedy. It was
a disgrace to America to lose the war like that. And many young
people, the ages that would have to go to war, just don't like it.
I think the American people would respond if we got
into the trouble that they understood, and they would be willing
to take the risks. But I don't want to see us get in the position
where we have to take those risks. And I think we can't handle it.
We can't handle it if we have great businesses like the
United States Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of
Manufacturing saying, "Let's cut defense." I happen to be on those
committees and I can tell you we can cut a little bit, but we
can't cut a lot.
HERMAN: Let me try something on you that I think we've
been dancing around a little bit here. After carefully studying
our polls and other people's public opinion polls about the Presi-
dent and foreign pol icy, I think one could make a case that the
American people, or a large percentage of them, are worried about
President Reagan and Secretary Haig being a little hasty, being
a little apt to shoot from the hip. They do not have quite the
confidence they've had in other Presidents that these gentlemen
will act with the sobriety, the care, the caution that other
Presidents may act.
SENATOR GOLDWATER: I think if you got out in the coun-
try and talked to the people, you wouldn't find this to be as
true as you would believe it to be if you read just the New York
Times, the Washington Post, and the big newspapers in this coun-
try.
Alex Haig is a rather quick-spoken man. He was a four-
star general. And when he says "right face," that's just exactly
what he means.
Now, I know President Reagan as well as anybody in this
town, and he's not a warlike man. He's a peaceful man.
But you have to keep in mind that we've had a succession
of Presidents that didn't understand war, that didn't understand
the foreign policy necessary to prevent war. For 20 years, we
have allowed our military to go down, down, down. So when we
start talking about building up a military strength, not neces-
sarily to equal the Russians, but to be able to talk with her,
which is the basic necessity of foreign policy, Americans are
understandably concerned.
I think I can give you one little bit of good news on
that and the American people. The old infantry journal, the in-
fantry manual, 100-15, which everybody studied since, I guess,
the days of Washington, is being rewritten. And a salient point
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
in it is that the American people have to be told of every move
we make in the military fields, the diplomatic fields, foreign
policy fields, so the American people will understand what's
going on and not have to read a newspaper that necess -- unneces-
sarily or necessarily is biased, or watch a television show where
the same thing might occur.
JONES: Well, on that very line of keeping people in-
formed, do you feel that you, as Chairman of the Senate Intelli-
gence Committee, have been kept Informed by this Administration
on all aspects of Central America?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: Yes, I do.
JONES: Isn't It a fact, though, that you read in the
newspaper about the covert operations that we had going in Nicar-
agua?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: No, that's...
JONES: ...the first you learned about it?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: That's not exactly the way it hap-
pened. Ben Bradlee, the Editor of the Washington Post, who is a
good friend of mine, called me one day to ask some questions.
And he hadn't spoken 10 seconds worth of words, and I said, "This
man knows everything we heard in the meeting yesterday." And I
said, "Well, Ben, I can't talk about that, but I'd suggest you
talk with Mr. Casey." Which he did. And then the story came
out by Mr. Woodward covering everything that we had talked about.
However, I didn't see or know of anything In that brief-
ing that I didn't think the American people should know.
JONES: So, you're fully satisfied with the quantity
and quality of information that your committee is receiving from
the CIA and other intelligence...
SENATOR GOLDWATER: Yes, I am. There may be a case
here and there where we don't get every last word. But it's not
the fault of the CIA, nor the fault of our committee. We ask
questions. And Mr. Casey and Admiral Inman and the rest of the
Intelligence family have been meticulous In answering what we
want to know.
Now, there's a lot of things that we hear that we don't
want to have get out. But this town has more leaks in it -- and
I'm not going to tell you the place I have In mind. But every-
thing we hear, practically, on that committee we know is going
to turn up .in the New York Times or the Washington Post. And I
don't like that. [ think that's a bad way to try to run foreign
policy.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
JONES: Are you keeping all of the members of the com-
mittee informed on everything that you know?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: Under the rules that established
this committee, the Vice Chairman, who is always a member of the
other party -- in this case, Senator Moynihan -- and the Chairman
have to hear some things that the other members of the committee
are not allowed to hear. I think that's happened -- in my nearly
two years as Chairman, it's happened twice. And then in a sub-
sequent meeting, they were briefed.
JONES: Because your colleagues are not trustworthy?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: No, no. No.
JONES: Why can't they share this information?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: We now have -- because we have a
committee in both houses, we have about 200 people that are privy
to top secret. Now, I have to thank God that we haven't had more
leaks out of those committees. I am very favorably inclined
towards having a joint committee, where we reduce the number of
senators and congressmen and reduce the number of 200 down to
maybe 20 or 25. But we've been -- we've been pretty good about
it.
GERMOND: Senator, let me ask you about a different
subject. It is apparent now that President Reagan's budget, as
now written, is not going to be approved in Congress. You just
said a moment ago that you could see room for only modest reduc-
tions in defense spending.
SENATOR GOLDWATER: That's right.
GERMOND: That being'the case, how can the budget be
altered to make it acceptable to -- even to you Republicans in
the Senate?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: I think there's one thing you have
to keep in mind. There's 70 percent of our budget that the Presi-
dent has nothing to do with. And the only way the Congress can
have anything to do with it is to have enough courage to rescind
laws that created agencies that spend this money under no control
other than a law saying that the Congress is going to control.
Now, where the President can act and hasn't acted is
in a very, very dangerous, to my mind, and touchy field. The
welfare business of this country has gone up over 200 percent
in the last several years, pnd military spending's gone up, oh,
maybe 10 percent. But when you get fooling around with the per-
son on welfare, on food stamps, Social Security, which is your
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
money and my money. It's not the Federal Government. And I think
there's been a lot of dishonesty throughout the years in handling
Social Security funds -- but when you get tinkering with that
objective, to reduce the welfare cost, how long is it going to be
before you might even have anarchy in this country?
GERMOND: You're talking about -- we're talking about
deficits, though, in fiscal '83...
SENATOR GOLDWATER: Yes.
GERMOND: ...that could go up to $130 billion, which is
the internal White House figure, assuming that some of these pro-
posals are not approved. You have been, like every other Repub-
lican, very critical of deficits and very supportive of balanced
budgets throughout your career. You can't cut 130 billion, or
anything like it, out of welfare costs. Where do you make the
cuts? Taxes?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: Well, you're not going to get rid
of this deficit.
GERMOND: What's an acceptable deficit, though?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: Nothing Is.acceptable to me. But
you have to keep In mind that we've had 40 years of Democratic
spending, and that's why we have this deficit. Reagan didn't
accumulate this deficit, by any means. It's been coming on,
coming on, coming on all these years, I'll say through Democrats
and Republican Presidents.
JONES: Well, but several of his programs are respon-
sible for part of this deficit.
SENATOR GOLDWATER: Well, the tax cuts might be. But
on the other hand, if you don't,cut taxes, you don't give the
economy an incentive to Increase, If you don't increase the econ-
omy's ability to produce you don't create new jobs. So it's
about six of one and a half dozen of another, and the devil on
both your houses.
JONES: Well, fine tuning. Do we need a little fine
tuning at this point, though? Perhaps look at that third year
of the Reagan tax cut and some other changes?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: Oh, I don't think it would hurt
to look at It. I think it would be a dreadful mistake to not
grant these tax cuts. I feel very strongly that we are already
on the upgrade In this country. We've just about gotten Infla-
tion back to normal.
JONES: So'you don't want It repealed, In other words.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
SENATOR GOLDWATER: Pardon?
JONES: The third year, you don't want it repealed.
SENATOR GOLDWATER: No. Wait. The third year, yes, I
want to go through with the tax program that was enacted. I don't
think it would serve any purpose to deny the American people the
tax cut we've given them, because we have to create a rebirth of
our free enterprise, marketplace economy. We can no longer play
around with socialism or nationalism, which many members of Con-
gress are prone to do. This country became a great economic power
because we could work the way we want to, make the money we could
make, and so forth. I want to get back to that, and that's the
Reagan plan. And I think any deviation from that plan can really
bring disaster.
GERMOND: Some of your colleagues, Republican colleagues
in the Senate think you've already got a disaster in the condition
of the economy and the reaction that's showing up in opinion polls.
In fact, some of them even think that it's possible you might lose
control of the Senate this year, though that seems a little far-
fetched.
Aren't you worried about the political consequences?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: No. There's a lot of people running
for reelection. And when you're up for reelection, anybody that
says something to you that's unhappy, you're all with him.
I want to see the Republican Party stay hitched to the
President. He's the first President we've had in many, many, many
years that makes sense to the American people.
GERMOND: But he's developing an image as being unfair
to the poor, of polarizing black Americans, of being too hard-
line. Isn't that a thing that,bothers you?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: That doesn't bother me because it's
not true. If you don't have good big business in this country,,
you don't have good -business any place. If you don't have full
employment of whites, you don't have full employment or even
partial employment of blacks.
HERMAN: But getting back to the Senate, Senator Gold-
water, is the Republican Party hitched to the President when it
goes off on the social programs, abortion, busing, things of that
sort?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: I don't think they're hitched to
him when they try to get around and pass social programs by cir-
cumventing the Constitution., That is not a conservative position.
It's not a Republican position. It sounds more to me like some-
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9
thing that, bless his soul, Hubert Humphrey would have suggested.
JONES: Human Events, which is a newspaper that's been
the voice of conservatism over the years, has suggeste that _
haps you no longer should have the title of Mr. Conservative ofr
American politics.. How do you react to that?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: Oh, it doesn't bother me a bit.
I'm a conservative. I get a hundred percent rating every time
they rate anything.
I think when history is written, men like Bob Taft and
myself will probably be called, along with Tom Jefferson, one of,
my heroes, the real liberals in this country. Of course, I won't
be around to enjoy that.
JONES: What effect is the Moral Majority having on
the American political system?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: I don't -- I think the Moral Maj-
ority has every right to do what they're doing. I don't agree
with everything they're doing. I don't agree with anybody, any
group telling me what my morals should be.
I don't think they have much political clout anymore.
They're good, decent people, but they just got off on the wrong
track.
GERMOND: I gather you're not prepared to go along with
a constitutional amendment on abortion.
SENATOR GOLDWATER: Not at all.
GERMOND: That means you're going to lose your hundred
percent rating with the conservatives, eh?
SENATOR GOLDWATER: Well, I probably will. But I'll
keep my hundred percent, rating with my wife.
[Laughter]
HERMAN: How about a constitutional amendment on bal-
ancing the budget?_
SENATOR GOLDWATER: Well, I think it's Impractical. If
we haven't been abl.e to balance the budget any more than we have
in the last 40 or 50 years, a constitutional amendment isn't going
to help.
HERMAN: Okay. Thank you very much, Senator Goldwater,
for being our guest today on'Face the Nation.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/06: CIA-RDP90-00552R000202230087-9