March 22, 1974
Page 7870
PAUL H. NITZE
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, this morning's New York Times carries an article about the possible nomination of Mr. Paul H. Nitze to the position of Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs. According to this article, Secretary Schlesinger has recommended the nomination to the White House, but some of the President's advisers are deeply troubled by Senator GOLDWATER's announced opposition to Mr. Nitze. The allegation is made that these advisers are concerned primarily that to push through the Nitze nomination might so alienate Senator GOLDWATER and possibly other conservative Senators that it would affect their judgment on the issue of the President's removal from office.
Mr. President, I have known Senator GOLDWATER for a long time, and it is unthinkable that he would ever allow his judgment on an issue of such import – the President's possible removal from office – to be influenced by his personal disagreement on any policy issue or proposed nomination. If Senators are ever called upon to vote an impeachment trial, they will have to make the most judicious and thorough explanation of that vote. They will have to consider not only the evidence of Presidential misconduct, but also the difficult question of the proper grounds for impeachment. I know of no Senator who would ever consider that a proposed nomination – however adamantly he may oppose that nomination – is an appropriate reason for removing the President from office.
If members of the White House staff believe the President's defense can be conducted by a purely political strategy in the Congress, they are badly underestimating the quality of the Members of Congress and the deep sense of constitutional responsibility which all of us will feel when and if we are called upon to vote on impeachment or conviction.
Mr. President, I would also like to add a word about the particular issue of Mr. Nitze's nomination. Paul Nitze, during a long and distinguished career of Government service, has had the unusual distinction of arousing criticism and opposition from both the left and the right. In his most recent position as the representative of the Secretary of Defense on the SALT delegation, he has been criticized by many liberal observers for his advocacy of the "bargaining chip" approach to the negotiations, and his reputation as an especially tough and unyielding negotiator with scant faith in Soviet assurances of their peaceful intentions.
I have had occasion during the SALT talks to be briefed by Mr. Nitze and other members of the delegation in the Arms Control Subcommittee of the Foreign Relations Committee, which I chair. I have had my disagreements with Mr. Nitze on matters of negotiating strategy, and I would not be surprised to find some of my liberal colleagues joining Senator GOLDWATER in opposition to the Nitze nomination should it come before the Senate.
For my part, I would support this nomination, and I hope the President will forward it to the Senate for our consideration. I would support Mr. Nitze for this post not because I agree with his stand on particular issues for foreign policy and defense, but rather because he is among the most distinguished, experienced, and able individuals who have served in this administration. At a time when there is great uncertainty at home and abroad about the strength, stability, and integrity of our political leadership, it is essential to have men of the caliber of Secretary of State Kissinger and Secretary of Defense Schlesinger advising the President on our Nation's foreign policy and defense. Paul Nitze is a needed addition to our foreign policy and defense leadership today, and I hope the White House will have the courage to allow this nomination to come to the Senate.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the article appearing in this morning's New York Times be printed in the RECORD at this point.
There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
IMPEACHMENT POLITICS MAY COST NITZE PENTAGON POST
(By John W. Finney)
WASHINGTON, March 21.– Six weeks ago it appeared all but certain that Paul H. Nitze, a former Deputy Secretary of Defense, would be appointed to a high Pentagon post. Now it appears that Mr. Nitze has become a casualty of impeachment politics.
Defense Secretary James R. Schlesinger's personal recommendation that Mr. Nitze be made Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs was submitted to the White House in late January. Thus far, the White House has not sent the nomination to the Senate, and there is growing doubt in Pentagon circles that it will.
The White House delay on the nomination does not stem from any personal objections to Mr. Nitze, whom the Nixon Administration has previously endorsed by making him a senior member of the United States delegation to the strategic arms talks with the Soviet Union. Rather, the delay, according to officials, grows out of a White House concern to preserve a one-third minority in the Senate that could block the conviction of President Nixon if he is impeached by the House.
GESTURE TO GOLDWATER
Maintaining that blocking minority depends upon keeping the Senate conservatives in line behind the President. One of the key conservatives, particularly now that Senator James L. Buckley, Conservative-Republican of New York, has jumped the traces and demanded the resignation of Mr. Nixon, is Senator Barry Goldwater, Republican of Arizona.
The first indication that the Nitze nomination was running onto the shoals of impeachment politics came about three weeks ago when Senator Goldwater issued a statement saying he was "unalterably opposed" to Mr. Nitze, whom he identified with "a group interested in bringing about our unilateral disarmament."
In retrospect, Defense officials acknowledged that Mr. Schlesinger probably miscalculated in not first checking out the Nitze nomination with Senator Goldwater, but they also point out that impeachment politics was far removed from the Defense Secretary's mind when he proposed that Mr. Nitze be head of what is known as the Pentagon's "little State Department."
But after the Goldwater statement, according to officials, the implications of the Nitze nomination on the impeachment proceedings were raised by the White House, in particular by Bryce N. Harlow, a Presidential counselor who is coordinating the White House's Congressional strategy during the Watergate affairs.
As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee Senator Goldwater probably does not command the votes to block the Nitze nomination. If the White House wanted, therefore, it could probably push the nomination through.
But, according to officials, the White House calculates that the political price it would have to pay would be the potential alienation of Senator Goldwater and some of his conservative colleagues on the impeachment issue. As analyzed by White House officials, Senator Goldwater is so strongly opposed to Mr. Nitze that he could well switch on the impeachment issue if the White House insisted on proceeding with the nomination.
The difficulties with the Nitze nomination are cited by some high-ranking officials as an example of how the Watergate affair has circumscribed the Administration's political latitude on Capitol Hill and, in turn, enhanced the bargaining power of the conservatives.
Mr. Schlesinger, for example, finds himself caught in this political bind as he attempts to defend his defense budget in Congress.
Mr. Schlesinger, according to associates, still wants Mr. Nitze, who he feels would revitalize the Pentagon's "little State Department" and take some of the burden of international policy issues off his shoulders.
But Mr. Schlesinger has his own problems defending his budget and, according to associates, does not want to expend too much political capital on the Nitze nomination, particularly if it means alienating the conservatives who form the hard core of support for the Pentagon.
At the same time, the conservatives have found that they can increase their demands on the Pentagon. One political straw in the wind was the way Senator Goldwater hinted this week that he might oppose an increase in military aid to South Vietnam, which the Pentagon has insisted is urgently needed.