May 28, 1984
The President's Trip to Ireland
Mr. Farrell. Good evening. Welcome to ``Today-Tonight,'' the Library, White House,
Washington, DC. On Friday, the President of the United States, Ronald Reagan, begins his
European tour with a state visit to Ireland.
Mr. President, it's not your first visit to Ireland, of course. It is your first visit as President and in
an election year. So, is it a sentimental journey? Is it electioneering?
The President. Well, it is true, I have been there more than once in a previous occupation when I
was a performer in the entertainment business, and then, subsequently, when I was Governor --
and when you and I met, when I was sent there by President Nixon on a mission for him. Actually,
I would be going even if I were not a candidate, so it isn't a part of an election process. But I'm
accepting an invitation that was first made by former Prime Minister Haughey and repeated by
your present Prime Minister FitzGerald when he was here.
But there is another reason, a personal reason, why I'm going, also. I have known I would be
going one day because up until I became President I had no knowledge of my father's family
beyond him and his parents. He was orphaned at less than 6 years of age. So, he had no
knowledge of his family roots. And I must say, the people of Ireland and the Government of
Ireland have been very kind and generous, and I found when I arrived here in this job that they
had gone to great lengths and have traced our family roots and found that Ballyporeen is the
locale and so forth.
So, I've always known I was going to have to go there. I want to go there.
Mr. Farrell. But it's not going to do you any harm in an election year. So, how important is that
Irish American constituency anymore?
The President. Well, I want the vote of all the Americans that I can get, and obviously, the Irish
Americans constitute quite a sizable block in our country. There is a rich history of the millions of
them that we have. I'm one of them. So, of course, I would like to have their approval, but I'm not
making this trip for that purpose. I think that their votes will be based on their belief in whether I
should be President for 4 more years or not.
Mr. Farrell. You're coming to us after the New Ireland Forum has finally reported. The Congress
is already giving its backing to that report. What's your view of the findings of the report?
The President. Of the report?
Mr. Farrell. The Forum -- The New Ireland Forum.
The President. Oh. Well, I think that Prime Minister FitzGerald said it very eloquently, and that
was that it was a practical agenda for a meeting of the minds and discussion. And I think so, too.
But I believe to go beyond that would be presumptuous of me.
This is a problem to be settled there between not only the Governments of England and Ireland
but also of the people in the north and the people of the south. They, too, must be considered, and
their wishes -- and I hope and pray we can find a solution that will bring peace.
Mr. Farrell. So, you wouldn't be proposing to pick up Mr. Haughey's suggestion that, in fact, the
United States might intervene at this date?
The President. I don't think it's our place to do that.
Mr. Farrell. But will you be raising it with Mrs. Thatcher, for instance, in seeking -- using your
good offices to encourage her at least to begin a process of further discussion?
The President. Well, I confess to a curiosity, knowing her well, about this proposal from the
Forum that has been made, and a curiosity as to how she sees it and how she feels about it. And I
could possibly ask a question about that.
Mr. Farrell. Mr. President, many Irish Americans still see what goes on in Northern Ireland as a
freedom fight. They see the IRA not as terrorists, but as people to be supported. Can they be
persuaded they're wrong on that?
The President. Well, I think that there is a fraction of the IRA that is revealed now, mainly what is
called the Provisional IRA, that is not the IRA of the glorious days of the fight for freedom and
that it has all the attributes of a terrorist organization. At the same time, I think that there is an
element of the same on the other side of that.
I have a feeling myself that the majority of people, on both sides of the border out there would
want, and do want, a peaceful solution, but that possibly, on both sides of the border, there is a
problem about voicing that because of fear of the more radical elements. And that, if it's true --
that's a tragedy, and there must be a solution found.
Central America
Mr. Farrell. Mr. President, as you know, there are people in Ireland who are objecting already to
your visit. In particular they feel that your stand on Central America has not supported justice
sufficiently. How do you feel about the likelihood of those protests?
The President. I feel that they're misinformed. We know that Cuba and the Soviet Union have
vast, worldwide disinformation machineries -- or machines -- in which they can give out
misinformation to the media, to organizations and groups and so forth. I'm sure that many of
those people, if there are people demonstrating on this issue -- I'm sure they're probably sincere
and well-intentioned. But I don't think that they know the situation.
Now, we've had a case here in which, with the three elections that have taken place, bipartisan
groups of our Congress and others have gone down there, in addition to the bipartisan
commission I appointed under Dr. Kissinger, to go down to Central America. When they come
back from viewing those elections -- many of these Congressmen have gone down openly
admitting they're like those people that would want to demonstrate, they think we're on the wrong
side -- they have come back completely converted by what they saw.
We've got a situation where, for decades and decades or even centuries, in Central America and
Latin America, generally, we've had revolutions in which it's simply one group of leaders being
overthrown by another group of leaders who want to take over and be in charge and the dictators.
Some years ago, there was an overthrow of a military dictatorship in El Salvador. And the
government that was set up then became kind of the same type of military thing. And then a man
named Duarte, who was President after that first overthrow, was exiled, was -- well, first was
imprisoned, was tortured, was exiled even though he'd been chosen as President. He has now
returned, and the people overwhelmingly have elected him as their choice for President.
Now, how anyone could not believe that he is going to be determined to enforce civil rights, and
if there is -- well, first of all, he's picking up something that has already been vastly improved
under the existing government already there, which was elected by the people. We've had three
elections in 26 months there, and in each one of them, a greater proportion of their people turned
out for that election than turns out for an election in the United States.
Mr. Farrell. But, of course, it's mandatory to vote.
The President. Not really. As a matter of fact, they had something like about a $20 fine if you
didn't vote. But these teams of observers of ours went down; they couldn't find anyone that ever
worried about that or that thought that it would ever be enforced -- whether they did or not.
But they did find an overwhelming enthusiasm on the part of the people. When a woman stands in
the line for hours, waiting her turn to vote, and has been wounded by the guerrillas, whose slogan
was, ``Vote today, and die tonight,'' and she refused to leave the line for medical treatment of her
bullet wound until she had voted -- she wouldn't take the chance of missing the opportunity to
vote.
Now, the guerrillas -- the government offered amnesty. The government offered for them to put
down their guns and come in and participate -- submit candidates for office and all -- in the
electoral process, and the guerrillas turned that down.
By the same token, in Nicaragua, the Sandinista government -- which is as totalitarian as anything
in Cuba or the Soviet Union -- indeed, they are the puppets of Cuba and the Soviet Union -- that
government, the so-called freedom fighters there -- or if they prefer to call them guerrillas -- they
are former revolutionaries who were aligned with the Sandinistas in the revolution to overthrow
the authoritarian government of Somoza. And once they were in, the Sandinistas, which is the, as
I say, totalitarian element, Communist element, they got rid of their allies in the revolution and
have broken every promise that the revolutionaries -- when it was still going on -- made to the
Organization of American States as to free elections, human rights, freedom of the press, freedom
of religion.
The present Government of Nicaragua -- right now, the Catholic bishops are protesting as far as
they can, at the risk of great persecution -- they embarrassed one bishop by parading him through
the streets of the capital naked. Now, the Archbishop of San Salvador has been quoted by this
disinformation network here and there as being one who wants America to stop lending aid,
military aid, to the Government of El Salvador. He has refuted that. He has denied that and said
no. He knows that the others -- the guerrillas -- are getting outside support, and he knows from
whence it comes. And he has said, no, he does not want us to leave.
So, the program we have is one in which three out of four dollars will go to help establish a
democratic economy and society in El Salvador, and only one dollar is going in military aid. You
can't have social reforms in a country while you're getting your head shot off by guerrillas.
Mr. Farrell. But your critics, Mr. President -- your critics here in the United States, your critics in
Europe, your critics in Ireland -- don't see, necessarily, Nicaragua and El Salvador quite in the
same way. There are those who've come back and who've said Nicaragua isn't as repressive as it
looks. There are those who say American aid going in to the guerrillas there strengthens and
toughens that government.
The President. How do they explain, then, the Miskito Indians, which, even under the Somoza
authoritarian government, were allowed to have their own communities, their own culture and
religion and so forth, and almost upon taking office, the Sandinista government marched its forces
into those Miskito villages, burned their crops, burned their homes, their villages, and then
confined as many as they could in concentration camps? But thousands of them fled across the
borders. Now, we know an awful lot about some of those Miskitos, because some of our medical
personnel in our military are helping taking care of them where they are in refugee camps in
Honduras.
All I can suggest to some of these people who are saying this in Europe and who have evidently
been propagandized is -- and I don't mean this to sound presumptuous -- but is there any one of
them that has access to all the information that the President of the United States has? I'm not
doing this because I've got a yen to involve ourselves or spend some money. But I do know that
when the Sandinista -- well, the revolution won in Nicaragua, the previous administration
immediately set out to help them -- financial aid to that government. And it was only a few days
before my inauguration when that administration had irrefutable evidence that the Nicaraguan
Government was supplying arms and materiel to the guerrillas in El Salvador, attempting to
overthrow a duly elected government that was trying to be a democracy. And he put a hold on
any further help.
Now, we came into office a few days later, and we still had to find out for ourselves. We thought
if there is a possibility of negotiating some kind of a settlement -- and so, on that basis, we
renewed the aid -- financial aid that was going to them and tried to deal with them. By April we
had found out that, no, there was no honor, no honesty. They were totalitarian, but more than
that, they openly declared that their revolution knows no boundaries, that they are only the
beginning of what they intend to be further revolution throughout all of Latin America.
Mr. Farrell. Would that, nevertheless, justify mining ports?
The President. Those were homemade mines that couldn't sink a ship. But let me ask you this.
Right now, there is a Bulgarian ship unloading tanks and armored personnel carriers at a port in
Nicaragua. That is the fifth such Bulgarian ship in the last 18 months. Just a week or two ago,
there were Soviet ships in there unloading war materiel. Now, the Nicaraguan Government -- the
Sandinista government is funneling this through to the guerrillas in El Salvador. Indeed, the
headquarters for the guerrilla movement in El Salvador is only a few miles from the capital of
Nicaragua, in Nicaragua where the strategy is planned and the direction of their revolution is
taking place.
Now, it seems to me that if you're going to justify people trying to bring this present Nicaraguan
Government back to the original promise of the revolution, to modify its totalitarian stand, and
you're going, at the same time -- and one of the reasons we were offering help is to interdict those
arms and weapons that were going to the El Salvador guerrillas, but you know that a flood of that
materiel is coming in through the ports and being unloaded, that you're going to try to think of a
way to interdict that.
And those were homemade mines, as I say, that couldn't sink a ship. They were planted in those
harbors where they were planted by the Nicaraguan rebels. And I think that there was much ado
about nothing.
U.S.-Soviet Relations
Mr. Farrell. Mr. President, you have an image problem, don't you? You said it in your press
conference last week that people think you've got an itchy finger.
The President. Yeah.
Mr. Farrell. Many people in Europe see you as a cold warrior. They see you as the man who
started your Presidential years talking about the empire of evil. They see you as the President
who, at this stage, is not involved in disarmament talks with the Soviet Union.
The President. But we didn't walk away from the table, did we? -- the disarmament table. They
did.
And let me point something out. There have been some 19 efforts by our country since World
War II to enlist the Soviets into talks to talk about disarmament -- the reduction of arms and the
control of weapons. It was this country that, as far back as 1946, when we were the only ones
who had a nuclear weapon, we made a proposal that an international commission be appointed to
take charge of all nuclear materiel, all weapons turned over to them. The Soviet Union hadn't
even completed one yet, but they turned down that proposal.
I am the first one since 1946 who has gone to the bargaining table and proposed the total
elimination of the intermediate-range weapons system in Europe, and they wouldn't listen. So, we
said, ``All right. We still think that's the best idea -- to free Europe of this threat. But we will then
talk to you about what figure would you suggest that we could reduce the numbers to, to at least
reduce the size of the threat.'' And their reponse is to walk away from the table.
Now, I think that -- I know that the relations are bad right now.
Mr. Farrell. Very bad?
The President. Yes -- well, not all that bad. They're maybe more unhappy than they've been in the
past. But I think one of the reasons for that is that in the past, the Soviet Union has seen this
country unilaterally disarm, cancel weapons systems such as the B - 1 and other systems, close
down our Minuteman missile assembly line. We don't even have the facility to make them
anymore. And they've seen that while they were doing -- while we were doing that, with some
idea that maybe they would see we meant no threat and, therefore, they would follow suit -- no,
they continued with the biggest military buildup in the history of man.
Now, how can anyone -- what I started to say, I guess, is that, sure, they're unhappy. They're
unhappy because they see that we're preparing to defend ourselves if need be.
Mr. Farrell. Many West Europeans are very unhappy, though, because they see the danger that if
the confrontation happens, if you don't get to talks in some shape or form, it is Europe where that
war will be fought.
The President. Yes, but also there's some 300,000 American troops there which are an indication
of our standing by them in the alliance.
They have lived almost 40 years now, since World War II, under an umbrella which has kept
peace, and that umbrella is our nuclear capability in this country. I know that there are
demonstrators, and I know that there are people that are influenced by the Soviet-sponsored
World Peace Council, but I don't think our alliance in Europe has ever been stronger than it is
today.
But, as I say, I think the Soviets -- sure, they're unhappy because they liked it the other way when
under a kind of detente, they were having things their own way. Now they know that we're not
going to make ourselves vulnerable, as was done before. But they also know that we're willing
anytime they want to sit down, we are willing to start reducing these weapons. And my ultimate
goal is -- I think common sense dictates it -- the world must rid itself of all nuclear weapons.
There must never be a nuclear war. It can't -- shouldn't be fought, and it can't be won.
Mr. Farrell. When do you think that might happen? When do you think the process, the talks
might begin?
The President. I don't know. We have kept the door open on any number of other negotiations.
We've been doing business with them on some things of interest to them as well as us, and with
some progress being made. It is only in this area -- they did come back to the mutual balanced
force -- the conventional arms treaty, and we are discussing with them, as well as others, at the
Stockholm disarmament talks. But it is on those two, the major nuclear weapons -- the START
talks, as we call them, and the intermediate-range weapons -- where they are being
intransigent.
Mr. Farrell. What about the boycott on the Olympics? Many people see this symbolically as just
that further little bit of evidence of the Soviet Union and the United States pulling further
apart.
The President. Well, I know that no one can really understand or fathom the thinking of the
Politburo, the people in the Politburo of the Soviet Union, but I would hazard two ideas that stick
in my mind as possibly an explanation for what they've done. One is retaliation for the boycott --
--
Mr. Farrell. 1980.
The President. -- -- President Carter, in those Olympics when it was their Olympics. Number
two, frankly, I think they don't want to be embarrassed by having revered athletes in their country
come to this country and decide to stay.
Persian Gulf
Mr. Farrell. Different part of the world very much in the news this week -- the Gulf. We're
obviously teetering into a crisis there. Do you see, Mr. President, the possibility of a direct
American involvement?
The President. Well, so far, it doesn't seem to be. The Gulf States have themselves said that this is
their problem, and they want to deal with it. Some have asked for some military assistance in the
sense of weaponry, and this is why we are sending some weapons, some Stinger weapons, to
them and possibly augmenting our little squadron of tankers that are there. We have four there
presently -- have had for quite some time. That could be expanded to six. But they have not asked
us to intervene, and certainly, we have not offered to intervene.
Mr. Farrell. Do you see this as essentially an American problem, or is it a problem for the West?
Is this something that either regionally should be picked up by the Gulf States, or is it something
that the Western alliance should come in, that you should stand back from?
The President. Well, if it comes to a complete shutdown of the sources of oil in the Middle East,
this is a Western problem, and far more than for us. Actually, only about 3 percent of our oil
comes from the Persian -- or by way of the Persian Gulf. Many of our allies are not in that
advantageous a position. They are very dependent on that. And I have said previously that I don't
see how the Western World could let that be closed down. But at the moment, the Gulf States
who are directly involved and who are on the firing line there believe that the problem can be
solved and without outside interference.
Middle East
Mr. Farrell. What about the Middle East? You, after all, tried the Reagan plan in terms of
resolving the West Bank problem. Do you see now a possibility of somehow coming to a
reconciliation of Israel with its Arab neighbors?
The President. This is what we have to continue to try. We have never given up on that. It was set
back by the inability to get a solution in Lebanon. It seemed impossible to go forward with that
while, for example, Israel itself was engaged in combat in Lebanon. But, ultimately, the solution,
as I have put it, is we must find more Egypts. We must -- and our job is to convince our Arab
friends over there that we can be evenhanded and that we're not seeking to dictate a settlement of
any kind, but that they must be prepared to sit down -- and the Israelis at the same time to sit
down -- and negotiate out an end to a war situation in which there are countries that have still said
they do not recognize Israel's right to exist.
Now, we have been supportive of Israel since 1948 and continue to be, but we also believe that,
rather than our Arab friends and the Israelis continuing to exist in armed camps, it is time to do
what the Government of Egypt did a few years ago and make peace.
Views on the Presidency
Mr. Farrell. Mr. President, you're constantly being asked to do the impossible. You're being asked
to intervene and not intervene. You're being asked, for instance, in Ireland to make an
intervention in regard to the trial of a priest there in Manila. You're being asked to do something
about Qadhafi. Can you do anything in these areas.
The President. Well, we can't do all of the things that people suggest. I think we've taken action
with regard to Qadhafi. We removed many of our people, as you know, and recognized him for
what he is. You mention the Irish priest in the Philippines. I do not know the details of that. I have
only recently heard about that, but we've had a longstanding relationship, dating back to the --
when we were the protector of the Philippines, with that government. And if there is any way in
which we could be of help in that, we'd be pleased to do it.
Mr. Farrell. Mr. President, we're in a library in the White House, surrounded by the lives of
American Presidents. Most of them, in the long haul of history, are remembered for one thing, one
speech, one decision. What do you want to go down in history for doing?
The President. I know that's a question that comes up every once in a while. I find it rather
difficult to think that way or think about yourself in history. I guess, if they just said I did my best,
I might be pleased with that.
Mr. Farrell. But your priorities -- after all, you're expecting to run into a second term. This is the
time for you to do things. You said last week that the top priority is disarmament. Do you think
you can achieve action in that over the next 4 years?
The President. I have to believe I can, because I don't think the world can go on this way. And
we're going to try. Yes, if I had to say one thing that we would be aiming for -- that I would be
aiming for as mine -- it is our country continuing along the path that was set so many years ago
with its goal the ultimate in individual liberty and freedom consistent with an orderly society; with
a government that is the servant of the people, not the master; and with peace throughout the
world.
Mr. Farrell. The United States began with a revolution, with a message for the rest of the world.
Mightn't some people argue that you've run out of steam, that, when they look at Central
America, they look at the North-South debate, they look at the inequality of resources, they look
at your richness and what you've got -- they wonder whether you can really appeal to the poor
people of the world effectively?
The President. I think we can. I remember that when World War II ended, Pope Pius XII said the
Americans, the American people, ``have a genius for great and unselfish deeds. Into the hands of
America, God has placed an afflicted mankind.'' And we were the only nation that was left
untouched by war, that still had our industrial power and all, had not been bombed and fought
over and so forth. And we turned our resources to helping reestablish not only the wartorn
countries on our side but our enemies as well. And we have lived to see those former enemies
close allies with us today, and democracies, living up to all the principles that we have believed in
for so long.
I don't think America's run out of gas at all. I think there are great challenges out there before us.
And even though some people are criticizing what we tried to do in Beirut, we were there on an
errand of peace, seeking peace, and I'm not going to be ashamed of that. We didn't succeed.
There were some advances made, and maybe that was one of the reasons why the terrorism
started against the multinational force was because they were succeeding.
But, no, where there's a chance to bring peace -- our relationship with our Latin American
neighbors -- I made a trip down there shortly after I got into office to tell them that my desire was
that I think we'd been insensitive in the past. We haven't recognized that maybe we looked like the
big colossus; and we were suggesting ideas with the best of intentions, but it was us telling them.
And I went down to tell them, ``Look, we're all partners, we're all neighbors. Let's exchange ideas
and find out how we can all be better neighbors here in this hemisphere.''
Mr. Farrell. Finally, Mr. President, any doubts that it will be you in the White House for the next 4
years?
The President. Oh, now, you've touched on a superstitious point with me. I find it impossible to
speculate or suggest that I am going to win. I think it jinxes me if I do that. So, I'm always going
to behave as if I'm one vote behind. I'll run scared.
Mr. Farrell. Mr. President, thank you very kindly for talking to us.
And that's all from this edition of ``Today-Tonight,'' from the Library, White House, Washington,
DC. Good night.
Note: The interview began at 3:40 p.m. in the Library at the White House. It was recorded for
broadcast in Ireland on May 29, the date the transcript was released by the Office of the Press
Secretary.