The General's Views

Though Alexander Haig's opinions on foreign policy are not widely known, he has expressed his thoughts emphatically in recent speeches and interviews on some of the main issues he will confront as Secretary of State: On

Relations with the Soviets. What we are observing is the consequence of 15 years of increased military spending by the Soviet leadership. Clearly, the task ahead for us is the management of Soviet power. We can no longer view every deleterious event that occurs in the context of Soviet duplicity. But we cannot refrain from challenging illegal, blatant Soviet intervention creating terror and blackmail in the Third World. On Soviet Intentions. The next

generation of Soviet leadership will inevitably be less conscious of the great Soviet sacrifices of World War II. It will be increasingly paranoid and more conscious of its power, while presiding over increasing failures within its own country. It will be threatened by centrifugal pressures in areas that are under Soviet hegemony. It may be tempted to strike out overseas to compensate for its troubles at home. On Detente. It cannot be, and never has

been, a substitute for strength and unity, but rather the fruit of that endeavor; to the degree that it loses that backdrop of strength, it loses its utility for our purposes. We must tell the Soviets that we shall not agree to any more arms control talks or to any more credit transfers and commercial operations as long as they violate international law. On Western Europe. NATO will shortly find itself in an

unprecedented predicament. After decades of virtually absolute security beneath the American nuclear umbrella, the members of this alliance will soon be inferior to the Warsaw Pact in many crucial areas of military power. NATO will have to find the will and the resources to limit the duration of this perilous inferiority, or risk being defeated from its own underbelly, the source of its raw materials. Free of bullying and insensitivity, Washington must inspire, urge and cajole other NATO nations to make the decisions that will be neither straightforward nor easy.

On Latin America. The U.S. must not condone the idea that justice rests exclusively in the hands of those who seek change by resorting to bloodshed, terrorism and so-called wars of liberation. I would have hoped that somewhat more visionary treatment could have been given to Nicaraguan Dictator Anastasio Somoza--and whatever warts he and his regime manifested--without decapitation.

On Human Rights. America must be in the vanguard of the search for social justice not only here at home but globally. We cannot seek, however, to create mirror images of the U.S. in every developing area throughout the world. It neither serves the purpose of social justice nor the vital interests of America to pursue policies under the rubric of human rights that have the practical consequence of driving authoritarian regimes, traditionally friendly to the West, into totalitarian models where they will remain in a state of permanent animosity to the American people and their interests.

On Military Power. The best way to approach military power is to conceive of it in its essential role as guarantor of diplomatic success. A nation whose military power is mediocre will inevitably see its influence and its diplomatic effectiveness seriously diminished. Only a credible balance of military power, linked to a vigorous foreign policy, can ensure peace and stability.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.