All the Best, George Bush: My Life in Letters and Other Writings
Page 25
But I want to top off this 1 1/2 hour picnic with a first-class U.S. film at the International Club theater just 3 blocks from here.
Can you recommend (not furnish, honest) any great American films depicting either the revolution itself or something unmistakably American. The film should be good entertainment. It needn’t be new. It should show our country in its true light—favorable.
It occurred to me that with the 200th year coming up some good films must have already been produced that would serve our purpose.
If there is no film depicting the revolution what might you recommend that would fill the bill? Oklahoma, Carousel, That’s Entertainment come to mind; but I’m sure I’m missing something great.
I hate to impose but I’d really like to have your ideas on this.
National Day receptions here are deadly. There are a lot of reasons why I think this year is a good one for us to do something different than the dreary standing-whiskey at the Peking Hotel.
Love to Mary Margaret. . . .
Yours very truly,
George Bush
We had many visitors while we lived in China because we wanted to share our wonderful experience with our friends. Among them were Dillon Ripley, head of the Smithsonian Institution, and Paul Austin, CEO of Coca-Cola.
March 15, 1975
I had to work. Bar went off sightseeing with the guests. Paul Austin and I took a walk to the Friendship Store, Austin not having heard from the three Chinese we requested he see on business. But Friday the 14th we went to the zoo. Dillon Ripley was disappointed in the zoo and he also thought the zoo was well below standards of any other international zoo. He asked about the musk ox.34 There were supposed to be two of them and there was only one there. We had requested to see three zoo people. None were available. I mentioned to Mr. Liu I thought it was a little unusual because when the Chinese zoo people had come they had been given the run of Washington, and I thought it was a little peculiar that we had never heard from them. Saturday noon I get a note from Mr. Liu saying that all three zoo people were out of Peking. We are speculating that the main reason for the failure to go to the zoo was either the condition of the zoo or possibly the dead musk ox. Probably the latter . . .
Pouch—we are missing mail all the time, and it is hard to explain to people in the States what this means. I remember in the Navy wondering where is our mail, where is our mail, but it is the same kind of feeling. But here we are thirty years later. You think it could be done better. But it simply reminds me of our isolation here. . . .
Saw the Ripleys and the Austins off at the airport at noon. . . . I believe they had a good time. We discovered the following day that the musk ox, Milton, had died. We were officially notified by the Chinese. The mystery is solved.
Three pouches came in on March 17. We have had hell with these pouches. Some mail was dated February 5, some as late as March 5. We have a small post and a tough area and yet we seem to be on the tail end of things. We get the worn out films, it is hard to keep maintenance on old stuff around here and I get the feeling that because it is a small outfit, this wheel seems to get less grease. . . .
Today in front of USLO on March 18 the whole school down the street was out for drilling—marching to command etc., getting ready, I guess, for the May 1 big day. We keep getting various reports of struggles in provinces around China. There are fewer here apparently. When people are caught, they are publicly humiliated etc., led around with signs around their necks. I have still seen no crime first-hand. I did see a couple of Chinese who looked like they were getting pretty crocked at a reception but good god that can happen any place.
Spent the afternoon getting caught up—digesting the mail from the three pouches. Our children are doing great. The letters from all of them are mature, sensitive—they are doing well in their work, no drugs, no dope, no crime, no troubles. We should knock on wood. I think it would be awful to be way over here and have family problems where you’d want to be home helping out. . . .
Word travels in this city. Nancy Tang mentioned, “You’re having many guests.” Why would she, a rather high official, know this. Chiao Kuan Hua, the Foreign Minister, mentions, “I hear you won a prize in tennis.” Hsu Huang, head of the DSB,35 mentioned, “I understand you gave some books to our people on tennis.” The zoo logs us in. Barbara spots the same guy watching twice when she’s at the Ming Tombs. In a way it is comforting. In a way it is rather eerie.
March 18th
Dear Pete [Roussel],36
John Burns a great guy who writes for the Globe and Mail (and will be leaving soon to work for the Times in NY) is doing a ‘Cover’ story for People Magazine. He has been running around taking pictures, jumping out from behind trees to shoot us on our bikes, going to the zoo, then he will pose us at the Forbidden City for what he says they want as a cover shot. It is ‘lifestyle’ in Peking kind of thing . . .
For your info only. If the Texas Gov thing in ’78 made any sense at all I’d maybe take a look at it hard—Go back to Houston after the ’76 elections, win or lose for Republicans, involve myself in academia and business, move around the state plenty and try one last gasp for ’78 keeping in mind that I wouldn’t do it unless there was a possibility of taking a shot at something bigger in ’80—not necessarily on the latter, but having it way off dimly in the future. Just a reminiscence—not a hard thought, certainly not a plan at this point. As you know well a GOP Gov in our State is tough.
. . . Maine—maybe maybe maybe. Bar, I will insist, goes there for August. She’s got to hold this gang of ours together. They are all doing good but Maine for us is like a magnet—we are drawn to it, and I want it to be that way for all our kids, forever. If she goes for August I may try to get up there for two weeks end of August. . . .
Best,
GB
The State Department “slapped my hands” for inviting too many members of Congress to visit us in China, and a few months later, they would do the same when I invited my fellow East Asian ambassadors to visit me in Peking. Everyone wanted to come, but without an invitation to come as our personal guests, it was next to impossible to get a visa. I think the State Department wanted more say on who got invited. My response:
March 20, 1975
Honorable William H. Gleysteen, Jr.37
Department of State
Washington, DC 20520
Dear Bill:
I appreciate very much the spirit of your letter of March 12th.
I served in the Congress for four years and served as Chairman of our Party for two years. Thus many of my closest personal friends happen to be members of the House and Senate—not professional friends, close personal friends. When I left Washington at one of several going away parties I naturally said to these people “come see us” and I meant it. Frankly, I think it would be very useful to have them do just that. I cannot conceive of any member of Congress that I invited doing anything that would embarrass our policy but I can see how some might understand it a little better.
The Roth38 visit will be pure sightseeing. He and Jane, his wife, are attending a Tokyo Conference and he asked if he might come to Peking for two or three days to look around. I will try not to set up any appointments with Chinese officials for him. Indeed I don’t know at this writing whether they will even give him a visa.
In the future, I will simply advise members of the House and Senate that I am not free to invite them without their first getting approval of the Secretary of State. However, I would strongly urge that this be carefully thought out back there. I do understand congress pretty well, and I do not believe this would be understood very well on the Hill.
Perhaps I am overreacting to the Secretary’s expression of “concern”. In short if it is a firm decision I will abide by it, but I want to be clearly on record as disagreeing with it. I will do my best to see that it causes no problems but if pressed I will simply tell the truth and say that I am not free to invite members of Congress without prior State Department approval.
Yours very truly,
George Bush
March 25, 1975
Mr. John A. Schneider,
President of CBS Broadcast Group,
New York, N. Y. 10019
Dear Mr. Schneider:
. . . Peking is “entertainment starved”. There is no way to overstate this. Visitors who come here for brief visits have so much to see and absorb, so many fascinating banquets to attend, so much jet lag to overcome that they do not focus on the totality of our isolation from what we Americans consider entertainment.
I am convinced that if we get some up-to-date entertainment that can be shown on our VTR TV set it will serve three main purposes:
It will help morale in our rather isolated post.
It will maximize the effectiveness of our representation with other diplomats.
It will help us find a way to possibly increase our contacts with the Chinese.
The kinds of tapes we would like to have might include:
Sporting events—for example, a bowl game, tennis matches, a basketball classic
Movies—I think particularly of something like Brian’s Song.
I mention this one because if we had five or six couples
watching in the relative closeness of TV it would create
an atmosphere of intimacy that would help particularly
in our diplomatic contacts.
Specials—those superbly done CBS specials would be just great
Miscellaneous—just pure serial type entertainment shows from time to time would be most welcome
. . . I realize that what I have requested is most unusual, and I do not want to abuse my friendship with Mr. Paley39 in any way. However, I am convinced some special access to these cassettes will be especially productive given this very different environment. . . .
Very truly yours,
George Bush
Chief, US Liaison Office
TELEGRAM
FOR: OSCAR ARMSTRONG40
SUBJ: GIFT OF MUSK OX TO CHINESE
The more I think on it the more I like the idea of having the Chinese receive another ox from the US. Milty is dead but a young and virile Bullwinkle could do a lot of good for relations (diplomatic relations, that is).
Bush
For the United States, the Vietnam War had ended in 1973, but the war between North and South Vietnam had continued. The fighting came to a disastrous conclusion in April of 1975. As the North Vietnamese forces closed in on Saigon, we evacuated our embassy on April 29; South Vietnam officially surrendered on April 30.
April 29, 1975
Went to the National Day Reception for the Netherlands and there I heard, not through the State Department telegrams but through gossip at a reception, that the big, big men in Vietnam had surrendered. . . . The Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese embassies are bedecked in flags and having understandable celebrations. Firecrackers are heard. It is a rather sad thing and you can sense the hostility and certainly the tension when I walk by certain groups at these receptions. John Small of Canada made an interesting comment. It is important that the U.S. stand firm in Korea, and it is important that this slide and decline be halted. It is important that these people stand for something. Where is our ideology? Where is our principle? What indeed do we stand for? These things must be made clear, and the American people must understand that, as soon as America doesn’t stand for something in the world, there is going to be a tremendous erosion of freedom. It is true. It is very true. And yet it is awful hard to convince people of it at home, I am sure. I am a little annoyed about getting nothing from the State Department, hearing about the surrender . . . from a drinking party. . . .
May First today, but April 30 I guess ends up as a gloomy day. A lot of dust in the air. And all in all not a happy time, but we are big enough and strong enough so we can regroup, redefine and move forward. A lot of human tragedy there. A lot of loss of life. . . .
June 4, 1975
. . . There is no credit in this work, but I think it is an accumulative thing and you’ve got to keep digging. I’ve tried to give the right impression of America here—not too formal. We have a good organized staff, tried to move around in the diplomatic community, tried to increase our contacts with the Chinese, tried to have interesting people from the States here, and tried to learn and make suggestions to Washington. Beyond this though, it is hard to “do” anything. And yet I wouldn’t trade it for England, Paris or any of the other posts. The others get more notoriety, and Elliot’s [Richardson] publicity is good I think out of England, but I think this is more substantive in one sense and certainly more interesting. A beautiful letter from Jeb about the problems of Columba adjusting, how much he loves her, how marvelous she is, and what she needs is self-confidence. It was a thoughtful, sensitive piece—an attractive kid who has got it all. I just hope he is fully happy because, knowing him and his sensitivity, he would be deeply hurt if she was ever hurt.
Hurray, George arrives tomorrow . . .
FOR THE PRESIDENT FROM GEORGE BUSH
THRU: GENERAL SCOWCROFT41 ONLY
Brent, please pass the following to the President. I hope it will be shared only with SecState and not be passed to NSC staff or Department. It is pure politics, but I feel strongly about it.
Dear Mr. President:
. . . The Taiwan issue is on the back burner right now as it relates to domestic politics. I am very concerned that as your trip to China approaches this will change dramatically. Your own personal interests dictate that serious thought be given to what is possible from a purely political standpoint.
Answers to the Taiwan question that may have been possible before the collapse in Cambodia and Viet Nam may no longer be any answers at all. I would strongly suggest the following:
(a) An in-depth poll be taken to measure public opinion on various solutions to the Taiwan question (the last poll, I believe, was by Gallup late last year). The poll should probe into opinion of conservatives and liberals and should sound out attitudes towards various solutions. Obviously this polling should be done in great confidence and commissioned by outside sources.
(b) An in-depth research job be done on what the conservatives in the US have said and are likely to say on this issue. A similar study should be undertaken on what the leading Democrats have been saying. N.B.: It seems to me that your political problems arising from this issue are quite different pre-GOP convention compared to post-GOP convention.
(c) Thought be given as to how to keep this issue from building into a major weapon for your opponents be they Republican or Democrat. Some will try to paint a China visit without a final solution to Taiwan as a diplomatic failure, an inability to solve the tough problems. Others, particularly the right wing, will soon start criticizing the visit itself and will be on guard to immediately criticize any concessions as a sellout of Taiwan.
In this communication I am not attempting to go into the foreign policy merits of China options. I firmly believe, however, that your coming to Peking this year, whatever the concrete results, is the right thing to do. What is done at this stage to assess the politics of the visit should be separate from the foreign policy machinery and not in any way inhibit the thinking and planning which undoubtedly is going forward at the State Department and NSC. I am suggesting that a trusted confidant who would not be involved with this planning be encouraged to think out the domestic political implications of your China visit.
I have already discussed with the State Department my concern that work need be done fairly soon to minimize expectations. Many journalists are saying, “The President can’t possibly go to China without solving the Taiwan problem.” It is to your advantage to have this talk dampened, so that expectations be realistic not euphoric and that a visit that does not solve the big Taiwan problem will not, post facto, be considered a diplomatic failure.
Pardon my intrusion on your busy schedule, but, based on my own political past, I worry that this issue can build into a political nightmare u
nless a lot of pure political thought gets into it soon.
Barbara and I are happy out here. We feel we are most fortunate to be in this fascinating job in this fascinating land.
Warmest regards to Betty.
Sincerely,
George
[Twenty-four years later, the Taiwan “problem” is still not solved. I felt back then as I feel now—that this issue will be resolved, but by the Chinese on both sides of the straits—not by outsiders.]
June 12, 1975
Doro, Marvin and Neil arrived along with a small industry delegation. They looked great, giggling, bubbling over with enthusiasm—having enjoyed Honolulu, tired, not seen anything of Tokyo, only one night there and into Peking. They were great. They rushed down and played basketball, rode down to the Great Square. Marvin played tennis with Te and then off we went to the Soup Restaurant where we had eel and they all loved that. Neil Mallon42 bought the dinner and it was all pretty good.
June 24, 1975
Oscar Armstrong, Esq.,
Department of State,
Washington, D. C. 20520
Dear Oscar:
I am sending you excerpts from a June 10 letter to me from Dillon Ripley of the Smithsonian Institute on the question of finding a replacement Musk Ox for the deceased Milton. I find his arguments against providing a replacement persuasive. As you know, I originally favored a replacement Ox, but now I am not in favor. I frankly don’t know where this question stands back there and whether or not people are clamoring to send a replacement Ox. It would not be appropriate for President Ford to bring an Ox with him, and probably not an appropriate gift for the Chinese at all.