What JFK tried to do before his assassination w/Jeffrey Sachs | The Chris Hedges Report
Summary
TLDRThe transcript is a detailed discussion on John F. Kennedy's efforts to build a sustainable peace with the Soviet Union, as chronicled by Jeffrey Sachs in his book 'To Move the World.' It covers Kennedy's campaign to curb the arms race and his attempts to end the Cold War through diplomacy, highlighted by his implementation of the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty in 1963. The conversation delves into the Cuban Missile Crisis, Kennedy's struggle against war-advocating figures within his administration, and the significant impact of the lies told by the CIA. It also touches on the post-WWII tensions over Germany, the near nuclear catastrophes, and Kennedy's powerful speech on peace that resonated with Khrushchev and led to a peace agreement. The summary concludes with a critique of the US's current approach to foreign policy, particularly regarding NATO enlargement and the conflict in Ukraine, contrasting it with Kennedy's diplomatic strategies and the consequences of not learning from past peace efforts.
Takeaways
- 📚 Jeffrey Sachs' book 'To Move the World' chronicles John F. Kennedy's efforts to curb the arms race and build ties with the Soviet Union from October 1962 to September 1963.
- ✊ JFK's vision for peace with the Soviets was not shared by many within his administration, especially the military, reflecting the internal struggle between diplomacy and war.
- 🗣️ Kennedy's famous inaugural address included the line, 'Let us never negotiate out of fear, but let us never fear to negotiate,' highlighting his commitment to peace through dialogue.
- 📉 The Bay of Pigs invasion was a significant failure that led to increased tensions with the Soviet Union and a critical shift in Kennedy's approach to foreign policy.
- 🤔 Kennedy recognized the danger of unchecked CIA actions and their propensity for misinformation, which contributed to the deterioration of US-Soviet relations.
- 🚫 The absence of a peace treaty post-WWII and the subsequent Cold War were rooted in a dispute over the future of Germany, leading to a remilitarized Western Germany and heightened Soviet fears.
- 🔄 The Cuban Missile Crisis was a turning point for Kennedy, leading to a secret deal with Khrushchev to remove missiles from both Cuba and Turkey, and a deeper understanding of the need for diplomacy.
- 🌟 Kennedy's speech on peace is considered one of the most courageous acts in political history, advocating for a reevaluation of the US position and the recognition of common interests with the Soviets.
- 🔄 The Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty of 1963 was a direct result of Kennedy's push for peace and marked a significant step towards the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
- 🔄 The end of the Cold War was facilitated by diplomatic efforts from both Reagan and Gorbachev, with Gorbachev unilaterally disbanding the Warsaw Pact and receiving promises from the US not to expand NATO eastward.
- ⚔️ The US's continuous expansion of NATO and aggressive foreign policy post-Cold War has been viewed as a provocation by Russia, leading to increased tensions and the current conflict in Ukraine.
Q & A
What was the main focus of John F. Kennedy's last battle before his assassination?
-John F. Kennedy's last battle was focused on building a sustainable peace with the Soviet Union and curbing the arms race.
Which book by Jeffrey Sachs chronicles Kennedy's efforts to end the Cold War?
-Jeffrey Sachs' book titled 'To Move the World' chronicles Kennedy's efforts from October 1962 to September 1963 to curb the arms race and build ties with the Soviet Union.
What significant treaty did Kennedy implement in 1963?
-Kennedy implemented the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty in 1963.
What was the Cuban Missile Crisis, and how did it influence Kennedy's perspective on the Cold War?
-The Cuban Missile Crisis was a 13-day confrontation in 1962 between the United States and the Soviet Union over Soviet ballistic missiles deployed in Cuba. It influenced Kennedy's perspective by making him realize the urgency of diplomacy and the dangers of unchecked military escalation.
What was the context of the Bay of Pigs invasion and how did it affect Kennedy's trust in the CIA?
-The Bay of Pigs invasion was a failed military operation in 1961 by the CIA to overthrow the Cuban government. It led to a disastrous outcome and significantly undermined Kennedy's trust in the CIA.
What was the significance of Kennedy's speech on peace and how was it received by the Soviet Union?
-Kennedy's speech on peace was significant as it was a call for reconsideration of the U.S. position towards the Soviet Union, emphasizing common interests and the possibility of cooperation. It was well-received by the Soviet Union, with Khrushchev considering it the finest speech by an American president since FDR.
What was the role of Ted Sorensen in Kennedy's speech?
-Ted Sorensen was a key advisor to Kennedy and played a significant role in crafting the speech, contributing to its elegiac and compelling nature.
How did Kennedy's approach to the Cuban Missile Crisis differ from that of his military advisors?
-Kennedy's approach was more diplomatic and cautious compared to his military advisors, who were pushing for an immediate and aggressive military campaign against Cuba. Kennedy sought a negotiated settlement, which eventually led to the removal of missiles from both Cuba and Turkey.
What was the impact of Kennedy's assassination on the progress made towards peace with the Soviet Union?
-Kennedy's assassination cut short the progress made towards peace. The hardliners regained control in the Soviet Union after Khrushchev, and the momentum for peace that Kennedy had built was lost.
How did the U.S. approach to NATO enlargement contribute to the tensions with Russia?
-The U.S. approach to NATO enlargement, particularly the expansion into Eastern Europe and the inclusion of countries bordering Russia, was seen as a provocation by Russia. This contributed to rising tensions and a renewed sense of threat from the West.
What were the key points of the proposed U.S.-Russia security agreement that Putin put on the table in December 2021?
-The key points of the proposed U.S.-Russia security agreement included NATO not enlarging to include Ukraine and the removal of missiles that were pointed at Russia.
Outlines
🌟 JFK's Vision for Peace with the Soviets
The paragraph discusses President John F. Kennedy's efforts to establish a sustainable peace with the Soviet Union, as detailed in Jeffrey Sachs' book 'To Move the World.' It highlights Kennedy's campaign to curb the arms race and build ties with Nikita Khrushchev, as well as the challenges he faced from within his administration and the military. The Cuban Missile Crisis is emphasized as a turning point for Kennedy, leading to his realization of the importance of diplomacy and negotiation.
🚩 CIA's Deception and the Tense US-Soviet Relations
This paragraph delves into the CIA's culture of deception, which included misleading President Eisenhower about the U-2 spy plane's vulnerability and the subsequent fallout with the Soviet Union. It also touches on the lack of a peace treaty post-World War II, the division of Germany, and the formation of NATO, which heightened Cold War tensions. The discussion underscores the precarious state of US-Soviet relations during Kennedy's presidency.
🔥 The Cuban Missile Crisis: Averting Nuclear War
The focus of this paragraph is the Cuban Missile Crisis, where Kennedy's decision-making process is explored. It details the initial consensus for military action against Cuba and the pivotal suggestion by Adlai Stevenson for a diplomatic resolution. The paragraph also reveals the secret deal between Kennedy and Khrushchev to remove missiles from both Cuba and Turkey and the risks of miscalculation that nearly led to nuclear war.
🕊️ Kennedy's Pursuit of Peace and Distrust in the Military
This paragraph reflects on Kennedy's shift towards peace following the Cuban Missile Crisis and his growing distrust of the military and the CIA. It discusses Kennedy's recognition of the need for diplomacy and his efforts to communicate with the American public about the possibility of peace with the Soviet Union. The paragraph also highlights Kennedy's speech, which is described as a courageous act of leadership.
🗣️ Kennedy's Speech on Peace and its Impact
The paragraph emphasizes the content and impact of Kennedy's speech on peace. It outlines the speech's message of common humanity between the US and the Soviet Union, the potential for cooperation, and the rational pursuit of peace. The response from the Soviet leader Khrushchev and the subsequent signing of the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty are also covered, showcasing the power of diplomacy over conflict.
🔄 The Power of Words and Leadership in Diplomacy
This paragraph discusses the eloquence and persuasive power of Kennedy's speech, its influence on the Soviet leadership, and how it was disseminated widely, even in Soviet media. It also touches on Kennedy's grassroots approach to gaining public support for the peace treaty and the successful ratification of the treaty by the US Senate. The paragraph concludes with Kennedy's address to the UN General Assembly, where he emphasized hope and the potential for collective action towards peace.
🔍 The Conspiracy Against Peace and the US Security State
The paragraph explores the conspiracy theories surrounding Kennedy's assassination, suggesting that rogue elements within the US government may have been involved. It criticizes the US security state, the CIA, and the influence of neoconservatives on foreign policy. The discussion also covers Kennedy's insights on avoiding confrontations with nuclear adversaries and the US's approach to the war in Ukraine.
📜 Broken Promises and NATO's Expansion
This paragraph examines the history of NATO enlargement and the US's broken promises to Russia, particularly regarding the eastward expansion of NATO. It discusses the Soviet Union's dissolution, the US's hegemonic ambitions, and the subsequent inclusion of several countries into NATO. The paragraph also addresses Russia's reactions to NATO's expansion and its warnings against the US's actions.
🚨 US Aggression and the Lead-up to the Ukraine Conflict
The paragraph details the US's role in the Ukrainian conflict, starting with the overthrow of the neutral Viktor Yanukovych government. It discusses the US's support for a Russophobic regime in Ukraine, the Minsk agreements, and the refusal of the US and Ukraine to implement them. The paragraph also highlights the US's military support for Ukraine and its rejection of negotiations with Russia.
🤝 The Failure of US Diplomacy and the Onset of War
This final paragraph characterizes the Russian invasion of Ukraine as an avoidable conflict that arose from a failure of US diplomacy. It argues that the US ignored opportunities to negotiate with Russia and instead escalated the conflict through military and economic means. The paragraph criticizes the US's refusal to acknowledge Russia's security concerns and its insistence on NATO enlargement. It concludes with a call for diplomacy and negotiation to prevent further escalation.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Cuban Missile Crisis
💡Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty
💡Cold War
💡Arms Race
💡Diplomacy
💡Nikita Khrushchev
💡Peace
💡Military-Industrial Complex
💡NATO Enlargement
💡Détente
Highlights
John F. Kennedy's last battle was an effort to build a sustainable peace with the Soviet Union, which was cut short by his assassination.
Jeffrey Sachs' book 'To Move the World' chronicles Kennedy's campaign to curb the arms race and build ties with Nikita Khrushchev from October 1962 to September 1963.
Kennedy implemented the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty in 1963, but faced opposition from cold warriors, including some within his administration and the military.
The Cuban Missile Crisis was a pivotal moment where Kennedy battled against military figures like Curtis LeMay, who advocated for a hot war.
Kennedy's vision for peace was not shared by many, leading to a change in his approach towards the end of his presidency.
Kennedy's inaugural address included the famous line, "Let us never negotiate out of fear, but let us never fear to negotiate."
The Bay of Pigs invasion was a disaster that led to a tense exchange with Khrushchev, highlighting the need for improved relations.
Kennedy administration's lies to the Soviets, including the U-2 spy plane incident and the Bay of Pigs, were destructive to building relationships.
The absence of a peace treaty post-WWII and the dispute over Germany's future were fundamental to the start of the Cold War.
Kennedy's speech, which advocated for peace and negotiation, was a courageous act that reshaped the perception of the Soviet Union among Americans.
Kennedy's approach to peace was rational and humanistic, emphasizing shared interests and the avoidance of confrontations that could lead to nuclear war.
The speech had a profound impact on Khrushchev, who called it the finest by an American president since FDR, and led to a peace agreement.
Kennedy's assassination in November 1963 cut short his quest for peace, and the hardliners in the Soviet Union regained control afterward.
The US has continued to push NATO enlargement despite warnings from Russia, contributing to the current tensions and war in Ukraine.
Kennedy's approach to diplomacy and peace stands in stark contrast to the current US stance, which has led to a failure in negotiations and an escalation of conflicts.
The war in Ukraine is seen as avoidable and a result of the US refusing to negotiate and pushing for a confrontational stance against Russia.
The US's actions, including economic sanctions and military support to Ukraine, have been perceived as an attempt to force Russia into submission rather than seeking a diplomatic resolution.
Transcripts
(Singing)
John F. Kennedy's last battle, cut short by his assassination, was the effort to build a
sustainable piece with the Soviet Union. Jeffrey Sachs, professor of economics at
Columbia University in his new book, To Move the World, chronicles the campaign by Kennedy from
October 1962 to September 1963 to curb the arms race and build ties with his Soviet counterpart,
Nikita Khrushchev. Sachs looks at the series of speeches Kennedy gave to end the Cold War and
persuade the world to make peace with the Soviets. Kennedy implemented the Partial Nuclear Test
Ban Treaty in 1963, but Kennedy's vision was not shared by many cold warriors in the establishment,
including some within his administration and especially within the military.
Joining me to discuss To Move the World: JFK's Quest for Peace is Professor Jeffrey Sachs.
I want to begin with the Cuban Missile Crisis because this is a moment that you write about
in your book where Kennedy is battling in particularly the military, figures like
Curtis LeMay was the head of the Air Force, who want to engage in a hot war to essentially bomb
Cuban missile bases and I believe even Soviet ships. And this I think kind of precipitated
the change that came about within Kennedy. Let me say first what a pleasure it is to be
with you and how good it is to talk about these issues on their 60th anniversary,
because they are completely alive today in the context of the war in Ukraine as well,
where the US and Russia are in effect at war. And I'm afraid our leaders are not learning
the lessons that Kennedy learned and espoused. I think even before the Cuban Missile Crisis,
it's worth saying that Kennedy came into office in January 1961, intent on peace, but found himself
at the brink of nuclear annihilation just a year and-a-half afterwards. And that was not only
shocking, but rather a sign of how extraordinarily dangerous the world was and continues to be.
So Kennedy came in January 1961, not aiming for war, but aiming for negotiation and peace.
And remember in his inaugural address, he had the famous line, "Let us never negotiate out of fear,
but let us never fear to negotiate." And he knew the dynamics of how things can
get out of hand. He understood that the world was dangerous and he was going to avoid it. And yet
the first year was a massive debacle because the CIA came to him and said, "Mr. President,
now you have to implement the invasion of Cuba." And he had serious doubts about it,
but like most presidents and certainly most presidents in their first months,
he kind of went along and said, okay, you can do it, but I'm not going to give air cover.
And some flaky set of decisions from the CIA and Kennedy
had them go forward. And of course the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba was itself a debacle,
a disaster. It led to a horrible interchange with Khrushchev who wrote in a private channel
to Kennedy, "Stop this piracy of people in your government." And Kennedy wrote back brazenly, "No,
it's not my government. This is independent of the United States." And Khrushchev wrote back in
effect, don't lie to me like that Mr. President. I want to stop you there because you write
in the book about two times the Kennedy administration lied to the Soviets and how
destructive that was to building relationships. Actually the first lie came when the Soviet Union
shot down a CIA spy plane, the U-2 spy plane with Gary Powers, just on the eve of what was supposed
to be a summit between Eisenhower and Soviet party chairman Nikita Khrushchev. And the CIA
lies for a living. We know this. But it lied to the president of the United States also saying,
Mr. President, don't worry, they can't shoot down the spy plane. It's too high. And if they do shoot
down the spy plane, it's designed to disintegrate. And if it doesn't disintegrate anyway, the pilot
is going to take his cyanide pill. There's no way anything can happen to embarrass you.
And of course they shoot down the spy plane, they get the wreckage, they get the pilot alive,
Gary Powers, they don't announce that. They say, we have been spied upon, and downed the
plane without revealing those details. And Eisenhower comes out and says, no,
no, no, no, this is a weather craft that went off course from Turkey. And then the Soviets reveal,
we have the fuselage, we have the pilot who has told us about his spy mission. Direct,
blatant lies. Then soon after this comes the direct blatant lies of the Bay of Pigs.
It's dangerous. And this is the CIA, by the way, and it's the CIA still today in my view.
It is lying and unaccountable and really never called to task for these lives because the public
doesn't know them, doesn't understand what's going on. But from the Soviet US point of view,
within months of the Kennedy administration, this air was poisoned.
And there was one other thing that was absolutely precipitating all of this, which was,
and very fundamental and completely never discussed in America almost at all, but there
had been no peace treaty at the end of World War II and the Cold War emerged in fact over a bitter
dispute between the Soviet Union and the United States about the future of Germany. The Soviet
Union had lost more than 20 million people in the war and did not want to see German remilitarized.
The United States, on the other hand, decided that the three occupied regions from the western side,
the US, French and British regions would form a single new Federal Republic of Germany.
The remaining fourth part, the Soviet-occupied part, would become the German Democratic Republic,
the GDR. But the western side would become the bulwark of a new military alliance, NATO,
and it would be remilitarized. And the Soviet Union said, no,
we just lost more than 20 million people, now within a few years you're remilitarizing.
Well, of course the United States never listened, never negotiated, and at the end of the 1950s,
took another step. Eisenhower was flirting with the idea, maybe we should just give our
allies control over nuclear weapons as well so we can reduce the US troops numbers in Europe.
Eisenhower was very frugal. He was a fiscal conservative and he wanted
to bring troops home and use the nuclear shield. And so there was, at the end of the 1950s, lots of
talk about nuclear sharing and this was freaking out the Soviet Union also. And the United States
doesn't know how to talk to anybody. There's no diplomacy, there are mortal enemies, there's no
one to negotiate. And so the situation by the time Kennedy came in was completely fraught,
then came the Bay of Pigs. Then Khrushchev said, okay, we need to teach Americans a bit
of their own lessons. We'll put missiles in Cuba. And Khrushchev had a quite remarkable exchange
with Andrei Gromyko, his foreign minister. Gromyko said, "No, what, war?" And Khrushchev said, no,
not war. Just basically teach these Americans about their arrogance. They
have missiles in Turkey. We're going to put missiles in Cuba, nothing about war.
But of course everything immediately spiraled out of control when the missile placements were
discovered and the subterfuge that the Soviets were using to place the missile systems in
place. And it was like the subterfuge of the United States doing what it did on it's side.
Things get out of hand. And as soon as Kennedy saw the U-2 spy plane
over Cuba taking these pictures of missile sites, he convened an executive committee, ExComm, and it
was almost unanimous. Well, we got to shoot down these sites, we have to take them out before they
can be deployed. And it was unanimous essentially that there needed to be an immediate war and the
joint chiefs were told to go off and plan the military campaign against Cuba. Would it be an air
campaign? Would it just be to take out the sites? How many troops would be needed? And so forth.
Kennedy, interestingly, to make a very long story short, had lunch by coincidence with
Adlai Stevenson, the US Ambassador to the United Nations, on the first day of the
Cuban Missile Crisis when Kennedy had seen the pictures. And Adlai Stevenson said to Kennedy,
well, of course you need diplomacy to end this and exchange the missiles with the Turkish missiles.
Kennedy was shocked because no other advisor had said anything
about diplomacy. It was basically unanimous for a military approach, which by the way
almost surely may be too strong, although I'm not sure it is, but most likely would've led to
nuclear annihilation. Because our doctrine was that if we were attacked by a nuclear weapon,
we would give a full response. By the way, full meaning not only the Soviet
Union but Eastern and Central Europe, China, hundreds of millions of people
killed. And now we learned afterwards from the nuclear winter, maybe all of humanity
perishing from starvation afterwards. But Stevenson laid the idea of maybe
a negotiated settlement. Well, to make a long story short, as people know, Kennedy
really almost alone though with this hint from Stevenson and then with his brother Robert
pushing and Ted Sorensen pushing and a few others pushing, turned the tide over a few days that,
don't do something precipitous, let's try to figure out what's in Khrushchev's mind.
And Kennedy came to realize, because he had people like the Air Force head, Curtis LeMay, who
just wanted nuclear war it seems or first strike against the Soviet Union, that he was surrounded
by a lot of hotheads who could end the world. And he realized Khrushchev probably was as well.
And the two of them came to realize, we better tamp this down. And they did.
And they agreed on a deal of this removal of missiles both from Cuba and from Turkey. The
big mistake Kennedy made, and I always think it's unfair to call it a mistake because he saved the
world, so you get a lot of credit for that. But the mistake he made was insisting that the deal
be secret so that it looked to the American people like he had simply faced down the Soviet Union and
they had backed away. Because it wasn't known that the removal of the American missiles were part of
an exchange, and that wasn't known for decades actually. Well, just to come to the book...
Let me just stop you there because right in the preface, and I didn't know this,
you talk about once that machinery begins to be put in place,
a human error can trigger a nuclear catastrophe. You write one Alaska-based US Air Force pilot
had not gotten the message. This was not to send flights over Cuba. And after taking off to collect
air samples to check on Soviet nuclear testing, the pilot had become disoriented and inadvertently
flown his plane into Soviet airspace. Soviet fighter jets scrambled to intercept the U-2
while, due to the high alert status prompted by the crisis, the US plane sent to escort
it back to base were armed with nuclear warheads and had the authority to fire.
Yes, and actually that was one of the episodes that brought us to the brink of
nuclear annihilation. But there was one even more dramatic, which was that after the agreement was
reached between Kennedy and Khrushchev, there was a disabled submarine in the Caribbean that
was part of a squadron and it was the one in that squadron that carried nuclear tipped torpedoes.
And when that disabled sub rose, normally the US might drop depth charges on the
submarine to get it, to force it to rise. But a jackass, I think is the right technical term,
dropped live hand grenades as he was flying over this rising submarine and the skipper thought,
our sub is under attack, there must be war. This was a Russian submarine?
Sorry, Russian submarine, that was my point, disabled Russian submarine, excuse me. And they
thought they were under attack and that there must be a war at the surface. It was disabled and out
of communication. And so the captain of the vessel ordered that the nuclear tipped submarine be
loaded into the torpedo bay and that it be fired. And if it had been fired, under US nuclear
doctrine, being attacked by a nuclear weapon, including a nuclear tipped torpedo,
under US doctrine would have launched that full scale response that would have destroyed humanity.
And the order to fire was countermanded at the last moment by virtue of the fact that there
happened to be a Soviet party official who was senior to the captain of the vessel who said,
I don't think it's a good idea. We should rise without firing.
And they did, and it turned out there wasn't a war on the surface and there wasn't a need to
launch the torpedo. We came within a second of ending the world and that was after the
agreement had been reached between the USSR and the United States. And Martin Sherwin, the late
historian who now people know as the person who co-wrote the great book American Prometheus on J.
Robert Oppenheimer, wrote this story in his wonderful last book before he passed away,
Gambling with Armageddon, which is a history of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Absolutely phenomenal.
As is American Prometheus. And they're both great books. He wrote that with Kai Bird,
of course. You can visit that submarine. I think it's in San Francisco. I did. The
Russian Submarine is a museum. So Kennedy walks away from this
horrified at how close the world came to nuclear Armageddon, but he also walked away
with a deep distrust of the military. And I want to talk about the decision to give this speech,
which I had not read in full until I read it in your book and then went and listened to it.
It has to be one of the most courageous acts by a politician, you could argue perhaps since anything
FDR did. And it's utterly remarkable. And what's frightening or disturbing is that I can't see any
political figure giving a speech like that again. So let's talk about how Kennedy changed and what
he set out to do. And of course it was all cut short by his assassination in November of 1963.
I think first it's fair to say that being president of the United States is a tough job
and it's impossible to do right in the early days and early years because you don't get it. And our
security state in the United States, which was created by the National Security Act of 1947,
which created a secret security state and a private army of the United States called the CIA,
which is one half its function, because it does intelligence and
it does private warfare of the United States. And the whole apparatus is secret and largely
out of control. And it is absolutely out of control by any public understanding or scrutiny
or accountability or congressional oversight today as it was in the early 1960s. Well,
Kennedy came in with a lot of energy and idealism and brilliance and he stumbled
terribly in the first year with the Bay of Pigs Cuban invasion and then in the second year,
the near disaster of the Cuban Missile Crisis. And my view is he had the potential for
greatness at the beginning and by his third year he had become
a magnificent politician and statesman of the first order. One of our truly great presidents.
Not so much in the first two years, although the potential was there, but the growth that came
through this set of trials was extraordinary. Already after the Bay of Pigs, Kennedy was so
disturbed by the CIA that he was beside himself about how they had led
the US and his administration and himself personally into this awful debacle. He didn't
trust the CIA. After the Cuban Missile Crisis and after hearing people like Curtis LeMay even
essentially calling Kennedy a traitor for not launching the war or a coward and feeling all
of this pressure for war, he was profoundly disturbed and profoundly moved and profoundly
scared at how fragile the world was. And he was determined to do something in 1963. And he-
Let me just interject. He fired Dulles and he fired Bissell. So he actually took on the CIA
establishment and triggered deep animus. And I want you, as you go on, to talk about this speech,
but one of the things I found fascinating from your book is how few people he informed about
what it was he was about to say. And we have about nine minutes left, so I want to make
sure we talk about the content of what he said. So Kennedy wanted to say to the American people,
peace is possible, even with the Soviet Union, even with the other side. And the whole content
of the speech is they are human beings like we are. They want to live, they want to
protect their children, they want to have a future. And this speech is unbelievable
because it's the only foreign policy speech I know of anywhere where it is not telling the
other side what to do, not making threats, not reveling in glory, not saying we are number one,
not saying they are evil, but saying to the American people, we need to reconsider our
own position. And remember today we're told every day by the completely irresponsible, reckless and
ignorant mass media like the New York Times, I'm going to say because it's terrible, and like the
Washington Post and others, there's no one to talk to. There's no one to negotiate with over Ukraine.
And in the Cold War in 1963, it was even more like that. The Cuban Missile Crisis had just occurred.
Could you even imagine negotiating with the Soviet Union? And Kennedy's whole message is we
can negotiate. They want the same things. They too will abide by treaties as long as those treaties
are also in their interest and they can be relied upon to abide by treaties that are in their
interest and also in our interests. There is a benefit of cooperation. This is rational. In fact,
the pursuit of peace is the rational end of rational men, says President Kennedy.
I just want to read a couple sections because it is an absolutely remarkable, and as you point out
through Sorensen, beautifully elegiac and just gorgeously written, but these are some of the
things, just I want to read three short sections. "I speak of peace," this is Kennedy,
"as the necessary rational end of rational men. I realize that the pursuit of peace is
not as dramatic as the pursuit of war. And frequently the words of the pursuer fall on
deaf ears, but we have no more urgent task." And then he says, "So let us not be blind to
our differences, but let us also direct attention to our common interests and to the means by which
those differences can be resolved. And if we cannot end now our differences, at least we can
help make the world safe for diversity. For in the final analysis, our most basic common link
is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air, we all cherish our
children's future, and we are all mortal." And just to conclude, he asks in the speech,
"What kind of peace do we seek? Not a PAX Americana enforced on the world by American
weapons of war, not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave. I'm talking about
genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living. The kind that enables men
and nations to grow and to hope and to build a better life for their children. Not merely
peace for Americans, but peace for all men and women. Not merely peace in our time,
but peace for all time." That was incredible. It gives you goosebumps. Of course, I've listened,
I don't know how many dozens or hundreds of times to the speech. I've made my family listen on so
many occasions. But the words are thrilling. The words are mesmerizing in their beauty.
And Ted Sorensen has a big hand in that as well and in their ability to make change.
And I think one of the things that Kennedy also says in here, which is incredible,
is his advice on leadership. And I don't have exactly the words here, but to paraphrase, he
says, by defining our goal more clearly, by making it seem more manageable and less remote, we help
all people to see it, to draw hope from it, and to move irresistibly toward it. So the goal of peace,
if made to be manageable, practical, like a treaty, to stop atomic testing, stop atmospheric
testing of nuclear weapons, is a practical, manageable step and people draw hope from it.
So the speech was so riveting and powerful. By the way, kept completely outside of the bureaucracy,
was essentially hidden from the security apparatus, from the State Department,
the CAA, even the White House. Only Sorensen and Kennedy worked on it basically until the last
moment. Then they said, I'm giving this. Kennedy said, I'm giving it, so it could not be vetoed by
state or by the Defense Department or the National Security Council or anybody else. And he gave it.
And what is amazing, absolutely amazing is that Khrushchev heard it,
was carried away, summoned the US envoy, Kennedy's envoy to Moscow, Averell Harriman,
and said, "This is the finest speech by an American president since FDR. I want to make
peace with your president." The words were so powerful, the motivation, the ideas were so
powerful. Kennedy disseminated the speech through Pravda, Izvestiya, on- [inaudible 00:27:44]
Isn't that hilarious? Pravda reprinted it. Exactly, and broadcast the speech. And
within a few weeks they had signed the agreement. Within a few weeks.
Absolutely an astounding achievement. Then Kennedy, just to say he was also the
grassroots politician, he was a political guy to the core. He went out to campaign
for it. And so he took his tour around the United States, the joint chiefs, oh, well,
we don't know this is... They come to testify in Congress and try to knock down this agreement.
And Kennedy carried the American public overwhelmingly and then won a decisive
victory in the Senate 60 years ago just now for the ratification of this treaty. And this is,
the time when we're talking is the time of the UN General Assembly. Kennedy went to tell the leaders
what this meant in another completely magnificent address. And he said,
"This is not the end of conflict, but it is a ray of hope piercing through the clouds."
And he ends his address to the world leaders assembled in front of him in the chamber of
the UN General Assembly. Kennedy, having brought peace, brought hope, and all the world leaders
assembled in front of him. And he says to them that Archimedes is said to have told his friends,
"Give me a place to stand and I can move the world. Fellow leaders of the world, let us
see if we can take our stand here in this place, in this time, to move the world towards peace."
And you just can't get better than that. The idealism, the hope, the practicality,
and Kennedy infused the whole world with it. And then they killed him.
And we've lost it. We've lost it. And they killed him because, I'm
personally convinced after having studied this in depth for decades now, and now we have the report
completely debunking the Warren Commission with the magic bullet being no magic bullet at all, but
a bullet that the Secret Service pulled out of the back of Kennedy's seat and put on the stretcher,
debunking the entire forensic basis of the Warren Commission. I'm pretty convinced that it was rogue
elements within the US government itself. Well, Alan Dulles-
Alan Dulles, the CIA. Can't get more evil than that.
Exactly. We don't know exactly who, but this was a conspiracy and it was a conspiracy against peace.
And our security state is in full force. Our president, in my view, is not in control,
and in any event has been a hardliner and a cold warrior, whatever you want to call it,
well past the Cold War. These neocons don't understand
peace, they don't understand negotiation, they don't understand diplomacy, they don't understand
the nuclear threat. And one other point, Chris, of the speech that I think is so pertinent and
completely neglected. Kennedy says, "Above all, while defending our own vital interests,
nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either
a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war. To adopt that kind of course in the nuclear age would be
evidence only of the bankruptcy of our policy or of a collective death wish for the world."
And the US has gone out to humiliate Putin and to defeat Putin, and Russia has 6,000
nuclear weapons. What are we doing? What are we thinking? Of course, I take it a little bit,
even a step back. I think this is, I call it the war of NATO enlargement because I think the entire
war in Ukraine came because the United States so recklessly and imprudently kept pushing, pushing,
pushing NATO enlargement, Russia saying, stop, it's a red line, stop. And then not to Ukraine,
for heaven's sake, not to Ukraine our 2,300 kilometer border, not to surround us in
the Black Sea, and the US is deaf to this. And then trying to humiliate Putin and doing
exactly the opposite of what Kennedy said. And I take it seriously when Kennedy says in that remark
about not pushing a nuclear power to a corner, he says, "above all," as if that's the synthesis of
what he's learned from the Cuban Missile Crisis. Above all, don't humiliate a nuclear adversary.
And our people don't even know it. We don't have diplomats and we don't have a president in my view
that understands the job of keeping the foot on the brake. So it's a very dangerous time.
In this last part, I want to ask you what happened.
So you have this incredible moment in American history. Of course, Khrushchev doesn't last
much longer. After Kennedy's assassination, the hardliners regain control in the Soviet Union.
What happened? Just run through that historical period to where we are now.
Of course it's complicated, but there was a period of detente and of arms agreements. The
Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty of 1963, which we've been discussing, led directly
to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty a few years later. A really momentous achievement to
not stop nuclear proliferation, but definitely to slow it down dramatically. Because Kennedy
rightly worried about 30 or 40 nuclear-powered or nuclear weapons countries by the time we are now,
and it is around 10. Absolutely not safe and in control, but not the mass proliferation.
And the Treaty of 1963 played a critical part in that. Detente came, we had our ups and downs. We
had huge tensions in the early 1980s when Reagan proposed to put intermediate range nuclear weapons
into Europe and the Cold War intensified, heated up again. Then came Gorbachev, and Gorbachev was
a great statesman, the greatest of our age of that time, a man of peace.
And he and Reagan actually realized the potential for peace and negotiated an end
to the Cold War. And quite remarkably, it was Gorbachev who unilaterally said,
in 1990, I will disband the Warsaw Pact military alliance of the Soviet Union. And James Baker III,
the Secretary of State of George Bush, Sr., who had followed Reagan as president,
of course. Baker ran to assure him, we will never take advantage of your decision,
President Gorbachev, we will not move NATO one inch eastward.
And this was repeated by the German government that was interested in German reunification. And
Hans-Dietrich Genscher, the foreign minister of Germany, promised no NATO enlargement.
Of course, as soon as the Soviet Union ended at the end of 1991, the US cheated
and it cheated till this day. And despite vast documentary evidence, we have a lot of people,
oh, we never promised anything. It's true Gorbachev didn't get it in writing in a treaty,
because they weren't making treaties. They were arranging the end of the Cold War. But Gorbachev
was promised, and those promises were sheer lies. I just want to interject. I was there. I covered
the unification of Germany. I covered the East German revolution, the revolution in
Czechoslovakia and Romania, and they could not have unified Germany without Soviet acquiescence.
Of course. And Gorbachev said, this is important for us, you will not take advantage of us. It was
very, very clear. And I was there as an economic advisor to Gorbachev's team and then to President
Yeltsin's team and to President Kuchma's team of Ukraine. I saw these events also very,
very close up, and we had a chance for peace. And the United States said, well, it's not
peace we want. We want unipolarity. We want world hegemony. We're now the most powerful
country in the world. We won. You lost. We're going to even take out every ally you ever had,
whether it's Syria or Iraq or Libya or Serbia or others. We're going to go in one by one and clean
up the act because we can do it with impunity. Now, who are you? You're a defeated power.
And so the United States treated Russia with contempt, engaged in regime change operations
all over the region, usually with some mix of CIA background and National Endowment
for Democracy and NGOs pouring in money and mucking up the local politics to get someone
that would be compliant with the United States. And Russia kept saying, wait a minute, wait a
minute, you promised and you keep moving eastward towards us. Clinton started the process of NATO
enlargement. His own secretary of defense, Bill Perry, was aghast and thought about resigning,
said, this is going to mess up everything. Of course, the very architect of containment policy,
George Kennon, who invented containment in 1947 in his long telegram and in his foreign
affairs article said, you start NATO enlargement, you're going to have absolutely a new Cold War.
But American politicians cannot hear anybody's concerns, and the arrogance is breathtaking,
and the ignorance is breathtaking in my view. And the power of the military
industrial security state in the United States is awful and breathtaking as well.
So under Clinton, three countries joined NATO, and then under Bush Jr., 2007,
seven more countries, the three Baltic states, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia,
Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, and Slovenia. And Russia's now being cornered by the advancing
NATO. And Putin says in 2007 at the Munich Security Conference, stop. Stop. You promised
in 1990 no advance, and now all you're doing is advancing your military. And in 2002, by the way,
the United States unilaterally pulled out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and started to put
in ageist missiles on Russia's borders, nearby Russia in Poland and Romania in particular.
So Putin says, stop this. And what does the United States do in response? Bush Jr. instructs
his ambassador to NATO, interestingly, Victoria Nuland, who was Cheney's foreign policy advisor,
then US Ambassador to NATO, then suddenly is Hillary's foreign policy advisor. Then
suddenly the Assistant Secretary of State in 2014 when the US was part of the overthrow of
the Ukraine government to get someone that was suppliant to the US desire for NATO enlargement.
And so the tensions kept rising until 2014, the United States participated in a regime
change operation, very typical, overthrowing a Ukrainian president that wanted neutrality,
Viktor Yanukovych. And at that moment, Putin said,
you're not getting our naval base in Crimea, and took back Crimea because it was not going to fall
into NATO hands. And the Russian part of Ukraine, ethnic Russian part of the Eastern Donbas,
was aghast at the Russophobic regime that had come into power with the US connivance in
February 2014, so it called to break away. And it required a treaty, two treaties,
in fact, Minsk I and Minsk II, to try to make peace within Ukraine itself.
And the idea of the Minsk II agreement was that the eastern part of Ukraine, which is ethnically
overwhelmingly Russian, would have autonomy within Ukraine, a federal Ukraine. And the United States
opposed federalization, and the Ukrainians opposed it. They signed the treaty. The US
Security Council endorsed the treaty, and they blew it off, the Ukrainians and the Americans.
Forget it. We don't have to implement it. So by the time Biden came in 2021,
Minsk had fallen apart. The US was arming Ukraine to the teeth. Biden came in full cold warrior,
we're going to expand NATO to Ukraine. Yes we are. And Putin said, no, you're not.
And in December 17th, 2021, Putin put on the table a draft US Russia security agreement
based on NATO not enlarging to Ukraine, and these missiles not being pointed at Russia.
And I called the White House at that point to senior official and said, "Negotiate. You've
got a basis to avoid war." No, don't worry. But anyway, NATO enlargement is none of Russia's
business. That's the formal policy of the United States of America. It's mind mindbogglingly
stupid. NATO enlargement is not part of Russia's business? Well, whose business is it part of?
I want to insert there that Victoria Nuland, of course,
is part of the Biden administration back at the State Department, number one, and I want to ask-
She keeps getting promoted as we get deeper and deeper into war. It's unbelievable. But that's the
deep state. Is she Republican? Is she Democrat? Doesn't matter. She's for war. That's it.
Right. Well, the Democratic party has become more fervently
the war party than even the Republican party. If you look at the base, the Democrats are
the war mongerers. The Republicans want peace. It's amazing. It's something that's absolutely
astounding. But basically the American public, as usual, has been lied to again and again and again,
told that there's no predicate to this war. There's no basis of negotiation.
They have no idea that Russia has tried to negotiate all the time throughout.
But the US attitude is we don't have to talk to them. And if you don't talk to them, you end up
with war. Whereas Kennedy's whole point was, we can negotiate with the other side. That was the
whole point that brought Kennedy's achievement of the Partial Nuclear Test Ban treaty.
Well, it's kind of chronicle of a war foretold because William Burns,
we know from released cables, sent cables back from, he was the ambassador in Moscow saying,
it doesn't matter where you are on the political spectrum in Russia, you don't essentially turn
Ukraine into a hostile entity on Russia's border. And he's ignored. I just have one last question.
Just to say, by the way, because that memo, which is entitled, "Nyet Means Nyet."
Yes. And saying it's not just Putin,
it's all the Russian [inaudible 00:45:18] class. That's right, that's right.
The only reason we saw it is WikiLeaks. Because our government is so secretive,
the American people are not told anything about what's going on. And your former paper,
it is the New York Times, right? Yes.
They're not... I love the New York Times. It published the Pentagon Papers. Now it's
completely in the hands of government. It doesn't question a word. Weird.
I have one last question- And alarming. Please.
How, well, we'll have to do a show on the deterioration of American journalism. As you know,
I'm a very strong supporter of Julian. So how, especially having worked in Russia, how do you
characterize the Russian invasion of Ukraine? I characterize it as occurring in the eighth
year of a war that started with the overthrow of Viktor Yanukovych and escalated after that
as totally avoidable. Because if Biden had negotiated with Putin in December 2021,
the war would've been avoided. I regard it as an attempt at the
beginning to force Ukraine to the negotiating table. And within a few days of the launch of the
so-called special military operation, which was not an invasion at the scale to take over Ukraine,
it was a military operation to push Ukraine to the negotiating table. Within a few days, Zelenskyy
said, we can negotiate. A few more days, he said, we can be neutral. We need security guarantees,
but we can be neutral. I know because I've spoken to the people that were involved in the
negotiations in March 2022 that these negotiations were making tremendous progress on the basis of
Ukrainian neutrality and non-enlargement of NATO. And we know that one day the negotiations stopped.
The Ukrainians walked in to the Turkish mediators and said, we're not negotiating now. We're taking
a break from negotiating. They stopped. Why? The United States told them, you don't need to
negotiate. You need to defeat Russia. You don't need to accept neutrality. We've got your back.
And the United States pushed Ukraine into an escalating war thinking that the combination
of economic sanctions and HIMARS and other wonder weapons would force Putin
to back down. Putin didn't back down. In fact, he mobilized in the summer of 2022.
So America's game of chicken didn't exactly work. It led to another round of escalation.
And it's especially led to a bloodbath, completely predictable, because Americans have refused,
and by Americans, I mean Biden, our president who's responsible and his team, have rejected
negotiations at every turn. And they tell us, which is a lie, that there's
no one to negotiate with and that Russia's not interested in negotiating, and that's a lie.
The difference is Russia's interested in negotiating an end to NATO enlargement,
and the United States is interested in going wherever it pleases. No other country, even not
even a nuclear superpower allowed to have a red line on their side in their neighborhood. Whereas
we are in the 200th anniversary of the Monroe Doctrine. So we said 200 years ago, no one in the
Western atmosphere should meddle, and Russia's not allowed to say we don't want your military on our
border. No, that's not Russia's business. So this is a massive, colossal failure of US diplomacy.
Great. I want to thank the Real News Network and its production team, Cameron Granadino,
Adam Coley, David Hebden, and Kayla Riveaa. You can find me at chrishedges.substack.com.
浏览更多相关视频
![](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/bwWW3sbk4EU/hq720.jpg)
The history of the Cuban Missile Crisis - Matthew A. Jordan
![](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/dtK8cVrPD6M/hq720.jpg)
Zelensky ESCAPES Russian Assassination Plot
![](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/AdtLxlttrHg/hq720.jpg)
From the archives: Robert Oppenheimer in 1965 on if the bomb was necessary
![](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/MOCr_4N0RM0/hq720.jpg)
The MEXICAN-AMERICAN War [APUSH Review Unit 5 Topic 3] Period 5: 1844-1877
![](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/mULVrUGh6wo/hq720.jpg)
“This Is Gonna Get Us ALL Blown Up!” Jeffrey Sachs On Russian Invasion
![](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Pt8_vXC9DEM/hq720.jpg)
LA GUERRA FRÍA EN 26 MINUTOS | INFONIMADOS
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)