CBS on the money - CBS commentary on Moscow Summit - column

National Review, July 8, 1988 by William F. Buckley, Jr.

CBS ON THE MONEY

NEW YORK, JUNE 3

THOSE (among them, this writer) who have made it a point to record the failings of CBS commentary should note the summation from Moscow on Wednesday night, June 2. It is a fine journalistic summary, saying everything about the Summit that needed immediately to be said.

(DAN) RATHER: ... And to talk about the substance of the Summit, Barry Petersen, Bill Plante, and Wyatt Andrews. Barry -- first, Gorbachev: an assessment of how it ended up for him.

PETERSEN: Gorobachev got exactly what he wanted -- a Summit of style over substance -- and he can (now) paint himself looking like the young aggressive winner. But I submit to you that paint is one layer deep. What he (Gorbachev) didn't get was any kind of a stop in the arms race, and without that he's got to keep spending the money on weapons and not spend the money to fulfill the promise of a better life in this country.

RATHER: Wyatt Andrews -- what did we get and did not get in terms of arms agreements?

ANDREWS: Dan, in arms, from a professional arms-negotiator point of view, (the Russians) made some impressive strides in details on verifying mobile missiles, and details on verifying air-launched cruise missiles. The big gap is what it's always been, though: Star Wars. Any sort of compromise on whether Star Wars should be tested ... It went nowhere....

RATHER: Bill Plante -- Does the President really believe, as he said, that it's the Soviet "bureaucracy" that keeps down people of Jewish heritage and other dissidents and refuseniks?

PLANTE: Dan, a lot of people were stunned when the President refused three times to blame Gorbachev or the Soviet system for not letting people out of here, and blamed the bureaucracy instead. The only possible explanations are that he didn't want to offend his host, or that the word "bureaucracy" triggers in him an automatic response that goes back twenty years....

RATHER: Wyatt -- ... what was accomplished for human rights here?

ANDREWS: Well, Dan, the human-rights situation in the Soviet Union is improving, and it may be that President Reagan avoided slamming Gorbachev today on human rights because of what is going on. A few of the refuseniks on the list that President Reagan presented to Gorbachev are getting out. We know of acquaintances and friends who've gotten phone calls today saying, "Come by the visa office when the Summit's over and you'll have your ticket out." Others, though, did not get that phone call today. And it just doesn't seem to sink in on Gorbachev that this is the essential cruelty of it all....

RATHER: I raise the question, what is the reality versus the perception of glasnost?

PETERSEN: The Summit is a terrific example of that (the problem of trying to decipher what actually is happening), and our being here is a great example of that. We've had incredible access to the Soviet Union. Policemen have stopped traffic for us to take pictures, instead of stopping us from taking pictures. And glasnost is still what it always was: It's not the Bill off Rights. It's not freedom of press or freedom of religion. Glasnost is the freedom to say what the Party says you're supposed to say; and it hasn't changed.

RATHER: Bill, what about this talk that Gorbachev in effect tried to roll President Reagan -- tried to pick his pocket?

PLANTE: Absolutely. The White House people now think that Gorbachev tried to pull a fast one from Day One -- gave the President a plain white piece of paper with some language on it that had words like "peaceful coexistence," and says, "How's it look?" And the President says, "Well, it looks pretty good!" But then they took it back, studied it, and they said, No. Today, the last day, (they) pressed (Reagan) again, said, "Why won't you sign this?" And they went at it -- as it was described to me -- just hammer and tongs for most of the session and the President finally said, "No, I'm sorry, we're not going to do it." And, as somebody put it to me, you just have to tell them "No" a dozen times.

Is there, really, any more to say? What do you say, Dan?