Transcripts

text | pdf |

---

SPEAKER 1: From National Public Radio, this is Communiqué.

WALTER MONDALE: Africa is terribly important to us. Good relations with Africa are important to us. And in order to have that, you've got to come clean and be assertive on the issues of human rights, majority rule, economic development, and be a respectful partner among the family of nations.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

SPEAKER 1: Vice President Walter Mondale has just returned from a one week series of meetings with African leaders in Nigeria, Senegal, and Niger. In this special edition of Communiqué, the vice president talks about Africa with host Sanford Unger of NPR, and Peter Osnos, national editor of The Washington Post.

SPEAKER 2: Mr. Vice President, welcome back.

WALTER MONDALE: Thank you. Delighted to be back.

SPEAKER 2: Nigeria, in particular of the countries on your itinerary, is a very important place for the United States, second largest supplier of oil after Saudi Arabia. It's not a country that we've always had particularly good close relations with. How did you find the new Nigeria? Nigeria, which recently went to civilian government?

WALTER MONDALE: Well, I was very impressed. And I might point out that Nigeria is important to us for many more reasons than oil, although spectacularly, it is our second source of oil, and one of our most reliable sources when the embargo hit some years back, Nigeria did not participate. When the Iranian oil production collapsed, the Nigerians helped by increasing production, even though it might not have been in their interest.

But far beyond that, they are perhaps one of the most dominant emerging nations in the world today. They are a very active player and leader throughout African politics. But more than that, they are increasingly influential at the United Nations and all the multilateral organizations in the non-aligned movement and so on.

It is a nation of enormous potential economically. It is wealthy and untapped hydroelectric power, coal. It has a great potential in agriculture because it has good soil and water. And now with its new Democratic institutions, if those are successfully adapted and accepted by the people of Nigeria, I think it will stand as a superb example to the rest of the world of the benefits that flow from a stable Democratic political environment.

And as a point of satisfaction for Americans, their latest constitution is very, very closely adapted to our own-- a president, a parliament, a court, states, elected governors, state assemblies. Very, very closely adapted to America's own model. So there's a point of personal pride, too.

SPEAKER 3: I gather that by the end of this year, our negative balance of trade with Nigeria will be even greater than our negative balance of trade with Japan?

WALTER MONDALE: Yeah, we think it will be the largest of any nation. It has been the largest vis-a-vis the Japanese. But it might reach $11 billion, for the reason that we have not as yet found many exports to Nigeria, to cover the large purchases of oil from that land.

SPEAKER 3: Did you make any progress on that find a way to get Nigeria to buy some things to counterbalance all that oil?

WALTER MONDALE: We had a major breakthrough, I think, in US Nigerian relations at this, what we call a 5th bilateral conference, where we established working groups on agriculture, which is their preeminent objective right now-- energy, science and technology, education, trade and economic relations.

And we brought a high level delegation of our top people in each of those fields. They did the same. And we worked out a joint agreement, which I think will help. These things take time. But will help over the long run to increase American exports to Nigeria.

Increase the use of American technology and science across the range in Nigeria. Encourage and make more attractive the participation of US investment and business in Nigeria. And help correct this yawning imbalance of payments.

SPEAKER 2: Nigeria has not been above in the past using oil as a political weapon. They nationalized BP at one point in an effort to force Britain to intervene in Rhodesia. Did you come away with any kinds of guarantees from the Nigerians of a continued oil supply to the United States?

WALTER MONDALE: They have never threatened us. And as a matter of fact, in every test, as I've indicated earlier, they've not only been reliable, but they've increased production to be helpful. The US-Nigerian relationship is now excellent. They are very supportive.

Not of all the details. But of the principle that we've established under the Carter administration of identifying with majority rule in Black nations and based on non-discriminatory policies, they are very laudatory of our role, for example, in nudging Zimbabwe to a democratically elected government.

And so our relationships are superb. And that is a better basis for reliability than a written document.

SPEAKER 3: Is there any chance, do you think, for prying the Nigerians away from OPEC in some way?

WALTER MONDALE: I don't think so. We have several good friends that are reliable energy suppliers. Venezuela is another classic example, who are members of OPEC. Feel strongly about that membership, but who have not participated in trying to interrupt supplies. In other words, the reliable suppliers. And that's very important to us.

But both are price hawks, as we call them. They want higher prices so they can get more money for domestic development. And we talked to them about being more restrained. We point out the inflationary impact in the world here, but particularly in the poor part of the world, from soaring energy prices.

And we talked to them about that. But as with so many other nations that are also reliable suppliers, we have been less than persuasive up to this point.

SPEAKER 3: Did you find pressure from the Nigerians about American policy in Southern Africa? Were they demanding tougher American pressure on South Africa?

WALTER MONDALE: We reviewed the situation in South Africa. I think they understand our position. They are publicly in favor of imposing economic sanctions at this time. They understand that we've not only imposed sanctions against military sales, but we went beyond the UN resolution. And impose sanctions against the sale of materials for police and security forces and the rest.

And they like us, see Namibia as a crucial next step, and see the crucial nature of South African cooperation there. And I would say that there's a slight, at this point, differences in emphasis. But we understand each other and there was not a basic disagreement.

SPEAKER 2: Mr. Vice President, what would happen with relations with Nigeria, say, if there were a change of administration in the United States? And Ronald Reagan were to become president, and if we're to believe some of his advisors, his administration were to take a say, a softer line towards South Africa. How would Nigeria react to that? What would be the effect on American diplomacy and supply of oil from Africa?

WALTER MONDALE: History teaches us something here. Under the previous administration, where we took a very diffident and distant position on issues, like ending discrimination and majority rule in Africa. Where we often identified with colonial powers such as the Portuguese when that power was slipping.

Where we seem to take so many internal disputes that were based on Indigenous complaints, and characterized them that East West disputes and we had to take the side of we didn't care who, as long as they weren't with the Russians and so on.

I think relations between the United States and all Black African leaders was very badly damaged and poisoned. And I don't think that's a matter of debate. I think, it's well-known. And we spent some time as a new administration gaining credibility with these nations. And I think we now have it.

If a follow on administrations were to slip back into that old, manipulative, insensitive way, we would be in very serious shape in Africa. And we might realize for the first time how important African nations are to us as participants in the international scene and for everything that counts for this nation.

We tend to be a European-centered political system. In other words, we tend to measure and think about the impact of our policies on Europe, and that's terribly important. Maybe some of us include Japan and China and so on. But regrettably, we do not focus on the other continents, like Latin America and Africa.

Africa is terribly important to us. Good relations with Africa are important to us. And in order to have that, you've got to come clean and be assertive on the issues of human rights, majority rule, economic development, and be a respectful partner among the family of nations. If we ever slip away from that again, there'll be real trouble, I'm sure.

SPEAKER 2: Did the Nigerians and others raise this point, are they worried about a Reagan victory?

WALTER MONDALE: Well, I have to be careful about that. In other words, I don't think any of these nations intend to interfere with the internal domestic political situation here. But for example, one of the reporters at my Lagos news conference got up and said, in effect, the Carter administration has been good on Black African issues. We respect that. What might we expect of this new crowd takes over. And I said, you have nothing to worry about. We'll handle them in November.

But I must say, in all candor, I'm worried about some of the advisors that they have on this issue. I'm worried about the record of Mr. Reagan on this question, among other things, the lack of attention to the third-world problems, as they're called. And I don't wish to speculate on this time or on this program. But I think it's fair to say there's considerable apprehension over there about what might happen to African policy in that event.

SPEAKER 3: Well, let's pick up on one specific point that is Namibia. I gather that the Angolans, according to the Nigerians at least, have pledged to withdraw the Cubans, or to order the withdrawal of the Cubans, 15,000 of them. If the Namibia problem is solved by an election, UN-controlled election.

And if this is generally perceived internationally to have solved that problem in Southwest Africa, then there would be no more Cubans in Angola, and presumably the United States would then be in a position to recognize Angola, which for the past five years, we have not. Where does that stand, do you think? I mean, how serious is all that?

WALTER MONDALE: One of the crucial links in all of this, as your question suggests, is Namibia. Namibia may be the next area where we can break through in terms of a Democratic government, elected by the people on the Zimbabwe model. And it would be a thrilling, exciting, improvement, because that would then remove the stated reason that the Angolans use for the presence of Cuban troops to which we object.

We have certain relationships of a non-governmental nature with Angola now. We make XM loans there. We have American businesses there. They've been very helpful with us in trying to work on the Namibian dispute, and so on. But we object to the presence of the Cuban troops there, and we've told them that we don't believe we can normalize relations until that's behind them.

So if we could settle the Namibian dispute, there may be a good chance that the Angolans would follow through on the suggestions that some say they've made. Remove the Cuban and the Russian presence, which we want them to do. And then I think that would clear the way for recognition, and a lot of other things that could follow in the best interest, not only of Angola, but that whole family of nations there that tragically.

One of the tragic stories of Africa is that these poor nations, many with enormous economic potential. For example, Rhodesia, now Zimbabwe, has enormous potential. Many other Africans. But they've had to spend the last 10 or 15 years fighting, using their own resources for military purposes, with all the internal turmoil and fears that poison the political system.

And if those poor nations could just live at peace for a while and pour those resources into economic development, developing their political institutions, it would be a marvelous development for the world.

SPEAKER 3: Did the Nigerians urge the United States to recognize Angola as one step toward solving the Namibia problem?

WALTER MONDALE: No, at least not in my discussions. They may have in other environments, but they did not at this time. I think they know our position and didn't press us.

SPEAKER 2: Is there any way to put that kind of pressure on the South Africans to take a step that would?

WALTER MONDALE: We're doing everything we can. I spoke on that issue in my address at Lagos. We have been pressing the South Africans to agree to the UN formulation. And they have agreed. All the terms, except they say that the UN should not supervise that election because they're not impartial.

SPEAKER 2: That's been a sticking point for a couple of years.

WALTER MONDALE: They say that since the UN has recognized as the official representative of south western African People's organization, as the official representative, they cannot be trusted to conduct a fair election.

Recently, secretary-general wrote them a letter trying to get them off that position, taking such steps as we can to guarantee a fair election. If the South Africans can take that additional step, then everything should be in place for a good election, a new government, and it would be an exciting additional breakthrough for Democratic government in southern Africa, following after, I think, fairly successful breakthrough in Zimbabwe.

SPEAKER 3: Do the South Africans distrust you personally because of your meeting with former Prime Minister Vorster in Vienna, when you asserted that majority rule was necessary?

WALTER MONDALE: I think there's a pretty good reason that he trusted me before the meeting, and I doubt that the meeting did much to dispel it. And it's not because I was confrontational or tried to get a fight. I didn't want one, and I don't want one. It's that there's such a basic collision in concept.

For example, I argued with Mr. Vorster that our experience while different than theirs had some similarities, and that is that our nation, regrettably, once had slavery, once had official discrimination and separation of the races. And we fought a civil war over that issue. And it had poisoned the political life of our nation for too much of its history.

And that in the years since we've eliminated discrimination, since we've had one man, one vote, since we've had an official policy of permitting all Americans to achieve, several things had happened. First of all, in the south, we now have perhaps the fastest growth area in the country because it's unleashed enormous potentials, not just for Blacks, but for whites.

The whole nation has benefited from human rights. It's not just a matter of principle and issues of justice. It's important as they are. It would be good for their country to do the same thing. They're just sort of at this point, at least from Mr. Vorster, I've never talked to PW Botha, his a successor. But it was a case of each of us explaining our positions but making no converts.

SPEAKER 2: And yet the Nigerian press, I gather while you were there, was saying that the United States seems to have moved away in recent months of its sharper criticism of the South Africans. Is that true? Has there been any kind of shift in US policy?

WALTER MONDALE: I did not see that one editorial in one paper until after I'd given my speech, in which I had actually dealt with that policy. As a matter of fact, I think we've had--

SPEAKER 2: But it was a paper that reflected government views, as I understand.

WALTER MONDALE: Yes. But they have learned from the American press and such journals as The Washington Post to be cantankerous whenever possible. Their press, like ours, believes that it's intolerable to have a politician have a decent night's sleep. And that's the test of a democracy, apparently, because you're very successful here.

In any event, we had several discussions with their top leaders. They are concerned as we are, and as they should be about progress in South Africa. Because of the history, I think of US, African relations, they are constantly watching us and testing us, wondering whether we're performing in accordance with our principles.

I believe that our meeting helped reassure them that we're constantly doing our best, and I believe there's a good deal of private understanding as to the legitimacy and the propriety of the policies that we're pursuing regarding South Africa and Southern African politics.

I think it is in the nature of a Democratic society to have different points of view. I mentioned earlier that some of these nations insist that sanctions be imposed right now. We think that's a mistake. We think that the threat of possible sanctions is a more persuasive strategy at this time, coupled with meaningful talks than to slap on the sanctions and have nothing to talk about.

And the South Africans embittered and enraged. And it may be that sometime in the future that will be necessary. But at this point, we think for tactical reasons, the approach we're taking makes the most sense.

Secondly, we think at this point, there would be substantial difficulties in making sanctions effective for reasons we don't have to go into. But it is very difficult, like we found, for example, in trying to impose restrictions on scientific high technology sales to the Soviet Union, very difficult to make those things work. And to impose sanctions that are ineffective is totally counterproductive.

And even though they may differ with us on tactics, I think they privately see the point, and I think many of them accept it.

SPEAKER 3: Mr. Vice President, I gather that the Nigerians are also unhappy, both publicly and privately, in the press and in the government, about the level of American aid to Zimbabwe, and they've complained about that. When you go into a meeting with them, how do you deal with the fact that they're unhappy? They feel we haven't kept our promises. And then on this end, you have trouble with Congress eking out almost each dollar for such purposes.

WALTER MONDALE: Well, first of all, we point out that in aid to Africa, in the four years that we've been in office, we've increased economic assistance and other kinds of technical assistance. I think from something like $300 million to well over $700 million. We've over doubled it. And they concede that.

Secondly, we do have a substantial aid program to Zimbabwe. I think it's something like $50 million over a year and a half or two. It is substantial. And then we point out to them. They often refer to the aid package proposed by the former secretary of state. And we pointed out that was a proposal for a consortium of nations from around the world, and that we would be glad to join with such a consortium to contribute to Zimbabwe.

We also point out the difficulties that we have in this country, getting adequate support for foreign aid. And I will say something very unpopular now that I think one of the biggest impediments to an effective American foreign policy that serves our interests, the interests of a stable world, that undercuts the appeal of the cynical Soviet policies is our inability to mount sufficient help at crucial moments in the history of a society now.

Nothing should be more basic to us than to make Zimbabwe succeed. It stands for everything that America stands for-- a non-discriminatory society, an elected Democratic society, an example of relatively peaceful transformation from colonial rule to independence.

A government that rejects now officially, the presence of Soviet influence and arms and all the rest, and a government, which if it can be encouraged to move along in a competitive Democratic process, can be an example that we can use around the world.

There's a lot rolling on the success of Zimbabwe in the interests of our nation and those things in which we believe. And while we're glad we can provide $50 million of aid, it seems to me that we ought to be in a position not to waste money. I don't mean that. But we ought to be in a position at this crucial moment, when they have so many-- they have a war ravaged country, they have so many problems that we and other nations might be able to help somewhat more than we are today, and do it more quickly.

SPEAKER 2: Why hasn't this administration been able to help more? Why hasn't? Is that not a failure of making the argument domestically then?

WALTER MONDALE: Well, as I pointed out, in fact, we have substantially increased aid levels. But even given that, this has been a problem of every administration that's ever been in office. Foreign aid is designed to help people who don't vote in America. And there have been a lot of mistakes in foreign aid in the past. I assume we're making some.

And every one of those errors are used with great effect not to do anything. Meanwhile, the Soviet Union can move in quickly, dramatically, as they please, often to their great advantage, and against everything we believe, and to the detriment of a stable world.

SPEAKER 3: They don't need appropriations from Congress or public approval?

WALTER MONDALE: No, and I'm not for a moment asking that we copy that system. But I do believe that in this day and age, when so many people are saying we're not strong enough, we're not decisive enough, we're not standing up to the Russians enough, even though those arguments, in my opinion, are exaggerated. Rarely do you hear him say, well, we ought to have a more effective ability to move swiftly.

For example, Nicaragua. If we could have moved with substantial help months ago, rather than have to go through this long, drawn, it might have made a difference. Who knows? It might have made a difference. But there have been and there are moderate forces down there that want a more open, competitive economy, a more open structure. And we've been much delayed. We're finally getting some help there. But it's been much delayed.

And I think a great nation like ours ought to be-- I think we're getting a little off Africa right now. But I say that point because I think Americans have got to focus. If they want a strong, effective America, we've got to be able to deal as a major power must.

SPEAKER 3: Well, let me extend that then to another country in Africa where we have moved and where, I think, our movement is somewhat controversial, and that is Morocco. Where this administration has left quite a good record of not getting too terribly involved in African conflicts. Yet in Morocco, in the war in the Western Sahara, in which the Polisario front is trying to declare its independence, we have sent military aid to the Moroccans.

The Algerians are supporting the Polisario. 26 countries, a majority of the countries in the OAU have said that the Polisario should be recognized. Isn't this a backing away from what US posture has been in Africa? Aren't we getting ourselves into a difficult area here by coming out so strongly from Morocco?

WALTER MONDALE: It's difficult. But on the other hand, the Moroccans were finding their own territory under threat. They asked for limited defensive equipment to help defend their own territory. We were pressing the Moroccans to negotiate, to settle this dispute amicably in the former Spanish Sahara.

And we are trying to use this aid, not only to help Morocco defend itself, but also to encourage them to feel more secure to enter into negotiations. And several of the African nations, as you know support that effort.

SPEAKER 2: Let's take another country that's been a bit of controversy in Africa recently. It was Liberia. The new president of Liberia didn't attend the OAU meeting recently in Freetown because he was very unpopular. His presence there would not have been desirable. But Liberia is an old and close ally of the United States.

WALTER MONDALE: And always with a special relationship to our nation because of the unique historical connection.

SPEAKER 2: But what do we think about a society in which they took out the old president, lined him up and shot him along with all of his key advisors. Did that subject come up at all?

WALTER MONDALE: Yes, it did. And as you know, we have repeatedly objected in private and in public to that horrible performance. There is no doubt, I'm sure, in the minds of the current leadership in Liberia of our objections.

SPEAKER 3: How much leverage do we really have in a society like Liberia is now?

WALTER MONDALE: We don't have the ability to run another country anywhere. And if we did, I think we ought to be very reluctant to do so because another people and another nation are not going to tolerate the reintroduction of either formal colonialism or its functional equivalent. The world's not that way, and we ought to get used to it.

But there are powerful historic and cultural affinities between our two nations that are very powerful. And like so many other African nations, I think they know that they're better off with the West. And you know, this is where you need to be somewhat relaxed sometimes.

A lot of these countries use harsh Marxist rhetoric, and they perform in very practical ways. Some of that is necessary for domestic politics. Some of it is a vestige of an early era. And one of the tenets used to be socialized-- societies, government ownership of everything.

In fact, those that implemented that rhetoric have been largely economic failures. And those that have moved toward a more open, competitive society and more open Democratic societies are the ones that are making the most dramatic progress in Africa.

It's now no longer a theory. We have 20 years or more of experience since most of these have become free societies. And it is that solid, practical reality that I think is perhaps the most powerful force at work in Africa today.

SPEAKER 2: On another subject, just briefly, during the past 3 and 1/2 years, have you ever thought of yourself as being a co-president of the United States?

WALTER MONDALE: No, nor would I. There is only one president of the United States. That's all we should have. I've tried to help him, but I have always tried also to make it clear as it shouldn't be necessary. In the United States, we have only one president of the United States. The thought of diluting or dividing the American presidency would weaken this nation and hobble it in a way that would be disastrous.

SPEAKER 2: So you weren't intrigued by what Governor Reagan and former President Ford were cooking up?

WALTER MONDALE: No, I wasn't. And I would like to know what the details of the proffered agreement were. But from what I hear, it was something along that line.

SPEAKER 3: Would the Africans impolite enough to ask you about Ronald Reagan and George Bush?

WALTER MONDALE: Yes.

SPEAKER 3: What did you tell them?

WALTER MONDALE: I'll be polite enough not to say.

[LAUGHTER]

SPEAKER 3: Thank you, Mr. Vice President.

SPEAKER 1: Vice President Walter Mondale, talking with Communique host, Peter Osnos of The Washington Post, and NPR Sanford Ungar. For a free transcript of this program, write Communiqué, National Public Radio, Washington, DC 20036. That's Communiqué, National Public Radio, Washington 20036.

The program was produced by Jeff Rosenberg, with Margaret Jay and Jerry Calkins. Communiqué is made possible by funds provided by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

[MUSIC PLAYING]

This is NPR-- National Public Radio.