SUBSCRIBE TO THE NIXON CENTER EMAIL BULLETIN

ff

HENRY KISSINGER, Conference Chairman: Senator Dole, members of the Nixon family, excellencies, ladies and gentlemen:

As they left the Garden of Eden, Adam turned to Eve and said, "We live in an age of transition." (Laughter.) And we certainly live in this period in an age of transition. The very days of the Cold War period have been altered by the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the change in status of Eastern Europe. The ideological conflict no longer dominates events. The world is no longer a bipolar world. At the precise moment that communications and economics have become globalized, ethnic conflicts and nationalist rivalries have reemerged. And, therefore, America faces the challenge of defining what it's role should be, what purposes it should achieve, and what challenges it must resist, and also to define the principles in the name of which it will strive for these goals.

It is appropriate that within this year of President Nixon's death the Nixon Center should have assembled a conference to address what was the consuming concern of his life. And he would be proud, as his former associates are, that we are doing this on a bipartisan basis, because the national interest of the United States does not change with the presidency.

It is in this spirit that a number of major speakers and a series of panels are assembling here over the next two days. We're grateful to all of you who are participating and who came, who can help us to define together how a America should define its role at this period, which in many ways is most comparable to the immediate post-war world after World War II when another act of redefinition had to take place.

Senator Dole, whom we've know for all these years as a friend and as a great national leader, is going to be our first speaker in a little while after lunch, but I want to thank him for having taken the time to come here.

I would now like to ask John Taylor, who is the executive director of the Nixon Library, to say a few words. John was probably the closest associate of President Nixon during the last 10 years of his life and made a major contribution in that extraordinary performance of the former president when, relying entirely on his own analytical ability and dedication, he made a series of contributions to the major aspects of our foreign policy, driven as he always was by the conviction -- by two convictions -- that the national interest of the United States must be related to the global interest and that the national interest of the United States was a challenge to all Americans and not to any particular partisan dispensation.

So in this spirit let me ask John Taylor to make a few remarks. (Applause.)

JOHN TAYLOR, Executive Director, Nixon Library: Thank you, Chairman Kissinger.

As you know, I have the briefest, but the happiest spot on your agenda this afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, because I have the enormous pleasure of thanking those men and women who have made it possible for us to come together today. And I am issuing those thanks both on behalf of the Nixon family and the boards of directors of the Nixon Library and Birthplace and the Center for Peace and Freedom.

We're particularly honored to have with us the co-chair of the Richard Nixon Library and Birthplace, a vice-chair of the center, and a member of the steering committee of this conference. She is here with the president's son-in-law, Edward Cox. Please recognize Tricia Nixon Cox. (Applause.)

Ed and Tricia have brought with them young Master Christopher Cox, who is often confused with the Newport Beach congressman, and not without reason, because they look very much like one another. Welcome to you as well, Christopher.

I'd also like to recognize the president's brother, Edward Nixon. Would you please stand, Ed. (Applause.)

I'd like to recognize those besides Dr. Kissinger who serve on the boards of the center and the library. Please stand as your names are mentioned. Ladies and gentlemen, and would the rest of you hold your applause until all of these august persons have stood? Caroline Ahmanson, George L. Argyros, Donald L. Bendetti, Katherine Loker, Cynthia Milligan, the Honorable Robert Ellsworth, C. William Maynes, the Honorable Lionel Olmer, Secretary James Schlesinger, and president of the Nixon Center, Dimitri Simes. (Applause.)

And now to the sponsors of this conference and the founders of our feasts. First of all, the John M. Olin Foundation, in particular it's president, William E. Simon, and its board of trustees, which includes another indispensable friend of the 37th president, Peter M. Flanigan. Representing that foundation today at the conference is its executive director James Piereson.

We also have to thank Dwayne O. Andreas and the Archer Daniels Midland Foundation and the Starr Foundation, particularly Maurice R. Greenberg and that foundation's president, T.C. Hsu.

I'd also like to mention the members of the staff and volunteers of the two institutions for all the work they did to bring us together today. First of all, the co-directors of the conference, Steven C. Clemons and Richard M. Quinn. To list all those who assisted Sandy Quinn and Steve in their work would be impossible, so I'll just try to isolate a few.

From the Nixon Library staff: Eva Hedger; Noah McMahon; Luke Stedman; and the assistant director of the Nixon Library, whose responsibilities today, ladies and gentlemen, included press relations, which in any Nixon operation is an intriguing concept, Kevin Cartwright. (Applause.)

And then the members of the center's staff: that institution's assistant director, Paul Saunders, and his colleagues, Kristin McArthur and Rebecca Friedman .

I'd also like All Nippon Airways for what they have done to make it possible for some of our important guests to be with us.

Those of you who knew the 37th president, and many of you did far better than I, know that it cannot have been easy to convince him of two things: first, that the world needed another think tank; and, second, that the creation of that think tank ought to be a priority of his own presidential library based in Yorba Linda.

Someone wrote a book once called "Five Wise Men." I forget who, but it's an appropriate comparison, because it was a book about five architects of the Cold War era. The group that persuaded President Nixon to found the Nixon Center were five wise and persuasive men who understood that there needed to be a new institution to help isolate and promote American national interest in the post-Cold War era.

That group includes the honorary chairman of this institution, Ambassador Walter Annenberg. The ambassador's friendship to President Nixon cannot be overestimated, and he will be honored in his own right on the first anniversary of the president's state services at a dinner at the Century Plaza Hotel on April 27th in Los Angeles.

Others in that group included our chairman, Dr. Kissinger, who was an important advisor to the conference -- the center as it took shape and to President Nixon, and he serves as well as the chairman of the advisory council of the Center for Peace and Freedom.

James Schlesinger, also an important early advisor to the president on the creation of the center, was the chairman of this center's first conference in 1992 and also serves as this conference's steering committee chairman. He is also the chairman of our ongoing study group on national security, in which I know some of you participate.

Next is the first and best president of the Nixon Center, Dimitri Simes, who in the last four years of President Nixon's life counseled him closely on the historic transition to economic and political freedom in the former Soviet Union.

And finally the gentleman I have the pleasure of introducing to you now. He is the founding chairman of the Center for Peace and Freedom. He is one of the West's most important business figures and at least avocationally speaking one of its most important political figures. It is his vision of a policy center based in distant Yorba Linda but vitally active in our nation's capital which more than any other thing made it possible for us to come together this afternoon. Please welcome George. L. Argyros. (Applause.)

GEORGE ARGYROS, Founding Chairman, Nixon Center: Thank you, John. And all of us that work with the library and also the center know how indispensable you are, John. Indispensable. But thank you.

Just over a quarter of a century ago, in 1968, the world was in turmoil. Relations between the United States and the Soviet Union were sour. We had no relations at all with China -- potentially one of the world's most powerful countries. War seemed to be a permanent fact of life in the Mideast. Over half a million Americans were fighting in Vietnam with no end in sight. Five and a half years later our forces had left Vietnam, we had a new relationship with China, our new relationship with the Soviet Union had produced historic breakthroughs in arms control and many other areas, and the first steps in a generation had been taken toward peace in the Mideast.

Through the great foreign policy initiatives of the Nixon administration, hundreds of millions of lives were changed for the better, and anyone who knew President Nixon, anyone who spent time talking to him, listening to him, reading his books and articles, understood that foreign policy was indeed his great love. He loved it, because it was the best way he knew to bring to life his thirst for peace and, as a former president, that he would in fact promise the day he left office that he would continue to work for peace and freedom in the world -- and he did.

In the last four years of his life he devoted much of his energy to the historic transition to economic and political freedom in the former Soviet Union. He also worked closely with those of us who believe that his principles of enlightened national interest and pragmatic idealism should be the foundation of a new, vital institution, the Nixon Center for Peace and Freedom.

It is a pleasure to welcome you today to the Nixon Center's first national policy conference, and I know you are looking forward as I am to two days of spirited discussion. But as I look over the schedule, what gives me the most pleasure of all is thinking about how much President Nixon would have enjoyed it.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, please enjoy your lunches, and afterwards the floor will belong to our esteemed chairman and the president's indispensable -- and I say indispensable -- partner in peace, Dr. Henry Kissinger. Thank you. (Applause.)

DR. KISSINGER: Because the majority leader has to leave and because as the chairman I have to assert my authority early -- (laughter) -- we have decided to reverse the order and ask Senator Dole to speak before lunch. Let me thank him again for coming. We express our enormous regard for what he has done, for his support for all administrations since he's been in the Senate. And Ed Cox will make the formal introduction. (Applause.)

EDWARD COX, President Nixon's Son-in-Law: It's a very daunting task to have to introduce to this distinguished audience here in Washington a man whom you, the audience, know so well. It's particularly daunting when Tricia told me before we came down here to remember her father's first rule of introduction, and that is: Keep it short.

Assemblyman, county attorney, congressman, senator, chairman of the Finance Committee of the Senate, majority leader, then minority leader, then after 1992 the de facto leader of his party, now majority leader. I'm sure I forgot something in that list. In '72 he was chairman of the Republican National Committee during the great landslide victory then. And many, many other things that he has done during his distinguished career. And I think there are very few, if any, living political figures that can match his record.

But this conference today, as Dr. Kissinger pointed out, is about foreign affairs and about America's role in an uncertain world. And so I think it's appropriate to note that Senator Dole has played an important role in virtually every major foreign policy concern encountered by the United States in the last 35 years. All the great issues of war and peace Senator Dole has been involved in.

Senator, you defended ably President Nixon's Vietnam policy in those tumultuous years of the early '70s. And fast-forwarding to 1991 when President Bush was about to wage Desert Storm, it was Dole who put together the crucial bipartisan -- 11 Democrats participating -- by a margin of three, that bipartisan Senate coalition that permitted Desert Storm to go forward.

And in dealing with major powers, it was Bob Dole who constructed the policies to protect, for example, with China the Chinese students in the United States after Tiananmen, while being mindful, very mindful, of China's strategic importance to the United States and in the world.

It was Bob Dole who recognized Yeltsin as the future of Russia when virtually all others in positions of responsibility had eyes only for the suave Mr. Gorbachev.

And in other areas of foreign policy, from crafting effective legislation -- it was Bob Dole who did it -- to combat terrorism around the world. It was Bob Dole who forced our foreign policy establishment to pay attention to the developing democracies in Latin America as well as in Eastern Europe.

And the list of foreign policy accomplishments can go on, but in addition to effectively handling foreign policy, Bob Dole has actually been there. He has traveled to and met the leaders in more than 50 countries around the world over the last 15 years. And those of us who've had the privilege of accompanying President Nixon on his trips abroad -- we didn't need to be told this -- inevitably when visiting a foreign leader, the leader would mention a recent or proposed meeting that was coming up with Senator Dole. "Dole was here" seems to be the universal words which could be painted on executive mansion walls around the world.

But such outstanding accomplishments and experience does not truly depict Bob Dole. The words which President Nixon used to describe another man from Kansas, a man from Abilene, apply as well to Senator Dole. "He came from the heart of America" was President Nixon's description of President Eisenhower in eulogizing him. Bob Dole is also a man from the heart of America -- strong, brave, compassionate, hard- working and persevering, unafraid of controversy, unyielding in conviction, patriotic, valuing accomplishments over ideology, a creative politician and statesman -- in short, a leader. He is a man who rose from a hard-scrabble youth during the Depression and Dust Bowl years with the help of a loving and supportive family in Russell, Kansas. He is a man who came back from life-threatening World War II wounds to hold one of the most powerful offices in the sole remaining superpower in the world. How American.

When we returned from the services for President Nixon, we were sitting in his library for one last time, and our son Christopher came up to me and said, "Look what I found in Ba's desk." All the grandchildren called their grandfather "Ba." And he handed me this card, and on this card President Nixon, which he signed, he had printed the 10 rules he said he would carve into the walls of the Oval Office for future presidents to follow in what he called the dangerous years just ahead.

And in summing up what a man needs to be president, he said a president needs a global view, a sense of proportion, and a keen sense of the possible. He needs to know how power operates, and he must have the will to use it. There is no doubt that Senator Dole -- and President Nixon had no doubt -- that Senator Dole fulfills those requirements.

Senator Dole, I look forward to your speech. Senator Dole. (Applause.)

SEN. ROBERT DOLE (R-KS), Senate Majority Leader: Thank you. I might add this is the little card Ed was talking about. I carry it around in my pocket. (Laughter.)

Let me say that you will have lunch. I've been assured of that. (Laughter.) Senator Lieberman will have lunch. But I have a meeting at 1:30. We're still trying to find one vote for the balanced budget amendment, and you know, I mean, if anybody knows Senator Lieberman, well, you might visit him during lunch. (Laughter, applause.) But it is -- I think it's an important measure and one that we don't want to give up on until we have to.

But I'm very honored to be here today, and very honored to be introduced by Ed Cox. And I didn't know I was going to come with all these experts in foreign policy, but I see Brent, Dr. Kissinger, Bob Ellsworth, Dimitri and others. So I'm a little intimidated. So Brent Scowcroft has agreed that after I speak he'll clean up whatever I said. (Laughter.) Then I can put it in the record, the Congressional Record. (Laughter.)

But I can't help remember the day when President Nixon made his last visit to the Capitol. And the occasion, as some here remember, was the 25th anniversary of his inauguration as president. And we had about 100 people there. I wanted more, but President Nixon always wanted -- he didn't care how big the crowd, but he wanted his friends there, and they were Democrats and Republicans and they were staff people and they were former senators and there were others -- just people he knew well like Mike Mansfield, for example, who had been the majority leader, Russell Long, Harry Byrd and Bob Michel on the House side and many others. So we had a great time.

And of course, as the president always did, at the end of the lunch he stood there without a note, and everybody listened with total attention. He talked a little politics, but not in the sense of partisan politics that day, but just talked politics generally. And he also shared some personal reflections on his life and career. But his life's passion was foreign policy, and that's where he spent most of the time. And he sort of took us on an round-the-world tour, as only Richard Nixon could do, and offered his unique perspective on the strengths and weaknesses of our allies and our adversaries and on the future as he saw it.

He made a statement that day, or he repeated a statement that day, and made it again and again during the last year of his life, when he said, "The Soviets have lost the Cold War, but the United States has not yet won it." And those words are just as true today as they were then. And while the tile of this conference, "After Victory," has a nice ring to it, I believe the declaration may be just a bit premature.

It is, after all, possible to win the war and lose the peace as the years between World War I and World War II demonstrated. But don't get me wrong. I mean, the stage is set. We are the world's only superpower. And the words spoken by Nikita Khrushchev in that famous kitchen debate were dead wrong. Not only will America's children never live under communism; neither will Russia's children live under communism.

And still there are far too many gains to consolidate and far too many uncertainties in the world to say that a final peace has been won. For example, there is a resurgent Russia asserting its position around the globe. China has international ambitions of its own. It's in the midst of a leadership transition. There are international tariffs often state-supported. There are global crime syndicates. There are extremist movements based on religion or ethnic origin. While none of these compare to the challenge we had with the Soviet Union, the Soviet empire, each of these can pose threats to important American interests.

And it seems to me -- and I'll do it very quickly -- it seems to me that these multi-faceted threats should be viewed in the context of five clear global realities which affect America's fundamental interests. And I think only by recognizing these realities and dealing with them with the same commitment which led to the defeat of Soviet communism, will America truly be able to claim victory.

Reality number one. The first new reality is that the world is plunging headlong into what David Hale of the Kemper organization of Chicago has termed "a new golden age of capitalism." I remember when Lech Walesa told me that the definition of a communist economy was 100 workers standing around one shovel. Well, now in places like Poland and Russia, India, Latin America, and even China, four billion people formerly under some form of socialism are now fighting with everything they can to lay hands not just to grab a shovel, but to build the shovel factories. And that change has been dramatic, and it hasn't taken long. There are now more than 30 stock markets in the developing world, and capitalization of the four-year-old Shanghai Securities Exchange has reached $30 billion. Deng Xiaoping himself has said that no one cares anymore what color the cat is, as long as it catches mice.

The bottom line is that everyone wants to trade and everyone wants to create and use capital on a worldwide basis. And while this new golden age of capitalism offers a great opportunity for America, we must remember that many of the countries so eager to enjoy the benefits of membership in the world trading system may not fully understand or accept the rules and discipline that goes with it. A trade war was averted with China in the last few days. But other threats to U.S. commercial interests will surely arise in the coming months and years, and our continued vigilance in leadership will be required.

Reality number two. The second inescapable reality of the post-20th- century world is that the security of the world's oil and gas supplies will remain a vital national interest to the United States and of other industrial powers. The Persian Gulf was referred to. The Gulf War was referred. Senator Lieberman and I stood together on that issue -- it's a tough issue. But the Persian Gulf, the heartland of world energy for half a century, is still a region of many uncertainties. Saudi Arabia, as everybody knows, has been weakened financially. Iran and Iraq continue to exhibit great hostility to the West and pose threats to their neighbors. And the boundaries of the oil and gas heartland are now being redrawn to the north to include the great hydrocarbon deposits in the Caucasus, Siberia and Kazakhstan. In this new energy order, many of the most important geopolitical decisions, one on which a nation's sovereignty can depend, will deal with the location and routes for oil and gas pipelines. In response, our strategy, our diplomacy and our forward military presence needs readjusting.

Reality number three. The third inevitable reality for America and the world is the fact that while the Berlin Wall may have crumbled, weapons of mass destruction have not. This is just a partial roll call of the countries and groups that already possess nuclear, biological or chemical weapons: North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Libya. Have any of these nations earned our trust? And, given their past behavior, is it any surprise that there are startling signs that a worldwide black market in nuclear weapons has emerged? All this is taking place as talks to review the global treaty limiting the spread of nuclear weapons will soon begin. And even if the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is extended indefinitely, we must avoid falling into a false sense of security. We must prepare now for the future.

Iraq, Iran, and North Korea all illustrate the failures of traditional non-proliferation efforts which depend largely on the cooperation of other states. Only after Desert Storm did the West learn just how far Iraqi nuclear ambitions had progressed. And instead of announcing that the United States will veto any efforts to ease or end U.N. sanctions on Iraq, the administration dispatches an envoy to plead with the Europeans for cooperation. Where would such timidity have gotten us in the Cold War? Iran also appears poises for a great leap forward in its nuclear program, and thanks to a cash-hungry Russia doing for Iran what the Clinton administration has done for North Korea. And make no mistake about it: the agreed framework with North Korea has little prospect of successfully addressing the North Korean threat and apparently has already been violated.

American leadership in addressing these non-proliferation challenges is essential if additional states are not to choose the nuclear option. It's worth asking, what would we have done or not done if Iraq had one or two nuclear weapons in 1990? Preventing military action as a non- proliferation policy tool cannot be ruled out. Like it or not, it cannot be ruled out. There are defensive options. However, that's to provide the United States and our allies with protection against accidental and limited ballistic missile strikes. Pursuing an effective ballistic missile defense capability should be a top priority for U.S. defense policy now and for the foreseeable future.

Reality number four. The fourth new global reality is the increase in violence due to extremist, religious and ethnic movements in many parts of the globe. Some of these movements, like the tribal warfare in Rwanda or conflicts in Burma or West Africa, have little direct impact on American interests. However, some of the instability and turmoil due to ethnic and religious violence is important for American interests and could lead to disintegration of key states.

Serbian genocidal aggression in the Balkans, which has been another concern that Senator Lieberman and I have shared, threatens to spill over to Macedonia, Albania and beyond. American and European inaction in the face of that aggression cannot help but invoke another radical ethno-nationalists by giving them a green light for ethnic cleansing.

The Indian rebellion in Mexico, coupled with financial uncertainty, has resulted in genuine security concerns on our southern border. And make no mistake that illegal immigration is a security threat

A key NATO ally in Turkey faces Islamic extremism and a separatist ethnic movement. Violent Islamic fundamentalists threaten the government in Algeria and have launched an assault on Egypt. How long would the Camp David treaty be honored if fundamentalists took power, for example, in Egypt? Islamic terrorists seek to destroy the peace process between Israel and the PLO and may be having some success. And without support from Iran and others, Islamic terrorists also demonstrated at the World Trade Center that even we are not immune from attack.

And ethnic turmoil in the former Soviet Union cannot be ignored as warfare as occurred in five former republics, and the Chechens may be just one of many ethnic groups willing to use violence to alter boundaries that were originally set by Joseph Stalin.

In short, the list of world hot spots is far too lengthy for anyone to conclude that America can become complacent. Certainly Richard Nixon would never have been complacent, and we cannot become complacent.

And, finally, the fifth reality. We must face the fact that geopolitical rivalry with Russia did not end the demise of Soviet communism. On his last trip abroad, President Nixon spoke before the Russian state Duma. And he foreshadowed a change in Russian-American relations, saying, and I quote: "Russia is a great power, and Russia as a great power must chart its own course in foreign policy. When we have differences we should not assume they will be overcome by a good personal relationship, even at the highest level." End of quote.

And, as we have seen time and time again, the foreign policy course that Russia is charting is one that often is in conflict with American interests. Just let me give you a few examples, if you haven't followed it closely, and I assume everybody here has.

-- Russia stepped in the middle of the North Korea agreement by offering to provide nuclear reactors, which would have the clear effect of killing the U.S.-brokered deal.

-- Russia continues to threatened prospective NATO members over an alliance expansion, thereby confirming the need to enlarge NATO sooner rather than later.

-- In December 1994, Russia vetoed a sanctions resolution on Serbia in the U.N. Security Council -- its first substantive veto since the height of the Cold War in 1985.

-- Russia persists in supplying weapons and nuclear technology to the rogue regime in Iran.

-- Russia continues to maintain an intelligence facility and support personnel in Cuba, thereby prolonging Castro's repression.

Russian pressure, subversion and intimidation to the sovereign states in the near abroad follows an historical pattern set long before the Bolsheviks took power in 1917. As Dr. Kissinger said last month before the Senate Armed Services Committee, and I quote, "What we dealt with in the Cold War was both communism and imperialism, and while communism was defeated, the trend toward imperialism still exists." End of quote.

And let me be clear that no one has been more supportive of President Yeltsin, I think, than I have as far as Congress is concerned. I remember in 1991, when nobody was certain whether it was Gorbachev or Yeltsin, he was coming to America based on an invitation extended by myself and Senator Mitchell. And we suddenly just wondered who was going to meet him at the airport. Well, because nobody knew precisely what would happen to Yeltsin, not anybody was going to meet him at the airport. So I met him at the airport, along with an assistant- assistant-assistant secretary of state. (Laughter.) Because at the time Gorbachev was the only game in town. And then because I met him at the airport, I got him to go to Kansas. He agreed to go to Kansas, I think with Brent's help, for four hours and 21 minutes one day, in Wichita, Kansas. We were all excited. He gave his coat away that day, as I remember.

But just as it was wrong probably in 1991 to place too much focus on Gorbachev, it is wrong in 1995 to ignore the fact that President Yeltsin has made serious errors and has moved toward authoritarian rule and has lost the political support of virtually all reform-minded Russians. And it seems to me that -- again, I'm not here to take issue with the administration, but I don't agree with their policy -- sort of the Russia-first policy, which has turned into a Yeltsin-first policy, has resulted, I think, in a loss of tremendous opportunity to state American concerns forcefully before thousands were slaughtered in Chechnya.

A new realism about Russia and its prospects for the future does not mean we're going to turn to the Cold War of the past. It does mean developing a more honest relationship, one that does not paper over important policy differences with an appeal to personal ties -- the very same thing that President Nixon said at the time. New realism means emphasizing the significance of Russia's 1996 elections and the pivotal importance of a peaceful democratic transition of power. And new realism means that developments like arms sales to Iran, violence in Chechnya, and the U.N. veto on behalf of aggressors should not be excused, ignored or minimized. Our differences with Russia should be identified, laid out on the table. They should be negotiated when possible and condemned when necessary. Such an approach would ultimately serve both Russian and American people better than defending, denying and rationalizing Russia's misdeeds.

So let me conclude then by sharing with you words that Richard Nixon spoke at the announcement of the creation of the Center for Peace and Freedom on January 1994. And I watched that particular speech on C-SPAN -- one of his best. And he said: "Some are tired of leadership. They say America carried that burden long enough. But if we don't provide leadership, who will? The Germans? The Japanese? The Russians? The Chinese? Only the United States has the potential to lead in the era beyond peace. It is a great challenge for a great people." End of quote.

And, ladies and gentlemen, I think President Nixon was right. In fact, as you travel around the country or travel around our states, as many here travel all the time, there is that sort of eagerness to, you know, unload the burden. It's too heavy. We've carried it long enough. Let someone else pick up the tab or whatever. But President Nixon was right: You pay a price for leadership. Leadership does not come without a price tag. But in my view it's a price that's worth paying. And I hope that dealing with some of these realities -- and there may be others that others have thought of that are more important than the five that I've listed -- will test America's resolve and her leadership. And if we fail in those tests and if we refuse the mantel of leadership, any declaration of victory -- in the view of this senator -- will be a long time coming.

Thank you very much. (Applause.)

DR. KISSINGER: Bob, thank you very much. And Tricia Nixon would like to express a formal thanks and make a presentation.

TRICIA NIXON COX, Vice Chair, Nixon Center: Senator Dole, thank you for your superb remarks and your global vision.

Ladies and gentlemen, this elephant has been in my father's elephant collection since he was a young freshman congressman from California in 1946, and today Julie and I and our family would like to give the elephant to a great leader and a great American, Senator Bob Dole. (Applause.)

SEN. DOLE: Thank you very much.