Record of Conversation between M S Gorbachev and the US Secretary of State George Shultz February 22 1988 Moscow Shultz In any case we discussed these questions more thoroughly than we ever have before We have not reached any specific conclusions but our work was useful Our discussions are becoming more mature On the questions of Angola and Cambodia we have come to the agreement that there are possibilities for interaction We discussed the problem of the Iran-Iraq conflict I would like to hear your thoughts on this subject This pertains to Afghanistan We welcome your statement on Afghanistan We think that the situation right now is very promising We would like for this round of the Geneva talks to be the last We can see that there is movement in this process We would like for this difficult process to finally be finished At the same time it is quite natural for our side to try to obtain certain assurances regarding the content of this process Yesterday I tried to explain what I am talking about We discussed this question in detail yesterday and I would like to hear your thoughts I would like to speak about the Middle East a region I will be visiting soon Gorbachev First I would like to state some general thoughts on the role of our countries--the USSR and the US--in the regional conflict settlement efforts I feel that in these matters we should be the example of cooperation to the world If we achieve this cooperation we can hope that the conflicts would be resolved with the consideration of the interests of all sides involved Shultz I can agree with that Gorbachev We will not be able to break up the painful knots that have built up around the world if we use other approaches I am saying this because I feel that you still have a negative approach to our sincere desire to work with you to resolve these acute problems Maybe this is because your approach has been set a long time ago Or maybe the policies coming from the National Security Council are at the heart of it They still think that the Soviet Union remains and will continue to be a State with which the United States will come into conflict everywhere in the world and we will always be guilty If this approach remains then we cannot count on progress and collaboration We could draw an entirely different conclusion from the fact that we are both have presence everywhere I've said this many times to you and I have said it publicly Since we are present everywhere we simply have to balance our interests This kind of an approach would stimulate the search for decisions and solutions This is our philosophy It is important for the understanding of regional situations How is our philosophy interpreted particularly in the Afghanistan question We brought our plan of action to Washington You were the first to whom we told this plan and we asked for your collaboration in finding a solution to this complex and acute problem We took into account and accepted your considerations regarding the Geneva negotiations that an agreement should be reached as soon as possible and that our withdrawal should not be tied to the formation of a coalition government in Afghanistan Regrettably a conversation about this did not happen in Washington Nevertheless we believe that our countries can collaborate on the situation that has built up around Afghanistan We could provide an example of how regional conflicts should be 1 approached In order to give you an impetus in this direction we presented our recent statement After this we saw some movement from you But what's happening You are rejecting your own advice If we want to have a neutral non-aligned independent Afghanistan then let the Afghans discuss and decide what kind of government they should have What do you find unacceptable in this idea Isn't this what you have been talking about all the time We talked about the fact that after the agreement is signed both you and we would have less power to influence the situation We are seeing this already it is more difficult to work with our friends Everybody thinks about himself about his future and the future of his country And this is quite natural I still think that we can play a role in the settlement of this conflict You wanted us to make a statement about the withdrawal of our troops to provide a date and a timeframe for the withdrawal We did this The way is open I welcome what you said about the Geneva negotiations that this round should be the last one This is the only right approach After all we cannot dance to the tune of the moods and emotions of this or that side of the conflict This question is too important to the Soviet Union to be doing Polka dances to please somebody And yet we cannot ignore the fact that some people have the insolence--I am not afraid to use that word--to say that the Soviet Union's statement about the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan is only propaganda Shultz We do not say that We welcome your statement and accept it as such Already six months ago I believed in the seriousness of your intentions when E A Shakhnazarov first told me about them Gorbachev I would like to again assure you that we have no intentions of creating a springboard in Afghanistan we are not yearning for warm seas etc That's rubbish We never had such intentions and we do not have them now One of the reasons why we would like you to contribute to a speedy signing of the Geneva agreements is to allow Afghanistan to become an independent non-aligned neutral country with the type of government that the Afghans want themselves Let's guide the matter from both sides in the direction of a bloodless settlement Shultz I agree Gorbachev You asked me to talk about the Middle East and the Iran-Iraq conflict Shultz Allow me to say a few words before you begin I will not repeat everything that I said yesterday to E A Shevardnadze I am sure you have a copy of that conversation I talked about the core of our concerns in the light of which we view the Geneva process We would like for the process to work well I have not changed my point of view since I spoke with you in Washington about the difficulties of forming a coalition government Gorbachev It is not going to be formed in Moscow or Washington Shultz And not in Pakistan Gorbachev All the more so not in Pakistan Right now contacts are being established between the Afghans that we did not even know about There are some things going on there that neither you nor we know about We should not present ourselves as a kind of arbiter of Afghanistan's fate Shultz Alright I am ready to limit myself to what has been said Let us move on to the Iran-Iraq conflict 2 Gorbachev Please convey to the President that we are hoping for collaboration with the American side in the settlement of the Afghan question Iran-Iraq conflict It looks like certain new elements in the collaboration between our countries both bilaterally and within the framework of the Security Council have come up in the process of looking for a settlement of the problems We appreciate this This is important in its own right as well as from the point of view of the UN Security Council's future prospects It is very important for such interaction to continue and not wither We are prepared to collaborate with you during the next stage But right now centrifugal tendencies are appearing in the Security Council The US is the chair of the Security Council right now We need an effort We did not fail in our chairmanship at the Council You should not fail in yours Shultz We would like to be successful Gorbachev We will help you in that Shultz Yesterday we discussed a somewhat new approach to this problem We did not reach an agreement but the discussion was comprehensive The solution we are proposing would have three main components Firstly there would be a mandatory embargo on supplying weapons to a country that does not follow the previous resolution In addition to that there are two more ideas A specific date should be determined on which the embargo on weapons would come into effect But there should be a period of say thirty days between this date and the vote at the Security Council Moreover the general secretary would be offered to create a special negotiations group or assign a special representative who would deal exclusively with this question What E A Shevardnadze said yesterday is true--the UN General Secretary has many other responsibilities That is why it would be a good idea to add this new element to the general picture with the aim of activating the negotiations This kind of a representative would work within a timeframe At the same time he could address the Security Council at a certain point and say that in his opinion the date when the resolution would go into effect should be postponed since there is visible progress in the efforts This way the representative would have some leverage This is the new idea that came up during the discussion Gorbachev We will discuss your proposals In this context the idea is new to us We are prepared to make a constructive contribution to the solution of this problem I would like to ask you to convey the following to the President in our opinion is it vitally important not to allow this conflict to grow and expansion This conflict should not become the center of a dramatic situation that would involve many countries We are very worried about this possibility That is why we should carefully adjust all our steps Of course we need to act firmly and consistently but at the same time we should take care that we do not get the opposite result of what we are striving for Shultz Yes we understand that Gorbachev Tell me did you consider the possibility of reducing your military presence in the Persian Gulf Or do you think that such a step could be seen as a sign of weakness You could use fewer ships to achieve your goals Shultz The task we are performing is ongoing We are carrying it out successfully Recently we reduced our presence in the Persian Gulf by two large ships As a result the configuration changed and the scale of our presence was reduced Our goal is still the same but we decided that we can carry it out with smaller means 3 We are not striving to keep large numbers of ships there When the scale of the problem decreases our presence will too Colin Powell When E A Shevardnadze raised this question yesterday I told him that the accumulation of our forces in the Persian Gulf in the last 6-6 sic months has led to the addition of only two warships The majority of the accumulation consists of mine-sweepers helicopter carriers and other ships that do not pose a threat and are necessary only for the minesweeping operation As we understand the situation we adjust the scale of our presence This is how we found it possible to withdraw two large ships As the threat decreases and we understand the situation we can make further adjustments Gorbachev Very well As I understand with this we can conclude the discussion of the Iran-Iraq conflict Shevardnadze We agreed to continue having consultations on this question Gorbachev An Iranian element is present in the Afghan situation We will have to take that into consideration Shultz We understand that This element is also present in the Middle East equation I talked about that yesterday Gorbachev You are right Iran wants a fundamentalist government to form in Afghanistan Shevardnadze And not only there Shultz It seems like the Iranians would not mind fundamentalist governments in the Kremlin and in Washington Laughter Gorbachev But it is unlikely that they are counting on it Maybe they are praying for it Now about the Middle East We studied your proposals which we obtained through Ambassador Matlock Moreover almost all the Arabs to whom you appealed with these proposals also appealed to us I welcome the starting process even though it is still rather weak of collaboration in finding a solution to this chronic problem We were waiting for you to understand that it is difficult to resolve this problem without the participation of the Soviet Union I think we may have common interests here We are advocating a universal just settlement with the consideration of the Arabs' interests including the Palestinians and Israel's interests on the basis of returning the occupied territories and resolving other questions No other approach stands a chance here It is impossible to ignore any side's interests We are reviewing your proposals from this perspective Of course there are certain differences between us But we both understand that it is impossible to impose any decision and it is unacceptable to ignore the interests of any of the sides or groups In this light a critical interpretation of your proposals on the Middle East is taking place Many believe that despite the elements of flexibility in your proposals they are nevertheless based on an old approach that under the cover of a discussion of a conference on the Middle East the same policy of separatist dealings with a limited number of participants if followed An example of this is that Syria is outside the framework of your proposals Everybody also noticed that your proposal reflects a negative position in relation to the Palestinian settlement and particularly the PLO Palestine Liberation Organization This is how people see it on the one hand your proposals seem to be aimed at trying to secure a cease-fire to alleviate the acute situation in Gaza and the West Bank If this were done 4 together with the general settlement it would be understandable But if it is not it's a totally different matter As you know we offered to start the work of a preparatory committee with the participation of the permanent members of the Security Council which would discuss in detail all the aspects of preparing the conference We suggested that the forum could be used for the discussion of multilateral as well as bilateral aspects of the settlement We think that this is a clear and understandable approach Source Archive of the Gorbachev Foundation Moscow Fond 1 opis 1 Translated by Anna Melyakova for the National Security Archive 5 This document is from the holdings of The National Security Archive Suite 701 Gelman Library The George Washington University 2130 H Street NW Washington D C 20037 Phone 202 994-7000 Fax 202 994-7005 nsarchiv@gwu edu