An audience in the palace of fine arts theater in san francisco. An estimated 100 million americans are watching on television as well. San francisco was the site of the signing of the United Nations charter 31 years ago. Thus, it is an appropriate place to hold this debate. The subject of which is foreign and defense issues. The questioners tonight are max frankel, associate editor of the new york times. Henry trewhitt, Diplomatic Correspondent of the baltimore sun, and richard have ler valeriani of nbc news. The ground rules are that questions will be alternated between two candidates. By the toss of a coin governor carter will take the first question. Each question sequence will be as follows. The question will be asked and the candidate there have up to three minutes to answer. His opponent will have up to two minutes to respond. And prior to the response the questioner may ask a follow up question to clarify the candidates answer when necessary with up to two minutes to reply. Each candidate will have three minutes for a closing statement at the end. President ford and governor carter do not have notes or prepared remarks with them this evening. But they may take notes during the debate, and refer to them. Mr. Frankel, you have the first question for governor carter. Governor, since the democrats last ran our Foreign Policy, including many of the men who are advising you, the country has been relieved of the vietnam agony and the military draft, weve started arms control fwoer negotiations with the russians. Weve opened relations with china, weve arranged the disengagement in the middle east, weve regained influence with the arabs without deserting israel. Youve objected in this campaign to the style with which much of this was done and youve mentioned some other things that you think ought to have been done. But do you really and a quarrel with this republican record . Would you not have done any of those things . Well, i think this Republican Administration has been almost all style and spectacular, and not substance. Weve got a chance tonight to talk about, first of all, leadership, the character of our country, and a vision of the future, and every one of these instances the administration has failed and i hope tonight that i will have a chance to discuss the reason for those failures. Our country is not strong anymore. Were not respected anymore. We can only be strong overseas if were strong at home. And when i become president well not only be strong in those areas but also in defense. A defense capability, second to none. Weve lost in our Foreign Policy. The character of the American People. Weve ignored or excluded the American People in the congress from participation in the shaping of our Foreign Policy. Its been one of secrecy and exclusion. In addition to that weve had a chance to become now, contrary to our long standing beliefs and principles, the Arms Merchant of the whole world. Weve tried to bind success from our enemies, and at the same time weve excluded from the process the normal friendship of our allies. In addition to that weve become fearful to compete with the soviet union on an equal basis. Weve talked about how the soviet union knows what they want and theyve been getting it. We have not known what weve wanted. The other point i want to make is about our defense. Weve got to be a nation blessed with a defense capability thats efficient, tough, capable, well organized, narrowly focused, fighting capability. The ability to fight if necessary is the best way to avoid the chance for or the requirement to fight. In the last point is this, mr. Ford, mr. Kissinger have continued on with their policies and failures of richard nixon. Even the republican platform has criticized the lack of leadership in mr. Ford and theyve criticized the Foreign Policy of this administration. This is one instance from i agree with the republican platform. Ill say this in closing. As far as Foreign Policy goes, mr. Kissinger has been the president of this country. Mr. Ford has shown an absence of leadership and an absence of a grasp of what this country is, and what it ought to be. Thats got to be changed, and that is one of the major issues in this campaign of 1976. President ford, would you like to respond . Governor carter, again, is talking in broad generalities. Let me take just one question that he raises. The military strength and capability of the United States. Governor carter in november of 1975 indicated that he wanted to cut the Defense Budget by 15 billion. A few months later he said he wanted to cut the Defense Budget by 8 billion or 9 billion and more recently he talks about cutting the Defense Budget by 5 billion to 7 billion. There is no way you can be strong militarily and have those kind of reductions in our military appropriations. Now let me just tell you a little story. About late october of 1975 i asked the then secretary of defense, mr. Schlessinger, to tell me what had to be done if we were going to reduce the Defense Budget by 3 billion to 5 billion. A few days later there schlessinger came back and said if we cut the Defense Budget by 3 billion we will have to cut personnel by 250,000. Job in america by 100,000. We would have to stretch out our aircraft procurement. We would have to reduce our Naval Construction program. We would have to reduce the research and development for the army, the navy, the air force and marines by 8 . We would have to close 20 military bases in the United States immediately. Thats the kind of a Defense Program that mr. Carter wants. Let me tell you this straight from the shoulder. You dont negotiate with mr. Brezneff from weakness and the kind of a Defense Program that mr. Carter wants will mean a weaker defense and a poor negotiating position. Mr. Trewhitt, a question for president ford. My question is the other side of the coin from mr. Frankels. We have lost the first war in vietnam, we lost a shoving match in angola. Communists threatened to come to power by peaceful means in italy, and relations generally have cooled with the soviet union in the last few months. Let me ask you first, what do you do about such cases as italy . And secondly, does this general drift mean were moving back towards Something Like an old cold war relationship with the soviet union . I dont believe we should move to a cold war relationship. I think its in the best interest of the United States and the world as a whole that the United States negotiate rather than go back to the cold war relationship with the soviet union. I dont look at the picture as bleakly as you have indicated in your question, mr. Trewhitt. I believe that the United States has had many successes in recent years, in recent months as far as the communist movement is concerned. We have been successful in portugal where a year ago it looked like there was a very great possibility that the communists would take over in portugal. It didnt happen. We have a democracy in portugal today. A few months ago or i should say maybe two years ago the soviet union looked like they had continued strength in the middle east. Today, according to Prime Minister rabin, the soviet union is weaker in the middle east than they have been in many, many years. The facts are the soviet Union Relationship with egypt is at a low level. The soviet Union Relationship with syria is at a very low point. The United States today, according to Prime Minister rabin of israel, is at a peak in its influence in power in the middle east. But lets turn for a minute to the Southern African operations that are now going on. The United States of america took the initiative in Southern Africa. We wanted to end the bloodshed in Southern Africa. We wanted to have the right of selfdetermination in Southern Africa. We wanted to have majority rule with the full protection of the rights of the minority. We wanted to preserve Human Dignity in Southern Africa. We have taken the initiative and in Southern Africa today the United States is trusted by the black frontline nations and black africa, the United States is trusted by the other elements in Southern Africa. The United StatesForeign Policy under this administration has been one of progress and success. And i believe that instead of talking about soviet progress we can talk about american successes. And may i make an observation . Part of the question you asked, mr. Trewhitt. I dont believe that its in the best interest of the United States and the nato nations to have a communist government in nato. Mr. Carter has indicated he would look with sympathy to a communist government in nato. I think that would destroy the integrity and the strength of nato. And i am totally opposed to it. I have never advocated a communist government for italy. That would obviously be a ridiculous thing for anyone to do if you want to be president of this country. I think that this is an instance for deliberate distortion and this has occurred also in the question about defense. As a matter of fact, ive never advocated any cut of 15 billion in our Defense Budget. As a matter of fact mr. Ford has made a political football out of a Defense Budget. About a year ago he cut the pentagon budget 6. 8 billion. After he fired james schlessinger. The political heat got so great he added back about 3 billion. When Ronald Reagan won the texas primary election mr. Ford added back another 1. 5 billion. Immediately before the Kansas City Convention he added back another 1. 8 billion in the Defense Budget. And his own office of management and budget testified that he had a 3 billion cut insurance added to the Defense Budget under the pressure from the pentagon. Obviously this is another indication of trying to use the Defense Budget for political purposes, which hes trying to do tonight. Weve went into south africa late. After great britain, the black nations had been trying to solve this problem for many, many years. We didnt go in until right before the election, similar to what was taking place in 1972 when mr. Kissinger announced peace is at hand just before the election of that time. And we have weakened our position in nato because the other countries in europe supported the Democratic Forces in portugal long before we did. We stuck to the portugal dictatorships much longer than other democracies did in this world. Mr. Valeriani, a question for governor carter. Governor carter, much of what the United States does abroad is done in the name of the National Interest. What is your concept of the National Interest . What should the role of the United States in the world be . In that connection, considering your limited experience in Foreign Affairs and the fact that you take some pride in being a washington outsider, dont you think it would be appropriate for you to tell the american voters, before the election, the people that you would like to have in key positions, such as secretary of state, secretary of defense, National SecurityAffairs Adviser at the white house. Well, im not going to name my cabinet before i get elected. Ive got a little ways to go before i start doing that. But i have an adequate background, i believe. I am a graduate of the u. S. Naval academy. Ive served as governor of georgia and have traveled extensively. Europe, the middle east and japan. Ive traveled the last 21 months among the people of this country. Ive talked to them and ive listened and ive seen it firsthand in a very vivid way the deep hurt thats come to this country in the aftermath of vietnam and cambodia and chile and pakistan and angola and watergate, cia revelations. What we were formerly so proud of, the strength of our country, its moral integrity, the representation in Foreign Affairs of what our people or what our constitution stands for has been gone. And in the secrecy that has surrounded our Foreign Policy in the last few years, the American People, the congress have been excluded. I believe i know what this country ought to be. Ive been one whos loved my nation as Many Americans do and i believe that theres no limit placed on what we can be in the future if we can harness the tremendous resources, militarily, economically and the stature of our people, the meaning of our constitution in the future. Every time weve made a serious mistake in Foreign Affairs its been because the American People have been excluded from the process. If we can just tout the intelligence and ability, the sound common sense and the good judgment of the American People we can once again have a Foreign Policy to make us proud instead of ashamed. Im not going to exclude the American People from that process in the future, as mr. Ford and kissinger have done. This is what it takes to have a sound Foreign Policy, strong at home, Strong Defense, permanent commitments, not betray the principles of our country, and involve the American People and the congress in the shaping of our Foreign Policy. Every time mr. Ford speaks from a position of secrecy in negotiations, in secret treaties that have been pursued and achieved, in supporting dictatorships, in ignoring human rights, we are weak and the rest of the world knows it. So these are the ways that we can restore the strength of our country. And they dont require long experience in Foreign Policy. Nobody has that except a president who served a long time, or secretary of state. But my background, my experience, my knowledge of the people of this country, my commitment to our principles that dont change, those are the best bases to correct the horrible mistakes of this administration and restore our own country to leadership in the world. How specifically, governor, are you going to bring the American People into the decisionmaking process of Foreign Policy, what does that mean . First of all, i would quit conducting the decisionmaking process in secret, as has been a characteristic of mr. Kissinger and mr. Ford. In many instances weve made agreements, like in vietnam, that vn revealed later on to our embarrassment. Recently ian smith, the president of rodesia announced he had unequivocal commitments from mr. Kissinger he could not reveal. The American People dont know what the commitments are. We have seen the destruction of elected governments in ch ile, these kind of things have hurt us very much. I would restore the concept of the fireside chat which was an integral part of the administration of franklin roosevelt. I would also restore the involvement of the congress when harry truman was president. He was not afraid of a strong secretary of defense, dean acheson, was a strong secretary of state. He made sure there was bipartisan support. Members of congress, vandenberg, Walter George were part of the process. Before we made a bluffing statement we were sure we had the backing, not only the president and the secretary of state, but also the congress and the people. This is a responsibility of the president and i think its very damaging to our country for mr. Ford to have turned over this responsibility to the secretary of state. President ford, do you have a response . Governor carter, again, contradicts himself, he complains about secrecy, and yet he is quoted as saying that in the attempt to find a solution in the middle east that he would hold unpublicized meetings with the soviet union. I presume for the purpose of imposing a settlement on israel and the arab nations. But let me talk just a minute about what weve done to avoid secrecy in the Ford Administration. After t