U.S. has trouble learning lessons of 70s

Press, 26 December 1979, Page 6

U.S. has trouble learning lessons of 70s

By JAMES RESTON. of the “New York Times” (through NZPA) Washington Washington is a troubled city at the end of the 1970 s because it is leading a life of pretence. It is anxious, not primarily because of its! immediate problems at home and abroad, but because of a growing conviction that it is! dealing with a world of di-1 vided national States that isi out of control, and that the Government is not working; effectively "i the challenges of the 19S0s. Put more simply, what is bothering thoughtful people in both parties in Washing-, ton is ’hat the world changed faster in the 1970 s than Americans have been able to change themselvesthat the prevailing attitudes of the American neool* and ♦he •>ss"mntinn« r> f in«t'*'irions. inri'-Hino the di- i v 'd»d responsibilities of the F’' , ’ r s| Government, are ou< ' of date. Th»re is a vague under > standing that some kind of i

important transformation took place in the world of the 70s: that the United States was no longer self-1 sufficient in the resources I essential to sustain its’ • industrial growth; that it; ! was no longer the most pro- . ductive or most successful ■ nation in the export markets) ■of the world: and that it) i was maybe not even the un- ; disputed military or moral leader in the shifting bal-| nance of a rapidly changing, > world. i But Washington has not| been able to adjust to these - fundamental changes. It has j been trying to deal with] 'them as if thev were a pass-1 ling phase which could be Icorrected by a largerl- - budget, or by blam- ■ ing Carter and substitution:! iKennedv or Reagan or Con- I nalh - or somebody else whoil would make the rest of the;< »iob« shene up tn America’s;t idea’s and interests. It Meanwhile, as Congress t scatters for th* ChristmasiS 'holidays, depriving us of its) advice (which may not he in < intolerable loss), we clearly.t

need a little time at the turn of the year to sort out and redefine our problems and (priorities. The nations of the. Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries and' i Ayatollah Khomeiny are try-j ing to tell us something: inamely, that we are con(fronted not only by the: 'growing power of Soviet missiles in Eastern Europe, and by Moscow’s naval (power in the oceans of the (world, but by the economic (power of the oil-producing (nations, and the philosophic challenge of Islam to the materialism of the West. 1 The political debates ragling in the headlines of the 'world’s press these days — in Iran and elsewhere — do not really deal with the deeper and more tragic tides running under the surface. The world is being changed, not primarily bv ( the ayatollahs or even by the contemporary leaders of ' ♦he principal industrial i States. , The world is being rhanred bv th? fertility of!' the human body and' theii

mind: by ordinary people I who produce more children I'than they can feed and edu/cate: by science that prei serves life at the beginning l and prolongs it at the end, (leaving to the politicians the problem of finding remedies ■ for this deluge. : Where the politicians as well as the teachers and preachers and reporters and ediI tors can be faulted, is in fail- ' ing to make this fundamental ' fact clear to the people as the central question for decision. Here in Washington, for example. at the end of the old year and of the 70s, we are preoccupied, and understandably so, with the lives of some 50 American captives in Teheran. So, too. we confront the paradox of increasing the United States defence budget in order to control the arms race: and the struggle for the American Presidency among a group of men who have been: Talking about transitory is-.

e sues, as if nothing had changn ed — and if it had, it was i- somebody else’s fault. -I But under the surface of g; these arguments, there are • serious people with long exf perience in Washington and s ! elsewhere who recognise: (structural defects in the Gov-! s .ernment that must be repair- ‘ ed if America is to deal with ' its present and coming problems. •i This is not a partisan or] observation. For] (example. Douglas Dillon, for-1 ,'mer Under-Secretary of State; J 'and Secretary of the Treasury, called the other day]' -(before the National Institute]: s(of Social Services in New]' [York for a reappraisal of ouri' thought and government to (I s ideal with all these changing!' -problems. i 5 I “What we are suffering I .(from today.” he said, “is not i .incompetence in our Foreign i •‘Service, or in our intellig- 1 - ence. Unfortunately our pro- < , blem gives every sign of i being much more serious 1 ’ than that. It is, in my view. < ■i the beginnings of a crisis in <

the operation of our basic' system of government. I “We must learn to accustom ourselves to a new world, a world in which act-! ions taken by others can! have rapid and serious effects’ (on our economy and on our (standard of living, a world: in which others have the military means to destroy] lour nation whenever they) are prepared to accept the: iconsequences. I “I very much doubt.” Mr Dillon concluded, “that in; (such a world we can long‘ continue to afford the luxury! (of the division of power and [responsibility between our] 'executive and legislative ibranches of government . , .1 I have no pat answer. But I do know that until we; are prepared to examine the basic structure of our Federal system and its functioning in today’s world rather than indulging ourselves in continuous personal and political recriminations, our problems will remain with us and. in all probability, in-I crease in severity." j