← 946-012946-014 →

Conversation 946-013

TapeTape 946StartFriday, June 22, 1973 at 11:31 AMEndFriday, June 22, 1973 at 11:41 AMParticipantsNixon, Richard M. (President);  Kissinger, Henry A.;  [Unknown person(s)]Recording deviceOval Office
AI Summary

President Nixon and Henry Kissinger met to review the public reception of the recently signed Agreement on the Prevention of Nuclear War, specifically focusing on Kissinger's press briefing and the challenges of explaining the accord's scope regarding nuclear first use, China, and regional military operations. They discussed how to frame the agreement as a significant symbolic commitment to peace while managing skepticism from the press and political critics. Additionally, the President briefly consulted with an unidentified staffer regarding legislative meetings and discussed a potential postponement of negotiations concerning a US-USSR air services protocol.

Agreement on the Prevention of Nuclear WarLeonid BrezhnevNuclear policyForeign policyPress relationsUS-USSR relations
AudioNARA Description

On June 22, 1973, President Richard M. Nixon, Henry A. Kissinger, and unknown person(s) met in the Oval Office of the White House at an unknown time between 11:31 am and 11:41 am. The Oval Office taping system captured this recording, which is known as Conversation 946-013 of the White House Tapes.

Nixon Library Finding Aid
Conversation No. 946-13 (cont’d)

                                                                    Conversation No. 946-13

Date: June 22, 1973
Time: Unknown between 11:31 am and 11:41 am
Location: Oval Office

The President met with Henry A. Kissinger.

       Leonid I. Brezhnev’s visit
              -Kissinger’s previous press briefing on Agreement on Prevention of Nuclear War
                      -Questions
                              -Nuclear weapons
                                      -First use
                                      -Prevention
                                      -People’s Republic of China [PRC], Cambodia, Middle
                                       East
                                      -Military operations regarding Cambodia
                                      -Calls for restraint
              -Press relations
                      -Peter Lisagor
                      -Max Frankel
                              -US foreign policy
              -Agreement on Prevention of Nuclear War
                      -Restraint
                      -Use of force
                              -Allies
                              -Third parties
                              -J. William Fulbright
                              -Article six of agreement

An unknown man entered at an unknown time after 11:31 am.

       President’s schedule
              -Gerald R. Ford, Leslie C. Arends
                                              -20-

                   NIXON PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY AND MUSEUM

                                      (rev. August-2011)

                                                            Conversation No. 946-13 (cont’d)

                     -Legislation
                     -W[illiam] Stuart Symington, John Pastore

The unknown man left at an unknown time before 11:41 am.

       Brezhnev’s visit
             -US-USSR Protocol on Expansion of Air Services
             -Peter M. Flanigan, State Department
             -Negotiations
                     -Postponement
             -President’s decision

Kissinger left at an unknown time before 11:41 am.
Transcript (AI-Generated)

This transcript was generated automatically by AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Do not cite this transcript as authoritative. Consult the Finding Aid above for verified information.

We had a 45-minute break, and my statement was very positive.
In the questions, things came up which I thought likely, but I couldn't avoid them.
They said, why didn't you ban the first use of nuclear weapons?
I said, because this is designed to prevent war, not a catalog for how to fight it.
and that we did not think we could make a distinction between various kinds of weapons once war starts, but we will make a major effort to prevent war.
I had to say, and somebody said, does that protect China?
I said, I don't want to say which country it protects, but I would certainly think an attack on China would serve an international peace and stability and would therefore, but we don't expect such an attack to take place.
And, uh,
You know, there was a usual question.
Somebody said, well, this is just reaffirming motherhood.
So I said, well, you had been with the president and president through all these sessions you've been in, so it was all that simple.
That was a military operation that was going on.
And it was
They fully understood it, and they fully understood what we were going to do.
Actually, it's covered by our legal sector.
But I took the position, and you might consider taking the position.
We just can't go into every situation which is really must be covered.
It is obviously the cause for restraint.
It's the agenda of the government.
It's the cause for restraint.
If the two, I said in answer to the question, if the two countries want to act like sharp lawyers pressing against the edges of the agreement, they'll find a way of doing it.
But this symbolizes a commitment to peace.
It strengthens it.
It strengthens it.
So that's what's the key.
We know the key, but don't be too worried about those cigars.
Mr. President, we've got to play our game.
As long as they're debating the substance of foreign policy, we are going to win.
They can't look up on the substance of foreign policy.
that we agree to refrain from force, use of force against each other, any force, or against our allies in either one of our countries.
No, that's a heck of a thing.
And it has a constitution to it.
But it's quite something.
Goddamn bull-brain propagation and bohemians.
Oh, yeah.
Absolutely.
I just hit it.
First of all, it's covered by Article 6.
It's an existing obligation.
Secondly, it was going on and was discussed with the Soviets.
It was a firework.
sure.
Yes.
We can get it if you give the word.
On the other hand, Stacey, in planning and change, we can do a little better if we hold out for six months.
It's a 5-10% decision.
That's what I think.
We have a 6% difference if we add one more.
Oh, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't be, don't
They can't lick up on the substance.
But it's a good thing.
It's a very important thing.
It's an important thing to agree to prevent a nuclear war in a way that we're going to prevent a nuclear war in a way to prevent a nuclear war.
And that means that we will restrain, that we agree to refrain from force, the use of force against each other, any force, or against our allies in either one of our targets or against our countries.
No, that's a government thing.
It has a constitutional thing.
And it's quite good, quite something.
Sure, if they break it, so will it.
It's a goddamn bull, right?
Oh, yeah.
I just hit it.
First of all, it's covered by Article 6.
It's an existing obligation.
that we agree to refrain from force, the use of force against each other, any force, or against our allies in either one of the parties, or against their countries.
No, that's a heck of a thing.
And it has a constitution, eh?
But it's quite something.
Senator Simonson is on his way along with Senator Vestorin.
We can get it.
If you give the word.
On the other hand, there's a plan in place.
There's a plan in place.
There's a plan in place.
I think it's just as well.
I think it's just as well.
← 946-012946-014 →