In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

463 Document No. 63: Record of Conversation between Mikhail gorbachev and Helmut Kohl June 12, 1989 In June 1989, Gorbachev travels to West Germany in pursuit of his foreign policy strategy of building the “common European home,” and to satisfy concerns over the “pause” in U.S.–Soviet relations. The ensuing “Gorbymania” among West Germans marks the peak of Gorbachev’s popularity in the West and evokes serious apprehensions in the Bush administration. However, as this document reveals, Gorbachev badly wants to resume the dialogue with the U.S. president, whom he really does not understand—“where is Bush genuine, and where is Bush rhetorical?” Gorbachev has already been talking with the key European leaders—Thatcher, Mitterrand, Kohl—but it would not be until December at Malta that he would come face-to-face with Bush. In particular, during this visit Gorbachev is seeking an understanding with the Western countries that no-one should take advantage of Solidarity’s victory in Poland . His clear rejection of the “Brezhnev doctrine” in his talks with Kohl follows the two leaders’ tacit understanding that both sides would steer clear of developments in Poland, Hungary and other Eastern European countries. (“[Y]ou should not poke a stick into an anthill. The consequences of such an act could be absolutely unpredictable.”) Only a few weeks later, speaking to the Council of Europe in Strasbourg on July 6 (see Document No. 73), Gorbachev would make the rejection of force even more public. We can also see in these notes precisely the kind of development Honecker was so concerned about, as Gorbachev and Kohl agree to establish a backchannel involving Kohl’s assistant Horst Teltschik and Anatoly Chernyaev. By this time, for Gorbachev, relations with West Germany have taken priority over relations with the East. Kohl: […] I have known george Bush for a long time, we have a very good, friendly relationship. In evaluating him as president, after just several months on the job, we have to take into account his previous career. george Bush was vice president under President Reagan for eight years. He was always a loyal person. In this respect we probably have a common point of view; we perceive such qualities as positive. However, for george Bush personally , such an assessment had a negative aspect, hurt him, because everybody was constantly asking whether he would be able to emerge from Reagan’s shadow and acquire his own political face, or whether he would always remain in a position of loyalty. In terms of public relations, Bush has a long way to go to compete with Reagan : he has neither the actor’s charisma, nor the art to communicate with people via TV, nor any other similar qualities. He is an intellectual. In America they Melyakova book.indb 463 2010.04.12. 16:20 464 distinguish between people from the West coast and from the East coast. People from California are very different from people from the Western [sic: Eastern] United States. In this sense Bush, as a politician, is very important for Europe—he has a more European vision of things than Reagan had. By the way, Reagan, as a politician , grew literally before my eyes; I have known him since 1979 when he still was the leader of the opposition. One time he came to Bonn, I received him, and we talked for three hours. Helmut Schmidt, who was chancellor then, did not receive him, stating that he did not have time. I had a depressing impression from that conversation with Reagan. It became clear that he did not understand anything in European affairs. My assistant, [Horst] Teltschik, was present at that conversation, and he can tell you even now how discouraged we were then. But later Reagan became president, and you, Mr. gorbachev, were able to find a common language with him. Bush is a completely different person. Do not forget that he inherited a difficult domestic political situation, above all in terms of the economy. Now the ghost of the united European market, which will be created in 1992, is knocking at the U.S. door. Japanese entrepreneurs are working in the United States, and they are capturing new positions all the time. The living standards of the U.S. population, above all those of the disadvantaged strata, continue to stagnate. Recently I had a chance to see it with my own eyes. Last week I flew to America on a personal, unofficial trip, to visit my son, who took...

Share