Interview: Lawrence Eagleburger with Philip Geyelin

INTERVIEW:_______________ LAWRENCE EAGLEBURGER WITH PHILIP GEYELIN Lawrence Eagleburger recently retired after twenty-seven years as a foreign service officer. During that time he served in key policymaking positions in the White House as special assistant to the president, in the Pentagon, in the National Security Council, and in the State Department as assistant secretary for Europe and as under secretary for political affairs. He also served as U.S. ambassador to Yugoslavia from 1978 to 1981. Upon retirement he received a presidential appointment to the position of career ambassador. In this interview with Philip Geyelin, syndicated columnist and editor-inresidence at TheJohns Hopkins Foreign Policy Institute, SAIS, Mr. Eagleburger brings his many years of experience and insight into a discussion of the central issues facing U.S. policymakers today. GEYELIN: What do you think are the fundamental changes in the working conditionsfor the conduct ofnational security policy—by which I mean things like relations with Congress, the problems with political continuity, the capacity to wage covert activity, the Vietnam syndrome, the growing scourge ofterrorism? Let's start with how we have gotten sofar awayfrom the days when you went into theforeign service, when we did have a level of bipartisanship, and we did have relationships with allies which were reasonably civil and constructive. EAGLEBURGER: I would begin with a philosophical point. If you take a look at the history of the last several hundred years, one factor that has to be put into the mix is that time consistently tends to dim the lessons you've learned, because generations change. I was heavily affected by the experience of the Second World War, and Korea. I grew up as a kid in the depression. I would have to say that the two events of the twentieth century that most affected me, I suspect, were the depression, largely 43 44 SAIS REVIEW because of the impact on my parents and how that affected me, and the Second World War. And so you tend from my generation to be psychologically concerned about stability, certainty, economic well-being. My generation of Americans went to college right after the war and associated with GIs who had come back from the war. Our whole personality was shaped by that experience—and for many there was also the experience of the depression. You had certain objectives and you were going to reach those objectives: stability, get through college, get yourself making money, don't rock the boat. The generation of the sixties and seventies didn't have that anchor or that rudder—or that impediment —depending on how you want to describe that. So now we're dealing with generations who, less and less, have had to be concerned about economic well-being, at least in terms that anybody who lived through the depression would recognize. And so as generations pass and as they leave the experience of the Second World War, stability is less a concern. I don't mean this to sound pejorative, but there's more opportunity for moralizing. GEYELIN: Is it roomfor moralizing orfor thefree play of ideology? EAGLEBURGER: You said it better, although it's more than that, too. Younger generations, as they have moved away from the Second World War, have had more opportunity to debate ideology, to be less convinced about any particular ideology. And as the United States has had to take on—and I emphasize had to take on, not wanted to take on—worldwide responsibilities, we don't do everything right. God knows we're human. We can't always live by the standards we set for ourselves. The good thing about this country is not that we always succeed, but that we try. But then the atmosphere has been such that people have been able to test the United States against those standards, and when they find it wanting, they are able to make harsherjudgments than people who come from my experience would have made. Now that's a long answer, but the point is nevertheless terribly important in trying to understand what's happened in terms of the way we run our foreign policy. It isn't that this is unique in history. I...