(3 of 4)
The Times of India argued that the Soviet leadership had given up more at the summit, since it had not insisted that the U.S. lift "its wholly illegal blockade of North Vietnamese harbors." While Israelis were pleased that Nixon had raised with Soviet Communist Boss Leonid Brezhnev the issue of Soviet treatment of Jews, the Egyptian press was happy because Moscow and Washington had suggested that peace in the Middle East be based on a U.N. Security Council resolution calling for Israeli withdrawal from occupied territories. Elsewhere, the summit was mostly welcomed, but with little elation and with disappointment that there had been no agreement on Viet Nam.
For Americans, after all the coverage and the Nixon report, questions about the summit still lingered:
¶ Was there an understanding reached on Viet Nam? TIME Correspondent Jerrold Schecter, who covered the Nixon odyssey, believes that the Russians tacitly agreed to limit future shipment of offensive weapons to Hanoi on condition that the U.S. would continue to withdraw its troops from Viet Nam and give the negotiating route in Paris another try. Brezhnev probably in effect conceded that the Kremlin could not tightly control Hanoi's war moves. The Russians learned this when the supplies they gave Hanoi were not used for an offensive in February, when Nixon was in Peking, as the Kremlin had wished. The attack came in May, thus threatening the Moscow summit. By not running the mine fields or North Viet Nam's coastline, the Russians have left the North Vietnamese on their own, at least until the present offensive runs its uncertain course. Yet a general hope persisted that the new Washington-Moscow friendliness might yet lead Hanoi to ease its conditions for a political solution to the war.
¶ How did Nixon impress the Russian leaders? They came to respect his professionalism, says Schecter. They found him totally prepared for tough negotiations, and they admired his oratorical restraint. But they retained a certain distrust, based on Nixon's unemotional and dry behavior. In nearly 42 hours of talks, however, they came to understand thoroughly the primary U.S. policy concerns in world affairs.
¶ How did Nixon find Brezhnev?
The top Soviet leader emerged as forceful, elemental and quite human, something like a tough union boss who can be charming personally, but negotiate cunningly behind a blunt bargaining exterior. He was self-assured, candid and, like Nixon, more concerned with results than with philosophical points.
¶ Why was there no deal on trade?
There was disagreement over the Soviet obligation to repay its World War II Lend-Lease debts to the U.S., over the interest rates on U.S.S.R. credit to buy grain from the U.S., and on how much of all goods would be carried in American ships. Creation of a commission to pursue trade agreements was a step forward, with results probable later this year. The Russians had also hoped to get U.S. funds for developing Siberian gas fields, in exchange for granting the U.S. rights to import some of the natural gas; but the Russians insisted on retaining 80% of the gas despite huge U.S. financing.