Reagan and Gorbachev Meet - History

Reagan and Gorbachev Meet - History


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

The signing of the I.N.F. (Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces) treaty in 1987 marked the beginning of the end of the Cold War. I.N.F. was the first treaty to eliminate a complete class of weapons. It was also the first treaty to include an in-depth verification program.

The treaty was concieved as a result of the United States' decision to deploy Pershing intermediate missiles in Europe, against strong Soviet opposition. At the same time, the Soviet Union, under the leadership of Michael Gorbachev, had undertaken a new course of external openness and internal reform. Thus, after failing to convince America to stop deploying the Pershing missile, Gorbachev agreed to negotiate the elimination of the Pershing. In return, the Soviets agreed to destroy all of their intermediate missiles. The Soviets had nearly three times as many intermediate missiles as the US Pershing inventory.

The I.N.F. treaty convinced many that it was possible to achieve a new set of agreements with the Soviets. As a result, Soviets were able to quicken the pace of what was known as "glasnost" (openess and reform). Glasnost would ultimately cause the end of the Soviet empire.


Geneva Summit (1985)

The Geneva Summit of 1985 was a Cold War-era meeting in Geneva, Switzerland. It was held on November 19 and 20, 1985, between U.S. President Ronald Reagan and Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev. The two leaders met for the first time to hold talks on international diplomatic relations and the arms race.


Geneva summit stirs memories of 1985 Reagan-Gorbachev meet

Wednesday’s talks between US President Joe Biden and Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin evoke vivid memories of the 1985 Geneva summit, when Cold War rivals Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev met for the very first time.

The November weather in the Swiss city may have been chilly, but relations began to thaw between Washington and Moscow as the US president and the Soviet leader came face to face on neutral territory.

Now some 36 years on, Biden and Putin are holding decidedly less hopeful talks on the placid shores of Lake Geneva, even as history weighs on them.

Back in 1985, “the atmosphere was relaxed… They had both lined something up to seduce the other camp,” said former AFP correspondent Didier Lapeyronie, who covered the Reagan-Gorbachev talks.

“At the same time, we were all aware that it was a historic moment.”

And yet the encounter was preceded with what could have been an ill omen. Just before US president Reagan arrived at one of the summit locations, a Swiss soldier waiting in the ceremonial honour guard fainted, overcome by the bitter cold.

Six years before the eventual collapse of the Soviet Union, the 1985 Geneva summit focused on de-escalating the nuclear arms race between the two superpowers, and came with hopes of fostering better East-West relations.

The three-day summit was covered by 3,500 journalists.

Nicolas Burgy, who was at Geneva Airport for AFP to report on the Reagans’ arrival, recalls the sense of “joy” in the air.

“There was a casual sort of feeling,” he said.

Fireside chat

One of the most enduring images from the summit is a photograph of the two most powerful men on the planet sitting beside a fireplace and smiling at each other from their armchairs in what could be a cosy fireside chat between two old friends.

The conviviality extended to their wives Raisa Gorbacheva and Nancy Reagan, who chatted over tea under the gaze of photographers.

Marie-Noelle Blessig, charged with following the wives’ programme for AFP, remembers seeing Gorbacheva paying a visit to the United Nations’ Geneva headquarters “to greet staff at the UN, where she was received with loud applause”.

Another sign of the thaw was the first handshake between Gorbachev and Reagan, which lasted seven seconds.

The historic moment took place in front of the Villa Fleur d’Eau, a late 19th-century mansion on the shores of Lake Geneva.

The villa is currently up for sale.

The handshake took place before freezing photographers and reporters who stood waiting in the garden in the bitter cold.

As the Americans had chosen the large villa for day one of the talks, Reagan was there first to welcome Gorbachev, “seemingly in very good spirits”, said Claude Smadja, a former deputy editor of Switzerland’s TSR television, who witnessed the moment.

“Straight away there was the very American, very Californian side of Reagan, shaking Gorbachev’s hand, putting his other hand on his shoulder to usher him inside, and the exchange of smiles.

“The two wanted to show that they were very much at ease.”

Awe-inspiring moment

It was only when Gorbachev arrived at the villa that Christiane Berthiaume, who worked for Radio Canada, realised the importance of the moment.

“Not a single journalist asked him a question when he got out of the car. We were all simply speechless. It was awe-inspiring,” said Berthiaume, who later became a spokeswoman for various UN agencies.

The fact that the Soviet leader was there for a summit with the US president “was a sign that the Cold War, a period marked by fear, was coming to an end”.

In a sign of how high the stakes were, the US and Soviet delegations decided to impose a “total blackout” on updating the media until the end of the summit.

“In fact, despite the personal warmth, the initial encounter was very harsh. The two sides’ positions were very far apart,” said Smadja, who went on to become the World Economic Forum’s managing director.

Hosts Switzerland were also well aware of the gulf between the two superpowers — so much so that the Swiss president Kurt Furgler’s assistant Walter Fust had to prepare for his boss “two different welcoming speeches, taking into account the different cultures”.

The cultural divide was also evident in the formality of the two delegations, Fust told AFP.

“The Russian participants arrived in formation very disciplined. The Americans were less strict on following instructions and the protocol order,” he said.

Meanwhile Nancy Reagan, he added, wanted to replace the bottles of mineral water provided with US ones, and also wanted an aide to try out her food before she did.


Geneva summit stirs memories of 1985 Reagan-Gorbachev meet

Wednesday's talks between US President Joe Biden and Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin evoke vivid memories of the 1985 Geneva summit, when Cold War rivals Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev met for the very first time.

The November weather in the Swiss city may have been chilly, but relations began to thaw between Washington and Moscow as the US president and the Soviet leader came face to face on neutral territory.

Now some 36 years on, Biden and Putin are holding decidedly less hopeful talks on the placid shores of Lake Geneva, even as history weighs on them.

Back in 1985, "the atmosphere was relaxed. They had both lined something up to seduce the other camp," said former AFP correspondent Didier Lapeyronie, who covered the Reagan-Gorbachev talks.

"At the same time, we were all aware that it was a historic moment."

And yet the encounter was preceded with what could have been an ill omen. Just before US president Reagan arrived at one of the summit locations, a Swiss soldier waiting in the ceremonial honour guard fainted, overcome by the bitter cold.

Six years before the eventual collapse of the Soviet Union, the 1985 Geneva summit focused on de-escalating the nuclear arms race between the two superpowers, and came with hopes of fostering better East-West relations.

The three-day summit was covered by 3,500 journalists.

Nicolas Burgy, who was at Geneva Airport for AFP to report on the Reagans' arrival, recalls the sense of "joy" in the air.

"There was a casual sort of feeling," he said.

One of the most enduring images from the summit is a photograph of the two most powerful men on the planet sitting beside a fireplace and smiling at each other from their armchairs in what could be a cosy fireside chat between two old friends.

The conviviality extended to their wives Raisa Gorbacheva and Nancy Reagan, who chatted over tea under the gaze of photographers.

Marie-Noelle Blessig, charged with following the wives' programme for AFP, remembers seeing Gorbacheva paying a visit to the United Nations' Geneva headquarters "to greet staff at the UN, where she was received with loud applause".

Another sign of the thaw was the first handshake between Gorbachev and Reagan, which lasted seven seconds.

The historic moment took place in front of the Villa Fleur d'Eau, a late 19th-century mansion on the shores of Lake Geneva.

The villa is currently up for sale.

The handshake took place before freezing photographers and reporters who stood waiting in the garden in the bitter cold.

As the Americans had chosen the large villa for day one of the talks, Reagan was there first to welcome Gorbachev, "seemingly in very good spirits", said Claude Smadja, a former deputy editor of Switzerland's TSR television, who witnessed the moment.

"Straight away there was the very American, very Californian side of Reagan, shaking Gorbachev's hand, putting his other hand on his shoulder to usher him inside, and the exchange of smiles.

"The two wanted to show that they were very much at ease."

It was only when Gorbachev arrived at the villa that Christiane Berthiaume, who worked for Radio Canada, realised the importance of the moment.

"Not a single journalist asked him a question when he got out of the car. We were all simply speechless. It was awe-inspiring," said Berthiaume, who later became a spokeswoman for various UN agencies.

The fact that the Soviet leader was there for a summit with the US president "was a sign that the Cold War, a period marked by fear, was coming to an end".

In a sign of how high the stakes were, the US and Soviet delegations decided to impose a "total blackout" on updating the media until the end of the summit.

"In fact, despite the personal warmth, the initial encounter was very harsh. The two sides' positions were very far apart," said Smadja, who went on to become the World Economic Forum's managing director.

Hosts Switzerland were also well aware of the gulf between the two superpowers -- so much so that the Swiss president Kurt Furgler's assistant Walter Fust had to prepare for his boss "two different welcoming speeches, taking into account the different cultures".

The cultural divide was also evident in the formality of the two delegations, Fust told AFP.

"The Russian participants arrived in formation very disciplined. The Americans were less strict on following instructions and the protocol order," he said.

Meanwhile Nancy Reagan, he added, wanted to replace the bottles of mineral water provided with US ones, and also wanted an aide to try out her food before she did.


Geneva summit stirs memories of 1985 Reagan-Gorbachev meet

Wednesday's talks between US President Joe Biden and Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin evoke vivid memories of the 1985 Geneva summit, when Cold War rivals Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev met for the first time.

Despite the chilly November weather in the Swiss city, relations began to thaw between Washington and Moscow as the US president and the Soviet leader came face to face on neutral territory.

Now some 36 years on, Biden and Putin are set for decidedly less hopeful talks on the placid shores of Lake Geneva, with the echo of history surrounding them.

Back in 1985, "the atmosphere was relaxed. They had both lined something up to seduce the other camp," said former AFP correspondent Didier Lapeyronie, who covered the Reagan-Gorbachev talks.

"At the same time, we were all aware that it was a historic moment."

Things got off to a bad start. Just before US president Reagan arrived at one of the summit locations, a Swiss soldier waiting in the ceremonial honour guard fainted, overcome by the bitter cold.

Six years before the eventual collapse of the Soviet Union, the 1985 Geneva summit focused on de-escalating the nuclear arms race between the two superpowers, and came with hopes of fostering better East-West relations.

The three-day summit was covered by 3,500 journalists.

Nicolas Burgy, who was at Geneva Airport for AFP to report on the Reagans' arrival, recalls the sense of "joy" in the air.

"There was a casual sort of feeling," he said.

One of the most enduring pictures from the summit is one of the two most powerful men on the planet sitting beside a fireplace, smiling at each other from their armchairs -- an image that conjures up the impression of a cosy fireside chat between two old friends.

The conviviality extended to their wives Raisa Gorbacheva and Nancy Reagan, who chatted over tea under the gaze of photographers.

Marie-Noelle Blessig, charged with following the wives' programme for AFP, remembers seeing Gorbacheva paying a visit to the United Nations' Geneva headquarters "to greet staff at the UN, where she was received with loud applause".

Another sign of the thaw was the first handshake between Gorbachev and Reagan, which lasted seven seconds.

The historic moment took place in front of the Villa Fleur d'Eau, a late 19th-century mansion on the shores of Lake Geneva.

The villa is currently up for sale.

The handshake took place before frozen photographers and reporters who had stood waiting in the garden in the bitter cold.

As the Americans had chosen the large villa for day one of the talks, Reagan was there first to welcome Gorbachev, "seemingly in very good spirits", said Claude Smadja, a former deputy editor of Switzerland's TSR television, who witnessed the historic moment.

"Straight away there was the very American, very Californian side of Reagan, shaking Gorbachev's hand, putting his other hand on his shoulder to usher him inside, and the exchange of smiles.

"The two wanted to show that they were very much at ease."

It was only when Gorbachev arrived at the villa that Christiane Berthiaume, who worked for Radio Canada, realised the importance of the moment.

"Not a single journalist asked him a question when he got out of the car. We were all simply speechless. It was awe-inspiring," said Berthiaume, who later became a spokeswoman for various UN agencies.

The fact that the Soviet leader was there for a summit with the US president "was a sign that the Cold War, a period marked by fear, was coming to an end".

In a sign of how high the stakes were, the US and Soviet delegations decided to impose a "total blackout" on updating the media until the end of the summit.

"In fact, despite the personal warmth, the initial encounter was very harsh. The two sides' positions were very far apart," said Smadja, who went on to become the World Economic Forum's managing director.

Hosts Switzerland were also well aware of the gulf between the two superpowers -- so much so that the Swiss president Kurt Furgler's assistant Walter Fust had to prepare for his boss "two different welcoming speeches, taking into account the different cultures".

The cultural divide was also evident in the formality of the two delegations, Fust told AFP.

"The Russian participants arrived in formation very disciplined. The Americans were less strict on following instructions and the protocol order," he said.

Meanwhile Nancy Reagan, he added, wanted to replace the bottles of mineral water provided with US ones, and also wanted an aide to try out her food before she did.


Geneva summit stirs memories of 1985 Reagan-Gorbachev meet

GENEVA (AFP) – Tomorrow’s talks between United States (US) President Joe Biden and Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin evoke vivid memories of the 1985 Geneva summit, when Cold War rivals Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev met for the first time.

Despite the chilly November weather in the Swiss city, relations began to thaw between Washington and Moscow as the US president and the Soviet leader came face to face on neutral territory.

Now some 36 years on, Biden and Putin are set for decidedly less hopeful talks on the placid shores of Lake Geneva, with the echo of history surrounding them.

Back in 1985, “the atmosphere was relaxed… They had both lined something up to seduce the other camp”, said former AFP correspondent Didier Lapeyronie, who covered the Reagan-Gorbachev talks.

“At the same time, we were all aware that it was a historic moment.”

Things got off to a bad start. Just before US president Reagan arrived at one of the summit locations, a Swiss soldier waiting in the ceremonial honour guard fainted, overcome by the bitter cold.

Six years before the eventual collapse of the Soviet Union, the 1985 Geneva summit focussed on de-escalating the nuclear arms race between the two superpowers, and came with hopes of fostering better East-West relations.

A 2011 photo of then US Vice President Joe Biden shaking hands with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin in Moscow. PHOTO: AP

The three-day summit was covered by 3,500 journalists. Nicolas Burgy, who was at Geneva Airport for AFP to report on the Reagans’ arrival, recalls the sense of “joy” in the air. “There was a casual sort of feeling,” he said.

One of the most enduring pictures from the summit is one of the two most powerful men on the planet sitting beside a fireplace, smiling at each other from their armchairs – an image that conjures up the impression of a cosy fireside chat between two old friends.

The conviviality extended to their wives Raisa Gorbacheva and Nancy Reagan, who chatted over tea under the gaze of photographers.

Marie-Noelle Blessig, charged with following the wives’ programme for AFP, remembers seeing Gorbacheva paying a visit to the United Nations’ Geneva headquarters “to greet staff at the United Nations (UN), where she was received with loud applause”.

Another sign of the thaw was the first handshake between Gorbachev and Reagan, which lasted seven seconds. The historic moment took place in front of the Villa Fleur d’Eau, a late 19 th -Century mansion on the shores of Lake Geneva. The villa is currently up for sale.

The handshake took place before frozen photographers and reporters who had stood waiting in the garden in the bitter cold.

As the Americans had chosen the large villa for day one of the talks, Reagan was there first to welcome Gorbachev, “seemingly in very good spirits”, said Claude Smadja, a former deputy editor of Switzerland’s TSR television, who witnessed the historic moment.

“Straight away there was the very American, very Californian side of Reagan, shaking Gorbachev’s hand, putting his other hand on his shoulder to usher him inside, and the exchange of smiles.

“The two wanted to show that they were very much at ease.” It was only when Gorbachev arrived at the villa that Christiane Berthiaume, who worked for Radio Canada, realised the importance of the moment.

“Not a single journalist asked him a question when he got out of the car. We were all simply speechless. It was awe-inspiring,” said Berthiaume, who later became a spokeswoman for various UN agencies.

The fact that the Soviet leader was there for a summit with the US president “was a sign that the Cold War, a period marked by fear, was coming to an end”.

In a sign of how high the stakes were, the US and Soviet delegations decided to impose a “total blackout” on updating the media until the end of the summit.

“In fact, despite the personal warmth, the initial encounter was very harsh.

“The two sides’ positions were very far apart,” said Smadja, who went on to become the World Economic Forum’s managing director.

Hosts Switzerland were also well aware of the gulf between the two superpowers – so much so that the Swiss president Kurt Furgler’s assistant Walter Fust had to prepare for his boss “two different welcoming speeches, taking into account the different cultures”.


Geneva, November 1985

Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan: Just a few years earlier, Reagan had branded the Soviet Union an "evil empire." During this Cold War-era meeting, the two leaders discussed ways to bring nuclear weapons under control and foster improved international diplomatic relations. The Geneva summit was intended to herald a new understanding between the two superpowers. Gorbachev and Reagan had good chemistry, and the relationship appeared to be based on trust.


Building mutual trust

Perhaps more important – and transformational – to ending US-Soviet enmity, was the personal bond that developed between Reagan and Gorbachev, and the trust that this made possible between these two leaders of formerly enemy states.

As we argue in our recent research, face-to-face interaction at the highest levels of diplomacy opens up new possibilities for two leaders to gain a better understanding of each other’s intentions and, under certain and specific conditions, develop a personal relationship of trust. What Reagan and Gorbachev were able to do that Kennedy and Khrushchev were not, was put themselves in the shoes of the other and recognise the importance of reassuring the other of their country’s peaceful intent.

Will Joe Biden and Vladimir Putin develop a bond of mutual understanding as Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev did at their 1985 summit? EPA-EFE/Mikhail Metzel/Sputnik/Kremlin pool

Geneva 1985 did not produce a big new sweeping agreement – but this should not be the litmus test of a successful summit. As the White House press secretary, Jen Psaki, said last week: “There’s nothing like face-to-face engagement in diplomacy.”

Whatever the public relations and domestic political benefits (or pitfalls) of a face-to-face encounter for the US and Russian presidents, such diplomacy provides unparalleled opportunities to credibly signal intent, read the intentions of others, and develop bonds of trust.

The Geneva 1985 summit began a process of interpersonal trust-building that made possible the major breakthroughs in US-Soviet relations (including the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan, and Gorbachev’s proposed sweeping cuts in conventional forces) later in the decade.

The challenge for Biden and Putin is whether, like Reagan and Gorbachev before them, they can convince the other that they believe the only security between their two countries is mutual security and that neither leader believes the path to security lies in the other’s insecurity.

If each can leave the summit with this reassurance then, unlike their counterparts 60 years ago, they will have contributed to the urgent goal of reducing the risks of nuclear conflict.


Strobe Talbott

Distinguished Fellow - Foreign Policy

Matlock describes in telling detail how Reagan rehearsed for his first meeting with Gorbachev, which took place in Geneva in November 1985. Reagan assigned the role of the Soviet leader to Matlock who, for maximum authenticity, played his part in Russian, mimicking Gorbachev’s confident, loquacious style. Matlock also sent Reagan a series of “spoof memos” that were “interlaced with jokes and anecdotes,” based on an educated guess at what Gorbachev’s own advisers were telling him in preparation for the encounter.

Shortly before setting off for Geneva, Reagan dictated a long memo of his own, laying out his assessment of the man he was about to meet. The Reagan game plan was to look for areas of common interest, be candid about points of contention and support Gorbachev’s reforms while (in Matlock’s paraphrase) “avoiding any demand for ‘regime change.'” He cautioned the members of his administration not to rub Gorbachev’s nose in any concessions he might make. Above all, Reagan wanted to establish a relationship with his Soviet counterpart that would make it easier to manage conflicts lest they escalate to thermonuclear war—an imperative for every American president since Eisenhower.

Matlock puts the best light he can on Reagan’s dream of a Star Wars anti-missile system, but he stops short of perpetuating the claim, now an article of faith among many conservatives, that the prospect of an impregnable shield over the United States and an arms race in space caused the Soviets to throw in the towel. Instead, Matlock focuses on Reagan’s attempt to convince Gorbachev that American defense policy posed no threat to legitimate Soviet interests and should therefore not prevent the two leaders from establishing a high degree of mutual trust.

That word figured in Reagan’s mantra, “trust but verify.” It set Gorbachev’s teeth on edge. However, Reagan intended the motto not just as a caveat about dealing with the Soviets but also as a subtle admonition to his relentlessly hard-line and mistrustful secretary of defense, Caspar W. Weinberger. According to Matlock, Weinberger was “utterly convinced that there was no potential benefit in negotiating anything with the Soviet leaders and that most negotiations were dangerous traps.” The rivalry that Matlock describes between Weinberger and Secretary of State George P. Shultz bears an eerie similarity to what we know of the one between Colin L. Powell and Donald H. Rumsfeld. Shultz grew so exasperated with Weinberger’s militancy and obstructionism that he contemplated resigning. Reagan wrote in his diary, “I can’t let this happen. Actually, George is carrying out my policy.”

That policy, as Matlock summarizes it, “was consistent throughout.” Reagan “wanted to reduce the threat of war, to convince the Soviet leaders that cooperation could serve the Soviet peoples better than confrontation and to encourage openness and democracy in the Soviet Union.”

Presidential attachment to those precepts neither began nor ended with Ronald Reagan. It was Jimmy Carter who first put human rights prominently on the agenda of American-Soviet relations. George H. W. Bush skillfully served as a kind of air traffic controller in 1991, when the increasingly beleaguered Gorbachev brought the Soviet Union in for a relatively soft landing on the ash heap of history—a major contribution to the end of the cold war that Matlock dismisses in a footnote as “cleanup” diplomacy.

While Matlock could have been more charitable to Reagan’s predecessors and to his immediate successor, his account of Reagan’s achievement as the nation’s diplomat in chief is a public service as well as a contribution to the historical record. It is simultaneously admiring, authoritative and conscientious. It is also corrective, since it debunks much of the hype and spin with which we were blitzed earlier this summer. The truth is a better tribute to Reagan than the myth.


The Untold Story of John Paul II and Ronald Reagan: “Mary is central”

An interview with Dr. Paul Kengor about A Pope and a President: John Paul II, Ronald Reagan, and the Extraordinary Untold Story of the 20th Century.

Dr. Paul Kengor is a professor of political science at Grove City College (Pennsylvania) and the author of several best-selling books, including Dupes: How America’s Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century God and Ronald Reagan God and George W. Bush God and Hillary Clinton The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism and Takedown: From Communists to Progressives.

Dr. Kengor is widely recognized for his scholarly work about the American presidency, the Cold War, and the history of communism. His most recent book is A Pope and a President: John Paul II, Ronald Reagan, and the Extraordinary Untold Story of the 20th Century (ISI Books, 2017), which chronicles in great detail the largely untold story of the friendship of Pope John Paul II and Ronald Reagan, and how they worked together to fight the great evil of the twentieth century: Soviet communism.

Dr. Kengor recently corresponded with Carl E. Olson, editor of Catholic World Report, about his new book.

CWR:The title and subtitle don’t indicate it, but your book is many ways about a Marian apparition. In fact, it begins with an important event that took place 100 years ago. What was it? And why is it so central to your account of Pope John Paul II and President Reagan and their fight against Communism?

Dr. Paul Kengor: Mary is central. In fact, to that end, I have a confession to make. This began as a book about Ronald Reagan and John Paul II and Mikhail Gorbachev. When it was about those three men, with Mary central to the story, my personal-secret working title for the book was “Three Men and a Lady.” I eventually removed Gorbachev as the third man, though he’s still very much a major player. But the Lady, however, always remained—a hovering presence. And yes, she’s the Blessed Mother—or, even more pointedly, she’s Our Lady of Fatima.

I start the book with a dramatic opening: May 13, 1981. It was on that date that Pope John Paul II was shot. Of course, it was the Feast Day of Our Lady of Fatima, dating back to the first Marian apparition in Fatima on May 13, 1917. John Paul II immediately was struck by the irony of those two dates. “Two thirteenths of May!” he said. He would come to see a direct connection, especially once he requested to see and then read the Third Secret of Fatima on July 18, 1981 when recovering in Gemelli Clinic from the shooting. As Father Dziwisz would later put it, “When he was finished [reading the Third Secret], all his remaining doubts were gone.” In Sister Lúcia’s vision, “he recognized his own destiny.” He became convinced that his life had been spared thanks to the intervention of Our Lady.

So, I start the story with May 13, 1981, and thus inevitably must next go back in time to May 13, 1917. The latter is my prologue and the former is chapter one of a 38-chapter book.

Mary’s presence in this story will not surprise Catholics and John Paul II aficionados, but it will surprise non-Catholics and Ronald Reagan aficionados. And all readers, Catholics and non-Catholics, will be a little shocked at the Reagan interest in not only Mary generally but Fatima specifically. I was certainly fascinated by it, and it’s something that I completely missed in Reagan’s faith story when I wrote God and Ronald Reagan in 2004, which was a year before I came into the Catholic Church.

CWR: You’ve studied and written about Communism for your entire career. How would you summarize the effect of Marxism and Communism on the 20th century?

Dr. Kengor: One word: Deadly. Over 100 million dead victims in the 20 th century alone. Actually, the true numbers are closer to 140 million. That’s more than double the combined death tolls of World War I and II. And the total dead are a tiny number compared to the countless more who suffered persecutions and even tortures without death. Some were bloodied and others weren’t. Some, like Cardinal Mindszenty in Hungary, ended up (in the description of Fulton Sheen) as “dry martyrs.” And some, like Pope Pius XII, had their character assassinated rather than their body, with Moscow smearing Pius with the hideous, slanderous label “Hitler’s Pope.” I spend about a hundred pages in the book chronicling those “persecutions and errors.” They form part two of the book. It’s quite sickening to revisit all of that pain, but it must be done in order to grasp the evil that John Paul II and Reagan passionately knew had to be defeated.

All of those crimes and “errors” were, of course, predicted by a Lady from Fatima. And all of them signaled how and why the Soviet empire truly was what Ronald Reagan described it as: an Evil Empire.

CWR: More specifically, what effect and impact did Communism have on Karol Wojtyla and Ronald Reagan, especially during their formative years?

Dr. Kengor: Both of them battled communists in their formative, early adult years. Reagan did so in Hollywood in the 1940s and 1950s. Back then, Reagan had been an FDR Democrat, a self-described “hemophiliac liberal,” or bleeding-heart liberal. He also had been repeatedly duped by self-proclaimed “progressive” pals who were, in reality, hardcore Marxists, Stalinists, and closet members of Communist Party USA—who quite literally (no exaggeration) swore a CPUSA loyalty oath to Stalin’s state. They lied to Reagan, used him, exploited him, hoodwinked him, and made him look like a fool—like a useful idiot, to borrow Lenin’s language. Reagan later admitted all of that. He would say to friends as president in the 1980s: “I still have scars on back from fighting communists in Hollywood.”

As for Karol Wojtyla, who likewise had been an actor in those same years, he encountered communists in an even more vicious way, as they took over and annihilated his beautiful homeland in the late 1940s. He saw their brutality in ways that Reagan did not personally experience. Sure, Reagan had to sleep with a Smith & Wesson, and he had faced some serious threats and scary, close calls, but Karol actually lost friends who had bullets fired into their skulls by communists.

And what especially rattled both of these men, a faithful Protestant and a faithful Catholic, was the hatred of religion by these communists. They recognized that communists wanted to kill not just men but God, not just the body but the soul.

CWR: What essential insights did the two men share about Communism and how it should be resisted and could be defeated?

Dr. Kengor: In answering that, I’ll go to the words of one of my mentors, Bill Clark, whose biography I published through Ignatius Press ten years ago. (The Judge: William P. Clark, Ronald Reagan’s Top Hand, 2007.) I dedicate this book to Bill Clark.

Clark said that the two men shared a “vision on the Soviet empire”—namely, “that right or correctness would ultimately prevail in the divine plan.” Both agreed that “atheistic communism lived a lie that, when fully understood, must ultimately fail.” It would be “part of the DP,” said Clark—what he and Reagan referred to as “the Divine Plan.” Each played a role in what Clark called “the war of good against evil,” and each was inspired by the other’s “increasing courage and action” in that war against “the terrible oppression of atheistic communism.”

CWR: You dedicate this book to Bill Clark. Why?

Dr. Kengor: This book really developed from a pivotal conversation I had with Bill Clark one day at his ranch near Paso Robles, California. It was through Clark that I set off on an investigation into a possible Soviet role in the attempted assassination of John Paul II, which is an overarching theme of this book, and where I report a lot of totally new information that people will find of very high interest. When I worked on Clark’s biography, we spent numerous days together as he recounted his past and we excavated material from his home office, his town office, and the dusty boxes inside the tack room of his barn. When we weren’t sitting together, we were chatting by phone, usually daily. A turning point came when I asked him this question one day in the summer of 2005: “Bill, did Reagan ever suspect a Soviet role in the shooting of Pope John Paul II?” He responded slowly: “Well, Paul, . . .”

I was so engrossed that I neglected to push the button on my handheld audio recorder. And there it began. We spent a lot of time on that issue. The original manuscript of my Clark biography for Ignatius Press included about 3,000 words on Reagan, Clark, and shooting of the Holy Father. To my disappointment, Clark asked that I remove this material from the manuscript. He didn’t know for sure whether the Soviets had ordered the shooting and thus didn’t want to go on the record. “I don’t want the focus of attention to be on a part of the book for which we are not absolutely sure and clear,” he told me.

He didn’t want even an iota of speculation. I told him we didn’t need to speculate. I merely wanted to note his and Reagan’s reasonable suspicions of a Soviet role in the shooting. I tried to persuade him. I was disappointed, but I honored his request. In agreeing to be his biographer, I had promised him that I’d honor his wishes to exclude information he wasn’t comfortable disclosing. We made the final decision on July 6, 2006. Yes, I recall the exact date. I wrote it down in my notes. The published version of The Judge retained only a few words on the assassination attempt.

Clark knew he was depriving me of a significant story. But he also looked at me with a wry smile and said, “Of course, this might be something you could use one day in another of your books.” He repeated the thought later: “This will eventually come out. And you have enough here for another book.”

As usual, he was right. He was very wise. If anyone embodied the virtue of prudence, it was Bill Clark. It turns out that I needed much more time to interview people, declassify documents, and piece together much more. And the rest is history—in the form of this book.

CWR: And what did you learn about the Soviet role in the shooting of John Paul II on May 13, 1981?

Dr. Kengor: I learned that Moscow ordered the hit. It was organized by the Soviet GRU—that is, Soviet military intelligence—and with the approval, knowledge, and go-ahead of Yuri Andropov at the KGB. I’m not the first to report that, but I am the first to report that the CIA, under the careful direction of Bill Casey, launched a super-sensitive investigation and learned and confirmed the role of the Soviet GRU. I also learned that Casey briefed Reagan on this. I even give the exact date and time when I believe Casey briefed Reagan. Further, I was told that Casey briefed the Holy Father, who asked that this information be kept quiet. By this point—it was mid-1985—John Paul II saw no positive value in public affirming what everyone suspected anyway. Gorbachev had just been selected as general secretary, and John Paul II saw far more promising times ahead. I say much, much more on this in the book. That’s the longest chapter, actually. It’s too much to try to summarize here.

CWR: You’ve written a book about Reagan’s faith, but you note how you learned some things in researching this book that you didn’t know before. What were they? What was his view of the Catholic Church and the Catholic Faith?

Dr. Kengor: Two words: “Ave Maria.” Ronald Reagan picked that hymn to be sung at his funeral service at Washington National Cathedral in June 2005. He had picked it a decade earlier, before his mind started fading from Alzheimer’s. I found that choice utterly fascinating, as did Bill Clark, who was overwhelmed with tears as he heard it belted out by Ronan Tynan inside the cathedral that afternoon. We tried to figure out why Reagan picked that hymn. I asked Mrs. Reagan, Michael Reagan, even Ronan Tynan. I’ll let you read the book for possible answers to that and other Reagan interests in the Blessed Mother. In fact, get this: Reagan was interested not only in Fatima but even Medjugorje. He and one of the Medjugorje seers even tried to reach one another in 1987.

Also, I must add that Reagan had immense respect not only for John Paul II but the Roman Catholic Church. He was surrounded by Catholics among his closest staff: Bill Clark, Bill Casey, Al Haig, Dick Allen, speechwriters like Peggy Noonan, Tony Dolan, Peter Robinson, and many more. In his personal life, his father was a lifelong Catholic, though some claim he was an apathetic Catholic (I’m not so sure about that). His brother Neil, became very devout, and, along with Neil’s wife, Bess, was a daily communicant. Reagan’s ex-wife, Jane Wyman, came into the Church on the Feast Day of the Immaculate Conception, December 8, 1954, along with their children, Maureen and Michael. Jane Wyman was converted by Loretta Young and Fulton Sheen. Jane Wyman became so devout that in the 1980s she had a stipulation into her contract for the TV show “Falcon Crest” that a priest be on set every day to give her the Eucharist. Jane Wyman actually became a Third Order Dominican nun, buried in the habit. Imagine that.

So, Ronald Reagan was very pro-Catholic. Robert Reilly, who served as President Reagan’s liaison to the Catholic community, quipped to me, “We considered Reagan an honorary Catholic.” Reilly told me that Neil Reagan, when once asked whether there was anything else he could wish for his brother—given he had been a movie and TV star, governor, and president—responded, “Yes, I wish he would become a Catholic.”

Bill Clark used to tell me that Ronald Reagan understood Catholicism better than most Catholics that Clark knew.

And no doubt, John Paul II sensed and saw and greatly appreciated that.

CWR: Both men were nearly killed in assassination attempts in the early 1980s. Do we know if they discussed those events with each other?

Dr. Kengor: Think of two dates in 1981: On March 30, 1981, just outside the Washington Hilton, Ronald Reagan, leader of the free world, was shot by a would-be assassin. On May 13, 1981, just outside the Vatican, in the heart of St. Peter’s Square, Pope John Paul II, leader of the world’s largest group of Christians, was shot by a would-be assassin. We now know today what an anxious world did not know then: both men came perilously close to dying. The pope and the president would meet to discuss that joint mission on June 7, 1982, at the Vatican—a little over year since the assassination attempts.

Reagan had coveted that idea as early as June 1979, when the pope visited Poland. He estimated then and there that the pope was “the key” to Poland’s fate and to the potential fate of the wider Communist Bloc. Among his earliest goals as president was to officially recognize the Vatican as a state, reach out to the Holy Father, and (as he put it) “make them an ally.”

In June 1982, the two men talked alone for 50 minutes in the Vatican Library. The attempted assassinations against them were raised right away. Both referred to the “miraculous” fact they had survived. They believed their lives had been spared for a special purpose, which they translated into a joint effort to take down atheistic Soviet communism. And their dagger to make that happen would be Poland—the wedge that both men believed could pierce and ultimately split the Soviet empire.

Bill Clark was there. He described that day to me as a “wonderful day” and a transformative one. He said that that day “gave the president and pope the ability to form a very personal relationship from then on.” The meeting led to real action. Reagan and John Paul II translated their lofty divine mission into a practical policy mission to sustain the Solidarity movement in Poland as the potential wedge that could split the USSR’s empire.

CWR: The matters of the consecration of Russia to Mary’s Immaculate Heart and the Third Secret of Fatima are still quite controversial in many Catholic circles. What do you think happened, based on your research, and why is there still so much controversy and confusion?

Dr. Kengor: As to the Third Secret, to be blunt, some were hoping for the Apocalypse. They were hoping that the Third Secret predicted the End Times. Of course, this isn’t because they morbidly wanted the world to explode in giant nuclear-mushroom clouds, but because they want Jesus to come again and straighten out this painfully insane world. In that sense, with the Third Secret “merely” predicting the shooting of a pope who didn’t die, I think some people were oddly let down.

Now, that said, I walk through this very carefully in the book: Sister Lucia told the Vatican several times, very specifically, that the Third Secret had been fully revealed and that John Paul II’s consecration of Russia to Mary’s immaculate heart had been done properly and successfully. I have full chapters in the book on each of those two events. To me, the issue seems resolved.

CWR: How would you describe the friendship between Reagan and John Paul II? And how might history been different without that friendship?

Dr. Kengor: Had these two extraordinary men perished from the shootings in March and May 1981, the 20 th century would not have ended as it did. For Americans, for Europeans, for Protestants and Catholics, and for so many others worldwide, the momentous and tranquil termination of the Cold War was the most remarkable event of the close of the 20 th century, a century where over 100 million people were killed by communist governments. And Ronald Reagan and John Paul II teamed up to seek precisely that historic victory, an outcome that they perceived as not only historical but spiritual. For both men, the Soviet empire was not a mere empire, but an atheistic empire, an “Evil Empire.”

In that, Ronald Reagan saw Pope John Paul II as his partner, as his “best friend”—as Reagan would (quite remarkably) put it. Yes, Reagan actually said that. In the book, I have the time, the place, the context, the witnesses. And Nancy Reagan said equally strong things about her Ronnie’s “closest friend.”

Their collaboration helped bring about the historic events of 1989-91, from the fall of the Berlin Wall and collapse of the Communist Bloc to the disintegration of the Soviet Union—the Bolshevik Russia that plagued a century with its persecutions and errors. They won the Cold War without a missile fired—along with the help of key names like Thatcher, Gorbachev, Yeltsin, Walesa, Havel.

These two men, a Catholic and a Protestant, a Pole and an American, at the Vatican and at the White House, stood out and stood together they together resolved to stop the atheistic Soviet empire. It was a historic partnership, and a historic victory. And the way they did it—and the larger, higher forces involved—is, I believe, the extraordinary untold story of the 20 th century.

If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!

Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.

Related Articles

Capital Punishment and the Papal Magisterium: A Response to Dr. Edward Feser

The issue is not so much whether prior popes were in error in their scriptural citations. The issue is whether their scriptural appeals qualify as […]

The True Spirit of Vatican II

As far as I know, no participant in the Second Vatican Council summed up its goals or described its spirit as addressing the question whether God’s truth and love are effective, that is, whether they […]

China, politics, faith, and the liturgical village: Cardinal Joseph Zen in context

Editor’s note: During the week of May 28 to 31, 2019, several hundred Catholic lay faithful, priests, deacons, nuns, and three bishops gathered at Spokane, Washington, for the annual Sacred Liturgy Conference. The conference was […]

2 Comments

Have throughly enjoyed reading these articles.

At this time of immense crisis in the world, the struggle to combat covid 19 pandemic, I feel quiet certain that it is only through prayers-sincere, contrite repentant prayers for the grave sins and the errors of our time, namely abortion in petition to Our Blessed Mother can and will effect change in our fate just as
Our Blessed Mother, Lady of the Rosary’s hand guided the bullet destined to bring a premature end John Paul II life and prevented a 3rd world war occurring, as the West responded to Russia’s murder of the pope.
There is no question that we can determine a change in our Fate, if we repent, truly repent for the outrageous offences committed against the sanctity of life, Pope John Paul II life of courageous FAITH proclaimed the culture of life, the dignity of every human life, the unborn and the child and adults with additional needs.
We need beg God’s pardon and Mercy for our most objectionable of sins, the increased promotion of a culture of death, notably the introduction of legislation (New York) and most recently just last week Northern Ireland that seeks to permit abortion right up to day of an infant’s birth.
This is horrific and utterly reprehensible, and God is not pleased. This needs to stop.


Watch the video: ΧΑΡΙΛΑΟΣ ΦΛΩΡΑΚΗΣ ΚΑΣΤΡΙ 1988


Comments:

  1. Emst

    I think you are not right. Write to me in PM, we will handle it.

  2. Kazikinos

    In it something is. I thank for the help in this question, now I will know.

  3. Kedar

    Between us, in my opinion, this is obvious. I recommend that you search google.com

  4. Tony

    You were visited with excellent idea

  5. Mikak

    I agree, the very good information

  6. Montes

    You are absolutely right.In this something is I think that it is good thinking.

  7. Khairy

    I consider, that you are not right. I suggest it to discuss. Write to me in PM, we will talk.



Write a message