Foreign Relations

In a June 2011 interview, Gary Eichten of Minnesota Public Radio asked Mr. Mondale "How did you move, in those Senate years, from support for the Vietnam War ... to opposition? How did that evolution take place?" Mr. Mondale replied "Painfully, slowly, and it's the one part of my record that I have to apologize for."

Mr. Mondale explained that his position stemmed from believing the situation with South Vietnam was similar to the United States' experience with Hitler in World War II, and if earlier involvement in South Vietnam might contain communism, then it was the right thing to do. His position was also complicated by his close relationship to Vice President Hubert Humphrey and Mr. Mondale's reticence to break from the administration's position.[1]

Over time, however, he grew more skeptical and eventually became a vocal opponent of the war. In 1967 Senator Mondale gave a speech at Macalester College discussing his support of the Vietnam War, the importance of not letting Vietnam split the Democratic Party, and the need to keep the party unified for the "larger objective" of "human improvement." He returned in 1969 with an entirely different message. He stated:[2]

In short, by not setting forth a clear policy which disavows the past and sets a new course for peace, we are clinging to old policies and old myths. It is this admission which we seek from our Administration. It is not their mistake they need admit, it is our mistake and it is my mistake. What we are paying for today is simply a price for pride, and the price is too high for any civilized society to continue to pay. I have a pride problem of my own. I once supported this war. I thought it was right.... I found out I was wrong; I admit it; and I think it is time for the U.S. Government to do the same.[3]

In an impassioned speech urging his colleagues to pass the Hatfield-McGovern amendment to withdraw U.S. forces from Vietnam by December 31, 1971, Senator Mondale echoed a similar yet more urgent message:

How many more men must be killed? How many more billions wasted? With the overwhelming majority of our constituents wanting us to end this war once and for all, how much longer will the Congress go on appropriating the money to perpetuate the tragedy? And if we do not stop the war now, how much does this representative government mean in this country? That is why this vote is so much more than a trial of policy. It is a test of this institution and of its pretense to legislate in response to the will of the people. Most of all, it is a test of our ability as a nation to cleanse ourselves of incredible error and dishonor. I pray we will not fail this test any longer. [4]

He sponsored several pieces of legislation to curtail the administration's expansion of the war into Cambodia and Laos, to withdraw troops from Vietnam, and to try to regain congressional authority over military action.

Early in his Senate career, Mr. Mondale's foreign policy was focused on world hunger and an issue described as "brain drain" — the recruitment of educated people in developing countries to the United States. He felt that both issues were important not only because people were starving and the educated were leaving their countries, but because these conditions created instability in the world. When introducing an amendment adding $200 million additional dollars to the Foreign Assistance Act of 1968, Senator Mondale argued: "We are not talking here about idealistic humanitarian aid programs. We are talking about our own national security and the extent to which a starving world—famine and strife–ridden—threatens the peace of all mankind."[5] He stressed that foreign aid did not just include sending the needed supplies and food, but also emphasized and insisted "upon self–help and the development of self–sufficiency in those countries where population growth is outstripping food production."[6] He described "brain drain" as a "national disgrace" because it was preventing these countries from becoming more self-sufficient: "The opportunities for health and even life leave many of the developing nations of the world along with medical personnel who migrate to the United States. . . . "[7]

Senator Mondale was a strong proponent of efforts to open trade with Eastern Europe. He argued that by keeping trade open with these countries, they would be less dependent on Russia[8] while benefitting United States agriculture. He introduced and cosponsored legislation that would grant Czechoslovakia and Romania most-favored-nation status.

Senator Mondale was also a strong supporter of Israel. In recognizing Israel's eighteenth anniversary, he stated: "I understand that the Hebrew word for 18 is 'chai' which also means 'life.' A particularly significant birthday, I should think, for a state which has given dignity and opportunity to so many lives and which has in fact been responsible for saving the lives of a considerable part of its populace. To oppressed and homeless Jews throughout the world, living in lands where freedom is a myth and tolerance a vice, the word 'life' and the word 'Israel' can also be synonymous."[9] He often made requests for more financial and military assistance for Israel and felt that "what little peace or 'balance' is now being preserved in the Middle East is due to the superiority of Israeli air power. Given her absolute inferiority in terms of population and strategic position, her continued superiority in the air is essential to any reasonable concept of 'balanced power.'"[10]

Towards the end of his Senate career, Mr. Mondale became a strong spokesman for arms control. During debate on an appropriations bill for the Department of Defense, he argued against "first–strike programs." He submitted an amendment against the development of first–strike weapons, and argued for research and development of ICBMs that could be used to withstand a Soviet first–strike rather than ICBMs with the capability to carry out a first–strike.[11] Senator Mondale also supported a strong military presence in Europe and opposed the proposed reduction of U.S. troops in Europe: "Making the scale of reductions the majority leader has proposed does not suit the political or security requirements of America today. The fragile nature of our transatlantic relations, the delicate balance which exists in Asia, the fact that we ourselves do not have the kind of political leadership that can effectively implement significant reductions and still retain U.S. influence abroad, all lead me to conclude that this is not the time for such massive reductions." [12]

Senator Mondale's foreign policy views were certainly refined by his experience as Vice President, yet as a Senator he displayed a skilled understanding of the dangers inherent in sweeping generalizations and assumptions when he said: "The first step in revising our thinking about foreign policy should be to jettison the amorphous term 'national security,' and to get back to talking concretely about our diplomatic, military, economic, and other interests.... I believe the fog of national security helped to lead us into the tragic swamp of Vietnam, into the morass called Watergate."[13] As Vice President, Mr. Mondale upheld this belief and focused on concrete issues such as the humanitarian crisis caused by refugees fleeing Vietnam, brokering peace between Egypt and Israel, and traveling to China to further economic and trade relations.