ambassador rudolf v. perina - Association for Diplomatic Studies and ...

war. But I can tell you that the Soviets I dealt with took it very seriously and seemed very
concerned about getting into a high-tech competition with the United States. The glory of
the Sputnik was long past, the computer age was beginning, and the Soviets sensed that
they were very far behind. They also realized that their strength as a world power came
from possession of nuclear weapons, and not from their GDP or anything else. Without
the clout of nuclear weapons, they would be in big trouble, and they realized this.
Already in Berlin my Soviet counterpart would turn social conversations to SDI and try
to argue why the U.S. should abandon the effort. Since neither of us had any
responsibility for this issue, it was clear to me that his comments came from generic
talking points that all Soviet diplomats had been instructed to use whenever possible.
This was, of course, within the context of the big debate in Germany about NATO
deployment of intermediate range nuclear weapons (INF) to counter the SS-20 missiles
deployed by the Soviets. It was a huge controversy during my time in Germany because
there was much European opposition. When President Reagan visited Berlin while I was
there, we had huge demonstrations against him by Germans opposed to INF deployment.
So these nuclear issues were very much on the table during this period, and while East-
West relations were stable in Berlin, there was a lot of tension in the broader U.S.-Soviet
relationship.
Q: Did you have problems with American soldiers getting loose in the Eastern zone and
getting into trouble?
PERINA: Well there were incidents like this, but fewer than one would imagine because
of fairly strict regulations on U.S. soldiers going to East Berlin. I don’t recall any specific
protests from the Soviets of this nature. By and large, our military was quite disciplined
and responsible, and there were far more opportunities to get into trouble in West Berlin
without the need to cross into the East.
Q: Who was the American Ambassador at this time?
PERINA: It was Arthur Burns, our Ambassador in Bonn. He had two hats. He was our
Ambassador to the FRG in Bonn, but he was also the head of the U.S. Mission to West
Berlin. So he also had two Soviet counterparts—the Soviet Ambassador in Bonn and the
Soviet Ambassador in East Berlin on Berlin issues. There was a tradition that every six
months there was a lunch on Berlin issues between the U.S. Ambassador and the Soviet
Ambassador. Because I was the working-level liaison to the Soviets on these issues, and
because I knew Russian, I was asked shortly after my arrival to serve as the U.S.
interpreter at one such lunch, and I ended up doing it for my entire time in Berlin. In fact,
once I was even asked to fly to Bonn and interpret at a lunch that Ambassador Burns had
with his Russian counterpart in Bonn. But usually I interpreted at the Berlin lunches,
which alternated between East and West Berlin. The way it worked was that both
Ambassadors brought an interpreter, and the Russian fellow interpreted English into
Russian and I did Russian into English. This was easiest for both of us because neither I
nor the Russian, I think, were professional interpreters. But it worked well and allowed
me to participate at all the lunches.
39