IP0195N: Nuclear Weapons Freeze Movement

Congressional Research Service The Library of Congress

NUCLEAR WEAPONS FREEZE MOVEMENT: ISSUES FOR NATIONAL DEBATE IP0195N

Is the American public increasingly against nuclear weapons?

Are U.S. and other world leaders paying too much attention to arms production and too little attention to arms control?

Have the fear and likelihood of a nuclear war increased?

These issues are being debated in local communities and increasingly among U.S. policymakers. The grass-roots movement to "ban the bomb" has already been endorsed by over one million people through local and State referendums. A recent Gallup poll concluded that over 314 of Americans favor a 50% reduction in nuclear arsenals by both the Soviet Union and the United States.

The nuclear weapons freeze movement has recently gained the attention of Congress. On March 10, 1982, Senate and House resolutions were introducted which requested the President to negotiate an immediate nuclear weapons freeze with the Soviet Union, followed by major reductions on both sides. Another congressional proposal calls for the President to negotiate with the Soviet Union a long-term, mutual and verifiable nuclear forces freeze, but at equal and sharply reduced force levels.

This Info Pack presents background information on the recent peace crusade and examines both the desirabilities and potential dangers inherent in such proposals to freeze or reduce nuclear weapons. Also included are relevant Reagan Administration responses to these various proposals.

We hope this material will be useful.

Congressional Reference Division COMPLIMENTS OF Gene Snyder

Articles reproduced with permission of copyright claimants.

Mr. RV'S aPening st.- naS irompsdbyamoyementfmarmclear rsac that has gathered wide national ddqand the support of same 170 nembof CQlgress. In opposition to BIDS THE RUSSIANS JOIN IN he pmposal for an early freeze, Sena- on, John W. Warner. Republican of {irginia, and Henry M. Jackson, Derm Pledge of Ultimate Cutbacks aat of Washington, introduced a pr+ &, supported by 56 other samtors, Is Designed to Stem Drive : htroulddelayafnezermtil.ftatbe ~nitedStates had either caught up witb for Freeze in Arsenals RhetieperceivedasaSwietadwmtage n nuclear weapons or had reached an rgrerment from Moscow for the sub- rtantial raiuctions that the President !ailed for again tonight. WASHINGTON, March 31 - Presi- lmporLsntxnitl8tive' dent Reagan said tonight that he in- TIE President called the Wamer- tended to reduce stores of nuclear radmm pmposal "an important move weapons dramatically. He called on the m the rigi~tdirection" and an "impor- Swiet Union to join witb the United tant initiative." States in such cuts and "make an im- In his statement, Mr. Reagan said portant breakthrough for lasthg peace plans were being completed fn W& memill." tngm for the eventual start of talks I.a nationally televised news amfer- with the Soviet Union on mhcbg encefnnntbeEastRoornoftbeWhite strategic arms. In answer to a question, House, the President sought to OOunter be@d he hoped that the talks eould start this summer but, alluding to the Ttmrscript of news session, page A22. martial law Govement in Poland, he said the timing would depend on "the ip pressure from those seeking a treeze in ternatid situation." Other officials Swiet aad American atomic arsenals have said the beginning of talks depend now by saying that such a move would on there being w sharp worsening of deprive the Soviet Union of an incentive thesituation in Poland. to negotiate a memhgtd reduction. He "1 want an agreement on strategic said the Russians had "a definite mar- gin of superiority" wer the United Cm~ooP8geA23,Columnl States in nuclear weapons.

SOURCE: The New York Times April 1, I982 p.A1 ,A23 Reagan Says He Plans to Reduce ~uClear~&nsStores Dramatically

Continued From Page 1 In his lifetime. He sdd4, "I share thg determination of today's young people that such a tragedy, which would be nuclear weapons that reduces the risk rendered even more terrible by the of war, lowers the level of armaments monstrous inhumane weapons In the and enhances global security," the world's nuclear arsenals, must new President said. "We can accept no happen again." less." In talking about the Soviet Union, the On other foreign questions, Mr. Rea- President also seemed conciliatory in gan made these points : his prepared opening statement that he read rather rapidly. QHe praised the wide turnout in the Hesaid the successful outcome of the elections last Sunday r a constituent United States space shuttle mission this assembly in El Salva& , saying it was week reminded the world "of the great inspiring. He noted that he had heard of the human pace can achieve awman who insisted on standfng in when it harnesses its best mfnds and ef- line to vote even after being hit by a forts to a positive goal." ricocheting bullet. But he refused to say "Both the United States and the what hetaould do if a right-wing govern- Wet Union have written proud chap meat tooh power and did away with ters in the peaceful exploration of outer previous social changes. space," he said, "so I tnvite the Soviet QThe United States is continuing to Unionto in with us now to subs^ tially E4.t ce nuclear weapons and watch developments in Poland. The make an important b- for President revealed no new Mtiatives lasting peace on earth." and said it was necessary that the Rus- The President's statement contrasted sians understand that "there could be a with the sharp attack on the Soviet carrot along with the stick, if they Union that he made in his first news straighten up and fly right." conference last year, in which he said QOn the Middle East. Mr. Reagan Met leaders had made a virtue out of said he hoped that recent clashes h the lylng and cheating and could not be West Bank between Israelis and Pales trusted. tiniam would not slow progress in the When asked ii his 15 months in ow negotiations between Egypt and Israel hadledhirntochangehisop~mabout for Palestinian self-rule in the occupied the Russians, he said, "No, I don't think area. He said he hoped for progress in they've changed their habits." those talks Israel turns He said the Russian8 were experkno 4 after over the Lnn a "demerate situation economical- rest of Sinai to Egypt on April 25. IF as a rdtof the military buildup In his openine statement, Mr. Reagan that "has left them on a very narrow seemed to gu out of his way to combat Lelge. " an impnssiar that bb was uninterested He said that as a reeult eamomic in anns oontrol and only problems made the the Rwiarn, vul- wan interested merable to economic sancttom by the in building up Ammlca'r military ma- west, such as the withholding of chine. xedits. Be pointed out that thts was He said he had seen the world being urged on the allies by the Ad& "plunged blindly into global war" twice istratfon. Asked whether a nuclear war would bd wianable or "SUrYivable," Mr. Rea- gan said, "I just have to say that I don't believe there could be any winnefil." If there was a nuclear war, Mr. Reagan said. "everybody would be a loser." Mr. Reagan declined to say pffdealy how the United States would respond if the Russians moved to place nuclear weapons in the Western Hemisphere. Any such move would be "in total viola- tion" of agreements reached in 1962 la the Cuban missile crisis, he said. Mr. Reagan also said tbat Cuba and perhap Nicaragua were the only places where the Russians mieht prt nucle8rweapoasinthishemispbars. The President decbed to reply fn & tail to statements about nuclff weap ons by Leonid I. Blw?hm?,th6 Saviel leader. hlr. Reagan said the statements were part of a Soviet "propaganb CamPam-'' Pro and Con A Reeze on Nuclear Weapons? YES-The arms race "could subject NO-It "would perpetuate an unstable the entire world to holocaust" situation" that increases the risk of war

lnterview With Interview With Senator Richard R. Burt Mark 0. Haffield

Republican, Director of Politco-Mhtary Of Oregon Affa~rs,Department of State

Q Senator Hatfield, why are you sponsoring a proposal in Q Mr. Burt, why is the Reagan administration opposed to a Congress that calls upon the superpowers to put a freeze on nuclear-weapons freeze? nuclear-weapons construction? A There are two basic reasons: A Because the U.S. has had superiority in nuclear weap The first is that we think it would lock us into some ons ever since World War 11, when the Soviets didn't even military disadvantages. In Europe, the Soviet Union has a have the bomb, and yet it is evident that the more nuclear force of 600 intermediate-range missiles with 1,200 war- weapons we build, the more they will build. And the result heads. The Soviets thus have a massive capability to target is less security in the world. Nuclear superiority is not only a our allies. The U.S. has no equivalent systems. Further- meaningless term in the age of multiple overkill, it is a more, the Soviet Union has developed over the last 15 years hindrance at the bargaining table. a new generation of intercontinental ballistic missiles which Now not only do the Soviets have the bomb, but by the threatens a large fraction of our existing land-based missile end of this century an estimated 60 nations will be capable force. Again, we have no equivalent capability. We cannot of building nuclear weapons. We must halt this kind of allow these disadvantages to continue in perpetuity. madness. It could subject the entire world to nuclear holo- Secondly, the administration believes that we can do caust-the end of the planet. better than a freeze. Q Wouldn't a freeze simply perpetuate the substantial Soviet Q Better in what way? advantage In medium-range nuclear weapons in Europe? A Our objective, both in the current talks in Geneva on A First of all, the U.S. has a massive nuclear-weapons intermediate-range nuclear forces and in the forthcoming capability in Europe. The Soviets have 2,000 missiles, and strategic-arms talks, will be significant reductions in the we have 1,200. The U.S. total includes invulnerable, for- existing arsenals of both sides. We believe that if both sides' ward-based submarines, two of which could knock out ev- forces are frozen at current levels, the Soviet Union will ery major Russian city. have no incentives whatsoever to take our proposals for Globally, we have over 9,000 warheads, and the Soviets reductions seriously. In fact, the only reason we have nego- have 7,000. Furthermore, our warheads are far more accu- tiations going on now in Geneva on intermediate-range rate. When we look at the nuclear arsenals in their totality, missiles is that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in we have a more destructive arsenal than the Soviets. 1979 decided to modernize its capabilities in response to Q Could a freeze prevent the building of our 8-1 and Stealth the Soviet buildup of intermediate-range nuclear forces. bombers and leave the Soviets free to enlarge their air defenses? Q Looking beyond the situation in Europe, where you say the A You must remember that there are other parts of our Soviet Union has a substantial advantage, wouldn't a freeze arsenal that will survive an attack and have significant leave the U.S. with a big edge in strategic warheads all told? deterrence value. Secondly, we can seek to negotiate a A Well, there are many different ways to measure the collateral agreement constraining U.S. and Soviet air-de- overall balance. The fact is that by most measures of strate- fense improvements. gic nuclear capability the Soviet Union is ahead of the Q But wouldn't the U.S. bomber force be rendered vlrtuaily United States right now. useless against Russia if our airborne-cruise-missile program We believe that both the Soviet Union and the United were killed by a freeze? States should reduce the level of nuclear arms they pres- A Absolutely not. First, current war plans call for pre- ently possess. So the real question is not how to accomplish attacks on Soviet air defenses that would leave them badly a freeze at existing numbers; it is how to achieve limita- damaged. In addition, our current bomber, the B-52, is now tions at reduced levels. And that's what the Reagan admin- equipped to suppress air defenses. The Air Force is on istration wants-agreed limits at reduced levels. We want record saying that the B-52 bomber will have a penetration to negotiate significant reductions, and history has shown capability at least until 1990 and perhaps well beyond. Also, that the only way to do that is to give the Soviets incen- it is worth noting that the production of a new Soviet tives for negotiating. * bomber the Pentagon claims is being developed would be Q Would a freeze actually end the nuclear arms race? prohibited with a freeze. A No. First of all, a freeze would be extremely difficult Q What about the vulnerability of land-based missiles? to verify and therefore would not limit the Soviets' ability A The Soviet Union's nuclear arsenal is more vulnerable to increase their nuclear force. than ours because 70 to 75 percent of it is based on land; Secondly, even assuming for the moment that one could

Copyright @ 1982. USNews 8 World Report, Inc lnterview With Senator Hatfield (continued) Interview With Mr. Burt (continued) 1.- - only 25 percent of our missiles are land based. Any negoti- verify it, such a freeze would perpetuate an unstable nucle- ation could include discussion of options such as moving ar situation, one that would increase the risk of war rather the Minuteman 3 missile frpm land bases to small, coastal- than reduce it. based submarines-which would reduce fears regarding Finally, such a freeze would leave totally unconstrained our vulnerability. many other military developments which could directly First-strike capability is a purely theoretical notion. Sec- threaten the nuclear balance. These include improvements ond, knowing that we have such great power to retaliate, in submarine warfare and air defenses. why, unless an accident occurred, would the Soviets attempt Q In your view, the kind of treeze being advocated in Con- a first strike? Finally, a freeze would seriously reduce Soviet gress could not be verified- confidence in a first strike by placing a cap on warheads and ' A There are a variety of proposals, but the proposals I halting testing activity which is needed for accuracy. have seen call for a freeze in warhead production, testing Q Were we to have a treeze, how would Soviet compliance be and deployment. As I noted, it would be very difficult to verified, in light of Russia's past refusal of on-site inspection? verify such a freeze. It would require extensive on-site A The U.S. has an elaborate satellite detection system. inspections, which the Soviets have traditionally rejected. We have a multitude of other intelligence-gathering mech- Q Many people urging a freeze argue that if the arms race anisms. Illegal activity could be detected more easily with a continues, it wiii lead to a nuciear war. How do you answer that? freeze than without a freeze because any testing or produc- A We are concerned, as everyone should be, about the tion activity would suggest a violation. Today we are faced dangers of a nuclear war. with detecting very subtle deviations and changes in activi- The best ways to minimize the chances of a nuclear war ty, which is far more difficult. are through the maintenance of a balance of power and the Q How do you respond to the contention of administration negotiation of significant reductions. We have been able to officials that a freeze would destroy any chance of negotiating avoid a nuclear war since the advent of the nuclear age by an agreement to reduce nuclear arsenals and limit the nuclear- maintaining an equilibrium in military capabilities, and that arms race on a broad basis? is the policy of this administration. A The logic of that idea escapes me. We have to first cre- 0 In light of the growing push for a freeze, is the administra- ate a freeze to get a change of direction. A freeze would not tion going to move quickly into strategic-arms talks? impair our ability to reverse the current upward arms esca- A We have spent several months extensively analyzing lation. Instead, it would stop the arms race so that it could be our options in the strategic-arms area. Secretary of State reversed. You can't throw a freight train corning down the Haig said recently that our analysis will be complete in a track into reverse until you first stop it. matter of weeks. We want to approach these talks serious- Q Another objection being raised is that the movement for a ly, with a thoughtful opening position. We should be pre- nuclear freeze in this country will impair U.S. defenses by under- pared in the near future for negotiations, international mining support tor the administration's buildup-- conditions permitting. A First, don't forget we also halt the Soviet buildup. Q Would a treeze help cut defense spending by large sums There isn't any question that a freeze would challenge the and thereby help reduce the deficit, the source of so much administration's present defense program. The Reagan de- concern in this country? fense program, compared to the Carter budget, provides A Experience has shown that existing arms-control for a 49 percent increase in military spending, whereas agreements have not resulted in great savings. A freeze at nondefense programs have diminished by some 12 percent. existing levels-levels that most people believe are already It weakens America to commit over 200 billion dollars too high-would probably not result in real savings. Agreed over the next six years to nuclear weaponry at a time limits at much reduced levels would possibly save money. when the economy -needs capital And. of course, this is our goal. to modernize its production ca- pability and channel more man- power and womanpower toward scientific and engineering fields so that we can better compete in the international marketplace. This, too, is a matter of nation- al security. Q Do you see any comparable movement toward a nuclear treeze in the Soviet Union? A It is very difficult to assess the mood of the people in a closed society. But Americans who have recently visited the So- viet Union frequently say that the Russian people don't want nucle- ar war. Eventually, that feeling will have to erupt, even within a closed society. As for the open societies of the West, ot r allies are attracted to a nuclear freeze. If we back the idea, America's leadership world- wide would be enhanced. 5 6 4 USNEWS &WORLD REPORT. April 5, 1982 Thinking About % The Unthinkable 4 Rising fears aboSit the dangers of nuclear war

'No anny can stop an idea whose time That was not all. Republican Charles has come. McC. Mathias of Maryland last week in- -Victor Hugo troduced another Senate mlution call- ing upon the President to "immediately - An idea whose moment invite" the Soviets to negotiations on may have arrived is sweep strategic anns and the proliferation of nu- ing the US.-for better or clear mapons and technology. Mathias for worse. From the halls of charged that the Administration was Congress to Vermont ham- guilty of a "grievous failure" for not hav- lets to the posh living rooms ing initiated such negotiations. "Nothing of Beverly Hills, Americans less than the future of mankind ia at arc not only thinkmg about stake," he said. Elthe unthinkable, they arc opening a na- The resolutions on Capitol Hill are tional dialogue on ways to control and re- the small tip of a very large iceberg. In duce the awesome and frightening nucle- part, the Senators who favor the motions ar arsenals of the superpowers. This new are responding to an unprecedentd flood awareness of the dangers of nuclear war of teach-ins, referendums, legislative pro- cuts across traditional political bound- posals, letter-writing campaigns, peti- aries. Advocates of a bilateral frceze on tions, and books addressing the peril of the development and deployment of nu- nuclear war. The groups involved in the clear weapons include some peacenik ac- movement include such longtime disar- tivists who led protests against US. in- mament organitations as SAM and the volvement in the Viet Nam War a decade Union of Concerned Scientists. But with ago. But the new movement is tar more them are a h06t of fledgling organizations: broadly bd,it includes more bishops Physicians for Social Responsibility, In- than Berrigans, doctors and lawyers with ternational Physicians for the Prevention impeccable Establishment credentials, of Nuclear War, the Lawyers Allfice for archconservatives as well as diehard lib- Nuclear Arms Control, the Business Alert erals, and such knowledgeable experts as to Nuclear War, Artists for Survival. The retired Admiral Noel Gayler, former di- St. Louis-based National Clearinghouse rector of the supenecrct National Securi- for the Nuclear Weapons Freeze Cam- ty Agency, and former SALT U Negotiator paign, founded last December, estimatca Paul Warnke. Says Rabbi Alexander that 20,000 volunteers arc now involved Schindler, head of the Union of American in the crusade nationwide. Hebrew Congregations: "Nuclear disar- mament is going to become the central lthough its hardconr publica- moral issue of the '809, just as Viet Nun tion by Alfred A. Knopf will not was in the '605." occur until April, one of the mas( The central goal of the movement is to talked-about books of the year ir educate the public to the tnre horrors of Jonathan Schell's Tire Fate of rhe World. what war would mean to the US. and the First published in me New Yorker last world today, and thereby put pressure on a month, it is an impassioned argument hawkish Administration to negotiate a that nuclear weapons have made war ob cutback in nuclear arms with the Soviet solete and world government imperative. Union. Weof that prodding is already Astonishingly, some 40 new books on nu. corning from Congress. Senators Edward clear issues arc scheduled to be published Kennedy of Massachusetts and Mark before the end of this ycar, Pocket Booka Hatfield of Oregon two weeks ago intro- is rushing into bookstores with 100,W duced a resolution that calls for a freeze on copies of Nuclear Wac Whar S in It for the testing, production and further deploy- You?, a paperback primer on the subject ment of nuclear weapons by both the US. written by Roger Molander, founder ol and the Soviet Union. The nonbinding measure has already attracted the suppod Fireball of m H-bomb exploslaa rises w.c of 22 Senators and 150 Representatives. BikM Atdafter r 1956 test bbt tailed analysis intended to show that the cia1 Responsibility. "Instead, the Reagan Brahnev plan would only harden an al- Administration gives us pronouncements ready overwhelming Soviet edge in nucle- that nuclear weapons are usable and that ar weaponry in Europe. Thesoviet Union, nuclear wan arc winnable." Adds Dr. for example, now has 300 SS2O-missides in Stephen Klineberg, professor of sociology place and capable of being targeted on at Rice University in Houston: "Reagan Western Europc-up from 100 in 1979-- has tcded not only the Russians, but the Ground Zero, a nuclearaducation group. while.p~TOcurrently has no land-based Americans too." The main reason for the growth of the missides that can hit the Soviet Union. Most of the groups lobbying against movement is increasing wn&rn that po- "What [Baahnevl is tallung about," the spread of nuclear weapons embrace litical leaders of both sumrwwers-cste- charged White Hsuse Counsellor Edwin the belief that, as a first step, the US. cia& since the she\& of the SAL~11 Meest, "is a situation where, two-thirds of should negotiate a bilateral nuclear- treaty in 1980 and the failure to resume the way through a football game, one side weapons freeze with the Soviet Union. talks since then-have moved, with mu- is ahead 50 to 0, and they want to freae The current proposal was written in 1979 tual belligerence, toward a direct confron- the score for the rest of the game.'.' Both by Randall Forsberg, 37, a former editor tation that could trigger a nuclear war. Reagan and Msae were somewhat over- for the Stockholm International Peace Those worries were, in a sense, symbol- stating the case, Since NATO dOCS have Research Institute, who was then study- iud by a rhetorical exchange between aircrafl- and submarine-based missiies ing for a doctorate in military policy and Ronald Reagan and Leonid Bruhnev last that partly offset the Soviet advantages arms control at M.I.T. "My objective was week that probably did more to augment There was something else to Brczh- to come up with a goal in arms control superpower tensions than to ease than. nev's proposal: a vague but ominous that would have grcat appeal," she ex- Spealung to the 17th Congress of Soviet warning to the US. that seemed to harken plains, "It had to be simple, effective and Trade Unions, the medal-bedecked Sovi- back to the days of an earlier showdown bilateral in order to involve people."-. et leader announced that Moscow was im- betmen the countries, the 1962 Cuban mediately suspending its deployment of missile crisis. If the NATO allies did -bdeed orsberg's treae propod was hrsP new SS-20 nuclear missiles west of the statih the new missiles on. Eiiroopean soil published in April 1980, in a book- Urals and targeted at Western Europe. next year, said the Soviet leader, "there let titled Gall to Halt the Nuclear The frrc2c would last until an arms agree- would arise a real additional threat to our FArmc Race. but it attracted searnt ment was reached with the US., or until mtryand its allies." Warned Brahntv: attention Only aher November 1980, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization This would compel us to take retaliatory when voters in three state senate districts began deploying 572 new Pershing II and steps that would put the other side, in- in Massachusetts approved a hezz rcm- cruise missiles in Europe, which is now cluding the United States itself, its own lution by 59% to 4146, did the proposal scheduled to take place in late 1983. temtory, in an analogous position. This begin to draw wide support. "Whet that Brczhnev also declared that the Soviet should not be forgotten." told us," says Randy KeNer, a formu Union would later this year unilaterally It is precisely that kind of scare talk. schoolteacher and antiwar activist, "was dismantle "a certain number" of its medi- whether emanating from the Kremlin or that Ronald Reagan's election was not um-range missiles already in plaa. from the White House, that is galvanizing necessarily synonymous with support of the nuclear-freeze advocates. For dl the the nuclear-arms race." At last count, ashihgton swiftly rejected obvious reasons, they are uneasy about freeze resolutions had been passed in 257 Brezhnev's proposals. "A the military intentions of the Soviet town meetings in New England. 31 city freue simply isn't good Union. Unfairly or not, the Reagan Ad- councils, and six state legislatures. W enough because it doesn't go ministration is also blamed for fueling the Perhaps the most significant local far enough," said President Reagan in a current jitters with loox talk-from the freeze campaign involves the med speech to the Oklahoma state legislature. President on down4bout the prospect of California initiative, which would require Instead, Reagan reminded Brczhnev of fighting a "limited nuclear war." Mvy the state's Governor, reflecting the will of his "zero option" proposal made last Nc+ Americantincluding some with wns~d- the people, to advise the President that he vember, in which the US. would forgo erable expertise in the area-fear that should propose to the Soviet Union an im- placing its new Pershing I1 and cruise mb- their leaden are mom comfortable than mediate halt to the "testing, production sila on European mil if *Moscow would ever before with the thought of using nu- and further deployment of nuclear wsap scrap its arsenal of SS-20 missiles. clear weapons. "There is great concern mu ... in a way that san be verified by Concerned that Moscow might p- Mtthere are no serhi efforts for axma both sides." The brainchild of Liberal AC- thelcsr score a propaganda coup wth tts control." says Thomas Habtpd, 48, dim tivist Harold Waens, boord chairman of proposals, the White House released a de- tor of the Boston-based Physicians for So- the La Annelts-bared Facm Esui~ 2 ment Corp., the initiative has bun en- University ofCdauh"The plan Qan't Nancy Smwmq whae uate is homc to dorsed by GmorJeny Brown Back- even mention radiatioa. Once a bomb is IPoreidonalkikfPaory8DdtheXU- have gathered more than 600,000 sigry- launched, it will be an doutwar urd w tion's only wapons-g.de plutonirmn tures, nearly twice as many as arc necer- community in the USwill be exempt" pt.nt~instnllrrtionsbavebetnherr sary to have the initiative plnad on the In Chicago,Kmlc 350 profcggn flwl fayam,butIdothinL~~pdopk.n November ballot. "We feel that we're on 42 colleges and rmive1.sities have banded now ueannfatably aware that hth the cutting edge of a new phenomem," together since Janumy to form m.Chi- CarolimpLyrafugeWrrotethanwe says Wiens. "It's going to bevery hard cqp Area Faculty for a Freeze. "This is a would wish in nuclear matters." E- for the opposition to sweep us into the cor- fint for me," said B~ceWinstem, a Vni- more ccmpfkabk has ban the rrceptim ner as a fringe group." Indd, early ed- venity of Chicago physicist .who pined given to faur dronclad Buddhist monks mates arc that the referendum measun the group. "I've never gotten mvdvcd be- from Jam,who arc trudging along high- could pass with 65% of the vote. fore, but finally I can oec where I can ways in the South chanting prayers af Then is considerable diversity in the make a difference." In Slth Dakota, peace. The monks belim that the ground goals and activities of the various antinu- which has 150 missile sites and an imp- they~wUbe~Eromnuclcar clear groups. The Lawyers Alliance for ing military payroll, eight city anmcils war, they began their pilgrimage h Nuclear AmControl, for example, was have so far passed their own nuclear- New Orleans last Januasy and hop to founded a year ago by Alan Sherr, 34, a freeze rrsolutions. "South Dakota h the reach New Yak City by Juue. "We have Boston attorney. "I felt then as I do now last place pople think something Wre this been met with great interest," said Jinju that there has got to be a popular initia- would be &iion." says Tim Langley, di- Moorishita last week, after being greeted tive on this issue or else no one rator of the South Dakota by 150 well-wish- who walked to the will really make the difference," Peace and Justice Center. "But ouWrirtsdALhens.Gr,inagaturcof says Sherr, who considers him- thesewhasgrownhmthatm welcome. "People do wt ignae ra." self a political moderate. Since arc entering a new phasc of the the alliance opened its Boston arms race, that we .re getting eligiora kadm and groups have headquarters, membership has ready to fight. nuclear war.- ' played an incrraJingly important grow from 200 to 700, and St. Paul, Minn., Bonnie Iverson, role in the movement. At last 70 them arc chapters ia h.eeother 37. a mother of two,, byd- 8 Roman Catholic bishops (of the cities. Shem has interitionally lecting signatm for her state's 368 in the US.) have spoken out against shied away from endorsing any freeze rrsolution. "I get nervous the arms race a in favor of a nuclear specific proposal for a nuclear- about going door to door." she Ereeoe, and the hierarchy's umbrella a- weapons freac, and instead is m~dq..hrt it's a I bp ganization, the ~ationalConferena of concentrating the alliance's ef- lieve in. It's the notion of what Catholic Bkh.dam to vote on a major forts on educating other lawyers would happen to the land and all statement abo;t bklear war at its annd about the perils of nuclear war. Thus, life. If nuclear war happens, I hope the meeting in November. Bishop Leroy the alliance is sponsoring symposiums bomb hits right here buse1 don't want Matthiesen of Amarillo, Texas, has even throughout the country and plans to seek to live to see it" urged Catholia working at a nearby a resolution of support from the American The strength of the antinuclear senti- nuclear-mapons asscrnbiy plant to am- Bar Association. ment is especially surprising in the South, sider switching ptu, and has set up r In Boulder, Colo., the three county considering the .region's traditional con- 510,000 fund to help workers who quit the commissioners voted earlier this month to servatism and its dependence on the mili- plant far modrcesons revoke ttieir endowment of a nucleardi- tary for its livelihood. Ln at least six of the Protestant churches have ban equal- saster evacuation plan propased for their region's states, the largest single employer ly outspdrm. The National Council d city by the Federal Emergency Manage- is the Department of Defense. The board Churches, which represents 40 do11 ment Agency, which administers the na- of supemisom in Loudoun County, Va., Protestants, supports a bilateral nucla! tion's civil defense programs. The witch adopted a nuclear-freae rrsolution last frecre. The 1.6 million-mcmber Ameri- week, and Atlanta Mayor Andrew Young has signed his city's petition. Physicians for Social Responsibility has 16 chapters in the South; last year there were none. Says South Carolina Lieutenant Governor

I ,TIME, MARCH 29.1982 7 Nation can Baptist Churches declared in Decem- a pediatrician at Children's Hospital- respond by claiming that a freeze on "tcst- ber that "the presence of nuclear weapons Medical Center in Boston, took over as ing, production and further deployment" and the wihgness to use them is a direct president in 1979. A zealous opponent of of nuclear weapons cannot be verified affront to our Christian beliefs and com- all things nuclear, Caldicott took her me without on-site inspection,which Moscow mitments." Even members of the evan- sage all over the country, and her hellfire has always resisted. Beyond that, a Prcsi- gelical movement, which has been gcner- oratory soon attracted a following. Since dent pushed into negotiations with Mos- ally noted for its political conservatism, then, membership in P.S.R. has gown cow by the force of a populist movement, have raised their voices against the arms from ten docton to 11,000, and the Bps- even in the name of a morally just cause, buildup. Says the Rev. Kim Crutchfield of ton-based organization now boasts a 22- would be at an enormous disadvantage in the Chapel Hill Harvester Church, a Pen- member staff, 85 chapters in 45 states and trying todeal with leaden ofa totalitarian tecostal church in Atlanta: "We are not a 5600,000 annual budget\ .society who knew in advance the limits of talking about Russians or Chinese or P.S.R. may be the most effective his maneuverability. Americans, but people. God's children. It group in the antinuclear movement. "Ourb It is too early to asses the domestic is right that Christians be concerned with credibility is as a scientific, single-issue political impact of the antinuclear scnti- nuclear war, because nuclear war threat- organitation," says Director Thomas ment. Although impressive in size, the ens God's kingdom on earth." Halstcd. "Our issue is nuclear war and its movement is still rather amorphous and Two organizations-and their lead- medical consequences. That's it." In an politically unorganized. Democrats are en--exemplify the passions and concerns ongoing series of symposiums across the pinning much of the blame on Reagan for of the nuclear-freeze movement: country, members lecture about the hor- the growing fears of nuclear war, and b Ground Zero was founded in late 1980 rifrc consequences of a 20-megaton bomb White House aida admit that indiscreet

ar movement what Earth Bredmv .dboshg trade unkn members at thc Kremlin last week movement of the 19605,"

Day was for the cause of en- A.. ypp~e threat that harkened back to the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. says Robert Neurnan. di- vironmentalism--the cata- -- rector of communications lytic launching of a mass effort to engage explosion, from the moment of impact to for the Democratic National Committee. the nation in discussions on the threat of the long-term effects of radiation sick- "It is confrontational, and will probably nuclear war. Although the focus of the ness. "As mnas you dwell on the effects not become a Democratic or Republican week will be on seminars and lectures, the of a nuclear bomb," says Halsted, "the issue." Says Republican Political Consul- group is also mailing out kits to local coor- coffee cups stop rattling." tant David Kcene: "It's like motherhood dinators with directions on where to place P.S.R. backs a bilateral nuclear freeze, and apple pie. Who's going to k in favor Ground Zero markers and details of the but Caldicott sees that proposal as only a of nuclear war?" effects of a I-megaton bomb dropped on Grst step. "No one has the absolute an- Some political observers believe that their city or town. swer," she admits, "but the kue of nucle- Reagan could defuse the movement4r Molander believes that the Reagan as war will reach a critical mass, and co-opt it-by sitting down to negotiate Administration has fanned feanofa nucle- from that will emerge a solution. We must with the Soviets. Some supporters of the ar war, but he iscareful not tolink hisgroup continue stirring the pot, for the issue is initiative secretly hope that will happen. with any partisan movement. Says Mo- survival." Only a proven antiCommunist like Rich- lander: "What we seek is a public active Advocates of a bilateral nuclear- ard Nixon could have opened the door to enough in the dialogue about nuclear war weapons freeze contend that the plan mainland China in the early 1970s with- that they will feel compelled to work with rnaka sense, since both the US. and the out causing a divisive national debate. the Government in coming up with solu- Soviet- - .- . Union- - - - -. already have larne enounh Siilarlv. the armment ROW, only a Pres- tions, whether it be disarmament, a irate arsenals to annihilaie each othk's po& ident strong-on naconal d&ense as ' or some other option. The ball is rolling, lations many times over. Supporters also Reagan could bargain with the Kremlin and we want togive it molnentum." reject the charge made by hawkish critics on nuclear arms in the early 1980s. That, I b Physicians for Social Responsibility that the movement is ultimately a pacifist indeed, may be the idea whose time has was a moribund organization.devotd to one that play into the hands of the Sovi- come. -8y Ims.Kelly. Reported by 8enbdn detailing the medical consequences of nu- ets. They point out that the freeze prop- H! &te/Lor Anpks wd CU Pltlllipr/AtlrN. I clear war when Helen Caldiwtt, 43. then a1 calls for verification. Critics, however, IlfhothW- I Q 8 TIME, MARCH 29.1982 Nation For and Against a Freeze Voicesfrom a citizens'choncs on a complex issue

Why har the nucleor-1;eeze damage fa countless generations to mowmrnl emerged ot this came, and that can destroy in the most moment of Americon histo- horrifjing manna massive noncombat- ry? How seriously should it ant populations isa wlossal evil and total- be taken? 'l7m asked a ly immoral. The very real possibility of sampling of i&uential citi- the destruction of all life a our planet is zens who ondeeply engoged above all a religious and moral issue. in the nuclmr debate to At the same time, the billions of dol- comment a the ismu inad. llreir Ian which are being spent on these arms responses: each year by a growing number of nations is an appalling form of theft, when so many of the world's disposes& are bc- ing deprived of the possibilities of a mini- mal human existence in a world of abun- EWYARDTEUER,~ofth.~dance. It is the very dismissal of these brmbadaReaga~s~~moral dderations that now threatens dvbar: I hop [the nuclear-fm movl to prcject ra into an abys of fantasy, in mentj will not become UI important which a nuclear war is thought of as possi- force. I hope more sense will prevail. If ble and even survivable. the nuclear freeze gaes through, this coun- try won't exist in 1990. The Soviet Union is a country that has had totalitarian rule for many hundreds of yean, and what 8 relatively small ruling class there might do can be very different from what a dem- matic mtrycan decide to do. The rul- ALANCRAllSfw--- ers in the Kremlin an as eager as Hitler cdifan~rd pm#cntlrl rrpt.nt: The was to get power over the whokvorld. pcaa movement in Europe has spread But unlike Hitler they arc not gamblers. If acrars the ooean,and back into Eastern we can put up a missile defense that Europe, I might add. Another factor is makes their attack dubious, chances are that Ronald Reagan frightens people. they will never try the attack. We can The rhetoric has alarmed people. The avoid a third world war, but only if calLs for huge increases in defense spend- strength is in the hands of those who want ing make us wonder. So have the absurd peace more than they want power. ~noVAJCRomrnCtthdkpNb.0 statements by Administration oflick& Our policy of [military1secncy is very ~rdll~~~rm~~~.tivrrocWcrltic:The that a nuclear war can be survived, ifone badly overdone. It makes the public dis- point of deterrence is to deter. Weapons has a shovel and can dig a hole fast mion irrational, because it wipes out the do not fire themselves. Where the will is enough. It's a form of sickness not to face dXerena betmen people wha know lacking,deterrence is absent. To deter nu- up to and deal with the situation. But pee what they are taking about and those clear disaster and the spread of totalitar- ple arc beginning to emerge from that who do not. Those who do know are not ian power is not a pleasant business. It is sickness and come to grip with it allowed to say what they know. There- not a form of cheap grace. It demands of It's a tcmble thing to think about. It's fore, the whole discussion is made on an ls extremes of selfdiscipline and self- very tough, but it has to be dealt with. It uninformed basis. By practicing secrecy sadce. National security is not %para- will have to come by an act of leadership we are doing nothing except impeding our ble from the defense of fminstitutions, from both the US. and USSR., a will- collaboration with our allies and keeping built it the cost of so much intellectual ingncs to engage in negotiations like the American people in ignorance. diligence, sweat and blood. there have never been before. We have to Tho# who choose detemnce do not cut out the diplomatic dance. This mad- choose Im than the highest human MI- ness can only be broken by leaders of the ues; they choose the only state of develop US. and USSR sitting down and agree ment within which -human beings would ing that this must stop. freely choose to live. It is not "better to be We cannot let infinite detail get in the dead than Red"; it is better to be neither. way, as in other arms talks. There should As the history of our time amply demon- be no agenda worked out by staff in ad- strates, some who choose the latter have vana. We should just sit down and talk not avoided the former. Avoidance of about it The Soviets don't want to be both sickening alternatives is the moral blown up in a nuclear war, they know the good which deterrence, and deterrence danger. Well never know if nuclear alone, effects. weapons have been eliminated. The The bishop [who favor a nuclear threat will be with mankind forever. [But freeze1 use the freedom purchased for without actial, sooner or later a nuclear them by the strategy of deterrence they war will happen. Possibly all life will end. wmn~RomanC.thdiekchbl.hog~decry to look down upon those who keep If that's possible, we have to act on the as- S;m Frmkco: Any mapon that can briag them free. I call them the "war bishops" sumption that it's true. We have to avoid about irreversible ecological damage to because their views are more likely to lead ever finding out. large portions of the earth, untold genetic to war than the dlternative.

6 TIME, MARCH 29, 1982 I cm 6nd much to argue about in my The nuclear-ums race of the various bilateral nuclear freeze pm has become Ear more expensive, wlus poaals now under discussion. But that's not and perilws than either the US. or the what b truly important. The frrat initia- !b&t Union can continue to count+- tives am an attempt by the popk of this nance. Neither nation can hope now to armtry to do somethin& to get the atten- gain any military advantage or add to its tion of our kadcrs, to say that we must put dtyby using or threatening to rse nu- an end to this madness that has been going clear bombs. Massive retaliation must be on for the past 35 years. No one wglles(s expected by any would-be fint striker that 8 6eezc is an end in itself. It is a begin- who is not insane. Not even a surprise at- ning that must be followed immediately by tack could be successhrl. Such an opera- m aderly. thoughtful, realistic and wri& tion cannot be rehearsed even once. A 1% able reduction in nuclear arms, and a re-. imperfection in performance, a level newed dediition to the prevention of a which experienced weapons enginan cnrusV~fOnner~dSt.tcIfurther spread of nuclear weapons. would call absurdly optimistic, would be urge a rapid resumption of SALT XI negoti- intolerable to the attacke~. ations and a serious effort at a SUCC~SS~~~ Thus deliberately swing a nuclear conclusion. I think it is realistic to expect war with the goal of winning is an idea the Soviets to agra to hrrther reductions whose he,if it ever came, has passed. beyond the SALT 11 figures [on strategic The more prilous possibility is a crisis launchers] plus accepting other ammetic provoked by the temporary irrationality changes. It is importint rccoph that of leadership, a mult of panic, misinfor- there will be prrssures on both sldes not to mation or misunderstanding. Both sides continue the-tacit obseniancc of SALT n. should recognize that the only rawn leR For example, Soviet President Leonid faa nuclear capability is to deter the oth- Brahnev's latest statement suBgeds to me er side from ever us- it. It wadd be an that they will create a new bissilel s)a- act of world leadership for both super- tern, perhaps putting a third stage on the powen to admit that fact and take neces- intermediate-range SS-20, wnverting it sary steps toward nuclear-arms reduction. into an intercontinental which h \ prohibited by SALT. ThmwiU be parallel -msrrrc,~adfornvpm prrssures on the US. to break out of the idantdtheIlk.~ttsh.tihrt.ofT.clc SALT amsuahta. ndon: There has ban for a long time Second, we should pvsue Theater dapseatcd fear of nuclear war, but only Nuclear Force taJks in parallel with the sine thosc in power have begun to talk effort to push ahead with START [Strategic openly about the prmpects of fighting and Arms Reduction Talks]. Third,we should winning a nuclear war have people recog- look seriously for progrcs in the negotia- nized the danger. When the leaders of the tions on equalizing conventional forces in Government say they are prepared to Europe. I think some sort of breakthrough 6ght a nuclear war and it really isn't going would then be possible on battlefield nu- to be all that painful, the public mponse is clear weapons in Europe. If the Soviets not all that surprisii. In a sense this Ad- would ngne to equal conventional farce ministration has been more honest with us levels with NATO,the battlefield weapons than its prcdecasora could be withdrawn, particularly fiom the The nuclear-freeze proposal is a good lOSEPH mr, lhrrd Ulivadty p9t.na foward amas where the threat of their start, for it would be a major chmin ndf~DLFutyUlkrkcrrtrr0tSt8ta being overrun represents one of the major the direction the world is going. It is a fanoclprdnerat&npdky: A sensible nucle- thrcab of early rae of nuclear weapons very important first step, and a perfectly ar policy has to make clear to people that safe one. The freae would not eliminate the weapons arc usable en- to be credi- nuclear weapons, but it would stop in- ble and deter the Soviets, but are not so us- creasingly dangerous new technology. able that they arcactually used. We have a The current deterrent foras on both sides wry narrow box in which to work. If the are sufficiently secure w that either the Reagan Administration had taken arms President or Mr. Brezhnev could declare control more seriously sooner, that would a unilateral freae and challenge the have helped to reassure the public that otbertojoin. there was an intention to manage this nar- row space betmen these two extremes. I personally do not think the In~learl freae is the right idea. The type of weap on is more important than the number of weapons when you are concerned with crisis stability. We should not get our- selves in a position where we are Ieh with MARYPl- atocnk rdcntlst nd some weapons that are destabilizing and preridmt of tha ManL hrtbof Tach prohibited from moving in the direction nology In the hll of 1981 I was on a com- of weapons that nught be stabilizing. mittee to select prospective Rhodes rhd- The escapism of the right is to treat anfrom all over California. Cscil Rhodo nuclear weapons just like other weapons asked that people be chosen who could in warfare; the escapism of the left is to 'contribute to the world's flght."'l asked treat them as though you could make all Lhesc 16 exceptional ywmen and them all go away. If you don't believe ei- women what they considered to be the ther of those is realistic, then you have antral problem in "the world's fight." Ev- to continually think how to make sure ery single one answered that the iswe that you preserve a careful management how to reduct the danger of nuclear war. of nuclear weapons. TIME, MARCH 2). Fkeeze Campaigndosed in St. Louis and working to ban 0 th h tgt%:,yand deployment of weapons by e arc - ussle--has 20,000 volunteers working in 149 offices in 47 states. Moves are Pfoot to put statewide nucle- ar-freeze referendums on the ballot in &ifornia, Michigan, New Jersey, Montana and Debware. Resolutions of support neeticut. Maine and Vermont rn In ;series of mid-March town meetings in New Hamp shire, 33 of44 participating communitia voted for a nuclear- The Fellowship of Reconciliation, a 66yeai-old inter- faith pPclfist group, has more than doubled ik 1970s mem- fhis time it's the middle class, not ~dleg* krship and on request from local churches has distributed radicals, leading an antiwar movement ronu 500,000 brochures on Though quieter than European protesters, rn The National ~ornmittEEY%b NUC~~Ppolicy, known as SANE, which hor been working for a quarter activists in rising numbers alarm offickls cenhrry to halt the arms race, reporb that its paid member- worried about a Soviet edge in nuclear WmS. rhip has jumped 88 percent in the last yenr to 16,000. m CroundZero, & organization dedicated to informing Even as Resident Reagan presses the largest pacetime the public on dangers of nuclear nrms, is publishing 200,000 military buildup in the nation's history, a peace movement copies of a paperback book-Nuchr War: mt's in It for demanding a first-step global freeze on nuclear arms is You?-nnd planning a nationwide Ground Zero Week in quietly ~ickinxup support across the US. April featurinn- community discusrio~uand other events. - still- faint &bo d bemuch louder antinuclear outcry that has shaken Western Europe-but potentially more far- UwFur of NwWu" reaching--the American camCPIIlpaignis -stprtiae to draw at- Cited by organizen as evidma of the emerging mood is tention in Washington. Government officials warn that it nccnt Gallup Poll that shows 72 pemt of Americans might undermine the nation's efforts to keep the Soviet ' questioned hvored a U.S.-Soviet pact not to build my more Union from gaining superiority in strategic weapona. nucleax weapons. Says George Gallup, Jr.: 7belatent fear At the same time, the movement is mustering important of nuclear wor among the American public should not be political support On March 10, Senators Edwd M. Ken- minimized. It is clearly somethng to reckon with." nedy @-Mass.) and Mark Hatfield (R-Oreg.) led 139 mem- While some leaden of the new pacifists are veteran ben of Congress in aligning themselves with the drive to antiwar protesters, the bulk appear to be or- people halt the nuclear-anns race. The lawmakers announced that convinced that the nuclear-arms race has careened out of they would seek a resolution of both houses asking Reagan control and is leading to the muNdestruction of both the to negotiate an atomicweapons freeze with the Soviets US. and the Soviet Union Three days before, former Vice Resident Walter F. Mon- 6pponents of the movement, both inside and outside dale gave his support to the freeze initiative.. government, argue that the protesters at best are nsve Barely a year &er the US. ban- about the Kremlin's intentions the-bomb drive formally began. A.aulb to mw Amdean pna&iva stmtch (ram and at worst could derail an more than a million Americans d.rgy nmnkn to pot...lonrb to drWdra American military buildup that is have endorsed its aims with their essential for the nation's world signatures or votes in state refer- 0 position if not for its very survival. endurn or resolution campaigns. I Latest estimntes show that the and the support is expected to U.6. leads in nuclear warheads pass the 1.5-millionmark by June. with 9.208 to Russia's 7,000, but Still in its formative stage, the d Russip b well ahead in delivery peace cwade remains largely f systems, 2498 to 1,944, and in uncoordinated; it includes more missile payload, 11.75 million than 75 groups with varying aims. pounds to 3.385 million pounds. Yet the movement's backers Americans in increasing num- claim a far broader and more barenot only signing petitions influential following than the for peace groups but also helping largely young and defiantly anti- to finance them The Fund for establishment activists who Peace reports a 25 percent in- spearheaded the opposition to crease in ~~~tributio~ova last the Vietnam War. Dedicated re- year, for an operating budget of cruits to the new pea& move- 1.9 million dok ment include substantial num- A crucial early test of the cru- bers of the middle-aged and the de's stmqth is under way in elderly, bluecollar workers and CPlifomia, where a coplition of professionah as well as homo activisb b seeking a statewide maken. The most significant en- referendum on a nuclear-arms thusiasb: A broad. Jpbdrum of freeze by both ru&rpowers. The clergy of all faith* Cplifornia drive in three months Signals of the newly emerging hPI reached its initial gad of col- pacifism across Americe- lecting 500,000 signatures to aa- m The Nuclear Weapons sure getting the issue on the Ne 24 U.S.MEWS WORLD REPORT %,emberballot. Backers hope success in California will, like the state's Proposition 13 tax-limitation referendum in 1978, spark a citizens' movement that will sweep the country. Business executives, musicians, women's groups and even children are involved in the drive against atomic weapons. The Rev. William Sloane Coffin, Jr., of New York's River- side Church, a leading figure in the anti-nuclear-arms cam- paign and a veteran of the Vietnam protests, notes the sharp differences in membership of the two movements: "The white collar seems to have taken over where the blue jeans left off. Now, it is doctors, scientists and lawyers on center stage instead of people from campuses and the arts." .4 10-year-old group called Physicians for Social Responsi- bility is drawing upon its 10,000 members in 40 states to conduct a series of symposiums on the medical conse- quences of nuclear war. The Union of Concerned Scientists sent members to 150 college campuses late in 1981 to conduct teach-ins on the danger of atomic arms. Most of today's job-oriented students have not yet shown the same zed for banning the bomb that their predecessors In town meetings, 8 heavy majority of communities in Vermont did for stopping the Vietnam War. But a new group called and Now H8mpshire endorsed the nuckar-freeze proposal. United Campuses to Prevent Nuclear War will stage a nationwide convocation on some 200 campuses on April 22, tentidy harmful." Others welcome tough challenges to the as Congress debates the Reagan budget that calls for a authorities as a headline-grabbing way of awakening public drastic cutback in student-loan programs and record levels concern and gaining new supporters. of military spending. Participants in the new peace movement have a wide Behind the Latest Drive variety of gods, ranging from opposition to locd nuclear What is fueling this new American peace crusade? Is the testing or weapons instdations in certain Western states to movement controlled by European activists, groups sympa- doing away with all the world's atomic arsenals. Some old- thetic to Communism,or former Vietnam War protesters? line pacifist organizations insist on banishing even conven- There is no evidence that the recent growth was generat- tional weapons or, in the words of one analyst, "huning ed simply by a few score former Vietnam activists in staff every last sword into a plowshare." positions. Nor are there any signs that pro-Communist sym- Most activists, however, favor a U.S.-Soviet nuclear pathizers exert any significant influence. One delegation of freeze as a practical first goal. As Dorothy Eldridge, head of 15 American activists has visited Europe to talk with orga- New Jersey's SANE group, explains it, this stance "provides nizers of antinuclear activity there-some of the Americans the average citizen with a common-sense handle on a com- even marching in at least one large demonstration-but its plex, deeply threatening problem. By comparison, the pros members insist that no help was sought or given. and cons of SALT I1 were so technical and confusing that The key force behind the American antiwar crusade con- the mass of citizens could only shrug and leave it to the sists of leaders of most of the nation's churches. experts, who got us into our present fix-" At a meeting in Washington in late 1981, an appeal for nuclear disarmament by Archbishop John R. Roach of St. Laying the Foundations Paul-Minneapolis, elected leader of U.S. Catholic bishops, The American peace movement is a subdued one com- drew strong support from among the 263 bishops attend- pared with the strident street marches and rallies in Europe. ing, 69 of whom have specifically endorsed the nuclear- For the most part, the U.S. crusade has emphasized quiet freeze proposal. The United Methodist bishops have called discussions, showings of antinuclear films and prayer. Orga- the threat of nuclear holocaust "the most crucial issue fat- nizers term this period the "consciousness raising" phase- ing the people.of the world today" and pledged to help one they hope will lay the foundation for later efforts to build a U.S. groundswell for peace on the European model. influence policy by demonstrating popular strength. Many Presbyterian and Lutheran leaders have stepped up Already, however, signs of a more dramatic and muscular their antiwar activity, while the governing synod of the approach are emerging in the form of scattered direct United Church of Christ has thrown its backing to "unilat- challenges to authorities. In Seattle, Catholic Archbishop eral initiative by the United States" if that is necessary to Raymond Hunthausen announced that he would withhold begin the process of nuclear disarmament. half of the tax on his 1981 personal income as a protest Three historic "peace churches'-Mennonites, Society of against the U.S. nuclear buildup, calling it "a grave moral Friends (Quakers) and the Church of the Brethren-have ed." He urged other Catholics to do likewise. challenged their members to renew their commitments Bishop Leroy T. Matthiesen of Amarillo, Tex., exhorted with radical acts including civil disobedience. Catholic workers in a nearby nuclear-weapons plant to Evangelist Billy Graham said recently in an interview: "I "seek new jobs or something that they could do which am not a pacifist and I don't believe in unilateral disarma- would contribute to life rather than destroy it." TO assist ment, but I do believe in [eliminating] nuclear weapons. As workers who quit, an order of Catholic priests in St. Paul, long as any of these weapons exist, there is a danger." \1inn., sent the bishop $10,000. Rabbi Marc H. Tanenbaum, national interreligious-affairs In L\.ermore, Calif., in early February, police arrested director of the American Jewish Committee, joined with 170 members of a peace group for trying to block the gates five prominent members of the Episcopalian clergy in at a government atomic laboratory. Those jailed included pledging to help organize "millions of co-religionists" into a - Daniel Ellsberg, who was instrumental a decade ago in massive force to help avoid nuclear disaster. releasing the Pentagon Papers on the U.S. role in Vietnam. In the face of this ecclesiastical militancy, Michael Novak, Some pacifists call such gestures "premature" and "P scholar in religion and public policy at the conservatively U S NEWS 6 WORLD REPORT. March 22. 1982 1 oriented American Enterprise Institute, has warned Catho- freeze campaign, "but we think a start must be made soon lics against following the pleas of the "peace bishops," and somewhere." saying: "These clergymen appear unaware that Russia has Critics of the Kremlin voice a sharply different view. Says been pushing a tremendous atomic-weapons buildup over Gerald Steibel, director of national security at the National recent years, while the U.S. was tapering off. To call a halt Strategy Information Center, a private group promoting a now would leave us at a serious disadvantage in numbers of stronger US. defense: "A joint nuclear-freeze agreement military aircraft and with no antiballistic-missile system between the U.S. and Russia at the present levels would such as the Soviets possess." give the Soviets an overwhelming advantage in Europe. It would leave our Western allies there vulnerable not only to A Test of Strength nuclear and conventional attack but to nuclear blackmail." Late this spring, the fledgling American peace move- What are the prospects that the American peace move- ment is scheduled to spread its wings in what backers hope ment will gain enough mass support to influence national will be a major demonstration of power. The target: A policy? Analysts concede that the crusade is growing steadi- special United Nations session on disarmament opening in ly but note that it is still fragmented and has the potential New York on June 7. A week before, on May 28-31, the for blowing apart over differences in goals and tactics. churches will test their strength as peace services are con- Says one organizer: 'There's no question we are gather- ducted in some 3,000 churches and synagogues. Then ing steam. But I don't think we are going to know enough groups from as many as 30 states are to head for Manhattan about whether we have something really big going here- by chartered bus and plane to join delegations from West- something capable of moving Washington and Moscow- ern Europe and Japan at a World Peace Day on June 12. until we see what happens in the months just ahead." 0 Organizers hope the turnout will top 200,000. The major factor in triggering the country's ne? outburst By DA Z7D 6. RICHARDSON of pacifism has been the breakdown of US.-Soviet efforts to control strategic weapons, starting in 1979 with the Sen- ate's failure to ratify the Salt I1 treaty. Compounding this concern, peace campaigners say, are Why Join the Peace Movement? the stance and policies of the Reagan administration-the Some typical supporters of the drive to freeze nuclear harsh anti-Soviet rhetoric, the coolness toward strategic- arms talk about why they joined the campatgn: armscontrol negotiations with Russia and the flurry of high- Dam Undley, 33, Indianoia, lowa, homemaker: level talk last year of fighting a limited nuclear war in Europe. "My commitment began when my church asked me to Explains Da\id Bnmell, head of the anti-nuclear-arms head a committee to find ways of working for peace. campaign of the Union of Concerned Scientists: "To many The more I read and studied, the more I was con- of us, the arms race between the US. and Russia is like two vinced this was not just another routine acm~tyI kids standing up to their knees in a room full of gasoline. became terrified at the immensity and horror ,,f the One has 10 matches, the other eight. Neither kid says he nuclear-arms danger. Suddenly, doing what I ccdd to will feel safe unless he has more matches; yet each has avoid a nuclear war began to supersede all social and many more than he needs to blow the place up. That's why housewifely things." people don't feel more secure with more missiles." Dlck Peterson, 45, Uncdn, Such talk brings quick re- Nebr., lawyer. "Iam a lrfelong torts from American officials. Republican and not normally a Secretary of State Alexander person who goes in for causes. Haig told a Senate subcommit- But soon after Reagan came tee on March 10 in relation to into office, I became alarmed at proposals for a nuclear-arms this administration's bellicose freeze: 'This is not only a bad posture and massive escdahon defense policy, but it is a bad of arms spending." arms-control policy as well. Harold Willens, 66, Los An- The effect of a U.S. accep- gelt, business executivc "My tance could be devastating." generation remembers the He said the freeze proposal atomic honors of Hiroshima and would hinder current U.S.-So- Nagasaki. The way things are viet talks in Geneva on limit- going, we think it's high time to ing nuclear missiles in Europe. )re we're all blown to hell." Peace spokesmen say they weapo& montorlum . believe Soviet leader Leonid Dlck Riley, 61, Oar Moinea, lowa, rttlred Navy Brezhnev was sincere in suggesting to an Australian disar- captain: "Isaw enough war to give me a bellyful. I mament group in February that there be a bilateral mora- don't want my grandchildren to go to war, or any torium on nuclear weapons. They say he has three good other individual on this earth. I strongly believe a reasons: Almost all the nuclear weapons outside Russia are nuclear deterrent is a 'must' until we can make our aimed at the Soviet Union; the arms race is a massive drain adversaries agree to jointly disarm. But no form of on the Russian economy, and a freeze would halt the escala- arms control is realistic that allows others to expand tion into counterforce weapons--an area where the U.S. is their nuclear weaponry." said to be several years ahead. Nan Rodmy, 44, Springfield, Va., homemake Most pacifists stress that they see the freeze only as a first 'The first thing I think about when the neighborhood step toward mutual arms cutbacks. They add that they civildefense siren goes off in a test every month is my would insist on satellite surveillance and other verification of kids. Now, I am working almost full time to try to Soviet weapons reductions. 'There is a calculated risk in- prevent a real doomsday from ever happening." volved." admits Randy Kehler, coordinator for the natiod

U.S.HEWS 6 WORLD REPORT. March 22. 1982 Analysis little immediate difference to voters. Says one party staffer: "Reagan faces a What's Next for the credibility gap in his sudden switch to Nuclear-Freeze Movement peacemakerhawk. Many feel from he is fire-breathingstill set on win- ning an arms race." On this issue. The antinuclear crusade A recent New York TimesKBS some Democrats already are eying has come a long way fast. Kews Poll showed 72 percent of the 1984 presidential campaign. Ahead is the tough part: Americans favor a US.-Soviet nucle- Two leading Democratic presiden- ar freeze, but only 30 percent want a tial aspirants-Edward Kennedy and Turning a controversial freeze if it might leave the Soviet Walter Mondale-have endorsed the idea into U.S. policy. Union with somewhat more strength. freeze. A Democratic pollster, Pat- Administration officials believe rick H. Caddell, says the concept has .4n .4merican peace movement Reagan has deepened such reserva- caused "a firestorm that goes be).ond that has captured the world's atten- tions, even if he has not defused the comprehension." tion now faces a test of whether it movement, with his warning that a For freeze-campaign leaders, ho~- can bring to bear enough pressure on freeze would lock in Soviet superior- ever, endorsements by prominent Ll'ashington to accept a US-Soviet ity-a point disputed by nuclear- Democrats are a mixed blessing. .4c- freeze on nuclear arms. arms experts in the movement. tivists insist that theirs is a nonparti- The \va! the nationuide peace cru- Still, some Republican leaders ad- san issue and claim many Republi- sade caught fire already is credited mit uneasiness about the possible im- cans in their ranks. They worry that with helping persuade the Reagan ad- pact of the freeze campaign on a other Republicans may stop joining ministration to soften its harsh anti- number of 1982 congressional elec- or drop out if the campaign begins to So\.iet rhetoric and to open arms- seem a straight partisan issue. control talks June 29 with Russia. Link to economy. In an effort The question now: Will the to maintain momentum, organiz- freeze campaign be a major force ers plan to broaden their ap- in future I..S. policymaking, or will proach. Top priority: Link the it quick]!- fade as ha\-eso many such freeze to key U.S. economic issues nlo\ ements in the past? by offering it as a means of cutting E\ en before President Reagan's arms spending, thereby helping to June 17 appearance in a peace- relieve unemployment, inflation maker's role at the special United and high interest rates and to soft- Sations session on disarmament, en trims in student loans and so- C.S. nuclear activists demonstrat- cia1 programs. ed their strength by staging in Even so, the campaign's main Sev,. Tork their first massive rally. strength remains its focus on the Soaring start. There is no deny- simply grasped-some critics say ing that the rise of the freeze cam- "simplistic"-concept of a freeze paign has been spectacular. In only on all atomic weapons as the best 15 months. campaigners have ob- means of avoiding nuclear war. tained nearl) 2 million signatures Unlike European antinuclear on antinuclear-arms petitions, protests that center on the US while recruiting volunteers to $ Pershing 2 missiles, the American gather still more grass-roots sup- ; crusade singles out no specific nu- port across 48 states. f clear hardware. It calls instead for Reflecting the movement's ris- $ a blanket moratorium to halt the ing influence. 125 city councils $ arms race. Regardless of \rho has ha\.e passed resolutions endorsing ? the edge now, its arms-control ex- the freeze. along with one or both $ perts insist, the U.S. and Russia housei of 12 state legislatures. Simi- "Well, it got his attention." both have enough atomic Ireapons lar endorsements have come from to finish each other off. some 200 members of Congress, often tions. The freeze will be on the ballot "By 1984," predicts ~andy~ehler, under stro~~ghome-district pressures. as a referendum in at least five states, national coordinator of the freeze >'?t the future of the crusade is including such key ones as California, campaign, "so many Americans u'ill cloudt.d \rlth doubts and difficulties. Michigan and New Jersey, with an- be behind a freeze that the le~.elof In its first congressional test on June other five possibly to follow suit. The support today may look like first 9. tht. ~~~~bl~~~~-~~nt~~ll~dSenate worry among COP professionals: A base." That could be optimistic, but Forelpn Relations Committee reject- heavy profreeze vote could carry many analysts agree that the antinu- clear outcry that has risen ~learl!. ed .I ireeze resolution on a near par- over into at least a few close congres- overnight from little more than a t! -1i1lti \ate, 10 to 6. sional contests where candidates take II\,ch depends on how Americans strong positions on the issue. whisper seems likely to persist as a strong voice on the American scene. rc,, \ e an ambivalence in their Despite Reagan's decision to start rnlndS between fear of nuclear holo- arms-control talks with the Russians, caust and danger to national security. Democrats predict that this will make BY DA WD B RICIMRDSOIV Reagan Urges One-Third Cut in Missile Forces

Asb for Tallis by End of June

By Lou Cannon siles baaed on land 'l'hh rould cut the Washintton PC& swr Writer roughly equivalent level d waahesds .on both EUREKA, Ill., May &President Reagan, sides from 7,500 to 5,000. A prime goal is calling for "dismantling of the nuclear men- reduction of 'the mat destabilizing nuclear ace," today proposed reducing by one-third systems," a reference to the powerful and the strategic missile-arsenals of the United accurate Soviet SS18 and SS19 missiles. States and the Soviet Union A second phase, on which the president Speaking at the commencement ceremony provided no details, looks to an equal ceilixg of Eureka College, from which he was grad- on all strategic nuclear forces, with the ap- uated 50 years ago, Reagan unveiled a two- parent but unspecified goals of preventing phase plan of nuclear arms reductions and either superpower from launching a succese- urged the Sovieta to join in discussions on fd first nuclear strike against the other. -" them by the end of June. 'In both phases, we shall insist on verifi- 'I believe that the West can fashion a cation procedures to ensure compliance with realistic, durable policy that will protect our the agreement," Reagan said. - interests and keep the peace, not just for this [In Moecow, in an apparent attempt tb generation, but for your children and grand- take the edge off Reagan's arms contrd ini- children," Reagan said to a burst of applause. tiative, Defense Minister Dmitri F. Ustinov The first phase of the president's proposal said in a sharply worded article in Pravda . would reduce ballistic missile warheads to that The Soviet Union will not allow the 'equal ceilings at least a third below current existing balance of forces to be disrupteclWl levels," with no more than half of these mis- See PRESIDENT,All, Cd 1

Source: Washington Post, May 10, 1982. P. A1 , A10, A1 I.

Reagan Unveils 2-Phase Plan To Cut Back Missile Arsenals @ PRESIDENT, From A1 Speaking to an audience of more than 2,000 economic problems, "the Soviet dictatorship has packed into a sweltering, metal-roofed gymnasi- forged the largest armed force in the world" He um, the president jokingly remarked that "it isn't repeated his longstanding view that a military bal- true that I just came back to clean out my gym ance is needed to counter this force but also said locker." Reagan wore the red robes of the honor- that the West would respond with expanded trade doctorate he received when he addressed the and other forms of cooperation if the Soviet commencement class of 1957, 25 years after he Union embarked on peaceful policies. graduated, and he quipped: "Mind :If I try for the Reagan called attention to the situation in Po- 75th?" land, where he said the Soviet Union has "refused In his speech, Reagan said he was willing to to allow the people of Poland to decide their own negotiate in good faith on Soviet counterpropoa- fate, just as it refused to allow the people of Hun- .+ 4 senior administration official said today- gary to decide theirs in 19.56 or the people of that he expects the Russians to counter with some Czechoslovakia in 1968." proposal to reduce the number of bombers, in If martial law is lifted, political prisoners re- which the United States has a definite edge. The leased and a dialogue restored with the Solidarity official said the United States is prepared to ne- Union, Reagan said the United States was pre- gotiate on this issue. pared to join in a program of economic support Reagan also hinted that he was willing to ac- for Poland. cept Soviet President Leonid I. Brezhnev's pro- But the speech bristled with skepticism about posal for a fall summit meeti Soviet intentions. 'I have already expressed7 my own desire to "Unfortunately, for some time suspicions have meet with President Brezhnev in New York next grown that the Soviet Union has not been living month," Reagan said. "If this cannot be done I up to its obligations under existing arms control would hope we could arrange a future meeting treaties," Reagan said. "There is conclusive evi- where positive results can be anticipated. And dence the Soviet Union has provided toxins to the when we sit down, I will tell President Brezhnev Laotians and Vietnamese for use against defense- that the United States is ready to build a new less villagers in Southeast Asia And the Soviets understanding based upon the principles I have themselves are employing chemical weapom on outlined today." the freedom fighters in Afghanistan" Brezhnev, who is 75 and ailing, has rejected a The timing of today's speech was dictated in June meeting, calling instead for a 'well prepared part by the president's desire to demonstrate in sulpmit" in October. Administration officials said advance of his European trip next month that he last week that the president was prepared to ac- is serious about discussions with the Soviet Union cept such an offer, adding that Brezhnev's health that would lead to reduction of nuclear weapons ,appeared to be the main obstacle to such a meet- and also to take the initiative on the arms control ing. issue away from advocates of an immediate nu- Until today, the 71-year-old Reagan has de- clear weapons "freezen at present levek clined to make any reference to the health of the The president offered no prospect for quick or Soviet president. But in his speech to the Eureka easy succesa .graduating class Reagan made an oblique mention "The monumental task of reducing and reshap- of Brezhnev's condition, saying that "both the cur- ing our strategic forces to enhance stability will renZ and the new Soviet leadership should realize take many years of concentrated effort," Reagan -[that] aggressive policies will meet a firm western said. 'But I believe that it will be possible to re- response." duce the risk of war by removing the instabilities While Reagan was calling for "a new start to- that now, exist and by dismantling the nuclear ward a more peaceful, more secure world," he re- menace." peated many of his favorite accusations against Administration officials mid they hope the dis- the Soviet Union, which he referred to as "a huge cussions will proceed at a brisker pace than the empire ruled by an elite that holds all power and negotiations that led to the SALT I treaty signed privilegew and fears that this power is slipping in 1972 or the SALT I1 treaty, which was with- from its grasp. drawn by President Carter in 1979 after it became The Soviet empire is faltering because rigid, clear that the Senate would not ratify it. The ne- ,centralized control has destroyed incentives for gotiations leading to that ultimately unsuccessful innovation, efficiency and individual achieve- effott- took seven years. ment," Reagan said. "Spiritually, there is a sense of malaise and resentmentw The president said that despite its social and Keagan said that he had written to Brezhnev outlining his proposal and directed Secretary of State Alexander M. Haig Jr. to approach the So- viet government proposing initiation of the stra- tegic amreduction talks (START) "at the ear- liest opportunity." "We will negotiate seriously, in good faith, and carefully consider ail proposals made by the So- viet Union: Reagan said. "If they approach these negotiations in the same spirit, I am confident that together we can achieve an agreement of en- during value that reduces the number of nuclear weapons, halts the growth in strategic forces, and opem the way to even more far-reaching steps in the future." Reagan's return to the small liberal arts college from which he graduated in 1932 was a sentimen- tal occasion He has come baqk to Eureka-as movie actor, governor of California and political candidate-many times since he left Illinois. Dur- ing a speech at Eureka in October, 1980, Reagan referred to the years he had spent at the college as the happiest of his life.- Often, Reagan has said that those who share' the memories of a small college enjoy a richer tra- dition than many graduates of larger, better- known universities. "If it is true that tradition is the glue holding civilization together, then Eureka. has made its contribution to that effort," Reagan said. "Yes, it ia amdl college in a small community; it is no impersonal assembly-line diploma mill. As the years pass. . . you'll find the four years you have spent here living in your memory as a rich and important part of your life." After his speech, Reagan went by helicopter to Peoria, where he attended a reunion of the Eureka clasn of '32, shaking hands with each of the 37 fellow alumnae who attended and theiu spouses. One former classmate, Karl Meyer, who mmed in the same fraternity house with Reagan, said he wea "honest, poor, a helluva nice guy." Plan Could Help Ease War Fears

By Michael Getler to what maat people would call 'the arms -wsunmr race." The new pro& probably will still Pnsident Reagan's dramatic new prop- mean footing the bill for expensive new MX, ab yesterday for big reductions in Soviet and Trident I1 and cruise missiles as well as new American nudear missiles could, if accepted B1 and Stealth bombera by Moscoci~, go a long way to reducing the For example, administration officiah say fear d nuclear war. the United States will propose that each side If tbe president succeeds in getting the gradually reduce to about 850 the total of Soviets to reduce their stockpile of big land- missiles based in underground silos and on baeed mhih that threaten this country's missile-firing submarines. Such a reduction would be gradual, taking perhaps five or 10 News Analysis yeare. The United States now has roughly 1,700 such mimiles and the Soviets 2,400. tom of smaller missiles, then Americans can But the officials also say privately that breathe easier. The temptation of either side those future 850 U.S. missiles could well be to strike first would be greatly reduced and 200 bii new MX missiles and 650 of the new maybe eliminated because neither side-4- 'hide& II missiles. These could replace the ter reductionti-fwould have an obvious ad- - existing 1,000 Minuteman land-based Val'ws - ICBMs and hundreds of the current Po- SO in one sew, the plan ia a would-be seidon undersea miyjilea step to nuclear de-escalation , Similarly, while the United States is pre- But it will almost certainly not be an end See ARMS, Alb, Col. 1

the Moet importantly, however, Rea- ARMS, From A1 Of roughly 2,400 Soviet mis- asks siles, 1,400 are land-based. Thia in- gan then that 'no more than pared to discuss bombers and cruise half cludes 308 of the huge SSl& each of those warheads be land- missiles in the new talks with Mos- basedw This means roughly 2,500 cow, these weam will come under of which carries 10 atomic warheads. warheads on land-based missilea ceilings rather than be eliminated. The United States has nothing to This ia crucial because the Sovieh Thus, the new B1 and Stealth bbmb match this weapon. There are also have percent of their 7,500 or so em are still viewed aa aecessary re- 450 four-warhead SS17 and six-war- 72 warheads on land-based missiles- placements for the old and existing head SS19 missiles. B52s. more than 3,000 of them on the 308 The 1,700 U.S. .misiiles include SSlbwhile the United States has In other words, although no de- the land-based Minutemen and 52 only 22 percent of its nuclear punch tails were discussed about what the older Titan missiles already sched- based on land with the rest on sub- United States might give up in the uled for retirement. The rest are on marines and bombers. negotiations, the administration be- submarines. Many U.S. specialists Essentially, the administration is lieves that if America ia to have say the American missile force is less trying to force the Soviets away from smaller forces, they must be thar- of a threat to Moscow's missiles than continuing its emphasis on those oughly modernized that they con- the Soviet foy pases to this coun- threatening land-bad systems. The tinue to deter attack and are able b try. idea is that Mmw would have to retaliate with confidence if neces- Oficiala say that each side now pay a very high price, within the sary. has roughly 7,500 individual war- overall allowed ceilings, to keep Reagan alluded to thi in his. heads on land and sea missile form many land-based missiles as opd speech when he talked of "tb man- Until now, a figure of roughly 9,000 to submarine-bad miseilea Thia umental task of reducing and re- warheada for the United States and would also complicate any plans for shaping our strategic forces to en- between 7,000 and 8,000 for MOBCOW a surprise attack hance stability.. . ." has been used in official statements. Becauae submarine missiles am In briefing reporters yesterday on The difference, officials say, is that less accurate &d therefore less the president'r proposah officials the 7,500 figure does not include threatening, and also because they said the idea wat?i to keep them clear bornbe carried on long-range bomb are less vulnerable and therefore do and understandable so they can era of both sides. The initial thrust not have to be fired quickly, they am 'command public supparts That will of the U.S. propd is to focus on generally not viewed as ones putting nat be easy because the subject b the matt destabilizing weapons, a hair-trigger on nuclear war. The extremely complex and because SO- deaning Soviet land-based missiles, new US. Trident II and Soviet 'l)t- viet and American rniaaik fow which are most accurate and there- phoon missiles now in development, have bii differencea fore the graveat threat to knock out however, will have greater accutacy In general terms, whet the preb the Minuteman in a first strika and thus could also treatee to knock 'ident is proposing is a plan that The president propoees reductions out missile siloa stresses eventual equality in striking to an equal ceiling 'at least a third power and aeeks, above all, to reduce below current levels* of warheads. in or remove the big Soviet lead over effect, this means a cutback from the United %tea in very large land- 7,500 to around 5,000 warheads on based missiles all missiles on both sides. Aside from warheads, the preai- esterd day, however, ofticiais dent has also called for "significant stressed that no one's arguments reductions in missiles themselves: were ignored and that cutting mie which officials privately say means siles and warheads ia one way.of cut an eventual ceiling of about 850 ting throw-weight. land- and sea-based missiles for both And what about the Russians? sides. This obviously will require far The Soviets undoubtedly will reject greater Soviet than American at: the initial US. offering and argue backs. that the United States seeks to pro- These missiles and warhead cuts tect ita bomber and cruise missile' are meant to be part of what the edge and deploy the new MX and president called "the first phaaeWof Trident while the Soviets are asked the strategic arms reductions talks, to give up the relatively new force of or START. Reagan made no public mention land-based ICBMa that hecarried of bombers, an area in which ths them to such prominence in global United States has sizable advan- power politics. The Sovieta will ah tages. These weapons, and cruiae probably we the proposals as an mhilea that fly like jet planes, an, American effort to push the stra* also considered leas threatening be- competition to submarines, whem cam they take hours to reach their US. technology also has an edga targets and are therefore unlikely to The administration, to the cfiagrin be used in a surprise first strike. of critia, bas taken well over a year Under questioning, briefing offi- to come up with this proposal but ciah said Washington "wae prepared hrrs made ita general views known to deal with bombers throughout from the atart. Oficials said yester- both phases* of the START talks, day the plan "won't come as a major since Moscaw obviouaty wiIl raiee the iseue. They eaid miee misailea also de- aurpriae* to Moscow and they expect would be dealt with but tcrlks to begin late &xt month . clined to say how or when. ae Because Russian land-based mis- The Soviete, pewed from here, sila are so much bigger than their ham aerioue ednomic problink, American counterparte, the Soviets coming changes i/ leadership, prob also have a roughly 34-1 advantage lema in Ppland @d elsewhere. Thia in so-called 'throw-weight," meaning couldrnaketabtotrytoatbt the lifting power for hurling either 'calm down the'nuclear threat eeem big warheads o!' Iota of them at tar- appealing. When asked what the gets. Therefore, the president wid, United States wdd give the Sovi- in the second pheae of START he ete, officia)r & not mention MX or also wants to equalize throw-weight, B1. Rather, they say, 'an incentive bringing both sides below curredt to reduce tk risk of nuclear war." American levela Because equalizing throw-weight would mean forcing the biggest pos- sible reductiona on Moecow rather than the United States, some Pen- tagon officials argued strongly that this should be the paramount con- sideration State Department offi- cials, with support from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, are said to have ar- gued privately that such an initial focus would make the proposal seem hnplausible bo friend and foe alike. The Soviet hion was expected to advance its Soviets Hit own package of proposals for forthcoming talks. The first Soviet reports of Reagan's speech came 24 hours after he delivered it yesterday, pro- posing a two-step plan in which both sides initial- US. Plan ly would reduce by one-third their arsenals of nu- clear warheads on land- and sea-based intercon- tinental ballistic mis iles. On Arms The Soviets were briefed on the new proposals on Saturday, when U.S. Charge d'Affaires Warren Zimmermann. called on the Soviet Foreign Min- But Kremlin Hints istry to deliver an outline of Reagan's speech and Proposal Could Be the president's message to Soviet President Leonid Breahnev. A Basis for Talks Ostensibly quoting American critics of Reagan's plan, Tass gave a list of Soviet concerns saying the By Dusko Doder president's proposals aimed "at making the Soviet WPlhl~Fmt~~ Union give up more than the United States." MOSCOW, May 10-The Soviet The Tass report, from Washington, quoted sev- Union received President Reagan's 'eral American politicians, weapons experts and strategic arms control prop4 prese commentaries as being critical of the pres- today with skepticism, but indicated ident's proposals. It quoted former secretary of broadly that it was prepared to con- state Edmund Muskie as saying the proposals sider them as a basis for resuming were aimed at undermining disarmament, while tab with the United States on re- the United States was attempting to achieve su- ducing nuclear men& periority over the Soviets. .' The government news agency Tass also quoted Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D- Tasa carried a preliminary list of Maw), who criticized the fact that the Reagan Soviet reservations using largely crit- , plan would enable the United States to continue ical remarks by various American its rearmament program. figures. It said Reagan's speech ap- Moscow's concerns about the plan included its peared to demonstrate that he was exclusion of long-range bombers and intermedi- not interested in 'mutdly accept- ate-range cruise missiles. Tass said this gave "far able decisions" but was rather 'in- too little evidencen that Reagan was serious about dicative of the United States at- curbing the arms race since the programs such as tempts to eecure for itself unilateral those developing the MX, Trident and cruise mis- military advantagan siles and the B1 bomber would continue. But shortly afterward, the govern- Yet the core of the president's plan-the pro- ment news agency Novosti distrib- posed reduction by one-third in the number of uted to Western reporters the text of warheads on both sides-appeared to be the prin- cipal concern because it seemed to suggest an en- a commentary that restated similar tirely new focus to strategic arms control. suspicions but said "the very fad of In previous negotiations, the two sides focused American readinm to come back to on the number of launchers, or kge missiles, the negotiating table can be wel- whme numbers could be monitored by the so- comed, for it is better late than nev- called national technical means, or spy satellites er? and other sophisticated electronic spying. War- . "As for the Soviet side, it is always heads in previous agreements were covered by set [ready] for talks," it added. sublimits. Soviet sources familiar with in the preliminary analysis here, Reagan's plan Kremlin strategic policies said Rea- to unit gan's proposals were scrutinized make the warhead the basic of counting: the Strategic balance would imply on-site inspec- carefully. Moscow's respon*, they tion, something Moscow has been reluctant to ac- mid, could come only after the So- cept. ~t was pointed out, however, that Brezhnev vieb receive 'detailed explanations" stat& publicly that he was prepared to accept of the proposals. some form of weapons inspection other than those The sources also emphasized that by "national technical means." It was *some fundamental thingsn from the arms unclear how the verification of warheads could be 1979 Soviet-American strategic accomplished, but some U.S. sources suggested a limitation treaty "would have to be form of international supervision. retainedn in the new round of t,. Reagan's proposal also provided that not more It appeared doubtful that prep- than half the retained warheads be land-bawl. arations could be completed by late The Soviets, who in contrast with the Americans, June, when Reagan proposed that .rely heavily on large, land-based missiles, in the talks open, although the Kremlin ' this greatPC for the Soviet Union than for binjre55ir77i clearly would like to resume the stra- the United Statea " ,:;", tegic dialogue with the United States Service. Librzry of c~~,:~~:,!:jib Boon Perirl7ri.n of C:2i-17t See MOSCOW, AM,Cd. 1 Source: Washinpton Post, May 11, 1982 p. A1. A16. 20 Neither Tass nor Novosti gave detailed ac- counts of Reagan's proposals. Both charged that they did not meet the basic Soviet requirement that any Soviet-American st ategic arms agree- ments should observe "the principle of equality and equal security." "What also makes one wary is the opinion voiced by political analysts to the effect that un- derlying the president's need for an impressive speech were tactical motives of current policy rather than principles of peace considerations," Novovti commentator Gennacly Cerasimov said. ' He suggested that Reagan's propmals were aimed at offsetting the antinuclear movement in Western Europe, where Reagan will be visiting soon. According to diplomatic ohservers, Reagan's straightforward and simple formula could prove an effective way to disarm antinuclear groups in the West. Soviet sources said privately that the plan may have a "psychological effect" in the' struggle for popular opinion. It makes it almost impossible for Mmcow to reject it outright. As one source put it, the issue of arms control 'is far more complex than the number of war- heads." Another source described the latest U.S. prupcaals as a "new zero option," a reference to the prwident's speech last November in which he proposed the abolition of all new intermediate- range missiles in Europe. That proposal led to the current Soviet-Amer- ican talks in Geneva. According to the Soviets, the Geneva talks have not moved off dead center as a result of U.S. "intransigence." Under Reagan's proposal, the United States would not deploy 572 new medium-range nuclear missiles in Europe next year if the Soviet Union dismantle all its medium-range missiles aimed at Western E urope. Soviet sources also showed serious skepticism toward some American asqessments suggesting that the new Reagan plan marked a shift in his dealings with the Soviet Union. According to this view, "great dangers" may be hidden hehind the president's conciliatory stance, and a citreful study of hi3 propmals was required hefore Moscow could take a definitive positi~n. "The president's so-called initiative," Tass said, "in no measure affects the wltole complex of stra- tegic nuclear weapons, hut draws only one narrow aspect from it." Despite all reservations, Novust.i noted that "the president expressed hilnself for dialogue . . . . The Soviet side expressed itself for dialogue with the new US. administration in February of 1981, a month after he assumed office."