OCR Text |
Show HILLTOP TIMES Friday, March 16, 1984 editorials The Soviet Threat 71 t Editor's note: "Arms Control Talks Soviet threat. How They mid-197- 0s triple-warhe- ad 0s single-warhead- s, ed The U.S.'s commitment to collective defense has not diminished. However, as the Soviets expanded the capabilities and global reach of their military forces, the need for greater defense efforts by all members of our alliances subjected them to new strains. The very success of deterrence through collective defense also opened it up to questions from some of those who have known nearly 40 years of peace between the great powers: was it really military strength that had prevented war, or was it some other factor, such as economic dependence, peaceful intentions on the part of the Soviet Union, or the spirit of detente? Finally, the same freedom that these nations had united to preserve also produced an inand public evitable diversity of opinion, which some interpreted as disarray. limit. The Soviets, however, persisted in their demand that NATO be prohibited from deploying any longer-rang- e INF missiles, while they continue to threaten U.S. friends and allies with several hundred SS-2- 0 -- the Soviet position The U.S. Soviet INF arms control negotiations began in Geneva, Switzerland Nov. 30, 1981. The U.S. negotiating position was developed through in-- Allied strength The events of the past year have demonstrated the underlying strength of our alliances. A strong commitment to rebuilding our defenses forms the basis for more effective cooperation in deterring threats to our mutual security. Despite pressure from an increasingly active disarmament movement, NATO has stood firm by its 1979 decision to deploy Pershing II and ground-launchcruise missiles in Europe in the absence of a negotiated solution to the threat posed by the Soviet intermediate-rang- e monopoly of longer-range- d nuclear forces. The United States is working with its NATO allies in a special effort to improve our conventional defenses, and with our allies and neutral countries to control the loss of military applicable technology to the Soviet bloc. Outside the formal alliance structure, the United States has also improved relations with our friends and those nations that support our mutual interests. For example, the United States has continued to expand its security relationships with Middle Eastern and Southwest Asian states. warheads. Because the Soviets have refused to consider any other proposal, in 1983 the United States began deploying the first NATO Pershing II and GLCMs on schedule. Both the Pershing II and GLCMs have reached initial operating capability. Meanwhile, the Soviet Union has suspended the INF negotiations, without agreeing on a date to resume the talks. Nevertheless, the United States is hopeful that the Soviets will agree to continue the talks, now that they recognize that NATO is determined to restore the INF balance and that it will not INF accept a Soviet monopoly in longer-rang- e missiles. The United States is ready to continue negotiations, and dismantle any and all Pershing II On Nov. 18, 1981, President Reagan announced the "zero-zero- " proposal to eliminate the entire class of U.S. and Soviet longer range INF missiles. Specifically, he offered to cancel Pershing II and GLCM deployments in return for Soviet elimination SS-- 4 and SS-- 5 missiles. The of its SS-2president made it clear that the United States would also carefully consider any serious Soviet proposal. Nuclear Force negotiaIn the Intermediate-Rang- e U.S. focused on the systems have tions, proposals in this case, longer-rang- e of greatest concern INF land-base- d, 0, 1 - In September 1983, the president offered yet another important initiative designed to move the INF talks forward and respond to several Soviet concerns. He agreed to consider proposals for limiting longer-rang- e INF aircraft, to assign any negotiated reductions in an appropriate manner between Pershing II and ground-launche-d cruise missiles, and to consider a commitment not to deploy in Europe all the missiles that the United States would be allowed under a global ground-launche- tense consultations with the NATO allies. trol agreement. Twice in this century, the United States sought, and failed, to stand aloof from conflicts across the seas. We learned from this experience that maintain-- , ing a system of defensive alliances is necessary both to deter attack by demonstrating to any potential aggressors that they would face a united front of opand to share the burden of defending position freedom. President offers initiatives k" Arms control and GLCMs in accord with an equitable arms con- missiles. The U.S. proposal called for the most desirable possible outcome: the complete elimination of these weapons from each side's arsenals. The United States believes that this result would be the for the United States, for best for all concerned the Soviet Union and for all the states in Asia, the Middle East, North Africa and Europe that are potenforce. tial targets of the massive Soviet SS-2- 0 The Soviet Union, however, was not ready to accept such an agreement. In March 1983, President Reagan proposed an interim accord that would reduce INF missile warheads U.S. and Soviet longer-rang- e to substantially lower, but equal, levels. The president later suggested a specific global limit of 420 warheads on each side. Started" deals with the Soviet achievement of strategic nuclear parity with in the raised concerns nuclear about the imbalance in the intermediate-rang- e forces in Europe. This imbalance was intensified by SS-2- 0 the Soviet deployment of if missiles, beginning in 1977. Such an imbalance could call the North Atlantic Treaty not remedied Organization's strategy of deterrence and flexible response into question. As of March 1983, the Soviets had deployed 351 SS-2with 1,053 warheads, which, along with 248 SS-4- s and SS-5total some older 1,300 warheads on longer range INF missiles (not counting retire missiles). This is more than double the number of warheads the Soviets had deployed in 1977. In the same period, no comparable U.S. missiles were deployed. NATO's response to this unprovoked Soviet builddecision on up was the December 1979 "dual-tracINF modernization and arms control. The allies agreed to deploy U.S. longer range INF missile systems in Europe (108 Pershing II ballistic missiles d and 464 cruise missiles), while at the same time offering U.S. Soviet arms control negotiations on INF. the United States Arms control talks; how they started ed J: ' if Most Soviet 96& U.S. security was strengthened by restored good relations with Grenada and closer ties to other neighbors, and the U.S. Caribbean Basin Initiative is under way, holding out new promise in a vital region. The United States has developed a more substantive relationship with the People's Republic of China, and laid the foundation for closer and stronger ties with the powerful nation with its enormous potential. 18'year-old- s begin active duty by reporting directly to a unit. fJSSST u J re ' "I'Z'fA safer world will not be realized simply through honorable intentions and good will ... c No, the pursuit of the fundamental goals our nation seeks in world affairs peace, human economic national progress, rights, independence and international stability -r- equires a dedicated effort to support our friends and defend our interests. Our commitment as peacemaker is - lamr l focused on those goals." President Ronald Reagan (LOGNEWS) Published by MorMedia Sales, 1152 West River-dal- e Road. Ogden, Utah 84405, telephone ; ' dm 394-965- 5. Deadlines: Editorial, 4 p.m. Monday before publication date; Announcements for "Where the Action Is," 10 a.m. Monday before publication date; Classified ads. 5 p.m. Wednesday before publication date. Articles may be turned in at Room 118, Bldg. 1102, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. Monday through Friday. The Hill Top Times receives Air Force News Service (AFNS), AF Logistics Command News Service (LOGNEWS), Tactical Air Command News Service (TACNS), and "American Forces Press Service ' (AFPS). , . ; .... rf . . Everything advertised in the Hill Top Times must be made available for purchase, use or patronage without regard to the race, creed, color, national origin or sex of the purchaser, user or patron. A confirmed violation or rejection of this poScy of equal opportunity by an advertiser win result in the refusal to print adver' i tising from that source. |