British wonder about Soviet power

Press, Volume CXII, Issue 32885, 7 April 1972, Page 9

British wonder about Soviet power

(By

JAMES RESTON

of the "New York Times", through N.Z.P.A.)

LONDON. British officials have a way of questioning whatever world political trends happen to be fashionable at the moment, so they are watching the Soviet Union’s new “reasonable” diplomacy with detached scepticism. They welcome the United States-Soviet strategic arms talks in Helsinki, Chancellor Willy Brandt’s rapprochment with Moscow, and President Nixon's visits to Peking and Moscow, but they have been around long enough to distinguish between hopes and realities, so they are waiting for specific results. Meanwhile, they are impresesd with the energetic build-up of Soviet naval and misisle power, and wonder, almost casually, why the Soviets have had a sizeable

naval task force standing in international waters off the north coast of Scotland for over nine months. It seems a little odd, they, say, since the North Sea above Scotland in winter is no sunny health resort. The British don’t make much of this. “I suppose,” says Sir Alec Douglas-Home, the Foreign Secretory, “that a super-Power can be expected to want a super navy, but one can't help wondering what they want it for.” Much of the same theme has been emphasised in recent days by Dr Joseph Luns, the new Secretary General of N.A.T.O. He agreed that the continuing aim of the Atlantic Alliance was to seek peace through initiatives designed to reduce tensions in Europe, but he emphasised that this must be accompanied by effective security gaurantees and an enduring partnership with the United States. The Prime Minister (Mt Heath) is preoccupied for the moment with the Irish ques-

tion, but like his Foreign Minister, he sees the maintenance af the balance of power with Moscow, not as an anti-detente, but as an essential foundation for any new world order. Was not the potential division of the United States over vast defence expenditures at the expense of social expenditures a greater danger to the security of the Eastern nations, the Prime Minister was asked? He thought it was not, that the United States would manage its allocation of financial resources, without undue turmoil at home or disruption of the strength of the alliance. The latest British Defence White Paper in fact, sounds very much like the testimony of the Secretary of Deefnce (Mr Melvin Laird) on the need for greater defence efforts in Europe and closet co-operation within the N.A.T.O. defence structure. It refers to “the continuing threat” from the Soviet Union, and makes these points: the Soviets are now

devoting 8 per cent of their gross national product to defence, compared with 41 per cent for most of the European allies, 5 per cent for Britain, and 6.8 per cent for the United States. The White Paper adds that the Soviet Union now has 1400 intercontinental ballistic missiles, and an army of 160 divisions, plus 63 divisions from the Eastern ' European nations in the Wari saw Pact. As for the Russian 1 Navy, it observes, deployi ments in the South Atlantic • and the Indian Ocean are pos- ' ing a “potential threat” to ' vital Western trade routes. There is some talk in offi--1 cial quarters here, as usual, i of the danger of American isolationism, and some muted criticism of Washington’s handling of the latest IndianPakistani crisis, on the ground that India is more important to the defence and trade of the West than Pakistan, but all this is discussed without any sense of crisis or urgency. The British are merely.

saying that, as Washington makes a more realistic appraisal of its world responsibilities, avoiding open-ended commitments in such places as Vietnam and replacing them with more dependable selective commitments, Europe must increase its share of defences and deci-sion-making within the alliance. i Officials are very conscious of the dependence of European industry and development on the oil of the Middle East and with the Soviet ■ Union now entrenched in Middle Eastern air bases and increasing its naval power in the South Atlantic and the Indian Ocean, believe it is imperative that the free I nations maintain sufficient naval power to prevent the interruption of the flow of oil from the Middle East to Europe and ; to Japan, and even, as one high official remarked, to prevent the possibility of a Soviet blockade of South Africa in any future racial wars in Africa.