International S.A.L.T. deadlock broken

Press, 23 May 1977, Page 8

International S.A.L.T. deadlock broken

NZPA Washington The United States Secretary of State < Mr Cyrus Vance > has returned home convinced that his talks with the Soviet Union on strategic arms limitations are on a sound footing, although difficult negotiations lie ahead.

Mr Vance left Geneva | after announcing that he and the Soviet Foreign Minister (Mr Andrei Gromyko) had* agreed to a general frame-i work for a new S.A.L.T. i agreement for the next eight! years. However, in separate! statements, he and Mrj Gromyko said that serious i differences remained, such i as what weapons should be. included under the new pact.; These would be discussed; by their S.A.L.T. negotiators! in Geneva, ambassadors in| Washington and Moscow,; and followed up at another meeting between himself and' Mr Gromyko, Mr Vance said. The announcement repren sents a break in the dead-1 lock that emerged at a previous meeting between the

I two in Moscow at the end: of March. American officials said' .that Mr Vance and Mr! Gromyko had made progress! jin Geneva beyond American i expectations, and that a Soviet desire for an agreement was indicated. However, j they emphasised that considerable work lay ahead, and, lit might not be completed iby October, when the fivetyear interim S.A.L.T.-l (accord runs out. I It is believed that the two : countries might agree to expend the deadline. The new framework inieludes three main elements: 'a S.A.L.T.-2 treaty lasting until 1985; a protocol which ■ would cover the period from. 11977 to 1980: and a stateIment of principles on the ! conduct of S.A.L.T.-3 negoI

The treaty idea is in line! with Soviet demands, while' the statement of principles! is expected to reflect the' Carter Administration’s pro-, posals for heavy reductions; in arms. It is believed that the! protocol would deal with! such controversial new. weapons systems as the; American Cruise missile, and the Soviet Backfire bomber. Before leaving Geneva, Mr Gromyko said that the failure to make more than limited progress at the talks was because of American attempts to obtain a treaty that would give the United States unilateral advantages. This was an apparent reference to outstanding questions of what weapons should be included in each of the three sections of the proposed framework.