U.S. tries to calm N-strategy worries

Press, 12 August 1980, Page 9

U.S. tries to calm N-strategy worries

NZPA Washington In an effort to reassure allied governments over Preside: Carter’s new nucleararms strategy, the American secretary of Defence (Mr Harold Brown) has told Western European' Defence Ministers that the United States has “no desire to fight a nuclear war.” In a diplomatic Note sent to the Defence Ministers of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation last Friday, Mr Brown said that the Administration’s “countervailing strategy” • was an “evolutionary development” . and not “a major break with past policies.” Mr Brown said that Mr Carter’s policy is “designed to enhance deterrence of any Soviet action that could lead to a nuclear war by making clear that we have both capabilities and plans for use of our forces, if deterrence fails?’ The message was given to allies as officials sought to defuse the controversy generated by disclosure' that the Administration had decided to place greater emphasis in its nuclear-war plans on threatening military targets, as opposed to cities, in the Soviet Union.

At the Pentagon, aides responded- to ; complaints by the Secretary Of State. (Mr Edmund Muskie) over not being informed: of the new policy b'y reporting that’ the strategic shift had been,.dis-: cussed extensively within the Government for more than two years. . They said that ranking State Department officials had taken part in these discussions and expressed surprise that Mr Muskie had not been briefed on the matter. ‘ At the same-time, officials expressed concern that the nuclear policy could trigger a loud debate this week at the Democartic national convention- in New York.

They are also concerned about the political impact of the nuclear policy on the Western alliance.

The Administration had planned to inform allied governments of Mr Carter’s nuclear decision later this month, before Mr Brown was scheduled to announce the policy, publicly. However, the disclosure of the policy last week in the press caught the Administration off guard and allied governments received, no warning. According to. Mr Brown’s

message -last Friday, the outlines of the hew strategy were discussed with allied military leaders last June, in a meeting of] N.A.T.O.’s nuclear planning' Group in Bodo, Norway./; .1 Mr Brown argues that: “It: is crucial that the Soviet leadership recognise that by aggression they would risk; not only a general United! States retaliation on the full! range of targets; they must] also understand that if they! choose some intermediate 1 level of escalation, thej United States could by more, limited responses impose on! the Soviets an unacceptably! high cost in terms of what! the Soviet leadership values, most — political and mili-I tary control, military power both ■ nuclear and conventional, and the industrial capacity to sustain military operations.” At the same time, Mr Brown says, “We have no desire to fight a. nuclear war, it would be .an unimaginable catastrophe. “But the surest way to avoid sUch . a . war,” Mr Brown added in the message, “is to make certain that the Soviet leadership can have no illusions about what such war would mean for Soviet State'power.”, •