Future arms deals will be more difficult — report

Press, 24 October 1984, Page 26

Future arms deals will be more difficult — report

NZPA-Reuter London Future East-West nuclear arms limitation deals will prove more difficult to negotiate because of the development of new, smaller weapon systems which are easy to conceal, an independent research body says. The London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies said in a report that the super-Powers had not expanded their nuclear arsenals significantly in the last year, despite the absence of new limitation agreements. Instead, they had refined their weaponry. “The general trend is in the direction of increasing accuracy, greater mobility, dispersal and concealment — and smaller size,” the report said. “It is a trend which will make it very difficult to negotiate verifiable con straints in future.” The report emphasised the development in noth the United States’and the Soviet Union of cruise missiles, low-flying, single-warhead nuclear weapons which could be launched from land, sea or air. The United States had already . deployed cruise

missiles on 852 bombers at home and on mobile ground launchers in Britain and Italy and had begun to deploy them on submarines. The Soviet Navy had both sea and air-launched versions, it said. “It is known that there are major research and development programmes for all variants, especially those of long range and this will undoubtedly complicate future arms control negotiations.” The report, a survey of the military scene, was issued to coincide with publication of the institute’s annual “military balance” which details the world’s armed line-up. It warned that the present lull in super-Power weapons programmes and deployment would not last. New weapons were being developed, it said, adding that “the pattern of testing indicates the probability of further expansion in the late 1980 s.” On military spending, the institute’s director, Robert O’Neill, said the Soviet Union and the United States accounted for the bulk of world growth in expenditure in the last year, when the

global defence budget grew by SUS4O billion to SUS79O billion. Most other countries, particularly in the Third World, were tending to spend less on defence. “Since the 19705, N.A.T.O. countries had been increasing their spending steadily, but that trend was losing impetus in the mid-80s, not for the United States but for ‘its allies.” In Latin-America and Africa, Governments struggling with economic crises were also curbing their defence spending, while financial considerations were cramping China’s re-equip-ment programme. Money for arms also appeared to be tight in East European countries — they had not matched the Soviet Union’s modernisation rate in the previous year, the report said. Notable exceptions to the trend were in the Gulf region where Iran and Iraq continued to spend heavily on their war, while neighbouring countries were building up their defences. The institute is an inter-nationally-staffed research body with members in 70 countries.