THE PRESS FRIDAY, JUNE 26, 1987. Hopes for nuclear arms cut

Press, 26 June 1987, Page 16

THE PRESS FRIDAY, JUNE 26, 1987. Hopes for nuclear arms cut

Nothing is signed and sealed between the United States and the Soviet Union yet. But there need be little doubt that the two are determined to reduce the number of nuclear missiles in Europe and elsewhere. What is being discussed is not merely an arms control or an arms limitation agreement but an arms reduction agreement. If the intentions are followed through, then the world will have the first agreement that cuts the number of nuclear weapons. The Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (S.A.L.T. 2) limited, but did hot reduce, nuclear weapons. In fact, S.A.L.T. 2 allowed an increase in the number of nuclear missiles.

Progress on a new agreement is encouraging. Although the negotiations are between the Soviet Union and the United States, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation countries have given their approval. And a joint United States-Soviet Union draft of the treaty has been prepared. The encouraging development of the last few days is that President Reagan has instructed United .States negotiators to include shorter-range as well as medium-range weapons in the treaty. A treaty that includes both types of missile would enforce the elimination in Europe of weaponswith ranges of between 500 kilometres and 5000 kilometres, except for 100 each retained by the two super-Powers. The West Germans have refused to allow some of their missiles to be included but the United States owns the nuclear warheads on them and the warheads will be part of the deal.

The removal of intermediate-range and shorter-range nuclear weapons from Europe is a sound place to start the process of scrapping all nuclear weapons. The intercontinental ballistic missiles that the Soviet Union and the United States are

pointing at one another (and goodness knows who else) still have the capacity to remove much of human life from the planet. However, the time that these missiles take to travel from launch to target gives both sides enough time to make an assessment of what is happening. The missiles in Europe reduce the warning time in many cases to a dangerous six minutes. The world deserves a better chance to survive than having to rely on calculations done in six minutes or less. The so-called battlefield nuclear weapons are not proposed to be covered by the new treaty and there is no immediate intention to press for another treaty to see them eliminated. It would be reassuring if they

could be eliminated but it is not worth waiting for such an accord before concluding an agreement on the weapons that travel further. Both President Reagan and the Soviet leader, Mr Gorbachev, appear to have set their sights on accomplishing a treaty. And it is just as well that a treaty be concluded soon. If President Reagan could not see the treaty through to its signing, then the chances would be strong that it would be another five to seven years before such a treaty could be negotiated again. Much of next year will be taken up with the process of selecting a new President in the United States, and the new President, who will take office at the beginning of 1989, will take time to demonstrate that he is accepted by the Congress and by the Soviet Union. In the meantime, circumstances could change within the Soviet Union.

Whether the signing of a nuclear arms treaty will bring about more trust between the Soviet Union and the United States remains to be seen. But the elimination of so many nuclear weapons would at least help rather than hinder the building-up of trust.