Top U.S. Officials Dispute Gromyko on Geneva Terms

Top U.S. officials Sunday differed sharply with some interpretations that Soviet Foreign Minister Andrei A. Gromyko placed on key aspects of last week’s U.S.-Soviet agreement for new arms control talks.

In an interview televised Sunday from Moscow, Gromyko said that the United States had agreed that deployment and testing of weapons that may emerge from the Reagan Administration’s research program on space-based defenses “could be prohibited.” And he said that unless the United States curbs its space research effort, the Soviets will refuse to agree to cuts in medium-range and long-range offensive weapons.

Defense Secretary Caspar W. Weinberger immediately denied that current space-defense research, or future weapons based on that research, can be bargained away, and he accused Gromyko of introducing a new condition--parallel progress in all the talks--even before the negotiations begin.

“We approach these talks with a completely undetermined, free agenda,” Weinberger said on the CBS-TV program “Face the Nation.”

Gromyko and Secretary of State George P. Shultz agreed in Geneva that three types of weapons systems--intercontinental ballistic missiles, intermediate-range missiles and space arms--will be the subjects of the new negotiations.

Shultz said Sunday that “it remains to be seen” whether the Soviets will insist on parallel progress on space defense arms--which Moscow most wants to curb--and offensive weapons, which are prime targets of U.S. negotiators.

At their Geneva meeting, Shultz said, Gromyko made a similar statement about firm “linkage” between offensive and defensive talks. “And then he (Gromyko) proceeded to list a lot of exceptions” where agreements could be reached--and presumably signed and put into effect--independent of progress in other forums, Shultz added.

The “exceptions” were agreements Moscow has wanted for a long time, he said, without identifying them further.

“It remains to be seen what will happen if we agree on something in one area, but not in some other area,” Shultz said on the NBC-TV program “Meet the Press.” “It may or may not go forward,” but Gromyko’s remarks “do not doom prospects” for eventual success in reaching an arms agreement.

Gromyko’s interview appeared to signal the start of a major propaganda effort by the Soviets to impress on the world that they will not deal with offensive weapons unless the United States cuts back space defense plans.

This position will bring pressure on the Reagan Administration from Europeans and U.S. congressmen, among others, to accept some limitations on space defense in exchange for reductions in offensive systems.

Gromyko said he agreed with the Reagan Administration that a ban on research on space defense would be difficult to verify. But he asked, “ . . . who can guarantee that the line will be drawn after research has been completed?”

Weinberger did not say anything that would reassure Gromyko. “I am ruling out the possibility of giving up a strategic defense either in the research stage or, if it becomes feasible, in the deployable stage,” he said, although before deployment, Washington would discuss the issue with its allies and the Soviets.