Peace and War--With Words

President Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev exchanged conciliatory messages Wednesday expressing readiness to cooperate in the interests of peace and disarmament. They also made speeches at about the same hour making it clear that they continue to see threats to peace from sharply different perspectives.

Reagan, in the last major speech of his trip, addressed the 10-nation European Parliament in Strasbourg, concentrating on the case for “Star Wars” and allaying fears in Europe that he is insufficiently interested in dialogue with the Soviet Union.

Reagan accused the Soviets of undermining nuclear stability by moving toward deployment of a mobile, multiwarhead intercontinental missile that he said is “clearly designed to strike first.” America’s preferred response, he said, is not to build more and more offensive missiles of its own but to negotiate a downturn in the nuclear arms race. He called his research program into anti-missile defenses a step toward that end--a proposition that is disputed by many experts, in Europe and America, who see the Star Wars program as part of the problem rather than the solution.

Although Reagan’s remarks were barbed in spots, on balance they were conciliatory. He reiterated U.S. determination to resist the Soviets’ efforts to impose their will on other people. But, in sharp contrast to the message that he conveyed early in his first term, the President said that the United States seeks a balance, not military superiority over the Soviet Union. Washington, he added, does not “seek to undermine or change the Soviet system.” He pledged new efforts by his Administration to conduct a “productive dialogue” with Moscow.

Reagan dusted off several proposals, all made before but rejected by Moscow, aimed at making less likely any war by accident or misunderstanding. The proposals involve the “regular” exchange of military observers, direct contacts between Soviet and American military leaders, and the establishment of a hot line between the Pentagon and Soviet military headquarters.

They hardly added up to a grand new diplomatic offensive, but they do provide the Soviet Union with an opportunity to make a positive response if it chooses to do so. Unfortunately, Gorbachev’s speech in Moscow on Wednesday was short on olive branches.

The Soviet leader said that Moscow favors a revival of detente, and he repeated that “the historical competition between the two systems cannot be solved by military means.” But these remarks were outweighed by a vitriolic attack on the United States, which he accused of becoming “ever more bellicose” and of posing a growing threat to world peace.

It may be that Gorbachev’s harsh tone had more to do with internal Soviet politics, and possibly a felt need to nail down his credentials as a tough guardian of Soviet interests, than with the actual direction of Soviet foreign policy under his leadership. This could explain, for example, why he went out of his way to praise Josef Stalin’s leadership during World War II. On the other hand, we may be hearing the real Gorbachev.