U.S. Spurns Soviet Proposal on Radar : Offer to Stop Building Siberia Station if U.S. Drops Upgrading Called Unfair

The Reagan Administration on Tuesday dismissed as “inequitable and unacceptable” a Soviet proposal to stop construction on a radar station in central Siberia if the United States would forgo plans to modernize radar devices in Britain and Greenland.

The Soviet offer was the latest in a series of informal probes to test Washington’s willingness to compromise before the Nov. 19-20 summit between President Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev.

An Administration official referred to the Soviet offer as “talk on the margins” that was conveyed informally to U.S. arms control negotiators in Geneva. Before the Soviet proposal was made public Tuesday, the U.S. negotiators had already rejected it.

White House spokesman Larry Speakes, in explaining the U.S. rejection, said that upgrading of the U.S. installations in Britain and Greenland is legal because the radars were in place before the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty was signed in 1972.

‘Grandfathered by Treaty’

“It was grandfathered by the treaty,” said another official. “The Soviets have never taken issue with it.”

But Washington has long considered the Soviet site at Krasnoyarsk, deep in Siberia, to be a violation of the ABM treaty because it is located so far inland and is oriented to monitor 4,000 kilometers of Soviet territory. The treaty allows such large radar equipment only on the periphery of a country because, if built inland, it is more likely to be used to detect incoming missiles and guide missiles to destroy them. The United States regards the Krasnoyarsk station as the potential hub of a Soviet land-based missile defense system.

The Soviets claim their Krasnoyarsk radar tracks space satellites. But because its antennas are pointed northeastward, one U.S. official said, they can “see” only a fraction, perhaps 15%, of Soviet satellites in orbit.

The official insisted that the Soviets, merely by putting forward the proposal, “recognize in principle the illegitimacy of that radar.”

The two U.S. radars that are due to be modernized are at Thule, Greenland, and at Fylingdales, in Yorkshire, England. Work has already begun on the Thule station, but the reconstruction of Fylingdales has been delayed because of British concerns that it might be a treaty violation.

Although the Reagan Administration clearly considered the proposal a lopsided trade, there is widespread concern within the Administration that the Soviets may have scored propaganda points by appearing to be willing to compromise as the summit approaches.

A top White House official pointed out that most people are not familiar enough with the terms of the ABM treaty to judge the fairness of the Soviet proposal.

U.S. officials are irked by the recent Soviet tendency to publicize every offer rather than to bring ideas quietly to Geneva, where arms negotiations have been under way since early this year.

“Our real response should be in Geneva. That’s the appropriate negotiating venue,” one official said with annoyance.

(The Associated Press reported that the Soviets also offered to accept small-scale tests of mockups of “Star Wars” space-based missile defense weapons. The tests would not be challenged by the Kremlin if they were just an extension of laboratory research. However, Moscow still objects to full-scale engineering development of such anti-missile devices, the AP said, quoting a U.S. official who requested anonymity.)

Elaborate Media Push

To counter the Soviet public relations offensive, Administration officials are mapping an elaborate media push for the U.S. position, beginning with a series of interviews Reagan will give foreign reporters this week. The British Broadcasting Corporation was first on the list with a Tuesday interview.

Reagan is also likely to address the nation the week before the summit to outline his “goals and aspirations” for the historic meeting, officials said. Still at issue is the extent to which the President will outline his specific arms control proposals before the summit.

At meetings with allied leaders in New York last week, Reagan was urged to make a counterproposal to the Soviet call for a 50% reduction in strategic nuclear weapons. The European leaders also expressed their concern to Reagan that Gorbachev had stolen a march on him in capturing world opinion as the more aggressive peacemaker.

Regardless of the summit’s outcome, Reagan plans to fly from Geneva to Brussels to brief allied leaders the day after he concludes his talks with Gorbachev. Then, taking advantage of the six hours’ time difference between Europe and Washington, the President is scheduled to return to Washington on Thursday evening, Nov. 21, to address a joint session of Congress.

The hoopla surrounding the trip contrasts sharply with Administration jitters that the Soviets are striking tough positions on all summit-related issues until they extract a concession from Reagan on his Strategic Defense Initiative. Reagan has said he will not use “Star Wars” as a bargaining chip in the talks.

Soviet Foot-Dragging

Officials confirm that the Soviets have been dragging their feet on several sideline issues that the United States hoped would produce a measure of accord in Geneva. Among them are new safety rules for airliners in the north Pacific aimed at preventing another incident like the Soviet downing of a South Korean jetliner two years ago.

The Administration will not renew permission for Soviet Aeroflot flights to the United States unless the Pacific agreement is signed. Aeroflot’s service to the United States was suspended in 1981 when the Administration imposed sanctions in response to Soviet pressures on Poland and a declaration of martial law there. In 1983, Aeroflot’s landing rights in New York and Washington were canceled after the Korean airliner incident.

Still, with three weeks remaining before the Geneva summit, officials on both sides are continuing to search for common ground that could salvage a potential disaster if there is no progress on arms control. Secretary of State George P. Shultz has publicly endorsed the concept of “an agreement of principles”--diplomatic shorthand for a framework that might spur the arms control negotiations and other bilateral talks even in the absence of a breakthrough.