Advisers’ Discord Clouds Reagan’s Arrival in Geneva : Confidential Weinberger Letter Urges No Compromise on Key Arms Issues

President Reagan, who arrived here aboard Air Force One on Saturday night, sought to strike a hopeful note three days before his summit meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev, but he faced dismaying new signs of discord and disarray inside his Administration.

Only hours before Reagan left Washington, sources apparently inside the government leaked to the press the text of a supposedly confidential letter to the President from Defense Secretary Caspar W. Weinberger--a letter that contained a last-minute appeal to Reagan not to make summit concessions to the Soviets on two key arms control issues.

Weinberger, in the letter written Wednesday, argued that the President should avoid pledging continued U.S. compliance with the unratified SALT II arms control treaty or affirming that the United States will follow interpretations of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty that might cripple his “Star Wars” program.

Hard-Liner on Talks

Weinberger, who was not included in the team of senior advisers who accompanied the President to Geneva, has long been a hard-liner on arms negotiations with Moscow. And the publication of his letter, which appeared in full in Saturday’s New York Times, was viewed by senior White House officials here as a significant embarrassment to the President that could undermine his position when he meets with Gorbachev on Tuesday and Wednesday.

While Reagan declared in his arrival remarks that “genuine give and take” are needed because U.S.-Soviet differences “run deep,” Weinberger’s letter called on the President to take a highly restricted approach to key issues on the summit agenda.

A senior Administration official, who declined to be identified by name, told reporters accompanying the President on Air Force One that publication of the report would put new strains on Reagan’s meetings with Gorbachev. Asked if the leak was an effort to sabotage the summit, the official said, “Sure it was.”

Later, White House press spokesman Larry Speakes said tartly, “The President would have preferred to read it in the privacy of the Oval Office and not in the New York Times.”

Pentagon Statement

At the Pentagon, spokesman Robert Sims issued a statement: “The Defense Department had nothing to do with the release of the text of Secretary Weinberger’s letter to the President to any publications. It is Secretary Weinberger’s longstanding policy not to discuss or make public his advice or recommendations to the President.”

It may be difficult for Reagan to determine who leaked the letter because it was widely circulated in the White House and the Pentagon. The official who talked to reporters aboard Air Force One did not say who he thought was the source of the report.

Reagan has made no public comment about the Weinberger letter.

In his upbeat remarks at the Geneva airport, he said that while he and Gorbachev cannot surmount all the problems separating the two superpowers in their two-day meeting, “I’m here in the fervent hope that on behalf of all the people of the world, we can at least make a start.”

In his letter to the President, Weinberger said continued observance of all aspects of the unratified second strategic arms limitation treaty after it expires on Dec. 31 “could put very rigid constraints on your ability to respond” to Soviet violations of arms control agreements.

The defense secretary also urged the President to reverse his decision, announced last month, that his Strategic Defense Initiative, the so-called “Star Wars” missile defense system, fits within a “restrictive interpretation” of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

If accepted by the President, Weinberger’s advice to ignore the SALT II treaty would eliminate all restraints on U.S. and Soviet development and deployment of offensive nuclear missiles at the end of this year. Although the 1979 treaty was never ratified by the Senate because of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, both Washington and Moscow have agreed not to undercut its provisions pending negotiation of a new and more comprehensive pact.

Reagan said last June that he would continue to adhere to the agreement, which he once had described as “fatally flawed,” despite Administration charges that the Soviets have repeatedly violated it. Secretary of State George P. Shultz said earlier this week that Reagan’s position has not changed since June.

Political Blank Check

Weinberger’s warnings to Reagan not to make concessions at Geneva contrasted with the position of congressional Democrats who offered the President a political blank check for his talks with Gorbachev.

In the official Democratic response to Reagan’s regular Saturday radio speech, Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) pledged his party’s full support to the President.

“Despite our significant differences on many issues, today we are one,” Dodd said. “With President Reagan are the hopes and prayers of all Americans.”

The defense secretary’s letter accompanied a Pentagon report on alleged Soviet violations of arms control agreements, especially the ABM treaty and the SALT II pact. The report itself has not been made public, although an Administration official said it contained no new violations that had not been discussed in earlier reports on treaty compliance.

In his letter, Weinberger said, “The report’s principal conclusion is that Soviet violations are continuing and require an appropriate and proportionate response on our part.”

‘Great Pressure’ on Reagan

He predicted that Gorbachev would exert “great pressure” on Reagan at Geneva to agree to extend the SALT II limits and to continue to accept a restrictive interpretation of the ABM treaty.

“A pledge to continue to adhere to SALT II, even though the Soviets are violating it, could make it difficult, if not impossible, to do other things we should do to make up for their violations,” Weinberger said.

“Any agreement to limit the (Strategic Defense Initiative) program according to a narrow and, I believe, wrong interpretation of the ABM treaty--a treaty which the Soviets are violating under any interpretation--would diminish significantly the prospects that we will succeed in bringing our search for a strategic defense to fruition.”

Both the United States and the Soviet Union have reached the limits allowed by the SALT II treaty for offensive strategic forces. The United States currently deploys 1,935 strategic “launchers” compared to 2,495 for the Soviets. However, because more U.S. systems carry multiple warheads, the United States has 11,140 warheads, compared to 8,720 for the Soviets.

New Generation of Arms

Weinberger said the SALT II limits, if extended, would restrict the U.S. response to Soviet treaty violations and would require the destruction of U.S. weapons as a new generation of arms is deployed.

Weinberger’s arguments on ABM treaty interpretations reopened a debate that appeared to have been settled last month.

The treaty, signed in 1972, permits research into anti-missile defenses but prohibits “testing, development and deployment” of most ABMs. In October, national security adviser Robert C. McFarlane suggested that testing and development of systems involving “new physical concepts”--essentially weapons that were in the realm of science fiction at the time the treaty was drafted--would be permissible.

Several arms control officials from previous administrations challenged McFarlane’s contention, and Reagan then decided against adopting the new interpretation. He ordered work on the Strategic Defense Initiative to be conducted under the original--more restrictive--interpretation of the pact, which would permit research but neither testing nor deployment of the weapons.

Question of Interpretation

Under the loose interpretation supported by Weinberger, the Administration could go ahead with “Star Wars” testing, and perhaps even deployment, both of which would be banned by the narrow interpretation.

Gorbachev has made it plain that he will push for a total ban on the U.S. strategic defense program, a position far more restrictive than even the Administration’s narrow interpretation of the ABM pact.

Two hard-line Pentagon officials, Assistant Secretary of Defense Richard N. Perle and Under Secretary Fred Ikle, were selected for Reagan’s Geneva delegation. But they lack Weinberger’s Cabinet-level rank and, therefore, were not picked for the “core group” of advisers, which included Shultz, McFarlane, White House Chief of Staff Donald T. Regan and U.S. Ambassador to Moscow Arthur A.Hartman. As a member of the Cabinet, Weinberger would have qualified for the inner group if he had gone to Geneva.

Meanwhile, representatives of both governments here were negotiating to arrange a joint appearance by Reagan and Gorbachev on Thursday, one day after the summit is presently scheduled to end.

No Firm Agreement

An Administration official involved in the negotiations said such a meeting “probably would be held” but no firm agreement has yet been reached.

At the closing ceremony, he said, the two leaders are likely to review their discussions and sign several agreements on cultural exchange programs and air safety.

Reagan has talked in the past of the summit’s sending a signal to spur the continuing U.S.-Soviet arms negotiations. The official said any such signal would probably not come in a formal statement, but, he added, “I wouldn’t put anything past this President.”

Except for a brief Swiss welcoming ceremony on Monday, Reagan will spend the two days before the summit talks resting and preparing.

Reagan will host the first day’s session at the chateau Fleur d’Eau, an 18th-Century gray stone mansion. He and Gorbachev will have a few minutes together without their aides in the library before the negotiating teams face each other in the den across a 16-foot-long conference table flown in from the United States.

Exchange of Courtesies

While there is no time limit on the two leaders’ initial private encounter, officials expressed doubt that it will extend beyond an exchange of courtesies leading into the first formal bargaining session.

After the first formal session, Reagan and Gorbachev are free to adjourn for additional direct talks themselves if they so choose, but such additional contact is not now built into their schedules.

To make maximum use of the eight hours of scheduled talks, the two governments have agreed to simultaneous translations. That is, each leader will hear a translation of the other’s remarks as they are delivered instead of waiting for the speaker to finish before translation begins. The latter system is extremely time-consuming and would drastically reduce the effective working time.

Negotiating is still going on behind the scenes to reach agreement on a number of subsidiary issues from air safety to cultural exchanges.

A team from Pan American World Airways flew to Moscow this weekend to make one more attempt to nail down a renewal of U.S.-Soviet landing rights. The Administration is making Aeroflot landing rights in the United States conditional on Pan Am’s being allowed back into Moscow under terms that are profitable to the airline. Air traffic between the two countries was suspended after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

Still Under Negotiation

The fact that this kind of relatively minor agreement is still being negotiated on the eve of the talks is an indication of how difficult the preparations for this summit have been.

In his arrival statement, Reagan said “it is fitting” that his meeting with Gorbachev take place in Switzerland, a country that “has long been a leader in the search for peace.” As examples, he cited the founding of the International Committee of the Red Cross in Switzerland and the many times Swiss embassies abroad have represented the diplomatic interests of other countries, including the United States.

The President said the United States and Switzerland have something in common, since “each of our countries, in its own way, stands for peace and liberty.”

Reagan, who wore a black overcoat and white muffler, was welcomed by President Kurt Furgler of Switzerland, who described Geneva as “the city of peace.”

Reminding Reagan that President Dwight D. Eisenhower took part in the Big Four summit in Geneva in 1955, President Furgler, speaking partly in French but mostly in English, said that “the spirit of Geneva was born at that time.”

The expression the spirit of Geneva was used by many people in the 1950s to describe the peaceful mood that they felt had come out of that summit. Furgler told Reagan that the Swiss people offered him their encouragement in “the difficult task that you and Mr. Gorbachev undertake.”