Weinberger Faces NATO Post-Summit Concerns

Defense Secretary Caspar W. Weinberger, whose unyielding views of arms control and the Soviet Union have put him at odds with Washington’s European allies, meets this week with his NATO counterparts at a moment of concern within the alliance about the future of nuclear arms in Europe and the allies’ role in superpower relations.

After half a day of talks here, Weinberger and Italian Defense Minister Giovanni Spadolini appeared optimistic Saturday about prospects for renewing dialogue between the United States and the Soviet Union following the Iceland summit.

The autumn session of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s Nuclear Planning Group begins Tuesday in Gleneagles, Scotland, little more than a week after President Reagan’s meeting in Reykjavik with Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev. Weinberger will thus hold center stage and face the other defense ministers on the topic of the summit’s failure to resolve differences on arms control.

‘Big Item’ on Agenda

One senior Pentagon official said: “The results in Iceland are going to be heavy on everyone’s mind (in Scotland). That’s going to be a big item.”

Already, questions have been raised about whether NATO’s military establishment was involved deeply enough in the planning of the hastily arranged Iceland summit, and whether it got detailed information before and afterward on what happened there.

London’s Financial Times newspaper quoted Gen. Hans-Joachim Mack of West Germany, NATO’s No. 2 military chief, as saying that Gen. Bernard W. Rogers, the top allied commander in Europe, had complained to Weinberger a week before the summit that his command was not given enough notice about proposals for reducing the number of medium-range missiles in Europe.

Asked about that report at a news conference here Saturday, Weinberger said, “There was very thorough consultation with all concerned.”

Earlier, Lord Carrington, secretary general of NATO, said in a television interview: “I don’t think it’s fair to say that there hasn’t been consultation. I don’t remember any occasion when the Americans have taken so much trouble to consult.”

Missile Count at Issue

The concern is relevant on the eve of the Nuclear Planning Group’s meeting, because the medium-range, U.S.-made Pershing 2 and cruise missiles now being deployed in Europe are the central elements in the modernization of the West’s nuclear force on the continent.

Some U.S. experts say that the prospect of movement in U.S.-Soviet talks aimed at cutting back on intermediate-range missiles in Europe has left the allies in an uncomfortable political position.

Defense ministers who argued strongly for deployment of the U.S. missiles, as a counter to Soviet SS-20 missiles long aimed at targets in Western Europe and to the superior conventional forces of the Warsaw Bloc, may be asked to explain why they are unnecessary if a U.S.-Soviet nuclear accord is reached.

“There’s a feeling that we made this tremendous effort to push this rock up this hill. Now we have to stand and watch the rock roll down again,” said one Reagan Administration official involved with arms control issues.

As to the likelihood of another superpowers summit, Italy’s Spadolini said Saturday at a news conference that he expects Reagan and Gorbachev to meet again.

“The signals coming from Moscow after Iceland give hope that there would be a meeting of the leaders of the superpowers,” he said, with Weinberger at his side.