B-52 Deployment Breaks SALT Pact : Move Triggers Protests by Arms Limit Advocates

The United States broke the 1979 strategic arms limitation treaty Friday as the 131st B-52 bomber equipped to carry cruise missiles landed at a Texas air base, touching off a storm of protest from arms control advocates in Congress.

When the plane arrived at 1:02 p.m. PST at the Strategic Air Command’s cruise missile facility at Carswell Air Force Base, it put the United States over the SALT limit of 1,320 launchers for land- and sea-launched intercontinental ballistic missiles with multiple warheads and bombers armed with cruise missiles.

The treaty was never ratified by the U.S. Senate, but both Washington and Moscow had pledged to follow it.

Sen. Sam Nunn (D-Ga.), expected to become chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee when Congress resumes in January, said the action ultimately would benefit the Soviet Union far more than the United States, damage U.S. relations with its allies and thwart future arms control efforts.

Continued Compliance Urged

Sen. Dale Bumpers (D-Ark.) predicted that Congress would pass legislation early next year requiring the Administration to dismantle another weapons system to push the U.S. total back under the limit. He sent Reagan a letter signed by a bipartisan group of 15 senators, urging continued compliance with the pact.

Rep. Les Aspin (D-Wis.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said breaching the pact was “a very bad decision” designed only to burnish Reagan’s reputation with right-wing ideologues.

Sen. John H. Chafee (R-R.I.) said the Administration “just handed (Moscow) an excuse” to resume a missile arms race that it is in a position to win, at least in the short run.

Reagan announced May 27 that the United States no longer considered itself bound by the treaty, which it accused Moscow of violating repeatedly. He said at that time that Washington would not scrap any other weapons to compensate for the 131st cruise-missile carrier when it was ready for deployment.

NATO Urged Reconsideration

Although all other members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization urged the United States to reconsider that decision, President Reagan decided earlier this week to go ahead with his original plan.

Britain, West Germany, Canada and the Netherlands issued statements Friday deploring the U.S. action. Other members of the alliance were expected to express similar displeasure shortly.

At Carswell air base, Capt. Paula Hoffmann, a public affairs officer, said the bomber was not carrying cruise missiles when it arrived from Kelly Air Force Base, Tex., where it had been modified to carry 12 of the accurate, low-flying missiles designed to penetrate Soviet air defenses. But she said it would go on alert on a “normal rotational basis” with other cruise missile carriers at the base.

Congressional leaders agreed last month to abandon efforts to force Reagan to comply with SALT II to avoid embarrassing the President before his Iceland summit meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev.

However, Bumpers said in a statement Friday, “Congress will almost certainly mandate a reversal of this decision when it reconvenes in January.”

More Soviet Warheads

“Even the CIA has said that the Soviets would have several thousand more nuclear warheads by the mid-1990s without SALT than they would have if they continued abiding by the treaty,” he said.

Although the Administration has accused Moscow of a long list of violations of arms limitation agreements, it has not charged the Soviets with deploying more weapons systems than permitted by the pact. A Bumpers aide said the Soviets have dismantled more than 500 missiles and bombers to remain in compliance with the treaty, compared with 48 dismantled by the United States.

Nunn, usually a staunch Pentagon supporter, said Reagan’s decision “gives the Soviet Union a military advantage, with its near-term missile production capabilities, as well as a substantial world propaganda advantage.

“It will cause our allies around the world considerable political discomfort, and it will now be much harder to reach a bipartisan consensus on strategic weapons and arms control at home,” he said.

Aspin, interviewed on the CBS Morning News, said the action was designed to appease conservatives who were distressed by Reagan’s arms-and-hostages deal with Iran and the likely fallout of disclosures that money from the sale was channeled to anti-government rebels in Nicaragua.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) said the breach of SALT II will compound the damage to U.S. foreign policy already caused by the Iran arms controversy.

“There is simply no good reason for the United States to move outside the SALT II limits at this time other than for the Administration to once again thumb its nose at the will of the Congress and the American people,” Kennedy said in a statement.