Scrap Pershing Warheads, Soviets Insist

A high Soviet official said Tuesday that the United States must agree to dispose of nuclear warheads for 72 West German missiles before a Soviet-American treaty on elimination of medium- and shorter-range missiles can be signed.

Alexander A. Bessmertnykh, a deputy foreign minister, also said that Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev will not attend another summit conference with President Reagan unless agreement has been reached on abolition of the two classes of missiles.

In a briefing for Soviet and foreign correspondents, Bessmertnykh also raised new questions about the U.S. position on verification of an arms control agreement. He appeared to be taking a harder line on the recent offer by West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl to get rid of the 72 Pershing 1-A missiles if Washington and Moscow decide to scrap their medium- and shorter-range missiles in Europe and elsewhere.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Gennady I. Gerasimov said last week that Kohl’s statement has “changed for the better” the prospects of an arms control agreement emerging from the Soviet-American negotiations at Geneva.

In Warsaw on Tuesday, Gerasimov reiterated that Kohl’s stand on the Pershing 1-As had improved the chances for a Reagan-Gorbachev summit.

Bessmertnykh, however, said there has been no progress at the Geneva talks despite Kohl’s statement. He said that the issue needs to be clarified and that the United States should declare its willingness to sign a treaty that would ban deployment of the Pershings along with all other medium- and shorter-range weapons.

American negotiators have refused to discuss the Pershings, arguing that they belong to a third country and are not a proper subject for Soviet-American talks. The Pershing 1-As are considered West German missiles, even though their nuclear warheads are U.S.-controlled.

Soviet officials have countered that a “global double zero” solution on the two classes of missiles cannot be achieved if the United States retains the 72 warheads.

“Any pretext to refuse to discuss this question no longer exists,” Bessmertnykh said. “To ask for an exception (in a proposed treaty) for its own warheads would be unworthy of Washington.” The issue of the Pershing warheads, he added, remains the major stumbling block to an agreement eliminating the short- and mid-range nuclear missiles.

Prospects for a summit, Bessmertnykh added, will depend on the Sept. 15-17 talks between Secretary of State George P. Shultz and Foreign Minister Eduard A. Shevardnadze.

Establishing a Base

“We believe that it’s important to establish a reliable and suitable base for a summit,” he said. “I would like to hope that the tradition of a dialogue at the highest level will be continued, because it’s on this level that problems are solved.”

But a summit conference, he added, would not be possible without an agreement in hand on the so-called intermediate nuclear forces, the category that includes medium- and shorter-range missiles but excludes the shortest-range category, known as tactical or battlefield weapons.

Arms control issues, the official predicted, will take up the “lion’s share” of the Shultz-Shevardnadze meetings.

Bessmertnykh also criticized Reagan’s recent speeches on Soviet-American relations, charging that some passages were almost insulting and others were “far from the truth.” But he seemed to spare Reagan some of the blame for his remarks, adding, “Those who wrote these speeches for the President did him a disservice.”

In Santa Barbara, White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater said President Reagan will reject any effort by the Soviets to include the Pershing 1-As in the U.S.-Soviet talks.

“We have said continually that third-country systems are not part of these negotiations,” Fitzwater said, in response to a question about proposals advanced by a Soviet official in Washington. “We will not negotiate them.”

Vladimir F. Petrovsky, who like Bessmertnykh is a deputy Soviet foreign minister, said at a press conference earlier Tuesday that while an arms control agreement is near, the disposition of the Pershing warheads remains an unresolved element and that they must be destroyed rather than returned to an existing American stockpile.

The warheads “would not be a part of the negotiations,” Fitzwater declared. The United States, he said, does not feel that this approach will stand in the way of attaining a treaty.

One senior White House official remarked that the Soviet comments represent “standard rhetoric” and that the Soviets “always like something to shout about.”

On another arms control issue, Fitzwater it is up to the Soviets to make a specific proposal for monitoring superpower nuclear arms tests. His comment followed a speech by a Soviet official indicating interest in a system advocated by the United States.

On Monday, Col. Gen. Nikolai F. Chervov, head of the Arms Control Directorate of the Soviet General Staff, speaking in Washington, raised the possibility that the Corrtex system, requiring close access to a test site, could be used.

Fitzwater said that the Administration views the proposal as “an interesting thought” that should be explored in formal arms-test talks.

“The ball is in their court in terms of making a specific proposal. . . , “ the White House spokesman said. “The comments were somewhat superficial and made in a public forum.”

The Corrtex system involves the use of a cable, placed in the ground near the site of a nuclear test, to measure the force of the explosion.

Times staff writer James Gerstenzang in Santa Barbara contributed to this article.