INF: Ignoring History, or Making It? : At Last We Are Learning to Listen to Each Other

Fresh opportunities opened in international politics and, primarily, in Soviet-U.S. relations when the two sides agreed in principle on the “double zero” option for medium- and short-range missiles. This is a breakthrough in a direction that of course remains decisive for the state of international affairs.

A sum of Soviet and American missiles and the nuclear warheads for them, albeit impressive (about 2,000 warheads), is not so big when compared with the accumulated charges for other classes of delivery vehicles. But arithmetics are relegated to the background before the political significance of what has been achieved.

For the first time ever an opportunity has appeared for the elimination of two categories of nuclear-missile weapons. Having spent a lot of time on acute debates, Moscow and Washington have proved that they can reach agreement on such a sensitive problem as the curbing of the arms race, an idea that seemed incredible to many people.

Now one can assess with a certain share of optimism the continued search for mutually acceptable compromises on other problems of arms control--namely, the prospect of an agreement on major (50%) cuts in strategic offensive arms in conditions of the strict observance of the anti-ballistic-missile treaty. By Soviet estimates, given a reciprocal striving for such an agreement, it could become reality already in the first half of the next year. A compromise on deep cuts in conventional weapons can also be attained.

The Soviet view is as follows: Since there is an asymmetry in the conventional weapons of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the Warsaw Pact, these weapons could be equalized at the lowest level. This would lead to real cuts in the armed forces of NATO and the Warsaw Pact, and open, in principle, a prospect of their disbandment, elimination of bases on foreign territories and return home of all troops deployed abroad.

The September meeting between U.S. Secretary of State George P. Shultz and Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard A. Shevardnadze, and the latter’s conversations with the U.S. President, give one the grounds to hope that at long last Washington and Moscow will start working together to ensure an overall nuclear test ban. The Soviet Union is ready to accept a complete ban on nuclear tests without any intermediate stages. It is also prepared to move to it by lowering the yield of nuclear explosions, limiting their number and perfecting verification methods. The solution of such a big problem as the prohibition and elimination of chemical arms and the very base of their production can be attained as well.

Every road begins with a first step. This is indeed so, and the first step, for all practical purposes, has now been made. In October, Shevardnadze and Shultz will meet again. Soviet and American representatives in Geneva are in for painstaking work on all the details of the proposed agreement to eliminate medium- and short-range missiles. But let us not forget that the first step does not yet mean that the whole road won’t be uphill.

There are quite a few other big problems on the agenda of Soviet-U.S. relations, which is to a certain extent an agenda of international relations as well. These problems were dealt with by Mikhail S. Gorbachev in his recent article in Pravda, “Reality and Guarantees of a Safe World.” In this article the Soviet leader sets forth Soviet ideas about a new political thinking, and Moscow’s doctrine of a comprehensive system of international peace and security. It is addressed both to government circles and to the public at large.

The Soviet Union does not at all claim to have made impeccable proposals. They can be developed and enriched. On the contrary, in the final analysis a concept of a comprehensive system of international peace and security should be produced by a concerted effort of all members of the world community.

To create the proposed system, all states should work together for the ensuring of economic security. The key to it lies in the implementation of the disarmament-for-development principle. The link between disarmament and development may be implemented in practice if all countries, especially those that are strong and rich, undertake to provide effective aid for the developing nations. A united front of struggle for economic (and, let’s add, ecological) security is essential to guarantee a calm future for mankind.

A feeling of satisfaction is not tantamount to euphoria. A noticeable step in the right direction opens the way to the solution of difficult problems that still beset Soviet-U.S. relations and world politics as a whole. The joint success of Moscow and Washington should be consolidated by a persistent effort in the spirit of good will.

Both countries have long been saying much to each other, about each other. The autumn of 1987 shows that now we are learning to listen to each other. This is a gratifying fact. This is indispensable for the assertion of mutual understanding and confidence.