Delusions Threaten Real Politics

Pondering the question of what stands in the way of good Soviet-American relations, one arrives at the conclusion that, for the most part, it is the arms race. I am not going to describe its history. Let me just note that at almost every stage the Soviet Union has been the party catching up. By the beginning of the 1970s we reached approximate military-strategic parity, but on a level that is really frightening. Both the Soviet Union and the United States now have the capacity to destroy each other many times over.

It would seem logical, in the face of a strategic stalemate, to halt the arms race and get down to disarmament. But the reality is different. Armories already overflowing continue to be filled with sophisticated new types of weapons, and new areas of military technology are being developed.

I shall not disclose any secret if I tell you that the Soviet Union is doing all that is necessary to maintain up-to-date and reliable defenses. This is our duty to our own people and our allies. At the same time, I wish to say quite definitely that this is not our choice. It has been imposed upon us.

All kinds of doubts are being spread among Americans about Soviet intentions in the field of disarmament. But history shows that we can keep the word we gave and that we honor the obligations assumed.

It is crystal clear that in the world we live in, the world of nuclear weapons,any attempt to use them to solve Soviet-American problems would spell suicide. This is a fact. I do not think that U.S. politicians are unaware of it. Moreover, a truly paradoxical situation has now developed. Even if one country engages in a steady arms buildup while the other does nothing, the side that arms itself will all the same gain nothing. Any striving for military superiority means chasing one’s own tail. It can’t be used in real politics.

Nor is the United States in any hurry to part with another illusion. I mean its immoral intentions to bleed the Soviet Union white economically, to prevent us from carrying out our plans of construction by dragging us even deeper into the quagmire of the arms race.

I ask you to take a look at the experience of the postwar decades. The Soviet Union emerged from World War II in a very difficult condition. Whereas not a single enemy bomb was dropped and not a single enemy shot was heard on the U.S. mainland, a large part of our country was an arena for the fiercest battles. Our losses, both human and material, were enormous. Nevertheless, we succeeded in restoring what had been destroyed, in building our economic potential and in confidently tackling our defensive tasks. Is that not a lesson for the future?

It is inadmissible that states should base their policies on mistaken views. We know that there is an opinion current in the United States and the West generally that the threat from the Soviet Union comes not because it possesses nuclear weapons.

The reasoning is as follows: The Soviets well know that if they attack the United States they can’t escape retaliation. The United States is equally well aware that retaliation will follow an attack on the Soviet Union. Therefore, only a madman would unleash nuclear war.

The real threat, according to these people, will arise if the Soviet Union accomplishes its plans for accelerating socioeconomic development and shows its new economic and political potential. Hence the desire to exhaust the Soviet Union economically.

We sincerely advise Americans: Try to get rid of such an approach to our country. Hopes of using any advantages in technology or advanced equipment so as to gain superiority over our country are futile. To act on the assumption that the Soviet Union is in a “hopeless position,” and that it is necessary just to press it harder to squeeze out everything that the United States wants, is to err profoundly. Nothing will come of these plans.

In real politics there can be no wishful thinking. If the Soviet Union, when it was much weaker than now, was in a position to meet all the challenges that it faces, then indeed only a blind person would be unable to see that our capacity to maintain strong defenses and simultaneously resolve social and other tasks has enormously increased.

I shall repeat that as far as U.S. foreign policy is concerned, it is based on at least two delusions. The first is the belief that the economic system of the Soviet Union is about to crumble and that we will not succeed in restructuring. The second is calculated on Western superiority in equipment and technology and, eventually, in the military field. These illusions nourish a policy geared toward exhausting us through the arms race so as to dictate terms later. Such is the scheme. It is naive.

Current Western policies aren’t enough, and lack the new mode of thinking. I am outspoken about this. If we don’t stop now and start practical disarmament, we may all find ourselves on the edge of a precipice.