Gorbachev Angrily Hits Hard Line of Reagan : Says Recent Speeches Reflect ‘Confrontational’ U.S. Stand; Few Gains Seen During Shultz Visit

A bitter attack Friday by Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev on recent speeches of President Reagan capped two days of U.S.-Soviet talks that produced little movement on arms control and regional issues dividing the two countries.

Gorbachev’s angry words, delivered to Secretary of State George P. Shultz just five weeks before Reagan arrives for a summit meeting, contained a threat to halt the warming superpower relationship if Washington does not stop badgering the Kremlin on the issue of human rights.

Complains About Attitude

The Soviet leader complained about the “confrontational” U.S. attitude that is “geared to interference in our internal affairs,” according to a report of the meeting carried by Tass, the official Soviet news agency. And he added:

“We have so far been showing restraint. But if we reciprocate--and we can do so over a very wide range of issues--the atmosphere in Soviet-American relations can become such as will make it no longer possible to solve any further issues.”

Charles Redman, Shultz’s spokesman, refused to comment on the Gorbachev attack. He told an official at the U.S. Embassy here that he had “no comment” because he had not seen the text of the Tass article. But he also declined an invitation to read the article.

During a half-hour news conference, Shultz did not mention the Gorbachev diatribe, which occurred in a three-hour meeting in the Kremlin. Senior U.S. officials who briefed reporters after the Gorbachev meeting covered all details of the talks without a hint of the Soviet leader’s blistering remarks.

The high hopes once held for the summit, including a new strategic arms reduction agreement that would cut offensive nuclear forces by half, had been virtually ruled out by the lack of progress here during Shultz’s meetings. Both sides, without saying so explicitly, are now looking beyond the May 29-June 2 summit for completion of the START agreement, officials said privately.

The Soviet leader did end his complaints by saying he hoped that the top-level meeting with Reagan, the fourth in three years, would be held in spirit of mutual respect and realism.

Propaganda Campaign

The attack had some of the earmarks of a propaganda campaign and could have been intended to draw attention away from a leadership challenge that Gorbachev seemingly has recently faced from officials in the ruling Politburo.

But it was apparently the first time the Soviet leader delivered such a barrage mentioning Reagan by name. As such, it must raise some doubt about the ultimate success of the summit itself, whether it contains much substance or not.

The proximate cause of his outburst was recent speeches by Reagan in Las Vegas and Massachusetts in which the President turned back considerably toward his original hard-line rhetoric against the Soviet Union.

On Thursday, Reagan said that just as a Soviet Union “that continues to suppress free expression, religious worship and the right to travel” cannot develop normal relations with the United States, “neither can a Soviet Union that is always trying to push its way into other countries ever have a normal relationship with us.”

‘Sermons’ From Reagan

Gorbachev, in his meeting with Shultz, focused immediately on what content and atmosphere are needed for a successful summit in Moscow, Tass said. He complained that recently Reagan had been delivering “sermons” telling Moscow how to behave and criticizing all its foreign policies.

“Moreover, everything that has been achieved in Soviet-American relations is being ascribed to the policy of strength and putting pressure on the Soviets,” even while Washington tries to demonstrate strength in Nicaragua, the Persian Gulf and Panama, Gorbachev said.

Official U.S. statements count on “fundamental concessions by the USSR,” he said, and the various U.S.-Soviet negotiations, “including those connected with President Reagan’s visit to Moscow,” are slowing down.

New Visit, Old Arguments

When asked whether the next summit, the first visit to the Soviet Union by an American President in 15 years, would revert to old arguments, he replied:

“It is time to get rid of delusions that we are insisting on this (a restructuring of U.S.-Soviet relations) because of weakness, that because the position of the present Soviet leadership supposedly is unstable, it is interested in some foreign policy success, and for this reason is persuading the Americans to agree to cooperation.”

He added: “A real policy cannot be based on such absurdities. One can only miss the chance given by time to solve problems of world importance.”

Gorbachev then said that human rights had been discussed lately in a businesslike way, but he contended the U.S. approach remains confrontational. He then threatened to reciprocate over a wide range of issues, creating an atmosphere that would preclude further U.S.-Soviet cooperation.

Different Cultures, Values

“We should realize once and for all that the Soviet and American societies have different values and should not attempt to foist our customs and our ideas of what is good and what is bad on each other,” he said.

Before the Tass story was released, Shultz had focused on the positive developments in U.S.-Soviet relations since 1985 when challenged on the lack of advances at his meetings and prospects for relatively little significant achievement at the summit.

“We are determined to see the summit well prepared, with a solid component, reflecting the last 2 1/2 years of general improvement and more constructive trend in our relationship.”

He cited progress in talks on nuclear testing, chemical warfare and space defense issues in the arms arena, plus “worthwhile discussions” on regional issues, including the Middle East, specifically the Persian Gulf.

But U.S. officials later could point to few tangible gains from the talks, and those advances made were mainly procedural rather than substantive.