ELECTIONS ’88 : ORANGE COUNTY : Times Questionnaire : Most Candidates Back INF Treaty

Leading Republican congressional candidates in the 40th and 42nd districts generally support ratification of the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces treaty that President Reagan presented to Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev in Moscow this week, according to a Times questionnaire and interviews Wednesday.

However, a few of the hopefuls voiced skepticism about Reagan’s comment Tuesday in Red Square that the Soviet Union no longer represents an “evil empire.”

Front-runners in the 40th District, C. Christopher Cox, Nathan Rosenberg and C. David Baker, voiced varying degrees of support for the INF treaty in a questionnaire distributed by The Times.

Cox’s Doubts Satisfied

Rosenberg said he supports the treaty. Both Cox and Baker said they also support the treaty, but with reservations regarding verification.

Cox, at a news conference at his campaign headquarters Wednesday, said his doubts have been satisfied.

Baker said he was concerned that the Soviets gave up something they never intended to use anyway. “The battle was really a public relations battle,” he said.

Rosenberg was enthusiastic in his support for Reagan’s trip to Moscow, predicting that the President would win the Nobel Peace Prize for the “improvement in U.S.-Soviet relations that both the INF treaty and the summit represent.”

Baker said he supported the President’s trip to Moscow because “it is important that East-West communication continues to grow.” But he said that he mistrusted Gorbachev.

“What I have said in the past is that Gorbachev is in many respects a Ronald Reagan counterpart,” the Irvine city councilman said. “He has this smiling and disarming charm that is a critical tool in the media these days. But I consider him much more dangerous than the growling Russian bear of the past.”

Two of the three candidates, meanwhile, appeared to part company over Reagan’s “evil empire” refutation.

Rosenberg said he agreed with Reagan that the Soviet Union no longer represents an “evil empire,” but added that “the Soviets can show good faith by withdrawing from Afghanistan.”

Baker, a member of the Irvine City Council, said he “would disagree with that statement” because of the Soviet Union’s involvement in Afghanistan and its support for the Sandinistas in Nicaragua.

“I would hardly call them an ally,” he said.

Cox, a former White House counsel who studied Russian at USC, was unavailable for comment later Wednesday.

Of the other candidates in the 40th District, eight replied on the Times questionnaire that they support ratification of the INF treaty. Those supporting the treaty are Democrats George Henry Margolis and Lida P. Lenney, and Republicans David M. Williams, John Kelly, Patricia Gunter Kishel and William Yacobozzi Jr.

John Hylton said he opposes ratification, and Larry F. Sternberg wrote that he had no position on the treaty because he lacked “sufficient detailed information on the subject.” Both are Republicans.

In the 42nd District, praise for Reagan’s performance in Moscow was enthusiastic from four of the leading candidates, all of whom support INF ratification without reservation.

“I have been extremely pleased with the President’s statesmanlike handling of the summit,” said Andrew Littlefair, a former White House advance man.

Stephen Horn, former president of Cal State Long Beach, called the summit “a major significant act of his presidency.”

Orange County Supervisor Harriett M. Wieder predicted that Reagan “will go down in history as a peacemaker and I think this summit is the beginning of that.”

Dana Rohrabacher, former White House speech writer, said he believes that “the President has maneuvered now with the Soviets and has spoken out eloquently on the issues of human rights.”

On Reagan’s “evil empire” pronouncement, however, there was some equivocation.

“I’m not so sure I agree,” said Wieder. “I’m wary.”

Rohrabacher said the Soviet Union “is still an evil empire until we see fundamental reform. Now the difference is there is reason for hope. . . . It is essentially an anti-democratic dictatorship and an anti-freedom society.”

Horn said he did not want to put the President’s change of heart “in those simple terms.”

“His original characterization (of the Soviet Union) had merit and a summit does not change that,” Horn said. “I think Americans have a tendency to be joyous too early too easily when there seems to be some glimmer of hope that you can get a reduction of arms.”

Littlefair said: “Whether or not they are not the evil empire, I don’t know. But we certainly should be pleased with the way they (the Soviets) are moving.”

All the other candidates in the 42nd District who responded to The Times’ questionnaire said they support ratification. They are Robert A. Welbourn and Tom Bauer, both Republicans; Ada Unruh and Guy C. Kimbrough, both Democrats; and Richard Rose, a Peace and Freedom candidate.

Times staff writer Ray Perez contributed to this story.