Bush Exploring Bold New Cuts in Long-Range Arms

Flushed with favorable reaction to his proposals to reduce conventional weaponry in Europe, President Bush is exploring radical new offers to slash long-range nuclear missiles when arms talks with the Soviet Union resume June 19, Administration and other arms experts said Thursday.

“The White House has the view that the bold, outside-the-bureaucracy approach paid off with the President’s proposal to NATO,” one Administration official said. “So it is intent on doing something bold in START.”

The Bush Administration recognizes that taking a radical new direction risks stalemating the strategic arms reduction talks (START), sources said. Under former President Ronald Reagan, negotiators in Geneva largely settled on new levels for many key nuclear weapons systems.

But Bush may be prepared to test whether Soviet President Mikhail S. Gorbachev, if pushed, is ready to make greater concessions than had been expected, much as he has in the conventional arms field.

The Administration also wants to put an identifiable Bush stamp on U.S. arms policies--to “Bush-ify” them, as one official said--by giving significantly greater focus to enhancing the nuclear balance rather than simply reducing the numbers of weapons.

Sometimes reductions do not enhance stability. Both Brent Scowcroft, Bush’s national security adviser, and his mentor, former Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger, for example, have warned that the START agreement could make U.S. land-based missiles more vulnerable to a Soviet surprise attack.

Some of the new ideas under consideration would seek to enhance stability by curbing fixed-base missiles carrying multiple warheads. These missiles, the most powerful and accurate in the U.S. and Soviet arsenals, are also the most useful to carry out a surprise attack. For that reason, they are also the most tempting targets for an enemy surprise attack.

“The Administration has been searching for new ideas for START almost from its inauguration,” said one expert who asked not to be named. “But since Brussels, the heat has turned up. They are sure looking hard for some gimmick.”

It was at a North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s summit meeting in Brussels last week that Bush advanced his proposals for conventional arms cuts.

Leading the search for new ideas has been Richard R. Burt, Bush’s choice, still unconfirmed by the Senate, to lead the U.S. delegation to the START talks.

The National Security Council plans to meet late next week to determine whether to pursue any or all of three possible major changes in the U.S. negotiating position at the START talks:

-- Eliminating all 308 of the Soviet Union’s biggest missiles, the SS-18, rather than half of them as the Soviets have now agreed. The United States has no missile of comparable size.

-- Banning multiple warheads on mobile, land-based missiles. The Soviets have 10-warhead missiles on railroad cars, while the Bush Administration has asked Congress for authority to deploy 50 MX missiles, with 10 warheads each, on rail cars.

-- Banning multiple warheads on all land-based missiles, both mobile and stationary.

The National Security Council also will consider some less drastic changes in the U.S. negotiating posture:

-- Raising the already-accepted ceiling of 1,600 missiles and bombers by 200 or more, without raising the total number of allowable warheads. More missiles and bombers reduce the likelihood of a surprise attack by making an attack less likely to wipe out the enemy’s nuclear force.

-- Banning the development and testing of “depressed trajectory” missiles, particularly submarine-launched missiles. Such weapons now take about 20 minutes of high-arching flight to reach their targets, but if maneuvered to fly lower, they could arrive with far less warning time.

Pressure on Administration

Bush’s proposals on conventional arms reductions, including his agreement to negotiate equal levels of aircraft and manpower deployed by NATO and the Soviet-led Warsaw Pact, have increased the pressure on his Administration to achieve reductions in nuclear arms.

“If you create great expectations for the conventional talks, as Bush has now done, and let down the fires under START, as now may happen, you may just get nothing during this Administration’s first term,” said Jack Mendelsohn, deputy director of the private Arms Control Assn.

Administration officials have lodged several objections to these innovations.

Some argue that the Soviets probably will refuse to eliminate all their SS-18s, particularly since they are beginning to deploy the fifth version of that gigantic weapon. If the Administration must later withdraw this demand, one Administration official said, Bush may again be “tagged as a wimp, as he was before Brussels.”

A broader objection is that any radical change in START could bring Soviet charges that Bush is reneging on deals made by Reagan. Early in 1977, when President Jimmy Carter’s new Administration proposed radical departures from earlier negotiations, it set back arms talks by two years.

Those who support offering bold departures respond that if Gorbachev balks, he will undercut his claim to “new thinking” on nuclear weapons. He, not Bush, would be held responsible for any resulting stalemate, they say.

Second, slowing the START talks would serve Bush’s emphasis on the conventional arms talks. He has argued that nuclear arms cuts should keep pace with reductions in tanks, armor and manpower in Europe, but not get out ahead.

Finally, Secretary of State James A. Baker III has said he finds little enthusiasm in Congress for ratifying a treaty reducing long-range nuclear weapons in the absence of major progress toward an agreement limiting conventional arms, where the Soviets now enjoy a clear advantage over the United States.

Baker, seeking Thursday to press the U.S. initiative in the conventional arms talks, called on Gorbachev to respond to Bush’s proposals by making new unilateral cuts in short-range nuclear forces.

“The time is ripe for Mr. Gorbachev to respond positively to the opportunities presented by NATO’s initiatives,” Baker said in a speech at the National Press Club. “Indeed, we look for him to do so when he travels to the Federal Republic of Germany next week.”

At last week’s NATO summit, Baker said, “we urged the Soviets to reduce unilaterally their short-range nuclear systems to our levels. Next week, General Secretary Gorbachev can sustain this new spirit by answering our call, by announcing a real cut in Soviet SNF (short-range nuclear) forces.”