SALT II IN AMERICA'S BEST DEFENSE INTERESTS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP88-01315R000400380017-2
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 8, 2004
• Sequence Number: 17
• Publication Date: May 26, 1979
• Content Type: NSPR

Approved & f~+e 2~~'S/(~ 1F Ilk ~8~~ ~1 ~~ 0017 11 5,4 L- T__
Article appeared Z6 May 1979
on page 17C
r ins Buildup Dangerous
? The writer, a decorated Marine veteran, is the author of I
the book Militarism, U.S.A. and a consultant to the Center for
Gvferse nformation.
Ca!uyel, USMC Met.)
In addition to defending the United States from attack and
maintaining peace, a primary national security objective of the
Carter administration - as well as of Presidents Nixon and
Ford - has been to deter nuclear war with the Soviet Union.
In recent years as both nuclear superpowers have
strengthened their strategic nuclear arms, the responsible lead-
ers on both sides have become increasingly aware that a nu-
clear war would not only destroy their nations and cause hun-
dreds,-of millions of casualties in both the Soviet -Union and
North:' America, but also would be disastrous for much.-of the
world.
As a consequence, no sane national leader is likely to take
any action tnat would result in even one nuclear weapon being
directed at one of his nation's cities. Ten or 20 hostile nuclear
explosions would be an unprecedented calamity for any modern:
society.
Yet the United States and the Soviet Union now maintain
growing stockpiles of strategic nuclear warheads totaling over
11,fO9 weapons. The French, the British, the Chinese and possi-
bly L' rael and India have additional stocks of nuclear weapons,
and the future of mankind remains in mortal danger.
All other issues - political, social, economic or religious
now pale to insignificance in comparison to the right of the
world's people to live in safety and peace, free of the very real,-
threat of nuclear death and destruction.
President Carter always has stated his desire to reduce,
and eventually to eliminate, nuclear.weapons from the world's
arsenals. But the realities of international power, internal poll-.,
tics and the pressures of vested defense interests make modest
arms controls and limited reductions of strategic weapons the
only feasible objectives-at this time.
Our national strategic policy seeks to maintain essential
equivalence (or, rather, total equality) with the strategic power
of the Soviet Union. This means that the United States must.
maintain sufficient strategic forces to assure the destruction of
all important enemy targets. This capability must be perceived
by our potential enemies -and recognized by our dependent
allies.
We now have such capability and have had for many years
a more than adequate and realistic deterrent to any form of
nuclear attack upon either, the United States or our allies and
friends who depend upon the shield of our strategic nuclear
strength-
The United States now has a mighty, alert, highly trained
and capable variety of strategic forces, armed with over 9,500
nuclear weapons. The Soviet Union has some 5,000 strategic nu-
clear weapons they could In turn direct at the U.S. Both nations
are capable of assured destruction of each other.
In a nuclear war of any scale, despite the theories and
fantasies of some strategic planners and dreamers, there would
bbe no winner. Most responsible national officials now recognize
that the time is long overdue for the nuclear powers to stop the
arms race and to practice restraint and sanity in their rela
The Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty talks have been the
initial and tedious steps undertaken since 1969 by the United
States and the Soviet Union to limit strategic arms, as well as
to enhance.each nation's own national security. Both nations
realize the dangers of an uncontrolled arms buildup and, at the.
sar'e,_time,. both want to be certain that they are not being
placed: in a position of strategic inferiority.
Secretary of Defense Harold Brown has stated: "The Sovi-
ets have as great an interest and should have as great an inter-
est in strategic arms limitations as we do. It's in their security
interests as well as ours to hold down the level of strategic
arms because raising them by a notch so that they have more
and we have more than we do now, will not make either of us
more secure. It will make us less secure. Therefore, it's in their
own self-interest to proceed with the Strategic Arms Limitation-
Talks, and an agreement, and I have observed that they act in
their own interest."
.