DECLASMMLU Authority 0 N0 FOREIGN DISSEM by To I The Secretary 1% Through 3 3 From I INR - Thomas L Hughes SubJeot Dobrynin's October 29 Oral Statement on Nonproliferation Dobrynin's October 29 statement to the Secretary appears to have been intended to renew Soviet pressure on Western decision- making rather than to address specific issues in nonproliferation talks Soviet editorialieto in recent days have anticipated the end of the pause in Western discussions of nuclear sharing arrange- ments and Dobynin's statement warning that a new sharing arrangement might make agreement on nonproliferation impossible seems intended to keep Soviet objections before American policy- makers while they prepare for renewed talks on NATO arrangements during Chancellor Erhard s visit and the forthcoming NATO Defense Mdnistere' meeting Dohrynin's statement that Moscow hoped the President personally would consider Soviet views may have been designed to remind high American officials or Koaygin'a suggestion to Governor Harriman that a nonproliferation agreement might be the basis for a productive summit meeting on neutral ground But Hescow was evidently not ready to commit that notion to paper even in eo ephemeral a docu- ment as Dohrynin's oral statement NO FOREIGN DISBEM GROUP 1' oluded from automatf downgrading and deolaesi cetion I DECLASSIFIED Aumorilyg m sacnsr LIMDIS NO FOREIGN moses commons DISSEM Presumably Mhscow will approach other western governments with parallel demarchee The subject is in all likelihood being raised with Couve during his current visit to the Soviet Union An approach to the British either before or during Foreign Secre- tary Stewart's proJected trip to Moscow is likely Whether Mbscou will um it has not to our knowledge done so for m approach Bonn directly remains to be seen Specific Issues Dobrynin introduced new uncertainties rather than clarified specific issues in US-Soviet bilateral talks on their respective draft treaties Indeed his emphasis upon the futility of nonproliferation talks if the US intended to go ahead with plans for a multilateral NATO force might be read as suggesting that Mhscou was backing away from the bilateral talks to which Grompko had agreed a month ago However in his subsequent conversation Dohrynin seamed to assume the bilateral talks would continue In what seemed a slight shirt from what Gromyko had said in his new Yerk talks with the Secretary Dobrynin referred to a NATO nuclear force rather than to the more specific term HEP as the main obstacle to agreement Growko had called it the only one Although both these slight amendments are a hit more accurate as descriptions of the Soviet position as it has emerged in recent months Dobrynin did little to answer some or the questions which the Soviet position has raised seem 1 1111313 no Possum DISSEM l mu Amhms maf H0 FOREIGN DISBEM - 3 Thus Dobrynin did not specifically address the idea of a NATO Special Committee on nuclear questions which has recently come in for renewed criticism by Soviet propagandists instead he merely referred to Soviet opposition to any forms and means or dissemination and to the plans for a multilateral nuclear force or other similar plans to bring nuclear weapons within the reach11 or West Germany He thus leaves open Moscow's appraisal of whether the Special Committee does or does not fit these Soviet strictures as something to be decided later The Soviet Ambassador was reluctant to talk about existing arrangements in either NATO or the Warsaw Pact Only when pressed by the Secretary's question did Dobrynin reply that if existing NATO arrangements provided for proliferation the Soviet union was against them That of course was a circular argument since the point at issue is the extremely broad and somewhat vague definition of proliferation in the Soviet draft treaty of September 24 Dobrynin's only hint that Moscow's definition might not be so sweeping as a reading of the Soviet draft treaty would indicate was his remark that In no way can we be blamed for taking any steps which even with a most fault-finding approach would look like dis- seminating nuclear weapons This was the most authoritative l Dobrynin did not explain whether or how the term within the reach might differ from the standard Soviet reference to access dostup to nuclear weapons Possibly it was nothing more than the Soviet Embassy's alternative translation NO FOREIGN DISSEM WFIED 3915 Autho ty w NO FOREIGN DISBEPVCONTROLIM DIS-SM - 4 - - answer we have had to date to American prodding on the question of Warsaw Pact nuclear arrangements On the race of it it is absurd For under the literal terms of the Soviet draft treaty the arrangement desoribed by a recently defeated East German private for rapid supply in the event of war or nuclear warheads by heli- copter for tactical missiles in East German hands would be ruled out Indeed so would East Gsrman and other bloc oountries' pos- session of such missiles Moreover the simulated nuclear exchange which the East German press described as the slime of the Warsaw Pact exorcise last month makes a public record of the fact that at least some information on the application or nuclear weapons has been disseminated in the Warsaw Pact Moreover the East German accounts do not specify that it was only the Soviet forces which fired nuclear weapons on behalf of the Warsaw Pant forces Polish missiles were at the exercise too If Dobrynin's remark is something besides mere affronterwt it is a suggestion that Moscow is prepared quietly to sink at some or the provisions or its draft treaty as they might apply to existing arrangements in the Horses Past and in NATO too On the other hand the Soviets it pressed may repeat Dohrynin's response that NATO arrangements are bad if they contribute to proliferation and perhaps go on to renew their old proposals for a dennclearised sons in Central Europe as the we to eliminate the problem or existing nuclear arrangements N0 FOREIGN Dreams commas DISSEM                     National Security Archive    Suite 701  Gelman Library  The George Washington University    2130 H Street  NW  Washington  D C  20037    Phone  202 994‐7000  Fax  202 994‐7005  nsarchiv@gwu edu