Clear or Stormy Skies for the World?

President Reagan showed great sensitivity when he ended his New Year’s Day address to the Soviet people with a wish that the future hold “ chistoye nyebo (clear skies) for all mankind.” In using a Russian expression for peace, he highlighted the central issue that divides the United States and the Soviet Union in their differing views of the future.

Just what constitutes “clear skies”? We have learned that the President sees the skies as the home of “Star Wars,” a place where we will render nuclear weapons “impotent and obsolete” with “a non-nuclear defense system” that will “kill weapons, not people.” He described this appealing vision to Soviet citizens on Jan. 1 by stating his “hope that one day we will be able to eliminate these (nuclear weapons) altogether and rely increasingly for our security on defense systems that threaten no one.” He explained that one day his dream would “. . . free us all from the threat of nuclear destruction.”

It would seem difficult to reject this powerful vision of a world made safe by benign defenses in space, but this is precisely what Mikhail S. Gorbachev did in his address to American citizens. Although his words were carefully crafted and his tone was reasonable, his meaning was clear: “. . . it is senseless to seek greater security for oneself through new types of weapons . . . every new step in the arms race increases the danger and the risk for both sides, and for all humankind.” He then linked arms-reduction proposals to the issue of “clear skies” by saying that “. . . we should follow the path of cutting back nuclear arsenals and keeping outer space peaceful. This is what we are negotiating about at Geneva.” Nothing could be clearer. Gorbachev expressly rejected the concept that space bases will lead to clear skies. His latest speech simply adds emphasis to the Soviets’ consistent opposition to “Star Wars.” They do not see U.S. efforts in space as measures to create benign defenses that threaten no one.

Who is right? Perhaps it is helpful to look at the record of U.S. objectives in space as set forth by the current Administration. Consider Secretary of Defense Caspar W. Weinberger’s instructions to the armed forces: “(We) will accelerate those areas of technology offering the potential for significant military advantage and develop those space systems that have been shown to enhance the U.S. military balance of power.” He went on to say, “We must achieve capabilities to . . . deny the wartime use of space to adversaries . . . and apply military force from space if that becomes necessary.”

Air Force Gen. Robert T. Marsh testified in a congressional hearing that “we should move into war-fighting capabilities, space-to-space, space-to-ground.” There is little that is benign in preparations to apply superior war-fighting capabilities from space.

The thought of nuclear weapons in space is not reassuring, either, but just three days before the President spoke of non-threatening defenses we conducted the latest test in Nevada of a nuclear weapon designed specifically for use in space. The explosion was about five times as powerful as the Hiroshima bomb, and was part of a $280-million program funded with Strategic Defense Initiative money. Since Reagan told Gorbachev at the Geneva summit meeting that our space-based defense program is non-nuclear, it is not difficult to understand Soviet concerns about “clear skies” when we are actively testing nuclear weapons for use in space.

Reagan has also said, “I will be happy when the Soviets can shoot down our missiles just as we shoot down theirs.” He promises to share SDI technology with them to make it possible. At the same time, the Pentagon is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to design and test missiles (and bombers) that that will evade, deceive, outmaneuver or jam Soviet defense systems so that they cannot shoot down our attacking forces.

It is this tremendous gap between the purity of Reagan’s vision of a world free from the threat of nuclear destruction and the U.S. policies and programs seemingly designed to fill the skies with superior new weapons that genuinely concern the Soviets. If there are to be tangible results in successful Geneva talks this year, as Gorbachev called for in his TV address, there must be agreement on the peaceful use of space. There will be no arms reductions until we make progress on space issues.

Two practical, constructive steps toward that end would be early agreements to stop testing nuclear weapons and to preserve and strengthen the anti-ballistic missile treaty. These two agreements are achievable, verifiable and urgently needed as first steps to guarantee that both sides share a common understanding of how we move together toward a future of chistoye nyebo. The alternative is a world with very stormy skies.