SOVIET PUBLIC TREATMENT OF PRESIDENT REAGAN

• Document Type: FOIA
• Keywords: UFO SPECIAL COLLECTION
• Collection: FOIA Collection
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 0005517512
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 56
• Document Creation Date: June 24, 2015
• Document Release Date: January 31, 2011
• Case Number: F-2010-00651
• Publication Date: June 1, 1984

C00175644
Page: 1 of 92
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 1
Classification: UNCLASSIFIED Language:
Report Volume:
Dissemination: FOUO
FULL TEXT OF ARTICLE:
1. YYYY/SM84-030
2. Report Date: 01 Jun 84
3. Soviet Public Treatment of President Reagan
4. November 1980 - May 1984
5. Introduction
6. The treatment accorded an American president in Soviet
authoritative statements and media commentary can be a sensitive
barometer of Soviet expectations for Moscow's relations with
Washington. Historically, Soviet efforts to promote improved
relations have been accompanied by restraints on public criticism of
presidents and their policies. By the same token, harsh public
attacks on presidents have been made during periods when the Soviets
seemed to believe that no improvement in relations was possible or
advantageous.
7. Soviet public treatment of President Reagan has proved to be no
exception to this pattern. Twice since November 1980 Moscow has
significantly moderated its propaganda line to test the prospects for
reduced bilateral tensions. Commentary during the last two months
has been harsh, however, and gives no hint that a third Soviet effort
of this sort is in the offing.
8. Pattern of Statements
9. The first Soviet effort to improve relations with the current
Administration came immediately after the November 1980 elections.
Soviet media pictured President-elect Reagan in positive terms,
asserting that he had moderated anti-Soviet views expressed during
the campaign and raising the possibility that he would reverse the
deterioration in bilateral relations that had occurred during the
period of the Carter Administration. Faced with continued criticism
after the Administration took office, Moscow abandoned such professed
optimism in low-level media comment, resorting to strident censure of
the Administration and to direct, if somewhat less harsh, attacks on
the President himself. Soviet political leaders continued to abide
by their normal strictures against attacking a U.S. president
directly, although by May 1981 they were strongly indicting President
Reagan's policies.
3io
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED Approved or Release
a o/c
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 2 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 2
10. This pattern of leadership and media comment continued until
Brezhnev's death in November 1982. It was broken only by a
month-long interlude of more moderate comment late in 1981, after
agreement was reached to begin talks on limiting intermediate-range
nuclear forces (INF) and before U.S. sanctions were adopted in
response to the imposition of martial law in Poland.
11. A second, more tentative Soviet effort to promote improved
U.S.-Soviet relations came after Andropov's accession to power.
Soviet leaders and specialists on the United States muted their
anti-U.S. rhetoric, which had become particularly harsh in the last
months of the Brezhnev regime, and expressed receptivity to any U.S.
gestures for improved relations. This selective restraint on
criticism--routine Soviet propaganda was little affected--lasted only
from November 1982 until early spring 1983, when contention over INF
and other issues took its toll.
12. In the aftermath of the shooting down of a South Korean airliner
last September, Soviet leadership statements and media commentary on
the President became more abusive than at any time in the last two
decades. This harsh rhetoric continued into 1984. Only in the final
days of the Andropov regime did Soviet leaders appear to indicate a
desire to lower the decibel level of their polemics against the
President. The usual strident invective was missing from Andropov's
25 January Pravda interview in response to President Reagan's 16
January speech expressing interest in U.S.-Soviet dialogue, and
routine Soviet propaganda became marginally less sharp in its
criticism of the President.
13. Although Chernenko's accession to power in February 1984 brought
a brief period of moderation in Soviet leadership polemics against
the President and his Administration, this restraint disappeared more
quickly than had been the case after Brezhnev's death. As early as
23 February a Pravda article by Defense Minister Ustinov excoriated
"U.S. leaders" for pushing mankind "toward a nuclear catastrophe." By
late March, even Chernenko, the Soviet leader who had been least
critical of the United States in February and early March, began
attacking the Administration in harsh terms. Routine Soviet
propaganda also became more strident, and in the last two months some
commentary has approached the level of abusiveness that was common
last fall.
14. Different Voices
15. Soviet statements about the Administration are made at three
levels of authority: the top political leadership, midlevel officials
with ties to the leadership, and routine media commentators. The
behavior pattern of each of these groups has distinguishing features:
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
CO0175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 3 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 3
16. + Although it authorized media attacks on the President, the
leadership itself conspicuously avoided attacking him directly until
1983, thereby observing its traditional posture of standing aloof
from the extremes of the polemical fray. Even in his strongest
criticisms of U.S. policy, Brezhnev attacked U.S. "ruling circles,"
"Washington," and "the line of the United States and those who follow
it" without naming the President. The Soviet leadership broke this
pattern last September in the wake of U.S. charges that the Soviet
Union had knowingly shot down a passenger airliner. Andropov's
January Pravda interview and statements coming after his death have
returned to the more familiar pattern of sharply attacking the
Administration but avoiding the extremes witnessed last fall.
17. + Midlevel officials and political commentators (for example,
Aleksandr Bovin, Georgiy Arbatov, Vadim Zagladin, and Nikolay
Shishlin) have been less restrained than the leaders in blaming the
President for the U.S. policies they have so sharply condemned. They
have also provided the most sensitive indicator of changing Soviet
perceptions about the direction of bilateral relations, registering
in their comments apparent fluctuations in Soviet expectations
regarding U.S.-Soviet cooperation.
18. + Routine media commentary has been the least sensitive
barometer of changes in the atmosphere of U.S.-Soviet relations.
When President Reagan was elected, this low-level propaganda was more
optimistic than some Soviet political observers. But as Soviet
assessments of Administration policy toward the Soviet Union
hardened, the propaganda assumed a hostile tone which has continued
despite some fluctuations in intensity.
19. * * * * * * *
20. This report presents a compilation of significant Soviet
statements about President Reagan from the time of his election in
November 1980 through May 1984. It is intended to provide a
comparative baseline for use by analysts in judging future Soviet
statements about the President. The compilation of statements is FOR
OFFICIAL USE ONLY.
21. Soviet Statements on President Reagan
22. November 1980 - May 1984
23. This compilation is divided into two parts. The first section
presents authoritative statements, including those by top political
leaders. The second presents assessments by well-connected midlevel
officials and a small sampling of routine Soviet media commentaries.
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
CO0175644
Page: 4 of 92
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 4
24. Authoritative Statements
25. Midlevel and Routine Media Commentary
26. Authoritative Statements
27. Premier Nikolay Tikhonov, October Revolution anniversary speech
(Pravda, 7 Nov 80)
28. Regarding our relations with the United States of America, just
as with any other country which belongs to a different social system,
they can only be built up on the basis of equality, noninterference
in internal affairs, not causing harm to the security of one another.
? ? ?
29. I would like to express the hope that the new Administration in
the White House will manifest a constructive approach to questions or
relations between our countries.
30. General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev, Kremlin dinner speech
(Pravda, 18 Nov 80)
31. Much in the development of the international situation will, of
course, depend on the position of the United States. A new president
has now been elected there. I shall not dwell on what was said by
him and his supporters and opponents in the heat of the election
struggle. I can only state with full responsibility that any
constructive steps by the U.S. Administration in the field of
Soviet-American relations and urgent world problems will meet with a
positive response on our part.
32. TASS statement (Pravda, 3 Feb 81)
33. Soviet leading circles have taken note of a new anti-Soviet
hostile campaign.being unfolded in the United States. This time they
ascribe to the Soviet Union involvement in "international terrorism."
Such inventions could be simply ignored as a new primitive trick by
professional anti-Soviets if not for the fact that this campaign was
started by high-ranking officials of the American Administration
including U.S. Secretary of State A. Haig. His statements, made at a
press conference on 28 January this year, and subsequent additional
comments made by another official representative of the U.S. State
Department, clearly indicate that this is not a matter of some
occasional unhappy expression but a deliberate political subversion.
? ? ?
34. Soviet leading circles would like to hope that they in
Washington will give serious thought as to what the continuation
there of the campaign hostile to the Soviet Union can lead and will
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
Page: 5 of 92
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page
take measures to stop it.
35. Brezhnev, speech to 26th CPSU Congress (Pravda, 24 Feb 81)
36. Unfortunately, the previous Washington Administration by no
means considered the development of relations and of mutual
understanding. Attempting to exert pressure on us, it began to
destroy all the positive results which had been scored with no little
difficulty in Soviet-American relations over the preceding years. . .
5
37. Even after the change of leadership in the White House, candidly
bellicose calls and statements are being heard from Washington, calls
and statements which seem to be specially intended to poison the
atmosphere of relations between our countries. In any case, we would
like to hope that those who now determine U.S. policy will ultimately
be able to look at things more realistically. . . .
38. The present state of relations between us and the sharpness of
international problems demanding solution dictate the need for
dialogue at all levels and, what is more, an active dialogue. We are
ready for dialogue. Experience shows that the decisive link here is
meetings at the highest level.
39. Brezhnev, speech in Kiev (Pravda, 10 May 81)
40. There are quite a few sober-minded people among those who today
shape the policy of capitalist countries. They understand that the
emphasis on strength, the emphasis on war in relations with the
socialist world is madness in our day and age, that there is only one
reasonable road--peaceful coexistence, mutually advantageous
cooperation.
41. But there are also such statesmen in the bourgeois world who,
judging by everything, are accustomed to thinking only in terms of
strength and diktat. They actually regard the attainment of military
superiority over the Soviet Union as their main political credo. The
solution of international problems by way of talks and mutually
advantageous agreements appears to be way down their list of
priorities, if they give serious thought to this at all.
42. Among them there are also those who openly state that peace is
not the most important matter, that there are things more important
than peace.
43. Just think, comrades: Can one imagine a more horrendous
position, a more cynical disregard for the destinies of peoples,
including one's own people, for the lives of hundreds of millions of
people! . . .
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 6 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 6
44. This is not to mention how absurd are any plans which are
intended by means of threats, economic blockade or military
aggression to impede the development of socialist countries or the
struggle of peoples for national freedom and social justice. . . .
45. As for the Soviet Union, it is not the first time that we are
hearing inventions about our policy, slander, and threats. But we do
not give in to intimidations.
46. Marshal Viktor Kulikov, first deputy minister of defense, and
commander in chief of the Joint Armed Forces of the Warsaw Pact
Nations (Krasnaya Zvezda, 21 Jun 81)
47. If you look at the statements of the leaders of the present U.S.
Administration, you cannot help noticing in them a similarity with
the aims set by the Hitlerite leadership in attacking the Soviet
Union. Speaking at Notre Dame in June, R. Reagan said: "The West
will outlive communism. . . . We will write it off as a sad,
unnatural chapter in the history of mankind."
48. Defense Minister Dmitriy Ustinov (Pravda, 25 Jul 81)
49. The ruling circles of Washington have decided to overturn all
the positive elements in Soviet-American relations achieved during
the seventies and to break down the approximate eqiiiiiy in the
military sphere between the USSR and the United States.
50. Without putting forward any positive initiatives the Reagan
Administration has taken a standpoint of unconcealed anti-Sovietism.
At the same time it is grossly interfering in the affairs of other
states and is high-handedly dictating its demands to them. . . .
51. The ruling circles of the United States are intensifying
international tension and exacerbating Soviet-American relations. .
. .
52. Washington, once again, as a decade ago, is trying to speak to
the Soviet Union in the language of "cold war." At the same time, its
disregard for agreements which were reached between our two countries
in the field of arms restriction is demonstrated. A. Haig states:
"We are not very concerned about the understandings of 1972, although
they were agreed by both sides."
53. Brezhnev, interview with Der Spiegel (Pravda, 3 Nov 81)
54. Unfortunately, the leading powers of the West, above all, the
NATO bloc, do not show so far a serious interest in talks on all of
these questions that are vital to mankind and its peaceful future.
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
000175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 7 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 7
Some people there are by far more willing to speak not on detente,
but on confrontation; not on peaceful mutually beneficial
cooperation, but on the use of trade to military-strategic ends; not
on agreements on the basis of equality and equal security, but on
diktat from the positions of military supremacy; not on the
elimination by joint efforts of seats of conflicts, but on the
creation of ever new military bases, on the buildup of their military
presence in various parts of the world; not on curbing the arms race,
but on "rearmament"; not on a limitation or prohibition of some or
other types of weapons, but on the creation of ever new, even more
destructive means of mass annihilation of people.
55. This way, unfortunately, they not only speak, but also act in
practice. You, certainly, understand that I have in mind, above all,
the policy of the present U.S. Administration, the way it was
manifest both in statements by high-ranking statesmen of that country
and, which is even more important, in their practical deeds.
56. All of it is actually an opposite to detente, blunt disregard
for the striving of all peoples for lasting peace. And it is,
certainly, profoundly deplorable that the leaders of one of the
world's biggest powers have deemed it possible to build their policy
on such a basis. . . .
57. President Reagan has recently expressed the readiness of the
United States to discuss with the Soviet Union also other probIims,
which cause differences between the two countries. We welcome such
readiness, as we have always considered talks to be the most
appropriate method of resolving international problems. The main
thing, of course, is that appropriate practical deeds should be
matched to correct words.
58. And it would be better to abandon dreams of ensuring military
supremacy over the USSR.
59. Ustinov, October Revolution anniversary speech (Pravda, 7 Nov
81)
60. The Washington Administration is with increasing frequency
resorting to frankly inflammatory language. High-ranking U.S.
representatives, with cynical disregard for the fate of the peoples,
state that there are allegedly some things more important than peace.
? ? ?
61. The preservation of peace is inseparable from the curbing of the
arms race--from stage-by-stage disarmament. Important steps in that
direction were taken in the seventies. But the present U.S.
Administration is intent on casting doubt on all the positive things
that have been jointly achieved in the field of Soviet-U.S.
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
CO0175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 8
relations. It openly declares its intention to speak to the Soviet
Union from positions of strength.
62. TASS statement on U.S. stance on Poland (Pravda, 14 Jan 82)
63. The United States and its NATO allies are continuing attempts at
crudely interfering in the internal affairs of a sovereign state--the
Polish People's Republic, at whipping up international tensions.
This has been most clearly revealed also in the statement, which was
issued on 11 January by the foreign ministers of the North Atlantic
Alliance.
Page: 8 of 92
64. It is well known that the whole of this disgraceful farce has
been initiated by the U.S. Administration. Its style is felt both in
the impudent distortion of facts, the high-handed tones, and
excessive political ambitions.
65. Yes, Washington makes no little effort to try to bring abut a
turnaround in international politics from detente to confrontation
between blocs. Why is it done? It is not too difficult to answer
this question.
66. What it amounts to is above all an attempt at crowding socialism
and impairing the positions of the USSR and other socialist countries
on the European and world scene. Certain figures of the imperialist
camp are day and night beset by nightmares because socialism is
growing stronger. The international positions of socialism rely on
the existing balance of forces in Europe and in the world, and are
guaranteed by the might of the socialist community.
67. Marshal Nikolay Ogarkov, first deputy minister of defense and
chief of the General Staff (Always In Readiness To Defend The
Homeland, Moscow: Voenizdat, approved for publication 26 Jan 82)
68. World imperialism, and particularly U.S. imperialism, is seeking
to extend its tentacles into every part of the world. Militant U.S.
circles have openly adopted a course of policy aimed at undermining
detente, engagement in a massive arms race, and active preparations
for nuclear war. The various actions and acts of sabotage against
the USSR and the other nations of the socialist community and against
progressive forces throughout the world which they are presently
conducting are of a coordinated nature and are joined together by a
common scheme. The main goal which the U.S. imperialists have set
for themselves is gradually and sequentially to weaken and undermine
socialism as a system, using any and all methods and means, and
ultimately to establish their world domination.
69. This is not a new phenomenon. History has seen many claimants
to world domination. Napoleon persistently sought to achieve world
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
CO0175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 9 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 9
domination, as did Hitler at a later time. The outcome of their
ambitions is well known. An even harsher outcome may await these
latter-day claimants.
70. Brezhnev, Soviet Trade Union Congress speech (Pravda, 17 Mar 82)
71. The newly fledged devotees of cold war and dangerous balancing
on the brink of a real war would like nothing better than to tear up
the legal and ethical norms of relations between states that have
taken shape over the centuries and to cancel their independence and
sovereignty. They are trying to retailor the political map of the
world and have declared large regions on all continents as zones of
their "vital interests." They have arrogated the "right" to command
some countries and to judge and "punish" others. Unembarrassed, they
publicly announce, and try to carry out, plans for economic and
political "destablization" of governments and states that are not to
their liking. With unexampled cynicism they gloat over difficulties
experienced by this or that nation. They are trying to substitute
"sanctions" and blockades for normal communications and international
trade, and endless threats of armed force, not short of threats to
use nuclear weapons, for contacts and negotiations.
72. It is simply astonishing to see it all. And you cannot help
asking yourself: What is there more of in this
policy--thoughtlessness and lack of experience in international
affairs, or irresponsibility and, to say it bluntly, an adventurist
approach to problems crucial for the destiny of mankind? Not in our
country, but in the columns of respectable organs of the U.S.
bourgeois press this policy was described as "a course to political
disaster." It is hard to deny the validity of this description.
73. Brezhnev, Pravda interview (Pravda, 18 Apr 82)
74. I already spoke on the value of an active dialogue with the
United states at all levels, especially emphasizing that the decisive
link here is summit-level meetings. Today we also support such
meetings. It is understandable that a meeting between the U.S.
President and myself must be well prepared and conducted properly,
not just in passing in connection with some international forum or
other.
75. Yuriy Andropov, Politburo member and chairman of the KGB, Lenin
anniversary speech (Pravda, 23 Apr 82)
76. The imperialist bourgeoisie, frightened by the upsurge of the
antiwar movements, is making ever-wider use of the weapons of lies
and sophisticated deception. What is Washington doing now? One
hysterical propaganda campaign replaces the other. People are at one
moment being persuaded of a Soviet military threat, then lied to
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
000175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 10 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 10
unscrupulously about the lagging behind of the United States,
intimidated with international terrorism, fed cock-and-bull stories
about events in Poland, Central America, South and Southeast Asia. .
77. Attempts are made to make use of diplomatic talks themselves in
order to deceive the public, among them talks on the limitation of
arms and on disarmament. The impression is created that often they
are entered into only to create illusions and, by lulling public
vigilance, continue the arms race. . . .
78. Brezhnev, Komsomol congress speech (Pravda, 19 May 82)
79. President Reagan, on his part, has now declared that the United
States is ready for the resumption of the talks. In our opinion,
this is a step in the right direction. It is, however, important
that the talks should begin immediately in the right key.
80. In the same speech the President said that the United States at
the talks would be in favor of substantial reductions. Well, we have
always been in favor of substantial reductions of strategic arms;
there is no need to persuade us in this respect.
81. But if one looks at the essence of the ideas voiced by the U.S.
President on such reductions, one notes unfortunately that the
American position is absolutely unilateral in nature. Above all,
because the United States would like in general to exclude from the
talks the strategic arms it is now most intensively developing.
82. Brezhnev, speech at Kremlin meeting of military commanders
(Pravda, 28 Oct 82)
83. The ruling circles of the United States of America have launched
a political, ideological, and economic offensive on socialism and
have raised the intensity of their military preparations to an
unprecedented level. . . .
84. The masses of people on all continents angrily protest against
Washington's aggressive policy which is threatening to push the world
into the flames of a nuclear war. The adventurism, rudeness, and
undisguised egoism of this policy arouse growing indignation in many
countries, including those allied with the United States. . . .
85. TASS report of 15 November 1982 meeting between General
Secretary Andropov and Vice President Bush (Pravda, 16 Nov 82)
86. In this respect Yu. V. Andropov stressed that the Soviet Union,
consistently carrying out a policy of peace, is prepared to build
relations with the United States on a basis of full equality,
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
CO0175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 11 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 11
noninterference, mutual respect in the interests of the peoples of
both countries, and normalization lozdorovleniyel of the
international situation.
87. Tikhonov, Kremlin dinner speech to U.S. trade delegation
(Pravda, 19 Nov 82)
88. We are meeting with you at a time which is not the best for
Soviet-American relations. Their climate has considerably cooled
and, to be frank, not through our fault.
89. The official stand taken in the United States towards the Soviet
Union, naturally, is also reflected in trade between our countries.
All sorts of discriminatory measures, attempts to use various
sanctions, embargoes, etc., against our country do not, of course,
inspire kind feelings, but rather undermine the confidence of Soviet
foreign trade organizations in the American market. . . .
90. The Soviet Union has been and is for normal, and even better,
friendly relations with the United States. There were such relations
in the past, and they can again become a reality. This would meet
the interests of our countries and the interests of universal peace.
I am confident that this is precisely what our peoples wish. They
wish lasting peace and mutually beneficial cooperation.
91. Andropov, speech at CPSU Central Committee plenum (Pravda, 23
Nov 82)
92. All are equally interested in preserving peace and detente.
Therefore, statements in which the readiness for normalizing
relations is linked with the demand that the Soviet Union pay for
this with preliminary concessions in different fields do not sound
serious, to say the least. We shall not agree to this and, properly
speaking, we have nothing to cancel: We did not introduce sanctions
against anyone, we did not denounce treaties and agreements that were
signed, and we did not interrupt talks that were started. I should
like to stress once more that the Soviet Union stands for accord but
this should be sought on the basis of reciprocity and equality.
93. In our opinion the point of talks with the United States and
other Western countries, primarily on questions of restraining the
arms race, does not lie in the statement of differences. For us
talks are a way of joining efforts by different states in order to
achieve results useful to all sides. The problems will not disappear
by themselves if the talks are held for the sake of talks, as it
unfortunately happens not infrequently. We are for the search on a
healthy basis, acceptable to the sides concerned, for a settlement of
the most complicated problems, especially, of course, the problems of
curbing the arms race, involving both nuclear and conventional arms.
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
CO0175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 12 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 12
But let no one expect unilateral disarmament from us. We are not
naive people.
94. We do not demand unilateral disarmament from the West. We are
for equality, for consideration for the interests of both sides, for
honest agreement. We are ready for this.
95. Ustinov, TASS interview (Pravda, 7 Dec 82)
96. !President Reagan] said in his speech of 22 November that the
Soviet Union now has a clear margin in practically any type of
military power. Such assertions are not in keeping with reality.
They are calculated at deceiving the public and have the purpose of
justifying the United States' unprecedented military programs and
aggressive doctrines. It is regrettable that such attempts to
convince people of the existence of what does not exist in nature are
made by the leader of a great power whose very position presupposes
realism and responsibility in assessing reality. . . .
97. At the same time, the President's speech contains an attempt to
sow distrust in the Soviet Union's stand. He stated that the Soviet
Union violates the unilateral moratorium it announced on the
deployment of its medium-range missiles in the European part of the
USSR. I state quite definitely that the USSR is true to its word.
98. Andropov, Pravda interview responding to President Reagan's Open
Letter (Pravda, 2 Feb 83)
99. I must say quite definitely that there is nothing new in
President R. Reagan's proposal. What it is all about--and this all
the world's news agencies have immediately taken note of--is the same
"zero option." That it is patently unacceptable to the Soviet Union
now is already generally recognized. Really, can one seriously speak
about a proposal according to which the Soviet Union would have to
scrap unilaterally all its medium-range missiles, while the United
States and its NATO allies would retain all their nuclear weapons of
this category?
100. It is precisely this unrealistic position of the United States
that has blocked, and this is well known, progress at the talks in
Geneva. That now the U.S. President has reiterated again this
position indicates one thing: The United States does not want to look
for a mutually acceptable accord with the Soviet Union and thereby
deliberately dooms the Geneva talks to failure. . . .
101. .We have believed and still believe that summit meetings have
special significance to resolving complicated problems. This
determines our serious approach to them.
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
000175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 13
of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 13
102. For us this is not a matter of a political or a propaganda
game. A meeting between the leaders of the USSR and the United
States aimed at finding mutually acceptable solutions to urgent
problems and at developing relations between our countries would be
useful both to the Soviet Union and to the United States of America,
to Europe, and to the whole world.
103. But when the U.S. President makes the meeting conditional on
the Soviet Union's consent to the patently unacceptable solution to
the problem of nuclear armaments in Europe, proposed by him, this by
no means testifies to the seriousness of the American leadership's
approach to the whole of this issue. This can only be regretted.
104. Andropov, Pravda interview (Pravda, 27 Mar 83)
105. The President pretends that almost a thousand medium-range
nuclear systems of the United States and its NATO allies do not
ostensibly exist in the zone of Europe, and that it is unknown to him
that NATO has a 1.5-1 advantage over the USSR in the aggregate number
of nuclear warheads on those systems.
106. The President not only keeps silent about all that. He tells a
deliberate untruth [on govorit zavedomuyu nepravdu], asserting that
the Soviet Union does not observe its own unilateral moratorium on
the deployment of medium-range missiles. . . .
107. The incumbent U.S. Administration continues to tread an
extremely perilous path. The issues of war and peace must not be
treated so flippantly. All attempts at achieving military
superiority over the USSR are futile. . . . It is time they stopped
devising one option after another in search of the best ways of
unleashing nuclear war in the hope of winning it. Engaging in this
is not just irresponsible, it is insane.
108. Andropov, speech to CPSU Central Committee plenum (Pravda, 16
Jun 83)
109. This period is marked by a confrontation, unprecedented in the
entire post-war period by its intensity and sharpness, of two
diametrically opposite world outlooks, two political
courses--socialism and imperialism. A struggle is going on for the
minds and hearts of billions of people in the world. And the future
of mankind depends in no small measure on the outcome of this
ideological struggle. . . . It is no less important to skillfully
expose the lying, subversive nature of imperialist propaganda. . .
110. On the one hand, as has already been said, the aggressiveness
of ultrareactionary forces led by U.S. imperialism has sharply
increased. Attempts are being made to reverse the course of events
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
CO0175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 14 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 14
at all costs. Of course, this policy will not bring imperialists
success but, being adventuristic, it is extremely dangerous to
mankind. This is why it is meeting with powerful opposition on the
part of the peoples, which, undoubtedly, will grow even further.
111. In the present-day capitalist world, however, there are also
other trends and other politicians who take a more realistic account
of the international situation.
112. Foreign Minister Andrey Gromyko, TASS interview (Pravda, 22 Jun
83)
113. Naturally, a [summit] meeting which could produce major results
for both bilateral Soviet-U.S. relations and the international
situation would be useful.
114. Quite a few words are now being said in the Vest, particularly
in Washington, about a Soviet-American summit. An outsider can even
get the impression that Washington is indeed giving serious thought
to such a meeting. But if we look into the crux of the matter, the
situation, regrettably, is different.
115. Obviously, proper preconditions are needed to hold a meeting of
the top leaders of the two major powers. First, it is necessary to
have a certain degree of mutual understanding on major issues which
are fundamental to the state of relations between the two countries
and the overall international situation. There also is a need for
the desire of both sides actually to strive for positive
developments, or even better, for a breakthrough in their mutual
relations.
116. If we consider the state of affairs from this point of view, it
becomes clear that the discourses of American figures on a meeting
are not backed by anything. U.S. policy on relations with the Soviet
Union does not pursue any constructive goals at all, of which
American leaders make no secret. Moreover, it is oriented in the
totally opposite direction.
117. When there appear in American politics real signs of a
readiness to conduct affairs in a serious and constructive manner,
the question of the possibility of a summit will appear in a
different light.
118. TASS statement on Korean airliner incident (Pravda, 3 Sep 83)
119. The intrusion into Soviet airspace by the aforementioned plane
cannot be regarded in any other way than a preplanned act. It was
obviously thought possible to attain special intelligence aims
without hindrance using civilian planes as a cover.
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 15 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 15
120. More than that, there is reason to believe that those who
organized this provocation deliberately desired a further aggravation
of the international situation striving to smear the Soviet Union, to
sow hostility towards it and to cast aspersions on the Soviet
peace-loving policy.
121. This is illustrated also
in respect to the Soviet Union
Reagan of the United States.
122. USSR Government statement
7 Sep 83)
by the impudent, slanderous statement
that was made instantly by President
on Korean airliner incident (Pravda,
123. The assertion of the U.S. President that Soviet pilots knew
that it was a civilian aircraft are absolutely not in keeping with
reality. . . .
124. It is the sovereign right of every state to protect its
borders. . . . So the U.S. President makes himself out as an
ignoramus saying, as he did in his address on 5 September, that the
Soviet Union "arbitrarily proclaims" its borders in the airspace
[sic].
125. But the point here, of course, is not the ignorance of one U.S.
official or another. The point is a deliberate preplanned action in
an area that is strategically important to the Soviet Union. The
instigators of that action could not help realizing what its outcome
could be, but went ahead with a major intelligence operation with the
use, as is now becoming clear, of a civilian plane, deliberately
exposing its passengers to mortal danger. . . .
126. This conclusion is confirmed by all subsequent actions of the
U.S Administration. Its leaders, including the U.S. President,
launched a malicious and hostile anti-Soviet campaign over a very
short time, clearly using a prearranged script. Its essence has been
revealed in its most concentrated form in the televised speech of
U.S. President R. Reagan on 5 September--to try to blacken the image
of the Soviet Union and discredit its social system, to provoke a
feeling of hatred toward the Soviet people, to present the aims of
the USSR foreign policy in a distorted perspective, and to distract
attention from its peace initiatives.
127. The entire responsibility for this tragedy rests wholly and
fully with the leaders of the United States of America.
128. Ogarkov, article (Izvestiya, 23 Sep 83)
129. The struggle for peace in our times has acquired special
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
000175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 16 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 16
significance. That is due primarily to the sharply enhanced
Aggressiveness of international imperialism, Zionism, and reaction
headed by the United States. In recent years their actions have been
significantly reminiscent of fascism's actions in the thirties.
Having adopted flagrant lies and slander, the United States and its
allies have launched a global offensive against socialism on all
fronts, initiating, as they openly assert, a new "crusade" against
us. The Washington Administration is nurturing sinister plans.
Expatiating on its alleged adherence to peace, the U.S.
Administration, through its defense secretary, blasphemously states
that "the path to peace is marked by preparation for war." The
"Directive in the Defense Field for Fiscal 1984," drafted on
instructions from the U.S. President, is evidence of how far the U.S.
"hawks" have gone. This official document sets as its main aim "the
destruction of socialism as a sociopolitical system." That's all!
There is no need to explain this gibberish. Commentary is
superfluous, as they say. We can only marvel at the sheer ignorance
and self-sufficiency of the transatlantic strategists, so infinitely
far removed from a knowledge of the elementary foundations and laws
of the development of human society.
130. Andropov, statement (Pravda, 29 Sep 83)
131. The Soviet leadership deems it necessary to inform the Soviet
people, other peoples, and all who are responsible for determining
states' policy of its assessment of the course pursued-Im-
international affairs by the current U.S. Administration.
132. In short, it is a militarist course that represents a serious
threat to peace. Its essence is to try to ensure a dominating
position in the world for the United States of America regardless of
the interests of other states and peoples. . . .
133. When the U.S. President bombastically declares from the UN
rostrum his commitment to the cause of peace, self-determination, and
sovereignty of the peoples, these rhetorical declarations can
convince no one.
134. If anyone has any illusions about the possibility of an
evolution for the better in the present American Administration's
policy, recent events have dispelled them once and for all. The
Administration is going so far for the sake of achieving its imperial
objectives that one cannot help doubting whether any restraints
[tormozal at all exist for Washington to prevent it from crossing a
line before which any thinking person ought to stop.
135. The sophisticated provocation organized by the U.S. special
services using a South Korean plane is also an example of extreme
adventurism in policy. . . .
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
CO0175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 17 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 17
136. In their endeavor somehow to justify their dangerous,
misanthropic policy, they are heaping mountains of slander on the
Soviet Union and socialism as a social system, and the tone is being
set by the U.S. President himself. It must be frankly said that it
is an unseemly spectacle when, having set themselves the aim of
denigrating the Soviet people, the leaders of a country like the
United States resort to what is virtually foul-mouthed abuse mingled
with hypocritical sermons on morality and humanity. . . .
137. Nov Washington, in addition to morality, is also flouting
elementary rules of decency, displaying disrespect not only for
statesmen and states but also for the United Nations. . . .
138. Of course, malicious attacks on the Soviet Union arouse in us a
natural sense of indignation, but we have strong nerves, and we do
not build our policy on emotions. It is founded on common sense,
realism, and profound responsibility for the destiny of peace.
139. Ustinov, article (Pravda, 19 Nov 83)
140. The aggressiveness of ultrareactionary imperialist forces
increased sharply when the R. Reagan Administration came to power in
the United States. They have declared a "crusade" against socialism.
141. The R. Reagan Administration, in blatant contradiction with
this commitment, is now stating its "right" to inflict a first
nuclear strike in the hope of victory. . . .
142. The Washington Administration's war preparations are
accompanied by shameless anti-Soviet hysteria. Discarding all
decency, top U.S. officials are slandering the USSR, its people and
policy, and the socialist way of life. Lies, disinformation,
juggling with facts, and provocations are being brought into play.
It is with the aid of such methods that Washington figures, heating
up the international situation, are counting on ensuring the
unobstructed implementation of their course aimed at an unrestrained
arms race. This policy on the part of the White House leaders does
not consist solely of emotions or rhetoric. It is a consciously and
coldly and deliberately implemented long-term strategy aimed at
broadening confrontation and thus increasing the danger of war.
143. Andropov, statement (Pravda, 25 Nov 83)
144. The leadership of the Soviet Union has already apprised Soviet
people and other peoples of its assessment of the present U.S.
Administration's militarist course and warned the U.S. Government and
the Western countries which are in agreement with it about the
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 18 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 18
dangerous consequences of that course. . ? ?
145. The Soviet leadership appeals to the leaders of the United
States and of the states of West Europe to weigh up once again all
the consequences with which the implementation of the plans for the
deployment of the new U.S. missiles in Europe threatens their own
peoples and all mankind.
146. We are already living, even now, in a peace that is too
fragile. Responsible statesmen must therefore evaluate what is
taking place and make a rational decision. Only human reason can and
must safeguard mankind from the awesome danger. We call upon those
who are nudging the world along the path of an ever more dangerous
arms race to renounce the unrealizable calculations of achieving
military superiority by such a path with the aim of dictating their
will to other peoples and states.
147. Gromyko, speech at Conference on Disarmament in Europe (Pravda,
19 Jan 84)
148. Instead of conducting talks and displaying a desire to work for
accord, the U.S. Administration has chosen a course of breaking the
existing alignment of forces. . .
149. The incumbent U.S. Administration is an administration thinking
in categories of war and acting accordingly. . . .
150. What is needed is deeds and not verbal equilibristics, the
resort to which has been made particularly often in Washington
lately. They clearly are a sign of short-term considerations, and
people already know sufficiently well the worth of such tricks. No
matter how hard one tries to lie--be it a crude lie or a virtuoso
one--this will change nothing in the actual state of affairs. What
is needed is a turn of substance in policy--from the policy of
militarism and aggression to a policy of peace and international
cooperation.
151. Andropov, interview (Pravda, 25 Jan 84)
152. Interstate relations have found themselves in an atmosphere of
dangerous tension. The leaders of the United States, the U.S.
Administration, bear full responsibility for this turn of events.
153. So, one may ask, why is the present situation in the world
being deliberately distorted in the statements of American leaders?
First of all to try to dispel the concern of the peoples, which has
been mounting with every day, over Washington's militaristic policy
and to undercut the growing resistance to this policy. . . .
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 19 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 19
154. There is no need to convince us of the usefulness and
expedience of dialogue. This is our policy. But the dialogue should
be conducted on an equal footing and not from a position of strength,
as it is proposed by Ronald Reagan. The dialogue should not be
conducted for the sake of dialogue. It should be directed at the
attainment of concrete accords. It should be conducted honestly and
no attempts should be made to use it for selfish aims.
155. The American leadership, as all signs indicate, has not given
up its intentions to conduct talks with us from positions of
strength, from positions of threats and pressure.
156. General Secretary Konstantin Chernenko, Central Committee
plenum speech (Pravda, 14 Feb 84)
157. Nowadays, in the age of nuclear weapons and super-accurate
missiles, people need [peaceful coexistence] as never before.
Deplorably, some leaders of the capitalist countries, to all
appearances, do not clearly realize, or do not wish to realize that.
158. We can very well see the threat created today to humankind by
the reckless, adventurist actions of imperialism's aggressive
forces--and we speak up about it, drawing to that danger the
attention of the peoples of the whole earth. We need no military
superiority. We do not intend to dictate our will to others. But we
will not permit the military equilibrium that has been achieved to be
upset. And let nobody have even the slightest doubt about that: We
will further see to it that our country's defense capacity be
strengthened, that we should have enough means to cool the hot heads
of militant adventurists.
159. Gromyko, speech delivered at Andropov's funeral (Pravda, 15 Feb
84)
160. Our country has put forward a series of major initiatives of
principled importance. Their aim is to strengthen peace. For this
it is necessary first and foremost that the attempts to tip the
existing military-strategic equilibrium be renounced, that the
nuclear arms buildup be stopped and that efforts be made to limit and
reduce these weapons. Those who are pursuing a policy of militarism,
the mad arms race, and interference in the internal affairs of other
countries should renounce this policy and substitute for it a policy
of peace and cooperation.
161. Ustinov, article for Armed Forces Day (Pravda, 23 Feb 84)
162. Mankind's development along the path of democracy and socialism
does not suit the most reactionary imperialist circles. They are
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 20 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 20
deliberately exacerbating the international situation. The American
imperialists in the grip of class hatred have proclaimed the Soviet
Union to be "the focus of evil" and, ignoring the lessons of history,
have declared a "crusade" against the USSR and world socialism. In
practice the United States is today playing the role of chief
organizer of the imperialist policy of aggression. All Washington's
actions in the political, military, economic, and ideological fields
are subordinated to the course aimed at establishing world domination
and primarily at achieving military superiority over the USSR and the
other Warsaw Pact countries. To this end the United States has
unleashed an unrestrained arms race and is commissioning more and
more new systems of nuclear and conventional weapons, spending
enormous sums on this. . . .
163. Disregarding generally accepted norms of international law, the
U.S. Administration is declaring whole regions of the globe to be
"zones of U.S. security" and flouting the sovereignty and
independence of other states' peoples. The United States' naked
aggression against Grenada, undeclared wars against Lebanon and
Nicaragua, overt support for reactionary dictatorial regimes in
Central and South America, Africa, and Asia, and the campaign of
threats against socialist Cuba will go down as pages of shame in U.S.
history. ? ? ?
164. In an attempt to dull the vigilance of peoples alarmed by the
U.S. Administration's militarist course-its official representatives
have begun to adopt the garb of "peacemakers." But the peoples cannot
be deceived. They can see increasingly clearly that the present U.S.
leaders' words are at variance with their actions. They are
continuing to push mankind toward a nuclear catastrophe.
165. Gromyko, election speech (Sovetskaya Belorussiya, 28 Feb 84)
166. The world situation remains complex, sometimes tense. The
source of the tension is aggressive imperialist circles' adventurist
actions. The present U.S. Administration has set itself the aim of
disrupting in the United States' favor the existing
military-strategic equilibrium, achieving for the United States
dominant positions in the world and by relying on force, dictating
its will to others. It is trying to climb to the top of the world
and issue commands to everyone from there.
167. The policy of the senseless arms race and flagrant pressure,
including the use of armed force against sovereign states, is aimed
at achieving these aims. This aggressive political course is shaking
the foundations of peace.
168. The already enormous arsenals of nuclear weapons which the NATO
bloc possesses in Europe are no longer enough for Washington
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
CO0175644
Page: 21 of 92
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Document 1 of 2 'AGAL Concatenated Database Page 21
politicians. They have decided to increase them.
169. The danger of war has increased substantially as a result of
the deployment of new U.S. nuclear weapons in Vest Europe. These
actions destroyed the Geneva talks aimed at limiting and
substantially reducing nuclear arms. . . .
170. For some time now allegations have circulated to the effect
that nothing special is happening in the international situation,
that the world has become more secure with the U.S. missiles in
Europe. The aim of this deliberate distortion of reality is
obvious--to lull the vigilance of the European and world public.
171. All indications are that not the least role here is played by
considerations dictated by the election campaign in the United
States. The candidate from the Republican Party now in power would
very much like to look respectable in the eyes of public opinion.
Otherwise, who knows, the electorate may vote for the other party's
candidate. . . .
172. It is not our choice that the state of Soviet-American
relations is characterized by tension. None other than the present
American Administration has worsened and exacerbated them by its
actions.
173. This Administration has done considerable work to upset and,
what is more, destroy what its predecessors did. It has worked, if I
can put it this way, with a big stick, striking out now at one and
now at another agreement. In fact, little remains of what was done
earlier by both sides--the Soviet Union and the United States--in
their common interests.
174. If prizes were given for this destructive work, or undermining
agreements aimed at strengthening the cause of peace, then of course
the present Washington Administration could with reason claim the
prize.
175. Of course, it is easier to destroy and easier to overturn
agreements which were achieved by others. No special effort is
required for this. All that is needed is a sizable dose of
recklessness and irresponsibility.
176. In Washington today it is possible to hear even at an official
level statements in favor of improving relations between the USSR and
the United States. But it is hard to trust these statements. The
U.S. Administration has repeatedly demonstrated how cheaply it values
statements of this sort.
177. Of course, I would like to hope that the recent statements will
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
CO0175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 22 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 22
not be empty talk and that they are not a sop to the election
situation. Of course, we will judge whether the United States has
serious intentions by its practical actions.
178. Ustinov, election speech (Moskovskaya Pravda, 29 Feb 84)
179. The Soviet people and all peace-loving forces of the planet are
deeply concerned over the complication of the world situation. The
cause of this is the aggressive, imperialist policy of the United
States. The United States is unleashing armed conflicts in different
parts of the planet. Imperialism is striving to liquidate the
national liberation and democratic movements and is interfering
openly in the internal affairs of sovereign states by using armed
force, provocations, terror, and subversion.
180. The United States has launched an unprecedented arms race and
is spending fabulous amounts of money on it. . . .
181. The deployment of the new U.S. first-strike nuclear missiles
(Pershing II and cruise missiles) in West European countries creates
particular alarm among the world public. These actions by U.S. and
NATO leaders have posed an additional threat to the security of the
USSR and its allies and have made it impossible to continue the
Geneva talks on the limitation of nuclear arms in Europe.
182. The Washington Administration is trying to claim that security
in Europe has supposedly become stronger as a result of the
deployment of these missiles. This is a blatant lie. The purpose of
such claims is to distract the world public's attention from the
dangerous consequences of the White House's adventurous course.
183. Nor do the U.S. Administration's assertions that the new arms
are being deployed because the United States lags behind the USSR in
that sphere correspond with the real state of affairs. They do not
correspond with reality in the slightest. Approximate parity in the
military-strategic sphere exists between the USSR and the United
States.
184. Chernenko, election speech (Pravda, 3 Mar 84)
185. The past few years have seen a dramatic intensification of the
policy of the more aggressive forces of U.S. imperialism, a policy of
blatant militarism, claims to world dominance, resistance to
progress, and violations of the rights and freedom of the peoples.
The world has seen quite a few examples of the practical application
of this policy. These included the invasion of Lebanon, the
occupation of Grenada, the undeclared war against Nicaragua, threats
to Syria, and finally the turning of West Europe into a launching
site for U.S. nuclear missiles targeted at the USSR and its allies. .
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
CO0175644
Page: 23 of 92
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 23
? ?
186. Far from all the leaders of Western countries and influential
political parties approve the adventurism of the U.S.
Administration. It worries a considerable segment of the U.S.
public itself as well. They are realizing ever more clearly there
that the intensive militarization and the aggravation of the
international situation have not brought nor are going to bring the
USA military superiority and political achievements. They only lead
everywhere in the world to the escalation of criticism of
Washington's belligerent course. . . .
187. Regrettably, the United States has turned its participation in
talks on this subject into a tool of propaganda to camouflage the
arms race and cold war policy. We will not participate in this game.
The Americans created obstacles to the talks both on "European" and
on strategic nuclear weapons by deploying their missiles in Europe.
It is the removal of these obstacles (which would also remove the
need for measures taken in response) that offers the way to working
out a mutually acceptable accord.
188. The U.S. Administration has lately begun to make peaceable
sounding statements, urging us to enter into a "dialogue."
189. Attention was drawn worldwide to the fact that these statements
are in sharp conflict with everything that the present United States
Administration has said and, which is the main thing, done and
continues doing in its relations with the Soviet Union. Assurances
of its good intentions can be taken seriously only if they are
substantiated with real actions.
190. Chernenko, speech at dinner for Ethiopian leader Mengistu
(Pravda, 30 Mar 84)
191. In order to camouflage its policy the American Administration
is now trying in every way to pass itself off as a "lover of peace."
However, everyone can see the real value of such posturing. Recently
the Soviet Union expressed readiness to reach agreement with other
nuclear powers to jointly recognize norms regulating relations
between them which should eventually contribute to the reduction and
subsequent liquidation of nuclear armaments. How did the United
States respond to this? I must say that no reply has come from
Washington to this proposal.
192. The value of the lofty phrases about U.S. readiness to work for
lessening international tension and to act in a spirit of restraint
and nonuse of force or the threat of force can be clearly seen from
the example of Nicaragua, against which the American special services
and their hirelings are waging an undeclared war. They are
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 24 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 24
committing acts of violence and are killing peaceful civilians. Does
Washington really think that its policy of state terrorism and
interventton in the affairs of sovereign states will be interpreted
as "peacemaking" efforts? It is profoundly erroneous to think so.
193. Chernenko, Pravda interview (9 Apr 84)
194. [The situation in the world] remains very dangerous. And this
is explained by the U.S. Administration's continued gamble on
military force, on the attainment of military superiority, on the
imposition of its order of things on other peoples. This was
confirmed once again by President Reagan's recent speech at
Georgetown University.
195. Even if sometimes peace-loving rhetoric is heard from
Washington, it is impossible, however hard one tries, to discern
behind it even the slightest signs of readiness to back up these
words with practical deeds. . . .
196. Our contacts with the American side also show that no positive
changes have taken place in the position of the United States on
these cardinal questions [of arms control].
197. Those who circulate [the idea that the USSR is waiting for the
outcome of the presidential election there] either do not know or,
most probably, deliberately distort our policy. It is a principled
policy and is not subject to transient vacillations.
198. Throughout the history of Soviet-American relations we have
dealt with various administrations in Washington. In those cases
when realism and a responsible approach to relations with the Soviet
Union were shown on the part of the U.S. leadership, matters, it can
be said, proceeded normally. This had a favorable effect on the
general situation in the world as well, but in the absence of such a
realistic approach our relations worsened accordingly.
199. Statement of the National Olympic Committee of the USSR (TASS,
9 Apr 84)
200. U.S. President Reagan submitted to the IOC written guarantees
of the U.S. Government's respect for the traditions, rules, and
provisions of the Olympic Charter. Facts show, however, that these
obligations and guarantees are not respected in a number of major
matters. The U.S. Administration is trying to use the Olympic Games
on the eve of the elections for its selfish political ends.
201. A large-scale campaign against the Soviet Union's participation
in the Olympic Games has been mounted in the USA. . . . In
particular, a coalition called "Ban the Soviets," enjoying the
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 25 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 25
support of the U.S. official services, has been set up. Open threats
of physical victimization and provocative actions are made to
sportsmen and officials of the USSR and other socialist countries.
Slanderous allegations are being made that the participation of a
Soviet delegation in the Olympic Games would presumably threaten U.S.
security.
202. Tikhonov, speech to Supreme Soviet (Pravda, 13 Apr 84)
203. The measures we take to strengthen our defense are a logical
response to the reckless attempts by militarist circles in the United
States and other NATO countries to upset the military-strategic
balance. We state that this will be maintained whatever the
conditions. Security--both ours and that of our friends and
allies--will remain reliably safeguarded.
204. Vladimir Dolgikh, candidate member of the CPSU Central
Committee Politburo, Lenin anniversary speech (Soviet domestic radio,
20 Apr 84)
205. We . . . now have to conduct our course in the international
arena in a complex and very dangerous situation.
206. The origins of its sharp exacerbation are to be found in the
aggressive policy of the imperialist circles of NATO, above all the
United States.
207. Under the flag of the struggle against communism, the present
White House Administration is opposing freedom and progress
everywhere. It is making open claims to world domination. It is
waging an unrestrained arms race that is fraught with the threat of a
nuclear conflict. The United States is declaring more and more areas
of the world to be in the sphere of its vital interests. It is
fanning hotbeds of war and violence. It is brazenly trampling on the
rights of entire peoples. Not confining itself to blackmail and
threats and crude interference in the affairs of sovereign states,
Washington is also resorting to direct aggression. Suffice it to
recall the piratical attack on Grenada, the barbaric actions of the
U.S. brass hats in Lebanon, and the incessant acts of state terrorism
Against Nicaragua, against which an undeclared war is in effect being
waged. . . .
208. In the capitalist countries, representatives of very, different
sections of the population are jointly participating in a mass
antiwar and antimissile movement that is unprecedented in its
breadth. The voice of the nonaligned movement is making itself heard
ever more loudly and authoritatively in the struggle for peace.
Concern at the increase in the danger of war and, sometimes,
criticism of Washington's bellicose course are also increasing among
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 26 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 26
state and public figures in the West, both in Europe and in the
United States itself. All this shows how deep the roots of detente
are. It makes it possible to hope that it will ultimately be
possible to redirect the current, dangerous course of events toward
the strengthening of peace, limitation of the arms race, and
development of international cooperation. . . .
209. President Konstantin Chernenko, speech at dinner for Polish
leader Jaruzelski (TASS, 4 May 84)
210. . . . Those who today are at the helm of government in the
United States declare their intention to conduct external affairs
from positions of strength. . . .
211. Unprecedented large-scale programs of the arms race, first and
foremost the development and deployment of nuclear weapons, have been
put to the service of this imperial course of achieving military
superiority and imposing one's writ on other nations.
212. Having gone ahead with the deployment in West Europe of U.S.
missiles aimed at the Soviet Union and other socialist countries,
Washington and those in NATO who follow it unconditionally
deliberately frustrated the process of the limitation and reduction
of nuclear armaments by depriving the talks on both strategic arms
and on nuclear arms in Europe of their subject matter.
?
213. And are not the large-scale programs of militarization of outer
space aimed at promoting the self-same goals of world domination?
They are now discussing these programs in Washington virtually every
day and arrogantly, refusing even to enter into talks with the Soviet
Union on this problem.
214. The U.S.A. is speeding up the production, modernization, and
stockpiling of chemical weapons, those abominable means of killing
people. To camouflage its real stand, it had begun deceitful
maneuvers at the Disarmament Conference in Geneva. But if the
rhetorical shell of its so-called "new" proposal on the prohibition
of chemical weapons is cast off, there is an obvious desire to
legalize, under the pretext of verification, U.S. intelligence
gathering activity. It is impossible to detect any positive shifts
in the U.S. position on this problem.
215. There is every reason to state that a similar U.S. policy of
military buildup is distinctly visible in many other areas of the
arms race, whether in nuclear weapons or in armaments referred to as
conventional.
216. All sorts of advertising tricks are being used to cover up the
course of conventional buildup. The West's latest proposals at the
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 27 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 27
Vienna talks on the limitation of armaments and armed forces in
Central Europe constitute just a new packing for the old position,
which has already deadlocked those talks.
217. In the recent period, mostly after the deployment of new U.S.
missiles started in West Europe, appeals for contacts and talks have
begun to be issued by Washington and some other Western capitals.
However, regrettably, there is nothing concrete behind those appeals.
He who could hope that realism and rationality are making their way
here at long last would be profoundly deceived, which, perhaps, is
precisely what the authors of these appeals would like to happen.
218. The proposals put forward for discussion bristle with so many
provisions and conditions patently unacceptable to the other side as
to confirm that these proposals are not meant for serious,
businesslike talks. The Soviet Union for its part is prepared for
dialogue. But we stand for a dialogue filled with real content. A
possibility for the resumption of talks on nuclear armaments can only
be opened if the U.S. side removes the obstacles raised by it here
and restores the previous situation.
219. USSR National Olympic Committee statement (TASS, 8 May 84)
220. As is known, in its statement of 10 April 1984 the National
Olympic Committee of the USSR voiced serious concern over the rude
violations by the organizers of the games of the rules of the Olympic
Charter and the anti-Soviet campaign launched by the reactionary
circles in the United States with the connivance of the official
authorities, and asked the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to
study the obtaining situation. . . .
221. Disregarding the opinion of the IOC the United States
authorities continue rudely to interfere in affairs belonging
exclusively to the competence of the Los Angeles Olympic Organizing
Committee. It is known that from the very first days of preparations
for the present Olympics the American Administration has set course
at using the games for its political aims. Chauvinistic sentiments
and an anti-Soviet hysteria are being whipped up in the country. . .
222. In these conditions the National Olympic Committee of the USSR
is compelled to declare that participation of Soviet sportsmen in the
games of the 23d Olympiad in Los Angeles is impossible. To act
differently would be tantamount to approving of the anti-Olympian
actions of the U.S. authorities and organizers of the games. . . .
223. Ustinov, article (Pravda, 9 May 84)
224. Imperialist, reactionary circles are trying to ignore the
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 28 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 28
lessons of the past and are nurturing plans for unleashing new wars
and military conflicts. The aggressiveness and adventurist policy
are manifested particularly blatantly in the actions of the present
U.S. Administration. The United States has proclaimed a "crusade"
against socialism in order to abolish it as a sociopolitical force.
To this end, Washington has resolved, come what may, to break the
military-strategic equilibrium and to achieve military superiority
over the USSR and the socialist community. An unprecedentedly
large-scale arms buildup has been planned for many years ahead, and
nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction are being
stockpiled. Washington has embarked on the militarization of space.
New first-strike nuclear missile weapons are being deployed on the
territory of a number of West European states.
225. The aggressive U.S. actions are also borne out by the fact that
it is thwarting the talks on questions of arms limitation and is
refusing to observe, and indeed is even violating, previously
concluded agreements.
226. Marching along the path of preparation for war, the imperialist
circles are seeking to conceal and camouflage their aggressive policy
by every means. Various "peacemaking" speeches have recently begun
to be delivered. Their aim is clear--to mislead the peoples of the
world with regard to the true intentions of the extreme reactionary
U.S. forces and their stooges.
227. In an attempt to justify the buildup of military preparations,
the United States is using the myth of the "Soviet military threat,"
which it fabricated itself, and is expatiating on the extreme need to
defend its "vital interests" in almost all regions of the world. On
these phony pretexts, it is expanding its military presence many
thousands of kilometers from its own territory, seeking any
opportunity to aggravate international tension, fuel military
conflicts, and then, by threatening to use or by using its own armed
forces, is trying to channel them to its own predatory imperialist
purposes. This is confirmed by the rampaging in Lebanon, the
aggression in Grenada, the undeclared war against Nicaragua and
Afghanistan, the interference in El Salvador's internal affairs, and
the overt threats to Cuba and Syria. Terror and subversive activity
against other states have become a component of the present U.S.
Administration's foreign policy.
228. The reckless, adventurist actions of imperialist reaction pose
a threat to all mankind. They carry within them the danger that
world war and nuclear catastrophe will be unleashed.
229. Chernenko, reply to letter from U.S. scientists on weapons in
space (Pravda, 20 May 84)
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 29 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 29
230. Some people . . . would like to turn space into a bridgehead of
aggression and war. It is clear from U.S. announcements that it
plans to deploy antimissile weapons in space, give scope to the
operation of various sorts of antisatellite systems, and deploy
super-new types of weapons designed for dealing strikes against
targets on land, in the air, and at sea.
231. The Soviet Union is a firm opponent of competition in the race
of any kind of armaments, including space weapons.
232. At the same time it should be understood that in the face of a
threat from space the Soviet Union will be forced to take measures in
order to guarantee its security reliably. Calculations that it is
'possible to lay the road to military superiority through space are
built on illusions. However, they do not want to give up such
calculations and this is fraught with extremely dangerous
consequences. To prevent such a train of events, before it is too
late, is the direct duty of responsible state figures, scientists, of
all who are really concerned for the future of mankind.
233. The Soviet Union again confirms that it is ready to make
maximum efforts to see that sinister plans for transferring the arms
race into space do not become reality. It is our conviction that a
policy aimed at safely protecting space from the deployment of
weapons should be the compulsory norm of conduct of states, a
universally recognized international obligation.
234. We are resolutely against the development of large-scale
antimissile defense systems, which cannot be regarded otherwise than
as calculated for the unpunished implementation of nuclear
aggression. There is a Soviet-American treaty on antimissile
defense, without time-limit, banning the creation of such systems.
It must be strictly observed. The solemn renunciation of the very
idea of the deployment in space of antimissile systems would meet the
spirit and letter of this treaty and the task of ensuring a peaceful
status of outer space in the interests of all mankind. Such a step
would be interpreted everywhere in the world as a manifestation of
genuine concern for the peaceful future of mankind.
235. The matter of banning antisatellite weapons is also urgent.
Deployment of such weapons would result in sharp destabilization of
the situation, to an increased threat of sudden attack, and would
undermine the efforts for ensuring trust between nuclear states.
236. Gromyko, speech at luncheon for West German Foreign Minister
Genscher (TASS, 21 May 84)
237. The United States Administration is absolutely clearly banking
on confrontation and arbitrariness in international relations, on
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
Page: 30 of 92
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 30
breaking up in its favor the existing military equilibrium.
238. Nov it appears that in the West, too, many have come to realize
that the torpedoing of the talks on nuclear arms in Geneva was
programmed in advance. This was done by those who were bent on one
thing--to deploy at all cost in NATO West European countries their
first-strike nuclear missiles against the Soviet Union and other
socialist countries. That is how they exploded the talks. They
tried to feign grief at this but nothing came out of it. Their
pretense is too obvious.
239. They try to cover up their actions with talk like the end of
the world has not come and a "new glacial period" has not set in.
But this is a sham, artificial optimism. Is it not clear that the
appearance in Europe of new American missiles has drastically
aggravated the nuclear threat. And this threat continues to grow
with every new missile that is being deployed, including on the
territory of the FRG.
240. Chernenko, remarks to West German Foreign Minister Genscher
(Soviet domestic radio, 22 May 84)
241. During the talk, Konstantin Ustinovich Chernenko reaffirmed the
invariability of the USSR's course for guaranteeing peace, curbing
the arms race, and averting a nuclear catastrophe. He drew attention
to the serious growth of the danger of war, especially following the
emergence in West Europe--including the territory of the FRG--of new
U.S. first-strike missiles. In connection with this, it was stressed
that if the United States and NATO continue to step up the nuclear
threat, adequate countermeasures will steadfastly be implemented by
the Soviet Union and its allies. They will not permit any military
superiority over themselves. However, building up the military
confrontation is not of our choosing.
242. The USSR is in favor of radical limitation and reduction of
nuclear weapons in accordance with the principle of equality and
identical security. . . .
243. It is the Soviet Union that advocates meaningful dialogue and
puts forward specific proposals aimed at reaching practical
agreements. The U.S. Administration is aware of the Soviet
proposals. The USSR proposes to the United States, in particular,
that negotiations should be started on preventing the militarization
of space, and that the negotiations on a total and universal ban of
nuclear weapons tests should be resumed, with the participation of
Britain.
244. We have called upon the United States to bring into force,
finally, the Soviet-U.S. treaties of 1974 and 1976 on limiting
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 31 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 31
underground nuclear explosions. The USSR also persistently raises
the question of a mutual freeze on nuclear arsenals. A negative
answer is invariably given to all these proposals by the American
side. In other words, Washington is not interested in negotiating.
The usefulness of dialogue is discussed there only in general terms,
nothing more.
245. Editorial article on U.S. chemical weapons convention proposal
(Pravda, 27 May 84)
246. The Soviet Union has . . . made considerable efforts to secure
progress in resolving the tasks of banning chemical weapons within
the framework of multilateral forums--the United Nations and the
Geneva Disarmament Committee. The document "Fundamental Provisions
of a Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production,
and Stockpiling of Chemical Weapons and Their Destruction" submitted
by the Soviet Union in the summer of 1982 took account of the
viewpoints of many other states. This document, which received a
broad positive assessment, provided an opportunity to achieve a
speedy mutually acceptable accord on banning chemical weapons and
establishing reliable verification of its observance. In February
this year the Soviet Union made yet another important step, proposing
the establishment of permanent monitoring of the process of the
destruction of chemical weapons.
247. The United States has a different approach. Having made
extensive use of toxins in the Vietnam war, the United States
continues even today to allocate this means of mass destruction an
important place in its aggressive military plans. It took the United
States over 50 years to accede to the Geneva protocol. While being
compelled to participate in multilateral talks on banning chemical
weapons, it nevertheless dodges the reaching of an accord in every
way, often retreats from its own positions, and complicates the
solution of already complex questions. . . .
248. For several months extensively publicized statements were made
in the U.S. capital that the United States would be submitting
"constructive proposals" on banning chemical weapons to the Geneva
Disarmament Conference. But when the United States presented its
much-publicized draft convention it immediately became clear how far
removed it was from promoting the achievement of an accord.
Moreover, any unprejudiced person familiarizing himself with the
American draft convention is left in no doubt that it is compiled in
such a way as to make it deliberately unacceptable to all who are
interested in seeing that there is no room on earth for chemical
weapons.
249. This applies primarily to the verification provisions contained
in the American draft. The verification system it envisages would
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 32 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 32
mean in practice free access for verification officials to any
chemical enterprises irrespective of whether they have anything to do
with the production or storage of chemical weapons.
250. Gromyko, speech during visit by Australian Foreign Minister
Hayden (TASS, 29 May 84)
251. Peoples of the Soviet Union and Australia, who fought against
the common enemy in the years of World War II, want to live in peace,
and peace is the main achievement of mankind. Our meeting gives us
an opportunity to compare the positions of the Soviet Union and
Australia on international problems, to exchange views on possible
ways of alleviating the dangerous tension existing now in the world.
To this we are prompted by all mankind's worry for its future, for
its very existence which has never before been subjected to such a
serious threat.
252. What are the reasons for this situation? They lie in the
imperial, hegemonist course of the USA in world affairs, its stake on
the acquisition of military superiority. That is the policy
proclaimed in Washington, that is the policy made there. All over
the world more and more people whose convictions are often different
from ours come to realize where the danger of war has built its nest,
from where it threatens peace. In these circumstances the Soviet
Union considers it to be its duty to take all necessary response
measures of a defensive nature. No more than that but no Lett
either.
253. Midlevel and Routine Media Commentary
254. Oleg Anichkin, CPSU Central Committee official (Soviet domestic
radio, 14 Nov 80)
255. Reagan is in favor of stepping up American military might and
the achievement of U.S. military supremacy. . . .
256. At the same time his advisers direct attention to such points.
The nearer Reagan has approached the White House, the more moderate
have been his enunciations. One can suppose that this process will
continue.
257. Georgiy Arbatov, director of the USA and Canada Institute
(Soviet television, 29 Nov 80)
258. It has become clear in any case that both Reagan and many in
his entourage have come to some serious conclusions during the course
of this campaign. The shift to the center has begun. This is
generally typical of U.S. political life. Whichever candidate
stands away from the center will shift. If he is left of center, he
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 33 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 33
will drift to the right. If he is right of center, he will drift
slightly to the left remaining at some distance, but even so will
approach the center. Reagan is a rather experienced man in this
respect. I would like to say that I have heard and read in the
foreign press that as a film actor he is a man without much
experience. However, it is difficult to judge from the past. There
were excellent presidents who were former loggers. . . .
259. The fact itself that moderate statements are made seems
important to me, because quite a few obstacles were left over from
the election campaign. This certainly does not mean that we will be
rancorous and will not let anything pass, including what was said in
the heat of the election struggle. We have already said publicly
that we will not act like that. However, even words are deeds to a
certain extent at present, because they influence atmosphere and
climate. Atmosphere and climate are rather important in politics and
any beginnings depend on them.
260. Aleksandr Bovin, Izvestiya political observer and reputed
adviser to Presidents Brezhnev and Andropov (Soviet domestic radio, 7
Dec 80)
261. Reagan, of course, realizes that he cannot get away from
continuing talks with the Soviet Union. But, by all accounts, it
seems to me, in general, that a harder line U.S. policy is at hand,
particularly where it concerns, for example, the problems of
disarmament and military detente. It seems to me that soon we will
have to confront a harder line of this kind and preparations for this
should be made, although in general I do not exclude the possibility
that after a while everything may return to the beaten track, as we
say.
262. Vitaliy Kobysh, CPSU Central Committee official (Literaturnaya
Gazeta, 1 Jan 81)
263. Reagan, with his reputation for being a politician belonging to
the extreme right wing of the Republican Party, has formed his
cabinet from people of basically moderate views. . . .
264. When "taking over," every new administration strives to show
that it is different from the previous one and that its policy will
meet the country's interests to a greater degree. Statements by
Reagan and some of his closest assistants indicate that they consider
the status to which the Carter-Brzezinski administration has reduced
Soviet-U.S. relations to be abnormal and that they see the
normalization of these relations as the next U.S. Government's
foremost priority. At the same time they stress that they will
pursue a "tough policy"; in other words, they will act from a
"position of strength." We will see how all this will appear in
FOU0
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 34 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 34
practice.
265. TASS report on President Reagan's 29 January press conference
(Pravda, 31 Jan 81)
266. Referring to the Soviet Union's policy, the U.S. President
permitted a number of premeditated distortions in his assessment of
the aims and character of the USSR's international activities. He
said, in particular, that up to now detente has been a one-way street
which the Soviet Union has used for the achievement of its own aims,
and that detente is more favorable to the Soviet Union than to the
United States. . .
267. In an unworthy manner Reagan went on to talk about some sort of
insidiousness in the Soviet Union's policy which allegedly aims to
establish a worldwide socialist or communist state. . . .
268. Concerning one of the important problems, the SALT II treaty,
the President committed obvious distortions of the treaty's essence.
269. Anichkin (Soviet domestic radio, 6 Feb 81)
270. On the whole President Reagan [at his press conference on 29
January] said nothing new in comparison with what he said during the
election campaign. He attributed to the Soviet Union designs to
establish world domination and to set up a worldwide socialist or
communist state. Then he declared that the Soviet Union is using
detente for its own ends and has allegedly turned it into a one-way
street. All of this is untrue. . . .
271. It is one thing when minor politicians are talking in this
spirit; it is another when such words are being pronounced by the
President. After all, it is a question of the deliberate distortion
of Soviet policy. . . .
272. In the words of The Washington Post, Reagan had adopted a tone
which is very strikingly different from the Republican and Democratic
administrations of the 60's and 70's. The President, the same
newspaper writes, spoke of the Soviet Union in terms that recall the
most difficult times of the cold war.
273. "I. Aleksandrov," pseudonym used in officially inspired
articles (Pravda, 25 Mar 81)
274. Regretfully, from their very first public statements and
practical steps the leaders of the new U.S. Government appear to be
bent not on rectifying but on multiplying the errors of the previous
administration, on facilitating not a lessening of international
tension but its growth. . . .
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
000175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 35 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 35
275. The leaders of the Washington Administration and some hawkish
lawmakers are now engaged in a competition of belligerent
phraseology, are trying to outdo one another by the hugeness of
military Programs.
276. Bovin (Soviet television, 29 Mar 81)
277. I now think that the essential outlines of the new foreign
policy course, of Reagan's foreign policy, have now become
sufficiently visible. It is a harsh, conservative, power policy, it
is a policy whose cornerstone comprises extremely primitive
anticommunist concepts. In general the views of Reagan and his
supporters on world developments are extremely simple: Anything they
do not like, anything that is contrary to the interests of
imperialism, they say is all the result of the insidious actions of
the Soviet Union. From this primitive package a simple conclusion is
drawn: The time for playing at detente is over, it is necessary to
rearm immediately, it is necessary to strive for military strategic
superiority over the Soviet Union, and on this basis impose the will
of America the Great on the whole world.
278. Well, this is approximately the philosophy. Let us now examine
the practice. We all know that during the past decade, let us say,
despite all the difficulties and complexities, between the Soviet
Union and the United States there became established a fairly
well-developed structure of mutual relations which was formulated in
dozens of different agreements. Nov the new Administration is
beginning to break up this structure and deal a mean blow to its
foundation, the process of strategic arms limitation.
279. Arbatov (Pravda, 4 May 81)
280. Most observers agree that, even by late April, no in any way
coherent U.S. foreign policy has emerged--at any rate when it comes
to actions. There have been plenty of words and rhetoric--so much
that the Administration itself has more than once had to backpedal.
But can words and rhetoric be regarded as policy?
281. They probably can be, in some respects.
282. First of all, they can shed light on political views and
intentions. In this light the "noises" from Washington are almost
unambiguous: They indicate a desire to accelerate the arms race in
every possible way and to secure military superiority, a wish to
switch relations with the USSR and the other socialist countries onto
the road of confrontation and power struggle, to rule according to
whim the fate of the countries that have liberated themselves from
colonialism, to dictate unceremoniously to the allies. The very fact
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 36 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 36
that the people who have come to power in the United States talk at
length and insistently of these desires and intentions cannot be left
out of account. The fact must be viewed as an objective reality.
But another fact remains no less a reality--the fact that intentions
and wishes alone are not enough to constitute a policy. Politics has
been and will remain the art of the possible. And the possibilities,
the realities of the modern world certainly do not leave a great deal
of room for the imperial ambitions which people in Washington are
today going on about with new force.
283. The question whether the new U.S. Administration has formulated
its foreign policy should be left open, I think. Some may hope that
it has not been formulated yet, others may think differently. It is
clear, however, that the continuation of the existing situation would
itself pose grave dangers, particularly the attempts to transform
bombastic propaganda slogans into practical policy premises. All
this is dangerous not only for other countries but also for the
United States itself and for its national interests, which need more
than ever before a realistic, sober analysis.
284. Leonid Zamyatin, chief of the CPSU Central Committee
International Information Department (Soviet television, 16 May 81)
285. On many questions the foreign policy concept of the new Reagan
Administration has already been formulated. . . .
286. On the basis of speeches, although at times you could say they
are quite saturated with anti-Soviet rhetoric, and on the basis of
documents which have already been published, it can be definitely
concluded that the new U.S. Administration has chosen a sharp
whipping up of the arms race as its course. The new Administration
considers that opposition to the Soviet Union--as its leaders, the
leaders of the United States, say--in the economic, political, and
other fields is its main foreign policy concept. Besides, they
maintain that this opposition must be on a global scale.
287. Reagan recently said: I do not wish to live in a world where
the Soviet Union is first. What does this mean? If these words of
Reagan's are translated into another language--into the language of
politics from everyday language--this means that the United States
has chosen military supremacy over the Soviet Union as its political
concept; that it is rejecting the policy of peaceful coexistence, the
policy of detente; and that it is making a stake on sharply raising
the military presence of the United States in various parts of the
world, including along the perimeter of Soviet borders. It is also
attempting, by increasing its military potential, to put pressure on
the Soviet Union.
288. Arbatov (Soviet television, 31 Oct 81)
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 37 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 37
289. If we are to speak about American policy, then of course we can
say that the most extremist views have prevailed in the question of
military spending, and generally in American behavior in the
international arena. Well, of course, many say that maybe these
people bark more than they bite. It is still difficult and too early
to judge. But they do in fact bark a lot, and a lot of militaristic
talk can be heard coming from Washington every day. This is not just
talk. There are military appropriation decisions on military
programs, certain U.S. positions and actions on various continents,
and interference into the affairs of a number of countries--all of
this has become a reality. Therefore, we are undoubtedly seeing a
period which gives cause to remember the cold war and to suspect that
quite a lot has been done to sweep aside all the positive things that
were accumulated at the expense of great labor in international
relations and thus a big step has been taken toward a cold war. . . .
290. So things in the economy are not turning out quite the way the
President figured, and to a certain extent this can be a limiting
factor for many far-reaching American plans. . . .
291. All of these realities are just beginning to appear--after all
this government has not been in power very long--and these political
and' social mechanisms, which demand some kind of accommodation on the
part of the Administration, have just been set in motion.
292. Of course, there are people there who . . . it is difficult to
imagine that they can reform. But overall--and we have seen this in
history more than once--even the most conservative politicians have
been sufficiently pragmatic in understanding what can be done and
what cannot be done. . . .
293. Even in America, they are beginning to somehow understand that
the question is becoming extremely acute, that some kind of reaction
to it is necessary, that in Europe and the world as a whole--and even
in the United States, as a matter of fact--some sentiments are
appearing.
294. Bovin (Soviet domestic radio, 29 Nov 81)
295. In fact, what did this Reagan speech of 18 November mean? Does
it, to some degree . . . signify a reassessment of the U.S. position,
or . . . is it an attempt to gain a political alibi with respect to
the pressures being exerted by America's allies in Europe? As for
which of these elements was more evident in the speech, this is an
open question both for us and for Europe. We will find out when the
talks begin.
296. Nikolay Shishlin, CPSU Central Committee official (Soviet
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
CO0175644
Page: 38 of 92
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 38
television, 5 Dec 81)
297. Regarding the fact of an alteration in the U.S. foreign policy
course taking place, an alteration in the U.S. foreign policy course
beginning to become perceptible--this is true. . . . It seems that
in this respect in particular we are right in talking neither of a
cosmetic operation nor of a break with past policies, but rather of a
certain alteration in course, a certain adaptation of American
policies to reality.
298. Bovin (Soviet domestic radio, 20 Dec 81)
299. One of the main problems for Europe at the moment is the
problem of the so-called Eurostrategic weapons. . . . One can view
these [INF] talks in different ways. On the one hand, the talks have
a specific object--medium-range weapons. But their principal
significance is the fact that after a whole year of agitation and
alarm and hysterical kinds of statements by Washington, generally
speaking things there are quietly beginning to stabilize.
300. TASS report on U.S. sanctions after the imposition of martial
law in Poland (Pravda, 30 Dec 81)
301. The U.S. Administration has taken a provocative step the
purpose of which is to poison the international climate even more, to
exacerbate tensions, to worsen confrontation and toughen the
militarist foreign policy course. . . .
302. President R. Reagan has published a statement, announcing the
introduction of a whole number of unilateral discriminatory measures
with regard to the Soviet Union, ranging from a suspension of
Aeroflot service to the USA to a review of bilateral Soviet-U.S.
agreements in trade and scientific-technical cooperation, agreements
signed by the Government of the United States.
303. To justify this crude diktat with regard to a sovereign state
unprecedented and absolutely inadmissible in universally accepted
international practice, the head of the U.S. Administration has
resorted to direct forgery and lies, maintaining that the Soviet
Union allegedly "interfered" in Polish affairs and bears "direct
responsibility" for the situation in Poland.
304. Arbatov (Pravda, 1 Jan 82)
305. "Seeking a crisis" is precisely how Washington's stance
regarding Poland can be described. . . . Attempts are being made to
"internationalize" the crisis and to exploit the events to still
further exacerbate the international situation and relations with the
USSR in particular.
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
CO0175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 39 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 39
306. The question naturally arises of the true motives and true aims
of the campaign unleashed by the United States over the events in
Poland. . . .
307. I want immediately to stipulate that in mentioning the present
leaders, I mean not only the President and his most influential
ministers but also a broader stratum of the Washington bureaucracy,
above all the stratum comprising the deputy and assistant cabinet
members, the President's chief advisers and entourage, the heads of a
number of departments, and so forth. . . . And with the utmost
responsibility I would venture to claim that as a group, this "second
echelon" is in considerable part composed of extremists representing
the far right wing, extreme militarist flank of the U.S. ruling
class. . . . A whole series of conclusions can be derived from all
that is known of these people. One is that they are people who rose
to prominence on a wave of crisis and feel like fish out of water
outside a crisis. . . .
308. A certain circle of American figures now needs a crisis as a
condition of its political success, even political survival. And it
is apparently prepared to go to any lengths for the sake of that.
309. Aleksandr Kaverznev, Soviet television political observer
(Hungarian domestic radio, 18 Feb 82)
310. We are of the opinion that the coming years will be difficult.
In the beginning, when the Reagan Administration came to power in the
United States, we had certain hopes that the President would not
implement the policy he announced during his election campaign. We
hoped that life would oblige him to see many things in a different
way. But now we are forced to conclude that for the entire duration
of the Reagan Administration we can hardly expect a different U.S.
policy.
311. Shishlin (Soviet domestic radio, 11 Apr 82)
312. Reagan, it must be said, has garnished these rather bellicose
statements with the somewhat curious assertion that he, the President
of the United States, is willing to meet Leonid Ilich Brezhnev in the
summer at the second special session of the UN General Assembly on
disarmament. And there is a rather strange contradiction here.
Actually, the idea of a summit meeting--a Soviet-American summit
meeting?was proposed over one year ago from the platform of the 26th
party congress. In that time, the Soviet Union has covered a
considerable part of the distance toward finding ground for mutually
acceptable solutions in the interests of improving Soviet-American
relations. We saw nothing of the kind from the American side. And
now into the midst of these rather definite statements, which can
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
Page: 40 of 92
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 40
only be called militaristic, he inserts the claim that he is ready
for a Soviet-American summit meeting.
313. Ernst Genri, prominent journalist (Literaturnaya Gazeta, 14 Jul
82)
314. Consequently, has the failure of Hitler's blitzkrieg against
the USSR taught the U.S. militarists nothing? By all accounts, this
is exactly the case and must be taken into account. It is not hard
to understand what is guiding the Pentagon's thinkers.
315. They are not taking the failure of the Hitlerite adventure into
account simply because there has been a revolution in military
hardware since then. It is now proposed to deliver a surprise strike
against the USSR not by means of tanks and conventional aircraft, but
by nuclear missiles and other "super weapons" which can fly thousands
of kilometers in a few minutes.
316. Arbatov (Pravda, 16 Jul 82)
317. U.S. policy would be good to the extent to which it is not
allowed to be bad, safe (not only for us but also for America itself
and its allies) to the extent to which it is not allowed to become
dangerous. It 4ill not be allowed to evolve in those directions by
economic and political realities, by the policies of other countries,
by the Americans' common sense and by the striving of the peoples for
self-preservation. I hope that these factors will be enough for the
continued political processes to bolster the realistic principles and
to return American policy to an understanding of not only the
existing contradictions but also of very serious and vitally
important common interests, the interests of peace and survival,
which require not only talks but also agreements as well as the
overall improvement of relations between the two countries. What if
this does not come to pass? I personally would find solace in the
thought that a time will come and it will be possible to say: It is
not with this Administration that history began, and it is not with
it that it has ended.
318. Vadim Zagladin, first deputy chief of the CPSU Central
Committee International Department (Czechoslovak domestic radio, 30
Jul 82)
319. Reagan and his Administration--and I deliberately do not say
the United States since there are various internal groupings--Reagan
and his Administration represent that part of the capitalist world of
monopoly capital, which is convinced that the solution of questions
of the future, of problems of mutual relations between the two
systems, can be achieved only by means of force. Circles currently
in the leadership of a substantial part of European countries take a
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 41 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 41
completely different viewpoint. It is not easy for them but they
give preference to a peaceful development of relations and to solving
questions by competition in a peaceful atmosphere. . . .
320. Extreme views exist; there are people who say that the
situation is so complex and difficult that there is no way out, that
only the worst can be expected, that we are on the very threshold of
war. That of course is an extreme view and is incorrect because
there are a number of positive factors; the head-on struggle and
existing equilibrium of forces is a guarantee that we can advance and
not allow imperialism to realize its plans.
321. On the other hand there are some people who say that there have
been all kinds of crises; this will pass, too. We are strong; we
have the strength of the Soviet Union, the strength of the socialist
countries; it will all pass of its own accord. It will not pass of
its own accord; of course that, too, is incorrect.
322. Yes, without doubt we are capable of defending ourselves, of
rebuffing the imperialist wave, but that depends on us, on the
situation of our countries and in our countries, on the unity of our
countries and their joint activity in the international arena.
323. Bovin (Izvestiya, 6 Aug 82)
324. In general it is hard to deal with -the--Americans am,- They
dissemble, twist and turn, say one thing and do another. They have
many ambitions and a great deal of self-esteem. They have little
responsibility. But what can you do? We do not choose our partners,
they are given us by destiny, by history. We have to talk and
negotiate with them although, to be frank, I do not believe that any
serious agreement can be reached with the Americans as long as Reagan
is in the White House.
325. Vladimir Ostrogorskiy, commentator (Moscow radio in German, 22
Aug 82)
326. If Reagan knew history better and made its lessons his own, he
would not harbor any illusions, since there were people before him
who, like Hitler, had a special liking for using the miraculous
weapon of inflammatory propaganda on the air. It is typical for
aspirants to world domination to rely on miraculous weapons. It is,
however, well known how they usually have ended.
327. Bovin (Izvestiya, 5 Nov 82)
328. Nov let us allow the skeptic to have his say. He is bound to
ask: Are we not overestimating our own strength? Can international
security and international cooperation seriously be expected when the
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
000175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 42 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 42
world is divided into opposing sociopolitical systems? Is the
"Reagan phenomenon" an accident? The questions are not farfetched.
The difficulties are indeed huge. Militarism and aggressiveness are
inherent in imperialism. We do not choose our partners; fate,
history hands them to us.
329. All that is true. Nonetheless, the hope is realistic. The
hope is realistic because the forces advocating that detente get a
"second wind" represent a real, weighty factor in world politics.
The Soviet Union is a mighty power. People across the Atlantic
cannot help but take this into account--whatever team is assembled in
the White House, it is still not a suicide team. The socialist
community and the communist and workers' parties are with us. Dozens
of nonaligned states advocate detente and disarmament and oppose the
division of the world into military-political blocs. The
antinuclear, antiwar movement is gaining unprecedented scope and its
social and political spectrum is becoming increasingly broad. . . .
330. I repeat, we would like to reach agreement, even with Reagan.
What if this does not happen? We will wait.
331. Shishlin (Soviet domestic radio, 21 Nov 82)
332. Actions for the benefit of peace would carry a lot more weight
than conciliatory words. If we were to see a real shift in the
American position at the talks that are being_held_on_strategic_
armaments, on European armaments, on conventional armaments in
Central Europe--that would surely be more substantial than the words
spoken by the American statesmen. So the situation remains pretty
1
difficult. . . .
333. Pravda editorial (Pravda, 21 Nov 82)
334. Judging by international reactions, Andropov's meetings with
foreign delegations gave new impetus to people's hopes for the
maintenance and development of the detente process. The Soviet Union
is always ready for honest, equal, and mutually advantageous
cooperation with any state which wishes it, particularly with the
United States. Normal, or better still, friendly Soviet-American
relations would accord with the interests of both peoples and of
world peace.
335. Gennadiy Gerasimov, Novosti deputy chairman (Soviet television,
28 Nov 82)
336. The events of the last weeks in Moscow, by the very nature of
things, have caused a certain pause in international relations. The
world has been watching Moscow to see what will happen and, in its
turn, Moscow has been watching the world attentively, too. American
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 43 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 43
Senator Robert Dole, a prominent figure in the Republican
Party--Reagan's party--has been in Moscow during these days. He
stated that he observes an advancement by the Reagan Administration
toward a new beginning--that is how he expressed himself. Some
observers have begun cautiously seeking signs of a thaw, even a weak
one, in American-soviet relations.
337. Arbatov, speech to U.S. trade delegation (Literaturnaya Gazeta,
8 Dec 82)
338. In the last few days many people's hopes regarding the
prospects of Soviet-American relations have revived. The dramatic
nature of the moment, when events are prompting reflection on the
most serious problems perturbing people, may even have helped in a
way. . . .
339. Something seems to be beginning to change for the better.
Something has happened and something positive too. I think it is a
good thing that ASTEC has met. It seems to me that it is an
important event and shows that many Americans (and Soviet people,
too, of course) understand the fundamental interests of their
countries and "gas for pipes" deal. We assessed positively the
American leaders' expression of condolences on the death of Leonid
Ilich Brezhnev and the fact that the U.S. President personally
visited the Soviet Embassy and sent the U.S. vice president and
secretary of state to Moscow. We have carefullvfollowed the words_
spoken in this connection, and the positive [khoroshiye] words we
have greeted positively.
340. But if I were asked if I could assess these facts as evidence
of the abandonment by the United States of a policy that in our
country--I must be frank with you--is seen as a policy of cold war
and as a course of a headlong arms race and of unbounded--mortal, as
the saying goes--enmity? [sentence as published] Or is what has
happened in the last few days merely a maneuver aimed at reassuring
the public at large and the allies so that they do not prevent this
policy of total enmity from being pursued in the future? If I were
asked those questions, I would honestly say that as yet I have no
answer.
341. Bovin (Soviet television, 30 Dec 82)
342. It is difficult to escape the impression that the opponents of
detente in Washington are gradually beginning to give ground. I
would even risk making the following conclusion: The isolation of
Reagan and his policy is growing both within the United States and
outside it. Evidently, we can assume that this will force the White
House to intensify its maneuvering. But at the moment it is
difficult to say whether this will affect the essence of the foreign
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
CO0175644
Page: 44 of 92
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 44
policy course or only its form, as has already been the case.
343. Commentators Aleksandr Korshunov and Oleg Blinov (Soviet
domestic radio, 12 Jan 83)
344. At the end of his [latest radio] speech, Reagan stated the
readiness of the United States--and I quote--to sit down at the
conference table with the Russians to discuss practical measures
capable of resolving the problems and leading to a more durable and
genuine improvement of relations between East and West. If this is
really so, then one can only welcome the U.S. President's
utterances. The Soviet Union believes that the path toward mutual
talks is open and that our two countries could make an important
contribution to the cause of creating a climate of mutual trust,
mutual understanding and cooperation in the world.
345. Valentin Zorin, Soviet television political observer (Moscow
radio [in English] to North America, 3 Apr 83)
346. But the leaders in Washington are not only rude and tactless in
their political styles, they also break another unwritten rule of
statesmanship. It is unfortunate when the mass media juggles with
facts but it is inexcusable when leaders in positions of utmost
responsibility resort to overt lies. There have been many instances
when the current leaders in Washington have flagrantly distorted the
truth and deliberately lied to the public?That was the case in the
most recent statements made by President Reagan about Soviet policy.
347. Kobysh (Literaturnaya Gazeta, 6 Apr 83)
348. [In his] 1 April speech and in previous speeches, R. Reagan
cast aside all Easter rhetoric and explained quite clearly and
bluntly that the Administration that he heads, far from intending to
renounce its military preparations on a monstrous scale and its
hegemonist aggressive course, actually contemplates something still
more sinister. Playing with words, he presented to the public in the
guise of "ABM defense" the announcement that the United States is
embarking on the implementation of a vast new, purely aggressive
program of military preparations, mainly covering space. This
announcement was further evidence that the present U.S. Government is
not simply preparing for nuclear war, but has set a course toward
unleashing such a war.
349. Valentin Falin, Izvestiya political observer (Izvestiya, 14 Aug
83)
350. And what does the U.S. leadership think now? It links the
maintenance of peace between our states to the United States'
acquisition of military superiority in addition to the USSR's
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
000175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 45 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 45
renunciation of a socialist social system. In other words, the
Soviet Union must learn to be at the United States' beck and call or
it will only have itself to blame. It is perfectly obvious that this
view has nothing in common with the "Basic Principles of Mutual
Relations between the USSR and the United States" which the U.S.
leader sealed with his signature in May 1972. . . .
351. True, for some time now representatives of the present
administration have been going in for soft-pedaling. They have been
transforming R. Reagan from a dashing mindless horseman into a
soft-hearted "peace champion." A broad stream of misinformation is
being broadcast in which they want to whitewash the U.S. stance at
the talks on nuclear arms in Europe and on strategic arms limitation
and reduction.
352. Arkadiy Sakhnin (Literaturnaya Gazeta, 5 Oct 83)
353. Under pressure from the peoples, imperialism seemed to accept
the incipient detente. But it could not keep it up. What do you
mean, detente?! So much power! Must rule the world!
354. A familiar turn. We heard it from the madman [Hitler]. It was
also heard by a smart master of ceremonies, an actor from the
"General Electric Theater" television program. He was advertising
washing machines and detergents. He got it into his head: A career
can be built around this tune. He selectecLthe_vords to_the tune_and-
rehearsed the pose of sovereign. He uttered: "I will not end the
ideological 'drama.'" Those who writhe with pain at the sound of the
word "peace" liked the pose. They liked the words, too. They
decided to give it a try and brought the actor in for a test. They
hauled him off the theatrical and onto the political stage. On the
small stage, to start with. The familiar tune sounded louder, the
words more threatening. The test was successful. On to the big
stage.
355. This is how the second plenipotentiary of imperialism to lay a
claim to world domination appeared on earth in our days. He picked a
team worthy of himself and settled into the White House.
356. Today the Second Pretender holds in his hands not a bomb but a
nuclear missile. He is waving it about on land, on the water, under
the water, and in the sky, and is carrying it into space. . . .
357. Take the plugs out of your ears, Reagan. Time to think about
God. That is what religious people would say. But we are realists:
Think about Nuremberg.
358. Aleksandr Yakovlev, director of the World Economics and
International Relations Institute (Izvestiya, 7 Oct 83)
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 46 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 46
359. There can be no doubt that the current U.S. President is
exerting an extremely destructive influence on the international
situation. His personal contribution to bringing the danger of war
closer is great, and he bears the responsibility for the very rapid
demolition of the structure of international cooperation built by the
efforts of many countries on the platform of deepening and
strengthening peace. . . .
360. As the Los Angeles Times notes, Reagan does not have an
inquiring mind. Eyewitnesses invariably stress that he has more
horses in his stables than books in his library. He believes in
flying saucers, assiduously reads horoscopes, and believes in the
actions of secret evil spirits.
361. Aleksey Leon tyev, Krasnaya Zvezda commentator (Krasnaya Zvezda,
15 Oct 83)
362. In an attempt to somehow justify their adopted course of war
preparations, the new aspirants to world domination--in that sense
too the heirs of the raving Fuehrer--excel in slander against the
Soviet Union and resort virtually to foul-mouthed abuse alternating
with hypocritical homilies about morality and human rights, with the
White House incumbent himself setting the tone.
363. If we are to believe Reagan, America-is-ruled by '!the - most
noble," "the most magnanimous," and "the most philanthropic"
gentlemen. But there is no mention of the fact that each of these
gentlemen possesses heaps of dollars in his bank account, acquired
from the drudgery of modern-day slaves, taken from widows and
orphans, and collected from the corpses of soldiers who have perished
in the dirty wars and criminal adventures of the United States.
364. Bovin (Otechestven Front, 1 Dec 83)
365. When the Americans agreed to detente and when they held
constructive talks with us, this was an attempt to adapt their policy
to the changes in life and in the world that had emerged. Now the
reverse process is occurring--Reagan is trying to adapt the whole
world to the interests of the United States as he understands them.
Such an approach, however, again undermines the realistic basis for
any constructive agreements. Evidence of this is the failure of the
Geneva talks.
366. The dominance of a conservative, reactionary, and archaic
Ideology in the United States, an ideology which is being transformed
to politics, is the main obstacle for regulating disputed problems.
I think that Reagan cannot change himself. . . . Since Reagan will
probably stay in the White House for another four years, it is my
FOUO
,UNCLASSIFIED
000175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 47 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 47
belief that for that period of time we will not succeed in reaching
an agreement on anything meaningful. We will, of course, conduct
negotiations, we will try to sign agreements and we will probably
even succeed somewhere on the political fringes. However, I think
that concerning the main and basic issues we will have to face a game
of nerves, confrontation, and conflicts for another four years. This
is not a very optimistic prospect. I would very much like to be
wrong but I can draw no other conclusion at present.
367. Fedor Burlatskiy, Literaturnaya Gazeta political observer and
CPSU Central Committee official (Literaturnaya Gazeta, 4 Jan 84)
368. It is impossible to deny that a serious turnabout occurred in
U.S. geopolitics on the threshold of the eighties, or that the
United States has completely rejected the very idea of detente and
has embarked on the path of global confrontation with the Soviet
Union. . . .
369. It is well known that this shift is basically linked with the
arrival of President Reagan in the White House, a man with extremely
reactionary views representing the interests of the "iron
triangle"--the military business, the Pentagon, and the militarist
wing in the U.S. Congress. . . .
370. [Whether the present militarist course in the United States is
irreversible] is a very complicated question- Much depends
whether R. Reagan manages to win the forthcoming U.S. election in the
fall of 1984. Much also depends on the correlation of forces within
the framework of the U.S. economic and political elite and on public
opinion in that country.
371. R. Reagan is hastening to consolidate the basic foundations of
militarism for the future. He is inflating the military budget and
planning programs for new types of weapons. Nonetheless, political
forces in the United States and the U.S. people still have not had
their final say. I am convinced that ordinary people in the United
States fear thermonuclear war no less than other people in the world.
372. TASS report on President Reagan's State of the Union Address
(TASS, 26 Jan 84)
373. President Ronald Reagan made a traditional "State of the Union"
address to a joint meeting of the two houses of Congress. His
statement, made in a spirit of electioneering, was an attempt to
picture in a favorable light the results of his three-year rule and
justify his policy, marked by extreme aggressiveness in the
international field and total disregard for the needs of the common
people in the home policy field.
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
CO0175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 48 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 48
374. The foreign policy section of the President's State of the
Union address was notable for demagogy and hypocrisy. The President
was trying to justify his militaristic policy by claiming that "the
United States is safer . . . and more secure in 1984 than before",
albeit, in real fact, the threat to general security, including to
the security of the United States itself, has increased. And the
leaders of the United States bear all responsibility for such a turn
of events.
375. Yuriy Kornilov, TASS commentator (TASS, 30 Jan 84)
376. The U.S. Administration speaks a great deal about "the need of
a dialogue." Yet, it deadlocks, disrupts, and blocks all the talks on
the problems of curbing the arms race. . . .
377. Our hands are clean, and we have never been aggressors, U.S.
President R. Reagan pointed out recently at the Congress in the State
of the Union message. This is an obvious lie. In the past six years
alone the U.S. Administration resorted to armed actions or the
threat of force against other states 38 times. . . .
378. The thing is that from whatever point of view we assess the
situation, it is more than obvious: The allegedly "peacemaking"
tricks of Reagan and his team, brought about by the purely
time-serving considerations, have nothing to do with the real foreign
policy pursued by Washington, which is based today, the same as
before, on the desire to make history reverse its course, to reshape
the political map of the world.
379. Eduard Mnatsakanov, Soviet television political observer
(Soviet television, 29 Feb 84)
380. It looks as though Reagan's people are working on preparations
for . . . a stunning finale [to the election campaign], but the plans
for this are stunningly primitive: simply turn things upside down,
call black white and vice versa. And so much chauvinist demagogy is
being poured over millions of Americans that it makes one recall the
times of German history at the beginning of the thirties.
381. Bovin (Czechoslovak domestic radio, 2 Mar 84)
382. During his entire three and a half years in the White House
Reagan spoiled practically everything he could. But now something
rather peculiar is beginning to happen. Today Reagan is preparing
himself for a new election and has realized the necessity of altering
his image. No longer does he want to be seen as a warmonger. . . .
The fact is that the words now being delivered by the U.S. President
do not correspond to his actions. . . . My own impression, however,
is that the Americans are not ready for such a dialogue and that so
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
000175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 49 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 49
long as Reagan is in the White House we will not reach an agreement
with the Americans on anything solid. . . .
383. The question of [a summit meeting] is . . . complicated, for,
above all, thorough preparation would have to precede it. Second, if
I may be frank, I would not even want such a meeting to take place,
because, after all, in the current situation it would mean throwing a
lifeline to Reagan, and I think that there is no need to do that.
384. Leonid Ponomarev, TASS commentator (TASS, 20 Mar 84)
385. Large-scale propaganda of nuclear war has become an integral
element of the policy of the present U.S. Administration which
preaches not only the admissibility and the moral justification of a
nuclear conflict but also the certainty of a U.S. victory in it.
386. Kornilov (TASS, 20 Mar 84)
387. It is common knowledge that Washington has made militarist
plans for a "limited" nuclear war although it is perfectly obvious
that nuclear holocaust, wherever it might spring from, will not spare
the United States. It is Washington's strategists who are making
plans for the first "disarming" nuclear strike, which can only be
viewed as an attempt to tailor Hitler's delirious "blitzkrieg" idea
to the realities of the nuclear age.
388. Bovin (Izvestiya, 21 Mar 84)
389. Reagan and his advisers realize that the dangerous formula
"Reagan Means War!" is being bandied about. It is no accident that
the President has been saying so much about peace, negotiations, and
disarmament in recent months. The image of the wild cowboy is
hurriedly being replaced by the image of the wise statesman concerned
to avert a war. What if the voters do not believe it? . . .
390. Reagan's immense strength is his personal attractiveness, his
ability to be just the way people want to see him. In the television
age this is not just a "subjective factor" but the most objective and
politically significant reality. The indomitable optimism, the
ostentatiously emphasized confidence, the permanent mask of the
regular, good-natured guy--all this impresses the "average American."
Much is said and written about the fact that Reagan is not weighed
down by erudition and culture, reads virtually nothing, spends his
evenings in front of the television, does not overwork himself,
confuses facts, names, and events, and so on. And here is the
paradox. What is a minus from the standpoint of a more or less
developed political culture becomes a plus in the eyes of that
"average American" who is pleased that the President is not some
intellectual or Harvard know-it-all, but a down-to-earth,
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
CO0175644
Page: 50
of 92
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 50
unsophisticated guy like himself. . . .
391. In my opinion, conservatism in the United States has already
peaked. Reagan's mass base is starting to contract. In an attempt
to get control of the situation the President is moving away from
conservative rhetoric increasingly often and toward political
pragmatism.
392. Georgiy Shakhnazarov, president of the
Political Science (Soviet domestic radio, 23
393. In the words of a Canadian journalist,
countries believe in the majority that under
is no less than under Genghis Khan.
Soviet Association of
Mar 84)
the people in European
Reagan the threat of war
394. Anatoliy Krasikov, commentator (TASS, 5 Apr 84)
395. Nowadays the entire huge military machine of the United States
prepares to repeat what was done by Hitler and his Vehrmacht. Only
the scope of this preparation is immeasurably greater. Washington
opens up new fronts of the arms race one after another and dreams of
war going beyond our planet and out into space. Like Nazi Germany's
leaders at their time, the White House leaders nowadays accompany
preparations for war by stirring up hatred for the Soviet Union.
396. TASS report on President Reagan's press conferenc.e_(TASS, 6-Apr
84)
397. It is noted by observers . . . that since the times of Hitler's
Reich no government has so openly set the task of liquidating lawful
regimes in other sovereign states and so cynically declared its
Intention to use the force of arms, armed intervention and blockade
for subversive purposes.
398. Sergey Kulik, TASS commentator (TASS, 11 Apr 84)
399. In one day, Ronald Reagan signed two documents. In one . . .
the President, in the bombastic style which is all his own, laid
himself out to lend credibility to his Administration's alleged
commitment to the rule of law and democracy. In the second document,
circulated in the form of a U.S. State Department statement "On the
International Court in The Hague," he refused downright to recognize
international law.
400. Many mass media organs and prominent U.S. politicians note that
by its posture vis-a-vis the International Court in The Hague,
Washington had actually admitted pursuing subversion against the
lawful government of a sovereign nation, mining its ports and sinking
vessels with peaceful cargo, subversion authorized, according to an
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
CO0175644
Page: 51 of 92
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 51
admission by today's Washington Post, by Reagan personally.
401. Vladimir Kudryavtsev, Izvestiya political observer (Izvestiya,
11 Apr 84)
402. The actions of the U.S. Administration's leading trio--the
President, the secretary of state, and the secretary of defense--are
absolutely full of ultramilitarism, lightly powdered with an
ostentatious "love of peace."
403. Reagan's speech at Georgetown University and Secretary of State
Shultz's speech at a session of the so-called "Trilateral Commission"
in Washington promise a repetition of what has already taken place
and an expansion of what is now being done by terrorist methods
elevated to the rank of state policy. . . .
404. Summing up briefly the essence of the recent speeches in this
sphere by Reagan and Shultz, it boils down to this: The United States
is now officially striving to cast aside everything that hinders its
armed assertion of its "leading role in the world," that is, to free
itself from the operative provisions of international law and the
directive decisions of the United Nations. We do as we please--that
is the "moral" that guides the present U.S. Administration.
405. Sergey Losev, director general of TASS (Ogonek magazine, 14 Apr
84)
406. The American Administration's destructive approach to the
problem of restricting the arms race fits into the framework of
Reagan's policy of a "crusade" against socialism and against the
sovereignty and freedom of peoples. Terror, arbitrariness, and
interference in the affairs of sovereign, independent states have
been elevated to the level of state policy by the present U.S.
Administration. Since the times of the Hitler Reich no government
has so openly set the task of the forcible liquidation of lawful
regimes in other sovereign states. Claims to international
brigandage--that is the meaning of the American President's arguments
that "peace based on force is by no means a slogan but a fact of
life."
407. Viktor Olin, commentator (Moscow Radio World Service in
English, 16 Apr 84)
408. The United States Administration persists in relying upon
military strength, on achieving a military superiority, on imposing
its system on other nations. The policies of the Washington
Administration also cause serious concern because of their historical
associations. Nazi Germany too adopted the strategy of a blitzkrieg
and justified its attack on other countries by speaking of the need
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
000175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 52 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 52
to deal preemptive strikes. Militarist Japan was following the same
doctrine in attacking Pearl Harbor. Such methods brought no success
to past exponents of international terrorism, but they did cause the
suffering and death of tens of millions of people. Today, in the
nuclear age, their consequences could be immeasurably more tragic.
409. TASS commentary (TASS, 3 May 84)
410. President Reagan's visit to the PRC has drawn to a close. The
U.S. Administration was striving to use it to the fullest possible
extent as an election-year visit and for the realization of its
hegemonistic plans in the Asian and Far Eastern region. . . .
411. Reagan and his Administration, taking account of the continuing
election campaign in the U.S.A., wanted to use the "China factor" to
the full to further its plans, to play the "China card," above all,
in the context of confrontation with the Soviet Union in the
Asia-and-Pacific region, to broaden out, in Reagan's words, areas of
coinciding and parallel interests with China, to carry on with the
coordination of actions with China on a series of issues in the
international arena.
412. The American President was in every way ?trying to give his
talks and, especially, his public statements, a provocative
anti-Soviet orientation. This came as a fresh confirmation of the
militarist course steered by the U.S. Administration-and of its
reluctance to seek agreement with the Soviet Union, including on
disarmament issues. In doing so, Reagan speculatively assured the
Chinese leadership that the U.S.A. would never consent to sign an
agreement with the Soviet Union on the reduction or elimination of
nuclear armaments in Europe, if the Soviet missiles deployed in Asia
remained unaffected. . . .
413. TASS report (TASS, 6 May 84)
414. R. Reagan, the United States President, has come forward with a
new demagogic statement timed for the beginning of the second round
of the Stockholm Conference on measures for strengthening confidence,
security, and disarmament in Europe. . . .
415. Reagan also touted other U.S. pseudo-initiatives, including the
draft treaty on chemical weapons tabled at Geneva whose purpose is to
camouflage the Pentagon's policy of stepping up the rate of
production, updating and stockpiling this monstrous means of dealing
a strike against people. The U.S. draft is aimed, under the pretext
of monitoring, at legalizing U.S. intelligence-gathering activity. .
. .
416. Reagan's assurances of the wish "to hold serious talks" look
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
CO0175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 53 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 53
particularly flimsy against the background of the course he has
mapped out for the militarization of space, signifying an undermining
of the whole process of limiting nuclear weapons.
417. Vikentiy Matveyev, Izvestiya political observer (Izvestiya, 8
May 84)
418. The U.S. leaders, having wrecked the Geneva talks through their
actions by way of unleashing a dangerous new round of the nuclear
arms race and having ignored the will of the vast majority of the
population in the FRG, Britain, and Italy, where the deployment of
the new American missiles has begun, would now like to weaken the
wave of criticism of them by stubbornly repeating statements in favor
of a "resumption of the Geneva talks."
419. On the eve of the resumption of the Stockholm Conference's
work, President Reagan spoke again, expatiating on the "desirability"
of talks on medium-range missiles. Yet a few days earlier he was
demonstrating his anti-Soviet obsession to the whole world with his
calls to knock together a "front" whose creation was striven for in
the thirties by inveterate reactionaries in the West together with
the fascist aggressors. . . .
420. TASS report (TASS, 10 May 84)
421. President Ronald Reagan of the United States_made a_televised
speech devoted to the policy of the United States in respect to
Central America. A shameless lie from beginning to end--this is how
one can characterize his speech that is yet another exercise in
demagogy, slander, whipping up of anticommunism, chauvinism and
hatred for other countries and peoples, in preaching openly state
terrorism and war. In effect Reagan called military interference and
aggression in Central America with the aim of suppressing the
revolutionary and national-liberation movement, that has spread
throughout that region, a "legal right and moral duty" of the United
States.
422. TASS report on U.S. Olympic ceremony (TASS, 15 May 84)
423. Addressing a White House ceremony on the occasion of the
arrival of the Olympic flame in Washington from New York, President
Reagan was hypocritically speaking about his Administration's
adherence to the ideals of the Olympic movement and "observance of
the Olympic Charter." President Reagan claimed that he and his
Administration have done their utmost to ensure a warm reception for
all states at the Olympic Games.
424. But what sort of a "warm reception" for the athletes can it be,
if, judging by the press reports, Peter Ueberroth, the president of
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 54 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 54
the Los Angeles Olympic Organizing Committee, himself, turned to the
authorities with a request that he and his family be ensured security
in connection with the outrages of fascist-type and terrorist
groupings in Los Angeles?! And the American press refutes the
hypocritical statements by the U.S. President.
425. TASS report on Administration stand on MX, INF (TASS, 15 May
84)
426. Speaking at a press conference on Monday, President Reagan
presented Congress with an ultimatum, demanding from it approval for
the White House's plan to spend in fiscal 1985 3.1 billion dollars to
build another 40 modern MX first-strike intercontinental ballistic
missiles under the program "to rearm America." According to him,
there is no more important problem on the agenda of his
Administration than the fulfillment of the strategic modernization
program, on which more than 180 billion dollars are going to be spent
and which is aimed at achieving military superiority over the USSR.
427. Last year the Administration pushed through Congress
appropriations for the manufacture of 21 MX missiles. All in all,
100 such missiles are going to be deployed in Nebraska and Wyoming.
Washington at that time used an outright lie in claiming that
approval of its plans by Congress would "stimulate" efforts to
control nuclear armaments. Reagan resorted to this tactic again:
"Without . . . the MX the incentive for the Soviets-to -return to the
negotiating table is greatly reduced," he claimed. Observers point
out that practice has demonstrated the utmost fallacy of these
calculations because every spurt of Washington in building up its
nuclear arms arsenals aggravates the military and political situation
in the world and lessens the chance of progress in arms reduction.
428. During the press conference the President again hypocritically
appealed to the Soviet Union to return to the negotiating table of
the Geneva talks although they had been scuttled by the deployment of
new U.S. nuclear missiles in West Europe by the United States and its
NATO partners. The Soviet Union's position on this issue is well
known: The possibility to reopen the talks on nuclear armaments can
appear only if the U.S. side removes the obstacles of its own making
and restores and predeployment situation.
429. Trying to justify his position, which is dangerous to the cause
of peace, the President again distorted facts and indulged in
outright slander. For instance, he claimed that the United States
did not start wars but maintained its might to deter aggression and
safeguard peace. That was said by the same man who personally
ordered a piratic act of aggression against tiny Grenada, sanctioned
the CIA's "secret war" against revolutionary Nicaragua and the mining
of the civilian ports of that country, and directed the U.S. armed
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
Page: 55 of 92
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 55
intervention in Lebanon.
430. TASS commentary (TASS 23 May 84)
431. As a result of these [Soviet] measures, the security of the
United States has diminished, of course. However, the Reagan
Administration's spokesmen, who at one time deceived the U.S. people
in the question of the correlation of the military power of the USSR
and the USA with a view to stepping up the arms race without
hindrance, are now misleading their own population by belittling the
importance of Soviet military countermeasures--so as to conceal the
dangerous consequences of the deployment of U.S. missiles in Vest
Europe. . . .
432. The Pentagon spokesmen nevertheless note that the travel time
of the missiles on new Soviet submarines to targets in the United
States has decreased from 20-25 minutes to 5-7 minutes. This alone
already means that Reagan's calculations to make the Russians go to
sleep with a thought that the United States will deliver a nuclear
strike against them, have failed. Such plans of Washington are
unrealistic. Retaliation for an aggression is inevitable.
433. Burlatskiy (Literaturnaya Gazeta, 23 May 84)
434. During my recent trip to the United States, I gained the
impression that the political pendulum, which for four years-now -has-
been pushing the country's present leadership solely in the direction
of militarism and adventurism, has reached its culmination point.
The United States has undertaken open, armed interference in Lebanon,
mined the ports in Nicaragua, and begun implementing the "Star Wars"
program.
435. All this has frightened Americans. Not only the public, but
Congress as well, seem to have realized clearly for the first time
that the President really is capable of involving the United States
in a war--a "small one" to start with, like the one in Vietnam, and
then, by way of escalation, possibly even a large one. . . .
436. The President has spent billions of dollars on consolidating
U.S. security. As a result of this, however, the country's security
has weakened while the threat of war has increased. He has
repeatedly resorted to military force in different parts of the
globe. And he has suffered one defeat after another, as was clearly
evidenced by events in Lebanon. The intoxication of the "victory"
over tiny Grenada failed to capture the imagination of serious and
thinking people in the United States. The President proclaimed the
resumption of the arms limitation talks process. But he wrecked
Geneva and has turned out to be the only U.S. leader whose term in
office did not contain the conclusion of a single agreement in this
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
C00175644
UNCLASSIFIED
FOUO
Page: 56 of 92
Document 1 of 2 AGAL Concatenated Database Page 56
sphere. Finally, he has brought relations with the Soviet Union to
their lowest level.
437. These results of the President's military and foreign policy
are forcing many representatives of the country's elite to recall
Talleyrand's memorable saying: "This is worse than a crime. This is
a mistake!" And although the average American is highly impressed by
strong policies and a "strong president," he is now saying more and
more often: Stop, this is impractical! Practical politics is the art
of the possible, not just of the desirable. . . .
438. I asked one of the famous U.S. political scientists in
confidence: What is the psychological explanation for the incumbent
U.S. President's fondness for nuclear games? One gets the impression
that some kind of mysterious force seems to attract him to them.
"Yes, yes, I myself have thought of this," my interlocutor said.
"And what strikes me more than anything else in this connection is
our President's statements about the inevitability of Armageddon, the
'end of the world."
439. According to religious beliefs, Armageddon is the place where
the final battle between the forces of good and evil will be fought.
At that moment God will take the affairs of mankind in his hands and
he will walk the earth and punish the sinners.
440. This is what R. Reagan said to correspondents of m-television
company: "It could be that our generation will be the one to witness
Armageddon."
441. An anticommunist complex multiplied by a superstition complex
and added to a boundless faith in the military-industrial
complex--are these not rather too many complexes for just one man? .
442. NNNN
FOUO
UNCLASSIFIED
?