TEXT OF PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS AT U.N.

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90-00552R000505370072-4
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 13, 2010
• Sequence Number: 72
• Publication Date: September 17, 1983
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

A16
Approved For Release 2010/09/13: CIA-RDP90-00552 R000505370072-4
THE NEW YORK TIMES, TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 1983
Text of President's Address at U.N?,
UNITED NATIONS, Sept. 26 (AP) and to negotiate in good faith toward
that end.
Following is the text of President
Today I reaffirm those commit-
Reagan 'S speech as delivered tote
ments. The United States has already
38th session of the United Nations reduced the number of its nuclear
Gene ra/ Assembly today: weapons worldwide and, while re-
placement of older weapons is tut-
Thank you for granting me the
avoidable, we wish to negotiate arms
honor of speaking today, on this first
reductions and to achieve significant,
day of general debate in the 38th ses-
equitable, verifiable arms control
sion of the General Assembly. Once
agreements. And let me add, we must
again I come before this body presoc- insure that world security is not un-
cupied with peace. Last year I stood dermined by the further spread of nu-
in this chamber to address the Special
clear weapons. Nuclear nonprolifera-
Session on Disarmarnent. I have tion must not be the forgotten ele-
come
nitmen today t have de to renew' my nationtO 's ment of the world's arms control
comr to peace. I co
discuss how we can keep faith With agenda.
the dreams that created this organ!. A Propitious Moment
zation. At the time of my last visit here, I
The United Nations was founded in expressed hope that a whole class of
the aftermath of World War II to pro- weapons systems ? the longer-range
tect future generations from the I.N.F. missiles ? could be banned
scourge of war, to promote political from the face of the earth. I believe
self-determination and 40bak Pros- that to relieve the deep concern of
perity and to strengthen the bends Of peoples in both Europe and Asia, the
civility among nations. The founders time was ripe, for the first time in his.
sought to replace a world at war with tory, to resolve a security threat ex-
a world of civilized order. They hoped elusively through arms control. I still
that a world of relentless conflict believe the elimination of these weap-
ons ? the zero option ? is the best,
fairest, most practical solution to this
problem. Unfortunately, the Soviet
Union declined to accept the total
elimination of this class of weapons.
When I was here last, I hoped that
the critical Strategic Arms Reduction
Talks would focus, and urgently so,
on those systems that carry the great-
est risk of nuclear war ? the fast-
flying, accurate, intercontinental
ballistic missiles, which pose a first.
strike potential. I also hoped the ne-
gotiations could reduce by one half
the number of strategic missiles on
each side and reduce their warheads
would give way to a new era, one
where freedom from violence pre-
vailed.
Whatever chaltengeS the world was
bound to face, the founders intended
this body to stand for certain vanes,
even if they could not be enforced,
and to condenntviolence? _even if it
could not be stopped. "Mia body was to
speak with the voice of Moral author-
ity. That wastO be its greatestpower.
The Evidence on Violence
But the awful truth is that the use of
violence for political gain has become
more, not lese, widespread in the last
decade. Events of recent weeks have
presented new, unwelcome evidence by one third. Again, I was disap-
of brutal disregard for life and truth. pointed when the Soviets declined to
They have Offered *anted testi- consider such deep cuts and refused
mony on how divided and dangerous as well to concentrate on these most
our world is, hey? quick the recourse dangerous destabilizing weapons. '
to violence. U.S, Still Committed
What has happened to the dreams Despite the rebuffs, the United
of the U.N. 's founders?
- . . States has not abandoned and will not
What has happened to me spirit abandon the search for meaningful
which created the U.N.?
arms control agreemeents. Last
The answer is clear: Governments June, I proposed a new approach to-
got in the way of the dreams of the ward the Start negotiations. We did
people. Dreams became issues of not alter our objective of substantial
East versus West Hopes became reductions, but we recognized that
political rhetoric. Progress became a there are a variety of ways to achieve
search for power and domination, this end. During the last round of
Somewhere the truth was lost that Geneva talks, we presented a draft
people don't make war, governments treaty which responded to a number
do.
And todag'? in Al
Middleia, Africa, Latin Union, We will continue to build upon
of concerns raised by the Soviet
North Pacific?, the weapons of war this initiative.
Similarly, in our negotiations on in-
America, tEast and the
shatter the security of the peoples terrnediate-range nuclear forces,
who live there, endanger the peace of when the Soviet leaders adamantly
neighbors and 'create ever more refused to consider the total elimina-
arenas of confrontation between the tion of these weapons, the United
great powers: During the past year States made a new offer. We pro.
alone, violent conflicts have occurred posed, as an interim solution, some
in the hind around Beirut, the deserts equal number on both sides between
zero and 572. We recommended the
_ of Chad and Western Sahara, in
the mountains of El Salvador, the lowest possible level. .
streets_ of Surinames the cities and. , Once again' the Soviets refused an
count/side of Afghanistan, the bor. equitable solution and proposed in.
ders or Kampuchea and the battle. stead what might be called a "half
fields of Iran and Iraq,. , , zero option" ? zero for us and many
hundreds of warheads for them. That
War gt)118,e10$ TAO . ` is where things stand today, but I still
We cannot 'Omit On the instinct for have not given up hope that the Soviet
survival to protect us against war. Union will enter into serious negotia-
Despite all the Wasted lives and hopes tions, \
. ?
' that war produces, it has remained a Arms Control Initiatives
regular, if horribly costly, means by
which nations have sought to settle We are determined to spare no ef-
their disputet or advance their goals. fort to achieve a sound, equitable and
And the progress 41, weapon verifiable agreement For this rea- Meaningful arms control agree-
nology hak far outstripped
son, I have given new instructions to ments between the U.S. and the
the
progress toward peace. In modern Ambassador Nitze in Geneva, telling Soviet Union would make our world
times, a new, more terrifying ele-
him to put forward a package of steps ' less dangerous; so would a number of
ment has entered into the calculet.
designed to advanc,e the negotiations confidence-building steps we have al..
,
tions ? nuclear weapons. A nuclear
as rapidly as possible. These initia- ready proposed to the Soviet Union.
war cannot won and must never be
tives uild on me interim framework Arms control requires a spirit be-
,
Europe. We would, of course, retain
the right to deploy missiles elte4
where.
e Second, the United States is pre-,
pared to be more flexible on the Wt.
tent of the current talks. The United
States will consider mutually acceptt.
able ways to address the Soviet desire
that an agreement should limit air,
,
craft as well as missiles.
eThird, the United States will adi
dress the mix of missiles that would
result from reductions. In the contaxt
of reductions to equal levels, we ?
prepared to reduce the number, o
Pershing 2 ballistic missiles as Wel
as ground-launched cruise missile*. '
Y ,
Allies Consulted in Advance
. ,
I have decided to pin forward these
important initiatives after full and
extensive consultations with our
allies, including personal correspond?
ence I have had with the leaderaof
the NATO governments and Japan
and frequent meetings of the NATO!
Special Consultative Group. I have
alsd stayed in close touch With other
concerned friends and allies. me
door to an agreement is Open. It is
time for the Soviet Union to wept
through it.
I weuit to make an unequivaal
`pledge to those gathered today in this
world arena. The United States seeks
and will accept any equitable, verifia-
ble agreement that stabilizes forces
at lower levels than currently exist.
We are ready to be flexible in our ap-
proach, Indeed, willing to compro-
mise. We cannot, however, especially
in light of recent events, compromtse
on the necessity of effective verifila-
tion.
Reactions to the Korean airlirier
tragedy are a timely reminder of jnst
how different the Soviets' concept of
truth and international cooperation is
from that of the rest of the world. Evi-
dence abounds that we cannot simply
assume that agreements negotiated
with the Soviet Union will be Willed.
We negotiated the Helsinki Final APt,
but the promited freedoms have not
been provided, and those in the Soviet
fillment languish in prison. We rie-
Union who soughtto monitor their fa.
gotiated a Biological Weapons Con-
vention, but deadly yellow rain and
other toxic agents fall on Hmong
lages and Afghan encampments. We
have negotiated arms agreements,
but the high level of Soviet encoding
hides the information needed for their
verification. A newly discovered
radar facility and a new ICBM raise
serious concerns about Soviet compli-
ance with agreements already negoti-
ated.
' Appeal to Moscow
Peace cannot be served by pseudo
arms control. We need reliable, reci
rocal reductions. I; call upon tile
Soviet Union today to reduce the te
sions it has heaped on the world in this
past few weeks and to show a ?iv;
commitment to peace by coming to
the bargaining table with a new un-
derstanding of its obliotions. I urge
it to match our flexibility. If the Sovi-
ets sit down at the bargaining table
seeking genuine arms reductions,
there will be arms reductions. The
governments of the West and their
people will not be diverted by misin-
formation and threats. The time has
t come for the Soviet Union to show
proof that it wants arms control in re-
ality, not just in rhetoric.
fought. I believe that if governments tne unites states aavancea as
are determined to deter and prevent March and address concerns that the
war, there will not be way. Nothing is Soviets have raised at the bargaining
more in keeping with the spirit of the table in the past. Specifically:
U.N. Charter than arms control. eFirst, the United States proposes
- a new initiative on global limits. lithe
When I spoke before the Second Soviet Union agrees to reductions and
Special Session on Disarmament, I limits on a global basis, the United
affirmed the United States Govern- States for its part, will not offset the
ment's commitment and my personal
commitment to reduce nuclear arms
. ?
yond narrow national interests. This
spirit is a basic pillar on which the
U.N. was founded. We seek a return
to this spirit. A fundamental step
would be a true nonalignment of the
United Nations. This would signal a
return to the true values of the Char-
ter, including the principle of univer-
sality. The members of the United
entire Soviet global missile deploy- Nations must be aligned on the side of
ment through U.S. deployments in justice rather than injustice, peace
Key Points hi Reagan's U.N. Address )
Excerpt Background
MediUm-Range Missile Negotiations
"First, the United States proposes a new initiative
on global limits. lithe Soviet Union agrees to reduc-
tions and limits on a global basis, the United States
for its part, will not offset the entire Soviet global
missile deployment through U.S. deployments in
Europe. We would, of course, retain the right to de-
ploy missiles elsewhere."
"Second, the United States is prepared to be more
flexible on, the content of the current talks. The
United States will consider mutually acceptable
ways to address the Soviet desire that an agreement
should limit aircraft as well as missiles."
"Third, the United States will address the mix of
missiles that would result from reductions. In the
context of reductions to equal levels, we are pre-
pared to reduce the number of Pershing 2 ballistic
missiels as well as ground-launched cruise mis-
siles."
? ?
The Soviet Union has 243 SS-20's aimed at Europe
and 108 at Asia. Under the previous American preeto
poscd, the United States would be entitled to deplu4
in Europe as many new missiles as the Soviet Union
had targeted on both Europe and Asia. Now, 1,4
Reagan says that if the Russians agree to cut the r--?,
overall total, the United States will not match tlial'i.t;
total in Europe, but will instead deploy fewer thereL,,,m?
retaining the right to deploy the difference else,
where.
re. ' ? e!'fl
The original American proposals deferred disctgq,,d
sion of bombers based in Europe until the question e
missiles was resolved. The Soviet side want
bombers considered at the same time. This propos
accepts the principle of talking about bombers, br
leaves open for future negotiations such questions' flf,,
exactly which planet should be subject to the negotbota
ations. ii ,41
The Soviet Union is believed to be more concerned
about the 108 Pershing 2 missiles to be installed inim
cause the Persh(ngs can reach their target in t e""
West Germany than about the 464 cruise missiles bt?,?
Soviet Union in a much shorter time. This proposarT
amounts to a pledge that if there is an agreed eta A
duced level, the United States will not make its cutiAtt
only in the cruise missiles., ' 4q
Possible Soy
,
"We have negotiated arms agreements, but the high
level of Soviet encoding hides the information
needed for their verification. A newly-discovered
radar facility and a new ICBM raise serious con-
cerns about Soviet compliance with agreements al.,
ready negotiated."
f-aloq
let Violations r
4415.?
The President's reference to a radar facility is tbate
one in southern Siberia which is configured in such 'Goa.
way as to raise questions as to whether it was tmE?01
violation of the 1972 treaty on antiballistic missiles')
The question was whether the radar was being usectris
for possible antiballistic defense in violatiori of tiiitora'
accord. The reference to the "new ICBM" is to?ZCzn
missile, code-named "PL-5" by the United StatestO
that has been tested in Plesetsk, from where th'e firStaitt
two letters come. Under the arms treaty of 1979 thpt
has never been ratified, but which is being generally?
complied with, the Soviet Union is entitled to te4
one new intercontinental ballistic missile. It has al-
ready told the United States of a missile designate, 1"
by this country as the "SS-24" If the "PL-5" is a ne?i