Trying to Stop the Nukes

By George Russell

Reagan announces a new policy to curb proliferation

In what it called a bid to "reestablish a leadership role for the United States in international nuclear affairs," the Reagan Administration last week issued a seven-point policy statement that both reaffirmed Washington's commitment to preventing the spread of atomic weapons and pledged the U.S. to be a "predictable and reliable partner for peaceful nuclear cooperation." Administration officials hailed the new program as being far more realistic and effective than that of Jimmy Carter. But critics claimed that the policy was much too vague to stop the frightening spread of devastating weapons and the potential for building them.

At the least the statement showed that President Reagan was increasingly concerned about the stark problem of more and more nations getting their hands on the bomb, or on the materials and expertise to make one if they so desired. As recently as January 1980, Reagan said that nuclear proliferation abroad was not "any of our business." There is no such attitude in the Administration today. Among the new guidelines are 1) continued support for the 1968 international nuclear nonproliferation treaty (N.P.T.) that prohibits the development of atomic weapons by the signatories; 2) a commitment to forge other international agreements to combat proliferation; 3) a commitment to "inhibit the transfer of sensitive nuclear material, equipment and technology" from the nuclear haves to the havenots; and 4) a pledge of strong support for the world's only nuclear weapons watchdog, the U.N.-sponsored International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

But Reagan was also breaking sharply with the approach of the Carter Administration, which had tried to slow nuclear proliferation by strictly controlling nuclear exports from the U.S. In 1978, at Carter's urging, Congress passed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act. This forced all would-be nuclear customers of the U.S. to accept international inspection safeguards, as provided by the N.P.T., over all their nuclear facilities, whether U.S.-supplied or not, as a condition on buying more atomic material from America. The same act vetoed the transfer of U.S. exports to a third country without prior U.S. approval, and tried to force client countries to rewrite their previous nuclear agreements with Washington to conform to the new and tougher standards. But the Carter plan had only limited success. By the end of his term Carter was reinterpreting it himself by selling 38 tons of embargoed uranium to India despite the fact that New Delhi, which had exploded a nuclear device in 1974, refused to sign the N.P.T. Carter's rationale: the need for the U.S. to strengthen its shaky ties wth India at a time when the subcontinent was overshadowed by the Soviet takeover of Afghanistan in 1979.

The Reagan Administration's approach is based more on enlightened free trade in nuclear goods than on restrictions. By actively encouraging responsible atomic exports and other forms of international cooperation, the U.S. hopes to be in a better position to discourage bomb building. Says an Administration official who helped in the intense effort to complete the nuclear policy so that it could be discussed at this week's seven-nation summit meeting in Ottawa: "We feel that two of the driving forces behind nuclear development in some countries are lack of energy security and military security. The response, therefore, is not to cut off these countries, to make them more insecure, but to cooperate with them so they will feel less pressure to manufacture explosives."

The plan also aims to soothe Western allies. Reversing another Carter initiative, it promises to allow other leading industrial powers, such as West Germany, France and Britain, to continue to develop controversial advanced nuclear technologies that produce large quantities of explosive plutonium. If a more lenient approach is not taken, the Administration statement argues, "other countries will tend to go their own ways and our influence will diminish."

Word of the Reagan program drew tentative approval from Washington's closest European partners. British officials "welcomed" the initiative and promised to "continue to play a full part" in non-proliferation efforts. The attitude of France's Socialist government, as echoed in the left-leaning daily Le Monde, contrasted Reagan's plan favorably with Carter's policies as being "more coherent than before"--and then said that further judgment would await the Ottawa summit.

What bothers the critics of Reagan's policy is that it does too little, and they point out that there is no time to lose. According to informed estimates, nine countries now have the ability to join the six nations that are avowed nuclear weapons powers (the U.S., U.S.S.R., Britain, France, China, India). Another 16 countries are expected to be able to join the nuclear weapons club by 1990. With that probability in mind, Reagan's program has been sharply criticized by Democratic Senator John Glenn, one of the prime backers of the Non-Proliferation Act. Said he: "It is much weaker, more flexible, more general than anything I imagined. The Administration argues that with this blueprint they can engage more effectively in quiet diplomacy. We've seen too much of that lately.

Let's see some leadership now." Said California's Alan Cranston, the assistant minority leader in the Senate: "I am particularly disappointed that the only policy statements that go into specifics seem to suggest a green light for more nuclear exports." Said an aide to Republican Senator Charles Percy of Illinois: "There is nothing wrong with the guidelines, but there is not a whole lot right with them either. They are all Mom and apple pie stuff." In response to such concerns, both the House of Representatives and the Senate late last week passed resolutions calling for a further tightening of safeguard on international atomic transfers.

Such grave worries aside, it remains to be seen how the Reagan Administration will put into effect its new nuclear-policy guidelines. As Senator Glenn has noted, "Based on this policy, the Administration could be a tough opponent of proliferation, and it could be a more lenient one." The challenge for the White House will be to use its rules to aid mankind with the atom while limiting the proliferation of nuclear weapons, which, warn scientists and politicians alike, will lead to disaster.

--By George Russell. Reported by Gary Lee/Washington

With reporting by Gary Lee

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.