A Thaw in the Big Chill

By John Kohan

Reagan talks softly on the eve of a superpower meeting

Phrases like "focus of evil" and "evil empire" will probably not be heard around the White House for a while. Or so it would seem, judging from a preview of the major foreign policy address on the Soviet Union that President Reagan is scheduled to make early this week. Whatever the President might have said about the Kremlin in the past, he has decided to call a truce in the war of words that has sent superpower relations plummeting to the lowest point in two decades. Instead, Reagan intends to steer a course, in his words, of "credible deterrence and peaceful competition." As he planned to say in his speech: "Neither we nor the Soviet Union can wish away the differences between our two societies and philosophies. But we should always remember that we do have common interests and that the foremost among them is to avoid war and reduce the level of arms."

By speaking more softly to the Soviets, the President hopes to rob the Democrats of the war-and-peace issue. According to recent public opinion polls, Americans have grown anxious about the Administration's tough way of handling the Kremlin, and Reagan's advisers think some conciliatory words could go far to soothe their jitters. Whether his softer line will anger the President's conservative supporters is another matter. The White House apparently feels that the Reagan record over the past three years will satisfy the right wing, however moderate the President may sound in 1984.

But Reagan has more than domestic politics on his mind. His milder message was supposed to set the tone for the meeting between Secretary of State George Shultz and Soviet Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko this week in Stockholm. Both men will be traveling to the Swedish capital to attend the opening ceremonies of the Conference on Confidence and Security-Building Measures and Disarmament in Europe. It will be the first time Shultz and Gromyko have met since they exchanged angry words in Madrid last September over the Soviet downing of Korean Air Lines Flight 007. Their discussions, along with Reagan's speech, will be closely monitored by U.S. allies in Western Europe, where the rise in superpower tensions has been felt most keenly.

The President was not expected to offer any new initiatives to break the deadlock that has existed since the Soviets walked out of arms-control talks in Geneva last year to protest the deployment of new NATO missiles in Europe. The shift will be one of tone, reflecting Reagan's confidence that the U.S. can now negotiate from a position of strength, thanks to its military buildup and economic recovery. Reagan planned to tell the nation that now there was less danger that "the Soviet leadership will underestimate our strength or question our resolve" and that the U.S. was "in its strongest position in years to establish a constructive and realistic working relationship with the Soviet Union." He also intended to ask the Soviets to help reduce tension and terrorism around the world, particularly in the-Middle East, and to seek arms reductions.

Moscow may not be willing to listen. The official Soviet news agency, TASS, pointedly noted last month "that neither the Stockholm conference nor bilateral contacts can substitute for the Geneva talks, which were disrupted through the fault of the Reagan Administration." Soviet President Yuri Andropov has not made a public appearance in five months, but the Kremlin keeps signaling that he is actively involved in decision making. Last week Andropov sent a message to a visiting delegation of French peace activists urging that "not a single chance should be missed for a return to the path of talks." But the Soviet leader continued to insist that negotiations would only resume when NATO was ready to "return to the situation which had existed prior to the start of the deployment of U.S. medium-range missiles in Europe."

With the Geneva talks ruptured, the Stockholm conference has become the focus of hopes for some movement out of the superpower impasse. Under the terms of the final document of the Madrid Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Stockholm gathering is not even supposed to discuss nuclear arms control. Instead, the estimated 350 delegates from Europe, the U.S. and Canada will discuss ways of reducing the risk of a conventional war in Europe.

During the coming months the NATO allies will push in Stockholm for improvements in the present system, which requires a nation to give notice of military maneuvers of 25,000 troops or more at least 21 days before they begin. The fate of such initiatives may depend on whether the Warsaw Pact nations distract the conference with propaganda blasts against the new NATO missiles or high-sounding but insubstantial "declaratory proposals" against aggression. In a press conference for Europeans last week, Shultz warned against expecting immediate improve ments in Soviet-American relations. "We are prepared for a thaw," he said, "but whether there is one will reflect what the desires of the Soviet Union are. It takes two to thaw."

The President intended to make the same point in his speech by calling on the Soviets to honor international agree ments. As evidence, the Administration planned to send Congress a report this week listing alleged treaty violations. The document accuses the Soviet Union of ignoring prohibitions on the use of chemical and biological weapons. It also cites a radar facility and a new missiles system that appear to violate arms control agreements. A White House aide insisted that there was nothing contradictory about the accusatory report and the conciliatory speech. Said he: "The Soviets will still lie and cheat-but we won't be announcing it with a megaphone any more."

-- By John Kohan. Reported by Douglas Brew and Barrett Seaman/ Washington, with other bureaus

With reporting by Douglas Brew, Barrett Seaman