(10 of 11)
West European political leaders and defense experts were taken aback by Reagan's out-of-the-blue suggestion that the entire deterrent doctrine be reassessed. One main worry: such a strategic shift might "decouple" America's defense of itself from that of its NATO allies. "I fear this will be an issue that could become extremely divisive between the Europeans and the U.S. because it is tending toward Fortress America," said British Colonel Jonathan Alford of the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. "The proposal intends to put a bubble over the U.S., and that would be followed by a bubble over the Soviet Union. If we can't threaten to strike the Soviet Union, we Europeans are going to be out in the cold." While the London Standard headlined its worry over REAGAN'S RAY-GUNS, the Times engaged in soberer hyperbole, calling the initiative "one of the most fundamental switches in American policy since the second World War."
In Bonn, the disarmament spokesman in the opposition Social Democratic Party, Egon Bahr, said Reagan "has broken a taboo, and the new perspective could be fruitful." But Manfred Worner, Defense Minister in the conservative government, called the plan "a program for the next century, not one to tackle the defense problems of tomorrow."
For Western Europe, visions of 21st century satellite weapons could scarcely divert attention from an immediate defense concern, the 572 American Pershing II and cruise missiles that NATO plans to begin deploying this year if no agreement is reached with the Soviets on Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF). For this reason, allied officials are less interested in the speech Reagan gave last week than in the one he is scheduled to deliver Thursday in Los Angeles spelling out the U.S. INF negotiating stance.
So far the U.S. has stood pat on Reagan's zero option, which proposes that NATO forgo its planned deployment if the Soviets dismantle the 613 intermediate-range missiles they now have in place. NATO defense ministers meeting in Portugal were successfully persuaded by Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger last week to reaffirm support for deployment of NATO'S missiles if there is no agreement at the INF negotiations in Geneva. But despite this declaration, West European leaders remain hopeful that the U.S. will adopt a more flexible approach. In this week's speech, Reagan is expected to indicate that the U.S. will consider accepting an interim U.S.-Soviet balance of, perhaps, 300 warheads for each side as a step toward the eventual elimination of Euromissiles. Offering such a compromise would help blunt the intense opposition among many citizens in Western Europe to new missiles. In addition, a good-faith bargaining gesture could neutralize one of Reagan's severest political problems both at home and abroad, the perception that he is not really sincere in seeking arms control.