(10 of 18)
Given the present exacerbated state of relations between our two countries and the present aggravations in the world at large, we must admit that today, thus far, there do exist certain restraints on the actions of either side. There is strategic parity. That is, after all, the foundation of equal security. There are also still in effect such treaties as the ABM treaty, the SALT II provisions, the nonproliferation treaty, the banning of nuclear weapons tests in three environments. To this day, so far, they are in operation. But even today, attempts are being made to remove these restraints or at least to raise the question of overturning the treaties, of abrogating them.
So when opportunities appear to take the path of creating and developing absolutely new types of arms, well then, of course, a new era will come about. We must give thought to this. So if the situation were to arise, if somebody were to give in to these illusions--and they can be nothing but illusions, because history shows that if one side has plans, the other side has counterplans; if one side wants to take some measures, the other side takes countermeasures; if there is a poison, there is an antidote--that is the lesson of history. So the question is: Where do we go from here?
And this brings me to the second point, my second reason why I decided to give this interview. That reason is that time is passing, and it might be too late. The train might have already left the station. If we are realists--and we hope we all are, we all want to live, none of us wants to be destroyed --then we must muster the political will and the wisdom and stop this process, and begin the process of eliminating weaponry, and the process of improving, invigorating relations between the Soviet Union and the U.S.
Perhaps we have too high an opinion of ourselves, but we feel that we are realists, both in terms of our policies and in terms of our practical actions. We believe that we do not simply limit ourselves to appeals, mere appeals for disarmament and improvement in relations. We act likewise.
We want to show our intentions and we also want to show by our actions what steps we are counting on the American side to take. Yet all our attempts to somehow escape this present bad situation in Soviet-American relations, attempts to somehow lead matters toward ending the arms race, toward relaxing tensions, toward disarmament--all these attempts come up against a negative position of the U.S. Administration. We keep hearing one and the same answer: "No, no, no. It's propaganda, propaganda, propaganda." Surely the most responsible people in the land cannot, should not, conduct themselves in that way in respect to their opposite numbers.
This reminds me--maybe it's a little out of place, but it reminds me of a story, a true story. For quite a few years there was one Minister of Finance in the Russian Federation government. His name was Ivan Ivanovich. He was rather old and would doze off at the meetings of the Council of Ministers. Whenever you would wake him up, no matter what you asked him about, he would always say, "No money, there's no money." We would hope that the American Administration has not given us its final word.