Newspaper Page Text
Page 10/The Maroon Tiger/February 17, 1983
Nuclear Age History
| News Analysis
The Nuclear Arms Negotiations
by Robert C. White
The Nuclear Age - A Chronology
Aug. 6, 1945. U.S. drops the first atom
bomb on Hiroshima. It has a destructive
force equilavent to 15,000 metric tons of
TNT. Eighty thousand people died instant,
another- 70,000 died within a month. (A
single MX weapon in today’s arsenal
carried 200 times the destructive force of
the Hiroshima bomb.)
Aug. 9, 1945. U.S. drops a larger A-
bomb on Nagaski; 95 percent of the
popualtion is casuality either of the blast
itself or of the radioactive fall-out.
Sept. 23, 1949. President Truman an
nounces that the U.S.S.R. has tested an A-
bomb.
Oct. 3,1952. Great Britain explodes first
hydrogen bomb.
Nov. 1, 1952. U.S. explodes first
hydrogen bomb.
1958 (date uncertain). Nuclear wastes
plant explodes in Russia’s Ural Moun
tains, killing untold numbers of people
causing widespread radiation sickness
and poisoning hundreds of square miles
SALT I. First accord on strategic-arms
limitation, signed in 1972, set ceilings on
long-range nuclear weapons. Expired in
1977 but is still observed.
SALT II. Signed in 1979. Sets lower
ceilings on launchers, limits warheads but
permits each side one new type of missile.
Not ratified by U.S. but observed by both
superpowers. Expires in 1985.
Anti-Ballistic-Missile Treaty. 1972.
Restricts each side to one ABM site. Five-
year review comes up this fall, but no
changes expected.
Limited Test-Ban Treaty. 1963. Prohibits
nuclear tests in the atmosphere, in space
and underwater. Among nuclear powers,
France and China have not signed.
Threshold Test-Ban Treaty. 1974.
Prohibits underground tests exceeding
150 kilotons.
Peaceful Nuclear-Explosions Treaty.
1976. Limits explosions for peaceful
purposes to prevent use of such tests to
develop weapons.
Nonproliferation Treaty. 1970. Bars
supplying of nuclear weapons to non
nuclear states; controls traffic nuclear
materials.
Latin American Nuclear-Free - Zone
Treaty. 1968. Bars nuclear weapons from
Latin America.
Seabed Arms-Control Treaty. 1972.
Prohibits placing nuclear weapons on
of land.
Feb. 13, 1960. France explodes its first
atomic bomb.
Oct. 30,1961. U.S.S.R., explodes a bomb
equivalent to fifty million metric tons of
TNT.
Oct. 16, 1964. China explodes its first
atomic bomb.
Jan. 17, 1966. U.S. atom bomb is lost in
air crash over Spain; it is recovered from
2500-foot depth in ocean.
May 18, 1974. India explodes its first
nuclear bomb.
Feb. 21, 1980. CBS reports that Israel
detonated an atomic bomb off the coast
of Africa (with assistance from South
Africa) on Sept. 22, 1979.
Aug. 9, 1981. President Reagan an
nounces his decision to develop and
stockpile neutron bombs, which leave
buildings and armaments intact while
destroying human life.
Aug. 13, 1981. The U.S.S.R. announces
its own plan to develop and stockpile the
neutron bomb.
ocean floor outside a nation’s 12-mile
limit.
Hot-Line Agreement. 1963. Provides
direct teletypewriter link between
Washington and Moscow to forestall
accidental war.
“Accidents Measures” Agreement.
1971. U.S. and Russia pledge to take
measures to avoid nuclear accidents and
to warn each other of any such instances.
Agreement on Prevention of Nuclear
War. 1973. U.S. and Soviets make removal
of danger of nuclear war and the use of
nuclear weapons “an objective of their
policies.”
Biological-Weapons Convention. 1975.
Prohibits development, production and
stockpiling of bacteriological and toxic
weapons.
Geneva Protocol. 1928. Bars use in
warfare of chemical or bacteriological
poisons.
Antarctic Treaty. 1961. Bars military
activities, inlcuding bases and weapons
tests, on Antarctica.
Outer-Space Treaty. 1967. Prohibits the
placing of weapons of mass destruction in
earth orbit; limits use of moon and other
celestial bodies to peaceful purposes.
Convention on Environmental
Modification. 1978. Rules out rainmaking
and other forms of manipulation of the
environment for war-making purposes.
Compiled by Wendell P. Williams
Time magazine, Jan. 31st issue, reports
that what may well be the most importnat
struggle of the nuclear arms race is
presently taking place in Geneva,
Switzerland. The issue: which of the
superpowers will hold the advantage in
European launch sites for nuclear
warhead-tipped missiles?
The arms control issue hinges on two
very closely related enterprises: the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization's (NATO’s)
plan to deploy 572 new American missiles
in Western Europe, and the deadlocked
U.S./U.S.S.R. negotiations on
Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF).
Failure to deploy its new missiles, the
Pershing II ballistic missile and the
Tomahawk cruise missile, may mean a
critical loss of face for the U.S., as well as
major changes in U.S. foreign policy
regarding its European allies. This crisis
seems to be straining to the limit the
increasingly fragile loyalties of the NATO
countries.
The better hand in what Time has called
a game of “nuclear poker” seems to
belong to the Soviets. Under Leonid
Brezhnev, and now Yuri Andropov, the
U.S.S.R. has steadily increased and up
graded its European nuclear arsenal: most
significantly by the development of the
SS-20 (a mobile, quickly launched missile
with a range of just over 3,000 miles), and
its deployment (some two-thirds of the
340 missiles are sited west of the Urals).
The Soviets have also conducted a
sweeping publicity campaign in Western
Europe, which may prove the most
serious deterrent to the actual deploy
ment of the American missiles. Like his
predecessor, Andropov has engendered a
favorable West European response by
publicly considering a significant reduc
tion of the numbers of already deployed
SS-20s, as well as encouraging proposals
of a nuclear freeze (pre-U.S. missile
deployment).
In contrast to the U.S.S.R., the United
States has been weakened by early
indecisiveness followed by apparent
inflexibility. In December of 1979 Presi
dent Carter took the “two track ap
proach” and agreed to build the new
missiles while simultaneously conducting
arms limitations talks with the Soviets in
hopes that actual deployment of the new
missiles would be unncessary; thus, the
present awkward position of the U.S.
At the bargaining table today, Time
reports, President Reagan’s hardline
approach has not paid off. Reagan’s
proposal has been the “zero option”
plan, the terms of which mandate the
removal of all Soviet SS-20s, as well as the
older Soviet missiles, in return for the
non-deployment of the Pershing II and
the Tomahawk. The zero option plan
initially appealed to the West Europeans
because its acceptance would mean a
lessening rather than an upward re
balancing of the superpwoers’ nuclear
arsenals. However, in the light of the
U.S.S.R.’s apparent willingness to com
promise (although historically the Soviets
have been very reluctant to actually
remove or dismantle any of their arma
ment), Reagan’s own inflexibility has
been a highly visible contradiction, in
West European eyes, to America's vowed
commitment to peace and nuclear
weapons reductions.
The key to the European arms
limitations is West Germany, which is
slated to receive all of the 108 Pershing Ms
and perhaps a hundred Tomahawk cruise
missiles. The current Bonn government
under Chancellor Helmut Kohl has been
pro- U.S. deployment. However, with
parliamentary elections next month, and
a strong anti-nuke sentiment among the
populace. West Germany's position is
uncertain; and awaiting her decision are
the wavering NATO nations, including
Belgium and the Netherlands, as well as,
perhaps, Britain, in the past a strong ally of
the U.S.
All told, the outcome of hte Geneva
talks are unpredictable. Paul Nitze, U.S.
negotiator on the INF, has indicated a
possible softening of Reagan’s hardline
position which might lead to some sort of
compromise. In regards to the impor
tance of whatever new balance of power
arises, it should be remembered that the
U.S. still has a sizeable force of Europe-
based bombers armed with nuclear
bombs and air-launched missiles. And, in
light of the recent nuclear freeze move
ment, it is very possible that
demonstrators and concerned West Euro
pean citizens may yet have the final say in
the deployment of the Pershing II and
Tomahawk missiles.
Whatever the outcome, it is sure to
significantly affect all our lives in the eyars
to come.
The Nuclear Club
The Nuclear Club
Current and Potential Members
Current Members: United States (1945),
Soviet Union (1949), Great Britain (1952)
France (1960), China (1964), India (1974).
Probable Current Members: Israel
South Africa.
Could Be Members In Ten Years
Probably Won’t Try: Australia, Austria,
Belgium, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Den
mark, East Germany, Finland, Italy, Japan,
Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Rumania,
Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, West Ger
many, Yugoslavia.
Might Try: Argetina, Brazil, South
Korea, Taiwan.
Probably Will Try: Iraq, Libya, Pakistan.
If You’re Confused
These are the major negotiations immi
nent or under way between the U.S. and
the U.S.S.R.:
START - Strategic-arm-reduction talks
open June 29 in Geneva. The U.S.
proposes an initial one-third cut in
existing warheads on each side plus a new
method of counting nuclear power.
Russia proposes controls on new
weapons. The SALT I treaty, which has
expired, and the SALT II treaty, which the
U.S. did not ratify, are being observed.
About Arms Talks-
INC - Intermediate-nuclear-force talks
began in Geneva in November, 1981. U.S.
proposes to scrap plans for new missiles in
Europe if Soviets take out existing missiles
aimed at European targets. Russia
proposes a freeze.
MBFR - Talks on mutual and balanced
force reductions between Eastern and
Western alliances, begun in 1973, have
made little progress. President Reagan is
expected to propose large reductions on
both sides.
17 Arms Pacts Signed by America and the U.S.S.R.