Arms restraint policy on brink of failure

Press, 18 April 1979, Page 9

Arms restraint policy on brink of failure

Bx

RICHARD BURT

of the

j“New York Times” (through; NZPA) Washington! ; President Jimmy Carter's policy of cutting back on i arms sales is "running out; I of time” and his efforts to ■ get Moscow to agree to a j joint formula for restraining weapons exports ■‘‘may be on the brink of I failure,” the Senate Foreign •Relations Committee has ■said. • In a staff report endorsed [by the ranking Democratic and Republican members of the committee, the pane’ ar-1 gued that in spite of Mr. Carter’s May, 1977. pled-e; to reduce military exports.' arms sales “continue to be a (major global problem.” j “The flow of arms to the; Third World has not been; reduced,” the report said. It said there is now “universal scepticism” about the; Administration’s sales re-i straint policy and added: “It I, is criticised on the one bind; for lack of vigorous impl.-| mentation and on the other for placing the United Stites: at a competitive dis-| advantage in the world’s arms markets. “Both criticisms are par-h tially accurate,” the report'; concluded. In making some;' sales, it said, the Adnums-j tration may have been too I eager to use weapons as dip-l<

lomatic instruments. Aid in those cases where restrain; had been exercised, th- re I port noted that arms suppliers had been ease >o jump in to fill the gap. The basic thrust of the report is that while President Carter has succeeded n gradually reducing the t ;tal value of annual Am-‘ri<;.nl exports, the Administration so far has been unan'.e to j get other big suppliers < f iconventional arms, such ?s the Soviet Union. Bn'ain and France, to join the effort. . In particular, the report expressed concern over re- [ cent setbacks in talks with Moscow on limiting the transfer of advanced weapons to such regions as i Latin America and Africa. i Without the co-opemtien I (of Moscow and other la.a. exporters in the near future.( i the report said. President) : Carter's policy of exercising I unilateral restraint was [likely to go by the board. ! When President Carter’s [ restraint programme was un- ■ veiled, officials emphasised (that it could not continue: for long without the support ; of other arms suppliers. But; according to statistics con-' tained in the committee’s re-j port, the Soviet Union now surpasses the United States)

in deliveries of combat' equipment world wide a. .1 other arms suppliers are making inroads into armmarkets tn the Third World, particularly Latin America. The teport said that from January. 1977, to June. 1978. the United States delivered $1 55.2 billion worth of mili tan equipment to countries in the Third World while the combined value of Soviet and Western European arms shipments was SUSB.B billion. The committee’s report comes amid much internal debate within the Government over the future of President Carter’s policy. In part, the report blamed the failure of gaining the cooperation of other arms suppliers on the Administration's own tack of restraint. Although it noted that Presi-! dent Carter had recently decided against selling ad(vanced fighters to South I Korea and Taiwan, it said that “the predisposition in most executive branch agencies remains to sell." ( “In fact.” the report said, ("four of President Carter’s major foreign policy sui cesses since May. 1977. could be considered failures at arms restraint. These included airborne warning and 'control aircraft for Iran. Flss for Saudi Arabia, lifting of! I the Turkish arms embargo.: and arms transfer authority (for South Korea."