 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 1     of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page   1
 Classification:     UNCLASSIFIED            Language:
 Report Volume:
 Dissemination:FOUO
 FULL TIAT OF ARTICLE:
 1.  YYYY/SM84-030
 2.  Report Date: 01 Jun 84
 3.   Soviet Public Treatment of President Reagan
 4.  November 1980 - May 1984
 5.  Introduction
 6.  The treatment accorded an American president in Soviet
 authoritative statements and media commentary can be a sensitive
 barometer of Soviet expectations for Moscow's relations with
 Washington.  Historically, Soviet efforts to promote improved
 relations have been accompanied by restraints on public criticism of
 presidents and their policies.  By the same token, harsh public
 attacks on presidents have been made during periods when the Soviets
 seemed to believe that no improvement in relations was possible or
 advantageous.
 7.  Soviet public treatment of President Reagan has proved to be no
 exception to this pattern.  Twice since November 1980 Moscow has
 significantly moderated its propaganda line to test the prospects for
 reduced bilateral tensions.  Commentary during the last two months
 has been harsh, however, and gives no hint that a third Soviet effort
 of this sort is in the offing.
 9.  The first Soviet effort to improve relations with the current
 Administration came immediately after the November 1980 elections.
 Soviet media pictured President-elect Reagan in positive terms,
 asserting that he had moderated anti-Soviet views expressed during
 the campaign and raising the possibility that he would reverse the
 deterioration in bilateral relations that had occurred during the
 period of the Carter Administration.  Faced with continued criticism
 after the Administration took office, Moscow abandoned such professed
 optimism in low-level media comment, resorting to strident censure of
 the Administration and to direct, if somewhat less harsh, attacks on
 the President himself.  Soviet political leaders continued to abide
 by their normal strictures against attacking a U.S. president
 directly, although by May 1981 they were strongly indicting President
 Reagan's policies.
 3I o
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED         Approved for Release
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 2     of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page   2
 10.  This pattern of leadership and media comment continued until
 Brezhnev's death in November 1982.      It was broken only by a
 month-long interlude of more moderate comment late in 1981, after
 agreement was reached to begin talks on limiting intermediate-range
 nuclear forces (INF) and before U.S. sanctions were adopted in
 response to the imposition of martial law in Poland.
 11.  A second, more tentative Soviet effort to promote improved
 U.S.-Soviet relations came after Andropov's accession to power.
 Soviet leaders and specialists on the United States muted their
 anti-U.S. rhetoric, which had become particularly harsh in the last
 months of the Brezhnev regime, and expressed receptivity to any U.S.
 gestures for improved relations.  This selective restraint on
 criticism--routine Soviet propaganda was little affected--lasted only
 from November 1982 until early spring 1983, when contention over INF
 and other issues took its toll.
 12.  In the aftermath of the shooting down of a South Korean airliner
 last September, Soviet leadership statements and media commentary on
 the President became more abusive than at any time in the last two
 decades.  This harsh rhetoric continued into 1984.  Only in the final
 days of the Andropov regime did Soviet leaders appear to indicate a
 desire to lower the decibel level of their polemics against the
 President.  The usual strident invective was missing from Andropov's
 25 January Pravda interview in response to President Reagan's 16
 January speech expressing interest in U.S.-Soviet dialogue, and
 routine Soviet propaganda became marginally less sharp in its
 criticism of the President.
 13.  Although Chernenko's accession to power in February 1984 brought
 a brief period of moderation in Soviet leadership polemics against
 the President and his Administration, this restraint disappeared more
 quickly than had been the case after Brezhnev's death.  As early as
 23 February a Pravda article by Defense Minister Ustinov excoriated
 "U.S. leaders" for pushing mankind "toward a nuclear catastrophe." By
 late March, even Chernenko, the Soviet leader who had been least
 critical of the United States in February and early March, began
 attacking the Administration in harsh terms.  Routine Soviet
 propaganda also became more strident, and in the last two months some
 commentary has approached the level of abusiveness that was common
 last fall.
 15.  Soviet statements about the Administration are made at three
 levels of authority: the top political leadership, midlevel officials
 with ties to the leadership, and routine media commentators.  The
 behavior pattern of each of these groups has distinguishing features:
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 3     of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page   3
 16.  + Although it authorized media attacks on the President, the
 leadership itself conspicuously avoided attacking him directly until
 1983, thereby observing its traditional posture of standing aloof
 from the extremes of the polemical fray.  Even in his strongest
 criticisms of U.S. policy, Brezhnev attacked U.S. "ruling circles,"
 "Washington," and "the line of the United States and those who follow
 it" without naming the President.  The Soviet leadership broke this
 pattern last September in the wake of U.S.  charges that the Soviet
 Union had knowingly shot down a passenger airliner.  Andropov's
 January Pravda interview and statements coming after his death have
 returned to the more familiar pattern of sharply attacking the
 Administration but avoiding the extremes witnessed last fall.
 17.  + Midlevel officials and political commentators (for example,
 Aleksandr Bovin, Georgiy Arbatov, Vadim Zagladin, and Nikolay
 Shishlin) have been less restrained than the leaders in blaming the
 President for the U.S. policies they have so sharply condemned.  They
 have also provided the most sensitive indicator of changing Soviet
 perceptions about the direction of bilateral relations, registering
 in their comments apparent fluctuations in Soviet expectations
 regarding U.S.-Soviet cooperation.
 18.  + Routine media commentary has been the least sensitive
 barometer of changes in the atmosphere of U.S.-Soviet relations.
 When President Reagan was elected, this low-level propaganda was more
 optimistic than some Soviet political observers.  But as Soviet
 assessments of Administration policy toward the Soviet Union
 hardened, the propaganda assumed a hostile tone which has continued
 despite some fluctuations in intensity.
 20.  This report presents a compilation of significant Soviet
 statements about President Reagan from the time of his election in
 November 1980 through May 1984.  It is intended to provide a
 comparative baseline for use by analysts in judging future Soviet
 statements about the President.  The compilation of statements is FOR
 OFFICIAL USE ONLY.
 21.   Soviet Statements on President Reagan
 22.   November 1980 - May 1984
 23.  This compilation is divided into two parts.  The first section
 presents authoritative statements, including those by top political
 leaders.  The second presents assessments by well-connected midlevel
 officials and a small sampling of routine Soviet media commentaries.
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 4     of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page   4
 24.  Authoritative Statements
 25.  Midlevel and Routine Media Commentary
 26.  Authoritative Statements
 27.  Premier Nikolay Tikhonov, October Revolution anniversary speech
 (Pravda, 7 Nov 80)
 28.  Regarding our relations with the United States of America, just
 as with any other country which belongs to a different social system,
 they can only be built up on the basis of equality, noninterference
 in internal affairs, not causing harm to the security of one another.
 29.  I would like to express the hope that the new Administration in
 the White House will manifest a constructive approach to questions or
 relations between our countries.
 30.  General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev, Kremlin dinner speech
 (Pravda, 18 Nov 80)
 31.  Much in the development of the international situation will, of
 course, depend on the position of the United States.  A new president
 has now been elected there.  I shall not dwell on what was said by
 him and his supporters and opponents in the heat of the election
 struggle. I can only state with full responsibility that any
 constructive steps by the U.S. Administration in the field of
 Soviet-American relations and urgent world problems will meet with a
 positive response on our part.
 32.  TASS statement (Pravda, 3 Feb 81)
 33.  Soviet leading circles have taken note of a new anti-Soviet
 hostile campaign.being unfolded in the United States.  This time they
 ascribe to the Soviet Union involvement in "international terrorism."
 Such inventions could be simply ignored as a new primitive trick by
 professional anti-Soviets if not for the fact that this campaign was
 started by high-ranking officials of the American Administration
 including U.S. Secretary of State A. Haig.  His statements, made at a
 press conference on 28 January this year, and subsequent additional
 comments made by another official representative of the U.S. State
 Department, clearly indicate that this is not a matter of some
 occasional unhappy expression but a deliberate political subversion.
 34.  Soviet leading circles would like to hope that they in
 Washington will give serious thought as to what the continuation
 there of the campaign hostile to the Soviet Union can lead and will
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 5     of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page   5
 take measures to stop it.
 35.  Brezhnev, speech to 26th CPSU Congress (Pravda, 24 Feb 81)
 36.  Unfortunately, the previous Washington Administration by no
 means considered the development of relations and of mutual
 understanding.  Attempting to exert pressure on us, it began to
 destroy all the positive results which had been scored with no little
 difficulty in Soviet-American relations over the preceding years. . .
 37.  Even after the change of leadership in the White House, candidly
 bellicose calls and statements are being heard from Washington, calls
 and statements which seem to be specially intended to poison the
 atmosphere of relations between our countries.  In any case, we would
 like to hope that those who now determine U.S. policy will ultimately
 be able to look at things more realistically. . . .
 38.  The present state of relations between us and the sharpness of
 international problems demanding solution dictate the need for
 dialogue at all levels and, what is more, an active dialogue.  We are
 ready for dialogue.  Experience shows that the decisive link here is
 meetings at the highest level.
 39.  Brezhnev, speech in Kiev (Pravda, 10 May 81)_
 40.  There are quite a few sober-minded people among those who today
 shape the policy of capitalist countries.  They understand that the
 emphasis on strength, the emphasis on war in relations with the
 socialist world is madness in our day and age, that there is only one
 reasonable road--peaceful coexistence, mutually advantageous
 cooperation.
 41.  But there are also such statesmen in the bourgeois world who,
 judging by everything, are accustomed to thinking only in terms of
 strength and diktat.  They actually regard the attainment of military
 superiority over the Soviet Union as their main political credo.  The
 solution of international problems by way of talks and mutually
 advantageous agreements appears to be way down their list of
 priorities, if they give serious thought to this at all.
 42.  Among them there are also those who openly state that peace is
 not the most important matter, that there are things more important
 than peace.
 43.  Just think, comrades: Can one imagine a more horrendous
 position, a more cynical disregard for the destinies of peoples,
 including one's own people, for the lives of hundreds of millions of
 people!  . . .
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOLIO
 Page: 6     of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page   6
 44.  This is not to mention how absurd are any plans which are
 intended by means of threats, economic blockade or military
 aggression to impede the development of socialist countries or the
 struggle of peoples for national freedom and social justice. . . .
 45.  As for the Soviet Union, it is not the first time that we are
 hearing inventions about our policy, slander, and threats.  But we do
 not give in to intimidations.
 46.  Marshal Viktor Kulikov, first deputy minister of defense, and
 commander in chief of the Joint Armed Forces of the Warsaw Pact
 Nations (Krasnaya Zvezda, 21 Jun 81)
 47.  If you look at the statements of the leaders of the present U.S.
 Administration, you cannot help noticing in them a similarity with
 the aims set by the Hitlerite leadership in attacking the Soviet
 Union.  Speaking at Notre Dame in June, R. Reagan said: "The West
 will outlive communism.      . We will write it off as a sad,
 unnatural chapter in the history of mankind."
 48.  Defense Minister Dmitriy Ustinov (Pravda, 25 Jul 81)
 49.  The ruling circles of Washington have decided to overturn all
 the positive elements in Soviet-American relations achieved during
 the seventies and to break down the approximate equa]ty  n tie
 military sphere between the USSR and the United States.
 50.  Without putting forward any positive initiatives the Reagan
 Administration has taken a standpoint of unconcealed anti-Sovietism.
 At the same time it is grossly interfering in the affairs of other
 states and is high-handedly dictating its demands to them. . . .
 51.  The ruling circles of the United States are intensifying
 international tension and exacerbating Soviet-American relations.
 52.  Washington, once again, as a decade ago, is trying to speak to
 the Soviet Union in the language of "cold war." At the same time, its
 disregard for agreements which were reached between our two countries
 in the field of arms restriction is demonstrated.  A. Haig states:
 "We are not very concerned about the understandings of 1972, although
 they were agreed by both sides."
 53.  Brezhnev, interview with Der Spiegel (Pravda, 3 Nov 81)
 54.  Unfortunately, the leading powers of the West, above all, the
 NATO bloc, do not show so far a serious interest in talks on all of
 these questions that are vital to mankind and its peaceful future.
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 7     of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page   7
 Some people there are by far more willing to speak not on detente,
 but on confrontation; not on peaceful mutually beneficial
 cooperation, but on the use of trade to military-strategic ends; not
 on agreements on the basis of equality and equal security, but on
 diktat from the positions of military supremacy; not on the
 elimination by joint efforts of seats of conflicts, but on the
 creation of ever new military bases, on the buildup of their military
 presence in various parts of the world; not on curbing the arms race,
 but on "rearmament"; not on a limitation or prohibition of some or
 other types of weapons, but on the creation of ever new, even more
 destructive means of mass annihilation of people.
 55.  This way, unfortunately, they not only speak, but also act in
 practice.  You, certainly, understand that I have in mind, above all,
 the policy of the present U.S. Administration, the way it was
 manifest both in statements by high-ranking statesmen of that country
 and, which is even more important, in their practical deeds.
 56.  All of it is actually an opposite to detente, blunt disregard
 for the striving of all peoples for lasting peace.  And it is,
 certainly, profoundly deplorable that the leaders of one of the
 world's biggest powers have deemed it possible to build their policy
 on such a basis. . . .
 57.  President Reagan has recently expressed the readiness of the
 United States to discuss with the Soviet--U-n-iii-aIso otFier pro-bteums,
 which cause differences between the two countries.  We welcome such
 readiness, as we have always considered talks to be the most
 appropriate method of resolving international problems.  The main
 thing, of course, is that appropriate practical deeds should be
 matched to correct words.
 58.  And it would be better to abandon dreams of ensuring military
 supremacy over the USSR.
 59.  Ustinov, October Revolution anniversary speech (Pravda, 7 Nov
 81)
 60.  The Washington Administration is with increasing frequency
 resorting to frankly inflammatory language.  High-ranking U.S.
 representatives, with cynical disregard for the fate of the peoples,
 state that there are allegedly some things more important than peace.
 61.  The preservation of peace is inseparable from the curbing of the
 arms race--from stage-by-stage disarmament.  Important steps in that
 direction were taken in the seventies.  But the present U.S.
 Administration is intent on casting doubt on all the positive things
 that have been jointly achieved in the field of Soviet-U.S.
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 000175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 8     of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page   8
 relations.  It openly declares its intention to speak to the Soviet
 Union from positions of strength.
 62.  TASS statement on U.S. stance on Poland (Pravda, 14 Jan 82)
 63.  The United States and its NATO allies are continuing attempts at
 crudely interfering in the internal affairs of a sovereign state--the
 Polish People's Republic, at whipping up international tensions.
 This has been most clearly revealed also in the statement, which was
 issued on 11 January by the foreign ministers of the North Atlantic
 Alliance.
 64.  It is well known that the whole of this disgraceful farce has
 been initiated by the U.S. Administration.  Its style is felt both in
 the impudent distortion of facts, the high-handed tones, and
 excessive political ambitions.
 65.  Yes, Washington makes no little effort to try to bring abut a
 turnaround in international politics from detente to confrontation
 between blocs.  Why is it done?  It is not too difficult to answer
 this question.
 66.  What it amounts to is above all an attempt at crowding socialism
 and impairing the positions of the USSR and other socialist countries
 on the European and world scene.  Certain figures of the imperialist
 camp are day and night beset by nightmares because socialism is
 growing stronger.  The international positions of socialism rely on
 the existing balance of forces in Europe and in the world, and are
 guaranteed by the might of the socialist community.
 67.  Marshal Nikolay Ogarkov, first deputy minister of defense and
 chief of the General Staff (Always In Readiness To Defend The
 Homeland, Moscow: Voenizdat, approved for publication 26 Jan 82)
 68.  World imperialism, and particularly U.S. imperialism, is seeking
 to extend its tentacles into every part of the world.  Militant U.S.
 circles have openly adopted a course of policy aimed at undermining
 detente, engagement in a massive arms race, and active preparations
 for nuclear war.  The various actions and acts of sabotage against
 the USSR and the other nations of the socialist community and against
 progressive forces throughout the world which they are presently
 conducting are of a coordinated nature and are joined together by a
 common scheme.  The main goal which the U.S.  imperialists have set
 for themselves is gradually and sequentially to weaken and undermine
 socialism as a system, using any and all methods and means, and
 ultimately to establish their world domination.
 69.  This is not a new phenomenon.  History has seen many claimants
 to world domination.  Napoleon persistently sought to achieve world
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 9     of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page   9
 domination, as did Hitler at a later time.  The outcome of their
 ambitions is well known.  An even harsher outcome may await these
 latter-day claimants.
 70.  Brezhnev, Soviet Trade Union Congress speech (Pravda, 17 Mar 82)
 71.  The newly fledged devotees of cold war and dangerous balancing
 on the brink of a real war would like nothing better than to tear up
 the legal and ethical norms of relations between states that have
 taken shape over the centuries and to cancel their independence and
 sovereignty.  They are trying to retailor the political map of the
 world and have declared large regions on all continents as zones of
 their "vital interests." They have arrogated the "right" to command
 some countries and to judge and "punish" others.  Unembarrassed, they
 publicly announce, and try to carry out, plans for economic and
 political "destablization" of governments and states that are not to
 their liking.  With unexampled cynicism they gloat over difficulties
 experienced by this or that nation.  They are trying to substitute
 "sanctions" and blockades for normal communications and international
 trade, and endless threats of armed force, not short of threats to
 use nuclear weapons, for contacts and negotiations.
 72.  It is simply astonishing to see it all.  And you cannot help
 asking yourself: What is there more of in this
 policy--thoughtlessness and lack of experience in international
 affairs, or irresponsibility and, to say it bluntly, an adventurist
 approach to problems crucial for the destiny of mankind?  Not in our
 country, but in the columns of respectable organs of the U.S.
 bourgeois press this policy was described as "a course to political
 disaster." It is hard to deny the validity of this description.
 73.  Brezhnev, Pravda interview (Pravda, 18 Apr 82)
 74.  I already spoke on the value of an active dialogue with the
 United states at all levels, especially emphasizing that the decisive
 link here is summit-level meetings.  Today we also support such
 meetings.  It is understandable that a meeting between the U.S.
 President and myself must be well prepared and conducted properly,
 not just in passing in connection with some international forum or
 other.
 75.  Yuriy Andropov, Politburo member and chairman of the KGB, Lenin
 anniversary speech (Pravda, 23 Apr 82)
 76.  The imperialist bourgeoisie, frightened by the upsurge of the
 antiwar movements, is making ever-wider use of the weapons of lies
 and sophisticated deception.  What is Washington doing now?  One
 hysterical propaganda campaign replaces the other.  People are at one
 moment being persuaded of a Soviet military threat, then lied to
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 000175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 10    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page  10
 unscrupulously about the lagging behind of the United States,
 intimidated with international terrorism, fed cock-and-bull stories
 about events in Poland, Central America, South and Southeast Asia.
 77.  Attempts are made to make use of diplomatic talks themselves in
 order to deceive the public, among them talks on the limitation of
 arms and on disarmament.  The impression is created that often they
 are entered into only to create illusions and, by lulling public
 vigilance, continue the arms race. . . .
 78.  Brezhnev, Komsomol congress speech (Pravda, 19 May 82)
 79.  President Reagan, on his part, has now declared that the United
 States is ready for the resumption of the talks.  In our opinion,
 this is a step in the right direction.  It is, however, important
 that the talks should begin immediately in the right key.
 80.  In the same speech the President said that the United States at
 the talks would be in favor of substantial reductions.  Well, we have
 always been in favor of substantial reductions of strategic arms;
 there is no need to persuade us in this respect.
 81.  But if one looks at the essence of the ideas voiced by the U.S.
 President on such reductions, one notes unfortunately that the
 American position is absolutely unilaterar  nature.    ove a ..,
 because the United States would like in general to exclude from the
 talks the strategic arms it is now most intensively developing.
 82.  Brezhnev, speech at Kremlin meeting of military commanders
 (Pravda, 28 Oct 82)
 83.  The ruling circles of the United States of America have launched
 a political, ideological, and economic offensive on socialism and
 have raised the intensity of their military preparations to an
 unprecedented level. . . .
 84.  The masses of people on all continents angrily protest against
 Washington's aggressive policy which is threatening to push the world
 into the flames of a nuclear war.  The adventurism, rudeness, and
 undisguised egoism of this policy arouse growing indignation in many
 countries, including those allied with the United States. . . .
 85.  TASS report of 15 November 1982 meeting between General
 Secretary Andropov and Vice President Bush (Pravda, 16 Nov 82)
 86.  In this respect Yu. V. Andropov stressed that the Soviet Union,
 consistently carrying out a policy of peace, is prepared to build
 relations with the United States on a basis of full equality,
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 11    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page  11
 noninterference, mutual respect in the interests of the peoples of
 both countries, and normalization {ozdorovleniye] of the
 international situation.
 87.  Tikhonov, Kremlin dinner speech to U.S. trade delegation
 (Pravda, 19 Nov 82)
 88.  We are meeting with you at a time which is not the best for
 Soviet-American relations.  Their climate has considerably cooled
 and, to be frank, not through our fault.
 89.  The official stand taken in the United States towards the Soviet
 Union, naturally, is also reflected in trade between our countries.
 All sorts of discriminatory measures, attempts to use various
 sanctions, embargoes, etc., against our country do not, of course,
 inspire kind feelings, but rather undermine the confidence of Soviet
 foreign trade organizations in the American market. . . .
 90.  The Soviet Union has been and is for normal, and even better,
 friendly relations with the United States.  There were such relations
 in the past, and they can again become a reality.  This would meet
 the interests of our countries and the interests of universal peace.
 I am confident that this is precisely what our peoples wish.  They
 wish lasting peace and mutually beneficial cooperation.
 91.  Andropov, speech at CPSU Central Committee plenum (Pravda, 23
 Nov 82)
 92.  All are equally interested in preserving peace and detente.
 Therefore, statements in which the readiness for normalizing
 relations is linked with the demand that the Soviet Union pay for
 this with preliminary concessions in different fields do not sound
 serious, to say the least.  We shall not agree to this and, properly
 speaking, we have nothing to cancel: We did not introduce sanctions
 against anyone, we did not denounce treaties and agreements that were
 signed, and we did not interrupt talks that were started.  I should
 like to stress once more that the Soviet Union stands for accord but
 this should be sought on the basis of reciprocity and equality.
 93.  In our opinion the point of talks with the United States and
 other Western countries, primarily on questions of restraining the
 arms race, does not lie in the statement of differences.  For us
 talks are a way of joining efforts by different states in order to
 achieve results useful to all sides.  The problems will not disappear
 by themselves if the talks are held for the sake of talks, as it
 unfortunately happens not infrequently.  We are for the search on a
 healthy basis, acceptable to the sides concerned, for a settlement of
 the most complicated problems, especially, of course, the problems of
 curbing the arms race, involving both nuclear and conventional arms.
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 12    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                    Page  12
 But let no one expect unilateral disarmament from us.  We are not
 naive people.
 94.  We do not demand unilateral disarmament from the West.  We are
 for equality, for consideration for the interests of both sides, for
 honest agreement.  We are ready for this.
 95.  Ustinov, TASS interview (Pravda, 7 Dec 82)
 96.  [President Reagan) said in his speech of 22 November that the
 Soviet Union now has a clear margin in practically any type of
 military power.  Such assertions are not in keeping with reality.
 They are calculated at deceiving the public and have the purpose of
 justifying the United States' unprecedented military programs and
 aggressive doctrines.  It is regrettable that such attempts to
 convince people of the existence of what does not exist in nature are
 made by the leader of a great power whose very position presupposes
 realism and responsibility in assessing reality. . .
 97.  At the same time, the President's speech contains an attempt to
 sow distrust in the Soviet Union's stand.  He stated that the Soviet
 Union violates the unilateral moratorium it announced on the
 deployment of its medium-range missiles in the European part of the
 USSR.  I state quite definitely that the USSR is true to its word.
 98.  Andropov, Pravda interview responding to  rP esident Reagan s-
 Letter (Pravda, 2 Feb 83)
 99.  I must say quite definitely that there is nothing new in
 President R. Reagan's proposal.  What it is all about--and this all
 the world's news agencies have immediately taken note of--is the same
 "zero option." That it is patently unacceptable to the Soviet Union
 now is already generally recognized.  Really, can one seriously speak
 about a proposal according to which the Soviet Union would have to
 scrap unilaterally all its medium-range missiles, while the United
 States and its NATO allies would retain all their nuclear weapons of
 this category?
 100.  It is precisely this unrealistic position of the United States
 that has blocked, and this is well known, progress at the talks in
 Geneva.  That now the U.S. President has reiterated again this
 position indicates one thing: The United States does not want to look
 for a mutually acceptable accord with the Soviet Union and thereby
 deliberately dooms the Geneva talks to failure. . . .
 101.  We have believed and still believe that summit meetings have
 special significance to resolving complicated problems.  This
 determines our serious approach to them.
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 000175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 13    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page  13
 102.  For us this is not a matter of a political or a propaganda
 game. A meeting between the leaders of the USSR and the United
 States aimed at finding mutually acceptable solutions to urgent
 problems and at developing relations between our countries would be
 useful both to the Soviet Union and to the United States of America,
 to Europe, and to the whole world.
 103.  But when the U.S. President makes the meeting conditional on
 the Soviet Union's consent to the patently unacceptable solution to
 the problem of nuclear armaments in Europe, proposed by him, this by
 no means testifies to the seriousness of the American leadership's
 approach to the whole of this issue.  This can only be regretted.
 104.  Andropov, Pravda interview (Pravda, 27 Mar 83)
 105.  The President pretends that almost a thousand medium-range
 nuclear systems of the United States and its NATO allies do not
 ostensibly exist in the zone of Europe, and that it is unknown to him
 that NATO has a 1.5-1 advantage over the USSR in the aggregate number
 of nuclear warheads on those systems.
 106.  The President not only keeps silent about all that.  He tells a
 deliberate untruth [on govorit zavedomuyu nepravdu], asserting that
 the Soviet Union does not observe its own unilateral moratorium on
 the deployment of medium-range missiles. . . .
 107.  The incumbent U.S. Administration continues to tread an
 extremely perilous path.  The issues of war and peace must not be
 treated so flippantly.  All attempts at achieving military
 superiority over the USSR are futile. . . . It is time they stopped
 devising one option after another in search of the best ways of
 unleashing nuclear war in the hope of winning it.  Engaging in this
 is not just irresponsible, it is insane.
 108.  Andropov, speech to CPSU Central Committee plenum (Pravda, 16
 Jun 83)
 109.  This period is marked by a confrontation, unprecedented in the
 entire post-war period by its intensity and sharpness, of two
 diametrically opposite world outlooks, two political
 courses--socialism and imperialism.  A struggle is going on for the
 minds and hearts of billions of people in the world.  And the future
 of mankind depends in no small measure on the outcome of this
 ideological struggle. . . . It is no less important to skillfully
 expose the lying, subversive nature of imperialist propaganda. . . .
 110.  On the one hand, as has already been said, the aggressiveness
 of ultrareactionary forces led by U.S. imperialism has sharply
 increased.  Attempts are being made to reverse the course of events
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 14    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                    Page  14
 at all costs.  Of course, this policy will not bring imperialists
 success but, being adventuristic, it is extremely dangerous to
 mankind.  This is why it is meeting with powerful opposition on the
 part of the peoples, which, undoubtedly, will grow even further.
 111.  In the present-day capitalist world, however, there are also
 other trends and other politicians who take a more realistic account
 of the international situation.
 112.  Foreign Minister Andrey Gromyko, TASS interview (Pravda, 22 Jun
 83)
 113.  Naturally, a [summit] meeting which could produce major results
 for both bilateral Soviet-U.S. relations and the international
 situation would be useful.
 114.  Quite a few words are now being said in the West, particularly
 in Washington, about a Soviet-American summit.  An outsider can even
 get the impression that Washington is indeed giving serious thought
 to such a meeting.  But if we look into the crux of the matter, the
 situation, regrettably, is different.
 115.  Obviously, proper preconditions are needed to hold a meeting of
 the top leaders of the two major powers.  First, it is necessary to
 have a certain degree of mutual understanding on major issues which
 are fundamental to the state of relations between the two countries
 and the overall international situation.  There also is a need for
 the desire of both sides actually to strive for positive
 developments, or even better, for a breakthrough in their mutual
 relations.
 116.  If we consider the state of affairs from this point of view, it
 becomes clear that the discourses of American figures on a meeting
 are not backed by anything.  U.S. policy on relations with the Soviet
 Union does not pursue any constructive goals at all, of which
 American leaders make no secret.  Moreover, it is oriented in the
 totally opposite direction.
 117.  When there appear in American politics real signs of a
 readiness to conduct affairs in a serious and constructive manner,
 the question of the possibility of a summit will appear in a
 different light.
 118.  TASS statement on Korean airliner incident (Pravda, 3 Sep 83)
 119.  The intrusion into Soviet airspace by the aforementioned plane
 cannot be regarded in any other way than a preplanned act.  It was
 obviously thought possible to attain special intelligence aims
 without hindrance using civilian planes as a cover.
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 15    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                    Page  15
 120.  More than that, there is reason to believe that those who
 organized this provocation deliberately desired a further aggravation
 of the international situation striving to smear the Soviet Union, to
 sow hostility towards it and to cast aspersions on the Soviet
 peace-loving policy.
 121.  This is illustrated also by the impudent, slanderous statement
 in respect to the Soviet Union that was made instantly by President
 Reagan of the United States.
 122.  USSR Government statement on Korean airliner incident (Pravda,
 7 Sep 83)
 123.  The assertion of the U.S. President that Soviet pilots knew
 that it was a civilian aircraft are absolutely not in keeping with
 reality.
 124.  It is the sovereign right of every state to protect its
 borders.      . So the U.S. President makes himself out as an
 ignoramus saying, as he did in his address on 5 September, that the
 Soviet Union "arbitrarily proclaims" its borders in the airspace
 [sic].
 125.  But the point here, of course, is not the ignorance of one U.S.
 official or another.  The point is a deliberate preplanned action in
 an area that is strategically important to the Soviet Union.  The
 instigators of that action could not help realizing what its outcome
 could be, but went ahead with a major intelligence operation with the
 use, as is now becoming clear, of a civilian plane, deliberately
 exposing its passengers to mortal danger. . . .
 126.  This conclusion is confirmed by all subsequent actions of the
 U.S Administration.  Its leaders, including the U.S. President,
 launched a malicious and hostile anti-Soviet campaign over a very
 short time, clearly using a prearranged script.  Its essence has been
 revealed in its most concentrated form in the televised speech of
 U.S. President R. Reagan on 5 September--to try to blacken the image
 of the Soviet Union and discredit its social system, to provoke a
 feeling of hatred toward the Soviet people, to present the aims of
 the USSR foreign policy in a distorted perspective, and to distract
 attention from its peace initiatives.
 127.  The entire responsibility for this tragedy rests wholly and
 fully with the leaders of the United States of America.
 128.  Ogarkov, article (Izvestiya, 23 Sep 83)
 129.  The struggle for peace in our times has acquired special
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 16    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page  16
 significance.  That is due primarily to the sharply enhanced
 aggressiveness of international imperialism, Zionism, and reaction
 headed by the United States.  In recent years their actions have been
 significantly reminiscent of fascism's actions in the thirties.
 Having adopted flagrant lies and slander, the United States and its
 allies have launched a global offensive against socialism on all
 fronts, initiating, as they openly assert, a new "crusade" against
 us.  The Washington Administration is nurturing sinister plans.
 Expatiating on its alleged adherence to peace, the U.S.
 Administration, through its defense secretary, blasphemously states
 that "the path to peace is marked by preparation for war." The
 "Directive in the Defense Field for Fiscal 1984," drafted on
 instructions from the U.S. President, is evidence of how far the U.S.
 "hawks" have gone.  This official document sets as its main aim "the
 destruction of socialism as a sociopolitical system." That's all!
 There is no need to explain this gibberish.  Commentary is
 superfluous, as they say.  We can only marvel at the sheer ignorance
 and self-sufficiency of the transatlantic strategists, so infinitely
 far removed from a knowledge of the elementary foundations and laws
 of the development of human society.
 130.  Andropov, statement (Pravda, 29 Sep 83)
 131.  The Soviet leadership deems it necessary to inform the Soviet
 people, other peoples, and all who are responsible for determining
 states' policy of its assessment of the course purs e
 international affairs by the current U.S. Administration.
 132.  In short, it is a militarist course that represents a serious
 threat to peace.  Its essence is to try to ensure a dominating
 position in the world for the United States of America regardless of
 the interests of other states and peoples. . . .
 133.  When the U.S. President bombastically declares from the UN
 rostrum his commitment to the cause of peace, self-determination, and
 sovereignty of the peoples, these rhetorical declarations can
 convince no one.
 134.  If anyone has any illusions about the possibility of an
 evolution for the better in the present American Administration's
 policy, recent events have dispelled them once and for all.  The
 Administration is going so far for the sake of achieving its imperial
 objectives that one cannot help doubting whether any restraints
 [tormozal at all exist for Washington to prevent it from crossing a
 line before which any thinking person ought to stop.
 135.  The sophisticated provocation organized by the U.S. special
 services using a South Korean plane is also an example of extreme
 adventurism in policy. . . .
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 17    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                    Page  17
 136.  In their endeavor somehow to justify their dangerous,
 misanthropic policy, they are heaping mountains of slander on the
 Soviet Union and socialism as a social system, and the tone is being
 set by the U.S. President himself.  It must be frankly said that it
 is an unseemly spectacle when, having set themselves the aim of
 denigrating the Soviet people, the leaders of a country like the
 United States resort to what is virtually foul-mouthed abuse mingled
 with hypocritical sermons on morality and humanity. . . .
 137.  Now Washington, in addition to morality, is also flouting
 elementary rules of decency, displaying disrespect not only for
 statesmen and states but also for the United Nations. . . .
 138.  Of course, malicious attacks on the Soviet Union arouse in us a
 natural sense of indignation, but we have strong nerves, and we do
 not build our policy on emotions.  It is founded on common sense,
 realism, and profound responsibility for the destiny of peace.
 139.  Ustinov, article (Pravda, 19 Nov 83)
 140.  The aggressiveness of ultrareactionary imperialist forces
 increased sharply when the R. Reagan Administration came to power in
 the United States.  They have declared a "crusade" against socialism.
 141.  The R. Reagan Administration, in blatant contradiction with
 this commitment, is now stating its "right" to inflict a first
 nuclear strike in the hope of victory. . . .
 142.  The Washington Administration's war preparations are
 accompanied by shameless anti-Soviet hysteria.  Discarding all
 decency, top U.S.  officials are slandering the USSR, its people and
 policy, and the socialist way of life.  Lies, disinformation,
 juggling with facts, and provocations are being brought into play.
 It is with the aid of such methods that Washington figures, heating
 up the international situation, are counting on ensuring the
 unobstructed implementation of their course aimed at an unrestrained
 arms race.  This policy on the part of the White House leaders does
 not consist solely of emotions or rhetoric.  It is a consciously and
 coldly and deliberately implemented long-term strategy aimed at
 broadening confrontation and thus increasing the danger of war.
 143.  Andropov, statement (Pravda, 25 Nov 83)
 144.  The leadership of the Soviet Union has already apprised Soviet
 people and other peoples of its assessment of the present U.S.
 Administration's militarist course and warned the U.S. Government and
 the Western countries which are in agreement with it about the
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 18    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                    Page  18
 dangerous consequences of that course. . . .
 145.  The Soviet leadership appeals to the leaders of the United
 States and of the states of Vest Europe to weigh up once again all
 the consequences with which the implementation of the plans for the
 deployment of the new U.S. missiles in Europe threatens their own
 peoples and all mankind.
 146.  We are already living, even now, in a peace that is too
 fragile.  Responsible statesmen must therefore evaluate what is
 taking place and make a rational decision.  Only human reason can and
 must safeguard mankind from the awesome danger.  We call upon those
 who are nudging the world along the path of an ever more dangerous
 arms race to renounce the unrealizable calculations of achieving
 military superiority by such a path with the aim of dictating their
 will to other peoples and states.
 147.  Gromyko, speech at Conference on Disarmament in Europe (Pravda,
 19 Jan 84)
 148.  Instead of conducting talks and displaying a desire to work for
 accord, the U.S. Administration has chosen a course of breaking the
 existing alignment of forces. . . .
 149.  The incumbent U.S. Administration is an administration thinking
 in categories of war and acting accordingly. . . .
 150.  What is needed is deeds and not verbal equilibristics, the
 resort to which has been made particularly often in Washington
 lately.  They clearly are a sign of short-term considerations, and
 people already know sufficiently well the worth of such tricks.  No
 matter how hard one tries to lie--be it a crude lie or a virtuoso
 one--this will change nothing in the actual state of affairs.  What
 is needed is a turn of substance in policy--from the policy of
 militarism and aggression to a policy of peace and international
 cooperation.
 151.  Andropov, interview (Pravda, 25 Jan 84)
 152.  Interstate relations have found themselves in an atmosphere of
 dangerous tension.  The leaders of the United States, the U.S.
 Administration, bear full responsibility for this turn of events.
 153.  So, one may ask, why is the present situation in the world
 being deliberately distorted in the statements of American leaders?
 First of all to try to dispel the concern of the peoples, which has
 been mounting with every day, over Washington's militaristic policy
 and to undercut the growing resistance to this policy. . . .
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 19    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page  19
 154.  There is no need to convince us of the usefulness and
 expedience of dialogue.  This is our policy.  But the dialogue should
 be conducted on an equal footing and not from a position of strength,
 as it is proposed by Ronald Reagan.  The dialogue should not be
 conducted for the sake of dialogue.  It should be directed at the
 attainment of concrete accords.  It should be conducted honestly and
 no attempts should be made to use it for selfish aims.
 155.  The American leadership, as all signs indicate, has not given
 up its intentions to conduct talks with us from positions of
 strength, from positions of threats and pressure.
 156.  General Secretary Konstantin Chernenko, Central Committee
 plenum speech (Pravda, 14 Feb 84)
 157.  Nowadays, in the age of nuclear weapons and super-accurate
 missiles, people need [peaceful coexistence] as never before.
 Deplorably, some leaders of the capitalist countries, to all
 appearances, do not clearly realize, or do not wish to realize that.
 158.  We can very well see the threat created today to humankind by
 the reckless, adventurist actions of imperialism's aggressive
 forces--and we speak up about it, drawing to that danger the
 attention of the peoples of the whole earth.  We need no military
 superiority.  We do not intend to dictate our will to others.  But we
 will not permit the military equilibrium that has been achieved to be
 upset.  And let nobody have even the slightest doubt about that: We
 will further see to it that our country's defense capacity be
 strengthened, that we should have enough means to cool the hot heads
 of militant adventurists.
 159.  Gromyko, speech delivered at Andropov's funeral (Pravda, 15 Feb
 84)
 160.  Our country has put forward a series of major initiatives of
 principled importance.  Their aim is to strengthen peace.  For this
 it is necessary first and foremost that the attempts to tip the
 existing military-strategic equilibrium be renounced, that the
 nuclear arms buildup be stopped and that efforts be made to limit and
 reduce these weapons.  Those who are pursuing a policy of militarism,
 the mad arms race, and interference in the internal affairs of other
 countries should renounce this policy and substitute for it a policy
 of peace and cooperation.
 161.  Ustinov, article for Armed Forces Day (Pravda, 23 Feb 84)
 162.  Mankind's development along the path of democracy and socialism
 does not suit the most reactionary imperialist circles.  They are
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 20    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                    Page  20
 deliberately exacerbating the international situation.  The American
 imperialists in the grip of class hatred have proclaimed the Soviet
 Union to be "the focus of evil" and, ignoring the lessons of history,
 have declared a "crusade" against the USSR and world socialism.  In
 practice the United States is today playing the role of chief
 organizer of the imperialist policy of aggression.  All Washington's
 actions in the political, military, economic, and ideological fields
 are subordinated to the course aimed at establishing world domination
 and primarily at achieving military superiority over the USSR and the
 other Warsaw Pact countries.  To this end the United States has
 unleashed an unrestrained arms race and is commissioning more and
 more new systems of nuclear and conventional weapons, spending
 enormous sums on this. . . .
 163.  Disregarding generally accepted norms of international law, the
 U.S. Administration is declaring whole regions of the globe to be
 "zones of U.S. security" and flouting the sovereignty and
 independence of other states' peoples.  The United States' naked
 aggression against Grenada, undeclared wars against Lebanon and
 Nicaragua, overt support for reactionary dictatorial regimes in
 Central and South America, Africa, and Asia, and the campaign of
 threats against socialist Cuba will go down as pages of shame in U.S.
 history. . . .
 164.  In an attempt to dull the vigilance of peoples alarmed by the
 U.S.  Administration's militarist course its o   c    representatives
 have begun to adopt the garb of "peacemakers." But the peoples cannot
 be deceived.  They can see increasingly clearly that the present U.S.
 leaders' words are at variance with their actions.  They are
 continuing to push mankind toward a nuclear catastrophe.
 165.  Gromyko, election speech (Sovetskaya Belorussiya, 28 Feb 84)
 166.  The world situation remains complex, sometimes tense.  The
 source of the tension is aggressive imperialist circles' adventurist
 actions.  The present U.S. Administration has set itself the aim of
 disrupting in the United States' favor the existing
 military-strategic equilibrium, achieving for the United States
 dominant positions in the world and by relying on force, dictating
 its will to others.  It is trying to climb to the top of the world
 and issue commands to everyone from there.
 167.  The policy of the senseless arms race and flagrant pressure,
 including the use of armed force against sovereign states, is aimed
 at achieving these aims.  This aggressive political course is shaking
 the foundations of peace.
 168.  The already enormous arsenals of nuclear weapons which the NATO
 bloc possesses in Europe are no longer enough for Washington
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 21    of 92
 Document 1 of 2  ' AGAL Concatenated Database                    Page  21
 politicians.  They have decided to increase them.
 169.  The danger of war has increased substantially as a result of
 the deployment of new U.S. nuclear weapons in West Europe.      These
 actions destroyed the Geneva talks aimed at limiting and'
 substantially reducing nuclear arms. . . .
 170.  For some time now allegations have circulated to the effect
 that nothing special is happening in the international situation,
 that the world has become more secure with the U.S. missiles in
 Europe.  The aim of this deliberate distortion of reality is
 obvious--to lull the vigilance of the European and world public.
 171.  All indications are that not the least role here is played by
 considerations dictated by the election campaign in the United
 States.  The candidate from the Republican Party now in power would
 very much like to look respectable in the eyes of public opinion.
 Otherwise, who knows, the electorate may vote for the other party's
 candidate. . . .
 172.  It is not our choice that the state of Soviet-American
 relations is characterized by tension.  None other than the present
 American Administration has worsened and exacerbated them by its
 actions.
 173.  This Administration has done considerable work to upset ancv,-
 what is more, destroy what its predecessors did.  It has worked, if I
 can put it this way, with a big stick, striking out now at one and
 now at another agreement.  In fact, little remains of what was done
 earlier by both sides--the Soviet Union and the United States--in
 their common interests.
 174.  If prizes were given for this destructive work, or undermining
 agreements aimed at strengthening the cause of peace, then of course
 the present Washington Administration could with reason claim the
 prize.
 175.  Of course, it is easier to destroy and easier to overturn
 agreements which were achieved by others.  No special effort is
 required for this.  All that is needed is a sizable dose of
 recklessness and irresponsibility.
 176.  In Washington today it is possible to hear even at an official
 level statements in favor of improving relations between the USSR and
 the United States.  But it is hard to trust these statements.  The
 U.S. Administration has repeatedly demonstrated how cheaply it values
 statements of this sort.
 177.  Of course, I would like to hope that the recent statements will
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 22    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page  22
 not be empty talk and that they are not a sop to the election
 situation.  Of course, we will judge whether the United States has
 serious intentions by its practical actions.
 178.  Ustinov, election speech (Moskovskaya Pravda, 29 Feb 84)
 179.  The Soviet people and all peace-loving forces of the planet are
 deeply concerned over the complication of the world situation.  The
 cause of this is the aggressive, imperialist policy of the United
 States.  The United States is unleashing armed conflicts in different
 parts of the planet.  Imperialism is striving to liquidate the
 national liberation and democratic movements and is interfering
 openly in the internal affairs of sovereign states by using armed
 force, provocations, terror, and subversion.
 180.  The United States has launched an unprecedented arms race and
 is spending fabulous amounts of money on it. . . .
 181.  The deployment of the new U.S. first-strike nuclear missiles
 (Pershing II and cruise missiles) in West European countries creates
 particular alarm among the world public.  These actions by U.S. and
 NATO leaders have posed an additional threat to the security of the
 USSR and its allies and have made it impossible to continue the
 Geneva talks on the limitation of nuclear arms in. Europe.
 182.  The Washington Administration is trying to claim that security
 in Europe has supposedly become stronger as a result of the
 deployment of these missiles.  This is a blatant lie.  The purpose of
 such claims is to distract the world public's attention from the
 dangerous consequences of the White House's adventurous course.
 183.  Nor do the U.S. Administration's assertions that the new arms
 are being deployed because the United States lags behind the USSR in
 that sphere correspond with the real state of affairs. They do not
 correspond with reality in the slightest.  Approximate parity in the
 military-strategic sphere exists between the USSR and the United
 States.
 184.  Chernenko, election speech (Pravda, 3 Mar 84)
 185.  The past few years have seen a dramatic intensification of the
 policy of the more aggressive forces of U.S. imperialism, a policy of
 blatant militarism, claims to world dominance, resistance to
 progress, and violations of the rights and freedom of the peoples.
 The world has seen quite a few examples of the practical application
 of this policy.  These included the invasion of Lebanon, the
 occupation of Grenada, the undeclared war against Nicaragua, threats
 to Syria, and finally the turning of West Europe into a launching
 site for U.S. nuclear missiles targeted at the USSR and its allies.
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 23    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                    Page  23
 186.  Far from all the leaders of Western countries and influential
 political parties approve the adventurism of the U.S.
 Administration.  It worries a considerable segment of the U.S.
 public itself as well.  They are realizing ever more clearly there
 that the intensive militarization and the aggravation of the
 international situation have not brought nor are going to bring the
 USA military superiority and political achievements.  They only lead
 everywhere in the world to the escalation of criticism of
 Washington's belligerent course. . . .
 187.  Regrettably, the United States has turned its participation in
 talks on this subject into a tool of propaganda to camouflage the
 arms race and cold war policy.  We will not participate in this game.
 The Americans created obstacles to the talks both on "European" and
 on strategic nuclear weapons by deploying their missiles in Europe.
 It is the removal of these obstacles (which would also remove the
 need for measures taken in response) that offers the way to working
 out a mutually acceptable accord.
 188.  The U.S. Administration has lately begun to make peaceable
 sounding statements, urging us to enter into a "dialogue."
 189.  Attention was drawn worldwide to the fact that these statements
 are in sharp conflict with everything that tVie presen   n  ed-Rtafes
 Administration has said and, which is the main thing, done and
 continues doing in its relations with the Soviet Union.  Assurances
 of its good intentions can be taken seriously only if they are
 substantiated with real actions.
 190.  Chernenko, speech at dinner for Ethiopian leader Mengistu
 (Pravda, 30 Mar 84)
 191.  In order to camouflage its policy the American Administration
 is now trying in every way to pass itself off as a "lover of peace."
 However, everyone can see the real value of such posturing.  Recently
 the Soviet Union expressed readiness to reach agreement with other
 nuclear powers to jointly recognize norms regulating relations
 between them which should eventually contribute to the reduction and
 subsequent liquidation of nuclear armaments.  How did the United
 States respond to this?  I must say that no reply has come from
 Washington to this proposal.
 192.  The value of the lofty phrases about U.S. readiness to work for
 lessening international tension and to act in a spirit of restraint
 and nonuse of force or the threat of force can be clearly seen from
 the example of Nicaragua, against which the American special services
 and their hirelings are waging an undeclared war.  They are
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 24    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                    Page  24
 committing acts of violence and are killing peaceful civilians.  Does
 Washington really think that its policy of state terrorism and
 intervention in the affairs of sovereign states will be interpreted
 as "peacemaking" efforts?  It is profoundly erroneous to think so.
 193.  Chernenko, Pravda interview (9 Apr 84)
 194.  [The situation in the world] remains very dangerous.  And this
 is explained by the U.S. Administration's continued gamble on
 military force, on the attainment of military superiority, on the
 imposition of its order of things on other peoples.  This was
 confirmed once again by President Reagan's recent speech at
 Georgetown University.
 195.  Even if sometimes peace-loving rhetoric is heard from
 Washington, it is impossible, however hard one tries, to discern
 behind it even the slightest signs of readiness to back up these
 words with practical deeds. . . .
 196.  Our contacts with the American side also show that no positive
 changes have taken place in the position of the United States on
 these cardinal questions [of arms control].
 197.  Those who circulate [the idea that the USSR is waiting for the
 outcome of the presidential election there] either do not know or,
 most probably, deliberately distort our policy.  It is a principled
 policy and is not subject to transient vacillations.
 198.  Throughout the history of Soviet-American relations we have
 dealt with various administrations in Washington.  In those cases
 when realism and a responsible approach to relations with the Soviet
 Union were shown on the part of the U.S. leadership, matters, it can
 be said, proceeded normally.  This had a favorable effect on the
 general situation in the world as well, but in the absence of such a
 realistic approach our relations worsened accordingly.
 199.  Statement of the National Olympic Committee of the USSR (TASS,
 9 Apr 84)
 200.  U.S. President Reagan submitted to the IOC written guarantees
 of the U.S. Government's respect for the traditions, rules, and
 provisions of the Olympic Charter.  Facts show, however, that these
 obligations and guarantees are not respected in a number of major
 matters.  The U.S. Administration is trying to use the Olympic Games
 on the eve of the elections for its selfish political ends.
 201.  A large-scale campaign against the Soviet Union's participation
 in the Olympic Games has been mounted in the USA. . . .  In
 particular, a coalition called "Ban the Soviets," enjoying the
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 25     of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                             Page  25
 support of the U.S. official services, has been set up.  Open threats
 of physical victimization and provocative actions are made to
 sportsmen and officials of the USSR and other socialist countries.
 Slanderous allegations are being made that the participation of a
 Soviet delegation in the Olympic Games would presumably threaten U.S.
 security.
 202.  Tikhonov, speech to Supreme Soviet (Pravda, 13 Apr 84)
 203.  The measures we take to strengthen our defense are a logical
 response to the reckless attempts by militarist circles in the United
 States and other NATO countries to upset the military-strategic
 balance.  We state that this will be maintained whatever the
 conditions.  Security--both ours and that of our friends and
 allies--will remain reliably safeguarded.
 204.  Vladimir Dolgikh, candidate member of the CPSU Central
 Committee Politburo, Lenin anniversary speech (Soviet domestic radio,
 20 Apr 84)
 205.  We . . . now have to conduct our course in the international
 arena in a complex and very dangerous situation.
 206.  The origins of its sharp exacerbation are to be found in the
 aggressive policy of the imperialist circles of NATO, above all the
 United States.                                 -- -
 207.  Under the flag of the struggle against communism, the present
 White House Administration is opposing freedom and progress
 everywhere.  It is making open claims to world domination.  It is
 waging an unrestrained arms race that is fraught with the threat of a
 nuclear conflict.  The United States is declaring more and more areas
 of the world to be in the sphere of its vital interests.  It is
 fanning hotbeds of war and violence.  It is brazenly trampling on the
 rights of entire peoples.  Not confining itself to blackmail and
 threats and crude interference in the affairs of sovereign states,
 Washington is also resorting to direct aggression.  Suffice it to
 recall the piratical attack on Grenada, the barbaric actions of the
 U.S. brass hats in Lebanon, and the incessant acts of state terrorism
 against Nicaragua, against which an undeclared war is in effect being
 waged. . . .
 208.  In the capitalist countries, representatives of very, different
 sections of the population are jointly participating in a mass
 antiwar and antimissile movement that is unprecedented in its
 breadth.  The voice of the nonaligned movement is making itself heard
 ever more loudly and authoritatively in the struggle for peace.
 Concern at the increase in the danger of war and, sometimes,
 criticism of Washington's bellicose course are also increasing among
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 26    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page  26
 state and public figures in the West, both in Europe and in the
 United States itself.  All this shows how deep the roots of detente
 are.  It makes it possible to hope that it will ultimately be
 possible to redirect the current, dangerous course of events toward
 the strengthening of peace, limitation of the arms race, and
 development of international cooperation.
 209.  President Konstantin Chernenko, speech at dinner for Polish
 leader 3aruzelski (TASS, 4 May 84)
 210.  . . . Those who today are at the helm of government in the
 United States declare their intention to conduct external affairs
 from positions of strength. . . .
 211.  Unprecedented large-scale programs of the arms race, first and
 foremost the development and deployment of nuclear weapons, have been
 put to the service of this imperial course of achieving military
 superiority and imposing one's writ on other nations.
 212.  Having gone ahead with the deployment in West Europe of U.S. ?
 missiles aimed at the Soviet Union and other socialist countries,
 Washington and those in NATO who follow it unconditionally
 deliberately frustrated the process of the limitation and reduction
 of nuclear armaments by depriving the talks on both strategic arms
 and on nuclear arms in Europe of their subject matter.
 213.  And are not the large-scale programs of militarization of outer
 space aimed at promoting the self-same goals of world domination?
 They are now discussing these programs in Washington virtually every
 day and arrogantly, refusing even to enter into talks with the Soviet
 Union on this problem.
 214.  The U.S.A. is speeding up the production, modernization, and
 stockpiling of chemical weapons, those abominable means of killing
 people.  To camouflage its real stand, it had begun deceitful
 maneuvers at the Disarmament Conference in Geneva.  But if the
 rhetorical shell of its so-called "new" proposal on the prohibition
 of chemical weapons is cast off, there is an obvious desire to
 legalize, under the pretext of verification, U.S. intelligence
 gathering activity.  It is impossible to detect any positive shifts
 in the U.S. position on this problem.
 215.  There is every reason to state that a similar U.S. policy of
 military buildup is distinctly visible in many other areas of the
 arms race, whether in nuclear weapons or in armaments referred to as
 conventional.
 216.  All sorts of advertising tricks are being used to cover up the
 course of conventional buildup.  The West's latest proposals at the
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 27    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page  27
 Vienna talks on the limitation of armaments and armed forces in
 Central Europe constitute just a new packing for the old position,
 which has already deadlocked those talks.
 217.  In the recent period, mostly after the deployment of new U.S.
 missiles started in West Europe, appeals for contacts and talks have
 begun to be issued by Washington and some other Western capitals.
 However, regrettably, there is nothing concrete behind those appeals.
 He who could hope that realism and rationality are making their way
 here at long last would be profoundly deceived, which, perhaps, is
 precisely what the authors of these appeals would like to happen.
 218.  The proposals put forward for discussion bristle with so many
 provisions and conditions patently unacceptable to the other side as
 to confirm that these proposals are not meant for serious,
 businesslike talks.  The Soviet Union for its part is prepared for
 dialogue.  But we stand for a dialogue filled with real content.  A
 possibility for the resumption of talks on nuclear armaments can only
 be opened if the U.S. side removes the obstacles raised by it here
 and restores the previous situation.
 219.  USSR National Olympic Committee statement (TASS, 8 May 84)
 220.  As is known, in its statement of 10 April 1984 the National
 Olympic Committee of the USSR voiced serious concern over the rude
 violations by the organizers of the games of the rules of the Olympic
 Charter and the anti-Soviet campaign launched by the reactionary
 circles in the United States with the connivance of the official
 authorities, and asked the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to
 study the obtaining situation. . . .
 221.  Disregarding the opinion of the IOC the United States
 authorities continue rudely to interfere in affairs belonging
 exclusively to the competence of the Los Angeles Olympic Organizing
 Committee. It is known that from the very first days of preparations
 for the present Olympics the American Administration has set course
 at using the games for its political aims.  Chauvinistic sentiments
 and an anti-Soviet hysteria are being whipped up in the country. . .
 222.  In these conditions the National Olympic Committee of the USSR
 is compelled to declare that participation of Soviet sportsmen in the
 games of the 23d Olympiad in Los Angeles is impossible.  To act
 differently would be tantamount to approving of the anti-Olympian
 actions of the U.S. authorities and organizers of the games. . . .
 223.  Ustinov, article (Pravda, 9 May 84)
 224.  Imperialist, reactionary circles are trying to ignore the
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 28    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                    Page  28
 lessons of the past and are nurturing plans for unleashing new wars
 and military conflicts.  The aggressiveness and adventurist policy
 are manifested particularly blatantly in the actions of the present
 U.S. Administration.  The United States has proclaimed a "crusade"
 against socialism in order to abolish it as a sociopolitical force.
 To this end, Washington has resolved, come what may, to break the
 military-strategic equilibrium and to achieve military superiority
 over the USSR and the socialist community.  An unprecedentedly
 large-scale arms buildup has been planned for many years ahead, and
 nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction are being
 stockpiled.  Washington has embarked on the militarization of space.
 New first-strike nuclear missile weapons are being deployed on the
 territory of a number of West European states.
 225.  The aggressive U.S. actions are also borne out by the fact that
 it is thwarting the talks on questions of arms limitation and is
 refusing to observe, and indeed is even violating, previously
 concluded agreements.
 226.  Marching along the path of preparation for war, the imperialist
 circles are seeking to conceal and camouflage their aggressive policy
 by every means.  Various "peacemaking" speeches have recently begun
 to be delivered.  Their aim is clear--to mislead the peoples of the
 world with regard to the true intentions of the extreme reactionary
 U.S. forces and their stooges.
 227.  In an attempt to justify the buildup of military preparations,
 the United States is using the myth of the "Soviet military threat,"
 which it fabricated itself, and is expatiating on the extreme need to
 defend its "vital interests" in almost all regions of the world.  On
 these phony pretexts, it is expanding its military presence many
 thousands of kilometers from its own territory, seeking any
 opportunity to aggravate international tension, fuel military
 conflicts, and then, by threatening to use or by using its own armed
 forces, is trying to channel them to its own predatory imperialist
 purposes.  This is confirmed by the rampaging in Lebanon, the
 aggression in Grenada, the undeclared war against Nicaragua and
 Afghanistan, the interference in El Salvador's internal affairs, and
 the overt threats to Cuba and Syria.  Terror and subversive activity
 against other states have become a component of the present U.S.
 Administration's foreign policy.
 228.  The reckless, adventurist actions of imperialist reaction pose
 a threat to all mankind.  They carry within them the danger that
 world war and nuclear catastrophe will be unleashed.
 229.  Chernenko, reply to letter from U.S. scientists on weapons in
 space (Pravda, 20 May 84)
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 29    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page  29
 230.  Some people . . . would like to turn space into a bridgehead of
 aggression and war.  It is clear from U.S. announcements that it
 plans to deploy antimissile weapons in space, give scope to the
 operation of various sorts of antisatellite systems, and deploy
 super-new types of weapons designed for dealing strikes against
 targets on land, in the air, and at sea.
 231.  The Soviet Union is a firm opponent of competition in the race
 of any kind of armaments, including space weapons.
 232.  At the same time it should be understood that in the face of a
 threat from space the Soviet Union will be forced to take measures in
 order to guarantee its security reliably.  Calculations that it is
 'possible to lay the road to military superiority through space are
 built on illusions.  However,'they do not want to give up such
 calculations and this is fraught with extremely dangerous
 consequences.  To prevent such a train of events, before it is too
 late, is the direct duty of responsible state figures, scientists, of
 all who are really concerned for the future of mankind.
 233.  The Soviet Union again confirms that it is ready to make
 maximum efforts to see that sinister plans for transferring the arms
 race into space do not become reality.  It is our conviction that a
 policy aimed at safely protecting space from the deployment of
 weapons should be the compulsory norm of conduct of states, a _
 universally recognized international obligation.
 234.  We are resolutely against the development of large-scale
 antimissile defense systems, which cannot be regarded otherwise than
 as calculated for the unpunished implementation of nuclear
 aggression.  There is a Soviet-American treaty on antimissile
 defense, without time-limit, banning the creation of such systems.
 It must be strictly observed.  The solemn renunciation of the very
 idea of the deployment in space of antimissile systems would meet the
 spirit and letter of this treaty and the task of ensuring a peaceful
 status of outer space in the interests of all mankind.  Such a step
 would be interpreted everywhere in the world as a manifestation of
 genuine concern for the peaceful future of mankind.
 235.  The matter of banning antisatellite weapons is also urgent.
 Deployment of such weapons would result in sharp destabilization of
 the situation, to an increased threat of sudden attack, and would
 undermine the efforts for ensuring trust between nuclear states.
 236.  Gromyko, speech at luncheon for West German Foreign Minister
 Genscher (TASS, 21 May 84)
 237.  The United States Administration is absolutely clearly banking
 on confrontation and arbitrariness in international relations, on
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 30    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page  30
 breaking up in its favor the existing military equilibrium.
 238.  Now it appears that in the West, too, many have come to realize
 that the torpedoing of the talks on nuclear arms in Geneva was
 programmed in advance.  This was done by those who were bent on one
 thing--to deploy at all cost in NATO West European countries their
 first-strike nuclear missiles against the Soviet Union and other
 socialist countries.  That is how they exploded the talks.  They
 tried to feign grief at this but nothing came out of it.  Their
 pretense is too obvious.
 239.  They try to cover up their actions with talk like the end of
 the world has not come and a "new glacial period" has not set in.
 But this is a sham, artificial optimism.  Is it not clear that the
 appearance in Europe of new American missiles has drastically
 aggravated the nuclear threat.  And this threat continues to grow
 with every new missile that is being deployed, including on the
 territory of the FRG.
 240.  Chernenko, remarks to West German Foreign Minister Genscher
 (Soviet domestic radio, 22 May 84)
 241.  During the talk, Konstantin Ustinovich Chernenko reaffirmed the
 invariability of the USSR's course for guaranteeing peace, curbing
 the arms race, and averting a nuclear catastrophe.  He drew attention
 to the serious growth of the danger of war, especially following the
 emergence in Vest Europe--including the territory of the FRG--of new
 U.S. first-strike missiles.  In connection with this, it was stressed
 that if the United States and NATO continue to step up the nuclear
 threat, adequate countermeasures will steadfastly be implemented by
 the Soviet Union and its allies.  They will not permit any military
 superiority over themselves.  However, building up the military
 confrontation is not of our choosing.
 242.  The USSR is in favor of radical limitation and reduction of
 nuclear weapons in accordance with the principle of equality and
 identical security. . . .
 243.  It is the Soviet Union that advocates meaningful dialogue and
 puts forward specific proposals aimed at reaching practical
 agreements.  The U.S.  Administration is aware of the Soviet
 proposals.  The USSR proposes to the United States, in particular,
 that negotiations should be started on preventing the militarization
 of space, and that the negotiations on a total and universal ban of
 nuclear weapons tests should be resumed, with the participation of
 Britain.
 244.  We have called upon the United States to bring into force,
 finally, the Soviet-U.S. treaties of 1974 and 1976 on limiting
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 31    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page  31
 underground nuclear explosions.    The USSR also persistently raises
 the question of a mutual freeze on nuclear arsenals.       A negative
 answer is invariably given to all these proposals by the American
 side. In other words, Washington is not interested in negotiating.
 The usefulness of dialogue is discussed there only in general terms,
 nothing more.
 245.  Editorial article on U.S. chemical weapons convention proposal
 (Pravda, 27 May 84)
 246.  The Soviet Union has . . . made considerable efforts to secure
 progress in resolving the tasks of banning chemical weapons within
 the framework of multilateral forums--the United Nations and the
 Geneva Disarmament Committee.  The document "Fundamental Provisions
 of a Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production,
 and Stockpiling of Chemical Weapons and Their Destruction" submitted
 by the Soviet Union in the summer of 1982 took account of the
 viewpoints of many other states.  This document, which received a
 broad positive assessment, provided an opportunity to achieve a
 speedy mutually acceptable accord on banning chemical weapons and
 establishing reliable verification of its observance.  In February
 this year the Soviet Union made yet another important step, proposing
 the establishment of permanent monitoring of the process of the
 destruction of chemical weapons.
 247.  The United States has a different approach.  Having made
 extensive use of toxins in the Vietnam war, the United States
 continues even today to allocate this means of mass destruction an
 important place in its aggressive military plans.  It took the United
 States over 50 years to accede to the Geneva protocol.  While being
 compelled to participate in multilateral talks on banning chemical
 weapons, it nevertheless dodges the reaching of an accord in every
 way, often retreats from its own positions, and complicates the
 solution of already complex questions. . . .
 248.  For several months extensively publicized statements were made
 in the U.S.  capital that the United States would be submitting
 "constructive proposals" on banning chemical weapons to the Geneva
 Disarmament Conference.  But when the United States presented its
 much-publicized draft convention it immediately became clear how far
 removed it was from promoting the achievement of an accord.
 Moreover, any unprejudiced person familiarizing himself with the
 American draft convention is left in no doubt that it is compiled in
 such a way as to make it deliberately unacceptable to all who are
 interested in seeing that there is no room on earth for chemical
 weapons.
 249.  This applies primarily to the verification provisions contained
 in the American draft.  The verification system it envisages would
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 32    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page  32
 mean in practice free access for verification officials to any
 chemical enterprises irrespective of whether they have anything to do
 with the production or storage of chemical weapons.
 250.  Gromyko, speech during visit by Australian Foreign Minister
 Hayden (TASS, 29 May 84)
 251.  Peoples of the Soviet Union and Australia, who fought against
 the common enemy in the years of World War II, want to live in peace,
 and peace is the main achievement of mankind.  Our meeting gives us
 an opportunity to compare the positions of the Soviet Union and
 Australia on international problems, to exchange views on possible
 ways of alleviating the dangerous tension existing now in the world.
 To this we are prompted by all mankind's worry for its future, for
 its very existence which has never before been subjected to such a
 serious threat.
 252.  What are the reasons for this situation?  They lie in the
 imperial, hegemonist course of the USA in world affairs, its stake on
 the acquisition of military superiority.  That is the policy
 proclaimed in Washington, that is the policy made there.  All over
 the world more and more people whose convictions are often different
 from ours come to realize where the danger of war has built its nest,
 from where it threatens peace.  In these circumstances the Soviet
 Union considers it to be its duty to take all necessary response
 measures of a defensive nature.  No more-than that but no 1-es-s---
 either.
 253.   Midlevel and Routine Media Commentary
 254.  Oleg Anichkin, CPSU Central Committee official (Soviet domestic
 radio, 14 Nov 80)
 255.  Reagan is in favor of stepping up American military might and
 the achievement of U.S. military supremacy. . . .
 256.  At the same time his advisers direct attention to such points.
 The nearer Reagan has approached the White House, the more moderate
 have been his enunciations.  One can suppose that this process will
 continue.
 257.  Georgiy Arbatov, director of the USA and Canada Institute
 (Soviet television, 29 Nov 80)
 258.  It has become clear in any case that both Reagan and many in
 his entourage have come to some serious conclusions during the course
 of this campaign.  The shift to the center has begun.  This is
 generally typical of U.S.  political life.  Whichever candidate
 stands away from the center will shift.  If he is left of center, he
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 33    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page  33
 will drift to the right.  If he is right of center, he will drift
 slightly to the left remaining at some distance, but even so will
 approach the center.  Reagan is a rather experienced man in this
 respect.  I would like to say that I have heard and read in the
 foreign press that as a film actor he is a man without much
 experience.  However, it is difficult to judge from the past.  There
 were excellent presidents who were former loggers. . . .
 259.  The fact itself that moderate statements are made seems
 important to me, because quite a few obstacles were left over from
 the election campaign.  This certainly does not mean that we will be
 rancorous and will not let anything pass, including what was said in
 the heat of the election struggle.  We have already said publicly
 that we will not act like that.  However, even words are deeds,to a
 certain extent at present, because they influence atmosphere and
 climate.  Atmosphere and climate are rather important in politics and
 any beginnings depend on them.
 260.  Aleksandr Bovin, Izvestiya political observer and reputed
 adviser to Presidents Brezhnev and Andropov (Soviet domestic radio, 7
 Dec 80)
 261.  Reagan, of course, realizes that he cannot get away from
 continuing talks with the Soviet Union.  But, by all accounts, it
 seems to me, in general, that a harder line U.S._ policy is at-hand,
 particularly where it concerns, for example, the problems of
 disarmament and military detente.  It seems to me that soon we will
 have to confront a harder line of this kind and preparations for this
 should be made, although in general I do not exclude the possibility
 that after a while everything may return to the beaten track, as we
 say.
 262.  Vitaliy Kobysh, CPSU Central Committee official (Literaturnaya
 Gazeta, 1 Jan 81)
 263.  Reagan, with his reputation for being a politician belonging to
 the extreme right wing of the Republican Party, has formed his
 cabinet from people of basically moderate views. . . .
 264.  When "taking over," every new administration strives to show
 that it is different from the previous one and that its policy will
 meet the country's interests to a greater degree.  Statements by
 Reagan and some of his closest assistants indicate that they consider
 the status to which the Carter-Brzezinski administration has reduced
 Soviet-U.S. relations to be abnormal and that they see the
 normalization of these relations as the next U.S. Government's
 foremost priority.  At the same time they stress that they will
 pursue a "tough policy"; in other words, they will act from a
 "position of strength." We will see how all this will appear in
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 34    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                    Page  34
 practice.
 265.  TASS report on President Reagan's 29 January press conference
 (Pravda, 31 Jan 81)
 266.  Referring to the Soviet Union's policy, the U.S. President
 permitted a number of premeditated distortions in his assessment of
 the aims and character of the USSR's international activities.  He
 said, in particular, that up to now detente has been a one-way street
 which the Soviet Union has used for the achievement of its own aims,
 and that detente is more favorable to the Soviet Union than to the
 United States. . . .
 267.  In an unworthy manner Reagan went on to talk about some sort of
 insidiousness in the Soviet Union's policy which allegedly aims to
 establish a worldwide socialist or communist state. . . .
 268.  Concerning one of the important problems, the SALT II treaty,
 the President committed obvious distortions of the treaty's essence.
 269.  Anichkin (Soviet domestic radio, 6 Feb 81)
 270.  On the whole President Reagan [at his press conference on 29
 January] said nothing new in comparison with what he said during the
 election campaign.  He attributed to the Soviet Union designs to
 establish world domination and to set up a worldwide socialist or
 communist state.  Then he declared that the Soviet Union is using
 detente for its own ends and has allegedly turned it into a one-way
 street.  All of this is untrue. . . .
 271.  It is one thing when minor politicians are talking in this
 spirit; it is another when such words are being pronounced by the
 President.  After all, it is a question of the deliberate distortion
 of Soviet policy. . . .
 272.  In the words of The Washington Post, Reagan had adopted a tone
 which is very strikingly different from the Republican and Democratic
 administrations of the 60's and 70's.  The President, the same
 newspaper writes, spoke of the Soviet Union in terms that recall the
 most difficult times of the cold war.
 273.  "I. Aleksandrov," pseudonym used in officially inspired
 articles (Pravda, 25 Mar 81)
 274.  Regretfully, from their very first public statements and
 practical steps the leaders of the new U.S. Government appear to be
 bent not on rectifying but on multiplying the errors of the previous
 administration, on facilitating not a lessening of international
 tension but its growth. . . .
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 35    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page  35
 275.  The leaders of the Washington Administration and some hawkish
 lawmakers are now engaged in a competition of belligerent
 phraseology, are trying to outdo one another by the hugeness of
 military programs.
 276.  Bovin (Soviet television, 29 Mar 81)
 277.  I now think that the essential outlines of the new foreign
 policy course, of Reagan's foreign policy, have now become
 sufficiently visible.  It is a harsh, conservative, power policy, it
 is a policy whose cornerstone comprises extremely primitive
 anticommunist concepts.  In general the views of Reagan and his
 supporters on world developments are extremely simple: Anything they
 do not like, anything that is contrary to the interests of
 imperialism, they say is all the result of the insidious actions of
 the Soviet Union.  From this primitive package a simple conclusion is
 drawn: The time for playing at detente is over, it is necessary to
 rearm immediately, it is necessary to strive for military strategic
 superiority over the Soviet Union, and on this basis impose the will
 of America the Great on the whole world.
 278.  Well, this is approximately the philosophy.  Let us now examine
 the practice.  We all know that during the past decade, let us say,
 despite all the difficulties and complexities, between the Soviet
 Union and the United States there became esta  is e  a  a r y --,.--------
 well-developed structure of mutual relations which was formulated in
 dozens of different agreements.  Now the new Administration is
 beginning to break up this structure and deal a mean blow to its
 foundation, the process of strategic arms limitation.
 279.  Arbatov (Pravda, 4 May 81)
 280.  Most observers agree that, even by late April, no in any way
 coherent U.S.  foreign policy has emerged--at any rate when it comes
 to actions.  There have been plenty of words and rhetoric--so much
 that the Administration itself has more than once had to backpedal.
 But can words and rhetoric be regarded as policy?
 281.  They probably can be, in some respects.
 282.  First of all, they can shed light on political views and
 intentions.  In this light the "noises" from Washington are almost
 unambiguous: They indicate a desire to accelerate the arms race in
 every possible way and to secure military superiority, a wish to
 switch relations with the USSR and the other socialist countries onto
 the road of confrontation and power struggle, to rule according to
 whim the fate of the countries that have-liberated themselves from
 colonialism, to dictate unceremoniously to the allies.  The very fact
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 36 of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                 Page  36
 that the people who have come to power in the United States talk at
 length and insistently of these desires and intentions cannot be left
 out of account.  The fact must be viewed as an objective reality.
 But another fact remains no less a reality--the fact that intentions
 and wishes alone are not enough to constitute a policy.  Politics has
 been and will remain the art of the possible.  And the possibilities,
 the realities of the modern world certainly do not leave a great deal
 of room for the imperial ambitions which people in Washington are
 today going on about with new force.
 283.  The question whether the new U.S. Administration has formulated
 its foreign policy should be left open, I think.  Some may hope that
 it has not been formulated yet, others may think differently.  It is
 clear, however, that the continuation of the existing situation would
 itself pose grave dangers, particularly the attempts to transform
 bombastic propaganda slogans into practical policy premises.  All
 this is dangerous not only for other countries but also for the
 United States itself and for its national interests, which need more
 than ever before a realistic, sober analysis.
 284.  Leonid Zamyatin, chief of the CPSU Central Committee
 International Information Department (Soviet television, 16 May 81)
 285.  On many questions the foreign policy concept of the new Reagan
 Administration has already been formulated.
 286.  On the basis of speeches, although at times you could say they
 are quite saturated with anti-Soviet rhetoric, and on the basis of
 documents which have already been published, it can be definitely
 concluded that the new U.S. Administration has chosen a sharp
 whipping up of the arms race as its course.  The new Administration
 considers that opposition to the Soviet Union--as its leaders, the
 leaders of the United States, say--in the economic, political, and
 other fields is its main foreign policy concept.  Besides, they
 maintain that this opposition must be on a global scale.
 287.  Reagan recently said: I do not wish to live in a world where
 the Soviet Union is first.  What does this mean?  If these words of
 Reagan's are translated into another language--into the language of
 politics from everyday language--this means that the United States
 has chosen military supremacy over the Soviet Union as its political
 concept;.that it is rejecting the policy of peaceful coexistence, the
 policy of detente; and that it is making a stake on sharply raising
 the military presence of the United States in various parts of the
 world, including along the perimeter of Soviet borders.  It is also
 attempting, by increasing its military potential, to put pressure on
 the Soviet Union.
 288.  Arbatov (Soviet television, 31 Oct 81)
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 37    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                    Page  37
 289.  If we are to speak about American policy, then of course we can
 say that the most extremist views have prevailed in the question of
 military spending, and generally in American behavior in the
 international arena.  Well, of course, many say that maybe these
 people bark more than they bite.  It is still difficult and too early
 to judge.  But they do in fact bark a lot, and a lot of militaristic
 talk can be heard coming from Washington every day.  This is not just
 talk.  There are military appropriation decisions on military
 programs, certain U.S. positions and actions on various continents,
 and interference into the affairs of a number of countries--all of
 this has become a reality.  Therefore, we are undoubtedly seeing a
 period which gives cause to remember the cold war and to suspect that
 quite a lot has been done to sweep aside all the positive things that
 were accumulated at the expense of great labor in international
 relations and thus a big step has been taken toward a cold war. . . .
 290.  So things in the economy are not turning out quite the way the
 President figured, and to a certain extent this can be a limiting
 factor for many far-reaching American plans. . . .
 291.  All of these realities are just beginning to appear--after all
 this government has not been in power very long--and these political
 and social mechanisms, which demand some kind of accommodation on the
 part of the Administration, have just been set-in motion.
 292.  Of course, there are people there who . . . it is difficult to
 imagine that they can reform.  But overall--and we have seen this in
 history more than once--even the most conservative politicians have
 been sufficiently pragmatic in understanding what can be done and
 what cannot be done. . . .
 293.  Even in America, they are beginning to somehow understand that
 the question is becoming extremely acute, that some kind of reaction
 to it is necessary, that in Europe and the world as a whole--and even
 in the United States, as a matter of fact--some sentiments are
 appearing.
 294.  Bovin (Soviet domestic radio, 29 Nov 81)
 295.  In fact, what did this Reagan speech of 18 November mean?  Does
 it, to some degree . . . signify a reassessment of the U.S. position,
 or . . . is it an attempt to gain a political alibi with respect to
 the pressures being exerted by America's allies in Europe?  As for
 which of these elements was more evident in the speech, this is an
 open question both for us and for Europe.  We will find out when the
 talks begin.
 296.  Nikolay Shishlin, CPSU Central Committee official (Soviet
 FOUo
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 38    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                    Page  38
 television, 5 Dec 81)
 297.  Regarding the fact of an alteration in the U.S. foreign policy
 course taking place, an alteration in the U.S. foreign policy course
 beginning to become perceptible--this is true. . . .  It seems that
 in this respect in particular we are right in talking neither of a
 cosmetic operation nor of a break with past policies, but rather of a
 certain alteration in course, a certain adaptation of American
 policies to reality.
 298.  Bovin (Soviet domestic radio, 20 Dec 81)
 299.  One of the main problems for Europe at the moment is the
 problem of the so-called Eurostrategic weapons. . . . One can view
 these [INF] talks in different ways.  On the one hand, the talks have
 a specific object--medium-range weapons.  But their principal
 significance is the fact that after a whole year of agitation and
 alarm and hysterical kinds of statements by Washington, generally
 speaking things there are quietly beginning to stabilize.
 300.  TASS report on U.S. sanctions after the imposition of martial
 law in Poland (Pravda, 30 Dec 81)
 301.  The U.S. Administration has taken a provocative step the
 purpose of which is to poison the international climate even more,--- to
 exacerbate tensions, to worsen confrontation and toughen the
 militarist foreign policy course. . . .
 302.  President R. Reagan has published a statement, announcing the
 introduction of a whole number of unilateral discriminatory measures
 with regard to the Soviet Union, ranging from a suspension of
 Aeroflot service to the USA to a review of bilateral Soviet-U.S.
 agreements in trade and scientific-technical cooperation, agreements
 signed by the Government of the United States.
 303.  To justify this crude diktat with regard to a sovereign state
 unprecedented and absolutely inadmissible in universally accepted
 international practice, the head of the U.S. Administration has
 resorted to direct forgery and lies, maintaining that the Soviet
 Union allegedly "interfered" in Polish affairs and bears "direct
 responsibility" for the situation in Poland.
 304.  Arbatov (Pravda, 1 Jan 82)
 305.  "Seeking a crisis" is precisely how Washington's stance
 regarding Poland can be described. . . . Attempts are being made to
 "internationalize" the crisis and to exploit the events to still
 further exacerbate the international situation and relations with the
 USSR in particular.
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 39    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database               Page  39
 306.  The question naturally arises of the true motives and true aims
 of the campaign unleashed by the United States over the events in
 Poland. ? .   .
 307.  I want immediately to stipulate that in mentioning the present
 leaders, I mean not only the President and his most influential
 ministers but also a broader stratum of the Washington bureaucracy,
 above all the stratum comprising the deputy and assistant cabinet
 members, the President's chief advisers and entourage, the heads of a
 number of departments, and so forth.      . And with the utmost
 responsibility I would venture to claim that as a group, this "second
 echelon" is in considerable part composed of extremists representing
 the far right wing, extreme militarist flank of the U.S. ruling
 class. . . . A whole series of conclusions can be derived from all
 that is known of these people.  One is that they are people who rose
 to prominence on a wave of crisis and feel like fish out of water
 outside a crisis. . . .
 308.  A certain circle of American figures now needs a crisis as a
 condition of its political success, even political survival.  And it
 is apparently prepared to go to any lengths for the sake of that.
 309.  Aleksandr Kaverznev, Soviet television political observer
 (Hungarian domestic radio, 18 Feb 82)
 310.  We are of the opinion that the coming years will be difficult.
 In the beginning, when the Reagan Administration came to power in the
 United States, we had certain hopes that the President would not
 implement the policy he announced during his election campaign.  We
 hoped that life would oblige him to see many things in a different
 way.  But now we are forced to conclude that for the entire duration
 of the Reagan Administration we can hardly expect a different U.S.
 policy.
 311.  Shishlin (Soviet domestic radio, 11 Apr 82)
 312.  Reagan, it must be said, has garnished these rather bellicose
 statements with the somewhat curious assertion that he, the President
 of the United States, is willing to meet Leonid Ilich Brezhnev in the
 summer at the second special session of the UN General Assembly on
 disarmament.  And there is a rather strange contradiction here.
 Actually, the idea of a summit meeting--a Soviet-American summit
 meeting--was proposed over one year ago from the platform of the 26th
 party congress.  In that time, the Soviet Union has covered a
 considerable part of the.distance toward finding ground for mutually
 acceptable solutions in the interests of improving Soviet-American
 relations.  We saw nothing of the kind from the American side.  And
 now into the midst of these rather definite statements, which can
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 40    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page  40
 only be called militaristic, he inserts the claim that he is ready
 for a Soviet-American summit meeting.
 313.  Ernst Genri, prominent journalist (Literaturnaya Gazeta, 14 Jul
 82)
 314.  Consequently, has the failure of Hitler's blitzkrieg against
 the USSR taught the U.S. militarists nothing?  By all accounts, this
 is exactly the case and must be taken into account.  It is not hard
 to understand what is guiding the Pentagon's thinkers.
 315.  They are not taking the failure of the Hitlerite adventure into
 account simply because there has been a revolution in military
 hardware since then.  It is now proposed to deliver a surprise strike
 against the USSR not by means of tanks and conventional aircraft, but
 by nuclear missiles and other "super weapons" which can fly thousands
 of kilometers in a few minutes.
 316.  Arbatov (Pravda, 16 Jul 82)
 317.  U.S. policy would be good to the extent to which it is not
 allowed to be bad, safe (not only for us but also for America itself
 and its allies) to the extent to which it is not allowed to become
 dangerous.  It will not be allowed to evolve in those directions by
 economic and political realities, by the policies of other countries,
 by the Americans' common sense and by the striving of the peoples for
 self-preservation.  I hope that these factors will be enough for the
 continued political processes to bolster the realistic principles and
 to return American policy to an understanding of not only the
 existing contradictions but also of very serious and vitally
 important common interests, the interests of peace and survival,
 which require not only talks but also agreements as well as the
 overall improvement of relations between the two countries.  {What if
 this does not come to pass?  I personally would find solace in the
 thought that a time will come and it will be possible to say: It is
 not with this Administration that history began, and it is not with
 it that it has ended.
 318.  Vadim Zagladin, first deputy chief of the CPSU Central
 Committee International Department (Czechoslovak domestic radio, 30
 Jul 82)
 319.  Reagan and his Administration--and I deliberately do not say
 the United States since there are various internal groupings--Reagan
 and his Administration represent that part of the capitalist world of
 monopoly capital, which is convinced that the solution of questions
 of the future, of problems of mutual relations between the two
 systems, can be achieved only by means of force.  Circles currently
 in the leadership of a substantial part of European countries take a
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 41    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                    Page  41
 completely different viewpoint.  It is not easy for them but they
 give preference to a peaceful development of relations and to solving
 questions by competition in a peaceful atmosphere.  . . .
 320.  Extreme views exist; there are people who say that the
 situation is so complex and difficult that there is no way out, that
 only the worst can be expected, that we are on the very threshold of
 war.  That of course is an extreme view and is incorrect because
 there are a number of positive factors; the head-on struggle and
 existing equilibrium of forces is a guarantee that we can advance and
 not allow imperialism to realize its plans.
 321.  On the other hand there are some people who say that there have
 been all kinds of crises; this will pass, too.  We are strong; we
 have the strength of the Soviet Union, the strength of the socialist
 countries; it will all pass of its own accord.  It will not pass of
 its own accord; of course that, too, is incorrect.
 322.  Yes, without doubt we are capable of defending ourselves, of
 rebuffing the imperialist wave, but that depends on us, on the
 situation of our countries and in our countries, on the unity of our
 countries and their joint activity in the international arena.
 323.  Bovin (Izvestiya, 6 Aug 82)
 324.  In general it is hard to deal with t   Ameri-cans-xiow-.--The_       _._
 dissemble, twist and turn, say one thing and do another.  They have
 many ambitions and a great deal of self-esteem.  They have little
 responsibility.  But what can you do?  We do not choose our partners,
 they are given us by destiny, by history.  We have to talk and
 negotiate with them although, to be frank, I do not believe that any
 serious agreement can be reached with the Americans as long as Reagan
 is in the White House.
 325.  Vladimir Ostrogorskiy, commentator (Moscow radio in German, 22
 Aug 82)
 326.  If Reagan knew history better and made its lessons his own, he
 would not harbor any illusions, since there were people before him
 who, like Hitler, had a special liking for using the miraculous
 weapon of inflammatory propaganda on the air.  It is typical for
 aspirants to world domination to rely on miraculous weapons.  It is,
 however, well known how they usually have ended.
 327.  Bovin (Izvestiya, 5 Nov 82)
 328.  Now let us allow the skeptic to have his say.  He is bound to
 ask: Are we not overestimating our own strength?  Can international
 security and international cooperation seriously be expected when the
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 000175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 42    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database               Page  42
 world is divided into opposing sociopolitical systems?  Is the
 "Reagan phenomenon" an accident?  The questions are not farfetched.
 The difficulties are indeed huge.  Militarism and aggressiveness are
 inherent in imperialism.  We do not choose our partners; fate,
 history hands them to us.
 329.  All that is true.  Nonetheless, the hope is realistic.  The
 hope is realistic because the forces advocating that detente get a
 "second wind" represent a real, weighty factor in world politics.
 The Soviet Union is a mighty power.  People across the Atlantic
 cannot help but take this into account--whatever team is assembled in
 the White House, it is still not a suicide team.  The socialist
 community and the communist and workers' parties are with us.  Dozens
 of nonaligned states advocate detente and disarmament and oppose the
 division of the world into military-political blocs.  The
 antinuclear, antiwar movement is gaining unprecedented scope and its
 social and political spectrum is becoming increasingly broad. . . .
 330.  I repeat, we would like to reach agreement, even with Reagan.
 What if this does not happen?  We will wait.
 331.  Shishlin (Soviet domestic radio, 21 Nov 82)
 332.  Actions for the benefit of peace would carry a lot more weight
 than conciliatory words.  If we were to see a real shift in the
 American position at the talks that are being-held on-strategi~
 armaments, on European armaments, on conventional armaments in
 Central Europe--that would surely be more substantial than the words
 spoken by the American statesmen.  So the situation remains pretty
 difficult. . . .
 333.  Pravda editorial (Pravda, 21 Nov 82)
 334.  Judging by international reactions, Andropov's meetings with
 foreign delegations gave new impetus to people's hopes for the
 maintenance and development of the detente process.  The Soviet Union
 is always ready for honest, equal, and mutually advantageous
 cooperation with any state which wishes it, particularly with the
 United States.  Normal, or better still, friendly Soviet-American
 relations would accord with the interests of both peoples and of
 world peace.
 335.  Gennadiy Gerasimov, Novosti deputy chairman (Soviet television,
 28 Nov 82)
 336.  The events of the last weeks in Moscow, by the very nature of
 things, have caused a certain pause in international relations. The
 world has been watching Moscow to see what will happen and, in its
 turn, Moscow has been watching the world attentively, too.  American
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 43    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                    Page  43
 Senator Robert Dole, a prominent figure in the Republican
 Party--Reagan's party--has been in Moscow during these days.      He
 stated that he observes an advancement by the Reagan Administration
 toward a new beginning--that is how he expressed himself.  Some
 observers have begun cautiously seeking signs of a thaw, even a weak
 one, in American-Soviet relations.
 337.  Arbatov, speech to U.S. trade delegation (Literaturnaya Gazeta,
 8 Dee 82)
 338.  In the last few days many people's hopes regarding the
 prospects of Soviet-American relations have revived.  The dramatic
 nature of the moment, when events are prompting reflection on the
 most serious problems perturbing people, may even have helped in a
 way. . . .
 339.  Something seems to be beginning to change for the better.
 Something has happened and something positive too.  I think it is a
 good thing that ASTEC has met.  It seems to me that it is an
 important event and shows that many Americans (and Soviet people,
 too, of course) understand the fundamental interests of their
 countries and "gas for pipes" deal.  We assessed positively the
 American leaders' expression of condolences on the death of Leonid
 Ilich Brezhnev and the fact that the U.S. President personally
 visited the Soviet Embassy and sent the U.S. vice president and
 secretary of state to Moscow.  We have carefully--followed-the---words
 spoken in this connection, and the positive [khoroshiye] words we
 have greeted positively.
 340.  But if I were asked if I could assess these facts as evidence
 of the abandonment by the United States of a policy that in our
 country--I must be frank with you--is seen as a policy of cold war
 and as a course of a headlong arms race and of unbounded--mortal, as
 the saying goes--enmity?  [sentence as published] Or is what has
 happened in the last few days merely a maneuver aimed at reassuring
 the public at large and the allies so that they do not prevent this
 policy of total enmity from being pursued in the future?  If I were
 asked those questions, I would honestly say that as yet I have no
 answer.
 341.  Bovin (Soviet television, 30 Dec 82)
 342.  It is difficult to escape the impression that the opponents of
 detente in Washington are gradually beginning to give ground.  I
 would even risk making the following conclusion: The isolation of
 Reagan and his policy is growing both within the United States and
 outside it.  Evidently, we can assume that this will force the White
 House to intensify its maneuvering.  But at the moment it is
 difficult to say whether this will affect the essence of the foreign
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 44    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page  44
 policy course or only its form, as has already been the case.
 343.  Commentators Aleksandr Korshunov and Oleg Blinov (Soviet
 domestic radio, 12 Jan 83)
 344.  At the end of his [latest radio] speech, Reagan stated the
 readiness of the United States--and I quote--to sit down at the
 conference table with the Russians to discuss practical measures
 capable of resolving the problems and leading to a more durable and
 genuine improvement of relations between East and West.  If this is
 really so, then one can only welcome the U.S.  President's
 utterances.  The Soviet Union believes that the path toward mutual
 talks is open and that our two countries could make an important
 contribution to the cause of creating a climate of mutual trust,
 mutual understanding and cooperation in the world.
 345.  Valentin Zorin, Soviet television political observer (Moscow
 radio [in English] to North America, 3 Apr 83)
 346.  But the leaders in Washington are not only rude and tactless in
 their political styles, they also break another unwritten rule of
 statesmanship.  It is unfortunate when the mass media juggles with
 facts but it is inexcusable when leaders in positions of utmost
 responsibility resort to overt lies.  There have been many instances
 when the current leaders in Washington have flagrantly distorted the
 truth and deliberately lied to the public. Thg-r_  s thn EsaQ- in-
 most recent statements made by President Reagan about Soviet policy.
 347.  Kobysh (Literaturnaya Gazeta, 6 Apr 83)
 348.  [In,his] 1 April speech and in previous speeches, R. Reagan
 cast aside all Easter rhetoric and explained quite clearly and
 bluntly that the Administration that he heads, far from intending to
 renounce its military preparations on a monstrous scale and its
 hegemonist aggressive course, actually contemplates something still
 more sinister.  Playing with words, he presented to the public in the
 guise of "ABM defense" the announcement that the United States is
 embarking on the implementation of a vast new, purely aggressive
 program of military preparations, mainly covering space.  This
 announcement was further evidence that the present U.S. Government is
 not simply preparing for nuclear war, but has set a course toward
 unleashing such a war.
 349.  Valentin Falin, Izvestiya political observer (Izvestiya, 14 Aug
 83)
 350.  And what does the U.S. leadership think now?  It links the
 maintenance of peace between our states to the United States'
 acquisition of military superiority in addition to the USSR's
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 000175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 45    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                    Page  45
 renunciation of a socialist social system.  In other words, the
 Soviet Union must learn to be at the United States' beck and call or
 it will only have itself to blame.     It is perfectly obvious that this
 view has nothing in common with the "Basic Principles of Mutual
 Relations between the USSR and the United States" which the U.S.
 leader sealed with his signature in May 1972. . . .
 351.  True, for some time now representatives of the present
 administration have been going in for soft-pedaling.  They have been
 transforming R. Reagan from a dashing mindless horseman into a
 soft-hearted "peace champion." A broad stream of misinformation is
 being broadcast in which they want to whitewash the U.S. stance at
 the talks on nuclear arms in Europe and on strategic arms limitation
 and reduction.
 352.  Arkadiy Sakhnin (Literaturnaya Gazeta, 5 Oct 83)
 353.  Under pressure from the peoples, imperialism seemed to accept
 the incipient detente.  But it could not keep it up.  What do you
 mean, detente?!  So much power!  Must rule the world!
 354.  A familiar turn.  We heard it from the madman [Hitler).  It was
 also heard by a smart master of ceremonies, an actor from the
 "General Electric Theater" television program.  He was advertising
 washing machines and detergents.  He got it into his head: A career
 can be built around this tune.  He selected- the words--to-the tune-end------
 rehearsed the pose of sovereign.                            He uttered: "I will not end the
 ideological 'drama.'" Those who writhe with pain at the sound of the
 word "peace" liked the pose.  They liked the words, too.  They
 decided to give it a try and brought the actor in for a test.  They
 hauled him off the theatrical and onto the political stage.  On the
 small stage, to start with.  The familiar tune sounded louder, the
 words more threatening.  The test was successful.  On to the big
 stage.
 355.  This is how the second plenipotentiary of imperialism to lay a
 claim to world domination appeared on earth in our days.  He picked a
 team worthy of himself and settled into the White House.
 356.  Today the Second Pretender holds in his hands not a bomb but a
 nuclear missile.  He is waving it about on land, on the water, under
 the water, and in the sky, and is carrying it into space. . . .
 357.  Take the plugs out of your ears, Reagan.  Time to think about
 God.  That is what religious people would say.  But we are realists:
 Think about Nuremberg.
 358.  Aleksandr Yakovlev, director of the World Economics and
 International Relations Institute (Izvestiya, 7 Oct 83)
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 46    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page  46
 359.  There can be no doubt that the current U.S. President is
 exerting an extremely destructive influence on the international
 situation.  His personal contribution to bringing the danger of war
 closer is great, and he bears the responsibility for the very rapid
 demolition of the structure of international cooperation built by the
 efforts of many countries on the platform of deepening and
 strengthening peace. . . .
 360.  As the Los Angeles Times notes, Reagan does not have an
 inquiring mind.  Eyewitnesses invariably stress that he has more
 horses in his stables than books in his library.  He believes in
 flying saucers, assiduously reads horoscopes, and believes in the
 actions of secret evil spirits.
 361.  Aleksey Leontyev, Krasnaya Zvezda commentator (Krasnaya Zvezda,
 15 Oct 83)
 362.  In an attempt to somehow justify their adopted course of war
 preparations, the new aspirants to world domination--in that sense
 too the heirs of the raving Fuehrer--excel in slander against the
 Soviet Union and resort virtually to foul-mouthed abuse alternating
 with hypocritical homilies about morality and human rights, with the
 White House incumbent himself setting the tone.
 363.  If we are to believe Reagan, America is ruled--by-"the--most
 noble," "the most magnanimous," and "the most philanthropic"
 gentlemen.  But there is no mention of the fact that each of these
 gentlemen possesses heaps of dollars in his bank account, acquired
 from the drudgery of modern-day slaves, taken from widows and
 orphans, and collected from the corpses of soldiers who have perished
 in the dirty wars and criminal adventures of the United States.
 364.  Bovin (0techestven Front, 1 Dec 83)
 365.  When the Americans agreed to detente and when they held
 constructive talks with us, this was an attempt to adapt their policy
 to the changes in life and in the world that had emerged.  Nov the
 reverse process is occurring--Reagan is trying to adapt the whole
 world to the interests of the United States as he understands them.
 Such an approach, however, again undermines the realistic basis for
 any constructive agreements.  Evidence of this is the failure of the
 Geneva talks.
 366.  The dominance of a conservative, reactionary, and archaic
 ideology in the United States, an ideology which is being transformed
 to politics, is the main obstacle for regulating disputed problems.
 I think that Reagan cannot change himself. . . . Since Reagan will
 probably stay in the White House for another four years, it is my
 FOUO
 ,UNCLASSIFIED
 000175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 47    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                    Page  47
 belief that for that period of time we will not succeed in reaching
 an agreement on anything meaningful.     We will, of course, conduct
 negotiations, we will try to sign agreements and we will probably
 even succeed somewhere on the political fringes.      However, I think
 that concerning the main and basic issues we will have to face a game
 of nerves, confrontation, and conflicts for another four years.  This
 is not a very optimistic prospect.  I would very much like to be
 wrong but I can draw no other conclusion at present.
 367.  Fedor Burlatskiy, Literaturnaya Gazeta political observer and
 CPSU Central Committee official (Literaturnaya Gazeta, 4 Jan 84)
 368.  It is impossible to deny that a serious turnabout occurred in
 U.S.  geopolitics on the threshold of the eighties, or that the
 United States has completely rejected the very idea of detente and
 has embarked on the path of global confrontation with the Soviet
 Union. . . .
 369.  It is well known that this shift is basically linked with the
 arrival of President Reagan in the White House, a man with extremely
 reactionary views representing the interests of the "iron
 triangle"--the military business, the Pentagon, and the militarist
 wing in the U.S. Congress. . . .
 370.  [Whether the present militarist course in the United States is
 irreversible] is a very complicated question-.-.. Much depends on
 whether R. Reagan manages to win the forthcoming U.S. election in the
 fall of 1984.  Much also depends on the correlation of forces within
 the framework of the U.S. economic and political elite and on public
 opinion in that country.
 371.  R. Reagan is hastening to consolidate the basic foundations of
 militarism for the future.  He is inflating the military budget and
 planning programs for new types of weapons.  Nonetheless, political
 forces in the United States and the U.S. people still have not had
 their final say.  I am convinced that ordinary people in the United
 States fear thermonuclear war no less than other people in the world.
 372.  TASS report on President Reagan's State of the Union Address
 (TASS, 26 Jan 84)
 373.  President Ronald Reagan made a traditional "State of the Union"
 address to a joint meeting of the two houses of Congress.  His
 statement, made in a spirit of electioneering, was an attempt to
 picture in a favorable light the results of his three-year rule and
 justify his policy, marked by extreme aggressiveness in the
 international field and total disregard for the needs of the common
 people in the home policy field.
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 48    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database              Page  48
 374.  The foreign policy section of the President's State of the
 Union address was notable for demagogy and hypocrisy.  The President
 was trying to justify his militaristic policy by claiming that "the
 United States is safer . . . and more secure in 1984 than before",
 albeit, in real fact, the threat to general security, including to
 the security of the United States itself, has increased.  And the
 leaders of the United States bear all responsibility for such a turn
 of events.
 375.  Yuriy Kornilov, TASS commentator (TASS, 30 Jan 84)
 376.  The U.S. Administration speaks a great deal about "the need of
 a dialogue." Yet, it deadlocks, disrupts, and blocks all the talks on
 the problems of curbing the arms race. . . .
 377.  Our hands are clean, and we have never been aggressors, U.S.
 President R. Reagan pointed out recently at the Congress in the State
 of the Union message.  This is an obvious lie.  In the past six years
 alone the U.S.  Administration resorted to armed actions or the
 threat of force against other states 38 times. . . .
 378.  The thing is that from whatever point of view we assess the
 situation, it is more than obvious: The allegedly "peacemaking"
 tricks of Reagan and his team, brought about by the purely
 time-serving considerations, have nothing to do with the real foreign
 policy pursued by Washington, which is based today, - he same
 before, on the desire to make history reverse its course, to reshape
 the political map of the world.
 379.  Eduard Mnatsakanov, Soviet television political observer
 (Soviet television, 29 Feb 84)
 380.  It looks as though Reagan's people are working on preparations
 for . . . a stunning finale [to the election campaign], but the plans
 for this are stunningly primitive: simply turn things upside down,
 call black white and vice versa.  And so much chauvinist demagogy is
 being poured over millions of Americans that it makes one recall the
 times of German history at the beginning of the thirties.
 381.  Bovin (Czechoslovak domestic radio, 2 Mar 84)
 382.  During his entire three and a half years in the White House
 Reagan spoiled practically everything he could.  But now something
 rather peculiar is beginning to happen.  Today Reagan is preparing
 himself for a new election and has realized the necessity of altering
 his image.  No longer does he want to be seen as a warmonger. . . .
 The fact is that the words now being delivered by the U.S. President
 do not correspond to his actions. . . .  My own impression, however,
 is that the Americans are not ready for such a dialogue and that so
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 000175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 49    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database               Page  49
 long as Reagan is in the White House we will not reach an agreement
 with the Americans on anything solid. . . .
 383.  The question of [a summit meeting] is . . . complicated, for,
 above all, thorough preparation would have to precede it.  Second, if
 I may be frank, I would not even want such a meeting to take place,
 because, after all, in the current situation it would mean throwing a
 lifeline to Reagan, and I think that there is no need to do that.
 384.  Leonid Ponomarev, TASS commentator (TASS, 20 Mar 84)
 385.  Large-scale propaganda of nuclear war has become an integral
 element of the policy of the present U.S. Administration which
 preaches not only the admissibility and the moral justification of a
 nuclear conflict but also the certainty of a U.S. victory in it.
 386.  Kornilov (TASS, 20 Mar 84)
 387.  It is common knowledge that Washington has made militarist
 plans for a "limited" nuclear war although it is perfectly obvious
 that nuclear holocaust, wherever it might spring from, will not spare
 the United States.  It is Washington's strategists who are making
 plans for the first "disarming" nuclear strike, which can only be
 viewed as an attempt to tailor Hitler's delirious "blitzkrieg" idea
 to the realities of the nuclear age.
 388.  Bovin (Izvestiya, 21 Mar 84)
 389.  Reagan and his advisers realize that the dangerous formula
 "Reagan Means War!" is being bandied about.  It is no accident that
 the President has been saying so much about peace, negotiations, and
 disarmament in recent months.  The image of the wild cowboy is
 hurriedly being replaced by the image of the wise statesman concerned
 to avert a war.  What if the voters do not believe it? . . .
 390.  Reagan's immense strength is his personal attractiveness, his
 ability to be just the way people want to see him.  In the television
 age this is not just a "subjective factor" but the most objective and
 politically significant reality.  The indomitable optimism, the
 ostentatiously emphasized confidence, the permanent mask of the
 regular, good-natured guy--all this impresses the "average American."
 Much is said and written about the fact that Reagan is not weighed
 down by erudition and culture, reads virtually nothing, spends his
 evenings in front of the television, does not overwork himself,
 confuses facts, names, and events, and so on.  And here is the
 paradox.  What is a minus from the standpoint of a more or less
 developed political culture becomes a plus in the eyes of that
 "average American" who is pleased that the President is not some
 intellectual or Harvard know-it-all, but a down-to-earth,
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 50
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                 Page  50
 unsophisticated guy like himself. . . .
 391.  In my opinion, conservatism in the United States has already
 peaked.  Reagan's mass base is starting to contract.  In an attempt
 to get control of the situation the President is moving away from
 conservative rhetoric increasingly often and toward political
 pragmatism.
 392.  Georgiy Shakhnazarov, president of the Soviet Association of
 Political Science (Soviet domestic radio, 23 Mar 84)
 393.  In the words of a Canadian journalist, the people in European
 countries believe in the majority that under Reagan the threat of war
 is no less than under Genghis Khan.
 394.  Anatoliy Krasikov, commentator (TASS, 5 Apr 84)
 395.  Nowadays the entire huge military machine of the United States
 prepares to repeat what was done by Hitler and his Wehrmacht.  Only
 the scope of this preparation is immeasurably greater.  Washington
 opens up new fronts of the arms race one after another and dreams of
 war going beyond our planet and out into space.  Like Nazi Germany's
 leaders at their time, the White House leaders nowadays accompany
 preparations for war by stirring up hatred for the Soviet Union.
 396.  TASS report on President Reagan's press-confer nce_(TASS,_6_Apr
 84)
 397.  It is noted. by observers . . . that since the times of Hitler's
 Reich no government has so openly set the task of liquidating lawful
 regimes in other sovereign states and so cynically declared its
 intention to use the force of arms, armed intervention and blockade
 for subversive purposes.
 398.  Sergey Kulik, TASS commentator (TASS, 11 Apr 84)
 399.  In one day, Ronald Reagan signed two documents.  In one
 the President, in the bombastic style which is all his own, laid
 himself out to lend credibility to his Administration's alleged
 commitment to the rule of law and democracy.  In the second document,
 circulated in the form of a U.S.  State Department statement "On the
 International Court in The Hague," he refused downright to recognize
 international law.
 400.  Many mass media organs and prominent U.S. politicians note that
 by its posture vis-a-vis the International Court in The Hague,
 Washington had actually admitted pursuing subversion against the
 lawful government of a sovereign nation, mining its ports and sinking
 vessels with peaceful cargo, subversion authorized, according to an
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 51    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                    Page  51
 admission by today's Washington Post, by Reagan personally.
 401.  Vladimir Kudryavtsev, Izvestiya political observer (Izvestiya,
 11 Apr 84)
 402.  The actions of the U.S. Administration's leading trio--the
 President, the secretary of state, and the secretary of defense--are
 absolutely full of ultramilitarism, lightly powdered with an
 ostentatious "love of peace."
 403.  Reagan's speech at Georgetown University and Secretary of State
 Shultz's speech at a session of the so-called "Trilateral Commission"
 in Washington promise a repetition of what has already taken place
 and an expansion of what is now being done by terrorist methods
 elevated to the rank of state policy. . . .
 404.  Summing up briefly the essence of the recent speeches in this
 sphere by Reagan and Shultz, it boils down to this: The United States
 is now officially striving to cast aside everything that hinders its
 armed assertion of its "leading role in the world," that is, to free
 itself from the operative provisions of international law and the
 directive decisions of the United Nations.  We do as we please--that
 is the "moral" that guides the present U.S. Administration.
 405.  Sergey Losev, director general of TASS (Ogonek magazine, 14 Apr
 84)                                                  ---
 406.                       The American Administration's destructive approach to the
 problem of restricting the arms race fits into the framework of
 Reagan's policy of a "crusade" against socialism and against the
 sovereignty and freedom of peoples.  Terror, arbitrariness, and
 interference in the affairs of sovereign, independent states have
 been elevated to the level of state policy by the present U.S.
 Administration.  Since the times of the Hitler Reich no government
 has so openly set the task of the forcible liquidation of lawful
 regimes in other sovereign states.  Claims to international
 brigandage--that is the meaning of the American President's arguments
 that "peace based on force is by no means a slogan but a fact of
 life."
 407.  Viktor Olin, commentator (Moscow Radio World Service in
 English, 16 Apr 84)
 408.  The United States Administration persists in relying upon
 military strength, on achieving a military superiority, on imposing
 its system on other nations.  The policies of the Washington
 Administration also cause serious concern because of their historical
 associations.  Nazi Germany too adopted the strategy of a blitzkrieg
 and justified its attack on other countries by speaking of the need
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 000175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 52    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database               Page  52
 to deal preemptive strikes.  Militarist Japan was following the same
 doctrine in attacking Pearl Harbor.  Such methods brought no success
 to past exponents of international terrorism, but they did cause the
 suffering and death of tens of millions of people.  Today, in the
 nuclear age, their consequences could be immeasurably more tragic.
 409.  TASS commentary (TASS, 3 May 84)
 410.  President Reagan's visit to the PRC has drawn to a close.  The
 U.S.  Administration was striving to use it to the fullest possible
 extent as an election-year visit and for the realization of its
 hegemonistic plans in the Asian and Far Eastern region. . . .
 411.  Reagan and his Administration, taking account of the continuing
 election campaign in the U.S.A., wanted to use the "China factor" to
 the full to further its plans, to play the "China card," above all,
 in the context of confrontation with the Soviet Union in the
 Asia-and-Pacific region, to broaden out, in Reagan's words, areas of
 coinciding and parallel interests with China, to carry on with the
 coordination of actions with China on a series of issues in the
 international arena.
 412.  The American President was in every way trying to give his
 talks and, especially, his public statements, a provocative
 anti-Soviet orientation.  This came as a fresh confirmation of the
 militarist course steered by the U.S. Adm-inis  aion--and-of its
 reluctance to seek agreement with the Soviet Union, including on
 disarmament issues.  In doing so, Reagan speculatively assured the
 Chinese leadership that the U.S.A. would never consent to sign an
 agreement with the Soviet Union on the reduction or elimination of
 nuclear armaments in Europe, if the Soviet missiles deployed in Asia
 remained unaffected. . . .
 413.  TASS report (TASS, 6 May 84)
 414.  R. Reagan, the United States President, has come forward with a
 new demagogic statement timed for the beginning of the second round
 of the Stockholm Conference on measures for strengthening confidence,
 security, and disarmament in Europe. . . .
 415.  Reagan also touted other U.S. pseudo-initiatives, including the
 draft treaty on chemical weapons tabled at Geneva whose purpose is to
 camouflage the Pentagon's policy of stepping up the rate of
 production, updating and stockpiling this monstrous means of dealing
 a strike against people.  The U.S. draft is aimed, under the pretext
 of monitoring, at legalizing U.S.  intelligence-gathering activity.
 416.  Reagan's assurances of the wish "to hold serious talks" look
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 53    of 92
 Docurent 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page  53
 particularly flimsy against the background of the course he has
 mapped out for the militarization of space, signifying an undermining
 of the whole process of limiting nuclear weapons.
 417.  Vikentiy Matveyev, Izvestiya political observer (Izvestiya, 8
 May 84)
 418.  The U.S. leaders, having wrecked the Geneva talks through their
 actions by way of unleashing a dangerous new round of the nuclear
 arms race and having ignored the will of the vast majority of the
 population in the FRG, Britain, and Italy, where the deployment of
 the new American missiles has begun, would now like to weaken the
 wave of criticism of them by stubbornly repeating statements in favor
 of a "resumption of the Geneva talks."
 419.  On the eve of the resumption of the Stockholm Conference's
 work, President Reagan spoke again, expatiating on the "desirability"
 of talks on medium-range missiles.  Yet a few days earlier he was
 demonstrating his anti-Soviet obsession to the whole world with his
 calls to knock together a "front" whose creation was striven for in
 the thirties by inveterate reactionaries in the West together with
 the fascist aggressors. . . .
 420.  TASS report (TASS, 10 May 84)
 421.  President Ronald Reagan of. the United._-S-tates _made_-a-r.e-l_e~vi~ed   __-_
 speech devoted to the policy of the United States in respect to
 Central America.  A shameless lie from beginning to end--this is how
 one can characterize his speech that is yet another exercise in
 demagogy, slander, whipping up of anticommunism, chauvinism and
 hatred for other countries and peoples, in preaching openly state
 terrorism and war.  In effect Reagan called military interference and
 aggression in Central America with the aim of suppressing the
 revolutionary and national-liberation movement, that has spread
 throughout that region, a "legal right and moral duty" of the United
 States.
 422.  TASS report on U.S. Olympic ceremony (TASS, 15 May 84)
 423.  Addressing a White House ceremony on the occasion of the
 arrival of the Olympic flame in Washington from New York, President
 Reagan was hypocritically speaking about his Administration's
 adherence to the ideals of the Olympic movement and "observance of
 the Olympic Charter." President Reagan claimed that he and his
 Administration have done their utmost to ensure a warm reception for
 all states at the Olympic Games.
 424.  But what sort of a "warm reception" for the athletes can it be,
 if, judging by the press reports, Peter Ueberroth, the president of
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 54    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database               Page  54
 the Los Angeles Olympic Organizing Committee, himself, turned to the
 authorities with a request that he and his family be ensured security
 in connection with the outrages of fascist-type and terrorist
 groupings in Los Angeles?!  And the American press refutes the
 hypocritical statements by the U.S. President.
 425.  TASS report on Administration stand on MX, INF (TASS, 15 May
 84)
 426.  Speaking at a press conference on Monday, President Reagan
 presented Congress with an ultimatum, demanding from it approval for
 the White House's plan to spend in fiscal 1985 3.1 billion dollars to
 build another 40 modern MX first-strike intercontinental ballistic
 missiles under the program "to rearm America." According to him,
 there is no more important problem on the agenda of his
 Administration than the fulfillment of the strategic modernization
 program, on which more than 180 billion dollars are going to be spent
 and which is aimed at achieving military superiority over the USSR.
 427.  Last year the Administration pushed through Congress
 appropriations for the manufacture of 21 MX missiles.  All in all,
 100 such missiles are going to be deployed in Nebraska and Wyoming.
 Washington at that time used an outright lie in claiming that
 approval of its plans by Congress would "stimulate" efforts to
 control nuclear armaments.  Reagan resorted to this tactic again:
 "Without . . . the MX the incentive for the--So fiefs---o-re-tu-r-n-to--the--
 negotiating table is greatly reduced," he claimed.  Observers point
 out that practice has demonstrated the utmost fallacy of these
 calculations because every spurt of Washington in building up its
 nuclear arms arsenals aggravates the military and political situation
 in the world and lessens the chance of progress in arms reduction.
 428.  During the press conference the President again hypocritically
 appealed to the Soviet Union to return to the negotiating table of
 the Geneva talks although they had been scuttled by the deployment of
 new U.S. nuclear missiles in West Europe by the United States and its
 NATO partners.  The Soviet Union's position on this issue is well
 known: The possibility to reopen the talks on nuclear armaments can
 appear only if the U.S. side removes the obstacles of its own making
 and restores and predeployment situation.
 429.  Trying to justify his position, which is dangerous to the cause
 of peace, the President again distorted facts and indulged in
 outright slander.  For instance, he claimed that the United States
 did not start wars but maintained its might to deter aggression and
 safeguard peace.  That was said by the same man who personally
 ordered a piratic act of aggression against tiny Grenada, sanctioned
 the CIA's "secret war" against revolutionary Nicaragua and the mining,
 of the civilian ports of that country, and directed the U.S. armed
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 55    of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                     Page  55
 intervention in Lebanon.
 430.  TASS commentary (TASS 23 May 84)
 431.  As a result of these [Soviet] measures, the security of the
 United States has diminished, of course.  However, the Reagan
 Administration's spokesmen, who at one time deceived the U.S. people
 in the question of the correlation of the military power of the USSR
 and the USA with a view to stepping up the arms race without
 hindrance, are now misleading their own population by belittling the
 importance of Soviet military countermeasures--so as to conceal the
 dangerous consequences of the deployment of U.S. missiles in West
 Europe. . . .
 432.  The Pentagon spokesmen nevertheless note that the travel time
 of the missiles on new Soviet submarines to targets in the United
 States has decreased from 20-25 minutes to 5-7 minutes.  This alone
 already means that Reagan's calculations to make the Russians go to
 sleep with a thought that the United States will deliver a nuclear
 strike against them, have failed.  Such plans of Washington are
 unrealistic.  Retaliation for an aggression is inevitable.
 433.  Burlatskiy (Literaturnaya Gazeta, 23 May 84)
 434.  During my recent trip to the United States, I gained the
 impression that the political pendulum, wh-i-ch--for four years-now--has----
 been pushing the country's present leadership solely in the direction
 of militarism and adventurism, has reached its culmination point.
 The United States has undertaken open, armed interference in Lebanon,
 mined the ports in Nicaragua, and begun implementing the "Star Wars"
 program.
 435.  All this has frightened Americans.  Not only the public, but
 Congress as well, seem to have realized clearly for the first time
 that the President really is capable of involving the United States
 in a war--a "small one" to start with, like the one in Vietnam, and
 then, by way of escalation, possibly even a large one. . . .
 436.  The President has spent billions of dollars on consolidating
 U.S. security.  As a result of this, however, the country's security
 has weakened while the threat of war has increased.  He has
 repeatedly resorted to military force in different parts of the
 globe.  And he has suffered one defeat after another, as was clearly
 evidenced by events in Lebanon.  The intoxication of the "victory"
 over tiny Grenada failed to capture the imagination of serious and
 thinking people in the United States.  The President proclaimed the
 resumption of the arms limitation talks process.  But he wrecked
 Geneva and has turned out to be the only U.S. leader whose term in
 office did not contain the conclusion of a single agreement in this
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00175644
 UNCLASSIFIED
 FOUO
 Page: 56 of 92
 Document 1 of 2   AGAL Concatenated Database                 Page  56
 sphere.  Finally, he has brought relations with the Soviet Union to
 their lowest level.
 437.  These results of the President's military and foreign policy
 are forcing many representatives of the country's elite to recall
 Talleyrand's memorable saying: "This is worse than a crime.  This is
 a mistake!" And although the average American is highly impressed by
 strong policies and a "strong president," he is now saying more and
 more often: Stop, this is impractical!  Practical politics is the art
 of the possible, not just of the desirable. . . .
 438.  1 asked one of the famous U.S. political scientists in
 confidence: What is the psychological explanation for the incumbent
 U.S. President's fondness for nuclear games?  One gets the impression
 that some kind of mysterious force seems to attract him to them.
 "Yes, yes, I myself have thought of this," my interlocutor said.
 "And what strikes me more than anything else in this connection is
 our President's statements about the inevitability of Armageddon, the
 'end of the world."'
 439.  According to religious beliefs, Armageddon is the place where
 the final battle between the forces of good and evil will be fought.
 At that moment God will take the affairs of mankind in his hands and
 he will walk the earth and punish the sinners.
 440.  This is what R. Reagan said to corr-espondent-s--o?--a-t-elev s-ion-----
 company: "It could be that our generation will be the one to witness
 Armageddon."
 441.  An anticommunist complex multiplied by a superstition complex
 and added to a boundless faith in the military-industrial
 complex--are these not rather too many complexes for just one man?
 FOUO
 UNCLASSIFIED

