War and Peace in the Nuclear Age; One Step Forward; 107; President Nixon's Arms Control Press Conference

Go back to the. Army have you. Sign. The. Arms the. Role of Women. In hospital. For your ministrations. Ask for. The money order was for teaching weapons some of your critics are saying that this is almost a deception giving the Pentagon. What it. Wants. They only concentrate on developing quality. Well. We will try to respond. To this. Mr. Martin the problem with regard to arms control is that we do not they deal with it in a vacuum. We have to deal with the problem as it affects the security of the United States first. Let me say that if we had not had an arms control agreement a limitation of ABM and a temporary limitation for five years on certain classifications of off NC weapons I would and I'm saying this conservatively have as half have had to ask the Congress of the

United States to approve an increase in the defense budget for nuclear strategic weapons of at least 15 but billion dollars a year on a crash program reason. Had there been an arms control agreement the Soviet Union's plans call for an increase of their ABM to 1000 over the next five years. The arms control agreement limits of the 200 as it does us. Had there been no arms control agreement the Soviet Union had a program underway in the field of submarines that would brought them up to over 90. The agreement limits them to 62. And had there been no arms control agreement. And this is the most important fight in the terms of often strategic weapons the Soviet Union that has now passed us and often chief strategic weapons. They have sixteen hundred We have roughly 10. Ten. Thousand. They would have built 1000 more over the next five years. Now under those circumstances any president of the United States could see that in five years the United States would be

hopelessly behind. Our security would be threatened our allies would be terrified particularly in those areas and our friends like the Mideast where the possibility of Soviet adventurism is considered to be rather great. So therefore the arms control agreement at least put a break on new weapons. Now with regard to the new weapons that you referred to arbor let me point out they are not for the next five year period. We're really talking about the period after that and they are absolutely essential for the security of the United States for another reason because looking at this not in a vacuum but in terms of what the other side is doing. Mr. pression I've made it very clear that he intended to go forward in those categories that were not limited. Now in fairness to him he also said and made it very clear that he made it perfectly clear I should say he said that he expected that we would go forward. Now under these

circumstances then for the United States not to go forward in those areas that were not controlled would mean that at the end of the 70s we would be in a very rare position. And no president of the United States can take the responsibility of allowing the United States to be the second most powerful nation in the world not because of any jingoistic idea but because if we are in that position our foreign policy our commitments around the world would be very very seriously jeopardized. Now the most important point I say for the last and that's that. I think these agreements are in the interest of the United States. I think that they are very much in the interest of arms control and therefore in the interest of world peace. But they are only a beginning there only the foundation. Now what we have to do is to really go forward with the second step. And that is why the phase two of the Arms Control limitation which we hope will begin in October provided the Congress approves the ones that we have before them at the present time. They's

two which will be a permanent arms control agreement on all off fancy nuclear weapons. This is the one that we think can have an even a far greater significance even than phase one phase one is the breakthrough. And Phase 2 is the culmination and phase two if we can reach agreement with the Soviet and it will take long and hard bargaining. But if we can reach it will mean then that we not only hold our arms budgets where they are but that in these new programs instead of going forward with them on the basis presently projected we will be able to cut them back. That is our goal and I think we can achieve it provided we approve phase one. And provided we continue a credible arms program. Because believe me the Soviets are not going to agree to limit their future programs unless they have something to get from us right now at.

A record rate. Your argument that our need for offensive weapons. Why then do you insist on selling the costly B-1 bomber when in fact Soviet Union has shown little interest in the bomber force in recent years. And as far as we know they have no new bomber force on the drawing boards at this time. Each power the Soviet Union in the United States must have those forces that are needed for its own security. We basically are not only a land or a but I land and sea power. The Soviet Union is primarily a land power with certain definite requirements. Having that in mind we believe that the B-1 bomber is for our security interests and necessary as far as the Soviet Union is concerned the fact that they are not developing bombers does not mean that they do not respect ours. And I would say too that had we not had our president advantage and bombers we could not then stand by and allow the

Soviet to have a sixteen hundred to one thousand advantage in terms of missiles that are land based so our bombers as an offset for that. May preclude their loss this week that you would be less than overjoyed at the sentence with attach a 20 percent Social Security increase to the debt ceiling extension bill which expires tomorrow night. It looks like. That might happen tomorrow. I wonder what you see as the consequences and what you can do about it. Well there should be an increase in Social Security. There's been an increase in the cost of living and I have favored an increase in Social Security.