Momentum of the Nuclear Contest

In its Aug. 3 issue, TIME published an open letter from Senior Correspondent John L. Steele to Dr. John S. Foster Jr., Director of Defense Research and Engineering. Steele pointed out what he considered substantive omissions in the Pentagon's comparison of U.S. nuclear strength with the Soviets. Following is Foster's response:

Dear Mr. Steele:

I was interested to read your letter and I am pleased to respond. You suggest that: "The Soviets are indeed eight feet tall. But so are we." I agree. Perhaps if you had asked a question as did many other newsmen at my appearance before the Washington Overseas Writers Club, I could have better clarified my essential concern.

My point is that the Soviets are still growing, while we are not. They are growing in numbers of intercontinental ballistic missiles (iCBMs), sea-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), bombers, anti-ballistic missiles (ABMs) and radars. They have already passed us in total number of missile launchers. How many multiple re-entry vehicles (MRVs), or multiple independently targeted re-entry vehicles (MIRVs) they might ultimately choose to place on those launchers we cannot know because of their closed society.

What concerns me then, as I told you and your colleagues, is not the relatively equitable situation in 1970, but both the Soviets' massive strategic arms momentum and research and development momentum that threatened to make them nine or ten feet tall in the mid-1970s and afterward. We in the Department of Defense, as all Americans, hope that as a result of negotiations in the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks an equitable agreement can be reached to limit strategic arms. We, as well as our negotiating team, regard orderly progress on the Safeguard ABM program as a key to our negotiating position at those vital talks.

My purpose was not to "scare hell out of the customers," as you suggest. I pointed out that I believe the U.S. is technologically superior to the Soviet Union today. I also pointed out that the U.S. does have forces of strategic sufficiency today. My concern is that there is a real danger that we will not be in such a position by 1975 or 1980 if present trends continue.

Respectfully yours, John S. Foster Jr.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.