Listening to the Allies

By Russ Hoyle

Bush is off to Europe amid hints that the U.S. missile stance is softening

"Short of the President's trip abroad, it is the most important mission undertaken by this Administration." That, in the slightly exaggerated words of a Reagan Administration insider last week, seemed to sum up the sense of anticipation in some quarters surrounding Vice President George Bush's journey to Europe. After weeks of growing anxiety among the Western allies, caused by the hard U.S. line in negotiations with the Soviets over intermediate-range missiles, a long-planned vice presidential trip suddenly became a belated counteroffensive against recent successes scored by the Soviet peace offensive in Western Europe. Said Bush on the eve of his departure: "Our strength lies in unity, and we are unified in what essentially is a strong moral position--banishing a whole new generation of intermediate-range nuclear missiles from the face of the earth."

With those words, the Vice President fired his opening salvo in a hastily arranged twelve-day, seven-country public relations blitz calculated to win the hearts and minds of the growing number of Western Europeans troubled by the missile issue. Their major concern: that U.S. rigidity in negotiating an arms control agreement with Moscow would mean almost certain deployment of 572 U.S. Pershing II and cruise missiles in Western Europe beginning at the end of the year. Bush's task is formidable. He will strive to present a "flexible" U.S. commitment to arms control while asking the Europeans to support the original U.S. bargaining position, President Reagan's controversial zero option. Under that proposal, NATO would not deploy any new missiles if the Soviets agreed to dismantle completely their total of 333 SS-20 missiles already in place.

Though Bush is carrying no new initiatives with him, he is charged with hearing out Western European fears and counterproposals. "We will not be proposing any specific fall-away positions," Admiral Daniel Murphy, the Vice President's chief of staff, explained last week. "But there may well be discussions of alternatives hi order to get their views." A strong message from the allies, say White House sources, could prompt the U.S. to re-examine its missile position. "We have tabled a very good proposal," said Bush of the zero option, but he added that Washington was prepared to entertain new suggestions from the Soviets that "will reduce the threat to the lowest possible level."

As aides attended to last-minute details of Bush's itinerary, the whirlwind of activity over the missiles was already well under way in Europe. In Bonn, Paul Nitze, 76, the chief U.S. negotiator in the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) talks with the Soviet Union in Geneva, dropped hints of his own that the Administration was edging away from the zero proposal. After Nitze met with Chancellor Helmut Kohl and Defense Minister Manfred Worner, a senior West German official said: "The word used most often by Nitze was flexibility, with balance spoken more softly afterward."

According to another top official in Bonn, Nitze told the West Germans that he had Reagan's authorization to pursue "all possibilities of balanced results." The official left the meeting with the distinct impression that one such possibility might be similar to the proposal that Nitze explored with his Soviet counterpart, Yuli A. Kvitsinsky, last summer. According to that scenario, later rejected by both Washington and Moscow, the U.S. would base 75 cruise missiles in Western Europe while the Soviet Union would pare its arsenal of SS-20s to 75.

On his arrival in Geneva for the resumption of the INF talks, Nitze declared that the U.S. "was certainly not locked into the zero option," but repeated Reagan's conviction that the plan was "the best way to achieve the peace and security that mankind desires." The silver-haired veteran U.S. negotiator also denounced "recent Soviet propaganda activities" that sought to drive a wedge between the U.S. and its Western European partners. Said Nitze: "The NATO nations cannot be held hostage to nuclear blackmail at the hands of the Soviet Union."

Before Bush's departure, West German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher visited Washington for meetings with Reagan, the Vice President and other senior Administration officials. The visit, undertaken at Genscher's request, provided more hints that the U.S. might not hold to its present posture in Geneva. In exchange for Bonn's "firm support" of the zero proposal, Genscher too received American assurances of "flexibility."

The flurry of hints was enough to prompt cautious relief in Bonn, the first, and easily most crucial, stop on Bush's trip. "The West's policy was never all or nothing," noted West German Defense Minister Worner. "The allies should resist all divisive tactics." During his three-day stay in West Germany, Bush is to deliver a major address at a West Berlin dinner at which Mayor Richard von Weizsacker will be host, as well as meet with government and opposition leaders in Bonn. One problem the Vice President faces is avoiding the appearance of attempting to influence the West German elections scheduled for March 6, in which the Kohl government faces growing opposition from the Social Democrats, most recently over the missile question. Anything that looks like a U.S. retreat from the zero option, which Kohl has firmly supported, could backfire and create a surge for Kohl's opponents. If there is to be a change in U.S. policy, it would come after the Vice President's return to Washington.

Even so, Bush's presence is almost certain to be a factor in the election campaign. He will take pains to hear out Hans-Jochen Vogel, Kohl's opponent and the Social Democratic candidate for Chancellor. Vogel's party still officially endorses the original 1979 NATO decision to deploy the missiles, which grew out of concerns first voiced by former Chancellor Helmut Schmidt, but Vogel himself would prefer not to have the new U.S. missiles deployed. Bush is also likely to examine a proposal for an interim solution put forth by Horst Ehmke, the Social Democrats' deputy floor leader in the Bonn parliament and a key member of their defense and foreign policy planning group. Ehmke favors the dismantling of about half of the Soviet SS-20s now targeted on Western Europe in exchange for waiving the planned Pershing II deployment altogether and reducing the number of cruise missiles. In addition, the Ehmke plan calls for an eventual step-by-step reduction of both arsenals. Proponents of the scenario argue that it would effectively stress the defensive nature of the Western alliance and reduce Soviet fears of a German-based nuclear arsenal.

After talks at The Hague, a stopover in Brussels and a special meeting with Soviet negotiators in Geneva, Bush will fly to Rome, where successive Italian governments have consistently supported NATO'S missile deployment plans. This time, though, Bush may find the going a bit rougher. The current government of Prime Minister Amintore Fanfani continues to support U.S. goals, but enthusiasm for the basing of 112 cruises at Comiso, in Sicily, is waning. The Italian Communist Party recently asked the government to present an initiative to parliament that would express "willingness to postpone any decision and suspend work on the missile sites in Comiso." Enrico Jacchia, director of Italy's Center for Strategic Studies, warns that opposition to the missiles "could add up to more than half the voting strength of the country." Says he: "The U.S. should take heed." Bush will also meet with Pope John Paul II at the Vatican.

Accompanied by Assistant Secretary of State-designate Richard Burt and White House Economic Adviser Martin Feldstein, Bush will end his trip with stops in Paris and London. Both French President Franc,ois Mitterrand, who may receive a report on U.S. economic policy from Feldstein, and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, have been among the staunchest backers of Reagan's zero option. Both will be fully briefed by Bush on his mission. Reassurances that Washington is ready to explore alternatives on the missile question will be received especially warmly at 10 Downing Street. According to a recent poll, an overwhelming 93% of Britons favor a "dual key" arrangement that would mean the 160 U.S. cruise missiles to be based in Britain could not be fired without the British actively taking part.

The growing signals that the U.S. might consider a compromise on the stationing of missiles in Western Europe seemed to buoy spirits at the sprawling Soviet U.N. mission in Geneva, where the INF negotiations resumed last week. A smiling Kvitsinsky emerged to welcome Nitze to the first session with a cordial handshake. Asked whether he expected a swift solution, the Soviet negotiator just threw up his hands. No one expects a quick agreement, a fact that could further slow the glacial pace of the parallel Strategic Arms Reduction Talks (START) be tween the U.S. and the Soviet Union on intercontinental ballistic missiles, which are linked to a successful conclusion of the INF negotiations (see following story). Indeed, TASS, the official Soviet news agency, hinted on the eve of the Geneva meeting that Moscow saw no point in continuing negotiations if NATO deployed any of the new missiles. The Kremlin also marked the reopening of the talks by stepping up its propaganda efforts, and publicly endorsed a Swedish proposal to create a European nuclear-free zone involving both NATO and Warsaw Pact nations. The idea could strike a particularly effective chord among many West Germans -- and signal another escalation in the war of words over missiles. -- By Russ Hoyle. Reported by Douglas Brew/Washington and William Rademaekers/ London

With reporting by Douglas Brew/Washington and William Rademaekers/ London This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.