Reaction to Gorbachev Views

Kirkpatrick’s article is a stylish exercise in perpetuating the dual myths of U.S. military weakness and Soviet omnipotence.

We have been hearing of U.S. weakness since the bomber gap in the ‘50s, the missile gap in the ‘60s, and the window of vulnerability in the ‘80s. Each of these “gaps” proved to be false, existing primarily in the minds of the Pentagon and our military suppliers. Data from the Center for Defense Information disproves the outrageous claim of U.S. vulnerability and weakness.

Soviet omnipotence is exemplified by Gorbachev’s diplomatic forays with France, China, et al. Because he has a flair (read: education, experience, intelligence), we are supposed to be even more concerned about his power, because he may convince our allies that it does not make sense to spend a trillion dollars to build a Strategic Defense Initiative. Is that bad? Why waste precious dollars on a leaky sieve of a defense when we are already deeply in debt. In reality, it only seems that Gorbachev is doing what any head of state does: carry on normal diplomatic relations.

What really worries me is that the ideas of Kirkpatrick perpetuate feelings of insecurity and justification for huge military expenditures. For a world as small as ours her old-fashioned ideas only exacerbate the problem of fear and mistrust. Cooperation and nonviolence are the only effective long-term solutions out of our present dilemma. It behooves all of us to both demonstrate new and creative solutions and to demand nonviolent responses from our leaders.

NICHOLAS R. RAY

Encino