ACCORDING to its supporters, the SALT I1 arms treaty is a step towards peace. restrain the nuclear arnas race. It will lessen the likelihood of a nuclear. war', US secretary of State Cyrus Vance declared.
aliti Pentagon's nuclear arsenal will be expanded under the proposed treaty.
Since SALT treaty concluded in 1972, nuclear arsenals in both the Soviet Union and the United States have roughly According to a speech on 5 March by Senator Mark Hatfield, the number of Soviet warheads increased 2,100 to 4,000, while the number of nuclear warheads in the Pentagon's arsenal went from 4,600 to 9,000.
The same process will occur under the SALT II accord. Summing up its expectations in an editorial titled 'We Support SALT', the US journal New explained advantages, the double the total Soviets do; in 12,000 8,000.' the 'arms limitation supporters increase in the weapons deployed!
Those doubled.
greater.
But public opinion May: • Carter as a man of peace. 'Because of submarine and bomber US currently has warheads that the will have • 0 Ine Soviets' Here we are presented with an treaty' waxe loresee a of nuclear cent number accept the SALT framework offer the lame argument that it is necessary to support the treaty because without it the increases in the arms budget might be even Soviet the whole purpose of the SALT debate, from the point of view of the ruling class, is to try to prepare for precisely such arms by playing up the supposed Soviet threat While at the same time presenting Carter jacking who has vowed continue up the military budget by at least 3 per cent in real dollars each year, is now able to present his new weapons programmes as necessary concessions to hawkish senators who would otherwise refus‹ to vote for the SAIL treaty.
Kenneth Bacon bluntly explained the tactic to readers of the Wall Street Journal in an article on 12 December: 'Even if an arms control ratified...the debate is likely to leave many people feeling less secure about strength, more suspicious intentions and, therefore, more willing to increase US defence spending.' Since coming into office January 1977, Carter has had consistent policy within the limits imposed on him by the anti-war mood of the Amencan working cids. increasing arms spending and pushing towards military intervention abroad. to The boldest moves have come in pact is the Middle East in the wake of the Iranian revolution. These include: The $5 billion worth of new arms of being shipped to Israel and Egypt • Trial balloons about the possible establishment of US air and naval bases in Israel and Egypt, and a treaty that opens the door for basing US ground forces in the Sinai. • The sending of $540 million in US arms to North contingents of US • The dispatch of a US naval fleet, including Constellation, May, to ment Carter Yemen, along 'advisers'. imperialist aircraft carrier to the Gulf of Aden during the conflict between North and South Yemen this March. • Plans for the creation of a US "Fifth Fleet' in the Indian Ocean • The establishment of a 100,000strong Mid-East intervention force.
Along with these moves has come a serious attempt to reinstitute the draft. As New York Times military analyst Drew Middleton explained on the attempt to restore conscription is due to la belief that in the (next) decade the Army will be summoned to intervene and perhaps defence of American interests outside continental Europe'.
words, the imperialists are well aware that they will have to fight new Vietnam-style wars if they are to contain the social upheavals that threaten their profits.
pursuing contradictory policy. The proposed SALT II treaty is not an isolated move towards peace in an overall policy of aggression. On the contrary, SALT II is part and parce of the imperialist war policy.
a vital part of working class sector by could. only The first step "secondary' miners would have been useless. was the massive use of