At the Geneva meeting of 7-8 January, Gromyko seems to have persuaded Schultz to agree to the includion of Star Wars in the negotiations and to the common sense notion that other aspects of the negotiations must be linked with Star Wars. brought a swift, public repudiation from Weinburger, the Pentagon boss, and the subsequent confusion has still not been cleared up. So even to get the Geneva panto on the road at all has been an extremely tricky business.
But one of the most amusing, and at the same time touching, sights in what promises to be of the longest-running pantos this side of Broadway, is the attitude of one part of the audience: the British media pundits. Anyone who takes a three or four year old child to the panto will know how they take every word literally, and easily forget that the dame isn't a woman at all, but a man masquerading as a woman.
So it is with our supposedly hardboiled media experts. laughing jeering at the latest patently absurd piece of buffoonery, the way an eight year old would, they solemnly note it down and repeat it. Reagan, they are told wants to get into history books as a peace maker.
"Experts' on Reagan here repeat this, to the point where the Financial Times has to devote an editorial to leung Dig ousiness ulal unis Is a piece of nonsense. Then we are told excitedly that Mr Paul Nitze is not only a dove but also designated to be the surpemo in charge of the negotiating team. Until we learn that Nitze hap. pens not to be a dove over Star Wars also happens supremo at all. (Nitze is actually a hawk with bad nerves, who lost his nerve during the cruise and Pershing talks and is no longer taken seriously in the Reagan administration excent as a PR sop to the West Europeans). Then we find that Reagan has actually appointed extreme hawks negotiators in the Star Wars and intercontinential missile talks.
Unable to deny this, our media pundits produce the following brilliant idea: the fact that hawks This have been chosen proves that Reagan is serious about reaching a deal that sticks — he has appointed hawks to ensure that the Senate is more keen on making concessions to the Soviets than Reagan is. Even Senator Goldwater has casually remarked that he is fed up with all these US nukes and feels like scrapping Reagan's beloved MX missiles. Horrified The reality is that the only serious arms negotiations that will be taking place during the next year will be in Washington, not Geneva, and will be between the congress and the president over Reagan's military budget. Reagan's enthusiasm phoney arms negotiations going in Geneva is in large measure a product of his fear that he will be forced into arms reductions in his tussie with congress over the budget deficit. And one of the oldest tricks for combatting congressional efforts to military spending is to say that such moves will undermine the Us nego tiating position with the Russians — it will be a stab in the back to our boys in the negotiating front line. And by appointing ex-Senator Tower to head Ine negonlaling team. ther arming himself for the coming top battle with congress.
There is thus overwhelming cumstantial esidence to indicate that the White House will use the Geneva talks as nothing more than a public domestic and West European Deadly Gambits magazine journalist makes abundantly clear, shing, explicit guide-line 'should not stand for cruise and Pershing.
Change
for to lengths to Culi US this is not the full explanation.
must understand that they convince their Reagan 1s furWashington. cir- The Tor! defence confusing opinion, while pressing ahead with Star Wars and the rest of the arms programme. In other words, the talks will be managed like the earlier INF talks Deadly Gambies nig. The Times Times Strobe Talbot the Reagan administration never had the slightest with the USSR on cruise and Per operating throughout on the that the talks way NATO's modernisation programme' such endor to contradic she contradict facts? The obvious answer is that they want to combat the peace movement and the much larger sentiment here that Reagan is a dangerous man. But At a deeper and more pathetic level we 'Chaos' want to own Tory elite sup porters as well and they even want to themselves Convince themselves what? That it is, or really before Christmas may be, possible for the British state to exert influence on policy-making in fact of the matter is that Whitehall and the great bulk of the with foreign policy establishment, as well as the bulk of deployed: he -ilitary here are opposed to Star Reagan's military policy. The reason is that this policy will make British nukes an irrelevant joke, while it has finally sunk in that cruise missiles here will have the effect of totally destroy. ing the decision-making power of the British state in the event of an Eastthere are signs of a deeper alarm over Reagan's entire political and military strategy towards the USSR, as well as drive to bring Western Europe to heel for its programme of economic warquieting in the Tory leadership or in days is that in this period Britain can within Washington for a change of policy to bring it more into line with the requirements of the British righ This is the terrible state secret which Thatcher's trip to Camp David was designed to obscure. She came out of that meeting waving a bit of paper to the press say. ing that she had carried off a grea diplomatic triumph: she had agreed that there should be negotiations before Star Wars was all empi! pledge irom Reagan in return :3: he: Tearing:: resolution from a Dutch MP callin for a freeze on all further cruise and Geneva talks get underway. Conster. nation! Apart from an inch or two in Pundits Europe to enthusiastically cooperate with the US in developing Star Wars so that the hardware would have a label on it. Consternation! Another (though it couldn't be since the Tory MP by the name of Hill involved in Times and Telegraph hailing the idea and declaring Star Wars should be usting Soviet missiles before they'd left much for the WEU. The second idea on the right is for Britain to leave NATO and become a 'neutral armed-to-the-teeth with recent backing from a book by a Cord etc. This has he merit, from foe right's point of view, of asserting BriBritain's role as a capitalist and militarist bastion of imperialism - it is a formula that would win strong popular right and centre of the electorate, bu capitalist interests now tied in to the US. It is significant policy crisis in the British establishneutralism can only be a socialist one ready to break with capitalist power in Britain and ready to link up with The Geneva Panto makes the elabora perspective al the =01 me: ==
Socialist Action 8 February 1985