REAGAN'S RISKY CUBAN POLICY OP-ED

• Published in: The New York times
• Main Author: Wayne S. Smith Wayne S. Smith, who was chief of the United States interests section in Havana from 1979 to 1982, is a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
• Format: Newspaper Article
• Language: English
• Published: New York, N.Y New York Times Company 01.10.1984
• Edition: Late Edition (East Coast)
• Subjects: ARMAMENT, DEFENSE AND MILITARY FORCES; INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS; Kennedy, John Fitzgerald; KENNEDY, JOHN FITZGERALD (1917-63); Khrushchev, Nikita S; KHRUSHCHEV, NIKITA S (1894-1971); Kirkpatrick, Jeane J; MISSILES; REAGAN, RONALD WILSON (PRES); SMITH, WAYNE S; UNITED STATES ARMAMENT AND DEFENSE; UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS; WASHINGTON; UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS; CUBA
• ISSN: 0362-4331

Are the Russians violating the agreement today, as Mrs. [Jeane J. Kirkpatrick] argues, or, as the General Advisory Committee suggests, did they violate it from 1970 to 1974, but not today? The answer is none of the above - for there is not an accurate statement among them. An understanding most certainly exists, and it has not been abrogated. The core of the understanding is outlined in a message sent by Mr. [Nikita S. Khrushchev] on Oct. 26, 1962 and in Mr. [John F. Kennedy]'s response of Oct. 27. The terms of the deal were clear: if the Russians would remove their offensive-weapons systems from Cuba, the United States would lift its naval blockade and promise not to invade. That was the sum of it. There was no prohibition on the stationing of conventional forces in Cuba. No mention was even made of the some 20,000 Soviet ground forces there at the time of the crisis. (Clearly, then, the Soviet brigade ''discovered'' by the Carter Administration in autumn 1979 did not constitute a violation.) Nor was there any stipulation that Cuba refrain from encouraging revolution elsewhere in the hemisphere. Mr. Kennedy certainly understood that we would have to contend with what he called ''the export of aggressive Communist purposes,'' but he also understood that it should not be dealt with by threatening nuclear war. President Richard Nixon was fully committed to the understanding. Noticing in 1970 that the Russians were constructing facilities in Cienfugos, Cuba, for the apparent purpose of servicing nuclear submarines, the Nixon Administration insisted that this would be a violation of the accord and demanded that the facilities be dismantled. They were. Washington and Moscow agreed at the time that isolated port calls by Soviet submarines would not be considered a violation, but their servicing in or operation from Cuban ports would be. Apparently to assert their right to do so, the Russians sent a submarine into a Cuban port in 1972, and another in 1974. The United States was aware of those calls and did not consider them a violation of the agreement.