unitex@rubbs.fidonet.org (unitex) (10/11/89)
other.
I would like to tell you, Ladies and Gentlemen, that it is with
great pleasure that we are extending our invitation to the
Secretary of Defense of the United States, Mr. Cheney, to go on
a visit to the Soviet Union at an acceptable time. We have a
good saying in the Soviet Union, that a debt is to be repaid. We
will do all our best in order to prepare a similar kind of an
exercise with the participation of the Soviet forces, and we are
going to plan some other functions and measures in order to show
them to the U.S. military delegation when it comes to the Soviet
Union.
You probably will ask your question about what struck me most
during my tour of the United States, and I think what I was
impressed by most of all. I would like to give you a single
word answer. Soldiers. Soldiers that evident are dedicated
young men that have high proficiency in order to carry out their
duties and functions, and that took pride in demonstrating their
high training standards to the Soviet military delegation. And
we're grateful to all of the that did their best in order to
successfully complete the instructions they received and showed
what they did to our delegation.
I am concluding my remarks at this point, so that you will have
more time to ask me questions.
Q: What is the B-2 bomber threat? How do you perceive it? What
would i cost you to upgrade your air defense in order to deal
with it?
Min. Yazov We do not consider it to be a challenge on the part
of the Un States with regard to the Soviet Union. You are
asking me a question about th B-2 bomber, right? We do not
consider it to be a challenge. You keep perfecti your military
hardware. We also keep perfecting our military weapon systems.
I think in this particular context, it is not the bomber that
should go to the foreground. It is the atmosphere of trust that
should be placed in the foregr We do not believe, and we hope
that you would not use these planes attacking the Soviet Union,
so that we would not be forced to bring them down.
Let me ask you a question. Are you serious about believing that
the Sovi Union is preparing to go to war with the United
States? (Laughter)
Q: You say the B-2 bomber is not a challenge. Is the B-2 bomber
a threa And how much will it cost to upgrade your air defenses?
A: We don't have to modify the Soviet air defense system. The
Soviet ai defenses have the capability today to bring down any
aircraft. I would like t underscore again that you might have
any type of an air defense system and the adversary can have the
capability to penetrate that air defense system. So th question
is, at what expense the air defense system can be penetrated. So
I don't believe you are going to undertake an operation to
penetrate the Soviet air defense system, and we are not going to
kill the aircraft that tries to penetrate the air defense
system.
Some of the people believe that as long as a new weapon system
comes out it is always to be regarded as a new threat. Why?
Q: Mr. Minister, a few days ago the Pentagon released its annual
report on Soviet military power. Although it acknowledged many
important reforms in the Soviet military, the report said that
the Soviet strategic nuclear arsenal is more fearsome today than
it was four years ago. Your host has argued befor Congress that
we need to build a mobile MX and a small mobile missile to count
your new systems that are called here the SS-24 and SS-25. I'd
like you pleas to respond to these things.
A: I would like to say the following. The Soviet armed forces
have not been increased in terms of numbers. The situation is
that certain types of systems have become obsolete in their
service life periods and now are being replaced by other
systems. Besides, the technology has been making progress and
somewhat modified weapon systems have been created and developed.
The new modern weapon systems are now replacing the obsolete
weapon systems. We do no say that those are weak weapon
systems. That is why the Soviet proposal still stands, that the
bilateral negotiations on a 50 percent cut of strategic offen
arms would be continued. Even if after we have concluded
agreements on a 50 percent cut of strategic offensive arms, what
remains within the inventories for each of the sides will be
enough in order to anihilate each other. Is tha our objective?
So I believe the work on concluding a 50 percent agreement is the
first task which is to be followed by more agreements in order
to bring about the complete elimination of nuclear weapons. As
long as we have nuclear weapons, people on this earth will not
be peacefully sleeping, will not be living in peace.
As far as the booklet goes, I have leafed through the booklet.
The lates edition of _S_o_v_i_e_t__M_i_l_i_t_a_r_y__P_o_w_e_r
has bee the past. Of course, it doesn't write that the Soviet
Union is a friend of th United States, but it doesn't write,
either, that the Soviet Union is an enemy of the United States.
Q: Mr. Minister, the Strategic Defense Initiative, SDI, has
decreased in emphasis in this country, or appears to be. The
* Origin: UNITEX --> Toward a United Species (1:107/501)
---
Patt Haring | United Nations | Did u read
patth@sci.ccny.cuny.edu | Information | misc.headlines.unitex
patth@ccnysci.BITNET | Transfer Exchange | today?
-=- Every child smiles in the same language. -=-