Editing 78-14-B1 (section)

= Rostow III =

<TABLE BORDER="0"><TR><TD WIDTH="60%" ROWSPAN="2">
=== Transcript ===
For two broadcasts now, I've been quoting from an address by Eugene Rostow on the
declining position of the United States in the face of the growth of Soviet military
power. That growth over the last sixteen years is, --QUOTE-- "without parallel in modern
history. Both our government and the British government, according to Rostow, have
said formally that the Soviet military posture and dispositions are offensive in character,
and cannot be explained by considerations of defense." --UNQUOTE--

The Soviet military budget is 40 to 80 percent more per year than our own in
real terms. Our Secretary of Defense has described the situation as the fable of the
tortoise and the hare. We sat back deceived by the belief that we had "overhill"
capacity. We cut our military budgets by half while the Soviets increased theirs.
--QUOTE--"Now, as Rostow says, we are behind in almost every relevant category of 
military power--behind in production, behind in research; and behind in programming."
--UNQUOTE-- The American people are clearly in favor of regaining the military
position of number one, but like the hare, officialdom is still sleeping in the tree.

According to the Professor, there is still time to head off a collision between
the Soviets to ourselves. It means stepping up our own rearmament and a vigorous,
active diplomacy with our allies to restore a pattern of world order based on the
charter of the United Nations. But this is only possible if we participate as the
leader of such an effort. And our nuclear arsenal is as Rostow says--QUOTE--"the
indispensable foundation for any such program."--UNQUOTE--

He sums up this necessary effort to head off a disastrous collision with this
paragraph which I shall quote:-- "The success of such an effort will depend not upon
SALT treaties but upon the reality of the military balance and the energy, self 
confidence, and imagination of our diplomatic campaign. In that process, arms limitation
agreements with the Soviet Union could play a modest part, if they are genuinely
fair, balanced, and verifiable, and are not allowed to induce euphoria about 'detente'.
But such agreements cannot significantly alter the cost of our defense programs. We
must undertake now to spend quite a lot of money to restore the military balance. For
years to care, the presence or absence of SALT II would not increase the cost of defense
for the U.S. by up to $100 billion as proponents of SALT claim. Those figures of extra
costs, if the SALT negotiation fails, or if the Senate refuses to consent to the treaty,
are just as fanciful as the claims of "detente".--UNQUOTE--

This is Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for listening.
</TD>
<TD WIDTH="10%" ROWSPAN="2">&nbsp;</TD>
<TD VALIGN="TOP" HEIGHT="250">
=== Details ===
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="80%">
<TR><TD WIDTH="150">Batch Number</TD><TD WIDTH="150">{{PAGENAME}}</TD></TR>
<TD>Production Date</TD><TD>10/10/[[Radio1978|1978]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Book/Page</TD><TD>[[Radio_Commentary_Books#Reagan:_In_His_Own_Hand|RihoH-94]]</TD></TR>
<TD>Audio</TD><TD></TD></TR>
<TD>Youtube?</TD><TD>No</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</TD></TR>
<TR><TD VALIGN="TOP">
===Added Notes===

</TD></TR>
</TABLE>