Missourian Takes Tougher Line on Weapons Issues : Gephardt, Dukakis Offer Differing Views on Security

WASHINGTON —  Missouri Rep. Richard A. Gephardt sounded tougher and blunter than Massachusetts Gov. Michael S. Dukakis as the two Democratic presidential contenders on Friday fired the opening salvos in a critical campaign battle over national security, an issue rapidly moving to the forefront of their party’s nomination contest.

In separate speeches on Washington college campuses, several differences emerged between the contenders, who are considered to have mounted the strongest Democratic campaigns so far:

--Dukakis favors a total nuclear weapons test ban, while Gephardt would ban tests of weapons only at the one-kiloton range and above. Below that level, a Gephardt spokesman explained later, Gephardt believes such a ban would be unverifiable.

--Dukakis wants to scrap the Midgetman missile, while Gephardt favors development and deployment of the weapon to maintain U.S. strategic forces.

More Sanguine

More generally, Dukakis, who spoke at Georgetown University, seemed more sanguine about the chances for negotiating future agreements with the Soviet Union because of the new generation of Kremlin leaders.

” . . . Mikhail Gorbachev and the people around him appear to reflect a real change--a new generation of Soviet leaders--more pragmatic, less ideological,” the governor said.

But Gephardt, who addressed students at American University, seemed more skeptical of the change in Soviet attitude. Acknowledging that Gorbachev exhibited “a remarkable sensitivity to Western public opinion,” he added: “We do not have to guess how much of this is real. Rather we have to test whether it is real and how far it may reach.”

Beyond these differences, Gephardt seemed more willing to make specific pledges on defense while the more cautious Dukakis said his policies will depend heavily on negotiations with the Soviets.

Favors Stealth Bomber

In discussing weapons systems, for example, Gephardt said: “I favor the stealth (bomber), the mobile Midgetman and the new Trident submarines equipped with the D-5 (missile). I’m opposed to the B-1 (bomber), the MX (missile) and deployment of ‘Star Wars.’ ”

He also stated his opposition to the Bradley Fighting Vehicle and two additional aircraft carriers requested by the Pentagon, but he supported the M-1 tank, the C-17 cargo plane, F-15 and F-16 jets and the fast sea-lift ship.

Dukakis mentioned the MX and Midgetman missiles, the Strategic Defense Initiative, anti-satellite weapons, nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and more nuclear warheads as examples of weapons systems that “we do not need and cannot afford” and which he said would cost nearly $100 billion over the next five years.

Other Methods

He then listed several alternative ways that defense money could be spent, ranging from converting three light divisions into mechanized units to extra training and equipment for the National Guard.

But he later told a reporter that these were only “examples of things that could be done” if he won the White House, depending on budget demands. “I don’t think anybody knows enough about our financial situation right now,” he said.

In general, Dukakis said many decisions on defense spending and other policy matters would have to wait until “the first 12 or 18 months” of his presidency, and would be influenced by the budgetary situation and the state of relations with the Soviets.

Early Advantage

Both Dukakis and Gephardt, who are generally regarded as having an early advantage over their rivals, were trying in their addresses to position themselves for two forthcoming debates on national security subjects that will be held in politically strategic locations.

The first is scheduled for Sunday in Des Moines, where the delegate selection process begins next February. Democratic voters are considered relatively dovish in Iowa and more receptive to proposals for cuts in weaponry and spending and optimistic about negotiations with the Soviets.

The second will be Oct. 7 in Miami, also televised in Florida and other Southern states, and will reach more conservative potential voters in the Southern Super Tuesday primary March 8 who tend to favor a harder line toward the Soviets and on defense spending in general.

Must Be Won Back

Many Democrats argue, as Gephardt did in his Friday address, that such voters must be won back to the Democrats if the party is to regain the White House in 1988. His party, Gephardt acknowledged, “has been equated, fairly or unfairly, with softheadedness and faintheartedness. . . . It is a basic question of confidence that we face, a test of credibility that we must meet.”

In one case at least, Gephardt appeared to have hardened his stance to meet that test in contrast with responses he had made last August in answering written questions on defense issues from The Times. On the nuclear test ban issue, he qualified his previous support for a moratorium by adding the provision that the ban should only extend to the one-kiloton and above level.

And he did not mention his previous support for a ban on ballistic missile testing, which Dukakis favors, although an aide said Gephardt’s position remains unchanged on that issue.

Clear Separation

Nevertheless, Gephardt conceded to reporters after his talk that he may have trouble establishing in voters’ minds a clear separation on defense issues between himself and Dukakis, whom Gephardt strategists have sought to depict as the front runner in the race.

“We’re going to agree on a lot of things--there’s no question,” Gephardt said.

Indeed, in their talks Gephardt and Dukakis agreed on far more things than they disagreed on, including their opposition to deployment of President Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative or “Star Wars,” support for future arms talks with the Soviets aimed at dramatically cutting strategic and conventional weaponry, their call for more military support from NATO allies to ease the financial burden on the United States and the need to modernize weapons systems.

Babbitt Speech

In a speech on nuclear weapons and U.S. security given Thursday, another Democratic presidential contender, former Arizona Gov. Bruce Babbitt, called for banning all destructive weapons tests in space, deep cuts in offensive forces and freezing the technology competition between the United States and the Soviet Union.

Babbitt also declared that if he became President, “It will be the policy of the United States to arrange its military affairs on the assumption that we will never be the first to use nuclear weapons in any conflict.”

He acknowledged that this was “a direct reversal of the assumption that has governed military policy under every President since (Dwight D.) Eisenhower,” which held that the threat of nuclear war helped contain Soviet expansionism in Europe and elsewhere.

Babbitt conceded that such a change could not be carried out overnight. “It is a goal, and we cannot reach it without significant changes in the kinds of weapons we buy and the kinds of strategies we use in deploying them.”

Staff writer Eric Lichtblau contributed to this story.