Published July 1970 — Download PDF of the original newspaper column
Byrd's-Eye View By U.S. Senator Robert C. Byrd Firmness Needed in the Middle East In dealing with the Russians over the current Middle East crisis, it is necessary that America negotiate from a position of firmness and strength. History has shown that this is the most effective way to deter the Soviet Union from its policy of aggressive communism. Eight years ago, for example, when the Soviet Union secretly shipped nuclear missiles to Cuba in a daring attempt to shift the world balance of power, the United States dealt with this threat from a position of strong nuclear and strategic superiority. At that time, according to White House sources, the United States had about 600 intercontinental ballistic missiles and the Soviet Union had less than a third of that number. In submarine-launched missiles, our country also had about a five-to-one advantage. Under these circumstances, a firm, but measured, response was implemented by our government. The Soviets, after calculating the relative array of strength between the two superpowers, decided against risking a confrontation. Currently, however, the strategic equation is far different. America's relative advantage in submarine launched missiles has decreased to three-to-one, while, in the number and mega tonnage of intercontinental ballistic missiles, the Russians have actually surpassed that of the United States. Perhaps reflecting our current power position as compared with that of the Soviet Union, America's policy in the present Middle East situation has thus far attempted to emphasize patience and conciliation rather than a measured toughness. While such a policy of restraint should continue to be an important part of our negotiations with the Soviet Union, we should also-in former ambassador George F. Kennan's words-"maintain at all times an attitude of decisiveness and alertness in the defense of our own interests." In the Middle East, these interests are vital. The spreading of Soviet air and sea power has already penetrated the Eastern Mediterranean and now threatens to stretch along the Mediterranean's southern coast toward Gibraltar and through the Suez Canal toward the Indian Ocean. This would not only put increase: l pressure on NATO's Southeastern hinge , but would also place 90 per cent of Japan's oil supplies and nearly that much of Western Europe's oil supplies within danger of being captured by the Soviet Union. Obviously, then, the Soviet Union's thrust into the Middle East and the potential shift in the geopolitical balance of power that it represents, transcends the Arab-Israeli conflict. While America must work to insure Israel's right to exist and at the same time attempt to keep our friendship with all the Arab states we must, nonetheless, make it unmistakeably clear to the Russians that we will protect our national interests in the Middle East. JULY 15 1970