Military Disengagement

Report Outline
Neutral Zone Proposals in Summit Talks
Growth of Deadlock Over Western Europe
Disengagement and European Security

Neutral Zone Proposals in Summit Talks

Soviet beating of the drums for Poland's plan to mark out a denuclearized zone in Central Europe makes that scheme a leading candidate for discussion if and when East and West heads of government get together in conference. The sharp tone of President Eisenhower's latest letter to Soviet Premier Bulganin, and objections raised to the Soviet approach to a top-level parley, seemed calculated to cool Kremlin enthusiasm for such a meeting. However, when Red leaders make up their minds that something is in their interest, they are not easily deterred. The United States and Great Britain already have removed one obstacle to a summit session by withdrawing earlier insistence on a preliminary meeting of foreign ministers.

Western willingness to consider a heads-of-government conference—after the disappointing results of the Geneva conference in 1955 and the persisting deadlock in general disarmament negotiations—may be attributed in large part to pressure exerted by public opinion and by opposition political parties in the United Kingdom and on the Continent. The heavy weight of the arms burden, weariness over the never-ending East-West struggle, and impatience at the failure of those in power to dispel the threat of atomic doom have disposed many Europeans to favor any action which conceivably may put more promise in the future. The same feeling of frustration has assured a wide hearing for Poland's proposed atom-free zone and for plans to pull apart or disengage the potentially hostile forces facing each other in various parts of the world.

First suggested in the West, the idea of military disengagement was almost immediately adopted by the Soviet Union as the theme of its campaign for a summit meeting. Conceptions of what “disengagement” actually entails (whether prohibition of nuclear weapons, withdrawal of foreign troops, or formal neutralization) and where it would take place (whether in East and West Germany, a reunified Germany, a wider area from Norway to Italy, or across the world in Korea) vary with the advocate. But proponents of disengagement are one in saying that the present world arms race must be curbed. They are fearful that plans to establish ballistic missile bases in Western Europe and to meet any aggression with nuclear retaliation greatly enhance the risk of atomic holocaust.