Sen. Wilson on the Midgetman

I find myself in the very unusual position of agreeing with Sen. Pete Wilson (R-Calif.) on a nuclear weapons issue. In his letter (May 27), he argues that the Midgetman missile should not be built--and I agree. I take issue, however, with his contention that a rail-mobile version of the MX missile is the preferred option, being “equally survivable and pos(ing) no greater first-strike threat than the Midgetman.”

Wilson appears to be under the popular misconception that a rail-based MX system would have thousands of miles of track to roam free upon, thus making it difficult for Soviet planners to target the MX in a first strike.

In fact, the entire history of the MX debate suggests that no U.S. state or county will allow the system to travel on their land. Subsequently, the MX would be confined to a military installation where it would continue to be vulnerable to attack.

The larger problem is that the very nature of the MX will always invite a Soviet preemptive strike in a time of crisis.

Since each MX has 10 highly accurate warheads, the Soviet perception must be that it is designed to strike Russian silos before the actual beginning of hostilities--what good is a missile to fire at empty silos?

Whether deployed in rail-garrison made Minuteman III silos, or any of the other half-baked deployment schemes that have been proposed, the MX will remain an incentive to strike first rather than a deterrent to such a strike.

Wilson seems to devote quite a bit of his energy to continuing the nuclear buildup without halt rather than searching for ways to reduce and eliminate those weapons that threaten all of us.

Californians need a senator who will respond to their desire to end the arms race, and not to the desires of large arms contractors to continue it.

JIM BONDI

Los Angeles