Cheney Urges Bush to Go Slow on Aid to Soviets : Diplomacy: The defense secretary reiterates his prediction that Gorbachev will probably fail.

WASHINGTON —  Defense Secretary Dick Cheney, speaking out as the White House prepares for a superpower summit, warned Saturday that President Bush should resist calls for financial assistance or trade concessions in his discussions with Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev.

Cheney, acknowledging that he disagrees with Secretary of State James A. Baker III over the proper response to changes in the Soviet Union, repeated his controversial prediction that Gorbachev is likely to fail in his bid to institute lasting economic and democratic reforms.

At the same time, Cheney--whose department last week began planning for deep budget cuts in coming years--said the extraordinary political changes throughout Eastern Europe have vastly reduced the military threat to Western Europe.

The defense secretary’s skepticism is widely believed to reflect a deliberate Bush Administration strategy to demonstrate to Moscow that even though the United States supports Gorbachev’s reform efforts, it is prepared for their possible failure.

But the defense secretary said his differences with Baker are deeper than the “good cop, bad cop” strategy that many have surmised. “Jim and I occasionally disagree,” said Cheney, appearing on Cable News Network’s “Evans & Novak” program. “We disagree pleasantly.”

Asked whether there is “genuine disagreement” between the two Cabinet officers over the appropriate U.S. response to the Gorbachev-inspired changes in the Soviet Union, Cheney replied: “Sometimes.”

Cheney’s call for the United States to withhold “material assistance” from the Soviet Union comes at a time when the Administration is debating the extent to which its efforts could boost prospects for Soviet reform.

The former Wyoming lawmaker linked his opposition to significant financial assistance or trade concessions to what he described as continued Soviet meddling in Third World conflicts.

“If you’re talking about material assistance of any kind, I’d say absolutely not,” Cheney said in response to a question about how far the United States should go to aid Gorbachev’s reforms.

“While we’ve seen some significant changes in Soviet behavior . . . the bottom line is (that) in many parts of the world, the Soviets are supporting regimes or supporting movements aimed at toppling regimes, and that’s a real problem,” Cheney said.

The defense secretary said the Soviet Union is “overcommitted” in its assistance to the governments of Cuba, Nicaragua and Afghanistan. He said Bush should signal to Gorbachev that “the American people are not going to be prepared to provide any kind of support or assistance under those circumstances.”

Cheney said Moscow’s continuing investment of “massive amounts of money in armaments, a lot of those targeted against the United States” also is a factor in his opposition to aid to Moscow.

That concern appeared to go beyond recent comments by Baker, who noted only that Moscow’s future restraint in regional conflicts would be a precondition for U.S. technical economic assistance.

While Cheney said he views Soviet activity throughout the Third World as a threat to Western interests, he observed that Soviet-supported changes in Eastern Europe have reduced the military threat to the Atlantic Alliance.

The apparently unlikely prospect of a full-scale attack on Western Europe, coupled with heavy political pressure to reduce the federal budget deficit, prompted Cheney last week to order preparations for deep cuts in future defense budgets.

In a Nov. 13 memorandum signed by Pentagon comptroller Sean O’Keefe, the military services were directed to draw up plans to reduce their 1992-94 budget blueprints by as much as $180 billion.

Meanwhile, the New York Times reported today that the Air Force, responding to Cheney’s request for budget-cutting proposals, has suggested closing 15 bases, stretching out the purchase of the Stealth bomber and eliminating five fighter wings.

The Air Force plan also proposes cuts in purchases of the F-16 fighter, retiring some B-52 bombers that carry conventional weapons and retiring the Minuteman II nuclear missile, the paper said.

Citing Administration sources, the Times said the Air Force-proposed cuts equal about $34 billion, about $10-billion short of the amount the service was asked to find for three years.