In the growing consensus for early nuclear arms control talks with the Soviet Union, too little attention is given the urgency of deterring spread of nuclear capability to other countries. Each new country which achieves the capability increases the number of hands on the nuclear button and the possibility of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorist organizations. The subject has been touched upon in congressional discussions in recent weeks. “In addition to the five nations which already possess nuclear weapons, 10 others either have the capability to produce such weapons or will have that capability within three years,” warned Sen. Gary I-Iart, D-Colo. The number of nuclear weapons states could grow to 20 by 1990, the senator said. “And today, a new nightmare haunts us – the possibility that nuclear weapons may ‘trickle down’ not only to nations but to terrorist groups.” Sen. John Danforth,DMo., say devising “some sort of deterrent or way of checking the expansion of nuclear capability” as an important responsibility of the United States and the Soviet Union. “The estimates are that by the end of this century perhaps a couple dozen or maybe three dozen separate countries will have nuclear weapons,” Danforth added. Negotiations with the Soviet Union on the nuclear arms issue are a matter of urgency. The fact is we have had no strategic arms talks with the Russians since June of 1979, nearly three years. In the intervening time, both the USSR and the United States have been improving their strategic weapons arsenals. It is encouraging that both President Reagan and Soviet President Brezhnev have called for top-level talks this year – although at different times and places. Reagan will address a United Nations disarmament conference in New York in June. He called on Brezhnev to join him there for a meeting on arms control. The Soviet leader countered with a proposal for a summit in neutral Finland or Switzerland in autumn. it is important that the two super powers find mutual ground for early negotiations and extend these as long as necessary to accomplish meaningful and verifiable cutbacks. The prime focus obviously will be the bilateral U.S.-Soviet problem. At the same time they should not lose sight of the question of containing nuclear proliferation to other nations…and setting an example themselves. As Republican Sen. John H. Chafee of Rhode Island said, speaking of American responsibility: ”l-low in the world can we have the moral leadership to urge these other nations to forego the develotpment of weapons, to a ide by various rules, if we camiot say: “‘We have done everything we can. We have entered into an agreement with the other major power to curtail, to put caps on, to bring about limitations ad reductions in the number of weapons?”‘