Dear Ann Landers,
"To those who protest against nuclear war, I can only say I'm with you. Like my predecessors, it is now my responsibility to do my ut-most to prevent such a war. No one feels more than I the need for peace." It is indeed my highest priority to deter and prevent such a war, for its consequences would be disastrous for mankind. That is why I've called for negotiations leading to major arms re-ductions, not limitations that only codify high levels. Under the so- called limitations of SALT II the Soviet Union and the United States could substantially add to their nuclear arsenals. I have instead called for the reduction of the most destabilizing strategic elements, the ballistic missile warheads, by one-third in the first phase of negotiations on strategic arms reduction. In the area of intermediate-range nuclear forces, I have also proposed the elimina-tion of the most threatening systems, the land-based missiles. During the last decade, the United States restrained its deployment of new nuclear forces while the Soviet Union enormously increased its forces. We, therefore, now face a serious imbalance, which decreases the credibility of our deterrent. That is why we must modernize our own forces both to reduce the dangerous imbalance and to make clear to the Soviet leaders that they should join us in negotiating the kind of substantial, equal and verifi-able reductions in nuclear arms the world demands. Ann, we have tried many times since World War II to persuade the Russians to join us in reducing or even eliminating nuclear weapons, with little success. Perhaps, instead of sending copies to me, your read-ers should send copies of your May 17 column to President Brezhnev. Sincerely, -Ronald Reagan

,