The following is an edited transcript of an interview with Secretary of Defense Caspar W. Weinberger '38. The interview was conducted on Thursday, March 26, in Weinberger's Pentagon office by Crimson reporter James G. Hershberg. Weinberger, 63, is a former secretary of Health. Education and Welfare who joined the Reagan administration after working as an attorney and executive for the Bechtel Corporation.

Crimson: During the campaign, Ronald Reagan indicated his opposition to a peacetime draft and peacetime registration. Since the Inauguration there have been mixed signals on this, and one of your advisory panels recently recommended reinstituting the draft...

Weinberger: There's a lot of support for the draft in Congress, and within some of the services. The president remains opposed to the draft. He is opposed to the compulsive aspect of it. He would like very much to see if by increasing salaries and educational and other benefits we cannot attract enough people to the services. We will need more people, and we're ordering more planes and ships and one thing or another so we'll need more people in the armed services. We hope to get them on an entirely voluntary basis, and that's what the increased benefits are designed to accomplish.

Crimson: Under what circumstances would you foresee a return to the draft?

Weinberger: Only if it became very apparent that we could not possibly get enough people to fulfill the national security needs of the country. At this point. I think we're doing pretty well. The salary increases last November helped some: we have another salary increase in June, and one in October. I've made proposals to exempt the first $20,000 of income for men in the military services from federal income taxation--a lot of states do that now--and we are considering some educational benefits. All of these things I hope would be enough so that we wouldn't have to go to a draft.

Crimson: In addition to the manpower element, some advisers have said reinstituting the draft might serve as a deterrent.

Weinberger: Well, this is said to be one thing. I think the Soviets are aware of the fact that if need be we could mobilize reasonably quickly. But a lot of people think we can't mobilize rapidly enough because we won't have as much time as we've had in previous wars. And a lot of our European friends and allies, when we push them to support defense efforts more, continually tell us that they have conscription and we don't and we should do it. But the president remains very strongly opposed to the compulsive element in the draft and for that reason we hope to avoid it just as long as we can. If we see that we aren't getting enough people then we would have to think about some other means of doing it. But at the moment, we think...the number of volunteers seems to be coming in at a little better pace.

Crimson: There seems to be no move towards rescinding registration.

Weinberger: I don't think, sir, there will be. Registration seems to be, first of all, not particularly onerous. It doesn't seem to be particularly...well, it's not as effective as...I think if we're going to do registration we should get more information as part of the registration process. But there doesn't seem to be any particular opposition to it, and it would save time on mobilization, if need be, and to that extent provides a good additional argument why we don't need the draft.

Crimson: You mentioned that you would favor getting additional information from the registration process. Does that mean that, without going back to the draft, you might be reopening some of the induction centers?

Weinberger: No, it just means that on the slip of paper that people fill out when they register they might give us some more useful information, like 'Where do we reach you in time of an emergency?' or 'What are some of your skills?' or 'What are some of your interests?' or a few more facts like that. Since you're going to all the trouble of getting people to sign up, it doesn't do very much good just to have the name and address. I think we need something a little more than is there now. But that's just an administrative matter, that doesn't have anything to do with the basic principle of whether we would draft or not.

Crimson: Secretary of State Haig said recently that the Soviet Union had a 'hit list' in Central America, starting with Nicaragua and moving on to EI Salvador. Would you agree with that assessment?

Weinberger: Well, I don't know quite what he had in mind by that. But I think it's apparent that there is a great deal of support within the Soviet government for aggressive invasion-type moves or infiltration-type moves. I think that they also do a lot of probing and testing, and if they don't meet any resistance--and they didn't in Angola, and they didn't in Ethiopia, and they didn't in Yemen, and they didn't meet much in Afghanistan except within Afghanistan--then they go ahead and do more. Each time they meet no resistance on one of these infilitrations or actual invasions, they're encouraged to do more. And I think they've had plans to do more, and I think it's essential that we provide the clear evidence of the fact that we are resolved not to let 'emproceed along these lines and we are resolved and have the capability of resisting activities of this kind which just further limit peace and freedom in the world. And I think that to the extent that they know and understand this, these additional probes and thrusts will stop. In Secretary Haig's language, maybe the hit list will get smaller.

Crimson: Richard Pipes was recently quoted as saying that "at a very low cost, without a big investment on our part, we can make it very hard" for the Soviets in places like Angola and Afghanistan. President Reagan has said he might favor supplying arms to Afghanistan rebels, and there have been reports that this has been done covertly. Should we be sending arms?

Weinberger: Well, I think that it is very much to the interests of the West and people who are for freedom and for peace to insure that aggression of the type that's practiced in Afghanistan--and I hope will not be practiced in Poland but is at least being threatened there--the people who are resisting that [aggression] need support from people who love freedom and peace all over the world. I would not argue with the president's statements on the subject, that these are freedom fighters and some support should be considered if they request it.