IMGpapers 1980–83

Newspapers of the International Marxist Group and its forerunners, 1980–83

Reagan rejects nuclearfreeze

Socialist Challenge No. 239, 26 March 1982 · p. 5 of the scan · 455 words

The scan: sc-no239.pdf (PDF, Marxists Internet Archive, opens at this page)

Uncorrected machine reading. This text was read by machine (Apple Vision OCR) from a scan of a newspaper page, and the page was cut into articles by machine, at the headlines found by their type size. Nothing has been corrected: expect misread words, text from a neighbouring article, and titles that are the machine reading of the headline, some of them only fragments. Quote from the scan, not from this page.
How this article was cut and titled: headline found by type size in the OCR geometry (split_tabloid.py); 1-7 of 7; machine-segmented newspaper page; uncorrected Vision OCR.

page 5 of the scan

freeze of the deployment of nuclear missiles in Europe met a predictable response.

sisting on the need for missiles to be stationed throughout Europe.

Reagan has proBUIT blems in his own back yard fast-growing profreeze movement in ine USA. Already five state legislatures have declared themselves in favour of a freeze on nuclear weapons, while members of Congress have Jolnca tne chorus caling for Reagan to stick at the prescit nucical ammis lever.

Pro-freeze senators

such as Edward Kennedy are concerned that the bellicose policies Reagan gang could trigger off nuclear conflict, which at this stage they do not belleve serves the besi interests or needs of US cavile.

Furthermore, Kennedy

and his ilk are not against nuclear weapons: their difabout how best to handle the Russians, and to keep the US people tow behind the strategy of imperialism.

They are scared that Reagan, by brandishing nucical weapons like a B Western Bullall, SOVIET LEADER Leonid Brezhnev's call for a President Reagan said it 'didn't go far enough', while inCruise and Trident will bring home to Lne American people the dreadtu impications all their nuclear policies.

The anti-missiles movement should welcome Brezhnev's offer of a unilateral freeze on the deploymnent of Soviet intermediate missiles, and calling for NATO not to position new Cruise and Pershings in five Western countries.

However. Brezhnev's proposal is very weak A call by the USSR for the renunciation of all nuclear arms would deal capitalism's war plans. Ii almighty blow would gain mass support the allong fast-growing supports unale anso including millions of people in the USA hat is more it is from a military point of view somelning lal tne Usok could only benefit me la passioly d c 'traditional' military conflict that the capitalist na tions could defeat the Dover UnoR way that the USSR and its alles could be deteated in a war is by massive nuclear strike - a fact that shrewd capitalist politician knows only too well.

The defeat of the war drive does not lie through Edward Kennedy, the 'astute' moves of the Russian bureaucracy, who aim TEN WEEKS their strategy towards the so-called progressive sections of the ruling class rather than working peowno nave noting lo gain by nuclear shoot out. The developing antiwar and anti-missiles movements growing al lile grass roots, including In the USA, are best guarantee against a nuclear holocaust.

We can help to build this movement by preparing the biggest demonstrations possible Reagan's visit to Britain, France and Germany. This will show that there is mass movement Europe that is not going to let this gangster and his associates blow us all to hell. Socialist Challenge

----- pull-quotes -----

Scottish Campaign Against Trident Glasgow-Saturday 10th

← HANDSManchester trade unionists adopt Polish prisoners →

Something wrong on this page?