Campaigns Against NATO
Many of the front organisations’ long-standing techniques have been deployed in their campaigns against NATO’s INFHmissile deployment and, more recently, the American Strategic Defense Initiative. But the methods employed have become more sophisticated to appeal as widely as possible to Western public opinion, with the obvious intention of exploiting the genuine element of pacifism, distrust of all things nuclear and impatience of the lack of progress over arms control which inspire the anti-nuclear movements outside their immediate control. Continuous repetition of the argument that NATO’s nuclear modernisation would create a new and dangerous phase of the arms race has caused many people not normally sympathetic to echo the Soviet claims. The greatest advantage derived by the Soviet Union from its activities has been to force NATO governments on to the defensive with public opinion in their own countries. So the justification for NATO’s collective response to what was originally a Soviet nuclear build-up — the deployment of the SS-20s — has had to be provided against a background of opposition often ranging from scepticism to outright hostility. This chapter describes the activities of the international front organisations in the United States and in the United Kingdom, and ends with a general review of the involvement of these organisations in the anti-nuclear campaign in Europe in recent years.
KeywordsEurope Boris Harness Preven Karen
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 5.John Barron, ‘The KGB’s Magical War for Peace’, Readers Digest, October 1982, p. 238.Google Scholar
- 11.Herbert Romerstein, The World Peace Council and Soviet Active Measures, (July 1982).Google Scholar
- 13.Michael Straight, After Long Silence (Collins, 1983) p. 202.Google Scholar
- 14.See Neal Wood, Communism and British Intellectuals (London, 1959).Google Scholar
- 15.Henry Pelling, The British Communist Party (London, rev. 1975) pp. 144–8.Google Scholar