User:Memorablename/sandbox

The Nuclear Freeze campaign was a mass movement during the 1980s intended to place political pressure on the United States and the Soviet Union to mutually freeze the testing, production, and deployment of nuclear weapons.

Background of the Nuclear Freeze Movement
Various freeze proposals occurred throughout the Cold War, with the first suggestion of a freeze of fissionable material for use in nuclear weapons suggested in the mid-1950s in letters between Eisenhower and Bulganin. Concrete policy proposals for freezes began in the 1960s, with a formal proposal from the United States to the Soviet Union of a partial freeze on the the number of both offensive and defensive nuclear vehicles. However, this was rejected by the Soviet Union due to fears that it would freeze the Soviet Union into strategic inferiority. In 1970, the US Senate passed a resolution calling for both superpowers to suspend further development of nuclear strategic weapons systems, both offensive and defensive, during the SALT I negotiations. Throughout this period, other arms proposals suggested would also qualify as partial freezes. Concerns over nuclear weapons continued to grow through the 1970s, but the movement remained fragmented. While figures like Reverend Theodore Hesburgh and Reverend Billy Graham had discussed the dangers of nuclear war, the combination of a conservative and nationalist tone in the country and the fractured nature and goals of activist groups resulted in little progress.

Randall Forsberg and "Call to Halt the Nuclear Arms Race"
The origin of the nuclear freeze movement is broadly credited to Randall Forsberg, the author of a 1980 public memorandum titled "Call to Halt the Nuclear Arms Race." This arms-control proposal called for both the United States and Soviet Union to stop the testing, production, and deployment of nuclear weapons as a first step towards lowering nuclear tensions. The memorandum built on the work of groups such as the American Friends Service Committee, Mobilization for Survival, and the Fellowship of Reconciliation as well as personal experience while working for the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute and reading about failed agreements between the US and USSR.

The accessible goal set forth in the memorandum became a widely accepted rallying point. The memorandum was moderate and simple in order to appeal to both peace activists and ordinary people concerned about the threat of the arms race but unwilling to risk national defense. Forsberg framed a nuclear freeze as a logical choice, claiming that the two countries owned more than 50,000 nuclear weapons with plans to build 20,000 more. The memorandum also argued against the more widely accepted idea of deterrence, arguing that adding more nuclear weapons to the world would only increase the chance of nuclear war. Additionally, Forsberg argued that a nuclear weapons freeze would result in a large amount of fiscal savings, going on to detail the social and economic benefits of various alternative domestic spending options.

After its publication, "Call to Halt the Nuclear Arms Race" was endorsed by various leaders, intellectuals, and activists. Political figures, such as George Ball, Clark Clifford, William Colby, Averell Harriman, George Kennan, and scientists, including Linus Pauling, Jerome Wiesner, Bernard Feld, Jonas Salk, and Carl Sagan came forward to support the idea.

Grassroots Support
Despite the proliferation of nuclear weapons being an international issue, initial efforts to advance the movement focused on alerting and educating at a local level. Activists secured signatures on freeze petitions and placed freeze referenda on local ballots nationwide. "Think globally, act locally" served as a motto of the campaign. After obtaining various peace groups' endorsements, a freeze resolution was first placed on the November 1980 election ballot in towns of western Massachusetts. With the leadership of Randy Kehler, Frances Crowe, and other local activists, the resolution passed in 59 out of the 62 towns. The freeze campaign contributed to Democrats adding twenty-six seats during the 1982 midterm elections. Later in March 1982, 88 percent of the 180 Vermont town meetings voted to support a bilateral nuclear weapons freeze between the United States and the Soviet Union.

National Impact
In March 1982, a plan to introduce a freeze resolution in Congress was announced by United States' Democratic Senators Edward Kennedy and Mark Hatfield. On June 12, 1982, the largest peace rally in United States' history to date was held concurrently with the Second United Nations Special Session on Disarmament with approximately one million participants. Results from public opinion polls taken in 1982 and 1983 were virtually identical showing an average of 72 percent support and 20 percent opposition to the nuclear weapons freeze campaign. Many major United States religious bodies and hundreds of national organizations endorsed the campaign.

However, national success was limited. The freeze legislation passed in the House was drafted by opponents of the movement, leading it to be called a "phony freeze" by activists.

Parallels in European Activism
Anti-nuclear activism was common in Europe as well at the time, as Europe was a likely choice for any nuclear conflict. Unease had started in 1979 with the stationing of Pershing II missiles in five European countries, and anxieties increased with Reagan's more confrontational rhetoric. In response to the growing threats, demonstrations were held in 1981 and 1982 in cities such as Bonn, London, Paris, Rome, and Amsterdam, with hundreds of thousands of participants. The US freeze movement maintained close contact with European Nuclear Disarmament (END) and other groups more focused on European missiles, with speakers going between the groups and rallies coordinated whenever possible.

Criticism
A key argument against the nuclear freeze movement was that such an action would leave the Soviet Union in a state of superiority. While a 1980 New York Times/CBS poll showed that 72 percent of Americans would support a nuclear freeze, roughly the same number of Americans opposed the idea of it would allow for a Soviet weapons advantage. William Buckley painted freeze supporters as Communist dupes, with other critics and commentators arguing that activists were simply naive. Polling data showed that about 66 percent of Americans believed the Soviet Union to be stronger militarily, with a majority opposing cuts to military spending.

While traditionally right-wing organizations were an obvious source of contentiousness, the pragmatic nature of a campaign merely to limit nuclear proliferation was a cause for much disagreement among the diversity of interests advocating for various degrees of demilitarization and nuclear non-proliferation.

The grassroots nature of the movement also led to controversy. Some critics argued that matters of national security and national policy should be left to experts and federal policy makers, especially in forums dedicated to local matters.

Ronald Reagan
Ronald Reagan's administration was initially a staunch opponent to the movement. According to Reagan's administration, the campaign was a danger to national security and was initiated by "foreign agents". Reagan's extreme military and nuclear policies were often used by Democrats as a rallying point. In 1982, the administration tried to prevent freeze referenda at state and local levels. They succeeded in defeating a freeze resolution in the Senate in 1983. The Reagan administration failed to defeat a resolution that passed the House of Representatives in 1983, but succeeded in weakening the resolution with various amendments.

Despite these initial efforts to defeat the campaign, Reagan later began publicly declaring his opposition to nuclear war and began to reevaluate his nuclear policies. By December, 1982, the anti-nuclear movement had continued to grow, and public support for increasing military spending had dropped 60 percent in the span of two years. In an attempt to decrease public fear of a nuclear war, Reagan launched his Strategic Defense Initiative. Reagan's administration disapproved of his switch of rhetoric and his Strategic Defense Initiative, however Reagan remained persistent.

1984 United States Presidential Election
Prior to the 1984 election, the Democratic strategy was to ensure the party and the Democratic nominee endorsed the nuclear weapons freeze campaign to gain support from freeze advocates. Even though she declined, Democratic candidate Reverend Jesse Jackson went as far as asking Randall Forsberg to serve as an official adviser. All Democratic candidates excluding Ruben Askew publicly supported the campaign. Democratic candidate Walter Mondale won the bid for the Democratic nominee. Mondale's opponent was incumbent President Ronald Reagan. Because of Reagan's shift in rhetoric and Walter Mondale's lack of distinction in policy, Reagan eventually went on to win reelection in a landslide.