As the weeks wore on table, headline writers became more exolicit. 'Do we really want Europe LO free?' asked The Daily Express on Thursday 4 April, when discussions were takplace about limiting short-range missiles well. The Daily Mail warned of the Folly and fallacy of a nuclear-free Britain' the Telegraph asked 'And if the Red Army rolls West?
West European politiclans and Ineir media in creasingly focussed on the of a nuclear-free Europe. They raised every conceivable bogus)
The INF treaty was seen as a possible thin end of the wedge to a nuclear free Europe and also as 'decoupling' Western Europe the United States.
Al each stage of the nuclear disarmament talks over lic root lwo vcas. has been the US and West that have raised objections to denuclearisation. This period clearly highlighted the real posiof the self-declared multilateral nuclear disarmers like Reagan and Thatcher: they are determined their nuclear armouries. That is why after first offering the 'double zero' -option the INF treaty was actually opposed when Gorbachev accepted it The 40 year old debate between unilateralists and so-called multilateralists has been exposed more than at any other time for te Take and te Iraud lial it is. The argument is not about which method will lead to nuclear disarmament but about whether or not to disarm.
The INF treaty is the first step to what must be the central slogan of ine next period — the elimination of all nuclear weapons