TIME: Almanac 1993/TIME Almanac 1993.iso/time/caps/83/83capmoy.6

Text File | 1992-10-20 | 13.5 KB | 262 lines

                                                ╫=                            ╚January 2, 1984

MEN OF THE YEAR

The View from the Street Corner


Americans feel anxiety, but little antagonism toward the Soviets


When Ronald Reagan won the presidency by a landslide, he seemed
to have a national mandate backing his repeated calls for
stronger U.S. defenses and a forceful response to any Soviet
challenge. But how solid is that support three years later?

To help answer this question, TIME commissioned a special poll
by Yankelovich, Skelly & White, Inc. The results indicate that
a great many Americans have reservations about the Reagan
Administration's policies toward the Soviet Union. Although
most of them approve of the President's assertive use of U.S.
power, 60% say they worry a lot about "the possibility of
nuclear war." To expand on the poll, TIME correspondents and
stringers in 28 U.S. cities questioned a random sampling of
people--not experts, just ordinary people--to see what lay
behind their views and how those views had changed during the
past year.

One of the most striking findings in these street-corner
interviews is the relative rarity of any sharp hostility toward
the U.S.S.R., and particularly toward the Soviet people. There
is wariness and anxiety in the land, considerably more so than
a year ago, but very little of the antagonism that marked the
height of the cold war in the early 1950s. The Soviets were
widely regarded then as a belligerent, ruthless and implacable
enemy; Americans today seem more inclined to emphasize the
similarities between the two nations and to blame their
conflicts largely on misunderstandings.

There are still many people (some surveys put the total at about
20%) who share Reagan's hostility toward what he has called the
"the evil empire."

"I think we're at war, without shooting each other directly,"
says Dan Wolf, 56, a sales executive in Atlanta. "I think
they've been planning military moves against us for years."
Sara Henderson, 39 who owns a flower store in Boulder, Colo.,
agrees: "Their pattern of aggression ever since World War II has
been very deliberate, and planned thoroughly and thoughtfully."

Hammond Chaffetz, 76, an antitrust lawyer in Chicago, has been
suspicious even longer, going back to New Deal days. Says he:
"We could never trust the Russians then, and we cannot now.
They have newer equipment than ours and the strongest
conventional forces in the world today. If we gave up competing
with them and let them have the balance of power, Europe would
immediately give up on us."

The history of European conflicts strikes other people very
different. Little Rock's W. J. Wisor, 66, a retired executive
of the U.S. Department of Labor, recalls when Moscow and
Washington were allies. "I was in the World War II, and had it
not been for the Soviet Union, we would be doing the goose step
and shouting `Sieg Heil?' They have been invaded; we have not.
They don't like our attitude or shoving our military in their
backyard. They are protecting their interests, just as we would
do."

Quite apart from World War II, many Americans share Wisor's view
of the Soviet Union not as an ideologically fanatic opponent but
as an equal counterpart to the U.S. "We're both hostile to each
other, and they're just as right as we are," says Robert
Mulligan, 20, an electrician in Palisades Park, N.J. Agrees
Dorothy Bender, 63, who heads the senior citizens' club in
Huntington Woods, Mich.: "I don't think they do any more to us
than we do to them. They're a power, and they want to let
people know they're a power and not to mess with them." Judy
Henning, 45, an executive in Los Angeles, puts it another way:
"The Russians are as frightened of us as we are of them."

Most Americans make a clear distinction between the Soviet
rulers and their citizens. "I don't think the Russian people
are any different from Americans," says Jill Breslow, 21, a
senior at Brandeis University. Despite their sympathy, however,
most Americans also regard the people of the Soviet union as
misled, misinformed and essentially helpless. Toward the
Kremlin, on the other hand, they feel some anger and
considerable anxiety, and both feelings have been increasing for
a variety of reasons. Many cite the shooting down of the Korean
airliner in September; others speak of the Middle East or Poland
or the arms race; some, like Harry Lockenour, 46, an autoworker
at the General Motors plant in Pontiac, Mich., just say, "I
think they're getting more aggressive all the time."

"They do more to make us feel threatened because of their
doctrine that they must conquer the earth," says Richard Hammer,
49, a utility- company executive in Suffern, N.Y. "Up until
lately, I didn't think about it too much, but with the U.S.
Pershing missiles being sent to Europe, and the Soviet walkout
in the arms talks, I've become more afraid about what could
happen. I think we made a mistake with the Pershing missiles.
[the Soviets] can deploy more missiles too. I'm wary now."

"I can't way I'm afraid of them," says Leo Rasmussen, 42, mayor
of Nome, Alaska. "But angry?  Yeah. I'm more angry that I was
a year ago. Especially after the Korean airliner incident."
Deedee Corradini, 39, who has a master's degree in psychology
and runs a consulting firm in Salt Lake City, is well aware that
"the more you rear, the more hostile you become," but the
destruction of the Korean jet changed her views too. "I used
to think the Soviets weren't as bad as they had been painted,"
she says, "but the airliner attack has made me more suspicious
of their intentions." Maureen Morrison, 22, who works as a
security guard in Cambridge, Mass., says of the incident, "I
used to think they were just being made out to be the bad guys,
but now I'm beginning to think they are bad."

The fears that Americans have about Moscow often appear to be
part of a general anxiety about leadership on both sides of the
confrontation, about a situation that seems beyond anyone's
control. Alice Gagnard, 26, a professor of journalism at
Marquett University, cites the downing of the Korean plane as
an example of Soviet misjudgment and overreaction, but also as
evidence of a wider problem. "Their threat has been on my mind
more since we changed Administrations and since they changed
leaders," she says. "We both have contingency plans against
each other, and our level of preparedness has taken us beyond
the question of a freeze. It's now a matter of being in the
same room of explosives with all those matches."

Karrie Olson, 26, a clothing store executive in Seattle, feels
that the Soviets have become more menacing, and, she says, "I
am frightened that as time goes on, as they acquire more and
more power, someone--not necessarily the Soviets, but someone
might blow up the world. But when I think about who it might
actually be that would start a nuclear war, it's just kind of
a blur in my mind."

Most Americans speak of the Soviets as people they have never
seen, except as figures occasionally spotted on television, but
a good many are trying to remedy that state of mutual isolation.
Some members of the United Church of Christ, for example,
invited the Soviets to send a group of visitors on a tour of New
England. Last April came a newspaper editor, a Russian Orthodox
bishop, a scientist and six others, who stayed in rural homes
and ate potluck dinners. "It was the first time many of these
people had ever done anything like this." says Elizabeth
Gardner, who helped organize the tour and whose husband Clint
was finishing an exchange visit to the Soviet Union in
December. "it proved to a lot of people that the Soviets are
human beings with human concerns, just like us," she says. "I
think Americans tend to forget that."

"I've lived in both countries, and both remind me of people
looking at the undersides of cars--seeing only the bad side,"
says Dr. James Muller, who was one of the first Americans to
study medicine at the Soviet university, and who is now trying
to arrange for at least 30 doctors form each nation to visit the
other side's hospitals next June. "That is not to say that the
Soviet union is all good. It isn't. No one is. But there is
some good, and our objectives, to some degree, are the same.
We should concentrate on that."

Despite their anxiety, Americans seem to remain convinced that
the ultimate nightmare will never occur. Partly this is a
belief that the Soviets are not strong enough to attack, that
deterrence works. Bailey Thompson, 34, editorial-page editor of
the Shreveport (La.) Journal, recently returned from a
three-week trip through the Soviet Union, and suspects that
"they are changing their strategy in Western Europe, and may be
contemplating a nonnuclear blitzkreig." But he adds: "Right
now, I don't see any possibility of overt action against the
West." Michael Fitch, 36, an electrician from Waterford,
Mich., puts it simply: "We have our missiles and they have
theirs."

Partly, though, the belief that the unthinkable will remain
unthinkable is a matter less of strategic judgment than of
inherent optimism, or perhaps simply faith. Tom Allan, 36, is
a program- control supervisor for Raytheon in Portmouth, R.I.
Much of Raytheon's work is military, but Alan refuses to
believe that nuclear war is possible. "I think the people of
the world will prevent it." he says, "the everyday people, the
bulk of the populace of the world. I don't think anyone really
wants to have a head-to-head confrontation that might result in
something that could annihilate the entire world."

-- By Otto Friedrich. Reported by Robert Carney/New York and
Benjamin W. Cate/Los Angeles, with other bureaus.

---------------------------------------------------------------
Answers to a Poll: Let's Talk

A larger number of American generally accept President Reagan's
view of the Soviet regime, but they have doubts about the wisdom
of his Administration's policies. While they approve of the
President's assertive military approach, they believe he should
put more emphasis on negotiations. They see the need to reduce
the danger of nuclear war as the No. 1 problem confronting the
nation, and they do not feel Reagan is handling that problem
well. They want Reagan to meet Soviet Leader Yuri Andropov in
a summit.

These are the main findings that emerge from a public opinion
poll conducted for TIME by Yankelovich, Skelly & White, Inc.*
The responses are sometimes contradictory, for they are the
views of a people divided over how best to confront the ominous
changes in the relations between East and West. Overall, the
emphasis is on making a greater effort for peace.

More than half the people questioned think that U.S. relations
with the U.S.S.R. have deteriorated within the past year. While
50% say their own views of the Soviets have remained about the
same, 45% report that their opinion of Moscow has worsened. Yet
Americans consistently regard the Soviet people with
considerable warmth. Fully 88% agree that "the Russian people
could be our friends if their leaders had a different attitude."

Andropov seems to have had little effect on these Americans;
67% endorse the view that "he is no better or worse than any of
the others. They are all part of the same system." Despite
this, however, 60% think Andropov "knows that the Soviet Union
is in just as much danger as the United States, and therefore
is willing to negotiate an arms-control agreement."

Americans apparently believe the danger of war is increasing.
Though only 30% think the Soviets have become stronger than the
U.S. (43% thought that in June), 61% say they "worry a lot"
about the Soviet military buildup, and 60% say the same about
the possibility of nuclear war. Both figures have risen nearly
10 points since June.

A remarkable number of those worriers expect to see their
nightmares come true. Fully 49% foresee "some chance' of
nuclear war in Europe within the next five years, and 17% see
"a good chance."

Though the Soviets are the main cause of these anxieties, a
surprising number of Americans see fault on both sides. More
than three-quarters endorse the proposition that "the U.S. has
to accept some of the blame for the misunderstandings that have
plagued U.S.-Soviet relations." In assessing Reagan's handling
of various problems, only 26% credit him with doing a good job
on avoiding war. That is his lowest rating on any major issue.
Says Opinion Analyst Daniel Yankelovich: "Reagan has proved
that he can be tough, but he has not yet proved that he can be
a peacemaker. It is unlikely that this issue will escape
bitter and partisan debate in an election year."

The responses are replete with contradictions: 54% agree that
every sign of Soviet influence must be contained, "with military
force, if necessary, whatever the risk." But even larger
majorities recognize that "we do not have the power to contain
Soviet influence everywhere in the world" (79%) and that a
"military containment policy is what got us into trouble in Viet
Nam" (83%). And 93% agree that "picking a fight is too
dangerous in a nuclear world" and that "we should be thinking
in terms of peaceful solutions." As for who should negotiate
and when, 76% favor a meeting between Reagan and Andropov now.

*The findings are based on a telephone survey of 1,000
registered voters made from Dec. 6 to Dec. 8. The potential
sampling error is plus or minus 3%. When these results are
compared with the results of previous polls, the potential
sampling error is plus or minus 4.5%.