Framing national security: Elite public discourse on nuclear weapons during the cold war

Abstract

Political discourse can provoke, preempt, or quell social movements, identifying which issues are most accessible for challenge and how. Movements are not simply reactive, however, and can affect public discourse, forcing political leaders and established elites to respond to their concerns. As a result public discourse may reflect the conflict between various actors, as challengers seek to redefine the issues of their concerns and shape viable political solutions. Challengers offer alternative “frames” for ordering consideration of political issues, creating contests both between activists and mainstream media within mainstream media. This article analyzes the “framing” of national security in elite discourse on nuclear weapons and the Soviet Union and its relationship to the broader political climate, including peace movement activism. I compare specialized political discourse, expert strategic discourse, and scientific public discourse from 1945 to 1989. I identify three “master frames” regarding national security, then note the relationships between frame contests in each venue and the larger political climate. I conclude that specialized venues for public discourse serve as both a resource and a site of struggle for protest movements, as elites both “cue” and respond to political movements.