President Reagan’s invitation to the Soviet Union to join the United States in negotiating an end to the nuclear arms race brought to a head whirlwind of proposals for accomplishing a weapons freeze and cutback. 1 As though everybody suddenly discovered the enormity of the risks nuclear weapons pose for humanity, many freeze andlor reduction resolulions have been put Qforward in recent weeks in Congress and in zlegislatures and town meetings across the country. Addressing a televised ;press conference Wednesiday. Reagan said there Twould be “no winners” in a Anuclear war. He threw his weight behind a Senate proposal for a mutual and ‘verifiable freeze of “the monstrous and inhumane” weapons. The proposal – by Sens. John Warner. R-Va. and Henry Jackson. D-Wash. with 56 other Senate backers – takes a longerterm approach toward mutual arms reduction than another wellsupported resolution seeking an immediate U.S.Soviet freeze followed by major cutbacks. The latter. advocated by Sens. Edward Kennedy, DMass. and Mark Hatfield, R-Ore. had gained considerable momentum as the forerunner of a number of proposals introduced in Congress. Keeping peace in a nuclear age is one of mankind’s most agonizing dilemmas and indeed requires urgent and sustained attention. Despite non-proliferation efforts of the past, the superpowers have more than enough weapons to destroy civilization, as we know it. The newest challenge to reverse the arms race came sharply into focus last Nov. 18 when President Reagan offered not to deploy the new Pershing and Cruise missiles in Europe – requested by NATO allies – if, the Soviets would dismantle the medium-range missiles they have there. “This is zero on both sides,” Reagan said. “If President Brezhnev is serious about arms control, and I hope he is, he will join us in a real weapons reduction.” Last month Brezhnev announced a unilateral freeze on the mediumerange missiles in the European part of the Soviet Union while warning the U.S. on deploying of its new missiles planned for 1983. But Reagan said the Soviets have deployed 300 3/ew SS-20 missiles. each bith three nuclear warheads. By contrast, he said, the Western Alli-ance hasn’t yet deployed any European missiles capable of reaching Russia. in essence, those of the Reagan philosophy oppose an immediate freeze because this would remove incentives for hard negotiations on nuclear reduction and undermine allied efforts to eliminate medium-range nuclear missiles in Europe. The reasoning makes sense. Cautioning against precipitous arms reductions that would weaken deterrence. Reagan says the U.S. must be careful in negotiating with the Sovietsf Dashed hopes in the past bear out his apprehensions. 4Yet the urgency is obvious – and mutual for Russians as well as Americans. It is hoped USSR leaders will join in serious negotiations to end th? amis race once and for a . Reagan has said U.S. negotiators can be ready by “summer.” Unanimity is important in our approach. With this in mind. advocates of all recent proposals should quickly iron out differences and unify behind the President for a solid front. Nothing less than the future of mankind depends on successful efforts by the two nations.