PEACE ~ Canadians don’t want Star Wars here From the submissions of trade unions to churches to one 15-year old boy, it has become obvious at the hearings of the Special Joint Committee on Canada’s Inter- national Relations that most Canadians don’t want our coun- try to be involved in any way with Reagan’s plan to militarize outer space. The Canadian Council of Churches told the hearing it was immoral for the USA to consider spending up to $1-trillion on the project when there are millions of sick and starving in the world. ‘“‘Pouring billions of dollars into military hardware rather than into _ the development of ways and means for meeting the basic needs of millions of people, just so they can survive, is obscene’’, the CCC charged. Although jobs supposedly to be created by Star Wars research here have been held up as bait to encourage Canadian _participa- tion, labor has challenged that claim. The Ontario Federation of Labor told the hearing that Star Wars research will do little to create jobs (only 25,000 over five years, it estimates). “‘Many more jobs will be created if the same money is re- directed to other sectors of the economy”, the OFL said. Canada could develop and im- plement programs in the area’ of economic conversion from war to peace production’’. UAW Canadian Director Bob __ White linked both free trade and _ Star Wars. *“Choosing free trade means accepting still greater economic integration into the United States, and this threatens to limit even further our political sovereignty — whether in domes- tic policies or on international is- sues like Star Wars’’, he told the hearing. White pointed out that claims that Star Wars will create jobs are weak, and said that there was ‘“‘no greater condemnation of an economic system than the argu- ment that the only way to provide jobs is to accelerate the arms race into space’’. The Toronto Disarmament Network (TDN), a coalition of 78 groups committed to multilateral nuclear disarmament, saw Star Wars “‘as the logical consequence of the race for nuclear superiority. It’s the same game with a differ- ent name — it’s a way of selling the arms race’’. The TDN pointed out that ‘‘if Canadian government or Cana- dian corporations involve them- selves in Star Wars research, the U.S. government, contemplating deployment of a Star Wars sys- tem, will be able to argue that Canada is obligated to accept the weapons because it has cashed in on the research phase. If Canada gets involved in any way in Star Wars, the hands of this and future Canadian governments will be tied”. The Communist Party of Canada was not given an oral hearing by the joint committee, but -in a written submission pointed out that through Star Wars Canada and its people are being used by U.S. imperialism to protect American, not Canadian security. ““Canada’s north will be an American ‘shield’, with Canada a victim in the event of an emergency’’, the party charged. ““Canada will be considered ex- pendable, all in the interests of the global strategy of U.S. imperialism. “Instead of adding to the sec- urity of Canada, capitulation to pressure from Washington opens up Canada to becoming a battle- field and bombing target’’. The CPC said that Canadian support of Star Wars and other U.S. initiatives points to a sharp and dangerous turn in foreign and Soviet test ban key initiative By FRED WEIR The announcement by the USSR of. a unilateral morotorium on nuclear testing, which began Aug. 6, may well be the most significant arms control initiative in decades. For some time large sections of the international peace movement have been pressing for a halt to nuclear testing. The call has been particularly urgent since Ronald Reagan came to office and, in July 1982, formally abandoned the ongoing negotiations for a Com- prehensive Test Ban Treaty. The Reagan nuclear arms buildup has resulted in the biggest ever upsurge in U.S. nuclear testing — 18 ex- plosions in 1984 alone. Many experts argue that a Comprehensive Test Ban would be the most useful first step toward ending the arms race altogether. @ A complete ban on testing would halt the emergence of the so-called “third generation” of 10th Anniversary marked . Helsinki Act product of detente On Aug. 1, 1975 the leaders of 35 European states, Canada and the USA, signed the Final Act of the Conference. on Security and Co- Operation in Europe, thus taking a serious and responsible step towards excluding-war from the political arsenals of the continent's states. The key provisions are: e Sovereign equality, respect for rights in- herent in sovereignty; e Renunciation of the use of threat of force: e Inviolability of frontiers; e Territorial integrity of states; e Peaceful settlement of disputes; — e Non-interference in internal affairs; e Respect for human rights and basic free- doms, including freedom of religious con- victions; e Equality and right of peoples to decide = destiny; e Cooperation among states: e Honoring commitments neice inter- national law. ; Commenting on the 10th anniversary of the _ Final Act's signing, the World Peace Council _ said it “reflected the supreme desire of Euro- pean nations and of world public opinion to safeguard peace, to live in security, to develop cooperation, to save present and future genera- tions from the horrors of war and not to allow humankind to perish i in a nuclear holocaust. - Tt was an expression, said the WPC, of the tangible achievements of international detente accomplished in the 1970s and mutually re- - affirmed the boundaries in Europe which emerged from the victory over nazi Germany. However, says the WPC, from the start it _ Ge PACIFIC TRIBUNE, AUGUST 14, 1985 became clear ‘‘that influential forces made — great efforts to counter its implementation and to step up the arms race and confrontation rather than continue the process of detente. The deployment of new first-strike nuclear weapons in Western Europe and the ensuing con-- sequences have further aggravated the situa- tion. “Therefore, it is now imperative that every- thing be done to return to the active policy of detente, to end the arms build-up and to guaran- tee a policy of security and disarmament. Con- trary to that, the world has arrived at a very dangerous juncture. The threat Park said. France Sources: DOE, SIPRI, CDI Nuclear Explosions 1945-1984 + Total: 1507 38 Eee piles United hina India Chart prepared by CDI nuclear weapons. Currently under development, these weapons will be designed to concentrate the des- tructive force of the nuclear explo- sion in selective ways. For example, the Neutron Bomb, an early spec- imen of the “third generation”, emphasized killing radiation over blast and heat. Other exotic devices now on the drawing-boards will be used to create a gamma-ray storm that burns out electronic equip- ment, or to power X-ray laser guns for the upcoming Star Wars net- work. A mutual test ban, however, would prevent the testing of these new weapons. If they cannot be tested, they cannot be placed into production, and the next deadly phase of the arms race could be halted in its tracks. © Nuclear weapons, like most other things, have a limited “shelf - life”. Without regular sample test- ing, no one can be sure that they «will function properly. If testing were banned, experts say, there would be persuasive reasons for nations to negotiate more general arms control agreements — to turn unreliable nuclear stockpiles into reliable international agree- ments. @ First strike weapons, which must perform with absolute accu- racy and precision, would be the first to deteriorate in the absence of testing. The world would become a much safer place if the functional- ity of the existing first-strike arse- nal were increasingly in doubt, and new weapons of this type could not be developed. © Of all possible areas of arms control agreement, a Comprehen- sive Test Ban would be the easiest to verify. Nuclear explosions are easily traced and measured with modern seismic monitoring equip- ment and, as two of America’s top geologists noted recently in Scien- tific American, “The technical capabilities needed to police a comprehensive test ban down to explosions of very small size unquestionably exist.” © A Comprehensive Test Ban is an immediately achievable and ~such an agreement would “not be workable goal. Agreement in this area would be a major confidence- building measure, and might help. to break the current stalemate atl the Geneva Talks. For all of these reasons, the Soviet initiative in declaraing a uni- lateral testing freeze holds out the possibility of an arms control breakthrough with tremendous ramifications for all areas of th nuclear competition. Unfortunately, the attitude of the Reagan administration has_ been far from encouraging. Des-_ pite large-scale support for a test ban among peace groups, church and labor organizations, and even in the U.S. congress, the adel tration has repeatedly stated that in the interests of the United States”, and that it would ‘‘under- mine the credibility” of American nuclear forces. The Reagan administration is committed to a massive expansion — of the U.S. nuclear arsenal, to con- structing an effective first-strike capability against the Soviet Union, and to introducing Star W ‘weaponry as soon as possibl £ These objectives call for rap’ development of the “third genera-_ tion” of nuclear technology, and require a sharp increase, not 4 reduction, in nuclear testing. As Washington’s independent” Centre for Defence Information commented after Reagan pulled out of Test Ban Talks with the Soviets in 1982: “Abandonment of ~ all efforts to negotiate an end to nuclear testing is fully consistent with the Reagan administration's ~ active preparations to wage su cessfuly nuclear warfare. . .it is consistent with its decision to coD~ struct 17,000 nuclear weapons if the next decade.” : These realities make it extreme unlikely that the Reagan adminis~ tration will voluntarily accept curbs whatsoever on nuclear tes ing. If the important opportunity created by the Soviet initiative is 10 0 be realized, it will require intenS© and concerted pressure from peace movement to make happen.