INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

{ah
it i

By TIM BUCK

Colombo conference examined
new imperialist tactics in Asia

T HAS NOW become evident that the conference \of

foreign ministers of the “British Commonwealth”
countries held at Colombo, Ceylon, was a Commonwealth
conference only in name. The real function of that con-
ference was to work out if possible g unified imperialist
Policy in Asia. Because of that and because*the men who
head the most influential governments in the Common-
wealth are more anxious to curyy favor with U.S. im-
perialism than to protect the democratic rights of sover-
eignties of their own peoples. Lester B, Pearson, Canada’s
minister of external affairs, was one of the key men at
the conference; he was the direct link between the con-
ference and U.S. imperialism. Pearson reminded the
other assembled foreign ministers of that fact occasjonal-
ly; as, for example, when he told newspaper men gather-
ed in a press conference that, “of course,” Canada cannot
escape from the “beneficent shadow” of the United States.

It would be a mistake, however, to assume that Pear-
son attended the conference at Colombo solely for the
representatives

Lae

vreee

Purpose of telling the Commonwealth
about the aims and policies of U.S. &
imperialism, That was only part of
his purpose.

Another was to find out whether or
not it might be to the advantage of j
U.S. imperialism to change its tactics |
4n Asia. There is much evidence which J
suggests that Wall Street and Wash- ;
tgton attach even more importance
‘o.the second part of Pearson’s func-
tion at Colombo than the first.

At was obvious that Pearson's atti- ees
tude was changed somewhat by what :
he learned at the conference. He is reported as describing
his trip there as “a voyage of discovery.” ‘He is quoted
as declaring that: “The centre of gravity of some of the
world’s problems is beginning to shift to this part of the
world.” As‘though to indicate the nature of the conclu-
sions he draws from that fact, Pearson added that in his
opinion “regional isolation” igs now impossible.

The significance of these fragmentary statements is
not in Pearson’s “discovery’’ of that rise of the new Asia.
It is worth while to remind readers that the shift of the
center of gravity in world affairs toward Asia was recog-
nized long ago by Marxists. Lenin indicated the prospect
35 years ago, Stalin emphasized the fact 25 years ago, and
Dmitri Manuilsky analyzed the reasons and some of the
results in a scintillating pamphlet 22 years ago.

Pearson’s recognition of that stupendous change in
world economy and. world politics is, to say the least, be-

lated. But Pearson isn’t concerned so much with the
factors upon which Marxists have based their forecasts.
Marxists have seen in that trend a challenging oppor-
tunity for human society to make a great, historic leap
upward. To Communists, the recognition presents the
possibility for half of all mankind, the depressed and
enslaved half, to catch up with the living standards of
the industrialized west in one lifetime, Pearson’s “recog-
nition” means in fact his new opinion that Asia is the
continent where the imperialists must concentrate their
efforts to prevent such an advance.

The force of the idea of the New Asia, even in Colom-
bo and New Delhi, field headquarters of its enemies, is
mirrored in other statements made by Pearson, If it were
not simultaneously an expression of his policy of Canad-
ian subservience to the U.S., his anxiety to repudiate any
connection with the hated British imperialism in Asia
would be amusing. As it is, some of his statements are
veritable political mirrors in which one can see the image
of. the fierce hatred British imperialism earned for itself
in India through 200 years of exploitation and repression.
Pearson intimated to the peoples of Asia that so far as
Canada is concerned at least, the “British connection” is
a thing of the past. He is quoted as saying:

“We have had the British empire, we have had the
British Commonwealth of Nations, .and .now .we .are.
initiating a new commonwealth of nations. Some of us
call it British if we want to, but it is in a sense a new
commonwealth.”

Pearson did not explain that the real difference be-
tween the British Commonwealth of Nations, of which
he spoke in past tense, and his “new commonwealth of
nations,” is that the latter is dominated by the U.S. In
fact, the extreme caution of his statements concerning
the U.S. reveals his realization of the growing popular
resentment against the predatory aims no less than
against the overbearing methods of the U.S. imperialists
in Asia. “I would not adimt for a minute,” he said, “that
the foreign policy of Canada is exactly similar to that of
the United States.” —

The decisive word in that statement is the word
exactly, Without that word the statemen would be defin-
itely untrue. Protecting himself by using that word,
Pearson did not have to think of an example of difference
between the foreign policy of the St. Laurent government
and that of the Truman administration at Washington.
He would have found it hard to think of a difference that
would have impressed the peoples of Asia.
© This is the first of two articles on imperialist policies

in Asia.

THE NATION

T HE government, says the former corporation law-
yer Prime Minister St. Laurent, “‘should try to
influence the general economic climate rather than
determine the course of each individual raindrop.”

Are there 300,000 unemployed in Canada? Do old
men hang themselves out of sheer desperation? Yes,
But St. Laurent says the present drop in employment
“may not be altogether a bad thing.” He ridiculed

‘trade union suggestions that the government should
step in to provide jobs. It’s up to free enterprise, said
he.

It is clear the government and the employers dear-
ly want an army of unemployed to beat down wages.
They've been waiting for it for a long time.

Sam, the old man now in Toronto’s Don Jail, is one
of the raindrops to whom, the prime minister cynically
referred. He stood in police court last week with “no
home, no money, no friends, in fact nothing left to
live for” in:the words of the Salvation Army officer.

The old man leaned against the dock, rested his
head on his arms and whispered, “Help me, help me,
help me. I have nothing.”

The police had found him looking over & viaduct
parapet into the Don River. He was “just wondering.

Ten dollars fine, or four months in jail. Sam, the
elderly worker, went off to prison.

One of St. Laurent’s “raindrops”.

A Toronto reader writes me: “I was just reading

St. Laurent thinks unemployment
‘not altogether bad thing

s

By LESLIE MORRIS

your comment on the old gentleman who took his life
on aééount of a pension cut. Speaking of pensions, my
mother received the old age pension for some years.
They .sent a stoolpigeon up to see her and they also
called me. The questions they asked me were awful.
She was then cut off the pension for two years until
I went down to make inquiries. They finally put her
back on, but no back pension. Oh, they are a dirty
bunch!” Another of St. Laurent’s “raindrops”.

_ St. Laurent is also an old man. Quite often he
poses with his grandchildren for the press photograph-
ers. But what a difference between this privileged
spokesman for free enterprise (read—capitalist mon-
opoly), which boasts that it safeguards the rights of
the individual, and the majority of individuals it sen-
tences to a life and an old age of insecurity and
desperation. There is nothing “free” about it except for
St. Laurent and his class, — t

The raindrops will become a flood. The employers,
who welcome the appearance of a reserve army of
unemployed, will find that their own system will pro-
duce that socialist strength and power—yes, out of
your “raindrops”, St. Laurent — which one day will
really give security to the individual, young and old,
because “the free development of each will be the
condition for the free development of all.”

® :
P.S.—Since writing the above, Sam Hawkins died.

LABOR FOCUS J. B. SALSBERG

Redbaiting won't
provide jobs

AST WEEK we tried to expose some erroneous con-
cepts which had crept into the ranks of the unem-
ployed. Now we want to expose some harmful advice
which certain “friends of the unemployed” are offering.

~ None of the so-called official labor leaders now offer-
ing advice did anything on behalf of the growing army of
unemployed until the unemployed themselves developed
public actions which broke through the veil of silence.
Unemployed associations were formed in Vancouver, Tor-
onto and other localities. Public protest meetings were
called, deputations and delegations approached govern-
ment bodies and the plight of the unemployed was pro-
jected into the center of public attention. It was then that
the official leadership entered the scene.

Bengough and Mosher made their joint public charge
that Humphrey Mitchell, St. Laurent’s minister of labor,
was withholding the facts of the extent of unemployment.
That was a very good beginning and the united action
was especially welcomed. It raised hopes for further unit-
ed action of a constructive kind by the two congresses.
But this has not materialized as yet. Instead the unem-
ployed and the labor movement were offered quack rem-

edies, confusion and divisive advice. Let’s look at what
happened.

\
The Toronto organization of the unemployed had no
sooner created an atmosphere for favorable consider-
ation of the needs of the jobless when Murray Cotterill
issued a press communique to the effect that the CCL
will issue charters to “unions of the unemployed.” .

Now that sounded very radical, didn’t it? But it’s just
a lot of harmful nonsense. It is positively against the

interests of the unemployed and the whole labor move-
ment. -

“Cotterill seems to accept unemployment as perman-
ent. He plans to organize “unions” of such workers who
will “bargain” for better conditions.” Instead we must
refuse to accept mass unemployment and must develop
the most intensive struggle for jobs, yes jobs and once

again jobs. Meantime we must get adequate cash relief
for the unemployed.

To achieve that the entire labor movement will have
to work in a unified and mighty fashion. But what does
Cotterill propose? He proposes two or three kinds of
unemployed “unions”, He cannot expect the AFL unions
to send their members and followers to CCL “unions” of
unemployed. Nor can he expect the Catholic Syndicates
in Quebec to urge their members to join CCL or AFL
bodies of unemployed. What, then, would be the result
of Cotterill’s plan? It would be the disorganization and
disarming of the unemployed and the trade union move-—
ment on a vital front.

2 ‘Cotterill also made it known that he will not allow

the Communists to lead the unemployed movement.
This injection of the red bogey into the struggle of the
unemployed is a stab in the back of the hungry and
homeless men who fight for work or decent relief. It is
but another shameful exhibition of the criminal effect of
red-baiting. Cotterill’s red-baiting of the new-born unem-
ployed movement reminds me of the story about a newly
established town. When asked what the new place was
like a visitor said, “There are no horses there yet, but
there are plenty of horse thieves around already”... - ~

The worst quack medicine offered by a “labor chief”

was served up by Fred Dowling of the Packinghouse ©
Workers. Understandably enough, the Toronto Telegram
cried, “‘Man-A-Block’ Scheme Might Aid !Unemployed,
Union Leader Suggests.” The paper adds, “It’s the revival
of a scheme introduced in the last depression.” All one
can say in amazement is, what next? What else will these
gentlemen think up to confuse the jobless?

It should be clear to all that what the workers
require is:

@ Organization of the unemployed in each community

‘into a single, all-in, organization. ‘

@ That the entire trade union movement, CCL, TIC;
independents, etc., should cooperate with such
bodies of the unemployed.

@ That no red-baiting or any other divisive factors must
be allowed to enter the unemployed movement.

@ That the unions keep their unemployed members in
good standing during the whole period of unemployment
and that each union set up its own unemployed commit-
tee, to involve the whole union in all activities for thi
unemployed. ant

@ That a nation-wide crusade be launched for jobs for
the unemployed. This is to be directed at Ottawa and the
provinces. Part of the fight for jobs is the battle against
speedup, for the 40-hour week, for higher unemployment

insurance and for payment of benefits as long as the >

worker is unemployed, for a foreign trade policy that will
develop trade with all countries, for public works pro- |
jects, etc., etc. The coming sessions of the federal and —
provincial parliaments should hear the compelling de-
mand of a united and determined labor movement for >
government action along such lines. In the meantime,

adequate cash relief must be gotten for the unemployed. _

It is such an approach and not the nonsense and the ~
divisive plans of the sort mentioned above that the unem-
ployed and the entire labor movement needs now.

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FEBRUARY 38, 190—PAGE 9