eet ‘ern cae r wa _ LES 12 et 1 SME -RACISM COLLOQUE CONTRE LE RACISME, 3 MAI 1978 Hotel De LaSalle, Montréal. Organisé par le Comité québécois de liaison contre le racisme el Poster for a Seminar Against Racism in Montreal May 12-13. / i GEORGETOWN — The __ anti-working class and unpopular 80vernment Of the Peoples’ Na-” tional Congress (PNC) on April 10, rushed through Parliament a Bill amending Article 73 of the Constitution of Guyana. The Bill takes away the right of . the people to decide by referen- um on future amendments of en- trenched provisions dealing with Matters such as elections, the lections Commission, the com- Position of the National Assem- bly. In fact it takes away the right of the people to determine the Constitution under which they must live. In order to emphasize its con- demnation of Bill, the Opposition coples Progressive Party Walked out of Parliament before the vote was taken. Before becoming law, the Bill Must be approved by a referen- dum which, in the view of the PPP and democratic opinion in the Country, will be rigged in the same Manner as the general elections in 1968 and 1973. There will be no need thereafter for the PNC to Call another referendum on Tther constitutional changes. In press releases the PPP and © Guyana Agricultural and General Workers’ Union express fear that steps are now Underway to restructure the Na- tional Assembly in the direction of an authoritarian, one party __ State and to institutionalize the C in power. In this regard the aims of the NC are as follows: to postpone © elections due in October, Perhaps for aterm of five years; to Change the composition of the National Assembly to include not Only political parties as in the Past, but also the appointment of - Tepresentatives of organizations Controlled by the PNC such as the -80vernment-controlled Trades - Union Congress, Guyana Asso- Guyana gov’t tries to rig constitution Bill ciation of Local Authorities, the youth and:women's organizations ‘OF the PING Sree es Cs eS Thus even if the PNC loses a future election it will not result in its removal from office because of its hegemony in the National Assembly. =. All of these measures are a reaction by the ruling party to the serious decline in its membership as well as deep-seated discontent among the people. Under these conditions the PNC cannot con- tinue to retain power by dem- ocratic means. And because it is unwilling to surrender privileges and a corrupt way of life acquired. over the last 13 years, it has re- jected the PPP’s call for a Na- tional Front Government, made in August 1977. It’s intention is to rig the Con- stitution to perpetuate itself in power at the expense of the fundamental rights of the people. Thus the danger of an authorita- rian dictatorship in Guyana is a very. real one. The PPP intends to fight this threat to democracy presently en- shrined in the Constitution, and in the United Nations Declaration- on Human Rights of which Guyana is a signatory. The PPP will fight to prevent Guyana re- verting under the PNC to a colonial-type . dictatorship with ‘nominated and ex-officio mem- bers. The Association of Concerned Guyanese in Canada have issued an appeal calling on wall Guyanese and peace-loving peoples to join the “‘Committee for Democracy and Majority Rule in Guyana”’ in the fight to prevent a military dictatorship. in the country. The Association of Concerned Guyanese can be reached by writ- ing to P.O. Box 284, Station ‘Cc, Toronto M6J 3P4. URGENT NEED TO HALT ARMS RACE __ Special UN session discusses disarmament By JOHN HANLY MORGAN The first step towards disar- mament is to stop the arms race. Despite all the treaties and agreements on arms, the arms race has grown to the point of ex- treme danger to humanity. The -most recent new horror weapon, the neutron bomb, which kills people but leaves buildings and property intact, is being promoted as a “‘clean bomb”’. Should it be produced by the United States, the Soviet Union would have to produce a similar or more devas- tating weapon. They do not want to do so and have asked the U.S. to desist. A further danger lies in possible N-bomb production by other powers possessing nuclear arsen- als and the capacity to make N-bombs.* Each advance in the arms race brings nearer the point of no re- turn — the time when such weapons will be used by accident or design. Organizations working for arms reductions are insisting that the neutron bomb must not be produced, ‘‘In the name of life itself.” ’ For the First Time The United Nations, for the first time in its history, will holda Special Session in New York City during May and June of this year devoted to the need for dis- armament. __ In view of the fact that stopping ‘the terrifying arms race is essen- tial if we are to keep whatever of value we have achieved since World War II — not to mention solving the -problems_ of unemployment and inflation, meeting our ecological responsi- bilities, etc. — one may well wonder why it has taken 28 years for the United Nations to devote a Special Assembly to it. Answer: because the older UN and its ‘majority did not want it, while the newer UN does. When the UN was founded in 1949, it consisted of 51 countries and was dominated largely by the - countries of Europe and North America. This domination came from their own voting strength and the influence they had economically, socially, and polit- ically with other member nations. The UN in 1978, however, has 149 member countries, with the result that the European and North American voting influence is greatly reduced, and often is in a minority position. So it is with the UN Special Assembly on Disarmament. Dur- ‘OTHELLO ‘SUBVERSIVE’ More than 50,000 books have been banned in the racist Re- public of South Africa in the past 30 years, and with every passing year, censorship ac- tivities are becoming ever broader.: According to official data, published in Capetown, the number of banned books and journals Increased by 40% in 1977, as against 1976. Among the “subversive” lit- erature is Shakespeare’s tragedy, “Othello.” Congregation, Toronto. This article is abridged from the April 1978 edition of Canada & the World, a magazine circulated among Cana- dian social studies teachers for use in classrooms from grade 9 upward. We think readers will agree that it is en- couraging to find such broadly-based material on so timely a topic — disarmament — accessible to our students. The author, John Hanly Morgan, is president of the Canadian Peace Congress and minister emiritus of the First Unitarian ing the 1950s and 1960s, anumber of countries, mostly socialist and not tied to one of the great pow- ers, called for a world conference on disarmament. This drive never got very far — until the 1970s. Then, on September 6, 1971, the Soviet Union proposed that a world disarmament : conference be called. This was supported by a large majority of the Assembly. Later, a special committee. on world disarmament was set up with members from 40 non- nuclear states, as well as the USSR, Britain and France. Unfortunately, since the U.S. and Chinese governments have taken a negative view of this ac- tion it has not been possible to proceed. In view of the situation, a conference of non-aligned coun- tries, meeting in Colombo in 1976, proposed that a special disar- mament session of the UN Gen- eral Assembly be held to con- sider, among other things, the cal- ling of a world disarmament con- ference. The 3ist UN General Assembly approved the proposal, and set the date (for the Special Assembly) for May and June 1978. In this way, it is certain all the UN member governments will be participating. Overcoming Opposition The major problem for the Spe- cial Assembly is how to overcome - the opposition of the U.S. and Chinese governments to the cal- ling of the world disarmament conference. In this the U.S. and China will not be alone. Other governments which voted for the Special Assembly did so on the assumption that the debate can be contained within the Special Ses- sion where they can control it. But governments who want the Special Session to call a World Disarmament Conference argue that the present United Nations, although far more representative of the world’s peoples than in ear- lier years, is still not representa- tive enough to have the disarma- ment question left entirely to it. These countries believe that some UN delegates do not follow the views of the people of the countries they represent. For in- stance, some governments repre- sent only a small fraction of their population. Some countries are controlled by powerful business interest, others by small groups of army officers in dictatorships. De- legates from such countries do not obey the will of the country’s people but the commands of the dictators. Even in countries with more representative governments such as the United States, the power of big business combined with the military has been suf- ficient to keep arms production growing at ever greater cost. - Wider View Needed The governments pushing for a world disarmament conference argue therefore, that such a con- ference must be thrown open to wider views than those of just UN member governments. They want to see people ftom Non-Govern- ment Organizations (NGOs) at- tending. From its founding the UN has provided for input from NGOs, and many of them present. briefs to UN commissions. These NGOs have set up com- mittees and commissions similar to those of the official UN. They have been very effective in pres- suring the UN to take action against racism and political oppression throughout the world. A world disarmament confer- ence with representation from such people’s groups would, its supporters argue, be the first true global gathering of humanity. The debates would, of course, be very different from those of the UN General Assembly. For instance, at such a conference speakers from governments that want arms growth would have to face speak- ers from their own countries cal- ling for arms reductions. The con- ference would have a chance to hear the people’s views and not just the views of powerful interests. Such a conference could not be a single ‘‘Special Session”’ as the upcoming UN meeting will be. It ‘would have to continue in stages - for months, perhaps several years, while agreements on re- ducing arms are argued upon and implemented. It is seen as a giant, slowly turning cog-wheel, moved by the force of massive world public pressure and gradually en- gaging the smaller cog-wheels of public pressure in the countries where governments still fire up the armaments race. This is why the UN Special As- sembly was called. Will the sup- porters of a world disarmament conference win? We will find out in May and June. The Assembly on Disarmament can be con- vinced by public opinion throughout the world to do all possible to reach agreement on this question. Canadians will be called upon to demand of the . Canadian delegation to the UN full support for banning the neut- ron bomb, stopping any further development of any weapons of mass destruction, and then plan- ning for action on dismantling all weapons of mass destruction. The Canadian delegation should be urged to support the calling of a World Disarmament Conference made up of govern- ments and representatives of people’s organizations. * May and June can be two of the » most important months in modern history. Se *These paragraphs were written by the author after the article’s original publication. PACIFIC TRIBUNE—May 12, 1978—Page 7 a t