EDITORIAL Canadians should welcome the Jan..7-8 Geneva meeting between U.S. Secretary of State Shultz and Soviet Foreign Minister Gromyko to discuss an _ agenda for new arms control talks as a promising step that could lead toward defusing the spiralling arms race. At the same time we should be clear on what these talks are and are not. During his meeting in Moscow Nov. 26 with British Labor Party leader Neil Kinnock, Soviet leader Kon- stantin Chernenko put in squarely: “The USSR recently addressed a proposal to President Reagan for the USSR and the U.S. to start negotiations on the entire complex of inter-connected questions of the non-militarization of outer space, reduction of stra-” tegic nuclear arms and medium-range nuclear wea- pons. ~All along these directions the USSR is prepared to search for the most radical solutions that would make it possible to advance to the complete prohibition and ultimately to the liquidation of nuclear arms. The future will show what position the U.S. administration will take. ..” The Soviet Union, at the joint announcement of the Shultz-Gromyko talks, stressed that the USSR does not view the meeting as a resumption of Reagan’s ~ Anopening toward peace so-called START talks, torpedoed in 1983 by the U.S.-NATO decision to deploy Pershing 2 and cruise missiles in Europe. The Soviet Union left those talks when Reagan placed first-strike weapons within a few minutes flight time of Soviet cities. It then met this threat by deploying its medium-range missiles in.the GDR and Czechoslovakia. The success of the Shultz-Gromyko meeting will depend to a large degree on pressure for peace. There can be no doubt that the-massive peace sentiment in the U.S. and other western states compelled Reagan to begin negotiations. This pressure must be increased. Concrete acts, such as Washington matching the Soviet pledge of no first use of nuclear weapons and its pledge not to militarize space would go a long way toward rebuilding an atmosphere of co-operation that the Reagan administration destroyed in four short years. It would be good to hear something positive on this issue from Ottawa as well. We are not immune. Instead of the disgraceful vote Canada cast at the UN against a nuclear freeze (along with the U.S.) this country. should be front and centre in the search for peace. A blow at independence The very day his Tory majority, joined by the Lib- erals, were voting down an NDP motion favoring a nuclear freeze, Prime Minister Brian Mulroney told the Economic Club of New York, “Canada is open for business again.” That was Dec. 10, 1984. We are now firmly embarked on the Tory road to total economic and ~ political sellout to Washington. 3 Mulroney was, as a news report put it, “unapologet- ically pro-U.S.” when he made his pitch to 1,500 _ black-tie U.S. executives. He had just steered through Parliament his open door policy killing the Foreign _ Investments Review Act, a move welcomed by his New York listeners. _ Warming to his topic, Mulroney promised an end to Canada’s National Energy Policy (NEP), spoke of his belief in free trade and a new-style energy tax where oil companies will get “appropriate” tax breaks. The prime minister then completely ingratiated himself with his audience, praising U.S. foreign policy and promising Canada will “co-operate with the U.S.” in military matters. The Americans didn’t even have to bargain. The sellout was breathtaking in scope and deadly in intent. Three days earlier we discovered cruise missile tests will resume in a few weeks. The same day Stats Can brought the news that 50,000 more Canadians are jobless since Mulroney took power — bringing the total number of official unemployment to 1,355,000 with thousands more not counted. The battle is now joined in stark terms: towards complete subordination to U.S. imperialism or towards Canadian independence,.jobs and peace. _ The Tories are paying off their political backers. “Private enterprise” is given absolute reign. An open door policy to U.S. economic plunder, wage cuts, tax . and price hikes, attacks on living standards and social security benefits, assault on organized labor, are all parts of the Mulroney-Reagan package. Along with this goes a loss of economic and political control by Canadians. Maximum unity, massive public pressure inside and outside Parliament is the need of the hour. Despite Mulroney’s disgraceful performance in New York and the equally sickening performance of the Tory-Liberal juggernaut in Parliament, the fightback against this latest sellout of Canadian independence is certain to grow. ; Dylex Ltd., Toronto, the clothing manufacturer and retailer which owns Bi-Way Stores, Thirifty Sports, etc., had as at Oct. 27a nine-month profit of $20,075,000. It opened about 100 new stores in 1984 to a total of 1,098; and men’s wear led the profit parade. ___ TRIBUNE — Editor — SEAN GRIFFIN Assistant Editor — DAN KEETON Business & Circulation Manager — PAT O’CONNOR Graphics — ANGELA KENYON | Published-weekly at 2681 East Hastings Street Vancouver, B.C. V5K 125 Phone (604) 251-1186 Subscription Rate: Canada — $14 one year, $8 six months Foreign — $20 one year, Second class mail registration number 1560 H: had formerly been an outspoken Conservative MP against the cruise missile testing agreement, perhaps because the base was near his Edmonton riding. policy review and any recommendations People and issues with delegates shouting out that it was & But there were many among Vancouver’s peace activists who left a meeting with Canada’s new disarmament ambassador Dec. 7 shaking their heads in dismay. What else could they do after hearing Douglas Roche defend the defence semin- ars held to involve Canadian businessmen _ in the United States’ arms race, and wit- nessing his equivocation on the questions of cruise testing in Canada, and the shameful vote by Canada in the United Nations on the nuclear freeze? Roche raised eyebrows when he told some 60 workers at Chalmers Uni- ted Church that contracts between Cana- dian companies and the Pentagon — the object of the recent controversial defence industry seminars held across the country - — “are not contracts for building wea- ase = . ~ _“We are faced with unemployment (and the) need to create jobs. Businessmen . want their fair share of these contracts,” | Roche told the meeting sponsored by the Vancouver branch of the United Nations Association. Roche also equivocated on cruise test- . ing, telling his audience, “We inherited the cruise agreement. But our response to It depends on two things: first, the foreign coming out of it and second, the results of the upcoming talks between (U.S. Secre- tary of State George) Shultz and (USSR foreign minister Andrei) Gromyko.” In retrospect, the ambassador’s remarks _-aren’t surprising considering the subse- quent news that the Tory government plans to continue testing of the U.S. wea- pon this spring. But where Roche really fell flat was the issue of a nuclear weapons ~ freeze, approved by 111 countries. in a recent UN vote, and opposed by a minor- ity of 12 countries, including Canada. “Of course, we would like to stop the arms race. The question is whether the freeze is the best method to do that. I understand the attractiveness of the freeze. But I believe. ..it isn’t really possible to negotiate a freeze. Wouldn’t it be better to negotiate downwards?” Reminded by a representative from End the Arms Race that the EAR poll con- ducted during the last federal election found several PC candidates in favor of the freeze, Roche replied: “I’m not here to defend the policy of any party. But the policy of the Conservatives on the freeze was to support the freeze provided that it - did not lock in any Soviet superiority.” ~ That remark more than any other raised the collective ire of the assembly, USS. superiority in nuclear weaponry that was the chief concern. Perhaps the one positive staement from Roche was his announcement of a foreign policy review committee that will conduct hearings across Canada in 1985. Whether the Tory goverriment will act on what it hears is up for question. But we're certain that, regarding Canada’s fueling of the U.S. arms buildup, cruise missile testing and the freeze — not to mention demands to declare Cana nuclear-weapons free — they'll get an ear- ful. * * * I; a long way from Wynyard, Sask., to | Vancouver, B.C. And it was a long and active service spanning several decades on ‘behalf of Canada’s working class that marked the life of Communist Party vete- ran Fred Hanson. . ak Born and raised in the small Saskat- chewan farming community that has pro- duced several leading members of the Communist Party in B.C., Fred’s activities " were curtailed in recent years by. failing health, which finally claimed him at age 87 ~ Dec. 11. It was in his home town that Fred became active working among relief camp ¥ laborers in the Hungry Thirties. This period in his life, as it was with so many others, brought him into contact with the Communist Party, which he subsequently joined. ; : - Fred stayed with the party for the rest of his life, earning the “50-year pin” some years ago. He was a member of the party’s Vancouver East Club for the last several years. gigs Moving to Vancouver during the war ~ years, Fred took a job in the then-bustling Burrard shipyards, starting work the same day as another revered party veteran, the late Julius Stelp. He worked at the yards until an accident cost him several fingers. Later, he worked for the city of Vancouver Fred’s wife of 20 years, Doris “Barney” Hanson, reports that following Fred’s strongest wishes, there will be no memor- ial service, ‘and definitely no flowers.” Instead, friends are asked to donate to the Tribune (through the name of the Fred - Hanson Memorial Fund), the B.C. Peace Council or the Vancouver Peace Assembly. A ogc % e have a note from Tribune reader Cliff Worthington that those who missed renowned peace activist Dr. Helen Caldicott’s appearance on the Jack Webs- ter show have a second chance. The inter- - view, in its entirely, will be re-run at9 a.m. — on Boxing Day, Dec. 26. 8 e PACIFIC TRIBUNE, DECEMBER 19, 1984