mm TN A By WILLIAM J: POMEROY LONDON ritain’s Tory government is run- ning into an ever-thicker wall of opposition to its announced policy of sup- plying arms to South Africa’s apartheid regime. It is increasingly apparent that the government had greatly underesti- mated world reaction to one of the most reactionary schemes yet conceived against third world interests. 3 The success of the UN Afro-Asian coun- tries in pushing through a Security Coun- cil resolution on July 23 that broadens and tightens the previous 1963 UN call to ban arms sales to South Africa gave an inkling of the anger produced in these areas by the proposed Tory step. Even stronger evidence of this can be seen in the response of Commonwealth countries to letters sent to them by the British for- eign secretary, Sir Alec Douglas-Home, informing them of the Tory intent. Of the 27 Commonwealth members (Britain makes the 28th), not one gave full support to the British policy. Four or five reportedly expressed an attitude of no opposition or of tacit approval (in- cluding Australia, New Zealand and Mal- awi), but from most of the rest has come such bitter opposition that the Common- wealth itself is threatened with collapse or dissolution. On July 22 Presidents Nyrere of Tan- zania, Kaunda of Zambia and Obote of Uganda met in Dar-es-Salaam and agreed on a joint course of action if the arms plan goes through: their countries will quit the Commonwealth. Further- more, they are calling upon the ten Com- monwealth governments in Africa, the five in Asia and the four in the Caribbean to do the same. Shortly afterward, Sierra Leone’s prime minister, Siaka Stevens, warned Britain that his country would “find it extremely difficult, if not im- {LLU LAL | 1 omme IL A ee : 2 un wR OS a a) RACISTS Top, South African militiamen and, bottom, Sharpeville. possible, to continue membership of the Commonwealth if the supply of arms to South Africa by the British government becomes effective. The: Malayan prime minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman, expressed the same strong opposition but took a somewhat different line of urging that Britain be expelled from Commonwealth member- ship. In Nigeria the newspaper that is identified with government opinion rec- ommended the boycotting of the next Commonwealth prime minister’s con- ference to be held in Singapore in Jan- uary; General Gowon, the Nigerian prime minister, cancelled a scheduled trip to Britain to discuss British aid. In the Carib- bean, Trinidad’s prime minister Eric Williams warned Britainnot to disregard world opinion against the arms measure, and Dr. Cheddi Jagan, leader of Guyana’s opposition People’s Progressive Party, demanded that the Guyanese government take a tougher stand than the mild disap- proval it has already indicated. Douglas-Home reportedly was banking on support from the white Common- . wealth nations to offset opposition from colored nations. This aspect of his gam- ble with guns received a harsh blow from the Canadian prime minister, Pierre Trudeau, who sent a letter on July 17 de- claring ‘‘serious misgivings over your decision to resume sales of certain types of arms to South Africa,’ which, said Trudeau, “will be interpreted by many Commonwealth governments as an impli- cit gesture of acquiescence in the policy of the South African government toward the African population.” Trudeau con- cluded with a veiled threat that the Heath regime must ‘“‘consider fully the possible consequences for the Commonwealth of your decisions.”’ PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FRIDAY, AUGUST 28, 1970—PAGE 6 Following protest against the British raised on the floor of the Canadian parlia- ment, the Canadian government decided to discontinue its supply of spare parts to South African aircraft (which amounted to about $1.5 million in 1969). Of more drastic significance, a Canadian govern- ment company, Polymer, a petrochemi- cal firm with a South African subsidiary that had been producing tires used by mil- itary vehicles, announced that it was ter- minating its South African operations. These Canadian decisions are in ac- cord with the new tighter UN resolution which not only calls for an arms embargo, but recommends a ban on spare parts, on vehicles, on licenses extended to South Africa to manufacture banned arms, and on military training and technical assis- tance with weapons. These are methods by which imperialist countries had gotten around the earlier UN resolutions. In the Security Council vote on the res- olution, the. United States, Britain and France abstained. Although all favor aid- ing the South African racist regime, none wished to court the adverse propaganda of indulging in an outright veto. The Amer- ican imperialist view, expressed by the U.S. representative, William Buffom, in explaining his abstention, is very illum- inating on USS. tactics in Africa. The U.S. objected, he said, to halting the supply of spare parts and to the prohibition on in- vestment in the manufacture of arms in Soth Africa. In other words, while express- ing lip service opposition to apartheid, American interests want to tse subtle, back-door methods of propping up the racist regime. The Vorster government in South Afri- ca is already much encouraged by the sup- port it is getting from the Tories and im- perialist allies. It has, in fact, boldly called on Britain to re-negotiate the Sim- e Southern Africa: A Time for Chang onstown Agreement under which the Brit- ish navy has use of the Simonstown nava” station on the Cape, and to insert definite treaty provisions for supplying arms, 4 step that would make it difficult for a0Y future Labor government to cut off arms the Tories would undertake to provide. Also, the Vorster regime has publicly a ~ nounced the holding of joint anti-submat™ ine exercises by the British and Sou African navies next month; these exe! cises had occurred before but without fanfare. A cause of the jubilation detect ed in South African statements is the fee | ing that Tory policy is helping the apart heid regime to break out of the isolation in which world opinion has been increas” ingly placing it. ‘ At present the Tories show signs of wanting to back away from the issue a” to hope that world-wide. opposition wil subside before definitely making arms sales. The hdpe is a slim one. On July 2% for example, the World Council of Chul ches, published a letter from its gener secretary, Dr. Eugene Carson Blake, 4& nouncing the arms move which it de clared “‘unacceptable to Christian mora conviction” because it would ‘‘further &? trench the South African government. The letter raised a “doubt as to the SI” cerity of the expressed commitment ° Her Majesty’s Government to the liber” tion of all oppressed peoples in Souther? Africa.”’ : ° All these reactions show that Tory Pr” paganda about the ‘‘Red fleet in the In- dian Ocean” threatening Britain’s S@4 life-line and that a distinction can made between arms for external and for internal purposes has been greeted W} contempt and disbelief. Pressures a!@ growing for Britain to wait on its policy until the Commonwealth prime ministe!S meeting in January, where it could we receive an undignified burial.