(ee Oe
= =

CSTs eS Se ees SS

Since Soviet proposals for nuclear and
general disarmament rarely see the light
of day in Canada’s mass media, we re-
print here brief excerpts from a recent
article in the English-language publica-
tion, Moscow News.

The total capacity of nuclear arsenals
today is enough to destroy everything
alive on the planet 20 times. According to
experts, the exchange of strikes with the
use of modern missile-nuclear weapons
will take no more than half an hour.
Meanwhile, the arms race is increasing.
One million dollars per minute is now
being spent on arms. The piles of weap-
ons of mass destruction are growing and,
correspondingly, the danger that these
weapons will be put to use is becoming
ever more real.

It is obvious that in these conditions

_ the responsibility is especially great for
leaders of countries and the United Na-
tions Organization to preserve peace and
avert war.

... it was precisely the Soviet Union
that elaborated a broad-scale compre-
hensive program of measures with the
aim of ending the arms race and enabling
disarmament in the 80s, which the UN
General Assembly proclaimed the sec-
ond decade of disarmament. These
measures provide for:

e ending the production of all kinds of
nuclear weapons and gradually reducing
_ their stockpiles, down to their complete
li : i tion: :

e the further limitation and reduction
of strategic armaments, both numerically
and qualitatively;

__ @ Signing a treaty on the complete and
banning of nuclear weapon

1 st 3 bi
e reduction of military budgets;
 @ limitation of sales and deliveries of
conventional armaments;
_ @ the convocation of a worldwide con-

— i | L a Poti owe TTD TT DDR TT

ference on disarmament and a con-
ference on military detente and
disarmament in Europe.

Equality, Equal Security

Socialism’s most important goal is to
save the nations of the world from the
danger connected with the growth in the
death-dealing arms race. General and
complete disarmament remains, as be-

The Prague Political Declaration (of
January 1983) confirms that the Warsaw
Treaty states do not aspire for military
superiority over the NATO member-
countries and do not intend to attack
them or any other country in Europe or
elsewhere. It is well known that the
NATO member-countries also declare
that they do not have aggressive inten-
tions. If that is so, then there should be
no reasons for hindering the states in-
cluded in both alliances to take upon
themselves relevant commitments such
as: to conclude a treaty on the mutual
non-use of military force and mainten-
ance of relations of peace between the
Warsaw Treaty member-states and the
NATO member-states. The mutual
commitment of the members of both alli-
ances not to be the first to use either
nuclear or conventional armaments
against each other and, therefore, not to
use military force against each other in
general should become the core of the

peace pact.
A Soviet view

fore, the ultimate goal of this course,
which is put down in the USSR Constitu-
tion. At the same time, the Soviet Union
and the other countries of socialism are

- doing everything possible, as before, to

achieve progress in the different direc-
tions leading to this goal: they are pre-
pared, in accord with other states, to
limit or ban any kinds of weapons. But,

Real measures for averting
a world nuclear war

naturally, this should be done mutually,

without damaging the security of the,

sides.

The nuclear arms race in Europe has
now become a sore point in international
relations. It is understandable that it can
turn into a source of a quick and dramatic
increase in the threat of a new war. A
component in the efforts of the USA and
NATO to achieve military superiority is
the deployment, planned for the end of
1983, on the territory of western Europe
of new U.S. medium-range nuclear
missiles.

The USSR started talks with the USA
on the question of nuclear arms in
Europe with a sincere desire to achieve
positive results. The initiatives it is mak-
ing on the lowering of the nuclear con-

 frontation in Europe do not damage but

can only strengthen the security of all
European states, and not only European
¢ “ntries at that.

Stop the Euromissiles

As we know, there are different ver-
sions for the solution of this acute dis-
puted problem. The USSR has proposed
a real zero option for Europe — to de-
stroy all nuclear means, both medium-
range and tactical, in Europe. Since the
USA doesn’t even want to speak about
this, another far-reaching version was
put forward. It provides for the rejection
of deploying any new medium-range
weapons in Europe and for reducing the
existing ones by about threefold, down to
300 units on each side.

Within this context the USSR is pre-
pared to have exactly as many medium-
range missiles as the NATO side has in

Britain and France. Moreover, the

USSR is prepared to reach accord on
equality both in carriers (missiles and
planes) and their warheads. As a result,
the USSR would have in the European

¢. ee 23 Pa
zone both medium-range missiles and
their warheads in lesser numbers than
before 1976, when the missiles, known in
the West as the SS-20, were non-
existent. However, the USA continued
to block all progress at the Geneva talks.

Mankind has reached the fatal brink
beyond which life itself on earth may
vanish. The supreme wisdom today: is
not in an acceleration of the arms race
and increase of the danger of a nuclear
holocaust, but in the liberation of all
people from the threat of a new war. The
foreign policy of socialist countries is
permeated with an understanding of this
truth and is guided by it in its practical
deeds.

The USSR and the socialist commu-
nity as a whole do not separate their own
well-being or their security from the
well-being and security of others. Such
mutual dependence can cement univer-
sal peace, making it genuinely firm, reli-
able and steady. The USSR and its allies
formulate their foreign policy in such a
way that it would serve not only them but
also the interests of the entire world
community. As Andrei Gromyko put it,
“our policy is an open book for all to
read’’. And those who read this book
without prejudice arrive, or will arrive, at ~
the conclusion that the socialist coun- |
tries are exerting maximum efforts to |
overcome the present-day dangerous

LONDON — Labor in Western European coun-
“tries is saying, “‘Enough is enough” to conservative

governments whose way of dealing with their eco-
nomic crisis is to slash welfare state spending and
public sector jobs. In strike action and at the polling

| unequal sacrifices being imposed upon them while the
| rich and their interests are protected.

The greatest upsurge of protest so far has occurred
in Belgium, where all three of the major trade union
federations called a gradually expanding strike of pub-
fic service workers between Sept. 9 and 15. The strike
| was called to oppose the right-center Christian
Democrat-Liberal coalition government’s heavy
| budgetary cuts in welfare services and in the pay
| scales of workers in the public sector.

Belgian workers are already suffering under one of
_ the worst unemployment rates in developed capitalist
| countries, which hit 15.4 per cent in August. The

government’s 1984 budget is proposing to delay wage
payments, to pay new employees only 80 per cent of
existing salaries, and to cut the pensions of state
workers.

Protest strike action began as a spontaneous unof-
ficial action by railway workers in the state-owned rail
_ system. It rapidly spread through all public services,
virtually bringing the country to a halt. So strong was
the upheaval, coming from below, that the leader-
ships of the Socialist, Christian and Liberal trade
union federations were compelled to endorse the
strikes and to make them official. (In Belgium the

various trade union federations tend to be linked with
the main political parties).

The strikes halted public transport, closed post of-
fices and schools, stopped refuse collection, jammed
the port of Antwerp with shipping, cut air traffic at
airports by two-thirds, and began to force the shutting
of key industries like steel and auto assembly due to

"PACIFIC TRIBUNE—OCTOBER 26, 1983—Page 8

booths working people are demanding a halt to the ~

West Europe workers fight cuts

London | "|

William
Pomeroy

non-movement of raw materials. Expansion of the
action to a 48-hour general strike was decided upon.

Strike unity was disrupted, however, when the
Christian and Liberal federations, tied to the two
ruling parties in coalition, were persuaded to accept a
slight easing of the proposed pay cuts and of welfare
reductions, and to call off their strikes. The national
leadership of the Socialist unions then followed suit.
Socialist union branches, however, angrily opposed
termination of the strikes and passed resolutions call-
ing for a widening of strike action. There was a bitter
rank-and-file feeling among Christian and Liberal
union members also, against the yielding by their
leaders.

The reaction of Belgian workers has sent a quiver of
trepidation through government circles in the rest of
Western Europe, where public spending cuts that
chiefly hit the working class have been one of the main
capitalist devices for coping with the crisis. The Bel-
gian unions demanded that the wealthy be made to
pay higher taxes and that government spending be
directed to reducing unemployment — moves counter
to conservative government economic policies.

The next worker protest is gathering in Holland,
where trade unions have demonstrated in the past
against welfare cuts. On September 20 the Dutch
government announced a cutback in public spending
that will drastically affect social benefits (including
social security for old age, unemployment payments,

~ increase in unemployment. As it is, the Dutch unem-

stage in international relations.

and welfare in general), the salaries of public workers,
and health care.

Public sector wages are to be cut by 3.5 per cent,
compensation for inflation will be abolished, unem-
ployment payments now at 80 per cent of previous
earned income will be reduced to 70 per cent. In
contrast, private sector capitalists will be handed a
reduction in corporation tax, from the present 48 per
cent to 43 per cent in 1984, 40 per cent in 1985.

Inevitably the Dutch government cuts will mean an

ployment rate, at 17 per cent, is the highest in the
EEC. The government admits that the present
825,000 jobless will be augmented next year by
100,000 more (the OECD estimates that the rate will
reach 20 per cent).

As the government announced its worsening cuts, —
the Federation of Dutch Trade Unions made it plain
that their workers will not take it lying down. A |
government-fostered increase in unemployment, it
said, will be “‘intolerable,”’ and the driving down of
incomes will lead to ‘‘serious social tensions.”

Social democratic governments are running into the
same problems as they contemplate following a simi-
lar budget-cutting path. In Sweden the Olof Palme
government has provoked trade union protests over
its proposal to trim public spending. Unemployment
hit anew four percent peak in August and trade unions
are demanding further spending to create jobs.

Next door in Norway, the right-wing coalition
government headed by the Conservative Party is pay-
ing the price for policies of curtailing welfare-state
spending. In local elections on Sept. 11-12 the
Conservative Party suffered a severe drop from 31.6
percent of the vote in 1981 to 26.1 per cent. The Labor
Party, with a program for protecting the welfare state,
halting public spending cuts, and action to reduce
unemployment, increased its vote to 39.3 per cent
from 37.3 per cent in 1981.