James Minitie’s book reviewed . . . by Leslie Morris

DEVILS — FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC

Subordination to the United States, merger with it, or
neutrality—these are the choices before Canada today as
seen by James M. Minifie, the CBC’s Washington corre-|..j,es cherish, capable of re-
spondent. In his book, Peacemaker or Powder-Monkey:
Canada’s Role in a Revolutionary World. McLelland and
Stewart, $3.50, Minifie argues for neutrality for Canada.
He calls for an end to the Canadian policy of “walking with

the devil’—the U.S.A.

stir. Newspapers and maga-
zines are giving it prominent

| fense,

reviews. The reviewer of the | ) ;
luselessnes and vicious stupid-

Toronto Globe and Mail went

so far as to court the possibil- |

ity of a. war of Canadian na-
tional defence: against the
U.S.A.

The fact of it being written
is in some ways more signifi-

cant than the book itself. None |

of the facts it relates are new.

The Communist Party and the |

Pacific Tribune for years have
been patiently putting them be-
fore the public. The miserable,

traitorous policy of selling out |

Canada to the U.S. corpora- |
tions: the surrender of the |
command of Canadian armed

forces to U.S.
als; the
piled on Canada by the crude
and blatant U.S. military and
the U.S. State Department; the
artificial boosting of industries
like uranium, zinc, lead and
aircraft, quickly to be plunged
into disaster at the whim of
U.S. trusts; the ‘“expendabil-
ity” of Canada and its treat-
ment as a military outpost of
the “preventive war” brass-
hats in the Pentagon;; the
scandals of the Avro-Arrow
and the Bomarc, the Dew-line,
Pine-Tree, and Mid-Canada
radar. lines; the burden of de-
fense expenditures at the cost
of poor social services and tax-
ation—these are now in the

headlines, the substance of
hundreds of editorials and
news stories.

Not so long ago the Com-
munists were alone in demand-
ing a new foreign policy for
Canada as a corollary of Ca-
nadian independence and _ lib-
eration from U.S. domination.

Now there are many voices

speaking for neutrality. Their |

motives may be different but
the general direction is the
same; liberation of Canada
from the terrible danger caus-
ed by U.S. domination. Such
& development is a tribute to
Communists. Of course, Min-
ifie says not a word about it.
But history is the recording
ef facts, and the facts belong
to history.
* x
The main value of Minifie’s
book is that it puts into 174
pages a mass of materials, and
this creates an impact greater
than many newspaper stories.
He tells about NATO and
NORAD—the incredible story

*

| what the Pacific Tribune sev- |
and Nazi gener- |
national humiliation |

| -
Minifie’s book has created a | of Canadian agreement to use

Canada as a front-line of de-
not of Canada,
the USA. He shows the utter

ity of spending billions of dol-
lars and surrending Canadian
sovereignty to “defend” Cana-
da from the non-existent threat
of a bomber attack, and he
describes the crisis of “de-
fence” policy brought about by
the appearance of the Inter-
Continental “Ballistic Missile,
against which there is no con-
ceivable defense at all.
* * *

He does a good job of de-
scribing all this. And we are
thankful to him for reviving

eral years ago paid a lot of at-
tention to exposing (but which
has become lost of late): the

deep involvement of Canada |

in preparations for chemical
warfare at the special ‘hush-
hush plant in Suffield, Alberta.
“CBR” is the name of this ugly
type of chemical, biological
and radiological warfare. The
man in overall charge is U.S.
General Creasy, who in June
last year defended the use of
these weapons which the U.S.
has never joined in outlawing
(although Canada did, when it
ratified the Geneva Protocol in
1925).

CBR is perfecting the meth-
ods of wiping out humanity by
disease. Minifie quotes U.S.
General Rothschild in Harper’s
magazine: “. .. a singe ounce
of the toxic agent which causes
the disease called ‘Q’ fever
would be sufficient to infect
28 billion people.” Canada is
up to her ears in the prepara-
tion of such fiendish agents of

mass murder,

* * *

Minifie’s proposals are: that
Canada declares her neutrality, |
pulls out of the North Atlantic |
Treaty Organization and NO- |
RAD (the North American Air |
Defense command, whose U.S.
commanders can start a war
without any consultation with
the Canadian government), and
annulling the Permanent Joint
Board of Defence, Canada-Uni-
ted States.

So far so good. But his rea-
sons for doing it are far from
being those which really fit in
with Canada’s interest. He
says:

"It is . . . to the interest of
the United States to have a
truly independent and neutral
northern neighbor willing and

but of-|

able to present and implemeni
|that thoughful idealism which
millions of Americans them-

|newing the youth of American

| thought.”
| A very vague and suspect
motive, this. What ‘Ameri-

cans” is he talking about?

It seems to this reviewer
that Minifie sees in neutrality
la road to involvement with
present U.S. governing circles
| which he heartily approves of,
for he writes:

“Tf Canada were neutralist if
would indeed be to the inter-
est of the U.S. that the most
modern American weapons
and planes available should be
produced in Canadian factor-
ies under license.”

What would these weapons
and planes be for if not to at-
tack’ the USSR? He says:

“Its position in the North
American continent obliges
Canada to create a reasonable
military protection for the ex-
posed northern flank of the
United States.” Again: “It
| would be to the interest of the
| U.S. today to insure a strong
| defense industry in Canada.”

This is nothing but the advo-
cacy of a strongly-armed and

jin the present-day world, an

| aggressive neutrality; a ‘‘neu-
| tral” Canada, which (as Mini-
\fie makes clear) would be
| strongly anti-Soviet and pro-
| U.S.A. This indicates that Min-
\ifie speaks for a current of
|thought which advocates neu-
| trality, not as a means to world
peace and peaceful coexistence,
not as a distinctly Canadian
contribution to world disarma-
ment, but as a means of help-
ing to bail the U.S. out of the
difficulties its.own imperialist
blindnes has got it into. In-
deed, there is little concern
with the world issues of co-
existence, peace and disarma-
ment in Minifie’s book.

* *

*

This would be false neutral-
ity, false independence. That
Minifie puts only one foot in-
side the door leading to a posi-
tive, peaceful, Canadian neu-
trality, backed up by a firm
policy of national interest and
independence, is shown also by
his failure to identify and con-
demn the Canadian economic
and political forces which got
Canada into the present mess.

“Integration” of the U.S. and
Canada, a la St. Laurent and
Pearson, for him never took
place. The politcal purposes of

| the cold war for him simply do

not exist. The Canadians re-
sponsible for the betrayal of
Canada to the atomaniacs and
advocates of "preventive,
strike-first war’ who. infest
the U.S. military to this day,
are not mentioned at all by
Minifie.

Presumably these gentlemen

Here is a view of the mass rally held in Peking, China,

July 3, to support the struggles of the African peoples

for independence.

will be persuaded by kind
words to become cooing advo-
cates of neutrality and inde-

pendence. What a hope!
* * *

As we said at the start of
this review, Minifie has ¢reat-
ed a stir. He may succeed in
arousing a lively debate. He
has raised basic issues of Ca-
nadian politics today. For that
we welcome his book. But the
things he has not said are as
important as the things he has
said. The treacherous forces
who have tied us hand and
foot to the U.S. are still in
power. Their evil accumulates.

If they are to be fought by
the people (and a day of reck-
oning will come) they musi be

|identified: the St. Laurents,
Pearsons, Diefenbakers,
Pearkes’, the Liberal and

Tory spokesmen of the big Ca-
nadian capitalist interests who
have betrayed this country by
prostituting its sovereign rights
and territory to the foreign
“devils” Minifie so vividly de-
scribes.

Minifie asks no questions
about the domestic devils. But
the people are asking about
them, and they will not be de-
nied. To attain genuine neu-
trality and independence they
must cast out not only the. for-
eign devils but also the home-
grown devils who brought our
country to the Dulles brink of
disaster

Plot for quick invasion
of Fast Germany exposed

BERLIN—Plans for a military invasion of the Ger-
man Democratic Republic by the West German Army were
exposed here recently by a senior officer of the West Ger-
man armed forces who has sought asylum in the GDR.

The. officer, Major Bruno
Winzezr,, was until. a month
ago press officer of the West
German air. force, stationed at
Karlsruhe. At a press confer-
ence here he gave sensational
top secret details of West Ger-

man plans for “aggressive
war.”

He said these provided for
the. creation of conditions

which would give an excuse
for West German intervention
against the peoples. democra-
cies on its borders, when the
moment was chosen to launch
an. attack.

The military plan envisaged
that the main attack would be
launched eastwards from the
town of Hof along the frontier
between the GDR and Czectho-

slovakia. West German mobile

forces would reach the Oder-
Neisse frontier quickly then
turn north, encircling the GDR
and cut it off from neighboring
states.

He said it was planned that
all military action must take
the form of lightning attacks se
that the Soviet Union would
be presented with accomplish-
ed facts. It was assumed, that ;
the Soviet Union would not
then risk a nuclear war.

HELP BUILD
PACIFIC TRIBUNE
CIRCULATION !

Pass this issue on to your
neighbor or workmate.

—

July 22, 1960—PACIFI CTRIBUNE—Page 2