No surprise in Afghan-Soviet action The South African Communist Party has issued the following statement on events in Afghanis- tan, excerpts of which we reprint: * * * The events in Afghanistan must be seen against the background of the frantic campaign by im- perialism to shore up the remain- ing bastions of capitalism throughout the world and to hold back the forces of change. Now they talk of ‘‘Soviet aggression against a neighboring country”’. But the truth of the matter is that on December 28, 1979, Radio Kabul transmitted the following message: “‘The Government of .the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, taking into ac- count the continuing and broadening interference and provocations of external enemies of Afghanistan, and with a view to defending the gains of the April Revolution, territorial integrity, national independence and maintaining peace and secunity, proceeding from the treaty of friendship, good neighborliness. and co- operation of December 5, 1978, approached the USSR with the insistent request that it give urgent political, moral and economic aid, including mili- tary aid,”’ To us it comes as no surprise that the Soviet Union has met the request of the Afghan side. For years now the imperialists have been concerting their Strategy for a counter-revolution- ary revival, leading to increasing confrontation with the Soviet Union and ultimately the threat of nuclear war. When the Soviet Union has taken the lead in pro- posing measures of detente and disarmament, the imperialists have resorted to delaying tactics and both secret and open rearmament. The ratification of SALT II has been repeatedly de- ferred, and now once again the Carter regime has used the excuse of Afghanistan to withdraw it from the consideration of the Se- nate. When the Soviet Union un- ilaterally withdrew 20,000 men and 1,000 tanks from the German Democratic Republic, the im- perialist response was a NATO decision to deploy hundreds of new atomic weapons throughout Western Europe and threats of nuclear war against the Soviet Union from Mrs. Thatcher and her allies. The Iranian revolution was fol- lowed by the dispatch of Ameri- can naval forces to the Persian- Gulf and the threat of military ac- tion to secure the oil wells of the Middle East for the West. Hatred of the Soviet Union has: united China with the imperialists and opened the way to massive mili- tary and economic aid to China as an ally of imperialism against the world revolutionary movement. Step by step hatred of the Soviet Union is being deliberately fanned by the Governments and media in the imperialist countries, whose people are being brain- washed to regard the Soviet Union as an enemy, and con- ditioned to accept that war against the Soviet Union is inevitable and intervention to stop the spread of socialism desirable ... The present tactic of the industrial-military complex in the imperialist countries is to keep the economy going by massive ex- penditure or armaments, and the vicious anti-Soviet campaign is designed to make this acceptable to the masses at a time when their social services are being cut to the bone. The danger, inevitably, is that preparations for war can so easily spill over into open conflict — a conflict from which the human race is unlikely to survive. It is in this context that we interpret the events in Afghanis- tan. We appreciate that it is for the people of Afghanistan to decide for themselves the nature of their social system, but ever since the April 1978 Revolution the i perialists have refused to leave © them to settle their own and have strained every nerve !© tum -the clock back. In dangerous situation which has developed in the region, with both America and China threatening and indeed either directly or inde rectly or through surrogates, 4 tually waging war, the Soviel Union had every right By respon to the appeal of the 5 Government to help defend thei! revolution ... Left unity Commenting on the results of the recent election victory of In- dira Ghandi’s Indian National Congress which swept back into ‘power, the Communist Party of India described the rout of the Janata Party as an expression of “the deep popular discontent, anger and frustration’’ of the people. The CPI said it was the same discontent that had toppled Ghandi’s INC in 1977. It warned, however, that only left democratic unity will force - the new government to address the burning problems of the In- dian people. ‘‘Not only is Con- gress back in power,’’ the CPI says, ‘with a massive majority far beyond its own expectations, but the notorious caucus and its hen- chmen, including the unrepentant organizers and perpetrators of the key to India’s future emergency excesses, have ap- peared in the parliamentary arena in large numbers. ‘There is need for the utmost vigilance against these forces whose aggressive hostility to the working class and the ideas of socialism are only too well known. The absence of a viable left and democratic alternative on a national scale has driven the Voters back into the arms of the Congress with its slogan of ‘stable’ government ...”’ The Congress Party captured 350 seats iri the 542-seat People’s Chamber — 66.85% of the seats, while gaining 42.58% of the popu- lar vote. The former ruling Janata Party, and its ally Lok Dal Party retained only 70 seats of 382 they previously held. An important factor in ad- Wide backlash to SAN FRANCISCO — Presi- dent Carter set ablaze a seemingly dormant anti-war movement in the Bay Area when he announced his commitment to reinstate the draft and increase an already bloated military budget, Jan. 23. Thousands of enraged people marched and demonstrated last week at Stanford University and on the Berkeley campus of the University of California, as the words *‘Hell no, we won't go,” again rang warning on another U.S. president. Nearly 10,000 demonstrated on’ the two campuses Jan. 25, af- firming a new and _ militant commitment to the anti- draft/anti-war/anti-nuke move- ment. Another smaller, but perhaps more significant march took place in this city on Jan. 28 as some 700 demonstrators marched from city hall to a rally at the Federal Bldg. Planned only two days in ad- vance, with almost no publicity, the demonstration was sponsored by the Ad Hoc Committee to Pre- vent a Nuclear War, a coalition of peace and anti-nuclear groups. The writing was on the wall — the peace movement in this area will be closing ranks to confront the President’s latest moves to open a new cold war. ‘*As long as we are fragmented they will do as they damn well please,’ Barbara Huber of the U.C. Nuclear Conversion Project said, calling on all anti-war groups, anti-nuclear groups, anti-draft groups to join forces. **We need to make connections on all points,’ Huber said to the rally here, at which point some- one from the audience shouted “‘expose the Tri-lateralists,”’ re- ferring to the Big Business Tri Laterial Commission to which many of Carter’s advisors belong. ““We must counter the myth that Russia is a maniacal power,”’ Huber said. ‘‘We must analyze how U.S. actions provoke Soviet EQUAL PORTUNITY Women demonstrate outside the White House in protest of Carter's announced intention to re-institute the draft. PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FEBRUARY 15, 1980—Page 8 U.S. conscription actions.” Middle-East expert Ali Alyami told the San Francisco rally that ‘President Carter's speech was degrading and demeaning’’ to the people of the Middle East, warn- ing that ‘‘it would take a million Americans to take the oil fields in Saudi Arabia alone.” Speakers at all the demonstra- tions, including the internation- ally known Daniel Ellsberg, warned of the U.S. policy of first strike nuclear capability. Ellsberg called Carter’s moves as bringing the world closer to nu- clear war than ever before. According to the Ad Hoc Coali- tion ‘‘the demonstrations are in response to statements by White House and National Security of- ficials that Soviet aggression into Iran or Pakistan would almost certainly escalate into a nuclear conflict.” Speakers at the rallies made it clear that the threat of nuclear conflict is one-sided — from the U.S; Of major concern to many of the demonstrators was the draft. Helen Michalowsky of the War Resistors League told audiences in San Francisco and Berkeley, “Some people are talking about women being drafted as equality. Well, being in.the army does not mean equality for anyone. The reason they need women is that the number of draft age men has dropped 15%.” Speakers pointed out that the Criminal Code Reform bill S. 1722, sponsored by presidential hopeful Edward Kennedy, would make it illegal to counsel or carry on anti-draft activities. There was no _ representation from organized labor at any of the rallies, although the Alameda Central Labor Council passed a _ Labs resolution opposing the rein- stating of the draft several months ago. But the reason there was no labor representation was_ stated bluntly by Alameda Central Labor Council Secretary- treasurer Richard Grouix who told the press, ‘““We were not asked.” Anti-draft, anti-war activities were not confined to the San Francisco Bay Area, however, as more than 400 angry students ral- lied at the University of Washington Jan. 25 to denounce Carter’s actions. One 32 year-old student de- clared to loud applause, ‘‘We are not going to shed our blood for Exxon. We stopped the war in Vietnam and we’ll stop this one.”’. In Los Angeles a coalition of more than 150 social and religious organizations have joined forces to protest the draft, vowing to take it to the Supreme Court if necessary. — Anti-war demonstrations are planned to greet President Carter in Los Angeles and San Francisco when he comes to the West Coast. In San Francisco ‘‘concerned citizens’’ will greet Carter on that day, and again in Los Angeles. Daily demonstrations are tak- ing place at Stanford University, and a large demonstration is plan- ned at the Lawrence Livermore where -U.S. -nuclear weapons are developed. The re- cent 5.6-point earthquake in Livermore has increased fears. that the 500 pounds of plutonium and other nuclear substances could be released into the atmos- phere. Compiled by Lincoln Smith, Wil- liam Allan, Max Rollens and Ben Collette vances.made by left forces in this election was the cooperation achieved between India’s tw Communist Parties, the CPI and the Communist Party of I (Marxist) which had opposed each other since 1964. Together they won 53 seats, a gain of 14. New Age, the CPI paper, in a? editorial comment, described unity as a “significant step for ward in forging (left) unity 2% projecting a fighting image. Mit lions of working people have 00! only welcomed this, but ‘havé taken it as their hope.” It dé scribed the new left group in the People’s Chamber as “‘unquestionably the most purposeful, cohesive fighting force.”’ : Looking ahead, New Agé writes: “The elections have brought about a change in the country § political scenario and new chal-— lenges and tasks face the left.and — democratic movement both 11 parliament and outside, espe cially where the working people are fighting for a better life, in de- fence of democracy and social justice. Our task should be not only to consolidate the unity that has been achieved in the ranks of the left, not only to further deepe? our bonds with the toiling masses and democratic forces, but also t0 constantly strengthen and broaden the left and democratiC unity so that it develops into 2 mighty national force. That is €S- sential to resist all anti-people and anti-democratic policies and measures and to win the urgent demands of the people. By so championing the cause of the masses and the country and in the unrelenting fight against im- perialism, neo-colonialism, monopoly capital, landlordism and reaction we must proceed, determinedly and vigorously, to build the national alternative for ending the monopoly of bourgeois power and for breaking from the discredited path of capitalist development. The left has before it the historic mission of so uniting and mobilizing the toiling masses — and building unity for closing once and for all the chapter of alternating bourgeois rules. The elections have emphasized pre- cisely this.”’ : In another development, the CPI Central Secretariat has ac- cepted the resignation of former CPI Chairman, S.A. Dange. In a communique, the CPI said that S.A. Dange’s public statements during the election ‘‘constitute an- open challenge to the accepted program and policy of the CPI, seek to disrupt the unity of the left forces and virtually amount to a tendering of his bonafides to In- dira Ghandi.”’