[ABOR FRONT By WILLIAM KASHTAN - The growing reaction in trade. union ranks all. over the- country against nuclear weapons in Canada.is a welcome de- velopment and should undoubtedly grow in volume. It is inter- esting to note, however, that apart from some honorable exceptions, few unions have spoken up: as yet on the real threat to peace today, expressed in the Berlin crisis. And yet the danger of. nuclear war arises precisely because U.S. im- perialism and the West German government. so far refused to accept the necessity of. a, peace treaty on Germany, a treaty which would recognize the reality of two Germanys, the post war, changes in frontiers, the. Over-riding need of preventing West Germany from being equipped with nuclear ‘weapons and, not least, the establishment of West Berlin as a free, demilitarized city. It is the refusal of the U.S. government to accept the facts “of life which has made the “German question” the most sensi- tive. and. most dangerous spot in the world today. ge % % + = Thus, while the pressure against nuclear arms in Canada or for Canadian armed forces is a.very important contribution . to peace and needs to be pressed for with greater vigor, it in itself is no guarantee against the outbreak of world nuclear war. This reality needs. to-be recognized and correct con- “clusions drawn there from. As Premier Khrushchev aptly declared and Andrei Gromyko “later repeated in his address in the United Nations, “No one in the world can sit on the fence now when the question of war “and peace is being decided . . . it is impossible to be neutral in questions of war and peace, as it is impossible to be in- different to a choice between life and death.” : The point is so obvious it hardly needs making. Yet the relative silence of the trade union movement on this question, in; the first place the,silence of the Executive Council of the Canadian Labor Congress which met during the height of the Berlin crisis and insofar as is known said nothing on the ; Subject, would indicate the need to emphasize this fact. Silence is sometimes golden. And sometimes silence means “consent. In this case the silence of the CLC when the issue -of war or peace is being decided is harmful to the extreme. < a *& *% The solution of the Berlin crisis is everybody’s business, not least the trade union movement. It ought to begin speaking up on ‘this vital issue, but over and above speaking up, it ought to use its great strength in support of negotiations for a peaceful settlement of the German question. : -. The Berlin crisis and the events around -it have also made it fairly clear that while the fight for -cessation of the tests ‘is a. useful contribution to the fight for peace, by itself, it ‘@ives no guarantees of peace unless it is tied in with the demand for the destruction and abolition of nuclear weapons and. for world disarmament: Ending the testing of nuclear weapons, while there is a huge Stockpile of nuclear arms, and in conditions where local wars could easily be transformed into world nuclear war, only begs ‘the question. What is at issue today and: cannot be evaded any- ‘more, is world disarmament with adequate controls. This is the way to eliminate the danger of nuclear war. Until thai is realized the danger of war will continue, . a a % There is no getting around this. Evasion, passivity or leaving it to someone else will not eliminate the danger. The trade ‘union movement, more so than any other force in the country, Ought to give a clear lead on this vital issue and press for its realization. In negotiations with employers it is common to use the term “package deal”. In the present state of international relation- Ships we also face the necessity of a “package deal” — settle- ment of the Berlin crisis and the issues surrounding it so as to prevent West German imperialism becoming a source of war; world disarmament with adequate controls; no nuclear arms in Canada or for its armed forces. Such a “package” — a true peace package — ought to be taken up and campaigned for by all sections of the trade union movement today. Insofar as it does that, it will make a vital contribution to the peace of the world and the security of the ‘Canadian people. , : : : ol trustees against ivil defence in schools “Contributes to idea nuclear war inevitable” B.C. School Trustees Association meeting at their 57 annual convention in Hotel Vancouver. last Wednesday voted. down a. resolution asking. that students get special. training on what to do in a nuclear attack. _ The delegate from Sooke on Vancouver. Island, said. the motion was negative and contributed to the idea that a. nuclear war is inevitable. “I protest involving our children ‘anything that might contribute to this type of thinking,” she:said. The. convention also. asked for a probe of: education finance. _ ; ; —_ ‘| done, |What's behind the plan make ALL Berlin neutral? By MAX REICH Pacific Tribune Correspondent BERLIN—What, is the meaning of Prime Minister Diefenbaker’s “plan” to solve the West Berlin problem by making all of Berlin a neutral city, which he submitted to the House of Commons on Sept. 11? Public pinion is disturbed by the prospect of a nuclear war over Berlin so that German monopolies may regain their lost positions and President Kennedy, as spokesman for U.S. imperialism, regain lost: prestige. Pressure for negotiations has increased internationally, Under such circumstances it is a godsend to have a plan, submit- ted -by- a “third force” country . like Canada, that is unaccept able to the; Soviet Union and the Ger- man Demo- cratic Repub- ers lic, that would, therefore serve the purpose of.a manouevre to delay negotiations and so al- low war preparations to con- tinue, at the same time fool- ing public opinion into the be- lief that something was being that a “compromise” plan was being submitted. PROBLEM OF W. BERLIN Why do the socialist cotn- tries refuse ‘to consider the “plan” of all of Berlin as an international city? To start, I want to clear up one point that is conveniently being thrown up by the Wes- tern powers to confuse the issue: There is no problem of Berlin,, there is only a prob- lem of West Berlin. West Berlin, with its policy ot a “capitalist window,” set itself the task of disturbing— by means that are now known to all and admitted by all— the GDR and the entire social- ist camp. Has East Berlin been’ disturbing anybody? © West Berlin is a capitalist} pocket in a socialist country. East Berlin does not differ in its political, economic and cul- tural system from the territory surrounding the GDR. In fact, it. is the capital of this terri- tory. YALTA AND POTSDAM What are the origins of the problem of. West Berlin? When the Second World War neared its end, the Allies discussed and made. agree- ments on what was to happen to Germany after the defeat of the nazis. At the Yalta conference, on Feb. 11, 1945, the Allies. un-|. dertook the following obliga- tion (President Kennedy, who speaks so much of America’s obligation to the people of Ber- lin, should note): : “It is our inflexible purpose to destroy German militarism and nazism and-to ensure that Germany will never again be able to disturb the peace of the world.” 2 And in the Potsdam Agree- ment of Aug. 2, 1945, - these obligations were assumed. “German militarism and nazism will be extirpated and the Allies will take in agree. ment together, now and in the future, the other measures necessary to assure that Ger- many never again will threaten her neighbor or the peace of the world.” And now, when Kennedy speaks of occupation as the right of conquest, he should be reminded that the occupa- tion of Germany had a pur- pose. The Potsdam Agreement Says on this point: ‘The purpose of the occupa- | tion of Germany (is). . . the militarization of Germany and {the elimination or control of ‘all , could be used for military pro- Germany industry that duction... .? So occupation has a definite purpose, and is exercised: “Supreme authority in Ger- many will be exercised . . by the British, United States, Soviet and French command- ers-in-chief, each in his own zone of occupation, and also jointly, in matters affecting Germany as a whole, in their Capacity as members -of the Supreme Control Authority set up in accordance with the present agreement.” GRANTED AS PRIVILEGE _ And here Berlin enters the Picture, After delineating the four occupation areas, where the Commanders hold supreme authority—Berlin was includ- ed in the area over which the Soviet commander had Supreme authority — Berlin was designated the seat of th Supreme Control Authority. — Consequently, the docu- ments which speak of supreme authority of the respective occupation areas, speak only .of the adminisiration (not occu- pation) of the respective areas of Berlin, granted as a privi- lege to the Allies by the Soviet occupation authority, in order to facilitate establishment of the Supreme Control Author- ity. : The occupation right remain- |€d with the Soviet authority, “in - whose territory Berlin is Situated. Proof of this is that the rail- Way system and the waterways system of all of Berlin remain- ed under Soviet competence, and is now under GDR com- petence, WHAT GEN. CLAY SAID Further proof ‘is supplied by U.S. General Lucius D. Clay, then U.S. representative in the Allied Control Council and now back as President Ken- |] Caribbean area for another eh "U.S. plans new Cuba attack’’ The Cuban. government charged Tuesday that the . U.S,_ is. training invaders at 30 different points in the large-scale attack on Cuba. It also charged that 20 training centres have been Set_up in the U.S. nedy’s “special” repre tive in Berlin, in his 16 “Decision in Germany”: “Tt is interesting t that all of these doe’ accepted a common occupé of Berlin and yet not one. them contained any guar of access or specific pr for truck, rail and aif of way.” 4 Which is only natural. * “rights of way are no at all, but privileges ; allies by courtesy of the S! Union, in whose occu zone Berlin unquestiom lies. 4 It is évident from the 4 ments that the sole purp05' the Allies participating in administration of Berlin, as the seat of the Cé Authority, to implement decisions -.of . tie Pols Agreement, : ; With the breach of ¢ agreements by the Wes Powers, and the setting UP’ their. occupation zones as 4 “Federal Republic’, all of - lin should have reverted to © -| Soviet Zone, and be now P* of the GDR. It was only for the sa peace, that the socialist c® dtries consented. to allow Berlin to lead its separate © tence. PRIVILEGES—NOT RIG! Premier Nehru hit the on the head when he said a cently that West Berlin and ‘i roads of access are privil granted and not rights. Consequently, Nehru cluded, if you live on the ritory of another power; # is no other way but to tiate an accommodation ¥ that power. a And what does Diefenb@ suggest? Because the 9? Union and the GDR are Ww} to give West Berlin the P lege of its independent & ence, and guarantee—agai# a privilege—its roads of a& to the West, the GDR sh? be. deprived of its caP which should also be nev! ized. ¥ Apart from this, the S© up of a unified administr@ for a whole neutral city Berlin, is nonsense. ~ WHAT WE MUST DO ~ As we said, there is no P” lem of Berlin, but only a P* lem of West Berlin. The solution to it is the gen@” offer of the Soviet, Union * the GDR which guarae™ West Berlin non-interfe™ t in its internal affairs and access to the outside worl But this means that Berlin, too, has to assum ligations in return f0F — rights. ee It is, not to interfere oT affairs of the GDR, on W territory it is situated. It ™ stop being a disturber 9 — peace, the role it has P until now, as an advance vial of imperialism in the 50°" camp.: the Western powers ang) is Berlin capitalism than = ‘ the GDR and the other --— ist countries. 100 ie It should not be over” 4 that it is not the West, PU” socialist countries th@ making all the coneess!® October 13, 1961—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—P4!