IORTH ATLANTIC TREATY

By PHYLLIS CLARKE

uter the Treaty has been in
© for twenty years, any
y May cease to be a party
year, after its notice of de-
lation has been given to the
ernment of the United.
S of America, which will in-
h the Governments of the
1 parties of the deposit of
™ Notice of denunciation . . .
} —Article 13, North Atlantic
Treaty

fe year for “denunciation”
| come. A review is in pro-
SS by the Trudeau. govern-
At of Canada’s foreign policy.
twenty years the cold war
E. about the North Atlantic
aty Organization has been
petuated. Pressure for with-
al has steadily mounted, but
_Who continue to support
aims of the cold war—des-
pction of the Soviet Union and
J Camp of socialism — advo-

More

By A. NIKANOROV
d man Mars is clanking his
Our with delight. There is no
S$ more pleasant for him, the
of war, than that coming
the Atlantic capitals. The
; am of this news has become
cularly big after the ses-
a of the NATO Council held
PTussels in November 1968.
on convening it a month ear-
than Planned, the U.S. lead-
of that aggressive bloc de-
4 ee put on their allies an
Agourien of military spend-
» All means were resorted. to,
intimidation to arms twist-
Belgium, for instance, which
hee to reduce its troops
é 4 BRS y ‘was threatened
_ iscontinuation of the
ar jmeocns into its econ-
@ result the Belgian
Y peroane not only gave ipthe
p srenuction plan but even
Et a to modernise its divi-
Re loned on the banks of
ine. Other European coun-
S, pander of the NATO, ex-
ae fee Which withdrew.
iad loc S military setup,
Rea and which has no army,
Military an increase of their
om 2.5 t
don an
1 Zeal,
nmark

© 15 percent. Bonn,
d Rome showed spe-
Smaller countries, like
, also increased their
le Spending, to say noth-
Fee mene Greece where the
cece arms is needed for
ae €ning the regime of the:
: yes either. In a
nning ful] ae Sgt ad
; © needs all this? The peo-
es Western Europe? No. In
“au 20-year history of the
ae existence they got con-

ON more than one occa-

in
of the adventurous nature

al

headquarters. The peo-
e to pa een Europe were
es Y tor the unrestrained
ce and were threatened
= ny HON-existent “Soviet

en the trend for the

budgets to the sum of

the policy worked out in the

Of the international |

cate our continued membership.

Will Canada continue to allow
the cold war delusions to deter-
mine her foreign policy? Or will
we finally free ourselves from
the entanglement of what twenty
years ago was called the “Sui-
cide Pact,” to play a'role for
peace in the councils of the
world?

What was the world into
which NATO was born?

Professor D. F. Fleming, whose
History of the Cold War and its
Origins remains the most com-
prehensive study in the West,
said that only two weeks after
President Harry S, Truman suc-
ceeded Roosevelt, he was ready
to begin the cold war against
the Soviet Union. “The years of
labor,” he says, “by Roosevelt
and Hull to build a basis of
understanding with the Soviet
leaders which would last through
the peace making were cancelled

profit

irom NATO arms

tension began to gain ground, it
gave many people in Europe a
hope for a lasting peace on our
continent. But such a turn of
events did not suit the Atlantic
“hawks.” Having snatched at the
events in Czechoslovakia, they
decided to fall back into their
old ways. An escalation of the
military spending followed.
Such a decision gladdened not
only the mythical Mars. The real
death merchants, the arms man-
ufacturers, are Yubbing their
hands with delight. The Amer-
ican trusts naturally get a lion’s
share of the profits. The West
European countries pay the
United States a thousand million
dollars a year for its arms de-
liveries. Lockheed alone sold 1.5
thousand million dollars’ worth
of the Starfighter jet fighter
planes. The Macdonnel firm made
almost the same profit on the
F-4 Phantom bombers. The West
European monopolies — the
Krupp .concern (E.R.G.), Vickers
(Britain), Dasso (France), FIAT
(Italy), etc.—keep pace with
their American partners. The so-
called Atiantic Commission func-

tioning in the Netherlands and |

financed by the arms manufac-
turing monopolies, has stepped
up its activities of late. It has
directly to do with the increase
of the Netherlands’ military
spending by an appalling sum of
225 million guldens. Character-
istically, the Commission is also
‘engaged in military propaganda
—it has received an access even
to the country’s schools where
it spreads materials sowing
-military psychosis.

The NATO leaders and the’

arms merchants are carrying on
a dangerous game with the des-
tinies of West European peo-
ples. European security can be
achieved not through the escala-
tion of military expenditures
and brinksmanship but through
seeking the opportunities of a
detente and the establishment of
a mutually advantageous cooper-
ation between East and West.

Ups eke Sayan ibs yissE

out on April 23, 1945.” This was
the day on which, Truman met
with Soviet Foreign Minister
Molotov on the eve of the estab-
lishment of the United Nations.
Five months later, according to
Fleming, Truman “decided fin-
ally to regard the Soviet Union
as an unfriendly state... and
began. composing the Truman
Doctrine for the ‘containment’ of
the Soviet Union.”

By December of 1945 Senator
Eastland was telling the Ameri-

can people that ‘“‘Russia,is a pre- —

datory, aggressor nation, and...
today she follows the same
fateful road of conquest and ag-
gression with which Adolph
Hitler set the world on fire.”

In March of the next year at
Fulton, Missouri, Winston
Churchill, life-long foe of social-
ism, with President Truman at
his side, declared that what was
needed was a great preponder-
ance of power against the Soviet

Union, the basis to be the
alliance of . English-speaking
peoples.

“This means,” he said, ‘“‘a spe-
cial relationship between the
British Commonwealth and Em-
pire and the United ‘States. . . It
should carry with it the continu-
ance of the present facilities for
mutual security by the joint use
of all naval and air-force bases
in the possession of either coun-
try all over the'world...”.

Throughout the next year the
leaders of the cold war line in
Washington. London and Otta-
wa preached the need of “con-
tainment” of the country with
whom they had just in alliance
fought a war. In March of 1947
the Truman Doctrine was pro-
claimed in the sending of money
to Greece to prevent her people
from determining their own fu-
ture. “The United States,’ com-
ments Fleming on Truman’s pro-
nouncement, “would become the
world’s anti-Communist,
Russian policeman.”

From there to the Marshall
Plan, to prevent any progressive
government emerging in West-
ern Europé was but a short step.

And then on to the concept of
an alliance of the countries of
Western Europe, the United
States and Canada enunciated
by Canada’s St. Laurent among
others, which could include
.Greece, Turkey, etc. as part of
the aggression against the Soviet
Union.

anti- ~

By 1949 the project was well.
underway and Canada’s parlia-
ment which met January 26 had
before it the NATO alliance, As
parliament met, Tim Buck, the
Communists’ leader, said of the
proposal:

“This is the military extension
of the Marshall Plan which is
U.S. imperialism’s method of
putting the western world into
the clutches of Wall Street. The
new pact is to follow up the dol-
lar with guns.

“It is a military alliance not of
a defensive, but of an offensive
nature — offensive against the
people of Western Europe,
against the Soviet Union and the

“New Democracies, and against

the colonial peoples who are
winning freedom in Asia and
Africa, and whom Truman and
St. Laurent hate and fear.

“Under cover of high-flown
rubbish about ‘defending our
security,” “superiority in arms”
and the “uselessness of the
U.N.”, Canadians are being ask-
ed to surrender their sovereign-
ty over the security of our coun-
try, as they have been asked to
surrender control over their’ eco-
nomic affairs, to the U.S. military
and its high-finance masters, the
Wall Street barons.”

“It’s two aims,” he continued,
was to “build up the military es-
tablishments of Western Europe,
on the basis of the U.S. control-
led Ruhr, with standardized U.S.
equipment, controlled by U.S.
military missions” and to pro-
vide legal camouflage for estab-
lishing U.S, military, air and
naval bases throughout the
Western hemisphere and in
Western Europe.”

‘No other Canadian political
party opposed the alliance. Al-
though individuals and even
some organizations of the CCF
came out against NATO, the fe-
deral leader, M. J. Coldwell led
his party in unity with the Con-
servatives and Liberals to en-
dorse the Pact. f

“Mark well the day! Monday,
March 28, 1949 — the tragic day
when Canada’s House of Com-

_mons voted 149 to 2 for the At-

lantic War Pact,” says an article
in the Tribune. .

It continued, “The fuller im-
plications of the dangerous war
pact will be more revealed even

to the most backward as the .

hours and days pass.”
Already in 1949 expenditures

969-year for denunciation

for war had totalled 70 percent
more than the previous year —
from $60 million to-$148 million
—and in the last twenty years
the bill to Canadians for mem-
bership in the Treaty has meant

billions and billions of dollars

worth of unbuilt homes, unbuilt
schools’ and hospitals, lack of
medical care and denial of other
benefits which could have been
enjoyed.

Even the revelation of a secret

clause of the Treaty which would |

mean the sending of troops to
participate in armed interven-
tion in case of democratic revo-
lutions within pact-signing, na-
tions did not deter Canadian or
other ratifiers, And on April 4,
1949 in Washington representa-
tives of 12 countries met to sign
the master copy of the Treaty

which was placed on file in the

American capital.

On the eve of this event, the
Associated Press dispatch point-
ed out the real character of the
event in saying, “The grand al-
liance of the non-Communist
western world. . . will be sign-
ed here tomorrow by 12 coun-

tries intent upon pooling their —

resources against Russia.”
And the Soviet Union, against

‘whose “aggression” this Treaty

was touted, what were they
doing? Fleming says, “Instead of
launching her armies Russia was
making tremendous investments
in long range projects, huge fac-
tories, big dams, irrigation, re-
forestation and the rebuilding of
cities'— all of it pure waste if
the Soviets believed war inevi-
table in the near future.”

And just as in 1949 the cry
was ‘we need NATO” to protect

us against the Soviet Union,.

with no foundation in fact, so

again today as the peace forces .

demand the implementation of
section 13 for denunciation, the

cry is about Soviet aggression,

again with no foundation.
Again the Communists’ are
campaigning for Canada’s with-
drawal from NATO. How will
the peace forces act this time?
They are stronger because of
their experience in the fight
against nuclear armaments,
against Canada’s complicity in

the U.S. aggressive war against —

Vietnam, surer that the cry of
Soviet threat is part of the cold
war falsities. Will the decisively
act to take Canada out of
NATO?

Ottawa, Ont.

Dear Mr. Sharp:

inform the Canadian government. of th

ign for NATO pull-out

Hon: Mitchell Sharp, M.P.
Minister of External Affairs,
House of Commons,

| welcome your invitation to the citizens of Canada to express their
opinions on the government's review of foreign policy.

1 would strongly urge that this review lead to a decision by Canada
to withdraw from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

ADDRESS 19bo nA ink nb Got, Saul aie ce

(This card is published by the COMMUNIST PARTY OF CANADA as a service to those wishing to
eir opposition to continued membership in NATO.)

<>

reer

ahs itt

© CBACIFIC TRIBUNE—JANUARY 10; 1969—Page7