awe

ISRAEL EPSTEIN

UN -debate on

ina reveals.

how U.S. dictates to ‘allies’

HE U.S. has won another dip-
lomatic victory in the United
Nations -—— the vote to declare

China an aggressor. And, as
has become usual with US.
diplomatic victories, the world

has reacted with a new spasm
of fear—fear of a third world
war.

Baek in the
days before U.S.
State Dean Ach-
eson and Warren :
Austin the word
diplomacy was.
thought to mean, :
as defined by the
Oxford diction-
ary, “the man
agement of inter-
national relations
by negotiation.”
Acheson and Aus-
tin have made it mean something
quite different—refusal of nego-
tiation and pressure on others
to refuse negotiation.

‘For. centuries, diplomacy was
supposed to be the art of side-
tracking and postponing con-
flicts that threatened, and alle-
Viating conflicts that already ex-
isted. U.S. diplomacy today has
a faculty of sharpening conflicts
that exist and bringing on any
that are still lurking around
the corner.

old-fashioned
Secretary of

Throughout history diplomacy
was thought to be a way of mak-
ing friends and influencing peo-

ple -on an_ international scale.
U.S. diplomacy in 1951 makes
: frienés anywhere, except

among tottering rulers who have
no friends in their own coun-
tries. While there can be no
denying that it influences other
nations, it influences them
against their own expressed will,
with broad hints that if they
do not come through the Mar-
shall plan cashier’s window will

not issue their current relief

checks.

©

Doris Fleeson, New York Post

columnist, described the result

January 30: “When the chips

are down the U.S. has the votes.
. What it does not have is

the confidence of its allies in

its wisdom and prudence... .

It comes as rather a shock to -

find that not just Arabs and
Asians... share in the general
distrust. Basically, it is feared
here that the U.S... . is pass-
ing the point of no return.”

In short,, while diplomacy used

- to be the art of making allies

who would stick with you in a
pinch, the current practice of
the U.S. State Department is to
pinch allies until they come un-
stuck and hang by a hair, to be
blown away at the first wind.
India, for example, has already
been blown away -—— and more
will be. :
‘Practically every recent press
dispatch illustrates that this is
the case. Scripps-Howard writer
Charles Lucy wrote January 30
from Ottawa that “an attitude

of ‘this isn’t our war’ or ‘let's,

sit this one out’ is a major ele-
ment of Canada’s story. This
‘traditional ally .-. . disagrees in
large part with the whole idea
of ewar in Korea and criticizes
the way the war has_ been
fought.” United Press report-
ed the same day from Lake Suc-
cess that “Canada said it would
abstain” in the vote. Yet, after
much arm-twisting, Canada vot-
ed for the U.S.—we can only
imagine with what feelings.
Britain tried for a long time
to prevent the vote taking the
form it did, but came along be-
cause she needs Marshall plan
money. In the same week one
of her leading conservative ex-
perts on the Far East, Victor

Purcell, wrote a letter to the
New Republic, in which he said
flatly: “It is hard to ,believe
that MacArthur did not and
does not now seek a world war.”

The. Syrian delegate to the
UN, Faris El Khoury, warned
solemnly January 30, according
to the ‘UP from Lake Success,
that
vide the world,” that “ranged
against the U.S. and its friends
would be the 800 million people
of Asia,” and that a month or
two after such a ‘vote “cities
would be in ruins, division of
troops would be dying and ships
sunk at sea.” In the vote, El
Khoury did not dare oppose the
U.S., but weakly abstained. Did
he suddenly become indifferent
to the prospect he himself paint-
ed. Or was little Syria bullied?

India’s Sir Benegal, Rau, who

voted “No,” neatly destroyed
Washington's vote-catching as-
surance that the resolution

would not bar further talks. “To
start with condemnation and
then propose negotiations is to
show we are serious about

neither. . It will finally ex-
tinguish all hope of peaceful
settlement.” - Sure enough, a
few hours after the resolution,

newspaper headlines reported
that the U.S. was pushing for
military and economic sanctions
against China, and suggesting
that it would apply them itself
if others didn’t. : :

As with these countries, so
with Americans, and especially
the Americans most concerned.
UP correspondent William Chap-
man, writing from the front
lines in Korea January 18, quot-
ed GI opinion as follows: “Wait
until.we get home. . . Those
politicians sit around and say
‘We will not leave Korea.’ Why
don’t they come over here and
then say ‘we’?”

J. B. SALSBERG

LPP convention

demonstration

of working class leadership

A -LIFE-LONG blacksmith, now
a brilliant labor editor, pre-
sided over the last’ session of
the fourth convention of the
Labor-Progressive party, at

- which an Albertan. coal sminer

nominated machinist Tim Buck

as national leader of the party.

A French-Canadian woman seC-
onded the nomination and sea-
men, tailors, printers, steel and
auto workers, metal miners and
waiters, shipbuilders and fur-
riers, electrical | workers and
bricklayers and wage earners of
other industries joined the rest
of the delegates in unanimously
re-electing Tim Buck to that
very important and responsible
post.

I mention this not because I
wish to create an impression
that the convention was @ gath-
ering of trade unionists alone.
It would, in fact, be wrong for
anyone to carry away such an
impression. While it is true
that the LPP, the party of Can-

adian Communists, is first and

foremost the party of the work-

‘ing class—the vanguard of that

Class—this party is, however,
not composed of wage earners
alone. It unites all who desire
the attainment of a: free, social-

aod

interests of the people.

~ conversely,

ist society in which peace, equal: |

ity and friendship of peoples,
economic, social and cultural
: ¢

progress will be enjoyed by all.
Thus, farmers, professional peo-
ple of all sorts, students, house-
wives and others who subscribe
to the socialist principles of the
party and who recognize : the
historic and leading role of the
working class in the struggle
for such a future join and are
welcome in the LPP.

The LPP \is vitally concerned
with all problems that affect
the immediate and long range
But the
party renders an invaluable ser-
vice by helping the working
class to keep its eyes focused
on the major, overriding issues
of the day, It does not mini-
mize the importance of this or
that problem which may con-
front a section of the workers
or people. It urges the finding

of the best possible solution for —
But it correctly —

such problems.
points out that no lasting bene-
fit can be gained by any seg-
ment of labor if it conflicts with
‘the interests of afl labor and,
that what benefits
the working class as 4 whole
constitutes, in reality, the great-
est benefit to every single seg-
ment of the class.

It seems: to me that trade un- ,

ionists can understand the cor-
rectness and profound signifi-

eance of this approach. There
isn’t a union that does not find

itself faced with the ¢hoice be- ©

tween the interests of a minori-

‘ty of its members and the
overall interests of the entire
membership. That is also fre-
quently the case within the cen-
tral labor body of a given coun-
try. The LPP convention dealt,
therefore, with the basic, over-
riding issues which face Can-
adian labor and all its people
against the background of the
present world situation.

In so doing the convention de-—

cisions provide the general direc-
tion for the people of this coun-
try and for -the working class
which. is historically destined to
lead the nation in the solution
of its problems.

Unlike the recent trade union
conventions which were domin-
ated by the bureaucracy, dele-
gates to the LPP convention did
“not receive instructions from big
business governments nor from
labor attaches of the U.S. State

Department. They approached .

every issue from only one stand-
point—the welfare of Canadian
labor and the peaceful future
of Canada.
respond with the
needs of the
country. ‘

fundamental
people and the

“the U.S. plan would di- —

Their decisions cor-.

BILLIONS,
Merraey

ROBERT FRIEDMAN

Eisenhower’s own words
condemn his new job

OR my part, “bygones are by-

gones,” said General Dwight

D. Eisenhower to the people of
West Germany. You forget your
reluctance to build a new Wehr-
macht and join us in a new war
against fhe Soviet Union, and we
will forget Buchenwald and Li-
dice, the dead, the maimed and
the torture, and we will forgive

your. Prussian generals, your
Ruhr industrialists, your Nazi
SS-men.,

“Let bygones be bygones,” said
Eisenhower, as he met with Hit-
ler General Adolf Heusinger and
Hans Speidel, former chief of staff
to the infamous General Stulp-
nagel, gauleiter for conquered
France;

In Paris, en route home, Ejisen-
hower confided that he had told
West German Chancellor Aden-
auer and “other German gentle-
men” the “regular German soldier
and officer” did not “lose his
honor” because of the Nazi atro-
cities. Eisenhower thus absolved
the whole Nazi officer caste of
responsibility for their war
crimes.

“T would never consent to be in
command of any unit whose sol-
diers ... were not there believing
they were serving their country
and civilization and freedom,”
said Eisenhower, as he prepared
to lead the Nazi. officers ‘who
raped Czechoslovakia, Poland and
France, murdered millions of
Russians and Jews, bombed Eng-
land and slew thousands of
American GIs.

* But Eisenhower didn’t always
include Hitler’s generals in the
army of “civilization and free-
dom.” : .

Back in the days before Eisen-
hower’s job became’ one rebuild-
ing a West Germany army for
war, here is how he spoke—ac-
curately and feelingly—of Ger-
man militarist aggression—

August, 1944: Eisenhower told
then Secretary of the Treasury
Morgenthau: “. . . the German
people must not be allowed to
escape a sense of guilt, of com-
plicity in the tragedy that has
engulfed the world. Prominent
Nazis, along with certain indust-
rialists, must be tried and pun-
ished. Membership in the Gestapo
and in the SS should be taken
as prima facie evidence of guilt.
The General Staff must be broken
up, all its archives confiscated,

and members suspected of com-
plicity in starting the war or in
any war crime should be tried
. .. The warmaking power of the
country should be eliminated.”
Eisenhower who now bears “no

resentment” wrote thus in his
Crusade in Europe, only two
years ago: 4

“

.'. I saw my first horror
camp: It was near the town of
Gotha. I have never felt able: to
describé my emotional reactions
when I first came face toe face —
with ‘indisputable evidence of
Nazi brutality and ruthless dis-
regard of ‘every shed of decency.”

“I know that in my personal
reactions, as the months of con-
flict wore on, I grew constantly
more bitter against the Germans,
particularly the’ Hitler gang.
..“On all sides there was always
evidence of the destruction that
Hitler's ruthless ambition had
brought about.”

“Bygones be bygones?” Not for
the Soviet people, of whom Eis- _
enhower wrote in his book: :

“When we flew into Russia, in
1945, I did not see a house stand- _
ing between the western borders —
of the country and the area
around Moscow. Through this
overrun region, Marshall Zukhow
told me, so many numbers of
women, children and old men
had been killed that the Russian ~
government would never be able
to estimate the total” *

Join the U.S. government and
rest of the ‘free world’ against |
the threat of Soviet aggression,
Eisenhower called to West Ger-
many.

But Eisenhower, in his new job
as salesman of the atom-bomb ta
the governments: of Western Eur-
ope, might have recalled his own —
words after the first atom bomb
was dropped on August 6, 1945.

“Henceforth, it would, seem, the
purpose of an aggressor nation
would be to stock atom bombs in
quantity and to employ them by
surprise against the industrial
wfabric and population centers of
its intended victim.” as

Eisenhower is home to “report
on his European tour. He will
not tell the people the truth. He
will not reveal that the peoples
of Western Europe do not want
bygones-to be bygones, will not
embrace the SS-men, and that the
people of Germany are equally
unwilling to march and fight
again in a war for Wall Street. :

PACIFIC TRIBUNE — FEBRUARY 9, 1951 — PAGE 9

dl