People can end the nuclear war threat

“ By JAMES LEECH og
“ee point to seize on as the threat of 2 OF
_ World nuclear war hangs over us, is the BALANCE THE
fact that people, in their millions, can still
do something to prevent it. The kinds of
they can do fall into two :
| Categories? winning ever more people to =
the struggle for disarmament, détente
"and peace; and compelling governments
_ 0 adopt policies to these ends. That is
the crux of the matter.
___ Tobe successful in winding.down and
Stopping the arms build-up and in pre-
Venting the inevitable use of those arms if
_ aley are not done away with, requires
~ facing fact, and taking action.
'

e know, because we are told every
day, of the nuclear war threat, backed by
_ Ysenals of mass. annihilation weapons
_ deadlier and more numerous than ever in
_ history. On the other hand, there has
_ Never been a time when the world’s mil-
~ lions have so demonstrably taken the “9200

| Cause of disarmament into their own

hands. USA

___ Policy-shaping Events

___ Six months ago the USA completed a NATO
’ Major policy-shaping event — the elec-
’ Yon of Ronald Reagan as U.S. president.
" months ago, in the USSR, Soviet

curostiatedcar based
national eurostrategic warheads

16% ‘submarine launched
84% air based

UK & FRANCE.

STRATEGIC NUCLEAR WARHEADS IN 1980

Policies were affirmed by the 26th Con-
Sess of the Communist Party of the

viet Union. In the period encom-
Passing these two events, and up to the
Preseht, the battle has sharpened be-
tween the forces for peace, and those
forcing an arms build-up leading to war.
Certainly both sides have arms. What

a ee

take; what are the positions of other
| Powers; where is Canada heading; and
_ What should we be doing about it?
Soviet president Brezhnev, at the Feb-
_Tuary party congress, made proposals
| whereby the Soviet Union is prepared to:
_ @ Resume negotiations at once on
limiting and reducing strategic arms.

e@ Negotiate the limitation of any type
of armaments. pe

e Agree to a moratorium on the de-
Velopment of new medium-range mis-
Siles of NA TO and the USSR in Europe.

e Call for and support establishment
of an authoritative international commit-
3 tee of scientists to demonstrate the vital
_ Recessity of preventing nuclear war.

e Urge the calling of a special session
of the United Nations Security Council,

with the participation of the top leaders

of its member-states in order to look for
keys to improving the international situa-
ton, and preventing war. If they so wish,
_ “aders of other states could also take
_ Part’’ — in short a summit meeting.
© Negotiate an international agree-
_ Ment to safeguard the Persian Gulf in-
‘Stead of bringing in more naval.and air
forces.
To emphasize the value of taking pre-
_Yentive measures, Brezhnev cited the
Carlier Soviet proposal to ban the naval
trident missile system and the Soviet

liens i

—

————

d. Now it has the Ohio submarine
armed with Trident I missiles and the
USSR has the Typhoon to'match. Cost-

ly, dangerous, and unecessary.

New Round of Missiles
i These are facts; it’s not a question of
__ liking or disliking. It is also a fact that the
| USA, and its European military bloc, the
_ North Atlantic Treaty Organization, has
 ROt responded positively to these pro-
Posals, except to leave the door open a
k for a summit meeting.

It is also a fact that the agreements at
| Ye ‘Strategic Arms Limitation Talks
SALT Th) initialled by Carter and
Brezhnev, have been buried by the USA.

Us an opportuniy to put a brake on

gic arms is turned aside.
_| At the same time, both Washington
and NATO have announced plans to go
ahead with @development of a new

ai gpl i tt i

then, is the direction these major powers |

Corresponding system. The’ USA. re- _

6000

uss; EE

80% ground based
20% submarine launched

res ‘I
50% ground! based
50% submarine launched

In retaliation to NATO’s eurostrategic warheads the Soviet Union
has medium range missiles which have not been increased in

generation of nuclear missiles in western
Europe — the Cruise and Pershing II.
Only the hawks and rabid anti-Sovieteers
of western Europe are cheering for this
dangerous move. Not only the thousands
who demonstrated outside a recent
NATO meeting, but the more rational
European leaders and spokesmen can
see the extreme threat to their countries.

Unfortunately, because of the Reagan
refusal of disarmament discussion, U.S.
social programs have been cut to the
bone, and the military budget boosted.
Carter’s 1982 military budget was
$181.5-billion. Reagan’s is $185.8-billion,
rising to $269-billion for 1986! ae

It cannot be argued that this is for ““de-
fence’’ when the USA has established a
costly Rapid Deployment Force to go
anywhere where U.S. ‘“‘interests’’ are
involved. These ‘‘interests’’ have been
shown to be outright threats as in the
Persian Gulf, and intervention as in El

~ Salvador. :

Is it defence of U.S. shores when the
USA has land, air and naval war bases

ringing the Soviet Union?

Headed for War
What is shocking more people into ac-
tions for disarmament is the direction of
U.S. policy — not to ‘‘protect’’ the
USA, but to take aggressive action, to
seek world military domination, and to

risk nuclear oblivion to gain its ends. The

USA is headed for war. —
Is the USA threatened? What is

“threatened by disarmament agreements

is‘the huge profits of the armaments
industry of the. USA. That is why dis-
armament is a dirty word. a

Why put new nuclear missiles in
Europe? As protection against the War-
saw Treaty countries? The Warsaw
“Treaty countries have put to NATO a
long-standing offer to disband the War-
saw Treaty simultaneously with the dis-
bandment of NA TO! Some people don’t
realize that the Warsaw Treaty came
into being in May 1955, six years and one
month after NATO was formed. NATO
was not set up as a defence against the
Warsaw Pact. That, too, is a fact — to be
liked or disliked.

Another chilling indication of the
direction the USA expects its policies to
take it is revealled in the Canadian Peace
Congress bulletin, Peace News (April),

territory.

under the head: USA hospitals to pre-
pare for war casualties. It tells how hos-
pitals in San Francisco and Oakland,
California, have been called upon by the
U.S. Department of Defence, in meet-
ings attended by military personnel, to
mobilize civilian hospitals to prepare for
massive miliary casualties. The meetings
were held Feb. 26 at a San Francisco
Holiday Inn and later in Oakland.

Military data provided said the war
being prepared for is a ‘“‘major conflict
outside the United States.”

What about Afghanistan?

The Soviet Union has also proposed
the calling of an all-European conference
on miliary détente, and has. urged a
Warsaw-NATO mutual renunciation of
the first-strike use of nuclear and non-
nuclear weapons. What is impressive
about all the Soviet peace proposals, is
that they have no strings attached to
other, unrelated activities of NATO
countries.

On the contrary, the USA speaks of
boycotting disarmament talks unless
Soviet troops are withdrawn from Af-
ghanistan. Shall the human race perish in
nuclear fire on that basis? The USSR has
said it is ready at any time to withdraw

those troops when countries arming and

number for the last 10 years. These missiles cannot reach U.S.

sending mercenaries to overthrow the
Afghan Government agree to stop their
subversion.

The Canadian Government is being
urged by signers of a country-wide peti-
tion (see elsewhere on this page) to take
urgent steps for disarmament. The peti-
tion originates with the Canadian Peace

_ Congress, Canada’s oldest, continuous

peace. organization,..founded .in. 1948.

If the crux of defusing the nuclear
threat is people’s participation, then in
the opinion of many peace workers in
Canada, the major task is to change
government policy. Canada has no nu-
clear weapons, but allows U.S. nukes on
our soil, an affront to Canadian indepen-
dence. Ottawaistied tothe Colorado-con-
trolled North American Air Defence by
which we can be catapulted into a nuclear
war.

We are squandering $5-billion a year
we can ill afford on armaments to meet
NATO commitments ordered by U.S.
generals.

It is time Canadians got out from under
this death-dealing load. It is time to ac-
cept offers of disarmament negotiations,
and to condemn the warmongers. It is
time to make Canada a peace base.

The nuclear arms race is growing at an

Peace is everyone’s business

alarmingly
holocaust that would destroy us all. The right to live is a sacred right of every person. Therefore, to help make
world peace secure we the undersigned, PETITION the Government of Canada to:

e URGENTLY PRESS THE UNITED STATES FOR EARLY SIGNING OF A
STRATEGIC ARMS LIMITATION TREATY AND TO START TALKS ON
LIMITATION OF MEDIUM-RANGE NUCLEAR WEAPONS;

e WORK FOR SIMULTANEOUS DISSOLVING OF MILITARY ALLIANCES,
DISMANTLING OF ALL FOREIGN-BASED MILITARY BASES, AND
BANNING OF CHEMICAL AND GERM WARFARE;

e ACTIVELY SUPPORT THE CONVENING OF A EUROPEAN CONFERENCE
ON MILITARY DETENTE AND DISARMAMENT IN EUROPE, SINCE IT IS
THE WORLD'S MOST HEAVILY ARMED AREA.

rate. Unless stopped It could end in a nuclear

‘NAME (In Full) ss ass

ADDRESS city
NAME (in Full)

ADDRESS city

=}

Issued by the CANADIAN PEACE CONGRESS, 671 Dantorth Ave. Room 301, Toronto, Ontario M4J 113

CT

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—MAY 8, 1981—Page 7

i igh