trade deal

-
y

raw state, that our timber and ores
become the basis for manufacturing and
processing industries.

In addition, scores of union and other
organizations have advocated that both
federal and provincial governments

‘adopt policies which would restrict the

export of raw resources and stimulate
further development of secondary indus-
try.

But those policies, present and future,
have been thrown into question by the
free trade deal.

Current provincial regulations gov-
erning the export of raw logs, ineffective
as they are in curbing the increasing
flow, could conceivably be challenged on
the basis that they, too, violate trade
agreements. Certainly the GATT ruling
on fish export regulations would effec-
tively prevent any government from
enacting legislation that would restrict
the export of timber which had not been
processed by Canadian workers.

If future Canadian governments are
restricted in their ability to make sover-
eign decisions about the country’s devel-
opment, B.C.’s economic horizons will
shrink. British Columbia will be con-
signed to a future as the exporter of raw
logs and lumber and the shipper of
unprocessed ores and frozen fish — and
that only as long as the resources hold
out.

The free trade deal would be one
more step towards that future. _¢ Gg

The Reagan-Mulroney trade deal —
which encompasses far more than trade,
and can, by no stretch of the imagination,
be called “‘free’”’ — is the issue facing the
Canadian people. In this interview, Wil-
liam Kashtan, leader of the Communist
Party of Canada, looks at the deal and its
implications.

Tribune: According to recent polls, 50
per cent of Canadians favour some idea of
“free trade”. But is this deal really a free
trade agreement?

Kashtan: The question here is not what

-you call it. This agreement opens the

door to American economic penetration
of and American investment in Canada
ona massive scale. That means increased
takeovers of the Canadian economy and
little if any benefits to Canada and the
Canadian people.

One of the negative aspects will be the
closing of American branch plants here,
along with the moving of Canadian capi-
tal to low-wage areas in the United
States. This in turn will lead to the loss of
jobs, and will be used by monopoly
interests in Canada to call on workers to
“tighten their belts” so they can compete
in the U.S. market.’

While business might claim the deal
will create jobs, all it will do is increase
the export of capital. Canadian workers
are therefore going to be doubly
attacked. This could include proposals to
amend labour legislation along with
other measures in the interests of
monopoly in Canada, and not to the
advantage of working people. In short,
the free trade agreement opens the door
to a frontal attack on the working class
by monopoly interests and governments
in Canada.

Tribune: Who are the main protagonists
of this deal in Canada?

Kashtan: The main protagonists of this
deal are Canada’s most powerful corpo-

rations, which have an alliance with the
Tory government. There is no doubt in
my mind that at an early stage after Mul-
roney’s election or even before, these
corporations tacitly agreed to support
the Mulroney government and in return,
the Mulroney government would sup-
port their efforts to penetrate the Ameri-
can market.

Corporate eyes today are not on the
Canadian market, or extending this
market, but on penetrating the U.S.
market. Transnationals here feel the
domestic market is too small, and are
looking elsewhere at the expense of Can-
adian development. They are prepared
to sell out Canada’s genuine interests for
the sake of profit. Economic and military
integration is their game, and free trade is
their name. Mulroney’s policies fit into
that framework.

Tribune: The Communist Party of Can-
ada has throughout its history opposed
closer integration with the United States.

Kashtan: It has done so for a number
of reasons. Integrating Canada econom-
ically with the U.S. will rob our country
of its ability to work out its own policies
in the interests of the Canadian people.
Integrating Canada economically leads
to our becoming part of the strategy of

American imperialism, which is directed -

against the people and the peace of the
world. In pursuit of this, U.S. imperial-
ism is prepared to offer some crumbs to
Canadian corporations, so that they
receive some of the benefits, and tie Can-
ada to the American war machine.

The Communist Party has therefore
fought tooth and nail for quite a long
time against such policies of integration.
Economic integration with the U.S. will
close the door to the ability of the Cana-
dian people to undertake fundamental
social change in a peaceful way. These
important factors have determined the

policy of the Communist Party through-
out the post-war period, when it became
clear that U.S. imperialism was using
what it thought was its monopoly of the
atom bomb against the people of the
world, including the socialist countries.

Reactionary forces in the U.S. have
still not abandoned their objective, des-
pite the fact that the U.S. has been com-
pelled to sign several accords favouring
peace, such as the recent INF accord
with the Soviet Union. But that accord
isn’t law, because there are still very
powerful forces in the U.S. opposed to it.

We see the struggle against economic
and military integration as a long-term
struggle directed to strengthen the sover-
eignty and independence of Canada, to
open the door to democratic reforms and
eventually, to a fundamental change in
society.

Tribune: The Communist Party says the
Canada-U.S. trade deal can be stopped.
What are the forces and under what condi-
tions can this be done?

Kashtan: If the polls are to believed,
Canadians are divided 50-50 on the
agreement. It is not inevitable that free
trade will be foisted on the Canadian
people. But the forces opposed to it are
wide and growing. The trade union
movement is at the centre of the struggle.
The women’s movement is actively
involved. So are the farm movement and
others.

In addition there are three. political
parties — the Liberal, NDP, and Com-
munist parties — that will likewise
speak up against the deal in different
ways, because of their different aims and
programs.

Also interesting, sections of monopoly
itself are likewise opposed. Just recently
the Bank of Nova Scotia came out pub-
licly in opposition. It may well mirror the
opinion of other Canadian business

interests which see little value, and
dangers, in becoming tied to U.S. impe-
rialism in this way.

Along with the free trade bill, the pro-
tectionist Omnibus trade bill is currently
being debated in the U.S. Congress. It
hangs over Canada like the sword of
Damocles. It’s hard to say whether this
Omnibus bill is really intended to be
used, or is rather a lever of pressure on
Canadian monopoly interests and the
Canadian government to go along with
the trade agreement, and perhaps even at
this time, to make further concessions to
what American imperialism wants.

Free trade is still to be debated in the
Commons and the Senate here. And it
will be the focus of a federal election.
There is still time to defeat it. But wha-
tever time is left must be used to extend
the opposition to this agreement. The
50-50 split must be shifted to 60-40 or
even 70-30 against. This depends on the
Canadian public, on the determination
of all the forces that have united in oppo-
sition to it.

Tribune: Supporters of the Reagan-
Mulroney trade deal accuse opponents of
favouring the economic status quo. What
are the plausible alternatives for Canada,
both immediate and long-term?

Kashtan: There are alternatives.
Opponents to free trade do not necessar-
ily favour the status quo. The Liberals
have come up with some kind of alterna-
tive, the NDP has an economic program,
we certainly have one.

The Communist Party said right from
the outset that it is not enough simply to
say no to this free trade deal. There has to
be a real alternative, and the people of
Canada have to fight for it. Events bear
out the truth of what we said some time
ago.

The Liberals say they are for liberal-

see CHALLENGING page 8

Pacific Tribune Supplement, March 16, 1988 « S5