WORLD The Berlin wall: when a socialist state responded By TOM MORRIS Twenty years ago on Aug. 13, 1961, the government of the German Democratic Republic, in conjunction ‘with its allies, took a step which dealt a heavy blow to the enemies of socialism. Following 12 years of sabotage, black marketeering and unbridled espionage, carried on via the 27 miles of open border between West Berlin and GDR territory, GDR authorities sealed the border, thus normalizing and securing its state frontiers. What came to be known as the ‘*Berlin wall’’ in the Western media was born, and with it a host of mis- conceptions and outright lies over its purpose and need. Geography and history in the ensuing 20 years were - tured upside down. The Western public were advised the ‘‘wall” was ‘‘built to keep the East Germans in.” ‘Conveniently forgotten was the fact that West Berlin lies 130 miles inside the territory of the GDR. Also forgotten was the intolerable conditions, which no sovereign state would permit, of having no control over the flow of currency, goods and people in and out of its borders. The situation between 1949 when the GDR was formed and 1961 was chaotic. This report from the Tribune’s Berlin correspondent gives part of the picture ‘at that time: . : “It is a financial attraction for some East Berlin resi- dents to work in West Berlin. They retain the advantage of cheap rents, cheap prices and free social services in the East and are paid two-thirds of their wages in West marks. “For every 100 West marks they exchange, they re- ceive 450 East marks. Since they do their purchasing in the East, they are four times as well off as either West or East Berlin workers. There are at present 60,000 such border-crossers and at least another 30,000 have to be added who work in West Berlin unofficially’. ‘‘For the GDR this means on the one hand a loss of. badly-needed manpower; on the other a large group of parasites who do not contribute any service or work toward the socialist society whose fruits they share, and whose consumption potential is four times as high as that of productive citizens. “The best products go to them — and not only for their own use, but to be smuggled for sale in West Berlin. ‘The artificial exchange rate makes this a lucrative pas- time. Prices for articles are similar and often cheaper in East Berlin than in the West. ‘A smuggler who pays 10 marks for an article in East Berlin, takes it across and sells it for five in the West. The West Berlin purchaser gets a bargain. The smuggler then exchanges his five West Marks for 22 East, a profit of over 100% ...” : This example, multiplied hundreds of thousands of times over 12 years gives a picture of the incredible drain on the GDR’s economy as the country struggled to re- . - build after World War II and poured billions into de- veloping the services required for its socialist system. Added to that was the impossibility for the GDR to protect itself against espionage activities. Hundreds of foreign agencies operated out of West Berlin with open access to the GDR. There was no possibility for any type of control, people and traffic simply moved about at will. West German, U.S. and other anti-socialist groups. by-passed the long FRG-GDR frontier by simply fiying into West Berlin lying in the heart of the GDR. From there you simply crossed the street. Inan interesting article Aug. 13, the Toronto Globe & Mail writes of the situation: ‘““By doing nothing that fateful Sunday morning (Aug. 13, 1961) the fate of East Germany was sealed. But far more importantly, the basis for a lasting European peace had been laid.”’ The article then gives some fascinating figures of what then took place: ‘‘The extent of East Germany’s economic progress is a matter of record. Its per capita GNP exceeds that of Britain, its per capita consumption exceeds most states of western Europe and its level of The Berlin Wall is 20 years old. Despite lies and miscor ceptions, in the Western media, the normalization of the border around West Berlin has contributed greatly to st@ bility in Europe. technological achievement all but a half dozen countries: ‘Today, to the extent there is a crisis in Berlin, it centres in the western sector, not the East. If East Get many and East Berliners have prospered since 1961, West Berlin has suffered a slow, agonizing decline. Sincé 1961 its population has shrunk by 300,000 ...” And the article concludes: ‘‘In 1961 the Berlin Wall . arrested the collapse of East Germany and provided thé basis from which European détente has grown ail flourished ...”” And that is the political reality 20 years later. After all the threats, rhetoric ‘and lies about the purpose of thé ‘«wall”’, the effects of a normalized frontier between Eas! and West are clear. To be sure, attemtps will (and aré) still being made to misrepresent the issue, but life has # habit of asserting itself. INTERNATIONAL FOCUS | By TOM MORRIS Menachem Begin and the Bomb _ As the backlog of mails roll into our editorial offices, one particularly revolting piece ap- peared in the June issue of The Jewish Standard, a Zionist publication printed in Toronto. It’s an editorial titled “: The Ultimate Hypocrisy’, critical of states in the Middle East who condemned = Israel’s bombing of Iraq’s nuclear reactor last June. Country by country, the editorial argues that the Arab states feel secretly happy that Iraq’s ‘‘nuclear threat’’ has been removed. It continues: “Israel has, for a few years at least, saved the Middle East — all of the Middle East and not just Israel — from the threat of nuclear disaster.”’ The editorial then adds a kicker: ‘*... Anwar Sadat ..- cannot fail to perceive the con- sequences for him if any Mid- dle East state except Israel were to possess the nuclear weapon.” In short, everyone, espe- cially the Middle East Arab states, should rejoice at Is- rael’s military strike. They should understand the nuclear bomb in the region.is only safe in the hands of Menachem Begin and his generals. Here’s the Likud Party in PACIFIC TRIBUNE—AUG. 28, 1981—Page 6 bed with the most reactionary religious groups in the Knes- set. There’s the Israeli military - bombing Lebanon. Here’s a state bent on making its occu- pation of Arab lands perma- nent with a vast settlements program. And now the Jewish Stan- dard tells its readers that the Middle East’s number one ter- rorist, Premier Begin, will be Gathering the dead in Beirut. Hundreds died in Israeli jet raids last month, and U.S. air- craft shipments resume. the custodian of nuclear weapons in the region, the ar- biter, the man of peace. Talk about the ultimate Hypocrisy. Menachem Begin and the F-16s Almost as a postscript to the Iraqi affair, the U.S. administ- ration announced Aug. 18 it is lifting the suspension of F-16 warplanes to Israel. Washington suspended sales of the fighter-bombers follow- ing the raid on Baghdad saying Israel may have violated an agreement not to use U.S. war supplies in an offensive man- ‘ner. The charade is now over. Secretary of State Haig told the press a complete review of the incident was held. The re- sult? ‘‘ The administration has not reached a conclusion if the raids were ... offensive or de- fensive.”’ That’s some review. Israeli jets leave their territory, sec- retly cross Saudi Arabia, enter . Iraq, bomb an installation and return to base. And we’re left to wonder if the raid was offen- sive or defensive! The United Nations had lit- ~ tle difficulty in condemning Is- rael’s act as open aggression. Israel’s habit of bombing neighboring states without any declaration of war is pure ag- gression. What else can it be called? Here Begin, Haig and the Jewish Standard editors find common ground. Haig’s announcement on lifting the ban on fighter-bomber sales is coupled with the comment: ‘‘The understanding with Is- rael does' not mean there will be consultations before Israel undertakes military action.” A free hand. A green light to the hawkish Premier and _ his even more hawkish defence minister. That’s what the White House is offering — and doing so to the hurrahs of the right wing and Zionist press. MacGuigan: A boy doing a man’s job External Affairs Minister Mark MacGuigan emerged from a three-hour meeting with Chinese leaders in Peking and hurried to tell the press he has received ‘‘clear assurance”’ that China would not try to re- instate the killer Pol Pot as leader of Kampuchea. But only weeks ago at a UN - conference, China pushed through agreement that Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge would be ‘‘interim administrators”’ until ‘‘Un-supervised free elec- tions’’ take place. (Kam- * fees puchea, Vietnam and the USSR did not attend the con- ference.) Imagine Pol Pot getting his hands on Kampuchea again after killing 3-4 million people last time around. Imagine Chi- - na, who propped up the Khmer Rouge then and still is today, urging Pol Pot’s removal if he was in power. Imagine ‘‘free elections” in Kampuchea under the tender care of the Khmer Rouge, Pol Pot and Chinese advisers. But, most of all, imagine the Kam- puchean people permitting this genocidal killer to govern again. kee MacGuigan must have given the Chinese leaders quite a chuckle when he bought that line. Talk about a boy doing a man’s job! | ee Pol Pot’s “f elections”.