es Letters/ World Letters In reference to both Jack Phillips’ (Trib- une, April 2, 1990) and Alex Taylor’s (Trib- une, April 30, 1990) letters about the Soviet | Sournalist’s reports on capitalist society, I amin complete agreement. I used to sub- Scribe to Moscow News and Sputnik but their reports on capitalist society were so Wopian as to be unbelievable. I cancelled MY subscription to these papers after writ- Inga letter to Moscow News. I still subscribe '0 New Times (I have for nearly 30 years) and I find some of their reporters nearly as ad as Moscow News. For example, in issues 2, 4, and 8, 1990, A they had articles on Canada with informa- ton that was blatantly false. Vladimir Zhi- ‘ormisky used as his source Ilya Gerol (can you believe this?), a Soviet emigre who, if memory serves correctly, used to write for ‘he Province. He is now foreign editor of the Ottawa Citizen but as I recall he was (is?) || Utopian reports on ‘West ‘unbelievable’ ing a few hours a day or in thesummer.” No mention of student loans that take years to pay off. In all fairness Soloveichik’s report was more balanced than those on Canada, but he still did not go to a poorer university in the deep south. Such articles do a great disservice to those of us in this country who have worked and are working hard to improve social services for all. Possibly Soviet journalists are trying so hard to improve the system that they are going to the other extreme of eulogising capitalism, but I think we should let them know that they are not doing the left any service by such articles. Renie D. McCallum Courtenay No freedom — Soviet wea tat SOVIET PERIODICALS ... some writers tend to eulogise capitalism. .. Literature OF THE SOVIET PRESS a & te fancies : oa . Why run the ‘Power Base’ letters? Since these LCUC deadheads don’t have the principles of democracy and union solidarity at heart, they cling to power and split postal workers at the worst possible time, during contract negotiations. Your paper continues to print the distortions and outright lies of self-serving unprincipled sore losers. Here’s an idea: why not start a new feature, “Reactionaries Talk Back” or | “Fascist Forum.” You could highlight the views of REAL Women or turn your read- ers on to some of the good points of racism. a, 4 Teactionary anti-Soviet. Some “May Day unity!” I was disgusted to see yet another showpiece of blithering fiction in your newspaper from the so-called “LCUC Power Base.” This time you really have taken glasnost too far with a letter from “alternate business agent” (get serious) Ken Doubt, the hack who inspired the saying, “When in doubt, don’t ask Ken.” It’s too bad you never read any of his previous “reactionary, — red-baiting, “anti-~ unionist drivel — maybe you wouldn’t have given him space ina “labour” paper to simple one. LCUC national officers pulled out of a merger agreement with CUP W (for reasons no one in the “power base” can clearly explain or justify), forcing a winner- take-all representation vote. Thousands of LCUC members didn’t bother to vote and we lost — CUPW became our new union. This wasn’t Coke versus Pepsi; winner take all means winner take all! Many former LCUC shop stewards and execu- tives respected the democratic results and joined CUPW. I certainly had no problem i He made such statements as “Quebec Was a backward province without legal | Tights;” “a minister was kidnapped and Killed, a British diplomat was killed” (empha- | SIS mine); racism is unknown in Canada, / 0ur medical services are superb, and so on. __ Iwas so enraged I wrote a 2 page letter 0 New Times. Why in God’s name would __| they use Gerol as a source? Why notat least then interview someone on the left to give a / balanced report? _ In Issue 2 was an article by their educa- tion expert Simon Soloveichik entitled, “I 7) §0 to an American University.” He went to ' Pullman — an excellent small university in | aliberal state. He brushed aside the fact that Working class students have to work to pay fees: “A student can earn enough to pay for education and other expenses by work- slander the CUPW. (Note People and Issues, Tribune, May 14 — Ed.). I was a mail service courier for nearly 14 years and an LCUC shop steward during the past eight years. I resigned from Canada Post Corpse on May Day. The divisive ongoing tantrums by former LCUC “‘lead- ers” have. become boring but the story is a becoming involved in CUPW — no one told me what to think or what to believe. Shop stewards remained in office. But some disgruntled, soon to be unemployed busi- ness agents organized a ‘“‘power base,” seized the former members’ assets and began a raid. CUPW demanded solidarity; the “power base” demanded, well, power. I didn’t subscribe to the Tribune to read anti-unionist garbage — I can just buy The Province. You can scratch my name off your subscription list. Like the LCUC “power base” you are just another special interest group competing for my bucks. William Whitmeyer | By GERRY VAN HOUTEN The unification of Germany has impli- cations ranging far beyond the borders of _the Federal Republic and the GDR. The unification of Germany is not simply a question for the two Germanys, but also the four principal war-time allies — the United States, Soviet Union, Great Britain and France — which defeated Germany in 1945. That was the basis of the 2 + 4 formula of German unification worked Out in Ottawa earlier this year. _ The issue being debated is whether a unified Germany should belong to NATO. Up to now, the U.S. ‘and its NATO allies have insisted that a united Germany be a member of the Western _ military alliance. This position is strongly supported =by:,.the Kohl government as well. ae extension of NATO’s so-called defense line to the Polish. border — a’ border which Chancellor Kohl’s government . _tefuses to unequivocally recognize. The Soviet Union, quite naturally, opposes a reunited Germany’s inclusion in a military bloc that is hostile to it. It wants | aneutral and demilitarized Germany. ° : : In practical terms, this would mean the Public polls have indicated that a large majority of Germans in both the East and West also want a neutral, demilitarized and peaceful nation. In short, the Soviet position corresponds with the will of the majority of Germans and together they would appear to constitute a formidable force of public sentiment and bargaining power. In order to enjoy the best of both worlds — to partially satisfy the will of the German people and to partially meet the security concerns of the Soviet Union, some are suggesting a united Germany belong to both alliances, a suggestion that has been rejected out of hand by the U.S. and other NATO powers. Still others, such as West German For- eign Minister Genscher, are proposing that Soviet troops remain in the eastern part of a united Germany and NATO be confined to the Western part. _. Both proposals, and the many varia- tions on them, all amount to pulling the GDR out of the Warsaw Pact while keep- ing a united Germany in NATO. Given ~ that Soviet troops are also being fully with- drawn, from Hungary and Czechoslova- kia, and since there are already no Soviet troops in either Bulgaria and Romania, the withdrawal of the GDR will amount to the collapse of the Warsaw Pact. Only Poland wants to maintain a Soviet military presence on its territory. Poles of whatever political stripe are worried that “anschluss” of the GDR to the FRG may whet revanchist appetites to the point that they demand the return of former German territories that are now a part of Poland. Also Poland, even with a Solidarity government, has a vested interest in main- taining Soviet supply lines to the GDR: However, Bush and Kohl are also faced with a problem if they insist on a united Germany’s inclusion in NATO — and not just from the Soviet Union. There is a growing sentiment among many Europeans — including a number of European governments — that NATO has to do some “new thinking.” Its present military stance is serving only to confirm the accu- sations of NATO critics that the Western alliance is what it has always been accused of being — an aggressive military bloc whose goal is the destruction of socialism and the Soviet Union. Public opinion in Europe in favour of reducing NATO’s military role and divert- ing expenditures from military to civilian sectors of the economy has grown so Polls shows Germans want neutral nation strong of late that a number of countries have begun to sharply curtail their defence expenditures. Belgium, for example, intends to with- draw all its troops currently stationed in West Germany. Even the United States has been forced — albeit reluctantly and only ina very limited way — to recognize the new reality. The U.S. intends to with- draw 15,000 troops as a cost-cutting mea- sure and has bowed to the demand of the German people not to replace the aging Lance short-range missiles currently on German soil. It is becoming very hard for NATO to maintain the image of an “enemy,” hostile Soviet Union — especially when Soviet troops are being withdrawn all over East- ern Europe, when the Warsaw Pact is on the verge of collapse and when it is becom- ing clear to the entire world that the Soviet Union has, in the last five years, bent over backwards to demonstrate its desire to put its relations with the West on a genuinely peaceful footing. Only time will tell what Europe’s future military configuration will be. The practi- cal expression of the will of the people of Europe, especially Germans, will be deci- sive. Pacific Tribune, May 21, 1990 « 5 we” am