var-mongering over G

“There is no justification for war over
Berlin’ says this professor, who was
Washington Correspondent for the
Wall Street Journal and a State
Department consultant

7, ‘€spondent for the Wall
Wteet Journal says something
Mth which working people can
tee. The exception to this is
American Professor, Fred
-4)*ner Neal, professor of In-
4, 2ational Relations and Gov-
7 ument at Claremount Gradu-
© School, in California.
ss hen? lecture on July 20, 1961,
“Pelore the Convocation class
‘4¢ the school, Professor Neal
Oke on the subject: “War and
“’ce and the Problem of Ber-
4) This lecture has now been
" hinted by Marzani and Mun-
wl Publishers in New York
al Will be available at the
“}°Ple’s Co-op Bookstore in
eouver in a few days. It
Mls for 15c.

yrbat are the qualifications
: Prof. Neal to speak on the
meee and German problem?
ies his background: From
439 to 1943 he was the Wash-
sston correspondent for. the
U Street Journal. From 1946
1948 he was State Depart-
4,% Consultant on Russian Af-
ts and Chief of Foreign Ec-

} Mic Research on Eastern
"rope,

Space does not allow the Pa-
© tribune to publish the full
4 i of the pamphlet ‘but we
J blish below some of the key
F'tacts on this vital question:
. i * * *

i t
ti

4,4 is tragically understand-
pe that we Americans are
: haurbed and perplexed about
‘}. Problem of Berlin. It is a

4 Satious problem . . . But to-

4 not very often that a cor- day, in the thermonuclear age,
: war or peace not only means

victory or defeat: war or peace
means survival or extinction

. The apparent failure of
American public leaders to un-
derstand this fact is perhaps
the greatest danger we face,
and the failure of. American
public leaders to make it clear
to our people is their most aw-
ful dereliction of duty.

ON BERLIN

“qf ET me say before going

» any furthér — and let
me say it as emphatically as I
can — that I am profoundly
convinced there is no conceiv-
able justification for consider-
ing that Berlin today rationally
involves the question of peace
or war ... The truth is that
our vital interests and our se-
curity are not involved in
Berlin and that the Russians
are not pushing us around. A
great deal of contrary talk is
coming out of Washington
these days, and this, then, be-
comes the basis for even wilder
newspaper talk. If any of this
has any other purpose than to
whip up a_ war hysteria, I
don’t know what it is.

“Just what American inter-
ests are affected by the Soviet
proposal on Berlin? To answer
this it must first be realized
that the present situation in
Berlin is highly abnormal] and
impermanent by its very na-
ture. It is absolute nonsense to
talk about this Berlin situation
—as Secretary of State Rusk

has done—as being part of a

u]

Wy,San’t see why labor shouldn’t support
TO _ after all, we do.”

Hips WReormome

merican
ermany

pas \. POST-WAR POLITICIAN" WE WAUST HAVE A STRONG ~ :
GERMANY AS ABULWARK AGAINST COMMUNISM eg
\k PRE-WAR POLITICAN THAT'S WHAT V7

TOLD THEM TOO, 010 Boy... %)

Western

ARMS : : SN

PREAWAR
LAA roars

ee

tained at all costs. It cannot
be maintained indefinitely, no
matter what the Russians do or
don’t do.

“It is no policy at all to re-
iterate that we will “stand
firm’ in such a situation. And
it is only sophistry to assert—
as President Kennedy and oth-
ers have done — that since the
United States is demanding no
change in the Berlin situation,
the issue arises only because
of Soviet trouble-making. Our
position in Berlin is untenable
militarily, diplomatically and
legally.

“The fact is that the Soviet
position on Berlin is not ex-
treme, that it has not lacked
restraint. Mr. Khrushchev has
repeated over a period of
years — at times almost plain-
tively — that he consider the
present impermanent arrange-
ment a source of instability in
Central Europe and that the
USSR attaches great interest
to a change.”

2 FATEFUL STEPS
N the first part of his lec-
ture Professor Neal dealt
with the violations of the Pots-
dam Agreement and how the
present division over Germany
arose. He said:

“By (1948) the wartime
agreements on Germany were
already, as Mr. James Warburg
says, a dead letter. The cold
war was well under way. And
the United States was commit-
ted to the idea, long propagat-
ed by men like the late James
V. Forrestal, that it was neces-
sary to build up Germany as
a military buffer to Soviet
power. T'o accomplish this, the
Western powers, under Amer-
ican leadership, took a fateful
step that changed the whole

;| complexion of the German sit-

uation. They established their
merged Western zones into a

new, seperate, independent
German state — West Ger-
many.

“Originally the rationale
for the Western powers being
in Berlin was that this was
necessary for quadripartite con-
trol and administration of Ger-
many, looking toward the uni-
fied German states with Berlin
as its capital. The Western ac-
tion in establishing a West
German state brought an
abrupt end to this rationale. As
many foresaw, the Soviet Un-

ion almost immediately follow-
ed suit and created an East

‘status quo’ that must be main- German State ..

. There were
now two German states, east
and west, one as valid and as
legal as the other .. .”

Professor Neal points out
how NATO came into being to
build a military buffer in
Europe and that the American
view was that if NATO was
to be anything it would have to
have participation by West
Germany. Consequently, says
Professor Neal:

“The Americans took the
second fateful step, beginning
—against violent opposition of
not only the USSR but many

others — the militarization of.

West Germany. The govern-
ment of Konrad Adenauer, if
not its people, were more than
willing. Secon the Soviet Union
again followed suit and mili-
tarized East Germany.”
BONN PROVOKES
EALING with the role play-
D ed by the new West Ger-

‘man government headed by

Adenauer, and after making
the point that “many people
cannot sleep when they think
of Germany,” Professor Neal
says:

“The provocative aspect of
West German policy is illustra-
ted in the altogether unwar-
ranted claim of the Adenauer
government to jurisdiction of
Berlin. It is illustrated by the
refusal to accept the Oder-
Niesse line. It is illustrated by
the inclusion in the Bonn goy-
ernment of a ‘minister of all-
German affairs’ and by West
Germany’s refusal — backed
by the United States — to rec-

ognize the East German gov-
ernment and by its use of dip-
lomatic pressure on any state
that does recognize it...

“West German policy is not
only provocative but arrogant-
ly so .. . The. West. Germans
are now calling the tune on
Berlin and are, in effect, dic-
tating American policy ...

“It is high time that Ameri-
can policy assert itself in be-
half of real American interésts,
not imagined American inter-
ests or West German interésts.
I can think of no better place
to start than for cur national
leaders to make realistic rather
than puropaganda .statements
about .the-whole issue.to the
American people.”

Canadian books
published in USSR

Soviet citizens will soon be
reading in their own language
books by the following Cana-
dian authors: Tim Buck’s “Our
Fight For Canada”; Wilson
MacDonald’s “Selected Poems”
and. Farley Mowat's “People
of the Deer.”

The last will be published
next year in a 50,000 run, ac-
cording to officials of the

Foreign Literature Publishing

House.

PASS THIS PAPER
ON TO YOUR
FRIENDS AND
WORKMATES

Canadian

Moscow News.

Soviets want peace

MOSCOW — “After my visit to Moscow, I am more
than ever convinced that the Soviet Union wanis disarma-
ment and peace just as the vast majority of people in Canada
want disarmament and peace,” declared Dr. Abraham L.
Feinberg, chairman of the Toronto Commitiee for Disarma-
ment, in a special article published in the Oci. 7 issue of

“Negotiations for settlement of basic political differences
have been the avowed aim of the Soviet Union; they are
'also the profound wish of Canada,” said Feinberg in his
article, which concludes with these words:

“The purpose of our effort is the most importani in all
history: to help mankind use the limitless power of nuclear
fission for the happiness, prosperity and well-being of every
race on earth, not for destruction and death.

“And towards that goal Canadians must work with men
and women of like minds in the Soviet Union and elsewhere,

“For the sake of future generations we are determined
to live together, noi die together.”

eenvineed

P

4
:
|
=
8