Prime Minister Clark has
committed Canada to U.S.
President Carter’s foreign
policy doctrine of which
the centrepiece is: the Un-
ited States will take all
measures necessary in-
cluding force wherever
U.S. national interests dic-
tate, with the stress on U.S.
oil interests.

That policy, enunciated
by President Carter in his
recent State of the Union
Address to the American
people, is aimed at oon
ping détente, return to cold
war and confrontation tac-
tics, and the resort to force
in settling differences be-
tween states.

It includes the extension
of both U.S. and NATO’s
political and military juris-
diction to the Persian Gulf,
the Indian Ocean and the
Middle East area.

Guns before butter

In backing fully this
dangerous expansion of
U.S. confrontation policy
aimed at the Soviet Union
and social progress, Prime
Minister Clark stated that
Canada’s contribution to
Carter’s offensive against
détente and peaceful re-
lations between states with
differing social systems
will mean big additional

xpendi ds fi
' aa ° OF un ©:

: es pera
sonnel. This includes addi-
tional commitments to
NATO.

Clark’s latest military
commitments (a 17% in-

budget according to Presi-
dent of the Treasury Board
Stevens) will mean addi-
tional cuts in social expen-
ditures all down the line. It
will mean another sharp
increase in inflation and a
further tightening of the
job market. In other words,
guns before butter.

Afghanistan

The rationale of Carter
and Clark in embarking on
this war-creating course is
their charge of a Soviet
“invasion” of Afghanistan.
They both deny that the
Government of Afghanis-
tan requested Soviet mili-
tary assistance in combat-
ting counter-revolutionary
activity by both internal
and external forces against
the new social order estab-
lished in that country.
Their stand flies in the face
of both fact and law.

Facts:

e Afghanistan and the
USSR are sovereign states.
Both are members of the
United Nations with the
USSR a permanent member
of that body’s Security
Council.

lied in a Treaty of Friend-
ship and Mutual Assistance
including military assis-
tance in full accord with the

crease of the military

e These two states areal- -

right of each state, as stipu-
lated in the United Nation’s
charter, to individual or
collective self-defence.

e Afghanistan in accor-
dance with that Treaty cal-
led upon its ally for military
assistance in putting down
armed actions against it.
The Soviet Union re-
sponded positively to that
request.

These indisputable facts
settle the question of the
legality of Soviet inter-
vention in the Afghan
situation. They also reveal
the false nature of the pre-
tense of Soviet ‘‘invasion”’
used by the Carter Admin-
istration to scuttle detente
and heat up the cold war.

In cold war camp

Unfortunately, New
Democratic Party leader
Broadbent fully endorses

~ the cold war stance of Carter

and Clark. He would be

‘. well advised to abandon

this reckless and dangerous
course.

Liberal leader Trudeau,
while striving to maintain
the pretense of straddling
the fence in respect to the
Carter doctrine of cold war
and confrontation actually
has both feet in the cold war
camp.

It is a sad day for the
Canadian people when, in
the hope of electoral gain,
the leaders of these three
parties are prepared to play
ducks and drakes with the
very fate of Canada and her
people.

Which way Canada

The interests of Canada
and Canadians will not be
served by acting as shock
troops for U.S. imperialism.
Neither will they be served
by cancelling trade,
scientific, cultural and
sports agreements with the
Soviet Union nor by trying
to scuttle the Olympics.

A sane foreign policy

The only party in this
election that advances a
sane foreign policy posi-
tion is the Communist Par-
ty. We call for an indepen-
dent foreign policy based
on peace, detente and dis-
armament — a policy of
peaceful relations between
states with differing social
systems.

Such a policy would in-
clude support for all meas-
ures to end the arms race
based on equality of sec-
urity for all countries large
and small; respect for the
territorial integrity of all
countries; active pursuit of
ways to extend mutually
satisfactory trade, coopera-
tion, scientific, cultural and
sport exchanges with the
socialist countries; material
aid tothenewly-developing
countries.

It would include a call for
ratification of SALT Il and
an early start on negotia-
tions for SALT II on reduc-
tion of nuclear stockpiles;
reversal of Canada’s sup-
port of the U.S.-NATO de-
cision to deploy medium-
range nuclear missiles in
western Europe; Canada’s
withdrawal from NATO
and NORAD: reducing the
military budget by 50%;
cancellation of the purch-
ase of the new war planes
and use of the funds saved
for socially useful projects.

Vote
Communist

If you support such a for- ’

eign policy for Canada
make your vote count on
February 18 — vote: Com-
munist.

If there is no candidate of
the Communist Party in
your riding you can. help
Canada by actively
campaigning for such an
independent foreign poli-
cy.
A lost vote in this elec-
tion would be for policies of
cold war and confrontation.
Don’t waste your vote in the
struggle for a sane foreign
policy. Vote Communist!

Published by authority of the

- Chief Agent of the Comm

Party of Canada, January 23,
1980.

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FEBRUARY 8, 1980—Page.8

ELECTION 80

Quebec

the referendum

Recognition of Canada’s
status as a two-nation state —
French Canadian and English
Canadian — and the necessity to
draw up a made-in-Canada Con-
stitution to embody the rights of
the two nations, has long been a
part of the body of political pol-
icy of the Communist Party of
Canada.

Needless to say, the CPC takes

an active part in all debates and .

projections leading up to enshrin-
ing these concepts in Canada’s
new Constitution, in arriving at a
new act of confederation based
on equality of the two nations.

The referendum decided upon
by the Levesque government in
Quebec, is therefore a matter of
immediate concern to the CPC as
it is to the overwhelming major-
ity in Quebec and to millions of
Canadians across the land. In a
resolution adopted at its 24th
Convention in January, the
Communist Party sets out the
specifics of its response to the
wording of the Levesque re-
ferendum. It is excerpts from this
resolution which are quoted
below.

It declares at the outset: ‘‘We
are the people of Quebec-—
Against the status quo and for
fundamental change! Against
separation! For unity through na-
tional equality ina new Canadian
Confederation!”

The Quebec referedum will .

take place in May or June,
Levesque has indicated, and the
Parti Québécois intends to ask
only one question. Summed up, it
is: Are you in favor of giving the
Government of Quebec a man-
date to realize sovereignty-
association through negotiation
— yes or no?

What is new in the PQ pro-
posals, notes the Communist re-
solution, is the promise that any
change in the political status of
Quebec, resulting from the
negotiations would be submitted
to the people of Quebec in a sec-
ond referendum.

The PQ’s White Paper of

sovereignty-association calls
sovereignty ‘‘the power to levy
all taxes, to make all laws and t0
be present on the internatio

scene ...’’ Says the resolution:
*‘The Quebec Government a0
mits that this means political i-
dependence, but does not wish t0
use this word because ‘it fright
ens people’. Itewould be more
honest to say that ... the vast
majority of Québécois want
equality and the right to self-
determination, they want this
within Canada, and they reject
political independence, or sep

a :

aration.” Every poll taken in —

Quebec shows this.

By ‘‘association,” the PQ —

government says it means it
would ‘‘offer to negotiate with
the rest of Canada a treaty °
community association, whose
aim will be ... to maintain the
present Canadian economic en-
tity ... This treaty will have af
international status...”

Basing its evaluation on the
Quebec Government’s White
Paper, which aims to establish
“big, Quebec-based industrial
complexes ...’’ the Communist
resolutions states: “‘The Gov-
emment of Quebec is even now
using public funds to create
monopolies out of small and
medium-sized Francophone-
owned enterprises ...’” It wants.
to accelerate this process by con-
trolling all taxing and lawmaking,
the document asserts. -

‘*And how does the Quebec
Government intend to use its
‘presence on the international
scene’? By joining the imperialist
club as a full-fledged member, in-
cluding NATO and NORAD,

and maintaining ‘all military in-

stallations already located on its

territory’. (Quoted from the —

White Paper)

Under these circumstances,

the Communist Party convention

voiced its agreement with the.

Parti Communiste du Québec
that ‘‘it would be ‘incorrect and

Behind grain embargo’

Special to the Tribune

Joe Clark’s embargo of further
grain shipments to the Soviet
Union appears to be less than
popular among prairie farmers.
Speaking to a group of farmers in
Wetaskiwin, Alberta, Jan. 24,
National Farmers’ Union vice-
president Bill Dascavish attacked
the Tory decision.

Dascavish said he suspected
the U.S. embargo stemmed from
a concern over the prospect of
higher grain prices resulting from
increased world demand trans-
lating themselves into higher food
prices for Americans. The in-

flated value of gold, he said, made
it easier for the USSR to increase —

grain purchases abroad which
would have created upward pres-
sure on grain values.

The NFU official said that ris-
ing food prices during a presiden-
tial election created an unde-
sirable situation for politicians
like Jimmy Carter and this might
have led to a decision to impose
an embargo. “‘By agreeing to

support the embargo, the Cana- >

dian government has made Cana-
dian farmers pawns in an inter-
national game of politics,’’ Das-
cavich charged.

‘‘Meanwhile,”’ he — said,
‘‘Argentina has moved to sell
90,000 tons of linoil to the USSR

and is persuing market oppor- —

tunities for rapeseed and flax seed
in Europe.’’ The NFU has re-
quested that Canada persue an
independent policy in foreign
trade in a telegram sent to Exter-
nal Affairs Minister MacDonald.

.
}
:
4
}
.
.
.
}
}
|
|