The USSR Wants Peace!

JOSEPH STALIN
“ ... for collective security
through whatever forms are
feasible and realistic.”

By JOHN STUART

T is important at this time to
outline Soviet foreign nolicy
in terms of a few questions
which have been asked repeat-
ediy in past months. The -ques-
tions themselves reveal a mixture
of hostility and friendship. The
hostility comes from a failure to
grasp the essence of Soviet di-
plomacy, and the friendship from
@ knowledge that without Soviet
eooperation peace becomes @
mirage in an atomic desert.

Revolution ? 5

DO THE SOVIETS WANT TO
BOLSHEVIZE THE WORLD?

HIS question creaks with age.

it is founded on a myth which
alleges a “menacing Red im-
perialism” eager to expand all
Over Hiurope and Asia. But in
an interview in 1936 Stalin said:
“We Marxists believe that revo-
lution will occur in other coun-
tries as well. But it will come
at a time when it is considered
possible or necessary by the
revolutionaries in those countries.
Export of revolution is nonsense.
Each country, if it so desires will
make its Own revolution, and
if no such desire exists, no revo-
lution will occur.”

Quite clearly, the Soviet lead-
er insists that Socialism will
come early to those whe want
it and it will come primarily as
@ result of internal conditions
and not because the USSR wills
it.

The bogey of Soviet expansion
also falls flat in view of the So-
viet territory available to the
Soviet people. Their own land,
enormously rich in resources
occupies almost haif of Europe
and Asia. It is almost two and
a half times the size of Canada.
But more important, there is no
individual or class to profit from
imperialist expansionism.

All the economic factors that
@rive the capitalist states to ag-
gression, territorial aggrandize-
ment, and the conquest of mar-
‘kets, have been eliminated by the
| Socialist system. It has no need
'to export capital. It does not
need colonies.’ It has no one who
| profits from the manufacture of
armaments.

Soviet foreign policy seeks universal peace because it
has nothing to gain from war and because it needs

It does not neea all these
things because the Soviet mar-
ket, unlike the capitalist home
market is insatiable. Consump;
tion keeps pace with produc-
tion—a pace determined by eco=z
nomic planning. As production
inereases along with the increase
in the output of labor, prices are
lowered and wages:raised so that
the perennial curse of capitalism
in peace time—overproduction—
is unheard of in the USSR...

Aggression ?

BUT ISNT THE USSR PUSHING
SMALL NATIONS AROUND,

- EVEN LF rr DOES NOT

WANT WAR? :

HIS again is a myth. In ac-
tuality the Soviet Union itself
is a federation of many nations,
mostly small, and national
groups. Hrom the very begin-
ning, Soviet policy has mirrored
the -principle of self-determina-
tion of all peoples whether they
be Soviet or non-Soviet.

The Soviets gave Finland its
independence—the same Finland
that was later to become an Axis
partner in a war against the
USSR. It was Soviet help that
put Turkey on its feet at the
close of World War I. And when
China, not a small nation physi-
cally but small in terms of pro-
ductive and economic power, was
being fed to the Japanese in
Washington and London, it was
Moscow that came to her assist-
ance.

At the opening session of the
UNC in London it was the Soviet
delegate, Andrei Vyshinsky, who
defended the rights of Greece, In-
donesia, Syria and MGebanon
against the oppressive policies of
Great Britain and her supporter,
the United States.

if the USSR has any design on
small nations, it is the design of
defending their independence by
making them independent in
fact through encouraging the de-
velopment of their resources, the
building of their labor movement,

"and the active participation in the

life of these countries of all the
democratic forees. It is these
forces which will keep their gov-
ernments from becoming pawns
in the imperialist game of power
politics.

While some of the small nations
are labelled “independent” they
have over the years been nothing
but commercial colonies of the
great imperialist powers which
have held them in political and
economic bondage.

itself is an excellent ex-
ample. Ft has permitted itself to
be drawn into anti-Soviet in-
trigue and anti-Soviet military
“adventures even though the
USSR through a treaty in 1921
renouned all Russian rights and

iran

claims in Iran which had been .

enforced by Czarism.

The Soviet interest in Iran is
to prevent that country from,
again becoming a place d’armes
against Soviet territory. The
United States would not tolerate
the hostile military apparatus of
a foreign country in Mexico. The
USSR will not tolerate such a
development in Iran.

As for the Iranian oil conces-
Sions, the Soviet technical de-
velopments wili not only increase
Iranian wealth but help provide
her with an improved economy.

“PACIFIC TRIBUNE — PAGE 12

Militarism ? :
IF THE USSR REALLY WANTS
PEACE, WHY IS IT
MAINTAINING A POWERFUL
ARMY?

T is undeniably true that the

Soviet government is main-
taining a strong army, urging
military leaders to perfect them-
selves in military science. But
an army is an instrument of po;
litical policy; by itself an army
does not make for war. No mat-

ter how large an army the USSR
might maintain, it would not be
an aggressive force for the fun-
“damental reason that the USSR
is a non-imperialist, non-aggres-
Sive state.

imperialism,

War has its roots in
in capitalist crisis,

V. MOLOTOV

Soviet Foreign Minister

~in the inability of capitalism to

solve its market problems.

In the capitalist world armies
are maintained and armaments
perfected for the purpose of eco-
nomic aggrandizement. And war
itself is “one measure by which
capitalism seeks temporarily to
overcome some of its most har-
rowing difficulties.

The Soviet people know this
as well as they know the name
oef- their own prime minister:
And they also know that since
the day they began to rule them-
selves, imperialism has been hos-
tile toward their state and has
warred against it in a dozen dif-
ferent ways.

The USSR has been invaded
at one time or another by the
armies of France, Great Bri-
tain, the United States, Japan,
italy, China, Spain, Germany,
Latvia, Austria, Canada, Fin-
land, Romania, Serbia and Hun-
gary.

England alone spent close to
$500,000,000 in its efforts to de—-
stroy the Soviets. Soviet offi-
cials abroad have been assassin-
ated, their offices raided. Him-
bargoes have been placed on So-

viet trade and attempts have

been made to blockade her.
Documents have been forged to
damage Soviet international
standing. Thousands of news-

papers and hundreds of books
have maligned her.

All this has happened not over
centuries but in a short span of
28 years. And so long as the
Soviet state feels imperiled by
imperialism it will take every
measure in terms of foreign and
military policy to safeguard her
integrity.

This Red Army officer has something to smile about. Back
to the ways of peace and the realization of the first post-
war Five Year Plan of Socialist reconstruction, which will
bring happiness and prosperity to the Soviet people.

peace to construct and reconstruct.

Soviet foreign policy seeks uni-
versal peace because it has noth-
ing to gain from war and be—
cause it needs peace to construct
and reconstruct. And as the
citadel of world peace, it attracts
all forces in every country which
have also nothing to gain from
war—particularly the working
classes and their allies.

it is, therefore, the summit of

falsehood to say, as the enemies -
of the USSR do, that those who
support the Soviet peace policy
are. disloyal to their native lands
and are acting as “Soviet agents.”
If the United States and Cansda
were pursuing a consistent peace
policy, we would look with amaze-
ment at other countries which
charged their citizens with a
lack of patriotism because they
Sought the same peace policies
for themselves.

Objective =
WHAT THEN IS SOVIET
FOREIGN POLICY?

‘hee aim of Soviet diplomacy
is to prevent dangers by an-
ticipating them. In the pursuit
of peace it takes advantage of
every situation by estimating
trends and currents among states
and their inner class relations. So-
viet policy is also based on its
national needs and national inter-
ests, and because it is a workers’
state those interests and needs
never collide with those of the
workings masses anywhere.

The objectives of Soviet for-
eign policy can be listed easily:

@) To prevent the reestablish-
ment of a new anti-Soviet “iron
curtain” of buffer states. This is
an intrinsic part of the Soviet
quest for security and lies be—
hind its persistent demand for
friendly governments contiguous
to its territory.

(2 To exterminate fascism
completely and to prevent its
rise again, particularly in Ger
many and Japan, by encouraging
and supporting the development
of people's economic and politi-
cal democracies in Europe and
the Far Fast.

(3) To aid the freedom and in-
dependence movements of all
colonial peoples. This is part
and parcel of the Soviets’ insist
ence on the right to self-deter-
mination and the fullest expres-
sion of the free will of alli peo-
ples.

(4) To demand the equality of
all nations as their right, for it
is only in this way that the USSR
can achieve equality for itself
and play a decisive role in inter-
national affairs equal to her
position.

(5) Te prevent the formation
of a new imperialist front
against herself by preventing the
establishment of bloes either on

a regional, continental or world
Seale.

(6) To fight for the unity of

the Big Three and the fulfill-~

‘ment of all agreements to which

they have jointly committed
themselves.
(8)To support the cause of

its search for

peace and security.

world labor in

(9) To fight for collective se

curity through whatever forms
are feasible and realistic.

G0) To remain militarily
strong and politically vigilant.

ERIDAY, APRIL 26, 1946