Be

S —ECCLES, Br. Daily Worker
‘Tm afraid we’re right up it!”

Two goals --one aim

Se latest Soviet proposal for

a limited “onsite” inspection
of nuclear test installations, not
only inspires the hopes of millions
of people the world over that at
last a formula has been found
upon which mutual agreement to-
ward an effective nuclear test:
ban can be achieved, but greatly
narrows the ground for repeated
US. “rejections” of Soviet initia-
tive towards this universally de-
sired goal.

“On site” inspection by com-
petent teams, aided in other areas
by scientific “black box” checks
on nuclear explosions, can effec-
tively eliminate all the trumped-
up pretexts and specious argu-
ments for “distrust,” and work to-
wards the elimination of the nu-
clear test horror, regardless of the
powers engaging in this immoral
and infamous experiment.

Needless to say, such an agree-
ment effected between the U.S.
and the USSR to end nuclear tests,
would go a long’ way towards a
complete cessation of all testing.

This is what the world has
been eagerly waiting and hoping
for. The possibility of a “break-
through” for a decisive ban on nu-
clear tests is now realizable. The
world must not allow it to be again
rejected.

In this the people of Canada
have a dual responsibility. To give

Pacific Tribune
Editor — TOM. McEWEN
Associate Editor—MAURICE RUSE
Business Mgr.—OXANA BIGELOW
Published weekly at: -

Room 6 — 426 Main Street
Vancouver 4, B.C.

Phone MUtual 5-5288
Subscription Rates:
Canadian and Commonwealth coun-
tries (except Australia): $4.00 one
year. Australia, United States and
all other countries: $5.00 one yer.

Authorized as second class raail by
the Post Office Department, Ottawa
and for payment of postage in cash.

active support to Soviet initiative
for “on site” inspection leading
towards an effective test ban; and,
despite Liberal leader Pearson’s
about-face in support of U.S.-
triggered nuclear weapons for
Canada, or Tory double-talk and
evasion to cover up a like betrayal,
to insist there be no nuclear
weapons in Canada or in the hands
of Canadian forces abroad. For
survival from nuclear disaster the
demand for an effective test ban
and “no nuclear arms for Canada”
are inseperable.

Ba HERING “cre in the

European Common Market
(ECM) appears to be headed for
the rocks. All the abject wheed-
ling, haggling and pleading of
Tory MacmillAn and company to.

5. get into ECM, despite strong and

growing opposition of the British
people, has now been rudely shat-
tered by Charles De Gaulle’s Na-
poleonic “Non.”

Even with West Germany’s neo-
fascist Adenauer hotfooting it to
Paris to “assist” Macmillan crash
the ECM gate, it is still “Non”
from “chef supreme” De Gaulle.
Back in London the much beflap-
ed Macmillan and his Tory cohorts -
are hoping for a “miracle” to help
them through the ECM door?

In the tight ECM trade “com-
munity” envisioned by De Gaulle
and Adenauer, there is no room
for Britain’s “Commonwealth and
Empire” trade and tariff prefer-
ences. For Britain the choice is
either ECM or the Commonwealth,
but not both.

The efforts (and conspiracies)
of U.S. imperialism to pressure
Britain into ECM are greatly
augmented by De Gaulle’s brusque
“Non.” It gives Brittannia a “last
chance” to get into ECM, but to
leave her Commonwealth family
and her haggling on the doorstep
—outside. There it can be handily
picked up, (or what hasn’t already
been grabbed off) by the Penta-
gon “empire builders.” During the
Kennedy--Macmillan Bahamas de-
skybolting conference it is report-
ed that Kennedy urged upon Mac
to “water-down” (British Com-
monwealth “conditions” to facili-
tate ECM entry?

ECM 'Non’ for Mac

Whatever the ultimate of De
Gaulle’s dictatorial “Non” one
salutory lesson for Britain and
the Commonwealth countries em-
erges, and specifically for Can-
ada; forget ECM and its Paris-
Bonn-Washington architects, and
strike out to win the vast mar-
kets readily available in the Social-
ist and emerging anti-colonial
world. That way, and not through
the media of cold-war trade blocs
such as ECM, lies a much greater
prosperity for the peoples.

British labor, the powerful labor
and peoples’ movements in the
Commonwealth countries, Cana-
dian labor; all have emphasized
that fact, but so far to little or
no avail.

Opposition to Britain’s entry
into ECM by the British people
has steadily mounted during the
past month, in many instances
‘cutting across party lines. Along
with this opposition has grown a
national indignation at the Mac-
millan government haggling and
begging for entry. This, in the
opinion of a wide ‘section of the
people, has reduced Britain’s pres-
tege and dignity to zero.

Now with De Gaulle’s impervi-
ous “Non,” Kennedy’s “watering-
down” sedative, and Adenauer’s
Munichized “intercession” on be-
half of Britain’s strangulation in
ECM, the Bard of Avon’s lines are
highly appropriate to a Tory prime
minister officiating at the burial
of an “empire”;

“Are all thy conquests, glories,

triumphs, spoils

Shrunk to this small measure?”

Tom
McEwen

y courtesy of the government of
France, Leonardo da Vinci’s

456-year-old painting, the Mona
Lisa has come to Washington, D.C.
on a brief visit. President Kennedy
made an appropriate speech of wel-
come to the distinguished visitor,
telling her in so many words that
her visit would indeed ‘be an in-
spiration in the development of our
own American culture’ before
turning her over to the hoi poloi.

Some observers have commented
that the president was careful to
avoid looking at the Mona Lisa
during his welcoming address. That
is understandable. Her centuries-
old smile can be truly disconcerting
under certain circumstances.

However, it would appear the
“inspiration” the president spoke
of got into high gear just as soon
as official ceremonies were con-
cluded. Scores of painters, daubers,
abstractionists and other assorted
artists got busy with their brushes,
pencils, etc., doing their own Mona
Lisas from Leonardo’s Immortal.
_Not a few, it is reported, netted a
tidy profit on the spot for their
artistic endeavours.

Then came the writers and press

hawks, the lads who never miss a
trick when there’s ‘inspiration’
around, scrambling for their type-
writers to bang out reams of ‘im-
pressions”, comments, speculations
and vulgarities.

That Mona Lisa smile, they ask-
ed, what is it? Is it a smile of pity,
of concealed humor, of cynicism,
or mebby a smile that conceals an
“inner” sorrow without tears? It
could be any or all of these human
emotions. The Mona Lisa smile
portrays many emotions to many
people. To put it another way,
when man’s conscience looks at
him through the “inner’’ smile of
the Mona Lisa, he doesn’t always
enjoy or appreciate what he sees?

We once visited her in the Paris
Louvre and came away with the
feeling, so aptly expressed by one
American viewer, that “she looked
like to me she was looking at me
every which way I went’. Perhaps
that is why Leonardo da Vinci
gave his great masterpiece that in-
scrutable smile on the face of a
Woman, who not only looks at you,
but “through” you. A smile which
can express the gentle serenity of
a Mother thinking of the future
happiness of her firstborn in an
atom bomb free world, or a smile
of pity for a world verging on mad-
ness? No lack of “inspiration” for
the boys at the typewriters.

Then the American picture mag-
azines, “alerted” by Kennedy’s
boost for ‘culture’ swung into
high gear. The millionaire Henry
Luce magazine Life (January 4-63)
topped all-comers by giving the

Mona Lisa a real USA “cultural”
whirl.

Life had the Mona Lisa dressed
up in the high-stepping under-
things of the “Can-Can” era, typi-
cally characteristic of the Ameri-
can stage. This garbage unit of U.S.
journalism also featured a full-page
illustration of its own ‘Mona Lisa”,
a typical female of the New York
streets, attired in an atomic-age
hair-do, a saucy ‘‘come-on’’ wink,
and a suggestive “smile”,

Since Life publications are often
touted as having “sources close
to the government’, it sure gave
the Mona Lisa a real Orange Bowl
build-up in its interpretation of
President Kennedy’s call for “cul-
ture”. One wonders why Life slip-
ped up by not having the Mona
Lisa do a turn or two at “rock ’n
roll”, the “twist” or other of the
calithyapian rumbles of Yankee
“culture”. Perhaps an_ editorial
oversight?

Should de Gaulle decide to recall
his magnificent cultural ambassa-
dor from her U.S. safari ahead of
schedule, we would humbly sug-
gest that the Statue of Liberty ac-
company her, since both are ob-
viously “foreign” to a “culture”
which holds the McCarran Act as
the highest expression of ‘free-
dom”, and a well-designed $-sign
the highest epitome of its ‘cul-
ture’”’.

No wonder the Mona Lisa
wears an “inner” smile. It is her
indestructable defense against the
guffaws of ‘cultural’ ignoramus-
ses.

Jan. 25, 1962—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Page 4