: ‘ : 4 i FORMER DEPUTY COMMANDER OF NATO WARNS Nino Pasti, a former Deputy Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, charges in this interview with the Italian journal Paese Sera that the United States is pre- paring to invade territories of the War- saw Pact states. Pasti analyses the nuc- lear strengths of both NATO and the Warsaw Pact in Europe and places the responsibility for the present escalation of tensions squarely on the U.S. Q. Joseph Luns, Secretary-General of NATO, stated in one of his interviews that NATO has no intention of extending its geographic borders, but if a danger arises in other regions vital to the interests ofthe West, then individual NATO countries — the United States, Britain, France, and, possibly, Italy or others — may take con- crete action in these regions, without in- volving in it the Atlantic alliance as a whole. What do you say to this? A. NATO is an alliance of sovereign States. This means that each Atlantic country should act according to its own interests. As is generally known, Nor- way and Denmark are reluctant to have atomic weapons on their territories in times of peace. Belgium and Holland have put off their decision'on the station- ing of ‘‘Euromissiles’’ on their ter- ritories. Chancellor Schmidt, despite crude and malicious pressure on the part of the United States, went to Moscow to resume talks on ‘‘Euromissiles.’’ The British Labor Party has decided, in case of its return to power, to cancel the deci- sion of the deployment of ‘‘Euro- missiles”’ on the territory of that country. As for Italy, which is a domain of the United States, it is abiding by the deci- sions of the latter country with slavish humbleness. Naturally, if a danger arose to Italian interests outside the confines of NATO, then Italy would not only have _the right, but also the duty to protect its interests. But it is necessary to find out who is threatening Italian interests. The U.S. decision to become the sole guardian of oil-producing regions and routes of oil transportation shows a clearly onesided approach to the prob- lem: After all, all the countries of the world are interested in oil. Therefore, it would be a constructive suggestion to try to achieve a political agreement, and not a military one, between the oil producing countries, countries interested in the transportation of oil, and consumer — countries. Only in this way it is possible to give reliable guarantees for the deliv- ery of oil, and this means for the develop- ing countries as well. Hence, it is pre- cisely the United States, with its unilat- eral actions, which is putting oil in danger. It is doing this in order to keep the Soviet Union from a solution of this question, just as it did in connection with the Arab-Israeli conflict, which resulted in the failed Camp David treaty. Q. Preliminary talks got under way in Geneva on Oct. 14 between the United States and the Soviet Union on the limita- tion of medium-range nuclear arms. Luns has expressed regret apropos the “bad example’ shown by Belgium and Hol- land, who have not yet spoken in favor of deployment of “Euromissiles.’’ But there have been many initiatives, both from the Western and Eastern sides with the aim of solving this problem. Is Luns doing the right thing by raising his voice and “‘bar- gaining’’ on the eve of the talks, in condi- tions when peace is already jeopardized? A. The good example shown by Bel- gium and Holland, as well as by Norway and Denmark, and the actions of West Recent Canadian demonstration condemns the decision to employ first strike wea- pons in Europe. Nino Pasti, a former supreme commander of NATO states in this . interview that these weapons give a dangerous lead to U.S. nuclear superiority. Germany and the British Labor Party all testify to understanding of the danger contained in the deployment of ‘‘Euro- missiles.” These are strategic arms, which will enhance the already consider- able strategic superiority of the United States. The stationing of ‘“‘Euromissiles”’ makes a ‘‘limited’’ nuclear war more possible and much nearer: President Carter’s recent directive, the so-called directive no. 59, is perfectly clear. If the Soviet Union were to knock out U.S. ground missiles with a surprise attack, the United States would preserve the capability of destroying military and political centres of the USSR, all its armed forces and industrial enterprises required for the build-up of a military potential. One need ey a military ex- pert to realize that, if the United States is capable of wiping out the Soviet military potential with one surprise blow, Then it can deliver this blow before being hit itself by a surprise blow. To use military terminology, it is a first strike against the Soviet Union. The United States has today twice as many strategic nuclear warheads as the Soviet Union. It is also making 200 mobile MX missiles, and the newest Tri- _dent submarines, and has putin an order for more than 3,000 Cruise missiles.. These are an especially dangerous weapon since they can hit targets with pinpoint accuracy, and by flying so low to the ground, can get by Soviet radar systems undetected. In this situation, particularly alarming significance is ac- quired by the United States refusal to ratify the SALT-II treaty, that is, refusal of strategic balance of forces with the Soviet Union, as well as the imposition on Europe of the decision on deployment of ‘‘Euromissiles,’’ which will increase the United States nuclear strategic superiority over the Soviet Union. We shall make a note, in brackets, of the fact that all these U.S. decisions are not at all connected with the Afghan is- sue. They were adopted much earlier than the coming of the Russians to Af- ghanistan to prevent the CIA from en- gineering a Chilean-type coup there. Similar disproportions (NATO is much stronger than the Warsaw Treaty organization) also exist in the field of conventional arms and in military budgets. For instance, the United States has planned, for the next five years, to. spend more than one trillion dollars, that is $10,000,000-million, on defence needs. The question facing Italy is not what our armed forces will do in the event of an attack by the Warsaw Treaty nations, since this is a fantastic question ad- vanced by journalists who have never deeply studied the given problem, but what the Italian armed forces will do -when the United States decides to invade the territory of Warsaw Treaty coun- tries, since the United States is definitely getting ready for such an invasion. (APN) Twice out on a mission of peace By ALEX FORBES In 1937 I eS: by sea to France and then on foot over the Pyrenees to Spain. My mis- sion? Peace. Just recently I journeyed again, this time by air, to Sofia, Bulgaria. My mission? Peace. I was a delegate from the Canadian Section of the Veterans of the International Brigades to the World Parliament of the Peoples for Peace, held in Sofia from September 23-27, 1980. — I was part of a delegation of 25 from English- speaking Canada and 12 from French-speaking Canada. Those Interbrigadistas who are reading this will most likely recall our warm and enthusias- tic welcome when we arrived in Spain. The wel- come that we received when our delegation arrived in Sofia was no less warm and enthusiastic. The wonderful and generous people of Bulgaria took us to their hearts and housed and fed us so that we could participate in the work of this very important conference. Official copies of the proceedings will be available soon and I am anticipating their arrival as impatiently as the rest of you. Was the mission to Spain a failure? I do not think so. The 1,200 Canadians who volunteered for the International Brigades had the support of hundreds of thousands of other Canadians from all walks of life. The majority of mankind supported the Spanish Republic but reactionary governments thwarted their desire for the victory of democracy in Spain. Instead of massive aid from these PACIFIC TRIBUNE—NOV. 14, 1980—Page 6 A MACPAP IN BULGARIA governments we saw the farce of non-intervention and of course, later, the defeat of the Spanish Re-. public. However, in the three years that the Spanish Republic continued its resistance the political cli- mate in the world had changed in favor of the anti-fascist forces. By 1939 Hitler had proved to the world that he was an outlaw and that he would have to be disarmed. In 1941 we saw the formation of the anti-Hitler coalition. This coalition made the defeat of Nazi Germany, fascist Italy and militar- istic Japan inevitable. This is exactly what hap- pened in 1945 with the unconditional surrender of the forces of the Berlin-Rome-Tokyo Axis. Re- sistance, struggle, is always worthwhile and it was especially worthwhile in Spain. We arrived in Sofia late at night. The next morn- ing when we got up the sun was shining and it was shining in a political sénse. Many of the reactionary governments who had done nothing to assist the Spanish Republic and thus paved the way for World War II had passed into oblivion. Take the case of Bulgaria. From 1923 to 1944 it suffered under a bloodthirsty fascist regime. Gangs of stormtroopers would wipe out whole villages ‘be- cause the regime thought that resistance could come from that direction. Today Bulgaria is a free, prosperous, (believe me on this point, I was there) member of the social- ist community. The schools, colleges and univer- sities are open to all. They have free medicine and jobs for all who seek work. They have a govern- ment that is willing to spend vast sums of money to promote peace. How different from the fascist gang who ruled Bulgaria prior to 1944! Should I lecture you on the danger of nuclear war? I do not think that that is necessary. You understand this danger every bit as well as I da. Let me just say that I was very proud to represent our organization at this conference. Comrades, I bring you greetings from the Bulga- rian Veterans of the International Brigades. Their ranks have been sadly depleted by injuries suffered in Spain and the Resistance and, of course, the passage of time. The Bulgarian comrades, evi- dently with the approval of their government, have awarded our organization the Order of Georgi Di- mitrov. Because of the nature of this Order, it has to be awarded to an individual so the documents are made out in my name. When I accepted Order, I accepted it on behalf of all of us. Com- rades, this is indeed a very high honor. This report by a veteran of the Mackenzie- Papineau Battalion was originally prepared for the Bulletin of the Veterans of the International Brigade, produced in Vancouver.