NATO defector unmasks pl

By FILS DELISLE

BERLIN — The GDR has now provided the world with documentary evidence that the U.S.-dominated NATO alliance has lied about its aims, has done everything possible to prevent disarmament, and has a detailed plan for a war of aggression against the USSR and the social- ist countries.

Though President Carter pre- tends his international crusade against the Soviet Union was triggered by Soviet military assis- tance to Afghanistan, secret NATO documents released here this past week destroy this claim completely. They show:

1) The plan to station 572 new U.S. medium-range missiles on NATO territories. As part of an arsenal with which to hit the Soviet Union, was in no way de- signed merely to achieve NATO military parity with the USSR. The stationing of the new missiles in western Europe is now essen- tial, NATO, West German and U.S. leaders claimed last De- cember, because of Soviet mili- tary superiority. The new missiles that could reach the USSR were needed, according to the NATO claim, to “‘modernize’’ NATO, to restore the military balance be- tween east and west again. But the decision to add this enormous number of nuclear missiles to the NATO arsenal was made, not last December, as claimed, but three years ago. It was decided upon secretly in 1977, and was only made public, as if it were

something new, at the end of

1979.

2) It was designed, not to re- store a military balance between eastern and western Europe, but to gain a decisive military advan- tage over the USSR and the so- cialist countries.

3) During the three years in which the new missile program was secretly being prepared, the long-standing NATO plan for military attack on the Soviet Union and the socialist countries was revised in expectation of the additional striking power NATO expected to have with its 572 new medium-range missiles.

4) The new plan for an all-out nuclear war against the socialist countries specifies the launching of nuclear missiles by NATO against more than 2,500 cities, towns and areas in the socialist countries. Two-thirds of these nuclear missiles could be aimed at the socialist countries outside the

USSR, one-third would be aimed ©

at Soviet targets all the way to the Urals. The documents containing this

information were brought to the

GDR in April by Imelda Verrept in the form of photocopies of the original NATO documents. As a secretary at NATO headquarters for 7 years, Verrept had typed hundreds of documents, includ- ing those containing details of NATO’s most secret plans for the preparation and launching of mili- tary aggression against the social- ist countries.

The authenticity of the docu- ments was indirectly confirmed by NATO itself. When Verrept first appeared on GDR television to say she had left NATO because it was preparing a war of aggres- sion and believed its plans had to be made available to the world, NATO officials declared she couldn’t possibly have had access to any secret NATO documents. But now, after she has turned over photocopies of such docu- ments to the GDR, and some have been published as photostats in Neues Deutschland, the GDR’s leading newspaper, NATO has backed down. The West German news agency, DPA, for example, confronted NATO officials in Brussels with one of the docu- ments showing that the decision to station the medium-range mis- siles in NATO countries was made, not in 1979 but in 1977. NATO officials admitted that the decision had indeed been made secretly three years ago and that Verrept’s document was authen- tic.

On the basis of this damaging admission DPA, the French news agency and other press agencies in Europe wrote that NATO had thus lied on this question.

On the basis of the photocopies of the original NATO documents which she had herself typed at the Brussels headquarters, Verrept made the point that NATO ex- perts had estimated that the addi- tion of the 572 new missiles to the NATO arsenal would make it possible for NATO to hit an addi- tional 350 military and civilian targets in the Warsaw Pact coun- tries.

On the basis of her archive of documents, a number of which she has now made public, Verrept declared: ‘‘These documents clearly show that NATO, and especially the USA and the FRG, have no interest whatsoever in an effective reduction of military confrontation in middle Europe on the basis of equal security.”’

Thus the U.S.-NATO claim that it is the socialist Warsaw Pact countries that are instigating war has been given a documented re- futation. Additional material in Verrept’s documents, with supplementary information from her, will be dealt with in a second report.

Sees cass Gaal diced cari GaN AGEN, nota Gites tIaTS a first strike capacity over the socialist countries.

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—MAY 30, 1980—Page 6

FINNLAND %

km

The above map was published in the German Democratic Republic (GDR) newspaper Horizont recent- ly. It shows some of the present imperialist anti-Soviet military measures.

1. U.S. fighter-bomber wings at “advanced bases” in the Fed- eral Republic of German (FRG), Britain and Spain.

Warsaw Pact nations issue — call for top power meeting ©

WARSAW (APN) — Rep- resentatives of the seven-member Warsaw Treaty States, following a meeting of their Political Con- sultative Committee here May 14, issued a call for the holding of a highest-level meeting of leaders of

states of all regions of the world to

take place as soon as possible. The Warsaw Pact nations con- sider such a meeting should be devoted to the problem_of remov- ing hotbeds of international ten- sions and preventing war. The call is prompted by the dangerous character of today’s international situation and, in the view of the Warsaw Pact states, a summit

meeting is one of the most reliable

ways for eliminating tension and

| promoting mutual understanding.

In a declaration also adopted at

a the conference, the seven states ‘ (Bulgaria, Hungary, the GDR,

Poland, Romania, the USSR and Czechoslovakia) called on the participants in the 1975 Helsinki Conference to gather in Warsaw

| for a conference on military de- | tente and disarmament in Europe.

They point out this decision

’ could be taken at the Madrid

meeting, scheduled for November, which is to be at- tended by participants of the Hel- sinki conference. The Warsaw Pact declaration urged measures that would ensure the success of

the Madrid meeting and said it is _

. British strategic bomber forces

French strategic missiles

U.S. aircraft carriers in the At- lantic and Mediterranean

U.S. missile submarines under NATO command ~

French missile submarines British missile submarines French aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean

Planned deployment of Persh- ing ll missiles in the FRG

© PNB wm PY BP

possible to reach agreement on practical steps on military and political aspects of European sec- urity.

These important invitations are made in a setting of an increas- ingly alarming situation in Europe especially following NATO’s de- cision to install new medium- range rockets in western Europe.

The Warsaw Pact declaration contained a list of concrete prop- osals to the West including an ag-

‘specified in the Final Act of Hel

- discussed with a view to scalii

10. Planned Cruise missile bases — in the FRG, Belgium, the Netherlands, Britain and Italy

11. Future FRG Tornado naval fighter bombers

12. Pershing | missiles currentifl deployed in the FRG =

The thin broken lines denote the — range of individual weapons s tems, the bolder broken line t range of the Pershing 1s.

reement that either side not ime crease troop strength in are

4

sinki. They called on NATO put forward: its proposals whic along with their own, could be—

down tensions. The Warsaw Pact meeting

founding on May 14, 1955 in = sponse to the U.S. -inspi E NATO alliance formed six yean earlier on April 4,:1949.

Weapon systems

Long-range Medium-range missiles

Tactical nuclear arms Intercontinental missiles (ICBM’s) Nuclear submarines

Solid-fuel powered ICBM’s Multiple re-entry vehicles (MRV’s) Multiple individually targetable re-entry vehicles (MIRV’s)

- Cruise missiles, latest generation

‘Who Arnts First? Who Catches Up?

Major arms innovations of the USA and USSR since 1945

Submarine-launched missiles (SLBM’s)

Manoevrable re-entry vehicles (MARV’s)

Year of introduction

USA _— USSR 1946 1950 1953 1954 1953 1957 1953 1959 1955 1956 1955 1957 1956 1962 1959 1968 1962 1969 1964 1972 1970 1975 1976 — 1965 —