War Capitalism

Scan page 9

"It is a treaty of alliance within the framework of the UN Charter for the defence of a of 1952. launched a campaign aimed "Cuba, it is true, is outside the NATO area, but the events which took place on the island confirmed the fact that through the commitments of its members, the Alliance is inevitably involved in the consequences of political events occurring outside its territory."

NATO publication "Facts and Figures"' states of. Eastern Europe. Capitalist participation in the coalition governments was eliminated; remaining privately owned industries were taken over; Communist ¡Parties were purged and expanded, more or less forcibly incorporating the Social Democratic parties; and the state machinery was placed firmly in their hands under the watchful eyes of the Red Army.

The Marshall Plan was met by the formation of the Cominform - designed to bind together Stalinist leaders in East and West Europe.

Build up

And later the expansion of NATO in 1955 to include West Germany was followed immediately by the formation of the Warsaw Pact.

Indeed at each stage it has been the initiative of the imperialists to build up the aggressive potential of NATO that has prompted a new escalation:

In 1950 in the midst of the Korean war, NATO leaders met and agreed a programme for a substantial military build-up. Its "forward strategy" laid down that:

"Any aggression must be resisted as far to the East as possible in order to ersure the defence of all the European member countries.

"Such a strategy however demanded forces far exceeding those available to NATO way of life ..

NATO publication "Facts at the time . Military strength would have to be built up and defence plans revised ..

(NATO: Facts and Figures)

Under: such US prompting and with US subsidies and loans, European governments were persuaded to agree to an integrated defence force, the establishment of a Supreme Headquarters in Europe and the appointment of Eisenhower as Supreme Allied Commander.

The build-up of troops was dramatic: from 14 divisions in Europe in 1950 to 50 divisions by the end NATO's commitment to such a build-up was underlined when in 1955 the USA, France and Britain rejected Soviet proposals for limitations on conventional forces and the abolition of 75% of the stocks of nuclear weapons.

By the late 1950s, US attention had shifted to the question of establishing nuclear bases in Europe. NATO was the stalking horse for this quest - which was couched in the blandest possible terms.

Thus NATO reports that in 1957:

"The Soviet leaders had at inducing public opinion in various member countries to oppose the modernisation 1! oi Western defence forces "The Council agreed that one object of this Campaign was to ensure for Soviet forces a monopoly of nuclear weapons on the European continent ...

"No power, it stated, could claim the right to deny the Alliance the modern arms !!, needed for its defence.' In December 1957 it was agreed that:

"It was necessary to establish stocks of nuclear warheads readily available for the defence of the Alliance in case of need ... it was also decided that intermediate range ballistic missiles should be put at the disposal of the Supreme Allied Commander Europe."

From this point onwards the US had its nuclear bases in Europe. And NATO was successfully mobilised behind American sabrerattling in the Cuban missile crisis and other actions in the 1960s.

Portugal used NATO hardware for its wars against its African colonies.

And in the summer of 1975, as Portugal simmered with revolution, there were NATO manoeuvres in Portuguese territorial water, NATO and US troop movements on Portugal's frontiers and a US intelligence centre aboard a ship anchored off Setubal.

Last year, Turkey's army - one of NATO's mainstays - carried through a coup to repress Turkey's militant working class. A NATO commander commented! «The prospect of worsening strife had us worried. Something had to be done."

After 1967 new technology in weaponry was combined with the particular tactical thinking of Denis Healey - British Defence Minister - to produce the first review of NATO'S strategy since 1956.

Healey's brainchild was the "tactical" use of nuclear weapons in what is laughingly described as "limited" nuclear war.

This is now firmly established as NATO policy and a bedrock of Reagan's strategy for the use of Europe as a launch-pad for war.

NATO remains today what it was in 1949: a cynical attempt by US imperialism to buttress European capitalism against proletarian revolution - or, failing that, to blow the European continent to smithereens, on the age-old Cold War hypothesis _ Better Dead than Red.

For socialists who reject such a view, the answer must be a struggle to smash the NATO alliance, combined with the preparation of the necessary • mass action and revolutionary leadership to overthrow the capitalist system in Britain and Europe.

Scan page 10

Socialist Organiser, Thursday 24 September 1981 Page 10 BRIGHEON *81 "no- полный