BASIC CAUSE OF MIDDLE EAST PROBLEM REMAINS
Eric Butler reports from Britain

"Sections of the British press have permitted some light to be shed on the basic realities of the situation in the Middle East. For example, The Daily Telegraph of June 14 publishes a letter from the Earl of Lytton which states:
"Britain planted a colony of 'returning' Jews (Zion) in Arab Palestine, and has voted 19 times for the return of the Arabs. One can name some 25 States where responsible leaders are convinced that Zion with Anglo-American support is designed to expand 'from the Nile to the Euphrates' (President of Iraq, April 6, 1967), and that neither America nor Britain intends that 19 annual affirmations of support for Arab 'return shall ever be implemented. Therein is the root of an unstable Middle East."

"In a special supplement in its issue of June 11 The Sunday Times provided a survey of the background history of the current Middle East situation, starting with the great injustice done to the Arabs when, in violation of promises made to the Arabs if they would revolt against Germany's ally, Turkey, the British yielded to the pressure of Political Zionism and promised that what was Arab territory to the Zionists. ...Successive British Governments tried feebly to reconcile the irreconcilable. They succeeded only in alienating both Arabs and Jews.'
Responsible, pro-Western leaders warned Britain that if she persisted with support for the Zionists in Palestine, they would lose their influence and interests in the whole Arab world.

The murderous terrorist activities of the Stern gang against British women and children, the murder of the British Minister of State, Lord Moyne, the shooting of UN representative Count Bernadotte, and the expulsion of Arabs from their own country, are all dealt with.

"While there is widespread satisfaction in Britain that Moscow's dupe, Nasser, has received the thrashing which the British were prevented from giving in 1956, there is also a realisation amongst many that unless Israel is forced to accept the UN borders originally decided upon, and to make a real effort to help solve the dreadful Arab refugee problem, it will be impossible for moderate Arab leaders to adopt pro-Western policies and survive. The Communists have suffered only a temporary setback in the Middle East unless the basic causes of the current situation are removed."

MR. ROSTOW INDICATES FUTURE MIDDLE EAST POLICIES

"In a speech in Vermont, Mr. Rostow said the Middle East was the 'last Region in the non-communist world where regional institutions and spirit have not yet begun to emerge." He added: "I am sure we and others outside the region will be prepared to be helpful if the people and Governments of that area themselves begin to move in their own ways along the paths already taken by Western Europe, Latin America and Asia."

The "paths" to which Mr. Rostow refers are the European Common Market, the Latin American Common Market, and the promotion of a similar type of market in Asia to which we referred in On Target May 12, 1967.

Mr. Rostow is President Johnson's National Security Affairs adviser. He is closely identified with powerful advisers in the U.S.A. who have pursued a continuous policy of protecting the Communists at home and defending their interests abroad. In 1962 Mr. Rostow wrote his book "Basic National Security Policy" which was described by one commentator as "the blue print for retreat in the cold war." He has recommended that the United States extend diplomatic recognition to Communist China and Communist East Germany, that United States armed forces be withdrawn from the Soviet Empire's borders, that the United States force Nationalist China to abandon its offshore islands of Quemoy and the Matsus to the Communist Chinese.
It is safe to say that any proposal by Mr. Rostow to solve the problem of instability in the Middle East is not liable to harm the interests of International Communism.

He is now reported to be Mr. Johnson's key confidential adviser, having traveled a long way since leaving his professorship at Massachusetts Institute of Technology to become one of the "brilliant" team of intellectuals surrounding John Kennedy.
He was one of the groups advising Kennedy on how to handle Castro in Cuba

THE CIA AND ANTI-COMMUNISM

"In a signed leading article in the May-June issue of "Quadrant", Professor James McAuley, the poet, discusses the recent revelation that the CIA contributed financially for some years to the work of the Congress for Cultural Freedom, the parent of similarly named bodies in all parts of the free world, including Australia…Professor, of English at the University of Tasmania and a ready and articulate spokesman for what might be termed the intellectual activist the anti-Communist movement in Australia." The Age June 16 from an article by Stuart Sayers entitled "Quadrant and the CIA."

Professor McAuley acts as an apologist for CIA and its distribution of funds to so-called anti-Communist' organisations. Unfortunately the Professor seems to have missed the whole point of the operation. On its own record the CIA has supported organisations which at the best are ineffectual in the fight against Communism, and at the worst are nothing but front organisations promoting Communist policy.

Book of the Week

THE POLITICIAN
by Robert Welch

Probably unsurpassed as a revealing penetration of the way modern history has been falsified. THE POLITICIAN has been described as the book, which would haunt the conscience of Dwight Eisenhower for the rest of his days. Elected to take the American people out of policies of disaster and compromise with Communism, his administration hastened the destruction of domestic and foreign policies, which lead to greater retreats and betrayals. THE POLITICIAN shows how Dwight Eisenhower was built up from an obscure Colonel to the point where he could be used in the conspiracy to destroy the West.... Send to: The Heritage Bookshop, Box 1226L P.O. Melbourne Victoria.

An example is the financing of the National Students Association in the U.S.A. by CIA in the belief (?) that in so doing the N.S.A. would offset the work of numerous student organisations promoting Communist activity. The record of N.S.A. speaks for itself. During the fifteen years it received funds from the CIA "to fight Communism" it has according to Review of the News March, 1 1967.
Supported Castro against Batista in Cuba… Called for the abolition of the House Committee on Un-American activities...Protested against the firing of Communist teachers, advocated membership in the United Nations for Red China. The list is extended ad nauseum.

What comes through is that CIA established by a liberal (socialist) administration believes that Communism can be fought by socialists. What eventuates is co-operation, which leads to the discrediting of the original intention. The background of Quadrant as revealed by Stuart Sayers makes this apparent to experienced observers.

The founding President, former Chief Justice Sir John Latham, whilst not a socialist in the eyes of most people certainly upheld the principle of a strong central government, and was also a rationalist. A combination, which hardly made him a strong anti-Communist. The present President, Dr. Lloyd Ross was a former Communist who left the movement to become a member of the A.L.P. and is now secretary of a key union, the Australian Railways Union that supports the basic premises of the socialist-communist movement.

"Figs do not come from thistles," would be an appropriate comment.

MR. McEWEN and THE BASIC INDUSTRIES GROUP

The Basic Industries Group was accused by the Federal Country Party Leader and acting Prime Minister, Mr. McEwen on Monday of trying to "destroy the Country Party in favour of the Liberal Party." The Age June 21.

It would be interesting to know the politics behind Mr. McEwen's attack. According to the spokesman for the Basic Industries Group, Mr. R. Chapman the group has been dormant since the elections. Our surmise is that Mr. McEwen is endeavouring to find a scapegoat for the disastrous economic policies of the government, which are leading to the position where the man on the land will find it hard to survive. Rising costs and falling income are common in the whole economic structure of the Australian community, but affects the man on the land more as he has no means of passing on increased costs.
The Country Party has attempted to answer the problem by accepting the Socialists answer, government control of one degree or another. The setting up of boards etc, involves both high costs (bureaucracy being the most inefficient form of management conceivable) and interference with personal liberty. It is these factors, which are bringing increasing odium upon the Country Party.

BRITISH TO HOLD REFERENDUM ON GIBRALTAR

ON ENTRY TO E.C.M. ALSO?

"Britain would hold a referendum in Gibraltar in which the people would be invited to say whether they wanted to pass under Spanish sovereignty, or retain their link with Britain, the Minister of State for Commonwealth Relations (Mrs. Judith Hart) said today." The Age. June 15.
Any comment seems superficial. Is the loss of British sovereignty over the control of their parliament, judiciary and economic affairs, as is certain if the Rome Treaty is accepted, comparable to the loss of Gibraltar?

Here is a golden opportunity to drive home the request by anti-Common Marketers for a referendum.

ARCHBISHOP APPLETON CRITICISED

"How much longer can Christians watch with equanimity if not applause the greatest nation on earth pulverising one of the weakest." The Australian May 5.

The above is a repeat quote from On Target May 12. Archbishop Appleton's statement concerning Vietnam came under considerable fire in Western Australia by T.A.G. Hungerford in a later edition of the Sunday Times in Western Australia. Symptomatic of the way publicity is organised these days was the eight antagonistic (to Hungerford and pro-Appleton) replies in the following edition of Sunday Times including one by the well known Communist authoress Kathleen Susannah Pritchard.

The following item appeared in the West Australian on June 19. Liberal Senator J.P. Sim, at a meeting of the Baltic community in Perth on Saturday, attacked the attitude of some sections of the clergy to the Vietnam War. He said:
"What the U.S.A. and others are doing in Vietnam is in defence of the rule of law." "If we fail to do this, then the world will surely sink into the abyss."

This is what people like Archbishop Appleton and others like him, who are bemused by new social orders, fail to understand. "While they pose as men of goodwill, full of pity for human suffering, they would, by their policies, unleash the forces of murder and torture on the people of South Vietnam."

Senator Sim said that Communism was not a social order dedicated to relieving misery and poverty, to provide a better and a free life - as some intellectuals and members of the clergy, in their ignorance and stupidity would have people to believe.
The only difference between Hitler and the Communists was that Hitler used direct methods. (End of quote).

ON TARGET BULLETIN
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION

THE COMMON MARKET

We continue with information on the provisions contained in the Rome Treaty.
POWER
The great powers of EEC are set out in Articles 189 to 192. The most important is 189 which says:
"The Council and the Commission shall, in the discharge of their duties and in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty, issue regulations and directives, take decisions and formulate recommendations or opinions. Regulations shall have general application. They shall be binding in every respect and directly applicable in each Member State. Directives shall be binding, in respect of the result to be achieved, upon every Member State but the form and manner of enforcing them shall be a matter for the national authorities. Decisions shall be binding in every respect upon those to whom they are directed. Recommendations and opinions shall have no binding force. :"
Comment: The powers invested in the Commission are superior to national parliaments, which can only be reduced to the role of rubber stamps. They are powerless to amend EEC regulations, even if they violate many principles of British justice.

As Roy Price, formerly Common Market press officer in London, explained in his book "The Political Future of the European Community."
"In any case a national parliament has no direct say in the preliminary - and decisive work of the Commission, nor in the subsequent stages by which the decisions are taken by majority vote even the semblance of influence disappears, for even if the national government concerned maintains its opposition to the bitter end it can still be out-voted, and the minister concerned can only then report the fact of the decision to his national assembly."
Further Comment: A good warning for British businessmen is in regulation 17, issued in accordance with Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty, which deal with competition between members of the Common Market. The regulation takes power for the Commission's servants to examine books and other business documents, to make copies or extracts, to demand oral explanations on the spot, and to have access to all premises, land and vehicles.

Later the same regulation takes the power to inflict huge monetary penalties on business, according to the decisions of the Commission.

The regulation is noteworthy because the Commission combines the roles of executive, judge and jury, no impartially-adjudicated hearing is provided before the levying of penalties, and no impartially granted search warrant has to be sought for the first lot of powers.