COMMUNISTS INTENSIFY TRADE WARFARE

"Russia today took a two-page advertisement in the New York Times to ask American businessmen to sell their products in the Soviet Union. The advertisement - the first of its kind - suggested that Americans should advertise in Soviet newspapers, radio, television and on posters. And in another move towards better East-West trade relations the International Basic Economy Corporation (IBEC), controlled by the Rockefeller family and Cleveland financier Cyrus S. Eaton Jr. announced plans to promote trade between Communist Europe and U.S., Canada and Latin America." - Don Petersen reporting from New York in The Herald (Melbourne), January 17.

Cyrus Eaton has a long record of collaboration with the Communist criminals, having visited behind the Iron Curtain on a number of occasions. He has also entertained Communist representatives visiting the USA. The top Communist publication, International Affairs, in its issue of October 1965, advises the good Comrades as follows:
"It would be hasty, to say the least, to assume that there are no supporters of peaceful co-existence among the spokesmen of the American bourgeoisie. Take the big industrialist Cyrus Eaton, the well-known sociologist Corliss Lamont, the late C. Wright Mills and others."
Lamont is a millionaire.

The advertisement in the New York Times is an extension of a special campaign, which the Soviet leaders launched in 1964 to encourage the West, including the USA, to provide further vital economic aid for the Communist Empire. In The Worker (USA) of August 30, 1964, Comrade Victor Perlo, the well-known Soviet economist, wrote:
"The change in the balance of world forces towards socialism and national liberation has impelled the more sensible and knowledgeable of the Wall Streeters to move towards limited accommodations with the U.S.S.R."

The New York Times on September 13, 1964, revealed
"The new element in the (international financial and political) situation is the increasing interest among American business men in getting a share of the Soviet pie."

Following up a number of strong statements in favour of trade and aid to both the Soviet Union and Red China, Mr. David Rockefeller, President of the Chase Manhattan Bank, initiated "an opinion survey among economics professors in US colleges and Universities". The June 1965 issue of New World Review (formerly Soviet Russia Today) reported with obvious relish that Mr. Rockefeller and his bank had found that 82 per cent of the 375 who replied "favoured an easing of restrictions on trade with the Soviet Union and Eastern European countries."
It was also discovered that "62 per cent thought that U.S. restrictions against trade with Mainland China also should be eased." These "conclusions" coincided with Mr. Rockefeller's previously announced designs.

The Communists in New World Review took the opportunity of expressing warm feelings towards Wall Street. The Worker of July 11, 1965, paid a touching tribute to the House of Morgan's affection for the Sino-Soviet cause.
Blasting the American trade union leaders, who have demonstrated little support for trade with the Communists, The Worker made the following significant comment:
"The ironical result is that big businessmen are generally more progressive than big labor leaders."

Mr. Louis Budenz, former top Communist who edited The Worker for many years, has warned that one of the most dangerous aspects of the current Communist tactics was the campaign to persuade the West to finance an increasing flow of economic aid to the Communists. Budenz has also warned of the subversive role of the New York Times.
It is not surprising that this journal was chosen by the Communists to make their latest appeal to American financiers and businessmen.

MR. EDWARD ST. JOHN, Q.C. M.P. ON "HUMAN RIGHTS"

"The Federal Government should concern itself with the rights of the Aborigines and the people of Papua-New Guinea, a leading Australian jurist said yesterday.

Mr. Edward St John, Q .C., the president of the Australian branch of the International Commission of Jurists, and Australian branch of the International Commission of Jurists, and recently elected Liberal member of the House of Representatives for Warringah, was speaking at the annual conference of the United Nations in Sydney. He said Australia should take an active part in the "International Year for Human Rights". - The Australian, January 16.

Any campaign in favour of "Human Rights" by the United Nations must be treated with the greatest suspicion. Genuine individual rights have been progressively undermined in all parts of the world since the UN came into existence. The subject of rights cannot be divorced from personal responsibility and justice. We would very much like to hear Mr. Edward St. John of the South African Defence and Aid Fund tell us as a jurist whether he thinks that the UN acted in accordance with its Charter in imposing vicious sanctions against Rhodesia. And whether it was justice to condemn Rhodesia without permitting Rhodesia to appear before the UN to put its case.

EMINENT BRITISH Q.C. ATTACKS UN DECISION ON RHODESIA

The following letter by Sir Derek Walker-Smith, eminent British Q.C., and Conservative Member of the British House of Commons, appeared in the Daily Telegraph (England) on December, 19, 1966:
"The Marques of Salisbury (Dec. 14) records the fact that his challenges to the application in the Rhodesian situation of Chapter 7 of the Charter (which gives the United Nations the power to impose sanctions and resort to force) evoked no Ministerial reply in the House of Lords. There was a corresponding reticence in the House of Commons, where I sought to analyse the position as fully as time allowed.

"Put shortly, the position which emerges from a study of the Charter appears to be this:
"1. The jurisdiction of the United Nations under Art. 41 to impose sanctions on Rhodesia depends on a determination, under Art. 39, of the existence of a threat to peace.
"2. Such a determination presupposes the existence of a dispute between two States, which remains unsettled in spite of the conciliation procedures of Chapter 6.
"3. The parties to the dispute must be sovereign States, Art. 2 (7) of the Charter. prohibiting the intervention of the United Nations 'in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any State.'
"4. In this case, of course, Rhodesia is not a sovereign State; Art. 2 (7) applies; consequently there is no dispute of the sort presupposed by Art. 39 and the British Government should nor have asked the United Nations to assume jurisdiction in a matter seemingly not within the contemplation of Chapter 7. "This argument has not been answered by Ministers, and I think it would be difficult to interpret the Charter otherwise.
Of course it may well be that the United Nations, having been invited inappropriately by the British Government to assume jurisdiction, are unlikely to relinquish it. But the matter remains one of great importance not only in the context of the responsibility of the Government but also in the future workings of the United Nations and the Charter."

As no British Minister has attempted to answer Sir Derek Walker-Smith's argument, perhaps the Hon, Paul Hasluck, Australia's Minister for External Affairs, would care to provide an answer?
Australia must have felt that it was just and in accordance with the much talked-about UN Charter for it to help condemn Rhodesia at the UN.

PRIME MINISTER IAN SMITH ATTACKS UN.

"The Rhodesian Premier, Mr. Smith, yesterday attacked what he termed the sanctimonious hypocrisy of the United Nations. In a New Year's Day message, he called on President Johnson and the Prime Ministers of Australia, New Zealand and Canada to consult their chief justices on the legality of UN sanctions on Rhodesia… "Mr. Wilson had managed to entice the United Nations to deviate not only from its charter but also from the generally accepted principles of justice and fair play. The Security Council had heard a pack of lies on the internal situation in Rhodesia and had passed its resolution calling for mandatory sanctions on the pretext that Rhodesia was a threat to world peace. He claimed Rhodesia was combating the relentless march of Communism.

"Condemning the UN. Mr. . Smith said:
'I venture to predict that there is more justice where the demon Satan reigns than where the United Nations wallows in its sanctimonious hypocrisy". - The Age (Melbourne), January 3.

Prime Minister Ian Smith increased his stature as a great leader when he drew attention to the reality of the UN. Prime Minister John Vorster of South Africa also had some refreshing criticism of the UN in his New Year day message, bluntly stating that South Africa could possibly withdraw from the UN this year. Rhodesia may well be the rock upon which this Communist-inspired international organisation could founder. More and more questioning of the UN is taking place, and every-reader is urged to obtain and to keep by him at all times a copy of The Fearful Master for quick reference. This book, with photographs, is a most devastating exposure of the Communist inspiration and control of the UN. (Price $1.15 post free, from The Heritage Bookshop 273 Lt. Collins St. Melbourne

THE GROWING PROBLEM OF PAPUA-NEW GUINEA

"Sir Donald Cleland retired as Administrator of Papua-New Guinea yesterday, predicting that self-government for the Territory would not occur in the near future. 'Papua-New Guinea will ultimately emerge as a young and vibrant nation, but though it desires self-government, this goal is some time ahead,' he said." - The Age (Melbourne), January 9.

The Communist strategists are well aware of the great importance of Papua-New Guinea in their plan to thrust into the Pacific. They are going to apply increasing pressure to Australia through the UN. And there will be growing attempts to create trouble in the Territory. Australia has set a dangerous precedent on the Rhodesian issue by weakly going along with "world opinion." What about when "world opinion" strongly demands that Australia grant immediate self-government to the natives of Papua-New Guinea?

ANOTHER HUNGARY?

The essence of the developments inside Communist China is that a typical struggle for power is taking place amongst the Communist criminals. Soviet Russia experienced a similar upheaval in the thirties when Stalin purged all his enemies, real and imagined, with his Secret Police. Mao Tse-tung and his supporters are using the Red Guards. Reliable information indicates that Communist China has been close to the point of civil war, with the masses of Chinese people hoping for some relief from the Communist tyranny.

The Chinese Nationalists on Formosa have 600, 000 highly trained troops, and a modern air force. Chiang Kai-shek has made it clear that he is willing to make the return to the mainland. Once he established a base, there would be a mass revolt in China against Communism.