THE article in Socialist Action before Christmas ovud unic Culicu Why NATO needs the bomb was untortunatelv marred in not placing the question in the framework of a working class response to the bosses war drive. Whilst correctly calling for unilateral nuclear disarmament, it incorrectly argued for it within the framework of an implicit neutralism.
A socialist reply must begin from an understanding that the cutting edge of the warmongers offensive 1s their attempt to throw back the colonial revolution and prevent any extension of the socialist revolution. This not only involves the biggest imperialist power, the United States, but also the second biggest, Britain.
The armed forces of Britain. both conventional and nuclear, play an active part in this process. It 1s the 'conventional' forces that hold in subjugation the risen people of Ireland. It is the nuclear forces that act as a threat, hanging over the heads of all those fighting for freedom, of the lengths the imperialists will go to to ceremo mer me ess Over both Cuba and the Inladie bast tney nave shown they are prepared to oring une world lo tile edge of the precipice in defence of their right to exploit.
The task of socialists consists of organising opposition to the actual wars launched by imperialism today, whist Danenv coucau, ou class in the basic questions involved, illuminating, not obscuring, the line of This the Turner article fails to do. The colonial revolution is absent from the article. Instead we are told that the imperialists nave cen weders because they are cheaper!
Instead of explaining that the threat of war todav does not come trom the Soviet Union because o moe rau ol uuc social system that exists there following the overthrow of capitalism, which unlike imperialism nas no inherent need to expand, the lack of a threat is made contingent on the policies of the bureaucrat orDaCrev Instead of explaining that the Soviet Union has nuclear weapons to defend itself from an agressive West, we are told, incredibly, that 'the Soviet Union has no need of a nuclear arsenal because it is in no position to launch a conventional attack on the West'!
And in the summary, insteda or explalning lle nature of 'defence policies uter subc aloill - that they are but a subterfuge for a war policy - we are told 'Reykjavik gave Labour the opportunity to expound a wholly coherent defence policy, starting with full support
Socialist Action 9 Jan 1987