The problem is that the overwhelming majority of the present shadow cabinet the foreign policy and defence policy leadership of the Labour Party is fully committed to clearing a Labour policy towards the East through Washington. They opposed to the implementation of the Moscow Agreement, simple reason that they Washington will not agree with such an agreement, US nuclear bases from Britain.
Is such a view of the shadow cabinet and parliamentary leadership just a matter of 'typical' left wing primitive paranoia? Not in the slightest.
We need simply refer back to reports of this year's Labour Party On the day defence The reported as follows: 'A majority of Mr shadow would never agree to a unilateral eviction of American bases, without prior US consultation and agreement.' (This before the recent shadow tions).
entire Parliamentary Origins of the Cold War government's are therefore for the consult know before becoming total nuclear disarmament... removing all Healey, the that unilateral of the Times would be cabinet reactions by nuclear cabinet eleccode.
The Financial Times the same day reported that Healey and Shore had urged their party colleagues to its allies in NATO •.• committed to bending over backwards to seem sympathetic to Party's view while sticking to the NATO principle was quoted as telling the Fabian Society actions are alright providing they do not lead to reactions by other governments; inside or outside the alliance, which made the situation more dangerous ... It fool-hardy take unilateral action without first making sure that they did not provoke other members OT In other words, Healey is saying that unilateral actions are fine so long as they are not unilateral at all, but have US approval. And on the debate itself, Denzil Davies insisted on the need 'for changes bemade within vaguer formulation but the same So the message is clear: the Moscow Agreements embody a policy backed four to one at conference this year, but which the bulk of the PLP leadership will sabotage if the Americans want them to. This means labour movement must adopt the following steps to prevent Healey co sabotaging establishment of nuclear free zone: * We must demand that leadership turns Moscow Agreement into a formalised, draft treaty in consultation with the Soviet leadership before the next election. * We must extract a pledge from the PLP leadership, backed by a massive conference majority, that the Moscow Agreement will not be conditional on US approval, and will be made a bilateral treaty with Moscow. * Any attempt by the US government to undermine the reductions in nukes agreed in the Moscow Agreement by shifting nukes from here to the continent will be opposed by a future Labour government. * Any negotiations agreements with the US over US bases and weapons here will occur after the treaty with Moscow is initialled will be conducted open diplomacy secret treaties or secret agreements. These the minimum necessary to ensure that Neil Kinnock's success in Moscow last week is more than a flash in the pan.
Socialist Action 7 December 1984