Basic HTML Version
NEWTHREAT
(Continued f rom page 6)
Washington to investigate the build–
up in the former British protecto–
rate- which now has an "unbreaka–
ble" 20-yea r friendship treaty with
Moscow.
The South Yemen buildup could
also presage a new assault on Oman
to the East. With the collapse of
Iran, the sultan of tiny Oman now
finds himself to be the guardian of
the Strait of Hormuz- through
which a Free World oil tanker passes
every 20 minutes of the day!
The "Car ter Doctrine "
Presiden! Carter professed initial shock
at thc Afghanistan power play. He said
that , as a result, his assessment of
Soviet intentions had "changed most
drastically"-astartlingadmission for
a U.S. president, the acknowledged
leader ofthe Free World.
The President claims that, after
three years in office, he finally sees
the light of Soviet intentions. But one
wonders. On June 15, Mr. Carter
said he believes that the Soviets must
feel "chastened and surpr ised" by
strong world condemnation of the
Afghanistan invasion. This reaction,
he felt, may restrain them from such
aggression elsewhere.
The President also claimed on
another occasion that the Soviet
invasion violated "accepted rules of
behavior," to which columnist
George F. Will replied: "The Soviets
are
playing by the 'accepted rules'
... raw force is the rule because raw
force works."
Even by another definition, Mr.
Will added, the Soviets are playing by
the rules-rheír rules; "Rules they
have proclaimed from rooftops. For 62
years Leninism has been the Soviet
Un ion's civil religion, teaching the
inevitability of lethal conflict with
'bourgeois' societies in a struggle for
the world. Yet for 62 years liberal
societies have earnestly wondered
what the Soviets 'really' intend...."
In enumerating what sorne have
dubbed the "Carter Doctrine" the
President says that "we must now
deal with the hard facts, with the
world as it is." He has jettisoned the
first three years of his foreign policy,
a program based upon sheddi ng
44
America's "inordinate fear of com–
munism," and pursuing the loftier
goal of "human rights."
T he nation's military posture–
allowed during the 1970s honeymoon
with detente to slip badly behind the
Soviets- will get new infusions of
spending. Yet, somewhat cont radic–
torily, the President proclaims that
until now "we have not been weak."
Many observers fe.el that a real
turnabout won't be easy. "We
didn~t
get into this position overnight, says
former Secretary of State Henry
Kissinger, "and we can't get out of it
with a few quick fixes."
Other experts point out that there is
little substance behind the rhetoric of
the "Carter Doctrine." Specific com–
mitments are vague. lnstead of seek–
ing permanent ground bases in the
Middle East (an offer from Egypt was
rejected) Washington speaks only of
"military facilities"- mostly naval–
and an ambiguous "framework" of
"cooperativesecurity."
T he Soviets are not fooled. They
are well aware of current U.S. weak–
ness in armaments, strategy-and
willpower. Reports the
U.S.
News
and World Report:
"Kremlin rulers view as more bark
than bite Carter's threat to use force
in the Persian Gulf, if need be ...
The only way Carter's 'hands off
Mideast oil' warning is seen getting
through to Soviet bosses: He must
deploy American forces-ground,
air, naval - within striking distance
of the crisis arca ...
"The Kremlin still respecls Ameri–
can power. But- what
counts is
U.S.
performance.
And when Russia looks
back over the last five years, it sees
inaction in the face of Moscow-spon–
sored Cuban intervention in Angola
and Ethiopia, inaction when Soviet–
backed Vietnamese forces invadeCam–
bodia, inaction when Ca rter spotted
Russian combat troops in Cuba."
The Cuba inaction last October,
experts believe, convinced the Soviets
they could safely move into Afghan–
istan. And Washi ngton's initial hesi–
tation to use military power in the
early days of the hostage situation in
lran also played into Moscow's
hands. Should the United States
decide to act with force now, . the
Soviets could enter l ran on the pre–
text of protecting the country from
an
Ame~ican
invasion!
Russia has power. America has
power, too-but is a fraid to use it! The
prideofits
power has been taken away
( Leviticus 26: 19). Or, as, columnist
J ames J. Kilpatrick put it:
" It
is useless
to provide ourselves with arms if we
lack the will to use them."
Who Wlll Counter Soviet Thrust ?
Soviet leaders- and they
can
be
believed- have stated repeatedly,
evenduringthedecadeofthe '70s, that
detente in no way impedes the world–
wide "class struggle" nor hampers
their support for "national liberation"
movements around the world.
Mr. Brezhnev explicitly outlined
the purpose of detente to Eastern
European Communist Party leaders
a t an East Bloc summit in Prague in
1973. His speech did not receive
much attention at the time.
"Trust us, comrades," Mr. Brezh–
nev was quoted as saying. " For by
1985, as a consequence of what we
are now achieving with detente, we
will have achieved most of our objec–
tives in Western Europe. We will
have consolidated our position. We
will have improved our economy.
Anda decisive shift in the correlation
of forces will be such that,
come
1985.
we will be able
ro
exert our
wi/1 wherever we need ro."
lt
should be plain to all that if
anyone is going to firmly resist the
Soviet inroads into the Middle East
and other strategic a reas of the world
such as southern Africa, it is not
likely to be the United States. Says
the noted world expert on Soviet
st ra tegy, Brian Cozier:
" lt
is a lamentable fact that the
Soviet Union takes a global view of
strategy and that the U.S. does not
-or no longer does.... The Rus–
sians know ver y well what they
want. ... The Soviets fight World
War 11 1 permanently and by what–
ever means are appropriate."
America has gone to sleep, strage–
gica lly, and other arcas of the Free
World are not much more alert to the
long-term danger at the present
time.
Yet, as the pages of
The Plain
Truth
have continually warned, Eu–
rope
wi/1
arise from
its
slumber, to
unitedly protect its endangered inter–
ests.
Europe only awairs strong, ga/–
vanizing leadership.
Editorialized
the
Dai/y Telegraph:
The
PLAIN TAUTH