ting aggression in Vietnam. South — you understand the real significance of the Chilean navy. It is vital to crush any internal rebellion. If you look at the map of Chile — a long, narrow coastal strip running from North to Honourable friend (the Foreign Secretary) repeated it yesterday. that we fully support the action of the United States in resis(Hansard 25 March 1965)
the post-war Attlee Government. which had one of the largest Parliamentary majorities in history:
At the 1945 Labour Party conference which preceded tho massive electoral victory, Attlee sald, We have to have our own line and our own judgement as socialists. A great deal was made of how a Labour Government was best suited to maintain friendly links with the USSR. A young delcuate. just back frum the war, spokedor many others when he declared: "The crucial principle of our foreign policy should be to protect, assist, encourage and aid in every way the socialist revolution wherever it appeats. *The upper cluses in every country of the despotic Shal. SETT LEISLS.
Southern and Central Attica. working class movement. States. mission to meet in London. intervention.
imperialism. bastoers.)
+ It intervened in Indonesia to hand power back to the Dutch colonialists, It did the same for the French in Saigon in 1946, where - British troops massacred scores of * It continued oppressive colonialist policies in Africa and constantly bolstered the white settler regimes in Labour leaders were thus the faithful poodles of US and British imperialism. Totally subservient to capitalium at home, they became dedicated 'cold warriors" abroad and, at the same time, fostered a crude anti-communism in the British The policy followed by the last Labour Government is within the memory of most socialists today.
Once in power Labour's policy was no different from that of its Tory predecessor, Labour became the most servile apologist for Americ an policy in Vietnam, their Foreign Secretary defending the State Department with an evangelical fervour rare even in the United Wilson's principal contribution to the growing anti-war movementwas to advise the Vietnam Solidarity Campaign to demonstrate outside -the Chinese embassy, He topped this off by denying the Bertrand Russell War Crimes Tribunal perThe Labour left had a record that was only a little hetter, They completely failed to challenge Government policy, even in Packam- ent is. ent. The best they could do was issue appeals for both sides to come to the conference table, and for UN In short, they engaged in every reformist, moral gesture possble, at the expense of actually expressing solidarity with the people lighting Not a single Labour MP came out and declared openly that he was in favour of an NUF victory in South Vietnam. (ll should be remembered that the peace organisations dominated by the Cornsunist Party had a sinitor position, and it was only the mass explosion that grew up around the Vietnam Solidarity Campaign that dragged the CP. half reluctantly, onto the streels belund solidanty In Africa, Wilson's Goverun ent tried desperately to appease the racist white setlier regime in Rhodesia. Cinly the Rhodesian" stubborness prevented a "com promise settlement. In Ghana • British intelligence was involved Government, Eric Heffer (in complete violation of the principle that members of a good bourgeois Government don't wash its dirty Enen in public), shows just how strong the pressure of this sentimHetter's statement on Chile is a valuable boost to the solidarity movement. Every Labour MP. especially those who, like Heffer's fellow-minister Judith Hurt, condeined the junta while Labour was in opposition should be compelled to speak out against the Government's present collaboration with the Chilean generals. But Heffer has inade it clear that his concern is with defending the left flank" of Labour against "another Vietnam. He is afraid that the sell-out over Chile could aguin produce a mass movement to the left of Labour and completely beyond its contrel He remembers that it was impossible for ministers in the last Labour Government to get a hearing at any university or hoid a major public meating without being confronted by VSC militants on the question of Vietnam, Michael Foot's recent reception by supporters of the 5 May demonstration during a meeting in Colchester must have revived these nasty memories rather sharply