Democratic Palestine : 30 (ص 36)
غرض
- عنوان
- Democratic Palestine : 30 (ص 36)
- المحتوى
-
An End to Regional Conflicts?
The effects of the disarmament talks between the Soviet Union and
the US are not confined to the northern hemisphere. Rather the new
atmosphere of detente is making itself felt around the world,
involving national liberation movements and newly independent
countries to a crucial degree.
Less than one year after the signing
of the INF treaty in Washington, the
progress made in the US—USSR
dialogue and disarmament process is
having a positive impact on the resolu-
tion of regional conflicts. A prime ex-
ample is the Geneva accords between
Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Soviet
Union and the US. A new element was
introduced into the attempts to resolve
the conflict in Central America with the
ceasefire and talks between the revolu-
tionary Sandinista government and the
contras.
The latest advance towards peace has
been made in Southern Africa, where
negotiations between Angola, Cuba,
South Africa and the US resulted in an
agreement for South African
withdrawal from Namibia, and Cuban
withdrawal from Angola. SWAPO’s
president, Sam Nujoma, termed this
the most important stage for Namibia’s
independence. However, subsequent
talks have shown that South Africa is
looking for excuses to delay its
withdrawal, while the US refuses to
stop funding UNITA’s dirty war
against Angola.
UN—sponsored peace processes are
also underway concerning the Western
Sahara, Cambodia, Cyprus, and the
Iraq-Iran war. Added to this are the
Soviet-Chinese talks which, although
they have a different character, are also
related to this process, especially con-
cerning Cambodia.
Each of these conflicts has its own
character and specific features which
‘must be taken into account if a truly
just solution is to be found. However,
there are also common features among
a number of these conflicts. The com-
monality is most apparent in the cases
of Angola, Nicaragua, Afghanistan
and Cambodia, where US-imperialism
and other reactionary powers have
sponsored counterrevolutionary forces
to fight new progressive governments.
In each of these cases, it is the pro-
gressive government in question which
initiated and sustained the peace drive.
The other impetus for peace came from
socialist countries offering to withdraw
the troops they had sent to support new
progressive governments. In the interest
of peace, the Soviets are withdrawing
from Afghanistan; Cuba has agreed to
withdraw from Angola in line with the
peace agreement; and Vietnam has of-
fered to do likewise in relation to
Cambodia.
— Hl...MAY J HELP en Bon
6-2 te ais
why “al LER
ay. Wiga ONS
Sy
4 Lr ”) a NNG hs a
he Vea, ak)
4,
aay =O E
, WV Le S
Ss MAS gate ~
q NY %, Qe @ = i
Sas Ss W Ww a @t orp.
38
In all these cases, it is US imperialism
and its local allies who are blocking
progress as seen in continued US
military aid to the Afghani rebels, and
US encouragement of the contras’
sabotage of the first round of talks with
the Sandinistas. Nonetheless, despite
local differences, obstacles and _ set-
backs, a new process is underway,
primarily related to the new interna-
tional atmosphere generated by the
Soviet peace offensive. This has forced
the Reagan Administration into a posi-
tion of detente.
Since the Reagan-Gorbachev summit
in Moscow, progress in the direction of
negotiated settlement has been most
obvious in places where the Soviet
Union or one of its allies plays an im-
portant role. This confirms the impres-
sion that the USA’s new and partial
readiness to resolve regional conflicts is
to a great extent related to the new at-
mosphere of detente prevailing on the
international scene. Concerning
regional conflicts, the Reagan Ad-
ministration has behaved in basically
the same way as it does on disarmament
questions: The Soviet Union and other
progressive forces take initiative, while
the Reagan Administration has to be
dragged along. The US has shown new
readiness to agree on_ bilateral
disengagement and stand as guarantor
for agreements, but this applies to con-
flicts where the contra-war it is suppor-
ting cannot be expected to achieve
decisive victory, and where it does not
have to relinguish interests defined as
vital. What the US administration has
been forced to give up in those cases is
the possibility of causing more harm to
the other side.
In the Gulf, Middle East and Central
America, where the USA has staked out
so-called vital interests, the same - هو جزء من
- Democratic Palestine : 30
- تاريخ
- سبتمبر ١٩٨٨
- المنشئ
- الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين
Contribute
Not viewed