Soviet-Japan talks

Press, 24 January 1986, Page 16

Soviet-Japan talks

Sir,—John S. Pallott’s assertion: “in today’s world peace will depend upon the voluntary dissolution of the Soviet Empire" is a pathetic delusion. He further claims: “These imperialists have no right to a legitimate presence in either the Pacific or Indian Oceans.” One Soviet naval base in each ocean is apparently enough to fuel his hostility. Since he so strongly supports the Japanese case for the return of islands it seized from Russia in 1904 (and lost in 1945), can he also justify the Japanese imperialists’ invasions of Korea in 1905, Russia in 1919-22, Manchuria in 1931 and 1939, China in 1937-45 and South-East Asia and the entire western Pacific in 1941-45? Russia withdrew from its very briefly-held Hawaiian whaling station in 1812. Can M. Pallott name a single act of Russian aggression in the Pacific in the 174 years since?—Yours, ptc *■’ M. T. MOORE. January 23, 1986.

Sir,—J. S. Pallott’s contribution to the recent spate of antiSoviet propaganda in “The Press” features and news items suffers from acceptance of biglie type distortions of what imperialism actually is. The “Soviet Empire” label is one such distortion. Imperialism is the development of the chaos of capitalism. It was the cause of World Wars I and 11, the United States aggression against Vietnam, and United States actions aimed at bolstering or restoring parts of its own Latin and. South American em-

empire that should be voluntarily dissolved. J. S. Pallott seems unaware that the United States is using Japan as part of its American lake for a nuclear first strike, in spite of protests by the Japanese people. This is imperialism, which no attempts, under cover of the anti-Soviet bandwaggon, can dignify or justify as a "legitimate presence.”—Yours, etc., R. TATE. January 23, 1986.