Antimissile coalition battles deployment

Scan page 11

deal with this. The right-wing elements within the parties actually support the missiles.

So it came down to ordinary individuals taking personal responsibility, especially women who are learning that they can do that. They are finding out how imaginative ways of demonstrating against these missiles can confound and confuse the military and civil authority.

They develop in many ways, and they make links that they weren't aware of before. Many of the women who came to the camp didn't know, for example, what's happening in the miners' villages. They didn't know what's happening in a lot of other campaigns-the anti-abortion lobby and the whole issue of violence being perpetrated against women in society generally, for example.

So although Greenham was formed and still exists predominately to oppose the missiles, it has made all sorts of links. The symbol we have adopted, the spider's web, represents these interlinking and interreacting movements.

S.A.: How were the ties first made between the Greenham women and striking miners?

John: Support groups were formed to maintain direct links with the mining communities, raising food and money for them. Whenever Greenham women went out and spoke about the cause we're predominantly concerned with, we always made people aware of the direct links between the miners' struggle and the nuclear-weapons issue.

A whole range of people, including people from the British Socialist Action, took an enormous part in introducing the miners' wives to women from Greenham. They urged women from the mining communities to go down and actually spend a day at the camp—to see for themselves what was happening there.

The wives The following interview with Thomas Van Duin was conducted in San Francisco by Larry Cooperman on Nov. 13, 1984. Van Duin is a member of the Leiden, Netherlands, chapter of the Campaign Against Cruise Missiles and of the Socialist Workers Party (Dutch section of the Fourth International).

Socialist Action: We have received many reports in this country about continuing demonstrations against the threat of nuclear war and against the placing of U.S. missiles in Western Europe. How did this movement develop in Holland?

Thomas Van Duin: In 1979 NATO decided upon a schedule to deploy cruise missiles in Europe. It would take nine years. Deployment in Holland would be in the last year.

The strongest peace groups formed a coalition against the cruise missiles and there have been three main campaigns in the last four years. In 1981 we had a major demonstration in Amsterdam. About 250,000 people showed up.

The second campaign was in October 1983 in The Hague, which brought together about half a million people. This was the largest rally we have had in Holland since World War II.

A very important aspect of this campaign was that the leading labor-union federation, the Federation of Dutch Unions (FNV), decided to join the national antimissile coalition and to mobilize its members for this rally in The Hague. In 1980 the unions decided upon one principal slogan, "No bombs but jobs, which indicates their awareness.

The FNV decided to support the third main campaign-held in May 1984—by having a symbolic 15-minute strike in which all the different unions that are members of the federation joined. About 600,000 workers participated. This is a very important signal as to the growing strength of the peace S.A.: The actual deployment of Pershing and cruise missiles in Europe, then, didn't produce a demoralizing effect in Holland?

Van Duin: No. But last June the parliament made a decision that was a big disappointment to the peace movement. It voted to go ahead with the deployment of the missiles unless the Soviet Union agreed to stop the deployment of its SS-20s. It is likely that in November 1985 parliament will make a final decision to go ahead on schedule.

S.A.: Did the Social Democratic Party oppose the decision in parliament to proceed with the deployment of the missiles?

Van Duin: Yes, and because it is a labor party it influences the discussions in the unions. But it is unclear what their strategy will be given their concern to win a majority in the next election. This consideration might paralyze their movement activity.

S.A.: Could a wing develop in the peace movement that would support the election of the Social Democrats as a means to end deployment?

Van Duin: Perhaps. Many branches of the party are more radical than the leadership. Five years ago the party took an official stand against the cruise

GEEN NIEUWE

KERNWAPENS IN EUROPA Poster announcing October 1983 protest in The Hague missiles and agreed to join the main campaigns as a result of the pressure from the local branches already in the movement. The local branches might continue their activity.

S.A.: Is there much awareness within the Dutch peace movement of U.S. intervention in Central America?

Van Duin: Unfortunately, until now the perspective of combining the fight against cruise missiles with the issue of U.S. intervention in Central America has not been supported by the major peace groups. On the other hand, there exists in Holland a strong Central America movement, which has decided to orient to the peace movement and to try to educate its members about this issue.

Central America will become an increasingly important issue in the next elections - because the relationship between U.S. foreign policy and NATO policy is very strong. The peace movement could become more and more an antiwar movement. This is what we in the Socialist Workers Party are continually stressing.

SOCIALIST ACTION MAY 1985