Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

Ashbrook

How We Built the Soviet Might

 

Korea, Hungary, Cuba, Vietnam, Czechoslovakia, the Middle East – the presence of the Soviet Union has be felt in all these and many other places.  In none of them has the Soviet Union been a promoter of peace.  Soviet space shots, Soviet missiles, Soviet invasions, and Soviet aggression is dependent upon American-made and Western-made technology.

Perhaps as much as 90% to 95% of Soviet technology came directly or indirectly from the United States and its allies.  Now this may sound incredible, but the facts substantiate the claim.  Soviet aggression is dependent upon American-made and Western-made technology.  In effect, the United States and the NATO countries have built the Soviet Union its industrial and military capabilities.  This massive construction job has taken fifty years.  Since the Russian Revolution in 1917, this job has been carried out through trade and the sale of plants, equipment and technical assistance.

By listening to administration spokesmen or some newspaper pundits, you get the impression that trade with Soviets in 1973 is some new miracle cure for the world’s – and particularly America’s – problems.

That is not quite accurate.

Peace through trade?

The idea that trade with the Soviets might bring peace goes back to 1917.  The earliest proposal is dated December, 1917, just a few weeks aster the start of the Bolshevik Revolution.  It was implemented in 1920, while the Bolsheviks held power.  They needed foreign supplies to survive.

Last year, the Soviets needed wheat.  They only had one place to purchase that wheat – the United States.  Did our government use that Soviet need to extract something for the United States in return?  Our government did not.  Instead, the American taxpayers were forced to subsidize the Soviet wheat deal with several hundred million dollars of their tax money.

Seemingly not learning anything from the wheat deal, the administration has now asked for the most-favored nation status and other concessions for the Soviets.  When some have suggested that the Soviets should also give something in return, the State Department’s reply has been that we cannot get involved in the internal affairs of the Soviet Union.  There seems to be no similar prohibition about getting involved in the internal affairs of Rhodesia and other friendly nations.

The American financial newspapers give their accounts of further credits from the Export-Import Bank, American government agencies and American banks.  An estimated $200 million in validated claims is owed by the Kremlin to United States citizens.

The history of our construction of the Soviet Union has been blacked out – much of the key information still classified – along with the other mistakes of the Washington bureaucracy.

Fifty years of dealing with the Soviets has been an economic success for the USSR and a political and economic disaster for the United States.  It has not stopped war, it has not given us peace.  It has given the Soviets increased industrial and military power and the ability to accomplish its never-ceasing goal of world domination.

The United States is spending billions of dollars a year on defense; a defense that is made necessary by the threat and aggression of the Soviet Union and other communist countries.  While we are spending billions on defense, we still help bild that enemy we are defending against.

Let us take a look at a statement made by Stalin to Ambassador Averell Harriman.  This is what Harriman told the State Department that Stalin said to him:  “About two-thirds of all the large industrial enterprises in the Soviet Union had been built with United States help or technical assistance.”

That is right.  In Stalin’s own words, two-thirds of the Soviet large industry was made with U.S. help.  By the way, today, Harriman is still in favor of trade with the Soviet Union.  Another interesting point is that the remaining third was built with considerable help from firms in Europe, including Germany, Britain, France and Italy.

Stalin could have also said that explosive and ammunition plants originated in the United States.  From 1930 to 1945, only two major items, SK-B synthetic rubber and the Ramzin once-through boiler, and a handful of lesser designs can be accurately considered the result of technology.  Almost ever other important technological advance and skill was transferred from the West.

At least 218 firms from the West were involved in the building of Soviet industry and military capability from 1930 to 1945.  Of this number, 139 were American.  The Western buildup of Soviet technology helped make possible Soviet and Soviet aid to North Korea and Communist China while they were fighting in the United States.  The massive technological assistance continues right down to the present day.

Now the Soviet Union has the ability to create any kind of military machine, to ship missiles to Cuba, to supply arms to North Vietnam or to the foes of Israel.  And all this depends on its domestic industry.  In the Soviet Union about three-fourths of the military budget goes on purchases from the Soviet Union.

This expenditure in Soviet industry makes sense.  No army has a machine that churns out tanks.  Tanks are made from alloy steel, plastics, rubber and other materials.  The alloy steel, plastics and rubber are made in Soviet factories to military specifications, just like in the United States.

Missiles are not produced on missile-making machines.  Missiles are fabricated from aluminum alloys, stainless steel, electrical wiring, pumps and so forth.  Those things are made in Soviet factories too.

In other words, the Soviet military gets its componet parts and materials from Soviet industry.  There is a Soviet military-industrial complex just as in our country.  The Soviet military base depends on the Soviet industrial base, just as in our country.  Steel can be used for consumer goods or weapons, just as in our country, when we build their industrial capacity.

This kind of reasoning makes sense to the man in the street.  The farmer in Ohio knows what I mean.  The taxi driver in New York knows what I mean.  But the policy makers in Washington do not accept this kind of common sense reasoning, and never have.

 

Advanced weapon technology relies on sophisticated computers.  Between 1959 and 1970, General Electric, through its European  subsidiaries, sold to the Soviet Union a number of medium capacity computers.  Soviet computer technology has always been years behind that of the West.  GE has been helping the Soviet progress.  IBM and RCA through subsidiaries have also sold computers to the Soviets.  Computers would be the main purchase in any Kissinger-promoted trade expansion with our enemy.

The Soviets also have the largest iron and steel plant in the world.  It is a copy of the U.S. Steel plant in Gary, Indiana.  In fact, all Soviet iron and steel technology comes from the United States and its allies.  The Soviets use open hearths, American electric furnaces, American wide strip mills, Sendzimir mills and son on, all developed in the West and shipped as peaceful trade.

Additionally, all Soviet tube and pipe-making technology comes from the United States and its allies.  If you know anyone in the space business, ask them how many miles of tubes and pipes go into a missile.

The Soviets also have the largest merchant marine in the world, about 6,000 ships.  I have the specifications for each ship.  About two-thirds of them were built outside the Soviet Union.  About four-fifths of the engines for those ships were built outside that country.

There are no ship engines of Soviet design.  Those build inside the USSR are built with foreign technical assistance.  The ships that carried Soviet missiles to Cuba tens years ago had Danish engines made at Bryansk plant in the Soviet Union.  About 100 Soviet ships were used on the Haiphong run to carry Soviet weapons and supplies for Hanoi’s annual aggression.  I was able to identify 84 of these ships.  None of the main engines in them were designed and manufactured inside the USSR.  All the larger and faster vessels on the Haiphong run were built outside the Soviet Union.  None of the main engines in them were designed and manufactured inside the USSR.  All the larger and faster vessels on the Haiphong run were built outside the Soviet Union.  All shipbuilding technology in the USSR comes directly or indirectly from the United States and its NATO allies.

If you think that’s bad, let us take one industry in more detail, motor vehicles.

All Soviet automobile, truck and engine technology comes from the West.  Chiefly, that technology comes from the United States.  The Soviet military has more than 300,000 trucks, all from U.S.-built plants.

Up to 1960 the largest motor vehicle plant in the USSR was at Gorki.  Gorki produces many of the trucks American pilots used to see on the Ho Chi Minh Trail, or would see now if they were flying there.  Gorki produces the chassis for the GAZ-69 rocket launcher used against Israel.  Gorki produces the Soviet version of the Jeep and a half dozen other military vehicles.  These same vehicles were used this month in the Arab attack on Israel.

And Gorki was built by the Ford Motor Company as peaceful trade.

In 1968, we had the so-called Fiat Deal to build a plant at Volgograd, three times larger than Gorki.  Dean Rusk and Walt Rostow told Congress and the American public that this was peaceful trade.  They said the Fiat plant could not build military vehicles.

Let us not kid ourselves.  Any automobile manufacturing plant can produce military vehicles.  I can show anyone who is interested the technical specifications of a proven military vehicle, with cross-country capability – using the same capacity engine as the Russian Fiat plant produces.  But the term Fiat Deal is misleading.  Fiat in Italy does not make automobile manufacturing equipment; Fiat plants in Italy have U.S. equipment.  Fiat did send 1,000 men to Russian for erection of the plant, but over half the equipment came from the United States.

So in the middle of a war that at that time had killed 46,000 Americans and countless Vietnamese with Soviet weapons and supplies, the Johnson administration also supplied false information to Congress and to the American people.

In 1971, the Soviets received equipment and technology for the largest heavy truck plant in the world.  It was known as the Kama River plant.  It will produce 100,000 heavy ten-ton trucks a year, and that is more than all U.S. manufacturers put together.  This will also be the largest plant in the world.  Period.  It will occupy thirty-six square miles.

Will the Kama truck plant have military capability?  The Soviets themselves have answered this one.  The Kama truck will be 50% more than the Zil-130 truck.  Well, that is nice, because that truck is a standard Soviet army truck, the kind used in Vietnam and in the Middle East.

Who built the Zil plant?  A Detroit firm.  Who is building the Kama truck factory?  This is classified as secret by the Washington policy makers.  I do not have to tell you why.  These files are all classified.  I cannot get them declassified.  The government will supply military technology to the Soviets, but it gets a little uptight about the public finding out.  I can understand that.

Of course, it takes a great deal of self-confidence to admit in writing that you are building factories to produce weapons and supplies for a country providing weapons and supplies to kill Americans, Israelis and Vietnamese.

Many people as individuals have protested our suicidal policies. What happens? Well, if you are in Congress, you probably get the strong ram put on you.

If you are in the liberal academic world, you soon find it is alright to protest U.S. assistance to the South Vietnamese, but never, never to protest U.S. help to the Soviets. Forget about the Russian academics being persecuted or the Jews who can not emigrate. We must not say unkind things about the Soviets.

If you press for an explanation, what do they tell you? First, you get the Fulbright line. This is peaceful trade. The Soviets are powerful. They have their own technology. This is a way to build friendship. It is a way to a new world order.

This is demonstrably false. The Soviet tanks in An Loc are not refugees from the Pasadena Rose Bowl parade. The Soviet ships that carry arms to Haiphong are not peaceful. They have weapons on board, not flower children or Russian tourists.

Second, if you do not buy that line you are told, “The Soviets are mellowing.” This is equally false.

The killing in Israel and Vietnam with Soviet weapons does not suggest mellowing. It suggests premeditated aggression. Today – now – the Soviets are sending more arms to the Middle East. For what purpose? To put in a museum?

No one has ever presented hard evidence that trade leads to peace. Why not? Because there is no such evidence. It is an illusion. Our trade in the 1930s with war-bent Japan proved that.

It is true, however, that peace leads to trade. But that is different than what is occurring today. You first need peace and then you can trade. That does not mean if you trade you will get peace. But that seems too logical for the Washington policy makers and it is not what the politicians and their business backers want anyway.

Trade with Germany doubled before World War Two. Did it stop World War Two? Trade with Japan increased before the war. Did it stop the war?

What was in this German and Japanese trade? The same means for war that we are now supplying the Soviets. The Japanese airforce after 1934 depended on U.S. technology. And much of the pushing for Soviet trade today comes from the same groups that were pushing for trade with Hitler and Tojo thirty-five years ago.

The Russian communist party is not mellowing. Concentration camps are still there. The mental hospitals take the overload. Persecution of the Baptists and other Christians continue. Harassment of Jews goes on, and persecution of dissidents continue too.

The only mellowing is when a Harriman and a Rockefeller get together with the bosses in the Kremlin. Some think that is good for business, but it is not much help if you were a GI at the other end of a Soviet rocket in Vietnam.

There is even a question whether trade with the Soviets is good for business. In 1926, a leading Soviet spokesman had this to say about East-West tradeand Western concessions in the Soviet Union: “On the one hand, we admit capitalist elements, we condescend to collaborate with them; on the other hand, our objective is to eliminate completely, to conquer them, to squash them economically as well as socially. It is a furious battle in which blood may necessarily be spilled.”

Immediately preceding Brezhnev’s recent visit to the United States, a leader of the communist party in Moscow stated: “In politics you may conclude alliances with the devil himself if you are certain that you can cheat the devil.”

The Soviets, like Hitler in his book Mein Kampf, are telling us their plans, but too many in the West refuse to believe the Soviets, just as in the 1930s, when many people would not believe Hitler’s own words.

But no one else cares. Not Washington. Not big business. Not the Republican party. Not the Democratic party. Few of us buck the tide to warn you.

And, meanwhile, 100,000 Americans have been killed in Vietnam and Korea – by our own technology.

The only response from Washington and each administration is the effort to hush up the scandal. These are things not to be talked about. The professional smokescreen – again – about the peaceful trade continues.

We can stop the Soviets and their friends in Hanoi, in the Middle East, in Cuba or anywhere, anytime we want to, without using a single gun or anything more dangerous than a piece of paper or telephone call. We have Soviet technical dependence as an instrument of world peace. The most humane weapon that can be conceived.

We have always had that option. We have never used it. Americans should wonder why.