...I will not speak here on behalf of the Mulroney Government and the Reagan Administration.
(This is one reason why i omit the authorities in my present correspondence though certainly we realize that, at minimum, i can still claim to represent those interests noted in the 1978 contexts.)
I explain these circumstances in an "open letter" to establish once more the actual terms of reference for the original representations and goals--which provide answers for this crisis which the "policy of silence" doesn't.
We did provide a legitimate means for the peace movement we anticipated beyond our 1978 work to pursue its goals--and because of the original "policy of silence," all that work was prepared by me and put in my name.
To leave the issue of "(my) present situation" unsatisfactorily settled is to risk losing credibility with the peace movement on its largest scale and risk the final annihilation of all humanity by such failure as well.
Given "(my) present situation" and how much depends upon it being dealt with expeditiously and fairly, i doubt that a long, drawn-out judicial battle, with its verdict already clear to many,
would serve the cause of world peace as well as this process of "open letters." As we agreed this was also the case in the 1978 "situation," no oath of secrecy by me was sought by the Carter Administration, as you would recall. Many times i have requested new instructions from the Trudeau Government, then the Clark Government, then the Trudeau Government, then the Turner Government, and the the Mulroney Government about whether they believe this condition of the work should be
changed--and i have never to date received any advisement in response to my requests.
Likewise, i have many times requested such new instructions from the Carter Administration and then the Reagan--and again, i have never to date received any advisement in response to my requests.
And equivalently, i have many times requested such new instructions from Dr. Waldheim and then Javier Perez de Cuellar--and again, i have never to date received any advisement in response to my requests.
The only sensible perspective on the issue i have seen from any of these individuals according to what i have seen reported by the press is the one by United Nations Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar, noted on the List of Contents page for my submission to Ambassador Glenn Babb.
I believe it would be appropriate to repeat it here. He said:
"I feel the question may be justifiably put to the leading nuclear-weapon powers: By what right do they decide the fate of all humanity?...The responsibility assumed by the great powers is now no longer to their populations alone; it is to every country and every people, to all of us."
And in relation to this and the other quote on the List of Contents for the submission to
Ambassador Babb by Donald Woods,* perhaps this further word by Mr. Woods* should be considered.
"It sounds reasonable to say that 'South African problems should be solved by South Africans' with the obvious corollary that outsiders should not interfere; that the world should stand back and leave the conflict here to South Africa only. The world cannot afford that lunatic luxury. What is disputed here is not purely a South African issue--it is an issue which touches all peoples everywhere. It is the question of whether discrimination by law based on skin pigmentation is acceptable or not, and this question is the concern of every person everywhere because every person has some color of skin.
Two-thirds of the people of the world are 'colored' or, to use the insultingly arrogant phrase, 'non-white.' Therefore what is done to people of color here is a deep form of affront to people of color everywhere. And that it is done by whites here makes it the concern of whites everywhere. It is the most contentious moral crisis in the world today, and those who refuse to interest or involve themselves in it are giving tacit approval to it. No human being of conscience can remain neutral in a moral crisis of conscience. Apartheid exisits in defiance of this and this is why, today, it has now become a real threat to world peace."
--from "Biko", copyright 1978
by Donald Woods*
If you decide these communications with the South Africans and international groups can help
bring "all of us" closer to ending apartheid and securing world peace, feel free to contact
You can count on my cooperation towards these goals. And i believe that Commonwealth investments in South Africa could be redirected to nearby sites. I could see no other way to help Desmond Tutu short of disclosing copies of my statements to him to the Botha Government. He has since shown me he has followed my advise and he did agree to accept the document copies while knowing they don't presently support the call for economic sanctions.
A Botha Government treason charge against him would be disputed by me on behalf of him, the oppressed victims of racial discrimination everywhere, and on behalf of "a Canadian concern" and "a Christian concern."
I apologize for this being longer than three pages in length.
It could mean President Reagan won't read it, according to what i've read about his habits.
Perhaps you can edit this for him, Prime Minister Mulroney can, or Senator Kennedy will, (when i send him a copy around the end of this month also). Undoubtedly such things are done for him regularly.
In USA Today a number of years ago, i read that President Reagan said he had recently read General Sir John Hackett's book, "The Third World War". ...My copy of it is 494 pages long...
I remain, as always,
Gordon C. Wong
*-THERE IS A FOOTNOTE ABOUT MY MEETING WITH DONALD WOODS ON THE PAGE TO BE FOUND IF YOU TAKE A BRIEF SIDESTEP HERE.
SUPPOSING MR. MULRONEY GAVE HER A COPY OF THIS STATEMENT, MRS. THATCHER CHOSE NOT TO REPLY TO IT.
INCIDENTALLY, THE OCTOBER, 1987 STOCK MARKETS CRASH--THE GREATEST IN HISTORY--OCCURS THE MONDAY MORNING AFTER A COMMONWEALTH CONFERENCE IN VANCOUVER WHICH FAILED TO PRODUCE AN ACCORD ON APARTHEID.
...OF COURSE I WAS LIVING HERE IN VANCOUVER AT THAT TIME.
HEY! THESE PEOPLE WERE 'DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED'. SURELY THEY WERE DOING THEIR "BEST" TO
END THE HORRENDOUS APARTHEID SYSTEM?
CONTINUE WITH THE SECOND OF THE FIVE SIDESTEPS HERE.