COMMUNISM IN CANADA

Wanganui Chronicle, 17 March 1947, Page 6

COMMUNISM IN CANADA

NATIONAL LOYALTIES BROKEN The 250,000-word report of the Canadian Royal commission which inquired into Russian spying in Canada emphasises that pernaps the most startling single aspect of the entire fifth column network was the uncanny success with which the Soviet agents were able to find Canadians willing to betray their country. The study cells of the Canadian Communist Party, where men had already learned complete ooedience to the party’s dictates, provided a fertile recruiting ground. In the indoctrination courses, the party constantly emphasised the importance of organism ion as such, and gradually created, in the mind ol the new adherent er sympathiser, an overriding moral sense of ‘ loyalty to th2 party.” The Commission s<.ys: “Th.; loyally to the part>' in due course takes tnc place in the members mind ot the earlier loyalty to certain principles professed oy the party propaganda. “In view of the rigidly hierarchic organisation of the Communist Party, particularly in its secret sections, tne concept of ‘loyalty tu the party’ means in practice rigid cctdience or adherence to those party members who are recognised as occupying a senior position in the hierareny, and particularly to such persons as Carr, the National organiser, and Rose, the Quebec organiser. “ . . . . this loyalty and obedience to the leadership of this organisation takes precedence over the adherent's Ic-yalty to Canada, entitles him to disregard his oaths of ailegianc? and secrecy, and thus destroys ms integrity as a citizen.” Research Groups A good illustration of the ease with whicn “The Director” in Moscow was able to obtain espionage agents from the secret membership ot the Canadian Communist Party in selected Canadian organisations is provided in tnc ‘‘Researcn Group.” This group consisted of three young scientists, two of whom were members of a Communist ceil made up oi scientists most of whom were employed in the National Research Council in Ottawa.

But by this time they were keeping their political views and the existence of their study group secret from the associates whicn wnom they worked. The Canadian go-between reported of them to Major Rogov, oi the Soviet Embassy, before he approached them for espionage purposes: “They aiready leel tne need for maintaining a very high degree of security and Lax.ng abnormal precautions at their normal meetings, since they are definitely not labelled with anj political affiliation. “One or two have even opposed tnc introduction of new members to outgroup on the ground that it would endanger tiieir own. security.’ 1 The corn was npe for tne harvest.

Soviet military intelligence wanted additional spies in Canadian scientific research organisations. Wthin a few weeks these three young scientists were engaging actively in the espionage operations. The Commission's report confments: “Thus in a short period, what had been merely a political discussion group, made up of Canadian scientists as members of a Canadian political party, was transformed on instructions from Moscow into an active espionage organisation working against Canada on behalf of a foreign Power. ‘lt is particularly startling that the three scientists tnemseives supplied acne of the initiative for this transformation.” Woman Agent The case of Kathleen Willsher is another illustration ol what was achieved along these lines. She had joined a secret "cell” of the Communist Party, and as ear.y .... 1935 agreed to give secret information, which sfc£-obtained from her work in the olfice of the High Commissioner for the United Kingdom at Ottawa, to Fred Rose, M.P., one of Colonel Zaootin’s key men. From 1942 to 1945 she gave similar information to Eric Adams, a man whom she regarded a s her superior in the secret of the Communist Party. She told ,flie commission that Rose and her that this information for the guidance of the National Executive of the Communist Parly. She also said that when Rose and Adams made these requests, whih she recognised were improper, she had some struggle with her conscience. The report comments on her evidence; “She felt her own position in the Communist Party to be a relatively humble one, tnat her one important contribution to the cause of the party lay in the transmission of the secret information to which her official position gave her access, and that it was expected of her that she shoo’d not hesitate to make this information available on request to the party leadership.” Reluctance To Give Information Mazerail was a young scientist in the “Research Group,” and was most reluctant to obey the request of the Canadian go-between, Lunan, to hand over secret information for Soviet agents. His evidence reads: “If I had refused Lunan, by the same token 1 would have turned round and then left the group; and, although in a way I wanted to do that, because I didn’t like th e group itself, 1 concurred with many of the things that, they stood for. Question: What was your obligation that you felt to deliver material to Lunan? Answer :I don’t know.

It must, have been something pretty sirong that infiuened you to do that, Mr Mazerall. wasn’t it.?- I suppose so.

What was it ? It was not money, you say? No. Well, just the whole background; what I have been trying to tell you.

The report comments: "Thus the leaders of the fifth column solved what woulu appear at first sight 1.0 be their most difficult, problem —that, of motivation , or finding capable and well-placed Canadians who would be willing to engage in espionage against Canada for a foreign Power —by means of a. widespread system of propaganda and in particular by organising a system of intensive study groups. What the report does not explain is the mystery how well eduated, basically honourable, and intelligent men ever came to be mixed up in a business that, of itself, restricted their normal right, f.d privilege to think over and decide matters for themselves. In other words, why did they voluntarily give away their freedom and place themselves in a position to be taken for a ride by mm who were, by far, their intellectual inferiors?