Newspaper of the Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist)
170, Wandsworth Road, London, SW8 2LA. Phone 0171 627 0599,
Return to Workers' Weekly Index Page
London Region Party Organisations Restart the Work in Earnest
European Union Set to Strengthen Itslef in Contending for World Hegemony British Finance Capital Aims to Stay at Centre
Military Threats against Iraq Growing
Struggles against Cuts in Health Care: Fight Continues against Run-Down of Queen Mary's, Roehampton
France: Unemployed Occupy Benefit Offices, Organise Demonstrations
North East: Interview with Delegate to South Tyneside Trade Union Council
US Ambition for a Unipolar World under Global Challenge
Text of Letter from International Commission of Inquiry on Economic Sanctions
7th Anniversary of Gulf War: Demonstration Demands: "Hands Off Iraq!"
| ON JANUARY 30, 1972, British paratroopers gunned down and killed 14 Derry citizens, most of them teenagers, taking part in a peaceful protest. It has become known to the world as Bloody Sunday and one of the great crimes of the British state against the Irish people. It was not some "mistake" of the Army command which can be wished away by an apology from Tony Blair. It was and remains a symbol of the nature of British rule over the six north-eastern counties of Ireland – based in the last analysis on brute military force, unjust and a leftover of 19th century colonialism no longer tolerable in modern times. Now all of twenty-six years later peace talks are taking place. The British and Irish governments have presented as the basis for discussion a document entitled "Propositions on Heads of Agreement", and are aiming for agreement by May. Mo Mowlam has hailed it as a breakthrough. But it too and the events surrounding it smack of 19th century colonialism. Over recent months murder and mayhem carried out by sinister groups, with the hand of the British state all too apparent, have created a climate of anxiety and tension, cynically designed to help rush through a new arrangement favourable to English and other capital. The proposals include a Northern Ireland Assembly, a North-South Ministerial Council, a so-called "Council of the Isles", and constitutional changes regarding Ireland's claim to the six counties and Britain's readiness to cede its rule over this territory but only with "majority consent". But how can these be the basis of discussion? How can the basis of discussion be the assumption that partition will continue and that Britain has sovereignty over part of Ireland, which characterises these proposals? The basis of discussion can only be the sovereignty of the Irish people over their own territory and the right of self-determination of the Irish people as a whole. So much was acknowledged by John Major's government when they stated in the Downing Street Declaration of 1993 "the right of self-determination of the people of the island of Ireland". Later they said Britain had no selfish political or economic interest in Ireland and in the Framework Document setting up the talks said that there would be no matters excluded and no pre-conceived conclusions. These words never became deeds and Tony Blair has now swept them aside altogether. Sinn Fein have rightly rejected the proposals as the basis of discussion. The working class and progressive people in Britain cannot accept them either. Such "new " arrangements are not new at all. They are the continuation of 19th century colonial arrangements and would bring only further disaster, further discord and bloodshed for the people both of Ireland and of Britain. They would leave unresolved the situation which gave rise to such a crime against the people as Bloody Sunday. Any serious discussions can only start by acknowledging the sovereignty of the Irish people and their right of self-determination. The demand of the working class and all progressive people in Britain must be that the number one item be immediate steps toward British withdrawal and an end to British interference in the affairs of the Irish people. This would be the road to peace and open the way to the Irish people healing the divisions caused by centuries of foreign rule, reuniting their country and enabling good neighbourly relations to be developed between Britain and Ireland on a free and equal basis. This would be the best memorial to those slain so cruelly on Bloody Sunday. |
London Region Party Organisations Restart the Work in EarnestBASIC ORGANISATIONS of RCPB(ML) in the London region, as well as the collectives of the Party in the work of journalism and of the technical base, have reported to Workers' Weekly how they have restarted the work in earnest in the first weeks of 1998, responding to the call of the Party for 1998. As the editorial in last week's newspaper pointed out, it is not that the Party is setting a new programme for 1998, but that there are possibilities to make advances precisely along the line of march that the Party has set, particularly with its core programme to Improve the Content, Extend the Readership of Workers' Weekly. The editorial also pointed out that the key to these advances is that the Party members and activists work on the basis of the strength of the collective. The basis for the success of this work was laid in 1997 in establishing the technical base and in strengthening Workers' Weekly as the scaffolding around which the Party is built and further strengthened. The important task in 1998 lies in regularising the newspaper, and organising to Improve the Content, Extend the Readership on that basis. We therefore think it appropriate at this time to reprint the resolutions of the London Regional Consultative Forum which took place on June 22, 1997. There were objective reasons which prevented the regularisation of Workers' Weekly in the second half of 1997. Nevertheless, the newspaper was consolidated in its new format in that period. The Party organisations in the London region are reaffirming the Party's programme as embodied in these resolutions, and we are confident that organising on this basis the work of all the members and activists will make great strides. |
Resolutions1. On Extending the Readership Recognising the necessity to Extend the Readership of Workers' Weekly, this regional consultative forum resolves to month by month increase the sales of Workers' Weekly according to a plan and develop a regular readership in this coming six month period. In particular it resolves to tackle the question of organising workers, youth and students and other sections to study, write for and disseminate the newspaper, and that all activists present at this forum take the lead in this work; it further resolves to take further initiatives to develop a network of readers of Workers' Weekly and increase the reports of the struggles of the workers and people in the localities so that these are reflected in the newspaper. 2. On Improving the Content Being aware of the on-going struggle to Improve the Content of Workers' Weekly, all activists present at this regional consultative forum resolve to consciously participate in the work to raise the quality and quantity of the articles, and intensify the efforts to look to the future in solving the theoretical and ideological problems which arise in this work. Bearing in mind that no activist can remain aloof from this work and the direct link between strengthening Workers' Weekly and the struggle against the class enemy and its social props, this forum further resolves to sharpen the cutting edge of this work in waging the class struggle against the anti-social offensive in the context of the political programme to Stop Paying the Rich – Increase Investments in Social Programmes. 3. On Regularising the Newspaper This regional consultative forum resolves to further strengthen and professionalise the technical and journalistic work in order to achieve and maintain the regularisation of Workers' Weekly on the basis of the highest possible quality of the form and content of the newspaper. 4. On the Raising of Finances Conscious of the absolute necessity to continuously raise finance for the Party's work of preparing the subjective conditions for revolution, and in particular at this time for the demands of the programme to Improve the Content, Extend the Readership of Workers' Weekly which give rise to specific financial requirements for this project, this regional consultative forum resolves to raise an immediate sum (to be decided on) on the basis of the guideline that all who support the programme politically should also support it financially; it further resolves to raise the regular income in the region by a minimum of 20% in the immediate period. |
| AS ECONOMIC AND MONETARY UNION (Emu) of the European Union approaches on January 1, 1999, a primary consideration of the various European powers is the contention for dominance on the world scale by the European Union as a bloc. This is a consideration not only on the political front, but on the economic and financial fronts, not to mention the European Union as a military power. At the same time, the main players in the EU are anxious to further their own interests, and are manoeuvring to this end and are clashing with the other European powers as the interests of the financial oligarchies of the various states come into contradiction. Meanwhile, the interests of the people are left out of the equation and their political and national sovereignty trampled underfoot. These reactionary features of the EU are standing out in sharper relief as the date for Emu approaches, and have also been highlighted by the continuing financial crisis in Asia. This crisis of the so-called "tiger economies" has had the finance capitalists licking their lips as they see endless possibilities for sinking their claws deeper into Asia. The European finance capitalists, aware of the opportunities to attempt to dominate the economies of the Asian countries that the US, Japan and the IMF are seizing, have also thrown their hat into the ring. Philippe Maystadt, the Belgian finance minister and chairman of the IMF's interim committee, on January 19 led calls for a new trilateral dialogue between members of the future Emu and the US and Japan, with the aim of further strengthening the role of the European Union as against other financial and economic blocs. The call appears to find support with the US, which is adopting the strategy that a consolidated European membership inside the G7 will serve its interests. In other words, US imperialism has dreams of dominating a united Europe, together with Russia, as a stepping stone for world hegemony. However, not all of the members of the EU approved of this initiative, backed as it is by France. Germany, for example, stressed the role of the G7 industrialised countries in working alongside the IMF to manage the international financial system. As for Britain, the Chancellor, Gordon Brown, who chaired the Brussels meeting at which the Belgian finance minister made his call, poured cold water on it, suggesting that it had little support. Britain has its own aims in the matter. Britain, along with Denmark, Sweden and Greece, is set to remain outside the single currency zone. The British government is therefore concerned that the representatives of the euro zone should not be considered as the "voice of Europe", as it has been denied a seat at the euro table, despite Tony Blair's pleas and cajoling to the contrary. Rather, it is seeking to make the City of London the centre of European financial affairs, not to mention those of the world as a whole, by other means. In this respect, the Bank of England is to launch an "international roadshow" to demonstrate the City's readiness to deal in euros as soon as the European Union introduces the single currency. Its deputy governor is to lead a delegation to New York, Zurich, Tokyo, Hong Kong and Singapore comprising of senior bankers with links to each of these financial centres. Its argument is that since it is already, it is claimed, the world's largest foreign exchange trading centre, the City must become the leading centre for trading the euro. These developments are fraught with danger to the people of Britain, Europe and the whole world. In particular, Britain's quest for European and world leadership poses a great danger, and can only contribute to the increasing threat of world war as the rivalry between the big powers and their contending blocs intensifies. The working class must fight for the dismantling of all economic as well as military blocs and in particular must fight for withdrawal from and dismantling of the European Union. |
| The military build-up in the Gulf is growing as the US and Britain once
again are adopting the role of international gangsters and attempting to use
the threat of force to bludgeon Iraq to accept the US dictate.
They use as the pretext that once more Iraq is opposing the predominance of US
and British personnel in the UN teams purporting to oversee the dismantling of
what they term Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. The Iraqi government
complains that they are also being used as spying missions and protests against
the violation of Iraqi sovereignty. The Iraqi people have also suffered the
punitive and disastrous results of seven years of sanctions which have caused
the death and untold suffering of millions, especially the most vulnerable. The
government of Iraq has warned that they will consider a six-month deadline for
the UN inspectors to end their work unless sanctions are lifted.
Iraq is refusing to bow down to the threats and dictate of the US and Britain.
In response the US has built up a strike force in the Gulf of over 300 combat
aircraft, together with several warships armed with cruise missiles. Britain is
sending the aircraft carrier Invincible as part of the military build-up. Britain is practically alone among the allies of the United States in following the lead of US imperialism in regard to the continued threats against Iraq and other "western" powers are refusing to be drawn passively in America's wake. It underlines that the issue for the US and Britain is not Iraq or the regime of Saddam Hussein as such, but the threat to the world's people and sovereign nations that they must passively submit to the demand of the US for a unipolar world, give up their struggle for whatever social system they choose and passively toe the US line. The peoples and nations of the world will never be reconciled to such international gangsterism. |
Struggles against Cuts in Health Care:
| FOLLOWING the vigil on January 13, reported in last week's issue of Workers' Weekly, when many concerned health workers and other activists protested against plans to close acute services in Queen Mary's Hospital, Roehampton, and demanded a reversal of the cuts in the health service, opposition has continued to further plans to run-down and threaten the hospital with closure. The history of closures at Queen Mary's is not untypical of hospitals under threat up and down the country. Early in 1997, paediatric services were removed from the hospital. Subsequently the casualty unit closed. Junior doctor accreditation was lost for the accident and emergency department because of the absence of on-site emergency surgery and paediatrics. Now the proposed transfer of the majority of acute services to Kingston Hospital represents a further serious attack on the health services provided to the local community. What is needed to meet the people's health care is an increase in investment in the hospital and others like it, not to further cut services. The latest proposals concerning Queen Mary's Hospital to go to "consultation" are to move the burns unit, which was set up during the first world war and is world famous for its pioneering work, to Chelsea and Westminster Hospital. London Health Emergency Campaigns Director, Geoff Martin, said of the proposals: "What the health authorities are saying is that the burns unit will close because there is no longer a full range of services on the Queen Mary's site. They have created a situation where there aren't the supporting services needed at the hospital. This consultation is a farce – it's a foregone conclusion and is a rubber-stamping process rather than a consultation. And I think there's a real danger that this service – which has gained a world-wide reputation – will just become submerged at Chelsea and Westminster." He accused the Health Authorities of "a campaign to undermine the hospital" and said that their aims were "to squeeze services away from Queen Mary's". |
France:
| OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS the unemployed, workers and youth have organised dozens of occupations of government Unemployment Centres throughout France. On January 13 the second demonstration in a week of jobless workers and others took place in Paris with an estimated 10,000 people taking part. On the same day 6,000 workers protested in Marseilles and protests also took place in other cities. Another national day of demonstrations is to take place on January 20. The protests have been organised by three national unemployed associations, AC!, APEIS and MNCP as well as the CGT Committee for the Defence of the Unemployed. The protestors' demands include a 3,000 franc (£250) Christmas bonus for the unemployed, a general increase of 1,500 francs (£125) a month in minimum social benefits so as to have guaranteed income without conditions attached, equal to the minimum wage; an extension of the Revenu Minimum d'Insertion for the under 25 year olds and students; and a total review of the unemployment benefit system. The official level of unemployment in France is 12.4%, which represents 3.1 million workers. A recent poll showed that 48.8% of the unemployed do not have the necessary medical care because of the low rate of unemployment benefits. |
Demonstration Called by CAEFIn addition to the formal meetings of the Council of Ministers of the European Union held throughout the year in Brussels and Luxembourg, Britain, which holds the EU Presidency for the first six months of 1998, is inviting ministers from all member states to a number of "informal" meetings in Britain. The first of these, of Justice and Home Affairs ministers, is to take place on Thursday and Friday, January 29 and 30, in Birmingham. The Campaign Against Euro-Federalism (CAEF) has called a demonstration on this occasion to take place on Thursday, January 29, outside the meeting to oppose cuts in public spending. Further details are to be announced. |
North East:
| Workers' Weekly recently interviewed a delegate to South Tyneside Trade Union Council. We print the interview below. Q. Can you speak about the views being expressed in the Trades Union Council on the present course of the New Labour government? A. I think one of the most striking features is that people are realising that New Labour has come to power with the same agenda as the Tories and is continuing the attacks on the people. On January 7, the Trades Union Council discussed this question. In the discussion it was clear that what particularly concerned people was the determination of the government to cut benefits and public services. There was concern about the "New Deal" for the unemployed as well because none of the serious questions that the Trades Council had raised about this scheme had been answered satisfactorily and I think there is growing realisation that this is just another cheap labour scheme. In fact the view was expressed that the aim of the scheme may be more sinister in that the shortage of skilled labour is presenting the local factory and shipyard owners with a problem of increasing wage demands. Shortage of skilled labour has become an acute problem for the capitalists and the scheme is one attempt to address this problem on the cheap and has nothing to do with ending mass unemployment among the youth. Q. What stand is the Trades Union Council taking on these questions? A. The Trades Union Council has been encouraging its affiliated unions to get active on these questions by discussing them in its Newsletter. On February 4 we will be discussing a motion that has already been submitted by one of the affiliated branches. If passed this motion will be submitted to the Northern Region of the TUC. The motion calls for a campaign of action to fight against the increasing cuts imposed against the most vulnerable sections of society and to demand increased investments in the NHS, education, social spending and other public services, and reverse the privatisation of public services. The motion highlights that in essence the aim of the government is to take society even further back along the road of dismantling what all in the workers' movement would recognise as the hallmarks of a modern society and that the government is following the strategic aim of reducing the proportion of national wealth that goes into public services and the public sector. Q. Do you expect the Northern Region of the TUC to take a stand on this motion? A. This question was discussed at the meeting as well. One thing that was pointed out was that John Monks, leader of the TUC, in his New Year message said that he was concerned that the strategy of the present government was to reduce the proportion of national wealth that goes into public services and the public sector. In other words, the leaders of the TUC are conscious of this problem. That much seems clear. Therefore they should actively take up this campaign. But we shall see. Q. What do you think are the lessons for the workers' movement? A. I think that the main lesson is that the workers' movement must take up the struggle to defeat the anti-social offensive whether it is championed by a Conservative government, or now by a New Labour government. Workers have to have their own political aim and activate themselves around an agenda and a programme that represents their interests and those of society. I think the other crucial thing is that it is only possible for the government to "think the unthinkable" and attack the most vulnerable sections in society because with the election of New Labour the capitalists have created a new arrangement between big business, government and trade unions at the top of society. This was seen most starkly at the TUC Congress last year with this new "partnership" being promoted as the way forward when this "partnership" is actually taking society back into medievalism. This new arrangement has imposed itself at every level in the trade union movement and we see its harmful effects in the Trades Union Council as well. Therefore workers are going to have to learn how to organise on a new basis at the place of work and build new arrangements in their communities and in society that are in keeping with their political aim and programme to take society forward. |
| Workers' Weekly is reprinting an article on US foreign policy in 1997 which appeared in China Daily with the above title. From the point of view of China's interests to establish a multipolar world, the article analyses the development of US attempts to establish itself as the sole superpower over Europe and Asia. A significant adjustment in US foreign policy took place in 1997, with the identification of Europe and the Asia-Pacific as two focal regions in its global diplomacy, under which it is seeking to establish US leadership in world affairs. It was also a year when US foreign policy met with stern challenges. Last January, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright emphasised at her first press conference after taking office that Europe and the Asia-Pacific would top President Bill Clinton's foreign affairs agenda during his second-term. The intention, as some analysts noted, was to set up two US-led communities on both the Atlantic and Pacific rims in the next century and establish a unipolar world order by "engagement and enlargement". Contrary to the US wish, the world has been moving further towards a multipolar pattern over the year, posing a grim challenge to US global ambitions. In Europe, the US has spared no efforts to push NATO's eastward expansion to bring the former Soviet allies in central and eastern Europe under its wing. Its aim was to fill the security vacuum left by the collapse of the former Soviet Union and to strategically cripple Russia so that no power in the region could pose any real threat to US interests. Despite the jump-start of its expansion at the July Madrid summit, NATO's cohesion has become somewhat weakened rather than strengthened. And on trade and security matters, trans-Atlantic disputes have intensified. First the US and its European allies could not see eye to eye over which east and central European countries should be the first group to join NATO. Then, NATO's European members hoped to gradually establish, through NATO's enlargement, a European defence system with less US control. France, for example, challenged the US control over NATO's Southern European Command. It criticised the US at the Madrid summit for arrogating power to itself and decided to delay its involvement in NATO's military integration mechanism. The European Union (EU) had a quarrel with the US in September over the merger of two giant American aircraft makers, the Boeing Co. and the McDonnell Douglas Corp., bringing the two sides again to the brink of a trade war. And the EU still refuses to budge in its challenge to the D'Amato Bill and the Helms-Burton Law, which were designed to tighten sanctions against Libya, Iran and Cuba but badly hurt the interests of EU countries. Most importantly, US diplomacy in Europe faces resistance from Russia, which favours a multipolar world in which it can establish its own rightful place. Throughout the year, Russia has been opposing NATO's eastward expansion for security reasons. Although the US initiated a redefining of future NATO-Russia relations to allow Moscow's voice on security matters, expanded the G-7 summit to include Russia and promised Russia's entry into the Paris Club and World Trade Organisation, these efforts failed to silence Russia's opposition to NATO's enlargement. Instead, US-Russian relations have clearly cooled down compared to the initial stage of the post-Cold War era. Shortly after she became secretary of state, Albright put China, Japan and South Korea on her visiting agenda. In September, the US and Japan signed a revised Defence Guidelines for Military Co-operation to strengthen their alliance. In October when Chinese President Jiang Zemin paid a state visit to the US, the two sides agreed to establish a constructive strategic partnership. Together with China, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and South Korea, the US launched the four-party talks on the Korean Peninsula issue. However, the adjusted US foreign policy in the region also faces great challenges. The strengthening of the US-Japan military alliance, a product of the Cold War, has made the Asian-Pacific countries more vigilant and worried. Analysts noted that the US intention in strengthening its alliance with Japan was to play a more dominant role in the Asian-Pacific affairs. A Pentagon report has said that the US will continue to attach great importance to its relations with countries in Europe and the Asia-Pacific for quite a long time to come, because it is unlikely that a power capable of challenging US leadership in international affairs will emerge from other parts of the world. (Reprinted from China Daily, January 5, 1998) |
Text of Letter from International Commission of Inquiry on Economic SanctionsSeven years have passed since the US and its British and other allies, acting under the auspices of the UN Security Council, conducted a war against Iraq in which facilities essential to civilian life and economic productivity were destroyed throughout the country, in violation of specific provisions of the UN Charter, the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the Nuremberg Charter, and the laws of armed conflict. During these past seven years, economic sanctions have been imposed on Iraq by the UN Security Council clearly acting under US pressure. This has resulted in the deaths of around a million Iraqis, most of them children. The sanctions have violated the provisions of the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other covenants, and constitute a crime against humanity of immense proportions. Britain's government talks of a "moral approach" to foreign policy. Yet in the case of the Iraq sanctions, its adopts policies which are almost universally perceived by international public opinion to run directly counter to both the legal and the moral norms of international behaviour. Our Commission of Inquiry, which is headed by four former heads of state and government and a number of other international senior states people, takes the opportunity of this anniversary of the war's outbreak to reiterate its call for the immediate lifting of the sanctions, and a new approach for an agreed, just and non-violent resolution to the points at issue in the Gulf region. Ahmed Ben Bella, former President of Algeria. Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici, former Prime Minister of Malta. Ramsey Clark, former Attorney General of the USA. Tony Benn MP. Co-Presidents, International Commission of Inquiry on Economic Sanctions |
7th Anniversary of Gulf War:
| For two hours on the evening of Saturday, January 17, the 7th anniversary of the Gulf War, around 200 people demonstrated in Whitehall opposite Downing Street. They had gathered at a time when further threats are being issued by the US imperialists against Iraq with the despicable backing of the British government. The demonstration was organised by the Hands Off Iraq Committee. The demonstrators very militantly shouted slogans and carried placards, including "Hands off Iraq!" and "Lift the Sanctions Now!". A petition was delivered to the door of Number 10 Downing Street by a delegation from the demonstrators, consisting of a number of Iraqi mothers and their children. The petition called on Tony Blair to respond to a letter from the International Commission of Inquiry on Economic Sanctions. [Text of Letter] The demonstration reflected the demand of peace-loving and progressive forces in Britain to condemn the gangsterism of US imperialism on the international stage, directed against sovereign states, Iraq included, to bully them into following the US dictate, as well as the demand that the British government end its support for such gangsterism and take a stand reflecting the sentiment of the people for justice, peace and the sovereignty of nations. |