Weapons of mass destruction or oil?
Iraq is a country of rich natural resources. Many experts believe that Iraq has additional undiscovered oil reserves. Iraqi oil is of high quality and is very inexpensive to produce. This makes it one of the world's most profitable oil sources.
However, the early discoveries of petroleum in the country gave rise to disputes between different internal groups, as well as friction with Western powers such as Britain and, more recently, the US.
Therefore, it should be asked if the new threat of war in Iraq is because of weapons of mass destruction or is it because of the significant oil reserves in that country. A review of the history of the history of Iraq shows many examples of British and US interest in oil.
In 1920, the British-San Remo conference provided permanent British control of any company developing oil resources in the Iran and Iraq area. Only in 1951, did the Iraqi government take the first step towards taking control of the oil industry. In 1964, the government established the state-owned Iraq National Oil Company. US and British companies long held a three-quarter share in Iraq's oil production but they lost their position with the 1972 nationalisation of the petroleum company.
In 1973, the Arab-Israel war strengthened Iraq's resolve to take complete control of its oil reserves. In 1975, after 53 years of the humiliating San Remo agreement, Iraq gained complete control over its oil resources.
Today, US and British companies are very interested in controlling the world oil industry. These companies have been very concerned that their rivals might gain a long-term advantage in the global oil business. In 1999, Anthony Zinni, commander in chief of the US Central Command, testified to the US Congress about the huge oil reserves in the Gulf region. He stated: "The US must have free access to the region's resources".
Therefore, it is evident that the major American and British oil companies have a strong interest in Iraq's oil reserves. These reserves will become accessible if a new government takes power from Saddam.
We should ask ourselves if the two most powerful countries in the world have the right to make a new war in order to expand their economic interests.
Erfanul Kabir
Stanmore NSW
Silver tape recorder
In one of his many gracious dispensations, Paul Keating once complimented Alexander Downer as being the "only person in the world to have been born with a silver cutlery set in his mouth!"
These days, however, it would appear that dear Alexander (like his boss and several other colleagues) has opted for a little Pentagon tape recorder instead.
PM McVean
Darwin NT
Socialist Alliance 'going nowhere'
Before dismissing the notion that the Socialist Alliance project diverts resources from activism, Ray Fulcher (GLW #520) might be advised to read the publications of his own organisation.
In a recent (internal) document, the Democratic Socialist Party writes: "[The entry into the Socialist Alliance does not mean] we pull out of movement work completely for the next few months. But it tips our priorities one way because our tendency has to prepare to make the turn into SA... We should lean on our allies and collaborators in the movement to take a bit more of the load."
Peter Boyle (GLW #519) asks why Socialist Alternative doesn't join the Alliance. Well, given none of the constituent organisations have actually changed positions on the issues which traditionally divide them, the "unity" so far achieved seems to me rather like the proverbial umbrella — full of holes — functional only until the time comes to actually use it.
Despite repeated requests, neither Peter nor Ray has been able to explain how, for instance, the Socialist Alliance would cope during a situation like that which developed in 1999, when the DSP — in opposition to every other Marxist current in Australia — lent its support to the UN intervention in East Timor.
Indeed, while the DSP argues in public that political differences between the socialist tendencies have vanished, in private its attitude seems quite different. A recent (and increasingly notorious) publication by a senior DSP member explains how the group plans to "contain" and "roll back" Socialist Alternative in Melbourne. Meanwhile the internal document quoted above outlines how, once ensconced inside the Alliance, the DSP intends to increase its own internal discipline, while maintaining ownership of the Alliance paper.
All this suggests that internal life within the Alliance will entail a more-or-less permanent factional war — a suspicion confirmed by the subterranean struggle currently raging between supporters of the ISO and the DSP.
Of course, matters might be different were there evidence of the Alliance attracting anyone much outside the ranks of members and ex-members of the existing groups. Instead, it has proved entirely unable to rally supporters for any of the recent anti-war or refugee demonstrations, while achieving in the recent Victorian elections a vote that compares unfavourably with that polled by the DSP under its own steam in 1996.
The coming months will provide plenty of opportunities for left-wing groups and individuals to work together against the slaughter in the Gulf. Why not acknowledge our differences and get on with the job, rather than continuing to intrigue and manoeuvre around a unity project patently going nowhere?
Jeff Sparrow
Melbourne
The Greens and Socialist Alliance
In Peter Boyle's article, "The rise of the Greens" (GLW #520), he writes: "The dramatic rise in the Green vote is a victory for the progressive side of politics." Why then does he say that there is still room for the Socialist Alliance to field candidates?
The Greens are on a massive wave, not only picking up Democrat votes but also ALP and progressive voters. Why would the Socialist Alliance run candidates against the Greens? The Socialist Alliance with this us and them attitude will never be a true reliable alternative to the ALP.
The left is at the crossroads, either run on its own and generally win 1% of the vote or support the Greens and make a real difference. Maybe the problem lies in that while the Greens believe in their causes, the Socialist Alliance uses these causes to undermine the government and as a means of advertising.
It is time to really form a true left progressive party, not a party of activists who turn up to marches only to leave when the march is over or not even bothering to turn up at all.
This is why I have put my support behind the Greens by becoming a member. I hope that other "Lefties" do the same.
Bill Weller
AMWU delegate
Printing division regional council
Adelaide
Who benefits?
Firstly, I would like to thank all the people who are working for humanity, especially for refugees, and I would like to thank the people who work for Green Left newspaper.
I want someone to answer my questions: I wish to know why there are detention centres for asylum seekers? The number of refugees in the whole of Australia is 550 people. Who is benefiting from keeping refugees in detention and who is harmed by it? Who pays the expenses of refugees?
How much are they spending? What for? Does that mean Philip Ruddock is taking care of Australia or his pockets?
I think there is no reason to keep us (refugees) in detention. If he releases us, there will be no money, no job [for Ruddock]. It is easy for him to lie to Australian people.
Sorry about my poor English. All the best to the beautiful Green Left.
A Port Hedland detainee
Thanks
For locking ourselves to Villawood detention centre stage 2 fence, we have been arrested and charged with Trespass on Prohibited Lands, and faced the beak on November 18, three months, two court "mentions" and six hours in Bankstown police station later. As Noam Chomsky says in his latest, Understanding Power, you can waste a lot of time in court. That is true, and myself and Tilly Cakau, had not wanted to get arrested, for that reason.
On the day of our hearing, our lawyer took one look at the magistrate and turned green. He was well known, apparently, for disregarding "reasonable doubt" and the concept of civil rights. After some discussion, we decided to plead not guilty. We were not convicted or fined.
We have learned something: do not make a statement to the police, beyond the barest minimum. It is easy to incriminate oneself. When the police have no qualms about inventing evidence, there is no need to make their job easier.
There is another difficulty: finding a lawyer who will represent you without charge. We were lucky to find our lawyer eventually. In this time, when our rights are under attack, we need a lawyers' group to defend protesters.
It seems that much protest is possible at Villawood refugee prison that would not result in arrest, and would raise the morale of the prisoners — prisoners of a system that has been internationally condemned.
La lucha continua. Thanks to all who supported us.
Stephen Langford and Tilly Cakau
Sydney
[Abridged.]
Socialist realism
Kenny McEwan's article (GLW #519) about the artist Wasilli Kandinsky implicates constructivist art in the development of Stalin's "socialist realism".
Constructivism emerged at a time of intense experimentation and debate in Russia's art world. Constructivists made an important contribution to the life and potential of the revolution, designing posters to promote literacy and support the Red Army in the civil war, clothes for workers and many other things.
Their rejection of some art reflected the reality that pre-revolutionary Russian artists catered to a rich minority and that a new perspective was needed to create art that would cater to the needs of Russia's peasants and workers.
Neither in style or theory did constructivism have anything in common with the limited "socialist realism" which was made the only allowable style of art under Stalin. Actually, the rhetoric uttered by Stalin was not about proletarian art, but about the survival and political needs of Stalin and the bureaucracy.
In searching for the cause of the repression that accompanied the policy of "socialist realism", McEwan would do better to look at Stalin's real goals than at an ideology that offered enormous potential for the artistic and material liberation of the Russian people.
Jo Ellis
Adelaide
From Green Left Weekly, January 15, 2003.
Visit the Green Left Weekly home page.