Congratulations
Happy 10th Anniversary!
Aziz Choudry
GATT Watchdog
Aotearoa (NZ)
Palestine
A response to the letter, "Israel and Palestine" published in GLW #432.
Zionists and their adherents are fond of claiming that they do not occupy Palestine. Such a position is being adopted on the assumption that there was no "legitimate sovereign" power on the West Bank and in Gaza Strip in 1967. Zionists & their adherents also claim that, "The UN in 1948 voted to hand Israel over to the Jewish". This "hand over" is wholeheartedly accepted by Zionists.
But United Nations resolutions were, and still are, refused, rejected and scoffed at by the Zionist regime of Occupied Palestine. That regime was admitted to the United Nations in May 1949 and has since been bound, as a signatory to the UN Charter, by all obligations deriving from the latter.
In substantiating the Zionist regime as an occupying power, the following is one of the many UN resolutions. Resolution 252 (1968): "The Security Council reaffirming that acquisition of territory by military conquest is inadmissible". It also "deplores the failure of Israel to comply with the General Assembly resolutions and urgently calls upon Israel to rescind all such measures already taken and to desist forthwith from taking any further action which tends to change the status of Jerusalem". Thus, the 252 resolution verifies that the Zionist regime of Occupied Palestine is an occupying power.
Zionists and their adherents who claim "Israel does not occupy Palestine" strive to conceal, as a smokescreen, the brutal occupation of Palestine and the systematic injustices against the Palestinian people.
Vic Savoulian
Mt Druitt, NSW
M1 strike call
Peter Boyle misrepresented my position on the call for a global strike on May 1, 2001 in GLW #432. He claims that: "Leon Parissi of the Workers' Liberty group has argued that it is a mistake for M1 activist coalitions to issue the strike call unless union officials agree". What I wrote to the m1-2k-01 eGroups list is:
"To make such a call in the wrong circumstances (when there is no possibility of success) may lead workers to the conclusion that left groups are not to be taken seriously."
Peter Boyle does not understand the difference between discussing what action may be necessary, for example, to defend miners and bank workers from having individual contracts imposed and the actual call to arms.
In calling workers out on a general strike, the political and/or industrial context must be ready or it is delusional. Peter then confuses these issues with an alleged tailing of the union bureaucracy. There was nothing in what I wrote of waiting until union officialdom gives the ok — if the conditions are ripe.
I take it that Peter Boyle is ignorant of the long history of my fights as a rank and file delegate (and those of my Workers' Liberty comrades) against union bureaucracies inside a number of unions (MEU, PSA, CEPU, CPSU). This is the same set of union bureaucrats I am now accused of tailing.
I concluded: "to challenge corporate tyranny at its centres of production, where profits are made, is the only way ultimately to overthrow capitalism and replace it with a working class based direct democracy. By linking up concrete workers struggles with the radical concerns of the anti-capitalist movement, the anti-capitalists can forge links with unionists and develop a basis to challenge reformist and nationalist union leaders for their positions."
Leon Parissi
Sydney
US dollar in Latin America
The trend toward dollarisation in Latin America won't solve the region's most important economic problems. However, a Latin American nation's decision to use the US dollar will greatly reduce the risk of hyper-inflation.
I was surprised to read Sean Healy's account of the dollarisation phenomenon (GLW #433) and not see any mention of the independent Latin American country that has been using it the longest.
Panama adopted the dollar in 1904, and, though we have Panamanian coins in the same sizes, weights and metals as the US mints, no serious Panamanian political figure suggests that we create our own currency. Not even the ones who put on the most obnoxiously nationalistic airs propose that.
During the pre-invasion US sanctions the Federal Reserve Bank's decision not to trade new bills for Panama's worn ones was but a minor irritant. I don't think that using the dollar made this little country any more or any less vulnerable to US economic coercion. Our experience is that the US dollar is a convenient currency for a commercial crossroads to use.
The United States also has a Latin American colony, Puerto Rico, which used the greenback. As a supporter of Puerto Rican independence, I think that the US dollar is the least of their problems.
It would be better for progressive folks to spend less time worrying about a common currency and more time conspiring to create common high wages and common strict environmental standards.
Eric Jackson
Editor, The Panama News
<pmanews@panama.c-com.net>
[Abridged.]
Rogue state
The announcement that Australia is to boost defence spending by $23.5 billion and acquiesce to US "suggestions" that we concentrate on forward defence should fill every Australian with dismay and send shivers down the spines of our regional neighbours.
Noam Chomsky reminds us that while we fixate upon Libya, Iraq, Cuba and North Korea, it is the US itself which is the rogue state par excellence. Referring to a secret 1995 US Strategic Command study, "Essentials of Post-Cold War Deterrence", Chomsky says it "advocates that the US exploit its nuclear arsenal to portray itself as 'irrational and vindictive if its vital interests are attacked'. That 'should be part of the national persona we project to all adversaries', particularly the rogue states. 'It hurts to portray ourselves as too fully rational and cool-headed', let alone as committed to such silliness as international law and treaty obligations: 'The fact that some elements (of the US government) may appear to be potentially out of control can be beneficial to creating and reinforcing fears and doubts within the minds of an adversary's decision makers'".
The Howard government and the non-existent Labor opposition are well down the path of irrationally obeying US diktats. Only a Great Refusal by the Australian people can prevent us being swept into another Vietnam-style conflict.
Gareth Smith, Maxine Caron, Hania Kraus, Ian Gaillard, Brian Burton
Byron Bay NSW
Socialism
On a recent Tuesday evening, we attended a meeting to hear Marcel and Stephen give battle over the correctness or otherwise of Cuban policies. While these gladiatorial contests are very interesting they further divide the many small Australian Socialist/ Communist parties and they actually teach us very little.
In some countries, a Capitalist society has not yet fully developed and their approach to Socialist revolution may be different to the Australian path. For the present it appears we should accept that all Socialist Revolutions are unique to that particular time and country.
Marx would remind us that all national political situations are continually developing. No other country is going to mark time and wait for others. Small countries such as Cuba are not strong world powers and have a terrible struggle trying to survive but a large undeveloped country like the USSR may have succeeded if it could have avoided the second major capitalist war of aggression for three or four generations. Twenty five years was not long enough to change the Soviet people from backward serfs into modern socialist citizens.
Political students and activists living in Europe, surrounded by 15 or 16 modern Capitalist states, all in a similar stage of social development, might reasonably assume that it was both a realistic or even a necessary condition that all states should engage in socialist revolution at the same time. Yet if we look at a map of the world with Australia in the foreground, we see Africa, Asia, the Americas and the Pacific Islands at widely different stages of social development and, therefore, most unlikely to go into Socialist revolutionary mode at the same time.
Bill, Kerry and Rupert may not allow their largely tax free capitalist empires to pass away peacefully but this last exploitative society will surely die replaced as the ordinary people seize control of the wealth they produce. Every factory worker knows that all wealth is created on the factory floor nothing is produced in the Boardroom except the most disastrous financial losses. Check with any BHP share holder.
John Sinclair
Melbourne
[Abridged.]
Stop right-wing death squads
If the US Government really wants to stop right-wing death squads in Colombia, the US should offer a $3 million reward for the capture of AUC leader Carlos Castano. The US should treat Carlos Castano like any other terrorist.
Several world organizations should publicly ask the US government (George W. Bush) to post a $3,000,000 or larger reward for the capture of Carlos Castano. It the US Government refuses that will help define the US Government's position regarding right-wing Death Squads in Colombia.
Once a reward is offered for Carlos Castano, it will be more difficult for Castano to get amnesty for the crimes he has already committed. It will become easier for Castano's surviving victims to sue the corporations and businesses that financially supported his rein of terror. Victims may be able to file their lawsuits in the US.
Ross Regnart
USA