Support the Baxter protest
I wish to make a comment on the article in GLW #525, "Inside Baxter Detention Centre". Firstly I would like to say thanks for illustrating the horrifying conditions inside Australia's newest "state of the art" detention centre. I hope it serves to galvanize people into action against the absolutely criminal system of mandatory detention.
One point I would like to make, however, is, in light of the planned Easter convergence on Baxter: I and many other refugee activists are extremely sensitive to the concerns expressed by Ali in the article. I heard similar concerns expressed prior to my participation in the Woomera protests.
The events at Woomera and the response I received from people in detention after that put my mind at ease. What was done at Woomera was on the whole a boon for the refugee campaign. Indeed, Steven Khan, a detainee who I know in the Perth detention centre (and have written about for GLW) urged me after Woomera to continue the concerted struggle to free asylum seekers held in Australia's prison camps.
Ali's concerns are well founded but the guards at the detention centre attack detainees whether protesters are there or not. There were no protesters at Baxter during the most recent disturbances at Christmas time. There were no protesters at Curtin when the photographs I attach of an attack by a guard on a detainee were taken.
Protesters don't cause violence — detention causes violence. The Baxter convergence is indeed targeted at the government and not Australasian Correctional Management (ACM) guards. It is the government that built Baxter and sustains it and Baxter therefore is a legitimate focus for refugee campaign protests. Of course, the people who participate at the Baxter convergence should be mindful of what occurs inside the detention centre but they should also be aware that they have no control over what goes on in there.
Indeed, isn't that one of the key points of our opposition to detention — that what goes on in there is not open to public scrutiny or regulation. For too long it has actually been the detainees who have moved the refugee campaign forward with their blood and their pain. The many desperate protests that have occurred inside Port Hedland and Woomera and Villawood and Maribyrnong have grabbed our attention and moved us to protest and renew our efforts.
It's time for us to take the lead in the cities and towns and at Baxter and other detention centres too. Please don't let ACM and the government hold the detainees hostage against our protests. Take heart from the lines, "Many detainees get much hope and inspiration from knowing that people around the country are protesting their treatment and fighting for their freedom".
Go to Baxter at Easter, 2003. Target the government and protest against the system of mandatory detention.
Azadi (freedom in Farsi).
Phil Chilton
Member Refugee Rights Action Network and the Socialist Alliance
Perth
Return to sender
The federal government, in its infinite wisdom, is spending millions of our dollars sending a mailout to every household in Australia. In this pack is a letter from our illustrious Prime Minister, a booklet on how to help the government "fight terrorism".
Recently, Brisbane's Lord Mayor Jim Soorley made the eminently sensible suggestion that Australians who did not support the Howard government's backing of America's oil war should simply return the package to sender.
I believe this is an excellent opportunity for the average Australian to make a significant statement to John Howard and his cadre of fools. This can be done in the hope that they realise that numerous Australians don't support his increasingly divisive and right-wing style of politics or simply don't think the way that he does.
Chris Kuszelyk
Mayfield NSW
Labor lapdogs
I have listened to Labor MPs passionately denouncing John Howard as Uncle Sam's lapdog, obediently following George Bush into war. They proclaim that this war will be an unjust war for oil that will decimate Iraq's civilian population and poison the land with depleted uranium.
They point out that insufficient evidence has been provided that Iraq has any weapons of mass destruction and in any case this war would not make the world safer from weapons of mass destruction.
These are all points I agree with.
However, Labor leader Simon Crean has stated repeatedly that Labor only opposes the war if the UN Security Council does not provide its consent. Apparently, all these very pertinent reasons to avoid this war disappear like magic if France, Russia and China fall (or are pushed) into toeing the American line.
Howard is indeed a lapdog to Uncle Sam. But Crean and his Labor Party are equally lapdogs to the extremely undemocratic UN Security Council.
Rohan Gaiswinkler
Lenah Valley Tas
What about Saddam?
The left can, and I believe should, demand that there be no war of aggression against Iraq under existing conditions. Even with UN support the cost of war on the civilian population would be far too great. This strong commitment to peace still leaves a question left unraised. What is to be done about Saddam Hussein?
The peace movement seems to be gaining momentum with large turnouts at rallies and some union support. During this campaign a number of truths regarding US foreign policy have been nicely explored by the left and has found a receptive audience. This discussion of capitalist activities around the world needs to continue.
What discussion also needs to take place is an exploration of any possible solutions to the problem of authoritarian governments. Hussein has tortured political activists, committed genocide against ethnic minorities and denied workers the right to organise. In attacking the US, the left needs to remain mindful of the kind of ruler Hussein has shown himself to be.
The problem is that sanctions, which have been identified as costing thousands of lives, have been ineffective at achieving the end of this dictatorship. Again the people suffer and the monster stays on. Simplistic and vacuous calls to "support the workers of Iraq" raise more questions than answers.
Does the left advocate arming the workers? What is to be done after any kind of "regime change"? How does any change relate to international capital? These are questions that beg to be answered and now is the time.
The left should continue to call for peace in the Middle East but it must also suggest substantial solutions to deal with dictators. This program needs to be an extension of the attack on the liberal dictators of the capitalists.
Jeff Payne
Kingston Tas
Gough to Iraq
Maybe former Prime Minister Gough Whitlam can go to Baghdad and convince Saddam Hussein that US engineered regime change is not all bad. Saddam could join the ex-Shah of Iran's family in Beverley Hills; other neighbours might include an assortment of torturers, murderers and Latin American drug barons plus the odd Nazi or two. All jolly good company.
Gareth Smith
Byron Bay NSW
Smoking gun
Colin Powell and Ari Fleischer responding to remarks by chief weapons inspector Hans Blix that his teams had not yet found a "smoking gun" in their inspections in Iraq:
When we came down the stair today.
We saw a gun that wasn't there.
It wasn't there again today.
That's why we must blow Saddam away.
Private John Tomlinson
Poet's Army
From Green Left Weekly, February 19, 2003.
Visit the Green Left Weekly home page.