NYCLAW DIGEST: War, Resistance, Labor (02.09.05)

WAR AND RESISTANCE

Path of Greatest Resistance Socialist Review (U.K.), November 2004

Bush and Blair’s denunciation of Iraqi insurgents as “criminals” and “terrorists” recalls the experience of the French Resistance and the Algerian war of independence.

There is nothing new about the situation in Iraq. Ever since imperial powers have imposed their rule on other peoples, there has been resistance. And since the occupying powers have superior weapons, those fighting back use unconventional methods, breaking the rules that their oppressors would like to force on them. This meant guerrilla fighting of some sort. . . .

Nowadays the activists of the French Resistance are regarded as heroes. For decades after the war it was impossible to make a political career in France without a Resistance record (real or fabricated). Even Jean-Marie Le Pen once claimed, rather implausibly, to have been a Resister. Yet the tactics and methods of the French Resistance were remarkably similar to those of the Iraqi insurgency, and the rhetoric of Bush and Blair closely recalls the Nazi slander of “terrorist and common law criminals recruited in the underworld”.

FULL TEXT: <http://www.socialistreview.org.uk/article.php?articlenumber=9099>

On the 27th of Shawal 1425h. The media platoon of the Islamic Jihad Army, December 10, 2004

These words come to you from those who up to the day of the invasion were struggling to survive under the sanctions imposed by the criminal regimes of the U.S. and Britain. . . .

We thank all those, including those of Britain and the U.S., who took to the streets in protest against this war and against Globalism. We also thank France, Germany and other states for their position, which least to say are considered wise and balanced, till now. . . .

And to the American soldiers we say, you can also choose to fight tyranny with us. Lay down your weapons, and seek refuge in our mosques, churches and homes. We will protect you. And we will get you out of Iraq, as we have done with a few others before you.

Go back to your homes, families, and loved ones. This is not your war. Nor are you fighting for a true cause in Iraq.

FULL TEXT: <http://resist.ca/story/2004/12/16/62444/246>, or watch video online: <http://resist.ca/story/2004/12/16/62444/246>

Hyderabad Antiwar Assembly Declaration December 19, 2004

Gathered in Hyderabad at a critical moment in history, we commit to continue waging a struggle against the occupation of Iraq, Palestine, corporate-led globalisation, and dictatorships anywhere in the world, including in West Asia and in other Arab countries. . . . We also commit ourselves to building international solidarity on Iraq and Palestine through common campaigns and common action programmes.

On March 19th/20th, the second anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, we call for a massive worldwide demonstration against the occupation of Iraq. This Assembly calls upon the global resistance to enlarge the scope of the current struggle, particularly in the countries that are a part of the US coalition of occupation, not only to protest but also to shut down the US war machine.

FULL TEXT: <http://www.focusweb.org/main/html/Article546.html?POSTNUKESID=0644c173fd878b652\ ee0a1c7c6a90c54>

The Future of the Antiwar Movement International Socialist Review Issue 39, January-February 2005

The antiwar movement was quiet because it plunged itself headlong into the Kerry campaign. . . . It is no mystery, then, why the [UFPJ] protest in front of the Republican National Convention (RNC), as impressive and important as it was, lacked a sharp antiwar message. Indeed, the demonstration failed to target the April invasion and mass murder in Fallujah or the siege of Najaf. Supporting a prowar candidate had tied the antiwar movement in a political knot.

FULL TEXT: <http://www.isreview.org/issues/39/antiwar_movement.shtml>

Behind the Rising Tide of Resistance in Iraq Socialist Worker, January 28, 2005

THERE HAS always been disagreement with the programs, politics and tactics of resistance movements. This was true of Albania, France, Algeria, Kenya, Cyprus, Vietnam and many others. This is also true of Palestine and Iraq today. . . .

[O]ne has to start from the principled position of opposing occupation and conquest, whether of the colonial or imperialist variety–and of supporting the struggle of the peoples for liberation. As a socialist, I would naturally be delighted if these struggles are led by socialist movements. But that is for the people in struggle to decide.

Nor should the absence of such strong socialist movements be used as an argument to absolve socialists of their internationalist duty and fundamental task of backing the struggle against imperialist policies of hegemony and wars of aggression.

Criticism of and dialogue with all movements in struggle is obviously essential. But to withhold support from the people’s resistance to occupation because one disagrees with some of its sections or even of its leadership would seriously damage the worldwide struggle against imperialist domination.

Also, one has to be also vigilant and take a dose of anti-imperialist immunity, because the mainstream media’s constant attempts to portray the resistance movements as a bunch of murderers is bound to affect us.

FULL TEXT: <http://www.socialistworker.org/2005-1/528/528_06_Ramadani.shtml>

The Antiwar Movement and the Iraqi Elections IAC, January 29, 2005

The right of people to resist occupation by arms is a basic right recognized under international law and the Geneva Convention. The people of Iraq have a right to fight back against the occupation of their country, the torture of their people, and the bombing of their cities. They also have a right to expect the solidarity of all who oppose the criminal war. It is not the role of the antiwar movement to debate the ideology or tactics of the resistance; it is our job to stand in solidarity with them and do everything possible to assist them by working to end the occupation of their country.

FULL TEXT: <http://www.iacenter.org/iraq-elections05.htm>

U.S. Encouraged by Vietnam Vote Officials Cite 83% Turnout Despite Vietcong Terror New York Times, September 4, 1967

United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in South Vietnam’s presidential election despite a Vietcong terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting. According to reports from Saigon, 83 per cent of the 5.85 million registered voters cast their ballots yesterday. Many of them risked reprisals threatened by the Vietcong.

The size of the popular vote and the inability of the Vietcong to destroy the election machinery were the two salient facts in a preliminary assessment of the nation election based on the incomplete returns reaching here.

FULL TEXT: <http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7943.htm>

Response to Bush’s State of the Union Address A.N.S.W.E.R., February 2, 2005

The Bush administration hopes that the January 30 “election” can confer semi-legitimacy to a new puppet Iraqi government. But the staged “election” will not mean a new dawn for peace – on the contrary. The U.S. government is threatening that if they can stabilize a puppet regime in Iraq, it will open new wars of aggression in an attempt to secure U.S. imperialist global geo-strategic interests.

FULL TEXT: <http://answer.pephost.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr012=vlgl0bun31.app2a&abbr=A\ NS_&page=NewsArticle&id=5877&security=1023&news_iv_ctrl=1521>

Iraq’s Right to National Self-Determination Socialist Worker, February 4, 2005

DO THE Iraqi people have a right to self-determination or not? If they do, then they have a right to resist U.S. occupation, using whatever means at their disposal. To deny that right–to deny their self-determination and, by extension, to deny support for the resistance (on the grounds that it has the “wrong” politics or leadership)–is tantamount to accepting the right the U.S. to stay in Iraq and impose its will there.

This is precisely the Achilles heel of the American left today. Having lost its knee-jerk opposition to U.S. imperialism, the broad left has failed to grasp the central issue in Iraq, preoccupying itself with secondary questions that cloud, contradict and negate the key issue: U.S. imperialism invaded Iraq in order to advance its imperialist aims.

On this basis alone, resistance to the occupation deserves our support.

FULL TEXT: <http://socialistworker.org/2005-1/529/529_08_SelfDetermination.shtml>

Out With the Old, In With the New Guardian, February 7, 2005

During the cold war, money was supplied indiscriminately to all anti-communist forces (including the current leadership of al-Qaida); the 21st-century recipients are more carefully targeted. The aim is slowly to replace the traditional elites in the old satrapies with a new breed of neo-liberal politicians who have been trained and educated in the US. This is the primary function of the US money allocated to “democracy promotion”. Loyalty can be purchased from politicians, parties and trades unions. And the result, it is hoped, is to create a new layer of janissary politicians who serve Washington.

This most recent variant of “democracy promotion” has now been applied in Afghanistan and Iraq, and it will hit Haiti (another occupied country) in November. Create a new elite, give it funds and weaponry to build a new army and let them make the country safe for the corporations.
. . .

The popular resistance will continue. Many in the west find it increasingly difficult to support this resistance. The arguments for and against it are old ones. In 1885, the English socialist William Morris celebrated the defeat of General Gordon by the Mahdi: “Khartoum fallen – into the hands of the people it belongs to”. Morris argued that the duty of English internationalists was to support all those being oppressed by the British empire despite disagreements with nationalism or fanaticism.

FULL TEXT: <http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1407210,00.html>

———————————————————————————-

LABOR AND WAR

Labor and Social Movement Coalitions in the U.S. Global Justice and Anti-War Movements Alana Jeydel April 3-7, 2003

[S]hortly after September 11 the focus of the global justice movement shifted to the war in Afghanistan. Some factions of labor began to organize against the war immediately. New York City Labor Against the War, a leading labor coalition in the anti-war in Iraq movement, was founded in fall 2001. However, two months after the 9/11 attacks, the AFL-CIO Executive Council endorsed the “war on terrorism”. . . .

Two major external variables seem to have influenced labor’s declining participation in the global justice movement and precedent-setting participation in the anti-war in Iraq coalitions. The first is the attacks of September 11, and the second is the anti-labor policies of the Bush administration.

The first major threat to labor’s interest is the September 11 attacks. These attacks have had several different demobilizing effects on labor. One was the nationalist responses it elicited from labor when they rallied around the president’s response. The AFL-CIO declared full support of the “war on terrorism” and then the war in Afghanistan. This was followed by the UAW and Teamsters, two important global justice coalition members, also declaring their support. This stand was divisive to international global justice alliances
(Reyes 10/2001). The 9/11 attacks also stalled such union initiatives as amnesty for undocumented workers. But mostly, the attacks demobilized the global justice movement’s disruptive protests, and reinforced conservative union elements’ timidity about such associations and tactics.

The second major threat to labor’s interests is Bush administration policies toward labor.

FULL TEXT: <http://mpsa.indiana.edu/conf2003papers/1031932428.pdf>

Report Back from USLAW Million Worker March, December 2004

USLAW represents a forum for bringing together this anti war milieu to make decisions about how to advance the movement inside of the unions. It is in a key position to play an important role in agitating within the national unions and AFL-CIO around the need for labor to oppose the US war and occupation in Iraq and US Imperialist foreign policy. However, its impact will continue to be a more formal one such as getting resolutions passed and periodic statements from union officials, and therefore limited, without a program to mobilize labor’s rank-and-file in conjunction with the other US social movements and the international anti war movement.

FULL TEXT: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LaborAgainstWar/files/>

National Endowment for Death Squads? The AFL-CIO and the NED Vheadline.com, December 30, 2004

Equally disturbing, yet more surprising, is the role that leaders of the U.S. labor federation, the AFL-CIO, play in carrying out the NED’s dirty work. The AFL-CIO’s Solidarity Center is at work in twenty-eight countries, discouraging radical organizing among workers and promoting privatization by assisting unions and labor groups that support private enterprise.

FULL TEXT: <http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=24112>