14th
March, 2003
French police attack
dockers, EU attacks their livelihoods
French police brutally attacked thousands of demonstrating
dockworkers on Monday, using tear gas in an attempt to disperse
the crowd, which was preventing MEPs and their staff from reaching
their workplaces. The protesters, mainly from France, Belgium,
Spain, the Netherlands and Britain, were driven back, but not
before some had responded by hurling metal barricades at the
riot cops. The protest formed part of Europe-wide demonstrations
against plans to open ports to greater competition and were
designed to focus the minds of MEPs before Tuesday's crucial
vote on the issue. Protests included stoppages in nine countries
and followed demonstrations by Belgian dockers, mainly from
Antwerp, outside the EP's other main building in Brussels on
Friday. The proposals, if eventually adopted, will allow shipping
companies to use non-union labour leading to job losses and
putting untrained personnel in danger.
United Left group (GUE-NGL) leader Francis Wurtz told
the Parliament that the protests were legitimate and that "The
police repression which has taken place outside is unacceptable."
Despite the protests, the Parliament voted by a big
majority to approve the liberalisation plans, proving once more
that it is an example of the best democracy money can buy.
GUE-NGL MEP Erik Meijer, who represents the Dutch Socialist
Party (SP) and lives in the major port of Rotterdam, tabled a proposal to have the entire plan scrapped.
The proposal won support from his own group, the Greens, and
many from the centre-left Socialist Group (PES), but was defeated
by the solid opposition of the right wing groups.. Describing
the proposal as "a return to 'cowboy conditions' in Europe's
harbours", Mr Meijer added that "we have not heard
the last of this. The EP has still to vote in Third Reading
on whether to accept or reject the whole package, and there
will then remain the possibility of a challenge at the European
Court of Human Rights, because there is no obligation on owners
to apply International Labour Organisation conventions to which
the member states are signatory. Undoubtedly pressure from dockers'
unions will be maintained, with boycotts and further strikes."
MEPs slam "polluted
pays" proposals
Euro-MPs from the United Left and Greens/EFA groups have attacked
proposals from the European Commission ostensibly designed to
ensure that organic and conventional crops can be grown without
contamination from genetically modified crop plants. Jonas Sjöstedt,
co-ordinator for the GUE-NGL (United European left/Nordic Green
Left), the fifty-strong progressive left grouping, on the Environment
Committee, described the proposals as "worse than inadequate"
while Plaed Cymru (Party
of Wales) MEP Jill Evans, who sits in the Greens-EFA Group,
said:
"The Communication argues that the responsibility for co-existence
measures such as buffer zones or pollen barriers "should
fall on the economic operators (farmers, seed suppliers, etc.)
who intend to gain a benefit from the specific cultivation model
they have chosen". This approach would turn the 'polluter
pays' principle upside down. Instead of those who produce and
use GMOs being responsible for what they do, the conventional
and organic farmers would be expected to prevent GMO contamination.
It's crazy that we should expect the polluted instead of the
polluter to have to pay.
"I am urging the governments of Europe and the European
Commission to go for strict legislation on the co-existence
of GM and non-GM crops," Ms Evans added. "The legislation
should require producers and users of GMOs to take effective
measures to prevent the unintended presence of their GMOs in
other products. This is in fact what the European Parliament
proposed back in July of last year when it adopted very clear
and precise amendments to the proposed Regulation on genetically
modified food and feed.
"The Commission and the Council of Ministers, which so
far have rejected these amendments, should seriously reconsider
them in the light of the new co-existence debate. Once it has
been established that producers and users of GMOs have the joint
responsibility to prevent GMO contamination, it will also become
clear that those who cause GMO contamination are liable for
any resulting damage.
"I am extremely concerned at the content of Mr. Fischler's
communication which outlines the measures the Commission envisage.
GMO contamination poses a serious threat not only to the consumers'
freedom of choice but also the sustainability and diversity
of agriculture in Wales and Europe."
Agreeing with Ms Evans views "100%", Swedish
Left Party MEP Jonas Sjöstedt added that "the precautionary
principle has to take precedence here, as in all scientific
research, which is in effect what the growing of GMOs is. It
should not be conducted in the open environment at all, because
we have yet to see proof that the addition of GMOs or GMO-derived
foods to the food chain or the presence of GMOs in the general
environment holds no dangers for human, animal or plant health.
The diffusion of GMOs could result in irreversible environmental
damage as well as harming the livelihoods of conventional and
organic farmers. This irresponsible step is being taken only
because the agricultural multinationals behind it are apparently
too powerful to resist, although the reality is that this reflects
more a lack of political will on the part of those who are supposed
to be responsible for protecting our health and our environment."
Mr Sjöstedt concluded that "a reliable means of
separation is clearly necessary if we are to have a reliable
system of liability and redress, which the European Parliament
sees as a precondition for lifting the moratorium. This proposal
would establish no such system, and so the moratorium should
certainly remain in place."
Malta says "yes"
Maltese voters approved the proposal to join the EU
in the first of the accession referenda in the EU's drive to
add ten countries. The government responded by calling an election,
with the opposition Labour Party
saying that it may yet seek renegotiation. Read about
it at here
Just don't order a Halal
meal...
The United States is to be given direct access to personal
details of air passengers travelling from the EU. Find out how
US Customs bounced the European Commission into a quick decision
at here
Stop the War
A report on March 1st's gathering of the international
antiwar movement in London can be found at here
This week, the European
Parliament plenary session in Strasbourg passed a highly critical
Resolution on the deal. The vote was 414 in favour and only
44 against. Read a full report at here
"Negative impact"
of water privatisation exposed in new report
A new report on the eve of next week's Third World Water
Forum shows that water privatisation has had a negative impact
on communities in many countries and threatens to affect an
increasing number of people in 2003, the United Nations International
Year of Water, and beyond.
The report, Water Justice
for All will be released on March 10, 2003 just prior to
the March 16-23 World Water Forum in Kyoto, Japan and World
Water Day (March 22). It reports "global and local resistance
to the control and commodification of water" through fourteen
case studies and was
published by Friends of the Earth International (FoEI), the
world's largest grassroots environmental network.
A spokesperson for FoEI said that "The Third World Water
Forum in Japan will adopt a World Water Action, drafts of
which show some very impressive rhetoric. But the bottom
line is increased market access for private water companies,
and corporate lobbyists will be present in numbers to ensure
that this happens in Kyoto."
Only about 5 percent of the world's water is currently in private
hands. The water sector thus has an enormous potential for the
few multinational corporations that dominate this market: mainly
Suez (France) and Vivendi Universal (France) but also Thames
Water (UK but part of German RWE) and Betchel (USA).
According to Hemantha Withanage of Friends of the Earth Sri
Lanka, "Water is a basic human right, and although water
management in the public interest may be necessary, this vital
resource should not be subject to ownership. International financial
institutions, hand-in-hand with multinational water corporations,
are paving the way by conditioning their loans to poor countries
upon privatisation promises. Trade treaties are helping by requiring
countries to deregulate their water sectors and open them up
to private investment. "
"The world's poorest people are desperately in need of
water and sanitation services,
but experience has shown that they are just further marginalized
when their countries
follow the corporate mode of privatization. Unable to afford
connection to the services,
they are condemned to using water that runs the risk of being
contaminated," according to Withanage.
In the report Friends of the Earth Malaysia states that "The
World Bank and other international financial institutions play
a key role in promoting water privatization around the world,
in alliance with the multinational water giants and the trade
agreements, promoted by industrialized countries, that pry water
markets open for corporate access."
"The World Bank's insistence that "water must be treated
as an economic good" means that if you are rich enough,
you can use water as wastefully as you like. For the poor, however,
access to water for even the most basic of needs will be a daily
struggle, " according to Friends of the Earth Malaysia.
More information can b found at www.foei.org
In addition, in preparation for the Third World Water
Forum, Corporate Europe Observatory has prepared a number of
briefings on the issues involved. Go to here
Due to technical difficulties, we were unable last week to
update the site. The Weekly News Review was prepared as usual,
however, before these problems arose. As its contents may still
be of interest, we include it below:
Global anti war movement
announces plans to escalate resistance.
On
Saturday March 1 representatives from the anti war movement
from twenty-six countries and three continents met together
in London to plan the next
steps in the world campaign against war on Iraq.
All countries reported rapidly growing opposition, and the meeting
mapped out a plan of escalating action over the next
weeks to try to stop war, including
student occupations, mass direct action, strikes and popular
assemblies against war.
If war starts the meeting called on the movements across the
world to organise mass protests on the day of an attack
in every town and city and
mass demonstrations in every capital city the following
Saturday.
According to the organisers, "There will be direct
action at military installations and to stop military
transport, mass pressure on parliamentary and United
Nations representatives, student strikes and occupations, workplace
industrial action, the establishment of peoples' assemblies
and popular consultations against war."
MEPs take peace demands
to Washington
A delegation of Members of the European Parliament (MEPs)
has arrived in Washington DC and is taking its Anti-War Appeal
to Capitol Hill and the US Administration. The delegation, headed
by United Left Group leader Francis Wurtz as well as a number
of Left and Green members, met on Tuesday with UN Secretary
General Kofi Annan and with UN Chief Weapons Inspector Hans
Blix in New York. A delegation of 31 MEPs travelled to Iraq
in early February.
In its Anti-War Appeal, presented yesterday to Kofi
Annan, the MEPs state:
'The lives and well-being of millions of people is at
stake in Iraq and elsewhere. We are gravely concerned that a
war with Iraq would have devastating social, economic and environmental
consequences. It would further destabilize the region and could
even lead to a full-scale regional war. It would contribute
to heighten tension worldwide and foster international terrorism.
We appeal to all the decision-makers: take your responsibility
seriously."
No Turkey shoot
"March 1. It had been another encouraging week
for the global antiwar movement. The momentum generated by the
massive demonstrations of mid-February held, with the Arab world
finally playing a central role. There were huge rallies in Khartoum
(100,000, Feb. 26), Cairo (100-500,000, Feb.27), and Sana, Yemen
(300,000, March 1). Significant peace rallies were also held
in Rabat (30,000, Feb. 23) and Manama, Bahrain (up to 20,000,
Feb. 28). In Oman, which like Bahrain plays host to an unpopular
U.S. troop presence, hundreds gathered Feb. 23 to protest an
Iraq attack. Meanwhile in Turkey (not an Arab country but a
Muslim one, the only Muslim NATO state), on March 1, up to 300,000
took to the streets of Ankara to express the nearly universal
antiwar sentiment in Turkey." Read the rest of "A
Very Fine Thing: Turkey Stands Up to Bush" by Gary Leupp
at here
US organised labour says
no to Bush's war
"The nation's largest trade union federation declared its
opposition Thursday to war against Iraq at this time, saying
President Bush has not made a case for an attack without broad
support from U.S. allies." Read all about it at herel
Top Secret Document Reveals
U.S. Spying on UN Delegates
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer has refused to comment on
questions about a story broken by the Observer
(UK) On Sunday the paper published an article headlined "Revealed:
U.S. Dirty Tricks to Win Vote on Iraq War."
The Observer reported
that it has obtained a top secret U.S. National Security Agency
memo outlining the surveillance of both office and home communications
of UN delegates from Security Council member countries.
The high-priority memo was from Frank Koza, chief of staff in
the "Regional Targets" section of the NSA, on January
31 -- shortly before Colin Powell's presentation to the Security
Council.
The NSA document states that the Agency "is mounting a
surge particularly directed at the UN Security Council (UNSC)
members" for "insights as to how" members are
"reacting to the on-going [Iraq] debate." It cited
"policies" and "negotiating positions" that
member states "may be considering," as well as "alliances,"
"dependencies" and "the whole gamut of information
that could give U.S. policymakers an edge in obtaining results
favorable to U.S. goals or to head off surprises."
The memo specifically addressed "efforts against UNSC members
Angola, Cameroon, Chile, Bulgaria and Guinea, as well as extra
focus on Pakistan UN matters." It also emphasized paying
"attention to existing non-UNSC member UN-related and domestic
comms [communications] for anything useful related to the UNSC
deliberations..."
The Observer article is available at:
http://www.observer.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12239,905936,00.html
The NSA document is available at:
http://www.observer.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12239,905954,00.html
Since we wrote the above story a 28-year
old woman has been arrested in connection with the leak. Read
about this at http://www.observer.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12239,910648,00.html
Diplomat walks out on
Bush Junta: "present policies incompatible with American
values and interests"
The following is the text of John Brady Kiesling's letter of
resignation to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell. Mr. Kiesling
is a career diplomat who has served in United States embassies
from Tel Aviv to Casablanca to Yerevan.
Dear Mr. Secretary:
I am writing you to submit my resignation from the Foreign
Service of the United States and from my position as Political
Counselor in U.S. Embassy Athens, effective March 7. I do so
with a heavy heart. The baggage of my upbringing included a
felt obligation to give something back to my country. Service
as a U.S. diplomat was a dream job. I was paid to understand
foreign languages and cultures, to seek out diplomats, politicians,
scholars and journalists, and to persuade them that U.S. interests
and theirs fundamentally coincided. My faith in my country and
its values was the most powerful weapon in my diplomatic arsenal.
It is inevitable that during twenty years with the State
Department I would become more sophisticated and cynical about
the narrow and selfish bureaucratic motives that sometimes shaped
our policies. Human nature is what it is, and I was rewarded
and promoted for understanding human nature. But until this
Administration it had been possible to believe that by upholding
the policies of my president I was also upholding the interests
of the American people and the world. I believe it no longer.
The policies we are now asked to advance are incompatible
not only with American values but also with American interests.
Our fervent pursuit of war with Iraq is driving us to squander
the international legitimacy that has been America's most potent
weapon of both offense and defense since the days of Woodrow
Wilson. We have begun to dismantle the largest and most effective
web of international relationships the world has ever known.
Our current course will bring instability and danger, not security.
The sacrifice of global interests to domestic politics
and to bureaucratic self-interest is nothing new, and it is
certainly not a uniquely American problem. Still, we have not
seen such systematic distortion of intelligence, such systematic
manipulation of American opinion, since the war in Vietnam.
The September 11 tragedy left us stronger than before, rallying
around us a vast international coalition to cooperate for the
first time in a systematic way against the threat of terrorism.
But rather than take credit for those successes and build on
them, this Administration has chosen to make terrorism a domestic
political tool, enlisting a scattered and largely defeated Al
Qaeda as its bureaucratic ally. We spread disproportionate terror
and confusion in the public mind, arbitrarily linking the unrelated
problems of terrorism and Iraq. The result, and perhaps the
motive, is to justify a vast misallocation of shrinking public
wealth to the military and to weaken the safeguards that protect
American citizens from the heavy hand of government. September
11 did not do as much damage to the fabric of American society
as we seem determined to so to ourselves. Is the Russia of the
late Romanovs really our model, a selfish, superstitious empire
thrashing toward self-destruction in the name of a doomed status
quo?
We should ask ourselves why we have failed to persuade
more of the world that a war with Iraq is necessary. We have
over the past two years done too much to assert to our world
partners that narrow and mercenary U.S. interests override the
cherished values of our partners. Even where our aims were not
in question, our consistency is at issue. The model of Afghanistan
is little comfort to allies wondering on what basis we plan
to rebuild the Middle East, and in whose image and interests.
Have we indeed become blind, as Russia is blind in Chechnya,
as Israel is blind in the Occupied Territories, to our own advice,
that overwhelming military power is not the answer to terrorism?
After the shambles of post-war Iraq joins the shambles in Grozny
and Ramallah, it will be a brave foreigner who forms ranks with
Micronesia to follow where we lead.
We have a coalition still, a good one. The loyalty of
many of our friends is impressive, a tribute to American moral
capital built up over a century. But our closest allies are
persuaded less that war is justified than that it would be perilous
to allow the U.S. to drift into complete solipsism. Loyalty
should be reciprocal. Why does our President condone the swaggering
and contemptuous approach to our friends and allies this Administration
is fostering, including among its most senior officials. Has
"oderint dum metuant" really become our motto?
I urge you to listen to America's friends around the
world. Even here in Greece, purported hotbed of European anti-Americanism,
we have more and closer friends than the American newspaper
reader can possibly imagine. Even when they complain about American
arrogance, Greeks know that the world is a difficult and dangerous
place, and they want a strong international system, with the
U.S. and EU in close partnership. When our friends are afraid
of us rather than for us, it is time to worry. And now they
are afraid. Who will tell them convincingly that the United
States is as it was, a beacon of liberty, security, and justice
for the planet?
Mr. Secretary, I have enormous respect for your character
and ability. You have preserved more international credibility
for us than our policy deserves, and salvaged something positive
from the excesses of an ideological and self-serving Administration.
But your loyalty to the President goes too far. We are straining
beyond its limits an international system we built with such
toil and treasure, a web of laws, treaties, organizations, and
shared values that sets limits on our foes far more effectively
than it ever constrained America's ability to defend its interests.
I am resigning because I have tried and failed to reconcile
my conscience with my ability to represent the current U.S.
Administration. I have confidence that our democratic process
is ultimately self-correcting, and hope that in a small way
I can contribute from outside to shaping policies that better
serve the security and prosperity of the American people and
the world we share.
Belgium 1 Israel 0
"Don't eat Belgian chocolate," the Israel
consul in Florida ordered the large Jewish community there.
In Israel, anti-Belgian curses reached an ear-splitting new
crescendo. Miserable Belgium! Mad Belgium! Megalomaniac
Belgium! And again and again, Anti-Semitic Belgium! Neo-Nazi
Belgium!
The Israeli ambassador was, of course, recalled from Brussels.
No wonder, how can Israel keep an ambassador in the world capital
of anti-Semitism?
Read the rest of Uri Avnery's "War Crimes and Ariel Sharon:
It's OK to Eat Belgian Chocolate" at http://www.counterpunch.org/avnery02222003.html
Resources on Iraq
The Trans National Institute (TNI) has put together
a collection of resources to help us make sense of the developing
situation. go to
http://www.tni.org/issues/iraq/iraq.htm
...and North Korea
Read Molly Ivins splendid "primer" at
here
Japanese Communists' analysis of world situation available on
line
John Manning writes:
There is now available on line a remarkable study of
the world situation, titled `Capitalism and Socialism in the
2 1st Century" by Fuwa Tetsuzo, Chair of the Central Committee
of the Japanese Communist Party, which I would recommend to
anyone concerned about the future or even the present.. Fuwa,
who has been the JCP's top theoretical and political leader,
has been able to find time despite a tight world situation,
to teach a Seminar on Marx's Capital,
in which 300 leading activists of the JCP have met every two
weeks of the year 2002, in the course of which they read and
discussed Capital
, all three volumes!
The recently-posted lecture was delivered to an audience
of thousands at this year's Akahata Festival, on November 3.
"Capitalism and Socialism in the 21st Century" is
at http://www,japan-press.co.jp
Corner House Briefing,
no. 27, "The Origins of the Third World: Markets, States
and Climate", by
Mike Davis, is now available at www.thecornerhouse.org.uk This
is the first in a series of briefings which explore issues related
to women, population control, public health and globalisation.
The briefing chronicles the first of several nineteenth century
famines in India and China. At the time, many policy makers
ascribed the famine to Malthusian pressures - too many people,
too little land, too little food - an explanation that survives
today. But Malthusian explanations were not only wrong-head
at the time: they were also contributory causes of the deaths
that occurred. The briefing outlines a revised understanding
of nineteenth century economic history that throws light on
how many of the current challenges of so-called "development"
came about: it also calls into question the wisdom of development
policies still pursued today and the justifications for them.
A summary is available here
or you can read the full text in PDF version (36 pages laid
out as in printed paper version) here.
If you prefer the HTML format go to here
The Corner House website at
www.thecornerhouse.org.uk now contains all back issues
of the Corner House briefings in both PDF and html versions
- suitable for printing out or for reading on screen. It also
has a wealth of articles, presentations, submissions and reports
on similar topics to the briefing papers.
Socialist Resistance
...is a new magazine from the British Section of the
Fourth International. Check it out at www.socialistresistance.net