Datum: 16. Dezember 2002
Erkärung:288

Nun ist auch Feride zur Märtyrerin
geworden

Wir sind geduldig und entschlossen;
Wie am ersten Tag!

Sie war eine Widerstandsfahne, die inmitten von Istanbul 3,5 Monate
hindurch wehte.

Von dem Tag, an dem sie mit dem Todesfasten am 28. Juli 2001 begann, bis
zu ihrem Todestag am 16. Dezember 2002 hat sie das rote Stirnband als
eine Fahne des Widerstandes getragen.

Ihr Name war Feride Harman.

Und der Widerstand war wie ein harman yeri(Dreschplatz), die
faulen Früchte wurden aussortiert.

Sie waren die Reifsten unter dem Volk der Türkei; wenn es darum ging,
Verantwortung zu tragen, der Tyrannei die Stirn zu bieten, seine Heimat
und sein Volk zu lieben, um Mut und Selbstlosigkeit, dann waren sie an
der vordersten Front.

Der Tyrann hat seine Tyrannei, aber wir haben Feride.

Gegen die Politiken des Imperialismus, gegen seine Politiker, gegen die
Tyrannei des Faschismus haben wir unsere Helden. Darum kann der Tyrann
nicht siegen. Er massakriert, kerkert ein, isoliert, aber kann nicht
siegen.

Sie sind die Helden der türkischen und kurdischen Nation, die Helden
unseres Volkes.

Das sind die Helden, die sich als eine Barrikade vor den Feind
stellen.

Man sollte nicht meinen, es würde sich um ein paar Menschen handeln. Man
sollte auch nicht meinen, es wären hundert oder zweihundert Menschen. Sie
sind so zahlreich, dass man sie trotz unzähliger Massaker, Folterungen,
Exekutionen, Verschwindenlassen und Gefangenschaft in 32 Jahren nicht
vernichten konnte. Sie sind fruchtbar, sie fallen in die Erde als ein
Samen. Sie heißen Feride Harman.

Vor dem Sarg von Genossin Feride Harman werden wir noch einmal verkünden;
Keine Berechnung die darauf abzielt, uns zu vernichten, kann aufgehen.

Wer die Vernichtungspläneder vorherigen Regierungen übersehen oder
ignorieren will, dem können wir diese Tatsache erneut zeigen, erneut
beibringen.

DER WIDERSTAND DER DAS WAHRE GESICHT DER REGIERUNGEN ZUM VORSCHEIN
BRACHTE!

Feride Harman ist nunmehr die 102. Gefallene im Widerstand, der gegen
die Isolation in den F-Typen seit dem 20. Oktober 2000 durchgeführt wird.
Die Barbarei der Oligarchie der Türkei wird mit dem 19. Dezember und den
F-Typen klar erkennbar. Die Regierungen der Oligarchie können mit ihrer
Maskerade über die Anpassung an die EUdiese Realität der Barbarei nicht
verschleiern. Alle werden wohl erkennen und zugeben müssen, dass in einem
Land, wo in den Gefängnissen Tyrannei herrscht, aus diesen Gefängnissen
jeden Tag Särge herausgetragen werden und Menschen, drinnen wie draußen
sogar dazu bereit sind, ihr Leben zu opfern, um diese Tyrannei zu
stoppen, keine Rede von Demokratie sein kann.

Keine Regierung, keine politische Kraft ist umhin gekommen, sich an
diesem Widerstand zu messen.

Ist die AKP eine Fortsetzung der faschistischen Tyrannei oder sind sie
Demokraten oder Muslime? Die Antwort auf diese Frage wird vor allem in
der Haltung gegenüber dem Widerstand deutlich werden.

Kein Scheinmänöver lässt die Haltung gegenüber dem Widerstand vergessen.

Anstatt die Probleme der F-Typen und der unterschiedlichsten
Volksschichten zu lösen, macht die AKP dort weiter, wo die
Ecevit-Bahçeli-Y1lmaz-Regierung aufgehört hat.

Eines der Dinge, die die AKP schwer beschäftigen, ist der
Gesetzesentwurf, der die Zwangsernährung legalisieren soll. Wenn die AKP
nun den gesetzlichen Rahmen schaffen möchte, den die Ecevit-Regierung und
ihr Justizminister Sami Türk nicht verwirklichen konnten, bemüht sie sich
umsonst. Sie sollen sich nur die Stellungnahmen von Ecevit, Sami Türk und
Tantan in den Morgenstunden des 19. Dezember 2000 durchlesen.

Das Massaker, das es in dem Maße in der Geschichte der Türkei noch nie
gegeben hat, wurde angeblich durchgeführt, um das Todesfasten zu beenden,
um gegen die Personen einzugreifen, die sich am Todesfasten beteiligen.
Sie waren sich ihrer so sicher. Sie machten sogar Aussagen, in dem sie
das Todesfasten für beendeterklärten.

Sie mussten einen Rückzieher machen.

Sie haben die revolutionären Gefangenen nicht brechen können; ihnen wurde
von den Todesfastenden draußen und schließlich an der Wahlurne von den
Volksmassen eine Lektion erteilt.

Wir warnen die AKP zum wiederholten Male: spekuliert nicht
damit, den Widerstand mit Gesetzesänderungen zu brechen. Ihr könnt
Euch vor dem Prüfstein des Widerstandes nicht drücken. Eure Bewertung als
Demokratenwird mit Eurer Haltung gegenüber dem Widerstand
gegeben!

Wir sind geduldig und entschlossen. So viel steht schon mal fest.

DIE KRAFT, DIE VON DEN HELDENTATEN DRINNEN UND DRAUSSEN ERSCHAFFEN
WURDE...KANN NICHT VERNICHTET, BESEITIGT WERDEN!

Feride Harman war in den Bergen von Dersim eine Guerillakämpferin.
Gegen die Tyrannei hatte sie an jenen Tagen eine Waffe in der Hand. Sie
wurde gefangengenommen. Das System der Oligarchie hat sie
entwaffnet...

Nur war das wirklich so? Wurde Feride entwaffnet.

Nein, sie hat die größte Waffe, die auf natürliche Weise alle
Unterdrückten besitzen, um sich gegen die Tyrannei zu wehren, entdeckt
und sich damit ausgerüstet.

In einem ihrer letzten Briefe, die sie an unsere Front schrieb, sagte
sie: Vor allem die Phase des Todesfastens war eine grosse Wende für
mich. Eine Phase, wo ich meine eigene Kraft gesehen habe. Vor allem
nachdem ich in die Zelle verlegt wurde, haben die Heldentaten drinnen und
draußen mir Kraft gegeben...

Weil sie über diese Kraft verfügte, hat sie den 19. Dezember erlebt und
ist vor dem Tyrannen nicht in die Knie gegangen.

Sie wurde in die Zelle verlegt und hat trotzdem nicht klein beigegeben.

Feride wurde am 23. August 2002, als sie sich im Todesfasten befand,
freigelassen. Diesem Bestechungsversuch des Staates hat sie sich nicht
unterlegt. Der Bestechung hat sie keine Beachtung geschenkt, sondern das
rote Band an ihrer Stirn inmitten von Istanbul als eine Fahne des
Widerstandes wehen lassen.

Wer diese Fahne, diese Willenskraft nicht wahrhaben möchte, möge sie oder
er in der Regierung oder Opposition sein, ist dazu verdammt, aus der
politischen Landschaft zu verschwinden. Denn die Politik formt sich nach
dem Kampf der Unterdrückten und Unterdrücker. Feride ist die Heldin der
Armen, Unterdrückten, unseres Volkes. Sie war dabei gegen den
Imperialismus und Faschismus Widerstand zu leisten; somit ist es
offensichtlich; Feride wurde von den VertreterInnen des Imperialismus und
Faschismus ermordet; Wer gegen die Ermordung von Feride schweigt, dient
dem System des Imperialismus und Faschismus auf die eine oder andere
Weise.

Unsere Genossin Feride Harman, ist im September 1973 in einem
Vorort von Malatya, Akçadaauf die Welt gekommen. Sie hat das
Gymnasium in Kürecik beendet. Ihr Vater war ein pensionierter Lehrer,
ihre Mutter eine Hausfrau. Sie waren acht Geschwister. Es war eine der
Familien, die man millionenfach in Anatolien antreffen kann. Als eine
Person, die zur Armut verdammt war, deren nationale Ehre gekränkt wurde,
als eine von zehn Millionen Jugendlichen, die von der Grundschule auf mit
Repressionen, Verboten und Strafen konfrontiert war, wurde sie eine
Revolutionärin. Mit unserer Front schloss sie 1991 Bekanntschaft. 1992
hat sie sich noch aktiver am Kampf beteiligt. 1993 hat sie sich in Dersim
der 0brahim Erdoan Landguerilla angeschlossen. Sie befand sich ungefähr 4
Jahre bei der Guerilla. Hinterher kam sie ins Gefängnis. In den 6 Jahren
ihrer Gefangenschaft hat sie sich der Tyrannei nicht unterworfen, sondern
sich unter diesen Einschüchterungsversuchen entwickelt, ist stärker
geworden.

Als Widerstandskämpferin in der 6. Todesfastengruppe hat sie mit
dieser Kraft 1,5 Jahre lang die Fahne getragen, auf der stand: Entweder
Sieg oder Tod.

Ihr letzter Wille war es, eine Handvoll Erde aus Dersim in ihr Grab zu
schütten.

Wir werden diesen Willen erfüllen; aber wir werden noch etwas machen: Wir
werden mit der freudigen Nachricht des Sieges an ihr Grab treten. Darauf
geben wir den HeldInnen, den VertreterInnen unserer Willenskraft und
Entschlossenheit, unser Wort.

Devrimci Halk Kurtulus Cephesi

Revolutionäre Volksbefreiungsfront

Hallo,

Die Erklärung der Front für Rechte und Freiheiten hat uns per E-Mail
erreicht. Wir möchten sie allen Interessierten weiterleiten.

TAGE DES KAMPFES GEGEN ISOLATIONSHAFT

Um die F-Typ-Gefängnisse zu eröffnen, hat die Oligarchie der Türkei
von19.-22. Dezember das blutigste und größte Massaker in der
Geschichte der Republik Türkei verübt. Nach ihren eigenen Angaben haben
sie nach einer einjährigen Vorbereitungsphase am Morgen des 19. Dezember
zwanzig Gefängnisse auf einmal gestürmt. Unter dem Einsatz von 8335
Sicherheitskräften, tausenden Polizisten, mehr als 20.000 Gasbomben und
zehntausenden Munitionen haben sie mit der Ermordung von 28
revolutionären Gefangenen und 2 Soldaten ihre blutige Operation
vollzogen.
Sie haben dem Volk ihr Wort gegeben, dass die F-Typ-Gefängnisse nicht
ohne neue Regulierungen eröffnet würden.

Das war eine Lüge. Sie haben die F-Typ- Gefängnisse mit einem Massaker
eröffnet und die oppositionellen Gefangenen, die ihre Freiheit forderten
in den Zellen ISOLIERT.

IN ISOLATIONSHAFT kamen die, die nachdachten, produktiv waren und
nach Freiheit forderten. Sie waren die Auserwähltesten unter den Völkern
der Türkei. Mit der Unterstützung von Amerika und Europa haben sie im
Rahmen der weltweiten Vernichtungspolitik gegen alle Kräfte, die in
Opposition zum Imperialismus stehen und nach Freiheit fordern, mit dem
Einsatz der ISOLATIONSPOLITIK begonnen.

Die Imperialisten wollten diejenigen, die sich für Freiheiten einsetzen
und die Oppositionellen auf der ganzen Welt vernichten. Die Oligarchie
der Türkei hat das mit einem Blutvergießen umgesetzt. Die
ISOLATION war nicht nur für die Gefangenen gedacht, sondern für
alle, die gegen das System Widerstand leisten, eine Welt ohne
Repressionen und Ausbeutung möchten. Die Völker konnten diese Tyrannei
nicht hinnehmen. Die politischen Gefangenen waren die auserlesensten
Elemente im Volk. Sie beschlossen, gegen die ISOLATION Widerstand
zu leisten. Sie setzten ihr Leben ein. Vom 19. Dezember bis heute sind103
(einhundertdrei) denkende Menschen ums Leben gekommen.
ISOLATION war eine Entdeckung des Imperialismus. Einfach jemanden
ISOLIEREN, somit seine Gedanken vernichten und den Menschen töten.
Sich gegen die Isolation auszusprechen kommt von der Fähigkeit zu
denken. Es bedeutet, die Tatsache, dass der Mensch ein soziales Wesen
ist, zu verdeutlichen. Es bedeutet produktiv zu sein und zu leben. Es
bedeutet, dass unser Wunsch nach Freiheit aufrechterhalten bleibt. Dafür
gibt es den Widerstand, dafür setzt man sein Leben ein.
19.-22. Dezember sind die Tage, an dem man der Isolation und Tyrannei die
Stirn geboten hat. Der Tag, an dem alle gegen ISOLATION denkende Menschen
die Fahne des Kampfes am höchsten Punkt platzierten. Gegen die ISOLATION,
gegen den Verlust der Denkfähigkeit werden die Völker der ganzen Erde
Widerstand leisten.
19.-22. Dezember ist eine Auflehnung gegen die Isolation Jeder, der
den Menschen verteidigt, den denkenden Menschen verteidigt, sollte am
Kampf gegen die ISOLATION teilnehmen.

Haklar ve Özgürlükler Cephesi

Front für Rechte und Freiheiten

==================================================
10 Workers Power Global Week 22 December 2002
Von: NEWSWIRE <newsire@workerspower.com>
==================================================
>>>WORKERS POWER GLOBAL WEEK
E-newswire of the LRCI
22 December 2002

>>>>WELCOME TO ISSUE #124
Workers Power Global Week is the English language e-newsletter of the LRCI.
To unsubscribe go to: http://www.workerspower.com/wpglobal/newsform.html
Please forward this to a comrade.

============================================================

>>SOUTH KOREA: PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS END IN DEFEAT FOR US FAVORITE

>>VENEZUELA: OPPOSITION "GENERAL STRIKE" PAVES WAY FOR COUP ATTEMPT
>>SCOTTISH SOCIALIST PARTY: FIREFIGHTERS STRIKE BRINGS OUT DIVISIONS
>>ITALY: FIAT, OCCUPATION OF ALL PLANTS THE ONLY ANSWER

============================================================

>> SOUTH KOREA:PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS END IN DEFEAT FOR US FAVORITE

Workers Power Global, Vienna

The presidential elections in South Korea ended in a defeat of the
right-wing
candidate Lee Hoi-chang and the victory of the pro-government Roh Moo-hyun,
who
called for continued dialogue with North Korea and a revision of the
military
alliance with the US. Roh won 48.9 percent compared to 46.6 percent for Lee.

The elections outcome is not only important because of the South Koreas
position
as the 13th largest economy in the world but also because of its
geo-strategic
position on the frontier of one of the George Bush?s "axis of evil" states ?
North Korea. As a historic "ally" of US-imperialism it is garrisoned by
37.000
US soldiers.

Thus it was no accident that these issues were central to the election
campaign.
US-imperialism always supported the military dictatorships which ruled the
country from World War II till 1987 and played a role in the bloody Kwangju
massacre in the popular uprising in 1980. Traditional anti-US imperialist
resentments amongst the population exploded in the past months after a US
military vehicle crushed and killed two Korean youths in a car accident. The
US
military are well known for their arrogant behaviour in public and their
status
as "untouchables". As ever the US army refused to deliver the soldiers
responsible for a Korean civil trial. Instead they were charged in US
military
court where? (surprise! surprise!) ? they were found not guilty.

This triggered a massive wave of mobilisations. Last weekend more than
50.000
people demonstrated against the acquittal of two US soldiers over the deaths
of
two schoolgirls and demanded a public apology from Bush, a retrial and
changes
to the country?s Status of Forces Agreement with the US. Such demonstrations
continuing for weeks, and anti-American feeling has very widespread. Many
restaurants have signs saying "Americans not welcome".

Roh, who was trailing in the polls? far behind his rivals only a few weeks
ago,
managed a comeback by skilfully exploiting the popular anti-American anger.
His
rival Lee, candidate of the right-wing conservative Grand National Party ?
founded by the military dictatorship in the 1980s - strongly backed US
president
Bush and his aggressive anti-North Korean policy. But given the popular
sentiments even he had to sign a petition calling for changes to the Status
of
Forces Agreement, which currently allows US servicemen to be tried by
court-martial, rather than in a Korean court.

Roh supports the continuation of Kim Dae-jungs "sunshine-policy" of
so-called
constructive engagement with North Korea. This policy basically meant a
shift of
South Korea?s stance towards Pyongyang: away from confrontation to dialogue
and
restoring links between the two Koreas. After September 11 this policy
became an
obstacle for George Bush?s war drive which uses the bugbear of "rogue
states"?
armed with "weapons of mass destruction"? as a means to strengthen
US-hegemony
in the world.

However while popular support for appeasement with North Korea represents a
progressive sentiment it has very different material interests when it comes
from Roh and the sectors of South Korean ruling class who support the
bourgeois
government. For them providing economic aid is a means of opening up North
Korea
to investment and an opportunity for South Korean capitalists to exploit the
country?s cheap labour.

Thus it would sheer self-delusion to believe in Roh?s "anti-imperialism".
This
was largely rhetoric for electoral purposes? like Schroeder?s "antiwar"
speeches
which won him the German Chancellorship. Only a day after the elections Roh
backtracked on his electoral pledges and declared his desire to visit
Washington
to forge a "mature" relationship with the US. "I will maintain a full
co-operation with the United States to resolve North Korea?s nuclear issue
and
we [South Korea] would play a leading role [in doing so]," he said.

Beside the rising anti-US-imperialist popular mobilisations there is also
another positive development in South Korean: the growing support for the
Democratic Labour Party. It?s candidate Kwon Young-ghil won nearly 4
percent, up
from 1.2 percent at the 1997 election. In the industrial city of Ulsan,
Kwon, a
former leader of the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU), received
11.4
percent of the vote.

While the KCTU and the DLP clearly follow a reformist policy, often
resulting in
compromises with the bosses, the party?s formation and growing support is a
progressive factor since it reflects the drive of South Korean workers for
political independence from the traditional bosses parties which dominate
the
countries political system. If it proves to be a democratic party, where the
rank and file not union bureaucrats and parliamentarians call the tune, then
it
could enormously aid the return to militant class struggle policy against
the
mounting attacks on the gains of the working class.

Revolutionaries in Korea should struggle in the party?s ranks for a militant
anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist programme of action. They should fight
for
the immediate withdrawal of the USA?s troops and for scrapping all military
treaties with it. Certainly they cannot ignore the question of the North.
The
regime of the "dear leader" is indeed a vile Stalinist prison house for the
workers and peasants. But this cannot be put right by US imperialism or the
southern capitalists. Indeed their economic and military siege is
responsible to
a major degree for its acute internal economic. But this can be solved only
by
the north Korean workers making a political revolution and their southern
class
brothers a social one and linking up to install workers democracy in the
whole
peninsular.

Meanwhile? besieged and threatened by the USA revolutionaries should stand
for
the unconditional defence of North Korea. This includes its right to
possess
nuclear reactors and to develop nuclear weapons, if it can. Certainly the
US
administration?s rather restrained attitude to North Korea is due in no
small
part to the fact that ? unlike the unfortunate Saddam Hussein, it may
already
have done so.

============================================================

>>VENEZUELA: OPPOSITION "GENERAL STRIKE" PAVES WAY FOR COUP ATTEMPT
Workers Power Global, London

The opposition led general strike in Venezuela has entered its third week.
Its leaders have rejected the Supreme Court ruling ordering a resumption of
work in the countries vital oil industry. The strike was launched by the
Venezuelan bosses with the support of the trade union leaders of the better
paid workers in early December. The aim is to oust Hugo Chavez, the
democratically elected President of the country.
This is the second attempt by Venezuelan business leaders backed by
Washington to get rid of Chavez who is seen a dangerous radical with
considerable support amongst the poorest and dispossessed of Venezuela. In
April a general strike was the cover for a military coup which ousted Chavez
for 48 hrs. Mass demonstrations on the streets swung sections of the army
against the coup; Chavez was re-instated and army generals implicated were
retired.
This time the opposition claims it just wants early elections. Chavez?s term
expires in 2004, the opposition is demanding he stands down with new
elections to be held in the Spring. The strike is an attempt to pre-empt a
recall referendum on the President?s record due to be held in August under
the constitution.
The opposition aims to inflict a massive defeat on Chavez and his supporters
in the Movement for a Fifth Republic, by making the country ungovernable and
driving him from office. This is the only way they can guarantee a safe
outcome for any early elections.
A group of powerful opposition leaders, the Caracas Mayor Alfredo Pena, the
head of the employers federation Carlos Fernandez and the president of the
CTV unions Carlos Ortega, have been calling on the military to ?abide by
their mission?, code for launching a coup as they did in April.
The struggle has come to centre around the state owned oil industry. Oil
production accounts for 80% of the country?s export income and more than a
third of the country?s GDP; its closure is estimated to be costing Venezuela
$40 million a day. Since coming to power Chavez has been trying to break the
hold of the old directors and to allocate more of Petroleos de Venezuela?s
(PDVSA?s) profits to state development projects.
The strike was failing in its first week until these directors brought PDVSA
into the ?strike?. They were soon joined by tanker captains who downed
anchors and refused to load oil. Refineries were hit when the management
closed them down, paralysing distribution centres and causing shortages at
petrol stations. Airline pilots joined the strike, followed by bank workers.
The struggle between Chavez and the management of the PDVSA is a make or
break question for the government, and both sides know it. Troops were sent
in to take control of distribution, and the navy attempted to get the
tankers moving amidst reports of some crews being against their captains?
actions. Last week the president ordered private lorries, planes and ships
to be commandeered by the military to get oil moving again.
Meanwhile the privately owned media ? TV and newspapers - have been talking
up the crisis, demanding that Chavez goes and calling on the army to
intervene. Only the state TV station remains on the government side. Mass
demonstrations by the opposition and the largest trade union federation have
been met with mass counter demonstrations from Chavez supporters from the
poorest suburbs.
They have surrounded the private TV stations on occasion, chanting ?shut it
down? and ?tell the truth?. PDVSA headquarters has been subject to similar
demonstrations with demonstrators chanting ?long live Chavez ? the oil
belongs to the people?. Meanwhile the opposition has broughts tens of
thousands onto the streets, blocking traffic and main highways.
Off-on ?reconciliation? discussions led by the secretary general of the
Organisation of American States are being used to try to broker a deal. On
Saturday the US government made clear that it saw the only ?peaceful and
politically viable way out of the crisis is through the holding of early
elections? publicly throwing their weight behind the demands of the
opposition.
Given their initial support for the short lived coup in April this should
come as no surprise. As war approaches in the Middle East they are
determined to seek a more ?reliable? regime in Venezuela - one of their
biggest oil suppliers.
In the last period Chavez? base of support amongst the electorate has
shrunk. The middle classes and better off workers are being hit by
recession, the economy shrunk by 6.4% in the first nine months of this year,
while official unemployment reached 17% in September. An investment strike
by Venezuela?s rulers backed by Washington is taking its toll.
The currency is sinking and inflation growing ? the current paralysis of the
oil industry can only make things worse. While the poorest sectors of the
community have become increasingly organised in active support for Chavez,
often through his Bolivarian circles, Chavez and his movement have taken few
radical and no socialist measures which could have won over the organised
working class to his side and broken the economic and military power of
their enemies.
His regime increasingly has to rely on the neutrality of the army to
survive. As the April coup showed such neutrality will be short lived if the
crisis deepens - Chavez?s days in power could be numbered.
This shows the dangers of relying on a populist, "anti ?imperialist"
president when the chips are down. He dare not? and without an actively
mobilised working class, as well as the urban poor? can not take decisive
measures against the rich and the powerful. The capitalist repressive
apparatus cannot be used to expropriate and disarm the capitalists.
To defeat his enemies he should, of course, seize the wealth of the
"investment strikers", of the US and EU owned banks and corporations and put
their wealth at the service of the impoverished millions. He should take the
weapons away from the professional officer caste and create a mass workers
and people?s militia.
Indeed if he does not then, sooner rather than later, he will meet the fate
of an Allende. More importantly the militants of the Bolivarian committees
and the shanty town mass organisations could face the "dirty war", the
"disappearances " which their Chilean and Argentinian brothers and sisters
suffered in the 1970s.
To avoid this grim fate the widest mass mobilisation and the organisation of
a workers and popular militia is needed. But the masses also need to be won
from class-blind neo-populism, from reliance on a "people?s president", to
the goal of making a revolution to install workers? and people?s power.

Workers Power Global, London

FOR MORE ON VENEZUELA AND THE FIRST COUP ATTEMPT IN APRIL SEE:
http://www.workerspower.com/wpglobal/chavez4.html

============================================================
>>SCOTTISH SOCIALIST PARTY: FIREFIGHTERS STRIKE BRINGS OUT DIVISIONS
Worker Power Global, London
December saw a series of charges and rebuttals thrown at each other by the
two biggest tendencies in the Scottish Socialist Party (SSP). The offensive
opened with a letter from the SSP Executive Committee, which is dominated by
the ex-Militant tendency led by Tommy Sheridan (now called the International
Socialist Movement).
The letter charged that the Socialist Worker platform, made up of members
who were previously part of the British SWP, were engaging in actions which
were ?disruptive, divisive and damaging? to the SSP. The specific charges
were that the SW platform had gone behind the back of the SSP structures and
was using a fire-fighters rank and file bulletin ?Red Watch? to do its own
work around the strike. This was linked to charges of ignoring the SSP?s own
fire-fighters bulletin, failing to distribute a special electoral paper for
the upcoming Scottish Parliamentary elections, following instructions from
the British SWP and generally being unenthusiastic about the SSP project.
In two replies from the SW tendency it re-affirmed its commitment to the SSP
and pointed out that the SW platform had a political project that was
?different and distinct from that of the SWP in England an Wales? and that
as an independent political body it could not be held accountable for the
actions of the SWP. It hotly denied that it had boycotted the election
special. It defended its right to distribute a UK wide rank and file paper
(citing SSP conference decisions) and declared that the executive should be
opening up a discussion on the correctness or otherwise of the rank and file
approach rather than attacking SSP members ?actively building solidarity for
strikers?.
At the root of this dispute is the different approaches taken to the trade
union bureaucracy. Tommy Sheridan and the founders of the ISM come from the
right-centrist tradition of the British militant. Under the leadership of
Ted grant and Peter Taffe this tendency was renowned for its long-term
entryism into the Labour Party and its opportunist adaptation to reformism.
At its most fundamental this was shown in its willingness to embrace the
idea that socialism could come through gaining a socialist majority in
parliament - a series of radical reforms to the state machinery were
presented as an alternative to smashing the state machine through
revolution, soviets a workers militia etc. The ISM carried this perspective
into the programme of the SSP even after they split with Grant and Taffe.
Building allies in the leadership of the trade unions in Scotland is
considered by the ISM leadership to be fundamental to the forward march of
the SSP on the electoral terrain, to replace labour as the party of
socialism in Scotland. Suddenly finding a large group of SSP members
distributing a Red Watch bulletin, which rightly criticised the leadership
of the Fire Brigades Union (FBU) for calling off the strikes and seeking a
rotten compromise on the fire-fighters? claim, was too much for the SSP
leadership ? especially as the Scottish parliamentary elections are only 6
months away.
The SSP executive make absolutely clear that no criticism should be made of
the FBU leadership and no rank and file organisation should be built in the
union to organise against a sell out. ?the FBU leadership in Scotland have a
tremendous record on a wide range of trade union and political issues ? In
these concrete circumstances, our emphasis is not to build a left opposition
inside the FBU to its leadership in Scotland.? (SSP Executive letter 1st
December 2002). In other words as long as the FBU leadership in Scotland
lends its name to a few of the SSP favoured campaigns like the Scottish
Campaign against Privatisation, they can be guaranteed in return a free run
to sell out a strike without criticism or organisation in the union rank and
file from the SSP.
Scottish Socialist Voice faithfully reflected this line with no criticism
being made of the FBU leaders calling off the strikes. The SSV editorial
greeted the decision by the FBU to suspend strike action and go to
arbitration with the headline ?Suspension of strike is far from defeat for
FBU?. In contrast both Socialist Worker and Red Watch, reflecting the
outrage of the majority of militants in the FBU, criticised the decision of
the FBU leadership to suspend an absolutely solid series of strike actions.
For the leadership of the SSP this dispute is about telling the SW tendency
that it will not tolerate actions that threaten its cosy relationship with
the TU lefts, nor will it tolerate the SW tendency continuing to follow
tactics developed by the SWP. The SW tendency is in a cleft stick. The
guidelines it agreed when it joined the SSP made clear that only SSV should
be sold on public activities, Socialist Worker can only be sold internally
in the SSP by SW tendency members. Using Red Watch was a means of getting
round this ? the alternative was remaining silent at a key juncture of the
FBU strike and worse being limited to selling a paper that sows illusions in
the FBU leadership.
But this problem is, in some respects, one of the SWPs own making. The SWP
wants to build an electoral challenge to the left of Labour, to scoop up
Labour voters alienated by New Labour and Blairism. But it is convinced that
this is realistically possible today only on a non-revolutionary basis.
Aware that this approach ? coming from a from a party would amount to
reformism ? it tries to juggle with the concept of united front (a bloc of
reformists, centrists and revolutionaries for action) but apply it to the
completely separate question of common electoral propaganda between these
currents.
It is positively in favour of building electoral united fronts on ?broad
programmes? (i.e. ones limited to reforms, plus vague aspirations to
socialism) that are entirely acceptable to left reformists i.e. the
Socialist Alliances in England and Wales, the SSP in Scotland. But because
the SWP does not really know what a programme is for they ignore completely
the "blowback" that these left reformist programmes have on a party?s whole
method of work. Instead they rather pathetically believe that it is
over-concentration on elections ("electoralism") that leads to these
problems.
The SW tendency is happy to peddle a reformist programme on the doorsteps of
workers for the Scottish parliamentary election but is uneasy when the same
methods come to dominate the trade union work of the party ? i.e. trade
unionism based on an unprincipled block with the "left" trade union
bureaucracy. Building fighting rank and file organisations in the unions
which can pursue the class struggle, break the bureaucrats stranglehold on
the unions, and play an important part in the struggle for power, are a
crucial weapon in a revolutionary party?s armoury.
But they have no place in the SSP's plans, nor would they in the Socialist
Alliances? if they recruited significant forces on their current programmes.
This is the contradiction at the heart of the SWP's ?united front? policy
and it is already starting to unravel in Scotland.

============================================================

>> ITALY: FIAT STRUGGLE, OCCUPATION OF ALL PLANTS THE ONLY ANSWER

Workers Power Global; Italy

The owners of the FIAT car manufacturing plant, the Agnelli family, have
just sold their 5.1% of shares in General Motors. So doing they have raised
1.16 billion dollars to help pay off at least a bit of their 6 billion or so
dollars of debts. Most Italian commentators are convinced that the manoeuvre
also reflects the Agnelli family?s strategic concern to get out of the car
business once and for all, thus allowing General Motors to take over this
historical bastion of Italian monopoly capitalism.
The three main union leaders have responded to this latest development with
their usual array of platitudes and moralizing phrases. CGIL leader
Guglielmo Epifani has passively asked: "Will the resources from the sale be
for investment or to reduce company debts?", adding that the company needs
to "be clear" about what it is doing. CISL leader Savino Pezzotta exhorts
with false surprise: "We weren?t informed". UIL chief Luigi Angeletti poses
the following bemused interrogative: "Does FIAT have a strategy, and if so
what is it?"
The response of the Agnelli family to all three leaders is evident in the
fact that it takes absolutely no notice of any of them. As far as these old
financiers of Mussolini are concerned, what they do with their money and
their factory is absolutely none of the business of either the FIAT workers
of their union representatives.
This is also the view of the Berlusconi government, which is using the FIAT
case to test out the response of the union leaders to a concerted
boss-government effort to exclude them from any type of collective
bargaining. This most anti-working class of governments has in fact had the
nerve to declare that IT is representing workers at the negotiations with
the FIAT management!
It claims, for example, that it took union demands to the negotiating table
with FIAT, and that these demands found their way into the FIAT-government
accord over restructuring. The Agnellis had insisted on the definitive
closure of the Termini Imerese plant in Sicily and the radical shearing of
the Arese plant near Milan of its planning and design functions.
Bosses and government have now agreed that the Termini Imerese plant will
re-open in September 2003 for production of the FIAT Punto. Workers will be
taken back on following a programme of training to be paid for by 60 million
euro worth of State funding. At Cassino, laid-off workers will be
re-employed from spring 2003 onwards, though this will only be if there is a
market demand.
In Mirafiori, FIAT is prepared to discuss the re-hiring of workers on the
basis of the launching of new models of the Punto restyling and B-MPV. Until
then, bosses and government have agreed that workers will be able to rotate
the lay-offs, by this meaning that they will take it in turns to go on the
dole.
At the Arese plant, the bosses have agreed to participate in a "permanent
table" of discussion with the government regarding business policies, and to
employ about 2,000 workers from FIAT Auto and other FIAT companies who would
otherwise have been laid off. The 5,600 lay-offs demanded by the company
will now be spread out by resort to extended dole periods (workers receive
about two thirds of normal salary) which will bring at least 2,400 workers
up to early retirement age.
After the signing of this agreement in the first week of December, the union
leaders were livid. On 6 December Epifani declared that during negotiations
on matters of employment, work organisation and unemployment benefit the
union representatives had been cut out. This, of course, is what he and the
other union top brass are really peeved over. Indeed, as Berlusconi noted,
they can?t complain about the content of the deal as they got what they
asked for, namely, rotation of the dole periods and the promise not to
definitively close the plant at Termini Imerese.
This has meant that all Epifani and the other leaders can do is claim that
the plan?s economic strategy is destined to failure. They can say nothing
more than this, since they accept that FIAT is a private company that
belongs to Agnelli. Their declarations since the plan?s signing have
therefore been limited to begging calls to "reopen the negotiations". The
alternative, of course, is an all-out general strike with plant occupations,
a prospect which none of them dare consider, as it would challenge the
Agnelli?s property rights ,which they actually respect.
In unison, the three union secretaries have declared that they refuse to
recognize the plan, but they contemporaneously refuse to do anything about
it, barring telling workers what they already know. Workers are faced with a
verbal vacuousness which claims to radically "oppose" the FIAT-government
agreement but which delivers nothing by way of programmatic consequences.
Epifani: "It?s an agreement between the government and the company which
doesn?t modify the original plan." Pezzotta: "It?s an agreement which
excludes the union and doesn?t contain any serious modifications to the
original plan." Angeletti: "Today there wasn?t even a negotiation. We simply
took note of the agreement reached between the government and the company."
Angeletti has also made sure to offset any talk of serious action in the
here and now. He stated that "in the new year they?ll see how short-sighted
their plan is, and then they?ll be forced to renegotiate." In other words,
if you?ve been sacked, accept it and say "I told you so" to Agnelli next
summer.
Referring to a recent insult made by Berlusconi against the Agnelli family
("They?ve wasted any number of opportunities, and if I weren?t prime
minister I?d move in myself and do a better job than them"), Epifani merely
appeals to the Agnellis: "The company heads, who replied to Berlusconi?s
accusations with such harsh words, today agree to throw in their lot with
the very government who has offended them. This is another sign of their
enormous weakness." The Agnellis get everything they want from the
government, the union bureaucrats are cut out of the deal and, according to
Epifani, it is the FIAT BOSSES who are weak!
The new-found "unity" between CGIL, CISL and UIL is a unity between the
bureaucrats to contain the militancy of the FIAT workers whose protests are
not only effective but gaining support. Workers have taken their struggle to
the railways and motorways, blocking traffic, causing havoc and forcing
Berlusconi to refer to their actions as "uncivilized". (This from the very
mouth of a rich businessman who has legalized criminality in Italy). Workers
have also been picketing the Agnelli-owned Rinascente shops.
Why are union bosses not speaking out, even using double-speak diplomatic
terminology, against such radical and self-organized measures by the
workers? After all, don?t such actions rick getting out of control (i.e.
become not recallable by bureaucratic sanction)? The fact of the matter is
that, for the moment at least, the situation as it stands suits the union
bureaucrats down to the ground, since in blocking motorways and railway
lines the workers make the dreadful error of not occupying the factories.
Set in the context of the union bureaucrats? hot air, worker actions,
however radical, are destined to go nowhere as strikers get fed up and
disillusioned by the lack of concrete results.
This is what FIAT, Berlusconi and the union leaders want, especially the
leaders of CISL and UIL who have been more honest than Epifani in making it
overtly clear that they don?t want to lead an escalation the action, since
it might undermine the so-called "Pact for Italy". This was an agreement
which Pezzotta and Angeletti signed separately with the government. It
agreed to the abolition of Article 18 (defence against unfair dismissal) in
exchange for empty promises which were based on exaggerated economic growth
projections.
The Pact has since been blown to pieces by events. Not only have
modifications of Article 18 been deferred (thanks to the massive worker
militancy of 2002), but figures from international bourgeois economic
sources project less than 1% growth. By excluding even CISL and UIL from the
December accord, what the recent FIAT accord has proven is that the "Pact of
Italy" was little more than a government-boss scam to split the unions. The
fact that Pezzotta and Angeletti still cling to the Pact is just further
proof of how far they are prepared to stoop to curb worker militancy while
contemporaneously receiving recognition for their social function as power
brokers between bosses and workers.
It is by now crystal clear that the Agnellis have completely lost interest
in FIAT (reconfirmed by the sale of their GM shares) and just want to get
out and live the lives of the stinking rich. Yet Epifani & Co. just cannot
hide their reverence for the FIAT fat cats, seeing in them the font of
worker salvation through a presumed massive "investment". Like the other two
pro-government hacks, Epifani is an apologist for capitalism, and a
professional adviser to the Agnelli family, even when the Agnelli family has
made it abundantly clear that it doesn?t want his advice.
In the meantime, as it was pointed out to Epifani by the bourgeois newspaper
"La Repubblica", despite all the "objections" and "refusals" of the union
leaders, redundancy and lay-off notices have been sent to workers. It is
clear, therefore, that the present actions by workers, however effective,
are not enough. Epifani, Pezzotta and Angeletti are also no doubt
"supporting" these actions in the hope of using them as a bargaining chip to
wangle their way back into negotiations and have their privileged positions
and status once more recognized by the people they themselves really
respect: Berlusconi and the Agnellis.
All FIAT plants must be occupied by workers and all production halted. In
this respect, lessons must be learnt from the failed strategy of the Italian
communists under Gramsci?s leadership during the occupation of the factories
in the early 1920s, when production continued during the occupations. Then,
the capitalists united as a class and sabotaged the production process by
denying raw materials and cutting workers off from the division of labour.
For many workers at the time, the "lesson" learnt was not that they couldn?t
produce on a socialist basis under capitalism, but that they were incapable
of controlling production and actually "needed" the bosses.
It must be demanded of the union leaders and the reformist leaders of the
Democratic Left and Rifondazione Comunista that FIAT be nationalized and
placed under the control of the workers and their allies among the white
collar sector, including the scientists, technicians and designers. Only
these have a direct interest in producing top quality, environment friendly
cars. They have also shown time and again their vast knowledge of the sector
and a far greater enthusiasm in car production than the rotten-to-the core
Agnelli clan and its parasitic financial backers. Not a penny should be
given to the Agnelli family by way of compensation. On the contrary. Every
euro and every square inch of their empire, including houses, museums,
insurance companies, fancy cars and yachts, should be expropriated.
But for this to come to pass, workers must dump the in-built respect
for bourgeois property inculcated by the union leaders, by the Democratic
Left and by Rifondazione Comunista too. Once again capitalism itself poses
the question as to who should be running society.
The workers in all of the FIAT plants must deepen the control over their
actions, a control which in many respects they already enjoy, but which is
endangered by the dark cloud of bureaucratic passivity represented by
Epifani and the other motley crew, all of whom are hell bent on being
finally accepted back into negotiations to reaffirm their own social status
by bringing the sell-out to full pro-boss fruition.

============================================================

>>>>BECOME A CORRESPONDENT FOR WPG
The LRCI has members across the globe - but there are many countries where
we have no correspondents. Send us your news and views:
newswire@workerspower.com

============================================================
>>>NOW FORWARD THIS TO A COMRADE >> NOW FORWARD THIS TO A COMRADE

-top-

Redaktionsschluss: Dienstag, 24.12.2002, 6:00 Uhr
Diese Ausgabe hat Heinz Nezessius
zusammengestellt


Fehler moege frau/man mir nachsehen!