ILC INTERNATIONAL NEWSLETTER
A dossier of weekly information published by the International
Liaison Committee of Workers and Peoples
June 20, 2006
Issue 187
INTRODUCTION
On Sunday, June 11, delegations from 21 countries came together in
Geneva at the 13th Conference of the ILC In Defense of the ILO Conventions
and Trade Union Independence.
This conference opened up a needed discussion concerning the reality
of the "new trade union international," which is set to be
founded on November 1st in Vienna, after the dissolution of the ICFTU
and the WCL.
In his introduction, Daniel Gluckstein, coordinator of the ILC, spoke
of the connection between the threats to the International Labor Organization
(ILO) and the questions posed by the "new trade union international,"
as well as the World Summit of the U.N. of last autumn.
The ILC is not in competition with any other organization of the workers´
movement.
Due to the quality of the discussion at this conference, we will be
publishing all of the speeches. This week, we are publishing the first
part of the report by Daniel Gluckstein. Each week we will publish a
special section on this discussion.
All our readers will be shocked by the Map of Europe, which was published
by the London Times. What is planned is a true dismemberment of the
nations by the European Union, to crush all the rights and conquests
won in the framework of nations.
To illustrate this offensive, we are publishing in this issue articles
from Belgium and Italy.
From Brazil, we are publishing an appeal from the Justice for Anderson
Committee.
You will also find an article on China, "Seventeen years ago in
Beijing."
To follow these debates, which concern all worker activists and to
support the ILC, subscribe to the ILC International Newsletter.
-----
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
p. 1: 13th Conference of the ILC In Defense of the ILO Conventions
and Trade-Union Independence
p. 2 -3. The dangers of « new world trade-unionism »
p. 4. The dismemberment of European nations
p. 5. Belgium: What political solution?
p. 6. Italy: Against the division of the Italian Republic
p. 7. China: Seventeen years ago in Peking.
p. 8. Brazil: Justice for Anderson Committee
Contact:
ILC International Newsletter
Entente internationale des travailleurs et des peuples,
87, rue du Faubourg-Saint-Denis -75010 Paris - France
Tel: (33 1) 48 01 88 28
E.mail: eit.ilc@fr.oleane.com - Site: www.eit-ilc.org
*********************
13th Conference In Defense of the ILO Conventions and Trade Union Independence
Geneva, Sunday, June 11, 2006
The countries represented were Algeria, Germany, Bangladesh, Belgium,
Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Ivory Coast, France, Gabon, India, Italy,
Niger, Pakistan, Romania, Senegal, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Togo,
and Chad.
A discussion began concerning the questions posed by the "new
trade union international"
On Sunday June 11, delegations from 21 countries came together in Geneva
at the 13th Conference of the ILC In Defense of the ILO Conventions
and Trade Union Independence
This conference opened up a needed discussion concerning the reality
of the "new trade union international," which is set to be
founded on November 1st in Vienna, after the dissolution of the ICFTU
and the WCL.
In his introduction, Daniel Gluckstein, coordinator of the ILC, spoke
of the connection between the threats to the International Labor Organization
(ILO) and the questions posed by the "new trade union international,"
as well as the world summit of the U.N. of last autumn.
Due to the quality of the discussion at this conference, we will be
publishing all of the speeches. This week, we are publishing the first
part of the report of Daniel Gluckstein.
------
Part 1 of Daniel Gluckstein's introductory speech
We are here today at the 13th Conference of the ILC In Defense of the
ILO Conventions and Trade Union Independence.
For the last 13 years we have met here to discuss together the threats
against the ILO Conventions and to reflect on the ways for the workers´
movement, while respecting its diversity, to face these problems.
This year, we are confronted with important new developments.
Everybody who participates in this annual conference and all those
who are delegates to the International Labor Conference of the ILO,
which takes place each year in Geneva, know that this year there is
a very important event that will take place on November 1st in Vienna:
The creation of a new trade union international. (It may be necessary
to put quotation marks around the word trade union -- in any case, this
is a discussion we should begin.)
There is a relationship between what is going on in the ILO and the
developments in the trade union movement.
All this is also linked to the World Summit of the U.N. which took
place a few months ago, last Autumn. The question that must be posed
is the following: Aren't we faced with a brutal modification, that is,
the disappearances of the system on which the ILO is based?
I say this because the ILO, as we all know, is a based on a tripartite
conception, with representatives from the governments, the bosses, and
the trade unions. However, there is a particularly deepened tendency
on an international level (which does not fail to strike the ILO) aiming
to undermine the tripartite character of the ILO, and in doing so, the
existence of independent workers´ organizations -- and, linked
to this, the existence of sovereign states.
In the framework of what is being called the march to the "world
governance," isn´t what´s at stake the disappearance
of independent workers´ organizations and the disappearance of
states and nations?
These are subjects which we have discussed in previous conferences;
those of you who participated in these are familiar with the subject.
But with every year that passes, this question is becoming more and
more serious. Undoubtedly, today, we must ask ourselves if quantity
is transforming into quality.
Before returning to the heart of the discussion, permit me one parenthesis,
seeing as we are in Europe.
Luc Deley, the Swiss delegate who opened our conference spoke of the
policies of the European Union. The majority of you have surely heard
that a few weeks ago, Europe saw the creation of a new "sovereign"
state: Montenegro -- with its 600,000 citizens and its 14,000 square
kilometers - is now "independent," due to a referendum organized
by the European Union (EU). The EU set in advance the percent needed
for "independence" at 55%. Miraculously, this percent was
reached, with 55.4%. But the most significant thing was not that Montenegro
was proclaimed independent, but rather that immediately after the referendum,
the European Union declared: "The independence of Montenegro opens
the path to a new era, in which a multitude of new states in Europe
will prosper."
The newspaper The London Times, whose credibility cannot be doubted,
went so far as to publish a map (see Page 4).
It's the map of what they announce will be new "sovereign states"
in the European Union between now and the year 2020. And there is even
discussion that many of these "states" might be summoned into
existence long before that.
The list is significant: Scotland, Ireland, Wales, the French and Spanish
Basque Country, French and Spanish Catalonia, Andalusia, Sardinia, Corsica,
Walloon separated from Flanders -- making Belgium disappear -- with
the South Tyrol proclaiming its independence. Also on the list: the
Serb republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina, the remainder of Bosnia-Herzegovina
of the Serb republic, Kosovo, the republic of Transniestria, in the
east of Moldavia, South Ossetia, Chechnia, Nagory-Karabak, Kurdistan
and North Cyprus.
Beyond the whimsical character of the list -- though the London Times,
we should note, is not a whimsical newspaper -- there is a certain logic.
This is the logic of the atomization of states and nations, the generalized
dismemberment of sovereign states. This is the logic of unending balkanization.
There is a connection between this and what they are proposing in the
framework of the ILO.
The U.N. Summit met a few months ago. The World Commission on the "Social
Dimension of Globalization" -- created by the ILO in February 2004
-- successfully proposed to the Summit a perspective (reiterated in
the ILO´s documents this year) that affirms that "we are
in favor of fair globalization. And we have decided to make full employment
and decent and productive jobs for all our fundamental objectives for
our national policies."
The ILO is thus mandated by the World Summit of the U.N. to work for
the implementation of "fair" globalization.
In one of the reports presented this year, the ILO referred to this
mandate -- more or less given to it by the U.N. I would like to read
to you three or four quotes from these reports prepared for the Annual
Conference of the ILO, which is taking place at the moment.
In one of these reports, we find the following quote: "Important
programs are currently being implemented, dedicated to the development
of the business spirit." Comrades, this poses a problem.
It is perfectly normal that in a tripartite meeting, compromises between
the governments and states, bosses, and trade unions should take place.
But the "business spirit" is a whole separate matter. The
"business spirit" is implemented by the heads of companies.
In relation to the Europe which the ILO has decided to work for, we
find the following formulation: It is necessary "to work for the
reform of pensions in Europe." All the labor activists present
here know the meaning of the "reform of pensions in Europe."
It means the undermining of all the existing pension systems in our
countries.
The second strategic objective set by the report proposes to "promote
the business spirit at all levels" and mentions the "growing
interest for ILO activities concerning the corporate responsibilities."
This is not the logic of necessary compromise between trade union organizations
and organizations of the bosses.
Activists deal with compromises on a daily basis. But when one mandates
the companies with a "social responsibility," you substitute
the framework of demands for the framework of "social progress."
This can only take place through the integration of the workers´
organizations into the company and, in general, into the transnationals.
In the report of the President of the Administrative Council of the
International Labor Bureau, we find: "It was admitted that the
regulation of the labor market could have inconvenient consequences,
if it is poorly conceived or implemented in too strict a manner."
Comrades, the workers throughout the world have heard all the arguments
concerning the "too strict" or "too constraining"
nature of labor regulations. The bosses and governments tell us this
so that they can impose deregulation, and the undermining of collective
rights and of labor codes in all countries. It is normal that this be
the language of the bosses and the governments.
But can the ILO respect its tripartite structure by associating all
its members to this struggle against the "too strict" labor
market? If we answer yes to this question, it follows that the workers´
organizations themselves should join the fight for "less strict"
labor regulations. This is precisely one of the problems posed today
by this march to the "world governance" and the "new
united international trade unionism" promised for us at the Vienna
Congress. The purpose of the trade unions would no longer be to defend
the material and moral interests of the wage earners by preserving their
full independence vis a vis the capitalist class and the state.
The mission of the trade unions would be to become the social components
of globalization, that is, the social component of the "world governance."
Is this an exaggeration?
Before responding to this question, I would like to remind you of the
definition of Pascal Lamy, the General Director of the WTO, concerning
the definition of governance. He notes the difference between the words
"governance" and "government." He states:
"'Governance'" aims to ensure a co-existence (and sometimes
a consensus) between different and sometimes conflicting points of view.
Evidently, this is different from government. In most cases, governments
arise from universal suffrage and are supposed to represent the general
interest -- but they are not supposed to synthesize different or conflicting
interests.
"In a democratic and organized society, the different or conflicting
interests are expressed through trade unions and, on a political plane,
through political pluralism. But the framework of governance aims to
make different or conflicting interests permanently co-exist -- the
meaning of the term is the same concerning both "world governance"
and "corporate governance."
In reality, this is a new form of the labor-capital partnership, a
new form of corporatism, in which divergent interests must always result
in a common decision. This is the true meaning of this term "governance,"
utilized everywhere for the past few years.
The real problem facing us is the following: Do we still live in a
society divided into social classes with antagonistic interests? If
this is so, why should the workers throw out truly independent organizations?
Don´t we still live in a society where capitalist exploitation
rests on the extorsion of surplus-value and a relationship of exploitation?
We have the right to pose these questions because, by putting forward
the plan for "world governance," all the international institutions
(the IMF, the World Bank, the U.N., and also the so-called regional
institutions, such as MERCOSUR, FTAA, ALENA, ACEAN, and OECD) are demanding
to be part of the construction of this "world governance."
In reality, what is planned is the integration of the international
trade union movement. This is why the "world governance" must
be unified on an international level.
---
(part 2 of this report will be published in the next issue of the ILC
International Newsletter)
---------------
The ILC is not in competition with any other organization of the workers´
movement. Its mission is not to formulate a program. Its responsibility
is to inform, alert and discuss these questions which affect the future
of the workers´ movement. At the end of the rich debate, the following
proposals were made:
-- To organize the debate and continue the discussion, not only on
a national level, but in the framework of the newsletter of the ILC.
In the ILC International Newsletter we will include, until November,
a special section on this discussion, beginning with the publication
of speeches presented at the Geneva conference.
-- To mandate the bureau of the ILC to write a letter to all the affected
organizations and all the delegates to the November 1st Congress in
Vienna, to discuss with them the need to preserve the independence of
trade union organizations.
*********************
BELGIUM
The London Times published the map of the upcoming dismemberment of
nations in Europe.
To end this dismemberment, break with the European Union!
The map published by the British newspaper The London Times, which
we are republishing below, is a cause for worry. Aside from the more
or less whimsical character of the list, the announced "new sovereign
states" clearly indicate the European Union´s plans to dismantle
nations.
Are these wild fantasies? Based on the recent events which we note
below, you can judge for yourselves.
In Belgium, the special congress of the CMB (metalworkers federation
of the FGTB) approved, at the end of April, new statutes which divide
the finances of the union between francophones and Dutch-speakers, thus
"communizaling" the federation.
Let us recall that on June 1st the House of Representatives voted on
a proposed law from Vlaams Belang (an extreme-right Flemish organization)
aiming to dismember Belgium and make Flanders and Walloons two sovereign
nations.
In Italy, the referendum on the reform of the constitution which will
take place on June 25 aims to transfer numerous duties of the state
to the regions: health care, education, and taxes. This is the continuation
of the drive toward the implementation of federalism and the creation
of "20 Little Italies," based on a consensus between Berlusconi´s
right and the "left" of Prodi-Bertinotti, supported by the
Italian friends of Krivine and Besancenot in France.
In Spain, the reform of the statute of Catalonia proposes to make Catalonia
an agency of the European Union and to have Catalonia accept its values,
principles, and obligations, notably the right to "general interest"
public services and the integration of the trade unions into the regional
institutions.
What is the relationship between these different events? After having
organized the referendum in Montenegro, the European Union, in the international
framework set by American imperialism and its institutions (the IMF
and the World Bank), intends to go fight to the end for the dismantling
of nations and the working classes in all Europe, thus destroying all
the conquests won in the framework of nations.
Thus, a few days after the "split" of the CMB in Belgium,
the Flemish branch signed with the Flemish bosses an agreement of principle
concerning the flexibilization of the auto sector.
According to 6 Com, the daily internet press review published by the
metalworkers of Liege, this agreement "implements instruments allowing
for more hours of work when the situation demands it and less during
light periods. Thus, certain companies could choose to have their workers
work six hours per week outside the system of overtime. Others could
implement work-days of 10 hours. .. This system, based on an individual
approach, does not yet exist in Belgium."
Would this deregulation agreement have been possible had the CMB remained
federal?
It is necessary to underline, despite the brutal character of this
offensive, that this drive is faced with the resistance of the worker
activists and leaders of all levels.
Thus, at the Geneva Conference, an Italian delegate noted that in the
face of the upcoming referendum union leaders who in the past were in
favor of regionalization now say that it is necessary to oppose the
new reform of the Constitution.
In Germany, as a delegate to the Geneva explained, during the recent
strike of hospital workers, the leadership of the Ver.di union, for
the first time in the history of Germany, accepted negotiating within
the framework of the municipalities and Landers, thus breaking the unity
of the national collective contract and opening up the path to the undermining
of the union and DGB confederation itself.
In Belgium, the General Secretary of the Interregional in Walloons
of the FGTB declared: "Those who speak of a ´francophone´
nation are only promoted under-nationalism. We want federalism with
three regions -- not two communities." This perspective was reaffirmed
by Rudy De Leuw and Annde Demelene, leaders of the FGTB, who declared
at the regular congress of the FGTB on June 9 that a "strong and
united FGTB and solidarity" is needed.
When Marc Goblet defends the "federal character of the right to
employment, labor contracts, and social security," it is necessary
to take into account that Belgium is a federal state, and thus he is
defending a single and united system for employment rights, a single
and united social security for the working class of Belgium, with all
its components, Flemish and Walloon. He is completely correct in doing
so.
In the face of the dangers facing the working class of Belgium and
faced with the balkanization drive implemented by the European Union,
it is an urgent necessity to defend the unity of the FGTB and the unity
of the Belgian working class. It is necessary to preserve the independence
of all the workers´ organizations in Belgium and in all the European
countries. This struggle requires the break with the European Union!
-----
"Faced with threat of the dismembering of Belgium, what is the
political solution?"
Excerpts from the editorial of Workers´ Tribune, the newspaper
of the Movement in Defense of Workers (MDT), member of the ILC
"In a very short time, a series of events have taken place that
attest to the growing dangers for workers. After the abominable killing
in Andre, we see in the return of the Charleroi "affair,"
leading to turmoil on all levels, the threats concerning the future
of the organized workers´ movement.
Seven days after the killing in Anvers, the Vlaams Beland proposes
to the House of Representatives a draft resolution concerning the "dismemberment
of the state of Belgium" -- something taken into account by all
the Flemish parties and rejected by all the Francophone parties. Three
weeks earlier -- this time on the initiative of the francophones --
the congress of the CMB "communalized" this important FGBT
federation.
Of course, these developments do not all have the same origin. One
cannot put the killing in Anvers on the same plane as the return of
the Charleroi "affair." But the facts demonstrate that a rapid
and worrisome evolution is taking place, in a political situation marked
by a continued offensive against social rights. These two developments
are inseparable.
They want to go "all the way"
We know that the base of our social model is now in the collimator:
social security and federal collective bargaining contracts. To undermine
these, to "go all the way," all means are allowed. And if,
at first, it seemed that the killing in Anvers and Charleroi "affair"
are unconnected events, it is now clear that they are politically exploiting
these events as a battering ram to smash our social model.
On May 1, in front of a meeting of Socialist Party (PS) activists in
Liege, Marc Goblet, the regional president of the FGTB, declared: "We
need to reinforce the unity of the left to guarantee the federal character
of the right to employment, labor contracts, and social security."
One month later, this appeal remains an important appeal to reason
and action. What is necessary is the unity of the PS and SP.A to defend
the fundamental conquests evoked by Marc Goblet.
But at this moment, the PS and SP.A are in a government with the liberals,
thus dividing the socialists. This government destroys, one after another,
the basic gains, unemployment rights (to reach the so-called generational
"pact" and promote competitiveness), our wages, and our social
security.
They want to divide us to smash our rights
Clearly, to destroy the rights of the house of labor, it is necessary
to divide it. Š
All these policies of social regression are dictated, to the detail,
by the European Union. The EU demands, for the benefit of the transnationals,
an acceleration of this driveŠ and, presto, we see an unprecedented
offensive against social security and federal collective contracts.
That is why it is essential that the FGTB, in preparation of its congress,
reaffirms the need to defend federal social security and the federal
unity of the federation in this struggle.
Seeing as PS and SP.A ministers participate in a government in contradiction
with these needs, isn´t the FGTB the only force that can put the
PS and PS.A leaders to order and demand that they defend the "right
to employment, labor contracts, and social security" and their
federal character? Aren 't they in their right to put the "clocks
back on the correct time"? The FGTB, with its 1.3 million members,
has the force to do so. All that is required is initiative from its
leaders.
This objective is in contradiction with the existence of a coalition
government with the liberals, which, in the last analysis, implements
all the demands of the European Union. We saw this with the generational
"pact."
Consequently, in the face of the threat of catastrophe, shouldn´t
we all demand that the PS and SP.A break the coalition with the liberals
and, taking up the demands of the FGTB, mobilize with the federation
to create a government in defense of the social rights, which, inevitably,
means a government of rupture with the European Union?
Doesn't the seriousness of the situation put this solution on the agenda?
*********************
ITALY
Against the "20 little Italies," for Italian unity
Why do all the parties agree that "it is necessary to reform the
Constitution?"
The stakes of the June 25 referendum
The referendum that will take place on June 25 is centered around the
question of "devolution," which would give regions full powers
over health care, education, the police force, and virtually the whole
tax system.
This "devolution" would deepen a process begun with the "reform"
of Title V of the Constitution (called "federalism") of 2001
by the center-left government and it would open the perspective of "20
little Italies," all in competition with one another.
In addition to "devolution," the "reform" that
we are called to vote on proposes a Regional Senate, the end of the
bicameral system the reduction to 400 MPs to the House, a rise in the
power of the head of the government, and the marginalization of the
role of the president of the republic.
All the parties agree that, "It is necessary to reform the Constitution
At a moment when millions prepare to vote "No" to affirm
the unity of the country and defend the conquests written into our Constitution,
all the political forces of the Unione who call for the "No"
vote nevertheless call for "a revision in agreement with the opposition"
following the referendum; they also propose to re-open a dialogue, including
with Bossi (the President of the Northern League). On the other hand,
the program of the Unione also proposes a Regional Senate, the regionalization
of the labor market, full fiscal "federalism," the strengthening
of the power of the government head, and the end of the bicameral system.
The program of the Unione proposes to implement in its term "federalism"
through "the respect of a domestic pact on budgetary equilibrium."
Regionalization is thus a tool to cut all the budgets, to respect the
Maastricht criteria.
The Example of Health Care
The example of the health care sector is illuminating.
Up until the mid-1980s, health care was organized nationally; the USL
(Local Health Units) were nothing more than the administrative and organization
bases of the system. The funding was guaranteed for the USL, depending
on their needs, by the state.
If a USL needed more financing, they could ask for the state to intervene.
The first step toward the destruction of this system was the transformation
of the USL into ASL (Local Health Enterprises), headed by a chief who´s
primary duty was no longer to care for the sick, but to control the
budget.
In the early 1990s, under pressure from Maastricht and in the framework
of the respect for the Stability Pact, a new reform was imposed to push
through drastic budget cuts. This reform was implemented by the Prodi
government: it meant the suppression of the "obligatory national
health contribution" from the bosses and the workers, and its substitution
with the IRAP, a tax which greatly reduced health-care funding.
However, these "reforms" against health care were not sufficient
to appease the demands from Brussels. This is what is at stake with
"regionalization."
The 2001 reform of Title V of the Constitution by the Prodi government,
in fact, imposed the regionalization of health care and other services;
through this reform, the regions and their governments were forced to
strictly respect the decisions taken in Brussels and Rome.
The regions are thus now directly responsible for all expenses and,
thus, they must chose between cutting services or raising taxes. This
was the beginning of the harshest attacks against public health care,
with the destruction of thousands of beds and the closing-down of whole
hospitals, the limitation of medical prescriptions, growing (and almost
unbearable) waiting lists.
In response to each attack, the governments are confronted with a organized
resistance by the trade unions nationally
The workers´ conquests (national contracts, pensions, health
care, and education) are structured on a national level and, each time
that they are threatened, under pressure from the EU, the governments
are confronted with resistance in all the country, a resistance organized
by the trade unions on a national level. But the Maastricht criteria,
the dictates of the EU, and the Stability Pact impose continual budget
cuts to privatize and liquidate all the conquests.
It is clear that states are being threatened with "regionalization"
to try to crush this resistance -- and also because the EU itself pushes
for this "regionalization."
This takes two forms: First, the implementation of "subsidiarity,"
one of the basic concepts of the EU. This allows for the directives
to be implemented all the way down to the communes and regions. Second,
this takes places through the Constitution of the Regional Committee
of the EU, which is mandated to have the directives be implemented as
quickly as possible. On this basis, dozens of regions have opened Brussels
"embassies."
Despite all the demagogy about the "United Europe," the EU
is an institution which prepares the dismemberment of nations and forced
competition between regions.
The Prodi government, in order to respect all the decisions of the
EU and impose all the demanded budget cuts, must attack the very unity
of the country. Isn´t this the reason for the "collaboration"
offered by the Unione to the House of Liberties to together push through
the necessary reforms?
This is why the "Committee Against the European Union, For Democracy,
Public Services, and the Unity of the Republic," constituted during
the campaign around the slate in the municipal elections in Turin, fights
for the victory of the "No" vote in the June 25 referendum.
Moreover, it is against any reform of the Constitution -- whether its
author is the Unione of Prodi-Bertinotti or the right of Berlusconi-Bossi
-- as all the so-called reforms are all ultimately aim at breaking up
the unity of the Italian nation.
We think, this poses the question of the rupture with the European
Union.
Lorenzo Varaldo,
Editor of Tribuna Libera
************************
CHINA
Seventeen years ago in Beijing
"Without democracy, we cannot eliminate corruption"
Seventeen years ago, on June 4, 1989, the army -- under orders from
the highest authorities of the state and the Chinese Communist Party
-- violently broke up a mass protest in Tiananmen square.
Seventeen years later, the Chinese authorities refuse to allow for
free discussion on the situation and continue to denounce as "counter-revolutionaries"
the demonstrators who call for the end of corruption and arbitrary rule.
The international press commemorated the event in its manner. The tone
was set by the New York Times, which writes that the events of May-June
1989 were caused by "the actions of students -- many of whom were
shot in Tiananmen square and its surrounding areas -- who the government
labeled ´counter-revolutionaries" aiming to overthrow the
government."
Of course, the students were at the origin of the movement, but in
the end of April and in May-June 1989, millions of workers (and not
only in Beijing) took to the streets. This immense majority threatened
the power of a leading caste which aims through the "reforms"
to destroy the economy based on state property and opens up the path
for imperialist penetration.
Whatever the costs, "order" had to be maintained in Peking.
This was demanded by the need to maintain the world order.
The French daily Liberation (June 3, 1989) republished excerpts from
a documents distributed to the party members and published by the Hong
Kong press. The main leader, Deng Xiao Ping, declared: "The agitation
has a national dimension; we should not underestimate it. Š We should
prepare ourselves for this national struggle and crush without weakness
this agitation. Otherwise, this will be the end of tranquility. I told
Bush: ´If China authorizes mass demonstrations, how can we speak
of stability?´ And without stability, we will not succeed in anything."
The workers and youth demanded democracy, that is, a representation
of the people with powers to govern.
Why? A Chinese worker responded: "Without democracy, we cannot
eliminate corruption."
This corruption became a way of life for a social layer. This corruption
was linked to and strengthened by foreign investments and the spread
of "Special Economic Zones."
It was against these policies that the Chinese workers and youth fought.
None of the leading forces in the movement called for the destruction
of social property and none argued that capitalism could solve the problems
of the Chinese people.
During one of the immense protests in Beijing, on May 18, marked by
"the appearance of the worst nightmare for any government, the
participation of organized labor," (New York Times), a worker explained
to a journalist: "The reforms and the opening have brought us nothing.
Of course, our wages have risen for the past ten years, but not fast
enough to match inflation. Moreover, they force us to buy bonds to fill
up the state accounts, while speculators pocket money at will and do
not pay taxes."
The initial target of the 1989 movement was parasitism. Point 7 of
the charter published on April 21 by the organizing committee of students
of Beijing University demands "that the leaders of the state publicize
to the people and the country their revenues and their wealth, including
that of their families. An investigation is needed that will publicize
all the details."
For its part, one of the first independent workers´ organizations
to form, the Autonomous Union of Workers of Beijing, declared on May
21:
"The working class is the most advanced class; in the democratic
movement we should be the shock troops. The Popular Republic of China
is under the leadership of the working class. We have the right to chase
out all the tyrants.
"In production, the workers completely understand the need for
knowledge and technique. That is why we will not allow the students
to be subjected to outrages. We must destroy tyranny and the dictatorship,
promote the democratization of the state. Our force is our unity Š In
the democratic movement, we have nothing to lose but our chains and
a whole world to win."
The various movements of workers and peasants in 2006 -- the authorities
have noted more than "80,000 mass incidents" (strikes and
demonstrations) in one year -- have the same demands as the uprising
of 1989. They are against the consequences of policies which, in the
last analysis, would make all China a "Special Economic Zone."
These protests express the will to defend, reconquer, and extend the
conquests of the revolution. As a worker said in 1989 in relation to
corruption -- this is all impossible without democracy.
(This article was published in Informations Ouvrières, Issue
746, June 8-14, 2006)
***************************
BRAZIL
Justice for Anderson Committee
The Brazilian unionist Luis Anderson was assassinated on April 10,
2006.
On April 19, a "Justice for Anderson Committee" was formed
in Rio de Janeiro, which published an appeal to all workers´ and
democratic organizations of the world. An international campaign is
being organized throughout the world.
In Brazil, the Committee met twice with the secretary of Human Rights,
once with the sub-prosecutor of Human Rights of the Public Ministry,
and once with the secretary of the secretariat of Public Security of
Rio de Janeiro. The authorities affirmed that, in response to the national
and international campaign, an investigation is being conducted. But
almost two weeks after the assassination, the truth has still not come
out.
The Committee has launched a new appeal to the democratic and workers´
organizations of the world.
Justice for Anderson
Headquarters: Sintrafrio-RJ - Rua Ibituruna, 14 - Maracanã -
Rio de Janeiro - RJ - CEP: 20.271-020 - Tel./Fax (21) 3872-7843
Telephone: Gabinete Molon: 21- 25881402
Contact: comiteanderson@grupos.com.br
------
To all workers´ and democratic organizations
Rio de Janeiro, June 5, 2006
As you probably know, the president of the trade union of the milk-product
sector (Sintafrio-RJ) and leader of CONTAC-CUT, Anderson Luiz, was assassinated
on April 10, 2006.
His assassination was the cause of indignation and a great commotion
amongst trade unionists and all those who fight for justice and democracy,
particularly, because this is part of a series of unsolved assassinations
of unionists.
A national and international campaign for the punishment of those responsible
of this barbarous crime has begun and created a Committee that will
follow the investigation and demand a rapid resolution.
The publication of posters and publications, the very functioning of
the Committee, and the financial relief we are providing for Anderson´s
family can only be provided with the help of an international financial
campaign inside all levels of the organizations which understand the
importance of this struggle. This is why we are asking for your financial
help. Donations can be deposited into
Bank of Brazil Branch 4480-6. Savings Account 0100185940.
Or into the Savings Account 18594-9 variação 01, in the
name of Christiane Nunes Granha.
You can also contact us concerning how to donate your funds. We thank
you in advance.
Justice for Anderson Committee
Contacts: comiteanderson@grupos.com.br Sintrafrio - (21) 3872-7843
e 22645838;
Cabinet Molon - (21) 25881402; Christiane Granha - (21) 81052910; Syndicat
des
Nutritionistes - (21) 22245122; Sindipetro-RJ
**************************
Errata
AFGHANISTAN
The messages calling for the liberation of the 200 imprisoned workers
and youth in Kabul should be addressed to:
President Karzai: rafiullahjawed@hotmail.com
And the Minister of the Interior: Imashal@yahoo.com
With a copy to Left Radicals of Afghanistan (LRA): Lr-afg@yahoo.com
and the ILC: eit.ilc@fr.oleane.com
Back to Home Back
to ILC Newsletter Index
|
Open World Conference of Workers