A dossier of weekly information published by the
International Liaison Committee of Workers and Peoples
December 12, 2006
Issue 213
------
INTRODUCTION:
India: The multiplication of "special economic zones" in
India is on the agenda. N. Vasudevan, a trade union leader in Bombay,
has sent us an article on this topic.
United States: We are publishing a press review concerning the Baker-Hamilton
report. "The Baker Hamilton report is a condemnation of Bush's
policy in Iraq and no less, in the Middle East for the past six years."
(Le Monde, December 8)
Bolivia: You will find below an interview with two young activists
concerning the current struggle for the unity and sovereignty of the
nation. "More than ever, the struggle of the Bolivian workers and
people and their organizations is centered on the defense of the nationalization
decree, the demand for the distribution of land, the re-nationalization
of the mines, a Sovereign Constituent Assembly, and the unity of the
nation."
Belgium: We are publishing an appeal of trade unionists for the unity
of the FGTB, the Belgian trade union confederation. "The social
conquests since 1945 have been won nationally. For the past 25 years,
Belgium has seen important regionalization reforms, for example, through
the dislocation of workers in education and public workers. But the
most important social conquests remain national, such as social security,
unemployment benefits, health care, pensions, and the national labor
code."
Germany, Spain, and Belgium: The crisis in the automobile sector is
deepening. Hundreds of thousands of jobs have been cut. The resistance
is becoming organized.
Romania: You will find below a correspondence concerning the entrance
of Romania into the European Union in January 2007. "The workers,
despite a gigantic media barrage, have begun to understand that the
European Union will not be a paradise for them."
Support the ILC. Subscribe to the ILC International Newsletter.
-----
TABLE OF CONTENTS
p. 1: Introduction
p. 2 - United States: The Baker-Hamilton report.
p. 3 - Bolivia: An interview with members of La Chispa.
p. 4 / 5 - India: The special economic zones in India.
p. 6 - Belgium: An appeal in defense of the unity of workers and the
FGTB
p. 7 - Germany, Spain, Belgium: The crisis of the auto industry.
p. 8 - Romania: Entrance into the European Union.
*************************
United States
The Baker-Hamilton Commission publishes its report on Iraq: "Nobody
expected the Commission to provide a certain solution; its mission was
to prevent the worst."
Press Review
The Iraq Study Group -- co-led by James Baker, former Secretary of
State for Bush Sr., and Democratic Senator Lee Hamilton -- published
last Wednesday its report to U.S. President George Bush.
"The Baker-Hamilton report is a condemnation of Bush's policy
in Iraq and, no less, in the Middle East for the past six years."
(Le Monde, December 8)
For the International Herald Tribune (December 7), "What occurred
Wednesday is a clear condemnation of the U.S. policy in the most important
conflict since Vietnam."
Though, "The Commission was careful to avoid formulas that could,
in the words of one its members, 'condemn the President,' the report
and the conclusions it draws remain. 'The current approach is not working
and the capacity of the U.S. to influence the course of events is diminishing.'
The boat of the sate is entering stormy waters. A new route is needed."
This is the implicit recognition that the resistance of the people
in Iraq, Lebanon, and Palestine is defeating the "current approach"
based on powerful arms, a strategy of chaos, and the deliberate dismantling
of nations. The Herald Tribune observes that "the Commission has
abandoned the notion 'of victory in Iraq' raised by Bush one year ago
as his personal strategy."
Returning to the parallel with Vietnam, the The Guardian of Britain
writes that, "The Iraq episode is much more dangerous for the U.S.
than Vietnam. Š The regional consequences are immediate, profound, and
lasting. The civil war (in Iraq) threatens to destabilize the whole
Middle East."
Iran and Syria
Bush's National Security Adviser quickly declared that "the president
will announce a major policy change within a few weeks." But the
Guardian notes that though Bush professes to pay attention to the Baker
report, he has distanced himself from the proposal to work with Iran
and Syria, arguing that they have to make the first step. Š The U.S.
dilemma is that to ask for help from Iran and Syria in Iraq (including
returning Golan to Syria), to push for a new agreement between Israel
and Palestine, goes against major facets of Bush's policy."
For The New York Times (December 9), "the Commission's report
is part of the conflict between the views of Baker and Condoleezza Rice,
the current Secretary of State. [The report recommends] a new diplomatic
offensive. [Baker thinks] that the U.S. should reach out to Iran."
Condoleezza Rice, for her part, called for "the deepening of the
isolation of Syria and Iran." Baker argues that, "if we work
with Syria, we will solve the Hezbollah problem." He underlined
that Syria was the country through which arms pass to Hezbollah and
that the authorities of Syria assured them that they had the possibility
of convincing Hamas of the right for Israel to exist. "In that
case, we would allow Olmert to negotiate." The partisans of Rice
assure that "if things were that simple, the Syria problem would
have been solved long ago."
A diplomatic initiative to resolve the Israel-Palestine conflict is
one the 79 recommendations of the Commission. An AFP article (December
8) notes, "Like the study group, Mr. Blair linked the resolution
of the Israel-Palestine conflict with the Iraq conflict. Š It is necessary,
he states, 'to send a very strong signal' that the U.S. and their allies
'treat equally' the Israelis and Palestinians, contrary to the perceptions
of many in the region."
According to Le Monde (December 8), the Commission considers "that
it is time for the U.S. to convince its main ally, Israel, to re-open,
as quickly as possible, substantial negotiations with Syria and the
Palestinians to create 'a negotiated peace.'"
This means the return to the Oslo Accords, which have at their center
the will to impose on the Palestinian people a Swiss-cheese "state."
The Israeli leaders are worried about seeing their interests sacrificed
by their "great ally."
For Dore Gold, the former Israeli ambassador to the U.S., the Baker
Report is "an Iranian victory, because if the U.S. asks for aid
from Iran and Syria, two problematic countries, the price to pay will
be very high."
The Israeli Prime Minister, Ehoud Olmert, considers that "the
report doesn't reflect the position of the U.S., but rather a position
in the U.S. It is, above all, a U.S. domestic matter."
The Kurds are also worried
For Peter W. Gailbraith, the first U.S. ambassador to Croatia after
1991: "The Baker-Hamilton program is impossible to implement. Š
In refusing to face a disintegrated Iraq, the Commission has missed
the possibility to formulate concrete proposals to contain the civil
war in Iraq and allow the U.S. to extract itself from the quicksand."
(International Herald Tribune, December 8)
The editorial of the same newspaper is more positive, but still not
optimistic: "Iraq has reached such a point that nobody expected
a sure-fire solution Š Its mission is to avoid the worst. If Bush is
capable of seriously re-thinking his strategy, he will precisely need
the kind of political cover offered by the Baker report. Š It is written
in a deliberately vague language, to allow the president to say that
this is 'the new path' he has spoken of."
Of course. But are the proposals sufficient? For Lore Thomson, a specialist
in questions of defense, to think so "would be exaggerated and
unjustified optimism."
(Article published by Informations Ouvrieres -- Labor News -- in France)
-----
What is the Baker-Hamilton report?
The Iraq Study Group is not just any "parliamentary commission,"
whose conclusions can be ignored. Its composition demonstrates this.
Its president, James Baker, held important government positions under
three presidents (Ford, Reagan, and Bush Sr.) He was Secretary of State
for Bush Sr. from January 1989 to August 1992. For imperialism, he presided
over the fall of the Berlin Wall, the dislocation of Yugoslavia, and
the first Gulf War. He was also one of the architects of the Bush victory
in 2000.
The co-president, Lee H. Hamilton, was a Democratic congressman for
34 years for Indian. He was, from 1990 to 1993, the president of the
Congressional Committee on Foreign Affairs, specifically for Europe
and the Middle East. After September 11, he became vice president of
the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks.
Another important member is Lawrence S. Englebanks, the ambassador
to Honduras in 1957, assistant to Kissinger in 1968, ambassador to Yugoslavia,
vice-Secretary of State in 1981, and Secretary of State in 1992.
Vernon Jordan was one of the main advisors to the president.
The continuity of the U.S. state, that is, of its ruling class, is
expressed in the composition of the commission.
************************
BOLIVIA
After the nationalization of the hydrocarbons and the beginning of
an agrarian reform, it is time for the re-nationalization of the mines!
An interview with Monica and Andre, two young Bolivians, members of
La Chispa
Monica and Andre are members of La Chispa (The Spark), the sympathizing
organization of the Fourth International in Bolivia. They are students
and participate actively in the struggle of the youth and people of
Bolivia for national sovereignty in the face of the multinationals and
the oligarchies, supported by the U.S. embassy, who are preparing the
break-up of the country through the secession of the four richest departments
and the rejection of the nationalization decree passed by President
Evo Morales last May 1.
ILC: What is the current political and social situation in Bolivia?
Andre: After the elections, Evo Morales received lots of support. Millions
of Bolivians pushed him into power so that the Agenda of October would
be implemented. The Agenda of October means the demands raised in October
2003 and May-June 2005, particularly the nationalization of the hydrocarbons,
land for the landless peasants, and the renationalization of the mines.
After coming to power, a truce was proposed to the social movement
of workers. But the push from below was very strong and on May 1st there
was a big demonstration for the nationalization of the hydrocarbons.
It was on that very day that Evo Morales decreed the nationalization
of the gas and oil. This was very surprising, nobody expected it.
Monica: The result was that the contracts that have just been established
with the companies give 80% of profits to Bolivia and only 20% to the
companies -- before it was the opposite situation. The people overwhelmingly
support Evo when he implements these policies.
Recently, substantial changes were made to the law on land. Three weeks
ago, there was a march from Santa Cruz to La Paz to support the measures
of agrarian freeform, because the current law is favorable to the big
landowners. The government's reforms reduced their powers and gives
some to the landless.
This provoked the reaction from the landowners and the agents of reaction,
who organized demonstrations against the agrarian reform. A radicalization
of the peasants, indigenous peoples, and workers followed.
ILC: Can you specify?
Monica: In Santa Cruz, on the one hand, you have peasants and poor
peoples demonstrating, with their organizations, in support of the reform
and other demands. On the other hand, you have the demonstrations of
the landowners and the authorities of Santa Cruz, who are agents of
imperialism and who fight for the autonomy of the regions, that is,
the break-up of the nation. The landowners address Congress with their
demands, but there are senators who support the reform.
Andre: This conflict has spread to other regions in the country. The
counter-revolution mobilizes against Evo. This has led to new mobilization
of workers and peasants, for example, for the re-nationalization of
the mines.
ILC: So what is the status of the re-nationalization?
Monica: Evo announced in the beginning of October the refounding of
COMIBOL, the state enterprise created in 1952 during the first nationalization
of the mines, which it administered for over 30 years. With the privatization
of the mines, COMIBOL became an instrument of the foreign corporations.
In the 1980s, when so many mineworkers lost their jobs, many were pushed
to work individually in the mines, thus becoming "co-operativists."
It was just after the re-founding of COMIBOL, the first step in the
re-nationalization of the mines, that the co-operativists, on October
5, tried to take over, with arms, the nationalized mine in Huanuni.
This extremely violent confrontation led to the deaths of 19 miners.
ILC: What did La Chispa do at that moment?
Andre: In a communiqué, we said that those responsible for the
crime were those who were against the refounding of COMIBOL, the same
people who opposed the re-nationalization of the hydrocarbons and the
redistribution of the land. These are the same people who want to divide
the country and prevent the Constituent Assembly from having sovereign
powers.
They demand that all votes should be passed by a 2/3 majority. More
than ever, the struggle of the Bolivian workers and people and their
organizations is centered on the defense of the nationalization decree,
the demand for the distribution of land, the re-nationalization of the
mines, a Sovereign Constituent Assembly, and the unity of the nation.
********************
INDIA
The Special Economic Zones in India: Capital Marches Ahead in India
The multiplication of the "special economic zones" in India
is today on the agenda. Comrade N. Vasudevan, a trade union leader in
Bombay who has participated in various conferences of the ILC, has sent
us the following article.
At the end of British colonial rule in 1947 India did not have any
industrial growth worth mentioning. Textile and jute were the main industries
having organized labor apart from railways and mining.
Independent India's government embarked upon an industrialization program
with public finances and for this purpose adopted a Soviet model of
planning. The Planning Commission under the Chairmanship of the Prime
Minister set aside huge amount of national wealth for industrial development.
Successive Prime Ministers from Nehru onwards have occupied the position
as Chairman of the Planning Commission of India. India is now in the
stage of its 12th Five Year Plan.
The first Five Year Plan initiated public sector industries in steel,
aluminum, coal, copper, machine tools, telecommunications, electricity,
thermal power, oil and natural gas, petro-chemicals, aviation etc. During
the 1950-1970 period, banks and general insurance were nationalized.
By 1990 public sector occupied the dominant position in Indian industrial
map. The private sector was way behind. A fragile private sector played
a supportive role as heavy industries required huge investments and
a longer gestation period for return on capital.
In the aftermath of the Gulf War, India faced unprecedented exchange
crisis forcing it to take fresh huge loans from IMF/World Bank under
the conditionalities imposed by the lending agencies which led India
to opening up its economy.
From 1991 onwards the so called economic reforms opened up opportunities
for private capital, domestic and foreign, to flourish. Monopolies and
Restrictive Trade Practices Act was repealed. Licences and Permits for
setting up industries were discontinued. Liberalization of laws and
regulations in favor of capital, investment, production capacity and
profits gave an unprecedented impetus to businessmen.
Public sector became a dirty term, it was linked to the so called socialist
baggage India carried on its back prior to 1991 before the collapse
of Soviet Union. The government decided to withdraw its support to public
sector units. Public sector growth was arrested and many profit making
concerns in public sector were offered for sale to private players.
Foreign Direct Investment and the creation of markets for goods and
services catering to middle class led to competition and for this purpose
the dire need to reduce labor cost was cited as the most important aspect
of business. De-investment became a catch word.
Destruction of regular and secured jobs in private industry became
order of the day. Government provided tax concessions to the private
sector to set up production units in different parts of the country
without any obligation on their part in terms of job creation and pricing
of products. States within the Indian federation entered into intense
competition with each other in attracting investment from within and
outside the country. India was clearly on the path of capitalist development.
Resources of the country were diverted for infrastructure to aid capital
growth at the cost of socially necessary state functions including education
and health. Industry needed infrastructure for profit generation. So
there started appearing new townships and modernization of cities, roads
and airports.
The destruction of the public sector led to loss of opportunities in
employment to people belonging to lower caste in India as public sector
had a certain percentage of jobs reserved for socially backward communities.
As the lower caste consists of over 55% of the total population and
constitutes a huge vote bank, no government or political party could
afford to ignore their concerns. If done, it would lead to serious political
repercussions and disastrous consequences. To overcome such hurdles
parliamentary democratic process was used as a clever tool to take care
of ticklish issues.
Through debates and discussions in parliament with the consent of people
supposedly representing the adversely affected section of population,
consensus was proclaimed without people knowing the real content and
effects of such consensus. Thus the parliament provided ample room for
public postures in favor of the downtrodden, mixed with anger against
mindless exploitation by business tycoons, utter lack of corporate responsibility
towards society and community, oozing sympathy all round for those who
were left out of market competition. Government pleaded with the employers
and highlighted corporate role towards society. For public consumption
Ministers proposed affirmative action. As a small part of Indians "progressed"
the farmers were in deep debts forcing them to commit suicide, workers
lost their jobs, poor and the marginalized living in the cities were
thrown out.
It was in the Nineties that India made big stride in the software sector.
Globalization gave a thrust to outsourcing of services, India captured
the opportunity came in its way, and soft ware catapulted India as a
world leader. As call centers and BPOs grew in select areas IT &
ITES sector provided employment to educated middle class employed youth
with monthly wages ranging U.S. $500 to 5000. This, along with the already
existing trading community and small enterprises created a 200 million
new consumer class and cater to which retail trade malls, posh housing,
new and modern cars, motor cycles started appearing. Global consumer
products got a ready made market in India.
Comparatively high wages in IT and service sector insulated the employees
working in this area from unionization. They worked unbelievably long
hours, 14-16 hours at a stretch, with no additional benefits, deprived
of any right, yet formation of unions and collective bargaining have
eluded them. Damaging health and uncertain future being experienced
during the last decade have generated debate about the need to have
unions in IT sector. But there is a long way to go. During this period
Indian market was flooded with Chinese goods.
This provided ammunition for a loud cry through capitalist media that
for the survival of India, Special Economic Zones are an absolute must
as China produced cheap goods in their SEZs. Soon came government policy
to encourage setting up of SEZs in different states for products ranging
gems, jewelry, IT, auto parts, garments in addition to multi-product
parks. SEZ Act 2005 was passed by the Parliament. FDI flow to SEZs became
evident. In the tiny north Indian state Haryana alone the Dubai based
Emmar group proposed to set up 10 SEZs involving an outlay of $1.3 billion.
Singapore based realty developer Ascendas chose Bangalore as its SEZ
base.
The ostensible intention of SEZ 2005 was to provide a fillip to employment
generation through units located in SEZ but the framers of the law in
reality provided enormous avenues and loopholes for land grabbing from
farmers at cheap rates to establish real estate which could be sold
at exorbitant prices.
The proponents of SEZ thus argued that for India to sustain 8% or more
growth a year it must have at least 300 SEZs each of size minimum 1000
square kms with quality infrastructure, good connectivity to ports and
airports. Any reference to employment generation would accompany the
demand of the industry to do away with favorable labor laws in respect
of lay-offs, retrenchment and closure what is called inflexible Indian
labor laws discouraging domestic and foreign investment in the industrial
sector.
What attracted investment in SEZ was the 10-year tax holiday and other
concessions offered by the Commerce Ministry of the government. This
ministry hoped to rope in investments to the tune of US $5 to 8 billion
and generate about 1.5 million jobs. But, contrary to commerce ministry's
expectations, finance ministry's estimate shows SEZs could lead to a
revenue loss of Rs.1,75,000 crores ($ 4.4 billion) in direct taxes,
customs and excise duties over the next five years. The governor of
the Reserve Bank of India, the apex Indian Bank, expressed reservations
about the concessional tax regime for SEZs saying this would take away
resources from other areas and lead to uneven development.
Property developers are a happy lot. Delhi based Property developer,
Ansals, said, global companies are showing interest in setting up their
bases in India as the China experience has led all to believe there
is a big opportunity in SEZs for property developers. The drive to develop
SEZs is clearly triggered by the huge fiscal sops that have now been
provided to service providers and developers. One of the ardent advocates
of globalization, Columbia University's Prof. Jagdish Bhagwati, (who
lost this year's Nobel economic prize) noted that India was poised for
dramatic growth but opposed India setting up SEZs as he felt it would
lead to resentment among people whose land is taken away.
His opposition came from an altogether different angle. Bhagwati said
China is experiencing land grabs in SEZ. "There they (farmers)
have no recourse at all" to oppose the policy. In India, he felt
opposition to SEZs by farmers can cause disturbance to government. China,
he said, needed SEZs because it had an export-oriented strategy which
relied on its eastern seaboard with four provinces and 700 million workers
as a platform to experiment with the policy while the rest of the country
remained closed.
India did not need SEZs. Agricultural land being cultivated by farmers
for centuries came for grabbing to set up SEZs. Farmers in Maharashtra,
Uttar Pradesh, Haryana and West Bengal resisted this attack on their
traditional occupation. Right, Left and Centrist political parties vied
with each other in speaking for the people and working for the evolution
of consensus in framing policies in the name of "growth and development"
which ultimately benefited only the rich few. The well entrenched bureaucratic
apparatus molded by the old British colonial rulers still continue to
control the levers of power in India and they ensure that the laws and
regulations framed by them work only in favor of capitalist and landlord
class to which class interests the bureaucrats submit unreservedly.
A classic example is the enactment on Special Economic Zones Act passed
the Indian parliament in 2005. Ever since the Act became public several
interpretations about its applicability started appearing and amendments
getting accepted and rejected thus leaving in utter confusion about
the exact nature of its provisions. It cannot be denied that the passing
of this Act was an impossible task without having consensus between
the political parties within the government and outside. And yet they
are in the forefront of agitations in different parts of the country
to defend the rights of farmers who are the losers in the bargain.
The Communist Party of India (Marxist) politburo member and MP, Sitaram
Yechuri, exhorted farmers in Maharashtra recently to oppose SEZ and
asserted that agricultural land must not be used for SEZ. But the Congress
led Maharashtra government does not seem to be perturbed. In West Bengal,
where the CPM is in power, Congress supported farmers opposing car plant
coming up in fertile agricultural land near Kolkata sanctioned by the
State government.
The West Bengal government has sanctioned 22,500 hectares of land for
SEZ. Congress President Sonia Gandhi advised state governments led by
her party not to make agricultural land available for SEZs. Maharashtra
and Haryana, where Congress is in power, are doing exactly the opposite
by bringing huge area of cultivable land under SEZs. BJP and allies,
for a change, have chosen to maintain conspicuous silence on this issue.
Finally the Supreme Court of India has given its stamp of approval
to the industry in acquiring land for SEZs. Industrialists argued in
the court that forces opposed to progress and development of the country
are behind the anti SEZs move. The court wanted rehabilitation of those
who would be deprived of their traditional livelihood. Thus, the Indian
working class is faced with another threat.
SEZs, as constituted now, will not have the cover of existing labor
laws. Trade unions are demanding that labor laws be made applicable
in all industries in every part of the territory. There should be no
"foreign territory" within India. These issues form part of
the nation wide general strike on December 14, 2006 called by the left
trade unions. The demands include defense of existing labor friendly
laws, Social Security for unorganized workers, opposition to proposed
changes in the pension scheme, privatization of public sector so on
and so forth.
**************************
BELGIUM
A call against the plan to break up the Belgian working class, in defense
of the unity of the FGTB
The IMF has just written, in its November 13, 2006, report on Belgium
that, "Modifications to the existing framework of wage regulation
are needed to favor the creation of jobs."
What is this framework? It is the national framework, in which the
Belgian workers negotiate with the bosses and the government. The IMF
is clear: this modification, "will contribute to resolve the regional
disparities concerning the labor market."
The wages and working conditions, according to the IMF, should be negotiated
separately in each region. The national collective bargaining contracts
must be substituted for the regionalization/undermining of rights.
These "recommendations" of the IMF are relayed by the EU
in the framework of the Europe of Regions. This offensive to destroy
the "Belgian social model," clearly expresses the policy to
lower labor costs, a policy implemented throughout Europe.
But in Belgium, this offensive is masked behind a so-called "communitarian"
conflict between the Flemish and the French-speaking regions. Of course,
the rights of the Flemish people were denied during the creation of
the country and in the period since then. This absence of equal rights
is leading toward the break-up of the nation. But at the same time,
Belgium permitted, in the second half of the 19th Century, the creation
of a nationally organized working class.
The social conquests since 1945 have been won nationally. For the past
25 years, Belgium has seen significant regionalization reforms, for
example, through the dislocation of workers in education and public
workers. But the most important social conquests remain national, such
as social security, unemployment benefits, health care, pensions, and
the national labor code.
Though all the parties, for 25 years, have been divided by region (as
is the case for the SP), the trade unions, organized into the FGTB,
have remained united nationally.
Regionalization and Labor Policies
These conquests have remained national until the present because the
working class, united nationally, has resisted.
But, today, finance capital, particularly of the U.S., demands the
destruction of the national conquests. This is what is at stake in the
coming period for the bosses (in the North and the South), who aim to
overcome the national resistance of the trade unions by breaking them
up on regional lines.
The Legislative elections will take place next Spring. The current
situation is marked by the preparation of an important negotiation to
transfer, from now on, powers to the regions. According to La Libre
Beligique (November 29), the President of the SP (Flemish Socialist
Party) hopes that the reform of the labor market deal "essentially
with labor policies, because the labor market differs importantly between
Walloons and Flanders." This is the demand of the IMF.
The right-wing Francophone Liberal Party has said that it is "open
to a discussion on employment" and "is ready to examine the
powers that can be given to the regions."
Up until the present, the Francophone SP has called for the maintenance
of the federal character of Social Security and collective bargaining
agreements. But under the pretext that this is only the position of
the SP, the leadership is orienting to a policy of a "united"
front of Francophone parties, of the left and right, to "negotiate"
with the Flemish parties, who are also united. The policy of "fronts"
is a total dead-end, because these fronts will either not reach an agreement,
threatening the unity of the country, or these fronts will reach an
agreement leading to the regionalization/destruction of the social rights.
Defense of the Unity of the Federal Social Conquests
Through using their united FGTB, the workers of Flanders and Walloons
can find a solution to preserve all the conquests. From this point of
view, the recent split in the metal workers' federation, though softened
by the maintenance of a formal national structure, constitutes a blow
against the unity of all workers.
To deal with the unprecedented dangers and with the goal of supporting
the resistance of the FGTB against regionalization, reaffirmed at the
last federal congress in May 2006, 20 trade unionists (ten from Flanders
and ten from Walloons) have launched an appeal in defense of the unity
of the FGTB and the unity of the federal (national) social conquests.
In a short time, this appeal has received 500 signatures, particularly
the support of the regional Bruxelles-Halle-Vilvorde du SETCA trade
union.
This appeal aims to help the workers and activists who want the FGTB
to turn to action against the increasing threats.
- Correspondent
-----
The so-called "Social Europe"!
After the closure of Renault-Vilvorde nine years ago, Belgium is living
today in another crisis, with the announcement of the restructuring
of Volkswagen-Forest, which would lead to the cutting of 5,0000 jobs
and would affect another 12,000 in a region already crushed by unemployment.
Throughout Europe, we are seeing this pillage of industry implemented
under the aegis of the European Union and often with the support of
the "European" funds. Hundreds of thousands of jobs are being
destroyed Š this is "social Europe." And the Belgian bosses
are asking even more. La Libre Belgique echoes the insistent offensive
of the Flemish bosses for regionalization. "The Flemish bosses
organizations are speaking of a decision by the European Court of Justice
seeking that tax credits be granted by regions. They also want the regions
to agree on the rebates on the social contributions and the questions
linked to temporary labor and labor permits. They also demand the regionalization
of the socio-economic instruments (i.e the collective bargaining contracts)."
To stop this march to disaster, there is only one solution: the break
with the European Union.
*************************
Volkswagen in Europe: The resistance to dismantling
The restructuring plans of Volkswagen, the biggest European auto company,
concerns more than 30,000 jobs in Europe and threatens whole worksites,
such as Forest in Belgiuma and Pamplona in Spain.
This is a direct effect of the policy of "lowering labor costs"
of the European Union and the destruction of the industrial base, under
the pretext of "competitivity." In Issue 212 of the ILC International
Bulletin, we published a correspondence concerning Belgium.
This week, in addition to a new correspondence from Belgium, we are
publishing the first reactions in Germany and Spain.
-----
GERMANY
In Germany, this campaign began in 1994. Around 30,000 jobs were cut
in the following years, through "social dialogue" with the
trade unions, to make these cuts "socially acceptable," by
giving part-time jobs to the oldest workers, as well as compensation
packages. These, also, were the instruments of "directives on employment"
decreed by the European Union. At the same time, for the over 100,000
Volkswagen workers in Germany, 28.8 hours week was established, with
a big 20 % loss in wages.
The new wave of attacks began at the beginning of the year and foresaw,
for Germany, the destruction of 20,000 jobs and a new brutal cut in
"labor costs" to raise, by 2008, the profits -- which were
1.2. billion Euros in 2005 -- to 5.1 billion Euros.
"Social dialogue" with the trade unions, so dear to the European
Union, was required. In September, 10,000 jobs had already been destroyed
through giving part-time jobs for older workers, and 5,700 through voluntarily
retirements. In October, IG-Metall finally signed the contract on the
extension of work hours, under the form of a rise in the length of the
work-week from 25 to 33-34 hours a week. This means, on average, an
extentionion of the work-week by three hours without a wage compensation!
Porsche, the other big German auto company, has become the new majority
shareholder of Volkswagen. Porsche now has 27% of the shares of Volkswagen,
but it only has the legal right to 20% of the votes. This law goes back
to 1961, following the privatization of Volkswagen. It foresees a bloc
minority of 20% for the Lander (of Lower-Saxony) in the surveillance
council, where the trade union and worker representatives have half
the seats, as well as a majority of two-thirds for the decisions concerning
the extension or reduction of production.
For years, the European Commission has lead a campaign against this
law and now has registered a complaint against Germany in the European
Justice Court for blocking "the free circulation of capital."
The first public deliberation on this question will take place on December
12. Porsche is supporting this complaint and the law could be abrogated
next year. This abrogation could be the start of a new phase of de-industrialization
in Germany.
Is there any other solution than the struggle for the re-nationalization
of Volkswagen, that is, to put the jobs and industrial production under
state protection and protect them against the European Union and finance
capital?
-----
SPAIN
The news of the cuts of most jobs in the Forest factory in Belgium
has been heard like thunder in the Spanish factories, which are seeing
their livelihoods threatened.
A leader of Workers' Commissions, Ramon Gorriz, claimed that it wasn't
necessary to mistake the situation in Belgium with the situation of
the Volkswagen in Pamplona. Other trade union leaders have declared
that, to compensate for the transfer of the production of the Golf in
Germany, Volkswagen will transfer the production of Polo of Pamplona
to Belgium. Others say that the new Audi model will be produced in Belgium,
not at the Seat factory of Volkswagen in Barcelona.
But, beyond all the rumors, the workers at the Spanish factories know
that they are being threatened with the same policies that have led
to the lay-offs in Forest. On November 5, 2006, the DRH of Volkswagen
explained to the regional Hanoversche Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper that,
"there is a problem with the Western factories and it is necessary
to reduce the number of workers. I am particularly speaking about Spain,
which is in the process of losing its advantage concerning labor costs
in relation to Russia, China, and India."
For its part, the Hanoversche Allgemeine Zeitung underlines that, "Spain,
Belgium, and Portugal will be touched by the new restructuring plans
of Volkswagen."
Last year, the trade unions signed in Seat (the most important auto
factory of the country) a unprecedented agreement, accepting the cutting
of 1,400 jobs. The workers struck, because in addition to the cuts there
were flexibility measures (more than 240 hours per year) and the possibility
for the company to pay workers 700 Euros, while older workers received
1,300 Euros.
At that moment, two trade union leaders of the sector launched an appeal:
"Faced with the attacks on the workers of Seat, the multinationals
are trying to convince us that we can't do anything. But we can prevent
dismantling. No worker can understand that our trade union and parties
are not united to prevent the auto factories from disappearing, to prevent
the country from being transformed into an industrial desert. Isn't
it necessary for the federations and confederations to support the comrades
of seat to demand the repeal of the signing of this agreement, which
opens the doors to catastrophe in the whole sector?
We invite the comrades of the auto industry, independently of their
affiliation, to organize in all the workplaces, beginning in the structures
of their trade unions, to call on President Zapatero to decree measures
guaranteeing the preservation of all the worksites and jobs."
A few months later, the workers in Pamplona struck against the flexibility
measures imposed by the company. Today, at the same time as lay-offs
are announced in the main Renault and PSA factories, the restructuring
of Volkswagen directly threatens the existence of the Navarre and Barcelona
factories. For the latter, the company is trying to make it compete
with the Skoda factories, in the Czech Republic, where labor costs are
lower.
The question is whether the government will continue to implement the
policies dictated by Brussels, leading to the off-shoring.
What is needed is the unity of the workers and their organization to
stop this blackmail, the destruction of the factories, the lay-offs
and the degradation of working conditions. More than ever, it is necessary
to regroup the workers for this struggle.
Correspondent
-----
BELGIUM
The announcement by Volkswagen, on November 21, of the end of the assembly
of the Gold in the Forest factory in Brussels has led to an interesting
media campaign.
When the expected closing of the factory was announced, public and
private companies declared, one after another, that they would provide
jobs for the laid-off workers. There have been over 2,000 offers!
The management of Volkswagen added, for its part, that the Forest factory
could, beginning in 2009, assemble the Audi A1, under certain conditions.
According to the FGTB delegation, these conditions would be a 20% cut
in production, which would include the move from 35 to 38 hours for
the same wage. Everybody asks what will happen from now to 2009 for
these workers.
At a moment when the management of Volkswagen brutally announces the
end of the production of the Golf in Forest, the European Commission
published a green book, aiming to undermine labor contracts with a set
time-span. In doing so, the Commission aims to deepen an offensive prepared
for all countries, but which comes up against obstacles.
Through a great series of "coincidences," the Belgian government
has been working for several months on a draft law to modify the Labor
Law of 1971.
This is a "coincidence" which concerns the auto-sector and
its workers. It aims to allow a work-day of 10 hours per day and 48
hours a week, all for the same wage.
To this day, the government has come up against trade union resistance
to its project. But it aims to take advantage of the "Forest effect"
to rapidly obtain this modification of the law. In this sense, the Volkswagen
offensive is directly linked to the green book of the European Commission.
(1)
In a demonstration in solidarity with Volkswagen workers on December
2, the Democratic Workers Movement (MDT) -- an organization linked to
the ILC in Belgium -- broadly regrouped banner workers and trade unionists
around the banner, "Break with the European Union."
-----
Endnotes
(1) See ILC International Newsletter 212
*************************
ROMANIA
"The workers, despite a gigantic media barrage, have begun to
understand that the European Union will not be a paradise for them."
Correspondence from Romania
Our brother and comrade, imprisoned Romanian mineworker Constantine
Cretan, thanks all the comrades who took part in the international campaign
for the liberation of the five mineworkers imprisoned by the Romanian
government for having protested in 1999 against the mine closures, for
jobs, and for a decent life.
The maintenance of the system of the private ownership of the means
of production is leading humanity to catastrophe, to barbarism. There
is a unprecedented destruction of the productive forces, by all the
necessary: war, privatization, the liquidation of public services, etc.
This is an offensive that must be resisted. On some level, the working
class understands this and mobilizes, under different forms, from Europe,
to Asia, to Africa, to the Americas.
In Romania, thousands of teachers and healthcare workers recently took
to the streets to demand a decent life, to express their anger toward
the policies imposed on the Romanian government by the European Union.
These policies mean the privatizations of the hospitals, the closing
of non-profitable health institutions, and the de-facto block on wages
for teachers.
This mobilization was successful, because it forced the government
to reach an agreement raising teacher's wages by 18% in 2007, and it
is possible that the healthcare workers will at least win some of their
demands. Moreover, in the discussions that accompanied this mobilization,
we saw people understand the meaning of the European Union, which seduces
less and less Romanians as the date for joining, January 1, 2007, gets
closer.
For example, as prices go up for basic products, the workers, despite
a gigantic media barrage, have begun to understand that the European
Union will not be a paradise for them, as they thought a few years ago.
And this is in a context where no political forces or groups have taken
stands against the European Union -- except for the activists linked
to the ILC.
For a long time, we have been alone in showing that the European Union
is a factor of destruction, that it won't provide any solutions to the
social or national problem in the Balkans.
The political perspective of the Balkan-Danube Federation has allowed
for activists from Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Moldavia, and Romania to get
together in Craiova to discuss independently the solutions for the working
class and the peoples of the region, who are resisting imperialism's
offensive.
We found points in common, around which we will build in the future.
We also had differences, which we will discuss in a free and open discussion.
The problem of immigrant workers is posed. More than a million Romanians
work today, legally or not, in the countries of the European Union,
mostly in awful conditions.
We must find the paths to organize these workers, even if today this
seems like a very difficult task to accomplish. We will work based on
the line of class independence, even faced with the threat of police
repression.
Back to Home Back
to ILC Newsletter Index
|
Open World Conference of Workers