CONTENTS
Page 3 George Bush - The imperialist crucade continues
page 4 Waterloo Redfern Authority - Devastation for a community
page 5 Imperialism and the tsunami
page 6 Mamdouh Habib - Free at last!
page 6 French workers fight to defend 35 hours
page 7 Mahmoud Abbas - PLO leader on his knees to Israel
Labor goes back to Beazley!
Latham�s illness came at a very convenient time. It gave
him a very good excuse to him to step down without the
appearance of being forced out. In reality he was forced
out. There were many head hunting Latham. The
Murdoch press and the premiers of Western Australia
and Queensland, Gallop and Beatie leading the charge.
Richard Gallop feared that Latham would have been an
electoral liability and could cost Labor state government.
Beazley is from Western Australia.
Whereas a mere six months ago Latham was praised for
his individual initiative, this year he has been damned as
a loose cannon � unreliable and dangerous. Rupert
Murdoch�s The Australian which has been leading the
charge with articles in virtually every January issue complaining
about him, calling for Labor to reconsider his
leadership, if not for his resignation.
The last straw was his illness which inappropriately
occurred during the tsunami disaster. Where was
Latham when Howard was on his PR high showing
Australia as the �caring and generous neighbour�?
Latham was sick and not to be seen. The Murdoch
media was quick to expose his weakness, claiming in
their editorial that the only cause Latham cared about
was himself. So Latham and Labor capitulated to pressure,
Latham fell on his sword leaving the three unapertising
options of Rudd, Gillard and Beazley. Julia Gillard
is supposedly on the left. She is also known as a supporter
of Mark Latham. Gillard was a victim of being in
the wrong faction. She was also an unknown quantity
(Labor wants stability) and she is also a woman. Labor is
still a very sexist party.
Beazley was the preferred option of the Right and Rudd
gave up when he realised he didn�t have a chance.
Beazley walked in unopposed.
Kim Beazley is a man with a history. He was part of the
Hawke and Keating governments. He was Minister for
Defence during the 1991 Gulf War which occurred after
Iraq invaded Kuwait. When Latham was in America�s bad
books for announcing the withdrawal of Australian troops
by Christmas should he be elected, he mended fences
with America by promoting Beazley as shadow Minister
for Defence. America was assured that Latham Labor
was in safe hands in regards to defence. He was and is
a US imperialist through and through.
KIm Beazley was part of the Hawke and Keating
Governments. He has learned from the experience of the
Latham loss that the issue must be taken headon and
not side stepped as Latham effectively did. So he proposes
to be pro-active and promote the economic
�virtues� of Hawke and Keating � the �reforms� which
made Australia the country it is today and paved the way
for Howard. These reforms involved cutting back the
public sector and reducing the power of the union movement.
Beazley is claiming that Labor was the vanguard
of the Howard reactionary offensive and to a large
degree he is right. A Beazley Labor government would
be totally unpalatable to working people, unemployed the
oppressed of this country.
.
The apparently hard line opponents of Labor are the
Democratic Socialist Party. In Green Left Weekly Dick
Nichols correctly considered Labor as totally unable to
be reformed and urges those on the left not to patch up
Labor but to bury it. These are sentiments we agree with
wholeheartedly!
The problem with the DSP and the broad front it dominates,
the Socialist Alliance, is that it opposes Laborism
but not reformism. For revolutionaries, the Lesson of
Labor is that it betrays not merely because of bad policies
but because of the framework within which it operates
� the capitalist parliamentary framework.The point
is to transcend this with a revolutionary programme. The
minimal programmes DSP offer certainly reject the
attacks on the working class. But they don�t fight the
system which causes these attacks.
Kim Beazley has just announced a new differentiation
between himself and Mark Latham. Beazley apparently
finds Latham a bit too class polarising. He defends
wealth and thinks that Labor should orient towards the
new rich. Basically the difference is that Latham wants to
encourage working class people to become rich and
Beazley wants to orient to those who have already got
there.
All of this should not be seen as an accident. The poverty
and utter bankruptcy of Labor is a reflection of many
political defeats beginning from the demise of Whitlam.
Their next attempt to offer something coherent after
Whitlam � the prices and Incomes Accord not only
attacked working people but failed to deliver the economic
bacon. Labor has been forced to have the same
agenda as the Liberals � economic rationalism �
meanwhile offering a few sweeteners and hope that the
Libs stumble. They haven�t!
In short, for those who join Labor with the objective of
social equality, for the foreseeable future, things are
going to be very demoralising indeed.
We have to be a bit sorry for Latham. He got a raw deal.
Eleven months is not long to establish a leadership
before an election.His predecessor Simon Crean was
the most unpopular ALP leader in ALP history. Latham
may have seriously underestimated the power of the
interest rate issue had over his beloved aspirational
voter. But so did every other potential Labor leader.
Labor did not have a leader who could have won the last
election. A more conservative leader would not have had
such enthusiastic support from the Greens. Latham
picked up and held seats which Beazley would have
lost. If one accepted Latham and his principles in the
first place, he deserved a second chance.Those with
even consistent reformist principles, let alone revolutionary
ones would never have voted for him in the first
place.
Communist Left rejects a Latham leadership outright!
We do so because we have principled political differences
with him. These involve a class line. Whereas
Latham espouses the virtues of the �aspirational voter�
climbing the �ladder of opportunity�, we stand by the proletariat,
those with nothing to lose but their chains.
Orienting to the �aspirational voter� means supporting
capitalism. It means selling the proletariat out.
One notable left wing individual who embraced Latham
was Bob Gould. Bob acknowledged having initial reservations.
However, according to Bob, Mark has well and
truly proven his worth by his efforts as leader. Bob, the
socialist, sidesteps Mark�s blatantly anti-socialist philosophy
by pointing to four concrete issues � withdrawal of
troops from Iraq, saving old growth forests in Tasmania
and Latham having a supposedly principled position on
industrial relations. Gould claims Latham as the most left
wing Labor leader in twenty years. This doesn�t say
much.
Once again �concrete political questions� are used to
evade fundamental class criteria. The fact that Latham
stands for the �aspirational voter� as opposed to the proletariat
means he is unsupportable. Bob chides the DSP
for being like Gerry Healy �considering themselves the
only socialists�. But it is hard to remember the last time a
prominent ALP figure proclaimed him or herself a socialist,
even a parliamentary one, let alone argued the
socialist cause. Bob is a true Labor man at heart. Yet at
the same time he is trying to identify with Trotskyism and
rationalise his very deep entrism with our tradition.
George Bush - The imperialist crucade continues
The inauguration of George W Bush was a patriotic
specticle of imperialist razamataz. Bush and his
Republican cronies project the United States as a great
and glorious nation carrying out God�s will. Nevertheless
irrespective of this, America�s efforts in both Afghanistan
and Iraq can hardly be described as successful. Despite
years of occupation America can describe neither state
as secure. The Taliban control a significant proportion of
rural Afghanistan.
In Iraq the imperialists have finally admitted that there
were no weapons of mass destruction. Effectively they
have been exposed as liars. But on the positive side
there have been what�s been described as a successful
election. Sixty percent of those eligible participated. But
this is only an election for the body with whom America
consults with as �representatives of the Iraqi people�.
Iraqis were not voting for independence from America
who remains in occupation without their consent. The
bloody resistance continues. In fact it is gaining in
strength.The invasion continues and no-one knows how
long America and allies will stay there.
After two failures you would think that Bush and his
Republican cronies would have learned that you cannot
impose democracy by invasion with the bayonet. But, no,
they haven�t They have only learned that a bit more consultation
is required. In his inauguration, George W.
Bush read off a whole list of countries. He considers it
America�s duty to liberate on behalf of the Almighty.
These countries include Libya, Burma, Zimbabwe, Cuba
and most significantly, Iran.
Jack Straw, Blair�s lieutenant, Britain�s foreign secretary,
has been busy flying the Atlantic. His mission is to dissuade
America from invading Iran. He is forced to admit
that Iran has weapons of mass destruction.He is also
forced to admit that Iran is reticent and inconsistent in
obeying United Nations resolutions. However he still
believes that diplomacy is the way to go and all diplomatic
avenues should be pursued before any military
intervention.
Now there is some sympathy for Blair amongst Bush and
his cronies. He did the hard yards trying to convert the
United Nations to the cause invasion. But this only goes
so far. As far as the Republican right is concerned Straw
is a dangerous liberal. His idea that you could influence
Bush by going along with him, at least part of the way, is
dangerously wrong. Blair�s attempt to be Bush�s attorney
has not changed this reactionary one iota.
The dissident Maoists who joined the imperialist camp in
support of the invasion have attacked most on the left in
this country as �apeaseniks�. Apparently �democratic�
America clamping down on Saddam when he invaded
Kuwait, nipped in the bud the Middle East�s answer to
Adolph Hitler. The dissident Maoists Albert Langer and
Barry York suggest that invading Kuwait was the first
step in an agenda of expansion throughout the Middle
East. The dissident Maoists accuse the majority of the
left, real and fake of ignoring this expansion. But no such
agenda existed! Saddam�s takeover was due to a local
dispute. Imperialism developed the artificial statelet
called Kuwait which has never been a proper nation,
especially in the Leninist sense. The invasion of Kuwait
was in fact a progressive act.
Things are, however, the other way around. It is America
who has the agenda of aggression and expansion. Bush
has now spelt this out, loud and clear.
Invading Iran would prove to be a total disaster. The
Islamic regime has mobilised and armed most of the
population. The rulers receive a religious allegiance and
can call on the armed masses to fight America in the
name of Allah. Basically, a US attempt to subdue Iran by
force would be ten times more bloody than what the US
is enduring in Iraq.
So will George W Bush carry out �God�s mission�, bringing
democracy to his list of �rogue nations�? Of course it
is convenient that �God�s will� coincides with the extraction
of billions of dollars in superprofits! America is an
imperialist country which depends on war to maintain
world hegemony. It�s not whether another poor third
world country will be scapegoated and conquered like
Iraq, it is when. This is determined by the interests of
capital and not by God. Irrespective, we , the class conscious
proletariat, must prepare to fight a future invasion!
More preferable would be the revolutionary overthrow of
the Bush regime and its replacement with a workers� and
small farmers� government.
Bush still believes in democracy by invasion. But he has
at least realised that he would be more successful with
the co-operation of the European imperialists.
Condoleezza Rice, the new US Secretary of State, is
touring Europe with the objective of patching up relations.
She started with America�s warmest ally � Britain.
She has assured the world that invasion of Iran is not on
the immediate agenda. But she hasn�t written off invasion.
Whilst it is comforting that military invasion is not
on the agenda, other forms of intervention are. All imperialist
intervention, peaceful and military must be
opposed by the class conscious proletariat with direct
working class action.
Waterloo Redfern Authority - Devastation for a community
Redfern and Waterloo are two working class suburbs
immediately south of the City of Sydney The Sydney
Morning Herald has really done the residents of Redfern
and Waterloo a massive favour. It has exposed the plans
of the Carr Government plans for the area. These, to say
the least, are devastating.
A �Chatswood style� shopping centre is planned for the
area adjacent to Redfern Station. The two towers of
Matavai and Turunga are to be demolished. Redfern
School is to be sold off. Much of the open spaces is to
be sold off also. There is to be a massive increase in private
housing. According to plan the population density of
the area is to double.
The man in charge of the Redfern Waterloo Authority,
Frank Sartor, is a dictator. He even has the right to override
heritage orders. He does not have to listen to the
people. Currently though, he is peddling backwards
claiming that no-one will be forced out and calling for
residents participation. It is clear that he has been stung
by the massive hostile response that the community has
given the proposals.
A reasonably satisfactory rally was held between the
Matavai and Turunga flats, Waterloo. Unfortunately, but
not surprisingly, the platform was dominated by politicians,
bureaucrats and social workers. Those who spoke
the loudest were the Greens and Democrats. There was
little time for discussion or debate. From what there was
though, it is clear that whilst the sentiments are overwhelmingly
for some sort of resistance, a section of the
Russian community, the largest ethnic minority on the
estate, have illusions that they might be transferred to
somewhere clean and green such as the Blue
Mountains. As one speaker pointed out, if those from
Redfern and Waterloo are given accommodation elsewhere,
what about those who have been waiting up to
eight years? Will there be extra construction to accommodate
them? All public housing must be defended.
Some residents are not unhappy to see the towers go
because of problems with cleaning, renovations, the odd
tenant who peddles drugs disturbing the other tenants.
Some of the concerns are understandable. But a wholesale
destruction of public housing is not the answer. That
is what the Authority is threatening.
One of the encouraging features of the rally was the
heartfelt solidarity some tenants felt towards those
Kooris resident of the Block who are also facing eviction,
Several placards urged Defend the Block. It has been
extremely important that all working class residents
come to the defence of the Block which is being directly
attacked by government and undermined by bureaucrats.
Of course, the full carrying out of the Authority�s
plan will mean the death of the Block in terms of being a
centre of low income Black housing. One grouping which
did not facilitate appropriate solidarity was the Socialist
Alliance. Their two identical banners said �Always was,
always will be Aboriginal Land� This is only true is the
spiritual sense, which is a sense we should not be
encouraging. They like everyone have the right to their
religion. Their religion, like all others, is the opiate of the
masses. Anyhow what is the point of spiritual ownership
when the block has been replaced by yuppy flats? We
must argue that the only way which the Block can be
defended for Black proletarians is through class struggle
unity. Socialist Alliance said nothing about the defence of
working class housing in Waterloo.
This redevelopment must be fought. It must be stopped.
Even if, as claimed, every tenant who wants to gets
rehoused within the area, this is still a massive disruption
to their lives. Even if full privatisation is deferred to
sometime in the future, more yuppies will move in so as
to live close to town. Land values will rise, in fact, escalate.
The redevelopment makes it much more easier for
governments to sell off the lot. This is no doubt what is in
mind for the future.
The extension of the city into Redfern and Waterloo has
been on the cards for a long time. Just two years ago
there was a plan to sell off sections of the part of
Redfern between Moorehead Street and Elizabeth
Street. This only stopped when the government decided
to look at the whole of Redfern and Waterloo as a totality.
This threat gave us a foretaste of what the government
intended.
The Authorities plans must be stopped. This requires
class action. It means action by unionists and working
class residents to physically stop it. But this needs to be
prepared for. Firstly the community must be organised.
There must be regular meetings for this purpose. Pickets
of government departments and Frank Sartor�s office
must begin immediately. These will ensure that the issue
is not forgotten if there is the appropriate publicity.
The unions must be lobbied and mobilised, It is odds-on
that for productivity, working conditions and safety will be
undermined. It�s odd-on that much of the redevelopment
will be by scab labour. Unionists and working class, pensioner
and low income residents have an interest in uniting
to smash this redevelopment.
It has to be stressed that all this is proposed by a
�Labor� Government. Workers and low income residents
must settle their accounts with the treacherous party
which is destroying their community
Redfern and Waterloo have been working class suburbs
for generations. That's how they must stay! Smash the
Carr-Sartor redevelopment.
The Tsunami, aid and imperialism
They say an ill wind does not do anyone any good. But
for John Howard, the tragic tsunami which killed almost
a quarter of a million people has been of significant political
benefit. For a start, he caught opposition leader
Mark Latham offside with a serious illness. Latham was
advised to rest until Australia Day. He did. And this
allowed Howard the full chance to bask in publicity with
Labor appearing not to care. This has cost Latham his
political career.
But Howard would not have been so effective had he not
responded appropriately � in a way in sympathy with
public opinion. Howard was a bit slow to react. But his
billion dollar offer to Indonesia is seen as appropriate.
Australia is one of the largest aid doners and certainly
the most significant on a per capita basis
For a long time Howard has been on the nose with progressive
public opinion. Racist campaigns such as lies
about refugees dumping their children overboard have
been very successful in winning over that electorally
powerful section of the middle classes which backed
Pauline Hanson. But there has been a political price.
Howard paid some price losing support from small �l� liberals.
But a bigger price has been paid in relation to
Asia. Government after government has condemned his
racism on refugees and for declaring Australia�s right to
make per-emptive strikes in Asia to protect Australia
from terrorists.There has been both a political and economic
price in terms of Australia�s relationship with the
region.
Thanks to the tsunami, Howard has been able to turn
this around. By donating a billion dollars, Howard has
been able to project Australia as the caring neighbour.
Relations with Indonesia have never been closer.
But from the Howard government�s point of view this is
money well spent. Howard knows that such disasters
are a recipe for political destabilisation. A destabilised
Indonesia is the last thing that neither he nor the US
want. It could mean Australian troop involvement. It
might stimulate some form of communist uprising. It
might lead to intensified national conflicts. National
minorities may seek to break free from the Javanese
elite and proclaim independence. All of this would be a
massive hindrance to imperialism.
Overwhelmingly, the damage done to Indonesia was
done to the province in the north of Sumatra known as
Aceh. Towns there have been almost totally flattened.
Over one hundred and fifty thousand Achenese lost their
life directly from the tsunami. More are probably losing
their lives through hunger and disease which have followed.
The aid workers are working tirelessly but there
are many people that they simply don�t reach.
However, there is more damage done to the people of
Aceh. The tsunami is assisting the re-occupation of significant
areas by Indonesian troops. This helps them militarily
in their fight against those fighting for Aceh independence.
Australia claims to be neutral:�This is a dispute
amongst Indonesians� but it co-operates with the
Indonesian authorities fully.
So the Acenese will lose two ways. They lose from the
devastating loss of property and loss of life. They lose
by having a strengthened Indonesia strongly encamped
within the province, more capable of dealing militarily
with the Acenese liberation forces. Australia, of course,
supports a strong Indonesia to facilitate imperialist
superprofits.
Mamdouh Habib:
Out of prison but still persecuted
We are pleased that after years of imprisonment,
Mamdouh Habib is back in Australia, united with his family.
Under American imperialist justice �against terrorists�
the procedure is: detain for years under barbaric conditions
first, find a charge later. In the case of Mamdouh,
they couldn't find a charge so after a couple of years,
they have decided to let him go.
Mamdouh has paid a massive price in terms of his
health. He is suffering from mental illness. He is suffering
from the torture he received from the screws. He will
take years to recover.
He is not entirely free though. They had to arrange a
special plane because the US decided he was not
allowed to be within their airspace. He is a person of
interest as far as Australian security is concerned and
will be continually monitered lest he be in contact with
terrorists.
He is, however, lucky. As an Australian citizen, there was
attention paid to him and America was forced to
respond. If he was Afghani, he probably still be locked
up for another two or three years. We must be concerned
with all the Guantanamo detainees and not just Communist Left wants all of the Guantanamo detainees
to be freed. They were obtained through the illegal occupation
of Afghanistan by the US imperialists. More innocent
people are being killed by the imperialists in their
occupations than by El Qaida with their September 11
terror raids on America. The Taliban did not carry out the
September eleven raid El Qaida did. The Taliban did
offer to co-operate had they been provided with proof
concerning Bin Laden. They weren�t given the opportunity.
America simply invaded. Many imprisoned in
Guantanamo Bay are simply guilty of defending their
country. Some such as Habib are not even guilty of that.
The camp at Guantanamo truly exposes the barbarism
of US imperialism. The workers movement must take
action until all prisoners are released and this terror
camp is closed. US imperialism is the world�s number
one terrorist.
French workers fight to defend 35 hour week
The thirty five hour working week was a significant gain
for the French working class. Whilst it was technically
granted by a social democratic government, the thirty
five hour week was never enough to reduce the rate of
unemployment to zero. A further reduction, in fact a sliding
scale of hours is needed to provide jobs for all at the
bosses expense. As long as there is one person looking
for work who can�t find it then the working week is too
long.
However, in this period of reaction even minor gains are
difficult to achieve and difficult to maintain. It was odd on
that the French conservatives would target this small
gain claiming workers were pricing themselves out of a
job and this is what is happening. Though the tories are
only talking about �more flexibility� and not abolition of
the thirty five hour week, correctly French workers won�t
have a bar of it.
To their credit, the French working class are not taking
this lying down. They are mobilised, 300,000 marched
through the streets. They are angry. They intend to
defend their minor gain, tooth and nail. All power to the
workers!
The situation in France is clearly much more advanced
than that in Australia. Here in Australia the spirit of the
Accord has had a poisonous effect and no one except
the far Left talks about the shorter working week. Yet in
Australia work some of the longest hours of any
advanced OECD country. It is not unknown for some to
work as long as an eighty hour week. Long hours have
a destructive affect on family life. The ACTU bureaucracy
know this and campaigned for a humanised version
of a long working week called �Reasonable Hours�.
They lost the Arbitration case and the campaign
appears to be over.
The situation is far more advanced in France. But the
movement is still under the sway of reformism. In fact
the opposition French Socialist Party is making a big
play for workers support by using its record introducing
the thirty five hour week. They are better than
Australian reformists but they still contain struggle, tying
workers protest to capitalism. They want protest that
bumps them into parliament. The fear anything that
goes beyond it. In France the decisive question is the
need for a revolutionary communist party with a programme
which includes the demand for a sliding scale
of hour and wages. This means a continual reduction of
the working week until every one is employed.
Mahmoud Abbas:
PLO Leader on his knees to Israel
Just after his election as President of Palestine,
Mahmoud Abbas sent the troops to the border with
Israel. He sent the troops not to fight the Israeli state but
to defend it. This act of good faith towards Israel has led
to peace talks. They are currently being arranged in
Egypt.
Abbas�s actions so far spell out very clearly what type of
peace he�ll accept � an imperialist peace which accepts
and respects the state of Israel. Condoleezza Rice
seems quite impressed with the new Palestinian administration�s
desire for peace. Of course she wants more.
She also wants Israel to make some hard decisions
mainly concerning Jewish settlements. But basically she
and the Bush Administration are Israel loyalists and are
brokering their peace agreement accordingly. We expect
a settlement to go 98% in favour of Israel, 2% Palestine
with America pulling the strings.
Israel was established as an imperialist enclave formed
by displacing the Palestinian people, forcing them into
the desert, where they remain. The newly created ministate
was only conceded by Israel after decades of military
conflict by Palestinian proletarians. It is not a successful
resolution to the conflict.
What the emergence of Abbas has shown is the total
and utter betrayal of the Palestinian national struggle by
the Palestinian bourgeoisie. These wretched bourgeois
traitors have not merely given up the armed struggle,
they are pointing the guns at their own people. It is only
the revolutionary proletarian struggle which will bring justice
to the Palestinian people.