Archive for the ‘International’ Category
Ensemble Backs Kurdish Fighters Against Islamic State.
(Signed – Suren, but it seems clear that the main points have general agreement in Ensemble, as with most of the French left)
Ensemble (‘movement for a left/green solidarity, is the ‘Third’ largest component of the Front de gauche, launched in November 2013, it is made up of Les Alternatifs (Originally from the PSU/FGA, historic self-management tendency), Convergences et alternative (Ex-Nouveau parti anticapitaliste, NPA) , the FASE (democratic Communists, left socialists, Greens, associated with the magazine Politis) , la Gauche anticapitaliste (ex-NPA), and activists of the Gauche unitaire (ex-LCR, the first Trotskyist group to join the FdG but who have split from the ‘Picquet Tendency’ ) and people from no organised left party or faction.
What is at Stake in the autonomous Struggle of progressive Forces against the Islamic State. (Extracts – Adapted)
The announcement of an “international coalition” to fight the “Islamic state” is the latest act in a string of disasters caused by Western imperialist interventions in the Middle East. This – a reminder – is not part of any genuine anti imperialism, but allows us to understand the dynamics at work, which have been reshaped since the US intervention in 2003, in the current situation. As with 2003, Western imperialism produce disasters, then intervenes to “fix” the consequences of these catastrophes, and then creates further disasters of an even greater magnitude – a succession of links in an endless chain.
Thus, we cannot admit that there are “humanitarian” motives at work inside the US administration or support the coalition that they seek to put in place in order to maintain their hold. Nevertheless, it is impossible to denounce, simply, American imperialism, and remain indifferent to the devastation caused by the Islamic State, IS (mass killings, persecution of religious minorities, Sunni disagreements, the tens of thousands of Yazidis left to die in the Sinjar). This would equally be to ignore the actions of the reactionary and authoritarian and regional powers. We need not simply to react to the massacres and repression perpetrated by the IS but also to stem the wave of disasters engulfing the region. Indeed, imperialism finds its strongest basis in these religious confessional and national divisions..
Faced with these obstacles, it is necessary to defend movements of local self-defence rather than increasing the stranglehold of imperialism. This implies, therefore support (including weapons) for progressive forces in the region to combat the Islamic State. That is, for the Popular Committees in Syria who have been abandoned to their fate, and for the broad movement around the Kurdish PKK.
(There follows an analysis which lays the blame for ISIS’s rise in Syria on Assad’s willingness to foment divisions in his opposition, and on Turkey, which is charged with “complaisance” towards the rise of the Islamists.)
Kurdish forces and issues
The main armed resistance opposed to the Islamic State is represented by various Syrian opposition movements and the PKK, the main Kurdish political-military organization of Turkish forces.
The PKK was born in the social and political ferment of the 70s Turkey, created by Kurdish leftist students. Its historic leader, Abdullah Ocalan, is held in prison in Turkey but still leads the PKK and the movement that revolves around it.Following a tradition that can be termed “Stalinist” the PKK has managed to supplant other Kurdish organizations in Turkey and has a mass base in the bulk of Turkish Kurdistan. The PKK “mouvance” (broad movement) can often have a very opportunist line – but retains a military capacity, is the political representative of the large Kurdish minority in Turkey. Note also that the whole movement around the PKK is highly feminised (both in recruitment and in access to positions of fighting and political-military leadership).
..an essential part of fighting is taking place in Syria where this movement already existed. However, it is true that the PKK stepped onto Iraqi territory in the mountains of Sinjar to fight IS and to rescue tens of thousands of Yezidi (a Zoroastrian religious minority from Kurdish-speaking areas). In keeping with its normal practice, the PKK has sought to create a local sister organization, with the Yezidi, the Resistance Units Kirkuk-Mexmour. In northern Syria, the PYD unilaterally declared independence in the territories it controls (the Rojava, that is to say, the Western Kurdistan). It has been criticised by other Kurdish organizations in Syria gathered in the Kurdish National Council. This tension between the PYD and CNK is only a reflection of the broader opposition among the Kurds between the PKK and the KDP (Kurdistan Democratic Party) of Massoud Barzani, the “feudal” political leader who heads the autonomous Kurdish regional government Kurdish in northern Iraq (and which is bound by the CNK in Syria).
Briefly, the PKK reproach, rightly, to Barzani and the Kurdish autonomous regional government in northern Iraq with having links with the Turkish government, leaving the Islamic State free to continue their progress progress in northern Iraq, and, as a result of this alliance, to be so directly responsible for the progress of EI and the fall of Mosul. Conversely, Barzani accused the PKK-PYD of having links with the Assad regime. …
(There follows detailed analysis of these ties, claims and counterclaims.)
The important points of the Ensemble analysis are these: they back “active local defence “, that they regard this as a “medium-term challenge ” to ” imperialist logic” and believe that will contribute towards the “healing” (assainissement) of the Kurdish national question” which is one of “the elements of division between the most important people of the region.”
The Stop the War Coalition (StWC) warns against US-led intervention in Iraq and Syria.
It has yet to offer any comment on demands for “support (including weapons) for progressive forces in the region.”
By contrast Socialist Worker said in August, Arming the Kurds won’t stop Iraq’s brutal civil war.
More recently (September 16th) they found nothing to say on the Kurdish struggle against the Islamist genociders.
Instead they warned US missiles will worsen Iraq crisis.
Apparently one of the main dangers is that, “This will be a green light for targeting Muslims and increasing Islamophobia as all Muslims are portrayed as a terrorist threat.”
Keep Sweden Swedish: Swedish Democrats, the early years.
France-Inter this morning compared the success of AfD (Alternative für Deutschland) and the Swedish anti-immigrant party, (which while it no longer uses the sticker pictured still stands for keeping Sweden Swedish) the Swedish Democrats (Sverigedemokraterna, SD) to the rise of the French Front National and the British UKIP.
A conservative German anti-euro party, Alternative for Germany (AfD), has won seats in two more regional parliaments.
Local elections in eastern Germany on Sunday gave the AfD 12.2% in Brandenburg and 10.6% in Thuringia.
The party entered a regional parliament for the first time two weeks ago in Saxony – another eastern German state.
The AfD is mounting a growing challenge to Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats. It wants to scrap the euro and sees law and order as a priority.
The party is attracting right-wing supporters, while avoiding links with nationalist extremists.
The Social Democrats (SPD) won in Brandenburg with 32% and are set to remain in power in coalition with the socialist Die Linke who polled 18.9%.
The Christian Democrats (CDU), polled 33.5% in Thuringia, only a few points ahead of Die Linke, who won 28% of the vote.
Until now, the CDU has been in coalition with the SPD in Thuringia but could lose the state to Die Linke if the Social Democrats switch allegiances.
The staunchly pro-euro CDU refuses to form any coalition with the AfD.
The AfD was among many Eurosceptic parties which made large gains in the European elections in May.
The AfD, founded just over a year ago, has seven seats now in the European Parliament. Its MEPs sit in the same grouping as the UK Conservatives, demanding fundamental reform of the EU.
The party campaigns against bailouts for southern European countries, angry that taxpayers’ money has been used to save the euro.
“We are the force that’s renewing the political landscape,” said AfD leader Bernd Lucke, 52, an economics professor.
“One can’t deny it anymore: the citizens are thirsting for political change,” he said. BBC.
Not noted by the BBC report is that the left party, Die Linke, lost more than half of its votes in this election in Brandenburg (Linke verliert mehr als die Hälfte der Stimmen) while it scored a record total in Thüringen with 28,2%.
Sweden‘s Social Democratic party, which on Sunday ended its longest spell in opposition in a century, faces a weak minority government after the far-right Sweden Democrats emerged as the third-largest party.
The below seems reasonable comment (extracts) by Hela Sverige (Spectator) ,
Who are the Sweden Democrats?
They call themselves “Sweden’s only opposition party”, the implication being that the Stockholm elite is one indistinguishable blob of vested interest. Like UKIP, they say they are neither left or right. I’d put them closer to Maine Le Pen’s National Front in being anti-immigration and protectionist. Is Ms Romson fair to compare them to racists? There is no doubt that the Sweden Democrats have moved towards the mainstream in recent years and tried to address racism within their ranks. Their language is a mixture of Salmond/Farage-style anger at the elite and populism.
….what unites these Scottish, UK and European nationalist parties is the strategy of posing as the insurgent, out to stand up for the people against a Westminster elite/Riksdag elite etc.
At 2’07, the Sweden Democrats’ video shows the EVIL ELITE in a limo and the narrator says:-
“We want to hit out against the elite who have let our society disintegrate for decades. They are to blame for the problems in our society… It is, therefore, no mystery that politicians want to be elected on the same policies which caused the problems in the first place… Their failed integration politics is solved by more mass immigration. And the problem of begging is solved by having even more people come here to beg.”
Then at 3’03, cut to a picture of a herd of cows…
“And the strangest thing of all: no matter what the other parties say, they still tend to think the same thing. Sometimes they think so similarly that they use the same campaign slogans.”
They accuse the other parties of changing their policies to suit the confected outrage of the Twitter elite in Soder (Stockholm’s equivalent of Islington). They (5.50, with the hard rock music) say they haven’t gone to political school, but worked out their policies from real life. At 6’32 they show a crowd with a placard saying “no to racism” and the narrator saying: “they’ll say anything to shut us up”. This, of course, is what the BNP said here: it almost relished the racism charges.
Over on the New Statesman, George Eaton offers some wider context,
In total, the centre-left alliance won 43.7 per cent of the vote to the centre-right’s 39.1 per cent. Social Democrat leader Stefan Lofven will now seek to form a coalition with the Greens and the Left Party, but the worryingly high level of support for the Swedish Democrats, who only entered parliament at the last election in 2010, presents the grim prospect of the anti-immigration party holding the balance of power.
Having fallen short of an overall majority (by 15 seats), while refusing to work with the far-right, the centre-left is danger of legislative gridlock. As outgoing finance minister Anders Borg said: “It is clear that from a broader perspective that this is difficult for Sweden. We go from having one of Europe’s strongest governments to having a weak government power with considerable uncertainty about economic policy.” The Feminist Initiative Party split the left-wing vote by winning 3 per cent (up from just 0.4 per cent in 2010), but fell short of the 4 per cent required for parliamentary representation. Their rise in support, combined with the far-right insurgency, means that despite finishing first, the Social Democrats only increased their vote share by 0.4 per cent.
From a UK perspective, the result is damaging for David Cameron in two respects. First, he has lost one of his closest EU allies in the form of Reinfeldt (part of his “Northern Alliance“), further tilting the odds against a successful renegotiation if he is still prime minister after next May. Second, the rejection of the Moderates, whose vote fell by 7 per cent, marks a backlash against welfare cuts and privatisation after a series of free school failures and care home scandals (policies emulated by the coalition). The ideological wind is no longer blowing the free market right’s way in the Nordics.
One final point worth noting, as Rob Ford suggests, is that the result looks eerily like a preview of the British election in May 2015: an unpopular centre-right government is expelled as voters protest against privatisation; a weak centre-left takes power without a majority; and the populist right (Ukip) surges into third place.
Like France-Inter I am principally struck by the rise of rabid right-wing populism in Germany and Sweden.
The Islamic State group has released a video purporting to show the beheading of British aid worker David Haines – an act described by the British prime minister as “pure evil”.
The video, released late on Saturday, shows Haines, 44, being killed in a desert location by a masked man. The father of two children, from Perth in Scotland, was abducted last year while working for the French aid agency Acted.The video comes after the murder of James Foley and Steven Sotloff, both American journalists, in similar settings and manners.
The masked man in the latest video states Haines was killed because the UK’s prime minister, David Cameron, had promised to arm Kurdish Peshmerga fighters in Iraq against the Islamic State fighters.
“This British man has to pay the price for your promise, Cameron, to arm the Peshmerga against the Islamic State.”
The Guardian states,
In the video, entitled A Message to the Allies of America, a masked man is shown carrying out the beheading of Haines, whose life had earlier been threatened in a film showing the murder of American journalist Steven Sotloff. The video, which runs to two minutes and 28 seconds, ends with a warning that a second British hostage would be the next to die. He has been named in international media and on social media as Alan Henning, a British aid worker.
The killer, swathed in black, then makes a statement in which he makes a direct reference to the British government’s aid to Kurdish fighters.
He says: “This British man has to pay the price for your promise, Cameron, to arm the Peshmerga against the Islamic State. Ironically, he has spent a decade of his life serving under the same Royal Air Force that is responsible for delivering those arms.
“Your evil alliance with America which continues to strike the Muslims of Iraq and most recently bombed the Haditha Dam will only accelerate your destruction. And playing the role of the obedient lapdog, Cameron, will only drag you and your people into another bloody and unwinnable war.”
The BBC adds, that the killer, “appears to have a British accent.”
This is a terrible event, and we are deeply saddened.
But let us avoid rhetoric about an “‘an act of pure evil’ (David Cameron).
Some more precise points:
- It is to be hoped that nobody from the Stop the War Coalition or elsewhere will blame this killing of an innocent aid worker on Western foreign policy. The murder is the responsibility of the person who carried it out, and the Islamic state leaders who directly ordered the beheading . The person killed, David Haines, bears no collective responsibility for the actions of the West. He bore no responsibility for what the Royal Air Force is doing now. He was an aid worker. The butcher who decapitated him had no right to take the right over his life to himself.
- It is equally to be hoped that the StWC and others will not repeat the phrase about a “bloody and unwinnable war”. This is not a matter of Cameron “not saying no” to the Americans, a lapdog of the White House. It may be wrong it may be right, but if the West did not arm the Peshmerga, the Islamic state will not stop religious cleansing, torture and genocide.
- The murderer says, “This British man has to pay the price for your promise, Cameron, to arm the Peshmerga against the Islamic State.” The killer is not an agent morally capable of making Haines “Pay” anything. You cannot transfer a debt – real or metaphorical – from one unrelated individual, the Prime Minister, to another person, particularly one who is independent of his field of action
- Nobody can lay the Haines’ death directly at Cameron’s door: it is the decision of Islamic state, an act of their will, in order to further their aim of enforcing a Caliphate over the corpses of ‘heretics’ and ‘unbelievers’.
- The individual who slaughtered Haines was, according to all accounts, British. Will he, and other foreign Jihadists, continue these actions and try to kill other British people that he considers responsible for attacking the Islamic state?
It would be appreciated as well if people would stop repeating that Islamic State/ISIS/Daʿesh has nothing to do with real Islam.
We are not in a position to know what ‘real’ Islam is.
Daʿesh claims to be Islamic: it is one form of actually existing Islamism. (1)
Fawaz A Gerges on Radio Four this morning underlined that it is marked by unrelenting sectarian hatred, above all of Shias.
This clearly has nothing whatsoever to do with Western foreign policy.
This is not to deny the complications at work in Iraq and Syria and few would be inclined to lay out the battle lines in black and white.
There remain plenty of contradictions at the heart of the US-led operations, ranging from the lack of fixidity in the roles of Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the Arab League, to the (sectarian) nature of much of the Baghdad government and the long-term goals of the Kurdish regional authority (see Rue89).
One aspect of Daʿesh, nevertheless, does concern us here with absolute clarity: every European jihadist may be held accountable for their crimes, tortures and murders.
They should be brought before a War Crimes Tribunal.
British Islamists earlier this year.
The brutal beheading of Scott Sotloff is fresh in people’s minds.
A couple of days ago Owen Jones wrote, ” Middle Eastern dictatorships that have played a pernicious role in the rise of Islamist fundamentalist terrorism.”
The article, published originally in the Guardian and posted on the Stop the War Coalition site, makes a refreshing change from one-sided denunciations of attempts to create an “American caliphate”.
He then says,
While there is no evidence to suggest Qatar’s regime is directly funding Isis, powerful private individuals within the state certainly are, and arms intended for other jihadi groups are likely to have fallen into their hands. According to a secret memo signed by Hillary Clinton, released by Wikileaks, Qatar has the worst record of counter-terrorism cooperationwith the US.
And yet, where are the western demands for Qatar to stop funding international terrorism or being complicit in the rise of jihadi groups? Instead, Britain arms Qatar’s dictatorship, selling it millions of pounds worth of weaponry including “crowd-control ammunition” and missile parts.
Then there’s Kuwait, slammed by Amnesty International for curtailing freedom of expression, beating and torturing demonstrators and discriminating against women. Hundreds of millions have been channelled by wealthy Kuwaitis to Syria, again ending up with groups like Jabhat al-Nusra.
But the worst example comes from Saudi Arabia,
And then, of course, there is the dictatorship in Saudi Arabia. Much of the world was rightly repulsed when Isis beheaded the courageous journalist James Foley. Note, then, that Saudi Arabia has beheaded 22 people since 4 August. Among the “crimes” that are punished with beheading are sorcery and drug trafficking.
Around 2,000 people have been killed since 1985, their decapitated corpses often left in public squares as a warning. According to Amnesty International, the death penalty “is so far removed from any kind of legal parameters that it is almost hard to believe”, with the use of torture to extract confessions commonplace. Shia Muslims are discriminated against and women are deprived of basic rights, having to seek permission from a man before they can even travel or take up paid work.
Even talking about atheism has been made a terrorist offence and in 2012, 25-year-old Hamza Kashgari was jailed for 20 months for tweeting about the prophet Muhammad. Here are the fruits of the pact between an opulent monarchy and a fanatical clergy.
This human rights abusing regime is deeply complicit in the rise of Islamist extremism too. Following the Soviet invasion, the export of the fundamentalist Saudi interpretation of Islam – Wahhabism – fused with Afghan Pashtun tribal code and helped to form the Taliban. The Saudi monarchy would end up suffering from blowback as al-Qaida eventually turned against the kingdom.
The regime is not just tolerated; it works in close cooperation with Western countries like the UK.
Owen notes that as a result,
So much rhetoric about terrorism; so many calls to act. Yet Britain’s foreign policy demonstrates how empty such words are. Our allies are up to their necks in complicity with terrorism, but as long as there is money to be made and weapons to sell, our rulers’ lips will remain stubbornly sealed.
One could add that Saudi Arabia has a regime of sexual apartheid, that it is riddled with racist discrimination against migrant workers, not to mention against non-Muslims of any stripe. And that it is utterly committed to the most vicious anti-Semitism imaginable.
What will the Stop the War Coalition do to change this position?
Will their lips remain sealed as well?
Here is an example of a movement to exert pressure on a state that they support.
The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement “against Israel until it complies with international law and Palestinian rights” encourages the following actions to fight for Palestinian rights.
Boycotts targeting products and companies (Israeli and international) that profit from the violation of Palestinian rights, as well as Israeli sporting, cultural and academic institutions. Anyone can boycott Israeli goods, simply by making sure that they don’t buy produce made in Israel or by Israeli companies. Campaigners and groups call on consumers not to buy Israeli goods and on businesses not to buy or sell them.
Israeli cultural and academic institutions directly contribute to maintaining, defending or whitewashing the oppression of Palestinians, as Israel deliberately tries to boost its image internationally through academic and cultural collaborations. As part of the boycott, academics, artists and consumers are campaigning against such collaboration and ‘rebranding’. A growing number of artists have refused to exhibit or play in Israel.
Divestment means targeting corporations complicit in the violation of Palestinian rights and ensuring that the likes of university investment portfolios and pension funds are not used to finance such companies. These efforts raise awareness about the reality of Israel’s policies and encourage companies to use their economic influence to pressure Israel to end its systematic denial of Palestinian rights.
Sanctions are an essential part of demonstrating disapproval for a country’s actions. Israel’s membership of various diplomatic and economic forums provides both an unmerited veneer of respectability and material support for its crimes. By calling for sanctions against Israel, campaigners educate society about violations of international law and seek to end the complicity of other nations in these violations.
Of these strategies, the cultural and academic boycott is probably the most contested. It appears to make individuals pariahs, not institutions.
In the UK the Boycott Israel movement has targeted Sainsbury’s and has mounted protests at the shop and other outlets for Israeli goods which have also met with criticism.
Controversy has arisen about the Sainsbury’s campaign, which makes the claim (which looks rather small in comparison with what is happening in Iraq and Syria) that this is a protest against the “genocidal attacks on the Palestinians of Gaza.”
Perhaps these methods are not the best way of expressing opposition to Israeli killings and brutality in Gaza, as incidents have erupted during every protest, including one in which the shop in Holborn withdrew Kosher products from the shelves.
Members of the public could be forgiven for thinking that this is a call to “not buy Jewish“.
Europe has, as is well known, a history of campaigns against “buying Jew.”
A better kind of campaign could be created to protest against the totalitarian regime in Saudi Arabia,. A programme for human rights, demanding that it tolerates all faiths, is democratic, respects women’s rights, allows people to express their own sexual preferences, and ends its own racism, religious and ethnic, that responds to the demands of what exists of a democratic opposition, would be promoted.
We could begin by putting pressure on companies involved in the country to pull out and calls for international sanctions.
We await the Stop the War Coalition’s forthcoming initiatives to force the British government to act against the Kingdom.
Should Left Back Everyone Resisting NATO?
As President Obama admits ” We don’t have a strategy yet.” one group in Britain is pretty certain he does.
The Stop the War Coalition urges people to ” Protest the NATO Summit” (? – Protest what? For, Against,?).
At a mass demonstration of 600 people (BBC estimate, StWC estimate perhaps 60,000) they expressed the views below.
The StWC focuses on NATO, “NATO is the military alliance binding Europe to US foreign policy, a foreign policy post-Iraq increasingly unpopular around the world. It is also the military alliance currently occupying Afghanistan.”
Apparently it’s all connected with the present wars and conflicts.
Or as they ask, and answer: What links Gaza, Iraq and Ukraine? The deranged policies of the US and NATO.
The most obvious but mostly unconsidered factor is that all three of these situations are directly linked to an increasingly aggressive Western foreign policy promoted by NATO over the last two or three decades.
So now we know: it’s the West’s fault.
The StWC urges mobilisation. “We need to make sure that the scale of anti-war opinion and the spirit of the great Gaza demonstrations is on display in Newport and Cardiff for all the world to see.”
Some might care to comment on the comparison between Gaza, Newport and Cardiff.
But for the instant other matters arise.
One group of people on the British left seem to have taken the analysis of NATO to a very definite conclusion.
They are now working with the “enemy” of the “West” on the issue of Ukraine.
A conclusion with practical consequences not all will admire.
The Alliance for Workers’ Liberty (here, hat-tip D) publishes the allegations below about the alliances of some of those on the British Left protesting against the Ukrainian government – that is ‘NATO’s ally’.
Less than two months ago Richard Brenner (Workers Power) and Alan Freeman (Socialist Action) were feted in the Hotel Yalta-Intourist by assorted Russian fascists and ultra-nationalists at a conference about Ukraine. The same initiative, meeting again this weekend, will apparently be without them.
The first conference produced a “Declaration” (full of worthy anti-fascist and anti-war verbiage, designed for a European/US left-liberal audience) and a “Manifesto” (which amounted to a programme to wipe Ukraine off the face of the earth, or at least to reduce it to the borders of pre-World-War-One Galicia).
Brenner defended his attendance at the conference on the grounds that “some of the people in the resistance are nationalists and socially reactionary on some (not all) questions.” As for the “Manifesto”, according to Brenner, “there is nothing reactionary in its practical proposals.”
(An astonishing conclusion, bearing in mind that the title of the Manifesto – “Manifesto of the Popular Front for the National Liberation of Ukraine, Novorossiya and Transcarpathian Rus’” – was itself a “practical proposal” for the dismemberment of Ukraine.)
This weekend’s conference in the same hotel is entitled “Russia, Ukraine, Novorossiya: Global Problems and Challenges”, and will launch what it calls the “Anti-Fascist (Anti-Maidan) Council of the Russian Federation”. (1)
The conference is organised by the “Co-ordination Centre for Novaya Rus’” – one of the organisations headed by Aleksei Anpilogov which ran the earlier conference attended by Brenner and Freeman.
Three of the conference’s listed speakers attended the earlier conference: Anpilogov, Vladimir Rogov and Pyotr Getsko. (Anpilogov can fairly be described as a nationalist-cum-fascist; the latter two are more ultra-nationalist/fascist-fellow-travellers.)
But this time they are not meeting with a couple of (possibly) useful idiots from the British left.
Keynote speakers at the conference include Igor Strelkov-Girkin and Alexander Borodai (respectively, former Defence Minister and former Prime Minister of the ‘Donetsk People’s Republic’). Both are members of the Izborsky Club, a Russian fascist ‘think tank’ headed up by Alexander Prokhanov and Alexander Dugin.
Sergei Glazyev (presidential aide to Putin, and a member of the Izborsky Club) will also address the conference, as too will Mikhail Delyagin (Russian academic and a member of the Izborsky Club).
Other speakers include Mikhail Sheremet (former head of the ‘Crimean Self-Defence’ which worked with the Russian military in the annexation of the Crimea, subsequently appointed Crimean Deputy Prime Minister) and Mateusz Piskorski:
“Piskorski is an open proponent of Nazism, a holocaust denier, and the author of articles in the portals “White World” and “I, A Russian”. He was the leading light of the Polish skinhead paper ‘Odala’, where he praised the Aryan race and Adolf Hitler.” (2)
Publicity for the conference states that it will be attended by “members of the Izborsky and Zinoviev Clubs”.
The latter Club is named after the late Soviet philosopher Alexander Zinoviev: an admirer of Stalin, a supporter of Milosevic, and an opponent of Western values. The Club is concerned with the restoration of “traditional Russian values”.
Also attending the conference will be “parliamentary and government delegations from twelve European countries.” So far, only one of them has been named: Marton Dyondyoshi, a leading figure in the Hungarian far-right and particularly anti-semitic party Jobbik.
The list of speakers shows the hollowness of the expression “anti-fascist” in the context of this conference and its goal of setting up an “Anti-Fascist Council”.
(It is no less hollow in the context of: “Campaign in Solidarity with the Anti-Fascist Resistance in Ukraine”, to which Workers Power, Socialist Action and other more explicit brands of Stalinism are affiliated.)
There is nothing “anti-fascist” about the politics of the Izborsky Club members. There is nothing “anti-fascist” about the politics of Dyondyoshi. There is nothing “anti-fascist” about the politics of the French National Front (regularly praised on separatist websites).
“Anti-fascist”, in this context, is no more than a verbal fig-leaf to cover up for straightforward Russian-imperialist aggression against Ukraine. And the fact that the organisers of the first Yalta conference have now organized this weekend’s event, inviting along sundry fascists, Hitler-admirers and anti-semites, tells you a lot about their own politics as well.
But for the likes of Worker’s Power, perhaps Jobbik should now also be classed as no more than “nationalists (who are) socially reactionary on some (not all) questions”?
It is important also to see this from the AWL here.
Confirmation of their report, “Veterans of the Russian military and special forces, together with rights activists and representatives of Orthodox Christian community, are to jointly launch a group to try and thwart any attempts to forcefully change the political system in the country.” more Spetsnaz veterans to launch ‘anti-Maidan council’ in Russia (Russia Today).
Glory to the Iraqi Communists!
As news came in from Iraq on Thursday that the troubled nation’s low-key communist party had scored a rare military victory over Islamic extremists of the ISIS near Baghdad, their Indian counterparts were passively watching the spectre of large-scale desertion from their ranks to the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) with its quasi fascist Hindu revivalist agenda.
The Iraqi Communist Party spokesman announced that the party in control of the Red Army fought a ground battle with armed Islamic State (ISIS) in the vicinity of the Northwest of Baghdad.
The Red Army killed 38 armed rebels and captured 107 people. They achieved “tactical victory in the full sense”.
They stated that at first many people began to join the Islamic fundamentalists after the collapse of the existing government forces but are now joining the Communist Party.
According to media reports from Qatar, a spokesman for the Iraqi Communist Party Mikhail Grew spoke publicly to the world. He called on the world proletariat to unite in support of their Iraqi Red Army against the Islamic extremists and fight against religious extremism who endanger people’s lives and safety.
Saturday, 9 August 2014
Statement of the Political Bureau of the Iraqi Communist Party
In solidarity with our Yazidi people
Concerted national efforts are needed to recapture the areas seized by criminal Isis gangs
We have been following with great anger and condemnation the brutal practices and horrific crimes committed by the criminal gangs of “Isis” against our Yazidi people that aim at eliminating this indigenous cultural and religious component of Iraq. These terroist and rogue gangs have killed the children of Yazidi people, captured and enslaved their women, destroyed their temples and desecrated their religious symbols. These heinous crimes are classified under international law as crimes against humanity.
These crimes represent another episode of the series of barbaric attacks waged by the terrorist gangs of “Isis” against the Iraqi homeland and people. It is part of the suspicious scheme that has extended over the whole of Iraqi territory, affecting all citizens, including Arabs, Kurds, Turcomans and Shabak; Muslims, Christians and Yazidis; Sunnis and Shiites.
While reaffirming the Iraqi Communist Party’s full solidarity with our Yazidi people in their cruel plight and sharing their pain as a result of this ordeal, we express our readiness to provide all possible help and contribute to the joint efforts to alleviate their suffering. We call on the Iraqi state and all its institutions to speed up the delivery of relief aid to the hundreds of thousands of displaced people who sought refuge in the mountains and caves under deteriorating conditions, and to provide the human, material and technical resources needed to accomplish these urgent tasks. In this regard, we call upon international organizations and the international community to deal with what is happening in Iraq as crimes against humanity.
In the difficult circumstances caused by this ordeal, our party calls upon all the political and social forces, parties, blocs and organizations, and in particular the forces that are in power at the level of the federal government, the Kurdistan Regional Government and the local authorities in the provinces, to unify their stance and efforts in the face of terrorism and the gangs of “Isis” and their barbaric acts.
The recapturing of the areas seized by “Isis” and eliminating it are urgent and immediate objectives that require mobilizing all national efforts. This necessitates accelerating the efforts to overcome the existing differences between the Federal Government and the Kurdistan Regional Government, and to achieve the broadest possible cooperation and coordination at both the political and military levels to ward off the dangers threatening Iraq. This also requires resolving speedily the naming of the Prime Minister nominee and embarking on forming an all-encompassing national unity government that is able to address the daunting tasks facing our country at this historic juncture.
BAGHDAD – 6 August 2014