>November's presidential election. He got an official 38
>percent of the vote. The KPU brought evidence of marked
>ballots, ballot-box stuffing and vote buying to Ukraine's
>criminal court but was told such matters were outside the
>court's jurisdiction.
>
>In the first round of the presidential election,
>Progressive Socialist Party candidate Natalia Vitorienko,
>who also condemns the IMF, was injured by a hand grenade
>tossed into a rally she was addressing.
>
>"Kuchma is trying to make a coup to gain absolute
>power," said Ukraine Socialist Party leader Oleksandr
>Moroz. "He is acting on behalf of powerful private groups
>that support him.
>
>"Since Kuchma came to office, Ukraine has gotten poorer
>but his friends have gotten rich. They now want to get
>even richer by selling shares in land and grabbing control
>of basic industries like steel, petrochemicals and even
>oil and gas, which it is now forbidden to be privatized."
>
>On Jan. 29, workers across Ukraine marched to protest
>the IMF-Kuchma program and to demand unpaid back wages.
>That was the anniversary of the 1918 uprising by Kiev's
>arsenal workers that was drowned in blood by a Western-
>backed regime.
>
>IAC founder and former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey
>Clark sent letters of protest to President Kuchma and the
>Rada.
>
>An IAC statement said: "Like the war against Yugoslavia,
>the attempted presidential coup in Ukraine is part of the
>NATO-Pentagon drive to the east, which carries great
>danger for all humanity. The U.S. corporate media, which
>so obediently repeated Pentagon-State Department lies
>about Kosovo, appear to have imposed an information
>blockade on the events in Ukraine and U.S. involvement
>there.
>
>"We must break that blockade. The democratic forces in
>Ukraine deserve the support of anti-war and justice-loving
>people in this country and around the world."
>
>Letters of support can be faxed to Deputy V.N.
>Romashenko at 011 380 44 293 2792 or 011 380 44 229 7228.
>
> - END -
>
>(Copyleft Workers World Service. Everyone is permitted to
>copy and distribute verbatim copies of this document, but
>changing it is not allowed. For more information contact
>Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] For subscription info send message
>to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.workers.org)
>
>
>
>Message-ID: <00b001b1fc00$775e91c0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>From: "WW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: [WW] U.S. strategy vs. Iraq
>Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1988 18:06:24 -0500
>Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>-------------------------
>Via Workers World News Service
>Reprinted from the Feb. 10, 2000
>issue of Workers World newspaper
>-------------------------
>
>U.S. STRATEGY VS. IRAQ & UNSC RESOLUTION 1284
>
>By Richard Becker
>
>It should be apparent by now to even the most casual
>observer that a major goal of U.S. foreign policy is to
>overthrow the government of Iraq, deprive that country of its
>sovereignty, and reduce it to the status of a colony.
>
>They even have a name for it in Washington: "regime change."
>
>There is virtually no debate at the top on the legitimacy
>and desirability of this aim--just some minor differences of
>opinion over how best to achieve it.
>
>For nearly a decade the U.S. rulers have waged war against
>Iraq and its people by military, economic, financial,
>political and diplomatic means. The United States funds,
>sponsors, trains and organizes political and military
>opposition to the Iraqi government.
>
>What drives U.S. policy, which has remained virtually
>unchanged under both the Republican Bush and Democratic
>Clinton administrations?
>
>In short, it's for domination and profit: domination of the
>key Persian/Arabian Gulf, which holds up to two-thirds of the
>world's petroleum reserves, and the immense profits to be made
>by exploiting those fabulous resources. Iraq itself sits atop
>a sea of oil. It is ranked second in the world in reserves.
>
>This reality, of course, must be concealed to the greatest
>degree possible, especially from the U.S. public. It wouldn't
>go over very well to tell people that the Pentagon is spending
>$50 billion to $60 billion a year to blockade and starve Iraqi
>children in order to safeguard the present and future profits
>of Exxon, Chevron and Citibank.
>
>So the modern-day incarnations of Nazi Propaganda Minister
>Josef Goebbels in the State Department and White House have
>spun a different story. They are motivated by their deep
>"concern" over "human rights violations" and "weapons of mass
>destruction" in Iraq. Saddam Hussein, Iraq's president, is
>relentlessly presented in their bought media as the
>personification of all that is evil--"worse than Hitler," they
>sometimes say.
>
>As if the U.S. ruling class, with its blood-drenched history
>at home and abroad, and armed to the teeth with every
>imaginable nuclear, chemical, biological and conventional
>weapon, could really be "concerned" about either Iraq's
>internal policies or armaments.
>
>ANTI-SANCTIONS MOVEMENT
>
>Unfortunately, some in the anti-war and anti-sanctions
>movement have taken a position that, unintentionally or
>otherwise, lends credence to the imperialist policy makers'
>arguments.
>
>This viewpoint can be summarized as follows: 1) Economic
>sanctions are wrong because they are causing great suffering
>among the Iraqi people, while not hurting the regime; 2)
>Saddam Hussein should be indicted as a war criminal and
>removed from office; and 3) economic sanctions should be
>"delinked" from military sanctions, meaning that economic
>sanctions should be ended while military sanctions are kept in
>place.
>
>A letter currently circulating in Congress argues this line.
>
>This position implicitly credits the U.S. government, and
>the United Nations Security Council which it dominates, as
>qualified to sit as judge and jury on Iraq. In other words,
>the U.S. government is legitimate and the Iraqi government is
>not.
>
>Moreover, this position gives credit to U.S. policy's stated
>and phony aims by agreeing with them. "Yes," this perspective
>says, "Saddam is evil. He must be replaced by a democratic
>government and Iraq must be disarmed so that it cannot
>threaten its neighbors."
>
>This view disregards, in addition to Iraq's right to self-
>determination, the fact that it is the United States, not
>Iraq, which is the greatest military threat and violator of
>human rights--in the Middle East and around the world.
>
>There is no greater proof of the U.S. leaders' criminality
>than the sanctions themselves.
>
>Nine-and-a-half years of near-total blockade have killed at
>least 1.25 million Iraqis and inflicted unimaginable suffering
>on a whole country and people. To call the sanctions genocidal
>is no exaggeration.
>
>OPPOSITION TO SANCTIONS
>
>Opposition to the sanctions has grown around the world,
>especially in the two years since the February 1998 crisis
>that brought the United States to the brink of a major new
>military attack on Iraq. In the Middle East, the opposition is
>so wide, deep and bitter that even some of the most pliant
>U.S. client regimes feel compelled to call for the blockade to
>be lifted.
>
>Three of the five permanent members of the UN Security
>Council--Russia, China and France--favor ending the sanctions.
>
>But the U.S. leaders want to keep the sanctions, which they
>see as a vital element in their "regime change" strategy. As
>they were designed to, the sanctions have destroyed or
>severely weakened much of Iraq's infrastructure, industry and
>agriculture, as well as the country's military capacity. The
>latter had always been wildly exaggerated in the Western
>media.
>
>The sanctions, along with continued bombing raids, are
>intended to grind down Iraq and its people. The United States,
>as President Bill Clinton, Secretary of State Madeleine
>Albright and other top U.S. officials admitted during the 1998
>crisis, intends to keep sanctions in place until the current
>government is removed or overthrown.
>
>To do this, they must keep alive the myth that Iraq
>possesses fearsome weapons or the capacity to produce them,
>with which it threatens its neighbors.
>
>Enter UN Security Council Resolution 1284.
>
>The Security Council passed Resolution 1284 in December
>1999, after nearly a year of rancorous debate. It supposedly
>provides for lifting the sanctions on Iraq if the country
>agrees to allow UN weapons-inspection teams to return and
>verify that Iraq no longer has any more "weapons of mass
>destruction."
>
>For eight years, Iraq was the most inspected country in
>history. Hundreds of UN weapons-inspection teams, known as
>UNSCOM, made thousands of visits to every corner of the
>country.
>
>Twenty-four-hour video cameras were set up in every factory
>that was deemed to have "dual-use technology." "Dual-use"
>means that a facility has the potential to produce military as
>well as civilian goods--as does much of modern industry
>anywhere.
>
>Yet the sanctions and the horrific suffering of the Iraqi
>people remained unchanged. In the fall of 1997, Iraq halted
>the inspections, declaring they would not be allowed to resume
>until it was made clear how and when they would lead to an end
>to the blockade.
>
>In addition, the Iraqis charged that many of the inspectors
>were actually spies for the government most committed to
>maintaining the sanctions indefinitely: the United States.
>While U.S. officials and media at first ridiculed this charge,
>even they were forced to admit that it was true a few months
>later.
>
>Weapons inspection began again in March 1998. They continued
>until December, when the UNSCOM teams fomented a new crisis,
>leading to the intensive U.S./ British bombing of Iraq for
>four days, Dec. 16-19, 1998. Since that time, there have been
>no inspectors in the country.
>
>RESOLUTION 1284--A TACTIC TO MAINTAIN SANCTIONS
>
>Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz, speaking to
>delegates from the Iraq Sanctions Challenge in Baghdad on Jan.
>18, described the U.S. position as "pretending to seek a
>solution" in the year-long Security Council negotiations.
>
>Resolution 1284, Aziz said, "presents that sanctions would
>be suspended if Iraq cooperates. But Iraq has cooperated for
>many years, from 1991 to 1998, and got as a reward missiles
>and bombs.
>
>"If you watch CBS News or read the New York Times," Aziz
>continued, "you would hear that there is a resolution to end
>sanctions, but the Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein refuses
>and so is responsible for the miserable situation. It's
>propaganda."
>
>Under Resolution 1284, Aziz explained, Iraq would be subject
>to even more strict controls than under the old system. The
>resolution invokes all the past UN resolutions against Iraq,
>and adds the word "verification" to the mission of the weapons
>inspection team. This means that Iraq must prove that no
>"weapons of mass destruction," nor the capacity to produce
>them, exists.
>
>Ramsey Clark, the former U.S. attorney general who headed
>the recent Sanctions Challenge to Iraq, points out that "it's
>impossible to prove a negative, to prove that no weapons exist
>in an area as large as Iraq." And in fact, as Clark explained,
>that is exactly the point: to set conditions that cannot be
>met, thus allowing the sanctions to continue without limit.
>
>There are no provisions for financial arrangements or
>controls in Resolution 1284. The subject was left for later
>discussions. Given that Iraq has received less than one-third
>of the value of the $19 billion in petroleum it has sold under
>UN Resolution 661--the so-called "Oil for Food" deal--the new
>financial arrangements are likely to be even less
>satisfactory, according to Aziz and other Iraqi officials.
>
>Clearly, Resolution 1284's real objective is to keep the
>sanctions in place while making it appear that Iraq itself is
>responsible for their continuation.
>
>`DUAL-USE' BULLS
>
>At the same time, $6 billion in contracts under the "Oil for
>Food" resolution remain blocked by the Security Council. The
>vast majority of contracts to repair the damaged water,
>sewage, electrical and other infrastructure have been denied
>or put on hold.
>
>The usual excuse given by the United States and Britain,
>which lead the way in blocking contracts, is that the
>commodities in question could be "dual use." So neither pipes
>nor chlorine, both desperately needed to rehabilitate the
>water system, have been allowed into the country.
>
>The extreme to which the "dual-use" pretext can be taken was
>illustrated by Iraq's recent attempt to import 15 breeding
>bulls. The contract was denied. When asked why, State
>Department mouthpiece James Rubin replied, "It's not the bulls
>we have a problem with, it's the vaccine that goes with them."
>
>Rubin claimed that the vaccines, necessary for modern animal
>husbandry, could be used to make biological weapons.
>
>The story of the 15 bulls shows just how bankrupt the
>"delinking" argument is. In reality, it plays into the hands
>of those who want to perpetuate the sanctions forever, or
>until a government to their liking is established in Baghdad.
>
>The anti-war and anti-sanctions movement needs to call for
>the unconditional lifting of the genocidal sanctions, an end
>to the constant assaults on Iraq's sovereignty, and for the
>United States to get out of the Middle East, where it has done
>so much damage over the past half-century.
>
> - END -
>
>(Copyleft Workers World Service. Everyone is permitted to
>copy and distribute verbatim copies of this document, but
>changing it is not allowed. For more information contact
>Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] For subscription info send message
>to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.workers.org)
>
>
>
>Message-ID: <00b601b1fc00$8d90f140$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>From: "WW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: [WW] Rocker: too little, too late
>Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1988 18:07:01 -0500
>Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>-------------------------
>Via Workers World News Service
>Reprinted from the Feb. 10, 2000
>issue of Workers World newspaper
>-------------------------
>
>EDITORIAL: TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE
>
>Sports commentators, radio disk jockeys, newspaper
>editorials, even pop psychologists are all publicly weighing
>in on the suspension of major league relief pitcher John
>Rocker. Rocker's bigoted diatribe against people of color,
>immigrants, people with AIDS, and gays and lesbians was an
>outrage, they all agree.
>
>But the positions lead in many different directions when
>it comes to Commissioner Bud Selig's decision to suspend the
>Atlanta baseball player for one month. Too harsh, said some.
>It's nobody's business what he believes, said others. Too
>little, too late, said just a few.
>
>Too harsh? Nobody's business what he thinks? Unfortunately
>we've all been forced to listen to what he thinks. Rocker
>spouts the line of the neo-Nazis. And a Sports Illustrated
>interview last December gave him a national podium for his
>ultra-right invectives. He has also publicly referred to an
>African American teammate in Klan language.
>
>Too little, too late? You bet. Rocker should have been
>booted off the team.
>
>But as the analysts talk about his psyche, there's
>something that almost none of the media are raising at all.
>The corporate owner of the Atlanta team markets racism.
>
>Billionaire owner Ted Turner has refused to accede to the
>demands of Native people that he change the name of the
>team. Using "Braves" as the team name is only the first
>insult. Turner and Jane Fonda have led crowds of fans in
>mimicking the racist "tomahawk chop."
>
>Racism: Rocker voiced it and corporate titan Ted Turner
>profits immensely for it. It's time--past time--to fire
>Rocker and demand that Turner change the name of the Atlanta
>team.
>
>
>
> - END -
>
>(Copyleft Workers World Service. Everyone is permitted to
>copy and distribute verbatim copies of this document, but
>changing it is not allowed. For more information contact
>Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] For subscription info send message
>to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.workers.org)
>
>
>
__________________________________
KOMINFORM
P.O. Box 66
00841 Helsinki - Finland
+358-40-7177941, fax +358-9-7591081
e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.kominf.pp.fi
___________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe/unsubscribe messages
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________
