>New Worker Online Digest > >Week commencing 26th May, 2000. > >1) Editorial - Britain's Vietnam? > >2) Lead story - Dig up and pay up! > >3) Feature article - UN agreement "just one small step". > >4) International story - Last exit from south Lebanon. > >5) British news item - Don't patronise us, say pensioners. > > >1) Editorial > >Britain's Vietnam? > >THE DEPLOYMENT of Royal Marines in Freetown, the re-arming of the Sierra >Leone army and the despatch of "military advisers" shows that British >imperialism has decided to intervene directly in this African civil war. > > Foreign Office Minister Peter Hain says the supply of 10,000 rifles to the >Sierra Leone army is not a breach of the United Nations arms embargo >designed to end the civil war, though it is difficult to see what else it is. > > The Defence Secretary, Geoff Hoon, talks about "winding down" the British >military presence, but he refuses to set a date for their final withdrawal, >or indeed, explain the purpose of their mission. > > But deeds speak louder than words and it's clear that British troops are >in Sierra Leone to Prop up the government, drive the rebels from the >diamond mines and ultimately drive them out of their own country. > > The bourgeois lie-machine is now in top gear. The rebel Revolutionary >United Front is branded as a bunch of savages. Tame journalists posing as >"military experts", tell us that the rebels will soon be defeated. Others >claim that not only was the country better off under British colonialism >but that this is the view of many of the Sierra Leonians today. Ominously >we are also informed that the Sierra Leone army will not be ready for >battle for another two months. > > There is no doubt that the Marines and the SAS pathfinder scouts will do >what they are good at doing -- killing people -- and there can be little >doubt that this is what will be required of them in the days to come. The >Sierra Leone government can barely hold on to the capital at the moment, >let alone mount an offensive on their own against the rebels. > > The Blair government, acting as a willing tool of British imperialism, >doesn't even attempt to justify its actions any more. But two sinister >unsaid principles underlie this new African intervention. The first is the >right of a major western power to intervene directly in a regional conflict >if asked to by a "government". This has to remain unstated because Britain >and the other imperialist countries only recognise the sovereignty of >others when they have to or when it suits them. > > It doesn't apply to the Arab countries whose territory is occupied by >Israel to this day. It doesn't apply to People's China as far as the rebel >province of Taiwan is concerned and it certainly didn't apply to Yugoslavia >last year when Britain, America and the rest of the Nato pack bombarded the >country in support of the rebels of the "Kosovo Liberation Army". > > The other unspoken principle is that Britain has a right to intervene in >its former colonies -- a claim it did not dare assert during the hey-day of >the non-aligned movement -- to protect its economic interests. > > This is blatant neo-colonialism. It is also war. We have to say over and >over again that Britain has no right to intervene in the Sierra Leone civil >war. The question of who rules that country is matter for the people who >live there alone to decide. > > British intervention can only benefit the Anglo-American mineral companies >and those Sierra Leonians who serve them. British guns cannot bring peace >to the country. The only peace that British imperialism can impose on >Sierra Leone is the peace of the grave. We have to demand the immediate >withdrawal of all British forces from the country. Some Labour MPs and >peace activists have taken a principled stand against this war. More, and >more must speak out to try and halt it. > > ********************* > >2) Lead story > >Dig up and pay up! > >by Daphne Liddle > >FARMERS and environmentalists last week joined together to call for >genetically modified crops sown by mistake to be dug up immediately before, >they produce pollen, and for the farmers to be compensated. > > Hundreds of farmers in Britain, Sweden, France and Germany unwittingly >planted the seeds over two spring seasons without any of the safeguards put >in place for GM crops trial -- inadequate as these are. > > The seeds, supplied by the Advanta seed company, came from the Canadian >prairies, from plants that were grown 800 metres away from GM crops. But >cross pollination occured and the seeds that were sold as non-GM were >tainted with GM characteristics. > > This in itself surely demonstrates that it is impossible to control the >spread of GM crops once they have been allowed to flower and spread pollen >around and that even under test conditions it is not safe to plant them. > > More than 22,000 acres of contaminated seed were harvested in Britain last >year with a further 11,750 acres planted this year. > > Some of last year's crop is already thought to have entered the food chain >-- in margarine, ice cream and chocolate. No one knows what the long-term >effects of eating such products will be. > > The Swedish and French governments have already announced their intention >to dig up the crops and destroy the seeds an quickly as possible and to >compensate the farmers. > > And one English farmer, John Sanderson from Harleston, has already >ploughed his crop of oilseed rape back into the ground. It had been just >about to flower. > > The planting of these crops all over the country means that no crops grown >anywhere near them can be sold as definitely GM free. This will cost >farmers very dear. > > It has emerged that Government officials have failed to test imported >crops for GM contamination. > > And the Government learned of the disastrous mistake on 17 April but did >not inform farmers for over a month -- allowing the contaminated crops to >grow on that much closer to pollination. > > Scottish farmers say they did not sow their crops until April and that if >they had been told at once they would not have gone ahead with the planting. > > The-British government is trying to play down the whole disaster. The >Ministry of Agriculture says it is "gathering legal advice and taking advice". > > It claims the contaminated food poses no risk to consumers -- how can it >know? And the ministry claims the crops pose no threat to the environment. > > It seems as though the Government's message is that it is "too late to do >anything so let's cross our fingers and hope the consequences are not too >bad". > > Baroness Hayman, speaking for the Government on BBC two's Newsnight said >the level of contamination was so low -- about one or two per cent -- that >there was no need for the destruction of crops. > > This is missing the point. It is like saying that one or two escaped >rabbits on the newly discovered continent of Australia would not possibly >do any harm. > > Introducing rabbits to thatcontinent did untold damage to the native >wildlife as they multiplied, driving out other species and they still >remain a serious problem for Australian farmers. > > Some suspect the whole catastrophe has been engineered by the companies >trying to promote GM crops to persuade us to accept them as a fait accompli. > > The environmental group Friends of the Earth says it has been given legal >advice that Advanta could be liable for criminal charges. > > The Consumers' Association is calling on the Government to act "quickly >and decisively" to mimimise the damage and prevent any more GM crops from >entering the food chain. > > The association's director, Sheila McKechnie, said: "This scandal makes a >mockery of the efforts that supermarkets and manufacturers have made to >secure non-GM supplies. It was being grown in Britain all along and being >used in our food." > > The world does not need GM seeds. They are being produced only with profit >in mind and the future risks and dangers are not known. Once released into >the wild it is extremely difficult to reverse the spread. > > The danger is that GM crops will hybridise with wild plants to produce >weeds that cannot be controlled and may be very harmful. > > The Government must act now as quickly as possibly to limit the damage. >The crops must be destroyed, the farmers compensated and the company >responsible must be prosecuted by the Government and made to pay. > > Any other course of action could endanger future generations on this planet. > > ********************** > >3) Feature article > >UN agreement "just one small step". > >by Caroline Colebrook > >FIVE MAJOR nuclear powers, including Britain, last week made a pledge at >the United Nations to eliminate their nuclear arsenals. But disarmament >campaigners are not celebrating just yet. > > At the weekend around 120 anti-nuclear campaigners descended on the Atomic >Weapons Research Establishment (AWRE) at Aldermaston to protest at the >illegality of nuclear weapons and draw attention to their continuing menace. > > The protest was organised by Trident Ploughshares 2000 and involved a mass >sit-down outside the gates of Aldermaston which succeeded in halting all >traffic in and out of the base for nearly an hour. > > Some 42 protestors were arrested and among them was Ray Davies, a veteran >anti-nuclear campaigner, vice chairperson of CND Cymru and a Caerphilly >county borough councillor, along with some members of the Cardiff Reds >Choir (Cor Cochion Caerdydd). > > Ray Davies told the New Worker: "We concentrated on blocking the base and >we were very successful. We crept through a cornfield, dashed across the >road and completely closed the gates. > > "One of the women chained herself to the gate and the chain was passed >around us so that it was difficult for the police to untangle us. > > "The police quoted Section 14, which says the whole area is a no-go area. >Anybody could be arrested if they come within a two-mile radius of the base." > > Ray Davies told the police it was they, the Government and the Aldermaston >establishment who are acting illegally. Nuclear weapons are illegal. > > He said to the police: "I am just back from a trip to Iraq and I have seen >the effects of the sort of weapons they produce here. > > "I have seen the 1,000 children a month who are dying from the effects of >depleted uranium weapons. > > "In Kosovo 100 children have already been listed as being killed after >accidentally picking up unexploded cluster bombs." > > He told the police: "I am not doing this just for my children but for the >children of Iraq and or Kosovo and of East Timor and children all around >the world who should have the same rights to live in peace and security. > > "I am prepared keep doing this, even if it means going to prison, as long >as I have breath left in my body." > > He and other protesters were taken to Reading police station but later >released on bail. > > Ray Davies told the New Worker he was heartened by the number of young >people involved in the protest and makeing a stand against the police and >the Government. > > When asked about the new agreement by the super powers to eliminate their >nuclear arsenals he replied: "It is a step in the right direction -- but >just one small step. > > "There is no date given and there are no arrangments to meet again to >discuss a deadline for disarmament. > > "This agreement is the result of campaigning, of non-violent direct action >here in Britain and all around the world. This agreement would not have >been reached without mass pressure. "There is still an awful lot of work to >do. It is only oy protesting and campaigning vieorously that we'll do away >with nuclear weapons. > > "Now is not the time to sit back. This agreement should galvanise us into >further action." > > ************************* > >4) International story > >Last exit from south Lebanon. > >by Our Middle East Affairs Correspondent > >ISKAELI troops scuttled out of south Lebanon on Tuesday, taking their Arab >qublings with them. In a panic move prompted by the collapse of their >puppet "South Lebanon Army" (SLA) auxiliaries, the Israelis pulled out six >weeks ahead of schedule. > > They were racing to the border while the Lebanese resistance advanced to >the cheers of the villagers who have endured occupation and Israeli terror >for 22 years. > > Stopping only to blow up fortifications and equipment to prevent the >resistance or the Lehanese army using them, the hated Israeli army drove >south and the Lebanese people hope they will never see them again. > > Lebanese villagers stormed the prison in the village of Khiam, freeing the >140 patriots jailed by the SLA on Israeli orders. Some had been inside for >over ten years. And throughout what was once Israel's "security bell" >villagers greeted the resistance and returning refugees with Lebanese flags >and the yellow banners of the Hezbullah (Party of God) militia. > > "This is the first victory in 50 years of Arab-Israeli conflict," >Hezbullah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah declared in Beirut with a slight >but understandable exaggeration. > > In Israel there is relief at what the people hope is the end of a conflict >that claimed the lives of hundreds of Israeli soldiers and a realisation >that their much vaunted army was brought to its knees by the determination >and courage of Lebanese guerrillas. > > "We have always wanted to leave Lebanon, but now itis happening we cannot >escape the feeling that events are being forced on us," Israeli General >Shaul Mofaz said in the Israeli border settlement of Kiryat Shimona on >Tuesday. That too was an exaggeration. > > In the 70s, when Lebanon was torn apart by civil war, many Israeli leaders >thought they could seize southern Lebanon for themselves. Tel Aviv ordered >the troops in to back the Falange in the civil war, briefly occupying West >Beirut and the whole of the south. But they were bombed out of Beirut and >the rest of south Lebanon, apart from this border strip which has been the >scene of continuous fighting with the resistance. > > "This tragedy is over," Labour Prime Minister Ehud Barak said on Israel >Army radio on Tuesday. He won the election last year pledging to pull-out >of Lebanon within a year. That promise he has at least kept. But it may not >be the end of the story. > > Thousands of "SLA" men and their families are fleeing to Israel to escape >the wrath of the partisans and the Lebanese govemment which has declared >them traitors. > > Barak has granted them asylum-status but their long-term future is in >doubt. They will demand Israeli citizenship as a reward for their loyal >service -- they after all have nowhere else to go. But Israel has no >further use for them. > > To use them as border guards would only be a further provecation to the >Lebanese resistance -- an open invitation to carry the war over into >Israel. And resettlement in other parts of Israel could anger fanatical >Zionists opposed to all but Jewish settlement in the country. > > Tel Aviv hopes most of them will eventually be allowed to return to >Lebanon. Some may want to go to America if they are let in. Most look like >staying in Israel for a very long time. > > That's the least of Barak's problems. He's first of all got to ensure that >the conflict with Lebanon is really over, and in the absence of any >formalagreement with Beirut it depends on Israel giving up every inch of >Lebanese soil. > > The Shebaa farms, an area on the tip of the border, is a potential new >flash-point. Lebanese premier Saiim al-Hoss stressed on Monday that any >pull-out that does not include them will be considered a redeployment and >not a withdrawal. The Shebaa farms were Lebanese and Lebanon had the right >to fight to regain them, he said. This is also the view of Hezbullah, which >announced last weekend that the Shebaa farms had become a new focus for >resistance action. > > Barak could have had a negotiated agreement if he had responded >realistically to Syrian peace proposals. Syria, the main power-broker in >Lebanon, with thousands of peace-keeping troops in the Bekaa Valley, >insists that there can be no peace unless Israel gives up every inch of >occupied Syrian territory as well. Barak still wants to retain part of the >occupied Golan Heights, regardless of the dangers ahead. Maybe now he's >having second thoughts. > > ********************* > >5) British news item > >Don't patronise us, say pensioners. > >by New Worker correspondents > >MASSES of pensioners descended on Westminster from all over the country >last Wednesday 17 May for a Day of Action. This was in support of their >long-running campaign for the link between average earnings and pensions to >be restored. > > The event coincided with a Government-staged "listening conference" -- a >cosmetic exercise aimed at patronising pensioner activists, pretending to >consult them and then ignoring them -- that did not go quite to plan. > > This conference kicked off in the new Queen Elizabeth conference hall in >Westminster. The invited pensioners were taken into a large hall full of >tables, each with seating for 10. > > The seats were all assigned beforehand and the pensioners directed exactly >where to sit. > > They were told to introduce themselves to each other and to elect a >"facilitator" and a "notetaker" at each table. > > The whole proceedings were continually interrupted by a wandering >chairwoman with a microphone who went from table to table utterring >meaningless phrases -- and photographers recording the event for the >Government. > > Barbara Wiseman, a member of the New Communist Party central committee, >was there representing the Brighten pensioners' movement. She was elected >facilitator at her table. > > Each table was given a topic to discuss, such as transport, leisure, >"happiness in the home" and so on. > > Barbara's table was given "work and learning". They first had to discuss >what this meant but it soon emerged that most around the table perform a >lot of voluntary social work. > > They readily agreed that if they asked to be paid for this they would soon >be deemed too old and dismissed. Yet if they did not give this work free to >the community, the system would soon collapse. > > Tom Morran, a leader of the pensioners' movement in Wales, reported that >his wife had served in the army in the Second World War. After that she had >retired from waged work to become a mother and run a household. Now her >pension entitlement is a shameful £40 a week. > > The pensioners were informed that each table's spokesperson would have >just two-and-a-half minutes to report their conclusions to the conference. > > During the lunch break MP Alan Howarth made the mistake of asking Barbara, >in a very patronising way, if she was enjoying herself. She told him very >clearly and plainly why she was not. > > Then followed a long speech by Social Security Secretary Alistair Darling >-- about pensions. This was the very issue most pensioners had come to >discuss but they were given no opportunity to discuss or reply to his speech. > > Then another six Government Ministers were trotted out to express party >platitudes at length. > > Barbara sought the agreement of her table and when her time to report to >the conference finally arrived, she laid into the structure and planning of >the conference. > > "We don't need all these ministers," she told Mr Darling. "We are not >satisfied with what has been done here today. The pensioners' campaign will >continue." > > Pensioners in the room were unanimous in their support of the views she >expressed. They were sickened that the Government was treating them like >feeble minded idiots when most of those present are very experienced >veteran campaigners who wanted a real debate about the basic state pension. >Clearly that was the last thing Mr Darling wanted to allow. > > Outside the conference hall pensioner campaigners, organised by the London >Pensioners' Forum, lobbied the meeting. > > They also lobbied the headquarters of the Department of Social Security >and then went on to a meeting in the Grand Committee room of the House of >Commons. > > Many were able to meet their MPs in the lobby to argue the case for >restoring the link. > > Speaker Jeremy Corbyn MP said he felt humbled by the contribution made by >the generation of pensioners present -- who had helped win the war against >fascism and then gone on to win and build state welfare. > > Mr Corbyn called on younger generations to take up the struggle to defend >what has been built. > > The pensioners campaign is certainly having an impact because Tory leader >William Hague earlier this week pledged the Tories would raise the basic >pension by £10 if elected. > > Examined more closely this pledge was pathetic. The £l0 was for a couple. >A single pensioner would be lucky to see £5 and the extras introduced by >Labour -- the £150 heating allowance and free TV licences for the over 75s >-- would be abolished. > > It is true the pensioners would prefer to see the money put on the basic >state pension. The increase will have to be much more than a measly £5 to >even begin to restore pensions to the value level they were when the Tories >broke the link in 1980. > > Clearly both Labour and Tory leaders still think they can bamboozle >pensioners with conftdence tricks. But the pensioners movement is growing >and strong. The politicians will learn in the end that they patronise >pensioners at their peril. > > ********************* > > >New Communist Party of Britain Homepage > >http://www.newcommunistparty.org.uk > >A news service for the Working Class! > >Workers of all countries Unite! > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Missing old school friends? Find them here: >http://click.egroups.com/1/4055/8/_/_/_/959285651/ >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > __________________________________ 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] ___________________________________
