2. Revolution Newsletter

//WORLD REVOLUTION //International Coordination Comittee //2007-03-14

• Climate Change
• We demend - hands off Iran!
• Stop occupation, stop war – start to resist!
• Thousands march in London to get the troops out now!

Climate Change

The phenomenon variously known as climate change, global warming or the “Greenhouse Effect” is caused by an increase in carbon dioxide (CO2) and other gases in the atmosphere as result of human activity, particularly the burning of fossil fuels (oil and gas) and destruction of forests. Despite the best efforts of our world leaders to brush it under the carpet, it has become impossible to deny. Last week, a discussion forum held by leaders of the G8 richest nations ( Canada , France , Germany , Italy , Japan , Russia , UK and US) plus Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa issued the closing statement that man-made climate change is now “beyond doubt”.

Another recent development is that scientists have issued warnings about the discovery of fast-moving rivers underneath Antarctic ice-sheets, leading to worry about the speed at which sea levels might rise if world temperature increases further. And it's not looking good on this front, given that average arctic temperatures have increased at almost twice the global average rate over last 100 years.

So there is no denying that the situation is severe. A report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released this month showed that as a result of human activity, global temperatures will rise by up to 6.4°C this century – while it is already accepted that a 4°C rise would be enough to cause catastrophic floods potentially displacing millions of people and leading to loss of hundreds of species and extreme food and water shortages. We are already seeing the devastating effects of global warming and the way it alters weather patterns, for example in Hurricane Katrina last year and more recently, flooding in Indonesia.

A large part of the problem is that even if all the concentrations of greenhouse gases and aerosols were kept constant at the same levels they were at in the year 2000, further global warming of 0.1°C per decade is expected. This is because global warming has actually changed ecosystems to the point that they now cause more heating themselves – for example warmer oceans are less able to absorb CO2.

But what really woke the bosses up to the threat was the Stern report on the economic impact of climate change. This warned of a 20% shrinking in global economy in the next few decades if no action taken to stop climate change, and suggested a programme of investment to limit its effects. The President of the Royal Society (a scientific body) said this should be “ a turning point in a debate which has pitted short term economic interests against long-term costs to the environment, society and the economy”. In other words now that they have realised it might actually harm their profits, the capitalists are starting to worry!

But the solutions proposed by capitalists will never be able to tackle climate change. The idea of a “Green tax” on activities such as the use of fossil fuels is problematic as it is not based on wealth or income so will hit workers hardest; corporations are unlikely to accept it if it actually damages their profit. Another popular proposal is “carbon trading”, where the government issues permits to companies allowing them to emit a certain amount of CO2 and if they emit above these allowances they have to buy permits from those emitting below. The problems are obvious: the biggest companies – i.e. those that cause the most damage – will be able to continue doing as they wish, as this will be profitable and allow them to have enough money to buy up permits. While idea is that the “cap” (the total amount of permits given out) for emissions is gradually lowered, this seems unlikely as governments are in the pockets of big business so would be unlikely to contradict their interests This has been shown already by their track record – for example, the EU has had a similar scheme in the past which was unsuccessful because governments set over-generous emission levels. Secondly, it relates to the class interests of our government, which rules on behalf of the capitalists and has business interests at its heart. Businesses do not want climate change to be taken seriously as it would damage their profits – for example the director of Easyjet recently said that governments should not over-react to climate change.

Capitalist governments have neither an interest in nor the ability to challenge such companies or to rationally control the market. The most extreme example is the link between the US government and the oil companies it subsidises, which are making a fortune out of destroying environment. Such companies aren't going to sit back and let their market share be taken over by renewable energy and, reflecting this, the government has put negligible investment into researching this. The UK government's agenda is the expansion of nuclear power, but this is a dangerous undertaking within capitalism since the necessary security and environmental measures are expensive and reduce profits, and the capitalists do not take them seriously.

These governmental measures act on the national level only, but global warming is obviously an international issue. Some efforts have been made to negotiate on an international, notably the Kyoto Treaty for the reduction of carbon emissions by 5.2% compared to the year 1990. There are many problems with this – firstly, it d didn't come into force until 2005, eight years after it was signed. The world's biggest polluter, the US, refused to sign up, and has blocked and sabotaged all such global agreements. Australia also has not signed up while other countries like India and China are not required to reduce emissions despite their large populations. Most of the countries that did sign up are not even meeting its limited goals. For example, the UK government previously claimed to have reduced carbon emissions since 1990, but it was recently revealed that this left out everything caused by shipping and aeroplanes!

So, if we can't rely on the government or the businesses, what is the solution to global warming? A popular view among charities and the liberal left is opposition to “consumerism”, “productivism” and “industrialism” – the idea that people should use less and even in some cases that humanity should retreat back to an earlier stage of development. Socialists reject this argument – we are not “against consumerism” but believe that workers are entitled to small comforts such as holidays and electronic gadgets, etc. The real problem is the massive waste caused by corporations who put profit before the environment, and the super-rich capitalist class who live in incredible luxury. We don't want to go back to a pre-industrial society (and we couldn't anyway!) - we want to go forward to socialism. We also realise that governments and corporations can't be “side-stepped” by individual action because they have a massive effect on our lives and the planet.

Since climate change is such a pressing issue, we must put demands on capitalist governments for reforms such as:

• Strict controls and penalties on corporate polluters & confiscation of property where these are broken
• Massive investment in alternative energy e.g. wind, wave, solar power to allow a shift from fossil fuel burning
• Huge expansion of public transport and reduction in its cost
• A global programme of reforestation

Where these reforms are granted, this will obviously help to lessen the damage done by global warming. But most of these will never be met, and we must use this fact to expose the capitalists as enemies of the environment.

Socialists understand that climate change and environmental destruction are inherent to capitalism, the system that puts the profit of a tiny handful of individual capitalists before the needs of both the majority of society and the planet itself. Under socialism, the means of production would be expropriated from the capitalists to common ownership by majority. Humanity would no longer be at the mercy of market forces; an international plan of production could shift resources in favour of those regions worst damaged by climate change, and a democratically planned economy would allow the needs of the environment to be taken into account as a serious matter, so that climate change could finally be stopped.

________________________________________________________________________________

We demand – hands off Iran !

On 23rd January, the BBC news website likened references to Iran in George Bush's State of the Union speech to a drum beat. In recent weeks this drum beat has become more of a marching band, complemented by an army of reports in the media discussing the threat of an invasion, with Tony Blair yet again living up to the nickname awarded to him by the anti-war movement.

"Nobody's talking about military intervention in respect of Iran but people are increasingly alarmed and concerned at the strategy that they appear to be pursing."

In reality everyone was and is still talking about 'military intervention', with newspaper reports particularly highlighting the move by three ex-US top ranking generals to warn against a war with Iran in a letter to the Sunday times, stating that it would have 'disastrous consequences'.

They came out in support of a call made by an organisation called 'Crisis Action', a pressure group containing member organisations such as the Amicus, Unison and GMB unions, the Oxford Research Group, the Foreign Policy Centre, Pax Christi, the Muslim Council of Britain and the Muslim Parliament. The groups' document explains "An attack on Iran would have disastrous consequences for security in the region”.

In the last few days, the White House has continued banging its war drum, with claims that the Iranian government is funding and arming Shia militias in Iraq , such as the Mehdi army of Muqtada Al Sadr, which is said to be between 70,000 and 100,000 strong. The White House has argued that the Iranian government is complicit with this whilst others, including officers and high ranking officials in the UK and US armies, suggesting that this is unlikely to be the case.

Above this however, the major aggression over Iran is regarding its refusal to back down over its nuclear programme, with President Ahmadinejad suggesting that Iran would suspend its nuclear programme if the US also suspended uranium enrichment. A spokesperson from the White House responded with the expected answer that this was not a serious suggestion. Uranium is a chemical that when enriched can be used for power production, but if enriched a lot further can be used to make weapons of mass destruction.

Perhaps more worrying than the rhetoric are plans by the US military to build up forces in the Gulf with two aircraft carriers already positioned in the region with more that can be deployed within a months notice. More worrying still is new information uncovered by the BBC that the US military has drawn up plans to attack Iran , allegedly in the event of Iran 's development of nuclear weapons or in the event of a major attack on US troops in Iraq backed by the Iranian regime.

This news coincides with the United Nations 21st February deadline for Iran to cease uranium enrichment. The attack plans show that the US will not only attack nuclear development facilities, but that they also have laid out strategies for attacking Iranian air bases, naval bases, missile facilities and command centres - bombing which could lay the groundwork for sabotaging Iran's military with a possibility of preparing for an invasion. There are thousands of troops in Iraq who could be used to attack, and nearby Israel has one of the most powerful armies in the world. It also has a larger stockpile of nuclear weapons than the UK , and information has been leaked that the Israeli Defence Force (IDF) has plans which detail use of tactical nukes against Iranian nuclear facilities - a recipe for a horrific war.

However, Iran is no Iraq or Afghanistan . It is an oil-rich state, which has not had the same destruction of its infrastructure by economic sanctions or years of war as with the latter. It also has an impressive military force with a large air force and long-range missiles. Critically, it has a population wary of US imperialism and according to worldpublicopinion.org 50% of Iranians believe Iran will be attacked with 84% of the population believing that Iran has a right to enrich uranium. With US forces tied up in Iraq and Afghanistan invading Iraq would indeed have disastrous consequences. So why does it seem to be on the cards?

Firstly, because of a genuine threat to the Israeli state that relies on a Jewish majority for its existence. According to one poll 27% of Israelis said they would leave the country if Iran developed nuclear weapons. Regardless that the real threat Iran poses to Israel is tiny, mass emigration from Israel would destabilise the country in an unimaginable way, threatening the US ' closest ally and watchdog in the Middle East .

Secondly, the War on Terror is going extremely badly and the US is losing against the resistance movements in Iraq , Afghanistan and support for the war at home is reaching an all-time low. In addition, its close ally Israel suffered an historic defeat this summer in Lebanon . The war has been the principle feature of Bush's presidency and outright defeat would have huge consequences for the US in maintaining its current dominance over the world.

The American ruling class are desperate to avoid what is known as the 'Vietnam Syndrome' a term used to describe the reluctance of the American public to go to war for years after the failure of the Vietnam in the 1960s and 70s. There is every likelihood that George Bush would do anything to avoid this possibility and is willing to massively escalate the “war on terror”, to raise the stakes for America and the people of the Middle East , in the hope that overwhelmingly force will quell the resistance. We must organise now to stop this war. Our message everywhere is - “HANDS OFF IRAN!”

By John, Leeds

________________________________________________________________________________

Stop occupation, stop war – start to resist!

The war against Iraq lasts now for nearly four years. Four years of war, occupation and tortures against the Iraqi people. The US-administration attacked Iraq under the guise that Iraq would possess weapons of mass destruction. The US-administration attacked Iraq under the so called banner of democracy. Today it's obvious that the allegations on the weapons of mass destruction were a lie and that imperialist democracy looks different than many people imagined. Now we know that 660.000 Iraqi people have died because of the war. We have seen the pictures of the tortures in Abu-Ghraib, where people were tortured until they died. There were the killings in Haditha were 24 non-combatant people were massacred by US marines. This war is an unjust war against innocent people.

In the background of new threats against Iran – the placement of two aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf, the sanctions against Teheran and the menace against Iran from Israel – it's important for all progressive anti-war activists to draw the lessons of the war itself and the protests against the war.

•  The war against Iraq is an imperialist war. Imperialism cannot exist without suppressing other people and cannot exist without war. Especially US-Imperialism as ruler of the world has to become more and more aggressive to ensure the hegemony of their system. The millions of dollars that come to the US every day as foreign capital from other countries are only flowing because the US made it clear that they are ready to accept thousands of dead people for profit. History showed that this system can only be stopped through a social revolution from the youth and the working class. That's why we have to connect the propaganda against the war with propaganda against the system of capitalism and imperialism.

•  There cannot be a neutral position to a war where a rich, imperialist country attacks a poor, semi-colonial country. All the pacifists that are trying to argue that every form of war is awful and that both sides should just stop the violence deprive the oppressed people to defend themselves. If one really denies the war, one also has to support the resistance against the war and the occupation. That's why we also support the military resistance in Iraq against the occupying forces.

•  The countries that attacked Iraq – on the forefront the US and UK troops – are not only leading a war against Iraq but also against their national youth and working class. This is more and more obvious after Bush has presented the new budget for 2008 that will increase the spending on the military and will decrease the money for health insurance. This lesson is important to prevent us from blind Anti-americanism but understanding that because of the war the oppressed layers of society are even more oppressed by their national bourgeoisie.

•  The protest-movement against the war has to be organized on a democratic basis and it's leadership has to be accountable for the rank and file activists. If we ensure that there is not a reformist leadership, that tries to canalize the movement to their own advantage and trying to stop the protests or letting it not develop, we can make enormous steps forward against this system and all its effects.

The propaganda against Iran is getting more and more aggressive as well from the USA as also from Israel . We have to start now to make propaganda against this war, explain why it is not about terrorists having a bomb but about the interests of the bosses to strengthen their position in the Middle East . But what is even more important – we have to start to organize actions against the ongoing war in Iraq and an attack on Iran that is getting more and more possible. That's why the sections of REVOLUTION are taking part and organising demonstrations against war and occupation this March. Join our demonstrations and struggle for another world without wars, without capitalism!

ONE SOLUTION – REVOULTION!

________________________________________________________________________________

Thousands march in London to get the troops out now!

The demonstration on the 24 th February, called by the stop the war coalition, attracted something between 60,000 and 100,000 people to London . They marched in opposition to the war on terror and to the replacement of the trident missile system, as well as opposition to any attack against Iran . There was a clear message across the demonstration that troops should leave Iraq now (not in 2008) and that the $76 billion planned for trident should be spent at home. We say welfare not warfare.

The march was followed by a large rally in Trafalgar Square . Speakers from Hiroshima , George Galloway and Jeremy Corbyn to name but a few spread the anti-war message. A speaker from Venezuela was present, but unfortunately there was not much talk from the platform of exactly what the British working class should do to properly halt Blair's policies.

The police estimate for the demonstration was 4,000 people, this is clearly a deliberate attempt to downplay the level of opposition, and even to the untrained eye a count of more than 10 times this was evident. The state being an armed body of class rule will always try to instil a feeling of defeat among the anti-war movement. The experience of being there and seeing the thousands of people creeping at snails pace from Hyde Park was so effective in dispelling this myth.

The combined Revolution and Workers Power contingent consisted of about 40 people, with more people occasionally joining the contingent momentarily of their own accord. We were very visible and loud chanting “Tony Blair – Terrorist” and singing “we all live in a terrorist regime”.

As we joined the demonstration from Hyde Park we turned plenty heads with our chanting against both the war on terror and the whole imperialist system. With three megaphones going at once there was never any time for silence. We will of course be hoping to bring this energy with us to the streets of Germany , joining Revolution members from other countries, this summer as we demonstrate against the G8.