Workers Power no. 33

THATCHER’S “VICTORY” IN the Malvinas holds not a shred of benefit for the working class - British or Argentine. Indeed, for the British working class it is an unqualified and shameful defeat.

The Argentine workers have made, and may yet make, important gains from their military oppressors’ inadvertant war with British imperialism. Galtieri’s involvement in war has allowed the Argentine workers’ movement a period of semi-legality, the ability to publish papers, demonstrate and mobilise for the discovery of the fate of the thousands of political prisoners who have “disappeared”. Argentina’s struggle, objectively a justified national! struggle ageinst British imperialism. wil! have weekened the pro-imperisiist forces in Arpertina

those who sought to hand over Argen> tine’s industries and resources to foreign (owestment heve suffered a major blow. Thowgh they wented to redouble the super-expioltetion of Argentina’s urban end rere! workers for the benefit of the Sritish, US and European banks, they heve seen their links with their masters put under severe strain, though, of course, not severed.

The possibilities for the overthrow of the junta, for an end to military rule, are better, not worse as the resutt of an open clash with Britain.

lh Britain the results of ‘‘victory’’’ for the working class are a hundred times worse. Its results are a simultaneous strengthening of the ruling class and a weakening of the working class. Like all.the most serious defeats, the working class suffers, this was selfinflicted. To. be more precise, it was inflicted by disastrous leadership by

WORKERS IN THE Health Service and on the railways are prepared to do battle with the Tories over pay and jobs. A whole host

of unions are formally committed to “Days of Action’ and even strike action against Tebbit’s law. What is at stake is whether the hatred felt by thousands of workers for this government can be welded into a general struggle to defeat its pay-policy and its antéunion laws.

Despite its special conference and much-publicised chequeswapping, the TUC has given no lead. It is terrified of a showdown with the Tories that could get out of its control. It is terrified of a trial of strength that would threaten its funds and security. So it offers up the pitiful spectacle of

laral “Dave anf Actinn’”’ af leaflet

willing or unknowing agents of the class enemy. In terms that some may claim are overworked and old-fashioned, but which remain none the less true, the British working class was BETRAYED by its leaders.

Thatcher and her hard line faction within the Tory party, within the military hierarchy and within the ruling class in general have won a triple victory. They have won a victory over the “moderate” Carrington wing of Thatcher's own party. They have defeated the Labour Party and the labour movement. They have even scored a victory over their ‘‘closest allies’, the US and Common Market teaders.

By a judicious alternation of fake negotiations and military escalation, Thatcher hed the initiative et every Stage. end made her rivels dance to tune. She turned the initial deb-

effect by purging the Carringtonites - @ job in which she was helped immeesurably by the purblind Labour front bench, who thought that their orgy of chauvinism in the first Commons debate would allow them to outflank and even oust. Thatcher.

Having gained the support of “the House and Country” mem con for the sendisig of the Task Force, the Tory “wets”, the Labour Party and the SDP/Libera! alliance were all tied to the wheels of her war chariot.

Internationally, Thatcher used Britain’s key position as go-between between the European and North American imperialist blocs. in \a fickle antiAmerican inclined EEC, America’s “staunchest ally’’ could, in the last analysis, call the shots against a US semi-colony. Reagan , Haig and Jean Kirkpatrick doubtless ground their

’ This feeble reply by the official tab-

our movement to the Tory onslaught| must make Tebbit feel confident]that he can press home his attack.

Tebbit’s law will outlaw all solidarity action. Blacking will be illegal. It outlaws union action against the use of non-union labour. It bans political strikes and-all industrial action in pursuit of international solidarity. This law, tog ether with Prior’s Emplyment Act} constitute.a legal noose around the neck of effective trade unionism. It shows that this government is a determined, class conscious enemy of the working class and its right to organise. Only decisive action on the part of our class can stop this government's assault.

asians eériicn te palishawigns contr

SIDE: IRAN/IRAQ

HEALTH STRIKE

RESPONSES TO THE WAR

Thatcher's victoryworkers defeat

Crack thugs trained by the British Army embark on the QE2. They were to be in the final attack on Porto Argentina / Port Stanley

teeth as their plans to utilize Argentina as a Trojan horse for counterrevolution in Central America were put in jeopardy by their European “ally”. They may have quaked in their boots at the prospect of setting all their carefully installed and expensively nurtured juntas against them by openly aiding the British attack. But in the end, Thatcher simply had to say “No” to their US-sponsored compromises and call in Reagan to make good his support for Security Council Resolution

picket line, is a challenge to Tebbit, and the Tories know that. Mass pickets and industrial stoppages aren’t simply the best means to back the health workers - they’re the means of building the forces to smash Tebbit. now!

Arthur Seargill has declared of action by NUM membesr in solidarity with health workers:“‘If we rea in violation of the Tory government’s legislation then so be it.” Fine words. Miners and health workers must hold him to them. The NUM machinery should be used to build up the campaign for strike action in-every pit. Scargill must turn his words into action, action that is consciously aimed at helping the health workers, and defeating Tebbit.

It is vital to organise rank and

>. sea (> saerlopGee: SS ume Se me Peet Be

502 which demanded an Argentine withdrawal. ;

Thus Thatcher and the ‘Big: Defence’’ spending lobby in the Tory Party, the Army and Navy chiefs, and their backers, have achieved a powerful and, for the moment, dominant position within the ruling class. Thatcher will now. seek to gain from her victory the fruits of considerably increased defence spending, and a new hard-line trouble-shooter role for Britain throughout the semi-colonial world. Thatcher

This means forming delegate action committees representing the organised workers in every area. It is

these committees that should coor- .

dinate solidarity action with the

and rail speak-in every plant. They should organise factory and shop meetings to explain and organise against Tebbit’s. law.

Of course every union must.be committed to non-recognition of — the laws and ‘non-compliance with any court that tries to implement them. But the workers’ movement cannot defeat Tebbit with resolutions. We must demand that the TUC immediately breaks of all neg: otiations and discussions with this hateful anti-working class government. Murray and Co should leave

Se ee Se ee ee eo. ee =

bee

wants her big navy to police the imperialised world. b Thatcher has been able to unleash a wave of chauvinist venom of a crudity that would have been laughed at the in ‘60s or ‘70s. In this she was aided by the reptile press - The Sun, Express and Mail - and abetted by the more hypocritical and circumspect. Mirror. Although it may appear tasteless to. the

CONTINUED ON PAGE 7P.

Strike against Tebbit’s law!

war on the Tory government. In every strike and on every

« picket line, militants must. bend

their efforts to linking up their

- struggle with those of other worhealth and railworkers. They should’ ~ ensure that militants from the health.

kers. The Tories’ attack is aimed at the whole class. Every striker from every industry will. be affec-

*. ted by Tebbit. We must respond by - mobilising the whole of our class to smash these anti-uniion laws.

In. this war with the Tories, the working class needs the weapons that can guarantee it unconditional victory over its enemy. Against Tebbit, against the Tory anti-union laws, we need a General Strike until the laws are wiped off the statute book. Solidarity! stoppages, mass pickets, must be seen as our means of launching our counteroffensive against the Tories and

aumnmetenee meee Sevens On Aactrris

THATCHER’S “WAR DRIVE” has long been the subject of left wing literary discussion. In an area that no-one expected, and with a country with which the Tories had formerly been developing friendly _ relations, that “war drive’ suddenly became an awesome reality.

The events of one weekend were sufficient to call forth the full fury of British imperialism. The seizure of the Malvinas by its rightful owners proved to be am unendurable slap in the face for both British and world imperialism. Without hesitation, and with the biessing of the Labour Movement's traitorous leaders, Thatcher responded to that slap with an all out war. For the first time since Suez, a British task force has joined battle on a scale vaster than anything seen in Britain's various “‘counter-insurgency” wers, from Aden to Ireland.

The war in the South Atlantic demands a clear and unambiguous response from all those on the left who claim to be revolutionary. The task now is to go beyond speculation towards an explanation of, and decisive opposition to, the war.

The causes of the present war lie far deeper than the superficial and immediate factors that precipitated the actual fighting. Marxists recognise that wears arise out of contradictions and conflicts that have their roots in the social and economic fabric of the world order.

The present world order is dominated and regulated by imperialism. We live in the imperialist epoch. What we mean by this is that developed capitalism has gone beyond the stage of consolidating national economies and the corresponding national states. It has gone beyond the progressive role that it played in Europe and America in the nineteenth century. Having consolidated their national markets the major powers are driven to search out and dominate new sources of raw materials, new reservoirs of of cheap labour and new areas to which capital can be exported in order then to repatriate ever greater profits. Capitalism’s remorseless logic — to grasp after and accumulate profits — stands in contradiction to the limitations imposed on it by its own national boundaries. It is forced to reach out beyond them. In order to secure its profits as it expands, imperialist capitalism is also forced to subjugate the nations whose markets, resources and workers it is exploiting.

In its early phase of development, imperialism did thi by direct conquest and colonial rule. The Sritish Empire was the classic form of early imperialism. The armies of the British state secured for the capitalist magnates direct rule over India, whole chunks of Africa, Asia, a myriad of islands in every ocean and, of course, the Malvinas.

The convulsions of the twentieth century, two world wars and countless nationalist uprisings, have forced imperialism to modify the form of its exploitation of the imperialised world., but not the content.

Today, Britain has very few colonies that it rules directly. West Germany has none. Does this in any way mean that these countries have ceased to be imperialist ? Not at all. Britain, Germany and the other major imperialist powers, e.g. the USA, Japan, Italy, France and Canada, have maintained’ their domination by economic means and by incorporating the national bourgeoisies of the imperialised countries into their world system through organisations like the UN and the IMF. The aid given by imperialism to Mugabe’s newly established Zimbabwe is but the latest example of this process.

TLLC. SPLI

THE WAR IN the South Atlantic threatens to wreak havoc with the Trotskyist International Liason Committee (TILC), which was formed in December 1979.

Its largest grouping - the Workers Socialist League - is now the major sponsor of the paper “Socialist Organiser’, and has refused to take a position in support of Argentina against Britain.

But at least two other sections, the Italian LOR and theAmerican Revolutionary Workers League (RWL), have. declared their support for Argentina in its war with British imperialism.

In the May 1982 issue of their paper, the LOR carried the following statement of position on the war: “By unmasking the pseudo anti-impreialist demagogy and rhetoric of the Argentine junta, Trotskyists are able to avoid every ambiguity by whatever means, and openly affirm unconditional support to Argentina against England, but naturally from the point of view of the proletariat’ (“Polftica Operaia” May 1982. Our translation and emphasis).

The TILC is not meant to be, as yet, a democratic centralist organisation. It set itself the task of becoming one ‘within two years” (Declaration of Intent, April 1980). However, the voting system of the TILC guarantees a built-in majority for the Brit: ish WSL over al! the other groupings combined! As a consequence the position of the TILC on Thatcher’s imperialist war is defeatist on both sides.

The Left and the Malvinas

COMMUNISM AND THE TEST OF WAR

It is the contradictions lodged within this imperialist world order that produce wers. Marxists are clear that the imperialist epoch, in which cap italism has completed its historical role and become entirely reactionary, is an epoch of wers — end of revolution. From what we have said the rassons should be clear. The drive by imperialist powers to dominate the world is carried out as @ competitive race. There is no honour among thieves. They will happily cut each other's throats in the drive for profits.

An early example of imperialism's ugly visege was the scramble for Africa in the 1880's end 90’s. The foundations of European and Americen capitalism were laid on the backs of slaves from thet continent. In the late nineteenth century, England, Germany, Belgium, Holland and Portugel went further and set about enslaving whole territories within the continent. This did not only mean violence against the indigenous peoples. It also stored up the potential for violence between the rival imperialist brigands. The events leeding up to the First World War revealed this potential. The clearest example was the Morocco Crisis of 1911 over control of North West Africa. This pitted Germany against England and France both of whom were concerned at Germany’s rise to industrial strength and her ensuing colonial appetites. The avoidance of a military clash at this time merely Postponed the inevitable conflict. Economic competition and the drive for plunder lined the imperialist powers up against one another and in 1914 the first major inter-imperialist war broke out.

The working class of Europe paid dearly for that war in its own blood.

These years of carnage revealed, however, that war did not depend on the poj/icies of governments. War could not be prevented by mere changes of policy. Of course war could be offset by peaceful policies and attempts at cooperation. However, this could only have a temporary effect. So long as imperialism exists then so too does the drive towards war.

Only twenty one years after the governments of the disfigured European continent had signed the Versailles ‘‘peace” treaty, the conflict between German imperialism and Angio-F rench imperialism, between two robbers in different political disguises, erupted once again, drawing all the imperialist powers into World War II.

In the aftermath of that war, the rise to world dominance of the USA and the strengthening of the degenerated workers’ state, the USSR, offset the inter-imperialist rivalries. Under US hegemony, imperialism presented a united front against the USSR. This imperialist united front, which aspires to sustain itself through the eventual reopening of the workers’ states to imperialist designs, is strategically set on a course for war with the USSR. Yet this does not mean that the inter-imperialist conflicts have disappeared. The strains in the Western Alliance, the conflicts within the EEC and the occasional trade wars with Japan, all indicate that although the rivalries have muted they are still a feature of the imperialist world order. If a united imperialism were to be victorious against the Soviet Union it would only foreshadow new and ever more violent rivalries over the division and redivision of its reactionary conquests.

TS_OVER WAR

It is hardly suprising that the TILC groupings outside Britain should adopt a position of support for Argentina. The majority of groupings on the international left which claim to be Trotskyist have also taken stands supporting Argentina in the war. It is only in Britain where “‘war fever” and antiArgentine chauvinism is strongest that many groups have taken a “‘defeatist on both sides’ position. But it remains to be seen whether the TILC sections who have taken a principled position on this question have either the will or the ability to counteract the British WSL and the national pressures which have led it to take an opportunist line on this question.

The founding document of the TILC, “The Transitional Programme in Today’s Class Struggle’ was largely a restatement of‘principles a document of timeless truisms which provided no basis as a guide to action for a revolutionary tendency. We said in a letter to the TILC: ““ We think — that there is a real danger in your position of building an international tendency on the basis of agreed principles, while differences over (national) tactics are either covered over or not seen as important. Of course this was the method of the International Committee and the OCRFI,and in both cases it led to federalism and splits” (Letter to TILC/WSL July 18th 1980).

Lenin

Imperialism means war. Its:crisis-ridden nature and its instability mean that wars will break out sporadically, as has the present war with Argentina. It also means that such wars signify worse to come. The present war should serve to remind the complacent that the threat of world war, thirty seven years after the last one, looms once again. This time humanity's very existence is at stake.

In conflicts between imperialist powers the position of revolutionary Marxism was made clear by Lenin in 1914. He had to fight the majority of international Social Democracy (the Second International) who had stampeded into support for the imperialist bloodletting in the name of “defence of the Fatherland’. Against this position, Lenin argued for revolutionary defeatism, “’ A revolutionary class cannot but wish for the defeat of its

im a reactionary war, and cannot fail to

see that the latter's military reverses must precip-

itate its overthrow. Only a bourgeois who believes that a war started by governments must necessarily end as a war between governments, and wants it to end @s such, can regard as ‘ridiculous’ and ‘absurd’ the idea that socialists of ALL belligerent countries should express their wish that ALL their ‘own’ governments should be defeated. On the contrary, it is a statement of this kind that would be in keeping with the innermost thoughts of every classconscious worker , and he is in line with our actities for the conversion of the imperialist war into a civil war.” (Socialism and War)

For Lenin it was not enough to say that the workers wanted an end to the war. It was necessary to add that the workers themselves, through their opposition to “their” government in the war, would bring about peace by revolutionary means, up to and including civil war.

Every victory for an imperialist power strengthens it. It strengthens its ability to oppress its own working class and the workers of other countries. It

The war against Argentina has sharply highlighted this specific inadequacy that lies at the very heart of the TILC’s founding document. As we have made clear, the WSL’s line on the war has thrown overboard a whole series of positions traditionally held by revolutionary communists - the attitude to imperialist wars, to settler populations and self-determination, and to the very nature of Lenin's theory of imperialism as applied to modern semi-colonies like Argentina.

To these questions the founding document of the TILC provides no guide but only anodyne generalities. Hence it could serve as the basis of formal unity between disparate tendencies but not as a guide to action in the sharp test of war.

We are not saying that there will never be opposed positions within an international tendency, or that an adequate programmatic document will provide “answers” to every eventuality of the international class struggle. But a difference on such a question as whether one is for or against the defeat of Argentina, reveals deep programmatic differences - on imperialism and the national question for example.

A simple choice faces the non-British sections of the TILC in its first serious test in the international class struggle. Either they will succeed in correctly resolving and accounting for the errors of the TILC in this war, or these errors will be systematised and compounded. &

weakens and demoralises the working class. Defeats, on the other hand, demoralise it, weakening its government at home and abroad. This is to be welcomed and should be furthered by the workers who should fight intransigently for their own interests even in war time.

This does not mean that,.in an imperialist war, revolutionaries favour a victory of a foreign imperialist. That is to miss the essence of Lenin’‘s policy. Trotsky explained what Lenin meant, “Unscrupulous enemies have tried to interpret this to mean that Lenin supposedly approved collaboration with foreign imperialism in order to defeat dongestic reaction. In fact, what he was talking about about was a parallel struggle by the workers of each country against their own imperialism, as their Primary and most immediate enemy.” (Lenin and

- oDes

The slogan, ‘The Main Enemy is at Home” is entirely applicable for an inter-imperialist war. {t does not mean that, ‘my enemy’s enemy is my friend’’, merely that it is not the principal enemy. It is the principal enemy that has to be fought and that means organising to defeat it by revolutionary means.

At the heart of this position is a complete rejection of patriotism in the imperialist countries. Patriotism implies that there is a national unity, a common cause of the bosses and the workers. This is a falsehood. The only thing that the workers of an imperialist country have in common with their bosses is geographical proximity. Patriotism, in these circumstances, precisely means saying that the bosses, and workers, of another country are the main enemy. The implications of patriotism are that, for the course of the war, differences with One’s own bosses should be set aside. This is why the ‘social patriots’ in the Labour Party entered coalition governments during two world wars — to unite the nation. The workers’ interests were sacrificed — Labour bitterly attacked miners who went went on strike over pay in the Second World War on the grounds that they were sabotaging the war effort.

In fact, patriotism means defending British imperialism’s “right” to exercise political and financial dominance over other countries. As Lenin argued, “Social chauvinism (i.e. patriotism in the ranks of the workers’ movement —WP) which is, in effect, defence of the privileges, the advantages, the right to plunder and pillage, of one’s ‘own’ (or any) imperialist bourgeoisie, is the utter betrayal of all socialist convictions.’’(Socialism and War)

Concretely, a rejection of patriotism and the call for defeatism in an imperialist country, like Britain, ina war, would mean no political support at all for the government waging the war. Communist MP’s would denounce the war in Parliament, vote against the government and against granting ita penny for the defence of imperialism. It would also mean building warking class action against the war — by blacking military supplies, calling demonstrations and strikes against the war, agitation amongst the troops-‘against the war and against the privileges and rights of their officers.

Of-course, the cry that rings out when such slogans are raised is that we are betraying ‘‘our boys” who are fighting. The wretched and reformist “Militant’s stand on the Malvinas conflict gives this refrain, a refrain more familiar from the mouths of Healey and Callaghan, a “Marxist’’ colouration. “Our boys” become “workers in uniform”: “‘The LPYS (controlled by Militant - WP) recognises that rank and file members of the armed forces are ‘workers in uniform’ “ (Militant 16/4/82).

The logic of this position was made perfectly clear at a Labour Party meeting in London when a! supporter of Workers Power moved a resolution calling on the Parliamentary Labour Party to oppose any wer credits to the government. A Militant supporter countered this with the pro-imperialist argument that to vote against credits would leave the “workers in uniform” defenceless. Such elaborate logic is designed for one purpose alone —

to justify Militant’s refusal to oppose the war.

What they oppose is simply the Tories’ prosecution of the wer. They make their battle cry the call

for a general election, without saying whether or not a Labour government so elected should immediately and unconditionally end the fighting,“ In Britain we demand a general election and the coming to power of a Labour government on a socialist programme as a means of appealing to Argentine workers.” (Militant 21/5/82)

Lenin’s stogan “turn the imperialist war into a civil war’ is rendered more profound by the Militant’s cry — turn the imperialist war by Britain into a vote winning issue for Labour!

It was an easy jump for Militant, therefore, into the camp of the right wing of the Labour movement. Denownetg Benn and Hart for their calls for the withdrawal of the fleet, the Militant praises the chauvinist stand taken by the National Union of Seamen “Despite their hatred of Thatcher the majority of workers have felt a sense of solidarity and sympathy for ‘our boys’ at war ... The support for the war and the hatred for Thatcher both came out, for example, at the annual conference of the National Union of Seamen where delegates overwhelmingly supported the Task Force, but, at the same time, gave loud applause to general secretary Jim Slater when he delivered a stinging rebuke to Thatcher.” (Militant 28.5.82)

Slater's anti-Tory demagogy was a handy smokescreen for his rabid chauvinism — and the Militant portray this as a more honourable stance than that taken by people calling for the withdrawal of the fleet. Militant may not explicitly support the war. They have yet to prove themselves to be unconditionally against it.

Their shameful excuse about defending “‘workers in uniform” is only that — an excuse for chauvinism. Let’s be clear , the British Army is NOT a conscript army, is not made up of ‘workers in uniform’. Of course, young men are recruited from_ the working class, driven to become professional killers by a capitalism that can offer them no useful work and would pauperise them if they stayed on the dole. However, once in the professional army army, these young workers are inculcated with a discipline and ideology that is absolutely proimperialist. Their actions are necessarily proimperialist in every wer they fight. We are in favour of agitation to try to break them from their weys of thought. We ere for freternisation to win them to the side of the workers. This cannot be done by conceding thet the British Army is simply «

done by breaking up that army, destabilising it through trade unionisation of the ranks and the formation of soldiers’ committees. However, even with the formation of such bodies, as long as the political control of the army lies with the capitalist state, we will always and absolutely oppose the military use of that army by imperialism. To do otherwise would be to concede that the imperialist wer can be justified from a working class standpoint. It cannot.

The “our boys” argument and the “workers in uniform” argument are, therefore, patriotic deceptions. They can only weaken working class opposition to the war and strengthen its imperialist prosecutors.

The peoples of the imperialised world have not been simply passive spectators of the brazen acts of robbery perpetrated against their countries by the Great Powers.

Resistance to imperialist domination has been a major source of war in the twentieth century. As - Marxists we do not, in any way, equate such wars— always objectively anti-imperialist when fought against an imperialist power— with inter-imperialist conflicts. The war waged between Vietnam and the USA, or between the forces struggling for a united, independent Ireland against Britain, are wars waged against imperialist domination itself.

The present world order of exploitation and oppression is a product of the plunder of the world by the institutions of imperialism. Massive profits are drained from the exploited states by the dominant imperialist states. A chain of military bases and murderous client dictatorships underwrite this system with the threat and reality of armed force. The working class in the imperialist countries has a common interest with the peoples of the imperialised world in destroying the imperialist order that is its exploiter too. Therefore whenever the forces of the oppressed take up arms against imperialism, Marxists in the imperialist countries do not simply declare that ‘““The main enemy is at home”. In the Vietnamese and Irish wars, for example, they had to declare that those fighting ‘our class enemy” - the National Liberation Front or the IRA - were in fact “our allies”, were waging a struggle against imperialism which we support. “The main enemy is at home” - yes, but also “‘Our allies are those who fight them’’!

The ultimate source of all that is reactionary in the present world order is the imperialist system itself. Only its destruction can pave the way to a new world system founded on the international solidarity of the working class and oppressed masses. Only its destruction will destroy the material and military base of the vicious military dictatorships that, as a rule, turn the imperialised countries into prison camps to facilitate imperialist plunder.

Because imperialism is the basis of the present world order, Marxists therefore have no hesitation in supporting wars against imperialist powers waged by oppressed peoples. We place no conditions on that support. As a rule those struggles are led, at least in their initial stages, by forces who have no intention of establishing the world order that revolutionary Marxists advocate. Petit bourgeoise nationalists, Stalinists and clerical nationalists have all proved capable of inflicting blows against imperialism without being able to destroy the beast itself. In such struggles, therefore, revolutionary Marxists organise to ensure that the working class and peesants - with their own independént organisations and revolutionary party - fight for leadership in the struggle against imperialism. __

We are not uncritical and passive supporters of the leaders of anti-imperialist wars. But we say thet the task of overthrowing reactionary leaders in the camp of the oppressed and exploited is a task of the oppressed and exploited themselves not of the armies of imperialism. Therefore we do not meke the overthrow of such leaders a condition of our full support for the war against imperialism. We unite with such leaders and fully participate im the war - but with our own slogans and organisations. Defeat for imperialism is our prime and driving objective in an armed clash between the armies of an imperialist and imperialised state. By playing full role in such a struggle the communists can win the confidence and leadership of all the toilers, and carry through the struggle to the socialist revolution.

What is at stake in the war over the Malvinas? The military government of a dependent semi-colony has struck out to seize a British colony off the Latin-American coast. It does so not because it itself is anti-imperialist, but because the mass of Argentines historically see the existence of the British colony as an affront to their national rights. The ailing junta hoped to repair its tattered image and recoup the initiative at home, which it wes losing in the face of intensifying working class opposition to its rule. It hoped that its loyal services to Haig and Reagan would insure it against imperialist attack and enable it to pose as a victor against imperialism, to the dependent and imperialised Argentine people. This is the contorted and contradictory rsed that led an agent of imperialism to strike a blow at imperialism itself.

Reactionary forces being driven into conflict with imperialism is not a new phenomenon. In Turkey in the early 1920s, Kemal Attaturk, the butcher of the Armenian people, found himself at the head of a national revolution, and in a bitter proxy conflict with British imperialism, then using its Greek pawn. In China, Chiang Kai Shek, a murderer of workers and communists, led a nationalist struggle against the Japanese, a struggle communists were duty bound to support. The motives of these men in waging their wers did not matter one jot to side im the wer? “

war, not _ causes or pretexts of that war, or the political character of the regimes fighting that war. We do not think that Chiang Kai Shek was any better than Galtieri. Both men were (and are) enemies of their own working class and it was the task of the Chinese working class,ris the task for the Argentine wor-

members of the armed forces are ‘workers in uni-

HH fe

nt

Sees | 5 ==

Militant’s view that the armed wing of the state is composed of “workers in uniform” leads them both to accept chauvinism during war-time, and to fail to realise that the armed forces

lain that p at the wringi re - hands and pious decane. : ¢. tions of “bring back the fleet’? cannot change , anything. Marxists in the 5 labour movement try to * Faise the level of under- : ee net the advanced ers and the worki on as a whole. A € argument is put forward that ‘it is all ery well * to talk about a genefal election and the election of a Labour government, committed to socialist policies, but we must do something Practical and immediate now.’ But what is practical , about deceiving workers into believing that there is any # quick way out of ‘stopping # the war’ or ‘bringing bac the fleet’? Ask how it -cag’ be done and there is op 5

need to be smashed. As to bringing back the fleet - WORKERS possess the power - by mass demonstrations and opposition which shake the Tories’ confidence in having “the nation” behind them, and by strike action in those industries which supply the armed forces.

king class, to settle accounts with these butchers. But both men found themselves leading their semicolonial countries into wars with imperialist powers - China in the 1930s, Argentina today.

“Who fired the first shot? “ ‘“‘What were their motives?’ “Was the war a diversion from domestic difficulties?’ These are the questions that preoccupy the muddleheads and msraiists of the reformist and the centrist left. They tell us nothing about the actual nature of the war now being fought. Is it an act of imperialist aggression by Britain against a nonimperialist power? Willa defeat for Argentina strengthen the international working class and weaken wor/d imperialism and its order, or is the opposite the case? These are the real questions to be confronted. Regardless of Galtierl s motives, we are clear that a victory for Argentina in this war would weaken imperialism. That is decisive. It enables us to say without hesitation that on Argentina’s side, this is @ just wer. Zinoviev, the Russian communist jesder, spelt this out in 1916:

defence. Imperialist wars against colonial peoples are unjust wars of aggression”.

This is the criterion we must use in the present wer.

The position to be adopted by those who claim to stand in the tradition of revolutionary Marxism

Socialist Organiser fails

The Marxist position on war is, in all truth, a difficult one to argue inside the labour movement. Britain’s imperialist past has poisoned the ranks of the movement with a heavy dose of social chauvinism. To argue for Britain’s defeat at this stage of of the conflict will earn revolutionists ferocious hostility from the reformists within the working class. To argue, as a revolutionist has to, for the victory of Argentina has led to WORKERS POWER being harassed on demonstrations and in labour movement bodies by the reformists. They have not stopped short at threatening the use of the police against us. This pressure is inevitable in the early period of a war. It has to be resisted. Ability to resist it depends entirely on the programmatic coherence and correctness of our arguments and our willingness to put forward these arguments in the Labour Party and the trade unions.

Centrists, those on the left who are revolutionary only in words, who vacillate between reform and revolution, those who will not fight for a consistent if unpopular, position for fear of splitting with their reformist friends, are incapable of resisting such pressure. They inevitably bow to it. Their “'Marxism” is skin deep, and bears only a passing relevance to their practice. Classically centrist in the present conflict are the positions put forward by the disparate and shaky alliance of forces grouped around the newspaper “Socialist Organiser’’.

From the start of the conflict, Socialist. Organiser has. set course for a position safely in the camp of Labour's peace-lobby. As we explained in the May issue of our paper, they tried first of all to ignore, or to deliberately obscure, the fact that Argentina is a dependent semi-colony. Throughout April, Socialist Organiser refused to recognise that Argentina was imperialised. This made life simple, because clutching at the 1,800 Falkland Islanders’ supposed “‘right to self-determination”, they could declare a plague on Britain and Argentina, telling them both to get their military machines away from the Falklands.

As May proceeded however, Socialist Organiser became less clear about the nature of Argentina,

_ the fleet”

though no less un-Marxist in the attitude it adopted to Argentina’s war. The May 6th Socialist Organiser offered “our support to the Argentine workers for a genuine anti-imperialist struggle against the banks and the multi-nationals - and against Galtieri”. Does this mean that Argentina is imperialised? Martin Thomas at the end of May tried to resolve the issue when he revealed with dazzling insight that “Argentina is not an imperialist big power like Britain” (SO 27/5/82) Magnificent! But unfortunately he didn’t see fit to unveil any more of his wisdom. Is it then a /itt/e imperialist power? Or not imperialist at all? It has taken Socialist Organiser over two months to tie themselves in ever more intricate knots on this question. And they still have not come up with an unambiguous answer.

Whatever the nature of Argentina - a little imperialism that can wage an anti-imperialist struggle, perhaps - it isn’t really a problem for Socialist Organiser. Under pressure from the International Workers League (who sent SO statements of their position for publication), and, perhaps, the voices of their own collaborators in Italy and the USA, Socialist Organiser had to concede that it was theoretically feasible that Argentina could wage anti-imperialist struggles and Britain could wage imperialist wars, even from the Falklands. But Socialist Organiser insisted that this was not the character of the war that was actually taking place over the Malvinas.

Britain's armed response was explained by the election-conscious Socialist Organiser as a ‘‘war to save the face and the prestige of Thatcher’ (SO 6/5/82) - doubtless from the forward march of the left of the British Labour Party. Imperialism’s eye for mineral resources in the area could be discounted as a motive: “‘developing the oilfields »f the South Atlantic is a task for decades, and can hardly be guaranteed by Britain these days through sending (13/5/82).

It is conceded that Britain might use the Falklands as a military base against anti-imperialist struggles...one day! “‘It is of course possible to imag ine circumstances where an attack on these imperialist interests in Argentina - through expropriations and the repudiation of debts to Western bankers -

would seem simple enough. We support any blow that weakens our mortal enemy - imperialism and its ability to police and exploit the world. Imperialism without the Malvinas would be weakened to the extent that its direct access to a military base ‘rom which to police Latin America and to prospect ‘or mineral wealth would have been limited or surtailed.

It is because thisiis what was at stake that Thatcher sent the fleet, and Reagan, Schimdt and Mitterand gave her their blessing. They all knew that a victory for Gaitieri would have signalled to the peoples of the imperialised world that their jailer and explaiter was growing weaker, that the property and investments of imperialism were ripe for seizure.

A defeat for Britain would therefore be a blow for the oppressed against imperialism. That is why we have called for Britain’s defeat. However, on the battlefields of the Malvinas and in the waters of the South Atle itic, defeat for Britain must meen wictory tor Argentina, tor its right to repossess the : Bete

precisely because Britain and Argentina are not bo imperialist powers, because we are not experiencing a re-run in miniature of the inter-imperialist wers that have ravaged the globe this century, but @ highly contradictory, but none=‘teless real. wer of an imperialisea’ nation against imperialism.

the test

might conceivably have triggered off a military response from Britain or the USA, in the course of which there might have been an attempt by the imperialists to use the Falklands as a base for their operations” (6/5/82).

But don’t worry, Reg Race or Tony Benn, this is only idle musing. on the part of Socialist Organiser. Thatcher's war is about saving her prestige! It is about boosting the flagging fortunes of Margaret Thatcher's Tory Party, not about imperialism at all! The Argentine junta, for its part is not waging an anti-imperialist struggle. Only if Britain shot first from her island base in the Malvinas, against a regime that was expropriating imperialist assets would our Socialist Organiser “Marxists” consider it defensible for the Argentine army to seize the islands. Given that no-one was expropriating stocks in Argentina. Given that Britain was minding its own business in South Atlantic, and 1800 kelpers were doing no one any harm in settling a base that “could’’ be used to wage imperialist aggression, given all these things, it is Galtieri who has disturbed the peace and thrown a “red herring’ into relations between Britain and Argentina. Because, after all, the Falklands “were not an outpost for British domination of Argentina’ (SO 6/5/82).

If Britain had been using the Falklands to direct imperialist operations, then Socialist Organiser declares that “In such a situation, plainly an Argentine invasion of the Faiklands would have been part and parcel of a genuine anti-imperialist struggle, and would have to be defended” (6/5/82). But nothing of the sort had happened! The Argentine

‘junta fired the first shot, thankfully allowing

Socialist Organiser to slip off into social pacifism: “But instead the whole invasion has been a red herring designed purely and simply to divert the Argentine workers away from their mounting mass struggles against the junta” (6/5/82).

This position explains the war in terms of Thatcher's and Galtieri's policies. \t ignores the rapacious logic that compels imperialism to strive for domination. It ignores the contradictions that wrack national bourgeoisies in the imperialised

CONTINUED ON PAGE 6>

See

THE BRITISH ATTACK on the Malwinas-Falkland islands is an act of umitigated imperialist iggretion against Argentina. This war is being fought to defend British land US) finance capitwi economic domination over Argentina itself. ft np being fought ta defend Britain's control ower the natural resources on and around the is lanes, and over the potential wealth of Antaretim. Thatcher has gone to war to defend a vital military base for imperialisn in the defence of its workewide interests.

The perersls, scimirois and hard-nosed mam of the City eurt Thetcher's Task Foros to demonstrate in Ar geetinian bined that no third world country can threat om Gee Intereets of imperialem in ory part of the gioien, That is why the blood-stained Fengan adminia wates ond the vulture of Europeen enperinlism have iecked tha murderous acranture of Mergeret Thatcher. (Whee in ot eteke bs enpertetionm's ability to police ard euptoet the world.

Tie wor bes lit ep with » flesh of gunfire, the @mole political terrain of British society. The Gellicoose Tory back-benchers, the gung-ho adeninils and the hyfGertcal ‘Sun’ newspaper heave proved to be tha vaica ot the boy rgecsia determined to defend its interests ina crits They are not heughstve eeargineliged eanks, The aetene Tory negotiation and the Libera! and Latour G@eceniza have either fallen sila, changed their tune oF Grooped into hetobes mutterings.

The Labour party's right wing leadership have res- @ecced to ihe war Ina predictable faghion, Healgy, Seore, Sidkin and F.cot howe constituted thenesiver a Che lameur mckment’s very on war-pearty. They mrery @ewearicate more thar the Tories, but they are me lees Say tO SuopoOrt avery military action oothoried by Thetcher of Admiral Woocyverd ome it hae tke place, i office there iy hitthe dowbt that they would outhorise Sect action thempetes, The leadership of the Laban Party had long been, and remains, 3 guardian of Gritain’s Setiondl, imperialist interest, Their commitment to In ferewtional working class unity expressed in their mem haestap of (he Second (Soscaedig:! internancenal, lea

Labour and the Malvinas =

LABOUR’S WAR PARTY

decnethe® mtlic mot # coal and operative prences. Ire deed thls eer finds the Latin American bureau of ihe Bono [irra suporting Aurgentina’s aan Ee the Mahim, wthide Poot ha denounced that claim: “There leno question in the Fallane idends of any cob one! dependence or anything of the port.”

The followersof the Sociahet internathonal, as happened in 1814-18, flog) thecmehad anemnieso! each other Of Sipe pice of a ehooting war. Foot mid Healey hava, by their ection, confinmed that the Latour Party ia party for the bom. Anyone with: lingerng doubts on this score should ponder tha full implications of Michael Footy each on April Jed. Without a thought for the interests of British or Qugentinian workers he placed the Labour Parry et Thatcher's dapoced arid goaded her into teking ‘action’:

“We are parmanently concormed, like | an sure the bulk ef the Hows... wbout what we can do to protect those who raghthy and meturally look to ws for protactlon. So for thay have bean betrayed. The responsibility Yor the betrmyel rests with the Gowermmant. The Gay ernment must now prov by daad=they will newer be able to do @ by words—thet they are mot responsible for the betrayal and cannot bo faced with that charge.” (Hansard Vol 71 Mo BZ),

Thatcher obliged by sending the task farce tao days later. Sings then, dete occasional Gu ninete at the thought of the fleet being used, Foot.and Healey hove ood by thale initial suppord for Che Gowerrerreent:

On their behalf Labour Weekly esqelained:

“The logic of sanding the taek farce waa that ite vary frength would be enough to bring an Argentina withdrpeel trom tha Falklands aed get thet Junta to pepe: ioge.” (Tih Mary BZ).

But when that fasled the other logic of sending the mak farce, when was mace clear by Thatcher from the very Geginming, became clear—it attacked the Malvinas, anc Foot and Hoalmy supperted it

Dennis Healey, the man whe has apparently taken over from Foot a: the lacing public epokeaman for Labouron thie iewe, hed, in the time honoured feshian, dressed up this impeerialiat acweniure as a noble couse: “The Gadeee of Hake bn the Felklands—human rights,

olf determination, redistance to aggression and support for the United Aeetions Charter are good and worthy. They ore the onty causes for whieh amy Labour Gevernr mont would eer ask cur people to risk their lives” (Labour Weekly 2ith May 871.

Heoley added that without the task force

“Danoency andl socinken would hava lost our voice in tha work”

Perhaps Healey can eaploin how the sinking of the ‘General Belgrano’ —an eet he ban refused to condermn— whieh wos 200 miles eey from the reeredt teak force gues veel, wee blow for democacy and socialem? The Winton Eeeagery by Theceethy pera huntersteiMer aubrrarine thet thet the fleet in in the South Atlantic aan amiery of beperisiiem and agent of death. Woodweed and hit. oracles dew ot Aoted for thale cornet: mant to chrmecrmcy, bet some socialiem,

Hesley") other “cour ot ptale by tha confiect ere, sindlariy, ore ‘Tha @eve found coecern for human rights eheaglel ben eames apeirert Laer’ meerd In otficm Dearkeg the 197s one third of Argeritina's military mpl came from Britain, Between 1876 ond (SPS, ache Leto LE eoporte to Aungaer tira daub —traen £63 milfios werth to E128 million. Mog: of thes: eperte were the gruesome array of gura and srmimunition that tha Junta needed to repress the Arpentinan working clam. Lasbour's support far the dunt wee geen during ite biondlest year That is why we think thet thee claim by bourgeais trash, like Healey and Sitkin, to mappert Whe amack on the Malvinas inthe interest of opposing feecem are ehamefl lide

Ths call for eel? cesermingtion arkd redietece 1 aggression dio net end up to serious saamination. Selt Geterninetion if a principle that the lobour leadership have Piloed “our paomde's tvs" to suppress, marcy times in many ooettries On television Healey toasted shoul Labour's roda-in Borneo in putting down o nationalist rebatlion. Mor racently Labour puthoriaed thea ise ot treat tn Aden and Ireland to kik and bru taliee people who wereéere fighting far the right to eelf determination. Ag: for resistance to aggression Healey must be asked to explain why Labour fully supported American agordision in Viena and why it ued thousands of

poleoe to etteck demonstratom protesting in Britain ower.

that aggression. In point of fact naltherof these prin Gla apply inthe Malvicds, Healey hes invoked them 05 DOMVenont OMewEee TO pathly Ale, and Foot's, servile Guard for an imperialirt wer against an “upstart' nation.

The one position onwhich Hexdey has been oonsistant is the céaeend for @omagor rale for the UAL Uintike the Jefts who dress this demand up-as on aliennative to wer, Hasley clearly recognime: if at a means of securing 8 favourable cutcoene fram the war, He declared in Parliament om fiy 20th:

“Wie would imsist that any now military setione ened aloe be deeigiead to criete the possibility of more fruitful

fefivl: -(teeit Pee ee

LABOUR’S LEFT: FOR BR

THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of tha Labour left hae lined up behind Foot and Healey throughout the Malvines cris. The Tribune

a) ume BO inn i

wl magait tani’ Fiber AOR aay tha tarideat ot comglaints. Only after seven weees, six pariiar motery debater and hundreds of deaths, dict 23 Lanour MPs have the alementary courage to wote epeinet Thatcher's imperialist outrape—and their eumber included noted rightists like Faulds, Galyell and Abse!

Apsloginis trem the ranks of the pro-Benn lett ieee been guick ta point to contingent rossons for Cee tellus to organies eflectivaly ageine! the war. Sep Recs excused his own impotence thus:

“The lett, having lost control of the Notional Executive, Geetiel mot uaa the Party machinery to win support tar @emonstrstions snd action ageing! the government." (Latboer Herd 7th May 82), London Labour Briefing Saened tha Labour Letts failure to mobdliaa slgnificant eben agar the wer on the local etection Gimpaiges: “Beceuse of the council elections, few constituency aertim hed the oppartonity te meat amd condemn the gemeort of Labour's front bench for this imperialist wet, But pow the elections are aut of tha way, wa core fetenthy expect » flood of resolutions dencending that the "eet be recalled aed calling oA the Labour leadar: whip to abandon its chauvinist and omgerislist ance.” ures 1982).

ie Ape (Minha |

These excuses reveal a great deal. If Race a soyling that the lett meds to contre! the MEC before it can enobiline ageing? ther war then hes admitting to the chrgniq wera of the bet mapper in the foal ies, about the war and Instead carting on capturing the HEC. But the tact ig thet if Benn, Race, Hart adit had put out repeated calls tor actlan, had feriaualy attempted to mobilise, and repeatedly voted against the goverment’ bower plans from day ona of the Tak Force's diipstch then the antiavvar mayameant would be far atronger. And the labour movement could have been faved tha derearnliging wews of chauvinist poison that fat Deen unleaded upon it

As for Labour Griefing’s argument—if the Labour Forty had mode the war threat an issue in the local olsetoni—inétead of brushing it under the carpet—than the @eelion cam peigns themselves could haya beoorne & focus for anti-war work. instead the ‘left’ council cheer ber cretine want to get on with getting elected first, and then opoose the warl!

Acomrding to Latour Weekly, a omere 100 resotutions coreg Che wer have been sent to the ME in ta months of crisis: OF those only halt supported the call for a -retunn of the Meet, Time and momentum have been leet, They will both be-difficutt to make up mot: wethstanding Briefings belated call te tur fara électionaoring to Dinlding on-antivwas movement,

But the weekness of the “hefte' is not the reault of these contingent factors. The truth is that they are mo mateh for Foot and Thateher becauwe they there the Behe Surin on which the murderous adventure has been justified by the warmongers. They share the objecthwas-af the Thatcher and Pym. They object only fo the means being adogted to achieve these enck,

Qeepite their emotional appecis to internateonalism at heart they Gerive their standpoint fram their ovn purely national viesvpaint They constanily fear.to ‘divide the mation’, to injure the national interset or ba enn To oppose ‘our pay” ered “Gur Bays’, Speaking in Trefalgar Square on May 23rd Benn attempted ta turn PATFiptic support for ‘our’ tregpa ageing Thatcher and Pym “Tho whe gogak out for peios are called traitors by minidiers who eodd arms to the fascist junta, to kill our mean inthe Patklands now.”

They shore the view of Food and Healey that there awe, @ Britigh mation, within which the wartords, the prees chiefs and the mass of the working clase can have a common interest, This mins they are powerless in the toch of the patriotism spewed fram the grass. They denounce patriatic ‘moos’, as ‘jingoiam' bul are uretide to challenge the furetamertal aesumetian of the Patriotic poaen, bdewewer it is presented.

Genesth the verbiage the letts dittarences with Faget and Thatcher are ovnr riearis, mot each, deer TRETIGR fot strategy. They howe consistantly ar gies) thet Che ube of forot was Premature ard Thad thers vere alternative

ree aoe for forcing the Aurgentiniens to relinquish

Lheir clairm to-the Malvinas. Tine lett howe parce hdr Thies

(Network!

heise Davies

McDonald, voles of tia boses’ meinfarnetan machine, faced fhe wd

ITISH IMPERIALIS

oo OEE: With # Dackeran oF mars

and flogs. The Mer fol cu ate sagen taken oo by tine fao-ciogs of Feet erat, wo ave analy foro wig to comp Hote both distortion ana censorship to bed ie eva,

They. fave bean at pains to express the unanimity between thera ves, Foot aac Thatcher in condemning Argentina's justified seizure of the Malvinas. Benn argue ed in the debate In Parliament as late as April 24th: Tie reality is thal there it umnenity ja Che Auge on the question of opposing the agresion of tha dunt. There ig alee umanienity on the rigit of self defence egainet aggression. "|Our empboasisl.

Gavin Strang. whe resigned over the Labour Front Bench's suppart for The imesion argued:

The feaad ho resist the agression by the fascist junta not in dispute” Here ee hove two leading “anti-ear’ spakeoten voicing support for “resistance” oF "sal? defence —Wwhleh can only moan war at poms stage. Countless simelar statement: papper Trlbune ond tha apeechies of the betts. Wihat is revealed bry thie i¢ thal they -oppdee the wer moe, rot from o position of firm prine| ples but beesuse other options have nat yet been tried, Bat onte you safiport Britain's right to maintain a colony off Latin America and deay Argentina's rigttt to defeat British aperialism and its places to exploit themilitary ened minera’ potential of the ragion then wabet le qpaur ree! diilferenos with Thatcher and Foot? The lefts hewe Gathered and blegtedatroaut the need For negotiation rather than military confrontation. What They Tai to understand i he yer ane negation are not alternatives or appasites, War i the continuation of the policy of negotisteon by vialemt means. Thatcher, Holey, Pym and Foot all koce that. Having failed to pantade Argentina out of the Molvings, ard subseque niby having felled fo nexiabe Argentine cut with the backing of the armed Task Force they have gone to wor ee Beat lifPee cot.

What would happen whe, of if, The Angeniiniane refuted to leave the Malvings 3 a result of negotiations \ihat would Labour's ancieaor dobby oo then? Wouk? they concedes delet? To do sowould Ge to concede the impotence of ther can imperialism an lrnaperial lan Theat they ane the i by Pirdinee, feat nonetheless real threacds—ideology, jobs, lifestyle. hore likely in th forg Tarm these heroes are heroines of padce would ‘reluctantly’ march the working css into waar, justityli Ib aS a crude against faecal ore tylng the worker to the interes! of the class enemy. This coritradiction liet et the heart of tho lefts positions.

The only conststent basis for opposing Thatcher's advantre ip to oppo poor and branch Britain's right to decide the fate of the Falklands anc this must mean Sup peor te ng Argantina’s reght to prevent Britain determining the future of the Mealvings. The moabous hil Kinnock is, for once, right when the argues:

“TF paola beslieve thet the aggression is pmportant | whieh the boft ofl say they do—eds) than they earmat aonpe the mnagnitlon thet tore 6s necteeriy te gine meaning to aconernic and di skermatic pressure agebnst 8 fascest state” [Tribune 2th May 1882).

The lett cetarmists hoge—de they doin all altuethor: of conflict at hema and intemationally, that nespotiatlong. and bargeining ill aches their desired anc. Their main erphasls bas been on settling via the United! Nations which the leftinvokes ae ifit ware a beneeolent fairy godmother, quarasteding hone dealing. hannony and justice. But even if [he Linited Nations did correspennd to the fantasies of the bet wwe would still have to tneat on one prineipie against them-

a soca Sener a fot

Begetionions that we have heel till nw.” Seely s sires on negotiation: nfiect: hia concern for Seiniaining imperlaliat cabpy in the aftermath of the Ser. In carticuier Healey aod the Labour lendenhips ay an iportuint pole as mouthpiece of American poi: ond concerns in the Britigh mulling class, Arerbea, sy rotthed by the imeact that the war is having Bn ita reactionary plana for Central ena] South Americn ies the need fora megotinted, hopefully amicsbie Bluthon. (1 reeqgnien thet thin pill have to be achieved ter its imperiaiest ally hes trounced Argentine, Then md cnby than, con equilirium be restored via imperialfs equivalent of ACAS, the United Maticns, Holey bm roiisbie agent for acd preescutor of this line. He is feel known Athentocig im the Labour Party. He supp: ts the proPentagon Labour Commiattes for TrareetBrthe Understending—racantly given a £22,000) handmetby NATO. This strategy for pce bee & LN ele Sent, ib nothing more then a suotie way of ne-ameerting he impersiist order of things throughout the world, ‘The feet 6 thot the LM ha no rode within the pre ea conflict for one sinple ranapn—the Mabeinae ae Regentina's. They are Latin dumerioan islands, stolen hom Argentina and held since, by British iemperiadisn a8 calls for UN truneeehic, oF adenininmtion abacure his basic trth. Thee is whet Heeley eid Foot ere ot gins to deny. They cannot sccept Argentina's claim es tia challange to Imperiale. They are woerigd, hey eer, about the potentially dismaiegu: effects that ihe wer could bares to cvere!! emperiolart Mebdlity. Meanece fear emphasis on the UA—the ‘fairest’ means by which hey can dary the justified national cinima of Argentina “OG Diriciler feekion with the WN—he eettlorid t fvelve times in one short intenwiew on Weekend Woric— iso desperste and aickaning attempt bya Sees mongrel” 60 cisguiee the fect that he has become we of the dogs of warl

The leadership of the Labour Party are willing anc ager to were the Gacond Internedi¢nal a bhoodstained enner of sock! cheuvineem br sepport of Thatchar's ear. They have declared thernmatves in favour of erecy NUiEry acshon That Per tatk force hat undertaken. They ae rafueed (oO press to 8 fote their cen feeble domand ora UN settlement, fearing that thiewoukd unceerrine ational unity. They haves denounced the 33 MPs who are prepared to vote against Thatcher. Poot, with the miling approvnl of Thatcher and Hewley, sacked throe font iach spokesmen who voted against the invasion,

fn short Foot ancl Healey, by legiternising the var ave os erell, begitimmnd the Thatcher Government he enormous boenst imi Popularity far the Tories chee- (reels thie. A MOA L Economist poll has reeled

Incmsedd support bor ths Tones emanget skilled Pra dal workers aod young voters—both téctions of society that hove been hit in many reapeecta by the Torte pol

ici, Such polls are not entirely black propaganda, They

do retioct the fact thet Labour's Buber? for the Torna over the key imue of var, hosstrengthaned the overall position of the Tesrieg, Well cone Foot and Healey!

Net analy haw you been uneble fo mount an opposition to the Thatcher Government, you hive also helipad © build hw gel Glecter lly crecial prepa of support for thet Government,

Of cours Healey and Foot will’ claim that they had

ne choice in the matter Thewer miged the question of The naonal Imbert and, of avays, Labour pute Lhe ‘faetion before the concerns of the working class: As Headey put it

“Wie wanted the tesk force to be sent because the Brit ih gOeermment—ond nation—had to megotiote with a vicious and violent regime.” Labour Woukly 26th Mary 82}.

The ‘nation’ and government are really equated, But this ‘nation’ includes health worker cumenthy being fought by this “government, (0 iicledes over 3 million Becofe whose daemployment benefits ape about to be subject (0 4 vicious tax by this government. It includes over 1 million trade unianiete whose rights to. defend themeelves ora about to be removed by this government Ao Mr C14 agent Healey this government is not qur feverment. This nation ie nat our nation, bn pace an in war this mation is owned lack Hack and bared by ‘De Ercrsaes dnd benkers.

The crist has saan the most nakedhy aggressive. fac on of the British nuling class risa to dominance. They howe Thed the Tory wets to their chariot wheels, But mone of this would heve bean posible witha! the ona en wappent that the Latour leaders heave gvento Thatch and Pym, The plocemonger’ Foot,a fig we Both ludicrous ard repulsiva, has endersed every Section of the Tory havi ane “the right hongumbla jody" in the Parliamentary debates. He has cluckedd in-

ofeciually stout the United Nations, pleaded dor more

information ond, whens Thatcher hes saad no, a6: quissoed in ard mupported the Tories actions,

T het Dea hope oF lhe Labour faders shanwa thet (he Right winger who bead the dour mrvercent—Healey, Foot, Callaghan, MoCluskey—will betray the warking clas movement into the hanck of the class enemy at. all crucial junctures, [in fact these men ere not the reget wing of ‘aur movement’, thay are the ‘lett wing" of the cies enemy. Thoy are agente of the bousas, financi#n and generals—iood of the blood and bone of the bone of tha Tory-Liberal-3OP seransa of capital.

7 _. ‘

Be ek Ban ae

seg eg

i, AGAINST ITS WAR

ee ee | riba ge aaa Pelee Cha

Benin ond the nest of the artheeyvar Lelsourttes progose SOmomiet samctions a a mane of achieving Thetoher's ac of bringing down Galtier! and forcing the Brith Poccution of the Falkiend ilande It is pathetic fatal thindcing for Socialist Organiser to claim im one f their becremsingly frequent whitewashas of Bern that, he hee et taken up the call for economic sanctions: Socislie Ovganieer re 85), Bann has woken up to tha pct thet Argentins ies dependent country in heck to he imperialist banks ta the tune of £18 billion, much fwhech it owed to Britian, Bonn and the lett realise hat debt repayments of £6 billion a yaar—amounting 5 SOX of Argentina's APO REN ger THT The ender: could cripole Argentina by calling im these debts. hut Bonn argued on Moy 20th in Partiamant:

We should step. up the einctions on Ampentina. Finecial and economic ginctions combined with the train fee of tho islands to a UN responsibility will salmon artainiy bring Galther| down."

Bann the groat civiliser rationalise his vention of nmariallet pressure by suggesting that it will bring own “fasciern’, Dot Bern pericuealy think thar if line erinlien topples Galtier’ it will do so in order te usher 1a Workers paradise, The banks, a¢ Turkey shoved, all protect thetr intersiia egeirat tha workers by what: wer means they can. They dre ino ally of the Angentinim werking dias, Chnly that class, not a grand alliance @ Benn and tha banks, can bring down Galtier! and solace him with worker rife,

This fa pot the position of Benn ard Abse oboe, ti jmivece ted by the meee “Infantile bettlet’ Trine aa rel i decdared eigety:

The Argentinian regime is.orcutany wulneable to somamic presure."” (7th May E2—our eenphuasial. scullarty imporialised! And for the left, docording to Thane the teak ib to resdsart Wmperialiet dorminetion ef mot by bloodshed! | Littl: wonder then thet the

efta have, so for, eeobilised pitifully smiallond. strangeiy eailey forces behind them on their Sunday demanfations. The lefts ideological incoherence has meant fl they have, of necauity, bean indaciive and aon wart.

The right have certainly dithered but they have en united in their support far the actunntibre aa it che oped. The lntt hava dithered ard been divided. Trotsky iicrbed thit feature of the left in 1926 In terra that ould bt aecuratal'y applied ta benn, Tribune and thalr Sliowrers tocky:

The party continue: to be led by extreme right wingwt. This is explained by the fact that the party canned a rostricted ty Various lef ventures, but is bound ta are a generalised system of politica. The bet wingers ave No syclomn, their vary nature prowents this. The ight wingers have a oostem: they have behind thom mtion, pperiqncs, routine, od most birporiaed, all fl, bourgaoks: society ag a whole 9 thiecing for thom id thrisgts teedy made decisions under thar niece. MecDonald has only te trandete Balcevin'’s or Lloyd

Se) eee re rg oe Pe erp The 7 ore water cna Seep che brew ingt igen the ars come fran hear lack of cahesin from their ideobogecal shapalesness.

Whether youre for tear againet it it oy ite wary Miurower domands car and pracie annyert, The

lott were Geogrred, Ip elvence, from giving such smawers.

Orn ell the key cous, Wherefore, there has bern canfusion—and that confusion has obstructed the bulkding of |r antievor movernoet.

The tnitial reiponse of! many on the le ft wes bo Blame the incompetence of the Tories—Labour, thoy crowed, handled oolonial attains better than the Tories, Voleran pate cimgwigner Fink: Alison ve obviously distressed that warships had not been sent oerly enough wihean hit sabe in Parllarnent= “The Tory gowarnen@et got ue in this cree. bf they had acted woeks age thir stustion would not Rave arisen.” By ‘acted” be presumably means do what Labowr did, In 787? send don some frigates ane) “hueyter-killer® aubmaerineé to ‘show the flag’, This sense of shocked, colonial pride la shared by Rag Face. in the face of & Porential war Fe wae Ditter dbowt oof being prepared Peer iE:

“F leat, wa rut hammer the government for procre timation and their failure to deter the Galtier! regina” The reasoning behind the Allan! Race fine of thought 8 taiely predectethe and wee most cheecly voiced by Tribune (16th April Gz: |”

“Far Labour thé task is now bo go in for the kill), . Labour should grasp the chance te show that we will defand Britih ltereste ina way which dows not thraaten the peor ot tho world, but dom mot eqnrrom ie with dictaters.” Tha practical proposals of this operstlon are lent yague—the intention is not.

The lett waindy hoped the ‘hnconmpadtence” Gegurment

woh pecaye ae elector! gift invan atmosphere of chauw

iniem. The labour left were hoping te gain pogulerity at tho polls Oy playiag on Labour's reputstion os the eOmpetemt colonialist party. The problem tor the loft is that this line was-only credible if they, Gke Feet, were willing To 90 The whole way and support a colonlal wate, ge Bethe late than never, Gut this would be to eile credit for the whole opermtion to a ooencially victorious Thetchor. Thus, aneo the thet wes well pep the way and fighting ioomed, the left looked to other 88 tO pin their banner to.

Opposition to the flant wasn issue on whieh Leb curs antiaawar forces could dltance therselves from Thatehar, Tony Benn wae the first to coise this oil, hex an Ageril dnd when even an interruption tassuming he was not called to speak) aad question im Parliament would have shattered tha image of the chauviriist unenimity that the House of Commons presented to the nation dhat day. He waited until April 6th before mak: ing his position kmeaven:

“Nie adhticn, for whet it is worth, is thet the task force should be withdranen™

Aowover Benn wit meet prepered to proad his oppose flor te vote, Thi glowed portion an the deft ta shHt as the fleet moved south. His carly peasetlon of fleet

er i cert een erecicfed, feet Gy tacit Hart: "2 the age ee ee el etreet bud helt the tak

alning the threat of the fleet and allowing far, its future use, Afber the racaphund af South Gaggia the damarmd charged again with Bann catling for the fleet's return to... South Georgia! The final teiet cane whan Battle jane kine. The demend for o fleet withorawelhes been cropped and subetituted by the call for on immeciacn cmaeefire—o demand that| lane the feet in position.

On the moet basic antwar demand—withdrew the

fieet—the lett have aot been abba te aches covuistency.

The result hes been thet pressure for withdrawal in the hour morement i tlackening. The demand that could hewe united aofeevar forces in action wos Standaned by the betts at the decisive moment—when the fighting stated, Toa add to the contusion the ever-contusd Aag Race could fot agree with ha manter Benn ap thee question of the feet:

“There it nothing we enn de abot tha fleet now. It is therefore the wrong ifad to catrea an. The malin thing ls te fight the war danger: |Sacialist Challenge 15th April Bal

Fight the war dangee—buy lane the war machine steaming south? Surely an abaurdity, Mt le—our It ls one that

Mike Abrahams (ietwart!

aut fhortare feat ane! Hav? ibattova onn

taken by the Rolls Royce workers the Britheh Aerospace

wn be sadly explained. This orofeeonel pobticm aed enerhey Geet hes 9 comopties of werk

workers, thaenginees, who supply the fleet weth every thing it ga! From cand pf bear to San oll mission Action by such worker would Uring ihe fleet aac, Gut te une suchaction thre workers woold hove to be won tod combebentl aniewar positian, Aged iti preity that thet Bern, Aeoce eno the others are incopetbe of dolnge Tad ina tangés of patrietic. demoacrote and pacifist impulses, The lefts heave prowl no maien for Fos, Healey and Gallaghen, forwhom all the phresemongering is merely a eernoullage ancien for tooling the mass of workers inte supporting the sime of? our ‘dyn’ enpeeialiet ruling class: While the letts-hold bank fram a split with Ghee agente of the fuller clase, (hair Gppenarce in The lagu movement haps no such scruples. They will ase il the meirumante of Uheir birasierpey, Of Pee llany: entry arivilege and thaemedia ta persacute and discipline the ‘bse,

The lett cen only bea force thet can mopilige worker to break, the grip of Footand Healey.and end Labour's craven suppart far Thetchers wer if i breaks with the coppling usiord thet hare cna its receded so inoansistent, oo hesitant and ultinvately, 6o inettective, i

tel ia front of Palio: Peace Carmi ttee Garey i Loader iq Mop,

Sonn’: calle far “Thong Gack The fleet” gradually changed ar to Task Poroe preceded and cherie ae Mew be aimok cals far a “nese-fie ) weeing the Fark Force age te diva Belfi frag topics.

Imperialism and the workers states *

Defend the USSR'

Reagan and Thatcher make mo bones about where their gum are aimed and their rockets are trained, The murderous arsenal of NATO is aimed ot the Soviet Union. it le imperiatisn's drive to destroy the USSA, not the armamants themselves, that threatens mankind with untold barbarity.

At the time of Reagan's visit to Europe, and the mas mobilistions against imperialisn's chief henchman, we print below an sbridged axtract on Defence of the WSSA from 4 book shortly to be publishal by WORKEAS POWER “The Deganerated Aevolution - the origins and nature of the Stalinist States”,

THE SOVIET UNION and the degenerate workers’ fistes rest on property forms that are qualitatively differant from, historically miperior to, and globally irreconcilable with aupitalinm.

Capiteliem's own fernorseiess inner logic driver oto attempt to subordinate the whole world to to bees aod cede bee sevival ultemately dapeeneds en thi. Gut the very axivtenee of the degenerate @orkern’ cates: means thee! hoge markets ond vost feturel reeouren are closed to direct emperiaiiat exploitation, Capitaliom'’s crisas drive it to attempt to recover thes arena of the world ard subject hart again to as eeplojteon.

Only way and oer can reture these states to the imperialist orbit. in and of itfet imperigligt yar in the lat quertor of the heentieth carmtury thrertend the whole 2! hamenity with unimaginable berberien, fo oeot with oomBete annihilation, Even if thi werd mot the cog ihe destruction of the degenerate workers’ siotes Sy brmperiaiien, the re-establithement. of capitalist Groperty relations, would represent an epochal defeat for the working class and oppressed peape fen of the world... ft would ureneseurably strengthen tha clas enemy on a world seole. For thet recon the gine of the proletariat of the wholo world - the destruction of capitalam in the Soviet Unie ged (he daqanerats workere etaten - mut fee defended, Capitsliem's drive to brenk up the workers’ state: must be resisted despite the

Solitical tyranny of the Dirmwerscy of Thode whate,

ate it montiroot privilege, and dette its Setivel of the historic interests of the proletariat of the workers stute: and of tho capitalist world

The pallies cquntesrevolution of the Stalinases hee rtifled the voice, the initiative and eathusiasm of the working clas in the degenerste workers’ wtetes. ‘The bureecrcia, motivated only by tha defence of their privileges, raprasent a mortal Theat to the preervetion of poet-capitelet progeri he This Sroperty Palatina Ga only = eed bel quelitinvely epee on the ead to socials, conetruction by being axténded (etenathonelly. But the Gureducrecy’s héteric shandonmment of the goal of communi wos ehrined in the nathoepligt doctring of “socighkam bore country.”

The Stelinést bureaucracies attempt to strike retegic deals with ingeriian, They dacrificad the Germen, Spenigh and French workers fo ther sites with Geemen ond Italian imporisiamn Betore the Geoore Viorld War, Aher thay war they crificed the European revolution - om Greece ttaly and Franea - fending back power to an feaited bowrgeciite dod ith trecetlantic beckers.

In return Seafin ethenpied to regulate a he div on of the world between himeolf and Anglo’ @reericon impersalien. But for imperialem the agreamants ond undertakings reached at ‘alta, Teheran and Potedam were to be kept only as long os the LISSR and anti-imperialist, amticapitalast forces, worki-vide, obliged them to. Far tha iouperiofiets these @oreements are tactical and act orebegtc, Howewer the highest goal of the Stadimisi buremucrecies ff to render them permanent. Thes Wtoplan and remctionary programma has bear vriounly chrtened “peaceful competitian of social sytem”, “'popoeful co-mistence’, and lripeigtionn Thiel! hat bein forced by upheaval end crisis iin its own world system to restrict its direct military omalaughts on tha degenerate wor: kers’ sates to the erraller power = Korea, Vietnam, Cuba - ged to utilige “cold war” economic blocketiet and boycotts agrinst Chine and the USSA. fs murderaus wars in Koren ond Vietnam do indicate that a bong as imperialism asists it will na ver historically meoomcile |teel! te the “loss” of These Oates,

The expropriation of the bourgecisia, tha Concentration of the magne of production in the fends of the state, the state monopoly of forgn trade and the machenisma of planification, fapraent hightrtic cornquedis of the working class. They are the property forms cbjectively pecossary for aocialigt corstruction, Thea abiarce of workers democracy, (he monstrous bureaucratic tyranny Go not alia this mor con it removes from come Muni the obligation to defend thoi gains ane therefore the state that defancs those gains. In any war with imperisiion we unconditionally defend the Soviet Union and the oegenerate worker Weta. bn the imperiglie, states we are for the defest of our “own” exploiters and for the vietory of the workers’ eteben, Whilst we give no polities! suppoet ta the buregucracy, our su port far rhe workees’ arenes’ self-defence ia uaeenGeLnoiai, TG Fere (ha we de nl ape precondition: for that support tuch es the ove theaw of the Stalinist bureaucracies, the cessation of repression agelrat revolutionary carnage or the piarsuit of an intermstionaliss policy. Sut our support for the workers’ sutes ruled by tha Stal: nist Dureaucracy le not unconditional support far that Goreuersey, Our support for the dofence of the workers’ stete soley meare that wo subordinate the overthrow of the burasucrecy tc the datas of imperialiam of [tas agent.

This dogs mot mean that we ehelwe the task of Cverthrowing the bureaucracy or thot we will sscrifiog the intoreste of the Worker To the rapeeious dafance of the Suragucracy’s privileged. Wa

Agitote for Ta Gefence of the workers’ conditiond, tor proletarian Gemocacy in the. conduct of the wer end for soeiets of workers ond soédiers, as tha means of mobilising the enthusaem of the manret doc defeating the limperialist enemy. Whenaver the bureaucracy’) defence of [tt privileges or itd attempts to sunender to imperaliom threaran the workerd state with collages, then en armed insurrection i necessary and justified. In a degenerates Workers’ gate the decdion i organise far insurrection if eeaditiena! on the defence of lhe proletarian’: gaing ageinat imperial attack,

4s sepportens of the internationalist tradition and programma of Lenin and Tratekiy wer aubordinate the defence of the workers’ states themSolves TG the litera cf tha world proletarian Telution juet a tactic is subordinate to 2 shestegy. For exampdo, If suecassful political or foclal eevelution provoked 2 counter-revolutionary intervention by @ degenerate workers’ state and The syecefyl defence of 6 workers’ politecel or social revolution threatened a bursaucratioaily dagenorate workees’ state with destruction at The hands of imperialist powers then we weld olvarya sy that a living revolution mat mot be sub pected to the defence of post-ompitelist property farms ff that meere subordineting ft fo the counterrevolutionary Stalinist burasucracy.

Trotsky mace thin clear et the orndet of the Second World War: " If the USSR le invelved in the weroon the sie of Germany, the German revdilution cowl? certainly mangses tha ini inte interests of the defence of the USSR. Would we advise tha Geomen workers mot to sot? Tho Cominiarn would sursty giva them such edvice, but not we ite will ey We crust subordinate the interests of the dafumnoe of the Soviet Union to the interests of the world revolution.”

IL. Trogiy: In Oetence of Marcigm,p.40l,

In caoitalist countries allied with the USSR or other degenerate workers’ states - Germany 193% 40, Britain 1841-46 - we remain strict!y cefeertist In the contest of accelerating founda of nuclear arnacment by the imperislist powers since the Second World Vier, wa recognise that the workers” aiete Ganot guarntee thelr owe cefance without the ability ta match the imoeriafists weepon for weapon, technology for technology. For that Manon We repogriie thet a long aa inperielion has nucle Weapons, the workers’ state: cannet fapudate their manufscture or depioyment without se iounly weakening tha defence of post-caplilist property. \Whike we oppose tho imperialists’ mucer Oren Ue ok ve OPPoMe TERY ensure thet Hirengthend the armed maght of Gur class enaeny “not @ penny, pot a man for this syste’

SOCIALIST ORGANISER... <2«»«2 som eace

world, who can be caught between the harnerer of their ean working class and tha prrell of thair imporloliat paymatters. Followed through to its fogica! and, this would lead to suggesting altarrative “none lmipserlalert™ polities to British imperialist govSromaents. A poor substitute for dismantiing imperialism, but one thot kee Socialist Organiser te foie with ite left-reformist friends who simi: ferly Renter otter am imparialism without werts,

indaad, 50 fashioradie is the call for a “diplo matic solution” amonget their left reformist mole like Bann and Reg Roce, that Socialist Organiser have added their voloa to chan lobby, Like Benn ard Feces they copose the bloodshed with the call for negotistians betveen Thatcher snd Galtteri: “ amd better that Thatehor and Gattion daa! with their dizputes by nagetiation than by war’? [B/S/E2). They acdvocet= 4 nagotiated deal with imperialiim to the Becwte of Argentina. Who should be trusted io tarry aut such nepotistions? is Thareher, ragking of treshty sollled Blood ond chortiing weth imperialist @ee ta be Crutted with achieving a “democratic” emce? Or perhaps Galtieri is the man for this sensit ve diplomatic task? Socialist Organiser are nen precise an this question.

They throw In calle for megetistiangs because They do not want to offend Benn. They heave na revolutionary soution to this war. They ore lett Mimicking empiy pliasie abot peace Bod negotiations. Phrases that disquise the tact that diplamacy by “our” govmrmnint (Tory ce Labour! is ire lict diplomacy, Negotiations by imperialeam could only be almed at gaining it aceaintagen Conmradag, this ic the magnitude of your differance with Birx@m. ‘You are aritting inte tha mire af sicial pacitiin.

Sdcialist Organiser mace cheir sacial pacifism with declaratians of support for the Falkland istonders' rights. Thet is whet they claim are paramount in the present situation. Rapeatedy tha clair of the

Fadklanders. are asserted of “valid - fist a0 they are by Fog Race, Tony Baon, Michael Foot anc Mangara Thatcher, The differance between Socialist Org aniser ond Thatcher & that they think sha is only wing the Falklanders' cheers B68 pretext, fr i Socealiet Organaser that is tha consistent friend of the kelpers,

The Falkianders seo themselves of British They WHR to stay That way, There le io mean for then oO Gay thet way @scept af part of a British armed camp, aa result of a British oeeupation of the Malvinas oe Tomy Gard pownvtad out ino lerter to Socblist Organiser that nominally criticised Reg Aaca, but objectively hit at Socialist Organiser itself (27/5/82), dafance af thea rights means datanding their “right to Lm part of the Brith Empire.

This logic eicanae Socialist Organiser. They don't ‘trust the Briteh navy to defend the Falklanders: “Wo cannot rety an Thetcher's (best to met in thea South Atlantic a¢ defanders of the Falk landerr rights... fe regend the rights of the Falklandars a a mathe for the international working clam, anc we base our attitude to the British Mwy on on overall class aeagermant (13/5/E2 |.

So tt ie down to the working class to defend the Falklonders acpinat Argentina, and against the Brit: ish flagt that they look to as their protector! The practical Implications oft this ave not spelt out. They qinreat be, There it no wey thet the interne ional working class can take practical action to defend the “right of the -Falklancers. Even if it ould, for it to doe so would bo to defend a setter oommunity who wish to ramein Betws!

Weask you, Socialist Orginimr, aa 1,908) Britons #000 oiled Fron their parent colintny. cooupying a Latin Arierican Bland stolen by Britein in 1899 hove the right to remain British aro determine the future of the Malvinas? To anewer “es” is toe defend the integrity of the British Empire and to completely

betray social.

When the farcae of Socialist Organiper evaritually foe fit to muster on an anthwar demonstration in London = the third one to be held during the erishe - thay Marched Unicer the slogan “The enariy if af home" and “Goan with Thetoher, Geen with Galtier|".. The slogan "The enemy is et home « aso touted by the Spariachth lho ara well eiemoreed in Gefanding the rights of imperiolist sattlars in the Middte East, in Northern lelaned aad naw im the South Atlantic! - ie vacuous in the present war,

In @ war between imperialism ond a dependant semi-colony it ducks the key queetion of supper for Thea Bruggla saint “eur anemy. This is meade ROBT lh The aT PT to aud Britsie and. Argan tira in the slogan “Down with Thatcher Gown with Galtier”, The tagks of Brith ane Avgeciing workers are not the same inthis wer, The Argentine workers must organi ta oxtand the struggle to defest imperialism by taking the plants and stocks of imperialism inte their cae hands. That could be done slonpide 2 motslisttion to defast impenddism in the felalvings and in the process destray tho pro imparighiet pinta that hae played with aetl-ingerialigt firs, This means Argentine workers: have a direct inderest in securing enperialian's defeat, Gattiowi's overthrew: cet ies fought for as a part of the sbruggle ta sscure that defest.

Brniteh Workers do have a common interred? with their Aungeniine brothers ond sisters. But that is an interest in seouring the defeat of British imperialism, ol the system that exploits the worker: of Britaln ard Argentina, That means fighting in Britain to stap Thatcher's war, afte to Glack supplies os part ota campaign toed the etrugge of tha paca of Augerntion and ail of Latin America ageinet irnparialism,

The Soeialist Organiser hes kept a tight grip on the coatiaik of Bann and Race. hile insisting thet

ee

anna

Froraky

we defend the right of tha workers’ sintes ta maintain nuclear weapon in dalance aginst imparioiicm's drive to. restore capitalism an a world scala, We oppose all pacifist and peutralict campaigns against thom that weaken the selfdefence of the workers’ states,

For Trotskyists the highest good is ahweys the independant mobilisation of the working clogs for les historic revalutiacary gosl. Within this con text we defend the post-capttalist aconoming aqinst attack by impertilian or ite agents. ~ Trotiky summed up the perseective clearlys“We must

way thet the

Eee een hae mar ae are dofureding in

the USSR (mate progerty aed planned aconamy| and ogeinst whom Weer Gor Gucding @ Pulhlees ctrepgla (the pornsitic bursauorecy and. ite Gomintern. Vite must not lose alight for a single meant of the fact thet the quegtion ol overthrowing the soviet burssuweracy is for us svbordinate to the quamion of pressing mate property in the means of production im the USSR; that the question of preeerring cate property in the means af preducthon In the USSA is subordinate fer us to the que than af the world proletarian revolution.”

ln Detence of Marxism, p.211. @

They ara Peet pocifiate in the abstract, they have proved pure social pacifists in this concrete fast. By late May, Chey were anil describing Bann'é stance HF one of increasing boldness: "Tony Benn, thaoagh silent le Perlianiart on Apell Srel, ean aut fer vith drowal of the fleet much. series than Tribune Ai first bowen heit-hemrted - “oy achves. for wat it fe Orth, ie tad ite Si tou ie withoren” - than bolder and bolder”. (ASSAF. It is a mark of the degensrotien of the forces that support Socialist Organiser that their retreat fram ravelutionary March, thelr own timidity lin the face of left reformiem, can be measured by the increased symmetry between thelr ornguments ard thoi of Race rel Benn, Even the left reformist, pro-

Ken Litingstene “Labour Hera” con soo Thatcher's wae For whet It ig an iriparialisn war.

Hot a Soelalitt Organiser. Labour Harold's reformist credentials are nat in dowbt, Sack iet Orgonier, however, is liking a contradiction. Its raison d'etre le ae-6 “riarsiet pale in the Latour Party. lite hope for survival and growth is to mevirr tain 6 forreggraiseen pnet with batt raformian, Tha price of the pact constantly undenmine the “marsiam" of tha pole, Failure to recognise this, follure ta stand firm on o question as vital as. the war, Will take @ further toll on Sociale, Charl gees daminshing reserves of markt,

Ones again, therefors, we make a call to the rank and Tike pallitomts within the Socialist Organiser Allianee:

Change your positional

Chaliengs your barkowpt toades|

Stop pleying the role of servile folbowtrovelbers of the lete ralarniietal

Join with the covelutionary internaiionalists to fight tha warl

lran/lraq war

IMPERIALISM’S PLANS FOR ULF IN DISARRAY

WHEN THE ARMIES of Saddam Hussein rwept into Iran in September 1980, WORKERS POWER argued that revolution aries in bran and throughout the world had a duty to give support to the military defence of Iran against |raq.

We took this position despite the axistenca of the murderous clerical dapotam of Khoamaini and the Islamic Republican Party, aed stressing Les we hare dona since before its formation, thet no pok iticel support whetiomver could be given to it. What we did support waa the dofence of the |renlan fethieperilaist revolution egaire! ite aoctarmad foes - just an we defend M against its internal foi, principally Khomain| and his terror regen

We recognised thet Saddam and tha |naqi fe‘eathi’ war einen were completely reactionary - the externally imposed division of bran and the seizure of its southern oilfields; the imposition of o military Gictstorshap or the peeteration of the Pehdawis; tho osteblishment of @ new “pohieemen of the Gulf" fer LS en@erialism. and the ovstaléation therefore of én entifoviet, anti-naetepnal revolutionary allianes in the region.

VWihin Korn’: regina a, and is, engaged in a murderous chvil eer ugsingt the Kurds and eyeinat the Lott, breg’s atteck forced the mullera to defend the mangled and distorted gains of the enti-Shah revolution, rextional indeperderce and the socel gaint of the worker, peasants end urban Boo. This dofeme: was carried owt in a thoroughly couver-renttutionary fashion Aeeotubonary com units would haw fought for completely different politica! end military methods ane goals, They would have fought for the removal and overthrow of the mullahs, fer a mobilisation of the mass net ony to defend: existing galing against mestorethon, but to advance tha class itermsts of the euploited and oppressed, in short for wahiag ciess imederbhio ane! pores,

Hewever, whilt such policies had not yet tdumphed amongst the mane, suppert for national defence in itel! rewind both neonesery amd pre qeeuie. Sock defence wea mot and |: not defence of Kikoenainl but of the worker, passant: and oporwssed people against pro-imperialis! rasta. ethan. it in thes the defence of the only forces who Gt andl mest bring Khomeini and the “eerie” murderer to the ber of pustica,

The (neg! Geeta, degpine theirs ‘“secula-"’, “eat” Arsh retioeligt rhetoric and their Garh gat oo eetteererne sotetaocaere uphervel. =a ee epee let eed Pcs Sage Geapert wether tha Ghat eepece ae eee eetal

peoidem for impenelien 4 thet nore of the hey Go Se ae, Ge Thee oer, Hrong eecagh to ated feel, Ge aio acl me rior) ge aa, checking the Geetogrent of antiamperialit en amore the mame All of the Gulf fa = Ruel, Sead) Arse, Orman, fc - are mceptibles 60 ech meweeenis.

=r

rag) purisarne rs oF wer fe Fea

thee

Post-rewolutionery been, even though Fos 9m tion has been reduced by the represtians of the idemic republic, remains proof of the posslbdlity of the overthrew of ha-strongest dietatorshics, ord of the fact that US ‘impsrialignm itself con be defied. Ag such, Iran nem@ina what the US onlie *g force for instability’. Theat i why the US ire Perialists ore doing all they can to forge an alliance of the Gulf states weth @ militarily streng Imo

Such an ailignea could deter the apres of nee Giutionary upheewal and could, potentially, nefore Iran te the ped-imperialist fold. The Gulf Cooperation Council (Seucti Arete, Kuvialt, Bobrain, Qotor, Gran ond the United Aree Emingtes! ha been given LES support in the shape of the AWAC reconraiines plane and military personnel. in tum the foros within the coundi!] gave ec finencial backing to Soddam’s war offort. Kueait ge 6 billion doftert, while Saudi Arable supplied the bulk of the 40 billion dollars total aid peckege pen fo Iraq by the Counell.

For its pact, America he definitely wermed te the once wooslly aniHUS, proSoviet Beghaiaed reg ime, A deal to send uo to 72 Hercules transport flere: hea been meede posible Dy Aeagen lifting an export ban on ™ militarily significant items” from the US to brag, The swift WG condomnation of the loreal! mold on breg’s nuclear power plent wae & further incication of Asagan's growing warmth for leg. leded Ssroel’s attack on iraq and ita supply ing of epawes to Jeon was part of the Zionist Hates atttempl to block the turn of LES policy towards iraq end the Gulf morarehees « a turn they fear will be at dsenel's expense.

A defeat for fron would mot only restore stablity, it wauld make the paeetionary alliance ot Jordan, Iraq and Che Gul! aneted ao viable peopepst: ion. The lranien vecbory hes scupmered these Bleed, and imperialist commentatan have not tried to hide their dismay, The US magazine “Nowsamek™ in én arthcks avled “The Thegat from Iran”, com mented: “lf Eran's anny fights its way into lrg and topples Prasidant Saddam Hussein, a pre Khorndini wedge could pugh Weetwards weroee the Middte East from ran, through Iraq to Syria, which i slromdy s¢mpethetic to Khomesini’s couse With the northern ther of the Areb world volnerhho acd a mond chenper tome pogible slong the @ermes Gell, the riabary ef the actine oi) coger am go” See,

Iefeenic work : find medisters to achive @ deal that will aia Secicharn a hance

iran’) wictery, thereioce, maka the thwarting of the iatest imperialist plac to “mebdise the Gull, aed that W to be meloemed However, now Theft Khorramihahr haw follen, acel once the clearing out of leeql troops from the last chunks of the

700 square mikes of Iran they occupied has been eomoleted, the time vill hee come for rreetution= ora fo end the military bloc with Khomeini’s forces. The immediate threat hae gama. Furthar military ection by bran would be designed to serve the Khomeini regene's gelfaggrandiamant, A cone tinwetlon af the war leveodvirneg any fasting incurtion inte breqi territory should Oe condemned.

The defence of the ging of the fronian nevoluton of 1979/60 In no wey entails support for an lranian “Holy War" to topple Saddam. These geins themselves are under constant attack if Inn, here fan forces would export only the counterrevolutionary clericadiat tapplegs of the antlSheh revolution, fot ie potential for workers’ power and genuine metiana! liberation which Thay are trying to expunge In fran. Certainly © revolutionsry

crisis - faared by the US ard tha Gulf monarchies -

6 likely after the collapre of Saddam Gloesdy adventure, but thi will not be hastened bry an ireinlan offanahe Inte img. Quite the contrary, it will tend to salklify Are nationallet and antiClericalist sentement around the Ba‘athiets, The brag! workers and poensants, the bregi Kords, truet settle accounts with Saddam. The onty assistance they cen benefit from is thet oof a class eonsclous iranian prodoterlat struggling for, or hiding, power,

The. "“natlaaa! walt’ that existed during the war is skin deep, These an the left lke “Socialist Organiser and “Socialist Worker” whe insisted that vietary would dociively strengthen the Iranian regime, testify to their ignerenca of tha |ranian revolution. The regime may enjoy 3 temporary resurgence of popularity, but without the excuse ef fighting Img, they will find it incragsingly cit: cult to guetain this. Iran & going through sooncomo difficulties tha! are moving towards proparthore similar to the criss: that preceded (ha Shah's Sill.

Government spending for 188283 is budgeted at 3,100 billion rials 136.7 billian dolls), invol= ving & projected deficit of S68 billion risks. Having slashed their oil prices, the governement ia likely to be wery hard previed to moeet this daticit. Huge debts are likely to beoome the order of the day, All food, axeept fruit and fresh vegetables, is -retjoned and food oriess om both the official and black merken have trebled ines TBO, Unerpicyment is rife aod incstry, coveged by the wor, it working at an enmoeourhy meduerc cooecity.

in the face of this cris, the “mations unity" a the by ireels hae begun to creck, The rub otarly daiined and counterposed factions. Khe eetind’s dearth will avtersify this conflict The wie tory agent ine. therefore, he mot. funcereentaliy rgived the contradictions that hav wrecked the inthe ruling che since the revolution, The frag mentation of that clam foretells the likelihood of new pavedutionary situations.

The ruling party haa split inte o “state gapiteliet”, nationalist faction know as “the Imam's line.) Led by “radicals” like the Avatalish Mon tater!, this group ts gressing for nationalisation, centralisstin and the uae oF Iranian oil te build an @conony “independant” of imperialism. fdontaSeri dure? Thit Tne up iA & Peet leery loe: "Our oll resoureas belong to all the Muslims of the workd, H's their property, We have egugtines like Fede, one Palestina and Pakistan to hafp, but the superpowers will not allow is to ply 8 Gore structive role” ("Middle Enst’’ June 19821.

Against “the [rams ling’ i ranged the power ful Hejetleh facthon who, fully in aooard with glam, fewour the develoariant and axtenslori of private canitadiom in tron. Little wonder thet ane of the leaders of this group, the Labour Minister Shmead Tavekell, has been in the front ling of the assault on the revolutions ecclal going - the shortaning of the working week, the profit-aharing laws: ane the (fesbee| ekerments of workers” control tha were inmtityuted, Saolnet avon the islam councils

THATCHER’S VICTORY... coves rnom mace

more saphaticonied patriotic palata of the Labour MP or Liberal journalist, it lé Ae then leas affnetive or virulent forall thet.

To the unem@layed working cldia youth, after manths ar yoars on the dole and with a Labour mayament thar has doe nothing for Aim or her, the eriaiz excitement, the proipect of “lolning up", the visjan of jobs in ship yards, staelmillé and fectarias huraming with wareorders, makes them very wulnerstele to pro-irievirial |e icheology. it Is no @ocident thet = recent opinion poll shows that amongst skitind workers ard youth, the Tore: have leapt ahead in pogelarity.

Threat a government thet faa inflicted muage attacks am the working class can have, with comgHreline qoem, tied the warking class movernent to 4 Edoody

Wears.

worover en objective @9 patantiy remote from he lide ad Interests. of working people is a medieire.of That: cheers suo. Ht underlies the sheer impotence of the Latour Party thet hes absolutely failed to mobelian che working class againet the moi detested Prime Minister since Balckvin.

Electoral. arithenetéc it ret eu fficlart to calculate the changing balance: af the clases struggl, Gut the pathetic third placa fer Labour at Riltchora ard Mor den & a meedure of Labepur's irrelevance ard bonkruptey in the fight ageinst wer ard the light against the menst yvielour anlizvorking clas gownrnment Tor forty

The peace meayvarent, lin ganaral, and CHO In particular, have likevioe bee creel axpoaed by events. The quarter af a million who damonstrated

They are

egeinst the abstract “danger of qucloar hofoceust'’ last October were snated dawn in the heat of media chauvinlim to between 1600 and TOU In the demonstrations agalmst this particles ar. CANO leader ond thele Latour, GP and “Trvekylet allies fen Ten ght hard te keop the nuchear sue and the antiAeagar darnoratrotians strictly separate from the Falklancs war,

The reason is simple. Many, if nol most of the middie clan wipeorter of CNC are patriotic littl Englardcrs, willing to protest against war in thw shetract, bur any and every actual wer imvohee “our boys", “Brit alin's Interests" onda whole list of “dermacratic” preiexts. Thala “argu ments” hit their pactfism with The foros of am Exocet missin,

appressed.

lalonesiers ond of seeoalled sealf-

Thatcher's victory will not be hee eet ore unless, In the coming manthe ard year, the workiney chess move ment finds 3 new ravolutianéary, inte nationalist kiderhip thet can lead the working claga under ite oven beciar - not Thatcher's Union Jack = but the rad banner af thee svorle’s worker and

This now leadershae can only be foraad from those who dare tear ackie tha pitiful camouflage of “demacrecy worst dictatorship’, af defending the “democmiic rights af the Falkland

WoREERS PCPA

’ = Tobran denanrstretiar

thet act, the Hojatieh daclarad: “the councils contradigt private awvnmership wridh is reqpectad in alam, Managamant must bo im the Kanda of tha manager: Capital it Iollawed by management, bul the infarferance of councils in management means vinlstion af the rights of the awmars; therefore ooureciie are marereligioas'. Even the Islamic shadaw of the workers’ shoras are tag mueh for the unabashed captialists of tha Hojetiah.

Thare in, inevitably, a paliticnl tag-c fase tak: ing places, The ditchvary af the pinned coup by Khomeini's: former fortign minister, asd the impli: ction of Ayatollah Shara. Mederl in it, hat been weed by the ‘radicals of the Imam’s lime as a atlek to baat the “liberals” with, On the other hand, the Famiteh's hate bean placed under miniterial control, while the powers of thea Pasdanen (Avetutionary Guagds! howe bean lieniced and those of the regular anny increased. These mueasune hilt directly at the bass of the lrnam's line fection’ armed pow,

This developing conflict - intensified in the afternath of “vletory = by threatening to explode in another internecine conflict. The warking clas hago sides in this conflict. ft can and must use the dispute within tha piling clea to prepare proletarian revedution in lran. The micophants of tha Tudeh (CP) and the Pedayean Majority ore dretting ua the lrmamn’s line fection - Gutchend of the Kurdish peopbe - as onti-inpermiists, This it dangerous poraenie thet will bin the working claw ton wing of the cles enemy, The United front needed in lren now ip rato owith one wing af the boursscias but benveen the lett. amd workers" Oorp@inketiona against the sttecks of tha Bourgenigia,

(Dermocratic righti, snaged by the regime, must be rertorec. Independent workers’ ongeneations - erectelly few, genuine shorde are trade unions - must be built in eer plant. Workers’ militia must defend auch oraanimtiors ageiret the club wielding semi-fascists amonget the Poscaran and Hezboflahi. Women must be freed from the dagracdd Ing Betrleteors On TPiCAGAE fd cheats thet Islam FRE Upon Them. The pessanis must take up the fight to realise their demerd of the rewalutian - thvarted by the IRF regimo - "land to the tiller”,

Strigghe around Theme le mii be directed ta one goal - the goal of workers’ revolution. The illusion of a poasible “democratic” phos, courtesy of the Ironlan bourgeoisie, should Ga car apie by lanier coririunigt, Together with Fella eammuniets in frag. they must merch inta the impending battles against thelr rulers archer the Bogan:

Bown with the Idamic Republict

Workers and peasants must rule in trom and traql imperial heeds off brani

Saddam mest fall to the Iraqi workers amd ponsants!

Por Rovaltionary Gonmmuniat (Tiretakyiet! Parties In tran are ling, ih

ff untedvified banner of internation fliam + of Unbending defeatam for British imperalismjand feariees defence of the oppremed and aaploited of all Cou Mtrliag,

Let those who cannot soa belind the camouflage sink beck unnenneéd and disgredited arenige the motley ranks af Chrittain. sociadists, pacitista and “flarkists” whe would moka Marx turn in he gras, They can take Benn as their ideologue and figurnhesd, Workers Power commits itgalf to rallying the Geet forces of the working class areas the banner of reeohitienary comenure iim - ihe interretionalist bannor of Lenin and Trotsky. ©

detarminatien fer oa population the eine of 4 large village inhoblting a pair of South American ielancds, All these forcos must be rallied to the urspotted

JIUALE: 7083 PAGE 7

dented Norman Fowler's arrogant optim,

His streetegy of divide ond ruje hes moe met with the hoped-for sips in particular tha attempt to set the fre agaiart the rest of the wortkforce hep bockfieed. Nurses in AUPE oe COHGE have been willing to strike for the full clsim of 127%. Even the oo eothing sash outfit, the ACM, Res re jected Powlar's 6.4% bribe to nurses. His calculated insult to the reat of tha workforce - on offer of 4% anc bem for Boerne Worker - hana united workers in the hospitals,

The ristons for thie Unity Gre mgt feed to Aird. They lie in Lhe pemilarity of wage packets between murses, por tert and ancillaries - el) sborineny low, Lagt yeor B9% of the female full-time workferce in the AAS wero on less thon £75 oer week grok eee ning. Glan that women comprise the majority of the workloros, thin place: the NHS ga ore of the lowest paid sectors in Britain. Thos whe look efter the sick ora worth @% to 8.4% In tha Tories scheme of things

However the already wealthy clspengent of justice - man whos judgernents fee forse ged fenorison trade umianistsore weorth Gn TELS cope, The recently cates chief of Thatchert Policy Weir mpanined this with impecoshte beseas' fogs: “Paryleg more: of aver “too much’

to fedges and senior cWil servants is fet going to prejudices tha country's fotora, of in skcerive pry incredees for fege numbers of gowernment amploy- =m that produce afl tha familiar prob a

There it only one way ta defest this mttittede - bring the government to It fowees by af -out indefinite etrike pesson and ty supoeertlod sirlke action from worken outside the health sevice. The one dey wtrikes heave fitted the wail on the determination to Fight thet éaiet aearget tha haolth workers, But 4 worker do not go beyond euch frlted actlons, then the determination, militancy and shiligy ta win the full

RAIL WO AGAINST

A MAJOR SHOWDOWN between the British Alall Board, egged on by Thatcher, and a! rail workers, fi oon the cords

Ewen before MeArthy's anquiry into “flexible rostering’ was publi: shel, Parker war planning to intro auce it rapeedies. The BAB has ted the yow's wage regotiationgs (offering » paltry 8S to be pal? in September! to aoceptewos of “thax (jhe roetering “ Ag if this wan't enough tho BAB hove announced that they plan to cut 5,000 jobs from their tvelva workshops inctuding the closura of Shildon ond Horwich aed the part clomre of Swindon waorkcs.

ln tha face of this attack SSLEF at thelr aoewel conlerancs rejected the Motarthy report. and voted to fight its recommendations. The riliteres aX the train drivers ower the last year pointed ta such an out com, Tha recent outbursts of milstant rheteric fram “Sid Bleich!

charm will be scquanciered. The Tories will ride out limited actions, Workers

willl jose pay, while winning nothing The. copartunity to davweiog ard axtane the strikes will be wasted. Individual fecthors will stom taking actlon and the militants will become teoleted and demor- [emer

it would appear. that the top off Gal of the 19 union in the TUC Heaith Service Committee are propering the wey for guich @ disaetrous development. After the sucemss of the May Sth wrike whan 39% of the. hospitals sinugk, the Comemitier! cid-act ae Port worker hy Edinburgh and Ath erhen who went on all-out strike and Instend called for further one day stopPage on June 40h and th,

Enraged by this decision militants tram Shetfiedd, Leeds ond Newenstia mounted a lobby af tha NUPE ratiqrel conference at Scarborough to force the call far all-out Incofinite strike ection.

Somrborcugh waa an educetion far every hospital worker, Tho executiva, is obeys, ployed 8 very char gama, Monothelns, thay wore fudhed to the Uimite by the mibhend bobby, Deets using ed] the Sure maven bn the HUPE rulebook, the oreisure - from the bobby emd the: doct thet some areas were siren cut = Wiel great arauigh i fort @ résolution cadling for alkout Indefinite action, with emergency cower, fron Jure 4h ento the foer of the conference.

Theugh thik was pesged, Alsn Flerar wind qulck to a4 and ute 8 get-out clause. Tho resctution called on all heh unions 1o sre bnvokiag unl Ma Maer of avgiding WUPFE giving 8 lesd to the other unions Fisher declared: “if wo oro to agealete the ection, which i many ardas hes already been effective, we here got to take the other undons with un™

By the end of the debate, delegates a. Joes fall they fed wen the Gaenrnirt ment to all-out action - Fisker corvire ced them by slating categerically that “there will be no ducking out.”

Immadiataly ater this Fisher told the press “The unity of the TUG SGagn if PErEMOUAT end the ola weould far reviewed ff other anions did) muppert it’

The executive dnd union officials have, throughout the campaign, payed on the fears of the monmbership thet dian between unions an a@ recipe

HEALTH

WORKERS: ALL OUT NOW!

for detest. They have pushed unity in ard of ial ae the key to winning, but unity around the lowest commen danaminater.

Se at the TUC Genera! Council WUPE

rofused ta roles the oll for its confer ance decision to be discussec, let olane Implemanted, The AUPE bursauerote showed that they agreed with the disprecetul sintimenis exprosad by Charlie Donne: of the GMWL, He denounced the MUPE conference, ie, the rir erect fib, fer “dragging thi: provernent Inte the gutter.” Getermined action & some thing ta be ashamecoof in tha world of thet qaieried sell-out merchants.

Flor and co howe been quick to Sol - aRinet opoved fo all-oul action, All fultimers hove bean send bertters telligg then todo nothing outelde the TUE committee's quiddings One ottelal in Ghatfieio who, reluctrtly, voiced his maembert dupoort for all aut @etion, hos bean threatened with being meoved frorn the araa, Jn Roth ahem the alkcut strike has been knifed by the withdrawal @! @rike pay, Tha worker at Edinburgh are under the nies pressure of being out on a2 limb,

Fisher's claim that “We are locking for victory cain hardly be tekken sarbaissly,

KERS MUST UNIT

PARKER’S PLANS

of the ALAA were sorbet lines expectec. Weighell has already accented temible poetering for hia own mermier:,. without ino amy wey corr sulting. them, and he took imeangie mant's side during the seven week ASLEF dispute. Aiow Woighell has threstened industrial actian from 7th dune if the plans to close the Workshop dre nol acekgpecd and 2 “reeondie pey offer” is mot made How do we explain this sudden about face? Weighell recognises: tho significance cf the workehop. closures for future. investment in the rales, With the rapid sundown of rolling stock the dacisign to close ihe weorkshoos: can only ran thet BRE intenc to hack the raikeay dawn ta its bare bones. Woighsll’s cance & alo 4 reqponeé to. mounting opaasition to hes apen collaboration with Parkar, Rank anc file members of the MUR heave been disgusted ot his acceptanes of “falxible roetering'. A. delegate eonb-eeence tft ALI oud meontiv

voted to fight: at the full AWWA conference bo rescind tha union's acmaptones of the scheme. Werghall hopes. to dutmanuvre this. growing militoney by “taking @ stand” on the workahop equa ane ansuring that, if there 6 tao be a fight, its will take piace under his eontral,

othe AWA etrike from June fth * end deapite the Exeotive’s decittxn there is mo. guarantee that it will - militonts must not put any trust. in Welghell and the other jesderk, For one thing he is airesdy backtracking onan “alkout strike. sugecsting a caanipdign af adlactiva strikes Ey different sections at differant teres, Supeinet this militants must camgaign for an éll-cug strike - of all tha. rail Hniohe <= until the threst ta chose the workshops is withdraw, the "flexible fostering’ scheme is sorpped, and the union's wage claim, as determined by cank are! Tile pail workers, it met in full,

The ootentisl for unity between the three unmbore oom evict. The

~[s called.

Oespite these disgraceful ontica by the jegclere the campaigns for all-out indefinite strike sctlon for the full claim must be bullt in. ayary hospital end @nulance station. The nurses of the ACN must oa broken from, that STGaniation and recruited by the tree unions. .Aeal unity im action. must replaces apurioue unity of penthment, Whan tha Torte: and buragucrets ues he argument that “patients will auffay", Aho. afiede pres bo, HF they do it is the Tories” fault for not paying Wie Ilving wage, Thar cute are lagding to deaths all the tilma, Under-peld and ovenvarked health war kera struggle day In anc day out ta

minimise the effect of these cuts, They! :

gomaend, desawo and ore determined tO Win & decent wage,

Alan Fishar argues that the manage ment should be the cee who decide what emergency cower dhould be provided iF an ailgut strike He is undermining the mxtantlal effectheness of strike action in adverse in Liverpodl during the geveent Found of atrliees the manage ment used bogus emergericieé to fore atrikers to work, Fisher's positlon gives the manegem@et the right to arganine seabbimg.

TS54 conforence pecently voted urarr imoudy ic suppeert actlan on the workshops issue, whila ASLEF wall act against rostering. That unity frust be forcad upon the Inaterships of the dhres wplons But it must be forged in sinigglé at @ rink and fila laveal. Through unity in acter the bash oa) bo lald for bridging the divisions that haves plagued rail workers for so long. Local jeint action committees need ta be built piecing all raihworkers wrth cise pats from the differant depots.

That the union bureaueras will geek compromises and attempt to sall Cut cele bnmereeis ik my sun a night follows day. ‘We hewe to prepere for this by putting the contre! of the sivike, the decision as to whet ite cemands shall bo and when to return fo work into the hence of the rank ord file through regular mass meetings are, in betwen lege, CArcugh dance eratically elected local action commit tines, bended tegethar inta o national

Se ee a ee |e

Whon we aay alleour atrike that i what wemean- pliequtetrike, Then and only then will the fomsibility of Graviding anergency caver, which should not be autceatic iin a strike, be ditcusiad and decided on By riers fthemsolves. ([t will be decided upon an the Gagis of dhe health workers’ Seseermenite, 004 the bosses . Such all« gut strike octlon, eortrolied ot avery inal by ronk ond file, damceratia strike

omits, mut bo linked to suppor.

tea action from other worker, The Rippon eirikee on May 18th by the South Yorkshire miners, by the Nowe costh: waternorkers aon June 4th and promised by the BEC (River Gen) Stechworkers and Minara throughout the

John Sorrreck [Matwork!

courtry for the Bth, must be built upon.

Scargill muct be called upon te turn hile words leo ection end uae hin power ae leader of the NUM to bring thet union out alongside healthwoarkora, 4 combination of the hoslthworkers ened the einer Gould net mierety win the 12%, it would rouse the whode working claie iritg @ massive offonsive ageinet a Tary qayvermment that, has spent too long ghoating ot the low pay ond pote lesanéss thet it has inflicted on the working cli. Bb

SUBSCRIBE!

ADDERS os 24 enters

Ce ee ee)

Send £3 to the eddredt below and recdind 12 keved of the paper, Make cheques or POs payable to Worken Power and forward to: Worker Power,

BCM Boz TTS0, London,

WCiM IKX.