Egypt's sham referendum

Referendums by themselves are not necessarily a sign of democracy at work. In fact, the one taking place in Egypt today is precisely the opposite because it is aimed at creating an autocracy with the country’s notorious army leadership firmly in control.

Not only is the draft constitution anti-democratic in its nature; people trying to campaign against the proposals have been arrested and the opposition effectively banned from the referendum process.

So where are the howls of protest from Washington and the European Union, from London and Paris about a  fake referendum that effectively legitimises the army coup d’état that removed the country’s first elected president in July?

Hypocrisy rules supreme in Western capitals when it comes to real democracy, as we are all too aware. So EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton could issue a statement backing the referendum. Unbelievably she claimed that it could lead to “democratic elections” and “accountability for the government and state institutions”.

Yet the constitution contains nothing of the sort. The new constitution exempts the army, police and intelligence services from civilian control and allows them to prosecute in military courts anyone they deem threatening. Workers rights are curtailed at a time when frequent strikes are taking place as living standards fall.

Little wonder that General Abdel Fatah al-Sissi, who led the coup against the Islamist government of Mohamed Morsi – who is currently in jail awaiting trial for a litany of “offences” - has hinted that he will take a “Yes” vote as a mandate to become Egypt’s next president.

Egypt remains Washington’s key ally in the region and the Obama administration performed linguistic somersaults to avoid labelling the overthrow of Morsi and the banning of his Muslim Brotherhood party a coup. Now its getting ready to resume large-scale aid once the referendum is out of the way.

Hidden in the massive budget bill heading for Congress is a measure that would exempt Egypt from a law requiring a cut off in aid in the event of a military coup. It would allow $1 billion in annual aid to resume if the administration certifies that Egypt “has held a constitutional referendum and is supporting a democratic transition.” More money is promised once the country implements “economic reforms”.

Yet an authoritarian regime now rules Egypt and the referendum won’t change that one jot. Activists who have tried to campaign for a no vote have been arrested and prosecuted on absurd charges. Public demonstrations are banned, and police have killed 27 people and arrested 703 who tried to protest on the past three Fridays, according to Human Rights Watch.

Four of the most famous secular leaders of the 2011 revolution against the Mubarak regime have been jailed on charges of participating in unauthorised demonstrations. Opposition media have been shut down, and journalists from Al Jazeera  imprisoned without charge.

Hundreds of Muslim Brotherhood members have been killed in protests and most of the group’s leaders have been arrested. Last month, the army-backed cabinet designated it as a terror group and said anyone who “promotes it by speech, writing or any other means and all who fund its activities” would be prosecuted.

The three years since the revolution that overthrew Mubarak, and placed Egypt firmly in the centre of the Arab Spring, have seen increasingly desperate attempts by the ruling class to hold on to power. The army, which owns and controls a large part of the economy, is historically an integral part of these capitalist structures and kept Mubarak in power.

When that façade was broken by the 2011 revolution, the Muslim Brotherhood, with its deep roots amongst the downtrodden masses, stepped into the breach. When it began to threaten the military’s privileges, and failed to deliver on promises to improve living standards, it too was removed in order to head off a popular uprising.  

The anger expressed in the Arab Spring has not disappeared. But what has been found wanting is a secular vision and organisation to complete the revolutionary process and transform the existing state. So let’s support those in jail in Egypt who have courageously opposed military rule and the millions who will boycott today’s referendum.

Paul Feldman

Communications editor

'Global May' on the launch pad

A year after the Arab Spring found its echo in the Puerta del Sol in Madrid, where a massive people’s assembly took control of the famous square, a new “Global May” is scheduled for an international launch tomorrow.

In Madrid, Barcelona and other cities in Spain, the demand for “real democracy now” found a response from hundreds of thousands of people angry with a political system that identified with financial and corporate interests.

The slogan “don’t vote for them”, directed against the major political parties, expressed a contempt for a sham democracy that had degenerated in its brief, 35-year existence since the end of fascism.

Simultaneous new occupations and assemblies are planned tomorrow in dozens of countries in a bid to stimulate the movement that took off last autumn, which saw camps created on Wall Street, outside St Paul’s cathedral and in hundreds of cities worldwide.

An attempt to give the May 12 movement some direction has resulted in an extensive
statement drawn up collaboratively by people’s assemblies and other networks over some months.

Acknowledged as a “hard and long process, full of compromises”, the statement, to its merit, is offered to “people’s assemblies around the world for discussions, revisions and endorsements”.

A clear concession made to reach consensus is that while the statement identifies the system in general as a problem, it refrains from using the term “capitalism” once in 2,000 words. This weakens its analysis, which tends to rely on moral terms like “greed” for explanations. Nor is there regard in the statement for the global economic crisis that is driving politics everywhere. Nevertheless, the statement is right when it declares:

We are living in a world controlled by forces incapable of giving freedom and dignity to the world’s population (if, indeed, they ever were). A world where we are told ‘there is no alternative’ to the loss of rights achieved through the long, hard struggles of our ancestors…. We condemn the current distribution of economic resources whereby only a tiny minority escape poverty and insecurity. Whereby future generations are condemned to a poisoned legacy thanks to the environmental crimes of the rich and powerful. ‘Democratic’ political systems, where they exist, have been emptied of meaning, put to the service of those few interested in increasing the power of corporations and financial institutions, regardless of the fate of the planet and its inhabitants.

Nor can one disagree with the statement when it says that “the economy must be put to the service of people’s welfare, and to support and serve the environment, not private profit” or that to achieve these objectives, people “must get democratic control over financial institutions, transnational corporations and their lobbies”.

The statement’s insistence that the movement does not “make demands on governments, corporations or members of parliament, which some of us see as illegitimate, unaccountable or corrupt” is commendable. But this is somewhat undermined by a series of demands about taxation, regulation and the reduction of military spending “to a minimum”.

These contradictions undoubtedly reflect debate and discussion about where a movement that includes people’s assemblies, democracy campaigns and occupations, is heading.

Some favour a sustained period of direct actions, and other forms of militancy that are essentially protests about aspects of the status quo. They imply that the existing political and economic system (aka capitalism) can be made to yield and change its ways. There is absolutely no evidence of this happening now or in the future.

Others acknowledge that the system itself is the problem and are willing to discuss how a transition is made from A to whatever B might look like. Ultimately, it’s the age-old question of reform or revolution. That, you can be sure, will loom large over all the actions that we will see from tomorrow.

Paul Feldman
Communications editor

NHS vote marks end of parliamentary road

While last night’s vote to approve the health bill marks the end of the parliamentary road – in more ways than one – the future of the NHS is far from being a done deal.

Only royal assent is needed to complete the legislation that brings competition right into the heart of the National Health Service and threatens its future.

And the gushing warmth of the parliamentary congratulations to the Queen on her diamond jubilee – with Ed Miliband suggesting to David Cameron that they should stand to applaud - ensures that happens very soon.

Living in the forlorn hope that Labour will repeal the bill is a waste of time. The ConDems actually built on what New Labour had done, especially in relation to virtually independent foundation trusts.

In any case, we can’t afford to wait until the general election of 2015. For the vast majority whose lives, literally, are bound up with the not-for-profit institution set up in 1948, defence of the principles of universal health care must be along a new path.

The same is true for pensions. Unions yesterday lost a legal battle to stop the government slashing up to 20% off public sector pensions by switching to the consumer price index instead of the normally faster-rising retail price index to calculate cost-of-living rises.

Siding with the Coalition, Master of the Rolls, Lord Neuberger, put it like this: “The government clearly believed the state of the economy was grave, and that any savings which could properly be made should be made – as soon as possible.” Unions are considering an appeal, but they’ll be wasting their time, and their members’ money.

The state of the capitalist economy is worse than grave, and the UK government, like most throughout the world, is willingly submitting to the relentless logic of contraction expressed through the simple measure of the credit rating calculated by agencies representing investors on the global capital markets.

Two of the three - Fitch and Standard & Poor – have already threatened to downgrade Britain’s AAA rating if the Coalition’s intensifying drive to cuts and privatisation continues to fail to deliver. The growth promised in last year’s budget hasn’t materialised, so the austerity assault will be ramped up in today’s budget – despite it deepening the recession.

Everything that can be handed over to the for-profit sector will be, and the latest victim is the handling of emergency calls to ambulance, fire and police, soon to be joined by the roads.

Simon Reed, vice-chairman of the Police Federation, which represents rank-and-file officers, warned that the momentum towards outsourcing was gathering pace. “This is the drip, drip, drip of privatisation,” he said. “They move in on something that might look like a good idea, and before we know it they are working in vast areas of British policing.”

Just as in the revolts of the Arab Spring, the police will soon be faced with a three way choice: to side with the repressive state forces seeking to preserve the status quo; to stand aside as new democratic forces arise; or to join with them in people's assemblies formed from workers in factories and offices, the professions, school and college students the unemployed, pensioners, community groups.

With the state’s forces ranged against the interests of the majority, and the parliamentary process a cul de sac, these new assemblies will become the focus for the democratic process that makes and carries out decisions in the interests of the people and small businesses.

They will work to identify and satisfy the unmet needs of the local population with respect to nutrition, housing, clothing, health, energy, safety, communications, transport, education and self-development, culture, sport, recreation, arts, entertainment, social support including security in older age.

And, as the democratic expression of the majority, they will give themselves the power to acquire the resources, including land, from their present owners in order to satisfy needs. That’s the best way to respond to what happened in Parliament yesterday.

Gerry Gold
Economics editor

Arab Spring's first election

“Whatever happens next, I feel like now I exist”, said one man in Tunisia, just after voting. And, indeed, Sunday’s elections in the small country that sparked off the Arab awakening of 2011 have seen an amazing enthusiasm from people, young and old.

Voter turnout exceeded all expectations as over 90% of those who had registered cast their votes. Out of Tunisia’s 10.6 million population, 4.4 have the right to vote. Over the summer 95% of them registered.

A Facebook campaign “Je me suis inscrit – Je vote” was enthusiastically supported and circular red bumper stickers with the motto “ana qayyadtu" – the same message in Arabic – are still decorating walls and cars.

For Tunisians this is an historic moment as the election for a constituent assembly is their first chance to voice their political desires since the overthrow of dictator Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali, last January. The new assembly has the task of designing a new political system and how the state will relate to its citizens.

The Tunisian political revolution was sparked by the self-immolation of a young fruit seller in the poor south of the country. Mohammed Bouazizi’s sacrifice became the signal for Tunisians to rise up against their oppressive rulers in a revolution which captured the imagination of millions of young Arabs, notably in Egypt where the dictator Mubarak was ousted within weeks.

The movement soon spread from North Africa to Spain and countless other countries which have seen democracy movements rise up.

The prejudice that Arab countries are incapable of embracing a wide range of views and holding truly democratic elections is being well and truly squashed by the seemingly endless and amazingly patient queues outside polling stations around the country.

They have voted for 11,000 candidates from nearly 100 parties for a 217 member constituent assembly in 33 districts of the country in a day which, according to thousands of international and local observers, saw few if any infringements of electoral procedures.

Dr Amor Boubakri, professor of law at the university of Sousse and a member of the Electoral Observatory , said he believed Tunisians have, have succeeded in making the Arab Spring's first election a resounding success.

Boubakri, who was interviewed by Al Jazeera, is confident that election will be a democratic transition, highlighting pluralism, power-sharing, organised opposition and gender inclusiveness as never before.

It is undoubtedly a new phenomenon, “something happening for the first time in Arab culture, as linguist and historian, Hammadi Sammoud has noted. “It is a rite of passage from accepting the things were decided for us to participating. We are creating ourselves.”

Huge problems beset the country, which has 700,000 out of work, a zero growth rate and near-junk status of its bond ratings. There is also a deep north-south divide. The northern coast benefits from tourism, cosmopolitanism and fertile land, while the south – where Bouazizi lived, remains dogged by poverty and under-development.

The people of the south and centre of the country are seen as a silent majority who have hitherto seen themselves as excluded from the entire political system.

Of the political parties, it is likely that al-Nahda (Renaissance), the moderate Turkish-style Islamic party will pick up voters in the coastal cities. But this will be countered by support for the Democratic Forum for Labour and Liberties and the Progressive Democratic Party.

The large number of political parties and diversity of views is an expression of Tunisia’s unique culture which has seen a synthesis of Ottoman, Arab and Islamic heritages with European influences.

The election is now re-shaping the relations of the citizens with the state. Tunisians know they are being closely watched by their neighbours in Morocco and Libya and more widely around the world. The huge enthusiasm shows a clear desire to take forward the democratic gains of the Tunisia’s January revolution into the social improvements that still elude ordinary people.

Corinna Lotz

A World to Win secretary

'Grow or die' measure heads south

The purchasing managers indexes (PMI) are key “grow-or-die” measures of the health of the capitalist economy. They show that it is in serious trouble.

August surveys of the purchasing managers who work for the global corporations in manufacturing, construction and services show the relentless logic of capitalist contraction that behind the clouds of financial storms.

With any figure above 50 indicating expansion – the growth which is the heartbeat of the profit economy – and any number lower indicating a widely-feared contraction, the overall index compiled by JP Morgan fell to the brink from 50.7 in July to 50.1 in August.

It is no wonder that stock markets went into freefall earlier in August as those in the know rushed for the exits.

In the UK, the world's most indebted nation, where the Coalition is dependent on rapid growth to reduce the government budget deficit, the PMI of 49 shows the opposite trend dominating: its economy is shrinking, joining Greece, Ireland and Portugal on the way down.

The marginally positive US figure at 50.6 turned out higher than had been expected, but still showed the weakest manufacturing activity since July 2009.

Whilst the official measure in China recorded a minor improvement in factory production to a hardly impressive 50.9, a parallel compilation by HSBC and Markit Economics stayed in negative territory at 49.9. This suggests that the sector continues to contract – no comfort for those who imagine that the Asian powerhouse will save the major economies and the global economy at a stroke.

Despite the use of every conventional and several unconventional methods of intervention, the concerted efforts of national governments, central banks, and the International Monetary Fund have failed to bring about a recovery even to the levels of production achieved before the 2007/8 crash.

European banks, in particular, are in dire trouble which partly explains the hysteria over the Coalition’s modest plans to separate retail and investment banking. Central banks and official bodies are reportedly in panic mode.

Other figures from the US are predictors of much worse to come. Production levels worldwide, bloated by decades of unsustainable credit expansion have to decline when the markets become saturated and US consumption, which grew hardly at all in the wake of the emergency measures taken to resuscitate the economy, is now flatlining at best.

Hardly surprising since the share of production costs received by US workers as wages, salaries and benefits was driven down throughout the era of corporate globalisation. In the wake of the 2007/8 credit crisis it plummeted to a historic low of 58% in 2010 even as corporate profits soared. US workers, the so-called “middle-class”, can no longer afford to be the pumped-up credit-enhanced consumers who used to absorb so much of the world’s output.

As Mike Whitney writes in the Market Oracle:

Not only is labour getting a smaller and smaller piece of the pie, but, also, financial engineering – spurred-on by low interest rates and deregulation – has given rise to consecutive credit bubbles which have transferred a larger share of pension and retirement fund-wealth to Wall Street speculators. So, working people are not just getting screwed on their labour, the government and central bank are actually helping to facilitate the pilfering of their savings.

Some economists and politicians in the US like Carmen Reinhart are arguing for "debt forgiveness for low-income Americans" including “debt repudiation, principle write downs on underwater mortgages and amnesty on delinquent student loans”.

Whilst these radical measures are dressed up as a necessary precursor to a return to growth, they show that at least some of capitalism’s defenders are beginning to see the light.

But, more significantly, they reflect a growing awareness that the revolutionary wave spreading from the Arab Spring, throughout North Africa and into Europe is washing up on American shores.

Gerry Gold

Economics editor

Liberal imperialism rears its ugly head over Libya

Scratch a liberal and you’ll find just about any political disease you care to name. Just look at the Lib Dems’ contribution to the reactionary coalition. Or just read The Observer’s call for Nato to “up its game and finish what it started in Libya”.

In the true spirit of the 19th century “liberal” Lord Palmerston, notorious for his “gun-boat diplomacy” used to advance Britain’s imperial interests, The Observer is concerned at the slow progress after 100 days of bombing Libya under the guise of enforcing a no-fly zone.

So the answer, as far as The Observer is concerned, is not peace talks and a negotiated settlement between the two sides of an apparent civil war but for Nato to “abandon its limited, cautious, low-risk approach and flex far more of its muscle”. You can’t get more bellicose than that.

Apart from the appalling use of the word “game” to describe attacks that have cost many lives, the appeal to intensify the bombing only confirms that all is not well in the war camp.

The US Congress has voted to block President Obama from going any further in Libya as he never sought their approval in the first place as required under the US constitution. The Arab League is split following civilian casualties and even Italy has called for a cessation of bombing to allow humanitarian aide to get through.

On the ground, the so-called rebels are making little military progress and the self-appointed Interim Transitional National Council based in Benghazi is divided about what to do next. Some have suggested that Colonel Gaddafi could remain in the country but not in power, for example.

David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy, the prime movers in the bombing campaign, have discovered that the TNC is not exactly the rabid pro-Western alliance they dreamt would emerge. It contains discredited defectors from Tripoli, monarchists, militant Islamists and not a few opportunists.

To maintain a semblance of public support for the attacks, which have cost the British taxpayer about £260 million so far, Nato has, as usual, invented a series of mass rapes, genocide and assorted other atrocities to lay at the door of the Gaddafi regime. Amnesty International and others have discredited these lies.

The intervention in Libya has nothing to do with protecting civilians from the Gaddafi regime. He’s been persecuting them long enough with the tacit support of the US, Britain and France. Nor is it about delivering some abstract “democracy” to a Libyan or Arab people suffering under dictatorships because the Syrian, Saudi and Bahrain regimes have carte blanche to carry on killing. It’s not even particularly about access to Libya’s oil, which Western companies enjoy in any case.

What spurred Cameron (with Labour's backing) into action was a deep concern that the Arab Spring that swept away the Tunisian and Egyptian regimes was running out of control. Libya, with its brutal repression of its own uprising, seemed a good place to get a grip on the process.

The military intervention in Libya is aimed at delimiting the revolution’s direction and usurping the way it unfolds. It is a denial of Libya’s self-determination and, however cruel the Gaddafi regime has become, this is a good enough reason to oppose the bombing.

With Western influence diminishing as Egyptians renew their self-determination, Libya must have seemed a relatively easy way to establish a presence in the region. But, as the invasion and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan have demonstrated, it is easier to make such plans than carry them out.

Even the killing of Gaddafi might only add to their problems. A report in the Daily Record suggests that British troops will be deployed if Gaddafi is ousted or killed. A Whitehall source told the paper: "I always find myself getting to my knees and praying to God that we don't bomb Gaddafi that night because what the f*** would we do next?" Cameron’s war could turn out to be his own political graveyard.

Paul Feldman

Communications editor

Power vacuum in Yemen's 'endless revolution'

Inspired by the ousting of dictators in Tunisia and Egypt, people have massed on the streets of Yemen since February in their “Endless Revolution”. They have defied government forces, including plain-clothes thugs acting for the regime, despite the martyrdom of at least 350 protesters.

When the badly wounded dictator Ali Abdullah Saleh was wafted to Saudi Arabia after the June 3 rocket attack on the presidential complex, crowds of Yemenis celebrated his departure in Change Square in Sanaa, and Freedom Square in the southern city of Taiz.

For a poignant moment, they could revel in the knowledge that their months of sacrifice had not been in vain – and give their country’s Roman name Arabia Felix ‘happy Arabia’ a real meaning.

Speaking in Taiz, activist Wassem al Gorashi hailed the sacrifice of anti-regime protesters, saying: “On behalf of the free revolutionaries and all the noble people of the nation, we send you our sincere congratulations. We start with all of our martyrs, and then we congratulate all the rebels in different squares and all the Yemeni people. We congratulate you for the departure of the head of the arrogant regime. This day will be marked in history as one of the greatest days in Yemen.”
They were heartened by the news that In Taiz, the Khalid Bin Walid barracks, the largest barracks in the city, defected over the weekend. Central security forces have also completely pulled out of the city's streets, though the Republican Guard still maintains a presence.

For most people, Yemen is just a place on the map – the southern-most tip of the Arabian peninsula, sharing a long border with Saudi Arabia. But it has long been known first for its fertility and stupendous architecture and town planning.

Unfortunately for its citizens, in the 20th century Yemen became a strategic hotspot, due to its location dominating the straits between the Red Sea and the Arabian Sea and proximity to the world’s biggest oil producer, Saudi Arabia.

The southern port of Aden was occupied by the British forces in 1839 largely to protect their shipping interests. It became Britain’s main base in the area after the loss of the Suez canal in 1956. After four years of anti-colonial insurgency and civil strife, the British departed in 1967, leaving a divided country in their wake. The 1990 unification of south and north Yemen under Ali Abdullah Saleh – and his 32-year rule - have left many southerners feeling they were unfairly treated by the south and civil war broke out in 1994.

Taking advantage of the tensions, Al Qaeda began operations in 1992. Around 300 Al-Qaeda fighters are thought to operate from the South, making it a major target for US drones and bombers.They have strongholds in the mountainous areas and, despite US bombardment, Al Qaeda militants in the south of the country seized the provincial capital of Zinjibar only yesterday.

Although it now wants him not to return home, the United States has been desperately propping up the Saleh regime for years, supplying it with military aid to the tune of $140 million in 2010. In the past they saw Saleh and his cronies as allies in the “war against terror”.

Lara Aryani, reporting from Sana’a for Jadaliyya, has warned of the manoeuvring “of the elites, by the elites and for the elites”, including the opposition party coalition, the Joint Meeting Parties (JMP), which, she says has thrust itself into the middle of negotiations with the regime (which the protesters have refused) as if it represents or even understands the demands of the protesters and the necessary changes that would cause the protests to dissipate.”

Ousting Saleh – who imposed the World Bank and IMF’s “Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facility” – on his people, is only be the beginning of clearing out the elites under whom the people of Yemen have been suffering for so long. The time for Yemenis to decide their own fate, free of the interests of Washington, Saudi Arabia, Al Qaeda and their own greedy elites must come soon.

Corinna Lotz

Eat or heat - the choice facing millions

As energy and food prices soar, jobs and services disappear and incomes are cut it amounts to the worst assault on living standards in living memory.

For the 2.4 million households affected, the price of gas supplied by Scottish Power will increase by 19% - almost one-fifth – on August 1, and electricity will go up by 10%. Other energy supply companies are expected to follow Scottish Power with similar increases in the wake of a 30% increase in wholesale prices since November 2010,

Annual household energy bills are expected to rise by up to £200 to £1400 this year, hitting those on low incomes hard, and British Gas is warning that wholesale prices are expected to rise a further 25% this coming winter. With food prices rises also accelerating – a typical basket has risen close to 5% in the last year - many pensioners already have to choose between eating and staying warm, and some will have to forgo both this winter.

Whilst across the world inflation is cutting into incomes and enraging millions, opinion leaders for rich investors are building the case for much worse to avoid the catastrophic consequences of having to admit bankruptcy by Greece or allowing debt default by the USA which is threatened for August 2nd.

As the inflationary US money-creation quantitative easing programme runs into the sand, having failed to bring about a recovery, Glenn Hutchins, co-founder of investment company Silver Lake, and vice-chairman of the Brookings Institution says ‘The time is long past for “rosy scenarios” which the markets won’t believe. Hard choices will have to be made.’ And these include dramatic cuts in government spending programs combined with savage tax increases.

Meanwhile, the oil-producing countries that belong to OPEC and control 40% of world supplies are meeting to consider increasing production or maintaining high prices whilst every NATO bomb that hits Tripoli keeps high-grade Libyan oil under the ground and drives world oil prices higher.

The Arab Spring uprisings has terrified autocrats in oil-producing countries – Saudi Arabia in particular. The Saudi monarchy, for example, hope they can cling remain in power by appeasing their populations with public spending programmes – and claw back the money by raising the price of their oil. Forecasters say that oil prices will not drop below $80-$100 a barrel for years to come. They could even rise to $130-$140 – with huge effects on the world economy which relies on oil for 30% of its energy needs.

And with oil the most critical commodity for capitalism after labour, the higher the price of oil goes, the lower wages and benefits - the price of labour - must fall, if profits are to be maintained.

Some are calling for energy companies to open their books to explain the need for price increases when Scottish Power, owned by Spanish company Iberdrola, made £1.3bn profit in 2009/10. Southern Energy made £2.1bn.

Norman Kerr, of the Fuel poverty charity Energy Action Scotland, says rightly that "It is time to recognise that being able to heat and power the home to an adequate level at a price that is affordable is an essential part of everyday living and we cannot continue to pile more on to fuel bills and push more people into fuel poverty."

For the majority of the world’s population there’s only one choice: to take the energy companies into social ownership and end the for-profit system once and for all.

The rising price of basic necessities – fuel in particular - is a common factor that can potentially unite ordinary people’s struggles around the world. Protecting the vast oil and oil resources in countries from the corporate raptors and their war-mongering representatives in government is vital. Bringing energy sources under the control of popular assemblies to be used in a not-for-profit way offers a way forward. Then, collectively, people’s assemblies can begin to plan safe use of oil and natural resources to meet needs and restore the planet’s ecosystem.

Gerry Gold
Economics editor

Assad in the firing line on the road to Damascus

The turmoil that has been sweeping Syria since January, when demonstrators caught the fever of the Arab spring revolutionary movement, is reaching a climax.

On Friday, tens of thousands protested against President Bashar al-Assad’s brutal regime in Aleppo, Suweida, Deraa and near Damascus on Syrian Independence Day. At least 22 are said to have been killed when security forces opened fire in Deraa.

The anti-government movement has deepened the crisis of the 40-year-old Assad dynasty. It is disrupting the mosaic of national, religious, ethnic, and oil politics together with big power interests. In response to the power of Friday’s Day of Rage, al-Assad promised to lift Syria’s emergency laws which have been in force since 1962.

To add to complexities, yesterday saw the publication of US embassy cables, released by WikiLeaks .They reveal that the US State Department has been promoting various “civil society strengthening initiatives”, such as the Movement for Justice and Development to the tune of $12m between 2005-2010.

The US has had an on-off relationship with Damascus over the decades, partly because of its anti-Zionist stance and partly because it is viewed as a cat’s paw for Iranian interests in the area. At the same time, the Bush administration used Syria to torture people as part of its “extraordinary rendition” programme. The US re-opened relations with Syria in 2010, appointing a ambassador to Damascus for the first time for five years.

In a desperate measure to satisfy protesters, al-Assad promised to lift the emergency laws that have ban gatherings of more than five people by Monday 25 April. Assad took over after his father Hafez al-Assad, who died in 2000, continuing the “hereditary dictatorship” that has kept Syria under the grip of state security forces. Amongst other authoritarian measures, the regime banned Facebook in attempts to stop anti-government blogging. In desperate moves to cling on to power he has been firing ministers and making promises and concessions (at least on paper) over the last couple of months.

But even while pledging to lift the state of emergency, al-Assad threatened: “We will not tolerate any attempts at sabotage.” So far over 200 people have been killed during the unrest, including four in the last 24 hours. Many were murdered by pro-regime thugs wielding revolvers, stun guns and batons.

Al-Assad and his brutal secret police will no doubt seek to exploit the WikiLeaks revelations to discredit those seeking reforms and/or to topple his regime. Like his fellow tyrants in the region, Assad seeks to rally support against his opponents by painting them as agents of foreign oppressors.

But rather than revealing the power of US imperialism, WikiLeaks cables actually show the state of disarray within Washington’s ruling circles, the divisions between the presidency and covert operations machinators. The US wants to maintain its cosy relationship with the feudal Saudi monarchy and keep the oil flowing, but at the same time manipulate the rulers of less powerful states like Syria, which they see as unreliable and too close to Iran.

It is not an unwillingness to sacrifice and even risk death that holds back the the hundreds of thousands who have espoused the cause of the Syrian revolution. They include, amongst others, the Youth of 4-5 February movement, the Syrian Days of Rage and the Syrian Revolution Facebook which has nearly 120,000 followers.

US support for the anti-regime movements in Syria as elsewhere in the Middle east and north Africa has produced a sorcerer’s apprentice. No one is truly in control. In Egypt, the army has arrested former president Mubarak in a desperate bid to retain control of the revolution. In Libya, the West’s intervention has helped create a stalemate and tainted the opposition to Gaddafi. The challenge for revolutionary forces is to create a secular Pan-Arab leadership that can unite the masses and build for the next stage of the Arab Revolution, whose aim has to be social revolution.

Corinna Lotz
A World to Win secretary