APRIL 1998
Cosatu's
"Autumn Offensive Begins"
"The Union a Spear, Cosatu a Shield - Join a
Coastu Union Now"
This month marks COSATU's launch of its April mass recruitment campaign.
Every year in April - beginning this month and leading up to COSATU's 7th
National Congress in 2000 - will be designated as a month of mass recruitment.
The main thrust of the campaign is to organise the unorganised and to bring as
many workers into the COSATU fold as possible.
At its 6th
National Congress, COSATU adopted a range of resolutions on building the
federation and its affiliates. The "Autumn Offensive" in the words of
COSATU General Secretary, Sam Shilowa, will be "putting into practice,
existing resolutions." While the dominant focus is on mass recruitment, the
campaign also seeks to service membership, rebuild regions and locals, build
leadership with a specific focus on women, build an effective administration,
assist less organised affiliates and create self sufficiency.
The campaign is being undertaken at a time when workers are under serious
threat from the neo-liberal agenda of capital. While COSATU has been able, in
opposition to international trends, to sustain and increase its membership,
employers have intensified their efforts at unilateral restructuring of the
industry and the workplace in their never-ending search for maximum profits. The
resulting mass retrenchments and worsening labour conditions present COSATU and
its working class partner, the SACP, with fundamental challenges.
Shilowa has clearly stated that COSATU will not "conform" to the
dictates of the neo-liberal agenda, which seeks to "erode workers
rights." Indeed, there is a direct link between the launch of the campaign
and the international neo-liberal onslaught around what has been commonly
called, the "Washington consensus". In order for the working class in
South Africa to resist, and possibly defeat, this anti-worker and imperialist
agenda there is the need to strengthen the organisational capabilities of the
union movement.
The "Autumn Offensive" seeks to increase COSATU's membership by
fifty percent over the next three years. And yet, it is not merely a matter of
increasing the numbers. The campaign will place particular focus on the most
vulnerable workers. Special emphasis will be directed at women and young
workers, those in the informal sector, farm workers, as well as white workers
who have historically been outside of the COSATU fold. At the same time, the
campaign will direct COSATU locals, in conjunction with affiliates, to identify
industrial areas that are not organised or only have a small COSATU presence,
for targeted recruitment.
The campaign acknowledges that one of its key tasks is to target public
sector workers. This is important for two particular reasons: to empower
organised workers to resist the neo-liberal agenda of 'right-sizing' and
privatisation and to struggle for a pro-active, interventionist public sector;
and to strengthen the role of the Alliance in the transformation of the public
sector into a people's instrument for fundamental socio-economic development. In
this effort, COSATU has stated clearly that the campaign must 'reverse the trend
where new bureaucrats play lip service as ANC activists to the important role of
the trade union movement, yet take very few steps to themselves join COSATU
affiliated unions. The time for paper activists is over - they either believe in
trade unions or they don't."
|
Besides strengthening the organisational capacity of COSATU, the campaign
will also present the working class movement with new political challenges. As
the unions grow, there will also be the need to ensure that new members (and
those that they support through their work), are introduced to the political
principles of socialism. As COSATU's partner in the struggle for socialism and
as the most significant political representative of the South African working
class, the SACP and its cadres have a duty to play a leading role in providing
all workers with a socialist political education. It is the SACP that must take
the lead in presenting to the workers, a political programme to fight capitalism
and in the process to weld the workers into a formidable force for the building
of socialism now!
The "Autumn Offensive" campaign must be seen as a central part of
our common struggle to roll back the neo-liberal onslaught and struggle for
socialism. While it is necessary, it is not enough for socialists to merely
defend the gains already made. COSATU's campaign presents the working class
movement with a solid challenge. We must organise to win!
Political
Education
What do we mean by the ''Left"?
Langa Zita explores the meaning and context of this widely used term. This
is Part 1 of a two-part series.
Introduction
Developments with the country as a whole and in the democratic movement have
seen labels of left and right not no longer the sole preserve for those out side
the movement but also within. It is within this context that it is important for
us to unpack the concept of the Left.
The Left Project and Modernity
The Left Project is informed by, is an engagement with and embodies the
heritage of the French Revolution- the ideals of Liberty, Fraternity
(solidarity) and Equality. Though these values underpin the Left project, the
Left is also about engagement, appropriation and redefinition of these concepts.
Essentially we question the incapacity and the impossibility of the capitalist
system to enjoy and to experience, these values. Ours is a tradition that
embraces the principles of rationality, tolerance, plurality and acceptance of
difference. Its heritage is grounded in the understanding that history is an
ongoing process and that history is made by humans in organised formations.
Historically, Marxists have correctly been critical of the formality that
capitalism has given to these ideas. For capital and its ideologues, Liberty
means the freedom to exploit and oppress the working class. Furthermore, in a
context in which the majority's freedom to work, and therefore to live is
dependent on the profit considerations of capitalists, how free are people under
capitalism? Except for social democratic society, which is partly a result of
the divide between the rich, imperialist north and the former colonised and less
developed South, capitalism has not committed itself to the principle of
solidarity amongst the people. Capitalist society is based on competition where
only the fittest (capitalist), survive. What is never explained is how the rich
got rich. There is no way of explaining this, except in the eyes of capitalist
propagandists.
Alternative Rationality
Rationality is about the set of arguments that people bring to justify
certain courses of action. The Left represents a positive opposition to
capitalist development: Against the principle of the maximisation of output and
profit it sets the necessary self-limitation of the amount of labour performed
by the workers. There is a biological limit to how much workers can do. Against
the principle of competitive struggle between individuals it sets the principle
of solidarity and mutual support. Therefore the Left aims not to displace
economic rationality (i.e., different views on why and how production should
proceed), but seeks to place that rationality at the service of human society,
and in effect, argues for an alternative rationality.
Alternative Political-Economy
Similar to the alternative rationality that emphasises collective solutions
to social problems, the left holds an alternative political economy. This
alternative is underlined by the following principles:
- Collective ownership of the means of production
- Social controls on the operations of individual capitalist enterprises
- Public control(via the state)
- A role for social and accountable planning in the economy
The principles are clearly delineated in the Freedom Charter as well as in
the unashamedly socialist programme of the SACP. The only aspects of this
alternative political economy that was expressed in the RDP related in the
people centered-ness of the programme. This is due to the fact that the RDP only
sees the role of the state as dependent of the balance of evidence. Whilst state
involvement is not the only expression of an alternative political economy, does
not this limited view of the state not undermine the Left credentials of the
RDP?
The Left Project and Democracy
Democracy is an integral and fundamental element of the left project. By
democratisation, we don't mean occasional elections but continuous popular
participation in and control of all social realities (those critical to the
reproduction and enjoyment of life), including that of the economy. This notion
of popular democracy does not negate the rights and needs of the individual
citizen. These democratic principles extend internally into the formation of the
Left.
The Left Project and Alternative Society - Lessons
from the fall of Eastern Euope
Socialised market: A key lesson to be drawn from the fall of Eastern Europe
is that we cannot dispense with the use of market mechanism (i.e. buyers and
sellers). These mechanisms, though useful in as far as stimulating innovation
and choice, continue to have negative implications that have to be addressed.
For instance, there will always be tension and competition between various
producers, between producers and consumers. Because of this, the market
mechanism needs to be socialised and subjected to social control and regulation.
Popular participation: Profoundly absent in the Eastern Europe,
post-capitalist societies was popular participation by ordinary citizens,
whether individually or as communities. Socialism cannot be monopolised by a
single party, but will involve parties in conjunction with social movements and
other organised popular forces.
Left project in the midst of globalisation
The character of capitalism has undergone dramatic changes in the past few
decades. The rise and mobility of transitional corporations, the predominance of
finance capital and its increasing mobility across national boundaries
(expedited by technological advances and the tendency towards overproduction in
the capitalist system), has been propelled by an ideologically-driven,
neo-liberal onslaught since the late 1970s. These realities of globalisation
have dramatically changed (and even circumscribed), but do not negate,
alternative paths of human development. It remains a historical challenge for
the Left to elaborate tactics and strategies based on a clear understanding of
these changes, that advance a programme of socialist transformation in these new
circumstances.
Umsebenzi
Discussion
Building a Casino Economy?
Over the last year there has been a flurry of casino-related activity
around the country. In addition to the several large casinos already operating,
40 new casino licenses have either been granted or are still in the selection
process. With all the provinces vying with each other to see who can find the
illusory 'pot of gold' at the end of the casino rainbow, South Africa is in
danger of becoming, literally, a casino economy.
The irony is so simple as to deceive. In the midst of the never-ending calls
by business and government for creating an environment 'conducive' to foreign
investment, the one area where there has been no problem in attracting foreign
investors has been gambling. If anyone is looking for real competition, just
look at the bidding frenzy for the 40 casino licenses up for grabs.
All around the country, provincial governments have been falling over each
other in the rush to get the gaming tables and machines up and running.
Legislation has been quickly passed, Gambling Boards set up and licences
granted. It seems as if the ongoing legislative and bureaucracy problems
associated with issues such as land, housing and infrastructural provisions
have, somehow, miraculously been sorted out when it comes to setting up casinos.
Indeed, casino gambling is presented to the people as a veritable gold mine
for both the local communities in which the casinos will operate, and
government, who will reap rich tax rewards. Without a great deal of dissent,
many politicians and businessmen have managed to sell the idea that casino
gambling is good for the economy. Elaborate criteria have been used in the
granting of licenses to justify both the political correctness and economic
usefulness of casino gambling. These include whether the casino would
"enhance the neighbourhood", create "sustainable
employment", benefit nearby, "needy communities", allow
"historically disadvantaged people" to share in "ownership and
profit" and contribute to "reconstruction and development programme
aims". And with GEAR's budget cutting in full flight, the promises of a
regular cash flow coming from gambling taxes seems to good to pass up.
What makes all of this casino madness even worse is the seeming indifference
to the character of the companies involved. We all know about Sun
International's role in supporting apartheid and good business practice. Now we
can add London Clubs International, whose main shareholder is one of the most
generous supporters of right-wing causes internationally, and US-based Caesar's
World, constantly surrounded in controversy for its alleged links to the
criminal underworld. Seems like a strange line-up of foreign investors to
attract in order to contribute to the RDP?
Putting aside all the rhetoric about the benefits of casino gambling to the
people and economy of South Africa, the bottom line is that it is the 'ordinary
people' who pay the costs. Who do we think will be drawn to the bright lights
and promises of instant wealth that all these casinos will 'offer'? Who will
spend the last of their salaries on the beckoning one-arm bandits? What kind of
social relations will spring-up around all these new casinos, that are now much
closer to where the 'ordinary people' live?
Here's another bottom line. Casinos are capital intensive 'industries' and
thus will create few jobs in the long term. Furthermore, casino development in
other countries has been accompanied by increased deindustrialisation. Instead
of productive investment that creates jobs and enhances the quality of people's
lives, casino gambling offers speculative investment that brings little in the
way of either social quality of life or economic benefit to the vast majority.
If we are going to be serious about real development to benefit the working
and poor people of South Africa, then we must be equally serious about fighting
the 'development' of casino gambling. It is poison, and the sooner we kill it
off with a healthy antidote of working class struggle the better!
What do you Think ?
Readers are invited to respond
|
Red Star and Thumbs Down
to Comrade Madiba for his resolute defence of South Africa's sovereignty to 3 Thumbs Down - to the idea that 2 Thumbs Down - to the CEO of |
Provincail
Focus
Kwazulu-Natal - One Province - Two Systems
One important objective of the Alliance in KZN is to win the 1999
elections, writes SACP KZN PEC member, HAROON AZIZ. The difficulties are now
challenges - to create peace and stability, to normalise political activities
and to access so-called minority and rural constituencies.
KZN remains one
province with two systems - democracy and semi-feudalism - expressed as a
contradiction between the ANC and Inkatha. Both share a common constituency, the
poorest of the poor, but this commonality does not make the two parties the
same. The ANC is led by revolutionaries who articulate the needs of the poorest,
while Inkatha is led by a bureaucratic petty-bourgeoisie who use the poorest to
articulate the wants of its own leadership. This startum was bred by apartheid.
Although apartheid has disintegrated, this class has reintegrated itself
parasitically, in the new democratic system
The suggested merger between the ANC and Inkatha or any other party, must
test the assumption that the other party possesses equal, if not greater,
strength than the ANC. Some of the prerequisites are:
- an examination of the class forces which the other party represents
- an unconditional acceptance of the Freedom Charter
- practical commitment to the RDP
- prior agreement on a merger within the Alliance itself
The first major challenge for the Alliance is to win over the rural
constituencies, which are the support base for semi-feudalism. The second
challenge is to win over the minorities - Indians, coloureds and whites.
The Indians and coloureds, though oppressed, enjoyed certain meagre material
benefits form apartheid social engineering - exclusive jobs, homes, social
spending and education. These privileges were heavily subsidised by the
exclusion of Africans. Now, the inclusion of Africans in the enjoyment of all
human rights has threatened their privileges. In defence, they voted for the NP
and other reactionary parties, while perceiving the ANC as a destructive and
fearsome dragon, spitting fire at their meagre privileges. They now use the
reactionary parties as political fire fighters. The whites, with their still
powerful colonial attachments, still enjoy an over accumulation of privileges,
which are now under threat.
The consciousness of the minorities is informed by their material benefits.
How does the Alliance address their fears by the 1999 elections? Can we appeal,
subjectively, to their sense of social justice? It is extremely difficult for
the Alliance to win over these communities, which are characterised by racial
parochialism of a special type. If this is the reality, should the ANC not
consider election tactics like fielding independent candidates or entering into
electoral pacts? Whatever the chosen tactics, they must be developed within the
context of the African working class asserting its hegemony.
SAMWU
and the Fight Against Privatisation
Umsebenzi recently talked to the
General Secretary of South African Municipal Woerkers Union (SAMWU), Comrade
Roger Ronnie, about the anti-privatisation battle:
Umsebenzi: What are SAMWU's
gravest fears about the privatisation of services in the public sector?
Cde Ronnie: Many people will not have
access to privatised basic services. This would especially be the case for
formally deprived people during the apartheid era. Under privatisation tariffs
are increased, there is a decline in the quality of services provided and many
jobs are lost due to restructuring through retrenchments. These fears can be
eliminated, by ensuring that the provision of municipal services remains under
control of the public sector.
Umsebenzi: So far, what have been
the visible consequences for the services that have been privatised?
Cde Ronnie: As you know, this
privatisation drive started with the apartheid regime's macro-economic policies.
The Constitutional Department is heavily involved in the drive to privatise
municipal services. Refuse collection and the provision of water are the main
targets, clearly because these areas guarantee huge opportunities for private
profits.,We have seen a rapid deterioration of refuse removal where this service
has been privatised. In several townships in the Western and Northern Cape
refuse removal services have collapsed. I have since held a meeting with the
Premier of the Northern Cape to discuss this unhealthy situation. People in the
affected areas have had negative experiences with the private service providers.
The full negative impacts on privatised metre reading, information services and
water have yet to be assessed.
Umsebenzi: What has SAMWU done to
halt this privatisation of services?
Cde Ronnie: It has not been easy,
but SAMWU has managed to halt the privatisation of water in Nelspruit,
Mpumulanga. The Nelspruit Council wants to sell the water in the area to a
British company - British Biwater, on a 30 year contract! On 2 March 1998, SAMWU
won a major battle in Khayelitsha when the Commission for Conciliation,
Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) ruled that the privatisation of refuse removal
in the area was unfair labour practice. The CCMA also upheld the NLRF decision
that the public sector is the preferred deliverer of services. In general,
together with COSATU, SAMWU has been able to raise the profile of the
anti-privatisation campaign into a national campaign.
Umsebenzi: What are SAMWU's
expectations from the Alliance Partners?
Cde Ronnie: The Alliance must turn
the anti-privatisation campaign into a national one. The SACP must work closely
with COSATU and its affiliates in this struggle.
The ANC must not abuse the black empowerment campaign by supporting the
creation of a small peripheral black capitalist class at the expense of
uplifting the living conditions of all the formally deprived people of South
Africa. The current practice where a small, insignificant group of Africans are
being favoured with state contracts is not a mass process that can lead to
genuine black empowerment. We do not want a small layer of individuals only to
benefit from the National Democratic Revolution. COSATU needs to place the
anti-privatisation campaign on the Secretariat's agenda.
Umsebenzi: Are we winning the
struggle?
Cde Ronnie: We have a foot in the door.
More and more people are seeing the dangers of privatisation. There is still a
lot to be done.
For further reading see:
1. SACP Strategic Perspectives, as amended and adopted by
the SACP 9th National Congress, April, 1995.
2. SAMWU: Campaign Bulletin, Volume 1, Issue I, March,
1998.
3. SAMWU: Workers News, March 1998.
4. Department of Constitutional Development: Guidelines for
Private Sector Participation in Municipal Service Delivery.
5. Department of Constitutional Development: Municipal
Infrastructure Investment Framework.
|
Left Laugh Karl Marx goes to Heaven.So Karl Marx dies and shows up at the gates of heaven to be met So Peter rushes off to confer with God. God hears the name Marx Some time later, a free trade agreement is forged between Heaven "Well?" asks Peter of Satan, "What's the hold up? "So?" Peter asks, "What would you have us Some time later Satan realises that Hell has not received any "Peter! Peter, are you there?" Satan demands. "Oh I'm sorry," Peter said, "We have decided to "What?!" Satan was furious. "I demand to speak to |
|
Clinton's Visit SA says no to re-Colonisation |
If US President Bill Clinton thought that he was going to be welcomed to
South Africa like the new Messiah, then he was in for a surprise. South Africans
from across the spectrum showed they were not going to be pushed around.
There was the Cape
Town take-away shop-owner whose business was closed for the day by Clinton's
security arrangements. She was asked by national TV news if she did not feel
"honoured", nonetheless, by Clinton's visit. "I would have felt
more honoured if he had brought some business", she said. There was the
priest at Regina Mundi in Soweto who gave a hard-hitting sermon on adultery
while the hapless Clinton couple sat in the congregation. There was the mayor of
Cape Town who said she was not going to be treated like a sack of potatoes by
Clinton's heavy-handed body-guards.
And there was our President, comrade Mandela, who politely but very firmly
informed Clinton, in the most public way possible, that South Africa is a
sovereign country. We have our own foreign relations policy. We make no
apologies for our relations with Cuba, and other countries demonised by the US
administration. We reject the trade-not-aid, neo-liberal package that Clinton
has been peddling on his Africa trip.
One of the most pleasing things about our government's rejection of the US
"Africa Growth and Opportunities" Bill, is that we were taking up an
African cause. The conditions, that this Bill tries to set for US trade with
Africa, are not ones that particularly disqualify South Africa. But, in
rejecting the Bill, we were speaking for our continent.
All-round a clear message came through. In years to come, we may well realise
that the Clinton trip was an important moment for our new democracy. It has
provided a bench-mark, it was a moment in which we collectively defined who we
are, as South Africans, and where we are located in the world.
The common position that emerged from our government, from the ANC-led
alliance, and from the SACP, was not one of total rejection. We need trade and
we need foreign investment. We need, also, to engage the President of the most
powerful economy in the world.
As the SACP general secretary told the National Union of Mineworkers'
Congress: " Let Clinton visit the poorest continent in the world. Let
Clinton visit SA, where there are four Communist cabinet ministers, and two
deputy ministers, where there is one Communist provincial premier (who was once
a mine-worker), and where there are over 70 Communist MPs, and hundreds of
Communist mayors and local councillors. Let him come and see how we are trying
to build a non-racial, multiparty democracy in an African country after
centuries of colonial ruin, and decades of Cold War devastation of our region.
He must see."
During the Clinton visit, the SACP and its allies used the moment to advance
the following basic demands:
- Clinton said he wants to reverse the public opinion that Africa is a
"lost continent". If he is serious, then he must immediately
address the major reason for Africa's continued marginalisation - the debt
burden. The US must use its powers to cancel the debt of Africa's poorest
countries (many of them in our region). - Clinton said he wants to be a "partner" in an African
renaissance. If he is serious, then he must understand what partnership
means. We reject all attempts to use the present African situation as an
opportunity to build a US hegemony in opposition to former colonial powers,
like France. We say no to all forms of re-colonisation. - Clinton said he wants to campaign for democracy, peace and human rights in
our continent. If he is serious, then he must come clean on the role of the
US in supporting white minority rule in SA over many decades. He must also
understand that democracy is not just about formal, multi-party
institutions, but about ensuring that African governments are answerable to
their people, not to foreign bankers. - Clinton said he wants to help Africa economically. If he is serious, then
he must understand that allowing the cold winds of global trade to blow
through the ruins of our continent will not benefit Africans. Trade-not-aid
is a reactionary slogan. Africa needs trade and aid, investment and
development.
News
Brief
Call issued for a People's Uprising in Indonesia
Following the spectacular collapse of the Indonesian currency and the
resulting economic problems, popular anger has turned into more organised
opposition to the dictatorial and corrupt Suharto regime. The People's
Democratic Party (PRD), the largest and most organised mass opposition, has
issued a call for the "international community" to support the
"people's struggle to overthrow Suharto" and to help the "people
to build a more democratic, economic and political system." Stating the
need to organise a "people's uprising", the PRD is now calling for
"independent and sovereign People's Councils" to be established at all
levels of the society in order to replace the existing "puppet"
Suharto structures of governance. Alongside this, the PRD is urging the
Indonesian masses to: reject the rigged electoral processes; launch mass
protests and strikes to seize and occupy factories, offices, schools etc.; and
end conflicts between the people based on religion and ethnic identification. All
internationalists unite behind the Indonesian people's struggle!
Palestine
50 Years of Enduring Expansionism
Increased political and social conflict, within and between Israel,
Palestine and neighboring countries, threatens to ignite yet another major war
in this historically volatile region. YOEL SHEMTOV, an activist in the Communist
Party of Israel, argues that we must understand the history of expansionism in
the region if feasible and informed solutions are to be found.
On 29 November
1947, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly accepted the
"partition" programme for the division of Palestine into a Jewish
state and an Arab state. The Palestinian Arabs rejected the programme. The
Zionist leadership accepted it joyfully, and then proceeded to empty it of all
meaningful content.
Emptying a programme of its content is not merely an abstract act. Unlike the
original formulation of the partition decision, the Zionists conceived of
partition as sharing the Palestinian Arab state's territory with the Kingdom of
TransJordan on the one hand, and emptying the Jewish state of its Arab
population on the other.
It was King Abdallah of TransJordan who had the most powerful and well
organised army in the region. After the 'partition', he won the area known today
as "the West Bank." That area was annexed to Transjordan which soon
became "The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan" (that is, both the East Bank
and West Bank). The border between the Zionist entity and the Arab West Bank
were set mostly in agreements. In rare cases of dispute, the Zionists were
initially unable to challenge the military supremacy of The Arab Legion.
The western side of the border was to be "The Jewish State," but it
contained more Arabs than Jews. Thus the Jewish character of the country had to
be realised through the transfer of some 800,000 Palestinian Arabs out of their
homeland. The expulsion was carried out during the 1948 war and in the years
that followed. In typical hypocrisy, they were declared absent, and their
properties confiscated by the state - their vacated homes were settled by Jews
coming from Europe and Arab countries.
Any demand for return was met with the claim that the return of Palestinian
refugees would negate the existence of the Jewish State. The legitimacy of such
existence within these borders was never seriously challenged outside of the
Arab world. Most amazing was the success of Zionist propaganda in describing
this massive exodus as an unplanned consequence of war, while still denying the
Arab refugees' right of return.
In 1967, Israel occupied (among others) the West Bank and Gaza, where it
implemented a military regime. The conflict's main focus gradually shifted to
the future of the West Bank and Gaza. While not annexing it (in order 'to keep
the Jewish character of the state'), Israel began placing settlers in the West
Bank. In the first few years, the settlement project was limited in both scope
and size, but with the emergence of the ultra-nationalist religious settlement
movement "Gush Emunim" (1974), the change in Israeli regime (1977) and
the separated "peace" agreement between Israel and Egypt (Camp David,
1978), it accelerated significantly.
While subsequent international pressure has prevented Israel from expelling
the Arab population as it did in 1948, an apartheid regime, that gives the
Jewish settler population all possible privileges, and denies the indigenous
community its most basic rights, has been implemented in these territories. The
West Bank, too, is undergoing a process of 'Judaization', not as rapid as the
one that followed the establishment of the 'Jewish State', but no less
determined.
Although the Oslo Accords (1993), signed between Israel and the Palestinian
Authority, mark some geographic limits to this expansionary process, settler
expansion continues in most of the West Bank. Thus far, only three percent of
the West Bank has been turned over to both Palestinian civil and military
control, known as "Area A". Twenty-five percent of the West Bank has
been turned over to Palestinian civil but not military control, which remains in
Israeli hands, known as "Area B". The remaining seventy-two percent of
the West Bank remains under Israeli civil and military control, known as
"Area C".
In the 1990s, the biggest effort has been the attempted 'Judaization' of
Jerusalem, through annexation and building new Jewish "neighborhoods"
in the annexed areas. Simultaneously, strong pressure has been put on the
Palestinian population to leave. This is accomplished by various administrative
means like complete neglect of urban planning and building permits in Arab
areas, house demolitions, expulsions, ID card confiscation and the denial of
family unification. In 1993 it was ceremoniously announced that in occupied East
Jerusalem there were more Jews than Arabs. Now, it is 'Greater' Jerusalem, a
quarter of the West Bank, that is being targeted for 'Judaization.'
Throughout, a most hypocritical role has been played by the Western allies of
Israel, mainly US Imperialism. While pretending to be fair mediators, they have
given Israel full support for any act of expansion. Meanwhile, the Palestinian
leadership, who have looked to America 'to deliver the goods', finds out time
and again that it has no will to do so.
There were hopes that the Oslo Accords would revive the partition idea. The
continuing expansionist steps carried out by Israel (now under the grip of the
Netanyahu regime) are meant to make this impossible. The apparent 'success' of
these activities leaves only one solution worth fighting for - the establishment
of one democratic secular state in all Palestine.
