Where Next?

Juan Cole is a professor of history at the University of Michigan, specialising in the Middle East. He also maintains a blog, which is a must read for anybody wanting to understand what's going on in Iraq. Today he has an ominous post, which does not bode well for the people of Iraq:

Well, now that Fallujah is liberated (i.e. wrecked and empty), residents of Ramadi are now beginning to flee in fear that they might get equally liberated. It is not clear how much liberation Iraqi cities (or ex-cities) can stand.

We still don't know how many people were killed during the assault on Fallujah, but reports for the Guardian, Channel 4 News and Socialist Worker suggest that it is likely to be high. Whatever the truth, I wouldn't want to be living in Ramadi right now.

Good News and Other Stuff

Yesterday's Grauniad reported:

Young people are regaining an interest in politics, because of the controversy aroused by Iraq, global terrorism, crime and natural disasters which hurt the developing world, a survey by the Electoral Commission, published today, says.

The commission found that today's 16-to 20-year-olds appeared to be much more interested in politics that their recent predecessors. Eighty per cent said they felt strongly about political controversies that affected their daily lives and 73% discussed such matters with their friends and family.

Presumably then Nottingham Student Peace Movement and our comrades at other institutions can expect a succesful period of recruitment over the coming years. Which'll be nice.

It's not all good news though. While "ten per cent was actively engaged in political activity, 5% had joined a political party in their teens: twice the rate of the age group immediately above them." Because that's what we need. More party hacks!

The report notes that the survey "does not provide an explanation, only clues to why political interest may have grown." This allows the Michael White to speculate that the Indian Ocean Tsunami was a factor. This seems strange. Recall that the tsunami was barely six weeks ago, is it really plausible then that it was a major cause? I think not, leading me to conclude that the Iraq War is the decisive factor. This should hardly be a surprise to anyone who remembers the amazing protests against the war in schools up and down the country.

It's coming to something though when school kids are more radical than students...

Buff Hoon

Friend and fellow Nottingham Uni based activist-type Dave Wills has a funky photo blog which I've just stumbled across. I draw your attention in particular to this gem from last November:


More on the Minister for War's visit to the uni here.

Sudan Anyone?

Most people have heard about the ongoing conflict in Darfur, even if they don't know much about it. For those of you who don't, the roots of the conflict lie in resentment felt by many Darfurians at the way the Sudanese government in Khartoum is neglecting them. This led to a rebellion by the Darfur Liberation Army (which later changed its name to the Sudan Liberation Army, SLA) and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM). In response the Sudanese government proceeded to arm and equip Janjaweed nomads, who come from a different ethnic group to most of the inhabitants in Darfur (the former are nominally Arabs, the latter Africans, although both are in fact black), who have carried out vicious attacks on Darfurian villages, forcing thousands to flee their homes, resulting in the deaths of anything between 100 and 200,000, perhaps even more. The conflict has been described by many, including the US Houses of Congress, as "genocide" and not without good reason.

The dynamics which led to the conflict, with the central government neglecting the populations of another part of the country is unfortunately mirrored elsewhere in Sudan. This lay at the root of the twenty-year war between Khartoum and the Sudanese People's Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A) from the predominantly Christian south. It is also a problem in the east of the country. Not that you'd know it from the mainstream media who seem to have largely forgotten about the conflict in Darfur (despite reports that Sudanese jets have been bombing villages in the region) let alone problems elsewhere in the troubled state.

I mention all this in order to introduce this article which reports that Sudanese police killed between 20 and 40 people when they opened fire on demonstrators in the Red Sea city of Port Sudan in the northeast of the country.

As ever with issues in Sudan difficult questions arise as to how we respond. Activists have an instinctive opposition to western intervention, which is entirely understandable when one looks at the damage which such interventions have done over the years. That we should simply stand by while such violence is perpetrated by the Sudanese government, hardly seems a satisfactory response, however.

In many ways, that anti-imperialist movements must confront this conflict between our opposition to repression by governments and western imperialism is a sign of their weakness. If they were more powerful, the debate would be more important (because it would have real consequences), but other options might be available. It is possible to conceive of a response along the lines of the efforts of Peace Brigades International (PBI) or the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), albeit on a considerably larger scale. The participation of many socialists and anarchists in the Spanish Civil War as a demonstration of their opposition to Fascism, perhaps provides a further model.

In the meantime we must compromise within the realities of the world we live in if we wish to avoid condemning ourselves to irrelevance. In the context of Darfur, it is my opinion that an African Union peacekeeping force (perhaps funded by much richer western governments) should be empowered to intervene forcefully to protect Darfurians. This should be coupled with efforts to address the grievances which fuel the conflict and incorporate not just the armed actors (the government and the rebels), but also representatives of civil society.

Is this a realistic response in the northeast? Certainly the AU does not have enough resources to police all of Sudan (Darfur alone is the size of France). Perhaps as the conflict is at a much earlier stage there is much more potential for effective intervention on the part of western activists. The efforts of PBI in the likes of Colombia, Aceh and Mexico demonstrate that this sort of activity is possible and can have a positive effect.

To be sure, such a response is unlikely to be forthcoming, but the question then is why not? Why do we allow situations such as this to develop until our government decide that the time is ripe for "humanitarian intervention," only to find ourselves forced to chose between the devil and the deep blue sea? It is time we became more proactive and started building the kind of world we'd like to see rather than just responding to the excesses of our glorious leaders. There's a world to win. What are you waiting for?

Positivity

(Article to appear in the next edition of Ceasefire.)

It is useful when thinking about activism to break it down into three components: (a) what’s wrong with what we have now; (b) what we want to replace it with; and (c) how we get from (a) to (b). This applies whether you are talking about reforms within the confines of the prevailing system or more extensive root and branch change (revolution).

When we look around the world today there is no shortage of evils which could fall within the realms of (a) and as such, there has been a tendency amongst activists to focus on this, sometimes at the expense of (b) and (c). You can go into any bookshop and find a wealth of books critiquing racism, patriarchy, imperialism, heterosexism, imperialism etc, but far fewer suggesting alternative systems or describing how we can get there.

An examination of the previous editions of this fine publication [i.e. Ceasefire - Dk] demonstrates that the Peace Movement is as guilty as anybody. Fortunately this focus is not total. Scanning through the last edition [available here as a pdf] one discovers an article by Andy Burrell on “direct local democracy” and a debate between Hich Yezza and Catherine Taylor on the merits of mass demonstrations. Nevertheless the fundamental point remains.

One possible consequence of this focus on the negative (what is wrong) rather than the positive (what we want) is a sense of powerlessness. If we have no idea of what we want or how to go about getting there it is easy to conclude that there is, indeed, no alternative. If there is no alternative, it follows that there is no point in seeking to alter the way things are and hence no point in getting involved in political movements.

It is clear, therefore, that those of us involved in activism, whether against imperialism, capitalism, racism or whatever, should seek to articulate a view of the kind of world we want to see and how we go about getting there. We don’t need to describe every single detail of this world, but we do need to set out comprehensive, convincing alternatives to the institutions we oppose with at least an outline of how we propose to get there. In the short to medium term this means that activists should vigorously debate possible alternatives, testing and critiquing them in order to establish which is best. Hopefully the final session of the Peace Conference, which will have speakers putting the case for Participatory Economics, revolutionary socialism and federalism, will play a role in igniting this vital debate.

We must also think long and hard about how we realise this new world (or even achieve small victories in the meantime). This is important, not only to demonstrate that the world we would like to see is genuinely achievable, but because it is far too easy to do things simply because that’s what we’ve always done, regardless of whether it is moving us towards our goal. This was one of my major criticisms of the Stop the War Coalition who manoeuvred themselves into a hegemonic position within the anti-war movement but seem to have no conception of strategy. Instead they call one national demonstration after another in the vain hope of repeating the undoubted success of February 15, 2003.

Attentive readers will note that this article ironically (perhaps even hypocritically) avoids offering any positive suggestions of its own. This is certainly true, but it is to be hoped that it will get people thinking and encourage others (perhaps even you!) to put pen to paper and start talking about what they want. Answers on the back of a postcard!