[Via... http://www.egroups.com/group/Communist-Internet ] . .REFLECTIONS ON THE QUEBEC SUMMIT Statement of the Central Executive Committee, Communist Party of Canada, May 23, 2001 An energetic debate is now under way within labour and democratic circles on the April 2001 "Summit of the Americas" in Quebec City and the mass mobilizations against it. The significance of these dramatic events, the tactics employed, and the direction the fightback should take from here, are crucial issues in this debate, one which our Party considers both timely and urgent. In our view, the mobilization in opposition to the Summit and its centrepiece, the proposed "Free Trade Area of the Americas," was an outstanding success for several reasons. First, because of the sheer size and breadth of the anti-Summit protests. Upwards of 75,000 joined the main anti-FTAA march, and perhaps as many as 100,000 participated in the myriad of other actions during the week-long protests. The Canadian government of course anticipated that there would be protests, and went to great effort to threaten and intimidate the anti-globalization forces. Its antidemocratic provocations backfired however, and brought more people into the streets than the Summit organizers ever imagined. Second, because of the high level of unity and awareness among the anti-Summit forces around the slogans "Scrap the FTAA!" and "Another Americas is possible." A much more pronounced anti-capitalist perspective permeated the protests. Although differences emerged over the choice of tactics (peaceful protest, nonviolent resistance, "direct action", etc.), the anti-globalization forces were, for the most part, united around the basic demand to reject the FTAA in its entirety, rather than the limited demand to have a seat in the negotiation process, and for minor amendments to the treaty text (eg., a social charter on labour and environment). Attempts by Summit organizers to coopt certain sections (especially labour and NGOs) in the hope of dividing and weakening the FTAA opposition were largely unsuccessful. Third, because the Summit mobilization injected new vigour and dynamism into the anti-FTAA campaign and the struggle against globalization in general, and has created a very positive basis for further escalation. Despite the efforts of Chr�tien, Bush and the capitalist media to dismiss the effect of the protests -- and failing that, to cast them in the worst possible light -- the demonstrations and actions had a profound impact on the Summit itself, and on public opinion here in Canada and throughout the hemisphere. Intended as a glitzy showcase for the FTAA, the Summit instead turned into a public relations nightmare. The massive security and police presence and the notorious "wall of shame" -- not to mention the hail of thousands of rounds of tear gas and plastic bullets -- graphically revealed the true face of the pro-FTAA forces -- primarily the imperialist states and the TNCs they serve -- and their utter contempt for democracy. As seen earlier in Vancouver, Seattle, Melbourne, Prague and elsewhere, the massive reliance on police repression in Quebec City is further proof that, in its drive to consolidate a new regime of global corporate domination, the ruling class in Canada and other imperialist states is prepared to discard the fundamental rights of the people, and resort to brute force to quell working class or any resistance to its neoliberal agenda. It is a telling irony that, in the midst of such flagrant trampling on democratic rights, Prime Minister Chr�tien should boast about the inclusion of a so-called "democracy clause" in the FTAA draft text as a great "achievement" of the Summit. In fact, this clause has nothing to do with upholding democratic principles and practices in the Americas. On the contrary, it is a cheap (and ultimately doomed) manoeuvre to isolate Cuba politically and punish it economically (by excluding it from the proposed trade zone). Moreover, it is a potential sword to be brandished over the heads of any other people or country in the region which dares to deviate from the neoliberal "path of development." * * * * * Shaken by the size and militancy of the Quebec protests, the FTAA's main proponents have nevertheless tried to characterize the Summit as a victory, and have gone to great lengths to reassure its backers that the FTAA is "still on course." They want Canadians and the peoples of the Americas as a whole to believe that the treaty is a virtual fait accompli, and that only some "fine tuning" remains before it is implemented at the end of 2005. In fact, the struggle to stop the FTAA is far from over. The battle has just been joined, and this pro-corporate trade and investment pact remains extremely vulnerable and can be defeated. Although the Bush Administration and the U.S.based transnationals were successful in imposing the general parameters for a negotiated treaty at the Summit, significant differences remain among the 34 participating national governments (all except Cuba). As the leaked "chapter on investment" shows, difficult negotiations lie ahead, and the terms of the pact could well be substantially altered or be derailed entirely long before it is slated to take effect. No sooner had the clouds of toxic tear gas began to disperse, than the facade of "hemispheric consensus" began to dissipate. Venezuelan President Chavez was the first to indicate his country's serious reservations about the draft text. Other Latin American and Caribbean governments also expressed misgivings about the threats to their national sovereignty posed by the onerous terms of this pro-corporate treaty. Cuba has sharply condemned the FTAA as a crude bid by U.S. imperialism to complete the "annexation" of the Americas. While Cuba has been excluded from the FTAA negotiations, its searing critique carries considerable weight, especially among working people throughout Latin America. The "protectionist" current within the U.S. ruling class is another important factor that could complicate the FTAA negotiations. These forces are demanding even greater concessions from Latin American and Caribbean states (and Canada as well), while maintaining key restrictions on foreign imports into the U.S. domestic market. They are exerting influence within Congress to deny the Bush Administration "fast-track" approval of the FTAA (as was done earlier to the Clinton Administration). The European Union and Japan are also deeply concerned about the drive by U.S. imperialism to consolidate its economic, political and military hegemony of this hemisphere and reduce or cut off their access to lucrative resources and markets in the Americas. All of these contradictions may serve to frustrate efforts to impose the FTAA on the countries and peoples of the hemisphere. The most determining factor in defeating the FTAA however will be the conscious and united resistance of the peoples -- led by the working class and its closest allies. Imperialism has an immense stake in the resources of Latin America. But many peoples of the hemisphere, and in the forefront the people of Cuba, have a long history of resistance to imperialism, and struggle for progress and national independence. These are countries with a strong history of revolutionary struggles. * * * * * One of the most significant features of the anti-Summit protests was the extent of mobilization by the labour movement, both within Quebec and across the rest of the country. At the outset of the anti-Summit preparations, the three main centres of the Quebec labour movement were cautious and noncommittal about their involvement. In certain quarters, there was concern over the potential for violent repression, as well as distrust of some of the non-labour forces. There was also hesitation about mobilizing a mass protest that would run directly contrary to the increasingly neoliberal, pro-globalization positions of the Parti Quebecois and its federal counterpart, the BQ. As the Summit approached however, the left and militant forces -- both within the leadership and among the rank-and-file -- gained the upper hand over the class collaborationist forces and succeeded in mobilizing a massive trade union presence on the streets of Quebec City. The large turnout of workers reflected not only anger at the antidemocratic measures of the Chr�tien government, but also growing support within Quebec for independent political action by the labour movement, which is increasingly distancing itself from the PQ, on both economic and social issues. No less important was the mobilization of labour in English-speaking Canada, particularly in light of divisions and difficulties in mobilizing members in recent years. Despite the recent CAW-CLC split however, thousands of trade union members mobilized for the Summit actions. The just-announced resolution of this dispute creates much more favourable conditions for labour to unite and fight around common objectives, such as opposition to the FTAA. While the mobilization and consciousness-raising of Canadian workers is of central and decisive importance, the activation of other sections of the people -- women, environmentalists, social and antipoverty activists and especially youth and students -- is also crucial to the advance of the anti-globalization struggle. In Quebec, the youth distinguished themselves for their militancy and courage in the face of brutal police repression. Their determination encouraged many other protesters, including trade union members, to join them in solidarity at the protests along the "wall of shame." Some of the youth actions were marked by spontaneity and a lack of clear leadership with a thought-out strategy, tactics, or alternative policies. In the pitched confrontations with police and the ensuing confusion, small bands of self-named anarchists (and probably more than a few police-agents provocateurs) undertook some actions which the police then used as justification to increase repression against the largely nonviolent and defenceless participants. Ultimate responsibility for the violence along the "wall" however must be placed squarely at the feet of the police and security forces, and the Canadian government which directed them. If some of the youth actions might have been ill-considered or adventurist at times, it must equally be noted that the decisions taken by the main organizers of the April 22 mass demonstration -- the "People's Summit" convenors, labour and mainstream NGOs -- were too cautious in character. These organizers underestimated the mood of the participants, most of whom were looking for more militant leadership. There was disappointment when the main march route steered well clear of the "wall" and ended at a remote site far from downtown. Many, including rank-and-file workers, wanted to show their solidarity with the youth along the wall, and to express their own anger at the FTAA and its assault on democratic rights, in a disciplined, peaceful, yet firm manner. One of the key lessons of Quebec is that the anti-globalization movement is now becoming a truly mass phenomenon, bringing broad sections of the people into active struggle. This includes, not surprisingly, activists with reformist and social-democratic views. For instance, it is significant that -- under pressure from below -- the NDP leadership has now come out against the FTAA, and has called for Canada's withdrawal from NAFTA. * * * * * Quebec City is an important marker in the struggle against the FTAA and corporate globalization. Quebec shows that the movement continues to grow, and to mature politically. The movement is entering a more militant phase, both in terms of demands and tactics of struggle. Left and anticapitalist ideas, those critical of capitalism and its lack or real democracy and genuine human rights, are spreading widely. Future actions will be even more confrontational in character. The most decisive task will be to continue to build the mass character of such protests, involving ever widening circles of the working class and the people in struggle against corporate globalization. Only such a course can move the fightback from resistance to advance for the working class and the downtrodden. During the "People's Summit," there was some useful discussion about the next steps in the fight against the FTAA. One of the main recommendations was to demand that any draft FTAA treaty be placed before the people in each and every country in the Americas for a democratic vote via referendum. This is a useful demand, aimed directly at the antidemocratic nature of the negotiations to date. This tactic has some limitations however: not all national governments will agree to a referendum. They may alter the wording of the referendum to create confusion, or change the timing of the referendum to attempt to weaken and dissipate the anti-FTAA movement. Several activists pointed out during that discussion that, in addition to the call for referenda, other forms of mass struggle will also be required to defeat the treaty, including the proposal for an hemisphere-wide general strike of workers, linked to other mass actions and civil disobedience. May 1, 2001 was suggested as a possible target date. Such an historic action by workers would hit directly at the interests of the transnational corporations and the neoliberal government promoting the FTAA, and bring tens, even hundreds of millions of people actively into the struggle to defeat it. This kind of escalation is possible, provided that the labour movement throughout the Americas begins immediately to develop a coordinated plan, and starts to mobilize working people in Canada, the U.S., and throughout Latin America and the Caribbean for its realization. The anti-FTAA movement brings together people's demands for democracy and to end the corporate agenda that undermines the sovereignty, equality and social conditions of the hemisphere's nations. It is reopening discussion on the alternative to capitalist plunder -- namely, socialism. The left forces and the Communist Parties of the hemisphere have a special responsibility to ensure that this struggle stays united and grows. ***************
