Tariq Ali : A Despised Leader Suffers His First Loss

Blair Defeated on Terror Laws

Tariq Ali is author of the recently released Street Fighting Years (new
edition) and, with David Barsamian, Speaking of Empires & Resistance.

Counterpunch -- -- 11/09/05

For the first time since he was elected Prime Minister in 1997, Tony Blair
was just defeated in a vote in the British Parliament. The issue was the
so-called 'war against terrorism'. Blair had insisted that the police be
given extra powers to hold people in detention for 90 days before being
charged and brought before a court. These were the laws of apartheid South
Africa. These were the laws of 'preventive detention' enforced by the
British Empire in the colonies. These were the laws Blair wanted to apply to
British citizens. Forgotten was habeas corpus and the rights of the
'free-born Englishman.' Even the Conservative Party, which has slavishly
supported Blair on Iraq, regarded this as an unwarranted and unnecessary
display of authoritarianism. And enough Labour Members of Parliament voted
against their leader to reject Blair's measures by 322 votes to 291--a
bigger than expected majority of 31.

Even before the London bombings of 7 July the Labour Government had
declared war on civil liberties in the name of the 'war against terror'. The
main reason why Blair and his debased Cabinet wanted to push the new
law was to avoid their own responsibility for the events of 7 July. They
played on ignorance, prejudice and fear to frighten British citizens, a
majority of whom know only too well that the reason for the attacks on
London was Blair's decision to participate in Bush's war on Iraq.

He is a much-despised leader in the country at large and the defeat in
parliament has weakened Blair's authority in his own party. All his
policies, his mistakes, his love of the rich, his aberrations, his vengeful
platitudes as he denounces civil liberties, his warmongering has now been
thrown open to the taunts of his critics, whose numbers too will increase.
Many in liberal England who have been kind to New Labour will now begin to
enquire into policies they had, till now, accepted on good faith. Blair's
desire to privatise education and health might now never be fulfilled.
Ridicule and contempt could well drive Blair out of 10 Downing Street.

He has promised his loyal and faithful would-be-successor, Gordon Brown,
that he would resign before the next elections. This defeat has wounded
Blair, but he might still recover. He has not yet been shaken to the core.
Expedient trickery will be used to try and revive him, but for how long? It
is said by those close to him that he wants to leave on a high, that he does
not want to be driven out by the Iraq war, but it is no longer up to him.
The ignominy and disgrace he has brought to his country as a result of that
war cannot be wished away so easily. Will his gutless Cabinet put on white
coats and tell him his time is up or will they allow him to bleed slowly to
death? These are the questions raised by yesterday's defeat in Parliament.

Tariq Ali can be reached at: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

***

Nov 6, 2005, NY Tr. Digest

Mar del Plata Spin Ccyle

by Joaquin Bustelo

That whirring sound you hear are the spinmeisters of the Bush
administration trying to prettify the outcome of the Mar del Plata
Summit of the Americas into something suitable for U.S. public
consumption.

To briefly recap: Argentina, which was hosting the summit, set
(as Lula put it) a 3-point agenda: "jobs, jobs and more jobs." Or as
the official conference slogan had it: "Creating Jobs to Fight Poverty
and Strengthen Democratic Governance"

Bush went to Argentina empty-handed on this score and
nevertheless wanted to get the Free Trade Area of the Americas
negotiations, which had basically crashed and burned at a Miami
ministerial level meeting two years ago, restarted.

Bush was met with a week-long alternate summit, a mass march
and rally of tens of thousands on Friday morning and violent street
protests in the afternoon while President Nestor Kirchner welcomed
the summiteers with a brief speech where he said Argentina wasn't
about to go down the road of "economic growth" without job growth.
Been there, done that, and at the end people didn't even have
enough money to buy the T-shirt. It's time to find another road.

The event was marked by an unusual amount of tension, reflected
in the cancellation of multiple press briefings and even a banquet.
Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay and Venezuela took a firm
position that the conditions did not exist that would make it possible
to have a fair FTAA. And thus no matter how many ways the Bushites
and their Latin American acolytes tried to square that circle, and get
the five to accept at least some nice-sounding noises about the FTAA
in the final communiqui, the five wouldn't budge.

But it also pissed them and lots of other folks off that Bush
basically hijacked the meeting away from a discussion of job creation
to a fruitless two-day wrangle over setting the date to negotiate over
the FTAA, which was basically the U.S. demand.

That's because Brazil has been very clear. It's not going to let
the Americans do to its agricultural sector what was done to Mexico,
where Mexico dropped its tariffs and was invaded by an ocean of
ultra-subsidized U.S. agricultural products. The U.S. said to Brazil
and others in the FTAA, so sorry, we're going to talk about subsidies
in the Doha round of the WTO negotiations. Not here. So Brazil said,
well, then there's really no point in talking about an FTAA right now
until we see what happens in the WTO with these subsidies. That's
basically Argentina's position, too.

In the end, a "compromise" was reached -- the position of both
the pro and anti FTAA camps would be in the final statement. In other
words, the United States was forced to accept having the final
communiqui record the position of the five that until and unless the
imperialist countries do something about their agricultural subsidies
and other trade-distorting swindles, not only wasn't there going to be a
deal, they weren't even going to waste their time talking about it.

This position is entirely reasonable. The United States has
refused to engage on its monstrous subsidies to agribusinesses in the
framework of FTAA talks. It claims it can't on account of it is already
negotiating about the same thing in the Doha round of world trade talks.

But the U.S. still wants countries like Brazil and Argentina to
eliminate their tariffs so that the ultra-subsidized U.S. corn, wheat,
soybeans, etc., can nuke their rural economies, just as they have
already done to Mexico and are now doing to Central America. In other
words, areas in which the U.S. wants concessions from Latin America
are on the table; but even in the same sectors of the economy and even
the same specific commodities, the U.S. isn't even willing to talk about
what it might give.

In Latin America there is a rather vulgar description of such a
deal which involves bending over and the lack of a use of Vaseline. And,
not unreasonably, these five Latin American countries, with the clear
sympathy of the majority of people in the region, invited the United
States to apply that procedure to itself.

Comes now the Washington Post, to describe how *well* Bush did
in Mar del Plata.

"In Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's version of Latin America,
the leaders who concluded a two-day summit Saturday are poised to
ignite a unified, region-wide socialist revolution that rejects U.S.-style
capitalism outright.

"But if the summit proved anything, it was that there is more to
Latin America than Chavez."

That's the LEAD of the article -- I kid you not. That dastardly dude
Hugo Chavez, was on the verge of having folks like Vicente Fox join
him on the barricades in a revolutionary overturn more earth-shaking
than any since the October Revolution. But St. George the Bush slew
that dragon.

"Instead of backing their Venezuelan counterpart's rallying cry
to bury a U.S.-backed proposal that would link markets throughout the
Western Hemisphere, the leaders reluctantly agreed to discuss the
proposal again during future talks. Cautious skepticism -- not Chavez's
tone of enraged dismissal -- emerged as the strongest unifying force in
a region exploring the possibility of greater independence from U.S.
influence."

One of the curious things about this "agreement" that the
Washington Post talks about is that they don't quote it. There is
literally no reference anywhere in the story to the official document
that issued from the event. Instead there is a recapitulation of some of
the reasons why Latin Americans hate U.S. imperialism in general and
George W. Bush in particular, all as a way of saying that given this,
Bush did OK.

The Miami Herald takes a similar tack: "Bush is bruised but not
beaten in talks. President Bush faced harsh criticism from Latin
American presidents over a free-trade proposal, but no clear winners
and losers emerged."

Remember, these are the imperialist-inspired "hemispheric
summits" that Clinton launched under the aegis of "the Washington
Consensus" for neoliberal globalization a decade ago in Miami. "The
Spirit of Miami" would lead by 2005 to the biggest and most powerful
trade block the world had ever seen.

And here we are, in 2005, and not only is there no free trade
area of the Americas, but the "Spirit of Mar del Plata" has replaced
the spirit of Miami. That spirit was expressed in the alternative summit
and the big demonstration of tens of thousands of people repudiating
Bush's visit. But it was also clearly echoed in the official summit itself
and not just by Hugo Chavez.

"U.S. policy not only generated misery and poverty but also a
great social tragedy that added to institutional instability in the
region, provoking the fall of democratically elected governments,"
Kirchner said at the summit Friday. "We must create a kind of
globalization that works for everyone, and not just for a few."

Compare that to the halcyon days of the mid-1990's when TINA
--There Is No Alterative-- was the watchword. Faith in the "free market"
religion has collapsed throughout Latin America as working people
have seen what it means in practice. And even bourgeois politicians
(well, at least some of them) are smart enough not to parade before
the people mounted on a horse that's dead.

The Herald quoted with a straight face this official U.S.
assessment: "It turned out well," said U.S. assistant of state for Latin
American affairs Tom Shannon. "Chavez came to Mar del Plata to
bury FTAA. Instead he resurrected it. He provoked a very deep debate
among the leaders about FTAA," he told The Herald.

Sure. I believe it. The U.S. *really* wants a big debate about
the FTAA. That's why they're always inviting Fidel to these summits.
NOT.

All of the bourgeois press emphasized that the division was
between the big majority (29 countries) and a small minority (5). None
even mention that the five are really six, because Cuba is excluded
from the talks but it is part of the hemisphere and there ain't no way it's
going to join the FTAA. Nor that together the six represent 275 million
of the 580 million Latin Americans (excluding colonial subjects) which
is 47% of the region's population and in  reality the bulk of its
economic muscle.

You can contrast the U.S. press coverage to the way it was
covered elsewhere. "Bush faces Latin fury as popularity sinks at
home." is the headline in the Independent. The FT says, "Bush is
single target of multiple complaints." The BBC reports flatly, "No
trade deal at Americas summit."

The BBC quotes the typical U.S. spin (basically, that it was really
good because no one torched copies of previous pro-FTAA summit
declarations, at least not during the official sessions):

"The US National Security Adviser, Steven Hadley, spoke of 'real
progress'.

"'We went from a summit which was supposed to bury FTAA to a
summit in which all 34 countries actually talk in terms of enhanced
trade ... recognizing there are challenges,' he said."

The Spanish news agency EFE, however, had a very different take:

"The 'Spirit of Miami' failed in Mar del Plata

"Eleven years and successive fruitless meetings had to pass
before the so-called 'Spirit of Miami,' which promised an Americas
united by free trade, would fail in Mar del Plata, 11,500 kilometers
to the south of the place where the 'integrationist dream' was born.

"Miami and Mar del Plata, hosts of the First and Fourth Summit
of the Americas, close the circle of a process that was initiated
in 1994 when the political stage of the hemisphere looked very
different from what it does today."

We'll see now what happens today in Brazil where Bush will
attend a barbecue thrown by Lula.

Joaquin

***

Prensa Latina, Havana
http://www.plenglish.com

Besieged City Welcomes Bush to Panama

by Fausto Triana

Panama, Nov 7 (Prensa Latina) An absolutely besieged city, full of
police officers, security agents plus helicopters and patrol boats
around a hotel, surrounds the US President George W. Bush's visit
to Panama.

The head of state arrived hours ago from Brazil following the
Americas Summit's fiasco in Mar del Plata, Argentina, where he
received broad repudiation.

However, Panamanian authorities, afraid of a repetition of
violent demonstrations, placed metal fences in all areas where
Bush will appear.

Bush was welcomed by first Vice President and Foreign Affairs
Minister Samuel Lewis Navarro at Tocumen airport.

Various union, religious, student and civic movements
concentrated at Don Bosco basilica, in this capital, to reject the
current occupant of the White House, who they said was guilty of
genocide and a fascist.

The National Front for the Defense of the Social Security Fund
leader, Gloria Castillo, visibly angry, told Prensa Latina that having a
president that sheltered terrorists in his country was a major offense.

"No one can forget he is the main aggressor of humankind at
present, a contentious opponent of Afghanistan and Iraq, and the
one trying to asphyxiate the Cuban people by hunger with a criminal
blockade," noted Castillo.

Meanwhile, defense lawyer of Panamanian victims for the
Pentagon's December 1989 invasion, Gilma Camargo, said it was a
shame that Martin Torrijos' government had warmly greeted Bush.

"No amount of money can pay for a family member's death. El Chorrillo
neighborhood was devastated by flames which caused a countless
number of deaths and neither the US nor the Panama administration
seems to be concerned about the after-effects," she emphasized.

The US President's agenda includes meeting with President Torrijos,
a press conference, visiting the Panama Canal to dialogue with
its administrator Alberto Aleman Zubieta and meeting with baseball
players.

Before he leaves the country, the Panamanian Peace Movement as
well as different organizations will have a Patriotic Act to reject his
presence in this city at central Porras Square.

mh/ymr/ft/mf









------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/7gSolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to