State Department Steps Against Honduran Coup Don't Go Far Enough

Center For Economic Policy & Research, Press Release, Sept. 3, 2009

Washington, D.C.- The U.S. State Department issued a release today announcing "the termination of a broad range of assistance to the government of Honduras as a result of the coup d'etat that took place on June 28."

“The State Department is responding to pressure, but it’s still not clear if the Obama administration is serious about dislodging the coup regime that it continues to support with military and economic aid,” said Mark Weisbrot, Co-Director of CEPR.

State Department spokesman Fred Lash told CEPR that total U.S. assistance to Honduras was $100 million and today’s decision affected $30 million: this included $8.96 million from the State Department, $9.4 million from USAID, and $11 million from the Millenium Challenge Corporation (MCC) (which will not be officially cancelled until its Board meets next week).

“There is still quite a bit of money that is not food assistance or anything that poor people need that continues to flow to the dictatorship,” said Weisbrot.

“Also, the State Department still hasn’t officially determined that a military coup took place in Honduras,” he added.

Weisbrot also noted that the International Monetary Fund decided just a few days ago to give Honduras more than $160 million. Since the United States has a veto over IMF decisions, this will be seen by the coup regime as a decision of the U.S. government.

“The IMF money, which is a huge amount of money for Honduras, will more than compensate for any cuts in U.S. official aid.”

The World Bank paused lending to Honduras two days after the coup, and the Inter-American Development Bank did the same the next day. More recently the Central American Bank of Economic Integration suspended credit to Honduras. The European Union has suspended over $90 million in aid as well, and is considering further sanctions.

According to the release, "The Department of State further announces that we have identified individual members and supporters of the de facto regime whose visas are in the process of being revoked."

The State Department would not release the names of those whose visas may be revoked.

The release also states: "we would not be able to support the outcome of the scheduled elections [in Honduras]. A positive conclusion of the Arias process would provide a sound basis for legitimate elections to proceed."

This decision on elections brings the United States closer to other countries in the hemisphere, who have stated that they will not recognize elections conducted under the coup government.

However, Weisbrot noted that the 3-month election campaign period has already started, and it is taking place under conditions of political repression and media censorship.

“Each day that goes by with the coup government in power makes it less likely that these elections could be considered legitimate,” said Weisbrot. “Certainly the idea of moving the election up one month to October, which is part of the Arias accord, has to be abandoned.”

G20 countries practice ‘agricolonialism’ in developing countries

By Betsey Piette, Workers World, Aug. 3, 2009

Collectively the countries which participate in the Group of Twenty comprise 85 percent of the global gross national product, 80 percent of world trade and two-thirds of the world’s population. What many G-20 countries lack, however, is sufficient arable land to meet the needs of growing urban populations.

In recent years, many G-20 nations have engaged in agricolonialism, taking over arable land in developing countries.

One billion people worldwide face starvation, according to United Nations reports. The global recession is expected to drive 103 million more into hunger.

However, the land grabs, concentrated in Africa, Asia and Latin America where hundreds of millions lack sufficient food, are intended to grow food and biofuel crops for export, not for use by at-risk populations.

While the U.S., Britain and European Union nations have a long history of colonial control over land in developing countries, other G-20 countries, including China, south Korea, Japan and Saudi Arabia, have recently bought up global farmland.

After the collapse of the former Soviet Union, even Russia and other former Soviet states became targets of land grabs.

Global “AgInvesting”

Last year, as the global economic crisis deepened, food “riots” destabilized many countries. In December, spiking grain prices that had led to food shortages fell by 50 percent. Today, grain prices remain above their 20-year average, and global food stocks continue at 40-year lows.

Over the next 40 years the world’s population is projected to grow from 6 billion to 9 billion, doubling demand, while arable land and water become scarcer. As a result, the cost of farmland keeps rising.

Food now rivals oil as a basis of power and economic security. Arable land has become the latest target for international investors, with more than 90 funds invested directly in farmland.

With the current credit crunch, large companies are investing in farmland as a means of control over future food supplies when food security could become a major concern.

In June a Global AgInvesting 2009 Conference, held in New York, aimed at investors eager for opportunities to invest in agricultural lands, commodities and infrastructure. It brought together top players from the global agricultural and investing industries, including Soyatech, Altima Partners, Bayer CropScience, Brazil AgroLogic, DuPont, Rabobank and the World Bank. The participating firms own and/or manage over 11 million acres of productive farmland worldwide.

The International Food Policy Research Institute reports that 37 million to 49 million acres of land in poor countries, valued at $20 to $30 billion, were sold or under negotiation for sale to foreign buyers since 2006.

Foreign investments in agriculture are not new, but today they are more strategic than commercial, with many transactions intended to insulate the foreign investor’s home country from future global food and energy crises.

Another significant difference is the scale of these purchases. A “big land deal” used to be 240,000 acres. Now the largest ones are many times that size.

The investment firm Blackrock has set up a $200 million hedge fund to invest in land. Dow Chemical has invested its pension funds in farmland futures. Morgan Stanley bought nearly 100,000 acres of Brazilian farmland.

Multibillionaire George Soros is getting into the global land-buying business. Jim Rogers Jr., Soros’ partner at the Quantum Fund, is involved with two farmland investment funds–Agrifirm and Agcaptia Farmland Investment Partnership. “I’m convinced that farmland is going to be one of the best investments of our time,” Rogers told ContrarianProfits. (July 27)

Land in Africa targeted

Africa imports 25 percent of its food, and the continent has become a prime target of land grabbers. Although sub-Saharan Africa is rich in minerals and natural resources, more than 450 million people live there on less than $2 a day. More than one-third of the population suffers from malnutrition.

A recent Food and Agricultural Organization study of five African countries found that 6.2 million acres of farmland valued at $920 million were bought or leased by foreign investors since 2004.

Most of the nearly 1 million acres taken over in Ghana were for biofuel production. Philippe Heilberg, chairman of New York-based Jarch Capital, controls nearly 2 million acres of land in south Sudan.

Saudi Arabian investors spent $100 million to raise grain on land leased to them by the Ethiopian government; the entire crop is for export back to Saudi Arabia. Meanwhile, millions of Ethiopians face hunger and malnutrition and require emergency food assistance.

A proposed 99-year land lease deal with the south Korean company Daewoo would have included nearly half of Madagascar’s arable land, with almost no benefits to the host country. Public protest over this deal contributed to the overthrow of President Marc Ravalomanana earlier this year.

Genetically modified sugar cane in Latin America

Since 1994, U.S. farm policies through the so-called “North American Free Trade Agreement” have devastated farmers who produced corn throughout Mexico. NAFTA opened Mexican markets to corn imports from the U.S. and to the introduction of genetically modified seeds.

Now other countries are getting into the act. A French investment firm is buying up cattle ranches in Argentina and Uruguay to convert the acreage to the production of barley, corn and soy.

Within a 10-year span, nearly the entire Argentine pampas and large areas of forest and farmland in Brazil, Bolivia, Uruguay and Paraguay have been converted to produce soy as a solo crop. Agribusiness giants Cargill, Archer Daniels Midland, and Bunge made billions selling chemical fertilizers, while Monsanto and Syngenta raked in record profits from modified seeds and chemical pesticides.

Corporations that led the boom in soy production in Latin America are now aggressively moving into genetically modified sugar cane production. GM and Monsanto have been working on “Roundup Ready” sugar cane and sugar beets. Production of genetically modified sugar cane crops would devastate cane growers in Colombia, where panela, a sugar cane byproduct, is a source of nutrition.

Protests erupt in Southeast Asia

Many of the anti-agricolonialism protests have taken place in Asia. The 15-million-member Asian Peasant Coalition recently began a five-month Asia-wide Peasants’ Caravan for Land and Livelihood. The group is acting against global land grabbing in 10 Asian countries, including Sri Lanka, Philippines, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal. In India and Thailand, the theme is “Stop Global Land Grabbing! Struggle for Genuine Agrarian Reform and Peoples’ Food Sovereignty.”

An estimated 365 million people in Asia make their living off the land. Globalization has increasingly integrated Asian countries into the global market and intensified landlessness among Asian peasants. In Pakistan and the Philippines, almost 75 percent of peasants are now landless.

In the Philippines, Fil-Japan is using 1.49 million acres of land for biofuel production. South Korea has leased 232,000 acres of farmland for 25 years to grow 10,000 tons of corn annually. Protests halted plans to allow China to use 3 million acres of farmland.

Wagar Ahmad Khan, the Pakistani federal minister for investment, assures legal cover and tax breaks for investors and says his government “has decided to raise a special security force, which will help create an investment-friendly atmosphere.” (IslamOnline.net, April 21)

Impact on Indigenous populations

Since the 1970s, more than half of the farmland expansion has come at the expense of natural forests, including large tracts of land in Brazil’s Amazon region. While biofuels are promoted as a means to reduce climate change, expanding cropland for biofuel production has devastated rainforests and savannas.

Conversion of natural ecosystems for production of corn and sugar cane for ethanol, and soy and palm oil for biodiesel, causes substantial greenhouse gas emissions since these crops absorb far less carbon dioxide than the forests and wetlands they replace.

Monsanto, DuPont, Archer Daniels Midland, Deere & Co. and the Renewable Fuels Association have formed the Alliance for Abundant Food and Energy, which spends billions of dollars to lobby U.S. lawmakers to support subsidies for biofuel production and to promote genetically modified crops.

The social consequences of these land grabs are significant. Indigenous groups who have lived off the land for generations are being driven off their lands. Even when local peasant farmers are able to retain the land, larger land tracts draw off most of the water supply.

G-8 code of conduct

Faced with growing pressure from developing countries, the recent G-8 Summit issued a code of conduct in international agricultural investments that reflects the debate over foreign land purchases in poor countries. It is not clear, however, how the code might work.

“The G-8 statement is pretty weak,” said Sarah Gillam of ActionAid, an anti-poverty group which is calling for an independent U.N. commission to establish an enforceable code of conduct for foreign land purchases. It would include adequate compensation for affected communities and an assessment of the impact on local food security and rural livelihoods.

Devlin Kuyek of GRAIN, an international nonprofit organization that supports struggles for community-controlled, biodiversity-based food systems, compared the danger of land investments to the subprime mortgage crisis. “It’s not just that they want to produce food. It’s that they want to produce it in a way that makes profit. ... Nothing is being done to address speculation or the amount of profits taken by the corporations in control of the food system.

“Land is fundamental to life particularly in many countries of the South,” stated Kuyek. “Governments are playing with fire, and better watch out what they are doing.” (See www.farmlandgrab.org.)

Article copyright 1995-2009 Workers World. Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.

Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: ww@workers.org
Subscribe: wwnews-subscribe@workersworld.net
Support independent news: http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php
Web: http://workers.org
http://workersworld.net

Honduras coup leaders under pressure as U.S. revokes visas

By Claudia Parsons, washingtonpost.com, July 28, 2009

TEGUCIGALPA (Reuters) - Honduras' coup leaders came under new pressure on Tuesday to allow ousted President Manuel Zelaya's return to power as the United States revoked visas for four members of the de facto government.

Washington has refused to recognize the government led by Roberto Micheletti, who took over when Zelaya was toppled in a June 28 coup, and it already had cut $16.5 million in U.S. military aid to the Central American country.

Zelaya had asked President Barack Obama to revoke U.S. visas for the coup leaders and he quickly welcomed the move.

"They are isolated, they are surrounded, they are alone," the deposed leftist said of the coup leaders.

"This is a coup that has been dead from the start, so they will have to abandon their position of intransigence in the coming hours," he said in Nicaragua, where he is camped out near the border with Honduras.

Micheletti's government, backed by the Supreme Court and Congress, has refused to bend to international condemnation of the coup. It insists that Zelaya cannot come back and serve his remaining six months in office.

Zelaya, an ally of Venezuela's socialist President Hugo Chavez, was ousted as he sought a referendum to change the constitution, a move the Supreme Court ruled illegal. Zelaya's critics say he was trying to extend presidential term limits so he could be re-elected, but he denies the claims.

Costa Rican President Oscar Arias has mediated talks between both sides, but the negotiations so far have failed.

Arias, who will host a regional heads of state meeting in northern Costa Rica on Wednesday, said he supported the U.S. move to strip some Micheletti officials of their visas as a way to pressure those holding power to reopen dialogue.

"If the pressure keeps rising with drastic measures, the de facto government in Honduras will possibly be more compelled to sit down at the table again," Arias told reporters.

U.S. State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said official diplomatic visas had been revoked for four individuals. "We don't recognize Roberto Micheletti as the president of Honduras, we recognize Manuel Zelaya," he said.

Kelly did not name those affected but said the diplomatic visas of others in government also were being reviewed.

Representative Connie Mack, a Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives who visited Honduras over the weekend, told Reuters it was his understanding that two of the people who had their U.S. visas revoked were Tomas Arita Valle, the Supreme Court justice who signed the order for Zelaya's arrest, and Jose Alfredo Saavedra, president of the Honduran Congress.

Mack criticized the move as intimidation.

Two others who confirmed they had their visas revoked were human rights ombudsman Ramon Custodio and Adolfo Lionel Sevilla, defense minister in the interim government.

Micheletti told reporters at the presidential palace on Tuesday that his U.S. visa had not been revoked.

Rosary in hand, Micheletti later appeared on state television to lead viewers in a "Day of Prayer" for peace. "I ask for forgiveness from those who for one reason or another do not agree with us, and I ask God to show them the light so they realize it is more important to live in peace," he said.

EUROPEAN UNION STEPS

Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos said during a visit to Venezuela he would ask the European Union to take similar punitive steps against the interim government. The EU has suspended all budgetary support payments for Honduras.

The Inter-American Development Bank and World Bank have frozen loans in a move the interim government says will cost $200 million in 2009, a blow to the coffee and textile exporter that already is one of Latin America's poorest countries.

Zelaya in recent days had questioned whether the U.S. government was doing enough to push for his return, and also called for a ban on the coup leaders' bank transactions.

Zelaya said as many as 1,000 of his supporters have made the trek to join him in Nicaragua, dodging road blocks and a curfew in the border region of Honduras.

Sporting his trademark cream-colored cowboy hat, Zelaya briefly crossed the border into Honduras last Friday but stepped back from security forces waiting to arrest him, saying he wanted to avoid a massacre. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton described his actions as "reckless" and not helpful to the negotiation process.

Julia Sweig, a Latin America specialist at the U.S.-based Council on Foreign Relations think tank, said suspending visas would hurt since "they need to be here (Washington) to press their case and maintain their lobbying efforts."

(Additional reporting by Arshad Mohammed, Susan Cornwell, Sue Pleming and Tim Gaynor in Washington, Mica Rosenberg, Marco Aquino in Honduras, Miguel Angel Gutierrez in Costa Rica and Ivan Castro in Nicaragua; Editing by Paul Simao)

Honduras: Breakdown of Mediation Means More Pressure for U.S. to Act

By Laura Carlsen, Americas MexicoBlog, July 20, 2009

• Coup rejects proposal that includes return of Zelaya
• Zelaya to return to Honduras on Friday, supporters prepare reception
• Clinton calls Micheletti to warn of “potential consequences”
• European Union suspends aid to Honduras
• Honduran “Feminists in Resistance” convokes demonstrations at U.S. Embassies throughout the world

Last weekend, President Oscar Arias presented a seven-point mediation plan to representatives of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya and the regime installed by a military coup last Jun 28. The plan included the return of Zelaya to carry out his term in office, formation of a coalition government, elections held a month earlier than scheduled, and amnesty for political crimes, among other points.

Showing great flexibility, the legal government, whose claim to power is supported by international law, democratic practice, the OAS and the UN, agreed “in principle” to the proposal.

The coup, led by Roberto Micheletti, replied with a flat-out “no”. The press reported that Carlos Lopez of the coup delegation announced, "I'm very sorry, but the proposal you presented [is] unacceptable to the government of Honduras that I represent."

The intransigence of the coup placed the nail in the coffin of efforts to mediate the conflict. On Sunday Zelaya called the talks “exhausted” and deemed the attitude of the Micheletti delegation “arrogant” and “disrespectful.” Sec. General of the Organization of American States José Insulza responded, “We deeply regret the attitude of Micheletti.” Insulza has led diplomatic efforts to return constitutional order in the country and reinstate Zelaya without bloodshed.

Although Arias has said he wants to continue with mediation, Zelaya has announced his return to Honduras this Friday, respecting the 72-hour period Arias requested for a last-ditch attempt at some kind of resolution. The National Front against the Coup called for a nationwide mobilization to receive the president, stating in a communiqué, "With the aim of giving a grand reception to our constitutional president, we call on all the Honduran people to be prepared and organized on this date for a huge march to the meeting at the place and hour to be announced soon.”

Leaders of the grassroots organizations of workers, farmers, teachers and citizens who support his return never had high hopes for the mediation efforts. They questioned the validity of making the coup a recognized counterpart in talks and have given up on the prospect of a mediated solution. Juan Barahona, leader of the Front, said Saturday, “We don’t see any possibilities to arrive at an agreement in the talks in Costa Rica. These talks could just be a way to buy time for the coup to consolidate its power and also to buy time to exhaust the resistance.”

As predicted, the talks fell through and the battle has moved to the streets. Zelaya’s daughter, Pichu, addressed the crowd and made clear the stakes. She defended the Honduran people’s right to democracy and urged the construction of “citizen power” to carry out the constitutional referendum and extend social programs started by her father.

A Two-Prong Strategy in the U.S.

Zelaya called on the international community to strengthen measures against the coup and said after the failure of the talks, “Today the coup leaders have once more insulted the international community, Oscar Arias and the Secretary of the United States, Hillary Clinton, promoter and sponsor (of the talks),” he said.

Clinton has been criticized lately for avoiding calls for the return of Zelaya and placing all the eggs in the basket of mediation. By all rights, she should be furious with the coup for scuttling that effort.

Instead, the State Department issued a milquetoast statement on the talks:

“We commend President Oscar Arias of Costa Rica for his continuing efforts to facilitate a peaceful, negotiated restoration of Honduras's democratic and constitutional order. This weekend's talks produced significant progress, and created a foundation for a possible resolution that adheres to the principles of the Inter-American Democratic Charter and the decisions taken within the Organization of American States (OAS).

We call on the parties to the talks to reflect upon the progress made so far, and to commit themselves to their successful conclusion. At this important juncture, we also call upon the OAS, its member states, and other interested parties to reaffirm their support for the talks facilitated by President Arias, underscore their commitment to the peaceful resolution of political disputes through dialogue, remain mindful of the principles of non-intervention and self-determination, and express their solidarity for the democratic well-being of the Honduran people.”

The declaration is not only weak and vague but also ominous and out of touch. When the international press announces that the coup has shut down talks, the State Department unaccountably refers to “significant progress.” There is no pressure on the coup to relinquish its illegitimate power to the elected president.

Later in a press briefing, spokesperson Phillip Crowley said that behind the scenes there has been some pressure. Asst. Sec. Tom Shannon and Ambassador Llorens had spoken with both sides and with other countries. He also said that Sec. Clinton called Micheletti from New Delhi for the first time and “encouraged him to continue focus on these negotiations and also helped him understand the potential consequences of the failure to take advantage of this mediation.”

Just how much Clinton put the screws to the Micheletti regime was unclear. Crowley said, “I think it was a very tough phone call. However, I think it was – she made clear if the de facto regime needed to be reminded that we seek a restoration of democratic and constitutional order, a peaceful resolution. We do not think that anybody should take any kind of steps that would add to the risk of violence in Honduras, and that we completely support the ongoing Arias mediation… that we need to have a restoration of democratic and constitutional order. We would like to see President Zelaya returned to Honduras, and that we’d like to see a clear path that leads to follow-on elections.”

When asked about sanctions, Crowley said “…in the Secretary’s phone call with Micheletti she reminded him about the consequences for Honduras if they fail to accept the principles that President Arias has laid out, which would – it has a significant impact in terms of aid and consequences, potentially longer-term consequences, for a relationship between Honduras and the United States.”

He also said that the State Department told Zelaya not to return to Honduras in the meantime and mentioned that the OAS was considering a statement in favor of mediation.

The response contrasts with the response of other countries. After talks broke down over the weekend, the European Union today announced the suspension of millions of Euros in financial aid to Honduras, in addition to the withdrawal of their ambassadors in the early days of the coup.

The U.S. government has done neither. For the grassroots organizations fighting against the coup, it is essential that the U.S. back up its words with actions. Barahona stated this weekend, “What we expect is for the United States to comply with the agreement of the OAS, which is for the complete economic and political isolation of the coup and they still aren’t doing it.”

The Honduran organization Feminists in Resistance has called for simultaneous demonstrations in front of U.S. embassies on Jul 22 at 10 A.M. The demands include:

* Condemn the political-military coup against the Honduran State, which was financed by Honduran businessmen and the Latin American and North American ultra-right, promoted by national media corporations, protected by the Ombudsman of Honduras and blessed by the leadership of the Catholic and evangelical churches in the country.

* Unconditional support for the return to constitutional order in Honduras, which means the return of President Manuel Zelaya Rosales a Honduras.

* End to repression of organizations that demonstrate against the coup by police and military units aided by retired military personnel responsible for the disappeared of the decade of the 80s in Honduras.

* End to threats of war, promoted by the de facto regime, which is creating a climate of terror in the Honduran population.

* Suspension of all technical or financial, bilateral or multilateral aid to the de facto regime.

* Condemnation of María Martha Díaz Velásquez, named as head of the National Women´s Institute by the de facto regime and María Antonieta Bustamante, representative of the Inter-American Commission on Women for Honduras, who met us with anti-riot police when we went to demand that they give back our institute. (See a video in Spanish on the violence against women protesters in front of the Institute July 15).

Grassroots organizations in the United States have launched a two-pronged strategy to defend democracy and unseat the coup in Honduras. The strategy calls for pressure on the government to demand additional sanctions, withdrawal of the ambassador and a cut-off of military ties. The School of the Americas Watch notes that although joint military operations have been suspended the school is still training Honduran soldiers. Many organizations are calling for U.S. citizens to support the Delahunt-McGovern resolution before Congress to declare the coup a coup, cut off non-humanitarian funding to Honduras and urge the reinstatement of President Zelaya.

The second part of the strategy involves grassroots actions to keep the issue at the forefront of a crowded national agenda through direct action and support the Honduran people. Tactics include demonstrations, protest actions including a planned convergence on SouthCom headquarters in Florida Jul 25, media and information sharing, and delegations to Honduras. U.S. unions have nearly unanimously condemned the coup and urged actions.

UK aiming to inoculate about 30 people an hour in a “military-style operation”

Swine flu vaccine to be cleared after five-day trial
By Jon Ungoed-Thomas, Times Online, July 12, 2009

Holden said it would be the biggest campaign in response to an outbreak since mass vaccination against smallpox in 1962. He said surgeries would be aiming to inoculate about 30 people an hour in a “military-style operation”.

The path of a popular medicine from the laboratory to the chemist or doctor’s surgery can involve years of clinical trials on a select group of patients.

When the new vaccine for swine flu arrives in Britain, regulators said this weekend, it could be approved for use in just five days.

Regulators at the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) said the fast-tracked procedure has involved clinical trials of a “mock-up” vaccine similar to the one that will be used for the biggest mass vaccination programme in generations. It will be introduced into the general population while regulators continue to carry out simultaneous clinical trials.

The first patients in the queue for the jab - being supplied to the UK by GSK and Baxter Healthcare - may understandably be a little nervous at any possible side effects. A mass vaccination campaign against swine flu in America was halted in the 1970s after some people suffered Guillain-Barré syndrome, a disorder of the nervous system.

However, regulators said fast-tracking would not be at the expense of patient safety. “The vaccines are authorised with a detailed risk management plan,” the EMEA said. “There is quite a body of evidence regarding safety on the trials of the mock-up, and the actual vaccine could be assessed in five days.”

The UK government has ordered enough vaccine to cover the entire population. GPs are being told to prepare for a nationwide vaccination campaign.

Dr Peter Holden, the British Medical Association’s lead negotiator on swine flu, who has been attending Department of Health meetings on the outbreak, said GPs’ surgeries were prepared for one of the biggest vaccination campaigns in almost 50 years.

He said although swine flu was not causing serious illness in patients, health officials were eager to start a mass vaccination campaign, starting first on priority groups. First, the jabs would reduce the chances of a shortage of hospital beds because of people suffering from swine flu. Second, it would reduce the effect on the economy by ensuring workers were protected from the virus.

“The high-risk groups will be done at GPs’ surgeries. People are still making decisions over this, but we want to get cracking before we get a second wave, which is traditionally far more virulent.”

Holden said it was likely the elderly would be given their seasonal flu jab as well as the swine flu vaccination. The new vaccine is likely to require two doses.

Details of the inoculation plans emerged after the death of a patient, reportedly a middle-aged man, at a hospital in the Basildon area of Essex. The victim had no underlying health problems, but officials say there is no evidence the swine flu virus had mutated into a more dangerous strain.

Holden said it would be the biggest campaign in response to an outbreak since mass vaccination against smallpox in 1962. He said surgeries would be aiming to inoculate about 30 people an hour in a “military-style operation”.

The Department of Health said it had still not finalised which groups would be vaccinated first, but children, frontline health workers, people with underlying illnesses and the elderly are likely to take priority.

The European Commission is also identifying population groups which it believes should get priority. It is keen to ensure that countries such as the UK, which had ordered supplies of the vaccine in advance, do not cause inequities in treatment elsewhere in Europe.

It warned health ministers in a note circulated last month that if the vaccines were more readily available in some countries it could cause “vaccine tourism/shopping in other member states”.

About 15 people have died of swine flu in Britain, but most of those infected get only mild symptoms. According to the latest figures from the Health Protection Agency, the UK has had 9,718 confirmed cases of the disease.

Honduras rejects OAS appeal to restore president

By WILL WEISSERT and MARCOS ALEMAN, AP, Yahoo! News, July 4, 2009

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras – Honduras rebuffed a personal appeal from the Americas' top international diplomat Friday, refusing to reinstate President Manuel Zelaya and setting the stage for a dramatic showdown if the ousted leader returns to reclaim power this weekend.

Jose Miguel Insulza, who heads the Organization of American States, said the hemispheric body would decide Saturday whether to suspend Honduras, a move that could lead to further sanctions against one of the Latin Americas' poorest countries and encourage other organizations and countries to halt aid and loans.

The OAS chief had flown to Honduras Friday to demand that the interim government restore Zelaya before a Saturday morning deadline. Zelaya was ousted in a military-backed coup Sunday and flown into exile, but the world community has rallied around him to demand his return to office.

"We wanted to ask that this situation be reversed," Insulza told a news conference in the Honduran capital after meeting with Supreme Court President Jorge Rivas, the attorney general and other political leaders. "Unfortunately, one must say that there appears to be no willingness to do this."

Insulza said Honduran officials gave him documents showing that charges are pending or have been brought against Zelaya, charges they say justified the coup. The military-backed ouster came after Zelaya pushed for a referendum on constitutional reform that the Supreme Court, the attorney general and Congress had all said was illegal.

Earlier Friday, Honduras' Supreme Court, which authorized Sunday's coup, said it wouldn't agree to restore the toppled leftist leader despite Insulza's demands.

"Insulza asked Honduras to reinstate Zelaya, but the president of the court categorically answered that there is an arrest warrant for him," said court spokesman Danilo Izaguirre.

"Now the OAS has to decide what it will do," Izaguirre said.

Insulza had conceded before traveling to Honduras that his mission was unlikely to succeed, saying: "It will be very hard to turn things around in a couple of days."

During the trip, the diplomat also met with the two main candidates in Honduras' Nov. 29 elections, as well with the leftist Popular Block, an umbrella group of farm, labor and student groups that largely supports Zelaya.

But he said he would not see Roberto Micheletti, whom Congress named president after Zelaya's ouster, in order to avoid legitimizing the government.

Micheletti's foreign minister, Enrique Ortez, said that Insulza "can negotiate all he wants, except for Zelaya's situation."

"That is not negotiable because he cannot return to Honduras, and if he does he will be arrested and tried," Ortez said.

Zelaya, who was traveling in Central America, planned to return to Honduras on Sunday, according to Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega. Zelaya has said he would be traveling with Insulza and the presidents of Argentina and Ecuador.

Honduras' interim government has said it will arrest Zelaya if he returns, setting up a potentially volatile showdown.

Contrary to assertions by the Micheletti government, Interpol on Friday released a statement saying it had not received any request to issue an arrest warrant for Zelaya.

Micheletti led a raucous chant of "Democracy!" before a giant crowd waving blue-and-white Honduran flags in front of the palace that Micheletti has occupied since Zelaya was seized by soldiers. He pledged to stand firm in the face of the international pressure.

"I am the president of all Hondurans," he proclaimed.

A rival rally by thousands of Zelaya backers marched to the offices of the OAS. Marchers carried a banner with a picture of Zelaya and the words: "Mel our friend, the people are with you!"

Despite feared violence, the two groups did not clash. Police helicopters circled overhead and dozens of soldiers and police guarded the palace.

Micheletti's supporters say the army was justified in ousting Zelaya — on orders of Congress and the Supreme Court — because he had called a referendum which they claim he intended to use to extend his rule. Zelaya denies that and has said he will no longer press for constitutional changes.

Nations around the world have promised to shun Micheletti and the nation already is suffering economic reprisals.

Neighboring countries have imposed trade blockades, major lenders have cut aid, the Obama administration has halted joint military operations and all European Union ambassadors have abandoned the Honduran capital.

If the OAS does suspend Honduras, Insulza said a government led by a new Honduran president after elections in November would not be automatically reinstated into the organization.

"It is not by any means automatic," Insulza said. "To eliminate a suspension, it should be unanimous decision, and it is not so obvious that it would be."

On Friday, the U.S. Embassy in Honduras issued a statement expressing "deep concern over restrictions imposed on certain fundamental rights" by Micheletti's government, including a curfew in force since Sunday, and "reports of intimidation and censorship against certain individuals and media outlets."

Micheletti's government is so eager to find a friend that it announced it had been recognized by Israel and Italy — surprising the governments of those countries. Italy withdrew its ambassador to protest the coup, and Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said: "All rumors about Israeli recognition of the new president are wholly unfounded."

Micheletti asked Nobel Peace laureate Rigoberta Menchu to help mediate the conflict, and she arrived in Tegucigalpa on Friday.

"I come to try to talk with anyone who wants to listen to search for peace for this country," she said.
___

Associated Press writers contributing to this report included Freddy Cuevas in Tegucigalpa; Bert Wilkinson in Georgetown, Guyana; Filadelfo Aleman in Managua, Nicaragua; Angela Charlton in Paris and Mark Lavie in Jerusalem.

Day 4: CNN backs Coup; Suspension Of Civil Rights In Honduras; European Union Recalls All Ambassadors From Honduras

by Eva Golinger, Postcards from the Revolution, July 1, 2009

CNN en Español, viewed throughout Latin America, has been backing the coup against Honduran President Manuel Zelaya since day 1, Sunday, June 28th. They initially referred to the events as a military coup during the early hours, then slowly transformed their headlines to call the coup a "forced succession". By the end of the day, dictator Roberto Micheletti was considered, by CNN, the "constitutional president" of Honduras and Zelaya was the "deposed" president.

Since then, CNN has shown about 90% coverage favorable of the coup government in Honduras, conducting interviews with Micheletti as well as those in his "cabinet". The "analysts" and "experts" providing insight and commentary on the coup in Honduras have all been either conservative U.S. voices of those on the Latin America right, like Alvaro Vargas Llosa. CNN has done little or no reporting on the mass protests on the streets in Honduras against the coup government, nor has it covered or reported on the detention of several Telesur and Associated Press journalists by military forces in Honduras this past Tuesday. CNN is also not providing much coverage of the major media blackout still in place in Honduras or the repressive measures taken by the coup government to impose states of emergency, suspend civil and human rights and mandate a national curfew through the weekend. And CNN is obsessed with making this whole thing to be about Chávez, and not about the internal class struggles in Honduras.

The coup government in Honduras announced this evening that the congress has passed a decree suspending all constitutional rights in the country indefinitely. This means the coup forces can enter homes without warrants, detain anyone with no notice or justification, prohibit all public gatherings, such as marches, rallies, protests or meetings, and maintain censorship of independent media. Due process rights are also suspended as are all other civil and political rights. Hondurans are also denouncing the coup government is forcing men as young as 15 to join the military to "defend" the country against any potential foreign threats or forces that may invade the country to restore Manuel Zelaya to the presidency.

If, as the coup leaders say, all is calm and peaceful in the streets of Honduras and a majority of Hondurans support the coup government led by Micheletti, then why does martial law need to be imposed and individual rights suspended?

In April 2002, when the coup was executed against President Chávez, the dictator who took over briefly, businessman Pedro Carmona, told CNN in a live interview that all was calm and peaceful in the streets of Caracas and throughout Venezuela. Meanwhile, millions of people were pouring into the streets around the capital and the nation to demand their president be returned to power. In Venezuela, the people and loyal armed forces were able to rescue their democracy, constitution and president, and defeat a coup backed by Washington.

Thousands are protesting in the streets throughout Honduras, facing repression and risking detention, or even worse, assassination. The people of Honduras fighting this brutal repressive coup and dictatorship (that is refusing to step down, despite all the international pressure) need your solidarity and support! Especially if you are in the US, find ways to pressure the Obama administration and demand it suspend aid to Honduras until the coup government steps down. Both the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank have temporarily suspended loans to Honduras until constitutional order is restored. All member nations of the European Union have withdrawn their ambassadors in Honduras. The US is the only nation that has not followed suit. Washington appears to be buying time trying to figure out how to save face and save its strategic interests in Honduras. Latin America and Europe have stood firm against tyranny. Will the US be an ally to tyranny or an example of democracy?

France is ignoring EU rules on arms sales to Israel, new study reports

by Katherine Orwell, IMEMC, May 30, 2009

The French arms trade with Israel breaks the rules that the European Union has set out for the defense industry, according to a new study brought out this week. Between 2003 and 2007 France licensed for more than 446 million euros for arms exports to Israel, making France the largest EU supplier of weapons to Israel.

The EU code for the defense industry forbids arms sales in cases where they may exacerbate regional tensions or are used in violations of human rights.

Patrice Bouveret from the French Center for Research on Peace and Conflicts in Lyon dismissed the claims from the French government that the "weapons" in question are generally only components of military goods instead of complete weapons systems. "Even if they are only components, they are used directly by the Israeli army," he added.

Amnesty International reported in February that after the Gaza war ceased electrical components were found in the ruins of buildings Israel destroyed, that had "Made in France" written on them.

At Gaza hospital, they 'need everything'

By Tom Aspell, msnbc.com, March 3, 2008

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip – A 15-year-old Palestinian boy lay dying today in the intensive care unit of Gaza’s Shifa Hospital. Both his legs had been amputated above the knees after injuries sustained by what the hospital admission center called "an explosive device."

The boy was connected to a respirator, his heart beat was strong, but there was no brain activity and doctors said he probably wouldn’t live long.

There was no frantic activity to try to save his life because the intensive care unit was already overcrowded and doctors were needed to work on patients with a better chance of survival. All of the beds were occupied by young men, all of them unconscious.

When I asked one of the doctors if the unit was equipped to handle so many casualties and if it was short of any supplies, he said, "We need everything."

Israeli offensive
Gaza has just experienced a four-day assault launched by Israel to stop Palestinian militants firing rockets into Israeli territory. Early Monday morning a column of Israeli tanks withdrew from positions it occupied last week in the Palestinian refugee camp of Jebalya, two miles inside the Gaza border.

Warplanes and missile firing helicopters hunting for Palestinian leaders spearheaded Israel’s ground attack. More than 117 Palestinians were killed. According to hospitals in Gaza City, at least half of the casualties were civilians, including women and children. Two Israeli soldiers were killed during the attack.

Israeli officers say Palestinian fighters loyal to the militant group Hamas appeared to have improved their battle skills in the past year, making good use of ground cover to launch flanking moves against advancing Israeli armor.

But it’s a one-sided battle against Israeli air power operating live battlefield surveillance from helicopters and pilot-less airplanes equipped with cameras that can see in the dark.

Hamas claims victory despite toll
The latest assault on Gaza was halted amid international condemnation from the U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon and the European Union of what was viewed as Israel’s disproportionate use of force to avenge the death of an Israeli civilian killed last week by a rocket fired from Gaza.

Israel insists it reserves the right to launch further attacks to protect its citizens. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told a parliamentary committee Monday that more military operations against Gaza were highly likely.

Despite the lopsided casualty toll, Palestinian militants Monday morning claimed victory.

Mohammed al-Zahar, a senior official in Hamas, the militant Palestinian group which controls the Gaza Strip, appeared briefly at a small rally in Gaza City.

"Hamas will rebuild any property damaged by Israeli’s in their attack," he said. "And Hamas will continue to fight."

Zahar is a high-value target for the Israeli military, which has killed dozens of Hamas officials with missiles fired from helicopters during the past year. So his appearance in public, speaking from the back of a pick-up truck and surrounded by masked bodyguards, was short.

Russia could use force in Kosovo

BBC News, Feb. 22, 2008

Russia's ambassador to Nato, Dmitry Rogozin, has warned that Russia could use military force if the Kosovo independence dispute escalates.

"If the EU develops a unified position or if Nato exceeds its mandate set by the UN, then these organisations will be in conflict with the UN," he said.

In that case Russia would "proceed on the basis that in order to be respected we need to use brute force", he said.

Many EU members have recognised Kosovo, but several oppose recognition.

Russia, a permanent member of the UN Security Council, backs Serbia, which has condemned the independence declaration issued by the Kosovo parliament on 17 February.

On Tuesday members of the Serb minority in Kosovo attacked two border posts staffed by UN personnel and Kosovo police.

The violence led the Nato troops in Kosovo - known as K-For - to reinforce the border with Serbia.

Kosovo's majority ethnic Albanians are following a plan drawn up by UN special envoy Martti Ahtisaari for "supervised independence", which was rejected by Serbia.

Russian media outcry

The EU will soon deploy 2,000 officials to strengthen law and order in Kosovo, which has a population of about two million. Russia argues that the mission has no legal basis.

There has been a furious reaction in some Russian media to Kosovo's declaration of independence.

A commentary in the Vesti Plus analytical programme, on state-run television, called the assassinated former Serbian Prime Minister, Zoran Djindjic, a Western puppet who had "received a well-deserved bullet".

It said Djindjic had sold national heroes to the International War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague.

The programme concluded that Serbia - and not only Serbia - must now decide whether to acquiesce in what has happened, or resist.

Kosovo’s ‘independence’ - Washington gets a new colony in the Balkans

Sara Flounders, Workers World, Feb 21, 2008

In evaluating the recent “declaration of independence” by Kosovo, a province of Serbia, and its immediate recognition as a state by the U.S., Germany, Britain and France, it is important to know three things.

First, Kosovo is not gaining independence or even minimal self-government. It will be run by an appointed High Representative and bodies appointed by the U.S., European Union and NATO. An old-style colonial viceroy and imperialist administrators will have control over foreign and domestic policy. U.S. imperialism has merely consolidated its direct control of a totally dependent colony in the heart of the Balkans.

Second, Washington’s immediate recognition of Kosovo confirms once again that U.S. imperialism will break any and every treaty or international agreement it has ever signed, including agreements it drafted and imposed by force and violence on others.

The recognition of Kosovo is in direct violation of such law—specifically U.N. Security Council Resolution 1244, which the leaders of Yugoslavia were forced to sign to end the 78 days of NATO bombing of their country in 1999. Even this imposed agreement affirmed the “commitment of all Member States to the sovereignty and territorial integrity” of Serbia, a republic of Yugoslavia.

This week’s illegal recognition of Kosovo was condemned by Serbia, Russia, China and Spain.

Thirdly, U.S. imperialist domination does not benefit the occupied people. Kosovo after nine years of direct NATO military occupation has a staggering 60 percent unemployment rate. It has become a center of the international drug trade and of prostitution rings in Europe.

The once humming mines, mills, smelters, refining centers and railroads of this small resource-rich industrial area all sit silent. The resources of Kosovo under NATO occupation were forcibly privatized and sold to giant Western multinational corporations. Now almost the only employment is working for the U.S./NATO army of occupation or U.N. agencies.

The only major construction in Kosovo is of Camp Bondsteel, the largest U.S. base built in Europe in a generation.Halliburton, of course, got the contract. Camp Bondsteel guards the strategic oil and transportation lines of the entire region.

Over 250,000 Serbian, Romani and other nationalities have been driven out of this Serbian province since it came under U.S./NATO control. Almost a quarter of the Albanian population has been forced to leave in order to find work.

Establishing a colonial administration

Consider the plan under which Kosovo’s “independence” is to happen. Not only does it violate U.N. resolutions but it is also a total colonial structure. It is similar to the absolute power held by L. Paul Bremer in the first two years of the U.S. occupation of Iraq.

How did this colonial plan come about? It was proposed by the same forces responsible for the breakup of Yugoslavia and the NATO bombing and occupation of Kosovo.

In June of 2005, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan appointed former Finnish President Marti Ahtisaari as his special envoy to lead the negotiations on Kosovo’s final status. Ahtisaari is hardly a neutral arbitrator when it comes to U.S. intervention in Kosovo. He is chairman emeritus of the International Crisis Group (ICG), an organization funded by multibillionaire George Soros that promotes NATO expansion and intervention along with open markets for U.S. and E.U. investment.

The board of the ICG includes two key U.S. officials responsible for the bombing of Kosovo: Gen. Wesley Clark and Zbigniew Brzezinski. In March 2007, Ahtisaari gave his Comprehensive Proposal for Kosovo Status Settlement to the new U.N. Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon.

The documents setting out the new government for Kosovo are available at unosek.org/unosek/en/statusproposal.html. A summary is available on the U.S. State Department’s Web site at state.gov/p/eur/rls/fs/100058.htm

An International Civilian Representative (ICR) will be appointed by U.S. and E.U. officials to oversee Kosovo. This appointed official can overrule any measures, annul any laws and remove anyone from office in Kosovo. The ICR will have full and final control over the departments of Customs, Taxation, Treasury and Banking.

The E.U. will establish a European Security and Defense Policy Mission (ESDP) and NATO will establish an International Military Presence. Both these appointed bodies will have control over foreign policy, security, police, judiciary, all courts and prisons. They are guaranteed immediate and complete access to any activity, proceeding or document in Kosovo.

These bodies and the ICR will have final say over what crimes can be prosecuted and against whom; they can reverse or annul any decision made. The largest prison in Kosovo is at the U.S. base, Camp Bondsteel, where prisoners are held without charges, judicial overview or representation.

The recognition of Kosovo’s “independence” is just the latest step in a U.S. war of reconquest that has been relentlessly pursued for decades.

Divide and rule

The Balkans has been a vibrant patchwork of many oppressed nationalities, cultures and religions. The Socialist Federation of Yugoslavia, formed after World War II, contained six republics, none of which had a majority. Yugoslavia was born with a heritage of antagonisms that had been endlessly exploited by the Ottoman Turks, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and interference by British and French imperialism, followed by Nazi German and Italian Fascist occupation in World War II.

The Jewish and Serbian peoples suffered the greatest losses in that war. A powerful communist-led resistance movement made up of all the nationalities, which had suffered in different ways, was forged against Nazi occupation and all outside intervention. After the liberation, all the nationalities cooperated and compromised in building the new socialist federation.

In 45 years the Socialist Federation of Yugoslavia developed from an impoverished, underdeveloped, feuding region into a stable country with an industrial base, full literacy and health care for the whole population.

With the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, the Pentagon immediately laid plans for the aggressive expansion of NATO into the East. Divide and rule became U.S. policy throughout the entire region. Everywhere right-wing, pro-capitalist forces were financed and encouraged. As the Soviet Union was broken up into separate, weakened, unstable and feuding republics, the Socialist Federation of Yugoslavia tried to resist this reactionary wave.

In 1991, while world attention was focused on the devastating U.S. bombing of Iraq, Washington encouraged, financed and armed right-wing separatist movements in the Croatian, Slovenian and Bosnian republics of the Yugoslav Federation. In violation of international agreements Germany and the U.S. gave quick recognition to these secessionist movements and approved the creation of several capitalist ministates.

At the same time U.S. finance capital imposed severe economic sanctions on Yugoslavia to bankrupt its economy. Washington then promoted NATO as the only force able to bring stability to the region.

The arming and financing of the right-wing UCK movement in the Serbian province of Kosovo began in this same period. Kosovo was not a distinct republic within the Yugoslav Federation but a province in the Serbian Republic. Historically, it had been a center of Serbian national identity, but with a growing Albanian population.

Washington initiated a wild propaganda campaign claiming that Serbia was carrying out a campaign of massive genocide against the Albanian majority in Kosovo. The Western media was full of stories of mass graves and brutal rapes. U.S. officials claimed that from 100,000 up to 500,000 Albanians had been massacred.

U.S./NATO officials under the Clinton administration issued an outrageous ultimatum that Serbia immediately accept military occupation and surrender all sovereignty or face NATO bombardment of its cities, towns and infrastructure. When, at a negotiation session in Rambouillet, France, the Serbian Parliament voted to refuse NATO’s demands, the bombing began.

In 78 days the Pentagon dropped 35,000 cluster bombs, used thousands of rounds of radioactive depleted-uranium rounds, along with bunker busters and cruise missiles. The bombing destroyed more than 480 schools, 33 hospitals, numerous health clinics, 60 bridges, along with industrial, chemical and heating plants, and the electrical grid. Kosovo, the region that Washington was supposedly determined to liberate, received the greatest destruction.

Finally on June 3, 1999, Yugoslavia was forced to agree to a ceasefire and the occupation of Kosovo.

Expecting to find bodies everywhere, forensic teams from 17 NATO countries organized by the Hague Tribunal on War Crimes searched occupied Kosovo all summer of 1999 but found a total of only 2,108 bodies, of all nationalities. Some had been killed by NATO bombing and some in the war between the UCK and the Serbian police and military. They found not one mass grave and could produce no evidence of massacres or of “genocide.”

This stunning rebuttal of the imperialist propaganda comes from a report released by the chief prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Carla Del Ponte. It was covered, but without fanfare, in the New York Times of Nov. 11, 1999.

The wild propaganda of genocide and tales of mass graves were as false as the later claims that Iraq had and was preparing to use “weapons of mass destruction.”

Through war, assassinations, coups and economic strangulation, Washington has succeeded for now in imposing neoliberal economic policies on all of the six former Yugoslav republics and breaking them into unstable and impoverished ministates.

The very instability and wrenching poverty that imperialism has brought to the region will in the long run be the seeds of its undoing. The history of the achievements made when Yugoslavia enjoyed real independence and sovereignty through unity and socialist development will assert itself in the future.

Sara Flounders, co-director of the International Action Center, traveled to Yugoslavia during the 1999 U.S. bombing and reported on the extent of the U.S. attacks on civilian targets. She is a co-author and editor of the books: “Hidden Agenda—U.S./NATO Takeover of Yugoslavia” and “NATO in the Balkans.”

Rioting in Belgrade; Grenades thrown in Kosovo

China 'concerned', Australia backs Kosovo split
AFP, Feb. 17, 2008

PARIS (AFP) - Australia on Monday became the lastest nation to welcome Kosovo's declaration of independence, joining the United States and several European powers, despite fierce objections from Serbia and Russia.

But China was among countries unhappy with Kosovo's breakaway from Serbia, declaring it was "deeply concerned" about the future of peace in the region.

"The unilateral approach by Kosovo may cause a series of consequences and lead to severe negative influences on the peace and stability of the Balkan region," foreign ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said in a statement.

"China expresses deep concern about this."

Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said diplomatic recognition of the new state would be offered soon.

"We've already indicated to our diplomatic representatives around the world that this (independence) would be an appropriate course of action," Rudd told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

Russia angrily condemned Kosovo's announcement, and called an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council late Sunday to discuss the issue.

But it failed to get backing for its call to declare "null and void" the decision by Kosovo's Albanian majority on Sunday to break away.

Russia has been Serbia's strongest backer in opposing Kosovo's independence, which President Vladimir Putin said last week would be "idiotic and illegal."

The United States, Britain, France, Germany and Italy have all indicated that their formal recognition will come on Monday.

Those countries around the world with separatist problems however -- from Spain to Sri Lanka -- have expressed concern at Kosovo's split.

The United States and most European nations gave a cautious initial reaction to the independence declaration ahead of a crucial EU foreign ministers' meeting in Brussels on Monday.

But even as the international community called for calm, rioting broke out on the streets of Belgrade, and grenades were thrown at EU and UN buildings in the northern Kosovo town of Mitrovica late Sunday.

US State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the United States "calls on all parties to exert utmost restraint and to refrain from any provocative act."

A significant minority in the 27-nation EU -- Cyprus, Greece, Romania, Slovakia and Spain -- oppose recognising Kosovo. Others like Malta and Portugal would prefer Kosovo's future be decided at the UN Security Council.

Czech President Vaclav Klaus warned that Kosovo's independence could unleash a domino affect in Europe.

"Some parties in other states could realise that they do not feel completely at ease within a big state in which they are now," he said in a television interview.

As if on cue, the breakaway Georgian regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia immediately seized on Kosovo's break, saying they would ask Russia and the UN to recognise their independence, Russia's Interfax news agency reported.

"In the near future Abkhazia will appeal to the Russian parliament and the UN Security Council with a request to recognise its independence," self-declared Abkhaz President Sergei Bagapsh was quoted as saying by Interfax.

South Ossetian President Eduard Kokoity made a similar appeal.

Some states see Kosovo as setting a dangerous precedent for other separatist movements. Cyprus is already split, with a Turkey-recognised statelet in the north. Spain has long struggled with radical Basque nationalists.

And the Sri Lankan government, which is battling separatist Tamil Tiger rebels, warned Kosovo's declaration could set an "unmanageable precedent" and was a violation of the United Nations charter.

The foreign ministry said it "could set an unmanageable precedent in the conduct of international relations, the established global order of sovereign states and could thus pose a grave threat to international peace and security."

Others are reluctant to recognise Kosovo because of their close ties to Serbia.

Slovakia said Sunday it would not recognise independence for the time being. Romania, which is traditionally close to Serbia, said its opposition was unchanged.

There is also anxiety on Kosovo's borders. Macedonia, which has a significant ethnic Albanian minority, said it was closely watching events.

Government spokesman Ivica Bocevski told AFP: "Whatever decision we are going to take, we will take care of the interests of our citizens, as well as the state and national interests of Macedonia."

Ethnic Albanians account for around 25 percent of Macedonia's two-million population. In 2001, the government and ethnic Albanian rebels waged a brief fight mostly in the northern and western parts of the country.

burs/jj/tha

UN Security Council meets on Kosovo

By JOHN HEILPRIN, AP, Feb. 17, 2008

UNITED NATIONS - Russia tried to block Kosovo's independence during a closed-door emergency session of the U.N. Security Council on Sunday, saying it is deeply concerned about the safety of Serbs living in the territory.

The discussion among members of the 15-member council continued to expose their divisions on the future of Kosovo. Russia backs its close ally Serbia, while the United States, Britain, France and other European Union members support Kosovo's majority ethnic Albanians.

The council met at the request of Serbia and Russia, which argue that Kosovo's declaration of independence from Serbia made earlier Sunday violates a 1999 council resolution that authorizes the U.N. to administer the territory.

The session got off to a rocky start; shortly after it began, the session had to be suspended for a couple hours because of a lack of interpreters.

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Serbia's president told him that Kosovo's declaration carries no legal weight, while Kosovo's prime minister assured him he was committed to "equal opportunities and no discrimination" against anyone in Kosovo.

Ban urged all sides to "refrain from any actions or statements that could endanger peace, incite violence or jeopardize security in Kosovo and the region."

The Security Council resolution on Kosovo remains in force and the U.N. "will continue to implement its mandate in the light of the evolving circumstances," Ban said.

Before the session, Russia's U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said Moscow was "highly concerned" about Sunday's decision by Kosovo's parliament in Pristina "to declare unilateral independence of Kosovo."

The past Security Council resolution means the U.N. still runs Kosovo and "it is not obvious at all what could possibly be the legal basis for even considering" Kosovo's declaration of independence," Churkin said.

He specifically addressed the estimated 120,000 Serbs living in enclaves in Kosovo.

"Our concern is for the safety of the Serbs and other ethnic minorities in Kosovo," Churkin told reporters. "We'll strongly warn against any attempts at repressive measures, should Serbs in Kosovo decide not to comply with this unilateral proclamation of independence."

U.S. and other Western countries said there was little danger to the Serbs in Kosovo and that the 1999 resolution does not preclude Kosovo's independence.

"We've knocked it down over and over again. This is an unprecedented situation, it creates no precedent," Alejandro Wolff, the U.S. deputy ambassador to the U.N., told reporters before the session

Wolff said the United States is not "particularly concerned or sees no particular danger to be worried about" with regards to the safety of Serbs in Kosovo.

"We're pleased by the commitments made to respect for religious and ethnic communities in Kosovo," he told reporters. "We're very much pleased that the declaration also reflects a position of the United States that's longstanding."

Kosovo's 2 million population is 90 percent ethnic Albanian, mainly secular Muslims, who do not want to be part of Serbia, a predominantly Christian Orthodox nation.

Kosovo has been under U.N. and NATO administration since a NATO-led air war halted a Serb crackdown on ethnic Albanian separatists in 1999.

In April 2007, U.N. envoy Martti Ahtisaari recommended that Kosovo be granted internationally supervised independence — a proposal strongly supported by the province's ethnic Albanians, the U.S. and most of the European Union, but vehemently opposed by Serbia and Russia, a traditional Serb ally.

Russia blocked the Ahtisaari plan. An additional period of negotiations failed to bridge the differences between the Serbs, who have offered wide autonomy, and Kosovo's ethnic Albanian leaders, who insist on independence.

Kosovo hopes for international recognition that could come on Monday when European Union ministers meet in Brussels, Belgium. Russia, which has veto power on the council, insists Kosovo is a Security Council issue — not an EU issue — and argues that Kosovo's move sets a dangerous precedent for separatist groups globally.

On Tuesday afternoon, a more formal and open debate is planned by the Security Council at Serbia's request. Churkin said Russia insisted it should be an open meeting, and the president of Serbia will attend.

However, diplomats said it was unlikely the council would be able to reach agreement on a resolution or statement.

The European Union acts like a colonial power in the Balkans

Workers World, Feb. 15, 2008

Following is an interview by Yugoslavia scholar Cathrin Schütz with Branko Kitanovic, general secretary of the New Communist Party of Yugoslavia (NKPJ), and published in the German daily newspaper Junge Welt on Feb. 12. The Belgrade-based NKPJ was established in 1990 and has its departments in all former republics of Yugoslavia. Schütz and Kitanovic discuss mainly Yugoslavia and European imperialism, but U.S. imperialism played a similar role as its European allies, and of course led the military assault on Yugoslavia. —WW editors

Cathrin Schütz: The West’s favorite candidate, Serbia’s President Boris Tadic, has just been confirmed in office. What position did the New Communist Party of Yugoslavia (NKPJ) take during the election campaign?

Branko Kitanovic: We supported Tadic’s opponent Tomislav Nikolic from the Serbian Radical Party (SRS), who lost by a small margin. He represents an anti-imperialist position, which refuses to accept either the separation of Kosovo or the membership of Serbia in NATO and the European Union, even though his position towards the EU is ambivalent. We are a Marxist-Leninist party and categorically against NATO, not only because it bombed our country in 1999, but because it is an aggressive alliance that supports the policy of the leading western states by military means. We are against Serbia’s entry into EU. The European Union is a creature of big western capital, especially German, English and French. The EU acts like a colonial power towards Eastern Europe and the Balkans. An EU membership would be a harder imprisonment than the ones we suffered under Ottoman or Austrian rule.

CS: So you support the SRS because of its foreign policy?

BK: Right. It is a bourgeois, patriotic party and we do have different ideas on how to achieve the national liberation of our country. The SRS stands for “honest capitalism,” for “fair privatization.” That’s nonsense. Any privatization of public property is theft. Nevertheless, the SRS, which is presently the strongest patriotic party in Serbia, struggles against the government, which carries out the interests of the West. Of course, we as communists are patriots, too.

CS: The term “patriotism” is upsetting to progressive movements in Germany.

BK: Patriotism is a characteristic of anti-imperialism. As Germany itself is an imperialist country, you probably understand the term “patriotism” as meaning support of imperialism. For us, it has a defensive character. We fight for our sovereignty and national integrity, and as a party, for the reestablishment of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The FRY had deficiencies, for example, Serbia did not enjoy the same rights as the other republics. However: even the worst socialism is better than the best capitalism.

CS: During the 1999 war, the majority of the western left did not oppose their governments’ anti-Serbian agitation and shared the position that then-President Slobodan Milosevic was responsible for the conflicts in the former Yugoslavia. What was your relationship to the Milosevic government?

BK: Since its establishment in 1990, the NKPJ supported the Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS), whose chairperson was Milosevic. The international circumstances at the beginning of the 1990s forced Milosevic to adapt to some sort of social democratic line and to carry out some limited privatizations. I think that he thought that this was the way Serbia could exist in peace. It turned out to be an error. The West, Germany and the UK in particular, wanted to destroy first Yugoslavia and than Serbia. In the end, Milosevic was harmed by not having followed a stricter ideological line. He was surrounded by the wrong people, many of whom turned out to be traitors. We did not support the bourgeois orientation of his party, but we completely stood behind the anti-imperialist features of his foreign policy.

During the years when Milosevic was president, we were able to participate in all elections. Since the pro-western “democrats” had come to power by the coup in October 2000, they made unconstitutionally high demands for the registration for the elections that we still have been unable to fulfill even once.

CS: How will you remember Slobodan Milosevic?

BK: In some respect, he cooperated with the West as president of Serbia and Yugoslavia. After he had been extradited and stood before the Yugoslav tribunal in The Hague, he was incredible. What he did not fully understand before—he realized much better then. In The Hague he made sure the truth was heard. He exposed the methods which the western states used to destroy Yugoslavia and the rest of the world. “Slobo” will go down in history as a symbol of the worldwide anti-imperialist struggle.

Translation by Zoran Sergievski

Rebel coalition fights neocolonial regime in Chad

By G. Dunkel, International Action Center, Feb. 14, 2008

Chad, in central Africa, was brutally conquered by France over a century ago and made part of its colonial empire. Today, while nominally independent, it is the fifth poorest country in the world, according to the U.N. However, it has become a significant, though not major, exporter of oil in the past three years.

ExxonMobil, a major U.S. corporation, is currently exploiting this oil, which has also brought billions of dollars to Chad. Most of that money, however, has stayed in the pockets of President Idriss Deby Itno -- a former helicopter pilot trained by the French, who seized power in 1990 -- and his clique, through one stratagem or another. Redistributing this wealth is one of the issues pushing forward a rebellion against Deby’s rule.

This struggle broke out into heavy fighting early in February when a rebel coalition fought for control of Ndjamena, Chad’s capital. An estimated 1,000 people died.

The Deby government claimed that most of the casualties were rebels—it called them mercenaries paid by Sudan—who didn’t know their way around the city, which has no street signs.

That’s not how the insurgents explain why they pulled back. Coalition spokesperson Abderaman Koulamallah said in an interview with Agence France Presse that direct attacks carried out by the French military had caused “enormous civilian casualties.”

Mahamat Nouri, the main military commander of the opposition, charged the French Air Force had “bombarded” its positions for over 13 hours to protect the Deby government.

During the battle for Ndjamena, which began Feb. 2-3, many of Deby’s soldiers reportedly deserted or didn’t follow orders because of ties they have with the rebels. Many of the rebels themselves were formerly in the government army. For example, Nouri himself used to be Deby’s defense minister and took a number of troops with him when he went over to the opposition.

While the French were willing to provide Deby with logistical, intelligence and air support and to defend the Ndjamena airport, they were not willing to put the bodies of French soldiers on the ground in harm’s way.

So Deby issued a call for reinforcements to the Justice and Equality Movement, a rebel group in Sudan fighting the government in the region of Darfur. It is drawn mainly from Deby’s ethnic group, the Zaghawas. However, Zaghawas also play a leading role among the rebel forces. (Le Figaro, Feb. 2)

The JEM troops quickly arrived on the battlefield in Chad. (New York Times, Feb. 8) The only practical way for JEM troops to have gotten from Darfur to Ndjamena, a distance of more than 600 miles, was for the French Air Force to fly them from its base in Abeche, a major city in eastern Chad not far from the border with Sudan.

The Sudanese government has announced that it will allow U.N.-African Union “peacekeepers” to move about freely in Darfur, but the JEM has just announced that it will attack them whenever they enter JEM-controlled areas.

The French press on Feb. 10 reported that the opposition had seized two major towns in the eastern part of the country. It also reported that EUFOR—with some 4,700 soldiers drawn from the armies of the 27 countries in the European Union—had begun setting up an advance base in Ndjamena, called Camp Europa. Full deployment of EUFOR is set to begin Feb. 12.

EUFOR, which stands for European Union Forces, has been used before in Bosnia and the Congo. While its commander and a large proportion of its troops are French, it does have a U.N. mandate to protect Sudanese refugees in Chad and the Central African Republic, distribute humanitarian aid and train Chadian police.

Its real aim is to project and protect Europe’s imperialist interests in the strategic center of Africa, bordering on the hotspot of Darfur.

Dr. Ley-Ngardigal Djimadoum, the leader of Chad’s Action for Unity and Socialism (ACTUS), at the beginning of February released a statement in French on a number of African and European anti-imperialist web sites.

Djimadoum said that, “Almost all the Chadian opposition is very hostile to EUFOR in Chad. The presence of French military bases, under the pretext of defending the territorial integrity of an ‘independent’ state, from independence [1960] to now, leaves a bitter taste. In reality, these occupation troops only defend the economic interests of the multinationals and the geostrategic interests of the imperialists on the African continent.

“A number of mass revolts and rebellions against the dictators imposed on our people by French imperialism have been drowned in blood by the support and the direct participation of French troops besides the army of their puppet government.

“The humanitarian aid proposed by EUFOR is a tree which hides the forest. More competent civilian organizations have been in place for years.”

The budget for EUFOR’s operation is nearly $450 million, close to twice the yearly income of Chad’s 9.3 million people.

The coalition that attacked Ndjamena independently issued a statement condemning France’s role, while avoiding the sharp language Djimadoum used.

Chad is an extremely poor but highly strategic country that has been waging an unrelenting struggle, with many twists and turns, against French neocolonialism for over 40 years. The intervention of European imperialism through EUFOR is going to raise the stakes, but is unlikely to end the drive of the people of Chad for their liberation.

Rice: U.S., France Seek Iran Sanctions

By DESMOND BUTLER, AP, Washington Post, Sept. 21, 2007

WASHINGTON -- The United States and France agree on how to pressure Iran to abandon its nuclear ambitions, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Friday.

At a joint news conference Rice gave with French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, both officials spoke of the need for new sanctions against Iran.

"I think that there's, essentially, no difference in the way that we see the situation in Iran and what the international community must do," Rice said.

Warm words between the two foreign policy counterparts marked a narrowing of differences since the days that Kouchner's predecessor, Dominique de Villepin, helped block a United Nations resolution sought by the United States on Iraq.

Since taking power in May, Kouchner's boss President Nicolas Sarkozy has set a very different tone of cooperation with the United States than Villepin and former President Jacques Chirac. But Kouchner's visit and France's recent moves on Iran seemed to illustrate that the change was more than tone.

The two countries were preparing the groundwork for a new U.N. Security Council resolution at a meeting in Washington on Friday of political directors from six major nations that have been trying to negotiate with Iran _ Russia, China, Britain and Germany, as well as France and the United States.

Afterward, speaking for the group, Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns said their discussions were serious and constructive. They will reconvene next Friday in New York, Burns said.

On Friday, Italy also called for sanctions.

"There is still room for a strong initiative that can on one end put pressure through sanctions, even more severe sanctions, and on the other end really offer the possibility for negotiations and agreement," Italian Foreign Minister Massimo D'Alema said in an interview on Italian state TV.

The French government's tougher line has brought it closer to the Bush administration, which has made a renewed U.S. push to tighten sanctions.

Rice said that she had also discussed Middle East peace efforts, Kosovo, Afghanistan and Lebanon. Standing next to Rice, Kouchner read a joint statement condemning the murder of Lebanese lawmaker Antoine Ghanem, killed in a powerful bomb blast two days ago. Ghanem, of the right-wing Phalange Party, was the fifth Christian to be killed in a wave of assassinations targeting anti-Syrian personalities.

"What is at stake, today, is the will of the murderers to disrupt the constitutional life of Lebanon, to deprive the Lebanese people and communities of their political rights in the framework of a united, sovereign and democratic Lebanon," Kouchner said.

During his two-day Washington visit, Kouchner has expanded on an earlier recommendation made by his boss, President Sarkozy, for tightening international sanctions against Iran.

Asked what kind of sanctions the United States would like to see through approved by the U.N. Security Council, Rice was vague.

"We have explored and have used various freezes on assets of individuals. We have used visa bans," she said. "I think that there are any number of ways that we can expand those efforts."

Kouchner also addressed his country's recent call for European Union sanctions against Iran. He said that European countries are discussing sanctions that would be targeted against banking and industrial interests in Iran.

In a speech Thursday, Kouchner said that France sees a nuclear-armed Iran as a threat to global security.

"To those who say that we should handle Iran with kid gloves, since it could destabilize the region, I say this: look at its adventurism today and imagine what it would be like if Tehran thought itself one day protected by a nuclear umbrella," he said.

The tougher position has been welcomed in Washington, where Kouchner also met lawmakers, as well as Defense Secretary Robert Gates and National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley.

In the joint news conference, Rice noted improved relations.

"It's an excellent relationship," she said. "I think there are many, many things that France and the United States are going to be able to do together."

Kouchner agreed, but said differences remain.

"Having good relations doesn't mean that we are in complete agreement every day, everywhere," he said. "But we have excellent relations."

Central Europe Socialists reject U.S. missile shield

By Jan Korselt, Reuters, Sept. 14, 2007

PRAGUE (Reuters) - Central European Social Democrat parties rejected on Thursday a U.S. plan to build part of its missile defense shield in Poland and the Czech Republic, saying it threatened to bring about a new arms race.

Top Socialists from Germany, Austria, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Slovenia said after talks in Prague that any such system must not be built unilaterally or bilaterally.

"We are concerned about the decision to deploy the system and are at one with the large majority of our populations in rejecting it," the parties said in a joint statement, which was signed among others by Austrian Chancellor Alfred Gusenbauer, Germany's SPD chief Kurt Beck, and Polish Socialist leader Wojciech Olejniczak.

They called on the European Union, the NATO alliance and the NATO-Russia council to consult on missile defense.

Beck said the statement was also a message to conservative German Chancellor Angela Merkel, with whom the Socialists jointly rule.

"We agreed we are against any new arms build-up in Europe," Beck said.

Some critics of the anti-missile system have warned the plan could be torpedoed if a Democrat president is elected next year after Republican George W. Bush, but a visiting senior Democrat said her party was behind the project.

"We wanted to come today to make very clear that we are very supportive... of missile defense," Ellen Tauscher, chairwoman of the House Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee, said after meeting Czech Deputy Prime Minister Alexandr Vondra in Prague.

She added that she hoped negotiations with the Czechs and the Poles would be concluded soon.

The ruling Hungarian Socialists attended the central European socialists' meeting but refused to join in.

"The Hungarian Socialist Party believes that if Europe is exposed to a terrorist threat we have to defend ourselves," said Imre Szekeres, deputy party chief and the country's defense minister.

The United States is building the shield to guard against missiles that it says could be fired by countries such as North Korea and Iran, carrying chemical, biological or nuclear warheads.

It is in talks with the rightist governments in Poland -- where it wants to put 10 ground-based interceptor missiles -- and in the Czech Republic, which is meant to host a radar base.

Russia opposes the plan, saying it would upset a delicate strategic balance between major powers and threaten its own security.

The plan has also hit obstacles in the United States.

The U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee cut $85 million from a $310.4 million funding request for the fiscal year starting October 1, joining the other three congressional committees with jurisdiction over the issue to recommend cutting the plan for European sites next year.

ElBaradei protests at EU statement

Agencies, Press TV, Sept. 12, 2007

The UN nuclear chief Mohammad ElBaradei has left an IAEA meeting in protest at an EU statement on Iran, diplomats say.

ElBaradei walked out of an afternoon session of his IAEA in Vienna on Tuesday to voice his anger at a statement issued against Iran by the EU, the diplomats attending the meeting said.

"The Europeans issued a nasty statement against Iran, so Mr. ElBaradei left the meeting," said one diplomat who spoke on condition of anonymity.

IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming declined comment but several diplomats confirmed that ElBaradei had left the session.

ElBaradei has been under pressure as the US and other Western powers warn that a timetable for new inspections in Iran agreed by the IAEA and Tehran last month provides Iran the opportunity to delay new UN sanctions.

Still, the United States and ElBaradei had closed ranks on the first day here Monday of a regular meeting of the IAEA board in urging Iran to meet the timetable and also to do more to show the world it does not seek the bomb, such as suspending uranium enrichment.

The European Union speech was given by Portuguese ambassador Joaquim Duarte, as Portugal is the current EU president.

After walking out, ElBaradei stayed away until the session was adjourned at its regular time until Wednesday. The Portuguese speech was followed by speeches from Canada and Norway.

Just before the Portuguese speech, ElBaradei had received a rousing statement of support from the Non-Aligned Movement, in a speech by Cuban Ambassador Norma Miguelina Goicochea Estenoz as the NAM leader.

She said "NAM shares the view that this work plan (timetable) is a 'significant step forward'" and "reiterates its full confidence in the impartiality and professionalism of the Secretariat of the IAEA and its Director General, Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei."

MGH/RA

National resistance confronts imperialism in Palestine

By Joyce Chediac, workers.org, June 24, 2007

June 20—Recent events in Gaza were not a “power struggle between rival factions,” or a “five-day civil war.” These descriptions in the establishment press are imperialist attempts to conceal the events’ true nature.

The Gaza struggle was between irreconcilable class forces. On one side were the forces of national resistance represented by Hamas. On the other side were the forces of imperialist slavery represented by a small faction of Fatah under Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and his security advisor Mohammad Dahlan. This group consciously lent itself to Washington and Tel Aviv’s designs to drive Hamas from power and overturn the results of the 2006 election that gave Hamas a majority in the Palestinian Parliament. (see chronology)

“Our fight is not against Fatah, the one with the long history in the struggle, but against just one group of Fatah agents who were following the Zionist agenda,” explained Abu Obaida, spokesman for Hamas’s Qassam Brigades. (Observer, June 17) Hamas recognizes Mahmoud Abbas, and has called on him to join them in a new unity government (see related article).

Hamas was compelled to defend itself by destroying the armed forces of the cat’s-paw of imperialism before this cat’s-paw destroyed Hamas. This is why Hamas staged a pre-emptive assault on Fatah security offices, especially the Preventive Security forces and the Presidential Guard, which reported to Mohammad Dahlan. In the heat of events, genuinely anti-imperialist, anti-Israeli militants in the Fatah side may have erroneously been drawn into the struggle. This, however, does not change the struggle’s class character.

Hamas and Gaza need worldwide support

The U.S., Israel, the Arab League and European Union have quickly lined up against Hamas, issuing further threats to that group and to the 1.4 million people of Gaza. Hamas and the Palestinian struggle need the support of progressives worldwide at this crucial time.

Palestinians, so much in need of a strong and united movement, have reacted to the Gaza developments and ensuing split with a heavy heart. Under constant attack by Israel, the situation in the Occupied Territories is dire. But it would have been worse if Hamas had been defeated in Gaza by the Fatah group. This group countered every attempt by Hamas to achieve unity against the Israelis, and stood by while Israel arrested 40 Hamas legislators. The group persisted in provocation, even to the point of trying to assassinate the Hamas prime minister, Ismail Haniyeh.

Quotes from the Gaza street reveal what this Abbas-Dahlan cooperation with U.S. and Israeli destabilization brought on the people. Hatem Shurrab, 22, an aid worker in Gaza, interviewed by aljazeera.net on June 15, said “I was really sad about what happened ... [but] one good thing is that Hamas targeted many collaborators who worked for Israel and committed many crimes—such as killing Palestinians just because they had beards and blowing up supermarkets and houses linked to Fatah.”

Continuing its blatant intervention, “The United States had quietly encouraged Mr. Abbas to dissolve the Palestinian government and dismiss Prime Minister Ismail Haniya,” (New York Times, June 15). This is exactly what Abbas did, ignoring offers from Hamas to re-establish the unity government (see Hamas statement).

In violation of the Palestinian Constitution, and much to the joy of Washington, he has fired Hamas and the entire elected government and appointed an emergency government and prime minister—a former World Bank official who is the West’s economic point man. (see related article). This new government, in which only Abbas was elected, claims to preside over the West Bank, really ruled by the iron fist of Israeli occupation, where all the struggle forces must remain underground.

Now Bush is now calling Abbas “president of all the Palestinians,” and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is calling Abbas “friend.” However, neither Washington nor Tel Aviv have any intentions of granting true sovereignty to the Palestinian people, out of fear of their revolutionary potential.

‘Won’t fight for an American agenda’

The U.S. and Israel were caught unawares, and dealt a stunning defeat with the fall of the Fatah security forces. Even the New York Times, in an editorial (June 15), calls events in Gaza “a defeat for Israeli and American policy.” The U.S., which looks upon the people as commodities to be bought and sold, was truly shocked at how quickly the more numerous and better armed Fatah forces collapsed before Hamas.

But people have hearts and minds. Though poverty may have driven them into the security forces, many Fatah soldiers had no heart for enforcing a pro-Zionist, pro-imperialist agenda on their own people.

The Observer (June 17) reports that people within Fatah support the Hamas move. Former senior Fatah member Khaled Abu Helah said on Hamas TV that he “welcomed Hamas’s cleansing of Fatah of its collaborators and traitors.” Additionally, “Some officers in the Presidential Guard had sent their men home as the fighting began.”

A Gaza resident added, “Hamas fighters were not getting salaries. They believed in what they were doing. Some fought for four days without going home.

“Fatah security forces fought for their thousand shekels or a pack of cigarettes. Dahlan had used poverty to recruit the people. The majority didn’t even turn up to defend their stations. Many stayed home. Most were in plain clothes. Dozens called the Qassam and said, ‘We want to leave, give us security and a safe passage.’ Most of the decent security people don’t want to fight for Dahlan, or Israel or America. They don’t feel they should be killed for the [U.S] American or Israeli agenda.”

There were earlier times when Fatah forces felt they had something to fight for. One of their finest moments occurred during the 1982 U.S.-Israeli siege of Beirut. For seven weeks, Israel attacked Beirut by sea, air and land, cutting off food and water supplies and disconnecting the electricity in blistering heat. But the armed people and heroic fighters, who mostly identified with Fatah, held strong under the most unbearable conditions, defended the camps and suburbs, and would not give in. Their steadfastness forced a negotiated settlement and inspired workers and oppressed people everywhere.

These Fatah fighters showed the world that only the struggle wins concessions, especially in a national liberation struggle as beleaguered as the fight for Palestine. Today Hamas is the most under attack for waging this struggle. It, and all who fight for Palestine, sorely needs the active support of all who value justice and freedom.