own. resolution againsn min-strike deals hut Scarvill forced the issue to a vole on the general council, cosuring hat even though the congress voted to shelve discussaun, it die not keep tout of the punte syr.
Meete was mute charrariment for. Willis when the print umons suck m their guns and pressed for rejection of the rue's line of sweeping Lie lessons of the Wapping dispute upder the
Nor was Willis pleased to see the congress vote for a campongh against the new ruund of Tory anti-union laws, which will ampore new requirements lor bullois.— but also give-legal protection against disciplinary action to acabs was flour ballot decimore for strike action:
These votes and bonhlicts are a public embarrassment to 7 T1C leadership which has resprinser to right years of Thatcherism be becoming ever more fondamentaliy righr wing and hostile to any form of class struggle resiscance l'he 'new realism' looks to collaboration rather than confrontation with the employers. Thus was why Eric Tammond had boei so arrogan and uncompromising in the rin-up to the TeC proclaiming the BETPU-ARU lipe to be de vuice of the furore, and threateneng to ballot his members on withdrawal from the roc if they were voted down on no-strike deals.
Far from being blackmailed by Hammond, the crade union movement should have declared that it would be a good thing if this happened. Had the BETPU been correctly expelled last year from the rOc for its scabbing role at Wapping he would not even be able to raise that threat пом:
In Fact. Hanumond is bluffing. He knows he would have rycrything to lose and nothing to gain hy being outside the TUC
He would lose the general council's protertion and the 'no poaching Bridlington agreement, leaving his members in many industries SOCIALIST OUTLOOK na 3 September/October 1987
Behind
the Gulf
crisis
THE HYPOCRISY olthe Ls naval intervention in the Cabl was completely exposed when the Trans resumed cir attacks on shipping in the Gulf ar the end of August. Despite the alray of US miliary firepower, backed up by Britist and French naval unite to defend tankers going to Tragi porrs from the altacks of the Iranians, ncarl-all. the attacks ou stupping arr being camied out by. Lie hagis Even mom bizarre, tue main sungle event which provoked the Americans to up their profile in the Gall was the attack on the Uss Stark which killed 35 American sadors. by the Tragi airlorce! For this arrack, the Iranians got most it the blame.
The basic facts of the Gulf shipping war are ximple anr straightforward. The lit for tat strikes against shipping in the Gull were started hy the Traqus as a weapon agamst Tranian oil exports: Whereas Iragi nil can go via the overland pinchine. all Iranian oil has to go by sea. If we want to examine who gains by the shipping war, we have to start with the basic fair that withour Gulf shipping there would be no Iranian oil! exports and lius a cruel bluw to the Tranian economy. wide open for recruitment by genuine unions.
Hammond needs TUC protection beraise his mole on behalf of tor employers in Britain is far from finished: Even now the FETPIT IS lighting m rechuir in non-electrical jobs ranging froni the Aberdeen oil industry to London's docklands Light railway.
Despite his setback at the LuC, Hammond knows his is still the dominant mood among most union leaders, The "Willis plan" for a
Women revolutionary guards march in Tehran cconomy has been wrecked by the war So Tragi leader Saudam Thussein is desperate for a ceasefire. By stoking up the situation in the Golf, he calculates that pressure will be built up for Iran to come to the negotiating table.
The contlict in the Golf comes in the wake of rwo important polical event — the clashes mn Meccu between Iranian shi'ites and Saud: sumi pilgrims and police, and the aftermath at the Trangatr scandal in the United Stares.
The Mecca incidents strengthened the belief among the Arab states which have financed Trag's war eilort that Iran was preparing attacks. and subversion against them
In the Urated Srancs revelations as the Irangare. hearings have pur pressure on the Reagan administration to show that it's not solt en Iran. does not have any truck now-style trade union movement looks heavily to EETPU-type schemes for: individual memherss cheap holidays, insuraner, and credit cards — and seeks to substitute expensive promorion vidcos, media campaigns and PR wOrk for fighting the emplovers.
The prerequisite for the now approach is to avoid all conflict on anything This is the only explanation for why even proposals for the TUC women's department were replaced by a bland statement
UPFRONT
with "terrorists", and ran hold its own in the region. So the request to rellag and cacort Kuwait cankers was jumped at by the Reagan ademistration as a tailor-made bpporlunity.to do all rhose things or cuce le is aimed at shoring up Americu's power and America's interesrs in the region
What of France and Kav Britan? Allist Thatcher inh rutused to sond mine sweepers to help thr Americals, but then tid a u-turn and sent the minesweepersanyway. Thatcher alwavs finds it difficot to refusc a request from Reagan Chirarin France has clubroiled himself partly as.a response lu France's traditionally pro-Iraqi: attitude, partly nut of a wish lu deepen France's simmering war of the diplomats with
There is now a huge comada ol western barleships. in the Gull Probably the es have nuclear weapons on the ussault ship Cuaduaranal. I'he scene is being ser for a mudhary clash with Iran, and one which has nothing lo do with keeping the Gait open to whipping. which conid only he ahieved by putung pressure on Irag lo stop die tanker
Socialists have no reason to: kupport either Tran or irag. buth reactionary tyrannies, in. the war. But they have every reason to demand that Reagan, Thatcher and Chirac stop their imperialist intervention in che Gulf. PHIL HEARSE from Norman Willis, vagucly endorsing the idca of women becoming more involver in The movement,
So commited is Willis to this new approach that he few in his American opposite number, AFL-CIO chief Lanc Kirkland, to addres the congress: he could of course tell delegates how exactly the Willis model of business unionism has helped American unions to slamp to only 18 per cent of the working population. Is this the way of the future?