'When in a hole, stop digging' is a useful maxim in politics. It appears, however, to be one that the leaders of the Socialist Workers Party have never heard of.
They continue to justify their refusal to defend Bosnia - despite (or, more likely, because of mounting opposition amongst their members to such wrong and fundamentally reactionary analyses. The most recent attempt is by Duncan Blackie in the July/August edition of Socialzu Keview.
In order to defend the SWP's line Blackie has to falsify the real nature of the war in Bosnia. He acknowledges that the division of Bosnia was cynically decided upon by Croatian President Tudjman and Serbian President Milosevic, but implies the war started simply as a result of them stirring up ethnic conflicts within Bosnia.
He fails to mention the invasion of Bosnia by the Serbian army, accompanied by fascist and semi-fascist bands. He fails to mention the invasion (on a lesser scale) by Croatian troops and fascistic galigs.
Blackie argues that the war is not between oppressed and oppressors. The Muslims of Bosnia, he claims, were not an oppressed group before the war started.
That is true - but it is also totally irrelevant. Once Bosnia was invaded the Muslims - and all those opposed to the policies of Milosevic or Tudjman - became oppressed.
Fascist gangs
If having your country militarily invaded, having your cities constantly bombarded, being slowly starved to death, being driven from your home because of your ethnic background, being murdered by fascist gangs, having your cultural symbols destroyed and so on, is not oppression then we eagerly await Duncan Blackie's exEthnic cleanser Karadzic has found unlikely support from British left planation of what oppression actually is.
The traditional Marxist position, most clearly expressed by Lenin, is for the right ofe nations (not oppressed nations, but simply nations) to be class questions? self-determination: Lenin de- Since nounced slogans about 'defence of Belgium' during the First World War precisely because the war was not being waged over Belgium. It was simply an inter-imperialist war aimed at grabbing colomies irom nival powers.
Lenin accepted that Bel- pure state. gium had a right to exist, and argued that if it were simply a question of opposing German aggression then Socialists should support Belgium (itself an imperialist power.)
In the case of Bosnia we do not even have the complication of an inter-imperialist war. Nor does Bosnia oppress the equivalent of the Belgian Congo. Perhaps Duncan policies is pure fiction. Blackie knows more about For a member of such a self-determination and the so- workerist current as the SWP, cialist attitude to wars than Duncan Blackie hardly menLenin who, unlike Blackie, er- tions the working class. roneously considered them to But this is not really surprisWing. Even the most cursory even Duncan glance at the policies and activiBlackie is forced to recognise ties of the Bosnian workers' that the Bosnian government movement will totally demolish still contains Serbs and the SWP's claim that the war in Croats, it is difficult to see Bosnia is simply between three how he can claim such a equally reactionary nationalist multi-natonal government parties, all with 'objectively' the has the same aim as Karadzic, same aims. the creation of an ethnically Duncan Blackie refers to Tuzla as a 'Muslim' town. Is How can a multi-national he totally unaware that Serbs army, in which the Second in and Croats also live in Tuzla? Command is a Serb, have the Does he not know that the same aims as Karadzic's thugs trade unions of Tuzla are who murder people simply be- multi-national? Does he not cause of their nationality? know that the administration We certainly have many of Tuzla is multi-national, differences with the policies with broadly Social-Demoof the Bosnian government cratic politics. but Duncan Blackie's charac- Has he ever heard of the Serb terisation of their aims and Civic Council and the Croat Karadzic