Editorial 1
Imperialist hands off Afghanistan
As we go to press, the bombing of Afghanistan by Bush and Blair has started. On Sunday October 7, cruise missiles rained down on the cities of Kabul, Kandahar and Jilalabad, together with missiles fired from heavy bombers. On the morning of October 8, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw informed the world that the bombing would carry on for weeks rather than days.
The first reports of the offensive on the BBC World Service referred to this an American attack, but within minutes Britain’s role had been acknowledged.
Socialist Outlook stands in complete opposition to the attacks on September 11 in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania.
We deplore the tragic loss of life that occurred on that day, which we do not believe in any way furthered the struggle of working people across the world for emancipation or justice.
But we say with equal vigour that a military assault on Afghanistan can do nothing to bring recompense for the loss of life that occurred on that day.
There was nothing progressive or anti-imperialist about the terrifying attack on the WTC. This is not just because the mass slaughter of office workers in this way is reactionary and indefensible, but because it has swivelled world politics sharply to the advantage of George Bush and the American right.
These events have brought Bush’s presidency from the discrediting shadow of a ballot rigging scandal, and increasing international isolation after his rejection of the Kyoto Treaty on climate change and his plans for "Son of Star Wars" missile defence, into an unassailable position, with polls showing over 90 per cent support from the American people.
This has allowed him to seize the initiative world-wide, and increase the authority of US imperialism at every level. It threatens a period of reaction in which socialists and progressive forces and those defending their national and other rights face the possibility of serious defeats.
For Afghanistan, after decades of misery and repression, the war seems certain to trigger a humanitarian disaster. However widespread and prolonged the bombardment, the casualties of the war will far exceed the hundreds or thousands who may be directly killed and maimed by missiles, bombs and bullets. Hundreds of thousands more, who are being driven from their homes as refugees, already face imminent starvation, or death from exposure as the cruel winter approaches.
In this context the cynical attempt by Bush and Blair to masquerade as "generous" bringers of "humanitarian" relief, with the air-drop of pitiful token quantities of food in the aftermath of the bombing runs stands out as the rankest hypocrisy.
But the hypocrisy runs alongside the suppression of information that does not suit the war plans of London and Washington.
Most of the media have obediently ignored the offer by the Taliban – over a week before the bombing started – to hand over bin Laden to a court outside Afghanistan. The Taliban made only two minor provisos: that some Islamic jurists be involved, and that they be given evidence of bin Laden’s involvement in the September 11 events.
The fact that the US never seriously responded to this proposal shows that they are not interested in justice. This is confirmed by their continued arrogant refusal to present any convincing evidence to anyone to prove that bin Laden is guilty as charged.
The US and Britain claim to be coming as liberators to free the Afghan people from the Taliban, even though it is clear that western military strategy helped create both bin Laden and the Taliban, and now involves promoting the murderous thugs and rapists of the so-called "Northern Alliance" in their place.
We have no reason to believe that this war will have any more positive results for the oppressed of Afghanistan than previous military interventions. While the reactionary Taliban may well be toppled from power, all history shows that any attempt by outside force to install a government against the wishes of the peoples of Afghanistan will simply result in more continuing bloodshed.
But the war is only just beginning. It already threatens to widen onto new fronts.
The labour movement should take warning from the careful words of George W Bush, who in his address to the nation as the bombing started made clear that "the battle is broader" than Afghanistan itself".
This has now been underlined as we go to press by a letter from the US administration to the UN Security Council, which also declares Washington’s intention to wage its "war against terror" in other countries over and above Afghanistan. Many hawkish US officials and politicians have urged that the war be widened to Iraq, Syria – and even Sudan.
Any such offensive would risk destroying the temporary unity of the "coalition" of governments painstakingly assembled by Blair and Bush: but this is no reason to assume that the US will hold back if it feels it can successfully press home its advantage.
The American ruling class have been all too ready to use the "alliance against terrorism" to push through a raft of reactionary policies with greater determination. Attacks on civil liberties and the targeting of immigrants are aspects of this offensive that we are grimly familiar with here in Britain.
But another facet of this offensive merits equal attention: the cynical use of the post September 11 situation to step up the neo-liberal offensive and globalisation.
US trade representative Robert Zoellick has insinuated that any opposition to "free trade" is unpatriotic and tantamount to support for terrorism. Zoellick is heading up a campaign to get through Congress legislation which will facilitate the approval of treaties such as the Free Trade Area of the Americas which had previously been rather less likely to succeed, and had certainly aroused a good deal of opposition from the mainstream US trade unions.
Zoellick wrote in the Washington Post "Earlier enemies learned that America is the arsenal of democracy. Today’s enemies will learn that America is the economic engine for freedom, opportunity and development. To that end, US leadership in promoting international economic and trading systems is vital. Trade… promotes the values at the heart of this protracted struggle".
Precisely. It is a war to defend and extend the power of the world’s only super-power, and uphold its right to exploit the world’s poor in pursuit of profit.
In this barbaric attack on a defenceless Afghan people, as in every twist and turn in developing the so-called "alliance against terrorism", Blair has been at pains to promote himself as the closest possible ally of American imperialism.
Now the task for all socialists and for the labour movement as a whole must be to strain every sinew to build the biggest possible anti-war movement. We have to stop this murderous assault on one of the poorest countries in the world.
It is not the anti-war movement which has no respect for those who died on September 11, but those in power, who use their suffering to push through yet more attacks on working people world wide.
That’s why we must not only oppose the bombing of Afghanistan, but also stand firmly against the accompanying attacks on civil liberties at home and abroad.