4,000 American deaths in Iraq; 1,000 French troops soon to come to Afghanistan; the Occupations Continue

On the fifth anniversary of the Iraq War, CBC is reporting that the latest milestone in Iraq has been reached: 4,000 dead American soldiers. This is, of course, in addition to the 29,451 injuries reported by the U.S. Military (antiwar.com suggests, based on disability claims by returning veterans, that 100,000 injuries is closer to the truth).

NAFTA-gate, the NDP, presidential dynasties, and neoliberalism

Canadian (and possibly American) readers may be familiar with ‘NAFTA-gate’, whereby the news networks reported on supposedly leaked information from a Canadian governmental meeting with one of Barack Obama’s advisors. Apparently, Obama’s advisor was largely sent to reassure the Canadian government that recent criticisms of NAFTA made by Obama (also made by Clinton) were more political maneuvering than a genuine belief. Harper claimed, at the time, that he did not believe that either Clinton nor Obama would be genuinely interested in ‘re-opening’ NAFTA.

The reaction of the Canadian opposition, both the Liberal and NDP, was to attack Harper on the leak from his office presumably intended to influence the elections of a foreign country. It’s quite irritating to see Layton fawning over Obama and trying to accuse the Harpercons of trying to sabotage his campaign; it goes to show how it’s not easy to make easy comparisons of political ideology across borders.

Stéphane Dion says it like it is

I had to laugh when I read the headline on this CBC.ca story on Dion’s decision to not oppose the Tories’ budget: “We’ll find a way to not defeat the government’: Dion”.

Thank goodness for the Liberals: if it wasn’t for them, who would be propping up this Tory government, anyways?

Manley nominated for Afghan potentate?

According to the Globe, John Manley is apparently in line to be nominated by the Conservative government as a so-called ’super envoy’ for the Afghanistan “aid and reconstruction” efforts. Manley, as you may recall, was the Chair of the recent ‘Manley Commission’ (otherwise known as the Independent Panel on Canada’s Future Role in Afghanistan) that decided Canada’s imperialist ambitions in Afghanistan were just super and that (as long as we get 1,000 troops committed from other NATO countries) we should stick around for the time being.

Linkity-link: Feb 8th, 2008

A few more interesting links for perusal: today we have Pilger doing a deliciously snarky lambasting of the U.S. Presidential Elections, Prince Charles being the royal buffoon he is, and Lenin’s Tomb taking a gander at Canada’s involvement at Afghanistan. Enjoy!

Kennedy backs Obama; ‘change’ occurs

A quickie: came across this article on BBC World. Teddy Kennedy, who is apparently ‘patriarch’ of the Kennedy clan, is backing Barack Obama for Democratic candidate for President. Obama, who uses the ‘change’ line (“I represent change”, blah blah blah) about as much as Giuliani mentions 9/11 (i.e. a whole shitload), and who is clearly positioning himself as the anti-establishment candidate (watch as Obama sticks it to the man by… continuing Bill Clinton’s neoliberal foreign policy!), is apparently anti-establishment enough to warrant the approval of… the head of America’s oldest surviving political dynasty.

I would find the irony to be delicious if the fallout from Obama (or any other Demo/Repub candidate, with the exception of loony-tunes faux-libertarian Ron Paul) didn’t mean the continuation of mass-slaughter at the hands of American capitalism and the neoliberal war machine.

Philip Agee dead at 72

Philip Agee, CIA whistleblower, died Monday at the age of 72. He worked for the CIA for a number of years before quitting in ‘69, apparently under protest of the CIA’s support for Latin America dictators and the like (specifically the repression at the 1968 Mexico City Olympics). He published a book in ‘75 called Inside the Company that exposed a number of CIA operations, and ‘named names’ of CIA operatives under cover in an attempt to sabotage their work.

The guy himself led a fairly interesting life, and was on the run from the U.S. government for years. He went from country to country trying to find a safe haven he wouldn’t be deported from, but the communist or left nationalist governments that sheltered him inevitably suffered ‘regime change’ (which I’m sure his former employers were involved with on more than one occasion).

Something I discovered about the fellow a few years back was that he was largely the reason the U.S. government created the Intelligence Identities Protection Act in 1982. This law makes it illegal to knowingly blow the cover of a covert U.S. intelligence agent. This law, of course, is the one that laid the legal basis for the Washington shitstorm over Valerie Plame’s outing by Rove et al. Now, I for one (like many others) was eager to see Rove and Libby and the rest go down in flames, but the law the Democrats were using to go after them is an embarrassment. Of course, I do find it humourous when state repression of dissenters (as this law essentially is) comes back to bite these chumps in the ass.

WGA crushes Golden Globes; millions flock to their cause

Looks like the Golden Globes are cancelled, folks (via Socialist Unity). It’s kind of too bad, really; it’s not that I love Hollywood awards shows, just that I wanted to see rich Hollywood liberals twist themselves in knots about crossing a picket line or not. It looks like enough of them made the right choice and told the awards shows they would be staying away that night.

If we’re really lucky, AMPTA will be intransigent enough on residuals that the strike will go on long enough to kill some other insufferable specials.

Now, some people have argued the WGA strike is good for showing American workers that strikes are a legitimate tool for the working-class, and I certainly hope this is true; however, I’m not convinced of the accuracy of this claim. I’m guessing that the public probably sees Hollywood as a peculiarity in the country, and doesn’t necessarily translate what happens there to their lives. Of course, the longer the strike goes on, perhaps this will change.

The more things change, the more they stay the same: 1898 & 2008

It’s funny how the historical record of imperialism is treated: it can be to some people, as this CBC news article shows, both something to be criticized, and yet also something to be simultaneously proud of. This is only complicated by current developments where this ‘proud history’ is being repeated, ad nauseum, with only a minor facelift.

The article is essentially a ’support-the-troops’ story about how some Canadian soldier’s great-grandfather was in the same general area (Eastern Afghanistan, presumably) in the late 19th-century. The soldier naturally argues that what Canada is doing in Afghanistan is completely different from what the British Empire was doing in the area:

Taylor said his mission is worlds apart from the work carried out by his great-grandfather’s unit more than a century ago, as the British attempted to subdue Pashtun tribe members in a valley in modern Pakistan.

“The main difference is that when the British were here in the 1890s, it was to colonize the area against the will of the people,” he said, “whereas right now, we’re here at the behest of the democratically elected government of Afghanistan in order to provide assistance to them, in order to provide security and stability within their own country.”

The Tirah Campaign involved the retaking of the Khyber Pass between what is now Afghanistan and Pakistan from the Afridis. The Afridis had been apparently been in the employ of the British Empire (for 16 years) to hold the pass safe for imperialism; they apparently changed their mind about the situation, rose up and took the Pass for themselves. The Empire, of course, could not stand for an indigenous population controlling their own land (especially when it held such important military and economic importance) and proceeded to invade and reconquer the area.

There were, apparently, some ‘Indian princes’ working for the military commander of the expedition, as the British Raj was in effect at the time and there would have been a fair amount of collaboration by the Indian elites with the British Empire. Additionally, a number of the actual soldiers were also indigenous people. Collaboration by elites with imperialist occupying forces is one of those striking similarities between the two military campaigns, although it is interesting to see the active service of the indigenous population in the occupying military.

I cannot claim that late 19th-century imperialism is identical to early 21st-century neo-imperialism, but they are both based on the same idea: control and access to key economically- and politically-strategic resources and locations. How anyone today can still ‘take pride’ in a family history of participating in imperialism, however, is beyond me.

Zuma wins ANC Presidency; Left-wing of party expects revolution “really, really soon”

So Jacob Zuma has officially won the ANC leadership contest, deposing former ANC head, and current South African President, Thabo Mbeki. Mbeki has been President of SA since 1999, and President of the ANC since late 1997. Zuma’s victory is widely seen as a lead-up to a run for SA President. Winning with 60.75% of the vote, Zuma’s support apparently comes largely from the South African Communist Party and COSATU, both formerly affiliated with the ANC, as well as the ANC youth wing. He is identified with the party’s left-wing, although the SACP endorsement and the ANC’s history as Marxist does not necessarily mean he is interested in taking the ANC or the country on a radical-left path. He has made efforts to ‘reassure investors’ and the like, and as Lenin points out,

He is in all probability an opportunist who has harnessed a unique chance based on the unrest. However, the fact that he has successfully channelled the energy of this revolt into a leadership bid which may lead to him taking power in the ANC (but not the country) is itself significant.

In this article Claire Ceruti quotes Zwelinzima Vavi, general secretary of COSATU, as saying the SACP have latched onto Zuma in an effort to “consolidate, retain and deepen [the ANC's] progressive posture and working class leadership under the current conditions of intense contestation”. I agree with Claire’s general position that the 11 million strike days recorded in the first half of 2007, along with other factors (both theoretical and immediate) indicate the latent and growing strength of the worker’s movements in SA, although a fetishistic connection to the ANC (understandable due to their historical prevalence in the anti-apartheid struggles) prevents it from becoming developed.

My personal analysis of leadership contests for broad organizations such as the ANC is that they are a useful indicator of popular sentiment, a sort of ’snap poll’ of the electorate, and largely useless in-and-of themselves. A parallel (although I’m sure many would disagree) would be of the 2005 Canadian Labour Congress election, where Carol Wall ran against incumbent Ken Georgetti. I don’t mean to argue Zuma is equivalent to Wall (or that the CLC is analogous to the ANC, for pity’s sake) but instead that the Wall campaign was less about getting someone elected (although anyone other than Georgetti would be a improvement) and more about the dissenters in the CLC using it as a chance to make their presence known. The question is whether participation in a broad-tent (or, more accurately, multi-class) party is the best option for the left.

(Edited to properly attribute the quotation from Claire Ceruti’s article.-Jan 30)