Troops on the ground?

Chris Burford cburford at gn.apc.org
Thu Oct 18 00:32:12 PDT 2001


The politics of each war is different. Unlike the majority of active contributors on this list (and I do not know about the silent members) and like leftists such as Ken Livingstone, and some of the Guardian staff, I believed that if imperial troops were hovering around yugoslavia, it was essential that they justified their presence by preventing another massacre of muslims. I also believed that bourgeois nationalism could not be a progressive force to stop even deeper divisions in the unity of working people.

When the war against Kosovo was unleashed it became rapidly clear that for imperialist reasons, it was to be restricted to high level bombing, which could in no way be the precision impartial operation that was claimed. Furthermore it became rapidly clear it was accelerating mass migration and expulsion. My impression was that the coalition of western imperialist countries was just about to break up, when Milosevic, for reasons we still do not know, conceded.

Now with a different war, but one that seems almost inevitable, there is a question of where the left targets its most effective protests. Certainly against an attack on Iraq. But now once again in Afghanistan the politics of imperialism are likely to make the easiest option to continue the high level bombing for weeks, but adding more cluster bombs to try to attack Taliban troop movements.

All this is both wrong and (from the point of view of the imperialists) counterproductive in many ways. If any war takes place it should minimise casualties and maximise a positive outcome. There is a difference for the left, and has to be, because no one can do everything, between supporting something and not opposing something. My sense is that if the northern alliance secures more of the country but keeps the door open to a consensual state settlement, that is less damaging than some options. The relevant point at the moment is that protests should specifically oppose cluster bombs on Taliban troops in the region of Mazar i Sharif.

If the troops of the rich western nations put their lives at risk by seizing some key communication points we should watch this very closely, but it might still be preferable to put the emphasis on pressing for cessation of all air activity except logistical activity, and activity, which must be stepped up, to get food and other relief supplies to the population.

And we should press the USA and Blair to negotiate with and not dismiss bin Laden's move to a neutral country willing in turn to negotiate with the United Nations.

Each protesting group would have to decide how to pitch its own emphasis. Global settlement of conflict between Israel and Palestine is obviously crucial. US and British troops should get out of the Arabian peninsular. World liquidity should not be pumped into stagnant western stock exchanges to fund weak price rises, but into a development plan in which the billion people of islamic faith have real prospects of building their lives in a global civil society, instead of suffering intensified global exclusion.

Chris Burford

London



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list