Take action for Palestine!

 As Palestinians starve under the Zionist thumb Israeli troops move into Gaza city leaving a trail of death and destruction in their wake. While People’s China and the Russian Federation have long taken the principled stand with the Global South in support of the Palestinian Arab freedom fighters America’s feudal Arab lackeys wring their hands but do little or nothing to stop the genocide on their door-step.
All over the world millions upon millions of people are demanding an end to the slaughter forcing even the venal Western politicians to at least pay lip-service to human rights in Palestine. But that’s as far as it goes for the likes of Starmer, Macron and Merz.
They try to stifle the solidarity movement by intimidating and jailing those who protest against Zionist terror. They’ll all crawl to Washington to bleat on about Ukraine but none of them are prepared to stand up to Trump or make the decisive break with Zionism and Israel that is needed to halt the violence which threatens to plunge the entire Middle East into chaos and bloodshed.
The Palestinians have called on people around the world to launch divestment campaigns as an effective way of showing solidarity with their struggle for freedom. The call for sanctions against Israel becomes louder and louder each day.
Israel's genocidal assault on the Gaza Strip has killed tens of thousands of Palestinian Arabs and displaced over 90 per cent of the entire population. But Israel’s actions can only be sustained through imperialism. And the leader of the pack is the United States.
The Zionist entity is a total dependency of the United States. The United States holds 99 per cent of the cards in Tel Aviv. Despite all the talk of “Zionist lobbies” and the “Jewish vote” only the Americans count in Tel Aviv. The Israelis are American puppets that, until recently, enabled the Americans to pose as friends of the feudal Arab kings who allow the Big Oil corporations to plunder their oil in return for a juicy cut and American protection.
Likewise the Zionist leaders who strut the world posing as independent politicians are just alibis for American aggression in the Middle East. US imperialism provides the military and economic support that keeps Israel going. The country is an American protectorate and their leaders will ultimately do whatever America wants.
The establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 led to the expulsion of nearly a million Palestinians from their homes. The war continues to this day. The Palestinians fight on and they will continue the struggle until their legitimate rights are restored.
UN resolutions have provided the basis for a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. First of all Israel must totally withdraw from all the occupied territories seized in 1967, including Arab East Jerusalem and Syria’s Golan Heights. The Palestinians must be allowed to establish a state of their own on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The Palestinian refugees whose homes are now in Israel must be allowed to return or, if they so wish, be paid appropriate compensation in exchange. And all states in the region should have internationally agreed and recognised frontiers guaranteed by the Great Powers.

Double trouble with Susan Ryeland

by Ben Soton

Marble Hall Murders by Anthony Horowitz, Penguin Cornerstone 2025; pbk 592 pp, rrp £9.99

This is the third in a series of novels featuring Susan Ryeland; the others being Magpie Murders and Moonflower Murders, both of which have been televised.  Susan Ryeland is arguably a modern Miss Marple; instead of a spinster living in a quaint West Country village she is a career woman working as an editor for a publishing company.  Like Miss Marple she has never been married and at fifty-five unlikely to have children; instead she appears to be constantly in and out of unsuccessful relationships.  
All three books are in effect two novels in one.  One being a murder set in the present day and the second, the novel that Ryeland is editing set in the 1950s and featuring the fictional detective Atticus Pünd. 
Pünd, a refugee from Nazi Germany, is a kind of post-war Poirot. And the essence of all three books is that the fictional novel contains the secret to the murder set in the present day. 
In Marble Hall Murders an up-and-coming author, Elliot Grace, has been commissioned to write Pünd’s Last Case.  Grace, a troubled young man with a tainted past uses the novel to expose his grandmother’s murder.  As with the previous books the characters in the Punt novel mirror with those in the present-day story.  
Meanwhile we see the return of murderer, Charles Glover, from Magpie Murders; although this time incarcerated in Belmarsh Prison wearing a grey tracksuit instead of Saville Row attire.  Glover makes the comment that prison is easier for men who’ve been to public school.  
A feature of the book (or book within a book) is that the author effectively reviews the Pünd novel as she narrates the modern-day story.  She regularly asks questions related to matters of historical accuracy and often what would appear to be minor issues. This taking the reader into the world of publishing.
Meanwhile although I established the identity of the murderer in the Pünd novel (I am no detective) the reader is kept guessing as to the identity of the killer in the present-day story or perhaps even questioning if there was a murder at all; the victim being in her eighties and suffering from a heart condition.       
Moonflower Murders is a story of revenge and anger spanning generations as well as different time periods.  Ryeland searches the novel for anagrams and cryptic clues as to the killer’s identity.  I understand the book will soon become a television series. I look forward to watching it.  But Horowitz leaves us in an element of suspense as to whether there will be another Atticus Pünd /Susan Ryeland novel.     

North to Alaska

An American jet escort for Putin’s plane. The red carpet. A ride in  Trump’s presidential car appropriately called “The Beast” and the red carpet rolled out as the world’s media swooped down on Alaska last week for the Trump-Putin summit that some believed would end the Ukraine war. But it didn’t. And though plenty of progress was clearly made in the talks at the American air-base in Anchorage there was, as Trump put it, “no deal until there's a deal”.
US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin met for about three hours in the American Arctic for what Trump described as very "productive" and Putin said were very "constructive" talks.
Putin: the man the imperialist media branded a “war criminal”. The leader of a country subjected to a harsh Western economic blockade was now being greeted like an old friend by the man that the bourgeois media still call the leader of the “free world”. But that world – the world of imperialism and exploitation was never free. And though the current leader of the United States wants to continue exploiting and plundering its resources, he certainly doesn’t wants to rule it.
Overall the atmosphere in Anchorage was one of equality, pragmatism, and friendliness. Despite the arrest warrant against Putin issued by the International Criminal Court, Trump extended a historic welcome to the Russian leader with warm handshakes on American soil. They even travelled together in the same car – gestures that conveyed Trump’s respect for Putin and signalled disapproval of the way previous European and US administrations handled relations with Russia.
"The 'Trump-Putin meeting' was neither a case of each side simply talking past the other, nor did it achieve complete alignment," says Zhao Long, deputy director of the Institute of Global Governance at the Shanghai Institute for International Studies. "It resembled a delicate puzzle, with both sides attempting to fit the core demand for a Ukraine ceasefire into the larger picture of normalising US-Russia relations." Zhao Long added that both leaders sought to avoid a perception of failure, so under the framework of low expectations, even minor consensus points were presented as significant progress to lay the groundwork for further dialogue. 
The Chinese academician argues that Washington and Moscow will continue to use the cease-fire issue to advance normalisation of ties, though a decade of mistrust, entrenched confrontation, and conflicting global interests means the process faces many obstacles.
Nevertheless the Western diplomatic embargo on Russia has been broken and while the summit ended without a deal on the Ukraine crisis it clearly has laid down the groundwork for future dialogue to pave the path toward peace in Ukraine.

The thin end of the wedge

Though the supporters of Palestine Action have won their bid to legally challenge the British government’s decision to ban them in the High Court the witch-hunt continues as the Establishment lashes out in feverish attempts to put a lid on the mass movement in solidarity with the Palestinians who are being starved to death in the Gaza Strip.
The ludicrous interpretation of the anti-terrorism laws has led to a protester being threatened with prosecution by a policeman in Canterbury for holding a Palestinian flag and displaying signs saying “Free Gaza” and “Israel is committing genocide” and the arrest of hundreds of others across the country on terror charges. In most cases simply for carrying a placard supporting the banned direct action movement at a demonstration.
Now the campaign set up to overturn the ban on the direct action group, which the government banned on the grounds that spray-painting RAF jets and vandalising the offices of arms manufacturers that supply weapons to Israel constituted acts of “terrorism”, has also been shut down. 
The Defend Our Juries website was taken down this week. The Terrorism Act 2000 specifically ensures that it is lawful to organise for the de-proscription of a group. But their web hosts imply that the campaign may have been in breach of their terms and conditions. Defend Our Juries have checked it out. They say there is no breach. 
Innuendo, threats, the hidden hand...this is what happens when a witch-hunt begins. 
Thousands of people have now been blocked from legal information to ensure their legal rights are upheld. This is an attack on our supposed freedom of speech. This is what happens when the Government uses anti-terror law to silence dissent.

It's still the same old story…

...a fight for love and glory – that’s how the old song goes. Or as Napoleon said: a soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of coloured ribbon. And some people, even today, crave for the acclaim of the world and the medals and fame that go with it. Men like Donald Trump who does nothing to mask his desire for a Nobel Peace Prize. 
Though the Donald has been nominated for the Nobel on four occasions over the years
 his supposed efforts to promote peace and resolve global conflicts have, so far, failed to impress the Nobel Peace Committee.
He, no doubt, hopes that the committee will now be more than impressed by news from Moscow that suggests that an end to the war in Ukraine is finally in sight.
The Russians say they’ve received an “acceptable” offer from the Americans on settling the Ukraine conflict following a visit by Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff to Moscow this week. There’s even talk of a Trump/Putin summit, possibly in the Emirates, later in the month.
Though not in the same league as Obama or a Biden Trump still has plenty of blood on his hands. Syria; Iran; the Gaza Strip – not a good start for a wannabe peace prize winner. Still he’s now got a new nomination from the Cambodians. Whether his latest initiative on Ukraine can tip the balance in his favour when the Norwegian Nobel Committee meets, however, remains to be seen...

On a roll…

With 600,000 sign-ups and more still pouring in the Corbynistas’ new party is certainly taking off. The motley crew of Blairites and Zionists behind the Starmer clique led the witch-hunt that drove Jeremy Corbyn and many others out of the Labour Party. Now they bleat on about splitting the “left” vote and opening the door to the Faragists. But nobody’s listening and nobody cares.
The New Communist Party was founded in 1977 to build the communist movement around the revolutionary principles of Marxism‑Leninism. Since then we have campaigned for the maximum working class unity against the ruling class, while campaigning to build the revolutionary party. At the same time day-to-day demands for reform, progressive taxation, state welfare and a public sector dedicated to meet the people's needs are winnable under capitalism, particularly in a rich country like Britain. We support these demands and back the demands of those within the labour movement who are campaigning for greater social justice. 
Working people can never achieve state power through bourgeois elections. Bourgeois elections are democratic only for the ruling class and their instruments, a tool to mask their real dictatorship. All bourgeois elections are the manipulation of the largest number of votes by the smallest number of people.
We supported those in the Labour Party fighting for left social-democratic policies. We also backed those, like Ken Livingstone who defied the Labour leadership, with rank-and-file Labour Party and union support. And our Party will continue to supports left social-democratic Labour activists with mass support, even when they come into electoral conflict with the Labour leadership. 
Now hundreds of thousands of people are again rallying to Corbyn’s banner. The Independent Alliance in one form or another will clearly be able to run a national slate at the next general election. Their existing MPs look set to keep their seats and the prospects of flipping others into their camp is now a realistic prospect for the future.
But what everyone on the left really wants to know is what the new platform led by Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana will be. It clearly will reflect the existing support for the Palestinians shared by the Corbyn-led Independent Alliance in the House of Commons. It will doubtless embrace the left social-democratic pledges on public ownership, jobs and the health service that Corbyn has supported throughout his political career. 
Corbyn has ruled out a merger with the Greens while leaving the door open to co-operation in Parliament. But the electoral stance and structure of the new platform – which still has to be officially named – is still to come.
When Corbyn led Labour only a fraction of the hundreds of thousands who supported him actually took part in constituency politics which left the Blairites in control of the party apparatus well-placed to use Starmer as a Trojan Horse to get rid of the Corbynistas and put themselves back at the helm. It was more or less the same in the unions where the bogus “broad left” factions posed as Corbynistas when it suited them but did nothing to save him when the purge began. It may be different this time round but that will depend on if the hundreds of thousands who’ve ticked the box over the past few weeks actually take part in the decision-making processes that will chart the course of this new party.  

The borderlands of history

by Ben Soton

 
The Far Edges of the Known World – A New History of the Ancient Past: Owen Rees: Bloomsbury Publishing London 2025; 384 pp; hbk: £25

The ancient world is often seen as a history of empires and the cataclysmic clashes between them. These empires include that of Egypt, Persia, the short-lived Macedonian Empire of Alexander the Great and, of course, Rome.  Owen Rees’s new book covers the many places on the edges of those empires as well as those gaps in-between.
The book is part of a recent tradition in historical literature, which focuses on trade and cultural exchange rather than simply that of kings, queens and battles, and it is divided into four sections; Pre-history, Egypt, Greece, Rome and Beyond the Classical World.   
The author makes extensive use of Greek and Roman historians such as Herodotus, Ovid and Tacitus as well as philosophers such as Socrates and Plato, who apparently went to Egypt to sell oil  – well a man cannot live by words alone. 
The most influential culture in the classical world was probably that of the Greece.  Ironically there was never a Greek empire as such; the Macedonian empire of Alexander the Great only lasted a few years and its successor states, Ptolemaic Egypt and the Syrian-based Seleucid empire did not actually include Greece. What we refer to as the Greek world was a collection of city states, centred in the Aegean, covering much of the Mediterranean and beyond.  
Meanwhile classical Greece is viewed by those on the right as the blueprint for the superiority of the West. Although Athens was, indeed, the first place to promote a limited form of democracy it was a hierarchical society based on slavery, the subjugation of women and a chauvinistic attitude to those outside its parameters.  
Those outside the Greek and later Roman world were referred to as “barbarians”; one such group being the Scythians, a nomadic people who inhabited much of what is now Russia and Ukraine. The author devotes a chapter to the Ukrainian city of Olbia; a place where Greeks and Scythians interacted. Rees points to shared cultural similarities; for example Scythians following the Greek cult of Dionysus as well numerous examples of inter-marriage.  As a result there were no clear boundaries between the two groups.  Meanwhile cultural definitions are often a result of elite manipulation; whilst the interactions between groups of people often take place on geographic peripheries and amongst the lower orders of society.  In other words the most important boundary between people is that of class and not culture. 
Today we live in a world still dominated by empires but there are large swathes of the world no longer under their domination.  People’s China, Democratic Korea, Cuba and parts of South America, to name but a few.  We are told by our masters that these people are inherently different from us, comparable to modern day barbarians. Is this really the case?
I am told basketball is a very popular sport in Democratic Korea. Baseball is a popular sport in Cuba; both sports originated in the USA.  Likewise football is a popular sport in China, having begun in Britain.  It would seem ordinary people have more in common with each other than the elites who seek to divide us.  Maybe this has always been the case?