Using Hunger as a weapon

 By Arnold August

A ship containing 25,000 tons of soy products which was in the Panama Canal heading to Venezuela was just seized due to the US blockade. The US is using hunger as a weapon,

So declared Cuban President Díaz-Canel in his 28^th July speech at the Foro de São Paolo in Caracas. It is not the first time that Cuba, through its leaders and revolutionary press, has made such an affirmation. Furthermore, in a modest and unassuming way, so has Venezuela. No doubt similar declarations will be made in the future. The fate of Venezuela is still being played out, even though the Bolivarian Revolution and its President, Nicolas Maduro, have defeated every single attempt by the US and by Venezuela’s external and internal enemies to overthrow the government.

Some supporters in Caracas of both the Cuban Revolution and the Bolivarian Revolution questioned whether Cuba should also be honoured for standing in that first trench.

The writer of these lines believes that the answer is “yes and no.” Since 1959, Cuba has solidly positioned itself – and likewise been designated by the world anti-imperialist movement – as proudly standing upright in that first trench as far as Latin America is concerned. Moreover, the international left consensus continuously and correctly reminds us that the Cuban Revolution has primarily been holding that banner courageously aloft on its very own.

Even though other important breakthroughs have occurred, nothing compares to the rise of Hugo Chávez and the fledgling Bolivarian Revolution through the December 1998 elections.

And in the wake of this watershed in Latin American history arose the development of regional integration, which would not have been possible without Chávez together with that other Latin American giant, Fidel Castro. Thus, one can say that both Cuba and Venezuela occupied that coveted (but not sought-after) first trench standing on the same footing.

However, as a result of the first coup attempt against the Maduro government on 23^rd January 2019, everything changed. The ripple effect not only hit Latin America but also, to a large extent, the world.

Never before in decades on this planet have we witnessed such a US-led international, sustained, vicious and coordinated economic, political and diplomatic media disinformation/lying campaign against a government and its leader – in this case, President Maduro – as we have seen over the last six months (and ongoing).

To put this in context by taking definite time frames, one can recall the “Black Spring” media war against Cuba in 2003 over the arrest of mercenaries, the so-called “dissidents.” However, this was nothing compared with Venezuela in 2019. After a relatively short period of time, the controversy over Cuba fizzled out on its own.

As far as personalising a media war by targeting an individual leader, what comes to mind is the “blitzkrieg” in much of the international media against the persona of Fidel Castro after he passed away on 25^th November 25, 2016.

Like starving sharks sensing blood, much of the mainstream media carried out a virtual non-stop, ten-day campaign. It centred around the theme that the “dictator” had passed away and so finally Cuba could come to its senses and liberate itself from socialism, its political system, and make concessions to the US in order to “be deserving of” better relations.

But it lasted only while the Cuban people laid their leader to rest. It soon became clear that Cuba would remain on the same path it had chosen to take since 1959. The time span was not more than about two weeks. It was, thereafter, business as usual.

These and other examples are relatively minor compared with the current 2019 anti-Maduro campaign.

Cuba defeated the mercenary US-backed military invasion at the Bay of Pigs in 1961 at a time when the Revolution was already solidly in power and did not share any political or economic power with pro-American forces. Close to 60 years after the Bay of Pigs, the US is still licking its wounds. It knows that it cannot – and will not – dare to attempt a military coup in Cuba or invade the island. Whether or not the US likes it, the military option for Cuba is not on the table.

The situation in Venezuela, however, is different. While the civic–military union is solid, a military intervention in Venezuela is still possible – and it is always on the American table. For example, during the Foro, while meeting with parliamentarians on 28^th July, one of the Bolivarian Revolution’s main leaders, Diosdado Cabello, said, “It is probable that the US Marines will enter Venezuela; the problem for them, however, is how they are going to leave [alive].”

Even though some of the important Trump allies in the Lima Group do not approve of a military solution, how much weight does this hold in the balance when all these allies fully support regime change?

Let us take one example to draw a distinction between Cuba’s and Venezuela’s situation from the author’s own country. It is still very “fashionable” in Canada at all levels of society and in the mainstream media to oppose the US blockade against Cuba and refrain from open regime change rhetoric. However, the US-led media war against Venezuela is so powerful and all=encompassing in Canada that it is “fashionable” in this country to repeat all the American lies and swallow hook, line and sinker the US narrative against Venezuela and especially its leader, Maduro.

Venezuela is thus indeed in the first trench of the anti-imperialist struggle. In the course of a meeting on 4^th February 2019 with a small foreign delegation in Caracas, Maduro pointed out to us that Venezuela was not seeking the honour of being the epicentre of the international anti-imperialist battle. However, invoking Vietnam, he drew the historical parallel and stated that Venezuela is indeed up to the challenge.

Yes, Venezuela is in the first trench. However, as Díaz-Canel pointed out, the U.S. is also targeting Cuba and Nicaragua.

Thus, due to its repeatedly stubborn refusal to abandon Venezuela despite US attempts to starve Cuba into submission and take the road of treason, Cuba is indeed, in a manner of speaking, sharing that first trench with Venezuela. Yet, Venezuela ranks first there, up front, not by its own choice, but rather because of a situation forced upon it by the US and its allies. The Bolivarian Revolution holds its head up, courageously peering over the trench and ready to take that first bullet, if need be – but not without a fitting response.

A Beggar’s Ball

 The Prime Minister is meeting German Chancellor Angela Merkel and President Emmanuel Macron of France this week. His spin doctors say Boris Johnson is going to tell them that a negotiated withdrawal from the European Union is attainable if they would only drop their demand for an Irish “back-stop”. He will doubtless threaten them with a “no-deal” Brexit which could precipitate a snap election and a Tory defeat at the hands of a Corbyn-led coalition.

 None of this is likely to impress the leaders of Franco-German imperialism. At the moment everything is going their way.

Johnson thought he could outflank Labour and the maverick Tories in the Brexit Party by threatening to by-pass Parliament altogether over Europe. Instead he has boxed himself into a constitutional crisis which could rapidly force him out of office.

 Liberal-Democrat and Blairite efforts to side-step Jeremy Corbyn in Parliament have failed and the Remainers are coalescing around the inevitability of a Corbyn-led government. The Corbyn leadership has embraced the call for a second referendum and all but said they will campaign to Remain when and if this so-called “People’s Vote” takes place. The trigger will be the vote of no-confidence that Labour is expected to move when Parliament re-opens in September.

Let’s see what happens. In the meantime we have to put the communist answer to the crisis back on the workers’ agenda. It starts with: No to the European Union; No to austerity; No to neo-liberalism and Yes to socialism!

            

A wise decision

The seizure of an Iranian oil tanker on the high seas off the Rock of Gibraltar was one of the last acts of Mrs May’s government in July. The decision of her successors to release it is one of the first by the Boris Johnson team. The new Prime Minister has clearly heeded wiser counsel this time round.

 Technically it was a Gibraltar court that ended the crisis. But Gibraltar is only an autonomous “overseas territory” much like the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man.

 Ultimately the decision came from the London Government.

The seizure of the Iranian vessel was a rash act that was plainly done at the bidding of US imperialism. It was a provocation that led to further confrontations between the Iranian authorities and Western shipping in the Persian Gulf while undermining European efforts to salvage the nuclear deal that the Americans walked out of in May 2018.

The May Government said the ship was bound for Syria but this wasn’t true. Her ministers said that the Royal Marines were enforcing European Union sanctions against Syria. This wasn’t true either.

Everyone knows that the ship was detained at the request of the Americans who have stepped up their economic warfare against the Islamic Republic in a renewed bid to provoke regime-change in Iran. But the detention of the ship and its crew in Gibraltar only heightened tension in the Persian Gulf.

 The Iranians first response was to call for the immediate and unconditional release of their ship and its crew. The second was the seizure of a British vessel with the warning of plenty more to come if their demands were not heeded.

Last weekend’s decision by the Gibraltar Supreme Court to ignore last minute American objections and release the tanker on assurance that the cargo will not be sent to Syria will, hopefully, lead to the release of the British ship held by the Islamic Republic and close this fraught chapter in Anglo-Iranian relations.

The Iranian ship should never have been seized in the first place. Let’s hope it doesn’t happen again.

Johnson’s summer of discontent

August is traditionally known as the ‘Silly Season’ – when parliaments close, politicians head for the beach and the papers are reduced to reporting even more rubbish to fill their columns during the summer break. Normally they make do with the mediocre performance of the English cricket team, sharks off the Devon coast and the occasional sighting of the Loch Ness monster. But this is not a normal summer.

The movers and shakers are on stand-by for a snap election, and all sorts of nonsense is being spouted by MPs who otherwise would literally be spending more time with their family in pleasanter climes.

Whilst Liberal-Democrats talk about “national governments” headed by the likes of discredited Blairites Hillary Benn or Yvette Cooper, the Greens have gone one better in calling for an all-woman coalition to topple Boris Johnson and keep us in the European Union (EU).

Caroline Lucas, the only Green MP in Parliament, has asked 10 female politicians from all parties to join her in forming an "emergency cabinet" in a bid to oust Boris Johnson and stop a No-deal Brexit. The chosen few include Labour Shadow Foreign Secretary Emily Thornberry, Liberal Democrat leader Jo Swinson and even Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish nationalist leader who is not even a member of the Westminster parliament. Diane Abbott, the most senior woman politician on the Labour front bench, was predictably ignored. But it hardly matters because no-one, apart from the Guardian that published it, took the Green proposal seriously in the first place.

Boris Johnson has nothing to fear from embittered Blairite backbenchers whose “Anyone but Corbyn” mantra makes the formation of a “government of national unity” in this current parliament all but impossible. But Johnson’s Brexiteers are under threat from the Europhiles in their own camp and the prospect of Brexit overturned in parliament cannot be ignored.

This week former Tory Chancellor Philip Hammond had a pop at Boris Johnson’s special adviser, Dominic Cummings, when he accused the Prime Minister of heeding “unelected” saboteurs “who pull the strings” of his government. Needless to say, Cummings is loathed by the Remainers for his hard-line Brexit views.

Johnson’s foolish talk of proroguing parliament has enabled the Remainers to don the mantle of parliamentary sovereignty in the quarrel over Europe. John Bercow, the Speaker of the House of Commons, has vowed to block Boris Johnson from suspending parliament to force through a No-deal Brexit “with every breath in my body”, whilst others believe that the Queen’s "disappointment in the current political class” has further undermined Johnson’s prestige.

Johnson is clearly banking on being bailed out by an American trade deal to off-set the supposed losses that will follow Brexit. But even this is in doubt, despite the enthusiastic support of the Republican president, Donald Trump. Democrat rival Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the US House of Representatives, says there is “no chance” of a UK–US trade deal if a No-deal Brexit undermines the Good Friday Agreement in Ireland.

The Brexit crisis cannot be resolved by dirty deals in Parliament nor by crawling to the Americans. In fact this fractious parliament cannot resolve anything. There’s got to be a snap general election.

This will be our chance to kick the Tories out and sweep Labour back into power. We must use every resource the labour movement has to win the biggest possible vote for Labour by mobilising the mass support that swept Corbyn to the helm of the party in the first place. Labour can end austerity and empower the unions to raise the standard of living of every worker across the country. Let’s make sure it does.