some sense the successors of the Ottomans, whose empire included those cities and the land around them, and who lost them when the British set up the modern Iraqi state in the aftermath of World War I.
It seems unlikely at the moment that the US would permit Turkey to capture Kirkuk, since they want to control the oil themselves, though conceivably that could change if the US found itself in an even worse position in the rest of
But perhaps the generals see one function of their threats being to test Kurdish ability to unite against them and to test US „caCuos whether for example they would defend Kurdish territory as they are bound to do as occupying power under the laws of wal.
On the face of it, it seems unlikely that Turkey will mount a large border operation.
Probably they are using the threat of invasion as an instrument of statecraft to achieve other aims, and the situation will be defused with some payoff to Turkey and with token attacks on alleged PKK targets.
But there is a real trial of strength going on between the various forces involved, and probably the main payoffs Turkey will be looking for are division and confusion amongst the Kurdish organisations and populations, which will weaken both the South Kurdish entity and the Kurdish national movement, and real moves by the US and KRG to conflict written by noted experts from the two countries. They analyse the regional roles of Syria, Iran and Hamas as well as the politics of the US and Europe They dissect the political background behind recent actions taken by Israel, whilst offering their assessments of future prospects.
SPECIAL OFFER £10 including post and packing, from
Socialist Resistance, PO Box 1109 London N4 9DU.
damage the PKK's organisation in Iraq. Turkey can exert quite a lot of force, mainly because 70% of US supplies for the occupation of Iraq come in via Turkey, and because they are a large weapons market for the US and Europe. But also they can use the largely state-manufactured wave of anti-Kurdish chauvinism within Turkey to show that they have public opinion behind them. The streets in Turkey are being taken over by rightwing and near fascist elements, with the aim of intimidating Kurds and leftists to the point where they cannot demonstrate or even walk about freely without the risk of being assaulted. As there is a real trial of strength gullg oll, should not rule out the possibility that either the US and PUK will make some real move to capture the PKK leadership in order to buy off Turkey, or that the Turkish generals will allow their emotions to carry them away and carry out an adventure in Iraq, if they do not get a payoff they find acceptable. Socialists should support Kurdish demands for solidarity protests against the threat of invasion, and should welcome any increased unity amongst Kurds in the various parts that is produced by this threat, as such increased unity would improve the chances of the Kurds being able to make progress in their complicated struggle for self-determination. Book by Gilbert Achcar and Michel Warschawski THE 33-DAY WAR Israel's War on
Hezbollah in Lebanon
and Its Aftermath This is an incisive and richly Intormed assessment or The recent sae -edanon Sarah Parker The US military's plan for Full Spectrum Dominance mean that they and their Israeli partners wish to deny geopolitical power to any STates nor controlled by them.
They also wish to distract attention from the disaster in Iraq. Iran, like the other states in the region, is using various levers to affect the political situation in Iraq. But whatever Iran's role in Iraq, destroying Iran will not solve the US's problems in Iraq. Iran would prefer stability, and to avoid war with the US. But they will defend what they see as their national interests, e.g. the right to civil nuclear power. They have gone out of their way to comply with the Non-Proliferation Treaty, unlike the US or Israel, and have allowed extensive inspections by the IAEA.
Yet some of their leadership play a dangerous populist game, as when Ahmadinajad said at Columbia that "more research" is needed on the Holocaust.
A leader who engages in foolish provocation may also miscalculate US determination. And some commentators note Ahmadinajad seems personally confident that the US will not attack. Such arrogance may be ill-advised.
But Dick Cheney sees a state that identifies its own national interests distinct from and even contrary to those of the US Empire, as a threat LO be dealt with. Serious commentators such as Scott Ritter, Dan Plesch and Seymour Hersh have pointed to the mounting evidence that Cheney is campaigning for open war against Iran. There are also some indications that some top US military opposes an attack, which may mean it can be stopped - but the anti-war movement must sharpen up its act.
Previously US policy focussed centrally on the alleged nuclear weapons programme. Recently the focus shifted to alleged military interference by Iran in Iraq. (See CASMII website).
However other issues are being used to build support for war: the Iranian regime's attitude to women, gays and lesbians, Jewish people, students, and national minorities.
The antiwar-movement must explain why the antidemocratic reactionary policies of the Iranian regime are not a reason for bombing the country bits. Otherwise there will be many people who will remain ambivalent towards an attack on Iran, and will not join the anti-war movement.
The main aim of the antiwar movement should be to stop an attack on Iran, and its main slogan attack Iran". But we also have convince people who are vulnerable to the demonisation of Iran. Bush is spending $200 million on disinformation against Iran, and if the anti-war movement doesn't separate the truth from the lies, people will be open to this propaganda.
We should point out that whatever the Iranian regime says or does, it is wrong for the US / Britain/Israel to attack the people of Iran. The parallels with Iraq are clear.
Second, we can explain that women, students and trade unionists are struggling in Iran, and achieving some results, and that this is the way to bring about social change such as many people of Iran would like to see.
Thirdly, on the question of particular allegations about the regime, we should put our response in the context of support for the oppressed.
For example, Ahmedinajad's alleged remarks about wishing to wipe Israel off the map have been shown to be a distortion based on a mistranslation; he actually predicted that the Zionist regime would vanish from the page of history - meaning that regimes (not nations or countries) come and go, something completely different. Iran Z PEACE O
But he did cast doubt upon the scale of what the Nazis did to the Jewish populations under their control by saying "more research is needed." Such a remark must have been intentionally provocative, and we should say clearly that this is wrong and offensive.
Again we should not ignore the national tion. This will backfire, as the US and Britain al c trying to use the Baluch and Kurdish movements against the Iranian regime.
Given recent British military deployments on the Iran-Iraq border, probably more border incidents will occur.
We support Baluch and Kurdish efforts towards self-determination, and we condemn the Iranian state's short-sighted refusal to allow them political rights. We caution the Baluchs and Kurds not to trust the US and Britain, and ask them to join those trying to dissuade the US from launching a "shock and awe" style attack on large parts of Iran.
In sum, we can say that we support self-organised and independent struggles for political, national, human and cultural rights and trade union struggles for more rights and better conditions, but we do oppose the manipulation of real grievances in the US and Britain's propaganda campaign to justify massive bombing raids.
page 24 of the scan
Norman Traub diktat. The police invade ranks of the peasantry and that the demand for the land stood alongside those of Adjustment democratic rights and indethe key demands in the struggle.
This took place in the conZANU was backed by China in the war and ZAPU by the then Soviet Union.
A lifeline had been thrown to the Smith regime by imperialism and the racist rulers in South Africa, ensuring oil and other essential supplies, while Britain had adopted a so-called sanctions programme against Smith because of his unilateral declaration of independment mplemented the Economic pendence for Zimbabwe as public spending, currency the trade unions strengthtion of prices and deregula-ment. tion of labour relations. text of the cold war and These policies undid the
social reforms introduced following the first democratic elections in 1980. fied following the ESAP. By June 2000 about 800 farms lower agro-ecological potenhad been occupied. Under mass pressure, the government was forced to implement compulsory land acquisition and mass redistribution. By the end of 2002 it had compulsorily acquired 10