The Socialist Issue 229

NEW LABOUR'S Chancellor Gordon Brown said recently that: "We will pay the price that is necessary to win the war... The Treasury will make the resources available that are necessary to win this fight".

Kieran Roberts

However, it's not the politicians or the bosses who will pay the price of this war. As always in times of warfare, working-class people will foot the bill for the military action through tax rises and job losses.

Of course, the heaviest price will be paid by the Afghan working class and poor. Many hundreds, possibly thousands, have already died in the bombing raids while well over six million face hunger and starvation over the coming months.

Reports have already started coming in from the more remote villages of deaths from starvation.

Is this what the government want working-class people in Britain to pay for? The Observer reports a government adviser as saying that the "public must accept that they have to pay more if they really believe that problems around the world are to be solved".

However, Blair and Bush's war won't "solve" any of the problems that working-class people face anywhere in the world, including here in Britain.

The war certainly won't improve the situation of the 1.2 billion people who live on less than $1 a day around the world, or that of the millions who live without a supply of clean drinking water.

Any world order dominated by the likes of Bush and Blair will still be one of mass poverty and war. These capitalist politicians are more interested in defending the right of US and western powers to maintain their profits, power and prestige.

Stop the bombing
No to war taxes and job losses
Fight racism and attacks on democratic rights
Build the anti-war movement
Fight for a socialist world

Capitalist Crisis Worsens

Fight The Bosses' Attacks

THE WORLD'S economy is headed for what could be the biggest recession for half a century (see page 4). And as usual in a class-ridden society, the bosses are trying to make workers pay for this crisis in their capitalist system.

In Britain an already sickly manufacturing industry has suffered badly. Factory output went down in September by 1.6%, the biggest monthly fall for nine years. Production is now nearly 4% lower than at this time last year.

The manufacturing sector is now deeper in recession than ever, worst of all in the computer and mobile phone makers - hundreds of jobs could disappear at one2one, Britain's fourth largest mobile phone operators. The trade unions should prepare to build resistance to job losses.

Now the problems of manufacturing have reached the service sector. The service industries' output shrank in both September and October, the worst results for at least five years. Already jobs are at risk in the insurance sector.

If you don't believe that this will hit jobs and working conditions, look at what's happening at British Airways (BA).

This giant airline suffered a fall in traffic of a quarter in October. They weren't only affected by the terror attacks in the US but by longer-term problems such as overproduction.

The media pundits only worried about BA's share prices but BA workers have different concerns. Their employers have already threatened them with 7,000 redundancies - many of them planned long before 11 September.

BA also plan to cut the pay of 30,000 workers as a cost-cutting measure. The bosses propose to withdraw the extra one week's holiday pay, due to be paid shortly and to stop the annual increment next year. They hope to save £37 million from this skinflint policy.

Wealthy shareholders won't suffer for long. Neither will fat-cat top managers. They claim that they're taking a 15% pay cut but they already earn far more than ordinary BA workers, some of whom are paid as little as £8,000 a year.

Workers should not pay the price - either in job cuts, living standards or work conditions - for capitalism's problems. Workforces must act in a united fashion to resist redundancies and fight for their jobs and conditions.

Fight Privatisation

University of London Union, Malet Street, London WC1. Saturday 24 November, 11am-4pm.

Registration £5 per delegate to: Glenn Kelly, 37 Linale House, Murray Grove, London N1 7QH. Tel: 020 7251 8449.

Desperate Measures Won't Stop Terrorism

AFTER WEEKS of bombing made no tangible progress in removing the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, US strategists have turned to carpet-bombing Taliban front lines using B-52 aircraft.

This desperate step, although undoubtedly killing many Taliban troops, has been reported to be increasing the cohesiveness of those same troops and their determination to fight back.

While failing to score successes with the air assault, the US and its supporting international coalition has also failed to make progress in cobbling together a post-Taliban leadership for Afghanistan.

Following the capture and killing of Afghan opposition leader, Abdul Haq, a second attempt at rallying opposition in Taliban areas led by Afghan exile and American businessman, Hamed Karzai, ended in failure and retreat.

The US has so far not managed to place a significant number of its own troops on the ground. And in a drive to satisfy its war-mongering promises, is now reported to be planning to supply the opposition Northern Alliance forces with large amounts of weaponry and other military equipment. This is another desperate step, reversing their previous hesitation about building up the Alliance forces while they tried to bring about a broader opposition coalition.

With a resolution to the military campaign far from sight, tensions are mounting in the international 'anti-terrorism' coalition.

UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, has warned that US strikes could undermine the coalition and Megawati Sukarnoputri, president of Indonesia, has called for a ceasefire. They fear the growing anger against the escalating bombing raids amongst ordinary people, especially in mainly Muslim countries.

It is widely obvious that the slaughter being carried out in Afghanistan is doing nothing to reduce the threat of further terrorist attacks. Osama bin Laden's network functions in many countries of the world, and in any case western government intelligence agencies are warning that terrorist units which are not under Bin Laden's command structure could strike at any moment.

And while the terrorist threat remains and is increased by the US action, there is daily news of intense suffering of millions of Afghan people who face starvation, disease and displacement. Oxfam has reported the first deaths from starvation in a remote Northern Afghanistan province. These will be added to by many tens of thousands more as the US bombs prevent aid agencies from delivering food and as neighbouring states attempt to keep their borders closed.

In a cruel demonstration of the hypocrisy of US imperialism, bright yellow cluster bombs are being dropped which are the same colour and size as their so-called 'humanitarian' food parcels, making confusion between the two a possibility.

Prestige and power

This war is being fought in the interests of the prestige and power of world imperialism and not those of working class people in the US or any other country of the world. Socialists must join with others in the anti-war movement, to help build its spread and strength as rapidly as possible.

But we must also recognise that no capitalist government in the world or international capitalist agency can offer the people of Afghanistan a future free of war and poverty. Neither can they begin to solve the threat of terrorism in the world, which exists solely as a result of their policies. Never before has it been more necessary to explain and argue the need for socialism, as the only way forward for a decent life for the whole of humanity.

World Economy

Deepest Downturn Since The 1930s?

THE USA's economy is contracting in its worst industrial crisis since 1945. In the three months ending in September its gross domestic product (GDP) was shrinking at a 0.4% annual rate while consumer spending fell at its steepest rate for 14 years.

Per Olsson

There were a record 3.57 million people officially out of work in the US in September; a surge up to 5.3%. Along with this goes a deepening crisis in Japan and an economic impasse in Europe.

Consumer spending and industrial production continue to fall in Japan while Europe's economies are slowing down and Germany is on the brink of recession. Unemployment is increasing again across Europe. France was creating 40,000 jobs a month early this year. Now it is shedding them at a similar rate.

"(The) global economy is slipping precariously toward recession," warns the World Bank's annual Global Economic Prospects report. The world economy could possibly suffer its deepest downturn since the 1930s.

After a sharp drop in global demand during 2001, what capitalist commentators call "global excess capacity" has reached its highest level since the 1930s.

This in turn will means further lay-offs and cuts in capital spending or investment as profits drop even further. 415,000 jobs were lost in the US alone in October and unemployment is probably rising in Britain. The ILO estimates that 24 million jobs worldwide will disappear by the end of 2002.

Growth in world trade volume will slow to 2% or less this year, from a record 12% last year. This is the sharpest drop in decades.

Investment bank CSFB predicts that global economic growth will only average 1.5% in 2001 and 2002, the slowest growth over a two-year period in 50 years. This points to a serious crisis of global capitalism which could last for years.

The world now has no major engine of growth. This crisis could get worse with the likelihood of an even sharper contraction in the US. Falling US demand is a particular blow to export-orientated countries in Asia and Latin America.

Spectre of deflation

Many countries are already in a deep slump. Singapore faces its worst crisis since independence in 1965. Most of East Asia is balancing on a knife-edge again.

"Asia's most open and globalised economies, such as Singapore, are suffering the most since they are so dependent on international trade patterns. 'What is virtuous in good times can become vicious in bad times', commented a Singapore-based economist" [International Herald Tribune 11 October].

In Mexico, which sends nearly 90% of its exports to the US, over 500,000 workers have lost their jobs since January. Argentina came close to default on its $132 billion debt recently.

"The economy is in a tailspin, destroying jobs, tax revenues and political support", wrote a leading economist (Financial Times 30 October).

World capitalism now faces the spectre of deflation - falling production, falling prices and wages, a squeeze on profits and an exaggerated debt problem, as in the 1930s.

This crisis was not caused by the 11 September terror attacks but originates in the economic imbalances and excesses built up during the 1990s. The blind forces of the market created worldwide overcapacity and overproduction.

Fuelled by credit, capitalist firms 'over-invested' and over-borrowed. But the longer this went on, the more painful the ending of the cycle would become. The present crisis may be longer and deeper than expected.

AS BUSH and Blair rain bombs down on Afghanistan, they also make big promises to rebuild the shattered country. Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, has pledged that a post-Taliban Afghanistan will mean "self determination, with the United Nations (UN) taking the lead in the political process, a massive reconstruction programme..." However, NIALL MULHOLLAND exposes their record of "international peace keeping" and "reconstruction", using the example of the Balkans.

Rebuilding Afghanistan?

Lessons Of The Balkans Conflict

IT IS more than five years since the US pressed all warring sides in Bosnia to sign up a 'peace deal' in Dayton, Ohio.

During that time $5 billion (£3.5 billion) has been pumped into the country. Bosnia-Herzegovina is divided into two administrative entities - the Bosniak (Bosnia Muslim) and Croat-dominated Federacija Bosna I Hercegovina (the Federation) and the Bosnian Serb-dominated Republika Srpska (RS).

The country has a rotating tripartite presidency with a Serb, Croat, and Bosniak member. The Federation and RS also have a president, vice president and cabinet.

Yet, despite the 'aid', and the complicated administrative structures imposed by the powers, "the country is still as far from unity as it was when the guns fell silent." (The Guardian, 16/04/01).

The imperialist powers never had any intention of bring the communities together. The Dayton structures more or less reflected the deep ethnic divisions reached through war and "ethnic cleansing" by 1995.

These administrative structures have actually increased divisions on the ground.

Although the country's government is charged with overseeing foreign, economic and fiscal policy, the UN Office of the High Representative (OHR) has extensive powers of intervention and can, for example, remove elected politicians from office.

This undemocratic power is backed up by S-For, the 20,000 strong multinational troop forces. Overall military authority is in the hands of NATO's Supreme Allied Commander.

A similar situation pertains in neighbouring Kosovo/Kosova, where a virtual Western 'Protectorate' has been established. In this case, the right of self-determination is denied to the majority ethnic Albanian population by the powers.

After fierce fighting earlier this year between Macedonian government forces and the minority ethnic Albanian rebels, NATO has again imposed its will, establishing a military force in the country and attempting to have the parties come to an "agreement".

No 'peace dividend'

THE OVERRIDING aim of the big powers' interventions in the Balkans has been to prevent local conflicts gaining an explosive wider dimension.

They want to maintain stability, not for the sake of the millions of people who have suffered a decade of war, but in order to get down to the business of exploiting the rich natural resources and cheap labour of the region. The US especially is taking advantage of its footholds in the ex-Yugoslavia to impose its power and influence.

The much heralded "peace dividends" have failed to materialise for the great majority of working people. In many cases, conditions have worsened. According to the Institute for War and Peace Reporting (IWPR), Bosnia-Herzegovina unemployment rates for 1999 were between 35%-40%, and Macedonia's reached 35% in the same year - before the recent heavy fighting!

Most of the 'aid' has gone into the hands of big business and local ethnic gangsters. Poverty and mass unemployment are fertile grounds for the right-wing ethnic politicians and warlords, further destabilising the region.

The Western powers had hoped the removal of Serbian nationalist strongman Slobodan Milosevic, by a popular revolt and the coming to power of more pro-Western government, would lessen ethnic tensions in Bosnia. If anything, the new Belgrade regime, and the recent election of a more pro-Western Croatian administration, has led to new anxieties and fears amongst Bosnia's ethnic communities.

In the absence of a clear class and socialist alternative, the hard-line nationalists have made some gains. Last December, the SDS, the party of Radovan Karadzic, the Bosnian Serb warlord, emerged as the strongest party in the Serb areas of the Republika Srpska. In Bosnia's Croatian areas, the reactionary nationalist Croatian Democratic Union, the HDZ, won nearly 90% of the vote.

Bosnia's Muslims have not voted in the same numbers for openly hard-line nationalist parties but they have more to lose from the break-up of the country. They also have gained materially, to some extent, from the economic spin-offs of the large presence of Western forces in the capital Sarajevo.

The common political institutions, such as the parliament and the three-man presidency, are hardly operating. Now even the Serb and the Muslim-Croat entities are beginning to come apart.

According to one Western diplomat, "the Serbs got their Mafia statelet. The Muslims got the country as a whole. The Croats got nothing. Now they want a statelet like the Serbs got."

Last March, the HDZ set up an illegal Croat parliament and appealed to the Croat soldiers to defect from the Muslim-Croat federation army, apparently with little success.

The city of Mostar is a symbol of divided Bosnia. Depending upon where they live, people pay their bills to different branches of the phone and electricity companies.

The Western powers point to speeded up returns of refugees to supposedly show the success of their policies. Yet more than 800,000 Bosnians are still internally displaced, with another 300,000 living as refugees abroad. The small numbers of recent refugee returns are mainly made up of elderly people and therefore not regarded as a "threat".

The obvious failure of the powers to establish stability and genuine democracy in Bosnia-Herzegovina, or to preside over a real improvement in living standards, makes all the more clear the disaster that awaits the Afghan people under Western rule.

Reconstruction myths

JACK STRAW promised that in addition to humanitarian aid, a new regime in Kabul would see a flood of reconstruction funding from global capitalist institutions, such as the IMF, the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, and development funds run by oil-rich governments in the Gulf.

But Afghanistan has been bombed back to the Middle Ages, without basic infrastructure or facilities. Straw announced the cost of rebuilding Bosnia has so far reached $5 billion and conceded that Afghanistan, with four times the population, could see the task of reconstruction "stretch into decades".

The enormous sums needed will not be forthcoming. All the present urgent talk by Blair and Bush of not "again walking away" from Afghanistan will in the long term be subordinated to the overall economic, military and strategic interests of the big powers.

Furthermore, the US and the world are facing a serious economic downturn, perhaps even a deep slump, which will result in a sharp contraction of capital going overseas.

If Bosnia, which is placed beside the richer economies of Europe, has not received the necessary funds for meaningful rebuilding and development, how can Afghanistan?

Just as in the Balkans, the real winners from reconstruction aid will be the likes of the big property developers, construction firms, lending banks, and administrators; all of which are usually linked to local gangster, ethnic elites. Indeed, funds sent to Afghanistan will be used to play a vital role in the attempts by the imperialist powers to buy off various mujahidin factions.

The main cause of continuing poverty in Afghanistan however lies in the fact that under the auspices of Western forces the system of capitalism will rule. Even though the market economy may develop somewhat from its present basic primitive level, the domination of big business will mean investment only takes place if capitalists believe they can make a profit.

It is estimated that Central Asia and the Caspian Sea areas holds more untapped oil reserves than even the Middle East. So billions of dollars can go into building a new lucrative oil pipeline across Afghanistan but precious little will be put towards health care and education. Millions will remain in abject poverty.

Post-Taliban regime

THE BRITISH foreign secretary and Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State, have proposed the creation of a "broad based" government in Afghanistan, representing all 55 ethnic groups and led by the ex-King Zahir Shah. Whether such a 'coalition' can ever be formed is open to question.

Whatever the character of a new regime, the US and Britain are short on details on how it would function, other than saying the UN would have to oversee it.

According to Tim Judah, a Balkans and Central Asia expert, UN officials are "horrified by the idea" (IWPR, 19/10/01). They "fear they will be asked to clear up the mess in the wake of the current bombing campaign." UN policy makers go on to complain, "we have been burned too often", referring to the UN's previous roles in Bosnia and Croatia.

The huge problems posed by putting 'peace keeping' troops in violently faction ridden Afghanistan led one UN source to despair: "What would the mandate be? Who is going to give the troops? Is the US going to put its troops in harm's way? This is no joke. It makes Bosnia look like a kids game." We could add, how will the UN ever be able to deal with the gigantic refugee problem in Afghanistan, given the organisation's failure in the Balkans?

At the end of the day, the UN is a tool of the big powers and will be forced to carry out their bidding. A new Western 'Protectorate' in Afghanistan would probably be run under the auspices of this organisation. UN representatives treat Afghans to the same arrogant contempt they display towards the peoples of the Balkans.

This means running a limited form of 'democracy' and consciously playing off ethnic, religious and tribal groups against one another. It can only result in further conflict and horrors for the Afghan people, and indeed throughout the whole region.

Any regime imposed on the people of Afghanistan on the basis of capitalism will be unstable and incapable of developing living standards.

Afghan working people and the poor have to decide their own future, just as the long-suffering people of the Balkans have to do. The international working class will give support to mass movements for real change.

A socialist government, as part of a socialist federation, is the only way to unlock the rich potential in these regions and to drag society out of medieval wars and poverty.

Protest in Brussels

THIS DECEMBER there will be a European Union (EU) summit taking place in Brussels, Belgium. Demonstrations and meetings have been planned around the summit to protest at the bosses' EU and the continuing war in Afghanistan.

Clare James, International Socialist Resistance (ISR)

On Thursday 13 December there will be a trade union demonstration against the bosses' EU and the cuts in services and privatisation being carried out. Trade unions in Belgium are expecting over 100,000 people to take part in this demonstration from across Europe.

On Friday 14 December, the main demonstration against the EU summit will take place. This should involve trade unionists, young people and local communities from all over Europe.

ISR will be sending people from our sister organisations in Sweden, Germany, Ireland, North and South, Scotland, England, Wales, the Netherlands and obviously Belgium.

On Saturday 15 December, International Socialist Resistance will hold its launch conference in Brussels. There will be an anti-war rally, discussions on different issues such as education, anti-racist and anti-fascist work and 'what is socialism?'.

The conference will end with a discussion and vote on the name, ideas and campaigns of ISR. This will involve members and groups from many different countries in Europe and will be an excellent event.

Accommodation will be available at a small cost on both Thursday and Friday night. Coaches are leaving from across the country. For information on coaches and to book tickets contact:

Northern Ireland

An Agreement Based On Division

THE DRAMATIC events of the last few weeks have kept the faltering 'peace process' on the road. The first act of IRA decommissioning and the decisions of the Women's Coalition and the Alliance Party to redesignate as unionist helped re-elect David Trimble as First Minister.

Ciaran Mulholland, Belfast

The way in which Trimble's re-election was secured however leaves him open to attack from Ian Paisley's Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and its allies.

The fact that the IRA has decommissioned even a small amount of armaments is of huge importance. Decommissioning is of symbolic value only but the strength of this symbolism should not be underestimated. No previous generation of Republican activists have ever gone down this path.

The IRA probably took a decision to at least partially disarm some time ago but they came under intense pressure to do so after the 11 September attacks. Their backers in the US would tolerate no other course of action and made this quite clear.

More importantly, the Republican leadership are firmly wedded to their current strategy and were prepared to move on the issue of decommissioning to this end. They are facing an imminent general election in the South and calculate that disarming will boost their prospects.

Dissident Republicans have reacted in predictable fashion. They have accused Adams and McGuinness of betrayal and have launched a series of attacks to assert their claim to the mantle of genuine Republicanism. The Real IRA was probably behind the car bomb attack in Birmingham and the Continuity IRA behind the shooting dead of an ex-UDA (Protestant paramilitary organisation) member in Strabane. These attacks are likely to lead to reprisals from the UDA, reprisals that the dissidents will welcome.

Whilst there is some disquiet in Republican areas most see little alternative. Mass defections to the dissidents are extremely unlikely.

The re-election of Trimble as First Minister will stabilise the institutions established under the Good Friday agreement, for now. A clear majority of the population want this though they are far from enthusiastic or hopeful for the future.

Trimble's position is not strong however. His opponents will make great play of his failure to garner the votes of a majority of unionist Assembly members and will be positioning themselves for a further push against him. Fresh elections are due in 18 months.

It is possible that relative peace and stability will boost Trimble but it is more likely that the DUP will continue to gain. It is even possible that the anti-agreement forces can find an issue around which to make a stand and which mobilises opposition on the streets, repeating the collapse of the Sunningdale Excutive in 1974.

Polarised communities

WHATEVER AGREEMENT has been reached at Stormont will not cut across the increasing polarisation on the streets. The conflict that has rocked north Belfast on a nightly basis over the last few months is a clear indication of where things are going.

There are local factors at play in north Belfast, in particular tensions both within the UDA and between the UDA and the UVF but the events of the last few months have deeper roots than this. Perceptions are all important and the perception of Protestants in the area is that they are being pushed out. The conflict has not disappeared; rather it has been transformed into a conflict over territory.

Ultimately the Agreement will fail. It is based on division which it copper fastens. It does provide a breathing space however and an opportunity to see the main parties in action. The local parties have their hands on the levers of power at last.

They can no longer criticise from the sidelines but now must take a stand on social and economic issues. Without exception the main parties have lined up in favour of the system. They have nothing to offer ordinary working people.

When the situation unravels it will not be to the advantage of the working class.

The Socialist Party is striving now to provide an alternative through both our own efforts and through linking up with genuine activists who are seeking a way forward.

There are real opportunities to extend working class unity, especially in the workplace and amongst the minority of young people who consciously reject sectarianism. The key is to seize these opportunities.

What Future For The Socialist Alliance?

THE SOCIALISM 2001 debate on the future of the Socialist Alliance (SA) was a no-holds-barred contest between the Socialist Party and the Socialist Workers Party in which the different political perspectives, analysis and methods of work were clearly delineated.

OPENING THE debate for the Socialist Party Clive Heemskerk gave plenty of evidence to show that the Labour Party has become a thoroughly capitalist party that doesn't represent the interests of the working class.

The June general election showed that while Labour won a 'landslide' majority of seats it in fact lost two-and-a-half million votes.

Most of these votes were abstentions in Labour's 'traditional heartlands'. The SA was only able - at this stage in the development of working-class consciousness - to pick up around 58,000 votes, a fraction of the 'disenfranchised millions'.

"It will take further, more profound events to put the question of a new mass workers' party on the agenda", said Clive. And therefore the SA was at this stage only "an outline of an outline", he concluded.

But how does this relate to the SA debate on a new constitution? The Socialist Party argues for an Alliance based on a federal structure which would allow different forces - trade unionists, community campaigns, political organisations - to be drawn together by allowing them freedom of action. Whereas, the SWP's plan to introduce majority rule through 'one member, one vote' (OMOV) does not match the current stage of working class political development.

By allowing the numerical majority of the SWP to dominate its structures the SWP will dictate to and constrain other groups and thereby risk jeopardising what has been achieved by the SA to date.

PUTTING THE position of the SWP, Chris Nineham said the SA performance in the general election represented the best results for the far left since 1945. And he listed the support for the SA from 50 ex-Labour councillors and PCS general secretary Mark Serwotka.

Although against the idea of the SA becoming a political party at this stage, he argued that OMOV is the best method of internal democracy. He criticised the SP proposals saying they amounted to a "democratic deficit" by allowing small groups to have a veto. Having quotas will put off people joining by "institutionalising the power of minorities".

He rejected the criticism of SWP domination of the SA and said the SWP wants a mass, broad SA. "That's why the SWP always takes a minority of positions in the SA structures. We always argue for the SP and other organisations to have representation."

To answer criticism of electing the SA leading bodies through a 'slate' of candidates he countered: "No organisation has an automatic right to representation on the national structures."

Roger Bannister, a UNISON executive member and SP member. "There is a distrust of the SWP in the Alliance." He gave the example of the Stop the War Coalition. "Your organisation went ahead and launched the Coalition without attempting to take it through the SA first. On the most important political issue facing us you choose to approach the anti-war coalition outside the Alliance from your own party political standpoint".

Kevin Pattisson of the Leeds Left Alliance asked: "How do you win over trade union branches, community campaigns to support the SA if the perception is one where these outside bodies must be subservient to the SA?"

The Leeds Left Alliance for example won't accept OMOV if that means the SWP members having a majority and deciding policy. "That's led to a split in the city between the two organisations and if you carry through this programme [SWP constitution] you'll end up with two SAs nationally."

Judy Beishon, Socialist Party. "The SA should be an alliance of different forces around common aims. At the end of the day this common action will depend upon the degree of political agreement. For example, we profoundly disagree with the SWP's position on the Middle East. But OMOV means that the political position of the largest organisation will win.

"These differences can't be swept under the carpet by simply using the majority's veto in the SA. At this stage, there has to be agreement on how to proceed with the principal Left forces in the Alliance"

Steve Score, Leicester Radical Alliance. "We have to have an eye to the future developments - the mass of workers coming into political activity - but we also must have a sense of reality as to where we are at now.

"If the SA had a mass membership the SP proposals would be different. Our proposals apply for the situation now, which is one of an Alliance of different forces. But as soon as one party imposes itself on others then that Alliance will break down.

"Chris says that he is not proposing a party but OMOV with a slate-elected leadership determined by the majority group in the SA. If that's not a party then it's certainly a proto-party".

Brian Cahill, Lambeth SP, referring to the SWP majority in the SA said: "The important thing for them is to appear not to dominate rather than not to dominate. Therefore you have strategies in the Anti Nazi League (ANL) and Globalise Resistance which promote 'independents' whose positions are dependent on the goodwill of the SWP."

Chris Nineham in reply categorically denied that the ANL and Globalise Resistance were fronts for the SWP. And the SP's attempts to portray them as such only played into the hands of the right-wing.

He continued: "To draw new forces into the SA to turn it into a mass alternative to Labour means giving new people a voice in the SA and that means OMOV. Having quotas for the leadership and vetoes over policy by institutional measures will be cutting our own throats."

Clive Heemskerk, summing up, said the SA prospects are linked to political developments. "In the future its possible that trade unions could break from Labour." And citing the example of the striking Tameside care workers who stood candidates in local elections, he said: "Our constitution would mean that these workers could be drawn in without fear of domination by one political group."

NATIONAL CHAIR of the Socialist Alliance, Dave Nellist, and SA executive member, Clive Heemskerk, have produced an Open Letter to SA members asking for support for the SP constitutional proposals.

For copies of the letter or to add your name as a supporter of the Socialist Party's proposed constitution, or for a copy of the Socialist Party draft constitution write to: The Socialist Party, PO Box 24697, London, E11 1YD or e-mail: clive@socialistparty.org.uk

Links With Labour Debated As Unison United Left Launched

On 3 November 150 UNISON activists met to launch United Left. They debated many key issues including the war, privatisation, struggles such as Hackney, the union's political fund and the fight against cuts.

Bill Mullins, Socialist Party Industrial Organiser

It was the culmination of months of negotiations between the Campaign for a Fighting and Democratic UNISON (CFDU), led by Socialist Party (SP) members, and others including the Socialist Workers' Party (SWP).

It adopted a constitution drafted by Glenn Kelly on behalf of the CFDU. The new constitution protects democratic rights and ensures that no political group can dominate it by sheer weight of numbers.

No group can hold more than one-third of the national officers of the National Executive Committee (NEC), which is made up of three delegates from each region of the union. No political group can have more than one of these places.

Socialist Party members elected were chair: Glenn Kelly, joint editor of United Left publications: Mike Forster (along with Kenny Bell, independent) and joint local government convenor: Roger Bannister (sharing with an SWP member).

The following were also elected: Claire Williams (SWP) national convenor, John Owen (independent) national secretary and Fred le Platt (Socialist Outlook) treasurer.

Other positions filled included convenor for health (independent) and higher education (SWP). It was also agreed that there should be an extra convenor for Black members to be filled later. All the left UNISON NEC members are on the United Left NC ex-officio.

Glenn Kelly moved the motion on the links with the Labour Party. UNISON members are being consulted by the union since the leadership were forced by resolution 131, moved by Glenn at the annual conference last June. The right wing are attempting to limit it to an "interim report" at the next conference. It is crucial that the Left put them under pressure to change the rules in line with the spirit of 131.

Whilst the conference agreed on the need to loosen up the political funds and agreed that no UNISON money should be paid to MPs and councillors who attack union members' jobs and conditions, the proposal by the Socialist Party that the Left should support a third political fund was lost.

Roger Bannister reminded the conference that anything else, including calling for one political fund, would be ruled out of order, leaving only the Socialist Party's resolution on next year's conference agenda.

If the United Left is to become a mass-based organisation, it must maintain the methods of the CFDU. They are democratic control by its members and no one party using its numbers to crowd out others. Unfortunately that has not been evident in practice

Claire Bradley, SP member from Wolverhampton, spoke in the constitution debate about the lack of democracy in her region when it 'elected' its three delegates. She that it was not good enough for the SWP to organise a regional meeting "with a few of their friends" to elect delegates to the National Committee. She had been in the CFDU since its inception and a member of the union for 20 years. Yet when she rang up to find out when the meeting was she was kept in the dark.

Despite efforts by some to stop Claire from speaking, Glenn Kelly said from the platform that now the conference had adopted a constitution, the NC would investigate and if necessary reconvene the West Midlands meeting, making sure that all the Left was informed and given a chance to be there. "And this goes for any other region" he added.

Paying The Price Of Bush And Blair's War