From - Thu Mar 14 11:35:15 2002 Status: U Return-Path: Received: from host3.websitesource.com ([209.239.61.206]) by robin (EarthLink SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 16LrYv6rT3NZFjX0 for ; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 01:56:43 -0800 (PST) Received: (from karamzin@localhost) by host3.websitesource.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) id g2E9uhE23892 for oblomovka@earthlink.net; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 04:56:43 -0500 Received: from hiro.kke.gr (ns1.solidnet.org [195.170.29.3]) by host3.websitesource.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id g2E9ufp23887 for ; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 04:56:41 -0500 Received: from solidnet.org (niki.kke.gr [11.0.0.141]) by hiro.kke.gr (8.11.6/8.11.2) with ESMTP id g2E9qZb30963; Thu, 14 Mar 2002 11:52:35 +0200 Message-ID: <3C906DFA.EF5C0A94@solidnet.org> Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 11:31:38 +0200 From: SolidNet X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en,pt-BR MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "info@solidnet.org" Subject: Communist Party of Britain: Resolution 2 For popular sovereignty against imperialism Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------F734D509346D31525D4496A7" X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 X-UIDL: 16LrYv6rT3NZFjX0.0 --------------F734D509346D31525D4496A7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit http://www.solidnet.org News, documents and calls for action from communist and workers’ parties. The items are the responsibility of the authors. Join the mailing list: info/subscribe/unsubscribe mailto:info@solidnet.org . ===================================================================================== Communist Party of Britain: Resolution 2 For popular sovereignty against imperialism -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Communist Party of Britain, Wed, 13 Mar 2002 mailto:info@communist-party.org.uk , http://www.communist-party.org.uk ==================================================================================== Dear Comrades, We are sending you the second of the four main political resolutions for the Communist Party of Britain's forthcoming 46th national congress in June. This second resolution covers the Communist Party's view of the current world situation; the role of British imperialism, the need for a class-based analysis of democratic struggle against the European Union; the urgent need to build a global alliance against war and for international solidarity. We hope you find this resolution of interest. Kenny Coyle International Secretary ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ Resolution 2 For popular sovereignty against imperialism The past decade has seen a sharp and menacing shift in the character of imperialism. Economically capitalism has moved into a serious crisis of over-accumulation. Politically the imperialist powers, led by the United States, have embarked on a dangerously predatory and aggressive course that threatens the democracy of all countries. The original trigger for these changes was the political disintegration of the Soviet Union. This created a largely uni-polar world. Those countries seeking to break free from imperialist domination lost a critical ally. The working class movement within the imperialist countries was weakened and the way opened for an intensified assault on economic and social conditions. Almost immediately the United States moved to consolidate its hold on strategic resources in the Middle East and central Asia. Its transnational companies entered previously inaccessible areas to take control of raw materials and exploit reserves of labour. Everywhere big business sought to impose new economic conditions based on the privatisation of the public sector, the casualisation of labour and the introduction of fierce market competition. The immediate result was a sharp hike in the rate of profit, a surge in investment and a decade in which capital values were inflated to unprecedented levels. The longer-term result was a major crisis of over-accumulation that first manifested itself in 1997. It is the unravelling of this crisis that underlies the present imperialist offensive. The dominant power throughout has been the United States. Over the past five years it has been able to use its military power and its control of world banking systems and energy resources to impose the main burdens of the crisis on other countries. In the first phase austerity programmes were enforced on Latin America - virtually ending economic growth across most of the subcontinent. In the second, from 1997, the banking crisis in south East Asia was used to wipe out large areas of competing capital and enable United States companies to buy up a significant amount of what remained. In the third, from 2000, the United States sought to pass on the costs of crisis to the other major imperialist powers. Japan was forced back into chronic recession by intensified US competition, higher energy costs and the consequent flight of Japanese capital to the United States. Germany and the EU were met by much tougher trade terms and intensified competition in IT, aerospace and military contracting. The new Bush government sought to impose on its allies the costs of higher NATO military expenditure and to launch the militarisation of space under US control, the so-called National Missile Defence (NMD) or Son of Star Wars. The new Bush administration also sought to impose on the whole world the costs of its refusal to sign the Kyoto Treaty and the environmentally destructive consequence of its drive to open up new sources of oil, as in Alaska. Under the impact of the growing economic crisis,and the United States' exploitation of its political dominance, the period 2000-2001 saw rising levels of resistance. In Latin America Venezuela gave a regional lead in the adoption of more independent policies - implicitly challenging US control over its own oil resources and those in neighbouring countries. In Europe France and Germany sought to develop an independent military force for the EU and to consolidate a single currency bloc. To the east China and Russia signed a friendship agreement based on opposition to NMD. The Shanghai Six, including China and Russia, concluded a security pact. In a number of cases these moves reflected responses to changes in popular attitudes, the reassertion of democratic movements for popular sovereignty and in some of the ex-socialist countries a reaction against pro-capitalist policies. In the United States itself 2001 saw the onset of the first recession for ten years - focussed in particular on the most advanced sectors of its economy. This combination of factors, increased inter-imperialist rivalries, wider political resistance to imperialism, the rising costs of militarisation, environment destruction, the growing exhaustion of world resources, and the serious economic distortions arising from unprecedented monopoly concentration, reveal a capitalist system moving towards more generalised crisis. It was in the context of this widening crisis that the Bush administration seized on the events of 11 September to reassert its military and diplomatic leadership and enforce a new world settlement on its own terms. The so-called war against terrorism initiated by the attack on Afghanistan marked a qualitative intensification of previous policies. Military intervention had been used through the 1990s. The US, by itself or through alliances with other imperialist powers, used military force against Iraq, in Sudan and the Horn of Africa, in the Balkans and Colombia. Plan Colombia remains particularly threatening - being targeted against progressive forces seeking to challenge the external economic and political control of their country. The new offensive initiated in 2001 crystallised all the aggressive characteristics of the previous period and was directly associated with the US's need to access the energy resources of Central Asia. Afghanistan was but the first of a list of states now named by the US as possible targets for intervention. The attack on Afghanistan was conducted without the sanction of the United Nations. Offers of mediation and negotiation were rejected. US military force was used directly to overthrow an existing government and install one that was compliant. The US has now secured military bases in four Central Asian states. The US base in Kyrgyzstan is within 200 miles of the Chinese border and completes China's strategic encirclement. While Communists condemned the terrorist attack on 11 September, the assault on Afghanistan and the suffering caused to its civilian population creates precisely those feelings of injustice, anger and despair that will breed terrorism in the future. The war was manifestly one of imperialism and not against the causes of terrorism. This emerging phase of imperialism can therefore be characterised by its more direct and ruthless use of neo-colonial methods in the continuing drive to supplant the sovereign institutions of existing states: o It asserts, in a neo-colonial and implicitly racist fashion, the ethical and cultural superiority of its own values - uniquely described as "civilised". o It claims, on the basis of this superiority, the right to intervene politically and militarily in the internal affairs of any country in the world. o It seeks to use global organisations such as the World Trade Organisation and the World Bank to enforce economic regimes that represent transnational capital, currently mainly in the interests of the US, and systematically intensify the debt bondage of the poorest nations. o It orchestrates a process of global exploitation and concentration of economic resources on an unprecedented scale l It reflects in its current stage the military and economic dominance of one superpower, the United States. This analysis of imperialism is in stark contrast to the bland talk of "globalisation" advanced by "New Labour". "New Labour" uses the term to conceal the real nature of the drive for imperialist control. It presents the current changes as the inevitable consequence of technological advance or blind economic forces. It argues that transnational companies operate as business corporations owned internationally without regard to particular states and that individual countries have no alternative but to buy into this growth economy by meeting their demands. In reality none of the great monopolies are of this character. They are all rooted in particular imperialist states and depend on "their" government to defend their interests. The "opening up" of economies and the growth in capital movements is the direct result of the change in the political balance of forces in particular countries in favour of finance capital and the consequent dismantling of legislation to protect in the interests of working people. It also results from the preponderant power of the biggest of the imperialist countries, and particularly the US, and their ability to use the World Trade Organisation and the IMF to do their bidding. It is precisely the use of much more direct and ruthless means to undermine the democracy of existing states that characterises imperialism today. Popular Sovereignty This new imperialism is not, however, unchallenged or unchallengeable. Our Party's programme Britain's Road to Socialism outlines the forces for change in our society and the role of the working class movement in building a broader democratic anti-monopoly alliance. The defence of popular sovereignty against imperialism represents a key focus for that alliance today. Popular sovereignty represents the ability of such progressive anti-monopoly forces to transform the sovereign democratic institutions of their own countries in order to meet the economic and social needs of their peoples. It is this democratic potential that is now under threat as never before. While the defence of popular sovereignty will take different forms in different countries, it is everywhere characterised by the need to protect existing democratic institutions against attempts to subordinate them to non-democratic supranational bodies expressing the interests of transnational capital. The collective organisations of working people provide the essential core for all such movements for sovereignty. The potential power of such movements has already been demonstrated. Across Latin America movements of popular resistance, led by the trade unions, have sought to block IMF-imposed austerity programmes and in some cases brought to power governments pledged to defend the interests of working people and national sovereignty. Strong regional bases of popular resistance have been consolidated - as in Sao Paulo in Brazil. Similar resistance, led by trade unions, has been seen in south east Asia and recently in South Africa. In Europe major mobilisations by trade unions, especially in France, Germany and Greece, has slowed and restricted the imposition of a neo-liberal regime under the auspices of the European Union. In Denmark, Norway and Ireland much broader movements have successfully opposed moves to undermine key areas of national sovereignty. Movements that simply seek to defend national sovereignty in isolation, and do not have a democratic and working class base, hold the potential for chauvinism and divisive nationalism that subordinates the interests of working people and thereby also undermines the democratic content of national sovereignty. This is why organised labour must be won to take the lead. Such leadership involves both action and explanation. It requires a programme of demands that exposes the anti-democratic and exploitative character of external control and demonstrates the common bonds that unite ordinary people across the world. It demands alternative policies, as in our Party's Alternative Economic and Political Strategy, which can unite all sections of society outside monopoly capital and its immediate allies. The current balance of world forces Across the world Cuba provides a beacon of resistance to such imperialism. Its ability to sustain its socialist economic development exerts a powerful influence on mass movements in Latin America and beyond. Building support for Cuba, and for an end to the illegal trade embargo imposed by the United States, is a key international task for our party. China also remains committed to policies of non-interference in other countries and to the maintenance of a course of economic development in which the Chinese state plays the leading role. The size of its economy and the coherence of its policies for economic development have so far enabled it to bargain on relatively equal terms with external capital. China provides a potentially important future counterbalance to the uni-polar dominance of United States imperialism. Its drive to lift its people out of poverty is of significance for the whole world. In a number of the ex-socialist countries powerful movements also exist, mainly under communist leadership, which reject the consequences of capitalist restoration and external dominance. In some cases these movements have been able to exert significant pressure on governments - as in Russia for a period after the crisis of its capitalist economy in 1997-98. In India an alliance of forces generally committed to popular sovereignty formed a government, with communist support, in the mid 1990s. In that case, and in others, imperialist interference - in collusion with domestic pro-monopoly parties - was successful in re-establishing a government that collaborates with US imperialism. As yet the economic and diplomatic weapons in the hands of the United States make it extremely difficult for countries with less developed economies to take an anti-imperialist position. For this reason the United Nations has only rarely taken a stand against US aggression - although the General Assembly has fairly consistently condemned US positions on Cuba and Palestine. The unimplemented UN resolutions on Palestine remain an indictment of the whole international community. However, it would be as incorrect to dismiss the United Nations as it would be to place undue reliance on it. The UN can only reflect the political level of its member governments. In the longer run the United Nations will be important to the degree that the political alignments of these governments change. And changes may be expected in the light of the inherent contradictions in the political and economic base of US imperialism, its unsustainable dependence on global exploitation and the serious distortions in its domestic economy. It is therefore urgent that steps be taken to reform the UN, end US dominance and ensure that the UN assumes full responsibility for handling issues such as international terrorism and its causes - including the economic and political imperialism exercised by the United States and its satellite states such as Israel. A key part of any such transformation will be a revival of the movement of non-aligned states and the struggle for a New International Economic Order. Rivalries between the imperialist powers are themselves likely to provide the context for the reassertion of genuinely international perspectives reflecting the aspirations of the great majority of the world's population who do not benefit from capitalism. The other imperialist states, Japan and Germany and its allies, have interests that ultimately conflict with those of the US. Global economic recession will tend to intensify competition over markets, materials and investment locations. The big business controlled government of Japan has recently moved in a more nationalistic direction. In the EU the establishment of a separate military structure has been closely connected with the drive to consolidate a European military-industrial complex that could compete with that of America. Britain, Democracy and the European Union The EU was established as a free trade area that could maximise markets for big business. Originally US interests were to the fore. Over the past two decades strongly contradictory tendencies have been apparent. Big business interests in Germany and France have moved to create a unified currency bloc with centralised banking, political and military institutions that would enable the EU to rival the United States. The US and its allies in Europe have sought to keep the EU as a unified market with only minimal state functions. In either version the EU exists as a creature of big business established to circumvent the democratic institutions of its member states. After 1945 the existence of these democratic institutions within the sovereign states of Europe made it possible for progressive forces to place some constraints on the freedom of capital. The successive EU treaties have progressively removed these powers - while ensuring that the EU itself is constitutionally bound by the free market and neo-liberal terms of its treaties. The European parliament remains profoundly non-democratic - giving the appearance of democratic procedures while in fact denying the people of the EU any rights to alter the pro-business treaty structures. Within the EU Britain has acted as the most consistent ally of the US. This alliance reflects the fundamentally parasitic character of British imperialism. Britain has a scale of foreign capital investment second only to that of the United States - much of it being the re-investment of overseas monies channelled through the City of London. Its own domestic industrial base is weak and distorted. The areas of high competitive productivity are in most cases US and Japanese plants exporting into the EU. The sectors of large-scale production still controlled by British finance capital are mainly restricted to petrochemicals and military-related aerospace and weapon systems. Both are highly dependent on US contracts and, in overseas locations, US military and diplomatic protection. The financial sector represented by the City of London, employing up to 10 per cent of the population, is now predominantly controlled by American, Japanese and European based banks seeking to exploit the EU market. The craven subservience of the New Labour government to the Bush administration demonstrates the dependence of the leading sectors of British finance capital on US support. In the EU Britain has sought to prevent the development of any military and diplomatic structures that can act independently of NATO. Across the rest of the world Britain has acted as the spokesperson for US power and sought to revive Britain's own previous colonial influence in Africa and the Middle East. This is why there is a particular responsibility on working people in Britain to raise the level of struggle against imperialism. Britain's position as the United States' ally inside the EU imposes a double block on democratic and economic progress. The EU robs our parliaments of the powers to intervene politically to redevelop British industry and other areas of home production in farming, fishing and the control of the public sector. The alliance with the United States intensifies the parasitic interpenetration with the US economy and flow of capital overseas to ventures that rely on US support. It is an alliance that is fraught with immense danger and is against the interests of the great majority of the population - including those of small and medium business. The development of a movement for popular sovereignty is now urgent. Elements of such a movement exist already. There is widespread unease about the EU: a majority of the population opposes membership of the Euro. A mass movement has developed against the so-called war against terrorism. This unites many sections of opinion. There is a growing opposition to NMD and the militarisation of space. Anti-globalisation and anti-capitalist movements have won a significant constituency of support among the young. Campaigners against global warming are beginning to understand the link between the exploitation of fossil fuels and the power of imperialism and the great transnational energy companies. Those wishing to defend civil liberties and resist the growth of racism are themselves pointing out the links between this and Britain's evolution into a state that is more and more nakedly identified with militarism and neo-colonialist intervention. In Scotland and in Wales there is a growing recognition that the provision of parliamentary institutions means little if the economic and social powers of the Westminster parliament have been lost - thereby depriving the peoples of Scotland and Wales of the resources and powers to rescue their own economies from big business depredation. What is lacking is a coherent understanding of what imperialism represents as a whole and how to combat it. This is particularly critical in the trade and labour movement where the political battle still has to be won. Communists have a particular responsibility to ensure that it is carried through. Until the bulk of the organised labour movement is won to see the need to defend popular sovereignty, to oppose the EU and resist the military alliance with American imperialism, there is every danger that the movements of resistance will remain fragmented and that reactionary rather than progressive ideas will take the lead. Communists therefore commit themselves to: o Strengthen their work in the campaigns to oppose the Euro and the European Union, participating in the Campaign against Euro Federalism and the Trade Unions against the Single Currency, and helping to initiate local campaigns where appropriate. o Develop the movement against war, neo-colonialism and the militarisation of space, working to rebuild CND as a mass permanent movement for peace. o Win an understanding of the link between the struggle for the rights of the peoples of Scotland and Wales and the movement for popular sovereignty at British level. o Engage with anti-capitalist movements and campaigns to protect the world's ecology in ways that will win an understanding of the associated need to build links with the labour movement and to defend popular sovereignty. o Strengthen solidarity work, including links with sister communist and workers' parties, and develop support from within the trade union and labour movement for solidarity movements within Britain. o Win the trade union and labour movement to understand the link between opposition to imperialism and the development of a society in which a united movement for popular sovereignty can progressively destroy the roots of racism and oppression and enable working people to exercise political and economic control. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- COMMUNIST PARTY OF BRITAIN UNIT F11, 1ST FLOOR, CAPE HOUSE, 787 COMMERCIAL ROAD, LONDON E14 7HG TEL: (44) 208 517 9722 FAX: (44) 208 517 9733 WEB: http://www.C0Mmunist-party.org.uk E-MAIL: info@communist-party.org.uk *End* --------------F734D509346D31525D4496A7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit http://www.solidnet.org
News, documents and calls for action from communist and workers’ parties. The items are the responsibility of the authors.
Join the mailing list: info/subscribe/unsubscribe mailto:info@solidnet.org .
=====================================================================================
Communist Party of Britain: Resolution 2 For popular sovereignty against imperialism
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Communist Party of Britain, Wed, 13 Mar 2002
mailto:info@communist-party.org.uk , http://www.communist-party.org.uk
====================================================================================

Dear Comrades,

We are sending you the second of the four main political resolutions for the Communist Party of Britain's forthcoming 46th national congress in June.

This second resolution covers the Communist Party's view of the current world situation; the role of British imperialism, the need for a class-based analysis of democratic struggle against the European Union; the urgent need to build a global alliance against war and for international solidarity.

We hope you find this resolution of interest.
Kenny Coyle
International Secretary
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

Resolution 2 For popular sovereignty against imperialism

The past decade has seen a sharp and menacing shift in the character of imperialism. Economically capitalism has moved into a serious crisis of over-accumulation. Politically the imperialist powers, led by the United States, have embarked on a dangerously predatory and aggressive course that threatens the democracy of all countries.

The original trigger for these changes was the political disintegration of the Soviet Union. This created a largely uni-polar world. Those countries seeking to break free from imperialist domination lost a critical ally. The working class movement within the imperialist countries was weakened and the way opened for an intensified assault on economic and social conditions.

Almost immediately the United States moved to consolidate its hold on strategic resources in the Middle East and central Asia. Its transnational companies entered previously inaccessible areas to take control of raw materials and exploit reserves of labour. Everywhere big business sought to impose new economic conditions based on the privatisation of the public sector, the casualisation of labour and the introduction of fierce market competition. The immediate result was a sharp hike in the rate of profit, a surge in investment and a decade in which capital values were inflated to unprecedented levels. The longer-term result was a major crisis of over-accumulation that first manifested itself in 1997.

It is the unravelling of this crisis that underlies the present imperialist offensive. The dominant power throughout has been the United States. Over the past five years it has been able to use its military power and its control of world banking systems and energy resources to impose the main burdens of the crisis on other countries. In the first phase austerity programmes were enforced on Latin America - virtually ending economic growth across most of the subcontinent. In the  second, from 1997, the banking crisis in south East Asia was used to wipe out large areas of competing capital and enable United States companies to buy up a significant amount of what remained. In the third, from 2000, the United States sought to pass on the costs of crisis to the other major imperialist powers. Japan was forced back into chronic recession by intensified US competition, higher energy costs and the consequent flight of Japanese capital to the United States. Germany and the EU were met by much tougher trade terms and intensified competition in IT, aerospace and military contracting. The new Bush government sought to impose on its allies the costs of higher NATO military expenditure and to launch the militarisation of space under US control, the so-called National Missile Defence (NMD) or Son of Star Wars. The new Bush administration also sought to impose on the whole world the costs of its refusal to sign the Kyoto Treaty and the environmentally destructive consequence of its drive to open up new sources of oil, as in Alaska. Under the impact of the growing economic crisis,and the United States' exploitation of its political dominance, the period 2000-2001 saw rising levels of resistance.

In Latin America Venezuela gave a regional lead in the adoption of more independent policies - implicitly challenging US control over its own oil resources and those in neighbouring countries. In Europe France and Germany sought to develop an independent military force for the EU and to consolidate a single currency bloc. To the east China and Russia signed a friendship agreement based on opposition to NMD. The Shanghai Six, including China and Russia, concluded a security pact. In a number of cases these moves reflected responses to changes in popular attitudes, the reassertion of democratic movements for popular sovereignty and in some of the ex-socialist countries a reaction against pro-capitalist policies. In the United States itself 2001 saw the onset of the first recession for ten years - focussed in particular on the most advanced sectors of its economy.

This combination of factors, increased inter-imperialist rivalries, wider political resistance to imperialism, the rising costs of militarisation, environment destruction, the growing exhaustion of world resources, and the serious economic distortions arising from unprecedented monopoly concentration, reveal a capitalist system moving towards more generalised crisis.

It was in the context of this widening crisis that the Bush administration seized on the events of 11 September to reassert its military and diplomatic leadership and enforce a new world settlement on its own terms. The so-called war against terrorism initiated by the attack on Afghanistan marked a qualitative intensification of previous policies. Military intervention had been used through the 1990s. The US, by itself or through alliances with other imperialist powers, used military force against Iraq, in Sudan and the Horn of Africa, in the Balkans and Colombia. Plan Colombia remains particularly threatening - being targeted against progressive forces seeking to challenge the external economic and political control of their country.

The new offensive initiated in 2001 crystallised all the aggressive characteristics of the previous period and was directly associated with the US's need to access the energy resources of Central Asia. Afghanistan was but the first of a list of states now named by the US as possible targets for intervention. The attack on Afghanistan was conducted without the sanction of the United Nations. Offers of mediation and negotiation were rejected. US military force was used directly to overthrow an existing government and install one that was compliant. The US has now secured military bases in four Central Asian states. The US base in Kyrgyzstan is within 200 miles of the Chinese border and completes China's strategic encirclement.

While Communists condemned the terrorist attack on 11 September, the assault on Afghanistan and the suffering caused to its civilian population creates precisely those feelings of injustice, anger and despair that will breed terrorism in the future. The war was manifestly one of imperialism and not against the causes of terrorism.

This emerging phase of imperialism can therefore be characterised by its more direct and ruthless use of neo-colonial methods in the continuing drive to supplant the sovereign institutions of existing states:
o It asserts, in a neo-colonial and implicitly racist fashion, the ethical and cultural superiority of its own values - uniquely described as "civilised".
o It claims, on the basis of this superiority, the right to intervene politically and militarily in the internal affairs of any country in the world.
o It seeks to use global organisations such as the World Trade Organisation and the World Bank to enforce economic regimes that represent transnational capital, currently mainly in the interests of the US, and systematically intensify the debt bondage of the poorest nations.
o It orchestrates a process of global exploitation and concentration of economic resources on an unprecedented scale l It reflects in its current stage the military and economic dominance of one superpower, the United States.

This analysis of imperialism is in stark contrast to the bland talk of "globalisation" advanced by "New Labour". "New Labour" uses the term to conceal the real nature of the drive for imperialist control. It presents the current changes as the inevitable consequence of technological advance or blind economic forces. It argues that transnational companies operate as business corporations owned internationally without regard to particular states and that individual countries have no alternative but to buy into this growth economy by meeting their demands. In reality none of the great monopolies are of this character. They are all rooted in particular imperialist states and depend on "their" government to defend their interests. The "opening up" of economies and the growth in capital movements is the direct result of the change in the political balance of forces in particular countries in favour of finance capital and the consequent dismantling of legislation to protect in the interests of working people. It also results from the preponderant power of the biggest of the imperialist countries, and particularly the US, and their ability to use the World Trade Organisation and the IMF to do their bidding. It is precisely the use of much more direct and ruthless means to undermine the democracy of existing states that characterises imperialism today.

Popular Sovereignty This new imperialism is not, however, unchallenged or unchallengeable. Our Party's programme Britain's Road to Socialism outlines the forces for change in our society and the role of the working class movement in building a broader democratic anti-monopoly alliance. The defence of popular sovereignty against imperialism represents a key focus for that alliance today.

Popular sovereignty represents the ability of such progressive anti-monopoly forces to transform the sovereign democratic institutions of their own countries in order to meet the economic and social needs of their peoples. It is this democratic potential that is now under threat as never before. While the defence of popular sovereignty will take different forms in different countries, it is everywhere characterised by the need to protect existing democratic institutions against attempts to subordinate them to non-democratic supranational bodies expressing the interests of transnational capital. The collective organisations of working people provide the essential core for all such movements for sovereignty.

The potential power of such movements has already been demonstrated. Across Latin America movements of popular resistance, led by the trade unions, have sought to block IMF-imposed austerity programmes and in some cases brought to power governments pledged to defend the interests of working people and national sovereignty. Strong regional bases of popular resistance have been consolidated - as in Sao Paulo in Brazil. Similar resistance, led by trade unions, has been seen in south east Asia and recently in South Africa. In Europe major mobilisations by trade unions, especially in France, Germany and Greece, has slowed and restricted the imposition of a neo-liberal regime under the auspices of the European Union. In Denmark, Norway and Ireland much broader movements have successfully opposed moves to undermine key areas of national sovereignty.

Movements that simply seek to defend national sovereignty in isolation, and do not have a democratic and working class base, hold the potential for chauvinism and divisive nationalism that subordinates the interests of working people and thereby also undermines the democratic content of national sovereignty. This is why organised labour must be won to take the lead. Such leadership involves both action and explanation. It requires a programme of demands that exposes the anti-democratic and exploitative character of external control and demonstrates the common bonds that unite ordinary people across the world. It demands alternative policies, as in our Party's Alternative Economic and Political Strategy, which can unite all sections of society outside monopoly capital and its immediate allies.

The current balance of world forces Across the world Cuba provides a beacon of resistance to such imperialism. Its ability to sustain its socialist economic development exerts a powerful influence on mass movements in Latin America and beyond. Building support for Cuba, and for an end to the illegal trade embargo imposed by the United States, is a key international task for our party.

China also remains committed to policies of non-interference in other countries and to the maintenance of a course of economic development in which the Chinese state plays the leading role. The size of its economy and the coherence of its policies for economic development have so far enabled it to bargain on relatively equal terms with external capital. China provides a potentially important future counterbalance to the uni-polar dominance of United States imperialism. Its drive to lift its people out of poverty is of significance for the whole world.

In a number of the ex-socialist countries powerful movements also exist, mainly under communist leadership, which reject the consequences of capitalist restoration and external dominance. In some cases these movements have been able to exert significant pressure on governments - as in Russia for a period after the crisis of its capitalist economy in 1997-98. In India an alliance of forces generally committed to popular sovereignty formed a government, with communist support, in the mid 1990s. In that case, and in others, imperialist interference - in collusion with domestic pro-monopoly parties - was successful in re-establishing a government that collaborates with US imperialism.

As yet the economic and diplomatic weapons in the hands of the United States make it extremely difficult for countries with less developed economies to take an anti-imperialist position. For this reason the United Nations has only rarely taken a stand against US aggression - although the General Assembly has fairly consistently condemned US positions on Cuba and Palestine. The unimplemented UN resolutions on Palestine remain an indictment of the whole international community.

However, it would be as incorrect to dismiss the United Nations as it would be to place undue reliance on it. The UN can only reflect the political level of its member governments. In the longer run the United Nations will be important to the degree that the political alignments of these governments change. And changes may be expected in the light of the inherent contradictions in the political and economic base of US imperialism, its unsustainable dependence on global exploitation and the serious distortions in its domestic economy. It is therefore urgent that steps be taken to reform the UN, end US dominance and ensure that the UN assumes full responsibility for handling issues such as international terrorism and its causes - including the economic and political imperialism exercised by the United States and its satellite states such as Israel. A key part of any such transformation will be a revival of the movement of non-aligned states and the struggle for a New International Economic Order.

Rivalries between the imperialist powers are themselves likely to provide the context for the reassertion of genuinely international perspectives reflecting the aspirations of the great majority of the world's population who do not benefit from capitalism.

The other imperialist states, Japan and Germany and its allies, have interests that ultimately conflict with those of the US. Global economic recession will tend to intensify competition over markets, materials and investment locations. The big business controlled government of Japan has recently moved in a more nationalistic direction. In the EU the establishment of a separate military structure has been closely connected with the drive to consolidate a European military-industrial complex that could compete with that of America.

Britain, Democracy and the European Union The EU was established as a free trade area that could maximise markets for big business. Originally US interests were to the fore. Over the past two decades strongly contradictory tendencies have been apparent. Big business interests in Germany and France have moved to create a unified currency bloc with centralised banking, political and military institutions that would enable the EU to rival the United States. The US and its allies in Europe have sought to keep the EU as a unified market with only minimal state functions.

In either version the EU exists as a creature of big business established to circumvent the democratic institutions of its member states. After 1945 the existence of these democratic institutions within the sovereign states of Europe made it possible for progressive forces to place some constraints on the freedom of capital. The successive EU treaties have progressively removed these powers - while ensuring that the EU itself is constitutionally bound by the free market and neo-liberal terms of its treaties. The European parliament remains profoundly non-democratic - giving the appearance of democratic procedures while in fact denying the people of the EU any rights to alter the pro-business treaty structures. Within the EU Britain has acted as the most consistent ally of the US. This alliance reflects the fundamentally parasitic character of British imperialism. Britain has a scale of foreign capital investment second only to that of the United States - much of it being the re-investment of overseas monies channelled through the City of London. Its own domestic industrial base is weak and distorted. The areas of high competitive productivity are in most cases US and Japanese plants exporting into the EU. The sectors of large-scale production still controlled by British finance capital are mainly restricted to petrochemicals and military-related aerospace and weapon systems. Both are highly dependent on US contracts and, in overseas locations, US military and diplomatic protection. The financial sector represented by the City of London, employing up to 10 per cent of the population, is now predominantly controlled by American, Japanese and European based banks seeking to exploit the EU market.

The craven subservience of the New Labour government to the Bush administration demonstrates the dependence of the leading sectors of British finance capital on US support. In the EU Britain has sought to prevent the development of any military and diplomatic structures that can act independently of NATO. Across the rest of the world Britain has acted as the spokesperson for US power and sought to revive Britain's own previous colonial influence in Africa and the Middle East. This is why there is a particular responsibility on working people in Britain to raise the level of struggle against imperialism. Britain's position as the United States' ally inside the EU imposes a double block on democratic and economic progress. The EU robs our parliaments of the powers to intervene politically to redevelop British industry and other areas of home production in farming, fishing and the control of the public sector. The alliance with the United States intensifies the parasitic interpenetration with the US economy and flow of capital overseas to ventures that rely on US support. It is an alliance that is fraught with immense danger and is against the interests of the great majority of the population - including those of small and medium business.

The development of a movement for popular sovereignty is now urgent. Elements of such a movement exist already. There is widespread unease about the EU: a majority of the population opposes membership of the Euro. A mass movement has developed against the so-called war against terrorism. This unites many sections of opinion. There is a growing opposition to NMD and the militarisation of space. Anti-globalisation and anti-capitalist movements have won a significant constituency of support among the young. Campaigners against global warming are beginning to understand the link between the exploitation of fossil fuels and the power of imperialism and the great transnational energy companies. Those wishing to defend civil liberties and resist the growth of racism are themselves pointing out the links between this and Britain's evolution into a state that is more and more nakedly identified with militarism and neo-colonialist intervention. In Scotland and in Wales there is a growing recognition that the provision of parliamentary institutions means little if the economic and social powers of the Westminster parliament have been lost - thereby depriving the peoples of Scotland and Wales of the resources and powers to rescue their own economies from big business depredation.

What is lacking is a coherent understanding of what imperialism represents as a whole and how to combat it. This is particularly critical in the trade and labour movement where the political battle still has to be won. Communists have a particular responsibility to ensure that it is carried through. Until the bulk of the organised labour movement is won to see the need to defend popular sovereignty, to oppose the EU and resist the military alliance with American imperialism, there is every danger that the movements of resistance will remain fragmented and that reactionary rather than progressive ideas will take the lead.
Communists therefore commit themselves to:
o Strengthen their work in the campaigns to oppose the Euro and the European Union, participating in the Campaign against Euro Federalism and the Trade Unions against the Single Currency, and helping to initiate local campaigns where appropriate.
o Develop the movement against war, neo-colonialism and the militarisation of space, working to rebuild CND as a mass permanent movement for peace.
o Win an understanding of the link between the struggle for the rights of the peoples of Scotland and Wales and the movement for popular sovereignty at British level.
o Engage with anti-capitalist movements and campaigns to protect the world's ecology in ways that will win an understanding of the associated need to build links with the labour movement and to defend popular sovereignty.
o Strengthen solidarity work, including links with sister communist and workers' parties, and develop support from within the trade union and labour movement for solidarity movements within Britain. o Win the trade union and labour movement to understand the link between opposition to imperialism and the development of a society in which a united movement for popular sovereignty can progressively destroy the roots of racism and oppression and enable working people to exercise political and economic control.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

COMMUNIST PARTY OF BRITAIN
UNIT F11, 1ST FLOOR, CAPE HOUSE,
787 COMMERCIAL ROAD, LONDON E14 7HG
TEL: (44) 208 517 9722 FAX: (44) 208 517 9733
WEB: http://www.C0Mmunist-party.org.uk
E-MAIL: info@communist-party.org.uk

*End*
  --------------F734D509346D31525D4496A7--