Chicago antiwar forces advance toward unity

Scan page 4

The author is a member of CISPES, the Chicago Antiwar Coalition, and wa: on volunteer staff in Chicago for the November 12 Coalition.

The Chicago antiwar movement has made great progress in recent weeks in increasing moves toward unity among the anti-intervention forces, the antinuclear weapons movement, and the Palestinian solidarity movement.

After the recent demonstration of 50,000 on November 12, 1983, protesting U.S. intervention in Central America (and Grenada), the coalition in Chicago decided to continue to exist-unlike what happened after the March 27, 1982, demonstration. This was possible because of the strength of the Chicago November 12 Coalition (which involved over 60 groups and sent nine buses and over 500 people the 1,000 miles to Washington D.C.), and because of the growing recognition of the need for a broader, and more ongoing antiwar coalition than CISPES (Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador).

The Chicago Antiwar Coalition is organized around demands which are broader than those of the original November 12 Coalition:

• Oppose U.S. intervention in Central America, the Caribbean and Lebanon, and against people struggling for freedom, justice and self-determination in other parts of the world;

• Oppose the production, deployment and use of nuclear weapons, which threaten all of us with nuclear destruction;

• Oppose the recent militarization of this country and its consequences, including unemployment and cuts in social services;

• Oppose racism and all forms of discrimination;

Unfortunately, only a few other cities have followed the example of Chicago and have continued on the strengths of the November 12 Coalition to build a broad, united antiwar front. Extending the example of the Chicago coalition remains a major task of the antiwar movement nationally.

(continued from page 1: “U.s. Hands Off Lebanon!”)

with Israel that would betray the Palestinians' fight to return to their homeland.

This situation, in which Syria is in a position to deal yet another damaging blow to the Palestinians" fight for the right to self-determination, is partially the product of the defeat suffered by the PLO in 1982 and partially the result of the bitter fighting that broke out between rival factions of Fatah at the end of 1983. Having lost much of its relative independence with respect to the Arab regimes, one wing of the PLO is forced to rely on the Syrians, who tipped the balance of the internal fight in its favor.

Yassir Arafat, on the other hand, sharing the essential strategy of reliance on the Arab regimes, is forced by his most recent debacle to embrace Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. For the Palestinians, either of these roads, the one that leads to Damascus or the one that leads to Cairo, is a dead end.

The background The siege of Beirut by the Israeli army in 1982 provoked, among the Jewish population, the greatest opposition to Israeli militarism ever expressed in the history of the Zionist state. (This opposition was to grow even more massive after the massacres at Sabra and Shatila.) At the same time, the siege, with all of the terrible pressure exerted on the PLO, posed a series of questons to the Palestinian and Lebanese fighters. Should the fight have been continued until the end, 4 Socialist Action February 1984

Chicago antiwar conference

The Chicago Antiwar Coalition planned for its first major activity to be a regional, antiwar conference this spring that could take up the connections between U.S. intervention in Central America, U.S. intervention in Lebanon, and the escalation of the nuclear arms race. What was hoped for was a conferGiven that the conference will not include the issue of Central America, the Chicago Antiwar Coalition is planning an April forum that will be publicized at the Middle-East Conference. This forum will take up the need for an antiwar movement that is ready to educate and respond to any escalation by the United States of the arms race, or of U.S. intervention in Central America, the Carribbean or the Middle East. The Coalition enthusiastically endorsed the conference, and will be discussing with conference participants the need for a bigger, broader, regional antiwar conference in Chicago later in the year.

Another positive development in the Chicago antiwar movement is the organizing around the May 13 Mothers Day march against the nuclear arms race.

For the last two years in Chicago, the peace and antinuclear weapons groups have organized massive marches in the Spring: 20-30,000 in 1982, and 5-10,000 in 1983. The slogan of the marches and demonstrations has been, "Help End the Arms Race-Save the Human Race." While the protest marches have been important and highly successful, the march organizers have refrained from explicitly attacking U.S. intervention AUTH, PHILADELPHIA INQUI in the exacerbation of already serious economic difficulties. Lastly, Israeli policy has led to a crisis in the legitimacy of the Zionist state, both domestically and internationally. These factors explain Israel's desire to shove the burden of establishing a strong central state in Lebanon onto the multinational force.

The crisis in the PLO over the withdrawal from Beirut was the beginning of a more general crisis. But the initial debate missed the most important aspect of the situation of the Palestinians. A more fundamental question had to be asked: How is it that the Palestinians found themselves in this situation? It was the isolation of the Palestinians, bereft of any important support, material or military, whether from the Arab states or the Soviet Union, that left the Palestinian movement with only two undesirable options. That isolation demonstrated graphically the failure of the PLO's policy of nonintervention in the affairs of the Arab countries. Those Arab countries, whether "moderate" like Saudi Arabia, or "radical" like Syria, view the Palestinian struggle both from the perspective of their antagonism to the Zionist state and from their hatred of revolution and their fear of the Palestinian masses. Therefore, they responded to the invasion of Lebanon with crocodile tears, paper resolutions, and little else.

United against PLO

European and American imperialism saw in this situation the possibility of establishing a strong rightist state in Lebanon, capable of preventing renewed ferment among the Palestinian masses and of keeping in check the aspirations of the abroad in the march slogans. In previous years they have feared that by adding anti-intervention slogans they would limit the size of the march by alienating those people who are for a nuclear freeze, but confused about U.S. intervention abroad.

Leavi ng aside the question of the correctness of this fear in past years, 1984 marks a turn for the Mothers Day March in Chicago. The Coalition this year has decided that, while the focus of the march will remain "Help End the Arms Race," three sub-slogans will be added for the first time.

They are: "U.S. Out of Central America," "U.S. Out of Lebanon," and "Cruise and Pershing Missiles Out of Europe."

This is, again, a big step forward for the Chicago antiwar movement; a big step toward a broader, more political, unified antiwar movement that directly confronts the policies of the Reagan administration, and places the blame for the war danger and nuclear arms escalation directly on the U.S. government.

Clearly the "Big Pine" maneuvers, where U.S.-commanded planes and ships landed Honduran armed forces into Honduras in a mock invasion, is a practice run for an invasion of Nicaragua.

The Reagan administration has to choose between allowing the extension of the revolution in Central America, or rapidly increasing its military intervention. Clearly it is choosing the latter.

U.S. Hands off Central America and the Caribbean!

It's bizarre. We all learn Spanish and then they majority of Lebanon's population, which is Moslem and poor. To that end, the United States, Italy, and France twice sent troops to be part of a "multinational peacekeeping force."

The difficulties in establishing a strong central state in Lebanon are apparent and cause the U.S. government to continue to consider the option of a joint military strike with Israel. For this reason, the U.S. recently announced its decision to have closer military ties with Israel. It continues its present policy because of two factors. First, any government fortified by a massive military sweep would be far more hated and isolated than a government based on a negotiated settlement. Secondly, the U.S. government is concerned over the impact of such a drive on American public opinion, especially if it occurred in the context of heightened expectations of U.S. military intervention in Central America.

In the aftermath of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon and the forced departure by Arafat from Tripoli, the weakened Palestinian national movement finds itself, afflicted with open fighting among its own ranks, the crushing presence of thousands of imperialist troops, and the continuing Israeli occupation of parts of Lebanon. To emerge from this situation will require the linking up of the struggles of the Palestinians with the struggles of all the oppressed throughout the Middle East. It will require the forging of ties with the opponents of Zionism and militarism within Israel. And lastly, it will require the massive solidarity of working class, antiwar, and political organizations in the imperi alist countries.