Behind the U.S. assault on Iraq organized in time to stop the impending cataclysm?

Scan page 7

The U.S.-led imperialist invasion of the Persian Gulf is being relentlessly escalated by President George Bush.

His decision to double U.S. armed forces to nearly half a million soldiers, sailors and marines in the Mideast by the end of 1990 has been judged by most observers to be a commitment to a shooting war that will be very difficult to avoid-unless Iraq capitulates.

It's no accident that this decision, including cancelling plans for rotating troops previously scheduled to stay in Saudi Arabia no more than six months, was made in the immediate aftermath of the November elections. And despite Bush's attempt to minimize the outcry against his giant step toward Armageddon in the Gulf, protests have erupted nevertheless-and with surprising speed. His timing, moreover, has been perceived as an attempt to maneuver around American voters.

Fear of the political consequences of Bush's military buildup has been smoldering within the ruling class itself. A division has existed, almost from the outset of the U.S. intervention into the Gulf region, between those who want to start shooting now and those who think it necessary to wait "until the sanctions can take effect." The U.S. rulers had hoped that with enough time the blockade would force Iraq to capitulate.

But those on both sides of the "war-nowor-later" debate have sensed that opposition at home was growing faster than expected and that the sanctions are just as damaging to the American-led military alliance as it is to Iraq.

Even before the Nov. 1990 election both sides were advising Bush to give more credible reasons for spilling American blood before taking the leap. Among these were the editors of The New York Times, a major mouthpiece of American capitalism, who had been beating the drums to "stop Saddam. Hussein.

On Nov.13, Secretary of State James A. Baker dug down and came up with the missing "credible reason." He said it could be boiled down to one word: "jobs!" One sharptongued critic summed up the incredulous reaction of most Americans. She quipped: "What's that supposed to mean? Is he plan*... Hussein's action, irrespective of his motives, serves the objective interests of the masses of super-exploited and oppressed peoples in the Gulf.' ning to put unemployed 'hardhats' to work pouring concrete over the Saudi desert?"

Now that the "jobs" rationale has fallen flat, President Bush "discovered" that the Iraqis are "closer" to building a nuclear arsenal than previously believed. This is despite solid evidence to the contrary, including renewed Iraqi invitations to inspect its potential for nuclear capability—not to mention regular official U.N. inspections which have led virtually all experts in the field to certify that any such potential is at least 10 years away.

Pointing to other disquieting reports of the growing public opposition, the Times pubWally McNamee/Newsweek lished a piece by Jason DeParle with the unusually frank headline: "War, Class Divisions And Burden of Service." It candidly described how the working class bore the burden of the Vietnam War and are now fated to fight and die in the Persian Gulf while the rich will again be allowed to evade military service.

The article notes that of the 535 members of Congress, only two had children deployed in the Gulf region. Moreover, the reporter cites former Navy Secretary James Webb as saying that if the military top ranks had their children proportionately represented in the Gulf, "Instead of being 'Hey, those are our boys,' it'd be, 'Hey, that's my kid."' Most readers will draw the more far-reaching conclusion of class privilege symbolized by President Bush's son's escapades looting the public treasury-while the sons and daughters of the working class sit in the Saudi desert awaiting the slaughter.

Such instances of frank acknowledgement of class injustice, wherein the poor serve as cannon-fodder for the wars of the rich, doesn't drop from the sky; nor is it motivated by altruism. It only reveals the uneasy concern of the rich and powerful that this consciousness is widespread among the working class and will blow up in their collective face once the body-bags start being shipped home.

But to understand why the American ruling class has been ready, nevertheless, to risk the catastrophic consequences of a shooting war—if Iraq refuses to "say uncle"—it requires a close look at the underlying forces which are pressing them toward disaster.

How imperialism conquers

For well over 100 years the Middle East, along with virtually all regions of the planet which had not yet entered the age of industrialization, has been colonialized by the developed Western capitalist powers. This was accomplished by the flood of cheap commodities dumped into the backward countries which drove goods produced by the lower technology out of the market place, completely destroyed the indigenous productive forces, and led to the total domination of the neo-colonial economies by foreign capital.

Unlike the imperialism which preceded SOCIALIST ACTION victims, with the exception of a small minority who were coopted to serve as the conqueror's local agents, were driven down to a level of impoverishment very often lower than that of chattel slaves in ancient society.

Under modern imperialist domination, the normal process of development of these vassal nations was blocked and their pre-capitalist economies warped and twisted to fit into the world capitalist economy.

To this day, semi-feudal social relations are intertwined with the worst horrors of modern capitalism in the neo-colonial world. The result leaves the majority of the earth's population plagued by the evils of both pre-capitalist society and modern capitalism, but benefiting from neither social order's advantages.

Background to Iraq's occupation of Kuwait The Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein has clearly embarked on a course in opposition to the interests of U.S. and world capitalism. Iraq's aim in reclaiming Kuwait is to win a larger share for the Iraqi ruling class of the super-profits extracted by foreign capitalists from the oil-producing countries of the Persian Gulf.

Confronted by the American military colossus, Hussein has been compelled to play a dangerous game. To strengthen his hand he has risked inciting the Mideast's impoverished masses to rise up against the foreign oppressor and its puppet regimes— setting in motion a revolutionary force he knows will not be easy to halt (and which can overwhelm the Iraqi rulers as well). Hussein's action, irrespective of his motives, thereby serves the objective interests of the masses of super-exploited and oppressed peoples in the Gulf region who yearn to break free of foreign domination.

This is a marked shift in policy for Saddam Hussein. From 1980 to 1988 he had served the interests of American and European capitalism by waging a reactionary war against the Iranian Revolution.

The great mass of poor workers and farmers in the Mideast had welcomed the Iranian Revolution as a powerful blow struck against the tiny minority in whose hands was concentrated the region's wealth. Imperialism, fearing that the Iranian Revolution also threatened the kings, emirs, princes and military dictators installed by them as their puppet rulers in the Arab world, welcomed Saddam Hussein's assault on Iran.

Hussein's poison gas attacks on Iranians and Kurds—on both sides of the border between Iraq and Iran-didn't stop the American ruling class from supplying the Iraqi capitalist dictatorship with all the military and financial help they needed to defeat Iran.

But history has often demonstrated that reactionary puppet rulers of colonial and dependent countries can come into sharp conflict with their neo-colonial masters when they and their people are squeezed beyond endurance. Malcolm X, himself a revolutionary Black nationalist, insightfully noted this phenomenon when he said: "When the puppet starts talking back to the puppeteer, the puppeteer is in trouble."

Furthermore, when it can be shown that a physical struggle by a nationalist movement or regime is objectively directed against imperialist domination, consistent fighters for human rights everywhere must give such national mobilizations unconditional support.

At the same time, we place not an iota of political confidence in the Saddam Husseins of the neo-colonial world. Only a revolutionary workers' movement can lead masses in a consistent struggle against the foreign oppressor—as well as against the oppressive regime at home.

Kuwait and self-determination Did Iraq violate the right to self-determination of the Kuwaiti people?

The imperialist hypocrites, who arbitrarily carved up and re-carved the Arab world-distributing and redistributing the new "coun(continued on page 8)

DECEMBER 1990

Scan page 8

...Behind U.S. assault on Iraq *...the costs of this military adventure and its impact on the national treasury alone can tip the U.S. economy into a ruinous SOCIALIST ACTION DECEMBER 1990 (continued from page 7) tries" among themselves, appointing sheiks, princes, emirs, kings, and Zionist "democrats" as puppet rulers—say yes. The Arab masses say no. We say no.

We do not recognize the "right" of oppressors to self-determination-whether a minority or majority. (For example; South African whites are a minority which oppresses the Black majority; Israeli Jews are a "majority" which oppresses the Arab "minority.") Moreover, both these ruling nationalities stand at the head of oppressive settler-states which had been carved out of much larger populations by murderous force, backed up by all the might at the disposal of the imperialist powers.

It is obscene for white South Africans or Israeli Jews to demand for themselves "rights" which negate the rights of their subjugated victims. In the case before us, moreover, only the briefest review of economic, social and political realities in Kuwait reveals the absurdity of any "right" to self-determination for the Kuwaiti sheiks.

Self-determination, Kuwaiti-style Throughout its rule, Kuwait's al-Sabah monarchy, foisted upon the indigenous population by British imperialism, has denied political rights to the majority of its people.

In Kuwait, 91.4 percent of the population is denied any citizenship rights. All immigrant Palestinians, Lebanese, Iraqis, Iranians, Jordanians, Pakistanis, Sri Lankans, Filipinos, and others are forever prevented from becoming citizens; even the children of foreigners born in Kuwait cannot become citizens. Of Kuwait's approximately 3 million people, only 8.6 percent, or some 260,000, cris inhabitants have citizenship rights.?

These "foreign" workers, some of whom are third-generation residents of Kuwait, represent more than 80 percent of Kuwait's work force. Only 10 percent of non-Kuwaiti Arabs are allowed to attend public school. Non-Kuwaitis are denied medical care provided to citizens.

"Foreigners" in Kuwait cannot own property, not even homes. They are also barred from participating in political activity and are not allowed to join trade unions. The monarchy did set up a parliament for which only 6 percent of the population could vote. It was dismissed, however, by al-Sabah six years ago and since that time he has ruled by personal decree.

The fate of many foreign workers in without citizenship, are literally women the hair of-servants who displease them.

Many servants have to carry buzzers so that they are on call at all hours. They are not allowed to do their own shopping or cooking, and eat only what is left after their employers and guests have been fed.

"Now and then the Kuwait Times reported spectacular cases of servants thrown from rooftops, burned or blinded or battered to death...' 794 The country's great oil wealth is controlled by a royal family and a small circle around them. As late as 20 years ago, all Kuwaiti investment was controlled by a mere 18 families. And the profits from these billions of dollars, virtually all invested in the United States and other imperialist countries, are used exclusively for the benefit of these families.

It can hardly disputed that masses, including in Kuwait, have lost nothing by Iraq's takeover of what most Arabs believe, in any case, is Iraqi territory.

Imperialism's need for cheap crude A major provocation causing Saddam Hussein to invade Kuwait was the Emirate's dumping of huge quantities of oil on the market in conjunction with Saudi Arabia. This reduced the price of oil to levels greatly harming nations like Iraq whose chief export is oil. Kuwait added insult to injury by slant-drilling into deeper levels of Iraq's Rumaila oil field—stealing millions of barrels of oil, which provided a large portion of what was being dumped on the market by the Emir at bargain prices.

Hussein's takeover of Kuwait, it is clear, was an attempt to strengthen the bargaining position of the crude oil producers by gaining control over the enormous oil reserves, which in Kuwait had been at the service of imperialism.

While a major share of the world's oil supplies is owned by the oil-producing colonial countries, a much larger share of oil profits goes to the giant oil companies and other corporate entities. The imperialist corporations have a virtual monopoly on the refineries and other industries which turn crude oil into various fuels, lubricants, plastics, fertilizers, paints and a multitude of other derivative products.

The industries which consume the variety of products refined from petroleum by the oil corporations are financially connected to the latter by a vast network of overlapping ownership.

Hence, while every capitalist is competition with every other capitalist, spheres of production such as this they all have a common interest in keeping down the cost of crude oil. This is true even when the oil corporations also reap a giant share of the profits derived from the sale of oil as it comes out of the well.

There is a good economic reason for the otherwise anomalous opposition by the imperialists to the rise in price even when it affects their own share of crude oil. A much bigger portion of their profits comes from the labor-intensive productive process, which adds much more surplus value to the raw material as it goes from one stage to another in the process of production.

Therefore, the industrial capitalists in the imperialist countries have little interest in artificially forcing up the price of oil as it comes from the well, which they must share with the capitalists of the oil-producing countries.

A price rise resulting from attempts by some of the oil-producers in the Persian Gulf to restrict the amount of oil placed on the market, increases the rate of profit on their end, but reduces it on the other. This is, of course, to the great disadvantage of the capitalists in the major industrial countries.

(Big oil corporations, however, did not hesitate to raise gasoline prices refined from crude oil purchased at half the price before the crisis.)

OPEC was the organization through which the oil-producing countries have attempted to control the supplies of oil reaching the market (and thus keep the price from being depressed by the monopolistic action of the industrialized countries). But the OPEC members have been unable to stick together.

The rulers of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait have material interests much closer to those of the imperialists because of the billions of dollars they have invested in the economies of the developed industrial powers. Therefore they have opposed regulating production so as to raise the poorer oil-producing nations share of total profits coming from oil.

Obviously, American corporations and their capitalist government, mainly on the other side of the exchange relationship between sellers and buyers of crude oil, have long ago won the position of leadership of the buyers. Thus their strategy is to unite the buyers and to divide the sellers—if necessary, by force.

But why, we must ask, is the United States prepared to risk another catastrophe like Vietnam to gain its objectives in the current confrontation?

Imperialist stakes in the conflict One obvious factor is the ominous reports of the precarious position of the American and world capitalist economies. The rise in the price of oil, as everyone expected, sent inflationary shock-waves throughout the U.S. economy-not excepting agriculture, transport, electric power or any other sphere in the entire array of commodity production.

Economists fear that such a rise in the price of oil will tip the American economy into a recession, whose depth is said to depend on how high the price will go. This is, by all indications, not an exaggeration. If anything, their fears are understated.

Moreover, leaving aside which side ultimately comes out on top, the costs of this military adventure and its impact on the national treasury alone can tip the American economy into a ruinous crisis.

But what if imperialism doesn't come out on top? Or, what if the carnage of a shooting war leaves oil fields and the physical equipment necessary for extracting and shipping Arab oil devastated? The impact of this outcome can be far worse than the modest rise in the crude oil price that the occupation of Kuwait was designed to achieveS Moreover, military action, even when successful, can add qualitatively higher additional monetary costs to the production of oil—not to mention the cost in terms of human lives.

Bush's "New World Order"

There is another, more compelling, motive behind the American ruling class' decision to risk a catastrophic military confrontation-aside from the hope that the massive mobilization of awesome military power will force Iraq to capitulate. This derives from a number of related concerns deeply disturbing the American capitalist class-giving new urgency to its role as world cop:

• Israel, which had been the main instrument of imperialist domination of the Mideast from the day it was carved out of Palestinian territory, has gradually been changing into a liability. The Palestinian people's unremitting resistance to Zionist occupation of their lands, and the equally relentless and murderous repression of the Intifada by the Zionists has steadily intensified the outrage of the masses of the entire Middle East and Northern Africa.

Iraq's challenge to imperialism was the final straw tipping the balance away from the latter's reliance on the Zionist army as its front-line military force and strategic base for military action in the region. Imperialism has been forced to establish firmer points of military support in the Arab world in its struggle to maintain its domination over this portion of its colonial domain.

But part of the price it may be compelled to pay is a sacrifice of some of its Zionist ally's ill-gotten gains as a token intended to shield its uneasy Arab allies. The kings and Bill Gentile/Newswe SIR, WHAT DID YOU SAY ABOUT THE IRAQIS BEING LOUSY SHOTS? emirs fear the wrath of the people who rankle at seeing their rulers in an alliance with imperialism and Israel.

The U.S. ruling class has already signaled all sides in the Mideast that this is its intention. It is thus no surprise that its Zionist mercenaries have reacted as if struck with a hot iron.

But the support American imperialism gains from sheiks, princes and military dictators is far outweighed by the increasing hatred of the Arab masses directed against the imperialist invaders and its puppet henchmen of all stripes.

• The decline in American capitalism's competitive economic position is modified by its undiminished military power. As long as the United States possesses the capability to force economic concessions from its imperialist rivals—not to mention from the colonial world and the so-called "socialist"7 countries-it will not hesitate to use it to bolster its position in the economic struggle.

In analysis, cap Uni of t ing WOI eco Col a tr wai exc WOI inte cluc SOn per Ger pati East pow achi and TI perh Ger nom Wh: the ( WOr. men peac TI esta the I aboi (Go) Sovi mor nal the 1 vokı The line

Scan page 9

¡ault on lraq changing into a liability. The Palestinian capitalist politics is all about. East European masses in capitalist economic people's unremitting resistance to Lionist • The unfolding economic crisis in the occupation of their lands, and the equally re- United States will ultimately bring the rest They are seeing no benefits-only worslentless and murderous repression of the of the world down with it, sharply intensify- ened living conditions-coming from the inIntifada by the Zionists has steadily intensi- ing economic competition between the troduction of market forces and the rip-off of of the developed industrial powers. Therefore fied the outrage of the masses of the entire world's capitalists. War, after all, is only public property by foreign investors and buthey have opposed regulating production so Middle East and Northern Africa. economic competition by other means. reaucrats and other aspiring capitalists. as to raise the poorer oil-producing nations Iraq's challenge to imperialism was the fi- And despite the illusion created during the The New York Times has run a pesshare of total profits coming from oil. nal straw tipping the balance away from the Cold War that inter-imperialist conflicts are simistic series on Eastern Europe which latter's reliance on the Zionist army as its a thing of the past, new line-ups and new documents the collapse of these economies Obviously, American corporations and front-line military force and strategic base for wars between imperialist camps cannot be but without yet having in its place the pretheir capitalist government, mainly on the military action in the region. Imperialism excluded. Furthermore, if the bureaucratized conditions for profitable investment by poother side of the exchange relationship be- has been forced to establish firmer points of workers' states are overthrown, even a third tential foreign investors. tween sellers and buyers of crude oil, have long ago won the position of leadership of military support in the Arab world in its inter-imperialist world war cannot be ex- It would be foolish for anyone to believe struggle to maintain its domination over this that East European workers, especially the buyers. Thus their strategy is to unite portion of its colonial domain. That's why there was much hesitation by Soviet workers, will accept mass unemthe buyers and to divide the sellers—if nec- some of the European rivals of German imBut part of the price it may be compelled ployment and unrestrained price-gouging beessary, by force.

to pay is a sacrifice of some of its Zionist perialism before they went along with fore seeing any benefits coming from capiBut why, we must ally's ill-gotten gains as a token intended to German re-unification. Their hopeful antici- talist market relations. States prepared to risk shield its uneasy Arab allies. The kings and pation of the opening up of new markets in And whatever else can be said of the impeBill Gentile/Newsweek like Vietnam to gain its objectives in the rialists, they are not fools. They are showing current confrontation? their awareness that the risks to capital invested in these states has up to now been Imperialist stakes in the conflict SIR, WHAT DID YOU SAY prohibitively high by holding back and waitOne obvious factor is the ominous reports ABOUT THE IRAQIS ing for guarantees which have not yet been of the precarious position of the American and world capitalist economies. The rise in BEING LOUSY SHOTS? • Finally, and most important of all, is the price of oil, as everyone expected, sent TUST ECONOMY_ imperialism's fear of new revolutionary upinflationary shock-waves throughout the surges certain to break out in the metropoliU.S. economy—not excepting agriculture, tan centers of imperialism itself when the transport, electric power or any other sphere economic crisis building up slips out of conin the entire array of commodity production. trol. Such a crisis is certain, moreover, to Economists fear that such a rise in the wreak havoc with the attempts to restore price of oil will tip the American economy capitalism in the workers' states. into a recession, whose depth is said to deAlready, world capitalism is witnessing pend on how high the price will go. This is, the harbinger of coming events in the miliby all indications, not an exaggeration. If tant upsurge of French high school stuanything, their fears are understated.

dents-hundreds of thousands have been Moreover, leaving aside which side ultimarching in the streets of France since early mately comes out on top, the costs of this November 1990. They are demanding smallmilitary adventure and its impact on the naHer classes, more teachers, guards for schools tional treasury alone can tip the American economy into a ruinous crisis. (the demonstrations were triggered by the But what if imperialism doesn't come out rape of a high school woman), and withdrawal of French troops from the Persian on top? Or, what if the carnage of a shooting Gulf. "Money for schools not the Gulf war!" war leaves oil fields and the physical equipwas one of the slogans carried in these mass ment necessary for extracting and shipping emirs fear the wrath of the people who ran- Eastern Europe was muted by their fear of a Arab oil devastated? The impact of this out- kle at seeing their rulers in an alliance with powerful German competitor in a position to youth demonstrations and marches. come can be far worse than the modest rise imperialism and Israel. achieve hegemony over a new Europe-East The ruling classes of the world certainly in the crude oil price that the occupation of remember the 1968 general strike by 15 milThe U.S. ruling class has already signaled Kuwait was designed to achieve.S Therefore, a lineup of allied Western, and lion French workers who occupied all of inall sides in the Mideast that this is its intenMoreover, military action, even when suc- tion. It is thus no surprise that its Zionist perhaps even Eastern European states, behind dustry and brought the economy to a grindcessful, can add qualitatively higher addi- German imperialism in the sharpened eco- ing halt. It was triggered by French college tional monetary costs to the production of mercenaries have reacted as if struck with a nomic competition to come, is not excluded. and university students. oil-not to mention the cost in terms of What effect such an outcome might have on The Mitterand government's swift grantBut the support American imperialism the course toward capitalist restoration in the ing of concessions testifies to their great fear gains from sheiks, princes and military dicta- workers' states is unpredictable-not to of history repeating itself.

Bush's "New World Order" tors is far outweighed by the increasing ha- mention its impact on inter-imperialist Moreover, the world has not stood still There is another, more compelling, mo- tred of the Arab masses directed against the peaceful collaboration. since 1968. The potential for revolutionary tive behind the American ruling class' deci- imperialist invaders and its puppet henchmen Thus, the American ruling class seeks to action in France and in other metropolitan sion to risk a catastrophic military con- establish its hegemonic military position in centers of world capitalism is greater than frontation-aside from the hope that the • The decline in American capitalism's the post-Gorbachev capitalist world order. ever in the context of today's developing massive mobilization of awesome military competitive economic position is modified • Furthermore, despite all the ballyhoo world economic crisis. power will force Iraq to capitulate. This by its undiminished military power. As long about 500 days that will shake the world These are the underlying concerns driving derives from a number of related concerns as the United States possesses the capability (Gorbachev's economic "reform plan" in the the American ruling class toward war in the deeply disturbing the American capitalist to force economic concessions from its im- Soviet Union), imperialism is growing ever- Persian Gulf, which are far more compelling class-giving new urgency to its role as perialist rivals-not to mention from the more fearful of another period like the origi- than Saddam Hussein's attempt to get a few colonial world and the so-called "socialist"7 nal "Ten Days that Shook the World," as more dollars per barrel of oil. Bush has sent • Israel, which had been the main instru- countries-it will not hesitate to use it to the transition to capitalism continues to pro- a message to the world that despite the cament of imperialist domination of the bolster its position in the economic strug- voke mass opposition in Eastern Europe. pitulation of the Stalinist bureaucracies, Mideast from the day it was carved out of The threat of political revolution grows in which earned Gorbachev the Nobel prize for Palestinian territory, has gradually been line with the growing disappointment of the "peace," there is no peace!

lost nothost Arabs ap crude : Saddam Emirate's ›il on the li Arabia. els greatly lief export injury by of Iraq's ins of bar- ask, is the United portion of another catastrophe market by it is clear, bargaining 's by gain1 reserves, service of 'orld's oil icing coloare of oil Janies and rialist coron the return crude :, plastics, e of other the variety 1 by the oil cted to the ping ownin compein spheres all have a n the cost len the oil are of the f oil as it on for the sy the imwhen it afI. A much mes from ess, which o the raw to another ists in the interest in if oil as it nust share producing tempts by irsian Gulf :ed on the it on their This is, of if the capi- hot iron.® tries. human lives. did not heined from ice before 1 through of all stripes. s have at'oil reachprice from stic action ' But the le to stick world cop: nd Kuwait er to those billions of gle. economies In analysis, remedies. no d cont lion apr Ami WOr. pres men van‹ the Ord mad cluded. prof tary Tr chev actic Bec: sis, 1 pelle impr max Sovi capit the 1 It of fo crisi wak riali It satir alist Sovi capi the mov road Robert-SIPA put in place.

Nati imp get U.N poss Pres gun men Er havi and Mid "Ar imp have its c hav sure the AI and West! yet 1 like able geoi the Gull up i NI Am they read to f Slal choi ultir the rulit • the

Scan page 10

'... an effective strategy against war in the Mideast is to find the of people into action around issues they deeply feel.' SOCIALIST ACTION DECEMBER 1990 In St le file ts Or of ts us ed ist to id AY th ed inist 1 a im lalahe en I's ed ng ily he to rld capitalist politics is all about.

• The unfolding economic crisis in the United States will ultimately bring the rest of the world down with it, sharply intensifying economic competition between the world's capitalists. War, after all, is only economic competition by other means.

And despite the illusion created during the Cold War that inter-imperialist conflicts are a thing of the past, new line-ups and new wars between imperialist camps cannot be excluded. Furthermore, if the bureaucratized workers' states are overthrown, even a third inter-imperialist world war cannot be excluded.

That's why there was much hesitation by some of the European rivals of German imperialism before they went along with German re-unification. Their hopeful anticipation of the opening up of new markets in entile/Newsweek UST ECONOMY_ Eastern Europe was muted by their fear of a powerful German competitor in a position to achieve hegemony over a new Europe-East and West!

Therefore, a lineup of allied Western, and perhaps even Eastern European states, behind German imperialism in the sharpened economic competition to come, is not excluded. What effect such an outcome might have on the course toward capitalist restoration in the workers' states is unpredictable-not to mention its impact on inter-imperialist peaceful collaboration.

Thus, the American ruling class seeks to establish its hegemonic military position in the post-Gorbachev capitalist world order.

• Furthermore, despite all the ballyhoo about 500 days that will shake the world (Gorbachev's economic "reform plan" in the Soviet Union), imperialism is growing ever-more fearful of another period like the original "Ten Days that Shook the World," as the transition to capitalism continues to provoke mass opposition in Eastern Europe. The threat of political revolution grows in line with the growing disappointment of the East European masses in capitalist economic remedies.

They are seeing no benefits-only worsened living conditions-coming from the introduction of market forces and the rip-off of public property by foreign investors and bureaucrats and other aspiring capitalists.

The New York Times has run a pessimistic series on Eastern Europe which documents the collapse of these economies but without yet having in its place the preconditions for profitable investment by potential foreign investors.

It would be foolish for anyone to believe that East European workers, especially Soviet workers, will accept mass unemployment and unrestrained price-gouging before seeing any benefits coming from capitalist market relations.

And whatever else can be said of the impeRobert-SIPAR rialists, they are not fools. They are showing their awareness that the risks to capital invested in these states has up to now been prohibitively high by holding back and waiting for guarantees which have not yet been put in place.

• Finally, and most important of all, is imperialism's fear of new revolutionary upsurges certain to break out in the metropolitan centers of imperialism itself when the economic crisis building up slips out of control. Such a crisis is certain, moreover, to wreak havoc with the attempts to restore capitalism in the workers' states.

Already, world capitalism is witnessing the harbinger of coming events in the militant upsurge of French high school students-hundreds of thousands have been marching in the streets of France since early November 1990. They are demanding smaller classes, more teachers, guards for schools (the demonstrations were triggered by the rape of a high school woman), and withdrawal of French troops from the Persian Gulf. "Money for schools not the Gulf war!" was one of the slogans carried in these mass youth demonstrations and marches.

The ruling classes of the world certainly remember the 1968 general strike by 15 million French workers who occupied all of industry and brought the economy to a grinding halt. It was triggered by French college and university students.

The Mitterand government's swift granting of concessions testifies to their great fear of history repeating itself.

Moreover, the world has not stood still since 1968. The potential for revolutionary action in France and in other metropolitan centers of world capitalism is greater than ever in the context of today's developing world economic crisis.

These are the underlying concerns driving the American ruling class toward war in the Persian Gulf, which are far more compelling than Saddam Hussein's attempt to get a few more dollars per barrel of oil. Bush has sent a message to the world that despite the capitulation of the Stalinist bureaucracies, which earned Gorbachev the Nobel prize for "peace," there is no peace!

We can say with certainty, there will be no disarmament, no "peace dividend." On the contrary, the message of nearly half a million troops being sent to the Persian Gulf is a promise that opposition to the interests of American imperialism-anywhere in the world—will be met by merciless, bloody repression by the self-appointed U.S. policemen of world capitalism.

Bush himself has summed it up by advancing, as a rationale for war in the Gulf, the goal of establishing a "New World Order!" Curiously, this slogan was first made famous by Adolph Hitler to justify his program of "unifying" Europe through military conquest.

Mikhail Gorbachev:

"champion of world peace"

The Herculean problems Mikhail Gorbachev faces in the Soviet Union led him to actions earning him the Nobel "peace" prize. Because of the enormity of his domestic crisis, this "champion of world peace" is compelled to provide aid and comfort to a U.S.imposed "new world order" if he hopes to get maximum financial assistance from it for the Soviet bureaucracy's attempted transition to capitalism. Thus, Gorbachev has sanctioned the U.S. invasion of the Persian Gulf.

It is no accident that American promises of food-aid to help ameliorate the economic crisis in the Soviet Union have come in the wake of Soviet Stalinism's service to imperialism.

It would be hard to come up with a more satiric joke than the awarding of the imperialist peace prize to Mikhail Gorbachev. The Soviet president's blessing of the American capitalist-led assault on the Arab people, at the very outset of the U.S. invasion, removed a major obstacle standing in Bush's road.

Without approval, the vay to Nations window-dressing would have been impossible. Even now, Bush's campaign to get approval for military action from the U.N. General Council would have been impossible without Gorbachev's help.

And without that, the lineup behind President Bush's adventure would have begun to crumble before it could gather momentum.

Even countries, like England and France, having the most to gain by the defeat of Iraq and the suppression of revolution in the Mideast would have soon lost heart as its "Arab face" began to melt away. American imperialism, thus stripped naked, would have been facing the world virtually alone in its criminal assault. The price that it would have had to pay for a shooting war would surely have been prohibitively high without the "peace prize"- winner's political support.

And even with Gorbachev's help, it will yet prove to be disastrous for American and world capitalist stability. So great is the likelihood of disaster, that Bush may not be able to follow his course through to the end.

This possibility is signalled by increasing warnings coming from "responsible" bourgeois commentators in the mass media that the American people's alleged support for a Gulf war is already evaporating and would go up in smoke soon after the killing starts.

No one can know, however, what the American capitalist rulers will do. So far, they are convincing the world that they are ready to go over the brink. This is not likely to force Hussein to capitulate. And if he stands firm, President Bush has only a choice between evils-and an unpredictable ultimate outcome.

We can only do whatever we can to block the cold-blooded course of the American ruling class toward a new Vietnam.

If President Bush is forced to retreat from • the Gulf conflict, it would be a victory in the first place for the oppressed and exploited masses in the Middle East, as well as for all the world's ordinary people who have nothing to gain and everything to lose from such a war.

The key idea in an effective strategy against war in the Mideast is to find the way to move the largest numbers of people into effective action around issues they deeply feel. To do this requires beginning with an accurate assessment of the level of consciousness of the great majority-not that of the more conscious minority.

We can be absolutely certain that the main concern most deeply felt by the American people, and which is most capable of mobilizing the largest numbers in action against the American invasion of the Persian Gulf, is concern for the lives of their sons and daughters in uniform sent there to kill and be killed for an unjust cause.

Vietnam and «Out As we might have expected, the same political forces we saw during the anti-Vietnam War movement are arraying themselves across the political arena today.

The ultra-lefts with their "more revolutionary," "anti-imperialist" slogans are as frenzied as before-when they called for "driving the GIs into the sea!"

And the liberals, Stalinists and other reformists are up to their old tricks, "demanding" negotiations; that is, that Iraq negotiate with imperialism, which this slogan presumes is imperialism's right!

When a thief holds a gun to a victim's head and demands "your money or your life," the victims are entirely within their rights to negotiate their way out of a bad situation—if resistance is not possible, or may be insufficient to save both their lives and their property. But only the victims have the right to determine whether to negotiate or resist!

Witnesses 10 the crime objectively become accomplices if they call for a negotiated settlement of the dispute. Such a call by bystanders implicitly places the robber and the victim on the same moral plane-placing such a witness, even if he or she has genuine sympathy with the victim, objectively on the side of the robber.

The demand for negotiations, however, is perceived differently by ordinary people. They may be led to view this demand as directed against the arrogant "non-negotiable" stance of their government. They also may be led to believe, falsely, that calling on "the hawks" to negotiate is a step toward forcing the withdrawal of American troops.

This seems entirely logical. But, even leaving aside for the moment, the impropriety of witnesses to a holdup calling for negotiations, it is not the demand to negotiate, no more than negotiations itself, that can compel the American rulers to withdraw from the Persian Gulf. Only the mobilization of real forces against the criminal U.S.led assault upon its Arab victims can have this effect.

It is the large numbers of people making visible their outrage in protest meetings, marches and other demonstrations in the streets of America and worldwide which is a first step toward compelling the American rulers and their cohorts to withdraw from the Persian Gulf.

Furthermore, there is no iron wall between peaceful protest and revolutionary action. On the contrary, the road to revolutionary action-that is, to remove the criminal ruling minority from power in a final resolution of the crisis of modern society-is precisely through mass, peaceful, protest action.

It is through such action that masses can gain confidence in their capacity to change the course of events. It is this sort of self(continued on page 10)

Scan page 11

"The demand calling for the UN to replace the U.S. in the Persian Gulf is pure hypocrisy, It would amount to no more than putting a UN label on U.S. armed force.' ... U.S. assault (continued from page 9) confidence that is indispensable for revolutionary action by working people.

The "Out Now!" demand is not only most effective for mobilizing the largest possible numbers in opposition to imperialist intervention, it retains its full force even during periods when the United States government may be compelled to negotiate its way out of a losing war!

The logic of "Out Now!"

Moreover, the slogan "Bring the Troops Home Now!" is much more than a tactic designed to mobilize the largest numbers in action to stay the bloody hand of imperialism—as important as that is. It also puts American people marching against the war on the side of our sons and daughters sent into the Persian Gulf to kill and be killed for oil and profits.

As masses of the American people march and demonstrate to bring U.S. troops home, it will serve to unleash a similar demand by the troops themselves! No one should underestimate the revolutionary potential of this interrelationship. This is why the ruling class fears the "Vietnam syndrome."

The rulers of America have good reason to fear it. They are fully aware that the roar which came from millions on the streets of America demanding that their boys be brought home made it easy for GIs in Vietnam to also make their natural feelings known.

The troops, themselves, could also say no to war with the confidence that the majority of the American people were on their side. And this they did in many ways, from putting flowers in the barrels of their rifles to open opposition to the most aggressive gung-ho officers. And if the war had persisted, even more dramatic action by our troops threatened to erupt.

This interaction between millions of people at home and their loved ones in Vietnam ultimately proved to be irresistible.

Beware trick slogans

In the current Mideast war crisis, the reformists and liberals are shamefully outdoing their predecessors in the anti-Vietnam War movement. Today they are including slogans designed to put faith in that thinly disguised instrument of world imperialism, the United Nations.

The demand calling for the UN to replace the U.S. in the Persian Gulf is pure hypocrisy. It would really amount to no more than putting a UN label on American armed force. It's as if no one can remember that the infamous assault on Korea from 1950 to 1953 was essentially carried out by U.S. troops marching under the banner of the United Nations. The entire operation was financed by the U.S. rulers and the human cost for working people amounted to 38,000 dead GIs and nearly 3 million dead Koreans.

The briefest glance at the history of the United Nations will show that it never lifted a finger to defend the victims of real aggression; for example, when Israel invaded and annexed Arab lands in 1948, 1967, 1973 and 1980, or when the U.S. invaded the Dominican Republic in 1965, Grenada in 1983 and Panama in 1989. Nor did the UN act in the interest of the victims of imperialism when they sent a "peace-keeping" armed force to the Congo in 1961 which resulted in the murder of Patrice Lumumba, the head of the Congo's legitimate government.

Two other trick slogans Another two of the more insidiously deceptive slogans being advanced today are the demands for "withdrawal of all foreign troops from the Persian Gulf," and for "self-determination for the peoples of the Middle East."

Both these demands help the criminals conceal their crime. The first by legitimatizing the imperialist pretext for intervention— equating the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait with the imperialist invasion of the Persian Gulf-and the second by equating the right to self-determination of invader and invaded—-legitimatizing the Zionist demand for recognition of "Israel's right to exist!"

The latter demand is the basic rationalization for the crime committed against the indigenous peoples of Palestine, who Zionists forcibly expelled from their land.

Certainly all peoples, Jews no less than 10 SOCIALIST ACTION any other, have an inalienable right to exist, but the inherently undemocratic, oppressive, clerical, Zionist settler-state has nothing to do with the Jewish people's right to exist. It has to do with the "right" of the Zionist rulers of Israel to negate the rights of all other peoples in the region!

Contrary to the Zionist thesis, the biggest threat to the rights of Jews, no less than it is to the Arab people, is the Zionist state. Socialist Action remains firmly in support of the Palestinian people's demand, "For a democratic secular Palestine!" This demand is in the best interests of all people in Palestine, the vast majority of Jews included.

There is no violation of the Jewish peoples' legitimate rights by the restoration of the property and political rights of Palestinians who have been driven from their land and/or made second-class citizens—no more than when a thief is denied his "rights" when forced to return what has been stolen. Nor is it a violation of the Jewish people's right to live in a democratic and secular society where all inhabitants, regardless of religion or nationality, are equal.

The only forces that gain from the Zionist state are the Israeli capitalists and their American imperialist sponsors who use the Jewish people as a mercenary military force and staging ground against revolution in the Middle East.

Who are the hostages?

The outcry by President Bush and other representatives of the ruling class against hostage-taking is also the most cynical hypocrisy.

Isn't the imperialist blockade holding the entire population of Iraq hostage? Isn't the encirclement of Iraq's population by threatening armies, fleets and air armadas a far greater assault on innocent children, women and men?

Moreover, isn't it self-evident that even DECEMBER 1990 Joseph Ryan/Socialist Action the threat of bodily harm to hostages held by Iraq comes not from Saddam Hussein but from the massive mobilization of military forces on Iraq's borders by the most powertul nation on earth, armed to the teeth—with poison gas, biological weapons, and an atomic arsenal capable of destroying all life on the planet many times over?

Furthermore, isn't it false to draw an equal sign between the act of the criminal and retaliation by his victim? Isn't Iraq the victim along with the other oppressed and super-exploited peoples of the Middle East-despite the reactionary character of Saddam Hussein's capitalist regime?

And the biggest mistake that can be made by anyone who wants to stop the sacrifice of countless human lives, American and Arab alike, would be to put an ounce of confidence in the politicians of either of the two capitalist parties to bring our sons and daughters home alive and well.

This time, neither Democrats nor Republicans have so far attempted to portray themselves as "peace" candidates. These fakers did this in the Vietnam days, but only after the overwhelming majority of Americans had shown their determined opposition to the war. We can be certain that a wave of capitalist "doves" will "see the light" as mass public opinion turns decisively in favor of unconditionally pulling out of the Gulf region.

But the sole aim of capitalist "peace candidates" will be to attempt, unjustifiably, to gain the confidence of the people. But their cynical aim has been, and will continue to be, to channel opposition from the streets into the halls of Congress and salvage as much as possible for their class when the tide of public opinion turns against their criminal goals.

Until the working class in this country has taken the road of independent political action, the best political option open to the opponents of capitalist war and economic crises is to take the road of independent mass political action.

Electoral action is only one aspect of political action. Its primary function is to use the electoral process to educate and mobilize the working class and its natural allies for mass action at the factory gates and in the streets of America for its own class interests.

This, in the final analysis, is the nittygritty substance of independent working class political action.

Tactical perspectives ahead

The response by the American people within weeks of the U.S. invasion of the Persian Gulf has been much greater than what occurred after years of a shooting war in Vietnam.

Shortly before this writing, most potential activists had settled down to watchful waiting in the vain hope that a peaceful resolution could be found. Now that the American rulers are doubling their forces-escalating their threat to unleash carnage in the Persian Gulf—a renewed wave of activists has begun to go into action.

It's not hard to predict that if a shooting war begins there will be an explosion of mammoth protests in short order.

But the most conscious sectors of the American people have an enormous responsibility to continue to mobilize, to the extent of their ability, against such a catastrophe-to stop it, if possible, before it begins. Our efforts will have the effect of warning the warmakers of the consequences to them of a decision to carry the logic of their intervention to its most horrendous conclusion.

And even though we have not yet heard a call to "nuke Iraq" from any significant sector of imperialism, the logic of President Bush's course leading to such a calamitous act of desperation "to save American lives" cannot be excluded.

A warning message to U.S. warmakers The Nov. 23 New York Times, reporting on President Bush's just concluded Thanksgiving Day tour of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia, saw fit to note an event which contradicted the article's headlines implying alleged GI support for the invasion.

The Times writer reports that while he was interviewing troops who had just heard the president explaining what they were doing in Saudi Arabia, " ...a truckload of soldiers slowly pulled past. Two of the soldiers started shouting at a group of reporters:

'''I want to go home! This isn't our war! What are we doing here! Why are we over here? We aren't supposed to be here-this isn't our war!""

This is the real voice of GIs in the Persian Gulf. It can only get louder. But our sons and daughters over there need our help. Only mass action can stop the American ruling class from following its invasion of the Persian Gulf through to the end.

And even if we are not able to prevent this awful crime, we will have set in motion the only force that can bring it to an end before too many lives are sacrificed on the altar of capitalist greed.

1 Before Japan began its war of conquest against China in 1937, the Kuomintang government had come to power by bloody suppression of China's millions of workers and peasants who had been fighting for social, economic and political justice. Despite this, the Kuomintang regime's military resistance to Japan was objectively in the interests of China's oppressed and exploited masses. 2 The statistics here are derived from an article by Germaine Greer, which originally appeared in Independent Magazine. It revises statistics which appeared in an earlier Socialiss Action piece. 3 Ibid. 4 Ibid. 5 There are limits imposed by capitalist market mechanisms which limit how far a monopoly, however perfect, can artificially force up the price. That limit is imposed by competing commoditiesin this case, coal, gas and other forms of energy. 6 Leon Trotsky warned, many years before the Zionists achieved their objective, that a Jewish state in Palestine would prove to be a deathtrap for the Jewish people-besides being a reactionary "solution" to the centuries of persecution suffered by them. 7 The countries that the capitalist world call "socialist" or "communist" are more scientifically defined as degenerated or deformed workers states. Cuba is an exception. It is not ruled by a privileged bureaucratic regime that can be removed only by political revolution. 8 "Ten Days that Shook the World," by John Reed. A chronicle of the October 1917 Russian Revolution—which is the literary allusion upon which is based the winged aphorism, "500 days that may shake the world."

Scan page 12

Socialist Action's request to the Fourth International to be its sole fraternal and political representative 'The Fourth International was founded by Leon Trotsky in 1938 with the invaluable assistance of the American Trotskyists, then SOCIALIST ACTION DECEMBER 1990 11 Aug. 23, 1990 To: United Secretariat Fourth International Dear Comrades:

On June 10, 1990, the Barnes leadership of the U.S. Socialist Workers Party (SWP) sent a "Letter to International Executive Committee of Fourth International [FI]" ending their fraternal links with our world movement. It brings to a close the first phase in the degeneration of the SWP.

Socialist Action is the only political party in the United States which is fraternally and politically linked with the Fourth International. We request to be recognized as the only political formation in this heartland of world imperialism which is the legitimate continuity of the party of James P. Cannon and Leon Trotsky as well as the continuity of the Fourth International, the world party of socialist revolution.

The following is our explanation of why such recognition of Socialist Action is an appropriate and necessary response to the blow struck our world movement by the Barnes group's defection.

The formal termination of their affiliation with the FI, signed by SWP leaders and their international supporters, is the logical result of the Party's break at the beginning of the 1980s from the historic program and theoretical conquests of the world party of socialist revolution.

In the summer of 1981, leaders of Socialist Action-who were at that time in the SWP-warned that the Barnes leadership faction had secretly decided to dump the theory of Permanent Revolution along with the Transitional Program and method, and had embarked on a course away from the Fourth International. That warning/prediction was for the most part confirmed before that summer was out. It has now been completely fulfilled.

The gravity of the SWP's defection cannot be overstated, as the briefest review of our history will show:

The unique contribution of the SWP to founding the FI The FI was founded by Leon Trotsky in 1938 with the invaluable assistance of the American Trotskyists, then organized in the SWP. Ten years earlier, James P. Cannon had been won over to the program of the Left Opposition when he was a delegate from the Communist Party of the United States to the Sixth World Congress of the Comintern [Third International]. There, because of several lucky accidents, he received a copy of Trotsky's "The Draft Program of the Communist International: A Criticism of Fundamentals."

Cannon describes this turning point in his life in "The History of American Trotskyism." He wrote: "So, lo and behold, it was laid in my lap, translated into English! Maurice Spector, a delegate from the Canadian Party, and in somewhat the same frame of mind as myself, was also on the program commission and he got a copy. We let the caucus meetings and the Congress sessions go to the devil while we read and studied this document.

Then I knew what I had to do, and so did he. Our doubts had been resolved. It was as clear as daylight that Marxist truth was on the side of Trotsky. We made a compact there and then-Spector and I-that we would come back home and begin a struggle under the banner of Trotskyism.

Cannon and a small band of Trotskyists were soon expelled from the [Communist] Party [CPUSA] after declaring their support of Trotsky and the Russian Opposition on all the principled questions.

A week later they came out with the first issue of The Militant. This fact alone-the first clear declaration of support from leaders of Communist Parties outside the Soviet Union-constituted a small but not insignificant victory for the future of the world revolutionary movement.

Cannon's "public faction" began the long uphill struggle under the most unfavorable circumstances to win over the best elements in the Stalinized CPUSA. When Hitler came to power in 1933, it registered the death of the Comintern.

Partly for this reason and partly because of the sharpening of the class struggle in the United States, the propaganda phase of the public faction, whose name was the Communist League of America (CLA), was brought to an end. The American Trotskyists turned their face toward the newly combative American working class.

Trotskyist leadership and the American class struggle The CLA jumped with both feet into the middle of the burgeoning working class upsurge, beginning the second phase of its goal of reconstructing the party of revolutionary Marxism in the United States.

Of the three historic strikes in 1934 which marked the opening of the semi-revolution led by Stalinists in San Francisco, Calif., but two were led by proletarian revolutionists in Minneapolis, Minn., and in Toledo, Ohio.

The latter two political currents, the Trotskyist Communist League of America and the fresh new group of worker militants of the American Workers Party, fused to form the Workers Party of the United States in December of the same year.

This fusion with revolutionary worker militants was followed by further aquisitions, culminating in a fusion with the left wing of the Socialist Party [SP]. The Trotskyists, who had entered the SP to merge with the leftward moving wing of the party were expelled from it and formed the Socialist Workers Party on New Year's Day 1938.

The same year Leon Trotsky, who looked to the SWP as his own party, asked it to submit his Transitional Program to the founding conference of the Fourth International. The newborn International adopted it as its basic programmatic document.

This thumbnail sketch shows the weighty contribution made by the SWP to the formation of the Fourth International, and by the same token shows what could be lost by the Barnes-led SWP's defection from Trotskyism.

The objective cause of the SWP's degeneration But as you well know, there is another side to this sad story: Barnes was not permitted to carry out his attempted destruction of American Trotskyism without a fight. And that fight is far from over!

It is necessary to briefly explain the material cause of the degeneration of the Barnes leadership.

First and foremost the ground was prepared primarily by the effects of the prolonged period of capitalist expansion, the resulting stability in the imperialist centers, the uninterrupted treason of reformist misleaderships of the mass workers' movements and the concomitant failure to solve the subjective problem of the socialist revolution, the crisis of proletarian leadership.

This objective process affected the entire workers' movement-especially in the metropolitan centers where decisive sections of the working class were able to maintain relatively tolerable living standards. This contributed to a prolonged decline in worker combativity and a growing bureaucratization of their fighting institutions in the main centers of world capitalism.

The four decades of relative worker quiescence in the metropolitan centers undermined confidence in the continued revolutionary capability of the working class. This adversely affected not only the SWP, but also to some degree, our world movement as a whole.

While we have not yet emerged from this objective period, evidence of an approaching end to the prolonged capitalist expansion is piling up. The world is entering a period of increasing capitalist competition, bankruptcies, inflation, unemployment and a renewed upsurge of wars and revolutions.

Cannon and Trotsky's party lives on in Socialist Action But we can say with complete assurance, that the Leninist combat party built by Cannon and Trotsky remains alive and well. Its name is Socialist Action (SA). We have regularly published a monthly newspaper, never missing an issue since December 1983.

SA conducts regular tours of its branches and other stable units which have been established in 12 major American cities. Our party has also sent several delegations to the Soviet Union, and at least one to China, Romania, Czechoslovakia, East Germany and Poland.

(Our first delegation to the Soviet Union James P. Cannon delivered a letter from Esteban Volkov, Leon Trotsky's grandson, to the Soviet government demanding that his grandfather's name be cleared.)

SA has helped establish Walnut Publishers as a viable producer and distributor of books and pamphlets. SA has worked together with Walnut to assist in the publication and distribution of basic works by Trotsky, in Russian, in the Soviet Union.

SA is an active participant in all arenas of the American class struggle. We have functioning fractions in industrial and other important trade unions. SA has, without exaggeration, played a major role in the movement against U.S. intervention in Central America and is currently in the center of initial efforts to oppose U.S. intervention in the Mideast.

SA has been, and continues to be a leading force in the political struggle by women to defend their right to choose as well as helping lead the physical defense of abortion clinics in several cities from ongoing fascistlike attacks.

In the best tradition of our founders, SA has proven itself to be a propaganda group which knows how to act like a full-fledged political party. Our weight and influence in the mass movement, because of this party-building perspective, is far greater than our numbers.

One measure of our success in maintaining the true continuity of the party of Trotsky and Cannon is the impact we have made on some of the best fighters in the SWP. In the last eight months, reinforcements from the SWP central leadership and other cadre have come back to the party of American Trotskyism, and more are on their way.

The United Secretariat of the Fourth International can give this process an important impulse by their simple acknowledgement that the SWP did more than resign from the FI; that it completed its break with its past, and forfeited all rights to claim the historic continuity of revolutionary Marxism in the United States-leaving Socialist Action as the rightful bearer of this continuity.

Such action by the FI will go a long way toward encouraging all those in the United States who wish to help build the revolutionary proletarian, Leninist combat party, based on the historic theoretical and programmatic conquests of our world movement, to join Socialist Action.

Fraterally, Socialist Action Political Committee International A biweekly magazine published under the auspices of the United Secretariat of the Fourth International. One year sub: $47 Send to: 2, rue Richard Lenoir, 93108, Montreull, France.

----- pull-quotes -----

Kuwait is very close to outright slavery. Domestic servants, almost exclusively

robbed, beaten and killed at the whim of their royal "employers." "Children are taught to discipline-to insult, pinch slap and pull

le th

ideast is to the largest

Bre Troa

MILITANT organized in the SWP! of American workers of that period, one was