POLITICAL AND TRADE UNION PERSPECTIVES
By: José Gómez Cerda
Secretary General of WFAFW
Belgium, 16 May 2003
The war against Iraq is currently at a military stage, which will of necessity give rise to different political and trade union positions internationally. We must therefore define our diagnostics and interpretation in the perspective of a new geopolitical, economic and trade union situation.
The attacking countries (the United States and the United Kingdom, with the support of Spain and other countries) think that the United Nations Organisation must become a sort of non-governmental organization (NGO) devoting itself to humanitarian problems, in search of and distribution of food and medicines and to reconstruction tasks. As far as these countries are concerned, they are in charge of military, economic and political issues.
The weakness of the UN and its major internal contradictions, as well as the unilateral and sovereign position of the United States have created an international conflict which will for a long time remain topical, with political, economic and trade union repercussions.
Historically, wars have always produced profound changes in economic structures, which are reflected on the political scene, causing serious trade union upheavals.
THE 1st WORLD WAR
The consequence of the 1st World War ended up finally with the supremacy of the United Kingdom over the economy. The United States thus became the first world economic power. The international trade union situation also changed profoundly, with the emergence of new ideological forces – scientific socialism and democratic socialism in the lead – which overthrew other movements. New trends also appeared in the labour world, like Christian trade unionism, international communist trade unionism, social-democrat trade unionism. The International Labour Organisation (ILO) was also created during this era.
THE 2nd WORLD WAR
The 2nd World war resulted in the economic downfall of Japan, Germany and other powers. The United States also reaffirmed its position of economic power.
Politically, the Socialist International strengthened itself, as well as the Communist International. The Christian Democracy also appeared on the international scene.
At the trade union level, the World Federation of Trade Union (WFTU) was established. In the United States, the AFL merged with the CIO. The Christian trade unionism reorganized itself.
With the implementation of the Marshall Plan for the Reconstruction of Europe, the Soviet Union parted ways with the United States and its allies, after joining in the fight against Hitler’s Nazism in Germany and Mussolini’s fascism in Italy. This political separation has repercussions on the trade union world, with the division of the WFTU and the creation of the International Federation of Free Trade Unions (IFTU). The Christian trade unions thus lost many organisations, especially in Germany, Italy and in other countries of Eastern Europe - organisations that it will never recover.
THE WAR AGAINST IRAQ
For the people of the Near East, the invasion of Iraq is part of a war that Christians and Jews are waging against Moslems and Arabs. The position of Israel against the Palestinian people is therefore compared with the attacks of the United states and Great Britain (with the support of Spain and other allies) against Iraq, as well as the threats against other countries called “The axis of Evil”, by George W. Bush, within the framework of his “sovereign” policy of preventive wars.
Despite the world-wide known position of Pope John Paul II and the whole Catholic Church against the war in Iraq, Moslems and Arabs do not know the difference between Catholics and Protestants and are asking themselves whether the Catholics are Spain and Italy. Just like we in the West are unable to distinguish between Moslems, Persians and Arabs, they put all Christians in the same boat, with Jews, whom they accuse as invaders.
The military and economic confrontation being waged from the West is aimed at getting their hands on oil wealth. However, the military occupation of a strategic zone can only accelerate the ideological, political and religious confrontation between different beliefs, for several years.
Since the events of 11 September 2001, the United States has demonstrated its military strength in Western Europe, the Middle-East, Central Asia, but above all in the Near East, ensuring new military access to Khirghizia, in Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and finally, four possible advanced posts in Iraq. All this in addition to already existing bases in Turkey, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Oman. These developments have changed the geopolitical situation in Eastern Europe and Central Asia, with a new American force in the strategic zone of the planet.
THE ECONOMY
Once the armed conflict is ended in Iraq, then begins the economic confrontation.
The Pentagon distributes the war booty, namely Iraqi oil: 60% for the Americans, 30% for the British, 5% for the Spanish and Italians and 5% for the Polish, Australians and the Turks. Russia and France are left out, whilst these countries had interests amounting to 40 billion euro in Iraq.
The economic changes on the international scale will have enormous social costs, in an established order where economic growth only benefits a minority.
The paltry technological development in the poor countries limits their competitiveness on the international market, which reduces the level of employment, and subsequently, the rate of trade unionisation. As for unemployment, it increases at all levels.
There is no doubt that economic development is uncertain.
And if war is the answer, then what is the question?
POLITICS
RICH COUNTRIES ; The next meeting of the Group of the eight most powerful countries in the world will take place in Evian, on 1 and 2 June 2003.
The Evian Summit took place in an atmosphere marked by divisions within the G8 on the issue of the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
As it is known, France and Russia were opposed to Bush’s war and have been excluded from the sharing of the Iraqi oil cake. The presence of George Bush at Evian is a subject that agitates the minds of the anti-war European movement for which the Evian Summit justifies the pursuit of mobilizations.
The Socialist International, with headquarters in Great Britain and headed by a Briton, must discuss the situation. One knows that the Labour Party is one of the large member parties of Socialist International.
The position of the English Socialist is to support the invasion of Iraq, but the socialists from Germany (German socialist Democrat party), from France (PS), from Spain (Spanish Workers Socialist Party, PSOE), from Italy and other countries hold a different position.
Besides, the American political parties (Democrats and Republicans) have neither the strength nor influence within international politicians as they have in their country.
One can expect a strong confrontation within the Socialist International. It is possible that it will come out more united and that the North American politicians will intervene, but a split or internal division is more probable.
A similar scenario is to be expected in the case of the Center Right International (ex-International Christian Democrat) with the Spanish Popular Party, which supported the military intervention against Iraq. This International also regroups French (which strongly disagrees), German, Belgian, and other parties, whose position has been different from the Spanish. A new regrouping is possible, or perhaps a new split.
Whatever it is, upheavals are to be expected within the Socialist International as well as in the Center Right International, resulting in either a strengthening of unity, or divisions. The situation, in any case, will greatly change.
TRADE UNIONISM
There are currently four large trade union blocks, namely:
The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), main organization.
The European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), which brings together the main trade union organizations of Europe in the process of pluralist unity.
The TUAC, trade union expression within the organization of industrialized countries (OECD)
The World Confederation of Labour (WCL).
The first three blocks are managed by the British trade unionists and the American AFL-CIO has a lot of influence in the ICFTU and the ETUC.
At the next meeting of the ICFTU, led by a British and the Americans (whose countries invaded Iraq), the latter will be confronted with the positions of the Germans, French, Spanish, Italians and the other powerful organizations who have publicly rejected the war in Iraq.
After the 2nd World War, British and American trade unionism towed the same line as their governments. We will now see whether history repeats itself and whether the British and American support the policy of their respective governments.
The next congress of the ETUC, which will take place in a few weeks, will elect a Briton to head it. However, many are the European organizations that do not share the position of the current President of the British TUC.
The pluralist trade federations of Europe apply statutory agreements and organise conferences to oblige all the ideological movements to affiliate themselves to world trade federations to which most of them are affiliated. This is the case of the European Federation of Agriculture, Food, Hotel, and Allied Workers which want to oblige the European federations of the WFAFW-WCL to be affiliated to the UITA-ICFTU, also headed by a British.
To impose a world affiliation goes back to violating the principles of freedom of association and ILO conventions. It is a contradiction of the pluralism principle that has been the basis of the organisational unity of the ETUC and the European Trade federations.
In the history of trade unionism, all imposed processes of unity have failed.
Within the TUAC, there are not many problems, because it is an organisation that is responsible especially for the consultation among trade unions and multinationals.
Within the WCL, neither the British nor the Americans have influence.
There is also the current trade union tendency to create a Global Union, a single world trade union, in response to economic globalisation. But after the war in Iraq, many trade unions are wondering what would happen with a single trade union, led by Americans and the British.
The trade union panorama will experience a fate similar to that of the international political movement: either it will come out strengthened, or we are on the verge of a great international trade union division.
CONCLUSION
The economic, political and trade union future in the world will change: either a large general and global regrouping, or a challenge at all levels. We hope that future events in the different international bodies will not be as serious as we expect. The history of humanity has however shown that after wars, the economies, political parties and trade unionism either deteriorate or are strengthened.
Trade union unity must bear the fruit of free shelter for workers, any imposed unity violates the fundamental principle of freedom of association. Unity cannot be imposed from outside, neither by financial projects. It can no longer be decreed by the will of governments, policies or employers. It belongs to the sovereign will of workers.
Only intelligence, reason and ideological wisdom can transform these processes into freedom, democracy, unity and social justice, in order to attain the common good. Peace will allow social transformations, whilst war only engenders divisions.
José Gómez Cerda
jose.gomezc@verizon.net.do