Making the NE Atlantic Safe for Global Capitalism

dublin | anti-capitalism | opinion/analysis Tuesday August 16, 2005 21:58 by Realta Rua

A talk given by Allan Armstrong (Republican Communist Platform in the
Scottish Socialist Party) at the G8 Alternatives Summit on July 3rd 2005 in
Edinburgh

MAKING THE NORTH EAST ATLANTIC SAFE FOR GLOBAL CAPITALISM

Earlier today, Eamon McCann, leading SWP member in Ireland, introduced a
session entitled, Making Northern Ireland Safe for Neo-liberalism. It is
revealing that such a prominent SWP member should concentrate on economic
policy and focus on just part of the partitioned Irish nation. I want to
look at the wider political picture, locating Ireland as a whole, along
with Scotland, England and Wales, in the current imperial plans for this
part of the world. Therefore, the title of my talk is Making the North East
Atlantic Safe for Global Capitalism.

One consequence of this approach is that it highlights the role of US and UK
imperialism in the world. In contrast, the SWP’s general approach emphasises
the US link with global corporations and its imperial policies, particularly
in Iraq. It downplays British imperialism. This is highlighted by their
electoral intervention in Northern Ireland, where Eamon McCann, who stood as
candidate for the Socialist and Environmental Alliance (SEA) in the General
Election, called for US and British troops to be withdrawn from Iraq.
However, the SEA platform failed to even mention the larger number of
British troops occupying Ireland - a remarkable oversight! The old Militant,
now the Socialist Parties in England and Wales, in Ireland and their
platform in the SSP, have a similar blindspot.

Of course, the neo-liberal economic policies being pursued throughout these
islands are important. Their aim is to create the economic environment
necessary for the global corporations to maximise their profits,
particularly through the policies of deregulation and privatisation -
something I’m sure will have been dealt with well at a number of sessions
today. However, a wider political environment is needed for these economic
policies to be pursued successfully. I will argue that this is the aim of
the current British imperial ‘New Unionist’ offensive, particularly its
policy of trying to establish ‘devolution-all-round’. This is being done
with the full cooperation of the Irish government.

Furthermore, the shared British and Irish governments’ policy of ‘social
partnership’ with the trade union bureaucracies isn’t confined to advancing
the neo-liberal economic agenda. These partnerships are mobilised to win
wider support for the ‘Peace Process’, the Good Friday Agreement and the
devolution settlements, all key to the ‘New Unionist’ political strategy.

It is perhaps helpful, before outlining the US/UK government and global
corporations’ plans for the North East Atlantic region, to briefly outline
some better known imperial projects in the world. A good place to start is
South America, because this is the current epicentre of resistance to
imperialism.

The US state has developed a range of strategies to deal with this
opposition. These started under President Clinton. Perhaps the best known is
‘Plan Colombia’. In Colombia imperialism faces opposition from the
peasant-based guerrilla movements of FARC and the ELN, and also from
independent trade unions fighting Shell-Amoco and Coca Cola. The US state,
with the support of the British government, is giving full-backing, with
both financial and military training, to the right-wing Uribe government,
the Colombian army and the local death squads. As a consequence Colombia is
one of the most oppressive states in the world.

In the case of Venezuela, the US state is continually trying to destabilise
the elected radical Chavez government, through attempted coups, economic
sanctions and a media offensive. Fortunately, so far, they haven’t been
successful. However, they have overthrown the elected government of Haiti,
by backing the ex-Batista supporters.

However, there is another country, where a different approach has been
tried, which is closer to the model being pursued here. That is Brazil. The
Brazilian people, particularly workers and peasants, elected Workers Party
leader, Lula, as President with great expectations. However, he has pushed
the World Bank and IMF’s economic policies, with the support of most trade
union leaders there. His commitment to US imperialism’s neo-liberal agenda
has even won him IMF approval. Lula’s commitment to the US imperial project
has been further demonstrated by Brazil sending its armed forces to Haiti at
the request of UN - read US imperialism. This is closer to the plan being
pursued here.

US imperialism has other regional plans, most notoriously, the Republican
Neo-Conservatives’ ‘Plan for the New American Century’. It is being
currently tested out in the Middle East, particularly Iraq. Control of oil
is obviously a major aim.

So what is the imperial and global corporate plan for our part of the world
- the North East Atlantic? First, the UK is itself one of the members of G8.
This reflects the fact that it is home to several major global corporations
itself. Nevertheless, the UK is much less powerful than the US, and New
Labour know that the UK can not act as an independent imperial force in the
world. This is why they seek to have UK imperialism working as junior
partner to US imperialism.

In return for this support, British imperialism, has effectively been given
the US imperial and global corporate license or franchise for the North East
Atlantic region. This license is political and military, as well as
economic. The UK’s key role in NATO, with former Labour War Minister, George
Robertson, being trusted as President, highlights this.

Ireland, however, is not a major economic player in the world. It has no
independent global corporations. It is not represented on G8. Therefore, the
Irish state is forced to act as infant partner to the junior partner -
British imperialism. There is much pressure on the Irish state from both the
USA and UK to force it to abandon its policy of neutrality. US/UK success in
this has been highlighted by the use made of Shannon Airport in the war
against Iraq. Shannon now plays a similar role to Leuchars and Kinloss RAF
stations in Scotland. Scotland, of course, also has the Faslane RN nuclear
submarine base.

However, in order to pursue US and UK governments’ political and neo-liberal
economic policies successfully, it has been necessary to establish a ‘New
Unionist’ political strategy for these islands. This is needed to create
political stability. Since the defeat of the Miners’ Strike in 1985 and
Labour’s full commitment to New Realism, there has been little for the
capitalist class to worry about, either from trade union or Labour leaders.
New Labour now has the full confidence of the US state and the British
employers. The employers here are even prepared to accept the trade union
bureaucracy committed to ‘social partnership’, as a very junior partner.
‘Social partnership’ was pioneered by Fianna Fail in Ireland in 1987, at a
time when the Tories were running the UK and were very hostile towards trade
unions. Now ‘social partnership’ is a shared policy of British and Irish
governments.

The real opposition the ‘New Unionist’ project is designed to deal with has
been the national democratic movements in Ireland, in particular, but also
in Scotland and Wales. The strongest resistance, of course, came from the
Republican Movement in Ireland. Now Des [Dalton - previous speaker from
Republican Sinn Fein] has already outlined very well the history of
Ireland’s Republican resistance and the role of British and UK imperialism
in trying to suppress or contain it. What I want to emphasise is how long it
took for the British state to find a strategy to marginalise this and how
the resulting strategy covers both islands.

Labour’s Northern Ireland Minister, Roy Mason’s original ‘Criminalisation’
policy was effectively defeated by the election of Bobby Sands during the
Hunger Strike. Then Thatcher was forced into a very reluctant U-turn,
abandoning her total support for the Ulster Unionists. She looked instead
for assistance from the Irish government and the SDLP through the
Anglo-Irish Agreement. However, this too failed to defeat the Republicans so
the Tories, under Major, put the first building block of a ‘New Unionist’
political settlement into place - the Downing Street Declaration. This was
designed to bring the Republican Movement on board and pave the road for a
reformed Stormont.

However, Ireland wasn’t the only place where there was opposition to the
unionist status-quo. The attempted imposition of the hated poll-tax in
Scotland in 1987, relit the dormant Scottish democratic movement too. The
widespread opposition and mobilisations resembled the early days of their
Civil Right Movement in the North. Jim Sillars was elected MP in Govan and
Militant had six councillors elected in Glasgow. National and republican
sentiment grew in Scotland. The liberal wing of the Scottish establishment
reached again for the old devolution solution, but unfortunately for them,
the Tories held them in little fear. Nevertheless, the continued cull of
elected Tories at all levels in Scotland, and the possible rise of the SNP,
converted Labour into much more ardent devolution enthusiasts than they had
been in 1979.

Therefore, as New Labour came closer to office, unlike the Tories, they
realised that any ‘New Unionist’ settlement would have to cover the whole of
these islands and not just Northern Ireland. They developed the policy of
‘devolution-all-round’ and a closer alliance with the Irish government.

In Wales things were different. The main impetus behind the Welsh national
movement had been cultural, particularly the Welsh language movement.
Indeed, the division between English and Welsh speakers had formed part of
the British state’s divide-and-rule strategy fro Wales. However, in the
1980’s, when there was still militant action over the Welsh language and
Plaid Cymru’s leader, Gwynfor Evans, threatened to go on a hunger strike
over a Welsh-speaking TV channel, the Tories developed a new strategy. This
has become another thread of ‘New Unionism’.

They decided to give state backing for approved Welsh language projects,
with the aim of building up a British state-supporting, Welsh-speaking,
middle-class, dependent on government subsidies for their cultural projects
and incomes. A similar approach was later used in Northern Ireland, where
Catholic Church and SDLP-backed Irish language and cultural projects
received state-funding, rather than those run by Republican ex-prisoners,
who had learned and used Irish to better resist the prison authorities.

Now, however, under the global corporations’ New World Order, culture is
playing a much wider role. The politics of self-determination is being
marginalised by the politics of consumer choice. People are free to choose
any cultural identity they want. They just have to buy the right ethnic
commodities, eat in the right ethnic restaurants, drink in the right themed
pubs or go on the right cultural and historical courses. Under ‘New
Unionism’ there has been considerable funding for many cultural projects. In
Ireland we have the Cultural Traditions group, whereby Orange marches just
become one more quaint folk custom in the rich tapestry of Irish life!

It is important to emphasise, that the UK and Irish governments are now
pursuing a joint and agreed strategy. Yes, in the face of some ‘local
difficulties’ the UK regularly breaks the international treaty with Ireland,
suspending the Northern Ireland Executive, without any prior notification to
the Irish government. However, like the UK in regard to the US, the Irish
government knows its junior position in regard to the UK. It knows its place
in the world pecking order. Relations with the British government continue
to be very good. There is even a Council of the Isles, with joint
parliamentary representation from Westminster, the Dail, the Scottish
Parliament, Welsh Assembly and Stormont.

What does this mean for socialists? First, it means a clear understanding of
the imperial nature of the UK state, both overseas, where it acts as a
junior partner with the dominant US imperialism, and at home, where it
continues to deny genuine self-determination for the constituent nations of
these islands. This means socialists must pursue a break-up of the UK state
strategy and also oppose the ‘crony capitalism’ of its Irish government
junior partner. However, just as the capitalist class has an overall
strategy for these islands, this means that we too must have an overall
strategy. We need a strategy of ‘internationalism from below’, which links
socialist republicans in Scotland, Ireland, England and Wales. At the very
least we need our own socialist republican Council of the Isles.