NTERNATIONAL I IEWPOINT V News and analysis from the Fourth International IV381 - September 2006 Lebanon/Israel Reproductive Rights Brazil International Viewpoint - IV381 - September 2006 IV381 - September 2006 Lebanon/Israel - Reproductive Rights - Brazil Lebanon Against resolution 1701, against the sending of NATO troops - Gilbert Achcar 3 Israel The Limits of Might - Michel Warschawski 4 United States Elections and Regime Crisis - Against the Current 6 Reproductive Rights USA Jumping Through Hoops - Dianne Feeley 8 Femicide in Latin America A Tale of Two Cities - Kathy Lowe 10 Aids Crisis Time to Deliver! - Julia Barnett 11 Sweden Narrow victory for the Swedish right - Anders Svensson 12 Brazil For an alternative in Brazil - Left Front 14 Review Liberation, Then What? - John Saul on South Africa reviewed - Jeffery R Webber 17 The revival of a political tradition - Celia Hart's new book reviewed - John Lister 20 Our History Alain Krivine and Algeria - Alain Krivine 22 FI Youth Camp 2006 Pasta, politics and parties - Thomas Eisler , Penelope Duggan 26 European Anti-Capitalist Left Call for Anti-G8 mobilisation in Rostok - European Anti-Capitalist Left 27 Debate The Labor Aristocracy Myth - Charlie Post 29 Eleven Theses on the Resurgence of Islamic Fundamentalism - Gilbert Achcar 38 Twelve comments plus one more, to continue the debate with John Holloway - Daniel Bensaïd 42 Theory The Mole and the Locomotive - Daniel Bensaïd 44 The Marxism of Trotsky's "Results and Prospects" - Michael Löwy 49 Dialectics and Revolution - Michael Löwy 51 The Challenge of Revolutionary Democracy in the Life and Thought of Rosa Luxemburg - Paul Le Blanc 57 Uneven and Combined Development and the Sweep of History: Focus on Europe - Paul Le Blanc 60 Letter to Readers International Viewpoint needs €3,670 - Chris Brooks 72 INTERNATIONAL VIEWPOINT is a review of news and analysis published under the auspices of the Executive Bureau of the Fourth International. IV appears online at www.internationalviewpoint.org and in a monthly pdf version. Editorial office: PO Box 112, Manchester M12 5DW UK ISSN 1294-2925 2 International Viewpoint - IV381 - September 2006 Lebanon Against resolution 1701, against the sending of NATO troops Gilbert Achcar Lebanon has, in recent years, been a privileged terrain for the shift brought about by the ending of the very specific system of “balance of powers” mutually necessary for the two Cold War superpowers until 1990. Security Council Resolution 1559 (2004) on the subject of the Lebanon is both the most flagrant violation of the UN Charter and a monument to hypocrisy. Adopted without any submission to the SC from the Lebanese government, it proclaims its attachment to the sovereignty of Lebanon while interfering in its internal affairs in violation of article 2, point 7, of the Charter, which prohibits any intervention “in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state”. It would, moreover, require an extraordinary “Could you be brought to use force against UNIFIL has been in place since 1978 and is dose of naivety to believe for a single instant Hezbollah? We could be brought to do it with accepted by all the Lebanese political forces. in the attachment of the permanent members respect to any element that would hinder our In spite of its obvious ineffectiveness as to of the SC to the sovereignty of any state other freedom of movement or would represent a the protection of Lebanon against Israeli than their own. Resolution 1559 - and the fact threat to the population or to peace. [...] encroachments on its sovereignty, and its that it was adopted in 2004, and not before, inaction in the face of the invasion of "What would UNIFIL do in the case of a raid amply demonstrates it - fits in an obvious Lebanon by Israel in 1982 and its occupation by the Israeli army on the Lebanon? fashion into the US action against Iran in the of south Lebanon for 18 years, it is a precious witness to these violations of sovereignty. course of their occupation of Iraq, targeting "Unhappily, since the cessation of hostilities, both of Teheran’s allies: the Syrian regime there have been more Israeli violations than What is important is 1) to reject the profound and Lebanon’s Hezbollah. violations by Lebanese armed elements. [...] and dangerous change in the UNIFIL Could it be brought to use force against Israel mandate represented by resolution 1701, and Resolution 1701 of August 11, 2006 is every in this case? I think that Israel wants 2) to oppose the use of UNIFIL II and the UN bit as flagrant in this respect. It was adopted international law to be upheld, and given that cover in order to continue the war for the after several weeks of stonewalling of the SC responsibility and sovereignty hand in hand common objectives of Israel, Washington and by Washington to allow Israel time to pursue in Lebanon, would assume its responsibilities Paris in Lebanon. What is developing is the its aggression. Its iniquity is blatant inasmuch in respecting international law.” rehearsal of a practice symptomatic of the as it fails to condemn Israel’s criminal new era: the use of the UN as fig leaf for aggression, mentioning only “Hezbollah’s Resolution 1701 is filled with deliberately military operations led by Washington with attack on Israel” and the “hostilities in ambiguous formulations that raise the NATO and other allies, as is the case in Lebanon and in Israel” (sic). prospect of a combat mission coming under Afghanistan since December 2001. Chapter VII of the Charter, which It shows a flagrant hypocrisy in demanding Washington and Paris invoked directly in In good logic, an intervention force should be that Israel "cease its offensive military their draft resolution distributed on August 5 made up of troops from neutral countries. Yet operations” without even demanding the and rejected by Hezbollah and the Lebanese Washington and Paris are in no way neutral in immediate lifting of the blockade it is government. Before these objections, the Lebanese conflict. No force allied to the imposing on Lebanon - as if a blockade was Washington and Paris abandoned the idea of US will be considered as neutral in a conflict not an eminently offensive military a new international force in Lebanon, between one of Washington’s principal allies operation. contenting themselves with the UNIFIL force and another state. That is why all those who already in position. desire peace in the Middle East and are The iniquity is just as flagrant when the new concerned by the US projects in this part of UNIFIL - which, remarkably, is deployed Nonetheless, the mandate of this latter has the world should energetically oppose the only on the territory of the occupied country been profoundly altered, not only in the sense sending to and presence in Lebanon of troops - is supposed to ensure that its zone of indicated above, but also as to its zone of from NATO member countries. deployment is not used for “hostile activities activity, with UNIFIL II authorised to deploy of any kind”. Resolution 1701 does not say a along the Lebanese-Syrian border and control A protest movement in this sense has begun word on the protection of Lebanese territory Lebanon’s aerial and maritime access. in the countries in question, from Germany to Turkey, via France, Italy and Spain. The task against the repeated aggression by Israel, In sum, the spirit of this resolution is to treat occupying power in Lebanon for 18 years is all the more necessary in that Israel gives Lebanon as if it was the aggressor! In this itself the “right of the strongest” to reject the (without speaking of the portion of territory sense it represents an attempt to continue the participation in UNIFIL of troops from occupied since 1967). Israeli war in the Lebanon in another fashion, certain Muslim countries, on the pretext that which could imply war operations in the To get an idea of the very biased character of they are not neutral in the Israeli-Arab short or medium term. That is why it should conflict. the vision of UNIFIL upheld by the European be vigorously denounced and rejected by states that will provide its backbone, read the anybody who upholds the spirit of the UN Gilbert Achcar grew up in Lebanon and teaches interview given to the newspaper Le Monde Charter. political science at the University of Paris-VIII. His (August 31, 2006) by Jean-Marie Guéhenno, best-selling book The Clash of Barbarisms just came out in a second expanded edition and a book of his head of the UN’s peacekeeping operations. It That does not mean rejecting the presence of dialogues with Noam Chomsky on the Middle East, requires no commentary. UNIFIL along the Lebanese-Israeli frontier. Perilous Power, is forthcoming. 3 International Viewpoint - IV381 - September 2006 Israel The Limits of Might Michel Warschawski This morning (13 Sept. - ed) the Israeli newspapers headlines Confronted with the growing himself... why after more than announced that Israeli PM, Ehud Olmert, agreed to the sympathy towards Hizbollah and 150 killed in the last three formation of a fact-finding commission, headed by a senior his sensational ability to hit the weeks, they are still trying one judge, in order to evaluate all the aspects, political as well as heart of Israel with hundreds of Qassam, one more rocket. Why military, of the Israeli war in Lebanon. This commission is rockets, the declared objective the logic of the IDF, which replacing the various non-independent inquiry commissions was reduced to “destroy the calculates its strength by the ability of Hizbollah to send previously established by the PM and the army. quantity of steel at its disposal, rockets on the Israeli territory.” why this logic doesn’t work on Two weeks after the colossal air them...” It is not yet what a majority of Political as well as military strikes on Hizbollah, the number Israelis, and more and more initiatives are usually evaluated of rockets hitting Israel, and The fact that the Israeli army has senior politicians are demanding according to their initial provoking serious damages to all not been able to achieve even - a national independent inquiry objectives.