WeeklyWorker

14.12.2000

European left conference

Small step towards unity

A useful exercise. That sums up the meeting, sponsored by the Ligue Communiste Révolutionnaire (LCR), of European left and anti-capitalist organisations in Paris over December 4 and 5. I was attending as chair of the London Socialist Alliance, alongside Greg Tucker, LSA secretary.

Held in the lead-up to the Nice summit of the European Union and the mass demonstrations of trade unionists and anti-capitalist activists, the LCR meeting achieved little in practical terms, but has laid down a possible basis for increased Europe-wide cooperation between various forces of the left. It was the second of its kind, the first having been held in Portugal during the last European Union summit. At the end of the meeting, a commitment was made to hold regular conferences of the European radical left before EU summits. The next meeting is scheduled to be held in Goteburg, Sweden, in six months time.

Quite correctly, the LCR is using the election to the European parliament of its comrade, Alain Krivine, to promote European left unity. In his opening remarks, comrade Krivine called for the recomposition of the left and the organisation of "the left of the left" - i.e. the unity of forces which were "radical" and "revolutionary". He called for a movement which refuses to accept "the adaptation of the workers' movement to liberalisation".

However, the press statement (published in last week's Weekly Worker), was not voted on by the conference. Although it was amended after debate, it remained in reality an LCR statement. Had it come to a vote, I would not have put my name to the document. Its composition, while promoting discussion, also seemed to serve the needs of the LCR in the European parliament. At the last minute, a formulation rejecting the enlargement of qualified majority voting was inserted into the document. This had not been agreed by those at the conference, with some comrades supporting an abstentionist approach to the way the EU and its Council of Ministers is organised.

The political forces assembled mainly comprised what the LCR considers "parties of recomposition" in which the United Secretariat of the Fourth International (Usec) has components. This was reflected by the fact that around one third of the 40 or so people at the conference were Usec supporters. The conference was weakened by the absence of some important political forces. Lutte Ouvrière, the LCR's partner in the 1999 European elections, refused to attend. Crucially, Rifondazione Comunista from Italy did not even bother answering the invitation. This can only be considered a snub, given that the editor of the Rifondazione daily paper is a Usec supporter, as is a member of its executive. Also, there was no representation from Germany or Ireland. As the criteria for attendance set by the LCR included electoral success, it is surprising that the Socialist Party of Ireland with its sitting TD was not invited.

There were a number of important issues debated. One was the nature of the European Union and the attitude the left should have towards it. Opinions ranged from the semi-nationalist withdrawal position of the Danish Red-Green Alliance (which had campaigned for a 'no' vote in the recent referendum on the euro) to the pro-EU position of the Turkish-Cypriot organisation, Movement for Patriotic Unity. Others called for a transformation of the EU. I pointed out that, while we should fight the neo-liberal criteria for the capitalist unity of Europe, we need to understand the underlying process taking place. This actually unites the working class beyond its national boundaries and places the objective necessity for European working class organisation on the agenda.

Other issues concerned the key aims of the Nice summit: European Union expansion; reweighting of the national votes on the European Commission; the establishment of the European Rapid Deployment Force; and the establishment of the EU's Charter on Fundamental Rights.

One problem with the draft statement was that it tried to incorporate widely conflicting views of the European Union. These differences also reflect a debate ongoing within the European organisations of Usec. The southern European components in Spain, France, Portugal and Italy favour a 'transformation of the EU' approach. The northern European sections are for withdrawal or abolition.

The problem with the approach of Usec, and many others at the conference, including the Socialist Workers Party, was that rather than trying to work out a principled European-wide position, comrades' starting point was the local conditions in various countries. While our tactics in different states need to be flexible, the idea that we cannot develop a common position is to bow to national sentiment and spontaneity.

There were some forces proposing a consistent democratic approach to the question of Europe. Myself, the comrades from Solidarité in Switzerland and the European organiser of Usec all put forward the need for a European Union constituent assembly. However, the Usec organiser said that this call should not appear in the document. His draft formulation read: "We have a radical democratic proposal: it is up to the peoples of the whole of Europe to decide how they want to live together: what kind of state institutions, on which social and economic foundations and in what kind of society. We need a broad public debate ... We need women and men to be elected by universal franchise and mandated to decide democratically in each country and in Europe."

At the insistence of the SWP's Rob Hoveman, this clause was removed. Incredibly, comrade Hoveman stated that its open-ended class formulation caused him some problems. In fact, the democratic demands were too vague and the conclusion of the press statement left reformist.

This is the difficulty facing such gatherings. By trying to write a lengthy statement to please everyone, you invariably please no one. Given the lack of agreement, a much shorter document containing clear demands, along with a supporting statement for the demonstrations assembling against the summit in Nice, would have been better. In the Socialist Alliance we are building a culture whereby majority decisions are increasingly acceptable, so long as minorities maintain the right to publicise their views. Hopefully, such a culture will develop across Europe.

The sorts of demands that should have been included were:

I also thought it odd that nothing concrete emerged around the Rapid Deployment Force other than vague formulations. Since the Nice summit formally endorsed the formation of the RDF, a specific call for its abolition would have been appropriate.

The statement also touched upon the role of the European Federation of Trade Unions, but again there was no concrete call for a democratic European-wide trade union centre, with European-wide industrial unions. And the need to organise politically across Europe was barely touched upon. I raised the call for a Communist Party of the European Union and pointed to the need to work towards a united socialist campaign for the next European elections.

While this report is critical of the press statement and the conference, the meeting was worthwhile. Comrades gathered from across Europe to debate issues of critical concern facing the workers' movement, including the demand for democratic change across the continent. There was a recognition of the need to deepen such debate, and an egroup will be established in the lead-up to the next conference in Goteburg. There were suggestions of broadening its composition to include wider forces and engaging in themed discussions, such as the issue of immigration into Europe. A welcome feature of the press communiqué was the demand for "open immigration into the EU and of their right to full citizenship".

Given that the forces in Sweden outside the Party of the Left (ex-'official communist') are limited to the Socialist Party, a Usec organisation, the organisation for the conference will be jointly undertaken by the Red-Green Alliance of Denmark and the Red Electoral Alliance of Norway, pending their organisations' agreement.

Speaking to the press afterwards, Alain Krivine gave a fair representation of the conference, its differences and its agreements. He said that some in the meeting had been calling for a constituent assembly, while others did not. A journalist pointed out, correctly, that the statement was rather lacking in detail on how we wanted to move forward. Comrade Krivine replied that we are still at the beginning of a process. A report was carried in Le Monde and Libération the next day.

After the collapse of 'official communism' and the crisis in social democracy, the task of reorganising the left across Europe and beyond is urgent. We have a long way to go.

Marcus Larsen

Participating organisations

United Kingdom: Socialist Alliance, London Socialist Alliance, Scottish Socialist Party, Socialist Workers Party, Socialist Party in England and Wales
Cyprus: Movement for Patriotic Unity
Denmark: Red Green Alliance
France: Ligue Communiste Révolutionnaire
Luxembourg: La Gauche
Norway: Red Electoral Alliance
Portugal: Bloc de Gauche
Switzerland: Solidarité

Apologies

Poland: Socialist Party
Spain: Espacio Alternativo (Izquirda Unida)
Turkey: ÖDP

Observer

Australia: Democratic Socialist Party