21.03.2002

Our alliance against theirs

Barcelona was, over the weekend of March 15-16, the latest city to play host to the European Union travelling circus. In addition to the heads of state of all EU member-countries some 5,000 officials and 3,500 journalists rolled into town on the EU bandwagon. Not to mention the several thousand who had travelled to protest against the summit and its stated goal: to further the cause of economic liberalisation and consolidate moves towards a single market. March 14 saw more than 50,000 trade unionists from across Europe take to the streets of Barcelona. Unions from across the continent took part. The composition of the protest was influenced by both geographical and political factors. Thus France, Spain and Portugal were, unsurprisingly, well represented, with Italy and Germany less so. British trade unions were again notable only by their absence. Partially this can be explained by the fact that the weekend saw several important events for trade union and left activists in Britain. And undoubtedly it reflects the fact that the working class in most major European countries has yet to suffer a major strategic defeat, as occured in Britain in 1984-85. While there have been many positive features of the European anti-capitalist movement, the participation of the organised working class from Britain has not been one of them. It has not seen a significant presence from this country, except of course in the form of the organised left. A certain danger of British isolationism exists; Britain is, broadly speaking, an Eurosceptic country. This is something that the British left urgently needs to take the lead in combating. Unfortunately, as recent discussions on the euro have revealed - with both the Scottish Socialist Party and Socialist Alliance likely to advocate a 'no' vote in a referendum on euro entry - the majority of the left can be characterised with some degree of accuracy as sharing the Euroscepticism of the majority. This stands in marked contrast to the position taken by left groups on the continent and also to enthusiastic proclamations of support for some form of European Socialist Alliance. Events in Barcelona, where an alliance of a different kind was making the headlines, brought into sharp relief the urgency of advancing this project. The European Council, the body meeting in Barcelona, brings together, alongside the various functionaries, flunkies and bureaucrats, the heads of member-states. As such it is supposed to provide the 'guiding vision' for the EU, aiming to "provide the union with the necessary impetus for its development and define the general political guidelines thereof", as article 4 of the common provisions of the EU treaty succinctly puts it. European capital set itself the strategic goal of becoming the world's most competitive economy by 2010 in Lisbon two years ago, a stated aim that pits it directly against the United States. However, to achieve that goal the 'structural reform' of the economies of member-states - ie, the creation of a single open market - is an essential step. The successful launch of the euro at the start of the year was a major step in that direction. However, more is required. Markets have to be opened up and state monopolies hived off. Not only is there the holy grail of economic supremacy to aim for, but 2004 will see a significant expansion of the EU, with the former 'eastern bloc' countries in line for ascension to full membership. A similar process of restructuring is continuing there. All of which provides business opportunities aplenty. Antony Burgmans, the co-chairman of Unilever, could barely wait: "The need for progress is urgent, particularly with the prospect of an enlarged Europe by the end of 2004, with all the economic and institutional challenges this will bring" (Financial Times March 18). In an attempt to increase the speed of Europe's progress towards Burgmans' dystopian vision, Italy, Spain and Britain formed what we might reasonably dub an 'axis of evil' at Barcelona. Blair visited Rome some weeks previously and signed several accords committed to joint support for liberalising measures at Barcelona. That Berlusconi was able to declare an "absolute convergence of views" will not surprise readers of this paper. The main test for this axis was the liberalisation of energy markets. France especially has been stubbornly resisting this, fearing a backlash from trade unions in an election year. Its main state-owned electricity company, Electricité de France, has caused some consternation by making several foreign acquisitions - while being immune from any takeover bid itself and possessing a domestic monopoly. An outrage, according to the 'principles' of the free market. Eventually this issue was fudged - the market will be opened up for 'commercial' users - however, Barcelona was not a complete failure from the standpoint of the Berlusconi-Anzar-Blair (BAB) axis. Barcelona committed the EU to improve 'labour mobility' by "more flexible pension and healthcare arrangements" (Financial Times March 18) and to create more jobs "through reform of tax and benefit systems and reduced incentives for early retirement" (ibid). The commitment to respect "quality public services" obtained by the French as a sop for its working class electorate is obviously not worth the paper it is written on. Famously Blair's efforts were dismissed by John Monks, general secretary of the TUC, as being "bloody stupid". However, they were entirely sensible, of course, from the point of view of British capital. The votes of the three countries combined are sufficient to block unwelcome change through a minority veto. What is more, the balance of power within Europe is shifting. The 'red tide' that swept Europe during the late 1990s, installing social-democratic parties in government in 13 of the 15 EU countries, is slowly but surely being reversed. Particularly symptomatic of this decline is the predicament of Schröder's Social Democrats, who may well gain more votes than the Christian Democrats at the ballot box in September, but be forced into a 'grand coalition' with them in any case. A victory for the centre-right would paradoxically be welcome for Blair. Franco-German hegemony over the European project is still strong enough to shape the direction of union, while Britain's economy is the closest thing to a 'preferred model' for a European single market. The Christian Democrats may well be willing to support the 'BAB' axis. The real question for partisans of the working class across Europe concerns the kind of alliance we need to forge in response to the one that intends to launch a frontal assault on workers' rights and conditions. While Barcelona set the scene for a showdown between European capital and labour, it also proved conclusively that reports of the anti-capitalist movement's death were premature, to say the least. March 15 provided us with an inkling of the way forward. Between 300,000 and 500,000 took part in a largely peaceful protest, organised under the slogan of 'Against corporate Europe - another world is possible'. Reflecting the politically heterogeneous nature of the movement, this demonstration was split into three sections. One was led by an umbrella organisation for over 100 groups, the Movement against a Capitalist Europe. A second was led by nationalists of various stripes - self-styled European 'nations without a state' - ranging from Scots to Basques. And a third consisted of left and trade union activists. The Financial Times reported that the third section of the anti-globalisation march was actually unable to parade due to a "human logjam" - which gives us an idea of the vast numbers protesting (March 18). As is now standard procedure, Spain suspended the Schengen agreement and stopped several buses full of protestors at the border. And when activists arrived they were on the receiving end of the also equally mandatory police repression - familiar to anybody who has travelled with the anti-capitalist movement. Barcelona was transformed into a virtual police state and there were around 109 arrests, according to Indymedia - most of which went unreported in the bourgeois press. However, even newspapers that are far from sympathetic to the movement, like The Times, commentated on the high level of repression. It observed that the situation was "unpleasantly reminiscent of the bad old days of Franco" (March 18). Thus the European continent and EU summits have seen the largest mobilisations of the anti-capitalist movement. In terms of numbers the Barcelona mobilisations were as significant as Genoa. Not only that, but the organised working class is, generally speaking, prominently involved with the movement, though not as a distinct political entity. Struggles against the negative effects of European capitalist integration are drawing workers onto the streets - witness Italy, where a relatively high tempo of class struggle led to an excellent turnout of 300,000 in Genoa. What is in Britain and the US a rather diffuse 'anti-capitalist' movement has, in Europe, a much more programmatically coherent edge simply because of the presence of the organised working class - with its socialist and communist traditions. Irresponsible anarchist influences have seemingly been marginalised - partially as a result of the ideological backwash from September 11, but also because of the working class involvement and its respect for, and understanding of, the need for discipline. This is something to be welcomed, though some on the left, like Workers Power, are seemingly still star-struck by the black bloc. A WP comrade, reporting on the demonstrations and their "surreal atmosphere", opines that: "It was the most peculiar demo I have been on, not only from the angle of the protestors' tactics, but also the tactics of the police." Why? Because "There was plenty of ammunition on the Ramblas to really go to town smashing things up, but nothing was touched. All the cafes were still open, with their patio chairs, etc, out in the open. A few rubbish bins were set on fire, but I saw no property destruction" (Workers Power Global, March 16). Do we detect a hint of disappointment in the comrade's comments? The formation of a European Social Forum, which will hold its first meeting in Italy later in the year, is an important step forward. It is a welcome recognition that the European wing of the anti-capitalist movement must organise and begin to cohere a viable alternative to the Europe of capital. However, problems remain. There was a sort of détente evident in Barcelona - the routine of summit and protest seems all too familiar. While the mobilisations against the various summits are impressive, they should not substitute for sinking roots and providing a lead to the numerous struggles across Europe. When the forum meets, it should discuss how we relate to developments within Europe, especially those like the EU's ongoing constitutional conference in Brussels. Rather than discuss abstractions like 'capitalism and war', as the Socialist Workers Party is proposing, we need to discuss how we should integrate our working class response, based on the call for a democratic Europe in the interests of working people. In this way we would outflank the 'BAB' axis. However, we must confront the possible dangers. While, so far, slogans have been 'pro-European' in feel, we will have to fight any move towards support for national particularism and protectionism. The Socialist Alliance delegation to the forum, while arguing for a coherent, consistently democratic and socialist programme, should take the opportunity to move forward the project of a European Socialist Alliance: our alliance to fight theirs. James Mallory