• All-India Conference on Rights
  A Timely and Historic Initiative

• Ruling NDA alliance suffers big defeat in elections to 4 state assemblies:

• The National Agriculture Policy is a violation of the rights of the tillers and of the right of every Indian to food security|

• Peasants in thousands stage a dharna in Delhi

• The Plant Variety Protection and Farmers' Rights Bill
  Who will create enabling mechanisms
  for ensuring these rights?

• Union Budget and the Danger of Militarisation

• Incoherent justifications of the Economic Survey 2001-02

• Conference on Rights in Delhi
  Arming the people with the modern definition of rights

• March 8, International Women’s Day
  Organise against injustice and for peace!

• Millions in Iran Rally Against U.S.

• US imperialist belligerence against Iraq

All-India Conference on Rights
A Timely and Historic Initiative

At a time when there is great pressure being applied on all political forces in India to toe the line of the official "war against terrorism", directing the fire especially at "Islamic fundamentalism", it is very significant that such a diverse group of political activists, retired judges and civil servants, representatives of workers, peasants, women and youth from different parts of India, ranging from Manipur to Mumbai and from Kashmir and Punjab to Kanyakumari, got together on this occasion and took a united political stand in defence of the rights of all. People’s Voice is happy to publish in this issue a summary report of the Conference on Rights.

Back to Table of Contents

Ruling NDA alliance suffers big defeat in elections to 4 state assemblies:

These elections have taken place at a time when the NDA government has completed half its term at the center. The workers, peasants, women, youth and middle strata of our country have been carrying out numerous protest actions to reveal their opposition to the economic course of globalisation through privatisation and liberalisation. The big bourgeoisie however is hell bent on this course which is its approach to becoming a global player, irrespective of the disastrous consequences for the masses. The September 11, 2001 events in the US and the "war against terrorism" launched by Anglo-American imperialism in its drive for the conquest of Asia provided the Indian big bourgeoisie with a god-sent opportunity. By hitching itself on the imperialist bandwagon, they have tried to justify war mongering against Pakistan and militarise the Indian economy, while unleashing state terrorism against the toiling masses. They have promulgated the hated POTO against the people. When massive opposition countrywide to this fascist ordinance made it clear that POTO would be defeated in parliament, various forces organised the terrorist attack on parliament following which parliament was adjourned sine die. Meanwhile, the NDA government utilised the terrorist strike on parliament to step up war hysteria in the country, and pile up the armed forces all along the border from Kashmir to Gujarat.

The ruling bourgeoisie had hoped that chauvinist war hysteria and the unleashing of state terrorism could help to divide, disrupt, disorient the struggle of the workers, peasants and middle strata against the economic reforms program of the bourgeoisie and imperialism. However, the powerful opposition of the people to militarisation and state terrorism has ensured that the rulers have not had their way. The NDA government was hoping to win the elections in Uttar Pradesh and Punjab, so that the bourgeoisie could declare this as a victory for its policy of globalisation, militarisation, and attack on democratic rights and civil liberties. The results of the elections are a comprehensive vote against the course of globalisation, state terrorism and militarisation. This defeat has created difficulties for the bourgeoisie in stepping up the "pace of reforms" and in pushing through all the anti-labour amendments that they wanted to in the Budget session of parliament.

However, the workers and peasants, women and youth, all those opposed to the anti-social offensive of the bourgeoisie must not have false illusions about the results. Elections, under the capitalist system, can at best be a barometer of the level of maturity of the working class and toiling masses. All the parliamentary parties are committed to the course of globalisation and interests of the big bourgeoisie. The program that the NDA government is pursuing is the program of the big bourgeoisie and imperialism. Neither the Congress, nor the other parties that have made gains in these elections, uphold the program of the working class of ending the anti-social offensive, and opening the way for deep going transformations in the economic and political sphere in the interests of the people. In the political system and political process in place in India, it is the practice of the big bourgeoisie to change horses, throw out one set of discredited faces and bring in another, while its rule remains unchanged.

Already there are signs that the bourgeoisie will play the communal and secular card to divide the people and inflict great tragedies on them. The toiling masses and all those who are firmly committed to defeating the anti-social offensive must exercise vigilance. They must step up the work to forge political unity of the toiling and oppressed masses against globalisation, liberalisation and privatisation and against state terrorism and the militarisation of the economy and the policy of hitching India to the bandwagon of Anglo-American imperialism.

Back to Table of Contents

The National Agriculture Policy is a violation of the rights of the tillers and of the right of every Indian to food security

Part II

During the first four decades after independence, the rulers of India claimed that they were building a "mixed" economy—wherein capitalism will flourish while the State would at the same time ensure food security and livelihood for the farmers. Following the food crisis of the mid 1960s and the dependence on American imperialist aid in the form of PL480, the Central Government launched the Green Revolution and built up a public procurement and distribution system. The policy of the "mixed" economy is being abandoned today; the public procurement and distribution system is in crisis and faces destruction. What is the reason?

Capitalist relations of production are incompatible with the provision of food security and livelihood for all the tillers of the land. This is the fundamental reason why the policy of the "mixed" economy failed. It was bound to fail because of the iron laws of capitalist economy and its impact on agriculture.

Increasing penetration of capitalism into Indian agriculture has brought large scale devastation to the marginal and small farmers and village communities. The imprudent use of fertilisers, driven by the greed of the capitalist corporations that produce fertilisers, has depleted the fertility of the soil in many parts of the country. This coupled with further shift in cropping patterns away from food grains towards cash crops is seriously threatening the food security of the country.

The champions of market reforms claim that the solution lies in dismantling the public procurement and distribution system and allowing private operators to take over the trade in food and agricultural produce. They say the state should cut the subsidies on power and water supply to farmers so that such sectors can be handed over to private profiteers. What about the livelihood of the tillers of the soil? Let them compete in the global market! This is the answer offered by the rulers of today.

The bourgeoisie wants to abandon the very principle that the state should ensure food security for the population. The plans of the bourgeoisie to dismantle the central food grain procurement system and leave it to the state governments to bear the cost of procurement from farmers constitute a vicious attack on the rights of those who till the land, and on the right of every Indian to food security.

The bourgeoisie has been repeatedly arguing that the productivity in Indian agriculture has reached a plateau because of the existence of millions of small and marginal farms. It seems that further efficiencies in agriculture can be effected only by the consolidation of land holdings. But how is this to be done?

A tried and tested way for the consolidation of land holdings so that efficiencies can be brought about in agriculture is the Soviet collective farm model where peasants were encouraged to form collectives, with liberal assistance from the state to the workers and peasants. The Soviet state gave the peasants all possible assistance in terms of timely and affordable supply of inputs and assured market for the crops. Productivity in agriculture increased tremendously in the Soviet Union between 1920 and 1935 because of these measures, which directly resulted in increased prosperity of peasants and freedom from the yoke of capitalists and moneylenders.

It appears that NAP has nothing to learn from this tremendous experience. The NAP advocates that the solution to small land holdings is increased corporate involvement in agriculture. It has recommended new avenues for corporate investments such as through contract farming, a mode which has been tried and tested in the consolidation of land holdings in the sugar sector.

It is also being suggested that the capitalist model of land consolidation as occurred in Punjab and Haryana, in preparation for the Green Revolution, be replicated in other parts of India. This means to enable big farmers to acquire the holdings of the small farmers. The NAP also envisages institutional and legal arrangements for leasing of private lands for agri-business.

We cannot accept in today's society that those who feed the whole of society and provide inputs to industry should be left to fend for themselves.

The right of the tillers to a secure livelihood can be realised only if the state fulfills its duty to them and curbs the capitalist and feudal forces who exploit and rob the toiling peasants. Credits as well as assistance in the form of technical services, fertilisers, water, electricity, seeds and other inputs at affordable prices must be guaranteed for all agricultural produce meant for the market. Access to the market and guaranteed minimum prices also need to be ensured by the State.

Further, security of land holding must be guaranteed in the hands of those who till it. All buying, selling of agricultural land between
private parties and contract farming must be immediately banned, so that no peasant is forced to part with his land. Special assistance and incentives should be given to the small and marginal farmers to pool together their land holdings and cooperativise, in order to increase productivity through the use of modern machinery and scientific techniques.

It is clear that the National Agricultural Policy of the Government of India does not guarantee the rights of the peasants nor the right of all members of society to food security. On the contrary, it advocates the continued and further violation of these rights and abrogation of duty by the state, for the sake of fulfilling the greed of private profiteers.

Back to Table of Contents

Peasants in thousands stage a dharna in Delhi

The President of Bharti Kissan Union, Mr Ajmer Singh Lakhowal and General Secretary, Prof. Manjeet Singh Kadiyan, addressed the peasants. They raised the issue that the farmers of Punjab are totally dependent on groundwater for their irrigation needs because the central and state governments have not taken any steps to provide irrigation facilities. Due to excessive drawal of water from groundwater sources, the water table has been decreasing by one foot every year. If this situation continues, then the future of Punjab’s farmers is bleak.

According to a memorandum submitted to the Prime Minister, following are the in demands:

Back to Table of Contents

The Plant Variety Protection and Farmers' Rights Bill

Who will create enabling mechanisms for ensuring these rights?

The initial draft of the Bill was heavily loaded in favour of the big seed and plant breeder monopolies who are pressurising every country, through the TRIPs agreement in WTO, to prevent local farmers and farming communities from reusing their seeds for cultivation and from entering the seed trade. As a result of determined campaign by farmers’ organisations and social activists, a section on Farmers Rights was added to the Bill later.

Since 1993, when the Uruguay Round of Trade Negotiations was concluded, there has been immense pressure on India to enact a legislation to protect plant breeders’ rights that will ensure the monopoly of foreign seed companies over the Indian market and over the huge Indian biodiversity resources. Successive Indian governments, under this pressure, refused to take a stand that it is the rights of farmers to reuse seed for farming that should be ensured and not the rights of monopoly plant breeders to make the Indian farmer perennially dependent on them.

Peasants in India have been demanding legislation that would allow the domestic farming community to retain control over seed production and use that they have always enjoyed for centuries. In the existing international convention on plant breeders’ rights, called UPOV, the right of farmers to save seed from the harvest to sow the next crop (called plant back rights) is treated as a privilege and not as a right. The Indian farmers demanded that the Indian law should ensure this aspect as a right and not as a privilege.

In addition, the peasant organisations argued that the Indian farmer is not just a cultivator but also a conserver of the agricultural diversity and a breeder who has developed successful varieties over the millennia. So, the farmers had a right to register their farm varieties so that they are protected against being scavenged by monopoly breeders. Experiences related to the scavenging of neem, basmati and haldi by monopoly breeders pointed to the necessity of legislating this right and making sure that it is judicially enforceable. The farming community demanded that the farmers should be paid for the development of new varieties and that they should also be compensated by the seed monopolies if poor quality spurious seeds led to crop failure.

A key element of their demand was to make certain that the farmer retained the right to sell non-branded seed to other farmers, even if the variety was under a breeder's right. This right is crucial to maintaining the livelihood basis of the farming community as well as the country's self-reliance in agriculture. This right is being fiercely resisted in the WTO by the imperialists. In India, the farming community is the largest seed producer, producing about 87% of the country's annual requirement. Depriving the farmer from selling his seed will not only deprive him of an important part of his livelihood, it will also pave the way for the seed multinationals to displace the farmer. The other possible seed producers, the public research institutions, have long since been marginalised by budget cuts and state apathy towards self-reliance and well being of farmers.

In the advanced capitalist countries, the seed monopolies captured the seed market by buying up smaller seed companies. In India, in the absence of smaller seed companies to gobble up, the strategy of the seed multinationals has been to eliminate the role of the farmer in seed production by legislation. Thus, in a situation where the Indian state of the big bourgeoisie has abrogated its duty to provide farmers with good quality seeds at an affordable price, the control of the peasants over seed production is central to the food security of the nation.

The Plant Variety Protection and Farmers' Rights Bill has been adopted by the Indian state after a protracted struggle by all those farmers’ organisations, social activists and agriculture experts who believe that India should be self-reliant in agriculture and that the right to livelihood and prosperity of those who feed the nation should be ensured at all costs. But, like any other legislation that has been passed to ensure the rights of working people, there are no practical enabling mechanisms provided in the Bill. This is because the ruling class has nothing to gain by providing these mechanisms.

A large section of the peasant community is still illiterate. Millions of small and marginal peasants have no access to irrigation, agricultural inputs, financial support and stable prices for their produce. The local bureaucrats, moneylenders and landlords are their biggest oppressors. Backward feudal and caste oppression weigh heavily on the vast majority of the peasant community. In such a situation, enacting a bill in Parliament guaranteeing farmers rights can have meaning only when enabling mechanisms are created to ensure these rights. Such mechanisms can be created only when the working class and peasantry exercise their duty to create conditions for the affirmation of these rights by taking power in their own hands.

Back to Table of Contents

Union Budget and the Danger of Militarisation

This increase has been in line with forecasts by defence experts who had been recommending an increase of 15% to buy powerful new weapons such as airborne surveillance systems, fighter planes, submarines and a second aircraft carrier. Mr Sinha further said that "In case of need I shall not hesitate to provide more funds".
Militarisation of the economy means a drain on productive forces, as the armed forces do not produce any goods or services that could raise the living standards of the people. On the contrary, rising allocation of limited public resources for the military budget means a further squeeze on the already meagre allocations for health, education and other basic needs of the people.

Militarisation is a feature of the monopoly capitalist system. It is a feature that shows the parasitism of this system. In the US economy, the military-industrial complex actually dictates many of the government policies.

Until some time back, following the end of the Cold War period, there was pressure on all the big powers to somewhat curtail their military spending and arms acquisition programs. Now the "war against terrorism" is being used as the justification for stepping up arms spending and militarisation.

Wars have become the most profitable business for the most powerful economic interests. Thus, militarisation also means the strengthening of the motives for waging wars, for the use of force in international relations, for the violation of the sovereign rights of independent states.

A stepping up of the military budget in India is a signal that the Indian Government is preparing for war, not for peace.

Oppose the anti-people proposals in the union Budget 2002-02

Incoherent justifications of the Economic Survey 2001-02

The reforms removed entry barriers to Indian and foreign investments in several sectors, opened the Indian market to rapacious plunder by the foreign multinationals, and opened up foreign direct investment to dig its claws into new areas of the economy. When launching the reforms, the bourgeoisie had promised that they will result in high growth in industrial production. It was claimed that since Indian industry had a comparative advantage in labour intensive areas than capital intensive ones, there will be a shift towards labour intensive production and hence industrial growth per se will result in more jobs.

However, the reality is that unemployment and under-employment is still as widespread or even worse than before. Millions of able-bodied Indians are still unemployed. Industrial growth has slowed down tremendously in the last one year due to the capitalist crisis throughout the world.

The survey has pointed out that during the entire reform period tax revenues have remained below 10 per cent of the GDP and this has contributed to the excessive deficits in spending. To satisfy the greed of the capitalists tax concessions and tax holidays were given in plenty to the capitalists and multinationals. Huge segments of the service sector, particularly the software sector, was kept out of the tax ambit using the justification that these will help the industry to grow and increase its competitiveness resulting in greater exports.

Turning a Nelson's eye to the fact that concessions to the rich is the main reason for the increase in the fiscal deficit, the survey says that there is a need to reduce the food subsidy and reduce the role of the government in ensuring food security. The survey recommends that food management should be left to private sector and private traders should be encouraged to make more investments. Would private traders be interested in increasing their investments in food management if it does not guarantee super profits. How can safeguarding the nation's food security be compatible with the profit motive of private traders and multinationals involved in the agri business? The survey is silent on this question.

Refusing to learn from reality the survey has recommended that a flexible labour market must be created, meaning that the capitalists should be free to hire and fire at will to safeguard their profits. It has recommended de-reservation of the items currently reserved for the small scale sector, which will result in big capitalists swallowing the hitherto protected small and medium entrepreneurs. It has advised the stepping up the pace of reforms that has so far caused unmitigated disaster for the working people.

The recommendations of the Economic Survey highlight the increasing incoherence among the ruling class in justifying that the economic reforms are being pursued for the welfare of the working people.

Grains are rotting in the FCI godowns. But, the Indian people are getting less to eat. This is what has been revealed by the Economic Survey. The per capita availability of cereals, pulses, and vegetable oils fell sharply from last year.

Per capita availability of cereals and oil

The World Health Organisation recommends a minimum requirement of vegetable oil of 10 kgs per person per annum.

Reforms have increased unemployment and casualisation

According to the Survey on Employment by the National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO), overall employment grew by a meagre 1 per cent per annum during 1993-94 to 1999-2000—less than the population growth. The growth in the organised sector was just half a percent (0.53%). The growth in the public sector was negative (-0.03%) due to retrenchment and privatisation.

The year-wise and sector-wise breakup reveals a "casualisation" of labour, meaning a larger percentage of the workers does not have any job security. There has been a drop in the labour force in the manufacturing industries as well.

Back to Table of Contents

Conference on Rights in Delhi

Arming the people with the modern definition of rights

Inaugurating this important conference, Justice Krishna Iyer noted that so-called anti-terrorist laws like POTO in India and the Patriots Act in the US are actually aimed at suppressing the growing opposition to the WTO and the imperialist globalisation agenda. He emphasised the need for the people to organise to actualise their rights, which are being violated today.

While both state terrorism and individual terrorism are to be condemned and opposed, it is important to distinguish between which is the cause and which is the effect. Today it may appear as if some individual acts of terrorism are the cause of the problem, when in fact they are only the effect. Comrade Prakash Rao, who delivered the keynote address, argued this out very effectively. He enumerated three factors that together pose the greatest threat to the rights of individuals and collectives today. They are: (1) globalisation through liberalisation and privatisation; (2) militarisation and war preparations; and (3) state terrorism and the criminalisation of dissent.

A right is not something that can be given or taken away by the authorities as they please. It is the very conditions of life that give rise to the demand for rights; it is the duty of the authority to ensure that rights are not violated. And when the authority fails to carry out this duty, then the people have the right to resist and not submit to such an authority. This was the modern definition of rights highlighted in the keynote address and became a running theme throughout the two-day conference.

Speaking on the subject of ‘Communism and the Inviolability of Rights’, Comrade Jasvir Singh pointed out that one of the major reasons why rights are being violated on such a broad scale today is the failure of the communist movement to consistently champion the inviolability of rights. The Soviet aggression on Afghanistan was justified on the basis of ideological reasons, thereby denying the right of the Afghan people to determine the shape of political power in their country. Conciliation with the positions of the social-imperialist Soviet Union has led some in the Indian communist movement to also conciliate with the chauvinist position of the Indian big bourgeoisie, including the notion that "fundamentalists" and "separatists" should be deprived of their rights in the name of defending national security. Such conciliation has brought disgrace, not credit, to the communist movement, he declared.

Comrade Jasvir Singh traced the history of the affirmation of rights from the time of the bourgeois democratic revolutions in Europe in the 18th and 19th centuries, and through the rise and fall of socialism in the 20th century. He drew the conclusion that the objective laws of capitalism are such that social differences will inevitably widen, as the rich grow richer and the poor grow poorer. The ruling bourgeoisie will inevitably suppress, not defend, let alone extend, the rights of the individuals and collectives in such a society that is based on the supremacy of private property over all those who work.

On the other hand, a socialist society is based on social property and the supremacy of human labour over all things. Such a society that leads to the narrowing and gradual elimination of social differences can affirm and extend the rights of all human beings. This is borne out by the positive experience of the Soviet Union until the mid 1950s. With the subsequent restoration of capitalism and emergence of social-imperialism, the Soviet state became an instrument for the suppression of rights. And this resulted in the ultimate collapse of the Soviet Union, he concluded.

The conference covered a wide range of rights, with separate sessions on (i) individual rights, including the right to conscience, political and civil liberties; (ii) rights of collectives such as workers, peasants, women and youth; (iii) rights of dalits and minorities, (iv) rights of nations, nationalities and tribal peoples within India and (v) rights of independent states in the international arena. Resolutions were passed in each session after vigorous discussion.

Speakers at this conference included Comrade Chain Singh Chain of Desh Bhagat Yaadgar Committee, Justice Ajit Singh Bains, Justice R. S. Narula, Professor Manoranjan Mohanty, Ajmer Singh Lakhowal of Bharati Kissan Union (Punjab), Dr. L. Pardesi Singh of the Committee on Human Rights (Manipur), former SC/ST Commissioner P. S. Krishnan, Chittarupa Palit of Narmada Bachao Andolan, Dr. Binayak Sen of Chattisgarh Mukti Morcha, Vijay of Adivasi Sangharsh Morcha, Govind Yadav of Modern Foods Employees Union, Geetha of Nirman Mazdoor Panchayat Union, journalists Kuldip Nayyar, Siddharth Varadarajan and Shivanand Kanavi, Ms. Tripta Vahi of Delhi University and many others. There were over 350 participants during the two days of deliberations.

This conference marks an important milestone in the work to build the political unity of the working class and all the oppressed, in preparation to become the real masters of India and shape her destiny.

Back to Table of Contents

March 8, International Women’s Day

Organise against injustice and for peace!

The dark clouds of war are hovering over our country and the entire subcontinent today, and an atmosphere loaded with tension threatens to engulf us all. Massive military mobilisation is going on at the Indo-Pakistan border and thousands of villagers have been forced to flee, leaving their homes and belongings behind. There are reports of rape of women and young girls by the military personnel in the border areas.

It is becoming amply clear that the Anglo American imperialists, as a part of their design to re-divide Asia and establish their hegemony over this region, are busy stoking up the tension in our subcontinent. On the one hand, hostilities between our two neighbouring countries are being encouraged in the name of "war against terrorism"; on the other hand, Blair, Powell and other imperialist chieftains are busy acting as "brokers of peace" and strengthening their interference in the region. The Indian government is working in close collaboration with the Anglo American imperialists, thus increasing the danger of imperialist intervention in this region, while we, the people of this region, are being asked to stand on the sidelines and silently watch the drama unfolding.

Today, in the name of "war on terrorism" and "national security", our rulers are trying to close down all those avenues for establishing peaceful and friendly relations with the people of Pakistan, that we have worked so hard to establish over the years. Using the events of December 13 as a pretext, hateful communal propaganda and communal attacks are being organised against people of Muslim faith and other minorities. Draconian laws like POTO are being imposed to stifle every form of political and economic dissent of the people. Our aspirations of living in peace within our own country and with our neighbouring peoples are being systematically shattered.

On the economic front, the working people are facing one attack after another in the name of the "free market" reforms that are being imposed on us. The policy of globalisation through liberalisation and privatisation has meant loss of jobs for millions of workers and working people, devastation for masses of peasants and loss of their means of livelihood for large numbers of small producers. Basic services such as transport, education and health are being handed over to the private Indian and foreign monopolies. Proper health care, education, etc. are rapidly going out of reach of the masses of working people.

Unemployment is on the rise. Through the dismantling of the Public Distribution System, food security of the working people is severely threatened. State subsidies in almost every sphere are being cut down, as the state absolves itself of all its responsibilities towards its citizens using the excuse that "it has no money". Meanwhile, lakhs of rupees continue to be spent every day on the military mobilisation.

Despite all these years of struggle, poverty, starvation and insecurity continue to be the lot of the majority of our toiling sisters and brothers. Our fate continues to be determined by a handful that constitutes the ruling elite and holds political power in its hands. All major decisions that affect the political and economic life of our people are taken by this ruling elite, while the masses of working people are completely marginalised and systematically deprived of all their political and economic rights.

For some years now, the women’s movement in our country has been engaged in the debate over whether reservation for women within the existing political system can empower women. Our experience with reservation for women at the panchayat level has shown us that despite this, the majority of women continue to be politically and economically marginalised. At the same time, the illusion is created in the women’s movement that empowerment can be achieved thorough reservation within the existing system. The bill for reservation of seats for women in Parliament has been stalled time and again, and for almost the whole of the last decade, the debate on this issue has blocked the further development and advance of the women’s movement.

We women have always been in the forefront of the struggle against every kind of injustice in society. In 1991, we came out in opposition to the economic reforms of the new economic policy, together with the organisations of workers and other working people. In 1993, in the midst of the frenzied communal hatred and violence following the destruction of the Babri Masjid, we raised our voice of protest against the communal attacks on the muslims and the rape of our muslim sisters. Earlier, in 1984, we opposed the massacre of the Sikhs in Delhi and elsewhere. We came out in large numbers to oppose the torture of innocents under TADA. We have consistently cried out against the killing of innocent people by the police and paramilitary forces in "encounter killings" in Kashmir, North-East and Andhra Pradesh and the rape and humiliation of our sisters there.

History is witness to the fact that women are the worst affected victims of fascism and war. That is why it becomes our imperative duty today, to stand up as one, against the fascist attacks on our people and against the danger of war, to oppose tooth-and-nail the threat to our livelihood and security through the economic reforms that are being imposed on us.

In order to be an effective fighting force, we women have to get organised around our own program, of building a new society where the rights of all will be guaranteed, where the economy will be organised to ensure the well-being of the masses, where no one will be deprived of her or his source of livelihood, where there will be no poverty, malnutrition or starvation, where our lives will not be devastated by terrorism or militarisation, where we shall live in peace and harmony, where there will no exploitation or oppression. To realise our dream of such a society, let us unite all our toiling sisters and brothers around this program and give a fitting reply to the attempts of the rulers to drown our struggles through fascism and war. This is the call of International Women’s Day!

Back to Table of Contents

Millions in Iran Rally Against U.S.

In his state of the union address on January 29, 2002, US imperialist chieftain Bush had described Iran, Iraq and North Korea as an "axis of evil", open to Anglo American imperialist attack. Ever since Bush designated Iran as "part of an international terrorist network" open to American attack, there has been a resurgence of disgust with the Anglo-Americans. The wide avenues and highways leading to Freedom Square in Tehran were jammed with hundreds of thousands of people. Iranian television reported that millions turned out across the country, showing pictures of jammed streets in every city. Marchers said they were more galvanized than in years past because they felt maligned by US imperialist chieftain Bush. They shouted, "Death to America!", "Death to Bush" and waved a variety of signs, including one in English saying, "The US cannot do a damn thing".

The popular Iranian revolution of 1979–80 overthrew the hated regime of the Shah, a staunch supporter of
US imperialism. This is one historical experience in the last few decades that the Anglo American imperialists have not been able to overcome. In his speech at the rally, Iranian President Khatami said, "Our policy is a policy of détente, …we intend to have ties and peaceful relations with all nations in the world, except Israel. "The American people," he said, "should ask today how much of the awful and terrifying incidents of Sept. 11 were due to terrorist acts, and how much of it was due to the foreign policy adopted by American officials…The threat to Iran originates from the fact that America, or at least some of its officials, see themselves as masters of the world," Mr. Khatami said. "Since they have power, they want to force the world to obey them and exert pressure on countries that disobey. Your revolution threatened America's illegitimate interests in the region, so it is obvious that you are the target of its animosity."

People’s Voice hails the determination of the Iranian people to defend their country against the Anglo-American imperialist threat. The brave Iranian people who overthrew the hated puppet Shah regime 23 years ago, have set an example to anti-imperialist and freedom loving peoples all over the world with their staunch defence of the rights nations to self-determination, and steadfast opposition to imperialist aggression in the name of fighting terrorism.

Back to Table of Contents

US imperialist belligerence against Iraq

Following the incidents of September 11, 2001, the Anglo-American imperialists have raised their self-righteous blasphemy to a crescendo. US chieftain Bush’s remarks that those who did not support his drive vociferously would be regarded as supporters of terrorism and attract the destructive wrath of the Anglo-American imperialists are only too well known. In their plans to force the re-division of Asia, the Anglo American imperialists have branded as "terrorist" and "rogue", all those who do not pay tribute to them. This includes countries like Cuba, Iraq, Iran, North Korea and others.

Iraq, for some years now, has been a thorn in the flesh of the US imperialists. When the present US chieftain's father was the President of the US, he had vowed to oust Saddam Hussein at the start of the Gulf War in 1990. Though that war was fought ferociously, it did not have the result that the senior Bush wanted. Said Powell, "with respect to Iraq, it has long been, for several years now, a policy of the United States government that regime change would be in the best interests of the region, the best interests of the Iraqi people and we are looking at a variety of options that would bring that about." In March 2002, US Vice-President Dick Cheney is scheduled to visit a number of countries that border Iraq, including Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Turkey. Cheney also plans to visit Britain, Egypt, Israel, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Qatar and Oman, in a bid to drum up support against Iraq.

The plans of the US imperialists also involve working through the United Nations to develop tighter but more "focused" sanctions against Iraq and demand that it allow nuclear inspectors unfettered access to the country, i.e. to be spied upon at will. They also include encouraging internal rebellions against the Iraqi leader's rule and the use of Anglo-American military power.

These dastardly plans must be opposed by all countries and peoples who respect human rights and sovereignty of nations. Surely, in a democratic world, it is the people of any country who ought to decide what type of political or economic system their country should have! To state so arrogantly as Powell did, that "(a) regime change would be in the best interests of the region, the best interests of the Iraqi people" is to disregard all norms of civilized behaviour between countries, and completely contrary to the aims of the United Nations charter. People’s Voice unequivocally denounces these reprehensible acts and plans of the Anglo-American imperialists and calls upon all peace-loving and democratic forces to do the same.

According to a Gallup poll, released on February 27 following a survey of nine Islamic countries, most people do not believe Arabs carried out the September 11, 2001 terrorist strike on the World Trade Center. The majority also are opposed to the US military invasion of Afghanistan. The poll also revealed that the majority of people in these countries disapproved of the terrorist strike in New York, just like people of other countries.

Respondents overwhelmingly described the US as "ruthless, aggressive, conceited, arrogant, easily provoked, biased", said Frank Newport, Gallup editor-in-chief. "The people of Islamic countries have significant grievances with the West in general and with the United States in particular", he concluded. The poll was conducted in Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey.

Only 9% supported the US action against Afghanistan, with the maximum opposition in Morocco, Indonesia and Pakistan.

Just 7% say that Western Countries are fair in their perception of Islamic countries. People in Pakistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia were the most vehement opponents of the US "war against terrorism".

Back to Table of Contents