COMMUNIQUÉ #04

Communiqué is a radical left-wing broadsheet published by the Inter-national Socialist Group | Scotland (ISG). The ISG is a new anti-capitalist group of activists who are anti-cuts, anti-war, pro-independence and for left unity and renewal. To get involved tweet @isgscotland or email isg@internationalsocialist.org.uk.

For membership enquires phone/text Jenna on 07972345940, for student enquires Lucky on 07778686145, for trade unions and website/broadsheet enquires phone Ben on 07805590391.IS Magazine, 111 Union Street, Glasgow

Egypt, Palestine and

indep e n d e n c eCommuniqué spoke to Mahmoud Mahdy, a participant in the Egyptian revolution in Tahrir

Square and a pro-Palestinian activist in Scotland, about the role of Egypt in the recent Israeli

bombing of Gaza.

What does the Palestinian struggle mean for Egyptians?

MM: My view is the road to Palestinian libera-tion runs through Cairo– but also the road to Egyptian liberation runs through Jerusalem. First it is to do with the Arab political state system. The system is built to divide the Arab world so that America maintains hegemony in the region. Israel is America’s watchdog in the Middle-East. Therefore the struggle of Palestine is essential to the political struggle of all Arabs, but especially Egyptians who border Gaza and are a key state in the region. In Egypt we don’t see Palestine as a separate entity; we see it as the front-line to what is happening in Cairo because our whole history is shaped by it. The second is about Arab identity, but most specifi cally Egyptian identity. Egyp-tian nationalism is quite a weak identity in its own right, its amorphous, very shallow - in itself, it has only defended America. A more revolutionary identity is Arab unity. This was seen in the Second Intifada: in Palestine itself only 5% were involved in that struggle, it ended in a very bad compromise, but in Egypt it set off a whole movement across the country that laid the groundwork’s for the Egyptian revolution. So Palestine is central to Egyp-tians not so much because of language or

ethnicity, but because of the history and consequent identity of the Arab world. This has forged the struggle of the Palestinians together.

What do you think about the role of the Muslim Brotherhood - the new government in Egypt - in the recent Israeli bombardment of Gaza?

MM: Their response is a good case study of the contradiction inherent in Islamist ideol-ogy. On the one hand the Egyptian Prime Minister, Hesham Qadil, visited Gaza and made a strong speech in defence of Hamas and in defence of the idea of a Palestinian State. So that is a much stronger stance than the complicity of Mubarak inthe Israeli occupation. On the otherhand, the Egyptian President, Mohammed Morsi, has been very cautious, very diplomatic - seeking to posi-tion himself as a go-between that can help induce a ceasefi re. Morsi’s stance is diff erent because he is attempting to show the West that he is mature and sensible, not going to do anything too radical to challenge Israel, whereas Qandil’s speech is aimed at keep-ing the Muslim Brotherhood’s base happy. It is important to understand that the Muslim Brotherhood were previously at the vangaurd of the anti-imperialist strug-

gle in Egypt. They organised thousands in the streets against Israel over the Lebanon war, and committed to sending thousands of fi ghters to help Hezbollah in the war with Israel. So in power they have becomemore cautious. The Brotherhood’s strategy is to try and break from the imperialist orbit by reinventing the Egyptian state as an Islamist state. This is contradictory as their ideology commits to an Islamist state beyond Egyp-tian borders, and their gradualism comes into contradiction with the rapid violence of the US and Israel as they attempt to maintain control.

What should we do in Scotland to support the Palestinian struggle and the wider revolution-ary process in the Arab world?

MM: You have to ask what does Britain mean? Britain still plays a key role in defend-ing imperial control around the globe, it is the key ally of America and is a loyal support er of Western intervention in every country, its arms industry and position in the world isdependent upon it. But there is something else: Britain’s colonial past has left scars that have not disappeared in the Arab world. It was not so long ago

Egypt was a colony of Britain. So in that sense independence makes sense as the most direct strategy for breaking up the British state. If it is a blow toAmerica that can only be a good thing. Breaking a state that pioneered Israel can only be a good thing. Also, Alex Salmond has said previ-ously that you can’t treat Israel like a normal state. However, it’s clear that the national-ists are moving to the right on this question, most explicitly seen in the SNP’s recent turn to supporting NATO. So that shows you thecontradictions in the movement, but also the possibilities to take on an argument that a Scottish state could have an ethical policytowards Palestine. So we should do two things: fi ght for independence to break up Britain and pressure the Scottish Govern-ment to take a unique position in the West-ern world and that’s to speak out against Israel.

Mahmoud Mahdy is a member of the International Socialist Group in Glasgow.

corglasgow @corglasgow sdsconference.nationbuilder.com

weareallhanashalabi

B R O A D S H E E T B L O G

CAMP A IG N S

COALITION OF RESISTANCEis a national campaign to stop the Con-Dem cuts. It hosts regular student, union, and

community activist forums in Glasgow.

radicalindependence

RADICAL INDEPENDENCEis initiating a conference of left-wing supporters of independence in November, we are

backing this.

STUDENTS FOR A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY is a student campaign to challenge pro-market ideas in higher and further

education, initiated by anti-cuts activists.

WE ARE ALL HANA SHALABI is a campaign initiated in Scotland to provide global solidarity to the Palestinian prisoner hunger strikes

movement.

@Radical_Indy @weareallhana

Name ............................................................................................................................................

Telephone ...................................................................................................................................

Email .............................................................................................................................................

Address ........................................................................................................................................

.................................................... Postcode .................................................................................

Do you have any skills that would be useful to ISG?

.........................................................................................................................................................

JOIN THE

INTERNATIONAL SOCIALIST GROUPNEW SCOTLAND, NEW LEFT?

COMMUNIQUÉ #04 2

The Left -Why Independence?

James Nesbitt

AFTER YEARS OF LURKING ON THE HORIZON, the independence debate is now at the heart of Scottish political life. Left-wing orthodoxy once held that it was immaterial, a distraction from the class struggle, there was no mass movement to prove it was an issue to be taken seriously. Even to supporters of self-determination, it sometimes looked like an abstract part of the program. In the last few years that has all changed. The ‘National Question’ is now sharply posed and dominates discourse. So much so, I’m almost sick of talking about it with taxi drivers and family friends. Almost. Everyone is talking about it - the question for us is how can we intervene to bring about radical social change. Ignore #indyref at your political peril. As always, ideas are lagging behind facts. For some comrades, all this stuff is nothing but nationalism, anathema to our sort. I’m keen to change their minds, because they risk missing out on a once-in-a-genera-tion opportunity. We are in unique circumstances, caused by global factors. In 21st century Europe, commentators and lawmakers agree that the Welfare State has got to go. It’s uncompetitive, and the rich are fed up with all these bloody taxes. When the fi nancial crash happened in 2008, Friedmanite witch-doctors were on hand to prescribe a hefty dose of austerity. Governments swallowed it, with side-eff ects of mass unemployment and rising inequality. Many forms of resistance have since emerged, some of which threaten not only to stop the cuts, but to call into question the very system that necessitates them. 2014 provides a realistic possibility of forming a new Green state, based on public ownership and citizens’ welfare. It would be a nightmare for the ruling class, and a source of hope for the 99%. Contrary to Brit press stereotyp-ing, Scotland’s movement for independence doesn’t run on Braveheart sentimentalism. Up here, it’s understood that the SNP won a crushing majority by occupying the Social-Democratic ground abandoned by New La-bour. It was a muddled process. People knew they were voting for the party of separatism, and they did so as a means to protect public services. Somewhere along the line, breaking up Britain became a viable means to halt the neoliberal avalanche. All that was won in the post-war pe-riod is now under threat. We would be better placed to push back this reactionary tide with an independent Scottish parliament, as most of Scotland’s progressive forces recognise. This is nothing to do with Scots bearing some inherent radicalism, but rather an honest ap-praisal of the situation we’re in. Politics and economics have led us here. We all complain about the Tory dictator-ships of the last 50 years, and rightly so. The country was decimated by right-wing fun-damentalists who no-one voted for (bar the occasional pariah). Even when Labour were elected, they rarely live up to the promise

of a people’s party. It should not come as a surprise that so many people are fed up with the status quo and looking for new avenues of people power. In the globalised economy, it’s become more cost-eff ective for capitalists to get things made in Asia. As Britain’s economy transformed into a fi nance hub, power and wealth fl owed to the Tory heartlands of the Home Counties. A new Westminster consen-sus emerged, demanding the shutdown of industry and privatisation of public services. The country became a banksters’ paradise, while millions faced declining wages and pre-carious conditions in the expanded service sector. A recent headline in the The Econo-mist ran: “Economically, socially and politi-cally, the north is becoming another country”. In Scotland, there is no “becoming” about it. Quite simply the material basis which bound the British state has gone. As a result, the component entities are diverging at such a pace as to make divorce the only healthy option. Independence off ers an opportunity to escape the clutches of the City of London and its Conservative hirelings. Hammering that home is the way to win the referendum and protect public services. Unanimity never exists on a national scale, but Scottish opinion is close to it in opposing Trident nukes, free-market funda-mentalism and the bogus ‘War On Terror’. The country cries out for re-industrialisation and the development of renewable energy. Experts are clear that immigration is the only thing that can save us from a demographic timebomb. Looking at devolution as an indicator, there are clear principles in favour of free education, an NHS which protects the vulnerable, and an end to bigotry. A new Scottish state would be a more eff ective means to implement progressive policy. People make their own history but not in conditions of their own choosing. Those who think another world is possible must answer whether another country is nec-essary. Ultra-left attempts to ignore the whole thing would cause exile from meaningful political life. Nor does preserving the decay-ing carcass of “the world’s greatest empire” represent a workable option. We cannot shirk our responsibilities. Exciting opportunities are opening up before us. Join the fi ght for an independent Scotland today - and do it quite honestly as a socialist who sees it as not the end, but the means to that end.

James Nesbitt is a member of the International Socialist Group in Glasgow @James__Nesbitt

COMMUNIQUÉ #04 3

T H E S N P L A C K T H EC O U R A G E T O T A K E O NT H E H E G E M O N I CD I S C O U R S E

The SNP’s switch at their recent conference to supporting Nato shows their intent: ‘we need re-spectability on the world stage, many of our neigh-bouring countries are in Nato, we have to show we are a good neighbour that will stand with them’. These were the arguments from the conference fl oor from Angus Robertson, SNP defense spokesman, and oth-ers in their limp conviction of the policy shift. Respect-ability is the watchword, Angus argues, because it is necessary to win independence: “Do not kid yourself. The most the SNP has achieved is 44% of the vote. If we are to achieve 50% in the referendum we must listen to the Scottish peo-ple.” There are two things wrong with this. Firstly, Angus clearly thinks that winning the referendum sim-ply means convincing over 50% of Scots that the SNP is good and therefore independence will be good too. This is an extremely fl awed strategy. Independence will only be achieved if the idea that independence = SNP is completely dispelled in place of independence = an opportunity for social change. That is what will convince people to vote yes – in the belief that they will have the option of what political party they want, but it will be in the context of a far more progressive agenda than is currently plausible from Westminster. The second thing is the idea that ‘listening to the Scottish people’ entails looking at Scotsman opin-ion polls and doing as they say. The opinion polls are fl awed, conducted in such a way as to produce the desired result. But more importantly, what people be-lieve is largely determined by the political discourse on off er. Shift the discourse, shift the values. One example will suffi ce: most people think that the biggest cheats of the public purse are ben-efi ts scroungers. But if a major political party clearly articulated the amount of money avoided in tax by the

super-rich, then there is little reason why there views wouldn’t change. If the SNP think a catch-all populism will suf-fi ce to win the referendum they are very much wrong. And if they tell you that will suffi ce to create a just society they are taking you for a ride. Sometimes you need to speak the truth very simply and clearly. If Gaza looks like a massacre, sounds like a massacre and feels like a massacre, it probably is a massacre. If the SNP look like they are abandoning their political principles, they sound like they are abandoning their political principles, then they probably are abandoning their political princi-ples. And such things don’t return just because you achieve an independent Scotland – once you accept you have to follow the hegemonic political discourse, you never look back. Just ask the Labour Party. It’s possible to win an independent Scotland and do it by challenging the sort of world we live in.

S H O U L D T H E L E F T C A R E

A B O U T E L E C T I O N S ?

David Jamieson

THERE HAVE BEEN FEW PERIODS IN HISTORY in which rule by Parliament has been so discredited. In Britain the Westminster establishment has been battered by wave after wave of crisis and scandals of which the discovery of an elite paedophile ring, which could well have been shel-tered and possibly staff ed by Thatchers No.10, is only the latest. The British Parliament is not corrupt by accident - it merely re-fl ects the nature of the state from which it draws its authority. Parliament is an unjust way to govern society and it cannot and will not address the problems with which ordinary people are beset. Why then would the left be involved in Parliamentary politics? Is it not the case that involvement in the establishment political process can corrupt the socialist project? Is that not born out by the history of left involvement in elections, from traditional Social Democracy to more recent left challenges? The huge Labour type parties, which dominated left politics in Europe for most of the twentieth century experienced periods of radical rhetoric and at times achieved signifi cant reforms for ordinary people. But today they are completely expunged of progressive motivation and have lost much of their working class support. Undoubtedly, a major weakness of these parties was a desire to draw the workers move-ment into a sole focus on achieving change through the parliamentary arena and adjusting their policies to acquire and maintain parliamentary power. Recent attempts to fi ll the growing void to the left of Social Democracy have been a mixture of success and failure - but recent local surges on the continent, most notably the French Left Front (Front de Gauche) and the Greek Coalition of the Radical Left (Syriza) show that the momentum behind united left electoral forces is still growing and developing a new sophistication. Failure might prove the mother of success for this new radical left. Each failed project, which often progressed at a rapid pace under hectic circumstances, can teach us lessons for the present and future. We cannot, even under the most intense pressure, trade one part of our program for another - this must be one of the lessons to draw from the 2006 collapse of Communist Refoundation (Partito Comunista Refon-dazione) after its support for Italy’s involvement in the occupation of Af-ghanistan. We know that the refusal of unity on points of abstract ideo-logical diff erence, rather than unity over short to medium term struggles will only lead to calamity - and we know this well after the Failure of the New anti-capitalist party (Nuvo Parti Anticapitaliste) which refused to join the Left Front. And why risk all the diffi culties that evidently accompany an electoral project? Whether we like it or not in a country like Scotland where the Parliamentary format of governance has existed for centuries, it has become the major focus of political and ideological life. There can be no serious strategy for achieving fundamental change that does not involve parliamentary action. The Scottish Parliament already has more representative regional seats that have been won by the SSP in recent years, and there is a possibility of gaining more with the establishment of full powers. Winning seats gives us exposure for our ideas and puts cred-ible faces to those ideas. It allows us to raise the suff ering and resist-ance of ordinary people and expose the crimes of our rulers. Apart from anything else, it gives incentive for the left to unite. The left in Scotland is steadily recovering from the diffi culties of recent years, we need to look to the future, and that future should include a left electoral chal-lenge.

Lucky Dhillon is student organiser for the International Socialist Group in Glasgow. @LuckyLDhillon

Lucky Dhillon

David Jamieson is an activist in the International Socialist Group.

Gaza is being massacred. The world knows it, but in our increasing quest to replicate George Orwell’s vision of the future of capitalism, all the important institutions in the world seem to be saying the opposite. ‘It’s not Gaza that’s being massacred, it’s Israelis that are being threatened by Hamas rockets, and only if that stops can we then ask Israel to stop killing in Gaza’, say the Middle-East Peace Envoy Tony Blair. There’s a deep sickness in the world when those who run it can look at reality and says the op-posite, and those who are appointed to achieve peace have been the most visceral in advocating war. Israel’s occupation of Palestine appears to be something that cannot be spo-ken about in the media or by governments. The most progressive comment you can get from politicians is ‘stop the bombing on both sides – we condemn both Hamas and Israel’. That was Humza Yousaf’s response on behalf of the Scottish Government to the ongoing crisis in Gaza. No context of occupation, illegal blockades, settlements from a state that has broke more UN resolutions than any other in history. No, simply ‘plague on both your houses’. Such a statement at a time of a massacre in Gaza brings shame to Scotland. It should lead us to ask some very profound questions about the party that is making them.

?RISE OF THE LEFT IN EUROPE

FRONT DE GAUCHE IN FRANCE:POLLED 11.10% IN 2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS

RED-GREEN ALLIANCE IN DENMARK:VOTES IN 1990 - 54,038VOTES IN 2011 - 236,860

SYRIZA IN GREECE:VOTES IN 2012 - 1,655,053 EQUATING TO 27% OF THE VOTE

LEFT BLOC IN PORTUGAL:VOTES IN 1999 - 132,333VOTES IN 2011 - 288,923

DIE LINKE IN GERMANY:MEMBERS - 70,000SHARE OF VOTES IN 2009 - 11.9%