|
||
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
||
|
|
Issue No. 158 | 25 October 2002 |
|
||
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Sirens' Song
Interview: The Wet One Bad Boss: Like A Bastard Unions: Demolition Derby Corporate: The Bush Doctrine Politics: American Jihad Health: Secret Country Review: Walking On Water Culture: TCF Poetry: The UQ Stonewall
The Soapbox Postcard Month In Review The Locker Room Bosswatch Wobbly
 Heaps of Bali FeedbackBrooklyn Phil Says ...Here Comes the WTOFrom Little Finks ...The Mouth From the South!Ushering the Rusted ShieldEchoes of DLP
|
|
|
Letters to the Editor Heaps of Bali Feedback
Dear Comrades, Peter Lewis' editorial in the latest Workers Online (No 157) commendably tries to take a step back from the Bali Bombing and argue against a blind anti-Islamic rage. In doing so, however, it falls into the almost equally dangerous trap of formulating a half-apology for the bombers. This deeply unsatisfactory response is the product of seeing the world primarily in national categories - and an ignorance of the dark undercurrents of elite Indonesian politics. The most credible theory so far in circulation is that the bomb was placed by Islamic fundamentalists. These people, small minorities in the diverse spectrum of the Muslim world, are vile reactionaries in their own right. The bombing is proof enough in itself, not considering any other arguments. In all countries where they operate, they wage war on their own societies even more than on the West. Their self-contradictory aim is to take Muslim countries back to the social relationships of the 7th Century and forward to a 21st Century economy - at the same time. They are deadly enemies of labour movements across the Middle East & in other Muslim countries. Their murders of trade unionists in Algeria, for example, are surpassed only by those of Colombia's death squad "democracy". Supporting Dubya's "War on Terror", however, is the very WORST response that can be made to fundamentalist terrorism. Most obviously, it can only drive untold millions of Moslems into the arms of fundamentalism, for there is no better recruiting agent for hatred & violence than the US military rampaging all over the Middle East. There are, however, other and more subtle reasons, including ones specific to Indonesia. Firstly, successive governments of the United States are responsible for the rise of Islamic fundamentalism in the first place - and not only through the means mentioned above. For over 50 years, the US has backed reactionary Islamist movements across the Muslim world in order to combat their enemies, be they Left-wing popular movements, secular nationalist generals or brain-dead Soviet puppets. Osama bin Laden himself learnt his bloody trade in a CIA-funded terrorism school, created to train warriors for Uncle Sam's side of the Afghan War of the 1980s. The US government has no principled objection to fundamentalist terrorism. It merely requires that the violence be directed against US-approved targets. Secondly, the role & nature of Islamic fundamentalism in Indonesia are far more complex than most people imagine. Elite players in Indonesian politics often take the role of the dalang, the puppet master of the Javanese shadow play. Traditionally, the puppet master controls everything, but is never seen. The Indonesian military, long-time allies of the United States government, have a lengthy track record of manipulating other forces, first supporting them against a current rival and then dropping them when their aim is achieved. Since the fall of the Suharto dictatorship, the Indonesian military have been sponsoring Islamic fundamentalist groups, in an attempt to destabilise the civilian government & prepare the way for a coup. The fundamentalists are the sworn enemies of the Left & the independent labour movement in Indonesia, as well as the West Papuan independence movement. There is a curious link to the Bali Bombing in that, barely hours before the blast, Laskar J! ihad announced that it was disbanding. Laskar Jihad is a private army of Moslems, backed by elements within the Indonesian military, which had been waging a murderous war against Christians in West Papua & Eastern Indonesia. The announcement was sudden & unexpected and progressive circles in Jakarta are certain that the timing was no co-incidence. Some people in Australia are raising fears of a fundamentalist regime taking control of Indonesia and then setting its sights on its neighbours. These people are ignorant of a basic fact in Indonesia - or perhaps merely relying on the ignorance of their audience. The basic fact which is relevant here is that Islam in Indonesia is split virtually 50/50 between two very different groups. One group is the Santri, who are followers of a version of Islam similar to those in Arab countries. The other group is the Abingan, whose beliefs are a mixture of Islam, Hinduism (the main religion of Java before the arrival of Islam) and the pre-Hindu Javanese animism. Bringing Islam to centre of politics in Indonesia would set off an explosive conflict between the rival branches of Islam and probably lead to a civil war. It would drastically weaken, not strengthen, Indonesia, a fact known to all since the emergence of the Indonesian independence movement in the 1920s. For this reason, the Indonesian military and other nationalist forces there have been determined to keep doctrinal matters out of politics in order to preserve the unity of the country. In these circumstances, it is a measure of the desperation of the military that elements within it are taking this course. While Islamic fundamentalists may come in handy in destabilising the civilian government of Megawati, the military are playing with fire. The Islamists are not like previous puppets. There can be no guarantee that, having let them loose, the Indonesian military would be successful in curbing them when they had served their purpose. In this context, the announcement of the disbandment of Laskar Jihad, if it suggests a connection between the Bali Bombing & the Indonesian military, also suggests that the military have not entirely lost their sanity. The dalang, perhaps, does not want his theatre burnt down. The working class must wage its own War on Terror. Our enemies are those who park their bombs outside nightclubs and also those who drop them from 30 thousand feet. They are those who would bomb societies back to the Middle Ages and those who would bomb whole countries back into the Stone Age. They are those who would achieve political domination through violence and those who, already having domination on a global scale, threaten nuclear Armageddon to any who dare challenge them. We do not have to choose - it is the one struggle. Further, we will wage our war in the same way we have waged war on poverty and oppression for over 150 years, through building & strengthening the labour movement around the world. It is through workers organising as a class, through learning the lesson that an injury to one is an injury to all, and through practising solidarity regardless or colour or creed, that we can defeat both the corporate exploiters of global capital and the purveyors of hatred & intolerance of any variety. From Campbelltown to Cairo, our message is the same. WORKERS OF THE WORLD, UNITE! Greg Platt ************************ Just wanted to say that i really appreciated and thought that Peter Lewis's open introduction letter addressing the tragic occurence in Bali made a lot of sense and was worldly compassionate. We need to look at the events that are occuring around the world with "eyes wide open", there can be no room for slanging off different cultures and without evidence ~ which can create false cultural/religious blaming. We are all human, and need to respect and appreciate each other for all our differences and view points. We cannot afford to fall into simplistic modes of "good guy's" versus "bad guy's", life is bigger and better than that. Lets all strive to live in harmony and remember the bigger picture, i.e. life is short and we are dead for a long time. Carmel Delprat ***************** Dear Peter, Many thanks for this clear statement of what really needs to be said. The hype this week has made feelings of compassion ever more necessary, for all the situations you identify. I have attempted something like this with my first year uni students who also look for other sources In support Suzanne Dr Suzanne Franzway Senior Lecturer in Gender Studies/Sociology Research Centre for Gender Studies **************** I read your editorial for the 18th October 2002, and I believe there were some worthy points. Certainly, "border protection" is largely a false messiah. Terrorists do not come in boats. Border protection simply means that refugees will be forced to apply for asylum off shore. This will not stop terrorists stepping off planes. You are correct in saying we should not turn our backs on our developing neighbours. We should be proactive in assisting the necessary process of capital accumulation. "Putting up the barricades" is not a solution. But then I think your message becomes somewhat confused. Are you suggesting that Al-Qaeda are reflecting the opinions of the world's poor? It appears that this is where you are heading, especially as the paragraph regarding how we ought to be "focussed on looking at the world from other nation's perspectives" (ie the "outsiders"), is followed by the reminder that the "response to mindless terror is not to dismiss the murderers as heartless aliens whose fanaticism alone and of itself explains their inexcusable actions". It is time for a reality check. The prevailing Leftist theory is that poverty causes terrorism, and if you solve poverty, terrorism will simply fade away. This is not true. The vast majority of the S11 bombers were comfortable Saudis who were never "oppressed" in any way. They were fanatical criminals. They were not the victims of "Zionism" or any other imagined evils. A Palestinian with no opportunities is one thing, but a rich Arab who hates Western Civilisation despite indirectly benefiting from it is another. Do not ever confuse the two, especially as the Arab countries have worse human rights records on their own people AND on Palestinians, than the Israelis. Terrorism has very little to do with the world's oppressed. It tends to occur do to the efforts of well-organised, well-financed upper-middle class misfits with too much time on their hands. The Italian Red Brigades, the Black Panthers, Lenin, Pol Pot, the Ku Klux Klan, Al-Qaeda, the list goes on. Terrorists who target civilians rather than the apparent columns of power are not victims. The various quislings in Australia who seek comfort in fanatical ideologies and who hate the very civilisation that has given them their opportunities tend to be the sanctimonious arts graduates from our declining universities, who have not known despair at any stage of their cushy lives. The leaders of Communist Parties, fanatical religious cults, and others, are in it for power and money. They are the ones which have killed so many millions of people in the last 100 years, and yet they so rarely are "victims" themselves. Hence "Leninism", an ideology which effectively admits that the working class does not agree with Communism, but calls for a vanguard party to attack the pillars of the state on behalf of "workers" anyway. The Left-Liberal line on Terror has been gutless. No amount of national soul-searching will halt the spread of the Islamo-fascists who will bring down Western Civilisation given the opporunity. They are already smashing up cafes, pool parlours and video game arcades in Indonesia, right on our doorstep. It is without question that a number of Muslims (even in Australia), however small, sympathise with the objectives of Al-Qaeda. These people are not people that need "understanding", nor do they have anything to do with the "underprivileged". They are criminal neo-fascists who hate women, hate queers, hate unions and hate freedom. Their economic management credentials have been on display in Iran and Afghanistan for some time. Needless to say, they are as incompetent as they are malevolent. I would hope the union movement would see merit in defending the civilisation that gave birth to it. It certainly does not make sense approaching the enemies of progress in the same equivocal manner that we did in 1938. Yours Sincerely, Steve Edwards Perth, WA.
|
| Search All Issues | Latest Issue | Previous Issues | Print Latest Issue |
|
© 1999-2002 Workers Online 
|
|
