Hands off the Solomons!

Most of the media coverage of recent events in the Solomon Islands has focused on the sensational details of riot and disorder: burning buildings, beaten-up cops, and looted shops have all been paraded across our screens. Explanations of the reasons for the riots in Honiara have been hard to find. Some commentators like Russell Brown have resorted to racist stereotypes of an uncontrollable 'communalist' people; others like the NZ Herald's Audrey Young have ventured the slightly more sophisticated opinion that the riots were caused by resentment of Chinese and Taiwanese interference in Solomons politics

It's about imperialism

Missing from the mainstream media has been any sort of account of the role that the United States, Britain and their South Pacific deputy sheriffs Australia and New Zealand, have played in creating and maintaining the manifold problems of Solomon Islands society. The Regional Assistance Mission to the Solomon Islands (RAMSI) has faced various criticisms of its handling of the riots, but no one has suggested that the Mission and the regional powers that back it are part of the Solomons' problems, not their solution.

When mainly Australian and New Zealand troops occupied the Solomons under the banner of RAMSI in 2003 the country was in the grip of a crisis that had been manufactured in the offices of the International Monetary Fund. Under pressure from the Australian and New Zealand governments, the Solomons government had implemented IMF 'reforms' that devastated its economy and profoundly destabilised its society.

After gaining independence from Britain in 1977, the Solomons found itself with a primitive infrastructure and an economy fashioned by the selfishness of colonialism that preferred plunder to sustainable economic development. Always heavily dependent on the prices it could get for exports of its raw materials, in particular timber and gold, the Solomons economy took a big hit when the 'Asian flu' of 1997 led to a drop in demand in its key export markets. In 1998 alone, the GDP of the country declined by 10%.

Pressured by Britain, Australia, and the US, the government of Bartholomew Ulufa'alu responded by implementing a programme of drastic economic 'reforms' drawn up by the International Monetary Fund. The country's currency was devalued by 20%, and hundreds of public employees were sacked. Conflict between the country's different ethnic groups followed, and at the beginning of 2000 a coup put Ulufa'alu into 'protective custody'. Continuing violence left the country's economy in ruins.

Instead of admitting the role that IMF policies had played in the collapse of the Solomons, the Howard government in Canberra used the chaos in its neighbour to demand even more brutal 'reforms' as the price of humanitarian aid. In November 2002 the government of Sir Allan Kemakeza began a new programme of spending and job cuts, sacking a third of public sector employees. Even worse, Kemakeza was forced to cede control of his government's Finance Ministry to Lloyd Powell, the Australian head of a New Zealand-based multinational company called Solomon Leonard. At a conference held in Honiara in June 2002, the IMF had demanded Powell's appointment as Permanent Secretary of Finance as the price of any new financial aid to the Solomons.

The second round of IMF reforms had predictable consequences. Even rudimentary health and education services collapsed in the slums of Honiara and in the provinces; power blackouts became frequent even in the capital; law and order broke down as police and judges went unpaid; and competition for scarce government funds renewed conflict between ethnic groups.


Howard rides in as US deputy sheriff


By the middle of 2003 it was clear that the reform of the Solomons economy by imperialism could only take place at gunpoint. The Howard government had become the US's most loyal ally in the Asia-Pacific region, having just participated in the invasion of Iraq. Proclaiming the Solomons a 'failed state' that like Iraq could become a base for terrorists and the cause of regional instability, Australia organised a force of 2,500 troops to occupy the country.

The real reason for the invasion was two-fold. In the first place, Australia and New Zealand feared that the chaos in the Solomons could damage their own economies, by ruining the many Australian companies that do business in the islands. In the second place, the Howard government's masters in Washington had become alarmed that the government of the Solomons might turn either to China or to France for aid money and help restoring security. With colonies in New Caledonia and French Polynesia, France still maintains a strong presence in the Pacific, and early in 2003 it had offered military aid to the Solomons government. Neither the US nor Australia wanted to see an expansion of French influence in an region they considered their own backyard. After the formation of RAMSI was announced in July 2003 the French offered troops for the force, but were brusquely turned down by Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer.

With its economy booming, China is seeking energetically to expand its influence in the Pacific. The country's drive to build trade and diplomatic ties has become particularly urgent since the government of Taiwan began using 'chequebook diplomacy' to bribe small countries with votes in the UN and similar international bodies to recognise the government in Taipei rather than the government in Beijing. With its view of China as an emerging rival superpower and potential medium-term military foe, the Bush government was concerned by the possibility of increased Chinese involvement in the Solomons. 

NZ follows as the Deputy's Dog

The government of New Zealand had extra reasons of its own for involving itself in the occupation of the Solomons. After tacking away from Australia and the US by siding with France and China over the invasion of Iraq, the Clark government was desperate to assuage anger in Canberra and Washington by proving that it could 'play ball' in the South Pacific. In addition to making up with its old allies, the Labour government believed that it could moderate the unilateralist tendencies of Australia and the US. Clark and her Foreign Minister Phil Goff trumpeted the multinational makeup of RAMSI and the consent of the Kemakeza government to RAMSI's intervention as triumphs of multinationalism over the 'Iraq approach'. In reality, the RAMSI force was dominated by Australia, and the Kemakeza government had already been stripped of most of its ability to make independent decisions. The Australian government treated the vote of the Solomons' parliament as a fait accompli: it had dispatched some 2,000 troops to Honiara before the vote had even been taken.

In the two and three quarter years it has occupied the Solomons the RAMSI force has made it abundantly clear that it acts on behalf of the Pacific's big states and international capital, not on behalf of the people of the Solomons. Like the army occupying Iraq, RAMSI's soldiers are exempted from prosecution or even investigation under Solomons law. They have authority over the Solomons' own police force. Soon after landing in the Solomons RAMSI had begun making sweeping arrests - by the anniversary of the occupation it had detained 700 people, most of whom had not faced any sort of trial. In August 2004 eighty prisoners of RAMSI staged a rebellion at Rove Prison in Honiara. After breaking out of their cells and overpowering guards, the prisoners shouted slogans condemning their inhuman treatment'. Most had been held in solitary confinement for a year. Despite the protest, hundreds of people are still detained without trial in the Solomons.

RAMSI has also felt free to intimidate the population of the Solomons and over-rule the country's government whenever it has felt the interests of international capital have been threatened. In March 2004, for instance, the Solomons' remaining public sector workers voted to stage a national strike to demand a pay rise. In an effort to avert a strike, the Solomons government announced a meagre increase of 2.5%. RAMSI's response was swift: the head of the Solomon Islands Public Employees Union was summoned by RAMSI staff to the Australian embassy, where he was warned that he was 'destabilising' the country. Shortly afterwards a RAMSI representative handed the same union leader a written warning that if he did not revoke the pay claim Australian aid to the Solomons would be suspended. Eventually the union capitulated.

Riots legacy of imperialism 

The riots that have destroyed large parts of Honiara in the past week can only be understood against the backdrop of the history of imperialism's exploitation of the Solomons. The underdevelopment left by British colonialism has been exacerbated by brutal IMF policies which Australia and New Zealand have shown themselves prepared to implement at the point of a gun.

The rioters have accused Taiwanese and Chinese businessmen and diplomats of interfering with the electoral process by bribing key politicians, and condemned the new Prime Minister Snyder Rini as corrupt. But it is imperialism and RAMSI's occupation of the Solomons which has created the environment for such corruption. The arbitrary, arrogant, and self-interested behaviour of RAMSI has created an atmosphere in which corruption can flourish. IMF policies and RAMSI occupation have greatly weakened the institutions of the Solomons state and cowed the trade unions, which might have acted as watchdogs against corruption. The Chinese and Taiwanese dealmakers and chequebook diplomats have stepped into the economic vacuum created by the failure of IMF policies and Australasian businesses to deliver prosperity.

The Australian and New Zealand governments have responded to the riots in Honiara by sending more troops to prop up RAMSI. Alexander Downer expressed the contempt of the Howard government and RAMSI for the sovereignty of the Solomons when he said last week that:

“The situation there is inherently unstable and our police will have to remain there for a long time to come and we will have to be prepared from time to time to send in military reinforcements if it's necessary just as it is at the moment.”

Campaign for Australian and New Zealand forces to be withdrawn from the Solomons just as we call for their immediate withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan.

From Class Struggle 66 April/May 2006

PACIFIC: Tongan Workers’ Struggle

The fight of Tongan public employees is the advance guard of a popular movement for democracy in Tonga. Tonga has had a Feudal style monarchy since it came under British protection in the mid 19th century. Today the monarchy has adapted to capitalism by forming a capitalist class exploiting workers and peasants. The huge and growing gap between the rich capitalist class and poverty stricken masses is what has led to the growing discontent and anger of the current industrial dispute. At stake here however is not only the struggle for democracy, but also the struggle for socialism.

Tonga’s traditional society was a lineage mode of production in transition to a tributary mode. The chiefs, who ruled the whole community, were in the process of becoming a ruling class along the lines of Hawaii. The arrival of the missionaries added impetus to this process, changing the rank system in the tributary mode of production into a feudal –style monarchy with nobles acting as local agents of an international capitalist class.

International capital has a profound influence on Tonga, through the governments of Australia, New Zealand, and the United States. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank institutions impose imperialism in the region.

If we want to understand why the strike lasted so long, and was fought so bitterly, we must look not at the greed and recalcitrance of the King, but at the shadow of imperialism that hangs over Tonga. The fact is that, whatever the King's attitude was toward the strikers, the ability of his government to accede to their demands was and will remain severely limited, by outside control of the Tongan economy.

Australia used this year's Pacific forum to insist that future economic aid to small island states like Tonga would be tied to the 'reform' of these countries' economies. 'Reform' usually means cuts to state spending.

The Solomon Islands butchered its public services and was brought to its knees last year. The same sort of ‘reform’ is currently laying waste to Papua New Guinea's economy. The attempts of the Howard government to force IMF 'reforms' on countries like Tonga are entirely consistent with its role as the Deputy Sheriff of US imperialism in the South Pacific. US foreign policy demands the use of the IMF and the World Bank to force open markets in the developing world for Western consumer goods, while at the same time cutting the price of raw materials extracted from the developing world, and the price of labour bought there by Western multinational companies. Where necessary, this process of 'globalisation' can be enforced and protected by the armed forces of the US or US allies.

Of course, the demands of the Australian government and the IMF can only collide head-on with the demands of workers in Tonga. The long-overdue pay increases strikers were demanding threaten to blow out a budget that imperialism is pushing Tonga to cut. The Australian government will not be happy about the strikers winning their demands and forcing Tonga to set a bad example. Imperialist pressure on the Tongan state will intensify.

The aggressive unilateralism in pursuit of US interests has already been felt in the Pacific region, in the form of the Australian-led and US-initiated military intervention in the Solomons. This intervention was justified by a need to 'restore order' to the Solomons, but order had only broken down because of the West's sabotage of the country's economy - under IMF 'reforms' imposed by Australia and New Zealand, a third of public sector workers had lost their jobs, with predictable consequences. The real reason for the intervention was to set an example for the Pacific, and to keep at bay US rival France, which had been making overtures to the Solomons government.

Like the United States, Australia has announced that it reserves the right to invade its neighbours 'pre-emptively', if it feels that its security is threatened. 'Security', of course, is understood in economic as much as military terms. It is not at all difficult to imagine the crisis that still threatens to develop in Tonga being resolved by a military intervention initiated by the US and Australia, and including New Zealand forces.

Solidarity with the PSA Strikers!
NZ and Australia Hands Off Tonga!

The refusal of the Tongan Public Service Association workers to accept a New Zealand-brokered deal was to be commended. The NZ and Australia governments have an interest in maintaining the control of the Monarchy over the economy so that the profits of the multinational corporations are guaranteed and protected. NZ politicians tried for a compromise between the people and the Monarchy. But compromise was only ever possible on the terms of the ruling class and would not change the system for the benefit of the people.

The workers refused to do a deal with the Monarchy that required them to accept arbitration in advance. It shows that the workers know that arbitration will leave the Monarchy all powerful and not change the real causes of the poverty of the workers.

Workers must not compromise with the Monarchy as it exists today as a ruling class that exploits the working class to enrich itself and its overseas backers.

Against the class system!

The recent pay deal is only a symptom of this class system where the Monarchy acts as the agents of international capital to profit from the privatisation of Tongan assets and to super-exploit the labour of the commoners.

This means that the wealth cannot be redistributed to the people who produce the wealth, without the Monarchy's control of the economy being taken over by the people, and the wealth being redistributed according to the people's needs.

We support the demand for a referendum to make all the MPs elected by the people, as put forward by the pro-democracy movement. However, this is a reform of the existing constitution and does not directly challenge the rule of the Monarchy over parliament.

The PSA workers have shown that the current wage crisis is a symptom of the class system in Tonga. By holding out for a 60-70-80% wage increase they were leading the challenge to replace the Monarchy's power with the power of the people.

The national strike was resolved following a proposal by politicians for political change. Clive Edwards proposed to amend the Tongan constitution, making it possible for the people to elect a 39 member parliament. From those 39 members a Prime Minister would be elected, and so would Cabinet Ministers. This is a step in the direction of democracy. But a constitutional amendment is not enough. Workers need to continue to lead the people in the demand to hold a Constituent Assembly based on universal suffrage (everyone voting) which could open up a full-scale constitutional debate and decide on a new constitution for a new Tonga, ruled by the people, for the people.

Meanwhile, the Tongan working masses must be on their guard against their leaders being bought off by the ruling elite.

The Next Step

Finau Tutone, the Chairman of the Public Servants Association, said that the next step for the Civil Servants was to form the Friendly Island Workers' Association, to be followed later with the formation of a Union of Workers for all Tongan workers.

We Agree: Workers and poor farmers can form a movement to defeat imperialism and its local capitalist agents. Then a government by and for the real people can be formed: A workers and poor farmers government.

This would not be possible to sustain without the support of workers internationally. The democratic revolution becomes permanent as part of the socialist revolution.
For a socialist pacific

www.wsws.org/articles/2005/aug2005/tong-a19.shtml
www.tongaonstrike.com

 From Class Struggle 63 Sept/Oct 2005

US SECRET WAR IN THE PACIFIC

A tale of nuclear 'liquidations'
On the 25th of March 2002, former NZ PM David Lange made the extraordinary claim that the former US Vice-President Dan Quayle, threatened him with "liquidation" [assassination]. The general response so far has ranged from out right ridicule, "did he mean 'liposuction'?" to " substantiate or shut up" as made by most political commentators. "Preposterous" said the US embassy in Wellington.

"A juicy anecdote of history, but little more" was one opinion being pushed by the editor of the Evening Post-INL [29th March 02]. Total ignorance of the story by the pro-US NZ herald-W&H immediately the day after Lange's claim was revealed, and only as a side comment day's later in an article about Helen Clark's trip to the US, only added to the attempt to put a dampener on the issue. Indirectly, Lange's claim was made to the Australian Govt. cabinet by Dan Quayle during a US state visit in April 1989, and only relayed to him through a phone conversation by one of the cabinet ministers present at the meeting. Lange himself plans to give substance to the allegation in a book to be released at a later date. Lets take a closer look at the issue and decide if there is substance to the claim.

When New Zealand declared itself "nuclear free" in 1984, it was at least a minor victory for a major player in the Pacific region where attempts to throw off the last vestiges of colonialism by smaller nations was being thwarted by the big powers by violent means wherever they thought they could get away with it. The difficulty with dealing with New Zealand was the fact that it was a predominantly Anglo English speaking and populated country with a long tradition of supporting imperialist causes everywhere. A "military solution" would quite easily have been the answer had this not been the case.

In anticipation of the likely backlash from the imperialist powers, principally the US, the peace movement was monitoring all attempts to undermine the no-nukes stand taken by New Zealand. Already it was revealed that a CIA plot to wreak economic sabotage on NZ was being hatched by operatives in Hawaii. The US ducked for cover as soon as the plot was made public; refusing to comment once they were put in the spot light. All eyes were on NZ, so the US had no chance to attempt any kind of covert action away from the prying gaze of the worlds media.

As a "power" in the region, NZ gave confidence to struggles in other Island nations similarly holding views against nuclear colonisers. Principal among these small Island nations was the Micronesian Republic of Belau [ Palau], which was the first nation in the world to declare a nuclear free constitution in 1979. With the blessing of the UN, the US became the island groups administrating authority in 1947. The "No-Nukes" constitution of 1979 was arrogantly considered a bit of a joke by the US and so was not adversely acted upon until NZ entered into the picture in 1984.

At Suva Fiji in April 1975, a draft Peoples' Charter for a Nuclear-Free Pacific was produced to become the basis of the charter adopted at the first South Pacific Forum in 1975. As a part of US Micronesia, Belau was directly affected by US nuclear testing. Names like Bikini Atoll, Kwajalein and Enewetak to name but a few, have become synonymous with this nightmare with many of their populations being displaced to Belau and other islands, the result of their home islands being destroyed because of US nuclear "FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY" Bullshit.

As background to the US involvement in the affairs of Belau, it is important to look at the so-called "Compact of Free Association." It stated that the US would retain control over Belauan military and foreign policy while being allowed to operate nuclear capable and propelled vessels and aircraft, and to use fully one third of its land for military purposes. The problem for the US has been an overwhelming rejection on seven occasions by the Belauan people not to recognise the "compact", Two attempts by the US to overturn Belaus anti-nuclear constitution were also rejected by the people during a forced vote contaminated by US threats of economic blackmail and violence.

For the US, there was only one course of action left to take against those who dared to defy their interests. In 1985, just days before the Greenpeace vessel "Rainbow Warrior" was sunk in Auckland harbour by French state terrorists killing Fernando Pereira, the first President of the Republic of Belau, Haruo Remeliik, was assassinated. Voted into office on a very strong anti-nuclear ticket, he more than most represented the symbol of his nations struggle against US imperialism.

Immediately, the finger was pointed at the United States. Anti-nuclear supporters in Belau were swift to lay the blame at the hands of the CIA. The response typically from the US was that Remeliik's death was the result of an internal struggle within his own political party. Given the history of the official policy of the CIA to conduct political assassinations, it seemed more than likely that the US was up to its old tricks. The murder of Bedor Bins, the father of two leading opponents of the "compact", in 1987 and the fire bombings of the homes of anti-compact supporters, all pointed toward an orchestrated campaign by pro-US/compact forces.

The final straw came in 1988, with the death of Belau's second President, Lazarus Salii. "Death by suicide, the result of an internal financial scandal", was the official position taken by the US State Dept. Extreme pressure by the US on Salii to sack government workers unless they voted in favour of the "compact", was more likely the reason for his demise, together with having to be forced to compromise the Constitution. Before his death, he was forced to lay off two-thirds of workers. He could no longer live with the shame. At the same time, several plaintiffs in an anti-compact lawsuit were threatened with death and fire bombings including a judge who had presided over the case by pro-US/ compact supporters. [see Overreaching in Paradise by Sue Rabbitt Roff.]

When the newly elected Fiji Labour government of Dr Timoci Bavadra declared that it was going to initiate a similar anti-nuclear policy to that of NZ, measures were taken by conservative pro-US forces in Fiji to undermine that policy. However as history shows, the pretext for the coup of 1987 was to be a perversion of indigenous struggles happening elsewhere in the Pacific. [see Class Struggle #33] The complete removal of a government as in the case of Fiji showed that an anti-nuclear policy could be reversed by forcibly overthrowing a democratic government by appealing to reactionary chiefly structures and vested financial interests. Those interests of course would have to be US.

During this period, much attention was focused on the no-nukes debate, with NZ leading the vanguard and this brought about a close political scrutiny. The US was very careful to watch its step, aware of the accusations flying around about its conduct in Micronesia. For there to be a change in Fiji's anti-nuclear position, it would be necessary for the US to shift the focus away from the nuclear issue to something completely different - INDIGENOUS RIGHTS! The world attention focused on Fiji would also have been a problem for the US to deal with at the time. The CIA's killers decided for now, "we'll hold fire."

In other Pacific territories, the anti-colonial struggle for independence has by implication also been anti-nuclear. The struggle for the people of Kanaky [New Caledonia] against French rule is a good example. Never known to shy away from pretentious PR like the US, France made sure that Kanak blood flowed with the assassinations of all of the FLNKS top leadership, including Eloi Machoro who was killed only months before Haruo Remeliik in Belau, the sinking of the Rainbow Warrior, and the killing of Jean Marie Tjibaou in 1989 by a pro-French reactionary. The massacre by French troops on the island of Ouvea in 1988 of Kanak liberation fighters, was the single most bloody outrage committed by imperialist forces during the whole anti-nuclear/ colonialist period of the 1980's. [See Blood On Their Banner: Nationalist Struggles in the South Pacific by David Robie.]

Half a world away in far off Sweden, the 1986 killing of Swedish Socialist Prime Minister Olaf Palme, also had an anti-nuclear component to it. In the 1960's, he took a very strong line against US aggression in Vietnam with Socialism, Peace and Solidarity as his main themes. He sheltered many Vietnam draft dodgers from the US. A position the US was never going to forget or forgive. Speculation still abounds about his killers. One suggestion is that he was the victim of a South African hit squad operating as part of " Operation Long Reach", the apartheid era's attempt to eliminate key opponents to its regime. Quite plausible, considering he was killed only one week after giving a speech at an anti-apartheid rally. Whatever one chooses to believe, the forces of money-grubbing imperialism were no doubt implicated in the Palme assassination.

The mainstream media in NZ, while being entranced by the over flowing hype of "Lord of the Rings", has decided to align itself with many on the right -wing and give the benefit of the doubt to the US. Unfortunately, much of the comment from other quarters supposedly more progressive, have tended to dismiss the Lange comments without any recognition being given to the historical context and personalities involved during the period in which they were said. Recent comments by ACT leader Richard Prebble that the threats were "all in Mr Lange's mind", only add to the "preposterous" line taken by the US Embassy. While in Washington to meet US President George W Bush, NZ Prime Minister Helen Clark said the alleged threat to David Lange was "pretty unlikely" and had no intention of raising the matter again.

Unfortunately for the forces of opposition to US imperialism in Aotearoa/ NZ and that includes the Peace Movement, the issue has passed without even the slightest serious consideration being given to making this an important issue. There is every likelihood that the US under the present climate, will actively re-ignite some of its more direct action against those seeking to challenge its interests and that the "veiled threats" that Lange spoke, will become open and explicit.

A so called secret report made to the US Congress on January 8th 2002, that listed unsurprisingly countries that are officially designated for nuclear attack and include China, Russia, Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Libya, and Syria [genocide by another name], shows quite openly the US intention to commit the most unbelievable crimes. Why should the NZ public balk at the idea that its former Prime Minister "is a bit gone in the head?" Think about it!

From Class Struggle 44 April/May 2002

Indonesia: Where to now? [May 1998]

Asia/Pacific economic turmoil

The so-called "Asian crisis" is as really a capitalist crisis where the blame is being shifted from capitalist exploitation onto Asian "values". (see Class Struggle # 20). Indonesia is usually given as the worst example of what the West sees is wrong with Asia. They say the country is run by an aging dictator, whose family controls the state and owns a large chunk of the economy, and who is stubbornly opposing the IMF's rescue package for restoring the economy. We reject this argument. We oppose Suharto's dictatorship, and we do not trust him to fight the IMF's medicine which will make Indonesian workers and peasants pay a terrible price for economic stability. We make the case for a socialist plan run by and for workers and peasants as the only alternative that meets the needs of the vast majority of the 200 million Indonesians.

The phoney battle over the terms of the IMF's US$40 billion rescue package for Indonesia has been won by international capitalism. There is no way that the international banks who have $130 billion invested in Indonesia will walk away from this kind of money without a showdown. So from a position of mock defiance, Suharto has now been worn down to accept most of the IMF's terms.

These include austerity measures to balance the budget which means real impoverishment for millions of working people. It means opening up the ownership of Indonesia's state corporations to foreign investment. Suharto has agree to allow foreign shareholding in 4 out of 5 of the major state combines. It is clear that despite a great show of opposition, this was only an attempt to keep his share of the booty intact. Now Suharto has no option but to comply with the demands of international capital. The question is why?

Indonesia : a US client state

We don't have to look very hard to see why. The Indonesian economy is bankrupt. Prices have risen 400% in a few months; the rupiah is worth less than 25% of its value one year ago; 90% of companies are technically insolvent leaving 10s of millions unemployed. Neighbouring states such as Thailand and Malaysia are rounding up and repatriating Indonesian migrant workers in their thousands. Protests, rioting and unrest have reached crisis proportions. Despite an army of 300,000 soldiers, 20,000 deployed on the streets alongside 20,000 police, there is no way that Suhato can keep the lid on a mass uprising unless he deploys the aid of his main allies, US and Japanese capitalists.

In other words, Suharto has been forced to recognise that his interests, if not his skin, lies with the international capitalist class and not the Indonesian people. The IMF will call the shots, which will include economic and military sanctions if Indonesia does not repay its debts.

Suharto was appointed as a stooge for the US in 1965 when he was aided by the CIA in the slaughter of up to 1 million communists and dissidents. But he has been able to hide behind a façade of nationalism until now. Growing opposition to Suharto over the last few years is clearly opposed to his comprador role as agent of foreign capital. Not only has his family and their cronies profiteered from Indonesian working people, but he has facilitated the locking of Indonesia in to the global capitalist economy.

Peoples' Power?

The popular alternative to the Suharto's oligarchy and the IMF package is the peoples' power strategy of the democratic opposition forces around Megawati Sukarnoputri. Like the recently elected President of South Korea, Kim Dae Jung, Sukarnoputri looks to "progressive" forces (including imperialist powers and puppets) outside Indonesia to bring pressure on Suharto to democratise the regime. Some of the militant unionists jailed by Suharto are appealing the IMF to withhold loans until Suharto introduces democratic reforms.

This is a tragic betrayal of Indonesian workers and peasants. It accepts that they have to pay back the debts owned to foreign banks. It sows illusions that the IMF as the economic hit-squad for US imperialism can play a progressive role. It creates a cover for US imperialism, which can get rid of Suharto and replace him with a more popular figure like Sukarnoputri, and lock into place the IMF package under the guise of 'human rights' and 'democracy'. The result would be the consigning of the masses of Indonesia's 200 million to further super-exploitation , misery and death in order to create imperialism's super-profits.

In order to overthrow Suharto revolutionaries must participate in all mass demonstrations against him trying to strengthen and radicalise them. Even though it is necessary to participate in joint demonstrations with the "democrats" (and even to do some entrist work amongst its tanks), our goal is to separate the working class from these bourgeois forces. In Indonesia it is important the call for the workers and peasant organisations to be independent from the capitalists and to establish a new party. The only way to smash the IMF and Suharto is tough mass action including a general strike and the formation of strike committees and workers and peasant councils and militias.

Workers' and poor Peasants' Power!

It is necessary to mobilise the working people around democratic and transitional demands to oppose the IMF imperialist package and to get rid of Suharto.

- Overthrow the dictatorship! Call for a Democratic Constituent Assembly.

- Build militant workers and poor peoples councils and self defence militia!

- Troops out now from east Timor and West New Guinea! Self-determination for all the nations of the archipelago!

- Repudiate the national and foreign debts! Break with the IMF!

- Nationalise landlords land under working peasant control!

- Socialise private and multinational assets under workers' control!

- For a Workers' and Poor Peasants' Government! - - For a socialist federation of South East Asia!

From Class Struggle No 21 April/May 1998