Broad themes and issues under global capitalism and imperialism, as they affect the entire world, various countries/regions, and major sectors

Africa Anti-Imperialist Monthly | March-April 2019

Thirty-six covert US operations in Africa were named after many Americans discovered the death of four US troops in Niger in October 2017 because of ISIS attacks there. Maurice Carney says the operations – which stretch from Libya to the Democratic Republic of Congo, and from Senegal to Somalia – stem from the Donald Trump administration’s view that Africa is a field for “great power competition,” in the US’ fight against the rise in China and Russia’s economic and geopolitical influence in the continent.

Each of these operations are named and explained by Nick Turse and Sean D. Taylor. According to them, “The code-named operations cover a variety of different military missions, ranging from psychological operations to counterterrorism. Eight of the named activities… are so-called 127e programs, named for the budgetary authority that allows US special operations forces to use certain host-nation military units as surrogates in counterterrorism missions.”

The discovery of these covert operations makes the efforts of the Black Alliance for Peace more timely. It has submitted letters and petitions to US lawmakers, particularly in the Congressional Black Caucus, to investigate the impacts of US military presence in Africa through the US African Command or AFRICOM. “BAP calls for an end to AFRICOM and to all foreign interference in the affairs of African countries. War, drone strikes and sanctions have devastated nations and millions of people – they must end now.”

In this 2019 report, Amnesty International refutes the US government’s claim that while it has increased airstrikes in Somalia, it has not killed any civilian. AI investigates five incidents in Lower Shabelle in which 14 people were killed and eight were injured. These cases, it argues, constitute violations of International Humanitarian Law and can be considered war crimes. AI bolsters the claim that the US government is directly at war in Somalia, against Al-Shabaab, “an armed group that controls significant territory in the country.”

Writing on the same topic, Amanda Sperber focuses on the US government’s lack of transparency with regard to airstrikes in Yemen and Somalia, especially under the Trump presidency. She summarizes: “My investigation identified strikes that went unreported until they were raised with AFRICOM, but also others that AFRICOM could not confirm – which suggests that another US agency may also be launching air attacks in the region. The investigation also tracked down evidence that AFRICOM’s claim of zero civilian casualties is almost certainly incorrect. And it found that the United States lacks a clear definition of ‘terrorist,’ with neither AFRICOM, the Pentagon, nor the National Security Council willing to clarify the policies that underpin these strikes.”

Responding to The New York Times’ inflation of Russia’s role in Africa and its claim that the US military only has “a relatively light footprint” in the continent, Glen Ford presents facts about US military presence in Africa. He cites the claim of journalist Nick Turse that by 2017, AFRICOM was “conducting 3,500 exercises, programs, and engagements per year, an average of 10 missions per day.” He says that since its creation in 2008, AFRICOM has created a presence in the entire continent and played a crucial role in US President Barack Obama’s invasion of Libya in 2011 “that plunged the whole northern tier of the region into flames.”

Ford cites the following facts: (1) the US and Europe “fund and oversee” all peace-keeping missions in Africa, (2) those missions include the one in Somalia, where the US is engaged in a drone war that intensified under Trump, (3) under the eight-year Obama administration, AFRICOM’s bases jumped from three to 84, (4) six million Congolese have died because of attacks from neighboring US-backed countries Rwanda and Uganda, (5) US and Israel supported the division of the continent’s largest country, Sudan, into two, (6) 400,000 people have been killed in the civil war in South Sudan as a result of the said partition, (7) the US and France have teamed up in Mali and Niger.

He says the reason for louder US propaganda against Russia’s military presence in Africa is this: “African nations like Guinea, Burkina Faso, Burundi and Madagascar want to do arms and training deals with Russia, to diversity their defense suppliers and create a ‘multi-polar’ environment in Africa.” He also says that “The US has nothing to offer Africa but guns, drones and an extended half-life for the neocolonial order – and Russia can cut a better deal on the guns.”

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is 70 years old this year, and Horace G. Campbell writes about its career as an instrument of Western powers, especially in Africa, and the crisis it is facing now. He says NATO is all about figting “the struggles for peace bread and justice by the poorer citizens of the planet, especially those who had emerged on the world stage after the decolonization of Africa, Asia, and the Caribbean.”

NATO has been a chief institution in upholding the “defense radius” of Europe which is claimed to be 4,000 kilometers from Brussels. While the French president Emmanuel Macron has apologized for killing more than one million Algerians in his country’s war with the African country, there is silence about NATO’s role in this crime. NATO also supported Portugal in suppressing its colonies Angola, Guinea and Mozambique.

Immediately after World War II, Africa was seen as crucial to European reconstruction. NATO was used to uphold US and European powers’ division of Africa among themselves, and NATO buttressed the apartheid regime in South Africa. Campbell decries the silence of even progressive scholars in Europe and the US with regard to NATO’s role in Africa. He warns that “The pace of change in Africa has created nervousness in the West and the deployment of French troops and AFRICOM is meant to contain the mobilization and organization of the oppressed in Africa.”

On April 11, the 30-year rule of Sudan’s now-former president Omar al-Bashir came to an end, following a military coup that in turn followed months of mass protests.

Whitney Webb traces the history of al-Bashir’s relationship with the US, Saudi Arabia and Israel, and narrates how he became an enemy of these countries after being their friend and ally for so long. She shows how Bashir’s policy of supporting Saudi Arabia’s war in Yemen cost him politically in his country, and how his eventual move away from the war angered Saudi Arabia and made it support his ouster. Her conclusion: the events in Sudan “appear to be yet another example of foreign governments manipulating real dissent against an authoritarian government in order to install yet another authoritarian government more friendly to their interests but to the detriment of the people.”

Al-Bashir was replaced by a Transitional Military Council (TMC), which is negotiating with the Declaration of Freedom and Change Forces (DFCF) for the transfer of authority to civilians. After ousting al-Bashir, protestors continue to put pressure on the TMC to relinquish power to civilians. Among those making this demand is the Sudanese Communist Party, a significant presence in the DFCF, according to this report by People’s Dispatch. The conflict between the TMC and the protestors is intensifying, according to another report from People’s Dispatch, with the latter accusing the TMC of being similar to the al-Bashir government and subservient to “the US-backed Saudi-United Emirates Alliance.”

Writing separately after al-Bashir’s removal, Lee Wengraf and Magdi el Gizouli touch on international powers’ relationship to the TMC. Wengraf writes: “The Saudi and United Arab Emirates regimes have offered their support in the form of a $3 billion aid package, to include a $500 million deposit into the Sudanese central bank, a move rejected by protesters as shoring up the military regime… The precariousness of the Sudanese economy dependent on oil only reinforces the political will of the local and international ruling classes reliant on its extraction. The economic crisis underpinning the revolution is an expression, to an important extent, of the deep contradictions of the secession agreement of 2011 between Sudan and South Sudan.”

El Gizouli meanwhile traces the history of Mohamed Hamdan Daglo or Himeidti as a leader of a mercenary army “on commission to the EU to guard its borders against African migrants by whatever means it wishes in the blind silence of the African Sahara and by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to carry out their war against Yemen.” He observes that the ruling junta in Sudan has “emerged in the alliance of counter-revolutionary forces in the region and was rewarded almost immediately with generous political support and funding.”

For his part, Yash Tandon presents the political forces responsible for al-Bashir’s ouster. While saying that the revolt is “a step further to the possibility of revolution, liberation from a succession of military dictatorships and their foreign backers,” he also states that “it is going to be a long, hard battle” – and makes suggestions based on the experiences of the people’s struggle in Uganda.

On April 2, Abdelaziz Bouteflika, Algeria’s president for 20 years, was forced to resign by months-long mass demonstrations. For 90 days, he will be replaced by the senate president, Abdelkader Bensalah, in a caretaker presidency that does not appear to satisfy the protestors that ousted him.

Writing before Bouteflika’s resignation, Tin Hinane El Kadi provides the historical background and socio-economic context of the mass protests, as well as the regime’s efforts to maintain power and its eventual division. Bouteflika’s first response to the protest was to announce the postponement of the elections scheduled on April 18 and his refusal to seek the presidency anymore – already a concession from his initial plan of running again.

France, through no less than its prime minister Emmanuel Macron praised the declaration as “opening a new phase in Algeria’s democracy.” El Kadi says that Western powers may be siding with the autocratic regime, and against the protest movement, in order to maintain security and stability in the country – and to ward off another wave of migration to Europe.

Under Bouteflika, he says, the “asymmetric exchange” between Algeria and France continued: “For years, French firms have benefitted from juicy contracts, including the Metro of Algiers and the management of several airports across the country.” He also claims that “The free trade agreement between the EU and Algeria has resulted in a significant trade deficit for Algeria.”

Writing after Bouteflika’s resignation, El Kadi observes how the protest movement is pushing for demands bigger than the former president’s resignation, demands for genuine change, including liberation from France. He says that the transitional presidency of Bensalah, given the Constitutional mandate of holding power before an election is held, is currently repressing protestors, proof that it wants to maintain the regime in power.

Abayomi Azikiwe provides the political-economic context of the powerful Cyclone Idai – and Cyclone Kenneth also – that hit Mozambique and adjacent countries. He says Mozambique, Zimbabwe and Malawi are “struggling against the broader political and economic forces imposed upon them by the Western industrialized countries.”

He says that Mozambique, in particular, “despite its natural resources and strategic location, was compelled in 2018 to renegotiate the terms of its financial obligations internationally.” The “imperialist-engineered civil war” in the country ended only in the early 1990s, and its development is being hampered by decreasing commodity prices in the world market since 2014 and by “western-backed loans and other financial obligations.”

He states that climate change is behind the “worsening impact of cyclones and other weather-related issues.” He cites an article quoting Daviz Simango, mayor of the costal city of Beira in Mozambique, who says that “it unjust that African nations face some of the toughest challenges while contributing little to global warming. People in rich, industrialized nations produce much of the carbon dioxide and other gases that are warming the planet by burning the most coal, diesel, gasoline and jet fuel.”

This year marks the 25 anniversary of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. Robin Philpot looks back at the shooting down of an airplane carrying two African heads of state in April 6, 1994, and claims that this event foreclosed “all hopes of peace and a democratic resolution of the conflict” in Rwanda, as well as hopes for peace in its neighbors Congo and Burundi. While the New York Times immediately blamed “Hutu hardliners” who oppose peace with the Tutsi for the attack, Philpot blames the Tutsi Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) led by Paul Kagame, which was supported by the US and the United Kingdom.

Citing Judi River’s book In Praise of Blood: Crimes of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (2018), Ann Garrison digs deeper. She claims that the RPF was indeed a division of the military of Uganda, which invaded Rwanda and fought the Rwandan people and military. It massacred Hutus and also Tutsis – in order to “provide an excuse for the dictatorship by the Tutsi minority who would then be able to claim victim status.” She says that “Western powers, including Canada, the UK, and the US have sustained that propaganda campaign for 25 years and made it a centerpiece of their ‘humanitarian’ interventionist argument.” She deplores proposed measures in the US Senate that would continue US aid to the Kagame regime.

In this article, Yu-Shan Wu tries to identify the factors that shape reporting of China’s role in Africa which tends to depict the Asian superpower as either a predator or a friend. First is perception towards China, which is affected by an entity’s level of relationships with China. Second is interest, whether China affects the interests of groups favorably or unfavorably. And third is lack of understanding, particularly in relation to Asian studies in colleges and universities. She also states how the lack of transparency in China’s dealings with particular countries and domestic politics shape perceptions of China’s role in Africa.

Dauti Kahura, on the other hand, writes about China’s China Global Television Network, based in Nairobi, and connects it with a “strategy for global supremacy,” “a hidden, subtle, and ruthless ambition and pursuit of global power that China hopes to use to conquer the world and re-establish China as the dominant civilisation that it once was in the centuries gone by.” He claims that CGTN’s bureau in Nairobi “in terms of strategic significance, geopolitical importance and long-term plans,… far outflanks the Washington bureau.” He also talks about how the BBC is sensitive to the development and is competing with its Chinese counterpart.

Julian Lahai Samboma writes a report about a conference on the work of Guyanese revolutionary Walter Rodney held at London’s School of Oriental and African Studies in March. Rodney’s work was discussed in relation to imperialism, Marxism, slavery, women’s oppression, Pan-Africanism and the need for revolution.

Meanwhile, Giovanni Vimercati provides a summary of the main points of Rodney’s 1972 classic How Europe Underdeveloped Africa: that within the international capitalist system, development (of some countries) could only entail underdevelopment (of many countries), that the two are connected by exploitation, and that the present exploitation and underdevelopment of Africa can be traced to the slavery imposed by the colonial powers, among others.

In this short piece, Laura Mann introduces a podcast series that she and her colleagues are creating regarding the production of knowledge about Africa. She details the ways in which scholars who are outsiders are privileged over insiders, or Africans themselves, and are calling for a soul-searching in relation to this condition, in order to “undermine colonial knowledge structures.”

Felix Tshisekedi, the new president of the Democratic Republic of Congo, is asking the US for help against the threat of ISIS attacks – and the US media is hyping the request and the supposed threat. This prompted Ann Garrison to republish her interview with Boniface Musuvali, who agreed to the republication, saying nothing in its contents has changed. The idea of an ISIS base in the DRC, where 90 percent is Christian and only two percent is Muslim, is preposterous, he claims. It is, however, being promoted to try to justify US military incursions in the country and in the region in the pursuit of economic and geopolitical objectives.

Speaking in time for African American History Month in the US, Abayomi Azikiwe talks about the African slave trade, its “economic basis” and “lingering impact in the present century. He claims that assumptions blaming corruption and lack of moral fortitude in the leaders of African countries for the poverty and underdevelopment in the resource-rich continent “are inherently racist and ignore the realities of the present international system of economic exchange and authority.” He claims that “Until there is a complete break with the character of imperialism there cannot be total freedom for the oppressed.”

He traces the root causes of displacement of migrants and refugees as follows: “Today the level of dislocation is greater than any time since the conclusion of World War II. United Nations agencies tasked to respond to humanitarian crises have documented that 75 million people are living as refugees or internally displaced persons. This situation is the result of imperialism which has waged war in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, Yemen and other geo-political regions. Migrants are seeking admission into the western industrialized states whose military forces and exploitative economic institutions have repressed and exploited their counties of origin.”

“Rather than address these failed foreign policies, the leaders of the West are reverting back to the mythology of past centuries. They dream of building fortress states aimed at keeping out the poor and dispossessed. The contradiction in such thinking is made futile by the rapidly worsening conditions of the working class and poor within the metropoles themselves.”###

More than 120 Filipinos and their international friends in Europe gathered to celebrate 50 years of struggle for social and national liberation in the Philippines on 31 March 2019. Billed as a “Tapestry of Resistance,” the event in Amsterdam, the Netherlands resonated with many other gatherings in the Philippines and overseas that commemorated the 50th anniversary of the founding of the New People’s Army.

In his speech, founding chairman of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) Prof. Jose Maria Sison emphasized that the NPA has already spread nationwide in a majority of the country’s provinces and is deeply rooted among the toiling masses. Sison traced the NPA’s history from its foundational years (1969-1977) to the period of growth, conservatism and upsurge (2002–2019), noting that it has frustrated all operational plans by the Philippine government (GPH) and the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP).

Luis Jalandoni, Chief International Representative of the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP), narrated the important role of international solidarity friends during the long years of struggle against the Marcos regime, and how they helped in isolating the dictatorship both domestically and internationally.

In view of the “fast developing reality of the Filipino people’s struggle for national and social liberation and the increasing danger of US imperialist intervention and even war of aggression”, Jalandoni said there is a need and opportunity “to launch and build the Friends of the NDFP” as a “systematic and organized way to develop a powerful solidarity” for the Filipino people’s struggle.

Three short films highlighted the celebration: on the NPA not only as fighting army but an army that works, lives with and embraces the aspirations of the people; on the agrarian revolution in response to the peasantry’s demand for land; and on how the masses exercise their rights and fight for their interests through the organs of political power of the People’s Democratic Government being built today in thousands of villages and towns in the country.

Photos on the everday life of NPA warriors captured thru the lens of freelance photographer Boy Bagwis and paintings of Parts Bagani, and the art and poetry of Felix Salditos aka Maya Daniel, were also exhibited. Similar themes were showcased by cultural presentations of Filipino migrants.

The speeches, messages, cultural performances, exhibits and films were all presented as a “tapestry” that helped explain and visualize the Filipino people’s continuing struggle.

One Dutch artist and supporter said attending the celebration made even clearer to her that in its 50 years, the whole Philippine revolutionary movement has continued to grow and achieve important victories for the people. ###

Source: https://www.ndfp.org/tapestry-of-50-years-of-resistance-and-victories

NZ 2019 mass shootout

Professor Jose Maria Sison, chairperson of the International League of Peoples’ Struggle (ILPS), said that it was “hysterical fear of white genocide” that drive Australian mass murderer Brendan Tarrant to kill 50 Muslim worshipers in a mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand on March 15. He further added that “the white victim complex and the hysterical assertion of white supremacy are two sides of the same coin” that led to the mass shooting. Full text of the ILPS chairperson’s statement follows.

Monopoly Capitalism Is the Cause of Mass Migration
and the White-Victim and White-Supremacy Complex

By Prof. Jose Maria Sison
Chairperson, International League of People’s Struggle
17 March 2019

In his 74-page manifesto, the Australian mass murderer Brendan Tarrant raves about the “great replacement” of white people by non-white peoples and blames the liberals for advocating mass migration, white displacement and cultural diversity in the same perverted way that the Norwegian mass murderer Anders Brevik blames “cultural Marxism”.

The hysterical fear of white genocide drove Tarrant to commit the massacre of at least 49 Muslim worshipers in a mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand. The victims came from various underdeveloped countries as well as from war-torn countries. The white victim complex and the hysterical assertion of white supremacy are two sides of the same coin that leads to the atrocity.

White people in the developed countries are themselves victimized by the monopoly bourgeoisie but are misled by the demagogues of the capitalist system to believe that the migrants, especially the Muslims, are to blame for the erosion of the wage and living conditions of the white working class and middle class.

The neoliberal strategists, think tanks, academe and mass media of the monopoly bourgeoisie obscure the fact that economic and social conditions are becoming worse for the working class and even for the middle class because of the crisis of overproduction and the unsustainable abuse of credit.

Neoliberalism and the adoption of higher technology have pressed down wages, eroded social benefits and services and have increased unemployment and poverty among the whites and non-whites. Those few whites turned hysterical and murderous by a combination of white-victim complex and white supremacy do not think much beyond their personal and national egoism.

They are kept ignorant of the fact that the mass migration from the underdeveloped to the developed countries is the result of the policies of the monopoly bourgeoisie to avail of cheap labor, to keep the underdeveloped countries more underdeveloped and to wage wars of aggression to put down anti-imperialist governments and popular movements asserting national independence and demanding broader democracy, social justice and industrial development.

As a result of decolonization due to the direct and indirect effects of armed national liberation movements, the imperialist countries have used mass migration towards them since the 1970s to make up for the loss of colonies and semicolonies. To make up for the tendency of the profit rate to fall in their own home grounds, they have also utilized neocolonialism to cause the further underdevelopment of former colonies and semicolonies to maximize profits. The widening mass unemployment and poverty drive the people to emigrate.

And whenever certain governments and revolutionary movements arise and assert national sovereignty, nationalize the economy and promote industrial development, the imperialist countries unleash campaigns of destabilization for regime change and wars of aggression, which are the biggest and worst form of terrorism. Thus, the imperialist countries themselves have been culpable for the increasing number of both political and economic refugees since the 1980s, especially from the war-torn countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America.

Whenever the monopoly bourgeoisie finds it too difficult or is frustrated in using liberal democracy or social democracy to disarm and sedate the working class, it resorts to the outright use of the most reactionary ideas and sentiments to obscure the roots of the crisis of monopoly capitalism, to mislead the broad masses of the people and the use the grossest form of violence and deception to suppress the anti-imperialist and democratic mass movements which aim for national liberation, people’s democracy and socialism.

We are living today in a crisis-stricken world capitalist system in which only one percent of the population, the top circle of the monopoly bourgeoisie, own 50 percent of the world’s wealth and only 10 percent own 75 percent. The gross social inequality means the increasing polarization of all societies and the intensification of the anti-imperialist and class struggle.

Under these circumstances the monopoly bourgeoisie unleashes all kinds of monsters and atrocities, including state terrorism and private terrorism of white supremacists, in order to counter the rise of revolutionary consciousness and movements among the proletariat and people in every country and on a global scale.

More than ever, it is necessary for the revolutionary parties of the proletariat to arise and strengthen themselves in order to promote proletarian internationalism among the workers of the world as well as international solidarity among the broad masses of the people of the world in order to overcome and defeat all the strategies and tactics of the monopoly bourgeoisie to divide the white and non-white workers and peoples of the world with the use of chauvinism, xenophobia, racism and fascism. ###

By Antonio Tujan Jr.
Crosscurrents 30 |7 March 2019

That the US should warn the Duterte government to be wary over concluding treaties with China just shows that the world is no longer under a single hegemonic global power.  Before, the US would not simply countenance a former colony of brown Americans to welcome the Chinese.  Nor would it allow any president before Duterte to make overtures to everyone, most specially the communist regime of China.

The rise of China as the strongest economy overall puts the US at a disadvantage even though the dollar still reigns supreme as a global currency standard.  It would be stupid for anyone, must less the government, not to recognize that opportunity to develop friendly relations along with the benefits of economic cooperation.   Not to mention the geopolitics of the West Philippine Sea dispute.

Of course, we assume that the Duterte government is wary of the pros and cons in dealing with China, of its economic and geopolitical interests on the Philippines. But Trump is playing big brother politics to even warn the Philippines or the Duterte government as if the latter does not know its business. This warning smacks of US imperialism, on the decline, especially after China has overtaken it.

Russia has emerged from the ashes of the collapse of the Soviet Union and recovered its military might, still not as strong as that of the US but sufficient enough to challenge the US.  Russian official claims that US and Russia nuclear parity has been broken with a new generation of Russian nuclear military technology. This lead Trump to break off its agreement on intermediate range missiles in Europe.

The parity in economic and military strength with emergence of China and Russia translates to the tremendous weakening of US political hegemony overall.  This phenomenon has reported by many diplomatic quarters especially from intergovernmental organizations like the UN as early as 2015 when several agreements and treaties could no longer be concluded easily with objections from China and India and the realignments in the UN such as the emergence of G77+China.

IBON International has monitored developments over the decade and reported in its International Situation Briefings in 2013 the emergence of this new phenomenon.  This has become known internationally in 2015 as the new multipolar world order – the US is no longer the sole global hegemon after the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union. US hegemonic power is starting to crumble in a multipolar world full of conflict.

Does this phenomenon mean the emergence of other hegemonic powers such as China and Russia?  Not necessarily.  There are several economic, political and military factors that can operate one way or the other to create new hegemons.  Several aspects and factors than can decide this include investment, trade, conflicts, military build up, diplomacy and alliances, etc.

The US continues to use what is left of its political, economic and military strength and existing agreements to preserve what is left of the framework of its hegemonic power to prevent what can be a catastrophic collapse of the capitalist system. Its stranglehold on the international monetary system through the IMF and the worldwide currency peg to the dollar is under tremendous challenge whether from the strength of the yuan/Chinese economy or the euro transactions as pragmatic solutions to address unreasonable economic sanctions on several countries like Venezuela, Iran or North Korea under US political economic attack.

US unilateralism under Trump is politically, economically and diplomatically dangerous for the US.  Trade wars with the European Union, China or Canada easily backfires when the US is on the defensive in the first place.  These actions weaken the international neoliberal agenda and leaves the WTO and similar agreements severely frayed.  These reflect the severe contradictions faced by monopoly capital in the face of a full decade of no growth since the collapse of 2008.  Since 2011 when the world emerged from the worst depression since the 1930s, it still faces depressionary features of a stagnant world economy overall. 

Behind the US-initiated trade wars is its intention to revive its flagging industry but China has long overtaken the US industrial development and high technology.  The irony of it all is that China is so far ahead in the game that it produces and exports robots to run the new factories the US wants to build.  (More in Part 2)##

The International League of Peoples’ Struggle (ILPS) reiterated its solidarity with “the government and people of Venezuela in their heroic struggle for national independence and socialism against US imperialism and its lackeys” within the country.

In the statement, ILPS chairperson Professor Jose Maria Sison reviewed the successes of “the Bolivarian revolutionary struggle” in Venezuela under the leadership of its late president, Hugo Chavez. “The people of Venezuela are loyal to and love Comrade Hugo Chavez because he led them to assert national independence and to aim for socialism,” Sison said. Read more

ORCC Logo global

Revolutionaire Eenheid, which describes itself as an anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist, proletarian and feminist organization, actively participated in the recently concluded October Revolution Centennial Conference on 23-24 September in Amsterdam. A member activist, comrade Susana Perez, delivered an inspiring speech focused on the lessons of the Great Proletariat Cultural Revolution in relation to the current “challenges amongst modern youth movements.” The full text of her speech follows: Read more

The Internationale (the anthem of the revolutionary proletariat)
New Philippine version, MP3 format, 4:32 playing time

The International League of Peoples’ Struggle (ILPS) held its conference on October 22 entitled “Right to Resist, Right to Exist: Unite to Fight Police Terror, State Repression, and Racism.” The decades-long cumulative results of neoliberalism and the crisis of monopoly capitalism provides a sweeping background of the current spate of state repression and police brutality in the US, and the basis for a broad united front vs. US imperialism. Prof. Jose Maria Sison, Chairperson of the ILPS’ International Coordinating Committee, sent this message of solidarity to the conference. Read more

“The recent ruling of the Philippine Supreme Court, which upheld with finality the constitutionality of the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA), [is] a stark reminder that the Philippines remains a staunch bulwark of US imperialist hegemony in the Asia-Pacific region, and that reactionary pro-US forces remain in control of the main levers of the Philippine state.”

PRISM is circulating the following statement by Prof. Jose Maria Sison, Chairperson of the International League of Peoples’ Struggle (ILPS).

Read more