Thatcher goes for blood on the Malvinas
MÃN* WEGEN KEATEN
MORGEN by Penny DUGGAN
The conflict that arose suddenly over the Malvinas erupted into full-scale armed conflict in a matter of weeks. British imperialism, aware of its declining world role, frustrated by its inability to impose its will, and facing increasing problems at home has chosen to go to war over two small islands the other side of the Atlantic.
This was done at tremendous cost. By the time major ground-fighting broke out Mrs Thatcher and her war cabinet had wasted 600 lives and spent £500 million on this attempt to win back a few of the ill-gotten gains of the British empire.
Despite the hopes of the British Foreign Secretary, Pym, that after this is all over Britain and Argentina 'can shake hands and be friends' there will be far-reaching effects. It is proof that declining imperialism is more dangerous as it is more unstable. It shows how small conflicts can escalate into major brushfires, in a world that has become a nuclear
In this reckless military adventure Britain has the support of her imperialist allies. But she has been made to pay a price. The European Economic Community have renewed trade sanctions a against Argentina for an indefinite period. But, in return, Britain has had to accept a less favourable deal on agricultural prices than it has argued for. The long-term effects of that in Britain on the continuing debate on British membership of the EEC, and higher food prices in Britain may in the end outweigh the benefits of support against Argentina.
The US has eventually sided with Britain, and is also giving material support. But it has had to pay a price for backing up its chief ally in the imperialist war drive. Argentina was a key element in US strategy in Central America. Argentinian military advisors were indeed present in El Salvador. Now these have been withdrawn as Argentina has won support from other Latin American states who are opposed to complicity in US plans for intervention. Argentina is rebuffing any US attempts to restore friendly relations between the two countries.
MALVINAS YES! JUNTA NO! The Argentine junta is not benefiting as it expected from the recapture of the Malvinas.
The junta had three aims in its original action, Firstly; to distract attention away from the growing interna problems in Argentina and to unite the country around the national demand for return of the Malvinas to Argentine sovereignty. Secondly; to regain prestige throughout Latin America and the Third World as a country prepared to stand up to and defeat a major imperialist power, and lastly to unite the ruling military around the project of regaining the Malvinas.
These aims have not been fulfilled. Athough the masses in Argentina took to the streets in support of the claim to the Malvinas, from the first these slogans were coupled with opposition to the junta.
MORD
SIDERHE IT
RHER
3
----- pull-quotes on this page -----
powderkeg. Opposition to imperialist wardrive and support for workers in struggle throughout the world (DR) SoL WENN VER PLA SOX INESON 67 VIELLLICHE
argument that all the forces in the area should be just as intent that Iran not
Indeed reports suggest that the opposition in Argentina is taking advantage of the present openings to reorganise. It is reported that local branches of the Argentine trade union federation, the CGT, are springing up in the localities.
Local groups of the Multipartidaria, the national opposition bloc including the five main bourgeois political parties, from the Peronists to the Christian Democrats, are also being set up. However, it seems that this may be an initiative of the left who are not formally in the Multipartidaria but are using the fact that the regime, having had to meet opposition leaders in its efforts to win national unity, has given this bloc a certain legitimacy, which can to organise the The lack of military success for the Argentines, despite the good showing of helped either. Although the Latin American countries have stood firm on support for Argentina this has been diplomatic support Cuba and Nicaragua have offered military heip, but made it clear they give no supto the junta, withdrawal of military advisors from El
Whatever the outcome of the military engagement the position of the junta will be precarious. Faced with a more organised opposition than at any time since it came to power, the effect of success, which would increase the self confidence of the masses, or defeat, which would increase their hatred of the junta as it proves itself incapable of even fulfilling this aspiration of the masses, the Argentine ruling class will be forced to move to install a government which will allow the junta to retire gracefully and avoid a confrontation while retaining the bourgeois project intact.
The best hope for the Argentine junta would be a dragging out of the war which would increase the pressures towards national unity and allow them further time to manoeuvre.
### SUPPORT FOR THATCHER
BUT OPPOSITION HARDENS
By contrast the Thatcher government is presently doing quite well. cent opinion polls, since the landing on the East Falkland on May 17, show that support for the government has leapt to around 80 per cent.
The drop in support shown at the time the Sheffield sank has not been repeated after successive British losses. undoubtedly begin to influence public opinion against the war. Indeed support is not so deep as the polls suggest. In a recent bye-election in the Tory stronghold of Beaconsfield the number of those voting dropped sharply from 76.2 per cent to under 54 percent. Although the Tory share of the vote slighly increased, there did not seem to be unbounded enthusiasm to rush out and vote for Thatcher's war.
Opposition to the war is hardening up in the Labour Party. At the end of the most recent Commons debate on the war left Labour members forced a vote for the first time on support for the government.
Thirty three Labour members voted against, including three Front Bench
In a disgusting show of Labour leader, Michael Foot, promptly sacked the three.
Their stand would get a different reaction within the ranks of the Labour Party. Many local branches, some estimates put it as high as 50 per cent, are sending in resolutions of opposition to the war and to the Labour leadership's sickening support for the Tories.
The recent conference of the National Union of Seamen, who have members on the ships that have been requisitioned for the task force, discussed the
Initially a motion supporting the war was passed. However, when the press claimed it as support for Thatcher, delegates were so appalled that three quarters of them signed a petition calling for a ceasefire and negotiations.
But the anti-war movement, although growing, is still small. Ten thousand demonstrated in opposition to the war on May 23, less than are prepared to come out in opposition to US military adventures in El Salvador.
The anti-war movement in Britain and throughout the world has to set the record straight on what this war is about. It is over the imperialist claims of Britain to possess a couple of small islands 8,000 away, against a country which for years it has economically exploited.
It is of no help whatsoever to the Argentine working class to refuse to take a stand against this imperialist aggression because of the nature of their govern-
The best service that the international labour movement can give to the Argentine workers is to stop this war and allow them to turn their attention to settling accounts with the regime
Iranians victories open way for new mass upsurge in Near East by Gerry FOLEY
The decisive defeat of the Iraqi army by Iranian forces in the second battle of Khorramshahr (May 23-24) has opened the way for explosive upsurges throughout the region. It was an effect of the momentum of the mass mobilization unleashed by the Iranian revolution.
The