The World of Computer Software/World_Of_Computer_Software-02-387-Vol-3of3.iso/m/mn23.zip/MN23

Text File | 1993-03-10 | 26KB | 497 lines

*----------------------------------------------------------*
|                                                          |
| x   x x x   x   x  x  xx  xxx xxx  xxx                   |
| xx xx x xx xx   xx x x  x  x  x   x       Issue #23      |
| x x x x x x x   x xx x  x  x  xx   xxx                   |
| x   x x x   x   x  x x  x  x  x       x   04/28/86       |
| x   x x x   x   x  x  xx   x  xxx  xxx                   |
|                                                          |
|----------------------------------------------------------|
|    Newspaper of the Maoist Internationalist Movement     |
*----------------------------------------------------------*



   WWIII HEATS UP

   SO-CALLED SECOND WORLD GOVERNMENTS BACK LIBYA SCAPEGOATING
   French government officials said that they would have
supported an all-out attack on Libya to replace Khadafy.
Hours before the U.S. raid, the U.S. asked for an airfield
for bombers to take-off from. The French declined. Later they
said that it would only pique the Arabs to bomb Libya with no
resulting change in government.
   Meanwhile, England supported the U.S. raid completely by
letting American planes start from airbases on English soil.
England has gone farther in isolating Libya than the United
States in terms of sending Libyan students home. The U.S. is
not sending home Libyan students in the U.S. because it
claims that after Khadafy the students will have a good pro-
American influence on Libya.
   Meanwhile, West Germany expelled 41 Libyans from the
embassy there. W. Germany also covered American plans by
confirming a few days before the attack that there was no
danger of a military act by the United States. Through these
standard procedure military lies, W. Germany and the U.S.
hoped to catch Libya off guard.
   Denmark expelled several Libyan diplomats and restricted
the movements of the rest. (Detroit Free Press, 4/23/86)
   By law, the U.S. government can not appear to support the
assassination of leaders of foreign governments. This law put
Reagan in the position of denying that the U.S. tried to
assassinate Khadafy by bombing his headquarters. It turns out
that Khadafy was indeed inside when the bombing started. Thus
by calling for Khadafy's assassination, France took the
hardest line.
   Indeed, France indicated its anger with the U.S. for not
backing past military actions against Khadafy in regard to
Libyan activities against Chad. Apparently, the U.S. did not
share relevant intelligence information when France undertook
military operations in Chad. France also complained about a
lack of support for French strikes in the Bekaa valley in
1983. (New York Times, 4/25/86) French "socialism"--ah so
inspiring.

   DEMOCRATS--WHERE ARE THEY WHEN WAR GETS GOING?
   True to form, the Democrats sought to take advantage of
the chauvinist upsurge surrounding the attack on Libya.
Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill supported the action as a
"justified" "defense" of the 12 mile limit recognized by
European sponsored "international law." Obviously, none of
the major Democrats stood up against the invasion, and
certainly none with presidential aspirations.

   SOVIET UNION GAVE GREEN LIGHT FOR BOMBING OF LIBYA
   Asked before the military action what the USSR would do if
the U.S. took military action against Libya, Soviet diplomats
said their role would not be to further escalate world
tension. Concretely, the Soviets pulled out their technicians
manning anti-aircraft missile batteries in Libya just before
the U.S. attack. During the attack itself, the Soviet Union
did not provide any intelligence information to Libya.
(Chicago Tribune, 4/20/86, p. 13)
   After the attack, the Soviet Union did cancel its pre-
summit meeting with Secretary of State George Schultz.
However, one Nigerian newsman in Moscow asked Soviet
officials: "'Is that all?'" (Chicago Tribune, 4/20/86, p. 13)
   A Middle Eastern diplomat grasped the role of Libya.
"'Every good politician needs his 'bad boy' to do the dirty
work.... That was Khadafy's job for the Soviet Union.'"
(Ibid.) Furthermore, "'but it doesn't mean that the Soviet
Union is automatically ready for war with the U.S. on his
behalf.'" (Ibid.)
   Libya is indeed a proxy for the Soviet Union despite its
Islamic government. Western observors estimate that the
Soviets have sold $15 billion in arms to Libya in the last
twenty years. In 1980, the Soviet Union may have received 10%
"of its hard currency earnings from the exchange of Libyan
petro-dollars for Soviet hardware and advice." (Ibid.)
   However, there are tensions between the Soviets and its
proxy. The Soviets support Iraq in the war against Iran.
Libya supports Iran with Soviet weapons. Libya has no Treaty
of Friendship with the Soviet Union unlike Syria, Iraq and
South Yemen. Last October Khadafy did not show up for a
reception in his honor in the Kremlin. (Ibid.) Perhaps for
this kind of recalcitrance, the USSR allowed Khadafy to see
what would happen if he did not toe a more pro-Soviet line.
Days after the attack the Soviets sent a military vessel to
Libya's ports. Along with diplomatic mouthings this showed
that the USSR would only go so far in leaving Libya on its
own.

   SOVIETS COOPERATE IN TURNING IN ALLEGED PALESTINIAN
TERRORISTS
   A German newspaper--Die Welt--said that the Soviet Union
turned over the names of 30 Palestinians suspected of
belonging to terrorist groups to the West German government.
This occurred after the hijacking of the Achille Lauro last
October. (Detroit Free Press, 4/23/86, p. 15a)
   American officials have admitted to asking Soviet help in
preventing the attack on the West Berlin disco that the U.S.
used as a pretext for attacking Libya. (Chicago Tribune,
4/20/86, p. 13)

   U.S. DOES NOT RECOGNIZE INTERNATIONAL LAW IT CLAIMS TO
PROTECT
   The United States is not a signatory to the treaty that
establishes the 12 mile limit on territorial waters. Nor does
the U.S. recognize the international court that handles
conflicts surrounding the 12 mile limit. Of course, the U.S.
does not acknowledge the international court ruling against
U.S. aggression against Nicaragua. The U.S. is hypocritically
defending "international law" in the name of fighting
"terrorism," which international courts find the U.S. guilty
of.
   This is not to say that the U.S. does not have an interest
in the 12 mile limit as imposed on other countries. Freedom
of the seas is important to American capitalists who wish to
exploit the fishing and mineral resources claimed by other
countries. For example, Third World countries such as Peru
have suggested a 200 mile limit. This would give oppressed
countries rights to the resources on the ocean shelf
extending from a country's coast. Oil and minerals are often
found on this shelf. "Freedom of the seas" means "freedom to
exploit" for American capitalists. The United States and
European countries hope to exploit ocean resources without
paying anything to countries claiming the 200 mile limit.

   REAGAN PLAYS ON ANTI-ARAB RACISM
   Reagan put Iran and Syria on notice that as "terrorist
countries" they are on the U.S. hit list. Besides widening
his target and possibilities for world war, Reagan listed
Libya, Iran and Syria as entire countries, not just
governments with certain leaders or places where certain
organizations are active. (Wall Street Journal, 4/24/86) This
took advantage of and perpetuated anti-Arab racism that
equates Arabs with terrorism.

   REAGAN LINKS LIBYA TO NICARAGUA, VIETNAM
   In attempt to carry "success" in battle from one part of
the world to another, Reagan said that Libya has given
Nicaragua $400 million in aid. "'And in this sense they are
trying to build a Libya on our doorstep. And it's the
contras, the freedom fighters, who are stopping them.'"
(Detroit Free Press, 4/23/86, p. 15a) Indeed, the situations
are connected. The U.S. is overcoming the "post-Vietnam
syndrome" according to Reagan (Ibid.) and taking a global
approach to defeat its Soviet rivals.
   Backing this point of view is illustrious scholar Daniel
Pipes who published an editorial saying "the U.S. should next
time go all out against Col. Qadhafi--destroying his air
force, crippling his oil facilities, and so forth." (Wall
Street Journal, 4/23/86, p. 34) Pipes, son of Richard Pipes,
Harvard scholar and former foreign policy adviser to Reagan
on the Soviet Union, said that Reagan was stuck in the
Vietnam syndrome himself. Speaking against "proportionate
response" and "incrementalism," as seen in Vietnam according
to Pipes, the U.S. should deal Khadafy one death blow and end
the fighting. Pipes concludes that "like Grenada, Libya is
unusually vulnerable to American power." (Ibid.) Surely the
son will follow the father into "public service."

   WALL STREET JOURNAL CRITICIZES REAGAN AS SOFT
   The Wall Street Journal criticized Reagan for even trying
to appear to uphold the SALT II treaty. "Death Knell for SDI"
said that Reagan must stand up to the Soviets or his SDI
program will suffer because of treaty claims. (The Journal is
implying that if Reagan is going to uphold SALT II, what
about SALT I? Won't he give up SDI for SALT I?) (Wall Street
Journal, 4/23/86, p. 34)

   RETIRED ISRAELI GENERAL ADMITS $2 BILLION DEAL WITH IRAN
   An Israeli retired general attempted to export $2 billion
in arms to Iran. He claimed that Israeli authorities quietly
authorized him to make the deal. (Wall Street Journal,
4/24/86)

   SOVIETS STRIKE BACK IN INTERNATIONAL SITUATION--
AFGHANISTAN
   Moslem rebels in Afghanistan admitted that Soviet
commandos captured and destroyed the most important rebel
base near the border with Pakistan. (Wall Street Journal,
4/24/86) The Soviet strike demonstrates that while the U.S.
may have control in the Libya situation, the Soviets can also
accelerate progress toward nuclear holocaust and make a point
of it when the U.S. flexes its muscle.

   SOVIETS STRIKE IN ERITREA TOO
   An April 14th communique from the Eritrean People's
Liberation Front stated that three to five thousand
"additional Soviet technicians and pilots have recently
arrived in Asmara in connection with the Dergue's ongoing
preparation for yet another large-scale offensive against the
EPLF.... This raises the number of Soviet military advisors
in Eritrea to 6,500-8,500."
   The EPLF has chosen not to confront the Soviet Union with
a fully Maoist analysis. In the communique it "calls upon the
Soviet Union to stop its steadily escalating intervention in
support of Ethiopia's policy of expansionism and
destabilization and, instead, use its authority and
influence, as a big power, to bring about peace and
stability."
   In any case, the Soviets moves in Ethiopia coincided with
its removing anti-aircraft experts from action in Libya prior
to the U.S. attack. The Soviets thus demonstrated that its
international posture is not weakening and that properly
subservient countries such as Ethiopia will receive the aid
they need.

   SOUTH AFRICA CHANGES INFLUX CONTROL
   South Africa apparently abolished pass laws for Blacks and
released prisoners convicted for pass law offenses.
   In the past, Blacks carried around a passbook everywhere
to justify their presence in white areas. Without official
permission as indicated in the passbook, Blacks were subject
to arrest and imprisonment. Most Blacks suffered under the
law at one time or another.
   Now it appears that all peoples in South Africa will carry
around identification cards. (New York Times, 4/25/86)
   AZAPO denounced the appearance of reform in South Africa:
"The removal of influx control is a very minute step towards
the removal of the racist laws that entrench white
supremacy." (Ibid.)
   AZAPO also pointed out that economic influx control will
replace legal influx control. Blacks may have the right to
visit the white areas, but they may not remain without a
residence. In other words, South Africa's extreme housing
shortage for Blacks will mean a different law will keep
Blacks out of the white areas. (Ibid.)
   "'Local authorities... still will have control over the
movement of people. It will take place within the framework
of provisions to control squatting, to enforce health
regulations, to deal with loitering and congregating,'" said
Mary Burton of the Black Sash a civil rights organization
composed of women. (Chicago Tribune, 4/27/86, p. 10)

   NEW YORK TIMES NOTICES DIRECT AMERICAN TROOP ROLE IN
CENTRAL AMERICA
   Although U.S. servicemen are flying contras in and out of
battle- zones in Nicaragua and Honduras, the New York Times
has chosen to make a front page story out of a different
fact: American Army helicopters and 50 American soldiers took
a role in flying Honduran troops to areas near the Nicaraguan
border where supposed Sandinista aggressions were taking
place. (NYTimes, 3/27/86, p. a1) This apparently is "news fit
to print." Wonderful American troops are protecting tiny
sovereign and defenseless Honduras.
   The same actions by Americans for contras is not fit to
print partly because the war in Central America is semi-
covert still: The American press does not report American
supplied bombing in El Salvador or the role of Americans in
the contra war. The U.S. government actually does conduct a
semi-covert war thanks to the media.

   HONDURAN OFFICIAL BLOWS SCRIPT
   The American sponsored regime in Honduras is in quite a
bind. On the one hand, the president of the country told the
press of a supposed international incident in which
Sandinistas pursued contra enemies into Honduras. Honduras
requested military aid and received the American troop
support discussed above. However, there is a certain price to
pay for this lackeyism. Honduran officials later covered
themselves by saying that it was Reagan who suggested the
whole uproar and military aid in the first place. This keeps
Honduras from appearing to want to fight Nicaragua on behest
of the United States. "'The United States interest was that
this situation have the connotation of an international
incident,'" said a Honduran official. "'We had no interest in
this.'" (New York Times, 4/3/86, p. a1) The irony of American
supported regimes is that they sometimes can not appear too
slavish lest they upset the nationalist sentiments of the
people they need to repress at the smallest cost possible.
   Still, the United States threatened to cut off military
aid if Honduras did not complain about Nicaraguan incursions.
Once it did complain, Honduras received $20 million in
military aid. (Detroit Free Press, 3/29/86, p. a1)

   NPA SPLINTERING?
   One of Aquino's first acts in power was to free 500
political prisoners "including Jose Maria Sison, founder of
the Communist Party, and Bernabe Buscayno, first leader of
the New People's Army." (New York Times, 3/25/86, p. 3) Such
actions can obviously cause both leadership quarrels amongst
the rebels and popular sympathy for Aquino.
   Reports have trickled out of NPA units' surrendering.
However, one such surrender involved only 20 guns and 1,000
supposed communists. It is not clear how much that particular
incident is merely a staged surrender created by the
government. (Ibid.)

   HOW TO SURVIVE NUCLEAR WAR, BY THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE
   The front page of the "Tomorrow: Science, medicine and
technology" section of the Chicago Tribune featured
instructions to build a fall-out shelter.
   The Federal Emergency Management Agency operates with the
philosophy that "'You need civil defense for the same reason
you wear seat belts. Pulling seat belts on doesn't mean you
drive more recklessly.'" (Chicago Tribune, 2/16/86)
   It's enough to make one wonder why the government does not
tell people to carry around pillows: "You need civil defense
for the same reason you carry around pillows. Carrying
pillows around doesn't mean you will jump off more buildings
and bridges."
   "The U.S. Defense Department estimates that a limited
nuclear war could result in as few as 5 percent fatalities,
or about 12 million Americans." (Ibid.) That's quite a few.
   Obviously the government and its vigilant press are
preparing the public for an escalation of war hostilities to
the level of nuclear holocaust. So don't wait, save your
C.O.D.s and send cash or check to the "Survival Center," NY,
NY for a "one-year food supply costing $975 per person that
can be purchased on a layaway plan." (Ibid.)
   The recommended food supply is found in "Life After
Doomsday." "8 cans of crackers or cookies; 4 pounds of candy;
a pound each of sugar and salt; 16 jars of coffee, tea or
cocoa; 8 dozen bottles of soft drinks; 16 cans of evaporated
milk; 16 cans of fruit; 32 cans each of vegetables, soups and
entrees such as meat or fish; 16 jars of peanut butter; 8
jars of jam; and 56 single-serving packets of cereal."
(Ibid.)
   Of course, "the comfort level of the shelter varies with
the cost... A section of basement can be converted to provide
some additional fallout shelter for as little as $500."
(Ibid.)

   ROUTINE BRUTALITY PROCEDURE BACKFIRES
   Police barged in on a supposed narcotics dealer's house.
The attack was a surprise attack. No one in the house was
prepared or asked in advance to surrender.
   However, this was not an ordinary raid. A different squad
of police were already inside questioning their suspects--not
aware of the other squad's plans to barge in.
   This time there could be no lies or cover-up at least on
some of the basic facts. In the end two Detroit police
officers were shot dead. Police officers shot police officers
before asking questions, all within twenty seconds. (Detroit
Free Press, 3/2/86)
   For once, American "democracy," "procedure" and "due
process" did not victimize the oppressed. But will anyone
believe the police's story about restraint and procedure
after the next police murder?

   NATIVE AMERICAN OPPRESSION: ANOTHER CHAPTER
   U.S. plundering of American Indian land has still not
ended for the inhabitants of Big Mountain. The U.S.
government has threatened these tribes with military force
unless they evacuate their land for the use of uranium mining
companies. But the Indians are not giving up; for hundreds of
years the Navajos and Hopis have shared the joint use area
(JUA) of Northeast Arizona. Relocating them would be
traumatic and impossible.
   Women of the Navajo tribes (the Navajo, or Dine, are
matrilineal) have led the fight; many have been arrested. The
military option is only one step in the U.S.'s long
domination of these peoples. In the 1960s, herbicides were
sprinkled on the area to justify reduction of livestock on
"overgrazed" land. The mass of the American public has heard
only, if at all, of the Navajo-Hopi land dispute, which the
government hopes will justify its brutal relocation plan. In
reality corporate intervention caused the infighting, and its
exaggeration only obscures the real issue of genocide; both
groups have been denied fundamental human rights. The most
obvious results are the framing of Leonard Peltier, the
record suicide and alcoholism rates among Indian peoples.
   Concerned people should write: Big Mountain Legal
Defense/Offence Committee, 124 N. San Francisco, Flagstaff,
AZ, 86001. In her letter to the feminist newsmonthly
Sojourner, Lynn Rose asks, "what about the Native Americans?
While we work to keep our homes free of the nuclear threat,
we virtually ignore the very source of that threat: the
mining of uranium. We may not be aware of the very high rates
of cancer, miscarriage and death due to uranium mining on
Indian lands. The antinuclear movement is made up largely of
white people. Are we on some level acting as a white self-
interest group?" (Soujourner, Oct. 1985)

   THE KILLING OF JUDITH PENLEY: MASS EFFORTS NEEDED TO
DISCOVER TRUTH
   September 26, 1985--Tennessee Valley Authority nuclear
plant worker Judith Penley is shot to death by two shots in
the head as she sits in a friend's care near a parking lot.
Later the county police find indications that the murder has
been the work of a professional, maybe a contract killer.
Many friends, who know that Penley complained about the
nuclear plant's disregard of safety precautions, now believe
she was killed to silence her. Where is the truth?
   Local authorities have suggested that the killing involved
Judith Penley personally. But they have failed to uncover any
reason why Penley, a quiet mother of 2 children, happily
married, should have aroused such animosity.
   The investigation of Penley's murder is important, but can
any real justice be done by an FBI which may well have helped
cover up the killing of Karen Silkwood? (Off Our Backs, Dec.
1985)

   SHUTTLE LOSS AGGRIEVES PENTAGON
   According to so-called "Defense" Secretary Caspar
Weinberger, "' the actual shuttle capacity has been reduced
by more than a quarter, so we are going to have to delay and
push back many of the programs-- payloads as they're called--
that we had planned for the shuttle, including some of the
Strategic Defense' programs."

   SOVIET ACADEMICIANS STRUGGLE AGAINST STATE CAPITALISM
   "A leading Soviet economist has published an article
asserting that economic opportunity in the Soviet Union is
still determined to a large extent by a person's social
status, connections and geographic location." (New York
Times, 1/27/86, p. a4) It seems that Tatyana Zaslavskaya has
taken to criticizing the Soviet social structure by comparing
it with communism. It is hard to say how far the economist is
willing to go in criticizing the Soviet Union, but outsiders
must remember that struggle takes different forms in
different conditions. At the very least, this economist is
criticizing the Soviet Union from the left.
   Most encouragingly, Tatyana Zaslavskaya argues that the
Soviet Union has yet to meet Marx's expectations of
socialism, never mind communism. For instance, she says that
pay is not according to work in the Soviet Union.
   "'Opportunities for the timely development of one's
abilities are still dependent to a large extent on one's
geographical locations and on the social standing of one's
parents.... The higher the level of study, the greater is the
difference among social groups.... The majority of students
in the most prestigious schools are the graduates of the best
Moscow schools.... The majority of girls who graduate from
village schools have to go to work at cattle farms because
there are no other jobs for them, while graduates from urban
schools have a wide choice of professions.'" (Ibid.) It seems
unlikely that any faction of the state capitalist class would
point up these factors as roadblocks to classless society.
   Another article suggested that Gorbachev's modernization
program would result in large bouts of temporary
unemployment. (Ibid.) Again this could represent the struggle
of one faction of one group of state capitalists against
another. Often in the Soviet Union since the 60s, sections of
the government have argued unemployment to get workers to
ally with one section of the state capitalist class against
another. On the other hand, talk of large unemployment opens
the way to criticisms of the Soviet social structure and may
be interpreted quite extensively in the Soviet context.

   PLO/ISRAELI COLLABORATOR MAYOR KILLED
   A pro-Soviet faction of the PLO working with Abu Nidal
killed a mayor on the West Bank upon the failure of Jordanian
"peace talks" with Yasser Arafat. Reportedly, 50,000
Palestinians attended the funeral of Zafer al-Masri. They
carried pictures of the slain mayor and Arafat. Arafat had
endorsed the mayor after Israel made it clear it would
appoint him and after he claimed to have found that Zafer al-
Masri was indeed popular. (Detroit Free Press, 3/4/86)
   Apparently the death of the mayor evoked some nationalist
sentiments that deserve respect. Of course, there are also a
number of Palestinians economically dependent on Jordan on
the West Bank. 2,500 receive civil servant salaries from
Jordan. Many others sell farm produce to Jordan. (Ibid.)
   The assassination by the mayor represents stepped up
efforts of the anti-Arafat and pro-Syrian factions of the
PLO. Arafat is clearly getting tagged as a collaborator with
Israel and Jordan. On the other hand, the attackers appear
equally dependent on Syria.
   Overall Arafat is in a difficult position. He benefits
from the sympathy for the assassinated mayor, but he is also
clearly identified with Israel in that sympathy.
   MIM would like to ask various long-standing cheerleaders
of the PLO: who are they waving the flag for now? Nothing
could cause greater disorientation than hitching one's cart
whole-heartedly to this opportunist-led organization. Arafat
has done everything short of taking an Israeli salary and
appears to realize his value to Israel and the United States
as a potential ally relative to more pro-Soviet leaders in
the PLO. He is left to holding out for the best deal until
the day he gets one or is assassinated by impatient Israelis.
While the PLO's cause deserves support, its factionalization
and opportunism points up that it was not always the perfect
vehicle of revolutionary nationalism it was cracked up to be
by its tag-along supporters. The Palestinian people deserve
better leadership.

   APARTHEID NORMALIZES VIOLENCE
   The white settler regime occupying Azania (South Africa)
lifted its seven month state of emergency. It is no longer
considered an emergency to shoot the Black people of Azania
every day. Indeed, the settler regime's violence has
increased: "The rate of killings has risen to five a day from
fewer than four before the emergency was lifted." (New York
Times, 3/27/86, p. a1)