|
Questions for Professor Jose
Maria Sison after his presentation at the Third Annual Global
Studies Association Conference, Brandeis University, Boston, MA, USA
24 April 2004
There have been discussions in academic circles about
multilateralism in relation to U.S. interventionism. In
your talk you have focused on U.S. imperialism as the dominant
force. What is your critique about the notion of
multilateralism within the context of neo-liberal
globalization and how would you situate U.S. imperialism in
it?
US touters of neo-liberal globalization are supposed to lay
great store on so-called multilateralism. They wish
loudly though deceptively that all countries be leveled off by
"free trade" and that no single state be protectionist. In
reality, imperialist countries multilaterally collude against
the more numerous client states and against the working people
of the world. At the same time, the imperialist countries
compete and contend with each other and in the process
subdivide into smaller scales of multilateralism, bilateralism
and unilateralism.
The US as sole superpower or hyper-power in economic and
politico-economic terms is adept at using multilateralism on
any scale (UN, UN Security Council, Group of 8, OECD, IMF,
World Bank, WTO, NATO, etc.) as well as bilateralism and
unilateralism in order to achieve its imperialist objectives.
It is characteristic of the US to promote its
ultra-nationalist interests under the cover of multilateralism
or to use multilateralism to spread the costs of security and
war and at the same time unilateralism to get all or most of
the peacetime plunder and the spoils of war.
In the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, the US appeared
unilateralist (despite the company of Britain and a few other
sidekicks) because it grossly violated the UN charter and UNSC
resolutions in its obvious desire to take over the oil
resources, to privatize all the major state assets
of Iraq and to deliver prime contracts to the US
monopoly firms. But now as the Iraqi resistance to the US
occupation is becoming more lethal, the US is
emphatically calling for multilateral support. Bush and
the neo-conservative war maniacs have clearly overestimated
the ability of the US to control the situation, especially
after the apparent success of the invasion.
In its "war on terrorism", the U.S. government has
indiscriminately labeled the revolutionary movement in the
Philippines as a "terrorist group". Can you
elaborate on this issue, touching on the response of the
revolutionary movement, the impact this labeling has on the
people's movement in the Philippines, and what it implies
about the ideological component of U.S. imperialism in the
context of neo-liberal globalization?
Representatives of the Philippine revolutionary movement have
condemned the US for labeling and listing the CPP, NPA and the
NDFP chief political consultant "terrorists". They have
exposed and denounced the US for using the 9/11 attacks as the
pretext for attacking national liberation movements, countries
assertive of national independence and progressive leaders and
as an opportunity for US imperialist self-aggrandizement
within the context of neo-liberal globalization.
The US is spreading fascism and war globally by pushing its
so-called permanent and borderless war on terrorism, engaging
in military intervention and wars of aggression and inducing
allied and puppet countries to replicate the anti-democratic
USA PATRIOT Act and unleash conditions of open terror.
The US motive and objective in launching wars of aggression on
Afghanistan and Iraq are to seize control over strategic
points and oil sources and routes of supply. Also, the
military intervention in the Philippines is to further
consolidate economic control over Southeast Asia, especially
the oil sources and supply routes there.
The Philippine revolutionary movement has condemned US
imperialism as the No. 1 terrorist power in the entire history
of humankind and the Filipino people. It has cited the
1.5 million Filipinos killed by US troops from 1899 (start of
the Filipino-American War) to 1913 (the end of the
so-called pacification campaigns), the US instigation of and
support for the 14-year Marcos fascist dictatorship and the
daily violence of exploitation of the Filipino people by the
US and the local reactionaries. In this connection, the
Philippine revolutionary forces have reiterated their
determination to fight US domination in all aspects.
.
Can you give us concrete examples of grassroots movements'
strategies of resistance against U.S. imperialism and
neo-liberal globalization in the countries you mentioned in
your talk and what were the outcomes, limits, and strengths of
those strategies?
The strategies of successful grassroots movements against US
imperialism and neo-liberal globalization necessarily involve
the following lines of action: arouse (information and
education campaigns), organize (sectoral and multisectoral
mass formations) and mobilize (protest and petition rallies
and other forms of campaign. These lines of action are
required whether grassroots movements are legal and/or wage
armed struggle.
Successful mass leaders and activists pursue the mass line,
from the masses to the masses. They undertake social
investigation to know the concrete conditions, needs and
sentiments of the masses. Thus, they learn what to tell
the masses in arousing, organizing and mobilizing them along a
certain general line opposed to the oppressive and
exploitative conditions of the country. For example, the
general line of struggle is national democratic of a new type
in confronting the semi-colonial and semi-feudal conditions in
the Philippines.
The legal democratic movement in the Philippines is now
exposing the destructive effects of neo-liberal globalization
on local production, basic food security and employment. The
sending out of Filipino workers, especially the great numbers
of women, is a clear manifestation and consequence of
neo-liberal globalization. Thus, a demand for national
liberation, national industrialization and land reform is
growing. As this demand is frustrated, the people
recognize the necessity of the new democratic revolution
through people’s war against imperialism and the local
exploiting classes.
Can you tell us more about your case, your not being
allowed to come to the U.S. and the Netherlands government's
response to your case?
The US has. falsely designated and listed me as a terrorist
since August 12, 2002 and barred me from entering the
US. Following the baton of the US, the Dutch government
has likewise listed me as a "terrorist" since August 13, 2002.
It has frozen my personal bank account, ruled that I cannot
take any paid job, and terminated social benefits for
subsistence, housing and health insurance.
I t has prohibited me from dealing with bank, insurance and
other financial firms and has put border authorities on alert
against me. It has encouraged a campaign of stigmatization and
demonization that does not only seek to destroy my reputation
but encourage threats against my life and physical integrity.
It has taken the lead in asking the Council of he European
Council to put me in its "terrorist" List and has provided the
false information for the decision of the European Council to
put me in its witchhunt list.
My lawyers and I have filed complaints against the Dutch
authorities concerned. We do so administratively and
then through the courts. I do not expect justice from
the Dutch authorities. We are prepared to appeal the
Dutch case to the European Court of Human Rights in
Strasbourg. In connection with the "terrorist" listing
by the European Council, my lawyers and I have already filed a
complaint before the European Court of Justice in
Luxembourg. We are through with the exchange of written
arguments. We are now waiting for the oral procedure to
be called by the court.
What forms of international solidarity can be waged from
the grassroots to deal with the formidable forces of
imperialism and what do you see are the roles of organic
intellectuals, the peasantry, the workers, and women in this
process?
There are many forms of international solidarity that can be
waged at the grassroots level to fight the formidable forces
of imperialism. There can be campaigns to exchange
information, views and calls to action on an international
scale among grassroots organizations through the internet, a
very economical and fast way of communication.
Grassroots organizations can run websites as steady sources of
information about their positions and capabilities, programs
of action and activities.
The intellectuals and activists can express their ideas and
views and spread them widely against the formidable forces of
imperialism, especially because of the economic and fast way
of electronic communication. The ideas and views of the
organic intellectuals can speedily go deep and wide among the
workers, peasants, women, youth and other major sectors.
The broad masses of the people are undergoing grave suffering
and they are receptive to clear analysis and the line of
action for changing the terrible crisis situation imposed on
them by the imperialists and their subalterns. Ultimately,
they will decide the life-and-death issues in society at large
and in every sector. They are capable of taking matters
into their own hands and decide their own fate because they
become highly conscious of their rights, they are well
organized and they are tested in militant mobilizations.
|
|