Due to this issue there is currently a new outburst of nationalist rhetoric in public discourse in Greece.  The common strategy of ‘Divide & Conquer’ is being employed in Balkans turning in this way the peoples of two countries against each other. In this act of ‘Macedonian’ drama, the showcase of national interest is misleading people in Greece in demonstrating against a created external common enemy, using as frontispiece the name of Macedonia. And because of this situation, people who are now resisting or just speaking publicly against this nationalistic rhetoric are being considered non-patriots or even traitors.

On the 21st of January, various nationalist groups in Greece managed to gather approximately 90.000 people (who came with buses from every part of the country) in Thessaloniki demanding the term ‘Macedonia’ not be included in the new name of the neighboring country. Under the exacerbated nationalism that has prevailed in the country, numerous far-right and fascist groups have taken advantage of this situation by attacking political squats and collectives that fight against state nationalism.  During that demonstration, these parastatal groups attacked the libertarian social collective of ‘EKX Sxoleio’ and afterwards they set fire to the anti-authoritarian squat of ‘Libertatia’. It is worth noting that these attacks were tolerated by the nearby police forces, a fact that shows once again the collaboration of fascists with the police and unmasks a government that claims to be ‘left’ and ‘in favor of people’.

The whole issue of the name of Macedonia works also as a disorienting pseudo-dilemma hiding the continuing harsh neoliberal attack against the rights of the people of both countries. At the same time that ‘national rallies for the name of Macedonia’ are organized in Greece, omnibus bills that extend the austerity policies are being voted in the parliament, auctions of primary residences (even of poor people) have started and the workers’ right to strike has been severely restricted.

It is also worth remembering that the political forces that present themselves as ‘patriotic’ by supporting the nationalist rallies and claiming that they ‘care’ about Greece:

• are the very ones that when they were in power promoted policies that were destructive for the natural environment of the country
• have sold natural resources and public companies to domestic or foreign private companies
• have violated every possible regulation to facilitate the disastrous (from an environmental and financial perspective) investment of the Canadian company El Dorado Gold in Skouries-Chalkidiki
• have taken decisive steps to commercialize and privatize drinking water in Thessaloniki.

We promote internationalism and class solidarity with Balkan people against the rise of nationalism and continuing neoliberal policies in both countries. Our belief is that people of both countries should fight against the degradation and exploitation of our lives by the neoliberal capitalist assault instead of demonstrating against each other. In fact, this is the only way to ensure a long-lasting peace in the region.

WE CONDEMN THE FASCIST ATTACKS ON RESISTING POLITICAL COLLECTIVES

WE STRUGGLE AGAINST NATIONALISM THAT CAPITALISM PROMOTES IN ALL COUNTRIES

30 January 2018

ReINFORM

Source of featured image: ThePressProject

https://twitter.com/reinformnl

SYRIZA’s mild Keynesian programme has been gutted. Is a more democratic economic alternative possible within the framework of the EU?

SYRIZA’s victory in the Greek elections of 25 January raised a wave of hope across Europe.  The dominance of the austerity-oriented conservative and social democratic parties was at last challenged by the victory of a leftist anti-austerity party, signalling a possible change of course in Europe.

But one month into a SYRIZA-led administration, the prospects look much gloomier.  SYRIZA is committed to Greece remaining within the Eurozone, and that requires the agreement of several powerful institutions (EU, ECB, IMF) and the tolerance of the core economic elites of Europe.  This was not forthcoming.  The new Greek Government was quickly challenged by a liquidity blackmail originated by the ECB and supported by the German government and the EU leadership.  It soon became apparent that even mildly reversing austerity and prioritising the tackling of the humanitarian crisis – the main pillars of SYRIZA’s Keynesian programme – have no place in the EU as currently constituted.

In late 2014, the previous coalition government of conservatives and social democrats refused the EU Commission’s offer to extend the bailout programme until the summer asking an extension until the end of February instead.  In this way, the newly elected government faced an immediate liquidity danger and was forced into a negotiation with the EU under unfavourable terms.  After repeated Eurogroup meetings, the new government practically gave up on the bulk of its programme so as to buy some time (four months).  According to the common Eurogroup statement of 20 February, and the letter of the Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis of 23 February, with the first commitments the Greek government agreed to leave practically untouched all privatisations and the majority of the budget cuts of the last four years and practically committed not to intervene to the banking sector.  All the sovereign debt is recognised as payable.  The Troika’s labour market deregulation laws are to be carefully evaluated, and partly changed, but definitely not reversed.  The raising of the national minimum wage will be subject to the approval of the EU, while further wage cuts in the public sector are not excluded (without adjustment of the wage floors).  The government is committed to abandoning all possibilities of early retirement, meaning the neoliberal pension reforms remain, while the already-realised pension reductions and the implementation of the pay-as-you-go system of the previous governments must remain untouched.

The abolition of Troika’s ‘Memorandum of Understanding’ (MoU) was the most central element of SYRIZA’s political campaign since 2011, and is the basis of the mandate it received in the recent elections.  Yet the new Eurogroup agreement refers to the MoU as the ‘existing arrangement’.  Moreover, EU Commissioners and Eurogroup’s Chairman Jeroen Djisselbloem publicly claimed the deal is about the extension of the MoU.

The SYRIZA-led government managed to avoid, for the moment, some of the remaining demands of the Troika under the MoU – like further reductions in pensions and changes to the laws on strikes and the funding of unions – but failed to abolish the bulk of it.  It got an extension of the same loan agreement – without any renegotiation of its characteristics – and the MoU will be evaluated with Varoufakis’ aforementioned letter as the ‘starting point’.

Nothing prevents the EU from coming back and insisting on the implementation of all measures included in the MoU, even if they are not in Varoufakis’s list, whilst the IMF has objected that the Greek letter ‘is not conveying clear assurances that the Government intends to undertake the reforms envisaged in the Memorandum’.  It notes in particular the commitment in the MoU to pension and VAT reforms, to opening up of closed sectors and privatisations, as well as administrative and labour reforms, and it emphasises that the ‘completion of the review’ cannot ‘be successful […] within the policy perimeters outlined in the Government’s list’.

The text of the Eurozone deal itself includes major impediments to the implementation of SYRIZA’s manifesto of 2014, known as the Thessaloniki programme.[1]  But the worst is that it gives the EU and the IMF the right to veto any law or reform with any economic impact introduced in the next four months.[2] The following table compares SYRIZA’s most important electoral pledges (included in the Thessaloniki programme) with the Eurogroup’s deal, or the list of measures included in ‘Varoufakis’ letter’ accepted by the EU as ‘a valid starting point for a successful conclusion of the [MoU’s] review’:

The first pillar of the Thessaloniki programme was a €2 billion bill to deal with the humanitarian crisis.  This included free electricity and food support to 300,000 households living in poverty, free healthcare to all, and subsidised rent for tens of thousands of citizens to combat homelessness.  It also included the restoration of the so called thirteenth pension (end of year bonus) for pensions below €700.  Now any decision impacting on the budget can be vetoed by the EU.  On the top of that, the government has committed to paying €22 billion on servicing the debt this year and still coming out with more than a 1.5% budget surplus.  Each 1% of fiscal surplus means €1.8 billion less for humanitarian relief.  In addition, non-salary and non-pension government expenditures are to be ‘rationalised’.  In a second letter sent by Varoufakis to the Eurogroup on 6 March 2015, the cost of the programme is reduced to 200 million.  Free electricity will finally be provided to only half of the households programmed (150,000) while the provision of free healthcare and the ‘thirteenth pension’ have disappeared.  All the cost is supposed to be covered by cuts in the expenditure of government ministries and a new system of public tenders which is expected to save €140 million.[3]

The second pillar of the Thessaloniki programme was about ‘restarting the economy’ by halting the ‘tax repression’ of the economically active part of the population.  The backbone of this pillar was the plan to help citizens with tax debts by breaking them into small (100) instalments, writing-off about half of these debts for those that pay up to April, restoring the limit of tax free income to €12,000 a year and cancelling the housing tax for small housing properties.  However, the EU is expected to add many conditions to these measures, with which the government had estimated it would receive €3 billion in revenues in the first year.  In the second letter sent by Varoufakis, writing off parts of tax arrears is replaced by ‘strict payment discipline’ as in the similar programme that was put forward by the previous government and finally rejected by the Troika.  The likely beneficiaries are also reduced since whoever misses a payment is now excluded automatically from the programme.

The other flagship measure of the second pillar was the restructuring of ‘bad loans’ made by banks to households and businesses.  SYRIZA proposed creating a public body that would buy and restructure this debt (which amounts to €77 billion) using €3 billion from the Hellenic Financial Stability Fund (HFSF).[4]  But this proposal has already been killed off by the Eurogroup deal, which made clear these funds ‘can only be used for bank recapitalisation and resolution costs’.  In any case,  these funds have in fact already been returned to European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF)/ European Stability Mechanism (ESM) and Greek banks can apply directly to the ECB/SSM by the end of June to use them.  But even if the Greek government could use these funds, they would still be insufficient to deal with the volume of the bad loans.

The third pillar of SYRIZA’s programme is referred to as ‘re-conquering labour’, and is perhaps the one most fatally undermined by the Eurogroup deal and Varoufakis’s letter.  Since the government agreed to refrain ‘from any rollback of measures [...] that would negatively impact [...] economic recovery [...], as assessed by the institutions’, any re-establishment of the collective bargaining system and arbitration mechanism that was demolished by the Troika would surely be vetoed.  In the place of the old system, the Varoufakis letter talks about ‘a new “smart” approach to collective wage bargaining that balances the needs for flexibility with fairness’.

The creation of 300,000 new jobs and the provision of 300,000 new unemployment allowances are now out of question, especially given that the €3 billion expected from tax reforms will be lost to servicing the debt and achieving a budget surplus.  In line with the 2011 Euro plus pact, Varoufakis’s letter pledges that ‘changes in wages’ will be ‘in line with productivity developments and competitiveness’.  With no investments in sight to improve productivity, and no other factor to drive Greek capital’s competitiveness other than low wages, this effectively rules out any wage increases.

Prospects are bleak for the public sector workers as well.  Varoufakis’s promise to freeze ‘the public sector’s wage bill’ and deliver ‘wage distribution through productivity gains’ means any improvement in the €600 salary that newly appointed doctors and teachers now receive, forcing them below the poverty line, is unlikely.  The Greek public sector has lost more than 200,000 employees since 2010, resulting in the radical degradation of basic services to the people.  One of SYRIZA’s electoral pledges was to hire back around 4,000 people who were illegally fired by the previous government.  Now it says these people will be included in the 15,000 public sector jobs the previous government announced it would create.  The Greek public sector needs much more of a boost on recruitments to become functional again.

An indication on the direction of the compromises that were made by SYRIZA is given by the position of the Greek employers.  While SYRIZA enjoys massive support among the working class around the country, it was the Federation of Greek Employers (SEV) who saluted the measures in Varoufakis’s letter and called citizens to ‘support the government’s agenda with fortitude and faith’!

What comes after the four month period?

This four month programme extension will unfortunately not be the end of the EU’s tutelage over Greece.  According to the government, this is only a bridge programme to be replaced in June by a permanent ‘contractual agreement’.  Greece’s unsustainable sovereign debt will need fresh cash to be serviced, and European tax payers will once again be forced to contribute to this black hole.  There is little prospect that any new economic programme attached to a new loan will be a programme for growth and social justice as SYRIZA would like.  On the contrary, it will likely have the same characteristics as the existing austerity programme.  Within this framework, it is difficult to imagine any improvement in Greece’s most extreme socio-economic problems; namely the 1.3 million unemployed, the 60% of working people unable to make ends meet, the three million people with no access healthcare and the lack of public investment which has led to a lost generation and a generalised feeling of depression.  Since it is actually questionable whether the Thessaloniki programme would be enough to put an end this social and economic disaster, one can only imagine what the consequences will be now that even this programme has been gutted.

Lessons to be learned

If one thing has become clear, it is that the long-expected change of course in Greece and the EU more broadly, will not come just because SYRIZA has come to power.  The question that emerges is whether things could have gone, and can still go, differently.  Is it possible for a left government in an austerity hit country to apply even a mild Keynesian policy while remaining within the eurozone and the EU? The answer is simply NO!

The EU institutions under the leadership of Germany have used all the means at their disposal to force the Greek government to backtrack from its programme.  Without new loans, Greece can’t service its existing debt, and the ECB (acting on behalf of the EU) has already threatened to cut off liquidity to enforce harsh neoliberal reforms, as it did in negotiations with Italy, Ireland and Cyprus.

In addition to the financial ‘weapons of mass destruction’ (liquidity and debt), the EU has numerous tools to discipline governments deviating from austerity policies, even when it hasn’t bailed them out.  The rules of economic governance in the EU give the European Commission the ability to review the yearly budgets of the countries, and to demand changes and apply fines to countries that deviate from its recommendations.  They can also freeze the structural funds[5] for a country that does not follow their recommendations on reducing deficits and sanctions can now also be imposed on countries for not dealing with ‘a macroeconomic imbalance’ the way the Commission recommends.  One of the rules imposed is the capping of the growth of nominal labour unit cost[6] at 9% for Eurozone countries and 12% for non-Eurozone countries for three consecutive years.  This effectively bars the redistribution of GDP from capital to labour through wages.  Such rules of economic governance are based on hardline neoliberal principles, and their interpretation is at the discretion of the organs of the EU (i.e. the European Commission) which are not subject to any democratic control.  Legislation on ‘competition’ and liberalisation also prohibits treating energy, mass transport, telecommunications or finance as public services.  In this context, there is just no room for manoeuvre for even a mild Keynesian economic programme.

Opposition to the dominant EU project has been on the rise not just in Greece, but also in Spain, and to a lesser extent in other countries too, like Slovenia and Portugal.  Left-wing forces have invested politically in the idea of pushing for progressive reform of the EU.  However, the demands of the social movements that these forces seek to represent – for more democracy, more commons, less unemployment and precariousness, work with rights and a more decent life – are clearly in contradiction with the political, legal and institutional structure of the EU.  What strategy then should be followed vis-à-vis the EU by political and social forces that aim to break with neoliberalism?

Changing the legislation on economic governance and infrastructure liberalisation would require a ‘qualified majority’ in the Council, while overcoming the European Fiscal Compact and other treaties would require unanimity.  We can be sure the socio-political conditions will never be favourable for the radical left to form governments in 16 out of the 28 countries, representing 65% of the EU’s population.  Applying disobedience to current EU treaties and legislation, therefore, is the only way for left governments to follow different policies.  Moreover, several institutions with substantial financial and political power (the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the European Stability Mechanism) lie beyond any immediate democratic control, and will always be able to take action against any undesirable political change at the EU level.

The only way for (radical) left governments to overcome these constraints is to regain monetary power by introducing national currencies under democratic control.  This would also require abolishing the ‘independence’ of their central bank and re-appropriating the capacity to create their own liquidity.  Such a programme should also include the nationalisation of private banks and the introduction of capital controls to avoid capital flight and find resources for job-creation and public investment.  Finally, it would require an end to the servicing of sovereign debt and an invitation to creditors to negotiate on this basis.[7]

The necessary requirement for a left political programme to succeed is that the political power of the forces it represents must extend further than the government.  It must be deeply rooted in mass movements and have the active support of the people.  Left movements must go much further than trying to ease the suffering caused by neoliberal policies, and aim at building an economy orientated towards serving the majority of people, while respecting the planet and the needs of future generations.  For a programme to be successful, an alternative vision must take roots in the hearts and minds of people, and this can only happen if it is concretely put in place with grass-roots initiatives and cooperative local economies leading the effort.

Greece now has four months to decide whether it wants to continue under the austerity straightjacket imposed by Schauble, Dijsselbloem, Draghi, Juncker and Lagarde, or to show the rest of Europe that a different path is possible.  The Left all over Europe should take note of the severe constraints that a an anti-austerity government faces within the Euro and the Treaties.  Juncker has remarked that ‘there can be no democratic choice against the European treaties’ – if he is right, it follows that a genuinely democratic economic alternative will only be possible outside of the framework of EU.

Dimitris Pavlopoulos works as an assistant professor at the department of Sociology of the Free University of Amsterdam. His research concerns the socioeconomic consequences of flexible employment.

Yiorgos Vassalos is a political scientist specialising in interest representation in the EU. He worked for six years for Corporate Europe Observatory and is now writing his PhD on financial lobbying. He is also active in anti-austerity movements.

On the 25^th of May the citizens of EU member states are going to vote for the European Parliament. While people in countries of EU, and especially in Greece, face the hardest ever attack on their basic rights in the history of EU, the question that arises is what position in the elections can facilitate the end of the crisis.

The last years EU has clearly demonstrated a repulsive face:

• Using the global economic crisis as an excuse (that in reality is nothing else than a capitalist crisis from which citizens are asked to suffer) the governments of EU member states implement policies that dismantle the welfare state. Access to health care, education and social security are no longer considered as rights but as commodities. Millions of people across Europe (3 million only in Greece) have no access to health care. Public education is discredited. Pensions are slashed. The social security benefits either disappear or recipients are forced to provide cheap labour (as in the Netherlands).

• The funds which are cut from the welfare state are transferred to the banks as capital injections and to large corporations as tax breaks and subsidies. In the so-called “bankrupt Greece” more than 150 billions from tax-payers were offered as rescue-funds to the banks without ever a single chance to return to the average citizen. The same happened in many other countries in the EU.

• Using the unfounded argument that reducing labour costs and increasing labour market flexibility is a means of market attracting investment and increasing employment, wages were reduced by legislative interventions (Greece, Portugal) or forced by employers (Netherlands), collective agreements were weakened or disappeared and collective dismissals were facilitated. And of course instead of getting more jobs, the unemployment reached unprecedented records.

• Democracy and freedom of speech have been weakened. Across Europe we see every day armed police beating workers and demonstrators, courts prohibiting strikes and fascist groups executing murderous attacks against immigrants and people that struggle for their rights. Many of these events are deliberately hidden by the mass media and very often demonstrators and dissidents are presented as terrorists.

• The EU member states are actively involved in military operations in different parts of the world (e.g. Mali, Iraq) to defend the economic interests of large European corporations. At the same time EU governments adopt racist laws that prohibit the access of migrants to labour, health care and social security. Right-wing extremist groups launch pogroms against refugees and countries such as Greece are converted into huge concentration camps for immigrants.

Despite the fact that the national governments are responsible for the implementation of the above mentioned policies, the EU is their actual trustee and coordinator. The fiscal discipline is imposed by the treaties and the mechanisms of the EU (e.g. the Treaty of Maastricht, the Fiscal Compact, the six-pack etcetera). The European Commission is ubiquitous in order to demand “reforms” from the member states that do not cut enough in the social welfare and to impose sanctions when member states deviate from these “reforms”. The European Commission participates in the notorious Troika (IMF, ECB, EU) which is involved in the daily implementation of policies in some member states. A typical example is Greece where the Troika has demanded along with some international “institutional investors” (commonly the international speculators) the lift of the restrictions concerning primary residence house confiscations due to debt and along with the Greek tycoons had demanded the continuous reduction of wages.

The abolition of parliamentary democracy which is being undergone in member states has been already implemented in the EU. The European Parliament plays such a small role that can be compared with the role of the elected councils of the European monarchs in the 19^th century. It is now a common secret that the decisions are taken by the European Commission and by the summit councils with the indispensable contribution of the powerful business lobbies. This holds even more true now that more and more responsibilities are passed on to organizations which do not even belong to the jurisdiction of the EU but they are directly controlled by banks and multinational corporations, such as the European Central Bank and the newly launched European Stability Mechanism (ITS). Let us not forget that the administration of ITS can raise capital from its member states without (!) their approval while this mechanism is not subject to the judicial system of any country or international organization.

Therefore, although they are trying to convince us for the opposite, the alleged ’people-friendly’ European Parliament plays no essential role in shaping the policy of the EU. The vote for the European elections no matter how left and radical could be, will not solve by itself the problems of the citizens either in Greece or in other EU member states. We invite all those that are going to vote for the European Parliament to do so in order to convey a message of hope that will strengthen the resistance of the people against unpopular policies of the national governments and the EU. We also invite all citizens, regardless they will vote or not, not to be content simply with their attitude during the elections by anticipating a reversal either through abstention or through a simple change in the distribution of seats between political groups in the European Parliament. The critical factor for stopping the unpopular policies is the strengthening of the labour and social movements around Europe. These movements should not be driven by the interests of a single country but by the interests of the working people, the unemployed and the immigrants of all countries together.

This is the only way that can bring radical changes and finally an end to the crisis in favour of the people and not in favour of the financial and multinational capital.

Passivity, on the other side, allows extremist and fascist organizations to use anti-European rhetoric in order to limit the concerns of citizens within the interests of the capitalists and turn the “natives” against the “outsiders”. Although the neo-Nazi Golden Dawn in Greece may attacks verbally the EU and the Troika, it openly opposes taxation of Greek ship-owners. Golden Dawn may claim opposition to the austerity measures, but simultaneously makes murderous attacks against trade unionists and organizes slave-like recruitment agencies for temporary jobs only for Greeks, with wages that would be envied even by Chinese employers. Although Wilders, the leader of the racist party in the Netherlands, may claim that he wishes to get the Netherlands out of the European Union , his party just two years ago supported by vote in the Parliament a government that strictly followed the unpopular EU policies.

ReINFORM stands next to the workers, the unemployed, the immigrants and other struggling citizens, who mobilize for their labour and social rights. Regardless of their vote during the European elections, we invite them to resist together against national and European austerity policies. We also invite them to stand against the right-wing “Eurosceptics”, who want us all to subjugate to the interests of the business elite of our country, by raising walls at our borders that will keep out the “others”, whoever these may be.

We call the Greeks and all the citizens of the EU member states not to limit themselves to the vote for the left parties, but to organize resistance to the governments’ and EU neoliberal policies in their neighbourhoods, their workplaces or the places where they study. We invite them to highlight the “social class” character of the European Union and its policies. Addressing specifically the Greeks who came to the Netherlands to search for work or study, we invite them to act collectively with their Dutch colleagues and fight for their rights, stressing at the same time the role played by the EU and the Dutch government in the impoverishment not only of the Greek people but also of parts of the Dutch population.

Along with the radical labour and social movements across Europe, we can turn the neoliberal tide and assert the consolidation and expansion of labour and social rights, trying to build at the same time an alternative economic and social model. The future of the European citizens should not be determined by the financial and political oligarchy of the banks and the multinational corporations. Additionally, the future of the people should not be trapped in the bigoted borders of the far right-wing “Eurosceptics”. The real economic, social and cultural cooperation among people in Europe can be achieved through common struggles against the policies of the national governments and the EU.

6/5/2014

ReINFORM

www.reinform.nl

Για τις Ευρωεκλογές (και όχι μόνο…)

Στις 25 Μαίου, οι πολίτες των κρατών μελών της ΕΕ οδηγούνται στην κάλπη. Καθώς οι πολίτες στις χώρες της ΕΕ και κυρίως στην Ελλάδα αντιμετωπίζουν την πιο σκληρή επίθεση στα βασικά δικαιώματά τους στην ιστορία της Ε.Ε. το ερώτημα που μπαίνει στους λαούς είναι ποιά στάση στις εκλογές μπορεί να βοηθήσει στην έξοδο από την κρίση.

Τα τελευταία χρόνια η Ε.Ε. έχει δείξει ξεκάθαρα ένα αποκρουστικό πρόσωπο:

• Χρησιμοποιώντας ως επίφαση τη «δημοσιονομική» κρίση (που στην πραγματικότητα είναι κρίση του καπιταλιστικού συστήματος που μεταφέρθηκε στις πλάτες των φορολογουμένων πολιτών), οι κυβερνήσεις εφαρμόζουν μια πολιτική αποδόμησης του κοινωνικού κράτους. Η πρόσβαση στην υγειονομική περίθαλψη, η παιδεία και η κοινωνική ασφάλιση δε θεωρούνται πλέον δικαίωμα κάθε πολίτη αλλά εμπορικό αγαθό. Εκατομμύρια άνθρωποι σε όλη την Ευρώπη (3 εκ μόνο στην Ελλάδα) δεν έχουν πρόσβαση στην περίθαλψη. Η δημόσια και δωρεάν παιδεία απαξιώνεται. Οι συντάξεις περικόπτονται. Τα επιδόματα κοινωνικής αλληλεγγύης είτε εξαφανίζονται είτε όσοι τα λαμβάνουν εξαναγκάζονται να προσφέρουν φτηνή εργασία (όπως στην Ολλανδία).

• Τα κεφάλαια που περικόπτονται από το κοινωνικό κράτος μεταφέρονται στις τράπεζες ως ενέσεις σωτηρίας και στις μεγάλες επιχειρήσεις ως δώρα φοροαπαλλαγών και επιδοτήσεων. Στην κατά τα άλλα χρεοκοπημένη Ελλάδα, τα τελευταία χρόνια, πάνω από 150 δις έχουν δοθεί για τη σωτηρία των τραπεζών χωρίς να επιστρέψουν ποτέ στους πολίτες.

• Με κριτήριο το αβάσιμο επιχείρημα πως η μείωση του εργατικού κόστους και η ευελιξία στην εργασία προσελκύει επενδύσεις και αυξάνει την απασχόληση, οι μισθοί μειώνονται με νομοθετικές παρεμβάσεις (βλ. Ελλάδα, Πορτογαλλία) ή με εργοδοτικούς εξαναγκασμούς (βλ μεταξύ άλλων Ολλανδία), οι συλλογικές συμβάσεις εργασίας αποδυναμώνονται και οι απολύσεις διευκολύνονται. Φυσικά αντί να αυξηθεί η απασχόληση, καλπάζει η ανεργία…

• Χαρακτηρίζοντας απανταχού την Ευρώπη τους αντιστεκόμενους πολίτες ως ‘τρομοκράτες’ η δημοκρατία καταργείται. Σε όλη την Ευρώπη βλέπουμε καθημερινά (όχι στα μεγάλα ΜΜΕ φυσικά…) πάνοπλους αστυνομικούς να ξυλοκοπούν εργαζόμενους, δικαστήρια να απαγορεύουν απεργίες καθώς και φασιστικές ομάδες να δρουν ανεξέλεγκτα και πολλές φορές δολοφονικά ενάντια σε μετανάστες και αγωνιζόμενους ανθρώπους.

• Αφού πρώτα πολλά κράτη μέλη της ΕΕ συμμετέχουν ενεργά σε στρατιωτικές επεμβάσεις σε διάφορα μέρη του κόσμου (πχ Μαλί, Ιράκ) για να προασπίσουν τα οικονομικά συμφέροντα των μεγάλων ευρωπαϊκών εταιρειών, έρχονται μετά οι κυβερνήσεις, η ΕΕ και οι ακροδεξιές οργανώσεις για να ξεκινήσουν πογκρόμ ενάντια στους πρόσφυγες που εισέρχονται στην ΕΕ από αυτές τις χώρες. Οι χώρες του Νότου, όπως η Ελλάδα, μετατρέπονται σε απέραντα στρατόπεδα συγκέντρωσης για τους μετανάστες και τους πρόσφυγες ενώ οι χώρες Βορρά και Νότου θεσπίζουν ρατσιστικούς νόμους που απαγορεύουν στην πράξη την πρόσβαση των μεταναστών στην εργασία, την υγεία και την κοινωνική ασφάλιση.

Παρά το γεγονός ότι οι εθνικές κυβερνήσεις είναι υπεύθυνες για την υλοποίηση των παραπάνω πολιτικών, η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση αποτελεί τον ενεργό θεματοφύλακα και το συντονιστή τους. Η δημοσιονομική πειθαρχία επιβάλλεται μέσω των συνθηκών και των μηχανισμών της Ε.Ε. (συνθήκη Μάαστριχτ, δημοσιονομικό σύμφωνο, 6-pack κλπ). Η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή είναι πανταχού παρούσα για να απαιτεί ‘μεταρρυθμίσεις’ από τις χώρες που δεν περικόπτουν αρκετά το κοινωνικό τους κράτος και να επιβάλλει ποινές όταν αυτές παρεκκλίνουν. Συμμετέχει στην περιβόητη Τρόικα (ΔΝΤ, ΕΚΤ, ΕΕ) που εμπλέκεται στην καθημερινή άσκηση πολιτικής σε ορισμένα κράτη μέλη. Χαρακτηριστικό παράδειγμα είναι η Ελλάδα όπου η Τρόικα απαιτούσε μαζί με τους διεθνείς ‘θεσμικούς επενδυτές’ (κοινώς τους διεθνείς κερδοσκόπους) την απελευθέρωση των πλειστηριασμών πρώτης κατοικίας και μαζί με το λόμπι των ελλήνων μεγαλοεπιχειρηματιών την συνεχή μείωση των μισθών στην Ελλάδα.

Η κατάργηση της αντιπροσωπευτικής δημοκρατίας που προωθείται στις χώρες μέλη έχει ήδη συντελεστεί στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση. Το Ευρωκοινοβούλιο έχει ένα διακοσμητικό ρόλο που μπορεί κάλλιστα να παρομοιαστεί με τα εκλεγμένα συμβούλια των μοναρχών της Ευρώπης του 19^ου αιώνα. Είναι πια κοινό μυστικό ότι οι αποφάσεις λαμβάνονται από την Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή και τα συμβούλια κορυφής με την απαραίτητη συμβολή των πανίσχυρων επιχειρηματικών λόμπυ. Αυτό ισχύει ακόμη περισσότερο σήμερα που όλο και περισσότερες αρμοδιότητες περνούν στην δικαιοδοσία οργανισμών που δεν ανήκουν καν στη δικαιοδοσία της Ε.Ε. αλλά ελέγχονται απευθείας από τις τράπεζες και τις πολυεθνικές εταιρείες όπως η Ευρωπαϊκή Κεντρική Τράπεζα και ο νεοσύστατος Ευρωπαϊκός Μηχανισμός Σταθερότητας (ΕΣΜ). Ας μην ξεχνάμε ότι η διοίκηση του ΕΣΜ μπορεί να αντλεί κεφάλαια από τις χώρες μέλη χωρίς (!) την έγκρισή τους ενώ δεν υπόκειται στο δικαστικό σύστημα καμιάς χώρας ή διεθνούς οργανισμού.

Επομένως, όσο και να προσπαθούν να μας πείσουν για το αντίθετο, το υποτιθέμενα φιλολαϊκό Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο δεν παίζει κανένα ουσιαστικό ρόλο στη διαμόρφωση της πολιτικής της Ε.Ε. Η ψήφος στις Ευρωεκλογές όσο αριστερή και ριζοσπαστική και να είναι δε μπορεί να λύσει από μόνη της τα προβλήματα του πολιτών ούτε στην Ελλάδα ούτε στις υπόλοιπες χώρες-μέλη της ΕΕ. Καλούμε όσους ψηφίσουν στις Ευρωεκλογές να το κάνουν για να εκφράσουν ένα ελπιδοφόρο μήνυμα που θα δυναμώσει την αντίσταση των λαών ενάντια στις αντιλαϊκές πολιτικές της ΕΕ και των εθνικών κυβερνήσεων. Επίσης, καλούμε όλους τους πολίτες είτε ψηφίσουν είτε όχι να μην επαναπαυθούν στη στάση τους στις εκλογές προσδοκώντας την ανατροπή μέσω της αποχής ή μέσω μιας απλής αλλαγής συσχετισμών στο Ευρωκοινοβούλιο. Ο κρίσιμος παράγοντας για την ανατροπή των αντιλαϊκών πολιτικών είναι η ενδυνάμωση του εργατικού και λαϊκού κινήματος με κριτήριο όχι τα συμφέροντα μιας χώρας αλλά τα συμφέροντα των εργαζομένων, των ανέργων και των μεταναστών σε όλες τις χώρες μαζί.

Αυτό το κίνημα είναι το μόνο που μπορεί να φέρει πραγματικές ανατροπές και να οδηγήσει σε μια επίλυση της κρίσης προς όφελος των λαών και όχι του χρηματιστηριακού και πολυεθνικού κεφαλαίου.

Αντίθετα, η παθητικότητα δίνει τη δυνατότητα σε ακροδεξιές και φασιστικές οργανώσεις που χρησιμοποιούν αντιευρωπαϊκή ρητορική για να εγκλωβίσουν την ανησυχία και τις ανάγκες των πολιτών στα πλαίσια των συμφερόντων του μεγάλου κεφαλαίου και να στρέψουν τους ΄γηγενείς’ ενάντια στους ‘ξένους’. Η νεοναζιστική Χρυσή Αυγή στην Ελλάδα μπορεί να καταφέρεται φραστικά ενάντια στην ΕΕ και την Τρόικα όμως αντιτίθεται σφοδρά στην φορολόγηση των Ελλήνων εφοπλιστών. Μπορεί να λέει ότι είναι ενάντια στα μέτρα λιτότητας όμως ταυτόχρονα κάνει δολοφονικές επιθέσεις ενάντια σε συνδικαλιστές και οργανώνει δουλεμπορικά γραφεία εργασίας που βρίσκουν δουλειά μόνο σε Έλληνες αλλά με μισθούς που θα ζήλευαν και οι Κινέζοι εργοδότες. Το ρατσιστικό κόμμα του Βίλντερς στην Ολλανδία μπορεί να ισχυρίζεται ότι θέλει να βγάλει την Ολλανδία από την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση όμως μόλις πριν 2 χρόνια στήριζε με την ψήφο του στη Βουλή μια κυβέρνηση που εφάρμοζε κατά γράμμα τις αντιλαϊκές πολιτικές της ΕΕ.

Το ReINFORM στέκεται δίπλα στους εργαζόμενους, τους ανέργους, τους μετανάστες και τους υπόλοιπους αγωνιζόμενους πολίτες που κινητοποιούνται για τα εργατικά και κοινωνικά τους δικαιώματα. Ανεξάρτητα από την ψήφο στις Ευρωεκλογές, τους καλούμε να αντιδράσουμε όλοι μαζί στις εθνικές και Ευρωπαϊκές πολιτικές λιτότητας. Τους καλούμε επίσης να σταθούμε ενάντια στους ακροδεξιούς ‘αντιευρωπαϊστές’ που μας θέλουν όλους να υποταχθούμε στα συμφέροντα της επιχειρηματικής ελίτ της χώρας μας υψώνοντας τοίχη στα σύνορά μας που θα κρατούν απέξω τους ‘άλλους’ όποιοι και αν είναι αυτοί.

Καλούμε τους Έλληνες αλλά και όλους τους πολίτες των κρατών-μελών της Ε.Ε. να μην αρκεστούν στην ψήφο στα αριστερά κόμματα αλλά να οργανώσουν την αντίσταση στις νεοφιλελεύθερες πολιτικές κυβερνήσεων και Ε.Ε. στη γειτονιά τους και στο χώρο δουλειάς ή σπουδών τους. Τους καλούμε να αναδείξουμε όλοι μαζί τον ταξικό χαρακτήρα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης και των πολιτικών της. Απευθυνόμενοι συγκεκριμένα προς τους Έλληνες που ήρθαν στην Ολλανδία αναζητώντας δουλειά ή σπουδές, τους καλούμε να δράσουν συλλογικά μαζί με τους Ολλανδούς συναδέλφους τους για τη διεκδίκηση των δικαιωμάτων τους αναδεικνύοντας ταυτόχρονα το ρόλο που παίζει η Ε.Ε. αλλά και η ολλανδική κυβέρνηση στην εξαθλίωση όχι μόνο του ελληνικού λαού αλλά και τμημάτων του ολλανδικού λαού.

Μαζί με τα ριζοσπαστικά εργατικά και κοινωνικά κινήματα όλης της Ευρώπης και μέσα από μαζικές δράσεις μπορούμε να πάμε κόντρα στο νεοφιλελεύθερο ρεύμα και να διεκδικήσουμε την κατοχύρωση και διεύρυνση των εργατικών και κοινωνικών δικαιωμάτων σε όλη την Ευρώπη και να προσπαθήσουμε να οικοδομήσουμε ένα διαφορετικό οικονομικό και κοινωνικό μοντέλο. Το μέλλον των λαών της Ευρώπης δεν πρέπει να κριθεί από την οικονομική και πολιτική ολιγαρχία των τραπεζών και των πολυεθνικών. Πολύ περισσότερο το μέλλον των λαών δεν πρέπει να κλειστεί στα μισαλλόδοξα σύνορα των ακροδεξιών ‘αντιευρωπαϊστών’. Η πραγματική οικονομική, κοινωνική και πολιτιστική συνεργασία των λαών της Ευρώπης μπορεί να επιτευχθεί με κοινούς αγώνες για την ανατροπή των πολιτικών εθνικών κυβερνήσεων και Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης.

6/5/2014

ReINFORM

www.reinform.nl

The Euro-crisis of euro is already in its third year and it continues unrelentingly. Nevertheless it is overall stated that the crisis is almost over. The North faces no problem. Spain, Portugal and Ireland have solved their own problems by following the recipe of the EU: large cuts in social security and salaries as well as abolishing working rights. Even Greece is on the right track because its state finances have improved through the cuts in the benefits and the increase of taxes.

These arguments are simply a summary of the official story of the spokesmen of the EU and the Greek government. Every citizen with basic understanding of the crisis knows that these kinds of arguments are far from the reality. The crisis affects not only the countries in the South, but the whole Europe.

Let us not forget that the second largest economy of eurozone, France, is placed under the strict supervision of the European Commission due to financial problems. Let us also not forget that the improvement in the state finances of several countries (including the Netherlands) can be attributed to a logistic trick of the EU which excludes specific expenses from the calculation of the budget deficit.

Perverse structure

No, the crisis is not over, because its causes – the liberalization of the financial sector and the perverse structure of eurozone – are not yet tackled.

According to the Troika (European Commission, IMF and European Central Bank) and the Greek government, Greece has a primary surplus of 500 million euros. However according to data of Eurostat, Greece has a primary deficit of 17 billion euros in the first nine months of 2013.

Moreover, and contrary to what the European Commission and the Greek government claim, the course of the Greek economy is anything but positive. The retail sales index is reduced with 8.1 % in 2013. The volume index is reduced with 6.7%. The investments make up only 12% of the GDP (gross domestic product), the seventh lowest percentage in the world! Most probably, the GDP of Greece was reduced with 7 % in 2013 despite the explicit prediction of European Commission and IMF for a small recovery. The sovereign debt has climbed to 170 % of the GDP and is now much higher than before the crisis.

The repeated statements of the European leaders and the Greek government that the austerity policies are effective and the recovery of the economy can occur at any moment goes against all facts. The harsh reality for the common people in Greece is not portrayed at all in this fantasy image.

No access to healthcare

28 percent of the workforce is unemployed. Two-third of the young people is out of work. Approximately one million workers receive their salary with one to twelve months delay. Salaries have been reduced by over 50 percent. The gross minimum wage is 586 euros (510 euros for the youth). The unemployment benefit (WW-uitkering in Dutch) is 360 euros and there is no social assistance benefit. Nearly three million people in Greece do not have access to health care because they can’t afford health insurance. Even pregnant women who come to public hospitals to give birth, may be rejected because they are not insured. Some heavily frequented hospitals are closed and the medical staff has been fired because of the cuts.

According to UNICEF, one out of three children in Greece, is at risk of poverty and social exclusion. Which are the causes? Rising unemployment and cuts in social benefits. 292,000 children live in households without working adults and have for this reason no access to health care.

The new taxes reinforce the regressive tax system in Greece, where the rich pay traditionally very little while the middle class and the poor bear the heaviest burden. There are even poor people whose homes are in danger of being confiscated because they cannot afford paying their taxes. The abolition of the protection of the private homes of poor debtors was a hard requirement imposed by the Troika.

Why do the European Commission and the Greek government try to present another reality? Is it because there are elections next month in the EU? The support for governments that are advocates of austerity and the EU is falling rapidly. The heads of governments and the EU-top still want to present austerity policies as effective even, if necessary, with the use of fictitious data. In Greece, this necessity feels stronger than ever. The coalition parties will most probably face a historic defeat in the upcoming elections and their European austerity partners want to prevent this. For this reason, the Greek government gets again permission to manipulate statistics and magically make a surplus from a large deficit. The way is simple: the 0.5 billion surplus of the Greek government-budget does not include the unpaid liabilities of the government to Greek companies and semi-public institutions.

Presenting the other southern countries as good examples of austerity policies, is also wrong. For example, the 0.1 percent growth of the Spanish economy should be seen in conjunction with the 28 percent unemployment rate and the largest debt ever (almost 100 percent of GDP) .

A sober observation of the facts inevitably leads to only one conclusion: the policies of austerity, privatization and liberalization did not offer any solution, but rather led to a deepening of the crisis.

by Dimitris Pavlopoulos
Dimitris Pavlopoulos works as an assistant professor in Sociology at the VU University in Amsterdam.

Source: http://www.volkskrant.nl/vk/nl/3184/opinie/article/detail/3630449/2014/04/08/Het-gaat-helemaal-niet-beter-met-Griekenland.dhtml

This is just the latest instance in the serial rape of “international law”. The rap sheet is humongous, including; NATO bombing Serbia for 78 days in 1999 to allow Kosovo to secede; the 2003 U.S. invasion and subsequent trillion-dollar occupation and civil war creation in Iraq; NATO/AFRICOM bombing Libya in 2011 invoking R2P (“responsibility to protect”) as a cover to provoking regime change; U.S. investment in the secession of oil-wealthy South Sudan, so China has to deal with an extra geopolitical headache; and U.S. investment in perennial civil war in Syria.

Yet Moscow still (foolishly?) believes international law should be respected — presenting to the UN Security Council classified information on all Western intel/psy-ops moves leading to the coup in Kiev, including “training” provided by Poland and Lithuania, not to mention Turkish intelligence involvement in setting up a second coup in Crimea. Russian diplomats called for an unbiased international investigation. That will never happen; Washington’s narrative would be completely debunked. Thus a U.S. veto at the UN.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov also called for the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe to objectively investigate those snipers shooting everyone on sight in Kiev, as revealed by Estonia’s foreign minister to E.U. foreign policy supremo Catherine “I love Yats” Ashton. According to Russia’s ambassador to the UN Vitaly Churkin, “a completely different picture would be drawn compared to what is being depicted by American media and, unfortunately, by some American and European politicians.” Needless to say, there will be no investigation.

Hi, I’m your good neo-nazi

Everyone remembers the “good Taliban”, with which the U.S. could negotiate in Afghanistan. Then came the “good al-Qaeda”, jihadis the US could support in Syria. Now come the “good neo-nazis”, with which the West can do business in Kiev. Soon there will be “the good jihadis supporting neo-nazis”, who may be deployed to advance U.S./NATO and anti-Russian designs in Crimea and beyond. After all, Obama mentor Dr Zbigniew “The Grand Chessboard” Brzezinski is the godfather of good jihadis, fully weaponized to fight the former Soviet Union in Afghanistan.

As facts on the ground go, neo-nazis are definitely back as good guys.

For the first time since the end of World War II, fascists and neo-nazis are at the helm of a European nation (although Ukraine most of all should be characterized as the key swing nation in Eurasia). Few in the West seem to have noticed it.

The cast of characters include Ukrainian interim defense minister and former student at the Pentagon Ihor Tenyukh; deputy prime minister for economic affairs and Svoboda ideologue Oleksandr Sych; agro-oligarch minister of agriculture Ihor Svaika (Monsanto, after all, needs a chief enforcer); National Security Council chief and Maidan commander of Right Sector neo-nazis Andry Parubiy; and deputy National Security Council chief Dmytro Yarosh, the founder Right Sector. Not to mention Svoboda leader Oleh Tyanhybok, a close pal of John McCain and Victoria “F**k the E.U.” Nuland, and active proponent of an Ukraine free from the “Muscovite-Jewish mafia.”

As the Kremlin refuses to deal with this bunch and the upcomingMarch 16 referendum in Crimea is practically a done deal, Team “Yats” is fully legitimized, with honors, by Team Obama, leader included, in Washington. To quote Lenin, what is to be done? A close reading of President Putin’s moves would suggest an answer: nothing. As in just waiting, while outsourcing the immediate future of a spectacularly bankrupt Ukraine to the E.U. The E.U. is impotent to rescue even the Club Med countries. Inevitably, sooner or later, threat of sanctions or not, it will come crawling back to Moscow seeking “concessions”, so Russia may also foot the bill.

Meanwhile, in Pipelineistan…

Meanwhile, the New Great (Threat) Game in Eurasia advances unabated. Moscow would willingly compromise on a neutral Ukraine — even with neo-nazis in power in Kiev. But an Ukraine attached to NATO is an absolute red line. By the way, NATO is “monitoring” Ukraine with AWACS deployed in Polish and Romanian airspace.

So as the much lauded “reset” between the Kremlin and the Obama administration is for all practical purposes six feet under (with no Hollywood-style second coming in the cards), what’s left is the dangerous threat game. Deployed not only by the Empire, but also by the minions.

That monster collection of Magritte-style faceless bureaucrats at the European Commission (E.U.), following on the non-stop threat of E.U. sanctions, has decided to delay a decision on whether Gazprom may sell more gas through the OPAL pipeline in Germany, and also delay negotiations on the legal status of South Stream, the pipeline under the Black Sea which should become operational in 2015.

As if the E.U. had any feasible Plan B to escape its dependency on Russian gas (not to mention eschew the very profitable financial game played between key European capitals and Moscow). What are they do, import gas on Qatar Airways flights? Buy LNG from the U.S. — something that will not be feasible in years to come? The fact is the minute a gas war is on, if it ever comes down to it, the E.U. will be under immense pressure by a host of member-nations to keep (and even extend) its Russian gas fix — with or without “our (neo-nazi) bastards” in power in Kiev. Brussels knows it. And most of all, Vlad the Hammer knows it.

Source: http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/ukraine-now-headed-fascists-and-neo-nazis?page=0%2C1

What sometimes goes unnoticed, though, is the effect these developments are having on people and their daily lives. The social cost of the crisis is often hidden from visitors and casual observers. It lurks behind the sight of apparently relaxed Athenians sipping coffee in the sunshine or seemingly carefree islanders clinking together their second or third glasses of ouzo.

In fact if one excludes some parts of Athens and other big cities, the signs of the crisis are not always that visible. Perhaps the frequent media images of protesting, rioting and poverty mean that these are the pictures we store in our brains and the standard by which we measure whether people are going through turmoil or not.

There are a number of reasons why the signs of the crisis are elusive. Perhaps the overriding one is that the social impact can rarely be seen on the street, on the beach, in cafes or in restaurants. It is most evident in places that are out of our direct view: Living rooms, offices, factories, hospitals and in the deepest, darkest recesses of people’s minds. In these places, the crisis is very real and very disturbing.

Recession

Greece’s recession, which began in the second half of 2008, has put enormous strain on Greek society. An increasing amount of Greeks are finding themselves socially excluded.

According to the latest figures from the Hellenic Statistical Authority (ELSTAT), 34.6 percent of the population was considered to be living at risk of poverty or social exclusion in 2012. This is the highest proportion in the European Union. This figure stood at 27.7 percent in 2010, when the crisis broke out.

According to ELSTAT, 19.5 percent of Greeks are severely materially deprived. This is by far the highest rate in the eurozone, compared, for example, to 8.6 percent in Portugal, 5.8 percent in Spain and 2.3 percent in the Netherlands.

Greek household disposable income has dropped by more than 30 percent since the crisis began. This has contributed to even the basics becoming a challenge for a lot of Greek families.

A poll carried out for the Small Enterprises’ Institute of the Hellenic Confederation of Professionals, Craftsmen & Merchants (IME-GSEVEE), indicates that about a third of households (34.8 percent) said that they are behind in their payments to the state, banks, social security funds or public utilities due to money shortages. More than 40 percent (41.7) said that they would not be able to meet their commitments for this year.

The Public Power Corporation is disconnecting around 30,000 homes and businesses a month due to unpaid bills.

Unemployment

Unemployment is the biggest concern in Greece at the moment. Over the past four years the number of unemployed Greeks has risen by about 160 percent. As a result, around 3.5 million employed people have to support more than 4.7 million unemployed and inactive. There isn’t an economy or labour force in the world that could sustain this for much time, certainly not without the strains on its society showing.

Unemployment plays a big factor in placing a large number of Greeks at risk of social exclusion (52 percent of men without jobs are at risk of poverty) but even those with jobs are not always secure. More than 27 percent of Greeks with part time work are considered to be at risk of poverty, while the same applies for 13.4 percent of those with full time jobs.

It is also worth considering that roughly one in four Greek workers do not receive their wages on time, some waiting several months to get paid.

For those without work, the lack of comprehensive welfare coverage is a major problem. The jobless only receive monthly benefits of 360 euros for the first 12 months they are not working. As a result, only 15 percent of Greece’s almost 1.4 million unemployed are currently receiving financial assistance from the state.

Also, until now, there has been no safety net for the self-employed, who make up about 25 percent of the local work force. The government has proposed a scheme that will see the self-employed receive 360 euros a month for up to 9 months. To receive unemployment benefit for that long, someone will need 15 years worth of social security credits.

Spending cuts

Public spending cuts have also contributed to more Greeks being left exposed to the effects of the crisis.

Without social transfers, almost half of Greece’s population would be living at risk of poverty. However, social spending has been cut considerably over the last few years. Social transfers were reduced by 6.8 percent between 2012 and 2013. They are due to be cut from about 17 billion euros in 2013 to just under 14 billion this year – a reduction of more than 18 percent.

Apart from having limited access to unemployment benefits, Greeks are also being cut off from free or subsidized healthcare which is available to most unemployed Greeks for only two years. In 2011, Greece spent 11.6 percent of its budget on healthcare, compared to an OECD average of 14.5 percent. Per capita healthcare spending was reduced by 11.1 percent between 2009 and 2011 – the largest cut among OECD member states.

During this time, the number of HIV cases, instances of tuberculosis and cases of stillbirths have all risen considerably. Demand for mental health services has increased by more than 100 percent. According to a study by the University of Athens, 12.3 percent of Greeks are suffering from clinical depression at the moment, compared to just 3.3 percent in 2008.

A recent report by researchers from Oxford and Cambridge universities, which was published in the British medical magazine The Lancet, accused the Greek government and its lenders of being in “denial” about the impact that austerity is having on healthcare.

Family and charity

The lack of work and the scaling back of social welfare mean that often the main safety net available to Greeks in difficulty is provided by family.

The IME-GSEVEE survey suggests that for 48.6 percent of families, pensions are the main source of income. The average basic pension in Greece is just under 700 euros per month. It has been reduced by about 25% since 2010 and is due to be halved over the next few years.

Donations and services offered by volunteers have also become vital in helping Greeks who have been pushed to the margins of society.

The Municipality of Athens, for instance, feeds roughly 1,400 people a day, while doctors providing their services for free administer donated medicines to more than 4,000 patients a year who visit them at a volunteer clinic in Elliniko, southern Athens.

There are numerous other individuals and groups running programmes to assist fellow citizens. The safety net that has been unfurled by family members, volunteers and charities is one of the reasons that on the surface Greek society’s difficulties don’t seem too dramatic.

In fact, the awakening of this spirit of solidarity has been a ray of hope amid the social desolation being caused by the Greek crisis. As encouraging as this is though, we should not kid ourselves into thinking it’s more than a bright spot on a social landscape that is much darker than should be acceptable for a developed European country.

*This was part of a presentation given at a Friedrich Ebert Foundation event in Berlin on March 12 titled “The social crisis of the EU. Who bears the costs?”

Source: http://greekindependentnews.net/2014/03/the-greek-crisis-we-dont-see/?utm_source=feedly&utm_reader=feedly&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-greek-crisis-we-dont-see

We are extremely concerned by the response of the international community to the popular protests that have erupted against almost two decades of misrule in Bosnia and Herzegovina (Editorial, 17 February). Western media and politicians have argued that now is not the time for the western powers to disengage from Bosnia.

In fact, it is time to recognise that external rule in Bosnia has failed. The Dayton agreement in 1995 set up an undemocratic “protectorate”, giving the high representative of the western powers neocolonial authority over a political system that has institutionalised ethnic divisions, while neoliberal economic policies have impoverished ordinary Bosnians regardless of ethnicity.

Do the western powers have any answers to this crisis? The high representative, Valentin Inzko, can think only of threatening military intervention. Periodic threats by the US and the EU to revise the Dayton agreement by recentralising Bosnia have only made matters worse, raising the spectre of secession as Serbs and Croats look to Serbia and Croatia for support. And neither Brussels nor Washington will contemplate reversing the neoliberal economic policies that have impoverished so many.

It is therefore time to terminate the office of the high representative and end outside meddling in Bosnian affairs.

The popular protests have made clear that there is widespread rejection of ethnic divisions and neoliberal policies imposed from above. Free from external economic, political and military pressure, we are confident that the peoples of Bosnia will come together to establish a society based on social justice and national equality.
Samir Amin Economist, Senegal
Cédric Durand Economist, Paris 13 University, France
Emin EminagićActivist, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Lindsey German Stop the War Coalition (p/c), United Kingdom
Grigoris Gerotziafas Associate professor of hematology-hemostasis, Université Pierre et Maris Curis (Paris VI), militant of Antarsya in France/Greece
Anna Grodzka Member of parliament of the Republic of Poland
Costas Isihos Member of the political secretariat and head of the foreign policy department of Syriza
Mariya Ivancheva Independent scholar and member of the editorial board of LeftEast, Bulgaria
Stathis Kouvelakis Reader in political theory, King’s College, London, and Syriza central committee, United Kingdom and Greece
Zbigniew Marcin Kowalewski Researcher and editor, Poland
Aleksandra Lakić Researcher, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Ken Loach Film director, United Kingdom
James Meadway Economist, United Kingdom
Matija Medenica Solidarnost editor, Serbia
China Miéville Author, United Kingdom
Tijana Morača Independent researcher, Serbia
Goran Musić Historian, Austria
Jelena Petrović Red Min(e)d, Slovenia
Dragan Plavšić Lawyer and author, United Kingdom
Florin Poenaru Anthropologist, Romania
Srećko Pulig Aktiv editor, Croatia
Marija Ratković The Culture of Memory, Serbia
James Robertson Graduate student, history, New York University, United States
Catherine Samary Economist, France
Richard Seymour Author and columnist, United Kingdom
GM Tamás Philosopher, CEU, Budapest, Hungary
Mary Taylor CUNY Graduate Center, USA
Vladimir Unkovski-Korica Historian, United Kingdom
Ana Vilenica Uz)bu))na))) editor, Serbia
Andreja Živković Author, United Kingdom

Source: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/03/end-western-meddling-bosnia

Obama’s White House statement came shortly after the “interim government” installed in Ukraine by the Western powers appealed for United States and Britain to come to its aid, accusing Russia of mounting an “invasion.”

Arsen Avakov, the new interior minister and member of Fatherland, the party of oligarch Yulya Tymoshenko, alleged that the international airport in Sebastopol in the Crimea had been blocked by Russian forces. He wrote on Facebook, “I regard what is happening as an armed invasion and occupation in violation of all international treaties and norms. This is a direct provoking of armed bloodshed on the territory of a sovereign state.”

His choice of words aims to provide a casus belli justifying Western military intervention in Ukraine. He is invoking terms of a 1994 agreement, the Budapest Memorandum—signed by US President Bill Clinton, UK Prime Minister John Major, Russia’s Boris Yeltsin and Leonid Kuchma for Ukraine—promising to uphold the territorial integrity of Ukraine in return for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons.

Article one of the Budapest Memorandum reads: “The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine … to respect the Independence and Sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.”

Sir Tony Brenton, the former British Ambassador to Moscow from 2004 to 2008, warned that if Russia was found to have invaded Ukraine, then war could be an option “if we do conclude the Memorandum is legally binding.”

The newly-appointed head of Ukraine’s National Security Council, Andriy Parubiy, accused Moscow of commanding armed groups at airports in Crimea. “These are separate groups … commanded by the Kremlin,” Parubiy said.

Parubiy was a co-founder of the Social-National Party of Ukraine, the forerunner of the far-right Svoboda. He led the right-wing militias that spearheaded the coup bringing down the regime President Viktor Yanukovych, which was more closely aligned with pro-Russian oligarchs. The militias were composed of members of Svoboda alongside members of the fascist Right Sector. Dmytro Yarosh, head of Right Sector, is Parubiy’s deputy.

Interim President Oleksandr Turchynov of Fatherland warned Thursday, referring to Crimea, that “any movements of troops, especially with troops outside that territory will be considered military aggression.” Turchynov yesterday dismissed the head of the armed forces, Admiral Yuriy Ilin, while Parubiy said a state of emergency could be declared—making possible the deployment of the army against Crimea.

In Simferopol, Crimea’s administrative centre, groups of armed men arrived overnight at the main airport wearing military fatigues. At Sevastopol airport, a military airport that handles few commercial flights, a reported 300 people of “unknown identity” had arrived.

There are reports that the men are wearing Russian-style uniforms without insignia, that flights from Kiev have been barred and that there has been movement of Russian armoured personnel carriers and helicopters. The Russian Black Sea fleet, centred at Sevastopol, is quoted as having taken “anti-terror” measures to protect the fleet and associated outposts, not connected to a broader mobilisation. Russia’s Foreign Ministry said that the manoeuvres are in line with bilateral agreements.

The most dramatic claim came from the Ukrainian president’s special representative in the southern peninsula, Sergiy Kunitsyn, who alleged that Moscow had deployed 2,000 soldiers to a military air base near Simferopol.

On Thursday pro-Russian militias seized the regional parliament and other government buildings. The men outside Simferopol airport said they belonged to the pro-Russia Unity Party and had come there on the orders of the new Crimean administration. The majority of the Crimean population is either native Russian or Russian-speaking. The Financial Times reported yesterday, “For almost a week, Kiev’s Crimean opponents have organised grassroots actions to rival those in the capital’s central Maidan (square), recruiting hundreds of local men into self-organised militias.”

Military manoeuvres on Ukraine’s border continued yesterday. The exercises began Wednesday, involving more than 80 combat helicopters and do not immediately impact on the Crimea. Russia also reportedly put fighter jets near the border on alert, as it warned of “a tough and uncompromised response to violations of compatriots’ rights.”

Kiev-appointed regional Premier Anatolii Mohyliov was replaced Thursday by Russian businessman Alexei Chaliy. A referendum on the independence of Crimea has been scheduled May 25, coinciding with planned presidential and local elections throughout Ukraine. Russian lawmakers introduced two bills on Friday meant to simplify the annexing of new territories into the Russian Federation, as well as access to Russian citizenship for Ukrainians.

In his first public appearance since being forced from office, Yanukovych spoke from Russia, insisting that he was the country’s legitimate elected leader and would “continue the fight for the future of Ukraine … Nobody has overturned me. I was compelled to leave Ukraine due to a direct threat to my life and my nearest and dearest.”

Yanukovych said he did not support Crimean secession, stating that Ukraine must remain “united and undivided.” He added, however, “The citizens of Crimea do not want to be subordinate to nationalists and bandits.” He added that he would not ask for Russian military support to return him to power, but was “surprised” that President Vladimir Putin had remained silent to date.

US Secretary of State John Kerry said that Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov had reaffirmed to him a commitment that Russia would “respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine,” echoing a commitment that Putin made to President Barack Obama last week.

Such statements by no means rule out military conflict, however. The entire region has been destabilised, bringing with it the danger not only of civil war in Ukraine but of a broader conflict that could yet be fought between the major powers.

The putsch engineered by Washington in alliance with corrupt oligarchs and fascist gangs has set in motion events that bring Russia into direct opposition to the US and European powers on issues of an existential character. The prospect of Ukraine falling into the orbit of the US and the European Union, with the possible loss of Sevastopol as a naval base, is dangerous enough for Putin. The ambitions of the Obama administration and its allies do not stop there, however.

Poland’s Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski played a key role in organising the putsch in Kiev, reflecting both Poland’s own long-term designs on Ukrainian territory it ruled prior to World War II and, more importantly, his role as a political ally of the US.

After playing a part as a student in the 1981 strike organised by the Solidarity trade union movement, Sikorski was granted asylum in the UK. At Oxford, he was groomed as a Western political/security asset. He eventually became a resident fellow of the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C., executive director of the New Atlantic Initiative and a member of the Board of Advisors of the American Committees on Foreign Relations.

Reuters reports, “The Polish government has been funding civil society projects in ex-Soviet countries such as Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia and Moldova, with much of the aid channelled through a fund controlled by Sikorski’s ministry. Recipients of Polish government money include opposition television stations operating in exile from Belarus, giving Poland influence in a country that, after Ukraine, could be the scene of the next confrontation between Russia and the West.”

Sikorski described the seizure of administrative buildings in Crimea as “a drastic step” that could escalate: “I’m warning those who did this and those who allowed them to do this, because this is how regional conflicts begin.”

Georgia is also set on association with the European Union, which Yanukovych acted to block in Ukraine, setting up the moves to depose him. Defence Minister Irakli Alasania said of Ukraine’s rejection of Russia, “There’s no way back for Ukraine. It’s a first strategic failure for Putin. This is a tectonic geopolitical shift in eastern Europe.” It would embolden other countries in the region, he said, and have a ripple effect.

Earlier this week, Kerry issued a statement pledging US assistance in bringing Georgia closer to the US and the EU.

Source: http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/03/01/ukra-m01.html

The Ukrainian Parliament came back into session on the morning of February 23rd. The president who was backed by one wing of the oligarchy had been deposed, but not before leaving many dead on the streets. With the situation in Ukraine destabilized, a struggle for power has now begun between several factions, both foreign and domestic.

The Party of Regions remains despite Yanukovich

Viktor YanykovichThe Party of Regions (PoR) was the largest party in the previous parliament, and had the most resources. Yanukovich had been in power since the 2010 presidential elections. It is important to note that their position had been pro-EU until the Russian government forced their hand with a much larger offer of aid ($15 billion) than the EU ($700 million). With Ukraine on the verge of defaulting, seeking aid from overseas had become the only option, as it was not possible to cut public services much more than they already had been.

The Party of Regions was built around oligarchs – such as Rinat Akhmetov and Viktor Pinchuk – based in Eastern Ukraine, who participated in plundering of state resources after the restoration of capitalism in Ukraine. With their robbing the country of public services, tax revenues and imposing deplorable working conditions, they were largely responsible for the deficit in Ukraine’s budget and the a deep hatred and anger amongst the masses.

Yet the more Yanukovich’s position became questioned, the more they distanced themselves from the presidency. Already in November, some of the PoR MPs began to resign from the party, like rats who flee a ship just before it hits the rocks. The media controlled by some of those who had supported Yanukovich with election funding were showing the police repression in full. Finally, just before Yanukovich fled Kiev, Akhmetov went public with his displeasure at his man and the way the situation in Kiev had been handled and suggested that someone else should be in charge. This was quickly followed by PoR MP Oleksandr Yefremov (speaking as the head of PoR) publicly denouncing the president.

The previous week, the president had replaced his army chief. The fact that the military were not called in, showed that their loyalty to the regime could not be guaranteed.

Even with what has happened in the previous months, the PoR remains a significant force. Their business interests will now come under pressure from the pro-west oligarchs. They, along with the Communist Party, have been banned in many areas in Western Ukraine, where the far-right is stronger. They will now jostle for positions in the new parliament. To their base in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, they portray themselves as the last bastions against the onset of fascism in Ukraine, when in reality it is their actions that are largely responsible for it.

New faces, same capitalist system

The new interim president is Olexander Turchynov, a businessman with a long history in Ukrainian politics, working mostly with recently released Yulia Tymoshenko. His appointment shows how little things have changed so far on the parliamentary level.

Despite some the opposition members’ calls for the protestors to stay on the streets, the hope of the opposition parties, UDAR, Fatherland and Svoboda, is to turn the movement into electoral results. Just a few days ago they were for accepting a compromise with Yanukovich for early elections. This was clearly not enough unacceptable for most of the protesters and there is significant skepticism among the masses about what new elections could bring.

Behind these pro-west parties are the interests of both a section of the domestic oligarchs along with US and EU capital. A leaked phone call between Victoria Nuland of the US State Department and the US ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt revealed the US preference for “Yats” referring to Arseniy Yatsenyuk from Fatherland. Yatsenyuk has a very similar background to a previous president Yuschenko, with a long career as a government bureaucrat for previous administrations. Nonetheless, the release of Tymoshenko will likely mean that she returns as the face of Fatherland.

Vitali Klitschko, whose party UDAR was founded with the aid of Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union, is considered the preferred candidate of German capital and therefore the EU. He appears to be the most popular opposition candidate and would likely win an upcoming election.

The explosion of the far-right, electoral and non-electoral

Near the beginning of the protests it became apparent that the parliamentary Svoboda was not the only political force representing the far-right. Far-right fascist hooligans are present in every major city in Ukraine, and Kiev was no exception. While many of these were traditionally Svoboda supporters, the unrest in Kiev offered them a chance to take their battle to the streets and recruit many destitute young Ukrainians.

While the self-defense units formed in Kiev were far from “entirely fascist”, as reported by some media, right-wing former football hooligans did make up the most well-armed and menacing force among these and thus dominated the movement. A group of anarchists who had organized their own unit were forced to leave by the right-wing groups due to being outnumbered, despite protests from some of the other unit leaders.

These fascist elements have organized themselves into a group called the “Right Sector”, with the stated aim of destabilizing the situation in order to facilitate “national revolution”. These are the same hooligans who were previously paid by the ruling class to break up protests and strikes, and have turned like a guard dog on its master. They reject the idea of joining the EU and now represent, to the opposition oligarchs, a force that they cannot control.

Svoboda and their leader Oleh Tyahnybok have always sought to take the maximum advantage of the situation as well. On the one hand, their supporters have played a large part in the seizure of administration buildings in their base in Western Ukraine. On the other hand, despite early calls for a “general strike”, they soon began calling for compromise with the government, claiming to follow the “will of the people”.

Despite them standing against many EU principles, they know that in order to gain power, they need some level of backing and acceptance from the US and the EU. That is why they have toned down their public anti-Semitic rhetoric and have become “pro-EU”.

Oleg Tyahnybok had pointed out ironically a few years ago, when confronted about his anti-Semitism, “We admire Israel; almost every party in the parliament is nationalist”.

At the core of these far-right groups is a battle for Ukrainian history. These groups see themselves as the followers of the Nazi-collaborationist Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists. Lost in all this is the fact that the OUN represented only a small portion of all of the Ukrainians who fought, died or were sent to labour camps by the Nazis during WW2. Lost, even more sadly, is the rich tradition of various Ukrainian leftists who lost their lives during the Stalinist repression in the late 1920s and 30s.

What is in store for ordinary Ukrainians?

The confused nature of the situation can be seen in the demands of some University students in Kiev, who have called for free education, which is in complete contradiction with the aspirations of the present group of oligarchs who are assuming power. Free education is something that will be difficult to restore under a capitalist Ukraine.

The pro-west oligarchs are now in power in parliament, but they are unable to offer solutions to the crisis of capitalism in Ukraine. A credit default is becoming more likely with each passing day. They will instead bide their time, securing their own economic interests while blaming the problems of the capitalist crisis and their greed on the previous administration and even the USSR.

On the morning of February 23rd, speaking from the parliament floor, an MP stated: “I already hear in parliament the same kind of exchanges of money for alliances, the same kind of corrupt deals and back-channeling that we had before. I urge you to stop this or the people will come back and remove the parliament just as easily as they did the president”.

It remains to be seen how long the masses will be able to tolerate the new regime. While nationalistic ideas have gotten hold of many, empty patriotic words without any improvement in people’s lives will only go so far.

In the end the movement in the Ukraine, although it was mainly dominated by right-wing populist and fascist elements, reflects the dead end of Ukrainian capitalism. The fact that the right wing could mobilize a significant force on the streets is testament to the desperate situation amongst the masses. That is the key to understanding the movement. It was the desperate movement by the bankrupted middle class and the crushed and disowned elements at the bottom of society to assert themselves against the pressures of big business. What they did not understand was that their only salvation can be provided by the working class.

The Ukrainian masses need not just to awaken as a force on the streets, but the working class must step in as an organized independent force ready to reject all the oligarchs and the far-right demagogues who will only bring them division and further misery. This will become clearer as the pro-western oligarchs take hold of government. To organize such a force will not come easily, especially with the far-right on the streets, but it is the only way forward to improve the lives of the Ukrainian people.

(February 24, 2014)

Source: http://www.marxist.com/yanukovich-leaves-kiev-but-what-remains.htm