#WORLD #WORLDWIDE #CZECH #ANARCHISM #News #Journal #Update - (en) Czech, OAFED: 20 years since AntiNATO: the discourse is changing (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

 In the fall, 20 years will pass since the NATO summit in Prague, against which a

strong anarchist bloc was formulated, consisting mainly of anarchists from
Eastern Europe. How did the anarchist movement feel about war then and how does
it feel about it now? ---- We bring you the CSAF's speech at the time, which
sounds like something from another world. Today, in connection with him, we might
talk about "the pursuit of ideological purity" or "the hypocrisy of the Western
left". Let's note, for example, the shocking fact that the authors of the article
do not at all support the "lesser evil" in the form of parliamentary democracy
and lump all states into the same bag. There is talk of refusing military
service, and the text even refers to a slogan that sounded from the lips of
anti-militarists a hundred years ago, without addressing specific workers. Well,
enlighten yourself.
***
To tell the truth, during the preparations for this event, together with other
groups and individuals, we discussed a lot whether it is appropriate to focus it
primarily against militarism, wars and military blocs. Unfortunately, the elites
have decided to let us know right now that this decision is completely
appropriate, with their undisguised preparations for a new war against Iraq. At
the same time, we are witnessing more than one interesting paradox, more than one
situation that would be hard to believe if we did not live in it.

One example can be Václav Havel, who now acts as a character from his own absurd
plays. A one-time peacemaker and humanist, he is now a more ardent agitator for
war than other European practical politicians. Another time, the writer of
brilliant essays and dramas treats with respect the half-witted President of the
United States of America, George Bush Jr., and supports his warlike ambitions.
The man who once proposed the dissolution of NATO has now become an agile
propagandist of this military bloc and the host of its meeting, which he
described as the biggest opportunity for Czechs to intervene in the fate of the
world.

However, let's supposedly let our president be the president and take today as an
opportunity to show the world that his voice is far from our voice. Other
paradoxes appear in the war propaganda we are witnessing today.

There is talk of defending democracy against an evil dictator who is as bad as
Hitler or, according to the father of today's American president, even worse. But
what kind of democracy is it really about? Do the people of the United States of
America have any real way to control their supposed politicians and rulers? In
fact, in many ways they do not even have access to true information about the
activities of their government. If democracy means the possibility to take part
in decision-making, then from this point of view people may not care if they are
ruled by the dictator Saddam or the democrat Bush. Their opinion still has the
same value, i.e. zero.

They talk about the fight for human rights and against religious fundamentalism.
However, the bases for the attack will be provided by Saudi Arabia, after the
fall of the Taliban in Afghanistan, the world's most sovereignly fundamentalist
state. Massive violations of human rights do not bother the United States of
America with this ally of theirs. They don't mind, after all, just as they didn't
mind in Iraq itself in the eighties, when they actively supported Hussain in the
war against Iran. He was an ally then, even though he was murdering his own
people by the thousands. Today, he is archilumpe and enemy number one. The
problem with Saddam is not human rights or Islamic fanaticism. The problem is
that he used to fit the United States strategically as an ally, now he would fit
them as a defeated opponent.

According to military historians, Saddam could have been overthrown as early as
ten years ago, when the Iraqis themselves rose up against him during the Persian
Gulf War. What was the reaction of the west? He let the elite Iraqi troops return
from the front line and drown the insurgency in blood. A good example of how to
take today's anti-dictatorship rhetoric seriously.

If anyone is violating human rights, it is again the United States of America.
The economic sanctions against Iraq that they imposed have already denied more
than one million Iraqis the most fundamental human right - the right to life. So
who is the dangerous terrorist, who is the mass murderer?

American political leaders constantly talk about the security risks posed by
Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Another example of the thief shouting: Catch
the thief! Should we expect a solution to the problems with these weapons from
their first and largest manufacturer? That would probably be as absurd as
believing a sincere fight against terrorism by a state that has trained and
financed a number of terrorists in various parts of the world. In both cases, the
United States is the source of security risks and part of the problem, not the
solution.

In the case of Iraq, as in many other recent wars, despite the propaganda, it is
not a conflict between good and evil, a worthy democracy and an evil
dictatorship. Such fairy-tale schemes are nice to listen to, but they have little
to do with reality. This is a classic war between the elite, whose interests are
linked to global capital, and the counter-elite, whose interests are anchored
locally and dependent on a specific state. Saddam Hussain is not the enemy
because he is a criminal, George Bush Jr. would have to start shooting himself,
Saddam Hussain is the enemy because he has different interests than the Western
elites. This is the real cause of today's gun rattling.

But we, the common people of all countries, have not the slightest reason to
support such a war. Quite the contrary - this war may cost us many more lives,
all for the profit of a few rich and powerful. Thank you, we don't want to!

However, we do not intend to see the current wars as an isolated phenomenon or
even as something arising from human nature. These wars are based on an existing
system that cannot be imagined without them. Therefore, our answer cannot be mere
anti-war moralizing, but the fight for the elimination of wars and their social
causes, and for the creation of a freer, more harmonious and self-governing
society in which no one could oppress another or even provoke him against a third
party.

We are not anti-American, and we are no more sympathetic to non-Western bloc
countries than the United States. On the other hand, we believe that it is our
duty to criticize, above all, the crimes committed by the governments of our
countries allegedly in our name. Especially in a situation where these powerful
people support a new brutal war and even have the audacity to invite dozens of
the biggest potentates to our city. All the more, they must feel the strongest
possible voice of real resistance. And that's why we call like anti-militarists
for more than a hundred years: War of war!

We will have several opportunities during the NATO meeting to assert that
position. There will be demonstrations on November 17, November 19 and November
21, organized by an anti-capitalist and anti-state platform against NATO. It is
clear, however, that the activity must not begin and end with demonstrations. It
is possible to convince people around you, it is possible to make your views
known by a drastic act, such as refusing military and civilian service. What is
needed above all is not to remain silent and not to resign. This is exactly what
the powerful are waiting for, that is how they would have us where they want us.

https://oafed.noblogs.org/post/2022/08/19/20-let-od-antinato-diskurz-se-meni/#more-1036
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca