WORLD WORLDWIDE EUROPE GREECE - news journal UPDATE - (en) Greece, APO: Announcement on the war in Iran and call for mobilizations | Athens TV station (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

 STOP THE US-NATO-ISRAEL WAR ON IRAN ---- The disintegration and complete bankruptcy of the world of the state and capitalism constitutes a limit for the era of its global integration and at the same time the cause of the intensification of intra-imperialist contradictions and the consequent increase in the threat of war. The state-capitalist system carries within itself its contradictions, the competition between the bourgeois staffs for the best position on the chessboard for the plunder and distribution of valuable and limited natural resources, the expansion of their "sphere of influence" is what makes the sirens of war sound again and again. Because as long as societies are bound by the so-called "national interest", private profit and capitalist accumulation, war will be the only way for empires in conflict. This capitalist law, however, does not mean at all that the system of oppression is heading towards its own annihilation, through its dead ends and contradictions if the peoples themselves do not claim to take their fate into their own hands.

States and transnational mechanisms turn on the war machines, launch military operations and shape warring societies both to expand their sphere of influence and to continue the plunder of the state and capitalist machine. A condition in which the only real losers are the peoples themselves, who are faced with the carnage of war and the consequences of war, impoverishment, poverty, uprooting and death. This is what is highlighted in the most tragic way, both in the war massacre in Ukraine after the Russian army's invasion 4 years ago and in the genocide of the Palestinian people, which is the brutal escalation of the 78-year-old bloody persecution of the Palestinian people from their land by the state of Israel and its allies. This is also evidenced by the ever-increasing aggression of the US with its intervention in Venezuela and its military operations against Iran, as a result of the crisis of its global hegemony and the enormous and multiple internal crises and its need to reassert its control over strategic areas rich in oil, minerals, water, etc.
Within this context, on February 28, the US-NATO-Israeli war operation against Iran was carried out with heavy bombing, which continues to this day. The sensitivity of American imperialism and genocidal Zionism, moreover, became apparent from the very beginning with the attack on a school and a training center, resulting in the murder of hundreds of children. Their same sensitivity was manifested with the bombing of desalination plants, making the situation prevailing in Iran even more suffocating due to the escalating water shortage. Subsequently, we witnessed the attack on an oil production plant in Tehran, with the direct result that the entire city was covered in toxic gases and substances, which pose a danger to the people living there. The hypocrisy of Western regimes exceeds all limits: at the same time that they cooperate flawlessly with all the monarchical, authoritarian & theocratic regimes of the Middle East, such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman, Bahrain, etc., they use the regime of the Islamic Republic in Iran as a tool to invest their crimes with a supposedly "liberating tone", culminating in the cold-blooded murder of over 180 children in bombings. They thus continue their godly work as they began in the modern period with the bombings of Belgrade in 1999, with the war in Iraq in 2003 that destroyed the country, the twenty-year occupation in Afghanistan that left behind the Taliban regime re-established and strengthened, the surrender of Syria to the camouflaged ISIS, and the complete disintegration of Libya after the overthrow of Gaddafi, which was plunged into perpetual civil wars. The victims of imperialist predatory and neo-colonial wars and interventions are always the peoples themselves, who are massacred in this global slaughterhouse or take the path of migration to find death at the land and water borders of Europe with the murderous assistance of the Greek state. It would also be naive to believe that the slaughterer of the Palestinian people, Israel, would care about the lives of Iranians, when for 2 and a half years it has been committing genocide in the Gaza Strip, while at the same time trying to dominate the Middle East with the aim of completely transforming the region.
At the same time, Israel's murderous war machine is intensifying its aggression, expanding its strikes to southern Lebanon, giving the Lebanese people in its southern part and numbering more than 500,000 people a 24-hour deadline to abandon their homes and move to other areas. While it then began bombing southern Lebanon from the air even with phosphorus bombs and invaded the region with ground forces.
Greece, as a member of the European Union and NATO, is firmly oriented towards the aspirations of the dominant political and economic elite of which it is an integral part and is tied to the chariot of Euro-Atlanticism, responsible for so many interventions in recent years and beyond. The continuous energy and defense cooperation agreements between Greece and the United States constitute yet another example of the ratification and expansion of relations between the Greek and American states, confirmation of the attachment of the domestic bourgeoisie to the chariot of interests of the dominant international political and economic elite and strengthening of the role of the Greek state in the crucial region of the Balkans and the Eastern Mediterranean. It is precisely this strengthening of the role of the Greek state, which today passes through the undivided and comprehensive support of the US and the state of Israel, that makes the entire Greek territory the rear of the front line of Western imperialism in the Middle East. The American base of Souda in particular functions as a critical center for military monitoring, coordination and support of American and Euro-Atlantic operations throughout the Mediterranean and the Middle East. The upgrading and expansion of its capabilities is directly linked to military actions in the Middle East, including direct and indirect support for the Israeli state and its participation in the genocide of the Palestinian people. This base symbolizes and serves the maintenance of American and Euro-Atlantic sovereignty and guardianship in the critical region of the Eastern Mediterranean, providing military capabilities for rapid reaction and handling of its geopolitical interests. Every ship that sets sail, every aircraft that takes off, every order issued from the Souda base offers services to the death machine that slaughters the peoples of the Middle East. In this context, the Greek state sends warships and planes to Cyprus, pretending that it is for assistance and for defensive purposes to prevent its attack. In reality, however, the Greek state involves the country more and more deeply in the war, first to defend the British military base at the Paphos cape, while then sending anti-aircraft systems to Karpathos for the defense of the American base at Souda and its frigates were and continue to be off the coast of Israel for its defense and the transfer of information via military radars regarding imminent strikes on NATO and American-Israeli targets.
The people of Iran, after being drowned in blood - once again over the years - by the regime after the popular uprising that broke out in January 2026, now find themselves faced with the bombs of Western imperialism, responsible for so many war operations around the world and the bloodshed of peoples. As anarchists, committed to the cause of the global social revolution and the principles of internationalism, we stand by the side of the Iranian people against repression and war, against tyrants and conquerors, recognizing that only the people of Iran themselves are responsible for their liberation, for their self-determination and emancipation, and for the conquest of a free life. Always on the side of the oppressed and exploited everywhere, never with the states, the transnational formations, the slaughterers of the peoples, the bosses.
No imperialist intervention can liberate the people - No state protects the peoples - No life can flourish under the clubs, the bullets and the ruins.

Against war, imperialism, nationalism, states and capital
Internationalist Solidarity with the people of Iran and Lebanon
Stop imperialist interventions in the Middle East
Close the bases - Sabotage the war machine
Immediate disengagement of the Greek state from the war
HAND-WRITING - SELF-DETERMINATION - SOCIAL REVOLUTION

ORGANIZATION & STRUGGLE FOR ANARCHY AND LIBERAL COMMUNISM

Demonstration: Thursday, March 12, Syntagma, 7:00 PM
Rally: Friday, March 13, Propylaia, 6:30 PM

local coordination of Athens | Anarchist Political Organization - Federation of Collectives

https://apo.squathost.com/anakinosi-gia-ton-polemo-sto-iran-ke-kalesma-se-kinitopiisis-t-s-athinas-apo
_________________________________________

Link: (en) Greece, APO: Announcement on the war in Iran and call for mobilizations | Athens TV station (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

Source: A-infos-en@ainfos.ca

WORLD WORLDWIDE EUROPE FRANCE - news journal UPDATE - (en) France, OCL CA #358 - Social Security: A Battleground in Class Struggle (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr) [machine translation]

Parliament passed two finance bills, both thanks to the Socialist Party (PS), as expected. But why two finance bills? Because one concerns taxes, as with all parliaments worldwide, and the other the Social Security budget. It is this latter bill that we will examine.

What was passed
Basically, there are always three parts to Social Security finance bills.
First, a National Health Insurance Expenditure Target (ONDAM) is set. A 3% increase compared to the initial plan is projected for 2025. Considering the state of hospitals and the extent of healthcare deserts while the population ages, this isn't enormous. But still, it's more than initially anticipated.

Next, an agreement must be reached on revenue. Of course, the government refused to consider any increase in employer contributions. The CSG (1) on certain incomes will increase. Part of the social security debt will be transferred to the CADES (2), which means that the CRDS (3) will increase. The government has abandoned the extension of deductibles. Some minor taxes have been retained despite their initial plan to be eliminated.

Finally, there needs to be an agreement on spending. The government has abandoned the elimination of 100% coverage for long-term illnesses, and the pension reform is suspended for two years. However, the maximum duration of sick leave is reduced, including for workplace accidents. The rest are mostly cosmetic measures.

While we're on the subject of cosmetics, since the prevailing narrative is "we're doing everything we can to save our social welfare system," we have to appear to be making progress: extending paid parental leave after childbirth, fully reimbursing wheelchairs (it was about time!), investing in housing for the elderly, covering certain preventative treatments for long-term illnesses (that, too, was vaguely about time...).

But what's fundamentally wrong with all this?

The best social protection in the world?

That's what we've long told ourselves about social security, and it was true for a while. We associate social security with "good times" and Fordism. Let's not romanticize it too much. Those days weren't so good, partly because the aftermath of war meant ruin, misery, and rationing. If there's ever a time when financing social security is impossible, it's now. And yet, it was done. Not in a grand, unanimous, and patriotic surge. Because part of the Resistance claimed to be communist, and it was essential that they agree to lay down their arms. Because the French Communist Party (PCF) was the leading electoral party in France, and in the Cold War, it was crucial that neither France nor Italy fall to the dark side.

The system initially envisioned was simple, modeled on workers' mutual aid societies. A fund financed by mandatory contributions (from employees and their employers), managed primarily by elected employee representatives. A single fund for health, retirement, unemployment, family allowances, and workplace accidents (a single fund allows for offsetting deficits between funds and prioritizing funding). 100% reimbursement. In fact, these were local funds (allowing for proximity to the user) overseen by a national fund (where representatives of the State were present).
The URSSAF (the French social security collection agency) had to be created to make employers pay. But yes, as originally conceived, social security was an excellent social protection system.

A death planned from the start
What were the debates in the National Assembly in 1949? The need to combat fraud and abuse by insured individuals, the aging population could not be supported by social security, minor risks had to be de-reimbursed, some benefits transferred to mutual insurance companies… Doesn't that remind you of anything? Apart from the CGT (4), everyone opposed the establishment of a single fund. From the outset, family allowances were separate from social security, and workplace accidents were included but with differentiated contributions. The state obtained a significant number of representatives on the national social security fund. The CGT won the 1947 elections, but immediately afterward, FO split and allied itself with the CFTC, mutual benefit societies, and employers. The CGT thus effectively became a minority in the fund's management.
From the Common Market onward, preparations had to be made for a liberal Europe. The reform of the general social security system was part of a broader framework of opening the market to competition. It was the Jeannenay Ordinances of 1967 that triggered significant strikes, even though the events of 1968 have overshadowed them in the collective memory. The general social security system was divided into three separate funds (health, family, and old age), thus preventing solidarity between different risks. Joint management by employers and unions was introduced: representatives of those affected were now appointed (the CGT union's share of employee seats fell from 43% to 33%), and they held only half the seats. In short, the unions lost control to an alliance between the state and employers. This sparked the debate on "undue burdens," meaning expenses that the state imposed on the general social security system without the latter collecting any corresponding contributions. Finally, the State seeks to better control the hospital sector by creating a healthcare map, strengthening the power of hospital directors (appointed by the Ministry), and gradually transforming it into a state service through the civil service status of its staff.
The left will reinstate elections, which are boycotted by employees. It must be said that this has become a symbolic issue, as the State has largely become the master of the game. It is the left (Rocard) that will initiate the fiscalization of financing with the CSG (General Social Contribution). Fiscalization means paying through taxes. What does this change for us? On the payslip, it amounts to an increase in contributions, except that the employer's contributions remain unchanged. But above all, it further reduces the autonomy of social security in relation to the State; it becomes a budgetary tool, an element of its policy. This was justified by the fact that it allowed the self-employed to pay, that it "broadened the tax base." Of course, since it's in the hands of the State, it changes without negotiation: 1.1% at the time, 9.2% in 2022… In 2020, contributions represented only 32.4% of the health insurance fund's financing, compared to 32.7% for the CSG (General Social Contribution).
What did Juppé do in 1996? He created the social security budget, the social security debt, institutionalized the role of mutual insurance companies, and created the regional health prefectures. It was a constitutional law (which amended the constitution). Parliament debated the major policy directions (the ONDAM, which I mentioned earlier), and in effect, we shifted from a logic of responding to needs to a logic of adapting to budgetary constraints. He created CADES, meaning that instead of increasing contributions to boost healthcare production, the social security system had to finance its own return to balance by borrowing on the financial markets. He mandated two representatives from French mutual insurance companies and four qualified individuals appointed by the State in each local (primary) fund. The hierarchical relationship between the State and the funds was reinforced through performance and management agreements. Finally, he created the Regional Health Agencies (ARH) under the direct authority of the Ministry (directors appointed by the Council of Ministers and subject to dismissal), which would become the Regional Health Agencies (ARS) in 2004.
From then on, social security became a cog in the State budget, an element of its social and general policy. It is well known that the social security budget is inherently countercyclical: in times of prosperity, the amount of contributions increases; in times of crisis, it decreases. This is the source of the social security deficit. Between 2008 and 2009, its deficit doubled. This isn't because we received twice as much healthcare… Right now, the priority is debt repayment, and therefore social security has to contribute to this at the expense of health and social objectives. As it was conceived in 1945, such reasoning was unthinkable. Social security was meant to manage contributions as best as possible and decide on priorities between health, retirement, etc., even if it meant raising contributions, negotiated between employers and unions. It wasn't part of the state budget. Although in the hands of union bureaucracies, our health wasn't a pawn in political games.

Social security at the service of capital
From the outset, medicine remained a liberal profession, and doctors were vehemently opposed to the introduction of fee-for-service billing. After years of conflict, this resulted in the creation of Sectors I and II. Doctors also imposed quotas to create a shortage.

For the pharmaceutical industry, drug reimbursement is a boon because it makes customers solvent. Prices are negotiated centrally, but close ties exist between pharmaceutical executives and the senior civil servants responsible for regulating them. Revolving door practices also play a role. (5) Private clinics also benefit from the system. Social security has also enabled a medical industry with heavy investments and standardization that promotes concentration. Since Juppé (and even before), we can speak of financialization. Hospitals have to finance themselves through loans since social security must contribute to budgetary balance. Social security is also forced to finance itself on the financial markets (previously, the State made repayable advances). The social security deficit also reflects the interests of financiers. Clinics, laboratories, nursing homes, etc., are now mostly in the hands of a few large groups.

Finally, the reduction in reimbursements (excess fees, delisting of medications, co-payments, etc.), which has been a continuous policy of the State for decades, allows for the development of mutual insurance companies and an insurance market, again made solvent by the tax system. Mutual insurance companies are now aligned with insurance companies in their management. Social security means everyone pays according to their income and receives according to their needs. Insurance is a calculation of risk: high risks mean high premiums (the older you are, the more you pay, for example), low premiums mean less coverage.

In fact, it all makes sense. You can't imagine an island of "social" protection in an ocean of capitalism. From the moment you leave most of healthcare in the hands of the private sector (general practitioners, labs, clinics, etc.), social security will allow a significant market for capital to become profitable. At the beginning of the last century, the poor didn't receive medical care, except in times of war. With social security, the poor can get treatment, and that's a huge step forward, but they have become an attractive market for capital.

Separating healthcare from the state. So, we understand, yes, we used to have very good social protection, and we still retain some of it. In France, major medical treatments are almost entirely reimbursed; we can't imagine forgoing major surgery for financial reasons. For several decades, the system functioned relatively well. Clinics were established, and massive investments were made in hospitals, which ceased to be places where the destitute were confined—as they essentially were until the end of the Second World War—and became renowned centers of healthcare. But today, we are paying the price for the space given to capital and its subsequent takeover by the state (the two being inextricably linked).
The issue cannot be reduced to simply more resources for this or fewer resources for that. Of course, we must fight to maintain social protection. But we must recognize that if we only consider budgets, it is medical capitalism that social security is funding, and therefore also a certain conception of medicine and healthcare. And this will continue as long as we leave the provision of healthcare to the private sector. We saw the result of nationalizing social security with the management of COVID: not only overwhelmed hospitals, but a one-size-fits-all solution—the vaccine—and a ban on personalized care. We must take back control of healthcare. Today, it is the State, in consultation with capital of course, that decides which treatments can be reimbursed and which cannot (see, for example, homeopathy). We must reaffirm the principle that everyone pays according to their means and is treated according to their needs, and fight against false assumptions like "if you are at risk, you have to pay more," which are the antithesis of social protection. Above all, we must remember that healthcare and a long life are not a burden and should not be budgetary adjustment variables; they are progress.

Sylvie

To learn more about the long and conflictual history of social security, there is an interesting book: Nicolas Da Silva, *The Battle for Social Security*. A History of the Healthcare System, published by La Fabrique

Notes
1. General Social Contribution (CSG). A tax that finances social security.

2. CADES is the fund created by Juppé to borrow on the financial markets to repay part of the social security debt.

3. Contribution to the Repayment of the Social Debt (CSR). A tax that finances CADES.

4. In fact, it wasn't completely unified. Railway workers, miners, etc., were keen to keep their special pension schemes and were therefore opposed to a single fund. They too contributed to the fragmentation of social security.

5. Revolving doors (or "pantouflage") refers to moving back and forth between the public and private sectors.

http://oclibertaire.lautre.net/spip.php?article4659
_________________________________________

A-infos-en@ainfos.ca

WORLD WORLDWIDE EUROPE ITALY - news journal UPDATE - (en) Italy, FAI, Umanita Nova #9-26 - A Special Species (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

 Francesca Geloni's article (Beyond Speciesism. The Path to Total Liberation), published in issue 6 of Umanità Nova, has the great merit of summarizing some of the most important issues of anti-speciesism, citing key theoretical sources to inform a debate that has been ongoing for many years. This weekly magazine has published numerous contributions on the topic over time, all worthy of attention.

The fact that there is still a need to discuss the issues raised by anti-speciesists demonstrates that this debate is not yet over. Which, in many ways, is certainly a good thing.
On this topic, within the anarchist movement itself, we have often witnessed conflicting dynamics that, predictably, have only served to harden viewpoints, fomenting mutual incommunicability or, in the worst cases, open hostility between those who profess to be anti-speciesists and those who do not.
Yet, for years now, anti-speciesism has made inroads into the minds and hearts of many activists within the libertarian movement.

It is therefore a good thing, in my view, that anti-speciesist critique has rightfully entered the theoretical debate within anarchism, because it significantly enriches our cultural baggage and provides new tools for the metaphorical toolbox we carry around to transform society.
There are, however, some points I believe are worth reflecting on.
Every line of reasoning we make, every expression of thought, of who we are, of what we want to be, as well as our empathy for the plight of others, are all elements that bring us back to our humanity. The very fact that we care and raise ethical and practical questions about the fate of other species, their suffering, and their exploitation, refers us to capacities that qualify us and differentiate us from other species. Because while it's true that no animal wants to live in a cage, and no animal wants to suffer or die to satisfy our needs, it's equally true that questioning these needs is our prerogative.
However, we cannot deny that humanity has always built itself-both concretely and symbolically-through interaction with animals. This interaction is multifaceted, and not necessarily marked by violence. We share many things with many other sentient species, and we know well how strong emotional and affective connections can be established with animals.
However, there are intrinsic characteristics of our humanity that are unique to us.
Does this, then, place us on a higher level of a supposed hierarchy? Certainly not. Does this awareness authorize us to commit atrocities against other species? Certainly not.
Often, when addressing these topics, we resort to somewhat extreme examples that are used as dialectical cues to support our arguments. This is not the case, and I don't want to be misunderstood, but I'll reiterate the classic paradox with which one usually tries to embarrass the antispeciesist: "If in an emergency situation you have to choose between saving a newborn baby or saving a lamb, who do you save?" To this question, as banal as it is tendentious, the antispeciesist would probably have no hesitation in preferring the human being, as the bearer of a life plan and a complexity of interests that the lamb lacks. I would respond more immediately: I save the newborn baby because it is human like me.
I know perfectly well that a borderline case cannot and should not ethically justify everyday and ordinary cruelty towards animals, but it is also thanks to paroxysmal hypotheses that we can get to the heart of the matter.
Therefore, while we cannot consider the human species superior to others, we must nevertheless consider the "something" that makes us what we are, and nothing else. Our perspective is human, and we cannot ignore our species' particularity, our cognitive complexity, our uniqueness.
Does this awareness still authorize us to commit heinous acts against nature? Certainly not. On the contrary, it calls us to specific responsibilities. This assumption of responsibility, expressed in a desire for liberation from domination for the benefit of all living species, implies an action taken in the name, on behalf of, and in the interest of others. It is a unidirectional moral action because, for obvious reasons, animals and nature do not follow moral principles that are unique to us. Therefore, fighting for animal liberation, being the voice of the voiceless, is a task we can undertake only by virtue of who we are: cultural animals who, unlike other animals, know how to question themselves about how to be in the world.

According to the anti-speciesist approach, there is a common thread that ties together the various axes of domination. The same exclusionary pattern underlies all forms of discrimination and oppression, both those perpetrated between humans and those inflicted upon animals. Therefore, one cannot simply be anti-racist or anti-sexist without also being anti-speciesist.
Personally, I find it very difficult to equate, even philosophically, the struggles for human liberation with those for animal liberation, considering speciesism, by analogy, to be the same as racism or sexism.
Racism and sexism are unacceptable because they are based on arbitrary and instrumental distinctions that deny human dignity. They are expressions of discrimination rooted in social and institutional structures.

On the contrary, biological differences between species are scientifically established (although today we recognize more nuanced "boundaries" and multidisciplinary criteria for their definition), while, for example, it is scientifically established that human "races" do not exist. It is therefore not so automatic to apply the conceptual or moral categories that are specific to discrimination between humans to the animal world (or, more precisely, to our relationship with animals).
Our species-which is also a relational, cognitive, and ethical community-is the community of human beings. No matter how hard we try to include them, animals can never be part of it in the same way.

When we reason about freedom, oppression, ethics, and all that comes with them, our moral perspective can only be human. Prioritizing human interests does not mean placing the human species at the top of a hierarchy, but rather recognizing the importance of human beings for human beings. Not to mention that the preference given to members of one's own species is a rather natural fact, common to other species as well, further strengthened-in our case-by the emotional and psychological bonds that characterize the way we relate to one another.
It's not a question, therefore, of justifying oppression, but rather of not denying the uniqueness that is based on our qualities, on our ability to recognize ourselves within an ethical framework and to act as moral subjects. Recognizing who we are means prioritizing our own interests and those of our fellow humans. This doesn't mean rehabilitating the old, shortsighted anthropocentrism that has caused so much damage to the planet, but rather reaffirming the rationale for a non-anthropocentric humanism that considers the relationships between different life forms organically and morally.

In this sense, and given what has been stated so far, using nature and animals for our sustenance, for food, or for the protection of our very lives cannot, in itself, be considered an abuse. Rather, it is the predatory and anti-human nature of capitalism that is destroying the world. Life on the planet-human and non-human-is dramatically abused by the systemic violence of power, the class division of society, the private ownership of the means of production, wars, the reckless exploitation of environmental resources, and the all-consuming and all-devouring logic of profit. And it is precisely in defense of life and human dignity that anarchism stands, with its struggles and proposals.

Beyond my personal and questionable beliefs, I believe that anti-speciesism is nonetheless highly valuable for anti-authoritarian thought because, among other things, it emphasizes the importance of empathy as a compass that guides our behavior, because it expresses an extraordinary drive for coherence, and because it advocates a constant expansion of the beneficiaries of a moral sphere characterized by equality and freedom.

That said, I believe it's legitimate and possible-without declaring oneself anti-speciesist-to fight, for example, against factory farming, to challenge animal experimentation in scientific settings (where not strictly necessary), to adopt lifestyles marked by compassion, and so on. These choices, coupled with a necessary and uncompromising critique of capitalism and its modes of production and distribution, are both valid and respectable.
At the same time, however, I believe that anarchism is a theory of human freedom, conceived by human beings and proposed to humanity.
After all, human beings are the only ones capable-if they want-of becoming aware of their problems, of destroying power, of eradicating exploitation, of organizing themselves differently, of caring for nature, of disposing of it in the most reasonable and respectful manner possible, of inhabiting the world with the awareness of being part of it.

Alberto La Via

https://umanitanova.org/una-specie-speciale/
_________________________________________

A-infos-en@ainfos.ca

WORLD WORLDWIDE EUROPE ITALY - news journal UPDATE - (en) Italy, FAI, Umanita Nova #9-26 - March 23-29: Week Against Wartime Rail Logistics (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation

 Railways are a tool for waging war. This is what the European Union and member state governments tell us. This is why the Antimilitarist Assembly, meeting on January 11 in Carrara (MS), has called for a week of protests against wartime logistics and the militarization of rail transport for the week of March 23-29. Since its inception, the Antimilitarist Assembly has been committed to coordinating and encouraging initiatives against the production and trafficking of weapons. Therefore, we now call for a commitment to ensure that resources earmarked for wartime use are directed toward improving rail services for users, as well as improving the economic and working conditions of employees and ensuring (real) safety.

The Antimilitarist Assembly therefore supports the initiatives of the Collective of Railway Workers Against War on this issue.

Even in the railways, a flood of public money is being channeled into emergency and war policies that serve the interests of authoritarian governments and their allies, large industrial and financial corporations. At the same time, less and less money is being allocated to improving commuter services and sustainable mobility, rail safety, and improving the economic and working conditions of railway personnel.

As the disasters at Tempe in Greece and Adamuz in Spain demonstrate, rail traffic is becoming increasingly unsafe due to technological innovation, line saturation, and the decline in railway personnel. The increase in military traffic will exacerbate these critical issues if it is not offset by cuts in civilian traffic. Military transport also involves the transportation of explosive materials and devices, such as munitions. It is easy to imagine the consequences of an accident involving these trains rather than passenger trains.

On November 19, 2025, the European Commission published the EU Military Mobility Package, which was then approved by a large majority by the European Parliament on December 17.

This package brings the EU one step closer to a "military Schengen."

This measure, along with the roadmap for the transformation of the EU's defense industry, are priority areas in the White Paper and the Defence Readiness Roadmap 2030.

The package aims to prepare dual-use infrastructure by 2027; to this end, it includes EUR17.65 billion proposed under the next European budget (2028-2034) for military mobility; approximately 500 hotspot projects and targeted investments to eliminate bottlenecks along priority corridors; and finally, tools to identify, strengthen, and protect strategic infrastructure.

In Italy, the projects are included in the EUR1.74 billion (over 50% allocated to rail transport) earmarked by the Connecting Europe Facility as part of the European Military Action Plan 2.0. After the stations in the provinces of Pisa (Tombolo and Pontedera) and Udine (Palmanova), the projects are concentrated in the stations of Genoa and La Spezia. Specifically, the European Union funding includes EUR28,774,201.50 to RFI for the Genoa Sampierdarena-Parco Fuori Muro station and EUR9,274,599.00 to the Eastern Ligurian Sea Port System Authority for the La Spezia Marittima station. Milano Smistamento is also involved, where work is underway on the new intermodal terminal, which could become important for military traffic, given its geographic location (Rhine-Alps axis, proximity to border crossings). The high-speed line under construction between Turin and Lyon is designated as a key hub for a military corridor, which should terminate in Kiev.

The Antimilitarist Assembly invites railway staff and service users, along with antimilitarist, pacifist, and internationalist groups, to participate in locally decided initiatives.

Antimilitarist Assembly

assembleantimilitarista@gmail.com

https://umanitanova.org/23-29-marzo-settimana-contro-la-logistica-ferroviaria-di-guerra/
_________________________________________

Link: (en) Italy, FAI, Umanita Nova #9-26 - March 23-29: Week Against Wartime Rail Logistics (ca, de, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

Source: A-infos-en@ainfos.ca

WORLD WORLDWIDE EUROPE FRANCE - news journal UPDATE - (en) France, UCL AL #369 - Antifascism - Rurality: The Resistible Rise of the Far Right (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr) [machine translation]

 Sign reading “Solidarity with workers’ and peasants’ struggles” at a rally in the Zone to Defend (ZAD) at Notre-Dame-des-Landes. ---- Rural areas, with their high proportion of National Rally (RN) voters, are often perceived as being so far removed from the networks of the militant left that some political parties choose to abandon them in order to focus on establishing themselves in major cities. However, left-wing initiatives in the countryside do exist, as does the potential to build genuine counter-powers there. A comrade from Aveyron tells us about the local grassroots struggles that are on the front lines against this resistible rise of the far right.

Seven of the ten million votes garnered by the RN in 2024 came from municipalities with fewer than 10,000 inhabitants. It is therefore largely in areas far from major cities that he is counting on seizing power by filling the void left by the left, which is largely absent from these regions.

Weakening of public services, medical deserts, closures of schools, bars, and grocery stores (21,000 municipalities without shops according to INSEE), isolation and poor public transportation, and a feeling of abandonment fuel the RN vote just as much as racism.

Yet the rise of the far right here, as elsewhere, as well as the division between urban and rural working classes on which it relies, is not inevitable. It would be misleading to consider the countryside as the exclusive domain of the far right, to the point of abandoning it to them. In fact, it is far more diverse and vibrant than the stereotypes attributed to it. Better still, it is perhaps also in these areas that aspirations for emancipation are currently taking root.

Fighting and Establishing a Presence
First, not all progressive forces focus exclusively on major cities and their working-class suburbs. Thus, the fact that rural areas have become major battlegrounds in environmental struggles is not explained by spontaneous phenomena, but rather results from both a process of establishing local presence and forging alliances. This is what allowed the development of the Earth Uprisings, for example.

Furthermore, the progress of the far right in rural areas cannot be measured solely by electoral results. It relies on other vectors, such as the activism of the Rural Coordination (CR). Therefore, the fact that in several departments, actions against the management of the health crisis linked to the spread of lumpy skin disease were carried out jointly by the CR and the Confédération Paysanne (CP) is, at first glance, troubling. But for the latter, this stems more from a tactical than a strategic choice.

In Aveyron, the CP (Communist Party) is wondering how to prevent the CR (Coordination Rurale), which made significant gains in the agricultural chamber elections and is increasingly occupying the public sphere through its activism, from dominating the protest movement. Therefore, the CP is striving to reach not only non-union members, but also sympathizers and those within the CR who are angry but not subscribe to far-right ideology. There are also issues at stake with factions of the National Federation of Farmers' Unions (FNSEA) who have joined the CP and CR in the mobilizations.

These two groups thus find themselves united in action, but not in a clear sense of unity, as there is no common message, whether in banners, press releases, press conferences, leaflets, posters, or marches.

In Aveyron, the CP (Communist Party) has adopted this tactic while working alongside Solidaires, the FSU (French National Union of Teachers), and the CGT (General Confederation of Labour) to establish Vigilance and Antifascist Trade Union Initiatives (VISA), which aims to expose the far right's hypocrisy. The far right claims to defend rural areas while supporting a deadly agricultural model that is crippling small farmers and destroying the environment.

More broadly, the CP's objective is to be present on the ground to defend peasant farming in place of the productivist model and land concentration promoted by both the CR (Revolutionary Communist Party) and the FNSEA (National Federation of Farmers' Unions), a model in which many farmers are trapped.

Developing inclusive collectives
Environmental and peasant struggles are the most visible, but they are not the only ones that matter. The involvement of many progressive activists in local social activities (village festivals, raffles) and the development of spaces collectively managed by associations (libraries, bars, grocery stores, community gardens, etc.), as well as mutual aid practices (bartering, lending, and sharing equipment), allow people to break out of their insularity, develop solidarity, and combat rural depopulation. This leads to the promotion of self-organization and autonomy in villages, but also of openness to others and democratic culture.

In Southern Aveyron, the activists most involved in these forms of collective action have, for several years now, been driving the networking of these initiatives. This encompasses sectors as diverse as community grocery stores, the food security project, the promotion of cultural and festive events, and the maintenance of rural trails.

These interactions bring together very different people. They are invaluable where the National Rally (RN) encourages division, scapegoating, and retreating into an idealized and mythologized past. They also constitute a bulwark against the offensive of the reactionary billionaire Stérin, who seeks to exploit village festivals with his funding and influence strategy. Such collective initiatives do not transform these villages into bastions of class struggle and intersectional activism, but they contribute to spreading progressive ideas and provide fertile ground for more aggressive struggles (against polluting industrial projects, against water privatization, for the development of public services, etc.).

This is how, in southern Aveyron, the Manifesto for the Defense of Local Hospitals has played a vital role for nearly thirty years in maintaining the hospitals in Millau and Saint-Affrique. This collective, led by activists from Solidaires, the CGT, the FSU, and the CNT, and with a real presence in both cities and villages, has, through its actions, helped prevent the dismantling of the two facilities and thwarted the maneuvers of the Regional Health Agency and local dignitaries, who were driving privatization and depopulation.

All these examples show that rural areas can be a true laboratory for social movement organizations as well as for both institutional and revolutionary left-wing groups. This is all the more reason to integrate them more fully into the project of emancipation and into a strategy that both develops counter-powers and promotes libertarian communist intervention.

Laurent (UCL Aveyron)

https://www.unioncommunistelibertaire.org/?Ruralite-La-resistible-ascension-de-l-extreme-droite
_________________________________________

Link: (en) France, UCL AL #369 - Antifascism - Rurality: The Resistible Rise of the Far Right (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr) [machine translation]

Source: A-infos-en@ainfos.ca

WORLD WORLDWIDE EUROPE BELGIUM BRUSSELS - De Standaard - TURBULENTE TIJDEN - Maandag 20 april 2026.

 

Indien deze mail onleesbaar is, klik hier

TURBULENTE TIJDEN   20 april 2026

Staakt-het-vuren loopt bijna af, maar Teheran en Washington naderen elkaar amper Van het staakt-het-vuren tussen Iran en de Verenigde Staten was tot hiertoe nauwelijks iets te merken, en dinsdag loopt het al officieel af. De deur naar de diplomatie is niet dicht, maar “wordt aanzienlijk moeilijker te openen”.

Live Midden-Oosten | Iran: “Niet van plan om te onderhandelen met VS”   VS delen beelden van entering Iraans vrachtschip Touska, Iran dreigt met vergelding

•   Analyse | In onrustige tijden riskeert België de kredietverlaging cash te betalen •   Ben Weyts: “Wat wij aan de energiefactuur kunnen doen, is maar een cijfer achter de komma. De kosten zijn altijd groter dan de baten” • Libanon vraagt Unesco om dringende bescherming van historische citadel

Orban is nog maar net weg en nu kiezen Bulgaren voor Moskou-vriendelijke premier Roemen Radev wordt de nieuwe premier van Bulgarije. Hij belooft komaf te maken met de politieke chaos, maar is ook tegen steun aan Oekraïne. Krijgt de EU een nieuwe dwarsligger?

Oekraïense boeren aan de frontlijn ploegen moedig voort: “Opgeven is geen optie”   Live Oekraïne | Grote brand in Russische haven Toeapse na Oekraïense droneaanval

•   Opinie | Nu de internationale politieke dialoog in elkaar klapt, bewijst de wetenschapsdiplomatie haar waarde

Schrijf u in op onze nieuwsbrieven Download onze app DS Nieuws Lees de krant digitaal Abonneer u nu voordelig

De Standaard is een sterk nieuwsmerk van Mediahuis.