Det danske Fredsakademi
Kronologi over fredssagen og international politik 17. Oktober 2004 / Time Line October 17, 2004
Version 3.510/17/2004
MLK III to Speak at Million Worker March(MWM) On
Washington
Coretta Scott King and Martin Luther King III have
endorsed the Million Worker March on Washington on October 17.
Martin Luther King III will stand in the footsteps of his
father at the Lincoln Memorial on October 17 and address the mass
mobilization. The declaration of support by Coretta Scott King will
be presented. Also featured: presentations by Reverend E.
Randall Osburn, Executive Vice President of the Southern
Christian Leadership Foundation, and a close collaborator of
Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and Dick
Gregory, social activist and associate of Dr. King.
The call for the Million Worker March was initiated by
International Longshore Workers Union Local The presence of the
family of Dr. King is a fitting moral and political expression of
historical continuity.
"Thirty-six years ago, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. summoned
working people across America to a Poor People's March on
Washington to inaugurate "'a war on poverty at home.' 'The United
States government,' he proclaimed, 'is one of the greatest
purveyors of violence in the world. SAmerica is at a crossroads in
history and it is critically important for us as a nation and
society to choose a new path and to move on it with resolution and
courage.'
Working people are under siege while new wars of devastation are
launched at the expense of the poor everywhere. The MWM will revive
and expand a great struggle for fundamental change, as we forge
together a social, economic and political movement that will
transform America.
10/17/2004
Reparations in Reverse
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1015-01.htm
by Naomi Klein
Next week, something will happen that will unmask the upside-down
morality of the invasion and occupation of Iraq. On October 21,
Iraq will pay $200-million in war reparations to some of the
richest countries and corporations in the world.
If that seems backwards, it's because it is. Iraqis have never been
awarded reparations for any of the crimes they have suffered under
Saddam, or the brutal sanctions regime that claimed the lives of at
least half a million people, or the U.S.-led invasion, which United
Nations Secretary-General Kofi Anan recently called "illegal."
Instead, Iraqis are still being forced to pay reparations for
crimes committed by their former dictator.
Quite apart from its crushing $125-billion sovereign debt, Iraq has
paid $18.8-billion in reparations stemming from Saddam Hussein's
1990 invasion and occupation of Kuwait. This is not in itself
surprising: as a condition of the ceasefire that ended the 1991
Gulf War, Saddam agreed to pay damages stemming from the invasion.
More than fifty countries have made claims, with most of the money
awarded to Kuwait. What is surprising is that even after Saddam was
overthrown, the payments from Iraq have continued.
Since Saddam was toppled in April, Iraq has paid out $1.8-billion
in reparations to the United Nations Compensation Commission
(UNCC), the Geneva-based quasi tribunal that assesses claims and
disburses awards. Of those payments, $37-million have gone to
Britain and $32.8-million have gone to the United States. That's
right ... in the past 18 months, Iraq's occupiers have collected
$69.8-million in reparation payments from the desperate people they
have been occupying. But it gets worse: the vast majority of those
payments -- 78 per cent -- have gone to multinational corporations,
according to statistics on the UNCC web site.
Away from media scrutiny, this has been going on for years. Of
course, there are many legitimate claims for losses that have come
before the UNCC: payments have gone to Kuwaitis who have lost loved
ones, limbs, and property to Saddam's forces. But much larger
awards have gone to corporations -- of the total amount the UNCC
has awarded in Gulf War reparations, $21.5-billion has gone to the
oil industry alone. Jean-Claude Aimé, the UN diplomat who
headed the UNCC until December 2000, publicly questioned the
practice. "This is the first time as far as I know that the UN is
engaged in retrieving lost corporate assets and profits," he told
the Wall Street Journal in 1997, and then mused: "I often wonder at
the correctness of that."
But the UNCC's corporate handouts only accelerated. Here is a small
sample of who has been getting "reparation" awards from Iraq:
Halliburton ($18-million), Bechtel ($7-million), Mobil
($2.3-million), Shell ($1.6-million), Nestle ($2.6-million), Pepsi
($3.8-million), Philip Morris ($1.3-million), Sheraton
($11-million), Kentucky Fried Chicken ($321-thousand) and Toys R Us
($189,449). In the vast majority of cases, these corporations did
not claim that Saddam's forces damaged their property in Kuwait --
only that they "lost profits" or, in the case of American Express,
experienced a "decline in business," because of the invasion and
occupation of Kuwait.
One of the biggest winners has been Texaco, which was awarded
$505-million in 1999. According to a UNCC spokesperson, only 12 per
cent of that reparations award has been paid, which means hundreds
of millions more will have to come out of the coffers of
post-Saddam Iraq.
The fact that Iraqis have been paying reparations to their
occupiers is all the more shocking in the context of how little
these countries have actually spent on aid in Iraq. Despite the
$18.4-billion of U.S. tax dollars allocated for Iraq's
reconstruction, the Washington Post estimates that only $29-million
has been spent on water, sanitation, health, roads, bridges, and
public safety -- combined. And in July (the latest figure
available), the Department of Defense estimated that only $4
million had been spent compensating Iraqis who had been injured, or
who lost family members or property as a direct result of the
occupation -- a fraction of what the U.S. has collected from Iraq
in reparations since its occupation began.
10/17/2004
Outrage at Secret Star Wars Deal
The Campaign for
Nuclear Disarmament today reacted with outrage at the
Independent on Sunday's report that the Prime Minister has secretly
agreed to host US Star Wars missiles at Fylingdales. The group has
promised to use all means possible to resist the move. CND
criticises the decision to host such missiles, the secretive,
behind the scenes deal-making that led to that decision and the
reported plans to develop a spin campaign to win public
support.
In response, the campaign group has promised to use all non-violent
means to stop deployment of such missiles, including a peace camp
at the base if/when building begins, an awareness-raising campaign,
demonstrations, direct action and educating parliamentarians.
Should deployment or building work begin at the base for these
missiles, CND has declared Fylingdales will become Blair's
Greenham
Common.
Kate Hudson, Chair of CND, said,
"Just as with the initial agreement for the Fylingdales radar to be
used for Star Wars, and just as with Iraq, Tony Blair has made a
hugely important defence policy deal with the US behind closed
doors and without debate. A decision of this magnitude should be
debated in parliament and the country. CND will push hard for that
debate and will do all it can to resist deployment of Star Wars
missiles in the UK".
Neil Kingsnorth, CND's Star Wars campaigner said,
"We've had enough of the closed-door democracy of this government.
Star Wars missiles in the UK will not provide another layer of
defence, as Blair will tell us when his spin machine kicks in, but
will make the UK a greater target for attack. The UK does not need
to be the front-line of defence for the US homeland and Tony Blair
needs to start putting the UK's interests before those of US
foreign policy."
The Star Wars system is designed not for defence but for control
and securing the US's position as sole superpower. It threatens to
provoke nuclear proliferation and lead to the placing of weapons in
space. CND argues that the UK should not only play no part in the
system but should openly oppose is on the international stage.
 |
 |