Thursday, May 12, 2022

Erdogan opponents allege Greek border pushbacks


Pushback: Greece has denied illegally sending back refugees likes these at the Turkish border in 2020
 (AFP/Sakis MITROLIDIS) 

Marina RAFENBERG
Wed, May 11, 2022, 

For years Greece has been accused of illegally pushing asylum-seekers back to Turkey, a practice it strenuously denies.

But according to witnesses and rights groups, the summary deportations are also hitting vulnerable opponents of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Kurdish writer Meral Simsek, 42, is one of several people who told AFP they were sent back to Turkey to face imprisonment and possible torture after already making a perilous crossing of the border on the River Evros.


Simsek said her experience was harrowing. She claimed Greek police forcibly strip-searched her and another woman from Syria, and that she nearly died on the journey back.

"They took our phones and all our documents. They told us to undress and strip searched us. They even put hands on my vagina," she said.

The two women were then put into an unmarked van and driven back to the river.

- 'Blood and urine' -


"The vehicle smelled of blood and urine, indicating that other people had been abused in there," the writer said.

Simsek was then forced onto a dinghy piloted by two migrant men who "intended to drown" her, she claimed.

"I jumped into the water and swam to the other bank," she said.

Last month Human Rights Watch said Greece was using men of apparent Middle Eastern or South Asian origin as "proxies" to facilitate illegal deportations at its land border with Turkey.


When she got back to the Turkish side, Simsek was locked up in the nearby city of Edirne.

She was fortunate to avoid a 22-year prison sentence for belonging to a terrorist organisation thanks to help from Amnesty International and other rights groups.

But she still faces a 15-month sentence for spreading propaganda against the Turkish government.

"This experience at the Greek-Turkish border revived the trauma of my past," said the writer, who was jailed and tortured in Turkey in the 1990s.

"I wanted to rebuild my life in Europe, be protected. Instead of that, I lived a nightmare," she said.

- Change of attitude -

Greece has traditionally been sympathetic to the plight of Kurds, some of whom have been waging an insurgency against the Turkish state since 1984 that has claimed tens of thousands of lives.

But according to the Kurdistan Cultural Centre in Athens which assists fugitive Kurds, the policy appears to have changed last summer and many are now sent back to Turkey before being given a chance to apply for asylum in Greece.


Hundreds of non-Kurdish Turkish citizens have also sought protection in Greece following the failed coup against Erdogan in 2016.


Mehmet, a former police officer accused of being loyal to Fethullah Gulen -- a preacher and former Erdogan supporter accused of plotting the coup -- claimed Greece pushed him back three times last year.

He avoided a fourth expulsion thanks to a Greek lawyer, who helped him lodge an asylum request.

Meryem, a 32-year-old with dual Franco-Turkish nationality, said she was turned back in October even after showing Greek police her French identity card and a copy of her passport.

She was jailed in Turkey after being sentenced for being part of Gulen's organisation, which is now illegal. Her case is pending before the European Court of Human Rights.

Athens has always denied that its security forces engage in illegal pushbacks.

In March, Greece's national transparency authority said a four-month investigation found no evidence of such practices.

EU border agency Frontex has also repeatedly been accused by rights groups of illegally returning migrants across EU borders.

Its chief Fabrice Leggeri quit last month amid an investigation by the European anti-fraud office OLAF, reportedly into alleged mismanagement.

Alkistis Agrafioti, a lawyer with the Greek Council for Refugees, said the time has come for the EU to mount a "serious" inquiry into pushbacks.

"Pushbacks not only run contrary to international law, but they are also accompanied by criminal acts -- stealing, violence, abuse" and lives being put in danger, she added.

AFP did not receive a reply to a request for comment from the Turkish authorities.

burs-mr/chv/jph/fg
ENVIRONMENT
Wildfires in Russia: Will war in Ukraine limit firefighting response?


The fire season has started early in Siberia, as drought and strong winds fuel blazes in its carbon-rich peat forests. But with Russian forces fighting in Ukraine, this year's emergency response could suffer.


Firefighters have been battling blazes across southwestern Siberia in recent weeks

Fires have broken out across Russia's vast forests and steppes in recent weeks, with blazes flaring up in several regions across southwestern Siberia. Several villages have already been destroyed by the flames, and local authorities have reported at least 10 dead in recent days.

The Siberian Times, an English-language newspaper that covers the area, has been posting videos showing dramatic scenes of the fires on Twitter since mid-April. DW has not independently verified the videos.




On Tuesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin told regional officials to get the forest fires under control, saying they were posing a threat to life, the environment and the economy.

"We cannot allow a repeat of last year's situation, when forest fires were the most long-lasting and intensive of recent years," he said, in comments broadcast on state TV. In 2021, a record-breaking 18.8 million hectares (72,600 square miles) of forest, steppe and peatland were burned, according to a Greenpeace Russia statement — an area roughly the size of Syria.

Burning of boreal forest peatland is a "climate bomb," said the environmental group. Carbon-rich peat contains organic matter that has collected for thousands of years, so emissions from each square meter of peat fire are "many times higher than from the most powerful forest fires."

Around half of the world's carbon that is stored in peatland lies along the Arctic Circle, including Siberia — that's billions of tons. Peat fires are particularly hard to extinguish.
War, sanctions may hamper response

Russia's Federal Forestry Agency told a news conference in late April that it was on high alert, ready to deploy helicopters, drones and other equipment. In previous years, Russian troops have also been sent in to help extinguish the flames.

But with a significant number of Russian soldiers and resources tied up fighting in Ukraine, some analysts have pointed out that this year's firefighting response might not be up to the task.

"It's inevitable that the allocation of resources to war is going to detract from the firefighting effort," said Thomas Smith, associate professor in environmental geography at the London School of Economics, in an email. He has been monitoring the recent fires using satellite imagery.



Max Bergmann, the director of the Europe Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, told DW that Russia probably still had the necessary reserve manpower to fight forest fires. But he pointed out that the ongoing war and international sanctions are likely putting a strain on other resources, including the budget and logistics.

"One of the challenges that Russia may face, with export controls and sanctions, is maintaining some of the helicopters and other advanced military equipment" with parts generally sourced from abroad, he said.

With the few parts that do make it into the country, he said, the challenge will be whether to "prioritize maintaining and repairing the firefighting fleet or the fleet used against Ukraine, […] one of the guns versus butter questions that Putin is going to have to juggle going forward."


Entire communities have been destroyed by the recent fires, including in the town of Uyar, in the Krasnoyarsk region

Wildfires are more frequent, more destructive


According to Russia's Emergencies Ministry, around 4,000 forest fires covering some 270,000 hectares (around 1,040 square miles) have been reported on Russian territory since early this year. Most have been concentrated in a handful of regions, including Krasnoyarsk, Kemerovo, Kurgan, Omsk and Tyumen.

Wildfires, sparked by lightning or spontaneous combustion, are a part of the natural cycle in Siberia's relatively fireproof ecosystem saturated with lakes, rivers and swamps. But climate change is making things warmer and drier, increasing the fire risk. Siberia, known for its long, icy Arctic winters, is warming faster than anywhere else on the planet — around twice as fast as the global average. And as the ice caps recede and the darker open water absorbs more of the sun's rays, it only makes things worse.


"It's too soon to tell whether these early fires [in the south] are an indicator of what may happen further north later in the season," said Smith of the London School of Economics, adding that weather systems and other conditions will all play a factor. "It's important to note though, that climate change in the Arctic is now making extreme fire seasons more likely, so in the event of the right weather, the fire seasons are likely to be increasingly destructive on average."

Smith said the fires across Siberia would likely pose a challenge even if Russian troops weren't busy elsewhere. "It has been clear in recent years that the scale of the fires in Siberia has been beyond the capacity of Russia's firefighting resources, even in peacetime," he said, adding that many remote fires are simply left to burn. He added, however, that there was the possibility this year of "greater socioeconomic losses as a result of the reduced civil protection."

Peat fires can smolder for months, releasing 10 to 100 times more carbon than a burning tree

And while Russia is unlikely to divert its attention from Ukraine to firefighting any time soon, Bergmann said it's possible that another devastating fire season could force the Kremlin to reconsider its priorities.

"Putin is juggling two competing objectives," said Bergmann. "One is his geopolitical goals in Ukraine, and one is domestic stability. If fighting fires is critical to the survival of his regime, that will be something he prioritizes."

Greenpeace Russia is calling for longer term solutions to stop forest fires from raging to this extent in the first place, such as implementing sustainable forestry practices and increasing funding for fire protection.


THE WORLD IS BURNING
Russia: No sign of relief
Many regions in Russia have been burning for weeks, with the area around Yakutia in the far northeast having been hit particularly hard. The authorities have counted more than 250 fires currently burning across Russia, covering a total area of more than 3.5 million hectares (8.6 million acres).

1234567

Edited by: Jennifer Collins
First Nations emergency professionals gather in Thunder Bay, Ont., ahead of wildfire season

Mon, May 9, 2022

A water bomber battles a fire in Red Lake, Ont., as smoke from several forest fires forced evacuations of several First Nations in northern Ontario last year. Emergency management professionals from those First Nations gathered to discuss their experiences, and prepare for the upcoming wildfire season. 
(Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry/Twitter - image credit)

While much of northern Ontario is pre-occupied with high water levels and flooding risks, First Nations emergency management professionals and organizations gathered in Thunder Bay, Ont., to prepare for the upcoming wildfire season.

It was the inaugural "After Action Responders Forum," hosted by the Northern Ontario Emergency Management Working Group, and was designed to give First Nations and people working in emergency management a chance to share experiences, challenges and best practices from previous years.

"We wanted to provide the communities a voice, to give them a platform where they could tell their stories … and how it is that their experiences can assist us in going forward and providing community support," said Darrin Spence, the chair of the emergency management working group.

It was an important opportunity for different communities, Spence said, especially as climate change is expected to result in more intense and more frequent weather events that will disproportionately affect northern First Nations and communities.

The conference also came on the heels of a record wildfire season — with more hectares of land burned in Ontario in 2021 that in any other year in history, and more than 3,000 people forced to flee their homes, many of them from remote First Nations in the northwest.

"It's always a traumatic event to be displaced from the community. There are always social issues, dealing with places that are not known to them, places that are culturally unfamiliar to them … so it's something that we want to help communities with," said Spence.

It's also why the working group is looking at a model that will see First Nations hosting other First Nations in the event of an emergency, he said, something that is a priority for many chiefs and community leaders in the region.

"Where we have a familiar face, we have people who speak the language, who know the culture, who understand where they're coming from and who they are. That's important," Spence added.


Logan Turner/CBC

That was something Greg Meeches was able to help secure for some residents of Wabaseemoong Independent Nations in Treaty 3, which was forced to carry out a partial evacuation due to heavy smoke from nearby forest fires.

Meeches, who works in Wabaseemoong, reached out to his home community Long Plain First Nation in Treaty 1, about 110 kilometres west of Winnipeg, and arranged to have rooms prepared for some of the evacuees.

"We had chief and council meet the evacuees and assured them that they were safe there, and that they would be treated like their own," said Meeches, adding there is now an established relationship between the two communities in case they need to evacuate again.

It is also important for First Nations to be prepared to host evacuees after an emergency, said Derek Maud, a former chief and now the community emergency management coordinator for Lac Seul First Nation, which hosted dozens of evacuees during the 2021 wildfire season.

He said the First Nation at times received just 24 to 48 hours notice prior to people arriving in Lac Seul, so it was important they had volunteers trained and preparations made for food and shelter. It's something the First Nation has incorporated into their emergency preparedness plan.


Logan Turner/CBC

While the conference was helpful to talk about the upcoming wildfire season, Maud added it was an important networking opportunity, given that the position of community emergency management coordinator is a relatively new one for First Nations.

"Seeing what other people are doing, and what I can incorporate into my community — because we all share the same daily situations, so we're not really reinventing the wheel — that's why I came here," Maud said.

One of those future projects, he added, is improving emergency response in the community, including bolstering their fire department and creating a full-time EMS first responder program.

"A lot of First Nations, [their] goal is to be self-governing and self-sufficient, and being prepared in any emergency is important."
PEI
No incidents, but tension simmering as Lennox Island launches treaty fishery


Mon, May 9, 2022

No incidents, but tension simmering as Lennox Island launches treaty fishery


The first lobsters caught under the treaty fishery on P.E.I. came ashore on Lennox Island Monday morning without incident — but with some simmering tension.

The fishery is not authorized by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans after negotiations to reach an agreement were unsuccessful. Without an agreement, DFO calls this an "unauthorized" fishery, which means it could be subject to enforcement, including trap seizures or fines.

The band says none of the traps set on Saturday have been seized or disturbed by fisheries officers.

"Everything went smooth and no trouble and it was a great day," said Kyle Sark, captain of the lobster boat Way Point.

The treaty fishers were able to set about 240 traps on Saturday, but plan to set 1,000 in what they say represents the "moderate livelihood" to which they are entitled.

They said they have had trouble launching boats, because local boat-moving companies say non-Indigenous fishermen have threatened to boycott them.

And with no understanding with DFO in place, it is raising tensions in the fishing community.

"Good for them but not everyone's going to like it or appreciate it," said Janet Banks, one of about 30 Lennox Island fishers with a commercial licence.


Good for them but not everyone's going to like it or appreciate it. 
— Lennox Island commercial fisher Janet Banks

"Usually the licenses cost, are $1.2 million to purchase ... Other people are going to have a hard time with it because they're not paying nothing for them."

Cecil Banks, who fishes with Janet Banks, said DFO should buy out non-Indigenous licences and allow the band to expand its existing commercial fleet.

At a wharf a few kilometres away, none of the non-Indigenous fishermen CBC News spoke with would agree to a taped interview.

But the crews on three boats said fishing without a licence has the potential to damage lobster stocks, and if DFO does not take action, some commercial fishermen might choose to do so, which is what happened last year in Nova Scotia.

DFO patrolling area

In an interview Monday with CBC News: Compass host Louise Martin, Lennox Island Chief Darlene Bernard said she hopes commercial fishers speak with her first before taking any action.

She said it was good to see DFO patrolling the area on Saturday.


Tony Davis/CBC

'We want them out there doing their patrols."

But she also wants DFO to accept the band's proposal for the treaty fishery.

"Change, good or bad, is always hard. I think this is a good change. I think it's progress, it's moving forward."

Fishermen's association urges peace

In an email statement to CBC News, the P.E.I. Fishermen's Association said while the safety of all lobster harvesters on the water and wharf is a primary goal, it also expects "any enforcement issues related to the fishery are administered in an appropriate, fair and consistent manner" by DFO.


Kirk Pennell

"There remains many differing opinions and unresolved issues around the Lennox Island Treaty Based fishery, as according to DFO this is an unauthorized fishery," the statement reads.

"The PEIFA strongly advocates for peace on the water leaving any enforcement related to this unauthorized fishery to DFO and other authorities. The PEIFA remains committed to working with our First Nations and governments in seeking viable long term solutions that are equitable to all harvesters and protect our valuable ocean resources."
Role of First Nations in marine rescues highlighted in docuseries currently being filmed in B.C.

Tue, May 10, 2022, 

Coastal Nations Coast Guard Auxiliary members during a training exercise near Bamfield, B.C., in 2021. (Supplied by Helen Yagi - image credit)

Filming is underway on Vancouver Island for a new television series documenting the lives of First Nations people who put their lives on the line when someone is in trouble in the water.

Creator Steve Sxwithul'txw said after years of watching these communities respond to dangerous situations, he wanted to share their stories with the rest of the country.

"It's something that I thought was important to highlight, to bring home to people, everyday Canadians, who might want to be enlightened by the good nature of our people, where incidences occur and First Nations are able to respond accordingly," he told All Points West host Robyn Burns.

The series, Ocean Warriors: Mission Ready, will follow four of the eight nations that are part of the Coastal Nations Coast Guard Auxiliary, which was established in 2018.


Supplied by Helen Yagi

Ahousaht First Nation Chief Greg Louie says he's proud to see his people being featured.

"Our people are very humble in what they do. They don't do it for the glory or to glorify the event they were involved in," he said.

For years, Coastal First Nations have been involved in rescue efforts during marine incidents. Indigenous people were among the first to respond to the 2006 fatal sinking of the Queen of the North ferry near Gil Island, and the capsizing of a whale-watching boat near Tofino that claimed the lives of six people in 2015.

"It's embedded in us," Louie said. "It's instilled in us. That's why it's been happening for generation after generation, our people just have this innate skill that they're going to go out there and save others."

The Quatsino, 'Namgis, and Heiltsuk First Nations will also be featured in the series.


Photo by Jordan Wilson

Ocean Warriors: Mission Ready will air on APTN and CHEK TV, and Sxwithul'txw expects it will launch sometime next spring.

Right now, he's focusing on gathering interviews and material to bring the 13-episode series to life.

"Again, these aren't people who like to toot their own horn. But when you sit down and look at them and see in their eyes, in their heart, what they represent … it's quite simply this unabated will to go out there in sleet, rain or snow, wind, fog," he said.

"It doesn't matter what it is — they're there."

 

Take Back the Unions for Their Members

What we are witnessing in the labour movement today is quite simply a tragedy. At a time when the working class is suffering as never before, leaders of South African Federation of Trade Unions (Saftu) are tearing the young federation to pieces.

The working class needs this federation to strengthen and grow. It is the only potentially militant, independent grouping of trade unions in South Africa. And it is not just a question of the labour movement needing such a leading force. It is the working class movement as a whole.

Community organisations are weakened if they are unable to get the active support of organised workers. Abahlali baseMjondolo (the people of the shacks) needs the active support and resources of organised workers. The Xolobeni struggle for the “Right to say No” is strengthened by the support of a federation of workers. The loss and the setback to the working class movement will be huge.

What Lies Behind the Dispute

The heart of the dispute inside Saftu comes down to a strategic difference over how to build the working class movement politically. National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (Numsa) argues that the correct way is to build what it calls a Marxist-Leninist Vanguard Mass Party. The Saftu General Secretary and a number of affiliates favour the building of a mass working class party or Movement for Socialism. Numsa established its “vanguard party,” the Socialist Revolutionary Workers Party (SRWP). It now wants Saftu to throw its weight behind the SRWP. It views as a class enemy anyone who stands in the way of that project.

And here is the first error, which can be traced back to the degeneration of the Bolshevik Party after the 1917 revolution. The Bolshevik Party regarded itself as indispensable to the working class. Without the Bolshevik Party, the revolution would fail. And it was not just the Bolshevik Party, it was its leadership. And not just its leadership, it was the General Secretary. So the interests of the working class become reduced to the interests of the Party and thereafter to the infallible leader.

Defence of the Party becomes synonymous with defence of the working class. Perhaps it was more understandable at a time when the Bolshevik Party had just successfully played a leading role in a revolution. It is rather less understandable when the party we are talking about is a largely dysfunctional, factionalised, small grouping of mainly Numsa worker leaders and staff. It is an organisation that was able to secure only 24,439 votes nationally in the last election. It is support for this organisation that Numsa appears to be willing to shatter Saftu, a federation of 600,000 members.

What an irony. The famous Numsa Special Congress in 2013 led to Numsa’s expulsion from Cosatu because the affiliates of Cosatu required allegiance to the ANC. Numsa is now ready to break Saftu apart because it requires allegiance to SRWP. Is there no learning from history?

Whence the Factionalism?

Factional politics are narrow politics. Politics which fetishises a tactic or strategy at the expense of having a perspective of the interests of the working class and the poor as a whole. Numsa fetishists a particular form of political party. Only a Marxist-Leninist Vanguard party will retain a revolutionary perspective. Only a Marxist-Leninist Vanguard party can be relied on to not sell out. Look at Syriza; Podemos: living proof.

Era of Investment Companies

And then there is the other aspect of this tragedy – the sell-out to a lifestyle for union leaders funded by a union investment company. In Numsa’s case it has been a particularly insidious process because of the business that the investment company engages in. The main customers of the Numsa Investment Company (NIC) are the union’s members. This has become clear as the sordid story of 3Sixty Life (the main subsidiary of NIC) has unravelled through amaBhungane and GroundUp.

3Sixty makes its money by selling insurance policies to workers. Numsa organises 350,000 workers. A perfect synergy you might think. The benign view of this model is that Numsa’s company makes money by selling policies to members and then ploughs that money back into the union for the members’ benefit. It must have looked like a pretty model on someone’s computer 15 years ago.

But what of the consequences of turning your members into customers? What of the consequences of turning your shop stewards and staff into sales people? What of the consequences of giving the union leadership a source of income separate from the subscriptions of its members?

It might look like a clever financial model. But when looked at politically and organisationally it is a nightmare. So the less kind view of the model sees a membership delivered as customers to an industry that has always been known as exploitative. It wants to sell policies. Selling of policies works on commission. The more you sell the better everybody does. So workers are persuaded one way or another to spend some of the little they earn on policies, often with no clear idea of their real value. And Numsa opens its doors to this industry. Numsa becomes part of this industry. And the membership becomes its prey.

And the problems grow. Once the investment company is so deeply entangled with the union, it starts to have an interest in how that union is run and by whom it is run. The doors to its customers must remain open. The tail starts to wag the dog as the interests of the company become more important than the interests of the union’s members. The results are plain to see in Numsa now. Bitter struggles for leadership positions have ended up in court cases around elections. Stories about money flowing in the election process abound. Compared to ordinary workers, the investment company has plenty of money. It has the means to buy people.

And if you think we exaggerate, listen to Khandani Msibi, the CEO of the investment company, himself. In recent court proceedings he was challenged – why did he spend money on the birthday party of the Numsa General Secretary? Why did he buy his daughter a laptop? What was the value for the company in these expenditures? They could not be valid expenditures if there was no benefit to the company. And what was his answer? It came straight out of the Bosasa playbook – these expenditures were “marketing initiatives”; they “allowed 3Sixty Life access to Numsa events where it could further its brand and strengthen relationships. When he said this, he jumped right out of a frying pan and straight into the fire. He was proudly proclaiming to the world that by sweetening the Numsa GS, he gained access to the union. What’s the difference between that and Gwede Mantashe’s security system? Or Malusi Gigaba’s bags full of cash? All of it is about access – access to the state as a market. Access to Numsa as a market. Looks very much the same.

And Now?

So where does the trade union movement go from here? It seems clear that we have now reached a point where the interests of the leadership have become separated from those of the membership of many unions. A leadership layer enjoys a lifestyle very far from that of the members. They develop an interest in making sure they remain the leadership. This happens at all levels. Which full-time shop steward, after four years working in an office, with access to a computer and a car, wants to go back to being a worker on the production line? Which General Secretary, who lives in a modern, middle-class housing estate and drives a Mercedes Benz or a BMW to work, with a bodyguard to boot, wants to go back to the ranks of the union again?

A new vision and practice for the labour movement is needed. The only direction when dealing with such a bureaucratised leadership is to organise workers again from the ground up. To build the capacity of members to challenge the vested interests of the leadership. To take back the union for its members.

Such organising is often called a rank-and-file approach. It’s a foot soldiers approach. In fact, of course, it’s where unions started in the 1970s and 80s in this country. There is a task to rebuild our trade union movement where the interests of members prevail and where to lead is to serve. We have to break the pattern where union leadership is about escaping your class position and status. In fact, we have an article in this issue (No. 81) about one such successful rank-and-file struggle in the United States.

It is time to begin the arduous task of building democratic organisation again from the grassroots. To struggle to wrest control of unions from those who currently mislead them. It won’t be a rapid process. There may be victories but there will certainly also be defeats along the way. But on this, there really is no alternative. •

This article first published as an editorial in Amandla No. 81, and reposted on AIDC website.

Amandla is a left wing media project built around a magazine that publishes six editions per year. It was initiated in 2006/7 by activists coming from different political traditions on the left.

 

The Fight to Defend Abortion Rights

In many countries around the world, winning or defending the right to abortion access has been a key feature of women’s movements in recent years. From the historic repeal of the constitutional ban on abortion in Ireland in 2018 to the Green Wave movement which won legal abortion last year in Argentina, millions across the world have mobilized to fight for new reproductive rights gains, and to defend abortion rights from right-wing attacks. But these are part of a longer trend: since 2000, 31 countries have expanded access to abortion.

Campaigns to win abortion rights are part of a broader global women’s revolt which has exploded on every continent in recent years. Women have stepped forward to lead movements fighting for feminist demands, and have come to play outsize roles in struggles where the primary demands are not around women’s rights, such as in the revolutionary movements in Sudan and Myanmar. In the years just prior to the pandemic, International Women’s Day was revived as a major event with mass rallies and walkouts in many countries. #MeToo has been a truly international phenomenon, and the fight against sexual violence has fueled movements in the streets in countries all across the world, and spurred a recent wave of high school walkouts in the US.

Attacks by the right-wing on abortion have also been a growing feature internationally, including in the United States. In some countries, right-wing parties and governments, often linked to conservative religious forces, are using the issue of abortion to mobilize their bases. The 2016 Polish “Black Monday” protest saw over 100,000 workers, mainly women, walk off the job to defeat the right-wing Law and Justice party’s attempt to push through a total abortion ban. This protest was a watershed event, inspiring activists and movements around the world to fight for women’s rights in general, and the right to abortion in particular.

Class Society and the Control of Women’s Fertility

With abortion access now under dire threat in the US, and with political polarization increasing generally in many countries, the stage is set for fierce battles against reactionary forces around reproductive rights in the coming year. If the right succeeds in dismantling protection for abortion rights on the national level without an all-out fight to oppose this, it would have significant costs to the credibility of the political establishment. Furthermore, other hard-won social gains such as marriage equality could be the next target of the right-wing agenda.

Women’s oppression has its roots in the origins of class society, when, in order to maintain control of wealth, the male-dominated ruling class needed to ensure a clear line of inheritance. Control of women’s reproduction by the ruling class also has an ideological component. A tiny handful of people cannot expect to maintain control over a brutally exploitative economy if the working class, who represent a majority of society, are united and organized. The ruling capitalist class has always used sexism to divide the working class. Working class men may have no control over their lives while they’re at work, but they are offered instead the domination of their female partner and children according to the ideology of capitalism.

Male domination of the family is now rejected by large sections of working class people in many countries. However, even in countries where women’s mass movements had a transformative impact on women’s roles in society, the idea that men have the right to control women’s sexuality and reproduction persists in different ways, and plays an important role in maintaining divisions in the working class.

As more women go to work outside the home, entrenched views of male domination of women’s sexuality and reproduction tends to weaken as women earn their own wages and have more independence. The monumental women’s movement of the 1960s and 70s in the US occurred as a large influx of women were moving into the workplace. The further globalization of the world economy under neoliberalism led to the growth of industries such as textiles in poor countries and an increase of women in the workforce in many countries. This process is also connected to the increasing urbanization of the population in poor countries.

The increasing presence of women in the workplace worldwide is a key factor in the trend of women demanding freedom from traditional patriarchal control, including on the reproductive front. Social factors, particularly the role in society of organized religion, are also important in influencing abortion restrictions. Positively, internationalism has played a big role in recent years with women’s movements taking inspiration from movements in other countries.

The need for the ruling class to control women’s reproductive capacity continues to be a feature of capitalist society. A number of capitalist regimes today are concerned with the reproduction of the working class and maintaining the population at a level where there will be enough workers to avoid economic stagnation and crisis. In both Iran and China, the regimes are facing long-term trends toward declining population and part of their response has been to strengthen penalties for abortions in Iran, and to begin to restrict abortion access in China.

The Revolt Against Patriarchal Norms

A significant feature of movements for abortion rights in a number of countries, especially in Latin America, in the past period has been women revolting against the social power of the Catholic Church and its highly sexist, even misogynistic policies and practices. The power of the church in many countries has been a form of social control utilized by the ruling class to shore up the capitalist state, and the political elite historically has been tightly linked with the church hierarchy. The legalization of abortion in Ireland and Argentina represents major defeats to the social control of the church. This has been a broad process: pro-abortion protests occurred in several Latin American countries on September 28, International Safe Abortion Day. Significant movements for abortion rights are building particularly in Chile and the Dominican Republic, and in Mexico the decriminalization of abortion was recently won.

Protests erupted again in Poland last year against a new draconian abortion ban imposed by the right-wing government with the full support of the Catholic hierarchy, with which this government is tightly linked. This time, much of protesters’ rage was targeted at the church itself – a sharp development in a country where the church has a special status and role in the state, as it played a major role in the restoration of capitalism following the collapse of the Stalinist regime. Images and videos went viral of a young woman holding a sign saying, “Let us pray for abortion rights,” in front of a church altar, and crowds chanting “fuck the clergy” at a historic church site in Krakow. Unfortunately, the movement in Poland was not able to reverse the abortion law last year, but the protests showed that working class people and particularly young people are becoming increasingly opposed to the domination of religious ideology over some of the most personal aspects of their lives.

Liberalization of abortion laws is occurring around the globe. The longstanding abortions ban was removed by the Supreme Court in South Korea in 2019, where a campaign by activists pushed the regime to act. Abortion has been both widely practiced and deeply taboo in South Korea. Despite being formally illegal since 1953, abortion was relatively easily accessible as the government was interested in reducing population growth, particularly during the 1960s. The situation changed around the turn of the 21st century, when the Korean government became concerned about the slow population growth, and some medical practitioners who performed abortions were prosecuted for it.

This happened against the background of a decades-long increase in the percentage of Korean women who were in the workplace, with an even sharper increase beginning in 2014. In 2017, campaigners gathered over 200,000 signatures for a petition demanding legal abortion. Thousands joined street protests, taking inspiration from the victory of the Irish campaign to repeal the anti-abortion eighth amendment. Public opinion was undergoing a sea change: in 2010, 33% of Koreans supported repealing the abortion ban, but by 2017, 51% did.

Abortion laws have recently been liberalized in Thailand and Benin. A new law loosened abortion restrictions somewhat this year in India, though the procedure still requires a doctor’s authorization and unsafe abortions remain a major cause of maternal mortality. The new Israeli government is discussing relaxing abortion restrictions.

While the general trend internationally is toward women’s movements winning increased abortion rights, there are important exceptions, such as the US and Poland, where abortion crackdowns are used mainly to stoke the voting bases of major right-wing parties, as well as China and Iran. The attacks of the Chinese and Iranian regimes on reproductive rights are more focused on increasing the birth rate in the face of rapidly aging populations, and both regimes also trade in promoting sexist gender roles that emphasize male domination in the family. In China, the regime has moved somewhat cautiously, restricting abortion rights in a piecemeal fashion because they are concerned about provoking a backlash from the world’s biggest working class. In November, the Iranian government approved a broad set of new regulations which restrict women’s access to contraception and strengthen penalties for performing abortions, including potentially the death penalty.

Situation in the US

Since the oral arguments in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case were heard at the Supreme Court on December 1, it is no exaggeration to say that Roe v. Wade, the crowning achievement of the US women’s movement of the 1960s and 1970s, is hanging by a thread. It’s fairly clear that the six conservative justices, which include Trump’s three right-wing appointees, intend to uphold the Mississippi law that bans abortion after 15 weeks – the law being challenged in the Dobbs case. The Court could uphold the Mississippi law either by moving the limit for banning abortions from fetal viability outside the womb to 15 weeks, or by dismantling Roe completely and leaving abortion law entirely up to the states. If they choose to weaken Roe by limiting abortion protections to apply only to the first 15 weeks of pregnancy, that will likely be just the first step in removing protection for abortion entirely.

Should the Supreme Court overturn Roe either via Dobbs in 2022 or in a subsequent court case, an enormous swath of the country will lose the right to abortion within weeks or months, meaning 42% of women of childbearing age in the US will live in a state where abortion is illegal. Abortion will remain legal in other states, and clinics in these states will see an increased caseload as women who have the means will travel to get abortion access.

Women seeking abortions who are in the first 10 weeks of pregnancy may be able to use abortion pills at home, which the FDA has recently authorized to be prescribed through telemedicine and sent to patients by mail. However, 19 states currently prohibit telemedicine visits to dispense abortion pills, and right-wing forces in Republican-controlled states are already looking to further criminalize the use of abortion pills. The Biden administration has legal options to challenge the anti-abortion pill laws as a recent piece in the New York Times details. Many women will be forced to seek out illegal and potentially unsafe abortions, or carry unwanted pregnancies to term.

How Did We Get Here?

Roe v. Wade established the legal right to an abortion in the US in 1973. For most of the nearly 50 years since Roe, it has been under attack by organized anti-abortion forces that are organized by the Christian Right which represent a powerful Republican voting block. Literally hundreds of laws have been passed by legislatures in Southern and Midwestern states that restrict access to abortion or make it illegal. The courts have overseen the slow chipping away of abortion rights by allowing laws to stand which make abortion more difficult to access, while striking those down that outlaw abortion outright.

Some of the abortion restrictions imposed in Republican-controlled states are inhumane and are evidence of a truly disturbing degree of hatred for women. A 2019 Kentucky law that requires abortion providers to perform an ultrasound, describe the fetus in detail to the patient, and force the patient to listen to the fetal heartbeat before performing an abortion was allowed by the Supreme Court to go into effect. For women who are nine weeks or less into pregnancy, this ultrasound must be done transvaginally – forcing women seeking abortions to undergo a highly invasive and completely unnecessary medical procedure that constitutes a form of assault by the state.

Twenty-six states require women to attend an initial appointment and then undergo a waiting period, which is completely unnecessary on any medical basis, before receiving an abortion. In six states this waiting period is 72 hours, and in one state, Utah, the law specifies that weekends and holidays can’t be included in the 72 hours. Waiting periods especially target working-class and poor women who have to take time off work or arrange childcare for two appointments instead of one. In the many states where there are only a few or even just one abortion clinic, women often have to drive hundreds of miles to get to a clinic for two appointments, and pay for lodging during the waiting period.

The prosecution of women who have had miscarriages and stillbirths has been a horrifically dystopian measure that reactionary state governments and individual district attorneys have taken against mostly poor women. Two women in rural California were charged with manslaughter after they had miscarriages and the prosecutor says they used illegal drugs. One of these women, Adora Perez, remains in jail serving an 11-year sentence. In Alabama, an estimated 500 women have been arrested for pregnancy loss, including a woman who lost her pregnancy when she was shot in the abdomen. (The charges were eventually dropped.) Right-wing authorities are actually stepping up the criminalization of pregnancy, with three times the number of women facing prosecution for allegedly harming their fetus between 2006 and 2020, compared to the period of 1973 to 2005.

The leadership of the anti-abortion right argues that any fertilized ovum constitutes a person, and their concern for “unborn persons” consistently outweighs concerns for the person who is pregnant. This serves as a very thin cloak for the reactionaries’ broader program of trying to turn the clock back to the norms of the traditional male-dominated family as a core unit of society. While a clear majority of Americans agree that women should have the right to abortion, there is a significant right-wing minority, especially within more conservative states, who can be mobilized against abortion rights. This makes abortion one of several useful wedge issues for right-wing politicians whose broader programs of unbridled free market economics – pro-business tax cuts, deregulation and privatization – are becoming less and less popular. At the same time, among younger evangelicals for example, there is less enthusiasm for the anti-abortion and anti-LGBTQ themes of the right.

Abortion has been weaponized in a different way by the Democratic Party establishment, which, despite being dominated by nominally pro-choice politicians, has proven itself of little use in defending abortion rights from right-wing attack. Democrats have long voted for the Hyde Amendment as part of spending bills, which bans the use of federal Medicaid dollars for abortion care. Biden campaigned on a promise to repeal the Hyde Amendment, but promptly abandoned that promise when West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin objected. 2021 saw an enormous escalation in anti-abortion lawmaking with the introduction of over 100 new abortion restrictions, including the horrific Texas abortion ban, and yet the traditional women’s organizations linked with the Democratic Party offered no response in terms of mass actions.

One of Biden’s campaign promises was to codify Roe v. Wade as “the law of the land.” The House has passed the The Women’s Health Protection Act which would guarantee the right to an abortion in law. There’s no doubt that passing it in the Senate will not be easy – it will require eliminating the filibuster and putting heavy pressure on anti-abortion Democratic Senator Bob Casey and potentially Joe Manchin, who has a mixed record on abortion. But the Biden administration didn’t even pretend to try.

The Democrats are now preparing the ground to use the threat to Roe to drive left-leaning voters to the polls in 2022’s midterm elections, when big sections of progressive and especially younger voters are deeply disappointed in the Democrats’ general inaction. A powerful defense of Roe will require mass mobilizations, civil disobedience, walkouts and possibly strikes. The Democratic Party has proven over many decades and countless opportunities that it won’t lead a fight for abortion rights, or anything else, based on a mass movement strategy.

Texas Abortion Ban

On September 1, 2021, the second most populous state in the US suddenly lost meaningful abortion access when the Supreme Court let Texas SB8, the infamous law banning abortions past six weeks of gestation, stand despite the fact that it clearly defies the Roe decision. Since SB8 went into effect, abortion clinics in neighboring states have been overwhelmed by demand from Texans seeking abortions, while the number of abortions performed in Texas has been cut in half. Copycat legislation has been introduced in several states to replicate the legal trick that was used in SB8 to give the reactionary Supreme Court majority an excuse for voting to let the law stand.

The Biden administration and various liberal organizations have launched lawsuits to try and suspend the Texas abortion ban, but the federal courts including the Supreme Court are stacked with right-wing judges appointed by Trump. Some legal challenges to the ban have been thrown out, and others are working their way through courts, but it will likely be years before the lawsuits are resolved, and in the meantime, the law still stands.

While there was a real mood among pro-choice people, and particularly young people, for taking action to oppose SB8 in September, the historic organizations of the women’s movement, that are linked with the Democratic Party, refused to call mass demonstrations. The leadership of Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), an organization with more than 90,000 members, didn’t move to organize demonstrations and build a movement, instead calling for people to give money to abortion funds that help low-income people access the procedure.

Eventually, Women’s March, the organization that came out of the mass protests in 2017, did call nationwide protests for October 2, but left the organizing of them to local affiliates, which in many cases consisted of one or two individuals who weren’t necessarily experienced activists. That tens of thousands of people came out to hundreds of protests all across the country despite the lackluster organization shows the anger that exists against abortion bans and the desire to defend reproductive rights. A big opportunity to bring much broader forces into active struggle was missed due to the absence of leadership from the traditional women’s organizations or from DSA. The right-wing, including the Supreme Court majority, were likely emboldened by the relatively subdued protest response to the Texas ban, and that can have an impact on their deliberations on the Dobbs case.

In Texas, the small forces of Socialist Alternative worked alongside students at University of Houston and organized a student walkout and rally to help build for the October 2 action. Young people showed in the uprising against the murder of George Floyd that they are prepared to take action against injustice and oppression. This fall, young women have led protests and school walkouts against sexual assault at universities and high schools across the country, a development that has mostly gone under the radar in the national corporate media. Stopping the right-wing attack on abortion will require a mass movement that is driven by the energy and radicalism of young people.

What Strategy to Defeat the Right?

The movements that have won abortion rights internationally in recent years show that mass struggle is what is needed to overcome the patriarchal control of women’s bodies that is at the root of abortion bans. Historically, liberalization of abortion regulations has often accompanied movements for the broader liberation of working class people. Abortion was legalized within a few years of the working class taking power in the 1917 Russian Revolution. In South Africa, the right to abortion was passed by the first parliament to be seated after the defeat of the apartheid regime, and abortion was legal for brief periods in Spain in territory controlled by leftist forces during the Spanish Revolution of the 1930s. Abortion rights in the United States were won by the massive women’s movement of the 1960s and 1970s which was part of a broader uprising of workers and oppressed people with revolutionary characteristics during the same period.

However, the urgent need for a mass movement to defend abortion rights is not a universally-held conclusion. A layer of left activists, including substantial sections of the active members of DSA, are committed to mutual aid as a key organizing strategy as opposed to mass struggle. This layer will probably look to reinforce existing networks that raise money for working class people to travel to states where they can receive legal abortions, or possibly even develop a safe but illegal abortion service in states with bans.

Mutual aid will no doubt be a huge help for many individuals looking to end pregnancies. The left should set its sights higher, however, and launch a determined struggle for full reproductive medicine including abortion, accessible to all, as part of a Medicare For All system. As the third largest socialist organization in US history, the DSA should take a decisive turn toward taking a lead in mass struggle on abortion and other crucial fights for working class people. To not do so risks the DSA’s becoming completely irrelevant as a force that working class people will look to in struggle

Publicly defying abortion bans by taking abortion pills in a very visible way, and linking this action to a mass campaign, was a potent tactic in building support for ending the Irish abortion ban. The use of abortion pills, which can now be legally dispensed through the mail, as a direct action tactic has been employed at a recent Supreme Court protest. Whether this kind of action will be a key feature of the abortion fight in the US seems less likely, although abortion pills obtained legally or not will undoubtedly be utilized more if the Court does dismantle Roe.

In Ireland, the reactionaries were already very much on the defensive in the run up to the 2018 referendum which made the public defiance very effective in exposing their weakness and hypocrisy. The situation in the US today is not the same, as the reactionaries have consolidated their control over big parts of the country as well as the Supreme Court, and will likely make further gains in the 2022 midterms. This in no way means that we should be defeatist, but it makes crystal clear that only a determined and sustained mass movement can defeat the reactionaries here. The use of abortion pills can be an important auxiliary in this struggle but it will not be the central tactic.

As we approach a spring where the Democrats and the liberal establishment will likely ensure that the impending Dobbs decision stays in the news cycle, the idea that we just need to vote Democrat will be repeated by politicians, the liberal media, and other figures in the Democratic Party orbit ad nauseam. Even when elements of the establishment, such as the Democratic Party – aligned women’s organizations, do organize marches or days of action, the main message from the rally stage will likely be to go vote for Democrats in the midterms. This will fall flat with many young women as young people generally are the most disillusioned in Biden, having had the fewest illusions to start with. A key role of revolutionary socialists is to counter the failed strategy of vote–blue–to–defend–Roe and to raise the need to build a mass movement with new organizations of struggle that are independent from the Democrats and their record of failure on defending abortion rights.

At this moment of overlapping public health, political, and economic crises, a disruptive mass movement on abortion rights is not what the Biden administration wants. However, the capitalist class is too divided and Biden and the Democrats are too weak to lead a progressive advance to codify Roe. Biden is amassing a long list of legislative failures: voting rights, labor law reform, policing reform, and most recently the Build Back Better debacle. The possibility of defending and extending abortion rights depends on the development of a youthful, combative and sustained mass movement.

If Roe is dismantled by the Supreme Court, and especially if a substantial mass movement doesn’t develop in response, the consequences are very serious for working class people. It would be the biggest victory for the right in a generation. In addition to the horrific hardships imposed on women by abortion bans, the right-wing could be emboldened to go even further in rolling back other basic human rights that rest on the same fragile legal foundation as Roe. Marriage equality would likely be the next target. Arch-conservative legal arguments hold that abortion, birth control, interracial marriage, and LGBTQ rights are not explicitly referred to in the text of the constitution and therefore are issues that should be left up to the states. Ultimately our rights are not guaranteed by the Supreme Court or capitalist democracy, but by the strength of working-class and oppressed people’s movements to defend those rights.

The road to a victory for the left in the US on abortion rights is nothing if not difficult and uncertain. Building a sustained mass movement, throwing up new organizations of struggle, developing a capable leadership, and avoiding the trap of the Democratic Party are some of the many tasks ahead of us. But in this struggle we can take inspiration from the victories of mass movements around the world in expanding reproductive rights, from Argentina and Mexico to Ireland and South Korea, and from the reality that the majority of working class people in America oppose the reactionary agenda of the right. •

This article first published on the Socialist Alternative website.