FRANCE
Plea in Defense of a Trade Unionist Facing Expulsion for Supporting Palestine
For initiating a petition denouncing the French CGT Confederation’s stance on Palestine after October 7, Salah was defamed and expelled from the union. This troubling case, part of a global witch-hunt against supporters of Gaza, deserves some attention.
Interventions and comments by Professor Bruno Drweski, who defended Salah L. during the proceedings for his permanent exclusion from the CGT Education union in Clermont-Ferrand, France. The CGT (General Confederation of Labor) is one of the largest and oldest trade union confederations in France. CGT Education, a branch of the CGT, specifically represents teachers and school personnel.
Departmental Trade Union Council (CSD) of the Puy-de-Dôme section of the CGT Education syndicate, April 12, 2024.
Salah initiated a petition urging the CGT to offer genuine support to Palestine in its hour of truth, published on change.org [here is the English version]. After his expulsion, a petition for his reinstatement was launched, nearing 10,000 signatures [here is the English version].
Details in square brackets and endnotes by Alain Marshal. See also Crackdown on Pro-Palestinian Voices: Letter to a Unionist Facing Expulsion. For further information on this case, where Salah was deliberately endangered (see endnotes, especially the first and last ones), write to moc.liamg@enitselaptgcnoititep
1. Opening Speech
First of all, I’d like to apologize for having to read my intervention, hopefully in the least tedious way possible. As the subject is “quasi-legal”, I must refer to facts that I might otherwise forget.
I must also apologize for the absence of Jean-Pierre Page [former member of the CGT Confederal Executive Committee and former Director of its International Department, and signatory of Salah’s petition], who cannot be with us today. He asked me to speak on his behalf, as we have known each other for a long time, having campaigned together and maintained links with a network of experienced comrades on both trade union and political fronts. It is thanks to this network that I have been able to build what I would hesitate to call a “plea”, because we hope to resolve this internally without resorting to bourgeois courts, which would harm all of us without exception.
I therefore address all parties, calling on them to hear me and show a willingness to overcome personal tensions or differences that are secondary to what should unite us all here: the defense of workers. All other issues — political, societal, or otherwise — are the responsibility of political parties and associations created for that purpose. In the union, however, we must focus on defending workers’ rights, respecting their diversity, along a class-based and mass-oriented line, tied to our founding principles, which remain relevant today. As is often the case, I remind comrades that it would do us well to reread the Charter of Amiens, which has not aged a single day.
To briefly introduce myself, I am a member of the CGT FERC Sup’ [sector of the CGT, specifically representing employees in higher education and research institutions] at INALCO in Paris [the INALCO is a French institution specializing in the study of languages and cultures from around the world, particularly focusing on non-Western regions]. I am a professor, lecturer, and researcher specializing in history and geopolitics, with a particular focus on Eastern European countries, though international relations have led me to study conflicts in the Middle East (Syria, Palestine, Sudan, etc.). I am also a member of the National Council of the Association Républicaine des Anciens Combattants (ARAC, or Republican Association of Veterans), which at our last congress became the Association Républicaine des Combattants pour l’Amitié, la Solidarité, la Mémoire, l’Antifascisme et la Paix (Republican Association of Veterans for Friendship, Solidarity, Remembrance, Antifascism, and Peace). ARAC was founded by Henri Barbusse, who played a key role in convening the Tours Congress, where the then Socialist Party split between its social-democratic and majority communist factions.
*****
On the issue at hand, I consulted several CGT comrades from different unions, departments, and regions, who expressed a range of opinions at the last CGT Congress and at the Confederation level. When the “Salah L. case” was brought to their attention, the general consensus was that the accusations against Salah seemed vague and convoluted. They believed the situation warranted clarification, but not an exclusion. Any exclusion should only happen after a neutral and impartial Conciliation Commission had thoroughly reviewed the case, heard all parties and witnesses, and allowed for proper confrontation to shed light on the core issues.
As far as I am concerned, it seems to me that the criticisms directed at Salah vary from one document to the next, from one meeting to another, and from one report to the next. The dates often don’t align or appear delayed in relation to facts, differences, or discrepancies that were already known and that didn’t seem to provoke any criticism at the time they were put forward. I understand that constructing a case retrospectively is challenging, relying on people’s imperfect memories, and is further complicated when understandable but regrettable emotions come into play. Consequently, and I am not alone in this view, some people question whether the criticisms of Salah have other underlying causes or even conceal unspoken issues. In any case, we need to move past this today, as we are here to speak openly and attempt to ease tensions that, in my opinion, should not have escalated to the point where they might soon become uncontrollable and ultimately work against all of us.
I believe that higher authorities within the CGT should have intervened earlier, especially since the UNSEN [National Union of CGT Education Unions] was contacted by Salah as early as November 2023, before the situation spiraled out of control. In any case, I sincerely hope we can resolve this matter today, without resorting to internal appeals or legal proceedings, which would tarnish the image of our union, and the CGT really doesn’t need this at the moment!.
Indeed, in all cases, the dispute that brings us together today must remain internal, and we must be cautious: I specialize in Eastern European countries at INALCO, so I speak from experience. When you initiate a purge, you know whom it starts against, but you never know where it will end — because it might eventually turn against you, whether individually or collectively. Therefore, let’s avoid intensifying our attacks on either side, as this could ultimately lead to us being the ones caught in the crossfire. An exclusion measure can quickly affect both the comrade we are targeting today and those who initiated it. Moreover, it risks further damaging the image of our union, especially when the CGT and trade unionism as a whole are already facing significant challenges. As you know, the current situation of the CGT is far from ideal, and we need to keep that in mind. Let’s all proceed with caution. I urge you to be mindful.
Salah has garnered support both within and outside the union, so it would be wiser to reach an honorable compromise, rather than engage in internal conflicts that could see our disputes aired in public. Salah is not alone and will not back down if he feels bullied. He has enough support to hold his ground for a long time, no matter what happens to him personally.
I want to remind you that the CGT is a union with a strong working-class tradition, which entails not shying away from tough confrontations — whether on principled issues or, regrettably, on personal matters. However, this tradition also emphasizes camaraderie, as after a meeting and confrontation, we should be able to share a drink and pat each other on the back. In Salah’s case, I understand this might only extend to a fruit juice, but that should not be a problem in an internationalist union that is open to all workers, regardless of their origins or political, ideological, or religious beliefs, as outlined in our founding Statutes and the Amiens Charter. We need to maintain unity, especially when our differences are pronounced and our influence is waning.
A public display of disputes is never beneficial, particularly when it highlights the divergent opinions within our union and exacerbates existing divisions. This is evident, for example, in debates over our stance on Palestinian resistance, Ukraine, or the WFTU (World Federation of Trade Unions), as well as differing interpretations among CGT members on political, societal, and moral issues. We understand that our members do not all vote alike and that there are varied approaches to societal and moral questions. Therefore, it is better to focus on our core mission: defending workers and promoting work and employment while opposing capitalism. We must respect differing opinions on other issues and uphold the equality of all our members. Reflecting on the principles upheld by Henri Krasucki, a distinguished figure who was both a child of immigrants and a notable resistance fighter, I want to emphasize his commitment to the CGT’s fundamental principles: a class-based and mass union that respects ethnic, ideological, and religious differences among workers, provided these differences are not imposed on others.
*****
Today, in the case at hand — which mirrors many similar situations affecting various unions — I have encountered a range of serious and speculative rumors, from accusations of religious fundamentalism to claims of Freemasonry, from suspicions of supporting terrorism to witch-hunts and racism, and from political disagreements to petty personal grievances. As you know, each of our activists perceives these issues differently. Ultimately, much of this is murky, often secondary, and regrettable. It fuels unhealthy rumors that I would like to see addressed and clarified today. I believe that as responsible trade unionists, we must prioritize the collective interest over personal opinions and behavioral choices. I hope we can resolve this matter through a compromise that serves the best interests of everyone present and, more broadly, the interests of our union and Confederation.
I would like to understand the primary reason behind this eviction procedure. Observing the timeline from October 7 to November 10, 2023, it is evident that the tensions and accusations emerged immediately after the issue of Palestine came up. This was around the same time as the CGT Departmental Union Congress and the discussion of discharge hours [Salah’s application to be a CGT Education delegate was rejected on the grounds that he had no discharge hours]. At the General Meeting on October 17, following a presentation on Gaza by an AFPS [French organization supporting the Palestinian people] member, Salah made comments that several Board members described, and I quote, as a “disgrace” [because he criticized the Israeli propaganda about October 7th found in the presentation]. Similarly, his proposal for a videoconference with a global authority on Palestine was rejected without a vote or discussion. On October 18, Salah criticized a national CGT press release on the local CGT Education Whatsapp group, leading to criticism from other Board members who urged him not to open the debate. The same pattern occurred on October 24 and even more so on November 4, when Salah announced his intention to write a letter to the Confederation denouncing the CGT’s stance on Palestine [1]. This letter garnered significant attention both within and outside the CGT. On November 10, at the meeting where Salah was invited to leave the Board, his views on Palestine were highlighted as central: it was presented as the “salient point”, the “most serious” grievance, and a potential cause for union members to be upset and leave the union (even though these statements have largely been confirmed). Today, many citizens and union members share the positions Salah expressed regarding the events of October 7. This accumulation of evidence supports the view, held by many, that his expulsion is indeed linked to his stance on Palestine, despite the fact that many union members hold views similar to his.
Today, worldwide, and with increasing intensity, the issue of Palestine is stirring growing emotions. Questions about the ongoing genocide, as well as accusations regarding events before and on October 7, 2023, challenge much of the Israeli narrative that dominated the media last October and November. I mention this because I have been closely following the issue as a leader of ARAC and other anti-imperialist, anti-fascist, and anti-militarist organizations. It is important to note that the global perspective on this issue is shifting, including in Western countries and even in France. Despite our lag in objective analysis of Palestinian resistance, due to the regrettable uniformity of French media and politics, things are changing. This is evident among our members, many of whom participate in demonstrations supporting Palestine or advocating for the release of Georges Ibrahim Abdallah [Lebanese pro-Palestinian militant, one of the longest-held political prisoners in Europe, having been imprisoned in France since 1984].
In any case, we should strive to find a compromise that is acceptable to all. This means allowing everyone to maintain their differing opinions, which are completely understandable and justified, and to continue in their roles as elected by their colleagues at Congress. While it’s unfortunate that enmities have developed, there should no longer be an obligation for interaction if it is no longer feasible. Everyone should be able to pursue their trade union activities as they see fit until the next elections.
If there have been defamatory remarks [2], stigmatizing requests [3], or misuse of union files outside normal activities, as well as differences of opinion [4], I propose that we leave it at that, after, if anyone wishes, a frank discussion with supporting evidence. It is regrettable that some elements have become public, but they may also reflect behaviors that are objectively stigmatizing or humiliating and thus unacceptable. The best approach might be to acknowledge these issues, regret the breach in propriety caused by heightened emotions, and move forward. Let each union member and colleague form their own opinions about each activist, and allow us to turn the page.
*****
The purpose of the CGT is to defend workers, and that is what I will focus on:
· Can anyone here criticize Salah for failing to defend workers, at least during the time when he wasn’t preoccupied with defending himself within the union, a situation that is deeply regrettable?
· The CGT welcomes all workers, regardless of their gender, orientation, political, ideological, or religious beliefs. Does anyone here have any specific grievances against Salah on this point? [Some have criticized Salah for abstaining from voting on a motion related to abortion and LGBT issues, which he believes fall outside the union’s scope.] Has Salah ever refused to defend a colleague on any of these grounds?
· Has Salah ever attacked or insulted a CGT comrade based on these issues?
· Conversely, can Salah claim that he has been attacked, defamed, or humiliated due to his origins or his political or religious views [5]?
These, in my view, are the only questions we should be addressing today with full objectivity. We must be willing to put aside our personal biases and recognize that this issue has gone beyond acceptable boundaries. We are now called to demonstrate restraint and put our resentments aside. I sincerely hope there has been no ill intent from either side, nor any personal maneuvering that goes against the principles of our union. A formal reconciliation could take the form of a joint statement reaffirming the fundamental values and principles of the CGT.
2. Closing remarks
I’ll keep my comments brief, as much has already been said, and better than I could express, since although I’ve reviewed the file carefully, Salah knows it better than I do.
If any contradiction appears between what I say and what Salah says, it is because I speak from a broader perspective. I am not speaking from within this departmental CGT Education section, which I do not know personally, but I have heard echoes from other departments. My primary concern is the broader CGT, and the ripple effects this case could have far beyond this particular section. You must understand that there are many CGT members, or even non-members who follow what the CGT does, who may have differing opinions. Whether those opinions are right or wrong is not the point. The real danger here is the risk of division, tension, or public conflict. This is a genuine threat that you must recognize and measure carefully. Because sooner or later, this situation may turn against your local section, whether through other teachers’ unions, other CGT sections, non-CGT unions, or even public opinion, especially as the question of Palestine continues to evolve rapidly. Admittedly, France is lagging behind the rest of the world and the Western world. For example, in England, 81 towns and cities have held demonstrations for Palestine, with 1.5 million demonstrators in London alone. However, this wave, which is beginning to reach France, will inevitably arrive in full force. The arguments used against Salah and others (like Jean-Paul Delescaut) will resurface, and those who adhered to media correctness after October 7 will likely face criticism in the future. This is to be expected.
We need a broader perspective, not just a local one. This is a serious threat at a time when the CGT is not in a position of strength. The last CGT Congress was far from unanimous, and divisions remain deep — on class issues, on the WFTU, NATO, Ukraine, Palestine, Israel, the one- or two-state solution, and more. There are many unresolved issues, not to mention the challenges posed by capitalism and social problems. It’s important to understand that. I appeal to your sense of responsibility to ensure your union section doesn’t end up in the spotlight. There are other regions, unions, and forces within France that are not on our side. Even within the CGT, opinions differ. We have every right to hold our own views, but we must be cautious not to stir up trouble on either side.
I’m not claiming Salah is without fault. From what I’ve observed, he’s as emotional as anyone, which can be interpreted as either good or bad — it doesn’t matter. For me, the focus should be on results, not emotional judgments, even if I come across as emotional myself. But, generally speaking, many who have defended Salah — and I’m far from alone in this — need to recognize that in France, 650 people are under investigation over the Palestine issue, not just Delescaut. Suspended sentences have already been handed down, and prison sentences with actual imprisonment could follow. You need to consider how that would reflect on the union.
Regarding societal issues, it’s important to distinguish between what is core to the CGT and what belongs to other entities like associations or political parties, which are legitimate in their own right. For the CGT, the question is not whether we approve or disapprove of things like abortion. We’re all entitled to our own opinions, individually or collectively. But the real question is this: if someone — a homosexual, a woman, an Islamophobe, a practicing Muslim or Christian — is attacked over labor rights, will the CGT defend them? Will Salah defend a homosexual colleague in a labor dispute? That’s the crux of the matter. It’s not about personal identity or beliefs, but about whether we, as workers, can rise above our convictions to defend anyone who needs it, regardless of theirs. For now, I haven’t seen any sign that Salah opposes defending women, homosexuals, or perhaps tomorrow, even Islamophobes who may be falsely accused in labor disputes. I’m not condoning Islamophobia, but an Islamophobe accused over labor issues must be defended. That doesn’t mean we endorse their views — these are two separate things. This is the CGT’s foundation: we defend all workers, regardless of their political, religious, or ideological views, even when we don’t share them. Of course, there are limits. For example, I recall an election candidate from some department who belonged to far-right’s Front National and explicitly stated his CGT membership in his campaign materials. That was illegal and against our Statutes, and he was rightly expelled. But that’s not Salah’s case.
We need to think carefully about the consequences of excluding Salah, considering not just local issues but broader implications. Like you, I’m a union member, and I naturally feel closer to the struggles at my own workplace or in my region than to what’s happening, say, in Brest, or randomly, in Nepal. But we must strive to think globally. That’s what we call internationalism, a principle that sets our union apart from others that are either less internationalist or claim to be without fully embracing it.
Emotions are indeed valuable, but they must be managed effectively. We might criticize Salah for not controlling his emotions, but have those attacking him done any better on their side? Without delving into everyone’s opinions, it’s easier to be 20 than to stand alone! A psychologist would confirm that this is part of human nature. Let’s assume Salah was completely in the wrong — he was isolated, and his emotions were therefore intensified. This is something the more “powerful” group must take into account. Reflect on this too. Emotions are natural, and joining a union is often driven by them, but learning to control and manage emotions is essential for both parties involved. Over the past thirty years, we’ve been dealing with the dominance of neoliberalism. Unfortunately, emotion seems to have taken precedence over rational thought. Just switch on any news channel, and you’ll see how emotion has replaced reason. As a union, our role is to restore rationality, despite the challenges of living in a world that is increasingly emotional, and this often serves the interests of the ruling classes, as you already know.
Regarding Palestine, as this issue was mentioned, I recommend that, instead of focusing solely on October 7, you read Karl Marx’s article in the New York Herald Tribune about the Sepoy rebellion in India. It might give you a new perspective on the events of October 7. Whether or not you agree with Marx, his cold, analytical approach remains valuable, as he is, in a way, our intellectual forebear.
In conclusion, a final point: we’ve discussed Stalinism and the purges. We’re not going to rewrite history and reduce it to Stalin alone, but I want to emphasize one point: in the 1930s, the Soviet leaders achieved tactical victories. They got everything they wanted, including the power to lead repressive purges. Even though these purges eventually turned against them, their tactical goals were met. However, today we are paying the price strategically. It’s crucial to distinguish between tactics and strategy, as a tactical success can lead to a strategic defeat. And this isn’t just about a strategic defeat for you, me, or anyone personally; it’s a strategic defeat for the cause we all serve, or are supposed to serve. I urge you to seek compromise, no matter how challenging it may seem. I understand this might be difficult for you, and I don’t know how you feel about what I’ve said, but be very cautious: if we rise above our personal and union concerns and view the situation at a national level…
I’m not claiming that Salah is the center of France, far from it. But, as I mentioned earlier, 650 people in France are under investigation for “glorification of terrorism”, meaning that potentially thousands of individuals, including Salah, could be under investigation soon. Opinions are shifting, particularly regarding Palestine. What is happening in Paris may be different from what you hear in local demonstrations, but in Paris, the slogans you hear now are vastly different from those heard in November’s pro-Palestine demonstrations. The two-state solution is losing traction worldwide, as we’ve seen in the UK and elsewhere. Constant criticism of Hamas is misplaced — there are 12 Palestinian Resistance groups working together, including two Marxist-Leninist and secular organizations fighting alongside Hamas. Whether we like it or not, this is a reality. We’re no longer dealing with “Hamas, Hamas, Hamas…” as we were in November. It’s important to think ahead.
I’ll conclude here. Thank you for your attention.
3. Retrospective comments on the proceedings
The CSD meeting on the morning of Friday, April 12, 2024, was rather unusual:
· We presented our perspective and raised several questions.
· Those in favor of exclusion (the Board) presented their case, mainly by reading a prepared statement. This statement outlined six charges that hardly justified a permanent exclusion, without providing supporting evidence. It also included Salah’s remarks on Palestine, denominational schools, and IVG/LGBT issues, which were considered problematic.
· Comments were made from the floor.
· We were given the last word.
However, the anticipated discussion, which was expected given the significance of the issues, never occurred. Salah L. protested against the process, which denied him any opportunity for a proper debate — a key element for clarifying the disputed points. He requested that at least a vote be taken, which passed unanimously in favour of this process, with the exception of his own vote.
My questions regarding Salah L.’s capacity and impartiality in defending workers went unanswered, despite touching on fundamental matters relevant to any trade union activist, without delving into personal, moral, individual, or emotional areas. Nor was the issue of the timeline addressed: in fact, the exclusion process began after the Palestine petition, not before, even though the other cited differences had been known for some time.
A secret ballot followed this series of monologues: 29 votes were cast in favor of exclusion, 1 against, and 1 abstention. This CGT section has around 160 union members, so approximately one-fifth were present.
Salah L. left with a pre-printed notice of his exclusion. An appeal process is now underway.
Bruno Drweski
Notes
[1] The main complaint against Salah at the November 10 Board meeting, where his colleagues tried to force his resignation, stemmed from a message he posted on the CGT Education local’s WhatsApp group on November 4:
“I’ve just read the Gaza dossier in the CGT’s national magazine, and I’m truly appalled.
History will remember all the ‘friends’ of Palestine who zealously spread the Israeli army’s propaganda about Hamas massacres that supposedly killed hundreds of women and children, even though available data refutes this claim. They provide cover for a very real genocide, while subtly reinforcing the racist cliché that Palestinians, like all Arabs, are nothing but murderers and rapists. After Kuwait’s incubators, Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction, and Kaddafi’s Viagra, there are still those who fall for this en masse.
October 7 was not a massacre, but a military operation that wiped out the equivalent of a Gaza Brigade battalion or more. The only figures published so far (by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz) clearly show that at least half of the Israelis killed were soldiers (including many women, since military service is compulsory for them, and fewer than 20 children). Courageous Israelis are exposing the lies of the Israeli army, which deliberately conflates soldiers, heavily armed settlers/militiamen, and civilians. They accuse the IDF of deliberately sacrificing its civilians en masse, rather than allowing them to fall alive into the hands of Hamas (the official and well-known Hannibal Doctrine). Here’s just one example.
I intend to write a letter to the CGT Confederation to denounce their shameful position.”
Salah was also criticized for responding to a colleague on that same day, who questioned his absence at Palestine demonstrations, by stating he would no longer attend them. His reply was:
“As for what I do or don’t do for Palestine, it’s in line with my principles. I attended the first demonstration and listened to most of the speakers, who were more eager to condemn ‘Hamas atrocities’, as if that was where it all began. I won’t be returning.”
Although the Board members claimed that the exclusion procedure “is not, as Salah maintains, connected to his positions on Palestine,” the bold excerpts above were included in their brief, pre-written speech read as an indictment at the April 12 CSD.
[2] Among the six “official” charges against Salah, the first is that he defamed the Board members (“defamation of all Board members”), accusing them internally of discriminating against him based on his ethnic and/or religious background, as well as his ideological and political beliefs. The second charge was that he threatened to make public the details of his “trial” if he were excluded, including these accusations (“threatening to make public defamatory statements”).
[3] The third charge against Salah was his “stigmatizing request regarding a Board member’s origin.” When he claimed to be the only Arab-Muslim elected to the Board, other members informed him that this was untrue, as another member was of the Muslim faith. Salah responded that, as far as he knew, she wasn’t Arab. This so-called “stigmatizing request” was considered serious enough to be included in the list of offenses warranting permanent exclusion from the union. The proverb “He who wishes to drown his dog accuses it of rabies” comes to mind, but in the absence of fatal illnesses, a simple cough will suffice for good people…
[4] The fourth charge was “using the union’s membership file for personal purposes.” Salah used a file containing members’ email addresses to send them the documents relating to the CSD case, including both his own and the opposing party’s. When the exclusion process was voted on, it was agreed that all documents would be emailed to union members to give them time to review them. However, the Board later decided that the documents could only be consulted in person at the House of the People, where CGT headquarters are located. Salah, therefore, took the initiative to send them to members himself.
[5] In addition to being marginalized and excluded from Board activities long before October 7 and the petition, Salah was the target of several slanders. He was notably accused of calling one Board member a “miscreant” during the November 10 meeting, which painted him as a religious extremist and facilitated the exclusion process, with the added threat of legal action based on this slander. None of the eight Board members present at the meeting were willing to testify about the truth or falseness of this accusation, effectively confirming it by their silence. The CGT Education Executive Committee also refused to clarify the matter (when all they had to do was ask). In response, Salah internally distributed a complete recording of the November 10th meeting via an unlisted YouTube link, proving the accusation to be false. This led to two additional charges against him: “illicit recording of a Board meeting” and “distribution of this recording, notably on YouTube.” In addition, CGT Education’s lawyer sent him a formal notice, stating that “this was a private, internal union meeting” and that Article 226–1 of the Penal Code punishes with up to one year of imprisonment and a €45,000 fine for recording or transmitting private or confidential conversations without consent. Salah was asked to “immediately remove the YouTube video” and informed that he would be summoned by the police. Judicial intimidation, it seems, is not the sole domain of Macron’s government…
*****
The petition urging the CGT to offer genuine support to Palestine in its hour of truth can still be signed on change.org [here is the English version], as well as the petition calling for Salah’s reinstatement, nearing 10,000 signatures [here is the English version].
Originally published in French here.
No comments:
Post a Comment