Palestine solidarity demonstration in London, October 19

On Monday, October 28, the Israeli parliament voted to pass a law that banned the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) [1]. This ban comes as Israel has cut off northern Gaza completely where 400,000 civilians still remain. This has been turned into Israel's latest killing fields to try and exterminate the Palestinian people from their own lands. Invading Israeli tanks roll deeper into this part of Gaza and southern Lebanon. On Tuesday, October 29, the Israeli military bombed a residential building in Beit Lahia in northern Gaza, killing at least 93 people and 25 children which is on top of the 1,000 who died from Israeli bombs in northern Gaza the week before.

Families in Jabalia forced to flee by US/Zionist aggression, October 21, 2024

This latest criminal move by the Israeli Zionist regime immediately brought outrage and condemnation across the world not only against Israel but against their "allies", particularly the US and Britain who continue to back and arm this genocidal war. The UN, as well as aid agencies, all rejected the unjustifiable and spurious allegations of the Israeli regime that UNRWA buildings and personnel are involved in the Palestinian armed resistance and therefore are also legitimate targets. On October 1, the UN announced that the report entitled "Genocide as colonial erasure" by Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, is now publicly available in all UN official languages [2]. Also what has been clearly documented over the last year is that Israeli forces have killed at least 237 UNRWA personnel with over 200 premises damaged or destroyed. They have killed more than 560 people seeking UN protection and dozens of UNRWA staff have been detained and reportedly tortured. The violence of the Israeli massacres has killed 42,000 Palestinian men, women and children.

Destruction left by Israeli massacre carried out in Beit Lahiya in Northern Gaza, October 28-29, 2024

On October 8, the same day that the Knesset banned UNRWA, Foreign Secretary David Lammy made a statement on the Middle East trying to justify the British government's support for Israeli actions against the Palestinians as well as against Lebanon and Iran. He mentioned nothing of concern for this latest move against the Palestinians in the banning of UNRWA. However, when asked by Kit Malthouse MP that if Israel will "proceed with the dismantling of UNRWA, making its job impossible, what will he do next? Will there be any consequence whatsoever for the Israeli Government?" Lammy claimed that in his reply to the Commons that "when I raised this issue with [Israeli] Foreign Minister Katz yesterday, he was at pains to explain that, although the Knesset could pass its bill today, that does not mean that it has to be implemented." This is a claim that even the BBC's diplomatic reporter, James Landale, says has not been confirmed by the Israeli Minister and he dismissed it as a "diplomatic" offering of "reassurance to one's allies in private".

However, there was no respite for the government at all when on Tuesday, October 9, Yasmin Qureshi, Labour MP for Bolton South and Walkden, asked as an urgent question to the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs David Lammy "if he will make a statement on what assessment he has made of legislation approved by the Israeli Knesset to ban UNRWA".

David Lammy was not there. The Minister who answered and took part in the debate was the Foreign Office Minister Anneliese Dodds, who said little more than David Lammy's comments the day before, and seemed to suggest that a distinction between the Israeli government and the full Knesset was a justification for the cruel, punishing and vindictive ban, and that Britain should remain aloof therefore. The BBC diplomatic reporter, in commenting on this debate, said that "the calls for sanctions and trade curbs were deafening in the House of Commons on Tuesday afternoon" and in looking at the debate this was not an overstatement. Here are some of these MPs' comments opposing this latest Israeli crime against humanity in the UNRWA debate, which reflected that the government has no answer to the charge of complicity and does all it can to get off the hook in its refusal to condemn Israeli Zionism for its genocide and crimes against humanity [3].

Contributions to the House of Commons Debate, October 29, 2024, on Israel's UNRWA ban

Jeremy Corbyn, Independent MP for Islington North, said that: "in effect, the Knesset yesterday legislated for extraterritorial decisions over Gaza, the west bank and refugee camps, and decided that UNRWA is an illegal organisation within Israel. What sanctions will the UK Government take against Israel for that? The one thing Israel will understand is if we suspend arms supplies to it, because those are being used to create the humanitarian catastrophe that exists in Gaza and that is beginning to exist in the west bank as well. If we do not do that, British arms and American arms that come through Britain will be complicit in the destruction of life of the Palestinian people."

Clive Betts, Labour MP for Sheffield South East, said: "My right honourable friend said that we are at an end now, when it comes to Israeli excuses about why aid does not get in, but this is beyond excuses; this is potentially an act of deliberate policy to destroy the most effective aid route into Gaza. What are we actually going to do about it, if Israel continues to ignore our requests and pleas to it? I come back to the issue of sanctions. If Israeli Ministers decide to implement the Bill, are they not effectively engaging in an act of warfare by starvation? That is a breach of humanitarian law. Will we use sanctions against those Israeli Ministers who get involved in promoting this policy?"

Stephen Flynn, SNP MP for Aberdeen South, said: "Israel is once again choosing to block aid to a civilian population that it is bombing. It is sinister and it is collective punishment. Can the Minister outline a single red line that Israel can cross that would lead her to question its status as an ally of the United Kingdom?"

Simon Hoare, Conservative MP for North Dorset, said: "With 90% of the Knesset voting for the Bill yesterday, it is surely naive to suggest that it will not be enacted. Therefore, other preparations need to be made. Despite the strong urgings of the United States, the United Kingdom, the EU and others, the Israeli Parliament voted for the Bill, knowing full well the collective international view of that proposal. Do the Government now realise that the Israeli Government, and indeed Parliament, is effectively diplomatically flying solo when it comes to these issues? If, as we all believe, no other agency can step in at pace and at scale to deliver the aid that is clearly needed, then, as was said by the leader of the SNP-an unlikely bedfellow for me-the right hon. Member for Aberdeen South (Stephen Flynn), is this not now verging on the definition of collective punishment? The Government can no longer just either wring their hands or urge."

Ruth Cadbury, Labour MP for Brentwood and Isleworth, said: "Under international law, Palestinian refugees retain their right to return. By seeking to dismantle UNRWA, Israel could, as part of a wider plan, be pressurising Palestinian refugees to relinquish that right to return. Despite our Foreign Secretary and Governments of many other countries raising concerns and pleading with Israel, the Knesset went ahead with this vote. What additional pressure will the UK Government apply to Israel, which continues to violate international law and breach the UN charter?"

Alistair Carmichael, Liberal Democrat MP for Orkney and Shetland, said: "If the Knesset Bill is an indication of how Israel now sees international treaties and international law, there is surely no point in further negotiations on a free trade agreement with Israel? Should we not just end those negotiations now? "

Stella Creasy, Labour/Co-op MP for Walthamstow, said: "With winter on its way, as the Minister said, it is vital that we are clear about the importance of aid and of challenging all who obstruct it. The Israeli Finance Minister said that the starvation of 2 million people in Gaza might be 'justified and moral' in order to free the hostages. Let us be clear: the hostage families do not think that. The Israeli National Security Minister backed the protests against aid convoys reaching Gaza. I understand why the Minister says that she will not give a running commentary on sanctions, but if we do not have sanctions now, what else is open to us to send the clear message that aid must get to Gaza immediately?"

Andrew George, Liberal Democrat MP for St Ives, said: "The Government have to accept that the far-right Government of Israel are laughing behind their hands at us at the moment. They know that they are operating under the comfort blanket of a UK Government who say that they stand with Israel and that Israel has a right to defend itself. But when has murdering children in their hospital beds been tantamount to defence? In what way is the cold-blooded slaughter of 11,000 children tantamount to defence? Rather than the use of words to condemn the actions of Israel, why does the Minister not follow suggestions of many Members in the House today and start taking action to make the Israeli Government sit up?"

Paul Waugh, Labour/Co-op MP for Rochdale, said: "Has the Minister seen the latest letter from the Commissioner-General of UNRWA? It states unequivocally: 'Today, even as we look into the faces of children in Gaza, some of whom we know will die tomorrow, the rules-based international order is crumbling in a repetition of the horrors that led to the establishment of the United Nations.' Does she agree with him that the implementation of the UN mandate 'may become impossible without decisive intervention by the General Assembly' and UN Security Council members?"

Adnan Hussein, Independent MP for Blackburn, said: "These are the words of the United Nations humanitarian chief, Joyce Msuya: 'The entire population of north Gaza is at risk of dying.' If someone so high up in the United Nations is making statements of that nature, we can safely make the assertion that the onslaught on Gaza is genocidal in nature-the measure being intent, and not, as the Foreign Secretary alluded to yesterday, the volume of counted deaths. Will the Government alter their position on this matter? What will they do, by way of resolute action, to ensure that this crime against humanity is halted immediately? Words are not enough; action is needed."

The fact is MPs have put the question to Parliament that the government should stop Britain's complicity in Israeli genocide. This is in accord with the wishes of the working class and people but it is also most importantly the result of the movements of the working class and people in standing with the Palestinian people and their resistance. It is the just stand of the people that has given rise to such a debate in the Commons, confronting the government with complicity in genocide.

Notes
1. On October 28, the Israeli Knesset (Parliament) approved two laws aimed at blocking, in areas under Israeli control, the activity of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), which services Palestinian refugees in east Jerusalem, Gaza, and the West Bank. The first bill states that UNRWA will no longer "operate any institution, provide any service, or conduct any activity, whether directly or indirectly," in Israel. The second bill states that the treaty between Israel and UNRWA, signed following the Six Day War in 1967, will expire within seven days of the bill passing its final voting in the Knesset.
2. Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967 - Genocide as colonial erasure
https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/n24/279/68/pdf/n2427968.pdf
3. For the full debate click here:
https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-10-29/debates/7DD72593-8087-4DC2-83EB-A4CDFAC8FC0C/IsraelUNRWABan

UNRWA in Gaza

His Excellency Mr Philémon Yang President of the General Assembly, New York

Dear Mr President,

On December 7, 2023, and February 22, 2024, I wrote to the President of the General Assembly that UNRWA's ability to implement its mandate was under threat. Today, I must inform you that the Agency is under such physical, political, and operational attack - unprecedented in United Nations history - that implementation of its mandate may become impossible without decisive intervention by the General Assembly. The consequences for Palestinians, for Israel, and for the region will be grave.

The adoption today by the Knesset of two laws on UNRWA in effect denies the protections and means essential for UNRWA to operate, forbidding Israeli state officials from contact with UNRWA or its representatives, and prohibiting UNRWA operations within what is referred to as the sovereign territory of the State of Israel.

The legislation comes after a year of blatant disregard for UNRWA staff lives, premises and humanitarian operations in Gaza, and after intense diplomatic campaigns by the Government of Israel targeting UNRWA's donors with disinformation to undermine funding. Israeli local authorities are also threatening to evict UNRWA from its headquarters in occupied East Jerusalem and replace it with settlements.

These developments risk the collapse of UNRWA's operations in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and Gaza, and severely undermine the overall UN Gaza humanitarian operation which relies on UNRWA's platform. In the absence of any viable alternative to the Agency, these measures will compound the suffering of Palestinians.

Mr President, The situation in Gaza is beyond the diplomatic vocabulary of the General Assembly. After more than a year of the most intense bombardment of a civilian population since World War II, and the restriction of humanitarian aid far below minimum needs, the lives of Palestinians are shattered. More than 43,000 people are reported killed, the majority women and children. Nearly the entire population is displaced. Schools, universities, hospitals, places of worship, bakeries, water, sewage and electricity systems, roads and farmland have all been destroyed. The surviving population lives in the greatest indignity. In the North, the population is trapped, awaiting death by airstrikes or starvation.

Hostages taken from Israel continue to suffer in captivity, their families left in terrible distress. Violence is escalating in the West Bank, where the destruction of public infrastructure inflicts collective punishment on the civilian population. War has spilled over and intensified in Lebanon.

Dismantling UNRWA will have a catastrophic impact on the international response to the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. It will also sabotage any chance of recovery. In the absence of a full-fledged public administration or state, no entity other than UNRWA can deliver education to 660,000 boys and girls. An entire generation of children will be sacrificed, with long-term risks of marginalisation and extremism. In the West Bank, UNRWA's collapse would deprive Palestine Refugees of access to education and primary healthcare, greatly worsening an already unstable situation.

The political ramifications of UNRWA's collapse are disastrous, with dire consequences for international peace and security. The attacks on the Agency advance unilateral changes to the parameters of any future political solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict and harm Palestinians' right to self-determination and aspirations for a political solution.

The attacks will not terminate the refugee status of Palestinians, which exists independently of UNRWA's service provision, but will severely harm their lives and future.

Mr President, Allegations concerning breaches of neutrality, such as misuse of the Agency by Palestinian militant groups, including Hamas, have been used to justify the actions against UNRWA. The April 2024 Independent Review of UNRWA's neutrality (the Colonna Report) noted the Agency's exceptionally difficult operating environment and found that UNRWA has a more robust neutrality framework than any comparable organisation. The Agency continues to make every possible effort to implement the report's recommendations, including through a dedicated implementation team. Notwithstanding these efforts, UNRWA - like comparable UN entities - does not have police, military or intelligence capabilities and must rely on Member States for protection and neutrality, especially in areas controlled by powerful militant groups. To this end, for over 15 years, UNRWA has shared annually the names of its staff with the Government of Israel. This includes the names of staff about whom the government n ever previously raised concerns but who have now been included in government lists alleging armed militancy. The Agency takes every allegation extremely seriously. It has sent repeated requests to the government - in March, April, May, and July - appealing for evidence to enable action. No response has been received. UNRWA is therefore in the invidious position of being unable to address allegations for which it has no evidence, while these allegations continue to be used to undermine the Agency. Going forward, I hope the Government of Israel will engage with UNRWA senior management to address every allegation, so they are no longer a concern for the government or an obstacle to UNRWA.

The Agency is also under intense physical attack in Gaza. At least 237 UNRWA personnel have been killed. Over 200 premises have been damaged or destroyed, killing more than 560 people seeking UN protection. Dozens of UNRWA staff have been detained and report being tortured. The Agency has received allegations regarding the military use of its premises by Palestinian armed groups, including Hamas, and Israeli forces. Given that all of Gaza is an active combat zone mostly under evacuation orders, the Agency cannot possibly verify these allegations. There must be accountability through an independent investigation.

Mr President, Today, even as we look into the faces of children in Gaza, some of whom we know will die tomorrow, the rules-based international order is crumbling in a repetition of the horrors that led to the establishment of the United Nations, and in violation of commitments to prevent their recurrence. The attacks on UNRWA are an integral part of this disintegration. I believe UNRWA has delivered on its mandate to a standard far beyond anything that could be asked of any UN entity or staff. Gazans say UNRWA is the only pillar of their lives still standing. My staff has worked for 13 months without pause, in great danger, amid personal tragedies and family displacement. Teachers are managing shelters for tens of thousands. Primary healthcare staff are performing surgeries. Drivers are risking their lives each day to save people from starvation. Managers are making impossible life or death decisions. UNRWA has helped ensure Gaza's survival until now, sustaining hopes for a politic al solution. My staff has given far more than we have the right to ask of them. Under such untenable conditions, I seek Member States' support, commensurate with the gravity of the situation and risks, to ensure the Agency's ability to fully implement the mandate conferred by the General Assembly, (Res. 302 (IV), 1949).

I await your urgent decision.

Please accept, Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration.

Sincerely,

(UNRWA, October 29, 2024)

March from Whitehall to the US embassy

Assemble midday, Saturday, November 2, 2024

Today will be the 21st national demonstration for Palestine, when we will march from Whitehall to the US
embassy demanding an end to Israel's genocide and an end to the arms sales that enables its campaign of terror.

Anti-war Convention: Stop the Drive to War

Sun 17 Nov 2024 12:00 PM - 5:00 PM

The Atrium, 124 - 126 Cheshire Street, E2 6EJ

From the Middle East to Eastern Europe, we face permanent war. Great power conflict looms, risking global
conflagration. The US and Britain are backing Israel to the hilt as it carries out genocide and lashes out in all
directions. The West's massive support for Ukraine has turned the conflict into a proxy war against Russia.
Tensions with China are rising.

Our governments spend billions on weapons and war while poverty spreads and services crumble at home.
Meanwhile millions around the world have joined massive campaigns to stop the spread of war.

The anti-war convention will bring together leading campaigners and commentors with activists
and trade unionists from across the country to discuss this situation and how to strengthen the resistance.

Workplace Day of Action 28 November

Please get organised for the next workplace day of action on November 28. The horrors in Gaza and across the Middle East necessitate the trade union movement do all it can to call on the government to stop arming Israel. Send office@stopwar.org.uk an email to let them know what action is happening in your workplace. It's not a moment too soon to start organising.

Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla addressing UN General Assembly

On Wednesday, October 30, the United Nations' General Assembly reiterated its call on the United States to end its economic, commercial and financial blockade against Cuba, which Cuba's Minister for Foreign Affairs Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla called "commercial warfare" and "a crime of genocide".

The 193-member Assembly adopted its annual resolution on the "Necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba" (document A/79/L.6), by a recorded vote of 187 in favour and 2 against (United States, Israel), with one abstention (Republic of Moldova). It began its debate on the topic on the previous day.

By the terms of the adopted resolution, the Assembly urged other states that have applied and continue to apply laws or measures in support of the blockade on Cuba to repeal or invalidate them as soon as possible.

UN Vote against US blockade of Cuba

"How long will this go on?" Rodríguez Parrilla asked the Assembly, recalling that the body has urged for an end to the blockade since 1992.

"Let Cuba live; let Cuba live in peace," he emphasised, calling the blockade "a flagrant, massive and systematic violation of the human rights of our people" and "the most encompassing, comprehensive and longest-standing system of unilateral coercive measures ever applied against any country."

Cuba's Foreign Minister recalled how from October 18 to 23 Cuban families had no electricity, except for maybe a few hours. "Many Cuban families lacked running water; hospitals worked under emergency conditions, schools and universities suspended their classes; businesses interrupted their activity," he said.

Since 2019, the United States has adopted harsher measures of "economic warfare" designed to prevent the supply of fuel and spare parts needed to maintain Cuba's power plants and electricity grid. "President Joseph Biden's administration tends to claim that its policy is to help and support the Cuban people," Rodríguez Parrilla said, also asking: "Who would believe such an assertion?"

The damage done to Cuba since the blockade was imposed some 62 years ago amounts to $1.499 trillion, considering the United States dollar value against the price of gold, the Foreign Minister said. During the last 18 years of the blockade, Cuba has lost $252 trillion.

"Imperialism is warning the whole world that any nation daring to firmly defend its sovereignty and to build its own future will pay a price for that rebelliousness," he emphasised.

"The right to food is a human right," Rodríguez Parrilla went on to say, adding that the accumulated cost of four months of economic blockade is equivalent to $1.6 billion. That amount would be enough to guarantee for an entire year the "delivery to all Cuban families a ration food basket". With $12 million, Cuba could buy the insulin necessary to treat all its diabetic patients. The losses incurred by the blockade within a single day exceed that amount. "The United States government is perfectly aware of the direct and indirect impact that its policy has on the Cuban health system," and the "consequences of incomplete treatments, delayed treatments and postponed surgeries," he said.

(UN News, Prensa Latina)

A T Freeman

From 21-26 October, the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting (CHOGM) took place in Apia, the capital of the Pacific island of Samoa. The meeting was overshadowed by a storm around the demand that Britain face up to its criminal responsibility for the gross violation of the human rights of millions of people that it conquered and enslaved within its empire. In particular, the point was raised that Britain must make reparations for the ongoing human and social damage caused by its role as the chief human trafficker in enslaved Africans and one of the greatest perpetrators of this crime against humanity. In many ways, this row underlines the fact that the Commonwealth is nothing more than a colonial relic of Britain's imperial days, underpinned by the same racist ideology and that it is time for it to be disbanded.

The Commonwealth currently has 56 member countries, 21 of which are located in Africa and 12 of which are CARICOM members. There are another 17 former British colonies from Asia and the Pacific which bring the total number of non-European countries in the Commonwealth to 50, or nearly 90% of the organisation's membership. However, this numerical preponderance does not translate into power within the organisation. This rests firmly with Britain and the European settler colonies it established such as Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The small European countries of Malta and Cyprus are the other two member states.

This racist distribution of power within the organisation originated in the development of Britain's empire. By the late 19th century, Britain had already established a racist distinction between its colonies. Those which were European settler colonies were classified as dominions and allowed a large amount of self-governance while colonies without significant European settlement were denied any such control over their own affairs. In 1926 at the Imperial Conference - attended by the leaders of Britain and its dominions, including Australia, Canada, India, the Irish Free State, Newfoundland, New Zealand and South Africa - the decision was taken to establish the British Commonwealth of Nations, which is now referred to as the Commonwealth. As part of the agreement, they all pledged allegiance to the British monarch. India was represented by Frederick Smith, 1st Earl of Birkenhead who was Britain's colonial Secretary of State for India and his under-secretary Edward Turnour, the 6t h Earl of Winterton. There were no Indians present. South Africa was represented by Barry Herzog, a Boer general and then prime minister of the Union of South Africa. He was accompanied by his finance minister Nicolaas Havenga. There were no Africans present.

In many ways, today's Commonwealth is simply a continuation of Britain's empire but one in which Britain exercises its control through neo-colonial means rather than through direct colonial rule. Just like its predecessor, today's Commonwealth is an important source of wealth and global power for Britain's ruling oligarchy and its politicians. The population of the Commonwealth amounts to 2.7 billion people which is an enormous market for Britain's capitalist corporations. According to the House of Commons Library, in 2023 Britain's exports to the Commonwealth were worth £89 billion and it maintained a trade surplus of £14 billion with these countries. Trade with Commonwealth states accounts for 9% of Britain's total trade. With regard to foreign direct investment, the Commonwealth is a lucrative market for Britain's monopolies which invested an average of £20 billion in Commonwealth countries in 2021 and 2022. Clearly, the Commonwealth continues to serve the interests of Britain's ruling oligarchy. To ensure that this is done efficiently, the Commonwealth Enterprise and Investment Council (CWEIC) has been established.

King Charles in his opening speech of over 1,500 words, not once did he mention the word slavery

This is the context in which the row about reparations erupted at the CHOGM. The demand that Britain take responsibility for its past colonial crimes and make reparations to those who continue to suffer the consequences of its wrongdoings is a longstanding one. Therefore, in the days leading up to the heads of government meeting, British prime minister Keir Starmer declared that the issue of reparations was not on the agenda for the meeting, that Britain would not apologise for its role as the main human trafficker in enslaved Africans and that with regard to reparations, "The government's position on this has not changed - we do not pay reparations." Keir Starmer's Labour government's arrogant refusal to acknowledge Britain's responsibility for its colonial crimes reflects the consistent position of successive British governments, whether Conservative or Labour.

To add insult to injury, Britain's King Charles then attempted to gaslight people in his address to CHOGM. In his speech of over 1,500 words, not once did he mention the word slavery, nor acknowledge the criminal role that Britain had played in it. Repeatedly referring to the member countries of the organisation as "our Commonwealth family", he declared, "I understand, from listening to people across the Commonwealth, how the most painful aspects of our past continue to resonate......None of us can change the past." Through this sleight of hand, Britain's king is trying to create the impression that the perpetrator and his victim have a shared past in which each is responsible for the crime. But the criminal alone is responsible for the crime. and the pain is inflicted on those who suffered at the hands of the criminal.

The fact that the British state, of which he is the head, refuses point blank to acknowledge its crime, let alone apologise or make reparations for it, shows clearly that Britain's rulers couldn't care less about the past and current pain that its colonial crimes have caused. If this is the behaviour within a family, then it is an abusive family. Further, the king raises the old worn-out argument about changing the past as if anyone thinks it's possible to change the past. The demand is that the crimes committed in the past and their consequences both in the past and present be openly acknowledged and addressed.

The British state's gaslighting and arrogant refusal to acknowledge its colonial crimes contrasts sharply with its attitude towards the crimes of the Nazis in Europe. It routinely acknowledges this holocaust while denying its own holocausts of indigenous genocide, human trafficking and enslavement. It has declared its intention to build a memorial to the victims of the Nazi holocaust, while telling the victims of its own holocausts to get over it. Not surprisingly, the final communique of the CHOGM did not contain a single word of condemnation of Britain's colonial crimes nor a call for it to make reparations. It did, however, contain a statement in support of the US-organised invasion of Haiti. It is evident that the British Commonwealth of Nations continues to be a reactionary organisation which serves the imperial interests of Britain's financial oligarchy.

The position expressed by Britain's king and government shows that they remain committed to its imperial ideology of racism. Rather than addressing this central issue Britain has, instead, opted to develop an entire industry based on fake anti-racism. This involves co-opting into the system individuals from communities which are the targets of colonialism and racism so as to give Britain's state racism a multi-cultural face. This was fully demonstrated by the fact that David Lammy, the current British Foreign Secretary, himself a descendant of enslaved Africans, accompanied Keir Starmer and the king to the CHOGM to defend Britain's disgraceful colonial crimes.

In 2024, when people are striving to bring about a world of justice and equality for all, an organisation like the Commonwealth, in which the most abhorrent crimes against humanity cannot even be acknowledged, is an organisation which is past its sell-by date. It's time for it to be disbanded.

(Caribbean Organisation for People's Empowerment)

Mass action in New York City marking one year of US/Zionist genocide and one year of resistance,October 5, 2024

For the information of our readers, we reproduce two articles by Kathleen Chandler on the US Presidential Election of November 5. They are reprinted from TML In the News, publication of the Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist).

The central issue in the US presidential election which will take place in less than a week is that no matter which candidate wins the most electoral college votes, they will not bring in the kind of change the people want. Whoever wins, the US working class and people will persist in waging their fight for the rights of all, at home and abroad. Even as the campaign winds down, they continue to oppose genocide, in Gaza and Lebanon and continue making their claims on society. Militant demonstrations will take place on November 2 in many cities raising the call: No Votes for Genocide!

Whether on campuses, workplaces, or communities people are stepping up their organised resistance and developing a people's way forward to bring about the change US society and rule require. Debates, seminars, tribunals and demonstrations are planned for the coming months to hold government and university officials accountable.

The frenzy to cover up that elections serve to block the change demanded is such that the last week of the campaign has become totally irrational. It involves the juxtaposition of the extreme violence and extreme racism promoted by Donald Trump with the desperate appeal of Kamala Harris for everyone to vote for her because she is not as extreme as Trump. It is tantamount to telling voters she is a better choice because she has killed fewer people than Trump, which is factually not even true given the genocide the Biden/Harris administration is responsible for in Gaza.

How many persons killed is okay to qualify for president, one is left to wonder. The fact that both candidates represent the worst killing machine ever known in the modern era is not up for discussion. Nor is the prospect that both will increase presidential police powers with their impunity and lack of accountability for war crimes and genocide at home and abroad. While the two candidates are portrayed as one standing for the Constitution and one wanting to smash it, in fact both stand for intensifying presidential powers to act above and against the law at home and abroad. Harris repeatedly calls to uphold the Constitution to defend democracy, while Trump calls to break any obstacles in the path of "Making America Great Again".

We are witnessing a frenzy to line people up behind Harris even if they oppose everything she stands for, to avert the danger of the extreme racism and violence which Trump is seen to represent, and does indeed represent. However, to think that the system Harris is part of and champions is not characterised by the very same extreme racism and violence, is not rational. It also counters the advanced stand taken by all those who stand firmly against genocide and all those responsible for it.

This is why unprecedented numbers of people will continue to reject the "choice" between one candidate and the other. Many are doing so because they reject the entire system which these candidates represent. It is clear to them that Harris, Trump, and the existing institutions stand against democracy, peace, and freedom.

History is calling on the peoples to march on to create a modern democracy of their own making. Conciliation with the rotten institutions called democratic, with the Constitution which was a compromise with slavery and oligopoly, against democracy and for wage and penal slavery, is not an option.

This is the central issue in this election.

History Is on the Side of the People

Demonstration in New York City opposing Biden's executive order to close the southern border and illegally
block refugees seeking asylum. June 6, 2024

The US presidential election provides evidence that the rulers cannot control the contention and conflict within their ranks. Predicting the outcome is out of their control. This increases the likelihood of open violent civil war in the United States and more imperialist wars abroad, no matter which candidate, Harris or Trump, is said to win in November. The situation also brings to the fore the decisive role of the peoples and their resistance to resolve the situation in their favour.

While elections are being used to try to line people up behind Harris or Trump, the peoples are persisting with their independent organising, unflinchingly speaking out in their own name for their rights. Opposing US/Zionist genocide and supporting Palestine remains front and centre.

As the presidential campaign enters its last days, there is an increasing effort to derail the striving of the peoples for their own empowerment as the solution to the current US/Zionist genocide - that both presidential candidates are guilty of - and to the dysfunction of the existing institutions. The candidates and their agendas are plastered across all forms of media. The peoples are to abandon their red line of no support for genocide and their firm stand that US crimes and wars are Not in Our Name! They are instead to rely on the candidates for change, something which has repeatedly meant that change favouring the people is a casualty.

However, all the ruling factions are ignoring the current level of collective consciousness of the working class and people in the US based on their experience of speaking in their own name and fighting for their rights and the rights of all. The US people's sense of internationalism, in support of the struggles of the peoples against US imperialism and its wars of destruction and genocide, imbues their struggles. The spirit reflected in the determination of the Palestinians, where resistance is honour and duty, is being embraced. It is the names of those massacred in Afghanistan, Iraq and other countries that are on the banners the people carry in the streets and today those of Palestinians and Lebanese are front and centre. It is their struggles for self-determination that are upheld. The united demand against US/Zionist genocide remains central.

To counter the widespread anger with the current dysfunctional institutions, with many people, especially youth, increasingly seeking alternatives, and to rally the divided rulers, both Harris and Trump promote US chauvinism. They use talk of "making America great", or that it is the "greatest country on earth" and "country before party". They try to divide workers in the US from those abroad, including with attacks on immigrants and refugees.

What stands at the centre of their campaigns is that it is the US that must be indispensable leader and its president the one to decide what is best for all, who is and is not a terrorist, or un-American or a "threat to national security", to be punished and faced with forms of extreme violence.

Harris, especially, is being brought forward in the hopes she can quell the resistance and anger with the existing dysfunctional and undemocratic set up and forestall open civil war. She is said to be "new", because she is a minority woman from a £middle class background", and "for the people". Her role as a prosecutor, where in court cases she introduced herself as "Kamala Harris, for the people", is brought to the fore.

This is done in part to promote the idea that the state stands for the people when in fact the justice system itself, which Kamala Harris represented as a prosecutor, is known for promoting mass incarceration and letting killers off scot-free when it comes to crimes committed against the people. The fact that this system hands out class justice which serves the ruling class is a given.

People on an organised basis are looking into alternatives, at the need for a new constitution with new institutions of their own making. They are speaking out against upholding a rule of law that is pro-war, anti-people and unable to solve problems at home and abroad. To ensure that change is not a casualty, the peoples are fighting for a way forward that serves their interests and meets their striving to govern and decide.

Having Harris, Obama, Clinton, military generals and many others put forward the need to uphold the US Constitution as key to finding a way forward is an effort to block this striving for new institutions. But the consciousness of the people is such that the Constitution is increasingly recognised for its compromise with slavery and with oligopoly, with rich men of property, against the empowerment of the people. There is growing consciousness that it is the state and its institutions that are the problem. They are undemocratic, unrepresentative, and beyond repair.

The governing arrangements impose a ruling elite governing above and against the majority. It includes prerogative powers for the president to "execute" his office, powers which today are greatly increasing and used with impunity. Harris, Trump and the ruling oligopolies they represent have their allegiance to ensuring the state organised against the people is what persists and is sustained.

The peoples are saying NO! and continuing to speak out, proclaiming US genocide, racism and wars are Not in Our Name. This is strengthening their work for political empowerment.

Among the peoples there is growing consciousness that it is the state and its institutions that are the problem. They are undemocratic, unrepresentative, and far beyond repair. The peoples are looking into alternatives, at the need for a new constitution with new institutions of their own making - not upholding one that is outdated and unable to solve the problems it helps create. To ensure change is not a casualty, the peoples are fighting for a way forward that serves their interests and meets their striving to govern and decide.