Capitalism Fouls Things Up
In May India and Pakistan captured the world's attention with a tit for tat round of nuclear tests. In past issues of this column we have looked at some of the environmental issues associated with the `peaceful' use of nuclear energy to generate electrical power. In the following column we look at the political and economic consequences of nuclear arms.
The nuclear arms race has returned with a vengeance! In May the world was stunned when India unleashed a series of five underground nuclear tests. Less than three weeks later Pakistan responded with six nuclear explosions. There is widespread fear that these events could be the catalyst in a new nuclear arms race that threatens to engulf the entire Indian subcontinent. Even more dangerous is the real possibility that this could be the nuclear spark that spreads to countries from Turkey to Iran, South and North Korea and Israel. For the first time since the end of the so-called "Cold War" the world teeters on the edge of nuclear conflagration!
Relations between India and Pakistan have been tense for most of the 50 years since they won their independence from British imperialism in 1947. The legacy of a subcontinent divided by the British along religious lines has produced three wars in the brief span of 50 years.
The Indian-controlled state of Kashmir has been the focal point of most of the disputes between India and Pakistan throughout the course of their troubled history. Kashmir is the only Indian state with a majority of Muslims; India is predominantly Hindu. For many years militant Kashmiri Muslims have been fighting for either independence or unity with Pakistan, officially an Islamic state. Pakistan's official position is that it supports the cause of the Kashmiri rebels but denies giving them military support.1 In any case, Kashmir has been a major source of conflict that has been the centre of a series of clashes along the border that continue to this day.
The foolhardy and dangerous events in May have deep roots in the economic and political problems facing both India and Pakistan. India, the world's second most populous nation, and widely described in bourgeois media circles as the world's "largest democracy", has been heavily scarred by communal politics and violence in past decades. Since the electoral defeat of India's traditional ruling Congress party (the party of Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Ghandi), national politics have been characterized by a series of unsuccessful attempts to reconstruct a viable bourgeois ruling coalition amongst a collection of regional parties and parties with far right and fascist links.
Prime Minister Vajpayee, screaming "national security" at every opportunity, is attempting to bolster his shaky coalition government by appealing to jingoistic nationalism. But whose security is really being threatened and by whom?
On the very day India exploded the nuclear bombs "Maoist activists were still being murdered in Bihar state by the Ranvir Sena, a private militia closely linked to the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Striking nurses in Delhi were being threatened with eviction, arrest, the application of the Essential Services Maintenance Act, and any number of repressive measures. Delhi University teachers, recently on strike for better pay and other benefits, were threatened with pay cuts for the period of strike".2
The question that begs answering is, are India's security and sovereignty truly threatened and if so by whom? As the Inquilabi Communist Sangathan (ICS, Indian Section of the Fourth International) points out, if there had been no sustained history of repression in Kashmir, no systematic violation of the democratic rights of the Kashmiri people, had their right of self-determination not been trampled underfoot, then Pakistan would not have been able to do anything in that region.3 Despite recent allegations by India that China is aiding Pakistan in its arms build-up, relations with the Chinese had actually been improving steadily in past years. It would appear that the recent allegations were designed more as cover for India's nuclear intentions.
For much of the period since gaining independence India maintained a position of non-alliance in the international political domain, for many years playing a leading role in the organization of non-aligned nations that attempted to steer a path between American imperialism and the Soviet Union. However, increasing frustration at its failure to be elevated to a permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council ultimately led sections of the military, state bureaucracy and bourgeoisie to adopt the long-cherished Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) vision of an armed, combative India, dominating Asia from Kabul to Singapore.4
However, becoming a "big-power" that can seriously challenge China, possessor of an acknowledged 300 nuclear bombs, in the military theatre, will impose severe sacrifices on the Indian economy, sacrifices that will be felt most heavily by the working class and under-employed. For a certain period of time militarization can offer large profits and provide a major area of investment. From the point of view of Indian Capital, this may be enough to compensate for any suffering that results from the imposition of Western sanctions in response to the nuclear testing campaign.
There is much more to this story than simply India's attempt to attain big-power status. The Indian government is using the pretext of "national security" to disguise its other objective of smashing the Indian workers' movement and eliminating the economic and social gains the Indian working class has achieved since independence.
Historically, India and to a lesser extent Pakistan, concentrated on building an economy based on a strong public sector, through control of electric utilities, telecommunications, aviation and mining.
Until recently India's economy was also characterized by strong protectionist measures designed to promote the growth of an indigenous Indian capitalist class and to defend this burgeoning class from domination by multi-national corporations. However, according to Payal Sampat, beginning in 1991 when India's economy faltered, "the International Monetary Fund stepped in with an offer to bail India out—on the condition that the country abandon its socialist planning for free-market policies."5
In the last few years foreign companies have rushed to India to exploit the new liberal economic conditions. Companies ranging from the world's major auto makers, to Coca-Cola, Kellogg, and Revlon, have led the way in the consumer sector. In the industrial sector India has opened its doors to Shell, Exxon and Mobil in oil, and mining companies like Australia's BHP Minerals and South Africa's De Beers Group. The liberalization of the economy has been accompanied by wholesale privatization, led by the electric utility sector.
Despite the advances made in privatizing certain segments of the economy the forces of capitalism are not yet satisfied. Unlike some other poor countries, like Jamaica or Sri Lanka, in India significant sections of the working class still benefit from past gains such as substantial cost-of-living increases. As well, struggles by bank employees and others, have succeeded in politically blocking certain moves in the direction of further economic liberalization. These limitations on capitalist power are a continuing thorn in the side of indigenous and international Capital, and are what drives the state in domestic concerns.
Pakistan's rapid response to India's nuclear tests reflects the ongoing military build-up in the region for which both countries are equally responsible. In addition to developing nuclear weapons, both Pakistan and India are investing heavily in missile delivery systems. Until recently Pakistan led in this department after successfully testing a Ghauri missile with a range of 1,500 km. However, India has now developed a missile with a range of 2,500 km. If form holds true, look for Pakistan to up the ante further.
Following the series of nuclear tests, western Capital, led by the United States, moved to impose immediate economic sanctions on both India and Pakistan. However, imposing economic sanctions only serves to highlight the hypocrisy of a western capitalism that says it's okay for it to have "the Bomb" because U.S. and allied imperialist powers are responsible and know how and when to use or not use the weapon.
The immediate effects of international economic sanctions will undoubtedly weigh much heavier on Pakistan than India. India's much larger internal economy and huge market of 950 million people will largely shield it from many of the intended effects of the hypocritical sanctions imposed by international capital. Pakistan, on the other hand, a nation of about 140 million people, is much more dependent on international assistance and loans than India.
In Pakistan, the right-wing government of Nawaz Sharif responded to the threat of sanctions by imposing a state of emergency and suspending Pakistan's constitution and legal system. Civil rights were suspended and extraordinary powers placed in the hands of the government.6 Sharif pledged to join his fellow Pakistanis in responding to the economic crisis by limiting himself to one meal a day if that is what it takes to build a nuclear defense arsenal.
However, it is clear that the only people that will ultimately make any sacrifices under these circumstances will be the working class and poor, especially in Pakistan. The imposition of a state of emergency and suspension of the constitution is but the latest attack on civil liberties and democratic rights in Pakistan. Since becoming independent in 1947, aside from a few years of nominally democratic governments, Pakistan's people have suffered under the yoke of one right-wing military regime after another. While formal fascist parties have not succeeded in gaining a foothold in Pakistan, the country has a long history of conservative, military governments that eventually declared Pakistan to be an Islamic state operating under Islamic law. Under these conditions, developing democratic norms of functioning has been most difficult.
Despite the crucial importance of condemning nuclear testing in the Indian subcontinent we must not ignore the veiled racism with which this issue is treated in the western media. Daily front page headlines denounced Indian and Pakistani nuclear testing. This is in stark contrast to the muted media response to French imperialism's similar nuclear testing program in the south Pacific that went on for several years. One could only conclude that it is okay for a white, western imperialist power to explode nuclear weapons in a sparsely populated area of small islands inhabited by non-white natives, but not okay for non-white peoples to think that they too can join the club of nuclear nations, with the power to destroy us all.
| Nuclear weapons/weapons of mass destruction must be abolished, starting with the arsenals of the imperialist powers. | |
| Communalist politics, religious sectarianism and national chauvinism must be uprooted—not be permitted to jeopardize the very existence of life on this planet. Class struggle politics is the road to peace, security and prosperity for all. | |
| Military budgets must be slashed and the liberated material resources redirected to serve human needs. | |
| Dismantle the bosses' armies; they serve only to oppress their own peoples. | |
| Real, effective arms treaties must be negotiated, implemented and supervised by the organizations of working people the world over. No reliance on the political or economic instruments of capitalist domination, domestically or internationally. |
1. AP & Reuters, "Troops exchange fire on Kashmiri border", The Globe and Mail, May 27, 1998, A7.
2. Inquilabi Communist Sangathan, "The main enemy is at home!", International Viewpoint, June, 1998, No. 301, pg. 20.
3. Op cit., Inquilabi Communist Sangathan, pg. 21.
4. Op cit., Inquilabi Communist Sangathan, pg. 21.
5. Payal Sampat, "What Does India Want", WorldWatch, Vol. 11, No. 4, July/August, 1998, p.32.
6. "Pakistan `settles a score'", The Ottawa Citizen, May 29, 1998, A1.
"The RSS is a mass movement with millions of members and dozens of `front' or affiliated organizations entrenched in civil society. Its daily activities include morning physical exercises, `Indian' sports and politico-religious classes. In the wake of natural disasters, train and plane accidents and in refugee camps, its members turn up dispensing food and medicine and doing relief work." (B. Skanthakumar - International Viewpoint, no. 301, pg. 26.)
The RSS has close ties to the ruling BJP. Both the present Prime Minister of India and the Home Minister, began their political careers in the RSS and have never concealed their past and present ties to the organization. Recently the BJP's nominee for the important Finance portfolio was over-ruled by the RSS in favour of another legislator who, though not an RSS member, was clearly someone they trust. (B.S.)
India's indigenous fascist party first developed in the 1930s. M. S. Golwalkar, one of their early leaders, first published "We or Our Nationhood Defined" in 1939. Written during a period of rising communal violence, this text outlines the early thinking of the Indian fascist movement.
According to Kunal Chattopadhyay, a lecturer in History at Calcutta's Jadavpur University, Golwalkar "developed and stressed the concept of cultural nationalism, rather than territorial nationalism. Not all who lived in India were truly Indians. The totalitarian implications were proudly flaunted, with reference to history's most genocidal political movement...", German Nazism.
For a more detailed discussion of the RSS and its fascist practices today, read the above article in the June 1997 edition of International Viewpoint magazine.
(Kunal Chattopadhyay, "India's fascist RSS moves forward", International Viewpoint, no.301, pg. 26.)