Sunday, December 18, 2022

PNG wants to assert greater independence

(Above: PNG Prime Minister James Marape    Photo from Flickr)

 Written by: (Contributed) on 19 December 2022

High-level diplomatic talks in December between Australia and Papua New Guinea have revealed the transient nature of the important relationship. PNG has moved from being a 'client-state' of Canberra in recent decades to having a more assertive role when governing its own affairs.

PNG is still, nevertheless, a strategic component part of Australia's military and security presence in the South Pacific although the neo-colonial relationship of yesteryear is now being successfully challenged by a rising generation of younger politicians and decision-makers. PNG-Australia diplomacy is no longer clear-cut, with the latter informing the former of their wishes: the relationship is now based more in shades of grey, where present-day PNG decision-makers are more astute than their fore-fathers and less inclined to follow the dictat of US-led initiatives channelled through compliant governments in Canberra.    

In early December PNG prime minister James Marape travelled to Australia with what was referred to as a 'heavyweight delegation of ministers' to finance a number of major development projects aimed at 'economic independence' for PNG. (1) The country won its independence from the Australian colonial administration during the mid-1970s, although political independence was accompanied by neo-colonial relations largely through Canberra
in the name of 'US interests'. The Marape administration is now challenging the status quo.

During the one-to-one talks with business leaders Marape drew attention to the problem of Bougainville, which he attributed to the failings of Australian-based business interests which did not assist local people. (2) Disputes, between local landowners, mining companies and the people of Bougainville erupted into a full-scale war in the late 1980s and resulted in the largest open cut-mine in the world being closed; the hostilities have recently been played-out with the people of Bougainville voting for independence from Port Moresby in a referendum. The matter has yet to be finally resolved.

During the early years of independence political leaders in Parliament House, Port Moresby, were keen to attract foreign expertise and investment to exploit the country's vast natural resources. The development plan was to use the returns from the joint ventures to finance the state and co-operative sectors for the benefit of local people. It never happened. To the contrary, Australian-based mining companies merely siphoned off huge returns which were paid to shareholders elsewhere.

Round after round of economic rationalism imposed on the country by international financial institutions largely controlled by the US were, furthermore, subsequently responsible for reducing PNG to a poverty-stricken country dependent upon foreign aid. Since 2019, for example, Australia has provided PNG with $1.2 billion in support.

Recent developments have also been accompanied by revelations that the population of PNG is larger than officially estimated. While official government statistics put the population at about 9.4 million, a UN study, using satellite modelling, housing data and household surveys, has found it might be as high as seventeen million. (3) The findings therefore reduce PNG's per capita income from $3230 per year, to about $1770 a year, which has been noted as 'putting Australia's closest neighbour on par with African states such as Sudan and Senegal'. (4) If the UN estimates are proved correct, PNG will be entitled to concessional loans from international financial institutions.

The effect of the economic crisis in PNG, in human terms, is not difficult to establish.

Despite PNG continuing to accommodate western mining interests, classroom sizes of 120 students in education and one medical doctor to about 10,000 people with one nurse or mid-wife for every 2,000 people, show basic services do not exist for many local people. (5) The failure to accurately calculate population totals has also created difficulties for any realistic economic modelling and forward planning.

PNG's Institute of National Affairs, furthermore, has acknowledged 'the UN population estimate reflects the situation on the ground in PNG, where unemployment and a weak state were feeding community unrest. Vast areas of the country were effectively ungoverned'. (6)
The problem is exacerbated by the country's population being divided into five main ethnic groups, which are then sub-divided into about eight hundred localised groupings. Inter-ethnic problems and violence remain commonplace. Effective governance is difficult.

The present political leaders and decision-makers in PNG have, nevertheless, used previous experiences, when dealing with Australia, as an autodidactic experience.

The Marape administration in Port Moresby used their diplomatic visit to Australia, for example, to table an ambitious economic development plan for PNG: they are seeking to replace 2.2 billion kina worth of imported foodstuffs with locally grown produce, grown in tax-free havens and 'new special economic zones' to encourage as wide a participation as possible. And if Canberra is not willing to co-operate the administration has already stated it will approach Beijing for assistance. (7)

While the US continues to focus its attention on the wider Pacific region with Partners in the Blue Pacific initiatives in June and the US-Pacific Island National Summit in September,
aimed primarily at countering China's role in the region, countries like PNG have had favourable relations with Beijing since the earliest days. PNG-China diplomacy has remained particularly strong for decades. The present Chinese ambassador in Port Moresby, sworn in last year, is the fifteenth since official diplomatic relations began in 1976!
Australia, however, has tended to use the South Pacific countries, including PNG, as buffer-type zones to protect northern approaches and so-called threats to Australia's sovereignty; the defence and security relationship is regarded as particularly sensitive for Canberra with a continuous stream of intelligence assessments about perceived threats. As the US continues to escalate diplomatic tensions with China, countries such as PNG have become more strategic for Australia's military planners, drawing both countries ever closer to real-war scenarios: it has resulted in dramas being acted out against a backcloth of shades of grey.

An announcement that PM Anthony Albanese will visit PNG in mid-January and will use it to visit Wewak 'to pay his respects at the grave of PNG's first PM Michael Somare', is a useful indication, however, of renewed favourable diplomacy; a lot of water has already passed under the bridge, nevertheless, since the time of Somare's leadership, which was marked by open optimism and a belief in Australia as the 'Mother Country'. Somare, as the Father of the PNG Nation, has remained a revered figure of a country ruthlessly exploited by the forces of international finance capital.

An official announcement from Canberra noted the high-level diplomatic meeting early next year would be to specifically 'discuss increased security co-operation'. (8)

Elsewhere, coverage of the diplomatic initiatives noted that while PNG regarded Australia as its main provider of 'security support', the country is now 'the beneficiary of significant Chinese investment for new roads and infrastructure in recent years', which are aimed, primarily, at longer-term economic development. (9)

Those long-serving Australian diplomatic officials responsible for the economic crisis now facing PNG might like to take the opportunity to ponder on some of their past initiatives and assess how they failed, and the outcome: the balance of forces, for example, is now turning. And they may also ponder on how they might rectify the chaos, some of which is of their own making from neo-colonial political expedience.

A major provincial newspaper in Australia has already reluctantly acknowledged these developments and the accompanying silent diplomacy and stated 'Australia's unchallenged  dominance in the Indo-Pacific is over forever, and Labor knows it – even if it won't say it aloud'. (10) It follows a US congressional commission's findings in 2018/19 where similar assessments found the US were no longer the dominant power in the Pacific and 'the implications for American interests and American security are severe'. (11)
 
These are important developments for the people of PNG, as they challenge traditional US-led hegemonic positions foisted on their country through Australia with independence and the accompanying neo-colonial diplomatic relations!


1.     PM's Pacific 'weak spot' warning, Australian, 5 December 2022.
2.     Ibid.
3.     Population shock puts PNG in peril, Australian, 5 December 2022; and, Editorial, PNG must put is house in order, Australian, 7 December 2022.
4.     Australian, ibid., 5 December 2022.
5.     Ibid.
6.     Australian, ibid., 7 December 2022.
7.     PNG hunts for funds from wherever it can, Australian, 6 December 2022.
8.     Albo's on a mission, The Advertiser (Adelaide), 12 December 2022.
9.     PM's PNG visit another step in our Pacific journey, The Advertiser (Adelaide), 12 December 2022.
10.   Ibid.
11.   Study: US no longer dominant power in the Pacific, Paul D. Shinkman, Information Clearing House, 22 August 2019.

 

Saturday, December 17, 2022

Respected Proletarian Revolutionary Comrade Jose Maria Sison Dies.


 Written by: Central Committee, CPA (M-L) on 17 December 2022

The Communist Party of Australia (Marxist-Leninist) joins with the entire international proletarian revolutionary movement in expressing our sadness at the passing of Comrade Jose Maria Sison, founding Chairperson of the Communist Party of the Philippines.

Comrade Sison died on Friday night at the age of 83 after a two-week confinement in a hospital in the Netherlands, where he had been living in forced exile from his own country.  His death came after a life of inspiring revolutionary service to the people.

On December 26, 1968, Joma and his comrades founded the Communist Party of the Philippines in opposition to the revisionist Lava clique which had thrown in its lot with the revisionist leadership of the Soviet Union.

The new Party, founded on the birthday of Comrade Mao Zedong, committed itself to applying the teachings of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Zedong Thought to the circumstances prevailing in the Philippines.

Using the pseudonym Amado Guerrero, in October 1969 Joma published the ground-breaking manifesto Philippine Society and Revolution on which the activities of the Party, the National Democratic Front and the New People’s Army were based. The NPA has led the longest-running and very successful People’s War under Comrade Sison’s ideological and political leadership.

In 2001, Joma established the International League of People’s Struggles (ILPS) to coordinate and support the anti-imperialist and democratic struggles of the world’s peoples. In 2020 Comrade Sison resigned as Chairperson of the ILPS although he continued to provide great ideological leadership as immediate past Chairperson.

The CPA (M-L) has confidence that the people of the Philippines will turn grief into strength and score new victories guided by the enduring legacy and inspiration of Comrade Jose Maria Sison.

Central Committee
Communist Party of Australia (Marxist-Leninist)
17 December 2022

 

Friday, December 9, 2022

Frackers walk from ruined environment.


 Written by: Nick G. on 10 December 2022

For years the anti-fracking group Lock the Gate Alliance has warned the WA government that fracking companies could go bust and force the public to pay for the environmental damage in their wake.

Unfortunately, their warnings have come true, with an Australian-registered but Chinese majority-owned company, New Standard Energy declaring bankruptcy and inability to repatriate drilling holes in the Kimberley.

The company was incorporated on 19 April 2006 as Hawk Resources Limited but changed to New Standard Energy Limited on 7 August 2008.

The company undertook onshore hydrocarbon exploration in the Canning and Carnarvon basins.

Its largest shareholder was China International Economic Huizhou Energy Investment (Beijing) Co Ltd with 32.76 per cent, followed by Zhang Xiangqian with 7.5%.  The remainder of the top ten investors are a mix of Chinese investors and institutional investors (eg Citicorp Nominees), but their shares are of the one or two per cent variety and hardly count.

New Standard Energy’s Non-Executive Chairperson was Liu Kunfang, chairman of Beijing Geology & Petroleum Technology Co., Ltd.

Its Managing Director was Liu Xiaofeng, Chief Geologist of Huizhou Energy Investment (Beijing) Co., Ltd.

A Non-Executive Director until her death from a car crash in 2021 was Lin Xiaoning. Ms Lin was the Managing Director of Goldfields Oil and Gas Pty Ltd. She established her own business, Shenzhen Huai Ri Real Estate Agent and Evaluation Company. She was also a director of Ocean Sincere and Australia Trailcraft Boats.

New Standard Energy started out strongly, partnering with US giant ConocoPhillips to explore the onshore region for what it hoped was a 40-billion-barrel oil resource. 

In 2012 when two wells, Nicolay-1 and Gibb Maiitland-1, came up dry ConocoPhillips left the project handing decommissioning liabilities to New Standard.
From then on, the company new it was in trouble. Its Directors eventually worked for several years without payment as the company’s cash reserves disappeared into the Kimberley exploration holes.

Over recent years the company has been issued multiple orders by the WA government to rehabilitate its failed oil operation. It has been estimated that the cost of abandonment, for five wells, an airfield and other infrastructure, could reach in the region of tens of millions of dollars.

Those costs and environmental rehabilitation now fall to the WA government.

Lock the Gate Alliance WA spokesperson Simone Van Hattem said “Fracking is a high-cost operation, particularly in areas as remote as the Kimberley. It’s no surprise New Standard Energy has gone bust with little cash left to clean up its mess.”

Unlike the mining industry, there are no legislative requirements on oil and gas explorers to remediate country they have drilled. 

And a company set up and run by foreign capitalists, regardless of their nationality, is one step further removed from having to take responsibility for rehabilitating damaged country.

Australian governments have always proven to be reluctant to exercise sovereignty over multinational investors.  They run scared of their power and influence and, unwilling to develop a capacity within the Australian state for self-reliant use of our resources, they hand them over as fast as they can to foreign multinationals.

The answer, ultimately, has to be economic and political independence, and that can only be achieved and sustained in a socialist Australia.

 

Human Rights and the fight for Peace

 

(Above: original image by Diego Mir on Flickr Creative Commons)

Written by: Contributed

The right to live in peace is a fundamental human right. It is not merely the absence of war, but the opportunity for all people to live a full and fruitful life.

This means security of work, food, shelter, healthcare, education and access to factual information. It means genuine equality and opportunity regardless of race, gender, age, religion, sexual orientation, language, disability or occupation. The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights carried by the General Assembly in 1948 enshrined these universal rights.

Standing in the way of this is the class system of modern capitalism, developed to its higher stage of imperialism especially in the USA, but also in Europe (Germany, France) and now the formally socialist countries of Russia and China, each with its sphere of influence or domination over other economies. They both collude and compete with each other, manipulating the global economy, global finances and world trade in the scramble for resources and markets on behalf of the giant corporations, multinationals and oligarchs.  

Between them, these imperialist blocs have virtually completed the territorial division of the world into their competing spheres of influence. They can only continue to expand by taking over a competitor’s sphere of influence and seizing access to new resources and markets, or by denying them to others. Hence the devastating war in Ukraine, caught between the eastward thrust of US-NATO and Russia's attempt to resist this and then to restore Ukraine under its own influence.

US imperialism has been the most dominant imperialist force. Since the Korean War and the war in Vietnam, it has fomented and led wars in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan and elsewhere, together with a history of coups, financial crises, sabotage, sanctions and ethnic divisions, leaving famine, chaos and repression in its wake. It is the number one enemy of peace, the main opponent of nuclear disarmament, the main sponsor of human rights abuses such as in Palestine and the Philippines. 

But its hegemony is now being challenged by China in particular, with its expansive Belt and Road penetration of other economies in Asia, Africa and the Pacific. China has been steadily increasing its financial and political influence. (Followed by other developing economies such as Brazil and India) 

Hence the rising tension and war preparations by US imperialism in the Pacific region, aimed at threatening nuclear war on China from regional military bases, (Guam, Japan, South Korea, Australia) and the potential to control China’s access to sea lanes and deeper waters. Provocative actions like military exercises and navy manoeuvres in the South China Sea, or using Taiwan as a proxy, may very well become triggers for war. 

This is the global context in which the working people of the world must struggle to assert their human rights, including the right to live in a peaceful world. They cannot rely on the imperialist/capitalist class to provide or respect their human rights to peace, to food, shelter, healthcare, education, and cultural and social development. They fight for these rights. They will fight to oppose imperialist war where the winners are the armament makers and fossil fuel monopolies and the losers are working people on all sides.

We stand on the side of struggles against military repression. We support the current fierce struggles for peace with justice in the Philippines, Palestine, the Kurdish lands, West Papua and Myanmar.   

The masses of workers, peasants and oppressed peoples learn that their rights are only as good as their struggle and have to be fought over again and again. In the course of struggles against exploitation, repression, devastation of their communities and the natural environment, they are coming to the awareness that the system of greed-based imperialism must be smashed and replaced by socialism which empowers and respects working people and can roll back the other threat of climate crisis.

 

Wednesday, December 7, 2022

AUSMIN 2022: Putting us further under the US thumb.

 

State Department photo by Ron Przysucha/ Public Domain

Written by: Nick G. on 7 December 2022

The annual meeting of US and Australian Ministers of Defence and Foreign Policy (AUSMIN) concluded with a Joint Statement on Australian-US Ministerial Consultations.

The document emphasises the continuing subordination of Australian sovereignty to US imperialism.

It also exposes Labor Ministers Penny Wong and Richard Marles as agents of influence of a foreign power, the US. It is not going too far to label them as traitors to the cause of an independent and peaceful Australia.

The document begins by saying that both sides want “a stable, rules-based international order where differences are resolved peacefully and without coercion, and where states cooperate transparently to address shared challenges.” 

That so-called order is one that is created by US imperialism to serve its own interests. It is certainly not an order that has been developed through the United Nations. The US continually flouts decisions of the UN and acts illegally, in defiance of UN decisions whenever it wants to. It does so whenever a nation or a people tries to elevate its differences with US imperialism to active struggle against it, and then it uses maximum coercion to crush them. It does not respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of other nations. It does not observe the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. It is a rogue nation and a global hegemon.

The document says the US and Australia want “to ensure an Indo-Pacific region that is free, open, stable, peaceful, prosperous, and respectful of sovereignty.” Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam might beg to differ. They have expressed concerns that Australia is adding to regional tensions, and ignoring or undermining ASEAN’s centrality to regional decision-making.

The document pledged to further expand US imperialism’s military presence in Australia. It said “Australia and the United States would continue the rotational presence of U.S. capabilities in Australia, across air, land, and maritime domains. This would include U.S. Bomber Task Force rotations, fighters, and future rotations of U.S. Navy and U.S. Army capabilities.” Further, they would “identify priority locations in Australia to support enhanced U.S. force posture with associated infrastructure, including runway improvements, parking aprons, fuel infrastructure, explosive ordnance storage infrastructure, and facilities to support the workforce.”

They decided to “preposition stores, munitions, and fuel in support of U.S. capabilities in Australia and to demonstrate logistics interoperability through joint exercises…(and) expand locations for U.S. Army and U.S. Marine Corps forces, to enable exercises, activities, and further opportunities for regional engagement.”

It is quite obvious that US imperialism thinks it can do whatever it likes here without the Australian people having any say in the matter.  

It is quite obvious that Wong and Marles will happily allow US imperialism to do whatever it likes here without the Australian people having any say in the matter.  

In reference to AUKUS, they said the they were “developing the optimal pathway for Australia to acquire a conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarine capability at the earliest date possible.”

That is, we are still on track to pay the US $171 billion for it to have eight more nuclear-powered submarines fully embedded within its Navy, completely interoperable with other US submarines and to have them patrolling the seas around China, US imperialism’s global rival.

This decision again highlights the Australian ruling class’s willing acquiescence in US war plans at great cost to the Australian people.

According to former submariner and senator, Rex Patrick, government is captured by the Defence Department which is in turn captured by the US. 

“If our objective is to be a deputy sheriff to the US, as the 51st state of the Union, then eight nuclear submarines is the answer.

“If our objective is ‘‘defence of Australia’’…then 20 AIP boats is the answer.”

AIP refers to air-independent propulsion, which enables a non-nuclear propelled submarine to operate without access to atmospheric oxygen (by surfacing or using a snorkel). They are quieter than nuclear-powered submarines and can be highly effective in coastal operations and pose a significant threat to less-stealthy and less-maneuverable nuclear submarines.

They have also been proposed by Sub-Imperial Australia author and former Australian military intelligence analyst Clinton Fernandes. 

He says “We could buy 20 ultra-quiet, air-independent propulsion submarines for $30 billion and they would be perfectly suited to our interests. Instead we are talking about buying eight – not twenty, but just eight – boats for $171 billion.”

By my maths, that’s $141 billion that is being gifted to US imperialism by Marles and Wong, who, like Morrison and Dutton before them, are happy to roll over and have their tummies tickled by the owners of Their Master’s Voice.

We should not be reluctant to call out grovellers like Marles and Wong. 

Liberal and Labor are national disgraces.

The Australian people will wake up to their treachery and reject being tied to the aggressive war chariot of US imperialism.

For an independent and socialist Australia!

Tuesday, December 6, 2022

Free Violet Coco!

 

(Above: Original photo"JMP_4925 XR" by Julian Meehan is licensed under CC BY 2.0.)

Written by: Nick G. on 6 December 2022

Extinction Rebellion activist Violet Coco has been jailed for 15 months, with a non-parole period of eight months, for stopping traffic in Sydney to protest against climate change.

Her sentence is so draconian that UN Human Rights Watch has found that authorities in the Australian state of New South Wales (NSW) are disproportionately punishing climate protesters in violation of their basic rights to peaceful protest. Their research has shown that magistrates in NSW have been imposing harsh penalties and bail conditions on climate protesters that violate basic rights.

NSW has some of the most draconian anti-protest laws in the country.  This is probably one of the reasons Sydney has been chosen to host the Quad meeting in late May early June next year which will be attended by Quad heads of states, including Biden with dozens of his security agents and vehicles.  Expect parts of Sydney to be off limits to the public and the police out in full force, - helicopters and drones over many parts of Sydney, police everywhere, etc.

Victoria is not far behind with anti-protest laws, particularly against environmentalists campaigning to protect old growth forests from logging in the state.  

Many of these anti-protest laws and increasing powers to police and army were brought in during Covid.  In spite of promising that these laws and increases in powers to police and the army were only temporary measures for the duration of Covid lock downs, they are still on the books, and now being used against environmentalists and others - as warned by many democratic rights and civil liberties campaigners and lawyers.

Violet’s sentence -for stopping a truck on Sydney Harbour bridge – is precisely the outcome demanded by current Leader of the Opposition, Peter Dutton, when in 2019, as then Home Affairs Minister, he attacked Extinction Rebellion protestors in Brisbane. He called for indefinite prison sentences (“jailed until their behaviour changes”) and the cancellation of any welfare payments. He also urged people to “surveil the protesters and distribute their images.” Citizens should name and shame them, he said.

During the Howard years, coercive legislation became the norm under the guise of combatting terrorism.

Stuart Rees OAM, Professor Emeritus, at the University of Sydney warned in 2021: “In the six years after 9/11, the Howard government pushed through a new anti-terrorist statute almost every seven weeks. Constitutional lawyer George Williams reveals that 60 counter terrorism laws have included provision for warrantless searches, the banning of organisations, the secret detention and interrogation of non-suspected citizens by ASIO. Barrister Greg Barns has recorded the ACT Ombudsman’s judgement that between 2015 and 2019, the Australian Federal Police accessed location information about individuals 1700 times but on only nine occasions did they comply with the law.”

Extinction Rebellion activists may inconvenience people from time to time by their tactics, but they are not terrorists. Laws punishing them as severely as Violet Coco has been must be torn up. 

Extinction Rebellion is pursuing the same objective as those who participated in the great Moratorium demonstrations against the US war of aggression in Vietnam. The Moratoriums sought to “Stop the Country, to Stop the War”. Extinction Rebellion seeks to “Stop the City to Save the Planet”.

Coco has courageously thrown down the gauntlet to the powers that be, declaring:

"In light of the urgency of the situation, I feel I have to do the most effective thing in bringing about political change. 

History has shown that at times of great crisis, when regular political procedure has proven incapable of enacting justice, it falls to ordinary people taking a stand to bring about change through civil disobedience. 

Civil disobedience in the form of strikes, blockades, marches and occupations have played a crucial role in the development of democracy, and helped to secure precious rights here and around the world - including women’s suffrage, 8-hour working days, racial legal equality and environmental protections."

Remove oppressive laws!
Support the right to protest!
Free Violet Coco!

Monday, December 5, 2022

CPA (M-L) responds to misrepresentation by the CPA


 Written by: Central Committee, CPA (M-L) on 6 December 2022

We are making public here several pieces of correspondence sent by us to the General Secretary of the CPA, to its President, and to its general office.

The correspondence relates to misrepresentations of policies and practices adopted by our Party in a previous era. By implication, they are also directed at our current policies and practices.

We acknowledge ideological, political and organisational differences between ourselves and the CPA. We have sought to put those to one side, and to work cooperatively with both the CPA and the other party that has the word “Communist” in its name, the ACP.

We will continue to do so.  However, we cannot let misrepresentation of our policies and practices go unanswered.

What follows is the email sent to the CPA on November 18, and the outcome that their refusal to reply has made necessary, namely, our correction of the misrepresentation.

 

To the Communist Party of Australia,

Comrades,

You recently assisted us with our enquiry about copyright on images, for which we thank you. However, we were disappointed to see in your latest Australian Marxist Review references to our Party which are incorrect.

Those statements are in a public document of your Party.

We have written a reply which we hope clarifies what has been said.

We ask that our reply be made public by you in the issue of the Guardian on 5 December 2022. We will publish our letter to you on our website on 6 December thanking you for its publication and expressing our support for continued cooperation between our Parties.

Our letter is attached.

With thanks,

Nick G.

Chairperson, Central Committee

Communist Party of Australia (Marxist-Leninist)

18 November 2022

………………………….

Dear Comrades, 

In the most recent copy of Australian Marxist Review, you republish a 1979 article by the late Alan Miller together with an introduction that refers to the Communist Party of Australia (Marxist-Leninist).

The introduction alleges that “the CPA (M-L) mechanically applied ideas from the Chinese revolution” that led to support for Australian nationalism, class collaboration and “the subordination of the working class to capital during the accords in the 1980s”.

You also state that the CPA (M-L) adopted “more nationalist positions that led to them supporting the liberal Fraser government at the time.”

Comrades, it is true that we have a difference of opinion over whether the defining characteristic of monopoly capitalism in Australia is that, despite its formal independence, Australia is under the control of US imperialism, or whether it is an imperialist power in its own right.

Our view is the former, as a consequence of which we do seek to exploit contradictions between US imperialism and our rather small and insignificant national bourgeoisie. By national bourgeoisie we are not referring to Gina Rinehart or Twiggy Forrest’s monopolist corporations, which are largely funded by foreign banks. Nor BHP which has long been foreign controlled, like most of the Business Council of Australia member corporations that hold the commanding heights of our economy. 

And when Australian-owned businesses are in conflict with the working class, we support the latter as we did in the Dollar Sweets and Mudginberri disputes during those Accord years.

Our view on the national bourgeoisie is not the same as adopting a position of bourgeois nationalism. It expresses the anti-imperialism of the working class which in turn arises from our rejection of capitalism.

You do not offer any examples of our class collaboration and acceptance of the Accords. Or perhaps our class collaboration was on display when our comrades were leading magnificent struggles such as the Ford Broadmeadows strike and the Chrysler Rank and File struggle, or struggles in the construction and other industries. Comrade Norm Gallagher (Federal Secretary of the Builders Labourers Federation and ACTU Executive member) rejected the social democratic concept of “consensus” that underlay the Accords with his speech at the 1983 Economic Summit where he said “I must emphatically reject a consensus that is all one way against wages, and insists on a system that reduces real wages.” 

Or maybe our January 1989 denunciation of ACTU leaders Crean and Kelty as being “in bed with the bosses” was class collaboration. We denounced their Accord, Accord Mark II and the two-tier system and called for “independent, militant action on the job (to) force reluctant trade union officials to join the fight.” Denunciation of the Accords runs through all of our publications of that period.

CPA (M-L) members working in unions vigorously denounced and fought against the Accord and the sell-out union leaderships. For this they were threatened with expulsion from their unions by the CPA of that time and the union leaderships pushing the Accord on the working class.  Some of our member workers were black-listed and threatened by the CPA leadership of some unions (Carmichael and others) that they would never find work in their industries.  These threats would not have emanated if we were “subordinating the working class to capital during the accords in the 1980s”! 

We have referred to it as “the CPA of that time” because it was then the party of the Aarons, Taft, Carmichael revisionists who eventually took their anti-Communism to its logical conclusion and disbanded their own party. The forerunners of your present CPA had left in 1971 and set up the Socialist Party of Australia. As we remember it, the SPA was divided over the Accord: Pat Clancy, SPA President and head of the Building Workers Industrial Union supported the Accord. This was one of the reasons he was forced to step down from leadership of the SPA in 1983 and then left the SPA. Others in the SPA, and notably veteran Communist Jack McPhillips, were opposed to the Accord. In 1985, McPhillips published an excellent analysis of the Accord, criticising those like Clancy, who had supported it, and giving qualified support to others, like CPA (M-L) and BLF stalwart John Cummins, who had struggled against it.

You refer to our support of the Fraser government. This is incorrect. We openly acknowledged that Fraser was more opposed to Soviet social-imperialism than Whitlam had been, but we denounced US imperialism’s semi-fascist coup that had brought him to office as in our April 1976 booklet Defeat Fraser’s New Fascism: People’s Alternative. We wrote: “In his international policy, Fraser is opposed to Soviet social-imperialism. In that respect, he is correct. Internally he pursues a fascist policy, the logical continuation of the semi-fascist coup of October, November, December 1975. To this fascism, the people are implacably opposed.”

As for “mechanically applying ideas developed during the Chinese revolution”, our party’s first publication in 1965, E.F. Hill’s Looking Backward, Looking Forward: Revolutionary Socialist Politics against Trade Union and Parliamentary Politics, analysed in detail specifically Australian history and politics, using a Marxist-Leninist lens. Chinese politics are barely mentioned. It was all about what we face here in a totally different context to China or the Soviet Union. 
Comrades, it is disappointing to see such careless presentation of our position. Our Parties cooperated in 2017 to issue a joint celebration of the Great October Socialist Revolution, we have shared speakers’ platforms, and indeed, we have just recently sent you an invitation to make a joint Parties’ statement on May Day 2023. 

We have always held that so long as our differences are acknowledged, they can be put to one side when our cooperation and unity assist the development of the working class as its own independent political force.

Acknowledgement of differences should not allow for misrepresentation of each other’s views.

Yours in unity

Nick G.

Chairperson, Central Committee,

Communist Party of Australia (Marxist-Leninist).

18 November 2022