War and deficits loom over G-7 meeting

It could be likened to an annual meeting of the Cosa Nostra families. It's called the Group of Seven. Leaders of the seven richest capitalist countries in the world meet to exchange proposals for solving their global problems.

The meetings, which began in 1974, bring together the U.S., Britain, France, Germany, Japan, Italy and Canada. Russia has also been in attendance since 1994, though not as a full member. In addition to gatherings of heads of state and top government officials, G-7 meetings of foreign ministers and ad hoc ministerial meetings are held during the year.

This year, at a meeting of G-7 finance ministers held in London early in Feb ruary, China, India, South Africa and Brazil were invited to observe the main proceedings.

They got a firsthand look at the machinations of the imperialist thieves. For example, China is under tremendous pressure from the U.S. to revaluate its currency so as to reduce its favorable trade balance. Lurking under the surface of the meeting was an atmosphere of tension and conflict among the imperialist families, due primarily to the U.S. policy of imperialist wars and intractable debt.

The agenda for the two-day meeting included trade deficits, the U.S. federal budget, the weakness of the dollar and China's linkage to the dollar. U.S. officials are very afraid that foreign central banks and private investors in Europe and Asia may decide to stop bankrolling the enormous U.S. debt.

The fear of a trade war was apparent. Alan Greenspan, chairperson of the Fed eral Reserve Board and President George W. Bush's monetary mouthpiece, opened up this critical issue. Speaking like a Mafia leader to the exclusive group of central bankers, he warned that the U.S. intended to reduce its current humon gous account deficit by flooding their markets with cheap U.S. goods and services to reduce a $60-billion trade imbalance. It was obvious to his counterparts that Greenspan was talking about a cheap dollar that bodes well for future U.S. exports. He indicated that the huge U.S. market for imports will be slowing down.

This is bad news for the G-7 family members and the 25-member European Union, the world's largest economy, whose members rely on enormous U.S. markets for their economic growth. Their economies have slowed precipitously to a less than 2-percent growth rate in 2004.

Mervyn King, governor of the Bank of England, warned the U.S. delegation about the feelings of the other G-7 members. "Reflecting the concerns of the global financial community," he said, "the international monetary system could be threatened by persistent deficits of the United States and the accumulation of vast dollar assets by Asian central banks." (New York Times, Feb. 5)

Imperialist thieves fall out

The G-7 meeting revealed differences between the Bush administration and Britain, its only imperialist ally at the London gathering. Washington is totally dependent on Britain in the Iraq war, which is deep in a quagmire. Ignoring the concerns of Prime Minister Tony Blair's government was only one of the issues that stirred up friction. The G-7 hoped they would find unity for a British/ French proposal on financing relief for Africa and poorer countries elsewhere.

It didn't happen. The U.S. delegation rejected a proposal for a $50-billion aid package to Africa, with the full knowledge that at least 2 million children there will die before the next ministerial meeting in July. This same administration, of course, had no problem asking Congress for $80 billion, to add to the $200 billion already allocated to finance the occupation of pillage and plunder in Iraq.

Nelson Mandela, former president of South Africa who attended the G-7, was outraged by the U.S. position. He reflected the growing protests of the African masses when he denounced the G-7 for quibbling over the aid. Mandela "compared the fight against poverty to the battles against slavery and apartheid." (New York Times, Feb. 6)

The U.S. also has sharp differences with Britain and France over who will control the funding and finances of under deve loped countries as they become involved in the international financial markets. They disagree on how to pursue a 100-percent write-off by 2009 of the $70 billion owed to transnational capitalist investors and institutions like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). They did find common ground on a demand that a debt write-off for each of the 37 poorest countries required approval, on a case-by-case basis, by the IMF and the World Bank--making it a certainty that these econo mies would be restructured to suit the G-7 imperialists.

The-100 percent write-off promises are a hoax, an exercise in imperialist deception, to create the image of compassion. Many of the poorest countries have already cancelled or defaulted on their debt. Demonstrations and protests of millions of oppressed workers plagued by hunger, poverty and disease have reached the ears of the imperialists. Land seizures are taking place in Africa and Latin America.

Bush's 'compassionate
conservatism'

Greenspan assured the G-7 that the Bush administration would restrain domestic spending--except for military hardware and "homeland security"--to offset its $400-billion budget deficit. The proposed cuts for the 2006 fiscal year will be borne by the workers, the oppressed and poor. From health care to food stamps, from Medicaid to child care, the Bush administration is slashing funds in every entitlement program. It will be a disaster for state and city funding throughout the country.

Washington is consolidating 18 community development programs into two, cuts that will impact on the poorest and most oppressed sector of the people, already plagued by double-digit unemployment. A record 1,625,208 families sought bankruptcy in 2003. That rose by 2.7 percent by midyear of 2004--a time of frenzied borrowing and 1-percent interest rates.

The Labor Department reported a measly new 146,000 jobs for January and revised downward the job total by 56,000 for November/December 2004. At least 200,000 jobs are necessary each month to absorb new job seekers--mainly youth of color--trying to find work. The long-time unemployed have dropped out of the statistics, rightfully discouraged by the lack of decent jobs. The total is in the millions. What's available are part-time and temporary work in the lower-paid service industries, for a non-union minimum wage.

Inflation has risen faster than wages for those fortunate to have jobs, and consumer spending, which makes up two-thirds of the Gross Domestic Pro duct, is slowing down. Manu facturers shed jobs for the fourth month in a row and the average work week slipped to 33.7 hours a week. Idle plant capacity hovers around 25 percent.

In human terms, all these facts and figures spell disaster and tragedy for a growing unemployed army. Exploited as well is a low-paid, service-oriented workforce of mainly women and oppres sed nationalities who are a pink slip away from unemployment.

While the AFL-CIO leaders, representing over 13 million members, are mired in internal debates, there is a desperate need for unified action. On March 19, the second anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, marches and rallies around the country and abroad will take place. It will be a united response to the death and destruction visited on the Iraqi people--over 100,000 thousand dead and injured--and to the deaths of over 1,400 GIs and tens of thousands more maimed and injured.

And the U.S. prize of seizing Iraqi oil and resources is still out of reach.

No one can dispute that this war is draining money and resources that could go to desperately needed social services, to rebuilding the decaying infrastructure, and to providing jobs, health care, housing and education. All this has become all too obvious to those who labor and create the wealth of the monopoly capitalists.

It's time for the organized labor movement to call for an end to the endless occupation, and join the growing movement to bring the troops home now. The stage has been set for building a movement free of the constraints and conspiratorial machinations of Wall Street and the White House. It's time the AFL-CIO leaders put aside their debates over how to structure the labor movement and recognize that there are forces and leadership, particularly in the movement that represents people of color, that are organized and prepared to struggle. The Million Worker Movement is one example.

As the imperialist empire reveals its frailties and becomes more isolated, a bitter competition intensifies within its own class, globally and at home. The time is ripe for an independent classwide strike--one that would organize workers and oppressed to withhold their labor for a powerful march on Wash ing ton, organized in conjunction with like-minded organizations here and worldwide. As in all profound social change, the stirrings will begin from below.