Re: [Marxism] Re: Australian troops back in East Timor

["Michael Karadjis" <mkaradjis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Greg Adler wrote:
> I would argue that amongst the "negative implications" of the
> "successful" and left-sponsored intervention in East Timor in 1999 was
> the strengthening of the Howard government's hand when it joined the
> coalition of the killing in invading Iraq in 2003.

Tom O'Lincoln wrote:
> So there is quite a bit of of evidence backing up what is surely
common
> sense: a popular military intervention abroad ? presenting itself as
> liberation and not just accepted but DEMANDED by most of the left,
from
> the unions through to the DSP ? is going to legitimise militarism. It
> would be strange if it didn?t.

Nice theories. Why keep repeating them when they so obviously crash
against the rock of hard reality?

Did John Howard need the "legitimisation" of East Timor to join the
invasion of Iraq in 2003? The how do we explain that the Australian
government joined the imperialist attack on Iraq in 1991, in which up to
200,000 people were slaughtered, and following this, the Australian navy
remained in the Gulf right throughout the 1990s participating in the
embargo against Iraq which killed another million or so people? All long
before Timor. It would appear to me that 2003 was simple follow on.

No, in fact there was one important difference. During the 1991
aggression, attempts to get people out in the streets demonstrating
drew, what, a few tens of thousands at the height of nthe movement, if
that (I actually think we were exaggeraitng at the time, because at that
time the left really needed to boost morale). Attempts at actions
against the blockade throughout the 1990s amounted to a few film
showings with a few dozen people, and maybe a couple of pickets.
However, the movement against the invasion in 2003 brought over a
million into the steeets, 500,000 in Sydney, the largest demonstrations
in Australia's history (or thereabouts).

Thus, if one were to ignore other factors, the empirical evidence might
suggest that there was far greater opposition to military adventures in
Australia in the aftermath of the Timor intervention. Of course, I'm not
arguing any causality here, simply pointing out the absursity of  the
opposite argument.

If you want to show the Timor intervention legitimised militarism in
theneyes of the Australian masses, come up with the goods.

> ________________________________________________
> YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
> Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Set your options at:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism
>



________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism