European Union:
6th Conference of European Anti-Capitalist Left in Athens:
An intermediary stage before new battles


François Vercammen*

One idea is central to the Conferences of the European Anti-Capitalist Left -
the advance towards a radical new political force is linked to socio-political
experiences of great breadth. These, and not ideological debates, are what
will lead to realignment and political convergence, the accumulation of
forces, the sinking of roots in society, as well as the development of a
platform which speaks to the masses and to youth.
From this viewpoint, 2003 has certainly been eventful, with a war whose
political impact has been felt across the planet, followed by a spectacular
remobilization of labour in several European countries around a common
objective.
Paradoxically, this powerful centripetal dynamic has not yet produced, at this
intermediary stage, a simplification and a strengthening of analytical and
tactical conclusions, nor a robust political and organizational impetus. The
Conference in Athens, a prelude to new mobilizations in Thessalonika, took
place too soon (early June) to grasp fully the impact.

The anti-war movement after the war
The point of departure has undoubtedly been the role of the powerful
international anti-war movement. In Europe, its point of departure was the
European Social Forum in Florence - the political strength won through an
immense debate, and a million strong demonstration. The initiative came
entirely from the radical forces - political and social. That others joined in
- from social democracy to the Pope - is still to the credit of these forces;
at the head of these broader unitary fronts, they exerted a veritable hegemony
in several countries, notably Italy and Spain, or, as in Britain, put the
Blair government in difficulty and shook the Labour Party. Even in countries
like France, Germany and Belgium, the governments, opposed to the Bush-Blair
line, did not succeed in creating a "sacred union" or demobilizing the
occupation of the streets and cities. You have to go back 30 years to find
such a breadth of mass mobilization, such a will to impose on the dominant
classes, such a situation of outflanking of the reformist apparatuses. And it
is certain that the political, organizational and personal relations born in
this period will be consolidated, ready to resurge at the next opportunity.
However, this favorable assessment is counterbalanced by three facts. First,
the movement did not succeed in stopping the war, while the maximum of
favorable conditions were met - mobilization from below, contradictions
between great powers, the paralysis of "neutral" international institutions,
the ideological and practical isolation of US imperialism. This factor of
setback has generated some mixed feelings among the masses ("who won?" "who is
strongest?"). The defeat of the Iraqi army (almost) without a fight fed this
impression of "unstoppable power". Bush tends to strengthen it by threats to
North Korea, Syria, Iran, and his acts in Palestine. Secondly, there are the
contradictions inside the Atlantic bloc which were very apparent during the
war and surprised not a few. And they have not gone away. They will henceforth
mark European societies. The European Union (EU) has drawn the conclusion (at
its Summit in Thessalonika) in the line of Solana; link up with US policy
"against international terrorism", but at the same time reject a unipolar
world (dominated by the USA) and adopt a Constitution which establishes a
supranational state reflecting the economic power of the EU. Thirdly, the
enormous anti-war wave has not clearly benefited the parties that were at the
head of it at the recent national elections, notably where it was strongest,
in Italy and Spain. The PRC in Italy, the party of the movement, did not
gather the fruits of the very important and very visible role it played. The
Italian left progressed overall (in percentage terms), but Berlusconi was not
really punished. In Spain, Aznar's vote held up; the United Left (IU)
progressed a little, avoiding a predicted collapse, but the PSOE made few
inroads into the electorate of the right.
These three points raise a debate, and this will not lead automatically to a
consensus.
The roadmap (of the quartet: USA, EU, UN, Russia) seeks to isolate and crush
the Palestinian people - who need great solidarity in a complex
diplomatic-political situation. The US occupation of Iraq, increasingly
problematic and insupportable, will demonstrate without doubt that the "easy
victory" was only provisional. Will the main imperialist countries, who played
at "reconciliation" in Evian at the G8, be capable of finding a common
strategy before the Middle Eastern quagmire?

The EU's offensive
But what will certainly weigh on the European political situation is the long
offensive - from September 2003 to June 2004 - by the EU to pass to a new
stage - creating a supranational state and winning sufficient popular
legitimacy. The real nature of the operation will be clear - anti-democratic,
anti-social, militarist. But that will not mean that the debate will also be
clear.
For two reasons. Before a choice as fundamental as this, which affects all the
mechanisms of stability and regulation of European capitalism, all manner of
conservative and legitimist reflexes will come into play. The pressure to say
"yes" to the draft Constitution will be enormous. The choice will affect the
future of political parties and personal careers. All the tricks in vogue
since the beginning of European unification will reappear: the "lesser evil";
the possibility of amending the texts in the future; the argument that "you
have to choose sides"; fear of mixing one's vote with the nationalist
right/far right; standing together against the Americans, avoiding a crisis of
the EU which would be a catastrophe; and so on. There is no doubt that
European social democracy will be aligned - in fact it is already, through its
collaboration in the Convention (which has been preparing the draft of the
Constitution for more than a year).
Even in some CPs, up to and including forces involved in the ESF, positions
supportive of voting for the Constitution - "critical" of course - could
multiply. On the other hand, a nationalist left (Greek and Portuguese CPs, the
Chevènement current in France, a mass of small Maoist and/or Stalinist
parties) will also manifest itself, which rejects the EU in the name of the
defence of national sovereignty (and thus the bourgeois state).
Political clarification will be a complicated process. It will initially
create more confusion than clarity.
The European anti-capitalist left faces the challenge of being resolutely
opposed to the EU and resolutely pro-European, in favour of another Europe.
Whereas the confrontation with the "nationalist left" will be rather simple,
indeed caricatural, the debate with the pro-EU "left currents" will be
altogether more difficult. For this debate will be less ideological-abstract
and clearly more political; it will not suffice to develop the contours and
general perspective of another Europe opposed to nationalist withdrawal.
Regulations and standards drawn up and controlled by the EU intervene
increasingly in the everyday life of European citizens. Directly and
indirectly, they influence increasingly the concrete conditions of the class
struggle. Without a "European" formulation of partial demands, a European
comprehension of state mechanisms, a global European political perspective, a
European workers' and social movement, the increasingly numerous militant
layers and those who are increasingly concerned will not be won to our
alternative. The acceleration and deepening of the establishment of the
bourgeois-imperialist state that the EU represents offers an opportunity to
the organizations of the anti-capitalist left.

Employers' offensive, workers' counter-offensive
As was predictable, hardly had the Iraqi war ended when the European
governments went on the offensive on the social front. That goes in particular
for those who cultivated their popularity on the backs of anti-Americanism.
They have had a strategy since the EU summit in Lisbon (March 2000) and a
green light to attack pensions (Barcelona summit, March 2002). The level of
European harmonization on the employers' side is striking. This time the
response of the working class has also been harmonized: Austria, Germany,
France (and then Portugal, Spain, Italy, and Britain, with partial but very
tough struggles) have been shaken by general strikes.
The working class has once again occupied the forefront of the political
scene. This combativity has surprised the bourgeoisie, which had begun to
believe its own ideology about the "disappearance" of the world of labour and
the left. A rule has been reestablished - providing the right conditions are
met, workers engage energetically and in great numbers in struggles of great
breadth. It proves that neoliberal policies remain massively unpopular, even
if past defeats have left traces of lassitude and skepticism. Strikes retain a
strong legitimacy among the people, not withstanding the media hysteria.
Moreover, as the struggles of the Italian metalworkers in Spring 2001
announced and the recent strikes of teachers in France have confirmed, a new
militant generation is being born. This amounts then to a very significant
change, as much in terms of the ideological climate as the reactivation of the
trade union movement and the inter-class relationship of forces.
Nonetheless, this revival remains contradictory. It is only beginning. It is
directly threatened by the brutality of the right wing governments and the
employers who will attempt to strangle it at birth.
The level of activity is higher than ever in the cycle that is beginning.
Austria has been the scene of the biggest general strike (24 hours) since the
war (1 million out of 3 million workers!). In Italy, there has been strike
activity for almost two years; millions of workers have on several occasions
occupied the streets both for political objectives (the war) and for their own
demands. In France, the recent "creeping general strike" with millions of
workers in the street has been in an impressive succession of "days of action"
the biggest action since May 1968.
On the other hand, this enormous activity is not enough to win. In Austria,
the right wing government has momentarily drawn back. It is difficult for a
regime that includes the semi-fascist FPÖ to attack the power of the trade
union bureaucracy. But in France and Italy - where the counter-offensive of
the workers is tough - the Berlusconi and Chirac-Raffarin governments are not
giving way. On the contrary, in the autumn they intend to pursue their
anti-social offensive against the gains built up by the workers throughout the
20th century. The goal is clear - to weaken the unions, demoralize the
workers, increase competitivity. A sign that the European bourgeoisies,
supported by the EU, are stepping on the gas; Schröder's "red-green"
government has launched an attack on all fronts (pensions, health, conditions
of hiring and firing, unemployment benefits and so on), generating the biggest
crisis in the German trade union movement since the end of the Second World
War. And Germany had been "lagging behind" on the European neoliberal
timetable.
Thus at this time of remobilization we can also feel the impact of the defeats
of the last 20 years on the cohesion of the workers' and trade union movement.
We need to rebuild social resistance and reorganize an active and democratic
trade union movement. We will see in the months to come what will be the
contribution of the movement for global justice, in particular the European
Social Forum (ESF) and the national social forums, to this sharpening of
conflict between employers and workers.

Social democracy's miserable comeback
Social democracy has played an active and unsavoury role in this setback, in
breaking the common base of social rights and reducing the weight of the trade
union movement. It has itself paid a strong price for its heated support for
neoliberal policies, weakening its parliamentary base and dilapidating its
previous political cohesion. If a return to a "classic" programme
(Keynesianism, public services, social security, standard of living) is
completely excluded, its return to government is not.
It is a perverse situation, but in the absence of a genuinely left political
force, kicking out the right wing implies the return of the neoliberal left,
lacking any trace of an alternative programme: the Olive Tree and the Left
Democrats (DS) in Italy, the PSOE in Spain and the PS in France. It is an
unhappy vista from all viewpoints; first, because the result will be a
neoliberal policy hardly different from its predecessors; then, this
neoliberal left will probably need political support in Italy (PRC), Spain
(IU) and France (PCF+Greens) to form a parliamentary majority. The poverty of
the social democrats could lead to a lamentable confusion in some Communist
Parties. Already the German PDS, as junior partner to the SPD inside
administrations of the Länder of Berlin and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern have
applied a brutal austerity policy, doubtless in the hope of ultimately serving
in the federal government. Decidedly, the disaster of the PCF, after the
plural left government, has not been assimilated, even in the PCF.

Intermediary stage, new battles
The situation today is paradoxical; there is an obvious gap between the
enormity of the historic intervention of the masses on the political and
social terrain on the world scale on the one hand, and on the other it has not
yet, at this stage, affected strongly the institutional structures and the
political and social organizations.
The traditional bureaucracies (trade union and party political) have known an
unprecedented setback and lost the monopoly on the big mobilizations and
political initiatives, including at the international level. But we are only
at the beginning of an alternative force.
The rise of the movement for global justice has overthrown the tendency of
profound retreat of 20 years (1980-1999), spectacularly, creating through
truly historic events, a new spirit of emancipation, self-activity, and hope.
This movement is very legitimate, but still not deeply rooted.
The new social movement has stimulated and inspired that of the workers (the
trade union movement in particular) but it has only helped to awaken this
latter, not to strengthen its militant structures. The trade union movement,
depending on the country, has led strong, significant battles, in contrast
with the preceding periods, but it seems that this is only the beginning of a
true revival of trades unionism, especially in the workplaces. The anti-war
movement - originating directly from the movement for global justice - has
been extraordinary for its impact on society and the big traditional mass
organizations, but this very political fact has only played a secondary role
even in the most "pacifist" countries. The "new" organizations have not been
significantly strengthened in terms of membership.
The most significant lag is certainly that between social activity and
political commitment (electoral and party political). This is a fact which is
explicable, and undoubtedly transient, but real. There is nothing in common,
from this viewpoint, with May 1968, when thousands of youth organized
themselves in revolutionary parties. That leads for the moment, to the
relative weakness of the alternative "new" forces (social, political) to the
left of social democracy.
For the European anti-capitalist left, there are two things at stake - to be
in the social battles and to participate in the main electoral contests. It
has solid convictions and many tactical experiences, which should allow it to
contribute to the stage which is opening.
      This new situation also poses questions for the CPs. Given a certain
weakness of the alternative left, an extremely anti-democratic electoral
system, and the difficulty of "beating the right" certain tactical maneuvers
can be justified. The danger is to pass from maneuver to political engagement;
governmental participation with a social democracy more than ever bogged down
in neoliberalism, would mean the end of a cycle of radicalism and would leave
the Party in tatters. Nobody should forget the sad experience of the Parti
Communiste Français.
The European Anti-capitalist Left, at its Athens Conference, took the decision
to constitute ourselves as a specific current (by history, tradition,
political sympathies), according to the terminology used by the EU to
designate organizations, "a European Party of the Anti-capitalist Left". It is
an important step, not anodyne. It is an appeal, everywhere in Europe, to
advance in this direction; regroupment, in each country, and on the European
continent, of the maximum of radical, pluralist, representative, non-sectarian
forces. But we do not confuse the setting up of such a formation with the
political battle at the European elections of June 2004. We act also to fight
against social liberal policies and constitute a broad and unified electoral
bloc, capable of dialogue with the social forces.
July 10, 2003


* François Vercammen is a member of the executive bureau of the Fourth
International.
1. The Conferences of the European Anti-capitalist Left involves parties,
movements or coalitions who share a clearly anti-capitalist, internationalist,
anti-racist and feminist orientation, as well as the objective of a democratic
and socialist society. Initiated in March 2000 (first conference in Lisbon) by
the Red-Green Alliance (Denmark), the Left Bloc (Portugal), the Scottish
Socialist Party and the Ligue communiste révolutionnaire (France), their
objective is to unite the radical left on the European scale on the basis of
debate, pluralism and cooperation, so as to build a European political
alternative to the parties of neoliberal social democracy. At the sixth
conference, held in Athens on June 9-10, 2003, present were: the Red-Green
Alliance from Denmark, the Left Bloc from Portugal, the Scottish Socialist
Party, the Ligue communiste révolutionnaire from France, the Socialist
Alliance and Socialist Workers Party of England and Wales, Espacio Alternativo
from the Spanish state, the Party of Communist Refoundation (PRC) of Italy,
SolidaritéS from Switzerland, the Party of Freedom and Solidarity (ÖDP) from
Turkey, as well as observes from the Socialist Party (Britain) and the
Socialist Party (Ireland). Moreover, Synaspismos (Greece), Esquerra unida i
alternativa (Spanish state) and the DKP (Germany) participated as guests.
Other organizations who had participated in at least one of the preceding
conferences - the Red Electoral Alliance of Norway, the Socialist Party of
Holland, La Gauche of Luxembourg, Izquierda Unida from the Spanish state, le
Mouvement pour le socialisme from Switzerland - were not able to attend in
Athens. The conference adopted a declaration that we reproduce on the
following pages.

Europe:
6th Conference of the European Anti-Capitalist Left Athens, 9-10 June 2003
STATEMENT
1. Resistance to the war in Iraq has inspired unprecedented mass mobilisations
on a world scale. The ongoing instability of world capitalism, the
international economic recession, the process of European Union state
formation, and a new wave of social attacks on the working classes, youth,
women, immigrants and others will lead to new mass struggles. They are
fostering a general process of political clarification inside the labour and
social movements and parties of the left. In the next twelve months the
European ruling classes will make an all-out effort to strengthen the European
Union as a supranational, imperialist state. The social democratic parties
will once more play a key role in trying to 'convince' working people to
accept new cuts in jobs, wages, pensions, housing, education, health care and
labour rights in the name of 'competitiveness'. They will also proclaim the
need to accept 'sacrifices' of democratic rights and freedoms and asylum
rights, to spend more on the military and to build a European 'army'. The
European Anti-Capitalist Left will be at the forefront of mobilisations
against this new neo-liberal wave, and will participate in the June 2004
elections. We want to break the iron chain that links neo liberal policies to
war and war that prepares a new waves of massive social aggressions - a chain
that is at the heart of global capitalism.

2. The war on Iraq has been an historic event: it was the first frontal,
planetary clash between global capitalism, led by the US government (and its
allies), and the new international social movement. Far from being irrational
or fortuitous, the new strategy of US imperialism, centred on 'unlimited war',
is linked directly to the rise of capitalist globalisation and the necessity
of mastering the heightened contradictions that result from it. These
contradictions include: unbridled extension of the reign of the market;
deregulation of economic and institutional functioning, including systematic
abrogation of labour's hard-won rights; transnational concentration and
mobility of financial and productive capital; a more pronounced hierarchy
among capitalist states; and an unprecedented intensification of social
inequality, on a planetary scale as well as in each region and country. As a
result inter-imperialist contradictions, which have been exacerbated and set
loose since the collapse of the USSR, need to be kept under control in new
ways, since all the institutions that traditionally kept social and popular
movements within bounds and channelled social explosions have lost their
legitimacy and their grip. The outcome is economic volatility and general
instability. The extraordinary extent of US power, whose supremacy is very
uneven on different levels (military, economic, monetary, political,
ideological and cultural), itself contributes to increased instability.

3. The 'surprising' opposition of the French and German governments (supported
by Belgium) impeded NATO's functioning for a while and (with Russia and
China's help) successfully blocked Bush and Blair's initiative in the Security
Council. Their opposition was too strong, too well thought out and too
concerted to be reduced to remote historical factors, accidents of party
politics or personal ambition. The opposition from the EU's key sector is
linked directly to a resurgence and reinforcement of contradictions within
Western capitalism. Admittedly these contradictions are still held in check by
transatlantic imperialist arrangements, the unrivalled supremacy of the US and
the EU's difficulties in forming its supranational state. But US strategy,
more and more systematically unilateralist, including in trade relations, is
having a growing impact on US-European relations. During the past five years
economic conflicts in the WTO framework have changed the diplomatic climate.
The unprecedented growth of the 'transatlantic economy', measured in the
volume of trade and above all in the level of foreign direct investment, has
had contradictory effects. Intensified transatlantic integration has also
stimulated intensified competition on both sides of the Atlantic and elsewhere
in the world. Two political-strategic shifts are thus taking place at the same
moment for the same reasons. US imperialism has been reorienting its foreign
policy in the wake of the disappearance of 'the communist danger': a close
union with Europe has become a lower priority than reaffirming its global
domination. In its ongoing alliance with Europe, the US sets the ground rules
on the basis of its own interests. (The war on Iraq is the most visible
example.) Simultaneously the European Union's economic dynamic (the euro,
consolidation of the single market, eastwards expansion) is impelling it to
equip itself with the nucleus of a supranational state apparatus. Without
challenging US supremacy, the EU is striving for a new equilibrium that would
change the relationship of forces. This dynamic is pregnant with frictions,
partial conflicts and more acute contradictions.

4. Formation of a supranational state, an indispensable tool for the European
ruling classes, is running up against the direct influence of US imperialism
and the heterogeneity of the EU's (main) member states. But the main obstacle
is the lack of substantial legitimacy or a broad social base. In order to
establish its semi-authoritarian state and withstand international (above all
US) competition, the EU is dismantling the 'welfare state' and recolonising
the Third World. This in turn increases popular resistance, particularly from
the working classes and youth. Europe has become an epicentre of a global
social confrontation, as shown by the huge anti-war mobilisations that have
shaken several governments. Several of these governments (Britain, Spain,
Italy) chose to back the war and line up behind the US; they reaped a huge
wave of protest and mobilisations. Others (France, Germany, Belgium)
positioned themselves 'against the war', visibly taking their distance from
the US; they portrayed themselves as peaceful, democratic, social, humanist,
'internationalist' imperialists, concerned about a new world order with its
institutions and rules. They had two goals: to win over world public opinion
while gaining ground from the US; and to win over public opinion at home, the
better to push forwards with neo-liberal policies.

5. The neo liberal policies of global capitalism has led to war; today, war is
leading to a new wave of antisocial policies . At the same time 'the politics
of war' is still on the agenda. The radical left rejects this capitalist,
imperialist strategy. It faces three challenges.

(1) The anti-war movement has partially demobilised since the war's end. It
was not able to stop the war. But its militancy, its huge demonstrations, and
its impact on society have reached far beyond activist milieus. It have made
it a major factor in political life, even if this has not a decisive impact on
the recent elections (in Italy or Spain for instance). The situation in the
Middle East is very unstable, specially in Iraq. The Israelian government
continues its war against the Palestinian people and occupying its country.
The US hasn't abandoned its goal to bring the whole of the Middle East under
its control, threatening the Iranian and Syrian States, calling to destroy the
popular resistance movements in the area. The so-called 'war on terrorism' has
also lead to a massive rise of racism and direct threats to the black, Muslim,
Arab, Asian communities in the different European countries. Whatever the
position of the EU governments has been in the Iraq war, all are united and in
alliance with the US to attack the asylum and democratic rights. We cannot
rule out a new threat or military intervention by the Bush administration. It
is important that anti-war activity continue to take place regularly in each
country and across the continent, combining antiwar and antiracist
mobilisations. The massive participation of youth, in fact a new political
generation occupying the forefront of the social movements, is a key element
for the new cycle of struggles and the reinforcement of the class struggle.

(2) After the war, the 'social question' is now at the centre of the political
battle, thanks to the governments' offensive and the bosses' offensive at the
workplace level. The EU is pursuing the same policies and carrying on with the
'Lisbon agenda' by attacking directly at three points: (a) Dismantling the
pension system and (partially) privatising it, transferring the huge sums now
in the publicly controlled funds. This relates directly to the EU's other
priority: unifying and expanding the financial market in the interests of big
capital; (b) The so-called 'labour market reform', in order to deregulate
rights in hiring, redundancies, working time, wages payment, social insurance,
etc. This is an attempt to smash the common framework that has been crucial
for working-class cohesion. Today the 'reformers' have Germany in their
sights. (c) The bosses think the current relationship of forces now makes mass
redundancies, drastic pay cuts, speed-up and increased exploitation of labour
possible. The wage earners have accordingly responded massively with
demonstrations and mobilisations, as well as some of the most powerful general
strikes in decades in France, Italy, Austria, Germany, Spain and Portugal.
This is a genuine 'Europeanisation' of the class struggle: virtually
simultaneous struggles around the same problems, putting forward the same
goals and same solutions, using the same forms of mobilisation. Now on the
agenda are European struggles, organised Europe-wide coordination meetings,
and European general strikes. In short, we need more than ever to form a new,
active, militant European wide trade-union force - while the bureaucratic
apparatuses of the national union federations and the ETUC are blocking this
perspective, linked as they are to the 'Lisbon agenda', the well-known
'business summit' of the European Union (March 2000).

(3) Faced with the bourgeoisies' attempt to move forwards towards the nucleus
of a supranational, imperialist EU state, the necessity of a European
alternative can no longer be evaded. The European radical left has been
lagging behind in its discussions and in developing its programme. While the
EU is imposing its decisions - more than 60 percent of national laws implement
EU decisions; the European military force is moving into action; the European
Central Bank is exercising sovereign power over monetary policy; EU laws
('directives')are supplanting national legislation - parts of the new European
social movement organised in the ESF, out of incomprehension, hesitancy or
ignorance, is not taking on the EU institutions. With the Convention meeting,
the Constitution being written and the Inter-Governmental Conference looming,
we must urgently make a more systematic, more coordinated, political riposte
and put forward a European anti-capitalist alternative.

6. The EU is going to use the June 2004 European elections to carry out a
gigantic EU political, media and publicity operation from the North Pole to
the Mediterranean and from the Atlantic to the Russian frontier. Its goal is
to win over a popular base and a substantial legitimacy, which are
indispensable to neutralising the recovering social and trade union movement
and herding them into line behind an imperialist European power. European
social democracy has already taken up its battle stations in the 'spirit of
Lisbon': first strengthen European capitalism (in face of the 'American
threat') and accept a new round of austerity, in order to re-launch social
progress at some later date. The EU is supposed to become the alternative to
the US: peaceful, social, humanist, 'international', etc. This new ideology is
meant to restore a stable political anchorage to the EU state.

But the historical, existential crisis of the SP's is irreversible. This
doesn't mean that they have already lost their hegemony over the labour
movement; neither are temporary, purely electoral resurgences to exclude. But
there will be, in the present conditions of capitalism, a genuine
reconstruction of social democracy on the ideological, programmatic, political
or organisational level. Besides, the process is very uneven, from one country
to the next in terms of scope, depth and tempo, as it has been throughout his
history. (Contrast the Labour Party with the SPD or Italian DS, or the Walloon
and Flemish SPs within the same country!)

7. The EACL will take part in social, political and electoral struggles as an
independent, radical, anti-capitalist current. But we will not lose sight of
two factors that constitute levers with which to expand into a much broader
space. First, we have entered a period of political clarification of
considerable scope and depth. The process of radicalisation during the last
several years has begun to push back the political and electoral boundaries.
The traditional parties may not be moving much, but their electorates are.
Besides the war, social issues and the everyday life of the world of labour
are provoking breaks. The militaristic and neo-liberal orientation of social
democracy has led to a massive rise in consciousness. The SPs and other
left-wing parties that have participated in such governments have generally
paid a high price! Second, the huge mobilisations of the 'global justice' ('no
global') movement and the popular upsurges against the war have been
initiated, organised and oriented by radical (social and political) left
forces, outside and often against the central bureaucratic apparatuses of the
traditional workers' movement. After having tried in the beginning to
discredit and criminalize the movements, they are now trying to join them in
order to win influence inside. This opens the way for broad united front
actions which widen the terrain and the political influence for the radical
Left.

All this is a reason for the EACL to be in the streets and in the struggles.
We will also be present, everywhere, in the campaign for the 2004 European
elections. Participating in this contest, is a key element for implementing
the hug energy and commitment of the social movements on the political
terrain, and for sharpening the political clarification towards the reformist
social-liberal forces.

First, we will develop our own political identity and our own platform, which
will distinguish us clearly on the basis of the experience of the last fifteen
or twenty years: - struggle against imperialist war, immediate withdrawal from
NATO; against an EU army and EU militarism; - against social-liberal policies
and against participation in social-liberal governments; - against so-called
'anti-terrorist' policies that attack democratic and political rights (the
Spanish state has outlawed a party, Herri Batasuna, which was legal and
massively present in the elected bodies of the state) and criminalize
struggles and movements, in particular those of immigrants and blacks; and
against the EU of big capital and the utterly anti social and anti democratic
(draft) Constitution.

This dynamic cannot be halted with limited measures, because it has become
systematic. Priorities must be changed radically: social needs for the mass of
the population must come before the profits of big capital.

Our alternative programme is as simple, easy and clearly defined as the
bosses' one: a full-time, stable job, a decent wage, and a liveable
replacement income (in the event of unemployment, disease, disability or
retirement) for everyone; radical reduction of working time without loss of
pay or intensification of work, with compensatory hiring; the right to
housing, education and professional training and health care, all good
quality; and access to means of public transport. These political and social
rights will be equal for all workers, native and immigrant, men and women.
Implementing them requires: a radical extension of public services; a
recasting of the state budget (including the tax system) which drastically
increases social spending; and a radical redistribution of wealth and income
from capital towards labour. For this purpose all anti-capitalist measures
must be taken that are needed to control and, if necessary, expropriate
private property and transform it into social, public property. Another Europe
is possible: social, democratic, egalitarian, ecological, internationalist-a
socialist Europe!

Second, the EACL will not be content simply to bear witness. To the extent
possible in each country, we will try to form alliances or electoral blocs in
order to defeat the parties of Big Capital as well as social democracy, -both
linked to the neo liberal policies of global capitalism, and the other left
parties that go along with them.

Third, the EACL will wage an active, dynamic campaign with a high political
profile in favour of an anti-capitalist, socialist alternative. The EACL will
publish its European 'Manifesto' at the next the 7th EACL Conference, to be
held in Paris in November 2003. The EACL supports the initiative of a
'Convention for an alternative Europe', as proposed by the PRC (Rifondazione).