your GLW?
Subscribe!
UNITED STATES: Anti-war protests gain strength, breadth26 February 2003  BY
ALEX CHIS
SAN FRANCISCO — Sunday February 16 was the largest anti-war protest in this city's history, with the march organisers estimating that 250,000 people took part. Even the police department said about 200,000 marched — double that of the January 18 demonstration. Some 150,000 people demonstrated in other California cities on February 15. In contrast to the January 18 demonstration, which was a regional mobilisation drawing participants from Seattle to southern California, the February 16 march was composed primarily from people from the San Francisco-Oakland area. There can be no mistake: the movement against the war is strong and growing. The San Francisco protest was part of the worldwide protests held on February 15. The largest in te US was the massive showing by more than 500,000 people in New York City. There were also demonstrations in other cities and small towns across the US, which attracted 200,000 people. The date for the San Francisco demonstration was put back so as not to conflict with the Chinese New Year celebrations. There was initially concern the change of date may reduce the attendance but, as the New York Times headline read, “A day late, but not a marcher short”. The growing US opposition to war was apparent not just in the numbers, but also in the participants themselves. A group calling themselves “Families for Peace”, consisting mainly of children in strollers pushed by young parents, was perhaps the most visible example of the large number of young people present. There were also organised high school groups as well as university students. There were war veterans, trade unionists, religious groups — from Buddhists and Muslims to Dominican nuns. The crowd was friendly and upbeat. Signs and banners focused on stopping the war with Iraq, but also dealt with the anti-terrorism legislation (my favourite: “I wasn't using my civil liberties anyway”), concerns about the economy (“Money for schools, jobs and health, not war”), congratulations for France's threat to veto a US resolution in the UN Security Council and many signs ridiculing Bush, the “war on terror” and his “empty warhead” warmongering advisers. Unprecedented movementSuch a large, representative and co-ordinated movement at this stage of a possible war is unprecedented in US history. It reflects the US population's profound unease at the doctrine of “pre-emptive war” and the growing mistrust of the Bush administration. Protests approaching this size took over five years to develop after the Vietnam War started, and only reached this representativeness of the general population near the end of that war, if then.Two examples of this breadth are the participation of the labour movement and the opposition of local city councils to the war. During the Vietnam War, the labour movement was officially pro-war, with only “radical” unions taking an anti-war stance. This time, a national organisation of labour bodies and activists, US Labor Against the War, has already been formed. A growing number of local, regional, state and some national labour organisations have signed on. At the February 16 San Francisco demonstration, members from more than 27 unions marched in a contingent, led by the dockworkers' union drill team. The president of the California Federation of Labor marched with the contingent. Representatives of the San Francisco Labor Council and the Alameda County Central Labor Council, the two largest in the Bay Area, also addressed the rally. Almost 100 city councils, and some state legislatures, from Maine to Michigan to California, have passed resolutions for peace, with many more in the process of doing so. Representatives from 30 cities travelled to Washington on February 13 to try to get their point across to President Bush (visit <http://www.ips-dc.org/citiesforpeace>). With such a large, impressive and inspiring movement, it would seem that we should have won the fight for peace already. Unfortunately, the US anti-war movement still faces formidable obstacles. Foremost is the Bush administration, which is disinclined to let opposition of any kind change its plans for US hegemony. Even Bush had to acknowledge the February 15-16 protests, however, he said he wouldn't be “deterred” by them. But, the protests have to affect US policymakers' thinking to some extent. After all, the worldwide protests were on a scale in many countries that could threaten governments. Although that wasn't the case in the US, they were still of a size that has to be reckoned with. Another obstacle facing the US anti-war movement is the media. The national US media has been completely pro-war, and the airwaves are filled with “strategy” assessments of how the US will fight the war, win the war and what the occupation will look like, as if it's a foregone conclusion. The US Congress, the “representatives” of the US people, with virtually every member being in favour of the war, is the final major obstacle. Since the mainstream media's political commentators focus on Washington, the fact that there is no noticeable opposition from Congress makes the drumbeat for war that much more overwhelming. Where do we go from here?However, the media could not ignore the February 15-16 demonstrations. The front page Sunday headlines in the major San Francisco paper reported that millions were against the war around the world. The February 17 morning headlines in the other major Bay Area paper read: “200,000 in SF decry the war, energetic marchers add to growing chorus of opinion.” This was a big change from the coverage of the January 18 protest.The demonstrations also shocked some politicians. There is the possibility that some may separate themselves from the majority, and the anti-war movement can begin to force a public debate on the issue, instead of the one-sided barrage we've put up with for months. Before the movement can stop the war, a real public debate is needed. Although the movement now has an impressive geographic spread, the US is a big country and to reach everyone, including the troops and their families, media coverage is essential. The US anti-war movement realises the obstacles, is determined to overcome them and will continue to mobilise. The mood at the demonstrations, although upbeat, was also realistic, being fully aware of the size of the task. Planning is already underway for further actions. A national student strike, expected to be the largest since the Vietnam War era, will take place on March 5 (visit <http://www.nyspc.net/>). There will also be a series of women's demonstrations in Washington on March 3-9, around International Women's Day, called by Code Pink: Women's Pre-emptive Strike for Peace (visit <http://www.codepink4peace.org/>). [Alex Chis is a socialist activist from San Francisco.] From Green Left Weekly, February 26, 2003.
|
From: International News |
| Home | RSS Newsfeeds | Copyright Info | Contact GLW |