www.granma.cu BY JOAQUIN ORAMAS

THE threat of U.S. military aggression against Iraq and the situation in Venezuela provoked by a pro-U.S. opposition are the main focuses of attention for thousands of participants at the World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, Brazil, and the World Economic Forum, Davos. In a clash of interests, both meetings are taking place on January 23-28.

Tens of thousands of party leaders, non-governmental organizations (NGO’s) and other sectors are meeting in the Brazilian city, matched by an equal number of businesspeople representing the huge corporations taking part at the other meeting in the Swiss mountain tourist resort. All of them will be analyzing the international economic situation from their own point of view, but through a fundamental prism: Will there be war in the Middle East in the next few weeks? How can we deal with a situation originating with an increase in oil prices, given the consequences of the Bush administration’ threats against that Arab country and the opposition’s destabilizing campaign aimed at the Venezuelan government?

This time, the Davos and Porto Alegre camps will be in agreement that the acute crisis in the world economy was dangerously increasing even before the destruction of the Twin Towers.

Capitalists gathered in the Swiss ski resort will not be able todisguise that reality after the collapse of the Argentine economy, the U.S. Federal reserve’s consecutive and unheard of series of 11 cuts in interest rate, and the alarming situation facing Japan, where the economy has been stagnant for the last few years.

These will not be the only topics at the two forums, but the dangers that war and oil bring with them are so grave and universal that the negative consequences for everyone mean that the problems must be thoroughly analyzed.

Because if the great capitalist bloc is going to be discussing markets and investments in Davos, then it cannot avoid the damage to and loss of confidence in investments and other factors that enter into such negotiations.

In the conclave of the powerful, the United States will reiterate its official refusal to reduce its strategic oil reserves (600 million barrels) vis-à-vis the crisis in the supply of that resource and high prices. But that will not halt the lack of confidence.

Meanwhile, at the Brazilian forum, voices demanding measures enabling millions of people to receive the food they lack are becoming even louder.

Currently, hunger and poverty - the main enemies of Latin America and the Caribbean - are the consequences of erroneous national policies, successive international economic crises and U.S. restrictions on agricultural exports. These problems figure among the main causes of poverty for 65% of the region’s 516 million inhabitants, causing extreme poverty for 38% and malnutrition for 11%.

But this data, contained in a report from last June’s World Food Summit, excludes increased hunger in Latin America, a continent that over the last few years has been punished by earthquakes, hurricanes, drought and the level of its respective governments’ political and administrative corruption.

Haiti, where 62% of the population is suffering from hunger, must also be added to the list of countries experiencing serious economic problems. In Colombia and Peru, hunger affects one out of every four persons; in Mexico, 40 million out of a total population of 100,000 inhabitants suffer some degree of malnutrition in infancy.

The Latin American and Caribbean continent is no longer the main recipient for international aid. The end of 2002 saw the fifth year of low growth rate in the region, with a fall in GDP production to 0.1%; high inflation; and 9.1% unemployment: 50% of the workforce had no steady jobs.

Nor are there any sustainable regional or governmental projects to confront this scourge. The only exception is Brazilian President Lula da Silva’s Zero Hunger Program, the first measure taken by his government after his January 1 investiture.

Lula’s plan is a completely new idea in Latin America; it is an attempt not only to overcome hunger in Brazil, but also inaugurates sustainable programs with a view to creating employment and areas of production benefiting the poor.

The goal of the Zero Hunger Program is for those 22 million Brazilians affected by poverty to eat three meals per day within the next four years; a number that the independent Brazilian Forum for Food Security intends to double, equaling 16% of the country’s inhabitants.

Twenty-one lines of action combining structural policies such as agrarian reform and extending social provision to illegal workers have been developed, plus other specific and local plans including distributing food coupons and increasing snacks for school pupils.

The Brazilian leader is the only president attending both important international events in Porto Alegre and Davos, and he plans to inaugurate the former. Some 100,000 participants are expected, comprising trade union leaders, representatives from ethnic groups, NGO’s, political parties, and others.

The Porto Alegre forum is to discuss the situation created by the region’s poverty, advances in the battle against neoliberal globalization, development of environmental awareness and protest against the U.S. war campaign under the pretext of combating terror.

An essential aspect of the Brazilian agenda is the problems resulting from the region’s poverty. The topic has been suggested by different international organizations such as the World Food Program (WFP), which confirmed in 2002 that some 72 million Latin American and Caribbean citizens are in extreme need of foodstuffs and suffering from hunger, a situation that is set to worsen this year.

Among the important issues that analysts consider priorities is the threat of hunger affecting more than 200 million of the region’s inhabitants who are vulnerable to the announced worsening of the economy or to fresh natural disasters.

According to World Food Summit reports, Central America’s hungry population has grown from 17% to 19% over the last ten years; Caribbean figures show a rise of 26% to 28%. In the last 10 years, some 200 Central American children died of starvation, and over eight million people are affected in the poorest and most arid areas of the Isthmus.

Paradoxically, Latin America and the Caribbean contain 25% of the world’s cultivatable land, 23% of its livestock and around 30% of potable water reserves, according to UN Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) experts.

Via sustainable development, these resources could be used to obtain food for all the region’s inhabitants and provide hard currency and sources for developing other economic sectors, adds the FAO.

Argentina, for example, produces enough food for 300 million - 12 times the country’s population. However, hunger is chronic in the poorest communities and, after the December 21 debacle, things are becoming worse and moving into other social strata.

The nation’s state-run National Statistics and Census Institute (Indec) indicates that more than 52% of the 37 million Argentines are poor and 26% are extremely poor, that is to say do not have the minimum income needed to survive.

The most dramatic cases are found in the infant population. Indec data from 2001 indicates that every year, 11,000 under-ones die in Argentina. But 6,000 of these deaths are preventable - they are linked to poverty-induced diseases such as malnutrition and diarrhea.

The situation can only be compared with the consequences of a “war or natural disaster” despite the fact that neither situation is occurring in any of the region’s countries, pointed out Pablo Vincur, UN Development Program (UNDP) advisor.

The profound Argentine crisis has affected its neighbor Uruguay. Although the latter nation is an excellent food producer, there are currently severe problems of hunger in its infant population, 60% of whom live in poor homes.

Analysts reveal that Uruguayan food centers sponsored by non-governmental and religious groups and subsidized by international organizations have quadrupled in the last six year. That makes it certain that Porto Alegre will also be the venue for denunciations from the NGO’s of the nation once dubbed the Switzerland of the Americas and now another victim of neoliberalism.

www.africaonline.co.zw Innocent Chofamba-Sithole

LAST week’s lead story in The Sunday Mirror on an alleged transition plan that would see President Robert Mugabe handing over power to a chosen successor before the end of his current term, has sparked off a very interesting and healthy debate, analysts say.

Despite the avalanche of speculative reports that found their way into the newsrooms of the international media and served to obfuscate the real import of the plan, analysts who spoke to The Sunday Mirror concurred that it is inevitable that a national debate on the succession issue should be put on the agenda. “In a healthy society, yes, it should be discussed. But from my perspective, the initiative should come from government, and not from outsiders, as reports in the international media seemed to portray it,” said Amy Tsanga, a lecturer in the University of Zimbabwe’s (UZ) Law School.

Institute of Development Studies (IDS) professor, Brian Raftopoulos also welcomed the debate, saying it echoes the opinion of some in the ruling Zanu PF who believe that “this project cannot continue in its present form.” Feeding off The Sunday Mirror story, the international media created their own speculative versions, in which President Mugabe would be forced to go into exile as part of the exit plan.

She said the international media’s drive to create a crisis situation out of the exit plan could be inspired by their motive to try and influence the course of events in the country. “Drawing parallels with the chaotic situation in Venezuela, where demonstrations have raged on for over a month now, may be in itself a way by the international media of instigating action from the masses here,” Tsanga observed. She also dismissed the idea of an externally-brokered transition plan, saying that serious talk about succession will come from Zanu PF itself.

Speaker of Parliament and ruling party secretary for administration, Emmerson Mnangagwa, who is also widely believed to be Mugabe’s eventual successor, said the international media reports were meant to divide his party. He was responding to questions posed to him by the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation (ZBC) after the media reports had alleged that he was the man behind the exit plan. Adding his voice in response to the reports, information and publicity minister, Professor Jonathan Moyo wrote in The Herald of January 15th that: “Of course, there is nothing wrong with debating succession but there is everything wrong with debating it outside the constitutional and democratic processes. Any succession that takes place outside these processes is tantamount to a coup and therefore unacceptable for that very reason”.

In December last year, Movement for Democratic Change president, Morgan Tsvangirai said in an address to party parliamentarians that there was an “unholy tripartite” plot by the British, South Africans, and Zimbabwean government officials to get him to agree to a round table meeting with President Mugabe, where an alleged transition plan would be discussed, and in which he would emerge as less than president.

But later, Tsvangirai said former army colonel, Lionel Dyck was sent to him as an emissary of Mnangagwa and defence chief, Vitalis Zvinavashe,to discuss the plan.

In the ensuing media reports on the issue, Dyck also initially acknowledged to a local daily that he had been sent by the two gentlemen. But as the issue fast gained global media attention, Dyck has denied any association with Mnangagwa and Zvinavashe, claiming instead that he was acting on his own behalf.

Sources available to The Sunday Mirror last week revealed that the latest succession plan was a resumption of the stalled transitional process that had begun with the draft constitution of February 2000. But with the gradual disappearance of the circumstances that had led to its suspension, the sources said, the plan was coming back into focus, and would involve a peaceful transition in which contenders could openly vie for the top post.

But in the same Herald article, Moyo suggests that there was a British-co-ordinated attempt to use the draft constitution to oust President Mugabe from power. “Put simply, there was a $64 million effort to use the draft constitution as a succession tool…” Tsanga noted that President Mugabe had made reference to his retirement in the past, but was skeptical of the possibility of his stepping down now, in the “midst of untidy ends in the land reform programme”. “That would be widely perceived as an admission of failure, and I’m not sure whether that would augur well with the kind of legacy the president would want to leave behind,” she said.

Responding to media reports about the alleged exit plan in Zambia last week, President Mugabe said he would retire only “when business was done”.

As part of the transition plan, the British government is understood to have pledged over half a billion pounds to jump-start the economy.

UZ political commentator and mathematics professor, Heneri Dzinotyiwei said although he felt there was an element of truth in the argument that a change of leadership would ease relations with the international community and attract external support, the real debate should focus on how to come up with solutions to the economic problems besetting the nation.

“If we do that, it gives us a format of following events, and we can get to a position where we can say either government has failed, or that they should adopt certain policies,” he said.

Tsanga observed that among the most vocal in the Mugabe-must-go lobby are people who seriously believe that the land reform programme can be reversed and that, with Mugabe’s removal from power, there is chance for them to get their farms back.

As the media glare on the succession issue enters its second week, General Zvinavashe has denied having given an interview to The Star of South Africa, which ran a story on January 17th, alleging that Zvinavashe had admitted that there was a crisis in Zimbabwe and had suggested the setting up of a national taskforce.

Speaking on ZBC’s Newshour on Friday, Zvinavashe flatly denied ever giving The Star’s reporter, Basildon Peta an interview.The defence chief, who rarely gives interviews to the media, had apparently given an exclusive interview to the Business Tribune, which was published on Thursday last week. In that interview, Zvinavashe had said: “First we must admit that there is a crisis. Everyone can see that…so we must do something about it. In my view, it is not right to keep quiet and let nature take its course.”

www.cnn.com From Elise Labott CNN Monday, January 20, 2003 Posted: 2:56 AM EST (0756 GMT)

NEW YORK (CNN) -- U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell met Sunday with the foreign ministers of France, Mexico and China, addressing what the next steps should be with Iraq and the impending report from U.N. weapons inspectors.

"He is making the point that the issue is disarmament and without Iraqi cooperation, the inspections process is not going to succeed," a senior State Department official said.

After the January 27 report from chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix, the official said, the discussion will entail "how to further the question of disarmament." The Security Council is expected to meet January 29 to further discuss the inspectors' report, he said.

Though several U.S. allies on the council have said publicly the inspectors need more time, the official said that during the meetings "they all agreed Iraq is not cooperating."

"Everyone agrees Iraq is not meeting the terms of [U.N. Security Council resolution] 1441," the official said, noting previous comments by Blix and others about "passive" or "superficial" cooperation by Iraq.

Powell plans more meetings Monday on the sidelines of a Security Council meeting on combating terrorism. In addition to Iraq, he will be discussing the crises in North Korea and Venezuela.

The United States faces growing opposition from several council members, including France, Russia and Germany, which favor giving inspectors more time. Even British Prime Minister Tony Blair, the Bush administration's closest ally in its effort against Iraq, has suggested inspections might be allowed to continue.

But Powell was expected to make the argument against that scenario, State Department officials said, because Baghdad's continued lack of cooperation with inspectors thus far is sufficient proof that Iraq is in material breach of U.N. resolutions and that military action is justifiable.

"Saddam is not doing what he is supposed to be doing, which is disarming," one senior State Department official said, pointing to chemical warheads found by U.N. inspectors last week. "It's not just doors opening, it's not even that inspectors have found things. Is Iraq disarming? No, it is not."

Officials say that while the United States may have no "smoking gun" to prove Iraq has amassed weapons of mass destruction, Iraq's unwillingness to cooperate is far more important.

"It's easy for this process to get away from us," another official said. "Everyone keeps putting the onus on us to find a smoking gun, but the onus is on Iraq. Iraq is on parole, and it has to show it is ready to rehabilitate itself."

This official said that Powell will push council members to focus on securing more intrusive inspections to "test Iraq's due diligence," including certain statements made by Iraqis about their willingness to cooperate and their previous weapons declarations.

This official likened Iraq's cooperation to "opening yourself up to an audit."

"If you have nothing to hide, you do everything you can to prove you are innocent," the official said. "We have yet to see this type of cooperation."

Although Powell said earlier that a "convincing case" would exist by the end of the month that Iraq was not cooperating, the official acknowledged the United States could give inspectors more time.

"We could give them (Iraqi officials) some more rope to hang themselves," this official said, adding the time frame could last until the end of February.

indymedia.ie by Bijan Mon, Jan 20 2003, 2:21am javanji@earthlink.net

B & G NON

This is nothing but playing the world good police - bad police in capitalism format.

Although many documents from Bill Clintons speech in Holland regarding american plan to attack North Korea, the bombing of Chinas embassy in Belgrade, the declaration of Axes of evil’s by Bush, the Richard Pearls declaration in total war, Donald Rumsfeld and his declaration in surgical war in Iraq and his offer in “immunity” for possible war crimes if some senior leaders would live Iraq! Meanwhile, there is lawsuit against Bill Clinton, Madeline Albright, Henry Kissinger and others pending in the international court for war crimes in Cambodia, Yugoslavia and Iraq. These are the words from a “hesitant intelligent” man who by Henry Kissinger been called a “rootless man” and where he is responsible for the war machinery in US and is just scary to think that, such a man even has a position in any system! Here, Mr. Hans Blix and Mohamed Elbaredi should consider these kind of links to what they are demanding and if the 12 years of Iraqis people suffering hasn’t been enough and or a ground for a legal case to indict the entire leaders in what has by this kind of “unintelligent and undemocratic” personality been called the “world community”!

But then again, Donald Rumsfeld gesture although it sounds “fair” but one has to consider why he is offering such “fair” idea now! Could it be that 87% of people around the world are against any kind of war in Iraq! Could it be that Bush administration is out of any “fair” policies for American people and therefore desperately wants to end the Iraqi matter before more people are organized and against US – NATO militarism wars!

Now, when Hans Blix and Mohamed Elbaradei demanding Iraq to “cooperate more”, which Iraq is fully cooperating, is yet another “fair” gesture that United Nations inspectors and Hans Blix or Mohammad Elbaradei would save Iraq from US and NATO attack! Question is, what more do you want and what kind of international guarantee would Iraq have if and when or as they are fulfilling and cooperating with UN resolution 1441! And after Iraq, what international guarantee would Syria or Iran and for that matter North Korea and almost every other country in the region would have in not being attacked by US – NATO militarism!

During the time in Patrick Lumombas democratic government in Congo the Swedish UN general secretary Dag Hammarskjöld did the same thing, when his Europeans blue helmet solders handcuffed Patrick Lumomba in the 60is and give him to his archenemy Mossa Chombeh, (Mossa Chombeh’s dictatorial government was appreciated by the European and Americans government) where Patrick and many others like him were hanged, yet there is still a civil war with European and american weapons in Congo, and no sight in democracy to be noted in that country. At that time, the reason behind US and European involvements was that Congo’s being a socialist government and Congo’s natural resources. Belgium, France, England and their political and economical interests in the region was beneficial in killing Patrick Lomumba. Here, the history of World Democracy has noted that fact and once again the naïveté in Swedish politic and its involvements are about to commit the same crime as in Congo. Everyone knows that if Iraq and Saddam regime falls the region as whole would fall in hand of US and European militarism and that’s what they want, but that wont happen without a long time war in the region and massacre of many thousands peoples. The “axes of evils” by Bush presidency is about these countries, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and North Korea! The bizarre matter is, that non of the political or social injustices or the inhuman acts in terms of military or CIA’s involvement in not letting the democracy in countries such as Iran and Etc. to grow, has ever by any of the European “democracy” been called a evils act, yet these governments calling every one whom is not or will not agree with their policies a axes of evils, but willing to cooperate with the sponsors of such preference in words!

The US and European Emperors and its stone aged Democracy in militarism in cooperation with American Neo Liberalism, playing the same game as policing the world, here the only difference is that, one plays the good one, and the other acts like if the other one is the bad one!

The yes sometimes and no sometimes, in English Neo Liberals governments, its foreign and domestic policies is always been the fact in, what I will gain if I would agree, or if I would not agree! The French I don’t know attitude, is not far as the British in questioning, who is going to be the boss, me or England and Germans attitude in saying, to hell with it, we either go or don’t go wit the plan, but let see what the Swedish government has to say, and Swedish governments opportunism policies is always in the right side of those whom is the winner and therefore, the country has lost its integrity in being neutral and the reputation in peace making and working for a non-militarized world, is more capitalist today then before.

But the fact is, that both continents are industrialized and its technology is in need of fuel and fuel is in Persian Gulf and there is lots of oil in every country located there and Iraq is one of them. Here, the meaning of the word capitalism and democracy is part from each other and cannot be connected in any way. One is about people, and the other is about money; therefore, when US - NATO is a talking about “democracy” in the region, they actually talking about oil and how its militarism could provide for the system to gain more by controlling the source of the money and capitalism “tactical” democratic systems in the region!

Here, humans are not of concern to the capitalism systems but the big Americans cars are. Where European, American and Arabian bourgeoisie feels that, these cars are “safe” to driving them, yet without considering the fact that for every gallon of gas they use, there is a child, elderly man and women, a mother, a father or son and daughter in Palestine, Iraq or Afghanistan, Pakistan, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Chili, Granada, Iran, Yugoslavia and in many more countries, been killed by the US – NATO militarism, these people have lost their life for capitalism interests and not for capitalism to implement democracy in their country. The history of democracy in each and every one of these countries where capitalism have committed genocide in terms of killing democracy, and for people of every and each of these countries struggle for achieving it, is over 130 years old, yet in 1972 it was CIA which helped General Augusto Pinochet to assassinate another democratically elected government Dr. Salvador Aliende along with 30.000 young and old Chileans in Chili!

Over production of goods, consumption of oil along with capitalism concurrence, the economical and social policies by capitalism is peoples worst enemy and above all, the developments in capitalism social and international political design in New World Order for last two decades, has become its habits in forcing the idea. The motive behind capitalisms today’s war or in time of Congo, Vietnam, Cambodia, First and Second World War and now all over the world war is the same. Behind presents US-NATO militarism and its buildups in Persian Gulf, Central Asia, Far East and Middle East is the capitalism history in conducting wars where the history answers the capitalism democracy! In other word, capitalism is against any form of people’s democracy period.

Question is; has any one from any of UN atomic or chemical and biological organizations in any time questioned the Atomic, chemical and biological warheads and its pileups in US and NATO countries! Have any of these organizations questioned the matter about Israel and forced its government to comply in the same meaning or manners as in Iraq! How about Franc, England, Germany or Japan and Australia, or even Sweden for that matter!

What all this adopted “militarism” in foreign policies by industrialized countries means is that, people in Middle East, Central Asia and Persian Gulf are forced to accept the US and Europeans “Emperors” democracy while the Emperor himself is stealing peoples wealth in middle east and robes its own people from a true democracy at home. Therefore, the right wings of Neo Liberals in Sweden asking for more cooperation between Swedish army and NATO and further they are asking for Swedish solders to be involved and sent to Iraq!

The capitalism militarism is a desperation act showing the destruction of capitalism itself and by itself; therefore, and due to the nature of capitalism, capitalism asks for more war and challenges the world to face him, here, the Swedish capitalism has joined the force in the idea of “new world order” and asks for more wars to be conducted by even the Swedish solders! The Iraq war, and all other capitalisms war never been or ever going to be about democracy unless there is a true democracy implemented at where capitalism home is, that home could be Iran, Sweden, Franc, England, Germany or for that matter America!

A statement from the White House said the president "welcomes the fact that we are a democracy and people in the United States, unlike Iraq, are free to protest and to make their case known." Sunday January 18,2003. Question is Mr. President, do you listen to what people say! In the name of solidarity,

www.islam-online.net

"The inspection is not a prelude to war, it is an alternative to war and that is what we want to achieve," Blix BAGHDAD, January 19 (IslamOnline & News Agencies) – As Washington intensified efforts with U.N. Security Council member states to secure a second resolution authorizing war on Iraq, in case one is needed, chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix Sunday, January 19, returned to Baghdad for critical talks.

Upon arrival in Baghdad, Blix said that war against Iraq was not inevitable but called for active Iraqi cooperation, reported Agence France-Presse (AFP).

"We have been to a number of capitals: Brussels, Paris, London. We do not think war is inevitable," Blix told reporters.

"We think that the inspection process is a peaceful alternative. It requires comprehensive inspections and a very active Iraqi cooperation," he said after flying in with U.N. nuclear watchdog head Mohammad El-Baradei.

"The inspection is not a prelude to war, it is an alternative to war and that is what we want to achieve. We are not here to humiliate or to insult, we are here to inspect in the best correct manner," Blix said.

El-Baradei stressed the timing of the trip was "very important ... critical".

"We would like to see the inspections work and for that to work we need a lot of additional information, and we are going to impress on our Iraqi counterparts the importance of providing as much information, as much documents, as much physical evidence as possible.

"This will help greatly before we submit our report next week to the Security Council," on January 27, he said, asserting that "it's in Iraq's interest to present us evidence so that we can present positive reports."

"The importance of the visit is that it is a direct eye-to-eye contact. A possibility to discuss with the Iraqis what they need to be doing, particularly in advance of the 27th of January," IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming elaborated.

"We need to see a demonstration of a change of course on the side of the Iraqis, a shift from passive cooperation to active cooperation. This message will be delivered directly to them today," she said.

Blix, head of the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission, and El-Baradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, were to have a series of meetings with Iraqi officials before leaving Monday afternoon.

U.N. spokesman Hiro Ueki said they would meet Foreign Ministry officials in charge of disarmament issues at 1300 GMT.

 Powell Intensifies Meetings Ahead of Security Council Meeting     In New York, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell was to meet Sunday, January 20, with his Chinese, French and Mexican counterparts ahead of a U.N. Security Council ministerial meeting. Powell also planned to hold private talks before and after Monday's special council meeting with the foreign ministers of Bulgaria, Germany, Russia and Spain, whose countries hold seats in the Security Council.

The topics of the private discussions are likely to vary depending on the minister, but Iraq and North Korea are expected to dominate the agenda.

With French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin, Powell is expected to discuss Ivory Coast peace efforts.

With new Mexican Foreign Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez, Powell will also discuss mediating the current political crisis in Venezuela. Political observers, however, believe that Powell's top priority is garnering support for a second resolution on Iraq, should Washington deem the situation too risky to go it alone against Baghdad.

Massive global anti-war demonstrations may force the Bush administration to reconsider its plans to strike, even without a clear go-ahead from the world community, according to analysts.