[WSF-Discuss] Global Movement strategy for a Just Transition

Tord Björk tord.bjork at gmail.com
Fri Mar 20 18:11:23 CDT 2015


Global Movement strategy for a Just Transition

- Ukraine, Greece, Climate and the multiple crisis from a WSF perspective


 There is a need for a popular movement strategy to solve the
multidimensional crisis. Prague Spring 2 (PS2) Network against right wing
extremism and populism proposes to all movements concerned and those
present at the World Social Forum in Tunis to address this crisis and its
most imminent expressions concerning Ukraine and Greece in a global peace,
social and ecological context. At the Tunis WSF a PS2 position paper will
be presented with this purpose. PS2 came out of the European Social Forum
process. Here is an analysis and proposal for action to connect the dots
between the climate justice, peace and social struggles of our time with
thoughts that was part of the process to make the position paper. It is
followed by an analysis and proposal for action drawing on the role of WSF
declaration and social forum participants. The text can be seen as a
response to Patrick Bond and his arguments concerning  on climate justice
and the need to connect the dots which was much missing at a recent mining
conference in South Africa organized by NGOs. The texts agrees upon this
need to connect the dots but is very different in the view how this can be
done. While Patrick emphasis we have to talk more about capitalism this
text emphasis we have to find the connections between the different
struggles and work from there rather than claim that a specific theory has
to be the most important. This does not contradict Bond message but it puts
a lot more emphasis on class actors as small peasants and Via Campesina and
workers and trade unions and action. As it only use the world capitalism
once and then only in the mouth of the landless movement in Brazil those
convinced we have to talk more about capitalism may find this piece less
interesting. I hope activists from many different strands find it fruitful.


What to do about the accelerating social and ecological crisis?

The present world order causes an accelerating social and ecological
crisis. The dismantling of welfare systems due to austerity politics or
wars imposed by neoliberal regimes results in severe human sufferings in
countries like Libya, Greece and Ukraine. Even in a country like Germany
poverty and social misery is growing in the midst of richness for some due
to neoliberal politics. Meanwhile is art extinction, soil erosion and
climate change threatening the very survival of human beings on our planet.
A threat that already is a reality wiping out indigenous peoples and small
peasant communities world wide. This accelerating social and ecological
crisis now also becomes a threat to peace with tensions between nuclear
powers and wars risking to escalate into a world war.

This calls for a comprehensive effort from popular movements to resist war
mongering and the degradation of social well being and ecological
sustainability as well as to construct economic and democratic solutions to
the multiple crisis. The era when single issue politics could give
successful changes of societies is over. Such single issue struggles are
still of great defensive importance. But they do not meet the challenge to
raise the horizons beyond the present development model and world order.
Nor does single issue politics makes it possible to connect different
struggles. Such connections are necessary to be able to challenge the most
crucial elements in the present system that accelerates the environmental
destruction and social cleavages between and within countries.

What the great challenges today call for is a common understanding of both
causes and necessary solutions to the crisis. These causes may have
different weight in different conflicts but may still be seen as having an
important role in most areas of concern. In general one can point at both
material and ideological causes of conflicts and claim that the roots lie
in both economical, political, social and cultural reasons. Solutions must
also answer to these elements.

Usually experts, political parties or business were seen as actors that
could provide solutions to a crisis. But today expertise tend to
compartmentalize conflicts and solutions giving people in common no role in
changing society. The party system do not provide anymore comprehensive
solutions making social mobilisation for changing the present system
possible. At times political parties do not only seem even more single
issue minded than movements, they also tend to have the same position on
the most crucial issues. To seriously change the role of business and
especially banks seems out of question. This makes no room for political
opposition. To escape from politics and hope that business and consumer's
choice will provide new technology is no solution to the greater problems
either.

So what should be done is to simultaneously develop both material and
ideological solutions confronting the causes of the multiple crisis. This
can be done at local and even smaller levels to the national, regional and
global level by democratizing economic activity and politics at the same
time and link this struggle to efforts in other areas and places.


Climate justice strategy beyond climate policy

Climate justice can be seen as an example of both ecological and social key
importance. Important struggles are here carried out in resistance to the
most dangerous green house gas emission projects. Impressive international
action days are organized all over the world to make people conscious about
the climate issue. Pressure has been made to influence national climate
policy legislation and international negotiations.

Yet what has been achieved is far from sufficient. Actually has green house
gas emissions drastically increased since climate negotiations begun. The
main strategy of the climate movement has mainly created illusions about
the possibilities to come to solutions by climate policy within the present
world order. The climate justice movement has not been able to challenge
this more narrow perspective. A convincing political challenge at all
levels from the local to the national and the global have not yet emerged
confronting the hypocrisy of governments and business when claiming
neoliberal politics can solve the environmental crisis.

This challenge can only become a reality when a climate justice movement
emerges using the full social and ecological strength underlying the global
warming issue. For such an endeavour needs actors capable of both resisting
false solutions and have an interest on sustainable solutions. As the
climate issue is intrinsically linked to ecology small peasants and
agricultural workers are the most important actors for solving land issues
and food production in a sustainable and social justice manner. This means
that solidarity with those struggling on the countryside are essential to
solving the climate crisis. The climate issue is also intrinsically linked
to the urban and industrial struggle thus making workers of all kinds also
essential in fighting false solutions and struggle for a just transition.

This class struggle on the countryside and in urban areas is at the core of
the possibilities to solve the climate crisis. These two class struggles
has to be combined to strengthen each other. Now urban interest dominate
the climate movement. Only by having the rural workers and small peasants
on equal importance with urban actors in the leadership can a global
climate justice movement become successful.

When urban interests have dominated we have seen endless negotiations and
single issue campaigns while the problems gets worse. What we now need is a
more clear opposition against the solution presented by governments in
terms of carbon trading and other ways to postpone solutions into the
future and establish even more global speculations markets. The kind of
clear opposition to the main solutions presented by our governments that
Via Campesina push for shows the way forward. These demands have gathered
wide support from other popular movements sceptical or opposed to markets
mechanism as the main solution to large environmental problems.

Both urban and rural class movements also are key actors when it comes to a
just transition. Here the landless movement in Brazil with their people's
project against the project of capitalism or the trade union campaigns
together with environmental organizations in South Africa and Denmark for a
just transition are good examples.

Such an agenda that combines resistance against corporate capture of the
climate issue with a struggle for a constructive program on every important
sector of society for a just transition gives hope not only to those
concerned about climate issues. Such a program also can give hope in many
other struggles. When popular movements are able to show and struggle for
change on many sectors in a comprehensive work for a just transition a
first step is made in showing how all the resistance can find a common
solution if we unite our rural and urban strength.

When struggling for such a just transition we will soon run into
confrontation with the present system. A key issue is to take money from
the rich and see to that public investments and other ways of organizing
common economy are directed at the needs of a sustainable agriculture,
forestry, fishing, mining, transport, energy, housing, industry and social
services. A just transition programme for changing the power relationships
within and between countries in such a way that each country do not exceed
the carrying capacity when the resources on earth are distributed in a fair
way.

When fighting with those in power that refuses public investments to enable
a fully financed solution to the climate crisis by a just transition
program new alliances can be built. Such a just transition cannot only
create meaningful jobs. When struggling for public investments there will
be a need to confront those actors that oppose actors that stand in the
way. Actors who not only oppose solutions to the climate crisis but also
impose austerity and war for controlling natural resources Thus the
possibility to have a common enemy is emerging stimulating popular
movements convergence on some key issues.

To democratize society is another important aspect of a just transition and
solution to the climate crisis. The corporate capture of UN and other
international institutions have been a great obstacle for the climate
justice movement and others. This antidemocratic tendency can now be seen
also at the national level and at most work places. A brutalization of
daily life takes places when corporations rule the world making the rich
richer and trying to set up people in common against each other. A flexible
job market and harder pressure on everyone to live up to the needs of an
economy and consumption pattern is making daily life harder for many. A
situation directed by the need to improve short term profit and speculation
with the help of an ever growing debt bubble. To be able to confront this
democratic commons of different sorts including institutions as parliaments
and governments needs change and a more comprehensive democracy must
emerge. A comprehensive democracy which at the economical level includes
both economical cooperatives of different sorts were every participant is
equally important to the way banks and the international economic system is
organized.

Democracy is needed, but must be repaired, strengthened and created from
bottom up and in many dimensions. Important resources are there in the
creativity and wisdom that we find in the traditions and present struggle
of indigenous movements, in feminist movements, the movements against
consumerism, in Gandhi's criticism of modern civilization and the ideas of
self-reliance, Ubuntu, Buen vivir, Swaraj, convivialism and so on.

It is not only social and ecological dimensions that are at risk. The
multiple crisis unfolding and now reaching also Europe in many ways is also
creating conflicts and wars. For the first time since the Cuba crisis 50
years ago there is now growing awareness of how the confrontation between
West and Russia is threatening with scenarios causing severe concerns
including even the use of nuclear weapons. That the cause of the conflict
is linked to corporate interest to take control of Ukrainian soil with the
help of IMF, social austerity programs creating unseen misery in a European
country and struggle over the control of fossil fuel resources shows how
the multiple crisis becomes more concentrated. Many of the different
aspects of the multiple crisis is in the Ukrainian conflict becoming
explicit in a very worrying way.

The multiple crisis foments the creation of identities to separate people
in common and create enemies. Thus is the struggle against all forms of
racism, ultranationalism, colonialism inside or between countries,
imperialism and super power exceptionalism of importance. To the climate
justice movement it is of crucial importance to oppose racism or feelings
of superiority among people that have been able to build their own welfare
by contributing much more to the green huge gas emissions than the rest of
the world. It is also crucial for enabling a just transition of both rural
and urban industries to overcome how urban life has become the norm while
countryside people are looked down upon.

The same reasoning as for the climate justice movement can be used for
other movements today the come into conflict with central parts of today's
social and ecological development model. In a longer analysis below the
main focus will be upon the Ukrainian crisis. This conflict entails maybe
more of the cute elements of the multiple crisis than any other or few
other in the world. It is here argued that the passivity among European
movement in regard to this crisis poses a threat not only to make the
conflict worse. It is also a threat for even more severe austerity
politics, against family farming in Europe, hatred between peoples and
brutalization of society. If not addressed here it will be harder to
address the same tendencies in the rest of Europe.

With this background it is of importance to formulate some few points for a
global popular movement strategy to be built from bottom up. A short
version could be as follows:



Yes to a just transition - No to austerity, carbon trading and turning
nature into globalized speculation

Yes to peace building and disarmament – No to wars in Ukraine, West Asia
and elsewhere

Yes to making friends - No to all forms of racism, imperialism and
ultranationalism

Yes to democratization of society – no to authoritarianism and the control
by the few of economics and politics

Peace on earth – Peace with earth!









 How one can see upon one of the present conflicts in Europe is analysed
and discussed in the following longer paper. The starting point is made by
comparing with how the think tanks Stratfor supporting those in power
address the most acute expressions of the multiple crisis at the moment.
While those supporting those in power have a clear view of the connection
between different conflict and are equally addressing both the Ukraine and
Greek crisis popular movements has failed to do so. This article which was
originally commissioned by Prague Spring 2 network against the far right is
now presented before WSF and before it has been approved by PS2. The
content is the full responsibility of the author.



 Tord Björk, Kristianstad 21st of February 2015



 - Ukraine, Greece and the multiple crisis from a WSF perspective



In general the passivity concerning the issue of the broadly speaking
Ukrainian peace conflict is one of the most severe failings of the popular
movements in Europe. Like maybe no other issue it also splits explicitly
the world social forum community. The movements from Ukraine that
participated strongly at the European Social Forum in Malmö 2008 and were
also present at the WSF in Tunis 2011 are now almost completely at odds
with each other. The movements from other countries are almost as split
also or passive which can be seen as worrisome as well. The link between
the Greek crisis and the Ukrainian conflict showing that both actually are
different parts of the same European crisis is under reported and almost
not addressed at all by popular movements or their closest political
allies. The lack of addressing the imminent connections between the most
explicit expressions of the European crisis is worrisome.

The US think tank Stratfor helping those in power with daily analysis
concerning the political and economical developments of the world is much
more concerned. February 24 Reva Bhalla writes in the geopolitical
reporting by the think tank:



”Within the past two weeks, a temporary deal to keep Greece in the eurozone
was reached in Brussels, a cease-fire roadmap was agreed to in Minsk and
Iranian negotiators advanced a potential nuclear deal in Geneva. Squadrons
of diplomats have forestalled one geopolitical crisis after another. Yet it
would be premature, even reckless, to assume that the fault lines defining
these issues are effectively stable. Understanding how these crises are
inextricably linked is the first step toward assessing when and where the
next flare-up is likely to occur.”



>From a perspective of popular movements supporting the WSF declaration such
an understanding could be seen as crucial. The Stratfor answer points at
the economical linkage between the Greek and Ukrainian crisis and the
security connection between the Ukrainian conflict and what is developing
in the relationship between the US and Iran and in general West Asia/Middle
East. There are not resources in the EU for solving the Greek and in
general Southern European crisis and at the same time finance the armament
needed in the way NATO wants. Bhalla writes of the different aspects of the
imminent crisis:



”Within four months, Greece and Germany will be at loggerheads again, and
Greece will likely still lack the austerity credentials that Berlin needs
to convince its own Euroskeptics that it has the institutional heft and
credibility to impose Germanic thriftiness on the rest of Europe.”



And concerning the role of the crisis in Ukraine and the connection between
Ukraine and Iran:

”But even if Germany on one side and Russia on the other were able to bring
about a relative calm in eastern Ukraine, it would do little in the end to
de-escalate the standoff between the United States and Russia.”



”Contrary to popular opinion in the West, Russian President Vladimir Putin
is not driven by crazed territorial ambitions. He is looking at the map,
just as his predecessors have for centuries, and grappling with the task of
securing the Russian underbelly from a borderland state coming under the
wing of a much more formidable military power in the West. As the United
States has reminded Moscow repeatedly over the past several days, the White
House retains the option to send lethal aid to Ukraine. With heavier
equipment come trainers, and with trainers come boots on the ground. … To
lighten its load in the Middle East, the United States will look to
regional powers with vested and often competing interests to shoulder more
of the burden.”



Bhalla concludes:



”Germany needs a deal with Russia to be able to manage an existential
crisis for the eurozone; Russia needs a deal with the United States to
limit U.S. encroachment on its sphere of influence; and the United States
needs a deal with Iran to refocus its attention on Russia. No conflict is
divorced from the other, though each may be of a different scale. Germany
and Russia can find ways to settle their differences, as can Iran and the
United States. But a prolonged eurozone crisis cannot be avoided, nor can a
deep Russian mistrust of U.S. intentions for its periphery.



Both issues bring the United States back to Eurasia. A distracted Germany
will compel the United States to go beyond NATO boundaries to encircle
Russia. Rest assured, Russia — even under severe economic stress — will
find the means to respond.”

A response and of more importance a way of solving the interconnectness of
these conflicts by popular movements based in civil society must be far
more concerned about the interest of people in common. In a very small way
PS2 has been trying to do this. As an all-European network coming out of
the European Social Forum tradition with participants also from countries
outside EU like Belarus and Russia and many from Central/Eastern European
(CEE) countries, PS2 have been addressing such issues as civil society
dialogue to solve the Syrian conflict successfully carried out by WSF
steering committee member Leo Gabriel and others also active in the PS2
efforts to establish civil society dialogue between Donbass and Central and
Western Ukraine. PS2 have from its start in Prague in the spring 2009
firmly based its work against in a broader context expressed in the title
of its first all-European conference titled Right-Wing Extremism and
Populism in a Time of Social and Ecological Crisis. The network has been
organizing solidarity actions globally for antifascists in Russia
confronting the corrupt interests in the Khimki forest conflict and
addressing the need for solidarity with Greece following the European
coordination closely.

Thus it is possible to act addressing the most imminent conflicts in our
time from a perspective that could be claimed to be coherent with the WSF
declaration. It is also necessary that a broader movement will emerge than
the minuscule action by PS2 with the WSF perspective on the crisis. Another
coherent WSF-inspired movement is possible.



It is the Ukrainian conflict where the gap between inaction and action from
a WSF perspective is most evident. Addressing this conflict in its broader
European crisis and even global crisis context can be done by looking at
the whole WSF declaration and seeing how this broader view can be looked at
in a coherent manner.



As Jai Sen pointed out in the book Challenging Empires the WSF declaration
in its finally approved version in 2001 pointed out two main areas of
interest, the social one and the ecological one. (Contrary to the still
today wrong earlier version quoted on the still existing official European
Social Forum website where the environmental issue is sidelined in the same
way as the first WSF declaration did which some months before it was
reformulated in the still official WSF declaration.) WSF is thus presented
as a meeting place for ”groups and movements of civil society” opposing
”neoliberalism and to domination of the world by capital and any form of
imperialism” on the one hand  and those ”committed to building a planetary
society directed towards fruitful relationships among Humankind and between
it and the Earth.”

Apart from the issues raised in this first paragraph the 10th paragraph
addresses several issues which WSF opposes of relevance to the present
European crisis: ”the use of violence as a means of social control by the
State. It upholds respect for Human Rights, the practices of real
democracy, participatory democracy, peaceful relations, in equality and
solidarity, among people, ethnicities, genders and peoples, and condemns
all forms of domination and all subjection of one person by another.” The
next paragraph also brings up explicitly the need to solve the problems of
racism and sexism.


Stratfor addresses the crisis in terms of political and economical matters
in a state centric way. From a WSF perspective the starting point is rather
social and ecological while also opposing capitalism and imperialism.
Furthermore this is done from a civil society perspective also addressing
opposition against racism, sexism and violence as a means of social control
by the state while promoting peaceful relations between ethnicities,
genders and peoples.

>From this point of view the Ukrainian conflict is an expression of all
these concerns at the same time in an utmost serious way. The social future
of Ukraine looks grim. As predicted by the WSF participant Borotba left
wing group in 2013 before the conflict became explicit the neoliberal
agenda of the EU would turn Ukrainian economy into a downward spiral
weakening the domestic companies,  opening up for competitive Western
European corporations and crippling the economic ties with the biggest
trading partner Russia with great suffering among the population through
severe austerity programmes.

In November 2013, the EU was unwilling to allow for tripartite discussions
concerning the consequences of the EU-Ukraine association agreement for the
trade agreement between Ukraina and Russia. The sum offered for the
adaptation of the Ukrainian economy of 600 million euro was considered by
the Ukrainian government as too low both under the presidency of Yanukovych
and the next President Poroshenko.

Only then EU with the help of IMF raised the sum of 10 billion dollars and
allowed for tripartite discussion with Russia that EU refused to in 2013.
These new conditions which most likely Yanukovych would have agreed to
first arrived after a most likely unnecessary civil war due to the
aggressive neoliberal policies advanced by the EU. As the change in EU
policies came too late the situation have further deteriorated and is now a
full catastrophy which none of the main actors behind the crisis wants to
take responsibility for while preferring to put all the burden upon the
Ukrainian people.

Already from the outset the Ukrainian economy was extremely mismanaged by
all governments from the start of the independence in 1991, also compared
to neighbouring countries. Belarus with far less natural resources and a
lower GNP per capita than Ukraine in 1991 had before the present Ukrainian
conflict at least twice as high per capita income. Thus Ukraine has to a
far extent created its own problems. It is also understandable that people
in common were frustrated about the corrupt way the economy was mishandled.
The complete breakdown of the Ukrainian economy that now takes place with
the free fall of the currency Hryvnia, minimum wages and pensions with
sincere announced raised costs for heating and food ahead and closing of
much of the industry turns the country into a economic black hole open to
perfect neoliberal plunder. There is no way to oppose neoliberalism in
Europe without addressing this most aggressive form of neoliberalism which
is now unfolding in Ukraine.


The social situation is also especially bad for women. The economic sex
slave trade is hidden when the exploiting Western countries claim
themselves to be of a higher moral standard then the supposedly more
backlash countries in the East and South. The Polish feminist Ewa
Charkiewicz has outlined how the Ukrainian women and women all over Eastern
Europe have been especially severely exploited by the new neoliberal
regimes through microcredit schemes run by Western banks.

The environmental future of Ukraine looks equally grim. With one of the
most richest soils on the Earth Ukraine is highly attractive for land
grabbing. That land ownership has been restricted for foreign privatized
speculation and a ban on GMO has put some barrier to the full
implementation of the fossil fuel based agroindustry in Ukraine. That is
now rapidly vanishing. IMF demands liberalisation and endorse GMO
corporations as Monsanto. Thus Ukraine is on its way to be a threat against
family farming in all of Europe. Resistance against hydraulic fracturing in
the Eastern parts of Ukraine with rich shale gas resources has met military
response. Conquered areas in the so called Antiterrorist operation have
been subjected to drilling for starting fracking by US-led companies. This
stopped by the fall in world oil prices only. NATO chief Rasmussen stated
in the summer of 2014 that opposition against fracking in Europe was
directly paid and orchestrated by Russia according to security reports
which he could not present as they were secret. Thus NATO saw the
environmental movement as an enemy and the climate justice opposition
against fracking as a tool in the hands of the Russian interest in having
Europe dependent on Russian gas. With the free fall of the Ukrainian
economy the selling out of any natural resources at any environmental cost
to the workers health or nature can be foreseen. There is no way to oppose
the destruction of agriculture and nature in Europe or the world without
addressing the neoliberal takeover of the Ukrainian agriculture, working
conditions and ecological policies.



In terms of not using state violence against the opposition, imperialism
and creating peaceful relations between ethnicities and people, imperialism
has unfolded in the Ukrainian conflict the worst humanitarian crisis in
Europe since the disintegration of Yugoslavia. With almost a million
refugees in both Russia and Ukraine from the conflict in Donbass the
civilian catastrophy in numbers is already close to the numbers after more
than one year in the Yugoslavian wars by mid 1992 which is stated as 2,7
million in total.

The Ukrainian conflict is embedded in both domestic and foreign forms of
domination over people.The use of state violence and the need to adhere to
international agreements has been supported in contradictory ways. Russia
have accused the West and the parties now ruling Ukraine of not adhering to
the international agreement made on 21st of February 2014 while approving
its own way of breaking international rule when letting Crimea after a
referendum under threat of violence to be annexed to Russia in March. EU
and especially the US opposed during the whole crisis the use of violence
against the Euromaidan protesters since the police attacked a peaceful
demonstration on the 30th of November 2013. In response the use of violence
and occupation of administrative buildings by protesters, including many
far right groups started in early December. After the severe laws to stop
the protests on 16th of January and the use of thugs to attack protesters
counterviolence and occupation of governmental buildings escalated as well.
In total some 120 people were killed, mainly protesters but also several
policemen.  The situation posed a clear problems for the functioning of the
state. When a meeting directly after the February 21 agreements at Maidan
immediately turned against the international agreement the Fatherland party
together with Svoboda did not stop the demands directed against what they
just had signed.  A collapse of the state followed directly as the security
forces followed the agreement and withdrew and a change of power in
contradiction with the democratic constitution took place which was rather
applauded than criticized by the Western powers.

The Antimaidan used similar tactics as Euromaidan from the first peaceful
demonstrations in November and after the shift of power in February. When
becoming an opposition against the new government Antimaidan organized
demonstrations, tent camps and occupation of administrative buildings the
state started to use violence against what was perceived as terrorists but
this time without protests from the West. Instead the conflict escalated
into war with separatists

The relationship with both imperialism of political and economical nature
and ultranationalism makes the Ukrainian conflict necessary to address in a
coherent manner with no double standards. On the one hand there is a
domestic conflict with ultranationalists tendencies on many sides, both
sides on the highest level proclaiming that the other part of the conflict
cannot be seen as anything else than a fascist junta or terrorists, both
concepts making a political negotiation more or less impossible.



There are big problems with a tendency of both Euromaidan and Antimaidan to
use the flags of foreign countries. The troubled history of Ukraine with a
heritage of Stalinist repression and crimes has been seen by many
Ukrainians as a motive for making the fascist organization UPA that
struggled against the Soviet Union into national heroes. Thus the red and
black UPA flag from WWII ethnic cleansing campaigns against Jews and Poles
and collaboration with Nazi Germany has been present in the Euromaidan
causing concerns as also the president Poroschenko claims UPA as national
heroes. Likewise has ultranationalist and Russian imperialist symbols been
used on the Antimaidan side also cause concerns

At the international level there is a clash between different capitalist
forms of imperialism both attempting at getting profit out of how Ukrainian
crisis develops. From a WSF perspective it is of importance to confront
both these forms of imperialism together with the need to create solidarity
with the opposition in all parts of Ukraine opposing neoliberalism whether
in the form of domestic capitalists, Russian or Western ones.

The immediate concern is to support the ceasefire and to stop the
humanitarian crisis. A long term settlement must also be promoted by
putting civil society and local populations at the center of our concerns.
This can include regional referenda in accordance with the international
law without threats of violence in the same disputes concerning Northern
and Southern Schleswig or the Åland islands were solved in very different
and peaceful ways after WW

But this cannot take place without a shift of power uniting all who are
opposing the austerity politics and lack of investments in a just
transition of societies that promotes social justice and ecological
sustainability in all of Europe including Russia. Only by addressing the
need for an all-European solidarity including confrontation of the colonial
attitude and policies of the wealthy North Western Europe that has been
profiting from the construction of the neoliberal ways EU politics is done
can a change take place towards the peace needed. Only by simultaneously
addressing way Russia have played a similar role can tensions be lessened
while at the same time domestic forces at play of equal importance as that
of larger countries must be confronted as well.

----


 Source:

The Intersection of Three Crises

Geopolitical Weekly FEBRUARY 24, 2015

Stratfor

By Reva Bhalla
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://openspaceforum.net/pipermail/worldsocialforum-discuss_openspaceforum.net/attachments/20150321/44b7d247/attachment.html>


More information about the WorldSocialForum-Discuss mailing list