Motion 2 – Affiliation with Palestine Solidarity Campaign
Submitted by: Tushar Sarkar:
The Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC), despite displaying some sectarian weaknesses, operates as a necessary national entity in Britain today that has successfully attracted widespread active support from the working people as well as various political factions for the oppressed people of Palestine.
The PSC faces a major political shortcoming, evident in its failure to expand its primary goal of stopping Israel’s aggression and that of its allies to encompass the broader aim of decolonizing Palestine.
To strengthen the bond of solidarity between the people of Britain and those of Palestine in a politically effective manner, the Congress instructs the Workers Party of Britain to form an affiliation with the PSC.
Tushar Sarkar, London branch
I think the link below is all that needs to be said to indicate my opinion on this, I was there that day walking right behind George and his beautiful family.
It was a real pity.
But for me, sorry this is a no.
https://iambirmingham.co.uk/2024/01/27/no-words-madness-george-galloway-decries-ban-birmingham-palestine-protest/
We must stand up against smug middle clsss liberals at every turn if we are to represent the working classes
I have been a regular fee-paying and monthly subscribing member of the PSC for at least five years. However, when I asked it about the absence of George Galloway as a speaker at the PSC marches, I did not even receive an acknowledgment. This situation exemplifies the nasty sectarianism present within the British Left, which necessitates our efforts to combat it both internally and externally. It is important to note that many thousands of individuals who march under its banners remain unaware of this issue. Consequently, thousands are deprived of the opportunity to be inspired by Galloway’s significant contributions to the anti-imperialist movement over the past fifty years. For this reason, we cannot overlook the PSC; we must engage with it not only from the outside but also from within, as this approach is likely to yield more effective results.
I was in Birmingham at that time although then not a WP member. I found it disgusting that GG an established Palestine advocate was denied a speakers slot. Those around me thought the same.
I am broadly neutral on this and would support whatever Congress decides. However, the WPB should ask itself whether excessive organisational engagement in the Palestine issue is the best use of limited resources. The WPB’s position on Palestine and, indeed, on imperialism in general, is well known and strongly expressed but much of the campaigning on this issue is tangential to the most useful way of helping Palestine – which is to persuade the British working class to abandon Labour. The only way to do this is to give priority to addressing its concerns and its concerns generally do not include foreign affairs. A WPB presence in Parliament, then in Cabinet and then in Number Ten is the best way to help the Palestinian people. Most other activity is morally attractive and may even be necessary to mark the card of the system but it is an expression of relatively impotence when you have a Government without moral compass in place, one that has a massive majority of largely supine opportunists underpinning it. So, by all means, affiliate but only if it does not redirect one ounce of effort from what really matters – national political power.
I think PSC has proven to be limited in the support it has been able to offer the Palestinian struggle, especially given how long it has been active as an organisation. Its suspension of the branch members in Manchester who openly supported the resistance in Palestine proved that they won’t even engage in the discussion of whether or not Palestine is allowed to resist the barbaric and illegal violence incessantly bestowed upon them, something our leadership have put their necks on the line to do on numerous occasions. By curtailing any conversation about Palestines right to defend itself keeps Palestinians in a state of perpetual victimhood and maintains the PSC’s saviour complex. This is amplified by their refusal to allow one of our leaders to speak at an event in Birmingham. I would be reluctant to vote to seek affiliation with them.
We have a duty to speak out against genocide – first and foremost- and this is a duty of the Working peoples of this this country and Internationally. To this end I believe we should affiliate, as long as the PSC keeps to its main aims and does not try to dictate policy or affect any policies the WPB puts forward.
I believe that the PSC motion has been presented in good faith with an intention to take the WPB into what appears to be a mass movement. However, the PSC despite its appearance is controlled by people who want to contain the struggle for Palestine within acceptable but ineffecitive limitations. In November 2023 in Manchester many of the leadership were expelled for lending support for certain resistance groups. I have personally attempted to get serious political discussions going with local leading PSC members to no avail. The PSC nationally is an umbrella for many entities some secular some religious. Our time would be better spent identifying those entities where serious links or alliances could be made. From past experience I have noted that any serious threat to the PSC is dealt with by expulsion.
The motion needs more detail and clarity.
Recently West London PSC have caught my complaint letter to the bbc and aligned to support my efforts for my group members of CAAMH. Following this I pressed a matter regarding the political play of the LDs who, in all their MP numbers, do not appear to be supporting the Palestine Statehood recognition bill on the second hearing this Jan. LDs appear to be isolated to backing of their own bill not being heard til July. It was to my utter and total horrific astonishment none of these people PSC were aware about the date for this 2nd hearing of the bill and were grateful. The secretary spent time absorbing the issue and himself then viewed this as a priority issue for the PSC informing me of updates.
On great effort of this secretary after escalation to the top it appeared that the PSC would not ‘under any circumstances’ be willing to support member comms to write to their MPs to support this Bill submitted by the independents. The reason given is that this was an apparant long term view not to support a specific solution eg 1 state 2 state etc. Astounding!!! There’s total oversight on the need for Palestine recognition in UK law foremost, secondary is the solution proposed as a political matter that can formulate and influenced later from amendments.
This PSC secretary, since my awakening, is now supporting an amendment in PSC motion, submitted by one of the biggest unions, to allow support of the Palestine bills moving forward, however is expecting backlash too and working behind the scenes to gain support. This is a meeting for Feb and after the scheduled second hearing. EPIC FAIL in political support by the PSC and unacceptable, given the mass effort to get more parliamentarians into government for Palestine support specifically.
When I say the motion needs more detail and clarity- to say the purpose of the motion is
“To strengthen the bond of solidarity between the people of Britain and those of Palestine in POLITICALLY EFFECTIVE MANNER, the Congress instructs the Workers Party of Britain to form an affiliation with the PSC.”
This is an ill informed view of what the PSC presently represents with their selective and current own definition. For sure I agree with a kind of alignment because UNITY IS STRENGTH but make the detail more accurate (or conditional) to what we realistically expect from this alignment current PSC political effectiveness is questionable.
I am keen to watch progress of this motion for my own understanding of the our party position, as a party.
This motion is being flipped on its head.
There are two compelling reasons to align with the PSC: (a) the struggle for Palestine represents the most critical issue now confronting people worldwide, and (b) the core issue of the colonisation of Palestine is not being addressed by any organisation in Britain.
There are only two routes we can take to establish an effective Palestine solidarity campaign: (i) the WPB can independently develop this movement, or (ii) we can pursue it through a united front. It is evident that the resources available to the WPB, as a newly formed organisation, are insufficient to support the former approach (i..
It is precisely due to the political weaknesses and organisational sectarianism of the PSC, as highlighted by most critics, that we should consider affiliation with it. It goes without saying that affiliation does not equate to capitulation; any united front inherently presupposes the autonomy of all its member organisations
Tanya
What you quoted from the motion is preceded by the following which you overlooked:
“The PSC faces a major political shortcoming, evident in its failure to expand its primary goal of stopping Israel’s aggression and that of its allies to encompass the broader aim of decolonizing Palestine.”
I wouldn’t trust these liberals as far as you could throw them
What do the PSC think about this motion. They proudly declare on their website that they are not affiliated to any political party both here and in Palestine…. Are we just stalking them from a distance…. Do they really have any interest in WPB affiliation… if not this motion is just a waste of time. They have an email address for questions such as this and their press secretary gets back to you very quickly…. ???
The PSC, of which I am a member, is not supposed to be affiliated with any political party; rather, it serves as a coalition of various political parties and community organizations. Should they deny WPB’s affiliation, they would be in the dock to justify that decision.
We really want to go out with them, but they’re not interested in us. I’ve heard this story before, it never ends well.
On reflection, we seem to be spending an inordinate amount of time on this issue. Our pro-Palestinian position is well known and is probably the most radical available in this country. However, Palestine is only one issue amongst many that the Party is designed to deal with – it is vitally important in terms of restoring moral compass to British politics and as a symbol and case study of Western imperialism in action but it is not the most important issue but only one of many interconnected important issues.
The PSC is at least doing something in this area and should be given credit for that even if not being enormously effectively in changing policy rather than venting feelings but it is a typical movement, a classic attempt to build a liberal-left progressive coalition on a single issue, in which political analysis and education is secondary. These ‘movements’ can be the making (as in Chartism) of the Left but also its breaking if they end up becoming a rather woolly emotional operation that proves about as useful in the long run as the Iraq War demonstrations of twenty years ago, that is, they help to educate and expose (which is good) but then get in the way of the serious change that only comes from the discipline of a party political organisation. How many people on those demonstrations still voted Labour at each election regardless?
It strikes me that we could affiliate and yet nothing much would change other than that we would have become a minor part of a liberal-left coalition that would always tend to accommodation and compromise, led by some activist caucus over which we would have no influence. Our scarce party resources could be diverted from electoral organisation into general rallies and demonstrations. The Labour Party would then be thoroughly chuffed that we had spread ourselves so thinly and looked committed to a single issue shared by many of their own activists, the Greens and every sectarian Left grouplet going.
The way we help Palestine is to get a cadre of tough-minded members into local government, terrify Labour on the ground and create a small but aggressive bloc in Parliament that constantly shames the Government with facts on its own evil complicity in death-dealing much as George G. was able to do so effectively for a brief period. Our people should be heading any platforms and on the media because we have earned the right through electoral success. Again, I am neutral towards this motion as such (I am not suggesting it should not be passed but only that its passing should not be interpreted as a reason to divert party resources too far in its direction) although this debate strikes me as being about potentially diversionary gesture politics at this point in our history.