[Gipfelsoli Newsletter] Hokkaido -- Heiligendamm

[International Newsletter]

- G8 2008: Japanese Call Out and latest planning update
- Japanese Government to Keep ‘Hooligans’ Away from Summit
- Japanese Budget: 31.9 Billion Yen to G8 Summit, including 15.5 Billion
Security Costs
- Heiligendamm G8 Summit: a chronology of protest and represssion
- PAULA explains herself
- Turbulence: Move into the light?
- German Court Declares Massive Pre-G8 Police Raids Illegal
- TOP Berlin: Make a foreshortened critique of capitalism history!
- G20: Call out for solidarity and support for Australian anarchists

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G8 2008: Japanese Call Out and latest planning update

The G8 Summit will take place between the 7th and 9th of July. Our action days
will begin on the 1st of July. There will be a series of themed demos in
Sapporo during succeeding four days. July 5th shall be the day of mass rally
and demo in Sapporo. We propose to make it the international day of action,
calling a simultaneous protest in different cities of the world. During the
three days of the Summit we are planning mass direct action at sites near Lake
Toya. People are trying to approach the site as close as possible to send their
voices.

Our presentation consists of following contents:

(1) Action Plans

(2) About the projects

(3) Facilities for foreign visitors

(4) Japanese police behavior and Immigration situations

(5) call out

(1) Action Plans

The G8 Summit will take place between the 7th and 9th of July. Our action days
will begin on the 1st of July. There will be a series of themed demos in
Sapporo during succeeding four days. For now the themes are tentatively: (1)
Anti-neo-liberalism, namely, anti-poverty, precarity, homelessness; (2)
farmers’day, characterizing Hokkaido as the land of farmers; (3) anti-military
base/anti-war; and (4) the day of natives and minorities, symbolizing the Ainu
people, Hokkaido’s native habitants before Japan’s colonization in the 19th
century.

July 5th shall be the day of mass rally and demo in Sapporo. We propose to make
it the international day of action, calling a simultaneous protest in different
cities of the world. During the three days of the Summit we are planning mass
direct action at sites near Lake Toya. People are trying to approach the site
as close as possible to send their voices.

Various groups are planning different direct actions. The tactics are varied.
You will get the information from the affinity groups in Japan. You are
encouraged to make proposals or organize your own actions in consultation with
Japanese groups. Your creativity is most welcome and appreciated.

(2) Various Projects

Japanese activists scene needs global connections and exposure, so we ask for
different types of participations. What is crucial primarily is a convergence,
namely, to meet and talk person to person. Aside from the actions, we are
planning following events.

Global Activist Conference: All the activists who have a little extra time are
encouraged to meet at workshops and speak about themselves. These will take
place in Tokyo, Kyoto/Osaka area, and Sapporo, around the end of June. (As we
shall explain in a minute, most of the foreign activists who go to Hokkaido
have to travel either via Tokyo or Osaka.) There will be a series of symposia,
featuring activist type intellectuals such as Michael Hardt, David Graeber,
Marina Sitrin, and Andrej Grubacic, who will come to Japan for solidarity.

Music concerts of Anti-G8 theme are planned in Tokyo, Sapporo, as well as at the
camp near Lake Toya, the site of the G8. The participants are punks, Djs, and
vanguard musicians who took part in the Sound Demonstrations against Iraq war
(we will show you the image of this type demo later). In Sapporo City, we are
organizing screenings of films related to Global Justice Movement and the
Anti-G8 projects from the past. Various kinds of radical theater groups are
going to take part in the anti-G8 protests, some in their own theater space,
others on the street or other sites.

Abut the events organized by other groups, there will be Alternative Summit
(from July 6th to 8th), involving wider range of groups including NGOs. NO! G8
Action is going to be part of. There will also be a summit of the natives.
Meanwhile the state of Japan is planning a international conference of
university presidents. Against this a coalition of students’ organizations are
calling for protest.

(3) Facilities for foreign visitors

Transportation: We are still researching the safest and cheapest way to get
there from different locations. We shall begin to upload the information at our
website in the near future. But so far, our tentative conclusion is that
airplane might be the cheapest way, rather than boat or train (i.e.,
trans-Siberia railway as some have suggested). To get to Sapporo, which is the
nearest city from Lake Toya and the biggest city in Hokkaido, you will have to
fly either via Tokyo or Osaka. Hokkaido is connected to the main land only via
airplane or boat, namely, there is no car traffic accessible to it. So all of
you might as well stay in either city for a period of time, before the summit
and participate in the events.

In Tokyo, we will set up a convergence center where you get information and
participate in workshops. We will secure cheapest accommodation (about $15 per
night) in a certain area of the city. Also we will organize network of people
who are willing to accommodate the visitors for free. In Osaka/Kyoto area, we
shall set up similar facilities and situations. But these two urban areas are
very different and the activist communities are also different.

In Sapporo, there will be a convergence center. There will be a camp where you
can stay with your own tents and sleeping bags. Vegan food is available for
free, with sliding scale donations. There will be workshops and events. There
will be an independent media center, where foreign media activists can go and
set up their station.

>From Sapporo Lake Toya can be reached either by train (three hours) or car (two
hours). Bus ride will take three hours. There will be a camp and media center
as well. This is the place where the main events will take place.

(4) About Japanese Police and Immigration Issues

The most common weapons Japanese police carry are truncheons, plastic shields,
and sand-stuffed gloves. They used to use tear gas and water-cannon, but not
much recently. Pepper spray has not been used for some time, but some source
says that they might start using it.

They don’t do mass-arrests like the European and American police. They tend to
do close combat by forming a line and arrest people one by one by drawing them
into their side. It is not illegal to hide your face on the street. One does
not have to respond to their interrogations; one does not have to let them
check their belongings. These are not obligation but only voluntary
cooperation.

They rarely start attacking protesters like elsewhere; they are not as
aggressive as American and European police forces. If you are Japanese, once
you are arrested, you are advised to be completely silent, and likely to be
held for twenty three days − the extensions of 3 days, 10 days, and 10
days. The enormity of the custody period has been criticized by the Amnesty
International. But there is one thing we would like you to know. In the past,
foreign political activists have rarely been arrested. The police prefer to let
them go. Probably there is a policy of not making political events
internationally known. Japan tends to be very nervous about their international
reputation. We are hoping that this will remain the same for the anti-G8 2008.

In any case, a legal team has been formed, while politicians and civic
organizations have organized a campaign to watch police behaviors toward the G8
2008.

The bad news is that beginning from the late November, Japan will begin to
employ the same immigration rules as the US. It is locally called the “US
Visit,” where all foreign visitors are fingerprinted and photo-taken. People
are organizing a wide opposition to this.

We cannot tell you how severe the restriction of the immigration will be for the
activists coming for the anti-G8 protests. But we can recommend the activists
who have many arrest records in the past and are nervous about it, but
absolutely want to come − please contact us and we shall try to make
special visa application.

All in all, if Japanese immigration restricts foreign visitors too severely on
this occasion, this will be made into a international stir. We will prepare a
campaign for this.

(5) Come to Lake Toya! Or International Days of Action

Most of all, we would love to have you there. This is a crucial moment for
Japanese social and political movements to open themselves to be global and
uplift their spirits. For this your creative engagement is indispensable. But
of course, everybody cannot come. So please respond to our call for
international action day in a way most suitable for you.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Japanese Government to Keep ‘Hooligans’ Away from Summit

TOKYO – The Justice Ministry has begun preparations to put into force a hooligan
provision of the immigration law to prevent anti-globalization activists from
entering the country to protest the Group of Eight summit meeting to be held in
Hokkaido in July.

Relevant ministries and agencies will discuss criteria for defining
anti-globalization activists, to whom the provision will be applied for the
first time, and seek additional information from other countries.

The hooligan provision was added when Japan’s Immigration Control and Refugee
Recognition Law was revised in 2001 and enforced in 2002 to keep hooligans out
of the country for the 2002 World Cup soccer finals.

The provision states immigration authorities can refuse entry to people who have
injured, assaulted, threatened or killed people or damaged buildings to disrupt
international sports events or meetings.

It also disallows entry to people who have been imprisoned in Japan or other
countries or have been deported before if immigration officials believe they
might be involved in similar actions again.

Under the provision, 19 hooligans were prohibited from entering the country in
2002. The provision has not been applied in other cases.

Unions and environmental protection groups have often been involved in protests
against economic globalization, which activists assert has widened the gaps
between rich and poor and harmed the environment.

Published on Monday, December 31, 2007 by the Times Argus (Vermont)


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Japanese Budget: 31.9 Billion Yen to G8 Summit, including 15.5 Billion Security
Costs

December 20, 2007. The original proposal of the fiscal 2008 made by Finance
ministry, which was approved by the cabinet meeting on the morning of December
20th, contains 31.9 billion yen in total related to Lake Toya G8 summit. The
total 15.5 billion yen budget is allocated to the precaution/security expense
related to the National Police Agency and the material facilities for the large
scale disaster. While the security measures around Lake Toya will be set up by
police units ordered up from all over the country, it will take precautions
against demonstrations and riots by anti-globalization activist forces from
foreign countries and keep a careful watch over the Tokyo metropolitan area.

13.4 billion yen is allocated to the realm related to the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, including administrative costs for setting up the communication
infrastructures such as fiber optics to the conference rooms and the media
centers, for renting the venue, and so on. The budget also includes a series of
international conferences like G8 Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in advance of Lake
Toya summit.

In addition, 940 million yen is assigned to the Defense Ministry for repairing
helicopters for VIP transportation and the communication expenses; 400 million
yen to the Land, Infrastructure, and Transportation Ministry for bulletproofing
patrol boats of Japan Coast Guard which will undertake the maritime security
operations. Moreover, 2007 fiscal year supplementary budget gives 3.3 billion
yen in relation to G8 summit, including the maintenance of the communication
infrastructure and the repair expenses of guard ships and helicopters.

[http://www.hokkaido-np.co.jp/news/summit/66936.html]


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Heiligendamm G8 Summit: a chronology of protest and represssion

Statewatch July 2007 (Vol 17 no 2) 1

>From 6 to 8 June this year, the annual G8 summit took place in Heiligendamm, a
seaside resort near the northern German city of Rostock. Since the WTO meeting
in Seattle in 1999, meetings of representatives of industrialised states and
businesses promoting and coordinating capitalist globalisation have met with
mass resistance, which in turn has been met with heavy-handed policing, some
argue, at an unprecedented scale for liberal democratic states. Protests shook
Washington and Prague in 2000, Gothenburg and Genoa in 2001, Quito in 2002,
Thessalonica, Evian and Cancún in 2003, Gleneagles, Mar del Plata and Hong Kong
in 2005 and now Heiligendamm in 2007. This latest summit also brought with it an
unprecedented arsenal and scale of police violence, criminalisation of protest
and many infringements of fundamental civil liberties.
Bild: Daniel Rosenthal

The scenes unfolding over the week were impressive: roughly 80,000 people
demonstrated on 2 June in Rostock against G8’s neoliberal policies, 10,000
demonstrated on 4 June for the rights of migrants and refugees, and around
20,000 people remained for a whole week in three self-organised camps around
Heiligendamm in order to block the summit at its main entry and exit roads.
10,000 people took part in peaceful blockades between 6 and 8 June. The
protests were policed by a total of 17,800 officers from all over Germany and,
according to some reports, 2,000 military personnel. The deployment of the
latter, which is now being debated in parliament, was in violation of Germany’s
constitution. After two years of alter-globalisation activists in Germany and
abroad preparing the protests, and the authorities’ parallel attempt to
criminalise them, protesters and civil liberties groups are drawing preliminary
conclusions and preparing for lengthy court cases. Below is an incomplete
chronology of the protests and their repression.

Stage 1: preliminary criminalisation

The first public attempt by the German authorities and police to de-legitimise
the protests by way of criminalisation took place on 9 May this year in form of
large-scale police raids. On the order of the Federal Public Prosecution
(Bundesanwaltschaft), 1,000 police officers searched around 40 private homes
and two social centres in Hamburg, Berlin and other cities in northern Germany.
The target: politically active people between the age of 25 and 50, some of whom
were involved in organising the protests against the summit. The reason given
for the raids and confiscation of personal computers and address books, in some
cases even cigarette butts and so-called “scent samples”, was the accusation of
the “formation of a terrorist organisation” under Article 129a of the German
Criminal Code. “Scent sampling” was a technique that many believed had vanished
with the Berlin wall, used by the East German Stasi secret police to track down
dissidents with dogs. Article 129a is a well-known provision amongst activists
as it is regularly applied by police and the public prosecution to legitimise
this severe infringement of privacy without the police having any hard evidence
that any of the victims took, or were planning to take, part in any criminal
act. In this case also, the purpose of its application appeared to be a general
information-gathering exercise targeting the political movement: police copied
the hard disk of the left-wing server SO36.net, which hosts many mailing lists
and websites as well as personal computers of third parties not accused at all.
Press releases from the Republican Lawyers Association (Republikanischer
Anwältinnen- und Anwälteverein – RAV) and groups affected pointed out that the
intent of the operation was to disturb the communication structures of G8
critics, which were in the final stages of preparing the logistics for the
camps and demonstrations, all of who had, at that time, the relevant
permissions of the authorities.

The suspicion that evidence to justify the police raids was lacking was hardened
by the fact that the public prosecution claimed that a criminal procedure that
was initiated against a group named militante gruppe some years ago in relation
to several arson attacks on cars, was somehow related to the G8 protest
organisers. There was, however, no indication that those whose homes were
raided were under suspicion of being members of this group or in any way
connected to arson, or even that the arson attacks had anything to do with the
G8 protests.

The RAV press release (10.05.07) concludes: The [judge’s] order for the house
searches construes a relationship between an old 129a procedure and alleged
plans to disturb of stop the G8 summit. As usual, the wide remits of an Article
129a procedure are being used to openly collect data with a great publicity
effect. Article 129a procedures regularly lead to the collection of masses of
information with a huge mobilisation of investigative forces. Convictions,
however, very rarely take place. But rather than insisting that concrete
attacks were to be averted with the raids, the Federal Public Prosecution
itself confirmed the indiscriminate nature of the action: Today’s
investigations were intended to shed light on the structures and the personal
composition of these groups and did not primarily serve the prevention of
concrete attacks. There was no evidence for We shot into the bush and now we
will see who and what will come out.

With this rather crude justification, the general assessment of the police
operation, not only in left-wing but also mainstream press circles, was that it
represented an illegitimate and unfounded attempt by the authorities to
criminalise the protest movement. This attempt, however, failed spectacularly
in that even conservative newspapers did not take the terrorist allegations
seriously and instead gave space to the protest press spokespersons, who used
the opportunity to advertise the demonstrations, blockades and conferences
during the summit.

The liberal daily paper Süddeutsche Zeitung even printed a comprehensive
chronology of planned demonstrations and action days next to reporting on the
house searches. The lawyer’s association RAV and the Committee for Fundamental
Rights and Democracy (Komitee für Grundrechte und Demokratie) used the
opportunity to reiterate their call for the abolition of provision 129a, as it
was in violation with democratic principles in criminal proceedings and
historically had been applied to criminalise political movements and not to
avert or solve crimes.

Criminalisation is continuing after the protests, too. Using reports of violence
during the G8 summit conservative politicians are now demanding a special police
database on “Autonomous” activists and raids have again taken place in Berlin.
Again no one was arrested, even though the allegation: formation of a terrorist
organisation under Article 129a, was applied also here.

Dutch police arrests 100 cyclists

A similarly disproportionate infringement of civil liberties took place in the
Netherlands on 5 May, a few days before the house raids in Germany, when the
Dutch authorities decided to take action against a rather unthreatening group
of around 100 cyclists from the Gr8chaoskaravaan, who were travelling from
Belgium via Holland to the protests in Heiligendamm. The whole group was
arrested on its way out of the city, allegedly for not following police orders
(that is, not to cycle on a cycle path).

The press release (8.5.07) issued by the Caravan organisers describes the
incident as follows: The cyclists where surprised when without prior warning a
special unit and police on horseback suddenly charged the bicycle ride with
batons drawn, one police van even driving right into the cyclists and hitting a
bicycle. The police then proceeded to arrest all members on the pretext of not
using the bicycle path. Bicycles were confiscated and removed with many being
damaged and locks broken. Demonstrators later reported that the police used
disproportional violence during the arrests.

Ill-treatment continued during the arrest. For several hours the demonstrators
were detained in overcrowded cells – 25 people in a 4×4 m cell – where they
suffered from anoxia caused by lack of ventilation and were deprived of food.
When the first demonstrators were released during the night a growing number of
reports about police intimidation came in. “They told us that what they had done
today was tolerant compared to what they would do if we continued to carry out
the actions we had planned” says Antje, a caravan participant.

The arrests were as surprising for the international members of the caravan as
they were for the Dutch activists. “It was a very unusual police action for
Dutch circumstances” said Antje, Dutch activist and caravan member. “I have
been doing bicycle actions for years and can’t remember anything like this
happening.” Andree Narres from the info office of the bicycle caravans is
outraged: “I can’t find any other plausible explanation than politics and
police doing what they can to prevent, harass and criminalise all protests even
ahead of the G8 summit.” According to him the action may have been planned to
make the bicycle caravan’s entry into Germany harder. “The police didn’t charge
the cyclists with the mere regulatory offence of not using the bicycle path but
of not obeying police orders, an offence that leads to a court hearing.

The bike tour organisers and two victims of the police action have taken legal
action on the grounds of indiscriminate use of violence and illegal arrest as
well as. As surprising as the police action, however, was the lack of media
coverage: the incident received uncritical local media coverage and almost no
national media coverage. Only two members of local socialist and green parties
criticised the incident and proposed a motion in the Utrecht city council to
lodge parliamentary questions, which did not receive sufficient votes. The
mayor, who is responsible for the local police force, denied any police
wrongdoing before any inquiry into the matter.

“Stasi methods”

The next measure, applied from the prolific German law and order arsenal, was
the routine opening of mail in Hamburg and an unorthodox attempt by police to
pressurise a university lecturer into denouncing his students.

The investigation into the militante gruppe that served as an excuse for the
mass house searches of 9 May continued with a comprehensive “snail mail” action
by police, according to the daily newspaper tageszeitung (25.05.07) and later
confirmed by the police. Dozens of officers from the regional Hamburg crime
police authority (Landeskriminalamt) were opening and confiscating “suspicious
looking” mail from specific city districts in the central Hamburg post office.
The order was given by the Federal Crime Police Authority (Bundeskriminalamt)
with the alleged aim of fishing out possible letters to newspapers or
television stations claiming responsibility for attacks. Not even the terrorist
provision 129a allows for this indiscriminate violation of privacy and
interception of communication; the lawyer Sönke Hilbrans reacted with
disbelief:

What more are citizens of whole city districts are to endure? Not only by taking
scent samples but now also by controlling the post, the security agencies are
increasingly and unashamedly resorting to Stasi methods. It is evident that
some ministers and police officers have lost any measure of acting within
democratic and proportionate remits. If the judiciary does not stop them, this
country is on its way towards a different Republic.

Another police action denounced as a “scandal” by the lawyer’s association RAV
was the attempt to get a lecturer at Hamburg University to divulge names of
students active in the G8 protest preparations. Two police officers approached
the lecturer in the break of his talk entitled, ironically, “Fear as a
social-disciplinary instrument”. He refused and asked the police leave the
premises and later proclaimed: “I believe the attempt to convince lecturers to
denounce students who are politically active is a scandal. This massively
infringes on the right to freedom of expression as well as scientific freedom.”
Interception, denunciation and political crimes, together with the erection of a
12 km long fence in eastern Germany to protect leaders from public criticism,
have conjured up uneasy images in Germany of old Stasi methods that were
thought a thing of the past.

Stage 2: fence off, ban, spin and provoke

Similar to earlier summits, the “red” security zone around the Heiligendamm
meeting place was surrounded by a fence (in this case a 12 km long razor-wire
“technical barrier”) and in the red zone itself, regular civil liberties such
as the right to assembly and freedom of expression were restricted. On 10 May,
the Kavala police unit, specially set up in 2005 to police the protests, banned
the demonstration planned for 7 June outside of the red zone as well: the
authorities also issued a general banning order that forbade all assemblies
within a second zone 10 km outside of the security fence. The general decree
led to much criticism by politicians and civil liberties groups and was
contested up to the Federal Constitutional Court. It ruled, one day before the
planned demonstration, that the decree generally banning assemblies outside of
the security zone was unconstitutional, and even explicitly criticised the
police’s “security concept” for being directed “against the creation of
assemblies” as the “right to freedom of assembly was given no chance to be
realised in an adequate manner”. It nevertheless accepted the police’s claim
that the demonstration itself should be banned because of expected violence on
part of the demonstrators.

On the general decree, Tobias Pflüger, the MEP for the left faction (GUE/NGL) of
the European Parliament said that: It is unacceptable that now even the
fundamental right to assembly is being curtailed. I protest strongly against
this decision and demand that those responsible return to the rules of
democracy. Those who invite the G8, also invite the legitimate protest. The
expression of protest has to be comprehensively protected, at the least to
bring the message of the critique of the [political content] of G8 [policies]
across [to the general public].

The Committee for Fundamental Rights and Democracy (18.5.07) pointed out that:
Such a precipitated banning order has to be based on current and concrete
evidence that a direct threat to legally protected interests exists. There is,
however, no sign of any evidence supporting this claim.

The fact that the Federal Constitutional Court used the escalation of violence
at the end of the demonstration of 2 June to justify banning the 7 June
demonstration has to be considered in light of later revelations of the use of
agent provocateurs by the police and the claim by demonstration observers that
the escalations on 2 June were initiated not only by some ’black block’
demonstrators but also by undercover police in the demonstration. Furthermore,
the violence appeared to have been hugely exaggerated: an attempt to
corroborate the police claim of 200 severely injured police officers would
later reveal that only two police officers were hospitalised for two days, one
of whom had fallen down some stairs whilst chasing demonstrators. Also
allegations appearing in the mainstream media (such as FAZOnline, Deutsche
Welle and the tagesspiegel) quoting an unnamed “high-level security expert” who
said that demonstrators attacked police with knives or were throwing potatoes
spiked with nails were denied by police spokesman Manfred Lütjann of the Kavala
police unit (see the website Unspin the G8, which is dedicated to media spin
around the G8 and lists various similar incidents).

“Yesterday was yesterday – and today is today” The ultimate scandal, however,
was the discovery on 6 June that the German police had deployed agent
provocateurs: it is ironic that on a demonstration that was banned by the
police on grounds of expected violence, a group of five undercover police
officers inciting stone throwing was identified by peaceful protesters. The
five men, dressed as “black block” demonstrators, carried stones towards a
group of people blockading the security fence and tried to convince them to
start throwing them at the police.

Angered by this, as the demonstration organised by the Block G8 network was
explicitly peaceful, (reiterated by the network in its numerous call-outs and
on its website) activists started to question the motives of the men in black
and asked for their identity and political background. The men refused to
identify themselves and ran away. One of them, however, was stopped by
demonstrators and challenged. From that moment he started addressing the
protesters with the formal address “Sie” and refused to reply to questions.
After intervention by the legal team as an angry crowd formed around him, with
his agreement he was led to the police lines, which welcomed him amidst their
ranks.

Immediately after the incident, police spokesman Manfred Lütjann categorically
denied the use of agents provocateurs: “As an institution acting in accordance
with the rule of law we are not allowed, and do not do, such a thing”. Although
German law does in principle allow for the use of agent provocateurs, Lütjann
was adamant the discovered police officer was not sent by Kavala and added: “I
do not know what other security agencies might be doing; I cannot represent any
internal security service officers here” (junge Welt, 8.6.07). The next day,
however, the evidence forced Kavala to retract its statement and Ulf Claassen,
another Kavala spokesman, admitted to Spiegel- Online (8.6.07) that the police
had used an undercover agent in the blockade in question, commenting on the
embarrassing retraction with: “Yesterday was yesterday – and today is today”.

Green party MP Christian Ströbele said he would ask a parliamentary question on
the incident and found that “if it appears to be true, the evaluation of many
incidents of these past days would of course have to be seen in a different
light”. The Rostock public prosecution is currently assessing possible criminal
proceedings against the undercover officer on grounds of incitement to commit
crimes.

Stage 3: arrest and attack

This brings us to stage three in the chronology of policing summit protests: the
use of disproportionate police violence and mass arrests. Protest groups and
media activists have started collating evidence and eye witness reports on the
police repression (www.gipfelsoli.de, http://de.indymedia.org). The balance
drawn so far shows that the security operation entailed massive stop and search
operations, mass detention in special cages, filming of arrestees in cages,
preventative arrests, accelerated court procedures, use of pepper stray and
baton charges on peaceful demonstrators, water canon use against peaceful
blockades, confiscation of bicycles and personal belongings and a plethora of
violent incidents and sexual assault. One demonstrator, for example, reported
on Bavarian Special Forces brutality during the arrests on 2 June: As I was
pushed into the car, I was told that I should “shut up, otherwise there would
be trouble” and that they were “fed up with stone throwers like me”. On the way
to the Police base, I was massively pressured to “admit everything” because they
were “going to get us all anyway”. I was kicked, beaten, shouted at and
threatened: “when we get there we will take you off the list and drive with you
into the woods, nobody will notice”. All in all, the whole incident took 4 and a
half hours, until I was released without charge.

The escalation from 2 June, exacerbated by police reports of hundreds of
“severely injured” officers, was used by police to legitimise repression during
the migration action day on 4 June. In the morning, the opening rally at a block
of flats in Rostock- Lichtenhagen, commemorating the racist pogroms against
asylum seekers in 1991 which saw hundreds of bystanders cheering on a gang of
neo-nazis setting fire to a house full of refugees and foreign workers, was
attacked by police without reason. The legal team reported that the police
encircled peaceful demonstrators and pepper-sprayed them arbitrarily. Two
demonstrators suffered serious eye injuries during a water cannon attack on a
peaceful blockade at the West Gate of the security fence.

Further reports about police violence include:

    * A number of people were arrested because they were carrying a banner with
the slogan, “Free All Prisoners!” as they passed by a prison on their way to a
demonstration. The police judged this as incitement to actively help people
break out of prison.

    * Two people were taken into detention at Kühlungsborn beach as they played
in the sand near the fence. Police accused demonstrators of trying to dig a
tunnel.

    * According to the legal teams, there was an overwhelming use of violence
during arrests, particularly by the Berlin police. Lawyers were also pushed
around and insulted. One lawyer who had subjected a police officer to a stiff
cross-examination in a previous court case was threatened during a
demonstration. She was told that they knew her name and where she lived.

    * During police transportation there were further abuses, as one victim
describes: “The police took off the handcuffs cutting into my hands so that
they could take off my rucksack, threatening to beat me if I moved. To
underline their point, one of the police officers rammed my head against the
cell wall. After the police finally left me and other detainees in the cell, we
were told not to speak or else he would ensure that we “would never be able to
speak again”. “In one case a police unit stormed a tram as it stopped, police
beat up everyone dressed in black and then left the tram again immediately”,
the legal team said on 4 June.

    * During a police check one woman was grabbed in the crotch whilst officers
made leery noises. Demonstrators were also sexually harassed near Wichmannsdorf
camp. On a parking lot near the camp on 5 June, a group of women had to undress
in front of all the police officers present.

    * At the fifth police check point on the way to the airport a demonstrator’s
car was tampered with by the police. All of a sudden the fuel injection pump was
missing and the vehicle would no longer start as the group of demonstrators was
encircled by grinning police officers.

    * A media bus from Holland was stopped on its way to a permitted
demonstration at the airport and all passengers were detained, including a
mother with her 3-year-old child, who was also photographed for the ID-check
and put in the prison cages. The media bus was later confiscated for around 24
hours along with all of the journalists’ equipment and material in the bus. One
journalist and the bus driver were held overnight.

The treatment of prisoners or rather, detainees, during the summit received
strong criticism by lawyers and legal teams, culminating in an unusual event on
7 June: the legal team organised a demonstration in front of the Rostock
Industriestrasse detention centre to protest against the poor conditions for
detainees and the fact that prisoners were denied contact with them. The
lawyer’s association RAV had issued a press release a day earlier criticising
the police for stopping legal teams from carrying out their tasks during the
demonstrations.

Two lawyers were pushed by police onto the street, in several cases lawyers were
verbally threatened by police that if they would not “shut up” and stop asking
arrestees for their names they would be beaten up. When the Kavala police unit
announced the closure of the only lawyer’s room at the detention centre, which
was holding hundreds of detainees in cages (implying that lawyers would have to
wait outside on the street until the police called them in to see their
clients), the lawyers made their decision hold a demonstration. The law in
Germany states that anyone detained by police has to be given a chance to speak
to a lawyer and within four hours, he or she has to be presented to a judge who
decides on the evidence and on which grounds the detainee will be held for
longer. On 7 June, around 100 people were held in the Rostock detention centre,
some for up to 12 hours, without access to a lawyer or being told what the
charges against them were. Not a single one of them was presented to a lawyer
or a judge.

The preliminary balance of arrests and convictions (collated by Indymedia
Germany) reads as follows: In total, 1,057 persons were detained up to 8 June,
in 140 cases, a judge decided on extending detention periods. The interior
ministry announced that 850,000 people were checked at Schengen borders, 155
were refused entry and 57 people who had outstanding arrest warrants were
arrested. During more intensive checks at the external Schengen borders, 401
people were refused entry into Germany.

Rostock police announced it stopped 67 persons from entering the Rostock area.
The justice ministry announced that 8 people were sentenced to between 6 and 10
months in prison in fast track procedures. Charges are: attempted and actual
assault and severe breach of the peace. Two of these people have been released
on parole, although the convictions are final. Two persons were remanded in
custody awaiting trial. In 120 cases judges ordered long-term detention on the
basis of people being considered ‘dangerous’. These people were released at the
end of the G8 summit. In the period from 2 to 10 June, a total of 103 persons
(90 men and 13 women) were imprisoned, of these, 92 people received security
and order rulings and 11 arrest warrants.

The youngest person was 16, the oldest 41. Amongst these there were 41
foreigners, 40% of the total. Nationalities were: Belgian 2, British 8,
Estonian 2, French 2, Irish 4, Italian 1, Canadian 1, Dutch 1, Polish 1,
Russian 1, Swedish 14, Swiss 1, Spanish 2, US American 1, and German 62.
(Source: http://de.indymedia.org/2007/06/185126.shtml)

A testing ground for security measures: deploying the army internally

Finally, this summit, like other summits before it, served as a platform for
ministers and police to test their toolkit of repressive measures. In addition
to reinstating Schengen border controls, Interior Minister Schäuble, pushed for
the deployment of armed forces inside of Germany to control protesters and other
“security risks”. It appears that the army had taken part in policing the
protest with over 2,000 personnel, “armoured reconnaissance vehicles” (mobile
armoured tanks used for intelligence and communications) and Tornado jets. The
latter flew over one of the camp sites above the head of 3,000 activists on 5
June. The web-news service Spiegel-online reported on 16 June that the jet flew
lower than the minimum height of 150 metres. The German air force has now
started investigations against the two pilots for misconduct, who apparently
ignored the warning signals that are automatically generated by undercutting
the minimum height.

Interior state secretary Peter Altmaier declared during parliamentary question
time (13.6.07) that the use of “Tornado jets took place in the framework of
mutual assistance [between authorities] in order to gather intelligence on
possible interference on roads or the landscape. This is a common and normal
procedure. It has a sound legal basis”. Journalists and activists reported
military police patrolling the area on motorcycles and it was impossible to
ignore dozens of air force helicopters continuously circling over Heiligendamm
and particularly over the camp sites.

Far from being a common procedure with a sound legal basis, the deployment of
armed forces internally has been debated in the media and by constitutional
experts for more than a year. Green Party MP Christian Ströbele called the
action a “precipitated praxis of the deployment of armed forces internally
which interior minister Schäuble is obviously planning [to go ahead with].”
Furthermore, the constitution regulates the deployment of armed forces over and
above procedural regulations such as mutual assistance. Even the scientific
service of the Lower House of Parliament finds that the constitution only
allows for the army to assist the police and emergency services in cases of
catastrophe, and then only with non-armed assistance such as emergency
accommodation and medical services.

“Technical Mutual assistance” can only be granted with additional support
equipment that the police already has at its disposal in its regular arsenal,
that excludes Tornado jets and armoured tanks. In light of the jets flying
below 150 metres and the threatening effect that would have on the
demonstrators, Dieter Wiefelspütz, home affairs spokesman for the social
democratic party SPD, said on 16 June that “From a current perspective, the
deployment was not only politically insensitive but also unconstitutional”.

Rather than representing a technical-legal issue, the use of the army against
its own population represents an ideological shift away from democratic
fundamental principles that should guide law enforcement and intelligence
agencies, towards state of emergency principles. This is reflected in the fact
that the government and responsible spokespersons adamantly deny the
problematic nature of the conflation of army and police tasks. Franz Josef
Jung, member of the conservative Party (CDU) and spokesperson for the ministry
of defence argued that Heiligendamm served as a training ground for the army
for war zones such as Afghanistan. He emphasized that the army thought it was
out of the question that “we have to practise our skills, as you can see in
Afghanistan” and claimed that police as well as army would benefit from the
deployment of armed forces in Heiligendamm: “it is a win-win situation for the
police as well as for us”.

RAV press release archive: http://www.rav.de/news//archive.php; Bike Caravan
press release (8.5.07): http://wiki.dissentnetwork.org/wiki/Bicycle-Caravan
_%22West%22:press:2007-05-08; Press release MEP Tobias Pflüger (10.5.07):
http://tobiaspflueger.twoday.net/stories/3712698/; The Media Gets the Massage -
the uneven battle over the media (Unspin the G8):
http://www.unspintheg8.org/media-gets-massage-uneven-battle-over-media
Spiegel-online video report on the successful blockade of 6 June and the
discovery of the agent provocateur: http://www.spiegel.de/videoplayer/
0,6298,18864,00.html; Spiegel-online (8.6.07) on the agent provocateur:
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/0,1518,487554,00.html

Chronicle (English) of police violence and state repression:
http://gipfelsoli.org/Multilanguage/English/3033.html; Other chronicles of
repression (German): http://de.indymedia.org/2007/06/184905.shtml
http://de.indymedia.org/2007/06/183750.shtml

Parliamentary questions and answers (13.6.2007) on the use of army jets and
agent provocateurs: http://www.bundestag.de/bic/plenarprotokolle/
plenarprotokolle/16102.html; Süddeutsche Zeitung (13.6.07) on the use of army
jets: http://www.sueddeutsche.de/deutschland/artikel/267/118135/; Army jets fly
lower than legal minimum height:
http://www.tagesschau.de/aktuell/meldungen/0,1185,OID6965730_REF2,0 0.html:
Assessment of police violence in parliament by Green Party MPs, lawyers and the
police trade union:
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/0%2C1518%2C488898%2C00.html


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PAULA explains herself

Meanwhile a series of asessment papers have been published about the G8
protests, some of them carry approaches that are worth discussing. a text that
quite some people have been waiting for has not been published, it somehow
disappeared in between. So here it is, it should reach many and play its part
in the evaluation-process.

PAULA explains herself

With this paper we want to publish a part of our evaluations and self-criticism.
PAULA, the crossregional plenary for a decentral space of actions and blockades
around the G8 Summit in Heiligendamm, has been a heterogeneous, temporary
alliance of groups and sole persons. For this reason we will only evaluate the
decentral blockades and not deliver a collective statement about the G8
protests in general. We take part in this discussion in another place in our
everday lives and in our groups.

The idea and the hope

The idea for PAULA emerged from the background of years of experience of
protests against the Castor nuclear waste transport inWendland as well as from
our experiences during the defensive summitblockades 2006 in Gleneagles. To
complement the concept of massblockades of Block G8 and because of our
criticisms of its restricted frame of action, we wanted to try to massively
hinder the summitmeeting 2007 with a circle of decentral blockades of the
crossroads to Heiligendamm. We wanted to use the “specific summit” situation-
to be with very many people on the spot – to effectively disturb the course of
the summit at various infrastructural points, thereby expressing our clear and
unmisunderstandable rejection of the meeting and of neoliberal politics. To
create an uncontrollable situation we thought of several material blockades
with materials that were already there, deposited for this. Decentrality should
enable us to act as uncalculable and flexible as possible.

Part of the PAULA concept was firstly) that further groups and networks would be
inspired by PAULA and prepare decentral blockades and secondly) that lots of
activists woulld join in and take part during the days of the summit. By this
we also tried to get out of the small clandestine circles and open the door for
mass militancy. There was work done to establish a structure of information to
enable groups to exchange points in time and place of an action expected to
happen, and that should guarantee the short term integration of other groups,
especially of the internationals.

The conditions and us

Shortly before and especially during the actiondays we realized our weaknesses
and limits. The result was desillusioning. We only heard of a few actions that
we could count as a decentral blockade (see
http://www.gipfelsoli.org/rcms_repos/maps/action.html). Some of the partly well
prepared decentral actions could not take place. Partly this was because the
cops got infos about planned actions, or because of missing activists, which
against our expectations got very close to the fence and therefor far from our
material depots. At other places the prepared points for blockades and the
material depots collided with other actions, so that these points could not be
reached because of the joyful trafficjam caused by them. Besides these outher
conditions a certain failure has to be ascribed to our own inability to stay
able to act in repressive surroundings. Already in the preparation we put the
focus on the concrete preparation of the individual actions and not so much on
the effective mobilisation for the actionplan. Connected with half-clandestine
action-forms is the difficulty to promote the ideas and have spokespersons for
the actions, which became a big problem for us during the days of the summit.
In the preparation we could work with known comrades from other alliances who
spread the decentral blockade-concept in different places. During the days of
the summit we failed totally to get our ideas known in a self-conscious and
offensiv manner. Because of fear of repression, we were way too much in the
background, so that even people who sympathised with the idea, had hardly a
chance to participate.

We became aware that the announcing of the actions needs to be much more and
more precisely thought about in the preparation-process. Instead of
concentrating on nice sounding calls we probably would have interested more
people when we would have given more detailed informations about the concept,
how to participate, orientation (accomodation roads, good points of attack) and
how many people are needed for the action. During the days of action we would
have needed an autonomous meeting or we should have been more visible on the
campmeeting, or the last autonomous meeting organised by the internationals in
Reddelich, to propogate our ideas and plans offensively. Another not
unimportant reason for our being absent, we see in the overloading of activists
being too much involved also through our responsibilities in the general
protest-infrastructue, which was mainly taken care of by persons of the
autonomous spectre. They took care of the wholes and helped in this way for the
success in the other concepts, but did not take care enough responsibility for
their own concepts. Finally, we have to say, that even when the hope should die
at last, to hope that many other groups will be animated to organize own
actions, only by calls, is not realistic at this time.

PAULA was an attempt. The result does not only mirror the organisational
weaknesses and limits, but also mirrors the lack of willingness of the
radical-left-scene to participate in this kind of concept by taking their own
initiative. When, because of bad preparation or consuming-behaviour,
self-organized and militant forms of protest stay away, then we see this as a
bad signal for the dedicatedness of the radical left.

The other way of “friendly fire”

In the discussion about possible action and blockade-forms during the G8-summit
we have decided not to participate in the concept of Block G8 (BG8), because in
the concept there was this ghost of regulation and the wish to control the
action and a stress on civil disobedience; all militance and further going
actions were rejected and strongly misliked in this concept.

Principally we liked the idea of mass-blockades. But the way it was put into
practice was wrong, in our eyes. Because in its precise and clear description
which forms of action are accepted and which not we do not only see the wish to
make space for participation of young and unexperienced activists. We also see
this way of acting as an implicit taking over of the criminalising view of
militant forms of actions. In this way in the BG8 a polarisation between forms
of action which are justifiable and those who are not took place, which could
not be corrected through the participation of radical left partner
associations.

Two days for the blockades representatives of BG8, a person who registered the
anti-militaristic actiondays in Rostock-Laage took part in conversations with
the cops in order to negotiate their space of action. The background of this
decision for BG8 has been their fear of not having enough space to act, because
of the riots on Saturday. Through the disclosure of their own plans they hoped
for a deescalation strategy of the cops or at least being more able to
critisize and delegitimate the cops when they would behave in a hard way. We
see these kind of conversations with the cops as a political mistake because
the idea of civil disobedience is to break the rules, especially we see this as
a problem because BG8 urged the activists in some cases to keep themselves to
the rules BG8 has dealt out. Our estimation got affirmed already on Wednesday
when the cops managed to neutralize the blockades. In this situation BG8 was
not able to create more space of action or to open the fence.

Our relationship with BG8 cannot be described only with the above mentioned
critisism. We always tought of both blockade-concepts as a complemention of
each other and also coordinated our blockades with parts of the BG8 alliance.We
were happy that thousends of people were willing to take part in the blockades
and we learnd of BG8 how to promote clearly. In the end also many people of our
circles took part in the BG8 blockades because of missing alternatives.

It is clear that propaganda of militant action-concepts is in contradiction with
the legitimated system and the majoritarian opinion. Therefore it is one of our
biggest challenges to cope with this contradiction in our political practice
and to represent publicly. The emanzipative character of actions and political
campaigns can surely not be measured to their grade of militance, but to their
antigonism towards the established system. Laying behind the discussion of
breaking the rules lays the relationship towards the violence of the state.

Solidair criticisms for the development of militant concepts of action ist
wished for and necessary. But it should be clear in all statements to other
forms of actions not to change sides in the fight for social change. Too fast
exclusion, denunciation and thinking over handling out comrades to the cops has
nothing to do with solidair behaviour.Very quickly a “ do not hit us” can change
in a “do not hit us ” .

The dissolution and the future

We have been PAULA. It showed that the concept of PAULA had its weaknesses and
needs changes in the preparation and the putting into practice. But still we
believe that the idea of decentral blockades can be useful, either during
summits, castortransports or fascist demonstrations.

We keep to our belief that unforeseeable and uncalculable forms of resistance
are necessary. A logical consequence of our analysis of the society is a
militant practice in the radical left.

We hope that our thuogst can be helpful in the planning of other subversiv
actions.

Solidair greetings with the comrades who are accused with the 129a proceedings

PAULA

(Überregionales Plenum- Antiautoritär-Unversöhnlich-Libertär-Autonom)


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Turbulence: Move into the light?

Postscript to a turbulent 2007

It’s night time and a man is crawling around on his hands and knees, looking for
his car keys underneath a lamp post. A woman comes along and starts to help him.
After they’ve been searching together for a while the woman asks the man: “Are
you sure this is where you dropped them?”

The man replies: “No, I think I dropped them somewhere else.”

“Then why are we looking here?” she enquires.

“Because this is where the light is.”

Download booklet at www.turbulence.org.uk


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
German Court Declares Massive Pre-G8 Police Raids Illegal

A massive police raid against globalization opponents ahead of the Group of
Eight Summit in Heiligendamm was unlawful, Germany's highest court decided. The
group suspected of planning attacks was deemed legal.

Car bombs do not constitute terrorist activity and are a matter for the states
and not the federal prosecutor's office, Germany's Federal Court of Justice
ruled on Friday, Dec. 4, in Karlsruhe.

On May 9, 2007, one month prior to the G8 summit in Germany, 900 police officers
searched 40 apartments, offices and left-wing meeting places in six German
states, taking numerous documents into custody.

The raid, which has now been judged illegal, was ordered by the federal
prosecutor's office after left-wing activists came under suspicion of planning
terrorist attacks surrounding the summit.

Court doubts terrorism intent

A police raid in HamburgBildunterschrift: Großansicht des Bildes mit der
Bildunterschrift: Protestors clashed with police during the raid

One of the groups was accused by the federal prosecutor's office of having
committed 12 acts of violence, mainly using car bombs, over a two-year period,
resulting in damage totaling 12.6 million euros ($18.5 million).

In a statement issued on Friday, the Federal Court expressed "strong doubt" that
this particular group should be criminally prosecuted, though it said its deeds
shouldn't be made light of.

A terrorist act is one that causes significant damage to the state, concluded
the court.

Friday's ruling came in response to one complaint from a member of the suspected
activist group. The court said other similar complaints have yet to be reviewed.

Left-wing politicians applaud court ruling

The head of the Green Party, Claudia Roth, praised the decision as a "blow to
the responsible parties."

"It is increasingly becoming a problem that the federal court has to fix
decisions made by the federal prosecutor's office in order to uphold law and
justice in Germany," said Dietmar Bartsch of the Left Party.

Both Interior Minister Wolfgang Schäuble and Federal Prosecutor General Monika
Harms had advocated the May 9 raid.

In the weeks leading up to the summit in the resort town of Heiligendamm,
anti-globalization activists held demonstrations, some of which involved
skirmishes with police.

[http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3038318,00.html]


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOP Berlin: Make a foreshortened critique of capitalism history!

Without a radical critique every action becomes mere activism- reflections on
the anti-G8 mobilisation 2007.

3, 2, 1...action!

Without a doubt, it was the event for the European left this summer: anti-racist
groups, queer activists, squatters, debt-relief groups, anti-fascists, trade
unionists, environmental organizations...in June, all of them travelled to the
small German village of Heiligendamm in order to express disagreement or even
disrupt the G8 summit. Months before there was a marathon of meetings,
conferences, fundraising concerts, and every leftist place in Europe got
swamped with flyers and posters mobilizing against the summit. The focus of it
all: action. Demonstrations, riots, blockades, vigils, clandestine
actions...there was something in it for everybody.

Those calling into question this mode of ‘action for action's sake’ are often
accused of trying to break or slow down the movement, of being a threat to the
radical left's unity, of intellectualizing. But protest in itself is not
emancipatory – how often have we seen racist mobs in the streets protesting the
building of a refugee home or mosque, or large-scale fascist demonstrations that
also aim at ‘the system’. Even ‘anti-capitalism’, the leitmotif of the more
radical part of the anti-G8 movement, can be a deeply reactionary ideology, as
can be seen not only when looking into the ideology of the Third Reich, but
also when looking at contemporary campaigns by fascist groups who are decidedly
‘anti-capitalist’.

Keeping all of this in mind, it would be naive for a radical left to simply want
to take part in whatever social movement comes along. Those who do not want to
mix up Islamists, neo-Nazis, landless peasants, welfare recipients and fare
dodgers in one subversive mass, to group them together as ‘the people’ standing
up against ‘the system’, will come to a lowly result. An intervention without a
critical definition of one's own standpoint is less than a sad 'being part of'
- it turns itself into a tool for the wrong purpose. Therefore, theory becomes
necessary - not because of a ‘more-radical-than-thou’ battle, but in order to
truly understand just how capitalist society functions so that it can
adequately be overcome.

G8: légitime!

Against the popular opinion among the anti-globalization movement that the
summit was illegitimate in the sense of ‘undemocratic’, we need to take note of
the realities of bourgeois society: Not just a gang of robber-knights but in
fact representatives of constitutional states with basic laws and acknowledged
proceedings of legitimisation came together at the summit. As juristic persons
states can "freely" and "equally" arrange informal meetings and close
contracts. Instead of forging alternative models of democracy and law, an
emancipatory movement should recognize that domination and exploitation in
capitalism are performed not primarily against law and democracy but within and
through these forms.

This insight should have had large-scale consequences for the mobilization
against the G8 summit. It implies an explicit refusal of economistic and
personalized (state-) conceptions. Whereas the first wants to directly debunk
the state as a mere tool of the economically dominant class - to demand its
‘right’ use for the common good in circular reasoning-, the second primarily
conceives the condition of the world as a result of individual misconduct of
single capitalists and politicians acting out of greed, venality or an absent
sense of responsibility.

One of the inherent dangers of this logic is to fall into anti-Semitic
stereotypes: the anti-Semitic ideology is usually embedded into a worldview,
which ‘explains’ the evils of modern capitalist society. Capitalism in this
worldview is not seen as a process, which arises following its own structural
logic without a particular leadership, but rather as an exploitative project
consciously put into effect by evil people. Historically, this way of thinking
emerged in the 19th century in Europe in a time of to the rapid spread of
capitalist society and the social upheavals this triggered. The anti-Semitic
worldview thus consists of personification for non-understood economic and
social procedures and draws upon the picture of the ‘Jewish capitalist’ that is
deeply embedded in Western culture, which for centuries associated Jews with
money. It can be displayed in talk of ‘the capitalists’ who ‘pull the strings’
from ‘the US East Coast’, ‘dominate the world’ and just can't get enough with
their ‘greed’.

Less reactionary but similarly problematic is the moral conviction of certain
companies and multinational corporations, whose practices are - often rightly -
stigmatized as especially abhorrent. What falls out of this perspective is a
critique on the plain ‘vanilla’ exploitation - that lies in every wage
dependant, commodity-producing labour. Furthermore, the notion misconceives
that in capitalism the economic actors are following a rationality that is
forced upon them by the economic relations themselves. Even the capitalist is
dammed by the band of competition to make profit or to perish. The process of
concentration and centralization of capital is insofar a structurally caused
moment of the dynamic of capital accumulation. That's why it would be ludicrous
to demand for instance ‘fair competition’ against the ‘power of corporations’ or
to classify capital under the motto small = good and large = evil with sympathy
points.

To conceive ‘rule of law’ as a specific form of capitalist domination does
certainly not mean that within capitalism legal norm and legal practice, ideal
and reality are always in accord with each other. That would mean to ignore the
ideological character that the law form has in a capitalist society. That on an
empirical level not only several capitalists but also institutions of
constitutional states are using illegal practices - disposing toxic waste in
Africa, killing trade unionists, practising torture, etc. - has been widely
scandalized. However, a political movement that primarily criticizes what is
generally defined as ‘criminal’, acts on the level of critique of an attorney.
The fallacy of such a position admittedly is: The world would be all right if
just everybody would respect the law.

Theory in action

While the contradictions of capitalism can be experienced in daily life, as a
complex social relationship of domination capitalism withdraws itself from
every-day-life’s consciousness. To introduce a radical approach into the
struggles against the G8 does target on more than a ritualized gesture. But
building a foundation of theory does not mean to withdraw into the ivory tower
and never take to the streets. On the contrary, such a conclusion would be
fatal: if one does not want to capitulate in face of capitalist reality, a call
to action is more than necessary.

The G8 summit can be conceived as one of the forms in which capitalist society
reflects itself on the political level. An irreconcilable act of negation
towards these should not aim at the ‘One Family’ of the defrauded and the
disappointed, but at the possibility of bringing the scandal of capitalism in
its totality into the focus of critique: to criticize its structures in
institutions and in our heads and to develop a perspective beyond domination,
violence, repression and exploitation. At this year's summit, this only
happened to a certain extent – more visible were the ‘analyses’ that conceived
the Group of Eight as the ‘spider in the web’ or the ‘distributing centre’ of
‘predatory capitalism’ and the personalisation’s that imply some of the dangers
and shortcomings mentioned above. More important than protesting against the
summit seemed for us to critically intervene into one of the biggest leftist
movements at present tense and challenge some of its dominant assumptions.

While talking about revolution seems to be pretty naive today, it appears to be
even more stupid to waste all of one’s abilities to arrange oneself with the
status quo. The G8 summit can be seen as a cause to go the whole hog with the
critique of capitalism – not because the G8 is the personified evil but rather
because domination in capitalism basically has neither name nor address. The
‘right place’ for anti-capitalist resistance is never immediately given. It is
defined exclusively by the experience of social contradictions, leading to the
insight that there is a necessity to (to speak with Karl Marx) “overthrow all
relations in which man is a debased, enslaved, abandoned, despicable essence.”

TOP (Theory. Organisation. Praxis) is a Berlin-based antifascist,
anti-capitalist group. They are part of the “
ums Ganze!” alliance
(http://umsganze.blogsport.de) which consists of more than ten groups from all
over Germany. Parts of this text are based on a paper written prior to the G8
summit which can be found in English at www.top-berlin.net. To get in touch
with them write to mail at top-berlin.net.

i Most information on recent developments of a „right-wing anti-capitalism“ in
Europe are available in German, such as the reader „Nationaler Sozialismus -
“Antikapitalismus” von völkischen Freaks“ brought out by TOP.

ii TOP tried to realize this for example through organizing a block at the
central demonstration in Rostock with the „....ums Ganze!“ (“...to the Whole!”)
alliance which tried to bring across some of the points mentioned in this
article, by organizing debates at the various camps on different critiques of
capitalism, and by distributing various flyers and reading material.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G20: Call out for solidarity and support for Australian anarchists

In a time of International repression against activists all over the globe, we
are calling out for letters of support and solidarity for anarchists arrested
and facing severe repression after the G20 economic forum protests of November
2006 in Melbourne, Australia.

On the weekend of November 18 and 19, 2006, the G-20 Meeting of Finance
Ministers and Central Bank Governors was held at the Grand Hyatt Hotel in
Melbourne, Australia. The G20 meeting happens annually and is attended by
finance ministers from 20 nations, including the USA, the European Union and
China amongst others.

The G20 of 2006 was attended by Paul Wolfowitz, former World Bank leader and
well known mastermind of the 'War on Terror', and the Energy and Minerals
Business Council (comprised of BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto and other powerful
mining and oil companies) which lobbied G20 delegates over a business lunch.

It was a meeting of neo-liberals pushing its economic/societal philosophy on the
rest of the world, enriching its member nations at the expense of the rest of
the world, and effecting global politics for the benefit of powerful
corporations. Unsurprisingly, anarchists and anti-capitalists set out to
disrupt the smooth-running of this meeting.

Prior to the anti-G20 protests, the following call out was sent out to form an
'Arterial Bloc':

"This is what we want: lives worth living, lives of dignity and autonomy and we
want to work together against capitalism and the state to achieve this. And we
want to do it now. The only power we have is each other, and this is more than
enough. To this end we want to work together in a bloc. To come together and
form an active, living community of struggle based on autonomy, solidarity and
democracy. We want a community that confronts and overcomes all forms of social
oppression. We want to develop collective power and collective communication.
Not to follow, not to lead, but to work out how we can organise ourselves.

This is what we want: To confront the G20 more directly as it meets - maybe
taking our protest right to their meeting; or maybe confronting capital another
way. We want our disobedience and our creation of other ways of living to be
effective as we can make it. We know that capitalism will deploy numerous forms
of repression and discipline to contain us, and we have no wish to be, or see
others, beaten and imprisoned. We have no time for violent macho fantasy or
delusions about Ghandi. Our bodies, our lives, our desires are too precious to
fuck with. We want to be smart, joyful and defiant, not martyrs.

We believe that an effective bloc is made up of many people who have many
different skills and capacities. Sometimes the most crucial skills (such as the
ability to care) can get forgotten when the focus is on more "exciting" things.
But we all have something to offer, and we are equals. None of us are heroes;
together we can help each other to be brave, happy and rebellious."

A counter summit was held the week before at a recently squatted social centre
'A Space Outside', in which activists met for workshops and discussion on many
different topics as well as to plan for the coming anti-capitalist protests and
'Arterial Bloc' logistics. Within the two days prior to the G20 protests, both
the 'A Space Outside' squat and another squatted Anarchist social centre 'The
Wake' were evicted by a special G20 police task force 'Salver', and footage
taken by the police was later used to arrest activists involved in the
protests.

Despite this setback, on the Friday, small autonomous groups of activists
invaded several offices around Melbourne, including those of arms companies,
energy corporations and army recruiting centres. All branches of the ANZ bank
in the Melbourne CBD were closed due to attacks by protesters against the ANZ
investment in military industries.

The main anti-globalisation protest was organised by a coalition planning a
'carnival against capitalism' and also other reformist 'Make Poverty History'
concerts were held. While the carnival protest was just warming up, the
'Arterial Bloc' of anarchists in white chemical suits and masks broke through
security barriors and destoyed road-blocks. In confrontations with both plain
uniform and riot police, the bloc collected industrial bins and dumpsters and
used tram tracks to slide them against barricades and into police.

Various projectiles were thrown resulting in minor injuries to the police, the
most serious being a broken wrist. The bloc moved around the streets in an
attempt to gain entrance to the blocked off hotel, at one stage a police
arrestation truck was attacked, being pelted with bottles and having its
windows completely smashed. By 15:00 that day the city centre had gone into
lock down.

Later that night, clashes occurred outside the parliament building between
police and protesters who were having a festive celebration around a car
'dragon' in which some activists were locked-on to. The police were especially
vicious and protesters were beaten, including one who had his arm broken.

The following morning a small group of anti-g20 protesters were brutally
attacked outside the Melbourne Museum, where delegates were meeting,
hospitalising one woman.

During the weekend a small number of people were arrested, all of which were
later released. One young tourist, mistakenly identified as a G20 protester,
was bailed into a van by un-uniformed police, interrogated, assaulted and
abused, before later being released from custody.

The state's police chief declared she never wanted another such economic forum
held in Melbourne again.

Of course, it wasn't until after this that the real repression started against
activists. Commercial media fabricated lies about the actions of protesters,
claiming that the 'arterial bloc' was a contingent of black bloc anarchists
from Europe who traveled the world in search of anti-capitalist summits to
start trouble.

The protesters were called violent thugs, and tabloid newspapers filled up their
pages with photographs of rioter's faces with a phone number to call if you knew
someone to dob into the police. Included in the newspapers were stories of
injured police and their families, how the poor police were in plain uniform
and not riot gear, and were just doing their job when they were attacked.

A special police task force 'Salver' (the meaning of which is quite ironic...)
was set up to arrest those involved in the protest, and with their own footage,
and that which they forced people to give them, they made a list of 28 'persons
of interest' whose photographs were published in a mainstream newspaper,
despite this breaking numerous codes of conduct.

Unfortunately the general public dobbed in the majority of these 'persons of
interest' to the police, and a number gave themselves in under the pressure on
themselves and their communities. The remaining few mostly went into hiding and
have disappeared from the activist scene, as with many arterial bloc members who
were lucky enough to escape being a 'person of interest'.

In march this year, a special anti-terrorism unit performed dawn raids on houses
throughout Sydney, arresting activists as they slept in their beds. On top of
all this, as to be expected, there has been a major backlash from leftist 'non
violent' groups, mainly from privileged white backgrounds, publicly speaking
out against the 'violent protesters' and how they ruined the 'peaceful
demonstration'. One major socialist figure threatened to inform the police of
arterial bloc members he knew personally. It doesn't need to be said, of
course, that the same people were supporting the people of Oaxaca, Mexico, in
their uprising the week before. (far, far away...)

Over 40 people have been arrested for their involvement in the protests, with
charges of riot & affray, assault of a police officer, property damage, and
theft. Those arrested have their lives effectively run by the state, with most
having to report into a police station every 2 weeks and not being able to
travel outside of their state.

Task force 'Salver' publicly announced that it would end in May 2007, and it was
initially thought that the tough measures of repression were being used to keep
anarchists away from the APEC summit in Sydney in June 2007, where George W
Bush was attending and the city turned into a veritable police state. However,
since then the arrests have continued. Exactly one year after the G20, one New
Zealand anarchist was arrested at Sydney airport while transferring to a flight
to Spain. Another Brisbane man was arrested just last week.

The court cases are being dragged out for as long as possible, with the
arrestees in a constant state of surveillance, anxiety and uncertainty.

As for the anarchist scene in Melbourne and around Australia, there has been a
drastic drop in any dissent against the government. The scene is full of
paranoia, fear, and even regret.

The police, government and media joined forces in this repression against
dissent to silence voices of opposition against capitalism and the status quo,
and to frighten activists into never contemplating attacking its power ever
again. And it has succeeded.

With the recent sentencing of Genoa G8 activists in Italy to 110 years of prison
collectively, the article 129a in Germany used to repress organised dissent and
label activists as terrorists, the recent 'anti-terror' raids against Maori,
environmentalist and anarchist activists in Aotearoa (New Zealand), and many,
many other examples of repression happening currently all around the world,
this is a call out for letters and emails of solidarity and support for
anarchists of Australia who have been arrested for opposing the exploitation of
people of third world countries, the destruction of our natural world and the
status quo which keeps powerful corporations and CEOs rich while keeping the
rest of us poor.

In a country as isolated as Australia, and without any real history of
resistance, it is important for people to know that this is not an isolated
case of repression. That these tactics of silencing dissent are occurring the
world over, and have been used for centuries against anarchists everywhere.
That the actions of the 'arterial bloc' are not those of 'violent thugs' but
rather valid forms of protest that are used commonly around the world...

If you have a spare 5 minutes, please take the time to write a small email or
letter to the arrestees awaiting trail to show your solidarity and support in
our global struggle against capitalism to: afterg20 at gmail.com

Or post a general solidarity message on Sydney Indymedia:
http://sydney.indymedia.org.au/ (melbourne indymedia fell apart after post g20
backlash...)

Love and International Solidarity!

For more information, see:

http://afterg20.org/index.htm
http://arushandapush.blogsome.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_G20_summit

See also:
A first communiqué from two uncitizens of Arterial Bloc
Another Reflections on the Arterial Bloc at the Counter-G20 Convergence in
Melbourne Australia
Support for G20 arrestees

[original article]

the ankle bone, connected to the thigh bone ;)

http://del.icio.us/dr.woooo

http://www.aut-op-sy.org
http://narconews.com
http://www.eco.utexas.edu/~archive/chiapas95/
http://noborder.org
http://slash.interactivist.net/
http://ainfos.ca
http://www.metamute.org
http://lists.perthimc.asn.au/pipermail/blackgreensolidarity/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precarity
http://www.metamute.org/en/Precarious-Reader
https://lists.resist.ca/pipermail/ipsm-l/2005-July/000781.html
http://www.deletetheborder.org
http://www.nettime.org
http://www.pochanostra.com/dialogues/
http://www.aspaceoutside.org/wp-content/uploads/Space_Outside_Reader.pdf
http://www.prol-position.net/
http://stateofemergency.nomasters.org/
http://www.infoshop.org/inews
http://www.eco-action.org/dod
http://www.16beavergroup.org/drift/overview.htm
http://ww4report.com/blog