West German unions
There has been considerable discussion tions are not leading to disarmament but in the press of the government's plans to rather serving as a cover for continuing the arms race. So, the feeling is growing that the people themselves have to mobilize against the deployment of the missiles, which is expected to take place this December. In the meantime, an initia tive group against the missiles has even developed in the Christian Democratic mobilise against missiles
Party.
The government's right to take a decision that threatens the survival of the population is being challenged. On this basis, the Initiative Group for a Referen-
On September 8 the national leadership of the main trade-union federation in West
Germany, the Deutsche Gewerkschaftsbund (DGB) decided to organise a 5-minute warning strike for October 5 to protest against the installation of medium-range nuclear missiles (Euromissiles) in West Germany and several other European coun tries in December this year.
This symbolic work stoppage was put in the context of an appeal to the US and
Soviet Union leaders to come to an effective agreement on disarmament at Geneva.
This was the condition set by the NATO 'two track' decision in 1979, that if such an agreement was reached, the 572 new missiles would not be deployed in Europe.
The purpose of the strike, in the words of one metalworkers union offical was, in fact, to give 'a warning to leading politicians, so that they know that the question of safeguarding peace in the world is the central concern of the trade unions.'
This action, which represented the entry of the organised workers movement into the fight against the deployment of the NATO missiles with its own methods of struggle, has obviously an importance as an example for the whole of the anti-war
The not inconsiderable response to the call for this strike also demonstrates its importance.
Thus, having described the low participation in the strike from 11.55 a.m.
to 12 noon in the federal capital of Bonn, the correspondent of the Paris daily le
Monde wrote on October 7,
However, one should not draw general conclusions from the situation in the capital. The DGB's call was taken up unevenly, but it was heard. In some cities public transport was immobilised. In the big factories on the
Ruhr, Hoechst in Dortmund, Krupp in Bochus, Thyssen in Duisburg, the 'five minute warning' was observed to the letter. It was the same in the big car plants, at Opel,
Ford, Volkswagen. The workers often left the work places to discuss among them-
The article we publish below was written before this action took place. It looks at the political considerations and significance of this action by the West German union
FRANKFURT - The National Ex- limit the right to demonstrate. Likewise, ecutive of the West German Trade-Union
Confederation (DGB) decided on September 8 to call a five-minute warning strike for October 5 against the deploy.
ment of intermediate-range missiles plan-
The DGB presented this as an admonition to the politicians to reach an agree-
This is the first time the organized workers movement has taken an action against the deployment of these missiles.
However, this action was taken separthe peace movement.
DBG deliberately chose a time other than during the October 15-22 week of action.
Nonetheless, it has recognized the legitimacy of using trade-union methods of struggle against the stationing of the rockets. A dam has been broken.
The basis for mobilizing against the missiles has been extended to the broad mass of working people, whose opinion was previously reflected only in the public opinion polls.
Several factors led to this shift on the part of the union leadership. In the first place, the mobilizations by the peace movement have continued without let- up. There was no summer break. Innumerable local actions were organized commemorate Hiroshima Day, August 6.
In Berlin, 30,000 people demonstrated on press has carried a lot of reports about negotiations between unauthorized representatives of the peace movement with figures in the government, police, and army about "defusing violence" in the fall actions.
LINKUP BETWEEN THE UNIONS
AND THE PEACE MOVEMENT
The kickoff date for the fall mobilizations was the "Anti-War Day of Action" on September 1, the anniversary of Hitler's invasion of Poland, which marked the beginning of World War II.
Since the end of the war, the unions have commemorated this date every year demonstrations and rallies. time a hundred thousand people took part in the trade-union actions. previous years, in many places the peace and trade-union activists demonstrated together.
A poll carried out in August showed growing opposition to the deployment of
About 75% are now against it. There is a stronger and stronger feeling among the population that the U.S
"not serious about the negotiations in Geneva," and does not really want dis-
This is the interpretation given also to the U.S.'s continual rejec tion of the Soviet proposals.
It is obvious that the Geneva negotiadum developed, and this proposal will be taken up on a large scale by the Coordinating Committee of Peace Initiative Groups after the week of action.
GROWTH OF PEACE MOVEMENT
COINCIDES WITH RISING CLASS STRUGGLE
Since the bourgeois parties assumed responsibility for the government on March 6, the critical elements in the SPD and the unions have gotten more room to mobilize for their positions.
In this respect, the unions are playing a vanguard role. Several individual unions have taken a clear position against the stationing of the missiles. Even the DGB, which is opposed to unilateral disarmament, is pushing the demand "No De-
Intermediate-Range Missiles" more to the fore in its state-
The SPD is limping along behind the unions. It has postponed its special party congress on the missiles to after the last round of negotiations in Geneva. Only if there is no agreement will it open up the for opposing deployment of the In the meantime, to the great dismay of the national SPD leadership, the state party congress in Baden-Wurmade opposition to the stationing of the missiles independent from the outcome of the negotiations. It is expected that other state SPD congresses will follow this example.
The bourgeoisie has as yet been unable to achieve its objective of transforming its March 6 electoral victory into an overall "turn" in the social relationship of forces. The bourgeois operation has run up against a rise in class struggle, and has tended, in fact, to reinforce and radicalize this fightback.
Immediately after taking office, the bourgeois government was forced to drop its project of a census, since the massive boycott that was shaping up would have made the results useless.
The government's austerity policy has more provoked Demonstrations by the unions against social cutbacks and the capitalist restruc turing of the crisis-shaken steel, coal, and shipbuilding industries have been grow-
Last week, a DGB women's demonstration drew 30,000 persons, although the union did little to mobilize for it. Mobilization for the 35-hour week has also gotten off to a strong start.
Resistance in the workplaces is also taking more radical forms. Two weeks
ago, the Howaldts-Deutsche Werft in Hamburg were occupied. In a parallel action to this, the Bremer AG Weser is supposed to be partially shut down There have been solidarity strikes all along the coast. Almost every decision by the government meets with protest and resistance.
THE QUESTION OF THE POLITICAL STRIKE
Political strikes, factory occupations, for a referendum the legitimacy of the government. government still bears the stigma of having come to power "improperly" last fall [through a deal with the liberals of the FDP, who had been part of the SPD coalition]. Its tactic of splitting the grow"moderates" and repressing and isolating has so far not gotten any
In combination, these factors favor politicalization and radicalization among the
If the DGB does not want to be pushed aside, it has to take the lead to some extent in this movement.
The mayor of Saarbruecken, Oskar Lafontaine, was the first to call for a general strike against the missiles. He did so
The demand was immediately taken up in the unions, above all by middle- and base-level union functionaries.
In this respect it is a lucky coincidence printers union, ing union (IG Metall), the teachers union, and the postal workers union
In the case of all these unions, numerous resolutions have been submitted to the congresses that, based on the right of resistance written into the constitution. call for strike actions up to, and including, a general strike, if there is no agree-
The strike discussions reached a new height in the unions this summer. Steinkuehler, IG Metall district leader in Stuttgart (who was elected vice-president of the national union in October, preparatory to being elected president in four years) called for a "Factory Day of Action" on October 19, in the course of the peace movement's week of action. He proposed a 10 to 15 minute work
Choosing this date assures a close linkup between the union mobilizations and the struggle of the peace
CAPITALIST PRESS RAISES AN ALARM
The business press and the bourgeois press have been raising a storm about this development. furter Allgemeine Zeitung has accused the maintain a distance between themselves and the peace movement and of "hitching their wagon" to it.
The DGB has to consider now whether
German peace camp (DR) it wants to become a socialist-oriented
The spark of radicalization has jumped from the peace movement to the vanguard in the factories and in the
The bourgeoisie fears that this dynamic can no longer be held back.
In fact, the political importance of this discussion lies in the fact that the taboo on political strikes has been broken. The
Its objective was to win codetermination in the factories.
After the strike was broken, the federal supreme court ruled that strikes not directly tied to wages and conditions were illegal. All political questions were supposed to be the monopoly of the government and the parliament. The right of resistance was also limited by the bourgeois courts to the defense of bourgeois democracy against an attempt to "overthrow the democratic order."
This restriction will not mean much to the activists in the factories. what can destroy bourgeois democracy more thoroughly than the nuclear annihilation of the entire population?
In 1958, in the campaign against the stationing of short-range missiles in West Germany, there were some strikes despite the ban on political work stoppages.
Later, the unions also called for short stoppages for specific One case was in 1972, when Willy Brandt was toppled by a vote of no confidence by the Christian Democrats.
was in 1977, when the chairof the employers association, Hanns Martin Schleyer, was murdered. This experience is being carried further
Steinkuehler's proposal led immediately to a call by the union officials in southern Germany for a "Pause for Peace" on October 19. This appeal has already been signed by hundreds of persons. mass signature campaign is underway in
Parallel to the discussion in the unions, numerous peace initiative groups have been formed in the factories. By systematic educational and informational work, the members of these groups are trying to mobilize their fellow workers.
There are over 150 such groups, mainly in the big factories, where the political left is active. Most of them were started by the West German Communist Party and some also by the MLPD, the last Maoist party in West Germany. They continue to be dominated by these forces.
On September 11 in Dortmund, the factory peace initiative groups held a conference to building the October 19 action. About 1,500 workers participated. The conference was organized by an action sub-committee of the Federal Coordinating Committee of the Peace Initia-
Although this conference was very successful from the standpoint of particisome major weaknesses. The political spectrum was almost totally the CP and the Democrats and Greens ous activists in the individual unions that have played the vanguard role in the strike discussions were not there.
The conference approved an appeal in support of the DGB decision to hold a five minute stoppage on October 5 and called for making October 19 a day of action in the factories. In this connection, went from circulating petitions, to tac tory assemblies, to warning strikes.
The meeting failed, however, to clar ify how to build the October 5 and October 19 actions. Thus, it failed to offer leadership for the factory mobilizations against the missiles.
The key date for the factory mobilizations thus became the one set by the DGB, October 5. By this proposal the DGB tried to undercut the Steinkuelher initiative. The activists who had already set their sights on October 19 had to completely reorient themselves.
THE TEST OF A NATIONAL WARNING STRIKE
Obviously, this choice of date must be seen by these activists as a maneuver designed to shield the workers movement as much as possible from the radicalizing pressure of the peace movement. Nonetheless, the DGB decision also has a mob-
The union officials are being called on to do something to assure that October 5 will not be a flop. Even the right-wing unions, such as IG Chemie and IG Berg bau (the miners union), are coming under pressure to do something.
In the factories now people are being approached who up until now have had no connection with the peace movement A broad discussion is getting underway about whether strikes are a proper form of action and about what the deployment of the missiles really means.
October 5 has become the focus of the mobilization in the factories against the deployment of the missiles. If October 5 is a success, then there will also be actions in the factories on October 19 that can serve as the basis for assuring participation in the assemblies" called for October 22.