Archive for Juni, 2011

Japan: Radioaktive Verseuchung…

Donnerstag, Juni 30th, 2011

“2,700 Becquerels/Kg Cesium from Teas Picked by Elementary School Children in Itabashi, Tokyo

POSTED BY AREVAMIRPAL::LAPRIMAVER

Children from 3 public elementary schools in Itabashi-ku in Tokyo did the tea picking in early May, the tea leaves were roasted and made into the final blend tea and was about to be given to the children. For some reason, the municipal officials decided to test the tea, and found radioactive cesium to the tune of 2,700 becquerels/kilogram, more than 5 times the loose national provisional safety limit of 500 becquerels/kilogram.

The public elementary schools and junior high schools in Itabashi are run by the Itabashi Board of Education. There are 53 elementary schools in Itabashi.

From Sankei Shinbun (6/30/2011):

    東ä都板橋区は30日、区内の茶畑の茶葉を加工した製茶から、国の暫定基準値(1キログラム当たり500ベクレル)を超える2700ベクレルの放射性セシウムが検出されたと発表した。

    Itabashi-ku (special ward) in Tokyo announced on June 30 that 2,700 becquerels/kilogram of radioactive cesium were detected in the final blend tea grown and processed in Itabashi, exceeding the national provisional safety limit of 500 becquerels/kilogram.

     茶畑は茶摘みä験用で、製茶は小学生が摘んだ茶葉を加工したもの。ほかに区内で茶を生産、出荷している農家はないという。

    The tea farm is not a commercial operation but for people to experience how it is like to pick tea leaves. The final blend tea was made from the tea leaves picked by elementary school pupils. There is no other farm that produces and ship tea in Itabashi-ku.

     これを受け東ä都は板橋、練馬ä区で生産されている農産物5品目の放射性物質の濃度を検査することを決めた。

    In response, the Tokyo Metropolitan government has decided to test radioactive materials in 5 types of vegetables produced in Itabashi-ku and Nerima-ku.

     板橋区によると、5月9日に区立小3校の児童約300äがä番茶を茶摘みä験し、6月15日に製茶約20キロが完成。児童に渡す前に安全性を確認するため、放射性物質を分析した。放射性ヨウ素は検出されず、ä番茶の放射性セシウムは基準値ääだった。

    According to Itabashi-ku, 300 pupils from 3 public elementary schools picked the first-pick tea (“ichiban-cha”) on May 9, from which 20 kilograms of the final blend tea was made and ready on June 15. Before giving it to the pupils, Itabashi-ku tested the tea for radioactive materials to ascertain the safety. There was no radioactive iodine detected, and the amount of radioactive cesium in the second-pick tea was below the provisional limit.

     板橋区は製茶を小学生に渡さず全量廃棄するä定で「児童が茶摘みをしたことによる健康への影響はないと確認した」としている。

    Itabashi-ku plans to dispose the entire tea without giving it to the pupils, and says “there is no effect on health by having them pick tea leaves.”

The famous last word in Japan since March 11, “There is no effect on health.” At least, an increasing number of Japanese people now know that it simply means “there is no immediate effect on health.”

According to the Itabashi-ku official website, cesium-134 was detected at 1,300 becquerels/kilogram, and cesium-137 was detected at 1,400 becquerels/kilogram.

I wonder how they are going to dispose the tea, though. I hope they just don’t throw it in the garbage that gets sent to the waste disposal plant in Itabashi, which then burns the tea in the ordinary incinerator and spread cesium in the neighborhood.”

 

(Quelle: EX-SKF.)

Kambodscha: Vor Pol Pot war Nixon da…

Montag, Juni 27th, 2011

“Year Zero: The Silent Death of Cambodia



Anyone who has not yet done so is encouraged to view John Pilger’s 1979 documentary “Year Zero: The Silent Death of Cambodia”.

The documentary begins with Pilger’s narration:

“At 7.30 A.M. on April the 17th, 1975, the war in Cambodia was over. It was a unique war, for no country has ever experienced such concentrated bombing. On this, perhaps the most gentle and graceful land in all of Asia, President Nixon and Mr. Kissinger unleashed 100,000 tons of bombs, the equivalent of five Hiroshimas”.

Watch the 52-minute film below the fold:

 

(Quelle: PULSE.)

Afghanistan: Wegen Geldmangels muss UN Nahrungsmittelhilfe kürzen

Montag, Juni 27th, 2011

“World Food Program cuts Afghan food assistance

By DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press

The U.N. World Food Program announced Monday it will cut food assistance to more than 3 million Afghans in about half the country’s 34 provinces because of a shortage of money from donor nations.

The U.N. agency said it had planned to help feed more than 7 million people in Afghanistan this year, but a shortage of donor funds means 3.8 million people will be helped through meals provided at schools and training and work programs. The program said it needed an additional $220 million to continue its work in Afghanistan at the level originally planned.

The program will focus food assistance on helping the most needy Afghans, especially women and children, said Bradley Guerrant, the agency’s deputy country director.

“We are working hard to raise the funds needed to restart these activities as soon as we can,” he said.

Two roadside bomb blasts killed seven civilians Monday in Ghazni province in eastern Afghanistan, the Interior Ministry said. A vehicle struck one of the bombs in Qarabagh district, killing four civilians, including two children, the ministry said. Another vehicle hit a roadside bomb in Ghazni city, killing three civilians.”

 

(Quelle: San Francisco Chronicle.)

Libanon: Jamil Sayyed klagt an – »Deutschland trägt für meine Haft Verantwortung«

Montag, Juni 27th, 2011

Interview with Jamil Sayyed – »Germany is responsible for my detention«

Eingestellt von R. Chatterjee

For four years Jamil Sayyed, former chief of Lebanon’s General Directorate of General Security, was detained as one of the main suspects in the murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri. Robert Chatterjee and Christoph Dinkelaker met Sayyed in Beirut this April. In this interview he lashes out against the German UN-Investigator Detlev Mehlis as well as against Germany’s foreign intelligence agency BND and the German news magazine Der Spiegel. A German translation of this interview was published in the German quarterly magazine zenith.

Alsharq: What would you do if you met Detlev Mehlis today?

Jamil Sayyed: The first feeling that would come to my mind is that I would have to vomit.

What led to your detention – and to your release?

It was a long battle that lasted for 4 years to get freed from my political and arbitrary detention. I was never exposed, neither by Detlev Mehlis nor his team , nor to any witness, proof or charges. On August 30 2005, British officer Ken Korlett from the United Nations International Independent Investigation Commission (UNIIIC), came to me with a letter, sent to me by the president of UNIIIC Mr. Mehlis, who had himself signed the paper. That Search Warrant read: »According to witnesses heard by the commission….Jamil Sayyed should be considered as suspect…«. From the day they presented the letter to me and multiple times later on, I asked them: Where are your witnesses? No answer!

Mehlis and his German team were counting on analyses, rumours and political accusations – nothing connected to the real crime to justify my detention. Everything related to a serious investigation was not done. They had a prefixed idea that Syria had committed the crime. They were part of a dirty political conspiracy. That´s why they presented more than 10 Lebanese, Syrian and other false witnesses that caused my detention for 4 years. I am sure, by proofs and facts, that Detlev Mehlis and Gerhard Lehmann were very consciously involved, in collaboration with some parts of the Lebanese authorities including security officers and judges, and in the fabrication of false witnesses – to the point that they invited me personally ,through promises, to become a false witness against Syria. Gerhard Lehmann came here to my house, three months before my arrest, and later, on the first day of my detention at the Commission in the presence of Mehlis, he made political proposals that had nothing to do with a true investigation, and his conclusion was: »Find a victim or it could be you«.

What were their motives?

There was a dirty game, an international one, played through the new pro-American Lebanese government, to attack the Syrian regime through the investigation by any means necessary, including false witnesses. That´s what the two German officials have done. Mehlis was the Head Commissioner and Lehmann the head investigator in this system. That´s why when I was lately invited upon my demand to the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) in The Hague for two consecutive public hearings, I said: »The presence of one false witness could be an accident that can happen in any investigation. But when more than 10 false witnesses are presented, as was the case with Mehlis and his collaborators, then it is no more an accident – it is a conspiracy for political reasons.« Because if they had succeeded in their plan to bring me as the major false witness, as Gerhard Lehmann had invited me to do, the false witnessing against Syria, and Bashar al-Assad in person, would be similar in consequences to the false accusations about weapons of mass destructions against Saddam Hussein. I was asked to do the following: »Go to Syria, ask al-Assad to form a comity of judges that will choose a Syrian ›fat victim‹ to confess about committing the crime for personal reasons. That victim would be found later killed in a car accident or a suicide. Just after, the Syrians would invite the Commission to discuss the issue and we could then find a compromise with the Syrian regime similar to the one done by Gadhafi in the Lockerbie case« Those were the exact words pronounced by Gerhard Lehmann in presence of the Police Attaché in the German Embassy in Beirut, Stefan Erhart. I am ready to go to a polygraph in Germany, facing Mehlis, Lehmann and Erhard to prove – me and them – that they were part in a dirty political game under the umbrella of the International Justice in the conspiracy of false witnesses to involve wrongly Syria and Lebanese officers.

So you say that the Germans had an active role in that?

What disturbed me is that Germany followed the situation in Lebanon, their embassy read about scandals around Mehlis and Lehmann. But even after our release from the Tribunal, the German government did not open an investigation, although their people in the Commission were representing the German judiciary and the German police and by doing so they dishonoured the reputation of their country.

Why were the Germans acting like that?

In my role as the head of the General Security in Lebanon, I used to have excellent relations with your security services and the Ministry of Interior. I negotiated with the Germans an agreement about some ten thousand Lebanese illegal immigrants in Germany. And we agreed that any Lebanese who presented a threat to Germany’s security would be extradited within a certain timeframe to preserve security interests of Germany. So we had very good relations at the level of the Ministry of Interior. On another level, we had a close relationship with the German Intelligence Service, the BND through its representative in Lebanon. I was well known in Germany due to my efforts, e.g. concerning prisoner swaps. We are not people of crime and of blood and they know it. Despite all of this, the German government did not make any move to treat this situation, officials in your country unfortunally betrayed the confidence of the Lebanese people. The BND officer at this time was Mr. Sold who now holds a high rank in the BND administration.

Since your release you have sued several Lebanese media outlets. Would you go as far as bringing Mehlis and Lehmann before court?

Already during the time of my detention, I made several official complaints to the investigation against Mehlis and Lehmann for their participation in the fabrication of false witnesses to cause my arbitrary detention for political reasons. Even before my release, i presented to the Commission after Mehlis’ term of office , headed later by Serge Brammertz and later by Daniel Bellamare, official complaints to the investigation and to Lebanese judges. That is one part. Besides, since my detention was politically motivated, I was subject to many defamations. The case against the Future newspaper was one of 25 complaints at the Publication Court. Another legal action for defamation based on false witnesses was presented by me against Mehlis in France and the French investigation judge took a decision to convoke him for a hearing .This convocation was sent by an international summon to the German authorities to notify Mehlis with no answer until now, whereas the Philippine authorities answered that Mehlis who is currently working there could not be notified since he enjoys diplomatic immunity. The third type of legal action I took was in Syria because some of the false witnesses were Syrian citizens and the Syrian Law accordingly allowed me to present a case against Mehlis, Lehmann and all their contributors, including the Syrian false witnesses, as partners in this conspiracy. Despite all of this, I didn´t find one German official to come to Lebanon and ask me about what happened and I am really seeking any NGO in Germany to come and see me if they are interested in Human Rights violations and abuses committed by German officials abroad. The German authorities’ behaviour in this matter was worse than any exercise of local services in the Third World. I have had the occasion to see in the eyes of Gerhard Lehmann several times and i can assure you that it seemed to me while looking at him as if his eyes were made of glass and I could never forget the impression he gave to me that Hitler didn´t die. And although Mehlis was the leading judge in the commission, he was acting like a slave to Lehmann. I am ready to confront them in front of any German Court by facts and proofs if the German authorities decide to open an official or parliamentary investigation.

Is it something personal with you and Lehmann?

I did not know Lehman before. This case, this scandal destroyed the human and political image and respect of Germany to be a country of institutions. How can they allow officials to convey this image of their country abroad? I am ready to go to any parliamentary committee, or university or press conference in Germany to explain what happened in Lebanon in connection with Gerhard Lehmann and Detlev Mehlis.

Aside from Mehlis and Lehmann, do you hold the German government responsible for your detention?

They were responsible for my detention. And even if they just knew later, they should have done something! There should have been official steps. Surely, Lehmann and Mehlis were working under the umbrella of the United Nations in this Commission. However, Mehlis is an active judge in Germany, as prosecutor in Berlin after he left Lebanon, and Lehmann was a policeman, a member of the security services. If they were criminals in this, this immunity would not work. They committed crimes. And all the German team was expulsed from the Commission at the end of 2005. They were thrown out! The German government has not asked why those people have thrown dirt upon the German image.

So what went wrong with the investigation?

Surely, it was a huge crime and from the first impression, a political crime. However, like with any other crime, you start from the crime scene, you put all the hypotheses logically and you proceed by elimination. And when you try to confirm your hypotheses you have to do that with elements directly from the crime scene, by circumstantial evidence and by human ones coming from witnesses. Then these hypothesis will give a scenario: how it happened, the tools, the means, the reasons. Surely, every investigation is a combination of form and context. When you violate the form, then your context and scenario will not be acceptable in front of any tribunal. From 2005 until now in 2011 they have wasted 6 years because they put all their energy to confirm that one hypothesis implicating Syria without having any credible witnesses or proofs. Who established this violation from the first day? It was Gerhard Lehmann and Detlev Mehlis with a contribution from certain elements within Lebanese political authorities using security and judiciary tools and with the cover of the UN. All this happened at a time of international madness during the Bush administration. So they sacrificed the procedures for their goals. That was in itself a bigger crime even than the initial crime!

Will the truth behind the crime will ever be revealed?

If you don´t come up with a credible investigation within the first months after the crime, how can you expect to get one after 6 years? And it is Gerhard Lehmann and Detlev Mehlis who bear the responsibility for this delay.

So what will the STL present then?

Who knows? Everything related to the crime was destroyed by the Commission – even its credibility. So will you ever bring someone to believe to have found the truth? In 2005, just 5 days after Hariri´s assassination, the Kuwaiti newspaper al-Siyasah published a story implicating Syria and Lebanese in the crime. I said to Mehlis: »Go to Kuwait and ask the owner about his sources.« Now the same scenario is repeated by Der Spiegel who contributes in circulating rumors. And Lebanon is the country of rumors!

What about Hizbullah´s role implicated in an article by Der Spiegel?

I was released from my political detention on April 29 2009. Look at this surprising coincidence. Less than one month later, on May 24 2009, Der Spiegel published their article, transferring the accusation from Syria to Hizbullah!!!

How did Der Spiegel put you then into their picture?

Journalists and magazines are free to publish anything they want based on proofs. Der Spiegel insisted three times through my lawyer in Paris, from May to September 2009, to interview me. And I agreed to go to France and met there with the representative from Der Spiegel, Britta Sandberg, and even Erich Follath, the author of the article on Hizbullah´s implication. I gave them answers and they made commitments to me that they would publish it after my approval. Later on, they created so many excuses and they never behaved professionally and respectfully. Until now, 2 years after, they didn´t publish anything. They wrote to me that they have legal problems in publishing my interview. I don’t believe them, since Der Spiegel are not amateurs in this profession and they should have known previously about the law, especially that I confirmed with respect to the interview my full personal and legal responsibility of its content, while for example, the article published by Der Spiegel accusing openly Hizbullah, was based on unknown sources which could put shadow on its credibility and legality. All of this means to me that someone exerted in Germany pressure to forbid the publication of my interview to protect the abuses of Mehlis and Lehman in violating human rights through their role in the conspiracy of my political detention in Lebanon for 4 years from 2005 to 2009. A respected and responsible magazine should not have accepted such thing.”

 

(Quelle: Naher und Mittlerer Osten – الشرق)

China: Nur dem Volke dienen?

Montag, Juni 27th, 2011

“Brot und Rosen auf chinesisch

Das Ende der Aufopferung in der neuen Topographie der Wanderarbeit

Christa Wichterich in iz3w – informationszentrum 3. welt

»Wer heute faul ist, sucht morgen Arbeit«. Diese Worte schrieb das Management einer chinesischen Textilfabrik groß an die Wand. Die Botschaft appelliert an die Bereitschaft chinesischer Frauen, sich für das Wohl der Familien und des Staates aufzuopfern. Widerständige Reaktionen waren nicht vorgesehen. Doch der Wandel in China macht auch vor den Geschlechterrollen nicht Halt.

Am Ende der Neujahrsferien waren viele der »Arbeitsexport«-Agenten, die im chinesischen Hinterland Nachschub für die Exportproduktion in den industriellen Zentren rekrutieren, verzweifelt. Größere Firmen können qualifizierte Arbeitskräfte mit höheren Löhnen und Zulagen locken. Aber kleinere Betriebe und Sweatshops finden nicht mehr die benötigten ungelernten WanderarbeiterInnen.

Die Abstimmung der WanderarbeiterInnen mit den Füßen bewirkt einen Umbruch in der Topographie migrantischer Lohnarbeit in China. Das Kalkül geht nicht mehr auf, dass junge WanderarbeiterInnen vor den Toren der Exportbetriebe Schlange stehen und damit der entscheidende komparative Vorteil Chinas im globalen Unterbietungswettbewerb und leibhaftiges Druckmittel zur Disziplinierung der Arbeitskräfte auch anderswo sein würden.

Für den Arbeitskräftemangel in den Exportindustrien an der Küste und in den Großstädten gibt es mehrere Gründe. Der demographische Hintergrund ist, dass bereits 2005 die »Alterskohorte«, die einen Job suchte, mit 227 Millionen am größten war. 2024 wird sie nur noch 150 Millionen umfassen. Der persönliche Grund vieler WanderarbeiterInnen ist die gescheiterte Hoffnung, dass sie durch harte Arbeit in den Städten und Fabriken zu jenem »bescheidenen Wohlstand« kommen, den die Führung allen versprach. Im Gegenteil: sie rackern sich ab, machen Überstunden, werden aber immer wieder um ihre Löhne geprellt, während die Produktivität im vergangenen Jahrzehnt enorm gesteigert werden konnte – in der Textilindustrie beispielsweise um 13 Prozent jährlich. Die Lebenshaltungskosten in den Städten stiegen indessen an.

Nach der Finanzkrise mit dem Auftragseinbruch in der Exportproduktion, als die Wachstumsraten erneut in die Höhe schnellten, zeigten die massive Streikwelle und die Selbsttötungen, wie gnadenlos despotisch das Arbeitsregime für die Randbelegschaften weiterhin ist: Akkordarbeit, Überstundenzwang, hohes Unfallrisiko und Dauerdisziplinierung. Die erkämpften Lohnerhöhungen ändern dies nicht wesentlich: aus Sicht der meisten WanderarbeiterInnen fällt für sie immer noch kein fairer Anteil vom wachsenden Kuchen ab.

Recht auf einen Ort

Gleichzeitig bieten sich in kleineren Städten neue Chancen. Eine Reihe von Firmen und großen Konzernen verlagern Produktionsstätten ins Hinterland, weil die Kosten an der Küste weiter steigen. MigrantInnen, die den Sprung ins Unternehmertum schafften, gründen oft kleine Zulieferbetriebe in ihrer Heimatregion, wo sie soziale Netze nutzen, um Arbeitskräfte vor Ort zu mobilisieren. Zudem hat die Regierung in der Krise Konjunktur- und Infrastrukturprogramme aufgelegt, die die Entlassenen auffangen sollten. Zwar verdienen die ArbeiterInnen im Landesinneren weniger, aber die Lebenshaltungskosten sind niedriger, und sie sind näher an ihrem Zuhause. Das zählt vor allem bei denjenigen ArbeiterInnen, die ihre Kinder bei der Familie im Dorf aufwachsen lassen, weil sie in der Stadt kein Anrecht auf Kindergarten- und Schulbesuch haben.

Im Gegensatz dazu wollen viele WanderarbeiterInnen, die in den Industrien, in Privathaushalten oder im Dienstleistungssektor der Städte arbeiten, nicht aufs Land zurück. Für sie sind Industrie und Stadt Inbegriffe der Moderne, an der sie teilhaben wollen. Eine ganze junge Generation ist bereits »illegal« in der Stadt geboren und aufgewachsen, ohne Bindung an dörfliche Kulturen, Land und Landwirtschaft. Formell gelten sie als WanderarbeiterInnen, obwohl ihr Zuhause immer in der Stadt war.

In offiziellen Statistiken wird davon ausgegangen, dass bis 2030 400 Millionen ChinesInnen vom Land ihre Herkunftsregistrierung (hukou) in den Dörfern und ihre Landnutzungsrechte aufgeben und sich eine Registrierung als StadtbürgerInnen kaufen werden. Das kostet je nach Beziehungen bis zu 10.000 Euro. Wo die Kommunen auf satte Einnahmen durch Erwerb des städtischen hukou hoffen, bleiben die Bürgerrechte in der Stadt ein ferner Traum für diejenigen, für die Migration weder zu sozialem Aufstieg noch zum ersehnten »kleinen Wohlstand« führt.

Diese Veränderungen auf den Arbeitsmärkten sind nicht nur Resultat neuer Konzernstrategien und staatlicher oder parteipolitischer Steuerung als Reaktion auf die zunehmenden sozialen Unruhen und Ungleichheiten. Sie sind auch Ergebnis einer Subjekt- werdung der »Bauern-ArbeiterInnen«. Die zweite oder dritte Generation der WanderarbeiterInnen trifft eigene Entscheidungen gegen das politisch geplante Prinzip der floating population, der kontrolliert zwischen Dorf und Stadt pendelnden LohnarbeiterInnen.

Arbeitende Schwestern

Die migrierenden Frauen spielten beim Aufbau der Exportindustrien eine zentrale Rolle. Um der Armut auf dem Land zu entkommen, schufteten sie jahrelang unter miesesten Bedingungen in diesen Wachstumssektoren und wurden regelmäßig um einen Teil ihres Lohns geprellt. Zusätzlich zu diesen ausbeuterischen Arbeitsregimen »unter einem Boss« sind die WanderarbeiterInnen als Folge der hukou-Registrierung auch einer Kontrolldespotie durch die Provinz- und städtischen Verwaltungen unterworfen: Sie haben in der Stadt keinen Zugang zu öffentlichen Einrichtungen wie Krankenhäuser und werden als BürgerInnen zweiter Klasse schikaniert. Diese doppelte Despotie bewirkt ein Apartheidsystem in den staatsbürgerlichen Rechten und eine Spaltung der Lohnarbeiterschaft.

Die Hongkonger Soziologin Pun Ngai

hat mit den Dagongmei, den »arbeitenden Schwestern«, zusammen gewohnt und in der Elektronikindustrie gearbeitet. Sie schildert eindrücklich, wie die schüchternen Bauernmädchen durch Akkordarbeit an den Maschinen, Überstundenzwang, drakonische Strafen bei Fehlverhalten und die Unterbringung in den firmeneigenen Wohnheimen als ständig verfügbare, flexible Billig-Arbeitskräfte zugerichtet werden. Im Fabrik-Wohnheim-Regime werden nicht nur Stadt-Land-Unterschiede reakzentuiert, sondern auch Geschlechterdifferenzen durch eine Resexualisierung und Refeminisierung der Frauenrolle verstärkt. Fingerfertigkeit, Konzentration und Ausdauer der Dagongmei machten seit den 1980er Jahren den entscheidenden komparativen Vorteil Chinas aus, der ausländische Investoren anzog. Im Unterschied zur Gleichstellung und Entsexualisierung in der Mao-Ära nutzen die Exportindustrien gezielt die Geschlechterunterschiede und werten die jungen Frauen vom Land doppelt ab, aufgrund ihres Geschlechts und aufgrund ihrer ländlichen oder ethnischen Herkunft.

Die Arbeiterinnen stehen unter einem mehrfachen Erwartungs- und Leistungsdruck. Schule, Partei, Politik und Medien vermitteln, es sei eine staatsbürgerliche Pflicht, sich aufzuopfern, um Produktivität und Wachstum zu steigern. Den Grundlohn brauchen sie für das Leben in der Stadt. Deswegen wollen sie möglichst viele Überstunden leisten, um den Familien Geld schicken zu können.

In den Fabriken sind soziale Netze von großer Bedeutung. Die Wanderarbeiterinnen kochen in den Wohnheimen in Kleingruppen gemeinsam, entwickeln zusammen ein Konsum- und Freizeitverhalten, streiten aber auch häufig mit den städtischen Lohnarbeiterinnen. Ein wichtiger Aspekt ist die kollektive Verarbeitung der durch die »Bosse« und Vorarbeiterinnen erlittenen Erniedrigungen und Demütigungen – unabhängig von der unterschiedlichen sprachlichen und kulturellen Herkunft der Arbeiterinnen. So bilden sich durch Migration und Fabrikarbeit neue Identitäten der Dagongmei, die einerseits Individualisierung, andererseits neue kollektive Gruppenbildung einschließen.

Vor dem Hintergrund der Ausbeutungs- und Kampferfahrungen der ersten Generation wurden sich die Arbeiterinnen ihrer Leistung und der mangelnden Würdigung ihrer Anstrengungen bewusst. In Liedern singen sie davon, dass die Wanderarbeiterinnen »das Wirtschaftswunder schaffen«, aber nicht fair behandelt werden. Sie thematisieren die Verletzung von Arbeitsrechten und ihrer persönlichen Würde durch das Fabriksystem. Durch verschiedene Kampfformen konstituieren sie sich als widerständige Subjekte: durch einen Aktivismus, der vom Wohnheim ausgeht, Sabotage, formal-rechtlichen Auseinandersetzungen bis zu direkten Konfrontationen durch Streiks und Blockaden großer Highways. Pun Ngai bezeichnet die Dagongmei deshalb als die erste subalterne Klasse im China der Wirtschaftsreformen, die einerseits im Prozess der Integration in die internationale Arbeitsteilung geopfert wird und sich andererseits gegen diesen Prozess auflehnt.

Bei den Protesten der Exportarbeiterinnen zeigen sich Parallelen zu den migrantischen Dienstleisterinnen und Hausangestellten in den Städten. »Dient unsere Arbeit etwa nicht dem Volk?« fragten aufgebrachte migrantische Hausangestellte in Beijing, die das Regime der Bosse und den Mangel an Anerkennung in den Privathaushalten nicht mehr einfach hinnehmen. »Wir haben unsere Jugend der Nation geopfert«, schrieben Restaurantangestellte auf ihre Streikposter. Der Begriff des Aufopferns wird von den Wanderarbeiterinnen gegen Staat und Unternehmen gewendet. Für die geleistete Pflichterfüllung fordern sie Fairness, nämlich Lohn und Anerkennung, Brot und Rosen.

Eigensinn statt Entwürdigung

Mit den Frauen als zentralen Akteurinnen der neuen Arbeitskämpfe lässt sich diese soziale Gegenwehr nicht auf einen klassischen »Klassenkampf« reduzieren. Die Wanderarbeiterschaft stellt eine neue soziale Klasse dar, aber es fehlt ein einheitliches Klassenbewusstsein bei diesem »neuen Proletariat«, wie linke Intellektuelle wie Wen Tiejun sie nennen. Außerdem sind die Kämpfe stark durch geschlechts- und kulturspezifische Elemente geprägt. Trotzdem haben die WanderarbeiterInnen Verhandlungsmacht aufgebaut, mit ihren Forderungen nach fairen Löhnen, Rechten und Respekt und ihrem Eigensinn, wo sie arbeiten und leben wollen.

Auf dieser Grundlage konnten die Honda-ArbeiterInnen 2010 die Proteste über einzelne Betriebe hinaus eskalieren und radikalisieren. Bei Honda streikten – unter Wortführung einer eloquenten jungen Frau – übrigens die »Praktikanten« genannten LeiharbeiterInnen, die meist als Kinder von WanderarbeiterInnen in der Stadt aufgewachsen waren. Diese neue Qualität von Widerstand bedeutet zwar nicht das Ende des chinesischen Lohndumpingmodells, signalisiert aber das Ende der Aufopferung der WanderarbeiterInnen.

Literatur

Pun Ngai/Ching Kwan Lee (Hrsg.): Aufbruch der zweiten Generation. Wanderarbeit, Gender und Klassenzusammensetzung in China, Assoziation A, Hamburg/Berlin, 2010.

Christa Wichterich ist freie Publizistin, Lehrbeauftragte und entwickungspolitische Gutachterin.”

 

(Quelle: Linksnet.de)

 

Hinweis

Die aktuelle Ausgabe der Zeitschrift “iz3w – informationszentrum 3. welt”, aus der dieser Aufsatz stammt, kann in unserer Bücherei entliehen werden.

Israel: Drohkulisse steht

Montag, Juni 27th, 2011

Netanyahu: Israel will not allow flotilla to breach Gaza naval blockade

Security officials inform cabinet that they have no information indicating that anyone affiliated with a terror group is planning to take part in the flotilla.

By Anshel Pfeffer, Danna Harman and Barak Ravid

Israel will not allow any ships to breach its blockade of the Gaza Strip, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told his inner cabinet yesterday, during a discussion of the Gaza-bound flotilla expected to set sail tomorrow.

Security officials and Foreign Ministry representatives informed the cabinet that Israel has no information indicating that terrorists or anyone affiliated with a terror group is planning to take part in the flotilla, said a government source. Nonetheless, there may be clashes between Israeli forces and some Arab activists aboard the ships.

Senior ministers will meet again today to continue discussing the flotilla.

“The critical mass of participants will include human rights activists from European Union countries, Canada and the United States,” said a senior security official.

Some 10 ships are planning to set sail tomorrow in an attempt to breach Israel’s blockade of the Strip. The government and army are hoping the ships will stop on their own, possibly early Thursday, and that the Israel Navy will not have to board them, a move that would not be well received in the world.

Some 500 people are expected to be aboard the flotilla, which will include six or seven ships currently docked in Greece; it is unclear when they will sail. The Greek authorities have been asked by Israel and the United States to hold up the flotilla as long as possible. Assuming the ships do sail from Greece, they will meet up with two or three that have already set sail from Spain and France, and continue toward the Gaza coast.

The announcement two weeks ago from the Turkish group IHH that it will not take part in the flotilla has changed the security establishment’s views regarding the anticipated resistance. IHH members violently resisted the naval takeover of the Mavi Marmara in the flotilla of May 2010, and nine of them were killed in the clashes. In addition, since the Mavi Marmara won’t be part of this flotilla, only smaller ships will be involved, increasing the likelihood that Israel will not have to board them to force them to turn back.

Cabinet ministers were told yesterday that after IHH announced that the Mavi Marmara would not be in the flotilla, there was less reason for concern about possible violent confrontations.

Government and defense sources said the fact that most, if not all, the flotilla participants will be European peace activists presumably not interested in violence will present a “more difficult public diplomacy challenge,” and Israel wants to avoid clashes with the activists.

In contrast to the decision last year to deploy naval commandos onboard the ships when they ignored Israeli warnings not to continue to Gaza – this year Israel will try other methods to stop the ships and direct them toward Egypt’s El Arish port.

The navy has, however, trained for scenarios involving violent resistance and forcible takeover of the ships, but this is considered a last resort. In such a case, the ships and passengers will be brought to a special security area at Ashdod Port.

The IDF is preparing for all possible scenarios,” the army spokesman said.

Flotilla organizers have been informed that if they dock first at Ashdod, Israel will bring the humanitarian aid directly to Gaza, a government source in Jerusalem said.

Israel has also talked in recent days with the interim government in Egypt, which has agreed to allow the ships to unload goods in El Arish, from where they would be sent to Gaza.”

 

(Quelle: Haaretz.com)

Siehe auch:

Israel: “Journalists Onboard Freedom Flotilla Will Not Be Allowed Into Israel”