Colombia: compromise or containment?

The design, reformulation, and final signing of Plan Colombia by the then US President, Bill Clinton, on the 13 July 2000 initiated in a new era of the US State´s involvement in supposedly sovereign-territorial issues of Colombian politics. The implementation of Plan Colombia there-on-after brought about a major realignment of political-military scales and terrains of conflict that have renewed discourses concerning the contemporary imperialist interests of key US-based but transnationally-projected social forces, leading to arguments that stress the invigorated geo-political dimension of present-day strategies of capitalist accumulation. With the election of Álvaro Uribe Vélez as Colombian President in May 2002 and his pledge to strengthen the national military campaign aganist the region´s longest-surviving insurgency guerrilla group, Las FARC-EP, as well as other guerrilla factions, combined with a new focus on establishing the State project of “Democratic Security”; the military realm of governance and attempts to ensure property security and expanding capitalist investment have attained precedence in Colombia´s national political domains. This working paper examines the interrelated nature of Plan Colombia -as a binational and indeed regional security strategy- and Uribe´s Democratic Security project as a means of showing the manner in which they have worked to pave the way for the implementation of a new “total market” regime of accumulation, based on large-scale agro-industrial investment which is accelerated through processes of accumulation via dispossession. As such, the political and social reconfigurations involved manifest the multifarious scales of governance that become intertwined in incorporating neoliberalism in specific regions of the world economy. Furthermore, the militarisation-securitisation of such policies also illustrate the explicit contradictions of neoliberalism in a peripheral context, where coercion seems to prevail, something which leads to a profound questioning of the extent to which neoliberalism can be thought of as a hegemonic politico-economic project.

The Containment of Labour Unrest in the Post Socialist China

Due to its transition from the socialist mode of production to the capitalist mode, workers in China have been exposed to the exploitative class relations that they hardly experienced before. The working class is now assuming a subordinate position in the relations of production while the capitalist class remains in the dominant position. As a consequence, workers’ protests are constantly emerging and class conflicts are exacerbating in the contemporary China. I have set out to study in this paper how the party-state in China contains labour unrest through the All China Federation of Trade Unions (the ACFTU), which I argue is a state apparatus that performs the ideological, political and economic functions in different situations. There has been an ongoing academic debate on if the ACFTU is defending workers’ interests. Some scholars have expressed optimism while some have taken a dim view. Drawing on Poulantzas’ theory of capitalist state, I hope to make contribution to this debate by demonstrating that the ACFTU is under some circumstances serving the short term interests of workers as individuals, but not the economic and political interests of workers as a class. Instead of organizing workers to overcome the effects of isolation or forming a class for itself, the ACFTU attempts to contain labour unrest and reproduce their subordination in the relations of production.