Volume 21 -Issue 03,January 31 -February 13,2004India's NationalMagazinefrom the publishers ofTHE HINDU Home Contents COVER STORYEmpire and `Anglobalisation' Interview with erem! Corb!n" #ritish $ember o% &arliament' erem! Corb!n, Member of Parliament from Islington North in London, has been a consistent advocate of the cause of disarmament and peace in Britain's ruling Labour Party. He counts relations ith the !hird "orld and human rights among his other main political concerns. !he left#ing MP as in the forefront of the anti#ar mobilisation all through $%%& and believes that public action in the coming months could ell forcea retreat from the militarist policies that no hold the stage. 'losely involved ith the (uropean )ocial *orum, Mumbai as his first encounter ith the ")*. (+cerpts from an intervie he gave S()(mar $(ralidharan, Do you see something coming out of the WSF? Because it is so dispersed and vast, there is a sense of participation and exhilaration, but a hundred different agendas are being pursued. Does this, as a Labour arty person, seem to you a strength, a virtue in itself, or a !ea"ness? I thin- those that have spent their lifetime in Left politics find it very difficult to conceive of something that lasts for four or five days and doesn't reach any decisions, doesn't have any programmes, doesn't have any bitterly contested elections for anyposition. !hese are early days for the ")* and it is feeling its ay about. But if one is prescriptive and says that this is a declaration e must agree on, e ould spend the hole of our days .ust discussing the declaration rather than the issues that surround us. I thin- hat one has to do is see ho the ")* informs people better and brings forard people ho can engage ith government and the media. But above all, e should see ho the ")* can mobilise people on general themes li-e ar, poverty and .ustice in orld trade. !he ")* is a combination of politically active people and single#issue campaigns. !hese single#issue campaigns are absolutely fascinating, colourful and very demanding. /nd the political parties are either e+cited by this or nervous, because there is an alternative poer base developing. "hat happens in the future, I ould hope, ould be that e establish some -ind of a small, permanent presence of the ")* and that e then use that as a ay of pushing governments in areas of particular concern. #ou !ould be going bac" to the $nited %ingdom &ust a fe! days ahead of the tabling of the 'utton in(uiry report )into the death of British !eapons scientist Dr. David %elly*. +nd this is obviously an effort to establish some form of accountability in government. Since accountability is one of the issues before the WSF, ho! do you expect it to play in the $.%. in the context of the 'utton in(uiry report? !he Hutton in0uiry has been an absolutely fascinating e+perience. /fter 1r. 2elly as found dead, no in0uest as held and 3Prime Minister4 !ony Blair, rather surprisingly, set up a .udicial public in0uiry. Lord Hutton then decided to interpret this in0uiry in a very broad ay and called for and received a hole lot of government communications that are normally denied evento parliamentary select committees. /nd hat these shoed in my vie as a degree of cynicism in 1oning )treet relating to decisions surrounding and leading up to the ar. But also, it demonstrated that the various confusing bits of evidence don't add up. /nd so !ony Blair then sent a ne statement to the Hutton in0uiry, hich has not been published, hich e understand is supposed to be a clarification of a clarification. )o the report comes out on the $5th 36anuary4 # and the discussion ill be on the 0uality of evidence submitted by the Prime Minister more than anything else, I suspect. ,here is a certain degree of be!ilderment in the rest of the !orldover the !ay in !hich the $.%. !as marching in loc"step !ith the $.S. behind this !ar enterprise. We also "ne! !ell before %elly-s death that the intelligence basis for the !ar !as very sha"y. ,he dossier !hich the $.%. government prepared in September .//., !hich the $.S. used to pump up its claim about 0ra(-s alleged purchase of uranium from 1iger, had been discredited. +nd the subse(uent dossier !as sho!n to be a plagiarism from a 2/3year3old research paper. 1o! all this pointed to the manipulation of evidence leading up to the !ar. But !hy is accountability being enforced only after the !ar has run its course and tens of thousands of 0ra(is have died. Did it ta"e the death of one British scientist? / very fair point. *irstly, there is an uncomfortable message for Parliament in all this, in that Lord Hutton's in0uiry into the death of 1r. 2elly has been more thorough, more public, better researched and more effective in its performance, than any of the parliamentary standing committees that have investigated the lead#up to the ar. I agree that it is strange that e should have a public in0uiry into the death of a scientist, but ten thousand Ira0ishave died after e ere given nonsensical information about eapons of mass destruction. 'luster bombs and depleted uranium ere used and no in0uiry is held. / number of us in Parliament have called for and voted for an independent .udicial in0uiry surrounding the policy on the ar in Ira0 and e ill continue to press that. I cannot predict hat Lord Hutton's conclusions ill be, but he ill have to reach some definite findings because of the huge discrepancies in the evidence that as submitted. 1r. 2elly clearly -ne a great deal. He clearly did have an opinion on the hole issue. 78B (LLI8!!9/*P A *ross+se*tion o% the parti*ipants in the rall! on an(ar! ,-' 4oming closer to the theme of this forum, there has been this boo" that is much cited in the $.%. and in fact has been mentioned in some of the discussions here, by the historian 1iall Ferguson )5mpire6 ,he 7ise and Demise of the British World 8rder and the Lessons for 9lobal o!er, .//:*. ,he term he uses is not ;globalisation; but ;+nglobalisation; 3 in reference tohis belief that the British empire in some senses, created the modern !orld, !hich the $.S. has been the historical legatee to as imperial overlord. Forgetting his rather rose3tinted vie! of theempire, does he have a point about the reason !hy the $.%. is getting into loc"step behind the $.S. in all these modern day imperial adventures? It is an interesting theory and it is not rong, in the sense that the:.). empire hich e+ists around the orld is a largely commercial one. /nd the British empire of the late#;5th century, yes it did colour much of the orld map pin-, but in 0uite a lot ofthe areas it didn't colour pin- it had massive imperial interests. Inmuch of /frica, at the 'ongress of Berlin in ;lobalisation is the poer of multinational corporations. It is ma-ing the orld's three main economic institutions # "!8, the "orld Ban- and theInternational Monetary *und # or- in their interests. But it has also been the imposition of a sort of /nglophile culture, /mericanised /nglophile culture # of fast foods, of film, of media # on !hird "orld countries all over the orld. )o it creates a sense of values hich oe themselves entirely to freebooting /merican capitalism, much more than to any -ind of (uropean cultural identity. 0s Blair being pushed along by the irresistible force of recent history or are there more fundamental reasons of commercial interest here? I thin- Blair sees Britain as a -ind of /merican bridgehead into (urope. "hereas (urope # by hich I mean *rance, >ermany and Italy and I'm not tal-ing about individuals li-e ?Italian Prime Minister )ilvio@ Berlusconi here, but of the generality of the political culture # see (urope as an identity of itself, as a counterpole to the :.). Blair came into office pledged to build better relations ith (urope because !hatcher famously sort of hated everything A(uropeA. But then, Blair got very angry hen the (.:. ould not support him on Ira0. ,he argument he made !as that he could be a voice for moderation !hen the $.S. !as embar"ed upon !hat !as a potentially very ha