WHAT LESSONS FROM THE KOREAN GENERAL STRIKE?

by the Liason Committee of Militants for a Revolutionary Communist International

As we go to press, the unions have pulled back from an all out general strike to a one-day a week strike. President Kim has refused to back down from the new anti-worker laws but has agreed to talk to the strikers. The opening up of negotiations has been the intention of the strikers from the outset, upset at the `undemocratic' passage of the anti-union legislation. It signals the political agenda of the union bureaucrats to arrive at a negotiated compromise with the Government. As we show, however, compromise can only hurt workers and set back the struggle for the reunification of Korea as a workers republic. From the outset of the strike action on December 26 last year, the union leaders have tried to force the government to repeal its anti-worker legislation by mobilising public opinion against the government. They have not built for an all-out general strike to bring down the government. Why is this? The answer is that the union bureaucrats do not want to rock the boat. They are part of the system. They don't want to overthrow capitalism and unite with the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK) as a unified workers state, they just want the right to exist and have a bigger slice of the economic cake.The union bureaucrats share the bosses view that the rapid economic development of Korea as an Asian Tiger can be shared by all.

They only disagree on the fairness of the shares. The Economist magazine, the free market mouthpiece for the bosses claims that workers can share in growth and prosperity, provided they are prepared to accept a flexible labour market. This is exactly what the new labour laws in Korea are designed to achieve – the right of the bosses to hire and fire at will and not be met with organised opposition. Such "flexibility" says The Economist, allows bosses to move workers where

they can be most productive, providing new jobs and living wages. The problem in South Korea, for The Economist is that for the last 10 years workers have had it "too good", their wages have gone up on average by 15% a year, and they have legal rights to protect their jobs. Today, says the Economist, if South Korea is to remain competitive, workers have to realise that they must be prepared to change jobs and to earn a `competitive' wage. i.e lower than their competitors. Fundamentally the union leadership agrees with this analysis, except that it wants the play by the rules of the OECD(Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) and ILO (International Labour Organisation). That is, it wants the labour market to be regulated by legally recognised unions with bargaining power to improve labour conditions. It sees no reason why this cannot be achieved in a "democratic" Korea backed up by the `international law' of the OECD and ILO. Unfortunately for these bureaucrats, capitalism is not like that. South

Korea's "miracle" economic growth since the war has been at the expense of the working class and poor peasants. Korea became a virtual colony of the US after the war and the workers movement was sold out by the Stalinists who agreed to the US occupying forces edict removing a popular government from power. Unions were outlawed and protest met with repression. Korea was ruled by the military until 1987. The current regime is still far from democratic. It outlaws all unions except its own domesticated house union. So long as workers could win more wages and protect their jobs the government has managed to prevent an open confrontation. Today faced with a worsening economic situation, the Korean economy needs to reduce costs, including labour costs. This has forced the bosses to bring in new legislation to cut labour costs and to restrict the right to take industrial action. South Korea is a semi-colony. It does not extract much of its profits from exploiting workers overseas. It relies on exploiting its own workers. Therefore there is no alternative for the Korean bosses but to clamp down on their workers.

OECD and ILO.

Therefore, the hopes of the union bosses cannot be met. Joining the OECD does not mean that Korea has any choice in the type of labour legislation it introduces. The ILO is a toothless tiger when it comes to imposing any protection for workers. The dictates of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) are far more important than membership of these Western `clubs'. They oversee the foreign debt and force governments to impose austerity and anti-union laws to repay the debt. With the IMF and World Bank on their backs the Korean bosses cannot back down. This means that their confrontation with workers cannot be resolved by negotiation unless workers accept defeat. The reformist strategy of the union leaders is therefore doomed to lead workers to defeat. How then do revolutionaries intervene in this situation? How does the demand for a general strike relate to the demand to unify Korea. Turning wildcat strikes into a general strike! First we must turn the current strategy and tactics of the union leadership into a strategy and tactics that can win.

What of the tactics of the KCTU? It appeals to all classes. It called of the strike over the New Year holiday period to keep public support. It appeals to religion by using the Cathedral in Seoul as `sanctuary' against the state forces. These tactics show that the union is pinning its hopes on the support of `democratic' public opinion, especially international opinion and institutions, such as of the ILO charter. Union leaders are attaching much importance to the OECD stipulating that Korea must meet the ILO provision for legalised unions. The KCTU news also states that reports in the NY Times and other major world media outlets, probably made the government reluctant to move against the union leaders. Is this realistic given the Korean ruling classes inability to live with an organised, legal TU movement? What must be done to win the strike? The tactics of `sit-downs', rallies, motorcades, and `public' services to win over public support, are good tactics to build broad-based support. But they do not by themselves build the general strike.

Rank and File held back.

The KCTU is one of two union groups. It is an illegal union federation formed over the last 10 years. It has around 500,000 members. Up to 300,000 were on strike by mid-January. The FKTU, the government sponsored union federation with 1.7 million members also went on strike in December and January for 2 days at a time. While it is important to mobilise support from this union, it is very conservative, and cannot be expected to support an all-out general strike without adequate leadership and preparation. There is a contradiction between tactics designed to win popular support by moderate means, and tactics able to build a general strike capable of winning. Workers in major industries such as Automobile, tyre etc. have stopped work. Some white-collar workers came out also, proving an important point about the unity of industrial and service workers. Health workers, teachers, lawyers, TV and Press rallied in support for the strike. Public support was reported by one newspaper at about 55%. Many students came out in solidarity But despite this broad based working class response to strike action, the leadership is holding back any movement towards an all-out general strike.

Unite the fight with the North!

Partly this is because the union leaders are trying to separate the struggle in the South from that in the North. The government misses no opportunity to label the strike action a front for those who support reunification with the DPRK. The union leadership has attempted to avoid this charge by distancing itself from the demand for reunification. This is part of its softly-softly strategy. But the two struggles cannot be isolated. The attempts by the US and other imperialists to restore capitalism in the North, if successful, will divide and weaken the Korean working class. Resistance to privatisation in the North will strengthen workers in the South. The attack on workers in the South will weaken the resistance of workers in the North to restoration. Imperialism wants to smash the resistance of workers in both Koreas. The only working class answer is to unite Korean workers against imperialism. An all out General Strike in the south must be linked to the demand for Korean reunification, and for a political revolution to overthrow the North Korean bureaucratic dictatorship. Forging this revolutionary link is important to break South Korean workers illusions in the OECD, the ILO and the Federation of Free Trade Unions, all of which have a rotten record in pushing restoration in the former degenerate workers states.

Negotiations mean surrender!

The decision to pull back to a weekly action may be reversed if no acceptable response comes from the President. Workers should have no illusions about the game the union leadership is playing. Strike action will continue to be used as a bargaining chip to negotiate a peaceful parliamentary back-down and the rule of `democracy'. What will happen if their bluff is called? If the Government does not back down, there is already union talk of mounting a campaign, during the election campaign next year, against the two Governing parties! This proves conclusively that the KCTU leadership's long-term strategy is a gradualist, peaceful process of negotiation which cannot defend the interests of workers under attack by Korean bosses. It is necessary to break from that strategy and fight for an unlimited general strike as part of a transitional programme for socialist revolution.

Workers Councils and Workers Malitia!

First, under the pretext of negotiations, the goverment can prepare for a crackdown and a new military dictatorship because it is forced to resign. The rank and file should reject winding down the strike during negotiations. On the contrary, if the governemnt backs down it will be because it is forced to resign. Short of a full and indefinite general strike, no government will revoke the new laws as these lay the basis for the competitiveness of the Korean economy under conditions of intensifying competition in the Asian region. Workers must reject campaigns to build public support because to win support from the liberal bourgeoisie, religious leaders and the like, the working class must put limits on its independent action. Instead the rank-and-file must organise defence squads, and rank-and-file strike committees to coordinate the building and defending an all-out general strike. These committees should be the basis for workers councils in every area. The demand that the government repeal the two Acts should become a demand for the government's resignation. Because the government is acting under a constitution which allows a virtual dictatorship, a transitional demand for a Constituent Assembly to write a new constitution should be raised. However, because a Constituent Assembly can never be more than a radical bourgeois parliament, in which workers interests become compromised by those of the rulin class, revolutionaries must fight within the workers councils for a workers council government and a workers militia that would replace the Constituent Assembly

For an indefinite General Strike!

For a Constituent Assembly!

For a Worker government based on workers councils and militias!

For Political Revolution in the DPRK!

For a United Workers Socialist Republic of Korea!