Well it’s hardly ‘news’, but it’s note-worthy: the International Workers’ Association (IWA) / Asociación Internacional de los Trabajadores (AIT) — the anarcho-syndicalist international — appears set to split. The December 2015 congress of the Spanish CNT (Confederación Nacional del Trabajo / National Confederation of Labour) apparently decided to ‘refound’ the IWA-AIT on a different organisational basis. The CNT has published an explanatory note (in English) titled ‘CNT on the re-foundation of the IWA. CNT-E’s XI Congress agreements on internacionalism’, which claims, inter alia, that:
… we have found sections in the current IWA to have very little commitment to union work in their local context. Rather, they exert enormous efforts to monitor the activities of other sections, larger or smaller, that do make this area a priority. Consequently, over the past few years, the IWA has become inoperative as a vehicle to promote anarcho-syndicalism and revolutionary unionism at an international level.
In addition to complaints about inactivity/bad practices, the statement also claims that the current general secretary of the IWA-AIT acted unilaterally to expel the German section (FAU). This claim, along with others, is disputed by the general secretary. See : On The Publication of the CNT Spain Regarding the IWA.
Currently, the IWA has the following sections:
• AIT-SP (PORTUGAL)
• ASI-MUR (SERBIA)
• ASF-IWA (AUSTRALIA)
• CNT-AIT (SPAIN)
• CNT-AIT (FRANCE)
• COB-AIT (BRAZIL)
• FAU-IAA (GERMANY)
• FORA-AIT (ARGENTINA)
• KRAS (RUSSIA)
• NSF-IAA (NORWAY)
• Priama Akcia (SLOVAKIA)
• Solidarity Federation (ENGLAND)
• USI-AIT (ITALY)
• ZSP (POLAND)
The FAU and USI — which, after the CNT, are the largest sections in terms of membership — have welcomed the CNT’s declaration, and would seem likely to join the ‘refoundation’. See : Erklärung des FAU-Kongress 2016 (May 17, 2016) and Le Mozioni del Congresso straordinario dell’USI-AIT (April 17, 2016). (The IWA has published a response to the USI statement here.)
Further discussion on the split/proposed refoundation can be found on Robert Graham’s (excellent) blog: The CNT Splits from the IWA (April 12, 2016).
The proper word is “split”, not refoundation, because the IWA has not decided to refound itself and no part of it can decide this on their own. It is a basic principle that members decide things according to statutes and at Congresses of the Federation, not behind closed doors.
I don’t think it is a good practice to spread rumors or false accusations, although here you do at least go through the motions of showing “two sides”. You have an IWA Section in your city and you can check with them how valid certain “claims” are. They aren’t valid, but you repeat them instead of checking facts, which you could do. Also, it is very sectarian and biased to quote one side but not any other. Or maybe you know better than those involved about things?
The only instance which decides who is to be or not to be is the IWA Congress as set out in the statutes. Not any Secretary and not any one, two or three Sections cutting out the rest.
In any case, further reading for those interested:
http://zsp.net.pl/position-x-congress-zsp-sections-and-friends-lwa
http://zsp.net.pl/x-congress-zsp
@Ann Kij:
A few things:
I agree with you that the term ‘split’ is probably more appropriate than ‘refoundation’, which is partly why I adopted the former term in the title of the post. That said, it appears to be the case that the situation is still in flux and I’m not sure that a formal break has occurred as yet. To put it another way, there’s a range of questions still to be resolved in terms of how the CNT and others intend to proceed.
Yes, there’s an IWA section in Australia and I’ll add any statement the ASF produces on the matter when it does, as I’ll attempt to do in the case of other sections. I’ve included only formal statements that have been produced in English by the CNT and IWA and two statements by the FAU and USI (as well as a response by the IWA) — so I’m not sure what you mean by ‘only quoting one side’.