Tag Archives: Griechenland

Interview with Nikos Maziotis, imprisoned member of Revolutionary Struggle (Greece)

Some Questions and Answers with N. Maziotis, event at Karditsa self-managed space, June 2016 [excerpts]

Q. How can the anarchist/antiauthoritarian space change from being reactive into a real revolutionary movement? In your opinion, what political characteristics should it have, and what kind of organization and aims?

A: It is a question of political positions. Anarchy, or Libertarian or antiauthoritarian communism is a social proposal and organization. The condition to create a truly revolutionary anarchist movement is the existence of political positions and proposals in order to make clear to the people, the masses and workers, what we believe and what aims we have as anarchists. This means that we must take positions on the burning problems and issues of our time that are the result of the capitalist crisis- such as debt, memoranda, the dilemma of staying in or leaving the European Union, and to make clear what is our goal as anarchists, which is none other than the overthrow and destruction of capital and the state and the creation of a stateless, classless society.
These are issues for which the masses of people, the people affected by the crisis and the policies for rescuing the system, have searched and still search answers, yet the anarchist/anti-authoritarian space had nothing different to offer them compared to the proposals of the mainstream parties (besides slogans perhaps). Also beyond the formulation of political positions and proposals it should be clear by whom or in what ways and means our struggle will promote and implement these political positions and proposals- in other words, how we will make Anarchy a reality.

So if we want to make revolution and overthrow capital and the state and to create a revolutionary movement aimed at this stateless and classless society, then we must necessarily have armed struggle in our practice as a means of struggle. Because as I said in my presentation it is obvious and a given that no revolutionary perspective is possible without armed struggle.
Of course a revolutionary movement must have diverse methods of struggle, it must have all the different methods as so many arrows in its quiver: propaganda, counter-information, demonstrations, self-organized structures, and there must be open and public, as well as illegal actions.
But all these actions must be part of a larger package that serves the same purpose, the overthrow of the regime. For this it is indispensable to have the greatest possible agreement among comrades on unified political positions and proposals, in a kind of political program. Otherwise we simply reproduce the characteristics of the current movement, which is a patchwork of groups and individuals, which is neither a unifying nor a united force and where all have different priorities, and therefore it remains a purely reactive political space, only for protest or at best insurrection, but it can not become a threat to the regime nor have a revolutionary perspective.
Regarding the organization that a revolutionary movement must have, it depends on the political positions and proposals we have. Since it seems today that nothing can be taken for granted, if we are anarchists, we are supposed to aim for the immediate abolition of the state as a mechanism to administer societal affairs and the destruction of capital. If our positions and our goals are the destruction of capitalism, the market economy and the state, leading to the creation of a stateless and classless society- that is, a confederal organization where the societal units are the communities, communes and collectives where the decisions are taken by assemblies of the people who make up these social organizations- then the organization of the anarchist revolutionary movement is quite obviously federal.
Because our organizational set-up is our social proposal in miniature, it is Anarchy in miniature. In such a case, anarchists already within their organizations do act as a microcosm of what they profess and support. Inside the old is born the new, but not by reproducing the old hierarchical structures and values of the world and society we want to change. This is very important, because previous revolutions in fact failed in their objectives because they reproduced these hierarchical values and structures in a slightly different way.

True communism means a society without a state. The difference between Marxists and anarchists is that in the process leading to communism, Marxists believe that there should exist in the transition from capitalism to communism, the so-called “workers state” or “dictatorship of the proletariat” and that later, when the conditions have matured and the class enemy is defeated, the state will simply dissolve itself. Whereas, in contrast, anarchists believe that the state must be dissolved and destroyed immediately without any transition. Historical experience has shown that no state dissolves itself, various pretexts are given for its preservation, and that no privileged caste resigns its privileges and gives up its power in the management of human affairs.
As shown in the example of the Russian Revolution of 1917-21, instead of the assumed self-dissolution of the state, there was created the most authoritarian and totalitarian state, and this was a bad example for the labor movement and anti-imperialist struggles and revolutions in the Third World, which reproduced regimes that imposed full nationalization of the economy, along with the dictatorship of a bureaucracy that reproduced class divisions.

In the case of anarchists in the example of Spain, they proved what Saint-Just said in the French Revolution, that “those who make revolutions halfway only dig their own grave”. The Spanish anarchists- and they achieved major gains in terms of self-management in most of the Spanish territory where, thanks to their efforts, the Franco coup was suppressed- did not topple the two governments, both the local one of Catalonia and the central government in Madrid of the Popular Front, all in the name the anti-fascist struggle, with this resulting in constant concessions and repression of self-management by the Communist-controlled government.
Future revolutions must not repeat past mistakes, and must dissolve the State directly as a mechanism of class-rule. We must promote this today as anarchists and we must show our political positions as a movement.

In February comrade Roupa attempted to help your getaway from the prison of Korydallos by [hijacking a] helicopter. Could you make a comment about this?

It was an action forming part of the framework of the continuation of action that Revolutionary Struggle has engaged in since 2009 at the beginning of the crisis, targeting the mechanisms and economic power structures that play a significant role in the crisis and its political representatives (Athens Stock Exchange, Eurobank, Citibank) and continued with the last attack of the organization in 2014 on the Directorate of the Bank of Greece and the IMF permanent representative office, for which I was recently sentenced to life imprisonment.

This escape attempt was a response to repression against Revolutionary Struggle and against other armed fighters, and in this context included in the escape were members of the CCF.
Despite the failure of this attempt, it is of great political value and importance.

As Revolutionary Struggle, we have made choices that have brought us face to face with state repression, prison, and we have risked our lives in this combat. For us, prison is a terrain of struggle, not the end of the fight, and we have proved that it was not the end with the arrests in 2010. To defend with pride what we are, and to continue the armed struggle is a duty and right, and it is our especial duty towards Lambros Fountas, our comrade who was killed in action, it is a matter of course for us and negates the repression.
Such actions as comrade Pola Roupa attempted are exemplary because they give a strong political message that we are and remain consequent, despite successive repressive operations of the state against us, despite the arrests, heavy sentences, and murder of Lambros Fountas, we are unrepentant and we will not stop struggling, we will never throw in the towel, we will never give up the fight.
Also the fact that the escape would have included members of CCF demonstrates further that there is not so much importance in different positions about issues concerning the struggle, but that what matters is the common goal, the struggle against authority, the struggle for the overthrow of capital and the state.

Lately it is possible to observe a large deficit of solidarity towards all political prisoners. This was particularly illustrated by the massive political prisoners hunger strike of 2015. What do you think is the cause of this?

In my estimation, this is a result of the general political failure, or if you like, the political defeat of the anarchist/anti-authoritarian space over the last six years where, first of all, it was not up to the historic occasion, it could not intervene as a catalyst in the period after the inclusion of the country in the programs of international organizations of the Troika, and secondly, due to the fact that the terrorism of the state started to bite, with the waves of repeated arrests for armed action the 2009-2011 period, a result that brought into prison dozens of comrades who have been sentenced to many years of prison, and that there exists the perspective that they will remain fairly long years in prison.
On the issue of solidarity there were simultaneous problems of separations, with criteria as to why someone was accused and what attitude they held, that is if they were “guilty” or “innocent”, if they took responsibility for participation in an armed organization or invoked a judicial “fabrication”. There were criteria of “solidarity” based on personal or family relationships, or the criteria that, “anyone I disagree with, I am not in solidarity with”.
In recent years we have witnessed many such separations using various criteria. All these divisions have basically a political background behind them, such as the exclusion of armed action as part of the fight against state and capital.
So a piece of the anarchist space has proven to be easier to mobilize on issues of “human rights” since they are considered more popularizable, with the issue of judicial “fabrications”, “unjust persecutions”, “construction of cases”, all this rather than of course the armed struggle cases for which the vast majority of the political prisoners are in prison, and many of whom have accepted political responsibility for their participation in armed groups.
But now there is a general indifference and a general deficit in solidarity towards all political prisoners, not just for one portion, and is irrespective of divisions and regardless of any controversy, and this is due to the political defeat of the anarchist/antiauthoritarian space in recent years. This defeat is the result of serious political shortcomings and incapacities, that it has no coherent political positions and proposals to the problems of our time, the crisis and policies to oppose it. So it could not intervene in the period of big mobilizations against the 1st Memorandum in 2010-12 and was unable to develop into a serious political pole, a revolutionary movement that would be a threat to the regime.

This general political defeat affects the overall activity of the movement and has led to the present resignation and fragmentation- particularly visible in the last rallies against the 3rd Memorandum- and of course this too affects the question of solidarity with political prisoners. Naturally, the movement is also influenced by the general social defeat, after the mobilizations against the memoranda and rescue programs implemented over the past six years have all been defeated. From 2012 there has been a decline in social resistance and a lessening of mobilizations made against the governments of Samaras and of SYRIZA.

The overall political failure and defeat of the anarchist/anti-authoritarian space to develop into a revolutionary movement that has the potential for subversion and revolution is the cause of the deficit in solidarity with all the political prisoners, and not just for those that might be said to have responsibilities for various confrontations between prisoners, and which in some degree are caused between views of “innocence” and “guilt” and the issue of assumption of political responsibility.

To sum up, the problem of the anarchist space is an existential political one. It has forgotten about the war against authority, and therefore has forgotten its own prisoners of war.

Greece: Some excerpts from the presentation by Nikos Maziotis, member of Revolutionary Struggle, at Pikrodafne squat, Athens

31/1/2016

“We have to sabotage the implementation of the Third Memorandum”

Q: What are the reasons, in your opinion, for the decline in the level of social resistance and struggles against capitalist restructuring and austerity measures and how can we get out of this impasse? What should be the strategy in the anarchist space currently?

A
: The cause of the lessening of social resistance is precisely that it had and continues to have a defensive character in face of the unprecedented onslaught of capital and the state after 2010. The capitalist machine has been malfunctioning since 2008, neither finding profitable investments for pumping out ever greater profits nor capital to offset its losses, so it attacks social gains and the working class. And it attacks social security, salaries and pensions, it confiscates property due to debts, reduces labor costs, and seizes public property through privatization.

To compensate for its losses, capital pushes through rescue programs, that is to say the memoranda, wiping out sections of the population that it neither wants to nor can exploit, leading to their destruction. The redistribution of large-scale social wealth by confiscation applies a large-scale policy of theft from society and societal genocide to save the powerful.

Faced with this unprecedented attack that has already left thousands dead and the majority of society immiserated and impoverished, the solution is not to struggle to restore the system and social order to pre-2008 conditions- when the system worked, the banking system was “prosperous” and giving loans, with a welfare state (which in Greece was never well-developed) and a social consensus on the neoliberal reforms of that time.

It is impossible to go back to that situation because of the dynamics of the system itself. Just as it is impossible to return to a social-democratic model of development with strong state intervention in the economy as advocated by Syriza before the elections of January 2015. This model has been disappearing for the past four decades. Rather, the solution is the overthrow and destruction of capitalism itself since its very existence creates crises, the tragic results of which we live. The solution is what we as Revolutionary Struggle have supported for years, that “the only answer to the crisis is social revolution”. The cause of the crisis is not neoliberalism as affirmed by Syriza in previous years, but capitalism itself, its very existence.

The people descended into the streets in the mobilizations of 2010 – 2012 and today on the occasion of the new memorandum, but they expected and still expect to restore the situation to pre-crisis conditions, and to maintain the gains that have been made in the past decades by the old labor and trade union movement’s compromises with capital. The protests that have been made then and now, with their defensive character, proved ineffective to halt in the slightest degree the measures taken by those governments.

But when people take to the streets in protests, it is a great opportunity for political forces to intervene catalytically by putting on the table the revolutionary perspective, the overthrow of capital and the state. And this was exactly what was missing in the period 2010 – 2012 and which is missing now. The masses taking to the streets did not hear anything other than what the regime’s trade unions and parties said to them.

The anarchist/anti-authoritarian space did not form itself into a political force that would pose the question of revolutionary perspective. It did not propose something tangibly different from the policies implemented. So it was a natural consequence that with these mass protests, however large they were, and however many riots there were in front of the Parliament, that they would eventually lose their energy and not manage to overthrow the austerity policies of the government.

I have said before in other events that the radical space found itself unprepared in front of the situation after 2010 which largely revealed its political shortcomings, its lack of analysis of our era and the political system, and its lack of perspectives, positions and proposals. To proclaim slogans like self-organization, self-management, social liberation, revolution, without being more specific is without meaning. That is why the anarchist space remains without serious popular and social support and can not intervene on the central political stage.

The answer to this impasse is to shape our own political positions and proposals, what we propose to society about the problems of our time. To have a political program, to take specific positions on the debt, memoranda, the EU and the eurozone, and what are our proposals to replace capitalism and the state. How can we shape the classless and stateless society to which we supposedly aspire, Libertarian Communism and Anarchy?

On the basis of our political objectives and positions we need to adapt accordingly our actions to achieve these goals and positions. Certainly our actions should be diverse, but to talk about revolution without preparing for armed conflict with the regime, and not to pursue armed confrontation with the regime, means that there is not really striving for revolution, and this word becomes meaningless. Social revolution is unthinkable without resorting to arms to smash the power of capital and the state.

I believe that a revolutionary movement must clearly formulate the positions and proposals of some sort of political program to allow maximum political agreement and commitment on these positions, and on the modes of action and means of struggle to implement these positions and our program. There must be as large as possible consolidation of forces, rather than a loose coordination of collectives or individuals that all have different priorities.

In the present time, we have to sabotage the implementation of the Third Memorandum and the measures taken by the government, along with the commitments they have pledged to the creditors. The range of such action is large: from the urban guerrilla, to mobilizations in the street whether violent or peaceful, counter-information and propaganda actions, or relief measures for the socially weak and vulnerable affected by the crisis, to self-organized projects, all should be pieces of one political project for subversion, not detached from each other. And an overturn cannot happen if we are not prepared for armed struggle, for armed confrontation with the central government for the capture of enemy strongholds, those places where the authorites make their decisions. If we want to make revolution we must be prepared for war literally, not figuratively, to be prepared to risk our lives. This is how I think struggles are conducted.

Also, I believe that a revolutionary movement must have a political-military character. It should have open, public action and also purely illegal action. If there was, for instance, a Federation of Anarchist Assemblies based on territorial distinctions with collectives, affinity groups and individuals participating on the basis of a clear political agreement on principles, objectives and means of struggle, this would link together and help achieve a politically revolutionary program, and parallel to this there could be an illegal armed structure, a mass armed group that would target structures of economic and political power, thus promoting the implementation of the positions and program of the Federation of Anarchist Assemblies.

This does not mean the existence of two mutually independent parts, a “legal” and an “illegal” arm of the movement, but the distinct existence of the open and public action with purely illegal and secret actions that exist within a single revolutionary movement that has diverse actions and does not have criteria for separations of legality or illegality, but is preparing for overthrow and armed confrontation with capital and the state.

There can be no revolutionary movement without having its sights set on armed struggle. There can be no serious revolutionary movement if it is not prepared for armed conflict with the regime. There can be no revolution if the movement has no armed forces and infrastructure to overwhelm the security forces and the armed forces of the regime.

Q. How to connect the solidarity with political prisoners and persecuted activists in the struggles against the memoranda, capitalist restructuring and in general the people descending on the streets at this time?

A: First of all, allow me to delineate what is solidarity. Solidarity means that we consider as comrades all who are in prison because of the means of struggle chosen and that the means chosen are integral parts of our common struggle for the revolution to overthrow capital and the state, with the one prerequisite of having a dignified attitude against the prosecuting authorities, meaning they do not cooperate with the authorities and do not repent of their actions. Solidarity means that we think and feel that with repression, persecution and imprisonment of comrades because of their action and means of struggle that they chose, this means that the state strikes at all of us. It means the continuation of the struggle for those who are prisoners because of their revolutionary action, it means the continuation of the struggle of those who gave their lives in the struggle for the revolution to overthrow Capital and the State.

On this basis, solidarity is expressed in many ways. For example, actions that allow the political prisoners to speak, or counter-information, interventions, occupations, and demonstrations designed to publicize and popularize the words of political prisoners and the reasons why they are in prison, and most importantly, to connect all this with the general revolutionary project, namely the overthrow of capital and the state in the social struggles of our time. It can of course also be the continuation of armed struggle when it concerns prisoners who are in prison because of armed action and are members of guerrilla organizations.

To connect the solidarity with political prisoners in the struggles against the memoranda and the attack which has been unleashed by capital and the state since 2010, there should exist on the one hand (in the political space to which the political prisoners belong) the prospect of subversion and social revolution, and this certainly not at the level of wishful thinking or sloganeering, but at the level of action; and on the other hand the political prisoners themselves advance the struggle with their words or actions that have a revolutionary perspective.

For example, the words and acts of Revolutionary Struggle that are expressed either as an organization that acts, or through prison, have a wide social audience, our words can be popularized and are assimilable. Because the actions and the logic of the organization are based on the struggle against the rescue programs and policies to address the crisis, it is a call to overthrow the regime for social liberation.

We are an anarchist collective who have talked about the enormous public debt since 2005, how the Greek economy was based on a dependency policy by borrowing from the markets and the transnational economic elites, and that the country would be in a dire situation if there erupted a crisis due to debt, and we diagnosed the policies implemented by the Greek governments since 2009 to address the crisis, these policies that led to the memoranda. We diagnosed the social explosions that would be caused by these policies, which resulted in the overall discrediting and delegitimation of the system for major portions of society and this appeared in the period 2010 – 2012, and as well we diagnosed the great opportunity that occurred due to this general discrediting and delegitimation of the system for a revolutionary attempt in Greece, this opportunity that currently remains untapped. We talked on just the same grounds since 2009 of the need to create a revolutionary movement with clear objectives to attempt the overthrow of capital and the state, but this has not been possible to do so far.

We made what should in our view be the political orientations and proposals that a revolutionary movement must have today, as expressed in the creation of our platform in the notice by which we undertook the responsibility for the attack on the Bank of Greece in 2014. Of course a revolutionary movement must not forget the captives who are in state hands.

As for a practical example of how to connect the solidarity with political prisoners in the struggles against the memoranda, I could mention the proposal on my part in March 2015, when the hunger strike of the political prisoners might have had a central demonstration in Athens linking those demands of political prisoners to the fight against the Memorandum, this coming at a time when the Syriza government had signed its acceptance for the extension of the then existing Memorandum and its acceptance of debt and obligations to lenders in the meeting of the Eurogroup on February 20, 2015- but this demonstration proved impossible to undertake.

Of course, the response to the hunger strike of political prisoners then revealed that solidarity with political prisoners is not a given. I have said some things about the hunger strike of political prisoners last March- in my view, there was not an appropriate response from pieces of the anarchist/anti-authoritarian space.

Generally over time it has been demonstrated that a large piece of the anarchist space consistently opposes and condemns armed revolutionary action but without being able to support that attitude publicly with political arguments, so instead it mobilizes on the issue of solidarity almost exclusively or more easily on issues like “violation of human rights” or in cases where the framework is of “machinations”, “persecution”, the “construction of cases”, the “criminalization of relations” , which are considered more fit for “popularization” and as more “digestible” in the eyes of society.

And because these political arguments can not be publicly supported by the depreciation of armed revolutionary action on their part, then it is most convenient in the case of prosecutions relating to armed rebel groups to misrepresent the substance of those cases, to claim that the meaning in these repressive attacks is not the suppression of armed revolutionary organizations but only the criminalization of the anarchist space, etc. In addition to the arsenal of this kind of “solidarity” has been also added the “solidarity does not mean identity”, but which has shown that the only ones who are asking for identification are only those who extend this kind of “solidarity”.

Over time, the unfortunate result of this split “solidarity” is seen with the political prisoners who are members of armed revolutionary organizations and have taken political responsibility for their organizations and actions and have carried the weight of political battles and confrontations with the state, through special courts and more generally.

The “solidarity” criteria that have prevailed in part of the anarchist space are either personal criteria, that some get mobilized on the basis whether they know someone or have personal, friendly or even family relationships; while at a political level the criterion for this split “solidarity” is the depreciation of armed revolutionary action and those who assume political responsibility for it and defend armed struggle. This is an attitude with which I disagree politically, and with which I am not in solidarity.

The hypocrisy of this split “solidarity” showed itself when I made the proposal for the creation of the Assembly of Solidarity for political prisoners, a proposal which was to determine solidarity solely on political criteria- i.e. to include all persons persecuted and imprisoned for using methods of struggle that are inextricable parts of the struggle of anarchists and revolutionaries in general, this including the communists, and with the only exception of those that have kept an undignified posture by making statements condemning actions or giving information to the authorities. In my opinion this should be the political criteria for solidarity regardless of the means of struggle of those that have been imprisoned, regardless of whether people know personally or not persecuted and imprisoned fighters, regardless of whether we agree or disagree in some or other matters, regardless whether some acknowledge their participation in armed rebel groups or whether their prosecution is a side effect of the judicial pursuit of guerrilla organizations.

But some, either inside prison or outside, raise concerns and make obstacles to create such a solidarity structure for all political prisoners because what they really wanted, but could not say so openly, was to exclude a significant portion of political prisoners as solidarity recipients since what they support – not publicly of course – is that this portion are not political prisoners. Let us not fool ourselves, let us not hide, but look at reality. Solidarity with all political prisoners as a whole who keep a dignified attitude is something that receives an underground war from parts of the radical space.

At this time, amid the general slump in social resistance (despite a mobilization period as now is the time for the pension bill of the Syriza government that implements the third Memorandum) and taking into account the general failure of the anarchist/anti-authoritarian space to emerge as it ought to, as the single serious political pole that puts on the table the revolutionary perspective, solidarity to political prisoners appears to be as discredited as ever. Any solidarity movement, any solidarity call is now settled in a fragmented manner in the general indifference, fragmentation and discord situation prevailing in the movement. Let’s apply what we said previously and still holds true: whoever forgets the prisoners of war, forgets the war itself. The problem is more radical and does not concern only solidarity but the struggle overall.

In conclusion, to answer your question as to how solidarity with political prisoners relates and can relate to the struggles against the memoranda, with capitalist restructuring and people descending into the streets- this is when our action must be aimed at social revolution, when our actions must bring us together in struggle with parts of society mobilized against the memoranda in order to influence them in an anti-capitalist and anti-state direction. To do this we must have clear policy positions and objectives, a revolutionary political program, we must have clear proposals to the militant segments of society to promote the influence of an anti-capitalist and anti-state direction, so that our actions can be understood to be for the benefit and interests of those affected by the attack of capital and the state, attacked by memoranda and the austerity policies for handling the crisis. Revolutionary Struggle has such action. Our action must reach a broad social audience and not be introverted or self-referential.

To have such action that puts on the table the prospect of subversion and revolution is the best shield and protection for political prisoners and imprisoned fighters.

http://325.nostate.net/?p=19688

Saturday 23rd April: Day of solidarity with 22 anarchists that stand trial before the appeals court in Koridallos prison

A few words about the appeal’s trial of 22 anarchists on April 20th 2016

The Conspiracy of Cells of Fire case – the judicial, legal and repressive moves of the State in regard to this anarchist organisation – spreads over a period of 7 years and is still underway.

As of April 20th 2016, after 7 years (since the first arrests in 2009), 22 anarchist comrades stand trial in the second instance in Koridallos prison, Athens. In the CCF appeal’s trial, other cases will be tried as well – dubbed “CCF cases” by the police-judicial complex, to give gigantic proportions to their judicial coup against anarchists.

The appeal’s trial that starts April 20th concerns the following:
i) the Halandri case (three trials in the first instance);
ii) the sending of parcel bombs in November 2010;
iii) the arrests in Nea Smyrni, Athens in December 2010;
iv) the capture of five CCF members in Volos in March 2011;
v) the shootout with police in Pefki, Athens in May 2011; and
vi) the arrests for the double robbery in Velventos, Kozani in February 2013.

In yet another judicial innovation, not only comrades that were tried in first instance as alleged members of the organisation and the CCF members themselves will undergo the same appeal’s trial, but also the six accused in the Velventos robbery case: Nikos Romanos, Yannis Michailidis, Dimitris Politis, Andreas-Dimitris Bourzoukos (who’ve claimed responsibility for the double robbery), Argyris Ntalios and Fivos Charisis (who’ve denied their involvement). In the first instance, these six comrades were fully acquitted of alleged involvement in the Conspiracy of Cells of Fire, so their case doesn’t even fall within the infamous 187A “antiterrorist” law.

But the significance of this police-judicial innovation is not just a simple merging of seemingly and practically unrelated cases. If we take a look at the accusatory dossiers, we can easily understand what’s going on and, most of all, why this is happening.

To defend comrades who’ve been captured for their acts and discourse – as the comrades who’ve claimed responsibility for the Conspiracy of Cells of Fire – or comrades who’ve been targeted by the State’s repressive operations, is a precondition for continuing and promoting a battle currently underway. In this battle against Power, joint action with comrades who’ve been imprisoned, persecuted or vilified doesn’t only aim at the liberation of hostages and the release of captive comrades from prison. It is, furthermore, a logic of “not leaving anyone behind”, thereby strengthening the integrity of the struggle. So that we fighters bring the prisoners back in our ranks; so that we nourish and intensify the war against the establishment.

A solidarity-based combative stance next to comrades who are incarcerated or prosecuted is yet another field of conflict with the State and its mechanisms.

International day of solidarity actions with the 22 anarchists that stand trial Saturday 23rd April

Solidarity Assembly for political prisoners & imprisoned and prosecuted fighters
(Athens, Greece)

Greece: A few words about the appeal’s trial of 22 anarchists on April 20th 2016

The Conspiracy of Cells of Fire case – the judicial, legal and repressive moves of the State in regard to this anarchist organisation – spreads over a period of 7 years and is still underway.

On April 20th 2016, after 7 years (since the first arrests in 2009), 22 anarchist comrades will stand trial in the second instance, facing charges related to “acts” for which they were arrested, but also the accusation of membership in the organisation Conspiracy of Cells of Fire.

In the CCF appeal’s trial, other cases will be tried as well – dubbed “CCF cases” by the police-judicial complex, to give gigantic proportions to their judicial coup against anarchists.

The appeal’s trial of April 20th concerns the following:

i) the Halandri case (three trials in the first instance);

ii) the sending of parcel bombs in November 2010;

iii) the arrests in Nea Smyrni, Athens in December 2010;

iv) the capture of five CCF members in Volos in March 2011;

v) the shootout with police in Pefki, Athens in May 2011; and

vi) the arrests for the double robbery in Velventos, Kozani in February 2013.

In yet another judicial innovation, not only comrades that were tried in first instance as alleged members of the organisation and the CCF members themselves will undergo the same appeal’s trial, but also the six accused in the Velventos robbery case: Nikos Romanos, Yannis Michailidis, Dimitris Politis, Andreas-Dimitris Bourzoukos (who’ve claimed responsibility for the double robbery), Argyris Ntalios and Fivos Charisis (who’ve denied their involvement). In the first instance, these six comrades were fully acquitted of alleged involvement in the Conspiracy of Cells of Fire, so their case doesn’t even fall within the infamous 187A antiterrorist law.

But the significance of this police-judicial innovation is not just a simple merging of seemingly and practically unrelated cases. If we take a look at the accusatory dossiers, we can easily understand what’s going on and, most of all, why this is happening.

To defend comrades who’ve been captured for their acts and discourse – as the comrades who’ve claimed responsibility for the Conspiracy of Cells of Fire – or comrades who’ve been targeted by the State’s repressive operations, is a precondition for continuing and promoting a battle currently underway. In this battle against Power, joint action with comrades who’ve been imprisoned, persecuted or vilified, doesn’t only aim at the liberation of hostages and the release of captive comrades from prison. It is, furthermore, a logic of “not leaving anyone behind”, thereby strengthening the integrity of the struggle. So that we fighters bring the prisoners back in our ranks; so that we nourish and intensify the war itself against the establishment.

A solidarity-based combative stance next to comrades who are incarcerated or prosecuted is yet another field of conflict with the State and its mechanisms.

Solidarity Assembly for political prisoners & imprisoned and prosecuted fighters

Grüße von Nikos Maziotis an das jährliche Treffen der Roten Hilfe International

Ich grüße die Genossinnen und Genossen, die am jährlichen Treffen der Roten Hilfe International teilnehmen. An diesem Treffen nehmen zum ersten Mal Genossinnen und Genossen aus Griechenland teil. Es nehmen Mitglieder der Gruppe „Solidarität mit den politischen Gefangenen“ teil, von welchen ich sicher bin, dass sie euch über die Situation der politischen Gefangenen, die Solidarität mit ihnen und über die allgemeine Situation in Griechenland informieren werden. Von meiner Seite aus werde ich euch über die jüngsten Ereignisse, die sich abgespielt haben, informieren.

Am 21. Februar hat die gesuchte Genossin Pola Roupa, auf die ein Kopfgeld ausgesetzt ist, versucht, einen Helikopter zu entführen. Das Ziel war, mich und andere politische Gefangene, die wegen bewaffneten Kampfes inhaftiert sind, aus dem Gefängnis Korydallos (Athen) zu befreien. Leider ist der Versuch misslungen, aufgrund des Widerstands des Helikopter-Piloten, der ein ehemaliger Polizist ist und bewaffnet war. Zum Glück ist die Genossin unverletzt entkommen. Auf Grund dieses Versuchs sind die Sicherheitsmaßnahmen in dem Gefängnisflügel, in dem wir uns befinden, erhöht worden. Die Genossin, ich und die anderen politischen Gefangenen haben mit öffentlichen Schreiben die Verantwortung für den Befreiungsversuch übernommen. Wenige Tage danach, am 3. März, wurde der zweite Prozess gegen den Revolutionären Kampf beendet, in welchem ich wegen dem Angriff der Organisation auf die Nationalbank von Griechenland zu einer lebenslangen Haftstrafe verurteilt wurde. Zusätzliche 129 Jahre Haft gab es wegen Schüsse auf 5 Polizisten und der Verletzung eines Polizisten, als ich verhaftet wurde, sowie wegen zweier Banküberfällen. Es ist das erste Mal, dass in Griechenland wegen eines Bombenangriffs, vor dem gewarnt wurde und bei dem es keine Tote und Verletzte gab, eine lebenslange Haftstrafe verhängt wurde. Dies zeigt die Verschärfung des Vorgehens des Regimes in Griechenland im Umgang mit bewaffneten revolutionären Aktionen und gegenüber denjenigen, die – wie ich – konsequent und reuelos bezüglich des bewaffneten Kampfs bleiben.

Die politische, ökonomische und soziale Situation in Griechenland ist sehr kompliziert. Auf der einen Seite erschweren sich durch die Durchsetzung der “Rettungsprogramme” (des so genannten Memorandums) die Bedingungen für große Teile der Bevölkerung zunehmend, während die internationale ökonomische Krise sich weiter fortsetzt und in Europa vertieft. Und auf der anderen Seite gibt es die große Welle der Flüchtlinge von Kriegsgebieten des Mittleren Ostens, vor allem aus Syrien. All das stellt ein hochexplosives Klima her, nicht nur in Griechenland, wo während der Schließung der Grenzen auf dem Balkan und der Revision des Schengener Abkommens von einigen Ländern der EU Tausende von Flüchtlingen und Migranten im Land gefangen wurden. Sondern auch in Europa, wo die Fundamente der Europäischen Union irreparabel gebrochen wurden. Diese Bedingungen sind noch weiter belastet durch die Attacken der islamistischen Kämpfer 2015 in Paris, Frankreich und vor einigen Tagen in Brüssel. Diese explosive Kombination der globalen ökonomischen Krise zusammen mit den gepolitischen Faktoren im Mittleren Osten, die ein Resultat des “Kriegs gegen den Terror” und der Politik des Westens sind, den Kriegen in Syrien, Irak, Afghanistan, die die Flüchtlingswelle nach Europa ausgelöst haben, erschüttert die Fundamente der EU und könnte die EU, so wie wir sie kennen, beenden. Das Ergebnis dessen ist einerseits die
Einführung von zunehmend autoritären und totalitären Maßnahmen in Ländern der EU, wie in Frankreich nach den Angriffen der islamistischen Kämpfer, im Namen der Sicherheit findet der Aufstieg eines Polizeistaats statt. Auf der anderen Seite der Aufstieg der Rechten, die die Rückkehr zu schlagkräftigen Nationalstaaten verfolgen, die für die Schließung der Grenzen und die Abschiebung von Fremden und Flüchtlingen sind, die ein Regime des nationales Kapitalismus zurückbringen möchten. Das schlimmste ist, dass nach den Angriffen sich ein Konsens in Teilen der europäischen Gesellschaft breit gemacht hat, die aus Angst und Unsicherheit hinter ihren Regierungen stehen, die auf die Ankunft von Flüchtlingen reagieren. Sie erleichtern damit die Einführung von autoritären Maßnahmen, die die europäischen Regierungen durchführen möchten, um auf die Flüchtlingswellen reagieren zu können. Leider hat sich die Bevölkerung in Europa in den letzten Jahren nicht drastisch dagegen gewehrt, als ihre Regierungen die Zustimmung gaben und mit dem “Krieg gegen den Terror” kollaborierten, der 2001 von den USA losgetreten wurde, als sie zu den Kriegen in Afghanistan und im Irak zustimmten und als ihre Regierungen Truppen zur Unterstützung der Amerikaner bei der Besetzung dieser Länder schickten. Genau aus diesem Grund leiden sie jetzt in doppelter Hinsicht an den Konsequenzen der “Kriegs gegen den Terror”. In der
Hinsicht, dass es bei den Vergeltungsattacken der islamistischen Kämpfer zivile Opfer gab und dass die Regierungen zunehmend autoritäre und totalitäre Maßnahmen im Namen dieses Kriegs und der Sicherheit einführen. Der weltoffene Charakter der EU liegt bereits in Trümmern
.
Ich glaube, dass nur durch das Anwachsen der revolutionären Momente in den westlichen Ländern, die Momente, die sich bemühen, den Kapitalismus und den Staat zu zerstören und eine internationale europäische Gemeinschaft hervorzubringen, dass nur durch diese ein Ende dieses Kriegs, des Rassismus, der Xenophobie, der Ausbeutung und Repression und all der Flüche des Kapitalismus und der Autorität erreicht werden kann. Nur eine internationale soziale Revolution mit antikapitalistischen und anti-staatlichen Charakteristiken in Europa und darüber hinaus kann die Antwort auf die aktuelle Situation, auf die globale ökonomische Krise, die sich mehr und mehr vertieft, und auf den Krieg gegen den “Terror” sein. Leider, Genossinnen und Genossen, sind wir weit von diesem Ziel entfernt. Nichtsdestotrotz müssen wir weiter in diese Richtung kämpfen.

Nikos Maziotis
Mitglied des Revolutionären Kampf

Greeting of Nikos Maziotis at the yearly meeting of Red International Help

I salute the comrades who participate in the yearly meeting of International Red Help. Comrades from Greece participate for the first time in this meeting, members of the solidarity assembly for political prisoners in Greece who surely will inform you about the situation in Greece with regards to political prisoners, solidarity and generally the political situation in Greece. From my side I will inform you about some recent events that took place here. On February 21st the wanted comrade, Pola Roupa, on whom a bounty has been set, attempted to hijack a helicopter in order to break myself, as well as other political prisoners condemned for armed struggle, out of the prison of Korydallos. Unfortunately, the hijack failed due to the reaction of the pilot, who turned out to be an ex-policeman and was armed. Fortunately, the comrade got away safe and unhurt. Following this, security measures in the wing where we are held have increased. The comrade Pola Roupa and I as well as the other political prisoners have assumed the political responsibility for this attempt with public statements. A few days later on the 3rd of March, the 2nd trial of Revolutionary Struggle was completed, in which I was sentenced to life imprisonment for the attack of the organization against the Bank of Greece, plus 129 years for the shooting against 5 cops and the injury of one of them at the incident when I was arrested and for the expropriation of two banks. This is the first time where a sentence of life imprisonment is passed in Greece for a bomb attack in which a warning was given and where there were neither dead nor injured. This demonstrates the increasing severity of the regime in Greece concerning the treatment of armed revolutionary action and of those who like me remain consistent and impenitent as regards the choice of armed struggle.
The political, economic and social situation in Greece is very difficult. On the one hand, the continuing implementation of rescue programs (the so called memorandum) that Greek governments implement make conditions evermore difficult for large parts of the population, while the international economic crisis continues and deepens in Europe, and on the other hand, the huge wave of refugees from the war zones of Middle East, mainly Syria. All this creates a highly explosive climate not only in Greece, where due to the closing of the Balkan borders and also the amendment of the Schengen treaty by some countries of the EU thousands of refugees and migrants have become trapped in the country, but also in Europe where the foundations of the European Union have been ruptured irreparably. These conditions are burdened even further by the attacks of Islamic militants in 2015 in Paris, France and in Brussels a few days ago. This explosive combination of global economic crisis along with the geopolitical issues in the Middle East, which are a result of the war against “terrorism” and of the politics of the West, the wars in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan that caused the refugee wave to Europe, shakes the foundations of the E.U. and may bring about its end as we know it. The result of this is, on the one hand, the adoption by countries of the EU of increasingly authoritarian and totalitarian measures, as in France after the attacks of Islamic militants, the rise of a police state in the name of security and, on the other hand, the rise of the far right who pursue the return to a regime of a powerful nation – state, who press for the closure of the borders and the deportation of foreigners and refugees, who want to bring back a regime of national capitalism. Worst of all is that following the attacks, a consensus has emerged by parts of European society, who rally behind their governments out of fear and insecurity, reacting to the arrival of refugees, thereby facilitating the implementation of the authoritarian measures European governments are taking to deal with the wave of refugees. Unfortunately, the people of Europe, in all the previous years, did not drastically resist when their governments gave their consent and collaborated with the war against “terrorism” that was unleashed by the USA after 2001, when they consented to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and when their governments sent troops to assist Americans in the occupation of these countries. It is precisely for this reason that they doubly suffer the consequences of the war against “terrorism”, such as that there are citizen victims of the reprisal attacks of Islamic militants and that governments take increasingly authoritarian and totalitarian measures in the name of this war and of security. The cosmopolitan character of the EU is already in ruins.
I believe that it is only through the growth, inside western countries, of revolutionary movements that will strive to destroy capitalism and the state and to create an International European Commune, that there can be an end to this war, to racism, xenophobia, exploitation and repression and to all the banes of capitalism and authority. Only an international social revolution with anti-capitalist and anti-statist characteristics in Europe and beyond can be the answer to the current situation, to the global economic crisis that deepens more and more and to the war against “terrorism”. Unfortunately comrades we are far from this goal. Nevertheless we must continue fighting in this direction.

Nikos Maziotis member of Revolutionary Struggle

Greece: Revolutionary Struggle member Nikos Maziotis on the escape attempt and life sentence

Text of Nikos Maziotis about the operation of escape from Koridallos prison and the sentence of life imprisonment handed down in the 2nd Revolutionary Struggle trial

The attempt to escape from Koridallos prison by helicopter on February 21st 2016 – an operation carried out by comrade Pola Roupa, member of Revolutionary Struggle – was a revolutionary act, a guerrilla action for the liberation of political prisoners. It was a means of continuation of Revolutionary Struggle’s activity, a response to the State’s repressive operations against our organisation and other political prisoners, comrades who are in prison for armed activity as well. It was therefore an exemplary solidarity act of great and unique importance. The prison escape operation was a step towards continuing armed revolutionary activity; promoting the struggle for the overthrow of the State and Capital; overturning the establishment’s policy of bailout programs imposed by the troika of the country’s supranational bosses, the EC, ECB and IMF, to which the ESM has been added with the enactment and implementation of the third memorandum program by the SYRIZA-led government. Armed struggle in the present circumstances is more timely and necessary than ever. The failure of this operation won’t bend us. We will struggle as long as we live and breathe.

Revolutionary Struggle has proven that it has remained standing over the years, despite successive repressive blows and sacrifices: the blood of comrade Lambros Foundas, who was killed on March 10th 2010 in a shootout with police in the district of Dafni, Athens, during a preparatory action of the organisation; our arrests a month later, April 10th 2010, on the eve of Greece’s signing of the first memorandum; my arrest on July 16th 2014 in Monastiraki, Athens, where I was injured following a chase and shootout with police. Revolutionary Struggle remained standing because we undertook political responsibility for our participation in the organisation – in Greece, we were the first armed revolutionary and anarchist organisation to do so – and because we defended our history, the organisation’s actions and our comrade Lambros Foundas, who gave his life so that the memorandum wouldn’t pass; to turn the crisis into an opportunity for social revolution. We remained standing as an organisation because we didn’t mind paying the cost and price, because we didn’t turn ourselves into betrayers or deserters, because none of us tried to save one’s own skin at the moment of repression. It’s precisely because we claimed political responsibility that we stayed alive as an organisation in prison in 2010–11. We gave a political battle against the enemy in the 1st special court. Once released from prison after 18 months in pretrial detention, we chose not to surrender ourselves to imminent imprisonment and went underground instead, to continue armed struggle and the organisation’s activity.

The attack of Revolutionary Struggle – Commando Lambros Foundas on April 10th 2014 against the Bank of Greece, a branch of the ECB – one of the most popularly-hated organisations that make up the quartet of supranational bosses – but also a building that housed the office of the IMF’s permanent representative in Greece, annulled the 2010 repressive operation, and continued the organisation’s strategy that was launched in 2009 with the attacks on Citibank’s headquarters and one of its branches, a Eurobank’s branch and the Athens Stock Exchange. For years Revolutionary Struggle is faced with the spearhead of state repression, since the issue of dealing with the organisation and generally armed revolutionary activity is a major priority for the survival of the establishment, seeking to eliminate the internal enemy for the smooth enforcement and implementation of bailout programs, which constitute policies of social genocide and cleansing of parts of the population.

In 2007, the U.S. Department of State and the Greek State placed bounties of 1 million dollars and 800 thousand euros, respectively, after the organisation’s attack with an anti-tank RPG at the U.S. Embassy in Athens. In 2010, the Papandreou government celebrated our arrests, and a government official stated that they prevented a blow that would end the economy, on the eve of the signing of the first memorandum and amid fear of Greek economy’s collapse. In 2014, after we had gone into clandestinity and had been sentenced to 50 years imprisonment by the 1st special court, the Samaras government placed a bounty of 2 million euros on our heads – one million on comrade Roupa and another million on me. My arrest, three months after Revolutionary Struggle’s attack against the Bank of Greece, was celebrated by Greek authorities. U.S. officials congratulated them on my recapture and made statements on political stability. Special measures were implemented after my arrest and, in December 2014, I was transferred to the newly-inaugurated type C maximum security prison, this being the first such transfer of a political prisoner, already preannounced since my recapture. In April 2015, I was included in the list of “international terrorists” designated by State Department, even though I was in prison. The authorities have now unleashed a manhunt to arrest comrade Roupa. All this demonstrates that combating Revolutionary Struggle holds great significance for the establishment. That is, repression against Revolutionary Struggle and implementation of memoranda, together with the establishment’s political stability, go hand in hand.

Last link in the chain of the establishment’s repression against Revolutionary Struggle is the decision of the 2nd trial against the organisation, a few days after the prison escape attempt. I was sentenced to life imprisonment for the bombing attack against the Bank of Greece, plus 129 years for two expropriations of bank branches and shooting of cops who persecuted me in Monastiraki. The imposition of the severest possible sentence for the organisation’s attack against the country’s bosses is a conscious political decision and not just a procedural exaggeration. As I have already stated, this decision aims not to terrorise me – because they know I am and will remain unrepentant – but those who’ll want to opt for armed struggle, comrades of the anarchist/antiauthoritarian milieu and other fighters within society. This political decision – applied for the first time in Greece in regard to a bombing attack which took place following a phone call warning, causing no injuries, but only material damages – is aimed at multiple recipients and sends out an intimidation message, that fighters who’ll opt for armed revolutionary activity will be treated with the utmost severity.

This decision demonstrates the establishment’s increasingly harshening stance against their number one enemy – Revolutionary Struggle, armed fighters. It’s not difficult to understand why, at a time when the SYRIZA-led government has voted the third memorandum, which is harsher than the previous ones. The big difference between penal treatment in the 1st and the 2nd Revolutionary Struggle trials may give rise to misinterpretations; I would therefore like to point out the following: Since the enactment of anti-terrorism laws in 2001 and 2004, this special legislation constitutes a political choice of Power in order to deal as effectively as possible with urban guerrilla in Greece as a major threat to the establishment. A provision in the anti-terrorism legislation allows life sentence, not for homicide, but for explosion as a result of which there was danger to humans or an injury occurred. I was sentenced to life in prison under this provision. Special court decisions in trials against armed fighters are eminently political decisions; the elements in the accusatory dossier are often of secondary importance. For example, as demonstrated during court hearings of the 2nd trial against Revolutionary Struggle in regard to the organisation’s attack against the Bank of Greece, even though there was a phone call giving 50 minutes warning before the explosion, the security officers remained inside the building on the instructions of the Bank of Greece’s security supervisor. The security supervisor himself admitted there’s a standard regulation which obliges the security staff to stay inside the building despite the threat of explosion. The same happened at Piraeus Bank’s headquarters located opposite the Bank of Greece, where security officers remained inside the building on the instructions of the bank’s head of security. As demonstrated in the 1st trial against the organisation, the same also happened on September 2nd 2009 in Revolutionary Struggle’s attack against the Athens Stock Exchange building, where security staff stayed inside as ordered by the head of security.

It’s thus demonstrated that those who are responsible for causing danger to humans are the executives of the economic Power and establishment’s mechanisms and central structures, such as banks and the stock exchange, who consider people and entire populations to be expendable, and even the security officers of their facilities. Because, for them, their profits override everything; their profits, which are dipped in blood and misery, override human life itself. These are the mechanisms that the Greek people consider responsible for the policy implemented over the last six years, which has resulted in thousands of deaths and millions of poor, destitute and hungry people. These are the mechanisms whose executives (bankers, major shareholders, big businesspeople) alongside their subordinates (politicians of Greek governments) the Greek people consider responsible for the devaluation of life of millions of people, for suicides and pauperisation; not the fighters of Revolutionary Struggle. Revolutionary Struggle’s attacks against such mechanisms and structures are to a great extent popularly and socially accepted.

In both the 1st and 2nd trial against the organisation, I have been consistent in facing the enemy at special courts. This entails the undertaking of political responsibility, the political defense of Revolutionary Struggle’s activity, armed struggle and Revolution for the overthrow of the State and Capital, without counting the cost and the price. This is the duty of every fighter, every anarchist, every revolutionary who is faced with judges and organs of the enemy. The sentence to 50 years imprisonment in the 1st trial was based on the undertaking of political responsibility. This is why we were convicted as accomplices in the organisation’s 16 actions by the theorem of collective responsibility, rather than being convicted as actual perpetrators. The State’s response to the fact I remain consistent in my trajectory as a fighter and continue to defend Revolutionary Struggle, and by extension armed struggle and the prospect of Revolution and the establishment’s overthrow, was the outcome of the 2nd trial, where I was sentenced to life imprisonment for one action, the bombing attack against the Bank of Greece. My entire trajectory after the initial arrests in 2010, the fact that Revolutionary Struggle stayed alive during the pretrial detention in 2010–11, the fact that comrade Roupa and I defended the organisation’s activity at the 1st special court, our choice to not surrender ourselves to prison, to go into clandestinity and continue armed struggle and the organisation’s activity with the attack against the Bank of Greece, this entire trajectory and all these choices are based on the undertaking of political responsibility for our participation in Revolutionary Struggle after being captured in 2010. This is what the State attempted to crash by means of the decision of the 2nd trial against the organisation.

My sentence of life in prison was a message to the fighters who assume political responsibility and do not repudiate their activity and membership in their organisation.

Things are becoming increasingly clearer for the fighters who want to resist and the political prisoners. The dilemma “repudiation or life imprisonment” (in the old days there was execution by firing squad) comes into effect; a dilemma put by Power, a dilemma that in the old days was “repudiation or death”.

Over time, in order to suppress any revolutionary perspective, the State doesn’t confine itself to military predominance over its rivals only, but it also attempts their political defeat by forcing them into political repudiation. In the case of the Western-European urban guerrilla in the 70s and 80s, especially in Italy, the target of political repudiation was not one’s convictions or political identity, but rather armed struggle as being one of the means of struggle and urban guerrilla organisations. In Greece, the dilemma put by Power was once this: either repudiation of communism, or imprisonment and, in other circumstances, execution by firing squad. Nowadays, more indirectly, the dilemma is this: either choice of armed revolutionary struggle with heavy costs and consequences, or renunciation of armed revolutionary struggle as being one of the means of struggle. Either undertaking of political responsibility for one’s participation in an armed organisation and defense of its activity, or acceptance of the State’s pursuit of repudiation of an armed organisation and one’s membership in it, and by extension of armed struggle, in the face of fear of going to prison.

In other, more difficult periods like the Occupation and the Civil War, the price to pay for the struggle was the firing squad; and not only for armed struggle. Many fighters faced with the dilemma “repudiation or death” preferred the firing squad; of course not because they wanted to become martyrs, but because they believed that repudiation is a shame and disgrace; as such, it was considered worse than death. There were armed militants and guerrillas of ELAS (Greek People’s Liberation Army) and DSE (Democratic Army of Greece), but also fighters that didn’t wage armed struggle, who remained unrepentant and were sent by thousands to the firing squad during the Occupation and the Civil War; they were executed in Goudi, in Kessariani shooting range, in Chaidari and Pavlou Mela camps, on Makronissos and Corfu, in Yedi Kule. Similarly in Spain, after Franco’s victory, thousands of armed anarchists who fought for Revolution in 1936–39, and waged guerrilla warfare until 1975, were sent to firing squads in Campo de la Bota, Montjuïc, Carabanchel, or strangled by the method of garrote – used as a means of execution for heretics since the Inquisition.

The struggle for the overthrow of the State and Capital is an activity that requires unwavering convictions, responsibility, consistency, commitment, political engagement, steely will, and political and theoretical knowledge of principles and experiences of the historical revolutionary tradition. How can we even talk about struggle, social liberation, revolution, Anarchy, asking others to participate in a subversive struggle with all the costs and consequences that it entails, if we ourselves are unable to assume responsibility for our political choices?

For the first time in decades – since the era of the post-Civil War State, when ELAS guerrillas who were excluded by the 1945 Treaty of Varkiza, which didn’t recognise their activity as being political, as well as those of DSE remained in prison for at least 15 years – there is a prospect that political prisoners sentenced to 25 years or life imprisonment for armed revolutionary action will remain many years in the prisons of the contemporary Greek State-marionette of the supranational economic elite. We’re going through a period where Power is even indirectly trying to pose dilemmas for educing credentials once again, as in the past, to break us with the spectre of long-term incarceration.

The struggle for Social Revolution, for overthrowing the State and Capital, must go on despite the difficulties, the cost and consequences. We will never surrender the weapons of our struggle.

NO PEACE, NO TRUCE WITH THE STATE AND CAPITAL
ARMED STRUGGLE FOR SOCIAL REVOLUTION
HONOUR FOREVER TO COMRADE LAMBROS FOUNDAS,
MEMBER OF REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE

Nikos Maziotis, member of Revolutionary Struggle

http://325.nostate.net/?p=19401

Greece: Open letter of Pola Roupa about the attempt to break Nikos Maziotis out of Koridallos prison

Under other circumstances, this text would be written by Revolutionary Struggle. However, the outcome of the attempt to break out the comrade Nikos Maziotis of Koridallos prison obliges me to speak personally.

On February 21st [2016], I attempted to break out Revolutionary Struggle member Nikos Maziotis by helicopter. The operation was planned so that other political prisoners could join us, who wished to make their way to freedom. Details of the plan, how I managed to evade the security measures and board the helicopter armed, have no special significance and I will not refer to them; despite the fact that there has been a lot of misinformation. Just for the sake of clarity, I will only mention that the plan was not based on any previous helicopter prison escape, it is not associated with any findings of plans not yet implemented, and I do not have any relation to another fugitive person despite media portrayals to the contrary. Also, this attempt was not preceded by any escape plan that “was wrecked”, as reported by some media.

A quarter of the journey after our takeoff from Thermisia in Argolida, I took out my gun and I asked the pilot to change course. Of course, he did not understand who I am, but he realised it was an attempted prison break. He panicked. He attacked me pulling out a gun – a fact he “omitted”. Also because they will likely try to refute the fact he was armed, I remind everyone that there are publicly available reports about the discovery of two mags in the helicopter. One was mine, but the second wasn’t mine. The second mag was from his own gun, which he dropped from his hands during our scuffle during flight. And as for me, of course I had a second mag. Would I go to such an operation with only one mag?

He lost control of the helicopter and shouted in panic “we will get killed”. The description that was presented of a helicopter substantially unmanageable is true. But these images did not result from my actions, but his. The helicopter was losing altitude and swirled in the air. We flew a few meters over electricity wires. I screamed to him to pull up the helicopter, to do what I tell him so no one will get hurt.

Within no time at all, we were on the ground. Those who speak of a dispassionate reaction of the pilot, apparently judging from the result, don’t know what they are talking about.

Instead of doing what I told him to do, he preferred to risk crashing with me in a collision of the helicopter, which didn’t happen by chance. It goes without saying that upon entering the helicopter and trying to gain control of it, to direct it to the prisons, I had made my decision. If he refused to do what I told him, I would naturally react. Those who claim I was responsible for the uncontrolled descent of the helicopter, from 5,000 feet to the ground, what did they expect? That I would have said “if you don’t want to come to the prisons, never mind”? I fired my gun and we engaged – both armed – in a scuffle during flight.

He preferred to risk crashing with me on the mountain than to obey. When we finally landed on the ground with speed, even though I knew the operation was lost, I had every opportunity to execute him. I consciously decided not to do so. Although I knew that with this decision I was endangering my life or freedom, I did not execute him even though I had the chance. He himself knows this very well. The only factor that held me back was my political conscience. And I took this decision, risking my own life and possibility to get away.

Regarding the prison escape operation itself, it’s obvious that all possible safety measures were taken in order to safeguard the undertaking against the armed guards patrolling the prison perimeter, and I even carried a bulletproof vest for the pilot as well. In this case, the purpose was to make the prison break happen in a way that would ensure the lowest possible risk for the helicopter, the comrades and, of course, the pilot. I acted with the same thought when we landed on the ground; despite the fact that the operation failed because of the pilot; despite the fact that he was armed. I essentially put his life over my own life and safety. But I am to reconsider this specific choice.

Organising to break out Nikos Maziotis was a political decision, as much as it was a political decision to liberate other political prisoners as well. It was not a personal choice. If I wanted to only liberate my comrade Nikos Maziotis, I wouldn’t have chartered a large helicopter – a fact that made the operation’s organising more complex. The aim of the operation was the liberation of other political prisoners as well; those who actually wanted, together with us, to make their way to freedom.

This action, therefore, despite its personal dimensions that are known, was not a personal choice but a political one. It was a step in the path to Revolution. The same goes for every action I have carried out and for every action I will make in the future. These are links in a chain of revolutionary planning aimed to create more favourable political and social conditions, for broadening and strengthening revolutionary struggle. Below I will refer to the political basis of this choice; but first I have to talk about facts, and the way I have operated until now in regard to some of these facts.

As I previously mentioned, every action I carry out concerns an act related to political planning. In the same context, I expropriated a branch of Piraeus Bank on the premises of Sotiria Hospital in Athens last June [2015]. With this money, in addition to my survival in “clandestinity”, I secured the organising of my action and financing of the operation for the liberation of Nikos Maziotis and other political prisoners from Koridallos women’s prisons. The reason I refer to this expropriation (I couldn’t care less about the penal consequences of this admittance) is because, at this time, I consider it absolutely necessary to disclose how I operate in regard to the safety of civilians, who in certain circumstances happen to be present in revolutionary actions I am involved in, and my perspective about this issue on the occasion – always mutatis mutandis – of the prison escape attempt.

In the case of the expropriation of Piraeus Bank branch, what I mentioned to the bank clerks when we walked into the bank was that they should not press the alarm button, because this would endanger their own safety, since I wasn’t willing to leave the bank without the money. I did not threaten them, nor would they ever be in danger because of me. They would only be in danger because of the police, if cops arrived at the spot and we subsequently had an armed clash. And the police would only arrive if any clerks pressed the bank alarm. This was a development which they themselves wanted to avoid. Because people who happen to be present in every such action are not afraid of those trying to expropriate, but instead the police intervening. Besides, it’s really stupid for anyone to attempt to defend money belonging to bankers. And for the record, when a female clerk told me “we ourselves are also poor people,” I suggested to her that we step over to a “blind” spot, where cameras can’t see us, to let her have 5,000 euros, which she did not accept, apparently out of fear. If she had accepted the money, she can be sure I would not speak publicly about it. And one detail: what I was holding was a medical apron to conceal my gun while waiting outside the bank; it was not a towel(!), as mentioned several times.

In every period of time, in the struggle for Revolution – as is also the case in all wars – at times the revolutionaries are obliged to seek the assistance of civilians in their fight. The historical examples are too many – an attempt to document them would fill an entire book, and this isn’t the time to expand on the matter – both in Greece and in armed movements and organisations in other countries. In such cases, however, we essentially ask them to take sides in a war. Once someone refuses to assist, their stance is not just about the particular practice, but an overall hostile stance against the struggle. They endanger or cancel undertakings, they put the lives of fighters in danger, they throw obstacles in the way of a revolutionary process. They take a position against a social and class war.

Neither at Piraeus Bank branch nor during the attempted helicopter escape did I make my identity known. Therefore, no one involved in these cases knew that those were political actions. But after the failed escape attempt, and given that – as I already mentioned – I had the opportunity to kill the pilot but I didn’t, risking my own life, I have to make the following public: from now on, whenever I need the assistance of civilians again, and if I deem it necessary, I will make my identity known from the outset. Since my mission in any case concerns the promotion of the struggle for overthrowing the criminal establishment, let everyone know that any possible refusal of cooperating and effort of obstructing the action will be treated accordingly.

I am, of course, aware of the personal details of the pilot, but I did not threaten his family. I would never threaten families and children.

This is my balance sheet after the escape attempt, one I must make public.

THE PRISON ESCAPE OPERATION WAS A REVOLUTIONARY CHOICE

[…]

I ATTEMPTED THE PRISON ESCAPE FOR SOCIAL REVOLUTION
ALL MY LIFE I STRUGGLE FOR SOCIAL REVOLUTION
I WILL CONTINUE TO STRUGGLE FOR SOCIAL REVOLUTION

Pola Roupa
member of Revolutionary Struggle

https://en-contrainfo.espiv.net/2016/03/13/greece-open-letter-of-pola-roupa-about-the-attempt-to-break-nikos-maziotis-out-of-koridallos-prison/

Greece: Prison sentences in the 2nd trial against Revolutionary Struggle

On March 3rd 2016, the Koridallos prison court sentenced all co-accused in the second trial against Revolutionary Struggle with regard to the attack with a car bomb containing 75kg of explosives against the Bank of Greece’s Supervision Directorate in central Athens on April 10th 2014; the shootout in Monastiraki on July 16th 2014 (when comrade Nikos Maziotis was injured and recaptured by police); and expropriations of bank branches.

Revolutionary Struggle member Nikos Maziotis was sentenced to life in prison plus 129 years and a fine of 20,000 euros.

Revolutionary Struggle (fugitive) member Pola Roupa was sentenced to 11 years in prison on misdemeanor charges (if arrested, she will stand trial on felony charges, too).

Antonis Stamboulos was sentenced to 13 years in prison.

Giorgos Petrakakos was sentenced to 36 years in prison plus a fine of 9,000 euros.

https://en-contrainfo.espiv.net/2016/03/03/athens-prison-sentences-in-the-2nd-trial-against-revolutionary-struggle/

Greece: Police allege helicopter escape attempt by revolutionary comrades held hostage in Korydallos Prison, implicate comrade in clandestinity Pola Roupa of Revolutionary Struggle

Over the last days an anti-terrorist media spectacle is unfolding in Greece. Police released a statement about an incident of attempted helicopter hijack on 21 February; a woman using a fake ID card and apparently with the description of Pola Roupa, clandestine member of R.O. – Revolutionary Struggle attempted to hijack a helicopter departing from Thebes with a pistol. The woman had booked a flight to pick up 5 people at a pre-arranged route, but caused the pilot at gunpoint to change direction towards Attica. At one point, the pilot fought back, being an ex-policeman, who claimed to have recognised Roupa through media photographs. He tried to take the pistol, leading to a struggle which ended in the helicopter being brought down with two bullet holes in the windshield and one in the instrument panel. The woman then escaped and so far has not been captured. Police recovered a pistol mag, headphones and a wig which were sent for forensic analysis. The police believe that this was an attempt to spring imprisoned member of Revolutionary Struggle, Nikos Maziotis, from Korydallos Prison, and they also speak as well of anarchist comrade Antonis Stamboulos, bank robber Giorgos Petrakakos and “at least 2 to 3 members” of R.O. – Conspiracy of Cells of Fire who are suspected of participating. The police now attempt to reconstruct the “synchronisation” of the imprisoned comrades and locate the woman who made the defeated hijacking operation.

Maziotis is held in the isolation dungeon which is the basement of the Woman’s Section of Korydallos, where members of R.O. – November 17 and R.O. – Conspiracy of Cells of Fire are also held. Searches by the security forces took place in all parts of the isolation basement yesterday night revealing absolutely nothing.

http://325.nostate.net/?p=18994