Significance of Building Solidarity with Iraqi Civil Resistance

2. Objections by Worker-Communist Party of Iraq

In response to the above-mentioned views by Western activists, the WCPI, which plays a central role in the Iraqi Civil Resistance, has published a number of objections. About Caneisha Mills' article, however, no response seems to have been made by the WCPI or by the Iraqi Civil Resistance as of yet, for the article came out quite recently.

Here, I introduce objections by two activists from among the Iraq Civil Resistance.

(1) Iraqi people's struggle for rights and class struggle

Mahmood Ketabchi of the WCPI, in his paper 'Which Side is the ISO (International Socialist Organization) on, Working Class Socialism or Nationalism and Islamism?' criticizes Eric Ruder's 'The right to resist' and 'U.S. out of Iraq now!'[4]

Eric Ruder, in 'The right to resist', insists that armed resistance by Islamists and Nationalists are legitimate and therefore those who support freedom should all support the movements of Islamists and Nationalists in Iraq. Ketabchi points out that 'in the entire article of 2,260 words, there is not even one word about Iraqi working class struggle for freedom and equality and the tremendous efforts by Iraqi workers who are fighting under incredibly harsh and brutal conditions to organize their ranks against the US occupation and capitalist exploitation of Iraqi workers.' 'You will not find one word about the women's liberation movement that opposes the US government, violence against women, misogynism, and all brutal laws and regulations that turn women into sub-humans.' Ketabchi asks, 'Why are they ignoring Iraqi workers and their struggle, the women's liberation movement, etc.? Iraqi workers, through their unions and councils, have repeatedly opposed the US occupation of Iraq and demanded an immediate withdrawal of US forces from Iraq. Is this opposition of any importance to the ISO? Have mass protests or workers, continuous strike actions, shop floor activities, unionism and general assemble movement any value for the ISO? Aren't these struggles targeted against the US government, Halliburton, Bechtel, etc.?'

'Which side is the ISO on, Iraqi workers or the Iraqi bourgeoisie? It is quite a shame for an organization that calls itself "International Socialist" to ignore workers and their daily endeavors for a better life and to become a mouthpiece and spokesperson for Islamists and Nationalists.'

Next, Ketabchi takes up Ruder's 'U.S. out of Iraq now!' in which Ruder insists that 'to demand anything else of the U.S. government other than its immediate withdrawal would give it the political justification to continue the pursuit of its war aims -- which it has always cloaked with lofty phrases about democracy, freedom and justice.'

'According to this statement, if Iraqi workers fight for the right to organize, protest and strike, if they demand jobs, unemployment benefits, higher wages and benefits, if they work to build shop floor power and demand control over their workplaces, they would provide justification to the US occupation.' The most backward and reactionary forces in Iraq are throwing the same rhetoric, i.e. 'it is not the time to speak about class and class struggle, women's right and liberation because we all have to unite and fight our common enemy, the US government.'

Ruder also stresses that 'the opposition to occupation is "home-grown" and foreigners are insignificant in numbers.' But according to Ketabchi, 'Iraqi workers and communists do not have any problems or concerns with foreigners.' On the contrary, they welcome international solidarity just as they welcomed international support at the time of the Spanish Civil War.

Ruder says that 'if the Iraqi resistance drives the U.S. out of Iraq, it would be a major setback for Bush's agenda and the agenda of U.S. imperialism. This would be a tremendous victory for our side.' Ketabchi, in response to this, insists that 'A victorious Iraqi bourgeoisie will viciously turn Iraq into an unbearable hell for the Iraqi masses.' He concludes that 'how would mass murder of communists and freedom loving people in Iraq at the hands of victorious bourgeois forces be of any benefit to the workers, communists, and progressive forces in the U.S.? �c No doubt it is important to defeat the US agenda in the Middle East. But, as communists and socialists, we should strive for that goal on our own terms. We do not have to choose between the US and Iraqi reactionary forces. �c Opposition to the US is not a progressive stand per se. �c What matters is the kind of future that this opposition represents and objectives it pursues. "Anyone interested in justice and freedom in Iraq should support the right of Iraqis to resist" and build a free and egalitarian society and a better world. �c No one can deny the possibility of a better future and the ability of people to build their own future and control their own life and destiny. �c Only a revolutionary defeat of the U.S. and the Iraqi bourgeoisie by workers and egalitarian forces in Iraq can benefit and empower revolutionary movements and working class forces in the US and around the world.'

(2) On the "third world" bourgeoisie

Furthermore, Ketabchi gives his criticism in his article 'Debunking Left Nationalism and Bourgeoisie Criticism of Imperialism' as follows. [5] In the views of the Western Left, 'there are two types of capitalisms in the world, the US and Western capitalism (imperialism) on the one hand, and third world capitalism on the other. In this perception, imperialism is viewed as a "foreign" and "outside" force in "developing" countries. According to this understanding of imperialism, imperialism represents multinational corporation that dominates "third world" economy and prevents "domestic and national capital" in developing countries from growing. �c As a result, those who promote such a perception of imperialism portray the former as victimizers that benefit from the world capitalist system and the latter as victims that don't benefit enough or at all. �c But capitalism of the "first world" and good or harmless capitalism of the "third world" is a bunch of bourgeoisie nonsense to subdue workers and suppress their struggle for freedom and socialism. "Imperialism of the west" and "capitalism of the third world" are not two separate entities in terms of their class process, exploitation and appropriation of surplus labor; they are one and the same thing. Capital in "developing countries" is as much dependent on international capital for its survival as international capital is dependent on them. �c What primarily defines their interconnection and relationship is exploitation of workers and contention over who gets a bigger piece of the profit. �c The "third world" bourgeoisie and capitalist ruling class whines and complains about the unfairness of the international economic system, but is very much a beneficiary of the same system. ' ···'

'"Third world" capitalists label their contention with the US and the western powers as "a noble struggle for self determination," "national independence and sovereignty," "economic development," and so on. But in reality, they are contending over their share in the exploitation of workers. National independence and self determination for the bourgeoisie is nothing but the right to exploit their working class "compatriots."' According to Ketabchi, 'What is missing in left nationalists' understanding of imperialism is that they fail to define imperialism' primarily as a capitalist relation between capital and labor.'

(3) On the armed resistance

In the same manner, Shamal Ali of the WCPI, in his paper 'The "Iraqi Resistance" and Worker-Communists,' criticizes the illusions that have spread among the international Left. [6]

The first illusion is the view that 'the foreign occupation legitimizes resistance and leftists should support the resistance regardless of the nature of its leadership.' Behind this illusion is the concept of national 'sanctities'. But 'what sanctity is left for us, the workers, that the foreign army can violate!' The motherland, as Marx said 150 years ago, is never ours. The above-mentioned illusion, therefore, is as nonsensical as saying that 'a local and "national" wolf is better than a foreigner because if it happened to eat our flesh it will never break our bones.'

The international Left criticizes Iraqi communists for opposing this '[armed] resistance forces.' However, according to Shamal Ali, 'the Iraqi workers struggle against the US army and take a radical position against Coalition authority policies and plots.' On the other hand, Iraqi workers 'do not participate in the fronts of reactionary forces,' for 'the struggle of workers and toilers against the occupying army is inseparable from the struggle against the reactionary forces and their medieval and nightmarish visions for society.'

The second illusion is the view that 'Islamic terrorism has been created and nurtured by America and it will end once America is defeated.' This is a view that forgets the fact that 'al-Sadr's followers and other Political Islams in Iraq are part of an international current which commit terrorism from Manhattan to Bali, and from Madrid to the Philippines.' 'Very few in the world are as stupid as the traditional Left, so they encourage and support one terrorist [i.e. Islamic terrorism] against the other [i.e. America]' in a conflict between two terrorists.

According to Ali, 'the defeat of the US in Iraq by Islamic forces and the resistance that it leads will only be a victory for Political Islam's reaction and fascism on an international scale.' 'Islamic terrorism in Palestine has only resulted in strengthening the Israeli Right. �c (The) defeat of the US, if it is at the hands of Political Islam, will only enhance the reactionary and fascist Right's foreign and domestic policies in the West.'

'We in Iraq are confronting forces, which are not only local forces, but rather are international forces. It is difficult for the Left (but it is not impossible) to emerge as an effective force in Iraq without the support of the international leftist force. Unfortunately, in our current circumstances, some of the forces of traditional Left are asking us to cooperate and join alliances with al-Sadrists and the followers of Bin Laden.'

'As far as armed resistance as a revolutionary tactic is concerned, although the worker-communists view armed resistance as a viable revolutionary tactic, amid the current ideological and class formations and the organizational weakness of a mass movement of workers and emancipatory forces, (we) believe that, resorting to this method can be a huge political mistake, which could hinder the development of a secular mass movement and will deepen the current unfolding dark scenario.'

According to Ali, 'as long as workers and liberationist people lack their own strong parties and mass organizations, able to fill the political vacuum when the US troops are defeated and forced to retreat from key areas, this withdrawal is likely to mean helping the armed nationalist and religious militia and groups to dominate these places. Also the US and allied forces' withdrawal probably will mean turning Iraq to another Somalia. The only tactic to prevent this from happening is through an immediate strengthening of the partisan and mass organizational and armed capabilities of workers and communists to enable them to take the initiative in their hands and appear as a dominant and ruling force across Iraq or in any region where an opportunity exists to do so.'

'The only way for the international Left to emerge as an effective and prominent force amidst the current situation in the world is not standing beside al-Sadrists and followers of al-Zarqawi and Bin Laden, and hailing their "resistance." Rather by politically and materially supporting the worker and communist forces in Iraq and on top of them, the Worker-communist Party of Iraq.'

As it is clear from what we have seen so far, the objection by the WCPI is that they cannot join 'resistance' fought by Political Islam that represents the position of Iraqi bourgeoisie, and what is imperative today is a third alternative to fight both American and Islamic terrorism.

page3 / total 6