We pass along this important piece with reservation on the usage of the imperialist term "middle east", which draws a relationship of subjugation between us and the imperialist center. We don't call Western Europe Middle West and North America Far West. That's because such terminology would signify their inferior relation to some reference point in Africa or Asia. Similarly, we should be fully aware of the pro-imperialist connotations of the term "Middle East".
-AN list moderators
-----------------------------------------------
By Borhan Azemi and Reza J. and …
Socialist Worker and IRI “Antiwar” Lobby Network
Recently we have read an article under the title of “Standing up to Islamophobia” published in Socialist Worker Online*2.
As a group of Iranian antiwar activists, we decided to make our comments and some clarifications on the issues that are put forward by the International Socialist Organization (ISO), and published on its official web site Socialist Worker Online, concerning the direction of the antiwar movement. We think that the position of Socialist Worker is not in the interest of international proletarian revolution and must be opposed based on Marxist dialectical and materialist understanding of reality. The position that the ISO is theorizing is based upon their assertion that the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) regime is a progressive regime and anti-imperialist in nature. We do not believe so, and intend to show that IRI regime is dependent and part of the world imperialist-capitalist system. And its contradictions with U.S. imperialism will not change the nature of this regime. We cannot support one side in the contention between imperialism and the reactionary regime, and stand under the flag of one of those.
To theorize and reach its objective of supporting the IRI regime, the ISO starts with saying that “Since September 11, 2001, Islam has become the target of choice in U.S. ruling circles. If it were only Bush and the discredited neocons of his administration who used this rhetoric, that would be one thing. But Democratic Party politicians are also quick to denounce ‘Islamic extremism’ and warn of the threat of ‘fundamentalist’ countries like Iran .” Further ISO tries to make a case against “some voices on the left--even radical sections of the antiwar movement…” who, according to them, “accept these same terms.” This is just a mud sliding. Because we are opposed to the Islamic fundamentalism as an alternative for emancipation of the masses from imperialism. ISO must clarify its position on this. We oppose the IRI because for 28 years it has carried out and consolidate a comprador capitalist theocratic regime who has written in its own law that women are subject to men in different spheres of their lives. Defending IRI under whatever pretext would immediately lead to defense of reactionary rotten patriarchal social relations. Also we must remind people that contrary to the claims of the ISO judging the Bush regime from its acts, this US administration has not only carried out not anything against Islam but in fact it has written Islamic Sharia into the Iraqi US installed regime’s constitution. The Islamic Republics in Afghanistan and Iraq are made in the USA ! Do not forget this. It was US ambassador to Iraq that twisted the arms of the Kurdish leaders to accept inscribing in Iraqi constitution that “no law which is against Islamic Sharia can be passed”. This is not because these Christian fascists have been converted to Islam but exactly because Islam and especially its fundamentalist brand represents and promotes certain class relations and certain class alliances which is beneficial for imperialist penetration and control and taming of the masses of these countries. In fact, ISO is so worried about “some voices on the left--even radical sections of the antiwar movement,” such as us, that are against Islamic Republic of Iran regime, to the extent that it would prefer to be in opposition to us as a voice of revolutionary proletarians of Iran !
ISO’s postmodernist position within the antiwar movement proposes to “Stand up to Islamophobia” while “forgetting” to recognize the class struggle in Iran by working and oppressed Iranian people, as well as forgetting about the class nature of the IRI regime. Thus the ISO forgets to recognize what class the IRI regime belongs to!!
So, what is really behind the ISO “Standing up to Islamophobia?” And, when the ISO is warning us not to be in opposition with “Islamic extremism" and “fundamentalist" countries like Iran, what does it mean for the oppressed and working class of Iran, and what is the ISO going to end up standing for?
And should we – antiwar and anti-occupation forces - stand for and against? Is the Islamic Republic of Iran regime a progressive anti-imperialist force as Socialist Worker claims it to be? Why is it that the ISO is so insistent to ask the working people, minority nationalities, women, workers and other oppressed Iranian strata of Iran to forget about revolutionary struggle against IRI regime? Should they forget about standing up to fundamentalist IRI regime, or should they forget overthrowing the IRI regime and join those reformist forces-like Mr. Khatemi the former IRI president-within the context of IRI regime and its “antiwar” lobby network to ”stand” against U.S. intervention and occupation so IRI can survive the U.S. attack? What is the justification for Socialist Worker to stand by the Islamic Republic of Iran regime and against the majority will and right of Iranian working and oppressed people?
What is the Character of the Islamic Regime in Iran ?
28 years ago the IRI took over power from the Shah’s regime in Iran . In 1979, working class and other oppressed strata of Iran (poor peasants and peasants with no land) made history through a revolution and overthrew the US backed monarchy - the Pahlavi dynasty. From 1953, when a US coup brought the King to power, until the 1979 revolution, we lived under the heel of the US sponsored regime of the Shah. Iranians suffered from US sponsored dictatorship, torture and executions, and the theft of the country’s oil reserves. When we finally were able to put an end to that, our revolution for freedom and independence was stopped short by the US and its European allies, who maneuvered to continue exploitation and neo-colonialism in Iran through the theocratic government of the Ayatollahs (the outmoded Islamic Republic of Iran). In this way, the revolution of the people against the monarchy and US imperialism have transformed into a counter revolution.
Ayatollah Khomeini, the first leader of IRI, issued his first important decree against women! On March 7, 1979 (3 weeks after coming to power) he announced that women would have to wear Hijab, which is complete cover of the hair. This decree shook women deeply. This decree on the dress code of women was a clear proclamation that the IRI regime intended to take back the society as a whole. It was pronouncement of the future social relations in Iran in which women would be slaves to men.
In the face of women outpouring in protest and anger, Khomeini took back his decree and waited a little longer, and then step by step advanced. Women were organising and fighting back, but that was not enough to prevent the Islamic regime from advancing and consolidating. At the same time the Islamic regime started to open other fronts of attack against the people, against the Kurds, the workers and against the student movement, the teachers and nurses. It was like the Hitler regime who started with the communists and social democrats and eventually came for everybody else-including its own elected president Bani Sadr. A theocratic fascist regime was consolidated in Iran . At the heart of this fascist theocracy lies the slavery of women.
Then, 19 years ago in September 1988 in Iran , one day all contact between political prisoners and the outside world was cut. No newspapers, no radio or television. No visits. Even communication between prisoners became severely restricted and punished. Every night the guards came, called out 100s of prisoners and killed them in cold blood. The systematic massacre of the political prisoners went on for a little over a month. In September 1988 over ten thousand young women and men were killed behind the walls of prisons in Iran .
The great majority were in their teens or twenties. Some of them had only a few years left of their sentences; some had already finished their sentences but were not released because they had refused to bend to the will of Khomeini. Their phony trials had lasted one or two minutes; sometimes there were no trials. Their “crimes” ranged from disagreeing with the Islamic Republic of Iran and refusal to repent from their past political activity, to believe in the socialist system, Communism, to not believing in God, or refusing to do the Namaz (Islamic prayer).
They were shot, machine gunned or hanged. But hanging was by far the executioners’ preferred method: it doesn’t produce blood and the blood of hundreds killed each night was too much for the cynics to clean. The bodies were thrown in meat trucks and taken to remote cemeteries. One such cemetery in Teheran was that of the Bahais (a minority and persecuted religion in Iran ). The cemetery is called Khavaran and the Islamic Republic calls it “the Place of the Damned.” The bodies were dumped in mass graves, on top of each other, with clothes on, and very near the surface…. All this was done at night, so that nobody would see, so that this heinous crime would be hidden from humanity. But somehow this came to light, and ever since that cemetery has become a gathering point of the families and friends of those who gave their lives for their dreams of a better world. It has also become a testimony to the murderous cruelty of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
When this massacre took place, the governments in Europe and US turned a blind eye. There was no cry against injustice; there was no talk of “respect for human rights” or “democracy.” Hardly a word on this massacre made it to the media. Their silence was a tacit agreement to the crime. The Islamic Republic wished to effectively get rid of any talk of revolution, and kill any hope of liberation; the Western governments were hoping that this would enable them to tighten their grip on Iran , for more oil, more globalization and more profit.
In sum, during last 28 years the Islamic Republic of Iran has systematically subjugated the massive movement of workers, women, students and peasants and the national movement of the people in Kurdistan . Tens of thousands of political prisoners have gone through dark ages trials and have been executed.
Today, 19 years after the massacre of political prisoners, people in Iran are again rising against exploitation and oppression. Women take to the streets for freedom and equality. Kurdish people rise up against national oppression. Workers strikes are becoming common place. Nurses and teachers demand a change in their atrocious conditions. Again the prisons of Iran are getting vastly populated with those who protest. And again the execution squads are being put to work. But the “heroes of Democracy” in the Western governments talk about nothing but Uranium enrichment.
The Islamic fundamentalist groups as well as the Islamic Republic regime of Iran are part of the reactionary and anti masses political forces in the Middle East . The contradictions and differences between them and US imperialism are based upon their reactionary interests. They want to be local manager and headmasters of the oil fields in the Middle East and are asking the U.S. , who is the number one master of the world’s oil fields, to provide them with this position. The Islamic regime of Iran has only one request to America : accept me as one of your official lap dogs in the Middle East ! But America has chosen other lackeys for Iran since the Islamic regime is mostly dependent to European and Russian powers, and is a shaky political structure.
There is only one way to end the current Iraq war and prevent possible future unjust wars in the region. The Middle Eastern people need a revolution against local reactionaries and occupying imperialists to establish their sovereignty and gain emancipation, and American and European people need revolutionary rebellions against their own governments. The current genocide will only continue without revolutions in Middle Eastern countries and rebellious arising in the U.S. of American and European peoples. Pretty soon the Bush administration might attack Iran and reproduce the horrendous tragedy occurring in Iraq .
In Iran , unlike Iraq , revolutionary communist forces and anti reactionary and anti imperialist groups exist in organized fashion. In the Iranian political scene there is a third factor-the revolutionary people and their revolutionary organization who are struggling to overthrow the IRI and are preparing to fight against the U.S. and other imperialists if they choose to attack and occupy Iran. The revolutionaries of Iran are strongly anti imperialist. There is a strong sentiment against the IRI but also against U.S. Imperialism. Struggling to overthrow the Islamic Republic and fight against imperialism ( US in particular) coincides with Iranian peoples’ interests, the demand of the majority of the Iranian people, and is the principal guideline for Iranian revolutionaries. This is the main demand and slogan that should be defended by the international antiwar movement. During the last 28 years the Islamic Republic regime of Iran has systematically subjugated the massive movement of workers, women, students and peasants, and the national movement of the people in Kurdistan . Tens of thousands of political prisoners have gone through Dark Age’s trials and executions. The Islamic regime of Iran has enslaved 35 million Iranian women to the males. Based on Islamic Republic’s law, any non Muslim is a second class citizen. This regime has never been truly resistant to US imperialism nor shall it ever become such. Anti-American slogans of the regime officials are only populist demagogy and nothing more. The antiwar movement in the West and the rest of the world has to be in support of the people of Iran ’s desire to overthrow this reactionary regime. But the Iranian people want to overthrow this regime themselves - they are against any sort of American or any other imperialist power’s interference, be it direct war against Iran , or economic and political schemes such as Orange or Velvet “Revolution”.
Yes, the IRI is a criminal regime, but not because of phoney reasons cited by the Western powers and Bush regime. Not because it is clashing with the Western powers for its own reactionary interest to stay in power. The IRI regime is a reactionary regime. With its suppression of Iranian oil workers, it has insured the control of U.S. and British petroleum companies over Iranian oil reserves. This regime is criminal and reactionary and in no way is it anti imperialist - it has made workers and other oppressed peoples of Iran slaves of the World Bank and IMF and the greed of globalized capitalism and it has made the women slaves of men.
Islamophobia and Fundamentalism
The struggle of Middle Eastern people against political Islam should not be confused with the politics of Islamophobia fostered by the Bush administration in the post-September 11 days. Islamophobia and anti-Arabism, like anti-Semitism, are forms of racism, which the modern Western state appeals to in order to maintain its hegemony in times of crisis. One can oppose both political Islam (by advocating the separation of state and mosque) and Islamophobia.
The struggle against Islamophobia can succeed if it not only is a project of overcoming racism, and preventing the transformation of liberal democracy into fascism, but also supports the just struggle of Middle Eastern people - including the struggle of working people of Iran - against Islamic fundamentalist forces such as IRI regime.
Let us be clear: the IRI have used Islam and phony anti imperialist posturing in order to cover the exploitative and oppressive social relations it is feeding to masses of Iran . This must be exposed rather than guarded. A truly internationalist stand is to work for revolution in ones country and promote the same for other countries. ISO is violating from this principle in its defense of IRI and RCP is acting on the basis of this principle.
Where is the ISO Going to End Up?
In light of keeping the record straight in connection with the true nature of IRI regime as explained above, there are a few questions that the Socialist Worker should answer. Why is it that ISO just “mentions” but does not condemn the repressive nature of IRI regime against Iranian women for the last 28 years? Why does ISO close its eyes on the 1988 massacre of Iranian political prisoners in the hands of IRI regime? Why is it that ISO does not mention anything about that brutal suppression of workers, students, women, national minorities, teachers and revolutionary communists and progressives for the last 28 years? Why is it that ISO has closed its eyes on a regime that has made workers and other oppressed peoples of Iran slaves of the World Bank and IMF and greed of globalized capitalism? Why is it closing eyes on ruining of millions of peasantry by this regime? Why is it closing its eyes on the fact that this is a theocratic state? Has ISO abandoned the basic democratic measure of separation of church and state? Would ISO promote turning U.S. into a theocracy just like the Bush regime wants to achieve?
When Socialist Worker extends its “Standing Up to Islamophobia” to support the IRI regime, should respond these question.
We think that the ISO, by making an absolute case of Islamophobia, has ended up standing with the reactionary Islamic extremist regime of IRI, and against the independent revolutionary front in Iran . This is what the Neocons have forced them to do. “You are either with us or against us”! We want to promote the independent historical role of the masses against all reactionaries and imperialists and against all obscurantists rotten ideologies- be it imperialist or feudalist. This is what the revolutionary front in Iran is demanding from the all antiwar and anti-occupation forces to stand by them.
Furthermore, we believe that the ISO has fallen into a trap of IRI “antiwar” lobby groups that are active here in the U.S. and in European countries. IRI lobby network including CASMII (Campaign Against Sanctions and Military Intervention in Iran ), IAPAC, NIAC*3, AIFC (American-Iranian Friendship Committee), and stopwaroniran.org or Iranian.com in which the IRI advocate Ardeshir Ommani*4 and his wife Eleanor have a lot of influence. Both have been writing a lot in support of the IRI regime. All of these lobby groups are funded and supported by Iranian Regime. Just as pro US Iranian groups are aided and supported by the US government agencies. These pro US Iranians are not just the overthrown Monarchists of Iran but also sections of the IRI who have defected to the US side – such as Mohsen Sazgara*5 who is one of the founders of the Revolutionary Guards of IRI and the Islamic Student Associations leaders who are brought to Washington to be groomed for the future regime that the US wants to install after its regime change. Many of the IRI top men such as Rafsanjani and the Islamic Coalition Party are negotiating and dealing and wheeling with the US government in the back doors. So beware: do not look at the conflict between US and IRI simplistically. Always have in mind the masses and their fundamental interests.
These IRI “antiwar” lobby groups have one thing in common and that is, on one hand they all exclusively and openly show their support for the outmoded fundamentalist and theocratic Islamic Regime of Iran, and on the other hand, in order to attract the support of leftists in U.S. and Europe (such as Socialist Worker), the prominent members of IRI “antiwar” lobby are presenting a glossy picture of the ostensibly anti-imperialist character of this regime. But their story does not end up there; these prominent IRI lobbyists (also including Miss. Allahe Rostami and Mr. Abbas Edallat) are responsible for attracting the most reactionary factions of Islamists in the Middle East . If hugging Hugo Chavez and twinkling to Castro is the way to wink to “leftists” in the U.S. and Europe, their support for the Hezbollah in Lebanon is indicative of their real intentions, and the international political line and agenda that they are out to establish.
Marxists, unlike most liberals, believe that liberal democracy is not simply democracy - it is capitalist democracy and dictatorship. They realize that capitalist democracy can transform into fascism, as it did in the 1930s in Europe . In Germany the transformation occurred through democratic elections. This can happen again, especially under conditions of crisis, or even the perception of a serious crisis. The most liberal of all liberal political philosophers, Michael Ignatieff, defended the US war in Iraq , and used the theory of lesser evil to argue that war, torture and other evils can be used in order to get rid of the greater evil of terrorism. If liberal democracy transforms into fascism, citizens of Middle Eastern origins and those practicing Islam in Western countries can readily become targets of genocide or end up in concentration camps (as happened to Japanese-Americans during WW2). Concentration camps and forced population transfers can occur even in the absence of a world war.
The current world situation is developing in a direction that smacks of more setbacks for the people of the world, for the planet and surely for socialists. Capitalism has already divided the world into two types of human beings: those worthy of living and those worthy of dying. The mega-cities of the world warn us of coming disasters: a planet devastated by the forces of capitalism, with small fortresses in which the rich minority reproduces itself and its rule through sheer military force. During the last reign of fascism, in WW2, communists and socialists were the major force in the struggle for freedom, from the streets of Paris and Milan to the mountains of Greece and China . What role are the forces of the left, especially socialists, playing in the current crisis in which the conflict between reactionaries has overshadowed class and gender struggles?
In closing, we would like to emphasize that we do need to win our emancipation from the Islamic Fundamentalist rulers of Iran , but we don’t need the Bush regime as our broker! We do not need an Imperialist broker at all! Iranians know too well about the US and Bush regime’s intentions with our experience from 1953 through 1979 and up to now. We do not want our people oppressed and our toil and oil stolen under the pretext of bringing freedom and democracy to us by military force, or the lies and fear-mongering about Iran ’s nuclear program and the so-called “War on Terror.”
Next door to us is Iraq , which is in turmoil, with the Jihadist movement growing because of US military occupation and enforcement of so-called freedom and democracy. We are watching the movie in Iraq and we do not need a sequel in Iran . We Iranians intend to gain our liberation and build a new world on the ashes of the old one-be it Islamic or Imperialism- on our own. We want a better world for ourselves and for all humanity. We want a world without the Imperialist pole and without the Islamic fundamentalist pole. We intend to struggle to free ourselves, independent of those two rotten economic and socialist relations –be it Islamic or imperialist democracy robe.
U.S. Imperialism is trying to prevent the Middle Eastern people from making revolution and overthrowing the reactionary states in the region, by imposing a selection between two poles of “ U.S. progress or religious fundamentalism.” We have seen the outcome of those two poles in Iraq . The objective reality in Iraq is that, since the oppressed Iraqi people couldn’t organize their independent force and action-independent from both Imperialists and reactionaries, and couldn’t achieve their struggle for freedom and liberty around a clear revolutionary political vision, they are being destroyed in the press between imperialists and Islamic fundamentalists. We, the Iranian revolutionaries and progressive forces, are determined to prevent that from happening, and people being squeezed between these two reactionary poles. The people must struggle for liberty independent of both imperialist and reactionary lines.
We, the revolutionary and freedom loving communists and leftists of Iran are the spokespeople of such a people’s line and are struggling to shape and broaden that task amongst the Iranian people. We are getting united among ourselves to carry out this historic task, and we implore international forces in the antiwar, anti occupation and anti globalization movements to reinforce and support this policy, and just this policy.
Borhan Azemi and Reza J.
And, by endorsement of an Iranian Antiwar and anti occupation forces in U.S.
Footnotes
*1 http://www.socialistworker.org/20071/628/628_04_Islamophobia.shtml
2 Trita Parsi , 31, president of the National Iranian American Council, calls for greater U.S. engagement and business ties with Iran. Parsi is a former adviser to the only Farsi-speaking member of the House, Rep. Bob Ney (R-Ohio), and recently completed a PhD at Johns Hopkins University 's School of Advanced International Studies , studying under Francis Fukuyama and Carter-era national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski. The NIAC helped persuade a dozen conservative House members to sign a letter to President Bush earlier this month calling for unconditional negotiations with Iran 's regime.
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/23/AR2006062301345_pf.html )
*3 http://www.iranian.com/Ommani/2007/February/Scapegoat/index.html
*4 Mohsen Sazegara a former aide to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and founder of the Revolutionary Guard, became disillusioned with the Islamic Revolution, quit the government in 1989, started reform-minded newspapers and was later imprisoned. After his eyesight suffered because of two hunger strikes, Sazegara sought medical treatment last year in the United States , where he continued to organize a petition demanding a referendum on Iran 's constitution as a means of regime change. He has met informally with State Department officials -- whom he counsels against anointing a single exile leader -- and has strong links to student activist groups back home. He is close to Akbar Ganji, one of Iran 's leading dissident writers. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/23/AR2006062301345_pf.html )
