The way forward for Iran solidarity?

Submitted by cathy n on 10 January, 2007 - 12:51

We reprint here the founding statement of “Hands Off the People of Iran!”, a campaign currently in the process of being launched by a number of Iranian socialist groups and individuals in and around “Workers’ Left Unity”, as well as the CPGB/Weekly Worker group here.

The AWL welcomes the move to establish a principled Iranian solidarity campaign. For too long, activity in connection to Iran has been dogged by fragmentation and lack of focus on one hand, and the SWP and Stop the War’s pro-Islamist politics on the other. An active campaign of support for Iranian workers against both US war threats and Iran's theocratic regime is overdue.

However, there are some problems with “Hands Off...”

• Although, in welcome contrast to the SWP etc, the campaign's founding statement does mention the Iranian working class, the headline focus is more populist. From the name of the campaign to the references to “solidarity with the people of Iran”, “progressive struggles” etc, there needs to be a much clearer emphasis on support for Iranian workers’ struggles.

• The basic demands of the campaign include “The immediate and unconditional withdrawal of US/UK troops from the Gulf region!”

The AWL believes that this is the wrong way to pose our opposition to US imperialism, as immediate US withdrawal from Iraq can only mean collapse into civil war and the destruction of the Iraqi labour movement.

Moreover, why should support for this particular formulation be necessary condition for support an Iran solidarity campaign? It is one thing to be clear about the need to build a Third Camp against both the US and the Islamic Republic, and quite another to insist that those who want to support the Iranian workers say “Troops out now”.

• Similarly, the demand for “Opposition to Israeli expansionism and aggression!” Of course socialists should oppose Israeli expansionism and aggression, but why should this be part of the campaign's basic platform? True, there is the threat of an Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, but this possibility came to light after the platform was drafted. Why not a specific statement about opposition to an Israeli attack on Iran instead?
We hope that the campaign will alter its platform to make wider cooperation possible; and in any case, we look forward to working together on the concrete task of solidarity with the Iranian working class.

Sacha Ismail

Hands off Iran statement: No to imperialist war! No to the theocratic regime!

We recognise that there is an urgent need to establish a principled solidarity campaign with the people of Iran. The contradictions between the interests of the neo-conservatives in power in the USA and the defenders of the rule of capital in the Islamic Republic have entered a dangerous new phase.

US imperialism and its allies are intent on regime change from above and are seriously considering options to impose this — sanctions, diplomatic pressure, limited strikes, or perhaps bombing the country back to the Stone Age.

In Iran, the theocracy is using the international outcry against its nuclear weapons programme to divert attention away from the country’s endemic crisis, deflect popular anger onto foreign enemies, and thus prolong its reactionary rule.

The pretext of external threats has been cynically used to justify increased internal repression. The regime's security apparatus has been unleashed on its political opponents, workers, women, and youth. The rising tide of daily working class anti-capitalist struggles has been met with arrests, the ratification of new anti-labour laws and sweeping privatisations. Under the new Iranian government, military-fascist organisations are gaining political and military strength, posing an ominous threat to the working class and democratic opposition.

Paradoxically, the US/UK invasion of Iraq has actually increased the regional influence of Iran's rulers — it led to the election of the pro-Iranian Shia government currently in power in Baghdad. This means that any support from the anti-war movement for the reactionaries who currently govern Iran and repress its people is in effect indirect support for the occupation government in Iraq.

We recognise that effective resistance to this war can only mean the militant defence of the struggles of the working class in Iran and of the rising social movements in that country. We want regime change — both in Iran and in the imperialist countries. But we know that change must come from below — from the struggles of the working class and social movements — if it is to lead to genuine liberation.

We call on all anti-capitalist forces, progressive political groups and social organisations to join with the activists of the Iranian left to both oppose the imperialism's plans and to organise practical solidarity with the growing movement against war and repression in Iran headed by the working class, women, students and youth.

Our campaign demands:

• No to imperialist war! No to the theocratic regime!

• The immediate and unconditional withdrawal of US/UK troops from the Gulf region!

• Opposition to Israeli expansionism and aggression!

• Support to all working class and progressive struggles in Iran against the poverty and repression!

• Support for socialism, democracy and workers’ control in Iran!

• For a nuclear free Middle East!

If you support the struggle for an Iran free of the oppressive theocratic regime, but oppose the war plans of the imperialists - join us!

Comments

Submitted by sacha on Tue, 16/01/2007 - 12:13

The first thing to note is that no one got in touch with the AWL to even ask our opinion when the campaign was being set up. It was just presented to us as a take it or leave it. Given that we're probably the British left group that has done the most Iran solidarity work of any, this was fairly irritating. Now I accept that the Iranian comrades involved have contacts in Iran who, rightly, have a privileged position in formulating a campaign. But surely it would have made sense to try and bring in British socialists active on Iran too? (I don't know if the CPGB were involved or whether they just signed the statement once it was published.)

This is not a question of sour grapes. The failure to create a "united" campaign will limit the effectiveness of our solidarity work; in fact, it already has. One example. At the Socialist Youth Network (LRC youth) conference on Saturday, for instance, one of the SYN co-chairs moved an amendment to delete support for "Hands Off..." from a motion on Iran proposed by the CPGB. We voted against this amendment on the grounds that it also weakened the motions opposition to the Islamic regime, but it passed. I'm pretty sure that if we'd worked together on a joint motion of support for a jointly agreed campaign, we could have got it through. And the situation will be even worse in the unions, where the CPGB doesn't do much at all.

On the substantive issues, they're not *all* bottom lines, just friendly criticisms. (And on A Bloke's point about Israel, having thought about it, I tend to agree - not because the regime cares about pretexts for repression, but because it makes it clear to Iranian workers etc that the campaign is not pro-Israeli aggression.) But on the question of "Immediate withdrawal", surely you'd acknowledge that the AWL can't sign a statement an important point of which is in conflict with our democratically agreed policy?

We'd be pleased if something like "Opposition to the occupation of Iraq and to US domination of the Gulf" was substituted - in fact we wrote to the campaign to propose this. But apparently "Immediate withdrawal" is a non-negotiable phrase.

This website uses cookies, you can find out more and set your preferences here.
By continuing to use this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms & Conditions.