By Toma Hamid , December 2004
There is a split on the left internationally on the question of the reactionary Iraqi Islamoethnocentric" resistance". Some Leftist groups lend support to this reactionary resistance. It is the mentality of the pressure group which prevails in these organisations and determines their political position and activity. The reality of the oppressive practices of the occupation forces against the innocent people of Iraq and the sharp contradiction between this and promises made by the USA and UK in days leading up to the war have prompted the vast majority of people to change position and oppose the occupation and its existence and all its manifestations. However, this opposition to occupation does not amount to support for the Islamo- ethnocentric "resistance". The armed confrontation between the two poles of terrorism in Iraq the USA forces on the one hand and the Islamo- ethnocentric "resistance" on the other has deliberately turned living and working places into battlefields. They are trying to embroil innocent people in this terrorist race. But the resistance of these embroiled people is different from the organized Islamoethnocentric "resistance". There are people who may attack the occupation forces in revenge for the death of loved ones and for humiliation at the hands of these forces. However, these ordinary citizens and their resistance is not an essential part of the current organized armed"resistance" in Iraq.
The backbone of this "resistance" (despite denials by many on the left) is made
up of groups of political Islamists and Baathists. This "resistance" is extremely reactionary, backward and right wing. It is a bourgeois resistance which has nothing to do with the interests of the Iraqi people. When we classify this "resistance" as a right wing as bourgeois we do not mean, as many leftist groups claim, that the individuals involved in it are not workers or deprived people. What we do mean is that the organised, armed "resistance" as a social and political movement is a bourgeois movement. It persues extremely reactionary objectives, it offers a very reactionary alternative to the current bourgeois authority and uses very reactionary methods to realize its objectives.
The alternative offered by this "resistance" was made obvious in Falluja and other parts of Iraq controlled by them for short periods of time. Not only is this "resistance" unconcerned with the wellbeing, prosperity and daily needs of the people like electricity and water supply, health services etc., but also (due to the nature of its ideology and politics) it deprives people of the most basic pleasures of modern life, like enjoying music, dance, modern clothes, alcohol, modern hair styles and so on. It attempts to impose the most backward and reactionary values, traditions and way of living on people. Women in particular are forced to live conditions worse in many aspects than conditions under the ex Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Moreover, groups in this "resistance" use the most violent and inhumane methods to impose their will and achieve their objective.
These methods include suicide bombers, car bombs which kill indiscriminately assassinations, beheadings, torture, kidnapping, destroying people property, attacking public services, issuing fatwas and death threats against anyone who disagrees with them and does not observe their way of living. They use funds raised by smuggling, kidnapping and taking ransoms, robbery, theft and blackmail to finance theirominous war. They have negatively touched all aspects of life in Iraq. Evidences indicates that the victory of these groups in the current terrorist war will have disastrous consequences for 25 million people in Iraq, for people in the region and worldwide. It is this obvious reality, which neo-liberals (like Bush, Blair and Howard) use to scare people and to maintain their grip on many Western societies. The fact that the Islamo-ethnocentric resistance is very reactionary and is antagonistic to human wellbeing and prosperity is undeniable.
So why do sections of the Left: people who claim to be humanist, progressive and for liberation, support and associate themselves with such a reactionary force? I believe one of the reasons is the mentality of the pressure group, which works in and leads certain groups of the Left. Political parties are organizations which struggle for political power. Pressure groups are organisations which struggle to exert pressure on ruling and influential parties to force them to take or not to take certain positions, or to do or not do certain things. Except for very few examples, Left groups have been pressure groups since the failure of the Bolshevik experience. Certainly Western left groups today are not even pressure groups as the ruling class rarely feels their pressure. However the mentalities of the pressure group direct their positions and activity. Any progressive party, not just socialist and communist parties, will separate its ranks from the two poles of reaction in Iraq and will try to mobilize people to defeat both these poles. But pressure groups can only stand with one of the major players against the other. This mentality creates a huge dilemma for these groups, since their perception of imperialism drives them to stand beside one of the most reactionary forces in the world today, namely the Iraqi "resistance".
These left groups both theoretically and practically, are not able to take an independent position from the major bourgeois players. They do not have the confidence to lead and organize people against all bourgeois alternatives. They are mentally not up to such a task. Therefore we see these groups resorting to the methods of struggle they are used to: and that is standing with one reactionary bourgeois force against another. Such groups attack others on the left who dare to challenge and oppose this tradition and mentality. However this is a very difficult task and creates a deep dilemma for the members of these pressure groups. The position of the Iraqi Communist Party in support of the occupation emanates from this same mentality (the CP of Iraq has a member on the US appointed interim council). This party too has to spend its life defending this reactionary position.
No comments:
Post a Comment