28.02.2008

No even-handedness

Hopi political discussions focus on the role of imperialism and what position to take, reports Tina Becker

The second meeting of the Hopi steering committee on February 23 managed to get through a number of important political and organisational decisions in record time - thanks mainly to the excellent work done in preparation, chiefly by Hopi secretary Yassamine Mather (who was absent due to illness) and chair Mark Fischer. The full minutes will be available on Hopi’s website shortly (www.hopoi.org).

Most political discussions centred, in one way or another, on the role of imperialism and our position on this crucial question. The debates confirmed once again that Hopi is firmly opposed to both the theocratic regime and the threats and sabre-rattling of imperialism. A position that evidently not many on the left share.

AWL: no fudging

Ben Lewis gave an overview of Hopi’s work in relation to students. There have been successful Hopi campus meetings in Manchester and Sheffield, with events in Bristol and Nottingham to follow soon. Hopi and Communist Students member Chris Strafford is standing for the ‘block of 12’ - members of the national executive of the National Union of Students who will be directly elected at NUS conference at the beginning of April. His platform contains several references to Hopi. Ben also reported that Hopi Manchester had succeeded in bringing a motion to the NUS LGBT conference, which urges it to affiliate to Hopi.

Hopi student members also support the election of arrested Iranian student Anoosheh Azaadbar as honorary vice-president of the NUS. Just before the closing of nominations, the Socialist Workers Party put forward anti-war activist Rose Gentle (whose son, Gordon, was killed in Iraq) as an alternative. Clearly, the comrades did not want to see a repetition of last year’s proceedings, where imprisoned Iranian trade union leader Mansour Ossanlou was elected unopposed.

The meeting went on to discuss our response to an approach by Education Not for Sale (the student front organisation of the Alliance for Workers’ Liberty), which has asked us to participate in a joint meeting at the NUS conference on the imprisoned Iranian students and workers. Comrade Lewis had prepared a response, in which he welcomed the invitation - but only on condition that the meeting is organised, and advertised, as a debate.

Charlie Pottins and Moshé Machover expressed concern about being seen to collaborate too closely with the AWL, which would give this group more credibility than it deserves. Steve Monaghan pointed to the AWL’s dodgy position on imperialism, which is, for example, evident in its motion going to NUS conference: “Conference believes: That the current chaos, sectarian conflict and corporate plunder consuming Iraq proves that American (and British) military adventures in the Middle East have almost inevitably disastrous consequences” (my emphasis).

This is a slippery formulation which implies that imperialist military intervention in some circumstances might not be such a bad idea. Clearly, the political line of the majority of this organisation can only be described as social-imperialist.

“I have yet to see a single good occupation or military adventure,” comrade Steve quipped - or one that was not at least potentially disastrous, he might have added. And, while the AWL’s motion calls on the NUS to “oppose any military action or economic sanctions against Iran”, it mysteriously does not demand ‘troops out now’ in relation to Iraq, despite the “disastrous consequences” of the occupation. No wonder the current NUS executive, dominated by Labour bureaucrats and careerists, had no problem in adopting the motion, presented by the AWL’s Sofie Buckland, as their own.

As an aside, the SWP-sponsored motion ‘Don’t attack Iran’ neatly demonstrates the other side of the unprincipled coin: in their long resolution, the comrades refer only twice to the people of Iran: “Sanctions hurt ordinary people, damage their economic and civil institutions and are a prelude to war. The best way to support the Iranian people is to campaign against war and sanctions.”

But to support the people’s struggles against the theocratic regime is somehow totally out of order and ‘gives ammunition to imperialism’, as we have been told many times. Interestingly, the SWP motion also does not spell out the need to campaign for an immediate end to the occupation of Iraq. Another exercise in self-censorship, no doubt, in line with the official line of the Stop the War Coalition. Lovely to see the AWL and SWP agreeing on something.

All Hezbollah again?

Hopi will also intervene at the World Against War demonstration on March 15 in London. The speakers have not yet been advertised, but will in all likelihood again include a member of Hezbollah. In fact, the STWC is currently organising a speaking tour for Ibrahim al-Moussawi, the editor of Hezbollah’s newspaper in Lebanon, al-Intiqad.

Since the attacks of Israel on Lebanon in 2006 and the anti-war demonstrations that followed it, the SWP has been very keen to identify itself with this organisation. At the demo in July 2006, SWP members were seen carrying pro-Hezbollah placards and heard shouting, “We are all Hezbollah now”. George Galloway - then still a hero of the SWP - even said from the platform that he “had come today to glorify Hezbollah”. And he certainly did (see Weekly Worker July 27 2006).

Hopi will do its utmost to remind the rest of the left of the reactionary nature of this organisation, which has been promoted and financed by the Iranian state in opposition to the organised left.

However, as comrade Machover pointed out in the discussion at the steering committee, our criticism of Hezbollah should not only be based on its past. Our weapon of criticism should be as sharp as possible, which means we have to judge Hezbollah on its current practice: “From using terroristic methods and being clearly manipulated by the Iranian regime, they are now acting more like a political party and enjoy a lot of support from the poor shi’ite population”, the comrade said. He recommended that comrades read up on this question on the website of the Middle East Research Information Project.

Despite all the health programmes and social services that organisations like Hezbollah and Hamas provide today to the poorest sections of society, they remain deeply reactionary. Hezbollah’s programme is based on a loathing of democracy, a disregard for the rights of all but its own religious group and a hatred of working class power.

Al-Moussawi and his ilk should not be given a platform by the STWC. So it is a double disgrace that his views cannot be challenged from amongst the official list of speakers on March 15 by Hopi. Our requests to have a speaker have so far been ignored. Hopi will nonetheless continue to demand that its voice be given proper recognition and will intervene with our own placards and stalls at the demonstration.

March 6 ‘Global day of action’

The steering committee unanimously endorsed the text for a critical leaflet (see below), which we will hand out at the March 6 ‘global day of action’ organised by the International Transport Workers Federation (ITF) and the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC).

Why critical? We could hardly disagree with the demand for the “release of imprisoned Iranian union leader Mansour Osanloo”. However, the campaign should be criticised for what it is not saying: there is not a single mention of the war threats directed against Iran by imperialism. The publicity material does not condemn sanctions, plans for nuclear strikes or the threat of out and out war against that country. It also makes not a single reference to the ‘war on terror’ on Iraq or the devastation caused by the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq.

This is not just an oversight. It underlines the close political and often organisational and financial dependency these official trade union bodies have with their ‘own’ imperialist country. It is not surprising that the AWL has posted an entirely uncritical article on the event on the front page of its website.

More serious is the enthusiastic support from organisations like the Hekmatist Worker-communist Party of Iran (WCPI-H), which has sent a ‘thank you’ letter to the organisers. It is understandable - though still wrong - that comrades from the Middle East with direct experience of repression at the hands of local reactionaries might elevate the fight against them to a higher level than their opposition to imperialism. In Hopi’s view, those who either place an equals sign between imperialism and political islam or even identify the latter as more dangerous than the former are ‘bending the stick’ too far.

A comrade like Azar Majedi, a member of the WCPI-H and the Hopi steering committee (she has not been able to attend either of its meetings so far) will have to resolve this contradiction for herself. But Hopi is very clear: we will continue to fight on two fronts. Our opposition to the Tehran regime and our support for the struggles of the women’s, workers’ and student movements in Iran is always linked with the recognition and clear emphasis that imperialism is the main enemy.

Tina Becker

What sort of solidarity?

Hopi leaflet for March 6 day of action

Supporters of Hands Off the People of Iran will be taking part in the day of action on March 6 to highlight the plight of Iranian trade unionists currently languishing in the prisons of the regime (Ossanlou, Salehi and many others). However, we draw the line at politically endorsing these protests.

The groups centrally involved in organising this mobilisation - the International Transport Workers Federation (ITF) and the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) - are deeply compromised politically. They are more or less silent on the role of imperialism in the region and - in truth - are junior partners in implementing the reactionary agendas of the US and its allies.

The official leaflets to mobilise for this day of action focus almost exclusively on opposition to the theocratic regime. But the Iranian working class is facing two enemies - both the Ahmadinejad regime and the biggest enemy of it and the world’s working class, imperialism.

The negative impact that the pressure of US-led imperialism has already exerted on the Iranian working class does not merit a mention in the publicity material of the IFT and ITUC. The looming threat of war and sanctions has cost the jobs of thousands of Iranian workers - and those that protest to defend their conditions against the anti-democratic attacks of the theocratic regime are branded “traitors” or “dupes of imperialism”. Iranian workers are struggling daily against the islamic republic’s attacks - privatisations, casualisations, systematic non-payment of wages and attacks on effectively organised trade unions that stand up to this vicious exploitation.

Yet, in this, the theocracy is just enthusiastically enforcing neoliberal economic policies dictated by the World Bank and the IMF! No wonder there is no enthusiasm amongst the working class and radical movements of Iran for regime change ‘George Bush style’. Not only do they have the grinding experience of what this already means for their daily struggle to live: they have only to glance at the nearby hell that imperialism has fashioned in Iraq to understand that the chance for genuine democracy and social change must come from their own struggles, not from reactionary, self-appointed ‘saviours’. Organisations such as the IFT or ITUC that are silent on imperialism - and those on the left that uncritically tail them - effectively provide a left cover for the war plans of Bush.

Hopi has a totally different approach to solidarity. We are clear that moribund capitalism - imperialism - has no answers either for the people of Iran or anywhere else on the globe. We want direct links of support between the working class in Iran and internationally that are ideologically, politically and materially totally independent of either imperialism or the theocratic regime. In today’s world, democracy and progressive social change comes from struggles only from below - whether in the Middle East, in Europe or in the United States itself.