08.07.2009

Anti-imperialism of fools

Phil Kent reports on the most recent Hopi meeting

Hands Off the People of Iran organised a well attended fringe meeting at the University of London Union to coincide with the Socialist Workers Party’s Marxism event on Saturday July 4.

The idea was to help generate a more forceful and effective solidarity with the Iranian masses, hopefully with the cooperation of the SWP and others on the left. To that end the SWP, as well as the Socialist Party in England and Wales, were invited to send a speaker, but unfortunately neither replied to Hopi’s request.

As it was, the two platform speakers and Hopi stalwarts, John McDonnell MP and Yassamine Mather, made an excellent case for stepping up our solidarity work. Comrade McDonnell welcomed the mass movement that had been generated around the election protests in Iran - they were far too massive to have been created by the CIA. The obvious split in the ruling class has provided the Iranian people with a window of opportunity and we must act in their support.

Comrade McDonnell was clear that he was not calling for support for Moussavi, whom he described as a “butcher of socialists” the last time he was in office during the Iraq war. Nor was he impressed by Hugo Chávez’s endorsement of Ahmadinejad, although he hoped that this disagreement would not split the anti-imperialist movement. More people in Britain were now more familiar with the political situation in Iran, and this should create favourable opportunities for Hopi to grow.

Comrade Mather gave us a detailed analysis of the situation in Iran, much of which is covered elsewhere in this paper (see opposite - ed), so I will not dwell on it here, but move on to the discussion from the floor, which mostly revolved around the stance socialists should adopt in the event of a conflict between the clerical regime and US imperialism.

Everyone agreed that a military invasion was not on the cards, although Mike Macnair thought a ‘shock and awe’ bombing campaign, including tactical nuclear weapons, was a possibility (others thought this was impossible because the US required a functioning Iran, not a state of chaos). Everyone also agreed that we should unequivocally oppose sanctions, but there was some disagreement over whether they were a preliminary to hot war, as was the case with Iraq, or merely a coercive measure aimed at bringing Iran to heel. Either way, it is clear that the US still hopes to achieve regime change despite Obama’s soothing rhetoric.

A speaker from the Spartacist League denounced Hopi and all that sailed with her because John McDonnell was a member of the imperialist Labour Party, while the CPGB and other left groups involved in Hopi had supported the mullahs in 1979. Her case would have been stronger had it been more accurate. Stuart King for Permanent Revolution pointed out that his group came out of Workers Power, which had not supported the ayatollahs, while John Bridge explained that the forerunner of the Weekly Worker, The Leninist, carried an article in its first issue in 1981 denouncing “the butcher Khomeini”. As for comrade McDonnell, he was rebelling against Labour’s imperialism, not acting as an apologist for it.

A point of real difference was raised by the Spartacist comrade, however. In the event of an imperialist invasion, the slogan should not be ‘Hands off the people of Iran’, she said, but the unconditional defence of Iran against imperialism. For the Sparts the essential political unit is not class, but the state. They claim that this is the authentic view of Trotsky. It certainly was the authentic view of Stalin.

Alan Davies of the International Bolshevik Tendency put the same point in a different way. For him, when push comes to shove, there are only three possible positions: pro-imperialism, as with the Alliance for Workers’ Liberty; anti-imperialism, epitomised, of course, by the IBT itself; and “neutrality”, as advocated by Hopi. As with their Spartacist parents, the IBT comrades never contemplate an independent working class position in conflicts between two reactionary powers. And, as everyone knows, it is impossible to make a concrete analysis of a real situation and chose the most appropriate tactics for the circumstances, because we are forearmed with a biblically derived absolute truth. Such is the anti-imperialism of fools.

The Spartacist speaker proudly declared that her organisation calls for the arming of the Islamic regime with nuclear weapons, while simultaneously advocating its overthrow by the Iranian working class. Not only does Iran have the right to acquire nuclear weapons, but the duty to develop them as the most reliable defence against imperialist attack. The USA did not dare nuke North Vietnam thanks to the Soviet Union’s missile defence umbrella - although that did not seem to prevent the massive use of conventional weapons. Stan Keable of the CPGB made the obvious point that arming the state with advanced weaponry strengthens its hand and weakens working class forces seeking to overthrow it.

Comrade McDonnell was frustrated by the Spartacist rant and suggested that someone suffering torture in an Iranian jail was unlikely to give a damn about the position of Workers Power in 1979. Our job was to provide solidarity in the here and now. Which is true, but not the whole story. The Sparts played a useful role in reminding us that political positions that proved disastrous in the past are still common currency on the left and can have just as disastrous consequences the second time around. Hopi was not allowed to affiliate to the Stop the War Coalition precisely because of wrong theory, which harms our ability to deliver solidarity now. And the situation in Iran itself is no different - Iranian workers need a theoretical understanding that will see them better armed than in 1979.