27.10.2010

Let Hopi affiliate

The leadership of the STWC not only divides the anti-war movement, but risks discrediting it and making it appear ridiculous, writes Mark Fischer

There is a real danger that the stubborn determination of leading officers of the Stop the War Coalition to repeatedly block the affiliation of Hands Off the People of Iran is beginning to look like a sectarian point of honour - in the process making a mockery of slogans about unity.

As an uncontested affiliate of STWC, the Communist Party of Great Britain has once again this year submitted to the annual general meeting a call for the coalition to accept Hopi into its ranks. Hopi has received an email from STWC essentially asking it once again to repudiate some less than complimentary remarks I personally made about the anti-war movement’s leadership during a CPGB aggregate in 2007.

The STWC officers’ position has become more stupid the longer the dispute has gone on and the more Hopi has garnered support and influence. Initially, comrade Andrew Murray - a leading member of the Morning Star’s Communist Party of Britain and STWC chair - at least had the honesty to make it explicit that “our decision in respect of [Hopi] is ... political”. And the politics that informed his antipathy to Hopi were very specific. Here are just a few of the frankly disingenuous claims he used in 2007 seeking to justify Hopi’s exclusion:

“[Hopi is] effectively controlled by the Weekly Worker group (‘CPGB’) … This body has been hostile to STWC from its inception ... [The Weekly Worker’s] coverage of STWC activities is not merely critical, but usually abusive, and reflects the attacks made by our pro-war opponents. [The Weekly Worker] supported the witch-hunting of George Galloway in 2003 and urged voters not to support Jeremy Corbyn in the general election of 2005. When I was myself subject to extensive attack in the pro-war media in 2003, the main lines of such attack were echoed faithfully, with if anything added vitriol, in the pages of the Weekly Worker …

“Even a cursory perusal of the material produced by Weekly Worker is testimony to its antipathy to STWC. This is consistent with the disruptive role it has played in a series of organisations in our movement over the last 25 years, which is why it has been praised by pro-war journalists like David Aaronovich and pro-war websites like Harry’s Place.

“Naturally, Weekly Worker has every right to pursue its own political agenda as it sees fit, but STWC has no obligation to provide it with a platform” (see Weekly Worker October 18 2007).

Needless to say, Hopi opposes all imperialist wars and has consistently sought to expose the lies of the warmongers, especially if they happen to pose as leftwingers or supposed friends of the working class in the Middle East.

As for the CPGB, it is true that we have strong political criticisms of both George Galloway and Andrew Murray. That is no secret. But political differences are no bar to united action. What of the 2005 general election? The CPGB urged the electorate to vote for Labour Party candidates who openly and unambiguously stood for the “immediate and unconditional withdrawal of British troops from Iraq”. Then there is the claim, or implication, that the CPGB supported or joined pro-war witch-hunts in 2003. This is transparently false and easily checked.

Of course, as an accepted affiliate throughout this idiotic argument over Hopi, the CPGB actually has had “a platform” in STWC - see, for example, our motion to this year’s AGM and our sponsorship of Yassamine Mather as a candidate for the coalition leadership.

The idea that Hopi is some Potemkin village front for the CPGB is, I am glad to say, totally unfounded.  But it is clear that comrade Murray has a particular dislike for our organisation going back many years. His attacks on Hopi stem from an abiding hatred of the CPGB - or the “Weekly Worker group”, as comrade Murray insists on calling us, revealing, no doubt unwittingly, his retro-political loyalties in the factional bear pit of the ‘official’ CPGB in the 1980s-90s that produced both his organisation and ours. Comrade Murray was a supporter of the proudly Stalinist Straight Left faction; my good self, of The Leninist, a trend always pleased to be dubbed “Trot” … by comrade Murray and fellow Stalinists).

Today Hopi is supported by a wide range of leftwing groups, campaigns, individuals and trade unions.  That is especially the case in Iran itself, where the tireless work of Hopi has won considerable respect amongst those who want an end to the corrupt theocracy ... but also oppose UN sanctions and US attempts to bring about regime change through a ‘colour revolution’.

It is patently absurd that the “disruptive” CPGB should be allowed to stay as an affiliate, while Hopi was barred because of CPGB “antipathy” to STWC, which in reality amounts to nothing more than having political criticisms of various spokespersons.

Predictably, comrade Murray has tried to shift the argument. All that remains is that I, speaking in a personal capacity, not as Hopi national secretary, made a particularly negative assessment of the STWC leadership three years ago. I was not expressing the opinion of Hopi or even of the CPGB.

The fact that Andrew Murray and the STWC officers insist on excluding Hopi on such absurd grounds carries the risk of making the anti-war movement appear ridiculous.