17.02.2011

Thirty years of reaction

Ruben Markarian of the Organisation of Revolutionary Workers of Iran addressed the Hopi AGM

Firstly, thanks very much for inviting me. As an Iranian leftist it is a pleasure to speak at the Hands Off the People of Iran annual general meeting. Hopi is a principled and consistent campaign, internationally supporting the Iranian labour movement and democratic movement with a clear stance against US imperialism.

As you know, after the Iranian revolution the coming to power of the Islamic movement spread huge confusion amongst the left both inside Iran and internationally. Some parts of the left saw the Islamic movement as an anti-imperialist one and ‘forgot’ the tyranny of the theocratic regime. Others drew the conclusion that the Islamic regime is the logical conclusion of the politics of ‘anti-imperialism’. So, when we Iranian leftists see a campaign like Hopi which opposes both tyranny and any imperialist intervention against Iran, this gives us much hope and inspiration in our struggle for democracy and socialism in Iran, whilst challenging imperialist rule in the Middle East.

Before discussing recent political events in Iran, please allow me to commemorate a very significant event in modern Iranian history - the Siahkhal uprising, which took place 40 years ago. This event produced the Fedayeen movement after two decades of stagnation and reformism on the left. The Fedayeen initiated armed struggle against the shah’s regime. In so doing they revived the Iranian left and turned it into the main force in the struggle against the shah and against imperialism in Iran. We should commemorate our fallen comrades and their memory - they died for socialism and freedom and passed on militant traditions to the next generation of Iranians.

Yesterday also saw the 32nd anniversary of the Iranian revolution. The revolution started eight years after the Fedayeen organisation began. In commemorating this movement I must also add a very important self-criticism. We were very committed activists who thought that we could ‘break the wall of fear’ with our armed actions against the regime: ie, empower people and convince them that they should also take part in the struggle against the forces of the regime and bring it down. But this did not happen. The regime only fell later with the rising tide of revolutionary upsurge. We were marginalised. Yet the mullahs, who were tolerated by the shah regime and had the power of the mosques, were able to organise the people and then hijack the revolution. So on the very day of the revolution’s victory it was dead and defeated. Hijacked by the mullahs, it turned into theocratic tyranny - a fascist-religious regime which undid all the gains of the revolutionary, democratic movement of the Iranian people.

June 2009 and today

In order to set the scene for the movement today I must also go back to another great event in Iran’s revolutionary history - the June 2009 mass demonstrations against the ayatollah’s regime. It heralded a new era in the Iranian revolution. After three decades of tyranny and suppression, the people exploited factional contradictions in the regime by coming out onto the streets on a mass scale. The message was clear: the masses did not want this regime any more and were chanting slogans of freedom, independence and the overthrow of the Islamic regime. This is important because the Iranians were the first people to bring an Islamic government to power, and after three decades they are clearly standing against it. As Moshé Machover explained earlier on, we are entering an extremely important era of revolution in the Middle East. These revolutions have so much to learn from our revolution of 1979, because they are asking about the result of a revolution which brings Islamist forces to power. In 1979 the Islamic Republic was supported by the people, but they now oppose it.

Looking at today’s political situation, I must note that the Islamic Republic is not dependent on imperialism like other tyrannies in the Middle East. It is a semi-independent, reactionary regime. Thus imperialism cannot dictate the regime to do this or that. This is different from the situation under the shah in 1979, when new US president Jimmy Carter told the shah that the political atmosphere in Iran should be relaxed in order to avoid a revolution from below. Prisoners of the shah immediately felt the effects. This contradiction between the rulers in the US and those in Iran could be traced back to the role of the comprador bourgeoisie.

In 2009 the regime used massive repression against the demonstrators all across the country. There now seems to be a very shaky stability amongst the Islamic rulers, but the roots of political crisis are unresolved. The people who came out onto the streets were subjected to enormous repression: arrests, shootings, rape and executions. Today, executions have reached such a scale that somebody is being executed every eight hours. Iran has now overtaken China in executing the most people. The Iranian regime wants to preserve its rule by spreading fear.

The demonstrations alone have not been able to bring down the government - the regime simply sends in the military onto the streets and represses them. This means that the price of demonstrating becomes very high. Either the anti-regime movement can go out into the workplaces and neighbourhoods to draw in further forces and increase support or street demonstrations will cease to be effective. In 1979, for example, it was the general strike which supported the mass demonstrations in the streets, and these demonstrations in turn gave new energy to the mass strike. This also served to disperse the security forces, making the government unable to do away with all of these different protests at once across the country. This is why it is necessary to build the entire labour movement in Iran. The Iranian left can and must play a very important role in this work, linking up the backbone of workers’ struggles with three other important movements in Iran.

The youth and students have always been very active against both the shah and the Islamic Republic, irrespective of the repression they have faced. The Iranian women’s movement is one of the most powerful in the Middle East, combating as it does gender apartheid. The women’s movement is an excellent ally for the workers’ movement. The third other important movement is that of the nationalities. Iran is a multinational society in which 40%-50% of the people are not Persians, but Kurds, Baluchs, Arabs, Turks and others. Throughout the 20th century they have been deprived of their national rights. Again, these movements have always challenged the shah and the Islamic Republic.

There must be a network comprised of these four movements - workers, students and youth, women, nationalities. All four are very active, but separated from each other. Saying that they should get together is easy: actually facilitating such cooperation is less so. Nonetheless, these are the tasks we have set ourselves: the Iranian left must unite on the basis of a democratic, socialist, rank-and-file workers’ movement. In my opinion this movement must be feminist, ecological and committed to peace - it must argue for the Iranian people to live alongside others in the Middle East without war, nuclear weapons and so on.

Sanctions and austerity

I also want to talk about the economic situation in Iran. On the one hand, Iran’s oil income ensures that it is one of the region’s richest countries. On the other hand, its industries are in free fall. Every day we see companies going bankrupt, causing huge lay-offs. It is estimated that 500,000 people have lost their jobs in the last couple of months alone. The economic situation is getting worse by the day, and one of the reasons for this is the sanctions regime imposed by US imperialism. The effects are particularly harsh because the EU, Japan, China and Russia are all cooperating with the Obama administration. The brunt of these reactionary sanctions is being taken by the Iranian people themselves, not the government. The sanctions are partly responsible for the disintegration of Iranian society and the worsening situation of the working class.

Internationally, the Islamic Republic is one of the most isolated regimes, with few friends. In this regard it is up there with North Korea or Burma. This is in marked contrast to Iran under the shah’s regime, which had many allies around the world - not least the US itself.

The Islamic Republic is also planning a harsh austerity programme based on proposals from the International Monetary Fund. The removal of subsidies on food and energy is proof of this. One has to wonder why they are doing this - playing with fire when the people are so opposed to it. Under siege from sanctions and facing a worsening economic climate, is this not just madness on the part of the mullahs? No. They have no other option. The US is currently planning a new round of petroleum sanctions, and the Iranian rulers now see that they must get money from the Iranian people. This is reason behind the austerity measures: the $40 billion they hope to save. This will be paid for by the subordinate classes in Iranian society - including the middle classes.

Wind of change

But, as we have seen in the last week or so, things are changing in the Middle East and we are entering a new period. The uprisings we have seen started with the youth. There are about seven million unemployed in Iran, 78% of which are young people. A large number of them have a university education. We can therefore see what links Iran, Tunisia and Egypt.

Egypt is the centre of Arabic culture and is of key geo-strategic importance to Pax Americana. Dictators may have gone, but the dictatorships are still in place. But we are just at the beginning. It took us six months to force the shah from power, but only 18 days in Egypt! The fall of the shah was the most important day in modern Iranian history, so you can understand the emotions and hope we see amongst the Egyptians.

I think the movements in the Arab world have learnt from us. They saw that we installed an Islamic Republic and what that has meant: not only silencing dissent, but forcing people to cut their hair or dress in a certain way. I think it is for this reason that in Tunisia Rachid Ghannouchi of the Islamist Ennahda movement is insisting he is not Khomeini. Similarly, when Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, welcomed the protests in Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood issued a statement distancing itself from Khamenei and his project. Up until now these revolutions have not been Islamic, but popular revolutions against tyranny.

The recent demonstrations have also had huge effects on Iranian political consciousness. Some in 2009 had forgotten about the need for anti-imperialism and opposition to the US, but now they are seeing how the US supported these hated regimes. We can thus see how revolutionary movements learn from each other and interact. I am looking forward optimistically to the revolutionary future in both Iran and the Middle East. The people are writing history and we must support them.