1 – The conscious proletariat of Russia had a dialectical sharp sightedness to hold resolutely to revolutionary Marxism as the scientific theory of proletarian liberation and to resist the social democratic, petite-bourgeois and anarchistic interpretations of Marxism. These revolutionaries decisively defended this theory, and in their revolutionary practice they further developed revolutionary Marxism. This was evident in their full understanding of the nature of class and of its functions, of class struggle (which is a matter of life and death), and of class rule (which is the dictatorship of one class over the other – either for safeguarding the old system or for the consolidation of new class relations in place of the decadent and retrograde class relations); they benefited from a guiding science (revolutionary Marxism) which they applied in a responsible manner.

2 – The conscious proletariat of Russia in its revolutionary practice focused on the essential revolutionary points which opened the door toward revolution and the seizing of political power; and it focused on its essence which was expressed in revolutionary Marxism. Their practice erected great shining along the path of the proletarian program and its tactics in advancing the class struggle and the strategy for seizing political power.

3 – In addition, after the seizing of power, the conscious proletariat of Russia was confronted with complex contradictions in socialist construction which were not only related to the internal problems of the workers movement but also to international problems, to the international workers and communist movements, and to the movement of oppressed nations against the exploitation and plunder of these nations by imperialism.  By confronting these contradictions, and offering solutions, the Russian proletariat displayed the international character of the October Revolution, and they left behind many enlightening lessons.

A more detailed explanation of these three contributions is beyond the scope of this article. But we would like to point out some important issues within the Iranian Left movement which exist at the present time. Many comrades unconsciously, and often thoughtlessly, ignore the critical importance of decisively defending scientific proletarian theory and of teaching its scientific achievements; quite a few of their organizations within the movement no longer include these activities in their adopted programs (1). [notes are found at the end of this article]

a – On “Going back to Marx”:

With the collapse of the socialist camp due to the emergence of revisionism (which basically has its roots in the objective reality of the development and backwardness of these societies), some have drawn the conclusion that they should start over from the beginning – and in this manner they look directly to Marx for solutions. This line of thought ignores the October Revolution:  whether from the Right social democratic view that the time for socialist revolution in Russia had not yet arrived in 1917 or from the Left view that the leadership of the October Revolution balked at the immediate establishment of communist relations of production and the abolition of wage labor.
So long as this “return to Marx” is related to scientific communism as expressed by its founding fathers, then  it is a rational precept. But more often, this “return” is conceived in such way that the evolution of scientific communism after Marx and Engels, as advanced specifically by Lenin and Mao Tse-Tung, must be rejected or set aside, since these historical achievements do not, in their view,  properly reflect proletarian revolutionary practice. There is no serious reasoning behind the statement of such a claim so the misconceptions about the shortcomings of today’s scientific revolutionary theory (if they exist) have no possibility of “clarification”.  Science cannot be negated simply by vilification of “scientists”, since doing so simply betrays the magnitude of the individual’s or organization’s irresponsibility in making such claims.

These line of thoughts hold either that the principles of scientific communism do not have a dialectical developmental aspect, or are like religious dogmas “revealed truth”: that is, once such principles have been discovered and have been presented, they remain in human society exactly as their original discoverers presented them.  If they perceive the principles of scientific communism otherwise, then they must explain what their Marxism is today, and of what consequence is their Marxism to revolutionary practice, and why is it correct?

The concept of “going back to Marx”, in the absence of an underlying justification, is nothing more than a metaphysical viewpoint which has no scientific value for the advancement of the liberation of the working class and the oppressed masses.

b – In what way is it possible for scientific communism to be taught to the working class?

The one-dimensional aspect of the left-wing sectarian viewpoint within the Iranian Left movement, which creates so much disruption within the working class movement, has been labeled “ proletarian pretension”; it believes that the working class in its struggles against the capitalist system is capable on its own of mastering the science of self liberation from within.  For them, “bringing scientific communism from outside to the working class” is meaningless. This view is definitely an obstacle in the path of the conscious working class movement, and it sharply limits its potential to learn the science of its liberation. Why?

Classes in human society necessarily do not have any concrete thick walls to prevent the entry or exit of any individuals from one class to another one.  Often people, who for different reasons belong to non-proletarian classes, join the ranks of proletarians; and on the other hand, there are workers who are promoted to the petite-bourgeois, or the bourgeoisie, or who become the owners of productive forces. In the meantime, intellectuals who come to serve the working class in its struggles undertake an important responsibility in bringing consciousness to this class.  Due to their social position, they have more scientific and cultural knowledge compared to workers. As a matter of fact, the world outlook and the analysis of the historical development of human societies, as well as the basic principles of scientific communism, were formulated by intellectuals who emerged from the ranks of the bourgeoisie. Those intellectuals summarized the practice of the working class struggle – and this fact is quite clear and understandable to any ordinary worker. But the sectarians wish to erect a “Great Wall of China” to separate the working class from other non-proletarian classes- creating obstacles to the growth of the proletarian revolutionary ranks and isolating the working class.

At the same time, we must acknowledge that the numerous intellectuals who enter the ranks of  the proletariat necessarily have not all completely given up their past world outlooks, and there are those who bring with them many corrupting elements such as dogmatism, sectarianism, opportunism, revisionism …etc. to the workers movement. Whether consciously or unconsciously, they hinder this movement and can inflict heavy damage.  However, provided that the working class movement enjoys the benefit of having conscious and revolutionary leaders joining it, and that it implements proletarian work methods, it becomes capable of distinguishing revolutionaries from non-revolutionaries among the intellectuals, and of taking action to cleanse the revolutionary proletarian ranks of non-proletarian ideologies.

In the ranks of communists, class origin does not have an immediate determinative role in being a revolutionary and a communist.  It is defense of  the revolutionary proletarian line at all times, adherence to revolutionary proletarian policy, participation in vanguard proletarian organizations, and devotion to revolutionary practice that determine who becomes a revolutionary communist.

Although advances of science and technology and the increase of educated workers, the importance of the role of the worker leadership among the ranks of the communist parties grows every day. Nevertheless the material conditions of production, with its days and nights of cumbersome work and the lack of leisure and material amenities, create much more obstacles to enhancing the working class level of education in their class struggle. To overcome these obstacles, it is necessary to rely upon communist intellectuals to raise the level of working class consciousness, and the workers clearly perceive this complexity of their movement. So, the objection to raising the consciousness of the working class itself indicates the presence of non-proletarian ideological disruption within the working class movement.

c – The Role of the Communist Party

The history of the worker’s movement in the recent 160 years and generally, the history of the class struggles during the past thousand years, show that each class, to advance toward its goals, needs vanguards in order to guide these struggles step by step. The Communist Manifesto was drafted by Marx and Engels at the request of the “Communist League” which was the first international vanguard workers party. The theory of the new vanguard proletarian party was developed by Lenin and then by Mao-Tse-Tung and through its victories were achieved in the October Revolution of Russia in1917 and in the October Revolution of China in 1949 under the leadership of the Bolshevik Party of Russia and the Communist Party of China, respectively.

The party is analogous to the central command of the proletarian military army in the class struggle. The concept of a unified war effort in the absence of such a central command, without concentration of forces, is unimaginable; victory in such warfare would be impossible. That is not complex and incomprehensible. Right now, the bourgeoisie in all of the industrialized countries rely upon multiple parties to advance its policies. The existence of different bourgeois parties, with their more or less similar programs, which have no other goal than to serve the ruling elites, is nothing more than an artful. The bourgeoisie spreads divisions among the people by encouraging allegiance to different parties, thereby preventing the people from earlier seeing the exploitative and oppressive nature of the capitalist system, and from rising up against it. In other words, “divide and conquer!” is the main capitalist strategy to safeguard their hold on power. Of course, the reality in the majority of capitalist countries is such that generally one or two bourgeois parties enjoy the most influence, and in parliamentary elections power merely shifts from from one to the other, and the result is “business as usual”.

This manipulation by the bourgeoisie of the petite-bourgeoisie (which is basically formed from different strata of people) is accepted specially, because in that small-property ownership and the competition that small holdings breeds is the basis for safeguarding their social conditions.

Communists, who are the defenders of the specific and general interests of the working class, have the strategy of socialist revolution and, at its later historical stage, the transition to communism, in mind.  In opposition to the bourgeoisie, not only communists seek to unite the working class to bring down the capitalist power;  but  in order to achieve victory in this struggle to free the toiling masses from the yoke of repression and oppression imposed by the capitalist system, they must strive to be organized within the communist party of their country, and to create the broadest united front against this system. The slogans of “Workers of all Countries Unite!” and “Workers of all Countries and Oppressed Nations Unite!” are expression of the historical point of view of communists who seek to abolish “the self alienation” which arises from the existence of the exploitative and oppressive classes in all countries.  They seek to create a global society free of all forms of exploitation, oppression, and discrimination.

Therefore, in the interest of ensuring the unity of the vanguards of the working class, communists must unite in a single party in every country. Just as at the level of class society, the working class is the most vanguard of all, at the level of organized political forces in any given country, the communist party is the most conscious and disciplined force, and consequently it is the most revolutionary party which comprises the most vanguard and conscious proletarian elements. We must strive to build such a party.

But this model, which has been validated by practice and confirmed by scientific communism, is denied and ignored by some Iranian Left groups:

-     Some of them under the illusion that the workers must organize themselves in workers councils and advance their own precepts; they are totally opposed to, and antagonistic to, building a communist party. One would say that the communist party is not having a class basis but rather it falls from the sky fully formed!

-    Some others, operating under the perception that the working class is formed from different strata of people, believe that in order to defend the interests of those different strata, separate parties are required.  They then advocate organizational pluralism among the ranks of the communists and oppose the creation of a single party.

-    Some others consider themselves to be the only vanguard working class party and practically they  tolerate organizational pluralism – but this without having proven that they are the sole defenders of the specific and general interests of the working class movement, or that they are guiding this movement;

-    And finally, there are others who, although they accept the single unified party concept, also feel the need to tolerate factional-organizational viewpoints; their tolerance extends to allowing factions to refuse to follow leadership directives and thereby shattering the unity of view and action of the party. This view disrupts and subverts party building; it is the mother of the three prevailing corrosive deviations described above, and it stems from the petite-bourgeois ideology which intrudes itself among the ranks of the proletariat.

The consequence of these incorrect views so far has been that communists, especially after the emergence of modern revisionism in scientific communism, have been deprived of the weapon of the single unified political party.  Instead, they give a movement character to all their actions and the sharp and dynamic dialectic of concentration of forces is sacrificed to a pluralistic movement with full of riot and chaos, which gives way to anarchism and spontaneity in the organizational arena. And in this manner, the proletariat is deprived of a singular commanding leadership in the class struggle.
As long as classes and class struggle exist, dissonance arises from this situation within the classes  and divides them into the strata of vanguard/advanced, intermediate, and backward in the class struggle. The vanguard sector of each class would also be mobilized to take up its leadership/command role. This situation for the working class, which intends to overthrow the class system, is more straightforward than for any other class.

d – The Anarchistic View vis-a-vis the Concept of Democracy

In the final analysis, class struggle is the life and death battle between the exploiters and the exploited. Class rule has been accomplished by force and not by leaning to peace between the exploiters/oppressors rulers and the exploited/oppressed who are condemned to subjugation. This axiom is the ABC of class rule which has been clearly identified by scientific communism. The historic experience of the ruling council which were established in Russia soon after the Revolution shows that after the establishment of this government, the resistance and sabotage of the capitalists, feudal elements, and the powerful church and even of a sector of the petite-bourgeoisie against socialism, whom were initially defeated in the class conflict, flares up in a thousand ways to resist the transition to socialist relations. They do their all to subvert the advancement of the proletarian advanced system. These counterrevolutionaries also enjoyed the unconditional support of the world capitalist system, which intensified the “fist against fist” combat that intensified. It is useful to point out Lenin’s summing up of the period which immediately followed the victory of the October Revolution:
“The dictatorship of the proletariat is a most determined and most ruthless war waged by the new class against a more powerful enemy, the bourgeoisie, whose resistance is increased tenfold by their overthrow (even if only in a single country), and whose power lies, not only in the strength of international capital, the strength and durability of their international connections, but also in the force of habit, and in the strength of small-scale production. It is this small-scale production that continuously, daily, hourly, spontaneously and on a mass scale engenders capitalism and the bourgeoisie. All these reasons make the dictatorship of the proletariat necessary, and victory over the bourgeoisie is impossible without a long, stubborn and life-and-death struggle which calls for tenacity, discipline, perseverance, firmness and a single determination is impossible”.
But among the Left forces, on the question of the interpretation of democracy, it seems as if competition has occurred, and those who defend “ unconditional freedom” for the entire society wish to be recognized as the “champions” of the defense of freedom and democracy!

In a workers council democracy, unconditional freedom exists for the workers and laborers who are the defenders of the socialist system, but not for the enemies of the socialist system who are constantly conspiring against the system to overthrow it.  Granting organizational freedom to them means allowing them to wage war to overthrow workers power.

As long as classes and class struggle exist in socialist society, the dictatorship of the proletariat must be established  with the goal of the abolition of classes and the class struggle. Otherwise both dictatorship and democracy will be eroded since there would be no ruling authority in society; and as a result, authority over people would be reduced to authority over objects – meaning nothing more than affaires management – and the freedom of the individual is a pre-condition for the freedom of all.

Advocating “unconditional freedom” in council democracy amounts to backtracking from proletarian democracy to social-democratic and bourgeois democracy – which is a total imposture; it is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.  In fact it has been proven to be completely and totally impractical; even in the best light, it is an ultra-class interpretation of democracy in a class society!

This petite-bourgeois interpretation of “unconditional freedom” at the level of society would become reflected within the party and would undermine proletarian democratic-centralism. This would, in turn, generate theoretical dispersion to such an extent that  the people who oppose the party’s political line, outside the party, would be entitled not only to criticize, but also to refuse to carry out party directives!

e – On Proletarian Internationalism

Since the working class is an international class that demands the removal of all obstacles in its path to liberation, including national boundaries that were forged by the ruling classes, specifically by the bourgeoisie, in the recent historical era, its struggle must be unified and integrated. The international working class must create its central command of leadership and clarify its fundamental strategy and tactics in its struggle to overthrow the capitalist system,as it does at national level. Therefore, if sympathy, unconditional support and protection for the struggle of the working class and the toiling masses is the necessary condition for the proclamation of international class solidarity for every communist party, then the struggle for the creation of a single global working class center is also a sufficient condition for the realization of the global unity of the world working class.

But, the Iranian Left movement about this subject, as it vacillates, caught up in diversity, and abstention to create a single communist party, also do not have the necessary readiness to attempt to achieve such unity at the international level. Those parts of the Left forces who to some extent are active in international relations, instead of finding a way to eliminate division and dispersion of the organized international communist movements, choose rather to proceed along the path of sectarianism at the international level. As a result they continue to be involved in the perpetuation of dispersion and division of comunists internationally.

In this manner, Left Iranian left internationalism has not gone beyond mere words; it has not reached the level of action. This is further indication that many Iranian communists – organized or  unfortunately  unorganized – refuse to accept the teachings of scientific communism!

f – Struggle and Unity within the Party

According to the teachings of scientific communism, class struggles outside of the party become reflected within the party; and the viewpoint struggles continue continually. The correct handling and guidance of these theoretical struggles promotes the party’s knowledge and its ability to scrutinize policies and work methods. The formula of “unity – criticism – unity” (Mao) determines the correct limitations of these ideological struggles within the party. In other words, starting from the position of unity in the party regarding problems which arise, a view may be criticized, and finally, after discussion and dialogue, we strive to reach unity at a higher level. Obviously, it is possible that some do not agree with the majority’s view and retain their view. According to the platform of the party, these comrades have the right to continue to struggle within the party and they can even call for more discussion regarding their views. But, outside of the party, they must apply the majority’s view. This proletarian style of work ensures that the party acts with unity and power in its class struggle, while at the same time the minority’s view does not disappear. Failure to follow this proletarian method of struggle within the party will cause the party to divide and to split, draining its strength and stunting its growth.

It is only when principled differences which have to do with the nature of the party’s positions and policies that a split is justifiable and correct. This would include when a proletarian party proceeds with a bourgeois policy, and if the struggle against these positions and policies does not rectify the problem, then it is justifiable to split. Otherwise, the resort to splits is a sign of the non-proletarian nature of the splitters and their decision to split. Naturally, these policies must be related to the proletarian or non-proletarian nature of the party, and not any day-to-day policy.
This style of ideological struggle within the party must be implemented in every Left organization, and even though at this stage many organizations still do not have the qualities of a vanguard working class party, they must try to do away with splits and dispersion as much as possible.

In Iran’s Left movement, lack of attention to the importance of organization and its role in service to the growth of the class struggle of the working class has reached horrific levels. Without any regard to principled differences, as soon as a dispute breaks out within their party or organization, these individuals leave their organization. In this manner, ideological struggle within the party does not help to strengthen the party but rather to weaken and divide it. The most recent example of these types of splits can be observed in the “Communist Party of Iran” during the past two decades, in which, despite the claims of the splitters, these splits did not result in more advanced organizations. To the contrary, being at the service of sectarianism, these divisions never produced any positive result for the class struggle of the working class.

The root of these splits lies within petite-bourgeois ideology which stems from the dispersed social existence of the petite-bourgeoisie in relation to production and exchange (2). Also this non-proletarian style of resolving political, organizational and internal party problems presently prevails at the level of the workers and mass movement. This results in Left forces not only not contributing to the unity of the worker’s movement but actually slumping further toward the divisiveness that is so highly praised by the local bourgeoisie and world imperialism.

Perhaps it is not out of context to point out that the ideological struggles within the party or within the communist movement must be rational and ideological – political, but not in the non-proletarian style of accusation and defamation which results in a pessimistic and distrustful atmosphere where nothing can be learned. In the conscious proletarian movement, there is no place for such lumpism.

Unfortunately, the current ideological context is one of conflict of which the revisionists of the “Tudeh Party” were the mother, and of which the forces supporting Mansour Hekmat during the 1980’s became the chief propagators of these methods.  Presently, the ideological struggles within the Iranian communist movement which result from this non-proletarian style of work have diminished and silenced. And under the reign of these destructive ideas, the views which are being put forward by the presently weak communist forces (weak from an organizational point of view) need no reply; that they can be somehow disregarded.  The tactic of strangling these points of view is being advanced, which has nothing to do with the communist style of work!
This incorrect theory and practice, as partly mentioned above, can be propounded; this fact in itself that shows why the Left forces in Iran have not been able to unite for the creation of a single communist party, and sectarianism occupies the primary place. The struggle against these incorrect, non-proletarian views and practices strives for a principled leap forward in world outlook, policy, organizing, work methods and communist leadership.  During the participation of communists in the workers and  mass movements; and all genuine communists, both the organized and unorganized, must together proceed to clear away these harmful non-proletarian weeds from the fertile garden of the conscious proletarian movement. To shrink from this revolutionary proletarian task, or to adopt a passive attitude to this intolerable and dissonant situation, provides the opportunity for all manner of revisionists, opportunists and anarchists to further lead the workers and  mass movements astray and to spoil the fruits of at least 30 years of struggle against the capitalist system which came at the cost of tens of thousands of communist lives, including those of  worker activists who were sacrificed at the altar of sectarianism, for tendencies that soon evaporated.

K. Ebrahim – October 2, 2011

1 – To fully document this article with quotations from Iranian Left activists – including both the organized and unorganized – would require many pages; certainly, those communists who assign great importance to the ideological struggle within the ranks of Left forces are not unaware of this.

2 – Should we not learn from the Iranian workers, who despite suffering under a police state characterized by torture, imprisonment, arbitrary and punitive terminations from employment and pauperization, bravely and unquestioningly supported the petrochemical workers’ strike at the Port of Imam?  They showed that they share each other’s pain and they strive to have an independent organization of their own. But the communist movement in Iran, which should be the role model for the working class in organizational activity, is plagued by sectarianism at the nucleus of the movement!

The new E-Mail of Party is : ranjbaran.info@yahoo.com. Please don’t use the old one: ranjbaran@hotmail.com. It is not valid any more.

Thanks a lot. Ranjbaran Party of Iran -8 jan.2012

ICOR

23 January 2011

Statement of ICOR about the people’s uprising in Tunisia

——————————-

1 – On Friday 17 December 2010, a young unemployed graduate of 26 years, Mohamed Bouazizi, committed self-immolation. He sacrificed himself after the local police of Sidi Bouzid confiscated his sole means of support, which was a cart to sell fruit and vegetables from it. This was the start for a national uprising having its provisional turning point on Friday 14 January 2011 with the escape of the dictator Ben Ali to Saudi Arabia. The uprising was against hunger, misery and unemployment which is particularly hitting the youth and against the undemocratic Ben Ali regime.

2 – All over the country, street demonstrations, meetings and strikes have spontaneously broken out protesting against the regime of Ben Ali under the leadership of local revolutionary working class activists. The protester are demanding bread, work for the young and the right to live in dignity.

3 – Faced with this revolt of the exploited and youth deprived of a future, the ruling class has responded with a hail of bullets in which more than 100 people lost their lives.

4 – Faced with this carnage, the bourgeoisies of the ”democratic” countries have not raised a finger to condemn the barbarity of the regime and demand that the repression stops. Instead, various imperialist and comprador governments are complicit in this carnage! Even the bourgeois media is releasing only an incomplete and distorted picture about the crimes of Ben Ali.

5 – After the bloody weekend of 8 and 9 January 2011, the French state was still openly offering support to this ruthless dictator. The French foreign minister, Michèle Alliot-Marie, in her speech to the National Assembly on 12 January 2011, offered to lend a hand to Tunisia’s security forces: “We contend that the savoir-faire of our security forces, which is recognized throughout the world, would make it possible to resolve the security situation in this country.”

6 – This bloody terror of the state could not prevent the masses any more to fight for democratic conditions. Meetings and demonstrations of solidarity developed throughout the country: at Sfax, Kairouan, Thala, Bizerte, Sousse, Meknessi, Souk, Jedid, Ben Gardane, Medenine, Siliana… Despite the repression, despite the absence of freedom of expression, demonstrators brandished placards reading: “Today, we are no longer afraid!”

7 – The forces of repression have greeted the protests with a hail of bullets. On 24 December 2010, a young demonstrator of 18, Mohamed Ammari, was killed by police bullets. Another, Chawki Hidri, was seriously wounded and died on the first of January 2011. At Kasserine, Thala and Regueb, the repression on demonstrations turned into a massacre. Cold-blooded the police fired into the crowd killing more than 25 people. Through Friday, 14 January 2011 the provisional list of deaths by bullets exceeded 90 killed!

8 – From 3 January 2011, schoolchildren mobilized themselves and used mobile phones and the internet, notably Facebook and Twitter, to call for a general strike of all pupils. They demonstrated on 3 and 4 January 2011 and were joined by unemployed graduates at Thala. The young demonstrators were faced with truncheons and tear gas. During the course of these confrontations the seat of government was invaded and the centre of the party in power was set on fire. The call for a national strike of pupils, relayed through the internet, was followed in several towns. At Tunis, Sfax, Sidi Bouzid, Bizerte, Grombalia, Jbeniana, Sousse, schoolchildren joined up with the unemployed. Meetings of solidarity also took place in Hammamet and Kasserine.

9 – On 27 and 28 December 2010 lawyers joined in the movement of solidarity with the population of Sidi Bouzid. Faced with the repression meted out to them, arrests and being beaten up, the lawyers called for a general strike on 6 January 2011. Strike movements also affected journalists in Tunis and teachers in Bizerte.

10 – A total blackout of information was organized. In the region of Sidi Bouzid, several localities were placed under a curfew and the army was mobilized. At Menzel Bouzaiane, the wounded could not be transported to hospital and the population lacked provisions. Schools were used as lodgings by police reinforcements.

11 – In order to try to restore calm, Ben Ali gave a public declaration. He promised to create 300,000 jobs in 2011-12 and to free all the demonstrators except those who had committed acts of vandalism. He dismissed his interior minister using him as a scapegoat and at the same time denounced the “orchestrated” politics of a minority of “extremists” and “terrorists”. They were trying to harm the interests of the country.

12 – The anger of working class and oppressed people grew to such heights by Friday, 14 January 2011 that everybody was in the streets of Tunis. The demonstrators started to walk towards the Interior Ministry and the Palace of the dictator Ben Ali, who escaped to Saudi Arabia.

13 – The protests succeeded in chasing the dictator Ben Ali, but his party and his staff tried to hoodwink the masses. The Prime Minister Mahamed Ganoushi put Fouad Lambazae the president of the second chamber of parliament in the place of Ben Ali, and formed a government which promises elections after two months. But the masses have rejected this manipulation and have started to form their popular committees in each town and in each village. They have striked every day against this government.

14 – ICOR supports the struggle of working class and oppressed masses in Tunisia. It supports the right of the people to be able to decide their own political and economic future.

15 – ICOR supports the demand of the people’s movement for withdrawal of the government and demands the formation of a democratic government by the people. Already councils are being set up in every village, town and city. ICOR supports such councils as a form of a direct democracy.

16 – ICOR also notes that there is a compromising trend, led by some opposition parties. They want to strike a compromise by changing the persons in power while leaving the exploitative system and policies without any change. ICOR supports the struggle of the local, regional and other people’s councils against this trend.

17 – The struggle of the working class and oppressed people of Tunisia is a beacon to other countries in the Arab world and even outside it. It shows how people can overcome a dictatorial regime and determine their own future. ICOR calls upon all its members to support this attempt of the people in every manner possible.

• In solidarity with the working class and oppressed masses of Tunisia and the Maghrib,

• in solidarity with the youth, wherever they struggle against hunger and unemployment,

• in solidarity with the struggle for a democratic people’s power in Tunisia!

International Coordination of Revolutionary Parties and Organizations

- Office of the ICC -

Schmalhorststrasse 1c

D-45899 Gelsenkirchen

Germany

Phone: + 49-209-3597479

Email: coordinationint@yahoo.co.uk

Website: www.icor.info

Editorial of Ranjbar 67, Nov. 2010

AN IMPORTANT STEP FOR THE UNITY OF THE WORLD COMMUNIST MOVEMENT

The Communist Movement has struggled to liberate humankind from the yoke of class relations which are based on exploitation and oppression, and to eliminate alienation among the people. This alienation has been imposed for thousands years to the working and toiling masses by the ruling classes. Along with that alienation, war and bloodshed, poverty and distress, and homelessness are endured by the many, while the few drown in wealth. In addition, the Communist Movement struggles to reconcile humankind with the natural environment; Nature that is presently being devastated due to the rapacious activities of global monopoly capitalism and the ruling classes, to the point that life itself has been pushed to the brink of destruction. It is quite clear that this type of liberation for humankind which communism has in mind cannot be achieved without the unity and cooperation of producing and conscious people, nor without the unification of conscious, progressive proletarian organizations.

It was for that purpose that 163 years ago, Marx and Engels- those great leaders of the working and toiling masses throughout the world – provided the slogan “Workers of all countries unite!” as the guide for working class struggles. The class that was in the way to become the majority of the exploited and oppressed peoples at the capitalist countries. This class that had only its physical and mental power , in this historic battle had nothing to lose besides the chains of the bondage of slavery and wage labor. In the more recent historical situation and the ascent of capitalism to the imperialism stage and its aggression to the backward nations, Lenin proposed the slogan of “Workers of all countries and the oppressed nations of the world unite!” in the day order of communists and worker class movement.

The formation of the First Working Class International in 1864 through the efforts of Marx and Engels faced the obstructionism and destructive tendencies of anarchists. The formation of the Second Socialist International in 1889 was plagued by the fact that the majority of its founders were social democrat parties; by the time of the outbreak of World War I, it had degenerated from reformism to revisionism and finally to social- chauvinism and social-imperialism. The formation of the Third Communist International took place in 1919, through the efforts of Lenin and revolutionary social democratic parties after the victory of the October Revolution of 1917 in Russia. Its demise in 1943 coincided with the outbreak of World War II, under pressure from the imperialist bourgeoisie. This on the one hand demonstrated to what extent the international bourgeoisie relentlessly opposes the global unity of the working class; on the other hand, this period demonstrates the extent to which the continuous struggle of the globally conscious working class to achieve its historic mission needs such an organization.

Presently, global capital has taken the form of giant multi-national monopolies. Guided by its neo-liberal policies, the concentration of capital has accelerated and its aggressive policies seek to impoverish as much of the world as possible under this post modern colonialism. In this context, the success of the prophetic mission of the unification of the global working class must become the number one priority. The responsibility for accomplishing this mission lies squarely on the shoulders of the vanguard of the working class. By being organized at the global level, they will provide a positive role model for the unity of the global struggle of the working class: The elimination of alienation due to the exploitation of wage labor and the establishment of socialism and communism or enslavement under the barbaric global capitalist system which every day confronts workers and toilers throughout the world with oppression and brutal acts. Therefore, no communist should ignore this historical responsibility and sit idly by while watching organized global capital attack the unorganized global working class.

But the history of world communism unity shows us that unity has not progressed smoothly or continuously. In the second half of the Twentieth Century, there were numerous negative experiences of the Third International in dealing with the autonomous activities of the various communist parties. There was a sub-estimation of the formation of new international for the struggle against imperialism and reactionaries, against the modern revisionism in power and opening a path for modern revisionism to take power. This situation, with the influence of this revisionism in the leadership of communist parties throughout the world encouraged further divisions within the world communist / working class movements. The imperialists and the local bourgeoisie took full advantage of these divisions in their efforts to wipe out the socialist camp, to corrupt roughly the revisionist parties. Imperialism had successful at this aim.

Since the 1980’s decade, initiatives hade been taken toward the unification of communist parties and organizations by would-be “world” organizations. But, due to insular viewpoints in regard to the true unity of revolutionary parties, and so very little was accomplished. However, efforts through the creation of ICOR (International Coordination Committee For Revolutionary Parties and Organizations) in October, 2010 and ICOR’s opening proclamation of October 16, 2010 in Berlin, accompanied by marches and demonstrations, show far greater promise. ICOR’s analysis of the present situation and of divisions among communist parties and organizations, along with its adoption of a flexible method, are positive steps forward toward uniting them and workers movements against global imperialism and all enemies for the victory of socialism.

The time has come for communist forces throughout the world to wholeheartedly attempt to reinforce the communist and workers movement, by accepting ICOR’s positions and statute, and to join it. The time has come to set aside the negative experience of unprincipled sectarianism which continues to inflict great harm to the united struggle of workers and toilers, and which encourages even to come to the deeper ideological political unity.

In Iran, from this point of view, we face two principal trend of communists:

Some organizations In regard to the shared global struggle are somehow more or less unified with the organizations of other countries. However, from the point of view of the unifying the communist movement in Iran, they suffer from sectarianism and see only themselves as the vanguard representative of the proletariat. In this manner, they undermine the pursuit of the objective of global proletarian unity. Nevertheless, if these organizations truly want to serve the cause of proletarian internationalism, they are prime candidates to participate in ICOR. Within this spectrum of organizations, Ranjbaran Party of Iran has consistently defended communist unity both globally and locally; and it actively participated in the founding of ICOR.

There are other organizations that are indifferent in regard to the creation of an International Communist Organization, and we see no effort on their part to reach this objective. Regardless of their claims, in practice, the steps that they take, in the end, only benefit the world capitalist system, by promoting sectarianism within the communist and workers movement. In these circumstances, Right and Left revisionism have created such Augean stable of Left forces views which will require many years to clean out.

Nevertheless, in the spirit of proletarian optimism, we hope that the Iranian communist movement forces will learn the lessons of the past few decades of fruitless activity and lack of meaningful influence in workers movement, in advancing the proletarian revolution, and must seriously revise their past positions and strengthen the world communist movement, by uniting and joining ICOR.

In this issue of Ranjbar, we present highlights of the positions and decisions of the Founding World Conference of ICOR for Ranjbar’s readers.

K. Abraham, November 11, 2010

Reports from Vakilabad Prison in Mashhad, Iran confirm that the crimes of the despotic Islamic Republic regime continue at a scale comparable to the slaughter of the decade of the 1980s. The recent executions of political prisoners charged with possession or sale of narcotics, among a group of 30 to 70 prisoners – in the absence of any prior notification of the convicted prisoners themselves and their families – is a continuation of past practices. These horrible conditions have once again provoked panic among prisoners such as what occurred during the 1980’s. The regime’s aggregate prison capacity is 80,000 prisoners but presently more than 205,000 prisoners are being held in detention (1). According to Jallil Mohibi, an attorney, 8 million new cases annually are filed by public prosecutors, which added to pending cases amounts to more than 11 million prosecution cases. There are total of 7,000 judges, of whom 1,500 work at the management / supervisory level. The remaining 5,500 judges must each adjudicate over 20 cases every day. Note the fact that each case on average has 50 pages in its file (2). These facts alone expose the reality that Iran’s judicial system is entirely overwhelmed and that there is little more than cursory review of cases. As a consequence, death by stoning for innocent women like Sakine-Mohammad-Ashtiani, and the execution of teenagers under the age of 18 years routinely occur. This barbaric behavior has provoked anger and severe reactions by people throughout the world against Iran’s despotic Islamic regime. Execution and torture have been the everyday tools of this regime since its consolidation of power. Another report from Kamyaran in Kurdistan tells us that a young man who was charged with possession of alcohol had been detained by police, and that he died in detention as a result of physical torture. His burial ceremony was held in Kamyaran on Tuesday, August 28, 2010 (3). Also, according to a report from Kurdish sources, Mohammad Esmaeil, a Kurdish resident of Ghaladeze in Iraq’s Sulaymaniyah Governate, had been arrested by Islamic Republic security forces in Sardasht, Iran. Due to severe physical torture during interrogation while in detention, he died. (4)

These kinds of crimes occur every day in the regime’s prisons and torture chambers all over Iran.

Due to the political consciousness and activities of opposition organizations and the families of political prisoners, the Islamic regime’s inhumane treatment of political prisoners has been widely exposed. Iranian, and world, opinion has turned against the unholy and tyrannical behavior of the Iranian judicial system toward its political opposition. But injustice, oppression and torture are also endured by non-political prisoners; for some of them, hands and feet are chopped off as punishment for petty theft. This is routinely carried out in Iranian jails and prisons. Courtrooms have become the stage for violent repressive acts – a stage where the wealthy are protected, and where judges are the nemesis of Justice rather than its servants; they are agents of revenge. This is the barbarity brought about by 31 years of the Islamic Republic : a living Hell for 90% of Iran’s population, for whom a solid legal defense is insufficient to ensure justice.

Judicial authority is supposed to based upon the “independent” foundation of parliamentary democracy. However the Iranian judiciary system hasn’t shown any independence over the past 31 years. On the contrary, it has become the servant of the state security apparatus. Judges base their decisions on trumped up charges and fabricated evidence. The degree to which torture is utilized is unprecedented; it is through torture that prisoners come to admit to whatever charges have been brought against them. As seen in a recent case, Sakine Mohamadi Ashtiani was put on national television to “confess” to her “crimes” and then to state publicly that she had not been tortured!

Evidentiary files – especially those related to political prisoners – are fabricated by the Basiji, the military, the Ministry of Information, or even by the Minister of Justice – himself one of the many unscrupulous clerics who have served on “revolutionary” courts. In such courts very often even the defense attorneys are kept uninformed of trial dates for their clients!! In fact, prior to the opening of the trial, the defense attorney isn’t allowed to review the charges or evidence – making it extremely difficult to make any preparations for trial. This is done to avoid the headache of defense attorneys exposing the disarray of the case files and the fabrication (or absence) of evidence.

Regarding the cases of the martyrs Farzad Kamangar, Shireen Alamholi and others, the trumped up, fraudulent charges were dramatically exposed at the Appeals Court level for the tortured Farzad. His defense attorney believed that it was very likely that Farzad would be released. Then, suddenly, the news of his execution by the regime was broadcast. The people, especially in Kurdistan, reacted with astonishment. And the people’s hatred of the Islamic regime has grown.

The blinded religious dictatorship has never been willing to restrict its suppression of civil rights, even for the purpose of improving its international image. The absolutism of their “spiritual” worldview simply does not allow the flexibility to admit, let alone correct, error. For this reason the judicial system continues its march, crushing its own Constitution, and moving ever closer to total fascism. Their vengeance is now aimed at defense attorneys who seek to professionally and conscientiously represent their clients.

A recent Deutshce Welle broadcast, headlined as “When Defense Attorneys Join their Clients in Prison” presented a list of imprisoned attorneys as part of a conversation with Mitra Shojaei :

DW: Nasrin Sotoodeh, the attorney for several human rights activists, was arrested on September 4, 2010 and remains in detention. This is not the first time that the Islamic Republic’s judicial system has arrested a defense attorney, charged the attorney with the crime of defending his client, and sent him to prison.

In March, 2001, two years after the notorious serial murders of more than 80 progressive and revolutionary activists by the regime, Naser Zafarshan, an attorney representing the families of some of the murder victims, was himself arrested. He was charged with publicly releasing federal documents related to the serial murders, and was condemned to 5 years in prison and 50 lashes.

A few months before that incident, Shireen Ebadi was arrested for releasing a cassette recording related to the “Navarsazan” case; the cassette included a recorded “confession” by Amirfarshad Abrahimi, a former member of Ansar-e-Hezbollah. She was convicted and sentenced to 15 months imprisonment; she was also barred from practicing law for 5 years. A court of appeal overturned that sentence, and settled for a fine of 300,000 tomans.

In January, 2003 Mohammadali Dadkhah, the attorney representing Nehzat Azadi, was arrested. He was initially convicted and sentenced to 5 years imprisonment and barred from practicing law for 10 years. A court of appeal reduced the sentence to 5 years imprisonment.

Abdolfattah Soltani, another attorney, was arrested in August, 2005 by undercover agents of the Ministry of Information. He was charged with espionage for publicly releasing his clients’ case files. His clients in these cases were employees of Iran’s Atomic Energy Agency. Soltani spent 7 months in Evin Prison, but then was released on bail. He was convicted, and initially sentenced to 5 years imprisonment, and barred from practicing law for 5 years. A court of appeal exonerated him of all charges.

In February, 2010, Mohammad Oliaifard was reviewing the case files of several of his clients who had received Court summons. For that activity, he was arrested by order of the Director of Court Division 26. This same Ministry of Justice attorney / public defender, in reviewing the execution of Behnood Shojaei in the course of an interview, stated that he believed the execution to have been illegal, given the youth of his client. He was then arrested, accused of publicly criticizing the judicial system, convicted, and punished.

In May, 2010, a few days after the execution of five political prisoners, Khalil Bahramian, the attorney for Farzad Kamangar and Shireen Alamholy (two of the five prisoners who were executed), was himself arrested. Following the execution of his clients, in a media interview, he had continued to defend his clients and had

spelled out his defense strategy at trail. He stated his belief that the authorities knew full well that Arash Kamengar was innocent, but that he had been condemned to death and executed despite his innocence.

With the confirmation of the sentencing of Sakine-Mohammad Ashtiani to death by stoning during the summer of 2010, her attorney, Mohammad Mostafaei, discussed her case with the Media. He was then summoned by the authorities. Due to legal defects in the summons, he refused to show up at the public prosecutor’s office. In response, security agents instead arrested his wife and his brother-in-law. At that point, this Ministry of Justice attorney / public defender fled the country. After his exit from the country, his wife and brother-in-law were released. Presently, Mohammad Mostafaei along with his family resides in Norway.

Also, on September 4, 2010, Nasrin Sotoodeh, Shireen Ebadi’s attorney, was arrested while returning from the public prosecutor’s office. Before being arrested, she had told a Deutsche Welle reporter that security agents contacted her husband several times and had told him that Ms. Sotoodeh must give up defending Shireen Ebadi. After the execution of her client, Arash Rahmanipour, Nasrin Sotoodeh stated in a conversation with Deutsche Welle, “Even when I am unable to assist my clients in any manner, I would still prefer to be on their advocate”.

Mansour Shojaei, who is one of Nasrin Sotoodeh’s clients, says: “Iran is full of clients without attorneys”. Regarding the arrest of his attorney, this women’s rights activist says: “From the client’s point of view, the arrest of one’s attorney is a travesty which could only happen in Iran – where even an attorney like Nasrin Sotoode, whose commitment to social ideals and to human rights is widely known, can be arrested.”

“These activities are a direct attack against defense attorneys. As you know, many of the attorneys of the ‘Association of Human Rights Defenders’, like Mr. Soltani, Mr. Dadkhah…etc can no longer practice law or defend their clients. While it may appear that this situation only impacts a limited number of attorneys, in reality, the rule of law is being threatened. Within the judicial system, advocacy in defense of a client is increasingly subject to retaliation. Sooner or later, the judicial system will operate no differently than extra-judicial or military tribunals, where there is no defense attorney, only one person decides the verdict, and the defendants have no right to defend themselves. Eventually, it is possible that prosecuting attorneys will replace the human rights attorneys in court…” .

Mohammad Mostafaei states that the purpose of these actions is “to silence any kind of demand for justice”. This attorney, who had to flee the country, says: “The aim is clearly to suppress any kind of opposition voices and to deprive Ministry of Justice public defenders of any ability to defend their clients. If they want to defend their clients, they have to keep their mouths shut. The aim is to protect the ones who actually break the law, to allow them to be free to continue their unlawful activities. The judicial system does not want defense attorneys to expose these miscarriages of justice to people across the world. They do not want the Ministry of Justice attorneys to expose their illegal activities to the eyes of the people of the world. They know that the voice of the Ministry of Justice attorneys is the voice of truth, the voice demanding justice, and they cannot possibly tolerate hearing the voice of truth and justice”.

Mr. Dadkhah says: “In 1975, the Iranian government endorsed the entire UN Declaration of Human Rights, entering into a treaty. In accordance with Article 9 of Civil Law, all of the articles of the Declaration are to be taken into account in local legal proceedings, and backtracking from them would be illegal. Besides that, in accordance to the Article 27 of the Vienna Convention, adopted in May, 1969, no government on the basis of its own domestic laws may act in violation of international treaties and or disregard those treaties”.

This is the status of the “judicial apparatus of Iran’s Islamic Republic”. It is a sterile seed which cannot thrive. The counter-revolutionary rulers of the Islamic Republic have driven Iran back to the medieval ages, when accused defendants were deprived of any right to defend themselves.

Once again, this reality clearly shows the historical legitimacy of the slogan “Keep the hands of religion off of the government and public education”. This slogan was shouted by the full blooded revolutionaries of the bourgeois democratic revolutions of the 18^th and the 19^th centuries; and has continued to be shouted by working

class and communist vanguards right up till now – so long as religion continues to interfere in government affairs, and until religion becomes strictly a personal matter.

K. Abrahim, September 9, 2010

(1) Deutsche Welle, Sept. 1, 2010-10-12,

(2) ibid.

(3) Herana News Agency

(4) Iranian News Agency

]]> http://www.ranjbaran.org/01_english/?feed=rss2&p=97 0 http://www.ranjbaran.org/01_english/?p=94 http://www.ranjbaran.org/01_english/?p=94#comments Wed, 03 Mar 2010 19:57:02 +0000 admin http://www.ranjbaran.org/01_english/?p=94 PAKISTAN LIES IN THE PATH OF THE US QUEST FOR DOMINATION

A few points regarding the shifting of war from Afghanistan to Pakistan

1-      Pakistan is the sixth most populous country in the world and the second most populous country in the Moslem world. Among Moslem countries, Pakistan is the only one armed with nuclear weapons, and it shares more than 1000 miles of border with Afghanistan. A great number of the people in the world, the mainstream media, and many public officials believe that Osama Bin-Laden has taken refuge in one of the mountainous areas in Pakistan near the border with Afghanistan. Beyond all that, the factor that makes Pakistan such an important link in the US global strategy in the vast Middle East- Indian Ocean region is the fact that Pakistan shares a border with China. In the view of many think-tank denizens, if in the future China is not contained by the US, it will be possible for China to emerge as the US’s main rival in the international arena. This global geopolitical factor has greatly influenced Pakistan’s domestic politics throughout its 63 years of existence as a nation.

2-      So far, for 33 of the 63 years, Pakistan has lived under military dictatorships that have been propped up by  Western countries, primarily the US.  During the Cold War period, the US broadly supported military regimes in Pakistan under Ayub Khan, Yahya Khan and then Zia-ul-Haq.  It funded and supplied the establishment of various quasi- military Islamic fundamentalist groups based in Pakistan which were then dispatched to Afghanistan during the 1980’s.  This was done in pursuit of the following two objectives:

a-       Restricting Pakistan from joining the “Bandung Conference” and the “Non-Aligned Movement” during the period from1955 to 1975; and

b-      Converting Afghanistan to Russia’s Vietnam  through the CIA and through intervention in the “Green (Moslem) Belt “around Soviet Russia during the years 1970-1991.

Indeed, promoting corrupt fundamentalism and Wahabbism among the people in Afghanistan and Pakistan (with the assistance of Saudi Arabia), weakening and ruining secular governments in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and expanding the cultivation of opium and the spread of drugs (mainly heroin) in these countries had all served the US global strategy in the last decade of the Cold War era in the region of South Asia.  US foreign policy strategy, after the decline of the national liberation movements of the Bandung era and following the collapse and break up of the Soviet Union which led to the end of the Cold War era, has been re-tooled. From that time until now the aim and the purpose of the US strategy has been re-directed to contain China, via military dominance over Afghanistan and Pakistan and the Central Asian countries (which cover vast territories along the northwestern borders of China). The support of the CIA for fundamentalist groups on the one hand; and the strengthening of Pakistan’s armed forces and intelligence services on the other, did not end after the conclusion of the Cold War. It has, in point of fact, expanded.

3-      Contrary to reports in corporate and state-controlled media and official statements regarding the Islamic tendencies in that part of the world, there is no real solidarity or cohesion among them. Islamist fundamentalists in Turkey who presently are in power, are among the most loyal and trusted members of the NATO alliance and are supporters of the IMF “Economic Structural Adjustment”,  of neo-liberal free market policies, and of privatization. The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the Taliban in Pakistan and in Afghanistan not only owe their political and organizational foundation to the CIA and other US security / military institutions; they are anxiously willing to be among the US’s partners in those countries. Muqtada al-Sadr, Ismail Haniyeh, Sayed Hassan Nasrollah and Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad – due to the absence of a genuine and united Left in their countries – have succeeded in attracting a good portion of the toiling masses by capturing them in the “prison of illusion” constructed of pseudo contradictions.  This has led countless youth of “the wretched of the earth”- residents of the huts and the ghettoes of Baghdad, Gaza, Beirut and Tehran – to be recruited into the armies of Sadr, Hamas, Hezbollah (“the Party of Allah”) and Basigis. In the absence of progressive and democratic forces, it is not surprising that a section of the toiling masses in these countries – due to their hatred of the likes of Hariri, Chalabi, Karzai, Maliki and the rulers of Iran’s Islamic Republic (who are all publicly well known for financial corruption, dependency and rapacious greed) – turn to Sadr, Haniyeh, Nasrollah and Ahmadi-Nejad and show allegiance to them. Without a doubt, the growth and the ascension of a kind of “radicalism” in the huts and the ghettoes of the big cities of those countries of the periphery which are surrounded by windfall oil wealth can be readily observed. But this radicalism which operates under the cloak of Islam and on the basis of charitable activities, alms and “religious solidarity”, has obvious limitations which must be pointed out.  Such “charitable” activities and religious solidarity can only mobilize “the wretched of the earth” for a short period of time. But since this activity occurs mainly on the basis of “tolerance” of the brutal logic of capital, with reliance upon the “generosity” of the system, sooner or later these organizations are pulled toward concordance with the logic the capitalist system. The growth and  ascension of a genuine and united Left that is capable of freeing the toiling masses and the “wretched of the earth” in these countries from the “prisons of illusion” built by religious and Islamic tendencies, and of arming them with class and national consciousness and the socialist perspective, has not yet occurred .

4-      However, presenting the Taliban, Al Qaeda, the Taliban Council of Quetta, the Haqqani Network and others as a clear and present threat of “global Islam” against humanity is no less insane or contrived than the Cold War threat of “world communism” as a monolithic danger against humanity. A survey of the formation and growth of the old and the recent Taliban, along with other fundamentalist groups in Pakistan; their spread to Afghanistan and then their return to Pakistan, would familiarize us more and more with the phenomenon of Talibanism and its complex and historic relationship to intelligence organizations – US intelligence services.

5-      A high percentage of the events in Afghanistan, especially after the “Cold War” era, have had their origin in Pakistan. The fundamentalist forces are mainly recruited into militias in Pakistan. After training and indoctrination at Islamic schools run by Saudi Wahabbis, and with the joint support and cooperation of the CIA and Pakistan’s intelligent services, they head for Afghanistan. When these militants are wounded or injured in Afghanistan, they then return to Pakistan. After recovery and rest, they head back to Afghanistan again.  American officials and the mainstream corporate media are constantly trying to influence public opinion to portray Pakistan as the “source of tension” in the region; that it provides safe haven for the Taliban.  They have even pressured a section of Pakistan’s government officials to admit to Pakistan’s role in the region. The attacks and the terrorist activities in Bombay, India were primarily designed for this reason:  to make world opinion, especially American public opinion, accept the belief that Pakistanis play the main role in exporting insecurity and terror in a systematic and organized manner. The design and execution of the Taliban attack on the Indian Embassy in Kabul in October, 2009 and the suicide attacks and bombings in Iran’s Baluchi cities (especially in Zahedan) indicate targeting not only of Afghanistan and India, but also of areas within Iran’s borders.

6-      The NeoCons, and even a significant number of US State Department officials, along with high ranking Pentagon personnel, present Pakistan as a center for the spread of insecurity in the Middle East-Indian Ocean region.  These individuals have substantial influence on the media and current events literature, especially on international journalism. They have been able to portray Pakistan in public opinion as an “enabler” and “a failed state”. In order to justify the escalation of war from Afghanistan to Pakistan, the American war mongers constantly emphasize that Pakistan has become the “Somalia” of the region and it is a country that has become “ungovernable”.

7-      Despite the fact that the Zardari-Gilani government, in the past year and a half of it time in power in Pakistan, has tried patiently and dutifully to present itself as an ally and friend of the US, American officials – for some reason unbeknownst to me – do not trust the Pakistani officials. From the beginning of 2009 till present, US military forces under the pretext of pursuit of Taliban elements, routinely invade Pakistan’s territory. From the air they routinely bombard the border regions. Under these circumstances, Pakistani officials and the leaders of the ruling party in Pakistan (People’s Party of Pakistan = P.P.P.) tell  US officials, “If your commando raids and your air attacks continue in our territory to a degree that our ‘national sovereignty’ is compromised, then we will not be able to maintain our internal security.” The response of the US officials has always been that there exists a balance between US security and Pakistan’s security. If US security in Afghanistan or at home becomes endangered, to the same extent, due to US long range missiles, Pakistan’s security is also endangered. And then, these officials immediately proclaim that if Pakistani officials “accept responsibility” and arrest the Taliban who are “sheltered” in Pakistan and hand them over to US forces, as a result to the same degree “the number of US attacks will decrease”. It is worthy of mention that the Taliban, who are trained by Saudi Wahabbis and the CIA and who generally enter Afghanistan with the favor and support of the CIA, all of a sudden are transformed into  security enemies of “Afghanistan and New York”.

8-      The relationship between the Taliban phenomenon and the CIA and other US intelligence networks and think tanks is more complex than what it appears to be. Recent events (during 2008-9) have brought about a new dimension to this complex relationship, revealed by the initiation of a Taliban movement in the northern tribal regions (mainly in South and North Waziristan) of Pakistan. The original Taliban, after completing religious / military training within Pakistan, were dispatched to Afghanistan.  After defeating and wiping out Afghanistan’s Mujahedin, they usurped power in Afghanistan for seven (1994-2001) years. Today, simultaneously with the initiation of a Taliban movement in Pakistan, we are witnessing the revival of the Taliban in Afghanistan. The new Taliban (whom some analysts call “Neo-Taliban”) in Afghanistan and Pakistan are both enjoying a renaissance. This renaissance is the result of two rational factors which are evident in each of these countries. The first factor is that during the past seven years that the US and NATO forces have occupied Afghanistan, the Karzai government in Afghanistan has been all but invisible, despite the claims of US officials and the mainstream media. During this period of time, many of the regions in Afghanistan did not experience any ‘socio-economic transformation’. The country of Afghanistan in reality has been divided in various sub-regions that are controlled by war lords / drug lords. Hamid Karzai can only enforce his rule in a portion of Kabul; otherwise, in many distant border areas, such as Badakhshan- which is located near northwestern China – people are not able to recognize Hamid Karzai from photographs presented to them. Any clear-sighted Afghani would conclude that about 90% of Afghanistan’s marginal regions have never been affected by “socio-economic transformation” in the past eight years, and that the people’s means of livelihood have not changed. The masses of the people remain in extreme poverty and do not have any access to public health/hygiene, education, welfare and transportation.  For the vast majority of them, these would be considered “luxuries”. The state of affairs in Pakistan, especially in the northwestern tribal areas (including North and South Waziristan), is not any different from the situation in Afghanistan. Due to the outbreak and escalation of war between the Pakistani army and the Neo-Taliban of Pakistan in the border regions of Pakistan and Afghanistan in recent months (summer and autumn of 2009), there has been an exodus of hundreds of thousands of people from these regions toward the provinces of Punjab and Sindh. This situation has become extremely critical. In this power vacuum, a modicum of legitimacy / sovereignty has accrued to the Taliban at the expense of central governments (Kabul and Islamabad) since they are filling the power vacuum in second and third order cities. This accretion of influence is documented by the number of suicide attacks which have occurred in Afghanistan’s cities during the past three years, the higher profile presence of Taliban, and the higher frequency of bombings. This extension of power / influence during the year 2009 is so substantial that in the view of some reporters, today the Taliban have become the “shadow government” in Afghanistan, especially in the northern regions.

9-      Regarding Pakistan, we should pay attention to the fact that “Neo-Taliban” has considerable influence in the organs of government, social institutions and within political parties and organizations. Presently, there is no proof of such Taliban influence within Afghanistan’s government. But, in my view, it is not an exaggeration to assert that the political ruling system in Pakistan, whether at the federal or provincial level, has to a high degree become Talibanized. The process of the Talibanization of security, military and government institutions in Pakistan is not a new phenomenon. In the 1980s and 90s, Pakistan was the logistical center for Islamic Mujahedin who were fighting against “atheistic communists” in Afghanistan. During that period, the military and security forces of Pakistan with the CIA, protected Afghan Mujahedin forces and funneled money from the governments of Saudi Arabia, Iran and the US to them. These forces which gradually became Islamic fundamentalists played an important role in the mid-90s in shaping the Taliban during the time that Benazir Bhutto was Pakistan’s prime minister. The tendencies toward fundamentalism in the military, security government institutions remained while the secular, nationalist and Left tendencies were marginalized. The absence of  Left, secular or nationalist forces on the one hand and the growing role of the central government [which in reality was under the influence of Saudi Arabia, Persian Gulf Sheiks (especially the Wahabbi clergy and the CIA)] on the other hand reinvigorated the Taliban and enabled them to attract a  sector of the masses. When it is mentioned that the Taliban has been revitalized and rebuilt in Pakistan, it does not mean that they dropped out of the sky. In fact the Taliban are like many other feudal and reactionary movements which are part of  Pakistani society – but the Taliban have a more complex and very secretive relationship with US security institutions; especially the CIA. As a matter of fact, the connections between  a sector of the official intelligence service-security apparatus as well as part of the upper Pakistani military echelons and the CIA along with the ruling elite of Saudi Arabia is a subject about  which  several books could be written.

10-   The support of the CIA and other US intelligence / security institutions for pro Islamic groups and networks in the peripheral countries, especially in south Asia, goes back to the beginning years of the “Cold War” period.  However the support of the CIA for religious fundamentalists after the collapse and breakup of the Soviet Union has intensified. Many Left analysts maintain that after the end of the Cold War, the ideologues of the global system (especially NeoCon activists), in the absence of a “dangerous external threat” (e. Soviet Communism), immediately decided to conjure a new external threat (which is always necessary to sway public opinion in the US in favor of the devastating wars that are “Made in America”). This new enemy – fundamentalism / international terrorism – is complex, intricate and mysterious. It should simply be stated that the US ruling class, or at least the NeoCon faction within it (which still exercises significant influence within government departments, Congress, mainstream media and among  high ranking military personnel), while mounting a huge publicity campaign against terrorism and against Islamist tendencies especially in Pakistan and Afghanistan,  is at the same time secretly promoting and assisting various fundamentalist, anti-nationalist and anti communist organizations. Among these organizations in Pakistan and Afghanistan are the old and the new Taliban, the Islamic Party of Afghanistan, (under the leadership of Gulbeddin Hikmetyar), Jondollah (under the leadership of Abdomalek Rigi) in Pakistan’s Baluchistan province, and even part of Al-Qaeda.   These organizations enjoy the technical assistance of the CIA, Pakistan’s intelligence service, and Britain’s MI-6; they receive financial support from Gulf Sheikhs and Saudi Arabia’s Wahabbi clergy.  The architects of the US global project (globalizing the “Monroe Doctrine”) are building toward the ultimate objective which is “containment of China”.  They covertly build up and maintain fundamentalist Islamic organizations, Hindutva, and Lamaistic tendencies in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India and in Tibet for legitimizing the escalation of war from Afghanistan to Pakistan, to Central Asian countries and possibly to India.  This is a matter of urgent concern.

11-   It is very important to study the activities of US intelligence services and their interactions with Islamic fundamentalist groups [their information “sources”] from the mysterious 9/11 event to the present. One of the very important characteristics of the kind of connection between the various “terrorist” / Islamic fundamentalist organizations and the CIA is that they (the “terrorists”) must be unaware of the role they play in the arena of the US global geo-political chess game. Without a doubt, this ignorance is wide spread among the members and cadres within these organizations – whose recruitment takes place not just in Pakistan, Afghanistan and the Islamic countries but also in Europe and America (refer to the Washington Post, October 19, 2009 edition). In reality the CIA and other security organizations are the “brains” behind the “terrorist” / fundamentalist leadership.

12-   In addition to the function of supplying and transmitting intelligence, the other function of the Islamic fundamentalist groups is the absorption of the support of different strata of people, especially among the toiling masses in Islamic countries – but also in non-Islamic countries such as Germany, the Netherlands, and the US.  This trend has intensified in recent months. In the absence of  a united  and organized Left in these countries,  Islamic fundamentalists – through their propagation of deceitful ideas among the large, second generation young Moslem populations of Germany, the Netherlands, France and other countries – have successfully recruited soldiers and deployed them for “Jihad” in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This covert CIA support for Islamic fundamentalist recruitment activities (for deployment to Afghanistan and Pakistan) has two justifications, which can be mentioned briefly:  First of all, this covert activity causes Europeans [especially in Germany and the Netherlands, where there is substantial opposition to their military presence in Afghanistan and Pakistan] to fear “fundamentalism and terrorism”, and thereby abandon their opposition to the wars. Secondly, the covert support of the propagation of religious fundamentalism causes the people in different countries to quarrel and fight against each other instead of uniting against the war and promoting social justice. Without a doubt, the fissures created have impeded the growth of the war resistance movement and undermined the secular and democratic struggles under the leadership of the anti-establishment Left.  They are among the only potentially effective challenges to achievement of the US “ultimate objective”.

13-  The actions and the activities of  religious fundamentalists in Afghanistan and Pakistan help to establish the mental and social mindset necessary to accept the reality of a new external threat (fundamentalism and terrorism) by a majority of people in the US and Europe. Perhaps this ploy has been more successful (at least at the present time) among the supporters of war in America.  Obviously, without an enemy, there can be no war.  Presently, the fabrication of a foreign enemy in order to justify deployment of tens of thousands of American soldiers to Afghanistan, with a design for escalation of the war  to Pakistan, is a matter of very high priority in US foreign policy.  It has become very urgent. Reinforcement of this illusion (in which fundamentalist terrorism is the real enemy of not only the American people but also the enemy of the people of Afghanistan, Pakistan and the international community) would legitimize military intervention and the escalation of the wars as “humanitarian” solutions; they could be carried out consistent with “the principle of self defense”. Whereas, the “ultimate objective” of the US in its global strategy would remain concealed behind the curtain of war against fundamentalism and terrorism.

14-  Contrary to the reports of  mainstream corporate media and many officials of  NATO countries (especially the US), the biggest threat to the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan is the widespread poverty and lack of security caused by foreign occupation, military intervention and the comprador class in those countries. Neither the old nor the new Taliban, nor Al-Qaeda nor the former Mujahedin of Afghanistan are capable of converting  the government and Pakistan’s 175 million people into a “prostrate and failed state” like the Somali Republic without the financial and military backing of the CIA, Wahabbis (including the Saudi royal family), Pakistani warlords, and Pakistan’s intelligence services..

15-   Pakistan’s intelligence organizations, or at least most of them (just like during the time of the Parvez Musharraf government), with the active support of the CIA, play a key role in the management of most of the old and new Taliban leadership. This organization, under the supervision of the CIA and Britain’s MI-6  funnel weapons from the southern ports of Pakistan (such as Karachi) to the Taliban sectors in Afghanistan and Pakistan, while at the same time they aid Pakistan’s military in its combat against the Taliban of Darreh / Savat and the northern and southern regions of Waziristan. As a result they played a key role in the displacement of nearly three million people, mainly among the “tribals” of the northwestern areas of Pakistan.

16-  In reality, Pakistan is standing in the path of the US’s “quest for hegemony” which is the “ultimate goal” of the global system. If the Pentagon and the CIA do not succeed in their first game plan (the conversion of the Zardari-Gilani government to an unconditional and spineless comprador like the Karzai government in Afghanistan), they will probably implement the second option. This second plan consists of the outbreak of civil war in Pakistan (first in Baluchistan, then in the northwest border provinces and in  Sindh) – utilizing the Yugoslavia model from the 1990’s –  and consequently, the escalation of war from Afghanistan to Pakistan. If the US ruling class can create a “Washington consensus” to support implementation of this second option, then it will have taken a giant step toward its ultimate goal.

17-  The “ultimate goal” of the US global strategy – in light of the expansion of the wars ”Made in America”, specifically in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and the expansion of its military presence in  Central Asia (e.g. Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan) -  in its first stage is the establishment of unchallenged hegemony over energy resources and export terminals in the region; and in the second stage, it is containment of China. In my view, the execution of wars “Made in America” under the pretext of combating the “main enemy” (fundamentalist terrorism) in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the support for Lamaism under the leadership of  the Dalai Lama in Tibet (southwest China), the assistance provided to the “Turkestan Islamic Movement” in the province of  Xinjiang (among the Uighur people residing in northwest China), the direct support of  the Lamaistic movement and “democracy movement” in Burma,  the financial and military aid provided to Jondollah in Iran’s Baluchistan, and finally the US’s attempt to sign a military pact with India [which also serves its “ultimate objective” (i.e. containing China)], all require thorough analysis.

18-  Despite the fact that the US has close economic ties to China, mainly via multi-national corporations and currency exchanges, the deepening of the geopolitical rivalry internationally, especially given the spread of war from Afghanistan to Pakistan which has intensified in the autumn months of 2009, has established the conditions for the development of an explosive collision course between China and the US.  Meanwhile, the flaring up of civil war in Pakistan and its expansion to its border provinces with China will increase the possibility of that collision.  Although the predictions of think-tank analysts seem to be rational, I believe that the probability of the US falling in to a quagmire of war in Pakistan, on the one hand, is high; as is the probability of the growth of anti-war movements in North America and Europe on the other hand.  This will deprive the US of achieving its “ultimate objective”.

N. Nazemi – February 2010

The Central Committee

……………………………

Dear comrades,

Revolutionary greetings,

We are enclosing a resolution adopted by the All India Revolutionary Women’s Organisation (AIRWO) to declare solidarity with Ms. Irom Chanu Sharmila, who is on a ten-year long indefinite fast to get the draconian Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act repealed. The resolution is self-explanatory. We appeal to your party and the women’s organization to extend solidarity with the struggle of the people of North-East India against AFSPA and to the struggle of Ms. Sharmila symbolizing this resistance.

Comradely yours

Sanjay Singhvi

International Department

CPI(ML)

Declare Solidarity with Ms. Sharmila’s Indefinite Fast Against AFSPA

Support Struggle of People of North-East for Repealing AFSPA

Ms. Irom Chanu Sharmila who is continuing her ten year old fast surmounting all obstacles is the symbol of the struggle of not only the people of Manipur, but of the whole North East India against state terror intensified through the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA). From her childhood she had heard and seen the atrocities committed against the women and the people of Manipur as a whole by the military, para-military and numerous other security forces under the licence provided by the AFSPA in order to suppress their struggle for self-governance.  From the time Nehru government deployed armed forces in 1948 to Naga areas to suppress the Naga people’s movement for the right of self-determination these atrocities are continuing in North East.

In October 2000, to do something against this barbarity Ms. Sharmila volunteered her service to the Justice Suresh’s People’s Tribunal enquiring about it.  There she heard the testimony of a victim who was raped by the army men in front of her father-in-law.  Then she felt more bitterly to do something to protest, to revolt against the brutal system.  It was then Assam Rifles killed ten innocent people including a woman in Malom near Imphal airport on 2^nd November 2000.  She could not tolerate it any more.  On the very same day after witnessing the bloody scene she declared her decision to start indefinite fast until the AFSPA is repealed, and started it.

When M.K. Gandhi, acclaimed as the father of the nation, went on indefinite fast a number of times during independence struggle, the /British colonialists have never arrested him on the charge of attempt to suicide.  But the Indian rulers who claim to uphold him, got Sharmila arrested on 5^th November alleging attempt for suicide.  She was removed to the Security Ward in JN Hospital, presently JN Institute of Medical Sciences, and put under painful forced nasal feeding.

Though the central and state governments continued the drama of releasing and re-arresting her many times, though popular movement has broken out  in support of her fast many times, and though her case was taken up even up to Supreme Court, the ruling system remained unmoved about any steps to repeal the AFSPA.  But Sharmila, in spite of the inhuman attitude of the authorities continued the fast undaunted.

On 11^th July 2004 when the bullet ridden naked body of Manorama Devi who was in Assam Rifles Custody and subjected to mass rape was seen on the public road, intense agitation broke out.  In protest against torture, rape and killing of Ms. Manorama ten women marched naked in front of the head quarters of Assam Rifles.  It became an international news exposing the autocratic policies of Indian government and its virtual imposition of military rule in North East and Jammu Kashmir.  It was then the central home minister followed by the prime minister visited Imphal and then set up a five member committee under the chairmanship of Justice Jeevan Reddy, former Judge of the Supreme Court, to advise the government on the continuation of the AFSPA.

The commission after visiting all the seven states of North East, based on the materials presented before it and the impressions gathered during the inter-actions with various sections stated in its Report submitted to the central government on 6^th June 2005 : “ The Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958, should be repealed. Therefore recommending the continuation of the present Act, with or without amendments, does not arise. The Act is too sketchy, too bald, and quite inadequate in several particulars….. We must also mention the impression gathered by it during the course of its work, viz., the Act, for whatever  reason, has become a symbol of oppression, an object of hate and an instrument of discrimination and highhandedness.  It is highly desirable and advisable to repeal this Act altogether”. In spite of this absolutely clear recommendation by the Commission no action is so far taken on it by the government.  The military, para-military and other security forces are still continuing their reign of terror.  The judiciary is turning a behind eye towards these acts of terror in spite of so many appeals.  The bureaucracy and the elite political class are abetting these crimes against the people while engaged in perpetuating the corrupt regime.

In this gruesome situation, in the lonely corner of the Security Ward of JNIMS in Imphal Ms. Irom Chanu Sharmila is continuing her heroic struggle in spite of the irrepairable damages to her body from the ten years of forced nasal feeding.  Outside, led by Ima Taruni, the women are continuing their indefinite relay fast.  The people are hurt and angry.  On the occasion of every act of atrocity thay come out on the streets and protest.  If a plebiscite is conducted, overwhelming majority of the people of North East shall vote against the draconian AFSPA and for self-governance.   Ms. Sharmila , Ima Taruni, the people of Manipur and the people of North East as a whole expect the solidarity of women, solidarity of progressive democratic forces of India and abroad to their life and death struggle to get the barbarous AFSPA repealed.

The All India Convention of the activists of the All India Revolutionary Women’s Organization (AIRWO) declares its firm solidarity with the struggle of Ms.Sharmila and  the people of Manipur and North East for getting the AFSPA repealed and vows to take up this struggle at all India level.

The AIRWO appeals to all women’s organizations in India and all over the world to raise their voice against the AFSPA for its repeal as early as possible, and in support of the heroic struggle continued by Ms. Sharmila for last ten years sacrificing her life for the cause of democracy, for the cause of the people. The AIRWO resolves to raise the solidarity with Ms. Sharmila’s struggle as one of the main slogans of the March 8, International Women’s Day, 2010, programmes and appeals to all women’s organizations in India and abroad to do the same.

Chennai                                                                     Sharmistha

7^th February 2010                               Convenor, All India Organising Committee

AIRWO

please notice our current information about the closure of Opel plant in Antwerpen. Please publish to your contacts and organize solidarity.

Opel Workers in Antwerp are Blocking the Gates

21 January  2010 – Today the Opel workforce in Antwerp (Belgium) was informed at a special meeting of the workforce that the plant shall be closed by the end of June. Wednesday evening the Opel workers had blocked the gates ”preventively” after they had learned on Tuesday that Opel boss Nick Reilly had announced the closure to the European works councils. Behind the closed gates, several new cars are blocking the way: ”Nothing in, nothing out.” Without shilly-shallying the Antwerp Opel workers are making clear that they are determined to fight for their jobs. ”No closing!” is the slogan.

Against all declarations made in previous negotiations to do without plant closures, now Antwerp is supposed to be shut down immediately and further closures are being  discussed. In the ”WAZ” (regional newspaper) of 21 January, Eisenach, Luton as well as  Bochum „on a medium-term basis” are mentioned as next candidates for closure. The restructuring of the corporation in Europe in the interest of its international competitiveness is obviously supposed to be pushed through quickly and more ruthlessly. Time is pressing for the GM corporation which dropped from the first place of the world raking list to the third place within a few years. The new Opel boss Nick Reilly stressed he would reduce the capacities in Western Europe drastically – by 20 percent.

This shows what all the agreements, all the papers, the chancellor’s promises, etc.,  up till now are actually all about. Their only purpose was to keep the workforces quiet.

The tactics of GM are now to play off the workforces against each other. That is why they are maintaining that the plant in Antwerp is technically outdated and that the production of Astra is not profitable anymore there. By shifting the Astra production to Bochum, GM is trying to gain time in the plant at Bochum with its militant workforce. The Opel workforces are supposed to be prevented from taking up the common struggle. “Apparently GM management has respect for the determination of the workforce, which after month long blackmail attempts pushed through vacation benefits, Christmas bonuses and wage hikes. Reilly knows that if he openly attacks the workforces he would be provoking a European-wide struggle. But GM wants to prevent that at all costs.” The workers’ newssheet “Blitz” (Lightning Bolt) already wrote that on 4 November 2009.

On Wednesday evening the closure and the blockade at the gates was the topic at Bochum at the meeting during the break. A common struggle demands that the workers come to grips with the subliminally nurtured hope that the closure in Antwerp would be to the advantage of the people at Bochum.

In Antwerp the blockade of the gates is continuing. Tomorrow, on Friday, and on Monday there will be short-time work. In any case, it is important to make the initiative of the Opel workforce in Antwerp in their struggle for their jobs broadly known in factories and trade unions and to organize solidarity. Within the Opel enterprise this must be combined with the discussion over the common struggle:

• The closure of Opel Antwerp must taken back!
• Fight for each and every job!
• For the 30-hour work week with full wage compensation as company-wide agreement!

“rf-news”will keep its readers informed with up-to-date information!