Message-ID: <29163693.1076611371160.JavaMail.root at statler.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 13:42:50 -0500 (GMT-05:00) From: John Lacny <jlacny at earthlink.net> Reply-To: John Lacny <jlacny at earthlink.net> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org Subject: Organizing the docks of Umm Qasr (was: Re: [lbo-talk] Iraq, the
left and the 'resistance' (Geras blog)) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Earthlink Zoo Mail 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by infothecary.org id
i1CIgpCO020446
Shane Mage, Yoshie Furuhashi, and Justin Schwartz (among others) have settled into a back-and-forth along these lines:
>>>> ...My own opinion is that I am with whatever forces in Iraq
>>>> promote real democracy...
>>>
>>> Who they?
>>>
>> Don't know. But in a nation of millions there must be some, don't
>> you think?
>
> Sure there are, but do they constitute "forces," i.e. at least
> numbering in millions, well organized and prepared to use (as well
> as capable of effectively using) force if necessary to defend
> themselves and democracy?
I'm not unsympathetic to the view that the temptations of "armchair theorizing" are to be avoided, and that the primary task for those of us in the States is to rein in the aggression and repression of the occupation. Still, I think some analysis of the situation is necessary if we're going to build the kind of movement in this country that will be necessary to do that. Therefore I think this discussion should be based on two premises: (1) what best serves the democratic aspirations of the Iraqi people and (2) what issues can we highlight that would best enable us to reach out to people in the US that would make more disposed to question the occupation's legitimacy?
I would argue that the burgeoning Iraqi labor movement is an important component of the democratic forces in Iraq, and one worth our support. In unions in the US there are many rank-and-filers (as well as staff and elected leaders!) who are going to be moved because of things like the David Bacon/Clarence Thomas speaking tour about their visit to Iraq, and the union-busting activities of the "Coalition Provisional Authority" in, e.g., continuing to enforce the 1987 Ba'athist law prohibiting collective bargaining rights in the public sector (the only part of the formal sector where Iraqis actually have jobs these days).
I would further argue that it is the height of armchair theorizing for leftists in the US to pooh-pooh the unions' concerns because the leadership is supposedly insufficiently opposed to the occupation. In the struggle against apartheid, people didn't stop offering support to COSATU or to the struggle against the pass laws because that somehow "distracted" from the issue of opposing apartheid itself. Rather, those fights were necessary to overcoming apartheid itself. So when it comes to Iraq today, there are two active labor federations -- (1) the one in which the Iraqi Communist Party (ICP) is very active, and then (2) the federation based around the union of the unemployed (70% of Iraq is formally unemployed!) and its allied unions among employed workers, which led some of the unemployed demonstrations that were fired upon by the British, and which appears to have heavy involvement from the Workers Communist Party of Iraq (WCPI).
Now, the ICP is pretty famously a part of the so-called "Governing Council," and their analysis of that body is that it is not so much an outright US puppet as a concession to the Iraqi people on the part of the occupation, somewhat along the lines of the Palestinian Authority. The WCPI is not a part of the Governing Council, but makes a lot of statements about Islam that seem a bit sectarian from my (distant) perch, and like the ICP they would like to see a temporary UN administration in Iraq. These positions probably seem insufficiently muscular to left purists in the US, particularly Trotskyites. I have no idea if either of these lines is "correct," but the bottom line is: I'm not in Iraq. And what I can say with some confidence is that the actions of the armed "resistance" are not drawing much popular support apart from select areas in Iraq, and that the union leaders in Iraq are denouncing the activities of most of these armed factions, not just because they view them a!
s adventurist or premature but because they are criminal, masterminded mostly by reactionary cliques.
It's possible that some of the armed actions are not carried out by muj or Ba'athists but by genuine revolutionaries and patriots. I don't know. It's more than equally likely that some of these armed actions are just downright criminal. But I don't see how holding these two ideas in one's head at the same time should be so difficult. And further, if you ask me who I would prefer: the armed groups, at least some of which are of shady political provenance, or the labor activists who are actually leading actions that are OBJECTIVELY opposed to the occupation (because they interfere with occupation goals like privatization, wage cuts, etc.), often at great personal risk to themselves -- I choose those labor activists in a heartbeat. The way you make that choice concrete -- as opposed to armchair theorizing from afar -- is by mobilizing people to support their brothers and sisters in that other country who are engaged in a similar struggle. US Labor Against the War is planning on!
sending another labor delegation to Iraq in the near future -- they will visit and bring back stories about regular people, engaged in struggles similar to the struggles of US trade unionists, stories that will actually bring US union people to a better understanding. You can do this and win the support even of people who were formerly supportive of the "war," and that gives you an in to talk about why the whole thing was a bad idea in the first place. I am saying that this has potential in the union movement at least, but it's not hard to imagine analogous strategies and "issue framing" in other settings.
I'm appending an e-mail from the Iraqi Labor Rights Task Force of US Labor Against the War, about organizing on the docks of Umm Qasr. It is rather long -- in fact, I hope this message doesn't bounce! -- but I think it does a good job of bringing out some of the concrete issues that Iraqi workers face on the ground. The back-and-forth where the workers debate what they should do -- with some courageous and hopeful, others afraid and pessimistic -- is something that organizers in probably any country would recognize.
- - - - - John Lacny
People of the US, unite and defeat the Bush regime and all its running dogs!