Marxists Must Stand Firm Against Ahmadinejad
Open letter to the workers of Venezuela on Hugo Chávez's support for Ahmadinejad.
Honourable workers of Venezuela,
The Revolutionary Marxists of Iran are aware of your achievements as part of the Bolivarian Movement and have always supported this movement against the widespread lies and the open and covert interference of imperialism. In order to defend your invaluable movement and to confront the attacks and interference of US imperialism in Venezuela, labour and student activists in Iran have set up the ‘Hands Off Venezuela' campaign in Iran and during the past few years have stood together with you in confronting the imperialist attacks. It is obvious that your achievements were gained under the leadership of Hugo Chávez and, for this reason, you reserve deep respect for him.
In terms of his foreign policy, however, Chávez has made a mistake. With his support for Ahmadinejad he has ignored the solidarity of the workers and students of Iran with your revolution, and in a word, made it look worthless. Most are aware that two weeks ago Ahmadinejad, with the direct support of Khamenei, committed the biggest fraud in the history of presidential elections in Iran and then, with great ferocity, spilt the blood of those protesting against this fraud. You just have to take notice of the international media reports to be aware of the depths of this tragedy. All over the world millions of workers and students, and also those of Marxist and revolutionary tendencies (which mostly are the supporters of the Bolivarian revolution), protested against these attacks.
In of spite this, Chávez was one of the first people to support Ahmadinejad. In his weekly TV speech he said: "Ahmadinejad's triumph is a total victory. They're trying to stain Ahmadinejad's victory, and by doing so they aim to weaken the government and the Islamic revolution. I know they won't be able to do it." And that "We ask the world for respect." These rash and baseless remarks from your President are a great and direct insult to the millions of youth who in recent days rose up against tyranny. Some of them even lost their lives. Many of these youths came out on the streets spontaneously and without becoming infected with the regime's internal disputes, or becoming aligned with the policy that US imperialism is following for taking over the movement. In addition, the remarks of your President are an insult to millions of workers in Iran. Workers whose leaders are today being tortured in the prisons of the Ahmadinejad government and some of them are even believed to be being punished with flogging. Workers who were brutally repressed by the mercenaries of the Ahmadinejad government for commemorating May Day in Tehran this year are still in prison.
So far Chávez has travelled to Iran seven times and each time he has hugged one of the most hated people in this country and called him his "brother". He does not realise that the economic, social and political situations of Venezuela and Iran are going in opposite directions. Although both countries have seen a similarly significant boost to their oil (and gas) revenues the contrast between the ways in which this extra money has been used by the two governments could not be more marked. In Venezuela this income is used for building hospitals, schools, universities and other infrastructure of the country, but in Iran it is used for lining the pockets of just a few parasitic capitalists.
On the one hand, in Venezuela, we have seen the nationalisation of an increasing number of companies and factories, the free provision of healthcare, education, civil liberties and so on. By contrast in Iran privatisation is on the government's agenda, even at the cost of trampling on Article 44 of the Constitution of the country and using the excuse of inefficiency and low productivity of state companies and factories. All these advances of the workers and the poor in Venezuela have given them greater control over the way they work and the way they live. Most importantly, the expropriation of factories and the encouragement of workers' control and participation have transformed the character of the workers' movement in Venezuela, advancing it by many stages. The Bolivarian movement and the policies of the government have brought about a huge shift in the balance of class forces in Venezuela in favour of the working class. Not only has the government encouraged the Venezuelan workers to build the Unión Nacional de los Trabajadores as an alternative to the Confederación de Trabajadores de Venezuela (CTV), but the workers have become involved in running and managing factories and other enterprises. The whole world knows that your government has even drawn up a list of 1,149 closed-down factories and given their owners an ultimatum: re-open them under workers' control or the government will expropriate them.
In Iran, on the other hand, on top of the lack of many basic democratic rights, the workers are also without any independent trade union rights. Today the workers of Iran do not even have a confederation like the Confederación de Trabajadores de Venezuela. All they have are the Labour House, the Islamic Labour Councils and other anti-working class bodies tied to the state.
But this has not always been so: the overthrow of the Shah brought about many freedoms for workers including, in some cases, control over production and even distribution. Then, however, through repression the Islamic hierarchy managed to take back all the workers' gains. The leaders that your President hugs killed thousands of workers, destroyed the workers' movement and pushed it back by several decades. In Iranian society even the ‘yellow' pro-boss unions - that the Shah had tolerated - became and remain illegal. Even a CTV-style trade union confederation is illegal in Iran.
In Iran the official (and underestimated) unemployment rate stands at 10.85 per cent, with unemployment among the youth (15-24 year-olds) standing at 22.35 per cent. Even when workers are employed they are often not paid - in many cases for more than a year. Even those who get their wages face an impossible task in paying for the basic necessities of life, because their wage is not enough for living costs. For example, with the rent for a two-bedroom flat at $422 a month, a civil servant on $120 wages, or a teacher on $180, or even a doctor on $600 a month struggle to survive. It is no wonder that some 90 per cent of the population live below the poverty line.
The capitalist government of Iran has no fundamental disagreements or contradictions with US imperialism. It is in a ‘cold war' with America and when it receives enough concessions, it will quickly enter into political dealings with the US and will turn its back on you. Indeed, the Iran regime has already helped the Americans in their military invasion and occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq - and installing the puppet regimes of Karzai and Maliki through significant trade, security and other deals. The capitalist government of Iran, despite the current apparent differences, is busy in close negotiations with the Obama government on resolving the problems of Afghanistan. This government, despite the "anti-imperialist" rhetoric, is heading towards re-establishing old links with the US. Ahmadinejad's selection demonstrates the final turn of the regime towards resolving its problems with imperialism. Despite all the "enmity" and "anti-imperialist" gestures the regime is ready to resolve all its differences with America. The government of Iran wants to turn Iran into a society like Colombia (in Colombia thousands of trade unionists have been killed so that multinational companies can exploit workers and plunder the country's natural resources without any obstacles). It is not without reason that the Iranian government has been implementing the bankrupt neo-liberal prescriptions of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund and counting the minutes until it joins the World Trade Organisation.
The close and regular links of your leader, Chávez, with the leaders of this regime will eventually make the Iranian masses turn their back on the great lessons of the revolutionary process in Venezuela. Winning the hearts and minds of the masses in Iran and similar countries is the best long-term solution to breaking Washington's stranglehold on Latin America. Your leader's closeness with the capitalist government of Iran, a government that has the blood of thousands of workers and youth on its hands, shows that his anti-imperialist foreign policy has a major flaw. Being close to reactionary regimes will never be able to bring the anti-imperialist foreign policy to a successful conclusion. Only the unity of the real representatives of the workers and toilers can confront imperialism.
Stand together with the Iranian workers and condemn the foreign policy of your leaders. Support for Ahmadinejad means support for the repression of Iranian workers and youth. Challenge the flawed positions of Chávez and reject them. Support for the government of Ahmadinejad, especially after the recent events, is at worst an open betrayal of the toilers of Iran and at best a political blunder in foreign policy.
Disagree
Chavez first priority has to be fighting American imperialism. If Chavez endorsed the demonstrations in Iran he would end up destroying diplomatic relations between Venezuela and Iran not to mention he would be aiding an attempted "color revolution" which would only benefit the US government and its allies in Europe. Iran's government is one of Venezuela's allies against American imperialism. Iran is also the only powerful country in the Middle East that opposes the state of Israel.
Chavez shouldn't take sides in Iran's election dispute. Chavez must support Iran's sovereignty and oppose any foreign intervention in Iran's domestic affairs. No one has provided any evidence that Iran's election was fraudulent. Most of the protesters were Mousavi supporters. Mousavi is the candidate backed by the US Government. Mousavi's supporters were being used by the CIA to in an attempt to destabilize Iran's government. Many of the protesters engaged in violence. Ahmadinejad is hated by America and Israel but no evidence has been provided that the majority of Iran's people hate him. I too dislike the Islamic hierarchy but the hierarchy wasn't going to change no matter who won the election. I see no evidence that Iran will resolve its disputes with the US. Whether you like it or not Ahmadinejad's base of support are the lower classes. It is also obvious with the high voter turnout in Iran's election that the large majority of Iran's people support the country's system of government. Otherwise they would have refused to participate in the election.
In case the Marxists didn't notice most of the regimes in the world are reactionary. If Chavez only sought alliances with progressive governments he would have very few allies.
Both the Iranian Marxists
Both the Iranian Marxists and Ty are right. The Iranian government is a capitalist entity who's policies should be opposed by all socialist revolutionaries, at the same time, Iran is also one of the few truly independent nations of the Middle East and US imperialism along with its Israeli client are desperate to crush it. I believe Chavez would support a revolutionary movement in Iran if it actually organized itself and presented a real alternative within Iranian society. The "Green" movement had no leaders or clear objectives, it also had little support (at least visibly) among the Iranian poor and working class. Chavez could not risk losing major diplomatic support, especially imperialism again striking in the region as seen in Honduras. The situation is similar to Cuba supporting the USSR's crushing of the Prague Spring. Lamentable, but what other choice did Cuba have with the US carrying out terrorism and even an invasion against it?
Chavez doesn't know when to shut up.
He could have kept quiet about Iran's elections. Or at least stayed neutral. Doesn't he have enough to do in Venezuela and Latin America?
But no, he has to defend the "Islamic Revolution," which arrests and beats women for wearing the wrong (to us modest) clothing, outlaws independent unions, shuts down newspapers, allows a self selected clique of clerics to decide who can run for election, and slaughters Marxists.
And why? Because the US doesn't like the regime? In '79 the CIA tilted toward Khomeini in Iran against the left. Does Chavez know that? Apparently not. Will he support the Taliban because the US is fighting them? How about the junta in Burma? No, the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. The world is a little more complicated than that.
There are plenty of enterprises in Venezuela which need to be turned over to their workers. THAT is fighting imperialism. When the workers of Venezuela really own the economy and the country, there will be no need for alliances with Ahmadinejad and his clerics. Nor, for that matter, would there be a need for a maximum leader in Venezuela.
Kudos for publishing this
Kudos for publishing this piece.
I think the last statement in the essay sums up the situation pretty well:
"Support for the government of Ahmadinejad, especially after the recent events, is at worst an open betrayal of the toilers of Iran and at best a political blunder in foreign policy."
No doubt the "threat" and state of the Iranian government is overblown through the western media, but I think the fact that the Iranian government says gays "don't exist" in Iran - and other such things - is a major clue as to where their values lie. I think it is a mistake for Chavez and the Venezuelan government to side with Ahmadinejad, at least in such warm terms.
I am surprised that Chavez has fostered this alliance and I think it might be an example of political opportunism that has arisen out of Iran being a member of OPEC. From what I see, Chavez seems to be supporting the Iranian government carte blanc, which is never a good idea in any situation.
so-called Iranisn Marxists
These so-called Iranaina Marxist are colaborating with US and European Imeralism. They have been turn down by all those progressive forces that know their barand of Marxism and their close colaboration with Europen Parliament and American Neo-cons.
In London they have been turned down by "Stop The war Coalition"
http://stopwar.org.uk/content/view/1310/1/
Please look at their colaboration with reactionary forces of EU:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=CRE&reference=2008013...
Their brand of Marxism is working well in Iraq!!
A Sober View of Iran
For a better understanding of Mr. razi's brand of Marxism please see:
http://mltoday.com/en/a-sober-view-of-iran-630.html
Thanks
stop slunders discus politics!
I read Maziar Razi's article. He has in no way shows any inclination towards USA policies or Isreal. This is a slunder on the part of those who do not want to have a proper discussion. His line is one of anti US imperialist. He is supporter of Bolivarian Revolution and activists of Hands Off Venezueal campaign in iran. He is NOT one of these "Marxist-Leninst" sects either.
But his ONLR "crime" is pointing out the ractionary nature of semi -fascist regime of Ahmadinejad. He is not the only one to claim that. This is the view of million of Iranians (not only supporters of Mousavi BUT majority of workers and students whose leader are in prison right now) and billion people internationally.
For example on 25-27 June the 2nd Latin American Gathering of Workers in Occupied Factories expressed their support to the revolutionary movement of the Iranian masses against the Islamic Republic. They supported Iranian workers and made a strong position against Ahmadinejad.
http://www.marxist.com/la-occupied-factories-solidarity-iranian-workers....
Are all these workers in Venezuela also CIA and Mosad agents?
why to go that far?
Ty (first comment) writes:
"Chavez first priority has to be fighting American imperialism. If Chavez endorsed the demonstrations in Iran he would end up destroying diplomatic relations between Venezuela and Iran.."
That is true Chavez priority is to be fighting Imperialism. But the question is with what method? Could you have fought Imperialism in second world war by calling Hitler your "brother" and collaborate with him politically and economically? The question is not supporting or not supporting the demonstrations. The question is supporting hundreds of workers leaders and syndicalists who have been in prison for organising 1 May this year.
The experience in Cuba has showed that the only way to fight the Imperialism is siding with the toilers and working class of the world. The conspiracy of US Imperialism against Bolivarian revolution should NOT be compared with anti Ahamadinejad movement in Iran, in spite of apparent resembelances.
Chavez surely has made a BIG mistake by supporting Ahmadinejad. Not only in his strategy to fight US Imperialism, but also tactically. He could have kept his political and economical relationship and not be the first person to congratulate and kiss and take Ahmadinejad into his arms.
The Iranian workers see Ahamdinejad as a reactionary and anti working class dictator. With the same token they have developed a clear hatred rewards Chavez as defender of that dictator (unfortunately)
Why Chavez should go that far to support a reactionary regime and be hated by Iranian workers and students? Why that far?
Will: You are full of hatred. The people of TN are nice
Will: First of all you are totally biased in favor of capitalism. And second of all, you seem to me to be full of hatred, classism and racism against the poor citizens of TN. Despite the poverty levels of Tennessee. The people of this state are nice, humble and hard working and they are not guilty for what the Republicans and Democrats have done to America since those parties were created in the 1800s.
What USA needs is a new socialist workers third party in order to save what's left of US economy.
.
BUY THE BOOK "THE CHAVEZ CODE" BY EVA GOLINGER.
I URGE YOU ALL TO BUY THE BOOK "THE CHAVEZ CODE" BY EVA GOLINGER.
It shows the evidence of US role in the desestabilization of democratically elected governments in Latin America, and in other parts of the world.
http://www.amazon.com/Chavez-Code-Cracking-Intervention-Venezuela/dp/156...
This book proves clearly the involvement of the US government in the April 12, 2002 coup against President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela.
As Saul Landau states in his excellent foreword: `the US government acted in a premeditated conspiracy with the wealthy classes of Venezuela to undo a democratic process in a country with free and fair elections and a functioning legislative and legal system.'
Before the coup, the US penetrated all sectors of the civil society, political parties and Armed Forces in Venezuela; the latter through control of those who had received training at the School of the Americas. During the PDVSA (Petroleos de Venezuela SA) strike against Hugo Chavez a US company with CIA ties intentionally sabotaged essential equipment.
Despite the fact that coups against democratic governments are illegal, the US financed the plotters, which included representatives of the Catholic Church. During the failed coup (it lasted only 2 days), all of Venezuela's democratic institutions were dissolved. There were flagrant media manipulations (CNN) and the US press unanimously praised the Venezuelan president's undemocratic ouster.
This shameful saga tells also the story of an assassination (Danilo Anderson) and a kidnapping (Luisa Ortega Diaz).
Eva Golinger did magnificent research under the Freedom of Information Act. She points rightly her finger at the totally biased media monopolies (the Cisneros group controls 70 media outlets in 39 countries).
This book sketches a terrible story of a totally undemocratic intervention in a foreign country by another `democratic' state.
A must read for all those who are fighting for a real democracy.
I highly recommend the TV report made of this coup by Kim Bartley and Donnacha O'Brien `The Revolution will not be televized'