Labor Shall Rule
20th June 2007, 20:15
To my knowledge, Iraq is still under the anti-labor laws of Saddam Hussein, and unions are not legal. They still strike, negotiate, and win.
The GUOE, General Union of Oil Employees, won strikes against Kellog, Brown and Root (subsidiary of Haliburton) so that reconstruction of the oil industry would be done by Iraqis, they won strikes against the former 'Coalition Authority' for an increase in pay. Within Baghdad, one of the Worker-Communist affiliates have won strikes for work place and community issues. Also, in Basra the port workers waged a campaign against the Stevedoring Services International (think of them as Haliburton for ports) and SSI gave up and left Iraq.
Iraqi labor unions function even though their leaders are assassinated by baathists and fundamentalists, their offices raided and leaders arrested by US forces.
Regarding the Iraqi Communist Party and its affiliated unions, the Iraq Federation of Trade Unions: to the extent that the IFTU is a democratic union and represents the sentiments of the Iraqi working class (as opposed to merely being a vehicle for Stalinist politics), I believe as working class internationalists we should relate and listen to the IFTU and engage with them.
We need to make common cause with all Iraqi workers to oppose imperialism and advance the cause of the working class.
The IFTU has stated for the record that it is against the occupation, that it needs to end now and not some later date. Putting litmus tests that the IFTU is not anti-imperialist enough for how they choose to oppose the occupation is ultra-left sectarianism. If I were an Iraqi, I would oppose their policy of supporting the current Iraqi government which is a client of the US occupation. But even though I oppose their methods, the IFTU is opposed to the occupation and what the Iraqi labor movement calls "the economic occupation" which is the integration of Iraq into the world market economy, the WTO, privatization of state enterprises, etc.
There are a total of five federations of unions in Iraq - at least according to their united statement opposed to the oil law imposed upon Iraq by the US occupation. Iraqi unions are targetted by baathist and Islamic fundamentalist resistance and by American occupation forces.
In opposing the imperialist occuaption of Iraq, certainly the totality of the Iraqi resistance deserves our support. However, in offering our support to the resistance we can choose to channel our support to the Iraqi working class. Would that be a correct "third way"? Or am I misinformed? Should we grant unwavered support; a "leap in the abyss" with the insurgency?
The GUOE, General Union of Oil Employees, won strikes against Kellog, Brown and Root (subsidiary of Haliburton) so that reconstruction of the oil industry would be done by Iraqis, they won strikes against the former 'Coalition Authority' for an increase in pay. Within Baghdad, one of the Worker-Communist affiliates have won strikes for work place and community issues. Also, in Basra the port workers waged a campaign against the Stevedoring Services International (think of them as Haliburton for ports) and SSI gave up and left Iraq.
Iraqi labor unions function even though their leaders are assassinated by baathists and fundamentalists, their offices raided and leaders arrested by US forces.
Regarding the Iraqi Communist Party and its affiliated unions, the Iraq Federation of Trade Unions: to the extent that the IFTU is a democratic union and represents the sentiments of the Iraqi working class (as opposed to merely being a vehicle for Stalinist politics), I believe as working class internationalists we should relate and listen to the IFTU and engage with them.
We need to make common cause with all Iraqi workers to oppose imperialism and advance the cause of the working class.
The IFTU has stated for the record that it is against the occupation, that it needs to end now and not some later date. Putting litmus tests that the IFTU is not anti-imperialist enough for how they choose to oppose the occupation is ultra-left sectarianism. If I were an Iraqi, I would oppose their policy of supporting the current Iraqi government which is a client of the US occupation. But even though I oppose their methods, the IFTU is opposed to the occupation and what the Iraqi labor movement calls "the economic occupation" which is the integration of Iraq into the world market economy, the WTO, privatization of state enterprises, etc.
There are a total of five federations of unions in Iraq - at least according to their united statement opposed to the oil law imposed upon Iraq by the US occupation. Iraqi unions are targetted by baathist and Islamic fundamentalist resistance and by American occupation forces.
In opposing the imperialist occuaption of Iraq, certainly the totality of the Iraqi resistance deserves our support. However, in offering our support to the resistance we can choose to channel our support to the Iraqi working class. Would that be a correct "third way"? Or am I misinformed? Should we grant unwavered support; a "leap in the abyss" with the insurgency?