Log in

View Full Version : Iranian Revolutionary Communists



RNK
2nd September 2007, 00:49
While browsing the internet, I happened upon this very, very interesting article (http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/001409.html) written by "Michael J. Totten", who is some liberalcon and writer for the New York Daily who has made the Middle East his topic of choice.

In brief, the article explains how Mike and his crew were to meet with some Iranian social-democrats in exile in Kurdish Iraq. However, somehow, they manage to link up with Communist revolutionary insurgents from Iran who are taking refuge in a military camp outside of Iran.

While the article is full of pokes and prods at communism in general, it's actually quite informative and talks a lot about a particular topic which is rarely touched on in the west -- Iranian communist parties.

Here are some interesting statements in the article:


They call themselves the Komalah Party, which is some kind of acronym for the Kurdish Organization of the Iranian Communist Party. ...


...We announced our hostility to the Iranian regime 28 years ago, he [Kamal] continued. Before that we didnt announce our party. We saw that many people were persecuted under the Iranian regime so we began our struggle against that regime in order to liberate the people. At that time Khomeini was in power and he waged a campaign against Kurdistan a jihadi campaign. The Iranian regime said Kurdish people are blasphemous and deserve to be killed. ...

Many of the people in Kurdistan especially have been deprived of education because of the regime, Kamal continued. All the people are under the rule of the Islamic Republic. ..."


Some of the Communists in Iran were a part of the 1979 revolution, I said. Were you a part of that revolution?

Yes, Kamal said. We were. We were supported by people who were workers and poor people. You should remember that the Komalah Party was the first party that brought women equality. Komalah still wants women to have the same rights that men do.


How long have you been here in Northern Iraq? I said.

Since 1988, Hassan said.

Are you here because its safer, or because the Iranian regime exiled you? I said.

We are in opposition to the Iranian regime, he said. We are political men.


I know there is an insurgency in Iran, in the Kurdistan region of Iran, I said. What do you know about it?

We have details about the events that happen every day in Iranian Kurdistan, Hassan said.

Events happen every day? I said.

The struggle is going on, he said. Its not every day, but its going on.


The muezzin sang the call to prayer from the minaret of the small local mosque.

No one paid any attention to the call to prayer. No one ever does in Iraqi Kurdistan unless they are already in the mosque, nor does anyone in any other Muslim country Ive been to. Many Westerners I know assume Muslims stop what they are doing and pray five times a day. The Koran may tell them to do this, but thats not even remotely how Muslims live in the real world especially not in an armed Communist camp.

The cows [in a nearby field], however, wasted little time before they started mooing in annoyance at the muezzins call to prayer.

Apparently they are Communist cows who are no more religious than I am.


Do you think that if the mullahs get nuclear weapons they will further oppress their own people? Patrick said.

Sure, Hassan said. Of course. They will have a stronger authority. People think that if the state has nuclear power, struggling against it will be more difficult. Making a coup detat against it will be difficult. So it spreads fear and panic among the people of Iran.


Ok, so what do you think of the Soviet Union? I said. I thought perhaps he was angry about the American support for the mujahadeen (not the Taliban) against Soviet imperialism. Maybe he liked the Soviet Union. He is a Communist, after all.

The Soviet Union was an imperialist country. We were never in favor of the Soviet Union.


If the United States wanted to help the people of Iran struggle against the dictatorship, I said, would you welcome that assistance, or would you rather the Americans stay out?

We think meddling in Iranian affairs is a bad thing, he said. There is already the reality of a struggle against the regime. There are many people who are already against the Iranian regime. Let them do what they want to do.


So you want armed revolution, I said. Is that right?

We want the ordinary people to rise up against the government, he said. But in a situation where everyone has a gun, you have to have a gun to defend yourself. We want protests inside factories and a closing of the market. We want a general strike against the regime in universities, in the market, everywhere.


I know that in Iranian Kurdistan, I said, and in the areas where the Azeris live, there is a violent insurgency against the government. Which groups are behind this?

There are many armed groups in Kurdistan, he said. We are an armed force. And there are other groups and forces in Iranian Kurdistan which are armed.



We have a relationship with all the Kurdish groups in Iran, he said, except the Islamic groups.

You mean like Ansar Al Islam? I said.

Ansar as of a few days ago started calling themselves Al Qaeda in Kurdistan, Patrick [one of Totten's crew] said.

Even if they didnt announce that, Hassan said, we know they are part of Al Qaeda. They have a close relationship with Iran. After the Americans attacked them in Biara and Tawela [in Northern Iraq], they went to Iran. Now they have camps there. We know where they are, around the town of Mariwan. The Iranian government hires them as mercenaries. ..."


Do you get any support from the Kurdistan Regional Government [of Iraq]? I said. It would be news to me if the Iraqi Kurdistan government has any connection to armed groups opposed to the state in Iran.

Yes, Hassan said. From the PUK.

The PUK is the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, the secular leftist political party in charge of Suleimaniya Province.

Only PUK, Hassan added.

Iraqi Kurdistans other major political party, the Kurdistan Democratic Party, is more conservative, tribal, and has no interest in leftism, international or otherwise.

What kind of support do you get from the PUK? I said. Is it political support, or also financial support?

Financial support, Hassan said.

It's an interesting article to say the least, and it looks legitimate. The contents of the article do make me very curious about the state and nature of revolutionary movements in Iran.

ComradeR
2nd September 2007, 09:44
I'd love to hear more about this group if it exists, does anyone have anymore info on it?

Devrim
2nd September 2007, 10:52
Originally posted by ComradeR+--> (ComradeR)I'd love to hear more about this group if it exists, does anyone have anymore info on it?[/b]

There are a few details about them below. We charectorise them as a bourgeois nationalist group. If there is anything else you would like to know please feel free to ask.


They call themselves the Komalah Party, which is some kind of acronym for the Kurdish Organization of the Iranian Communist Party. ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komalah


Originally posted by Wiki+--> (Wiki)The word Komele in Kurdish is derived from Komel (Society) and means association[/b]

I knew some of these people in the 80s. They were involved in the formation of the Communist Party of Iran (1983) along with the Hekmatists of UCM , and SUCM (supporters of UCM-exiles in Europe). The worker Communists were a latter split from the CPI (1983)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_Iran
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_of_Communist_Militants


[email protected]
The Communist Party of Iran is an Iranian communist organisation. It was founded in 1984 in Iranian Kurdistan after Komalah (which since then became the Kurdistan branch of the organisation) merged with Union of Communist Militants. Iranian renowned Marxist theorist Mansoor Hekmat was one of the active members in the forming of the organisation.

There is an article by the ICC which is relevant here:
http://en.internationalism.org/wr/293_wpiran.html


ICC
The origins of the WCPI the unholy alliance of Iranian Stalinism and Kurdish nationalism

The origins of the WCPI lie in a group called the Unity of Communist Militants (UCM), which was formed in Iran in 1979 at a time when a huge proletarian movement was shaking the country. As a reminder to todays readers, this ferment included massive strikes and demonstrations by hundreds of thousands of workers in key sectors of the economy against austerity, the war economy and state repression. Workers in the in oil refineries, for example, formed their own independent committees, inspiring class solidarity and attempts to fraternise with soldiers sent in to crush the movement (see WR 23 for an analysis of Iran at this time). The subsequent Islamic revolution and the regime of Khomeini which replaced the Shah were in no way an expression of this movement; on the contrary, this was capitals principle means for overcoming it.

Some of the elements who helped form the UCM may have been an expression of this movement. But whether or not some proletarian elements were involved at the beginning, the programme defended by the group and its actual practice were entirely reactionary even at this time.

Due to its radical-sounding denunciations of the Islamic state, and its agitation among militant workers with democratic demands, e.g. for the freedom to organise and the separation of religion and state, the UCM won some support within the working class. Essentially, faced with a militant proletariat, the radical Stalinist language of the UCM, under its founder Mansoor Hekmat, was an adjunct to the efforts of part of the Iranian bourgeoisie to deflect the class struggle into demands for democracy. But in the face of the ensuing repression by the Islamic state in the cities, the group lost its potential political base, and in the context of a deepening reflux in the class struggle the group sought influence with the left-wing of the Kurdish nationalist movement, entering into an alliance with Komala (the Toilers Revolutionary Organisation of Iranian Kurdistan) in 1981.

Komala was actively engaged in mobilising workers and peasants for a local imperialist war. Its goal was to carve out a slice of the existing state in return for policing their own workers and peasants. In other words it wanted a bourgeois proto-state similar to the Palestinian nationalist factions. It was also, to this end, involved in a front with the Stalinist Kurdish Democratic Party a party even the UCM admitted was bourgeois (see WR 57). The alliance with Komala in the liberated areas of Kurdistan offered a political base for the growth of the UCM after the massive repression launched in June 1981.

Significantly, it was precisely in this period of defeat for the Iranian proletariat, with part of the population in Kurdistan fleeing the cities for the mountains, that in 1983 the UCM / Komala absurdly pronounced the formation of a party the Communist Party of Iran. Under Hekmats leadership, the new CPI oriented itself towards organising the nationalist forces (peshmergas or fighters) as part of the inter-imperialist struggle in Kurdistan. Essentially the working class and any continuing struggles in the cities were used as an adjunct to the nationalist struggle of Komala, and the peshmerga force was seen by the CPI as the military wing of the working class movement in Kurdistan.

The unholy alliance between the Kurdish nationalist tendency and more workerist faction proved an uneasy one, and flared into an open faction fight within the CPI, which ended in 1989 with the departure of the workerists around Hekmat to form the Worker-Communist Party of Iran in 1991. This in no way represented a break with the reactionary political positions previously defended by the UCM and CPI, but essentially a change of political strategy and tactics. The counterpart of the WCPI in Iraq was formed two years later.

Devrim

Labor Shall Rule
2nd September 2007, 10:56
Interesting post Devrim.

RNK
2nd September 2007, 20:06
So essentially, they're all bourgeois Stalinist nationalists?

Leo
2nd September 2007, 20:21
You didn't even read your own post did you?


Do you get any support from the Kurdistan Regional Government [of Iraq]? I said. It would be news to me if the Iraqi Kurdistan government has any connection to armed groups opposed to the state in Iran.

Yes, Hassan said. From the PUK.

Or alternatively, again you don't know what you are talking about.

PUK is one of the main Kurdish nationalist parties in Iraq, and of course one of the strongest parties collaborating with the Iraqi regime. In fact PUK is the party of the current president of Iraq, Jalal Talabani, who is also officially the leader of the party.

So they are not only Stalinist bourgeois nationalists, but they are also collaborating with the strongest and most pro-US group in Iraq.

RNK
2nd September 2007, 21:56
I fail to see how collaborating with the PUK makes them "Stalinist bourgeois nationalists".

Leo
2nd September 2007, 22:02
I said: so they are not only Stalinist bourgeois nationalists, but they are also collaborating with the strongest and most pro-US group in Iraq. This clearly shows that collaborating with PUK does not make them Stalinist bourgeois nationalists - they already are Stalinist bourgeois nationalists.