PARTISAN!

C. Cunningham, Melbourne

I read with interest the letter by Labor Tribune’s Martin Greenfield (March 21), “About the slogan ‘defend Iran’…” This is a polemic against Communist Unity (CU) for raising the call to “Defend Iran!” in the face of the barbaric US-Israel onslaught. Our critic calls centring defence of Iran “an error” that should be dropped and “the quicker…the better.” Why? Because according to Greenfield this demand clouds the fact that “The main aim of communists in Australia is to mobilise the working class to cripple Australia’s support for and involvement in the war.” Instead, Greenfield argues that “Stop the war on Iran. Defeat for US-Israel aggression. No Australian support for Trump’s wars” and “Bring the troops home” are much more concrete slogans to defeat “our side” and mobilise workers against the war.

I wholeheartedly agree that communists should aim to cripple Australia’s involvement in the war and fight to defeat US-Israel aggression. What is puzzling is the attempt to separate that from standing in defence of Iran—does a rose by any other name not smell just as sweet? Another puzzle is the argument that taking a stance in defence of Iran implies hailing the Iranian regime. Would Greenfield make the same argument in regards to Palestine? As was explained in the CU’s most recent article “Iran War: Our Enemy is at Home”:

“Workers in Australia cannot be neutral in this conflict. We have a side we must choose — against the United States and with the Iranian proletariat. This means taking a firm stand in defence of Iran against the attempts by the US and Israel to topple or subjugate the Iranian state. We lend no support to the Mullah’s butcher regime…. But we recognise that the Iranian proletariat’s interests lie not in an American victory, which would only bring the barbarity of warlordism and the strengthening of its imperialist grip on the planet, but in the United States’ defeat.”

Standing as the best fighters in defence of Iran under threat of imperialist subjugation would not only undermine support for the regime but it would win the most militant workers and oppressed to the Communist banner. The Australian and international proletariat taking such a stance would be a great demonstration to the toilers of Iran that there is another alternative to the Mullahs in the fight against imperialism.

Workers from the US to Australia have every reason to embrace defence of Iran. The chaos in the Middle East is only heightening the cost-of-living crisis with greater social regimentation and bloody crackdowns to follow. The more this imperialist madness continues the more the sons and daughters of workers will be dragooned into forfeiting their lives in wars that benefit only the billionaires who lord over them.

It is such anti-imperialist solidarity that revolutionary, communist unity is made of—this was the political basis for Lenin’s Comintern which the CU strives to reforge. It is only with this perspective that calling for “Solidarity with the peoples of Iran” would have any meaning, otherwise this call would be entirely acceptable to everyone from liberal Greens to Albanese, Netanyahu and Trump.

Greenfield’s strongest argument is that we should prioritise the tasks of the socialist and workers movement in Australia. Unfortunately, this is precisely where he falls short. The situation desperately calls for a workers movement that fights for anti-imperialist working-class actions such as strikes against the war, black-banning military goods and driving the US bases out. The biggest factor in crippling this development is the class’s union leadership, which channels discontent at the status quo away from the anti-imperialist road and into liberal cul-de-sacs. This includes the right wing, which either responds with silence or, like the ACTU leadership, calls for “a fair stake in the massive windfall profits.” It also includes the left-talking union leaders and liberal elements of the Labor Party who mouth fine words to stop war etc. but out of fealty to warmongers like Albanese & Wong don’t lift a finger to mobilise their base. Instead the MUA leadership champion calls for the Labor government to take a “decisive turn to diplomacy, disarmament and respect for international law.” Anger at the war, instead of being directed in opposition to imperialism is kept within bounds acceptable to Albanese thus maintaining the wretched status quo.

Feeling pressure from liberals and left Laborites, much of the left have remained in line with liberal-pacifist respectability. In some recent “anti-war” demos talk of Iran was verboten. When Iran has been mentioned it is with calls to “stop the war.” Instead of forthrightly arguing that to stop the war what is needed is to defeat US imperialism, the left stays within the good graces of “left” bureaucrats and other liberals peddling little more than appeals to the US’s deputy sheriff in Canberra to do better. The anti-imperialist movement can only be built in sharp opposition to all this liberal twaddle. In his bid to try and separate defending Iran and defeating the US, Greenfield muddles the latter with these very liberal calls as if they are one and the same! Enough conciliating with the conciliators! As CU drove home in its recently adopted “Theses on the Labor Party and Laborism”, we struggle to:

“…expose those ‘left’ Laborites who from Palestine to AUKUS preach nice-sounding demands but ultimately prioritise unity with the right wing above all else. This struggle would demonstrate the impotence of the left Laborites’ liberal pacifist program and their inability to carry out their demands.”

The workers and socialist movement needs to stop tripping over itself trying to disassociate from the Ayatollah and start fighting to disassociate itself from Albanese and his left conciliators. The sooner this is done the sooner we can build the anti-imperialist movement.