The World After September 11
Part One: The War of Terrorists
Two Reactionary Camps
The appalling September 11, 2001 terrorist crimes
against humanity and the slaughter of thousands of innocent people in
America has pushed the world to the brink of one of the darkest and
bloodiest eras of contemporary history. What the American administration
calls an international war on terrorists is in fact the world's entry
into a new and destructive phase in the international war of terrorists.
At opposing poles of this bloody conflict stand
the two main international camps of terrorism, which have left their
bloody mark on the lives of two generations. At one pole, there stands
the most enormous machinery of state terrorism and international
intimidation and blackmail. This camp includes the American government
and ruling elite, the only force, which has used nuclear bombs against
people, reducing hundreds of thousands of innocent and unsuspecting
people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki into ashes within seconds. A state that
slaughtered millions in Vietnam and razed and ruined their country for
many years by chemical bombardments. It includes NATO and coalitions of
Western governments who from Iraq to Yugoslavia, have destroyed people's
homes, schools and hospitals and have taken ransom the bread and
medicine of millions of children. It includes the Israeli bourgeoisie
and state. They occupy, seize, slaughter and deprive. They bomb and
shell refugee camps and shoot scared ten-year-old children taking
shelter in their fathers' arms and at school gates. From Hiroshima and
Vietnam to Grenada and Iraq, from the killing fields in Indonesia and
Chile to the slaughterhouses of Palestine, the track record of this
international pole of state terrorism and imperialist intimidation is
obvious and irrefutable for all the world to see.
At the opposing pole, there stands Islamic
terrorism and the reactionary and vile political Islam. These forces
that were once created and nurtured by America and the West themselves
during the Cold War as a means of organising indigenous reaction against
the Left in Middle Eastern societies, have now become an active pole of
international terrorism and one contender in the bourgeois power
struggle in the Middle East. The murderous history of political Islam,
from Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan to Algeria and Palestine includes a
long list of genocide and appalling crimes. From state and state
sponsored killings in Iran and Afghanistan to the daily crimes of
Islamic terror squads in Israel, Algeria and the heart of Europe and
America, from the bloody suppression of political and intellectual
opponents to imposing reactionary and anti-human Islamic laws on people,
particularly women, from Islamic beheadings and mutilations, to planting
bombs and mass murder in buses, cafés and discothèques - these are the
highlights in the track record of these reactionaries
Now, this conflict is going to take hundreds of
thousands and probably millions of other victims in Afghanistan tomorrow
and in any other corner of the world the day after. This must be
resisted.
War Propaganda
Along with this military alignment, we are
witnessing the ideological and propaganda alignment of the two camps.
Piercing and tearing down this propaganda wall and pulling the truth out
from beneath the massive wave of hypocrisy and deceit, which will engulf
the world is the first condition of organising an independent rank of
freedom-loving humanity against the terrorists' world war.
The ideological banner of extremists in both camps
is clearly visible and recognisable from afar. Today's complex world no
longer has time for these coarse views. Western and American flag waving
and jingoism, racism, the 'clash of civilisations' garbage and such like
may only have an effect on the margins of Western society. Western
governments and media know that these crude and primitive views and
opinions cannot form the ideological and propaganda framework for the
conflict they have entered into. In the opposing camp, too, the idea of
Islamic Crusade (Jihad), indiscriminate bloodletting, whether for the
grace of god and religion, for the 'liberation of Qods (Jerusalem) and
the land of Islam from the claws of bloodsucking international Zionism
and imperialism,' only succeeds within the ranks of political Islam's
extremists and activists. It does not mobilise the masses of people in
contemporary Middle Eastern society. The propaganda war and ideological
battle dominating the impending bloody military conflict cannot be based
on these openly extremist, sectarian and crude outlines. What can
eventually draw the vast masses of people in the West and in the Middle
East to this war and align them with the two sides of this reactionary
hostility are not these primitive ideas but much more sophisticated
rationalisations and justifications that are already gaining popularity.
In the Westerners' formula, despite Bush's cowboy
gunslinger gestures, 'civilised humanity' is faced with the plague of
terrorism. USA is portrayed as the leader of this civilised rank. The
objective is to neutralise terrorism and bring terrorists to justice.
The issue seems much simpler than the attack on Iraq and the bombing of
Belgrade. Who can blame the US government in its military policy when
6,000 of 'its people' have been killed with such brutality? What is more
obvious than the American government's military action to smash this
terrorism and protect 'its citizens,' and even the people of the world,
against subsequent imminent crimes? This time, to be a member of
'civilised' humanity's club, applicants need not have any ethnic, racial
or religious qualifications. Applicants - of whatever colour,
appearance, religion or background - need only to declare their support
for America. This time, the war propaganda is not going to be racial,
ethnic, religious or even political. The issue is not maintaining the
flow of oil, defending the burgeoning democracy in Saudi Arabia and
returning Kuwait to its sheikhs. If American military, once again dons
its armour to repeat what it has done innumerable times, it is seemingly
for the right to life, the right to travel, the right of people not to
be blown up in their homes or on their streets. The crimes of September
11 have given the most powerful ideological and propaganda framework to
date for USA and NATO's military intervention in the furthest corners of
the globe. At this moment, separating the masses of people in the West
from the military policy of the ruling elite of these countries requires
Herculean enlightening efforts. This ideological equilibrium could,
indeed, change rapidly with new developments, but at this moment, the
idea of the 'war of civilised world against terrorism' has put western
politicians and media in full control of western public opinion.
In the opposing pole too, a sophisticated and
relatively effective ideological framework in defence of political Islam
and Islamic terrorism is taking shape. Not many dare to openly defend
the slaughter of thousands of people in America. Even the beasts ruling
over Iran and Afghanistan have had to restrain their words. Openly
defending political Islam and Islamic terrorism will not be the
propaganda banner of this pole. The Islamic side in the war of
terrorists will rely on an effective but old formula for justification
of Islamic terrorism, a formula which has been one of the foundations of
petit-bourgeois 'anti-imperialism' in the Third World, particularly in
the Middle East. Seven years ago, in the wake of a wave of Islamic
murders in Israel, Egypt and Algeria, we clearly exposed and condemned
this reactionary defence of terrorism in an editorial column of the
journal 'The International.' It is not inappropriate to quote that short
article here:
'A wave of Islamic murders has engulfed the
Middle East and North Africa. The victims of this wave are the most
ordinary of ordinary people. In Egypt and Algeria, they shoot at and
behead foreign nationals - be they workers, tourists or pensioners.
They bomb and kill school children at school gates. They kill young
girls who do not submit to forced marriages. In Tel Aviv, they murder
unaware pedestrians - children, old and young - on streets and on
buses. And heroically, from Israel to Algeria, they reassure a stunned
humanity that this 'armed struggle' will continue.
'There was a time when the traditional and
'anti-imperialist' Left would look upon the blind violence and
unrestrained terrorism of Third World and anti-western currents if not
with admiration then at least with toleration. In their opinion, the
injustice suffered by deprived nations and oppressed people justified
this terrorism as a legitimate reaction. The terrorism of Palestinian
groups, Islamic organisations and the Irish Republican Army - whose
victims were increasingly unprotected and unaware civilians - were
prime examples of this 'permissible' terrorism in recent past. A
terrorism, which seemingly responded to past and present injustices; a
terrorism, which seemingly appeared as a reaction to the inhuman and
brutal policies of oppressive powers and governments. Interestingly,
throughout the years, the Israeli government has also used this exact
abuse-excuse rationalization; that is by alluding to the indescribable
genocide carried out by Nazis and anti-Semitic groups in various
countries against the Jewish people, they have justified the brutal
suppression of the deprived people of Palestine and the daily killings
of Palestinian youth.
'From a communist standpoint, this type of
rationalisation and the blind terrorism erected on it in the Middle
East - whether by Arab and Palestinian organisations or the state of
Israel - is regarded as bankrupt and is condemned. There is not the
slightest real and legitimate relationship between the appalling
calamities that have befallen the Jewish people in this century and
the suppression and crimes committed by the extremist right wing
government in Israel against the Palestinians. There is not the
slightest real and justified relationship between the sufferings of
the deprived people of Palestine and the terrorism of Islamic or
non-Islamic organisations attributed to these people. Bourgeois state
and factions are exploiting and capitalising on the suffering of the
deprived people. Condemning and eradicating this terrorism by the
working class, particularly in countries of the region, is an
essential condition for placing the workers in the leadership of the
social struggle to end the age-old miseries of the people of the
Middle East.
'It seems the new wave of Islamic murders,
particularly in North Africa does no longer even require such
political justifications. A turban and a gun are sufficient to begin
this despicable Jihad against humanity. This is Islamic gangsterism
and its source is the ruling regime in Iran. And it will be in Iran
where it will be smashed. (Mansoor Hekmat, The International, in
Farsi, November 1994,
http://www.wpiran.org)'
With the intensification of this conflict and
particularly with the imminent US and NATO attack on Afghanistan, the
'anti-imperialist' defence of Islamic groups and rationalisation of
their terrorist actions by reference to Israel and America's crimes and
oppressive acts, can once again gain foothold among the people and
political parties of the Middle East and also among sections of the
traditional radical and intellectual Left of western societies. The main
ideological refuge of Islamic gangsterism and Islamic reaction in this
power struggle will not be the worn-out and openly anti-human religious
and Islamic slogans, but rather the so-called 'anti-imperialism' of the
religious-nationalist and petit bourgeois apologists.
No popular movement can succeed against the war of
terrorists without exposing and breaking the ideological framework of
this hypocritical war propaganda on both sides of this reactionary
conflict.
What is the Conflict Over?
For both sides, this is a power struggle.
Terrorism is one reality of this conflict, but this conflict and the
imminent war are not about terrorism. Everyone knows that US entry into
Afghanistan and even Ben Laden's arrest will not dampen the terrorist
campaign by Islamic groups against the West, and will not bring more
security to those who live in Europe and America. On the contrary, it
will increase the danger. The Palestinian question is where America and
the Islamic movement come directly face to face. But this conflict is
also not really about the resolution of the Palestinian question. The
declared policy of USA, that is a 'massive, sustained and comprehensive'
military war will clearly exacerbate both issues - the Palestinian
question and Islamic terrorism. Not only this, but also a possible civil
war in Pakistan with serious regional and global consequences, and deep
governmental crises in seemingly stable Middle Eastern countries could
be the initial result of this military policy. They are well aware of
this. Nonetheless, for USA, the main issue is the consolidation and
expansion of its political and military hegemony and dominance over the
world as the only superpower. The resolution of the Palestinian question
or fighting Islamic terrorism is not the objective of this policy.
Consolidation and expansion of America's global position, within the
context of pressures and opportunities created by the September 11
crimes is the main aim of this policy.
For the Islamists also, this is a power struggle.
Neither the suffering of the people of Palestine nor the historical
injustices of the West to the East are the source of this terrorism. The
Islamic movement is striving to reverse its falling fortunes and
ultimately to expand its position in the bourgeois power structure of
the Middle East. Terrorism and blind enmity with anything that is
Western or Westernised is their main political capital in a society and
among a people who rightly see America and Israel as the main causes of
their deprivation and rightlessness. Peace in the Middle East, the
formation of an independent Palestine, the end of discrimination against
the Palestinian people, will herald the demise of the Islamic movement
in the Middle East. Terrorism is the Islamic movement's main tool in
further deepening the national, ethnic and religious splits in the
Middle East and keeping alive this conflict as political capital and a
source for its power. Despite the military pressure brought about by
America, the Islamists will welcome this confrontation.
To form an independent popular movement against
this unprecedented and deadly confrontation of international terrorist
and military poles, the truth of these trends and events must be taken
to the people. The war propaganda and rationalisations dished out by
belligerent camps must be exposed. Events of September 11 and the policy
being pursued by USA have important regional and global consequences.
They will profoundly change the political and ideological complexion of
the world. Politics in Iran will also be acutely influenced by these
events. It is necessary to address the main issues in these developments
and the fundamentals of a principled communist policy.
The World After September 11
Part Two: Where is the 'Civilised World?'
Barbarism is not Inevitable
The war of terrorists can be the beginning of one
of the bloodiest eras of contemporary history. Already, hundreds of
millions of people are bracing themselves. But this prospect is not
inevitable. The scene is not restricted to the two sides of this
conflict. There is a third force, a sleeping giant who can turn the
situation around. If this giant awakes, this era can be the beginning of
positive changes and the realisation of ideals in the world which
humanity had given up on during the final decades of the last century.
Bush, Blair, Khamenei, USA, NATO and political Islam do not know that
there really is a civilised humanity, a civilised world, which could
rise up and defend itself against the war of terrorists. Despite the
darkness and terror that they have placed before us people, the 21st
century does not have to be the century of capitalist barbarity. These
are decisive days.
The media does not reflect the real intellectual
and ideological makeup of the world. They give their own version, the
dominant version, the version of the ruling class. A version that suits
them. Militarism, terrorism, racism, ethnicism, religious fanaticism and
profit worship are headline news but do not have a firm place deep down
in the minds of the majority of the people of our times. Even a cursory
look at the world shows that the vast masses of the people are more to
the left, more altruistic, more peace loving, more egalitarian, more
free and more freedom-loving than governments and the media. The people
on both sides of this appalling conflict have no desire to dance to the
tune of the leaders of the bourgeoisie. The gunslinging American
administration immediately realises that despite one of the most
horrendous terrorist crimes, despite the live broadcast of the perishing
of thousands of people in an instant, despite the sorrow and rage which
takes hold of anyone who has not sold their conscience to some material
interest, still this same horrified western society, these very people
who are daily brainwashed, these very people who are from dawn to dusk
'educated' by the ruling ideology of racism and xenophobia , call for
'caution, fairness, justice and a measured response'. The people of the
Middle East who are conceived as zealous Moslems and members of the
'Islamic civilization' - be it in the sick minds of clerical rulers in
Iran and Afghanistan and the assorted sheikhs of the Islamic movement or
in the deluxe studios of the CNN and BBC - are mourning with the people
of America and rising in the condemnation of the genocide of September
11. It does not take a genius to realise that the majority of the people
of the Middle East despise political Islam, that huge segments of the
people of Western Europe and America are fed up with Israel's injustices
and sympathise with the deprived people of Palestine, that the majority
of western people want an end to the economic sanctions against Iraq and
can put themselves in the shoes of heartbroken Iraqi parents who are
losing their children to shortage of medicine, that the vast masses of
the world's decent and honourable people are on neither side of the war
between Bush and Bin Laden - old friends and present-day rivals. This
civilised humanity has been silenced under the barrage of propaganda,
brainwashing and intimidation in the West and East, but it has clearly
not accepted the garbage. This is a massive force. It can come to the
fore. For the future of humanity, it must come to the fore.
And here lies all the difficulty - to bring to the
fore this massive force. In the war of terrorists the battle lines are
drawn, camps are defined, resources and forces are mobilised; this is a
vast military, political and diplomatic confrontation. Despite all the
ambiguities, the intellectual and political framework of this war, for
leaders of both camps, are clear. In our camp, however, in the camp of
humanity, which must confront this terrifying prospect, all is
ambiguous.
Undoubtedly, resistance against the war of
terrorists is now growing in various countries. But as much as the
Islamists and USA need a clear strategy and theory and a unitary and
workable outlook, this popular movement also needs an intellectual and
political banner and a series of practical strategic principals. Various
political movements, particularly those on the Left will strive to guide
and lead this resistance. The question is what outlook will lead this
'Left' itself.
In Part I of this article, I wrote that alongside
the hawks in both poles - American militarism and Islamic fascists -
there are indeed two more sophisticated, refined and 'respectable' set
of arguments defending the two sides of the conflict. Alongside US
militarism, and supporting it, there are those who promote the formula
of the war of 'the civilised world against terrorism'. Alongside the
murderers in the Islamic movement, there are those who justify Islamic
terrorism with the familiar 1970's religious-nationalist and Third
World-ist 'anti-imperialism.' But none of these rationalisations will
have any serious influence in the people's resistance movement.
Centre-right parties and groups in the West on the one hand and the
remains of the traditional left student-intellectuals of the previous
decades in East and West on the other will be the main customers of
these crafty formulations in the propaganda war on both sides. What
could politically and conceptually derail the potentially powerful
movement of the world's progressive people is, in my opinion, the
pacifist and futile liberalist outlook and efforts to maintain the
status quo (merely trying to prevent a US attack on Afghanistan) or
status quo ante (returning to pre-September 11).
The September 11 incident was not an isolated act
of psychotic individuals cut off from society; neither is the USA's
impending military action. The world prior to September 11 was not in
equilibrium, but rather was proceeding on a deteriorating path. There
are important economic, social and political problem behind these
events. These problems have pushed the world in this direction. These
problems and issues must be addressed. September 11 is how political
Islam is addressing these issues. The same way that bringing the Taliban
to power, destroying Baghdad, starving the people of Iraq, suppressing
the people of Palestine, bombing Belgrade and now the 'long war with
terrorism' are how the leader of capitalism in the USA and Europe have
dealt with these underlying contradictions. Today's events are moments
in an on-going and dynamic situation. The people's movement against this
developing reality cannot be a movement calling for calm and demanding
'Hands off Afghanistan!' Calling for peace and keeping the status quo is
not only unrealistic, not only utopian, but also not just, not
progressive and not useful. The popular resistance movement against the
war of terrorists can only be organised around positive solutions to the
critical political and economic problems of our times and around an
active position - not for maintaining the status quo but rather for
changing it. We have had our own independent agenda and solutions for
all the problems that have been pushed to the fore, such as the
North-South question, the Palestinian question, the question of Iraq,
the question of political Islam, the question of Afghanistan and Iran,
the question of militarism and USA and NATO's hegemonism in the new
world order, the question of racism and fortress Europe, etc. These must
form the agenda and the banner of the popular resistance movement
against the war of terrorists. This is the difference between us and the
peace campaigners and pacifists, who do not see or are indifferent to
the divisions, contradictions and instability of the world prior to
September 11. If we had an agenda to change the world prior to this
incident, then a principled position in the current situation means
following the same agenda in the new situation. We do not intend to
leave Afghanistan under the yoke of the murderous gang of Taliban, we do
not intend to live under the rule of a trigger-happy USA, we do not
intend to tolerate political Islam or Islamic governments in the Middle
East, we do not intend to accept the statelessness of Palestinians and
their everyday suppression. We did not want terrorism, be it Islamic and
suicidal or military and uniformed and high-tech; we do not accept the
poverty of half the world; we do not want fortresses and barracks around
Europe, we will not succumb to racism and ethnicism. Neither the
September 11 crime nor the imminent heroics of NATO in the Hindu Kush,
should turn an active movement for changing the world into uncritical
and aimless retiring lot calling for peace and quiet and a return to the
day before.
The 'humanitarian' and 'peace' movement is not the
right response to today's situation. But the influence of this movement,
particularly among ordinary people in western society - because of
people's belief in non-violence, humanism and their spontaneous sense of
caution - is extremely widespread. This position condemns USA's
intervention in Afghanistan, but shirks its responsibility to fight
Taliban's rule. It condemns racism and incitement against Moslems but
does not see any reason to put pressure on the USA and Israel in defence
of the people of Palestine. This position wishes Jack Straw success in
his trip to Iran so that hopefully this pole of Islamic terrorism can be
tamed and pacified, despite the fact that this policy strengthens the
rule of these wolves over the people in Iran. This position defends the
civil rights of Moslems in European countries, but in order to prevent
'tension' rejects and opposes criticism of the Islamic veil and lack of
rights of women in Islam and Islamic communities. This position appeals
to all to back off and to leave the situation as it was before. If this
movement goes to dominate the minds and actions of discontented people,
then civilised humanity will leave the stage to Western and Eastern
terrorists. If there is to be a future, it is in the formation of an
active, progressive and freedom-loving policy at the forefront of the
people's ranks. This is the duty of communists. New communists. Marx's
communists. This is our task.
In part III, I will deal with the fundamentals of
an active policy against the war of terrorists. But it is necessary to
briefly address the most pressing issue of the day, which is the USA's
imminent attack on Afghanistan. 99 percent of the people of the world
know and can clearly explain why USA's military attack on Afghanistan
and even the arrest and or killing of Bin Laden which is the declared
aim of this operation and seems technically very improbable, not only
doesn't diminish the danger of Islamic terrorism against America and
Britain but rather greatly increases it. It is very clear that the US
and British governments are themselves aware of this fact. But they seem
to regard a Hollywood or James Bond adventure easier to feed to the
people. A mad lone millionaire or gangster in a remote part of the world
- Saddam, Milosevic, Bin Laden etc. - intends to destroy the
civilization and American heroes are sent off to save the world. But
their own analyses shows that political Islam and Islamic terrorism does
not have a central headquarters, unified command and an hierarchical
organisation; it is an international movement made up of government
agencies and circles, various organisations, networks and circles, which
are weaved together in a series of official and unofficial relations, as
an underground movement, with extensive degree of initiative at the
local level. For the West, entering Afghanistan is the start of a wider
military and political campaign. Capturing or killing Bin Laden and the
accomplishment of some kind of US revenge would naturally reduce the
urgency of further military operations for the US administration and
calm the American domestic scene until and only until the next Islamic
terrorist attack. But this is a small step in a wider, military and
political move in the Middle East, whose eventual extent is not yet
revealed. In the final analysis, this is a show down with political
Islam, that is the reactionary movement that the West itself found in
the peripherals of Middle Eastern society and brought to the fore to
confront the emerging Left in the developing capitalisms of these
countries as well as to pressurise the Eastern bloc. This power struggle
could remain limited, but due to the un-centralised and extremist nature
of political Islam and Islamic terrorism, it is more likely that it will
lead to a more fundamental and total confrontation. However, political
Islam cannot survive in the Middle East without Western support, let
alone in a confrontation with the West. So far, the intensification of
the battle between secularists and Islamists in Pakistan and the revival
of Khatamites and the resumption and escalation of factional infighting
within the Iran's Islamic rulers is an indication that the battle
between the West and political Islam could act as a detonator for
serious changes in the balance of power within the bourgeois factions in
Middle East to the disadvantage of Islamists.
What could be said about the America's attack on
Afghanistan? Is 'Hands off Afghanistan!' a progressive and principled
position? The people of Afghanistan and its opposition will tell you
otherwise. The prospect of Taliban's downfall, a gang of murderers and
drug dealers, has spurred political forces in Afghanistan. The demand
for the overthrow of the Taliban is a humane and progressive demand. We
must not allow the legitimate and just opposition to American militarism
to be interpreted as leaving Afghanistan in the hands of Taliban. This
is one living example of the incorrectness and insufficiency of the call
for calm and the defence of the status quo. The people of Afghanistan
have been waiting for a lifetime for Taliban's downfall. No doubt, the
US will not enter Afghanistan for the liberation of that country. They
brought the Taliban to power. This time they may weaken it but de facto
accept its existence. They have promised (the Pakistan ruler) Gen.
Musharraf that the next government of Afghanistan will be to Pakistan's
liking. They are to remove these beasts and replace them with others
from the same breed. The principled position is the participate in
overthrowing the Taliban shoulder to shoulder with the people of
Afghanistan and the progressive opposition, and fighting for the
establishment of a government elected by the people of that country.
This must be imposed on the West, USA and the United Nations. Any attack
by the US forces and its allies against civilians in Afghanistan and the
destruction of cities, villages, infrastructures and people's livelihood
must be condemned. Any attempt to impose another gang on the people of
Afghanistan through wheeling and dealings between USA, Pakistan, Iran
and any other state is condemned. But the overthrow of Taliban by
foreign armies is not in itself condemnable. Taliban is not a legitimate
government in Afghanistan. It must be overthrown. The question is the
government that is to replace it and the guarantee that the people of
Afghanistan must have regarding their right and opportunity to decide
the political system in their country.
The World After September 11
Part Three: The Demise of Political Islam
Outside today's two opposing reactionary poles - the militarism of US
and Western governments on the one hand and the camp of political Islam
and Islamic terrorist groups on the other - the prevailing climate for
the majority of the world's humanitarians and peace-lovers is one of
apprehension and trepidation. It is a climate of despair. Everyone is
anxious about the deteriorating situation - the escalation of an insane,
terrorist race, the killing and flight of hundreds of thousands of
innocent Afghan people, chemical and biological attacks in the west, a
political eruption in Pakistan, 'laptop' atomic bombs falling into the
hands of political adventurers, religious fanatics and international
criminals, 'the USA's new war' and a new phase in global bloodletting on
a scale that only the USA has been and is capable of. The slogans and
protests of the world's decent people has been mainly focused on
maintaining the status quo (stopping the US attack on Afghanistan or
returning to the pre-September 11 situation). This is a humanity, which
has no hope for a better future. At best, it calls for calm. It wishes
to avoid bombs, war and violence. A humanity that despite its naïve,
duped and docile daily image knows the brutal and heinous nature of the
monsters that have entered this war - political Islam and US militarism.
A humanity that simply wants to avoid the next catastrophe at any cost.
The dominant policy within the wide spectrum of forces that oppose the
war (and this includes relics of marginal Left groups in Europe, which
prior to September 11, would not agree to anything less than a 'world
revolution') is to call for calm, to attempt to halt the current trends
and to return to before September 11. Pacifism is the dominant tendency
in the resistance movement. And this is an extremely harmful policy that
not only does not prevent the next disasters and its consequences, but
actually guarantees their taking place.
The pacifist policy and concentrating on the
military and armed aspects of the confrontation and the ensuing physical
violence actually does harm since it causes political paralysis in
people. The condition for preventing this terrorist race and this wave
of explosions, destruction and mass murder that they have in store for
us is people's intervention in Europe, America, the Middle East and the
so-called Third World in the real political processes behind these
events - a participation based on an active and positive agenda. If this
happens, the future does not have to be bleak.
It is necessary to unearth these political trends
and facts from beneath the war propaganda.
Behind the Official Propaganda: Terrorism and
Political Islam
I do not think that anyone, even in the US army,
believes the story that the September 11 atrocity was the work of a
fanatical group taking orders from someone called Osama Bin Laden in
Afghanistan who has a personal and blind enmity with the USA,
'democracy' and the American 'way of life'. The western media are
insistent that this incident was not 'the work of Moslems' and has not
emerged from 'the teachings of the Koran'. Seasoned journalists are
careful not to make any reference to Israel and the Palestinian
question. They say linking the Palestinian question to this terrorist
attack would mean conceding that this action has been instrumental in
making the West pay attention to the Palestinian question. Consequently,
instead of political Islam and Israel, they point us to Bin Laden and
Afghanistan. The USA's war with Taliban in Afghanistan is an important
event with long lasting consequences for the region and the world. This
war will definitely affect the future of political Islam and even the
Palestinian question. It has nothing to do, however, with capturing and
punishing the perpetrators of September 11 and will even increase the
possibility of terrorist actions against the West (I will return to this
issue).
Islamic terrorism is a fact of our times. This
terrorism is one of the main pillars of political Islam's strategy.
Political Islam is a reactionary regional, and now global, movement that
is nourished by the West and Israel's historical injustice toward Arabs
and specifically the people of Palestine. The statelessness of
Palestinians and the oppression of the Palestinian people by Israel and
its Western allies are a main source of hatred for the West and the USA
in the Middle East. More importantly, the Palestinian question and the
USA and West's continued unwavering support for Israel against the Arabs
both during and after the Cold War have created a huge economic,
cultural and psychological rift between the people of the Middle East
and the West. But the ability of political Islam to shift from the
margins of Middle Eastern societies into the mainstream and to
capitalise on this discontent in its endeavour for political power is
all directly owed to the West and USA. Political Islam as a criminal
movement with a widespread power base is the creation of the West and
USA. They have created this monster and unleashed it on the people of
the Middle East and now the world. Political Islam was the West's tool
during the Cold War against Russia and against the emerging labour and
Left movements and revolutions in many countries of the region. It was a
means of preventing the Left from taking power in the region after
nationalist governments reached an impasse during the '70s and '80s. The
Palestinian question and the existence of Islamic governments in the
Middle East are the pillars and foundations of Islamic terrorism. Any
popular progressive and active policy must begin from this very point:
1) Resolving the Palestinian question. This historical problem must be
resolved. The Palestinian people must have their own independent state.
We must force Western governments and the USA to end their one-sided
support for Israel. Israel must be compelled to accept peace and
Palestinian independence. The resolution of the Palestinian question is
the most important element in confronting political Islam and Islamic
terrorism and is one of the main aspects of a progressive and active
agenda in the current situation.
2) The West must end its reactionary support for
Islamic and backward governments and various parties in the Islamic
movement in the Middle East. Without Western backing, the Islamic regime
of Iran would not have come to power or remained in power. Without the
West's support, the assorted sheikhs in Saudi Arabia and large and small
emirates would not maintain their brutal and reactionary rule and their
system of slavery. Without the West's support, not only Taliban but also
the preceding groups of Moslem Mujahedin could not have turned
Afghanistan into an immense human tragedy. If the West's military,
diplomatic and political support for Islamic movements were to end, the
people of the region would quickly overthrow these governments. The
demand to overthrow Islamic governments and to prevent dealing and
wheeling between Western governments and USA with these reactionary
governments must be another important aspect of the anti-terrorist
platform of any progressive and popular movement.
3) The economic sanctions against the people of
Iraq must end. The suffering of the people of Iraq has turned this into
the 2nd Palestinian question in the minds of the people of the region.
It is a living proof of Western and US terrorism in the Middle East. The
economic sanctions have helped perpetuate the reactionary Iraqi
government and pushed back the people of Iraq away from politics to a
daily battle for physical survival. The struggle for an end to economic
sanctions against Iraq is another vital element in a progressive
platform against Islamic terrorism.
4) We must actively defend secularism in
Moslem-inhabited countries and in Islamic and Islam-ridden communities
in Western countries themselves. The shameful idea of cultural
relativism (leaving people at the mercy of 'their own culture') and the
systematic and theorised failure to defend people's, particularly
women's, civil and human rights in these countries and communities, have
given a free hand to political Islam to intimidate people and incite the
youth. Universal human and civil rights must be the standard and any
compromise with religion and reactionary religious rule to the detriment
of human rights must be condemned.
Islamic terrorism is a reality. Terrorism is not
the work of Moslems, but it is the official policy of the Islamic
movement. This is a phoney movement created by the West in the context
of the Cold War and amidst an anti-communist confrontation with workers
and freedom-lovers in the Middle East. It is a weak and frail movement.
It does not enjoy serious moral and political support in the region's
major countries. It is out of step with the region's social realities.
Without the West's support, political Islam would be defeated by
socialism and secularism in the region. In Iran, which like Palestine is
one of the main scenes where the fate of political Islam shall be
sealed, the demise and downfall of political Islam has already began.
In the Next Part
The US war in the region, which has started in
Afghanistan is not a war against terrorism, since it not only does not
address any of the conditions necessary to fight terrorism (which I
referred to earlier), but it even relies on sections of that very
Islamic movement. Nonetheless, in my opinion, the USA has entered into a
confrontation with political Islam. This is a power struggle. This
conflict will logically lead to the weakening of political Islam. But
the objective of the West is not the elimination of political Islam. It
rather seeks to weaken it, tame it and remould its ranks in order to
create a new equilibrium. The war in Afghanistan is about redefining the
West's relationship with political Islam. We must break this framework
and thwart this new reactionary alliance. We must pursue our own
independent policy for ridding the region of this reactionary force much
more rigorously under the new conditions.
* The pacifist position does not see this new
conflict between the West and political Islam, does not recognise its
importance for the people of Middle East who have been victims of this
reactionary movement and for future political developments. The pacifist
rank shirks its responsibility towards these realities. We must take our
criticism of this pacifist and cautious position into the popular
movement against terrorism and militarism.
* Because of the global and historical dimensions
of this confrontation, the ideological and psychological characteristics
of the people of world today, particularly in the West, are very
different from the period of the attack on Iraq and even Yugoslavia.
With people's mass participation in politics and civil struggles, US
militarism will come out of this conflict politically weakened. With the
active intervention of progressive forces, the current conflict which is
itself about aspects of the new world order after the fall of the Soviet
Union, can turn into a mass critique of this entire notion, re-examining
the USA superpower status and its continued military intimidation of the
world. From the point of view of freedom and equality, this is a much
more important debate than the future of political Islam.
The World After September 11
Part Four: After Afghanistan
Afghanistan: War or Aerial Terrorism?
There is no war in Afghanistan. War logically
requires at least two sides. What is currently taking place is the
USA's bombing of Afghanistan. In this newfound tactic of the world's
sole superpower and self-appointed international sheriff, terror and
intimidation on a mass scale have formally replaced war. After
Vietnam, it has been decided that American society is not to witness
any more soldiers returning in body bags from far away battlefields.
The price for this will now have to be paid by the unlucky civilians
of that wretched country which, in the half-baked theories of Dr.
Strangeloves at the National Security Council and the US State
Department, is now deemed to be the bastion of the USA's latest arch
enemy and the newest leader of the 'Evil Empire'. The casualties that
the US military avoids will instead be taken a hundred times over from
innocent civilians who are barely scraping a living in a typically
poor and marginal country of the world. One day, it is the Iraqi
people who hit the jackpot; another day it is Yugoslavia, Libya or
Afghanistan. In the cover of darkness, from high-flying out-of-reach
planes and from warships and submarines tucked away in far away
oceans, they hurl tens of thousands of tons of bombs and missiles at
people and their cities. They boast that they will send the pounded
country 'back to the stone age,' and yet they insist that the morally
'smart' American bombs are programmed to only hit the guilty. The aim
is to intimidate; to intimidate the whole society; to rule by fear -
fear of death and displacement, fear of total destruction of a whole
economy and civil society; to the point where society is paralysed and
resistance becomes impossible. Today, the US ground troops are only
the hounds that are to bring the lifeless prey back after the shooting
ends and the dust settles.
No one can condemn a declaration of war on the
Taliban - even if it is by the USA and West. The Taliban must go and
can only be removed by force and by military action. The enmity
between the West and the Taliban is much preferable to their hitherto
friendship. No one will stand in the way of the removal of murderers
who were first installed by the West itself. But there is a difference
between war and terror. The US and UK actions in Afghanistan are
terrorism. The bombing of cities and residential areas must be
condemned and stopped. Worthless myths about the Taliban's military
prowess and Afghanistan's history of bringing superpowers to their
knees only reinforce and feed into US and UK terrorist methods. The
Afghan Mujahedin was merely a facade for the West and the USA in their
war against the Soviet Union. The Taliban is a criminal drug gang that
was created by the West with the assistance of Pakistan and Saudi
Arabia. They can turn their switch off and remove them within weeks.
But aerial terrorism is safer, more spectacular, more fitting for a
superpower, and more likely to teach the discontented people of the
world a lesson in the virtues of obedience. We must oppose these
inhumane methods.
From Taliban to Political Islam
The US and UK action in Afghanistan, even if it
leads to the downfall of the Taliban and Bin Laden's death, will not
diminish the threats of Islamic terrorism against the West; it will
escalate it. Western leaders are fully aware of this and even publicly
warn citizens. However, the choice of Afghanistan as the first theatre
for the US 'revenge' for the September 11 atrocity has two fundamental
reasons.
Firstly, even if the USA concedes that Islamic
terrorism and the anti-Western hatred it nurtures on is a political
problem with a political solution, it does not see a solely political
response to such a huge physical and military attack inside the US on
September 11 as a sufficient and satisfactory response. Militarism is
part and parcel of the official ideology in the USA and a foundation
of its identity as a superpower. Thus, to the US government, an attack
on the USA can only be appropriately answered with an attack on
someone else, somewhere else. For the USA, only a military response
can 'avenge' September 11, irrespective of the roots and causes of
political Islam and Islamic terrorism. This military action must be
huge and must represent the 'wrath and power' of the USA; it must
display its ruthlessness. A huge military action, however, requires a
large theatre. War needs a battlefield. Afghanistan has not been
chosen because Bin Laden is there, on the contrary, Bin Laden has been
chosen because he is in Afghanistan. There are many like Bin Laden,
heads of Islamic terrorism who live openly or clandestinely in Iran,
Britain, France, Egypt, Pakistan, Lebanon, Palestine, Chechnya and
Bosnia. The idea that Islamic terrorism has a pyramid structure and a
defined hierarchy with Bin Laden at the top is ridiculous. Who
believes that [Iranian Ayatollah] Khamanei has been working under Bin
Laden in this terrorist hierarchy? The key is Afghanistan, a land that
can be the scene of a huge military action. Afghanistan is the only
possible theatre for 'US revenge' on the massive and frightening scale
promised by the US administration. Today, there is no such military
target area outside Afghanistan. And even here, Western leaders
complain of the lack of tall buildings and large bridges to destroy.
Secondly, as we said in part III, what is being
settled behind the conflict with the Taliban and Bin Laden is the
relationship and balance of power between the USA and the West with
political Islam. 'The long war against terrorism' is the code name for
a show down with political Islam. From the USA's point of view, it is
a power struggle, which must sooner or later define the more lasting
characteristics of a new world order after the fall of the Soviet
Union. Political Islam, a by-product of the Cold War, has emerged as a
bourgeois contender for political power in Middle Eastern countries as
well as in 'Islamic' communities within Western societies. This force
is either in power or has significant political leverage in parts of
the world, e.g. in significant countries like Iran and Pakistan. It is
a player in the fight over the future of Palestine and Israel. In the
former Soviet Republics, it is making mischief close to sensitive
nuclear arsenals. In the West, thanks to Saudi Arabia's money, local
state subsidies and the corrupt ideology of cultural relativism, it is
recruiting the youth in Islam-ridden areas in droves. For the West,
this political Islam is no longer the tool and the puppet that served
them well in the containment of the Soviet Union, in preventing the
Left from taking power in the anti-monarchy revolution of Iran, and in
creating problems for Arafat and Arab nationalism. Now, this creature
is more ambitious. It has its own agenda. It has come out from under
the West's patronage. And on September 11, from the US point of view,
political Islam went one step too far. A terrorist attack of this
scale in the heart of the USA set off this inevitable power struggle.
These events are essentially moments and stages of a power struggle
between the USA (& the West) and political Islam. From the USA's point
of view, this is a struggle with Islamic states, Islamic parties and
the entire political Islamic movement. The Taliban is the weakest,
most vulnerable and most hollow symbol of political Islam's power in
the Middle East and consequently the most suitable point of entry to a
comprehensive power struggle. The USA's victory in Afghanistan does
not affect, militarily and practically, the foundations of political
Islam's power. They know this. The main centres of power are primarily
in Iran, Saudi Arabia and in Islamic organisations in Egypt, Lebanon
and Palestine. This is, however, a power struggle, and not a life and
death battle. Afghanistan is the only arena, at least in the current
framework of the world, where there could in fact be a military
conflict between the USA and political Islam. It is the only arena
where 'the long war against terrorism' can begin with a dramatic and
spectacular military action without causing total havoc.
This is a Political Conflict
'The long war with terrorism' is actually a
power struggle between the USA and political Islam. After Afghanistan,
the confrontation will be essentially political, even if both sides
occasionally turn to specific military and terrorist actions. The
USA's objective in this war is not to eliminate political Islam.
Contrary to the self-congratulatory propaganda of the so-called
Reformist faction in Iran, it is not the political skills of Mr.
Khatami that has 'saved Iran from bombardment'. An attack on Iran and
such a bombing campaign against that country is not part of the West's
agenda at all. The notion that the USA will enter into military
conflicts with country after country according to the list of those it
has once labelled terrorist is extraordinarily superficial. The USA's
objective in this show down is neither to eliminate political Islam
nor even to overthrow Islamic governments, but rather to impose its
own political hegemony and define the rules of the game. From the
USA's point of view, the Islamic movement must know its boundaries. It
must limit its field of operation to the region, understand its own
place and recognise the USA's special position. Not only can Islamic
governments remain in power, but also even terrorism is still
permissible on the condition that its victims are the communists and
the Left in Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Turkey. But an attack on
American soil is going too far. The USA wants to take this lesson and
this equilibrium to the Middle East.
This is a power struggle and not a confrontation
over Islam, liberalism, Western democracy, freedom, civilisation,
security or terrorism. This is a battle between the US superpower and
a regional political movement with a global reach, which is contending
for power in the Middle East. It is a struggle for defining spheres of
influence and political hegemony. The West does not intend to
establish Western democracies in the Middle East. The USA, Pakistan,
Iran and a whole bunch of other reactionaries in the region are
already busy plotting to impose another despotic and backward regime
on the people of Afghanistan. Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and the
Gulf Emirates, the most reactionary regimes in the world today, are
openly or tacitly on the side of the West in this conflict. Even if
Islamic governments fall, the preferred alternative of the West will
be the local and regional Right wing and reactionary parties, military
juntas and police states.
The USA Does Not Make History
But the West does not determine the future. The
current US policy and actions will inevitably shatter the present
political framework in the Middle East, but other forces will
determine the alternative relations that will take shape. Undoubtedly,
the confrontation between the West and political Islam will weaken the
Islamic movement, Islamic parties and Islamic governments. But this
confrontation does not take place on an empty stage. The Middle East,
like the West, is the scene of a confrontation between social
movements that have existed prior to the conflict between Western
bourgeoisies and political Islam and which have shaped political
developments in all societies. The West's conflict with political
Islam, despite its importance, is not the engine and the moving force
of history. On the contrary, it is itself placed within this history
and is defined by it. The conflict over the new world order has more
important players. Social classes and their political movements,
whether in the West or the Middle East, are facing each other over the
political, economic and cultural future of the world. It is these
movements that will determine the final course of these events,
irrespective of the current designs and demands of Western statesmen
and the leaders of political Islam.
As far as the Middle East is concerned, even if
the West aims at a mere marginal retreat of political Islam and
definition of a new framework for coexistence, the secular, Socialist
and progressive movements in the region will nevertheless come to the
fore in these new conditions. For example, in my view, political Islam
will be overthrown in Iran, not because the West pursues such an
objective, but rather because the people of Iran and the
worker-communist movement at their head will overthrow the Islamic
Republic. The defeat of the Islamic Republic will be the biggest blow
to political Islam. If the resolution of the Palestinian question is
the precondition for removing the political, intellectual and cultural
sources of the growth of political Islam, the defeat of the Islamic
Republic in Iran is a precondition for smashing political Islam as a
movement aspiring for political power in the Middle East. Without the
Islamic Republic of Iran, political Islam will become a marginal and
sterile opposition in the Middle East.
|