Hands off Syria!
Hands off Syria!
(new-power.org)
Syria is under attack by the imperialists and their agents. The Arab spring, which started out as a popular movement against comprador regimes that sell out to the imperialists, has been transformed and co-opted in many places by the imperialists themselves. The imperialists, especially the US and NATO, have sought to use the Arab spring to create color revolutions in places like Libya, Syria, and, eventually, Iran. At the same time, Gulf Arab states, like Saudi Arabia and Qatar, are seeking to spread their own hegemony in the region, often though the support and financing of Sunni Jihadi groups, in order to challenge Iran. The Zionists in Israel also seek to weaken Syria because to do so weakens Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Iranian regime. Turkey, a Western ally, also seeks to extend its influence. Here are points to consider.
1. Several forces are coming together to undermine the Assad regime in Syria. The Western imperialists seek to undermine the regime as part of its war against growing Iranian power in the region. The Assad regime is part of a regional alliance that includes the Islamic Republic of Iran and Hezbollah in Lebanon. When the United States pulls out of Iraq, pro-Iranian forces hope to fill the vacuum and seek to solidify the alliance with the Islamic Republic of Iran with Iraq. Thus Iranian influence will increase. At the moment, many are biding their time in Iraq.
2. The Gulf states, especially Saudi Arabia and Qatar, are financing the anti-Assad forces in Syria. The Sunni Gulf states fear the emerging power of Iran, which they seek to stop in Iraq. In addition, it would not be surprising if Qatar is putting boots on the ground against Assad as it did against Gaddafi in Libya. While they are close allies with the West, the Gulf states are willing and able to use the Sunni-Islamist forces that the West keeps at arms length.
3. The Assad regime is a secular one. However, many of the top officials of the regime come from the Alawi, a religious and cultural minority that has suffered terrible oppression in the past. The Alawi were some of the poorest and most discriminated in the region. One of the reasons that the Syrian regime has a greater degree of religious tolerance than other regimes in the region is due to the Alawi origins of the Assad family. Hafez al-Assad, after taking power, removed the provision of the Syrian constitution that only allowed Sunnis to occupy the office of President. The Alawi will not willingly give up their position in society to become lower caste again. This means they will fight tooth-and-nail to keep power. This means that those seeking to take power from them may end up resorting to ethnic terror. There is much potential for Syria to descend into a bloodbath.
4. The Zionists in Israel also seek to weaken Syria because to do so increases their hold on Palestine and increases their power in the region. In Palestine, Hamas, a Sunni organization, has maintained close ties with both the Iranian regime and Gulf states. Because of the ethnic and religious nature of the conflict in Syria, Hamas is in a tough spot. As of now, they have said the conflict in Syria is an internal matter to be resolved by Syrians, but have not come out publicly to back Assad. Hamas has backers in the Gulf states that are coming more and more into conflict with the Iranian state and Iranian-state-aligned forces. In addition, Hamas is religiously and culturally closer to those who oppose Assad. The conflict in Syria will undermine Hamas in Palestine. The West benefits greatly by placing Hamas in such a difficult situation. This is one reason that the Zionists in Israel are moving to destabilize Syria. In addition, a weakened Syria means a weakened Hezbollah in Lebanon. Also, Israel has an interest in isolating and toppling Iran.
5. The Russian state has a longstanding commitment to the Assad regime. The Assad regime had been an ally of the Soviet Union in its revisionist days. Unlike with Libya, at present, the Russian state is seeking to actively block the West from taking down the Assad regime. The Russian state is moving to impede Western efforts to undermine Syria diplomatically and in the UN. Also, the Russian state recently stated it would honor its arms deals with the Syrian regime. The Russian regime is pushing for a peaceful resolution that keeps Assad in power, rather than throwing the regime to the Western wolves. At the same time, if push comes to shove, or if the West cuts the Russian state a deal, it is very possible that the Russian state will cut its losses and abandon its ally. We should not expect the Russian state to go to war with the West over Syria. As broader efforts by the West unfold to isolate the Iranian state, the Iranian state will try to turn to the Russian state too.
6. Despite the left rhetoric or anti-imperialist Jihadi rhetoric of the anti-Assad forces, the reality is that, at this moment, such forces are playing into the hands of the West’s efforts to gain control of the region and the West’s aim of eventually toppling the Iranian regime. The Assad regime, for all its flaws, should be defended against Western intervention.
Hands off Syria! Hands off Iran! No war! No sanctions! No intervention of any kind against Syria and Iran! Uphold the Broad United Front! Hold the Red Flag High!
Uphold the united front from attacks by fake leftists
Uphold the united front from attacks by fake leftists
by cherokeetears
(new-power.org)
There are those who say that it is acceptable to support imperialism on some occasions. This opportunism has plagued revolutionary politics since their inception. From the anarchists of Marx, to the social-imperialists of Lenin, and through the capitalist roaders of Mao’s China, every revolutionary period has had its opportunism. The Left has been infected by the liberalism and idealism of identity politics, and too often it has succumb to the pressure of this idealism. Individuals have embraced imperialism for their own prejudices, they aligned against national liberation in places like Libya and Afghanistan. They have set themselves up as shills for so-called “progressive imperialism.” They enable oppression from the shores of their imperial homelands. This is the case today with the US assault in the Middle East.
Mao Zedong saw the principal contradiction as between imperialism and oppressed nations. The main enemy on the world’s stage was imperialism. There can be no liberation without the defeat of imperialism. The struggle against imperialism is the struggle that unlocks the possibility of other social liberation. In this way, the struggle against imperialism is the most important one today. The so-called “left”in the First World has often exhibit a liberal naïveté that supports imperialism when the imperialists present their projects in the liberal and activist language of the “left.” It will yield when the imperialists present themselves as champions of idealistic and unscientific ideas such as bourgeoisie “democracy” or when the imperialists present themselves as supporting Third World peoples against totalitarian dictators or when the imperialists present themselves as the saving Third World women from Islam. The illusion of progressive imperialism is just that, an illusion born of successful propaganda by the imperialist themselves. This propaganda allows opportunists on the so-called “left” in the First World to support the export of imperialism with a liberal, democratic face. Such opportunism is idealistic and unscientific. It assumes that imperialism brings “democracy” and “freedom” when in fact it only brings exploitation and oppression. The institutions placed in countries by the imperialists are rarely better, and are often worse, than the institutions that imperialists condemn. Imperialism is not a better option, it yields nothing but open markets for capitalism. When the US’s pocketbook is threatened, when its hegemony in the world market is threatened, it acts: economic sabotage, destabilization, sanctions, bombs, invasions. The imperialists intervene “on behalf of the people,” but the reality is that these interventions only provide instability and violence against people.
When facing the threat of the invading Japanese forces, the Communist Party of China (CCP) allied with the reactionary Guomindang (GMD) in order to defeat the imperialist aggressors. The GMD was made of of several elements ranging from the nationalist bourgeoisie, feudalists, to compradors. The GMD had waged war against the CCPfor decades. The GMD had tried to annihilate the CCP. The long march, led by Mao, was begun as a breakout by the CCP from an anniliation campaign by the GMD. However, there was a bigger enemy than the GMD. The Japanese invaded and occupied China. If the Communists had continued fighting the GMD, both groups would have more easily been defeated by the Japanese. It was by upholding the Broad United Front Against Imperialism that the CCP won support of the masses. The CCP took up the national banner against the Japanese. This not only won them the support of the masses. This also won more progressive elements within the GMD to their cause. We must learn from history.
Imperialism cannot be justified in any aspect. Bourgeois so-called feminists try to justify imperialism by appealing to “women’s rights.” They try to justify imperialist aggression against Iraq and Afghanistan. Women’s rights have not significantly improved under the pro-US governments. Any improvement in women’s rights on the ground is coupled by religious, ethnic, and sectarian violence. Social programs in many cases have been destroyed, people have been forced into exile for fear of persecution on religious, ethnic, or political grounds. Resources are taken from the people by multinational corporations. This is not better than the current regime. Iraq is being destroyed by religious violence, and Sunni-Shia infighting is killing innocent civilians every day. This was not an issue under the previous government. Afghanistan is involved in a brutal tribal war, one in which there are still remnants of Taliban supporters, along with other tribes and ethnicities, all fighting one another. Imperialism has not made life better in these areas by any means. In addition, when the imperialists cannot put in a boot-licking, pro-Western moderate, they often cut a deal with those who are the most socially conservative. The imperialists are about power, not about human rights.
In light of recent events, attention has turned towards the tensions between the imperialists and Middle Eastern and African countries, most recently Libya and Syria. The US is setting the stage for a confrontation with Iran also. If imperialist aggression occurs with Iran in any aspect, the imperial so-called “left” will remain divided on the issue. Some — Leading Lights, anti-imperialists, and others — will oppose the attacks against the Third World. Many others — Democrats, opportunists, revisionists, and other First Worldists — will support the imperialists in the name progress. A “left” that supports imperialism is an enemy of the Third World masses and the revolution. They are social-imperialists. They may claim to be socialist, communist, anarchist, democratic, or progressive, but they line up with the imperialists. They do not understand the balance of social forces in the world. They do not correctly answer Mao’s famous question “Who are our enemies? Who are our friends?” Not only does their opportunism and idealism lead them to their incorrect position, but their privilege as First World peoples also leads them to align against the Third World. They desire more for themselves. They are consumers. They have a class interest in supporting a system that provides them with a relatively comfortable life.
The most deliberate opportunists will qualify their support, as they did with Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, stating that they “don’t support the imperialist support, but they support the movement of the people.” The reality is that they do not support the people. The media portrays these civil wars as one-sided, they portray US invasions as domestically popular, but this is not the case. Few support the invasion of their country by an occupying force. To do so is consider treason by most. Civil wars are civil wars because they are struggles between antagonistic groups. No coup d’etat, no civil war, no dissenting action is unchallenged or undisputed. Libya was a civil war. Tribal and religious opportunists took advantage of opportunities presented to them. They manipulated Libyan people to fight the government, the people did not act unanimously to destroy their governments, this was done for them. The Libyan regime was only defeated with massive support from the US, NATO bombs, MI6 and CIA operations, etc. Even other Arab states put troops on the ground in what amounted to a de facto invasion to oust Gaddafi. This imperialist act was cheered by the opportunist and movementarian so-called “left” in the US.
The same will be true of the actions in Syria and Iran. US aggression in Syria and Iran will face support from the corporate media. The media will portray one-sided views of unanimous support for imperialist aggression, and many self proclaimed “leftists” will support the imperialists. Be warned: these opportunists are effectively supporting imperialism and denying self-determination of peoples. They are serving up the people and resources of the Third World to the imperial butchers. Those who align with imperialism are lackeys. They are idealists. They are liberals. They do not uphold Marxism, they uphold liberalism. Their approach is not scientific. It will not bring socialism. Only by acknowledging the enemy of imperialism, will we be able to end imperialism. Embracing science will bring socialism, not idealism and liberalism.
Oppose US intervention in the Middle East. Fight against imperialism and its lackeys. Syria and Iran are the next targets in the imperialist’s crosshairs. We must not support imperialism against Syria and Iran, we must oppose imperialist aggression and uphold Leading Light Communism. Revolution is the only solution, imperialism will only delay the revolution.
Increased EU sanctions against Syria; evidence of more imperialism
 |
| Protesters in Seattle being dealt with “peaceably” |
Increased EU sanctions against Syria; evidence of more imperialism by Cherokeetears
Despite the fact that the EU has been dealing malevolently with protests in the last year and a half, they nevertheless have no problem applying a double standard to the Syrian government’s response to protests. It’s easy to condemn the suppression of protestors without acknowledging the domestic protest violence that the EU has been continually dealing with. Protests in Greece, Portugal, and France over the last year have met incredible amounts of police suppression, yet when Syria acts the same way, sanctions are imposed.
Syria’s Ba’ath Party is simply coming under attack by First World imperialism, just like Afghanistan, Iraq, Venezuela, Egypt, and Libya before. Imperialists are continuing to fight for the “freedom of speech” that they deny their own citizens. It’s easy for the EU to forget the three deaths from the Greek Protests1, the 65 deaths from the fire that the state so incompetently failed to prevent in 20072 and the authorities’ reaction to the protests that followed. It’s easy for the EU to forget the repression of protests in Portugal, Spain, and France; it’s easy for the First World to forget the 1999 WTO suppression of protests in Seattle. The First World forgets a lot when it’s telling others what to do.
 |
| Police Brutality in Barcelona |
It is important to distinguish that these protests are First World protests working for nothing more than a larger piece of the pie and “austerity reform,” but the EU’s actions are hypocritical nonetheless. The deaths of protesters this week is nothing compared to the deaths that occur at the hands of imperialism every day. NATO has been responsible for the deaths of 700 civilians in Libya so far in the Civil War backed by imperialism.3 UN sanctions in the past have been the cause of the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children. 4 Yes, imperialist backed protestors have died in the wake of violent protests in Syria, but how many deaths have been the result of imperialism? How many deaths have been the result of First World parasitism? How many deaths have been the result of capitalism? Many more.
The EU needs to learn to choose their words and actions wisely, since they have had to eat them in the past, and will have to eat them in the future.
Recent Comments