Worker-communism and the Armed Struggle in Iraq:

guerrilla war or mass armed resistance?

We said well before the USA-UK war on Iraq began that it would have disastrous consequences for the people of Iraq and that it would affect every aspect of their lives. We said that none of the announced promises made to the Iraqi people by the invading forces would come true.

There would be no peace, freedom, stability, prosperity or reconstruction. We were the only political group in Iraq which opposed both the US led invasion and Saddam's regime. Many saw our views on this war as overly pessimistic and emanating from "the

inherited antagonism" of the left to the USA and its policies and actions. Apologists for this war and supporters of the occupation were celebrating after April 9, 2003 the day Baghdad fell to US forces. Why? Because (according to them) causalities were well below our estimation.

However the war did not end the day George Bush Jnr. declared that major combat operations had finished. The war has continued and many innocent people kept losing their lives on a daily basis.

Today, nobody can deny the enormous price that the population of Iraq has paid for this war.  The announcement that 100,000 Iraqi people have been killed since this war first began is no surprise.

Day by day the vicious cycle of violence is intensifying. More people are dying and we are starting to see acts of genocide like the one committed in Falluja. The results of military operations by the occupation forces, widespread looting in the immediate aftermath of the war and operations perpetrated by the " "armed resistance" in the name of "liberating the nation" have all caused incalculable material damage. The "reconstruction" promised by Bush is nothing but a joke. 18 months later, basic services including electricity, water supply and health services are worse than before the war.

In terms of culture and morale, Iraqi society has regressed. The most reactionary values and traditions have been revived. Extreme reactionary forces have gained a foothold and are increasing in influence.  Ordinary people are less secure than at any other period in the history of present day Iraq. The USA and its local bourgeois supporters have not only failed to build any sort of Western-style democracy, they have also failed to create a stable regime. In the current circumstances, talking about civil and individual rights and freedoms is not the priority, because in reality criminal gangs, Islamic terrorists and forces of obscurantism are today the de facto rulers of Iraqi society. There is no government or state apparatus in the usual sense of the word, which people can direct their protests towards and pressure to get their demands met.

The current horrifying circumstances in Iraq have not come out of the blue. Our predictions were not based on speculation but on the reactionary nature of the US administration, its "New World Order" and its policies. The USA and its allies cannot achieve anything better in a country like Iraq.

In the case of Iraq, the only way to build a civil and modern society where minimum freedoms and rights are respected and people's basic needs are met is by curbing the reactionary sectarian, ethnocentric and clan forces and their values and traditions. The alternative is to build a secular, non-ethnocentric government.

However The US administration is a reactionary bourgeois force which seeks to assert and sustain its hegemony in the world. It is afraid of progressive ideas and forces. Encouraging secularism and building a secular, non-ethnocentric government may strength the left and progressive forces. The US administration   will do what it can to prevent a revolutionary communist movement like the Worker-communist Party of Iraq from becoming a significant force in Iraqi society. If this happened it would upset the plans of America and its allies, not only in Iraq but also in the whole region.

Therefore the USA has only one option: to try and cut deals with reactionary, sectarian, ethnocentric and clan forces and individuals and to fight against any secular and progressive ideas and forces. This will plunge Iraq deeper into economic, political and social crises.

We can find this reality by studying the structure of the US-appointed Governing council, the interim Iraqi government and the groups and individuals pushed forward to stand in the proposed elections to be held in January 2005. Over last 18 months, the most consistent feature of the occupation is its direct and indirect support for reactionaries and its opposition to progressive people.

The occupation is the main cause behind the current impasse facing Iraqi society. As long as the occupation forces are in Iraq there will be no real solution to any of these crises. And since the US is extremely unpopular, it needs to use excessive force to maintain its authority and to protect itself. Because of this, it indirectly strength reactionary forces who pose as defenders of people and their dignity and provide an excuse for political Islamic and the ethnocentric groups to perpetrate their military operations, which cause more damage to the civilian population than to the occupation forces.

This vicious cycle will continue, the society will remain unstable and living conditions will deteriorate.There is no question: the occupation forces must leave. HOW they are made to leave is the issue.  In our opinion, the way to force the occupation forces to leave is through civil resistance. This can show the general resentment toward the occupation forces, expose their crimes and gain the support of progressive people worldwide.

Inside Iraq this is the task of the Worker-communist Party of Iraq and progressive, mass organizations like the Organization of Women's Freedom in Iraq, the Union of Unemployed in Iraq and the Federation of Workers' Councils and Unions in Iraq.

This movement has to grow and show it is able to run society and provide an alternative to the rule of the occupation forces and their puppet government. What we need to do to achieve this goal needs further discussion and study.

Overseas, social movements which can exert pressure on the occupation forces to withdraw will come to the fore if their members can see a progressive alternative which can run Iraqi society.

The demonstrations of February 2004 where tens of millions took to the streets around the world have show that this movement is gigantic. Although it is now dormant, it could be re-mobilized quickly and grow fast. 

The second form of resistance is armed resistance. In the current circumstances we believe communists and progressive forces should avoid the traditional guerrilla-style of armed resistance because:

1. It would play into the hands of the terrorist Islamo-ethnocentric"resistance". Distinguishing the progressive resistance from the terrorist operations perpetrated by these backward forces would be difficult. As the Islamic and ethnocentric groups are dominant at the moment, guerrilla-style armed resistance by other forces would only play into the hands of these groups. It would encourage them to commit more crimes against the population under the rubric of fighting the occupation.

Becoming allies with the Islamo-ethnocentric resistance would undermine our struggle against them.

2. Purely armed resistance at this point would only serve the US forces.The USA prefers to turn confrontation with its opponents into armed confrontation. As it has superior military capabilities the US can be fairly sure of winning such battles. Force is its strength. Its weakness is its inhumane and contradictory policies. It will be very difficult for the US to win in a political confrontation, especially if it is up against a just and progressive movement.

3. A guerrilla war in Iraq would cause huge loss of life and massive destruction of property.  Due to the geographical nature of Iraq, the level of infrastructure development and the brutal nature of the US forces, this is a foregone conclusion.

In the current circumstances, the armed resistance strategy adopted by the Worker-communist party of Iraq is the best method. This resistance focuses on mobilizing and leading the population to reclaim various suburbs, villages, towns and cities and bans both US forces and Islamo-ethnocentric militia from entry.

This form of resistance has the following positive features:

a.  It opposes both poles of terrorism; the USA and its allies on the one hand and Islamic and ethnocentric groups on the other. It maintains its independent from both these two poles.

b.  It reduces the damage inflicted on the population.

c. It encourages the population to intervene in running their own affairs. It will embroil the masses in a process, which will raise their awareness. One of the negative features of the current circumstances (which we call the "dark scenario") is that many feel alienated. This form of armed resistance will re-energize people and negate the effect of the dark scenario.

For the Worker-communist Party of Iraq and other progressive organizations to success in this task, they need the support of progressive people worldwide. As we have said before, the struggle in Iraq is not strictly a local issue. The forces involved in it: the occupation forces, the Islamo-ethnocentric forces and the Worker-communism are international forces.

The USA is getting the support of a number of governments, especially those who have sent military forces to Iraq like the UK and Australian governments. Political Islam and the Pan-Arabism movements are getting support from reactionary regimes in the region like the Saudi feudalists and the mullahs who control Iran.

 However, Worker-communism and the progressive front in Iraq has so far received little help from elsewhere. We are hoping that exceptions like the support lent by the Japanese progressive movement, by US Labor Against the War, by Australia/Iraq Trade Union Solidarity and UK/Iraq trade union solidarity grow in size and depth.

Helping to build this international support is a key task of the Worker-communist Party of Iraq.