آذرخش: 01/08/10

Your Editorial of July1, 2005, concerning the victory of Mahmoud Ahmadi Nejad in the so called « presidential election » in Iran, has evoked a great astonishment among the Iranians who have read it. Especially among the Iranian communists, democrats and all honest women and men who have some objective knowledge of the dramatic political, economic, social and cultural situation in Iran, and know something about the bitter and sanguinary class struggle in this country during the past three decades: they cannot conceal their sorrow, their fury and their indignation about the unjust and erroneous position that you have taken in this affair. We say "sorrow", because this position does not come from a media depending on Republic Islamic of Iran or imperialists who support this reactionary regime, but from a Party whose declared positions are the emancipation of the working class, proletarian internationalism, and solidarity with the oppressed peoples!

You are describing Mahmoud Ahmadi Nejad as a "revolutionary", "anti-capitalist", "Islamic socialist", "anti-imperialist" and so on. You are portraying him as the "son of a blacksmith" who came out of the Iranian 1979 revolution against the regime of Shah and the US domination in Iran.

The fact is that he is neither a revolutionary, nor an anti-imperialist, nor anti-capitalist: he is nothing but
a most reactionary, anti-democratic, anti-revolutionary figure in the political scene of Iran.

You are certainly aware of serious accusations against him as the responsible of logistics support and as the head of the "reserve team" in the assassination of political opponents of Iranian regime in Austria in 1989. At that time Rafsanjani was president of Islamic Republic of Iran, and Ali Khamenei was, as he is today, the Supreme Guide; Khamenei, Rafsanjani, were the principal commanders of this assassination, and the same Ahmadi Nejad was one of the executers of this barbarous act, according to the testimonies of a number of informed people (including certain ancient agents of Iranian terrorist operations abroad), and the information and statements of a number of human rights activists, some political figures in Austria, many independent journalists, families and surroundings of the victims.

From a social class point of view, Ahmadi Nejad is a docile servant of capitalists and other propertied classes. More precisely, he is a cynical lackey of the bureaucratic-military- religious faction of the bourgeoisie in Iran. This faction, in alliance with a section of large merchants and commercial bourgeoisie, maintains the upper hand inside the bourgeois class. It is in permanent struggle not only against the workers and the toiling people, but also against other sections of the bourgeoisie for appropriating the lion share in the profits extracted from the brutal exploitation of the working class and toiling people, and in order to preserve and consolidate its political and cultural hegemony in addition to economic supremacy.

You are trying, in your Editorial, to describe Ahmadi Nejad as the popular antithesis of Rafsanjani; the fact is that he is a creation of Rafsanjani and other high rank officials of the Islamic Regime. It was Rafsanjani who promoted him as the governor (prefect) of Ardebil province in the northwest of Iran. Their present rivalry and competition can only be explained in the framework of the internal contradictions of the ruling class and the reigning clique.

Ahmadi Nejad is not a "man of the people against the Establishment" or against the imperialist domination and imperialist threats (as one can deduce from your Editorial), he is not an "outsider", on the contrary: he is a man of the Establishment, in other words, an interchanging part of the state machine serving the Iranian bourgeoisie at present.

According to you, the Iranian workers elected Ahmadi Nejad "for jobs, not the World Bank. And the vote told the U.S.: hands off." Despite your argument and your conclusion, any objective and informed observer will assert that: a) the World Bank does not have considerable investment in Iran and it is not going to do so in the near future (especially if we take account of its new managing team), and b) the large unemployment in Iran is not a result of the World Bank investment or policies in Iran (for the fact that they have a negligible small role in Iranian economics and politics at present); the large unemployment in Iran is a result of the laws of capitalist accumulation and capitalist mode of production in general, accelerated by the reactionary policies of the regime of Islamic Republic of Iran, and some powerful tendencies in the ruling circles in favour of parasitic merchants and intermediaries rather than productive industrial capitalists.

Consequently, the regime of Islamic Republic of Iran is the main obstacle in the way of social progress, freedom and welfare of the people, and the main obstacle in the way of the proletarian revolution in Iran. This regime and generally, the bourgeois domination in any form, are the main lever and mainstay for the imperialist domination in Iran. The reactionary internal and foreign policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran feed and reinforce the reactionary policy of G. W. Bush, and his so called "war on terrorism" which is the pseudonym of the US imperialist wars for world hegemony, wars of imperialist expansion, annexation and domination.

You are talking of relatively large number of votes to Ahmadi Nejad. This is perhaps the main reason that makes you attribute these votes to the workers, and at the same time you buy demagogic electoral slogans of Ahmadi Nejad at their "face value"!

We cannot elaborate these issues in detail here however, we mention the following points:

No one in Iran admits the health and regularity of this election, excepted perhaps the Supreme Guide, the Council of the Guardians of the Constitution – a body essentially assigned by the former to filter the candidates – (in the last elections it eliminated more than 1000 candidates and approved only 6, to which the Guide himself added two other candidates!), everyone knows that there were massive intervention and implication of military, paramilitary forces and mullahs in order to "redirect" the votes in favour of Ahmadi Nejad.
From almost 48 million people qualified for voting, Ahmadi Nejad's votes counted about 17 millions and Rafsanjani's about 11 millions: about 20 millions of the qualified population didn't vote. How do you conclude that the majority of the workers voted for Ahmadi Nejad? Statistically, it is normal to suppose that in 20 millions people (chosen randomly) there are more workers than in 17 millions (also chosen randomly). Furthermore, a fraction of the 11 millions votes for Rafsanjani, was the vote of the workers (Rafsanjani has some influence, though it is declining, in the so called "Islamic Workers Councils" – governmental worker organization). So, there is no evidence that the majority of workers voted for any candidate.
Ahmadi Nejad himself, and the parties and organizations who supported his candidacy, had never pronounced anything against the private sector. The leader of one of these very influential parties maintained recently that all state enterprises should be privatised, except petroleum industry and state TV broadcasting. One or two times Ahmadi Nejad said some phrases against the high interest rate of private banks or the "gambling function" of stock exchange market, but he rapidly corrected these "lapses".
You underline Ahmad Nejad's modest class origin, we think that we don't need to mention to you that many people coming out of toiling people became eventually their worst enemies: Mussolini and Hitler also had modest class origins.

We understand that you wanted to support what you thought might have been the aspirations of Iranian working class and to reveal Bush administration's reactionary and war mongering policy. But, we think that solidarity with Iranian workers is incompatible with the eulogies that you have made in favour of one of the most fervent anti-communist and anti-democratic figures in Iran, who with his reactionary and bloodthirsty mentors can only be compared with mullahs and generals in Indonesia of 1960's and with the torturers in Chile, Argentina of military junta, Iran in the epoch of Shah, Greece of Colonels, Spain of Franco, etc.

We hope that you will correct your erroneous position, and will show your solidarity with the class conscious Iranian workers and genuine revolutionary forces who have been engaged in a death or life struggle against the Islamic Republic of Iran., as well as with the revolutionaries of other countries.

You can publish all or a part of this text on your site (and we encourage you to do it).

With the best regards

A group of Iranian communists

www.aazarakhsh.org

azarakhshi@gmail.com

آذرخش

۱۳۸۸ دی ۱۸, جمعه

نقد موضع« حزب دنیای کارگران» ایالات متحده در مورد انتخابات ریاست جمهوری در ایران

صفحات

آمار