When the occupation of Iraq began in April
we stressed that the task of holding down the country would not be so easy for
the imperialist armies as the actual winning of the war. US Deputy Secretary of
Defence, Paul Wolfowitz, has just finished a short visit to Iraq. This was part
of a public relations gimmick by the White House. Unfortunately for Wolfowitz
his attempt to portray a rosy picture of the situation in Iraq was rudely
interrupted by the shooting down of a US army Black Hawk helicopter. The number
of attacks on the US military is on the increase – an average of two dozen every
day!
Wolfowitz would like the Iraqi people to believe the US military are
there to help them. However a study by Iraq’s Centre for Research and Strategic
Studies has recently revealed that 67 per cent of the Iraqi people regard the
US-UK led forces as “occupying powers”. This is 20 per cent more than when
Saddam Hussein’s regime was brought down. Thus as time goes by things get worse
for the imperialists. The people of Iraq have lost any illusions any of them may
have had in the early stages of the US occupation. They can see which interests
the US-UK troops are really defending.
It is not only a question of armed
resistance that is growing day by day. The mass media cannot avoid reporting
this. There is also a growing mood of anger among ordinary Iraqi workers that is
beginning to be expressed in strike action.
The class struggle on the
part of the Iraqi workers and unemployed is beginning to take off. And yet this
kind of opposition hardly gets a mention in the western media. The reason is
obvious: they want to give people here in the west a picture that depicts the
Iraqis as a bunch of uncivilised barbarians, of Muslim fundamentalists far
removed from our “cultured”, “civilised” world. What they want us to believe is
that what is happening is not a war between oppressor and oppressed, but a
“clash of civilisations”, one in which we are supposed to be more inclined to
take sides with our own rulers against so-called “alien cultures”. However,
nothing could be further from the truth. Iraq, far from being some backwoods is
an industrialised country, where the workers, especially in the oil sector, play
a key role. And like workers of all countries they act when their vital
interests are at stake.
In the last few weeks a whole number of
demonstrations and strikes have been taking place. The unemployed have held mass
rallies and demonstrations in Baghdad and Basra. On October 1 in Basra
unemployed workers, tired of empty promises, attacked the council building in an
attempt to occupy it. The governor and the members of the city council, which is
mainly made up of Islamic groups, fled from the building. The police then
started shooting randomly to disperse the demonstrators.
A solid one-day
strike was also reported in the country's biggest refinery in Basra at the
beginning of October, although if its outcome is unclear. In Baghdad's Daura Oil
Refinery three strikes in two weeks have taken place. The refinery's Director
General Dathar Khashab explained how he dealt with the industrial action: “I
wish I could have solved the protest by peaceful means but, well… we can't have
anymore stoppages. More stoppages will harm the country”.
This ruthless
former Ba’ath Party member, and now enthusiastic supporter of the occupying
forces, revealed a lot about the attitude of the new rulers to a freelance
journalist (part of an Occupation Watch delegation of US Labour Against the
War). He explained to him that, “Privatisation [of Iraq's oil industry] is good
because it keeps workers in fear. It keeps workers in fear for their jobs. Every
worker here knows I control his life. If I sack him I ruin his life, his
family's life”.
These are the kind of new managers that the US-UK
bourgeoisie like. The fall of Saddam Hussein for the Iraqi workers was like fall
from the frying pan into the fire.
In 1987, the Ba’ath passed a law that
banned strikes and also officially deleted the very existence of “workers” in
Iraq. They all became “civil servants”. It is no accident that the Provisional
Authority has deliberately decided not to repeal this law. It seems not all of
Saddam’s laws were bad. It also reveals that the outlook of the Saddam regime
and that of the US-UK imperialists were and are the same, when it comes to
dealing with the working class. Thus, thanks to Saddam, Bremer and Co., feel
they have free hands when it comes to dealing with the Iraqi workers.
The
working conditions of the vast majority of the Iraqi workers are appalling. The
same freelance journalist visited Nahrawahn, near Baghdad, a complex of 150
factories, employing 15,000 workers, churning out thousands of bricks daily.
Men, women and children are employed there, working 14 hours a day for the sum
total of $1.50 (or 60cents for child labour). Of course, there are no health
benefits, no holiday pay, no safety rules and no medical aid for
injuries.
The reporter showed, however, that all workers have a limit
beyond which they cannot go. When things reach this limit they have no
alternative but to fight back.
“On Saturday October 11th, 75% of the
workforce decided enough was enough and went on strike. 300-400 workers marched
to the owner’s office and demanded social security, retirement payment, onsite
medical aid facilities, contracts and a rise in wages. The owner had no idea
that a union had been formed and told them, 'Fine, strike, go, I will dismiss
you, others will come to take your place'. The workers responded by going to
their homes, bringing out their guns and spontaneously forming an armed picket
line. Manned with machineguns and kalashnikovs, workers guarded their factory
and defended their strike from demolition by scab labour.
“The owner,
overpowered, ended up granting the workers a rise of 500 dinars (25c), and
agreed to enter into negotiations regarding social and health benefits. The
strike was regarded all round as a massive success.”
“The unionised workers,
empowered by their victory, have ideas about improving their conditions and
keeping the owners in check. 'The Union must control the fuel in the ovens. Then
the factory owner will obey us', says Farhan (one of the workers
interviewed).”
This episode is only a foretaste of the music that we are
going to hear in Iraq in the future. Even in the extremely difficult conditions
of Iraq, the workers are rising to their feet. The clashes between bosses and
toilers will often take on a brutal character. This is due to the nature of the
occupation by the imperialists and to the ruthlessness of the native and foreign
bourgeoisie. That is why self-defence committees on picket lines are absolutely
necessary. The workers in the episode described above clearly understood this
when they went and got out their guns!
However, we must also understand
that the question of weapons and guns is always auxiliary to the organised
action of the working class. It is mass action that is always decisive. The
workers in the case mentioned above won firstly, and mainly, because they were
determined and united, and the question of arms was secondary (although
obviously important). The US Army, from a purely military point of view, could
have smashed them any time they wanted. What they could not do was destroy the
spirit of solidarity among the workers and their determination to
struggle.
The working class, together with the unemployed and the poor
peasants are the overwhelming majority of the population in Iraq. Organised in a
revolutionary party, they could defeat any army of occupation. This is
especially the case in a situation where the US soldiers are not happy to be in
Iraq. According to a survey conducted by the Stars and Stripes newspaper,
already about a third of the respondents complain that their mission lacks clear
definition and characterize the war in Iraq as of little or no value. Fully 40
percent said the jobs they were doing had little or nothing to do with their
training. A total of 49 percent of those questioned said it was “very unlikely”
or “not likely” that they would remain in the military after they complete their
current obligations. (The Washington Post, 19/10/2003).
As conditions
deteriorate, the workers of Iraq will inevitably take the path of working class
struggle, involving strikes and factory occupations, general strikes and mass
demonstrations. Such a mass movement of the Iraqi masses would have a deep
effect on these already dissatisfied American soldiers. It would make it
abundantly clear that what they are doing in Iraq is not “liberating the people”
but oppressing their Iraqi working class brothers and sisters.
A mass
movement of the Iraqi working class would also cut across the Islamic
fundamentalist fog which is being used to dupe the workers and it would be seen
as a beacon by all the workers and youth of the Middle East.