[Militant, No 469, 7 September 1979, p 10]
In response to increasing opposition from the working class, national minorities and liberal bourgeoisie, Ayatollah Khomeini has mobilised his forces to strike at all resistance to the rule of his unelected Central Revolutionary Islamic Council.
In the past weeks, Khomeini has been preparing the way for a clamp down on all possible centres of opposition as a prelude to consolidating his own authoritarian regime. While blows have been struck at capitalism, through the massive nationalisations, reactionary laws have been prepared as well.
Harassment of opposition forces and press censorship was stepped up during the elections (held on 3 August) for the 73-member Council of Examiners formed to approve Khomeini’s new constitution. The election itself accentuated the political crisis.
„The manner in which these (elections) were organised was so evidently unfair,“ reports Fred Halliday (‚Irish Times‘, 22 August 1979) that most opposition parties, including that led by the influential Ayatollah Shaniat-Shaniat-Nadar, boycotted them, and the press, such as Ayandegan [the paper of the National Democratic front, whose circulation rose to over 100.000 after Khomeini’s previous, unsuccessful attempt to suppress it], gave prominent coverage to the protests.
The small number of seats ensured that few dissident candidates got in, and in some towns religious leaders pronounced ‚Fatwas‘, or Islamic injunctions, telling the people which way to vote. Illiterate voters – over 70% of the total – were sometimes given ballot papers already marked up with the names of pro-Khomeini candidates.”
Fortified by this successful result, Khomeini stepped up his assault on the left.
Less than a week after the elections, Khomeini complained that all he was hearing was about “strike after strike, sit-in after sit-in, protest march after protest march, lie after lie.“
The speech signalled further moves against newspapers critical of the government, the attempted breaking up of a rally of the liberal National Democratic Front and attacks on the offices of left-wing organisations.
Repressive measures
Khomeini has been leaning on his Revolutionary Islamic Militia and the Muslim zealots – the Hezbullahis, the ‚Party of God‘ followers – in an attempt to crush all opposition and bolster up his popularity. The Ayatollah has pressed home this attack with speeches denouncing opposition to „God and his representatives“ i.e. to Khomeini’s clique.
„Let no one expect“, Khomeini declared. „that the corrupt, and the American or non-American Left will be able to reappear in this country. We can when we want, in a few hours, throw them into the dustbin of death.
Later, he spoke of condemning all opposing political parties to death at the gallows. There is only one party – the party of God.”
Declaring himself the supreme army commander, Khomeini gavethe armed forces 24 hours, to crush the Kurdish rebellion in Paveh and Sanandaj
At the same time, 26 newspapers and magazines were closed down: the Fedayeen-e-Khalk, Tudeh (‚Communist‘) Party – which supports Khomeini’s policies and previously endorsed the closure of ‚Ayandegan‘ – and National Democratic Front offices closed down and everyone except armed forces personnel and Revolutionary Islamic Guards were banned from possessing guns.
Khomeini’s ministers are claiming that the left played no part in the overthrow of the Shah and that they are now working to overthrow the revolution. All opponents are denounced as ‚plotters ‚ and ‚traitors‘ – propaganda intended in many cases to justify their violent elimination.
Like fanatical ruling cliques at other times in history, Khomeini’s religious coterie have the illusion that because they found themselves – by an accident of history – at the head of a revolutionary flood tide, they are themselves providing the driving force.
Khomeini and his mullahs are trying to exorcise the role of Iran’s young, but vigorous working class – which provided the decisive forces for the movement against the Shah.
Whether Khomeini likes it or not, it was the massive strikes in the oil fields, transport and other sectors which ensured that ruthless measures were taken against the old regime. and forced Khomeini ’s government to carry out nationalisations.
Khomeini ’s appeals to the workers – alongside his denunciations of the left – indicate that he still fears their independent power. Wages in the oil fields have been doubled since the revolution, and reporters recently noted that ,although it was Ramadan, when devout Muslims fast during the day, the canteens there continued to serve lunch.
Many of the workers‘ committees formed during the revolution have come under the influence of Khomeini’s loyal revolutionary committees, or akhunds. There has been little or no linking up as yet of the workers‘ committees in a wider trade union organisation.
With the considerable popular support that Khomeini still enjoys – support conditioned by the overwhelming cultural backwardness of Iranian society – and in the absence of even a semi-mass party based on Marxism and capable of giving a clear lead, the working class for the moment remains in the background.
But we may be sure that the workers are watching and waiting for Khomeini’s regime to be tested by events. Popular support generated by the circumstances of the revolution is not the same as a firm social basis capable of ensuring the government’s survival.
The merchants of the bazaar, who played an important part in putting Khomeini into power, are already complaining about the government’s economic inefficiency. The Islamic economics‘ preached by the government, may well appeal to the merchant’s class prejudices, but they have no chance of securing prosperity.
Economic problems
The modern industrial set-up built up under the Shah was shattered when his regime was swept away. Even with the Ayatollah ’s patronage, the bazaar merchants cannot step into the shoes of the former big-business consortiums and state-sponsored enterprises.
Industry is believed to be running at only 40% of pre-revolutionary levels, and unemployment is rising – with a quarter of the eleven-million strong labour force thought to be jobless.
Inflation is running at over 30%, some services are collapsing, and shortages in the shops are becoming more frequent.
Although there has been a rise in oil revenue (OPEC price rises have more than compensated for the 30% fall in output), large amounts are thought to be lying around unspent because of the government’s paralysis.
In this crisis. the idea of unity between the classes preached by Islamic economics is only a pious dream.
The social demands of the working class, who made most of the real sacrifices in the struggle against the Shah, remain unsatisfied. Discontent with the meagre material benefits of the new regime, among the peasantry as well as the workers, will be amplified by the renewed suppression of all forms of democratic expression under Khomeini’s religious dictatorship.
The resistance of the minorities to continued domination from the traditional seat of Persian imperial power will guarantee bloody strife and turmoil until national demands are met, especially as the non-Persian nationalities make up around half the population.
At the moment. the future of Khomeini’s regime remains in the balance. Events as yet have not decisively determined whether Iran can continue on the capitalist road or not.
Capitalism in decay
Clearly, capitalism can survive in Iran only on the basis of the most ferocious reaction.
But it is not certain that, however virulent the dictatorship, capitalism can be preserved anyway, because of the utter decay of indigenous capitalism and the weakness of imperialism internationally.
But if Khomeini, or a more radical replacement for Khomeini, is pushed – just in order to maintain a basis for their own power – to lean on the mass movement to smash completely the remnants of landlordism and capitalism in Iran, it would inevitably be in the distorted form of a Bonapartist development comparable to Ethiopia.
This would be a step forward compared to capitalism and landlordism – but could only be a grotesque caricature of socialism.
Only the working class, with a clear Marxist programme and an orientation to the international development of the revolution, can provide an alternative. This, as the events in Iran have already shown, needs above all a mass workers‘ party capable of guiding the workers and other toiling masses with conscious socialist strategy and tactics.
By Bob Labi
Schreibe einen Kommentar