[Militant, No 484, 4 January 1980, p 11]
The seizure of the United States Embassy and diplomats in Tehran can only be fully explained against the background of the continuing turmoil in Iran. The Iranian revolution did not come to an end with the final collapse of the Shah’s regime in February last year. On the contrary, that insurrection was seen by the masses as opening the way for an improvement in their position.
The workers, peasants and oppressed nationalities have seized hold of this opportunity to press home their demands. Since February there has been wave upon wave of struggles by the masses. But given the complete absence of a revolutionary leadership these movements have not led to the overthrow of capitalism and the establishment of a workers‘ democracy.
While Khomeini and his unelected Central Islamic Revolutionary Council are the real government. of Iran, they do not have effective control of the country. In some of the areas of the national minorities, like Kurdistan and Azerbaijan, Khomeini has either partially or completely lost control.
At the same time Khomeini is under enormous pressure from the movements in the towns – over jobs, wages, housing and control over industry and in the country side, where the peasants are in many areas attempting to take over the land. Khomeini, who is striving to establish a theocratic dictatorship, has been forced by these movements to make concessions and take radical measures against capitalism.
But these actions have often been accompanied by repressive blows such as the law against ‚industrial agitation‘ and the suppression of opposition newspapers and leftist groups. Khomeini, who has no clear conceptions of what policies to take, is desperately attempting to maintain his position by this type of manoeuvring to contain the revolutionary movement.
Gradually Khomeini’s support has ebbed away as the masses‘ high expectations that the Shah’s fall would lead to a dramatic improvement in their lives have been dashed. This has forced Khomeini to take drastic measures to maintain the mullahs‘ position, and the seizure of the US Embassy is a prime example.
Only four days after the downfall of the Bakhtiar government in February a small group invaded the US Embassy in Tehran and took several diplomats hostage. Within hours Khomeini sent members of the Islamic militia to free the hostages. Why then did Khomeini take a completely opposite approach when the Embassy was occupied for a second time in November?
The clear answer is that Khomeini used the Iranian masses‘ enormous hatred towards American Imperialism and the Shah, which found a focus in the Embassy seizure, as a means of rallying support. This it was hoped, would divert the masses attentions away from their immediate problems and ensure massive backing for the December referendum on the second draft of the constitution.
While the Embassy occupation may have rallied support for Khomeini, this will not last, as once again the masses feel their daily problems coming to the fore. The situation in Iran will not be stabilised, even for a short time, until the question of Iran’s social character has been decided and the issue of the national minorities resolved.
Despite the enormous strength of the revolutionary movement in Iran, it cannot be discounted that there will be a counter-revolution which would instal a new repressive regime defending capitalism. The absence of a revolutionary leadership means that there is the ever present possibility that Khomeini or another mullah or military leader could lead to an attack on the working class, peasantry and minorities.
At the same time the Embassy seizure has given reaction, the chauvinists and militarists in the the USA and throughout the world a field day. This has helped lay the political basis inside the USA for new military interventions by US Imperialism not just in Iran but elsewhere in the world. Therefore it cannot be ruled out that US Imperialism would not try to intervene in Iran and possibly ·in other oil producing states as well to forestall the implementation of further anti-capitalist measures.
It seems likely at present that Khomeini will be prepared to let the hostages go, not willing to face an actual attack from US Imperialism, while of course using the threat of such an attack to unify the masses around him. But that will not save his position for ever as increasing numbers of Iranian workers draw the conclusion from their experiences of the need for an independent workers party, armed with a Marxist programme, which can lead the Iranian masses in the struggle against capitalism and oppression.
Schreibe einen Kommentar