For one democratic state in whole Palestine
The call of Iran's president Ahmadinejad to wipe Israel off the map did not only evoke the expectable Zionist protests. This time they could drag behind the entire European establishment including the corporate media. The latter omitted that Ahmadinejad did nothing more than to refer the classical anti-Zionist position of the Palestinian liberation movement which does neither aggress Jews nor oppose the Jewish presence in Palestine altogether but does question the racist Jewish separate state Israel. On the other hand the often very small (pro)Zionist demonstration have been reported as if it would be official announcements.
The anti-Iranian mobilisation in Europe results in a net success for the US war drive which for years has been launching a multi-fold aggression against the Islamic Republic including a trade embargo. In Washington's terms Iran is the most dangerous "rogue state" as it refuses to completely subordinate to the American Empire.
As can be retrieved for the examples of Yugoslavia and Iraq the intensive media campaigns to satanise the resisting forces are indispensable preconditions for the aggression especially when it is about to wage war. Which form the attack on Iran will assume depends on the relationship of forces. In the first instance there is the Iraqi Resistance which is binding the US war machine and deterring it from further wars of aggression. But also the European public opinion plays its role. Therefore we are to reply:
On the accusations against Ahmadinejad
As mentioned the position exposed by Ahmadinejad is congruent with the one established by the historic Palestinian liberation movement of which both the Palestinian left as well as the Islamic movement is heir while Arafat's Fatah backed down and recognised Israel. No real democrat can accept the racist Jewish settler state which denies both individual civil rights as well as collective national rights to the native Palestinian population. Colonialism - and Israel is the last massive stronghold of overtly declared Western suprematism - violates the right to self-determination. National self-determination on its turn it the most important precondition of democracy.
Therefore the anti-imperialists have been unconditionally supporting the demand of the Palestinian liberation movement for one democratic state in the whole of Palestine from its inception, even after the PLO under Arafat gave in to the Zionist war of extermination. Like the other anti-colonial liberation movements also the Palestinian one combined the struggle for democracy for the oppressed people with an offer to the colonial settlers to remain in the country formerly occupied by them if they are ready to accept a common democratic state together with the once subdued native population. The claim the Palestinians could intend to drive the Jews into the sea turns reality up side down. It is Zionism which not only intends the extermination the Palestinians as a nation, but steadily moves ahead in its accomplishment.
The entire excitement therefore is completely amiss. The focus of attention must be on the Zionist annihilation of Palestine over which the West has laid a taboo. Analogous it can be stated for the Israeli demand to exclude Persia from the US: If there is a state systematically violating UN resolutions and uninterruptedly committing genocide then it is Israel which consequently needs to be expelled from the UN.
Ingenious people might ask why then the Jewish people is not entitled to the right of self-determination. a) Self-determination by extermination of the native people is no right but genocide. b) Only Nazi racism (and in its slipstream Zionism) have tried to transform Judaism from a religion to a nation and worse even to a race. As religion and culture Judaism is integral part of the European and Middle East nations and therefore to be recognised with all rights of worship and expression within these nations which does, however, not include to carve out a separate state. c) The reference to a mythological Israel of the bible is ridiculous and undemocratic. If one would apply the political map of several thousands years ago (which obviously is disputed and in no way clear-cut) the majority of the world's population needed be killed or displaced - with would especially effect the US.
Finally, the campaign against the position of the Iranian president is nothing than a pretext. His position has been repeated on the occasion of the Jerusalem day, more as a ritual than a combat cry. Actually the battle with imperialism (also over Palestine) today is fought in Iraq. There Tehran co-operates closely with the US. If Iran would push the Shia political leaderships to actively resist the occupation, the defeat of the US in Mesopotamia was sealed.
The real stake
Behind the Western reactions to the Iranian verbal radicalism there is being hidden a conflict of larger dimension. Iran is a regional power which despite many oscillations does refuse the subordination to Washington.
This can be clearly seen in reference to the Persian nuclear programme. We are unable to evaluate whether the US claims of an Iranian atomic bomb in constructions are true or not. In any case the US wants to curb the civil programme in order to impede any possible military use. This is not only a grave violation of Iran's sovereignty.
Why Iran should not have nuclear arms while the freedom of the peoples is being threatened by US and Israeli atomic bombs? Facing the US terror war the only possibility to guaranty for national sovereignty seems to be pre-emptive nuclear armament.
As in Iraq also in Iran nothing less than the US' role as imperator is at stake. In this battle we are firmly on the side of all those resisting the empire.
For the time being Iran seems to have remained in the hopeless dichotomy between pro-Western reformers with the backing of the middle classes on one side and anti-Western conservatives with the support of the clerics as well as the rural poor. Latter appeared to have had the state apparatus under their control.
But Ahmadinejad makes the impression not to be completely dependent on the cleric leadership. His electoral campaign for social justice not only won him the support of the lower classes but can be interpreted as an indirect challenge to the clerics who keep enriching themselves. At least here is a possible line of conflict.
The highest authority within the state, Ayatollah Chamemei, swiftly pushed the representative of the pro-Western capitalist wing, Rafsanjani, to speak out conciliatory words. At the same time Ahmadinejad's power as president was cut back by the upvaluation of the Expediency Council, over which Rafsanjani presides not by accident.
So while we take side with the Iranian resistance to imperialist pressure we hope that a popular anti-imperialist wing striving for social justice is going to emancipate itself which does not serve as a cheap mass of manoeuvre for the clerics whose only interest is ton defend their power.
Novemver 4, 2005