Iraq’s Democracy of Globalized Colonialism and Opportunism of the White Civil Society

By Adel Samara

The last elections in Iraq have been followed by a new face and phase of crisis inside the local camp of occupation collaborators, agents, mafia, sectarian separatists…etc, while the popular classes stood neutral or were exploited despite of the flood of rhetoric that masses vote on a national not sectarian basis. After the results of elections, none of the large lists was able or was allowed to build a cabinet. The corrupt comprador, parasitic and collaborationist mafia are competing with each other over the whole country. Until now, foreign powers, US and Iran, continue to mobilize and direct their agents in the open or directly. It is obvious that there is an indirect conflict between the two foreign powers that are in a position to “milking” their local agents but ultimately they are “milking” Iraq.

Arab regimes are paralyzed either individually or collectively through the Arab League because there is no Arab system that is able to help another Arab country when it falls into crisis or because one of the aspects of US massacre against Iraq is to destroy and to de-Arabize Iraq and to de-Arabize all Arab countries. The US aggression supported by the West in general is the last crime of western modernity against Arab Homeland. That is why the role of the Arab league in Iraqi elections wasn’t different than any NGOs’ group.

The political scene in Arab Homeland demonstrates that the US and other imperialist regimes are the real rulers in this region. US/EU leaders spend more time and involvement in our region than in their own countries, especially when resistance spirit and activity rise.

Palestine‘s Bitter Lesson Repeated in Iraq

The Zionist Ashkenazi Regime – Israel (ZAR) had paid back some of what US/EU was accustomed to “donate” to its sustenance and survival since it is a mere creation the imperialist West. It paid back at two main levels in their crimes in Iraq:

· The ZAR criminal military experience against Palestinian resistance,

· And the experience of “democracy” under occupation, the “colonized” democracy.

Following the signing of Oslo Accords between ZAR and PLO, two rounds of elections took place in Oslo-stan under the settler colonial regime sponsored and financed by the US/EU imperialisms. What a democracy under occupation on the one hand, and supported and financed by imperialism on the other! This form of morally bankrupt democracy would have never happened if the resistance spirit were still high. It was a political game to deviate the struggle against occupation, from military and political struggle against normalization with the occupier, to concentrate on monopolizing power for the upper elite of both, political currents the semi-secular, and those of Political Islam. The result of this deformity was an internal Palestinian violent conflict motivated by another aspect of dispute over its military struggle on the one hand, and the recognition of the ZAR on the other. It was finally crystallized in the split of Gaza from the West Bank.

The same experience was copied and repeated in Iraq. It is copied in an Arab country where the occupation deliberately encourages and supports all national, ethnical, sectarian and political currents to compete among each other and to struggle against each other. All this was designed under the pretence of democratizing Iraq, a democratizing that led to 1.2 million deaths, 4 million refugees who fled the country, overwhelming and generalized poverty and placing most of the work force within the militia for the sects and nationalistic bourgeois.

That form of “democracy” was built on three false pillars:

· “Free” elections under military criminal occupation

· Local client regime serving the occupier

· A bitter sectarian conflict.

In the early days of the US occupation of Iraq in 2003, the US military governor dissolved Iraqi army as a symbol of unity and national defense and issued a military order named de-baathization or “uprooting of Baa’th party”.

Neither the UN nor any official regime in the world showed any signs of protest, a case that looked more like an international conspiracy or subjugation for US hegemony over world politics. This case of compromise was a premise for democracy under military colonial occupation. As noted above, this experience repeated and copied the ZAR experience in the occupied WBG.

In the second elections 2010, the same military orders against Ba’ath party were emphasized and all candidates who were suspected to be close to the Ba’ath party were deprived the right of nomination themselves. Candidates were limited to those who are collaborators, corrupt, mafia…etc.

The result of the elections brought to the Iraqi parliament representatives from several sects but of one kind only. In fact the results of the elections came according to what was planned. The main four blocks are collaborators: Maliki, Allawi, Sadrists and Kurds.

All these candidates come from the same political line, with no patriotic orientation, and all are collaborators and from the same class, the comprador parasitic class, despite their sectarian loyalty. Meanwhile, Iraq had fallen into a political crisis, crisis of competition among the leaders of the same class while the popular masses continue to be the victim of this class conflict and bear the burden of sectarian bloody fight. This form of internal social conflict is the mirror of the bloodshed which was designed by the US occupation and will persist for some time to come.

It should be noted that the partners in this conflict in Iraq are different than class conflicts under ordinary conditions in other countries. It is even different from the law of partnership between center/periphery bourgeoisies, that of “trickle-down economy”. In Iraq the local sectarian bourgeois are not patriotic they are traitors … betrayers for the national cause. It is very difficult to say that they are a coalition of “Social Structure of Accumulation”. They are not a productive nationalist bourgeois. The rental and trickle-down role for many dependent bourgeoisies in various Third World countries enjoy some form of sovereignty, in Iraq this is lacking. This non-patriotic bourgeois is a tail to several masters: US military governorate and embassy, the Iranian regime, and theological clergy.

That is why they failed to form a joint government because each of the main lists believes in negating all others and impose its sectarian dependent dictatorship. However, the sponsors of the elections continued to claim that the elections were democratic…etc. It should be noted that the same imperialist regimes which impose the sanctions and siege against Iraq, occupied and destroyed it are those that sponsored the Iraqi elections, i.e. democracy under military occupation and colonialism. What an irony!

After the conclusion of the elections, each of the main lists went back to its point of reference: especially to the US and Iran. Allawi, who is now the US “favorite”, tried to use Arab League but in vain since there is no joint, free and effective Arab role in Iraq. While the US still has the upper hand in Iraq, through its military might, Iran has the political/sectarian one. Two forms of foreign power are still the most decisive factors in Iraq today. But in the Iraqi political scene, the picture is the opposite so long as the majority of the collaborationist forces supports Iran and receives the backing by its rulers. Those who are loyal to the US occupation pretend that sooner or later the occupation will end, but the Iranian danger is persistent on the borders and even in the semi-occupation of the south. This is, however, the choice of collaborationists but not that of the resistance.

What is taking place in Iraq now is a competition between the foreign enemies using local agents, i.e. both Maliki (as a traditional political Islamic current) and Allawi (as a renegade Bathist and the first puppet used by the US occupation of Iraq), both currents are offering concessions to Tehran which, in turn, declares its willingness to welcome any of the Iraqi leaders. The dependent Kurdish forces are in the position of waiting and see. They are exploiting all these passive developments to gain more pointes, although gradually, to strengthen their final goal of separation through the partition of Iraq and the termination of its Arab depth.

It is important to note here that the Arab League deliberately support the occupation of Iraq from the point view that all resistance forces in the Arab Homeland (in Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine, Somalia…etc) represent a danger to the Arab Qutriyeh[1] state, a position that supports deliberately or by its outcome the US dangerous and liquidationist aggressive project of the so-called Large Middle East Project (LMEP), which a foreign and endemic project designed deliberately to be imposed over another country/s.

Both, the enmity of Arab regimes against the resistance on the one and, and the LMEP on the other, have the same goal of recognizing the ZAR and its integration into the Arab Homeland, by means of domination and control.

Resistance is both, the Target and the Goal

Resistance is the target of enemy’s camp, and the goal of the popular masses. That is why; the battle is at the doors of the resistance. All the competing foreign forces and their local agents might reconcile with each other against the resistance movements, or at least decide to divide the region among them.

As this is the case, we are talking about a complexity of class interests of the foreign and the local bourgeois and any demagogic discourse about people’s free choice, enjoying democracy , development, and independence are mere lies.

Only the resistance movement represents the people’s aspiration for liberation through its fight in the field. It is not an easy battle since the enemies are too powerful. But it is well known that the Iraqi resistance succeeded to make the US occupation forces fatigued to a great extent and it was the main cause behind the US financial/economic crisis. The continuity of the resistance in Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine is the only response to the colonial capitalism in its global era.

A Bribed or a Racist Civil Society!

In spite of our critique of the anti-war movement against war and globalization in the West, we were pleased and encouraged as we witnessed the emergence of that movement on the eve and throughout the criminal white capitalist wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia…etc. But with the passage of time and as these wars progressed, they became the norm and the crimes of the white armies in occupied countries became an accepted reality, whether by means of neutral manner or carelessness. The human motivation against the war declined almost to zero. What is astonishing is that the masses did not protest again against the war as the main factor behind the current financial/economic crisis.

The question is: what might mobilize the masses, the civilized/civil society in the West against their aggressive bourgeois if humanity, war and economic crisis failed to generate any serious protest? Those calamities were the main caused and pillars of war and revolution in the recent human history.

Some might argue that to accept this interpretation you need a revolutionary climate not an era of the triumph of the counter revolution. Others might argue that because most of the social classes in the West including the working classes remain “bribed” by capitalism and even their consciousness has been deteriorated in spite the crisis. If this is right, but also the Lumpen-proletriat of Marcuse failed to be carry the revolution which he dreamt of, but even more, many of them are soldiers in Iraq committing the crimes of war.

I like to venture by noting that this social/human/class compromise from the side of white popular classes in the West is due to:

· A white racist cultural education and deformed consciousness:

· And an opportunistic attitude based on the belief that:

o First, there is no near horizon for a change or defeat of capitalism;

o Second, as long as those in the countries of the periphery bear their miserable situation, they deserve it;

o Third if we in the west protest now, the precious privileges that we are enjoying might evaporate in this the delicate world economic situation.

If this analysis is correct, it will support the long known analysis that the revolution will start, but will not be limited, to the countries of the periphery because capital insists to exploit human beings to an extent where they can’t bear and the revolution will erupt as a result.

While the analysis or strategy which is based on de-linking and development by popular protection is correct and necessary for the start of revolution in the periphery, revolution in periphery and center will necessitate:

· A communist party of that must be build/developed by popular masses, to be under a continuous supervision by popular committees, and not imposed by a leadership of intellectual elite;

· This party must be able to carry on the duty of re-educating the popular masses which have been the victim of the heavy burden of de-education and de-humanization by bourgeois media. The bourgeois de-education of popular classes made it imperative for revolutionaries to interfere and to not to allow class consciousness to develop politically in a spontaneous manner.

[1] The term Qutri or Qutriyeh State in Arabic political life and discourse, signifies an area that was artificially severed from the rest of the Arab Homeland and refers to the fragmentation of the Arab Homeland into aqtar (plural of qutor). This term is used by the nationalist Arab parties that believe and struggle for a united Arab Homeland.