Defend the Islamic Republic

Millions upon millions have taken to the streets of Britain and throughout the rest of the world to demand an end to the imperialist war on Iran. Donald Trump and the fools he surrounds himself  with talked about   a “decapitation” victory. Benjamin Netanyahu thought his dream of a “Greater Israel” from the Nile to the Euphrates was about to come true. The Americans and their Israeli and feudal Arab lackeys thought that Stealth war-planes, missiles and drones would soon have the Iranians on their knees begging for mercy.  But it didn’t happen. The dream of The Donald died in the smoke of burning American bases and the bombed out  ruins of Tel Aviv.
The leaders of the European Union have wisely spurned Trump’s call for help to break the Iranian blockade of the Persian Gulf. So has Starmer who’s now trying to rebuild the links with his old mates in Brussels while still keeping sweet with the Americans and the oil sheikhs.
The bourgeois media talk about the crisis in the Persian Gulf that threatens Western supplies of oil and gas – and indeed that is a crisis for them, Soaring energy prices could plunge the imperialist world into a slump of 1929 proportions – but re-opening the waterway won’t solve the underlying problems that once again set the Middle East on fire.
The immediate issue is to end the fighting, lift the imperialist sanctions on the Islamic Republic and recognise Iran’s right to control its own economy and develop a nuclear energy programme. But the heart of the matter is Palestine. The legitimate rights of the Palestinian Arabs must be recognised including the right of return for the millions of Palestinians whose families were driven from their homes by Zionist terror in the 1940s and the equally legitimate right of the Palestinian Arabs to self-determination and the independent state they were promised when Palestine was partitioned in 1947. 
UN resolutions have provided the basis for a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. First of all Israel must totally withdraw from all the occupied territories seized in 1967, including Arab East Jerusalem and Syria’s Golan Heights. The Palestinians must be allowed to establish a state of their own on the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The Palestinian refugees whose homes are now in Israel must be allowed to return or, if they so wish, be paid appropriate compensation in exchange. And all states in the region should have internationally agreed and recognised frontiers guaranteed by all the Great Powers.

Defend the right to protest

Palestine Solidarity Campaign director Ben Jamal and Stop the War vice-chair Chris Nineham have been found guilty of breaking the Public Order Act this week. Though their punishment – they were fined and conditionally discharged – was not severe they shouldn’t have been in court in the first place. These were clearly trumped up charges designed to stifle the massive Palestinian solidarity movement that has swept the country in recent years. The two campaign leaders have made it clear that they will appeal and so they should. This is an attack on civil liberties. It affects us all. The verdict raises huge concerns about any further powers granted to the police through the Crime and Policing Bill, which is currently progressing though parliament. It confirms the view that these proposed increased powers represent a seismic threat to democratic freedoms.

The future beckons

While the imperialists live in the past with their “American Dream”  their “new world order” and “Making America Great Again” the Global South aims for the future – a better tomorrow that was charted out in Beijing by the leaders of the people’s democracies and the leaders of the Global South during the top-level discussions on the sidelines of the Victory Day celebrations in the Chinese capital last week.
Donald Trump and the other old men who lead the bourgeoisie in America and Europe have nothing to offer the new generation apart from tales of an imagined glorious past when imperialism in all its forms ruled most of the world and promises of never-ending poverty, austerity and war in the future.
These people pose as defenders of what they still call the “free world”. They say that socialism means dictatorship and that capitalism stands for freedom. But it is freedom only for the exploiters to continue to rob and plunder working people across the globe to ensure that a tiny handful of parasites can live the lives of Roman emperors at our expense.
They preach their “freedom” with their bombers and drones, their special forces and blockades against all those who dare to stand up for themselves. We see what the ruling class meant by “freedom” in Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Ukraine. We see it today in the Gaza Strip,
They say we have free speech and democracy, but it’s democracy and freedom only for themselves. Their elections are used so that the smallest number of people can manipulate the maximum number of votes.
Now a new economic and political counter to US‑led imperialism is being built by China, Russia and the rest of the Global South. BRICS and the Belt & Road initiative provides an alternative to imperialism’s tariffs and one-sided “deals” and “partnerships” that solely serve the interests of the trans‑national corporations of the imperialist world.
In Beijing the Chinese leader Xi Jinping outlined five core principles that should be the driving force for global reform: sovereign equality, adherence to international law, multilateralism, a people-centred approach, and focus on practical action. The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, backs China’s new initiative on global governance, calling it “timely and positive”. He reaffirmed Russia’s support for China’s proposals, which aim to build a more effective and fair international system amid Western dominance. 
The history of humanity is a history of exploitation and class struggle. For century after century working people – the slaves, the peasants, the artisans, dreamt of justice and equality. But in the modern era with the rise of the working class and the development of scientific socialism it is now possible not only to dream of a better world but also concretely to build it.
The imperialists think that their guns will ensure that they can ignore the will of the people for as long as they like. But they were proved wrong in the 20th century and they will be proved wrong today. The days when people listened to the rich men who told us that the greatest virtue of humanity was the possession of the largest amount of money are over. 

A dangerous escalation

The Ukrainian raid into southern Russia last week was clearly monitored and probably even directed by the NATO military advisors embedded in the Ukrainian army. The main target was the Kursk nuclear power station that the Ukrainians hoped to seize and then swap for the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant in southern Ukraine that was liberated in 2022. Their secondary objective was to seize Russian land to swap for recent Russian gains in the Kharkov region of northern Ukraine.
Russian resistance has foiled the Ukrainians on both counts. Though the Ukrainians are still entrenched on Russian soil their advance on Kursk has been beaten back while any hopes for peace talks and a negotiated settlement to end the war have now been dashed as the Kremlin vows to fight to drive all the Ukrainians out of their lands and carry on fighting until Kiev accepts Russia’s terms to end the conflict. 
Though no one knows exactly why the lame-duck Biden administration sanctioned this Ukrainian sortie it is clearly linked to the American presidential election. The war lobby, the cross-party clique that represents the most venal and aggressive circles within the American ruling class, are always ready to cuff the Russians while Democrat bagmen may believe that a slap in the face to the Russians will boost Kamala Harris’ chances in November.
Whatever the motive it’s a dangerous gang. This sort of escalation brings NATO one step closer to a direct clash with the Russian army – a clash that could easily turn into a nuclear exchange in the heart of Europe.
The aim of the NATO alliance all along has been to force war on the Russian Federation, and now the whole world can see the terrible price which has been paid for a war which could so easily have been avoided. 
In the past the Russian Federation did everything possible to avoid a full-scale war in Ukraine. The Kremlin spent eight years supporting the Minsk process plan, involving simple autonomy for the then Donetsk and Lugansk Republics, while Ukraine, with NATO’s support, broke ceasefire after ceasefire and thousands of civilians in those republics died in constant Ukrainian attacks. When the Russians intervened to support the anti-fascist resistance and stop the persecution of the Russian-speaking minorities in the Donbas in 2022 they withdrew all their forces around the Ukrainian capital to negotiate a peace deal with the fascist regime only to be double-crossed at the last moment by the NATO powers who told the Zelensky regime to keep on fighting.
Sir Keir Starmer likes to pose as the equal of the Americans in the NATO alliance but in reality Britain is no better than the rest of the Western European pack that have been forced to accept the model of subservience imposed on Japan by US imperialism after its defeat in 1945.
Dependent on American protection to defend their own global interests they destroyed the Yugoslav federation and the Libyan Jamahuriya at Washington’s behest. They fan the flames of war in Ukraine and the Middle East and prolong the unhappy partition of many countries including Cyprus, Ireland, Kashmir and Korea. Fearful of the second coming of Donald Trump and uncertain of the loyalty of the Harris team all they can now do is watch as the drama of the race to the White House plays out.

With One Hand Waving Free

by Ben Soton

With One Hand Waving Free: a novel by Ken Fuller. Independently published, 2024. Pbk, 351pp, RRP: £12.99

This is the title of Ken Fuller’s latest book. Regular readers will remember him as the creator of the Red Button trilogy set in the heady days of the early 20th century. This work, however, is set in the 1970s. Roger Drummond is happily working in a bus garage when offered a managerial position in a medical supply firm Merrit &Thwaite which is thrust upon him through his socially ambitious wife.  Drummond, who also spends some of his spare time in left-wing bookshops, resembles a combination of Reginald Perrin and Citizen Smith. 
Drummond’s work for Merrit & Thwaite takes him to the Caribbean island of Arawak.  
The novel shines a light on British imperialism’s role in the Caribbean; it was in fact the slave trade that enabled the industrial revolution to take place.  Set in 1978, the 30th anniversary of the founding of the NHS we see the Callaghan Labour Government under left-wing pressure agree to fund a shipment of medical supplies.  I wonder if a Starmer Government would be susceptible to such pressure: don’t hold your breath.  Drummond’s reason for visiting the island is to oversee their delivery.
Arawak’s left-wing government, which has similarities with both Michael Manley’s Jamaica and Maurice Bishop’s Grenada is attempting to introduce healthcare to the island’s impoverished population.  On the island he witnesses attempts by US imperialism to destabilise the country and becomes involved in a passionate affair with the country’s health minister, Davinia Lee.  
 The dual role of religion is exposed in the story.  On one hand the Reverend Bassfield Thomas advocates a form of Liberation Theology and he refers to the imperialists as Pharaohs.  His followers come into open conflict with a group of Billy Graham style Evangelical Christians who object to the presence of Cuban doctors on the island and try to turn backward sections of the population against the government. 
The novel ends with a very interesting twist which readers of Fuller’s other works will understand.  However With One Hand Waving is an excellent read in its own right.  Not to say there is a possibility of a sequel.  It can be safely said that Fuller is a pioneer in the genre of the left-wing political thriller.  I hope his work continues.    
   

A new wind of change in Africa

The army has taken over in Niger, a land-locked, poverty-stricken part of what was once “French West Africa” that gained formal independence from its colonial masters in 1960. But the French maintained a hold over their former territory using pliant civilian and military leaders to maintain their grip on the country’s gold and uranium exports which largely went to France. Or did do until the army led by General Abdourahmane Tchiani kicked out the old gang last week.

In the capital, Niamey, people took to the streets in support of the new leadership and call for the closure of the French air base and withdrawal of all French troops from the country. Many were carrying Russian flags during the protests calling on people to block Niamey airport, where the French are based, until all French military personnel leave the country. 

General Tchiani  has suspended the export of uranium and gold to France while warning against foreign meddling and military intervention against the coup. He called on "...the people of Niger as a whole and their unity to defeat all those who want to inflict unspeakable suffering on our hard-working populations and destabilise our country,". But the intervention has already begun as the imperialists on both sides of the Atlantic work to restore the old regime politicians that long did their bidding in Niger. 

French President Emmanuel Macron condemned the revolt as "completely illegitimate and profoundly dangerous for the Nigeriens, Niger and the whole region". And in Washington Joe Biden called for the release of deposed president Muhammed Bazoum and the restoration of what he called “democracy” in the country. “I call for President Bazoum and his family to be immediately released, and for the preservation of Niger’s hard-earned democracy,” Biden said.

“In this critical moment, the United States stands with the people of Niger to honour our decades-long partnership rooted in shared democratic values and support for civilian-led governance. The Nigerien people have the right to choose their leaders. They have expressed their will through free and fair elections- and that must be respected” Biden said.

The pro-Western Economic Community of West Africa, known as Ecowas and led by Nigeria, is already threatening military intervention as a “last resort” should the coup leaders fail to back down. But few, if any, will want to send in their troops without substantial Western backing.

Though the stage is set for an imperialist inspired civil war the days when the imperialists and their hirelings simply could do what they liked in Africa are long gone.  

The future of Niger is not the plaything of Western politicians and big energy and mining corporations that have mercilessly looted and plundered the country for over a hundred years. Biden and Macron don’t speak for the Nigeriens whose voice was stifled by the bogus values of imperialism and the sham ‘democracy’ of the West. Their voice is in the barracks and on the streets of Niger who want the French out and genuine independence and the right to choose their own way of life without imperialist interference.

General Tchiani and his National Council for the Safeguard of the Homeland may or may not succeed. But that can only be the choice of the people of Niger. 

China-bashing a tragedy for 10 Downing Street

by Ding Gang

April 7th 1840 is a day that the Chinese will not forget. On that day, the British Parliament debated issues related to China. Historians originally believed that it was that meeting that made the decision for the British to invade China. Later, a journalist investigated and found that British warships were already on their way to China at the time of the debate. The British Parliament did not pass the appropriation for the military expenses of the expedition to China until July 27th 1840, after the outbreak of war. The facts show that the Opium War was initiated by the British government.
    The reason why I thought of this is that I saw that the two candidates for the British premiership both use the "China threat theory" to denounce each other in their election campaigns in order to attract more votes. Their rhetoric is very reminiscent of the word "war" and reminds me of the Western media's portrayal of the competition with China as "an ideological war."
    The Opium Wars took place at the height of the British Empire's global expansion, a time when the greed and madness of capitalism was most fully revealed. For raw materials and markets, war was a necessary means to satisfy the Empire's lust for treasure. Empire means war. The whole world was the object of its colonial plunder, and China was certainly not an exception.
    This imperial hegemony and greed continued into the 1950s, even as late as July 1965, when then British Prime Minister Harold Wilson said " our frontier is on the Himalayas." Historians generally agree that the Suez Canal crisis of 1956 confirmed the decline of Britain as a global power. And the handover of Hong Kong to China on July 1st 1997, marked the formal end of the Empire on which "the sun never sets."
    The end of an empire is the decay of power, but the end of its spirit is often not so quick. While Britain's prime ministerial candidates claim China as a major threat, there is still a strong sense of empire left on their mind. Rishi Sunak, the former British finance minister who is running for prime minister and head of the Conservative Party, said on July 24th that he would adopt a tough policy toward China if elected as the next British prime minister. He also said that China is the "largest threat" to British and global security this century. Another Conservative rival, Liz Truss, has accused Sunak of being "weak" on China.
    Britain is now facing a serious crisis with inflation expected to hit 11 per cent by the end of the year, and the British media estimate that the biggest problem for whoever becomes prime minister will be coping with the sharpest fall in real incomes in Britain since the 1950s. That the candidates for the British prime minister would now use China as an excuse to canvass votes is a testament to their inability to lead the country out of crisis. They are more like a spiteful complainer, pouring out their incompetence on others. Instead of trying to convince the public that they can make their country rise again, they are misleading voters with their self-made fears. This is the tragedy of British politics.
    Today's China is on a completely different path from the rise of the British Empire. China's rise doesn't follow the road to imperialism. China overtook Britain and many developed countries to become the second largest economy in the world, without plunder and war. This is the essence of the "China model" – a reality that British politicians, still steeped in the psychological delusion of the British Empire, are unwilling to accept.
    Although their means of trying to contain China appear to have changed, their expansionist nature remains the same, making it impossible for them to allow China to compete with them on an equal and reasonable basis, and are resorting to more financial and economic means to contain China's peaceful global advancement. This is probably considered the last hysterical cry of the imperial psyche. The world has changed dramatically from the Opium Wars, when the British Parliament discussed how to open the gates of China, to today's UK which does everything possible to curb the legal and peaceful entry of Chinese companies and influence without a single warship to accompany them to Britain.
    British politicians who pretend not to see this change because they don't want to accept it are doomed to take this country down a dark path.


The author is a senior editor with People's Daily, and currently a senior fellow with the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies at Renmin University of China.

Oil lords of the Middle East

by Ben Soton

  

Lords of the Desert: The Battle Between the United States and Great Britain for Supremacy in the Modern Middle East by James Barr. Simon & Schuster UK (2019). Hardback: 416pp; £20; ISBN-10: 1471139794; ISBN-13: 978-1471139796 Paperback: 416pp; £9.99; ISBN-10: 1471139808; ISBN-13: 978-1471139802 Kindle Edition: 416pp; £5.99; ASIN: B077DHWWRG

This book describes the Anglo-US rivalry in the Middle East from 1942 to 1967 that undermined the notion of the ‘special relationship’ between the two imperialist powers.

James Barr’s Lords of the Desert is divided into four parts focusing on: the formation of the state of Israel; the events in Iran in 1951; the Suez crisis of 1956; and the final part ending with the British withdrawal from South Yemen in 1967. Barr goes into considerable detail about various diplomatic meetings and those involved. He also discusses differences within the British and US ruling classes as well as between the two powers, such as the disagreements between the pro-Zionist Winston Churchill and his ‘Arabist’ Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden. Meanwhile in the USA, domestic oil companies were not keen on US development of the Saudi oil industry because this would lower the price of the ‘black gold’.

Barr sees the region’s history in terms of rivalry between imperialist powers, making little mention of popular movements in the region – Communist, Arab Nationalist and even Islamic.

Progressive movements in the Middle East were aided by that great anti-imperialist power the Soviet Union, which gets little mention. The only movement Barr mentions, in an over sympathetic way, is Zionism. Originally an instrument of the European big Jewish bourgeoisie, Zionism eventually become a tool of US imperialism. On occasion Zionism was at odds with British imperialism, which for much of the period favoured the Hashemite monarchies of Jordan and Iraq. Meanwhile US imperialism was able to trade its pro-Zionist position in the Arab world by promoting the House of Saud, which was often at odds with Britain’s Hashemite clients.

At the beginning of the period British imperialism was the dominant power in the region, holding key strategic assets such the Suez Canal and the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, the fore-runner of British Petroleum (BP). The changing role of US imperialism was shown when these assets were threatened.

In 1951 the Iranian Government nationalised the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company; the US Government sided with Britain and orchestrated the overthrown of the Iranian government two years later. The CIA paid Islamic mobs to riot, believing their government would close down the mosques. One of the rioters was the late Ayatollah Khomeini.

The same British government believed the USA would back them in 1956, when they along with France and Israel invaded Egypt after the Nasser government nationalised the Suez Canal. The Prime Minister Anthony Eden, who was Foreign Secretary at the time of the Iranian crisis, made a serious error of judgement when the USA not only refused to support them but threatened to sell off reserves of sterling.

This was the point when US imperialism replaced Britain as the dominant power in the region. Washington’s long-term aim in the region was to ease out their British counter parts, replacing them as the dominant power in the region whilst fooling the region’s people and some governments that it was not an imperialist power.

Barr paints a rosy view of two of the region’s worst curses: imperialism and Zionism; not questioning their right to interfere, exploit and treat the Arabs with contempt. Lords of the Desert is, however, a useful source of information for anyone interested in Middle East history. He inadvertently provides anti-imperialists with ammunition by making little mention of the Soviet Union. If it was such an evil empire, why does it feature so little in a book on inter-imperialist rivalry in the region?

         

Ropes of Sand

While Donald Trump lords it in London posing as a great statesman in front of the Queen and Mrs May his dream of winning a Nobel Peace Prize is fading fast in the face of mounting Arab resistance to what the chief American warlord still calls the “deal of the century”.

            Trump really shouldn’t have bothered in the first place if the details of the American “peace plan” that have appeared in the Israeli press are true. His “deal” gives the Zionists everything they want and more. The Palestinians get nothing apart from some monetary compensation funded by the feudal Arab oil sheikhs as part of their effort to build an anti-Iranian front in the Middle East. While some of the princes of oil, including the disgraced Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, were prepared to support Trump’s surrender plan others are clearly having second thoughts.

The Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank and the refugee camps are boycotting the talks. Few others have shown any enthusiasm for the “Peace to Prosperity” conference in Bahrain which the Americans hoped would kick off the first stage of the Trump “deal” in June. Now even the future direction of the major beneficiary, Israel, has been thrown into doubt as Israel gears up for a second general election after the first one undermined Benyamin Netanyahu’s efforts to form a new coalition in April.

Trump’s unilateral recognition of Israel’s illegal annexation of Arab East Jerusalem and Syria’s Golan Heights was designed to boost Netanyahu’s chances in the spring election. In actual fact the American card counted for little in elections that revolved around the turf war between Netanyahu’s Likud bloc and the new Blue and White front led by General Benny Gantz.  

 “The citizens of Israel know we are going to elections only because Bibi [Netanyahu] wants to save himself,” Gantz says alluding to Netanyahu’s apparent efforts to scupper pending graft indictments against him. “Netanyahu could have returned the mandate to the president, and we would have formed a government. Why is he not doing that?”

            The Blue and Whites, who are named after the colours of the Israeli flag, style themselves as “centrists” and “liberals”. In fact their platform differs little from Likud’s long-standing right-wing Zionist agenda. Whether a Gantz-led coalition would continue where Netanyahu left off is anyone’s guess.

The social-democratic parties which once dominated Israeli politics are now amongst the also-rans. For the first time Labour and Meretz were pipped at the polls by the communists who have always campaigned for the restoration of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people and a just and lasting peace in the Middle East.

Now the communist-led Democratic Front for Peace and Equality (Hadash) and three Israeli Arab parties are planning to reunite and run once again, like in 2015, as a single slate in the forthcoming elections scheduled in September.

            Israeli politicians across spectrum are now back on the campaign trail for an election whose outcome no-one can predict. One thing’s for sure though – Trump’s “deal of the century” is going nowhere.