Written by IWL-FI
Wednesday, 02 October 2013 09:15
A new moment in the Syrian Revolution and the need for international solidarity
Faced with Assad’s bloody attack with chemical weapons against zones controlled by rebels in Damascus, the USA announced with fanfares that they would bomb Syria because Assad “had crossed” the red line”.
Obama declared that he would do so even without the OK of the UN and barely with the support of England and France. And yet, the USA finally deferred the intervention and grabbed hold of the Russian plan of placing the chemical weapons under international control in consideration of suspending the intervention.
This resounding recoil of the American government and their allies can be explained by the so-called “Iraq syndrome” that is expressed in the refusal by broad sectors of the population of imperialist countries – beginning by the very USA. It is the rejection of the involvement of their governments on new and costly military adventures. There is no doubt that it is all about one of the most outstanding and progressive expressions of the political and military defeats that have put an end to the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. The British Cameron paid with his defeat in the Parliament his bet to accompany Obama: an unprecedented event in recent history. Only France was still there but began to doubt seeing the internal opposition and the crisis unleashed in the USA as well as in Great Britain.
But even the very contents of the agreement of USA-Russia evidence the real nature of all imperialist powers. The agreement does not go essentially far beyond cosmetic measures to save Obama’s face. This essentially goes to expose what the entire activity of American imperialism and their allies throughout the over two years of the civil war in Syria and the latest events confirm: that their policy is nothing but forcing Assad and the resistance to seek a negotiated solution that, taking for granted some concessions to the resistance would preserve the essence of Syrian regime and so stabilise the country.
Another element, even if not determining but which increases the suspicions of imperialism about supporting the rebels is the lack of centralisation of the leadership of the rebel camp, which is much more fragmented than in Libya. That is why, the USA and their imperialist allies must greatly fear that the forces that control the process may not be under their complete control.
Obama and Putin have staged efforts to stabilize the country as if it were the old days of the USA-USRR collaboration to bury revolutions.
This fact proves clearly that the resistance, the one that for good reasons was against the military intervention as well as those who driven by the desperate situation harboured expectations regarding this intervention, that the so-called great powers – and especially the USA are not “friends of the revolution” nor do they have any humanitarian interest in it: they are Al Assad’s accomplices.
SO THAT SYRIAN PEOPLE’S LIBERATION MAY BE SAME WORK OF SYRIAN PEOPLE: WEAPONS AND MATERIAL AID FOR THE RESISTANCE.
The IWL-FI has always been against imperialist intervention, because this intervention had a single aim: to control the revolution from inside in order to stabilise the country and the region under their control. There was no interest at all in the “humanitarian” aspect. All their activity is in the service of colonial and counterrevolutionary targets. The imperialist project does not go beyond turning Syria into an American colony. Our address for those who from the positions of the resistance against the tyrant Assad keep on hoarding expectations in liberation coming from the USA, Great Britain or France is that history proves that they can be “liberated” from one bloodthirsty satrap, Assad, only to fall into the bondage of the worst satraps in history of mankind: imperialists.
If Syrian people do not achieve their own liberation with the help of their brothers from the other peoples, the sacrifice of the martyrs will have served the purpose of changing a dictatorship like that of Assad for another one, much more powerful like the one represented by the USA and their allies.
Were there the slightest humanitarian interest, the most minimal democratic criterion, they would not spare weapons and supplies for the Syrian resistance to exert the most elementary right to defend themselves against the tyrant.
The IWL-FI has always been on the side of the Syrian people and their heroic resistance against Assad and will remain there for ever and it is as from this unequivocal side of the barricades that we are calling on all proletarian, popular and democratic organisations to double efforts to demand shipments of weapons and material aid for the Syrian resistance from their governments.
THE FIGHT ON THE SPOT AND THE REGRETTABLE ROLE OF THE “LEFT”
In the latest weeks, Assad’s counteroffensive has been based upon the superiority of the armament and the support from Hezbollah with thousands of armed men as well as the supplies and logistical support from Russia as well as from Iran and Venezuela. This offensive achieved some headway, such as the recovery of Qusair, but it most certainly has a limitation: the situation of the Assad troops that, in spite of all the military superiority does not have the morale necessary to go into the frank and direct combat to annihilate the revolution. This is particularly noticeable in Damascus and this is what can explain that the regime cannot annihilate the battalions of the peripheries such as Ghouta or Kabum.
This is why the panorama of relative strengths reflects a moment of impasse that may linger on. Several analysts foresee a long war which from the point of view of the struggle for defeating Assad means a prolonged period of further suffering if there is no effective aid for the revolution.
Even if the suspending of the bombing grants Assad a gasp of fresh air because it relieves him from a possible destruction of military objectives from the air, it does not alter the overall situation in the field. In spite of his military superiority, Assad cannot retrieve control over most of the liberated zones, including the peripheries of Damascus for he does not have enough troops fit for direct combat. The dictator is trying to make up for the casualties and the demoralisation in his army by appealing to Hezbollah’s sinister and shameful role, who is squandering the heritage accumulated in their struggle against Zionism.
In spite of all, there have even been some victories in Aleppo and Latakia. This panorama seems to promise a long distance civil war and this makes an international solidarity campaign so much more important.
But unfortunately, the positions of most of the world left are against the Syrian revolution. ON the one hand, the Castro-Chavism and Stalinism in general who have lined up totally for Assad, just the way they did with Kaddafi.
ON the other hand, centrists and many organisations that claim to be “Trotskyists” yield to the pressure of the Stalinists with the excuse who are these who lead the rebels. In order “not to capitulate” to these leaders, they actually propose leaving the Syrian revolution isolated and in this way they contribute towards the defeat while they let imperialism and their allies to keep on playing at being the only ones who defend it.
The IWL-FI has no doubts as to what side of the barricade they are on: We demand weapons and material support for Syrian resistance so as to put an end to the qualitative difference between the armament of the regime and that of the rebels. They need superior armament, anti-aircraft missiles and tanks with updated technology. This type of materials cannot be achieved unless it is issued by the governments and imperialist governments.
And while we pose this basic democratic demand, the right to self-defence of the Syrian people, that the alleged left-wingers and Trotskyites are shocked and they scream things about the “capitulation of the IWL to imperialism”.
It may be a good idea to ask them all, was it not the shipment of weapons and material aid the unanimous demand of the entire left in the SpanishState when the toiling masses stood up against Franco’s troops? Was not the demand of weapons posed especially to England and France? Were not England and France imperialist countries? Was not their refusal of sending this armament registered in history as evidence of having refused to support the Republic and so having helped towards Franco’s triumph?
Groups that pretend to be Trotskyists join the choir saying that we play the imperialist game when we demand weapons for the Syrian resistance. These groups are full of pompous phrases in the name of an alleged orthodoxy while Trotsky was the first to vigorously condemn the refusal of the governments of England and France, during the Spanish Civil War pointing out that this attitude only strengthened the fascism and, what is more, he taught that revolutionaries had to use the contradictions of imperialism and could accept weapons to continue the struggle.
Consequently, as Trotsky used to say, let us leave these ultralefts to their pompous statements and together with the Syrian people, whom we support, let us repudiate that declaration with legitimate outrage.
THE AL QAEDA GROUPS: ASSAD´S FIFTH COLUMN
Further and further into the liberated zones a confrontation is taking place between the rebel battalion and Local Committees on the one hand and organisation linked to the Al Qaeda on the other, especially Jabat Al Nusra and EISI.
It is a confrontation growing in the liberated zones between the activists who fight to bring down Assad in the name of a democratic Syria and groups liked to Al Qaeda who claim that the target is nothing but the establishment of a caliphate and consequently, the dividing line of the war is not between the troops of Assad and the Local Committees and the ELS but between the followers of a new theocratic and dictatorial state and the infidels.
In accordance with this project they persecute activists, arrest and murder – including a priest who supported the revolution for the simple fact that he wanted to exert his right to worship; they punish and execute young people who do not declare themselves to be Muslim or cannot read Koran ; women who do not wear their veils, etc, in all the areas where they are in the lead. They have murdered SLA commanders and they refuse to comply with the united action against Assad and they refuse to join the other rebel militias. Moreover, they have been accused by the Local Committees and the rebel battalions of leaving the front to concentrate their troops in the rearguard. This is as good as leading to a division apart from serving as an alibi fro Assad and also drives minority sectors – such as Alawites or Shia, whom they persecute, to be attracted by the dictatorship.
The IWL-FI has been exposing their role, but now we must say clearly that they are the fifth column of Assad in the camp of the revolution; that wherever they are in the lead, it is necessary to be organised against their dictatorship. For the defence of the Local Committees, it is the people who are to decide about life in these zones. It is not a good idea to remove Assad only to replace him by a new Al Qaeda & partners dictatorship as the resistance has been exposing.
WAR IS THE CONTINUATION OF POLITICS BY OTHER MEANS
When old Trotsky, who knew a few things about wars and military affairs, founder and leader of the Red Army, said when he spoke about the Spanish Revolution and the war as part of it, at war, the result depends in a fourth part or less than that on the military aspects and in three quarters or more on the politics.
Programme and policies in resistance become the crucial problem if we are to win the war.
Is it possible to unify the currently dispersed and fragmented resistance without a programme that will express the common objectives of workers, toiling masses, oppressed nationalities, youth and women who are now sighting against Assad? Is it possible to unify the resistance without a programme of national and social liberation?
Those who believe that such questions are unnecessary or even harmful because “at present it is all about toppling Assad and then we can talk,” place military victory and the tasks of the revolution into two separate planes and in this way, they prepare the failure of the revolution and the defeat in the war.
Consequently, the problem of the battle for this programme is the problem of the leadership of the war and the revolution. If the Al Qaeda groups have gained ground, it is not mainly due to the weapons that they receive – and it certainly is an important item – but mainly due to the fact that with their Caliphate, their Shari and their Islamic constitution they have a programme – a counterrevolutionary programme but a programme when all is said and done, a programme round which they can make all the objectives or their struggle hinge.
Can resistance become stronger if leaders do not make it clear for all the Kurdish people to see whether the Syria they are fighting for will include the right of the Kurdish people to self-determination?
Can resistance be unified and grow stronger if in the eyes of the combatant youth it is not clear whether the Syria they are fighting for will be governed by the principle of national sovereignty or their resources will still be handed over to the multinationals so that looting can be continued?
Can resistance grow stronger if Syrian women, vanguard in the struggle do not know if in the victorious Syria there will be room for them on an equal footing with men or if they will keep on being oppressed and subjugated by reactionary laws?
Can resistance grow stronger without knowing who will decide the future of Syria if Assad is toppled? Will it be a constituent assembly, free and sovereign who will decide the future of Syria? Or will it be the friends of imperialism who are even now preparing the “transition” while expecting sectors of the Assad regime to help out with the negotiations?
This is how the struggle for a programme for the revolution turns into the most powerful weapon. The struggle for this programme begins when we help the revolutionary combatants to get more insight when leading the battle, to share it with the Local Committees while battling for the centralisation of these Committees, that once united should turn into the real organ of power of the revolution. The battle for the programme should include the task of fighting for the shaping of a Central Committee of Militias what, submitted to the decisions of a centralised organ Local Committee, put an end to the current atomisation and centralise military plans, supplies of the militias and their armament.
The battle is for this programme to WIN THE WAR AND PROVIDE A PROLETARIAN, POPULAR AND DEMOCRATIC solution for the Syrian revolution.
From this point of view, it is fundamental that all the most aware combatants and those who are part of the local committees and, pose the task of building a political, revolutionary, socialist, proletarian and internationalist party hinging round it.
The defence of this programme and the struggle for the construction of a revolutionary party will unavoidably take place stemming out of permanent political combat against the current collaborationist leaderships who beginning with Syrian National Coalition or the Syrian National Coalition or the commanders of the FSA who have so far done nothing but to cry repeatedly for imperialist intervention while exhibiting their incapacity to solve crucial problems of resistance.
An international campaign of solidarity with the Syrian revolution is urgent!
From the IWL-FI we claim for intensification of the campaign of aid for Syria. We call all the workers´ and democratic organisations to demand weapons and material aid for Syrian resistance.
We do not want any military intervention from imperialism; we want Syrian people to have the most elementary and democratic right to defend themselves. All those who rightfully claim that one cannot remain indifferent in the face of the massacre that has claimed over 100 000 lives should be in the lead of those who join this demand to their governments.
As far as we are concerned, we shall intensify the campaign to facilitate for the voice of Syrian resistance to be heard everywhere: we shall organise rallies and tours with the closest comrades who are part of Syrian resistance.
Our campaign is in the service of the triumph of the Syrian Revolution and consequently we appeal to the public opinion to get shipments with material aid to reach Syrian combatants, such as the Local Committees.
The Syrian Revolution is at present the main confrontation between revolution and counterrevolution in the world. The future of not only this revolution but of all the revolutions in the region depends on this victory. Therefore there can be no more urgent task than to surround the Syrian Revolution with active solidarity.
Executive International Committee
27th September 2013