RE: [Marxism] Should the Iraqi resistance resume the50-yearwarbetween Iraq and "Iraqi" Kurdistan ? Or, In defense of the "well-known national liberalism of Comrade Lenin"

["Jose G. Perez" <elgusanorojo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Fred Feldman wrote: >>The fact is that Kurdistan is autonomous of Iraq
today<<

I thought perhaps it was just some hyper energetic  formulation in my
original post that have led to my differences with Fred on this;
however, his latest makes me think that this is not the only thing
involved.

The sentence I quoted above captures the difference.  I would NOT say
that "Kurdistan is autonomous of Iraq today" for two reasons: 

a) There is no "Iraq," there is no internationally recognized sovereign
entity that is in some form or fashion an expression of the Iraqi nation
as a social formation, on the contrary the territory of Iraq in under
occupation by imperialism and 

b) There is no "Kurdistan," some political quasi government or powerful
movement with a legitimate claim to speak on behalf of a people
struggling for self-determination. So that there is no confusion, let me
say again: the quisling authorities, councils, militias, etc., in the
North of Iraq are not and cannot be expressions of the Kurdish people;
they stripped themselves of that role by agreeing to be instead an
expression of the American nation, i.e., U.S. imperialism. I *reject*
the idea that, under the specific, concrete condition today, of
invasion, occupation and people's war, there is even a scintilla of
national legitimacy to the Kurdish collaborators. Any such legitimacy
that these formations may have had in the past are not reduced to
insignificance by the U.S. occupation; they are reduced to absolutely no
significance whatsoever, less than zero.

The case is different with the Iraqi nation. The legitimate political
expression of the Iraqi nation that exists today is a struggle against
the foreign occupier. That is the political expression of the Iraqi
nation.

Kurdistan does not exist AT ALL, unless one wants to say that being an
outlying parking lot of a concern headquartered in Langley, Virginia, is
a genuine or legitimate expression of the Kurdish people, in which case
it WILL be necessary to resurrect the concept of "reactionary nation"
from the archives of Marxism's infancy. The Kurdish people have no
national movement through which to exercise any self determination. What
they have are American Foreign Legionnaires of Kurdish origin and their
propaganda office. 

The policy followed by the Kurdish leaders of allying with,
subordinating themselves to, and becoming part of the occupation by
imperialism is precisely "national suicide" because they have put
themselves in a position where it is *impossible* for Iraq to recognize
the national claims of the Kurds. I am not speaking of 2 years ago under
Saddam. Nor 2 years from now. Nor after the world socialist revolution. 

But TODAY, NOW, in the PRESENT, in the one and only war which is
actually going on.

It was the Kurdish leadership that opted for this course. They sold
their national heritage to the Pentagon. They *handed over their
country* to the United States. The Kurds *have no part of their national
territory* within the internationally recognized borders of Iraq. The
Kurdish leadership took it, GAVE IT AWAY  to the Pentagon, and the
Pentagon used it to attack the Iraqi nation with it. IF the Kurds were
to reclaim this territory from the CIA and the Pentagon, and DRIVE OUT
the imperialist occupiers THEN one could talk about Kurdistan and the
rights of Kurds. 

RIGHT NOW as things stand there is no Kurdish leadership for the Iraqi
national movement to talk with, only ventriloquist dummies for Bush. 

If the Kurdish groups and militias don't want to be treated as part of
the U.S. occupation the solution is very simple: they should stop
collaborating. 

Until and unless they do that, no talk of Kurdistan or rights or
autonomy can change the REALITY that what is being defended is a CIA
enclave, CIA-organized, financed and led militias, and CIA ventriloquist
dummies that who can say whatever it is that they have to say to the
Iraqi and Arab nations at their trials for treason.

There can be no policy of concessions to "Kurdistan" by Iraq in this
war. That is not militarily possible. And it makes no political sense.
That territory, by the choice of the Kurdish leaders, is ALREADY an
integral part of the theater of operations of this war. The Kurdish
fighters are an integral part of the "Coalition Forces." 

The patriotic forces from Fallujah and Baghdad did not go to northern
Iraq to clash with the Kurdish militias. The Kurdish soldiers came to
Baghdad as part of the puppet army. And when the order came to the
puppet troops to go into operations against the people of Baghdad and
Fallujah in April, the big majority rebelled, deserted and mutinied.
But the Kurds OBEYED. 

Any talk about "Kurdistan" and autonomy in Iraq TODAY is simply a
defense of a CIA-run imperialist enclave, it has no other meaning under
current circumstances, there is no other Kurdistan within the
internationally recognized borders of Iraq except CIAdistan.

And, yes, this is NOT just a matter of the Kurds, but of so-called
Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other imperialist satrapies. 

Under current circumstances, if the Iraqi resistance found it useful or
necessary in their struggle against the imperialist invaders to go into
Kuwait and overthrow the puppet regime of the Emir, this would be a
perfectly legitimate exercise of the right of self-defense. Ditto for
Saudi Arabia, Qatar and all the rest of them that have joined the
imperialist occupation of the Iraqi nation directly with boots on the
ground or indirectly by serving as staging areas, as aircraft carriers
on dry land. If these countries wanted to be treated as "neutrals" then
they should have stayed neutral. Allowing the stationing of imperialist
military forces and the launching of military attacks on Iraq from their
territories was an act of war against Iraq and an act of treason against
the Arab nation by these puppet regimes. Their removal by an extension
of the Iraqi people's war would be an act of liberation, not occupation.

I am not saying this is now, or is ever likely to be, a wise tactical or
operational plan for the Iraqis in this war but certainly I AM VERY
DEFINITELY saying that the Iraqi nation in arms on its own behalf and on
behalf of the Arab nation as a whole has every *right* to do this, and
all revolutionary socialists are DUTY BOUND to defend Iraq's right to
self defense and to drive out imperialist invaders under those military
circumstances also.

José



_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism