Introduction

By Bill Fletcher, Jr., BC Editorial Board

In the context of repeated threats by Israel to attack Iran and discussions in the USA—particularly within the Israeli lobby—about the need for US involvement in such an attack, it may at first glance seem odd to pay any attention to the internal situation in Iran. After all, an attack on Iran would be blatant aggression under the pretext of stopping a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (Note: Iran) from developing nuclear power that could, under certain circumstances, be used to produce the sorts of nuclear weapons possessed by a non-signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (Note: Israel).

Raha and Havaar oppose all military intervention in Iran. Further, we oppose all U.S., U.N., and European sanctions against Iran, and have been active in trying to build an anti-sanctions/anti-war movement.

Yet politics is never linear. At each moment an actual situation is layered and so it is in the case of Iran. A regime that frequently uses anti-imperialist rhetoric also crushes internal opponents, be they ethnic minorities or political dissidents. The Iranian regime will preach against the threats to Iran’s sovereignty, but undermines the right of workers to form and join labor unions. This same regime will denounce Western imperialism, but go forward enthusiastically in embracing neo-liberal economics and attempting to cut the best deals that it can with Western corporations.

Politics is always complicated.

We are reminded of this in reading the open-letter from the Raha Iranian Feminist Collective to the anti-war movement in the USA. All too often those in the USA who will speak out against aggression by US imperialism and the tyranny of many of the allies of Western imperialism, will remain strangely silent about injustice, inequality and tyranny when perpetrated by countries that utilize anti-imperialist rhetoric. Instead of examining the content of policies, many US progressives remain satisfied that if, as in this case, Iranian President Ahmadinejad denounces Western imperialism that this means that he is a supporter of social justice and freedom. The story does not stop with Ahmadinejad. There are various leaders, countries and movements that sing a certain political tune, and many US progressives are ready to embrace them without stopping to examine the all-round dimensions of the situation.

The Raha Iranian Feminist Collective, then, poses a challenge to US progressives. On the one hand, and without qualification, they implore us to actively oppose any aggression against Iran. They want to ensure that people of good will are not tricked into believing that attacks on Iran will somehow advance the cause of democracy and liberation. If anything, attacks will harden the stance and position of the Iranian theocracy.

At the same time, the Collective wishes that we in the USA better understand that the internal situation, with high levels of repression and injustice, necessitates attention and global solidarity. In other words, the movements for justice in Iran need the support of people—not governments—as they fight to transform Iran. In that sense it is no different than one offering solidarity to workers in Mexico fighting neo-liberal governments, popular movements in Algeria fighting corruption and tyranny, or movements in Greece against austerity and growing authoritarianism. The movements in each of these places—and many more—need to settle accounts with their own elites, but in so doing they need global attention and global solidarity in their struggle. Such solidarity, however, does not include military strikes by duplicitous aggressors.

There are those who believe that the position taken by organizations such as the Raha Iranian Feminist Collective are off-base and naïve, somehow providing excuses for external aggression. Those who believe that are themselves naïve and are falling prey to the simplicity of rhetoric when what is called for is independent judgment and analysis, looking at the concrete conditions, and doing what we can to support our friends in other countries who all too often engage in uphill struggles feeling very much alone.

Reading the statement by the Collective, then, is sobering and leads one to move to real discussions about political action, rather than knee-jerk anti-imperialism. We are compelled to think about how, on the one hand, to stop the threat of war being waged against Iran while at the same time paying close attention to those who seek to transform Iran as part of a larger struggle for global justice.

-0-

The upcoming anniversary of the invasion of Afghanistan is a crucial time for activists to reflect on the urgent need for an anti-war movement that is committed to opposing systematic oppression, domination and violence. In the spirit of moving us towards this goal, we feel compelled to respond when individuals and organizations within the movement are harassing and maligning other members of the movement. We need to ask how this reflects on the political and ethical commitments underlying our activism. We need to ask when enough is enough and some kind of collective action is necessary to address an untenable situation.

There is a campaign of hostility and intimidation underway against Iranian activists in the U.S. who oppose war, sanctions and state repression in Iran. The Iranian American Friendship Committee (AIFC) has taken the lead in a series of physical and verbal attacks on Iranian activists and their allies. Enough is enough. This letter is an appeal to those who consider themselves part of the anti-war movement: stop condoning, excusing or dismissing these attacks by continuing to include AIFC in your coalitions, demonstrations, forums and other organizing events. We call on those of you who want to build an effective anti-war movement that includes the participation of those whose families are directly targeted by U.S. imperialism, and that is committed to social justice for all, to oppose the abuse AIFC has been heaping on members of various Iranian American organizations.

A regime that frequently uses anti-imperialist rhetoric also crushes internal opponents, be they ethnic minorities or political dissidents. The Iranian regime will preach against the threats to Iran’s sovereignty, but undermines the right of workers to form and join labor unions.

On June 29, 2012, Ardeshir Ommani of the AIFC circulated a public missive attacking members of Raha Iranian Feminist Collective, Havaar: Iranian Initiative Against War, Sanctions, and State Repression, Where Is My Vote, and United For Iran. This so-called AIFC “Factsheet” accused individual members of each group of harboring covert imperialist, Zionist, and pro-war agendas. Such a smear campaign should be transparent to all who know and work with us and to all those who recognize in these charges a familiar script. Ommani and AIFC are uncritical apologists for the Iranian government, proudly organizing dinners for President Ahmadinejad in New York each fall and inviting anti-war and pro-Palestinian activists to come pay their respects. They are not alone but work with the Workers World Party and the International Action Center to give left cover to the Iranian government and to infuse the anti-war movement with pro-Islamic Republic politics. They repeat the Iranian state’s position that the pro-democracy protesters in Iran are agents of Western imperialism and Zionism.  And now AIFC mimics the regime by lodging such false charges against us, activists who dare to challenge their orthodoxy and who oppose the Iranian state’s oppressive actions.

Unfortunately, it is not enough to simply dismiss AIFC’s charges as spurious and move on with the serious and necessary work of opposing U.S. intervention around the world. Ommani’s accusations of Zionist loyalties carry serious prison sentences in Iran as a crime of moharebeh (crimes against Islam or against the state). This means that Iranians who refuse to become apologists for the Iranian state cannot participate in the anti-war movement without having their reputations attacked and their names publicly identified with charges that can land them in prison, or worse, if they go to Iran. The continued acceptance of AIFC as a legitimate presence in the anti-war movement virtually ensures that the majority of Iranians in the U.S. will see the entire movement as pro-Islamic Republic and, therefore, unsafe and hostile. Forcing Iranians to have to choose between visiting their family members in Iran and joining the anti-war movement produces another form of discrimination and oppression of Iranians in the U.S.

The Iranian state, the Israeli state, and the U.S. state each are guilty of repressing popular democratic movements.

To be clear, Ommani’s accusations in print are just the latest in an ongoing campaign of harassment and abuse going back to 2010. The brief history that follows illustrates tactics that are unacceptable to us, and that should be unacceptable to the anti-war movement. At a June 24, 2010 workshop at the US Social Forum hosted by Raha and Where Is My Vote, Ommani was disruptive, insulting young women organizers and questioning their legitimacy in speaking at the conference at all. At a February 4th, 2012 anti-war rally in Manhattan, Ommani attempted to physically knock an Iranian woman off of the speakers’ platform while she expressed her views against war and sanctions and in solidarity with those resisting state repression in Iran. At a March 24th, 2012 panel called “Iran: Solidarity Not Intervention” that was part of the United National Anti-War Committee conference, Ommani had to be asked repeatedly by conference security to stop calling members of Raha “C.I.A. agents” and “State Department propagandists” and even to allow us to speak at all. Unable to engage in any respectful dialogue with the ideas Raha members and their allies were advocating, he simply stormed out of the panel. At a conference plenary, security had to be called after Ommani poked a woman who was there to support Raha and who was waiting in line to speak. Ommani eventually had to be moved by conference security to a different part of the hall in order to prevent him from harassing members of Raha on the speakers’ line.            

This conflict cannot be reduced to a matter of political differences about the nature of the Iranian state. There are certain behaviors that should be quite obviously beyond the scope of what is acceptable in the anti-war movement. These include the physical and verbal harassment of activists, particularly intimidation tactics lodged by men against women. Shoving, insulting and bullying women in an effort to silence us is outright sexism. Furthermore, the leveling of false charges that could make us targets of state repression has haunting historical precedents in the spy operations of SAVAK, the Shah’s secret police force, which hounded the Iranian student opposition abroad throughout the 1960s and 1970s. The same way that American progressives defended Iranian students from persecution by the Iranian and U.S. states in those days, we call on activists today to oppose these efforts to silence us. AIFC has consistently demonstrated an inability to follow basic rules of civility and engagement and should have no place in our movement.           

Raha and Havaar oppose all military intervention in Iran (For a more on Raha’s analysis see www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/683/solidarity-and-its-discontents). Further, we oppose all U.S., U.N., and European sanctions against Iran, and have been active in trying to build an anti-sanctions/anti-war movement. In our view, the Iranian state, the Israeli state, and the U.S. state each are guilty of repressing popular democratic movements. Standing in solidarity with others engaged in similar struggles, we will organize against the vicious and autocratic measures of these governments until we are free--from the U.S. to Iran to Palestine and beyond.

Yours in struggle and solidarity,

The Members of RAHA Iranian Feminist Collective
Rahacollective.org

The Members of Havaar: Iranian Initiative Against War, Sanctions and State Repression
Havaar.org