Hezbollah & the ANC, an unfair comparison?
IN THE article in Socialism Today No.103, US-Israeli
‘new Middle East’ plan derailed, you compare Hezbollah with the African
National Congress (ANC), the national liberation movement that fought
against the white apartheid regime.
The ANC were recognised internationally to be the
most incompetent and ineffective of all the liberation movements in
Africa, whose only major achievements were to detonate bombs in shopping
malls and restaurants where woman and children were killed and
mutilated. It is shameful that you compare this doubtful effort to the
heroic resistance of Hezbollah against the might of the Israeli army.
Secondly, you overestimate the impact that the ANC
had on the situation in South Africa. Certainly the party caused some
disruption but it was hardly likely to bring down the apartheid regime.
It is a myth perpetuated by many left-wing organisations.
The capitalist system decided the fate of South
Africa not the ANC, when Citibank withdrew all loans and the South
African government had to reschedule all its loan repayments. In
addition the US started building an air base in Botswana with the
implied threat that it would be used to bomb the country if it did not
comply with the US demands (a tactic to be used with great success from
Yugoslavia to Lebanon and elsewhere). The worldwide fanfare surrounding
Mandela’s release from prison was not organised by the ANC but the
capitalist international news media. It was apparent that a deal had
been struck as to what path the ANC would follow - capitalism pure and
simple. The ANC, with its appalling pre- and post-apartheid record, is
hardly the benchmark to compare with Hezbollah or for that matter any
liberation organisation. I suppose that socialism needs heroes in its
struggle against the capitalist system but please choose a role model
with a little more integrity than the ANC.
You also write on page 19 that Israeli workers will
be "forced to pay the costs of this conflict". I should point out that
is highly unlikely as at the start of the conflict the USA provided the
Israeli air force with $268 million worth of aviation fuel and in
addition the US provides Israel annually with over two billion dollars
worth of military aid. The Israeli workers will continue to support
their capitalist and racist regime as long as they receive this sort of
aid. The root of the problem lies with US foreign policy that props up
the Israeli government’s oppression of the indigenous people of
Palestine.
Derrick Joyce,
Reading
Kevin Simpson replies:
DERRICK’S CRITICISM of my article shows the
importance of clarifying the central role of the working class drawing
behind it other oppressed layers like the poor peasantry in fighting for
national liberation. This applies not only to the Middle East but also
Africa, Asia and Latin America.
Derrick’s argument is that the article unfavourably
compared Hezbollah to the ANC in South Africa. In doing so Derrick
clearly feels that it underestimates the role of Hezbollah and
overestimated the role of the ANC in the struggle against apartheid.
Unfortunately, I think Derrick is incorrect on both
counts. The article was absolutely clear on the huge significance of the
outcome of the war in Lebanon when it stated: "The result of the war
will also be recorded as a political victory for Hezbollah". The article
was also very clear on our estimation of the dedication of Hezbollah
fighters in resisting the might of the IDF when it commented,
"Undoubtedly its fighters are well trained and extremely courageous".
But the article did conclude that unfortunately it
would not be possible for Hezbollah to cut across the sectarian tensions
that exist in Lebanon in the long term. It also put forward the idea
that, given its present strategy and tactics, Hezbollah would not be
able to inflict a lasting defeat on the Israeli military forces that
would rule out for ever the possibility of future invasions of Lebanon.
Of course, this is not to question the bravery of its members in
standing up to the fourth-strongest army in the world. Neither does it
rule out further episodic military defeats for the Israeli state.
The article argued that any attempt to ease
sectarian divisions between sections of the Lebanese population, the
majority of whom consist of the working class, would mean uniting in
struggle around common issues. Above all, it would mean implementing
policies which would allow the huge resources of Lebanese society to be
used for the good of all its population, laying the basis for the ending
of the social, economic, religious and national oppression of minorities
on which sectarian division can breed. How will this be achieved?
Through the overthrow of capitalism and the building of a socialist
society under the democratic control of the working class. The article
went on to explain that the leadership of Hezbollah, although it has
organised protest movements against privatisation, does not have this
approach. Given the growth in sectarian anti-Hezbollah propaganda from
reactionary parties and organisations in Lebanon since the end of the
war, the possibility of Hezbollah reverting to narrow Shia and Islamic
sectarian policies is raised.
Derrick’s criticisms do not really address the
question of how the Israeli capitalist state and its army will be
defeated. In his letter Derrick says, "The Israeli workers will continue
to support their capitalist and racist regime as long as they receive
this sort of aid". While it may be difficult for those outside Israel to
believe, especially given the Israeli state’s military hardware, Israeli
Jewish workers support their regime because of the fears they have for
their security, not because of the military and financial aid that the
government receives from US imperialism. Their perception is that they
are surrounded by hostile, undemocratic Arab dictatorships who want to
destroy the country they regard as their home. Just as socialists
realise that the Palestinians’ demand for self-determination and an
independent state has to be fought for, it is also the case that an
Israeli Jewish national consciousness exists and has to be taken account
of in the struggle against capitalism and imperialism in the region.
Israeli capitalism survives because of the social
support of its working class. Only by splitting away this support can
the Israeli state and its army be defeated. The article attempted to
explain that the only way this can be done is by answering the fears of
the Israeli working class for their future as well as fighting for an
independent Palestine, through the creation of a socialist confederation
of Middle Eastern states.
Workers in Israel are finding out to their own cost
that the Israeli ruling class has forgotten all about the ‘national
unity’ of which it spoke during the war, now that the conflict is over.
It was the Israeli Jewish working class who made sacrifices during the
war and are being forced to do so after the war, as the most recent
budget shows. The government intends to privatise what remains of the
public sector and further cut welfare benefits. That is what the article
meant about paying for the conflict. By exposing the hypocrisy of the
Israeli ruling class, the huge anger that exists among Israeli workers
can be mobilised in a struggle against capitalism. However, this will
not be possible if our starting point is that Israeli Jewish workers are
irredeemably racist or reactionary.
Unfortunately, I think Derrick also has a very
one-sided view of the national liberation struggle in South Africa and
the role played by its supporters and sympathisers amongst black workers
and young people.
It is incorrect to paint the fall of apartheid as
purely a manoeuvre by capitalism and imperialism. Derrick completely
ignores the insurrectionary movements that shook South Africa’s
apartheid regime to its core during the 1980s. He says nothing about
organisations like the United Democratic Front, which saw itself
carrying on traditions of the ANC inside the country. There is no
mention of the Confederation of South African Trade Unions (COSATU)
whose activists organised huge general strikes which were
insurrectionary in character. And there is absolutely no comment
anywhere in Derrick’s criticism on the role played by socialist ideas in
these movements.
The reason why the apartheid ruling class moved to
an accommodation with the ANC leadership is that they were aware that
they faced a bloodbath if major concessions were not made. The collapse
of the Soviet Union made them more confident that, with the alternative
‘communist’ (Stalinist) model absent from world politics, they could do
business with the capitalist wing of the ANC. The negotiations between
the De Klerk government and the ANC leadership were designed to come up
with an agreement in which the black elite would be given a share in
political and economic power while in return capitalist interests would
be protected and working-class aspirations held back. CWI members in
South Africa warned that this would be the case during the process of
negotiations and afterwards.
However, this does not take anything away from the
significance of the working-class movement against apartheid. The
character of the ANC as a liberation movement cannot be judged purely on
the basis of the anti-working class role being played by the ANC leaders
since they came to power.
|