Oh its ok, ill just copypaste an old comment i wrote on this. It repeats some stuff i already said but it explains why the ICP sometimes collaborated with imperialism. O7
The people who say that slanderous shit about Saddam are simply ignorant. They bought into western and iranian propaganda. Saddam Hussein was a baathist. Baathists arent anticommunists, baathism was literally founded by a syrian communist (Michel Aflaq) who believed marxism leninism couldnt be just copied from the Soviet Union and pasted onto the arab world, it needed to be adapted to the material conditions of arab countries. Baathism came out of this. Baathism is basically marxism leninism +panarabism. They believe that the working class must seize power led by a vanguard party and establish socialism, and later on as classes disappear communism will be reached. Basic marxism. Panarabism is the belief that all the arab speaking countries, from Morocco to Iraq, are 1 nation that was divided by colonialist powers. Baathists want to unite all arab countries under one socialist republic. Baathists also believe in multi party democracy along with a vanguard party. This means that 1 party, the Baath Party, will lead the government but other parties will also be allowed as long as they arent reactionary. This includes communists, and in fact coalition governments of baathists and communists were formed both in Syria and Iraq (and in Syria its still like this).
However it is true that there was persecution of communists in Baathist Iraq. Why is this? Well we must understand the history of the Iraqi Communist Party (ICP). In its recent history, the ICP has been a very opportunistic party. The earliest example of this is the Ramadan Revolution of 1963 in Iraq. This revolution toppled the military dictatorship of Abdul Karim Qasim, a general who had come to power after the 1958 Revolution which toppled the UK puppet monarchy of Iraq. Qasim wasnt a communist, however he did cooperate with the USSR as a wedge against the british who were angry that he toppled their puppet. For this reason the ICP cooperated with Qasim. Nevertheless, Qasim did no meaningful reforms that were demanded by the iraqi people. No land reform, no nationalizations, nothing. He was just enriching himself. So the Ramadan Revolution happened and he was toppled by the baathists and nasserists (another strand of arab socialism). But instead of supporting this popular revolution, the ICP chose to side with Qasim against the iraqi workers. All of this just so they could use Qasim as a wedge to weaken the baathists and nasserists and also to please Khrushchev. This is a clear example of ICP being opportunistic.
The Ramadan Revolution is also important because the myth of “Saddam being a US puppet” comes from here. And yet, the source of this myth is a literal CIA puppet. King Hussein of Jordan, a UK and US puppet, claimed that the Ramadan Revolution was orchestrated by the US. This was cheap slander against the baathists who rightfully denounced him as a reactionary. So, the leaders of this revolution were Ahmed Hassan al Bakr and Saddam Hussein (baathists) and the Arif brothers (nasserists). As further evidence of baathists not being anticommunists, Bakr said in front of the international reporters covering the events that “Despite the brutal fighting between us and communists, we are not anticommunist, we oppose anticommunism. We just fought them because they took up arms in counterrevolution. We hope for cooperation with the communists”.
So in the end the Arif brothers took over and persecuted the baathists, becoming a bureoucratic reactionary government like the Qasim regime themselves. For this reason in 1968 another revolution occured. This one finally brought the baathists to full power, allowing them to start their ambitious socialist program. They began land reform, nationalization and creation of mass organizations. They sought help from the USSR to do this and became one of their closest allies in the Middle East. In 1972 they signed a Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation with the USSR. This treaty allowed soviet troops to be stationed in Iraq. They were there until the USSR ceased to exist in 1991. Most of iraqs weapons were soviet and east bloc, supplied by the USSR. Also in 1972 an agreement was reached and the ICP and kurdish political parties were invited into the government by the baathists. Autonomy was also granted to Iraqi Kurdistan (this debunks another myth that Saddam genocided kurds). In the 1970s relations between the baath party and the ICP were good.
However in 1980 the Iran Iraq War, caused by Iran trying to topple the “infidel secularist baathist regime” (as Khomeini called them) for no reason, began. At this time, the ICP again showed their extreme opportunism. They began organizing antigovernment protests and calling for regime change. They hoped to use the war to overthrow the baath party and seize power for themselves. So ofc they were expelled from the government and rightfully repressed. But again, as proof that Saddam wasnt anticommunist, a minor proSaddam faction of the ICP was again invited into the government in the early 90s and allowed to operate. During the 1991 Gulf War the ICP tried again, together with kurdish and shia islamist political parties, to do regime change. How is that okay? You are being invaded by the imperialist US and instead of defending your socialist government you try to do a revolution? Very opportunistic. It got even worse during the 2003 Iraq Invasion when the ICP actively collaborated with US forces and refused to participate in or endorse the resistance. Indeed, the ICP was very happy to collaborate with the invaders in exchange for minor government posts and the legalization of the party. This is exactly why noone in Iraq likes the ICP, they are opportunists. The real opposition to the US in Iraq nowadays comes from proIran shia militias like Hezbollah who actually do something. I think this explains well why the ICP was repressed by Saddam.
As a final note, im not saying that all ICP members were reactionary or opportunist. The main problem was the leadership, which considered baathism to be “bourgeois nationalism” and thus were ready to collaborate with imperialism, because according to them baathists and imperialists were just as bad. This is ludicrous considering the policies of the baathists and the fact that the communists had been part of the government. Im sure many good iraqi communists suffered under Saddam, but i think the main blame is on the ICP leadership, not on Saddam.
Yeah and its very unfortunate because the ICP used to be a very strong party, the second strongest in Iraq after the baath party, very popular. However the constant fighting between the baath party and the ICP in the 1980s and 1990s weakened the ICP a lot. That combined with their terrible leadership who were imo very opportunist and selfish completely destroyed the party. After the 2003 US invasion they became a completely reformist party, often straight up proimperialist. They rejected marxism leninism, instead became a marxist reformist party. They dont even have a militia, and this in Iraq, the country with thousands of militias and weapons everywhere. All the ICP does is run in elections and print newspapers. How is this the vanguard of the iraqi working class? Oh, and they also collaborate with imperialism. The current General Secretary was a member of the US puppet government installed after the 2003 invasion. Yes, the leader of the COMMUNIST PARTY, was part of the government that did neoliberal shock therapy and ran the Abu Ghraib torture camp. Thats how fucked the party is, worse than the CPUSA if you ask me. They also often oppose proIran shia militias like Hezbollah who actually challenge US imperialism. I think they have also participated in attempted color revolutions against proIran iraqi governments (not 100% sure tho). So yeah, straight up proimperialists.
Very sad tbh, a bunch of morons crashed a great communist party. Imagine how great Iraq would be if the ICP had stayed in the baath ICP coalition. Truly very sad and disappointing.
Indeed it would, Iraq, Syria and Iran together in the USSR bloc. Frankly it could have been possible, but Khomeini and Hafez Al Assad were dumbasses. Khomeini i already explained, he opposed USSR and Iraq for no reason. Hafez Al Assad was also quite the opportunist. As i said in 1991 he invaded Iraq with the US. Also in 1976 in the Lebanese Civil War he briefly sided with the prozionist fascists against the communists and palestinians because the latter were fighting Israel too much for his taste (simplified ofc). Thankfully he quickly reversed that and supported again the communists and palestinians after getting a lot of backlash from Iraq, Libya and the USSR. So yeah, in 1979 Iraq and Syria were planning to unite in a United Arab Republic (remember panarabism) but Hafez Al Assad the moron tried to do a coup against Saddam Hussein and got caught, so ofc the idea got cancelled. What a dumbass honestly. Thankfully Bashar Al Assad never did this shit and is very based.
Oh its ok, ill just copypaste an old comment i wrote on this. It repeats some stuff i already said but it explains why the ICP sometimes collaborated with imperialism. O7
The people who say that slanderous shit about Saddam are simply ignorant. They bought into western and iranian propaganda. Saddam Hussein was a baathist. Baathists arent anticommunists, baathism was literally founded by a syrian communist (Michel Aflaq) who believed marxism leninism couldnt be just copied from the Soviet Union and pasted onto the arab world, it needed to be adapted to the material conditions of arab countries. Baathism came out of this. Baathism is basically marxism leninism +panarabism. They believe that the working class must seize power led by a vanguard party and establish socialism, and later on as classes disappear communism will be reached. Basic marxism. Panarabism is the belief that all the arab speaking countries, from Morocco to Iraq, are 1 nation that was divided by colonialist powers. Baathists want to unite all arab countries under one socialist republic. Baathists also believe in multi party democracy along with a vanguard party. This means that 1 party, the Baath Party, will lead the government but other parties will also be allowed as long as they arent reactionary. This includes communists, and in fact coalition governments of baathists and communists were formed both in Syria and Iraq (and in Syria its still like this).
However it is true that there was persecution of communists in Baathist Iraq. Why is this? Well we must understand the history of the Iraqi Communist Party (ICP). In its recent history, the ICP has been a very opportunistic party. The earliest example of this is the Ramadan Revolution of 1963 in Iraq. This revolution toppled the military dictatorship of Abdul Karim Qasim, a general who had come to power after the 1958 Revolution which toppled the UK puppet monarchy of Iraq. Qasim wasnt a communist, however he did cooperate with the USSR as a wedge against the british who were angry that he toppled their puppet. For this reason the ICP cooperated with Qasim. Nevertheless, Qasim did no meaningful reforms that were demanded by the iraqi people. No land reform, no nationalizations, nothing. He was just enriching himself. So the Ramadan Revolution happened and he was toppled by the baathists and nasserists (another strand of arab socialism). But instead of supporting this popular revolution, the ICP chose to side with Qasim against the iraqi workers. All of this just so they could use Qasim as a wedge to weaken the baathists and nasserists and also to please Khrushchev. This is a clear example of ICP being opportunistic.
The Ramadan Revolution is also important because the myth of “Saddam being a US puppet” comes from here. And yet, the source of this myth is a literal CIA puppet. King Hussein of Jordan, a UK and US puppet, claimed that the Ramadan Revolution was orchestrated by the US. This was cheap slander against the baathists who rightfully denounced him as a reactionary. So, the leaders of this revolution were Ahmed Hassan al Bakr and Saddam Hussein (baathists) and the Arif brothers (nasserists). As further evidence of baathists not being anticommunists, Bakr said in front of the international reporters covering the events that “Despite the brutal fighting between us and communists, we are not anticommunist, we oppose anticommunism. We just fought them because they took up arms in counterrevolution. We hope for cooperation with the communists”.
So in the end the Arif brothers took over and persecuted the baathists, becoming a bureoucratic reactionary government like the Qasim regime themselves. For this reason in 1968 another revolution occured. This one finally brought the baathists to full power, allowing them to start their ambitious socialist program. They began land reform, nationalization and creation of mass organizations. They sought help from the USSR to do this and became one of their closest allies in the Middle East. In 1972 they signed a Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation with the USSR. This treaty allowed soviet troops to be stationed in Iraq. They were there until the USSR ceased to exist in 1991. Most of iraqs weapons were soviet and east bloc, supplied by the USSR. Also in 1972 an agreement was reached and the ICP and kurdish political parties were invited into the government by the baathists. Autonomy was also granted to Iraqi Kurdistan (this debunks another myth that Saddam genocided kurds). In the 1970s relations between the baath party and the ICP were good.
However in 1980 the Iran Iraq War, caused by Iran trying to topple the “infidel secularist baathist regime” (as Khomeini called them) for no reason, began. At this time, the ICP again showed their extreme opportunism. They began organizing antigovernment protests and calling for regime change. They hoped to use the war to overthrow the baath party and seize power for themselves. So ofc they were expelled from the government and rightfully repressed. But again, as proof that Saddam wasnt anticommunist, a minor proSaddam faction of the ICP was again invited into the government in the early 90s and allowed to operate. During the 1991 Gulf War the ICP tried again, together with kurdish and shia islamist political parties, to do regime change. How is that okay? You are being invaded by the imperialist US and instead of defending your socialist government you try to do a revolution? Very opportunistic. It got even worse during the 2003 Iraq Invasion when the ICP actively collaborated with US forces and refused to participate in or endorse the resistance. Indeed, the ICP was very happy to collaborate with the invaders in exchange for minor government posts and the legalization of the party. This is exactly why noone in Iraq likes the ICP, they are opportunists. The real opposition to the US in Iraq nowadays comes from proIran shia militias like Hezbollah who actually do something. I think this explains well why the ICP was repressed by Saddam.
As a final note, im not saying that all ICP members were reactionary or opportunist. The main problem was the leadership, which considered baathism to be “bourgeois nationalism” and thus were ready to collaborate with imperialism, because according to them baathists and imperialists were just as bad. This is ludicrous considering the policies of the baathists and the fact that the communists had been part of the government. Im sure many good iraqi communists suffered under Saddam, but i think the main blame is on the ICP leadership, not on Saddam.
Sounds like the ICP was lead by dogmatists, like the self-proclaimed communist parties in many European countries
Yeah and its very unfortunate because the ICP used to be a very strong party, the second strongest in Iraq after the baath party, very popular. However the constant fighting between the baath party and the ICP in the 1980s and 1990s weakened the ICP a lot. That combined with their terrible leadership who were imo very opportunist and selfish completely destroyed the party. After the 2003 US invasion they became a completely reformist party, often straight up proimperialist. They rejected marxism leninism, instead became a marxist reformist party. They dont even have a militia, and this in Iraq, the country with thousands of militias and weapons everywhere. All the ICP does is run in elections and print newspapers. How is this the vanguard of the iraqi working class? Oh, and they also collaborate with imperialism. The current General Secretary was a member of the US puppet government installed after the 2003 invasion. Yes, the leader of the COMMUNIST PARTY, was part of the government that did neoliberal shock therapy and ran the Abu Ghraib torture camp. Thats how fucked the party is, worse than the CPUSA if you ask me. They also often oppose proIran shia militias like Hezbollah who actually challenge US imperialism. I think they have also participated in attempted color revolutions against proIran iraqi governments (not 100% sure tho). So yeah, straight up proimperialists.
Very sad tbh, a bunch of morons crashed a great communist party. Imagine how great Iraq would be if the ICP had stayed in the baath ICP coalition. Truly very sad and disappointing.
A socialist alliance between Iraq, Iran and Syria would be glorious
Indeed it would, Iraq, Syria and Iran together in the USSR bloc. Frankly it could have been possible, but Khomeini and Hafez Al Assad were dumbasses. Khomeini i already explained, he opposed USSR and Iraq for no reason. Hafez Al Assad was also quite the opportunist. As i said in 1991 he invaded Iraq with the US. Also in 1976 in the Lebanese Civil War he briefly sided with the prozionist fascists against the communists and palestinians because the latter were fighting Israel too much for his taste (simplified ofc). Thankfully he quickly reversed that and supported again the communists and palestinians after getting a lot of backlash from Iraq, Libya and the USSR. So yeah, in 1979 Iraq and Syria were planning to unite in a United Arab Republic (remember panarabism) but Hafez Al Assad the moron tried to do a coup against Saddam Hussein and got caught, so ofc the idea got cancelled. What a dumbass honestly. Thankfully Bashar Al Assad never did this shit and is very based.
Hey i remember that one, its a classic!
Lmfao did you read it already in the past?