dection is over.
Third certain forms of proporconal representation destroy the very strong link between the MP and the constituency - and any element of accountabiliit Sixty to eighty people come song each weeK my argery. Truthfully, unless you are repared to address your mind to cal problems, and fight for the cople coming to see you, you're ot rooted in the community.
Evade Fourth, PR allows politicians evade responsibility. At the end the parliament they say 'Well I an't like it, but it was the price we ad to pay to get the support of this oup or that group.
at least can see policy making in the open, What happens under tional representation would civil service establisment governs.
Italy has had ments since the war. None of them had advice and were particularly powerless in Wrong are wrong.
At present up call. step propor1S that the governany particular power in the decision making process of society dealing with the economy, or the financial sector, or the civil service.
There are people who support PR on the principled grounds that until you win over 50 per cent of the vote you can't change anything I respect that view but I think they RONALD British government are whipping hysteria in order to force an arms embargo against Iran through the UN security council. Labour Party conference will also debate and be asked to support a similar Socialists should clearly reject the proposal to introduce an arms embargo against Iran. Its content today is simply to disarm Iran in the context of the huge build-up of US, British and other imperialist warships in the Gulf.
Moreover is the height hypocrisy. The United States has supplied arms to Iran.
London to be used as the chief base for Iran to buy arms. Their proposal for an arms embargo comes when they have sent their own fleets into the Gulf. The demand of socialists must be for the withdrawal of all US and British warships and military from the area.
It is ridiculous to think that the bloody hands of Reagan and Thatcher can play any positive role in the Gulf. The US and British call for an arms embargo is not for the sake of 'world peace' still less is it for the sake of the oppressed and imprisoned inside Iran the US has raised no objection to Khomeini's internal policies.
The sole reason for the pressure from the Us for an arms embargo is to ensure the outcome to the Iran/Iraq war that it desires, and at the same time to apply pressure on the Iranian regime on a series of questions concerning US policy in the Gulf.
brutal reactionary, should give not the slightest support to the efforts of imperialism to impose its policy by force in the Gulf.' Patrol The bombing of an Iranian patrol ship by a US helicopter last Monday was not a 'snap judgement' according to the Pentagon. It was the logical next in the military and diplomatic policy pursued over the last months by the US in the Gulf.Its goal is to force Iran to back off from its war with Iraq.
This intervention has had a number of elements - the direct build up of the imperialist fleet, the attempt to impose the UN ceasefire resolution, the call for an arms embargo against Iran series of provocations and incidents in the Gulf itself, ranging from the reflagging of tankers to this direct military assaut on Iranian ship. military offensive, with British support, can only escalate.
The military build w by Britain and the US in particular sir e the end of July, is itself the exten n of the policy over the last five years. The chief goal of this policy has been to defend Iraq and prevent it being decisively defeate by Iran in the war. Alongside this the US has sought to place pressure on the Khomeini regime to pursue a policy that is more conciliatory towards US policy in the Gulf.
Over the last five years, as the table reproduced shows, the flow of arms into the area the has overwhelmingly been to the benefit of Iraq. The US, Britain and Sweden have had a public policy of not selling arms to Iran since the overthrow of the Shah in legal and illegal arms sales continuing but always with strings attached and at a significantly reduced rate.
successfully 'persuaded' and Italy to cancel important orders. The chief arms suppliers to Iran today are China, North Korea, countries in the Eastern bloc. Iran has of also received US weapons left behind in Vietnam. allowed Policy simple policy of cutting off all support to Iran. As the revelations of 'Irangate' demonstrated. prepared to sell arms to Iran in certain curcunstalle. cumstances have nothing to do with the trivial matter release of hostages. The goal is to shift the policy OI the closer to that of the US in the Gulf, or so bord a win there dietha. supports policy Alongside this the US also promotes alternative secular capitalist forces inside Iran — but to apply pressure on, rather than replace, point in time.
cern about the outcome of the war in the Gulf area. took place in repressive state apparatus up by the roots and destroyed or weakened many of its key elements, including the ofsocialists ficer corps of the police, and upper echelons of the state bureaucracy.
was unable to impose its own solution to the situation which unfolded in Iran, and the bourgeoisie was able to secure an alternauve or lls own Khomeini's standing as the key exiled opponent of the Shah's regime strength of the solution imposed. Khomeini was the only force acceptable to the Iranian bourgeoisie command the support of the majority of the Iranian population.
However weakness of the bourgeoisie is that it had to rely to a high degree on the inand a stitutions of the Islamic church to impose its solution structures to have survived the revolution intact. The clergy were also able to The US play an enhanced social role due to the identification of the church with the movement against the Shah.
However the around Khomeini is exceptionally weak as an institutional structure, its ability to survive has depended upon a continuous reactionary mobilisation of the population, particularly bourgeoisie, framework of Islamic fundamentalism.
which Khomeini carried through his counterrevolution, shoras and working class organisation, Economist rolling back the mobilisation of women by the imposition of the veil and other national This has not stopped mobilisation Since 1983 the US has stepped up its winning.
destruction South Korea rights.
Israel and However the US has not pursued a from the the US is more than these Khomeini regime ceptable, directly.
Khomeini at this the area.
The reason for imperialism's conThe revolution which Iran tore the Shah's Iran/Iraq war.
army, the secret However the working class itself Kharg against Iran. tremendous personal was chief the face both who qis.
of the - the only serious ment established the petty the ideological the region This mobilisation was the basis on destroying the Iraq. natess sarg, defeating destroying struggle, destroying democratic rights The war gainst Iraq, which began as a just war of defence against Iraqi invasion, was also rapidly turned to this end 1 cal lullal of the population and their acquiesence the of civil and democratic After the initial invasion was defeated the war was prolonged by Iran - becoming reactionary on both sides.
From 1985, and even earlier, it has been clear that Iran was winning the war against Iraq. And this is when the problems for US policy in the region began to intensify Khomeini has never been a satisfacnor sufficiently stable regime noll or view _ot us im perialism. It was an emergency solutior to the situation created by the over throw of the Shah. The hostility to both the US and Britain, which has been a clear element in the popular mobilisation creates important problems for US policy in the entire Middle East.
Confined to the borders of Iran Khomeini is an unsatisfactory, but acalternative to more deepgoing social revolution in Iran. Certainly the US has no objection to Khomeini's repressive internal policies. But exported beyond its borders it threatens to destabilise a number of regimes in US imperialism is pursuing a policy of, on the one hand, seeking to build up forces supportive to it within Iran, and also to prevent an Iranian victory in the Arms supplies, particularly of aircraft, to Iraq now gives it virtually unchallenged superiority in the air. Iraqi planes have been virtually unchallenged in stepped up bombing behind Iranian lines, on Iranian shipping, and on the Island oil terminal in recent weeks. Most seriously of all the US and its allies have now put their fleets into the Gulf and will, if needed, use them Any arms embargo against Iran is simply to call for it to be disarmed in of a direct US military build up, and in the face of a growing arms superiority on the side of the Iracall against both countries is a fake. First the US will continue to supply Iraq. Se cond the most powerful forces in the area are now the imperialist fleets.
Attack While continuing to call for a settle.
…of the the basis of previously agreed frontiers, socialists should give no credibility to the clau of the US or Britain to be seekin "peace' through the UN. Only Iran and Iraq can agree the terms of a peace. Nos should we call on the imperialists to police such a peace through future arms embargoes or other measures - thai is a pure cover for their own policies The well publicised nature of the Iranian regime is used to cover over the far more reactionary and far more powerful role of the United Siales. It : also used to cover up the equally rea tionary regime of Saddam Hussein is
Socialist Action 25 Sept 1987