|
MENU
CAMPAIGNS
NUNEATON BRANCH
ARCHIVE
|
Comment & AnalysisIslam4UK, Wootton Bassett and the ‘war on terror’: Who benefits from the politics of provocation?(January 22, 2010)Ten Years of the War on Terror Introduction
As we enter the tenth year of US/British occupation of Afghanistan, it is fitting to remind ourselves that socialists have always opposed imperialist wars for profit, and that The Socialist Party has consistently argued against the so-called ‘war on terror.'
But we never make the mistake of blaming the troops for the crimes and mistakes of their political bosses or the financial interests which drive those political policies.
We’ve never thought that sending British working-class youth abroad to suppress workers in other countries is ‘the right thing to do,’ and we’ve never swallowed the lie that the wars initiated after 9/11 were for the benefit of ordinary Afghans or Iraqis.
 On the contrary, we’ve always argued that the strategy and tactics adopted in response to the threat from Islamic terrorism have put our troops in an impossible situation, and that those who started this ‘long war’ were also responsible for financing and arming the enemy our soldiers now face.
The troops themselves, like the general public, have long realised how confused and contradictory the rationale for these wars are: first they are wars of liberation and protecting women’s rights, then projects of nation-building and heroin eradication, then of anti-insurgency and ‘winning hearts and minds’, then protecting the so-called democracy of the puppet governments set up because our ruling class aren’t really in the empire business any more, and finally about defending the tattered credibility of the NATO alliance. They are also asking themselves if the future for the British armed forces is just to chase the elusive Al-Quieda brand from one impoverished country to another so that the political elite can preserve their illusory ‘special relationship’ with Washington?
After ten years the three mainstream political parties still ignore public opinion and continue to support the war. In this situation, the sacrifices of ordinary British soldiers, undertaken in the belief that they are protecting their country, are open to cynical exploitation by politicians of various dubious shades, from those who hypocritically hail them as ‘heroes’ from the safety of Westminster in order to disguise a failed foreign policy, to the fascist BNP opportunists who first tried to hijack the public expressions of support in Wootton Bassett, and now Islamists who brand them ‘baby-killers’ in order to fuel the fires of reactionary religious extremism.
In the article below, Peter Playdon, a new member of the Coventry and Nuneaton branches, explores the latest developments....
Islam4UK, Wootton Bassett and the ‘war on terror’: Who benefits from the politics of provocation?
Comrades will be aware of ongoing stories in the media involving the right-wing Islamist group Islam4UK and their proposed (then abandoned) anti-war demonstration in Wootton Bassett, an announcement that coincided with the recent prosecution of several of this group’s members for public order offences committed during their demonstration against British soldiers at a homecoming parade last year.
The immediate result, following hard on the heels of right-wing tabloid outrage, is that the Home Secretary has pledged to ban this and other groups for ‘glorifying terrorism.’ While socialists have our own independent critical analysis of the reactionary views held by Islam4UK and groups like it, this further clampdown on civil liberties – in this case the right to free speech – must be resisted.
As with all cases of censorship or suppression of information, legislation introduced to deal with one issue inevitably gets used for another. In this case, the government is working hard to muddy the clear distinction between making ‘anti-war’ statements and ‘glorifying terrorism’, and seeking to further censor and criminalise quite legitimate resistance to the war on terror, which socialists recognise as imperialist aggression aimed at securing resources and establishing control in the Middle East.
 The hysterical reaction of politicians and media commentators to the proposed anti-war march in Wootton Bassett and to the verbal abuse shouted at returning soldiers in Luton also demonstrates that while there is no public support for the war or its ever-mutating supposed aims, the rhetoric of ‘support for our boys’ is the only card the government has left to play. While they cannot articulate a credible reason for our involvement, they insist that no criticism of the armed forces be voiced because it might distress them! This is slavishly repeated by the mainstream media while they largely ignore the reports from Afghanistan showing that atrocities against the civilian population continue apace.
Figures from Afghan Rights Monitor show that over 1,000 children were killed in war-related violence in 2009, or 3 per day. Highlighted in their recent report is the massacre of eight students aged 11-17, a 12-year old shepherd boy and a farmer in Kunar Province on Boxing Day, where US commandos assaulted a house where they were sleeping, handcuffed and then executed them. While NATO initially insisted that all the dead were ‘insurgents’, massive protests by ordinary Afghans and an investigation by the UN has now led to Karzai’s puppet government ‘demanding’ that the US hand over those responsible.
Britain cannot dissociate itself from complicity in such war crimes committed by Americans (or those by a resurgent German military) in Afghanistan because Britain is a willing partner in this adventure.
Some of the abusive language used by Islam4UK - even if directed at wrong people - is trying to play on anger felt by many at these innocent deaths. So socialists need to retain a critical standpoint, and in this case recognise that what is in play from Islam4UK is a politics of provocation which can only ultimately serve to prop up the government’s otherwise weakened position.
While Alan Johnson seems intent on chasing tabloid approval and generating anti-Muslim sentiments by chasing the same small group of individuals as they pop up again and again in differently-named groups, we might ask why the government is so insistent for banning them for what they say but is apparently unable to prosecute them for any actual serious offence. Like Abu-Hamza, they seem more like a useful ‘bogey-man’ for the tabloids to attack than a serious enemy of the state.
Who runs Islam4UK?
The views and tactics of groups like Islam4UKrepresent only a tiny fraction of people in Britain, and while nothing can be proved at this stage it is not outside the realm of possibility that they are agent provocateurs intent on smearing and discrediting both the Muslim community and the wider anti-war movement.
We should keep in mind that the CIA have publically identified extremist British Muslims as the likeliest source of another terror attack on the US, and have since 2006 dramatically increased their espionage activities amongst the British Pakistani community. All the so-called ‘terror plots’ uncovered on US soil since 9/11 have involved undercover agents acting as provocateurs, and in certain cases these ‘plots’ are so flimsy that their only purpose, aided by a compliant media, seems to be to discredit Muslims who campaign against imperialist wars and generate Islamaphobia amongst the general population.
If the CIA openly admit to widespread activity in the British Muslim community, is it so unthinkable that MI5 might also be running the kind of destabilising operations they have long experience of? If the security services can infiltrate the IRA, or the NUM, for reasons of ‘national security’ wouldn’t they also see these Islamist groups as a similar target? After all, it wouldn’t be too hard to find a group of young Muslims angry about the war and alienated from British society. Given that the government wants to spin Islam4UK’s anti-war or anti-military demonstrations into ‘glorifying terrorism’, might we not find that they soon face charges of ‘plotting’ terror itself, especially since ‘plotting’ can now be defined so vaguely, and that this will be used as an excuse for further repression of the Muslim community and of anti-war sentiment?
 But socialists do not need conspiracy theories or leaps of imagination to see what is happening here. Just like the equally reactionary and extremist BNP, Islam4UK have nothing to offer ordinary workers, soldiers or the anti-war movement except a diversionary smokescreen of inflated rhetoric and resentment. The reactionary politics of both the Islamists and the government must be resisted while the clear facts of Britain's involvement in imperialist wars of aggression must be exposed.
Public support for the war is minimal and brittle, resting only on the residue of patriotic support for ‘our lads’, while public animosity towards the politicians who led us to war is greater than ever. Whatever the crimes committed on the ground, the ultimate responsibility rests with the political elite. Like the Nazi High Command, they are guilty of the ultimate crime against humanity: plotting aggressive war for material gain, and it is against them that our anger and energy must be directed. They must not be allowed to benefit from this sideshow of provocation.
The Socialist Party says:
|
Latest News
Comment & Analysis
Events
EDUCATION
|