Response to Weekly Worker on defence of Iran

Dear comrades,

Ian Spencer’s article “Carnival of the oppressed” in last week’s Weekly Worker featured a picture of the Spartacist League’s contingent at the 21 June pro-Palestine mass demonstration in London with a caption reading: “Some want to defend, not Iran, but the theocratic regime”. The article also claimed that our contingent flew the Iranian flag “because of a warped version of anti-imperialism”. This is a demagogic and dishonest polemic.

Our contingent, whose main banner read “Stop the Zionist bloodbath! Stand with Iran & Palestine” together with placards calling on trade unions to defend Iran, did not fly the Iranian flag. What happened was that our unambiguous stand against imperialism attracted multiple Iranian people who took our leaflets, marched with us, chanted our slogans and waved their flag, something we welcomed. This is what the photo in the Weekly Worker shows. As Iran was being bombed by the US and Israel, the CPGB’s denunciation of those waving the Iranian flag in a London anti-war demo is the kind of thing one would expect to see in the tabloid press, not in a so-called Marxist newspaper.

Furthermore, if Ian Spencer had bothered to actually read what the Spartacist League says on Iran, he would have quickly realised that we do not support the Iranian clerical regime. Here is what our comrades in the US wrote the day after the US bombing:

“Many cite the reactionary character of the Iranian regime as an excuse to pull back from the defense of Iran against the U.S. oligarchy—by far the most reactionary force out there. The Iranian regime does deserve to be ended—not by the much bigger U.S. sponsors of ‘state terrorism’—but by Iran’s working and toiling masses.”

—“Defend Iran Against U.S./Israel!”, Workers Vanguard supplement, 22 June 2025

While the CPGB denounces our straightforward and principled line, its own position is a confused mish mash which refuses to say openly: defend Iran. Rather, the CPGB insists on the need to defend the peoples of Iran. The implication of such insistence is that the Iranian defence forces and military—that is, those who are actively fighting the US and Israeli aggression—are fair game, as opposed to “the people”. This is a complete capitulation to imperialism, comrades.

Just look at what happened in Iraq or Libya. The imperialists brought down the regimes in order to subjugate the people, laying waste to both countries. Does this mean that Marxists supported those regimes? No. However, it does mean that Marxists had to take a side with the regime’s forces against the imperialist aggressor. The same is true for Iran today. In contrast, standing with the “Iranian people” is a meaningless phrase which everyone can utter. Netanyahu and Trump claim to be for the Iranian people. So does the Ayatollah. So does Keir Starmer, Jeremy Corbyn and the far left. What draws a clear class line is to call for the defence of Iran against imperialism.

This is not only essential in Britain, but is also key to building a revolutionary movement in Iran against the regime itself. No Iranian worker is going to follow so-called communists who defend “the people” but who refuse to take a side in the war and help the armed forces defend the country against imperialism. Any conscious worker would see this as treachery, no different than that of the monarchists and liberals. Such a stance discredits communists and only strengthens the authority of the mullahs. The only way communists can aspire to lead the Iranian masses and turn them against the reactionary regime is if they place themselves on the front lines of the struggle to defend Iran against the US and Israel, putting forward a revolutionary strategy against that of the mullahs.

As far as we know, our contingent at the 21 June demonstration was the only one on the British left which marched under the straightforward call to defend Iran. Most other left groups either ignored the question, or else limited themselves to pacifist platitudes (“no war with Iran” or “hands off Iran”). Such pacifist slogans remain perfectly compatible with liberals and Labourites, whose politics dominate the pro-Palestine demonstrations. Yet, Ian Spencer uncritically praised the demonstration, and of all the contingents present, the only one he deemed objectionable was ours! This is quite telling.

This all goes to show that the main concern driving your position is not to take the strongest stance against the imperialist rulers, but rather to not offend the opinion of petty-bourgeois liberals and Labourites who might accuse you of softness on the regime.

Comrades, communist unity will be forged in the struggle against the pacifists and Labourite lackeys who dominate the British left. Not through demagogic and false polemics against those who oppose them.

Comradely,

Vincent David

For the Spartacist League