| COMMENTARY

“Bee

Br Fo}

~ Sho’
“More than anyone dreamed that he could. He beat out

Jackson campaign offers new course

; Whatever the outcome of the Democratic Convention
‘ 3 Sepa U.S. electoral politics have been irre-
ne yaltered by the candidacy of Jesse Jackson for the
Presidential nomination.
nte ra Coverage has tended to focus on a “‘racial”
ae €tation of Jackson’s stunning performance,
Sa the substantive political differences that
3 ate him from the other candidates. Commentators
as Paced Jackson’s exceptional showing in the
on l€s to a surge of ‘Black pride’, rather than any
srammatic appeal. They have made much of dubious

i

“ec C “es . we
a pence of “‘racism’’ in the Jackson camp — witness the
_ x, 50ing tempest over remarks made by the flamboyant

ae of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan. And, the ulti-
back Ypocrisy,. many have begun to warn of a “white
ana that might result from Jackson’s ‘‘too pushy

_ All of this works to obscure the fact that Jackson has
Nable to rally behind him’the only sizeable force that
urrently putting up serious, effective opposition to
aganism. Jackson has put forward a solid — and often

& att were . ;

ba pevent — Critique of the Reagan administration s re-
Soin on domestic and foreign affairs, and has offered his
uw €ssentially social democratic, program for dealing

with the multi-faceted crisis presently facing the U.S.

_, “a¢kson would increase social spending, sharply re-

ae the military budget, toughen affirmative action and
ae pets legislation, remove the U.S. military pres-
© trom Central America and seek conciliation with

Te 5 : : z
Volutionary regimes and national liberation move-

eee. He would also seriously negotiate a renewal of ©
tente with the USSR.

ee ackson’s program adds up to a dissenting, reformist
eet directing itself through traditional channels
ard the center of political power in America. It is not

he first such movement in U.S. history, but it may

£ventually prove to be one of the most successful. Jack-

ae clear and distinct alternative to the right-
“Moving policies of both thé Democratic and

Republican party machines.

- tis is a point that Jackson himself nails down quite
atly when he tells supporters that a vote for Mondale

or Hart means ‘getting off a Republican elephant and _

Onto a Democratic donkey going in’the same direction,

_ Only just a little slower. We need a new direction. It is

a to lose an election going in the right direction tha’
1 going in the wrong direction.”
= na nation which lacks any major organizational
' Pression of social democracy, the Jackson revolt is the

88est popular upsurge of reformist spirit within the

eeeomtic Party since the Roosevelt coalition brought
New Deal to Washington in the 1930's.

© measure of Jackson’s success begins with his

Wing in the primaries. Here he accomplished far

€ “More experienced’’ white candidates — including

4Stronaut-superstar John Glenn — and captured 20 per

*€nt of the popular vote. His performance, beside the

__Msipid Mondale and the plasticine Hart, was dynamic

a €xciting. A superb orator, Jackson in full filight is
pre €mely impressive. Louis Harris, conductor of the
pr Stgious Harris polls avows that ‘Jackson might be
: g kiont if he were white’
e ackson’s foreign travels —to Syria, Nicaragua, Cuba
= Produced more than just headline-grabbing prisoner
€ases. His ability to conduct an open dialogue with the
“aders of these countries effectively punctured the Rea-

- Banite myth that they are ‘‘mad-dog’’ revolutionary re-

8imes with whom no useful discourse is possible. More
any other big party politician in the U.S. today,

etse Jackson has demonstrated that there is a peaceful,
a Uonal alternative to Reagan’s big stick and tough line in

reign policy.
the momentum of the Jackson campaign has alarmed
© Democratic party machine and made fools of many

“Stablishment black politicians — such as Chicago

Mayor Harold-Washington, and Atlanta’s Andy Young
~ who did their best to block support for him in their
Constituencies. Indeed, party leaders have been forced
J €xpend considerable effort recently trying to persuade
“ackson to ‘“‘play ball’’ at the convention; to bring his

Tainbow coalition’’ in behind the official Democratic
Candidate and keep it within the strict confines of

. ©Onventional electoral activity in the months leading up

© November’s election. ;
Whether Jackson will co-operate with the chosen

- Democratic candidate remains to be seen, but his

Tainbow coalition’ is an idea that soars far beyond the

Personal ambitions of a single man. The Jackson cam-.

Paign has galvanized political resistance in America.
€arly two million newly-registered voters — a direct

Tesult of Jackson’s efforts — will hit the polls this year.

hey are not only Blacks, but also poor whites, Latinos,

News Analysis |

Dropping the elephant and donkey

Fred Weir

Asians, youth, women, and senior citizens. The victims
of Reaganism are on the march, and their outrage will not
be easily contained.

This point is underscored by Angela Davis, the Vice
Presidential nominee of the Communist Party USA. She

‘points out that while the J ackson campaign has emerged .

from the specific struggles of American Blacks for civil
rights and social justice, it has succeeded in
‘crystallizing’ opposition to Reagan across a broad
spectrum.

“Tt is extremely important,’’ she says, “‘that the Jack-

‘ son campaign very explicitly represents itself as a ‘rain-

bow coalition’ that involves people of different racial and

national backgrounds, that involves labor, women and _
- youth. The maturity of the Black movement today calls

for precisely this kind of anti-monopoly alliance’’.
So, whatever the result of the Democratic Conven-

JESSE JACKSON: “It is better to lose an election going in
the right direction, than to win going in the wrong
direction.”

tion, and indeed, whatever path Jesse Jackson per-
sonally chooses to tread, something has begun with his
candidacy that is likely to keep right on growing.

War plays into U.S. aims

No winner in Iran-Iraq conflict

By OMAR LATIF
The bloody armed conflict which erupted between
Iraq and Iran on Sept. 20, 1980 is still raging, causing
untold suffering to the peoples of both countries, jeopar-
dizing peace and security in the whole region and com-

“plicating the situation not only in the Arab and Muslim

world but also in the non-aligned movement. :

Mistakenly believing that a strife-torn Iran would be
easy prey, Iraq launched the invasion, ostensibly to
wrest from Iran the equal rights of navigation justly
conceded to the latter through the Algier’s Treaty of 1975
in the Shatt-al-Arab (a waterway of significant economic
importance to both countries) and to assert its claims to
adjoining territories which had, formally, been sur-
rendered to it under that Treaty by Iran. In reality, the
Iraqi regime thought it an opportune moment to elim-
inate the political threat represented by Iran’s revolution
and, simultaneously, to renew a-strong bid for regional
hegemony. ee, : :

Instead of collapsing, the Iranian regime was quickly
able to mobilize the people in support of the revolution
against an alien invasion, halt the Iraqi advance and
recapture almost all its lost territory. At this point, with
Iranian troops poised to enter Iraqi territory, while Iraq
became amenable to a negotiated settlement, the Iranian
regime raised the stakes. It ill-advisedly declared that its
peace terms were not negotiable and that it would not
give up its aim in toppling the Saddam regime and exact-
ing heavy war reparations before accepting a ceasefire.

In all of this the positions of both the Communist Party
of Iraq and that of Iran are noteworthy. Bothrthe parties,
point out that wars profit only the ruling classes who use
the workers and the popular masses as proxies. They
have urged both sides to desist from attempts to destabi-
lize each other and to settle any disputes they might have
through peaceful means. Otherwise, they have re-
peatedly warned, not only would the war and its
continuation cause incalculable suffering in human
terms and the destruction of material values created by
many years of hard work by the Iranian and Iraqi peoples
but would also weaken the anti-imperialist front in the
region and provide the U.S. additional opportunities to

restore outposts of imperialism there.

Events have vindicated their stand fully. During the
last four years tens of thousands of citizens, including
young men and even boys, have fallen in battle. The lives
of millions, among both peoples, have been dislocated;
towns and villages reduced to rubble; trade disrupted,

economies eroded and numerous plans to battle hunger

and disease have been downgraded or abandoned. __

As far as the international context is concerned, hav-
ing concentrated their efforts on the war, Iran and Iraq
are not making full use of the anti-imperialist potential of
their peoples against the encroachments of the colo-

‘nialist and imperialist forces. Iraq has shirked its pre-

vious role of building Arab unity on an anti-imperialist
basis while within Iran the persecution of democratic
forces has gone hand in hand with the attempts of pro-
imperialist elements in Tehran to seek a rapprochement
with the United States:

For its part the Pentagon has long hatched the idea of
active armed interference in the Persian Gulf — the

“region, rich in minerals, above all oil — which has arbi-

trarily been proclaimed by the U.S. as ‘‘a zone of its vital
interests’’. Now, unfortunately, the protracted war,
especially the attacks on shipping, are providing it with
just such an opportunity. ‘

The Pentagon has already dispatched AWAC. spy
planes, KC-135 aerial tankers (operated by U.S. crews)
and Stinger missiles to Saudi Arabia and has offered that
country and Oman advanced fighter planes (FC-15s)
provided they allow the U.S. to use their airfields. Apart

» from stationing U.S. aircraft at Saudi and Omani air

bases, the U.S. has been harbouring plans of setting up
an ‘‘international naval task force’’ to escort tankers in
the Gulf. The bulk of that force will be made up of,
undoubtedly, American, British and French battleships.
It is only after a long and arduous struggle that these
two countries — after the 1958 and 1968 revolutions in

‘Iraq and that of 1979 in Iran — have been able to free

themselves from the clutches of international mono-
polies and start on the path of national development and

_ independent control over their natural resources.

From figuring prominently in Washington’s strategic
plans — including plans to undermine the security of the
Soviet Union on its southern borders and to contain the
national liberation movements in the Middle East —
these countries have come to declare their adherence to
the principles of non-alignment, protection of national
interests within the OPEC framework and have resol-

“utely opposed the Camp David deal between Wash-

ington and Tel Aviv with regard to the Arab people.
The non-aligned movement, the Organization of Is-
lamic Countries and the United Nations have all offered
to mediate the conflict and have put forward proposals,
like resolution 540 passed by the UN General Assembly

- on October 31, 1983, which call for an end to all hostili-

ties, troop withdrawals to within internationally. recog-
nized borders and mediatory efforts to achieve a settle-
ment acceptable to both sides.

For the prevention of a further escalation of tensions
in the Middle East which could very well lead to a bigger,
more destructive war; to avert the danger of imperialist

intervention and to focus the people’s attention on the
main danger threatening the region — the expansionist
policies of the United States and Israel; and so that the
pressing problems of the people, who are tired of war and
privation, can be addressed, it is necessary that both the

governments of Iraq and Iran display good will and

realism and end the war now.

PACIFIC TRIBUNE, JULY 18, 1984e5

ee
Oo