A History of the Iraqi Communist Party 1934-1963: Part 1
By "Comrade Mudarisov"
Thought I might share an edited version of my final year thesis with my fellow comrades. If anyone wants further information, or some references your most welcome to contact me. Same with anyone who may get confused or not understand something. Additionally, I appologise for my writing style
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This work aims to look at the early origins and development of the ICP, followed by an analysis of the events from the 1940s until 1963 and the role the ICP played in them. Finally, this work shall look at the decline and destruction of the party following the February 8th coup of 1963. The ICP, it could be argued, was one of the strongest parties in Iraq in the decade prior to and during the revolution, to the extent that they had the chance to take power. The study will attempt to show how these opportunities were missed, and how much influence and power the ICP really had. The structure and composition of the membership of the ICP will also be looked at in the second and third chapters. This issue is extremely important because it shall tell us why people joined the party, and what factors made the party appeal to them. In addition, the internal situation of Iraq will have to be examined, so as to understand what shaped the Party’s policies. Furthermore, this work shall analyse the ICP’s relations with other parties inside Iraq and other communist parties outside Iraq, as well as external events, which affected Iraq, such as the issue of Palestine, and relations with the Soviet Union.
British Rule in Iraq 1918-1932
Following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after the First World War, the Middle East was divided and in disarray. The Arabs felt cheated by the British as no independent, unified Arab state had been established as promised in the Husayn-McMahon correspondence of 1916. Although the British had ruled the three former Ottoman ‘wilayas’ of Mosul, Baghdad and Basra practically as a single entity since 1918, it was not until the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne that these three provinces were merged into a single mandate to form today’s modern Iraq. Thus, 1918 signalled the beginning of British rule in Iraq.
The British administration of Iraq remained, until October 1920, the responsibility of the Commander-in-chief of the British forces exercised through the Civil Commissioner, Sir Percy Cox, who was replaced in May 1918 by Arnold Wilson. With the situation of the Arab government under Amir Faisal in Syria quickly deteriorating and the increasing violence emanating from the Shi’ite centres of Najaf and Kerbala, as well as the secret meetings between the Sunni and Shi’ite communities in Baghdad, the British position was slowly weakening. This culminated in the Iraqi revolt of 1920, which began as a general protest against British rule, but ended as a revolt of the tribes of the mid-Euphrates. The revolt was easily defeated by the British, but left bitter resentment from the tribes towards the emerging political establishment in Baghdad, who were worried that the revolt would enhance the power of the Shi’ites in the country. At the Cairo conference of 1921, the decision was taken to establish a Kingdom of Iraq and to offer the deposed Amir Faisal of Damascus the throne.
Despite the setting up of an Iraqi Kingdom, the British retained control over much of the administration, mainly through the Sharifian and ex-Ottoman administrative elites, for whom the new state was a guarantee of their centrality of status and also through the notables, who were increasingly defined by property ownership and who also depended on the state as a means of ensuring social order. The mandate, which was a commission from the League of Nations authorizing a member state to administer a territory, given to Britain by the League was vehemently opposed by many of those who had taken part in the earlier revolt, and although the Anglo-Iraqi Treaty of 1922 attempted to disguise this, many especially the Shi’ites in the south and the tribes of the mid-Euphrates feared that ratification of the treaty would consolidate a state over which they had no control and which might ignore their interests The remainder of the decade saw many more treaties. The Anglo-Iraqi Treaty of 1926 incorporated recommendations of the League of Nations that Britain should ‘actively consider’ Iraq’s admission into the League of Nations by 1928. However, by 1927 the British government had a change of heart and decided to negotiate a new treaty promising support for Iraqi independence by 1932, ‘provided the present rate of progress in Iraq is maintained and all goes well in the interval.’ By 1930 opposition to the 1927 treaty was very high, thus allowing the Iraqi government to negotiate a new treaty, which was signed in June 1930. This treaty was to form the basis of Britain’s relationship with a post-independent Iraq. Iraq was now responsible for all its administrative affairs, including defence, however, Britain would be able to keep two major bases in Iraq, as well as move troops through the country through times of war. Despite the opposition to the 1930 treaty, the promise of independence had managed to defuse much of the criticism.
The Anglo-Iraqi treaties of the 1920s had a direct affect on the politics of the new Kingdom. By 1926 three major parties were active, and all were concerned with the issue of the treaties. The Nationalist Party (hibz al-watani) established in 1922 by Ja’far Abu al-Timman; the People’s Party (hibz al-sha’b) was founded in 1925 by Yasin al-Hashimi; and the Progressive Party (hizb al-taqaddum) created also in 1925 by ‘Abd al-Muhsin al-Sa’dun. These parties’ platform were the abolition of the Mandate and a demand for immediate independence. They were also important because they reflected the widespread opposition to the treaties, as well as the Sunni domination of politics in Iraq. However, after the achievement of independence in 1932 and in some cases before that, these parties were disbanded since they no longer served any purpose.
Independence
The admission of Iraq into the League of Nations marked the end of an era which King Faisal and the Iraqi nationalists had been too preoccupied with securing independence instead of paying proper attention to internal reforms. Having achieved independence the King asked the then Prime Minster Nuri as-Sa’id to resign in favour of a new administration, which would include himself and his opponents, the National Brotherhood party (Ikha’ al-Watani). The reason for this was that the King wanted someone relatively more neutral as head of the government, and so appointed Naji Shawkat as Prime Minister, rather than the Pro-British Nuri. The Ikha’ was formed in 1930 by leaders of the People’s party and the Nationalist party. Their initial programme was that of immediate independence, after this was achieved their main policy was to oppose the Anglo-Iraqi treaty. Shawkat subsequently resigned due to opposition to him from parliament and Rashid ‘Ali al-Gaylani, who was to play a major role in Iraqi politics during the 1940s and 1950s, was asked by the King to form a cabinet. Ikha’ leaders, it must be noted, pledged never to recognise the Anglo-Iraqi treaty of 1930, hence creating a potentially embarrassing situation for the King who felt he had got a good bargain from the British. Yet, following talks with the King, the Ikha’ leaders decided to drop their opposition to the treaty in favour of a mild statement instead. However, the coming of the Ikha’ party to power without a promise to revise the treaty led to a rupture of relations with the Nationalist parties. Following this compromise the Ikha’ led a controversial government. Having massacred many Assyrians for their role in the infamous Assyrian affair of 1933, and ignored the warnings of King Faisal that such an action would course major discontent in the fledgling state, the Ikha’ government collapsed. It was these events as well as the economic world depression of 1929-30 that it became evident that communist ideas had gained ascendancy in Iraq. The first communist circles were set up in Iraq in the late 1920s. Little is known about communism in Iraq in this period, but what we do know is that there appears to have a been a member of the Comintern, a one Pyotr Vasili, who introduced a young Yusuf Salman Yusuf (Fahd) to communism. Whether Vasili had a direct influence in the setting up of Basra’s communist circle in 1927 is unknown, but what is for sure is that he affected Fahd in a profound way, and so, albeit indirectly, was responsible for sowing the first seeds of communism in Iraq. Our attentions will now turn to the founding of the Iraqi Communist Party, the problems it faced and the issues of membership, Fahd, its relations with other parties, and reactions to both external and internal events.
====================
Previous Part << {1} 2 3 4 >> Next Part
====================
