Discussion:
Communist Iraq?
(too old to reply)
David Tenner
2005-01-14 08:11:23 UTC
Permalink
A thought provoked by the thread about what would be the largest nation
after 1949 likely to "go communist":

In May 1959 Commentary magazine published an article by Walter Laqueur
entitled "As Iraq Goes Communist."
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/Summaries/V27I5P7-1.htm The article is
not available online except to subscribers, and I have not yet read it, so
I don't know what Laqueur's arguments were, but as of May 1959, it did
seem quite plausible that Iraq was "going communist." The Iraqi Communist
Party certainly seems to have had advance knowledge of the military revolt
that overthrew the monarchy and brought Abdul-Karim Qassem to power on
July 14, 1958: "It is clear, according to Batatu, that officers close to
Qassem kept the leading members of the National Unity Front [which
included the ICP] fairly well posted on what was going on. Thus, the
communist party centre placed all the party organisations on alert on the
night of July 13-14, only giving the vaguest of reasons for taking this
step."
http://www.soviet-empire.com/ussr/viewtopic.php?t=28574 (All quotations
in this post are from that site, unless otherwise indicated.)

Although the ICP was not totally satisfied with Qassem, they did support
him as an "anti-imperialist" and an opponent of Arab nationalism in either
its Nasserite or Ba'athist forms. They hoped to take advantage of the
split between Qassem and his pro-Nasser deputy, Abdul-Salam Arif. After
Arif's removal:

"The next months saw a hardening of the positions of what now developed
into two distinct sides, the communists and their sympathisers and the
nationalists and theirs. One must not forget that despite the ICP's
support for Qassem, he still regarded them with suspicion, believing that
if he publicly allied with them he would lose more support at home, and
also isolate potential allies abroad. It was not until the end of January
1959 that the party was given official permission to publish their
newspaper legally, the 'Ittihad al-Sha'ab'. In addition, Qassem could
still not be persuaded by the ICP to appoint any communists to his cabinet
or to any high executive position. Nevertheless, he did appoint communist
sympathisers, such as Ibrahim Kubba and Naziha al-Dulaymi."

The nationalists then attempted to overthrow Qassem. First there was a
plot by veteran pan-Arabist poltician Rashid Ali, which failed utterly,
due to lack of secrecy. This was a prelude to a much more serious revolt
in Mosul in March 1959. This revolt was also crushed, and for a while the
ICP did seem to many observers (as the title of Laqueur's article shows)
to be on the verge of power. Indeed, apparently there was a debate within
the ICP on whether they should seize power: "However, after heated
arguments in the politburo it was decided not to embark on such an action.
It claimed that while it may succeed in taking power, its original
analysis of the essentially bourgeois character of the revolution was
correct. In addition, the party's opponents would be able to combine
successfully against it; a civil war would follow in which the left would
be defeated."

In any event, June-July 1959 seems to have marked the turning point for
the ICP: In late June, Qassem began to arrest or forcibly retire officers
sympathetic to the ICP and to restrict the role and operation of the ICP-
backed "People's Resistance Forces" (PRF). In July, there was conflict in
Kirkuk between the Kurds (who feared Arab nationalism and looked to the
ICP as a counterweight to pan-Arabism) and the fiercely anti-Communist
Turkomen, in which a number of Turkomen were killed: "Although this was
not a pre-meditated attack by the Kurds or the ICP, it was seized upon by
enemies of the ICP and by Qassem in particular since it gave him a chance
to distance himself from the communists and to try to end his
identification with them. Mass arrests took place in Baghdad of prominent
communists and further restrictions were put on the activities of the
People's Resistance, and control of the Peasants' Union was taken away
from the communist controlled General Federation of Peasant Unions and
given to provincial governors. This was the beginning of a sharp decline
of communist influence in Iraq." Evenutally the party's newspaper was
banned and it lost control of the trade unions, student union, etc. In
February, 1963, the Ba'athists and their allies seized control, and killed
Qassem and many Communists. This was the end of any real power of the
ICP; true, in the 1970s it was legalized and even got a couple of seats in
the cabinet (perhaps Saddam Hussein did this to please the Soviet Union,
with which he had good relations at the time) but of course Saddam would
not allow the ICP any real power, and it was soon subjected to severe
repression.

There are two ways I can see of having the ICP come to power:

(1) One, mentioned above, was for them to strike in the spring of 1959
when they were at the height of their power. They had important
sympathizers in the army, they strongly influenced the PRF, they
controlled the trade unions, the peasant union, etc.--and they even had
sympathizers holding high posts within the regime. Indeed,even those
politburo members who opposed a coup acknowledged that it might be
successful for a while, but thought that a civil war would follow which
the Left would lose. That the IRC and its allies would indeed lose seems
likely but not certain--would their opponents (Ba'athists, Nasserites, the
remaining monarchists, etc.) be able to unite? And then of course there
is the question of outside aid--would the USSR help the ICP? (The US
would presumably aid the ICP's opponents, acting through Turkey, Iran, and
friendly Arab states.) I wouldn't put the odds in favor of the Left in an
Iraqi civil war, but I wouldn't rule out their prospects, either. One
possiblity: they lose most of the country but retain control of
Kurdistan?

(2) Alternatively, they might have succeeeded by getting along better with
Qassem and gradually gaining more and more influence within his regime.
Obviously, the Kirkuk massacre hurt the ICP badly here, but even before
that, Qassem seems to have begun to curb the ICP's influence. So maybe
what we need is a Qassem who underestimates the communist menace and
overestimates the nationalist one, rather than vice versa as in OTL. (In
1963 the ICP appealed to Qassem for arms to help them resist the Ba'athist
coup that they said was imminent, but Qassem, confident that he could
defeat the coup on his own, declined.)

Obviously, communist parties face serious obstacles in Muslim countries.
Still, South Yemen was officially "Marxist-Leninist" for many years, so I
would not rule out the possibility of a Communist Iraq. Admittedly,
though, the IRC had only a brief window of opportunity under Qassem, and
it is questionable whether their leadership had the competence to take
advantage of it.

Any thoughts? (I do want to look up Laqueur's article...)
--
David Tenner
***@ameritech.net
c***@aol.com
2005-01-14 23:01:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Tenner
A thought provoked by the thread about what would be the largest nation
In May 1959 Commentary magazine published an article by Walter
Laqueur
Post by David Tenner
entitled "As Iraq Goes Communist."
<snip how a stronger (or weaker) hand could have brought the
Revolution, comrades!>

An Iraq war evolves instead of Vietnam? It's not totally ridiculous,
though of course the details would be completely different. Maybe this
could be a follow-on from my earlier thread about Ike getting entangled
in Lebanon in '58. A general US commitment to the Middle East rather
than South Asia in the '60s. Aw, hell, this TL cries out for either
Prescott or GHWB to be President at some point during the Iraq War.
Bonus points if Saddam goes out like Diem!
Rich Rostrom
2005-01-15 10:26:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by c***@aol.com
An Iraq war evolves instead of Vietnam? It's not totally ridiculous,
though of course the details would be completely different.
I can't see it.

The Communists in Vietnam had several huge advantages
that would be missing in Iraq.

Firstly, the Communists controlled Vietnam's nationalist
movement, could rightly claim credit for its success, and
had total control of the first independent state in half
the country. This gave them legitimacy and a powerful
claim on popular loyalty that a band of coupsters in Iraq
could never have.

Second, the Communists in Vietnam had adjacent sanctuaries
and supply from China in 49-54, and from the north in 55-75.
Unless Syria becomes a Cambodia-like conduit, Communists in
1960s Iraq are isolated from outside help. It's not coming
through Turkey, nor Iran, nor Saudi Arabia, nor Jordan.
--
Nothing which was ever expressed originally in the English language resembles,
except in the most distant way, the thought of Plotinus, or Hegel, or Foucault.
I take this to be enormously to the credit of our language. -- David Stove
David Tenner
2014-07-02 01:12:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Tenner
A thought provoked by the thread about what would be the largest nation
In May 1959 Commentary magazine published an article by Walter Laqueur
entitled "As Iraq Goes Communist."
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/Summaries/V27I5P7-1.htm The article is
not available online except to subscribers, and I have not yet read it, so
I don't know what Laqueur's arguments were, but as of May 1959, it did
seem quite plausible that Iraq was "going communist." The Iraqi Communist
Party certainly seems to have had advance knowledge of the military revolt
that overthrew the monarchy and brought Abdul-Karim Qassem to power on
July 14, 1958: "It is clear, according to Batatu, that officers close to
Qassem kept the leading members of the National Unity Front [which
included the ICP] fairly well posted on what was going on. Thus, the
communist party centre placed all the party organisations on alert on the
night of July 13-14, only giving the vaguest of reasons for taking this
step."
http://www.soviet-empire.com/ussr/viewtopic.php?t=28574 (All quotations
in this post are from that site, unless otherwise indicated.)
Although the ICP was not totally satisfied with Qassem, they did support
him as an "anti-imperialist" and an opponent of Arab nationalism in either
its Nasserite or Ba'athist forms. They hoped to take advantage of the
split between Qassem and his pro-Nasser deputy, Abdul-Salam Arif. After
"The next months saw a hardening of the positions of what now developed
into two distinct sides, the communists and their sympathisers and the
nationalists and theirs. One must not forget that despite the ICP's
support for Qassem, he still regarded them with suspicion, believing that
if he publicly allied with them he would lose more support at home, and
also isolate potential allies abroad. It was not until the end of January
1959 that the party was given official permission to publish their
newspaper legally, the 'Ittihad al-Sha'ab'. In addition, Qassem could
still not be persuaded by the ICP to appoint any communists to his cabinet
or to any high executive position. Nevertheless, he did appoint communist
sympathisers, such as Ibrahim Kubba and Naziha al-Dulaymi."
The nationalists then attempted to overthrow Qassem. First there was a
plot by veteran pan-Arabist poltician Rashid Ali, which failed utterly,
due to lack of secrecy. This was a prelude to a much more serious revolt
in Mosul in March 1959. This revolt was also crushed, and for a while the
ICP did seem to many observers (as the title of Laqueur's article shows)
to be on the verge of power. Indeed, apparently there was a debate within
the ICP on whether they should seize power: "However, after heated
arguments in the politburo it was decided not to embark on such an action.
It claimed that while it may succeed in taking power, its original
analysis of the essentially bourgeois character of the revolution was
correct. In addition, the party's opponents would be able to combine
successfully against it; a civil war would follow in which the left would
be defeated."
In any event, June-July 1959 seems to have marked the turning point for
the ICP: In late June, Qassem began to arrest or forcibly retire officers
sympathetic to the ICP and to restrict the role and operation of the ICP-
backed "People's Resistance Forces" (PRF). In July, there was conflict in
Kirkuk between the Kurds (who feared Arab nationalism and looked to the
ICP as a counterweight to pan-Arabism) and the fiercely anti-Communist
Turkomen, in which a number of Turkomen were killed: "Although this was
not a pre-meditated attack by the Kurds or the ICP, it was seized upon by
enemies of the ICP and by Qassem in particular since it gave him a chance
to distance himself from the communists and to try to end his
identification with them. Mass arrests took place in Baghdad of prominent
communists and further restrictions were put on the activities of the
People's Resistance, and control of the Peasants' Union was taken away
from the communist controlled General Federation of Peasant Unions and
given to provincial governors. This was the beginning of a sharp decline
of communist influence in Iraq." Evenutally the party's newspaper was
banned and it lost control of the trade unions, student union, etc. In
February, 1963, the Ba'athists and their allies seized control, and killed
Qassem and many Communists. This was the end of any real power of the
ICP; true, in the 1970s it was legalized and even got a couple of seats in
the cabinet (perhaps Saddam Hussein did this to please the Soviet Union,
with which he had good relations at the time) but of course Saddam would
not allow the ICP any real power, and it was soon subjected to severe
repression.
(1) One, mentioned above, was for them to strike in the spring of 1959
when they were at the height of their power. They had important
sympathizers in the army, they strongly influenced the PRF, they
controlled the trade unions, the peasant union, etc.--and they even had
sympathizers holding high posts within the regime. Indeed,even those
politburo members who opposed a coup acknowledged that it might be
successful for a while, but thought that a civil war would follow which
the Left would lose. That the IRC and its allies would indeed lose seems
likely but not certain--would their opponents (Ba'athists, Nasserites, the
remaining monarchists, etc.) be able to unite? And then of course there
is the question of outside aid--would the USSR help the ICP? (The US
would presumably aid the ICP's opponents, acting through Turkey, Iran, and
friendly Arab states.) I wouldn't put the odds in favor of the Left in an
Iraqi civil war, but I wouldn't rule out their prospects, either. One
possiblity: they lose most of the country but retain control of
Kurdistan?
(2) Alternatively, they might have succeeeded by getting along better with
Qassem and gradually gaining more and more influence within his regime.
Obviously, the Kirkuk massacre hurt the ICP badly here, but even before
that, Qassem seems to have begun to curb the ICP's influence. So maybe
what we need is a Qassem who underestimates the communist menace and
overestimates the nationalist one, rather than vice versa as in OTL. (In
1963 the ICP appealed to Qassem for arms to help them resist the Ba'athist
coup that they said was imminent, but Qassem, confident that he could
defeat the coup on his own, declined.)
Obviously, communist parties face serious obstacles in Muslim countries.
Still, South Yemen was officially "Marxist-Leninist" for many years, so I
would not rule out the possibility of a Communist Iraq. Admittedly,
though, the IRC had only a brief window of opportunity under Qassem, and
it is questionable whether their leadership had the competence to take
advantage of it.
Any thoughts? (I do want to look up Laqueur's article...)
--
David Tenner
Nine years later, *Commentary* has opened its archives to non-subscribers, and in reading Walter Laqueur's article--incidentally, Laqueur is still alive and writing at the age of 93!--one can see why it really did seem plausible that Iraq was "going Communist" in May 1959. http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/as-iraq-goes-communistdays-of-decision-in-baghdad

"The current journalistic discussions about whether Iraq is already a 'People's Democracy' recall scholastic disputations about the gender of angels. There is no single pattern under which a country becomes a Soviet satellite. The various 'People's Democracies' in Eastern Europe and Asia came into existence under varying conditions. In Prague in February 1948, for example, the transition was dramatic and there can be no doubt about when full Communist control was established. But at what point did the Communists assume full power in such countries as Poland and Bulgaria--sometime in 1947, or much earlier?

"Iraq's President Abdul Karim Kassem, it is sometimes argued, is not a Communist; but Rumania had a non-Communist President for a decade after 1945. The Communist party is not the only political party in Iraq; but sundry Peasant Unions continue to exist in Eastern Europe; there are three or four parties in East Germany, and several also in China, including a 'left- wing' Kuomintang. Nor is the nationalization of key industries or the seizure of foreign properties a reliable test; Britain in the one respect and Mexico in the other have gone much further than Iraq, yet there is little question of either's becoming a 'People's Democracy.'

"In the last analysis, the only reliable test is the test of political power: to what extent do the Communists now rule Iraq? Surely they have made great advances since our last report, 'Nasser and the Iraqi Communists' (COMMENTARY, February 1959)...

"This lull in the inter-Arab cold war came to an abrupt end on March 9, with the abortive revolt against Baghdad led by Colonel Shawwaf in Mosul. A rebellion on the part of the pan-Arab and anti-Communist officers had clearly been brewing for some time, with active help from the UAR, but we have no way of knowing whether it was indeed scheduled to begin on March 9, or whether Colonel Shawwaf was provoked to act by a 'Partisans of Peace' mass meeting in Mosul. In any case, the uprising was a dismal failure. Whoever was responsible for it had grossly underrated the extent to which the Communists had already acquired key positions in the Iraqi army; they were able to suppress it without much difficulty. Shawwaf, wounded in the bombing of his headquarters, was shot to death in the hospital by a male nurse. The tribesmen who had taken up arms in his support were easily subdued by rival tribes and by the People's Resistance, the Communist militia.

"The next day there were mass demonstrations against the plotters in Baghdad and other cities, and a violent purge of non-Communists got under way. Nasser was publicly accused of complicity in Shawwaf's revolt. 'Death to Nasser the Imperialist and Hashish-eater' was one of the milder slogans...

"We have seen four distinct stages of the Iraqi Revolution since the uprising last July 14.1 In the first stage (July-September 1958), the old regime was overthrown; the new military junta was aided by a number of civilian advisers and by the heads of the former opposition parties--the right-wing Istiqlal, the left-wing National Democrats, and the pan-Arab Ba'ath. The Communists were in a minority at this point, and none represented the party officially. In the streets, however, Communist militants, released from prisons and concentration camps, energetically consolidated their hold over mass organizations: the Partisans of Peace; the Workers' Union and Liaison Committee; the unions of teachers, artists, engineers, physicians, and journalists; the associations of farmers, students, and economists; the Democratic Youth; the Defense of Women's Rights League; and many others. Even the Chamber of Commerce soon passed under Communist control. Several ulema (Moslem preachers) hailed the Communists as fighters for the social ideals of Islam.

"In the second stage (September-December), Colonel Arif, Iraq's would-be Nasser, was ousted, thus placing the other Ba'athists in the regime under a cloud. They were not deposed just then, but power gradually shifted into the hands of their Communist aides. Wasfi Taher, Kassem's pro-Communist aide-de-camp, and his brother Loutfi Taher, a party member, now emerged as the eminences grises of the regime. The Communists gained control of the government radio station and most of the Baghdad newspapers. The Kurds in the north, traditionally pro-Russian, declared for the Communists. Most important, the party achieved full control of the People's Resistance.

"In the third stage (December 1958-March 1959), the leading pan-Arabists, including Colonel Arif and Rashid Ali (who had just returned from seventeen years in exile), were brought to trial. Nasserites and members of the right-wing Istiqlal were removed from leading positions in the government. The non-Communist wing of the National Democrats, led by Kamil Chaderchi, lost influence. Minister of Information Hussein Jamil flew to India and did not return; his functions were assumed by his Communist deputy. Pan-Arabists in the army high command were also purged--including the head of the military academy and the commanders of the first, second, and fifth divisions. The Communists gained decisive influence in the air force, tank corps, and military intelligence. A Communist, Taha ash Shaikh Ahmad, took over the political police.

"The latest stage began with the suppression of the Shawwaf revolt. Since then the Communists have been consolidating their hold throughout the country, while the purge of pan-Arabists is reaching into the middle ranks of the government and army. In fact, the Communists seem almost ready--if it were not for certain international complications--to proclaim the foundation of the first Arab 'People's Democracy.' Their achievement in ten months has been spectacular..."
David Tenner
2018-03-26 15:28:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Tenner
Post by David Tenner
A thought provoked by the thread about what would be the largest nation
In May 1959 Commentary magazine published an article by Walter Laqueur
entitled "As Iraq Goes Communist."
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/Summaries/V27I5P7-1.htm The article is
not available online except to subscribers, and I have not yet read it,
so I don't know what Laqueur's arguments were, but as of May 1959, it
did seem quite plausible that Iraq was "going communist." The Iraqi
Communist Party certainly seems to have had advance knowledge of the
military revolt
that overthrew the monarchy and brought Abdul-Karim Qassem to power on
July 14, 1958: "It is clear, according to Batatu, that officers close
to Qassem kept the leading members of the National Unity Front [which
included the ICP] fairly well posted on what was going on. Thus, the
communist party centre placed all the party organisations on alert on
the night of July 13-14, only giving the vaguest of reasons for taking
this step."
http://www.soviet-empire.com/ussr/viewtopic.php?t=28574 (All
quotations in this post are from that site, unless otherwise
indicated.)
Although the ICP was not totally satisfied with Qassem, they did
support him as an "anti-imperialist" and an opponent of Arab
nationalism in either its Nasserite or Ba'athist forms. They hoped to
take advantage of the split between Qassem and his pro-Nasser deputy,
"The next months saw a hardening of the positions of what now developed
into two distinct sides, the communists and their sympathisers and the
nationalists and theirs. One must not forget that despite the ICP's
support for Qassem, he still regarded them with suspicion, believing
that if he publicly allied with them he would lose more support at
home, and also isolate potential allies abroad. It was not until the
end of January 1959 that the party was given official permission to
publish their newspaper legally, the 'Ittihad al-Sha'ab'. In addition,
Qassem could still not be persuaded by the ICP to appoint any
communists to his cabinet
or to any high executive position. Nevertheless, he did appoint
communist sympathisers, such as Ibrahim Kubba and Naziha al-Dulaymi."
The nationalists then attempted to overthrow Qassem. First there was a
plot by veteran pan-Arabist poltician Rashid Ali, which failed utterly,
due to lack of secrecy. This was a prelude to a much more serious
revolt in Mosul in March 1959. This revolt was also crushed, and for a
while the ICP did seem to many observers (as the title of Laqueur's
article shows) to be on the verge of power. Indeed, apparently there
"However, after heated arguments in the politburo it was decided not
to embark on such an action.
It claimed that while it may succeed in taking power, its original
analysis of the essentially bourgeois character of the revolution was
correct. In addition, the party's opponents would be able to combine
successfully against it; a civil war would follow in which the left
would be defeated."
In any event, June-July 1959 seems to have marked the turning point for
the ICP: In late June, Qassem began to arrest or forcibly retire officers
sympathetic to the ICP and to restrict the role and operation of the ICP-
backed "People's Resistance Forces" (PRF). In July, there was conflict in
Kirkuk between the Kurds (who feared Arab nationalism and looked to the
ICP as a counterweight to pan-Arabism) and the fiercely anti-Communist
Turkomen, in which a number of Turkomen were killed: "Although this
was not a pre-meditated attack by the Kurds or the ICP, it was seized
upon by enemies of the ICP and by Qassem in particular since it gave
him a chance
to distance himself from the communists and to try to end his
identification with them. Mass arrests took place in Baghdad of prominent
communists and further restrictions were put on the activities of the
People's Resistance, and control of the Peasants' Union was taken away
from the communist controlled General Federation of Peasant Unions and
given to provincial governors. This was the beginning of a sharp decline
of communist influence in Iraq." Evenutally the party's newspaper was
banned and it lost control of the trade unions, student union, etc. In
February, 1963, the Ba'athists and their allies seized control, and killed
Qassem and many Communists. This was the end of any real power of the
ICP; true, in the 1970s it was legalized and even got a couple of seats in
the cabinet (perhaps Saddam Hussein did this to please the Soviet
Union, with which he had good relations at the time) but of course
Saddam would not allow the ICP any real power, and it was soon
subjected to severe repression.
(1) One, mentioned above, was for them to strike in the spring of 1959
when they were at the height of their power. They had important
sympathizers in the army, they strongly influenced the PRF, they
controlled the trade unions, the peasant union, etc.--and they even had
sympathizers holding high posts within the regime. Indeed,even those
politburo members who opposed a coup acknowledged that it might be
successful for a while, but thought that a civil war would follow which
the Left would lose. That the IRC and its allies would indeed lose
seems >> likely but not certain--would their opponents (Ba'athists,
Nasserites, the
remaining monarchists, etc.) be able to unite? And then of course
there is the question of outside aid--would the USSR help the ICP?
(The US would presumably aid the ICP's opponents, acting through
Turkey, Iran, and
friendly Arab states.) I wouldn't put the odds in favor of the Left in
an Iraqi civil war, but I wouldn't rule out their prospects, either.
One possiblity: they lose most of the country but retain control of
Kurdistan?
(2) Alternatively, they might have succeeeded by getting along better with
Qassem and gradually gaining more and more influence within his regime.
Obviously, the Kirkuk massacre hurt the ICP badly here, but even before
that, Qassem seems to have begun to curb the ICP's influence. So maybe
what we need is a Qassem who underestimates the communist menace and
overestimates the nationalist one, rather than vice versa as in OTL.
(In 1963 the ICP appealed to Qassem for arms to help them resist the
Ba'athist coup that they said was imminent, but Qassem, confident that
he could defeat the coup on his own, declined.)
Obviously, communist parties face serious obstacles in Muslim
countries. Still, South Yemen was officially "Marxist-Leninist" for
many years, so I
would not rule out the possibility of a Communist Iraq. Admittedly,
though, the IRC had only a brief window of opportunity under Qassem,
and it is questionable whether their leadership had the competence to
take advantage of it.
Any thoughts? (I do want to look up Laqueur's article...)
--
David Tenner
Nine years later, *Commentary* has opened its archives to
non-subscribers, and in reading Walter Laqueur's article--incidentally,
Laqueur is still alive and writing at the age of 93!--one can see why it
really did seem plausible that Iraq was "going Communist" in May 1959.
https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/as-iraq-goes-communistdays-of-
decision-in-baghdad/
"The current journalistic discussions about whether Iraq is already a
'People's Democracy' recall scholastic disputations about the gender of
angels. There is no single pattern under which a country becomes a
Soviet satellite. The various 'People's Democracies' in Eastern Europe
and Asia came into existence under varying conditions. In Prague in
February 1948, for example, the transition was dramatic and there can be
no doubt about when full Communist control was established. But at what
point did the Communists assume full power in such countries as Poland
and Bulgaria--sometime in 1947, or much earlier?
"Iraq's President Abdul Karim Kassem, it is sometimes argued, is not a
Communist; but Rumania had a non-Communist President for a decade after
1945. The Communist party is not the only political party in Iraq; but
sundry Peasant Unions continue to exist in Eastern Europe; there are
three or four parties in East Germany, and several also in China,
including a 'left- wing' Kuomintang. Nor is the nationalization of key
industries or the seizure of foreign properties a reliable test; Britain
in the one respect and Mexico in the other have gone much further than
Iraq, yet there is little question of either's becoming a 'People's
Democracy.'
"In the last analysis, the only reliable test is the test of political
power: to what extent do the Communists now rule Iraq? Surely they have
made great advances since our last report, 'Nasser and the Iraqi
Communists' (COMMENTARY, February 1959)...
"This lull in the inter-Arab cold war came to an abrupt end on March 9,
with the abortive revolt against Baghdad led by Colonel Shawwaf in
Mosul. A rebellion on the part of the pan-Arab and anti-Communist
officers had clearly been brewing for some time, with active help from
the UAR, but we have no way of knowing whether it was indeed scheduled
to begin on March 9, or whether Colonel Shawwaf was provoked to act by a
'Partisans of Peace' mass meeting in Mosul. In any case, the uprising
was a dismal failure. Whoever was responsible for it had grossly
underrated the extent to which the Communists had already acquired key
positions in the Iraqi army; they were able to suppress it without much
difficulty. Shawwaf, wounded in the bombing of his headquarters, was
shot to death in the hospital by a male nurse. The tribesmen who had
taken up arms in his support were easily subdued by rival tribes and by
the People's Resistance, the Communist militia.
"The next day there were mass demonstrations against the plotters in
Baghdad and other cities, and a violent purge of non-Communists got
under way. Nasser was publicly accused of complicity in Shawwaf's
revolt. 'Death to Nasser the Imperialist and Hashish-eater' was one of
the milder slogans...
"We have seen four distinct stages of the Iraqi Revolution since the
uprising last July 14.1 In the first stage (July-September 1958), the
old regime was overthrown; the new military junta was aided by a number
of civilian advisers and by the heads of the former opposition
parties--the right-wing Istiqlal, the left-wing National Democrats, and
the pan-Arab Ba'ath. The Communists were in a minority at this point,
and none represented the party officially. In the streets, however,
Communist militants, released from prisons and concentration camps,
energetically consolidated their hold over mass organizations: the
Partisans of Peace; the Workers' Union and Liaison Committee; the unions
of teachers, artists, engineers, physicians, and journalists; the
associations of farmers, students, and economists; the Democratic Youth;
the Defense of Women's Rights League; and many others. Even the Chamber
of Commerce soon passed under Communist control. Several ulema (Moslem
preachers) hailed the Communists as fighters for the social ideals of
Islam.
"In the second stage (September-December), Colonel Arif, Iraq's would-be
Nasser, was ousted, thus placing the other Ba'athists in the regime
under a cloud. They were not deposed just then, but power gradually
shifted into the hands of their Communist aides. Wasfi Taher, Kassem's
pro-Communist aide-de-camp, and his brother Loutfi Taher, a party
member, now emerged as the eminences grises of the regime. The
Communists gained control of the government radio station and most of
the Baghdad newspapers. The Kurds in the north, traditionally
pro-Russian, declared for the Communists. Most important, the party
achieved full control of the People's Resistance.
"In the third stage (December 1958-March 1959), the leading
pan-Arabists, including Colonel Arif and Rashid Ali (who had just
returned from seventeen years in exile), were brought to trial.
Nasserites and members of the right-wing Istiqlal were removed from
leading positions in the government. The non-Communist wing of the
National Democrats, led by Kamil Chaderchi, lost influence. Minister of
Information Hussein Jamil flew to India and did not return; his
functions were assumed by his Communist deputy. Pan-Arabists in the army
high command were also purged--including the head of the military
academy and the commanders of the first, second, and fifth divisions.
The Communists gained decisive influence in the air force, tank corps,
and military intelligence. A Communist, Taha ash Shaikh Ahmad, took over
the political police.
"The latest stage began with the suppression of the Shawwaf revolt.
Since then the Communists have been consolidating their hold throughout
the country, while the purge of pan-Arabists is reaching into the middle
ranks of the government and army. In fact, the Communists seem almost
ready--if it were not for certain international complications--to
proclaim the foundation of the first Arab 'People's Democracy.' Their
achievement in ten months has been spectacular..."
BTW, years after posting this, I cam across a vignette from *The Oxford
Handbook of the History of Communism* which I think indicates something of
what went wrong for the Iraqi Communists:

"On May Day 1959 two boys were watching crowds throng the streets of
Baghdad for the workers day parade. Twelve-year-old Hani Lazim was awed by
the size of the demonstration: 'It was just... endless. Whenever we went
to see the end of it, we couldn't.' Nine-year old Sami Ramadani, the
youngest child in a large family of communist activists living in
Al-Waziriyya, saw the march with his mother, sitting on the wall of a
mosque in Al-Rashid Street, 'watching endless streams of people' until two
or three in the morning.

"Decades later both still recalled the Communist Party's huge presence on
the march: echoing in the endlessly repeated slogans calling for communist
participation in the government. Lazim remembers that his father, a former
party member, was worried by the communists' open call to share power with
General Abd-al-Karim Qasim, the first president of the republic which had
been established by the overthrow of the monarchy in July 1958.

"'I remember my father didn't like it at all. And I asked him, I said 'why
Dad, why not?' He said 'nobody gives you government, you take it. It is a
foolish thing to say. You don't say it. If you want it, go and take it, if
you can. But don't say it, because you are actually antagonizing them and
they could hit you back.' And I remember that very well'..."
https://books.google.com/books?id=5OBMAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA268

Maybe if the Iraqi Communists hadn't been so obviously eager to take
power, they would have had a better chance of eventually doing so...
--
David Tenner
***@ameritech.net
Rob
2018-03-26 23:17:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Tenner
Post by David Tenner
Post by David Tenner
A thought provoked by the thread about what would be the largest nation
In May 1959 Commentary magazine published an article by Walter Laqueur
entitled "As Iraq Goes Communist."
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/Summaries/V27I5P7-1.htm The article is
not available online except to subscribers, and I have not yet read it,
so I don't know what Laqueur's arguments were, but as of May 1959, it
did seem quite plausible that Iraq was "going communist." The Iraqi
Communist Party certainly seems to have had advance knowledge of the
military revolt
that overthrew the monarchy and brought Abdul-Karim Qassem to power on
July 14, 1958: "It is clear, according to Batatu, that officers close
to Qassem kept the leading members of the National Unity Front [which
included the ICP] fairly well posted on what was going on. Thus, the
communist party centre placed all the party organisations on alert on
the night of July 13-14, only giving the vaguest of reasons for taking
this step."
http://www.soviet-empire.com/ussr/viewtopic.php?t=28574 (All
quotations in this post are from that site, unless otherwise
indicated.)
Although the ICP was not totally satisfied with Qassem, they did
support him as an "anti-imperialist" and an opponent of Arab
nationalism in either its Nasserite or Ba'athist forms. They hoped to
take advantage of the split between Qassem and his pro-Nasser deputy,
"The next months saw a hardening of the positions of what now developed
into two distinct sides, the communists and their sympathisers and the
nationalists and theirs. One must not forget that despite the ICP's
support for Qassem, he still regarded them with suspicion, believing
that if he publicly allied with them he would lose more support at
home, and also isolate potential allies abroad. It was not until the
end of January 1959 that the party was given official permission to
publish their newspaper legally, the 'Ittihad al-Sha'ab'. In addition,
Qassem could still not be persuaded by the ICP to appoint any
communists to his cabinet
or to any high executive position. Nevertheless, he did appoint
communist sympathisers, such as Ibrahim Kubba and Naziha al-Dulaymi."
The nationalists then attempted to overthrow Qassem. First there was a
plot by veteran pan-Arabist poltician Rashid Ali, which failed utterly,
due to lack of secrecy. This was a prelude to a much more serious
revolt in Mosul in March 1959. This revolt was also crushed, and for a
while the ICP did seem to many observers (as the title of Laqueur's
article shows) to be on the verge of power. Indeed, apparently there
"However, after heated arguments in the politburo it was decided not
to embark on such an action.
It claimed that while it may succeed in taking power, its original
analysis of the essentially bourgeois character of the revolution was
correct. In addition, the party's opponents would be able to combine
successfully against it; a civil war would follow in which the left
would be defeated."
In any event, June-July 1959 seems to have marked the turning point for
the ICP: In late June, Qassem began to arrest or forcibly retire officers
sympathetic to the ICP and to restrict the role and operation of the ICP-
backed "People's Resistance Forces" (PRF). In July, there was conflict in
Kirkuk between the Kurds (who feared Arab nationalism and looked to the
ICP as a counterweight to pan-Arabism) and the fiercely anti-Communist
Turkomen, in which a number of Turkomen were killed: "Although this
was not a pre-meditated attack by the Kurds or the ICP, it was seized
upon by enemies of the ICP and by Qassem in particular since it gave
him a chance
to distance himself from the communists and to try to end his
identification with them. Mass arrests took place in Baghdad of prominent
communists and further restrictions were put on the activities of the
People's Resistance, and control of the Peasants' Union was taken away
from the communist controlled General Federation of Peasant Unions and
given to provincial governors. This was the beginning of a sharp decline
of communist influence in Iraq." Evenutally the party's newspaper was
banned and it lost control of the trade unions, student union, etc. In
February, 1963, the Ba'athists and their allies seized control, and killed
Qassem and many Communists. This was the end of any real power of the
ICP; true, in the 1970s it was legalized and even got a couple of seats in
the cabinet (perhaps Saddam Hussein did this to please the Soviet
Union, with which he had good relations at the time) but of course
Saddam would not allow the ICP any real power, and it was soon
subjected to severe repression.
(1) One, mentioned above, was for them to strike in the spring of 1959
when they were at the height of their power. They had important
sympathizers in the army, they strongly influenced the PRF, they
controlled the trade unions, the peasant union, etc.--and they even had
sympathizers holding high posts within the regime. Indeed,even those
politburo members who opposed a coup acknowledged that it might be
successful for a while, but thought that a civil war would follow which
the Left would lose. That the IRC and its allies would indeed lose
seems >> likely but not certain--would their opponents (Ba'athists,
Nasserites, the
remaining monarchists, etc.) be able to unite? And then of course
there is the question of outside aid--would the USSR help the ICP?
(The US would presumably aid the ICP's opponents, acting through
Turkey, Iran, and
friendly Arab states.) I wouldn't put the odds in favor of the Left in
an Iraqi civil war, but I wouldn't rule out their prospects, either.
One possiblity: they lose most of the country but retain control of
Kurdistan?
(2) Alternatively, they might have succeeeded by getting along better with
Qassem and gradually gaining more and more influence within his regime.
Obviously, the Kirkuk massacre hurt the ICP badly here, but even before
that, Qassem seems to have begun to curb the ICP's influence. So maybe
what we need is a Qassem who underestimates the communist menace and
overestimates the nationalist one, rather than vice versa as in OTL.
(In 1963 the ICP appealed to Qassem for arms to help them resist the
Ba'athist coup that they said was imminent, but Qassem, confident that
he could defeat the coup on his own, declined.)
Obviously, communist parties face serious obstacles in Muslim
countries. Still, South Yemen was officially "Marxist-Leninist" for
many years, so I
would not rule out the possibility of a Communist Iraq. Admittedly,
though, the IRC had only a brief window of opportunity under Qassem,
and it is questionable whether their leadership had the competence to
take advantage of it.
Any thoughts? (I do want to look up Laqueur's article...)
--
David Tenner
Nine years later, *Commentary* has opened its archives to
non-subscribers, and in reading Walter Laqueur's article--incidentally,
Laqueur is still alive and writing at the age of 93!--one can see why it
really did seem plausible that Iraq was "going Communist" in May 1959.
https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/as-iraq-goes-communistdays-of-
decision-in-baghdad/
"The current journalistic discussions about whether Iraq is already a
'People's Democracy' recall scholastic disputations about the gender of
angels. There is no single pattern under which a country becomes a
Soviet satellite. The various 'People's Democracies' in Eastern Europe
and Asia came into existence under varying conditions. In Prague in
February 1948, for example, the transition was dramatic and there can be
no doubt about when full Communist control was established. But at what
point did the Communists assume full power in such countries as Poland
and Bulgaria--sometime in 1947, or much earlier?
"Iraq's President Abdul Karim Kassem, it is sometimes argued, is not a
Communist; but Rumania had a non-Communist President for a decade after
1945. The Communist party is not the only political party in Iraq; but
sundry Peasant Unions continue to exist in Eastern Europe; there are
three or four parties in East Germany, and several also in China,
including a 'left- wing' Kuomintang. Nor is the nationalization of key
industries or the seizure of foreign properties a reliable test; Britain
in the one respect and Mexico in the other have gone much further than
Iraq, yet there is little question of either's becoming a 'People's
Democracy.'
"In the last analysis, the only reliable test is the test of political
power: to what extent do the Communists now rule Iraq? Surely they have
made great advances since our last report, 'Nasser and the Iraqi
Communists' (COMMENTARY, February 1959)...
"This lull in the inter-Arab cold war came to an abrupt end on March 9,
with the abortive revolt against Baghdad led by Colonel Shawwaf in
Mosul. A rebellion on the part of the pan-Arab and anti-Communist
officers had clearly been brewing for some time, with active help from
the UAR, but we have no way of knowing whether it was indeed scheduled
to begin on March 9, or whether Colonel Shawwaf was provoked to act by a
'Partisans of Peace' mass meeting in Mosul. In any case, the uprising
was a dismal failure. Whoever was responsible for it had grossly
underrated the extent to which the Communists had already acquired key
positions in the Iraqi army; they were able to suppress it without much
difficulty. Shawwaf, wounded in the bombing of his headquarters, was
shot to death in the hospital by a male nurse. The tribesmen who had
taken up arms in his support were easily subdued by rival tribes and by
the People's Resistance, the Communist militia.
"The next day there were mass demonstrations against the plotters in
Baghdad and other cities, and a violent purge of non-Communists got
under way. Nasser was publicly accused of complicity in Shawwaf's
revolt. 'Death to Nasser the Imperialist and Hashish-eater' was one of
the milder slogans...
"We have seen four distinct stages of the Iraqi Revolution since the
uprising last July 14.1 In the first stage (July-September 1958), the
old regime was overthrown; the new military junta was aided by a number
of civilian advisers and by the heads of the former opposition
parties--the right-wing Istiqlal, the left-wing National Democrats, and
the pan-Arab Ba'ath. The Communists were in a minority at this point,
and none represented the party officially. In the streets, however,
Communist militants, released from prisons and concentration camps,
energetically consolidated their hold over mass organizations: the
Partisans of Peace; the Workers' Union and Liaison Committee; the unions
of teachers, artists, engineers, physicians, and journalists; the
associations of farmers, students, and economists; the Democratic Youth;
the Defense of Women's Rights League; and many others. Even the Chamber
of Commerce soon passed under Communist control. Several ulema (Moslem
preachers) hailed the Communists as fighters for the social ideals of
Islam.
"In the second stage (September-December), Colonel Arif, Iraq's would-be
Nasser, was ousted, thus placing the other Ba'athists in the regime
under a cloud. They were not deposed just then, but power gradually
shifted into the hands of their Communist aides. Wasfi Taher, Kassem's
pro-Communist aide-de-camp, and his brother Loutfi Taher, a party
member, now emerged as the eminences grises of the regime. The
Communists gained control of the government radio station and most of
the Baghdad newspapers. The Kurds in the north, traditionally
pro-Russian, declared for the Communists. Most important, the party
achieved full control of the People's Resistance.
"In the third stage (December 1958-March 1959), the leading
pan-Arabists, including Colonel Arif and Rashid Ali (who had just
returned from seventeen years in exile), were brought to trial.
Nasserites and members of the right-wing Istiqlal were removed from
leading positions in the government. The non-Communist wing of the
National Democrats, led by Kamil Chaderchi, lost influence. Minister of
Information Hussein Jamil flew to India and did not return; his
functions were assumed by his Communist deputy. Pan-Arabists in the army
high command were also purged--including the head of the military
academy and the commanders of the first, second, and fifth divisions.
The Communists gained decisive influence in the air force, tank corps,
and military intelligence. A Communist, Taha ash Shaikh Ahmad, took over
the political police.
"The latest stage began with the suppression of the Shawwaf revolt.
Since then the Communists have been consolidating their hold throughout
the country, while the purge of pan-Arabists is reaching into the middle
ranks of the government and army. In fact, the Communists seem almost
ready--if it were not for certain international complications--to
proclaim the foundation of the first Arab 'People's Democracy.' Their
achievement in ten months has been spectacular..."
BTW, years after posting this, I cam across a vignette from *The Oxford
Handbook of the History of Communism* which I think indicates something of
"On May Day 1959 two boys were watching crowds throng the streets of
Baghdad for the workers day parade. Twelve-year-old Hani Lazim was awed by
the size of the demonstration: 'It was just... endless. Whenever we went
to see the end of it, we couldn't.' Nine-year old Sami Ramadani, the
youngest child in a large family of communist activists living in
Al-Waziriyya, saw the march with his mother, sitting on the wall of a
mosque in Al-Rashid Street, 'watching endless streams of people' until two
or three in the morning.
"Decades later both still recalled the Communist Party's huge presence on
the march: echoing in the endlessly repeated slogans calling for communist
participation in the government. Lazim remembers that his father, a former
party member, was worried by the communists' open call to share power with
General Abd-al-Karim Qasim, the first president of the republic which had
been established by the overthrow of the monarchy in July 1958.
"'I remember my father didn't like it at all. And I asked him, I said 'why
Dad, why not?' He said 'nobody gives you government, you take it. It is a
foolish thing to say. You don't say it. If you want it, go and take it, if
you can. But don't say it, because you are actually antagonizing them and
they could hit you back.' And I remember that very well'..."
https://books.google.com/books?id=5OBMAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA268
Maybe if the Iraqi Communists hadn't been so obviously eager to take
power, they would have had a better chance of eventually doing so...
--
David Tenner
That's a great quote, and a good point.

And, they were tolerated enough past 1959 to have some time to rethink their approach. And, they could have walked into 1959 by being more attentive to how political change was being made, and suppressed, in contemporary Egypt and Syria.

Of course the call for power was probably an important part of "mobilizing their base".

And it is not like attempts to get just all the right spots in military and security services could not have been noticed or preempted.

Suffice it to say, the older Mr. Lazim was a wise man. Hopefully his circumspection paid off and he avoided being a casualty of lethal politics in Iraq.
s***@yahoo.com
2014-07-02 04:28:15 UTC
Permalink
That's a lot of detailed info on stuff I didn't know about. Hows about going back a bit further? Didn't the commies invade Iraq in WWII with the western allies? They got away with an awful lot of conquering stuff in our time line, how hard would it be to add Iraq at the end of WWII?

Nils K. Hammer
David Tenner
2014-07-02 07:58:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by s***@yahoo.com
That's a lot of detailed info on stuff I didn't know about. Hows about
going back a bit further? Didn't the commies invade Iraq in WWII with
the western allies?
No, only the British invaded Iraq in 1941 to reverse Rashid Ali al-Gaylani's
pro-Axis coup. You are thinking of Iran, which was invaded by both the UK
and USSR. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reza_Shah
--
David Tenner
***@ameritech.net
Larry Headlund
2014-07-03 21:58:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Tenner
Post by s***@yahoo.com
That's a lot of detailed info on stuff I didn't know about. Hows about
going back a bit further? Didn't the commies invade Iraq in WWII with
the western allies?
No, only the British invaded Iraq in 1941 to reverse Rashid Ali al-Gaylani's
pro-Axis coup. You are thinking of Iran, which was invaded by both the UK
and USSR. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reza_Shah
Which leads me to speculate that a communist Iran (somehow the British-USSR division goes south) could lead to to either Shite Communist and Kurdish Communist trouble for Iraq. Note Iran has a land border for supplies from the USSR.
Rob
2018-03-26 23:28:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Tenner
(2) Alternatively, they might have succeeeded by getting along better with
Qassem and gradually gaining more and more influence within his regime.
Obviously, the Kirkuk massacre hurt the ICP badly here, but even before
that, Qassem seems to have begun to curb the ICP's influence. So maybe
what we need is a Qassem who underestimates the communist menace and
overestimates the nationalist one, rather than vice versa as in OTL. (In
1963 the ICP appealed to Qassem for arms to help them resist the Ba'athist
coup that they said was imminent, but Qassem, confident that he could
defeat the coup on his own, declined.)
Obviously, communist parties face serious obstacles in Muslim countries.
Still, South Yemen was officially "Marxist-Leninist" for many years, so I
would not rule out the possibility of a Communist Iraq. Admittedly,
though, the IRC had only a brief window of opportunity under Qassem, and
it is questionable whether their leadership had the competence to take
advantage of it.
Any thoughts? (I do want to look up Laqueur's article...)
--
David Tenner
So, the local upshot in Iraq is that it becomes a Communist one-party-state by early 1961 by building influence from within the Qassem regime.

Is there a civil war in which non-communists can wrest any of the country from control of the Communists and Qassem.

And what are the regional and geopolitical consequences of a Communist regime in Baghdad at this time?

While superficially this is a great win for the USSR, it could easily be a mixed blessing.

Does Khrushchev find the Communist Iraq an embarrassment in his relationship with Egypt and Syria, and thus keep his distance? Such a course would have Baghdad soon align with China in the Sino-Soviet split.

Or does Khrushchev invest fullest support in the new Baghdad Communist regime? If so, will Nasser break with the Soviet Union and rapproche with the United States? Kennedy would have been receptive to a great extent, as he was in OTL. And fear of communist takeover in Syria was one of Nasser's motives for supporting the union in Egypt and the motive of some of those who encouraged union in Syria.

Also, Egypt was still united with Syria in the United Arab Republic at this time. Could fear of a Communist takeover supported by Iraq make the Egyptian-Syrian union last longer?

Or, could Khrushchev have his cake and eat it too, building up its relations with both the true People's Democracy of Iraq at the same time keeping a strong patronage relationship with the Egyptian-led United Arab Republic?

If Nasser ends up fixating on Iraq as a major problem, might that discourage him from getting involved in Yemen?

Are plans for the formal independence of Kuwait and reduction of British forces there put on hold?
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...