“Some in the U.S. peace movement and the left,” says the party’s chairman, Sam Webb, in an article published in the August 19-25 issue of the People’s Weekly World, “are against any kind of exit strategy that isn’t ‘immediate.’ While this position may be correct in the abstract it is too inflexible as a political approach…. In fact, the most advanced demands of the progressive and center forces—not the demands of the left—are the basis for building the broadest possible mass unity and a congressional majority to end the occupation.”

The article, headlined “Ending the occupation, the 2006 elections and tactics,” is based on remarks by Webb at the June meeting of CPUSA’s National Committee.

“Of course, we don’t support an open-ended occupation, no matter which party proposes it,” Webb says. “And needless to say, we don’t support a long-term U.S. military presence in Iraq.”

But the main choice, the CP leader says, “is between a concrete phased exit strategy [backed by many Democrats] and permanent occupation [the Bush administration’s goal].”

Webb points to two resolutions sponsored by Democrats in the Senate in July. One by Massachusetts senator John Kerry, he says, “envisions a short exit strategy and a role for the international community.” The other by Wisconsin senator Carl Levin calls for troop withdrawal beginning this winter, but leaves the process open-ended, Webb says. Both of these proposals were defeated with large bipartisan majorities.

The lead article, “Bipartisan support grows for Iraq war,” and editorial “U.S. troops out of Iraq now!” in the July 10 Militant described the falsity of arguments that these Democratic proposals represented either a split in the ruling class on its Iraq strategy or anything that’s in the interests of working people.

Citing the Kerry and Levin proposals as part of the evidence of growing congressional support for pulling U.S. troops out of Iraq, Webb argues that “political realism and tactical flexibility should dictate that the left and progressive-minded people should rally support for the best of the alternative exit strategies.”

And then comes the Stalinist party’s time-worn clincher: “defeat Bush,” that is, vote Democrat. “Of the ways to influence this debate,” says Webb, “none is more important than the November elections.”

The stakes in the outcome of these elections are so high, he claims, “that the best way for the American people to register their opposition to Bush’s Iraq policy is to deliver a stinging blow to Republican hopes of retaining control of the Congress in November.”
 
 
Related articles:
Competing bourgeois forces vie for power in much of Iraq  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home