Israel has declared war on the people of Lebanon. Overnight, it launched 1,600 airstrikes on Lebanese towns and villages, killing approximately 500 people—including at least 35 children. This comes just days after it unleashed indiscriminate terror across the country by exploding thousands of pagers and walkie talkies used by Hezbollah, the Lebanese political party and militia allied with Iran. One of the victims was Fatima Abdullah, a nine-year-old girl who had just started the fourth grade.
Clearly, the far-right Israeli government is not satisfied with annihilating the Gaza Strip and expanding the illegal occupation of the West Bank. It demands yet more destruction and devastation, and is prepared to terrorise the entire Lebanese population. 
This act of aggression against Lebanon opens a new and dangerous chapter in Israel’s war on the people of the Levant. It will have huge ramifications for global politics and risks a spiralling regional conflict that could even develop into nuclear war.
Of course, the most immediate impact will be felt by the people of Lebanon. In 2006, the last time Israel waged war on Hezbollah, the death toll for the whole affair was, at most, 3,000 people. It is certain that the casualties this time will be far higher. A year of atrocities in Gaza means that the international media and diplomatic class are even more desensitised to the sight of dead Arab bodies than usual. 
Already, tens of thousands of people are fleeing Lebanon’s south, looking for sanctuary. The school year has been delayed, with many schools transforming into makeshift refugee camps. There are already hundreds of thousands of Palestinian and Syrian refugees in Lebanon—it will be a huge challenge to feed and shelter so many additional people.
Lebanon is entirely unprepared for war and its consequent devastation. In the last decade it has suffered through an unprecedented economic crisis, with a currency and banking collapse leading to the mass impoverishment of its population. In a society with no functioning state institutions, people have been left to fend for themselves. While the wealthy have used these crises to enrich themselves, the working poor of the country’s many sects and ethnicities have suffered like never before. The catastrophe has driven another generation of Lebanon’s youth to flee the country, seeking work and any sort of future. 
Indeed, part of the reason Hezbollah has been fairly restrained in its clashes with Israel—despite numerous provocations—is that many Lebanese people rightly hold it responsible for the terrible social and economic conditions they face and are unwilling to lend it political support. Its leading figures have long been part of the ruling elite that has run the country into the ground, doing sordid deals to ensure that nothing changes. This explains the popularity of the anti-establishment chant in the country’s ill-fated revolution back in 2019: “All of them means all of them, and Nasrallah is one of them” (Hassan Nasrallah is Hezbollah’s leader). It’s impossible to know whether this war will rebuild some of Hezbollah’s reputation or if it will merely exacerbate these preexisting fissures and lead to further social explosions. 
Beyond the suffering and internal dynamics of Lebanon, this war opens whole new vistas of regional bloodshed. Let’s be clear, Israel has been looking to open a new front in its war to its north for months. It has assassinated key figures in Hezbollah, Hamas and the Iranian government anywhere and everywhere, hoping to provoke a response that would justify a more serious confrontation. Failing to get the reaction it hoped for, Israel has decided to unilaterally start the war.
But now there is a real risk that Israel gets the regional conflagration they want. That in turn could draw in the Americans, who have made it clear that they are not fundamentally opposed to anything Israel does and will keep providing weapons with no strings attached. 
The obvious question is why the West, including Australia, continues to give Israel the license to kill so freely. Many turn to conspiracy theories or vaguely antisemitic ideas that Israel somehow controls the US. Western institutions don’t offer much in the way of an explanation, spending more time hurling ridiculous accusations of antisemitism at Palestine solidarity activists, as they have no other way of defending their support for Israel’s crimes.
But the real explanation for the US-Israel alliance is that the Americans know they need strong allies in an important region. And nobody could have any doubts about Israel’s murderous capacities.
The sickening reports in the imperialist media following each of Israel’s provocative actions is proof of this. After every Israeli atrocity we are subjected to earnest statements by US and Australian politicians saying that they are “deeply concerned about regional escalation”, as if Israel’s atrocities aren’t already a huge escalation. As if those who respond to Israel’s aggression are the escalators. 
Many have tried to explain away Israel’s lack of restraint as an unfortunate outcome of Netanyahu’s extremist coalition. The liberal Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz
has consistently put forward this line, arguing that the war is irrational and causing irreparable damage to Israel’s international reputation. The liberal wing of the international capitalist press often parrots these arguments after an episode of inexcusable Israeli behaviour, hoping to convince critics of the war that there is nothing fundamentally wrong with Israel itself.
But while Israeli society is divided in many ways, it is not divided in unleashing brutality on the workers, students and poor of Palestine and the wider Middle East. When Netanyahu began the latest round of attacks on Lebanon in late August, multiple figures on what passes for the political centre in Israel criticised him for being too restrained. Yoav Gallant, Israel’s defence minister, and IDF Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi are often presented as more moderate and rational figures in the Israeli state. Both have recently criticised Netanyahu for being too mild in response to Hezbollah, with the latter making direct preparations for a ground invasion before it was raised as an option by the government. Benny Gantz, leader of the main opposition coalition, has regularly attacked the government for failing to address the “threat” of Hezbollah.
This means we need to look elsewhere for an explanation of Israel’s atrocious new war on Hezbollah and Lebanon. 
The first is that for all its destruction and killing, Israel will not be able to claim a meaningful victory in Gaza. This is not because Hamas has successfully resisted the brutal occupation of the strip, but because they have managed to simply survive. This will be seen as a failure in Israel. So the government must look elsewhere for a win. It is feasible—though not at all guaranteed—that they could push Hezbollah back a few kilometres north of the Israel/Lebanon border and weaken its military apparatus for the future. This would require a huge amount of violence, but that’s never been an issue for Israel. Scoring some sort of victory and returning Israeli citizens to the abandoned settlements in Israel’s north would be a victory and allow Israel to reestablish its deterrence threat viz its neighbours. 
Second, an attack on Hezbollah is a chance to take a serious enemy down a peg or three. Hezbollah is a well-armed, well-funded and well-established political entity on Israel’s border. It has a loyal following among a large section of the Shi’a community in Lebanon and is central to the function (and disfunction) of Lebanon as a whole. The political and economic cost of extending the current war to a new front is less than the disruption that would be caused by starting a fresh one in a few years. When life gives you lemons, might as well start all the wars you’ve ever dreamt of.
Finally, Netanyahu needs a political victory. He will not destroy Hamas, but achieving the above would be something he could sell to the Israeli public. As well, Netanyahu needs the war to continue for as long as possible to hold together his governing coalition. There’s not much left to destroy in Gaza, so a war on Lebanon allows him to maintain his fragile hold on power by surfing the intense waves of patriotism that a new war with a more serious opponent inevitably entails. This high-risk strategy could backfire, but the people of Lebanon or Gaza will be the biggest losers regardless of whether Netanyahu survives or not.
It is vital that the global movement in solidarity with Palestine responds to Israel’s new act of aggression. Nothing Israel does would be possible without the blank cheque, and endless weaponry, it gets from countries like Australia and the US. That means activists in the West can make a serious contribution to ending Israel’s war on Gaza and Lebanon by building mass movements that force our governments to cut all ties to Israel.

Omar Hassan

By attacking Lebanon, Israel seeks to expand its genocidal war

The battlelines on campuses have been drawn. On one side is the enormous institutional support for the military-industrial complex and the highly militarised state of Israel in particular. This takes the form of research deals between university administrations and companies like British Aerospace Engineering, Elbit Systems and Boeing, along with all sorts of direct partnerships with Israeli universities and institutions. These are reinforced by right-wing, pro-Israel student groups organised around the Australian Union of Jewish Students, as well as Liberal and Labor clubs that almost all back Israel.
On the other side is a movement of students and staff desperate to show solidarity with the people of Palestine, as they endure an unprecedented genocidal onslaught from Israel. These activists have organised a range of actions since 7 October. 
At the University of Sydney, a historic motion calling for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel was endorsed by a mass meeting of 346 staff. Students for Palestine has organised more than a dozen
student strikes in cities across the country, with thousands of university students walking out of classes to show their opposition to the war. Their actions inspired high-school students to join their movement, which together resulted in the biggest student anti-war actions since the invasion of Iraq.
“The university and school strikes galvanised the movement and made headlines because we proved that young people were not going to sit by and watch while a population was being annihilated”, said Bella Beiraghi, a convener of Students for Palestine in Melbourne. 
Many of the activists who spoke to Red Flag
emphasised the diversity of the attendees and how they brought together activists from inner city and outer suburban areas and from a range of different ethnic backgrounds. “We were really inspired by the numbers of Arab and Muslim youth from the outer suburbs who joined our actions and stood up to the racism they are subject to, but there were also students from so many diverse backgrounds, it was really an amazing show of unity and solidarity”, explained Deaglan Godwin, the vice-president of Sydney University’s Student Representative Council. 
All this activity peaked in the student encampments late last semester, which established around a dozen camps on campuses across the country. The first and longest lasting was at Sydney University, which quickly inspired similar actions around the country. 
While each camp had its own characteristics, they all tapped into the growing support for Palestine among students and staff. For a month, the students dominated media headlines and raised awareness about the myriad links between Australian universities and Israel’s war and occupation.
But as the semester came to an end, the camps eventually wrapped up. While some universities made mealy-mouthed noises about acceding to some of the students’ demands regarding transparency in their dealings with weapons companies, mostly this was intended to deflect student and staff anger rather than change anything. A much more concerted campaign would be needed to force administrations to cut ties with weapons companies and Israel. The camps had played their part, now the struggle would have to continue in a new form. 
At this moment of uncertainty, student activists at the University of Queensland showed the way forward. Students there had the brilliant idea of calling a student general meeting to pass motions to condemn their university’s role in facilitating Israel’s war crimes and demand it cut ties with companies and institutions complicit in the occupation. 
Student general meetings are provided for in the constitutions of most Australian student unions. Although relatively rare these days, in more radical times they were regularly held both to determine the views of the student body and to direct democratically the activities and decide the policies of the student unions. They can be called by the student union officials, or can be triggered when a certain percentage of the student body signs a petition calling for one. “They’re more democratic than a vote of some small council behind closed doors”, explains Ella Guterridge, convener of Students for Palestine at the University of Queensland. “They allow hundreds—or thousands in the case of my university—of students to engage with arguments from both sides and make a considered decision on an issue as a collective”. 
Importantly, decisions made by these meetings are binding, becoming the official position of the student union regardless of the attitudes of office-bearers or their unelected staff.
The decision to call a student general meeting at the University of Queensland came after widespread mobilisation efforts coordinated by the local Students for Palestine chapter, which had just finished organising the largest encampment in the country. After weeks of mass protests, teach-ins and an occupation of the Boeing Centre on campus, students decided to call a mass meeting to gauge the views of the student body. Two thousand students showed up and voted almost unanimously for motions in support of Palestine. “We were overwhelmed by the response”, recalls Gutteridge. “This was the largest student meeting at UQ since the 1970s.” 
News of the triumph quickly spread across the country. “When we heard about what UQ had done, we just had to try it here too”, said Jasmine Alrawi, convener of Students for Palestine at Sydney University. Holidays forced students to take a breather, before they launched their campaign in the second semester. The Sydney University meeting was organised for 7 August and had the backing of the student union, which is controlled by an alliance of Socialist Alternative and the Grassroots Left. Around 800 people showed up, including at least 600 undergraduate students, overwhelmingly to show support for Palestine. “This wonderful turnout has made history on this campus, and reflects the impact of the camp we organised last semester”, explained Alrawi. “The students have spoken: This is a pro-Palestine campus!”
There were similarly successful meetings at RMIT in Melbourne, the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) in Brisbane, and the Australian National University in Canberra. Exactly 535 students registered at the RMIT event, supported by dozens of staff and community activists, with a few dozen more turning out at the much smaller Bundoora campus the following day. At least 600 showed up to pass a similar motion at QUT, a figure that came as a shock to campus organisers. “We can’t believe it. This student general meeting is the largest student action ever to take place on this campus, around any issue”, said Isabella Foley, who moved the motions.
Elsewhere the situation has been more contested. At the University of Adelaide, Students for Palestine collected nearly double the number of signatures required to call a general meeting. But the Student Representative Council—run by right-wing careerists—refused to meet for a month, making it impossible for the petition to be officially received. Fortunately, an unusual quirk of the union’s constitution allows for a legally binding meeting to take place even without endorsement by the representative council as long as 300 signatures are collected calling for it, and 150 students show up on the day. Both these hurdles were easily cleared. More than 200 students turned up to pass the motions unanimously. “We were thrilled with the turnout, given the sabotage from our elected reps”, explained El Hall, convener of Students for Palestine on the campus. “The student body, the university and the media have acknowledged the meeting’s legitimacy, so it’s a massive win for us. But going forward, we’re going to need to kick out these conservative creeps and have a union that stands on the side of justice.” 
The bureaucrats in the University of Melbourne Student Union took a different tack in their efforts to sabotage the meeting. At first the general secretary avoided his office so as to avoid having to receive the 1,200 student signatures calling for a student general meeting. Then when a digital scan was sent, the secretary—the second in charge of a multimillion-dollar organisation—claimed to lack the skill required to open a pdf file. After this pathetic stalling failed, the union’s executive asked law firm Slater and Gordon to find a legal technicality they could use to avoid following through on their democratic obligations. The firm, which is closely tied to the Labor Party, obligingly provided advice that suggested that the motions calling on Israel to stop its genocide in Gaza were unconstitutional. A big fight ensued at the subsequent student council, where the majority refused to accept the petitions or call a student general meeting. When Students for Palestine activists insisted the meeting would go ahead regardless, a compromise was reached in which council eventually came round to endorsing a mass meeting on Palestine, albeit with no formal legal status. 
On the day of the meeting, around 800 students showed up to vote on a motion demanding the university break ties with Israel. This included a sizeable contingent of about 150 students from the Victorian College of the Arts, who had marched up Swanston Street to the main campus with typical flair. Their energy was infectious, and the crowd was buzzing in anticipation.
Bella Beiraghi, an education officer in the student union, explained what happened next: “Given that the student union had eventually, against its will, backed our meeting, we gave them the right to say a few words at the start. The president then decided to use her time to announce to everyone that the vote would not be legally binding! She was rightly booed off the microphone and never returned.” Oskar Martin, Indigenous representative for the student union, spoke after the president and explained to the crowd the ways in which the Student Union majority had tried to block the meeting from going ahead, and reminded attendees of the union’s earlier decision to abandon its support for boycott, divestment and sanctions measures against Israel. “We will continue mobilising until the union fully backs the cause of Palestinian liberation”, he declared to wild cheers. 
Subsequent speakers slammed the university and the Labor government for their complicity in Israel’s genocide. Palestinian socialist Yasmeen Atieh had seconded the motion, and spoke to condemn Albanese’s attacks on protesters. She called out the hypocrisy of his “concerns” about the welfare of parliamentarians who have never been harmed, while tens of thousands of her people have been murdered by Israeli bombs. Nobody took up the option of speaking against the motion, and it passed without dissent.
On many campuses, these meetings are by far the largest campus actions for Palestine that have ever taken place. They reflect the impact of the mass anti-war movement that has sprung up since Israel began its slaughter of the people of Gaza. 
But the students are not finished. At a number of campuses, including Deakin, La Trobe and Monash, the battle to call the meetings is still ongoing. There are also plans for further student strikes in Sydney. 
In Melbourne, Students for Palestine is working with a coalition of groups to organise a picket of the upcoming Land Forces 2024 convention, an odious military exposition hosted and funded by the Victorian Labor government. “This festival celebrating weapons of mass destruction is a natural target for student activists”, explained Jasmine Duff, a co-convener of Students for Palestine in Melbourne, and one of the organisers of the protest against the Land Forces event. “We discovered recently that RMIT—a publicly funded university—is planning to present research on hypersonic missiles at Land Forces”, she said. “What a disgrace!”
The students’ efforts show no sign of letting up. “We’re so proud of the response of students across Australia, but we still have a lot to do”, Alrawi says. “Our challenge is to turn these huge mobilisations into an ongoing movement that can finally break ties between our universities and an international military-industrial complex that profits from war and devastation. We won’t accept any half-measures.”

Students turn out in record numbers for Palestine

It’s hard not to feel helpless when watching the Israeli army unleash carnage on Gaza. In this apocalyptic situation, it’s understandable why Palestinians and their supporters are desperate for allies of any sort. So when the Iranian government launched a military attack on Israel a few weeks ago, many celebrated it as an act of solidarity with the Palestinians. Was a government somewhere finally stepping in to provide practical support for the beleaguered people of Gaza?
But there are big problems with this narrative.
The first relates to the immediate facts of the situation. The Iranian government signalled very strongly that its actions had absolutely nothing to do with Gaza. Hossein Amirabdollahian, Iran’s foreign minister, explained to the Financial Times that his government had informed Washington before the attack that its “operation will be limited with the goal of legitimate defence and the punishment of Israel”. Just hours after the attack, Iran’s UN mission tweeted that the “matter can be deemed concluded”. This was not a response to the annihilation of Gaza and its people, but a tactical reaction to Israel’s attack on the Iranian consulate in Damascus.
The second is both more general and more important and relates to the kind of principles and politics that our movement should be upholding. The Palestinian cause rests on the principle of national self-determination: a people should not be ruled over by a foreign or imposed entity. The right of national self-determination in turn is part of a broader democratic tradition that insists that nobody should suffer under a government not of their own choosing.
Now in a very important sense, every capitalist government is a dictatorship of the rich. But many countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Vietnam, Iran and China, refuse workers and the poor even the most basic input over how society is managed. This includes denying them the right to protest, strike, organise and even vote.
It is self-defeating for a movement fighting to expand democratic rights to ally ourselves with those who are blatantly hostile to these same democratic principles. It makes us hypocrites, akin to those like Joe Biden who cynically denounce human rights abuses in China while enabling and enacting them in Gaza and Yemen.
Iran’s government is an authoritarian capitalist regime that brutally oppresses its own population. Such an institution can have no sincere interest in the liberation of Palestinians or anyone else. That’s true even when, for transient geopolitical reasons, Iranian politicians criticise—or even militarily confront—Israel or the US.
The current Iranian state is the distorted product of the 1978-79 revolution. In those glorious years the people of Iran rose up to <a href="https://redflag.org.au/article/stolen-revolution-iran-1979">successfully topple</a> a US-backed dictatorship under the wealthy Shah. The movement was led by a highly organised working class and quickly spread to encompass nearly the entire population. Revolutionary councils were set up in workplaces, university campuses and in the wider community.
The revolution opened up a huge political debate regarding the future of Iran, where various parties and organisations vied to convince the majority of their vision. But the reactionary clerics were able to use their base among the mosques, small shopkeepers and parts of the urban poor to capture and co-opt the revolution. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini elevated himself to be the most prominent spokesperson for the movement, sidelining more radical voices and instigating a dictatorship. This was made easier thanks to the terrible Stalinist politics of much of the left who championed Khomeini as part of their insistence that Iran needed a national, rather than socialist, revolution.
Just after the revolution, Iraqi president Saddam Hussein invaded Iran in the hope of claiming territory. Any Iranian who opposed the war or criticised the government for any reason was branded a traitor and sent to jail. In prison people would be tortured within an inch of their lives. Many disappeared, never to be seen again.
Thousands of communists, Arab and Kurdish nationalists, feminists, religious minorities and others were swept up in this wave of repression. In just a few months in 1988, up to 30,000 prisoners were executed by the regime, many of whom were members of the organised left. This period saw the normalisation of severe methods of repression that have been used against the population ever since.
Yet despite this brutality, the mullahs have found it impossible to crush popular demands for change. There have been countless cycles of opposition to the government that have demanded improvements to its economic and social policies. Since 2009, these have coalesced in multiple waves of protests and strikes. These movements and demands have deepened over time, starting from fairly moderate calls to liberalise the regime, then moving towards the total rejection of the theocratic dictatorship. They have criticised the government’s social policies, but also point to the profound economic injustice of Iranian capitalism.
The “Woman, Life, Freedom” movement of 2022 was emblematic of this dynamic. It kicked off when the despised morality police murdered <a href="https://redflag.org.au/article/women-life-freedom-struggle-iran-continues">Kur</a><a href="https://redflag.org.au/article/women-life-freedom-struggle-iran-continues">d</a><a href="https://redflag.org.au/article/women-life-freedom-struggle-iran-continues">ish woman Jina Amini</a>. Amini was beaten to a pulp for refusing to wear the mandated hijab. This triggered a women’s and youth movement across the country, in which some participants also took up the specific oppression of Kurds and other minorities. Importantly, revolutionary workers brought a class struggle dimension to the movement.
The mullahs tried to <a href="https://redflag.org.au/article/women-life-freedom-revolt-continues">crush the movement</a>, unleashing their militias on peaceful protesters, imprisoning thousands of demonstrators, and even poisoning hundreds of high school and university-aged women’s rights activists. But when this failed to crush the spirits of the inspirational women and their supporters, the regime was eventually forced to loosen the rules around hijab requirements to calm the rebellion.
In response to these growing waves of struggle, conservative hardliners in the government have attempted to cohere their supporters around a reactionary populist agenda. They have tried both economic and political tricks to galvanise support. The conservative wing of the establishment has rolled out expanded social welfare programs to buy off sections of the poor. This can be effective when the official opposition is completely committed to neoliberal market mechanisms.
But culture wars are just as important in solidifying the grip of the conservative bloc currently in power. They cynically promote their regressive version of “traditional” Islamic values, attack feminists as “Western stooges”, and denounce Iran’s many ethnic, cultural and religious minorities as traitors to the nation.
Part of this propaganda package is the assertion that the Islamic Republic is a principled and consistent opponent of US imperialism in the region. The hard right is the most committed to this seemingly radical rhetorical posture, while liberals and reformers tend to argue for rebuilding relationships and peaceful coexistence. The former position is popular given the terrible history of Western intervention in the country. The Shah himself was installed and propped up by the US following a coup against an earlier progressive nationalist leader. In exchange, the Shah granted Western companies generous access to the country’s abundant oil fields.
This is especially important to understand given that Iran is attempting to expand its sphere of influence across the region, dubbing itself the leader of an “axis of resistance”.
This is most clearly demonstrated in Hezbollah, an organisation that is now a typically corrupt fixture of the Lebanese political scene. This is a party that is pro-capitalist, hostile to workers’ struggle, and profoundly sectarian and conservative when it comes to social issues. The extent of Hezbollah’s <a href="https://marxistleftreview.org/articles/review-joseph-daher-hezbollah-the-political-economy-of-lebanons-party-of-god/">counter-revolutionary politics</a> were exposed during the Arab Spring, when it joined the Syrian, Iranian and Russian governments in drowning the Syrian revolution in blood. This should be no surprise given that the party was founded by clerics entirely aligned with Iran’s political and organisational perspectives, and now represents some of Lebanon’s wealthiest figures.
While Hezbollah is the most successful of Iran’s allies, it has a growing network of actors in Iraq, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and Yemen. While these forces at times posture as being anti-American and pro-Palestinian, their politics are entirely regressive. In Iraq, sectarian militias backed by Iran have ravaged and looted what remained of the country following the US withdrawal in 2011. Every time Iraqi people have risen up demanding change, they’ve faced the repressive power of both the state—which also tends to be influenced by Iran—and the various militias. In this context, the latter’s occasional attacks on remaining US outposts are window dressing for a thoroughly reactionary social force.
Overall, then, the Iranian government is not serious about confronting imperialism. In fact, Iran is second only to Israel as the most powerful regional player in the Middle East. Like any other regional imperialist nation, it uses economic, military and cultural measures to expand its sphere of influence. Its only principle is self-interest, which explains why the supposedly anti-imperialist mullahs were happy to support the US-led war and sanctions against Iraq in 1991.
Which brings us back to Palestine. Iran’s rhetorical support for Palestinian liberation is one of the ways that its brutal dictatorship tries to win popular legitimacy at home and abroad. But its thin pretence of being an axis of resistance is window dressing for a counter-revolutionary domestic and international agenda. It is inexcusable for anyone on the left to lend them any support.

Iran’s reactionary regime is no ally of Palestine

Students at the Monash University encampment for Gaza were awakened at 2am this morning by a far-right invasion of their camp. Draped in Australian and Israeli flags, a group of middle-aged thugs—overwhelmingly men—swarmed the camp, destroying parts of its infrastructure and shaking the tents of young women while they slept inside. This violent attack comes after the student protesters endured multiple intimidation attempts by supporters of Israel as they were setting up their camp. 
One of the perpetrators claimed to be a member of the Israeli Army. Others were dressed in coloured wigs, aggressively chasing students around asking them “what’s your gender?”.
Madi Curkovic, one of the Queer Officers at the Monash Student Association, was in her tent when the invasion began. “They came in the middle of the night while we were all sleeping and started blaring this obnoxious music extremely loudly”, she told Red Flag. “When I got out to see what was going on, I saw these middle-aged white guys circling around people’s tents, calling out loudly about how the Palestinians deserved it because they were all terrorists, and we were terrorist supporters.”
One of the songs played on rotation was an Israeli anthem of the far right titled “It’s on us”. This song is controversial even in Israel for being a militaristic, jingoistic, religiously-inspired call for indiscriminate violence against the Palestinians. “Good evening Gaza, another day, another dead nazi”, it begins, with visuals depicting the bombing of schools and hospitals as the rappers celebrate “sending the rats into their holes” and “burying the scumbags”.
Campus security turned up after a few minutes but did nothing to stop the attackers from destroying the camp kitchen and welcome marquee. Nor did they ask if the victims of this outrageous assault were ok. This contrasts with their usual behaviour on campus, where they are quick to investigate any protest action and regularly harass students setting up information stalls. 
Faced with the determined inaction of the university, students eventually called the police to end the attack. Their response was shocking, even for those who understand their terrible history of racism and bigotry. “The first question they asked me”, explained Max, an engineering student, “was ‘what is their skin colour’. I couldn’t believe what I was hearing”. 
Max was eventually able to get past the officer’s racist prejudices and explain the rough outline of events. But when the police arrived sometime later, they quickly decided that there was nothing they could do. Madeline explained the farcical situation to Red Flag: “They asked if we had seen who damaged the camp, or who had shaken the student in the tent. We obviously hadn’t, because we were asleep, so they said that there was no evidence to follow up on”.
When the police asked the far-right thugs to provide basic identification, they refused, which the police happily accepted. In fact, the police only took the students’ details, despite them being the victims. 
Speaking to the students in the morning, the overwhelming sense is that last night’s attack has left them with a steely determination to continue. 
“They were trying to scare and intimidate peaceful protesters”, said one young woman whose tent was attacked by the men. “But it’s not going to stop me being here, I’m even more proud to be here now, their attacks just make me want to support the people of Palestine even more.” 
The message from the students is clear. “We will not be cowed”, insisted Madi. “We’re organising a snap protest today to demonstrate our renewed commitment to the cause, and we hope that dozens and dozens will join us to strengthen the camp tonight.”
Madi is particularly hopeful that the student and staff unions will lend their weight to the local branch of this growing student rebellion. “Unions have a long history of standing up for justice, at home and abroad. The battle lines are now drawn, we hope they join us in this vital movement.” 
Support the Monash students by joining the protest camp today at 2pm on the Lemon-scented Lawns and if you can, camp tonight. Those unable to do so can donate <a href="https://www.gofundme.com/f/cgcgn5-we-need-to-rebuild?utm_source=customer&amp;utm_medium=copy_link&amp;utm_campaign=p_lico+share-sheet-first-launch&amp;attribution_id=sl%3Aae27c5f7-4348-4bcf-b645-5a8bb006521c">here</a> to help rebuild the camp, or deliver food or other supplies by calling 0423 479 652.

Zionists attack Monash University Gaza encampment

Socialist Alternative is the largest left-wing revolutionary group in Australia. We are the only socialist group with a national presence and an expanding membership. 
We’re known for leading campaign groups against racism and fascism, for Palestine, for refugee rights, for climate justice, for workers’ rights and against education cuts. 
We led the successful street movements for marriage equality and a militant student movement that defeated the Liberals’ plan to impose $100,000 university degrees. Just in the last few years, we’ve led demonstrations of tens of thousands in response to the bushfire crisis of 2019, brought out even greater numbers in support of abortion rights in Melbourne, and helped to organise the recent Palestine solidarity movement in every city. 
Ultimately, socialism is about taking power away from the billionaires and putting it in the hands of working people, so rebuilding our trade unions is vital. The organising efforts of Socialist Alternative members in workplaces across the country have won them respect and recognition across a range of industries. Sometimes this has been the consequence of our leadership in strikes and other industrial campaigns. A recent example led to the defeat of a plan to impose a 15 percent wage cut on every worker in the university sector, a plan that was being pushed by the university union itself (yes, you read that right). 
Our most significant effort in recent times has been the campaign to get the first revolutionary socialist elected to an Australian parliament in more than 50 years. This gargantuan effort involved reaching out to more than 190,000 voters across the north and the west of Melbourne, through door knocking, public meetings, protests and more. We just missed out on winning a seat, but we were proud to get more than 8 percent in a range of working-class suburbs, an historic result that has been widely acknowledged—even by the mainstream parties. 
All of this has been possible due to the growth in size and experience of our organisation. Without committed socialists working tirelessly, Australia would be a more passive, more right-wing place. 
Every person reading this article has a role to play in building a socialist movement that can make a difference to the world, right now. If we had a few hundred or a few thousand more members, the possibilities for action would multiply. 
Having said that, the sort of people who consider joining a socialist organisation are not motivated only by the fight to build a union at work or combat sexism in everyday life. There are other groups whose sole focus on those issues. The point of a socialist group is to fight to overthrow the capitalist system. 
While that is a big task, there’s some good news: according to researchers at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in the United States, the 21st century has witnessed more mass demonstrations and revolutionary events than any era of modern human history, even adjusted for population growth. Protests, strikes and even revolutions have swept the world, from Chile to Egypt, Hong Kong to the US. This peaked just before the pandemic, when 2019 saw sizable protests around issues as varied as climate change, democratic rights and economic equality. 
These movements are inspiring to observe and exhilarating to participate in. In them, the downtrodden and the unseen burst onto the stage, demanding a better world for all. Their energy and militancy awaken society to injustices that had once gone unchallenged, and offer hope that change is at hand. 
Those who have participated in such events never forget the sense of communion, strangers united in solidarity; a tantalising glimpse of the power of humanity at its best. They confirm all the basic arguments of Marxist theory: that capitalism is a system of crisis, that workers will fight back, and that their struggle contains within it the seeds of a better world. 
Yet for every heroic revolutionary struggle there is a story of tragic defeat. The crises that generate mass resistance—economic, social or political—do not last forever. The politicians and billionaires adjust to the new situation and find ways to respond. So if immense social movements and revolutions spring seemingly out of nowhere, they can often recede or be put down even more suddenly. 
The repeated failure of such movements is a result of the lack of strong and radical working-class institutions, most important of all being a mass socialist party. The billionaires and politicians have a million ways to shield themselves from the rage of the exploited and oppressed: from repressive laws and armed police all the way to having in their pockets the moderates (usually self-described “realists”) who work to undermine our movements from within. Here I’m talking about NGOs, reformist politicians and union bureaucrats, who are always eager to contain and diffuse popular anger. 
Challenging these types of politics is crucial to building effective campaigns around all sorts of issues. Moderates often oppose the most minimal social and industrial activism, for fear of alienating their “friends” in high places. The climate and refugee NGOs, for instance, are the most typical examples of this trend. They have gone into total hibernation, not because climate change has been addressed properly, but because they want to avoid undermining the Labor government. This explains why a small socialist group is responsible for far more progressive activism in this country than much larger organisations like the Greens, Amnesty International and so on. 
These same political debates unfold in revolutionary moments, but the stakes are much higher. Should people demand everything they need and want, or do they put up with crumbs? Should workers self-organise and take disruptive action, or instead place their hopes in gradual change via the official channels? A socialist party is vital to combat the latter arguments, which are backed up by both the carrot of appearing “respectable” and the stick of police and military repression. To put it bluntly, socialism will never win unless we can break the stranglehold of reformists over the workers’ and student movements. 
This isn’t just about simply swapping the old leaders for better ones. In that scenario, the new leaders could just as easily sell-out as the current lot do. When revolutionaries talk about leadership, we are talking about a radical, democratic type of leadership, in which hundreds of thousands of working-class militants are supported to be effective radical leaders in their workplaces and wider society. 
In the climactic moments of a revolution, a mass socialist party is necessary to popularise the arguments for workers’ power and to smash the police, the jails and the armies that defend the dictatorship of capital. Only then can workers begin to reorganise society to meet human needs, which will include an end to oppression and exploitation as well as a reorganisation of our abusive relationship with nature. 
For now, we’re a long way away from that point. 
There are two big traps that socialists can fall into in moments when revolution is not on the immediate agenda. One is to lose sight of this long-term goal and just focus on lifestyle changes, charity provision and accepting that tokenistic reforms are the best we can get. The other is to daydream about a revolutionary future while doing nothing to bring it any closer. It’s easy to make the first mistake when there isn’t much going on—something is better than nothing, right? There is also a temptation to make the other error, as demonstrated by the internet left, where seemingly ultra-radical anarchists and Stalinists happily coexist in glorious isolation from any real-world resistance. 
A socialist organisation, even a relatively small one like Socialist Alternative, can help avoid these traps. It’s a self-selecting group of people who are committed to organising resistance right now while also preparing politically and theoretically for the bigger challenges to come. The more people involved in such a group, the more likely it is that the skills, knowledge and political principles accumulated through generations of class and social struggle can be passed on and built upon in a way that can shape the future of the workers’ movement. And ultimately, it will determine whether our side wins or loses. 
That’s why the most important task of any socialist organisation is to grow. It is only by building a mass socialist movement that we can begin to have a real impact on society. Small groups of radicals can occasionally punch above their weight by going viral or by calling well-timed demonstrations. But to seriously organise a challenge to capitalism, we need socialist activists and organisers embedded in every workplace, campus and social struggle. 
For this reason, every serious revolutionary socialist has to be a recruiter, winning others to the ideas of socialism and to an organisation that can make those ideas a reality. 
Capitalism encourages us to be self-centred: to focus on our image, our studies, on paying the bills. Socialists prioritise building a movement that has a shot of fixing the root causes of society’s problems once and for all. The other option is that creeps like Elon Musk will continue to rule the world. Who wants that? 
This is a revised version of a 2022 article, “<a href="https://redflag.org.au/article/why-you-should-join-socialist-alternative">Why you should join Socialist Alternative</a>”. It has been updated for the 2024 Red Flag campus supplement.

Who is Socialist Alternative?

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s genocidal assault on the people of Gaza has exposed the brutality at the heart of Israeli society. Millions of people around the world are beginning to see the so-called “Israel-Palestine conflict” for what it is: a repressive colonial occupation of one people by another, punctuated by a series of brutal massacres. This has been going on for nearly a century, and every atrocity has been backed to the hilt by the US and Australia.
For those coming to grips with the issue for the first time, understanding Israel as a colonial settler state intent on expansion through ethnic cleansing is a good place to start. But truly to understand the nature of Israel, a regional perspective is needed. While the Palestinians have been the main victims, there is hardly a country in the Middle East left unscarred by Israel’s imperial aggression. It is not an exaggeration to say that the entire history of the Zionist project is one of perpetual warfare against the people of the region, involving Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Iran and more. Or, in the words of Jewish-Israeli journalist B. Michael, Israel is “a small, arrogant, violent, wicked nation ... and an ally to pariahs”. 
From the very beginning of Israel’s existence, it was consciously hostile to the countries surrounding it. This reflected its roots as a creation of British imperialism, designed to strengthen London’s control over a region rich with oil. Zionist Jews would be allowed to settle in Palestine as long as they promised to be a force for conservatism in the region, protecting the imperialists from unwanted rebellions by the restless natives. This role was made explicit by one of the co-founders of the World Zionist Organisation in a speech to British diplomats in 1920. “We must protect the Suez Canal for you. We shall be the guards of your road to India as it passes through the Middle East”, he explained. “We are ready to fulfil this difficult military role but this requires that you permit us to become powerful.” 
Their chance to protect the Suez Canal came sooner than anyone expected, when Israel led the British and French armies in an invasion of Egypt in 1956. The trigger for this act of aggression was the nationalisation of the Suez Canal by Egypt’s new leader, Gamal Abdel Nasser. The canal had previously been owned and operated by the British government alongside French businesspeople, who had profited from it for more than 70 years while Egyptians lived in extreme poverty. This reflected the broad relationship between Egypt and the West. The same forces had made a killing from the cotton trade, in which low-paid Egyptian peasants and workers grew cotton to be shipped to Europe and spun into high-quality fabrics and other products. 
Though an authoritarian figure who was no friend to workers, Nasser sought to undo some of these historic injustices. His promise to usher in an era of political and economic progress—nothing less than an Arab renaissance—was a threat to British and French interests. So even though Egypt committed to paying the full value of the shares to the Canal’s investors, they refused to accept it. Their opposition to the nationalisation was just an excuse to topple a popular and powerful Arab leader who refused to be subservient to the imperial powers. Israel had its own reasons for wanting to overthrow the nationalist regime, which represented an obstacle to its ambitions. It leapt at the chance to work with the old powers to undermine a regional rival. 
Despite early successes of the aggressors, the US quickly intervened to force Israel and its allies’ withdrawal from Egyptian territory, worried that the whole episode would push Nasser closer to the Soviet bloc. Despite this, Israel’s role was clearly established. It would be the protector of the status quo and a warrior for social and geopolitical conservatism. It would seek to crush any attempt at changing the political and economic conditions that left millions in dire straits while a handful of parasites made immense wealth at their expense.
Israel launched another unprovoked war against its neighbours just a decade later in 1967, known as the Six-Day War. Israel took Egypt, Syria and Jordan by surprise again. In a lightning-fast operation, Israel managed nearly to double the territory under its control, seizing not only the West Bank and Gaza but also the Golan Heights in Syria and the entire Sinai Peninsula in Egypt. 
This expansion is presented by many Israeli historians as an accidental and unwanted consequence of Arab military failures. The war is presented as a defensive one to prevent a second holocaust against Jews in Israel. Yet a few years ago, journalists at the Intercept compiled a number of statements from Israeli figures that revealed the truth about the whole affair. In an interview with Israeli newspaper Al HaMishmar in 1971, a member of the government during the war insisted, “This whole story about the threat of extermination was totally contrived, and then elaborated upon, a posteriori, to justify the annexation of new Arab territories”. 
This approach, of posing as the victim while inflicting enormous casualties on its enemies, has become a trademark of Israeli politics. “We had fallen in love with the pose of a victim with an iron fist”, wrote Yossi Klein in a recent piece in the liberal Israeli newspaper Haaretz. 
This positioning was given its first and only justification in 1973, when the Arab states launched an unexpected attack against Israel. But far from representing a real threat to Israel, the war was largely a face-saving exercise by new Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. Its goal was not the military defeat of the Israelis, but opening negotiations for a permanent peace with Israel on more favourable terms. Sadat eventually got his way, signing the reviled Camp David Accords in 1978. He was assassinated shortly after. Few mourned.
Israel’s peace treaty with Egypt did not end the occupation of Palestinian and Arab land. Nor did it encourage Israel to demilitarise and shift away from its aggressive military posture. Rather, by isolating and neutralising the Arab world’s major economic and military power, it allowed Israel to act with impunity. Aside from the Sinai, Israel’s occupation of territory stolen in 1967 has continued indefinitely, while its theft of Palestinian land never stopped. To this day, Israel is the only country on the planet with no finite borders, as its leaders refuse to constrain their colonising ambitions. 
Lebanon in particular has borne the brunt of significant Israeli violence. Through the 1970s, a revolutionary wave had swept Lebanese society, as students and workers protested and struck to demand democratic reform and an end to economic inequality. Their target was the sectarian political and economic system, which entrenched the power of capitalist elites of all religions while leaving the population permanently divided and ripe for exploitation. The movement, led by various communist groups and Arab nationalists, threatened to challenge the very foundation of capitalism in Lebanon, and united people across traditional boundaries. Israel, along with the other regional powers, was terrified.
What made things worse, from the ruling class perspective, was the involvement of Palestinians in the whole affair. By this stage there were around 300,00 Palestinians refugees in Lebanon, some of whom had been there since the Nakba in 1948, others who had arrived more recently. They were politicised by their oppression at the hands of Israel and then the Lebanese elites, who denied them their basic rights. 
The situation developed further on the arrival of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) in Beirut in 1970, which had been expelled from Jordan following its failed uprising against the corrupt monarchy. The presence of these well-armed revolutionaries added further political and military strength to the left forces. Many Lebanese leftists joined the PLO militias, seeing their struggle against Lebanese bourgeois as inseparable from fighting the influence of Zionism and imperialism in the region.
Fearful of losing power, the Lebanese far right eventually moved to crush the nascent revolution. It used its militias, and its control over the official Lebanese army, to launch a campaign of terrorist attacks against Palestinian and Lebanese people. But aided by the PLO, the Lebanese left seemed unstoppable. When it looked as though change was on its way, Lebanon was invaded by the Syrian and Israeli armies, both of which were bitterly hostile to any radical change. Israel’s invasion of southern Lebanon began in 1978, but for a while reached right into the suburbs of Beirut. Their targets were not simply the Palestinians; their goal was to crush any possibility of real democracy—let alone socialism. To achieve this, they were prepared to collaborate closely with the Syrian regime, which saw a chance to entrench its influence over Lebanon. Together these reactionary regimes were able to stabilise the situation. In collaboration with the various Lebanese warlords, they turned a revolutionary movement into a brutal sectarian civil war. 
Israel’s occupation of Lebanon led to unfathomable violence and destruction. Most infamous are the events surrounding the UN-run Tel al-Zaatar refugee camp, where Israeli troops assisted far-right Christian militias to besiege and then murder thousands of Palestinian refugees. But there were many more such incidents. By June of 1982 Caritas, the Catholic aid agency, insisted that the “minimum established figures” were 14,000 dead, 25,000 severely wounded and 400,000 homeless. “The overwhelming impression among Beirut’s residents”, reported the Washington Post after one particularly brutal assault on Beirut, “was that the Israelis in a single day had wrought almost as much destruction in some places as the various combatants had achieved in the 19-month civil war”. The occupation lasted for another 18 years.
The point of this violence was again to prevent any progressive developments that might endanger its occupation of stolen land. Israel knew full well that a revolutionary movement led by students and workers, who saw the Palestinians as their comrades in the struggle against capitalism and imperialism, posed a fundamental threat to its power. 
Aside from these major episodes, Israel has been involved in innumerable assaults on neighbouring states. It treats Iraq and Syria as a free fire zone, and assassinates Arab and Iranian diplomats and scientists at will. During the terrible war between Iran and Iraq, the Israelis armed the reactionary Iranian regime, selling it equipment worth billions of dollars in order to prolong the bloodshed and weaken both sides. (They then gave some of this money to fund right-wing death squads in Nicaragua as part of the Contra scandal.) In 2006, they invaded Lebanon again, killing at least 1,000 people. 
Why recall all this terrible history? When fighting a battle, it is vital to understand the nature of our enemies. So while it is true that Israel is a settler colony, it is much more than that. It is an outpost of Western imperialism, a vicious dog designed to hunt down and destroy any prospect of progressive change in the region. The Zionist state is a key plank of the system of capitalism and imperialism that keeps workers and the poor oppressed across the whole Middle East. That is still the case today, even though Israel’s current focus is not on crushing nationalist or left currents, which are today relatively weak. Instead, it helps to entrench the most authoritarian and reactionary factions of the Arab ruling classes, forming close ties with repressive regimes, including in the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the treacherous quislings among the Palestinian Authority. 
This is why revolutionaries across the Middle East and North Africa have always understood that the oppression of Palestinians is at the same time our oppression, and that the liberation of Palestine requires the liberation of the entire Middle East. Put another way, the question of Palestine cannot be solved by nationalism, but only by internationalism.

‘A small, arrogant, violent, wicked nation’: Israel’s permanent war on the people of the Middle East

Middle Eastern supporters of Palestine have long bemoaned the failure of Arab leaders to take a strong stance against the Israeli occupation. It’s easy to see why.
Every time Israel ramps up its brutal oppression of the Palestinians, its Western allies snap into action. Leaders of countries like Australia, Germany, France, the UK and the US send passionate messages of support. The media go into overdrive, amplifying the racist narratives that justify Israel’s crimes and doing their best to distort the fact that Israel is the oppressor and aggressor. Billions of dollars’ worth of emergency aid gets rushed through parliaments to assist the Israeli army in its genocide.
While all this support is given to Israel, governments of the predominantly Arab and Muslim states sit twiddling their thumbs. This deplorable passivity was on display at the recent special combined conference of the Arab League and the Organisation for Islamic Cooperation. Promoted as an urgent and “extraordinary gathering” in response to the massacre in Gaza, the conference met for just one day. After much shouting and gesticulation, the only concrete demand from these eminent representatives of the Arab and Muslim world was the “convening of an international peace conference, as soon as possible”. The Israelis will be shaking in their boots.
To be fair, there was more to their motion. While they patiently wait for Israel to finish its genocidal attack on Gaza, the leaders committed to “supporting Egypt’s efforts to deliver aid to the Strip”. This sounds all well and good, except if you know that Egypt controls and constrains the woefully inadequate aid that currently passes through the Rafah crossing into Gaza. Similarly, Egypt has helped the Israelis maintain the siege on Gaza for the last seventeen years.
But with that piece of breathtaking cynicism—followed by the obligatory feast and photo opportunities—another successful gathering of the Arab and Muslim world was complete.
Little wonder that Palestinians and their supporters rage against these pathetic gatherings. The fiery rhetoric heard at such events is never followed by any real action, either in terms of practical solidarity with the Palestinian people or in pressuring the West to stop the atrocities.
It’s not as if the Middle East can’t hold anything over Israel and its imperial allies. Arab and Muslim countries control the bulk of the world’s known oil reserves; Saudi Arabia and Iraq alone control more than 21 percent of daily oil exports. This gives these countries enormous leverage.
But it’s not just oil. The Suez Canal, owned and operated by the Egyptian government, is vital to global trade. A report by the New Zealand embassy in Cairo estimates the value of goods transported through the canal to be US$1 trillion a year, which represents about 30 percent of global shipping trade. When it was cut off for just six days due to an accident in 2021, the cost to the world economy was an estimated $9.6 billion a day, according to data from Lloyd’s List.
So why don’t Arab and Muslim leaders actually use any of this power?
Because they don’t want to. As participants in a global system of capitalism and imperialism, their success rests on its overall stability and profitability. This is why most of them are aligned with the US, which is the most powerful player on the world stage. Like any other part of the global ruling class, Arab and Muslim leaders do not believe in ethnic, national or religious solidarity. Their only commitment is to profit and power—especially their own. And if that means allying with the US and Israel, then so be it.
As well, they lead countries scarred by endemic poverty and inequality, where women and various minorities are denied their basic rights. Why would the crown prince of Saudi Arabia or the president of Turkey care about Palestinian oppression when they violently oppress the Shia and Kurdish minorities in their own countries? This applies equally to the Islamic dictatorship in Iran. Despite their superficial hostility to the US and Israel, why would the reactionary mullahs risk their extensive domestic and regional power to defend Palestine? These regimes might occasionally talk about the oppression of Palestinians to give themselves a popular gloss, but they will never put anything on the line to end it.
Of course, they’re not alone in this approach. Western leaders did nothing to prevent the holocaust in Nazi Germany nor the genocides in Rwanda and Armenia, despite using these terrible atrocities to justify their imperial agendas. The common thread is that ruling classes can never be relied on to fight for justice.
So yes, we should be angry at Arab and Muslim leaders for failing to respond to Palestinian calls for solidarity. But we should not be surprised. Their inaction is not a result of bad policy, but of their position as ruling powers trying to govern a system predicated on exploitation, competition and war. For the Arab and Muslim world to genuinely show meaningful solidarity with the Palestinian struggle for liberation, it will first need to free itself from the corrupt and self-serving capitalist elites.

Why won’t Arab and Muslim countries help Palestine?

It’s always been difficult to speak out in support of Palestine. Those who want to do so are confronted by a genocide-denying consensus among the pro-Israeli Western establishment. Those who insist on speaking out against Israel and its imperial backers inevitably get turned into pariahs. 
I would know, having had my pay docked for Palestine advocacy and having been arrested along with nineteen others on charges of “trespass in a public place” during Australia’s most successful BDS campaign <a href="https://bdsmovement.net/news/victory-australia%E2%80%99s-boycott-campaign-charges-blockading-chocolate-store-dropped">in 2011</a>. We managed to get those ridiculous charges overturned, but plenty of others haven’t been so lucky, sacrificing their jobs, careers and public reputations for the cause of justice. Many have been cowed by the prospect of such attacks, leaving Palestine as a relatively fringe issue in mainstream discourse.
But things have been different this time. Something special is happening. 
In the face of unimaginable Israeli brutality, a mass movement for Palestine has erupted across the Western world. Protests in Germany and Paris have overcome the attempt to ban them out of existence, mobilising thousands despite media slander and threats of police brutality. More than 100,000 people marched in London on consecutive weekends, alongside hundreds of sizable actions in cities and towns across the UK. 
Demonstrations in the US have been enormous, despite the challenge of living in the country most committed to defending Israel’s every move. Among the younger generations, the tide has well and truly turned. A recent Quinnipiac poll found that just 32 percent of those aged between 18 and 34 approved of Israel’s response to 7 October, and 65 percent opposed the US sending military aid to the country.
The most inspiring scenes from the US have been generated by young Jewish activists in New York and elsewhere putting their bodies on the line for Palestine. It is incredibly hopeful that a growing number of US Jews, led by <a href="https://www.972mag.com/jvp-anti-zionist-rebecca-vilkomerson-2/">Jewish Voice for Peace</a>, are breaking with Israel and Zionism. For better or worse, these activists have a unique position from which to assail the ideological fortifications of Israeli apartheid, most important of which is the lie that opposing Israel is anti-Semitic. 
Here in Australia, the weekly demonstrations have been enormous, breaking the attendance record for Palestine solidarity actions in every city. Adelaide, Perth and Brisbane have held demonstrations of more than 5,000 for the first time ever. Sizable protests have taken place in Geelong, Wollongong, Canberra, Newcastle and Hobart. Rallies have probably exceeded 50,000 in Melbourne and Sydney, making them some of the largest anti-war demonstrations in Australia’s history. (These defiant, youthful and principled events stand in contrast to the pathetic turnouts of middle-aged, middle-class warmongers at pro-Israeli events in Bondi and Caulfield.)
Unlike the campaign against the Iraq War, the protests have not been seriously promoted by the student and trade unions or the churches, and are opposed by all wings of the Labor Party. This makes their size even more significant; rarely before have so many people mobilised without the involvement of these kinds of institutions.
Remarkably, the numbers are holding up after a month of protesting, and in some cases are still growing. For many people, this will be the first time they protest for Palestine. This is reflected in the size but also the demographics of the rallies, which are less dominated by Arab and Muslim communities than in the past. This is a big step forward, reflecting that support for Palestine is now becoming an important principle on the left and in broader society.
Yet despite all this, the Western ruling classes remain steadfastly in support of Israel. Nothing exemplifies this more than the media refusing to cover the historic demonstration in Melbourne on Sunday. The Age, for instance, thought a car accident in Daylesford was the most newsworthy event of the weekend. In their desperation to slander our righteous march, news.com.au posted a headline as ingenious as it was disgraceful: “Thousands attend pro-Palestine rally in Melbourne while police investigate Hitler posters in Sydney”. 
But the corporate media do not have a stranglehold on the distribution of news and ideas. The challenge for supporters of Palestine is to redouble our efforts to mobilise as many people as possible for as long as the war continues. Whenever we feel tired or overwhelmed, we should remember the words of Nowar Diab, a university student living in Occupied Gaza:
“There is one thing that has recently given me hope in the face of the tragedy that has become our lives here in Gaza. It is the pictures of hundreds of thousands of people standing up for us and protesting <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/oct/28/marching-palestine-gaza-tragedy">in our name</a>.”
PHOTO CREDIT: Matt Hrkac

Despite corporate media blackout, Palestine solidarity marches are making history

Large demonstrations have been taking place across Syria in recent weeks. While their scale has yet to reach the peaks seen in 2011, many are hopeful that the government will be brought down. To get a more detailed assessment of the movement and the situation it faces in Syria, Red Flag spoke to long-time Syrian leftist Jamal Chamma. Jamal is based in Melbourne and has been involved for years in organising demonstrations in solidarity with the Syrian revolution.
--------------------
A chant has been echoing in the streets of Syria’s cities over the past month: “The people want the fall of the regime!”. This thrilling call for the downfall of the Assad family dynasty has been repeated by thousands of protesters angry at a government that has failed to meet their basic needs. The movement started in fits and bursts over summer, but was transformed after a general strike was launched in Suweida, a city in the country’s south-west, on 17 August. The movement quickly spread across the country, but it continues in that region, where crowds have been flocking to public places, singing and chanting as they burn posters of Assad’s face while proudly bearing the revolutionary flag.
The immediate trigger has been an economic crisis brought on by runaway inflation. The prices of bread, petrol and other essentials have increased dramatically in recent months, due to the collapse of the Syrian pound and withdrawal of government subsidies on bread and other essentials. The United Nations estimates that 90 percent of the country <a href="https://apnews.com/article/syria-humanitarian-aid-funding-crossborder-russia-5d28da9aa4d55b8c0f24563f69d8b5a0#:~:text=UNITED%20NATIONS%20(AP)%20%E2%80%94%20The,that%20the%20$5.4%20billion%20U.N.">lives in poverty</a>.
“One US dollar is now worth around 14,000 Syrian pounds on the street exchanges: it was 10,000 in June. Back in 2011, it was just 50 pounds”, Jamal explained. “In 2011 people used to receive around $200 a month as a salary or pension, now they get about ten bucks”, Jamal says.
Society is in total collapse and the population is once again in free fall: “People have been sending their kids away, selling their house to pay for a plane ticket to Europe or anywhere. There’s no future under Assad”.
For those who can’t leave, resistance is the only option. Hence the wave of protests and strikes that broke out over summer. Hundreds of volunteers distributed <a href="https://www.alaraby.co.uk/politics/%D8%B3%D9%88%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%AD%D8%B1%D9%83%D8%A9-10-%D8%A2%D8%A8-%D8%AA%D8%A8%D8%AF%D8%A3-%D8%AD%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%83%D9%87%D8%A7-%D8%B9%D8%A8%D8%B1-%D8%AA%D9%88%D8%B2%D9%8A%D8%B9-%D8%A2%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%81-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D9%86%D8%A7%D8%B4%D9%8A%D8%B1">revolutionary leaflets</a> across the country on 10 August. A general strike was called in Suweida on 17 August and again three days later. Roads and businesses were shut, university exams were deferred.
Their demands were initially focused on the economy: calling for salaries and pensions to be raised to $100 per month, for a ban on the privatisation of public assets and for the introduction of subsidies on electricity, bread, diesel and petrol. They also called for the release of political prisoners and an end to the regime’s open facilitation of the <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/5/9/what-is-captagon-the-addictive-drug-mass-produced-in-syria">Captagon</a> (an amphetamine-type drug) trade. 
Jamal recalls how the politics of the movement evolved: “The first couple of days they didn’t ask the regime to fall, they just asked to live like a human being ... But every day, the chanting changed. Quickly, they began saying: ‘We want the regime to fall’”. This evolution of slogans, from the reforming to the revolutionary, is a familiar pattern in major social rebellions. But in Syria, it has a particular significance. 
It was just over a decade ago when supporters of Syria’s unelected president infamously declared: “Assad or the country burns”. And burn it did. The Assad regime unleashed a brutal wave of violence and repression, using barrel bombs, murder and torture on an industrial scale, and even chemical weapons on the population. 
The regime was supported by Russia and Iran, which used the crisis to deepen their influence and gain access to vital resources. But it was also assisted by the US and its allies, which refused to provide the necessary aid to allow the revolutionaries to overcome the government. 
Jamal is furious that his country has become a political playground for the various powers: “Everyone uses Syria, nobody cares about Syria: the Russians, the Iranians, the Americans and the Arab League”.
The results speak for themselves. In 2021, the United Nations Human Rights Council estimated that the government’s counter-revolutionary war had killed 350,000 people in nine years, a figure it described as “certainly an under-count” and a “<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20220625180553/https:/www.ohchr.org/en/statements/2021/09/oral-update-extent-conflict-related-deaths-syrian-arab-republic?LangID=E&amp;NewsID=27531">minimum verifiable number</a>”. Other estimates put the death toll at well over 600,000. As well, the United Nations refugee agency says that 14 million people have been displaced, half of whom were forced to flee Syria.
This unimaginable brutality was the Syrian ruling class’s response to a peaceful movement fighting for a better life. The Syrian revolution was just one aspect of a broader wave of struggle across the Middle East and North Africa, in which millions took to the streets demanding bread, freedom and democracy.
While Egypt was the most significant country to be shaken by revolution, Syria was the site of the most enduring and radical struggles. 
Mass demonstrations endured for years despite facing local repression and international indifference. The Syrian revolution became famous for its revolutionary music and dance, the creative and inclusive themes of its weekly demonstrations, and its determinedly non-sectarian spirit. As well, the revolution in Syria went the furthest in challenging the regime’s hold over the country, revolutionary local committees and popular militias controlling vast areas for years at a time. 
This partly explains why such incredible violence was needed to restore order. Assad’s counter-revolution should be remembered in a similar vein to the massacres following Pinochet’s coup in Chile or the Paris Commune. The world did nothing while the violence unfolded. In Syria, however, the magnitude of destruction and murderous violence was far greater.
Today’s demonstrators are all too aware of this history and the nature of the president, whom they rightly denounce as “the criminal of the barrel bombs, sarin gas <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20230831154447/https:/www.newarab.com/news/protests-continue-syrias-suweida-province-shots-fired">and Captagon</a>”. So they know that, by demanding the downfall of the regime, they are risking their lives. That they are still prepared to resist is genuinely heroic.
The regime’s propaganda has increased in response to the protests. Jamal speaks of activists being baited on national television, asked if they were prepared to shoot and kill “Syrian soldiers”. They refused to fall for this trap, insisting they were peaceful and simply demanding their rights. “But if the regime wants to attack us, we are prepared to fight.” Others have been denounced as criminals, and a campaign is growing for the “restoration of order” in Suweida.
Protesters have responded by establishing infrastructure to sustain and protect their movement, including committees to plan the protests and self-defence groups to deal with the security forces and other agents of the regime in the community. As in other dictatorships, the government runs a political party to give the illusion of public participation, but in reality it is a tool of coercion and control. Its offices were immediately targeted. “Activists shut down the offices of the Ba’ath party in Suweida, kicked all the staff out and welded the doors shut.”
At the same time, there is hope that the regime will not respond with the same violence in the south as it did in 2011. Jamal explains that Suweida has special status because its population is predominantly Druze: “The government pretends it defends minorities [from the spectre of Islamism], so they can’t attack them so easily, can’t dismiss them as ISIS”.
Partly because of this status, Suweida did not join the revolution in 2011. But there have long been signs that the community is not enamoured with the government. “People in Suweida have refused to send their kids to fight in Assad’s army for years, because they don’t want to be killing Syrians”, Jamal says. “The regime eventually agreed to allow them only to be stationed inside Suweida. But, at the same time, it punished them by allowing an ISIS-affiliated militia to attack the area and kill 40 people.”
The government has used a similar carrot-and-stick approach to the Alawite community, one of the sectarian regime’s core constituencies. “Assad’s father demonised the old religious leaders, so there are no respected community leaders there aside from the government”, explains Jamal. “Activists on social media are calling on people in Latakia, in Tartus, in Homs, to join the movement, to show the Syrian people that the government does not represent the Alawite community.”
This solidarity is reminiscent of the early years of the previous Syrian revolution, when activists raised inclusive slogans and tried to build alliances across the country’s ethnic and religious communities. Last time, these efforts were undermined by the government, which released known Islamist thugs from jail to discredit the revolution.
This was made easier by the political problems of the official leaders of the opposition to Assad, who have long been based in Türkiye and are influenced by its president, as well as the leaders of the Gulf states. According to Jamal, the activists are determined to avoid the mistakes of the past: “One of the activists from Suweida said on Lebanese TV that both the regime and the official opposition are the same: ‘Neither of you represents us’”.
As well, the deeper economic crisis this time around has undermined the regime’s support in the broader population. “The economic crisis has hurt the regime’s supporters as well, so now everyone is angry. The widespread opposition in the Alawite areas is new and very dangerous for the government.” 
To stave off revolution, the government has attempted to make some economic concessions to the protesters, doubling public sector wages and government pensions. Yet this was not enough to keep up with the rising cost of living, especially given the simultaneous cuts to subsidies. And Jamal insists: “The regime cannot make any political concessions, because everything will collapse”. 
The difficulty for the government is that it is broke and cannot afford to lift living standards substantially. As well, political freedom is now part of the package of demands being raised across the country. So the struggle continues, and there are signs that the dissent is growing. Against all odds, the revolutionary Syrian people are proving that they cannot be silenced.

‘The people want the fall of the regime!’

When asked about her thoughts on the charges arrayed against Donald Trump, former Republican governor of Alaska Sarah Palin was quick to reply. “Those who are conducting this travesty”, she said, “and creating this two-tier system of justice, I want to ask them: What the heck? Do you want us to be in civil war? Because that’s what’s going to happen. We’re not going to keep putting up with this”.
This casual invocation of mass violence by a senior Republican figure was deemed barely newsworthy in the US, such is the normalisation of far-right rhetoric. But her threat reflects the mood of millions of Americans who are deeply convinced that their preferred leader is being unfairly persecuted by the establishment. 
To this day, the vast majority of Republican Party supporters defend Trump’s narrative about the 2020 election. Fearing a backlash from their deranged base, just 27 of 249 Republican members of congress acknowledged Biden’s victory at the time. This cowardice has left a deep legacy, with a recent <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2023/08/05/politics/2020-election-predictor-2024/index.html">CNN poll</a> finding that an incredible 71 percent of registered Republicans and Republican-leaning independents still believe Trump won fair and square. 
As well, the Republicans have consolidated around the hard right political agenda that Trump brought into the mainstream. This is clear from the political pitches of those competing with Trump for the presidential nomination. Tech bro (almost) billionaire Vivek Ramaswamy <a href="https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1697339817216839822?s=20">confidently asserts</a>, “The climate change agenda is a hoax”. Former Vice-President Mike Pence is <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/pence-calls-for-2024-gop-candidates-to-back-a-15-week-federal-abortion-ban">campaigning for a federal abortion ban</a>. Ron DeSantis, first choice of those in the party looking for an alternative to Trump, has used his position as governor of Florida to initiate <a href="https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/gov-desantis-signs-slate-of-extreme-anti-lgbtq-bills-enacting-a-record-shattering-number-of-discriminatory-measures-into-law">vicious attacks on the LGBT community</a> and force high schools to teach children that <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/new-florida-standards-teach-black-people-benefited-slavery-taught-usef-rcna95418">Black people benefited from slavery</a>. 
The cult of personality that has been built up around Trump follows a pattern more commonly seen in dictatorships. A recent poll by <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-poll-indictments-2023-08-20/">CBS/YouGov </a>found that 71 percent of his voters trust him to speak the truth, substantially higher than they rated religious leaders, conservative media and even their own friends and family. Given this extraordinary loyalty, it’s hard to see how he could lose the primary race.
Whatever happens from now, though, Trump and his ilk will leave a legacy of a significantly strengthened far-right current in US politics. By mainstreaming the most extreme irrationalism and conspiratorial ideas, socially reactionary politics and a pro-business agenda, Trump has brought together many of the ingredients needed for a mass far-right movement to grow. His attacks on basic democratic norms have set a dangerous precedent in a country with a long history of anti-democratic policies. And by strengthening far-right news sources such as Newsmax and Truth Social, Trump has created institutions that will continue to shape US politics for years to come.
For US progressives, all of this has made Trump enemy number one. His blatant bigotry both embodies and emboldens the current conservative backlash to decades of social progress, exemplified by the Supreme Court’s decision last year to overturn Roe vs. Wade and withdraw abortion rights from tens of millions of women.
The Democratic Party has had some success in turning the widespread opposition to this conservative agenda to its own electoral advantage. Its campaign for the 2022 midterm elections played heavily on the theme of abortion rights and the threat posed by Trumpist candidates, many of whom <a href="https://news.sky.com/story/us-midterm-results-trump-backed-candidates-fared-poorly-despite-former-presidents-claims-12742373">performed significantly worse</a> than expected. The party appears set to repeat the strategy in 2024.
Yet beyond rhetorical gestures, there’s little evidence of any genuine Democratic commitment to action on the key issues. Trump’s defeat in 2020 was widely seen as an opportunity to build a new kind of America, one where life was just a little bit more bearable. Joe Biden actively encouraged these hopes by promising to <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/build-back-better/">“build back better”</a> at home and abroad. Three years on, those dreams lie in tatters. 
Democrats loudly denounced Trump’s brutal treatment of migrants and asylum seekers, yet Biden has made things worse and <a href="https://redflag.org.au/article/fight-migrant-rights-us-interview-justin-akers-chacon">deported more people</a>. The pandemic was managed just as badly under Biden as it was under Trump, leading to hundreds of thousands of unnecessary deaths. “Medicare for all" is off the table. 
The Democrats have made no real attempt to pass legislation protecting women’s access to abortions, nor have party activists and resources been used to build movements against the bans being implemented in dozens of states. So now there are 13-year-old rape victims being <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/14/mississippi-abortion-ban-girl-raped-gives-birth#:~:text=A%2013-year-old%20girl,magazine%20report%20published%20on%20Monday.">forced to give birth</a>, and growing numbers of women are <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-05/miscarriage-stillbirth-prosecutions-await-women-post-roe">being charged</a> for having miscarriages and still births.
All this is bad enough. Ultimately, though, it is the economy that tends to make or break popular attitudes to governments. And while the news that <a href="https://www.afr.com/world/north-america/us-lines-up-for-a-soft-landing-20230802-p5dt5l">the US might avoid a recession</a> has given <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/aug/02/bidenomics-is-working-which-means-biden-and-the-democrats-may-win-too">advocates of “Bidenomics”</a> a shot in the arm, polls show the public remain pessimistic. 
In typical form, liberal commentators have responded by wishing they could dissolve the people and <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/07/uncle-sam-american-military-patriotism/674644/">elect another</a>. But a cursory glance at the data shows why the mass of workers aren’t celebrating US GDP growth: they’re getting very little of the wealth that’s being created. <a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LES1252881600Q">Real wages fell</a> throughout the pandemic and, due to continued price increases for daily essentials that official inflation metrics are designed to understate, have rebounded less than the headline figures suggest.
The Biden administration has also <a href="https://jacobin.com/2023/08/joe-biden-pandemic-relief-economy-poverty">abolished </a>most of the welfare improvements introduced during the pandemic. This has denied millions access to <a href="https://jacobin.com/2023/07/biden-administration-economy-americans-negative-precarity-pundits">vitally needed support</a>, such as food stamps and essential health care. 
As a result, most people in America are now economically worse off now than they were under Trump. This explains why Biden is one of the most unpopular presidents in US history, with just 24 percent of Americans wanting him to run again in 2024.
This brings us back to the Trump indictments. Unsure of Biden’s chances in a straight contest, the Democratic establishment is using the legal system to attempt to undermine Trump’s popularity. That they feel so unsure of their ability to defeat a fascistic buffoon with an agenda so out of touch with a majority of Americans is indicative of the deep crisis of US politics today. That Biden—a man arguably less qualified and coherent than the average AI chatbot—is the establishment’s best hope is another.
One or the other of these dubious characters is set to govern the most powerful empire the world has ever seen for another four years. Are we still supposed to believe capitalism rewards talent and hard work?

By attacking Lebanon, Israel seeks to expand its genocidal war

Students turn out in record numbers for Palestine

Iran’s reactionary regime is no ally of Palestine

Zionists attack Monash University Gaza encampment

Who is Socialist Alternative?

‘A small, arrogant, violent, wicked nation’: Israel’s permanent war on the people of the Middle East

Why won’t Arab and Muslim countries help Palestine?

Despite corporate media blackout, Palestine solidarity marches are making history

‘The people want the fall of the regime!’

As Trump prepares for political war, Democrats offer a failed status quo

Other Media

Shop

Conferences

Manage Your Subscription

Contact Us