‘Iraqi left’

[ste finch]

Comrades, this rather long email from Rezgar Akrawi
landed on my inbox today. Asking us to publish the content. Perhaps others have received it too.
A brief scan shows it to be a lot like the shite seen recently around Their Party – anybody fancy responding?
**********************************
The Iraqi Left at a Crossroads: Renewal, Unity, and Reclaiming Grassroots Action

Rezgar Akrawi

The crisis of the Iraqi Left is not a crisis of sincerity or history, but rather a crisis of tools and form of work.

Scientific development and digital transformations have redrawn the spaces of influence, and whoever ignores them automatically exits the equation.

Leftist and progressive lists in Iraq did not obtain any seats in Parliament in the recent elections.

1. The Iraqi Left: A Crisis of Tools, Not a Crisis of Values

This article comes at a critical moment through which the Iraqi Left is passing. The results of the recent elections in November 2025 cannot be read as merely a passing electoral loss, or as a direct result of the unfair electoral law and the dominance of political money. These external factors are correct and influential, added to which are the even more grueling challenges of systematic restriction and narrowing, and structural corruption. However, focusing on external influences alone overlooks the essence of the problem.

What happened is a concentrated expression of a deeper crisis affecting the forms of organization, the method of work, and the discourse within all of the Iraqi Left in general. It is a crisis touching the dysfunctional relationship between the correct idea and its wrong tools. It is the relationship between a radical transformative discourse and the way it is presented within a highly complex and brutal “political market.” Despite this clear decline, the Iraqi Left remains the real hope and the most serious alternative for social change.

Starting from this dual diagnosis, the real question becomes: Why, despite the bad situation of the masses and the power of the cliques of tyranny and corruption, has social change not turned into a clear and convincing popular choice? Why has the Left’s project remained scattered, conflicting, multiple in name, similar in slogan, and different in work mechanisms, such that the masses did not see a single coherent alternative?

2. Do We Benefit from the Capitalist Methodology?

To understand this defect, it becomes necessary to look at the issue from an unconventional angle. The logic of capitalism, based on science and measurement rather than ideology, presents a strict practical model in how to deal with decline and weakness. Where the crisis of the Iraqi Left can be read as a crisis of a good transformative “product,” with policies that seem correct theoretically but have not yet found the optimal forms to translate them practically, and with management and marketing that need development, within a political market with huge competition from religious, nationalist, and bourgeois forces. Capitalism deals with society as a market, and with ideas as commodities. When a group of “companies” carrying a similar name enters and sells one product which is “social change,” without harmony or coordination, the quality itself turns into a problem.

This is what actually happened to the Iraqi Left in the recent elections. It was not only organizationally scattered, but also politically divided between participation and boycott. No unified position appeared, nor a clear discourse, nor an understood collective tactic. The masses did not see one “product” with clear features, but rather a series of similar products competing among themselves instead of facing the real competitors. In this case, the market itself punishes the inconsistent product. Chaotic plurality, conflicting discourse, and confusion are all factors that make the masses lose confidence, not because they reject the idea of change, but because it reaches them in a scattered and theoretical elitist way, difficult to understand compared to the development of society and its daily needs.

3. The Left and Addressing Decline and Weakness

Upon decline and weakness, the fundamental difference appears between the logic of capitalism and the logic of many forces of the Left. Capitalism does not return at every crisis to its classical theorists to search whether their texts were fully applied. As a practical system, it deals with decline as a measurable and treatable technical signal. It changes tools, discourse, facades, and work mechanisms quickly, without a sense of guilt, and without sanctifying names and history. It uses scientific research: it collects data, analyzes numbers, studies behavior, distributes forms, uses advanced technologies and artificial intelligence, and tests hypotheses. It asks simply and strictly: Why did the product not succeed? And based on the answers, it rebuilds its policies.

In contrast, some forces of the Left tend, when facing decline, to return to their classical theorists searching for answers, and to the bright history of their parties decades ago, even though the real question must be: Why did our message not arrive today? The problem is not in returning to the leftist heritage as a living critical method, but rather when this heritage and old organizational mechanisms turn into a rigid standard that rises above reality.

4. We Reclaim the Scientific Method Which Was Always the Essence of Leftist Thought

The lesson here is not glorifying capitalism nor adopting its values, but benefiting from its scientific method. The fundamental challenge lies in how to “borrow the tool” (the scientific methodology) while rejecting the “spirit” (individual profit and class dominance).

The Iraqi Left is now in need of this type of evaluation and scientific rigor. To conduct real surveys in popular neighborhoods and among the female and male workers of hand and thought, not in order to concede its class horizon, but in order to understand how its message arrives, how it is understood, and where it breaks. It is in need of studying and measuring the impact of its policies, measuring its presence on the ground and in the digital space, and measuring the language of its discourse. To ask clearly: Why do we not reach? And why do we not influence? Only after that can brave political and organizational decisions be taken based on the results.

5. The Left in the Age of the Digital Revolution

In the context of the digital revolution, this need increases in urgency and in an unprecedented way. We live in a time where ideas are no longer measured by the soundness of their theoretical starting point only, but by their ability to reach, influence, interact, and transform into a tangible collective action, which are criteria that young generations understand and deal with daily in their digital and social lives. The young generation of female and male workers of hand and thought does not receive politics through long speeches nor through heavy theoretical texts, but through digital platforms, short videos, open discussions, fast solidarity campaigns, and forms of flexible horizontal organization that allow direct participation and decision-making from the bottom to the top. Ignoring these transformations does not mean neutrality, but leaving this space entirely to the Left’s opponents who are more organized and capable of investing in digital tools.

From here, dealing with the digital space as a real arena of class struggle becomes a political and organizational necessity, not a secondary technical or media matter. For organization, mobilization, building trust, formulating discourse, and measuring impact, have all come today to pass through this space as much as they pass through the street and workplaces. And without the Left possessing the tools of organization, mobilization, and scientific evaluation in this field, it is unable to transform wide social anger into an organized force capable of continuity and influence. The contemporary Left is that which is capable of linking the justice of its social project with a conscious and systematic use of the tools of the age, allowing it to reclaim its role as a real force of change in a society that is changing rapidly.

6. Why Do We Need a Broad and Unified Leftist Framework?

The Iraqi Left played an important historical role in the struggle for the rights of female and male workers of hand and thought. But this honorable history carries us with a greater responsibility today: not to be satisfied with celebrating the past, but to face reality as it is. For the Iraqi Left is living a difficult situation manifested in a continuous decline, increasing popular isolation, and its clear distance from the young generations. The average age of the current leaderships mostly ranges between sixty and seventy years, with my appreciation for their great struggle role and sacrifices, which requires making room for the energies of the young generations who live a different reality.

In front of this reality, it is no longer possible to be satisfied with diagnosing the crisis. For if our class opponent rebuilds itself constantly through analysis, experimentation, and correction, then our remaining scattered and prisoners of our old forms weakens our chances of influence. From here, talking about a broad and unified leftist framework becomes a practical response to a crisis and a historical necessity.

7. Lessons of Unity and Frontal Work: How Did Global Leftist Forces Reclaim Their Effectiveness?

In many experiences around the world, leftist forces proved that exiting from marginalization and decline was not achieved through sticking to old organizational forms, but through unity and joint work and building flexible frameworks capable of absorbing plurality. In Portugal, the Left Bloc presented a leading model for merging several leftist currents within one framework that respects pluralism, which enabled it to become a difficult number in forming governments and possessing a negotiating capacity that was not available to individual parties. In Chile, the “Approve Dignity” alliance was formed between the Communist Party and youth organizations that led wide protests and brought Gabriel Boric as the youngest president of the country in 2021, and despite the setbacks of the 2025 elections, the alliance remained steadfast as an organized opposition bloc that prevented the fragmentation of the forces of change. In Denmark, the merger of three small Marxist parties into a multi-platform organization, which is the Red-Green Alliance, led to the transition of the Left from the margin to a political force that harvested 7.1% of the votes in the 2025 elections and emerged as a major municipal force in the capital. In Colombia, the Historic Pact succeeded as a coalition that included Marxists, environmentalists, and feminists in breaking the traditional monopoly of power and bringing Gustavo Petro to the presidency in 2022 through a radical pragmatic discourse that touches the daily life of people. In Germany, the unification of leftist currents from the East and West in the Die Linke party achieved one strong framework that represented for years the social and electoral Left despite intellectual variations. As for Spain, Podemos used horizontal organization and digital tools to move the Left from the squares of protest to the heart of Parliament within record time, challenging traditional party structures. In Brazil, the “Front of Hope” reclaimed power in 2022 through wide alliances that bypassed narrow ideological slogans, and with professional use of the digital space in facing the dominance of the far-right.

What brings these modern experiences together, despite the difference in contexts, is the realization that the Left is no longer capable of action and influence as closed individual parties, but rather as wide, flexible, and multi-platform alliances, capable of managing difference and linking politics to direct social demands. These lessons are not transferred literally to Iraq, but they open a practical horizon for thinking about building a broad and unified Iraqi leftist framework, capable of overcoming fragmentation and transforming the justice of the leftist project into an organized and effective social force.

8. Foundations and Mechanisms of the Unified Leftist Framework

A roadmap can be put forward for establishing a unified Iraqi leftist framework, based on gathering all leftist and progressive forces on points of meeting and an agreed-upon minimum program, through:

Holding a general conference for all factions and figures of the Iraqi and Kurdish Left, discussing the building of a unified multi-platform organizational framework, including parties, currents, unions, and syndicates, and allowing the joining of individuals from female and male activists.
Formulating a unified minimum program centered on what is possible to achieve in the near term; a short, clear, and direct program focusing on the interests of female and male workers of hand and thought, and the development of basic services, social justice, and providing job opportunities. The program adopts the issues of full women’s rights, neutralizing religion from the state, and protecting freedoms. This program is formulated in a modern, understood, and practical language, away from ideological complexities.
Choosing a simple name like “Bread and Freedom Alliance or Union,” away from traditional leftist naming.
The framework is based on a rotational collective leadership, and on flexible organizational rules, and different and flexible forms of membership. Most importantly, the founding leftist entities must be ready to restructure their frameworks and ease traditional party centralism.
Focusing on broad decentralization according to provinces and regions, so that each unit becomes capable of leading its work effectively within a unified general political line.
The active use of modern sciences in leadership, management, organization, media, and digitization, and in evaluating policies periodically, with the adoption of feedback from the masses as a basic mechanism.
Strengthening the role of youth in leadership through binding organizational rules, such as representation rates for youth and women in leadership bodies with real powers.
Building an effective digital policy that deals with the digital space as a real arena of class struggle, including multiple media platforms, digital training programs, the use of artificial intelligence, and actual scientific measurement tools.
The decisive condition is that the unified framework be capable of working according to points of meeting and the agreed program and containing the difference positively without turning into an arena of conflicts.

9. Will We Continue to Interpret the World While Our Enemies Continue to Change It?

The pivotal question today is not about intentions, but rather about action: Does the Left put forward alternatives starting from what is socially and class-wise possible, and achievable within the existing balances, and with the logic of cumulative gradual change? Or is it satisfied with raising slogans without any actual and tangible change in the life of the masses resulting from them?

In conclusion, the crisis of the Iraqi Left is not a crisis of sincerity or history, but rather a crisis of tools and form of work. Scientific development and digital transformations have redrawn the spaces of influence, and whoever ignores them automatically exits the equation. We do not need a Left that is new in its values, but rather a Left that is new in its discourse, its action, and its organizational mechanisms; a Left that translates thought into tangible changes on the ground, without abandoning the essence of its socialist project.

From here, the boldness required today is the courage to dismantle rigid structures, and abandon narrow centralisms, in favor of a broad and flexible framework that accommodates everyone and reconnects organization with living reality. Before us are two choices and no third. Either we take the path of renewal and practical unity and reclaim our role as a real force for change, or we continue on the current path and risk that the movement of history will bypass us. Global experiences prove clearly that unity is not only possible, but also feasible, even in the harshest conditions.

Footnotes:
The Iraqi Left is composed of a group of parties and organizations, the most prominent of which are: the Iraqi Communist Party, the Kurdistan Communist Party, the Worker-communist Party of Iraq, the Worker-communist Party of Kurdistan, the Communist Alternative Organization, the Communist Left Party, in addition to other organizations.
All leftist and progressive lists in Iraq that participated in the elections did not obtain any seat in the Iraqi Parliament in the November 2025 elections.

[Author]

Posts