Mike Tait  The butcher of Baghdad, Saddam Hussein, was killed in a rushed execution while Suharto, “the Butcher of Jakarta”, died at a ripe old age, his ill-gotten millions intact, surrounded by the best medical attention money could buy.
Despite the difference in their deaths, these two dictators had remarkably similar careers. Both emerged from obscurity in the middle ranks of the military to rise to power in bloody coups against popular nationalist leaders. In both cases, these coups were orchestrated by the CIA, who provided death lists of Communist Party members and trade unionists to Suharto and Saddam.
There is another striking similarity – both invaded small, oil-rich neighbours – Kuwait and East Timor - but here the likeness ends, for Suharto's genocidal invasion of East Timor in 1975 (it is estimated he presided over the massacre of 200,000 Timorese, a third of the population) was ignored in the West. When Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1991, however, he had outlived his usefulness to the West. As the culmination of a more than decade-long war, Hussein was captured and executed after a show trial.
{mosimage}The role of the New Zealand government was crucial in giving legitimacy to Suharto’s bloody rule, especially over the annexation of East Timor. As former MP Matt Robson wrote:
“And our own country from Labour’s Bill Rowling through to National’s Jenny Shipley had failed the long-suffering people of Timor. They followed MFAT’s advice to talk about respect for the processes of international law while secretly supporting Indonesia’s annexation. National PM Muldoon refused to see Ramos Horta when he came to New Zealand as part of a world tour as East Timor’s foreign minister in exile begging nations like New Zealand to protect his country through the processes of international law. In fact Muldoon and MFAT tried to prevent his visit. David Lange complained that Indonesia was nowhere near grateful enough for New Zealand’s work in keeping East Timor off the international agenda . . . Helen Clark on a trip to Indonesia in 1987 saw things the way of the Indonesia generals and declared that East Timor’s independence was "no longer an option.”
The New Zealand military trained Indonesian officers, and allowed their Skyhawk fighter jets to be refurbished in Blenheim right up until 1999, when Suharto was overthrown in a popular revolution. Tolerance for atrocity The outpouring of praise from regional and international leaders for the Indonesian dictator Suharto, who died in January, provides a grim warning of the anti-democratic shift in ruling class thinking internationally.
The US sent its condolences, neighbouring autocrats, former Malaysia Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad and Singapore’s elder statesman Lee Kuan Yew, came to offer their respects. Former Australian Labour prime minister Paul Keating, attended the funeral and described Suharto as a friend.
The current Indonesian President, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, is himself a Suharto-era general. He praised Suharto as “a loyal fighter, a true soldier and a respected statesman”.
The Wall Street Journal declared: “For all his flaws, Suharto deserves to be remembered as one of Asia’s greatest leaders.”
A more fitting epitaph was provided by the widow of ousted president Sukarno: “He was Indonesia’s Pol Pot.”
The World Socialist Web Site (wsws.org) cites a Time magazine report on the 1966 massacre: “The killings have been on such a scale that the disposal of corpses has created a serious sanitation problem in northern Sumatra where the humid air bears the reek of decaying flesh. Travellers from these areas tell us small rivers and streams have been literally clogged with bodies. River transportation has become seriously impeded.”
Before the bloodbathsSuharto and Hussein’s careers are similar for very good reasons. Neither dictator shaped history in any unique way. Both were better known as thugs than thinkers and neither made any greater contribution to their countries than running repressive police states on behalf of Western imperialism (although Hussein also received limited support from the Soviet imperialism).
Both dictators came to power in the 1960s, when the local ruling classes, having established nation states that were free of direct colonial rule, were intimidated by the growing strength of the organised working class. They saw the need to come to a new accommodation with overseas powers, at the expense of working people.
Sukarno, Indonesia’s first leader after independence was won from Dutch colonialism, championed the Non Aligned Movement of poor countries opposing imperialist control from either Washington or Moscow, making him a hate figure for the CIA.
Even worse, he had incorporated the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI), numbering some 2.5 million members and with ten million supporters in various front organisations, into his ruling coalition of parties together with the army and Islamist organisations.
In Iraq, Abd al-Karim Qasim, a nationalist military officer, overthrew the British-appointed monarchy and seized power in 1958. Lacking an organised political base, Qasim was heavily dependent on the Communist Party, which by 1959 had recruited between 20,000 and 25,000 members, inspired by the 1917 Russian Revolution and the leading role played by the party in the struggle against colonialism.  A fatal theory
But the Communist Parties of Iraq and Indonesia had little in common with the Bolshevik party that led the Russian revolution. To justify his bureaucratic counter-revolution, Stalin argued – in contrast to Marx and Lenin – that a socialist revolution need not be international but could be built in one country. As Scott Cooper wrote: “From “socialism in one country” flow the two other main tenets of Stalinist politics. First is that the workers' movement – given the focus on building socialism in one country (i.e., the Soviet Union) – must adapt itself to whatever is in the best interests of that focus at any given moment . . . The second is the idea of revolution in “stages” – that the “national-democratic revolution” must be completed before the socialist revolution takes place.”
Communist Parties – and revolution - in other countries were secondary to the survival of Stalin’s state. This ‘two-stage’ theory, led resistance movements all over the world into dead-ends and disasters.
Sorry history of vacillation and betrayalIn Indonesia, the communists continued to support Sukarno even as his regime became increasingly unstable. As Peter Symonds wrote:
“The Stalinist PKI, which was based on the “peaceful road to socialism”, not revolutionary politics, made no attempt to mobilise against the military. Its entire orientation was to subordinate the working class and peasant masses to Sukarno. Even as the military was murdering its members, the PKI leaders insisted that the party should do nothing to alienate Sukarno. Sukarno, however, was incapable of seriously challenging the US-supported military. After temporising for months, he formally handed over power to Suharto in March 1966.”
The Indonesian Communist Party was liquidated.
In Iraq after 1958, the communists were subjected to increasing harassment from their “national-democratic” ally, Qasim, who feared the party’s increasing popularity. The party – dedicated to slavishly following Moscow, which had ordered loyalty to Qasim – did not know how to react. It continued to support Qasim until his overthrow by the Baathist Party but the pattern was set.
In the coups and counter-coups that continued until Hussein seized power, the Party continued to vacillate between timid opposition and slavish support of military leaders. Like a dog that is whipped but keeps returning, the Party again and again offered its support to whichever army thug supposedly represented the ‘national-democratic’ revolution.
In 1978, Hussein unleashed renewed repression and the party shut down in Iraq. In a shameful sequel, the pathetic remnants of the once-proud party returned to Iraq with the US imperialist forces to take part in their puppet government.
With leadership like this, who needs enemies?
Further reading:Peter Symonds, Government leaders pay tribute to Indonesia’s former dictator Suharto, www.wsws.orgDerrick O'Keefe, Suharto's brutal legacy, www.rabble.caAlexis Wearmount, Suharto (1921–2008): from Cold Warrior to “model pupil” of neoliberalism, www.swp.org.ukScott Cooper, Stalinism, www.marxists.org |
Home