As a step of realising its world hegemony, the American imperialism has occupied Iraq. Thus, it tried to own the natural resources of the region and to prevent the development of its existing or potential rivals from competing with itself. Iraq is only a phase in the American imperialism's geopolitics for the world hegemony. The occupation of Iraq cannot be con-sidered separate from the American imperialism's policy on the Middle East, Caucasus, Caspian Basin and Central Asia, and from its policies against the EU, Russia and China. Therefore, the occupation of Iraq, the threats on Syria and Iran, and the "Great Middle East Project" as a whole are the logical consequences of the imperialist American bandits' understanding of world hegemony.

The real concrete opposition in actions against the imperialist war has come from the labourers of the world. Millions of anti-war people almost invaded the streets in order to protest the coming war. The anti-war movement protested the possible war through magnificent demonstration that was participated by millions around the world on 15th of February 2003. Such magnificent demonstrations were not seen since the years of 60s.

The war on Iraq has awakened the sleeping millions and, at the same time, deepened the contradictions between imperialists, at least among the USA-EU and USA-Russia. It once more exposed the characteristics of the UN.

The occupant bandits, who thought they will be welcomed with flowers in Iraq, came across with resistance. The advantages of military superiority could not turn Iraq into a "silence of cemetery". Peoples of Iraq have intensified the resistance with their hatred, anger and reaction against the occupant bandits who plundered the country's oil, destroyed the historical monuments and values, and degraded people via implication of torture and rape. They started an organised struggle against the occupants. What ever their political tendencies and understandings are, the Iraqis have shown a progress with con- tinuing their resistance on national level and in organised manner. Iraq has turned into a total quagmire for the occupants. The American imperialism reached a situation of living Vietnam syndrome.

Once more, the struggle against concrete war, imperialist occupation and threat has exposed the class characteristics of the anti-war movement's leadership. The pacifist leadership of the movement does not make differentiation between the just and unjust wars because of its class characteristics, and limits the actions only with the concrete war. For these elements, the main purpose was to stop war before it broke out. The content and success of the action was limited with prevention of the war. They could not reach this result, and the occupation of Iraq, the imperialist threat was protested in weak actions. This is the point where the difference between the pacifists and the real anti-imperialists becomes clear on the understanding of fight against the imperialism.

In the current situation, this movement has cloyed with the occupation of Iraq. They do not give importance to the struggle conducted against the occupation. So much so that, the debate whether we should concentrate on the war or on the neo-liberal attacks took significant part of the discussions in the 3rd European Social Forum. But the struggle against the imperialist aggression and war is not broken off from the struggle against the imperialist globalisation assaults and neo-liberal policies. The great international mass action, which took place on the day of 15th February 2003, was an indirect but impressive reaction of millions over the neo- liberal assaults also.

Today, the American imperialism is having a full impasse in Iraq. It knows that it cannot get out of Iraq by acting as nothing has happened. On the other hand, it is also being seen that the continuation of occupation in Iraq causes the organisation of more Iraqis in the struggle for freedom and, therefore, it (USA) might come across with expulsion similar to the one in Vietnam.

In order to show that it is not an occupier and willing to bring democracy to the country, the American imperialism organised a made-up election. But the elections were an attempt for legitimisation of the imperialist aggression and occupation in Iraq. Therefore, the election is a scenario that was prepared for the continuation of the occupation.

The collaborators such as Barzani and Talabani are the leading actors of the scenario. The other actor of the scenario is Ayatollah Sistani, the spiritual leader of the Shiite Arabs. These forces were convinced in the elections. Thus, the occupation of Iraq was going to be legitimised over the elections. But the Iraqi people are showing that their choice is to resist. Yes, there are two options in Iraq: One is to elect the regime of protectorate and the other one is to elect resistance for freedom.

Re-election of Bush was a sign of the American aggression's spread out and intensification in the world. This is what happened as a matter of fact and they start threatening Syria and Iran again. By saying "I hope we can solve the matter through diplomatic channels. But I am not going to take any alternatives away from the table", G. Bush, the President of USA, was emphasising his intention to strike Iran on one way or another. At the same period, D. Cheney was saying "Iran has got a powerful nuclear programme, and we know that it persistently gives support to the terrorist groups. For us, unification of these two is the serious source to worry. Iran remains as the foremost in the Bush administration's list of threats in the world".

Iran is one of the American imperialism's foremost targets because of its mineral resources, strategic position and regime. The American imperialism does not want its rivals to capture these natural resources and wants to use the country's strategic position for its own hegemonic purposes. But the occupation of Iran will not be as easy as the occupation of Iraq. It is because, first, Iran is stronger compared with Iraq and, second, the EU, Russia and China will take more active stance against the possible occupation. These countries already have made announcements on this occasion.

The deepening and intensifying Iraqi resistance, the American imperialism's threats and possible assault on Syria and Iran will both sharpen the contradictions between the imperialists and bring the re-acceleration of the anti-imperialist struggle. In such a moment, it is important to orga-nise and conduct international solidarity and anti-imperialist struggle. But such moments also will put significant and urgent duties before especially the revolutionary and communist forces of the countries in the region. In our region, not only in the Middle East but also in Balkans and Caucasus, the revolutionary and communist forces are face to face with the task of organising the anti-imperialist struggle.

We believe there are no barriers for building the united struggle of all democratic, anti-imperialist and revolutionary forces that could be united in the region, but it needs intense work. At the end, our enemies are same: The imperialists and their local collaborators are the ones who plundered, occupied or want to occupy our countries.

Therefore, we have to form regional anti-imperialist co-ordinations in order to build an anti-imperialist struggle in our region and develop regional resistances. MLCP thinks such co-ordinations are inevitable for the regional anti-imperialist struggle, and it is the most correct form of regionally organisation of the anti-imperialist struggle. Together with regional seminars, which will serve the enlightening, the regional anti-imperialist co-ordinations are the most correct form of organisation for the solution of common problems of the Middle Eastern, Balkan and Caucasian peoples.