askchapo

First it's semantically a "should" question. This is commonly a normative framing as in "they should be doing this" and "they shouldn't be doing that". Second, it's about "doing", meaning concrete actions.

As communists, our understanding of history shows us that actions must be matched to real conditions on the ground as well as aligned with theory.

You asked about 3 different countries, and the inclusion of Iran shows that you can't possibly be personally steeped in the exact conditions on the ground in all three countries. This means you're asking a sort of hypothetical (theory) question about the normative standards for actions by other people in other places in conditions you don't understand.

Essentially, any answer you come up with by asking such a question can only be normative imposition on the actions of others from a position of ignorance, or what we call chauvinism.

I do think that there's something you are trying to explore that is worth exploring, which is to use those countries as examples of a theoretical category (anti-imperialists) and then to discuss the theory of the natural laws that produce human societies and arrive at some hypotheses for what will be most effective for abstract societies within the category to move them and the world towards communism.

What's not worth exploring is what do outsiders think should be done by others who have the real experience of what conditions are like in each of these nations and have the responsibility and accountability to themselves, their families, and their comrades to carry themselves within their context.