Category Archives: Arab & Mid-East Liberation

PFLP condemns Zionist attack on Syria

352a
Statement by Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine

Commenting on the Zionist aggression on Syria, the official spokesperson of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), Comrade Abu Ahmad Fouad of the Political Bureau of the PFLP, made a statement denouncing the brutal aggression on Syria as a heinous crime and a blatant challenge of the principles of international Law and the resolutions of international legitimacy.

Fouad added that this aggression is one episode in a series of state terrorist attacks practiced by the Zionist entity against the Arab nation and the Palestinian people.

Furthermore, he called upon the international community, the Arab League and all Arab countries and civil society institutions to condemn this aggression, and for international institutions to end their double standards and silence on the crimes committed against the Arab nation and the Palestinian people.

Finally, Fouad concluded his statement that the enemy has underestimated the capabilities and commitments of the Arab nation, adding that it engages in daily attacks against the Palestinian Arab people throughout Palestine as well as the Arab people of Lebanon and Syria, and that it is important that the enemy faces an immediate response to its attacks. The crimes of the Zionist enemy should not pass with impunity.

Teargas as thousands protest top opposition leader assassination in Tunisia (PHOTOS)

chokri-belaid-500

Tunisian opposition leader Chokri Belaid has been shot dead outside his home, prompting thousands of Tunisians to protest in the capital and across the country, torching ruling party offices in several towns and chanting “the government should fall.”

(FOLLOW LIVE UPDATES)

In Tunis thousands of people flooded the central Habib Bourguiba Avenue, close to the tree-lined boulevard, where violent anti-government protests were raging two years ago, when the so-called Arab Sprig was ignited.

Flocking to the Interior Ministry office, protesters were chanting “The people want the fall of the regime!”

Security forces cordoned off the area.

As an ambulance carrying Belaid’s body was driven in front of the ministry, hundreds of mourners crowded around the vehicle.

Calls for a second revolution were heard from the crowd. The protesters were chanting “We are all Chokri,” “O Chokri, O martyr, we will follow your path,” and “Terrorism, bullets, Tunisians are fearless”.

Police responded to mass gathering in Tunis with teargas and warning shots. One officer has already lost his life in a violent clash with the people. There have also been reports that an ambulance was teargased.

Further protests have erupted in more than 12 towns and cities across Tunisia.

Rubber bullets and tear gas were also used to contain the crowds in Sidi Bouzid, central Tunisia, the birthplace of last year’s revolution.

A local man placed the number protesting at “more than 4,000” in Sidi Bouzid, according to Reuters. He said that many were “burning tires and throwing stones at the police.”

Some 200 protesters attacked the police station in the central town of Sidi Bouzid. Police had to fire teargas to force the crowd back.

Angry crowds set fire to or vandalized HQs of the ruling Ennahda party in the capital Tunis and in several cities around the country.

Amid raging mass protests, the Tunisian opposition has announced in a statement the suspension of its membership in the constituent assembly. It has also called for a general strike on Chokri Belaid’s funeral.

Four opposition parties have followed in their steps and announced the suspension of their membership in Tunisia’s constituent assembly as well. They have also joined calls for a strike to protest the assassination of the prominent leader.  

Later Tunisian prime minister said he was going to dissolve government and form a national unity cabinet consisting of non-partisan technocrats.

myriam ben ghazi tweet

Two men on motorbike killed Belaid – Interior Ministry

Chokri Belaid, 47, who was leader of Tunisia’s Democratic Patriotic Party, was killed as he was leaving his house in Tunis, the country’s capital, according to the county’s Interior Ministry. Belaid reportedly took four bullets to his head and chest. Shortly after the shooting, Belaid was rushed to a nearby medical clinic, but the injuries proved fatal.

There have been reports about “three men in a black vehicle” had been present at the scene. However, the latest statement from the Interior Minister said that killer of Chokri Belaid is believed to be a middle-aged man on a motorcycle that was ridden by an accomplice, Reuters reports. The Interior Ministry said after the shooting the attacker and rider sped away.

No responsibility has been claimed so far, but protesters and supporters of Chokri Belaid, who had recently formed a coalition in opposition against the Islamist-led government, blame members of the ruling Ennahda for assassinating country’s prominent opposition leader.  

The Ennahda has said it had nothing to do with the assassination of Belaid, Reuters reported. 

Forensic inspectors examine the car of prominent Tunisian opposition politician Chokri Belaid, who was shot dead outside his home, in Tunis February 6, 2013. (Reuters / Zoubeir Souissi)
Forensic inspectors examine the car of prominent Tunisian opposition politician Chokri Belaid, who was shot dead outside his home, in Tunis February 6, 2013. (Reuters / Zoubeir Souissi)

The Ennahda came to power following the 2011 revolution when Tunisia’s long-ruling leader was ousted. The Islamist party has been widely accused of seeking to monopolize power. 

“Ennahda bargains and claims to want to expand the coalition, but refuses to cede any of the key ministerial portfolios sought by opposition,” an anonymous Western diplomat told AFP. The country has been waiting on a ‘long overdue’ cabinet reshuffle.

Belaid recently spoke out against alleged attacks by the Islamists, targeting his party’s members, stating that, “a group of Ennahda mercenaries and Salafists attacked our activists.” The attacks reportedly occurred as a party meeting drew to a close last Saturday.

There have been tensions over the role of Rashid al-Ghannushi, the so-called ‘spiritual leader’ of the Ennahda Movement, which is currently the ruling party in Tunisia. In October 2012, clashes took place in the southern city of Tataouine, during which the coordinator of Nida Touns political party, Lofi Nakd, was killed. Tunisians suspect that Ghannushi might have been behind such radical actions against political opponents.

The fact that his son-in-law is the country’s foreign minister could also be fanning the flames of protest. 

“The fact that the members of the family of the spiritual leader of this Islamic ruling movement have prominent positions of power is one of other things that makes even people who supported the general tendency say “all we are seeing are revolutions to get rid of the Ben Ali family only to replace it with a new ruling family,” professor of international relations at Bilikent University in Turkey, Mark Almond told RT.

A picture taken on December 29, 2010 shows Tunisian opposition leader Chokri Belaid. (AFP Photo / Fethi Belaid)
A picture taken on December 29, 2010 shows Tunisian opposition leader Chokri Belaid. (AFP Photo / Fethi Belaid)

‘Assassination of Tunisian revolution’

Prime Minister Hamadi Jebali has condemned the suspected politically-motivated assassination, labeling the death of Belaid “the assassination of the Tunisian revolution,” adding that, “by killing him they wanted to silence his voice.”

Tunisia’s President Moncef Marzouki canceled a foreign visit following the news to return home. He denounced the“the odious assassination of a political leader who I knew well and who was my friend”.

Asma Belaid, Chokri’s wife, told reporters his death is a catastrophe for Tunisia and their family.

French President Francois Hollande has expressed great concern over the escalating political violence in France’s ex-colony.

“This murder deprives Tunisia of one of its most courageous and free voices,” Hollande’s office said in a statement.

Protests have also been spotted in Paris near the Tunisian embassy, AFP reports. Some protesters even managed to get into the building.

Two years ago Tunisia was the first country to overthrow its leader, following uprisings throughout the country, in what came to be known as the Arab Spring. The country has been gripped by social and religious uncertainty following the introduction of subsequent free elections, yet has managed a smooth transition to democracy up until this point.

“There hadn’t been too much of violence, but unfortunately with these deep disappointments with the failure to make life better (life has got worse) and the sense that a trajectory that takes many people in Tunisia away from what they wanted,” said Almond.

Tunisia is fast becoming a microcosm of the Middle East, where the dichotomy between an Islamic regime and the predominantly secular opposition is magnified – especially after this recent assassination, believes political analyst Danny Makki. He claims that in the current era, the Arab world is so completely politicized that even a minute change can spark hatred and mass outrage.

And because Tunisia’s current Islamist regime is supported by Salafists, it has strong links to other Muslim Brotherhoods, further widening the country’s ideological rift. President Marzouki, for instance, is a firm supporter of the so-called Syrian Jihad. “[Belaid’s] assassination was committed by people with close links to the government, though they deny it”, Makki told RT.

He adds that the move to dissolve the coalition could be to dissuade further unrest, but whether it will work is unclear as “there is a stigma attached to the Muslim Brotherhood government, whose policies are incompatible with the liberal, outgoing nature of Tunisians – this is a problem within itself.”

Makki told RT that the latest events are testimony to the backwardness of the Arab Spring in Tunisia and the Brotherhood’s inadequate leadership, which has no tangible political policies or social and economic programs.

Screenshot from YouTube video / MegaBigpoopa (posted 6 Feb 2013)
Screenshot from YouTube video / MegaBigpoopa (posted 6 Feb 2013)
People surround an ambulance transporting the body of Tunisian opposition leader and outspoken government critic Chokri Belaid on February 6, 2013. (AFP Photo / Feithi Belaid)
People surround an ambulance transporting the body of Tunisian opposition leader and outspoken government critic Chokri Belaid on February 6, 2013. (AFP Photo / Feithi Belaid)
Tunisian people shout slogans during a rallye in front of Interior ministry to protest after Tunisian opposition leader and outspoken government critic Chokri Belaid was shot dead with three bullets fired from close range, on February 6, 2013. (AFP Photo / Feithi Belaid)
Tunisian people shout slogans during a rallye in front of Interior ministry to protest after Tunisian opposition leader and outspoken government critic Chokri Belaid was shot dead with three bullets fired from close range, on February 6, 2013. (AFP Photo / Feithi Belaid)
The body of Tunisian opposition Chokri Belaid (top R) arrives amidst tens of thousands of protesters as they demonstrate on Avenue Habib Bourguiba in Tunis February 6, 2013.(Reuters / Anis Mili)
The body of Tunisian opposition Chokri Belaid (top R) arrives amidst tens of thousands of protesters as they demonstrate on Avenue Habib Bourguiba in Tunis February 6, 2013.(Reuters / Anis Mili)
Tunisian protesters shout slogans during a demonstration after the death of Tunisian opposition leader Chokri Belaid (pictured on flag), outside the Interior ministry in Tunis February 6, 2013.(Reuters / Anis Mili)
Tunisian protesters shout slogans during a demonstration after the death of Tunisian opposition leader Chokri Belaid (pictured on flag), outside the Interior ministry in Tunis February 6, 2013.(Reuters / Anis Mili)
A police officer fires teargas to break up a protest during a demonstration in Tunis February 6, 2013.(Reuters / Zoubeir Souissi)
A police officer fires teargas to break up a protest during a demonstration in Tunis February 6, 2013.(Reuters / Zoubeir Souissi)

Leila Khaled on Revolution & Life

tumblr_mexnxei3Kd1riff31o3_500

“I have learned that a woman can be a fighter, a freedom fighter, a political activist, and that she can fall in love and be loved. She can be married, have children, be a mother. Revolution must mean life also; every aspect of life.”

Leila Khaled

Party of Labour of Iran (Toufan): Condemn the Despicable Assassination of Chokri Belaid in Tunisia!

487446_10151705872134838_933990206_n

Chokri Belaid, a popular, prominent, and tireless fighter for the freedom and independence of Tunisia was assassinated in front of his house on the morning of February 6, 2013. Comrade Chokri was the general secretary of the United Party of Patriotic Democrats (PUPD) of Tunisia and a leading member of the Popular Front, a coalition of democratic and left wing forces including the Workers’ Party (PT) of Tunisia.

The criminal assassination of Chokri Belaid is one among a series of repressive acts and barbaric attacks against the activists of the Popular Front that have been carried out for a while with the backing and support of the Tunisian government led by Ennahda Islamic Party. As Comrade Hemma Hemmami, the spokesperson of the Front and the leading figure of PT stated: “The government as a whole is responsible for this crime”.

The barbaric assassination of Comrade Chokri Belaid reminds us of the gradually increasing offensive acts of the reactionary forces of the regime of the Islamic Republic of Iran, soon after they took power, against the advancement of the Iranian Revolution and against the secular and radical left forces in Iran.

Chokri Belaid strongly opposed the “elected” government of Tunisia dominated by the Ennahda Islamic Party, the Party that was put in power through conspiracy, deception, election rigging, and imperialist backing.

The assassination of Chokri Belaid is a vile act that stems from, on the one hand, the weakness and sagging power of the present reactionary rulers in Tunisia and, on the other hand, the advances of the Popular Front. The democratic and revolutionary forces in Tunisia are extending and deepening their influence among the labourers, toilers, deprived masses, and intellectuals. They are holding high the banner of their national-democratic revolution. This has frightened the regime and decaying forces. The assassins not only have targeted Comrade Chokri and PUPD, but also have targeted all democratic and left forces, the trade unions, the women organizations, all secular and progressive institutions. All these forces were and are under the offenses of the dark and reactionary forces backed by the Ennahda movement.

The Party of Labour of Iran (Toufan) strongly condemns the assassination of Chokri Belaid and expresses solidarity with his immediate family, with the United Party of Patriotic Democrats, and with the United Front. We call on all revolutionary and progressive forces of all lands to condemn the reactionary regime of Tunisia for this despicable act and other ongoing criminal offenses against the people of Tunisia.

The Party of Labour of Iran (Toufan) supports the struggle of the Tunisian people for the continuation of their revolution. We support the Popular Front, the force that is fighting for deepening the revolution and establishing a national and democratic order. We continue to expose the criminal Islamic regime of Tunisia headed by Ennahda, a regime that is backed by imperialists and the remnants of Ben Ali regime.

The Party of Labour of Iran (Toufan) supports the call by trade unions and the Popular Front for general strikes, for dissolution of the government, and for the formation of a new democratic constitutional assembly.

Long Live the Tunisian Revolution!
Down with Imperialism and Reaction!
Long Live International Solidarity!

The Party of Labour of Iran (Toufan)
February 7, 2013

WWW.Toufan.org
Toufan@toufan.org

Source

When Gaza Burns

Smoke and fire from an Israeli bomb rises into the air ove Gaza City

When Gaza Burns

by Charlie Mann

Gaza burns tonight.
It burns alone by the sea,
And it burns in the minds
of the masses,
Tears in their eyes with news of
dead children,
Explosions that reverberate
In the ears of those
Across the globe.
Mothers, daughters, fathers, sons,
Brothers and sisters and uncles and aunts
Feel the loss and pain
of dead relatives.

And tonight,
When Gaza burns,
It burns around the world.

Source

International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organizations: Resolution on the West African Region and Mali

logo_mundo-copia

Since 2010, the West African region and particularly the sub-Saharan zone has been marked by the armed interference and intervention of the imperialist powers. The objectives of those actions are:

* Political, geostrategic and military, related to the struggle for the redivision of the world and of the African continent.

* Economic (access to the petroleum of the Gulf of Guinea and the Ivory Coast; to the uranium of Niger and the precious metals that abound in the region; to solar energy; cacao, coffee, etc.

* The struggle of the Anglo-Saxon (U.S. and Great Britain) and French imperialists to prevent the penetration into the region by new actors such as China, India, Brazil, etc.

* The will of the imperialist powers to crush any type of protest by the popular masses, who are condemned to misery and lacking in political freedom, as well as the repression that they suffer carried out by the corrupt puppet powers, and their desire to crush any revolutionary insurrectionary movement.

The military-political crisis after the military coup d’état of the National Committee for the Defense and Restoration of the State (CNRDE) of March 22, 2012, as well as the military occupation of the North of Mali, begun January 22, 2012, which covers two thirds of the national territory, an occupation carried out by the National Movement for the Liberation of AZAWAD (MNLA) and the “jihadists” (AQMI, ANSAR, DINE, MUJAO, BOKO, HARAM…) must be put in this context

The military-political crisis in Mali has grave consequences for the neighboring countries, particularly Algeria, Niger, Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast, Mauritania, etc. and the group of the countries of the west African region (destabilization of States, proliferation of arms, massive displacement of populations towards the South of Mali, and thousands of refugees in other neighboring countries).

The military-political crisis in Mali is also a threat to the interests of imperialism, particularly French imperialism, in that country and the whole region. That is why there are preparatory maneuvers for an open military intervention that the troops provided by the members countries of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) can carry out, with the consent and logistical support of the great imperialist powers (France and U.S.A.) and of the UN under the pretext of “making a secure transition,” of “restoring constitutional life” and of “restoring Mali’s territorial integrity.” This is a reactionary plan by the imperialist powers and their allies in the region to maintain and reinforce their domination.

Faced with this serious situation, the International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organizations (ICMLPO):

* Denounces and condemns the puppet powers that have opened their territories (particularly in Mali, Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast, Niger, Mauritania and Senegal) to the troops of imperialist aggression.

* Denounces and condemns the proclamation of independence of the State of AZAWAD by the MNLA, instrument of French imperialism.

* Denounces and condemns the crimes perpetrated against the peoples of the North of Mali by terrorist group AQMI and the Islamist groups ANSAR-DINE, MUJAO and the MNLA.

* Supports the brave resistance of the peoples, particularly of the youth, against oppression and medieval and obscurantist practices.

* Denounces and condemns the reactionary plan of the ECOWAS in Mali.

* Calls on the proletariat and peoples of the imperialist countries, particularly France, to support the Malian people in their struggle for a revolutionary solution of the military-political crisis.

* Calls for solidarity and support for the struggle of the peoples of the West African region against imperialist domination and their African lackeys.

Tunisia, November of 2012.

Source

International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organizations: Resolution on the Situation in Syria

handsoffsyria

The plenary of the ICMLPO, held for the first time in Africa, reaffirms its support for the right of the Syrian people to live under a democratic regime: a regime that guarantees freedom, equality, social justice and dignity, as well as assures the unity and total independence of the country, including the recovery of the Golan Heights occupied by Zionism since 1967.

The ICMLPO:

1. Denounces the dangerous development of events in Syria. The popular movement of protest has been transformed into a destructive civil war. The bloodthirsty repression is striking the people, and since the beginning, the Assad regime has rejected any democratic reform that would satisfy the aspirations of the Syrian people. This situation is the consequence of the foreign reactionary, imperialist and Zionist intervention, through Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which masked by the so-called “Free Syrian Army” and under the pretext of “saving the Syria people”

2. We reaffirm that this war has nothing to do with the interests of the Syrian people and their aspirations. On the contrary, it serves the reactionary forces of the country, the region and internationally. Syria is at the moment the place of confrontation between, on the one side the U.S., France and Israel and Arab and Turkish reaction that are trying to subject Syria to Western rule and make it break its ties with Iran and Hezbollah. On the other side, Russia and China are supporting the regime to preserve their strategic interests in Syria and the region, after having lost their influence in Libya.

3. We reject all intervention by NATO in Syria under any pretext, given the dangers that this represents for the Syrian people, the peoples of the region and world peace in general. The Conference calls on the Turkish people to oppose Turkey’s intervention in Syria. It sends a call to the workers and peoples of the Western countries, in the first place of the United States, Great Britain and France, whose leaders are threatening military intervention in Syria, to pressure their governments to stop them from carrying out their criminal strategy that caused disasters in Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Libya, etc. in the past

4. It is up to the Syrian people, in all cases, to determine their own future. The ICMLPO calls on the Syrian patriotic and democratic forces to unite to save their country from the claws of the Assad regime and the armed gangs and to prevent the foreign powers from mortgaging their future and making use of a part of their minorities to undermine their unity. The ICMLPO calls on those forces to strive to build a new, democratic, secular, independent and united Syria in which the different religions and nationalities live together in freedom and equality.

5. Calls on the patriotic, democratic and progressive forces of the region to urgently mobilize and to undertake the necessary measures of solidarity to support the patriotic and democratic forces of Syria, forces that must act to end the slaughters perpetrated against the Syrian people, to stop the destruction of the country and prevent the foreign intervention, to facilitate dialogue among its inhabitants to achieve their aspirations and break with the tyranny and foreign domination.

Organisation pour la construction d’un parti communiste ouvrier d’Allemagne

Parti Communiste des Ouvriers du Danemark – APK

Parti Communiste d’Espagne (marxiste – léniniste) – PCE(ml)

Plateforme Communiste d’Italie

Parti Communiste des Ouvriers de France – PCOF

Organisation Marxiste Léniniste Révolution de Norvège – Revolusjon !

Parti Communiste Révolutionnaire de Turquie – TDKP

Parti des Travailleurs de Tunisie – PT

Parti Communiste Révolutionnaire de Côte d’Ivoire – PCRCI

Source

Tunisia’s ‘unfinished revolution’ — interview with Workers’ Party militant

jabbar_younene

By Peter Boyle

November 16, 2012 – Green Left Weekly – Abdel Jabbar Madouri (pictured above) has been a militant in Tunisia since his early secondary school days. He was jailed three times (in 1987,1993 and 2002) because of his political activism. After every arrest, he was tortured and then sentenced to more then 12 years in jail. Madouri spent four years in hiding during the Ben Ali regime. He was also deprived of the right to work or to obtain a passport.

Madouri is also novelist and member of the League of Free Writers and some of his novels were banned by the dictatorship. Today he is member of the national committee of the Tunisian Worker’s Party and is editor of its newspaper Sawt Echaab(People’s Voice).

Green Left Weekly interviewed Madouri by internet with with the assistance of and translation from Arabic by Tunisian journalist Haithem Mahjoubi.

* * *

The sacrifice of the young Tunisian street vendor Mohamed Bouazizi opened a new wave of popular revolt across the Arabic countries and beyond to Spain and eventually the whole world through the Occupy movement. But how much has been gained by the revolution in Tunisia? Is the democratic space still opening up?

We can say that this revolution has achieved certain aims such as the abolition of the ex-ruling party (though elements of it still operate freely but with little public support), freedom of expression and media and also the dissolution of the hated secret police, if only in a formal way.

The revolution also achieved for the first time a democratic election despite some failures and lack of transparency and equal opportunity in the election campaigns. The election of the constituent assembly was one of the goals that people fought to achieve, unfortunately, the Islamic Ennahdha coalition exploited the revolution win a majority in those elections.

Many of the tasks of the revolution remain unfinished because of the strength of the forces of counter revolution seeking to circumvent the revolution. Among these unfinished tasks are the enforcement of accountability; an investigation and end to corruption in government institutions; a purge state agencies, bringing those responsible to account for crimes against the people – especially putting on trial those who murdered the martyrs of the struggle – and redress for their victims.

What has been achieved by the one-year-old Constituent Assembly? And did the workers’ movement and the left have much input into its decisions?

More then a year after the election, the Constituent Assembly has still not drafted laws that reflecting the demands of the revolution. With the majority of assembly members, of representatives, Ennahdha is able to pass laws for its own benefit. This has made it clear to the people that this is no revolutionary government but a government of a new dictatorship working against the completion of the tasks of the revolution.

The people’s rejection of this government can be seen in the growing demonstrations and sit-ins in public squares and in the streets in front of government offices.

So the revolutionary process is moving slowly along with the transitional to equality.

Amnesty International says there have been some reversals of the democratisation. Protesters, activists and journalists have been attacked. What is the situation for freedom of political expression and organisation?

The Ennahda government has used the Islamic fundamentalist Salafist militias to attack independent journalists so that it dominate public media and put its loyal supporters and allies in charge of the main media institutions. It has refused to put to into practice laws guaranteeing media freedom and establishing an independent commission for information.

So, journalists are still fighting for independence and freedom.

What is the state of the trade union movement? How strong is your party in the trade union movement? Is there a problem with corruption and co-option of trade union leaders by the capitalist parties and the state?

The General Union of Tunisian Workers (UGTT) is the biggest union in Tunisia. The UGTT has been organised since 1952 and is playing a very important role in fighting the government’s plans.

It is true that this union suffered from corruption during the Ben Ali regime, but after the revolution it has regained its integrity, energy and a leading role social and political struggles in cooperation all with other popular organisations.

The Worker’s Party is is very strong in the UGTT. The trade union movement is working with the newly formed Popular Front, which was launched in October by 12 political parties that are all active in the UGTT.

The constituent parties of the Popular Front are left-wing parties and progressive nationalists that participated in the revolution and suffered repression under former dictatorship.

The Popular Front is the now largest political force apart from the ruling Ennahda and the “Tunisia Appeal” party, which represents the remnants of the old regime.

How much danger does Tunisia face from the religious fundamentalists?

Islamic fundamentalism remains part of the political landscape of Tunisia and occasionally expresses itself through attacks on bars, artists and police. Some fundamentalists have been killed in clashes with the police.

But the popular resistance has led to the isolation and decline of the influence of the fundamentalists. The recent manifestations of Salafist violence is due to growing government complicity with these groups.

There have been some recent significant strikes in Tunisia. Can you explain what this was about?

We’ve been organising several workers’ campaigns to claim three main things. First, the passing and implementation of the laws to regulate working conditions which remain precarious for most workers. Second, wage increases to keep up with the rising cost of living and better working conditions, especially working hours and occupational safety. Third, regulation of employment and dismissal of workers in public institutions.

Can you explain the recent protests about women’s rights in Tunisia?

Since it came to power the current government has tried to circumvent the demand for women’s rights, especially in relation to polygamy, the regulation of the minimum age of marriage and gender equality in rights and duties. But its attempts have failed because of the resistance from civil society, including the women’s associations which are very strongly engaged. Still the struggle women’s rights in Tunisia remains strong challenge.

Will the elections promised for June 2013 satisfy the popular will in Tunisia? How well do you expect the left to do in this elections? What are the prospects of a new revolutionary upsurge?

The revolutionary forces are aiming to be influential in next June’s election and to use these elections as an opportunity to achieve the demands for which the people revolted.

Our most important goal is providing employment, freedom and ending our country’s dependency on the great imperialist powers.

It is certain that the left led by the Popular Front will be active and influential in this election. According the last opinion poll, the Workers Party had 6% of the vote and is in the fourth place. But it is expected that the Popular Front would get more than 15% of the vote in the coming elections.

Because of the deterioration of the living conditions of the Tunisian people and the government’s inability to deal with these situations, a second revolution in Tunisia is also expected. The Popular Front is ready for this eventuality and prepared to lead such a revolution to achieve its goals.

What is your party’s view of the developments in Libya and Syria? Are the imperialist powers beginning to successfully manipulate the “Arab Spring”?

The imperialist powers are collaboration with reactionary regimes in the Arabic region especially Qatar and Saudi Arabia and they have succeeded in thwarting revolution in Syria by converting it from a popular uprising to a devastating and dirty civil war.

In Libya, the situation looks somewhat different, especially since the Libyans began rebuilding state institutions. But the Libyan revolution needs to make a lot more struggle to achieve Libyan people’s demands.

The imperialist powers are working hard to control the situation in the countries of the so-called “Arab spring” so they are aiming to find help customers in the area especially after the coming to power of Islamist parties in Tunisia and Egypt and their collaboration with the imperialist-Zionist agenda. In the other side, there are the ongoing revolutionary processes and the parties that lead them in both these countries.

Source

Marxism & Bourgeois Nationalism

As always, a re-posting of articles does not necessarily imply an absolute endorsement of the entirety of its content. However, this well-written article does make a good point about the duality of the bourgeois class, particularly in the Third World and oppressed countries.

– Espresso Stalinist.

Tripoli is burning. Thousands of black Libyans and African immigrants are rounded up by the NATO-backed rebels and thrown into prisons. Supporters of the ousted nationalist government wait with baited breath for the inevitable and bloody purge by the new rebel government. Libyan oil gushes out of Benghazi into the pipelines of Western energy companies. And militia groups, deputized by Interpol and the now-victorious National Transitional Council (NTC) government, hunt for Colonel Muammar Qaddafi and his family across the Libyan desert.

Now that NATO has won this asymmetrical imperialist war, at least in the short term, no one can reasonably say that the Libyan people are better off with the rebel government in power. For all of the flaws of Qaddafi’s government – and other nationalist governments like his – the Libyan people enjoyed the highest standard of living on the African continent, rising from the lowest standard of living in the world as of 1951. (1) The national and tribal governments had an amicable working relationship that allowed for decentralized planning and local decision-making. Moreover, Libya’s natural resources were controlled by a national government at-odds with Western energy corporations, and the wealth they generated was publicly owned and shared. (1) In other words, the Libyan nation exercised its inherent right to self-determination.

Qaddafi’s government wasn’t socialist; it was nationalist. The relations of production in Libya were capitalist in nature, but to deny that Qaddafi’s government was more progressive and objectively anti-imperialist ignores the brutal material reality that millions of Libyans are facing because of the NTC government.

As the West begins to re-calibrate its war machine and set its crosshairs on President Bashar al-Assad’s government in Syria, Marxist-Leninists need to understand their relationship with nationalist bourgeois states, like Qaddafi’s Libya. History has objectively proven those “leftists” who were cheerleaders for the fall of Qaddafi’s government in Libya or Saddam Hussein’s government in Iraq wrong.

At the same time, every bourgeois state operates fundamentally in the interest of some sector of the capitalist ruling class, whether national or international, and in time the proletariat will replace that old machinery with socialism through revolution.

I posit these theses:

Because of their relation to imperialism after the fall of the socialist bloc, the objective historical position of nationalist states in the Third World is progressive.

Marxist-Leninists must uphold the right of nations to self-determination, which in the present is principally characterized by freedom from imperialist subjugation.

Where it arises, Marxist-Leninists must support genuine revolutionary proletarian struggles for socialism against bourgeois nationalist governments.

Josef Stalin, author of Marxism & the National Question

What is nationalism?

To understand when and why Marxist-Leninists should support nationalism, it’s important to examine the material conditions from which nationalism arises.

As a starting point, it’s important to distinguish a nation from other units of social or geographical organization, like a tribe or country. Historically speaking, national identity is a relatively recent development in class society. In his seminal 1913 work, Marxism and the National Question, Josef Stalin outlines the characteristics of a nation as “a historically evolved, stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life and psychological make-up manifested in a common culture.” (2)

Two important characteristics to note about Stalin’s definition. First, while territory and geography is a defining feature of a nation, it is not its sole determining characteristic, meaning that within the existential boundaries of a country–itself a recent social development–many nations may exist. Second, while a common economic life is also a defining characteristic, nations are not formed on the basis of class unity. In other words, there is no proletarian nation or bourgeois nation, but rather these two classes are both part and parcel of their respective nations.

In its inception, nationalism arises as an ideology of the bourgeoisie. From Marxism and the National Question:

The chief problem for the young bourgeoisie is the problem of the market. Its aim is to sell its goods and to emerge victorious from competition with the bourgeoisie of another nationality. Hence its desire to secure its “own,” its “home” market. The market is the first school in which the bourgeoisie learns its nationalism. (2)

Though all classes in a given nation are capable of embracing nationalism, Stalin argues that its historical basis lies in the bourgeoisie and its need for capital accumulation as a class. While other classes can appropriate and have transformed this concept, the demand for national self-determination begins as a bourgeois demand for exclusive access and control of its own national markets and resources.

European and American nationalism, for instance, arose from the break-up of feudal empires and the fledgling bourgeoisie’s struggle to establish itself as a class via primitive accumulation. American merchants, traders, shopkeepers, and speculators, denied full access to the readily available land and resources in North America by British mercantilism, led revolution of 1776 on the basis of American national unity. Though the American revolution of 1776 was waged in the interests of the fledgling bourgeoisie, the working masses rallied to the banner of American nationalism and led a successful struggle against British colonialism. Stalin notes that the “strength of the national movement is determined by the degree to which the wide strata of the nation, the proletariat and peasantry, participate in it.” (2)

Though the role of American nationalism in 1776 was historically progressive, the triumph of the American national movement was fueled by and resulted in the further subjugation of the African masses kidnapped and violently lashed into slave labor, along with the indigenous tribes ruthlessly slaughtered in the expansion of the American empire. Dialectically, American nationalism’s progressive features became the basis for the rise of the most oppressive imperialist power in the history of the world.

Without the subjugation of the African masses as a slave labor force, the Western bourgeoisie could never have established itself as an independent ruling class. Indeed, the same American nationalism that united the colonists against British mercantilism would unite the country in waging genocidal wars for land against indigenous people and Mexicans. After the series of successful European bourgeois revolutions, all ideologically fueled through nationalism, colonialism in Africa, Asia, South America, and the Pacific Islands became central to acquiring the cheap labor and resources necessary to generating extreme national wealth.

Because of the cheap labor and resources acquired through ruthless expansion, American capitalism transformed into imperialism, in which developed countries use force and comparative advantages in trade to violently extract resources and exploit the labor force of other colonies. Central to maintaining the colonial apparatus was the denial of equal rights and the cultivation of racist myths about colonized people, which materially manifested itself in slave labor, apartheid, and denial of access to the liberal democratic institutions established by the colonial bourgeoisie in imperialist countries.

Inevitably, the placement of capital in colonial countries allowed some small fraction of the colonized population to gain access to limited amounts of their own capital, albeit usually dependent on the colonial power. In other words, this small class of propertied yet colonized people constituted a bourgeoisie. Of this bourgeoisie, Stalin writes:

The bourgeoisie of the oppressed nation, repressed on every hand, is naturally stirred into movement. It appeals to its “native folk” and begins to shout about the “fatherland,” claiming that its own cause is the cause of the nation as a whole. It recruits itself an army from among its “countrymen” in the interests of… the “fatherland.” Nor do the “folk” always remain unresponsive to its appeals, they rally around its banner: the repression from above affects them too and provokes their discontent. (2)

The bourgeoisie of oppressed nations has the same basic features as the American and European bourgeoisie, in that both classes sought greater access to their own markets, resources, and labor. However, the conditions around the oppressed national bourgeoisie are qualitatively different than those around the Western bourgeoisie; they cannot seize control of their own national resources because of the fetters of colonialism.

Unquestionably the type of colonial oppression faced by the oppressed national bourgeoisie was different than that felt by the colonized proletariat and peasantry, who faced more brutal repression from the state and worse terms of labor. However, these colonized classes all had something to gain by overthrowing colonial and imperialist rule and achieving self-determination for their nation.

Nationalism becomes vital to the colonized bourgeoisie because it unites themselves and the colonized laboring masses in the struggle for national liberation. At the point where the laboring masses embrace nationalism, “the national movement begins.” (2)

National liberation struggles are not exclusively led by the nationalist bourgeoisie, and historically the bourgeoisie in colonial or semi-colonial nations is often too weak or too connected to the colonizing nation to exert itself independently as a class. Numerous examples of successful revolutionary proletarian national liberation movements exist, including the People’s Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA). These successful communist movements, like the MPLA, also made use of nationalism to unite the country around the central task of expelling the colonizers. In essence, although nationalism is originally a bourgeois ideology, other revolutionary classes can appropriate it during the national liberation struggle phase.

Saddam Hussein, with an AK-47

Bourgeois nationalist states in the Third World

Because the nationalist bourgeoisie finds itself opposed to imperialism in the Third World, they can function as a tactical ally for the proletariat and peasantry in these same oppressed nations. Marxist-Leninists should never accept this alliance as permanent, however, and must carefully evaluate the place of the national bourgeoisie in relation to imperialism and the vast laboring masses.

Iraq provides one of the most potent examples of the fickle and unreliable nature of the nationalist bourgeoisie. The Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party, for instance, was primarily bourgeois in its orientation and leadership, but it also attracted a mass following in the wake of the Iraq’s independence from British colonialism in 1958. (3)

Ba’ath was not committed to socialist revolution in Iraq, but they did preside over an aggressive nationalization program in 1972, which seized oil refineries from British and American companies and allowed them to diversify Iraq’s economy. Though these nationalizations were motivated by the access considerations of the national bourgeoisie, they also allowed the Ba’ath state to redirect revenues into public works projects that lifted nearly half the country out of poverty. In a 2006 profile piece on Saddam, PBS News writes of Ba’ath’s accomplishments:

As vice chairman, he oversaw the nationalization of the oil industry and advocated a national infrastructure campaign that built roads, schools and hospitals. The once illiterate Saddam, ordered a mandatory literacy program. Those who did not participate risked three years in jail, but hundreds of thousands learned to read. Iraq, at this time, created one of the best public-health systems in the Middle East — a feat that earned Saddam an award from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (4)

True to form, Saddam and Ba’ath rose to power in direct response to British colonialism. Acting in the interests of the Iraqi national bourgeoisie, they ‘took back’ the resources monopolized by the West’s colonial subjugation and used the revenues to rapidly construct a modern Iraq, which required an educated populace, secular government, a functional road system, and social infrastructure like hospitals. One can question the sincerity of Ba’ath’s actions towards the masses, but one cannot dispute the profoundly positive effect these nationalist policies had on the lives of ordinary Iraqis.

However, the social accomplishments of bourgeois nationalist regimes should never obscure their reactionary character. With both Ba’ath and the Communist Party of Iraq (ICP) vying for supremacy after the 1958 revolution, hostile confrontations between the parties continued until 1963, when Ba’ath launched a coup d’etat against Prime Minister Abdul Karim Qasim. (5) During the coup, communists organized massive militant resistance to Ba’ath, and over the course of the three days in Baghdad, “5,000 Iraqi citizens were apparently killed, including 80 Ba’th Party activists and 340 Iraqi communist activists.” (6)

Following the consolidation of Ba’ath rule in Iraq, the ICP experienced two separate waves of repression: one in 1963 following the coup and the subsequent unrest, and the other in 1977, led by Saddam. (5) Historian Bob Feldman writes in a February 2006 piece on Iraq that “By March 1963, an estimated 10,000 Communist Party of Iraq members had been arrested by the Ba’th regime and many imprisoned Iraqi leftist activists were not treated gently.” (6) Quoting Said Aburish’s book, “A Brutal Friendship: The West and the Arab Elite”, Feldman continues:

The number of people eliminated remains confused and estimates range from 700 to 30,000. Putting various statements by Iraqi exiles together, in all likelihood the figure was nearer five thousand…. There were many ordinary people who were eliminated because they continued to resist after the coup became an accomplished fact, but there were also senior army officers, lawyers, professors, teachers, doctors and others. (6)

The CPI was correct to resist the 1963 Ba’ath coup and oppose the consolidation of a bourgeois nationalist regime. Iraq’s independence in 1958 had shifted their primary adversary from British colonialism to the Iraqi bourgeoisie, seeing as no colonial entity to struggle against still existed. Saddam’s case reminds Marxist-Leninists that it’s strategic to enter into a popular front with bourgeois nationalists against imperialism, but after the national liberation struggle is complete, they constitute a vicious and dangerous foe.

Palestinian women wave PFLP flags

Nationalist governments support revolutionary people’s struggles in the Third World.

Failure to conform to imperialist foreign policy is the most common wedge issue between bourgeois nationalists and the West. Often driven by pan-national ideological unity, bourgeois nationalist countries objectively support revolutionary people’s struggles and national liberation movements abroad, placing them at odds with imperialism.

Finding common ground with the Shi’a-led Iraqi resistance to US occupation, Iran has provided weapons to Iraqi insurgents, as well as training for assembling their own weapons. (7) While many allegations about Iranian aid to the Iraqi resistance are exaggerated by Western capitalist media to ratchet up tensions, journalist Michael Perry describes Iran’s rationale in a February 2007 article:

But let’s go even further and say, for the sake of argument, that the Iraqi insurgents are receiving officially authorized aid from the Iranian state. It is true that having a neighboring nation in chaos does not generally benefit any country, but the Iranians have been under the gun from the U.S. for a very long time –decades in fact. The recent threats and provocations from the Bush administration make it clear that Iran is an imminent target. I’m quite sure the Iranians realize that the quagmire in Iraq is the primary impediment to an American invasion of Iran. Troubles for U.S. forces in Iraq may buy the Iranians more time. Could the Iranians be so blind to their own self-interests? (8)

At odds with Saddam’s secular Sunni government for decades, the Iranian bourgeoisie would relish the opportunity to have an oil-rich Shi’a-dominated Iraq to its west. More pressing, however, is the collective national fear of having another US-client state in the region. There’s a reason that Tehran, and not Qatar, the UAE, or Saudi Arabia, is actively subverting US occupation by materially supporting the Iraqi resistance. That reason, of course, is because the Iran’s ruling nationalist bourgeoisie has a material class interest in anti-imperialism.

The best evidence for the progressive quality of the Iranian nationalist bourgeoisie, embodied in President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is the attempted color revolution in 2009 by the US-backed Mir-Hossein Mousavi. This so-called ‘Green revolution’ was financially supported by both the West and the wealthy neo-liberal bourgeoisie, represented by multi-millionaire former President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. (9) In the 2005 Presidential elections, Ahmadinejad defeated Rafsanjani largely on the basis of the latter’s gaudy neo-liberal orientation. A 2005 article in GreenLeft by Doug Lorimer highlights the divergent class interests represented by Ahmadinejad and Rafsanjani. While both accept the fundamental tenents of the Iranian capitalist state:

In the same TV interview [Ahmadinejad] claimed the country’s vast oil wealth was controlled by one powerful family — a reference to Rafsanjani, who is alleged to have enriched himself through his son’s management of the country’s nationalised oil industry. The Rafsanjanis also have investments worth US1 billion in pistachio farming, real estate, automobile manufacture and a private airline.

“The whole Iranian economy is set up to benefit the privileged few”, Ray Takeyh, a professor and director of studies at the US National Defense University’s Near East and South Asia Center in Washington, told the Bloomberg news agency last December. “Rafsanjani is the most adept, the most notorious and the most privileged.” (10)

Rafsanjani, and his running dog Mousavi, hoped to rise to power via a US-supported color revolution and open Iran to Western markets; in other words, they represent the comprador Iranian bourgeoisie. Despite the best efforts of the imperialist powers to oust Ahmadinejad–who by every objective measure legitimately won the 2009 election–the Iranian people resisted these attacks on their national sovereignty. (11) Even as he nears the end of his two terms as President, Ahmadinejad remains popular with the Iranian masses because of his consistent anti-imperialism on the world stage, along with the social programs he has championed at home despite Western sanctions.

Pivoting to another nationalist state, Syria has consistently functioned as the most progressive of the multitude of Middle Eastern countries by substantially supporting the major national liberation movements in the region. Trinity University professor of history David Lesch writes in his fantastic book, The New Lion of Damascus: Bashar al-Asad and Modern Syria that:

Syria does not deny claims of support for Hizbollah, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad, viewing that such operations constitute legitimate resistance and not terrorism; indeed, Damascus often views Israeli activities vis-a-vis the Palestinians and its actions in Lebanon as terrorism. (12)

Since the Syrian Ba’ath party took power in 1963, the state has always supported the Palestinian and Lebanese liberation struggles and sought to keep Israeli imperialism in-check. (13) Sharing the common trait of secularism, Syria allows the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), the largest Marxist-Leninist revolutionary movement in Palestine, to operate comfortably out of Damascus and materially supports their struggle with supplies and resources. (14) Because of the Syrian bourgeoisie’s desire for regional secular pan-Arab unity–rooted in the Alawi faith of President Bashar al-Assad and others–and the Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights, Assad’s government is objectively anti-imperialist.

Similarly, Saddam’s Ba’ath state in Iraq financially supported and championed the cause of Palestinian national liberation, which was played up by the West in the months leading up to the 2003 invasion. On March 13, 2003–just six days before the invasion–the BBC reported, “Saddam Hussein has paid out thousands of dollars to families of Palestinians killed in fighting with Israel. Relatives of at least one suicide attacker as well as other militants and civilians gathered in a hall in Gaza City to receive cheques.” (15) Later, the same article estimates that the Iraqi government had paid out nearly $35 million to Palestinian families since 2000.

In hindsight, the timing and purpose of this BBC article is obvious, but that Saddam’s support for ‘terrorist groups’ was one of the reasons for the 2003 invasion demonstrates the extreme degree to which his support for the Palestinians offended and scared the West. Startlingly few people remember that Israel invaded Syrian airspace and bombed a peaceful nuclear power plant in September 2007 for many of the same reasons. When a bourgeois state in the Third World becomes nationalist in its orientation, as opposed to comprador bourgeois states, it demands a response from the West.

Emperor Haile Selassie I of Ethiopia

Never confuse your primary and secondary contradictions!

Although a multitude of contradictions exist in class societies, at any given time, one of these contradictions is principal in comparison to the others. If a person goes for a walk, decides s/he wants a cigarette, and then gets bitten by a rattlesnake, the order of the day is to call a doctor and receive medical attention immediately for the venom. As much as that person might have wanted–or even needed–a cigarette, only a great fool would tell this person that s/he should prioritize smoking over seeking medical attention.

Primary and secondary contradictions seem like common sense, but a multitude of so-called ‘leftists’ and revolutionaries confuse them when analyzing imperialism. Ultimately, the approach that Marxist-Leninists ought to take to bourgeois nationalist governments is tied up in correctly identifying and acting on primary and secondary contradictions.

Though largely ignored in Marxist-Leninist writings, the experience of the Ethiopian revolution offers valuable insight as to how communists ought to struggle against bourgeois nationalist governments. Having played an instrumental role in repelling the Italian fascist occupation of Ethiopia, Emperor Haile Selassie I began as an archetype bourgeois nationalist. He encouraged pan-African unity, promoted decolonization, and began an aggressive process of modernizing Ethiopia.

That said, Selassie’s government became firmly aligned with the West after World War II and opened the country up to an influx of foreign capital. Presiding over and encouraging severely unequal land distribution, Selassie’s government was also responsible for a series of famines and foot shortages, the worst of which claimed an estimated 40,000 to 80,000 victims. (16) Ahmed Khan of the Communist Workers and Peasants Party in Pakistan writes this of Selassie’s government:

During the monarchical period, life expectancy was a mere 38 years and 90% of the people were illiterate. Only a tiny handful of feudal landowners and royal sycophants controlled the entire wealth of the country.

Severe drought and famine engulfed Ethiopia which led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of peasants, and led to widespread hunger and food crises in the urban areas. (16)

Even bourgeois sources regard these famines as the product of Selassie’s destructive policies. A 1997 report by Human Rights Watch called “Rebellion and Famine in the North under Haile Selassie” indicted the nationalist government for its culpability in this famine, saying:

The Wollo famine was popularly blamed on drought, a backward and impoverishedsocial system, and the cover-up attempted by the imperial government. These factors were all-important — though it must be remembered that specific actions by the government, especiallyafter the Ras Gugsa and Weyane revolts, were instrumental in creating the absence of development. (17)

By 1974, Selassie’s bourgeois government lost all legitimacy in the eyes of the masses. Because of the widespread crises brought on by Selassie’s selective industrial development and close trade relations with the West, Ethiopian workers and peasants began to mobilize against the government. Khan writes, “The inability of the monarchy to deal with the crisis and the propensity of the feudalists to bleed the peasantry dry led to increasing hatred for the monarchy on part of the oppressed peasants, workers and a section of the emergent urban middle class.” (16)

Although no Marxist-Leninist vanguard party existed in Ethiopia at this time, a communist council of military officers known as the Derg organized alongside labor leaders in the urban centers and peasant communities in the countryside to produce the Ethiopian revolution of 1974. (18)

The revolutionary experience of the Ethiopian people in overthrowing Selassie’s government and establishing the People’s Democratic Republic of Ethiopia–firmly committed to socialist construction–has tremendous lessons for Marxist-Leninists about their relation to bourgeois nationalists. Objectively, Selassie’s government was essential to the anti-imperialist and anti-fascist struggle waged against fascist Italy in 1935. The Communist Party of the United States of America (CPUSA) went so far as to launch a “Hands off Ethiopia” campaign in the same year, which included substantial demonstrations supporting Ethiopia’s right to self-determination (19).

However, classes do not exist in a vacuum. While one class may play a historically progressive role at one time, a change in the material conditions–like increased trade relations with the West following World War II–may render that same class reactionary. For as important as nationalism was to Ethiopia repelling fascist Italy in 1941, the same nationalist government’s reactionary policies reached a boiling point in 1974, resulting in a popular socialist revolution.

The lesson from Ethiopia is clear: Marxist-Leninists in nationalist states must organize with a keen awareness of primary and secondary contradictions. For a moment, let’s assume that an organization like the Derg existed in Ethiopia circa-1935. Said organization would commit a grave error in throwing in with the fascists in hopes of toppling an admittedly reactionary monarchy. First, the organization would undeniably alienate the Ethiopian masses, who despite their poverty and poor military training, flocked to defend their homeland, the only African state never colonized by the West, from fascist occupation. (20) Second, although Selassie’s bourgeois government was at-odds with the interests of Ethiopian workers and peasants, that contradiction receded into the background the moment that fascist Italy began poison gassing entire villages of Ethiopians.

When Mussolini’s forces invaded Ethiopia in 1935, there was only one organized military force capable of mounting a resistance: Selassie’s nationalist government. Unsuccessful at first, Ethiopian patriots of all classes, albeit predominantly workers and peasants, struggled onward to victory and liberation in 1941. That this liberation struggle took place across class lines on a nationalist basis is no small detail. It’s paramount that Marxist-Leninists, in light of Iraq, Libya, and increasing aggression towards Syria, comfortably identify anti-imperialism as the primary contradiction facing the international proletarian revolution today.

Proletarian internationalism is superior in every way to bourgeois nationalism, but so long as neo-colonialism and imperialism exist, communists must unite all who can be united in the anti-imperialist struggle. Simultaneously, though, communists must remember the other side of the dialectic: When bourgeois nationalists become complicit partners in Western imperialism and alienate themselves from the masses, communists must never hesitate to overthrow that state with extreme prejudice and on its ruins erect revolutionary socialism.

The irrelevance and obscurity of the Iraqi Communist Party (ICP) following the toppling of Saddam’s Ba’ath regime demonstrates the devastating effects of incorrectly identifying primary and secondary contradictions.

Saddam was by no means a consistent anti-imperialist throughout his reign. Though Ba’athist Iraq established diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union and China, it still retained casual relations with the West; relations that were strengthened following Saddam’s condemnation of Soviet intervention in the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, as well as the Iranian Revolution in 1979. (21) Between the overthrow of the US-backed Shah, the establishment of a militant Islamic republic, and the Iranian hostage crisis, Iraq began to work closely with the West to curb Tehran’s influence in the Middle East. Though the Reagan Administration would notoriously fund the Iranians also, the US comfortably placed their initial bets behind Saddam in the devastating Iran-Iraq war of 1983-1988.

Even though the imperialists used Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war to sow chaos in the Middle East, the Ba’ath state remained largely at odds with Western interests because of its nationalist orientation. Refusing to privatize its oil industry and allow Western capital to fully penetrate its national markets, the West increasingly saw Saddam as a danger to imperialist interests in the Middle East. Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait over territorial disputes, the subsequent Gulf War, and Saddam’s unabashed support for the Palestinian liberation struggle cemented Iraq’s status as a pariah state in the eyes of the West by the early 1990s.

In an effort to eliminate an unfriendly pro-Palestinian government perched atop massive oil reserves, the US and UK fabricated the now-infamous falsehood that Saddam’s government had weapons of mass destruction. While communists around the world uniformly condemned the imperialist invasion of Iraq, “the Iraqi Communist Party (ICP) welcomed Saddam Hussein’s removal and is happy that the ousted president is to be put on trial.” (22) Exhausted and furious from decades of repression by Ba’ath, the ICP’s position is understandable on a purely visceral and emotional level. However, Marxist-Leninists must remain level-headed during periods of crisis and correctly identify primary and secondary contradictions; a task at which the ICP uniformally failed.

In the coming years, the ICP would come to participate in the puppet state erected by the West–most recently in the liberalizing ‘Political Reconciliation’ movement–and integrate themselves into this comprador government imposed from without. (23) Despite comprising the strongest opposition to the Ba’ath government during the 1960s, the ICP has descended into relative obscurity, having lost any credibility with the masses for their blunder. Instead, Muqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army and other religious sects comprised the mass base of resistance after Saddam was captured, though their bourgeois and petty-bourgeois class character has led them to also participate in Maliki’s bogus government.

One would think that the international ‘left’ would have learned about correctly handling primary and secondary contradictions after witnessing the failure of the ICP to lead a mass revolutionary resistance to imperialist occupation. Instead, the same ‘leftists’ who witnessed the invasion of Iraq cheerled a racist, imperialist-backed ‘rebel movement’ in Libya, and many made the full leap into supporting NATO’s invasion to oust Qaddafi.

When a nation achieves self-determination, the secondary contradiction between the proletariat and the national bourgeoisie will ascend to the forefront as the new primary contradiction. Before that time, however, the primary contradiction facing the masses in oppressed nations is between imperialism and national liberation. In bourgeois nationalist states, this contradiction can and must draw in all who can be united to strike a blow against imperialism.

Countries want independence.

Nations want liberation.

People want revolution.

—-

(1) Gerald A. Perreira, “Libya Getting it Right: A Revolutionary Pan-African Perspective,” March 4, 2011, Dissent Voice, http://bit.ly/mQT4iz

(2) Josef Stalin, Marxism & the National Question, March-May 1913, http://bit.ly/cwOCSQ

(3) Said K. Aburish, “How Saddam Hussein Came to Power,” 2002, From Saddam Hussein: The Politics of Revenge, Published in The Saddam Hussein Reader, pg. 41-42

(4) Jessica Moore, “Saddam Hussein’s Rise to Power,” 2003, PBS News, http://to.pbs.org/65tro

(5) Turi Munthe (Editor), The Saddam Hussein Reader, 2002, pg. xv-xviii

(6) Bob Feldman, “A People’s History of Iraq: 1950 to November 1963,” February 2, 2006, Toward Freedom, http://bit.ly/qwCar2

(7) CNN, “Iraqi insurgents being trained in Iran, US says,” April 11, 2007, http://bit.ly/nHra0S

(8) Michael Perry, “So what if Iran is Interfering in Iraq?,” February 21, 2007, AntiWar.com, http://bit.ly/ogwqxd

(9) Paul Craig Roberts, “Are the Iranian Protests Another US Orchestrated ‘Color Revolution’?,” June 20-21, 2009, CounterPunch, http://bit.ly/pmXj7w

(10) Doug Lorimer, “IRAN: A vote against neoliberalism,” July 6, 2005, Green Left, http://bit.ly/nYcOll

(11) Terror Free America, New America Foundation, “Ahmadinejad Front Runner in Upcoming Elections,” June 12, 2009, http://bit.ly/k8x0w

(12) David W. Lesch, The New Lion of Damascus: Bashar al-Asad and Modern Syria, 2005, pg. 102

(13) Reuters, “Syrian President Vows to Keep Supporting Hezbollah, Hamas,” August 2, 2007, http://bit.ly/qex219

(14) Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, “PFLP condemns attack on Syria,” November 3, 2008, Fight Back! News, http://bit.ly/qWDlmo

(15) BBC News, “Palestinians get Saddam funds,” March 13, 2008, http://bbc.in/9BWsXr

(16) Ahmed Khan, “Defend Comrade Mengistu! On the struggle of our Ethiopian brothers,” November 19, 2008, Red Diary, http://bit.ly/jbYhks

(17) Human Rights Watch, “3. Rebellion and Famine in the North Under Haile Selassie,” 1997, http://bit.ly/pzy53w

(18) Christopher Clapham, Transformation and Continuity in Revolutionary Ethiopia, 1988, Cambridge University Press.

(19) Robin D.G. Kelley, Hammer and Hoe: Alabama Communists During the Great Depression, 1990, pg. 123.

(20) A.J. Barker, The Rape of Ethiopia, 1936, 1971.

(21) Said K. Aburish, “How Saddam Hussein Came to Power,” 2002, From Saddam Hussein: The Politics of Revenge, Published in The Saddam Hussein Reader, pg. 44

(22) Shaheen Chughtai, “Iraqi communists celebrate change,” June 1, 2004, http://aje.me/qp5rVW

(23) Talal Alrubaie, “The Iraqi Communist Party and Hegel’s Owl of Minerva,” February 2, 2010, http://bit.ly/rqF6fr

Source

Fighting the Bigger Oppressor First

A Syrian detainee, who was arrested over participation in the protests against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime, is seen in a prison vehicle at Damascus police leadership building to sign his release papers 11 July 2012. (Photo: Reuters – Khaled al- Hariri)

By: Amal Saad-Ghorayeb

In March 2011, a commentator for al-Jazeera wrote: “Events in Egypt and Tunisia have revealed that Arab unity against internal repression is stronger than that against foreign threat.” While this may have been an over-generalization at the time, events in Syria have borne out this assumption. This is due to the deep polarization between Arabs who place primacy on opposition to the Syria regime’s authoritarianism and Arabs who view such opposition as secondary to Assad’s struggle against imperialism and Zionism.

In this essay, I will outline the main moral and intellectual considerations informing the resistance or anti-imperialist camp’s (known as mumanaists in Arabic) prioritization of confronting imperialism over other forms of domination.

The Violence in Syria is Misrepresented

Although supporters of the Syrian opposition often accuse this camp of being ready to countenance any type of violence, no matter how heinous, in the interests of the resistance priority, this accusation ignores the fact that the seeming consensus on the nature and scope of the violence in Syria is a purely manufactured one. Mumanaists do not view the current violence engulfing Syria as a dictatorial regime’s one-sided brutal suppression of peaceful protesters, as is commonly misrepresented in mainstream media, but rather, as a civil war by proxy that the Syrian army was dragged into as it sought to stamp out a US-NATO-GCC-backed armed insurrection.

While supporters of the Syrian uprising contend that this perception of the conflict is designed to reduce the cognitive dissonance produced by the regime’s brutality, few mumanaists harbor the illusion that the regime is not repressive. What they do believe, however, is that the extent of this repression has been grossly distorted by mainstream media. To bolster their argument, they point to a growing number of mainstream media reports which have admitted to the existence a singular master-narrative that is widely used to frame the conflict.

As acknowledged by the BBC in its recent self-study on its coverage of the “Arab Spring”, “journalism is not an exercise in simply relaying raw and untreated facts to the audience…This cannot be done without some sort of framework – if you will, a “narrative” – and therefore the construction of such a narrative by journalists should not be treated as if it were a sin in itself.”

Writing on Syria in the Sunday Times, Peter McKay contends that “It’s not simply uprisings by ground-down peasants against tyrants who repress them. It’s about a transfer of power to rival clans and/or religious groups. About a continuation of the old US-Russia Cold War stand-off.” In a similar vein, the BBC’s world news editor, Jon Williams, has recently admitted in a blog post on Syria that “stories are never black and white – often shades of grey.”

But such admissions are the exception rather than the norm in a psych-ops campaign that is stage-managed by US-NATO-GCC information warlords to bring about a military victory for proxy forces. At the helm of this campaign are politically embedded journalists, political activists and human rights representatives who work in concert to ensure that all coverage of the Syrian crisis remains confined within a carefully guarded body of self-referential “evidence.”

The effectiveness of this information warfare in enlisting public opinion in support of military intervention is substantiated by the aforementioned BBC report: “No doubt these reports…helped stimulate empathy for the [Libyan] rebel cause among the British public, and thereby to facilitate, if not actually bring about the NATO intervention – as similar reports had done in northern Iraq as long ago as 1991.”

Imperialism Cannot Be Equated with Authoritarianism

The second premise guiding the resistance camp’s position on Syria is that imperialism cannot be equated either morally or politically with authoritarianism, let alone demoted to a secondary rank. By contrast, the liberal democratic impulse driving the “Arab Spring” has led some to declare the obsolescence of anti-imperialism as a unifying force in the region. Al-Jazeera commentator Lamis Andoni epitomizes this view with her assertion that “The old ‘wisdom’ of past revolutionaries that liberation from foreign domination precedes the struggle for democracy has fallen.” In the new Arab Spring vernacular, revolutionary struggle is no longer synonymous with resisting US-NATO interventions and Israeli aggression, but has come to mean confronting internal repression even when that confrontation benefits the Empire and its colonial outpost, Israel.

Furthermore, this new liberal political discourse and the preeminent status accorded to securing internal freedoms has served to effectively remove Palestine from the forefront of Arab concerns. In effect, Palestine has been relegated to just another Arab nation which is responsible for freeing itself from its own domestic, i.e. intra-Palestinian, authoritarian rulers, over and above its Israeli oppressors. The mumanaists’ response to this logic is multi-pronged.

As a matter of principle, neither Palestine nor questions of national self-determination in general are viewed as fashions; justice doesn’t go out of style for truly conscientized and committed intellectuals and activists for whom Palestine remains the cornerstone of Arab political identity. What is more, the resistance camp sees this new trend of reducing Palestine to a national cause that belongs exclusively to the Palestinians as a very dangerous development that requires Arabs to unlearn generations of political socialization in order to expunge Palestine from their political consciousness.

Some supporters of the Syrian opposition have argued that the insistence on maintaining the primacy of the Palestinian cause over the concern with authoritarianism, and the concomitant precedence given to Israeli violence over the Assad regime’s repression, is tantamount to claiming that Syrian blood is cheaper than Palestinian blood. But this charge misunderstands the extent of Israel’s iniquity by locating it solely in Zionist aggression, human rights violations or in the circumstances of the occupation. The resistance camp conceives of Israel as the greatest injustice because of its very existence and the unprecedented nature of its oppression, which renders it not merely a human rights cause, but humanity’s cause.

As detailed by the Never Before Campaign for Palestine: “What happened in Palestine since 1947 has never happened before, in terms of the combination of the elements: brutality and racism of the occupier, the injustice of granting one peoples land to others, duration of this injustice, complicity and apathy of the civilized world as well as Palestinian people’s will to resist all that against all odds.”

Even on the level of violence alone, Israel’s violence by far exceeds any domestic repression in so far as it is systematic and genocidal violence that is deeply embedded in its military ethos and strategic culture. Indeed, the celebration of violence is part of its collective consciousness as illustrated by a number of recent examples on social media where many Israelis celebrated the killing of Palestinian children. More importantly for mumanaists, any parallels drawn with Israel are Zionist-enabling in so far as comparing Israel’s violence with that practiced by repressive Arab regimes, legitimizes Israel’s existence as just another authoritarian regime in the region.

Not only are such comparisons with Israel morally and ideologically indefensible, but the very equivalence between imperialism and authoritarianism is an intellectually flawed one that is rooted in a liberal-leftist tradition that conceives of all deployments of power as being equally coercive and oppressive, irrespective of the global hierarchy of power.

In the mumanaists’ conceptual hierarchy of oppression, imperialism and authoritarianism are situated in two entirely different levels of domination. This rank-ordering is not based on an ideological abstraction that is divorced from political reality or on the rhetorical value of anti-imperialist sentiment, but on immediate, practical concerns. Imperialism is not evil because it is practiced by the West, but because it harms people’s lives and interests. Empire kills; it kills vast amounts of people, whether it occupies countries directly or intervenes militarily, economically or politically, it is responsible for innumerable deaths, destruction and impoverishment of all those in its wake.

Thus, viewed from a purely utilitarian perspective, or according to a basic cost-benefit calculus, there is no comparison between the type of violence autocratic regimes exercise when they repress dissent and the death and devastation wreaked by Empire. This moral logic would still hold even if we were to set aside the Assad regime’s anti-imperialist and resistance credentials and assume it was neutral on Palestine; when faced with a choice between the Assad regime’s repression on the one hand and the threat of NATO invasion, coupled with the externally-instigated sectarian civil war and terrorism on the other, anti-imperialists and the majority of Syrians alike will choose the former, especially when they don’t have the luxury of rejecting both.

Resisting Regimes Safeguard Collective Rights and Freedom

If anti-imperialists place far greater political and moral value on resisting the Empire than on unseating autocratic regimes, then surely that is even more so the case when those regimes themselves resist imperialism. As in the case of Syria, anti-imperialist leaders are identified with a set of rights and a concept of freedom that is considered far more conducive to democracy, justice and dignity than the western liberal discourse of “human rights” which is informed by the “negative freedom” from authority.

While not rejecting liberal freedoms outright, anti-imperialists view liberal freedoms that stress the individual’s right to be free from government interference and coercion as being secondary to positive and liberationist conceptions of freedom which affirm human agency and self-determination. As critiqued by political theorist, Anthony Bogues, “when freedom morphs only into rights, then the very question of freedom itself is delinked from other forms of domination other than political authority.” Indeed, it could be argued that the universalization of the Euro-American-centric human rights doctrine that has come to dominate the Arab Spring freedom discourses, serves to obscure imperialism and foreign domination.

The great anti-colonialist thinker, Franz Fanon, anticipated this intellectual colonization by liberal rights discourses when he wrote: “History teaches us clearly that the battle against colonialism does not run straight away along the lines of nationalism. For a very long time the native devotes his energies to ending certain definite abuses: forced labour, corporal punishment, inequality of salaries, limitation of political rights, etc. This fight for democracy against the oppression of mankind will slowly leave the confusion of neo-liberal universalism to emerge, sometimes laboriously, as a claim to nationhood. It so happens that the unpreparedness of the educated classes, the lack of practical links between them and the mass of the people, their laziness, and, let it be said, their cowardice at the decisive moment of the struggle will give rise to tragic mishaps.”

Clearly cognizant of their deviation from the anti-imperialist struggle, Arab Spring intellectuals attempt to reconcile this disconnect between liberal freedoms and liberationist freedom by arguing that liberation from western hegemony and Israeli occupation can only be achieved once freedom from internal tyranny is won. Andoni contends that “combating internal injustice – whether practiced by Fatah or Hamas – is a prerequisite for the struggle to end Israeli occupation and not something to be endured for the sake of that struggle.”

But this logic operates in a geo-political intellectual void which elides any kind of world systems analysis’ recognition of the hegemony exercised by core nations over peripheral ones. In a world order characterized by an uneven division of labour, the notion of achieving any kind of comprehensive and far-reaching internal change without a commensurate change in the global balance of power, is futile.

If there cannot be genuine revolutionary change from within, given prevailing power disparities on the international level, then the expectation that domestic change will inevitably balance out global power asymmetries is nothing short of liberal self-delusion. It is precisely this reasoning which undergirds mumanaists’ claim that liberation from foreign domination is a prerequisite to genuine democratic change.

Furthermore, resistance intellectuals and activists maintain that there can be no progress or democracy in the Arab world so long as a colonial implant like Israel continues to exist in our midst, perpetually threatening our security. Viewed from this lens, liberating Palestine is the prerequisite for the democratization of the region.

As such, mumanaists prioritize a collectivist notion of rights that emphasizes people’s rights as opposed to human rights. In this collectivist understanding of the term, freedom is conceived as liberation from foreign domination and oppression and the pursuit of self-determination. In effect, to be free is not to be left alone, unencumbered by external constraints and hindrances, but to struggle for justice. Seyyid Hassan Nasrallah provides the clearest definition of what this freedom entails: “[it is] not just the blood of a man, the fate of a woman, the crushed bones of a child, or a piece of bread stolen from the mouth of a poor or hungry person. It is the issue of a people, a nation, a fate, holy places, history, and the future.”

In other words, the ultimate purpose of freedom for Arab mumanaists is not merely the protection of various civil and political rights of the individual, but the trans-historical collective right of the umma in its past, present and future manifestations. In this dispensation, freedom and democracy are not reduced to procedural aspects like elections and political reforms as they are in western liberal thought, but more substantially, the ability of peoples enjoying popular sovereignty to shape their own political identity, control their national resources and participate in determining their national destiny.

Amal Saad-Ghorayeb is a Lebanese academic and political analyst. She is author of the book, “Hizbullah: Politics and Religion”, and blogger at ASG’s Counter-Hegemony Unit.

Source

Peking Review on Environment and Development

Environment and Development
by Chu Ko-ping
Peking Review
May 14, 1976, p. 19

The question of environment and development is of common concern to various countries in the world. The numerous developing countries are speeding up the development of their national economies and, in the course of such development, are protecting and improving the environment so that economic development and environmental protection can be co-ordinated with each other. This is a question of special concern to the developing countries and their people.

The question of environmental pollution and its damages has cropped up in many areas of the world. Pollution has become a scourge of society in some countries with highly developed economies. What is the root cause of environmental pollution and damage? The main social cause of environmental pollution and its damages lies in the fact that, as a result of the development of capitalism into imperialism, the monopoly capitalist groups, in their quest for big profits, are unscrupulously plundering the natural resources and disposing of harmful substances at will, thereby polluting and poisoning the environment. The developing countries also face certain questions concerning the environmental pollution and damage. But their environmental question is different in nature from that in the developed countries. Over a long period in the past, the colonialists and imperialists dominated the Asian, African and Latin American regions by various means, controlling their economic lifelines, carrying out savage plunder and ruthless exploitation, and engaging in indiscriminate development and utilization of natural resources, thereby wreaking serious havoc on their national economies and natural environment. This is the root cause of the poverty and backwardness of the developing countries and of the damage to their environment. In the face of superpower hegemonism, this state of affairs has become even more serious in these regions.

Now some people still regard economic development as the root cause of environmental pollution, while others consider poverty its root cause. All these views represent an attempt to evade the essence of the matter and seek the causes of the problem from superficial phenomenon, thus making it impossible to reach a correct conclusion in conformity with objective reality, and leading to pessimism about the future of the human environment.

Economic development and environmental protection are interrelated and promote each other. The former gives rise to the environmental problem and the latter constitutes an important condition for developing the economy; economic development increases the capability to protect the environment, and environmental improvement in turn promotes economic development. This is the interdependent relationship between the two.

At present, the developing countries have a pressing need to develop their national economies, gradually build up a modern industry and modern agriculture and achieve economic independence so as to consolidate their political independence. This is the urgent task of the developing countries in freeing themselves from imperialist, colonialist, neo-colonialist and big-power hegemonist control and plunder; it is also a basic guarantee for the protection and improvement of the environment. In the absence of political independence and economic development, how can the environment be effectively protected and improved? Economic development will be bring with it the problem of environmental pollution, which, however, can be solved only in the course of development, not by calling a halt to development or slowing down its pace. We hold that in the struggle against nature, man has constantly to sum up experience and go on discovering, inventing, creating and advancing. With social progress and scientific and technological development, the problem of environmental pollution can be prevented and solved in the course of development so long as we proceed from the interests of the people and adopt effective measures to this end.

China is a developing socialist country. We have in the course of advance also come across the problem of economic development causing environmental pollution. The main cause of pollution is the problem left over from the old China. It takes some time to transform the lopsided economy in the old society. So far we are still short of adequate experience and knowledge of environmental protection work, which is a new problem for us. Chairman Mao has taught us that we should proceed in all cases from the interests of the people. Economic development is in the interests of the people and so is environmental protection. The development and protection are in harmony with each other. We are constantly summing up experience and striving to reduce and eliminate pollution while developing the economy so as to create good living and working conditions for the working people.

In developing the economy, we should make an overall planning and arrangement when handling the relations between industry and agriculture, between town and country, between production and livelihood, between economic development and environmental protection, so that they will advance in co-ordination with each other. This is an important measure for preventing industrial pollution.

As to the development and utilization of natural resources, we should also make an all-round planning to ensure multiple benefits, pay attention to immediate and long-term effects, take into consideration the accruing gains and the possible effect on the ecological conditions. Our practice in the building of water conservancy projects over the years has proved that by making an overall planning and striving to ensure multiple benefits in flood-control, power-generation, irrigation, navigation and cultivation of aquatics, we can make the best use of water resources and at the same time reduce and avoid damage to the environment.

Geographical distribution of industries should be put on a rational basis, with greater stress put on small cities and towns. The small cities and towns have characteristics favouring the environmental protection such as the integration of cities with the countryside, of workers with peasants, facilitating production and conveniencing daily life. Meanwhile, the difficulties which often arise in big cities can be averted in small cities and towns: difficulties in housing, communications and transport, supplies of agricultural and sideline products and other public welfare facilities. This is also beneficial to environmental improvement.

To prevent industrial wastes from contaminating the environment, we put anti-pollution measures into practice simultaneously with the designing, construction and commission of the projects in our industrial construction. Such practice has proved effective. In so doing, we can ponder over the ways and means,before the construction work starts, of getting rid of the harmful substances as best we can in the course of production, or adopt purifying measures against any possible damage which might accrue from these harmful substances. This may cost more money when a project is under construction, but the cost will be much smaller than the price which has to be paid for keeping the pollution under control after it has occurred, and the results have proved much better.

Will the environmental protection and improvement affect development and slow down its pace? This depends on what policies are adopted. Our country regards the multiple-purpose use of resources as an important policy for economic development. Thanks to the development of modern industrial technology, the natural resources discovered and used by mankind are increasing daily. Discharge of industrial wastes at will will contaminate the environment. Multiple-purpose utilization of industrial wastes makes it possible to turn many harmful things to good account and make useless things useful. This will help to open up new sources of raw materials for industry, expand social production, increase social wealth and promote the development of production.

Agriculture is the foundation for the development of the national economies of the developing countries. Without the development of agriculture, industrial development cannot go very far. Protection and improvement of the environment is of particular importance to promoting the development of agriculture.

Agriculture production, including food crops, forestry, livestock breeding, side occupations and fishery, depends to a large extent on natural conditions. There is a certain limit to the development of agriculture under certain natural conditions, that is, it will be hampered by natural conditions. However, through its own hard work, mankind can change the existing natural conditions and strive to master the natural law governing the reproduction of living things, and create still greater productive forces. On the question of the natural conditions for agriculture, the naturalist point of view is wrong, and the ideas of pessimism and inertia are both groundless. In the old China, as a result of the long years of oppression and plunder by the imperialists and their lackeys, rural natural environment was seriously damaged, agricultural production was ruined because large tracts of land turned alkaline or became deserts. One-third of the cultivated lands were red soils or alkaline, sand-stony and cold-swampy fields and lands susceptible to drought and waterlogging. Some lands became barren. Since the founding of New China,  our Government has given the first place to agriculture in developing the national economy.

By extensive mobilization of the masses, relying on our own efforts and transforming our country in an indomitable spirit as displayed by the legendary Foolish Old Man who removed the mountains,  it has worked with great will to transform the natural conditions for production. After more than two decades of hard work, we have improved over one half of the alkaline land in north China, reclaimed, utilized and improved over 120 million mu of red soil which is sometimes called “red deserts,” and brought one-fifth of the land subject to erosion under preliminary control. With the planting of shelter belts over large areas and the improvement of water conservancy conditions in the desert regions in northwest and north China, more and more oases have emerged. The improvement of natural conditions for agriculture has enabled China to reap good harvests for 14 years running, with the broad masses of the people enjoying a happy life. Certain people assert that speedy development of agriculture would reduce the fertility of soil and bring about an ecological crisis. The fact that China has improved the  natural conditions for agriculture and reaped good harvests in succession shows that mankind can transform nature and create a more suitable environment. So long as the creative power of the people is brought into full play and necessary measures are taken, the fertility of soil will not be destroyed; instead, poor soil can be turned into fertile soil and produce more food grains.

EMEP: Tunisian Workers Communist Party Changes Its Name

The leader of the Communist Party of Tunisian Workers (PCOT) Hamma Hammami gestures during a press conference on March 19, 2012 in Tunis. Tunisia is in a state of immobility five months after the election of members of the National Constituent Assembly (ANC) and three months after the appointment of a new transitional authority “, said Mr Hammami. AFP PHOTO/ FETHI BELAID (Photo credit should read FETHI BELAID/AFP/Getty Images)

Please note that this is a computer translation from Turkish and is not entirely accurate.

— Espresso Stalinist

Tunisian Workers’ Communist Party (PCOT) resulted in an on-site-standing name change debate. Party, the Workers’ Party of Tunisia as a way to continue after that.

Secretary-General of the party that Hamma Hammami, a tactical move in order to reach a wider audience, he said. Hammami, communism, religion, or that their decision is effective in keeping identical hostility, he said.

Hammami, change the name of the party does not mean that changes in the political line, Tunisian Workers’ Party, a Marxist-Leninist party would continue to fight, he said. There were no changes in the party’s program and constitution.

Hammami, “Tactical had to make a choice, or Islamists communism ‘is anti-religion,’ the propaganda would spend the time or the strength to tell you that’s not true, people use it to unite around the Party program, and thus the workers, the youth, the other sections of the struggle for socialism kazanabilecektik” he said.

Hammami who launched a propaganda campaign in this direction, distributing press party program stated that 500 thousand units.

Workers’ Party of Tunisia opened 60 new party organization in the region, the next step is planning to open dozens more recording Hammami, this process strengthened the party’s youth organization said. (FOREIGN NEWS)

Source

Tunisian Workers Communist Party Changes Name to Tunisian Workers Party

Tunisia’s eminent communist political party, the Tunisian Communist Workers Party (POCT), has officially changed its name to Tunisian Workers Party (POT). POT decided to omit the word “communist” from their title following a series of discussions that have been ongoing since February that concluded with a general referendum within the party.

“Our goal is to avoid the stereotype most Tunisians would think of when hearing the word ‘communist’,” said Mohamed Mzam, a representative of POT. Mzam stated that the name change came as a response to, “numerous admirers of the party who were suspicious about our ideology.”

Mzam explained that programs and agendas of political parties are more important than their ideologies. “Tunisians should focus on what a political party is committed to offer them on political, social, and economic levels,” he said.

Additionally, POT has participated in discussions concerning the formation of a coalition of progressive, leftist, political parties and independent politicians. “We held a meeting on Sunday during which nine parties announced that they’ll join the front. We, the coalition, aim at representing a political alternative to the two major political poles: Ennahdha and ‘pro-Dostouri’s [supporters of ideology the party of Tunisia's first president Habib Bourguiba],” Mzam added.

Hama Hammami, the secretary general of POT, told Mosaique FM radio that the Wafa movement – consisting of former members of the Congress of the Republic (CPR) – might join the coalition as well. “Both POT and the Wafa movement have a lot in common. We share similar political history with opposition and oppression by the previous regime,” Mzam reiterated.

Source

Ecuador: Speech at 48th Anniversary of the PCMLE

We pay tribute to our fallen comrades in the revolutionary struggle.

(Delivered by c. Oswaldo Palacios J. Spokesman Nacionalen the anniversary event held on Friday July 20 at the National Theater of the CCE.)

Friends, Friends and Comrades, elected representatives, leaders of the Left Plurinational Coordinator, comrades social organizations of all provinces, special guests:

We start this Act communicating to our friends, workers and peoples of Ecuador, the joy and pride that pervades the minds and hearts of our members and leaders to reach this new celebration of the 48 year class party workers, whose life and actions are dedicated since the days of August 1964 to push the revolutionary change in our country, which as you can see, is the only way out and solve the social, economic and labor of our peoples.

With this momentous occasion, the Marxist Leninist extend a message of unity, cooperation and sincere decision to move to the various organizations, the Coordinator of the Left Plurinational and each of the parties and organizations that comprise it, reiterating that the years of the PCMLE, we demonstrated a vocation of unity and concrete actions, as we are willing to work now, because sectors committed to transform Ecuador march together for the benefit of advancing the process of emancipation.

Dramatic events occur in the world these days. We have experienced one of the cyclical crises of capitalism that began in 2007 and whose effects are still felt. While some of the spokesmen of the monopolies and the banks claim that the world economy “away from the precipice” for now, the disastrous effects and the consequences suffered in the various continents, regions and countries, have shaken the economic, political and social world.

During the period, have been destroyed immense volumes of productive forces, there is a drop in production and services, thousands of companies have gone bankrupt and banks, the big bump caused the collapse of the budgets of states and a large debt major economies such as the U.S., for example.

But, the main effects have suffered catastrophic working masses, youth, people, because the crisis has brought an increase in unemployment chilling, leaving hundreds of thousands in the street, jobless, unable to pay their housing, their leases and sustain life. Surprising are the indices of poverty in the world.

The present crisis shows more evidence, how capitalism – which some defend and praise – is a system of injustice, oppression and exploitation is a rotting, corroded by a series of scourges such as dehumanization, selfishness, social insecurity, crime, crime, drugs, etc..

However, the most prominent feature in the middle of the crisis, is that the workers and peoples, the poor of the world, they are unwilling to submit the capitalist system to an oppressive situation. Faced with the difficult situation they have to live with the working masses, in almost every corner of the world, even in regions that were said quiet, large social explosions have erupted strikes, struggles, demonstrations, protests, against the iniquitous measures have been taken by governments, corporations and institutions of global power, that harm them substantially.

More than a year in Spain, gripped by the effects of the crisis, suffocated by debt and the imposition of capital movement broke the “outraged” and now to met its first anniversary, over 80 cities have replicated rallies, demonstrations and protests. The university has been featured youth discontent resulted in street actions. In these same days, the miners have gone from around the country to Madrid to oppose the closure of the coal mines, leaving them on the street, unemployed. Public sector workers, including firefighters and police protesting wage cuts, the cancellation of rights and threats of dismissal contained in the “adjustments” to the right-wing government and agencies have imposed capital there.

Europe has been and is the scene of angry protests and mass struggles in Greece, Portugal, Belgium, England, Germany staged by workers, migrants, professionals, young and unemployed, who are opposed to street fighting with adjustments ordered by international agencies such as the IMF, the World Bank, the ECB, etc.. with which the bourgeois and imperialist circles are trying to be the people who pay for the crisis.

In the U.S. itself, where the so-called housing bubble burst mortgages, large clusters of migrants and workers have developed intense fighting and protests to oppose being victims of the effects of the crisis, the bank closures and industrial companies, unemployment, exclusionary laws and discrimination. There has been a massive movement “occupy” that took nerve parks and large cities, as a protest to oppose measures that affect their lives and their work.

Latin America is a continuous and irreducible series of mobilizations and struggles of diverse industries in Peru anti-mining of large monopolies, Chile, in the street fighting has thousands of middle and secondary students against education reform retrograde public. In Mexico the social struggle for land and heartfelt aspirations now joins the protest against electoral fraud, demanding fair elections, in Colombia are rising social movement actions, Puerto Rico continues its courageous action for independence against colonialist policy of Puerto Rico. In Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Central America and occur days combat actions by the needs, aspirations and demands of the various sectors. In Venezuela large popular sectors are in constant action in promoting their proposals for change, mobilizing to radicalize the political process of transformations that are driven from the government of Colonel Hugo Chavez Frias.

In Ecuador, the rightward shift that has taken place Rafael Correa regime aside their initial proposals and betraying democratic, patriotic and nationalistic, they have now become a government to serve new sectors of the bourgeoisie and some other traditional banking, as well as oil and mining monopolies of China and other world powers. In recent years they have signed oil contracts given the fundamentals of our hydrocarbon resources to imperialist companies, harming the national interest.

In the case of mining, has been raised to jump right to the exploitation of large-scale mining and open pit, signing a contract with China Ecsa, leaving aside all the talk about “respect for the rights of the nature “, knowing the environmental disaster that causes this type of mining on the lives of communities, water, flora, fauna, penalizing and persecuting the community leaders who have opposed it, although environmentalists , universities and other sectors have expressed open opposition.

In an initial moment, Correa declared that debt tranches that past governments had contracted, was a matter “illegal, immoral and unjust” and that was chargeable. However, negotiations resumed and Global bond payments, was negotiated with China of $ 10 billion it had given an “advance purchase” of oil, but also charged interest for that sum up the 6% interest that we pay all Ecuadorians.

The Ecuadorian banking sector – in times of global crisis – has increased, at least in the last three years, millions in profits with the full support of the current government’s policies, as outlined own official announcements of institutions.

There was a few weeks ago a real affront to national sovereignty and independence as a legislative majority in the Assembly – obeying layout rules – approved the signing of the Convention on the Law of the Sea, UNCLOS, which the country loses its jurisdiction over the 200-mile territorial sea, to leave at the expense of the interests of countries with powerful fleets to take advantage of the wealth of our ocean ichthyological.

Another aspect of the present government is regressive authoritarianism. In an arbitrary process, abuses and illegalities, Correa has been concentrated in the hands of all executive branches of government, trampling the Constitution of Montecristi approved by a referendum.

In Ecuador there today and cancellation restriction of human rights, labor, information, mobilization. Important social achievements with the struggle of the peoples are being eliminated, or imposing new rules in practice disappear. Testing the song: the right to organize, and claim workers’ strike, the university entrance and free higher education, the right to popular mobilization and participation in major national decisions.

The Correa government has unleashed the criminalization of social struggle: indigenous and peasant leaders, people who oppose mining, social leaders and leftist politicians, professionals and community leaders as those arrested March 3 in Quito, as student leaders Marcelo Rivera and Edwin Lasluisa, the Rector of the University of Cotopaxi have been prosecutions, persecutions and verbal attacks President Correa wicked accusations “terrorism”, “conspiracy” alleged “attacks on national security” are being passed reforms Penal Code and the regime is interested in making people feel fear, as a measure to allay or suffocate the popular struggle.

A propaganda machine created from the use of the media that were seized from debtors bankers, directs every moment of broadcasting in radio, TV and newspapers, the government’s achievements of the “citizens’ revolution”, exalt messianic figure of Rafael Correa and his unpublished work in favor of the “poor”. President Correa calls itself a historical figure at the height of Eloy Alfaro, of Simon Bolivar, the great “statesmen reformers” now living a “time of change” but a “change of time”.

Faced with this reality, however, stands a social movement composed of the main unions, UGTE, CEOSL, CEDOCUT, sectors and grassroots leaders CTE, CONAIE, UNE, ECUARRUNARI, FEUNASSC, CUBE, FEUE, FESE Opponents in fact harmful policies, submissive actions, the abuse and authoritarian government. That social movement to start considering Correa government supported democratic and progressive element, is now opposed, while mobilizing goes by its own demands, to defend their conquests and rights that correísmo snatches them and understood the need to oppose, expose and mobilize for protest banners and democratic, while breaks through the aspiration of building a new and different country on the basis of the organization and the united struggle of these sectors.

We salute tonight’s action Plurinational Coordinator of the left cohesive working for political and social forces of our country to face the correismo unpopular policy and propose to the people of Ecuador claims platform and democratic social and political achievements to be able to propose and galvanize action to defeat President Correa in the elections of 2013 and look for Ecuador march to a new situation that progress towards the profound changes needed majorities claiming Ecuador, given that those actions also unmask the traditional right, which is not in the government and aims to capitalize on the discontent for their own purposes.

The revolutionary party of the working class Ecuadorian, the PCMLE reaffirms its readiness to march with the workers, the youth and the people of Ecuador, along with the Ecuadorian left to effectively achieve these aspirations for change, mobilizing and fighting who want to transform the country.

To do this, leaders and foundation of our organization, we are in a process of qualification of our business with the working masses, improving our relationship ideological, political and organizational; taking steps in the communist education of our cadres and members, working in construction Communist Party, which according to our revolutionary concept is essential and effective tool for promoting leftist politics.

We reiterate our view internationalist, who just had a look these days relevant to the successful completion of the 16th. International Conference “Problems of the Revolution in Latin America,” has attended over 60 international delegates from our continent, Europe and Asia. We have discussed the presence in some scenarios current Latin American populist caudillo, generated at times of crisis in the capitalist world, which as in the case of Ecuador is present in an attempt to contain, confuse and divert the aspirations of revolutionary change peoples of Ecuador. With delegates from all these countries left by the frank discussion of ideas and commitment to advance the unity and struggle for a different world.

We pay tribute to our fallen comrades in the revolutionary struggle.

Reiterate the resolve and commitment to continue – despite attacks, threats – and the whole thrust of the government and the right, with our fight with the people, by the revolution, popular power and socialism

Long live the 48 years of PCMLE!
Long live the struggle of the working class and our peoples!
Live proletarian internationalism!
Glory to Marxism-Leninism!

Source

Who Killed Yasser Arafat?

Now we know he was poisoned – but by whom?

by Justin Raimondo

Yasser Arafat died on November 11, 2004, of a mysterious ailment. His enemies spread the rumor he had AIDS: David Frum, with typical classiness, claimed he had contracted AIDS as a consequence of having sex with his bodyguards. Now, however, it has been revealed Arafat was poisoned: the cause of his death was exposure to very high levels of polonium-210 [pdf], a rare radioactive substance. An investigation conducted by Al Jazeera showed Arafat’s personal items, released to the media organization by his widow, contained several times the normal level of polonium that would normally be detected on such items. The Palestinian leader’s terminal symptoms were similar to those experienced by victims of polonium poisoning: the substance targets the gastrointestinal tract and the subject wastes away.

Arafat’s Ramallah compound had been bombed several times by the Israelis, and they had the place surrounded – yet still he persisted. They couldn’t get him out. Worse, his plight was becoming a metaphor for the condition of his people, who were – and still are – prisoners in their own land. A former adviser claimed he was poisoned by the Israelis, who detained the Palestinian ambulance used to deliver Arafat’s medications to the Ramallah compound. At the time, one tended to write this off as a purely polemical exercise: in light of the new evidence, however, the question has to be asked.

Simply by continuing to exist in the face of such a sustained assault, Arafat was defeating the Israelis every day. They had to get rid of him. Did they? We’ll never know for sure, but it is worth noting that Israeli threats to kill him preceded his untimely death by less than a year. As is well-known, Israeli intelligence has carried out numerous assassinations: it is simply another tool in their international operations, one they have never hesitated to utilize. A passport-falsification scheme involving New Zealand, Britain, France, Spain, and a number of other countries was widely believed to have been meant to equip the Mossad’s crack team of assassins, who could slip into – and out of – target areas at will.

The Israelis hated Arafat with a particular passion, for two reasons:

1) His longevity – The Palestinian movement is thick [pdf] with factions, but thin when it comes to recognizable leaders. Arafat was the principal leader, and no one since his death has achieved his stature. He was a political survivor, having lived through numerous assassination attempts, and deflected the schemes of internal enemies to displace him. Simply by sticking around for so long, he became a living symbol of the Palestinian struggle for self-determination – and that is one big reason why the Israelis got rid of him.

2) His secularism – The Israelis encouraged the growth of groups such as Hamas in the beginning, in order to split away the more religious elements from the decidedly secular Palestine Liberation Organization/Fatah, which Arafat headed. It is easy to sell the Palestinians as crazed jihadists when a group like Hamas or Islamic Jihad is the most visible champion of their cause: the secular PLO presented the Israelis with a public relations problem. There’s another reason for the Israelis to have knocked him off.

One aspect of this case is extremely odd: polonium-210 is the same poison Alexander Litvinenko was dosed with. Litvinenko, a former KGB official, converted to Islam, joined the Chechen rebels, and became an associate of Boris Berezovsky, the notorious Russian oligarch wanted on charges of embezzlement in his home country. Litvinenko and Berezovsky are the Russian version of 9/11 Truthers: they believe practically every terrorist attack on Russian cities has been “staged” by Vladimir Putin in order to keep him in power. When he became ill, Litvinenko charged the Russian spy agency with poisoning him – although that seems highly unlikely.

Polonium-210 isn’t something you can buy off the shelf at your local Walmart. It isn’t even something a mad scientist might cook up in his home lab. About 100 grams are produced each year for specialized technical uses. The only entities with access to this sort of thing are state actors, or, at least, a private organization with very substantial resources at its disposal.

What’s interesting is that a diplomatic cable, dated Dec. 26, 2006 and published by WikiLeaks, details the conversation of a US diplomat with Russian spook Anatoly Safonov in which Safonov claims the Russians told the British about the importation of “nuclear materials” into London during the Litvinenko affair – and were told that the whole thing was “under control before the poisoning took place.” In the course of the same conversation, Safonov – Putin’s chief representative on terrorism-related matters – went on to describe a number of threats and their possible sources:

“Safonov noted the daunting number of countries that posed particular terrorism threats, mentioning North Korea, Pakistan, South Africa, Libya, Iran, India, and Israel (sic?). He described a range of dangers, stressing the more immediate threats posed by nuclear and biological terrorism, but also acknowledging the risks of chemical terrorism.”

While the use of “sic” is meant to indicate our diplomat’s incredulity at the inclusion of Israel in this list, what we now know about how Arafat died should tear away the blinders from several sets of eyes – yes, even at the US State Department.

Source

This Is My Will: Muammar Gaddafi

This is my will. I, Muammar bin Mohammad bin Abdussalam bi Humayd bin Abu Manyar bin Humayd bin Nayil al Fuhsi Gaddafi, do swear that there is no other God but Allah and that Mohammad is God’s Prophet, peace be upon him. I pledge that I will die as Muslim.

Should I be killed, I would like to be buried, according to Muslim rituals, in the clothes I was wearing at the time of my death and my body unwashed, in the cemetery of Sirte, next to my family and relatives.

I would like that my family, especially women and children, be treated well after my death.

The Libyan people should protect its identity, achievements, history, and the honourable image of its ancestors and heroes. The Libyan people should not relinquish the sacrifices of the free and best people.

I call on my supporters to continue the resistance, and fight any foreign aggressor against Libya, today, tomorrow, and always.

Let the free people of the world know that we could have bargained over and sold out our cause in return for a personal secure and stable life. We received many offers to this effect but we chose to be at the vanguard of the confrontation as a badge of duty and honour.

Even if we do not win immediately, we will give a lesson to future generations that choosing to protect the nation is an honour and selling it out is the greatest betrayal that history will remember forever despite the attempts of the others to tell you otherwise.

Muammar Gaddafi was the leader and guide of the revolution of Libya. He died a martyr to the noble cause of the independence and sovereignty of his country, assassinated on 20 October 2011 by traitors in the service of NATO. This English translation of his will was published by the BBC on 23 October 2011; it is reproduced here for non-profit educational purposes. Note: In Islam, the body of a martyr is to be buried unwashed, like those of the followers of Muhammad who died at the Battle of Uhud, fighting against the Meccan army.

Source

Free Libya is Green Libya: Supporting the Real Libyan Revolution

by W. Yusef Doucet

“Will they now stand up and assume the real leadership necessary to make themselves relevant, or is overcoming their class allegiance to the Western bourgeoisie just too much to fathom? That’s probably too much to expect from a class trained to protect the interests of its benefactors in order to protect its own narrow interests. I guess this great task is up to the world’s African workers and peasants.”

For eight months now, NATO has executed an open crime against a sovereign African state and called it a democratic revolution. Libya was a stable, prosperous, debt-free country in Africa until it came under attack in February. The United States and the European Union cynically seized the opportunity provided by the genuine people’s movements in Tunisia and Egypt where the Western backed administrations were forced to remove their heads of state in attempts to manage the popular democratic movements in the streets. The U.S. and E.U. rapidly exploited the monarchist and “Islamist” resentment long present in Benghazi. The democratic aspirations of this opposition in Libya was dubious from the beginning, and within days of the actual opposition demonstrations that were not unusual in Benghazi, the “peaceful demonstrators” attacked a police station and suddenly emerged as a full-fledged armed faction. That U.S. and E.U. country Special Forces and intelligence forces had been on the ground from the very beginning arming and guiding what has become the National Transitional Council has become clear, and who denies the fact?

Even now, as this coalition claims to be the true and legal representatives of the wishes of the Libyan people, they represent maybe 5 percent of Libyans. They are an illegitimate entity thrust upon Libya by the force of NATO military power, and still they have not defeated the Jamahiriyah, the People’s Government of Libya. Through their actions, NATO has declared once again that no country can impart upon an independent path of development and an indigenous, culturally specific experiment with democracy. The West claims a monopoly on the meaning, form and practice of democracy, and the intellectuals, journalists and pundits in the West have shown themselves unable to remove the prejudices that convince them that democracy must look like and smell like the elite bourgeois democracy of the imperial countries. These are the same liberal bourgeois republics and constitutional monarchies that have perpetrated more than two hundred years of slavery, colonialism, and genocide attendant to capitalist production over the centuries. That doesn’t smell very good!

Through mainstream media, these professional talkers and writers made and continue to make the ground and air war palatable. Mainstream capitalist media rarely break with the official story offered by government. However on Libya, they have aggressively disseminated misinformation about Libyan society and the character of the uprising. Not every rebellion is a revolution. The media’s uncritical representation of the factions that would become the NTC cast them as democratic freedom fighters rather than investigate their reactionary monarchism and fundamentalism. Moreover, the media all but ignore the aggressive genocide taking place against the native Black population and migrant worker population. Early in the conflict, media spread the lie of “African mercenaries,” thus facilitating attacks against dark skinned Libyans and other Africans. Again, mainstream media reproduce the official story as a matter of course.

Unfortunately, the mainstream, corporate, pentagon friendly media were joined in the demonization of Gaddafi and the misrepresentation of the Jamahiriyah by the standard of progressive and liberal media in the United States, Democracy Now! and the Pacifica Network. Progressive/liberal media characterized the rebellion that began in Benghazi as a revolution rather than the counter revolution that it is. They provided airtime for opposition spokespersons and their supportive progressive and liberal analysts and pundits, which betrayed an antipathy to African and Arab revolutionary nationalism. They offered little to no air to voices in support of the Jamahiriyah; neither did they report on its democratic processes, again reproducing the government narrative. Those voices that make it onto Pacifica stations are brought on by independent producers like Dedon Kimathi at KPFK in Los Angeles and J.R. Valrey of Block Reportin’ at KPFK in Berkeley. Progressive/liberal media has been consistent in its unity with the mainstream on the question of Libya, revolutionary nationalist governments like Zimbabwe, and war in Africa, assuming their place in the continuum of the hegemonic narrative of empire. Much of the establishment Black press was only slightly better, refusing to criticize Obama directly, or doing so only obtusely, even when covering the anti-black violence of the NTC brigades. Tied to the two-party system, and especially the Democratic Party, the imperative to re-elect the undeserving Obama supersedes the duty to defend what was the most advanced country in Africa in regard to the human development of the population and a government that reached out to African Americans as members of the Pan-African nation. The Nation of Islam’s The Final Call’s coverage has been, on the other hand, exemplary.

Libya is the northern front in the re-assault on Africa. NATO countries engage in proxy war in Somalia while French troops continue muscularly to prop up the imposed government of Alassane Ouattara in Cote Ivoire, and now with troops on the ground in Central Africa, the U.S and Europe through AFRICOM has increasingly militarized their activities on the continent. These powers cannot abide African independence, nor will they allow China to continue to pursue its agenda in Africa unchallenged. As during the Cold War of the Twentieth Century, the US and EU again show their willingness to use African and Asian bodies in hot war to frustrate the interests of their competitors, this time capitalist-communist China. Where ever the U.S. and Europe are present in Africa, the countries are destabilized and in debt, and the people suffer. Despite their democratic rhetoric, their humanitarian rationalizations, and promises of economic growth, the Western presence in Africa, whether through diplomacy, covert and overt military intervention, economic investment, or settler channels, remains toxic. Now the poison flows through Libya, literally, as NATO has bombed both land and water with depleted uranium.

During the 1960s and 1970s, socialist and progressive sectors around the world recognized the heroism and thecorrectness of the Vietnamese people in their struggle against the U.S. inheritors of the French colonial project in Southeast Asia. The Vietnamese fought the most powerful military in the world and won the victory. Their struggle inspired revolutionaries across the Global South and among internal colonies in the Global North. Today Vietnam is a sovereign country.

Despite a number of independent journalists’ (e.g. Lizzie Phelan, Webster Tarpley, Stephen Lendmen, Gerald Perreira, and Thierry Meyssan) challenges to the dominant narrative on Libya, easily accessible on the internet and sometimes on cable news outlets like RT News, Libya still suffers from gross misrepresentations of the experiment in direct democracy and socialism embodied in the People’s Committees of the Jamahiriyah. Western professional progressives rarely take the vision expressed in the Green Book seriously, routinely falling into the “eccentric, flamboyant” Gaddafi” lazy reporting trap. The failure of what passes for leftist analysis in much of the U.S. and Europe to recognize the progressive and genuinely popular character of the Jamahiriyah makes them complicit in the disaster called the NTC that has befallen Libya. Nonetheless, the Libyan people continue to fight against the most powerful military alliance in the world, NATO. The NTC is nothing without NATO. The Green Resistance continues to fight. Libya is Vietnam. Can the Green Resistance rely on international support?

Libya is also Spain in the 1930s. During that struggle, the capitalist governments of the West stood by and watched the fascists bleed Republican Spain, despite material support from the Soviet Union, because in fact, they cared more about capitalist social relations and profits than they cared about democracy and the will of the Spanish people who elected the popular government. Today, they have destroyed the infrastructure of the most stable African country outside of Southern Africa, bombing them incessantly in support of racist, fascist and monarchist forces in the NTC who would have been defeated months ago if not for NATO air war. This time Russia failed to veto the key vote in the UN Security Council and can’t offer the same kind of material support, despite their distrust and defensive position vis-à-vis NATO. Their criticism of NATO since then, even as it helps challenge NATO’s narrative, still rings somewhat hollow. During the Spanish Civil War, progressive forces around the world organized themselves into international brigades to support the Spanish Republican and Loyalists forces materially and as brothers and sisters in arms. Can the international brigades today fly to Libya’s aid? Can African revolutionaries fight in Libya, knowing that the fight for Libya is the fight for Africa, and not care if they’re called mercenaries? What national African military will join the Green Resistance in its battle against a virulently anti-black, racist force in the NATO/NTC and the mercenaries they are now flying into Libya, like Xe (formerly Blackwater)?

Of course, now it is not so easy to offer material support or even ideological support to revolutionary movements. In the world of the Patriot Act, heightened security measures and full spectrum surveillance, one can quite quickly be arrested and disappeared for aiding and abetting “terrorism” if the group or movement one supports has been classified as a terrorist organization. Power has been very careful to police the degree to which groups and movements engaged in anti-imperialist and revolutionary struggle can be helped by exile and solidarity formations. The kind of fund raising and support that the ANC, the PAC, the PAIGC, the PLO, the IRA, the FMLN and similar movements enjoyed in the 1960s, ‘70s and ‘80s into the ‘90s is mostly illegal now. The governments of the NATO countries will not likely look easily on activists among their own citizens and residents dedicated to restoring the people’s government they have spent so much money and time bombing. The formation of a group like C.I.S.P.E.S. (Committee in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador) or Witnesses for Peace who worked to support citizens and revolutionary parties in El Salvador and Nicaragua during the 1980s grows increasingly difficult in the current surveillance climate. Even so, those of us committed to African sovereignty, African continental and diasporic integration, to socialism and people’s democracy, and to a brighter future for humanity need to find ways to support the Green Resistance in Libya. We need to find ways to be international brigades for Libya. Free Libya is Green Libya.

More than two hundred years of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie is long enough. Liberation struggles and revolutionary governments must be supported despite differences on some ideological points. The fate of an individual is not what is at stake. Despite his defamation in the mainstream Western press, Gaddafi is being mourned by millions in Africa and around the world. This attack has short-circuited the move toward African continental integration that Gaddafi championed. He acted independently in the interests of Libya and Africa, and offered real material support for the integration of Africa under one, gold standard currency, one army, and continental governing institutions. He supported revolutionary and national liberation struggles around the world. He was a genuine anti-imperialist. For many of us, the opinions of Minister Louis Farrakhan, Ms. Cynthia KcKinney and Warrior Woman of the Dine Nation matter more than the opinions expressed by the U.S. State Department and 10 Downing Street and disseminated by the New York Times, Le Figaro, CNN, AL Jazeera, et al. The Jamahiriyah is a genuinely popular government that has come under attack by the most powerful and advanced militaries in the world, yet they continue to hold out despite the loss of the revolutionary leader. Who speaks out? Who can help restore Libya and a united Africa? NATO, the UN and the NTC trivialized the African Union during this debacle, rendering the body all but ceremonial. Will they now stand up and assume the real leadership necessary to make themselves relevant, or is overcoming their class allegiance to the Western bourgeoisie just too much to fathom? That’s probably too much to expect from a class trained to protect the interests of its benefactors in order to protect its own narrow interests. I guess this great task is up to the world’s African workers and peasants.

W. Yusef Doucet is a faculty member of the Santa Monica College English Department. He co-founded and facilitated the Dyamsay Writers’ Workshop in Santa Monica, CA, the Third Root Writers’ Workshop in Pomona, CA, and a poetry reading series at the Velocity Café in Santa Monica, CA. Yusef is currently working on a Ph.D. in Cultural Studies at Claremont Graduate University. His research interests include Fanonian analysis, the policing effect of integrationist/post-racialist ideology and anti-blackness in the modern symbolic order. Yusef keeps a blog at freeignace.wordpress.com.

Source

Video: Lowkey – “Long Live Palestine”

Hath not a Palestinian eyes?

I am a Palestinian. Hath not a Palestinian eyes? hath not a Palestinian hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer, as a Jew is? If you prick us, do we not bleed? if you tickle us, do we not laugh? if you poison us, do we not die? and if you wrong us, shall we not revenge? If we are like you in the rest, we will resemble you in that. The villany you teach me, I will execute, and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction.

Party of Labor of Iran (Toufan): The Criminal, Inhumane, Warmongering, and Illegal Sanctions on Iran

On Monday January 23, 2012, the foreign ministers of the imperialist European Union countries decided in Brussels to extend the economic sanctions on Iran by putting sanctions on Central Bank of Iran and by freezing the assets of the Iranian people in Europe. In order to inflict a heavy damage on the economy of Iran, they decided to place an embargo on the export of the Iranian oil to Europe.

To impose economic blockades on and to cause hunger in Iran are acts that are internationally illegal and are crimes against humanity. Imperialists want to impose their sinister, plundering, and domineering intentions on Iran and on their “axis of evils” by creating another Iraq and a second Gaza Strip. By punishing Iran, the imperialist countries want to teach a lesson to Non-Allied countries and to those who do not submit to their dictates.

In the past, the imperialists try to justify their crimes by passing illegal resolutions in the UN Security Council. But they imposed sanctions against Iran today without any UN authorization. The sanctions are plots by a gang of international plunderer against a UN-member state and are against the UN Charter. The US and EU sanctions against Iran lack any legal basis on the international arena. The US imposes on countries of the world the decisions made in the US Congress and pretends that the decisions are made by the international community. The illegal and bullying actions against Iran show the hegemonic and despotic nature of the US imperialism.

While the foreign minister of Russia, Sergei Lawrow, stated that the “unilateral actions are useless”, he added that there was no reason to make any decision in addition to collective decision by the UN Security Council. The deputy foreign minister of the racist government of Israel, Danny Ajalon, claimed in a press interview that “These sanctions have reduced the threat of war”. Coming out of the meeting that made warmongering and threatening decisions on Iran, Ms. Catherine Ashton who is in charge of the EU international relations and the foreign minister of Sweden Mr. Carl Bidlt claimed that the basis of their work was to appeal to diplomacy and negotiation!

The imperialist powers clearly lie when they claim that they recognize the legal and indisputable right of Iran to enrich uranium. The fact is that they have monopoly in producing nuclear energy. The recognition of Iran’s right to produce nuclear energy is to break the imperialist monopoly. In a deceptive psychological war, the major powers warn the world about Iran’s nuclear bomb, but they have not disclosed any document to show the existence of this bomb. German foreign minister Guido Weserwelle shamelessly said that “We cannot accept Iran developing nuclear weapons” and that “This is not a security problem for region only but it will disrupt the world security”. Wow! The non-existence Iranian nuclear bomb disrupts the security of the entire globe but many hundred known or secret warheads in the hands of American, British, French, and Israeli warmongers are nor dangerous for the world security! Apparently, there are good and bad atomic bombs! The arguments given by the representatives of the imperialist powers are fierce, threatening, and sickening.

The history of economic sanctions shows that the ordinary people of the countries on which the sanction were imposed suffered the most by the sanctions. In Iran, the inflation is rapidly rising, shortage of medicine and medical equipments is already felt, and particularly the patients with heart problems are under attack because the companies making the equipments are under the US sanctions and cannot export their products to Iran. This is not a concern for the imperialist powers. It is not important to the US President Obama and his Iranian allies if millions of people are slaughtered in the war. Also, the sanctions on Iran give an excuse to the authority of the Islamic Republic to increase the suppression of the anti-imperialist and democratic forces in Iran.

The imperialist powers think that if their sanctions cause widespread hunger in Iran, then the people will rise up and install a Western puppet regime. This is a miscalculation because the history of the Iran shows that Iranian people have always rejected submission to any forces allied to foreign imperialist powers. The Iranian masses have no feeling except disgust and hate towards sellout, spies, and for those who carry out terrorist operations in Iran.

The fact is that the imperialists’ actions against Iran are not for eliminating the Iranian nuclear bomb. Such a bomb does not exist. Iran holds a key geo-political position in the Middle East region and is the center of entangled world contradictions. To control Iran is to control an entire strategic region with enormous energy resources that the US desire to plunder for decades. Strait of Hormuz is a valve for export of oil to four corners of the globe. The US imperialists wish to have control over this oil valve. The presence of the US forces in the region is a danger for the world security and is a threat particularly to the security of the Middle East. The propaganda about Iranian atomic bomb, the bomb that does not exist, is justification for aggression on Iran and for domination of the region, and Islamic Republic’s capitulation to imperialists’ demands will not change the imperialists’ nature of following their domineering goals.

The Party of Labour of Iran (Toufan) believes that the economic sanctions on Iran act against the masses and are inhumane. We take the imperialists, particularly the US imperialists, responsible for the suffering and misery these sanctions will cause. The sanctions on Iran are illegal, warmongering, and unjustifiable. Our Party strongly condemns the imperialist sanctions, embargoes, and threats against the Iranian masses. We believe that every progressive, human-loving, and patriotic Iranian must take stand against the sanctions and against the imperialist-Zionist warmongering threats, and must draw a sharp line to separate enemies from the people.

The regime of the Islamic Republic of Iran is a reactionary and Mafia-style capitalist regime. The regime of Iran has lost all its legitimacy, and the overwhelming majority of the Iranian masses are disgusted by the regime. The task of overthrowing this criminal regime is on the shoulders of the Iranian masses. The regime change by the imperialist invading forces will be for the purpose of colonizing the country and looting the resources of the nation. The imperialist powers have never supported and will never support the freedom-loving and democratic forces anywhere in the world. Their talks about freedom and human rights are nothing but smokescreens for their criminal actions, and Iraq, Libya, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan … are testimonies to this. Hypocrisy is written on their foreheads.

The Party of Labour of Iran (Toufan)

January 23, 2012.

Source

 

Enver Hoxha: On Palestine, Zionism and Arab Liberation

WEDNESDAY
JULY 29, 1970

We Have Sympathy & Respect for the Arab People of Palestine

A delegation of «Al-Fatah», Movement for the National Liberation of Palestine, is coming to our country these days for an official visit. Yasser Arafat personally asked our embassy in Cairo for permission to send a delegation.

We have sympathy and respect for the Arab people of Palestine, because they are a brave people who are suffering. At the moment they are the only Arab people who are fighting all round the borders of Israel, while some Arab leaders, from those of Egypt to those of Lebanon, are merely talking, holding conferences, preparing… for compromises, etc.

The Palestinians, expelled from their land by the British colonialist government and from UNO in favour of Israel, are living in tents, in great hardship, in camps in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and elsewhere. The latest Israeli aggression increased the number of Palestinian refugees, so the only road of salvation left to them was that of the partisan war. And they began it, attacking the Israeli aggressors from outside, from Jordan, Syria and Lebanon, and from inside, in the territory occupied by Israel.

Thus, thanks to the struggle of the Palestinians, the Palestinian question has become an important national and international issue, which both the friends and the enemies of the Palestinian people are compelled to bear in mind and cannot fail to take into account.

Despite its nationalist tendencies, the «Al-Fatah» organization is progressive and democratic and the biggest and most powerful organization which, at the moment, has a correct line of struggle for the liberation of Palestine and the defeat of the anti-Arab, annexationist policy of the state of Israel, concocted by international Zionism and supported by the imperialists. This organization is not against the masses of the Jewish population whom, in its program, it accepts as citizens of the new Arab state of Palestine.

However, although the representatives of the feudal bourgeois cliques ruling in some Arab countries pose as pro the Palestinians’ struggle, they do not look kindly on this movement of resistance and, since they are unable to liquidate it, want to have it under control.

The resistance of the Palestinians has become a serious political and military obstacle, which these cliques are obliged to take into account. The King of Jordan, an agent of the British and the Americans, has made two or three attempts to liquidate the Palestinian partisans, who are stronger than this sold-out king. At these dangerous moments for the Palestinian guerrillas they ought to fight him to the end, to unite with the people of Jordan, in order to continue the war against Israel and American imperialism.

The Soviets and the Americans are making the law in the Middle East. The Egyptian leadership has fallen completely under the influence of the Soviets. Hussein of Jordan is a dyed-in-the-wool traitor, the Syrians are posing as somewhat «concerned», while the Lebanese trim their sails to the wind.

Nasser agreed in general to discuss the «Rogers Plan», which means to enter into negotiations and compromises and, in the end, «to make the peace» so greatly desired by Israel, in favour of that country and its American patron and in disfavour of the Arab peoples, especially the Palestinian people, against whom the savage attacks of the gendarmes of the ruling cliques sold out to foreigners, will commence later. With the signing of the «peace» the Soviets will turn this into a «colossal victory» for themselves. They will try to remain in Egypt and to dominate it. There is the danger that the Egyptian ports may become the ports of the Soviet Mediterranean fleet which emerged from the Black Sea. From the Mediterranean the Soviet revisionists intend to extend their colonies in Africa «in peaceful ways», in order to cross the seas and reach India. This is how they dream of achieving the empire of Alexander the Great, by conquering the peoples through the threat of arms from land and sea, through rubles and through their demagogy of a falsified socialism.

The «Soviet-American peace» in the Middle East will be a defeat for all the Arab peoples and an especially great obstacle for the Palestinian people. This kind of «peace» is a victory for the Soviet-American imperialists in general and for Israel in particular.

What will happen with the Palestinian people will be what happened with the Albanian people before the First World War. As is known, at that time large parts of Albania were divided by the imperialists of Europe among Serbia, Montenegro and Greece. And after they had thoroughly dismembered our Homeland at the Conference of London and through secret treaties, the Tzar’s Minister, Sazonov, in order to satisfy the appetite of Prince Nikola of Montenegro demanded that the city of Shkodra be handed over to the latter. On this occasion, one of the other wolves, the representative of French imperialism, said something which went down in history: «Sazonov wants to set fire to Europe to fry an omelette for Montenegro».

The enemies of the Arab peoples, the American imperialists and Soviet revisionists, will act and speak in a similar way when it comes to the question of the territorial rights of the heroic Palestinian people.

Only the armed struggle through to victory settles accounts with the wolves who attack peoples.

From “Reflections on the Middle East”

Green female Revolutionary Guards will “honour the memory of martyr Muammar Gaddafi”

Rough translation by I.A Libya

The Female green resistance, “the Alzafa al Akhdar brigade (from the Revolutionary Guards) are ready and prepared to fight in honour of the Martyr Gaddafi who is still alive in our hearts. We are prepared to carry out missions to cleanse the country of the enemy. We have already undertaken certain missions and will continue in our struggle … Greetings to all resistence from east to west, north and south who are struggling until we are all free … We are approaching “

Source

VI Congress of Emek Partisi

From En Marcha
# 1562 January 5 to 13, 2012

Resolution

We support the peoples who have rebelled for their rights and their freedom; we condemn the imperialist conspiracies against Syria and Iran.

Throughout 2011, the Arab peoples of North Africa and the Near East have risen one after another. They do not want to be victims of the consequences of the hegemony of monopoly capitalism nor to be subjected to poverty and unemployment, and they rejected the repression of the autocratic dictatorships that safeguarded such hegemony. The despotic regimes that have lasted for 30 to 40 years have been the main reason for the disorganization of the oppressed masses and have served as an obstacle to their attaining consciousness. The peoples who have risen up have achieved some victories but they have not been able to reap important fruits of this struggle, such as for example to achieve their own political power. Therefore, these reactionary bourgeois forces supported by Western imperialism have maintained or have tried to maintain their hegemony through the strengthening of their pillars with new collaborators, seeing that their hegemony was in difficulty.

The Arab peoples, who have risen up, have realized their potential and have tasted certain victories, which is why their struggles have still not been repressed in any country except for Libya. Despite their low level of consciousness and organization, the peoples are carrying forward their uprisings with an effort to try to overcome their weakness, and they insist on opposing the attacks by reactionary forces that have been organized especially by elements of political Islam, which has become more moderate and pro-American in almost all those countries.

We understand that the communist parties and organizations that are signing this document, gathered at the Sixth Congress of the Party of Labor of Turkey, express our pride and solidarity with the struggles of the masses of the people, not only in the Arab countries of North Africa and the Near East, but also in Europe, from Spain to Greece, and in Latin America, from Venezuela to Ecuador, for their social and popular rights and freedoms; as well we proclaim our support for the just struggle of the Palestinian people against the Zionist imperialism of Israel.

However, we are aware of the fact that our main weakness is the inadequate level of consciousness and organization of the peoples of the world, with a view to any process of struggle. The imperialists and their collaborators take advantage of this weakness in their efforts to renovate the weakened bases of their hegemony and to repress those struggles through ideological penetration and infiltration in those struggles of the peoples that imperialism claims to support, manipulating these struggles towards their own interests and eliminating the popular features of these struggles.

Western imperialism, which maintains hegemony in its hands and tries to strengthen its position in relation to the ascending imperialist powers, not only aims to reinforce its hegemony in the countries under its influence through the repression of the popular struggles, but also tries to establish its hegemony by extending its influence on the peoples and their struggles and using them as a tool in countries such as Syria and Iran, which have not yet been subjugated.

We do not support the regimes of either Assad or Khamenei. However, we stress the fact that the imperialist powers are intervening with the support of the reactionary forces in the region such as Turkey and the Saudis, in the name of support for the so-called “opposition” in Syria and Iran under the pretext of the struggle for “democracy” and “repression of the dictators”; these policies have nothing to do with the right of self-determination of the peoples or the democratic and social aspirations of peoples. We are opposed to imperialist interventions – economic as well as political and military – for whatever reason, whether they are called by their obliging collaborators or not, and we condemn such policies that only lead to war, bloodshed and suffering.

We call on the peoples of the world, especially the peoples of Syria and Iran, to be alert to the interventions and imperialist tricks such as those that have taken place in Libya, to show solidarity with the struggles of the peoples of the region and to support the fight against imperialism and its reactionary forces.

Ankara, December 2011

Communist Party of Albania
Communist Party of Benin
Party of Labor of Belgium
New Party of Cyprus
Marxist Leninist Communist Party of Ecuador
Communist Party of Spain (ML)
Organization for the Reconstruction of the Communist Party of Greece
Communist Party of the Workers of Tunisia
Emek Partisi of Turkey

Source

PCMLE: Iran in the crosshairs of the U.S.

En Marcha, January 10, 2012

In the current world situation, U.S. imperialism is by all means of aggravating the conflict with the Islamic Republic of Iran, under the pretext of avoiding the use of enriched uranium nuclear military purposes.

The U.S. tactical retreat, once lowered his flag of Iraq, popular military pressure, claims to be settled by a military adventure in Central Asia that allows it to extend its hegemony against Iran in the Persian Gulf. Geographical position favored for centuries and abuse of pirates raids and since the mid-twentieth century, major geopolitical point for transporting 40% of global oil production.

The focus of these new imperialist tensions has to do with actions of Israel, U.S. and NATO military installation Iranian long-range ballistic missiles and criminal attacks on the lives of Iranian nuclear scientists, the operation of the Iranian military defense, which in December shot down a U.S. spy plane that took off from Afghanistan imperialist possible approval at the request of Obama, new economic sanctions against Iran, the imminent adoption by Congress of a new Act defense spending, including economic sanctions on U.S. financial institutions to conduct transactions with Iran.

Iran’s response greater and blocking the threat to navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, at the end of military exercises in the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran test-ground missiles, land-sea and sea -sea in a naval demonstration of the potential and the ability to affect navigation through the strait. Important measure of pressure on the U.S. and its allies intended to counter the application of U.S. sanctions and the European Union.

Given the possible closure of the Strait of Hormuz, U.S. imperialism responds with the transfer of the Fifth Fleet to the Persian Gulf to prevent it. It is assumed that in the course of the conflict the Russian Federation and the Republic of China was put on the side of Iran to protect their interests against the geopolitical consequences of a possible U.S. greater control in the area.

Source

Tunisia: Interview with Communist Workers’ Party (PCOT) leaders

Ted Walker interviews Samir Taamallah, Chrif Khraief and Jilani Hamemi

November 26, 2011 — Al-Thawra Eyewitness, posted at Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal with the author’s permission — I first met with Samir Taamallah, a former political prisoner and member of the central committee of the Communist Worker’s Party of Tunisia (PCOT), in Tunis on October 4, 2011, to discuss the October 23 Constituent Assembly election and Tunisia’s ongoing revolutionary struggle. The first part of the interview took place before the election. The follow-up interview part took place after the results were known.

* * *

How is the election campaign going?

Samir Taamallah: We are still in the beginning of the campaign – opening offices in all regions, getting together the essential means of a campaign; these things are not easy for a party without major financial support like ours! We are working in communities, printing flyers and posters, distributing as much of our material as we can with few resources. In addition, we are also profiling ourselves on the internet – through Facebook, Twitter, our website.

What issues have you been campaigning on?

We’ve mainly been campaigning on three fronts – the political, the social and the economic.

On the political side, the issue is how to write the constitution and how the new parliament will be formed. We are struggling for the new constitution to defend freedom of thought and belief, individual liberty, gender equality and the right of employment. On this front, we are also looking for a change with Tunisia’s foreign relations, especially its relationship with Israel.

On the social front, we are fighting for essential services to be made available to all citizens – free health care, free education, free housing – as well as for fairer income levels to address inequality. Right now we are calling for an increase in the minimum wage to around 400 dinars a month to keep up with inflation.

On economic issues, we are part of the campaign to suspend debt service payments, and to channel this money towards investmentment in Tunisia. At least in the short term, we need to cancel these payments if we are to develop our economy. We are also encouragining Tunisian investment for the needs of our country, not for profit – we are not against investment, but we want it to be done in a reasonable way that benefits the people. Under Ben Ali, all capital was directed and exploited by the regime – everyone who wanted to start a business competing with the regime’s favoured monopolies would have problems with the government.

Do you think the election will address the problems facing Tunisia?

That depends on what happens after the election. There are two possible outcomes from this election – either the government of interim president al-Baji al-Sebsi will stay in power and continue working as it has, or we will build a new government chosen by the Constituent Assembly. The PCOT is fighting for the latter course. We believe that only a new government can make real immediate inroads into the structure of the old regime. We believe that the Sebsi government is putting obstacles in front of the process of democratic transition, for example, the possibility of referenda, which are being discussed right now, which will take more time to organise and delay a real transition to democracy.

The PCOT stands for a transitional justice. We believe that there can be no democracy without getting rid of the structures of corruption and all figures from the former regime being judged in a fair way. For this to happen, we need a new government to form.

What were your personal experiences of repression under Ben Ali?

I am a member of the national leadership within PCOT. In 1994, I was sentenced to five years and three months in prison – but I was not imprisoned. I remained underground, constantly moving from place to place, and in that way I stayed safe from the regime.

Then in February 1998, I was again judged and this time sentenced to nine years and three months. As with the first time, I lived underground; I was eventually imprisoned in 2002, along with [PCOT leader] Hamma Hammami and Abdel Jabbar Mandouri. In the same year, we were released from prison, and we continued the struggle.

We never changed our minds or made concessions to the regime, despite the Ben Ali regime’s persecution. We faced beating, threats, everyday fighting with the police – this was the common experience for every communist militant in Tunisia before the revolution.

In your opinion, will the revolution of January 14, 2011, keep going?

The PCOT sees a revolution not just as a moment but a progression of events over time. We consider the election as just a crossroads between revolutionary forces, which want to pursue the revolution until it creates the popular awareness of the meaning and value of freedoms as a right, and the counter-revolutionary powers, which include the former members of [Ben Ali's] Democratic Constitutional Rally (RCD). Each member of the central committee of the RCD has formed their own party; they are working in the same way to go back to the past and renew their power.

Other counter-revolutionary powers include the transitional government, which has made fictitious concessions to calm down the population. For example, the decision was made to dissolve the political police of the State Security Department; yet it is well known that all members of the bureau were found new jobs one by one and are still working.

We believe that the Sebsi government is struggling against the revolution – putting obstacles in the way of justice, undermining our independance, maintaining the regime’s media. The government is ruling beyond its mandate and is illegitimate. For example, the old judicial files for the Trabelsi family or other regime figures are not being pursued and they are being allowed to flee the country one by one or only pursued for small crimes – but not for murders or drug trafficking.

Parties using money to buy votes are also acting as counter-revolutionary powers; they can lead the revolution in the wrong path by using its slogans, for example, “Give your vote to the revolution”. Those who buy your vote today will sell you tomorrow.

We believe that the counter-revolutionary powers are negotiating with the population, giving some rights against security and political stability. But they are not making the kind of deep social and economic change the revolution was fighting for, change that we need in order to start on a new basis. For example, the violent conflicts between the clans in the south are being empowered by the counter-revolution giving them political capital, with help of the political police, as a way of undermining the revolution. People’s energy is being channelled into fighting a fake problem which has never existed in Tunisia in order to push the revolution from its path.

Tunisians are very aware of this situation, but still have a peaceful temper, and are willing to give the interim government a chance to step down and for the Constituent Assembly to move the democratic transition forward; but if the election doesn’t deliver real change they are ready to make another revolution. The consciousness of Tunisians is strong; so far, all these attempts against the revolution have failed.

Are elections the only way forward for Tunisia’s revolution?

From the beginning, we wanted to form a national revolutionary government made up of parties, associations, independents – but other powers refused. The Higher Independent Election Committee is a fake body set up to counter this idea and instead channel the revolution into protecting the status quo.

We’ve reached the point where elections, if transparent, honest and fair can really help the success of a democratic transition. The PCOT is willing to give the elections a chance and see the outcome.

We are willing to not return to the beginning point of the January 14 uprising, but to look forward to the revolutionary struggle. The new generation of Tunisians are no longer afraid of anything. Fear was the main way by which Ben Ali stayed in power, but that is now useless.

* * *

The following questions were answered by Chrif Khraief and Jilani Hamemi after the October 23, 2011 election. The response to the first question comes from a statement by Hamma Hammami. A more detailed statement by the PCOT on the election result was released on October 29 (the original Arabic can be read here. It has been translated into English by The Moor Next Door). For more details on the results of the Constituent Assembly election, see the infographic here.

* * *

How do you feel about PCOT’s results in the election? Do you feel the campaign was successful in raising the issues that you wanted to?

Hamma Hammami: Some newspapers consider that the election of October 23 was extraordinary and unique, furthermore, perfect; this is clearly an exaggeration. We have to avoid blind optimism for the election’s results, and instead consider it with more criticism.

There were many complaints against some lists, and I don’t think the judiciary system would be rude in taking positions in their affairs. But despite our criticism, the PCOT isn’t asking to re-run the election or to cancel it, however we have some remarks.

First, the reduced number of participants in the elections: according to the ISIE, only 48.9% have voted! Such statistics are worrying and their impact on the political future of the Constituent Assembly would be important, because the constitution doesn’t reflect the opinion of the majority. To heal this problem, the PCOT is calling for the constitution, once it is drafted, to be presented to the people in a referendum. Thus, the Tunisian population can accept it or not.

Second, political money (money invested by parties in their electoral campaign) was a significant factor in the results. No one can deny that there obvious differences between spending an average 25 dinars per elector and spending 500 dinars.

Third, the use of religious rhetoric in mosques and public areas directly and indirectly influenced people. The biggest failure is that people who should have reacted against such attempts to influence voters didn’t, and behaved just as passively as they did under Ben Ali regime. It’s just like there were hidden powers that wanted to divide atheists and religious people.

Fourth, the poor role played by the media, especially the public media, meant that it didn’t help people distinguish, choose and understand what the constitution does and its content means.

Fifth, there were mutual attacks between parties which sometimes reached a very pitiful level.

Sixth, many infractions of electoral rules were noticed in polling stations, confirmed by a wide number of observers.

To conclude: no one can deny that the Tunisian election was manipulated by international actors (most notably US and European ones) which are aiming to limit the Tunisian revolution to minor reforms and modifications and want to sustain the former system, and maintain former pro-capitalist economic, political and social policies. This foreign intervention was facilitated by the transitonal government and some parties, because during the election campaign there were many people travelling in and out Tunisia and we there were many assurances from different parties that Tunisia would maintain the old political and economic policies.

How does PCOT evaluate its own participation in the election?

Chrif Khraief: We estimate that our participation was very weak, and we’re not satisfied because three seats in the assembly doesn’t reflect the real weight of the PCOT on the streets. No one can deny the historic role, the historic activism and the big impact of the PCOT in building the revolution. We are looking critically at ourselves all the time for the purpose of going forward and overcoming our weaknesses and improving ourselves.

It’s true that the PCOT has learnt revolutionary activism and have always done it very well, but we’ve never learnt or experienced electoral campaigning. We conducted a clean electoral campaign in which we focused on our program and proposals for the constitution and the transitional government and we relied on our activists’ energy and motivation, mainly young ones, but we’ve suffered from our weak implantation in cities and countryside, which negatively impacted on transforming our political reputation into an electoral power. And we lost many voices by changing our name “PCOT” to “Al Badil (Revolutionary Alternative)”; many people didn’t recognise us on polling day.

We made a big mistake when we didn’t organise a supervisor for each polling station, which allowed some parties to use the opportunity to influence people. We’ve also faced the electoral campaign with very modest material means and we relied on campaign funding given by the authorities, which reached us very late in the campaign. Additionally, our candidates were the target of a very rude campaign of attacks because of our principles and integrity; some parties spread many rumours against us which didn’t allow us reach our target result of 10%.

Although our results are not satisfying, we’ve learnt a lot from this experience, we actually know our weaknesses and we are more convinced than ever of our principles.

Do you feel like the new government will make any deep social or economic changes? Will it pursue real justice against the former regime?

Chrif Khraief: We don’t believe that the new government, with its current composition, is willing to make radical and real changes on the social and economic fronts. Even before the first sitting of the Constituent Assembly, government members are reassuring the world that they would carry on the same way as the former regime. This is especially true regarding economic policy; they have stated they will pay foreign debts and they still sustaining the market economy that led to political dictatorship, economic regression and social inequality.

On the social front, the Constituent Assembly has shown no interest in poor people and disadvantaged interior of Tunisia, which were neglected for a long time under Ben Ali, and that was one of the reasons behind the protests and strikes. And given the lack of judicial reform, even if the government makes decisions, they would be fake because we can’t exercise real democracy when the agents of the former regime are still active, the judiciary system is still not fair or free, the media is still not free, the administration is still corrupt and people involved in torture and corruption are still free. We can’t talk about real justice without talking about accountability and giving back esteem to the victims of Ben Ali.

There have been major strikes in the tourism, transport and other industries since the election. Have PCOT members been involved in or supporting these actions? What role is the General Union of Tunisian Workers (UGTT) taking in the revolutionary struggle?

Chrif Khraief: The PCOT was not behind those protests, but it’s supporting them and forever will! We will insist that the government realise the promises it gave just after the revolution — like cancelling interim work wages, subsidising those worked on a fixed wage, adopting transparent standards of recruitment.

Workers are, at present, split into two groups. There are revolutionaries who aim to concretise internal democracy within the General Union of Tunisian Workers, and defend workers against capitalists and bosses. This includes democrats, left, syndicalists and others. This was always present in the brightest moment of the UGTT: the strike of January 26, 1978; the bread revolution of 1984; legitimacy fights of 1985; support for Iraq in Gulf War of 1990; the Redeyef and Oum Laarayes uprising of 2008. But mainly and above all, these workers were involved in the revolutionary movements that led to the downfall of Ben Ali on January 14, 2011.

All activists of this kind are going to have an assembly in December to pursue the path of revolution and to install a real democracy and to pursue defending workers’ rights.

[The second kind of workers] are the bureaucrats who represent the counter-revolutionary power (bosses’ syndicate) that wants negotiations to fail … rather than making the union a tool of worker’s independence and power. These bureaucrats are the ones who supported Ben Ali until the last moment and treated revolutionaries as troublemakers.

What do you think about the #Occupy protest movement that has been growing around the world and which saw an Occupy Tunis protest on November 11?

Jilani Hamemi: The #Occupy protest movement that began in Wall Street is a logical consequence of the collapsing capitalist system. In fact, the capitalist system has passed through many crises through its history, but they are getting closer and closer … And now, the Occupy protest movement is giving hope that we can change this capitalist system to a communist one. This movement is tagging its origin to the “Arab spring” and it’s materialising into a similar revolutionary struggle against miserable life conditions.

The capitalist system is now making every effort to absorb the street’s anger and make frequent interventions – but these have not worked so far, because the people want real change: a minimum guaranteed industrial wage, a guaranteed yearly income, the right of work, the right to free education, of public health care, the cancelling of debts, and even the cancelling of many countries foreign debt, such as Tunisia’s. They are demanding a new society based on democracy, equality and freedom.

That’s the real way of struggle. We have to hold on to reach our objective. The struggle won’t be easy, but it’s not impossible for us to win. But we must remain critically aware of the movement’s weaknesses.

Source

Turkey: Sixth Congress of the Labour Party (EMEP) Resolution

We support people who have rebelled for their rights and freedoms, condemn the imperialist conspiracies against Syria and Iran.

During 2011, the Arab peoples of North Africa and the Middle East have raised a after another. They did not want to be reported to the consequences of the hegemony of monopoly capitalism, nor voted on unemployment and poverty, and have rejected the repression of autocratic dictatorships that preserved this hegemony. The regimes despotic that lasted for 30 or 40 years have been the main reason for disorganization of the oppressed masses and have served as obstacles to the realization. The people who have raised have won some victories, but failed to collect the real fruits of their struggle, such as risucire to conquer their own political power. Therefore, the bourgeois reactionary forces backed by Western imperialism have maintained or are trying to maintain their hegemony, which has been questioned, strengthening their bases with new workers.

The Arab peoples that have been raised, have realized their potential and have tasted some victories, their struggles have not yet been crushed in any part, except Libya. Despite the low level of consciousness and organization, people have brought continue their uprising with an effort that aims to overcome the weaknesses, and continue to against the attacks of the reactionary forces that have reorganized especially through of political support, which has become a force moderate and pro-U.S. based in almost all countries.

We, the communist and workers parties and organizations have signed this document, meeting in VI Congress of the Workers’ Party of Turkey, we express our pride and solidarity with the mass struggles of the peoples, not only of the Arab countries of North Africa and the Middle East, but also of Europe, from Greece to Spain, Latin America, Venezuela and Ecuador, for the rights and social freedoms and national, as we proclaim our support for the Palestinian people’s just struggle against imperialism and Zionism in Israel.

Nevertheless, we are aware of the fact that our main weakness is the inadequate level of consciousness and organization of the peoples of the world, both during the uprisings in other processes. The imperialists and their accomplices take advantage of this weakness in their efforts to restore the decaying bases of their sovereignty and punish these struggles by ideological penetration and infiltration into the ranks of the people who claim to want to support, exploiting the struggle for their interests and by eliminating popular features.

The Western imperialism, which keeps the global hegemony in his hands and tries to strengthen its position in competition with the imperialist powers on the rise, not only aims to strengthen its hegemony in countries traditionally under its influence of suppressing popular struggles, but also attempts to establish its hegemony influencing people and their struggles, using them as levers to countries like Syria and Iran, which have not yet been subdued.

We do not support schemes and Assad | Ahmadinejad. However, we stress the fact that when the imperialist powers involved with the support of the reactionary forces of region such as Turkey and Saudi Arabia, in the name dell’apoggio the so-called “opposition” Syria and Iran under the pretext of fighting for “democracy” and “suppression of dictators, “these policies have nothing to do with rights to self-determination and their democratic aspirations and social. We oppose all actions imperialist – both economic and political and military – whatever their reason, they are desired by their accommodating staff or not, and condemn these policies only bring war, bloodshed and suffering.

We appeal to the peoples of the world, especially the peoples of Syria and Iran, to be in guard against the traps and imperialist interventions like those that occurred in Libya, show solidarity with the struggles of the peoples of the region and to support the fight against imperialism and the reactionary forces.

Ankara, December 2011

Communist Party of Albania
Communist Party of Benin
Workers’ Party of Belgium
New Cyprus Party
Marxist Leninist Communist Party of Ecuador
Spanish Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist)
Movement for the Reorganization of the Communist Party of Greece (1918-55)
Communist Party of Workers of Tunisia
Turkish Labour Party

Source

In Libya, the end of 42 years of….

…self-directed economic development aimed at giving Libyans a stake in their economy.

I’m not saying Gaddafi’s Libya was a model society, but it did offer its own citizens advantages that are conspicuously missing in Washington’s Third World satellites.

Margaret Coker, writing in today’s Wall Street Journal (“Libya speeds oil output but sees hurdles ahead”) serves up an example of Gaddafi’s friendly-to-Libyans, not-so-friendly-to-overseas-investor policies. Among “many of (Gadaffi’s) heavy-handed state policies” were “foreign-currency exchange limits and a law that forced private enterprises to make Libyan employees shareholders of the business.” These policies “crimped corporate work during the Gadhafi regime,” writes Coker, by which she means encroached on the profits of Western banks, corporations and investors. Bad man.

In the same issue of the WSJ we learn that Washington is quietly funnelling bunker buster bombs and other ammunition to the group of anti-democratic oil monarchies that make up the Gulf Cooperation Council. The aim is to build up these despotic regimes as “a unified counter-weight to Iran” (“U.S. plans bomb sales in Gulf to counter Iran.”)

The GCC, it will be recalled, dispatched tanks and troops to crush a popular uprising in one of its member states, Bahrain, while it was also helping rebels oust the Gaddafi government in Libya. GCC member, Qatar, an absolutist state, was particularly helpful to the Libyan rebels, dispatching hundreds of ground troops to aid the cause of…

• (A) Building democracy in Libya?
• (B) Ending Gaddafi policies that crimped corporate work?

You decide.

Finally, yesterday’s WSJ ( “U.S. to build up military in Australia”) points to plans for “a new and permanent U.S. military presence in Australia…a step aimed at countering China’s influence and reasserting U.S. interests in the region.” Notes WSJ reporter Laura Meckler, the “South China Sea, which China considers as its sovereign territory…is important economically.”

Indeed it is.

Fortunately, the combined forces of the US Army, US Navy, US Marine Corps, US Air Force and the CIA exist to make sure the South China Sea—and every other economically important region of the globe—is available to Wall Street for its aggrandizement…and free from anyone who might exercise their sovereignty to impose policies that crimp corporate work.

Source

Oh Revolutionaries of the Squares. They will not Rob us Twice!

Oh Revolutionaries of the Squares. They will not Rob us Twice!

Let us form popular committees in all the revolutionary squares

When the revolutionaries chanted for the continuation of the revolution they believed. They believed when they insisted that it had not been completed. Now it is returning, crashing into the squares. The price of freedom and justice is being paid for with the life and eyes of it youth. Ten months since the spread of the Egyptian revolution’s first spark, the foresight of those has been proven, those who called for not leaving the square, and those who sat-in time after time demanding retribution, the rights of the martyrs, the release of their colleagues who had been tried in military courts, and the departure of a regime that gave the military salute the first day, in order to steal good Egyptian hearts then swoop down and torture, arrest, judge and slaughter us today with its bullets and deadly bombs, revealing its true face. It has always been, since the first day, an extension of Mubarak’s regime.

In the January – February round of our noble revolution, when the revolutionaries were facing the regime’s bullets with their bare chests in defense of their sit-ins, and when they were sowing the seeds of freedom with every martyr and injury, some elected themselves and decided to represent the revolution and speak in its name, claiming that it was a revolution without leadership. Thus they decided that they were the leadership. They stole the revolution and diverted the path of resistance into the path of negotiations, agreements, and documents that represented their interests. They wrestled with the constitution and the elections, denying the demands for retribution, for trying the killers, and for purging all the regime’s institutions.

Today the same situation is repeating itself with more ferocity, and as parliamentary seats and political power float on the horizon, they ask full of insolence, “Who are those people in Tahrir?” We are answering them: “We are the youth of Tahrir, and all Egypt’s squares are the revolution. We are the revolutionaries of January and February, the revolutionaries of April, August, and September. We are those who did not sell out the revolution. We are those who do not forget the martyrs of yesterday and today. We are those who are being martyred now in the squares while your mouths water for power you do not deserve.

This time, we will not let them steal our revolution. This time, we will not let them speak in our name. They’re searching for the revolution’s voice? Then let us form committees in the squares of every revolutionary governorate.

Let us make them listen to the revolution’s voice. The voice of January and February and what is between them.

The voice of the ongoing revolution. Its only legitimate spokesman.

The Popular Committees for the Defense of the Egyptian Revolution

Contact: Facebook (The Popular Committees for the Defense of the Egyptian Revolution)

Source

Qatari Regime “An Enemy to Tunisia and Arab World”: Hama Hamami Communist Workers Party of Tunisia (PCOT)

Hama Hamami Leader of Communist Workers Party of Tunisia (POCT) , claimed yesterday (i.e 19th October 2011 –editor OA) that ”The Qatari regime is an enemy to Tunisia and the Arab World,” referring to Qatar’s alleged involvement in the guiding of democratic uprisings of 2011 in North Africa and the Middle East.

Qatar’s role in the “Arab Spring” has been a source of controversy among politicians and citizens across the Arabic-speaking world.

Many have claimed that the tiny Gulf emirate has been promoting its agenda through its television channel Al Jazeera, while others have claimed that Qatar has broader motives for backing and supporting Islamist parties.

The Tunisian Islamist Party Ennahda, whose historic election victory solidified its hold on the largest share of seats in the Constituent Assembly, was accused of having affiliations with, and accepting financial aid from, Qatar.

The extent of political and economic Qatari involvement in Tunisia’s affairs has been a large point of contention in Tunisia since the revolution. Hamma Hamami, leader of POCT, stated that Qatar is playing a dangerous game, and is only serving its own agenda. He also added that Qatar is an agent of USA and Israel.

“Qatar is playing a dangerous role under the umbrella of USA; it is a government that serves America’s agenda, and also has direct relations with Israel. Qatar’s intentions are not patriotic,” Hamami said.

Hamami also asserted that Qatar is attempting to guide moderate Islamic parties, which are popular in Qatar, toward the political choices of the USA.

“Qatar is conditioning popular Islamic parties to serve American and Western interests, and they are managing to achieve that end through the messages that Ennahda is sending to America and Western society. Ennahda is basically assuring the west that the relationship between Tunisia and the West will not change. I do not have concrete proof but this is my political analysis.”

Hamami also referred specifically to Al Jazeera, claiming that during the electoral campaign the network was 90% pro-Ennahda.

When asked about Qatar’s support for Tunisia economically, he said that Tunisia does not need financial aid as much as it needs a, “political economy.”

“Tunisia is a self-sufficient country that is rich with natural resources – it is not about having money. A good example is Libya: The country was rich but they were living in awful conditions,” he added.

“The revolutions were authentic, but the USA wants to orient these new democratic movements in their own direction,” he added.

Samir Dilou, an Ennahda member who is rumored to hold the post of the Human Rights and Transitional Justice Minister (and to be spokesperson of the upcoming Government) disagreed with Hamami.

“I respect what he said, but I do not agree with him. It is his political opinion and it lacks any concrete proof.”

He added that Tunisia’s relations with Qatar are no different from Tunisia’s relations with other Arab countries.

“Our relations with Qatar are nothing but friendly, just like any other Arab country. We want what’s in our nation’s best interest, and if that involves having economic relations with Qatar, or any other Arab country, then we will not be against it. We welcome all Arab investors.”

When asked about Al Jazeera being Pro-Ennahda, he replied,”We actually protested against Al Jazeera before because some of its broadcasts were anti-Ennahda. We respect media but Al Jazeera is sometimes right and sometimes wrong.”

Source

Lavrenti Beria: The Victory of the National Policy of Lenin and Stalin

The Fifteenth Anniversary of Soviet Power in Georgia

THE fifteen years of Soviet power in Georgia represent splendid pages in the new history of the people of Georgia.

Under the banner of the national policy of Lenin and Stalin, the peoples of Soviet Georgia in close collaboration with the peoples of the whole of the Soviet Union are successfully and victoriously building socialism.

I

The national policy of tsarism was a policy of colonization and Russification, of merciless peoples oppression and exploitation of enslaved.

In its policy of conquest in the South and East, Russian tsarism dug deep with its preying claws into the body of the peoples of Georgia. With the backing of the princes, nobles and landowners of Georgia, at the expense of concessions to them of the right to exploit and plunder the masses, tsarism strove to consolidate and maintain its rule in Georgia.

The enslaved peasantry of Georgia rose up time and time again against the oppression and violence of the landlords and tsarist autocracy. In 1812-13 the peasants rose up in Cachetia; in 1841, in Guria; in 1857, in Mingrelia; in 1858, in Imeretia.

The tsarist generals, princes and landowners organized a bloody bacchanalia to suppress the revolutionary uprisings of the peasants.

“The insurgent villages”, wrote General Yermolov, the governor of Georgia, “were devastated and burned down, the gardens and vineyards were cut down to the roots, and for many years to come these traitors will not return to their original state. Extreme poverty will be their punishment.” [1]

Waves of revolutionary struggle by the toilers of Georgia rose up with new forces against the autocracy, when the working class of Georgia and the Trans-Caucasus came onto the scene of class struggle.

The years 1902-05 were years of constant unrest, uprisings of the peasants and strikes by the workers.

Vorontsov-Dashkov, governor of the Caucasus, was compelled in “a most loyal document”, addressed to the tsar in the year 1907, to admit the extreme stubbornness with which the toiling masses of Georgia were fighting for their emancipation against the autocracy, the landowners and capitalism.

“At the time of my arrival in this region”, wrote Vorontsov-Dashkov, “the revolutionary movement, obviously connected with the movement throughout the empire, had taken on dimensions dangerous to the state. I immediately placed Tiflis under martial law. At the same time part of the Tiflis province and the whole of the province of Kutais were in the throes of unrest among the peasant population, accompanied by the destruction of the estates of the landlords, the refusal by the peasants to render services, refusal to recognize the village authorities, the forcible seizure of private lands, mass felling of trees in the grounds of governmental and private country villas…. In Tiflis, Baku and other towns in these parts strikes by workers of all trades, including domestic workers, took place almost every day. . . .”

“As a result of the general strike of postal, telegraph and railway workers, the province of Kutais was completely cut off from Tiflis. All railway stations within its confines were seized by armed revolutionaries. The Surama tunnel was blocked up by two engines dispatched from opposite ends, for the purpose of preventing the movement of troops from Tiflis. . . .”

“At the slightest action taken, the rural governing authorities were subjected to raids, and their property burned down by crowds of peasants. Meetings and demonstrations have been taking place throughout the villages, and the idea of the equality of the classes, the abolition of capitalism, and changes in the existing system of government openly propagated. . . . Various repressive measures were adopted by the governing authorities of the Caucasus against the movement among the Georgian rural masses described above. Ever since 1902, troops have been sent to Guria time and time again, penalties were inflicted on the rural councils, and agitators were arrested and exiled to distant parts. . . .”

This is how the really scared tsarist satrap reported the revolutionary movement of the Georgian workers and peasants.

Even a satrap like Vorontsov-Dashkov was compelled, in a strictly secret letter addressed to the Tsar, to recognize the extreme hardship of the economic conditions of the Georgian peasantry, apparently trying to justify himself in the eyes of the Tsar and to lay the responsibility for the revolutionary events taking place in Georgia onto his predecessors in the governorship of Georgia and the Caucasus.

“The abolition of feudal rights in the confines of the Trans-Caucasus and especially in Georgia”, he wrote, “was conducted in conditions especially advantageous to the landlords, and disadvantageous to the peasantry; moreover, . . . . it increased the land service of the peasants for the landlords above the average existing in the feudal days. . . The fiscal contribution to the state is collected, legally or illegally. . . . If part of the peasant lands becomes overgrown with trees, it is turned over to the item covering fiscal contribution on state forests; if another part of the peasants’ land finds itself under water owing to a river changing its course, it comes under the heading of state fishing rights. . . . Things have come to such a pass that the nut trees grown by the villagers themselves in their own yards come under the heading making them liable to state contributions.

“The peasants, with a total area of land twice as large as the area under private ownership, pay twenty times more than the private owners in monetary taxes alone.”

This exploitation of the toiling masses of the peasantry was supplemented by the arbitrary acts of the nobles, princes, officials and police.

Bribery and violence were the rule in the rural courts and rural governing bodies. Together with the officers of the tsarist police, the Georgian landowners flogged, tortured and mercilessly exploited the toilers.

The countless punitive expeditions and exaction of penalties were accompanied by bestial cruelty and violence. In the interests of colonizing the country, German colonists, Greeks from Anatolia, Turkish Armenians and Russian dissenters were increasingly allowed to settle in Georgia.

Out of the total expenditure of the rural bodies, amounting to 4,670,000 rubles, 57 per cent was spent on the upkeep of the police, and only 4 per cent on national education. The policy of Russification was carried through the schools. There were few schools, and the system of teaching in the schools was on an extremely low level.

The direct result of this policy of tsarism was that the bulk of the population was illiterate.

“Tsarism deliberately cultivated patriarchal-feudal oppression in the outlying regions, in order to keep the masses in a state of slavery and ignorance. Tsarism deliberately settled colonizers on the best spots in the outlying regions in order to force the natives into the worst areas and to intensify national enmity. Tsarism restricted, and at times simply did away with, the native schools, theatres and educational institutions in order to keep the masses in intellectual darkness. Tsarism frustrated the initiative of the best members of the native population. Finally, tsarism suppressed all activity on the part of the populace of the border regions.” [2]

But while the tsarist autocracy was establishing a bloc with the national bourgeoisie, princes, nobles and landlords of Georgia, so as to stabilize its oppression of the toiling masses of the enslaved nationalities, by trying to inflame enmity between the different nations, the advanced representatives of the working class and toiling masses of Russia and Georgia established a close international fighting alliance against the autocracy, against capitalism.

The foremost proletarians of Russia heartily greeted the heroic struggle of the workers and peasants of Georgia and the Caucasus against tsarist autocracy, and offered them their support.

The following decision was passed by the Third Congress of the R.S.D.L.P. (Bolsheviks) in connection with the revolutionary activities of the peasants in Georgia in 1905:

“Bearing in mind

“1. That the special conditions of the social and political life of the Caucasus favored the creation there of the most militant organizations of our Party;

“2. That the revolutionary movement among the majority of the population of the Caucasus both in the towns and in the villages has already reached the stage of a popular uprising of the whole people against the autocracy;

“3. That the autocratic government is already sending troops and artillery into Guria, and is preparing to mercilessly crush all the most important centers of the uprising;

“4. That the victory of the autocracy over the uprising of the people in the Caucasus, facilitated by the fact that the population there is composed of different nationalities, will have the most harmful consequences for the success of the uprising in the rest of Russia;

“This Third Congress of the R.S.D.L.P., therefore, in the name of the class-conscious proletariat of Russia, sends warm greetings to the heroic proletariat and peasantry of the Caucasus and instructs the central and local committees of the Party to adopt the most energetic measures to spread information concerning the state of affairs in the Caucasus in the widest possible manner, through pamphlets, meetings, workers’ conferences, exchange of views in circles, etc., and also for timely support to the Caucasus by all means at their disposal.” [3]

In their support of the unstable throne, the governor and the tsarist generals, in collaboration with the Georgian princes and nobles, and helped by the treachery of the Georgian Mensheviks and nationalist parties, mercilessly meted out punishment against the toiling masses of Georgia, against the revolutionary workers, suppressing any action on their part with fire and sword. The tsarist government spread the bones of the best revolutionary representatives of the Georgian people all along the long road from Georgia to Siberia.

Such was the “national policy” of the tsarist autocracy.

II

During the years between the victory of the October Socialist Revolution in Russia and the establishment of Soviet power in Georgia, the latter country suffered almost three years of the rule of the Menshevik nationalists.

Not only did the Menshevik rulers of Georgia not provide the toiling masses of Georgia with freedom, not only did they not bring about the economic and national-cultural regeneration of Georgia, but, on the contrary, they disorganized the economic life of the country which was weak enough as it was, they caused the healthy shoots of culture which had developed among the people themselves to decay, they betrayed and sold the Georgian people to the imperialists of the West, with their support of the oppressive hand of the princes, nobles, landlords and kulaks in Georgia. Under the rule of the Mensheviks, the Georgian people against experienced severe suffering.

While appealing for “democratic liberties”, the Mensheviks at the same time openly and cynically betrayed the interests of the Georgian people to the bourgeoisie and imperialists.

“I know”, said Noy Jordania, the leader of the Menshevik government, “that enemies will say that we are on the side of the imperialists. That is why I must say most forcibly here: I prefer the imperialists of the West to the fanatics of the East.” [4]

And the Mensheviks preferred the imperialists of the West to the revolutionary liberation of the toiling masses, which was coming from the East.

The Mensheviks concealed their mercenary conduct in favor of the imperialists of the West, under cover of “democratic” talk about the “independence” of Georgia.

With regard to the arrival in Georgia of the German troops of occupation, the Menshevik government of Georgia made the following statement on June 13, 1918:

“The Georgian government informs the population that the German troops who have entered Tiflis have come at the invitation of the Georgian government itself, with a view to defending the borders of the Georgian democratic republic, in full accordance and on the instructions of the Georgian government.” [5]

The independence of Georgia became out and out deception; actually the arrival of German troops in Georgia meant that it was occupied and seized in its entirely by the German imperialists. As Lenin said, “It was an alliance between German bayonets and the Menshevik government against the Bolshevik workers and peasants.”

After the German revolution in November, 1918, the Germans were compelled to quit Georgia. Their place was taken by the English army of occupation.

The Mensheviks pretended that the English occupants had also been “invited” by the Georgian government for the purpose of defending the borders of the Georgian Democratic Republic and in “full accordance” with, and on the “instructions” of the government.

On December 22, 1918, on the occasion of the entry into Georgia of the English troops of occupation, the government of Georgia sent the following note signed by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, E. Gegechkori to the chairman of the English Mission, Colonel Jordan:

“1. The Georgian government does not consider it necessary to introduce foreign troops on Georgian territory in order to keep order, as the government itself has sufficient forces at its disposal for this purpose.

“2. If the introduction of troops is for any other purpose, the Georgian government categorically declares that such cannot take place without the agreement of the Georgian government.”

In reply to this lying, sham declaration by Gegechkori, the chairman of the English Mission, Jordan, wrote the following to the Menshevik government on December 23, 1918, the following day:

“Acting on instructions received by me from General Thompson, Commander of the allied forces in Baku, I would ask your Excellency to set aside accommodation for one brigade of infantry, one brigade of artillery and 1,800 horses, and also suitable accommodation for Headquarters. I am sure that my request will be granted and that every assistance will be afforded to the entrance of the allied troops. I shall be very much obliged if you will send me a car and an officer tomorrow to show me the accommodation which you have set aside for the allied troops.” [6]

This is how the British command talked to the “Independent” Georgian government of the Mensheviks, knowing full well that Gegechkori’s “objections” against the introduction of British troops had been made merely to pull wool over the eyes of the toilers of Georgia and that the Menshevik government would agree with pleasure to the entry into Georgia of units of a British army of occupation.

As we know, this was the case.

The “independent” rulers of Georgia actually were the bribed puppets, who danced to the tune of the agents of the English imperialists.

“When a life-and-death struggle is raging between proletarian Russian and the imperialist Entente, only two possibilities confront the outlying regions:

“Either they join forces with Russia, and then the toiling masses of the outlying regions will be emancipated from imperialist oppression;

“Or they join forces with the Entente, and then the yoke of imperialism is inevitable. There is no third solution.” [7]

During the period of its rule in Georgia, Georgian Menshevism brought to its logical culmination its long road of treachery and betrayal of the working class and toiling masses, began by it during the years before the beginning of the struggle for the Soviet government.

On April 28, 1918, in the Trans-Caucasian Seim, one of the leaders of the Georgian and Russian Menshevism, Iraklii Tseretelli, said:

“When Bolshevism originated in Russia, and when the hand of death was raised there over the life of the state, we fought with all the strength at our disposal against Bolshevism, for we understood that a blow delivered against the Russian nation and the Russian state was a blow against the whole of democracy. We fought there against the murderers of the state, the murderers of the nations, and we shall fight here against the murderers of the nations with the same self-sacrifice.” [8]

These flowery phrases of Tseretelli signified that the Mensheviks preferred a bloc with the whiteguards, the avowed enemies of the Soviet government, to any sort of rapprochement with the Bolsheviks.

Indeed, at a conference of representatives of the reactionary Kuban government and whiteguard armies, held on September 25, 1918, in Yekaterinodar, at which Generals Denikin, Alexeyev, Romanovsky, Dragomirov and Lukomsky were present, E. Gegechkori, the Georgian Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Menshevik government, made the following frank declaration:

“On the question of our attitude to the Bolsheviks, I may state that the struggle against Bolshevism within our boundaries is a merciless one. We are crushing Bolshevism with all the means at our power as an anti-state movement which menaces the integrity of our state, and I think that in this respect we have already given a number of proofs which speak for themselves. . . . At the same time I consider it my duty to remind you that the services we have rendered you in the struggle against Bolshevism should also not be forgotten. . . . We are now all aiming our blows at the one spot which at the present moment is a hostile force both for you and for us. . . .” [9]

By acting as the lackeys of the Western imperialists, by entering into a bloc with the whiteguards against the October Socialist Revolution, by supporting the acts of oppression undertaken by the bourgeoisie, princes, nobles and landowners in Georgia, the Georgian Mensheviks strengthened capitalism and doomed the working class and the toiling masses of peasants in Georgia to heavy torture and exploitation.

“There is no doubt,” said Noy Jordania, “that every state, within the bounds of-bourgeois society, will in one way or another serve the interests of the bourgeoisie. The Georgian state can also not avoid this at all. To get rid of this is pure utopia, and we are not in the least striving after such a situation.” [10]

And the Georgian Mensheviks faithfully served the interests of the bourgeoisie.

All their talk about socialism was mere bluff to deceive the toiling masses.

“You think,” said Noy Jordania, “that if the government is a Socialist one, it must bring about socialism. That is the view of the Bolsheviks. . . . We think otherwise. We say that when socialism is established in other countries, then it will be established here also.” [11]

By the autumn of 1920, the economic crisis in Georgia was at an extremity. The supplies left in Georgia by the former tsarist army had all been used up. The majority of the factories and works were not working. Railway transport had completely broken down. The Georgian village was experiencing ruin and poverty. The head of the government, Noy Jordania. was compelled to admit the following:

“A short time ago we said that we were racing towards catastrophe in the economic sense…. But now this supposition has already justified itself. Now each of us is most acutely feeling the effects of bitter reality. We have already arrived at the catastrophe.” [12]

Accordingly, by that time the enormous supplies left behind in Tiflis by the former Russian army had been completely consumed.

The Assistant Minister of Labor, Eradze, speaking at a Congress of Railwaymen in Georgia in 1920, said:

“Today the working class of Georgia is passing through a severe, acute economic crisis. Their poverty and need are extreme, and henceforth we can expect a rapid, severe process of physical degeneration among our class. Not a single democratic class or group in our society is in such a hopeless position as the workers in the towns.” [13]

This is how Mr. Eradze summed up the results of the Menshevik policy in Georgia.

The toiling masses of Georgia replied to this treacherous policy of the Mensheviks by an uprising.

In the years 1918, 1919, 1920, waves of uprisings against the rule of the Mensheviks, led by the Bolshevik organizations, rose high in Georgia. The peasants of Guria and Mingrelia, the peasants of the districts of Gorrisk, Dushetia, Lagodekh, and others, and of the Kutais and Lechhum counties rose up in revolt, as did the peasants of Abhasia. In 1920, the toiling masses of South Osetia rose up in arms. There were strikes among the basic masses of the workers of Tiflis, Kutais, Poti, Chiatur and other towns.

The Menshevik government used fire and sword against the revolutionary activities of the workers and peasants of Georgia.

Noy Jordania tried to justify the treacherous, bloody struggle against the revolutionary activities of the toiling masses in the following way:

“Although you should not have been surprised at the peasant revolts against us,” said Jordania, “we have so far forgotten Marxism and fallen victims to the muddled outlook of the Socialist Revolutionaries that up to now many of us regard these insurgents as revolutionaries, and reluctantly agree to adopt repression against them. It is time we returned to Marx and stood firm guard over the revolution, against peasant reaction.” [14]

And so by hiding behind loud phrases, by falsifying Marxism, and under the banner of whiteguard, interventionist counter-revolution, the Mensheviks meted out punishment to the revolutionary workers and peasants.

“It is night. Fire is visible on all sides,” so runs the diary of Jugel, the Menshevik punitive expedition leader, former chief of the “people’s” guard, who led the suppression of the peasant uprisings, “they are the homes of the insurgents burning. All around us the Osetin villages are alight. With my soul at rest and a clear conscience I gaze upon the ashes and clouds of smoke.” [15]

Such was the “national policy” of the Mensheviks.

During the period of Menshevik rule in Georgia, the country was visited by Karl Kautsky, MacDonald, Snowden, Vandervelde, and other leaders of the Second International. They hypocritically called the bacchanalia and demoralization of Menshevism, its treachery in favor of imperialism, and the oppression of the toiling masses, a “socialist paradise”. But these loud phrases of the leaders of the Second International could not cover up the disgraceful collapse and bankruptcy of Georgian and international Menshevism, as witnessed in Georgia.

The Georgian Mensheviks are the foulest, most perfidious traitors to the Georgian people. They tore Georgia away from revolutionary Russia, and together with the Dashnak and Mussavatists of the Trans-Caucasus, converted it into a jumping-off ground for foreign intervention and bourgeois-whiteguard counter-revolution against the Soviet government.

The Mensheviks inspired and organized the reactionary forces of the nobility, the princes, the clergy and the bourgeoisie against the revolutionary movement of the workers and peasants of Georgia. The Mensheviks pursued a policy of brutal national jingoism and set the peoples of Trans-Caucasus one against the other. The organized bloody drives against the national minorities of Georgia, the Osetins, the Abkhasians, the Armenians and the Adjarians. The Georgian Mensheviks, together with the Mussavatists and Dashnaks, were the organizers of the Zamhora pogrom of revolutionary soldiers. They treacherously fired on a meeting of the workers of Tiflis in the Alexander Gardens. Together with the Dashnaks, they organized blood-letting fratricidal war between the Georgians and Armenians.

The hearts of the toilers of Georgia are filled with tremendous hatred towards the Menshevik traitors.

It is the lot of the miserable remnants of the Mensheviks today to wander, in emigration, around the backyards, ante-chambers and back entrances of the agents of the imperialists in the West.

On February 25, 1921, the Georgian people, supported by the Russian proletariat and the workers’ and peasants’ Red Army, overthrew the rule of the Mensheviks and set up a Soviet government, and, under the banner of Lenin and Stalin, took the high road to victories in the field of socialist construction.

III

In the fifteen years that the Soviet government has existed in Georgia, the toilers there have achieved tremendous successes in building the economic and national-cultural life of their country. These successes are the triumph of the national policy of the Bolshevik Party.

The establishment of Soviet power has led to a stormy growth of economic and cultural construction in Georgia.

Georgia has changed from a colony of Russian tsarism, “a country more agrarian even than Russia” (Lenin), and has become an advanced industrial and agrarian republic.

While capital investments in the industry of the U.S.S.R. during the First Five-Year Plan amounted to 506 per cent of the figure for the whole of the restoration period, in Georgia in industry alone it was 934 per cent. The increase in capital investments for 1934 throughout the Soviet Union was 19.4 per cent and for Georgia 32 per cent. In 1936, the increase in capital investments in industry is to be 17.7 per cent, and for Georgia 38.4 per cent.

While for the whole of the Soviet Union the production of electrical energy in 1934, as compared with 1913, rose by 1,331 per cent, the figure for the same period of time for Georgia was 2,259 per cent.

While the total production of the whole of industry in the Soviet Union amounted in 1935 to 542 per cent of the 1913 figures, for Georgia it amounted to 1,908 per cent.

The total production of the whole of Georgian industry in 1935 rose to 473 million rubles and in 1936 will amount to 600 million.

During the First Five-Year Plan, capital investments in the national economy of Georgia amounted to 700 million rubles, while during the year 1935 alone, 401 million rubles were invested. The plan for 1936 provides for capital investments in Georgia to the amount of 616 million rubles.

During the fifteen years that the Soviet government has existed in Georgia, a number of entirely new branches of industry have been built up. The share of industry in the general production of the national economy of Georgia has increased to 74.9 per cent.

The industrial and economic development of Georgia is being built up on the basis of a powerful supply of electrical power. By the end of 1935, the capacity of the electrical power stations of Georgia was 105,000 kilowatts, and in 1936 it will increase to 162,000 kilowatts, as against 8,000 in 1913.

Only under the Soviet government have the rich resources of hydro-electrical power obtainable from the headlong rush of the mountain rivers been widely exploited.

The Chiatura manganese industry has been technically re-equipped. The Soviet government has already invested 45 million rubles in the manganese industry, and will invest another 17 million in 1936. Last year 1,180,000 tons of manganese were obtained.

With the Chiatura manganese as a base, a large ferrous-manganese works has been erected in the town of Jugeli (Zestafony).

The old Tkvibula coal mines have been reconstructed. New Tskvarchela coal mines have been equipped by the Soviet government.

Large oil refineries have been erected in Batum, which deal with three million tons of crude oil per year. Considerable work is being undertaken to discover oil deposits in the Shiraka steppes of Georgia.

The earth in Soviet Georgia is rich in the most varied kinds of minerals. A coal and ore industry has been constructed and is developing on a wide scale. The rich earth of Georgia has been put to the service of socialist construction, among other things, barytes, lithograph stone, diatomites and marble being prepared. In 1935-36, the production, of arsenic, molybdenum has been undertaken. In 1936, a start has been made with the building in Kutais of a huge works for the production of fertilizers.

Light and food industries have been created on a large scale. The value of the output of light industry increased from 2,155 thousand rubles in 1923-24 to 87,557 thousand in 1935, in other words, increased 40 times.

The value of the output of the food industry increased from nine million rubles in 1928 to 71 million in 1935; 90 per cent of the total production falling to the share of the factories and works built since the Soviet government was established.

Twenty-three million rubles were invested in the forestry and timber industries of Georgia during the First Five-Year Plan, while 41 million rubles have been invested in them during three years of the Second Five-Year Plan alone. In Zugdidi the important Ingursk paper works is under construction, its annual productivity to be 24,000 tons of various kinds of high-class paper.

Altogether, daring the period that the Soviet government has been in power in Georgia, a total of 117 different kinds of industrial enterprises have been constructed and completely re-equipped; and they represent 96.7 of the total {ands invested in the industry of Georgia.

Transport in Georgia by rail, water, road and air is also developing: 200 kilometers of new railroad have been constructed; 183 kilometers of main railway lines have been electrified. A new port is under construction on the Black Sea coast, at Ochemchira; 4,462 kilometers of paved main roads and improved roads have been completed; 50 motor routes connecting district centers with the railway stations, and serving to connect the different towns, stretch over a distance of 2,590 kilometers. In 1935 there was a regular service of Soviet airplanes flying over eight air routes.

The national policy of Lenin and Stalin of industrializing the national republics and raising them to the level of the foremost republics in the Soviet Union is embodied in all this great work of industrial construction in Georgia.

By mastering the advanced technique of the industry built up, by raising the productivity of labor on the basis of socialist competition, “shock” methods and the application of Stakhanov methods of work, under the leadership of the Bolshevik organizations of Georgia, the working class that has grown up is successfully fulfilling and overfulfilling the tasks set by the Party and the government.

The successes of Soviet Georgia are also tremendous as regards the improvement and socialist reconstruction of agriculture.

On the direct instructions of Lenin and Stalin, irrigation works have been widely developed. The Soviet government has irrigated over 100,000 hectares of land.

The swampy lands of the Kolhida plain lay untouched for centuries and were a hotbet of malaria fever. It was only the Soviet government which set about draining the Kolhida swamps. Forty-five million rubles have already been expended in the fulfillment of this task; 16,837 hectares have already been drained, and part of this area is being used to establish plantations of tea and citron fruits.

The total sown area in Georgia has grown from 738,000 hectares to 947,000 during the last fifteen years.

A tremendous piece of work is being done by the Bolsheviks of Georgia in connection with the development of valuable and technical cultures. The total area under tea plantations before the revolution amounted to 894 hectares. In their struggle to make the Soviet Union an independent country as regards tea, the Bolsheviks of Georgia have increased the area under tea plantations to 34,000 hectares in the year 1935. During the last three years the harvest on the tea plantations has been doubled. In 1935 over 12.5 million kilograms of green tea leaves were collected on the plantations. The tea industry of Georgia can now produce tea which is in no way inferior to Ceylon tea.

Before the revolution, the area under citron cultures did not exceed 500 hectares. By the year 1935, this area had already increased to 3,280 hectares. Last year Soviet Georgia gave the Land of Soviets about 200 million citron fruits. By decision of the C.C. of the C.P.S.U. and the Council of People’s Commissars of the U.S.S.R., the area under citron fruits in Georgia must be increased to 20,000 hectares by 1940. The Bolsheviks of Georgia have started a struggle for the fulfillment of this task, and there is not the slightest doubt that it will be successfully fulfilled. And Soviet Georgia will give the toilers of the Soviet countries not millions, but thousands of millions of citron fruits!

There are also the valuable cultures like eucalyptus trees, ether bearing plants and others. During the last two years alone, about one million eucalyptus trees have been planted, and by 1940 no less than ten million, trees will have been planted.

Georgia provides the highest grades of export tobacco—“trapezund” and “samsun”. In 1935 the tobacco plantations covered approximately 20,000 hectares; for purposes of export and for the production of high grade cigarettes, 15,875 tons of high class tobacco from Georgia and Abkhasia were collected and dispatched to the Moscow, Leningrad, Kharkov and other tobacco factories in the Soviet Union.

One of the most important branches of agriculture in Georgia is the cultivation of grapes. When the Mensheviks ruled Georgia, there was a decline in this sphere. Phylloxera destroyed whole hectares of vineyards. During the last few years the reduction in the area of vineyards has been stopped, and an increase has begun. During the period 1932-35, up to 4,000 new vineyards have been established. Cuttings from American vines have been planted over an area of 690 hectares. The total area of vineyards today is over 39,000 hectares. The grapes cultivated in Georgia supply the country with the best, high-class wines.

During the last five years alone new gardens have been laid out over an area of 12,000 hectares, the total area reaching the figure of 50,000 hectares. In the year 1935 over 21,000 tons of different kinds of fruit were delivered to the state.

Silk-worm production in Georgia is an important branch of economy, and has begun to flourish rapidly. In 1935, the silk growers of Georgia overfulfilled their plan, producing 2,552 tons of high quality cocoons.

By carrying out the instructions of the Party, the Bolsheviks of Georgia brought about a change in the development of live-stock breeding in 1934-35, and this branch of economy is rapidly rising. The plans covering the increase in the number of heads of cattle, large and small, were overfulfilled in 1935.

Advanced technical methods are being embodied in the agriculture of Soviet Georgia. Agriculture is being mechanized.

Thirty seven machine and tractor stations have been set up in the various districts of Georgia; 1,710 tractors and tens of thousands of different types of agricultural machinery are at work on the socialist fields.

Two hundred and fifty four state farms, including 117 large ones, have been set up in Georgia.

In the agricultural enterprises (in the state farms, machine and tractor stations, and so on) 26,000 permanent agricultural workers are engaged.

The tremendous work performed in Soviet Georgia to reconstruct agriculture is the embodiment of the national policy of Lenin and Stalin.

Before the revolution there was an acute land hunger in Georgia. Tens of thousands of peasants could find no outlet for their labor, and to avoid dying of starvation went to earn their livings far beyond the confines of Georgia. Today, as a result of the growth of industry and the development of agriculture, with the introduction into agriculture of valuable and technical cultures, an insufficiency of labor power is already making itself felt, while the intensive conduct of agriculture has created all the conditions necessary for a prosperous life for the collective farm peasantry.

The Bolsheviks of Georgia achieved all these successes in the development and improvement of agriculture through creating and strengthening the collective farming system. On January 1, 1936, 70 per cent of the peasant farms of Georgia were in collective farms. The collective farms are growing and gathering strength on the basis of the Stalinist statutes governing agricultural artels. With every year that passes their incomes are growing, and the value of the work day is rising. In Georgia there are already a number of collective farms whose total income, is over a million rubles. These are “millionaire” collective farms.

In these collective farms the value of each work day for the individual collective farmer has increased from 15 to 20 rubles; the average income per family belonging to the collective farm has reached the figure of from 8,000 to 12,000-15,000 rubles a year; while if the income from their kitchen gardens is taken into account, many hundreds of collective farmers in 1935 found themselves with an income of from 20,000 to 25,000-30,000 rubles, and certain individual families as much as 40,000 rubles.

The collective farming peasantry of Georgia are well fed, prosperous and happy. The collective farmers are full of song as they work on the tea; citron, tobacco, vine and other plantations.

The towns of Georgia are growing and being planned and beautified. During the last two years alone, 1934-35, 93 million rubles have been spent on municipal works and housing in Tiflis, and in 1936, 66 million rubles will be spent. Places like Kutais, Poti, Chiatura, which have become industrial towns, are also being planned and beautified.

The capitals of the autonomous republics and regions—Batum in Adjaria, Sukhoum in Abkhasia and Stalinir in South Osetinia—are being similarly dealt with. There is not a single regional and industrial center in Georgia where similar activity is not going forward.

Georgia is the health resort of the Soviet Union. There are such excellent health resorts on the Black Sea coast and in the mountains of Georgia as Borjom, Abastuman, Tshaltubo, Gulripsh, Gagri, Cobuleti, Bakuriani, Akhtala, Java, Bakhmaro, Shovi, Mahinjauri, Zeleny Mys. Thousands of toilers come to Georgia from all corners of the Soviet Union to restore their health.

Considerable work has been carried out to reconstruct and improve these health resorts. Tshaltubo, a health resort renowned throughout the whole of the Union, has been rebuilt. In 1936 building operations will begin on a new health resort, Mendji, where the waters are in no way inferior to those of Matsesta and Kislovodsk.

A total of more than 70 million rubles has been invested in the building of health resorts in Georgia during the period of the existence of the Soviet government.

Soviet power has ensured the real blossoming of the culture of the peoples of Georgia, culture national in forma and socialist in content.

Soviet Georgia will meet the twentieth anniversary of the October Socialist Revolution as a country where everybody is literate. Universal, compulsory, elementary education for children has been introduced. Today, 614,000 scholars are studying in the elementary and secondary schools of Georgia. There are 19,000 teachers working in elementary and secondary schools.

Under tsarisni there was not a single university in Georgia, but under the Soviet government 19 universities have been opened. In almost all these educational institutions the teaching is carried on entirely in the Georgian language.

During the period of the existence of the Soviet government, the universities in Georgia have trained 14,000 people of working class and peasant origin as engineers, agronomists, doctors, teachers, economists and others qualified to carry on the task of socialist construction.

Education is carried on in the native language in the schools and educational institutions of Georgia. The Russian language is also taught in the schools of Georgia.

There has been a big development of scientific research work under the Soviet government. One hundred and twenty of the most varied scientific research institutions have been set up, and the work of many of these institutes are of great scientific value for the whole of the Soviet Union.

Art and literature are flourishing. The Rustaveli and Mardjanishvili State Theaters have produced a number of highly artistic plays, which have advanced them to the ranks of the best theaters in the Soviet Union. In Georgia today 47 theaters are open, of which threequarters are conducted in the Georgian language.

The Soviet government organized a cinema industry in Georgia. A cinema factory has been constructed in Tiflis. The State Cinema Industry of Georgia has produced 80 Soviet films.

Physical culture is developing on a broad scale. On January 1, 1936, 110,000 sportsmen passed the Ready for Labor and Defense test and were presented with the badge known as the G.T.O. The sportsmen of Georgia have established a number of records covering the Soviet Union. During the 15 years of the existence of the Soviet government in Georgia, over 35 million books have been published. The works of Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin have been published in hundreds of thousands of copies in the Georgian language.

Writers and poets are growing up in Soviet Georgia. In their works they depict the problems and the heroic story of socialist construction. Soviet artists, architects and sculptors are growing up, who are enriching Soviet culture with new works of art.

The old generation of intellectuals have linked their fate fast with the toiling masses of Georgia; and together with them, shoulder to shoulder, are working to build up socialism. They have rallied around the Soviet government, around the Communist Party.

During the fifteen years of the existence of the Soviet government in Georgia new and strong forces of Soviet intellectuals have grown up from among the workers and peasants. These new forces, brought into being by the Soviet government, are filled with unbounded loyalty to it.

When the tsarist autocracy called up the sons of the toilers of Georgia to join the army, it sent them into distant parts of the Empire, fearing to leave them armed in their native towns and villages. Today, Soviet Georgia has its own national divisions which are the faithful fighting units of the mighty, glorious workers’ and peasants’ army of the great Land of Soviets.

In all this we have the embodiment of the national policy of Lenin and Stalin, under whose banner the toiling masses of Georgia liberated themselves from the yoke of tsarism and the Menshevik rulers, and are confidently marching along the road to a happy, joyful life.

The steadfast realization of the national policy of Lenin and Stalin ensures that the peoples of Georgia and the Trans-Caucasus live in staunch friendship and peace. Instead of the former national strife, inflamed by tsarism and the Mensheviks, friendship and collaboration flourishes among the peoples of Georgia.

The autonomous republics and regions which go to make up the Georgian Republic—Soviet Adjaria, Soviet Abhasia and Soviet South Osetinia—are growing and gathering strength.

Great is the friendship among the toiling peoples of Georgia, great is the friendship between the toiling peoples of Georgia and the peoples of Azerbaidjan and Armenia.

Comrade Molotov, the head of the Soviet government, said the followabout this friendship between the peoples of Soviet Caucasus:

“In the Trans-Caucasus, with its many nationalities, where, for a long time a fierce struggle raged between the toilers of different nationalities, a struggle inflamed in every possible way by the capitalists and henchmen of the tsar, we have brought about a situation where this struggle has been finally eliminated and where, in place of this struggle the lives of all the toilers of the Trans-Caucasus are flourishing in an atmosphere of peace.”

A big part in achieving these successes was played by Comrade Ordjonikidze, Comrade Stalin’s comrade-in-arms, under whose leadership the Bolsheviks of Georgia and the Trans-Caucasus consolidated and organized the Soviet government and routed the Mensheviks and those who deviated on the national question, educating broad masses of the toilers in the spirit of proletarian internationalism.

The deviators on the national question tried during the first years after the Soviet government was established to turn the Bolshevik organizations of Georgia from the right road. The national-deviation current in the ranks of the Communist Party of the Bolsheviks of Georgia constitutes an opportunist current which reflected the pressure upon various strata of the Party organizations by kulak-bourgeois-nationalist and Menshevik elements. The national-deviation current, having taken the road of struggle against the correct national policy of the Party, lowered itself to the platform of Georgian Menshevism. The national-deviation current was jingoism on the offensive reflecting the great-power bourgeois nationalism of the Georgian Mensheviks and national democrats. The national-deviation current reflected the interests and demands of the nobles, landowners and kulaks of Georgia.

Only by mercilessly crushing the national-deviation current did the Communist Party of Georgia ensure that the national policy of Lenin and Stalin would be successfully carried out, leading the work of socialist construction in Georgia, and educating the masses in the spirit of internationalism.

In the struggle for these victories of socialist construction, the Bolshevik Party of Georgia has become strong and has rallied still closer around the C.C. of the C.P.S.U. and Comrade Stalin.

Under the banner of the national policy of Lenin and Stalin, under the wise leadership of the Bolshevik Party, the toilers of Georgia are confidently marching forward to new victories for socialism.

Notes

1. Records of General Yermolov during the period of his governorship of Georgia. Printed in 1868.

2. Stalin, The Policy of the Soviet Government on the National Question in Russia. 1920.

3. Resolution of the Third Congress.

4. Stenogram of the First Session of the Constituent Assembly, January 14, 1920, p. 5

5. See the newspaper Borba (Struggle), June 13, 1918, No. 92.

6. Documents and Materials on the Foreign Policy of Trans-Caucasus and Georgia, Soviet Publication, Tiflis, 1919.

7. Stalin, The Policy of the Soviet Government on the National Question in Russia (1920).

8. From the stenographic report of the session of the Trans-Caucasian Seim, April 26, 1918.

9. Documents and Materials On the Foreign Policy of Trans-Caucasus and Georgia.

10. N. Jordania, Two Years. Reports and Speeches, p. 111.

11. Speech in the Georgian Parliament, June 16, 1918.

12. Speech at an economic conference.

13. Archives of the Trade Union Movement, No. 3, Item No. 280.

14. N. Jordania, Two Years, p. 119.

15. Jugel, The Heavy Cross.

Source: The Communist International, February 1937, Vol. XIV, No. 2