AGAINST TITOISM, THE CUBANS REAFFIRM THE REVOLUTIONARY ROAD
[We are printing below the full text of an editorial which appeared. in Granma, the official organ of the Central Committee of the Communist party of Cuba. The editorial is in reply to various articles in the Yugoslav press attacking certain positions of the Cuban revolutionary leadership as "sectarian. " 7
[The reply by the editors of Granma is of unusual interest, we believe, because of its clear statement of the Cuban position on a number of issues under discussion among revolutionists on a worldwide scale. Particularly worth noting are (1) the explanation of the forces impelling Latin America toward a socialist revolution; (2) the vigorous defense of the Vietnamese people against American imperialism, which includes an appeal to utilize revolutionary means to help them out;.and.(3) the reaffirmation of the stand.taken by the Cuban delegation at the twenty-third congress of the Communist party of the Soviet Union in favor of united action to help the Vietnamese and use of all the means necessary to stop the bombing of north Vietnan.
[World Outlook has previously called attention to the polemic between Belgrade and Havana and stressed its importance. (See World Outlook February 25, April 1, and April 15.)
[Among other things, the polemic provides clear evidence of the differentiation between the Cuban position and that of the reformists and the right wing in the world Communist movement on a number of key issues.
[The translation is the official one provided by the May 15 English edition of Granma under the title, "Reply to the Yugoslav Press." We have corrected obvious typographical errors and a couple of phrases where the translation.-could be misinterpreted. The subheadings appear in the original. ]
# Oe Oe
AID TO STRUGGLING PEOPLES
IS DUTY OF PROGRESSIVE GOVERNMENTS AND STATES
Continuing to pursue the road of intrigue and defamation, the Yugoslav press persists in its attacks on the revolutionary positions of Cuba. It is important to refute these arguments, Since they reveal conciliatory stands which it is correct and necessary to unmask.
- Let us analyze what they impute to us from the point of view of surrender of principles -- because that is what they represent ~~ and also from | a revolutionary viewpoint because that is what Cuba is defending.
The Yugoslav correspondent states in the Mexican magazine, "Siempre, "- that, "The editorial written by GRANMA, answering: simple. news items in the Yugoslav press and. not an ‘official editorial! . which was never published..
The leadership of the so-called "League of Yugoslav Communists!' may be cowardly enough not to accept formal responsibility for the:issues' which they have repeatedly raised, and continue to raise in their press. But the Communist Party of Cuba does not ._ employ such dishonest procedures. If they do not wish to appear.. "officially" in the polemic, that is a question that only concerns © the Yugoslav leaders. They may have their reasons for trying to hide their faces in this ridiculous. manner. For our part, we can assure. the Yugoslav: correspondent for Latin America that he is not impor- -, tant enough ‘to initiate a polemic with the Communist Party of: Guba. =
at should be ‘understood, then, that from the very beginning | we interpret this debate as a polemic between the leadership of our Party and--the. ‘so-called "League of Yugoslav Communists." No Right to Interfere
in Our Discussions with the leaders of China
The Yugoslav daily, "Politika," presents the discussion between Cuba and the leaders of the Communist Party of China as based on purely commercial differences. In addition, they stressed. that the attack on Yugoslav leaders was an attempt to-round out -~ our positicn in the polemic with the Communist Party of China. Our line is very clear. Our position is a firm one. We have no double ~ intentions. We have argued with the Chinese leaders for reasons of principles concerning the relationship that ought to exist between two Communist parties; two socialist States. We dispute with the ., leaders of the "League of Yugoslav. Communists" also on matters of .~ principle, but on another plane that has nothing to do with the ..relationship between Communist Parties, since there is no communist party in Yugoslavia, and the so-called "League of Yugoslav Com-., . munists" is neither a party nor is it communist. On this question vs we wish to answer. the Yugoslav spokesmen: "In our debate with the _.: Leaders of China, you have no right to interfere. There is a popular expression which is appropriate as:a reply to these accusations: 'No one has offered you a candle at this burial.'"
Traitors and Waverers Are Always Accusing Revolutionaries . of Being Adventurers, Lunatics,.and Deluded Dreamers
The Yugoslav press has attacked the stand of the Communist ~ Party of Cuba as being adventurist, and lacking in objectivity and realism. These accusations honor us. coming from the spokesmen of the so-called "League of Yugoslav Communists.
The accusation that we are adventurers, lacking in objectivity and realism is the same accusation that has been leveled throughout history against all revolutionary and combative parties and organizations.
The Russian bolsheviks represented by Lenin, were called adventurers who lacked objectivity and realism. Yet, today, one scarcely remembers the critics of Leninism and the undying memory of Lenin is present in the heart and acts of millions of workers all over the world.
- In the history of our country the "Mambi" liberation fighters were called lunatics and adventurers when they launched their war of liberation and defeated the European colonial power. Those who fought against imperialism in Cuba in the decades of the 1920's and 1930's were also termed deluded dreamers and adventurers. Julio Antonio Mella and Antonio Guiteras were the object of similar accusations. More recently, those of us who fought against the tyranny of Batista, were also called lunatics, adventurers and deluded dreamers. Nonetheless, history has demonstrated that the real deluded and foolish ones were our enemies. That is why the charges made by the spokesmen of the so-called "League of Yugoslav Communists" sound very familiar to us. We have become accustomed to hearing the same imputations throughout the whole history of our revolutionary movement and we are accustomed to replying to those charges in the most appropriate manner.
Aid to Those Who Fight Intervention Is a Contribution to Peaceful Coexistence
A Belgrade news reporter falsely accuses us of having ignored the resolution approved in the Tricontinental Conference concerning peaceful coexistence. We would like to make clear that this resolution was proposed by the Cuban Delegation. We elaborated it in accordance with our political criteria and we have no reason to deny this, since, as was made very clear in the resolution, the problem of coexistence refers exclusively to relations among the States of different social systems, great and small, and does not affect, as the Yugoslav columnist would wish, the struggle of the oppressed classes against their oppressors,. and of the exploited peoples against imperialism. _
Moreover, however, the resolution concerning coexistence had even deeper implications: it posed the thesis that when progressive and revolutionary states aid those peoples who are struggling against imperialist intervention, they are defending the principles of peaceful coexistence. Aid to the national liberation movements which struggle against foreign military intervention and against their domestic exploiting classes allied with imperialism, is, according to the resolution approved by the
Tricontinental Conference, a contribution to peaceful coexistence. Let the so-called "League of Yugoslav Communists" know this very clearly, in the event that it has not. read this resolution care- —_. fully. Peaceful coexistence, in our opinion, is not a. dogma before ~~ which we must prostrate ourselves. We do not accept peaceful coexistence as a policy applicable only to powerful states, with imperialism having the right to make war on small nations as it chooses; much less do we understand as peaceful coexistence the Yugoslav. practice of acting as an instrument of the imperialist policy: of the United States. It is inexplicable, almost cynical, that a. ‘spokesman of Yugoslav politics invokes nothing less than an agreement of the Tricontinental Conference.
Aid to Peoples Who Are Struggling Is a Duty of Frogressive States. and Governments
The Yugoslav newspapers have echoed since the beginning the imperialist thesis that the Tricontinental Conference had approved tactics of subversion and intervention in the internal affairs of other countries. This imperialist line was exhaustively refuted in the GRANMA editorial entitled "The cynicism of the imperialists and §_ their lackeys," of January 28, 1966; in Fidel Castro's letter to the United Nations, of February 11, 1966; and in our first reply to the Yugoslav press on February 13, 1966. The affirmation that the Tricontinental Conference approved interventionist tactics is” the worst type of canard. When the imperialists insist that this is so, they are only defending their own interventionist positions. When the Yugoslav leaders affirm it, they spread the additional poison of saying that certain delegations to the Conference left unhappy with this "Cuban position."
The Yugoslav spokesmen are doubly vicious Since they support an imperialist line, and they attempt, though futilely, to rupture the revolutionary unity achieved in the Conference.
The line approved by the Conference, and we have repeated it many times, is that the right and duty of the progressive states is to aid the peoples who struggle against imperialist intervention. ~ It means cooperation with the peoples who suffer intervention;. that is, it opposes intervention. It also means cooperation with the liberation movements which struggle against the reactionary classes allied with imperialism. If the Yugoslav spokesmen feel that this is an interventionist thesis, we challenge the Yugoslav press to answer the following questions:
Can the aid given by progressive and socialist states to the people of Viet Nam be considered interventionist?
Can the international cooperation with Cuba in her struggle against- imperialism be characterized as interventionist?
Can the aid of Socialist states and governments to peoples confronting imperialist intervention and in struggle against domestic reactionary classes. serving imperialist interests be classified as interventionism?
If the replies to these questions are negative, then they will be in agreement with the resolutions approved ty the Tri-~ =~ continental Conference. If they are affirmative, they will’ be in ~. agreement with imperialism. We answer these questions negatively, a and say,.as did the Conference, that when the progressive govern- _ ments and States provide such aid, they are combating ‘intervention, — they are defending the principle of self-determination and of . national law.
But, moreover, to accuse the aid given by the socialist states to peoples struggling against imperialism as interventionist, is tantamount to brushing aside, or ignoring, the fundamental principles of proletarian internationalisn.
The cynicism and shamelessness of the argument that such aid, in solidarity with the peoples who struggle for their liberation, constitutes an act of intervention can only emanate from bourgeois, imperialist, or lackey positions. No true Marxist-Leninist can deny that it is the duty of the. socialist states to cooperate in every way possible with the peoples engaged in combat against the chief enemy of the working classes: imperialism. Those who deny this can never be considered Marxist-Leninists.
2.
NO FORCE CAN DETAIN THE REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE
OF THE PEOPLES OF THE AMERICAS
The Yugoslav. spokesmen, obviously referring to us, repeat an argument employed by opportunists and traitors, to the effect that for the extremists, "a man with a gun is worth more than a combatant for revolutionary principles." Consistent revolutionaries, those of us. who combat reaction, traitors and opportunists, do not raise this contradiction. We reply to this fallacious argument by stating that, under certain definite conditions, such as those that exist in most Latin American countries, for example, the most valuable. combatant is the one who fights for revolutionary principles, and is also prepared to take up arms. In the same declaration, they insinuate that. we evade the debate on ideas, in order to open the way, exclusively, to armed struggle. First of all, in this respect, we would remind the Yugoslav spokesmen that revolutionary ideas are not simply the formal expedients nor stereotyped phrases of opportunists and traitors..There are some who confuse revolutionary ideas with hollow words. Individuals who live isolated from the necessities of the peoples.of the world, with no understanding of, and no interest in, the profound revolutionary changes which are taking place in our times, can never give us lessons in the value of ideas. Ideas have revolutionary value to the extent that they
-2l1-
interpret: reality: and: transform it-in favor of the exploited classes. Those who have remained ‘historically congealed by passivity, inaction, opportunism and self-accommodation cannot teach us the value of political ideas. And that is the situation of the Yugoslav leaders. . Ll Violence . isthe Midwife of, History
Only, from an: anti-Marxist, opportunist and superficial : position can one support the- thesis ‘that armed insurrection implies . a renunciation of the ideological struggle. ;
‘Historically, the defenders of armed struggle and violent methods are those who have made the most important theoretical contributions.to the world revolutionary movement. Very few remember those “who conciliated in the different revolutionary periods. But. the names of Marx , Engels and Lenin cannot be forgotten-even by .-.our enemies. mo
The theoretical arsenal of Marxism-Leninism as a scientific theory of class struggle was developed by an analysis of the -. experiences of the great popular insurrections, and especially by a study of the European revolutions of 1848, the Paris Commune | of 1871. and the Russian Revolutions of 1905 and (1917.7
. Every Comfmnist knows that -- as Marx: ‘stated -~ "violence is the midwife of history," and that armed insurrection is the highest’ expression of class struggle. Whoever ignores this or tries to concéal it, is not a communist!
This truth originated from the irreconcilable’ nature | OF the contradictions between the interests of the oppressing classes and those of the oppressed classes. This is the ABC of Marxism-Leninism. It is not we, the revolutionaries, who engender violence. And- it is not, moreover, an artificial creation of our minds; Violence is* © an objective necessity deriving from'the system of* ‘exploitation | of man by man, from the division of society into antd&dgonistic classes and from. the brutal resistance of exploiters to any Social change ofa revolutionary nature.
- “Revolutionary armed struggle presupposes the ‘participation: of the exploited masses in the combat against their- oppressors. We do not deny that this should be complemented by other forms of” struggle. But it is important that the other forms not be permitted to hold back; and thus weaken, the prestige among the masses of ‘the gust and fundamental idea of armed struggle but, on the contrary, that ney. help to develop and advance the armed struggle.
TO. “accuse us of disparaging the importance of ideas shows . profouria. “ignorance of the Cuban Revolution, which precisely has demonstrated to Latin America the decisive importance of subjective factors and, consequently, ideological factors, in a revolution today -- the political preparation of a vanguard, revolutionary conviction and the decision to triumph or die in the battle.
~2o-
-aean. :iMhe Cuban Revolution has made an important ideological contribution to the theoretical and practical aspects of the Revolution in the Americas.
“In Fidel Castro! s historic speech while undergoing trial for the attack on the "Moncada" garrison, known as "History Will Absolve Me," in the First and Second Declarations of Havana, and in many other documents of the Cuban Revolution, we have been conducting “dn “intense ideological struggle in relation to fundamental prosvlems ‘of tactics, strategy and methods of struggle in cur times.
Bet thé Yugoslav spokesmen know that Cuban Communists fight in the arend of ideas with the same conviction and force with which we fight on thé field “of battle. Let these Yugoslav spokesmen also know'that by defending from Marxist-Leninist positions our criteria concerning armed struggle, we are waging a transcendental ideological battle in Latin America, and we will carry on this battle to its final practical consequences. Can They: ‘Show Us a Victorious Revolution without Violence?
The leadership of the so-called "League of Yugoslav Communists,".which has neither the knowledge nor the experience of Latin America that the Communist Party of Cuba possesses, has taken upon itself the right to expound on the nature of organizations, parties, and revolutionary forces in this Continent. From a distance of thousands of miles they have accused us of a lack of objectivity and realism. Light years away from the oppressed peoples of Latin America, and from their revolutionary situations, they set thenselves up.as judges of parties, organizations and forces of this continent. With unheard-of insolence, they deny to the Cuban Revolution, the first socialist revolution in the Americas, the © right to express objective and realistic opinions concerning the’ roads to. revolution,on our continent. ve
The people of this continent have a rich tradition of | experiences in the struggle. The most recent is the Cuban Revolution. There are other experiences in contemporary times that are worth studying, as well.--: those of the Russian and ‘Chinese Revolutions, the experiences: of Korea and Viet Nam, etc. Not one. of these diverse experiences fails to confirm the necessity for the use of violent methods in the struggle against imperialism, colonialism and neocolonialism.
We are not denying that in a given country, under certain very special conditions, an exception could occur in the future. Nevertheless, not one case can be cited of a victorious revolution which has been able to avoid: the use of. violence, insurrection or armed struggle as fundamental. methods. This is a universal experience and: the political positions of Communist parties must be developed
by taking into account what has been learned in the ‘practical experience of revolution, by generalizing from that experience and by probing deeply into it.
Cuba does not impose its own experience on others. Actually, the triumph of the Cuban Revolution arose: from Latin-American conditions. And those conditions, with Cuba as an example, deter-_ mine the road to revolution. The experiences of Cuba must be analyzed in relation to the. conditions in each country.
We understand the. special conditions. that exist in Chile,” Uruguay and other countries. We have a high estimation of the great mass movement which is developing in Uruguay. The specific conditions in that country require special analysis. However, in Montevideo, in the midst of street.demonstrations, strikes and other modes of protest, specified forms~of violent action have appeared. The solidarity of the people of Uruguay with Cuba is one of the most militant on the continent and we-evaluate as positive the forms of struggle that the Frente de Izquierda de Liberacion of Uruguay is developing.
We could take the situation in Chile as a case in point. Comrade Fidel Castro has spoken in detail of the problems of this country. We understand the means of struggle that are possible under Chile's present circumstances -- circumstances which are, naturally, subject to change. Other conditions prevail in Argentina, Brazil, Venezuela, Colombia, Peru and Guatemala. We could give our opinions concerning the conditions in each Latin-American country. to prove, once again, that our opinions are based on the objective analysis of each situation, and not on hasty or subjective judgments..,However, we should not go into this now in detail, but we do want to give the general picture of Latin America in order. to reply to certain points formulated by the Yugoslav . spokesmen.
Let's Deive More Deeply into Leninism
“There is one fact that must be.- taken into account. The bourgeois revolution and consequently.,. agrarian reform,.was never completed in Latin America. Capitalist.development was not a consequence of the growth of agriculture. Yankee imperialism extended itself over the Continent, replacing the earlier European. colonial powers, and paralyzing all independent development of our peoples. A type of capitalism, largely imported, developed alongside the feudal land system, subordinating the national economy: to the interests. of foreign. oligarchies.
In: the dig cities, the miserable living conditions. are striking. Alongside the mansions and the unlimited wealth of the native oligarchies and the bourgeoisie, in great part parasitic and commercial, exist the poverty-stricken neighborhoods inhabited by the workers and hundreds of thousands of unemployed, where the extraordinarily antagonistic character of the contradictions between
24 |
the small minority, possessors of everything, and the great masses, exploited and dispossessed, is obvious to any observer. The "Favela" © in Rio de Janeiro, "Villa Miseria" in Argentina, and "Los Cerros" in Caracas, are only three examples of the extreme poverty in which hundreds of thousands of urban-dwellers in Latin America are forced to live, in contrast to the opulence of the residential neighborhoods (of the ruling classes.
In the countryside, those who cultivate the land do not own it. Millions of peasants live under feudal or semifeudal regimes, in the most shocking conditions of exploitation.
In certain regions, capitalist and imperialist development has created a’ ‘strong proletariat, with a high degree of class consciousness. A body of intellectuals with a strong tradition of struggle also exists, which is embracing an increasingly progressive | stand. Amidst the great class contradictions, there are broad intermediate strata, also oppressed, which demand social changes. At the base of all of this system of oppression is imperialist penetration, supported by the professional armies, which are its shock troops.
The peasant's demand for land, the struggle of the proletariat for new social gains, the fight by large sectors of the people in | defense of their revolutionary and patriotic traditions, the influence of Cuba-in the Latin America of today -- all constitute a force which is destined to prevail.
Add to this the influence of political and patriotic traditions on the great masses of the population, and the ideological, cultural and political unity among our peoples which has deepened in the struggle against imperialism. Our nations form a coherent group of peoples, destined to play a transcendental role in the history of the world.
Are the conditions that we have pointed out of a feudaleconomic, semifeudal latifundist-bourgeois structure not similar to those that prevailed in Czarist Russia? There, also, a powerful working class existed, with strong traditions of struggle, as well as an exploited and combative peasant class, combined with a strong — ideological and political movement among the progressive intellectuals and the Russian proletariat.
Those who would like to understand better what is going on in Latin America and in the underdeveloped world should study well the Leninist analysis and apply it to the panorama of today. The ideas of Lenin are increasingly valid. Forty-five years ago, these ideas expressed a reality which was in the process of development but which today manifests itself on a worldwide ‘scale.
Let us delve more deeply into Leninism. If we study the course of imperialism in the countries which have been subjected to colonization and to feudal exploitation of the land, we can clearly understand certain Latin-American realities.
The Peoples of the Americas Have Accepted the Challenge of Imperialism
A profound moral disintegration is evident in the exploiting classes. Bourgeois, imperialist and semifeudal society in Latin America does not possess the necessary political strength to . confront the actions of the masses. In its dilemma, lacking political or social means of opposing ‘the revolutionary movement, it resorts to calling out the professional armies. Coups d'état, military coups, .and changes. of governmental . figures. follow one upon another. In ‘this process, the professional armies have come to represent the last support of the reactionary classes ‘and imperialism. Brute force, used against the people, increases the sense of patriotism and the will, to combat which is latent in broad sectors of the populations, thus creating favorable > political conditions for the revolutionary movement. food:
The fundamental wisdom of Fidel. Castro! s revolutionary strategy during the insurrectional period in Cuba lay in his ability to understand clearly that the liquidation of the professional army of the regime was a step of prime importance in the develop~ ~ ment of the Revolution, and that the only definitive way to guarantee the power of the people was to organize an army of workers. ar “Moreover, there are very concrete situations which permit “an objective evaluation of what the path of the Latin-American © Revolution must be. The example of Cuba has been pointed out. We should not forget a contrasting example:. What happened in Brazil |. when President Jodo Goulart. attempted to carry out a timid land reform? What is the Brazilian experience in. relation to peaceful methods of revolution? The mere planning of reforms by the Brazilian government was sufficient to provoke the latifundist caste and imperialism, utilizing. the professional army, into a coup d'état and the inception of a brutal. repression. :
Is this not a sufficiently eloquent lesson in what can be obtained through the legal and semilegal. mechanisms of the so-called "bourgeois democracy" of Latin America?
We: could cite many other examples. But, in addition, the military intervention in Santo Domingo, the declaration of the President of the-United: States to the effect. that another revolution in Latin America would not be tolerated; the resolution of. the Yankee House of Representatives which formulates their supposed imperial right to intervene in any country of Latin America; all of these are facts which the oppressed nations of the. Continent must follow. Santo Domingo under intervention, Cuba constantly attacked and menaced, the events in Guatemala. twelve. years ago, and the long succession of Yankee interventions throughout more than a century, point to the road of socialism for Latin America. The . peoples of America have accepted the imperial challenge, ‘and they
are ready to fight. Some of them are already fighting. Others will fight in the future and all will march on the road to revolution and socialism!
The Beginning of the Colonial War Will Mean the Collapse ey a. of Imperialism
What will happen when insurrection gathers momentum in several countries at once? Imperialism does not have the necessary. strength to check the revolution of the oppressed peoples. It has had to employ 245,000 men in order to confront the heroism of the people of a country as small as Viet Nam. -
How many divisions and how many men will they need to confront a whole continent? How many situations similar to that of Viet Nam can imperialism face simultaneously? What will happen when, not one, but several, and even the greater part of the peoples of the Continent, take to the road of revolutionary action? How many U S. soldiers will have to die in the mountains or on the plains of the Americas defending a system of exploitation which is |. not theirs and which oppresses them as well, and which has, in addition gained universal repudiation?
There is another factor which in certain circumstances can contribute positively to the peoples in their struggle for liberation. This factor is the people of the United States and the internal contradictions of the U.S. ruling classes. With respect to the struggle in Viet Nam, certain sectors of the U.S. people have been developing extraordinarily positive activities. Moreover, there is not unanimity in relation to the U.S. policy in Viet Nam, among the ruling sectors of the United States. The heroic struggle of such a small country as Viet Nam has been able to cause this rift. With the growth of the revolutionary movement in Latin America, these contradictions will intensify and the antiwar movement among the people of the United States will take on considerable strength, above all, taking into consideration the fact that hundreds of | thousands more soldiers will have to be mobilized and will die on Latin-American soil.
There is no force capable of detaining the revolutionary struggle of the peoples of America. Imperialism will encounter a tragic crossroads: they must permit revolution to take its course, or start a colonial war. A colonial war will mean the collapse of imperialism in Latin America.
‘The experience of the French colonial system in Algeria confirms this. The liberation of numerous countries in Asia demonstrates it. Universal experience confirms it. This truth, which becomes every day more evident, can only be denied by imperialism and its allies, among whom, obviously, we must include the socalled "League* of Yugoslav Communists."
_ YUGOSLAV GOVERNMENT POSITIONS ~
- SAME AS IMPERTALISTS') ON VIET.NAM ©
The’ capitulating position of the. Yugoslav government in the case of Viet Nam has many antecedents. One of the most outstanding © was the maneuver promoted by the Yugoslav. jeaders in a meeting _. held in Belgrade of a group of ambassadors--from ‘the "nonaligned". -.-countries. By this maneuver, the Yugoslav leaders: tried to impose’ points of view which could only serve the interests of the ~ imperialists. How can one conceive of a meeting: called in Belgrade to discuss. the’ problem of Viet Nam, in which‘ the: Yugoslav: government forebore to: name the United States as theaggressor, did not mention the’ violation of the sovereignty of the Democratic Republic: ~ of Viet: Nam, and did not demand an end to the criminal attacks ©.» which the United States is carrying out against that nation?
In that maéting.,. the position: of Yugoslavia was clearly reflected dn ‘the’ following points:
-- No condemnation of the presence of United States troops in South Viet Nam, much less a demand for their withdrawal.
-- No condemnation of the violation by the United States of the: Geneva Agreements.-
—_ No condemnation.-of the permanent presence of U. S. airs a eraft carriers and other naval units in territorial waters of the: Democratic Republic of Viet Nan.
‘-- The proposal of a peaceful. settlement by. negotiations, without the establishment of any provisos.
There are certain conclusions which can be drawn from the. attitudes of the Yugoslav government in these meetings and from their published documents: When the government of Yugoslavia speaks of "foreign intervention" in Vietnamese territory, it does so in a generalized way, with no adequate denunciation . of. the role of Yankee imperialism. J 2d,
In the speech by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Yugoslavia at the celebration of the twentieth anniversary of the founding of the United Nations, Viet Nam was depicted as "a most’ dangerous center of tension, or of war," with :no: indication. of the revolutionary content of that struggle nor denunciation of the aggressive action of the United States government. Nevertheless, it was recommended in the speech, that a political solution be given to the problems ‘which have arisen in Viet Nam.
The imperialist war against the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam and'the people of South Viet Nam has not been condemned nor denounced by the Yugoslav government in its true character, but
only referred to as, "a danger capable of provoking an extension of the war." Several Yugoslav publications have censured the intran- Sigence of the Vietnamese in refusing to enter into any kind of negotiations without the previous withdrawal of the Yankees from South Viet Nam territory. ‘One of these publications even labeled this firm Vietnamese position as "mistaken" and "extremist." Let's. Analyze the Official Statement of the Yugoslav Government |
The correspondent for "Politika" in ‘Latin “America states — that in a Prensa Latina bulletin, dated February 3, an official statement by the government of-. Yugoslavia appeared which "made it clear that the United States'..actions in Viet Nam have been condemned," and expressed the view that the solution to the conflict in Viet Nam could only be based on the Geneva Agreements. This was cited by the correspondent in an attempt to refute statements contained in an editorial of GRANMA in February of this year. Nevertheless, a simple reading of the declaration of the Yugoslav government reveals the weak and conciliatory political position maintained by the Yugoslav leadership in the case of Viet Nam. Since the "Politika". correspondent has brought it up, we shall demonstrate this affirmation.
The text of the Prensa Latina news release is as follows: "The government of Yugoslavia issued a statement today expressing its profound anxiety in regard to the renewal of air bombardments by the United States against the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam.
"The people and government of Yugoslavia" -- the declaration states ~- "have pointed out: on many occasions that tragic consequences are inevitable unless a political solution to the problem is found in consonance with the Geneva Agreements and with the rights of the Vietnamese people to liberty, independence and self- determination. :
"And finally," the. Yugoslav government states, "the decision by the United States to renew. their bombardments places a serious responsibility on them before all humanity.'
Q No one who considers himself a revolutionary can accept “these statements as the expression of an energetic, decisive and firm position. Let the leaders. of the so-called "League of Yugoslav Communists" ask themselves if they, in the epoch of the struggle , against the nazis, would have made such statements to Hitler. There is the key to the question.
Our position in relation to the intervention of the United States in Viet Nam is one of a fight to the death against the invader, and the Yugoslav position is conciliation with the imperialists. From our. point of view the correct stand is to demand strict adherence, to the Geneva Agreements..The Yugoslav position .
is satisfied simply with announcing that: "tragic. consequences are inevitable unless a political. solution to. the problem is found in . consonance. with the Geneva Agreements." In our opinion, it is.. a indispensable to demand an immediate end to the. criminal. bombings. of the cities of Viet Nam, and to strongly demand, as well, the withdrawal of all imperialist forces from Vietnamese territory.
In the Yugoslav declarations they simply state that "the United States assumes a great responsibility,.by -the. ‘bombings.." There is no concrete condemnation of the imperialist aggression in South’ Viet Nam. In fact, they do not mention the intervention of U.S. forces in South ‘Viet ‘Nam at all. Only the "anxiety" of the Yugo- - slav government is expressed in regard to the renewal of bombings.. of the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam. ——
Merely to denounce the action of imperialism in Viet Nam is, naturally, not enough. It:-is necessary, in addition, to declare that peace negotiations cannot be accepted until the conditions ,. previously laid down by the National Liberation Front of South Viet Nam and the Democratic Republic Of: Niet Nam are. fulfilled..
. By requesting peace negotiations, ‘without demanding the ending of the bombardments nor the withdrawal of troops, the ; Yugoslav government in fact coincides with the imperialist Stans» and thus, stands contrary to the. positions defined by the Demo-- |: cratic Republic of Viet Nam and the NLF of South Viet Nam, which | - have been upheld by-the socialist countries and by the revolution-__ ary movement all over the world. ,
The government of Yugoslavia, on a question as vital to ‘the revolutionary movement as the heroic fight being waged by the Vietnamese people, places.itself outside-.the position adopted co unanimously by the socialist countries and by the revolutionary °:. movement of the entire world.
How Did the Yugoslav Declaration Come About?
As we all remember, the U.S. government, several months age, confronted by military reverses in Viet Nam, the growing wave of world ‘protest, and particularly the protest of the American people: themselves, found itself obliged to announce a hypocritical "peace: offensive," initiated by a halt in itS* bombardment of the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam. This peace offensive was a political maneuver on the part of the United States, designed to coerce the Vietnamese people into accepting imperialist conditions. Thanks to the firm stand-of the Vietnamese people and*their leaders, the maneuver. failed, prompting Johnson to resume the bombings against the Democratic~. Republic of Viet Nam. This decision has “met enormous opposition throughout the entire world.
The declaration of the Yugoslav government concerning Viet Nam is simply a timid and token reply to the renewal of bombardments
against the DRV. Declarations similar to that of the Yugoslavs havé been formulated by some capitalist countries and by some U.S. congressmen. Moreover, some capitalist countries have specifically condemned the imperialist aggression against Viet Nam. Viet Nam Has Denounced the Yugoslav Positions as Coinciding with Those of Yankee Imperialism
But, moreover, it has been the Vietnamese themselves, who on repeated occasions have accused the Yugoslav government of supporting imperialist positions and of proposing negotiations under circumstances which are inadmissible from the points of view of the. government of the DRV and the National Liberation Front.
Yugoslavia was not accepted as an observer at the Tricontinental Conference because the Vietnamese delegation insisted | that..the government of that country had maintained points of view similar to those of the imperialists concerning the Vietnamese war. More,.recently, the newspaper "Nhan-Dan," official organ of the. Vietnamese Workers' Party, denounced that the Yugoslav government — had supported the U.S. plan to get the puppet administration of Saigon into the United Nations surreptitiously. In its denunciation, the Vietnamese paper stated that Yugoslav Federal Executive Council President Peter Stanbolic's tour of several Asiatic countries was an adjunct.of the plan to persuade the governments of those countries to support Yugoslavia's proposals for negotiations in the problem of Viet Nam. :
This is a new maneuver of the Yugoslav government to rally support from a group of "nonaligned" countries for their sellout policy in the Viet Nam question.
Shocked by Our Request that All Military Forces. Necessary’ .
Be Employed to Halt the Bombardments:
Of course, from this point of view, it is logical that the Yugoslav press correspondent in Moscow was shocked by the statements contained in the greeting of the Cuban delegation to the twentythird Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
As is known, the greeting of our Central Committee underlined the necessity of employing whatever forces might be required to detain the Yankee bombardments of the DRV, of running all indispensable risks and of tightening unity of action among the Socialist countries and the revolutionary movement throughout the world in terms of this objective.
The Yugoslav leaders call this an adventurist position. They do not point out that it is the Yankee imperialists who are the
-3l-
real adventurists in the Vietnamese war.
We may ask the. ‘Leaders of the so-called "League of Yugoslav Communists" a few questions. Do you want the Vietnamese people to: shed their blood and, without the decisive aid of the socialist — countries, to endure the criminal aggression carried out by the strongest imperialist power on earth? How do the Yugoslav leaders think that the bombardments can be ‘stopped? By convincing the Yankees through persuasion and discussions?
If they think they can do this -- and we know they don't believe such a thing -- it is they who are deluded. But the Yugo- Slav leaders are not deluded. _ They are actually accomplices of the imperialists in Viet Nam.
We challenge the leaders of the so-called “League of Yugo-. Slav Communists" to tell us, concretely, the formula for paralyzing the bombardments against the Democratic Republic of Viet. Nam. Naturally, these questions cannot easily be answered by any "reporter" or "functionary" of the Yugoslav Government. Our challenge is directed to the leadership of the so- called nbeague | of Yugoslav Communists." ~ Yugoslav Leaders Surrender “to. Imperialism
The Yugoslav newspaper "Vjesnik, " of Zagreb, writes that ‘the Cuban statements in the twenty-third Congress of the CPSU were “considered, -to be pseudorevolutionary. " .
“The: “truth of ‘the ‘matter, is that our statements were not "pseudorevclutionary" for the. -Yugoslav Press but, on the contrary,
too revolutionary.
The Yugoslav leaders and the pro-imperialist and reaction-~ ary press, have carried on identical intrigues with respect to the declarations.of the Cuban delegation. Imputations similar to . those of the Yugoslavs were voiced by imperialist agents concerning the statement of the Cuban delegation. The fact is that the Cuban stateménts aroused tremendous repercussions throughout the world, and served ; to emphasize Cuba's position with respect to the Viet— namese struggle. But what matters most is not what Cuba said. What matters most is that Cuba, 90 miles from the shores of imperialisn, threatened by the strongest capitalist country in.the world, surrounded by an economic blockade, interests itself in the furthering of the Revolution all over the world. While the leaders of the so-called "League of Yugoslav Communists," whose country is situated thousands .of miles away from the frontiers of imperialism, fear it and become cowards, play imperialism's game, placate and _ serve it by proclaiming its lies and reactionary libels against the revolutionary fighters of the world, we, bordering the U.S..coast, challenge Yankee imperialism.. The Yugoslav leaders, at a distance
of thousands of miles and in a part of the world where the balance of power is extraordinarily in favor of socialisn, oppose revolution and seli out to imperialism. This is one difference between the: so~called. “beague of Tugoslaw Communists" and the COMMUNIST PARTY OB: ‘CUBA! TE: .
—_ ROAD. OF TREASON VERSUS THE ROAD OF REVOLUTION
The newspaper "Politika" maintains its charges of "sect~ arianism" against. the Tricontinental Conference agreements.
When ‘the Yugoslav press arbitrarily accuses. the Tricontinental Conference of sectarianism, it is motivated by the position of conciliation and submission held by the so-called "League of Yugo- Slav. Communists" with. regard to imperialism.
In what sense coulda the Conference be considered sectarian? In its composition? In the limitation of participating delegations? In the narrow content: of its agreements? ~~ ns
“We challenge the ‘so-called League of Yugoslav Communists" to point out any other conference or international meeting in which a greater number of revolutionary parties and organizations has been represented. We challenge them to indicate any conference or meeting in the history of the anti-imperialist movement which has adopted broader and more combative agreements than the Tricontinental Conference. Lo
Revolutionary organizations from 82 countries were represented in the Conference, among them, parties and organizations which are in power in their countries. Also included were organizations representing revolutionary movements in arms. More over, practically all the communist parties of Asia, Africa, and. Latin America were present.
In the specific case of Latin America, the representation of its anti- imperialist. organizations was never so wide'or so militant.
Seventy. organizations from 27 countries of the Latin-American continent were present. The fundamental agreements of the Conference were unanimously approved. The approved ‘line did not only take ~ into account the importance of the national liberation movement, but also,the role of the socialist camp and of the working class in the capitalist countries, and an exhortation to the U.S. people was formulated, as well, urging them to intensify the struggle against. the war in Viet Nam.
The Yugoslav leaders accuse this Conference, which adopted | transcendental agreenents and achieved cohesion among the anti-— imperialist forcés of Asia, Africa, and Latin America, of béing sectarian.. In the diversity and type of organizations represented, as well as in the depth and extension of its resolutions, the
Tricontinental Conference has meant a major step forward in the battle to achieve a massive anti-imperialist front in the world. In all of history there has ‘not::been .a.wider, more- combative, and deeply rooted anti-imperialist: frorit than that which ‘has arisen from.the =~; Tricontinental Confererice.-In“spite of this, the YugoSlav press: maintains that the Conference wassectarian-iand' affirms that there were . . important Latin-Ameriéan:- organi zations which were not present:. The = Yugoslav newspaper "Politika" lies when’ it-states that the MNR of Bolivia was denied participation in the Conference. The participation of ‘the MNR in the Tricontinental Conference was never requested. Organizations Allied to the’ Inperialists. oe and to Yugoslavia... Did not Participate in the Tricontinental Conference
Which are the organizations that, according to the "League-of Yugoslav Communists," should have been present at the Conference, and whose participation, nevertheless, was. denied?. Could it be Accién Democratica of Venezuéla, at the head of:a puppet government serving imperialist interests, which represses workers, assassinates peasants and applies criminal methods and violence against. commun. -. ists and revolutionaries in general? Venezuela's Accién-Democratica, traitor to the cause of the masses, sworn enemy of revolution and of. communism, has had its general secretary, Paz. Galarraga; visiting Yugoslavia recently.
Perhaps the so-called "League of Yugoslav Communists" would like to have seen the APRA of Peru represented in the Conference, APRA, ally of imperialism, sold out to the native reactionary classes. Should the political: group of José Figueres, instrument of Yankee interests in Central America, have been present at the Tricontinental Conference? -
We challenge ‘the leaders of the "League of Yugoslav Commu—. +. nists" to present a concrete list of the names of anti-imperialist.. organizations which asked to participate in the Tricontinental Con-_ference and were rejected. CS
The truth is that the organizations which may be cited by the Yugoslav press spokesmen do not form part of the revolutionary camp. They are allies or servants of imperialism in one degree or another. The so-called "League. of Yugoslav Communists" tries .to. appear unaware of this. The fact is, beyond any doubt, that the —. Yugoslav leaders coincide politically in many ways with the forces allied with imperialism in Latin America. Pe
There Were No_ Communists or Socialists among the Chileans Who Left Cuba |
In making the absurd accusation that the Conference approved: a sectarian platform, the newspaper "Politika" states the following:
"The narrowed, sectarian platform of the Latin-American representatives in the Tricontinental Conference naturally produced results that. are not unanimously acceptable to all the progressive and democratic forces of the Continent." Further along in the same paragraph it affirms: "Recently, for example, the Chilean Parliamentary Delegation, which also included communists and. socialists, interrupted its visit to Havana in protest,,. expressing» in this way — its dissent from the extremist Cuban declaration.
‘The paragraph ‘gust quoted states that. communists and socialists departed. Those who are not aware of the details of this matter receive the impression that Chilean communists and socialists were opposing statements of Fidel Castro. The truth is that among those Chileans who left there was not one communist or socialist. The conmunists did not come with that delegation. One socialist was included and he -- along with Several Christian Democrats -- remained in our country.
We should clarify that the Chilean Delegation's visit had nothing to do with the Tricontinental Conference. It was a delegation. which had been invited by the Cuban Government to see at first hand the accomplishments of the Cuban Revolution. This is another example of the broad way in which we analyze the political forces of the Continent. Nobody who knows even slightly the process of our Revolution and the history of our relations with the parties, revolutionary organizations and also with institutions and persons of the most diverse tendencies, can be misled about these matters.
. The history of our revolutionary process has demonstrated to us-in a very objective way the need that exists to rally all combat— ive forces around the great revolutionary objectives.
Our policy with regard to narrow positions is known by the friends of Cuba throughout the world, and even by many of our enemies. We have been able to win friends and supporters in many sectors which have doubts and worries concerning the ideas of com-'munism: That is, in noncommunist sectors. We have won them, which. is the interesting part, by maintaining the same radically Marxist- Leninist positions and revolutionary firmness which the spokesmen of the Yugoslav press have termed "extremist."
But the entire world is also aware of the profoundly radical and revolutionary positions of the Communist Party of Cuba, which would never accept close relations -- as the Yugoslav Government is doing -~ with the military authorities and reactionaries of Indonesia, who have assassinated thousands of communists and unleashed a brutal repression against the people. Are the "illustrious," "proad-minded," and "antisectarian" Yugoslav leaders by chance up-.. set because Cuba opposed the participation of the reactionary delegation of Indonesia in the Conference, and’ supported the progressive delegation?
Yugoslavia Was Not Admitted to the Tricontinental Because Her Stand on Viet Nam Coincided with that of the Imperialists
As. we ‘stated in our February editorial, the Yugoslav press charges’ the -Tnicontinental Conference with peing sectarian in charactex because. sthe Yugoslav Organization of Solidarity was not admitted to the iGonference.
We wish to point out to the Yugoslav leaders that if the delegation from their country had been admitted, important revolutionary forces-from Asia (Viet Nam and Korea, for example) and from Latin America;.such as Guatemala, Venezuela, the Dominican Republic and Cuba, ‘would have refused to participate in the Conference. ‘In:order to widen the scope of the Conference. so that true representatives : of the forces of our continents might take part, it was necessary | to agree that the Yugoslav Organization of Solidarity not. be invited as observers.
Where does the responsibility :lie? With us, the Cubans? No,.,; gentlemen of the so-called "Leagué of Yugoslav Communists"! The ~ responsibility is yours and yours alone! A popular expression states that: "One cannot be with God and with the Devil as well." This =; applies as well -- even though you seem to have forgotten the fact. -to the struggle against imperialism. They Seek Unity in Order to Hold Back the Revolutionary Struggle _ and Placate the - imperialists
| The Tricontinental Conference ‘demonstrated the effective - “way to unite the peoples and their militant organizations. This way is the way ‘of Revolution.
The development of the revolutionary struggle in Asia,: ‘Africa and Latin America will generate a powerful mass.movement in the entire world. The socialist camp, workers, intellectuals and students in: capitalist countries, will come forward to support. the oppressed peoples, as is already being made clear in the universal repudiation of the ‘Yankee interventions in Viet Nam and the Dominican Republic. In other words, the fight for national liberation in the underdeveloped countries will stimulate new forms of revolutionary action in the entire world and will help build. wider ‘deeper and more concrete unity... oh PS
What the Yugoslav spokesmen. ‘do not understand is that in the last few years a crisis has definitively arisen in relation to certain schematic concepts of methods and forms of struggle.
In Latin America, the Cuban Revolution has hastened this crisis. To what did conformism and passivity lead? To the advance
of imperialism on this continent, to the consolidation of exploitation, and to the isolation of the revolutionary vanguard. Passivity and conformism bred only isolation and sectarianisn.
The Cuban Revolution made it very clear that energetic, deci- Sive, valiant and audacious action unites the masses, strengthens the bonds between the vanguard and the people and pushes the class struggle ahead. In this way the Cuban Revolution forged something more than a “united front." We forged a Marxist-Leninist revolutionary vanguard , around which ‘the unity and strength of all of the . people has grown:
The Yugoslav position is something very aifferent. ‘For them "the front of the masses" should be sought in an alliance of diverse “political organizations, no matter what positions these organizations hold in regard to imperialism. For us, this front of the masses can only be achieved by uniting those anti-imperialist forces which are prepared to fight against the reactionaries, oligarchic governments and imperialism itself.
We Seek Unity to Make the Revolution
They prefer to ally themselves with reactionary governments like that of Venezuela in Latin America; with the reactionary, landowning military caste in Indonesia; or-with the usurpers in Ghana in Africa. This is the tricontinental alliance which is satisfactory to the so-called "League of Yugoslav Communists."
We prefer to unite ourselves with the guerrillas of Venezuela, with the heroic patriots in Viet Nam, with the highly esteemed and steadfast communist leaders in Korea, and with those in so-called Portuguese Guinea. Citing these examples clearly illustrates the type of unity we Cuban revolutionaries desire.
There is no doubt that the type of unity that ‘interests the Communist Party of Cuba is much broader, since it represents the ‘exploited and oppressed masses of the world. The Yugoslav type of unity is with groups of corrupted politicians, with reactionaries - and conservatives. We defend the unity of the peoples, of fighters, of revolutionaries. We try to reach the masses by means of Revolu-~— tion. They attempt to oppose the revolutionary‘ movement of the masses by an alliance with the forces that capitulate and sell out to the imperialists.
At the root of all this is the fact that we seek unity - in order to fight imperialism and make the Revolution, while they seek unity in order to hold back the revolutionary struggle and placate imperialism.
This is the difference between the so-called "League of Yugoslav Communists" and the Communist Party of Cuba. The position taken by the Yugoslav leaders points the way to treason. Our Pposition points the way to Revolution.