THE
CUBANS DEVELOP THEIR POSITION ON THE MIDDLE EAST
[With the success of the Israeli blitzkrieg, U.S. imperialism dealt a heavy defeat to the colonial revolution. The blow was all the worse, coming as it did in the train of other defeats such as the catastrophe in Indonesia. Bitterest of all, instead of a heartening victory to give them encouragement, the Vietnamese were served by their allies with a debacle that must have deeply disappointed them with its display of ineptitude, weakness, stupidity and downright treachery.
(Who was responsible for this defeat? What policies paved the way for it? What line must be followed to overcome the setback and to open the road to victory? These and related questions are now being intensively discussed in vanguard circles on an international scale.
[Where do the Cuban leaders stand in this? As yet they have not presented a rounded analysis of the complex crisis and the roles played by the various participants. It is clear nonetheless that they are greatly concerned about the defeat and that they have definite views on it and what to do about it.
[The document below, indicating their thinking at this stage, is of considerable interest, we believe. It is an editorial published by Granma, the official organ of the Central Committee of the Communist party of Cuba.
(Much of the editorial will undoubtedly meet with the approval of revolutionary Marxists everywhere. On two points, however, some observations are in order.
{The editorial indicates a shift in attitude toward Boumedienne, the head of the Algerian government. The Cubans recall their critical attitude toward the coup through which Boumedienne seized power. At the time, they left open the possibility that the new regime might demonstrate through action its adherence to the program of advancing the Algerian and world revolutions. In the current crisis in the Middle East, the editorial maintains, the Boumedienne regime has conducted itself in such a way as to pass the acid test on this.
[Boumedienne has indeed opted for a line of strong opposition to the aggression of imperialism in the Middle East as deployed through the State of Israel. But is this enough to meet the criticisms expressed by the Cuban leaders themselves at the time of Boumedienne's coup d'état? What about the political prisoners behind bars in Algeria -- Ben Bella in the first place?
[So long as Ben Bella and many other revolutionists remain in prison solely because of their political views it would seem obvious that the "methods" used by Boumedienne in the process of assuming power are still in force. Before placing a blanket seal of approval on his regime it would seem in order to require at least the release of all political prisoners and recognition of their right to resume functioning in the vanguard of the revolution which they helped win by their role in the most difficult stages of the struggle.
[The second point is a possible misunderstanding of the editorial's argument that "It was fear of fascism and cowardice in the face of Hitler's threats that caused the Second World War."
[If the reference is to Stalin's policy of coexisting peacefully with inperialism and building socialism in one country for the benefit of a parasitic bureaucracy, there is substance to the point. An analogy can indeed be drawn between Stalin's line, with its disastrous consequences, and the current line of the Kremlin which plays into the hands of imperialism and helps pave the way to a. third world war.
{It should be noted, however, that it is inaccurate to state that Stalin's policies "caused" the second world war. His line of peaceful coexistence and policy of blocking and betraying revolutionary struggles wherever he could only facilitated the invasion of the USSR by German imperialism, after having helped pave the way for Hitler's ascension to power. The causes of the war, however, lay in the dynamics of capitalism, particularly the capitalism of the Western powers, including the U.S.
{The Granma editorial, for whatever reasons, does not draw this parallel in a clear and specific way; and thus it lends itself to being interpreted as referring to Chamberlain's "Munich" policy, in which British imperialism sought to reach a deal with German imperialism at the expense primarily of the Soviet Union. This, however, is rather beside the point in the current crisis in the Middle East.
{The translation of the editorial is the official one provided by the June 25 English edition of Granma. The title of the editorial is "The Correct Revolutionary Position of the Government of Algeria." The subheads appear in the original. ]
x ke *
In 1962 the Algerian people's struggle for liberation was crowned with victory
over colonialism, which was cause for rejoicing in Cuba. Our own guerrilla epic had been climaxed with a people's victory 3365 a few years before, on January 1, 1959.
The Algerian and Cuban revolutions, each with its own distinctive circumstances and conditions, signified tremendous victories for the underdeveloped peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America. They brought the world dramatically closer to the coming downfall of the colonial and neocolonial worlds. Subsequent to the victory of the Algerian patriots, the revolutionary leaders of Cuba and Algeria reacted similarly to important international events. Their community of ideas was instrumental in forging close bonds of friendship between the two peoples.
In June 1965 Colonel Boumedienne assumed power in Algeria. Our Revolution, represented by Fidel Castro, took a critical stand as to the methods used in this process. These criticisms became known by revolutionaries and others throughout the world, including the Algerian leaders. At that time Fidel Castro stated: "If they demonstrate with their acts that their hearts are with the Algerian Revolution and that they are heart and soul with the revolution of the oppressed of the world, then we will not deny them our aid; we will not withhold our indorsement."
_ Immediately afterwards, he explained: "And if, some day, the imperialists turn against them and threaten Algeria for being revolutionary, we will give them our moral support; we will shed our blood for their struggle, for the Algerian Revolution, for the revolution of the Algerian people. Because with whom do we stand, now and in the future? With the Algerian people and with those who interpret their revolutionary will!"
Today the Arab peoples have been made victims of aggression launched by the imperialists and their confederates in the Middle East. In the eyes of our Party, the position taken by the Algerian Government regarding these happenings is one worthy of examination and evaluation in all its aspects.
Faced with the Middle East crisis, a situation of the greatest consequence for the revolutionary movement of the Arab peoples and of great importance, as well, for the worldwide struggle against imperialism, the Algerian Government has stated its decision to reject the compromising and shameful decision of the Security Council.
This position may be most completely appreciated if we consider what it means in the face of the brutal and treacherous blow that the revolutionary
movement has suffered in the Arab coun-
tries.
The stand taken by the Algerian
Government has singular value becausé it
is the only revolutionary position that
can be adopted in the face of imperialist
aggression.
In the development of the crisis
in the Middle East, the armed forces of
the Israeli Government were clearly the
first to move, staging surprise bombing
raids on Egyptian airports and launching
a Nazi-type operation against the terri-
tory of the United Arab Republic. The
Israeli Government clearly showed that
it had been intensively preparing the
attack against the Arab peoples, which
originally was to have been directed
primarily against the revolutionary State
of Syria. This was opportunely denounced
by the governments of the United Arab
Republic and Syria in the days prior to
the attack.
They Call for a Cease-fire
without Condemning the
Perpetrators of the Aggression
These acts constitute a gross and
flagrant violation of peace and of the
principles of international law. But what
did the United Nations, acting through the
Security Council, do in the face of this
crime? After the armed forces of the Is-
raeli Government initiated the aggression
and penetrated deep into Egyptian terri-
tory, the UN Security Council adopted the
shameful position of calling for an un-
conditional cease-fire.
The cease-fire resolution placed
the Arab peoples in an impossible and ab-
surd position.
To call for a cease-fire without
condemning the aggressors, or even de-
manding the withdrawal of the invading
troops, which, encouraged by such a res-
olution, stepped up their attack, is tan-
tamount to condoning the crime and deal-
ing an overwhelming moral and political
blow against the Arab peoples. The reso-
lution showed that the United Nations --
just as in the Congo and in all other
similar situations in the past -- was
manipulated to serve Yankee interests.
The curity Council catered to those
interests. The Israeli Government's armed
forces, apparently encouraged by the res-
olution and acting in full cooperation
with imperialism, took the Sinai Penin-
sula for all practical intents and pur-
poses, won an important part of Jordanian
territory, and in the midst of the cease-
fire launched its armored units against
Syria, which, in the face of the over-
whelming numbers of planes and tanks with
which the imperialists had equipped the
Israeli army, had no other recourse than
to face the aggressors with the heroism
of a practically unarmed people.
These events took place openly and with complete impunity, to the applause and satisfaction of the imperialists and the Pentagon warmongers. Now the aggressors cynically announce their intention of remaining in the occupied territories indefinitely, showing the true motive behind the war.
The Path of Concessions Led _to the Second World War Thirty Years Ago
The imperialists, in line with their reactionary policies, gave full support to the Israeli Government. The government of the United States has given complete political and military support to its allies in the Middle East.
Events that followed show once again that making concessions to the inperialists encourages them and leads to new acts of war, obliging the peoples to respond to aggression with heroic resistance and revolutionary war.
The path of concessions led to the Second World War thirty years ago. It is a path that poses grave dangers for the peoples. It was fear of fascism and cowardice in the face of Hitler's threats that caused the Second World War.
Events in the Middle East confirm that concessions, far from detaining the imperialists, encourage them in their criminal attacks and their shameless aggressions. Those who, out of fear of war, make concessions to the imperialists, far from preventing war, cause new and even more serious aggressions.
These Acts of Aggression Can Only Be Countered by Struggle and Revolution
This situation has involved the Arab peoples in a dramatic and complex dilemma. It is a decisive and difficult moment for the revolutionary movement among the Arab peoples. In the face of these aggressions there is no other decision than that of resistance and struggle. Only struggle and revolution lie ahead. This is the only revolutionary policy. In view of the conditions that exist in the Middle East, the only revolutionary position is to resist and to convert the war of conquest unleashed by the aggressors into a people's revolutionary war.
"In the face of imperialisn," stated our Central Committee a few weeks ago, "there are two alternatives: to capitulate or to resist and fight, to resist and fight means running the risks that are involved in such a position. And capitulation simply means capitulation."
The Algerian Government declared:
",..If we have suffered the blows of the enemy in our Arab East -- in Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Palestine -- and if we have experienced momentary reverses owing to the extraordinary measures employed by our enemies, this in no way affects our will or our firm determination to continue advancing toward the destruction of the bastions of evil and of aggression, toward the elimination of imperialisn...
"The battlefield is not limited to the Suez Canal or the Sinai Peninsula. It includes the entire Arab world. It involves a general struggle which has not yet ended and which will only end with our victory over imperialisn...
"Frankness impels us to state that tomorrow no one will be able to hide behind the excuse of neutrality. There can be no neutrality between justice and injustice, between aggression and defense against aggression, between slavery and liberty, between tolerance and racisn.
"The war will go on. We will only lay down our weapons with the re-establishment of right, the elimination of abnormal situations and the elimination of the aftermaths of aggression. The Arab nation is solidly united. It has behind it a giant human and moral force: the justiceloving peoples of Africa, Asia and Latin America."
The Algerian Government has thus declared the need to resist and fight the aggressors and to place the struggle of the Arab peoples within the framework of the broader struggle of the peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America against imperialisn.
This revolutionary position adopted by the Algerian Government is entirely correct and reflects the interests of the Arab peoples and all the peoples of the underdeveloped countries of the world. This position reflects a profoundly antiimperialist and revolutionary position. Therefore, revolutionaries throughout the world have the binding duty to support, with all forces at their command, the position of the Algerian Government. We have this duty because the Algerian Government has refused to accept "the exist-— ing situation."
It refuses to accept the criminal aggression perpetrated by the imperialists and what is tantamount to acceptance of it by the UN Security Council.
Our Party Supports the Positions Expressed by the Algerian Government
Our Party completely supports the position of the Algerian Government and urges all the peoples of the world to
unite in favor of this line and attitude. The Algerian Government's position on questions of the Arab world is a key point by which to differentiate revolutionaries and pseudo-revolutionaries and the enemies of the peoples. Our people call on revolutionaries throughout the world, the peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America and the workers of all countries to stand by the line and the position that the Algerian Government has bravely and firmly adopted.
The Arab peoples have our support