p Comrades,

p On behalf of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Uruguay we declare our support for the text of the Main Document as approved by the Meeting’s Preparatory Committee. An important theoretical and political document, it is a step of tremendous significance towards unity of the communist movement. It contains an integrated system of correct definitions of a general nature and represents a platform for achieving unity in the anti-imperialist struggle around a number of propositions of a democratic character. In particular, it stresses the extremely important task of solidarity with Vietnam and the peoples of other countries fighting for independence and freedom. As regards Latin America, the Document stresses the role of solidarity with the Cuban revolution and its historic significance in our continent’s revolutionary development.

p Our Party considers that the Document is, first and foremost, a new point of departure on the road towards complete unity in the communist movement. Its importance for our day and, more still, for the future, is emphasised by the fact that it has been drawn up collectively.

p The main significance of our Meeting lies in this feeling of unity. The Meeting plays the role of a weapon for moulding unity of action of all Parties against imperialism and various reactionary forces around a common programme and ->n the basis of a common strategy. Only by conforming to these requirements can we really unite the main trends of modern times, anticipate the plans of the enemy by our actions, preserve or win national independence, democracy and peace and, in the last analysis, accelerate the world socialist revolution.

p On the other hand, we realise that some compromises are reflected in the Document inasmuch as it is a successful attempt to achieve a coincidence of various standpoints on a principled foundation. But the most important thing is that we regard it as a Document ushering in a transition to higher forms of unity, which would ensure the dialectical unity of ideas and action and the combination of theoretical and strategic unity on an international level with creative diversity in the activities of each Party within its national boundaries.

p This idea is by no means aimed at belittling the significance of our principal 201 evaluation of the Document. We say this in order to stress that unity is moulded, that it is the result of constant efforts by the fraternal Parties, of their internationalism, mutual’ understanding and ideological struggle, which we take to mean not quarrels but a quest for scientific theoretical propositions and orientation for joint action. Moreover, we deliberately use the term historic when we speak of the Meeting. Its documents are the first of such a high level to be adopted by the international communist movement since the 1957 Declaration and the 1960 Statement. They are thus a practical testimony of unity, reaffirming that the Meeting had to be held and that it is a victory despite the limiting aspects we have mentioned.

p We shall not analyse the text of the Main Document, which all of you have in your hands. We shall only briefly dwell on some considerations of our Party’s Central Committee on this question.

p We consider that unity is necessary in the strategic plane and that it can be achieved from the viewpoint of principles.

p The fact that it is necessary strategically is quite obvious. This is confirmed indirectly and, sometimes, directly by our DP^cumentJ which stresses existing possibilities for the development and triumph of the revolutionary movement in all its forms, noting the preservation of an international relationship of forces favourable to socialism, a relationship beneficial for the peoples fighting imperialism and reaction. In the Document this is accentuated also by the exclusion of all illusions of a more or less idyllic peaceful coexistence, by its rejection of simplified assessments of the situation that only a quantitative and automatic evolution of revolutionary processes is observed in the world.

p The need for unity on the strategic level is confirmed by the Document where it highlights the intensification of the aggressiveness intrinsic to the piratical and militarist nature of imperialism, above all US imperialism, which is the principal aggressor and world policeman; where it exposes the aggression against Vietnam, the threats to Cuba and Korea, the plans and provocations directed against the socialist system, the occupation of Taiwan, the intrigues in Africa and Asia and the systematic and bloody oppression of Latin America; and, lastly, where it exposes the so-called global strategy of US imperialism, in whose service huge resources, including the achievements of the scientific and technological revolution, have been placed.

p These propositions do not lead us to a loss of perspective or a pessimistic assessment of the international balance of forces. They make it plain that life illustrates the Marxist truth that no ruling class quits the scene calmly and peacefully. At the same time, they remind us that the huge strength of the integral socialist system—the axis of which is the historic and ideological prestige and economic and military might of the Soviet Union—if it combines with the trends of world reality, with the working-class and national liberation movements, can avert a world war, paralyse or crush aggressors, destroy fascist, anti-democratic regimes, facilitate the struggle for national independence and the transition to socialism of the peoples in developing countries and, moreover, secure a fresh upsurge of the socialist revolution, for whose sake our Parties exist. This is all the more possible now, when the crisis of the capitalist system manifests itself in new forms of economic and social upheaval in the most 202 developed capitalist countries, when the contradictions underlying our epoch are growing more acute.

p We thus stand in need of unity because we foresee a great collision on the international and the national levels. We consider that the unity of our movement will facilitate the coming stern struggle and, in particular, it will lighten the grim battles of the peoples of colonial, semi-colonial and dependent countries. We stand in need of unity because thanks to it the inspiring light of Marxism-Leninism will burn more brightly on the ideological, cultural and human levels.

p When we sum up the results of the past decade we must ask ourselves the question: Why have there been some setbacks and retreats, why have the successes not been more considerable?

p We do not think that this was the result of negative changes in the world balance of forces. Neither do we think, as some people do, that many of the defeats and retreats in various sectors have been the result of an erroneous assessment of the correlation of forces. We feel that to some extent this was the result of idyllic assessments of world development, and was perhaps the consequence of the fact that sight was lost of the dialectics of processes, the inevitable sternness of the class struggle on a national and an international scale, which sometimes leads to an obliteration of the qualitative borderline between bourgeois democracy and socialism.

p Our setbacks and retreats, as well as inadequate successes have, moreover, shown the influence of such an extremely negative factor as the breakaway of China and its actions directed at undermining the socialist system and the Communist and Workers’ Parties. These actions prevented the anti-imperialist forces from concentrating on the struggle against the common enemy, and this has had a particularly adverse effect on the. conditions of the struggle of the Vietnamese people. They diverted much energy to internal polemics. In some cases these actions were a factor paralysing the creative, Marxist-Leninist elaboration of problems. In other cases they allowed the Chinese spectre to be used as a cover for Right slogans, while those on the Right do not scruple to utilise the Chinese formulation of the problem. But above all this circumstance was a factor which injected ideological confusion, a factor which reduced the attractive power of socialism and communism for the broad masses, creating new foundations for anti-communist and anti-Soviet propaganda. The actions of China have, in particular, helped to give rise to a false conception of relations between socialist countries, dealt a serious blow at the principles of proletarian internationalism and their application in the world socialist system, and seriously harmed the very concept of the Party and its leading role. To a large extent all this has hindered the utilisation of ripe opportunities for considerably enhancing the influence of the ideas of Marxism-Leninism, for the winning of the broad masses to our positions. At the same time, under conditions where new social strata have been drawn into the revolutionary movement, it has promoted the flowering of various kinds of infantile concepts.

p In these circumstances we regard all steps taken to restore and strengthen our unity as steps directed towards the creative development of Marxism coupled with an active struggle for thepreseivation of its theoretical and 203 methodological purity, against all Forms of revisionism, against bourgeois nationalism and other deviations. But when divergences of different proportions arise in the communist movement it is always wise to recall how Lenin put the question: What is necessary—unity or parting of the ways, demarcation ?

p We Communists are proletarian revolutionaries and not political gamblers, and we must not evade answering this question. In answering it we maintain that, unity is possible on a principled foundation. This assessment of ours coincides with the assessment of almost all Parties. We know of no other actions in favour of demarcation except those of the Chinese leadership and some of their yes-men, who have given the split a theoretical foundation, implemented it and are levelling virulent slander at our Meeting.

p We are happy to welcome as a most favourable fact the presence here of representatives of the glorious Communist Party of Cuba. The friendly words addressed to the Meeting by the heroic Parties of Vietnam and Korea and by the Laotian comrades express warm feelings of communist fraternity which facilitate unity.

p Unity is possible on the basis of principles, provided a dynamic struggle is waged for it, provided we mould it day by day and refrain from turning every divergence into an insult, oppose all centrifugal trends leading to confusion, combat all glorification of isolation, which identifies a Party’s independence with aloofness, confuses creative Marxism with a departure from the CPSU arid the socialist system, if we combat the metaphysical counterposing of the national features of each Party to its internationalist duties and, lastly, if we provide the conditions for a creative, fraternally critical and self-critical dialogue between all Parties or, at least, between as many of them as possible. We venture to think that this would lead, on the one hand, to a real and not only declarative enhancement of the leading role of each Party within its national boundaries, a role about which so much is being said, and, on the other, to the reaffirmation of the internationalist content determining the epoch-making mission of the proletariat.

p Today nobody suggests an international leading centre, but this does not prevent us from emphasising the great historic role played by the Third International; however, we feel that it is really necessary to considerably strengthen our international contacts.

p Furthermore, we believe that the difficulties which various contingents of our movement have experienced or are experiencing on the road to becoming a real political force in their countries by no means derive from the obligations stemming from internationalism. If in the course of decades of activity they have failed to sink roots in the ranks of the proletariat, substantially influence the movement of the popular masses and play an important role in the struggle against such savage aggressive acts of imperialism as the intervention in Vietnam, in which armed contingents from their own countries are used, they can hardly blame their shortcomings on proletarian internationalism and on the basic propositions of Marxism-Leninism. Life refutes this untenable explanation—suffice it to glance at the struggle of other peoples.

p There are also these considerations. Although we do not think our Meeting has the possibilities for conducting discussions on these questions, it will be 204 necessary, sooner or later, collectively to determine the reasons giving rise to divergences and contradictions among our Parties. In this respect, we should like to note in passing only one circumstance. Frequently, the following is given as the only and principal explanation: the breadth and diversity of the international revolutionary process are the objective basis for differences and divergences. In other words, the scale and successes of our movement are, at’the same time, the reason for our weaknesses. Partially that is so. Arid it would be legitimate to stress this as a counterbalance to simplified notions or to attempts to reduce everything to some single factor when specific problems are examined. But this is only half the truth, for on this basis emerge ideas and, sometimes, trends both incipient and those that have already taken shape, which concern profound ideological problems and are, in our view, of a revisionist nature and which, therefore, must be qualified from the class standpoint, from the standpoint of Marxist-Leninist principles. Any other approach would lead us to relativism, namely, to regarding the practice of the international socialist revolution as a sum of local experiences, which would imply negating the universal nature of Marxist-Leninist theory.

p If we strive for unity, no political and theoretical explanation of these questions must be made with the help of epithets or labels—that is what some Parties fear. Our Party, as far as its modest forces allow, strives not to avoid quests but to help carry them out. It strives to understand the role of other revolutionary forces in Latin America and the whole world and appreciate their contribution. However, it does not consider that the class approach can be renounced. All opinions explained by objective reasons cannot be thrown into one pile and named Marxism-Leninism.

p Moreover, this leads to a wrong approach. To the detriment of the ideological struggle such an approach leads to the thought that divergences do not disappear because they are regarded (which sometimes may be the case) in a wrong, flagrantly distorted light. As a consequence, emphasis is laid on questions connected with an underestimation (false or real) of national features or, when the matter concerns relations between Parties, on the question of sovereignty. We by no means tend to think that everything has been resolved in the matter of surmounting dogmatic ideas or incorrect methods; we even do not think that the actions undertaken have always been good. But we nevertheless consider that insistence on these questions can lead to rejection of creative ideological discussion and legitimise opinions playing a negative role or even trends clearly alien to Marxism-Leninism. And, frankly speaking, we believe this creates the danger of strengthening the Right, or revisionist trends in some contingents of our movement.

p We believe that the main danger is in the isolation of some Parties, which reduces fraternal discussion to a minimum when such a discussion requires criticism and self-criticism. Let this not be understood as a wish to infringe the autonomy of other Parties. We stand for the equality of Parties. We consider that it is their right, more, it is their duty to determine their positions at their congresses and Central Committee meetings. But to hold that the greatest danger today is the threat to Party autonomy from external forces is tantamount to displaying "as much ’sense for the realities of life^^1^^ as was displayed 205 by the hero in the popular fable who cried out to a passing funeral procession, ’Many happy returns of the day!’ " (Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 5, p. 446.)

p However, we understand that unity requires the fulfilment of certain conditions. In particular, we must organise polemics in an appropriate manner. Through unity of action we shall make headway in the fraternal exchange of opinions until we learn to understand that the ideological struggle is a weapon of the revolution and not a ghost appearing in a stranger’s house. Common action and the joint study of problems will undoubtedly engender the highest forms of unity for which we are striving.

p All this gives the Meeting a positive character of the highest degree. It would have been of positive significance even if we confined ourselves to adopting a platform of united action, i.e., to the minimum concretisation of unity acceptable to Parties recognising Marxism-Leninism as their common source of inspiration. But that would be much less than what the movement can give the cause of unity already now.

p For our part we would have liked to include in the Document more political and theoretical definitions. Much time has elapsed since 1960. In this period rich experience has been accumulated, experience relating to the development of the socialist system, problems of the revolutionary struggle of the peoples of colonial and dependent countries, with the revolutionary practice of Latin America, the links between democratic and socialist revolutions in countries with a relatively high level of capitalist development, processes taking place in the working-class movement of developed capitalist countries, to the rebellion of students and intellectuals, to the actions of the radical petty bourgeoisie, particularly in Latin America, to the processes of implementing the vanguard role of the Communist Parties, to an assessment of deviations and trends that have come to the surface in the course of this period throughout the movement, and so on. In particular, we should have liked the Document, in addition to reasserting the great importance of the creative development of Marxism-Leninism, to repeat the known Marxist-Leninist propositions on the dictatorship of the proletariat, the relationship between the state and the revolution, which warrants the conclusion regarding the break-up of the military-bureaucratic machinery of state, the ways of the development of the revolution, and so on. Nevertheless, we did not insist on this in order to facilitate the adoption of such an important document. Our guideline is that at the present stage everything must facilitate unity. At the same time, we do not lose sight of the Right danger, which manifests itself in the fact that the propositions which in the final analysis determine our status as Marxists-Leninists, are not recognised as valid today.

p Comrades, the strengthening of unity and the enhancement of the international role of the socialist system, particularly of the Soviet Union, is of fundamental significance to all revolutionaries throughout the world. This internationalist duty, which historically emerged together with the triumph of the Great October Revolution, has by no means been abolished in the new conditions of the development of the world socialist revolution. We, therefore, cannot agree with those who evaluate the relations between the CPSU and the revolutionaries of the apitalist world according to a special measure: they take credit for the 206 suecesses deriving from the historic transformations in the socialist countries, while the inevitable consequences of the class struggle in the world arena and the needs linked up with the defence of the socialist system, which are also prerequisites of the development of the world revolutionary process, they regard as an obstacle to their own successes. It is hard to believe that assessments of this kind conform to proletarian internationalism, and it is still harder to believe that they guarantee the conversion of one or another Party into a genuinely national political force.

p It has been suggested here that a theoretical discussion should be started on one or another international development, or on the question of the international influence of socialist society. If this refers to the Soviet Union, this question is answered by the 50 years of triumphant socialism, the conversion of a backward society into a new socialist civilisation; it is answered by the 20 million Soviet people who laid down their lives for victory over nazism; it is answered by the assistance to Vietnam, Cuba and other countries. All this is testimony of the real contribution to the advancement of the socialist and anti-imperialist forces of our epoch. On the other hand, the successes of the socialist, democratic or anti-imperialist revolutions in the capitalist countries are the best defence of the gains of the socialist camp. The content of our epoch is embodied in this inviolable dialectical unity. Therefore, when a call is made for a struggle simultaneously against the USSR and the USA, as has been done at the 9th Congress of the CPC, the purpose pursued is to break the backbone of the world socialist revolution and the world liberation movement.

p Comrades, our Meeting is sitting at a time when the peoples of Latin America are resolving difficult, complex problems, involving, as a rule, bloody struggle.

p The peoples of our continent, oppressed by US imperialism and the bourgeois-landowner oligarchies, have made themselves heard on the international scene after the Second World War. Today the continent is going through a new phase of revolutionary development. The victory of the Cuban revolution has become a determining landmark of this historic change.

p Since the beginning of the 1950s the situation in Latin America has been characterised, on the one hand, by the upsurge of democratic and anti-imperialist movements some of which develop along the road of armed struggle, as well as by actions by the proletariat and by other broad sections of the masses, which include, in particular, students and intellectuals; on the other hand, this situation has been characterised by the interference of US imperialism, political instability, frequent coups, an offensive on democratic freedoms and the alternation of tyrannical regimes.

p The objective foundation of such a complex situation is the deep crisis of the socio-economic structure of the Latin American countries. Social, economic and political contradictions are growing more and more acute on that foundation and this is inducing our peoples to intensify the struggle against US imperialism and against the ruling classes of big capitalists and landowners.

p In this revolutionary process the ruling classes are showing their inability to meet the vital requirements of economic development and halt the upsurge of the working-class and popular movements. Mass militant strikes of the working class, the awakening of the peasants and other sections of the rural 207 population in many countries, the courageous actions of the students, the struggle in the underground, the heroic actions of guerilla squads and other forms of the democratic and anti-imperialist struggle—such is the picture of the turbulent revolutionary process in Latin America over a period of several years.

p Naturally, this process is neither easy nor simple. Flagrant interference by US imperialism, the creation of a powerful machinery of repression, provocation and espionage, the assassination of Party functionaries, the shooting of demonstrations, and the political crimes against revolutionaries—such are the conditions in which this difficult battle is being fought.

p But new forces join in the struggle each time imperialism and reaction celebrate a victory. They use new forms of struggle. This shows that the mole of revolution, mentioned by Marx, is zealously working in our continent. Neither repression nor the temporary retreat of one or another contingent waging a liberation armed or unarmed struggle, nor even the murder of such popular heroes as Ernesto Guevara have paralysed the heroic deeds of our peoples. If today we turn our eyes to Latin America we shall see this struggle in all its magnitude, the stormy actions of the workers and students in all the capitals, the failure of the Rockefeller tour under mass pressure and, possibly, the beginning of a new revolutionary wave on a continental scale.

p How is this situation in Latin America to be characterised? Our Party regards it as a general revolutionary situation such as existed in Russia, according to Lenin’s assessment, from 1900 until the outbreak of the First World War.

p Arising on the objective foundation of the structural crisis of our societies, this general situation accelerates the maturing of specific revolutionary situations now in one country, now in another. The comrades of some Parties call this a pre-revolutionary situation, of others—changing conditions objectively preparing the ground for revolutionary crises. I do not propose to judge which of these definitions is correct. We feel it is more important to draw attention to the fact that in an atmosphere of relentless and bloody battles, our continent is moving towards new and still higher stages of the revolutionary struggle and that in these conditions the vanguard role of the Party, the unity of the working class and of the anti-imperialist forces, and international solidarity can determine the course’ of events. Latin Americans consider that the unity of the international communist movement is an important factor of their liberation. Our small Uruguay holds a place in the general panorama of unrest in the Latin American continent. Against the background of the deep socio-economic crisis, which today manifests itself in extreme forms, the present decade has witnessed a grim struggle of the working class, rural workers, students, intellectuals and middle strata of the urban population against US imperialism and the ruling classes. This persevering, sharp struggle of the working class and other sections of the popular masses is the most important feature of Uruguayan reality. And the struggle for economic and social demands intertwines with the defence of democratic freedoms and national sovereignty, with the most active forms of solidarity with Cuba and Vietnam and with mass action against US imperialism. In this struggle the working class and all other working people have rallied in a single trade union centre, the 208 National Convention of Working People, which has a clear-cut class orientation. In this struggle a firm alliance has been moulded between students and the workers, the unity of the Left forces has taken shape and a powerful movement has been started in defence of democracy and sovereignty. In recent years the class struggle has become particularly acute; the actions of the working class and other sections of the people have time and again thwarted the adventurist designs of the “gorillas”.

p In 1968, the government of Uruguay tried to suppress the working-class and popular movement and completely abolish democratic freedoms. For almost a whole year emergency laws were in operation; workers and students were murdered, hundreds of people were wounded, more than 6,000 people were thrown into prison and 60,000 workers of state enterprises were made to work under military control. However, the working masses fought back. General strikes, the occupation of factories, street actions, militant demonstrations by workers and students which in many cases were accompanied by clashes with the repressive forces, and also actions by young people and women and protests by democratic forces and religious people played a decisive role in restoring democratic freedoms. But this grim struggle has not ended. It continues to shake the country and holds out the prospect of still more acute clashes.

p In this great battle our Party and the Communist Youth League—the main forces of the working-class and student movements—substantially increased their membership. Our Party, whose membership rose ten-fold during the past few years, was joined in 1968 alone by 11,000 persons, including the new members of the Communist Youth League. The circulation of our daily newspaper has grown. More and more people listen to our radio broadcasts and our theoretical journal has the most massive readership in the country. Our Party, 78 per cent of whose membership are workers, and our Communist Youth League, which has sunk deep roots in the student movement, have won greater influence over these sections of the people. At the same time, we have consolidated the unity of forces within the Left Front of Liberation and extended the alliance with democratic circles and believers.

p Now, as we speak here, our country is looking for solutions to complex political problems. It is in the grip of a sharp class struggle. Our Party, which is working to resolve these problems in a democratic and anti-imperialist spirit and to secure progressive changes, realises that our country may soon again be confronted with a threat from the “gorillas”. But the Party is confident that the people will rise to the struggle against them.

Comrades, let our concluding words be words of gratitude to the glorious Party of Lenin, of gratitude for its hospitality and for its extremely valuable contribution to the success of our Meeting.