448

p Dear Comrades,

p Our Party agrees with the Main Document and also with the Address "Centenary of the Birth of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin", the Appeal in Defence of Peace and the Appeal "Independence, Freedom and Peace for Vietnam!”.

p The convening of this Meeting, which seventy-five Communist Parties are attending, testifies to a strengthening of the unity of the international communist movement, which has faced serious difficulties after 1960. The non- participation of some fraternal Parties, regrettable though it.is, does not write off the fact of the victory of the cause of unity -and of the demonstration of this unity at our Meeting, the result of the joint struggle of our fraternal Parties. The efforts to cement the ranks of the communist movement, the vanguard of progress, cannot wait for complete unanimity. It is the majority, in the first place, that unites for the sake of unanimity.

p We support the Main Document because it is not only a programme of action but also has a definite ideological basis. Comrade Brezhnev’s speech has deepened the sound concept of communist unity of action on the basis of ideological unity. Communist Parties are united in the first place by the unity of ideology, which is rooted in the class origin and in Marxist-Leninist theory. Working out a joint action programme without ideological unity, without discussing the general strategic line and tactics of the international communist movement may suit a front which unites different class interests and ideologies for a certain period of time, but does not conform with the nature and tasks of the Communist Parties.

p The disagreements in the international communist movement, although they sometimes seem to pertain to purely practical matters, are in reality disagreements of an ideological character. Despite the fact that all Communist Parties proclaim Marxism-Leninism to be their guide to action, some, for instance, call for building socialism in isolation from the socialist system. Relations between the system of socialist states and each of these states, relations between capitalist countries, modern imperialism and its international organisations, the issue of war and peace—all these problems give rise to disagreements between Communists, which are nothing else but an expression 449 of differences in the class interpretation of Marxism or, in some cases, of an inability to develop the Marxist teaching so as to find solutions to the new problems of the world revolution in our epoch and the problems that confront mankind today.

p This viewpoint of ours is confirmed by the fact that the content of Section Three of the Main Document stating the joint action programme does not go beyond the habitual bounds or diifer from the slogans usually advanced by Communists. But- the essence of the matter will become clear if we pose the following questions: Why do acute disagreements arise between Communists, despite the community of their practical slogans ? Why is not every effort made to fulfil this programme of action?

p The common programme calls for struggle against world imperialism. But is there a Communist Party or a Communist in the world calling, openly or by intimation, for something else? In practice, acute disagreements emerge as a result of differences in ideological conceptions.

p The Chinese Communists regard struggle .against the Soviet Union, the socialist system and all differently-minded contingents of the communist movement as their top-priority task, an indispensable condition of the .struggle against imperialism. We all agree on the matter of unity and solidarity of the Communist Parties, and at the same time we see the Chinese Communists apply their own concept of unity to some of the Communist Parties. For example, in the autumn of 1964, without having contacted us to state their views, they attempted to split the Sudanese Communist Party. It is clear, then, that the CPC regards any joint action programme from the viewpoint of the possibility to engineer or deepen divisions in the Parties not sharing its views. The CPC has reneged on Marxism-Leninism, violating the principles of settling disagreements accepted among Communists, and gone as far as to commit armed provocations against the world’s first socialist state which supplied it with weapons and effectively contributed to the victory of the Chinese revolution. In so doing, it raised trumped up border issues that even bourgeois states would have settled peacefully.

p We all oppose and unanimously condemn modern imperialism. But we see that a section of the working class in the capitalist countries which, moreover, is not influenced by the Right-wing Social Democrats, overlooks the activity and neo-colonialist methods of the monopoly capital of their countries in the Third World. These groups of workers do not realise that the relatively high standard of living in Western Europe and the United States has been achieved not only as a result of the technological revolution, but also due to the profits which the monopolies squeeze out of the Third World and which they use to bribe new strata of workers. Working out a programme of common action and solidarity between the working class of capitalist Europe and America and the peoples of the Third World calls above all for Communist ideological unity on all questions pertaining to modern imperialism.

p Therefore the task of the international communist movement is not only to work out an action programme, but also to rectify those ideological trends and overcome those disagreements which hold down the tremendous potentialities of our movement and prevent raising its activity to a higher level.

450

p The socialist world system—the creation of the international working-class movement led by Marxist-Leninist Parties—-constitutes, without a doubt, the material basis of the movement of the peoples fighting on all the fronts of the modern world. Consequently, defence of the socialist world system is a supreme internationalist duty, because the workers of all countries, the peoples of all the world and not only the peoples of the socialist countries have a stake in the destiny of this system. The peoples of our country are tremendously and legitimately interested in consolidating the positions of the socialist system. They will not consent to any changes in its map save those that will tend to expand, increase its territory rather than bring about dismemberment and fragmentation. That is why our peoples understood and hailed the resolute measures taken in August to safeguard socialism in Czechoslovakia.

p The nature of the socialist system and its internal laws demand that as a social system it should develop on the basis of the international socialist division of labour, on the basis of the most advanced forms of internationalism which under Socialism are expressive of the loftiest national sentiments and notions. This system will not develop if ideas afe allowed to gain currency which ^:ustify division and national narrow-mindedness or a concept of relations between members of the socialist community Which identifies them with the relations of peaceful coexistence between States With differing social systems. Unable to attain their ends through direct fflilitaily intei’ferencej the imperialist powers are whipping up nationalist passions to destroy the unity of the socialist camp, to weaken it as the decisive force of historical progress.

p Owing to its unity, the socialist camp possesses attraction for all peoples. Having become the principal motive force of our time, having acquired appeal, socialism began to attract broadef social strata formerly hesitant or hostile towards it. The material and spiritual bankruptcy of capitalism has quickened the realisation by these strata of the profoundly humane nature of socialism. The problem of the superstructure of socialist society has acquired great importance for attracting and influencing them. The dialogue with these strata is no longer limited to comparing socialism and capitalism from the viewpoint of the satisfaction of man’s material requirements; it has now shifted to the realm of the spiritual requirements of modern man, who wants to see the triumph of socialist democracy over bourgeois democracy, who wants .socialism to take precedence both in technology and in the social sciences and free the human mind of bigotry.

p Much still has to be done for the international communist movement, with the socialist system as its vanguard, to ensure further development of Marxist-Leninist theory with the help of new creative methods conforming to the level of the complex problems of our time. Owing to a lag in this sphere, superficial ideas of the "New Left" type have surfaced in some contingents of our movement. This has happened only because these contingents raised problems which other contingents refrain ffoffi taking Up. We are confident that Marxism-Leninism is capable of posing and solving such problems, for there is no other theory which would surpass it in this respect.

p We consider that the Document correctly characterises inter-Party relations based on the principles of proletarian iuteffifttionalism. These principles cannot 451 lead to the emergence of contradictions among Communists. They are founded on loyalty to Marxism-Leninism to which Communists voluntarily adhere in their practical activity in behalf of the common interests of the international working-class movement. The fulfilment by Communists of their internationalist duty is judged by the contribution of every Party to the propagation of MarxismLeninism, by the effectiveness with which it convinces the masses in the need of selfless struggle for the cause of socialism, national liberation and progress. Affirmation of these principles calls for a stubborn struggle against Right and Left deviations, against conciliatory and nationalist trends, for the unity of the international communist movement.

p Cohesion of the three components of the world revolutionary movement-Hie socialist system, the international working-class movement and the national liberation movement—is one of the principal new features of our time singled out by us in the 1960 Statement. The past years have witnessed both flow and ebb in that respect. Today we are searching for a suitable formula that would help Consolidate this cohesion. We support the cleat-cut formula suggested by the CPSU Central Committee and contained in Comrade Brezhnev’s speech at this Meeting, namely: Communist Parties, progressive regimes in the Third World countries, revolutionarydemocratic movements, and the workerpeasant alliance. This formula will make the fight for unity more effective. It should be admitted frankly that our movement is not yet fulfilling its duty in this respect to a sufficient extent.

p The socialist camp with its tremendous potentialities is prevented from advancing along the road of unity by a’ number of factors., such as a serious internal split, the existence of nationalist extremist ideas in some of its contingents which ignore the common interests of the afiti’irnperlalist front, etc. Despite the great influence it wields, the Working class in the capitalist countries does not pay sufficient attention to the problem of neo-colonialism and of struggle against it, i.e., to the important and essential problem of rallying the ranks of the anti’imperialist front. The successes of the struggle of the working class in the capitalist countries against the monopolies depend on its solidarity with the national liberation movements suffering under the yoke of monopoly plunder.

p The national liberation movement, which scored major victories over old colonialism in the early 1960s, is experiencing great difficulties now. On the one hand, it has been confronted with new forms of colonialism, and, on the other, with problems of transition from the national to social revolution. Hence shifts in the position of the various classes, changes in their development, hence the reactionary role of the ruling groups influenced by the national bourgeoisie which headed the movement of these peoples for independence after the Second World War.

p We agree with the Document’s appear to heighten the peoples’ vigilance towards the imperialist offensive. We also agree that the socialist camp is the principal target of this offensive. We Consider, however, that it is necessary to stress more clearly the need to prevent any counterposifig of the socialist camp to the national liberation movement. Of course the socialis* camp is being viciously attacked by the imperialists. But it possesses tremendous possibilities 452 to give a prompt and effective rebuff to these attacks, as happened last August. As regards the national liberation movement, its possibilities are limited so far, and rebuffing the imperialists is more difficult for it, despite the economic, military and political support rendered by the socialist camp and primarily the Soviet Union. In our opinion, the formulation should be:

p 1. Imperialist strategy is aimed at destroying the might of the world revolutionary front.

p 2. The socialist camp is the principal target of this strategy.

p 3. Imperialism is striking blows at those links of this front which are the weakest at present.

p As for the Document’s treatment of the problems of the national liberation movement, we consider it useful to give a more clear-cut characteristic of some of its new features:

p First, it is necessary to indicate the particularly vicious character of the imperialist attack on this contingent of the world revolutionary front. Today, things are not going as smoothly as at the time of the 1960 Statement, when the general upsurge of the national liberation movement had led to major victories over old colonialism.

p Second, although the national liberation movement has suffered some setbacks as a result of the neo-colonialists’ actions, we cannot say that the outcome of its development is entirely negative. Faced with the penetration of neo-colonialism and the need to solve complex problems of development, the national bourgeoisie which formerly headed this mpvement has become an impediment to the social revolution. The working class and other revolutionary forces have advanced to the fore, offering an alternative to the traditional path of development. Under the impact of new objective conditions in some of the countries that have embarked on social development, the national revolution is merging with the social revolution.

p The Arab national liberation movement is a part of the world national liberation movement and reflects its common features, but it has its peculiarities stemming from the concrete conditions of the Arab countries, and principal among these is the connection between the struggle against imperialism and the struggle against world Zionism. Herein lie the real roots of the Middle East crisis.

p The Zionist circles have long been trying to conceal these roots and depict the struggle that is going on as a racial or religious confrontation in order to distort the class and liberatory character of the Arab peoples’ struggle for social progress and against imperialism, Zionism and domestic reaction.

p In connection with the problems of the national liberation movement, we want to describe the experience of Sudan in the light of the recent events of the national-democratic revolution.

p The revolutionary act of May 25 in our country confirms that, despite the activity of the counter-revolution and the sustained offensive of neo-coloniaiism against the national liberation movement, the general correlation of forces did not change in the mid-1960s and there is a possibility of some country breaking through the counter-revolutionary cordon and the imperialist encirclement. In the summer of 1965 the counter-revolution did win in our country, but the 453 popular movement, employing a flexible tactics, was able to retreat while preserving important positions in the mass organisations. This tactics enabled it to resume rallying its ranks and come out in defence of its fundamental interests,,;-for democratic freedoms, against economic backwardness, against the imposition of a reactionary constitution in the name of Islam to crown the victory of the counter-revolution, against Right-wing bourgeois reformism with its attempts to strip the slogans of the Sudanese October 1964 revolution of their social essence. The popular movement fought on staunchly for five years right up to May 25, when a group of patriotic-minded officers expressing the aspirations of the people wrested power from the counter-revolution and turned it over to the forces of the national-democratic front.

p The establishment of this new power paves the way for an upsurge of the revolutionary movement, which has been rallying to advance an alternative to the old methods of dealing with the country’s age-old problems: to lead it along the non-capitalist road of development which has crystallised in the course of the revolutionary movement into a clear-cut programme of development, changing the functions of the machinery of state, solving the nationalities problem in Sudan’s South and carrying out a revolution in the sphere of education.

p At this stage of the Sudanese revolution the new power is beset by difficulties, the most serious of which are:

p 1. Economic decline and Western domination in key economic areas.

p 2. The positions the counter-revolution has retained among the masses, the influence of the traditional parties, and the interests of the social circles ’ connected with their leadership.

p 3. The atmosphere of hostility along the southern, western and eastern frontiers.

p Despite all the possibilities and internal resources of the Sudanese revolution, the material and moral support of the socialist camp plays the decisive role— above all in providing adequate conditions for preserving the new power and developing the revolution in the face of the counter-revolution and neocolonialist intrigues.

p The future of the Sudanese revolution, which is living through the nationaldemocratic stage and going over to a new stage, depends on the continued revolutionary activity of the Communist Party and all revolutionary forces in buildjng the _;national-democratic front.

p The experience of our revolution shows that building up the nationaldemocratic front is marked by peculiarities stemming from the living conditions of our people. The most important of them is that the front does not assume an integrated, centralised form, but incorporates diverse classes and groups which have different forms of organisation corresponding to the level of awareness and organisation of each component of the front in different regions of the country.

p Although the front relies on a close alliance of workers and peasants, as well as other, new classes and strata, there is also the need to create simple forms of organisation to influence the majority of the population in the backward regions, 454 like the alliances and associations of different tribes which appeared after the 1964 revolution.

p The experience and the lessons of the October 1964 revolution in Sudan are the beacon that helps the democratic revolution to find its bearings at the present stage. The most important of these lessons are:

p 1. As a result of a revolutionary struggle which took the form of a general political strike, the population of the developed regions (a minority of the population of the country) was able to overthrow the reactionary power and install a new, progressive government. But the absence of a trained coercive apparatus made it impossible to preserve this power. Its preservation and development required defence by armed popular detachments. Also it was necessary that the democratic forces of the army should go over to the side of the revolution.

p ......

p 2. The development of the Sudanese revolution should be based on a new democracy. The new forces were unable to retain their hold on the power won in the 1964 revolution because, among other things, many of them, especially the revolutionary democrats, did not have a clear idea of the new democratic road. They were influenced by the liberal democratic slogans advanced by the counter-revolution, which helped it to come to power through Western-type parliamentarianism. The new forces saw from their own experience, especially after the reaction dissolved the Communist Party and expelled Communist deputies from the parliament, that the reactionary forces do not tolerate democracy and distort even its liberal forms.

p 3. The discussion in the Arab world of the causes of the defeat in June 1967, suffered despite the existence of progressive regimes, and the subsequent more revolutionary and more resolute steps to rectify the situation in these regimes helped to clear up many issues, such as the role played in the new democracy by the masses, the state apparatus, the armed forces and their social composition, the vanguard role of the Party, and other aspects of the ideological development of the revolutionary democrats and their gradual acceptance of Marxism.

p These and other lessons of the past five years had a positive influence on the revolutionary movement. It held out ideologically against the Rightist reformist trend which the reactionaries, who had earlier resorted to both physical and juridical violence to crush the revolution, employed to win over a part of the mass movement.

p The Communist Party played a prominent role in exposing the policy of Right-wing bourgeois reformism. It was able to do so owing to its activity on the economic front, where it stimulated the trade union movement’s fight for immediate demands and induced it to press for social change and influence the structure of society. As a result, the activity of the unions of factory and office workers, teachers and professional people, increased. In parliament, the Party used every opportunity to offer an alternative to the economic and financia’ policy of the counter-revolutionary government.

Thus, a complex and multiform struggle was waged in the conditions of the counter-revolutionary regime. The new power established on May 25, 1969 declared that it would continue the revolution of October 1964. It has opened 455 before the national-democratic front the road to deep-going changes designed to strengthen its unity and implement the tasks of the democratic revolution. An important feature of the events in Sudan is that the change occurred, not after the democratic front or its basic part had been fully constituted, but on the way to this goal. Favourable conditions have arisen for completing the establishment of the front, because power belongs now to one of its constituent classes. In conclusion, allow us, comrades, to express our profound gratitude and comradely appreciation to the Hungarian Socialist Workers’ Party and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union for their sincere efforts, for everything they have done to ensure the success of our Meeting. We are also grateful to all the other fraternal Parties that have contributed sincerely and selflessly to the preparatory work. We are convinced that their efforts, and our work at the Meeting itself, will be an important landmark on the road to the unity of the world communist movement, the pioneer of the new world.