449

[introduction.]

The tide of national liberation revolutions that had swept across Asia and Africa had brought political independence to scores of colonies and dependencies. In 1914 these countries accounted for 66.8 and 60 per cent, respectively, of the world’s territory and population, but by April 1965, the lands remaining under a colonial regime formed a mere 4.5 and 1.1 per cent of its territory and population.

450

Independence: the Consequences

p The Statement adopted by the 1960 Meeting of Representatives of Communist and Workers’ Parties stressed that "the breakdown of the system of colonial slavery under the impact of the national-liberation movement is a development ranking second in historic importance only to the formation of the world socialist system".  [450•1 

p The new sovereign states were at different levels of social, economic and political development. Some had thrown off their colonial or semi-colonial yoke as the result of successful peoples’ democratic revolutions. Others remained within the orbit of the world capitalist economy, though enjoying a special status therein. Quite a few of the developing countries had been granted formal political independence, but were not yet actually fully independent due to the fact that they were either saddled with puppet governments or belonged to imperialist military blocs.

p While they remain economically dependent on imperialist states, developing countries continue to be the object of semi-colonial exploitation, to be the world’s rural appendage, so to say. This economic basis is precisely the mainstay of modern neo-colonialism. Imperialism aims to prevent the defection of former colonies and semi-colonies from the capitalist system and is prepared to use all possible means to that end, ranging from colonial wars all the way to economic “assistance”. The imperialist powers are currently banking, in the new situation, on an alliance with the Right-wing collaborationist bourgeois elements of the new states of Asia and Africa.

p Now that the world socialist system is largely determining the development of mankind, however, and thanks to the support of the Soviet Union, the other socialist states and the international workers’ movement, most of the new states have come to enjoy genuine political independence, their economic weakness notwithstanding.

p Most of the states that have thrown off the colonial yoke base their foreign policy on the principle of non-adherence to any imperialist military blocs. These non-aligned countries play an important role on the international scene, actively opposing the aggressive policies of the imperialist powers and the stocking and testing of atomic weapons, fighting for the creation of atom-free zones, etc.

p As to the internal development of the new states, a characteristic feature was the aggravation of contradictions between the working people and the propertied classes.

451

With class warfare growing ever more intense, the national bourgeoisie was exhibiting a trend towards making deals with foreign imperialism and internal reaction.

Republic of India: 500,000,000 Strong

p After India was proclaimed a republic in 1950, the country’s political life focussed mainly on the prospects of its further development. The national bourgeoisie, which had established itself in power, was intent not only on assuring India’s newly won independence, but also on strengthening its own dominant position. The working people, on the other hand, were increasing their activity, and this factor had an important effect on the power relationship of the classes.

p The National Congress Party had retained its leading influence in the country after the 1951-52 elections to parliament and the state legislative assemblies, which had given it 44 per cent of the total votes, and in which the Communist Party had received 6.7 per cent (6,000,000) of the votes. But the 1957 elections gave the Communist Party 12,000,000 votes and 29 and 207 seats, respectively, in parliament and in the state legislative assemblies. In Kerala the Communists collected a majority of votes and formed a state government. The overall situation in the country and a desire to maintain its influence among the masses made it incumbent on the National Congress to follow an increasingly consistent policy of undermining the positions of the feudal landlords and princes. Nehru’s influence within the party became stronger than before.

p On the whole, the Indian Government’s foreign policy may be said to have been anti-imperialist, progressive. India consistently followed the policy of non-adherence to any imperialist blocs, and established cordial relations with the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries.

p At home, the government’s main aim was to create conditions favourable to the country’s economic development by promoting national capital. The agrarian reforms of the 1950s had weakened the positions of the landlords, but landlord ownership of estates had remained. About one-third of the arable lands continued to be leased on onerous semi-feudal terms. Still, capitalist relations were developing more and more rapidly in the rural areas; the process of class differentiation among the peasantry was also picking up speed; and the rural bourgeoisie had grown stronger.

p Taking into account the weakness of Indian capital and the reluctance of the big national bourgeoisie to invest in heavy industry, the Indian Government resolved to create a relatively 452 powerful public sector. Initially, this sector comprised the facilities which had belonged to the British colonial authorities (such as railways, etc.). Next, the public sector was extended to include power installations and the basic branches of heavy industry. The assets of state-owned companies increased by a factor of 20 over the decade 1951-61, though the public sector still accounted for only 10 per cent of industrial production.

p The year 1951 saw the initiation of the five-year plan system; and in January 1955, the Sixtieth Session of the National Congress adopted a resolution declaring that the party set itself the aim of achieving in India "a society on the socialist pattern”. This resolution mirrored the growing trend towards socialism among the masses. Actually, it must be said, the Indian governing circles in speaking of socialism meant, more often than not, a development of Indian capitalism with a strong accent on the state-capitalist sector. A government statement in regard to the first five-year plan contained the following: "It should be remembered that while the government can influence the private sector, it cannot determine the actual placement of investments therein. The programmes in question, therefore, should be regarded as statements of opinion regarding what is considered practicable and desirable.” But the advancement of state entrepreneurship and the fulfilment of the five-year plans played a progressive role notwithstanding. Here in India, as in the other developing countries, state capitalism was anti-imperialist in its nature, and had set out to eradicate the 453 consequences of colonialism and promote the country’s independence.

p India had a great deal to show for the aid it received from the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries in the field of industrial development. Between 1955 and 1961 she was granted Soviet credits to the amount of roughly Rs. 6,000 million. The Soviet Union built a steel works at Bhilai, the largest in India, and aided in laying a foundation for the heavy engineering and oil-extracting industries. An agreement was concluded for the construction by the USSR of yet another steel works, at Bokaro.  [453•1  All told, more than 40 projects for the national economy were built or were under construction with the help of the Soviet Union.

p The Republic of India scored a marked advance in the development of its national industry. New branches were added, such as the production of atomic energy, manufacture of electronic equipment, aircraft construction, and machine-building. Industrial production was growing considerably faster now than under British colonial rule.

p Over the first two decades of independence industrial production practically tripled. Manufactured goods now figured in India’s exports—for the first time in the country’s history. Key positions in heavy industry, transport, communications, as well as in foreign trade and banking were in the hands of the state.

p While promoting the development of the national economy as envisaged by the five-year plans, the country’s progressive forces were carrying on the fight to improve the condition of the masses and to compel the propertied classes to finance industrial production. India’s working people came out for an expansion of the public sector and its democratisation; for the restriction of private capital; for radical agrarian reforms in the interests of the peasantry; and for an end to all feudal relics in the rural areas.

p The big Indian bourgeoisie, on the contrary, was seeking to exploit the public sector entirely in its own interests and to obtain the output of state-owned enterprises (that is, metals, electric power, etc.) at low prices, thus assuring it handsome profits. The section of the monopolist bourgeoisie that was linked to foreign capital called for a limitation, and even for the complete abolition, of the public sector. The forces of reaction were exerting a heavier and heavier pressure on the National Congress Party leadership and on the Indian Government. This was particularly conspicuous in 1959 in the case of the state of Kerala.

p The emergence, in 1959, of the new Right-wing Swatantra (Independent) Party was but a manifestation of the growing activity and consolidation of the forces of reaction. Created to safeguard 454 the interests of the big capitalists and landlords, the Swatantra called for a limitation of the public sector, the dissolution of the National Planning Commission, abolition of the non-adherence policy, and rapprochement with the Western powers. Reactionary activity reached a peak following the exacerbation of the IndoChinese frontier conflict in the autumn of 1962. The state-of-emergency law passed in October was used for mass repressions against the Communists. Right-wing elements did their best to work up a chauvinistic frenzy. And the Western imperialist powers, for their part, exerted increasing pressure on the Nehru government in an attempt to induce it to give up its non-alignment policy.

p In the face of growing Right-wing pressure India’s working people carried on the fight for their economic and political rights. The mass movement got going again in the summer of 1963, after a short recession. A wave of mass demonstrations rolled across the country in July and August 1964, as a result of increased difficulties with the food supply.

p The death of J. Nehru, which followed on May 27, 1964, came as a shock to all Hindus. Contrary to the expectations of the Rightwingers, however, it did not lead to any radical changes in the policies of the Indian Government. L. Shastri, who succeeded Nehru, announced that his government would continue the late prime minister’s policy. In 1965 a conflict with Pakistan over Kashmir created a serious situation in India: the conflict developed into regular warfare with heavy loss of life and was settled only through the friendly mediation of the Soviet Union, which invited the two sides to negotiate at Tashkent. The Declaration of Tashkent came to be the last official act of Prime Minister Shastri, who died at Tashkent on the eve of his departure for Delhi. He was replaced as prime minister by Indira Gandhi, daughter of J. Nehru and a prominent public figure in her own right, who continued the policy of development laid down by her father.

p In the second half of the sixties, however, India’s economic difficulties increased, largely in consequence of the situation in agriculture, where the half-measures of the unfinished agrarian reform failed to provide the landless peasantry with land or deliver them from bondage to the rich, the traders and the money-lenders. While by these years agricultural production roughly doubled since 1947, it was still insufficient to supply the wants of the population. The necessity to import foodstuffs was drawing heavily on the budget, seriously setting back the country’s balance of payments, with the inevitable dire consequences. 10,400,000 tons of grain (or 30 per cent of India’s total annual imports) were imported in 1966/67. The price paid for this grain—1,140 million rupees—considerably lessened the possibility of importing the industrial equipment needed to continue the programme of 455 industrialisation. The Indian monopolies tried to induce the government to renounce Nehru’s concept of top priority to the development of the state sector of the national economy, but their efforts failed.

p Sharper class contradictions were reflected in the elections to the all-India parliament and the state parliaments that took place early in 1967. An extreme polarisation of political forces became manifest. On the one hand, the Indian Communists were able to strengthen their position, and governments of the United Left Front, led by Communists, were formed in several states (Western Bengal, Bihar, Punjab and others). Many Indians came to see the soundness of communist principles, which point the way to true democracy and profound social changes and to the eventual building of a society where there is no room for exploitation.

p On the other hand, the elections showed a considerable strengthening of the reactionary political forces, which gathered the second largest number of votes. Swatantra and other reactionary organisations were clamouring for repressive measures against democratic organisations and leaders. As a result, the central government dissolved the progressive governments set up after the 1967 elections in Western Bengal, Bihar and Punjab. But the government set up by the extreme Right-wing elements in the state of Orissa continued to function. The Right-wingers also controlled the capital’s municipal council.

This polarisation of political forces affected the Indian bourgeoisie’s most important party as well: dissension increased within the Indian National Congress, as a result, inter alia, of some loss of that party’s popularity. While its central leadership was promoting a programme of "building a democratic socialist society”, certain influential elements were calling for co-operation with the Right-wingers. Swatantra and other Rightist organisations were carrying on subversive activities and provoked sanguinary clashes on religious grounds in various places. And the political atmosphere in India became increasingly unsettled.

For a Non-Capitalist Mode
of Development

p Past experience and that of the new states of Asia and Africa testify that no developing country can count on capitalist methods to tackle the job of eliminating economic and cultural backwardness—a legacy of colonial rule; capitalist methods are certain to lead to neo-colonialism.

Meanwhile the effective aid in the political, economic and cultural fields now being made available to the developing countries by the world socialist community provides excellent opportunities 456 for the formerly backward countries of Asia and Africa to opt for a non-capitalist mode of development. That is precisely what the working class and the working-class parties are fighting to achieve. The idea of breaking with a social system that engendered colonialism has a wide popular appeal. It is a perfectly logical consequence of the struggle to safeguard the newly won independence that voices are lifted in a number of countries in favour of a non-capitalist mode of development, or, to put it differently, in favour of socialism. This preference is voiced by revolutionary democratic nationalists who reflect the interests of the petty urban bourgeoisie, the peasantry, and certain sections of the national bourgeoisie which had initially hoped to rebuild their economy by the familiar methods of private entrepreneurship. In the 1960s some of the developing countries, notably the UAR, Burma, Algeria, Guinea, Syria, Congo (Brazzaville) and Tanzania, initiated important reforms as a prelude to a change-over to a non-capitalist mode of development.

The Algerian
People’s Democratic Republic

p In the Algerian People’s Democratic Republic the situation became extremely difficult and complicated after the signing of the Evian agreements. The war and the terrorist tactics of the OAS had laid the country waste. The French were leaving en masse, practically to a man, abandoning their businesses and farms. French employees, teachers and experts were also leaving the country. Most enterprises were idle.

p The consequences of the policy of division and separatism practised by the French were making themselves felt. The problem of charting Algeria’s further development provoked violent conflict.

p The more farsighted leaders at the National Liberation Front (FLN) realised that the revolution should go on and the aspirations of the people at large should be satisfied if the independence so dearly bought was to be safeguarded. The FLN programme adopted at the June 1962 session of the National Council of the Algerian Revolution at Tripoli was based on the assumption that the struggle for national independence would be followed by a people’s democratic revolution which would introduce reforms embodying socialist principles. The Tripoli programme included an agrarian reform and the nationalisation of transport, banks, foreign trade, mineral resources, etc. A sharp conflict ensued between the leaders of the Provisional Government who favoured moderate reforms and the democratic wing of the FLN, bringing the country to the brink of civil war, but ending in victory for the forces of democracy. The National Legislative Assembly convened 457 in September 1962, proclaimed Algeria a People’s Democratic Republic.

p That is when workers began, on their own initiative, to take over administration of the enterprises and farms abandoned by the French and setting up "committees of self-administration”. This upset the calculations of those sections of the national bourgeoisie which had hoped that the property abandoned by the colonialists would fall into their hands. The working people succeeded in getting the "committees of self-administration" officially recognised. The decrees of March 1963. declared all property abandoned or unexploited by the French nationalised and officially transferred to the "committees of self-administration".

p To carry on the revolution it now became necessary to unite all progressive forces and organise a party that would form the working people’s striking force and provide leadership for an independent Algeria. An important step in this direction was the April 1964 congress of the FLN. The Algerian Charter adopted by the congress stressed that self-administration manifested and would continue to manifest a continuous process of transition from a national people’s revolution to a socialist revolution, with all the economic and political problems implicated in the transition from colonialism to statehood, showing the way to socialism.

p By 1965 the self-administrated sector of the Algerian economy comprised 40 per cent of all arable land and 150,000 farm labourers. In industry this sector accounted for 20 per cent of the total industrial production.

p Algeria undertook a programme of industrialisation which would change the face of the country and assure economic and social progress. Her first project in the field of heavy industry—a metallurgical complex at Annaba was to produce yearly 450,000 tons of steel with the completion of its first section. A large chemical plant producing ammonia and nitrogen fertilisers was built at Arzew. Petroleum discoveries were made and it was planned to set up a petroleum and chemical complex near Arzew, including a refinery handling 2,500,000 tons of petroleum yearly. Industrialisation was calculated to end unemployment and the mass emigration of labour from Algeria. Many specialists living in France, where Algerians used to migrate in search of work, were approached with the proposal to return.

p A factor of importance for the reconstruction of an independent Algeria were the friendly relations established by the young republic with the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries. Soviet aid to Algeria was steadily increasing. In December 1963, a Soviet-Algerian agreement on economic and technological cooperation was concluded and long-term credits were made available to Algeria. In 1964 the Soviet Union built and presented as 458 a gift to Algeria a petroleum and gas institute, a textile secondary specialised school, and two educational centres. In addition, the Soviet Union has agreed to help Algeria with the construction of 28 dams in the country’s arid regions.

p Thousands of Soviet engineers, technicians, geologists, teachers, physicians, etc., were at work here, helping the Algerian people build up a new independent economy and training national cadres. Soviet engineers were aiding in the construction of the Annaba metallurgical complex, mentioned above, which was financed by a Soviet loan of 115,000,000 rubles. Soviet specialists worked out a project designed to radically alter the aspect of the Sahara by building irrigation systems and bringing water to the desert oases. A service that will long be gratefully remembered by the Algerian people was the removal by Soviet Army sappers of thousands of mines remaining on Algerian soil after the war, an operation that brought thousands of hectares of land back into cultivation.

p Algeria was following an active independent policy in the sphere of foreign relations and was dedicated to the principle of Arab unity in the struggle against Israeli aggression. The revolutionary government’s determined stand brought about the evacuation of all remaining French military bases.

Since Algeria launched her programme of non-capitalist development there was a sharpening of the class war in the country, the Right-wing elements often trying to resort to force. Thus in 1967 an armed putsch was attempted by Chief of the General Staff Zbiri, which, however, was put down by the government. The progressive social, economic and political reforms implemented by the National Liberation Front had the active backing of the Algerian people.

The United Arab Republic

p In the 1960s political life in the United Arab Republic was focussed primarily on the prospects of the country’s further development. The petty-bourgeois revolutionary nationalists who came to power in Egypt following the July 1952 revolution took over leadership of the struggle against imperialism and for the strengthening of the country’s political independence. Viewed objectively, this was a struggle waged to turn Egypt into an independent capitalist state. This anti-imperialist policy of the revolutionary government received the active support of the masses, who had played so decisive a role in dealing with the Anglo-French Suez gamble. The bourgeoisie, however, had tried to pluck the fruits of that victory over the forces of imperialism. The acquisition of property rights to the foreign banks and enterprises after 459 the nationalisation of the Suez Canal had fortified the positions of the big bourgeoisie. Intent on a “normalisation” of relations with the monopoly capital of the imperialist powers, it had begun to show displeasure with some aspects of the policy followed by the Nasser government. The masses, meanwhile, clamoured for social reforms and better living conditions.

p When they came to see that the country’s hard-won independence was imperiled, Nasser and his followers, counting on the support of the people at large, decided to launch a series of reforms designed to weaken the economic and political positions of the big bourgeoisie. These were initiated by the nationalisation, in 1960, of the Misr Bank, a leading Egyptian banking concern. In July 1961, the government decreed the nationalisation of all banks and insurance companies and some of the leading commercial houses, and the revocation of a number of concessions previously granted to foreign investors. More nationalisation decrees followed in 1961-64. As a result the government gathered in all banks, all insurance companies, and the vast majority of the big and medium-sized industrial plants. The government got under control 90 per cent of the country’s industrial production and practically all of its foreign trade.

460

p The government passed laws on the introduction of a seven-hour working day, minimum wage rates, vacations, and social insurance. Representatives of workers and employees were admitted into the administrative councils of enterprises.

p July 1961 saw the promulgation of laws augmenting the agrarian reforms, which struck a heavy blow against the latifundia system. 480,000 hectares were nationalised, out of a total arable area of 2,800,000. By 1964, some 332,000 families received land in return for the payment of certain sums. Nevertheless, private ownership relations continued to prevail in Egyptian agriculture; a considerable number of peasants continued to possess no land and the number of unemployed farm hands ran into hundreds of thousands.

p The various economic reforms introduced in the UAR aided the efforts of the Egyptian people to build up an independent national economy. The UAR became an agrarian and industrial country which was basically self-sufficient in respect of consumer goods. A ten-year economic development programme was in operation here since 1960, which envisaged a doubling of the national income by 1970. Friendly relations between the UAR and the countries of the socialist camp, notably the USSR, were an important factor contributing to the country’s economic development and to the strengthening of its political and economic independence. A powerful contribution to the development of its productive forces was the Aswan Dam built by the Soviet Union.

p Economic reforms were paralleled by changes in the country’s political life. February 1962 witnessed the convention of a National Congress of Popular Forces which adopted a Charter of National Action, an important instrument having the force of a programme. The Charter established that no developing country could achieve success through capitalist methods and set forth a programme of social reforms. The interests of the reactionaries, according to the Charter, conflicted with those of the people, inasmuch as the reactionaries monopolised the country’s entire wealth; that is why they must be deprived of all of their weapons as the one sine qua non prerequisite of a peaceful solution to class warfare.

p Elections to the National Assembly were conducted in March 1964, in accordance with the principles laid down by the Charter of National Action, which gave the workers’ and peasants’ representatives over 50 per cent of the seats. The provisional constitution of the UAR, promulgated at the same time, proclaimed the country a democratic socialist state founded on the union of the nation’s peasants, workers, intellectuals and national bourgeoisie. All emergency laws were decreed repealed and political prisoners freed, including the Egyptian Communists.

461

p It must still be said that the social and economic reforms definitely outstripped, in scope and speed, the political changes that were being operated in the UAR: the lack of a political organisation capable of heading the masses in their fight for social advancement was making itself felt. The Arab Socialist Union created by presidential decree in November 1962, with a membership that totalled, in 1965, roughly 7,000,000, was at the beginning of its activity a mere embryo of an ideologically uniform and well-organised national democratic party fit to be the vanguard of the UAR working people. In this situation an important role was still played by the bureaucratic machine largely controlled by bourgeois elements hostile to the policy of non-capitalist development.

p Imperialism, however, was not content to allow the United Arab Republic pursue its course of development along non-capitalist lines and resorted to various measures to obstruct it, including outright armed aggression.

p On June 5, 1967, Israel, backed by the imperialists of the United States, Britain and West Germany and by the forces of Zionism, launched a war of aggression against the UAR, Syria and Jordan with the purpose of overthrowing the progressive regimes of the three countries and striking a blow at the national liberation movement of the Arab peoples. During the six days the war lasted Israel succeeded in occupying extensive areas belonging to the three Arab countries, notably the Gaza strip and Sinai Peninsula belonging to the UAR. The Soviet Union and other socialist countries at once declared their solidarity with the victims of the Israeli aggression, called for unconditional condemnation thereof by the UN Security Council, and broke off diplomatic relations with the aggressor. On November 22, 1967, the Security Council adopted a resolution under which Israel was to withdraw from all of the occupied Arab areas before starting any negotiations concerning a peaceful settlement between Israel and the Arab countries. Israel flatly refused to comply and continued its raiding tactics against the Arab countries in infringement of the cease-fire agreement.

p Immediately after the June events President Nasser relinquished his powers, but this act provoked spontaneous popular demonstrations in the country’s important towns, calling upon the president to continue in his post, which he was constrained to do. The UAR leadership devoted itself, in the months that followed, to a careful analysis of all aspects of the Arab-Israeli war in order to draw therefrom the necessary lessons. It was established that _the republic’s military reverses were caused not only by the inadequate fighting efficiency of its armed forces but also by the failure of a certain segment of high-ranking officers to share the leadership’s progressive views: having come to constitute a privileged stratum of the military bureaucracy, these men had lost interest in the 462 republic’s further non-capitalist development. These elements were resolutely purged from the officer corps; and those who had been directly responsible for the armed forces’ unpreparedness to repel the aggressor were dealt with accordingly.

The events of June 1967 showed that the revolution of 1952 had been implemented largely from the top, without the masses having been widely drawn into participation. Taking this into account the UAR leadership undertook a programme of substantial democratisation of the country’s political life, providing, notably, for a reconstruction of the Arab Socialist Union on a democratic foundation, for the introduction of the principle of electivity to all its administrative bodies from top to bottom, half the seats were reserved for workers’ and peasants’ deputies. This was to assure the United Arab Republic further successes in its advance.

Burma

p Over a period of fourteen years, since its coming to power after the withdrawal of the British colonialists in 1948 until 1962, the bourgeoisie led the country along the capitalist path, cloaking its policies with pseudo-socialist terminology. Admittedly, Burma achieved an advance during that period, as exemplified by a certain dislodgement of foreign capital and the creation of a state sector, by its adherence to a non-alignment policy, and by certain achievements in the educational and cultural field; but the colonial pattern of the Burmese economy had remained and foreign capital still retained strong positions therein. Living standards were going down. Economic, political and inter-nationalities contradictions were growing sharper. The Burmese Communist Party, outlawed in March 1948, was waging an armed struggle against the government. The reactionary Right-wing opposition and feudal-separatist elements also had armed forces in the field.

p On the night of March 1, 1962, state power was seized by the Revolutionary Council set up by ranking army officers and presided over by the Commander-in-Chief, General Ne Win. General Ne Win was put at the head of the Revolutionary Government of Burma. Within the Burmese army, formed in the struggle against Japanese and British imperialism, prevailing sentiment was antiimperialist and democratic. Its officer cadres were chiefly of pettybourgeois, intelligentsia and peasant stock. The new government headed by Ne Win desired to take the country along a new, progressive path of development. And on April 30 the political declaration "Burma’s Road to Socialism" was issued.

p This programme document proclaimed the aim of the Revolutionary Council to be the establishment of socialism in Burma. 463 It envisaged the nationalisation of vital means of production in agriculture and industry, as also the nationalisation of commerce, transport, communications, foreign trade, etc. It provided for the continued existence of private entrepreneurship, though subject to fair and reasonable restrictions.

p Substantial social and economic reforms were introduced on the basis of the declaration, including the nationalisation, subject to payment of indemnity, of British-owned property in the petroleum-extracting industry, and of all private banks owned by foreign or Burmese interests. Then foreign trade was nationalised and control established over domestic trade. Large private enterprises were also taken over by the state. The revenue of capitalists who retained ownership of their enterprises was made subject to progressive taxation. Measures were taken to end the vestiges of feudalism in rural areas and to improve the lot of the peasants. Dispossession of tenant-peasants was prohibited, and a law passed in March 1965 abolished the payment of rent to landlords.

In view of the increasingly anti-popular nature of the bourgeois parties’ activity, the Revolutionary Council dissolved all political parties in the land except the Burmese Socialist Programme Party which was the leading organisation of the Burmese revolution. The string of reforms introduced in Burma since the coup d’etat of 1962 showed that the country was swinging over to a non-capitalist mode of development. Burma was ridding herself of foreign monopoly capital control. And the big national bourgeoisie was also losing its grip on the country.

p Among the new independent countries of Tropical Africa there were likewise some that were resolved to take a non-capitalist path of development. In Guinea, for instance, various industrial plants were being set up with a view to pulling the country out of the backward state in which it found itself as a result of centuries of colonial oppression. The main effort was directed towards the development of state-owned enterprises. In the agricultural field there were notable successes in the activities of production cooperatives.

Similar measures were adopted in the Congo (Brazzaville). In Ghana, the Convention People’s Party previously in power had also sought to effect the transition to a non-capitalist mode of development, but a couf) d’etat in 1966 brought the downfall of Kwame Nkrumah’s government.