p The imperialist powers see control of the trade unions in Africa as an important and promising means of strengthening their ideological and political influence over large numbers of Africans. Consequently, the struggle over the trade union movement in the African countries is an important aspect of the general political rivalry between the imperialist powers.

p African trade unions were created during the development of the national liberation movement. In a number of countries they played an active part in the political struggle and protested against the hard working conditions in enterprises owned by foreign companies—the principal employers in Africa. Since the achievement of independence by the African countries the role of trade unions has increased significantly, which predetermines the attitude of the 258 imperialist states towards them. What is more, in most of the liberated countries the trade unions are truly national institutions, acting outside the bounds of ethnic communities and administrative areas. They occupy an important place in the economy, since they embrace the workers in precisely those sectors on which economic development depends. Finally, the trade union movement is linked with international organisations and is tending towards regional and sub-regional amalgamation. All these factors offer African trade unions the opportunity to become a major political force and, at the same time, turn them into an object of inter-imperialist rivalry. Even during the colonial period Britain, France and Belgium devoted considerable attention to the trade union movement in the colonies, with the colonial authorities trying, moreover, to take absolute control of them. In some of the French colonies trade unions were entirely forbidden. In her book African Trade Unions,^^1^^ published in 1966, the British sociologist Joan Davis, who has made a close study of the trade union movement in Africa, points out that in the British colonies all trade unions had to be registered and receive the approval of the authorities. The colonial administration would either take harsh measures against trade union organisations that avoided this control, as happened in Kenya, for example, or it would set up completely servile trade unions, run by “non-political” bodies such as the Labour Council in Sierra Leone. In those French colonies where trade union activity was permitted only a person who was able to read French could become a member before 1944. The Belgian colonial authorities had complete power over the amalgamations of Congolese workers. In order to qualify for membership of a trade union, a person had to be at least 18 years of age, and needed 6 years of education and 3 years’ work experience behind him. All political action by the trade unions was banned and every attempt was made to isolate them from political parties.

p Despite conditions like these, however, trade union activity increased in a number of countries, especially during the Second World War. The membership of the trade union organisations grew rapidly in Nigeria, Gold Coast, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Tunisia, Tanganyika and several other African countries. In postwar years they became an important 259 force in the national liberation movement, notably in Kenya, Mali and Tunisia.

p The rapid growth in the African peoples’ national liberation struggle in the fifties was closely associated with the development of the workers’ movement and the increase in the numbers of the working class, which acted in a number of countries as the vanguard of the anti-colonialist forces. Examples of this are provided by the massive miners’ strike in Northern Rhodesia (Zambia) in 1955-56, the strike by workers in Sierra Leone in 1955 and the stoppages on the plantations of Tanganyika in 1957-60. In 1952 the trade unions organised a general strike in all the countries of French West Africa.

p From about the mid-fifties the metropolises, and Britain in particular, started to give serious consideration to the trade union movement in the African countries. The British ruling circles and the trade union leadership tried to direct it along the reformist path, well tested in Britain. The policy of "setting up trade unions in the colonies" was carried further, with one of its instruments being the "labour departments" specially created in the African countries, through which the local governments provided help and useful advice to the trade unions.

p The aim of these measures was clearly delineated—to place the trade union movement in the colonies that were on the verge of liberation under British control and to forestall the creation of militant organisations, capable of leading the struggle of Africa’s working people for complete independence. It may be recalled in this connection that it was precisely the British trade unionists who kept in constant touch with African trade unions who were used by the British ruling circles to exert influence on African opinion. For instance, these trade unionists made strenuous efforts to persuade the leaders of the national liberation movement in Nigeria, Rhodesia, Uganda, Kenya and other countries that it was necessary to accept the neo-colonialist constitutions and other pseudo-democratic reforms that London wished to impose on the colonies before independence.

p In the new conditions that arose in the African countries after their emancipation from colonial rule the problem of 260 guiding their social development took on an even greater importance for the former metropolises, since in addition to the internal front there was now an external one—the expansion of imperialist competitors. London and Paris were obliged to take extra measures to see that control of the trade union movement in former British and French Africa was not seized by their dynamic rivals.

p In 1961, when greeting the Prime Ministers of the Englishspeaking African countries that were about to become independent, the General Council of the British Trades Union Congress expressed its conviction that the trade unions of these countries would maintain their links with Britain and would play a “worthy” role in the new situation of independence. In subsequent years both the Executive Committee of the British Labour Party and the General Council of the TUG took constant steps to strengthen their influence on the trade union movement in the former colonies.

p Accordingly, particular attention was given to the conferences of Commonwealth trade unions, which welcomed their new participants—the colonies that were about to attain political independence. In June 1962, at the 13th annual conference, for which a record number of participants from 15 Commonwealth countries had assembled, the British delegates persistently voiced the thesis that the world was not seeing the disintegration of the colonial system under the blows of the national liberation movement, but the process, "consciously prepared" by Britain, whereby the Empire was being transformed into the "free Commonwealth of Nations”, and the trade unions should do all they could to further the consolidation of this Commonwealth. At the same time, the TUG General Council announced that, in order to achieve "better mutual understanding" in tackling the tasks that lay ahead, it had accepted the Conservative proposal to extend its collaboration with the British Government and with the Federation of Overseas Employers in all spheres of the trade union movement in the Commonwealth countries.

p This step by the General Council was not just explained by the need to unify the efforts of the Right-wing trade union leadership with the alliance between the monopolies and the state in the struggle (already on a neo-colonialist 261 footing) against the further growth of the national liberation movement in the newly independent countries. An important factor in this and other similar measures was the attempts being made by Britain’s imperialist competitors, particularly the USA, to gain control of the trade unions in Britain’s former African possessions.

p France has opted for a slightly different means of defending her position in the trade union movement of the liberated countries. Deprived of the opportunity to make full use of their own trade unions owing to the communist influence within them, the French ruling circles act mainly through the national governments, relying on the collaboration agreements that accompanied the granting of independence to the colonies. Since they are bound by these agreements, many governments categorically reject the calls of individual trade unions for a revolutionary struggle against neo-colonialism and capitalism, and limit the role of trade unions to purely industrial functions. This is the situation in the Ivory Coast, for example. Isolating the trade unions from political problems helps to reduce outside influence (American included) on them.

p In the USA’s general plans for expansion in Africa and in her struggle with the former metropolises for political influence an important role was assigned at the outset to seizing control of the trade union movement. The amalgamated American Federation of Labor and the Congress of Industrial Organisations (AFL-CIO), which had previously done it* utmost to establish links with the trade unions in the former British colonies, turned its attention in the early sixties to the French-speaking African countries as well, and the US Government began to view the trade unions as one of the main instruments of its African policy. As the magazine Time explained in July 1961, since the workers’ leaders are generally the most brilliant and energetic young people in Africa, the nation which today controls the African trade unions stands a good chance tomorrow of controlling the whole continent.

p As in other areas of American imperialist expansion, the assault began under the banner of the struggle with " communist infiltration”. Joan Davis recalls in her book that, when the representatives of the African trade union 262 movement appeared at meetings of the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) in 1945, the monopolies "... were less concerned to develop a labour movement than to recruit troops for an anti-communist crusade".^^2^^ But after the split in the WFTU in 1949 and the founding of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), which really did become an instrument of US foreign policy, the activities of American trade unions in Africa were stepped up and acquired more than just an anti-communist orientation. The struggle against imperialist competitors is an important part of the AFL-CIO programmes.

p From 1960 onwards the US Government began to allocate an annual 13 million dollars to the trade unions’ international activities. Over 100 labour attaches and promotion advisers appeared in American embassies in the developing countries.

p Characteristically, the first targets of US "trade union" expansion in Africa were precisely those countries in which American diplomacy was trying to strengthen the USA’s position and to oust the former metropolises. Thus, US trade union leaders were particularly active in Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda and Ghana. A headquarters for the Kenya Federation of Labour was built in Nairobi. In 1958 the Americans set up a trade union school under the auspices of ICFTU in Kampala (Uganda). Similar schools later appeared in Zaire and Ghana. An American-financed Afro-Asian Institute of Labor Studies was organised in Tel-Aviv in order to train personnel for trade union work in Africa and Asia. Typically enough, the Ugandan authorities have frequently accused the school opened in Kampala of interfering in the country’s internal affairs, and London has advised them to “ nationalise” it.

p Nor has this aspect of policy been ignored by US official representatives. After his visit to Africa in 1957 Richard Nixon commended American trade unions on their "active support for the free trade union movement in Africa".^^3^^

p In order to further expand their activities in Africa, the AFL-CIO set up the African-American Labor Center (AALC) in New York in 1965. The AFL-CIO annually provides the centre with 100,000 dollars to cover administrative expenses. In addition, the Agency for International 263 Development (AID) contributes 500,000 dollars, and sums running into millions of dollars arrive from all kinds of hidden sources, including the CIA.^^4^^

p According to official figures, the centre is carrying out 34 programmes for “assisting” trade unions in 16 African countries, with the core of these programmes consisting of proAmerican propaganda, amply spiced with anti-communism.

p In 1966 AALC set up in Nigeria the Institute for Trade Union Studies, which had produced over 70 African trade union leaders by the beginning of 1968. A School for the Training of Trade Union Personnel, founded by AALC, operates in Kinshasa (Zaire) and trains intermediate-level and junior officials. Similar schools have been built in Sierra Leone and Dahomey. At the centre’s instigation, the "Peace Corps‘s” “volunteers” sent to the African countries now include an increasing number of specialists on the trade union movement. There is a steadily increasing stream of African trade union workers invited every year to the USA, where they are given as much “Americanisation” treatment as possible.

p Relying on her influence in ICFTU, the United States has been trying to make use of this organisation too in order to seize control of the trade union movement in Africa. In 1957, at the suggestion of the American trade unions, ICFTU created a so-called "solidarity fund”, thus trying to monopolise the granting of “aid” to the trade union movement in Africa. The move failed, however. The largest African trade union amalgamations left ICFTU, and "... the Americans, disappointed in the ICFTU as a medium for activity, are increasingly using the Secretariats (i.e., International Trade Union Secretariats—author] to further their own aims".^^5^^ This version of US "trade union" expansion gives America certain tactical advantages over her competitors. The point is that, although many African trade union centres left ICFTU, their industrial unions retained membership of the International Trade Union Secretariats. These Secretariats, in turn, frequently act in cohesion with the American trade unions and depend on their financial support, as well as on loans from the ICFTU "solidarity fund”. In this way, US influence on the International Secretariats is maintained through two channels.

p In the struggle to control the African trade union movement the Americans also make wide use of the method of simply bribing Africa’s trade union leaders. Confirmation of this can be found in a number of sources. For instance, Vernon McKay wrote: "Tom Mboya .. . was given 35,000 dollars by the AFL-CIO . . . this money was used by Mboya for political activities.”^^6^^ The paper Evening News of the 16 December 1963 pointed to similar operations being carried out by the US Embassy in Uganda. The British Africanist Jack Woddis observes bluntly that "The open use of dollars to ‘buy’ up African trade union leaders has become so much of a scandal that the US has had to find more indirect ways of carrying on this activity".^^7^^

p An example of these indirect methods for establishing the financial dependence of African trade unions on the USA is provided by the arrangement whereby the US Government gives direct financial support through AID to the activities of the AFL-CIO in the developing countries, and especially those in Africa. In particular, AID has agreed to meet 90 per cent of the expenses borne by the AFL-CIO in maintaining the African-American Labor Center.

p US State Department direction and co-ordination of American trade unions’ foreign policy activities have been intensified. To this end a special Consultative Committee on Labor in matters of foreign aid has been set up. The committee consists of representatives from the AFL-CIO leadership and prominent officials from the State Department, AID and the Department of Labour.

p In the struggle with the USA for control of the African trade union movement Britain and France and, more recently, the FRG too have been trying to use a weapon which the Americans do not possess—social-democracy.

p The British and French social-democratic leadership made attempts in the late fifties and early sixties to interfere in the political and trade union life of Africa in order to seize the initiative. The old links that the British Labour Party and the French Socialists had with the African colonies were exploited, and new inroads were made into the political and trade union organisations. The French Socialist Party even merged its local branches in Africa into an African Socialist Movement, while Labour’s Executive 265 Committee strove tirelessly to extend its influence in Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia. Neither had any great success though. There are many reasons why organised socialdemocracy finds a poor following in Africa, but the main one is the pact it has made with imperialism against the national liberation movement. This is well exemplified by the position taken up by British Labour delegates to the Socialist International Congress in May 1966. One item for discussion was "Socialist Thought and Action in New Countries”. The Congress was attended by representatives from the national liberation movements in a number of African countries, but, when they wished to speak on the main problems encountered by their movements, they were not allowed to. This was categorically demanded by the British Labour delegation, which feared public condemnation of the Wilson Government’s compromise policy towards the racists in Rhodesia.

The inter-imperialist rivalry for control of the African trade union movement, just like the combined pressure on it from the AFL-CIO, ICFTU and the British Trades Union Congress (TUG), is very damaging to the movement. It is still torn by dissension. Nevertheless, the struggle of the African working people for their rights and the support given them by the World Federation of Trade Unions are producing results. The African trade union movement will develop in step with the growth in the numbers of Africa’s working class and the strengthening of its class awareness. The outlook for the inter-imperialist competition for control of African trade unions depends largely on the positions that these unions adopt. A strengthening of the anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist tendencies in their activities and a consistent struggle for continental unity and the complete emancipation from foreign influence may weaken the interimperialist rivalry and oblige the imperialists to seek compromises. At the same time, treading in the reformist footsteps of the trade union bureaucracy of the West will prepare the ground for further rivalry between the imperialist powers. Another important factor is the way in which relations will develop between the trade unions and the ruling parties.