p Neocolonialist ideology and policy play a large part in imperialism’s attempts to weaken socialism’s positions, suppress the national liberation movement and halt the irreversible decline of capitalism.

p The content, aims and social role of imperialism’s neocolonialist strategy and tactics can be correctly understood and explained only if account is taken of the objective trends of social progress in the modern epoch. A key place among these is occupied by the tendency toward internationalism, whose objective foundation lies in the increasingly pronounced social character of the present-day productive forces. Lenin regarded internationalism as a derivative of modern large-scale machine industry, which breaks down national partitions.^^1^^ The swift growth of modern industrial production and the use of the latest achievements of the scientific and technical revolution give rise to new philosophical, socioeconomic and political problems. This concerns not only the enormously greater possibilities for the production of material goods but also the new phenomena in the international division of social labour, in the co-operation, specialisation and integration of the world economy. The utilisation of the tendency toward internationalism and the attitude to it are one of the watersheds between the forces of progress and reaction and underscore the socio-economic difference between world socialism and world capitalism. Expressions of 142 this difference are, in particular, socialist economic integration, whose principles have been stated in the Comprehensive Programme of the CMEA countries, and imperialist integration as exemplified by the Common Market in Europe and similar other associations.

p The tendency towards internationalism manifests itself in economic integrational processes and in the socio-political sphere. An important progressive feature of the present revolutionary process is its international character. The internationalisation of the class struggle and all areas of social life is making steady headway despite differences in the socio-economic level, the multistructural character of various national economies and the unevenness of economic and political development in different countries.

p Apart from its economic foundations, this process is in many ways expedited by the means of communication, by the possibilities for broad contacts, interaction and mutual influence of nations that are at different stages of historical development.

p The combination of the socio-political revolutionary transformations with the social effects of the scientific and technological revolution has also become an important factor in world development. Together, these progressive changes have brought the interests and aims of international imperialism and of the industrial and financial oligarchy in individual countries into conflict with the interests of the army of wage labour and small proprietors, and with the true national interests of all nations.

p Alongside the existence of world socialism and the downfall of the old colonial system, this circumstance has substantially narrowed the social basis for monopoly domination, aggravated the old contradictions and generated new ones.

p It is important to note that different authors are not unanimous in their interpretation of the term “neocolonialism”. According to an interpretation that predominated until the close of the 1960s, neocolonialism is the logical continuation of the old colonial policy under fundamentally different 143 conditions. Exponents of this view stress that for their substance and aims there is complete identity between modern and “classic” colonialism. The only new major difference relates to the methods, forms and tactics of the colonial policy pursued by the imperialist metropolises toward the new, formally independent states.

p Different variants of another widespread viewpoint overrate and absolutise the new neocolonialist methods and tactics employed by the imperialist monopolies in the developing countries. According to this view neocolonialism amounts to the modernisation of the mode of colonial exploitation and the neutralisation of the consequences of the colonial system’s disintegration. Unwittingly or deliberately the exponents of this view reduce the foundation of neocolonialism to the subjective will of the monopolies, to a striving to modernise their methods of domination.

p One of the most urgent methodological problems requiring study by Marxist scholars is to ascertain the actual historical place, substance and social role of neocolonialism. In this context the reader is offered some initial ideas and considerations.

p First, any one-sided assessment of neocolonialism’s substance or methods, laying undue emphasis on its economic or political aspects, does not simply distort the true picture but may serve as an obstacle to the struggle against the various forms of neocolonialist expansion.

p Second, in defining neocolonialism one should use definite criteria, the most significant of which are the objective conditions of the rise, substance and basic aims of neocolonialism, its methods, means and class exponents. The sum of these criteria makes it possible to spell out neocolonialism’s actual content, historical place and social role.

p Third, a fundamental distinction between “classical” colonialism and neocolonialism is that the former was the natural imperialist policy of the world’s territorial and economic partition and of oppressing nations mainly by extraeconomic means in the past historical epoch when monopoly 144 capital held unchallenged sway in the world. Neocolonialism likewise conforms to the nature and substance of imperialism, but under totally different conditions that arose in the modern epoch, when imperialism had lost the historic initiative and now seeks to work out the ways and means for its social self-preservation.

p Fourth, a new approach is required also because the old interpretation gave neocolonialism a geographical hue: it was frequently regarded as an imperialist policy of pillaging and oppressing the peoples of three continents: Asia, Africa and Latin America. This interpretation contained at least two essential shortcomings. The first is that the countries of the three continents are artificially united by the sole indicator of economic backwardness, though actually many of these countries are at different levels of social and political development and have different socio-economic systems.

p The second shortcoming is that the stereotype characteristics—economic underdevelopment, a multistructural system —applied to these countries according to a pattern obscure rather than bring to light the actual alignment of class forces, the content of the liberation movements and the historical prospects. For instance, it is indeed obvious that the capitalist-based multistructural system in most Latin American states predetermines a different content and different phases of the revolutionary process as compared with the multistructural systems based on feudal (or even pre-feudal) relations in some Asian and African countries.

p Fifth, and last, the beginning of the 1970s has eloquently shown that there is a need for a broader interpretation of neocolonialism, which in one way or another affects all the capitalist countries and many aspects of their social life. In connection with imperialist economic and political integration, the imperialist monopolies are intensifying their penetration and influence not only in countries with a low and medium level of capitalist development but also in the industrialised capitalist states.

p It is extremely indicative that after the monetary 145 upheavals of recent years the term “economic nationalism” has come into use and vogue in the Western press. This term implies the defence of the national trade, economic and currency interests of the capitalist countries, for instance, of France, Canada, Japan and other nations. It is a sort of reaction to what the Western press calls “economic neocolonialism”.

p These considerations allow us to draw the conclusion that neocolonialism is ceasing to be a specific policy of the imperialist monopolies toward the new countries that have won political independence. As we see it, neocolonialism expresses the global strategy of modern imperialism, which is determined to find, enlist and mobilise the social reserves for the re-adaptation and self-preservation of the world system of capitalism, for erecting new barriers and obstacles to the socialist tendencies of the epoch and to the anti-imperialist struggle for social and national emancipation.

p As Lenin had noted, oppression of foreign nations by the imperialist powers “is a source for artificially retarding the collapse of capitalism”.^^2^^ A direct link exists between neocolonialism and anti-communism, the latter being the ideological and political foundation of neocolonialism and expressing the substance of imperialist foreign policy.

p The anti-communist orientation of imperialism’s neocolonialist foreign policy was underscored in the documents of the 1969 International Meeting of Communist and Workers’ Parties, where it is stated: “In its struggle against the national liberation movement, imperialism stubbornly defends the remnants of the colonial system, on the one hand, and, on the other, uses methods of neocolonialism in an effort to prevent the economic and social advance of developing states, of countries which have won national sovereignty. To this end it supports reactionary circles, retards the abolition of the most backward social structures and tries to obstruct progress along the road to socialism or along the road of progressive non-capitalist development, which can open the way to socialism.”^^3^^

p Under cover of “urgent problems and vast opportunities that know no geographical and ideological frontiers” imperialism strives to rule everywhere, interferes in the affairs of other nations, high-handedly violates their legitimate rights and sovereignty and tries to impose its will on countries and entire regions by force, bribery and economic infiltration.

p International imperialism’s neocolonialist expansion is multiform for its objectives, methods, forms and combinations of tasks and aims (immediate and long-term, tactical and strategical, economic, military, ideological and political). Special study is needed before an overall characteristic can be given of this problem, which is pressing from both the scientific and political angles. In the context we are interested in we shall note those aspects, particularly the new ones, that show in bold relief the link between neocolonialism and anti-communism.

p First, attention is attracted by the sharp multiplication of the objectives of neocolonialist expansion harmonising with international imperialism’s global anti-communist strategy. The objects of penetration, influence, interference and establishment of various forms of monopoly control and domination are not only the former colonies and dominions, the historically backward countries and regions. Neocolonialist expansion also embraces countries with different levels of capitalist development, the capitalist states dependent on imperialism’s international centres, and countries that have adopted the socialist orientation. The content of financial-economic, military, political, cultural and ideological expansion mirrors the new historical conditions and aims of each of the state-monopoly capitalist nations, the multinational monopolies and the traditional centres of international imperialism.

p For instance, in the economic sphere expansion is accompanied, in addition to non-equivalent commodity exchanges, by a new system of financial and monetary dependence, customs preferences and a relative intensification of 147 technological expansion. Military and political expansion reflects the impact of the new historical, social, military and technical conditions. Monopoly reaction is confining itself to local wars, being compelled to abandon direct annexations and to have more and more frequent recourse to the anti- communist strategy of indirect strikes. The crisis and decay of the imperialist military and political blocs, notably SEATO in Asia and the Inter-American Military Forces of the Organisation of American States, are making imperialism look for new forms of military and political expansion.

p Cultural and ideological expansion has not merely broadened in volume but has grown deeper and more differentiated by zones, countries and social strata. Today it covers social knowledge on the theoretical level, indoctrination, the manipulation of the public mind on the level of people’s traditional attitudes and the training of anti- communistoriented personnel in all spheres of social life.

p Considerable changes have taken place also in the main orientations of neocolonialist expansion in different countries and regions.

p West German neocolonialism has its own specifics that spring from historical, socio-economic and political factors. Hiding behind the mask of non-complicity in colonial pillage, due to the fact that it has no colonies, West German imperialism endeavours to spread its political and economic influence not only in the European capitalist nations but also in the former colonial and dependent countries.

p Since the end of World War II the build up of an industrial, economic and military potential by the West German monopolies has been accompanied by foreign trade expansion and growing demands for a redivision of spheres of economic and political influence. The failure of the Hallstein Doctrine as a result of the GDR’s recognition by a number of Asian and African countries accelerated the elaboration of a neocolonialist programme with a “new orientation” in the “aid” policy, which in fact constitutes a new phase of West German imperialist expansion. The purport 148 of this programme is to give the West greater influence over the social processes taking place in these states and thereby oppose their revolutionary reforms and socialist orientation. The “aid policy” is prejudicing the public sector in the newly-independent countries in order to increase their trade, technical, technological, monetary and financial dependence.

p Moreover, this policy is used as an instrument of ideologically influencing public opinion through many institutions and organisations (of which there are over 150 in West Germany operating in Asian, African and Latin American states). Prominent among them are Das Deutsche Institute fur Entwicklungspolitik (the German Institute of Development Policy), Das Deutsche Entwicklungsdienst (the German Development Agency) and Der Deutsche Hilfsfond fur Entwicklungslander (the German Foundation for Aid to Developing States). The aims of the German Institute of Development Policy, which receives formal backing from the government and the anti-communist Ford Foundation, were formulated in 1965 by Heinrich Lubke, who was West German President at the time: “For the sake of the very existence and future of these countries the free industrialised nations must not allow communism to create large contingents in the regions threatened by hunger, epidemics and igno- rance.”^^4^^

p Anti-communist neocolonialist influence is spread also by the “volunteers” of the German Development Agency who operate in 27 countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America. Similarly active in this area are the Protestant and Catholic churches of West Germany, which exercise moral and ideological influence through their own channels and organisations.

p West German imperialism is enlarging its neocolonialist positions independently and through the European Economic Community, which is a state-monopoly agency of collective neocolonialism. The anti-communist substance of the FRG’s foreign policy in Latin America, Asia and Africa is borne out by the military aid given to Israel over a period of 149 many years and by the close contacts with military dictatorships, for instance, in Brazil and the Republic of South Africa. This adds weight to the words of the journal Sechaba, organ of the African National Congress of the RSA, which speaks of a Bonn-Pretoria axis. It reports that the Federal Republic of Germany uses its industrial potential for neocolonialist penetration into the Third World and for subverting the liberation movements of Asia, Africa and Latin America.^^5^^

p Neocolonialism’s anti-communist substance is even more pronounced in the main areas of expansion by the former metropolises and by the USA, the leading centre of imperialism. As distinct from the colonialism of the past epoch, neocolonialist expansion is directed at countries where social and national liberation movements are in progress. Here it must be noted that the current term “Third World” or “ developing countries” does not exactly reflect the different situations in these countries. They should be grouped by levels of their historical, socio-economic and political development, the degree of national self-determination achieved by their peoples and the level and prospects of the revolutionary processes.

This approach makes it possible to distinguish, first, a group of Latin American states where anti-imperialist democratic and socialist revolutions are on the agenda; and second, the group of newly-independent African and Asian countries where the socialist-oriented anti-imperialist national-democratic revolutions are determining the destiny and prospects of national and social progress.