Intercontinental Presscombined with

Vol. 18, No. 30 August 4,

[xclusive InterviewWith Prime Minister

Maurice Bishop:

Class StruggleIn Grenada,

the Caribbean,

and the U.S.

f

niiif

United States: What the

Republican Party Convention Showed

!#

"

t,f \l

On-the-Scene Report:

Cubans Celebrate

July 26fh,Hail Advance of

Central American

Revolution

Revolution In Central America Is the Theme

Cuba: More than 100,000 at July 26 Celebration

By Fred Murphy

CIEGO DE AVILA, Cuba-More than100,000 Cubans gathered here on July 26for celebrations marking the twenty-seventh anniversary of the 1953 attack onthe Moncada barracks, the opening battleof the Cuban revolution.

Participants came from throughoutCiego de Avila Province, an area of bigsugar plantations and cattle farms in thecentral part of the island. Once part ofCamagiiey Province, Ciego de Avila wasestablished in Cuba's 1976 geographic andadministrative reorganizations. The national celebrations of July 26, Cuba's mostimportant holiday, are held in a differentprovincial capital each year. This time thehonor fell to one of the newest and small

est, Ciego de Avila.

'A Sandinista Event'

Just as last year's celebrations in Hol-guin had been, this one too was, as CubanPresident Fidel Castro put it in his speech,a "Sandinista event."

Castro had returned to Cuba only oneday earlier after a week's stay in Nicaragua. While there he not only addressed arally of half a million in Managua July19—the first anniversary of the Sandinistarevolution—hut also visited workplacesand farms, spoke to thousands at impromptu rallies at several cities, and heldmeetings with trade-union activists, militants of the Sandinista National Libera

tion Front (FSLN), and with a large groupof Catholic priests and nuns who supportthe revolution.

The theme of Castro's speeches in Nicaragua—the history of solidarity betweenthe two revolutions and the growing bondsof friendship between the two peoples—was echoed in FSLN Commander Jaime

Wheelock's speech to the July 26 rally inCiego de Avila. Wheelock was part of aNicaraguan delegation that also includedjunta member Arturo Cruz, Minister ofCulture Ernesto Cardinal, and the renowned Nicaraguan folk singers Carlosand Luis Enrique Mejla Godoy.

July 26, 1953, represented not only the

Summer Schedule

This week's issue is the last beforeour two-week summer break. We willresume our regular schedule with theissue dated August 25.

beginning of "the end of tjrranny inCuba," Wheelock said, but also "the beginning of the new revolutionary wave inLatin America."

In the FSLN's early guerrilla front of the1960s, the Sandinista leader went on, "inPancasdn, in Rio Coco-Bocay, in Zinica,the Cuban revolution and the example ofthe Cuban revolution were also present."

Even at the moment when the Sandinis

tas were reduced to a handful of militants,Wheelock went on, Cuba's solidarity neverwavered. When political differences causedthe FSLN to divide into three tendencies,"the support and advice of our brother,Fidel, was of great importance for theunity of the Sandinistas."And when our people—children,

youth—were confronting a superior andwell-trained army with pistols and contactbombs and were ready to fight with stonesand even with their own teeth, we also hadthe concrete solidarity of Cuba and ofComandante Fidel Castro. Because we

know that revolutions are not made with

one's teeth."

Wheelock was repeatedly interrupted byapplause and chants of "Cuba, Nicaragua,united will win!"

But the crowd's loudest and most prolonged response came when the FSLNleader spoke of the "extraordinary house-cleaning here in Cuba in recent days"—areference to the exodus of some 100,000Cubans to the United States, which beganafter the events at the Peruvian embassyin Havana in April—"which is going toenable the revolutionaries to work much

better, firmly united with your party andwith the revolution in Latin America."

"The Cuban people have kept the revolution alive despite all the difficulties,"Wheelock concluded, "and we can say thatfor us Nicaraguans this made our ownrevolution much easier.

"There is much to he done among ourpeople. We have just seen a few days agohow a military coup has struck the peopleof Bolivia. We see how the people of ElSalvador and the armed people of Guatemala are being massacred. But we alsoknow that somehow, very soon, just asNicaragua won. El Salvador will win."

After Wheelock spoke, greetings wereread to the rally from the newly formedUnited Revolutionary Directorate (DRU) ofEl Salvador.

Nicaragua, Grenada, and Cuba

Fidel Castro was the final speaker. Hediscussed the Nicaraguan revolution and

its significance for Cuba and Latin America, the world political situation, and Cuba's economy and domestic tasks.

Having just arrived from "the secondLatin American country to be liberatedfrom imperialism," Castro began, it was"almost obligatory that we say somethingabout Nicaragua." In the hemisphere as awhole, "there are now not only two of us,but three, because we have to include Grenada."

Nicaragua, Grenada, and Cuba were notthe only "progressive countries," Castrosaid, citing regimes such as those in Mexico, Jamaica, and Panama that maintaincordial diplomatic relations with Cuba."But we are the three that have reallyshaken things up in a radical and definitive way."By the imperative of history, one day it

will have to be all of us. . . . The slogansof 'Patria Libre o Morir' 'Patria o Muerte,Venceremos,' will have to be the slogans ofall the peoples of Latin America and theCaribbean."

The Cuban leader went on to recount

what he had learned on his visit to Nicara

gua, citing details of the country's geography, economy, history, and currentpolitical situation. He reviewed the deep-going measures, taken by the Sandinistagovernment, as well as its efforts to getNicaragua's remaining capitalists to invest and resume production.

Unlike what happened in Cuba, Castrosaid, strong unions and mass organizations have already been built in the Nicaraguan revolution in the first year. Henoted the existence of "the multipartyregime" and a "broad form of government," which he considered "very beneficial when it comes to continuing to enjoythe broadest possible support internationally.""Well now," Castro asked the crowd, "is

there or is there not a revolution in Nicara

gua?""Yes!" came the answer.

Castro continued the exchange: "Doesthe existence of a bourgeoisie, of privateproperty, perhaps mean there is a bourgeois revolution in Nicaragua?""No!" the crowd shouted back louder

than before.

"No," Castro agreed. "There is no bourgeois revolution in Nicaragua. It is apeople's revolution—the fundamental forces are based on the workers, the peasants,the students, the middle layers of the population. . . .

"The fundamental thing in a revolutionis to have the people and to have the army.A Chile cannot happen in Nicaragua,because the people have the power and thepeople have the army. The revolution isguaranteed."

A Vietnam in Central America?

Castro went on to talk about El Salvador

and the attempts of the rightist regime

Intercontinental Press

there to crush the mass upsurge throughterrorism. He asked: "Where are the demo

cratic voices to save this heroic people?They are talking about possible interventions. I don't want to mention governments, but at the moment when some arecondemning the coup in Bolivia, wherethere is a ferocious repression againststudents and peasants, these same governments support the genocidal governmentof El Salvador. And in the first place is theUnited States, sending arms and offeringeconomic aid to the fascist/Christian-

Democratic junta."

They speak of intervening, Castroadded, but "let's see what they get into ifthey intervene. Let's see what they get intoif they intervene in El Salvador. Theimperialists should not underestimate theSalvadoran people. I am convinced that ifthe United States commits the stupidity ofintervening in El Salvador, it will create aVietnam in Central America."

Big Stick Policy

Turning to the response of the U.S.ruling class to the revolutionary upsurgein Central America, Castro singled out theRepublican Party platform, which he described as "extremely dangerous and reactionary," and as an effort to return to thepolicy of the big stick.

Castro said that some Americans had

warned him that if he criticized Reaganpublicly he might improve the Republicancandidate's chances. But Castro said he

rejected such warnings because, "What isat stake here is not a presidential electionin the United States. The fate of humanity,the destiny of the world, war and peacemay be at stake."In regard to the Cuban economy, Castro

said that the three agricultural diseasesthat plagued the country last year—sugarcane rust, blue mould in the tobacco crop,and swine fever—are being brought undercontrol. The tobacco mould and swine

fever have been practically eliminated,and the cane rust is being overcome byreplanting new varieties of cane.

Finally, Castro took up the great effortsmade by the Cuban people in sendingdoctors, teachers, technicians, and otherskilled personnel to help other countriescombat the legacy of imperialist exploitation. Looking to the future, he declared;

"It's necessary to think about what willhappen when the revolution triumphs inEl Salvador, when the revolution triumphsin Guatemala and other countries, becausesooner or later they will triumph. They willneed more internationalist doctors, moreinternationalist teachers, more internationalist technicians. I think I interpretcorrectly the sentiment of our people whenI say that this must be our consciousnessand this must be our conduct—foreign toall chauvinism, foreign to all nationalegoism." □

In This Issue Closing News Date: July 26, 1980

FEATURES

CUBA

COLOMBIA

GRENADA

EL SALVADOR

JAPAN

ISRAEL

SOUTH AFRICA

BOLIVIA

COVER PHOTO

Women's Meeting Reflects Rise of InternationalClass Struggle—by Janice Lynn

More than 100,000 at July 26 Celebration—by Fred Murphy

What the Republican Party Convention Revealed—by Gus Horowitz

Cuba Emigres Find Out They Made a Mistake

Regime Steps Up Repression—by Luis Rodriguez

Interview with Maurice Bishop

The People's Revolutionary Army-Party of the Salvadoran Revolution—by Will Reissner

The Changing Face of Politics—by Goro Hayashi

Palestinian Political Prisoners Murdered

Socialists Explain Issues Facing Women

Fatima Fallahi Tours Australia andNew Zealand—by Janice Lynn

The Social Crisis and the Attack on theUniversities—by Michel Rovere

Behind the Upsurge in Cape Town

Junta Tries to Crush Workers' Resistance

Maurice Bishop—by Diane Wang/IP-l

intercontinental Press (ISSN 0162-5594).Intercontinental Press, 410 West Street,

New York, N.Y. 10014. Published in NewYork each Monday except the first in January and the third and fourth in August.

Second-class postage paid at New York,N.Y.

Editor: Mary-Alice Waters.Contributing Editors: Pierre Frank, Livio

Maitan, Ernest Mandel, George Novack.Managing Editor: Steve Clark.Editorial Staff: Gerry Foley, David Frankel,

Ernest Harsch, Janice Lynn, Fred Murphy,Will Reissner.

Business Manager: Nancy RosenstockCopy Editor: David Martin.Technicai Staff: Arthur Lobman.

Intercontinental Press specializes in political analysis and interpretation of events ofparticular interest to the labor, socialist,colonial independence. Black, and women'sliberation movements.

Signed articles represent the views of theauthors, which may not necessarily coincidewith those of Intercontinental Press. Insofaras it reflects editorial opinion, unsignedmaterial stands on the program of theFourth International.

To Subscribe: For one year send $35.00

(41.00 Canadian dollars) to IntercontinentalPress, 410 West Street, New York, N.Y.10014. Write for rates on first class andairmail.

Subscription correspondence should beaddressed to Intercontinental Press, 410West Street, New York, N.Y. 10014.

For air-speeded subscriptions to Australia: Write to Pathfinder Press, P.O. BoxK208, Haymarket 2000. In New Zealand:Write to Socialist Books, P.O. Box 3774,Auckland.

European Subscribers: For air-speededsubscriptions write to IntercontinentalPress, P.O. Box 50, London N1 2XP, England. Britain and Ireland, send £11.00 forone year. Continental Europe and Scandinavia, send £15.00 for one year. For airmailfrom London send £22.00. Address subscription correspondence to Intercontinental Press, P.O. Box 50, London N1 2XP,England.

Please allow five weeks for change ofaddress. Include your old address, and, ifpossible, an address label from a recentissue.

Intercontinental Press is published by the408. Printing and Publishing Corporation,408 West Street, New York, N.Y. 10014.Offices at 408 West Street, New York, N.Y.

August 4, 1980

Ronald Reagan: Part of the Capitalist Mainstream

What the Republican Party Convention Revealed

By Gus Horowitz

[The following article appeared in theAugust 1 issue of the U.S. socialist weeklythe Militant.^

The Republican Party's nomination ofRonald Reagan, longtime darling of theparty's right wing, as its candidate forpresident and of George Bush, a formerhead of the CIA, as his running matewould ordinarily have evoked a touch ofalarm among middle-of-the-road capitalistcommentators.

In hasic views, after all, Reagan is muchthe same as Barry Goldwater, the 1964nominee, who was treated as an unreliableextremist by most of the media.

This year, however, Reagan has beenportrayed in respectful, even deferentialtones.

One reason for the change is that Reagan is now favored to win the election. Soprudent journalists and newscastersrender him proportionate courtesies. It'sall part of what Newsweek columnist MegGreenfield called "taking Reagan seriously."More important, though, is that Rea

gan's policies do accurately represent thecapitalist mainstream today, while hiscampaign style—in contrast to Goldwater's—fits in with the general image thatthe capitalist ruling class wishes its leaders to project.Whereas Carter is seen as bungling and

irresolute, Reagan is presented as decisive,yet prudent and flexible.

Whereas Goldwater personified narrow,doctrinaire conservatism, Reagan hassought to widen his appeal.

'Look Like Democrats'

As New York Times reporter AdamClymer put it, "the Republicans are tryingto look like Democrats this year. Lastnight Ronald Reagan was nominated witha speech that stressed his concern for thepoor and the disadvantaged. His acceptance speech tonight was barely begunbefore he called for an end to discrimina

tion against women, and as he finished hewas quoting Franklin D. Roosevelt."That, at least, is the current public

relations image.The Republicans' real policies were

spelled out more candidly in the platform,adopted early in the convention. It included the following planks:• Taxes: An "across-the-board" tax cut,

that is, a cut that would grant most benefitto the rich.

• Government spending: They favor

"fiscal and monetary restraint" as regardssocial services; and an "immediate increase in defense spending."• Women's rights: Withdrawal of sup

port for the Equal Rights Amendment;opposition to Medicaid funds for abortion.• Labor: Reaffirmation of support for

the antilabor "right to work" laws.• Unemployment and welfare: They

"categorically reject the notion of a guaranteed annual income"; they attack thewelfare system as "fostering dependency."

• Blacks and Latinos: They reject anynew measures to meet the needs of Blacks

and Latinos, claiming only that incentivesto business would provide new jobs.• Environment: They favor "revision of

cumbersome and overly stringent CleanAir Act regulations."

Does the program of the RepublicanParty sound different from life under Carter? Not at all. On every one of theseplanks Republican proposals are virtuallyidentical to Democratic practices.

Foreign Policy

As for foreign policy, the tone of theRepublicans is decidedly beligerent.The platform "contains some of the most

alarmist rhetoric either major party hasused against the Soviet Union in a decadeor more," comments New York Timesreporter Hedrick Smith, "hut it is lesshard-line on specific programs and it givesRonald Reagan, the expected Presidentialnominee, considerable flexibility to set hisown policies."Indications of that flexibility are the

planks in the platform against peacetimedraft registration and in opposition to thegrain embargo on the Soviet Union. TheRepublicans, sensing the adverse reactionto these moves among young people andfarmers, are hoping to score a few morepoints in the voting booths over theseissues.

On this or that foreign policy measurethe Republicans and Democrats have theirdifferences. But what is noteworthy is thebipartisan agreement on fundamentals.The Republicans favor what the Democrats have been practicing; a step-up inU.S. militarism in preparation for newwars.

The Republicans would like to acceleratethe pace. But their leader, if elected, wouldbe flexible enough to adjust his policies towhat he could get away with. The same asCarter, in other words.All through his administration Carter

has been pressing to undo the "Vietnamsyndrome"—that is, the legacy of antiwar

feeling among the American people—andreassert Washington's readiness to intervene militarily in other countries.

Shift to Right

The nomination of Reagan does not,therefore, signal a bid for presidentialpower on the part of a right-wing fihnge ofthe capitalist spectrum. On the contrary, itreflects the fact that the entire axis of

capitalist politics has been shifting to theright.In the person of Reagan the ruling class

has found a candidate who openly andforcefully expresses that shift. The rulerscount on Reagan's candidacy—even if heis not elected—to help push things furtherin that direction. That is why Reagan istreated much more seriously this year thanin campaigns past.Why, then, did Reagan invoke the name

of Franklin Roosevelt in his acceptancespeech? Why did he speak of concern forthe poor, for working people, for Blacks,for women? Why is it, as Clymer said, that"the Republicans are trying to look likeDemocrats this year"?

It is a pitch for votes, of course. But thefact that Reagan had to make his pitch inlanguage that has tended to conceal hisreal program is significant.It is capitalist politics that has shifted

rightward, not the masses of working people.

Search for Alternatives

Working people do not accept the attackson their standard of living, the cutbacks insocial spending, the blows dealt to Blacks,Latinos, and women. Increasingly themood is one of bitterness and anger, and asearch for alternatives to the austeritypolicies of the Carter administration.Reagan is trying to capitalize on this

mood by speaking of the "unprecedentedcalamity" that has befallen the country,by offering a "crusade" to turn thingsaround, and by baiting his line with quasi-progressive demagoguery.But working people are not looking for

the antilabor, prowar policies that Reaganoffers. No more than they want Carter's.In the labor movement, there is growing

receptivity to the idea of breaking awayfrom the two-party framework and forming a labor party based on the trade unions.

As the Carter-Reagan convergence on anantilabor course becomes more apparent,the labor party mood is bound to grow,take shape, and begin to chart a wayforward for working people. □

Intercontinental Press/lnprecorwill give you a week by weekanalysis of the most importantworld events.

Subscribe now!

Intercontinental Press

3,000 Arrested in Medellin

Colombian Regime Steps Up RepressionBy Luis Rodriguez

BOGOTA—During the last week in Junemore than 3,000 people were detained inraids by the army in the Colombian city ofMedellin, according to Col. GuillermoCamelo Cadas. All were picked up onsuspicion of having thrown incendiarybombs at the office of the area's governor,Rodrigo Urihe Echavarria!

The following week the pretext used forsimilar raids in all of Colombia's majorcities was the audacious escape of twoleaders of the M-19 (April 19 Movement)guerrilla group from La Picota prison. TheBogota daily El Tiempo reported July 2that close to 500 people had been detainedin the latter raids.

Putting the lie to government claimsthat its target was the guerrilla group wasthe fact that members of a number of legalleftist groups having nothing to do withthe M-19 were detained, includingmembers of the Communist Party and the"Firmes" group. Three members of theCommunist Party,, including an alternatecity council member from Miranda, weremurdered in the repressive wave of thepast several weeks.But why the heavy repression after a

period of relative quiescence?No one leftist group or trade union is the

government's target. Rather, the target isthe resurgent mass movement as a whole.Recession is hitting key sectors of theColombian economy. Layoffs from Mede-llin's important textile industry havepassed 10 percent of the work force. On topof the growing unemployment, workingpeople are reeling under the blows of aninflation officially estimated at 28 percenta year. When, in this context, the government announced stiff hikes of 20 percent inthe price of gasoline and increases of about20 percent in bus fares, militant protestsbroke out spontaneously.In the capital city of Bogota, for exam

ple, thousands of poor residents in thetugurios (slums) blockaded key avenues in

"operacion tachuela" (the spreading ofsharp nails that puncture tires) and stonedany buses attempting to move. In twohours time the city was paralyzed, withnothing moving in the way of public transportation.In other cities the protests were similarly

successful. Unlike last year when similarprice hikes brought relatively isolated protests, this year's actions were more numerous and broadly based. It took the policeand army days to smother them.There has also been a resurgence of the

student movement, with protests againstthe government's reactionary educational

"reforms." Numerous universities were

invaded by the police and army. Somehave been closed altogether, and othershave been occupied, including the University of Antioquia in Medellin, the University of Pedagogica in Bogotd and theuniversity in Tunja.

A number of strikes have also occurred.

Although these have not been in keysectors of the economy, they have beenmarked by their militancy. "Faros Clvi-cos" have occurred in a number of munici

palities and others are scheduled for July.("Faros Clvicos" are local strikes organizedby broad municipal coalitions, usually toprotest the lack of basic services, such aswater shortages, frequent electricity blackouts, poor or nonexistent highway repair,etc. The ones to date have been successful

in shutting down not only the towns wherethey are based, but often in paralyzingregional commerce for as long as tendays.)Such a growth in protest activity, espe

cially in local strikes, characterized theperiod before the giant "Faro Clvico Na-cional" (citizen's national general strike)that shook Colombia in September 1977.

Under pressure of these protests three ofColombia's four national labor federations,the Confederation of Colombian Workers

(CTC), the General Confederation of Labor(CGT), and the Trade Union Confederationof Colombian Workers (CSTC), have votedto call another Faro Clvico Nacional. Theyare demanding a 50 percent increase inwages, an end to the repression, and liftingof the Security Statute, among other demands.

Although they have not set a date for thestrike and are unlikely to do so withouteither the participation of the Union ofColombian Workers (UTC), the biggestlabor federation, or more massive andorganized pressure from the masses, numerous individual unions are vigorouslypropagandizing in favor of the action.Fosters and stickers are appearing everywhere, creating a climate of expectation.Committees are being organized in poorneighborhoods, in many unions, and on acity-wide basis all over the country. Largenumbers of activists are turning out atplanning meetings.Unlike a year ago, when leftist groups

calling for a second Faro Nacional wereisolated, this year the mass sentimentseems to exist and the context is one of

more generalized protest.A building action for the Faro in Bogotd,

focusing on the shortage of cocinol, a fuelused (by the poor) for cooking, drew be

tween 5,000 and 30,000 people (the latterfigure was cited by the television news).

Significantly, the second National Forum on Human Rights is scheduled forAugust 15, 16, and 17. The first suchforum, in April 1979, was broadly sponsored by the labor movement, the liberalopposition, the left, and intellectual andacademic figures. It was a stunning blowto the Turbay government's massive use oftorture and repression. The coming forummay well surpass the first in its breadthand impact.It is this growing mass movement, and

the momentum towards a second nationalgeneral strike and the second humanrights forum, that is the real target of thegovernment's repression. The governmentis obviously hoping to intimidate the labormovement and the broad masses to stop

them from mobilizing to defend theirrights.

July 10, 1980

Conditions Improve

for Mexican Trotskyist Prisoners

A campaign by the Revolutionary Workers Farty (FRT), the Mexican section of theFourth International, to gain improvedconditions and amnesty for three of itsmembers who are now in prison scored apartial success on June 20 when two of theprisoners were given the right to receivevisitors.

The two—Juan Islas and Arturo Galle-gos—have been incarcerated since 1974,and were sentenced to thirty years imprisonment in 1977. In recent months theyhad been refused the right to have visitors,were receiving only one meal a day, weredenied reading or writing materials, andwere not allowed to use outside exercise

areas.

In addition to now being able to receivevisitors, Islas and Gallegos are being fedtwo meals a day, and can use a gymnasium two hours daily.But authorities have refused to consider

pleas that the prisoners be included in oneof the periodic amnesties, charging thatthey are "highly dangerous."Although Islas and Gallegos were ar

rested on September 20, 1974, and wereaccused of having assassinated an Aca-pulco political boss, they were not broughtto trial until 1977. Both had signed blankconfessions after being subjected to savagetorture.

The third FRT prisoner, Aquilino Lorenzo Avila, was seized in February 1978,and after seventy-two days of torture "confessed" to the assassination of an Aca-

pulco university director. All three joinedthe FRT while in prison.The FRT is continuing its campaign for

total amnesty for Islas, Gallegos, and Lorenzo. □

August 4, 1980

'I Expected More Humanity'

Cuban Emigres Find Out They Made a Mistake

[The following are major excerpts froman article by Dan Williams that appearedin the July 16 Miami Herald, a majorFlorida daily.]

They came to America, tried it on forsize, and found it didn't fit.After braving the scorn of their country

men and 90 miles of open sea to get here,some Cuban refugees want to return to theisland they fled."I just can't adapt myself to this sys

tem," said Andres Sergio Alvarez, a plumpblue-eyed teacher from Havana."In Cuba, you don't have to pay for

electricity, water, things you need to subsist. I see the inflation here, taxes. You buya car and you have to pay insurance, too.Everyone works all the time, there's not amoment even to read the newspaper," hesaid.

Alvarez, 31, served as spokesman for agroup of six men living under the end zoneof the Orange Bowl [a sports stadium] whosay they wish they hadn't joined 116,000in the Cuban exodus that began in April.

Officials say the six are among at least20 who mill about the dusty temporaryrefuge at the stadium, lamenting theirdecision to flee. Perhaps hundreds more inrefugee camps elsewhere want to return totheir homeland, said a United Nationsofficial who is trying to help them return.The regretful refugees are alone and

miss their families. They are homeless andmiss guaranteed housing in Cuba. Theysay longtime Cuban residents of Miamiare too wrapped up in their work to botherwith them.

More habituated to socialism than theymay have known when they left Cuba, therefugees have become instant dissidents inthe world's leading capitalist country.What Americans call the job market, theserefugees call exploitation. What U.S. residents term competition, they call inhumanity.

For the moment, they have nowhere togo. The government of Fidel Castro inCuba says the refugees cannot return.The refugees wait, meanwhile, lulling in

the cot-cluttered Orange Bowl. They arefed once a day and may sign up with socialservice agencies to find sponsors to clotheand feed them. Some had stayed brieflywith sponsors or friends before seekingshelter in the stadium.

The six in Alvarez' group said they hadmade an impulsive decision to come to theUnited States, and most left wives andchildren behind. If earlier in their shortexile they echoed the tales of Cuban repression told by other refugees, they don't now.

"We abide by the laws; we're not criminals. We have no trouble with the authori

ties," Alvarez said."It was the excitement," said Alberto

Estrada, explaining why he came to the

United States. "I wanted to see what itwas like. We don't have tourist flights fromCuba."

Estrada, 31, is a shoemaker. He said henever intended to stay, but he complainedthat the U.S. government has done little tohelp the refugees."If an immigrant arrived in Cuba, Fidel

would dress him up and feed him, at least.Here we have this," he said, motioning togate of the Orange Bowl's west end zone.

Estrada said Cuban residents of Miami

take advantage of their new compatriots."They raise rents, they want to pay onlythe minimum wage—to exploit us. Theysay they suffered at the beginning. So whydo they want to make us suffer? I expectedmore humanity," he said.Luis Lopez Quiala, a young stevedore,

nodded. He said he came to stay, hoping tobring his family. But he is disillusioned.He combed his bushy, curly hair and

said exile visitors to Cuba "cheated" ontales of the good life in the United States."They came to Cuba with pictures of

themselves standing in front of a Cadillac.They said everything was marvelous. Theydidn't say you had to know English to geta job. They didn't tell you about theexpense of medical care," he said.Some Cuban exiles of longer U.S. resi

dence say it was predictable that not all ofthe new refugees would fit in."They've never been in a competitive

market before," said Cesar Odio, assistantMiami city manager and the official directly in charge of the Orange Bowl refuge. □

Emigres ProtestMIAMI—A police SWAT [Special Wea

pons and Tactics—heavily armed andspecialty trained] team was brought inJuly 20 to put down a demonstration by200 Cuban ^smigr^s housed in theOrange Bowl.

Police said some of the Cubansclaimed they got the idea of a demonstration from successful attempts byBlack Miamians to focus attention ontheir problems through recent rebellions.

The homeless emigres, part of the 750sleeping on cots under the stands of thesports stadium, had set up barricades toprotest unsanitary living conditions, aswell as reports that they might be movedto a military camp to make way for anAugust 9 exhibition football game.

When cops tried to arrest one of thedemonstrators, a scuffle broke out andsome of the Cubans began throwingrocks and bottles.

The cop in charge of the operationsaid his team had used force "to showthem they are guests in this country. . . .We had the SWAT officers mobilizedanyway for the disturbances at LibertyCity."

Cuban emigres housed in Orange Bowl in Miami.

Intercontinental Press

Thousands of Women in Copenhagen Debate World Politics

Women's Meeting Reflects Rise of international Class StruggleBy Janice Lynn

Thousands of women converged on Copenhagen, Denmark, July 14 for two weeksof discussion on the situation of women inthe world today.More than 1,000 delegates appointed by

their governments were in attendance atthe second world conference of the United

Nations Decade for Women. And some

6,000 women attended workshops andseminars at a parallel nongovernmental

on its crimes.

U.S. and Israeli delegates, for example,strongly objected to any discussion on theeffects of the Israeli occupation on Palestinian women. They claimed it was anobstacle to an "action-oriented conference

that will develop programs helpful towomen."

Women, according to this argument,should stay away from politics and focus

CM' A -i

4-Palestinian delegation protests harassment by photographers.

conference, called the Forum, at thenearby University of Copenhagen.

Although the Forum was also sponsoredby the United Nations it was open to allwomen's groups. Many of the official government delegates shuttled back and forthto attend the lively workshop sessions atthe Forum.

The fact that these conferences are beingheld at all is a reflection of the powerfulimpact that the women's liberation movement has had around the world. Even

some of the most reactionary governmentshave been forced to pay lip service toimproving the status of women.

Representatives from a number of theimperialist countries expressed dismay atthe extent of political discussion and debate at the conference. They were fearfulthat the conference would serve as yetanother international forum that wouldcondemn imperialism and focus attention

on narrowly defined "women's issues." Butthose raising this argument were in aminority.

Among those in attendance at the UNconference was Leila Khaled, well knownfor her role in the Palestine Liberation

Organization. Along with delegates fromseventy other countries, Khaled participated in a protest walk-out as the Israelidelegate got up to speak. The representative from Israel was quick to lash outagainst this "politization" of the conference.

A similar walk-out occurred around the

appearance of Jihan el-Sadat, head of theEgyptian delegation. One of the Syriandelegates later devoted her speech to denouncing the "traitor-agent [EgyptianPresident Anwar el-] Sadat" and the CampDavid accords.

The U.S. delegation, appointed by president Carter, was co-headed by DonaldMcHenry, U.S. ambassador to the UN and

Sarah Weddington, a presidential assistant. They publicly stated their commitment to fight against any resolution "condemning Israel unfairly." At the 1975Mexico City conference Zionism wasequated with colonialism and apartheid.

Another walk-out took place as the delegate from "Democratic Kampuchea" (representing the ousted government of thebutcher Pol Pot) got up to speak. TheSoviet delegate pointed out that it was"inadmissable to hear from someone who

represents no one—neither a governmentnor the people in that country."

A ten-member delegation from Iran wasthere, headed by Akram Hairiri who commented on the issue of Iranian women and

the chador.

"I don't have to go to the hairdresser,"she said laughingly, pointing to the scarfon her head, "so I can save money to giveto my country. When we wear the chador,we can hide guns inside. . . .

"We have the best situation now of anywomen in the world," Hairiri said, explaining that what they had was their country'sfreedom.

As news of the military coup in Boliviareached Denmark, women attending thealternative conference marched from the

university to the official conference sitechanting "international solidarity" to register their protest with the head of theBolivian delegation. They were led byDomitila Barrios de Chungara, the wife ofa Bolivian miner.

The conference was also scheduled to

discuss the effects of apartheid on SouthAfrican women. The real world just couldnot be kept out, despite the wishes of theU.S. representatives.

The UN delegates heard a report describing how the status of women had deteriorated over the last five years, especially inthe areas of health, education and employment. For example, women today constitute one-third of the official labor force and

yet receive only ten percent of world income. The illiteracy rate of women, twicethat of men, has increased. And femaleunemployment has risen faster than therate for men.

What these figures reflect is how theworldwide capitalist offensive against theworking class is having a devastatingeffect on women, and the need forwomen—as half the population—to fightback against the exploitation and oppression spawned by the capitalist system. □

August 4, 1980

Interview With Prime Minister Maurice Bishop IThe Class Struggle in Grenada, the Caribbean, and the USA

[The following interview with Grenada'sPrime Minister Maurice Bishop was conducted July 15 by Andrew Pulley, presidential candidate of the U.S. Socialist Workers

Party; Steve Clark, managing editor ofIntercontinental Press/Inprecor; and Diane Wang, a steelworker and SWPmember. The three U.S. socialists were in

Grenada on a fact-finding and solidaritytour.]

Andrew Pulley. What can supporters ofthe Grenadian revolution, antiwar activists, and Black activists in the UnitedStates do regarding the U.S. government'swar drive and slander against Grenada?How can we help combat that?

Maurice Bishop. I think there are anumber of areas. Certainly the question ofmobilizing the population, particularly theBlacks, the deprived minorities, progressive forces, the working class, around theimportance of world peace and detente.There might he some concrete ways ofgetting that message across. Certainly, forexample, using the Vietnam experienceand what it has meant concretely for people—not only for those who died, but thosewho are now permanently crippled orthose who have come back war heroes but

still cannot find jobs.Secondly, I think it is very important to

try to organize around one or two keyslogans that could dramatize and reallyfocus in a very concrete and spectacularway on this war drive. What I'm getting atis this, for example.Everybody knows, but most people can

not quite articulate, that the reasons forwar, the reasons for any war-mongeringright now, have to do essentially with thedeveloping crisis in international capitalism. The economic problems in the UnitedStates even more so.

Witness the $142 billion defense budgetor whatever it is. Fifty million dollars cutback on school lunch programs. The retrenchment, the general cutback in socialexpenditures.Yet at the same time, it is equally clear

that while they are cutting back in thoseareas, they are stepping up on defensespending. And inciting the countries ofNATO, for example, to do likewise.

'Let General Motors Fight'

Now it seems to us that it should be

possible to get that message across ina concrete way. To point out that reallywhat the war drive is all about is a means

of the transnational corporations, the elitein America, to try to revive their super

profits, which have been falling so dramatically. And the best way always of doingthat is by getting a war economy moving—step up spending in armaments, step upspending in the area of the military generally.So the slogan, for example, that makes

the point; "We don't want a war. GeneralMotors wants a war. Let General Motors

go and fight." I'm saying that it should bepossible to step up that kind of message ina very concrete way so that people canunderstand.

Because I get a feeling—certainly thelast time I was in America—last year atthe United Nations—that this war

mongering was beginning to seep throughto the population in general to some extent. I wasn't there long enough, I didn'tspeak to enough people or to an especiallywide cross-section to he sure that what I'm

saying is right. But certainly listening tothe radio, watching the television shows,and just talking to people here and there,that impression came across very strongly.I don't think there's any need for that to

happen in the United States. I certainlyfeel that a carefully worked-out programaimed at getting the message across thatwar is not in the interests of the American

masses, that it's really only a very tinyminority who wants this war, essentiallyfor economic reasons. Therefore, if theywant the war, let them go and fight thewar. Why should we go and die for them?It's not helping us.Third, I think precisely what your party

and your newspaper have been doing, andwe certainly appreciate it. Focusing on theactual reality in the region and the effortsbeing made by progressive and revolutionary countries to try to get a better life fortheir people. And doing it in as concrete away as they can, in terms of focusing onthe basic needs of the population—jobs,health, housing, food, clothing. The concrete attempts to bring these about andtherefore the developing perception in theminds of the Caribbean masses that this

really is a way to measure progress. Not interms of how many industries you have orhow many hotels you have when theprofits are going to a very tiny elite, but interms of what benefits are truly getting tothe masses.

Getting across the point, too, that thereis absolutely no doubt that for all of us inthe Caribbean who are trying to developnew paths and new processes, our concernis not with America. We have no axe to

grind. All we want is to be able to live inpeace. To have the opportunity to developour own processes free from all forms ofoutside interference, from intimidation.

Diane Wang/IP-lBISHOP: "The reasons for war. . . have to

do essentially with the developing crisis inInternational capitalism."

from threats of invasion, from task forcesand Solid Shields and whatnot. That's

really all that the people of our region areasking—that it is our right to do as wewish in our own countries.

I think, as I said, that your party andyour paper have certainly been making animportant contribution there. And that, tous, is one very, very key area—continuingthat work.

Grenada-U.S. Friendship

The fourth thing I can think of would bethe question of Grenada-U.S. friendships,Cuba-U.S. friendships, Nicaragua-U.S.friendships—these societies, which exist inthe case of the three particular countriesI've named.

For Grenada, it's a fairly recent development, hut it has begun to spread. It'sgotten to the West Coast now. And I know

there are plans for pushing it furtheralong. The importance is getting, not necessarily progressive, but democratic forces in America to join organizations likethat, so that they get an opportunity oflearning at first hand what is really happening and give themselves the opportunity of being able to see the other side andbeing able to understand what the views ofthe people in these countries are. So thatthey would get a different point of view

Intercontinental Press

and would not have to have to continue to

be saturated by the official American propaganda.Because, again, one of the things that

struck me when I was in America—I

hadn't been there in two or three years—was the extent to which the news is

canned, the way it's focused. If that'sreally all people get exposed to—the stuffyou see in the New York Times, what yousee on all the different channels and on the

radio—you really have no possibility ofdeveloping a different point of view. Because it's all just aimed at pushing theirpoint of view.And these are the same people who talk

of the free press, the right to have independent views so that everybody gets tohear what's happening. I mean, I can'tthink of a more unfree press, a more unfreemedia than the American media.

Pulley. One big lie that they are perpetrating right now in the United States isthat Grenada is an aimed camp whereevery single person walks around withcarbines and, therefore, if you fear for yoursafety, you should not go there as a tourist.The truth is that we see more people armedin a two-block area of Chicago, especiallypolicemen, than I've seen here. Do youhave anything to say about this line ofpropaganda?The other line is that the new interna

tional airport that you are building here issimply a military base.What do you have to say regarding more

Black people and other Americans comingdown here just to see for themselves what'shappening here?

Bishop. On the first question, the question of everybody walking around withguns, the island being an armed camp,civil commotion, civil war, barricades, therest of it. Obviously that is part of thewhole attempt at propaganda destabiliza-tion.

We really have been having that fromday one. Obviously the aim of that is towreck the tourists coming here, in particular. To make tourists generally afraid tocome to the country. And they are reallypushing that very viciously over the pastsixteen months.

Within the first few weeks, they weresaying that we had cut down the forests inthe middle of the island, in the GrandEtang region, and had missiles aimed atneighboring islands. Then there wasanother story sasdng that we had burrowed all the earth from under the island

and established pontoons and a U-2 baseso that the Soviets could attack. Another

one said that there was a Soviet naval

base on the offshore island of Carriacou.

Obviously that kind of propaganda cannot affect our people. The island is sosmall that in a quarter of a second everybody knows that it's a joke and a lie. But onpeople outside of the country, it can ob

viously have an effect. And has had someimpact.

It's the same with this new line about

the island being an armed camp. That'sjust the latest round of propaganda desta-bilization. We've had a lot of it. They haveof course been linking that to economicdestabilization—attempts at wrecking theeconomy.

To go back to tourism again, there aretwo recent examples that you might findinteresting. In February a hotel ownerhere, the owner of a hotel called the Calabash, received a letter from one of thetravel agents in New York saying that thepeople who were booked to come down hadcancelled out because the travel agencyhad been advised by the State Departmentthat Grenada was off bounds. We pub-

All we want Is to be free from

all forms of outside

Interference . . .

lished that letter. The U.S. embassy, ofcourse, denied it.More recently still, someone did a survey

for us in the Washington, D.C. area, andthey discovered that of the twenty-fivetravel agencies nineteen advised againstcoming to Grenada, arguing that it wasunsafe, the usual stuff.So that economic destabilization has

certainly continued.As you know, they have been moving

more and more now to the third leg of thatsystem of destabilization, the violent de-stabilization, and more particularly to assassinations and straight terror. All of thisis predictable.

'Come See For Yourself

We would certainly see it as importantfor Black Americans to come down to

Grenada, for the rest of Americans generally to come, members of the Americanworking class, American working peoplein general to come to our country to see forthemselves. We feel that in the final analysis that is the best proof. Don't wait andlisten to the propaganda. Come down andsee.

I just opened the Caricom [CaribbeanCommunity] ministers of health conference a while back this morning. In talkingto a few of the ministers right after theopening, they were all pointing out thatthey can't believe that they are in Grenadawhen they consider the propaganda thatthey were hearing on all of the radiostations, that they were reading in all ofthe national newspapers over the past fewmonths.

One sister from Barbados was sayingthat two weeks ago she heard on the radiostation in Barbados a report that said thatthe Cuban construction workers at the

airport are all walking around in fulljungle fatigues with AK-47's on theirbacks, and that government ministers are

likewise walking around that way. Thatchildren eight, nine, ten, years old walkaround carrying guns in the streets. Thatchildren are going to school with guns intheir hands. That there was a civil war

going on in the country. That a barricadehad been established in one part of theisland near the airport, and people weresaying they would not lift the barricadeuntil all the Cubans were sent back home

and all detainees released.

Of course, all of these are figments of theimagination. And this sister from Barbados was just so glad that she was able tocome herself.

So one of our main slogans has been,"Come to see for yourself." We really thinkthat's very important. The extent to whichmore and more people can have the opportunity to come down and judge for themselves. We feel that's one of the very bestways of countering these attempts at propaganda destablization.

Steve Clark. What has been the responseof the U.S. government to your government's request for extradition proceduresfor Eric Gairy?

Bishop. That has had a varied history.In the first few weeks and months before

we even formally applied for the extradition, they were all giving the impression,the U.S. embassy people in Barbados, thatit's a formality, a very simple matter andso forth. Then, of course, they told us thatwe should get down to the formal aspectsof it—prepare the warrants, and the backup witnesses, proofs, and whatnot. We didall of that.

By November, we got a written communication from them, saying that the paperswere in order. No problem. Then by January they came back saying that they haddiscovered the papers were not in order.There is some more information they want.

In between all of that [U.S. Ambassador]Sally Shelton comes to Grenada last December, at our invitation, and her line wasthat America didn't want Gairy. So, wepointed out that, well then, we want Gairy.America doesn't want Gairy. Gairy issaying he is coming back tomorrow morning. So what's the problem. Let him come.[Laughs.]

Of course, she had no answer to that.Because obviously what was going on wasjust the usual hypocrisy.More recently, in the last two or three

months, they have come out publicly forthe first time—not publicly, but privatelyto our ambassador—saying that they havelifted all surveillance on Gairy—something that they kept saying that theywere doing to some extent within theirlimited resources and whatnot. And that,so far as they were concerned, the Gairyquestion was a dead letter.So it has now come to the point where

August 4, 1980

they have admitted openly that they arenot going to hother with our request forextradition.

Carter Harbors Eric Gairy

Obviously, this is going to be one of themain stumbling blocks to having any kindof reasonable relations with the United

States. Because it is not possible to acceptthat any country, and one that deems itselfto be a friendly country, has the right toharbor fugitives from justice from ourcountry—criminals, people who are usingthe territory of this other country to inciteaggression against our country, to activelyplan counterrevolution, to plan for mercenary invasion and all that sort of thing.Therefore, that certainly is going to he

one of the major stumbling blocks to thedevelopment of any reasonable relations.

Clark. Going back to a point you madeearlier. One of the slogans that veryquickly has developed into probably themost popular antidraft slogan is, "Wewon't fight for Exxon." This relates mostdirectly to the war dangers in the MiddleEast rather than in the Caribbean. But it

shows the beginning development amongthese activists, who are the backbone ofthe growing antidraft movement, of aconsciousness of the cause of war. In the

early stages of the Vietnam War, therewere many antiwar activists who thoughtthis was just simply a mistake on the partof the U.S. policymakers. It took quite awhile into the war before the conscious

ness of the role of big business, the consciousness that the war was being foughtfor a specific reason in the interests of atiny handful, began to develop. But that'sthere now right at the beginning of thisnew fight.

Bishop. That's fantastic.

Clark. We think that another very positive thing in terms of mobilizing solidaritynot only with Grenada but with Nicaragua, El Salvador, and the Cuban revolution, and against the CIA destabilizationefforts in Jamaica, is the fact that Grenada is the first revolution of this powerand scope in an English-speaking countrywith a largely Black population. So itmakes it much easier for at least that

segment—which is a large and importantsegment of the American population—toidentify with the revolutions in the Caribbean and Central Ameria.

Example for U.S. Blacks

Bishop. I agree fully. I have absolutelyno doubt that one of the major factorsresponsible for all of the aggression andhostility against the revolution in Grenadabeing shown by the United States government is precisely the fact that they recognize that being a small Black country,with a large Black population, and as yousay English-speaking, that it becomes a lot

easier for Blacks and other oppressednationalities in the United States to iden

tify with our goals and our aspirations.And that must be a real problem for them.It must be.

Because what you have in America withthe Black situation is already a situationof great oppression. And they have notbeen able to find any solutions by theusual methods of political prisoners andcontinued shootings of people, like happened in Miami recently. And to haveadded to that the example of a Grenada-fype revolution must be a frighteningthing for them—particularly since they seethis place as being in their backyard. Andthey understand only too well that moreand more Blacks are going to hear about

We always try to fully Involvethe masses In whatever

we do . . .

Grenada, about what we are trying to do.Many of them are going to join any movement that is opposed to trying to turn backour revolution.

I think your point is a key one. Extremely important.

Pulley. I'm looking forward to being ableto pick up Radio Free Grenada soon inMiami.

It will be a very powerful developmentwhen its beam is strengthened, especiallyfor the English-speaking Caribbean, ofcourse, but also for the average person inthe United States, in order to help refuteall the lies. The American people arealready suspicious of anything the government says about anything. Their firstthought is whether the government is lying.The more people discover that just out-

and-out lies are being told about Grenada,Nicaragua, and Cuba, the more the U.S.government will have a tremendous problem trying to get away with its war drive.As people in the Black movement becomeaware of what your government and country is up against, they will be outraged.Because they will see it as a racist injustice, just as they have seen with regard toHaitians, the Haitian immigrants.

It was largely pressure from the Blackcommunity that forced Carter to change,at least in words, his discriminatory double-standard toward Cuban and Haitian

immigrants.A similar consciousness can be deve

loped with regard to this revolution, themore that Black leaders, activists, andothers are aware of it.

Clark. What are some of the gains of therevolution over the past year and fourmonths that you are most pleased with?And what are the biggest challenges thatyou see ahead in terms of social programs

and economic development and reconstruction?

Bishop. Answering that question is notthe easiest thing, because people's perspectives on that really differ very dramatically.If you went out into the countryside and

you spoke to an elderly sister, her responseto a question like that might be somethinglike, "I feel free. I feel good. I feel like aGrenadian for the first time." Intangiblethings.

Community Mobilization

As for those of us in the party andgovernment, our view is that the greatestsingle achievement, the thing that we arehappiest about, is the community mobilization, community involvement, communityparticipation. That has really impressed usmost.

I can tell you, over and over again,month after month, we keep saying, "Itcan't continue." [Laughs.] And then monthafter month, you make a call and peoplestill come out.

When the rains came in November lastyear, it did us tremendous damage, morethan $50 million^ worth of damage to theeconomy, twenty-three inches in onemonth. Before those rains came, there weresome weekends when we'd have 85 percentof the villages around Grenada involved incommunity efforts. That's an extraordinary development. I tell you that in otherEnglish-speaking Caribbean countries, Idon't think they'd get 2 percent of villagesto be involved. And I'm not saying this in aboastful way, I'm saying it in a factualway.

In January, we closed down the schoolsfor two weeks so as to hold seminars for all

the teachers to talk about the work-studyapproach, curriculum reform, and so on.And during those two weeks, we askedpeople to organize themselves to repair,repaint, refurbish all the schools, becausethey were in disastrous condition. Andsixty-six primary schools got refurbishedand repainted in that two-week period as aresult of that drive, saving the country atremendous amout of money. Really quiteextraordinary.

We see it also in the area of the villagehealth committees that are emerging aspart of our drive to move toward a primaryhealth system. Our aim is that doctors,nurses, paramedics, and technicians working as teams will go out into the countryand hring medical attention to peoplewhere they live and where they need theattention.

The disproportion in the health budget isreally quite staggering. In 1978, the lastyear of Gairy, 70 percent of the healthbudget was spent on the three hospitals inGrenada and Carriacou. Those three hospi-

1. One East Caribbean dollar is equivalent toUS$1.00.-/P//

Intercontinental Press

tals, in turn, attended to about 25 percentof the sick. But under Gairy only 30percent of the health budget was spent intrying to keep together the thirty-fivehealth centers and medical clinics around

the country where the people actually wentfor attention.

If you understand the situation in thiscountry in terms of poverty, in terms of thehigh cost of transportation, in terms of the

inaccessibility of many of these healthcenters and medical clinics, then you cansee the problem. People are sick, hut theyreally cannot move. Even if they manageto go once, they cannot return two dayslater and so forth.

So we see the primary health system asheing key. And getting the masses involved in that through village health committees, where they do a number of things.One, involve themselves in public healtheducation. Two, deal with overhangings,deal with unblocking drains, which is oneof the main problems with mosquitosoutdoors, which means yellow fever and so

Third, monitoring the quality of healthcare they receive. Because doctors, naturally, came out of the system of 350 yearsof colonial oppression and thirty years ofGairy's misrule and neocolonialism. Theireducation system was preparing a tinyelite and one that was not dedicated to

service but to dollar bills and to migratingas fast as they could. And even when theystayed here, they either moved into privatepractice altogether or insisted on theirright, while being paid out of taxpayers'money, to practice privately at the sametime, using hospital facilities to do so.Now that kind of doctor is not going to

join up as part of any medical team ofnurses, paramedics, and technicians. Soit's a real problem getting that struggle,that program going. We have been able tomake some limited impact, but we have along way to go. But we're sure it can bedeveloped because of the community involvement and a new sense of oneness and

unity in the country.

Some Concrete Benefits

The other way I think we can look at thequestion you asked is to try to identify alittle more concretely and specifically someof the actual benefits that have come to the

people. More jobs, for example, 2,500 in thefirst year. That has made a very smalldent really in the overall unemploymentrate of 50 percent, which we inherited. But

• obviously it has made a difference. It hashelped, reduced it to about 35 percent.Secondly, in the area of education. Be

fore the revolution, the last year of Gairy,three students went away on universityscholarships in 1978. One of the three wasGairy's daughter. After the revolution, inthe first six months, 109 scholarships, 109people are able to go abroad to study.We've been able to reduce secondary

school fees from $37 a term to $12 a term.

"The thing that we are happiest about is the community mobilization." Above,January 1980 demonstration headed by leaders of New Jewel Movement.

Next year, we intend to make it entirelyfree.

We have been able to increase greatlythe number of scholarships in the secondary schools so that more children can getin.

We have started a breakfast and lunch

feeding program in the schools so thatthose children who are too poor or areunable to return home for lunch will be

able to keep themselves together—whileyour government is cutting it out.In the area of health likewise. We inher

ited a situation where there were eighteendoctors working in the governmentservice—virtually all of them concentratedin the hospitals, one or two moving aroundthe clinics, but mostly doing a few hoursevery week, once a week for a few hours.And in the first six months again, we

were able to get seventeen new doctors tocome to Grenada. In other words virtuallythe same figure as we had before wereadded to the system. And that has made

an enormous difference in the quality andquantity of health care available.As you know, twelve of these seventeen

doctors and dentists came from Cuba on

loan to us and that, of course, has heen anextremely important contribution, one ofmany they have made to the revolution.So you have jobs, you have education,

you have health. You also have the question of struggling with the infrastructure.Pipe-borne water has been greatly increased with the opening of the new Mardi-gras water project, and several others areabout to be completed. That should ensurewater for the whole of St. George's. Thereare pipes in some parts of St. George's thathave not seen water for four and five

years—not days or weeks, but literally fourand five years, just rusted up.We've been struggling with new feeder

roads, opening the forests, for example, toget timber. Right now Grenada suppliessomething like 4 percent of our overalltimber needs locally, when there's a lot of

August 4, 1980

forest land just going idle. Without doingany great amount, just cutting a feederroad, not even paving it, just enough for avehicle to get in using four-wheel drive,buying a sawmill for $20,000, that's all.And doing this now, we expect that in fiveyears, we will be able to supply 90 percentof our timber needs.

There's a lot of little, relatively smallthings that overall have made quite animpact. These are some of the achievements.

Dependent Economy

In terms of the challenges. In a situationlike ours, given our inheritance and dependent economy, we have an economythat was accustomed to looking outwardfor solutions never inwards toward our

own needs and problems. We have a country that was misruled for so many yearsunder colonialism and today continues tobe exploited by imperialism. The inheritance, the legacy of not just waste andcorruption, but of the lack of physicalamenities, is really quite frightening.Three hundred and fifty years of Britishcolonialism, for example, gave us onepublic secondary school. That's all theycould build in 350 years! The other elevenwere built by the churches.When you come into that sort of situa

tion, you obviously have to set yourselfgoals and targets for the revolution.As you know, this year in Grenada is the

year of education and production. And thetwo main things involved would be theCPE [Centre for Popular Education] andthe land reform program.The land reform commission has been

established and is laying the basis foreventual agrarian reform. At this point weare mainly trying to identify the idle landsin the country, and to see how many of theidle hands are willing to work in cooperatives, so as to bring about that marriage.

Clark. And that also involves the devel

opment of a fishing industry?

Bishop. Right.

Clark. What are some of the main political features of the Grenadian revolution?

Three Pillars

Bishop. I would say that there are threemain pillars of the revolution.

First, the organization and mobilizationof the masses. That is very key. To alwaystry to fully involve the masses in whateverwe are trying to do, to keep them fullyinvolved, to ensure that they understandwhat the problems are and where we aretrying to go.Secondly, the question of national secur

ity and defense—consolidation in thoseareas.

Thirdly, the question of building a soundnational economy and bringing more benefits to the people, improving the qualityof their lives.

Those to us are the three key pillars. Andwe believe that all three have to be worked

on at the same time. We cannot afford to

let any drop or lag behind.In any revolutionary situation, in any

progressive situation, the question of finding the right mix between the people of thecountry is key. The people without theguns, after all, is Allende, and we knowwhat happened to Allende. The guns without the people, on the other hand, isPinochet, and we know what will happento Pinochet.

So it's a question of striking that balance, ensuring that our people understandthe importance of being ready to defendour country from external attack, understand why it is that imperialism mustattack us—why it is, therefore, that assassinations, terrorism, destabilization, mercenary invasions, must be a part of theiragenda.That's something that is not as easy as

it sounds in our context. Generally speaking, the historical tradition of the English-speaking Caribbean has not been one of agreat deal of state violence, or other formsof violence really against the people. It'smuch easier, I think, for people in LatinAmerica, for example, to understand theserealities.

Secondly, remembering the way we tookpower. While there was a long history ofrepression by the state, by Gairy, in thedays leading up to the revolution, to someextent the people themselves were notreally involved in receiving that violenceon a personal level.We don't have, in other words, a situa

tion let's say of Nicaragua, where since1935 people have been fighting with armsin hand from time to time to try to unseatthe various Somozas.

Or a situation like Cuba. The Platt

Amendment in 1902 and the constant

struggle since then, year after year, the

We need to remain

constantly alert, constantlyvigilant . . .

years in the Sierra Maestra. You didn'thave that kind of situation here.

The people's consciousness, in otherwords, did not come out of that objectivesituation that makes it fairly easy for themto understand what is possible at thehands of imperialism.In addition, we didn't have the situation

that the Cubans and Nicaraguans had,where there is a whole lot of land tied up inthe latafundias, in the hands of one or twobig exploiters, that you can take and justhand over, making easier the objectivebasis of proceeding on the subjective level.That is not our situation.

You talk about a big landowner in Grenada, you're talking about somebody withseventy-five acres of land.

So we have had right from day one this

tremendous difficulty of getting across toour people, getting them to internalize intheir bellies, the fact that we are going tobe attacked, the fact that economic destabilization is going to continue, that thepropaganda war will continue, that theyare going to move eventually to assassinations and to mercenary invasions. Theobjective conditions for getting that message across were not there from before.People did not have that period of socialization, and therefore internalizing thiswas not the easiest thing.To that extent, the recent [June 19]

events, unfortunate as they are in terms ofloss of life, have gone a long way towardshelping to raise consciousness. Becausepeople are now able to say, "Right. Fromday one the comrades were talking aboutthat." They now see that on June 19, evenwhile [the terrorists] moved to wipe out theentire leadership, they did it in such a waythat it didn't matter that hundreds of

innocent women and children could getwiped out at the same time.That has made a qualitative difference

in the people's perception of what imperialism, what counterrevolution really means.From that point of view, it has been an

extremely important experience. That certainly is one of the biggest challenges thatwe face, trying to get that across, trying toget our people to understand that we needto remain constantly alert, constantlyvigilant. To understand that the threatsare not there in theory, but are there inpractice. We have to be ready and preparedto meet that.

You read about Allende, and you knowthat three months before September 11,1973, was the last attempt on his life. Sothat last assassination attempt was aprelude to an actual coup. So we make thepoint that, in much the same way, anassassination attempt here can easily be aprelude to a mercenary invasion.What imperialism is admitting now by

moving to terror tactics and moving toward assassination attempts is that theyhave failed. Because all the attempts tobuild a popular base [for counterrevolution] have failed. Their attempts to pushWinston Whyte and his so-called UPP—the United People's Party. The attempts torevive Herbert Blaize and his GNP [Grenada National Party], when the massesliterally ran them off the streets; theydidn't want to hear what they were saying.The attempts to use the Torchlight,'^ thelocal media, to try to assist them in theirpropaganda in much the same way as theyused El Mercurio in Chile or the Gleaner in

Jamaica.

The attempts to try to find a popularbase, using elements in the country whoare trying to exploit genuine objectivegrievances of the masses. In other words,conditions are bad. There is a lot of unem-

2. The Torchlight was a right-wing capitalistnewspaper opposed to the revolution.

Intercontinental Press

ployment. There is a lot of poverty. Theyget these people, therefore, to try to incitestrikes, to try to whip up sections of thepopulation around issues that are pressingissues, that we are concerned about, thatwe are trying to do something about. Butmaking them at the same time feel thatrevolution is like instant coffee; you justthrow it in a cup and it comes out presto.That you can negate 350 years of Britishcolonialism and thirty years of imperialism and neocolonialism overnight.

A New Civilization

That is really what they have beentrying to do, and they failed miserably.Even their attempts to isolate us in theregion, that has been a massive failure,notwithstanding all the adverse propaganda against Grenada. While undoubtedly several governments are hostile—theydidn't need propaganda to become hostile;they were hostile from day one—themasses in the Caribbean understand well

what we're trying to do. They understandthat this is a genuine process. That we arereally trying to build a new process thatmay become a new civilization, that couldhave tremendous relevance as a model to

their own lives.

And therefore they have not been put off,and imperialism has seen that. They haveseen, too, that their attempts at economicsabotage have not bitten deep enough,partly because America is our numberseven trading partner. We get virtuallynothing from America in terms of ourshops and stores. So they have had problems crippling us in that way.The only option left was to move to the

top of the pyramid. At the top, of course, isthe terror, is the assassination, is themercenary invasions. And I think that'sone of the major challenges—getting ourpeople to understand that. Certainly in thelast four weeks, that message has gottenacross a lot more quickly.People now see the importance, for ex

ample, of joining the militia in largernumbers. The original figures relativelyspeaking were small; you were talkingabout the vanguard really in the militia.Now quite a few more thousand havejoined up.People now begin to get a deeper appreci

ation and understanding that really thePRA [People's Revolutionary Army] andthe small militia that we had at first

cannot seriously defend the country in asituation of all-out attack. That we can

really only do that through a people's war,to be able to fight on that front. So thatwhen the mercenaries are passing andthey look at what appear to be innocentchildren and women bathing in a river, asthey get going they get a bullet in theirback. I think our masses are getting tounderstand that better now.

And a lot of that consciousness has

certainly come as a result of recent events,and not just in Grenada. There are theassassinations of Archbishop [Oscar Ar-

nulfo] Romero in El Salvador and WalterRodney in Guyana; the destruction of theEventide old people's home by fire inJamaica on exactly the fourth anniversaryof the similar destruction of Orange Lanein 1976^; the recent attempt on [PrimeMinister Michael] Manley's life and thecoup d'etat attempt over there. And then,of course, in Grenada, the June 19 bombing coming right after the April 26 plot.'*

^ 4 jpf^ - ^

I-

m

Jerry Hunnicutt/iP-l

Recent attacks have highlighted Importanceof revolution being able to defend Itself.

When you think of it, after just fifteenmonths, four plots—the October plot, theNovember plot,® April 26 plot, and a fewweeks later, June 19. And in each of theplots, what is central is wiping out theleadership. So I think we are beginning toget that clarity a bit more now, and thatcertainly has been a very important development from our point of view.At this point, our feeling very strongly is

that what is happening in Grenada isreally part of a regional plan that imperial-

3. In May 1976, at a time of U.S.-backed destabil-ization efforts against the Jamaican regime, fiftyarmed men attacked a tenement section in cen

tral Kingston that was a stronghold of MichaelManley's People's National Party. They set fireto it, killing ten persons. Four years later, in May1980, a similar fire was set at the Eventidenursing home in Kingston, killing 144 elderlywomen.

4. In late April 1980, Kennedy Budhlall—anopponent of the revolution and a large-scalemarijuana trader—was arrested along with several others for planning to overthrow the government on April 26. The plotters had severalsupporters at one army camp.

5. In late October and early November 1979, anumber of counterrevolutionaries were arrested

on charges of plotting to overthrow the government, including Winston Whyte, former head ofthe right-wing United People's Party; RupertJapal of the bourgeois Grenada National Party;and Wilton De Ravinere, a former police corporal.

ism has devised for dealing with progressive forces and revolutionary processes inthe region. It's more than regional, it'sclearly worldwide—the attempts to rollback the Afghanistan revolution, the continued search for bases in that area, thequestion of Iran and the attempts to invade that country a few months ago, themilitary presence in the Indian Ocean andthe Persian Gulf area, the floating arsenalat Diego Garcia.And in our own region. Carter's task

force last year. Solid Shield '80 this year,artificial Cuban crisis in Peru, artificialcrisis in Nicaragua over the two membersof the junta who resigned, continuingdestabilization attempts in Jamaica. Thepattern is quite clear.

Cuba in the Vanguard

We feel that there are a series of concen

tric circles that imperialism has drawn up.Into their first circle they have certainly

put Cuba, Nicaragua, and Grenada asbeing the key countries to get at.Cuba for obvious reasons. It is obviously

the vanguard in this region.Nicaragua because of its tremendous

importance for Central America. Everybody in Central America wants to be aSandinista. It's a massive problem therefor them.

Grenada because of our powerful potential example for the English-speaking Caribbean countries, and indeed for theFrench- and Dutch-speaking Caribbeancountries. So that's their first circle.

In the second circle we believe they havecountries like Jamaica, Guyana, St. Lucia,Surinam, El Salvador. Countries whereeither there have been positive developments on the anti-imperialist front, orwhere there have been important attemptsat building new structures for the peopleand bringing new benefits, or where thereare important progressive forces in opposition or in power who are determined tobring about these changes.Or where, as in the case of El Salvador,

there is an ongoing national liberationstruggle that clearly will not be settled inany reformist way. All attempts at reformism in El Salvador must fail.

Their third circle, therefore, will beaimed largely at all progressive forces,individually and collectively, whether in orout of office. That would explain, forexample, the Rodney slaying or the Archbishop Romero slaying. They understandthe potential that the left-progressive forces in the region have, and they aredetermined to crush that potential, usingassassinations.

So it's an extremely dangerous period forus in this region.

Artificial Cuba Crisis

Clark. The U.S. propaganda around theCuban emigrants has backfired on Carter,especially following the opening of the portof Mariel, the massive anti-imperialistmarches in Cuba, and the racist treatment

August 4, 1980

of the Cubans in the United States. What

was the impact here in the Caribbean?

Bishop. Was it in the Militant that I sawthe Fidel interview with Lee Lockwood

from way back in 1965? Did you repeatthat in the paper? [See April 18, 1980,Militant.} That I found to be an extremelyimportant interview, particularly as it wasfifteen years old, in tracing the history ofthis whole emigration question.

It was really quite succinct, the wayFidel put it. Pointing out that from theword go it was an artificial crisis beingcreated. That people, of course, when theywere able to leave freely were leavingfreely, nobody was blocking them. It became more convenient eventually for theAmericans to force them to escape andthen treat them as heroes, so that they canget propaganda out of it.

In South Africa, there aremllllons of Blacks being keptas hostages. Yet they aremaking so much fuss aboutfifty-three Americanhostages . . .

It was really quite an important article,coming at the time it did, especially as itwas done such a long time ago.That propaganda has really done dam

age, there's no question about it, in theEnglish Caribbean. Given that there's allthis talk about "boat people running fromCommunism" and so forth. I think a lot of

the Caribbean masses have had difficultyin comprehending what is really happening and putting it in a full context.

Because what's the reality? If any ofthose islands had America's doors openedtomorrow morning, there would be sixpeople left on the island. That's the reality.But they make this song and dance.The imperialist-controlled media have

the resources, they have the skills, everything else. We find that there has been amarked improvement in imperialist propaganda throughout 1980 on virtually everyissue. First of all, the speed with whichthey respond and the amount of ammunition they throw into it has been quiteextraordinary.Consider Afghanistan, in December of

last year. Just think of the speed withwhich they moved and how quick thatpropaganda built up and therefore howdifficult it was to combat and counter it.

But really on every issue. Within secondsof the bomb attack here in Queen's Park,the United States embassy in Bridgetown[Barbados] was already sending reportsout. Interestingly, their first reports weresaying that members of the leadership hadbeen killed. Very interesting. We want toknow, how did they know that?Or take Iran, the question of these fifty-

three hostages. Again, the speed they

moved on that question, and the amount ofsupport they were able to muster, made itdifficult for people to put it in a full contextin terms of the twenty-seven years ofoppression under the shah, armed byAmerican guns, and the very deep feelingsof indignation as a result of all that by thepeople of Iran. The feeling that if Americais harboring this man, then what is required?But even more fundamentally, the fact

that you have a situation like in SouthAfirica, where there are millions of Blacksbeing kept as hostages. Yet here they aremaking so much fuss about fifty-threehostages. Millions of African hostages,imprisoned in a system of apartheid.That's not important. You never hear talkof sanctions about that, but they wantsanctions for fifty-three.

It's difficult, because they come overwith this powerful emotive line. They put itin the context of the need for international

security of all embassies. And it leadsmany democratic, even some progressivecountries to take a firm position against—without ever putting it in any kind ofcontext.

Pulley. One thing that has hurt theimperialists in their drive against Iran hasbeen the attitudes of a good number of theparents of some hostages. Many havecome out against the U.S. raid, against thesanctions. A majority favor what Carter isdoing, but it's certainly a large numberwho are vocal and are opposed to it.They're having a rough time. They've

been forced to back away from what wasthe case at the time of the raid in April,when it looked like imminent war. Everything blew up in their face.

Bishop. The OPEC countries capie outwith a very strong statement in the lasttwo days. Really good news. I think it wasthe day before yesterday. Threatening anoil boycott.

Clark: Fidel had urged that in his MayDay speech.

Bishop: That's right. That was a first-class speech. It really came over powerfully. What was important to me aboutthat whole trip was the very, very closefeelings between the Cuban people andtheir leader. That was extraordinary. Ittook Fidel about ten minutes before he

could open his mouth. Everytime he triedto say something, the people just keptgoing again. I really found that extraordinary, because you're talking about a million and a quarter people or whatever itwas.

And at the end, their tremendous discipline was another eye opener. Wholewaves of people moved to the left whileothers stood still, moved to the right whileothers stood still. Then the front rows

moved out by a few hundred thousand, theback rows by a few hundred thousand.

Whole waves of people, left and right, leftand right, no pushing. And in ten orfifteen minutes, that square was empty.An extraordinary manifestation of discipline.

Diane Wang. Even the New York Timeshad to comment on that. They wrote witha great deal of consternation about thatrally. They had to admit not only theenthusiasm, but the discipline.

Bishop. Yes, it was so striking. Youwould have had to write your article on theplane before you got there really—whichthey do sometimes.

Clark. The lies on Afghanistan are oftenparticularly outlandish because it is sogeographically remote. The media at onepoint recently were reporting that an armyof 20,000 guerrillas—they always call them"Muslim freedom fighters," failing to pointout that there are Muslims on both sides—

were surrounding Kabul. But then a fewdays later, if you turned to the bottom of aremote page, you noticed a little itemsaying the story turned out not to be true.One of the things we try to do with the

Militant and Intercontinental Press/Inpre-cor is simply to counteract the barrage oflies, just to keep reminding people that thecapitalist press will stoop to outright deception. Lenin said that they often tell thetruth in the little things so that they canlie in the big ones.

Bishop. On the Afghanistan question,we have been pointing out here in Grenadathat what we are really concerned withthere was the April 1978 revolution, not somuch the December 1979 events. And in

the intervening eighteen months, whatwas happening—in terms of the attemptsat destabilization, the armed attacks fromPakistan and elsewhere, the plans of imperialism. And that what requires solidarityand support, therefore, is the right of the

We have nothing at aiiagainst the people ofAmerica. Our quarrel iswith the system ofimperialism . . .

people of Afghanistan to build their revolution. And people can relate to that overhere, because they see it happening to ustoo. They know we can have a similar typeproblem.

Clark. One last question. What wouldyou like to say to working people in theUnited States? To the Black community inthe United States? What message wouldyou like us to take back?

Bishop. First of all, we would like tostress something that imperialism hasbeen trying to use as a means of dividing

Intercontinental Press

and ruling—and that is that we haveabsolutely no quarrel with the Americanpeople. We have nothing at all against thepeople of America as a people.Our quarrel is with the system of impe

rialism. Our quarrel, therefore, is with theAmerican establishment and all its var

ious manifestations—whether it's throughthe presidency or National Security Council or the State Department or the CIA orthe powerful business lobby or the powerful media or whatever. That is who our

quarrel is with. And particularly insofar asthat establishment seeks to support byviolence the right of their transnationalcorporations to continue to exploit andrape our resources. That is what our quarrel is with.

After all, more Americans come to ourcountry every year than the entire population of Grenada—140,000 came by shiplast year, and I'm not talking about thosewho came for stay-overs.So that is not our quarrel and we want to

make that clear. Because imperialism hasbeen doing its best to try to sow all sorts ofconfusion in that area.

Likewise, when you come to the questionof the Blacks and other oppressed minorities in America, obviously we have aparticularly close feeling, given our owncultural background and our own history.There is a very close sense of culturalidentity, which the people of Grenadaautomatically feel for American Blacksand which we have no doubt is reciprocated by the American Black community.Because our own struggle is internation

alist, we have over the years been givingour fullest support to all internationalcauses that demand such support. We seethat as our internationalist duty.

Since the revolution, we have continuedin that vein. We were the first country inthe Western Hemisphere to recognize thePolisario Front; the second country in theworld to recognize the provisional junta inNicaragua on May 23 last year, fully threeweeks before they finally won their victory; our open and consistent support tothe PLO, for Puerto Rican independence,and so forth. That is our position.And therefore we see the importance of

progressive forces worldwide joining together. We see that struggle as being onestruggle, indivisible. And what happens inGrenada, we recognize its importance forall struggles around the world. And therefore we're willing to support any of thestruggles around the world. And we feelthat on that basis, the progressive forcesand democratic forces in America ought togive their support to our revolution also.

We certainly place a great deal of importance on the activity, the potential, and thepossibilities for the American working-class movement. Both in terms of mobiliz

ing and organizing to stop any draftmovement, and in terms of the potential ofdoing mortal damage to the internationalcapitalist and imperialist system fromwithin the belly of the main imperialistpower on earth.

And thirdly, in terms of the great possibilities for expressing solidarity with therevolutionary struggles around the world.Something they have done before and cando again. For example, mobilizing andorganizing themselves to refuse to loadships heading for particular areas.So, our basic message would he to get

across this sense: That what we are struggling against is the system of imperialism.That we have the greatest respect for the

people of America. That we feel a particularly close affinity to American Blacks andother oppressed minorities, to the working-class movement in America, toward progressive forces in America. That we certainly are willing to extend our solidaritywith them in their struggles, and we cer-

We place a great importanceon the activity, potential, andpossibilities for the Americanworking-class movement. . .

tainly would hope that they would extendtheir own solidarity to us in our struggle.Finally, our message would be: We would

love to see them. We believe that it is veryimportant that instead of reading thepropaganda that is being circulated inAmerica, they should come out to Grenada,come out to Cuba, come out to Nicaragua,and see for themselves. So that they canunderstand what is happening and as aresult he in a better position to appreciatewhat is going on in this part of the world.Let me add just one final thing. That is

to say that we, without intending to hedisrespectful, would very strongly recommend to the Black movement in America

the importance of developing the firmestand closest links with the white working-class movement and the white progressivemovement. Our feeling certainly is that inorder to win that struggle inside of America, it's extremely important that all progressive forces get together and wage aconsistent fight against the real enemy.Don't spend time fighting each other,debating trivialities. That's something Ithink is important and that I would like toget across in the message. □

Clark, Bishop, and Pulley during interview Diane Wang/IP-l

August 4, 1980

How Salvadoran Groups View Struggle

Mexican journalist Mario Men^ndezRodriguez conducted some ninety hours ofinterviews with underground leaders ofthree of the organizations fighting againstEl Salvador's ruling military/ChristianDemocratic junta earlier this year. Thoseinterviews were the basis for a seventeen

part series of articles on Salvadoran leftistgroups that was printed in the CubanEnglish-language weekly Granma betweenMarch 16 and June 15, 1980.Because of the importance of the revolu

tionary struggle in El Salvador, Intercontinental Press/Inprecor has been summarizing the Men6ndez series to provide ourreaders with a better idea of the views and

perspectives of leaders of the three organizations Men§ndez interviewed.

The first IP/I article dealt with the

views of the Farabundo Marti People'sLiberation Forces (FPL) and the secondwith the Communist Party of El Salvador.This article examines the views of the

People's Revolutionary Army-Party of theSalvadoran Revolution (ERP-PRS).Men§ndez's interviews with the ERP-

PRS took place on March 6 and March 7,and were printed in the May 18 weeklyGranma.

The People's Revolutionary Army (ERP)was founded in 1971. According to theERP's top leader Joaquin Villalobos, "theERP came into being in answer to the needto create and organize the armed apparatuses that would make it possible to carryout new forms of struggle in the Salvadoran revolutionary process. . . ."

Villalobos adds that initially "the organization was chaotic, comprised as it was ofdifferent groups with different approachesto strategy but sharing the desire to promote armed struggle in El Salvador."In 1975, the ERP began the process of

building a political party, which culminated in the first congress of the Party ofthe Salvadoran Revolution (PRS) in 1977.Villalobos is the general secretary of thePRS as well as being a leader of the ERP.The early history of the ERP was very

stormy, to say the least. According toMen^ndez, that early period was marked

By Will Reissner

3.The People's Revolutionary Army-Party of the Salvadoran Revolution

activity or problem and reflected a profound underestimation, even scorn, for therevolutionary movement of the Salvadoranmasses, channeled through different methods, forms and means of struggle."That "militarism . . . not only isolated

the ERP from the people but from the verydevelopment of the political process in ElSalvador," Menfedez states. "Because itexpected a rapid denouement of classcontradictions and spent its time preparing the instruments of war, the ERP wasunable to influence the forces that were

developing in the critical phases of thesocial movement."

When factional differences within the

organization developed on how to proceed,these differences too were handled "mil

itarily." Men6ndez notes that there were"summary executions to settle politicalcontradictions," as a result of which "prestigious members of the ERP were slain,including poet Roque Dalton Garcia," whowas killed in May 1975. Roque Dalton hadbeen a leader of the Communist Party andwas a well-known intellectual.

The present leadership of the ERP-PRSblames the internal situation in that period on Sebastidn Urquilla, who was thenits top leader. As a result of the innerturmoil, there were a number of splits inthe ERP. The largest led to the formationof another of the principal organizationsnow fighting El Salvador's ruling junta,the National Resistance, whose fightingorganization is the Armed Forces of National Resistance (FARN).

According to Octavio Ponce, member ofthe PRS Political Commission and of the

ERP General Staff, correcting the excessive militarism in the organization was"very difficult and bitter. Recovery," hestates, "has meant big sacrifices, but theresults are there to be seen today." Poncewas a founding member of the ERP.The ERP came, through experience, to

realize that it had to link up with the massmovement and to work for unity with theother organizations fighting for socialchange in El Salvador.In Villalobo's words, in the process of

the struggle, "the guerrilla cadres reflect,mature, process their experience and start

by "pragmatism, nearsightedness, the to acquire a political vision requiring linksthirst for power and individual control, with the masses and a structure thatand militarism," all of which had "tragic permits suitable political work. . . . Thus,consequences." greater application of experiences led us onMen6ndez maintains that the ERP's the course of building a Party. . . ."

initial line viewed military victory over the By the time of the first congress of thedictatorship as a short-term perspective. Party of the Salvadoran Revolution, inThat line, he argues, "generated military 1977, "serious discussion" was possibleconceptions and solutions for every type of and "the eradication of militarism from

824

the organization" had been achieved, according to Villalobos.Today the ERP-PRS is the leading force

behind one of the largest mass organizations in El Salvador, the February 28People's Leagues (LP-28), which takes itsname from a massacre carried out by thegovernment of Gen. Carlos HumbertoRomero on February 28, 1977.

ERP-PRS Strategy Today

"Our strategy," says Joaquin Villalobos,"is that of the people's revolutionary war.Imperialism is the fundamental strategicenemy, in alliance with the national oligarchy and the most reactionary sectors ofthe army."To understand the ERP-PRS strategy,

Villalobos stresses, it is important to bearin mind "that we arrived on the Salvado

ran scene during a profound economic andpolitical crisis in Central America," at atime when imperialism was "weakening."This situation, he maintains, "created

the conditions to proceed from guerrillawarfare and building an army . .. to afundamental phase of the struggle forpower . . . which we see in the short emdmedium term."

On a number of occasions Villalobos

repeats the importance of the fact that theincreased weakness of imperialism is abasic strategic factor in the strugglethroughout Central America.He argues that "the present crisis of the

economic and political structures of Central America is manifested at a time in

which imperialism, in our opinion, is fighting a defensive battle. . . ." Pointing tothe Vietnamese victory over U.S. imperialism as "the greatest of all victories, forcingimperialist policy to retreat, placing imperialism in a situation of weakness," Villalobos adds that the victory of "the peopleof Vietnam made possible the victory ofthe Nicaraguan people and the futurevictories of the Salvadoran and Central

American revolution."

Need for Left-Wing Unity

Given the ERP-PRS's view of the proximity of the struggle for power, it sees,along with other organizations fightingthe junta, a pressing need for "unity of allthe left-wing forces," says Villalobos.He adds that since the prospect for

taking power is opening up at this time"not only for the Salvadoran revolution butfor the Central American revolution, andgiven the fact, in addition, that this prospect exists for the anti-imperialist forces inLatin America as a whole, in the concrete

Intercontinental Press

reality of the Salvadoran situation failureto achieve the left-wing unity that wouldmean a new victory for the Latin American revolution would amount to a betrayalof the interests of that revolution. . .

Villalobos returned to this point to arguethat "the unity of the revolutionary anddemocratic organizations is a vital necessity of this historic moment, when . . . theSalvadoran oligarchy and its reactionaryforces, in alliance with imperialism, aregoing on the defensive."At this point," Villalobos states, "the

idea isn't to wage a debate on politicallines, since when it comes to concretereality, we are all acting in unison for thesame goals and we are all under attack bythe forces led by imperialism, and theymake no distinction between one revolu

tionary political-military organization £indanother. . . ."

On the question of how unity is to beachieved, Villalobos expressed very strongviews. He stressed that "we are not partyto the traditional concept of unity, that is,of organic unity established overnight,which tries to overlook the different styles,concepts, language, etc. that characterizeeach revolutionary organization."We look upon unity as a process built

up from permanent coordination. . . . Andby coordination we mean genuine, frankcoordination, which has the Salvadoranrevolution as its main goal."He adds, however, that "the process to

which we refer ought not take a year; itcould take just a few months." He pointsout that "contacts at the grass-roots levelbetween different revolutionary organizations and contacts in implementing ourlines indicate that if coordination is estab

lished the organizations will be broughttogether fast."According to Villalobos, this process can

develop quickly because "today therearen't any political differences among therevolutionary organizations, but subjectivism almost forces them into being, because different organizations are involved."

In Villalobos's view, "as for the medium-term objectives, we believe they are theseune for all the forces that make up thevanguard of the Salvadoran revolution; thetaking of power and the establishment of apopular democratic government leadingtoward socialism," that is "a governmentthat would be defined by all the revolutionary forces in alliance with the most advanced democratic sectors."

Attitude toward Ruling Junta

On October 15, 1979, Gen. Carlos Hum-berto Romero was overthrown in a coupthat had the backing of the U.S. government. The new junta that came to powerclaimed to favor reforms, and it invitedcivilian groups to take part in the government.

In response to the coup, the ERP-PRSorganized an insurrection on October 16.

"For 12 hours," says Joaquln Villalobos,"and in some cases for longer, we militarily occupied several villages, wherelengthy combats took place, and in thatfighting we were supported by the localpopulation."

They took this action, Villalobos states,"because the overthrow of Romero was an

imperialist maneuver, and this has beenfully demonstrated, to deceive the Salva-

Literature Available

Ten of the articles in the Granma

series we have been summarizing areavailable in pamphlet form, for thoseinterested in further reading on thepositions of the Farabundo Mart! People's Liberation Forces. The pamphlet.General Insurrection in the Making, isavailable for 75 cents firom the U.S.Friends of the Salvadorean Revolution.

Other pamphlets available from thesame group include: U.S. Involvementin El Salvador, 1947-80, 75 cents; Platform for a Democratic RevolutionaryGovernment, 50 cents; and InterviewWith a Leader of the Solidarity Bloc ofthe BPR, 75 cents.

There is a 25 percent discount onorders of 10 or more copies. Checksshould be made out to "El Salvador;People in Struggle." Orders should besent to the U.S. Friends of the Salvado

rean Revolution, P.O. Box 40874, SanFrancisco, California 94140.

doran people. Had it become consolidated, itwould have meant a defeat, of a temporarynature to be sure, but all the same a defeatfor a revolutionary alternative."The junta was, however, able to attract a

number of civilian forces to cooperate,including the Christian Democratic Partyand the Communist Party, which hadmembers in the cabinet. This presented theERP-PRS with the problem of explainingto the masses that the junta was essentially a creation of the military, despite thepresence of some reformist civilian forcesin the cabinet.

"If we had spoken out on the innercontradictions in the junta," the ERP-PRSleader explains, "we would have confusedthe masses." He stresses that "we couldn't

adopt a stance on the basis of the intentions of the civilian personalities, wholacked decision-making power and wereunable to apply reforms and changes inpractice. . . . And so, regardless of thegood intentions of the personalities belonging to that first ruling junta, our policyconsisted of applying constant pressure sothat the military sectors that were really

running the government would be forced totake up the defense of the true scheme ofimperialism, the oligarchy and their allies. . . ."

The pressure exerted upon the junta,says Villedobos, speeded up its crisis andthe resignation of most of the civilianforces in it in January 1980. "The democratic officials resigned, and the maneuvers of the enemies of the people wereexposed. Now, the alliance between themilitary and the [remaining] ChristianDemocrats faces many political disadvantages, including a low level of credibilityand very few possibilities for resolvingproblems. . . ."The present military/Christian Demo

cratic junta acts on the following premise,says Villalobos; "promise lots of reforms,make a minimum of concessions and go allout in repressing the people."

Role of Women

"Since the very inception of our organization, the participation of women hasbeen highly significant" the ERP-PRSleader remarked. "Thirty percent of ourCentral Committee are women, and onewoman comrade is a member of the PRS

Political Commission. In our cells,women's participation as political andmilitary cadres is notable."He adds that "this participation is not

the result of a line established by the Partyleadership but is the reflection of a complex political process involving the massesof the Salvadoran people. ... In the Salvadoran countryside, women cadres arepractically strategic, irreplaceable pillars.And no kind of differentiation is estab

lished in regard to the work women takeon. . . ."

According to Villalobos, "in our country,among the forces acting at the center ofthis society in conflict, the Church hasplayed one of the most important andcourageous roles. The revolutionary organizations are not unaware of the role playedby the democratic sectors that seek arevolutionary solution to the crisis of Salvadoran society. Within those broad socialforces, the Catholic Church plays a keyrole.

"And in this regard," Villalobos continued, "it should be pointed out that thegrass-roots level of the Salvadoran Churchis closely linked with the popular sectors."On the international arena, Villalobos

said, "We regard all the revolutionaryforces of Latin America, especially in theCentral American area, and most especially the Cuban Revolution, as fundamental strategic allies of the Salvadoran revolution.

"In defining ourselves as enemies of U.S.imperialism we also identify with the Non-Aligned Movement, with the struggle ofthe Palestinian people and of the liberation movements of the African peoples. Ina word, we identify with the cause of allthe oppressed and exploited peoples." □

August 4, 1980

Events in South Korea Have Broad Impact

The Changing Face of Japanese PollticsBy Goro Hayashi

TOKYO—The lower house of the Diet

(parliament) passed a vote of no-confidence against the Liberal DemocraticParty (LDP) government of Prime MinisterMasayoshi Ohira on May 16. The no-confidence motion was submitted by the Socialist Party (SP) and supported by all theopposition parties. It came as a surprisewhen some 70 members of the LDP stayedaway from the chamber, allowing themotion to pass by 243 votes for to 187against. (The LDP had 257 deputies in thelower house.)Among those boycotting the session

were former prime ministers Takeo Fu-kuda and Takeo Miki. They were expressingtheir dissatisfaction with Ohira's indeci

sive attitude toward recent political scandals, and have formed the "RenovationLeague of the LDP." In fact, the LDP isnow faced with a de facto split. The split inthe LDP shows that there is no faction in

the party capable of solving the structuralcrisis of bourgeois rule.This was the first time in twenty-seven

years that a no-confidence vote passed.Instead of resigning, the government decided to dissolve the House of Representatives (the lower house). A general electionwas announced for June 22. (The electionfor the upper house, which was originallyscheduled for June 29, was also moved toJune 22.)

Dissatisfaction with the LDP's rule has

been increasing due to a succession ofscandals involving corruption in government and business circles, the rising costof living, uneasiness about job security,and so on. Also, the LDP government isincreasing arms spending within theframework of the U.S-Japan SecurityTreaty, which is a challenge to the deeppacifism of the masses. Finally, a drasticrationalization in governmental officesand public enterprises in the name of"normalization of finances," and attackson wages are arousing anger among broadlayers of the population.

After the last general election in November 1979, in which the LDP lost amajority for the first time in thirty years(they managed to keep a parliamentarymajority by recognizing several independents after the election) the infightingwithin the LDP got worse. The factionheaded by Fukuda and Miki openly opposed the reelection of Ohira as primeminister, denouncing him for being responsible for the LDP's electoral setback.

These divisions in the LDP resulted in

the passage of the no-confidence motion.At the same time, it is no accident that

the collapse of the LDP government has

Japanese Election Resultsthe results of the June 22 general election In Japan surprised everyone. Although it

was deeply split and in the midst of a severe crisis, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP)won 284 out of 611 seats in the tower house—a gain of 27 seats.The New Liberal Club (NLC), which split from the LDP after the 1976 Lockheed

payoffs scandal, also did quite well, even though it had also been going through a deepinternal crisis. It went from four seats to twelve, tripling its representation.The Buddhist Komeito (Clean Government Party), which represents the urban petty

bourgeoisie and defines itself as "middle of the road," lost the most, going from fifty-eight to thirty-three seats.The Democratic Socialist Party (DSP), the right wing of the Japanese Social

Democracy, lost slightly, going from thirty-six to thirty-two seats. The Sociaiist Party(SP) won ten seats as compared to the seven it had won in the October 1979 generalelection.

Although the Communist Party (CP) lost parliamentary seats, its percentage of thevote remained stable, at slightly over 10 percent of the total.The electoral victory of the LDP and NCL came after the unexpected death of Prime

Minister Masayoshi Ohira in the midst of the election campaign. A Mianichi Shimbunnational opinion poll conducted before Ohira's death found that public support for theOhira cabinet was at a new low—21 percent. More Important, opposition had jumped 15percentage points, to 46 percent compared with a similar poll taken in September 1979.Ohira's death certainly had a definite impact, and provoked a conservative reaction

among large layers of the petty bourgeoisie. But the petty-bourgeois iayers were alsoreacting to the very obvious political crisis revealed by the vote of no-confidence in thegovernment and the dissolution of the lower house only eight months after the previousgeneral election, and to the dramatic developments in South Korea following theuprising by the people of Kwangju and the military's bloody repression.The response of the petty-bourgeois masses was fear. They fell back on political

conservatism in the face of a situation that was rapidly evolving toward a domestic andinternationai crisis. They sought some illusory political stability.During the October 1979 elections, these same petty-bourgeois layers gave a high

vote to the Komeito, expressing their discontent and skepticism toward the policies ofthe conservative and corrupt bourgeoisie. Within ten months, there was a completeal)Out-face in the voting pattern of the petty bourgeoisie. The LDP has gained anelectoral victory, but it is one that reflects the instability of its electoral base. Nothinghas been resolved in terms of the relationship of class forces, and the crisis of the LDPand the big bourgeoisie will continue.The accompanying article, which was written before the June 22 election and before

the death of Ohira, explains the background to the election and the situation within theworkers movement.

been accompanied by the crisis in SouthKorea. The crisis of the Japanese rulingclass and that of the South Korean mil

itary regime are inseparably linked. Thestruggle of the South Korean workers andpeasants against the heirs of the Parkregime is a serious blow to Japaneseimperialism, which has backed the SouthKorean military regime in order to main

tain its political and economic hold in thatcountry. On the other hand, the strugglesof the Japanese people against the capitalist LDP government are also hitting theSouth Korean regime by undercutting itsbase of support from abroad and by encouraging the democratic movement of the

Korean masses.

In this situation, many workers, students, leftist groups, and Christians inJapan are taking part in an emergencycampaign for the defense of the struggle inSouth Korea. Almost every day there aredemonstrations, rallies, and picket lines atthe South Korean embassy, and Koreanresidents in Japan are in the forefront ofthis campaign.

LDP Weathers 1974-76 Crisis

The collapse of the LDP governmentbegan with the governmental crisis of1974-76. Instability in East Asia after thedefeat of U.S. imperialism in Vietnam

Intercontinental Press

caused difficulties for the Japanese rulingclass. At the same time, the "oil shock" hitthe Japanese economy hard, highlightingthe end of Japan's rapid economic growthin the post-World War II period.Also, the combativity of the working

class was increasing. The high point ofthis combativity was seen in the eight-daystrike of public workers, including railwayworkers, in November 1975. Finally, thedisclosure of the Lockheed scandal in 1976,which involved former Prime Minister

Kakuei Tanaka, brought the LDP government to the brink of collapse.But this crisis of 1974-76 did not lead

directly to the collapse of the government.Several factors intervened to prevent this.

Internationally, detente with Chinahelped moderate the effects of U.S. imperialism's defeat. Since the diplomatic normalization between China and Japan in1972, the Chinese leaders have been insisting more and more that the U.S.-JapanSecurity Treaty and the strengthening ofJapan's military forces are necessary forstabilizing the status quo in Asia.The sudden diplomatic shift by the Chi

nese leaders, toward encouraging a greaterJapanese military role in Asia, causedconsternation among Japanese workers,who had been fighting against movestoward capitalist militarization. Reformistleaders, using the prestige of the Chineserevolution and the pretext of Peking'sdiplomatic shift, began to abandon anti-imperialist struggles, and to change theirstance toward the U.S.-Japan SecurityTreaty and the Japanese military establishment.

The Socialist Party and the leaders ofSohyo (the General Council of JapaneseTrade Unions) revealed their inability tomobilize the workers against the LDPgovernment as they moved openly towardclass collaboration, calling on the workersto restrain their wage demands. The SocialDemocratic leaders stepped up their attacks against struggles on the shop-floorlevel, afraid that the militancy of the rankand file would go beyond their control.Their traditional policy of using the combativity of the masses to pressure thecapitalists for tiny concessions had lost itsmaterial basis, since the rulers refused togrant such concessions with the Japaneseeconomy no longer in a period of rapidgrowth.The Communist Party aided this be

trayal by its sectarian attitude toward anymilitant mass movement and its adaptation to the anti-working-class sentiment ofthe petty bourgeoisie. The CP launched avery antagonistic campaign against theBurakumin (outcasts similar to the untouchables in India) liberation movement.It also carried out a reactionary campaignurging teachers and other governmentoffice workers not to strike.

Fukuda's Harsh Policy Breeds Resistance

The Fukuda government, which replacedthe Miki government in late 1976, stepped

up the offensive against working people.Fukuda's policy was more openly aggressive than that of Miki, who made someconcessions to the demands of the workers

and peasants.But Miki's policy only postponed the

crisis. Fukuda tried to reunite the political

'tS la

OHIRA: He led LDP to relative defeat in

October 1979, but after his death in June,

the LDP made electoral gains.

forces of the bourgeoisie and to repress anyindependent movement of the masses. Hesucceeded in minimizing resistance fromthe reformist apparatus.Faced with the crisis of the capitalist

economy and with the uncompromisingattitude of the government, the reformistleaders sought to avoid any class confrontation. Leaders of the Sohyo put forwardthe idea of a coalition goverment thatwould include the proimperialist Democratic Socialist Party (DSP) and the Ko-meito (a petty-bourgeois, Buddhist formation), but would exclude the CP.The Sohyo leaders also began to cooper

ate with the government's harsh rationalization in the public sector, especially in theJapan National Railway, in hopes of demonstrating their reliability to the capitalists.

These initiatives by the Sohyo leaderstriggered a drastic rearrangement of forceson the political arena and in the tradeunions. The moves of the Sohyo leadersmet with resistance even in the SP.

At the same time, an active independentcurrent developed in the SP. This currentgrew out of the Sanrizuka struggle(against Narita Airport), struggles againstthe layoffs of workers in the public sector,and from some very combative strikes insmaller enterprises, especially in the metalindustry.This independent current is centered

around Labor Bulletin, which is publishedtwice a month and has nearly 10,000readers. The editorial board of this bulletin

includes some prominent former Sohyoleaders. It has been calling for a workersmovement on a class-struggle basis, andfor coordination of struggles on a nationalas well as on a district level. Activists

around this bulletin are active in the

Sanrizuka struggle, in the solidarity cam

paigns with Korea and Vietnam, and alsoin the antinuclear movement.

Just after taking office, Fukuda began tospeed up the opening of Narita Airport,which had been suspended many timesbecause of the uncompromising struggle ofthe farmers (whose land was taken) andtheir supporters. Fukuda hoped to reinforce his authority by smashing this outstanding example of militancy by theworkers and peasants. But his plans metwith unexpected results.On March 26, 1978, militants led by the

Japan Revolutionary Communist League(JRCL, Japanese section of the FourthInternational) and other leftist organizations rushed into the airport and occupiedthe control tower for several hours, forcing

Fukuda to again postpone the opening.This spectacular action was an encour

agement for various layers of the population and caused consternation within the

government and spread dissension withinthe LDP.

Despite harsh repression of the Naritastruggle and reprisals, including the firingof arrested workers from their jobs, and

despite repression from the union bureaucrats, sympathy for such militant actionspread among rank-and-file workers.Indications of this were the massive

boycott against the atomic-powered shipMutsu; the struggle of the Chiba prefecturelocomotive workers against the transportation of fuel to Narita Airport; and thepostal workers' job action against the"Marusei Movement" (an attempt to organize workers behind management inorder to enforce discipline in the workplace and demobilize the workers).Another indication of this sympathy

was that a petition for the release of themilitants who took over the airport controltower, and who have been in jail sincethen, gathered more than 30,000 signatures in only two or three months in late1979.

Fukuda also provoked the anger of theworking class when he called for an Emergency Measures Law that would restrictcivil liberties.

Criticism of the Fukuda leadership began to be expressed openly in the LDPitself. This led to Fukuda's replacement byOhira, who was backed by former PrimeMinister Tanaka, in December 1978.

Realignment in the Trade Unions

Under Ohira, however, the disorienta-tion in the LDP continued to deepen, andthe realignment of political and trade-union forces also proceeded.

The opposition parties continued to raisetheir proposal for a coalition government,with the DSP and the Komeito strengthening their antilabor stance in preparationfor taking part in such a government. TheKomeito and the DSP also pressed theleaders of the SP and Sohyo to cut theirties with the CP as proof of their willingness to help in stabilizing capitalist rule.The SP, for its part, moved closer to the

August 4, 1980

DSP and the Komeito. In accordance with

this process, a move toward reunificationof the trade unions was undertaken.

There are two major national trade-union federations in Japan. One is Sohyo,which is identified with the SP, but includes some CP-led unions. Sohyo alsoincludes the Japan Federation of Iron andSteel Industry Workers Union, which participates in the International Metalworkers Federation-Japanese Committee (IMF-JC, a proimperialist organization). Theother main union federation is Domei

(Japanese Confederation of Labor Unions), which is led by the DSP.

During the 1960s, Domei and the IMF-JC achieved a strong hold on major unionsin the private sector by carrying out, hand-in-hand with the employers, an all-outattack on the most militant workers. Since

the late 1960s, there have been very violentconfrontations between militant workers

in Sohyo and the scabs of Domei.Divisions in many unions were provoked

by Domei, but it failed to gain a majorityof the public sector workers. Young workers in the National Council of the Govern

ment Enterprise Workers Union (GEWU)beat back the harsh attacks from the

government and Domei in the late 1960sand early 1970s, thus setting hack theattempt to unify the trade unions on a pro-imperialist basis.But since the late 1970s, the leaders

within Sohyo have taken the initiative inthe reunification effort. Leaders of the

telephone and telegraph workers, who hadbeen the main advocates of SP-DSP-

Komeito collaboration, tried to cooperatewith the government's rationalizationplans and to strengthen their bureaucraticcontrol over the workers, so as to pave theway for reunification. Leaders of the National Railway Union also tried hard tocollaborate with management.Rationalization of the pubhc sector

which would include tens of thousands of

dismissals, has become one of the mostpressing needs of the capitalist government because of huge financial deficits.Leaders of the rail union are trying toplacate the antiunion sentiments of petty-bourgeois layers by supporting "reasonable" rationalization. At the same time,they want to show their "responsibility,"and their fitness for partnership in thegovernment to the capitalist class by taking the initiative in the reunification of thetrade unions, as well as in the realignmentof political forces.But the reunification process is facing a

lot of difficulties. One problem is theconflicting interests of the separate unionbureaucracies. Domei and the IMF-JC insist

on excluding any combative unions fromthe reunification process.The CP, for its part, responded to the

turn to the right by the leaders of Sohyo ina very sectarian way. They are calling fora third national federation, but only a fewCP-led unions responded to this call. Lead-

Demonstration protesting construction of Narlta Airport.

ers of Sohyo, without concealing theirintention to expel unions following theCP's line, have denounced the CP's call asa splitting move.Recently, there was a sharp confronta

tion between leaders of the Tokyo TeachersUnion (headed by the CP) and leaders ofthe Japan Teachers Union (headed by theSP) over the participation of the former ina new "national federation" called for bythe CP. That confrontation led to a split inthe Tokyo Teachers Union.The other difficulty is that there is still

strong resistance to this reunificationamong rank-and-file militants, and evenamong some leaders of Sohyo and ofunions who maintain a class-struggle orientation. As a result, open conflict hasbroken out among the tendencies in theGEWU.

The class-struggle left should intervenein this conflict in a united way. In Miyagiand Fukushima prefectures in Tohokudistrict, in northern Japan, several telephone and telegraph workers are nowlaunching a fight against bureaucraticcontrol. They were expelled fi-om theirunion because they insisted on working-class unity, participating in the Sanrizukastruggle and antirationalization strugglesdespite the opposition of the bureaucrats.They are showing that this reunificationscheme would only result in a tighteningof bureaucratic control over the activities

of rank-and-file workers.

Political Perspectives for Capitalists

One of the main issues in the last elec

tion was a tax increase proposed by Ohira.The capitalists have been faced with aswelling financial deficit, allegedly causedby the price of rice (which is maintainedby the government), government outlaysfor the national health insurance system,and the deficit of the National Railway.The capitalists have been trying to over

come this situation by victimizing theworkers and farmers, as well as the urbanpetty bourgeoisie. The relative defeat of theLDP in the November 1979 elections shows

that it is losing support fi:om petty-bourgeois layers in both urban and rural areas.The SP is trying hard to show the

capitalists that it can be relied on as apartner in the government. It has abandoned its policy urging a coalition of allopposition parties, including the CP. Inaddition, SP Chairperson Asukata recentlyproposed that his party "suspend" itsopposition to the U.S.-Japan SecurityTreaty and to the Japanese armed forcesin order to make it easier to build a firm

SP-DSP-Komeito coalition.

But the DSP responded coolly to thisproposal. It maintains that the SP shouldnot only "suspend" its opposition, hutrenounce it completely. On the other hand,there is still strong resistance to the rightturn in the ranks of the SP itself.

Neither can the bourgeoisie rely on theDSP and the Komeito. The DSP consist

ently defends the interests of the capitalists, especially on the issue of militaryspending, and it often takes an evenstronger procapitalist stance than the LDP.But its influence is limited to the best-paidlayers of workers in the biggest companies,as in auto, metal industries, and shipyards. Even in those sectors, resistance isdeveloping among the workers, as wasshown in a long and widely supportedstrike at Sasebo Heavy Industry (SSK)early this year.

It is obvious that the DSP doesn't have

the ability to contain the combativity ofthe workers, especially those in the publicsector and in small private companies. Itsantilabor, proimperialist policy is too wellknown.

As for the Komeito, its religious natureprevents its expansion. It has played animportant role in dividing the urban petty

Intercontinental Press

bourgeoisie from the working class and inforcing the SP to stop cooperating with theCP, but it has little influence in the tradeunions.

Opportunity For Revolutionaries

Thus, the advent of a period of coalitiongovernments also means the beginning ofreal class confrontations. And the dynamics of this confrontation will tear apartreformist parties and reformist trade-unionleaderships. In other words, a really enormous opportunity is now opening up forrevolutionaries.

In this situation, the most urgent needfor working people is to build a visiblealternative to the capitalist governmentand to any "moderate" or "moderate-conservative" cosdition.

The JRCL is calling for a workers andpeasants government based on a unitedfront of the working class and an allianceof the workers and peasants. A step toward that is to build a united front of the

class-struggle left, a front which now exists in embryonic form around the Sanriz-uka struggle and Labor Bulletin. Rightnow, this current should intervene activelyin the ongoing realignment in the trade-union movement.

Although the last six years have seendefeats for the struggles of workers forhigher wages, and attacks on trade-unionrights have been increasing, along withunemployment, the relationship of forcesis not favorable for the bourgeoisie. Thecurrent crisis of the bourgeoisie is closelylinked to the overall crisis of imperialistrule in Asia. What is at stake is the

structural reorganization of the Japanesestate apparatus in order to adapt to thisdrastic change in the international situation.

The reformist leaders of the SP and CP

are seeking to defend the ruling class'snational interest. They are currently rallying to the nationalistic, anti-Soviet campaign launched by the bourgeoisie. As aresult, they cannot fight back effectivelyagainst the militarization drive, or againstattacks on wages, inflation, and violationsof the basic rights of the people in thename of the crisis facing the nation.The capitalists are searching for a way

to stabilize the situation in East Asia to

minimize the effects of the turmoil in West

Asia. They are relying on the reactionaryforeign policy of the Chinese leadershipand the U.S.-Japanese-Chinese peacefulcoexistence deal to turn back the "Soviet

threat." But the struggles of the EastAsian peoples, especially in Korea, arechallenging this status quo.In view of this, a united front of the

class-struggle left should be based first ofall on internationalism and an uncompromising fight against the counterrevolutionary alliance of the imperialists andtheir allies.

Now that the reformist leaders have

abandoned any effective struggle agednstthe capitalist government, it is the respon

sibility of the militant forces of the class-struggle left to lead struggles for the defense of living standards, and for political,economic, and trade-union rights.The JRCL is calling for a united front

around three major tasks: solidarity withthe Korean people and in opposition to theU.S.-Japan Security Treaty and the Japa

nese military; for the final victory of theanti-Narita-Airport movement (defeatingthe plan to build a second runway and fuelpipeline, thus forcing the airport authorityto finally abandon the airport); and fordefense of the living standard of the toiling masses faced with the capitalists'inflation and austerity policies. □

Palestinian Political Prisoners Die From Mistreatment

An Example of Israeli 'Humanism'Two Palestinian political prisoners—All

Mohammed Shehadeh el-Jafari, and Kas-sem Mohammed Halawi—are dead.

Jafari and Halawi were among seventy-six Palestinian prisoners in the newlyopened Nafha Prison who began a hungerstrike July 14 to protest the inhumanconditions there. The hunger strikers protested that the prison—in the middle of theNegev Desert—had cells with solid metaldoors and only narrow slits for windows.

In addition to the poor ventilation, thecells are overcrowded, the prisoners areforced to eat and sleep on the floor, theyare allowed only two hours of exercise aday, and they are given inadequate medical care and subjected to frequent terms ofsolitary confinement.

Israeli prison authorities tried to breakthe hunger strike by adding the torture offorced-feeding to the more routine forms ofbrutality practiced against Palestinian inmates.

At first, following Jafari's death on July22, Israeli officials denied that he had beenforce-fed. But following the death of Halawi on July 24, a prison services officialexplained that the force-feeding was anexample of "Jewish humanism," since itwas meant to prevent the death of thehunger strikers. The official did not address the question of what kind of conditions would lead people to prefer death bystarvation.

In a statement released by attorneyLea Tsemel, one of the hunger strikers whohad been force-fed charged that guardsand nurses at Ramie prison (where twenty-six of the strikers were transferred) beathim repeatedly when he refused to eat, andthen forced a rubber tube from an enemabag down his throat. A salt water solutionwas forced down the tube.

"It was like drinking the Dead Sea,"Yaacoub Dawani testified. He said that theliquid was forced into his lungs. Jafari andHalawi died from pneumonia as a result ofthe liquid forced into their lungs.

The customary brutality of the Israeliprison authorities has received furtherencouragement from Prime Minister Mena-chem Begin's policy of provocation andrepression against the Palestinian popula

tion as a whole. On July 23, twenty-sixpeople demonstrating in support of thehunger strikers were arrested in East Jerusalem.

The death of Jafari and Halawi, and theconditions they were protesting, are notjust the responsibility of a few sadists inthe Israeli prison administration. Like therepeated instances of torture being usedagainst Palestinian prisoners, these atrocities are the responsibility of the Zionistregime as a whole, including its highestcircles. □

Palestinian political prisoners in Israel.Zionist regime is responsible for latestdeaths.

August 4, 1980

For Unity In Struggle Against Imperialism

Iranian Socialists Explain Issues Facing Women

[The following article was published asthe editorial in the July 8 issue of Kargar,the weekly newspaper of the RevolutionaryWorkers Party of Iran. The translation ishy Intercontinental Press/Inprecor.]

In view of the importance of the Revolutionary Council's decree making it illegalfor women not to wear Islamic dress in

government offices, and given the propaganda offensive the imperialist forces havelaunched around this question, we decidedto publish the following interview withMahsa Hashemi, one of the leaders of theRevolutionary Workers Party in this area.Both Kargar and Mahsa Hashemi

wanted to do a more extensive interview

on this subject. But time factors did notpermit. The following is a shortened text ofthe interview.

Question. Would you explain the viewsof the Revolutionary Workers Party on thestruggle against the state bureaucracy andon the Revolutionary Council's order imposing Islamic dress on women in government offices'?

Answer. In Iran, this question has beenposed in an unclear way. So, it has to beanalyzed step by step. For a start, wecannot understand this development hybasing ourselves on the headlines andarticles in the Iranian capitalist newspapers.

For example, the articles in Jomhuri-yeEslami [Islamic Republic—the newspaperof the Islamic Republican Party] and Ette-la'at have spread confusion about what isinvolved in this question.The basic thing is that the demands of

women, which were blocked under thePahlavi regime, cannot be won separatelyfrom the ongoing anti-imperialist struggle.One of the first things that is necessary

to win these demands is unity on the partof women. There is no force that can givewomen their rights. The power to achievethese demands lies in the hands of women

themselves. And the effect of the confusion

created in the last few days has beenprecisely to sow disunity. So, the problemof restoring and strengthening the unity ofwomen must he our starting point.

The kind of newspaper articles mentioned above are consciously designed toundermine and destroy the unity of womenin the struggle against imperialism. Andwe women must realize this.

Q. Could you explain more what youmean about these newspaper reports?

A. Take the reports in Jomhuri-ye Es

lami, for instance. After the struggleagainst the state bureaucracy started up,the need was to educate the masses of

Muslim and revolutionary people about it.But instead of doing this, Jomhuri-yeEslami devoted a lot of pages to pictures ofwomen not wearing Islamic dress. And thewriting that went along with them was ofa very peculiar type, unworthy of therevolution. The writer of these captions,who was certainly a man, tried in theworst way to equate not wearing Islamicdress with shamelessness.

Also notable, in this respect, were theheadlines in Jomhuri-ye Eslami a few daysago, which proclaimed, "A Thousand Ash-raf Women Demonstrate."' There is no

reason to be astonished that seventeen

months after the victory of the revolution,the Ashraf set and the capitalists arehanging on in this society the way theyare. And Jomhuri-ye Eslami gave us freshfood for thought about that.But Ashrafism had nothing to do with

one's external appearance. The Ashrafpeople are capitalists and big landowners.By the way, how do we explain the factthat the president of the republic addressed these Ashraf women as "honora

ble ladies"?

By the way it dealt with this question,Jomhuri-ye Eslami was only trying tocover up another problem, the existence ofthe 500 capitalist and big landlord familieswho for an entire epoch have used thestate bureaucracy to serve their interests.The fight against these 500 families is avital matter for the revolution, not a fightagainst a "thousand Ashraf women."They all know that just because women

do not wear the Islamic dress that does not

mean that they are shameless. The propaganda in Jomhuri-ye Eslami is designedprecisely to sow divisions among womenby fostering this baseless notion. It is nottrue that women who do not wear Islamic

dress are Ashraf women.

A few months ago when the universitiesand high schools were open, we could seethat a minority of women in our society donot wear Islamic dress. We can see the

same thing now at the beginning and endof the factory shifts. This is still more truein the government offices.This question can he more easily under

stood if we view it in a broader context.

The great majority of women in the worldare just as concerned as men with the

1. Princess Ashraf, the sister of the shah and aleading opium smuggler under the Pahlavi regime. Under the shah, she was promoted as anexample of "modern womanhood" and the new"liberated" Iranian woman. She has become the

symbol of the corrupt, neocolonial ruling class.

problems of society, which are basicallyhound up with the struggle against imperialist oppression. The majority of womenon a world scale do not wear Islamic dress.

That does not mean that our women

should not wear it. But this fact does

indicate that the attempt to equate notwearing Islamic dress with the old regimeis baseless.

The women of Cuba have foughtshoulder to shoulder with the men againstimperialism for twenty-one years, withoutwearing Islamic dress. This, I repeat, doesnot prove that there is anything wrongwith wearing Islamic dress. It only indicates that in its propaganda, Jomhuri-yeEslami has put the cart before the horse. Itis not clear what Jomhuri-ye Eslami istrying to prove with this propaganda. If itscontention is that everywhere Islamicdress is not worn, the dark-age corruptionof the old regime still exists, why does itnot say this clearly?Why doesn't Jomhuri-ye Eslami print

pictures of the rich men and big businessmen with gold rings and Western-stylecoats and trousers who we see every daydriving fancy Mercedes Benz cars fromone side of town to the other? It is ob

viously not clear what is involved in thisquestion, there is more to it.

Q. Would you explain what lies behindthis question?

A. What lies at the root of it is the

inferior position of women in society. Thisis not just the heritage of the society thatdeveloped under Pahlavi and imperialistoppression. Its origins go hack further.You can see this in the sort of propagandathat appears in the capitalist newspapers.There is not a single instance of any of

these newspapers saying a word about theorigins of the question. If you glancethrough Jomhuri-ye Eslami, you see thathalf the pages have pictures of womenwearing Islamic dress, the other half havepictures of women who are not wearing it.Does this mean that there are two groupsat war with each other?

This is an example of the poisonouspropaganda that threatens the rights of allour sisters. (I will take up the nature of thedemonstration by women not wearingIslamic dress later on.)I want to raise a question. Women were

involved from the outset in the struggleagainst the dictatorship. They took part inthe first nationwide wave of demonstra

tions that launched the struggle. Most ofthem wore Islamic dress. Many womenwho did not wear Islamic dress also took

part in the struggle against the old regime.The point of this is obvious. Women were

drawn into the social struggle. They cameout of the political isolation, out of theisolation in the home, in which they werekept by the Pahlavi society. They joined inthe struggle against the dictatorship, wearing Islamic dress and Western dress both,although the majority wore Islamic dress.

Intercontinental Press

It is a simple enough thing to take picturesof that.

My question for Jomhuri-ye Eslami isthe following: Where is your program forthe women who wear Islamic dress? Whereis your program for fighting illiteracyamong women, since the overwhelmingmajority, more than 90 percent, are illiterate? Where is your bold revolutionaryprogram for setting up day-care centers forthe small children of working women whowear Islamic dress and who want to participate in the economic life of the society?Where is your program for solving theproblems of women, such as the need forsocial welfare provisions, housing, laun-deries, public cafeterias, equal pay forequal work, and equality in working conditions? Where is your immediate programfor involving women in the struggle? Whydon't you project programs instead offilling your pages with pictures? It's veryeasy to run pictures in the paper.The question we pose to such forces is:

What sort of program for liberating womenhave you put forward? Women have showntheir capacity for revolutionary initiativein fighting the old regime. This was anuprising against the whole historic systemof corruption and tyranny, one of whoseaspects was the inferior status to whichwomen were relegated. What does thisshow? That women fought against thissystem and came onto the political stagein the country.Instead of remaining confined to the role

of housewives, women proved themselvesas leaders and organizers of the country.But Jomhuri-ye Eslami has failed to respond to any one of the gigantic steps thatwomen have taken. It has not taken the

slightest step to present an action programto solve their problems.

Q. What do you think women should doabout this? What is your opinion of therecent women's demonstration outside the

premier's office?

A. As I said, the basic question is how toachieve unity among women. And usingthe term "Ashraf women" when a crowd of

oppressed women gather is no way to unitewomen. What is needed to unite women is

not a flood of statements, circulars, andorders from the various authorities and the

Revolutionary Council, which are alwaysissued by men. What is needed is action bythe women themselves.

You see, it is now the fourth day sincethe order imposing Islamic dress, and thewomen of Iran themselves have not yetsufficiently discussed this matter.

Let's look at these small demonstra

tions outside the premier's office in thecontext of the atmosphere that has arisenin the anti-imperialist struggle. It must besaid that these demonstrations were not

organized by anyone who represented allwomen or by the women's organizationsrooted among the Muslim and militantsisters.

Iranian Socialist Tours New Zealand and Australia

By Janice Lynn

Fatima Fallahi, a member of theIranian Revolutionary Workers Party(HKE) who was released from prisonlast April, has been touring New Zealand and Australia to get out the truthabout the Iranian revolution.

Fallahi explains that the purpose ofher tour is to thank the working peopleof New Zealand and Australia for their

efforts in helping to secure the releaseof the HKE members and "to explainthe truth about our revolution which

has advanced the rights of the oppressed in Iran."Fallahi spoke in cities throughout

New Zealand and Australia and appeared on over a dozen radio programscountering the lies and distortionsspread about the Iranian revolution."Ours is not a reactionary revolution,as the press is trying to say," Fallahiexplained, "our revolution is very progressive."In New Zealand she spoke to meet

ings at Westfield freezing works andthe Otahuhu Railway Workshops inAuckland and to about 100 Gear meat

workers in Wellington. In AustraliaFallahi spoke to 220 people at theSydney Trade Union Club and met withleaders of the South Coast trade union

movement.

Fallahi talked about the gains Iran'sworkers have made since the revolution

Because of the atmosphere that arose,forces hostile to the revolution, Bakhtiar-ists and others, were behind these verysmall "demonstrations." Therefore the

Revolutionary Workers Party did not support these "demonstrations" since theycould only have promoted intrigues andthat sort of thing. Because of the atmosphere that arose, ways and means must befound whereby women can take up theirown problems and discuss them.

The basic demands of women, the majority of whom in this country wear Islamicdress, have not yet been put forward bythese women themselves. The majority ofthem have not yet expressed their opinionabout imposing Islamic dress in any area.This must be clear.

Q. If the majority in the society decidesthat women must wear Islamic dress, willthe Revolutionary Workers Party askwomen to accept this?

A. The answer is definitely yes. TheRevolutionary Workers Party is convincedthat in such circumstances it will quicklybecome clear that the question is notwhether women should or should not wear

and discussed the importance of thefactory committees (shoras) that havebeen formed throughout Iran.She also spoke about the gains made

by the peasants and national minoritiesas well as the unprecedented and,active involvement of women in the

political life of the country."When you are in a revolution," Fal

lahi declared, "you are with themasses. ... You realize the power ofthe majority. . . ."The most important thing is that the

people are organizing themselves frombelow."

Fallahi also met with Maori activistsin Wellington, visited with Black Powermembers in Auckland, met with anumber of New Zealand Labourmembers of Parliament who had signedpetitions for her release from jail, andspoke with trade unionists at a meetingorganized by the Queensland Tradesand Labor Council State executive in

Australia.

Socialists in New Zealand and Australia report that Fallahi's tour hashelped build new interest in and enthusiasm for the progress of the Iranianrevolution.

The examples of workers reopeningfactories, electing councils to run them,and firing uncooperative managerswere particularly well received.

Islamic dress, but that the real question isthe rights of women and the struggle of theentire society against American imperial-

Q. What can you say about the role thatthe counterrevolutionary forces are playing on the woman question?

A. They are exploiting it. This is nothingnew. From the time of the victory of therevolution, and even before, the imperialists have sought to make Islamic dress,which is very commonly worn in thiscountry, into a symbol of reaction in theeyes of people in societies that are notfamiliar with our revolution.

Fighting this poisonous propaganda isan important task of the revolution. Andone of the best ways this can be done is forwomen to participate consistently in demonstrations such as the one held around

last Friday's prayers.^ Participation insuch demonstrations showed that women

are an important part of the revolution

2 Millions took part in anti-imperialist demonstrations throughout Iran July 4, with an estimated two million participating in Tehran.

August 4, 1980

EUid that their interests are bound up withit. This is the strongest rejoinder to imperialism.

Q. Are the bureaucracy's measures imposing Islamic dress on women going topromote revolutionary administration!

A. Wearing Islamic dress is a traditionin Iran and since the majority do this, tooppose it is a divisive act and does not helpadvance the revolution. The action of the

state bureaucracy with respect to this,however, was an attempt to divert theagitation of millions of people demandingthe elimination of the old state apparatus.One of the militant sisters told me that a

worker sister said to her: "From now on I

will wear a head scarf. But I know that

this is not going to solve the problem of thebosses in this factory or the problem ofoppression that is defended by the bureaucracy."The attitude of the Revolutionary Work

ers Party toward this question is basicallythe same. This problem is one that theworking women and all the militant andMuslim women in Iran must quickly cometo understand.

The struggle of the broad massesagainst imperialism continues to advance.The action of the Islamic Councils in

Paris^ shows the breadth of this struggle.Now with the decrees by the RevolutionaryCouncil, all the brothers and sisters in theranks of the millions are demanding thepurging of the old-regime bureaucracy.They will have to go through the experience of having a new bureaucracy inIslamic dress.

All the militant and Muslim brothers

and sisters understand that if the old state

bureaucracy was filled with Ashrafwomen, putting veils on them is not goingto change their nature. The Muslim sisterswill find that the women left over from the

old regime are not a serious obstacle on theroad of revolution.

What is vital in order to advance and

win the rights of women is to continue theanti-imperialsit struggle and to coordinatethe struggle of women with it. Then theplots of the forces supporting Bakhtiar andother counterrevolutionary figures will beeliminated. Then the tumultuous cam

paign in the press equating every womanwho does not wear Islamic dress with

Ashraf will be silenced.

Then women will see with their own eyesthat equal pay for equal work, day-carecenters for small children, acceleratedliteracy programs for women, and programs to train women in all occupations

3. On July 4, members of the Muslim StudentOrganization in Paris occupied the Iranian embassy. They announced that they were protesting "against those who call themselves ImamKhomeini's supporters but who do absolutelynothing for our poor and our martyrs." Theydenounced Iranian foreign minister Ghotbzadehfor "undermining the revolution."

previously reserved to men and to open theway for women to move into all areas ofthe society will become permanent things.Despite the attempt of the bureaucracy

to shift attention away firom the anti-imperialist struggle to the question of wearing Islamic dress, the women of Iran haveshown along with the rest of the militantpeople they will not stop fighting for the

victory of the revolution. From the demonstrations in the forty days after Ashuraunder the old regime until today, thiscombativity has been as clear as day. Theprogram of the Revolutionary WorkersParty is to reinforce the confidence of allthe Muslim sisters and to maintain unityin the trenches of the anti-imperialiststruggle. □

Behind the Upsurge in Cape TownMuch of the South African press—as

well as the major bourgeois news media inthe United States and Europe—attemptedto portray the massive student and workerupsurge in the Cape Town region in Juneas an essentially Coloured struggle, ratherthan part of the^Black struggle as a whole.This was aimed at reinforcing the apartheid regime's contention that there aredeep divisions between the three sectors ofthe Black population—the Coloureds(those of mixed ancestry), the Indians, andthe Africans.

However, an article in the July 19 Johannesburg Star's weekly internationaledition, based on interviews and discussions with various Black figures in theWestern Cape, provided a glimpse of howBlacks themselves viewed the upsurge.

"June 16, 1980, was not a 'coloured'revolt," reporter Cilia Duff concluded. "Ithad very little to do with teachers' salaries,tatty textbooks and cramped classrooms.It had everything to do with black unity, apulling together of all South Africa's oppressed and disenfiranchised.

"It had everything to do with thefinal, absolute rejection of 'negotiation'with what is venomously called the 'regime.'. . .

"What is more, any hope that life willreturn to normal, and that the white-biased status quo will be preserved, hasbeen smashed. The people, you see, havefinally run out of their 350-year supply ofpatience and trust and supplicating humility."

One academic Duff talked to—a politicalactivist who had earlier spent ten years inprison and five years under a governmentbanning order—commented, "We are beginning to realise that perhaps the onlyway to achieve peace is by making war."

Talking about the high degree of political consciousness among Black youths, hesaid, "They're far more aware than ourgeneration was, even though we, the pettybourgeois varsity students and professionals, had the advantage of discussiongroups, lectures and workshops. . . .

"It is dangerous to undervalue theawareness of black children, even amongthose who are socially and economicallydeprived. Remember, they live with politicsfrom birth, because they are at the receiv

ing end of the system."Referring to the political influence of

these youths, the academic noted the roleof the Committee of 81, an ad-hoc body ofstudents, during the upsurge in the Western Cape:

"Seventy to 80 percent of the peopleobeyed their call to stay off work, whileGovernment threats were ignored. This isa prefiguration of things to come. Threatsfrom the regime are counterproductive—they simply steel people to prepare for theworst. Until the franchise is conceded,radicalisation is inevitable. . . .

"Although education was the catalyst ofthe unrest in the Cape, the elimination ofthese grievances will not alleviate thetension, nor quell the anger.

"No concessions will act as a brake.Concessions merely lead to a heighteningof aspirations and expectations."

Vincent Farrell, the chairman of theTeachers' Action Committee, which wasformed in May to support the protestingstudents, pointed out to Duff that obedience among Blacks "is dead. Parentslearnt in '76 that not even peaceful protestwas a guarantee that your child will notget shot.

"Now they're saying, to hell with it, wemight as well back the kids the wholeway. . . .

"So the days of sitting around, waitingfor the white authority to uplift us, areover.

"We'll help ourselves, and we'll show theworld that there are alternatives to throwing stones. . . .

"We have no money, we have no guns.But 20 million people do have a lot ofeconomic muscle."

An attorney, who is representing manyof the Black student protesters detained bythe police, remarked that one of the mostsignificant aspects of the June 1980 upsurge was the forging of greater unityamong Black students.

"There is also a new solidarity betweenstudents, parents and workers, and a totalrejection of the kind of political activitywhich places reliance on concessions. . . .

"One thing is certain: the students arebeing educated in weeks in matters itwould normally have taken them years toassimilate." □

Intercontinental Press

How the New Regime Has Performed

By Michel Rovere

[The following is the second of a three-part series on the situation in Iran anddevelopments in the Iranian revolution.The first part, which argued that there hasbeen a rightward shift by the Khomeinileadership in Iran, appeared in the July 21issue of Intercontinental Press/Inprecor.[This article will deal with events on the

universities and the continuing economicand social crisis in Iran. The third article

will discuss the contradictions of the Iran

ian national bourgeoisie and take up howrevolutionary Marxists should approachthe leadership.]

The attempt to bring the universitiesinto line and to expel the principal organizations of the Iranian "far left" (Fedayeen,Peykar, and Mujahedeen) from the campuses was the second high point, after thenew military offensive in Kurdistan, of therightward turn taken by the Khomeini/Bani-Sadr leadership beginning at theend of March. The clashes caused several

dozen deaths and led to the arrest of

several hundred students, particularly inAhwaz.

While the "good faith" of certain veryminor Islamic currents, which reallywanted to "revolutionize" the university inorder to put it at the service of the Mostaz-zafin/ may have been abused or exploited,the chronology and detail of events leavesno room for doubt that this in fact was a

sustained campaign against the left, orchestrated from the highest circles of theregime. The "Guide of the Revolution"Khomeini was involved in the campaign,as were the Revolutionary Council, President Bani-Sadr, and the Islamic Republican Party (IRP), although their degree ofparticipation varied.It began on March 21 with Khomeini's

New Year (Now Rouz) "message to thenation," in which he announced that Iranian universities should be "Islamized."^ In

his speech, Khomeini explained that theuniversity ought to be purged of all elements—professors, staff, and students—who are ideologically linked "to the Westor the East."

In the two weeks preceding the firstincidents that took place April 16 at theUniversity of Tabriz, the leaders of the

1. Mostazzafin (the disinherited) is a name givento unemployed people, poor workers, and slumdwellers.

2. On the content of the Now Rouz speech, seethe preceding article in the July 21 Intercontinental Press/Inprecor, p. 770.

August 4, 1980

Iran: the Social Crisis and the Attack on the Universities

the country in a building near the U.S. embassy.It was decided there that the universities should

5. Islamic students are grouped in the Islamic be closed for a period of two years, in order toAnjomans and the Islamic Student Organize- clear out the political groups and carry out ations, which are organizations linked to the IRP cultural revolution.(the IRP created the Islamic Anjomans at theuniversity). The Islamic Student Organizationsincludes, among others, elements of one of themost activist factions of the IRP, the paramilitary Mujahedeen Enqelab Eslami organization(Fighters of the Islamic Revolution). This far- 7. The new Iranian authorities have taken overright paramilitary organization—not to be con- the former "social" institutions of the Pahlavifused with the Islamic-progressive organization, regime, sometimes enlarging their fields of activ-the Mujahedeen-e Khalq—has ties that extend ity. The mostazzafin foundations, for example,into the Pasdaran (Revolutionary Guards). The are the successor to the Pahlavi Foundation,Mujahedeen-e Khalq revealed that the cam- while the Jihad for Reconstruction plays apaign for "Islamization" and closing of the broader but analogous role to that of the defunctuniversities had been organized at a "secret" regime's "Armies of Learning" and "Armies ofmeeting of two hundred delegates from the Hygiene," with the addition of a campaign ofIslamic Societies from universities throughout public works and housing construction.

6. This is the ayatollah who directed the activities of the "Khomeiniist" sectors last December

against the Azerbaijani national movement inTabriz.

Islamic Republican Party—such as Dr.Ayyad,'' and in particular Ayatollah HadiGhaffari, who is known for his diatribesagainst the left and is one of the recognized organizers of the bands of hezbol-lahs*—organized a series of public meetings in several Iranian cities around thetheme of the "Islamic cultural revolution."

These meetings called on the Islamic Student Organizations to mobilize and prepare to carry out the project, giving themadvance assurance of support from theIslamic Revolutionary Council.These speeches, which all refer to the

Now Rouz message, were published andexplained in the newspaper Islamic Republic, the organ of the IRP.On April 16, in the context of this series

of meetings, Ayatollah Rafsanjani, who isa former minister of the interior and an

elected deputy of the IRP in the Majlis(parliament), held a meeting at the University of Tabriz. Incidents broke out betweenIslamic students and far-left groups, following the Ayatollah's speech, in which heviolently attacked the left.These fights served as the pretext for the

occupation of the University of Tabriz bythe Islamic Anjomans (councils). Theydemanded a "purge of the university."The following day, to back up the occu

pation, a demonstration was organized inthe city. The composition of this demonstration, as it is described in nationalcommunique number two of the IslamicAnjomans and the Islamic Student Organizations^ published in Kayhan, April 18,

3. Candidate of the IRP in the elections.

4. Hezbollahs (followers of the party of god) arethe bands of unemployed and marginal personswho attack left-wing marches with cries of"There is only one party, the [hezb-e Allah] partyof God".

illustrates what political forces launchedthis "Islamic cultural revolution":

"Ayatollah Madani, representing theImam in Tabriz,*^ and revolutionary organizations such as the Revolutionary Guardsand the members of the Jihad for Recon

struction,' supported this action."In the same issue of Kayhan, another

press release from the Islamic Anjomansand Islamic Student Organizations explains the political axes of the campaignlaunched by these organizations.

It shows that it targets the left-winggroups and that the proposed solution isnot so much to "revolutionize" the univer

sities as to "close" them, because theyserve as a "base" for the far-left organizations:

In the situation where the slogan of "Death to

America" is taken up by all Iranians, ImamKhomeini, using his knowledge of religion andGod, has continually shown the revolutionarypath to follow at each step.Our Imam knows that the struggle against the

"great Satan," America, is not possible unless allits internal

his Now Rouz message, he stated that theuniversity system, which has not changed sincethe shah's regime, remains a dependent, American-type system. . . .

In the universities, the presence of the shahand America is still felt today. That is why wehave decided to change the university system.The truth should be told to Iranian Moslems.

Since the Imam sent out his message and peoplehave begun to consider a revolution in theuniversities, it was well known that the left-wingand right-wing groups would be against it because the university is their only base and theysee that a program of Islamization would betheir death. That is why these groups have calledthe Imam's message counterrevolutionary.But we are ready for any attack. We have the

Imam and the Islamic people behind us and weare not afraid. We believe that the only way to

are destroyed. That is why in

833

Islamize the universities is to close them. [Em

phasis added.]

After Tabriz, incidents broke out thenext day, April 17, at several universitiesin Tehran, including the University ofScience and Technology in northern Tehran and at an institute of paramedicalstudies, which the Islamic students tried toclose down. The statement of the IslamicAn] Oman at that institute, published in theApril 19 Islamic Republic, explained, afterthe standard reference to the Now Rouzspeech:

Muslim people, if you do not help us destroythe system reigning in the universities, otherswho call us reactionaries will expel us from theuniversities. This is because in the universitieswe Islamic students are characterized as reac

tionaries. We Muslim students demand that theauthorities who think that revolution in theuniversities is a correct slogan should close themand study a program for Islamizing them. Weask the Muslim people to defend the Imam'smessage and not allow the defenders of theshah's regime, the Marxist-Leninist theoreticians, and the intellectuals who have come fromabroad to turn back the revolution.

The Speech by Tehran's 'Friday imam'

On Friday, April 18, a new escalationoccurred, first with the speech at the mainFriday prayer by Hojate'eslam Sayad AliKhameini, the Imam Jomeh^ of Tehran,which led to new confrontations, followedby the Islamic Revolutionary Council'sultimatum in the evening.Hojate'eslam Khameini, Khomeini's de

signated adviser on military questions,® islinked with the IRP and the StudentsFollowing the Imam's Line at the American embassy. Moreover, he gave the closing speech at the May Day demonstration—called by the Students Following theImam's Line, the IRP, the Pasdaran, themostazzafin foundations, the Jihad forReconstruction, etc.—in front of the embassy.

His Friday, April 18, speech—large sections of which were published the next dayin the IRP's newspaper. Islamic Republic—could not be clearer. "Our students do

not want to remain under the influence of

the enemies of Islam and humanity," themullah's speech explains right at the beginning.He followed this with a short paean in

favor of increasing production and opposing strikes:"Work is what can solve the problems.

Tbose who today invite us not to work, or

8. The Imam Jomeh (Friday Imam) is the clergyman who leads the main prayer. Khameinisucceeded Ayatollahs Taleghani—who died inSeptember 1979—and Montazeri, who weremembers of the Islamic Revolutionary Council.Khameini's sermon each Friday, broadcast nationally by television, is one of the major political events each week.

9. See "Rebuilding the Bourgeois State in Iran,"by Michel Rovere, IP/I, July 21, 1980, p. 770.

to work poorly, are counterrevolutionaries.Anyone who incites people in the oil industry in the south or in the steel mills inIsfahan not to work, anyone who doesn'tlet people do their work in the villages, is acounterrevolutionary."Then he comes to the subject at hand,

the "Islamic cultural revolution" in theuniversities:

Today, there are groups that do not let peoplework correctly in the universities. They want toturn the universities into their base for organiz

ing a movement against Islam, against theIslamic Republic, and to help our enemiesabroad. From the beginning, our enemies havetried to organize a series of people against us, inthe name of leftism. This is perfidious.Mohammed came to purify the whole society.As Imam Khomeini said in his Now Rouz

message, the universities should be centers ofeducation. . . .

The universities were built and function with

the people's money. Therefore the people havethe right to expect the universities to be Islamic,not anti-Islamic universities. It is intolerable forthere to be counterrevolutionaries in the universi

ties who were for Aryamehr [the shah] and whotoday call themselves leftists, who take over theuniversities under leftist slogans and try tointerrupt all Islamic activities. . . .Our students cannot tolerate that the universi

ties in Tehran, whose funds come from theMuslim people, should serve for armed activitiesby groups that fight against the Islamic Republic, groups that set themselves up there and sendpeople to Turkmenistan and Kurdistan. . .The political groups that work against the

Islamic government must leave the universities.If they do not, the people will go in and chasethem out. This is a firm and final decision thatImam Khomeini announced in his Now Rouz

message and that the Islamic RevolutionaryCouncil and the president must apply.Muslim students, I say to you that you are

right to be dissatisfied, seeing photographs ofLenin and flags of communism with the hammerand sickle all over the universities. The peopledid not offer up martyrs and wounded in order tosee such a thing. The people do not want thesegroups, and do not want their sons and daughters sympathizing with these groups."

Following the prayer, groups of hezbol-lahs went to the university campuses andthere were bloody clashes with membersand sympathizers of far-left groups whohad mobilized there.

The same day, the Islamic Revolutionary Council, which met at the home ofImam Khomeini, ordered the students toleave the universities before the followingTuesday, because after that "the presidentof the republic may call on the people toevacuate them."

The bloodiest clashes took place thefollowing Monday, April 21.The centrist organizations, Pishagam

(the youth group of the Fedayeen), Maoistsof Peykar, and members of "Workers'

10. References to the attitude of far-left groupsin regard to the events in Kurdistan are found inseveral communiques of the Islamic Anjomans.

11. Islamic Republic, April 19, 1980.

Voice" (a split from the Fedayeen) held asit-in in front of the University of Tehran.They then barricaded themselves off and

tried to resist the attacks hy the hezbol-lahs, several thousand of whom had come,armed with clubs, broken bottles, andknives, to "Islamize" and "purify" theuniversities.

These confrontations, and the ones thattook place in the universities in the provinces (Rasht, Ahwaz, Shiraz), resulted in atotal of several dozen deaths.

On Monday evening, far-left groups finally evacuated the University of Tehran,which Bani-Sadr entered the followingTuesday, leading a demonstration of tensof thousands of persons. While announcing that differing opinions would he respected and that he did not favor closingthe universities, the president of the republic threatened all other opponents of theregime with the same fate as the studentleft. He explained that he would not hesitate to "call on 36 million Iranians to

march on Kurdistan and the factories"

(sic) in case of new disorders.^®"Those who are plotting should he

warned that the government is strongerthan ever, that it will win with the help ofGod, and will not allow anyone to substitute for it in making decisions." Barelymaking himself heard over the cries of thecrowd, which yelled "Death to the Fedayeen" according to the Le Matin correspondent, Bani-Sadr concluded, "This dayis one of reaffirmation of the government'sauthority.^®Contemporary history has provided sev

eral examples showing that the schoolsand particularly the universities in capitalist society can he the institution mostquickly seized by the effects of a prerevolu-tionary or revolutionary crisis.The phenomenon has also been seen in

the colonial and semicolonial world. In

these social formations, the intelligentsiaand the student layers still differ considerably from their counterparts in the advanced capitalist countries. In the colonialand semicolonial world the student population comes firom a much narrower socialstratum, and they are called on in greaterproportion to play a primary role in theadministration of the state or the manage

ment of the economy. Nonetheless, wehave seen the central role that studentradicalization and struggles have beenable to play at certain specific politicalconjunctures—including as detonators ofbroader social movements or revolutionaryprocesses.

The most famous example is undoubtedly the May Fourth Movement that brokeout among Chinese nationalist students in1919. Launched under the dual mottos ofcultural revolution and anti-imperialiststruggle, the May Fourth Movement was

12. Le Monde, April 24, 1980.

13. Le Matin, April 23, 1980.

IntBrcontlnentai Press

to mark both the start of the second

Chinese revolution and the beginning ofthe formation of a Marxist workers move

ment in China."

Since then there have been numerous

examples in Latin America, the MiddleEast, Africa, and most recently again inAlgeria and Korea, showing the importance of student struggles. The recenthistory of Iran is no exception.

The Iranian Student Movement

Against the Dictatorship

The student movement played an important role in the struggle against the dictatorship. Suffice it to recall that the greatpopular demonstrations that were repressed in 1963 had been preceded by amajor strike movement in the universities.In 1977, it was the intelligentsia, then

the universities, that set off the movementthat challenged the regime. The repressionof public meetings and demonstrations ofstudents and professors by the shah'sparamilitary gangs in November 1977 ledto the first general strike of the Tehranbazaar, one month before the Qum demonstrations in January 1978.

After Qum, and especially after the

Tabriz uprising in February 1978, thecenter of gravity of the struggle againstthe dictatorship shifted toward the pettybourgeoisie, the urban plebeian layers, andthen the working class (beginning in September 1978, with the start of the generalstrike). But the universities continued to

play an important role. We need only recallthe importance of the student mobilizations during the months of October andNovember 1978, before the military cabinetof General Azhari was appointed, andduring January and February, up to tbeinsurrection. The universities—particularly the polytechic universities in the capitaland the University of Tehran—becameveritable "liberated zones" during the lastweeks of the Bakhtiar government. Notonly could political forces (including religious groups) express themselves and organize, but striking workers who wereforced out of their factories by the bosses'lockout also came to the campus to holdtheir assemblies.

The Iranian student movement radical

ized under the impact of both the crisis of

14. On May 4, 1919, a student demonstrationtook place in Peking to protest against thedecision of the Treaty of Versailles to transfer toJapan the rights that defeated Germany had hadover the Chinese province of Shondong. Thestudent movement had begun two years earlier,through a "cultural revolution" and the demandthat the language used in the university henceforth be the spoken language rather than theMandarin written language. In the front rank ofthis "cultural revolution" was Chen Tu-hsiu's

magazine New Youth. It was through this magazine that preparations for the founding of the

Chinese CP took place from 1920. See LucienBianco, Les engines de la revolution chinoise,NRF.

the university institution (exacerbated inIran by the dictatorial nature of tbe regimeand the effects that the partial industrialization of 1960-70 had on the educational

system),'^ and the Iranian and international political context (the struggleagainst the dictatorship, the effects of theimperialist defeat in Indochina, and theimpact of the Palestinian resistance).That explains why, despite the social

origins of the students, the universitybecame a bastion for the organizationssuch as the Mujahedeen, the Fedayeen, thePeykar,'® etc. The Muslim student campaign for "Islamization" of the universities and for an "Islamic cultural revolu

tion" must be assessed in view of these

facts.

No one, and no political group, deniesthe necessity for an overturn in the educa-tionl structures in Iran.

The Iranian masses did not make a

revolution, at the cost of 50,000 deaths,only to overthrow a dictatorial regime, butalso because they correctly see in theoverthrow of the shah the possibility toradically change the conditions of theirown lives. One of the very first demands—alongside the right to work, the right toland, improvement of material conditions,and the recognition of national rights—isthe right to knowledge.This is all the more clear if we look at

the balance sheet of twenty years of theWhite Revolution: more than 60% of the

people are still illiterate, a figure thatexceeds 80% for women. That is the objective basis for the need for a cultural

revolution, which must overturn the educational system (the maintenance of selection according to old criteria, for example,is an obvious obstacle to the rapid trainingof tens of thousands of teachers who could

bring literacy to the countryside and theslums).

That does not, however, lead us to support any plan for a "cultural revolution"

15. The crisis of the Iranian university system isrelated first of all to selection: in 1978, out of300,000 new high-school diploma holders, only44,000 could be admitted to the university. Aftera first competition to apply this quota, a secondcompetition served to separate students by discipline. The most selective universities organized athird competition. Next came selection by money—between $1,200 and $6,900 per year at MelliUniversity. The wages of teachers were such thatthey had to have a second or even third job. Tothis, of course, has to be added the dead weightof the dictatorship, the dulling of educationthrough censorship, etc. The whole system, forexample, produced scarcely half the 40,000teachers needed every year! (See Robert Graham,Iran: The Illusions of Power; and Paul Balta,L'Iran insurge.)

16. The next article will discuss in more detail

the politics of these groups. The term "far left,"applied to them for lack of a better word, doesnot take into account that these different organizations represent quite varied programs andsocial bases.

tbat is proposed, especially when it isdefined as an "Islamic cultural revolu

tion," and "Islamization" of the universities.

It is one thing to recognize that in face ofimperialist domination, Islam has beenseen by the masses of Iranians as tbecounterweight to the phenomena of partialacculturation engendered by imperialism,that it was the means, including for segments of the intelligentsia, for reaffirminga national identity that was being mockedand dishonored.

But that must not lead us to obscure the

fact that Islam, especially an Islam asdefined by Khomeini and tbe Shi'ite hierarchy, can represent what is reactionaryand retrograde in the twentieth century."From the standpoint of the exchange ofideas, we can imagine what an "Islamization" of teaching in the social scienceswould represent, not only from the point ofview of defending Marxist ideas, but evenin relation to modern bourgeois sociologyor psychology. It would take the form of anactual intellectual counterreformation. Notto speak of the consequences this wouldhave in the scientific disciplines.

There is above all the risk of increased

sexual segregation, as the regime increasingly limits women's access to certain jobs.But even the discussion on the content of

an "Islamic cultural revolution" remains

quite abstract, given that the campaignwaged both by the Islamic student groupsand certain factions of the Khomeini lead

ership was centered on the slogan of"closing the universities," a measure thatcould last as long as several years.

Closing the Universities:

Political Censorship

It is impossible to view the slogan juston the basis of the forms of struggle(occupation), comparing it to the occupation and closing down of the "spy nest,"the American embassy in Tehran. Nor canwe compare it to the occupation of factories or land.

This is true first of all because in Iran

since the February 1979 insurrection, theuniversity has not simply been a place

17. Such a definition does not prevent us in anyway from recognizing the historic contribution ofMuslim civilization between the seventh and

fifteenth centuries in our era, in the fields ofscience (algebra, medicine, and astronomy), thearts, philosophy, and even technology (irrigation). Along with China, Muslim civilization was

in that era the most advanced in the entire

development of humanity. This position willnever lead us to give the slightest support to thecampaigns carried out by the imperialist bourgeoisies against the "return to the Middle Ages"and Muslim "fanaticism," which serve, as theyhave done since the beginning of colonialism, togive ideological cover to an imperialist policy. Inface of imperialism, however cultivated it maybe, we always defend the oppressed and exploited, whatever their ideas.

August 4, 1980

where the dominant bourgeios ideology ischurned out.

It has become a center for politicaldebate as well, a place for free expression,and the material base for organizing andpropaganda by revolutionary groups, aswell as workers organizations.Unlike the centrist organizations (the

Fedayeen or the Peykar), we do not believethat there is a risk of "fascism" in Iran

and that the relationship of forces betweenthe classes has deteriorated to the pointthat the university has become the "lastbastion of freedom."

But it is also necessary to recognize thatthe Iran of the Islamic Republic is not thetotal paradise of civil liberties either. It isenough to take two examples, which concern freedom of the press and the right todemonstrate.

Everyone knows that all, absolutely all,demonstrations organized in the streets bythe far-left organizations, even the Mu-jahedeen, have been physically attackedby bands of hezbollahs organized by theIRP or sectors of the Shi'ite hierarchy;including, for example, the demonstrationsorganized last January by the Fedayeen tosupport the occupation of the U.S. embassy, or the most recent assemblies organized for May Day.While—so far—there is no massive re

pression by the regime against the far leftthe government has refused to recognizethe legality of most of the organs, periodicals, and newspapers of these organizations. For three weeks the Pasdaran and

the committees in Tehran and other cities

have again been arresting sellers of publications that do hot have the official stamp.

The far-left organizations have no publicheadquarters. Even the Council of IslamicShoras in Tehran had to fall back on thepolytechnical university to hold meetings,after being evicted from an official building of the former regime that it had takenover.

Last, it should not be forgotten that theIslamic organizations, the Islamic Anjo-mans and the Islamic Student Organiza

tions launched their agitation on the cultural revolution after they had suffered adefeat in the new elections for the univer

sity shoras, in which the "left" forces(Mujahedeen, Tudeh, Fedayeen, Peykar,etc.) won a majority in most of the institutions throughout the country. Consequently there can be no doubt that theslogan of "closing" the universities wasindeed a slogan of political censorship, anattack on freedom of expression.

A Rightward Turn Without a Changein the Basic Relationship of Forces

How has the revolutionary situation inIran developed since the outbreak of thesecond civil war in Kurdistan and the

attack on the universities? Despite theseriousness of these attacks, we do notthink that the rightward turn taken by thewhole Khomeini/Bani-Sadr leadership.

has yet reached—nor can it in the shortterm reach—the point of a qualitativedeterioration of the relationship of forcesbetween the fundamental classes, that is, astabilization, much less an ebb in thesituation.

1. Among the peasantry, agrarian movements and land occupations have spreadsince last January. For example, in Qaz-vin, located 150 kilometers from Tehran,the small peasants have doubled their areaof cultivation by occupying and redistributing the lands of the large landowners.Similar activities are taking place in

several other provinces of Iran, as in thecultivated zones around Tehran, Isfahanand Shiraz.

The main obstacle to these land occupations becoming the rule and to a "wholesale agrarian reform" being institutedremains the well-founded fear of militaryconfrontations with the regime, and especially with the Pasdaran, in certain sensitive regions. The Pasdaran have beencalled to the rescue of the big landowners.This is the case in the regions occupied

by the non-Persian nationalities, in particular in Turkmenistan and Khuzestan, butalso in the northern provinces borderingthe Caspian Sea (Gilan, Mazanderan),where the influence of the clergy is traditionally weaker and more subject to challenge than in the other Persian provinces.The Pasdaran have intervened in Turk

menistan, where the agrarian question isdirectly tied to the problem of nationaloppression. They were able to make inroads against the movement of Turkomenpeasant shoras, taking advantage of thesectarianism of certain centrist organizations (such as the Fedayeen) which tried tomanipulate and capitalize on the peasantmovement for their own narrow advantageand ended up allowing the Central Council

of Committees that had been constituted to

become partially isolated.2. Regarding the movement of oppressed

nationalities, too, there is no retreat. Everywhere, fire smolders under the ashes.This is even the case in Azerbaijan, although there the national movement istaking a certain amount of time to reconstitute itself, in view of the way the Muslim People's Islamic Republican Partypolitically capitulated. The Muslim People's Islamic Republican Party is the formation controlled by Ayatollah Shariat-Madari, who, partly in spite of himself,found himself propelled to the head of themass movement in Tabriz last December.

In Baluchistan and Sistan, which likeAzerbaijan are still provinces that are off-limits to foreign travelers, a sporadic agitation goes on, aimed in the first place atthe Pasdaran and members of the Kho

meini committees who regularly are subjected to military engagements, ambushes,or individual attacks.

In actuality it appears that in these twoprovinces, populated by impoverished nomadic tribes, great expanses of land areout of the de facto control of the central

authorities.

This is not the case in Khuzestan (Arab-istan). Khuzestan is the oil-producing province where the Arab minority is concentrated. After the May 1979 demonstrationsin Khorramshahr which were fiercely repressed, large numbers of repressive forces(the army, the Pasdaran, and the Khomeini committees) remain in the province.Several hundred activists or persons "suspected" of activism in the Arab movementare in prison. The commando group thatseized the Iranian embassy in London didso to demand freedom for ninety-two ofthose prisoners. The political origins of

Don't miss a single issue of IntercontinentalPress/lnprecor! Send for your subscription now!

□ Enclosed Is $35 for a one-year subscription.□ Enclosed is $17.50 for a six-month subscription.□ Enclosed is $8.75 for a three-month subscription.□ Send me the special supplement containing the documents and

reports of the 1979 World Congress of the Fourth international. Thesupplement Is free with a one-year subscription; $2.50 with a six-month subscription; and $3.95 with a three-month subscription.

□ Please send me Information about airmail and first-class rates.

Address

City/State/Zip

Country

Make checks payable toIntercontinental Press410 West StreetNew York, N.Y. 10014 U.S.A.

Intercontinental Press

those who seized the embassy is still notclear.

Alongside the appearance of the verysmall terrorist movements (it would be anillusion to think that these are the pureand simple creation of the Iraqi secretservices, although the Iraqis are quiteactive in the region), the Arab nationalistmovement has begun to reconstitute itself.In the industries, the nationalist opposition to the regime is combined with workers' demands and takes the form of re

duced production, passive resistance, andsometimes sabotage.Fearing demonstrations that could mark

the first anniversary of the Khorramshahrclashes, the Iranian authorities intensifiedpolice surveillance. Thus, in Ahwaz, listswith identification photographs of knownmembers of the far-left organizations weredistributed to the members of the Kho

meini committee, and more than 400 students were arrested in the same city following the "Islamic cultural revolution"clashes. Two of them, including a memberof Peykar, were shot in reprisal after theoccupation of the Iranian embassy in London.

The Tehran authorities, however, arestill hesitant to go further in repressing theArab national movement. This is first of

all because of the proximity to Kurdistan,which borders Khuzestan to the northwest,and especially because of the consequencesthat such an escalation could have on oil

production and exports. No one in Tehranhas forgotten the central role that the oilworkers' strike played in overthrowing thePahlavi regime.The beacon of the oppressed nationali

ties in Iran obviously continues to beKurdistan. This is first of all because for

more than a month and a half the national

struggle there has again taken the form ofopen civil war. And secondly, because ofthe special characteristics of the Kurdishnational movement. These special characteristics include the importance of agrarian movements, the independent organization of the masses, the population's beingmassively armed, its ability to carry outlong-term resistance to military intervention from Tehran, and the special featuresof the political organizations throughwhich the Kurdish resistance is carried

out.^® This all indicates that, despite theretaking of certain cities in southern Kurdistan (which became indefensible or defensible at too high a price for the civilianpopulation), the situation is far from beingas favorable for the Khomeini/Bani-Sadr

leadership as certain official statementswould lead one to believe.

3. In the working class, the presentsituation in Iran is marked by continuedhigh combativity and self-confidence, continuation and extension of independentorganization by the workers, and accumulation of experience of struggles and work-

18. See IP/I, July 21, p. 770.

ers' control. A long road remains to betraveled, however, to fill the gap thatremains between the level of combativityand the present level of political consciousness, particularly to lay the basis for aunified labor movement organized on anational basis that is independent of thestate and the bourgeois formations. That isstill the basic requirement for the workingclass to intervene on the political scene inits own interests and with its own proposals to solve the crisis.

Since last January, the shora movementhas not fallen back. On the contrary, wehave seen it spread geographically. Themost striking step in this direction was themeeting of workers shoras from Gilan,which met in Rasht and brought togetherthe representatives of several tens of thousands of workers, in a province whereindustry remains rather traditional (wood,paper pulp and agriculture-related industries). In Tabriz, the development andradicalization of the shoras in the main

industrial units (a tractor factory andmachine-tool factories) led to a politicalconfrontation with Khomeini's local representative, Ayatollah Madani, who tried toimpose an "Islamic" leadership on theseshoras "from above" and tried to tie them

to the IRP's wagon.

In Isfahan, the shoras, which are generally controlled by Islamic currents in thisregion, have tried, with the endorsement ofcertain religious authorities, to reactivatesome small industrial units (brick-makingand textiles).In the Abadan refinery, on the Persian

Gulf, the oil workers shora has de factocontrol over production and distribution,much to the displeasure of the minister incharge of petroleum affairs, Moinfar. Hehimself was nearly expelled from a meeting in a refinery. Every day the workerspublish a list of oil shipments and theirdestinations (to avoid exports to countriessuch as the United States, Israel, or SouthAfrica).Elsewhere, various struggles have taken

place and continue to take place, notalways in the form of strikes. These struggles are sometimes over the closing ofcertain industrial enterprises (such as theAhwaz steel mill) or over economic demands (such as distribution of dividendsdue the workers on the basis of the old

imperial legislation aimed at giving theworkers an interest in the profits of theenterprises).The activity of the shoras, however, is

still essentially on a "trade-union" level, inspite of the accumulation of experiences inworkers' control, opening the accountbooks, restoring plants to production, anddiscussion of plans for industrial reconversion. In particular, their level of coordination and centralization is quite low.

Today, in many cases, the main activityof the "natural leaders" of the shoras takes

place outside the enterprises, negotiatingin the corridors of the ministries oversee

ing their enterprise (three-quarters of Iranian industry was nationalized last July)for pajnnent of wages, delivery of rawmaterials and spare parts, etc.Through these confrontations, the bour

geois class character of this governmentbecomes more obvious every day for awhole layer of advanced workers, since thegovernment is incapable of solving thecrisis, breaking Iran's dependence on imperialism, or satisfying the demands of theworkers.

But this has not yet led to the politicalunderstanding that the shoras can besomething other than or more than instruments of control. There is little sense of

shoras as the embryos of an alternativeform of social organization and system ofgovernment, against the bourgeois government and the capitalist system, the cornerstone for forming a workers and peasantsgovernment.

This is partly due to the role of thepolitical currents and organizations, suchas the centrists, that do not really emphasize the political role the shoras can play,and that carry out a policy of dividing theworkers' ranks, engaging in mutual denunciations with Islamic currents. Each, ineffect, builds its own coordinating bodiesof shoras or its own "workers fronts"

alongside the others.But there is also an objective reason for

this slowness in the process of centralization, a reason that has nothing to do withany supposed backwardness of the Iranianworking class.There is a need today for a national

assembly, where the delegates of the shoras of workers, white collar workers, andpeasants could meet to develop a centralplatform of demands, independent of thestate and the regime. But such an assembly would mean a test of strength with theKhomeini leadership.Bani-Sadr's threats, when he announced

that he would not hesitate to send "36

million Iranians" to purge the factorieswhere disorders take place, the calls tobattle for production, and the denunciations of agitation and strikes as counterrevolutionary in speeches by religious dignitaries, clearly indicate the kind ofcollisions and confrontations the Khomei

ni/Bani-Sadr leadership is preparing for.

The climate of police pressure that existsin the oil-producing cities in the south, thearrest and detention of four leaders of the

shora at the Abadan refinery who hadcome to negotiate certain demands withthe Tehran authorities, and the attacksperpetuated by the hezbollahs against theworkers' contingents in the May Dayactions of the Mujahedeen and Fedayeenshow how the attacks on freedom of ex

pression and democratic rights still weighheavily on and partially constrict thepossibilities for building the Iranian labormovement. These possibilities are furtherhampered by historical factors (such as theabsence of even an embryonic independent

August 4, 1980

labor movement) and subjective factors(the policy of the centrist and Islamicpopulist currents).But the whole forward movement of the

Iranian working class and plebeian layers,which have not been defeated, continuesdue to the depth of the economic and socialcrisis.

The Economic and Social Crisis

Inflation is running at 50% per year.More than 3.5 million are unemployed,

which could increase by 800,000 this yearsimply from the effects of the acceleratedrural exodus and the arrival of youngpeople on the labor market.There is a sharp drop in productive

industrial investment.

Finally, hard currency income from oilmay end up being between $8 billion and$15 billion, rather than the $23 billionexpected.These few figures suffice to show the

extent of the economic disaster in Iran.

Last January, Bani-Sadr, who was thenonly the finance minister, announced thatin spite of the freeze on Iranian assets inU.S. banks (estimated at $7 billion out of atotal of $12 billion), Iran would have notrouble rebuilding a safety cushion, settingaside about a billion dollars a month from

the decrease in imports (which fell by two-thirds in one year).Several weeks later, however, at the

beginning of April, Oil Minister Moinfarannounced a new "wildcat" increase in the

price of Iranian crude oil, which wasalready one of the most expensive in theworld, with a surcharge of two and a halfdollars per barrel, which brought a barrelof light oil to about thirty-five dollars(thirty-three and a half for heavier crude).In fact, all the figures indicate that the

Iranian leaders' decision is directly linkedto the fall in production, which is due bothto technical factors (the absence of spareparts because of the blockade and theproblem of keeping installations runningafter the departure of foreign technicians)and to political factors (sabotage and afall-off in production due to the situation inKhuzestan, and the Iranian workers' anti-imperialist desire to limit exports of anonrenewable resource, one that symbolizes more than any other the eighty yearsof imperialist dependence and pillage).According to the report of the Iranian

Central Bank'® concerning the first sixmonths of the Iranian year extending fromMarch 1979 to March 1980, the foreigncurrency income brought in by petroleumwas $9 billion less than the government'spredictions. Even these predictions by theIslamic government had themselves beenworked out on the basis of an alreadydrastic fall in production, which was 6million barrels a day under the shah andwas to have stabilized between 2.5 million

and 3 million barrels a day.

19. Middle East, April 1980.

But in these first months, the quantity ofoil exported fell continuously, decreasingfrom an average of 1.3 million for the firstweeks of 1980 to only 700,000 barrels a dayafter April.®" Even with the latest priceincrease, that level of production wouldonly bring Iran between $8 billion and $15billion (at the production levels of 700,000barrels and 1.3 million barrels per dayrespectively) instead of the $25 billion thatTehran was counting on.

Under the shah, oil exports represented96% of total Iranian exports and thus hardcurrency income. Capital firom this oilrevenue was one of the main motors of the

partial industrialization that has beengoing on for two decades.

The Collapse of investments

In the domestic area, the official statistics of the Central Bank are also terrible.

For the first nine months of the Iranian

year 1979-80, industrial production fell26%, with the fall reaching 50% to 60% forthe mechanical and metallurgical industries.®' In fact, according to other sources,out of 8,000 modem factories working onprimary materials and import technologies, and which employed 25% of theindustrial work force and accounted for

70% of production, production was runningat 30% to 60% of capacity.®®Even these estimates do not take into

account construction, which was thenumber one industry in Iran and whichhas hardly started up again.The fall of investments, both public and

private, is dizzying.For the same first nine months of 1979-

80, the governmental development creditsfor investment in economic activity fell by50% compared to the preceding year (morethan half these credits were devoted to

completing the Isfahan and Ahwaz steelmills).

Credits granted by the three major specialized industrial banks (the Industrialand Mining Development Bank, the Industrial Credit Bank, and the Developmentand Investment Bank), which serve private investors, fell by 90%.®"An economic journalist describes the

consequences of this veritable investmentstrike: "On the industrial boulevard lead

ing from Tehran to Karaj, one loses countof the skeletons of factories that were to be

new milestones on the road to the 'Great

Society,' a road on which Iranians refusedto follow their former despot."

Industrialists who have not yet se^ntheir enterprises nationalized often shutdown, caught between excessive indebtedness to banks and wage demands (the

20. Middle East Economic Survey. FinancialTimes, March 27, 1980. Middle East, May 1980.

21. Source: Tehran Times.

22. Expansion, April 4-7, 1980.

23. Source: Tehran Times.

minimum wage doubled in the last year).In other cases lack of raw materials leads

to lockouts. It should be emphasized thatthe imperialist shares in enterprises werenot nationalized.

The government itself sets its policiesfrom day to day. It tries to completecertain industrial projects that have beenstarted, such as the steel mills in Isfahanand Ahwaz, and the gigantic petrochemical complex at Bandar-e Khomeini, builtas a joint venture with the JapaneseMitsui trust. That petrochemical complexrepresents a total investment of $3.2 billion. In addition, the government hasrenegotiated with the Romanians and theSoviets over the completion of units producing production goods (machine tools).But that is about all.

There is no real plan for industrialreconversion. The National Iranian Oil

Company (NIOC), for example, is allowedto set up an exhibit of 6,000 to 7,000 partsout of the 170,000 used in the oil industry,so that the visitors, Iranian artisans andindustrialists, can consider producingthem (up to the present they have beenimported). But in the automobile industry,the workers are still waiting for a reconversion plan that would make it possible forthe seven different assembly plants toproduce a single vehicle model that is low-priced and fits the needs of the people. Butthey see no results.

The consequences of the Khomeini/Bani-Sadr governmental policy, whichdoes not want to and cannot break with

the laws of the market, are particularly feltin two areas: inflation and the black

market, and the blocking of the agrarianreform.

Speculation and the Black Market

Recently, violent incidents took place insouth Tehran pitting housewives protesting price increases against shop owners.When the women began to overturn stallsand distribute the merchandise, the shopowners reacted with extreme violence and

attacked them with clubs and knives.

Several of the angry housewives werehospitalized in serious condition.

While the economic blockade has hardlyaffected food supplies for the Iranian urban market, and while there is no realscarcity, on the other hand price rises,speculation, and the black market areflourishing.

Theoretically, according to legislation inforce under the shah, the prices of basicnecessities are fixed and subsidized by thestate and their prices cannot go up morethan 10% a year. But almost no merchandise is available at these official prices.The "surcharge" varies from 40% to 300%.An example is meat, whose official price is250 rials per kilogram, but which cannotbe found at less than 600 rials. The same is

true for eggs, theoretically fixed at 145rials per kilo, but which really cost 200

Intercontinental Press

rials. The price of bread has gone from 80rials to 140.

Who is responsible? Not the peasants,for whom agricultural prices are stagnant,but the middlemen, the bazaar, which feelsit can act with impunity since the establishment of the Islamic Republic. Theblack market, or rather the "free" market,since it is not very secret, deals in eggs,soap, and detergent, as well as meat, flour,cigarettes, spare parts and automobiles,rice, vegetable oil, and fish.

Let's take the case of eggs, which arepart of the basic diet. Consumption is 480tons per day, a quarter of which must beimported from Holland (previously eggscame from Israel). In the last six months,8,000 tons were imported, but only 3,000were distributed through the regular, fixedprice channels. The rest were sold underthe table and in backrooms.

The most typical case is wheat flour.Iran annually produces 5.5 million tons ofwheat and imports another million tons.This wheat is subsidized 10,000 rials a tonfor distribution through the fixed-pricemarket. In reality it turns up in the form offlour on the other end of the gulf, inKuwait and Dubai, where it is sold atdouble the price.The Khomeini neighborhood committees

send checking teams out from time to timeto verify prices, and the other day it wasreported that a chic tailor in the north ofTehran had just received thirty lashes forselling a shirt a little too expensively.But nothing is really done to fight specu

lation; the bazaar remains the best base of

support for the regime and the Shi'itehierarchy.To get rid of speculation and the black

market, and especially to end Iran's dependence in food, all the experts, includingbourgeois experts, agree that it would benecessary to carry out a radical new agrarian reform that would include the redistri

bution of land, a remolding of the policy oncredits and fixed prices, and a major long-term effort in education, social assistanceand technical aid to the peasantry.

The Vicissitudes of The Agrarian Reform

This is not the direction the governmentis moving in. In January 1979, even beforethe insurrection, some of the highest religious authorities in the country denouncedthe land occupations (in particular Ayatullah Taleghani).

After the establishment of the Islamic

Republic, clashes took place in Turkmenistan when Turkoman peasants began tooccupy the great estates stolen by richPersians with the complicity of the shah'sgovernment.

The military offensive launched againstthe Kurds in August 1979 by the Iranianarmy and the Pasdaran began shortlyafter the first occupations of land and theestablishment of several peasant shoras inKurdistan.

During the same month of August, the

Bazargan government and the Revolutionary Council adopted a decree against theusurpation of agricultural lands, whichcalled for returning all lands to theirlegitimate owners, as well as water resources, orchards and nurseries illegally occupied since September 1978.In a second legislative act, the Bazargan

government in September 1979 legitimizedthe shah's agrarian reform and fixed nomaximum in landholdings (the shah'sreform called for former landowners beingable to keep no more than one village, avillage being the unit of measure of the bigland holdings). No new distribution oflands was projected.Of course, after the shah's agrarian

reform, the inequality among landownersremains very great.According to the agricultural census of

1974, 9.5 million Iranian peasants mustlive on plots of less than ten hectares,which represent 33% of the agriculturallands, or 5.4 million hectares.On the other end of the scale, 9,553

families (about 60,000 persons) possess2.45 million hectares (properties greaterthan 100 hectares).After the fall of the Bazargan govern

ment, and faced with the development ofagrarian movements, the new deputy minister of agriculture, Reza Isfahani, beganto trumpet that the government was immediately going to undertake a radical agrarian reform so that the land would "belongto those who work it."

A new plan for agrarian reform wasworked out, with guidelines that remainedquite moderate in comparison with other"green revolutions" carried out hy bourgeois regimes. The idea was to redistributelands that had been expropriated firom biglandowners who had been in collusion

with the old regime, and lands that belongto the state. There was also to be a rather

high upper limit on the land area thatcould belong to a single owner.This plan for agrarian reform was actu

ally amended further downward, in thedirection of a compromise with the September law, because of the opposition ofreligious representatives from Qum andMashad in the Revolutionary Council. Ifwe consider the financial, economic, commercial, and family ties that link thebazaars to the big and middle-sized Iranian landowners, and if we are also awarethat the Shi'ite clergy itself has alwaysbeen one of the top landowners throughthe religious foundations (waqf, or religious endowments) we don't have to looktoo far for the reasons why this plan ofReza Isfahani was scratched.

Toward New Social Confrontations

The crisis of the Iranian economy, reinforced by the crisis of the internationalcapitalist system, the partial blockade byimperialism, and the social instability inthe country, further reduces the regime'smaneuvering room.

After granting certain wage demandslast year (such as raising of the low wagesof the industrial working class and lowlevel public employees), it becomes moreobvious every day that this regime, whichfor social reasons is incapable of undertaking even plans for the "bourgeois-democratic" reforms (such as the agrarianreform) required by the objective situation,is less and less in a position to grantsubstantial concessions to the masses.

On the eve of the second day of thereferendum on the Islamic Republic, theleader of the Islamic Republican Party,Ayatullah Beheshti, called for the "totalredistribution of wealth in Iran, so thatbefore the end of the year every Iranianwill have the same income. . . . This must

at all costs he the year of egalitariandistribution of all internal production andall other goods among Iranians."Advancing to communism in one year!

Unfortunately, these end-of-election-campaign speeches are far from reality.The exodus from rural areas quadrupled

last year, going from 380,000 (the averageof the last three years of the Pahlavi regime)to 1.5 million, more than two thirds ofwhom squeezed into the slums of Tehranalone.

While the estimates coming from thegovernment itself indicate that the numberof unemployed persons is between 3.5million and 4 million, only 176,000 unemployed persons are officially aided bygovernment agencies.The egalitarian distribution of the

wealth, as practiced by the Islamic government, can be seen in a few statistics: lastyear 7 billion rials were spent for workers'housing and 4 billion rials went to unemployed persons. On the other hand, thetotal aid to industrialists was 80 billion

rials. Industrial debts benefited from a

one-year moratorium, while the bankingreform and the lowering of interest ratesrepresented another gift of 300 billion rialsto investors.

But these stipends for the capitalists willnot be enough to revive investments on alarge scale. For that to take place it will benecessary to carry out sharp attacks on allthe workers and toiling masses and try todeal them defeats that they have not yetsuffered. □

Copies Missing?Keep your files of intercontinental Presscomplete and up-to-date. Missing issuesfor tfie current year may be ordered bysending $1 per copy. Write for information about previous years.

Inlercontinentai Press/inprecor410 West StreetNew York, New York 10014

August 4, 1980

Miners Stand Firm Against Coup

Bolivian Junta Tries to Crush Workers' Resistance

By Ernest Harsch

"Once again, a Latin American countryis drowned in blood by those who thinkthey can do whatever they want, and killwhenever they are pleased to do so."With those words, the Revolutionary

Party of Bolivian Workers (PRTB), one ofthe numerous political parties and tradeunions resisting the July 17 military coup,began an appeal for international solidarity with the Bolivian people."Armed with tanks, planes, and all

kinds of weapons, the army and theirMends, the paramilitary groups, are trying to kill not only individuals, but a wholecountry," the statement said."The truth is that thousands are being

killed, murdered, tortured, and taken prisoner just because they don't like to betreated like slaves or animals."Noting that the new military rulers

headed by Gen. Luis Garcia Meza will beunable to "kill a whole nation," the PRTBadded that "the people will not be able todefeat them either if we get isolated. Thatis history. Bolivia needs internationalsupport to win this war."So far, unofficial estimates place the

death toll since the beginning of the coupat more than 1,000, as the military seeks tosuppress continuing workers' resistance tothe takeover.

Among those killed was Marcelo Qui-roga Santa Cruz, the presidential candidate of the Socialist Party-1 in the Juneelections. According to the Bolivian Workers Federation (COB), which is in theforefront of the resistance to the coup, atleast fifteen union activists were killed inLa Paz, the capital, and another thirty inSanta Cruz, in eastern Bolivia.Hundreds have been arrested. More than

500 political prisoners were taken to theTempladerani stadium outside La Paz andothers are being held at the Bolivar stadium in the capital itself.On the day of the coup, about twenty-

five journalists were arrested, some ofwhom were later released. According to aJuly 21 Associated Press dispatch from LaPaz, "One newsman said that while hewas held he heard Communist Party deputy Simon Reyes screaming for his captorsto kill him.

"The newsman said that as he was

being led out of the detention area, he sawReyes and the deputy's face had beendisfigured by beatings." (Reyes had previously been reported to have been killedduring a paramilitary attack on the COBheadquarters on July 17.)According to the journalist, one of the

officials overseeing the beatings of the

arrested journalists had an Argentinianaccent. In a statement issued in Paris, aleader of the COB charged the Argentinemilitary junta with aiding the Boliviancoup.

In an attempt to undermine the opposition to the coup, the junta had JuanLechin Orquendo, the arrested leader ofthe COB, appear on the government television station July 22 to call on workers toend their active resistance, so as to "avoidthe shedding of blood." Col. Luis Arce, thenew interior minister, confirmed that Lechin was being held in Section 2, theheadquarters of army intelligence.

Despite fierce repression, the resistance iscontinuing. Reports from La Paz notenightly gunfire from various parts of thecity. According to the July 23 WashingtonPost, the general strike that had beencalled by the COB and that had paralyzedLa Paz for the first few days after the coupwas ebbing. The report noted, however,that many businesses in outlying neighborhoods were still closed down.

The sharpest resistance to the coup hascome from the mine workers in the south-

em provinces. According to the July 24Christian Science Monitor, "Strikes, demonstrations, and armed conflict are part ofthe resistance. The important tin, copper,silver, and tungsten mines are closed."Whether the miners' opposition will be

enough to bring down the military government or force it to alter course remains to

be seen. But miners are angry that themilitary has once again brazenly seizedpower and thus sidetracked the democraticprocess."Clandestine radio stations under control

of the miners have denied governmentclaims that resistance was crushed. Ac

cording to one station, some 4,500 Indiansin the silver-mining province of Potosiwere marching to Catavl to link up withinsurgent miners.In carrying out their coup, the Bolivian

generals were seeking to counter the growing political influence of the powerfulCOB, which was moving more and moreinto the forefront of the struggle for democratic rights and higher living standards.They sought to justify the coup by refer

ring to the results of the June 29 elections,in which Hemdn Siles Zuazo, the presidential candidate of the Democratic People'sUnity slate (which included the Communist Party), won the highest number ofvotes. Although Siles Zuazo is a bourgeoispolitician and former president of Bolivia,the military hierarchy has little confidencein him.

"We cannot permit the people of thiscountry to vote for a man whom we disapprove of," the military high commandstated. "Until the people leam what iscorrect and begin making the correct choices, we will have to shepard them, for we,among Bolivians, know what is correct."The generals' longtime allies in Wash

ington, however, apparently do not thinkthat Garcia Meza and his colleagues reallyknow what is "correct."

Although the White House generallytries to dissociate itself from such repressive coups (often while actually supportingthem), in this case it went to the unusualextent of not only denouncing the coup butalso declaring that it was sharply curtailing economic and military aid to Bolivia.Secretary of State Edmund Muskie personally condemned the coup at a July 25 newsconference in Washington.What the imperialists are concerned

about is not the repression in Bolivia, butthe possibility that the coup could backfire.At the least, it is likely to lead to evengreater class polarization, at a time whenpolitical unrest is already sweepingthrough Central America and the Caribbean.

Bolivia, moreover, was to have played acentral role in Washington's efforts tohammer together an Andean Pact force tointervene in El Salvador. The coup nowmakes the use of Bolivian troops in such a"peacekeeping" force politically unfeasible.

Washington's assessment of the coup isshared by the other members of the Andean Pact—the governments of Ecuador,Colombia, Peru, and Venezuela. All fourhave called for a special session of theOrganization of American States to reviewthe human rights situation in Bolivia sincethe coup. n

Still Available

Complete Back Files (Unbound)Intercontinental Press

43 issues

43 issues

45 issues

47 issues

46 issues

47 issues

47 issues

49 issues

48 issues

49 issues

47 issues

pages)

pages)pages)pages)pages)pages)pages)

pages)pages)pages)

pages)

410 West Street

New York, N.Y. 10014

Intercontinental Press