|
For Your Reference
A Response
to the 'Investigators' of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement
(RIM)
The following
article was published in El Diario Internacional (EDI)
in March 1995. It has been excerpted to a length suitable for printing
in this issue of AWTW. An effort has been made to maintain
all of Arce's main arguments, and footnote numbers appear as in
the original. Readers who want the unedited article (about 50% longer)
should write to AWTW. Our response, "An Initial Reply to
Arce Borja", is found on page 36.-AWTW
The Committee
of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM) is currently
circulating two political documents that refer to the purported
negotiation of the People's War in Peru. One of these documents
is dated June 1994, nine months after Fujimori published the first
"peace letter" (1 October 1993). The other document is more recent,
dated 10 November last year. According to their authors, these documents
reflect "a very important process of investigation and study" in
relation to the current situation in Peru. Despite the chronological
difference between the first and second documents, the contents
of both are nearly the same, with only small variations.
Both
documents pretend to be serious and claim to be based on a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist
analysis. These documents pretend to adopt an objective stand: they
give equal importance to the political position of the Central Committee
of the Communist Party of Peru and the position of the capitulators
and police agents propagating the "peace agreements". The authors
of these documents pore over the history of peace negotiations conducted
by communists, revolutionaries and reformers. The examples of Brest-Litovsk
in the rising Soviet Union of 1918, the negotiations undertaken
by Chairman Mao during the Chinese Revolution, the negotiations
in Nicaragua and El Salvador, etc. The ideological framework of
both documents is restricted to general theoretical formulations.
For the sake of the unity of the Revolutionary Internationalist
Movement, they ask for patience and calm in dealing with the problems
generated by the "peace letters". Hesitantly, merely trying to keep
up with events, they make a mild criticism of one text of the bogus
"peace agreement". The leadership of
RIM points out that the distribution of these documents should be
restricted. That they "should not be revealed in any public or semi-public
fashion". According to them this is "to prevent the enemy from taking
advantage of these polemics". They propose a clandestine debate
on these facts. What should be done? We cannot remain silent. When
there are questions of principle involved, the right attitude is
not to remain silent. That would mean conciliating with incorrect
ideas; ideological differences should not be covered up. On the
contrary, historical experience shows that their wide and open debate
is healthy for the revolution. In his time Lenin advised: "The duty
of communists is not to cover up the shortcomings of their movement,
but to criticise them openly and to rid themselves of these in the
most radical and prompt fashion".1
Chairman
Gonzalo points out: "But if the leadership is not just and correct,
if the leaders follow an erroneous line... then those with the correct
line must struggle to make it prevail".2
The leaders
of RIM are seriously mistaken. Their analysis of the Communist Party
of Peru and the struggle against the fraud of "peace agreements"
contributes nothing to the revolutionary process directed by the
PCP. We believe that the opinions advanced in those documents seriously
damage proletarian internationalism. That they run counter to the
ideological and political principles relating to the unity of the
international communist movement. Hence the necessity of responding
and clarifying the erroneous ideas advanced by the leadership of
RIM. Our criticism essentially centres upon the following aspects:
First
aspect: The RIM Committee asserts that "since October 1993 a very
important struggle is taking place within the PCP". They affirm
that this is a problem of a "two-line struggle".
Second
aspect: They resort to a quotation of Chairman Mao Tse-tung and
call for "treating the sickness to save the patient".
Third
aspect: They paraphrase Chairman Mao and point out that he who makes
no investigation has no right to speak and that one should seek
truth from facts.
Fourth
aspect: They hold that the elements promoting the "peace agreements"
are people who historically played a leading role in the Communist
Party of Peru. That they are mainly to be found in the jails, but
that they also have support outside the prisons.
Fifth
aspect: They ask that the debate around the "peace agreement" should
not undermine the task of defending the life of Chairman Gonzalo
and exhort for continued support for the International Emergency
Committee (IEC).
TWO-LINE
STRUGGLE OR COUNTER-REVOLUTIONARY FRAUD?
First
aspect: "Since October 1993 a very important struggle has been taking
place within the PCP, principally around the peace negotiations".
"Evidently a struggle in two different directions has arisen within
the ranks of the Communist Party of Peru". "...This is a two-line
struggle within the largest organisation of our Movement...." (Documents
of RIM).
It is
a mistake to hold that the "peace letters" belong in essence to
a process of two-line struggle within the PCP. This question is
erroneously formulated. The analysis of the leading Committee of
RIM is trundling in the wrong direction. The assertion that the
"peace letters" are a product of the "two-line struggle" within
the PCP falls into the following deviations and dangers:
1. If
one considers the "peace letters" as an external manifestation of
contradictions within the PCP, one is denying that these are in
reality but a montage set up by the Peruvian regime and US Imperialism.
Thus, this fraud is given the category of an inner-Party contradiction.
If one is to adopt this position, it then becomes logical to draw
the conclusion that it is not right to treat this as a police plot.
That one should demand, as the leaders of RIM do, to be "cautious
and restrained" in dealing with this problem. In this fashion, one
would not only be overlooking Fujimori's fraud, but also the counter-revolutionary
and criminal aims of the "peace agreement". To hold that the "peace
agreement" is part of a process of internal conflict within the
PCP portrays it as an organization corroded by a scandalous division,
an organization divided and undermined and on the very verge of
destruction. This point of view is similar to that of the die-hard
enemies of the revolution. Merely as an example, we are going to
quote a "senderologist" and visceral enemy of the PCP:
"Internal
documents of the terrorist organization reveal that the factional
struggle between those who support the peace agreement and those
who support Feliciano is ending with a clear victor: Abimael Guzman".3
Now,
consciously or unconsciously, the leaders of RIM are sliding into
the bog of conciliation with the enemies of the People's War in
Peru. This conciliation is evident, not only in the content of the
documents we have mentioned, but also in their attitude of keeping
at arms length from the struggle against the so-called "peace agreement"
fraud. Here lies the explanation for the protracted silence that
the leaders of RIM have been keeping for over a year.
2. The
leaders of RIM are confusing a police plot with a two-line struggle.
In history we can find many cases of revolutionaries having to face
frauds concocted by experts in anti-insurgency struggle. The most
elementary manual of counter-insurgency procedures shows the two
main methods for destroying a communist organization or a revolutionary
process. The first method is to use violence and outright repression.
This method makes use of the military superiority and the ample
resources of the state. The second method uses the system of psychological
warfare. It makes use of the enormous publicity machine in the hands
of the reactionary state. This method aims at weakening and undermining
the ideological and organisational capacity of the party leading
the revolution. Its objectives are: Dividing, disorganizing and
slandering the revolutionary organization, isolating it from the
masses while generating capitulationism. Usually, psychological
warfare makes use of infiltrated agents within the party, or renegades
and turncoats that have gone over to the ranks of the enemy. Both
methods are generally used in combination within a single counter-insurgency
strategy.
It is
an ideological and political error not to differentiate between
a police plot and a two-line struggle. What is the gist of the "peace
letters"? Where and how were these concocted? The "peace letters"
were fabricated in the offices of the Intelligence Service of the
Peruvian state (SIN). These letters did not originate in any Party
organism, nor are these the product of any internal process of debate
within the Communist Party of Peru. It is an error to hold, as the
leaders of RIM do, that this is "a two-line struggle within the
ranks of the Communist Party of Peru".
The authors
of these letters are functionaries of SIN, police agents, high-ranking
army officers, and specialists from the US Central Intelligence
Agency (CIA). A police plot is not the same thing as an inner party
struggle. The fact that some capitulators have participated in the
elaboration and distribution of this montage does not make this
a two-line struggle within the PCP.
To illustrate
this point we shall refer to certain instances in history where
police plots have been notoriously used. Between 1901 and 1904,
the people's revolutionary movement in Russia was in full swing.
Then the Tsarist police organized within the proletariat's ranks
several bogus workers" organizations. The brains behind this scheme
was police Colonel Zubatov. Although these organisms claimed to
be working class, they were in fact led by police agents. Their
aim was to arrest the growing influence of the revolutionary social
democrats upon the workers and oppressed masses.
Later,
also in Russia, this time in 1917, another plot was hatched: Lenin
arrived in Petrograd in the German sealed train. Then, all the enemies
of the Bolsheviks, the Mensheviks and the provisional government
itself took the opportunity for a furious campaign to depict Lenin
as "a German imperialist agent". Four months later, in July, the
Kerensky government issued an order to arrest Lenin and charged
him with "treason". The objective of this plot was to undermine
the prestige of the Bolsheviks and to assassinate the great leader
of the October Revolution.
In Peru,
police frauds can be counted by the dozen. Since 1980, different
Peruvian regimes have included within their counter-insurgency policies
the fabrication of lies against the PCP and the People's War. Among
the most widespread fabrications we shall mention three in particular:
The first is the lie that links the PCP to the international drug-dealing
gangs. The second is the portrayal of the Maoists as brutal and
bloodthirsty murderers of the people: They accuse the PCP of being
a fanatical sect led by lunatics.
The third
lie refers to the so-called "internal weaknesses of Shining Path",
specifically its ideological weakness. All kinds of fabrications
are put in motion purporting to show that the PCP is an organization
on the verge of collapse due to "intense internal struggle". All
this slander is based on sheer lies while promoting different personalities
who contribute to lend credibility to these farcical charges. Here,
propaganda is used as the principal means in attempting to destabilize
the Party. The strategic aim is the same as that of the military
actions directed against the revolution.
3. The
leaders of RIM hold that the "peace agreement" is a two-line struggle.
By doing this, they cast aside the analysis and position of the
PCP's Central Committee in relation to this issue. The PCP, by means
of various documents, characterized and denounced the "peace letters"
as vile slander fabricated by the Fujimori regime and by US imperialism.
There is nothing that can justify contradicting the Party that is
leading the People's War, especially if we consider that their analysis
was carried out in the very field of operations, at the very centre
of the fray. One of these PCP documents, dated February 1994, clearly
states the following:
"The
purported letters presented by Fujimori, the bogus international
telephone call, and all other subsequent concoctions are counter-revolutionary
plots. These are fabricated by US imperialism and the mass-murderer
quisling dictatorship in combination with the sinister actions of
the evil gang of turncoats. This plot is aimed at winning elections,
to impede the celebration of the Centenary of Chairman Mao in December,
and to cover up the Cantuta scandal. These are its immediate aims.
Its essential objectives are the defeat of the People's War. In
this context, they are continuing their plans to assassinate Chairman
Gonzalo. We must denounce, condemn and smash the evil gang who are
promoting revisionism and capitulation. We must point out that they
are a group of infiltrated agents, turncoats, capitulators and rotten
old revisionists. This handful of traitors are a group directly
linked to the reactionary camp."4
Since
the presentation of the first letter (October 1993), the Central
Committee of the PCP has decidedly fought against the "peace agreement"
plot. This struggle took place at both the national and international
level. In Peru, the emphasis was on strengthening the development
of the People's War and on unmasking the individuals who from inside
the prisons were appealing for capitulation. Abroad, precise directives
were issued: To oppose those individual members of the evil gang
working in Sweden, Paris, Germany and Mexico. To stop them peddling
the "peace letters" and the purported telephone instructions by
Chairman Gonzalo. Why are the "investigators" of RIM ignoring these
facts? To understand the "peace agreement" and its political and
repressive implications, any person or political group must consider
the position of the Central Committee of the PCP. It is not possible
to overlook the solid reasons of the organization carrying out the
armed struggle in practice, the principal protagonist in this conflict.
Those who, while proclaiming themselves of the Left, fail to take
on board the position of the PCP, inevitably slide into opportunism.
It is worth noting what Lenin said about the manner in which opportunism
approaches problems:
"The
opportunist, because of his very nature, always avoids approaching
problems definitely and precisely. He seeks the aggregate result.
He wriggles like a snake between mutually exclusive points of view.
He makes efforts "to agree" with both sides of every argument, while
reducing his differences to small amendments, doubts, innocent good
wishes, etc., etc."5
4. ....Experience
confirms that there is a close link between cause and effect, between
the People's War and the international tasks of support. In this
field, proletarian internationalist action is still in its beginnings.
It is easy to fall into idleness and to become demoralized. Any
setback of the revolution, and even the imperialist propaganda itself,
generates doubts and suspicions. Basing ourselves upon this reality,
the way of dealing with the "peace letters" should be unequivocal.
Those who speak of "two-line struggle" only impede the struggle
against the capitulators. Thus the erroneous position of the leaders
of RIM confuses and spreads doubt among the less advanced sections
of the people at the international level.
5. Reducing
the affair of the "peace letters" to a two-line struggle within
the PCP amounts to opting out, avoiding to take up a position and
evading the struggle against Fujimori's fraud. Basing oneself upon
this false premise, one ends up conciliating with all those in Peru
and abroad who are promoting the "peace agreement". The tactic of
keeping silent is a conciliators" charter, its ideological and political
roots are to be found in opportunism and revisionism. In this fashion,
those individuals in Europe and America who are distributing the
documents about the "peace agreement" are allowed to cause maximum
damage. If we consider the "peace letters" as a problem of "two-line
struggle", we cannot but conclude that this is a purely internal
affair of the Communist Party of Peru. We must conclude that this
is a case in which it is better not to meddle. A problem in which,
as the leaders of RIM assert, we should not interfere "irresponsibly".
What
conclusion can we draw from the idea floated by the RIM investigators
of "not acting irresponsibly" and that we should merely take up
investigation? Following their example, there would be no reason
to struggle against the "peace agreement". We should wait for the
outcome of their investigations....
Looking
at it from this angle, the conduct of El Diario Internacional
can be deemed as worse than "irresponsible". We have dedicated several
editions to the unmasking of Fujimori's fraud. In this context,
and since October 1993, some organisms closely linked with the leadership
of RIM have initiated an underhanded struggle against EDI.
In some cases, they have even prevented its distribution. EDI
is a publication translated into several languages and well known
nearly all over the world.
It is
and will indeed continue to be a serious obstacle for the enemies
of the Peruvian revolution. It is because of this that the Peruvian
regime and imperialism are attempting to boycott and obliterate
it.
This
explains why an important base of RIM in the USA in charge of translating
EDI into English stopped doing this work. Moreover, they
also suspended their sales of EDI. How do the leaders of
RIM explain this fact?...
6. The
leaders of RIM chose to ignore this problem: If it were true that
there is a very important struggle within the PCP, why do they then
not point out the character of this contradiction and the interests
served by both lines? Why do they avoid taking up a position in
relation to this problem, even though more than a year has elapsed
since it first arose?
Supposing
that the "peace agreement" were indeed a problem of two-line struggle
within the PCP, what is there to prevent RIM, a political organization
organically linked to the PCP and claiming to be a defender of the
Peruvian revolution, from condemning the incorrect line? Here there
is no room for intermediate or eclectic positions. The counter-revolutionary
content and aims of the "peace agreement" are absolutely clear and
cannot be denied. In any event, whether police plot or two-line
struggle, this position must be fought vigorously. No one claiming
to belong to the camp of revolution can stay aloof from this struggle....
How should
we understand what makes up a two-line struggle within a revolutionary
organization or party? How does this differ from a police plot?
In theory
and practice, the two-line struggle is the confrontation between
the proletarian and the non-proletarian line within the party. By
means of the two-line struggle the internal contradictions of a
political-ideological character within a revolutionary party are
resolved.
Essentially,
the two-line struggle serves for fighting against and eradicating
opportunism, revisionism, rightism and capitulation, and all anti-party
phenomena harming the revolution. The process of unity and struggle
of opposites within a party is related to the law of the universality
of contradiction within things, in nature and social phenomena.
Unlike revisionism and opportunism that denies the two-line struggle,
Marxism promotes it as the motive force for the party's development.
Chairman Mao Tse-tung points out:
"The
opposition and struggle between different ideas occurs constantly
within the Party. This is the consequence of contradictions between
classes within the Party and between the new and the old within
society. If there were no contradictions or ideological struggles
to resolve these, the life of the Party would end. There is nothing
that does not contain contradiction. If there was no contradiction
the world would not exist".8
Assuming
that the phenomena of unity and struggle of opposites is inherent
to the Party's development, it then becomes important to establish
the nature of each contradiction. To establish with exactitude if
this contradiction is or is not antagonistic. The character of the
contradiction depends on the historical conditions the Party is
undergoing.
In a
party like the PCP, involved in a civil war, contradictions sharpen
and their struggle also tends to become more acute. In our specific
case, the different contradictions are centred on the armed struggle
and the road to the conquest of political power. Within the same
phenomena of the struggle of opposites, a non-antagonistic contradiction
will turn into an antagonistic one. Chairman Mao notes that some
contradictions do not initially manifest themselves as antagonistic,
but that in the course of the class struggle these contradictions
become antagonistic. Moreover, Mao also teaches the importance of
correctly establishing the character of these contradictions. He
teaches us to use Marxist analysis and to adopt the specific methods
of struggle needed to resolve them. There are no contradictions
nor two-line struggles of an abstract character. If one fails to
establish the character of a contradiction, and moreover, fails
to point out the interests served by the opposite lines, one goes
against dialectics.
The
limit of contradiction
The limit
of non-antagonistic contradiction relates to the issue of whether
its development goes against the ideological and programmatic principles
of the Party. Whatever the particularity of this contradiction may
be, it must remain consistent with the interests of the proletariat
and the revolution. In other words, the opposite line would remain
non-antagonistic while it does not develop as a complete negation
of the Party and the revolution. A non-antagonistic contradiction
is resolved by means of criticism and self-criticism. This method
of struggle is related to the task of persuading those comrades
expressing damaging and erroneous ideas to return to the correct
line. With the two-line struggle, the Party strengthens itself and
advances, consolidating its class line. The principal contradictions
are resolved by means of unity and struggle. Chairman Mao points
out that the application of this method is based upon the necessity
of finding the unity of opposites.
"Currently
the contradiction between the correct and the incorrect ideas within
our Party does not manifest itself as antagonistic. If the comrades
that have committed errors can correct them, it will then not turn
into an antagonistic one."9
On his
part, Lenin says: "The struggle of different tendencies is inevitable
and necessary within the Party if it does not lead to anarchy and
splits and if it is carried out within the framework commonly accepted
by all comrades and members of the Party."10
Under
the impulse of class struggle and internal and external factors,
the contradiction within a Party may turn antagonistic - thus expressing
irreconcilable interests. Then the solution of such a contradiction
can only come about by frontal class struggle. Class antagonism,
a manifestation of the struggle of opposites, by its own nature,
cannot remain and develop indefinitely within the confines of an
organization or revolutionary Party. Its permanence, by its very
nature, is the negation of the fundamental principles of the Party,
principally democratic centralism and the basis for Party unity.
If the movement of such an antagonistic contradiction is not detained,
it will lead to the ideological and organizational destruction of
the working class organization.
The history
of the international communist movement is rich in examples of how
a non-antagonistic contradiction can turn into an antagonistic one.
Lenin led a protracted struggle against opportunism and other anti-Marxist
tendencies within the SDLP of Russia. The contradictions between
Bolsheviks and Mensheviks were at first non-antagonistic, later
turning into antagonistic ones. Another example is the struggle
within the Second International. For instance, the struggle between
Lenin and the right-wing opportunists led by Kautsky, Plekhanov,
Axelrod and others who openly went over to the side of the class
enemy. The struggle of comrade Stalin against the trends of Bukharin,
Trotsky, Rykov, Tomski, Kamenev, and others was non-antagonistic
at its onset. This struggle also became antagonistic when these
"old Bolsheviks" turned criminal and sided with international counter-revolution.
In China, the Communist Party fought against and smashed several
antagonistic trends headed by revisionists, opportunists and adventurers.
One of these struggles took place in 1927. Then Chairman Mao had
to fight for the eradication of the opportunist line responsible
for a serious defeat of the Chinese Communists and the people's
movement.
In Peru,
Chairman Gonzalo, as the leader of the red fraction, fought since
1962 against opportunists, liquidators and all kinds of opposite
lines within the PCP. In the midst of an acute two-line struggle,
he reconstituted the PCP and initiated the armed struggle in 1980.
The protracted road of the two-line struggle within the PCP, personally
led by Chairman Gonzalo, is proof of three concrete facts: First,
that a two-line struggle carried out under the guidance of Marxist-Leninist-Maoist
principles serves for the consolidation of the Party, strengthens
its ideological and political foundations and promotes the revolutionary
process. Second, when the contradiction within the Party reaches
its antagonistic level, it turns into the main problem that the
communists must resolve. That this contradiction is resolved is
the fundamental condition for the attainment of the strategic objectives
of the Party in relation to the seizure of power. Third, to sweep
away "the colossal mountain of garbage" because the tools for resolution
of non-antagonistic contradictions within the Party, criticism and
self-criticism, are no longer effective. In such cases, it is obligatory
to take radical measures of struggle, such as purges, and a rigorous
screening of cadres and militants.
"It is
by means of persistent, determined and wise two-line struggle in
defense of the proletarian line and defeating the opposite lines,
that Gonzalo Thought was generated and established."11
If we
consider that both kinds of contradictions, antagonistic and non-antagonistic,
have their origins within the party, the latter develops as a permanent
phenomena implicit in matter and thought. It exists as a reflection
of the class struggle and it experiences changes and mutations during
its process of development. However, an antagonistic contradiction,
because of its very character, dissolves the relative unity of opposites
and thus excludes itself from the Party. By clashing openly with
the Party's nature, it loses any identity with its opposites within
the organization. In this respect it is worth quoting what Chairman
Mao states in relation to the exact character of the antagonistic
phenomena:
"Before
a bomb explodes, it is a single whole within which the opposites
co-exist due to the presence of certain conditions. The explosion
only occurs when a new condition presents itself: ignition."12
Where
is the bomb that has exploded within the PCP? We should ask ourselves
where the bomb is that has exploded within the Communist Party of
Peru? It is true that the "peace agreement" was set up as a kind
of sinister bomb by the secret services of the Peruvian state and
of US imperialism. However, this explosion - in reality more like
a big noise - took place outside and not inside the Party. This
is a fact, despite the claims of the low-intensity warfare strategists
of reaction.
The fact
that some traitors and capitulators participated in priming and
igniting this bomb (the "peace fraud") does not mean that this is
an internal conflict within the PCP. Even less can we speak of this
as a "two-line struggle within the PCP". In El Diario Internacional
of 24 September 1994, we have explained in detail how the fraud
of "peace agreement" was planned and carried out. In that article
we proved that this fraud was concocted at the behest of the National
Intelligence Service of the Peruvian state (SIN, with the US secret
services). We also showed that its counter-revolutionary objectives
aim at destroying the PCP, arresting the People's War, assassinating
Chairman Gonzalo and liquidating Gonzalo Thought.
What
Kind of Patients Are These We Should Aim To Save?
Second
aspect: The leaders of RIM say: "Treat the sickness to save the
patient."
This
is an incorrect assessment with no validity for the case at hand.
Let us see why. The phrase bandied about by the leaders of RIM is
taken from Chairman Mao Tse-tung's speech, "On the Correct Handling
of Contradictions Within the Ranks of the People". This is a clear
text that deals with the two kinds of contradictions existing then
in Chinese society (1957). Concretely, it deals with the contradictions
that the Communist Party had to resolve to lead the Chinese People's
Republic along the road of socialist construction.
The two
kinds of contradictions referred to by Chairman Mao are: Those that
exist within the people's own ranks and those that develop between
the people and its enemies. Chairman Mao expressly shows that we
must first establish with precision who belongs to the ranks of
the people and who to the enemies of the people. Only then can we
distinguish correctly between these two different kinds of contradiction.
Chairman Mao says that we should consider as the people "all those
classes, social strata and groups supporting and participating in
the cause of socialist construction". On the other hand, Mao characterizes
as enemies of the people "all forces and social groups resisting
the socialist revolution, hostile to socialist construction or undermining
it". Chairman Mao stresses that the contradictions occurring within
the people's own ranks are not antagonistic and that their resolution
is by the democratic method (criticism and self-criticism). In this
respect it is perfectly proper to apply the Maoist policy of "curing
the sickness to save the patient". Chairman Mao said: "The application
of this method requires to start from the desire for unity". On
the other hand, the contradictions between the people and its enemies
are antagonistic. Their resolution requires confrontation, and open
struggle against the saboteurs.
Let us
dialectically apply the theoretical formulations of Chairman Mao
to the concrete case of Peru. The ranks of the people in Peru are
made up of the working class, the peasantry, the petite bourgeoisie
and the middle or national bourgeoisie. That is, all classes and
forces that in various degrees support the People's War led by the
PCP. Within this camp there are and will continue to be contradictions
for a long time. These contradictions will be gradually resolved
by the Party and the working class in the course of the democratic
revolution, the socialist revolution and in the transition to communism.
Who are the enemies of the Peruvian people? The imperialists, principally
the USA. Also, the two factions of the big bourgeoisie (comprador
and bureaucratic), the landowners, Fujimori's puppet regime and
its army and police forces, the backbone of their state. In other
words, the enemies of the Peruvian people are those classes, social
groups and political institutions sustaining the oppressor's state
and fighting against the revolution. Those openly fighting against
the armed struggle initiated in 1980. Here, according to the concrete
stage of the revolutionary process, antagonistic contradictions
between the oppressed masses on the one hand, and imperialism, bureaucratic-capitalism
and semi-feudality on the other, are resolved by the method of armed
struggle.
Who can
claim that the "peace letters" and their authors are to be found
within the people's camp and even within the PCP? No one can be
confused about this, unless it is intentionally. The "peace agreement"
is an antagonistic contradiction, an irreconcilable contradiction
pitting the revolution against counter-revolution. It is a contradiction
between the Peruvian people and its enemies, between their liberation
war and the anti-insurgency war of the reactionaries. There is no
room here to "treat the sickness to save the patient" as the leaders
of RIM are seeking to do....
In synthesis,
no Marxist-Leninist-Maoist can demand what the leaders of RIM do:
That capitulators be dealt with by the methods used to resolve contradictions
within the ranks of the people. Even less can they demand, as they
also do, that these elements should be considered as people undergoing
an "illness", as people with whom we should not deal with "in hasty
or irresponsible fashion". Chairman Gonzalo says that we must deal
with capitulation by branding it with searing fire:
"Capitulation
expresses itself in two aspects: Capitulation in the face of native
reaction and capitulation in the face of world reaction. It is always
like this. Its aim is to sell out the revolution. Therefore, it
is something rotten. It must be eliminated by searing fire".15
"Without
Investigation No Right to Speak"
Third
aspect: The leaders of RIM say that: "Without investigation there
is no right to speak, and that one should seek truth from facts.
That way one shall not act irresponsibly nor jump to conclusions
before having grasped the problem as a whole."
One cannot
deny that every problem should be studied in depth, especially when
it affects the most important revolutionary process in the Americas.
From the inception of Marxism, in the 1840s, the working class and
the revolutionary forces have found a scientific instrument that
serves them to understand and transform the world. Dialectical and
historical materialism are the basis of Marxist philosophy. Of these
two, dialectical materialism makes up the Marxist theory of knowledge.
That is, the scientific method that guides itself by the principle
of studying the phenomena and process of nature and society as permanently
inter-related. But Marxism teaches and proves that any theoretical
study must be linked with revolutionary practice. Marxism is profoundly
linked to historical reality. This principle differentiates a Marxist
study from an anti-dialectical, inane and philistine study. Chairman
Gonzalo points out:
"We always
undertake study with a view to its application and to resolve actual
problems. Otherwise we would fall into bookish studies, into mere
parroting, and that is a bourgeois, idealist and metaphysical method."16
Here,
we must, like Karl Marx, point out that words divorced from reality
have no meaning, they are dead letters: "It is in practice where
man has to prove the truth, the power and reality, the this-sidedness
of his thinking. The debate about the reality or unreality of an
idea in isolation from practice, is a purely scholastic problem."17
Any serious
attempt at investigating the counter-revolutionary political content
of the "peace plot" must evaluate the complete set of elements that
make up the political scene in Peru. The "peace agreement" and its
repressive aims cannot be correctly explained if one does not at
least take the following aspects into account:
1) The vanguard
role of the People's War in the development of the world proletarian
revolution.
2) Its links
with the liberation process in Latin America and other parts of
the world.
3) The struggle
of the Communist Party of Peru (PCP) for the validity and application
of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism as the third and superior stage of Marxism.
4) The fundamental
role of Gonzalo Thought for the continuation of the revolution and
the seizure of power in Peru.
5) The bankruptcy
of bureaucrat capitalism in Peru and its consequences reflected
in the decomposition of the old Peruvian state.
6) The struggle
of the PCP against revisionism, opportunism and other counter-revolutionary
trends within the working class and the oppressed masses.
7) The development
of 14 years of armed struggle and the strengthening of the three
instruments of the revolution (Party-Army-United Front).
8) The consolidation
of the strategic equilibrium (Second stage of the protracted People's
War).
9) The generation
and multiplication of the People's Committees as the expression
of People's Power in Peru.
10) The military,
political and psycho-social plans of imperialism aimed at liquidating
the revolution, destroying the Communist Party of Peru and eliminating
Chairman Gonzalo.
If the
"peace letters" are viewed in isolation from the sum of these elements,
one is sure to go astray. One is sure to fail to arrive at a correct
analysis or synthesis. One arrives anywhere except at the truth.
Is it true that the leaders of RIM have seriously investigated this
problem? We believe that they have not advanced very much in their
investigations. Let us, for argument's sake, assume that it is true
that they have investigated. After more than a year of studies,
one question begs to be answered: How do they explain that their
conclusions do not go beyond claiming that the "peace letters" are
an issue of "two-line struggle within the PCP"? How is it possible
that they fail to say anything about the fraud? How can they not
have found a method to face this fraud from a revolutionary perspective?
The leaders
of RIM did not undertake a serious investigation. This becomes evident
from their claim that "it is very important to know exactly what
Chairman Gonzalo really thinks". Moreover, they prattle: "It is
as yet impossible to be sure about Chairman Gonzalo's point of view".
No one
mildly acquainted with the theoretical contributions of Chairman
Gonzalo can possibly have any doubts about the great Peruvian revolutionary's
thoughts about the "peace letters". One cannot overlook the fact
that since 1962, for more than 32 years, Dr Abimael Guzman has led
the most solid and coherent revolutionary process in Latin America.
Any one
of his authentic documents amply proves his character as a communist.
It places him above any suspicion of being the vulgar capitulator
that the bourgeois media is attempting to portray. Who, within the
camp of the people, can imagine Chairman Gonzalo as the author of
those despicable tracts advocating the "peace agreement"? Expressing
doubts about the position of Chairman Gonzalo vis a vis Fujimori's
negotiations plot only serves the Peruvian regime and US imperialism.
One of the strategic aims of this plot of "peace agreement" is to
liquidate and vulgarise Gonzalo Thought. With this objective in
sight, the leader of the Peruvian revolution is counterpoised to
his own political thought....
Clearly
the investigation carried out by the leaders of RIM is merely descriptive,
lacking objectivity and scientific scope. Not in a million years
could this investigation be considered as a true Marxist analysis.
They
overlook most of the elements implicit in Fujimori's plot, both
political and repressive. That is why their preliminary conclusions
sound rather like a bad joke....
On
the "Historical Leaders" of Capitulation
Fourth
aspect: The leaders of RIM claim that there is "A group of people
who have historically played a leading role within the PCP. That
these are people strongly and decidedly promoting a line concerning
the peace conversations.... This group appears to be concentrated
inside the prisons. However, they also have support among PCP members
and supporters outside the prisons, both in Peru and abroad...."
Here
we can point out at least three errors. This evaluation is drenched
in subjectivism and reflects mainly the influence of the psycho-social
campaign of the Peruvian government. Let us analyse these points
in detail:
1) Is
it true that the individuals promoting the "peace agreement" belong
to "A group... that have historically played a leading role within
the PCP"?
How do
the leaders of RIM come to this conclusion? Where do we find this
historical role of the capitulators? This is what the Committee
of Families of Political Prisoners, Prisoners of War and the Disappeared
in Peru, an organism generated by the PCP have to say on this issue
in their statement of 3 December 1993:
"...the
sinister activities of this handful of proven and known capitulators,
snitches and cowards ... servants of US imperialism and the mass
murderers" dictatorship.... they are the same group of people who
for a long time attempted to take advantage of the revolution, seeking
to obtain important positions. They dreamt about seizing power without
messing up their fine coiffeurs. They dreamt of dividing up the
cake of power among themselves. Meanwhile, they were carping about
the development of the strategic equilibrium and the achievement
of the aims of the Party."
"...their
"historical contingent" (is) made up of renegades who have taken
upon themselves the frontal task of assassinating Chairman Gonzalo
and destroying the Party". "They are the same old puny bourgeois
politicians" .... "usurping the name of the Party...."
It should
be noted that this statement never accepts that the promoters of
the "peace agreement" are high leaders of the PCP. Even less does
it imply that they are people with an historical role. In reading
this statement, it becomes evident that these people are but old
renegades. It is true that the Peruvian government, as part of their
psycho-social warfare, portrays these capitulators as historical
leaders of the Party. This lie is but a component of the "peace
agreement" plot. It is true that, within the prisons they control,
the National Intelligence Service (SIN) has elected a "Central Committee
of the PCP". This Committee is under the control of the police and
headed by the "historical" Osman Morote Barrionuevo who has been
promoted by the Peruvian government as "Shining Path's no 2 man".
In the November 1994 issue of El Diario Internacional, we
already dealt with the case of Morote. In that issue we reported
on a conversation between the author of this document and Chairman
Gonzalo. What transpired in that meeting of July 1988 is very valuable
in clarifying this situation:
-Journalist:
"Chairman Gonzalo, what is the concrete situation of Osman Morote?
Is it true that he is the No 2 in the PCP? Is it true what the media
says about him?"
-Chairman
Gonzalo: "These are fantasies invented by our enemies. Morote has
nothing at all to do with the leadership of the Party. Even less
could he be the "No 2". We are not people who number themselves
from 1 to 100.
"On the
question of whether or not there is a line opposing the leadership:
It is important to note that the Party's First Congress has consolidated
us, both organically and at an ideological-political level. On the
other hand, there could be some truth in that Morote may have some
problems with the leadership. That is very worrying."
If Morote
was not a leader and if we also remember that he has been in gaol
since 1988, how does he then magically turn up as a "top leader
of Shining Path", and leading the "peace agreement" at that!? Who
appointed him as a member of the Central Committee? We understand
that the PCP resolves its organic problems at its various Party
levels such as the Party Congress, the Plenums of the Central Committee,
the Enlarged Plenums, Party Conferences, etc. These events take
place periodically but not within the prisons and even less with
the support of the police. In synthesis, Morote and the high position
he is supposed to occupy within the PCP is a mere invention of the
government. This whole charade is a key element of "Operation Capitulation".
2) The
leaders of RIM say that this group is concentrated inside the prisons
but that they also enjoy support among militants outside the prisons,
in Peru and abroad. This opinion is completely lacking in analytical
seriousness. It does not tally with concrete facts. Even the reactionary
Peruvian media supporting Fujimori recognizes the fundamental fact
that: The weakness of the "peace agreement", and therefore its failing,
lies in the fact that its chieftains and supporters are exclusively
within the prisons. Some "senderologists" and the Peruvian media
also admit the following fact: The government, in its counter-insurgency
strategy, is setting some capitulators free and giving them the
concrete task of promoting the "peace agreement" and snitching on
the Maoist fighters....
Considering
their grossly distorted figures-lumping together prisoners of war
and hundreds of other people rounded up en masse and falsely accused
of belonging to the PCP-here is a summary of the statistics concocted
by the Intelligence Services of the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
This report claims that the prisoners "in favour" and those "against"
the "peace agreement" are: in Castro Castro Jail (Cantogrande),
820 in favour and 469 against; in Chorrillos (women's prison), 168
in favour and 168 against; in Pcsi, 50 in favour and 65 against;
in Chiclayo, 6 in favour and 43 against.
Commenting
on this issue of the police evaluation of these figures, it is worth
quoting the newspaper La Republica: "The figures crudely
reveal that Abimael Guzman's "Great Decision and New Definition"
did not gain credibility among real Shining Path prisoners...."23
3) On
the question of the purported support that capitulation enjoys abroad:
Here the leaders of RIM are chewing on a half truth. On the one
hand, it is true that the leaders of the old Peru People's Movement
(MPP) took the lead in the international campaign to promote the
"peace agreement". In their dirty task, they circulated the "peace
letters" and even invented a telephone conversation with Chairman
Gonzalo. Thus, they claimed to have received his orders to capitulate
and sell out the People's War. But it is also true that these turncoat
individuals, who went over to the camp of the enemies of the Peruvian
people, ended up excluded from any links with the PCP and its work
abroad. In November 1993, the true Central Committee of the PCP-not
the one led by the National Intelligence Service (SIN)-issued an
International Directive unmasking these elements. In this Directive
the PCP gave precise instructions for the reorganization of the
MPPs around those supporters that had kept their distance from the
capitulators.
It is
also true that the leaders of RIM did not take up a position regarding
the capitulators of the old MPPs and that they are still persevering
in this course of action, despite the time that has now elapsed
since the beginning of this struggle (more than one year). On the
contrary, they have kept links with them as if nothing unbecoming
had been going on. To justify this behaviour, they use their stock-in-trade
excuse of "conducting investigations". From this position, they
have even refused to circulate the documents from the PCP and any
information against the "peace letters". This obviously pleased
the capitulators who are denying the authority and the validity
of the Central Committee of the PCP. In essence, the political behaviour
of the leaders of RIM in this problem is open conciliation with
elements that the PCP has expelled from its generated organisms
abroad.
Defend
the Life of Chairman Gonzalo in Deeds and Not Merelyb in Words
Fifth
aspect. The leaders of RIM say: "It is also imperative that the
present debate does not affect the importance of continuing with
the task of Defending the Life of Chairman Gonzalo and supporting
the People's War in Peru. We must continue supporting and helping
the International Emergency Committee to Defend the Life of Abimael
Guzman...." ...
By simple
political logic, the revolutionary or democratic masses are not
going to support a campaign to defend the life of a Chairman Gonzalo
turned capitulator. They would not mobilize in defense of a person
who according to the official propaganda holds daily negotiations
with his jailers. A man equipped by the secret police with a private
mobile phone. A man free to hold meetings with "his central committee"
and give lectures on the "peace agreement" under the protection
of the state. A man who writes and publishes essays about the economical,
political and military successes of the puppet Fujimori. In synthesis,
the masses, consciously or instinctively, would never struggle on
behalf of anyone in cahoots with repressive and murderous governments
such as the Peruvian regime.
The leaders
of RIM and the IEC are closing their eyes to these facts. They do
not want to see what even the blind can see. They call for defending
the life of Chairman Gonzalo and supporting the International Emergency
Committee (IEC). However, they do not take up a position vis a vis
the "peace agreement". They contribute nothing to debunk the black
propaganda woven by imperialism and the reactionaries around the
fate of Dr Guzman. They do not lift a finger to unmask the capitulators.
This attitude places them in an untenable position. They are falling
into the most elementary subjectivism and leading the IEC to its
final bankruptcy.
Some Final
Notes
From
the above analysis, and taking the perspectives and international
significance of the People's War in Peru into consideration, we
can put forward the following conclusions:
1) Revisionism
continues to be the main danger within the international communist
movement. The conciliating tendency of the leadership of RIM reflects
this phenomena. It is imperative to fight against this deviation.
This struggle must guide itself by the scientific ideology of the
proletariat. Failure to undertake this task would contribute to
undermine the international revolutionary process and would render
succour to the imperialist powers. To remain aloof in this contest
is tantamount to going over to the opportunist swamp.
2. We
must put into practice the three guidelines advanced by Chairman
Gonzalo in relation to the unity and development of RIM: a) To unite
around Marxism-Leninism-Maoism. b) To serve the world proletarian
revolution. c) To fight uncompromisingly against revisionism.24
"Unite
to overthrow imperialism, revisionism and world reaction. This battle
cry remains fully in the order of the day."25
3. Consider
the position of the PCP regarding RIM. Chairman Gonzalo points out
that currently we do not have a Communist International and that
it is the duty of the revolutionaries to strive for its establishment.
To this aim, the RIM is a step forward "which would be useful on
that account if it bases itself upon a just and correct ideological
line."26
4. The
support for the People's War in Peru and the defense of the life
of Chairman Gonzalo is a revolutionary stance based on the principles
of proletarian internationalism. In theory and practice this means
struggle against capitulation. It means fighting against the police
agents, against imperialism. It means smashing revisionism and opportunism.
By following these Marxist principles we will accomplish the task
of contributing to the revolutionary process in Peru and at the
international level.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1 V I Lenin,
"Thesis on The Fundamental Tasks of the Second Congress of the Comintern",
Selected Works, p 135.
2 Chairman
Gonzalo, "Speech at Plenary Session of the Second Plenum of the
Central Committee", August 1990, p 9.
3 Carlos Tapia,
Diario La Republica, 18 August 1994.
4 Central
Committee of the Communist Party of Peru, February 1994 Report.
5 V I Lenin,
"One Step Forward, Two Steps Back", February-May 1904.
...
8 Mao Tse-tung,
On Contradiction, Selected Works, Vol I p 340.
9 Ibid, p
366.
10 V I Lenin,
"One Step Forward Two Steps Back", Selected Works, p 15.
11 Fundamental
Documents of the PCP, "The Forge Amid The Two-Line Struggle",
1990 Edition.
12 Chairman
Mao Tse-tung, Selected Works, Vol I, 1976 Edition, p 366.
...
15 Chairman
Gonzalo, "Speech Report at the Plenary Session of the 2nd Plenum
of the CC of PCP", August 1990, p 14.
16 Chairman
Gonzalo, "On the Rectification Campaign"-"No to Elections, Yes to
the People's War", People's War in Peru, Gonzalo Thought,
Vol II.
17 Karl Marx,
"Theses on Feuerbach", 1845, Selected Works, p 401.
...
23 Angel Paez,
Diario La Republica, Investigations Unit, 21 August 1994.
24 Chairman
Gonzalo, "Speech at the II Plenary Session of the Central Committee
of PCP", October -November 1990.
25 Chairman
Gonzalo, "Speech at the II Plenary Session of the Central Committee
of PCP", October -November 1990.
26 "Document
of the Congress of the PCP", Bases for discussion, "International
Line", Luis Arce Borja, People's War in Peru, 1989,
Vol I , p 323.
Errata
There
were two errors in the Feburary 1994 Report by the PCP Central Committee,
"Reaffirm Our Party Basis of Unity and Build the Seizure of Power",
printed in AWTW 1995/21. Both were on p 21 in the section
headed:
II On
the Application of the Work Session
2. On
Yankee imperialism's indirect intervention.
In column
two, the second page reference under the document "Build the Seizure
of Power Amidst People's War" should have been:
pp 13-14 On
ideology as an arm of victory...
In column
three, after the reference for p 43 Point 2. Psy-ops. II Plenum,
pp 395-407, it should read:
* On the
war of low intensity. Preparatory session. II Plenum pp 395-410.
* On probabilities.
Summary document p 116.
|