A WORLD TO WIN    #22   (1996)


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).


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.


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.


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.