[This issue of Peking Review is from massline.org. Massline.org has kindly given us permission to to place these documents on the MIA. We made only some formatting changes to make them congruent with our style sheets.]
[This article is reprinted from Peking Review, #4, Jan. 21, 1966, pp. 16-18.]
THE First Afro-Asian-Latin American Peoples’ Solidarity Conference came to a successful conclusion in Havana on January 15. It adopted a resolution, firmly supporting the Vietnamese people’s struggle to resist U.S. aggression and save their country, a general declaration, a general political resolution, and other resolutions condemning imperialism, colonialism and neocolonialism headed by the United States, and expressing solidarity with the national-liberation movements in various countries. These documents give expression to the common desire and will of the hundreds of millions of Asian, African and Latin American people to carry forward their cause of solidarity against imperialism.
The conference took place against the setting of the peoples of the three continents and throughout the world locked in a bitter struggle with U.S. imperialism. The anti-imperialist revolutionary struggles on the three continents are growing in intensity and the general situation is excellent. The heroic Vietnamese people are indomitably carrying on their resistance against U.S. aggression to save their country and are winning repeated resounding victories, thereby strongly encouraging and supporting the anti-imperialist struggles of other peoples. The battle against imperialism, colonialism and neocolonialism headed by the United States is surging forward in Laos, Cambodia, Japan, south Korea, the Congo (Leopoldville), Southern Rhodesia, the Dominican Republic and many other places on the three continents. A new anti-U.S. revolutionary storm is in the offing in the Afro-Asian-Latin American region and the whole world. The anti-imperialist struggle of the peoples has reached unparalleled heights, while imperialism headed by the United States is at the end of its rope—such is the main current in Asia, Africa and Latin America today; and the tri-continental conference naturally cannot but reflect this characteristic of the present situation.
Strong voices against U.S. imperialism resounded from all corners of the conference hall. U.S. imperialism was the principal target of attack and exposure in delegates’ speeches, in discussions at sub-committee meetings and in the many documents of the conference, which was in fact a conference to denounce U.S. imperialism and mobilize the people of the three continents for a more intense anti-U.S. fight.
Countless facts show that U.S. imperialism is the biggest international exploiter and the main bulwark of colonialism. It is the prop of all reactionary forces and the main force of aggression and war. It is the most arrogant, most ferocious and most brutal of the aggressors that mankind has ever seen. It is the root of all the evil for the Afro-Asian-Latin American region. To attain or safeguard independence and to seek liberation, it is absolutely necessary for the people of the three continents to rise and combat U.S. imperialism. To realize its overweening ambition for world conquest, U.S. imperialism is frenziedly prosecuting its policy of aggression and war in Asia, Africa and Latin America, committing aggression and intervention everywhere and wilfully infringing upon and menacing the independence of other countries. Thus, the most pressing task facing the people of the three continents is to enhance their militant solidarity, further consolidate and broaden the international united front against U.S. imperialism and its flunkeys to the widest possible extent and isolate U.S. imperialism as much as they can. Consequently, many delegates at the conference roundly condemned U.S. imperialism’s policies of aggression and war. They declared that U.S. imperialism was the common enemy of the people of the three continents, and emphasized the necessity to direct the national-democratic movement in the region at U.S. imperialism. They stated that victory in any revolutionary cause, independence, peace and progress were unthinkable if the struggle against U.S. imperialism were discontinued. The conference said in its general declaration: “The Asian, African and Latin American peoples know from their own experience that the main bastion of colonial oppression and international reaction is U.S. imperialism—the implacable enemy of all the peoples of the world. To overthrow the domination of U.S. imperialism is the decisive question in order to attain a conclusive and complete victory in the anti-imperialist struggle in the three continents. In the pursuance of this objective all their peoples’ efforts must converge.” This is a just verdict on U.S. imperialism and a solemn call to the Asian, African and Latin American peoples.
The Vietnamese people’s struggle to resist U.S. aggression and save their country is now the focus of the worldwide struggle against imperialism. The Asian, African and Latin American peoples all demanded that the conference make it its central task to support the Vietnamese people’s anti-U.S. national-salvation struggle and to oppose U.S. aggression against Vietnam. At a time when the Johnson Administration was busy, with a big “peace” swindle and expanding its war, the conference voiced strong condemnation of the U.S. imperialist policy of aggression against Vietnam and expressed resolute support for the Vietnamese people persisting in their anti-U.S. struggle for national salvation. Many delegates sharply exposed the Johnson Administration’s “peace talks” fraud. They pointed out that the Vietnam question can be solved only in accordance with the will of the Vietnamese people. They appealed to the people of all countries to resolutely support the Vietnamese people to carry their anti-U.S. national-salvation struggle to the finish, until the U.S. aggressors are completely defeated. The resolution on Vietnam severely condemned U.S. imperialism’s plot to intensify its moves for widening the war under the “peace talks” smokescreen, and indignantly denounced U.S. imperialism as the war criminal. At the same time, the resolution expressed unreserved support for the five-part statement of the South Vietnam National Front for Liberation and the four-point proposition of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam. It demanded an immediate withdrawal from south Vietnam of U.S. and satellite troops and the recognition of the South Vietnam National Front for Liberation as the sole legitimate representative of the south Vietnamese people. All this voices the common aspirations of the more than 2,000 million people of Asia, Africa and Latin America.
As U.S. imperialism and its lackeys are more wildly relying on counter-revolutionary violence to carry out their tyrannical rule and armed suppression of the revolutionary movements of the oppressed nations, the broad masses of the Asian, African and Latin American regions have become increasingly convinced that armed struggle is the correct path for the oppressed nations and the oppressed peoples to win independence and liberation, and they have firm faith in people’s war as the most effective way to deal with U.S. imperialism and its lackeys. Many delegates showed by their own experience that it was necessary to oppose the counter-revolutionary violence of U.S. imperialism and its lackeys with revolutionary violence, that the independence and freedom of all peoples could be won only by armed force, and that only by armed force could their independence and freedom be defended. The general declaration of the conference proclaimed in no uncertain terms that the people of all countries have the right to oppose imperialist violence with revolutionary violence.
The common demand of the overwhelming majority of the delegates was that the anti-imperialist revolutionary struggle in Asia, Africa and Latin America be pushed to new heights. But the Khrushchov revisionists and a handful of their followers tried hard to divert the conference and lead it astray. The Khrushchov revisionists tried in vain to impose their capitulationist and divisive line on the conference and to bring the national-democratic movements in Asia, Africa and Latin America into the orbit of U.S.-Soviet collaboration for world domination. Therefore, an intense struggle between the two lines had to be waged throughout the conference.
The Khrushchov revisionists made it quite clear that they wanted to call the tune for the conference by imposing their erroneous line on it. On the opening day, the Soviet paper Pravda, in an article by its editorial department, asserted that the struggles “for peaceful coexistence of states with different social systems,” “for the prohibition of nuclear weapons and their means of delivery” and “for universal peace” “will be the main subjects of discussion at the Havana conference.” It attempted to divert the attention of the conference with its so-called “universal peace,” “total and complete disarmament,” “peaceful coexistence” and similar stuff. But most delegates were aware that it was U.S. imperialism which was carrying out armed aggression and intervention everywhere in Asia, Africa and Latin America and that, to the people of these areas, the most urgent task was to resolutely combat the U.S. imperialist policies of aggression and war and intensify their revolutionary struggles against U.S. imperialism and its lackeys. The Khrushchov revisionists were, in fact, doing a service to U.S. imperialism by hawking their goods at this juncture. Obviously, their wares could find no market among the revolutionary peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America. Soviet delegates resorted to all kinds of despicable means to smuggle into the conference their contraband “peaceful coexistence” and all that sort of rubbish. This only enabled the broad masses of the people of Asia, Africa and Latin America to see more clearly the counter-revolutionary features of the Khrushchov revisionists.
At a time when the people of Asia, Africa and Latin America were daiiy becoming more awakened politically and when the anti-imperialist revolutionary struggle was reaching unprecedented heights, the Khrushchov revisionists had to resort to increasingly hypocritical and cunning two-faced tactics—sham anti-imperialism but real capitulation, sham support but real betrayal, sham unity but real split—and carefully disguised means to peddle their erroneous line at the conference.
The two-faced tactics of the Khrushchov revisionists were especially vicious on the Vietnam question. In his address, the Soviet delegate pretended to support the Vietnamese people in their struggle against U.S. aggression. But he did not dare condemn the United States in strong terms for its aggression in Vietnam. Forced by circumstances, he mentioned casually that “the U.S. imperialists hypocritically talk of negotiations.” However, even this sentence, was deleted by TASS when reporting this address. At a time when the Johnson Administration was launching its “peace offensive” in a big way, the Soviet delegate at the conference advocated “the realization of peace in Vietnam.” This was obviously acting in co-ordination with U.S. imperialism. The Soviet leaders actively peddle the “peace talks” swindle for the United States, while U.S. ruling circles hope that the Soviet leaders will help “realize peace” in Vietnam. This is no longer a secret.
Even more despicable is that the Khrushchov revisionists, exploiting the legitimate aspirations of the peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America for closer unity against imperialism, have raised a big howl about what they call “solidarity,” “cohesion” and “unity.” There is no doubt that, at the present moment, when a most fierce struggle is being waged between the aggressors and their victims, all forces which truly pit themselves against imperialism should unite and form the broadest possible international united front against U.S. imperialism and its lackeys. But what the Khrushchov revisionists are advocating is certainly not such anti-imperialist unity. Since they regard the common enemy of the peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America as the one with which they should collaborate, since they are bent on taking united action with U.S. imperialism in pursuit of the domination of the world through U.S.-Soviet co-operation, and since they have set themselves against the revolutionary people of all countries, how can the genuine anti-imperialist, revolutionary forces stand in “unity” and take “united action” with them?
What kind of “unity” the Khrushchov revisionists want could be clearly seen at the conference. In spite of all their calls for “united action,” the Soviet delegate refused to put up his hand in favour of the proposal tabled at the subcommittee meeting by the Cambodian delegate urging all countries which uphold justice and peace to refuse to have any political, diplomatic, economic and cultural co-operation with the United States, though all the other delegates voted for it. In spite of all the Khrushchov revisionists’ calls for “united action,” the Soviet delegate refused to support, though many other delegates supported, the demand of the delegate of the Dominican Republic to condemn the United Nations as a tool serving the interests of colonialism and neo-colonialism. In spite of all the Khrushchov revisionists’ calls for “united action,” the Soviet delegate opposed, though most of the other delegates supported, the demand of the delegate from the Portuguese colonies to sever all relations with Israel—U.S. imperialism’s instrument of aggression. These hard facts readily show that in calling for “united action,” the Khrushchov revisionists do not intend to unite with the people of the Asian, African and Latin American countries to oppose U.S. imperialism and its lackeys, but that they want the others to join them in giving up the struggle against U.S. imperialism and surrendering to it. Of course this is impossible.
Throughout the conference, the Soviet delegates tried in every way to form a new tri-continental organization to replace the Afro-Asian People’s Solidarity Organization which has a history of eight years of struggle against imperialism. They fondly hoped that in this way they could bring the mass organizations of Asia, Africa and Latin America and their anti-imperialist activity under control. This plot, hatched also for the alleged purpose of “united action,” has made it crystal clear that the Khrushchov revisionists are working for sham unity and real split.
The conference achieved great successes, thanks to the unflagging struggle of the great majority of the delegates who upheld truth and justice. The true colours of the Khrushchov revisionists, with their manoeuvres of sham anti-imperialism, sham support and sham unity, were further exposed, and their capitulationist and divisive line met with ignominious failure. From the proceedings of the conference one sees once again that no force on earth can stem the tide of the anti-imperialist, revolutionary struggle in Asia, Africa and Latin America. One sees still more clearly that, in order to combat imperialism, struggles must be waged against revisionism. As the conference has stressed in its general declaration: “The peoples of the three continents, determined as they are to sweep all the obstacles out of their way, and to fight undauntedly towards a new Asia, a new Africa, and a new Latin America, once and for all emancipated from imperialism, colonialism and neo-colonialism, should co-ordinate their efforts in closed ranks until they win a total and conclusive victory. They are inspired with full confidence in their future.”
Advance, the revolutionary peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America!
(“Renmin Ribao’s” editorial, January 18, 1966.)
Peking Review Index | Chinese Communism | Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung