The Philippines, East
PHILIPPINES
Marxist parties, whether we are talking so-called pro-Moscow about
Or pro-
Beijing ones... Even Marxist parties in your own Trotskyist tradition have to deal
Europe, Socialism with the question of the role of the party after victory. In the case of the Philippines, fortunately these questions are being posed in the course of the struggle and Democracy itself. This is very important because if you do not deal with the issue now, in a real way - which is in a way that affects how you are acting — then you will never
Interview with Joel Rocamora deal with it properly. One has to deal with such issues in practice, and not only in theory.
For example, in 1986 the CPP made a self-criticism, not only for having decided
JOEL ROCAMORA has been active in the Philippine struggle, at home and abroad, for many years. He taught politics at the
University of the Philippines in Manila, before he was imprisoned by the Marcos regime, after the declaration of martial law in 1972, and subsequently forced into exile. In the
United States, Joel was director of the Southeast Asia
Resource Center and later the Philippine Resource Center.
This interview was conducted in February 1990, in
Amsterdam, The Netherlands, where Joel is now based and where he is associate director of the Transnational Institute
(TNI). This interview was done for International Viewpoint by
Jeroen Zonneveld and Rob Lubbersen.
Joel Rocamora analyzes here the impact of the recent developments in Eastern Europe on the Filipino Left and the
Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP). He presents his own views on the significance of these historic events for
Third World revolutionaries.
W hat has been impact of the recent
Europe and the USSR on the Philippine Left?
THESE developments have put certain questions on the agenda in the Philippines, for the National Democratic Front and all the "national democrats". This is true for both the above ground and underground NDs.!
Even if it is experienced by the CPP and the NDF people in ways that are quite specific, I think that what Marxists in the Philippines have to confront is the same as everywhere else in the Third
World. We must deal with the question of democracy, inner party democracy the role of the party in relation to other political and mass organizations.
That is extremely important and goes very, very deep. What has happened in
Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union is historic. Questions of democracy cannot anymore be disregarded by revolutionarchoose to be democratic, but the question is now on of revolutionaries everythe agenda
22
International Viewpoint #186 • June 4, 1990
• It is not the first time you have underlined the importance of the issue of democracy for revolutionI have said the same things previously, even before the developments in Eastern Europe. The questions themselves are not so new, of course. The NDF has had to confront them many times, since 1986 and the downfall of the Marcos dictatorship especially. But with the changing situation in Eastern Europe, they are raised in an even more serious way than before. If you look at the program of the NDF, you will find that it does not believe in one-party-rule. This is then true for the CPP itself, as it is a member organization of the NDF. In fact, the latest version of the NDF program, of November 1989, explicitly uses the term "political pluralism". Some people will argue that the CPP puts out a program in which it does not really believe. I don't think that it is correct to say so.
What I think is true is that, as the CPP struggles to deal with its position in Philippine society, at whatever point time, it has to confront its ideological history. This is in fact the case for all to boycott the 1986 presidential elections, but also, and more importantly, it criticized itself for failing, on this occasion, to implement democracy within the party and in relation to the mass organizations in which it operates.? The CPP Politbureau made criticisms of the process whereby the decision to boycott was made within the party. Moreover, party units within mass organizations used pressure tactics and took organizational steps to get legal organizations to take a boycott position even when that did not reflect the opinion of the mass organization itself. After that, there was a call for more democracy, inside the party as well as in the mass organizations. However, especially under conditions of clandestinity, the battle for inner party democracy is a long battle. It is not just one single battle, it is really a long war to fight. It is hopefully a situation of two steps forward — one step back and not the other way around. Clearly this has not yet been comsuccessful. Not decisively anyway. I speak of the 1986 self-criticism as an important step forward, but it went only part of the way.
• How does the CPP assess what's happening in China, Eastern Europe and the USSR?
On international questions it is very difficult at this point to say where the center of gravity is in the leadership of the CPP.
For a long time, the CPP looked to China on international issues. It stopped doing so when it decided not to follow anymore the Chinese Three Worlds Theory according to which the USSR had become the main enemy. The CPP leadership decided own understanding of the world situation. This was eventually made explicit in an interview with the chairman of the Party, in July 1987. This has been a very positive step forward
On the other hand, if you are an intellectual and you have been in the hills for the last fifteen years, what happened in China and Eastern Europe must be bewildering because you have only got some tiny little pieces of it. On the radio you can only hear the "Voice of America" and the BBC
"World Service". I am not even sure that
PHILIPPINES
Dimming prospects for democracy in the Philippines serious position on these events. What REPRESSION is intensifying in the Philippines. We happens depends on certain people for party for- then is that the leadership publish below a statement on the latest events issued mulations on international questions in a by the Transnational Institute and signed by many greater way than on other issues. individuals and organizations which participated in a
There was an article, in the November conference on "Sustainable Development in the Phi1989 issue of the party paper, Ang Bayan, lippines" held in Amsterdam May 17-19, 1990. which said some quite favourable things about perestroika and glasnost. But there is no collective position, yet. Some in the
RECENT developments in the Philippines put In jeopardy the proswith Ligachev believe
CPP leadership that Gorbachev is betraying Communism pects of democratic expression, independent people's initiatives and and Marxism-Leninism. They say the reahuman rights.
We are alarmed that in the repressive loglc of the Philippine governson why the Communist parties in Eastment's counter-insurgency policy, which treats everything as a weapern Europe have failed is because they on of war and almost every non-government Initiative as a suspect introduced capitalist elements in the economy, so they allowed the reactionaries to and seditious endeavor, these basic features of democracy have establish a foothold and now the reactionbecome, like a growing number of innocent Filipinos, casualties of aries have kicked them out. I disagree total war.
with that position. Some others think, and
We raise special concern over the following events which highlight
I would agree more with them, that at the the direction government policy and attitude are taking:
root of the problem is that, in those coun
1. The arrest last May 10 of Jaime Tadeo, chairperson of the Kilusang tries, the dictatorship of the proletariat
Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP — Philippine Peasant Movement) and has been identified with the dictatorship leader of the Coalition for a People's Agrarian Reform (CAR) and the of the party, which is a quite different
Peasants Forum, and the filing of sedition charges against Leony thing.
Montemayer (FFF), Benjamin Cruz (Sanduguan), Paang Mariano
(KMP), Oscar Castillo (Pakisama) and 195 others.
Coming after renewed farmers protests, Tadeo's conviction over
• Could you elaborate a bit more on what the late Senator Jose Dickno calls a ten year criminal "non-case"
this question?
The present problems have to do with is a thin and ridiculous excuse to silence him. More than this, it symthe way the idea of the dictatorship of the bolizes the imprisonment of the people's desire for genuine agrarian proletariat has been linked to the role of the Leninist party. In theoretical terms,
2. The violent dispersal of anti-US bases rallles and the arrests of leaders Lidy Nacpil-Alejandro of BAYAN, Nathaniel Santiago of the yes it makes sense. If you agree that the state is the expression of class rule then
League of Filipino Students and Al Senturlas of the UCCP with several whichever class rules you will have the dictatorship of a class. If the proletariat
This happening highlights the government's Increasing Intolerance rules then you have the dictatorship of the towards dissenting opinions and its as yet unofficlal option in the curproletariat. The assumption is that once rent negotiations over the U.S. bases in the Philippines you get rid of the bourgeoisie by revolu-
3. The summary killing of unarmed tribesfolk Norman and Antonio tion, then everybody will be the proletari-
Akien last April 3 at Tadian, Mountain Province and the continuous at. Therefore it is not really a dictatorship.
harassment of their sister, Georgia Valasco of DATC, a Cordillera non-
But in many cases, the reality was not government organization.
dictatorship of the proletariat but dictator-
The two brothers were allegedly killed in an encounter between Phiship of the so-called proletarian party.
lippine Constabulary troopers and NPA rebels which residents denied
Then, the state and the apparatus of the ever occurred. The Armed Forces have since been harassing proteststate merged with the party. All of the ers, Including the victims' sister and tribes kin, who are requesting other organizations become part of the
Independent Investigation and subsequent prosecution of Involved operation of the state or the party. This is bad not only for the society, but also for
This and other similar killings, compounded by government Inaction, the party. If the party controls everything have made a mockery of the country's system of justice and have elethen there are tendencies that develop vated the Armed Forces as judge and executioner in the exigencies of within these parties that make them flabby and bureaucratic and not accountable
As Individuals concerned with the realization of democracy in the to the people. There should be room for
Philippines, we are calling for the Immediate release of Jimmy Tadeo, organizations to operate independently of
Lidy Nacpll-Alejandro, Nathaniel Santlago and others. Likewise, we the government and of the party.
are calling for the prosecution of the gullty In the Tadian killings.
We are calling on the government of President Cory Aquino to redi-
1.The National Democratic Front (NDF is an underrect its hostilities towards the causes of pervasive poverty and misery ground organization, led by the CPP. The "national
We urge it to work with equal zeal to uplift the people's socal and ecodemocrats" (or NDs) are those activists.
including those acting above ground in legality, who identify nomic conditions. Only through this can it give justice to the popular themselves with the basic program and goals of the sacrifice that, in the first place, placed it in power. *
NDF.
2. The CPP boycotted the 1986 snap presidential election which led to the "EDSA revolution", the downfall of the Marcos dictatorship and the formation of the
Aquino regime.
----- pull-quotes on this page -----
you can still get Moscow in the Philip- pines. You can get radio Beijing but their news broadcasts are not heard very much. So, it's understandable that people in the mountains find it difficult to figure out a 23 June 4, 1990 • #186 International Viewpoint
PHILIPPINES
So, at the core of the issues that Eastern
Europe and the Soviet Union are facing, you'll find the connection between the party and state institutions. And I think that Marxists and Marxist-Leninist parties have not dealt with these things seriously enough in the past. Even in the case of the
Philippines, the CPP still needs to undertake some extremely serious debates on these kinds of questions. Because while the NDF program already says all the right things about democracy, some of the ideas in the heads of some people within the party do not correspond to them. So there are now and there will be struggles within the party as well as between party people and non-party people within the
Hopefully, I think that there is a worldwide positive trend. On democracy and the practice of proletarian Marxist parties, the more recent experiences are showing improvements. Socialist countries, especially the newer ones, have a contribution to make. Even the Soviet Union... But one has to go back to their past in order to find such a contribution. From the Soviet party to China to Cuba, from Cuba to Nicaragua, there are positive changes. Many of my ideas on the subject are in fact picked up from Latin American revolutionaries. • So the traditional bourgeois democratic model is not the only way forward ?
I think that the Marxist criticism of the bourgeois state and democracy remains valid - the criticism of the class nature and the limits of democratic institutions in advanced capitalist countries. As long as the means of production are controlled by a small minority of the people, the exercise of institutions is going to be limited. Because economic power plays a very important role in how democratic rights are
However, that criticism did not give sufficient scope to the way in which certain elements in bourgeois democracy things like the bills of rights, representative institutions, checks in the power of the state and so on - are things that were fought for not just by the bourgeoisie against the aristocracy, but also by the working classes. I think there is broad agreement now among progressive people, including Marxists, that we have to respect these rights and institutions. That is relatively new. The way the NDF program puts it is that there are certain internationally recognized institutional require24 whatever the social system. ments democracy, International Viewpoint #186 • June 4, 1990
An important element is to look at the experiences of direct democracy, not just representative democracy, to see what aspects of them can be useful for various levels of social development — to study all of them, from the workplaces to the neighbourhood institutions, from Cuba or Yugoslavia to the "Soviets" (the word means "Councils") in the USSR itself. These are things that need to be looked at very carefully as forms to place next to parliamentary or representative institutions. Because I would say that the experience of advanced capitalist countries and most certainly the experience Third World countries have shown that representative institutions by themselves do not necessarily mean real democracy.
There are also questions which have to do with Socialist construction, and the connection between the type of economic strategy that you want to follow and the political institutions that are required by it. If you are going to follow a Stalinist model of forced collectivization, heavy industrialization and so on, then of necessity you are going to have a repressive • Has the NDF worked out a program on such issues ? More on the economic issues than on the political ones. Among all the currents of the Left, in the Philippines, the National Democratic one has been the most successful in recruiting professional economists. The best progressive professional economists of the country are National Democrats.
PROFITS
• How do you explain that ?
I don't know. It could be as simple as the fact that the cadre assigned to recruit the economists happened to be a very good cadre. Well, I think that it has to do with the National Democratic framework. With the fact that, for example, despite the
CPP's influence within the NDF, Bisig 3 talks about Socialism a lot more than the
National Democrats do. These economists are ideologically linked with the CPP and they have done a lot of very good work, looking at the prospects for a mixed economy in the Philippines and what that would mean. In some senses the Philippine CP and the NDF are much better prefor Socialist construction pared and transition than, say for example, the
Namibian SWAPO is or even the Nicaraguans when they took power in 1979.
This is brought about by the realities of the struggle itself. Here is the New People's Army (NPA) and the party. They work in a given rural area, where they have won the support of the population.
The landlords have been kicked out. New trading and credit networks get constructed. The CPP and the NPA have to deal
With very concrete problems, with the economy of areas that are liberated.
That's why this question of mixed economy comes in. But, here, there is a gap between the practice and the theory of the movement. The CPP and the NDF mostly use the word "nationalization", somewhat into the way that Catholics say "Hail
Mary". But what is the strategy behind such nationalizations? How do they fit in the framework of a mixed economy, where you have state, cooperatives and private enterprises. And what do strategic industries (the ones to be nationalized) mean for a Third World economy?
What is happening is a situation where the practice of a revolutionary movement requires certain new understandings, a whole change in a traditional ways of thinking. It is very, very hard to give up such ways of thinking, despite the very obvious contradiction between practice, what I call the middle-level theory that you develop in relation to it, and the basic theories that have been handed down to you through Mao
Zedong
Thought and Stalin's "Problems of Leninism". There is need for discussions. All of us should look at this contradiction between practice and theory with a completely open mind. The only thing that I am hoping for, is that it does not lead to organizational splits and new forms of sectarianism.
• Do CPP cadres see dan-
gers in the policy of economic reforms as applied in China or other countries ?
A fairly common position, with which I would to some extent agree, is that the Deng leadership has been rather indiscriminate in its attempts to bring in market type economic activities in China. It is particularly dangerous in China because overseas Chinese from Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore, the Philippines, Indonesia, or Thailand still operate, and
PHILIPPINES
RIALIST DOMINATIONTE their networks are still Chinese networks. They really represent a transnational capital, whether naturalized as Filipinos, Indonesians,
THE US BASE or something else. They represent a very powerful base for the bourgeoisie in China so that the indiscriminate way in which Chinese capital was allowed to come into the economic
1A • KAPPA DELTA SIGMA zones is very dangerous. • Do you imply that the Chinese democratic movement was a product of this capitalist trend ?
No, I don't mean that. Clearly, the struggle for democracy in China goes beyond the results of the economic reforms of Deng Xiaoping. But I think that in the case of China, these reforms do explain some things. For example, probably the most important issue is corruption. There was already corruption in China before. But the level of corruption, as a result of the reforms, has become massive. Also, one of the measures that Deng implemented was to allow graduate students to find their own jobs. Then, the government rescinded that order and once again required graduated students to join work units in a compulsory way. This played a role in the radicalization of the
But I also think that some CPP leaders tend to project onto the USSR and Eastern Europe elements of analysis which apply only to China and maybe to Poland and Hungary. They certainly do not apply to the Soviet Union because I don't think that there is a bourgeoisie left in the Soviet Union. Gorbachev will have to recreate one! Of course, there is concern among a lot of people, including me, that in the rush to get rid of the nastier aspects of the - state, the Socialist baby might be thrown out with the bureaucratic Communist bathwater — things like guarantees for employment, basic necessities and so on. These are things that workers in these countries fought for.
But the essential point, I think, is to recognize that it is the people who move, there, in Eastern Europe and in a more complex way in the Soviet Union.... the masses. And if you are going to continue to be a Socialist, you've got to affirm what these masses have done. The thrust towards democracy which underlies most of the claims and the demands of the masses in Eastern Europe and the Soviet
KA Union are things to be affirmed. And their victories are things to be celebrated. In addition, the development of the productive forces in these countries is much higher compared to those in Nicaragua, Zimbabwe and Vietnam, so that the posadvancing to more favourable, if you see Socialism as not just class struggle but also as developing the productive forces. It offers the possibility for a renewal of Socialism as • What other implications might the changes in the USSR have for whole question of proletarian internationalism has to be reexamined And a related question: what kind of role do Socialist states, especially those under the influence of the Soviet Union, play in the anti-imperialist struggle. The theoretical questions here, I think, are quite profound. It starts from the declaration of the CPSU that the class struggle is not anymore the main determinant of the foreign policy of the Soviet state. Which I never thought it was. But for them to state it theoretically is a very important development.
The way the CPP is confronted by this issue is different than for many other organizations. Because it comes out of the Maoist tradition, it already formulated sharp criticisms, in the past, of the international practice of the Soviet state and party. Also, it has never received any assistance from the CPSU. Since it abandoned the Chinese position that the USSR is social-imperialist, the CPP has been trying to develop party-to-party relations with the CPSU but, as far as I know, it has not succeeded.
I think that the CPP agrees with other Communist parties in different parts of the Third World in being worried about the existing changes in Soviet international policy, and about future changes. That is, in very simple terms, that they are worried that there will be less money available from the Soviet Union. I agree
Where I differ with such an approach is that I think that proletarian internationalism is not a one-way street. I don't believe that we should look at proletarian internationalism simply in terms of the flow of ideas and resources coming from the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe towards Third World revolutionary movements. I think it is very important for revolutionary movements to look into the situation the Soviet party faces and to say, for example, if it does make sense for them to withdraw troops from Afghanistan. Is there any justification for the Soviet Union or any Socialist country to maintain troops in another country at the level and for the length of time that the Soviets maintained their troops there? I do not think so. The same question can be asked about the military role of the Soviet Union in Eastern Europe, in the course of the last twenty • And what about the presence of a pro-Soviet party in the Philippines?
Within the Philippines itself, the CPP had to grapple with the question of how to relate to another party that says it is a Communist party— the PKP4, which as far as I know continues to maintain fraternal ties with the CPSU. There, the theoretical question that needs to be answered is the following one: in any given country, is there room for more than one Communist party? In the case of the Philippines and the CPP, this question has never been confronted. 3. Bisig is an organization of the militant independent socialist Left, founded in 1986. 4. PKP: Partido Komunista ng Pilipina, or the "old" PaY in 1e or the "new " party originated from the 25 PKP in 1967-1968. June 4, 1990 • #186 International Viewpoint
PHILIPPINES
The traditional position has always been to assume that there can only be one Communist Party in one country. That question was posed and answered in a fairly decisive way by the experience of Latin America and by the practice of Cuba, where they organized a Party Congress for which they invited seven different organizations from Chile that all claimed to be Communist Parties. Which means that the Cubans don't believe anymore that you can only have one communist party for each country. • How about Cuba itself ?
That's true, that's a different question for them. But I think that the need for political pluralism cannot be ignored, in the long run. The way that I look at this development is as materialist as possible. This issue is central to the most recently liberated countries, like Nicaragua and Zimbabwe in particular — but also to Namibia. If you are a good Marxist, then you have to say this is not just because people in these countries have read about it, but because there are material bases for
Therefore, I think that what the Nicaraguans call revolutionary pluralism is the position that will win in the long run. This idea of doing away with one party states, the more serious introduction of democracy into the revolutionary process is a position that will win out, because there is a social, material basis for it, for demands for democracy to intensify, to increase, not only in Socialist countries but also in the Third World and hopefully in the advanced capitalist countries as well.
So you think that the thrust toward more democracy expresses, even in the Third World, an objec-
Yes, very clearly. Look at those Third especially in America and parts of Asia, where authoritarian regimes have been replaced by democratic regimes: the process was a real process, it is not fake. The 1986 revolution in the Philippines was real.
The same thing is true of the movement that brought Duarte in El Salvador into power, Cereso in Guatemala, Alfonsin in Argentina, or Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan. There was a real thrust towards democracy. However in these countries, it has been taken over by the bourgeoisie, or the landlords. This is because the political organizations of the lower classes were developed enough, and, I would insist, because Marxist movements in many places in the Third World have not taken democracy seriously enough.
Aquino says democracy that's for real, but in the sense that she rejects the Marcos regime, which was a dictatorship not just against the lower classes but a dictatorship against 26 other fractions of the upper classes, too. So what she has created in the Philippines International Viewpoint #186 • June 4, 1990 is equal rights for all the different fractions of the bourgeoisie.
In all of these countries where you had a transition from authoritarian regimes to so-called democratic regimes, from the point of view of the lower classes, the promise of democracy was betrayed. And everywhere in these countries, the main reason is because the social-economic basis for broad democracy does not exist. The struggle for a popularly rooted democracy is quite difficult, there. • What do you mean ?
To begin with, if you are not even sure to be able to feed your family then it is very difficult to think about political participation. It is as simple as that. Democracy requires a civil society outside of the state. It is this that Eastern Europeans are always talking about. The state and its institutions have to be balanced by institutions in the civil society, whether you are talking about labour unions or women's organizations or ecological organizations, chess clubs or whatever. A wide range of institutions within which there is participation by the population. But, in the Third World, there is a stronger element of violence, of repression than in Western societies. Organizations of the lower classes are very often suppressed and cannot operate freely.
You also have to take into account the nature of imperialism at this point in history and its impact on the societies it
- especially on their class structure. There, the urban industrial proletariat is not becoming the majority, as was probably assumed by many Marxists. Instead you have a broad rural semiproletariat, you have millions of landless
It is even quite hard to think in Marxist terminology, about things like the way in which the informal sector has grown.
What do you call somebody who sells single cigarettes? Or chewing-gum by the piece? How do you deal with that? Or how do we understand the term petty bourgeoisie in a Third World context? There, the petty bourgeoisie in the original Marxist meaning, the small bourgeoisie of traders, small artisans and so on, is less important than the schoolteachers, the clerks of the department stores or the government, reporters etc. So the class situation in many Third World countries is quite unexpected. You have to come up with new ideas. If you look at the political programs, you will find that they reflect these changes because they have to deal with them in a day-to-day sense. The problem is that the ideology that has been handed out from 1917 down is very difficult to dislodge. In many ways, there is a contradiction between the reality and the thinking of party people who formu-
We face specific difficulties in the Third World countries. Your political current have placed most of the emphasis on overcoming the separation between the state and civil society, on initiating a process of withering away of the state. But the kind of situations that many Third World countries are confronted with is very different, to the point that theoretically, the distinction between the state and civil society remains valid. I would insist that in many Third World countries the concrete situation is such that the state will continue to be strengthened in the • For some organizations, the struggle for democracy in the Third World is only for a remote future...
Yes, there are people in the left who think that democracy is something you can postpone. First you have to feed the people and then you have to destroy the base of the bourgeoisie and the other ruling classes and then you have to kick out US imperialism and to prevent counterrevolution and, maybe, 40 years later we
My own feeling is that you can't effectively feed the people unless you have democracy. You can't effectively prevent counterrevolution unless you have democracy. In other words all of these things are interrelated. Unfortunately, if you are trying to run a country you have to deal with all these things at the same time. But the struggle for democracy is not a luxury, it's an illusion to think that you can deal with economics now and with democracy tomorrow only. Or the other way around. • Compared to other Third World countries, how would you assess the conditions, in the Philippines?
I think the Philippines has greater chances of developing democracy in the future than many other Third World countries. First, because the bourgeois institutions of representative democracy and the bill of rights have been in place in the Philippines since 1916, when the country was still a colony of the United States. is a practice already of at least bourgeois democracy. And this is important in the culture of a people.
Two, during the twenty years of the Marcos dictatorship, there has been a massive growth of non-political party type of organizations. The infrastructure of workers, peasant, women organizations and so on is tremendous.
Third, I think that the fact that there are struggles within the Left, not just struggles between National Democrats, Social Democrats and Bisig, but struggles within the NDF itself on these questions, is already an advance. This is a process that will take a long time. I hope it will end in a fight for a more authentic Socialism.
Socialism with a more direct type of democracy, a combination of representative democracy and other forms of democ-
AROUND
Street sign from Cheb on the Czechoslovak / West
German border (from Reportér)
THE
WORLD
SENEGAL New moves to far left unity LIKE many other black African countries, Senegal has experienced a deep social and economic crisis over the past few years. While the state is increasingly paralyzed, and its principal activity has tended to become the repression of strikes and demonstrations, the democratic opposition has been incapable of developing a coherent strategy for the overthrow of the regime The revolutionary left is conscious of this problem and is seeking to regroup its forces to maximize its weight in the current political situation. Four organizations of the far left, among them the OST (Socialist Workers Organization, Senegalese section of the Fourth International) have recently officially begun a process of reunification. The other organizations gence of a united, democratic, prosperous and socialist Africa". * SOVIET UNION Workers back Lithuania THE following resolution was passed at the April 30-May 2 congress of independent workers' movements and organizations held in Novokuznetsk, the centre of the Kuznetsk coal field, where massive strikes occurred last summer. The text is from the May 4 issue of Russkaya Mysl, a Russian-language weekly published in Paris.
Some 143 delegates were reportedly present, representing 40 cities. There were also representatives of the new Workers' Union of Lithuania. The leader of the Lithuanian delegation, Kazimieras Uoku, expressed his satisfaction with the