eoeeee At a largo domonstration in Trafalgar Square in Octobor, initiatod by an organisation called the Viotnam Solidarity Campaign, Pat Jordan of The Weok, in ono of the main spocchcs of tho afternoon, appealed for a united front. "Wo urc tired of boing told that we can't work with ccrtain poople becausc they arc Communists, Trotkyists, Maoists, Anarchists. Lct's got rid of this Macarthyism once and for all.! Any appoal for unity in the prescnt situation nccossarily ovokes an immediate resyonso. Is thore not an ovorwhclming nood for tho concontration of all possible force-s? Must wo not wclcome all who dolearo support for the Victnamose people? Communists can work with Christians, liborals, pacifists. Should they not also bo ready to work with all those who claim to be committed socialists? Surely it could only be the most doctrinairo, the soctarian, thoso who do not soc tho nood for unity, those who want to continuc into the sixtios old and forgotton controvorsics and divisions, who could hold back from such an appeal? Calls for unity, howover, must be accompanicd by principled discussion and agrocment on policies and forms of action which can be mutually agreed, whatever the frankly oxpresseod difforences on long-term policics and solutions, because of tho urgont necd to avert immediate disastor. We necd thorefore to progross from goncral calls for unity to an oxamination of various policics which are being put forward in the poaco movoment, in order to soo preciscly what it is on which wo are being asked to unito.
In pamphlicts, articlos, loaflets, posters, meetings, in the visit of our delegation of three Political Committco members, including our General Secretary, to North Victnam in 1965, and in our policy resolution at tho 30th National Congress in Novombor 1967, the Communist Party has mde its policy absolutely clear. Our Congress resolution states that wo beliovo tho only just basis for a solution is summarised in the four pobnt proposal of tho Democratic Republic of Victnam, and in the programme of theo broad alliance of progressive forces ombodicd in tho National Front of. Liboration of South Viotnam. This has beon our position throughout the whole period and romains our position today. It is our objective, by continuous cxplanation of this policy, to win more and more people to undorstand and agree with it. Furthermore, Communists have supported and participated in the work of the British Victnam Committce which was sct up 2s long ago as 1952 and which has consistently campaigned over all those yoars to bring information to organisations and individuals in Britain about the struggles of the Victnamese people and to win understanding and support for these. Thoro is no doubt that their work ha: contributed to no small measure to the decisions of the Labour Party and Trade Union Conferences on Victnam. Our Party also declares in its resolution that it will respond to all requests made by the Victnamese people. What requests havo been made? Medical aid and sup,lics are desperately needed, and we have worked for the fullest sup ort for such a campaign. But above all they ask us for political action,
i * 1% he op oe,
ai hot tee os
shine tip” cereepht ited
for the mobilisation of British people in such numbers: that the policy of
support by Britain for American aggression can be ended, This would further
isolate the US and put greater pressure on it to withdraw its forces from
Vietnam, as provided for in tho 1954 Geneva agreemonts.
How to bring this about? Only on the basis of genuine unity betwceon hundreds
of thousands: of people, who may differ widely in their viows on the causos of
war, on religion, on communism and socialism, on tho basic rolo of American
imperialism, on tho charactcr of the Governments of North and South Viotnan,
but who nevortheless can unite in their demands for the cossation of tho
bombing, for the withdrawal of American troops, and for the right of tho
Vietnamese people to decide their own future.
Such are the divisions within the imporialist camp, and evon within the ruling
classes in Britain and Amcorica, that not even all of these are united in
pursuing ~resent American Government policics in Vietnam. And amongst
ordinary people awareness of the pressing dangor of nuclear war, of a future
clouded with permanent menace, horror at the actions of a world powcr turning
the might of its military machine upon 2 small undeveloped country, admira-
tion at the horoism, tenacity and skill of a people fighting against aggrossion,
disgust at the dorruption of the Saigon puppot Government and its fascist-
loving ruling class, are all powerful and varied motives driving many who are
not aware of all the fundamental issues involved, or who hold firmly to
different views, to become nevertheless, the nllics of those who already have
a totally committed position based on a socialist world view.
It is this kind of unity which is the task before the poace movement, if it
is to mobilise forccs poworful enough to change the situation, and not simply
to make a declaration of its horror at what is haypening. How to bring into
the struggle hundreds of thousands more who can unite on the kind of immodiate
demands we have have outlined, and which if fought for and realised could
change the shape of future events both in Britain and on a world-scale,
This organisation (The VSC), a very late arrival on the scone, having been
sot up only 1966, claims to be the only organisation in Britain which secks
to build a united front of organisations and individuals pledged to full
support for the National Liberation Front and tho Domocratic Republic of
Vietnam. ‘Victory for the NLF* is its slogan, and this it declaros must be
the basis of united action. Our party, as we have alroady shown, has made its
own analysis and policy perfectly cloar. It is not then on the question of
the call for support for the Viotnamese people that we are critical of this
organisation, but over what needs to be done now to cond US aggression. We
believe that what is required is a movement of hundreds of thousands that
will make e@ roal political impact in Britain. It is hore that the attitude
and activities of the VSC are obstacles to the building of such a movement, since
they express continuow hostility to all whom they consider have not passed
their test of full commitment, and constantly endeavour to narrow down, and
indeed attack, genuine offorts for the broadest unity around realisable
immediate demands such as wo have already outlined.
Thus U Thant, for example, became a figure for major attack and hostility,
and his »roposals were posed against the 'full solidarity’ this organisation
demands.
Are we doing it an injustice? Let us examine a frank declaration of
its intentions as outlined in the current Labour Worker by the organiser, David Robinson, Hitherto, he states, the policy of the VSC has been to encourage its supporters to join local Peace in Vietnam Committees ami there put forward the "full solidarity" position. Following the successful Trafalgar Square demonstration, he continues, the VSC must use its new streng*!. in these committees "to call for a slogan of full solidarity with the Vietnamese people" and "the situation is now favourable for transforming Peace in Vietnam groups into Solidarity Committees. This is, of course, not a call for unity but for disruption. It would exclude the vast majority of organisation from any participation in the committees, including great sections of the Labour movement. It is necessary to examine the position even further. How did this organisation come into existence? It was set up in Britain with total disregard for all existing organisations, following the call of the "World Congress" of the Fourth International in 1965. By that time the British Council for Peace in Vietnam was already firmly established and embraced a wide range of peace, anti-colonial, labour movement, church and youth organisations and individuals of all parties and all walks of life. What was the "World Congress of the Fourth International"? There have been many splits in tle Fourth International since Trotsky founded it in 1938 and there are now at least four bodies claiming to be the true heirs of Trotsky. But for our purpose here it is sufficient to know that this Congress was held by the Paris-based section which publishes a journal in English called World Sutlook. Supporters in Britain do not have a public organisation, but work within other organisations. The creation of the VSC must be seen in the context of policy put forward by this 1965 "World Congress". .»»eFollowing the Congress, supporters of the Fourth International in Britain, together with International Socialism supporters, and some who supported the position of the Communist Party of China, called a conference to set up the Vietnam Solidarity Campaign.... -..-Later the supporters of the Communist Party of China withdrew from tle conference because of various differences with which this article is not concerned, and what finally emerged was a committee largely composed of members of these other two groupings... .seeWhatever our views about the nature of the two organisations we have described this would not cause us to create divisions in any genuine united effort for Vietnam. The issue is too immediate, too important, too centr@l for that. However, not all who shout the loudest match words with deeds. The VSC, as we have seen, explicity campaigns against the concept of a broad united movement, ¢...ese 2-4 i ++ en nae Tae? *6t Seure+23~ When the journal 'The Week', which played a big part in the setting up of the VSC, states, for exemple, in an editorial that the demonstrations in Britain and America on Vietnam represented "the agonised socialist conscience of the Western world" (our emphasis) we must say that this is non= sense, and dangerous nonsense, since on the one hand it totally overestimates the stage reached in terms of a coherent socialist position, and on the other it understimates what mobilisation on a broader scale could achieve. And if we listen again to Mr. Jordan of The Week speaking at Trafalgar Sq. we way come to a further conclusion - that he is implying that nothing in
fact can be done for Vietnam of any real consequence until we get a
genuine socialist government ,with an anti-capitalist ,antimimperialist
mandate,
“We ‘can only force a change in the sense that this Goversment
manoeuvres.This Government is totally committed to the defence of
capitalism and imperialist domination of the third world.......c.ee-
therefore the only lasting thing we can do to help the people of Vietnam
and other countries in their fight against imperialism is to replace
the present Government with one which is anti-imperialist and anti-
capitalist."
As always,the ultimate objective is posed against immediate demands,
Thus on the one hand we are offered as a solution to the Vietnamese war
the revolutionary overthrow of the American Government,and in Britain
where the majority of the population has not been won to an understanding
of the nature of capitalism and to a committed socialist position it is
proposed that we should naxro down the movement for Vietnam to those wh,
understand the need to participate in the struggle for socialism,
Thefight to explain the necessity for a socialist solution and to
.expose the role of right-wing democracy must go on,and the Communist
Party devotes a major part of its energies precisely to this task,This,
however,is not the task of the peace movement which brings together
people on a clear platform of immediate demands. ........0.