Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
7 Days 12 January 1972
PAKISTAN: Who is Ali Bhutto?by Dick Nations
Fo r t h e f ir s t t im e infourteen years Pakistan has a civilian ruler. The Punjabi
generals who lost over half the country have now called in Ali Bhutto to salvage what he can of the military and class basis of power. Bhutto is the best man for their job. He, and his People’s Party, straddle the contradictions of Pakistani society: they have a socialist image which gives them a base among the workers and militants; and they reflect the landed estates and communal chauvinism of Pakistani society. Bhutto is therefore the best man to put a new face on the old order.
Posturing AristocratBhutto is an aristocrat and Sindhi
landlord who began his political career in the late ’50s as the personal protege and later Defense Minister of Ayub Khan. His most notable achievements in that period were an assiduous censorship of the press and the building of “basic deomocracy”, Pakistan’s own contribution to the centralisation of power. But the Indo-Pakistani war of 1965 altered Bhutto’s relations with the regime: Ayub went for a quick settlement in the Tashkent agreement, and this alienated all those in both the army and civilian life who saw a compromise, with India as a sellout.
Bhutto, Ayub’s former legman, came forward to denouce the Tashkent agreement and consolidate a large body of popular support among Islamic chauvinists. These he has held together ever since by an often hysterical anti- Indian campaign, based on the slogan that India will face “a thousand years’ war”. These slogans gained Bhutto the support of the middle ranking officers and the powerful generals who are behind his power to-day.
Off to PekingInternationally, Bhutto refused to
compromise on the anti-Indian Islamic front. When Pakistan’s traditional patron, the US, momentarily shifted hes support to the enemy, Bhutto was forced to cast around for another power as uncompromisingly hostile to India as himself. At that time China was looking across the Himalaya for the weak link in the imperialist encirclement of China through SEATO. The result was that Bhutto went to Peking as the architect of the Sino-Pakistani alliance.
The effect of this alliance on class • politics in Pakistan was disastrous. For much of the left the link with China transformed yesterday’s “American puppet” into “an anti-imperialist and progressive force”. Worse than this was the fact that Bhutto took up the mantle of “radical socialism” just as the organised left abstained from active opposition to the military regime. This coincided with the situation in which ten oppressive years of Ayub’s raj awakened fierce militancy among the working class. For the lack of any alternative, Bhutto’s socialist posturings were able to capitalize on this discontent, and he gained considerable popularity.
But, if Bhutto’s “progressive” foreign policy won him credit at home, it got him into serious trouble with the imperialist powers abroad. The State Department took Bhutto’s socialist slogans at face value; so, when in late 1967 Ayub began to warm again to Washington Bhutto was sacked as the first price for the resumption of US aid. Now outside the regime and determined to return to power, Bhutto found himself in a position to exploit the political opportunities created by both the dictatorship he served and the Chinese alliance he pioneered. Setting himself in open opposition to Ayub,
Bhutto gathered about him all the opponents generated by Pakistan’s narrow monopoly of wealth and power. These spanned the social scale from those landlords, racketeers and urban rich locked out from the spoils of Ayub raj to the militant students and workers left leaderless by the Chinese alliance.
Anti-Bengali MoresIn ’68/’69 the mass discontent
exploded into a spontaneous uprising of students, workers and peasants and Bhutto was in a good position to ride the crest. He gained the leadership of the movement as the only politician willing to come out in open support. In march of ’69 when Ayub conceded the demands for democracy Bhutto seemed the logical civilian successor to the military regime. Anxious for power it was Bhutto who forced Yayha Khan to hold the promised elections last February. But the results came as a complete shock. Rather than confirm Bhutto’s claims to rule, the People’s Party came out in second place: the. Awami League won 97 per cent of the Bengali vote and hence an absolute majority in the country.
Faced with the prospect of sharing power in a genuinely democratic regime, Bhutto effected another reversal. From the bitter critic of the military he now aligned with Yayha against the Bengalis to become the mouthpiece for West Pakistani chauvinism. After failing in a number of constitutional manoeuvres to trim Awami League power, Bhutto sabotaged the negotiations which were to arrange the transfer of power from the military to civilian rule. Shortly thereafter the Army prepared for the purge of March which unexpectedly initiated the armed liberation of Bangladesh. Bhutto is therefore one of those chiefly responsible for the truncated state of Pakistani he now leads.
With the Army now totally discredited Bhutto has stepped in in the hope of buying sufficient time to repair the military and class base of power in Pakistan. The three steps Bhutto has already taken indicate the direction in which he intends to move. His first act was to offer up the necessary scapegoats by sacking Yayha and “those fat and flabby generals” closely associated with him. However, the subsequent appointment of Gul Hassan as Commander in Chief signifies a much less dramatic change in the Army’s future political role. As the former director of Intelligence Hassan’s position at the top indicates an even more repressive and tightly controlled Pakistan. While faces may change, the Army still remains the power behind the new regime. Bhutto’s second step was to conceal this fact by the expected flood of rhetoric promising to ‘restore socialism, democracy and the honour of Pakistan.’ The substance behind these words will amount to little more than such token gestures as seizing the passports (not the assets!) of the legendary 22 families who control the economy. Thirdly Bhutto accompanies promises of democracy and socialism with a concentration of power in his own hands.
Martial law continues, but whereas Yayha was only President and Chief Administrator Bhutto has added for himself the ministries of Defense, Foreign Affairs, the Interior, and Interregional Co-ordination. It’s rumoured he intends to become Prime Minister as well! While in the provinces the military governors have been replaced by three top P.P. men — all of course wealthy landlords, one of whom is Bhutto’s cousin.
But Bhutto’s rise to power may signify something more than a replacement of the ‘corruption and nepotism of military dicatorship’ by that of himself and his party. For the political consciousness and militancy of the working class has steadily increased since late Ayub days. And now with a weaker economy and a more repressive military backbone to the regime the regional and class forces in Pakistan threaten to move too fast even for Bhutto.
YUGOSLAVIA: D jilas Blames New Bourgeois for National Clashby the foreign newsdesk
THE STRAIGHT SIT-INS and demonstrations in Zagreb, capital of the Yugoslav
province of Croatia (see 7 DAYS no. 7) have presented the most serious threat to the Yugoslav state since the end of World War II. Last month over 400 people were arrested in one demonstration alone, the top leadership of the Croat party and government were sacked, Tito called for vigilance and warned of foreign intervention.
In a recent article in the French paper Le Monde, the Yugoslav opposition writer Milovan Djilas presented his views on the present crisis. Djilas, a former leader of the Yugoslav party, is the author of The New Class, a critique of social relations in post-war Yugoslavia, and of Conversations with Stalin.
Djilas began his article by reviewing the theoretical treatment of the national question in Russia: since national interests reflect the development of capitalism, a socialist state merely recognises the cultural and linguistic pecularities of each national group. But, while in Russia there was one ethnic group and one party which dominated the others, this was not so in Yugoslavia. This meant that national differences were given more attention in the Yugoslav state than in Russia.
Serbs & CroatsIn the interwar period and under the
Nazi occupation national differences were used and sharpened. The two biggest ethnic groups, Serbs and Croats, were at each others throats.
The Communists represented the unity of Yugoslavia in the face of foreign occupation, a unity based on the co-operation of the different nationalities. This sense of unity was further reinforced by the conflict with Stalin that broke out in 1948.
Up with Some, Down with OthersWhile welcoming the setting up of,
separate state structures in the provinces of Serbia and Croatia, Djilas criticises the decision to give a separate status to the Montenegrans; he says they are Serbs, but were given a separate state to weaken the weight of the Serbs within Yugoslavia as a whole. He also denounces the setting up of a separate state in Bosnia-Herzogovina, where he says the Muslim minority have been given national rights far out of proportion of their size.
National ProblemsDjilas goes on: “It would be wrong to
conclude from the present revival Of nationalism that the communists did nothing in this field, or that they made serious mistakes. The truth is that the change of political and social systems does not make national problems disappear. In a multinational state, these can only be resolved at the best of times over a given period and within the structure of certain political and social structures”.
In Yugoslavia, Djilas argues, the original party changed as a middle class appeared and the party became bureaucratised. Although there is no bourgeoisie in the strict sense, because there is no bourgeois property, the new class has many things in common with the bourgeoisie “if only in that its ideals are technical progress and a high
standard of living”.
National Foundations“This transformation of the society
and of the party is based on a natural foundation, the only possible one, which is the national foundation; this is found first in the pretentions of the bureaucracies of the national parties, and then in other aspects of bourgeois nationalism. The Communist Party of Yugoslavia has as many branches as there are Republics, and the differences in social and other outlooks of their members add to the diversity of the Party”.
Djilas goes on to argue that there also developed an ideology of nationalism, based on allegedly scientific analyses of how the Serbs were plundering other nationalities. “This was how irrational impulses were stimulated and pretentions to exploitation and domination were disguised. Exploitation certainly existed. But not because of domination by such and such a nation, but because of the waste and privileges of the bureacuracy at the expense of all the nations in Yugoslavia”.
No SolutionDjilas adds that there has been no
solution to the national problem in the recent purges in Croatia. The regime which is able to crush left critics of political authoritarianism is unable to handle the national contradictions that it has helped to sustain and revive. Djilas ends on a faintly optimistic note, hoping that national differences will weaken as the country evolves towards “a political regime that is not dogmatic, but still authoritarian”. Meanwhile, Tito and his collaborators grapple with resurgent Croatian nationalism.
7
Ali Bhutto in full, calculated flood
7 Days 12 January 1972
THE FOREIGN OFFICE were trying hard last week to cover up the British role in Oman,
where two members of the counter-insurgency Special Air Services have recently been killed in fighting. These SAS men, and at least two other British officers killed in recent battles, are the first members o f the British armed forces to be killed outside the UK since 1967. They only admitted the SAS deaths-after the news had got out in The Middle East.
OM AN:British LiesHide Colonial War
Masira BaseThe British pretend that the RAF
personnel at the base on Masira island and at other bases are not actively engaged in the war. But this is a ludicrous claim since the Sultan’s armed forces use the facilities, and RAF personnel defend the bases from guerrilla attacks. RAF personnel also fly combat missions.
Equally stupid is the FO claim that the killed SAS were only involved in “training”. The official line was that they were merely seeking “realistic training conditions” and would defend themselves if fired upon. The simple fact is that British troops have been sent in to back the Sultan’s flagging 6,000-man army.
Politically too the Sultan is dependent on Britain. His father Said, who ruled the country from 1931 to 1970, had a cabinet composed entirely of Englishmen — with one exception. He was booted out by the British in July 1970 after popular discontent had got too fierce. He now lives in a luxury hotel in Park Lane.
But Qabus has done little better even though Oman has had oil revenues since 1967. He spent two months in Europe this summer fixing up arms supplies for his army. In Britain he refused to give any interviews, although it is known he went to see ‘‘How the Other Half Loves” with Sir Alec Douglas-Home.
Failed Promises
Back home he has failed to meet the Promises he made on accession in September: he was forced to declare a state of emergency in the capital, Muscat, after demonstrators attacked he Shell installations and tried to march on his palace. And last week his
RAF Salala: The Foreign Office claim that Britain only lends the Sultan some officers. But there is little doubt from this picture that a lot more is going on.premier uncle Tarik resigned, allegedly on “grounds of ill health”.
The real reason is that Tarik, an ambitious reactionary, opposed British control of the country through the Sandhurst educated Qabus. “I am not their baby”, the rotund premier recently told Le Monde’s Eric Rouleau. His private army of tribal followers, with which he threatened to seize power himself, also worried the Sultan’s British backers.
Guerrilla WarIn the Dhofar province of Oman the
Sultan’s forces are locked in combat with the guerrillas of the Popular Front for the Liberation of the Occupied Arab Gulf. Dhofar, the size of Scotland, has a tropical climate, with jungle-covered mountains giving excellent cover to the guerrilla fighters. Fighting has been going on since 1965, and since 1968 the guerrillas have formed a People’s Liberation Army.
The Ho Chi Minh division of the PLA scored a major victory last spring by cutting off the last land link between the Dhofar capital and the rest of
In the mountains the guerrillas of the People's Liberation Army have been fighting British imperialism for six years. They are the only revolutionaries in the world fighting a full scale people's war against Britain.
Oman. Guerrillas of the Ho Chi Minh and Che Guevara units have launched a series of artillery attacks on the RAF base at Salala.
The Front have carried out a series of social reforms in the liberated hinterland: all land has been nationalised, as have water-holes on which the pastoral tribes depend. They have launched a campaign to encourage the people to engage in settled agriculture. The first doctors have been introduced into the mountains. 400 children attend the Lenin School, and administer the camp themselves with the aid of only 3 adults. Education is based on the Arabic version of the Little Red Book.
In the western sector of Dhofar the Front have built the first road in Dhofar, linking the liberated areas to the People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen, their major ally in the struggle.
In the five year war the British and the Sultan’s army have been driven into a tiny enclave around Salala. Qabus is spending over half of his £55 million annual income on the war in Dhofar. But he cannot simply pull out: Saudi Arabia is frightened of the example
The FO line is a pack of lies. The first lie is that Oman is an independent country, which Britain is aiding under a 1958 agreement. Oman has been a British colony for over a century: though Britain never formally declared Oman a protectorate, British troops have intervened on several occasions to save the Sultan from rebel tribes. The British now provide the Sultan with the commander-in-chief of his army, the head of his airforce, and around 70 seconded officers. These are the official figures but the real figures may be much higher.
by Fred Halliday
DHOFAR:
B ritain 's C olonial W ar in the G u lf
— a 72 page selection of
reports and documents published this week
Price 20p + 5p postage from
The G u lf Committee, c/o Russell Foundation,
3 Shavers Place, London, SW1.
_____________________________
Sultan Qabus inspects his men, watched by M ajor John Cooper, sporting his SAS badge. Cooper is a notorious counter revo lu tionary w ho partic ipated in the British in filtra tio n in to the Yem en during the c ivil war.
Dhofar poses to the rest of the oil-rich Gulf. And a pullout in Dhofar might encourage an uprising in Oman itself.
Instead the British decided to try to crush the revolution by heavy aerial bombardment of the liberated areas, attacks into the mountains from Salala and the cutting of the supply lines with Yemen. It was in these operations that the SAS and other British were killed. Details on this campaign are few at the moment, but it was reported in December that the PLA had shot down a British plane over the western region and had set fire to a militarised launch that was bombarding the coast.
The British have inflicted heavy suffering on the civilian population and their flocks through indiscriminate bombing and artillery bombardment. But there is no sign that they have been able to deflect the people. The Times reported in mid-December that “the Dhofar rebellion has reached the pitch of a revolutionary war even after a year of determined thrusts by the Sultan’s armed forces”.
The news of the SAS deaths confirms this optimistic outlook.
8
7 Days 12 January 1972
N E W S O F T H E
WORLDUSA - GIs in Vietnam have killed around 45 of their officers with explosives since the beginning of 1970. According to the US weekly Saturday Review. 363 attempted murders have been recorded, with 188 other cases of probable attacks. Figures for attacks with bullets or with bare hands are not given.
In another report the FBI announced last week that the number of policemen killed in the USA last year had risen 25% in comparison with 1970. In all 125 police were killed, with the highest rise being in the south where 48 were killed in 1971, compared to 24 in 1970. In the ten years from 1962 to 1971 721 policemen in the US have got killed.
DUBLIN — Best news of the week in the 26 counties was undoubtedly the resignation at the age of 76 of the Reverend Dr John McQuaid, Archbishop of Dublin and Primate of Ireland. This atrociously reactionary prelate has been at his post for 31 years. The list of his malefactions is so extensive that it would take a book to do it justice. He was mainly responsible for sabotaging the welfare scheme put forward by Noel Browne after the war. On a lesser level he once councelled his flock not to visit an Irish-Yugoslav football match held in the city. He was close to De Valera and between them they forged the constitutional links between the State and the Catholic church. Narrow-minded and bigoted, he was a prime object of protestant abuse from the north, and was indeed no great advertisement for the future of non-Catholics in a United Ireland. He has been succeeded by a (seemingly) more liberal element. Noel Browne has pointed out that at the age of 76 he must hopefully be expected to live on the £3 pension on which he once condemned the less privileged aged to subsist.
LEBANON - Costa Gavras’ film The Confession has been banned in the Lebanon, after protests by the Soviet embassy. The French protested about The Battle o f Algiers, the Greeks about Z, and the Lebanese right about Soldier Blue - but all to no avail. Now the Russians have succeeded. The Lebanese authorities have also met Soviet requests by allowing the officially banned Lebanese Communist Party to operate publicly again. It held its third congress on January 7.
CHINA — The New China, News Agency reported last week that from January 1 copies of the Communist Manifesto had gone on sale in Tibetan, Kazakh and Uighur translations. This is the first time that classic Marxist texts have been translated by China into these minority languages. The first Chinese translation of the Communist Manifesto was made in the early 1900s by Chinese intellectuals living in Japan.
They had extreme difficulty in finding adequate Chinese concepts for such words as “worker” and
"exploitation” — the latter being translated as “shamed”. Other more accurate translations were made later, and a Chinese version of volume I of Marx’s Capital was published soon after the victory of the revolution in 1949.
USA - Representative Henry S. Reuss, a Wisconsin Democrat, reported last week that 112 US citizens with annual incomes each of over $200,000 had succeeded in paying no income tax at all in 1970. Before a tax reform in 1969 at least 300 people in the over $200,000 bracket paid no taxes, and this included 52 with incomes of over $ 1 million. The 1969 reform has not been able to shut the gap.
The standard ploy is for a capitalist to borrow money to buy long-term growth stocks or property of relatively low current value. At first he makes no capital gains, but the interest payments on the loan use up all of what would otherwise be taxable income. Although Reuss named no names in his revelations, it is known that oil millionaire Paul Getty for example paid taxes of $500 in the last fiscal year.
RUSSIA — A court in the Moscow suburb of Lyublino sentenced Vladimir Bukovsky to 12 years in prison, labour camp and exile last week. Bukovsky was tried under article 70 of the Soviet criminal code, which defines “anti-Soviet agitation and propaganda”. He was accused of having tried to subvert the Russian army and of being in contact with the anti-communist exile group, NTS.
In 1970 Bukovsky gave interviews, describing his previous experiences in labour camps and “special psychiatric hospitals”. Foreign correspondents and friends and relatives were stopped by police from attending the trial.
SUDAN — Ethiopian Emperor Haile Selassie paid a four-day trip to Sudan last week, returning a visit made late last year to Ethiopia by Sudanese President Numeiry. These visits reflect a new friendship between the two states, and present a great danger to the Eritrean Liberation Front, which has been fighting Ethiopian rule in Eritrea since 1962. The ELF were able to use bases in the Sudan along the border with Eritrea and had offices in Khartoum. In December 1970 they reached a peak in their activity by killing an Ethiopian general and provoking a state of emergency.
But Numeiry has now cut off support for the ELF, and Ethiopian officials are being allowed to inspect camps of Eritrean refugees in southern Sudan. This blow comes at a dangerous time for the ELF: they have been hit by internal divisions, but a unity conference was successfully held within Eritrea in December.
More serious has been the loss of support from China: since the establishment of Sino-Ethiopian diplomatic relations in which China specifically recognised the territorial integrity of Ethiopia, Chinese aid to the ELF has ended. Haile Selassie visited Peking last October and negotiated a Chinese aid agreement.
Grand Harbour, Malta, crucial strategically since the Crusades. Does Mintoff want the British out?
Will the Arabs cross the Mediterranean again? in the meantime the latest in a long series of retreats from the island
9
