The leadership of the League Against Imperialism meets in preparation for its upcoming second international congress in vastly different circumstances than the first. Between the two congresses (early 1927 and the summer of 1929) the alliance with the Kuomintang had been drowned in blood, a significant change in leadership and policy the Soviet Union and Communist International occurred as the New Economic Policy gave way to the Third Period, and the withdrawal of the Indian National Congress and other ‘left-nationalist’ forces from active League participation.

‘The Last Session of the League Against Imperialism’ from Communist International. Vol. 5 No. 8. March 15, 1929.

THE last session of the enlarged Executive Committee of the League against Imperialism, held on January 15th and 16th, marks a further stage in its development. The League has now entered on the stage of gathering and uniting all the active forces for the genuine struggle against imperialism and national oppression. ‘This session was in the nature of a preliminary conference for the congress to be held this year. In addition to the members of the Executive, the Secretariat and the General Council of the League, representatives of the various national-revolutionary and workers’ and trade union organisations, also participated in the session. For the first time in the League’s existence delegations from the Profintern, the General Council of Soviet Trade Unions, and other revolutionary trade union organisations took part in the session. Their participation and the interventions of their representatives introduced a fresh current and will undoubtedly entail an increase in the importance and the vitality of the League. This circumstance was taken into account and correctly evaluated by the leaders of the League themselves. “The Executive Committee considers the collective adherence of the Russian trade unions to the Teague against Imperialism as a step of decisive importance to the development of the anti-imperialist movement on a world scale,” says the session’s address of welcome to the Russian delegation. The Executive Committee notes with satisfaction “that the adherence of the Russian trade unions has coincided with the adherence of the Furnishing Trades Association of Great Britain, and of a number of trade unions of India, South Africa and Latin America, and it expresses the hope that all trade unions, both in imperialist and in colonial and semi-colonial countries will shortly follow their example.”

ABSENTEES

But a number of organisations and persons formerly actively participating in the work of the League were absent on this occasion. And this was no accident. The League against Imperialism is a conglomeration of the most varied tendencies and groups, from petty bourgeois, national-revolutionary organisations and certain “left-socialist” groups to Communists inclusive. The League received the especially strong sympathy of the petty-bourgeois nationalist and “left-socialist” groups during the period when the Cantonese army was triumphantly marching from Canton to Shanghai, when the Chinese revolution still had a “general national” character. But when, under the influence of the fire of the agrarian revolution, the Kuomintangites passed over to the counter-revolutionary camp, when with the connivance of the Second International and the social democratic parties, and the aid of the old and new Chinese militarists, the imperialists succeeded in suppressing the workers’ and peasants’ movement, that sympathy swiftly died away.

At the Brussels Congress of the League against Imperialism in 1927, Lansbury, of the British Labour Party, and Marrot, a social democratic deputy of Belgium, both had seats in the Presidium. Not only the Viennese “Arbeiter Zeitung,” but also the central organ of the Belgian social democrats, “Le Peuple,” regarded themselves as bound to remark on the League congress in favourable tones. But when the Chinese national bourgeoisie turned their weapons against the revolution, when it became clear that the Chinese revolution was taking on the character of an agrarian revolution, and when on the other hand anti-imperialist organisations giving support to a genuinely revolutionary movement began to develop in other countries, the Bureau of the Second International with Friedrich Adler at their head began a slanderous campaign against the League against Imperialism, representing its activities as a purely Communist device, as a “maneuver of the Comintern,” and so on. In the autumn of 1926 the Executive Committee of the Second International called upon all social democratic parties to cut off all relations with the League. Under this pressure the Dutch social democratic group ceased its activity in the Dutch section of the League in the autumn. The chairman of the League himself, Lansbury, was one of the first to drop out of its ranks, and humbly submitted to the decree of the Second International.

WORK WITH REFORMISTS

Of course, at a certain stage the petty bourgeois nationalist groups and certain “left socialist” elements may be in opposition to imperialism, but one must not ignore the fact that they are not capable, nor are they desirous of carrying on a consequential revolutionary struggle against imperialism. Joint participation with them in the League against Imperialism may be expedient. But this cooperation must proceed on the basis of a definite, concrete program, and, of course, in no circumstances may it be carried on at the cost of concession of principle on the part of the revolutionary wing, or at the cost of its renunciation of the right of free criticism of their inchoate and indefinite position. This was indicated in the speech of the representative of the Soviet Trade Union delegation, who rightly pointed to the fact that the Soviet trade unions cannot abrogate their right to free criticism and for their part will prohibit no one from subjecting the policy and activity of the Soviet trade union movement to criticism. It is quite obvious that it would be profoundly unsound to renounce the right and the possibility of criticising Maxton, Cook, Fimmen and their political followers for their half-heartedness, for their failure to conduct an energetic and open struggle against British and Dutch imperialism. In exactly the same way it would be impossible to justify the renunciation of criticism of inactivity in regard to the struggle against war preparations and attacks on the U.S.S.R., made by the International Federation of Transport Workers and its responsible leaders. The struggle against the danger of further slaughter must be based on a concrete program of action, and must not be restricted merely to bare demonstrative declarations. More than that, it must be strengthened by a definite, positive activity directed to the practical realisation of the proclaimed principles and slogans. The adherents of the League must get their parliamentary representative to declare against the imperialist policy of their bourgeois governments, must obtain their vote against war credits, and the recall of naval and military forces from the colonies. The adherents of the League must at the same time provide moral and material support to the economic struggle of the workers’ and peasants’ movement in the colonies. ‘This necessity of supporting the workers’ and peasants’ movement in the colonies found expression in the resolution adopted on Cook’s report.

The disagreements which have been revealed must by no means be stifled, or concealed for the sake of achieving a “unanimous” decision, but must be disclosed and subjected to wide discussion. It is to the point to mention that the League against Imperialism is one of the organisations where the most varied antiimperialist groups can co-operate, where free discussion is possible, Of course, as comrade Munzenburg correctly remarked in his speech, the League is not a Communist organisation. Together with all the honest forces permeated with a sincere desire for the emancipation of the colonial and semi-colonial peoples from imperialist oppression and for the struggle to annihilate imperialism universally, the League unites elements only partially ready to support that struggle.

REFORMISM AND IMPERIALISM

World reformism is the finest bulwark of imperialism. Undoubtedly the Second and Amsterdam Internationals fulfil the role of agents of imperialism among the working class and the workers’ movement generally. By political class co-operation they disintegrate the workers’ movement from within, weaken its fighting powers, break up the united ranks of the proletariat, strive to subject the interests of the proletariat to the interests of the bourgeoisie. They vote war credits to their imperialist governments, introduce imperialist bourgeois ideology into the mass consciousness, raise the slogan of defence of the bourgeois fatherland, concealing their solidarity with and support of the imperialist policy of their governments in the colonies under “socialist” phraseology. The French reformists supported their government during its war in Morocco, the British Labour Party supported and continues to support the Conservative government’s policy in China, India and Egypt, the German social democrats openly act in concert with their bourgeoisie in support of the construction of cruisers, despite the indignant protests of the masses of toilers. The American Federation of Labour is the direct channel for the imperialist policies of the American bourgeoisie in the countries of Latin America, giving its support to the introduction of United States capital into those countries, as Professor Goldschmidt very eloquently related in his report. The Japanese reformists are striving to create a Pan-Asiatic International with the aim of bringing Japanese imperialist influence to bear on the eastern countries by its means. This fact has to be stated, and the activities of international reformism have ruthlessly to be exposed. However, these questions found no expression in the main report of the session: the report given by Cook. Cook endeavoured to represent the leaders of the General Council as wandering sheep, as people who did not understand what they were doing. Of course, such a qualification of the line of conduct of the reformist leaders is radically incorrect. And it was quite natural that this estimate of the reformists’ policy and all Cook’s opportunist argumentation met with severe criticism from the representatives of the revolutionary wing. Despite the fact that the League adopted the resolution on Cook’s report unanimously, the discussion clearly revealed the difference in views as to the role and attitude of the reformists to the anti-imperialist movement. Cook and his adherents find that the reformists adopt a negative attitude to the genuine struggle against imperialism only because they do not understand the situation. The representatives of the revolutionary wing proved beyond all shadow of doubt that the social democrats have long since become active agents of imperialism, and that they are quite consciously aiding imperialism in its policy of exploiting the colonies. The unanimous acceptance of the resolution by no means indicates that success was achieved in obtaining a unity of views on the aims and the methods of the anti-imperialist activity of the trade unions and the latter’s tasks. One thing was established beyond all doubt; namely, that the role of the organised working class in the struggle against imperialism is becoming steadily more considerable, not only in imperialist countries, but also in the colonies and semi-colonies. Even when they attach themselves to the anti-imperialist front the bourgeois democratic nationalist groups in colonial countries are far from dependable participants in the struggle. The struggle against imperialism is being put more and more on the shoulders of the toiling masses of the colonies. Consequently the Executive Committee of the League took up a sound. position in the resolution adopted, in emphasising that the workers’ organisations in the colonies can only fulfil the task of leaders of the struggle against imperialism if they carry out a strict class policy and are completely independent of the national democratic parties.

INDIA AND THE EAST

Recent events in India, and the decisions. of the Indian Congress dictated the necessity of the session occupying itself with the situation in India, and on this subject it received a report from Saklatvala. The Indian Congress decision amounting to a rejection of the slogan of absolute independence, and an attempt at a compromise between the bourgeois elements of the national emancipation movement and British imperialism, undoubtedly constitutes an event of great significance, and one which is fraught with political consequences of no small importance. This decision once more witnesses to the vacillations and hesitations of the petty bourgeois nationalists and to the beginning of their retreat from a consequential struggle against imperialism. Saklatvala quite accurately qualified the Indian Congress decisions as a step backward, and in his report pointed to the necessity of consolidating the forces of the national revolutionary movement for a further struggle for India’s complete independence and against imperialism.

At the same time he remarked, not without justification, that the anti-imperialist movement in India must create a mass basis for itself, must build up on the workers and peasants, and that this is a prerequisite to any further successful struggle against imperialism and for the independence of the colonies.

The Chinese problem was not on the agenda, but none the less on Cook’s report the representative of the All-China Federation of Labour succeeded in giving a survey of the problem of the Chinese revolution and the struggle against imperialism, in exposing the imperialist policy of the large bourgeois States: Britain, the United States and Japan, and in disclosing the role both of the right and of the “left”? Kuomintang. He gave a clear characterisation of the role of the so-called “third party,” which is still hoping to find a common language and contact with the official leadership of the Kuomintang, and is still living on the illusion that it is possible to re-organise the Kuomintang, to thrust it leftward, to give its activity a fresh, more radical content.

As we know, at the Brussels Congress of the League against Imperialism, the Kuomintang was represented by a large delegation. At that time it was seeking for a basis and support in the national revolutionary groups of workers and trade union organisations in their struggle against the imperialists and in defence of the Chinese revolution. An imposing manifestation of solidarity with the Indian national emancipation movement was effected at the congress. It was decided to form a special committee jointly with the Indians for active support to the Chinese revolution. At a time when all the abuse was being hurled at China, all the sympathies of the oppressed peoples and races were on the side of the toilers of China. At that time speeches were sharper, and the demonstrations of the Indian Swarajists against British imperialism were more definite. Only the Second and the Amsterdam Internationals occupied an openly hostile position in regard to the Chinese workers’ movement, refusing to afford it any active assistance, and declaring itself against the sending of a special delegation to China. Since then times have changed. The workers’ and peasants’ movement has been temporarily suppressed by the Kuomintang with the aid of foreign imperialists. The Kuomintang has been transformed into a party of counterrevolution and an instrument of imperialism. Thousands of revolutionary workers and peasants have been executed, the revolutionary movement has been driven underground. The Kuomintang has turned its back on the League and has taken up a highly hostile attitude towards it. And now accordingly the attitude of the reformist leaders to the Kuomintang has changed so much that they have decided to send a delegation to China. Now that the workers’ movement is driven underground, now that yellow and Fascist unions have been formed with the aid of the Kuomintang government, now that thousands of the finest militants have been tortured and executed, the Second and the Amsterdam Internationals have at last developed an interest in China, and are taking active steps to draw the Chinese workers into their maw. The preparatory work to this end has been undertaken by Albert Thomas, Chairman of the League of Nations International Labour Office.

TASKS FOR THE LEAGUE

Only in the U.S.S.R., the first republic of labour and the brotherly alliance of peoples in the world, have the toilers and the oppressed peoples and races a faithful and dependable ally. The revolutionary role of the U.S.S.R., which by the one fact of its very existence is a living example and challenge to struggle for national independence against imperialism, is clearly understood by the imperialists. Evoking as it does the warmest feelings of sympathy and solidarity from the toilers and oppressed peoples of the whole world, the U.S.S.R. concentrates on itself all the power of class hatred and hostility of which its class enemies are capable, and provokes unceasing attempts to strangle the U.S.S.R.—the fatherland of the world proletariat. In this hostile policy an active part is played by the reformist agents of imperialism, the leaders of the Second and the Amsterdam Internationals, who ardently spread the legend of “Red imperialism,” striving by so doing to arouse a feeling of alienation from and hostility to the U.S.S.R. in the proletariat, and to weaken its sympathy for the U.S.S.R. and its readiness to come to its defence against the imperialists in the event of an attack being made on it. The first duty of the League is an energetic defence of the U.S.S.R. against the imperialists’ concupiscence and against the reformist agents’ preparation of the masses for the forthcoming war. The League expressed its attitude to the U.S.S.R. and to the preparations now being made for an attack on it in the address to the Soviet delegation on its first participation in the sessions of the League.

“In the delegates of the Russian Trade Unions,” reads this document, “the executive committee simultaneously welcomes the representatives of the Soviet Union, which by the fact of its existence and the development of its economy and cultural level is filling the peoples still under oppression with faith and hope for their own emancipation from imperialist and capitalist slavery. The Executive Committee avails itself of the adherence of the Russian trade unions to direct the attention of all the organisations and the friends of the League to the continually increasing danger of war on the Soviet Union, and calls on them, out of solidarity with the Soviet Union, and in the interests of the mighty development of the anti-imperialist movement, to put every obstacle in the way of preparations for war against the Soviet Union. In the Soviet Union the League against Imperialism sees the strongest guarantee for the achievement of victory in its own antiimperialist struggle.”

In the struggle against imperialism and the war danger, the League can undoubtedly play its role, but this is conditioned by the necessity for first and foremost increasing the influence of the organised proletariat within the League, for drawing into its ranks more and more of the mass workers’, trade union, and then the peasants’ and national revolutionary organisations. Not one of those participating in the League can be or ought to be a passive member, sharing in its program but for one reason or another holding back from active service, from open and public demonstrations. At the present time the League unites not only organisations and groups, but also a number of prominent social publicists. None the less the basic method of working should consist in the attraction of mass organisations. The entire policy of the League should be based on such organisations, and not on this, that or the other very prominent and popular personage’s attitude to this or that question. Only such a principle will ensure the League development and success in its activities.

The League should concern itself primarily with the strengthening of its bases in the various countries. In this regard the League is right in expecting great activity from its British friends and should work for the formation of a solid and militant organisation in Britain. The same has to be said of France, concerning which the session adopted a special resolution to this effect. The next congress is to be called in July, but a number of circumstances indicate the expediency of postponing the congress and holding it not earlier than November or December. As is well known the Latin-American Congress of Trade Unions is to be held in May, and the Pacific Ocean conference in August, and during the summer a negro congress is to be called also. The League should set itself the task of drawing these great organisations into its ranks and should afford them the possibility of preparing to send an authoritative delegation to the congress, and to this end should carry on work for the explanation of aims and tasks of the League. One may expect that the League Presidium will take all these circumstances into account and will early decide on postponing its congress with a view to allowing of more general preparation for it and to ensuring delegations from the above-mentioned organisations. Only in that case will the forthcoming congress be a genuinely powerful demonstration of the forces of the anti-imperialist movement and mark a serious stage on the road to the further consolidation and development of the League.

The ECCI published the magazine ‘Communist International’ edited by Zinoviev and Karl Radek from 1919 until 1926 irregularly in German, French, Russian, and English. Restarting in 1927 until 1934. Unlike, Inprecorr, CI contained long-form articles by the leading figures of the International as well as proceedings, statements, and notices of the Comintern. No complete run of Communist International is available in English. Both were largely published outside of Soviet territory, with Communist International printed in London, to facilitate distribution and both were major contributors to the Communist press in the U.S. Communist International and Inprecorr are an invaluable English-language source on the history of the Communist International and its sections.

PDF of full issue: https://www.marxists.org/history/international/comintern/ci/vol-6/v06-n08-mar-15-1929-CI-grn-riaz.pdf