As you are no doubt aware we have had considerable differences with you over the question of Ireland, both in terms of an analysis of the situation there, and in terms of how to build a solidarity movement in this country. Now however, a change in your policy appears to be taking place which makes it seem possible that some closer measure of joint action could be reached. In the student field your comrades have adopted, as a basis for solidarity work. a position of unconditional, but obviously not uncritical, support for the IRA and various of your branches have supported the slogans of "Victory to the IRA", or Solidarity with the IRA'. Despite our complete disagreement with the way you handled the Aldershot explosion these other actions we completely welcome.
As far as Marxists are concerned, the absolutely central question for revolutionaries in an imperialist power is that of defeatism. In a colonial war carried out by an imperialist power, they must be anoquivocally for the defcat of the forces of their own bourgeoisie, and for the victory of the other side. There is no question of compromise on this issue. All sorts of people are prepared to rant on about "peace" and an end to 'violence, justice etc. but it is the question of defeatism which is decisive. Within this general framework of course tactical differences as regards slogans cic can exist. However at all times the revolutionaries must clearly support the victory of the other side. This brings us to the question of the Anti-Internment League. The objection which the IMG has to the platform of the AlL is that it is not clearly defeatist. Its programme is ambiguous enough to be capable of acceptance by all sorts of chauvinist, racist, "paddy bash ing elements.
of the All. a ing to change its programme to a defeatist one. This we have already tried on at least one occasion (with Ibe I.S. voting against). It is this question of defeatism which we regard as decisive. Naturally we have our own ideas as to the exact slogans the AlL bould raise (this is dealt with below) but we wi ald be preFi so accept, as the bases of a principled ves in history of course Marxists oo weak to initiate large scale camclear cut defeatist position. For a or example, the Vietnam Solidarity had to act as a pressure group C.P. controlled "peace" movement. and to the AlL, it might therefore be that this organisation was so massive ng that revolutionaries had no option carry out propaganda work within it. ould be incapable of running an indeit campaign on a clear defeatist position. circumstances at all times the revolwould raise defeatist slogans for the of the other side (something the IS. scuously failed to do) but would be to change the demands of the main - This, however is very definitely not on as it at present exists. We are no the days of "movement" and do thing' politics and the left can now people independently of the C.P. y the AlL and the ISC can draw in lances than the membership of revolu organisations, but when it comes to actual ground work of propaganda, setting sp branches, holding meetings, etc. it is the tve of the revolutionary groups which a necessary to 'start the ball rolling'. The 1S. an perfectly well aware that if the IS. changed its line in the AIL instead of backing the present position. there would be a con siderable chance of the adoption of a clearly defeatist position. Even if this were not possible it would be the task of the I.S. to attempt to get such a change adopted instead of trying to prevent it.
SLOGANS In the few words available for a slogan it is of course impossible to completely express the whole content of an analysis. Trotsky for example points out that the Stalinists were even able to twist the apparently impeccably revolutionary slogan of A Workers and sum up an entire analysis but it cannot do so perfectly. Nevertheless of course it is possible to have varying degrees of "goodness" in a stogan. Let us therefore be clear as to the main elements of the analysis.
Firstly what is the basis of the struggle in Ireland. On this we have a clear position. The basis of the struggle in Ireland is the domination of that country, both direct and, in the South, indirect, by British imperialism. Furthermore the hold of British imperialism over Ireland cannot be broken as long as capitalism exists in Ireland. Until this point the imperialist cconomy of Britain will continue to dominate and exploit Ireland. Within this general framework however there are several possible outco es. For example it is by no means ruled out in theory that British imperralism could impose a federal solution int Ireland. It may be unlikely in practice, but it is not theoretically excluded in the sense that the ending of imperialist domination without the destruction of capitalism is. Similarly it is not excluded that even bourgeois or petit-bourgeois movements can secure formal independence for their countries. Algeria is a case in point. Clearly however such an event is no real solution to the national question. Algeria today is still dominated by French imperialism. The immediate political task that flows from this analysis is to determine the attitude of revolutionaries in Britain and Ireland to the present struggle. Quite clearly the position of revolutionaries in Britain is that they consider the securing of even legal independence under bourgeois rule of all Ireland from Britain to be in the direct interest of the Irish and British working classes. In consequence they are clearly for the defeat of the forces of the British state even if an 'independent" Ireland was a bourgeois state. Even a slogan of the simple type For the defeat of the British Army in Ireland" would convey this and we would be prepared to Pd slogan. However, logans can be , in particular in regard to the actual forces leading the struggle in Ireland. However it must be clearly understood that it is not the primary task of British revolutionaries to criticise these leaderships in agitation. In propaganda ve naturally make a detailed analysis, but the Station is the defence of these I chauvinist sent support and 99 per cent cond a in fact a betrayal of the revolution in L In slogans it is therefore necessary to pre support to the armed vanguard of the Reput can population that is to say to the IRA. Neverthel a clearly within this general provision it is abo necessary to educate the British vanguard in the nature in Ireland and the nature of the I.R.A. In the case of Ireland therefore we have to sort out several points. Firstly does either wing of the IRA have a programme capable of destroying the hold of British imperialism in Ireland. This in fact boils down to the question of whether the IRA can destroy capitalism in Ireland. The answer to that is clearly NO. The Provisional IRA is ideologically linked to the Southern bourgeoisie, and the Officials' stages theory means in practice that they are incapable of linking their explicit socialism to the national struggle. Therefore any slogan which states that the IRA can destroy British imperialism is completely incorrect. Any Marxist who holds to the theory of Permanent Revolution must accept this, Nevertheless this is entirely different to saying that the IRA cannot defeat the British army. Here in practice we may think it unlikely but it is not theoretically excluded in the same sense as is the IRA destroying British imperialism. There are many examples of struggles in which imperialist armies have been defeated without capitalism being destroyed and thereby destroying imperialism. We have already noted Aigeria and the case of the FLN: Aden and Cyprus are other examples. Quite clearly, for example, whether the IRA could defeat the British army could be affected by what revolutionaries do in Britain. A massive solidarity campaign might lead to the bourgeoisie being forced to abandon the struggle because of fear of the internal repercussions of continuing its policy. If we therefore summarise the points of this ment we may say the following. To educate the British working class in the nature of the aggle in Ireland it is necessary not merely to e a clear defeatist slogan, but to relate i to the struggle of the actual armed leadership in Ireland. There are two slogans which cecst themselves on this, and both have some ight drawbacks. One is "Victory to the IRA" and the other is "Solidarity with the IRA'. The danger of the "Victory to the IRA" slogan is that it can be interpreted in the sense of 'Victory to the IRA against British imperialism, i.e. implies that the IRA can destroy imperialism in Ireland. However this danger is far less than the drawbacks of the Solidarity with the IRA slogan. This is used to justify positions such as that support can only be extended to the IRA in defensive activities. This is the position put foward by, for example, sections of the Communist Party and has been used by them with "success" in the NUS. This is of course fully in line with their "who fired the first shot" pacifist approach to solidarity campaigns. It attempts to reduce politics to geography. We therefore hold that the slogan which most fully gets the political point across is Victory to the IRA provided that it is explicitly understood that this refers to the armed forces of the British state, not to imperialism itself. However we would not fetishise such a point if the I.S. were prepared to come out with any clear cut defeatist slogan such as "Solidarity with the IRA', 'Unconditional but not uncritical support to both wings of the IRA', or any such similar formula. Indeed, in order to achieve a common platform within the Liaison Committee for the Defence of Student Unions, we have already agreed with cdes. in I.S. a position of Unconditional but not uncritical support to both wings of the IRA. As we have already said, within the essential principle of adopting a clear cut defeatist position we would not allow differences on slogans to come in the way, and these become of secondary importance.
WE THEREFORE MAKE THE FOLLOWING PROPOSAL TO THE I.S. LEADERSHIP' IF YOU INTEND NOW TO ADVANCE ANY CLEAR CUT DEFEATIST POSITION WITHIN THE AIL, NATURALLY COUPLED WITH THE DEMAND FOR SELF-DETERMINATION, WE WILL SUPPORT THIS. FURTHERMORE, WHILE CONTINUING TO FIGHT FOR OUR OWN SLOGANS, IF YOU PUT FORWARD ANY DEFEATIST SLOGAN WITHIN THE AIL WE STATE IN ADVANCE THAT WE WILL VOTE FOR THAT SLOGAN AND FIGHT A CAMPAIGN FOR ITS ADOPTION. At present the I.S. appears to wish to use organisational arguments to justify its position in the AIL. It claims the ISC is sectarian. Unfortunately the reality of the situation is that IS is maintaining a diffusion of forces in solidarity with the struggle in Ireland by having no consistent policy (see the last issue of The Red Mole) and by refusing to come out clearly for a defeatist solidarity campaign. As long as this situation continues we will continue to try to create a defeatist campaign. It is for this reason that we are supporting the Irish Solidarity Campaign conference in Oxford on 29-30 April. We would greatly welcome a chance to unify in one organisation all forces working in solidarity with the struggle in Ireland. This however can only be done on a clear basis of revolutionary defeatism. The choice is up to the leadership and membership of I.S. Either a continuation of slogans and policies open to any sort of pacifist or chauvinist interpretation, or a campaign on a clear cut defeatist basis. We have made our position clear. We await your reply in hope and with interest.
-The Political Committee of the I.M.G.
Red Mole 30 March 1079 Dams G