Saturday, February 12, 2022

Message to the International Meeting of ICSPWI - PCI (Maoist)

Dear Comrades!
The Central Committee of the Communist Party of India (Maoist) firstly extends Revolutionary Greetings to one and all of you on the occasion of the meeting organized by ICSPWI in continuation to the Action Day on 24th November, 2021 held in the great spirit of proletarian internationalism.
We came to know of the meeting through the report of the Action Day released by ICSPWI posted on December 15th. We are sorry for not being able to send our representative to the meeting due to state repression.
It is highly welcoming to know that the meeting shall be deciding upon ‘new days of struggle, new forms of solidarity initiatives and will strengthen the ties between the Committees in different countries and the people’s war led by the Maoists’. We write this message without any further details about the meeting.
Dear Comrades,
We all know that the world is simmering with the intensifying fundamental contradictions. Human life is suffocated with increasing economic, political, cultural, environmental and other such crises. We must come together in each and every issue against imperialist onslaught. The situation is leading towards and also demanding further unity of the world proletariat. The need for the unity, coordination and joint action to support the ongoing People’s Wars and Anti-imperialist struggles in various countries and the resistance to repression is rising.
We must work with the objective of international proletarian revolution to establish Socialism-Communism in the world by accomplishing the two
streams of World Socialist Revolution, the National Democratic Revolutions in the semi-colonial, semi-feudal countries and proletarian revolutions in the capitalist/imperialist countries. We need to continue and expand relations among us, the Maoist parties and forces of various countries. We must release joint statements on various international issues and the bourgeois, revisionist theoretical trends. We have to exchange the experiences of the revolutionary movements and learn from their positive experiences.
Let us build and strengthen international people’s movements and people’s organisations against imperialism, must integrate with those movements, develop and coordinate them. We must organise Non-Resident Indians and all those people displaced and made refugees by imperialist policies, especially the working people and intellectuals in support of the Revolutionary movement of India and all over the world. Let us highlight and propagate MLM for which we will have to inevitably fight against the various shades of revisionism especially the new synthesis of Bob Avakian and that of Prachanda and Baburam Bhattarai.
The programs of the Action Day on the 24th of November, 2021 reflected the increasing need to politically combat the fascist offensive on the revolutionary, democratic and anti-imperialist struggles all over the world. As the ICSPWI said in its report, Nov 24th is the new beginning of the international campaign. Let us take it to new heights. We Maoists must develop into a genuine vanguard of the world proletariat.
On the occasion we would appreciate if you could take up programs on –February 10th, the ‘Bhoomkal Day’ the formation day of people’s state power in the legacy of the great Bhoomkal struggle of 1910 with programs in support to the ongoing class struggle and People’s War to defend,
expand and strengthen the organs of people’s state power; March 23rd the anti-imperialist day in the spirit of the three heroes of Indian National Movement, Comrades Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru hanged by the British imperialists in 1931 with programs in support of the ongoing struggles against imperialist exploitation and oppression of the world; September 13th, the day of martyrdom of Comrade Jatin Das in prison during British rule with programs demanding the release of political prisoners; and the May Day with programs against the onslaught of Finance Capital.
We hope that the present meeting shall make positive steps for the unity and for the beginning of more coordination among us, the Maoist forces. As the great teacher Lenin said, the genuine international line depends upon the fulfillment of revolutionary tasks in their own country and in supporting the parties of various countries that are fulfilling such tasks. In the light of this, let us build strong solidarity movements all over the world.

Note: We enclose the document of our Party on ‘Our stand on the formation of an International Organisation of the Proletariat’ released in 2017 February.
Revolutionary Greetings
In-charge of International Affairs,
CPI (Maoist) 


Our Stand on the Formation of an
International Organisation of the Proletariat

The Central Committee releases this document to guide our
Party regarding the formation of an International Organisation
of the Proletariat together with the Revolutionary Parties and
Organisations of various countries, in the present conditions.
This would be a proposed draft for discussion with the
Parties of various countries to form
an International Organisation of the Proletariat
- CC, CPI (Maoist), February 2017

The proletariat is an international class. It is the most
revolutionary class. It can liberate itself only by accomplishing
the mission of emancipating the whole of humanity, a world task
to be carried out through leading the world socialist revolution to
success by smashing the imperialist system and all reaction and
thus advancing to communism.
This forms the basis for the need of an international
organisation of the proletariat.

Recognising this, the founders of Marxism paid attention to
build up such organisation. Marx and Engels played a major role
in establishing the First International and guiding the workers
parties and gave the workers of various countries an
internationalist outlook and camaraderie through their clarion
call: “Workers of the World Unite”. The task faced by Marx and
Engels in the 1st International was mainly that of fighting against
petty bourgeois ideologies, supporting the worker’s movements,
establishing the scientific ideology of the proletariat, forming unity
between the workers and the worker’s organisations and
summarising the experiences of the worker’s movements and
revolutions. They also paid attention to studying the particular
problems and conditions in different countries and offered their
advice. Engels directly participated in the German revolution.
When the Paris Commune raised the flag of revolution they
immediately did all they could to build solidarity with it and
mobilise support. Thus Marx and Engels formed the First
International and led it to prepare the proletariat theoretically,
politically and organisationally to continue revolutionary attack
on the Capital with the objective to achieve Socialism in the
International level.
In the later period, Marx formed the Second International
and formulated a program according to the changed conditions of
the World Proletarian movement. Engels played a similar role in
the 2nd International. The 2nd International was built at a time
when Marxism became broadly accepted as the ideology of the
proletariat and Marxist parties (then known as Social Democratic
parties) and organisations were being built in most countries of
Europe. This organisation played an important role in spreading
Marxism widely and building parties and other organisations of
the proletariat and in the building of proletariat movement, with
the aim of establishment of Socialism in the International level.
Yet the right trend succeeded in seeing that no formal international
centre of the organisation was set up. This continued for twelve
years, thus allowing rightist trends in the member parties to
continue unchecked. Till his death Engels tried to fill in this gap
by maintaining a regular correspondence, giving guidance to
parties in various corners of the globe. Though there were leaders
and forces of the revolutionary camp in these Parties, opportunist,
revisionist leadership was dominant. The deviation of leading
parties and important theoreticians of the 2nd International from
Marxism increased. And when the most important test came in
the form of the inter-imperialist 1st world war, almost all of them
abandoned Marxism. They sank into the worst forms of
opportunism and revisionism. Proletarian internationalism was
replaced with service to the bourgeoisie of ‘one’s own country.’
The objective and subjective basis of this degeneration were
analysed and sharply exposed by Lenin. He related the growth of
revisionism and opportunism in the 2nd International to the
transition of capitalism into imperialism, the super-profits it
extracts from the colonies and semi-colonies, its ability to bribe a
section of the working class in the capitalist countries who turn
into a labour aristocracy, and the consequent split in the working
class. He further pointed out how the 2nd International remained
stuck in the frame of the pre-imperialist period and failed to grasp
the strategical and tactical implications of the new situation arising
from the advent of imperialism.
The 3rd International, Communist International (Comintern)
was formed. The First Clause of the Constitution of the Third
Communist International formed in the leadership of Lenin after
the Russian Revolution stated its task – ‘The Communist
International - the International Workers’ Association - is a union
of Communist Parties in various countries; As the leader of World
Communist Party, activist of the World Revolutionary Movement
of the proletariat and as a guide to the principles and aims of
Communism, the Communist International strives to lead the
majority of the working class and the broad strata of the property
less peasantry, fights for the establishment of the world
dictatorship of the proletariat, for the establishment of a World
Union of Socialist Soviet Republics, for the complete abolition of
classes and for the achievement of socialism - the first stage of
Russian Soviet Republic was established in the condition
when Monopoly Capitalism took the form of imperialism. With
this a new era in the history of the world – the era of revolutions
where there was liberation from wage slavery and a transformation
to a genuine freedom – started. The basic ideological and political
orientation for the Comintern formed in this situation had already
been put forward by the Bolshevik party led by Lenin. With the
victory of the Russian revolution this orientation gained
widespread acceptance and paved the way to the founding of the
Comintern. The Comintern took Marxism to all the four corners
of the world in various forms. The proletarian movement truly
became an international one. Communist parties were founded
in the colonies and semi-colonies. The parties in the Comintern
organised the masses and stood in the van of struggles in both the
imperialist and oppressed countries. They organised and led
revolutions. Thus Comintern provided the correct theoretical
perspective and political guidance to the proletariat movements,
the anti-imperialist national liberation movements. It extended
help and cooperation to these movements in various forms and
mustered support.
In view of the debacle of the 2nd International the
organisational structure of the Comintern was seen as a
concretisation of firm ideological, political positions, like that of
a party. It was conceived as the ‘world party of the world
proletariat’. The Executive Committee (EC) of the Comintern had
the powers of a Central Committee and the different parties were
subordinate to it. The EC took upon itself the authority to
formulate strategy and tactics of the revolution in different
countries and sent its emissaries to direct the parties in its
implementation. This inevitably led to bad results, at times even
disastrous. In view of such experiences in the course of the Chinese
revolution, the Chinese communist party welcomed the
dissolution of the Comintern during the 2nd World War. Some
have failed to see the genuine reasons underlying this approach
and wrongly criticised it as ‘nationalism’.
The CPC was very conscious of the problems caused by
external interventions. It resisted such tendencies from the CPSU
led by Stalin who later self-critically admitted that they had given
such wrong advice. Under Krushchev the projection of the CPSU
as an international centre was taken to extreme levels and relations
with other parties was handled in a very bureaucratic and
patronising manner. Those parties that refused to toe its
increasingly revisionist line were sought to be isolated. This
harmful approach on the relations between parties itself became
a subject of criticism in the polemics waged by the CPC under
Mao’s leadership against Krushchev revisionism. It cautioned the
international communist movement against such wrong concepts
like ‘father party’. In its relations with other parties, the CPC took
extreme care not to impose its views. It preferred to offer its
experiences not as criteria but as reference material and stressed
that every party must base itself on its own understanding, analysis
and lessons gained from practice in the respective countries.
After the dissolution of the Comintern in 1943 the communist
parties continued to play their internationalist role through
bilateral and multi-lateral relations and initiatives. The Cominform
was formed in the wake of the 2nd World War, with the
participation of parties from the new socialist states of East Europe
and the CPSU. In 1957 and 1960 two important international
conferences of communist parties were convened. But the
international proletariat has been without an international
organisation for the past seven decades. Despite this, while socialist
countries were existing, one or the other party has in effect played
the role of a leading centre. The CPSU and later the CPC had this
position. Their views were held as authoritative by other parties.
If we examine the whole course of the international
communist movement we can see that at different periods one or
the other party has been in a leadership position, regardless of
whether this was formally recognised or not. Thus in the First
International, the Trade Union leaders of the ….. countries played
an important role. Even in the 2nd International the German party’s
views enjoyed more weight and influence, eventhough
organisationally all the proletariat Parties and Organisations were
equal. The same was true of the CPSU (B) in the Comintern. This
is a reflection of the uneven development of the international
communist movement in accordance with the advance of
revolution in this or that country or the deviation of a party into
revisionism or liquidation. As pointed out by the CPC in its
polemics against Krushchev revisionism, “…the vanguard position
… does not remain unchanged for a long time but shifts according
to changing conditions. This shift is decided not by the subjective
wishes of any individual or party, but by the conditions shaped
by history. If conditions change, other parties may come to the
van of the movement. When a party which formerly held the
position of vanguard takes the path of revisionism, it is bound to
forfeit this position despite the fact that it has been the largest
party and has exerted the greatest influence”
The leading position of one or the other party in the ICM
emerged from the objective fact that these parties had at certain
junctures been the most advanced in their theory and practice
and thus served as guides for the rest of the movement. This is not
in itself a bad thing. On the contrary, the advanced should lead.
The problem arises when this is taken in an absolute manner, as
an unchanging status, rather than as a service rendered by a
contingent of the international communist movement in a period
or specific juncture of its development. Engel’s very correctly drew
attention to this danger — “...for the present moment the German
workers form the vanguard of the proletarian struggle. How long
events will allow them to occupy this post of honour cannot be
foreseen. But as long as they are placed in it, let us hope that they
will discharge their duties in the proper manner...In the first place,
however, it is necessary to retain a real international spirit which
permits of no chauvinism, which joyfully greets each new step of
the proletarian movement, no matter in which nation it is made.
If the German workers proceed in this way, they may not march
exactly at the head of the movement — it is not in the interest of
the movement that the workers of one country should march at
the head of all-but they will occupy an honourable place on the
battle line, and they should stand armed for battle when other
unexpected grave trials or momentous events demand heightened
courage, heightened determination, and the will to act.”
There is a further problem. As we know, despite the different
approach taken by the CPC under the leadership of Mao, and its
insistence that, “In the present international communist
movement, the question of who has the right to lead whom simply
does not arise. Fraternal parties should be independent and
completely equal, and at the same time they should be united. On
questions of common concern they should reach unanimity of
views through consultation, and they should concert their actions
in the struggle for the common goal.” Its views and positions were
considered as the final word by most of the new Marxist-Leninist
parties that emerged in the 1960s. This shows us the other side of
this problem. Unless the individual parties grasp the vital
importance of taking their own bearings while shouldering the
task of leading the revolution in their countries they will inevitably
fall prey to blindly following one or the other party. A
metaphysical approach of seeing only the positive achievements
and not seeing drawbacks and limitations, not keeping in mind
the particular conditions in which the successes were obtained
and whether this has been possible in new conditions, in other
words an uncritical attitude to the successful Parties, underlies
this state of affairs. This in turn hampers the creative application
of lessons learnt in the concrete conditions of one’s own country.
If this becomes general, even without an organisation, an
informal centralisation will emerge. This may be reflecting a
vanguard role of a party in the ICM achieved on the basis of correct
ideological and political positions and practice. But all the same it
has the effect of organisational centralisation also without an
organised venue for the exchange of views and struggle over ideas.
In fact this was the situation that existed in the international
communist movement that emerged through the Great Debate.
The CPC supported the revolutionary Marxist-Leninists in all
countries, assisted them and rendered all possible service to the
world revolution. Even while carrying out its internationalist
duties it had opposed taking up the task of forming a new
International. It declared, “In their mutual relations, each fraternal
party maintains its independence and at the same time unites with
all the others. Here, the relationship in which the minority should
submit to the majority does not exist, and still less so the
relationship in which a lower Party organization should submit
to a higher one. The only way to deal with problems of common
concern to fraternal Parties is to hold discussions and reach
unanimous agreement in accordance with the principle of
consultation.” Yet, it was in effect considered as an international
centre, regardless of its views on this matter.
After the Dengist coup in China, those parties that
continued to uphold MLM felt the need for international ties and
some form of organisation to address this. Various initiatives were
seen in the decades that have passed. They range from very loose
co-ordinations to the more centralised structure of the
Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (RIM). The RIM had
an elected committee that was charged with the task of acting as
an embryonic political centre, guided by commonly adopted
positions. While most of the co-ordinations became dysfunctional
after some time, the RIM continued to function relatively
consistently over a span of slightly more than two decades. The
role of the Committee of the RIM (CoRIM) is no doubt significant
in this. Under its leadership the RIM played a leading role in
popularising the lessons of the people’s war in Peru and Nepal. It
played a major role in the adoption of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism
by the international Maoist movement and has also aided the
formation of new Maoist parties in some countries. The RIM
played a positive role at critical times, such as the unfortunate
episode in the relations between the erstwhile MCC and PW. On
the other hand, CoRIM became arrogant with the subjective
assessment that it is absolutely correct. With its sectarian trends
it created obstacles to the International Maoist movement. As we
understand, this not only affected relations with other Maoist
parties but caused problems within the RIM itself. Its sectarianism
was manifested in a wrong attitude of deciding relations with
parties solely on the basis of whether or not they accepted its
Declaration. In view of the fact that the leadership of the
Protracted People’s War of India are not member Parties of RIM
and that it was not in the frame of People’s War it formulated, it
bore a negative attitude towards these in various forms. It was
negative towards the independent attitude and the independent
effort of CPI(ML)[PW], later the CPI (Maoist) regarding
Proletarian Internationalism. As a result it publicised the
revolutionary struggle of its constituents only and ignored those
of others with a sectarian perspective even when they were making
significant advances. It had a bad position on the unification
process that led to the formation of our party. And it has given
bad advice and tried to impose this on the participant parties of
the RIM. It accommodated parties that were stagnating and away
from revolutionary practice for decades together. The
metaphysical, dogmatic, sectarian theoretical and political
weaknesses that continued in the leadership of RIM since the
beginning, is the main reason for such severe mistakes. This
obviously raised questions on its claim to be an ‘embryonic political
In view of the overall role played by the RIM, a summation
of its experiences has great importance. This must also include a
review of its ideological, political positions as seen in its
Declaration and later Resolutions.
The RIM had set itself the task of advancing towards an
International of a new type. It set itself the twin tasks of working
out the General Line for this organisation and a form of democratic
centralism suited to an international organisation. Both of these
tasks remained unfulfilled. Serious differences on evaluation of
the world situation blocked advance in the matter of formulating
a General Line. The Declaration of the RIM had wrongly implied
that the principle contradiction at the world level was the one
between imperialist powers and that a 3rd world war was
imminent. This not only gave a wrong orientation, it seriously
damaged the prospects of a broader unity among Maoist parties.
This wrong analysis was corrected only in 2000 at its Extended
Meeting held that year. The report adopted by this meeting clearly
stated that the contradiction between imperialism and the
oppressed peoples and countries is principal. Even then the CoRIM
didn’t take the lead to initiate a systematic process of advancing
towards a General Line. In hindsight it can be seen that the
emerging deviations of the UCPN (M) and RCP, US leaderships
was underlying this lax approach.
From the very beginning there were different views among
the parties that joined up to form the RIM on the root causes of
the extreme centralisation exercised by the Comintern. A number
of parties considered that the ‘world party’ concept was the basic
reason for this approach. This was represented in the Declaration
of the RIM’s criticism on the concept of ‘world party of the world
proletariat’. But it remained a contested issue though it was never
taken up for further debate. Along with the RCP, US a few parties
considered that the main error in the Comintern’s handling of
relations with parties lay in mistakes in methods of leadership.
Since some of these parties had leadership tasks this started
influencing the CoRIM’s style of functioning. A style of
concentrating everything in the hands of the CoRIM, including
relations between parties, started developing. Independent
initiatives by parties to establish and maintain bilateral relations
were discouraged and frowned upon. While a few parties opposed
and resisted this, most went along with this growing centralisation
that was actually going against the adopted positions of the RIM.
This experience once again brings up the problems inherent in
the international relations of communist parties, emerging from
both objective and subjective factors.
No form of organisation can be taken as an absolute
guarantee of appropriate and correct international relations among
Maoist parties. Ultimately it depends on the correctness of the
ideological and political line of those (formally or informally) in
leading positions and the maturity and independence of all the
other parties and the practice of all constituents. Yet, this does
not mean that avoiding the formation of organisation is the
solution. There may be situations where this task has to be
postponed. But, in general, the proletariat needs an international
organisation. This is particularly true of the present situation.
Imperialist globalisation has further integrated the world. This
has its impact in a wide ranging manner and in diverse realms,
including class struggle. The international nature of the working
class and its struggles is becoming more apparent through the
scattered yet interconnected functioning of imperialist MNCs that
integrate production units in different countries into a single chain
of exploitation. The imperialists are formulating their repressive
strategies fully keeping this situation in mind. But the proletariat
and its Maoist vanguards are still lagging in developing strategy
and organisations to suit the challenges of the new situation. They
are lagging in mutual help too. Globalisation policies are wrecking
the lives of millions, more so in the oppressed countries, but also
in the capitalist countries. The present global crisis has exacerbated
this situation. This is bringing out the masses across the world
onto the streets. A whole new generation is battling against the
forces of exploitation and reaction, but without the guidance of
the proletarian ideology necessary for having a scientific and
consistent approach to the tasks they take up. This objective
situation holds immense potential. It must be unleashed if the
ICM is to make the advance called for today. Yet this task outstrips
the subjective capacities of the individual parties. But, with
proletarian internationalist perspective, through their united
effort, much can be contributed to consolidate each revolutionary
party and win over a large section to the cause of communism.
At each juncture we can seek out the forms most appropriate to
the concrete condition of the international movement and best
serving the tasks posed by the objective situation.
From the very beginning our party has held the position
that a centralised organisation like the RIM, functioning as an
embryonic political centre, is not suited to the existing subjective
conditions of the international Maoist movement. We still hold
the same position. We have clearly stated above our understanding
on the formation of RIM as International and its functioning. But
we have never ruled out the necessity of an international
organisation, which suits the present situation of the Maoist
parties. In fact we were an initiator of the Co-ordination
Committee of Maoist Parties and Organisations of South Asia.
Though restricted to a specific region of the world, this
organisation had given some experiences on what is possible and
viable in the present situation. It was based on commonly accepted
ideological, political positions. It had an elected Standing
Committee that was given the responsibility of issuing statements
based on its Declaration and the political resolutions adopted by
its Conferences. It initiated region-wide political propaganda
campaigns, occasionally published a bulletin that helped bring
out the views and practices of its participant parties and provided
mutual support and help. CCOMPOSA was consolidating and
conditions were turning favourable for the formation of a front
with the forces of revolutionary movements and national
liberation movements of various countries against Indian
expansionism in South Asia. Needless to say, in such a time, the
disruption caused by the revisionist betrayal by the leadership of
Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) to the revolution in Nepal,
South Asia and on the whole the World Socialist Revolution, has
made this organisation dysfunctional since a long time. But it
provides a positive experience. In the present juncture we can
take lessons from all such experiences, along with those of the
RIM and other international initiatives, and arrive at some
common positions through consultations.
An organisation at the international level would necessarily
have some tasks different from those at a sub-continental or
continental level. Other than the propagation of MLM, leading
proletarian revolutionary movements in their countries, making
preparations for People’s War, advancing and supporting the on
going people’s wars, mustering solidarity to the people’s struggles
and rebellions, making efforts to win over new sections to the
banners of communism, it/they would have to play the role of a
core in building and guiding such world-wide anti-imperialist mass
organisation/organisations. This is an urgent task in the present
world situation. The socialist revolution in imperialist countries
and new democratic revolution in the oppressed countries are
the two components of the world proletarian revolution. The
Revolution in every country is an integral part of the World
Socialist Revolution. An international organisation of Maoist
parties must address both of them and also the whole spectrum of
struggles, revolts and rebellions of the masses and its diverse
sections, which flow into them. Other than this, the possibilities
of its becoming a forum for debate and struggle focussed on
arriving at synthesised positions on key ideological, political issues
facing the ICM should also be explored. We must be ever clear
that the international organisation should neither replace nor
weaken the independent initiative of its constituent parties, their
bilateral relations and the relations they continue with other
revolutionary parties and organisations.
The task of building up such an organisation needs proper
preparations in all aspects and consultations between parties, as
widely as possible. We must firmly keep in mind the lesson given
by the CPC led by Mao Tsetung, “…the history of the international
communist movement demonstrates that proletarian unity has
been consolidated and has developed through struggle against
opportunism, revisionism and splittism.” “Only when it has
theoretical and political unity can the international proletariat
have organisational cohesion and unity of action.” At present, apart
from adherence to Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, international
unity of Maoist parties and organisations demands clear lines of
demarcation from the neo-revisionism of Prachanda-Bhattarai and
the neo-revisionism of Avakian. It is absolutely necessary to insist
on this orientation and firmly reject opportunist plans of bringing
together all parties in the name of ‘broad unity’, irrespective of
their ideological, political positions.
• Workers of all countries Unite!
• Long live Marxism-Leninism-Maoism!
• Long live Proletarian Internationalism!
• Long live World Socialist Revolution!
• Down with Imperialism and Reactionaries of All Countries!
• Down with various kinds of Revisionism!
• Long live the Unity of Proletarian Revolutionary Parties
and Organisations of various Countries!
• Long live the Unity of anti-imperialist Revolutionary,
Democratic Organisations and Forces!
• Long live the Unity of Workers, Oppressed Nations and
Oppressed Masses of the World!
‘The vanguard of the Indian proletarian class, the revolutionary
communist party of India, CPI(Maoist), stands by proletarian
internationalism. Revisionism, particularly right-wing opportunism, is the
main danger for world proletarian revolution and international communist
movement today. One could not move a single step towards revolution in
any country without fighting and defeating it. Hence the Indian proletariat
must fight against both Right and ‘Left’ opportunism in advancing the
class struggle and the revolutionary war. The party, while drawing lessons
from the past revolutions, and later, from the restoration of capitalism in
Russia and China, must uphold the relevance of the most modern
experiences of the GPCR particularly in the struggle against revisionism.
Thus, it has to build unity with all the genuine Marxist-Leninist-Maoist
parties, groups and forces in the world today. It also has to establish unity
with the proletariat, oppressed nations and oppressed people of the whole
world. By uniting with them and through the practice of learning from
each other, it forms part of the global struggle to eliminate imperialism
and counter revolutionary forces from the world.
This state will follow the five principles in its relation with the
countries having different social systems-mutual respect for territorial
integrity and sovereignty; mutual non-aggression; non-interference in each
other internal affairs; equality and mutual benefit; and peaceful coexistence.
This People’s Democratic State will establish unity with the
international proletariat and the oppressed nations of the world; opposes
imperialist war and aggression, bullying, subversion and interference etc.
It will support and help by all means the revolutionary struggles and
revolutionary war, especially the ongoing struggles under the leadership
of various Maoist revolutionary forces against capitalism, imperialism and
reaction the world over. After the victory of the revolution new democratic,
and later, socialist India will act as a Base in order to facilitate the victory
of the world socialist revolution. It will closely integrate with the
revolutionary and Maoist forces and their struggles in South Asia in
particular, keeping in view the historical relations of India with the people
of the sub-continent’.
- Party Program, CC, CPI (Maoist), February 2007

No comments:

Post a Comment