Amilcar Cabral and the Tricontinental

It has been 41 years since 20 January 1973 when Amilcar Cabral, founder of the African Party for the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde (PAIGC), was assassinated. This was a few months after independence had been achieved in the countries for which he had struggled. The NGO Socialist Solidarity (Solsoc) and their partner organisations in the South have paid homage to this notable anti-colonialist, considered one of the principal voices for the emancipation of Africa.

On 6 January, 1966, Amilcar Cabral (1924 - 1973) spoke at the heart of the Tricontinental, in Havana. This speech is particularly revealing. On one hand, it shows Cabral’s strength and originality, while inscribing his reflections and actions amongst a network of men and women; of struggles and experiences from his participation in the liberation movements of the 1960s. On the other hand, the text of this speech was to become a manifesto of what was then called the ‘Third World activists’. Finally, on a more personal note, I work with a Belgian NGO called the Tricontinental Centre, which, in one way or another, is a part of this legacy.

But what is the Tricontinental? The organisation was formed January 1966, in Cuba, at an international conference of solidarity with African, Asian, and Latin American people. Eighty two delegates from recently decolonised states, liberation movements and guerilla movements met in Havana. Cabral was in good company (but Che was not there: he was hidden in Tanzania after the failure of his attempt to develop guerillas in the Congo).

The Tricontinental, which a recent, well-written, book has explored its history in a manner more journalistic than theoretical [1], can be seen as a radicalisation of the movement of ‘non-aligned’ states, founded at the 1955 Bandung Conference in Indonesia, who intended to formalise their condemnation of colonialism and demonstrate their independence by refusing to align with the East/West axis (communist world versus ‘free’ world). It always acted to promote the ‘non-aligned’ movement (even though Russia and China were represented in Havana), but focused the organisation on the anti-imperialist struggle and embracing not only states, but also national liberation movements.

GILBERTO FERREIRA SOCIALIST SOLIDARITY

The NGO Socialist Solidarity (Solsoc), along with its Southern partners, had planned to hold an international meeting in honour of Cabral at the end of 2013 in Guinea-Bissau. Unfortunately, following the coup, carrying out such an event became impossible… at least in that country. Instead it was proposed by the Movement of Landless Workers (MST), that concurrent to the International Seminar on Social Economy and Solidarity for Food Sovereignty, held in December 2013 at Fortaleza, in Brazil, a tribute to Cabral be given.

It may even be that the Federal Public University of Lusophone Afro-Brazilian International Integration (UNILAB) [2] – also built during the height of the Brazilian anti-slavery struggle – where successive different stories, poems and speeches, in the presence of African students and Solsoc’s partners in Latin America, Guinea-Bissau, Cape Verde and the Democratic Republic of Congo, were better able to recall the internationalist and combative spirit of the Tricontinental.

On January 6, 1966, in Havana, Cabral was the first to speak. He was given three times longer than the other delegates, because of the important subject he addressed, but also because he represented one of the most advanced liberation movements in Africa. His speech [3] made waves and caused shock – not only for what he said but the manner in which he said it, to finally be one of the most applauded, then to go around the world.

Later delegates at the forum had praised Fidel Castro and Cuba and given some information of their struggles; information often embedded in anti-imperialist Marxist-Leninist harangues. Cabral began by paying tribute to the Cuban Revolution and mentioning the opponents of the regime, a subject which was nearly taboo or invisible. He evoked ‘certain Cubans who have not shared in the hopes and joys of the seventh anniversary celebrations because they are against the Revolution.’ Then he defined the limits and challenges of his speech: ‘It is not by shouting or uttering insults against imperialism that we will achieve its liquidation.’ What prevails is the fight: ‘the daily practice of the struggle.’ And this is what guides his theory. Hence Cabral’s concern to bring a certain level of eloquence to each discussion, to return constantly to his ‘dominant concern’, the urgent action, his impatience to ‘return to (his) our countries, to further develop the struggle.’ Finally, it uses a holistic view, which means it aims to identify external factors (economic and political) which affect the internal factors of the struggle, fearing neither the revision of certain theories nor self-criticism.

Cabral speaks of ‘our fundamental fight…the fight against our own weaknesses…which are the expressions of the internal contradictions of reality.’ This struggle is ‘the most difficult.’ In addition, he intended to revise the concept of class struggle as the driving force of history. This touched a central tenet of Communist and Marxist theory. But to review does not necessarily abandon or reject. Cabral rather sought to better define the concept, to alter it to better reflect other historical factors. The challenge for him was to reject the idea of ‘people without a history’ [4] of people who have waited under the bourgeoisie /or imperialism to access history. It reflected the notion that people stay outside, crushed by their ignorance and passivity, notably Africans, and the story is monopolised and reduced to a history of the winners. This strategy has not disappeared. Rather it has returned with force. A few years ago, on July 26, 2007, the former French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, in Dakar, declared, ‘with the frankness and sincerity we owe to friends’, ‘the tragedy of Africa is that the African man has never really entered history.’ [5]

While some aspects of Cabral’s speech became dated and others were contradicted by the half-century which separates us, it is interesting to revisit the negative factors which he analysed in the struggle against imperialism, which he defined as ‘piracy transplanted from the oceans to land, piracy reorganised, consolidated and adapted to exploit the human and material resources of our people’… the definition remains valid!

Among the negative factors, he cited the ‘so-called’ political assistance to underdeveloped countries ‘practiced by imperialism’ which continues to be a challenge, caught between solidarity, compensation and domination- the fact that ‘newly independent states’ abandon the struggle and support for other struggles, ‘the growing contradictions between anti-imperialist states’ and, finally, the threat of a world war.

However I would like to put a stop to a factor which was a double negative Cabral put forward and continues today to have an impact on the struggle against neo-colonialism. In the North, he pointed out ‘the progress made by neo-capitalism’ through investing to develop ‘a privileged proletariat’ and to turn this group away from the struggle for emancipation. In the South, he insisted that the dilemma of the petty bourgeoisie, whose alternatives were to ‘betray the revolution or commit suicide as a class’, and it’s tendency for gentrification. In this, he joined the author of The Wretched of the Earth, Frantz Fanon, the Martinique doctor who had taken up the struggle for independence in Algeria and died in late 1961. The two, Cabral and Fanon, were part of the emergence of the same anti-colonial praxis. [6]

Where are we today, nearly half a century after the end of the Tricontinental, the assassination of Cabral, the suppression of many national liberation struggles and the shift of former liberation leaders to immoveable dictators whose anti-liberation credentials give their rule credibility? Neo-colonialism has not disappeared. It is ‘only’ more complex and diverse. Returning to the defeats and the faults of the struggle does not mean to resign oneself to impotence and give up the fight. On the contrary it is to arm oneself by refusing heroic speeches and foolish optimism, to return to the again and always to the most important things, which for Cabral was ‘solidarity’ and ‘the most effective criticism of imperialism’: the struggle.

* This article was translated from French for Pambazuka News by Jeff Wilson.

NOTES

[1] Roger Faligot, Tricontinentale. Quand Che Guevara, ben Barka, Cabral, Castro et Hô Chi Minh préparaient la révolution mondiale (1964-1968), Paris, La Découverte, 2013.

[2] See http://www.unilab.edu.br/# In general, for a reflection on current news and the legacy of Southern internationalism, I refer to Alternatives Sud, « Coalitions d’États du Sud : retour de l’esprit de Bandung ? » (Vol. XIV 2007/3), http://www.cetri.be/spip.php?rubrique11

[3] http://www.legrandsoir.info/fondements-et-objectifs-de-la-liberation-nationale-et-structure-sociale.html.Sauf unless otherwise indicated, all quotations are from this speech.

[4] Even if his analysis is tainted by a certain Marxism

[5] Nicolas Sarkozy, speech on 26 July 2007 at the Cheikh Anta Diop University, Dakar, Sénégal, http://afrikara.com/index.php?page=contenu&art=1841 In response to this speech, it is useful to read, Makhily Gassama (dir.), L’Afrique répond à Sarkozy. Contre le discours de Dakar, Paris, 2008, Philippe Rey.

[6] Achile Mbembé, « L’universalité de Frantz Fanon », préface à Frantz Fanon, Œuvres, Paris, La Découverte, 2011

* THE VIEWS OF THE ABOVE ARTICLE ARE THOSE OF THE AUTHOR/S AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF THE PAMBAZUKA NEWS EDITORIAL TEAM

* BROUGHT TO YOU BY PAMBAZUKA NEWS

* Please do not take Pambazuka for granted! Become a Friend of Pambazuka and make a donation NOW to help keep Pambazuka FREE and INDEPENDENT!

* Please send comments to editor[at]pambazuka[dot]org or comment online at Pambazuka News.