From Quantity - To Quality

The Struggles of the Communists of the Caucasus Today.

K. Gurdzhiyev

A mountain of facts testify to the fact that a single plan, a single scenario and a single methodology destroyed the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Soviet state. The internal and external enemies of socialism were not distinguished from each other by theoretical conceptions or by their diverse practices. From the philosophical viewpoint resistance to these enemies was fully within the realm of possibility and even quite uncomplex. This required an understanding of the necessity to strengthen the Soviet Union ideologically and economically in a determined way. The CPSU and the USSR manifested their finest period in the first thirty years of triumphant socialism. The decline in the subsequent thirty-five years demonstrates again what happened, happens and will happen to socialism, if it is to successfully develop it must do so on the basis of Marxism-Leninism-Stalinism and curtail deviations to opportunism. When in the beginning Stalinism is renounced, then Leninism and eventually Marxism as such will be renounced. Marxism-Leninism-Stalinism is an organic, indissoluble trinity, each part of which logically grows from the preceding element and successively is a strictly scientific product, a shining combination of theoretical deduction and practical accomplishment. However, to select segments of this whole indivisible science cannot and must not be done except within the framework of academic discussion and analyses. Similarly, the making of preparations for separating parts of the human organism cannot and must not be disturbed by specialists who recognise the unity of the given organism.

An unprejudiced view of the events of the second half of Soviet history (which was distinguished from the above-mentioned science and so it is incorrect to perceive that history as an entire whole) helps us understand that the defeat of the resistance of capitalism did not destroy socialism but only a 'socialism' based on anti-Stalinism, this last, we may repeat, steadfastly with mathematical regularity led to anti-Leninism and anti-Marxism, that is, to anti-Communism. The 70 years of existence of the Soviet order under the leadership of the Communist Party which ultimately disintegrated falls into two approximately equal time-spans. The final period was initiated under the banner of Khrushchevite de-Stalinisation, continued with the Brezhnevite pro-capitalist reforms and was completed by the treacherous Gorbachev perestroika-ists who turned the party and the social order into its antipode. The order was reborn in an anti-Soviet form and the party was established as an anti-Communist formation. All through this, the idea and the basis of socialism which was located in the epochal ascendant course of Marx-Engels-Lenin-Stalin was manifested so strongly and tenaciously that capitalism could not defeat the USSR through the evolutionary, peaceful path. How was it that a powerful and apparently authentic socialist society could after some decades be totally destroyed despite the fact that the West itself did not have full confidence in its own ability to achieve full victory. But the enemy was dangerous.

Gorbachev and the members of his criminal circle - Yeltsin, Yakovlev, Shevardnadze and others were able to liquidate the party and the Soviet Union only by a veritable terror against the progressive forces and by a series of artificial, provocative, criminal, organised diversions not just in the sphere of ideology and the economy. On the consciences of these cannibals and their agents is the catastrophe at the atomic electrical station at Chernobyl and the catastrophes at sea, on the railways, in aviation transport; secret seismological instruments were deployed to obliterate towns and villages from the face of earth; all these were presented in such a manner as though they were unexpected natural calamities. Milliards of dollars were pumped into creating these diversions. All this was part of a programme of strategic destabilisation which was designed to create an atmosphere of tension and explosiveness. The misanthropic activity of these pseudo-democrats (in fact they were fascisising criminals) was crowned by the development of civil war.

This was how the perestroika-ists strengthened the achievement of their objectives before striking the final blow.

After that, however, the CPSU and the USSR ceased to exist de jure and the monotonous old map was destroyed. Bourgeois leaders, not without western assistance, usurped power in the former Soviet Republics. They began a struggle to sort out the hotbeds of civil war and to extinguish social conflict so as to strengthen control of territory, establish national consolidation, and to create strong organs for the presentation of law and order which would fulfill punitive functions to quell any disagreeable bourgeois opposition. Western interests were such that they wanted these tenacious dogs on a short leash so that they had less opportunity to squabble amongst themselves and had greater strength to assist world capital to secure control over additional raw materials. Local bourgeois control did not exceed the limits of policing functions. Henceforward the main managers of the national wealth of the Soviet Union emerged in the name of Western capitalism. The West was anxious about the ruling of these large, expansive regimes which were not in full control and which were weak when confronted with the many manifestations of the people's wrath.

It is true that there are regions where Western interference is somewhat less. Such is he case in the Baltic Republics. Here, law and order, from the bourgeois point of view, is strongly established and there is no recourse to the methods of Eastern despotism. In Turkmenistan the cult of personality of Niyazov was propagated in primitive forms. At the monument of Lenin the head of the Communist leader was sawn off and a 'Turkmen head' was stuck on. To the greater glory of the 'Turkmen head' school children are compelled to memorise special prayers. Most astounding is that Niyazov was the First Secretary of the Central Committee of Turkmenistan who was blessed in this chair by Gorbachev. There are the 'Communists' who were nurtured in the former leadership of the former CPSU.

But even the idea of a decapitated party was a terror for the perestroika-ists. Essentially they were intimidated in case this tendency might increase.

Yes the former party Bonzes, from their armchairs of the Central Committee and the regional committees and the armchair of the Republic resaw their ill-fated end from the Presidents and the Beys of the Stock Exchange and so they raised the alarm for the last time. In 'stable' and 'law and order-loving' Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia the underground Communist movement spread itself. It was constructed in a mood of strong resolution and did not yield to domestication as has occurred with some Communist organisations in Russia and other Republics. In Russia, however, the performing artists tamely lead the Communist parties, the ranks of the Communists are undergoing radicalisation.

An examination of the Communist parties in the Central Asian Republics and the Caucasus reveals that along with the disintegration of the united CPSU and the Union state there was, equally, the uneven growth of a reborn Communist movement in post-Soviet society. In whole regions the communist movement developed in unique ways.

In the first place this applies to the Caucasus and partially to Georgia.

We leave to one side the civil war which blew up with all strength between Gorbachev and the Gorbachevites which started up here. In 1987 the first armed skirmishes occurred between Armenians and Azerbaijanis in Nagorny-Karabakh. From here nationality collisions radiated to Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Moldavia, the Ukraine, the Baltic region, they affected Russia in the zone contiguous to the Caucasus, that is, the North Caucasus. ln Georgia, collisions of the nationalities took place later than the other areas but, and this is very important, here the ethnic conflicts reached the state of a classical civil war.

ln 1991 the Georgians were the first to begin removing each other. They had installed upon them the former First Secretary of the CC of the Communist Party of the Republic, the former Minister of Foreign Affairs of the USSR, a man who did not hide his friendship with leading obscurantists of the great fatherland and abroad, who served shady governments of the world, Shevardnadze. This political rascal who ascended to the summit of power began his career as a Khrushchevite, continued it as a Brezhnevite and then finally as a Gorbachevite and already by the 1970s he had carried the Republic to economic failure and moral putrefaction. He and his hangers-on pilfered the people's wealth, propagated horrendous corruption and a pro-capitalist course which promoted invisible speculation, bureaucratism and chauvinism.

We can now answer the question as to why it was Georgia that became the first flashpoint of a classical civil war, which was not sufficiently satisfied with inter-ethnic collisions. It could not remained confined to the last because it was the most capitalised of the former Soviet Republics. In the West, many, even Communists, consider that such was the case with the Baltic Republics. No. The undisputed leader in this sphere was Shevardnadze in Georgia.

At first Shevardnadze fulfilled the will of his international masters by placing into power through violent chauvinism, the 'democrat' Gamsakhurdiya. He profited from this by getting the progressive remnants punished, the genuine patriotic forces, and by getting the survivals of Soviet power liquidated. These were not entirely dissolved: two autonomous regions within Georgia, South Ossetia and Abkhaziya announced their exit from the Republic, upheld their own autonomous regions and the Soviet form of social organisation, and declared their allegiance to the United Soviet Union and to the ideology of Communism. To the same degree a similar position was taken by the third autonomous region in the Georgian Republic, in Adzhariya. While his bosses were impatient Gamsakhurdiya disclosed great stubbornness and intractability. Matters reached the point that he became conceited as the master of Georgia, infringing upon the interests of the local and transnational bourgeoisie. Affairs came to a head when Gamsakhurdiya came out with the slogan of fighting against 'red imperialism.' Later he changed his orientation and spoke in the same spirit against Yeltsin's Russia. However, the West desired that all of these puppet 'independent states' unconditionally give their support to the totalitarian regime of Yeltsin and actively collaborate with it. Shevardnadze organised a bloodbath in Tbilisi, the capital of Georgia through his paid agents. He had always preferred to work for a foreign hand, Gamsakhurdiya was banished. After a short time 'at the request of the workers' this true butcher of the peoples ascended to his former throne to completely destroy the Republic which had fallen into full decline.

In order to understand the background to the development of the Georgian communist movement it is necessary to note that the crushed majority of the local population get a monthly income which is equivalent to one and a half United States dollars. Prices in Georgia of the necessary commodities do not yield to American rates. According to official data industrial production stands at 16% of the pre-perestroika level. But these are facts released by that master of falsification and jugglery, Shevardnadze. Serious economists speak of industrial production having fallen to 3% of the pre-perestroika level. Famine reigns in Georgia for the first time in several centuries. Official statistics speak of fourteen famine deaths each day.

It may be legitimately asked: why do the people, both big and small, not rise up? Why do they submit to the criminal regime?

Significant sections of the population of Georgia either live in village localities or else they have relations there. That permits, despite all difficulties, the majority of the nation to escape death by starvation. In spite of everything the people rise up with relative success. When in 1993 Gamsakhurdiya landed in western Georgia with a handful of his supporters within a few days he had an army of 30,000 armed men and women. Not less than 100,000 people waited to receive arms to participate in the all-people's uprising against the pro-Western, Zionist government in Tbilisi.

Yeltsin acted to assist his like-minded friends. The punitive forces of Russia blocked the supplies of arms, closed off the Black Sea littoral and the overland routes to the Georgian Republic. Yeltsin's tanks and helicopters shot down and bombed the national uprising (just as he was to destroy the Parliament in Moscow).

Shevardnadze practically had no army except for a miserable heap of criminals released from the jails, and still more insignificant groups of well-paid mercenaries. His song was well sung. The former anti-Communist Gamsakhurdiya, partly due to enlightenment by the sheer logic of events, discarded his previous demagogic rhetoric and was able to link arms with the critics of Europe, the USA and NATO.

Even Communists joined his armed ranks though they were weak in terms of the quality of their organisation and legal forces. Precise information does not exist but it is supposed that up to 50,000 people were killed. This is how the Shevardnadze regime was saved from the inevitable day of reckoning.

It is necessary to point out that notwithstanding the 'victory' of the favourites of the West, at present their power does not extend to beyond the outskirts of Tbilisi. In the mountainous regions people live their own lives and to a man struggle for survival. All the three autonomous regions survive on their own strength. They possess their own armed formations which resolutely suppress all attempts by the warriors of Shevardnadze to penetrate into the territories of South Ossetia, Abkhaziya and Adzhariya, they safeguard their own citizens who live in a more or less hopeful tranquillity. A particular object lesson was taught by Abkhaziya to the Tbilisi aggressors. With the help of volunteers from the northern Caucasus and Russia they taught an armed lesson to Shevardnadze much more than the raid of the Chechen fighters on Budyonovsk led to the humiliation of Yeltsin. When the Abkhazi forces freed their capital, Sukhumi, they almost did not take Shevardnadze into captivity. (Shortly after this to protect the ill-starred, thrashed, commander a special division of the CIA was despatched). This regime is particularly detested in Western Georgia, where, incidently, Shevardnadze had been horn. It was here that the bulk of the 150,000 people perished who were sacrificed in the perestroika and post-perestroika events. It may be confidently stated that had there been no Russian forces posted in Georgia in the recent period the regime would have been swept away (and the special division of the CIA would have had to be urgently evacuated). How long can Shevardnadze keep his chair on the basis of foreign bayonets?

The reply to this question lies in an analysis of the Communist movement in Georgia. This is not simple as we must take into account not only the objective factors but also the subjective understanding of the masses which is distinctive to this region.

As Georgia in the Soviet period was the most anti-Soviet region in the perestroika period and immediately after it, the anti-Communist and anti-Soviet terror here reached high proportions. It may be asserted that of all the CPSU, the Communist Party of Georgia fell to pieces the most rapidly of all. Many in the country and abroad consider that the weakest portion of the Soviet Communists was in the Baltic Republics. This is not so. It is true that the Communist Party of Lithuania placed the renegade Brazauskas in the forefront, who was the first to announce his factual separation from the CPSU. However, there was a healthy, fairly well-organised force there which had the support of a good part of the population and over the years successfully stood its ground against Gorbachevian perestroika and the renegade Lithuanian leadership. A similar position obtained in Latvia. But in Georgia neither amongst the highest leadership nor amongst the lower ranks was there even one person who dared to defend the honour of the Communists in solidarity with the struggle against the local and Union 'democrats.' At the decisive moment the Communist Party of Georgia revealed itself to be weak-willed and defeatist from top to bottom. All of the leadership was united, whether due to happiness or taciturnity, in carrying out the final perestroika: the prohibition of Communist activity, and the liquidation of the USSR. Out of the 380,000 members of the Republican party organisation scarcely not less than half gave up their party card and denounced their Communist past. Basically these elements were representatives of the traditionally haughty sections of the intelligentsia who were in the ranks of the Communist Party. In general the Georgian intelligentsia, particularly the elite strata, the journalists, writers, artists and painters were distinguished by cynicism, mediocrity, cowardliness and were prone to abjectly grovelling before those in power. In its time it served under Shevardnadze who was playing the role of an orthodox communist (and sprinkled the dissident Gamsakhurdiya with water). Then it quickly beautified itself and was enraptured by the Shevardnadze-perestroika-ites (it looked towards Gamsakhurdiya for a while). At last it amicably arose under the banner of Gamsakhurdiya and ardently spoke against their former idol - Shevardnadze. But this Gamsakhurdiya was overthrown and the decaying part of Georgian society (although it was an intelligentsia for all times and of all peoples, which was reputed to be the salt of the nation in intelligence and honour) threw off this President and they extolled and lauded the 'white fox' afresh. (Shevardnadze carried this nickname for a long time. Why fox - that is understandable, but 'white' that is because this patriarch of Georgian political prostitution is graced with silver hair like the moon.)

If one speaks of the Deputies of the Georgian Parliament, that they were precisely elected for banning the Communist Party through the membership list of the Communists, their characteristic feature is clearly shown by the following event. One of the first steps which Gamsakhurdiya took when he became President was to put to vote in Parliament a motion to liquidate the autonomy of South Ossetia. Not one of the sixty Communist Deputies voted against this adventurist proposal which factually signified war between the peoples of Georgia and Ossetia. This was not one of the final events which occurred and it may he noted that practically all of this group of Deputies consisted of intellectuals.

It is not a digression to state that one of the heavy blows that Khrushchev inflicted on socialism was to 'substitute' for the dictatorship of the proletariat and replace it by the well-known 'state of the whole people.' This was in a class society. This was in conditions when the enemies of the Soviet Union were in existence, when socialists were lined up against the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie in the majority of the countries of the world. This monstrous perversion of basic Marxism violated the immutable laws of social development not only led to the downfall of the role of the proletariat in the life of the country, it enhanced the role of the non-proletarian strata and facilitated their bourgeoisification. The Soviet intelligentsia in the post-Stalinist epoch was not able to generalize that which had happened and what ought to be. Because they went over in raptures and adopted perestroika, they betrayed and sold the ideals of the working class, the working peasantry, and in the final analysis they sold out the majority of the people.

But if in the other Republics, particularly Russia, there were some worthy representatives of the intelligentsia who were able to take issue with the bourgeoisie and defend the interests of the workers and peasants, in Georgia right up to the end among the intelligentsia there was not a single voice which sounded which unmasked the capitalist order and which defended socialist values. Even today, when the ruling regime has finally discredited itself in the eyes of the slightest sensible thinking people, the elite of the Georgian intelligentsia, now and then timidly criticize it, but they do not talk about the central contradictions of modern life: between private and social property in the means of production, between labour and capital, and all that flows from this.

It is true that the non-elite section of the intelligentsia of the Republic joined and is joining the ranks of the revived legal Communist movement. As a rule these are teachers, engineers, scientific, artistic and literary personnel, and former party functionaries. Some of them stand as the source of the movement. A new stage of the development of the Communist movement started in 1992 when the former Communist Party broke up and established the Socialist Party of Labour of Georgia. It was headed by Ivan Tsiklauri.

In the course of two years the numerical strength of the party did not exceed 3,000 members. Under pressure from below the party leadership returned to its earlier name: Communist. At this time the social and political organisation 'Stalin' gathered strength in the Republic. The Union of Communists of Georgia sprang up. The small but cohesive All-Union Communist Party (Bolshevik) became active. Self-reliant Communist Parties were formed in Southern Ossetia and Abkhaziya.

It is necessary to make two particular points. As is known, in Ossetia and Abkhaziya the Tbilisi regime was defeated in war as they stood up for their own independence. The Tbilisi rulers (as well as a definite amount of disinformation) blame the autonomous regions for their separatism, forgetting that they were and are inveterate separatists themselves. After all Gamsakhurdiya and Shevardnadze and their circles actively advocated the secession of Georgia from the USSR. In the eyes of the current rulers in Tbilisi there are no worse criminals than those who wish to have the restoration of the Soviet Union. It is a different matter concerning Abkhaziya and Southern Ossetia. All of their struggles were essentially carried out under the invisible, but proud red banner with its sickle and hammer which showed the strength of the black-white-claret rag of the supposed flag of the supposedly independent Georgia.

The result of these struggles was that, for example, in South Ossetia as distinct from the rest of the territory of Georgia the structure of Soviet power was retained. Communists constitute 75% of the Deputies of the Supreme Soviet and 90% of the members of the local Soviets. They have enormous authority amongst the people. For all their wordplay they prepared and are preparing matters with rifles in their hands. Georgian laws categorically forbid the creation of party organisations at the place of work. In Southern Ossetia there is almost no enterprise left where Communist Party organisations have not been re-established. The Pioneers organisation has been established in schools and the red necktie is not an exception but the rule. Red calico has become a rare commodity in the shops.

It is of no value to idealise the situation in the Abkhazi and Southern Ossetian communist organisations. There are a number of defects in their programmes. Besides the parties have unreliable contacts with the basic masses of the Georgian Communists. They frequently give the impression that they do not wish to collaborate with the last. It attests to their weak theoretical preparation that a class approach to the problems of today is fully absent in their work. Their anti-Stalin position dooms beforehand the youth in the Communist Party of Abkhaziya to political defeat. At the XXX Congress of the CPSU which was held in Moscow in 1995 when the leadership of the Abkhazi delegation announced their anti-Stalinism this provoked the indignation of an absolute number of delegates. But today only deep-rooted opportunists do not agree that the overthrow of the capitalist order and the construction of socialist society is possible solely on the basis of Marxism-Leninism-Stalinism.

The comrades of Abkhaziya frequently say that the Communists of Georgia support Stalinism because Stalin was a Georgian. In defending the name of Stalin, his theory and practice, it is not only the Georgians who speak in his favour, many progressive-thinking people in Europe, Asia, America and an enormous number of Soviet Communists from the Black Sea to the Pacific Ocean think likewise. Even if, secondly, in the appraisal of Stalin in Georgia there are present elements of national feeling, it is impossible to forget the class approach to the problem. The Georgian bourgeoisie abhors Stalin no less, if not more, than it likes others, including the Abkhazians. It is regrettable to know that when Gorbachev went about in the country spreading anti-Stalinist hysteria that it was not Russia, the Ukraine, the Baltic Republics nor the Northern Caucasus which took the lead in this shameful and mendacious propaganda campaign. No, it was Georgia which took the precedence in this. It was here, let us recall, that the national bourgeoisie struck with the most capitalised means of mass information far in advance of other regions. But as Stalin said the national bourgeoisie in the twentieth century disregards national interests and national feelings even more. During the period of perestroika the attacks on Stalin by the Georgian hack writers did not increase, the Soviet publications took up out-and-out anti- Stalinism as was clear in the Moscow publications, Ogonyok, Moskovskie Novosti (Moscow News), Izvestiya, Moskovskii Komsomolets etc. etc.

In general terms who is it that does not renounce the blinkers of anti-Stalinism, and who does not hinder such a campaign of attacks? Repeated anti-Stalinist attacks were carried out by Hitler, Margaret Thatcher, Chiang Kai Shek, Ronald Reagan, Mussolini and Boris Yeltsin, Franco and Andrei Sakharov, Pinochet and Golda Meir, and other such trash.

It remains a fact that the common people in Georgia, as one of the people who have undergone the most suffering from the time of perestroika till today, have acquired great respect and love for the great leader. It is necessary to note that when in May 1994 the United Communist Party of Georgia (EKPG) was founded it was created on the basis of three organisations - the Society 'Stalin', the Workers' Communist Party of Georgia and the Union of Communists of Georgia - the backbone of the structure of the new party was the Society 'Stalin.'

Another thing requires to be noted. Although the EKPG is in the vanguard of the Communist movement not only in Georgia but in the entire Caucasus, the movement in the Republic is not united. As a result of behind the scenes manoeuvres but also as a consequence of objective causes a new party was formed beaded not by I. Tsiklauri but by P. Georgadze. The new leader was able to reorganise the work of the party so that today its membership approaches 200,000. (By comparison the Communist Party of Azerbaijan has 70,000 members, and the Communist Party of Armenia 50,000 members).

However, I. Tsiklauri maintains that he forms a separate communist party. His opponents hold that he has only a few hundred members with him. This is incorrect. They also unite at the most some thousands of Communists in different regions of the Republic. In the administrative framework of Georgia as it was formed in the 1970s we find that only in two areas there is no Communist party organisation.

A strong and powerful organisation of the EKPG exists in the Adzhar autonomous region. The Adzhar party organisation was some 10,000 strong when the USSR existed, today there are around 15,000 members. This increase in the number of members of the Communists in the organisation led by Ivan Tsiklauri cannot be considered small.

All of this occurs in a background of apathy of the people in the regions of the post-Soviet order. Even where there are vigorous and strong protests against the rule of the 'democrats', the Communist organisations are content to grow slowly. It is poor comfort to know that the 'democratic' organisations are not, in general growing. The depoliticisation of the masses is a serious threat to the Communist struggles for freedom. People in Russia and other areas are fed up with 'pluralism' and the 'multi-party system.' They cannot fail to see that there are no special differences between the majority of the parties. They firmly turn away from the party demagogues while even the sincere opposition does not call forth the anticipated enthusiasm.

In one aspect Georgia and the entire Caucasus in this sense is not included. In the Republic there are only ninety registered parties and in the whole of the Caucasus there are only a few hundred. However people here are drawn to the Communists. The bloody march of perestroika began from here. Similarly, from here, too, begins the funeral march of the hopes of international imperialism to benefit from the fruits of the perestroika-ists.

Frightened by the growth of sympathy for the Left amongst the suffering population, the government of Georgia attempts to play the so-called Communist card. To one party it manifests benevolence. Against the other party it engages in furious baiting. Matters reached such a pass that Shevardnadze stigmatised the members of the EKPG as fascists. And why did he say this? It was because the EKPG protested against privatisation, announced its radical opposition to the regime, and because it indicated in its programme that it was necessary to have socialisation of the means of production and to forbid sale of the land. The 'fascist' character of the EKPG was clear because it expressed the opinion that the majority of Georgians wanted the re-establishment of the Union of Socialist Republics! The 'democrats' who stand by the common interests of mankind have lost without trace the elementary logic which is common to all mankind. The 'white fox' sorely needs to work together with Germany. It is a fact that the GDR was surrendered and torn to pieces by West German capital and became an addition to transnational capital. However, there was one who alone did not hesitate to forcibly in one go break up the Soviet Union. For the offences he had committed Adolf Hitler was thrown into the grave. He thought that the fascists might attack the anti-fascist Soviet people. But the Soviet people show that they can defend themselves not only from the fascists but also from the present anti-fascists. They have to attack the ideas and the understanding of the Soviet people. Joseph Goebbels must be turning in his grave from envy. He had not dreamt of such shrewd propaganda tricks.

The political powers that exist are only feebly coping with the strength of the Communist movement, they try to manage matters by despatching agents into the movement through the bribed creatures of the regime.

Georgia is no exclusion. It is not possible to level allegations of betrayal only on the basis of the known strategy and tactics of bourgeois governments and their secret police. Still it remains unrefuted, that the son of the leader of the EKPG Panteleimon Georgadze is the head of Shevardnadze's security. For the communists with Ivan Tsiklauri at their head this along with some other facts provide a cause for a severe criticism of the EKPG.

But the twist consists in the fact that the Tsiklauri's Communist party is officially against the restoration of the USSR and a united CPSU, and this not only does not expose but even supports the 'white fox' and his measures, all of them anti-Communist and anti people. This party has put restraints on contacts with the Communist parties of other republics and strives to become a parliamentary party. We only hope that this is due to the incompetence of the leadership and a weak ideological level of the members of the party.

The EKPG, as has already been mentioned, is a much more radical [and therefore a mass] organisation. Its authority is so high, that 'democrats' (maybe, in this case, this term should have been used without inverted commas), having left the 'democratic' organisations have joined the EKPG, and have even been heading a number of city and district committee and are Members of the Central Committee. Last spring the Congress of the EKPG was held in Tbilisi. The ex-democrats underwent a difficult test. High demands were made of them. The criticism was made without any concern for personalities. Why are you now rejoining the Communist Party, what had happened to your conscience? - The delegates asked them. The leitmotif of the answers was: we were deceived, we believed the perestroika-ists, but now we understand that we made a mistake and want to repent. Let us join the party once again. By the way some of these 'democrats' were in fairly important positions in the monarchist, republican and democratic parties. Taking into account that at present staying in the ranks of the Communists does not promise any benefits for them, it is not excluded that their repentance is genuine.

But still there is something wrong with the EKPG. Take, for example, its conflict with the leadership of the Adzhariya autonomous region. Adzhariya is a unique corner of Georgia. There is no such nationality as Adzhar. This region is simply inhabited by Muslim-Georgians (the rest of Georgia is an ancient Christian land). The Soviet power brought autonomy in 1921 and cultural and economic prosperity. Therefore, the attitude of the Adzhars towards the Soviets, to Russia and finally towards Communism is very different from that of the rest of Georgia.

Maybe this relationship is not as ideal and as unshakeable as that of the Abkhazians and the Ossetians, who categorically refused to remain a part of Georgia, immediately on the government of Georgia's declaration of secession from the USSR. But the Adzhars reacted negatively to the adventurism of Gamsakhurdiya in internal and external policy and did not support the even more criminal actions of Shevardnadze.

Official Tbilisi hates Adzhariya, though it does not adhere to a policy of separatism. The 'white fox' and its criminal army dream of how they are going to overthrow the present leadership of the autonomous region, that is conducting a policy of peace and tranquility and intercepting all the attempts to violate them. In the background of the battles on the Abkhaz and Ossetian fronts, the criminal mayhem in almost all the regions of the Republic, Adzhariya was and continues to be an island of stability and, although poor, still there is a tolerable existence for the working people. Moreover, the capital of Adzhariya, the port of Batumi - in essence has now become the only gateway to the sea for Georgia and Armenia, as all the rail and road arteries have been cut that once connected them with Russia and the outside world. True these are adjacent to Turkey, but even here Adzhariya serves as a gateway in this direction.

Official Tbilisi is grinding its teeth, but cannot risk spoiling its relations with the Adzhars. In principle the plans for an intervention into the territory of Adzhariya are still entertained by Shevardnadze. But his cards have been spoiled by the Abkhazians and the Ossetians' resistance. If he is successful (with Yeltsin's help) in repressing them, he will without fail with all his strength pounce on Adzhariya. Such is the cruel logic of capitalisation of the Republic, which has been relegated a very particular (and clearly one of the last) places in the hierarchy of world capitalism, and which is forced to play this role whatever the cost in terms of blood.

It is necessary to say that the West considers Transcaucasia primarily as its forward post against a possible resurrection of enslaved Russia, and also as a strategic communication line for the transportation of Caspian and Transcaucasian gas. Other routes (North Caucasia and Turkey) are not available due to the revolt of the Chechens and the Kurds who are courageously repulsing the attacks of the Russian and Turkish occupiers. The West has got stuck in an unresolvable situation. With great satisfaction it is promoting a civil war in the Soviet Union and has pushed itself into a dead end. The collapse of the state at the level of the Union has unleashed a chain reaction of disintegration of the Union Republics at the level of the autonomous units. It is self-evident, such a disintegration is accompanied by armed conflicts. Thus the much-needed tranquility for the West on the transportation lines for oil and gas is not in sight.

Along with their Western sponsors the 'white fox' is rushing to and fro in this dead end. South Ossetia, Abkhaziya and Adzhariya, some of them with arms, others peacefully, are cocking a snook at him. Adzhariya, too, is taking a resolute stand. She has already a couple of times repulsed intrusions by Shevardnadze's armed groups active near her borders. Not a single Adzhariyan fighter has taken part in the fratricidal war against the Ossetians and Azkhazians. And the peace initiatives of the leader of Adzhariya Aclan Abushidze for controlling local civil strife, met and continues to meet with a negative response from the chauvinists in Tbilisi.

Objectively, Adzhariya can play a role that can lead to the restoration of an united, free and independent Georgia among a brotherhood of peoples moving towards peace, progress and prosperity - on the road to socialism. It's very important that, in contrast to those regions of the Republic, where first Gamsakhurdiya and then Shevardnadze carried out persecution of the Communists, Adzhariya on this question took a special position. Here, too, she was an island of peaceful and balanced reaction to the anti-Communist hysteria.

But still, EKPG has come down on the leadership of the autonomous region with severe criticism. It is necessary to realise that such a criticism frequently is not without basis. At the same time, a question arises. Is the criticism addressed by the leading communist party of the Republic towards the leadership of the autonomous region of Adzhariya principled and relevant and whom does it really serve? Would not the rank and file of the EKPG become a tool in the hands of the 'white fox' who dreams of finishing off these independent leaders who do not want to be in servitude to him? The representatives of the autonomous region published facts about the conspiracy, planned by the secret police of Shevardnadze, to physically remove Abasmidze. In response, the pseudo-democratic press in Tbilisi in unison raised a hue and cry, alleging the leader of Adzhariya of taking part in a conspiracy to violate the territorial integrity of Georgia in cohort with the separatists.

A paradoxical situation now exists. The leadership of Adzhariya and Georgadize's party are now dead against each other. He is vociferously fighting against Shevardnadze, and supports Tsiklauri's party which is sufficiently loyal to Shevardnadze. This paradox is influenced by a situation which has no analogy in the Soviet Union or even in the world.

The First Secretary of the Adzhar district committee of the Communist Party (of Ivan Tsiklauri) is the Vice-Premier of the region. Whatever the merits of the Government, it still is a bourgeois one. And if one of its top leaders becomes the head of the district committee of the party that calls itself Communist, that means that the process has started... whatever be the role of behind-the-scene manoeuvres the above-mentioned situation can and must favour the communists' ideals. Otherwise, the 15 thousand strong party organisation of EKPG in Adzhariya cannot even put out a leaflet. And a much smaller organisation of the other Communist party is already publishing its regular newspaper. The former does not even have a place for itself and has found refuge somewhere with no rights. The latter has a place right in the centre of the town, and not in some obscure building, but in the building of the Council of Ministers. Let's remind you, the bourgeois council of ministers.

Yes, the East is a complex place. But even here the rule is valid - the blow achieves its aim, when it is delivered by the fist and not open fingers. The differences between the two communist parties of Georgia, which are most prominent in Adzhariya, are very useful for the 'white fox'. Worst of all, these differences are not on principles, but out of the personal ambitions, clan rivalries, provocations of the special services and the intrigues of the politicians, who don't care a penny about either Communism, or Georgia, as long as they fill their bank accounts and make political capital.

It appears that politicians of this sort are at work in both the parties. But it also is clear that the most important thing i.e. the great majority of the population of Georgia today are spontaneously Communists. Will they organise themselves into a 300 thousand or 500 thousands strong movement of future victors (both in the parliament and in the field) would depend on whether and how the division of the Communist movement would be overcome. In this respect Georgia stops being an exception as this is also justified for republics where the Communist movement is divided.

Finally, regarding the Georgian specificity we would like to state that the Communist-Bolsheviks were not only excellent strategists but also expert tacticians. The events in the Republic makes us think that the Communist movement in Georgia must become a strategic ally of the Ossetian, Abkhaz and Adzhar people, who are according to their own capabilities contributing to the common struggle against capitalism (even if they are not military allies). It would be wrong tactically to refuse to participate in the parliamentary elections. However, strategic thinking cannot but suggest that the Red Army would have to enter Tbilisi as in 1921. This army must consist of Georgians, Russians, Ossetians and Abkhazians.

Ambiguous positions, elements of compromise and at times direct support to the so-called sovereignty of the Republic not only do not make the Communists look any good but also repel the youth. The youth does not accept the muddled explanations and vague juridical formulations. Real life, and not paper struggle, genuine and not formal action brings it into the ranks of the Communist parties of South Ossetia and Abkhaziya. In comparison with the Communist Party of Russia, their numbers are not small in the EKPG. But still about 80% of the members of the latter are veterans of war and labour, people above forty years of age. It is true that 20% of the members are the young. This is not too little in the face of intensified brain-washing by chauvinist propaganda and degeneration. Not too little today. But if tomorrow it is not going to grow to 50%, the perspectives of the communist movement are going to be dim. And this concerns not only Georgia. It is funny and at the same time regrettable that the Communists have forgotten their own history, have forgotten that Communists were everywhere and always the hope of the young. The Communist parties everywhere were the youngest in terms of the age of their members. In Georgia (as in Russia) people would become communists at the age of 14 and 20 years old. Stalin came to Batumi and organised and led the Communist organisation, conducted successful strikes at the local factories and earned his first party pseudonym. Do you know what was he called by the workers of Batumi who were as old as his father? Teacher. By the way, in Batumi the museum which was once Stalin's house is still open, and the Adzhar authorities provide a grant towards its maintenance. Someone may differ, and say what is so surprising about all this? Even Shevardnadze visited the Stalin museum at his birth place. But this same museum in Gori is in an extremely sorry state, and official Tbilisi has not moved a finger to do anything about it. The 'white fox's' visit was made with the intentions of being elected as the President. What if it would not be possible to falsify the elections? What if Yeltsin is overthrown and the Russian bayonets would pierce? Yes, anything may happen. And the people love Stalin, and maybe, they will remember that Shevardnadze visited Gori. To this it may be added that Shevardnadze went to Gori (as he goes everywhere) under protection. As a rule, the communist organisations in the west are small in numbers, especially nowadays. They are effective not because of large numbers but because of their abilities. When they, for example, come to know that in the Republics of Transcaucasia there are almost half a million organised Communists, they are genuinely surprised and wonder why they are not in power. It is difficult to tell them that as the Communists were in power they remain in power. These are the 'Communists'. Only the nameplate has changed. With rare exceptions the regimes in these republics are headed by the former members of the communist parties and no one has explained it to the foreigners, or for that matter to the Soviet people either about the two mutually exclusive periods in our history, about the degeneration of the party and state during the last 35 years of the USSR's existence.

This truth has been strongly brought home where the academic arguments have been replaced by arguments on the battlefield. Though the classics of scientific communism have long ago exposed and forecast the sources and essence of the Soviet tragedy, it is only at places where the blood of the victims of perestroika has been spilled that the Communists and the non-party population have at last recalled these warnings. They have started studying history. In Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia the lessons learnt and experience gained is the greatest.

Therefore the Communists of Caucasia are slowly becoming the leaders of the Soviet Communist movement and this, certainly, puts a big responsibility on them, though not all of them have as yet realised it. When they do so, they will reassess some of their values. Would that experience not only flow in but also flow out from their ranks. But they would inevitably be victorious if there are present three necessary conditions of struggle:

1. Strengthening of solidarity on a class basis with the best and progressive forces of the Russian and other people, ignoring the bourgeoisie altogether;

2. Uniting with all the peoples of Caucasia and rejecting all territorial and religious differences and ignoring the chauvinists of all the different shades;

3. Standing firmly on the platform of Marxism-Leninism-Stalinism and not providing the opportunists even the smallest opportunity to avoid even a single component of this trinity that is so lethal for them.

As of today not even a single one of these conditions is fulfilled. Therefore even if there are a million Caucasian Communists today, nothing would work out. This is not pessimism, but an objective assessment which actually shows objective optimism inspite of all the complexity and difficulties. This optimism consists in that with the increase in numbers in the Communist movement and with the sharpening of the class conflicts fewer and fewer people will oppose the above mentioned conditions. And this already is a precondition of the required transition from quantity to quality, to that quality of Communist struggle against which are absolutely helpless all the security agencies and armies of global capital.

Translated from the Russian by Anwar Jafri, Vijay Singh, Nirmal Kumar and Tahir Asghar.

Click here to return to the September 1996 index.