The Armed Strategy and the Legal Left-wing

The armed resistance - object of general concealment, disinformation and speculation

After the Western secret services have gained access to the Eastern European files, they have started analyzing and working out material about the different guerrilla groups and movements, which directly or indirectly were in contact with the Eastern countries. (1) This is done to get more knowledge about the political platform, contacts, ways of organization, logistics, etc. about the armed groups. The reason for this is firstly to get a more effective repression-machinery concerning the fight against the resistance and secondly to continue an already started effort from the rulers, with the help from the media, to establish a rewriting of the subversive struggle's history and its current political proceedings (with good help from the shrunken traditional left-wing's press). In this way the armed and militant struggle is going to be pointed out and classified as "agencies" for the interests of the Eastern European secret services. As "corrupt terrorists without political orientation, who, isolated, carried out their actions". (2)

Despite the ruler powers' false propaganda and suppression, and the parliament-orientated left-wing's tragic/comic repression and fear of contact with "illegal" militant and armed revolutionary activities, this resistance was and is nevertheless a fact, which in periods has shaken the imperialist rulers. The armed movements have for decades carried out their activities in Western Europe and have in our opinion had a constructive effect on the occurrence of numerous social struggles in the society. The existence of the armed movements disrupt the proclamation of the "social peace" between the classes. It also compromises the so-called "democratic state of affairs" in the NATO-countries, and it exposes it as being nothing but a facade, an apparently untouchable power-structure, a capitalist dictatorship. And untouchable is precisely how the system wants to appear to the population. The armed resistance directly confronts the capitalist and imperialist system with its own contradictions and attacks all kinds of integration attempts. Because of this, the radical militant resistance and the armed struggle is a taboo.

Through smear campaigns and criminalization, any real discussion about militant and armed resistance is attempted to be stopped. The existence of armed or militant resistance is in this manner being concealed or demonized by almost all the media including the media of the traditional system critical left wing. The armed struggles' historical and current importance for an anti-capitalist revolutionary process in society - the Western European example Since the (re)emergence of the armed, anti-imperialist, and social-revolutionary orientated resistance in Western Europe in the beginning of the 70s, the situation has severely changed in many society related areas. Exemplified by the anti-imperialist armed resistance in Germany - first of all represented by RAF and the internationalist connexion in Revolutionary Cells - the orientation of this resistance was to break free from the frame of West German policy and to regard it self as a concrete part of a long and global front development. Its practical concept was to build up a new front in the metropoles, in "the heart of the beast" (definition from Che Guevara), closely connected to the international anti-imperialist movements. The concept of the armed struggle was to develop its own and independent mobilizing forces, as a part of the resistance until the rise of social antagonistic forces on mass level were able to overcome an actual revolution of society. Most of the armed militant left wing groups and movements regarded this as the most realistic possibility to develop the liberation on a global level. When the US-imperialism and its NATO-allies are being attacked from many sides at the same time, it will result in a structural political and military weakening and a phase of destabilisation, which in the end will result in a break down of the frictionless inner order which is necessary for the bourgeois democracy.

In order to obtain an interaction between the liberation struggles in countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America and the class confrontations in the metropoles, the war should be transferred to Western Europe and attacks should be made inside the imperialist structures without compromise, starting with all the NATO institutions and the leading economic and political structures of the capital management and state apparatus. The strategic difference between the guerrilla and the left-wing organizations Even though the more serious parts of the Western European revolutionary left-wing, in the end of the 60s and in the beginning of the 70s, had similar strategical political estimations, there was a decisive difference in the attitude towards militant actions. The clandestine action was mainly a tactical means amongst many other forms of struggle and could thus be useful in a campaign with a limited antagonism. For the urban guerilla, however, the militant and armed actions meant the way forward in a revolutionary direction, a practical test and demonstration of direct attacks against "untouchable" power structures and their legitimation (democratic veneer, bourgeois morals and legislation etc.) The objective limitations in Western Europe in the 70s and 80s The battlefield of Western Europe, with the exception of Euskadi and Northern Ireland, has not until today been comparable with the historical mass-base of the guerrilla in Cuba, Vietnam, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Palestine, the Philippines etc. Even the similar anti-imperialist and social-revolutionary struggle experiences that MLN (the Tupamaro movement in Uruguay) had in the end of the 60s, were based on much better conditions than the conditions of the armed connexions in Western Europe are confronting. The guerrilla groups in the countries mentioned above were able to base their struggle on a large support amongst the population, even on an advanced level of the confrontation line. Even though the EEC, besides the USA and Japan (and the so- called Yen-area in Southeast Asia), is the most important bastion of the capitalist world market and therefore an important starting point for revolutionary changes - it is currently only a minor part of the population that wants a radical change of society. It is paradoxical to ascertain, that a part of the claims that people all over the world and on all historical levels have been willing to die for, to some extent, though in a deformed way, are carried out in the EEC countries and the realization of the claims here is the basis of the catastrophic economic and social conditions and dictatorships in many poor countries. The legal left-wing's development of an opposition loyal to the system Despite the objective difficulties that the urban guerrilla was (and are) confronted with here in Western Europe, there is also the problem with the objective alliance partner: the legal left-wing. The predominant part of the active basis was in no way geared to the unavoidable confrontation with the state. Parts of this left-wing escaped to institutional frames. They were distancing themselves from the armed actions and demanded the humiliating distancing-ritual from the rest of the legal left-wing. When it did not succeed they immediately demanded isolation and demarcation of those left-wing groups which refused to distance themselves from the armed struggle. Very characteristic was (and is) the fact that some of the most vocal critics of the armed fighting groups in fact did (do) not have any knowledge about those whom they were criticizing. Usually their knowledge about the guerilla is based on either out-dated facts or an undigested reproduction of the disinformation of the media. This is analogous to the state apparatus' international coordinated strategy of counter-revolution. The critical but allied left-wing Another (though smaller) part of the legal left-wing which refused to take part in the denunciations and tried to make a critical solidarity and at the same time kept out of the state apparatus' criminalization, which as a reflex turned against any uncontrollable left-wing opposition. A part of this part of the left-wing was, because of the power balance from the mid-70s to the beginning of the 80s, and the polarisation between the resistance and the state, criminalized or pressed into dissolution. (3) Other parts of this left-wing were constantly balancing on the edge of criminalization. (4) Repressed but not destroyed Because of the indifference or direct lack of solidarity of the revolutionary left-wing, the guerilla in Western Europe was a very narrow fighting area to act from. Though the state apparatus in most of the Western European countries never succeeded in destroying the urban guerilla (5), the armed resistance groups got seriously blocked in the building up of a political and armed anti-imperialist front in Europe. At times, the guerrilla was pressed back to a level of armed propaganda. It was not able to create an armed revolutionary alternative, which dialectically would have been able to dissolve the line between the legal struggle and the urban guerilla, though in some places looks like things could have been developed in this direction. (6) The guerrilla, the basic democratic resistance, and the authentic processes of experience and discussion The activities of the guerrilla has on vital points contributed to spread base-democratic orientated movements - especially in Germany and Euskadi, but also in Italy and the Netherlands - which will not accept the morality and legislation of the rulers. Firstly, this is autonomist and anti-imperialist groups, anti-racist and anti-fascist movements, feminist and lesbian connexions, radical ecological movements, squatting-movements, where they still exists, etc. This is, of course, also an interaction between the continuing existence of the guerilla - though as a whole weakened - and the experiences of autonomous resistance movements with the repression machineries. The existence of the guerilla and the revolutionary prisoners in the prisons of the NATO-countries is also playing a role concerning the fact that the active, militant and legal resistance does not just shut out direct and clandestine attacks on the responsible/institutions of the system. In contradiction to the rest of the almost totally integrated and passive traditional left-wing, this base-democratic resistance is not willing to transform its activities into the parliamentary frames of the bourgeoisie. Practical, collective experiences with the state, crystallized a straight political rejection of a prospective non-confrontational transition to a basic democratic socialist society. The history and experiences of the armed guerilla struggle and the armed/militant mass rebellion does not give any illusions of a voluntary resignation. A few times in the history of the resistance, the rulers have been too weak to defend themselves. But most times they have been ready to go to fascist or authoritarian structures of ruling or to military interventions in order to save the imperialist interests in every corner of the world. Everywhere it was possible the respective repressive arrangements have changed/are changing, but the imperialist mechanism of suppression continues to be the same in its basic structures. Any resistance with a revolutionary perspective will at some moment clash with the system. This confrontation, the class war, is only possible to win with the total defeat of the rulers. Thus, it is absolutely necessary that the major practical experiences and clarification-processes from the guerrilla movement become integrated as part of any serious resistance project. The current debate about the armed struggle's new orientation The restructuring process of the economical and social fundamentals in Western and Eastern Europe needs to destroy or integrate all militant base-orientated structures and structures of armed resistance. Only the elimination of all real opposition creates the possibility for the imperialist fusion of Europe. Under the leadership of the West German-dominated capital, the political foundation is created on a parliamentarian centred "free and democratic" legitimated basis without any revolutionary opposition. This development, because of competition-related reasons, will be followed up by a common and newly-defined aggressive imperialist policy, under the leadership of an enlarged and harmonized EEC. New times, new struggles Today, we are in the middle of an explosive process full of contradictions. Besides diffuse, ethnic and ideological related wars as e.g. in the former Yugoslavia and in big parts of the former Soviet Union, the existence of extreme poverty and declassification in the heart of the imperialist countries will mean new cycles of class war all over Europe. Especially in the Eastern European countries, that right now are being built up as the low wage production area of the EEC, resulting in big economical and social declassification. 50% of the population no longer have jobs or housing as a result of this decline. No doubt this will result in collective forms of resistance. A weakened, but not destroyed guerrilla starts a new political phase of struggles The history of counter-revolution has until today very clearly shown that the EEC imperialist rulers have not succeeded in destroying the armed and militant revolutionary struggle in Western Europe. Despite of the increased coordinated repression machinery and the constant undermining of even the most conventional rights, it will also in the future not be possible for them to eliminate the resistance. Although leading EEC politicians make a point of saying that the establishing of the inner market and the realization of the Schengen Agreement (7) means that armed and militant groups will no more exist, and despite the RAF's current cease-fire and Brigate Rosse's and Action Directe's stopping of armed actions, the militant radius of actions on an European level is still intact. The guerrilla in Turkey/Kurdistan, Greece, Euskadi, Northern Ireland etc., is still intact. The armed groups in Germany - RAF and the different wings of the Revolutionary Cells - are, together with autonomist, anti-fascist and anti-imperialist groups and other movements, starting together to find the ways to a new anti-capitalist offensive. This happens through the open and joint criticism of former experiences, closely connected to the discussion about perspectives for a new resistance movement. Venceremos!

Autonomous Revolutionaries, Denmark

Notes:

(1) Were supported by or had diplomatic contact with these countries, or their respective communist parties, that are loyal to the state, gave information to the secret services of Eastern Europe, for instance by informers.

(2) For us as autonomists it is important to communicate authentic material from the armed and clandestine left-wing groups, in order to contribute to the creation of an authentic history and experience.

(3) Potere Operaia, Lotta Continua, Autonomia Operaia in Italy, Proletarische Linke, Revolutionare Kampf, Iranian and Palestinian connexions in Germany, Rote Jugend in the Netherlands, Gauche Proletariene in France...

(4) E.g., the many autonomous connexions such as the Kommunistischen Bund in West Germany, Herri Batasuna in Euskadi, Sinn Fein in Northern Ireland, etc.

(5) With the exception of Portugal: The Revolutionary Party of the Proletariat (PRP), Belgium: the Fighting Communist Cells (Cellules Communistes Combattantes - CCC), and to some extent France: Action Directe and Italy: the different fractions of the Red Brigades etc.

(6) E.g., in Italy, during the years '77 to '80. The Red Brigades, which was the biggest guerrilla organization among more than 100 armed groups in Italy, showed itself as a rudimentary tail of the creation of a rising revolutionary revolt strongly rooted in the population. This was expressed in a broad and multitudinous spectrum of methods of action and with a great ability to mobilize, and the resistance was able to set the agenda for the politically unstable Italian society.

(7) A common refugee- and asylum-policy for all the EEC countries, with the purpose of selecting refugees and immigrants according to the needs of the market and profitability.