BERNADETTE DEVLIN INTERVIEWED BY JOHN SPENCER MID-ULSTER Jume 18 BERNADETTE DEVLIN says end system with... A loose Socialist organzatio

AFTER your 15 months in parliament, what have you actually achieved IN TERMS of what I would consider real reforms I haven't achieved anything. Because I haven't changed the system in the Six Counties and I don't believe that we can change anything effective until we destroy the system. I have, more than any other Member of Parliament, discredited, embarrassed and generally mucked up the Unionist government. This is, you know, to a certain extent, progressive in itself.

But it's not actually solved any problems. It's not created any more houses for the people, it's not created a society in which the people can live in. It's only a beginning; I don't think parliament is ever going to do it. The function of parliament is as a platform to educate the people into the total futility of parliament.

HOW DO you propose in fact to go about achiev. ing this then?

AT THE moment the Westminster parliament has in faot changed its attitude to N Ireland to a certain extent in - - most I would like about British troops at the ready in Dungiven Co. Derry in preparation for an Orange parade initiated by Paisley supporters last Sunday.

as much as the army is here, the civil service is here in the government offices and therefore the convention begins to be broken down and you have more latitude inside parliament of using the various parliamentary systems.

To bring the questions of N Ireland to light and to give the governments, whichever they may be, in Westminster, the opportunity of refusing to do anything.

They can slide out of it at the moment by saying it is not our responsibility. Pretty soon it is going to be their responsibility. And I think that that stage is important -that there be somebody there to put forward the socialist case for the people of Ireland, the only case for the people of Ireland.'' THEN you regard it in fact as the responsibility of the British parliament to solve the question of Ulster?

IT IS not the responsibility of the British parliament to solve the entire problem of Ulster, just like that.

PRICE ONE SHILLING wenne information They took on the problem of Ulster. The British parliament cannot do it, but it takes on itself the responsibility of government of the whole United Kingdom. It cannot do that either. But since it takes on that responsibility, either it rescinds the responsibility, accepts it cannot do it or is forced to carry it through, and in forcing it to carry it through you break it since it cannot carry it through.

DO YOU regard the sending of British troops as a progressive step?

THE SENDING of British troops here could in no way be called progressive. The 50 years of Unionist rule, with the birth of the Civil Rights movement, the reaction of that 50 years of Toryism to the movement, led to the necessity of the British troops coming in. In order to maintain both the lory system and Britain's reputation and in order to save lives.

The saving of lives, the necessity of saving lives in that circumstance, was brought around by the whole system and therefore you cannot CLASS STRUGGLES THOSE who are followers of African nationalism, panAfricanism and "Negritude would have been startled to see a photograph in the world press, late in May, of the S African apartheid Prime Minister, Vorster tosimply say take the troops out of Ulster. Because the people will say you cannot take the troops out because if you do the people will die.

This is a quite simple and actual truth.

At the same time what we must say is: take the troops out of Ulster and remove the system which necessitated the sending of troops-then you can remove the troops and leave the people in peace.

BUT WHO'S going remove the system?

THE PEOPLE must inevitably remove the system, and in the process of doing so will undoubtedly remove the troops.

YOU'VE SPOKEN of the need to set up an organization to fight for a 32county Ireland, I believe with Gerry Fitt. What would be the basis of such an organization?

YOU SEE you don't start organization by saying S Africa: Britain's go-between with 'independent' states AF RIC A ates in its semi-colonies, whether this be S Africa or Malawi.

The S African government of verwoerd, and later of Vorster has for some time been a usetul intermediary between Britain and Rhodesia and has played an important part in the 'negotiations' between the Wilson and Smith regimes.

This role has now been extended to Malawi.

Previously, it had applied to the now 'independent' protectorates of Lesotho, Botswana and Swaziland—held in British imperialism's iron grip mainly through the S African government and the close connection between this government and British mining monopolies.

Botswana 'neutralism' Recently the Botswana government, under Seretse Khama, has moved towards making diplomatic and trade contacts with Soviet and China-bloc countries.

The Vorster regime expressed alarm, but, in reality, understood very well that this was merely Seretse's manoeuvre to raise his bargaining power viz the Vorster regime and Britain. join an organization with you, you and you because you're all Members of Parliament.

You start an organization as any basic, fundamental human group is formed. You say l believe so-and-so who also believes it and then those people who believe it go out and try to convince other people of it. And the more people you gather, you organize, on two bases.

You organize for further education, of yourself, further education for people and for action. .

In order to explain this situation existing, in order to weaken the existing situation. And at the same time strengthen the situation you would like to create. And it is a long process.

You can't simply do it by ringing up your Westminster fellow MP and saying Gerry how about forming an organization.

WHAT sort of an organization would it be?

WOULD be a loose, socialto start off This is the basic strategic meaning of the 'neutralism' of African nationalism, whether it be in Egypt or in Botswana or Malawi.

The Botswana government wants, like all 'independent' semi-colonial governments in Africa, to get better terms for its own weak, utterly dependent and servile small capitalist class within the framework of 'independence'.

There is not the slightest intention of any political orientation towards the Soviet-bloc countries and against the real masters of these semi-colonial governments - the imperialist Lesotho persecution For all practical purposes there are diplomatic relations between S Africa and the three former Protectorates and Malawi.

In all cases these relations are based on the enslavement of these states to the 'S African mining economy owned and controlled by British capital.

One of the side-effects of these relations is the extension with which would allow the people in Mid-Ulster who belong to organizations already, allow people existing in Sinn Fein, people existing, say, in the N Ireland Labour Party who believe in socialism and are frustrated on two counts because the Labour Party is social-democrat and because it believes in the British link.

But they cannot move out of that organization and move into oblivion. There's no organization for them to work with. It's necessary that we start looking in terms, as it were, of an alliance of people who have the same ends, and discuss how we achieve them.

ON WHAT sort of principles, on what basis would you found such an IT WOULD have to be on clearly defined socialist principles. I don't think that I should define them and then say right, who stands with me. I think I should say this is what I want to achieve in the terms that I do and as for the of the persecution by these 'independent' states of anti-apartheid persons seeking refuge in these countries.

This persecution drove some anti-apartheid fighters back from Lesotho into s Africa in one case and now anti-apartheid refugees are in peril of their lives in Lesotho and are virtually prohibited immigrants.

A Bantustan Malawi has always been avoided by anti-apartheid refugees because of the blatant connection between the African Nationalist, Banda, and the Afrikaner Nationalists, Verwoerd and Vorster.

This connection is supervised by Britain, which has a vested interest in Malawi cheap labour for British gold mines inside S Africa and for British companies in Malawi itself.

Manager and foreman In all but name Malawi is another Bantustan, cheaplabour 'self-governing' reserve subserving British capital and 'white' S Africa. people who stand with me, then we work out the basic, you know, long-term solution, the long-term demands, the interim demands.

There must be a line of division before there is a line of unity. The line of division must be socialists with us, Conservatives with them.

And the people to be convinced, the people to join us, as the people will, inevitably will. I don't think you can just say, here is my blueprint, for the socialist republic. It's got to be worked out.

YOU SPOKE of the need to set up this organization. You've spoken on your platforms on the basis of the anti-communist theory of state capitalism. What's your attitude towards Marxism as the basis for the formation of such an organization?

THERE'S nothing wrong with Marxism. My attitude towards Marxism, in as much as 1, to my intellectual shame, underent' When Vorster, accompanied by his wife, paid a political and also a personal visit to Banda, it was simply an inspection visit by a Boer manager of the British estate in Southern Africa-his duty being to inspect the affairs of an African foreman.

For British imperialism in Southern Africa there has never between an its white and African been question of equality agents.

The Vorsters and Smiths belong to the 'inner circle' › the Khamas and Bandas to a remote outer circle.

This relationship applies in the economic, political and also the military field (NATO relations with S Africa, Simonstown etc.).

Apartheid bastion

The May visits of Vorster to Malawi and Rhodesia are important for British imperialism, steadfastly regards apartheid S Africa as its sole reliable bastion "against communism' in all of Africa.

The more this bastion extends own influence over the neighstand a limited amount of Marxism, I find nothing wrong with the Marxist thesis, but there are various interpretations of the Marxist thesis and people like yourself, SLL, and ICO, and myself disagree.

I don't think that Marxism necessarily leads to the Russian situation, which is in fact a situation whereby you change, you shift the basis of emphasis from economic control to political control.

The, as it were, economic masters, are rejected, but you still have the masters, you've only changed their basis power which is what you've done in Russia and you've made it political.

BUT IF you don't defend the conquests of the October Revolution, how do you advance the working class in Ireland or anywhere else?

I'M NOT complaining about the October Revolution. I'm complaining about the situation in Russia as and from today. bouring 'independent' African states of Malawi, Lesotho, Botswana and Swaziland, subordinating them increasingly to the vast interests of British capital in S Africa, the happier London, Whitehall and Westminster are, for all their pious and hypo"apartheid Protestations against Apartheid in S Africa remains major pillar of British imperialism and 'democracy', the latter being a luxury which imperialism affords only as long as it can continue to drag immense super-profits out of semi-colonies like S Africa.

The Vorster-Banda meeting is an attempt to reinforce this pillar.

This is especially important at a time when Portugal's ability to withstand the guerrilla movement in Mozambique and Angola not as unquestioned as previously.

And it is significant that simultaneously with the VorsterBanda meeting, the BritishS African Oppenheimer financemining group moved deep into the Mozambique economy, in a very big way.