The Colonial Problem

[p016] THE COLONIAL PROBLEM Three sections of the N.E.C. statement are devoted to the colonial question in the Far East, the Middle East and Africa. Here the inconsistencies in Labour Party policy are all too apparent. “The Labour Party recognizes that the peoples of Asia are engaged in a historic revolution against foreign exploit- ation and domestic poverty. It believes that co-operation between Asia and the Western world must be based on the right of the Asian peoples to govern themselves. “The Labour Government recognized the Peking Gov- ernment as the legal government of China and pressed frequently in the United Nations that the representative of the de facto government should occupy China’s seat. It is clearly a travesty that the delegate from the rump regime of Chiang Kai Shek should speak in the United Nations in the name of the Chinese people who have re- jected him, and the Labour Party believes that there can be no lasting political settlement in the Far East which is not based on the recognition that the Peking Government is the effective government of China and, as such, should represent that country in the United Nations.” We can endorse every single word of this statement. The question is: how do these words square with the actions and policies of the Labour Party leadership? If “the peoples of Asia are engaged in a historic revolution against foreign exploitation and domestic poverty,’ does this not include the Koreans, the Malayans, and the Indo- Chinese? Then what is the Labour Party doing on the wrong side of that struggle? How can you be against “the rump regime of Chiang Kai Shek’? —and uphold the equally rump regimes of Syngman Rhee or Bao Dai? How can you recognize the Peking Government and its right to recover Chinese territory, including Formosa, and still hold on to Hong-Kong? The N.E.C. statement “opposes any measures which might weaken the democratic forces in Japan, and particu- 13

[p017] larly the trade unions.” Don’t they know that the Yoshida _ government signed its treaty with the U.S. against opposi- tion from the Socialist Party and the trade unions? And > that it is proceeding with repressive legislation against the Jabour movement because of its resistance to the remili- tarisation of J apan under U.S. direction? The recommendations put forward on the Far East are neither consistent nor correct. But they are most com- promising in the case of Malaya. The N.E.C. says, ‘The Labour Party believes that terrorism in Malaya must be — stamped out.’’ We believe so too. But that would mean, ‘not hunting heads among the revolutionary fighters there, but withdrawing General Templer and his troops and halting the Briggs Plan which has already uprooted half a million Malayans and resettled them in stockades. The N.E.C. says: “The revolution already gripping Asia is felt no less throughout the Middle East.” One way to help this revolution would be to demand the withdrawal of the British troops, being used against it. Instead, it immediately goes on. to say, “The Labour Party supports proposals for : a defence pact in which the Middle Eastern - countries would join as equals with Britain and her allies.” _ We recall a passage in Mr. Bevan’s recent book when he told us “‘the underfed masses yearn for material aid: we send them guns.’ To be sure, the N.E.C. piously points out.that “economic measures against poverty are no less necessary to Middle East defence than arms.” But — ae all its proposals are presented in the context of the military oe oe measures and methods so congenial to Washington. When it comes to Africa, the N.E.C. does not even take a firm stand against Malan’s white-supremacist govern- ment, which has bared its teeth at Labour Party protests against its treatment of the native population and fascist encroachments on democracy. In Africa it says, ‘‘Britain - is both a colonial power with direct responsibility for the _ African peoples and an equal partner in the Commonwealth with the white government of South Africa.” Such a policy of carrying water on both shoulders will not make friends for British Labour in the colonial world. 14

[p018] at will only irritate the reactionaries while alienating our real friends and prospective allies among the peoples there.