Carving out a white state from South Africa was a serious consideration on the eve of the success of the struggle against the white racist state. Imperialist support in 1960 for the secession of the mineral rich Katanga Province of Congo was designed to weaken the government of the newly independent Congo. Katanga and its leader Tshombe were cynically abandoned following the coup and the assassination of the Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba in 1961, which placed the Congo under the control of imperialism. Another classic case is Eritrea, which, with the blessings of the US, was forcefully federated with Ethiopia in 1952 and made a province of Ethiopia in 1962. When Eritrea sought to secede, the US sided with Ethiopia to crush the secessionist struggle until 1974, when a military coup overthrew Haile Selassie of Ethiopia and set up a pro-Soviet government. ‘Emperor’ Then the US changed sides to support the Eritrean struggle, and the Soviet Union competing with US for global domination sided with Ethiopia. After the pro-Soviet regime fell in 1991, the US and the Soviet Union switched loyalties, but nothing could stop Eritrean independence in 1992. A point to note regarding the Sri Lankan national question is that imperialism has also resorted to using the grievances of ethnic groups and nationalities to weaken liberation movements as it did in Vietnam and Laos. It tried to weaken Nicaragua’s Sandinista government in this fashion, but failed because of the wise handling of the national question by the Sandinistas. Also secession as an imperialist tool has now transcended ethnic identity. This brings new challenges for the concept of right to self determination and for the Marxist Leninists. Struggles of oppressed nationalities are complex and continuously evolving, and no two struggles are alike. The differences are further accentuated by foreign intervention driven by hegemonic intentions. Thus there cannot be a universal Marxist Leninist position on the national question in the post colonial context. Imperialism, when it wants to stage a change’ in a friendly country” it meddles in its internal ‘regime “less affairs. The national question provides the pretext for intervention in the
Carving out a white state from South Africa was a serious consideration on the eve of the success of the struggle against the white racist state. Imperialist support in 1960 for the secession of the mineral rich Katanga Province of Congo was designed to weaken the government of the newly independent Congo. Katanga and its leader Tshombe were cynically abandoned following the coup and the assassination of the Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba in 1961, which placed the Congo under the control of imperialism. Another classic case is Eritrea, which, with the blessings of the US, was forcefully federated with Ethiopia in 1952 and made a province of Ethiopia in 1962. When Eritrea sought to secede, the US sided with Ethiopia to crush the secessionist struggle until 1974, when a military coup overthrew ‘Emperor’ Haile Selassie of Ethiopia and set up a pro-Soviet government. Then the US changed sides to support the Eritrean struggle, and the Soviet Union competing with US for global domination sided with Ethiopia. After the pro-Soviet regime fell in 1991, the US and the Soviet Union switched loyalties, but nothing could stop Eritrean independence in 1992. A point to note regarding the Sri Lankan national question is that imperialism has also resorted to using the grievances of ethnic groups and nationalities to weaken liberation movements as it did in Vietnam and Laos. It tried to weaken Nicaragua’s Sandinista government in this fashion, but failed because of the wise handling of the national question by the Sandinistas. Also secession as an imperialist tool has now transcended ethnic identity. This brings new challenges for the concept of right to self determination and for the Marxist Leninists. Struggles of oppressed nationalities are complex and continuously evolving, and no two struggles are alike. The differences are further accentuated by foreign intervention driven by hegemonic intentions. Thus there cannot be a universal Marxist Leninist position on the national question in the post colonial context. Imperialism, when it wants to stage a ‘regime change’ in a “less friendly country” it meddles in its internal affairs. The national question provides the pretext for intervention in the