Central Committee of the Communist Party of Peru: “Meeting of the Central Leadership with the Northern Regional Committee”

Proletarians of all countries, unite!
There is one goal, the conquest of Power!

3rd PLENUM
MEETING OF THE CENTRAL LEADERSHIP WITH THE NORTHERN REGIONAL COMMITTEE

Central Committee
Communist Party of Peru
March 1992

Red Flag PublicationsReproduced by The Red Flag

3rd PLENUM
MEETING OF THE CENTRAL LEADERSHIP WITH THE NORTHERN REGIONAL COMMITTEE

INTRODUCTION

Greetings from Chairman Gonzalo and the leaders, cadres and militants of the Northern Regional Committee (NRC), along with the combatants of the People’s Guerrilla Army and the masses who fight alongside us.

We are developing the tasks within the 3rd Plenum which should adopt the New Strategic Plan of Development which will become the fourth in the process of the People’s War, keeping in mind that we should definitely approve the Strategic Plan of Construction and implement the 6th Military Plan under the slogan: „Build the Conquest of Power!“, as befits within the stage of Strategic Stalemate. In addition to these three important tasks, we add the approval of the Central Document of the 3rd Plenum in order to understand the importance of this Session. For this reason, the 3rd Plenum is historic and transcendent, because in order to fulfill its highest ends, it is necessary to have the most objective understanding possible of the Party’s situation. This implies an understanding of the actual situation of the Committees, the Party’s work beginning with how we develop the construction of the Party, the Army and the New State, and how the Peoples’ War, which is our main task, develops. Only by starting from this understanding of the objective situation of the Party, can we define such high level tasks with such an important perspective. It is for this reason that the Permanent Committee, the Political Bureau and members of the Central Committee have decided that there should be meetings with every Committee, which will become the second part of the Session. We have already met with various Committees. We concluded that it is better to deal directly with the Comrades […] and this serves its cohesion, starting from the task on how to develop the work of each Committee. The cohesiveness of an organization is fundamental, especially when dealing with its leadership. Cohesion and unity are achieved in struggle, but only in a just and correct two-line struggle, an ideological struggle that aims to analyze problems and see a development of the two-line struggle. It requires objective analysis: to see and analyze reality as it is and to make the effort to do so. No one is unaware of the importance of the Northern Region of our country.

The NRC has been carrying out work for years, and it has advanced, but it could do much better, as its perspectives are very bright. For this reason, this meeting was planned. It will serve the Committee, not only the Regional, but also the entire Party.

The 3rd Plenum is showing us, as it had to, that every Committee is contributing as part of the Party. This Committee, in order to analyze its work, its objective should greatly contribute to the Party. We are sure that it will be this way. It depends on us, and efforts are not unusual in our work; rather, they are the norm.

In synthesis, this meeting hopes to view the situation of the NRC, keeping in mind its process, looking its potentials, and also serving the entire Party, defining its problems, tasks, the Strategic Plan of Development, the Strategic Plan of Construction, and now the new military plan.

We propose an agenda with two points:

1. On the NRC.

2. On other issues of the 3rd Plenum.

The first point, on the NRC, will be applied by adjusting ourselves to our interests, and what is concrete. We have written reports which have been studied, and we think we will develop this point.

ON CONTRADICTION

Everything that man does, is in the midst of contradictions. Everything is a contradiction, the Party is also a contradiction; war is also a contradiction. Two hills confront each other: armed revolution and armed counter-revolution. Nothing is exempt from this law. Furthermore, if we keep in mind what the 1st Session of the Congress said, we should make every effort to determine with clarity the situation of the two lines, adding also that the two-line struggle is not buried and unclear. This should be seen with clarity. We are insisting that the problem is to apply the experience that the Party has with two-line struggle. The Party has great experience with the two-line struggle and knows how to apply it. Applying the two-line struggle in the Party is a concrete expression of the class struggle, nothing else. To not develop it is to sidestep the class struggle. The Party has taught us to handle it with wisdom and firmness, it has taught us how to define the two lines, and how to make it specific in terms of ideology. One of the great experiences of the Party is knowing how to handle the struggle against rightist lines, including a Right-Opportunist Line (ROL). It is sufficient to look at the 2nd Plenum, the 2nd Session of February 1980, and the Military School. There we concluded that the Party is capable of handling the two-line struggle, and furthermore, we are capable of managing antagonistic struggles with non-antagonistic methods, developing the struggle within concrete situations in order to resolve problems, because it may become antagonic in a specific situation in order to resolve problems. We must apply and handle the two line struggle well. The struggle is not personal, it is objective and not subjective. It aims to strengthen the Party, not to weaken or undermine it, because whoever undermines the Party, is committing a grave error.

For this reason, the struggle should always be very well handled or manage well. It’s an ideological struggle developed for higher tasks like the conquest of Power or the strengthening of the People’s Army, the New Power or the consolidation of the Party. Obviously, these will develop the struggle further. We must keep in mind how the initiation of the armed struggle was. It demanded intense struggle because we had to make a great leap from an unarmed organization to an armed organization to develop the People’s War. The struggle was very intense and even antagonistic in the 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th Plenums of the Party. The 2nd Session, the Military School, 1978, 1979, the beginning of 1980 were years of intense struggle. If that leap demanded an intense struggle, which produced the Initiation of the Armed Struggle (ILA-80), and we have learned to handle the two-line struggle with wisdom and firmness. Therefore, is the conquest of Power a major leap? Obviously it is: Establishing the People’s Republic of Peru is a great leap, we have been preparing for it for some time now by making a leap in ideology, and a great leap in the incorporation of the masses into the People‘s War.

In the meetings we have held with the Committees, among advances we have reached a conclusion: The great leap must obviously be on all levels: ideologically, politically, organizationally, and militarily. A great leap on all levels, and like all leaps it is a problem of contradiction. It is within the great leaps that the contradictions sharpen; if not there is no change from quantity to quality; no leap. The problem is simple. For this reason, we must pay attention to the two-line struggle, and we must add that in conquering Power, we are not only fulfilling a leap amongst ourselves, we are also implying the destruction of the other hill. The war to the death enters into major contentions and most decisive ones. This is a concrete way of understanding it.

We have seen great advances of the Party and heroism up to today, but we should see more, we should do more: more transformation, more destruction, more strengthening of the Peoples’ War and more construction. We all understand this clearly, a Communist understands it, a revolutionary also. There will be great massacres, great heroism, and great destruction will come. If not, how will we reach the People’s Republic of Peru? How will we develop into a New State? It is enough to recall that it is the end of the first stage of the revolution (the culmination of the democratic revolution) and the beginning of the second (the socialist revolution). This implies that what has been done up to this point is immense and should be taken a gigantic preparation, the greatest effort made by our people in 13 centuries, the most heroic and resolute struggle of the Peruvian proletariat, the most extraordinary war ever unleashed by the Peruvian people. No war ever has fought for such high objectives. It is good to think this way with clarity, so that we will know how to place what we have done: A great preparation for the great leap that we are building. We should struggle more because nothing falls from the sky; we know this and we know it well. We should evaluate more our process, and our own history, everything that we have been through, the wasting of energy and the spilled blood of the people and the class. One must be clear about this, have a very clear mind, solid and firm passion and a resolute will. We must analyze the past will. If we analyze the genocide we will know what sinister plan it corresponds to and which reptile carries it out. We cannot say that it was the same as 1986: No Comrades, everything has its place. We must know how to interpret things, and never allow ourselves to be clouded. Sentiment must not blunt our will, nor control our minds; pain will only serve to strengthen our efforts, to temper our souls, and to make our decision more firm.

In synthesis, if we look at the contention between revolution and counter-revolution, it is obvious that it will be extremely bloody. Some time ago we said that this war to emancipate our people might cost even a million lives, but it is not because we want to be so costly, but because the reactionaries and imperialism are the ones who wish to drown the revolution in blood. They are the genocidal ones who sharpen their sickles to cut our throats, dreaming of defeating us in their slaughter of revolutionaries, like Nero dreamed. Imperialism and reaction think like him, it is what they would like to do […]. Our obligation as leaders, is to struggle for the cost to be the least possible; (remember the Central Committee Session of August 1980). There we agreed on that and it is still valid. We must precise calculations and thus know the real cost required by revolution as well as what are the enemy’s. If one thinks in this way, and when there is a firm passion and no hesitations, then we are not for whimpering, but for converting pain into strength, and converting it into powerful energy to demolish the enemy, and to know what heroism is all about.

If we see the leap that the Party has to make; if we see the growth of the conflict to its extremes — development we haven’t seen up to now — it is indicated that the contention between revolution and counter-revolution will reach higher levels; that the struggle will intensify immensely.

Keep in mind the „Considerations“ of the 2nd Plenum. They are clear and we must not forget them or else we will fall into serious errors.

ON MARXISM

The general counter-revolutionary offensive consists in a relentless attack against Marxism. They say that Marxism is obsolete, that socialism has proven that it doesn’t work, that revolutionary violence resolves nothing, proclaiming that the Party is useless, shouting to the four winds that everything accomplished by the Proletarian World Revolution has been a slaughter and they even talk about „rebuilding fascism“. Don’t they compare Comrade Stalin with Hitler? Don’t they talk like fugitives by saying that what is obsolete „is the socialism of Stalin“? In reality the obsolete thing is the solid waste which was generated by the revisionists.

That is how the world is now. Apart from this, the sharpening of counter-revolution is expressed between the imperialist superpowers and powers, and most importantly between the imperialists and the oppressed nations. We cannot sidestep this general counter-revolutionary offensive, it is the other hill at the world level. The contention between World Revolution and counter-revolution is sharpening. It is still true that the Proletarian World Revolution is developing within the Strategic Offensive of the World Revolution so that this counter-revolutionary offensive is within that situation. We must not be fooled; we must see imperialism’s situation, we must not believe what they tell us.

Recall Marx; he says that when we study the reactionaries, we must do so with a critical spirit, not gratuitous criticism, but that our studies should be done with a class spirit. No one is going to tell us that Yankee imperialism is in good shape, it is rotten from head to toe; or that German imperialism is a „miracle“; the so-called German unity is the devouring of what was the German Democratic Republic which had been prostituted by revisionism. Where has this brought German imperialism? To deeper problems, to hinder it. They crow so much about the Japanese myth, that it is not in a recession, but this is false, Japan’s growth is slowing. What path is it following? It is moving towards recession. Don’t be fooled by what they say and shout. The World Revolution continues to be the main historical and political tendency.

They are on the defensive, but they want to make it seem like things are not that way. We will not believe them and we will understand this if we start from a class position. What is certain is that there is a general counter-revolutionary offensive and it will last for years. The stage of the Strategic Offensive will last decades, the general counter-revolutionary offensive will last for a few years rather than for many years. Thus, at a world level the struggle intensifies, world reaction needs to consolidate its position. They need to consolidate what it has devoured in this scramble, dreaming that Communism will never raise its head again, dreaming that their capitalism will reign forever, that their bourgeois democracy is forever […] No matter how prostituted it is, and that it be the only one, that its bustard ideology, its vile conception be the only school in the world. This is one of their dreams.

Contradictions unfold on all levels. We will win, they cannot win. The working class is the final class in history, this is inescapable. The bourgeoisie will try to burn it in order to finish it off, but the bourgeoisie will be buried, the corpse will become ashes and will be scattered to the four winds to fertilize the Earth. Imperialism has no other destiny. Thus, the problem is one of eddies against the powerful river of the World Revolution. If we don’t think this way then we are not Communists, we are not revolutionaries. We would be wretches with eyes on our backs, we would not be mere breadwinners chasing the scraps of the reactionaries. We are Communists, we have a class ideology and cannot judge without starting from the class interests. We have a better understanding which allows us to see the recesses and eddies that reaction generates in the face of our relentless advance. It is not that we are blind in the face of the great defeats that we have suffered, but this will not detain history, eddies are nothing more than countercurrent perturbations. Which is bigger? An eddy or a river? The river, of course.

We must understand the reactionary offensive on all levels. Consider, Comrades, that the triumph of the People’s War here implies that the rise of the People‘s Republic of Peru is nearer and more immediate, in order to construct everything that millions have struggled for over centuries of combat. We are nothing more than the most recent part. We are the material part, the leading part, the part that opens the stream like the head of a river, because we have the force of history behind us. We have all read what that North American admiral has said: „If Communism is not crushed in Peru, it will be reborn in the world like the phoenix from its ashes.“ The rhetorical part is not important, because that is their fear, but their basic idea emerges when he said „it will be reborn in the world like the phoenix from its ashes“. Behind this figure of speech he expresses their dread, the dread of imperialism, of the only hegemonic power, the arrogant lord that seeks to do whatever it pleases, who wishes to parade around like the spirit of God across the seas, and since God does not exist, all they have is dreams and vapor. The rest is nuclear artillery to defend their interests. He said „before this happens that danger must be swept away“. Therefore we must think how imperialism opposes and will oppose our road, which is developing the People‘s Republic of Peru. As such, we must base ourselves on our own forces, and with the necessary support of the proletariat and the people of the world we will conquer Power. We will defend the People‘s Republic of Peru, which will build before it is born, and finally be born and developed. We must see this clearly to be united with common feelings and one will. What we are doing is reaffirming ourselves in this understanding.

In synthesis, at an international level the struggle will intensify and develop. By being a torch, a base, and trench they will not forgive us, and we do not aks for forgiveness nor for permission. As such, we must tie the intensification of the class struggle linked to the People‘s War in order that it be made specific as a two-line struggle within the Party, which expresses itself like the People‘s War against the counter-revolutionary war in the country and like revolution against counter-revolution in the world. That is our perspective and the situation in which we are evolving. Who among us will slacken in the obligation that the Party has assumed? „The Express“ says: „Sendero has no choice but to win“, regarding San Roman and Fujimori dialogue. They are part of the reactionaries, but hasn’t our Party taught us that we are condemned to win? A beautiful verdict. This is more valid today than yesterday, and tomorrow it will be even more so. They are expressing it from their point of view, from fear. The problem is an antagonistic contradiction between the Communist Party and the old Peruvian State propped up on the bayonets of the armed forces more than ever. For this reason, the contradiction between the Communist Party and the Armed Forces becomes more acute.

THE PARTY AND THE NEW POWER

From the following three struggles: the class struggle from the point of view of the conquest of Power; the destruction of reaction in the country; and the service this People’s War gives to the Proletarian World Revolution, what is the axis for the conquest of Power? The Party. What is it that serves the World Revolution? The Party. For this reason, the handling of the two-line struggle in the Party is crucial so that the proletariat maintains its hegemony, so that the Party accomplishes its tasks today and tomorrow, and so that the Party will be a fortress, and each Communist a bastion. „Fortresses are taken from within“; what does this demand of us? Its prevention: to carefully see the two-line struggle, to justly and correctly evaluate the line opposed, is it revisionist? Is it rightist? To what extent? Which is the fortress of the red line? How to strengthen the proletarian line, the red line? From what we are seeing in the Committees, we cannot affirm that there is an antagonistic contrary line in the Party. The struggle against revisionism as the main danger, continues to develop. We are proposing to carry out the struggle against rightism as the main danger; it is wider and more specific. Why are we proposing this problem? Because of the ideological dynamic. If we take into account the ideological dynamic on an international level as well as the one that develops inside our country, we have to understand the repercussions. Chairman Mao Tse-tung said that the Communists that went to see their families came back reflecting a variety of ideas. Clearly, the mind is that way; it reflects ideas, and for that reason they came back repeating imperialist, bourgeois or feudal ideas: something is reborn, the familiar ties are strengthened. These are material realities. He also said that in the world there are storms and typhoons and that the stalks will sway. Chairman Mao Tse-tung said that the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in 1956, which with Khrushchev represented revisionism, was a typhoon, but that we must differentiate between the stalks that swayed and others that did not. We must not close our eyes, but must see things with more objectivity, understand that if we consider all that, we will see things with more expansiveness […] so as to identify rightism, reaching levels up to revisionism. These are things that we will be further defined in the Third Plenum. All that we are saying here is that we will pay close attention to the two-line struggle.

Synthesizing: Within the Party, within the People‘s War counter-insurgency War and within the World Revolution vs. counter-revolution, the struggle will become more acute and the key to all of this is the two-line struggle within the Party, so that the Party will continue to be a fortress and fulfill its role, handling the struggle with firmness and wisdom looking at new problems, seeing how right ism expresses itself in its various gradations and manifestations because there is no antagonistic line in the party. The NRC has an accumulation of experience in handling this problem and this can help the Party to study and better understand the two-line struggle. It is also useful for this Committee because it will serve to make it more cohesive, and cohesion is absolutely necessary.

We believe that everything is a contradiction. We must also emphasize this, that contradiction is a process; this must also be analyzed. We have learned that we must begin with our experience, that we must know history, the path the country has followed, that our Party has followed; the path of the Regional Committee or our work has followed. This has to do with the famous thesis of Chairman Mao Tse-tung: „Know the past, understand the present and know the future.“ Contradictions are not always the same, they vary. Problems are not always the same, for example construction; are problems of construction always the same? No. When we did Party building before the People’s War it was different; after the initiation of the armed struggle it was different but the principles were the same. The Party develops today within People‘s War because war is the main form of struggle. As such, it defines the entire situation, but the problem of war today is that it is entering a new situation, it is unfolding into the Strategic Stalemate and the Strategic Stalemate presents us with Constructing the Conquest of Power; that in turn will lead us to prepare the Strategic Offensive. Thus, we are no longer in the same stage as before. Then it was a Party in construction in the midst of the People‘s War, colored by that stage of the war (the Strategic Defensive). Now that we are in the Strategic Stalemate we can say that we must build organizations superior to those of the reactionaries. If we don’t, how are we going to resist the attacks and assaults they will launch against the fortress? The reactionaries wish to dynamite it, destroy it, demolish it. For this reason our fortress must be strong, like a tower on a hill faced by a storm, because it is the Party that leads. Thus, circumstances are different. Secret work must be developed more, clandestinity must develop much better, we must be much more demanding with clandestine work, no one must know more than they need to know: a secret is a secret and if someone tells me stories, I know nothing. This is one of the Five Necessities, we must see how we are accomplishing it.

In 1979 we proposed that the militant or the Communist has three things to accomplish: First and foremost to be a Communist, a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, Gonzalo Thought; second, a militant is a combatant of the People’s Army no matter at what level; and third, a militant is a builder of the New State, we have said he or she is also an „administrator“. Are all of us administrators? It is no longer suitable to say that; things are changing. We are gratified to be in the Strategic Stalemate. What is this gratification? Communist joy expressed in the realization of Constructing the Conquest of Power. This is how we can look at the process.

In the New State it is the same: we are making the People‘s War. The Party leads it as a front of classes. How did it start? In the beginning, it was the Distribution Committees, later Clandestine People’s Committees, later Open People’s Committees. We proposed a road in this Strategic Stalemate that opens up the conquest of relative stability within the New State. Who leads this? The Party, unalterably. How? With People’s War sustained by the People‘s Guerrilla Army, there is a process. What does a process imply? Contradiction. What is contradiction? It is what makes a process dynamic; a contradiction implies two aspects. One is main, the other is secondary. The main aspect defines the contradiction. For example, in the Party there is a red line and a black line. Which one predominates? Which one must predominate? The red line. As long as it predominates the Party will develop.

We have had a process. When has there been an intense struggle, an antagonistic struggle? whenever the red line has been questioned and undermined; when the black line has sought to assault the red line in order to achieve the necessary changes, which now make four. It is critical to see which aspect predominates. The red line implies the development of the revolution. What does the predominance of the black line of pirates imply? The predominance of the bourgeoisie, revisionism, restoration (Russia, China). What did the predomination of the black line of Jorge del Prado in the Party imply? It implied the selling out of the revolution, its abandonment; to hinder it more, to tail after the bourgeoisie. The two-lines struggle has two aspects. In military question, implies the proletarian military line and the bourgeois military line, reflected in the People’s Army. What does this imply? Army of the new type vs. army of the old type. The army of the new type carries out three tasks: to combat, to mobilize and to produce. If these tasks are not being carried out, then the construction of the Army of the new type will fail. And this would be a rightist setback; look at its magnitude. Thus there are two aspects to the contradiction and these become dynamic. But there is not only one contradiction, there are many contradictions in the world.

We have the problem of conquering Power countrywide. Since our revolution is a democratic one, there is a New State with four classes that struggle together, and that has materialized by forming a front of three classes. This is what we call the constant trunk with a solid base, the worker-peasant alliance under the leadership of the proletariat headed by the Party. But today, the problem is to embrace the people: to win over the national bourgeoisie, or if we are more precise in our analysis, to win over the majority of it and neutralize its top third. There are three layers: lower, middle and upper. We must differentiate between the upper layer which seeks to increase its capital to become part of the big bourgeoisie. For example Vega Llona, which is why they have those expressions. There are four classes, but each one has its own interests and each class of the four wishes to mold the State according to its interests, according to its image and similarity. In this manner, the contradictions are born and are expressed.

If we look at the Party there are contradictions. For example, we wish to advance the Party, make a leap in its construction. Applying the principle of construction, it is necessary to introduce new forms of struggle. This requires new organizational forms, new methods of leadership, new styles of work, that is to say more Marxist-Leninist-Maoist, Gonzalo Thought styles. This is in accordance with the necessity of conquering Power. It does not mean inventing new forms. It means that from the experience that we have we must introduce new, more developed forms. For example the armed strikes, what have they shown us? Each day, they are managed better and we put there reactionaries in dire straights. Recently, an armed strike in the Central Region paralyzed Jauja- Concepcion, La Oroya, within the heart of the reactionary economic system. Or consider the military action developed by the Southern Regional Committee, an eight-day excursion to strike Chuquibamba, entering and exiting in seven days with confrontations, breaking through 10 encirclements. Arequipa was stirred; or look at the campaigns and counter-campaigns from 1989, 1990 and 1991: what does this show? The Ayacucho Zonal Committee, in four clashes that lasted more than six hours, 50 combatants faced 500 and we defeated them; they were challenging battles and we confronted them. And these great combats are taking place within the process of the Peoples’ War. They were not ambushes nor assaults, but battles. The war itself is generating new forms of struggle; higher, more developed forms; this is being demonstrated. Even the last genocide. Was it in the same conditions as the one García Pérez committed? No. It was in worse political conditions; everything was against the reactionaries, there were four days of resistance. This has to do with the experience of 1986, with a greater tempering, with the presence of leaders who we remember with profound affection and to whom we render our homage. What does our process show? That we are advancing. In 1986, there was a sinister, wicked genocide, and they said they would sweep us away. Haven’t we seen the resurgence of an even higher Shining Trench of Combat? Four days of resistance in the eyes of the world, haven’t they shown what a Communist is, a combatant of an authentic Communist Party? We discover new things.

In accordance with materialist principles, what exists resist its own death. It persists; furthermore, what is old resists and pretends to persist within what is new. It reestablishes itself. Consider, even in the simple phenomenon of doing what is already familiar. There is a tendency to do what is already familiar, what is already handled, by the law of minimizing efforts. These are material things. What is old is restored. It reestablishes itself. It denies its own death and disappearance. Thus with classes, the earlier situation have repercussions, and it is obvious that each class tries to represent its own interests in the State. There are four, and as such the contradictions multiply, they become aroused, each class will try to satisfy its class interests. First and foremost we must satisfy the interest of the proletariat and the peasantry, then the petty bourgeoisie, later the dual national bourgeoisie. There is not only one contradiction, there are various ones, and these imply divergences and convergences. In Party work it is the same: aren’t there expression of counter-positions on mass work and military actions, on ideological construction and organizational construction? There are contradictions between the base and the leadership. The issue is not that we can utilize the base to pit them against the leaders; that is erroneous, it is not our line, that can never be done. There is always a center and a periphery; there are centrifugal and centripetal forces. Tomorrow when we construct a government there will be contradictions between the government and the people; the question is how we will handle them; we must understand their class character. For example, the peasantry will want that everything be transferred at once. We must see what is main, what is primary, not everything can be resolved at once. We must see what is main, see the graduations, the interests. Contradictions are resolved in a process of main contradiction and main aspect. Keep in mind the multiple contradictions, their process, the main contradiction and fundamental contradiction, the contradiction between struggle and unity, with struggle as an absolute thing and unity as relative.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE NORTHERN REGIONAL COMMITTEE

We have looked at our concrete problems. The problem is not to consider our ideology in the abstract. Thus, we think that in order to analyze the NRC we must start with what the Congress said: „With the Congress as a weapon, and in the midst of the People’s War, build the NRC in a unified way to conquer Power.“ We are interested in looking at follows: there is the orientation, the road to follow, and this presents four questions:

First, with the Congress as a weapon; second, in the midst of the People’s War, with the Party in and for the People’s War; third, building the NRC in a unified way. A correct understanding of its construction implies construction of the Three Instruments: the Party, the People’s Army and the New State. To see the progress of our People’s War is necessary to look at the process underway since 1980; everything is being done to serve this. Our Party and its construction cannot develop on the margins of the war, nor can it develop without always aiming at the construction and development of the New Power as its goal. This is shown by the history of our Party. It shows that our line cannot develop solely as a General Political Line, but it is linked to the Military Line. Remember the 2nd National Conference. Nor can it be untied from the line of the United Front-New State. Recall the Plenum of 1983, the relationship between the Front and the New State cannot be untied from the construction of the Party and the construction of the Army. We all know well that the construction of the Front-New State follows a principle: first and mainly the construction of the proletarian ideology, and simultaneously, on that basis the organizational construction with two-line struggle must be developed, all of which is in and for the People’s War as the Party has indicated.

The fourth question is for the conquest of Power; it has to do with how we see support, the role of the NRC in the conquest of Power, within the Strategic Plan of Development that has to be established. What is the role of this Committee?; to what extent do we only see the NRC and not the entire set; this is a question of seeing the whole and not just part of it. This is important; only those who see the whole can see the revolution. If we do not see the whole, we do not see the revolution; if we only see the part we are in danger, we are mistaken. These are four issues that are before us in this road set forth by the Congress.

We have spoken about dialectics, and concrete contradictions, we have referred to the Congress, the road it established for the NRC, and its four contents.

The first point of the agenda is to judge the progress of the NRC, its compliance with the road established by the Congress in these four aspects. What do we mean to say? In the People’s War what was the progress? The course we followed since the Congress. For example, the ambushes have a moment, at the beginning there weren’t marvelous ambushes made. Consider how much effort and how many lives they involved, what we have advanced and what we have not advanced. The Congress has many things, but one is central: the Basis of Party Unity, which implies ideology, Programme and a General Political Line. How are the ideological and political questions, how is the process of struggle in the ideological and political level? A correct ideological and political line is decisive, we must grasp this. In the construction of the Three Instruments there is the Party, the Army and the New State. What is the course that has been followed? The Party has many aspects, ideological, political, leadership which is key. What is the course of the leadership? The militants, the problems between networks, the relationship among Party-Army-New State. And if we talk about the process, how is it today in the current situation and consequently what are its real prospects.

One thing that the Committee needs is to see how it has developed its progress and what are its strong and weak points, and very importantly what are its prospects; how to shape it, and how to make a reality out of that immense potential that the Committee has. If it didn’t have it, why would the reactionaries be so worried about it? This will be more appropriate. We need to give more mobility to our minds because when we follow one scheme, we are taking a risk: The routine as a mental scheme. Where is the problem? It requires more effort from us. We must do it because it is necessary, it is part of renovating our forms, and one problem is to know our reality. In conclusion, the lesson from the Zonal Committee of Ayacucho is the problem of applying Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought to our reality. If we don’t apply Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought to new problems we will not resolve them. The Party needs this, a renovation, as leaders who judge things.

A good part of the Party that we are seeing to date is empiricism, among the greater part of the Committees that have been analyzed. Why is this so? It has to do with problems of study; in the final case with contradiction and how we see the world, how we manage it. It should be treated in this manner. The situation of the NRC allows us to aim at renovating our methods as a form of judging. It is the first time that we are applying this in this Committee and we will achieve it, this will lead to the study of contradictions in a practical sense. That is not to know but to do, to apply. For this reason, we propose that the first point of the agenda should be seen in this manner, as the problems of the Committee on the road established by the Congress.

Regarding the second point of the agenda on the 3rd Plenum.

Handle analysis more clearly and synthesize the fundamental and main contradiction. Analysis is indispensable, establishing synthesis, aiming to be as clear and precise as possible. Synthesis saves time, it clears away the rubbish. The road of struggle is the most objective understanding of the road followed by the Committee, „its current situation“. If we all see the objectives in the same way, we will be cohesive. The objective is to consolidate the Committee for the highest tasks. We have an ideology which is the same, we have the same line, the same Party we are pledged to the same cause. We base ourselves on the same class, the same people, and we have a common enemy. All this will unite us. We must state the problems and we will consolidate it.

We are in agreement with the agenda. We must follow the road established by the Congress, the four questions. Regarding the ideological and political line: how do we forge the militants in Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, Gonzalo Thought, and how to apply the General Political Line while understanding that the Military Line is part of it. With regard to the People’s War how will we develop the four forms of struggle, particularly the guerrilla combats, and in what way we are developing a war of the masses. We are forming them in the midst of the People’s War. In the third question, on construction, we need to see the Three Instruments, keeping in mind that of the three the forging of the People’s Army is the main one, because it corresponds to the main form of struggle, and the question is strengthening it. The Party is the axis of all construction and as it fulfills its role, as it launches its organizational construction to become a heroic combatant, „it manages the People‘s War and leads the construction of the New State“. Understand the New State and its construction, as the central issue of construction, must be in agreement with the main one which is „Conquering Power“. The central task of the revolution. In order to conquer Power countrywide, we must see the role of the Committee within the whole, within the Strategic Plan of Development of the People’s War. In this fourth part, we must focused on the implementation of the Strategic Plan of Development, and try to aim at serving this and how to see it from that perspective. We must see the forest, the whole, not just the tree. The problem is to define the laws and roads to follow. With that you will begin to see. As leaders of the NRC, your task is „to consider the whole“, that’s what your tasks and responsibilities are. The role of the leadership is to seek, contribute and understand the revolutionary road.

Peru, March 1992

Central Committee
Communist Party of Peru