[p. 37]
January 19th 1966.
From the World Congress of the IVth International to all members of the R.S.L.
Dear Comrades:
The World Congress of December 1965 had on its agenda the particular problems of our movement in England. In addition the Congress set up an "English Commission" in which your two delegates participated and which had many sittings during the Congress. After considerable discussion, the Congress passed with an overwhelming majority vote, a resolution submitted to it by the commission (see attached resolution--in this internal bulletin see page 19). The Congress also decided that along with this resolution it would send this covering letter to the comrades of the R.S.L. in order to give the reasons behind the decision and explain to you its implications.
The Congress decision means, substantially, that the International recognises that there is no official section of the Fourth International in England at the present time and that the International has withdrawn from the R.S.L. the status it had conferred it several years ago of being the official section.
Why did the International come to such a grave decision ?
For several years now, the International has been greatly disturbed by the situation in which the Trotskyist movement in England finds itself, and especially with the relations between itself and the R.S.L. There is also another unsatisfactory element for us,-- the apparent inability of your group to reply to the attacks on our world movement by the Healy organisation which by its statements and activities presents itself in the public eye as a Trotskyist movement, thus discrediting Trotskyism in England and internationally. We do not think that the R.S.L. is capable of dealing with this situation; and even if it wished to, we feel the policies of the R.S.L. renders it impossible for you to fight Healy politically. It is also our belief that you have a poorly functioning organisation that is not up to the standard required of an official section of the Fourth International. At the time of the Reunification World Congress in 1963, we were of the opinion that the unifying of the RSL with the IG would create a stronger organisation and therefore open up greater possibilities to improve the situation. Unfortunately the fusion concept, though accepted in principle by both groups in 1963, was only implemented one year and a half later with great reluctance on their part. The actual unification was never consumated in common work, and such as it was, only lasted one month or two. It is our opinion that although the responsibility for this failure could be equally divided between the RSL and IG, the RSL by having assumed a preponderant numerical majority in the leading bodies of the common organisation, bore an especially heavy responsibility to be extremely sensitive and to work hard to create the atmosphere and conditions to maintain a working and viable united organisation: it did nothing to that end.
It is our conclusion that after the failure of the reunifi-
[p. 38]
cation of the RSL and the IG , nothing can be done in the immediate period ahead by the International to bring a change in the situation, in England, or in the relations between the two groups. Moreover, the situation is such with the groups, that the International feels it cannot take any responsibility for the activities and statements of both groups; the decision of the World Congress on England is meant to acknowledge this fact. To recognize in a given country an organisation as being an official section of the Fourth International means many things -- it means especially a relationship between the International and the section which unfortunately did not exist in England, and a role which the R.S.L. is not prepared to fulfill.
It goes without saying that you are entitled to the political views you have defended inside the International, views which, of course, are different from those held by the overwhelming majority of the International, but it is necessary now to state that it is simply untrue, as some of you may mistakenly believe, that the International is unaware of the special positions of the RSL on international questions. On the contrary, the R.S.L. has already presented them to at least three World Congresses, gatherings which have had as delegates attending them, very qualified comrades from our sections around the world who have not misunderstood the positions of the RSL. As for written contributions to the preparatory discussions before the congresses, you cannot blame the International if the leaders of the R.S.L. have written littele or late.
But the duty of a section is, among other things, according to democratic centralism, to make know publicly the policies and statements of the International, despite whatever differences a given section may hold with those positions. This the R.S.L. has never done. Comrade J.D., one of the leaders of your group, never attended one single meeting of the United Secretariat even though he was elected formally to that body. Astounding as it may seem, the R.S.L. has never paid its dues to the International, a thing --we think -- you would never tolerate from a local branch in your organisation. And, we regret to add, the R.S.L. has never fulfilled any of the most elementary duties of solidarity, as for example when the International launched an appeal to all sections for financial aid to our Bolivian comrades who are working under great difficulties and hardship.
This unfortunate relationship of the RSL to the International is neither accidental nor recent. All previous attempts to bring about a change have failed. The effort to unify the RSL and the IG was the most recent. Therefore the World Congress could have made no other decision; the status quo could not be maintained. To bring about a reunification within a certain time-period through the opening up of a discussion between the two groups, as was suggerated by your representatives at the Congress, is totally illusory. The record shows us that there is no basis, nor will, for it.
What is the full implication of the decision taken by the World Congress ?
[p. 39]
First of all it should be clear to all concerned that no member of the RSL is expelled from the International. The Statutes of the International have always contained clauses according to which groups are linked to the International without them as such being recognized as official sections. Usually this has occured when a group is organised in a country where there was a deep crisis in the Trotskyist movement with time being necessary to bring new developments.
We repeat : none of you has been expelled. The main change between the present and the former situation is that groups, in contrast to sections have voice, but no vote at World Congresses. We, of course, expect that groups will fulfill their duties to the International, as is set out in our Statutes. The future relations of the RSL to the Internatioanl rests in your hands. We hope that the decision taken by the W.C., far from taking you further away from us, instead will have the effect of making your organisation understand more fully what is required of it in its duties and relations to the International.
The W.C. decision, obviously, does not mean that the Int'l and its leading bodies will not give the utmost attention to the situation in England, and when possible, do their best to give organisational and political assistance to British Trotskyists with a view of reconstructing a viable and genuine section. The present political circumstances in England at large are of crucial importance, not only for the British workers, but also for the whole of the European working-class movt. It is essential that there be a Trotskyist organisation able and capable of presenting its views and policies to become a pole of attraction to the revolutionary vanguard. England is the main country in Europe to which the United Secretariat will devote its efforts, precisely because the political situation, is so important and the state of the movement so precarious.
In conclusion, we are asking you to bring this letter and its contents to the attention of all members of the RSL and we request of you that you give a member of the U.S. an opportunity to present a report on the W.C., including of course an explanation of the decision taken on England.
Yours fraternally.