Dear Jim,
I have just received a copy of your July 3rd letter to Tom and I am saddened by the tone and by the easily explainable misunderstandings that have arisen.
Copies of the RSL letter and all the other material were sent on to New York. You should by now have received copies of other material as well. In case you haven't, I am sending along everything up to date. The Pabloites send all their documents direct to the sections of the IC.
At last February's meeting of the International Committee it was decided to hold a World Congress of orthodox Trotskyists towards the end of this year and work out a political policy which could then be submitted as a basis for unification. The committee felt that this was the best way to sort out the position bearing in mind Goonewardene's letter to you, which was read at the meeting. Immediately the meeting was over, I conveyed this decision to New York.
Then came your reply to Goonewardene, together with your proposals. Upon receipt of a copy of this, I wrote to New York and asked that it be held up until we could discuss it, but it had already been sent. Our NC early in April accepted a resolution along the lines of your proposals, which were submitted to our pre-congress discussion. We did this so that our people could be thoroughly prepared. In addition we received a copy of Pablo's resolution "Decline and Fall of Stalinism" which was also sent out, with a reply, to our members. In the course of this a young Ceylonese passed a copy over to Pabloite sources—hence the screaming from that quarter. We believe we did right in placing this resolution before our members despite what happened. In any case our organisation rejects its line.
As soon as we received your proposals we sent them out to all members of the IC, but a meeting could not be arranged at once. In any case we want to get our people clear first and the other sections were in the same boat. We made a big effort to get a meeting of the International Commiteee held just after our Whitsun Congress, but only the French delegate could attend. The Swiss and German were fully occupied with work in Germany and a referendum in Switzerland. The French were greatly impressed by our Congress which reflected important progress over the past year, and we managed to convince them about your proposals. We found it extremely difficult to get a meeting arranged and in the end we had to settle a reply to the Pabloites by sending someone to visit all concerned. We then got an agreed position which supports yours and our proposals. The IC will be meeting within the next few weeks, and will continue to discuss the situation.
There is general agreement not to waste any time and to proceed to take advantage of the position in a positive way. All this I explained in a letter to New York a few days ago. It is obvious from your letter that you have not yet seen copies of this material.
For almost a year now there has been a constant attack upon us by the Pabloites here. Pablo has formed an unprincipled alliance with the sectarian Grant and launched an open organisation called the RSL, opposing our entrist policy. Our organisation rejects this completely and the Congress decided unanimously to ask them to disband this as the basis for unification. The second point of this resolution flowed from the fact that our group rejects the Pabloite document. But this is not a barrier to your proposals although the Pabloites are trying to make something of it. We can always negotiate something here if the international position is settled. At the same time as Pablo talks unity in the USA, he goes to war against us here. We can only explain this in terms of his political line. He has launched an attack on us not only in order to manoeuvre but also because he opposes our political position. We must not forget this fact.
The Pabloites here immediately they receive something from Pablo circulate it far and wide amongst our members and contacts. We are called upon to reply, since our people must have answers. We realise that this has conveyed the wrong impression to you that we want to "go it alone", but it is nothing of the sort. Pablo pushes the offensive all the time here, and we just cannot ignore this.
[p. 65]
We cannot and will not accept his line. We are in favour of your proposals which offer us a positive basis as against his manoeuvres, but the political questions will and must go forward for discussion. If there is any attempt to slur these things over then it would be a black day for orthodox Trotskyism. We appeal to you to study his resolutions. These remain the key to the whole affair.
We have tried to proceed by clarifying our section and convincing other members of the IC. This has taken a little time and it has been made more difficult by the distances which separate you from us. We are certainly not factional in any way, but you must appreciate that in a very new membership such as we have, we must speak out politically or else they will be confused. Pablo has been and is the main provocateur in Britain.
From now I feel we should keep regularly in touch direct, so that we can act promptly. Rest assured we will walk in step with you. All we ask is that you study Pablo's line now. We will send all the material directly at the same time as it is sent to New York.
A new issue of the "Revolution Betrayed" is now off the press. Could you ask Joe to let us have the proofs of the first half of your book at once. We are completing the remainder and they will be dispatched within the next three weeks. We want to finish this book next.
Warmest wishes,
s/Jerry