Before discussing the topic of my talk, I would like to introduce the general conditions of Pakistan. Pakistan society is mainly a Muslim society. 70% of the total population lives in the rural area and they earn their living through cultivation. But 70% of this rural population own 33% of the total cultivated land and rest of the land is owned by the feudal lords.

Here briefly I want to elaborate some facts about these feudal families. In 1857, when India was a British colony, there was an uprising against colonialism and Hindus and Muslims started their combined struggle for freedom. But, at that time, the British were able to win that war with the help of influential Indian feudal families, and in return they gave huge lands to those families and asked them to establish horse farming and trained horses for the British army.

After getting independence in 1947, these families still owned this land besides the military dictators Aub Khan and Bhutto’s land reform policies. The feudal families exploit the peasantry class with the help of military and the civil authorities obstruct any development in the public services such as hospitals, schools and roads etc. in the villages so that they can hold a strong control of their individual empires.

30% of the total Pakistani population lives in urban areas. 7.8 million people are working in different private and public sector. Only 6% of this work force is involved in different trade unions. Because of the industrial developments around the world, the feudal families in Pakistan are moving slowly from a feudal to an industrial set-up.

But they still own their lands in order to take benefits from the tax-free agricultural income. That means that they show a major part of their industrial income as agricultural income. Industrialists are also buying big lands to hide their industrial income. I would say here that the classical character of feudalism is changing.

In the past, the Pakistani left had two tendencies: one was Maoist and they led the concept of people’s democracy and tried to win the support of peasantry. The other group was pro-Moscow and followed the concept of national democracy. Basically these two groups followed the theory of two-stage revolution.

The two-stage theory of revolution is not new in the left history of Pakistan. Before the partition of India and Pakistan, the CPI followed this theory and thought that the proletariat was not yet ready for revolution and that CPI comrades should join the Indian Congress Party and Muslim League and support the partition. But at that time there was a big uprising in the working class in which they took control of some industrial cities.

After partition, the CPI helped the Pakistani comrades by sending their comrades to Pakistan to train young cadres. The CP of Pakistan not only had support in the working and peasantry classes, but they also had some bases in the military.

In the ’50s the Pakistani government claimed to have disclosed a coup plot and it started a big crackdown on the left by banning the CPP and by putting its leaders in jails. But the party continued its work in the underground and established its support in the working class and among students.

After 1965, because of the corrupt policies of the military regime and only 22 families controlling the whole Pakistani economy, the gap between rich and poor grew wider. This started unrest in the masses. In 1968, when military dictator Aub Khan was celebrating ten years in power, the massed turned over his carriage on a train travelling across the country.

The population was demanding basic needs which were out of reach at that time. A mass struggle was started by blocking the roads and by closing down factories.

But the Moist group was supporting dictator Aub khan because of his close links with China. Pro-Moscow leftist groups were supporting ZA Bhutto and helped him form the Pakistan People’s Party. Instead of leading the masses towards revolution under their own leadership, they gave all powers to Bhutto. Bhutto cashed in on the uprising and became PM of Pakistan.

The left leadership made another mistake and did not take part in the elections, because they were totally relying on Bhutto and were the main brain behind the PPP’s election campaign. Bhutto introduced some reforms like nationalising the banks, educational institutions and small industries but introduced very few reforms in the strong feudal system.

When the left elements realised that Bhutto was not going towards socialism, they withdrew support and started a campaign against him. Bhutto’s half-hearted reforms were something new for the suppressed working class, and though he was not following any Marxist ideology due to his reforms he established roots in the working and peasantry class. In the 1976 elections, there were some allegations of rigging and the opposition, which were mainly the religious parties, ran a campaign against him.

The left and progressive elements at that time were confused and were watching the situation. Some left parties were helplessly supporting that movement in order to get rid of Bhutto. In 1977 the military again took control and Zia-ul-Haq became president. During martial law, the PPP was struggling for the restoration of democracy but the left elements were silent.

After the collapse of Stalinism, the left situation degenerated. They could not explain the reasons behind the fall of Stalinism and to them it was the end of communism. The CPP ended all of its activities and some of its leaders joined different NGOs for huge salaries. Some shifted to social democracy. Nowadays they are involved in petty debates about the role and form of proletariat and its capabilities to bring about revolution.

In 1981, Pakistan Labour Party comrades were forced to go overseas in exile where they established a new left movement in Holland and affiliated themselves to the Committee for a Workers’ International. On coming back to Pakistan in 1986, they continued their struggle for revolution.

The PLP believes in a theory of permanent revolution and our present struggle for revolution entirely depends on this ideology. Our party is publishing its own weekly newspaper for the working class. To mobilise the masses, our party is acting on parliamentary and extra-parliamentary struggle. In the last general election our party formed a people’s alliance with the help of other progressive and left parties and groups, and now we are contesting in local elections under the banner of a left alliance. This is a first-ever left alliance which is formed on a maximum program.

At present, because of the adaptation of IMF and World Bank policies, people are the victims of the capitalism and a huge level of hatred of this system and the ruling parties. Our party is trying to channel this hatred into a movement by intervening on their day-to-day problems and by providing a conscious alternative socialist program with which to fight for their rights. We are directly involved in workers’ struggles against privatisation and downsizing as imposed by IMF and World Bank.

The Asia Pacific Solidarity Conference provides us a chance to collaborate with working-class movements and with the revolutionary parties in the region. Our party has already planned a subcontinental party conference to strengthen the progressive movements in the subcontinent. We hope that the Asia Pacific Solidarity Conference will be a milestone for the subcontinental joint struggle.