annually, but what this well five the people. We must ascertain for what purpose production is being developed.

Under socialism this development is subordinated to the interests of the people, which is attested to by facts and figures. Between 1950 and 1961 the national income rose by 183 per cent in the U.S.S.R. and by 37 percent in the United States.

The real incomes of factory and office workers in the U.S.S.R. per employed person increased annually on the average by 5.5 per cent, while on the United States, according to the most optimistic estimates, they rose slightly more than 1 per cent. Production of consumer goods in the U.S.S.R. per capita, more than doubled and the volume of state and cooperative retail trade increase 3.5 times. All this shows   the advance in the standard of living of the Soviet People.

To analyse the prospects of competition between the Soviet Union and the United States it is necessary to define the concept “standard of living of the people” and the system of indices characterizing it.

By standard of living we understand the degree of satisfaction of man’s material and spiritual requirements. This includes food, clothing, footwear and other consumer goods, housing, education, medical service, sports, the opportunity for work and recreation and for developing man’s finest abilities.

A comparison of the standard of living of the working people in the U.S.S.R. and the United States is a very intricate task because of the deep social differences, essential distinctions in the economic and climatic conditions and also national traditions. That is why a thorough analysis of all the main aspects of the life of the working people in the U.S.S.R. and the United States is needed. It cannot, of course, be made in a booklet of this size, but the main tendencies can be indicated.

At present the Soviet Union still lags behind the United States in per capita consumption levels and the general level of per capita real incomes. But the Soviet people already enjoy benefits which are inaccessible to the working people in the capitalist countries. These are the absence exploitation, unemployment, crises and racial or other discrimination. Confidence in the future, free education, free medical aid, low rents, etc. are all very real benefits. All these are elements of the standard of living which ensure the moulding of the finest human traits and the all-around development of each member of communist society.

What are the prospects of the Soviet people as regards the further improvement of their standard of living?

No matter what indices are used in measuring the standard of living in the U.S.S.R. and the United States, the consumption fund in the national income of both countries must be compared. In 1961, the total consumption fund amounted to 233,000 million dollars in the United States and about 115,000 million dollars in the U.S.S.R. i.e 50 per cent of the American level.

consists of plants which manufacture machinery and equipment for heavy industry itself; the second, plants which manufacture machinery and equipment for light industries, for the food industry, for agriculture, housing construction, for cultural and public services.

When the Soviet Union was laying the foundation of a modern heavy industry its efforts were concentrated on developing the first group of plants to the utmost, limiting capital investments in the second group. The situation is now changing radically. In the next twenty years plants of the first group have to increases output six times and of the second group, thirteen times. The development of heavy industry will be increasingly subordinated to the task of raising the material and cultural standards of the people.

Lastly, some foreign economists refer to the high proportion of accumulations in the national income of U.S.S.R.

For many years such accumulations accounted for one-quarter of the national income of the U.S.S.R and consumption, for three-quarters. Between 1950 and 1960 the national income increase 2.7 times, the annual rate of growth being 10.4 per cent. With an unchanging correlation between accumulation and consumption in the national income, this means that the consumption fund and accumulation fund increase annually by 10 per cent and the per capita consumption fund, taking into account the increase of the population, grew by 7-8 per cent annually.

In the United States, according to official figures, the proportion of accumulation is about 10 per cent and the share of consumption 90 per cent. Between 1950 and 1960 the national income increase by 35 per cent, that is, the average annual rate of growth was 3.1 per cent. Consequently, the consumption fund per capita rose annually by about 1 per cent.

In what country is the dynamics of consumption higher-where the proportion of accumulation is 25 per cent of the national income and the per capita consumption fund rises annually by 7-8 per cent as in the U.S.S.R., or in a country like the United States where the accumulation accounts for 10 per cent, but the consumption fund rises on the average by only one per cent? The answer is clear-in the Soviet Union! . .

for this machinery and chemicals-the output of heavy industry, were needed,

The same things are needed for the development of light industry, construction and transport . In the final analysis it is machinery, metals and chemicals that are vital for a country’s development.

The experience of the Soviet Union and other highly industrialized countries shows that the possibility of rapid development of industry and agriculture is directly connected with high rates of growth of  heavy industry.

The Soviet Union is building on a huge scale. Housing construction in the U.S.S.R. has outstripped in volume that in any other country. Clearly all this requires the production of a collosal quantity of machinery, equipment, metal building materials, etc.-the output of heavy industry.

Without a developed heavy industry it is impossible to build up an economy which could give the population the highest living standard in the world, and this is the cardinal aim of industrial development in the U.S.S.R.

Lastly, an analysis of the development of industry in all countries without exception shows that the building up of an industry to meet the country’s requirements, is possible only if heavy industry grows still faster. This is an economic law of development of society irrespective of its social nature. More than that, calculations show that in all industrially developed countries, such as the U.S.S.R. the United States, Britain, West Germany and France, the share of heavy industry in total industrial output is approximately the same, ranging from 60 to 70 percent. The soviet Union is no exception in this respect.

But it is true that the rapid development of heavy industry in the U.S.S.R. leads to a neglect of consumer’s interest? First of all, the correlation of rates of growth in heavy and light industry is constantly changing in the U.S.S.R. Suffice it to examine the following figures to understand the direction of these changes. During the first Five-Year Plan (1928-32) the growth rates of heavy industry were 2.3 times higher than in light industry; during the second Five-Year Plan (1933-37) they were 50 per cent higher, and in 1950-58, 20 per cent higher. Under the Seven-Year Plan (1959-65), as in the next twenty years, this proportion will remain about the same. It should be noted that on the whole Soviet light industry grows five times faster and the food industry four times faster, than those of the      United States.

Not so long ago textiles and footwear were the main branches of light industry. The situation is now changing: ever greater importance is acquired by durable goods: refrigerators, TV sets, washing machines, etc. The production of these goods is growing rapidly and the task has been set of equipping every family with one of each of this machines.

Committee for the Implementation of the Islamic Law Organization (KPPSI) of South Sulawesi. “88 At a meeting of 5,000 people called by Tablik Akbar Muktamar II of the Muslim Youth Front of Surakarta on September 16, 2001, 89 Abu Bakar Bashiyar was reported to have stated that “[the President] Megawati, [Vice President] Hamzah Haz, and the military should thank Osama bin Ladin because Allah has released our burden since his struggle is base on Islamic law and not politics.”90

While the Indonesian Mujahidin Movement and Pasantren Ngruki (anavtivist religious school in cetral Java) operate overtly, JI does so convertly. The first indications of Al Qaeda’s plans to infiltrate Indonesia became known to Indonesian intelligence in 1998, a few months before Sungkar and Bashiyar left Malaysia and return to Indonesia. Letters sent by those two prominent Islamic figures in Indonesia were intercepted. They contained a message from Osama bin Ladin:”that the most important obligation for Muslims nowadays was to work hard in order to free Arabian lands from the grip of the enemy of Allah, specially pointing to American Christians and Jews.”91 Reflecting their relationship to the Al Qaeda leader, Sungkar and Bashiyar also stated in the letter that “they were willing to show the most secure way to visit Osama whenever  the Islamic prominent figures would like to do so.”92 In response, Al Qaeda dispatched a high-powered delegation to the region to enhance ideological influence and operational commitment between Islamist parties and groups. Foreign intelligence agencies reported that Ayman al-Zawahiri and Muhammad Atef visited the Moluccas and Irian Jaya in 2000, both areas affected by long-running conflicts, thus conforming with Al Qaeda’s preference for regrouping in areas where the rule of law is weak.

Of the many operations conducted by Al Qaeda in Indonesia, the millennium bombings on Christmas Eve 2000 are very instructive of their tactics. The campaign of bombings against thirty churches in Jakarta, West Java, North Sumatra, Riau, Bandung, East Java and West Nusatenggara was coordinate with Al Qaeda’s Manila attacks and investigations revealed they were authorised from Malaysia and Afghanistan. The operation was compartmentalised with each cell being responsible for a church or cluster of churches and each unit having access to one bomb factory. The latter were supplied with detonators purchased from Malaysia, which is were their instructions emanated from. Eihgteen people were killed and eighty-two injured in the attacks, though had all the bombs exploded the casualties would have been much higher.93 Because the operations were so well planned the Indonesians at first suggested it had been a military operation. Three Afghan-trained Indonesian -Dedi Muyani, Kolis and Enjang (alias Jabir) were

To this end JI’s regional shura coordinated its support and operational activities with four groups-Kumpulan Militan Malaysia (KMM), Jemaah Islamiyyah  Singapore, the Indonesian Mujahidin Movement and the MILF in the Philippines. With common denominators established, they are suspected of being part of a regional terrorist network operating under the aegis of AL Qaeda’s instrument connecting mainstream and renegade terrorist and guerrilla elements in the region.

The Singapore arrest were the first evidence that Al Qaeda is actively fostering connections between domestic groups and planning to use them for something more than logistics. The subsequent multiple arrest in Malaysia and the Philippines uncovered a large and relatively unknown network of sleeper cells-both support and operational in South East Asia. JI’s regional shura in Malaysia handled training and operational planning not only in JI Malaysia but also in other JI country cells. For instance, after initial ideological and physical instruction in Negri Sembilan, Malaysia, JI Malaysia and Singapore used Afghanistan and Philippines as its main centres for terrorist training. On occasions, Indonesia was also used. Since the early 1990′s JI’s regional shura in Malaysia dispatched at least 100 JI recruits from the region to train in the use of firearms and explosives in Al Qaeda’s Afghan training camps at Khalden, Derunta, Khost, Siddiq and Jihad Wal. In the late 1990′s, operational planning to select targets for attack began, and as well as obtaining fertiliser for making off-the-shelf truck bombs, JI also used the Philippines and Thailand to procure weapons and explosives.

JI’s regional structures appears closely to resemble that of Al Qaeda’s vertical and horizontal organization-with an Emir as the head and shuras in various countries integrated in a regional shura in Malaysia. The 13 people arrested in Singapore all reported to a regional shura in Kuala Lumpur. The units under the regional shura also mirror the worldwide Al Qaeda units in both structure and modus operandi. As in earlier cases, the cells had painstakingly studied potential targets over many years; they planned to conduct coordinated, simultaneous and multiple attacks on symbolic targets; and the profiles of those arrested are remarkably similar to the 9/11 perpetrators-middle class, well educated, trained in Afghanistan, totally committed and methodical in their plans to bomb Western targets. The common denominator among those arrested is neither poverty nor lack of education but a shared religious ideology that depicts the United States as the enemy of Islam and a belief that Allah well reward them for waging a global jihad.

Socialism has offered mankind the only reasonable principle of maintaining relations between states at a time when the world is divided into two systems—the principle of the peaceful coexistence of states with different social systems, put forward by Lenin. Peaceful coexistence of the socialist and capitalist countries is an objective necessity for the development of human society.

War cannot and must not serve as a means of settling international disputes. Peaceful co-existence or disastrous war—such is the alternative offered by history. Should the imperialist aggressors nevertheless venture to start a new world war, the peoples will no longer tolerate a system which drags them into devastating wars. They will sweep imperialism away and bury it.

Peaceful coexistence implies renunciation of war as a means of settling international disputes, and their solution by negotiation; equality, mutual understanding and trust between countries; consideration for each other’s interests; non-interference in internal affairs; recognition of the right of every people to solve all the problems of their country by themselves; strict respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries; promotion of economic and cultural co-operation on the basis of complete equality and mutual benefit.

Peaceful coexistence serves as a basis for the peaceful competition between socialism and capitalism on an international scale and constitutes a specific form of class struggle between them. As they consistently pursue the policy of peaceful coexistence, the socialist countries are steadily strengthening the positions of the world socialist system in its competition with capitalism.

Peaceful coexistence affords more favourable opportuni-ties for the struggle of the working class in the capitalist countries and facilitates the struggle of the peoples of the colonial and dependent countries for their liberation. Support for the principle of peaceful coexistence is also in keeping with the interests of that section of the bourgeoisie which realises that a thermonuclear war would not spare the ruling classes of capitalist society either.

The policy of peaceful coexistence is in accord with the vital interests of all mankind, except the big monopoly magnates and the militarists. The Soviet Union has consistently pursued, and will continue to pursue, the policy of the peaceful coexistence of states with different social systems.

The Communist Party of the Soviet Union advances the following tasks in the field of international relations: to use, together with the other socialist countries, peaceful states and peoples, every means of preventing world war and providing conditions for the complete banishment of war from the life of society.

Winnipeg Hotel Virtual Tours of the Quality Inn Hotel Winnipeg

Winnipeg South Budget Hotel

Winnipeg Hotel Amenities at the Quality Inn Winnipeg Hotel

Tratfor Intelligence

www.tratfor.com

Deutscher believes that under conditions of peaceful coexistence the Soviet Union would present a real challenge to the Capital-ist world. He sees this challenge not merely as an economic rivalry in terms of “who will outproduce whom and when” but also as a contest that might find the U.S.S.R. a strong contender for supremacy on issues such as shorter working hours or enhanced opportunities for advanced education.

Deutscher acknowledges that the West is ahead as far as political freedom is concerned; but even here he foresees prospects for increased freedom in the U.S.S.R. However, Deutscher contends, if the West only “learns to face the future instead of clinging to the past,” it has nothing to fear from the challenge, and it may even gain in the end if and when competitive coexistence gives way to cooperative emulation.

In the first selection under Soviet Views, three Soviet specialists in international law assure the West that the Soviet Union has no subterfuge in mind when she proclaims peaceful coexistence as the cornerstone of her foreign policy. Peaceful coexistence, the authors proclaim, means “inter-national law in action,” means noninterference in one another’s internal affairs, and must exclude any attempt to export revolution or counter-revolution.

And the authors couple a demand for general disarmament with a proclamation of faith in the ultimate victory of Communism over Capitalism. For the past several years, the Soviet leaders have challenged the Capitalist world in general and the United States in particular to an eco-nomic race under conditions of peaceful coexistence to “prove” that their system is superior.

American social scientists may point out that in the field of agriculture the United States simply is not racing since American farmers are already producing more than the American public is able to consume; that the United States does not erect as many new dwelling places per month as the Soviet Union because there is no housing shortage in the U.S.A.; that while there are millions of unemployed at the present time, unemployment compensation, in many instances, is still higher than the income of the Soviet worker who does have a job; and that, after all, the really important difference between the United States and the Soviet Union does not lie in the field of production but in the area of individual freedom.

The United States may be unwilling to accept the challenge al-together—and yet, the race is on. It is on, as far as the uncommitted third of the world is concerned, as far as the hungry lands are concerned, as far as the newly created, less developed nations are concerned. It is on as far as all those impatient hundreds of millions are concerned whose main interest consists in finding the fastest possible way to increase their produc-tive capacity and living standards.

Winnipeg Hotel Virtual Tours of the Quality Inn Hotel Winnipeg

Winnipeg South Budget Hotel

Winnipeg Hotel Amenities at the Quality Inn Winnipeg Hotel

Tratfor Intelligence

www.tratfor.com

It is highly debatable whether or not the Soviet Union ever considered it necessary to spread communism by aggressive war, since Marx had predicted the inevitable collapse of the Capitalist order due to internal “contractions.”  But even if the Soviet Union ever did contemplate aggressive warfare against a Western alliance, the advent of the nuclear age seemed to impose the neces-sity of peaceful coexistence upon both East and West, as the only alternative to a war that could easily end in the total destruction of all contenders.

While there appears to be rather widespread (although by no means unanimous) agreement throughout the world that a nuclear holocaust must be averted at almost any cost, the question of just exactly what the Soviets mean by “peaceful coexistence” is a different matter altogether.

Does it mean that the Soviet Union would oppose any kind of war, even a war of “liberation” of colonial people against the parent country? Does it mean that the Soviet Union has given up the entire idea of the class struggle, the rebellion of the “exploited class” against the “exploiters”? The selections in Part A of this chapter are intended to introduce the reader to different views on what the Soviet Union means by “peaceful coexistence.”

The first selection below has been taken from the official Programme of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, adopted by the 22nd C.P.S.U. Congress in 1961. It represents the official position of the U.S.S.R. on the “principle of the peaceful coexistence of states with different social sys-tems, put forward by Lenin.” Under Western Views, C. M. Woodhouse interprets the Soviet mean-ing of peaceful coexistence as a policy of stirring up trouble by all methods short of a war that would directly involve the Soviet Union. Fedenko, next, attempts to prove that contrary to Soviet declarations Lenin did not really advocate peaceful coexistence as a permanent policy, and that only the awareness of the catastrophic consequences of a nuclear war induced Khru-shchev to retreat from Lenin’s position.

Isaac Deutscher, under Western Marxist Views, although by no means uncritical of the U.S.S.R., offers a considerably more favorable appraisal of Soviet intentions and prospects. He maintains that the Soviet Union appears to have a much greater economic interest in peaceful coexistence than the West since for her the armament race means an irrational waste of resources, while the West seems to view an unproductive expenditure as

The Chinese Communists, incidentally, would agree with Fedenko that IChrushchev’s course of peaceful coexistence almost at any price is quite contrary to Lenin’s teachings.  It should be stressed that Deutscher, while a Marxist, has been a determined opponent of Stalinism for over thirty years; that he was expelled from the Com-munist Party in 1932; that for more than twenty years he has not been affiliated with any political party, group, or sect; and that he, therefore, speaks only for himself.

Winnipeg Hotel Virtual Tours of the Quality Inn Hotel Winnipeg

Winnipeg South Budget Hotel

Winnipeg Hotel Amenities at the Quality Inn Winnipeg Hotel

Tratfor Intelligence

www.tratfor.com

The mid-17^th century showed depicted a clash between the Western-Catholic church and the Easter-Orthodox church.

Gogol was the prominent figure in the Eastern-Orthodox church. He grew up in a family that has been less educated and has not been endowed with a rich intelligence either. He therefore saw his literary talent as a gift from God. He thought early on that he had a calling to be Russia’s spiritual guide. This was further intensified with the tragic death of Pushkin in 1837. Later on, the success of his first volume of Dead Souls further confirmed on him that belief. When the second volume came out, it was full of didactic tendencies and exhortations. It was unappealing to many. It was like that his talent was running out.

He was aware of what was happening to him. He then chose to intensify his religious moods and attempted to influence people as their didactic moral teacher.  Later on he wrote “Selected Passages from Correspondence with My Friends”. It was an irritating work with a narrow Orthodox sense. His flirtations with the official Church and official Russia had a reactionary lining which cause consternation among the Westerners and the Slavophiles alike. The letter sent by Belinsky to Gogol was exactly how the Westerners thought of Gogol.

Belinsky belonged to a secularized civilization. His concept of Russia Salvation depended on progress of civilization and growth of human dignity. He didn’t believe in the doctrine of the Orthodox Church, who had always been a flatterer of despotism. He is angered at the tight connection of Christ and the Church that Gogol wants to impress upon. He said that Christ was so pure and a champion of human equality and freedom meanwhile the Church became so dogmatic, hierarchic and had been a defender of inequality and of power.

The distinction between Chaadayev and Gogol is thus made clearer. Chaadayev was from the Western-Catholic while Gogol from the Russian-Orthodox Church. Both were interested in reuniting culture with religion.

Since Belinsky came from a different organization his perspectives were in disagreement with both.

Gogol hurt by Belinsky’s letter wrote a reply. Some of his words were, “you say that salvation of Russia consists in European civilization, but what an immense and limitless word this is! Had you at least defined what one ought to understand by the name of European Civilization? We find it in all sorts of phalanteres… – all of them are ready to tear up each other and all of them full of destructive, principles that each thinking mind troubles in Europe and keeps asking: Where is our civilization?”

Chaadayev and Gogol represent two widely divergent opinions towards the West as well as towards Russia. The quasi-religious outlet championed by Gogol had repelled not only those who had liked his literary work but also the Slavophiles. It was Lewinsky’s Westernism that prevailed among the Russian Intelligentsia.

Winnipeg Hotel Virtual Tours of the Quality Inn Hotel Winnipeg

Winnipeg South Budget Hotel

Winnipeg Hotel Amenities at the Quality Inn Winnipeg Hotel

Tratfor Intelligence

www.tratfor.com

The story of the Slav cause is a story of various men who fought with intellect, undying will and love for their cause. Yury Samarin was among those who championed the freedom of the serfs. In 1857 he joined an organization that serves to abolish the system of serfdom. They were badly demoralized upon the death of Konstantin Aksakov.

His brother, Ivan Aksakov, had no hesitation filling-in the role that his brother Konstantin left unfinished. Ivan has been passionate in the pursuit of the cause. He began writing and his works were intense. He was considered as the most enterprising political journalist of the group. His eloquence was superb which drove a lot of interest to many readers. His editorial skills were frail. At times he would write good stuff other times the material were not that great. It was after the Crimean War that he got editing help from Samarin. They establish the newspaper called Den (The Day). The content was most of the time unappealing to the authorities. Their constant attack soon forced authorities to order their closure in 1865. Another newspaper he put up in 1867, Muskvale (Moscow), was also closed down. The last remaining part of his life was spent in the Russ (The Russian Land). He did the editing on his own. The newspaper ran from 1880 to 1885. It was also during this period that he worked on his major literary work. It was a biography of his father-in-law, the poet Tyuchev.

His most prominent contribution to the Slav Propaganda happened in the years 1877-1878. His voice was something to listen to. He championed the liberation of the Balkan Slavs from the Turks. This led some Bulgarians to find interest in putting him in the throne.

Winnipeg Hotel Virtual Tours of the Quality Inn Hotel Winnipeg

Winnipeg South Budget Hotel

Winnipeg Hotel Amenities at the Quality Inn Winnipeg Hotel

Tratfor Intelligence

www.tratfor.com