Notes on the Greek Civil War (1946-1949) - Some Reflections

by Costas Pateras*
Cde Aleka Papariga in her address to the memorial referred to the questions that are asked of the KKE's decision to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the formation of the Democratic Army of Greece:

"Why do we "stir-up" memories, why do we again bring this particular struggle into the public discourse, a struggle which some have baptised a "bandit-war" and others criticise as a civil war of heartbreak for both sides?"

Of course firstly there is the issue of honouring the militants who fought in the ranks of the DAG: those who were killed, imprisoned, tortured and exiled during the Civil war and the years which followed. To underline the sacrifices that these ordinary men and women made in the struggle for democracy, national independence and socialism. And on the other hand to remember the Anglo-American imperialist intervention, their puppet governments, the prison islands such as Makronissos, ruling class violence and intransigence. This in itself is enough, but of course flowing from there are various issues, which have a crucial importance in the world today.

It is an opportunity to counter the rewriting of history, smears and lies, which have characterised the dominant (i.e. ruling class) discourse on this struggle for 60 years. The language of the Right is instructive. The DAG was "foreign led", "Bulgarian", "Bandits" amongst other things. This more obvious ideological attack has gone hand in hand with historiography of opportunists and social-democrats which dwells on and distorts the real and imagined mistakes of the DAG and KKE, underplays the importance of imperialist intervention in Greece and the level of violence directed against the people's movement. This approach seeks to disorientate progressive people, and prevent them from trying to seek a radical change. In light of there is an urgent need to re-emphasise the fact the DAG's struggle that it was the continuation of the democratic anti-imperialist one of EAM against the fascist occupation, this time against Anglo-American imperialism and their domestic collaborators, to explain to the people the real reasons for the Civil war; particularly in light of the renewed anti-communism, an example of which was the recent motion passed by the Council of Europe.

As the period of the most intense class struggle yet in Greek History, the study of experiences and lessons of the Greek Civil War is invaluable for the people's movement today. Mistakes which were made can be properly analysed in their full historical context, the true nature of domestic reaction and imperialism, the forms of struggle necessary, the development of institutions of popular power in liberated areas, the ideological work carried out amongst the ranks of the fighters etc.

After the counter-revolutions in the USSR and the socialist countries of Eastern Europe, Imperialism has entered a new, more aggressive phase. The compromises of yesteryear have been ditched, liberated from the restraining influence of the socialist bloc. This has meant new colonial wars, and ferocious attacks on the democratic and social rights of the working class everywhere. Of course the peoples resist, whether it be fighting against occupation in Lebanon, Palestine and Iraq, maintaining democratic and anti-imperialist governments such as Venezuela, or continuing their socialist development as Cuba does, and the struggles of the working class everywhere against capitalist restructuring. The imperialist powers use every diplomatic and military approach necessary to crush resistance - still falling short of success in it.

This goes hand in hand with an ideological battle to criminalize those who resist and fight back as "terrorists" and discourage others from following the path of struggle. Going even beyond they now speak of the "need to combat extremist ideas and organizations". Workers' and people's movements, national liberation movements and struggles are being defamed, and a pharisaic "humanism" is being called in order to present their armed fighters as flagrant terrorists and murderers. And this when the state terrorism of the capitalist states escalates both domestically against their own working class as well as against other people and countries, using all means, political, diplomatic and military ones, attributing unprecedented levels and new class characteristics to the imperialist state violence.

Bourgeoisie propaganda is aiming constantly and consistently against the class struggle, irrespectively of the forms it may assume, spotting it as obsolete and harmful for the people's interests. Along with it, they try to slander the most high and noble ideas that humanity has known, that are the communist ideas and aims.

It is worth noting that at the same time arguments supporting the "class conciliation", the "social dialog" among the so-called "social partners" abound. The class collaboration is being projected as the means to deal with the "modern challenges", as the way leading to social progress.

One common argument used by the bourgeoisie is that asserting the right of the working class and its allies to use violence is extreme. They hide the fact that the violence of the people's movement is used defensively against the violence of the ruling class, while at the same time they pursue to cloak the violence of the bourgeois state, of its institutions and machinery. The same is true regarding the multi-faceted violence that capitalists extend on the workers at the workplaces. When imperialist armies occupy countries, or send phalanxes of riot police to smash picket lines, how should the people's movement respond? They want to divert people from asking the basic question about power, which Bertolt Brecht pithily expressed "Whose tomorrow is tomorrow- Whose world is the world?"

In this respect reformist and opportunist viewpoints converge with imperialist ideology, something also present in discussions about "non-violence". Certain forces, particularly around the "European left party", not only have come to the conclusion that the armed struggle has become obsolete, but they even dispute the legitimacy of this form of struggle. They do not only rule out the use of force in the class struggle domestically but openly criticize peoples who are resisting imperialist military attacks. In the context of the increased aggressiveness of imperialism today, calling on the movements to refrain from using every possible method of struggle, is in fact a compromise with imperialism: a basic characteristic of opportunism. This is also evident from the stance these forces take on the deployment of troops to Afghanistan, the participation of their countries in the new UN occupation force to be deployed in Lebanon etc.

A similar argument is the one arguing of "armed struggle as the last resort". This seems on the surface to be reasonable but both experience and reality refute it. Proponents of this position tend to undialectically pose mass peaceful work against the armed activity of elitist partisan groups, posing the moral superiority of non-violence. By posing the question as a moral one, the implication is that if one can successfully organise a demonstration then it is wrong to carry out armed actions as well. In fact in periods of heightened class struggles all forms of struggle can be used, from strikes to guerrilla warfare. The experiences of the resistance movements in Europe in World War 2 illustrate this, including the Greek civil war. In these situations it is dangerous to prevaricate (a danger implicit in this slogan). The peoples' movement has no option but to act decisively to counter ruling class violence, in order to bring about a favourable conclusion.

This line also promotes the illusion of the possibility that the bourgeois class whether in its own country, or when in occupation of another nation, will happily surrender power to the people's movement. There cannot be a "sharing" of power, nor can be possible an "intermediate" or "third" way in favour of the people's interests. This was not at least the experience of the communist and national liberation movements in the 20th century. Some of the basic conclusions KKE has drawn while critically assessing its activity from 1944 to 1947 are around these very points. The history of our movement is littered with salutary warnings, as well as with fake expectations that ended quickly in disillusionment, capitulation and incorporation, as was the case of the various infamous centre-left projects.

In remembering today the struggle of the Democratic Army of Greece, we assert the right of peoples to resist imperialism, and decide their own futures. The heroic resistance of the Lebanese people to the US-backed Israeli invasion and the big solidarity movement that rose, as well as the role played of the communists in these, show that resistance to the so-called "New World Order" is both possible and necessary.

However, as long as a distinct communist movement does not emerge strong and capable to conduct a strategic counter-attack, the popular movements, the emerging progressive radical forces will be more vulnerable to confusion and disorientation.

The developments have refuted those claiming the "end of history" and the "inevitable demise" of Marxism-Leninism and the communist parties. On the contrary, the facts themselves highlight the indispensable role of communist parties, the socialism as the only alternative to the capitalist barbarity.

*Costas Pateras is an associate of the International Section of KKE