…  the Cellules Communistes Combattantes / Fighting Communist Cells were active in Belgium in 1984 and 1985, carrying out around 27 actions … what follows below are a few mainstream media pieces, CCC communiques and interviews …

  1. “The New Terror Network: Small Groups Of Political Renegades Are Hitting NATO Targets In Western Europe”, Newsweek, February 11 1985ccc9
  2. “Triple C”, The Never-Ending War: Terrorism in the 80s
  3. “Fighting Communist Cells: Belgian Guerrillas Target NATO,” Resistance, No. 9, 1985
  4. “On Armed Struggle,” CCC communique, April 1985
  5. “Concrete Answers To Concrete Questions,” CCC communique, April 1985
  6. “Bombing of the Bank of America in Antwerp,” CCC communique,  4 December 1985
  7. “To The Workers And Comrades In France, CCC communique, 6 December 1985
  8. “Interview With 4 Militants Of The CCC, Le Peuple, April 1987
  9. “Interview With The CCC Prisoners Collective”, Anarchist Black Cross Gent, June 1998
  10. “From The Prisoners of the CCC To The Prisoners From The PCE(r) and GRAPO…”, January 1990

The New Terror Network

Small Groups Of Political Renegades Are Hitting NATO Targets In Western Europe

Newsweek, February 11, 1985

Just before dawn one morning last week,  a young woman rang the doorbell at the  home of Ernst Zimmermann, a West  German industrialist whose firm makes  engines for NATO’s raflogoTornado jets. When Mrs. Zimmermann answered, the woman said she had a letter for her husband and  needed a signed receipt. Zimmermann came to the door. Suddenly a man with a submachine gun jumped from behind a shrub. The intruders barged into the house and tied up the couple. Then they took Zimmermann into a bedroom and pumped a bullet into his head. A few hours later an anonymous caller phoned a Munich news­paper. The caller said that Zimmermann had been killed by the left-wing Red Army Faction (RAF) – in league with a shadowy alliance called “the West European guerrilla movement.”

The West German press has given it an-other name: “The New Terrorists.” Over the past few months three groups – West Germany’s RAF, France’s Direct Action, (AD) and Belgium’s Fighting Communist Cells (CCC)-have attacked scores of: NATO and other defense-related targets across northern Europe. They appear to have formed a looseadsymbol working alliance; they , may also have links to Italian, Portuguese; Dutch and Middle Eastern terrorists, Compared with the Baader-Meinhof Gang and the Red Brigades of the. 1970s, this generation of political renegades is still small and inexperienced, But t~eit -fervent anti-militarism=-fueled by the deployment of U.S. Pershing II and cruise missiles in Europe has drawn committed recruits. And with the shooting of Zimmermann and the recent murder of a French general, they have moved their campaign from attacking defense installations to killing top officials.

In hindsight, the first sign of the new wave of terror seemed to have come last June with the theft of a cache of explosives from a quarry near Brussels. But it gathered force in the fall. In Italy several groups claimed responsibility for the bombing of an express train, bound from Naples to Milan, that killed 15 passengers and wounded more than 150. In Paris, Direct Action bombed the Atlantic Institute, a pro-NATO think tank. Later AD attacked a French Defense Ministry research center and tried to blow up the headquarters of the Western Europe­an Union. Briefly things quieted down. Then the CCC launched its own offensive. It bombed the offices of the U.S.-based Honeywell firm in Belgium, then a NATO fuel pipeline, then a U.S. military facility near Brussels. Since the beginning of December the RAF has carried out some 30 arson and bomb attacks, including an attempt on a NATO officer’s school in Oberammergau. Among other aims, the West German terrorists are supporting a hunger strike by 30 RAF prisoners who have demanded to be housed together and given POW status.

ccc9Hideaway: Signs of cooperation among the three groups have become increasingly apparent. Since the quarrey robbery, the RAF, Action Directe and the CCC are each believed to have use some of the stolen explosives in separate attacks. Before the Belgian terrorists attacked the NATO pipeline, maps of the facility were found during a raid on a West German hideaway. The CCC has dedicated one of its bombings to the RAF. And on Jan. 15, the RAF and the AD announced the formation of a “Political-Military Front in Western Europe” to attack NATO targets.

Ten days later the merger was inaugurated with the murder of Brig. Gen. Rene Audran, director of arms sales at the French Defense Ministry. At about 8 p.m. on Jan. 25 a woman with a German accent phone Audran’s house in La Celle-Saint-Cloud, a Paris suburb. Audran’s daughter, Marie-Helene, said her father would be home in an hour. When Audran backed his gray Renault 20 up to the gate at 8:50 p.m. a gunman stepped out of the shadows, opened the car door and fired eight shots from a Colt .45. The general was found sprawled across the front seat. Neighbours reported seeing three men running from the scene.

A letter to the Paris bureau of the Deutsche Presse-Agenter claimed responsibility in the name of both Direct Action and the RAF. It accused Audran of being “at the heart of the homogenization of the European states under the control of NATO.” The letter was written in both French and German, but the German was better – a clue that the RAF was in charge. French authorities were also investigating the possibility of Middle Eastern involvement. Audran oversaw French arms sales to Iraq; thus either Iran or Syria may have wanted him out of the way. France has thousands of North African guest workers, and Middle Eastern terrorists can easily slip into the country on Algerian or Moroccan passports. A Soviet connection was also a possibility, although most French officials believe that Moscow was only giving passive encouragement to the anti-NATO attacks.

With the Zimmerman killing, the terrorists confirmed the escalation of their undeclared war. Zimmerman was the head of the Moteren und Turbinen Union, West Germany’s RAFSoliBreakthrough (2)largest jet-engine manufacturer; he was also head of the West German Aerospace and Armaments Industry Association. The main suspects in his shooting were Bernhard Lotze, 27, an RAF veteran and Barbara Meyer, 28, a recent recruit. Police disclosed that Zimmerman’s name appeared on a “hit list” found during a raid on a RAF safe house in Frankfurt last year. The list named dozens of officials including Chancellor Helmut Kohl and his predecessor, Helmut Schmidt. Until last week the list was not taken terribly seriously. But now authorities fear the RAF may go after other leaders – especially if the RAF hunger strikers, now in their eighth week without food, start to die.

On paper at least, none of the three main terrorist groups looks very formidable. Direct Action is thought to have only 30 active members, and 19 of them are behind bars. Most RAF members are also in jail; West German police estimate they have fewer than 20 activists at large and perhaps 100 sympathizers prepared to hide them. Little is known about the CCC but its ranks are believed to be thin, too. The three groups have also shown signs of inexperience – especially the RAF. The bomb at the NATO school in Oberammergau didn’t go off because whoever put the 60 pounds of high explosive in the trunk of a silver Audi left the timer on “stop.”. More recently, RAF member Johannes Thimme tried to blow up a Stuttgart computer center by hiding a bomb in a baby carriage. The bomb went off – but it killed only Thimme and injured his accomplice Claudia Wannerdorfer.

German police, in fact, tend to refer to the new terrorists as “the babies.” But officials across Europe are both impressed and dismayed by the dedication and daring of the new generation. “They seem to be even more strongly indocrinated politically than the veterans, who have been underground for years,” says Heinrich Boge, director of the Federal Criminal Office in Wiesbaden. They tend to rely on a strong cell structure, and do not depend on charismatic leaders to hold their groups together.

Murky: And the new terrorists have compensated for their weaknesses with closer coordination. Contact among the RAF, AD and CCC is thought to be limited; they probably have no central command and may only communicate through individual cells. But they have clearly pooled intelligence, resources and manpower. There is also evidence of alliances – of interests at least – with other terrorist groups. Italian terrorists are often spotted in France, last year AD leader Jean-Marc Rouillan is believed to have hidden in an apartment rented by a member of Italy’s Prima Linea. Recently, the Red Brigades symbol, a five-pointed star, has shown up on CCC communiques. Two Dutch terrorist groups – Onkruit and the Red Resistance Front – have vowed “hard actions” against Western Defense targets. And in Portugal, a murky group called FP-25 has also launched it’s own campaign. Last week it fired shells at six NATO ships in Lisbon Harbour. Two days later it exploded eight bombs near a West German Air Force training ground in southern Portugal.

BR3 (2)

The wave of attacks has prompted fresh criticism that some European governments have been less than vigorous in dealing with the terrorist threat. In France, Audran’s murder stirred anger among conservatives, who recalled that in 1981 President Francois Mitterand had unconditionally pardoned the two imprisoned leaders of Action Directe – Rouillan and Nathalie Menignon. Freeing the pair, the right-wing daily Le Figaro charged, made atrocities like Audran’s assassination “predictable, even inevitable.”

Others have chided the French government for its willingness to grant sanctuary to political refugees from around the world. Although France signed the European Convention on Suppression of Terrorism in 1977, it has yet to ratify the pact formally. “The French do not feel bound to extradite terrorists,” says Prof. Paul Wilkinson, a leading expert on terrorism at Britain’s University of Aberdeen. “The country has now become the natural base area of people who have fled from justice in other countries.”

Computers: French officials argue that the country should not renounce its long – and mostly honourable – tradition of providing asylum for political refugees. But even authorities in Paris acknowledge that many of those emigres may be involved in terrorism. Part of the problem is that France is lagging behind in surveillance and crime-busting technology. In contrast to West Germany antiterrorist agents who have access to 2.5 million index cards on potential suspects that can be called up on 2,500 terminals around the country, French police have only 70,000 cards on 40 computers. Still, there are signs that the French are beginning to toughen up security. Despite harsh criticism from left-wing members of his own Socialist Party, Mitterand agreed last summer to extradite three Basques to Spain to face murder charges. And in a speech last week he vowed that “France will refuse protection, direct and indirect terrorist acts of bloodshed.”

West German authorities have taken far tougher steps to combat terrorism. The country has an elite antiterrorist unit known as the GSG-9 squad that can be quickly deployed in crisis situations. As part of an effort to keep tabs on potential troublemakers, officials have developed a network of paid informants – and a chillingly thorough system of national surveillance. Not long ago West Germans were surprised to learn that police have a television camera trained full time on the new kiosk at the main railroad station in Frankfurt. The reason: authorities theorized that the kiosk would be a natural stop for traveling terrorists. In fact there are thousands of such cameras monitoring strategic public spots all over Germany. The police are even trained to recognize better-known terrorists through flashcard drills.

Not all of West Germany’s security measures have been applauded, however. any civil CCCd (2)libertarians worry that in its zeal to crack down on terrorists, the Bonn government may limit the rights of ordinary citizens. As evidence they cite the case three years ago of a policeman who thought he had spotted Christian Klar, one of the leaders of the RAF, in a speed-trap photo. Tracking the license number on the car, police broke into the house of the suspect and arrested him. But the young man turned out to be a student who bore only a vague resemblance to Klar. The outcry over that episode has helped delay the implementation of a nationwide system of computer-readable identity cards that would enable police to make spot checks of citizens.

Officials in Washington worry that U.S. military and diplomatic personnel in Europe may become even more tempting targets for terrorists.  Curbing the threat, however, will not be easy. Robert Kupperman, a terrorism expert at Georgetown University’s Center for Strategic and International studies, believes that penetrating the various terrorist organizations should be one of the top priorities for Western intelligence. Contrary to the notion that American officials should be virtually isolated in high-security fortresses, Kupperman suggests that diplomats should try to blend in more with the local population to avoid being obvious targets.

It is the cross-border nature of the threat, however, that has hit European antiterrorist forces where they are the weakest – in shared intelligence. Lack of international legal codes is one problem; conflicting extradition procedures is another. “Let’s face it,” says the University of Aberdeen’s Wilkinson. “It is difficult to get Europeans to work together on simple problems such as bread and wine, let alone on such a problem as this.”

But faced with the latest wave of violence, authorities across Europe are bound to step up antiterror measures. Already security has been strengthened at U.S. and NATO facilities in Belgium and Portugal. New rewards have been offered for RAF terrorists in West Germany. And it Italy, officials are talking about an antiterror campaign to rival the recent joint U.S-Italian efforts against the Mafia. How successful all this will be, however, remains to be seen. The thrill of violence, combined with the politics of destruction, has always held a strong attraction for many young Europeans. And if nothing else, the new terrorists have proved that terror’s deadly appeal is very much alive.

Triple C


“The Never-Ending War: Terrorism in the 80s”

ccc9Brussels is not just the capital of Belgium; it has also become the first city of the European Community and seat of  the international bureaucracy of government. Furthermore,  within a few miles of the city and close to the airport are  located the administration offices of the North Atlantic  Treaty Organization, and the military ones of the Supreme  Headquarters, Allied Powers in Europe (SHAPE). In these  establishments the United States and its friends and allies in  the West plan and coordinate their military measures to discourage the real red army, the armed forces of the Soviet  Union, from ever daring to launch an assault upon the old  continent.

It is hardly necessary to say more than that to explain why Brussels in particular, and Belgium in general, are targets of high attraction for the raggle-taggle red armies of European terror. As we have shown, the international gangs of the 1980s are geared to hatred of militarism, and what they are  pleased to call the Americanization of Europe. It ought not therefore to have come as an amazing surprise when in 1984 that country’s peace and quiet was suddenly disturbed by a series of bomb explosions and terrorist outrages. But it did.

It was known that the reactivated Action Directe in France made frequent use of the friendly open frontiers of Belgium. Both Rouillan and Nathalie Menigon had often hoppedADCollage (2) across them, using the neighbor country as a kind of fall-back base. When Belgian police, alerted from Paris, waited to arrest the “infernal couple,” an officer was seized at gunpoint and his car hijacked to make their escape. But apparently they were then able to live undisturbed in the Brussels suburb of Ixelle, though a few of their suspected anarchist supporters did go underground. Until then, the Belgian extreme left, though active in pamphleteering, had kept clear of violence.

Indeed, Belgium had been relatively terror-free, apart from the attentions of outside groups. The most notable attack was in 1979, when an attempt was made on the life of General Haig, NATO supreme commander. Even after that the authorities thought it prudent not to seem overzealous, hoping that if they made no vigorous response the country might escape the worst of terrorist attacks being suffered by neighboring countries. As a result of this attitude Belgium became the refuge base for a number of organizations such as GARI, the international anarchist movement and then of ETA, the Basque group whose emissaries often traveled to Brussels to buy weapons on the black market. German RAF people and Irish terrorists from the IRA, not to mention various Arab groups, operated from time to time within the country.

Nevertheless the Belgian authorities seemed to have no idea that a new native group was springing up from within. The first indication was the now-famous armed raid upon Scouffleny quarry at Ecaussines in June 1984. The marauders got away with a great quantity of explosives and detonators, shared out for use later in the European terrorist campaign. Some of the explosive was FIS, a plastic mix of high power.

The new Belgian terror group that had come into action called itself CCC, the fighting lignerougecovercommunist cells. Its first communique, bearing a symbolic five-pointed red star which was the same as that shared by the Italian Red Brigades and by Action Directe, announced that it was beginning “the armed struggle against the imperialist bourgeoisie.” The rhetoric of Ligne Rouge, its publication printed on a clandestine anti-imperialist press, resembled in style those of AD. It featured communiques and terrorist bulletin board under the heading “News from the Front.” But there was also a strong local element of political news which showed a clear and up-to-date grasp of political events in Belgium. In a statement its leaders explained, “Revolutionary guerrilla actions are never directed against the people, but always against the enemies of the people,” which of course meant that they felt confident to decide who were the enemies of the people.

Despite the bold words, it seemed at first as though the CCC had been set up as a logistic structure with the task of providing arms and explosives for more active co-groups. They were known to be getting liaison help from a strange anarchist body known by the peculiar, catch-all title Bakounin-Gdansk (Bakunin the nineteenth-century terrorist, and Gdansk, the home of the Polish Solidarity movement) whose main platform was to oppose Western defense policies. Before long that judgment had to be revised as tougher spirits took control and Belgians went into action on their own account.

In October attacks were made on the office in Belgium of companies working in the defense industry, and over the following few months CCC was responsible for 14 eye-catching incidents. The list of raids showed the increasing ambitions of an organization which gave every sign of being well-structured and directed. The first six were bombCCCE (2) attacks against the offices of multi-national companies and Belgian political parties. Then on December 11, 1984 came more spectacular action against NATO fuel lines passing from the ports into Germany to supply allied armies in case of Soviet assault. The scope of the bombing operations was shown by the fact that within an hour six bombs had been positioned in a district 30 miles by 60.

Some of the pumping stations chosen for the attacks were marked by signposts to indicate that they were used for both military and civilian purposes. But it was noteworthy that CCC blew up only the exclusively military pipeline installations-no doubt in order to justify its claim to be a fighting army, though its actions also demonstrated the quality of intelligence information available to its leaders. Before attacks ever took place, German security men raiding an apartment used by the RAF in Frankfurt found plans of the
NATO pipeline which they thought might have been obtained from an American base with bad security. It was a discovery which showed the terror groups to be capable of joint staff work and reconnaissance. In the words of Jean Gol, Belgian minister of justice, “We are not dealing with amateurs.”

Until the beginning of 1985 CCC attacks had not put people at risk. However, when they parked a stolen car packed with explosive, and detonated it outside a U.S. Army administrative building, two American soldiers barely escaped injury.

To mark this climax to the first stage of their anti-imperialist campaign, a special communique was issued.

“This morning’s action is the most complex and the most offensive which we have so far mounted. The obvious importance of the objective determined our decision to launch our first attack which might have wounded or killed Yankee soldiers and their accomplices. ”

In simultaneously announcing the start of a new campaign, it declared, “Human life is not an obstacle in itself. There is nothing sacred about it.”

These events at last goaded the Belgian authorities into counteraction as they launched “Operation Mammoth,” a series of police raids involving thousands of officers. The former policy of deliberately refusing to arrest terrorists so long as they did not attack targets CCC12 (2)within the country was abandoned overnight. The only trouble was that now the authorities could not find any terrorists to arrest. In an attempt to reassure the public the police presence on the streets was suddenly trebled, as the police force spent almost half its annual budget in one month. The government also began drafting a prevention of terrorism act similar to the British one.

A special antiterrorist squad, the 30-strong Groupe de repression de terrorism, was reactivated. It had been set up as a gesture towards reassuring public opinion after an earlier terrorist incident, but since then had not shown much sign of activity.

Like the French, the Belgians divide responsibility for action against terrorists between police and gendarmes. At the time in the early 1970s when all European governments were setting up special forces in the backwash of the Munich affair the Brussels government designated a special gendarme unit for hostage-release operations. The very existence of this unit, code-named “Diane,” was kept secret, and its commanders, Captain Lemignouse and Lieutenant Lievin, were forbidden to speak publicly about their force. It was modeled on the German GSG 9 to operate in action groups of five men each, and it had been trained to the highest European standards. Unlike most similar units, the Belgian one also has its own intelligence group trained for electronic surveillance work. Its members dress in plainclothes and have at their disposal a mobile laboratory.

“Diane” gets its recruits from a special gendarmerie unit, the Legion Mobile, which is responsible for the security of the Belgian government, and also for the international organizations which have their headquarters in Brussels. It has 1,000 men.

Operation Mammoth, despite the wide scope of its raids in Belgian left-wing circles, was a failure. Little new information emerged from the interrogation of more than 150 people pulled in for questioning and then released. The only positive result was to demonstrate that their number-one suspect as CCC leader was a man named Pierre Carette.

Carette was born in the mining district of Charleroi in 1952. He became known as an “antiimperialist printer” while studying at the Beaux Arts in Brussels, where he helped to produce various left-wing publications. He drew himself to the attention of the police through being among troublemakers who invariably resorted to violence during otherwise peaceable street marches and demonstrations. It was noticed that his pamphlets praised Belgian miners in their 1983 strike, and in Brussels he was active in setting up a support group for West German RAF prisoners.

In 1982 he had a road accident while driving in France on the Autoroute du Nord with Nathalie Menigon in his car. In the damaged vehicle police found 15,000 Direct Action pamphlets, most of them printed by him. In the same year he was distributing ADLogo1 (2) revolutionary review called Subversion to local radio stations. Careful examination of such literature provided fascinating hints about Carette’s connection with terrorist outrages. For example, Subversion drew attention to an attack on the Litton Corporation in Toronto. One of the first CCC actions was an attack on the corporation’s Brussel office. Did this mean that the idea of selecting it as a target had come from Carette?

The Belgian police, fumbling for clues, were left speculating about such minimal indications as pressure increased for them to do something. That is why they issued such a jubilant victory bulletin just before Christmas 1985 announcing that they had at last succeeded in arresting four suspects, including Pierre Carette. He was picked up with the other armed men at an address at Namur, 30 miles from Brussels, in the aptly named rue de L’inquietude. By that time CCC had carried out with impunity 27 bomb attacks upon international companies, banks and NATO installations.

The marked increase in terrorist incidents in Western Europe, and especially the fact that the perpetrators singled out NATO installations, provided a warning that more was to come. Belgium was not the only new country to be affected, and other groups made their appearance on the scene apart from the Franco-German Belgian alliance. Not a single European country has escaped the attentions of terrorists owing allegiance to one alliance or another. There have been outrages in Portugal, Greece, Austria and the Netherlands,
where a demonstrating group wrecked a train, and even in neutral Switzerland, where the so-called “autonomes” have blasted off their devices in Zurich and in Berne, the capital.

In January 1985 an organization calling itself FP-25t (Forcas Populares 25 de Abril) mortared NATO warships in the harbor at Lisbon. Only a week later an extremist group in Greece bomb-blasted a cafe near a U.S. air base outside Athens, injuring 70 American servicemen and 8 others. The confused state of affairs in the Greek capital makes it difficult to discover for certain who did it.

NATO itself took a surprisingly relaxed view of the dangers of the attacks in the territories of member states, which were dismissed as simply imitative ones brought on by publicity.fp25one-2-1
West Germany, hardened by long experience of terror campaigns, was less sanguine about the state of affairs in Portugal. In January FP-25 blew up 15 cars belonging to Germans at their training base in the town of Beja, and there were attacks on other military installations as well as upon NATO headquarters in Lisbon. The actual lobbing of mortar bombs towards the warships was a feeble affair, but the FP-25 communique taking responsibility echoed the language and declared aims of the other European movements. It wanted “to combat imperialism and capitalism, and to get Portugal out of the orbit of NATO and the super-powers.”

The Portuguese movement set up shop in 1980 with a fireworks display of 110 small bombs and a ritual announcement on paper bearing the ritual red star and automatic rifle: “A revolutionary army has been formed to overthrow the capitalist dictatorship and those of the old fascist regime now returning to power.” For its title it seized upon the date of the outbreak of the “revolution of the carnations” of April 25 1974 when the Portuguese armed
forces overthrew the old-established right-wing dictatorship.

In five years of activity the group has bombed a variety of targets, many of them commercial, and its members have mortared the U.S. embassy. It claims to have murdered 10 people. When in response to these outrages the security police arrested 73 suspected members and supporters of FP-25, they caused a sensation by also pulling in Lieutenant-Colonel Otelo Saraiva de Carvalho, one of the best-known leaders of the successful 1974 revolution, who was at that time something of a national hero. With his arrest, preparations for the trial became an important political issue in Portugal. Although he denied it, the prosecution alleged that his left-wing Popular United Front not only shared the ideals of FP-25 but also had links with the terrorist organization.

The trial, which had been due to begin in the summer of 1985 in a high-security court in Lisbon, specially built at a cost of half a million dollars, was postponed. A key witness for
the prosecution was Jose Rosa Barradas, who was himself a repentant terrorist. However, Barradas was shot seven times, and died of his wounds some weeks later. FP-25 promptly announced that they were responsible. There was a notable reluctance among jurors to take their place in court, and fear of reprisals persuaded some to pay a $1,000 fine rather than take the risk.

The most confusing terrorist hotbed in Europe is in Athens, which claims to be the birthplace of Western civilization. In the strong words of Constantine Mitsotakis, leader of the conservative opposition party New Democracy, the country has been transformed “into a hospitable den for international terrorism where the law of the jungle reigns supreme.” In a party statement he declared: “In the past two years bomb attacks and murders have been aimed at celebrities, political persons and newspapers.” Naturally, he blamed the socialist regime of Andreas Papandreou, the prime minister. There is
no shortage of highly placed Western security and intelligence people who would agree with him on this point.

Athens in fact has become a sort of transit camp for terrorists of all kinds. The intelligence estimate is that no fewer than 10 Arab and Islamic groups have their representatives installed in Athens. Some of their activities are described in another part of this book and it is generally believed that the Greek government has an arrangement with some of them that so long as they do no harm to specifically Greek targets, they will not be interfered with. The new European terrorists have also made use of this crossroads of Europe and the Middle East for their own purposes, and there are also local Greek terrorist bands which sometimes work in cooperation with them. The most notable of these is an extreme-left organization known as “November 17”-another of those date-names, this one in honor of a student killed in a demonstration. It first declared itself after the murder of Richard17November Welch, the Athens station chief of the CIA, and has also killed an American naval officer, two police officers and a prominent Greek newspaper publisher. Its statements are full of hatred for that well-known target “American imperialism,” and declarations that it advocates what is called a violent shortcut to true socialism. Whether or not this home-produced urban guerrilla group is strongly connected to the red armies of Western Europe is a matter of debate. However, when a 13-lb. device was planted near the West German embassy this action was claimed by people describing themselves as “friends of the Red Army Faction,” and that may provide a clue.

Because they are few in number but expert in living the clandestine existence, the new terrorists easily exploit the frontiers of Europe to meet up on the “old-boy network of violence.” They come together for a while, then move on to form new cells and make fresh brutal mischief. Among the most skilled of the frontier-jumpers are the multifarious groups of Italian terrorists, some of which have been active for more than two decades.

Fighting Communist Cells:

Belgian Guerillas Target NATO

from Resistance, No. 9, 1985

ccc9Ittre, December 11, 1984: A violent explosion shatters the calm of a cold winter dawn in the Belgian countryside. Minutes later, a wall of flames 150 metres high reaches into the sky from the twisted wreckage of an isolated pumping station in NATO’s military pipeline. Though firefighters arrive almost immediately, the intense heat keeps them at a distance from the blaze and renders their tools useless.

Even as reinforcements pour in from the firefighting units of neighbouring towns, a second explosion is reported, near the town of Gastuche-Archennes. Then a third explosion, this one near Ensival. It is 6:30 AM, only an hour since the Ittre explosion.

cccpipeline2And the fire is still raging a Ittre three hours later, when two more explosions, in the region of Glons, destroy more of the pipeline. Five separate explosions, all strategically placed within pumping stations and sluice gates have paralyzed the immense Central European Pipeline system. Affected by the action are military bases in Belgium, W. Germany, Luxemberg, and Holland. Also dependent on the system are the military forces of Canada, Britain and the United States. Kerosene for airplanes at 54 bases as well gasoline and diesel fuel are carried by the pipeline, designed to keep NATO forces fueled at the front in the event of war.

At 11:15, a statement claiming responsibility for the explosions is found in the mailbox of the Brussels newspaper La Cite. No one is surprised at the identity of the group: the Cellules Communistes Combattantes, or, Fight Communist Cells. This is their seventh attack on NATO in less than three months, and the extensive damage, the use of explosives, the symbolic value of the target as well as the lack of any injury to human life are virtually trademarks of the new urban guerrilla organization.

But the statement claims credit for six bombings, and so police rush out to the unharmed pumping station at Gages Gibecq, arriving there at 12:20 precisely the moment when the final explosion rock the pipeline. Baffling the Belgian police is another famous CCC trait.

As in previous CCC actions, the statement says little about the target itself beyond a cccpipeline1-002perfunctory “This morning of 11 December 1984, the Fighting Communist Cells have destroyed … “, precisely describing the targets, in this case even including the serial numbers of the sections destroyed. Most of the text is devoted to a Marxist critique of NATO and of Belgium’s key role, a critique based largely on Lenin’s writings on imperialism and statements from the guerrilla movements in Italy and West Germany. Supporting their critique are the hard facts of recent history, from NATO’s 40 per cent control of the Belgian military and the Autumn Forge manouevers that used Belgium as a launching pad for a European ‘war’ to a list of foreign intervention by the Belgian military: Algeria, the Congo, Pakistan …

“The war against the NATO system is the principal axis in the class war,” the statement says. NATO, the very first CCC statement said, is an instrument of imperialist war which in itself is a response to crises in the capitalist system. Subsequent statements would further develop that analysis and revolutionary practice that the CCC would strive to implement.

By evening, Belgian newspapers are giving the action rave reviews, even while expressing predictable disapproval. Said the Brussels’s daily Le Soir: “The terrorists have delivered a stupefying display of force that has given NATO and the Belgian army a solid thrashing.

The October Campaign

The Fighting Communist Cells were unheard of before October 2, 1984, when a severe explosion demolished part of the Belgian headquarters of Litton Business, an American electronics corporation with many military connections.

Police said the explosion had been caused by a powerful bomb, equivalent to 5-10 kg of TNT, and though the entire front of the building collapsed, no one was injured.

An anonymous phone call to a news agency revealed the hiding place of a statement regarding the action. Heading the document was the soon-to-be familiar red star triple-C logo and the name Cellules Communistes Combatantes. The statement said the bombing was in response to Litton’s role as a major supplier of weapons to NATO, whose headquarters were a mere half mile from Litton.

“Above all, and especially with its Canadian subsidiary,” the statement said, “Litton ccclittonpic-001Industries is the designer, manufacturer and producer of the Cruise missile.” Preparations to install those missiles were already underway at the Florennes military base. The purpose of the attack was to stop Litton’s Belgian activities, the statement explained, but attacks would not be limited to just one band of capitalists.

The Litton bombing came at a time when NATO had encountered years of determined and widespread opposition throughout Europe, partly as a result of American plans to increase its nuclear arsenal in NATO countries. Mass demonstrations in many European cities greeted these plans, which called for the prompt deployment of 572 medium range missiles, including 48 Cruise missiles in Belgium alone. In response to the public opposition, many social democratic parties opposed the scheme, and some governments, including Belgium’s, wavered, but legal protests were insufficient to stop NATO missile deployment, slated to begin in March 1985.

But it was this very missile deployment, the CCC stated, that had provoked Europeans into realizing NATO’s imperialist role and was now leading to the emergence of an underground resistance movement. This was inevitably also a revolutionary movement, since one cannot fight against imperialism without fighting against capitalism, the statement said.

The statement’s most important declaration, however, emerged from the CCC’s ccclitton-001prediction that the police and media would try to portray them as terrorists and enemies of the people. In accordance with the fundamental communist principle that guerrilla actions are never directed against the people, the CCC vowed to take all possible measures to avoid injuring people, even if their precautions jeopardized the success of their actions.

They quickly proved as good as their word. In the next fifteen days, four additional bombings – two more against military contractors, two against political parties – caused extensive damage but not the slightest of injuries. Even the NATO pipeline action three months later, despite its immense scale and spectacular results, harmed no one – the explosions occurred in areas so remote, many of the firefighters had no idea a military pipeline ran through their region.

Less than 24 hours after the Litton bombing, incendiary bombs exploded in the parking lot of the German corporation MAN, near Brussels. Of the five bombs, only four exploded, causing minor damage to trucks stored on the lot.

A statement found in the mailbox of the Brussels newspaper Le Soir explained that the CCC had attacked MAN because it produced the trailers used to store and transport the Photo policière. Dégats de l'incendie. Photocopie dans le dossiePershing II nuclear missiles. “It is the duty of revolutionaries to put an end to these activities,” the statement declared, listing a number of other MAN projects: military trucks for the Belgian Army and engines for armoured cars and warships. The super-profits reaped by companies like Litton and MAN from war industries not only proved that imperialist war arose from capitalist production, they continued, it exposed the corporations as the real protagonists of war.

On October 8, a bomb wrecked the entrance hall of the offices of US computer firm Honeywell International, only a few hundred feet from NATO.

“On all levels we are approaching the heart of the beast,” said the CCC statement, found in the private mailbox of a Belgian journalist.

The statement cited Honeywell for the production of Cruise and MX ‘Peacekeeper’ missiles, production of guidance systems for the B-52 bomber, torpedos, radars and fragmentation bombs. Placing the CCC’s activities in an international context, the statement dalittonsystemspiclisted previous actions against Litton, MAN and Honeywell by Canada’s Direct Action, the American United Freedom Front and the Revolutionary Cells in W. Germany.

Operation Mammoth

Even the high security guarding as obvious a target as Honeywell had been insufficient protection from the CCC. Now newspapers announced the country was slowly sliding into a state of crisis. Gendarmes and city police reinforced the extra security measures taken to protect public buildings and the offices of corporations with connections, direct or indirect, to military production.

From the beginning of the CCC campaign, Belgian authorities had stressed that the actions were obviously committed by foreigners, France’s Action Directe being the standard suspect. Despite total lack of evidence, the media played up the Action Directe theory, making it sound as though the police were always only one step away from cracking the case.

But the official line began to wear thin after the Honeywell bombing. For a week, the CCC had been able to bomb apparently at will, yet police could offer no leads. To make matters worse, the CCC issued an unconditional, flat-out denial of the charge that they were adsymbolAction Direct by another name. the state’s motivation for the charge, the statement said, was simply to deny the existence of an independent Belgian guerrilla movement. The concept that concrete conditions for the development of an underground revolutionary movement existed within Belgium itself was far too dangerous for public consumption.

Meanwhile, Justice Minister Gol slapped a media ban on the investigation and announced the formation of an ‘inter-force anti-terrorist group’, the GIA. They were soon joined by a new anti-terrorist squadron of the gendarmerie, and an anti-terrorist unit and a ‘Group To Repress Terrorism’ of the Brussels police. A special task force to coordinate the new anti-terrorist forces had to be convened.

But the proliferation of anti-terrorist forces did little to advance the investigation of even to shore up the sagging reputation of the police force. And on  October 15 and 17, the CCC struck again,  this time against the two governing political  parties. “Investigation powerless,” blared  the Le Sou headline announcing the bomb­ ing of the right-wing Liberals’ Centre Jean  Rey and the Christian Democrat’s office in  Gand. The targets were selected for the  CCC’s ‘October anti-imperialist campaign,’  their statement said, because of the parties’  role in the coalition government. The action  was dedicated to the rail workers of Charlet­oi, who had launched a major strike  campaign the previous year.

ccccvpoct17Even as the debris settled from the Gand  bombing, the state experts sifted the rubble  for bomb fragments, Prime Minister Wil­fried Martens, roused from his nearby  home, told reporters to expect a more  coordinated police offensive and further  government measures-after another spe­cial anti-terrorist group delivered its report  in the next few days.

At weeks end, Friday, October 22,5 a.m.,  the police make their move. As many as a  thousand police and gendarmes raid houses  and offices of leftist organizations of every description: communists, anarchists, envir­onmentalists, peace activists, even the  parliamentary left-wing parties. Roadblocks are set up all over the country. At least 18 activists are held, photographed and inter­rogated. Typewriters, mailing lists, leftist  publications and address books are confisca­ted by police wielding warrants authorizing  seizure of “any element or object useful to the investigation.” Dubbed “Operation Mammoth,” the venture is the largest police dragnet Belgium has ever seen.

The results however, are miniscule, and even the newspapers question Mammoth’s  true purpose. No arrests are made. A cache of munitions discovered at Courcelles turns  out to be related to a private dispute. Many  of the victims are obviously not linked to the CCC. A variety of people, from a socialist  senator to anarchist publishers, denounce  the police operation as anti-democratic. The  state proved it can react vigorously when attacked, said a newspaper summarizing  the effects of Mammoth, but “above all, its effect was to update police documentation  about the extreme left-wing movements.”

Officials admitted they had learned vir­tually nothing about the CCC. As Mammoth drew to an ignominous close, police were hurriedly pulled’ off the operation and dispatched to the homes of judges And other  officials in case of a CCC reprisal. Police and military paranoia about an immediate CCC response was running so high that explos­ives experts used a robot to ‘detonate’ a box of pacifist literature thrown over a fence into a military base. The CCC had quickly succeeded, commentators agreed, in raising  the political tension of the nation,

But the final proof that Mammoth had  failed to paralyse the CCC came one month later, early in the morning of November 25. That’s when explosions destroyed two
military telecommunications pylons outside the Bierset airforce base, home of a Mirage bomber squadron under direct NATO com­mand. The CCC statement, before resuming  theccctowerspic-001 continuing critique of NATO and imper­ialism, acclaimed W. Germany’s Red Army Fraction for an earlier attack on the same NATO force at Ramstein in August 1981. No mention was made of the recent wave of police repression; most of the statement consisted of ascathing attack on the peace movement leadership for refusing to ac­knowledge that the threat of nuclear war was more than just a potentially apocalyptic blunder by misguided world leaders. Even the model W. German peace movement was in shambles, the statement said, because its militants realized that years of pacifist struggle had produced nothing.


The December 11 attack on the NATO pipeline system remains the CCC’s most dramatic action to date. Its timing, only a few days before ‘defense’ ministers from NATO countries met in Brussels, focused world attention on the growing anti-NATO underground. Having established itself as an autonomous Belgian guerilla movement, the CCC stressed in their pipeline statement the international nature of the illegal front.

Already the events of the new year are demonstrating the formidable strength of that international movement. After a car bomb exploded outside NATO headquarters  in Brussels .January 15, the CCC issued a statement dedicating the action to the  militants of raflogothe Red Army Fraction. The same day, the RAF and Action Directe announced they would work together, “forming a joint political-military front in Western Europe” with NATO as its main target. The deaths of two major internation­al arms dealers, the French General Rene Audran and the German industrialist Dr. Ernst Zimmerman, followed soon after, responsibility for the killings being claimed by Action Directe and the RAF, respect­ively. In Portugal, the Popular Forces of April 25, FP-25, have claimed responsibility for at least three actions: the shelling of the American embassy in Lisbon in November,the shelling of a squadron of NATO ships in January, and, in February, the bombing of  14 cars at the Beja airbase in southern Portugal.

Meanwhile, Belgian police have spent half of their annual budget in January alone, but are no closer to stopping the CCC. Officials admit their heavy-handed meas­ures have become something of a grim joke among Belgians. “Our failure ‘will simply bring recruits to the CCC,” an official confesses. Foreign correspondents compare Brussels to a city beseiged. Since the year began, the number of police in the streets has tripled, parked trucks seal off embassies and public buildings from the threat of car bombs. Random roadblocks are an everyday event. Yet another anti-terrorist strike force has been formed, this one to spy on travellers and watch airports.

The political turmoil in Belgium has also stalled the NATO deployment schedule,  which called for 16 cruise missiles to arrive in Belgium by mid-March. In W. Germany, Portugal and France, where police recently claimed to have broken the underground resistance, the anti-NATO movements are as strong as ever. Will 1985 be the year the NATO conspiracy is broken? As the CCC put it in their pipeline statement: “From Portugal to W. Germany, from Italy to Ireland, ‘from Greece to Spain … a wind of hope and struggle is rising that unites all people in the struggle against imperialism.”


April 1985

On ‘Armed Struggle’

ccc91. It would be an understatement to say that the advent of revolutionary guerrilla tactics has created ripples in the miserable daily grind of political struggle in Belgium. At first glance, it might be thought that this uproar is caused solely by the fact that the activities of the CCC, offensive politico-military attacks, are upsetting the collaborationist tendencies of organizations born out of the class struggle. What emerges from a cursory examination, and what would appear to set us apart from the reformist groups organizations or parties, is the fact that we are waging an armed struggle.

But this simplistic view of what separates the revolutionary struggle from the reformist Soria1 (2)fossils is mistaken. It is not armed struggle that sets the CCC fundamentally apart from the rest of the political spectrum, but, above all, our authentic Marxist-Leninist leadership and genuinely revolutionary outlook. Political analysis has dictated the need for armed struggle and it is on the basis of this analysis that the unity, collective progress, and mobilization of the proletariat will be established on a lasting basis.

We have already experienced great sympathy and great hatred over this hazy view in which our struggle is reduced to its armed actions alone. Furthermore, we are all the more mistrustful of the fragility of sympathies that rely on this feature alone and we realize how fleeting such sympathies are. We therefore intend to explain, for the first time in this text, the political will that drives the fundamental strategic option of armed struggle, together with its origins, perspectives, and tactical appropriateness, etc.

2. In order to analyse a particular strategic choice correctly, one should examine what the fundamental task of the revolutionary really is. One thing forgotten long ago by all those who, amidst their calm integration, usurp and dilute this undertaking, is that the task of the revolutionary is to wage a revolution. In the broadest terms, this is reflected in two important focal points. The first, of primary importance at a time when the international revolutionary movement is experiencing a rebirth, is a political task. It is the struggle to bring about the emergence and expansion of class consciousness. Class consciousness means a collective analysis by the workers of their plight within the capitalist mode of production, of the class contradictions within this system, of the historical outlook of the evolution of the proletariat, and of the political and organizational means to be used to overthrow the bourgeoisie. This class consciousness provides the ideological basis for
affirming the Marxist-Leninist outlook in a progressive and qualitative movement
that draws its sustenance within an offensive balance.

From an international stance, a materialistic analysis of the proletarian class, its objective situation, and its evolution does pose a great many questions that Marxism-Leninism alone can answer. For example: what organization should the working class use to gain victory; what is the nature of the State under the bourgeois dictatorship; what is the contemporary outlook for class combat; why should one fight for the dictatorship of the proletariat; etc?

This political work, which consists of propaganda, debate, of building political, theoretical, and strategic models, of critical and instructional appraisals of the experiences of past and present, and of awareness-building, can exist only within the framework of class struggle. Awareness can be born only through combat and it reinforces combat in a dialectical relationship. This priority political task should therefore be understood not as the mysterious absolute from the carriers of the good word, but as a central and decisive element for developing the revolutionary process on the march toward socialism.

3. The second fundamental task, inseparable from the first, is to engage in organizational work. This means organizing and unifying the ever-expanding potential for the emergence of class consciousness and the manifestations of spontaneous struggle under the guidance of Marxism- Leninism in order to create a genuine, historical, revolutionary force.

We shall discuss this feature of organizational work later. We wish to emphasize, however, that while we have relegated this task to a second, albeit inseparable, position, it is only because, for us, and for the entire international communist movement alike, the critical appraisal of 15 years of armed struggle in the metropolises reveals certain gaps in the political leadership which absolutely need to be filled. It is therefore our contention that since politics is the key factor in class unification, in the current setting, after 40 years of revisionism, great efforts must be made to reinstill revolutionary Marxism in the proletariat.

4. All political work must be viewed starting with specific situations. Only a clear and correct view from the perspective of class makes it possible to define the priority focal ccc5points for this work, the gaps to be filled, the responses to be provided, and the errors to combat. Starting with specific situations also means that in order to optimize this political work, it must be adapted and modelled in terms of the landscape on which  is being conducted. Political work must provide comprehensive and historical responses drawing from specific struggle scenarios. In particular, it must start with the specific features of every struggle in order to arrive at the general nature of revolutionary combat.

5. Currently, in Belgium and in other countries alike, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat are confronting one another on two basic levels: in the struggle against austerity and the struggle against war. Contemporary class conflict centers on these two confrontations.

On each of these two battlefields, one or more irreducible contradictions pit the
exploited and the exploiters against one another in absolute terms. In each instance, the impossibility of reaching a negotiated settlement with the bourgeoisie forces the opposition to the capitalist mode of production to become to become increasingly absolute, and thereby increasingly political as well. Ultimately, faced with these two knots of antagonism, the reformist and collaborationist organizations (the PC [Communist Party of Belgium], PS [Socialist Party of Belgium], the labor unions, and the peace movements, for example), have lost all credibility in terms of their commitment and ability to confront this situation.

It is therefore our contention that the setting is historically auspicious’ for establishing and developing a strong revolutionary movement, provided the political leadership of the vanguards of this movement is capable of understanding the potential and the demands of this setting and of carrying out its duty in confronting these factors.

The CCC therefore base their policy within the two areas in which the bourgeoisie and the proletariat are confronting one another as part of the historic evolution of communism.

6. There are nevertheless many other areas of mobilization through which popular discontent and its commitment to a less unjust world are expressed. There are, for example, the struggles against the oppressive gala for the ‘Wojtyla incursion’ [visit of Pope John Paul II], the famine in Ethiopia, the criminalization of abortion, the frenzied development of the nuclear industry, the degradation of the environment, the US interventions in Latin America, etc., etc.

But, even if it is true _ that these demands are essentially legitimate, they are reformist in nature and therefore secondary concerns, and they cannot be taken into account as the kind of contradictions that would make it possible to achieve the political and organizational homogenization of the working class. Reformist struggles are by no means inimical to capitalist development, are generally aimed at seeking accommodation with it, and are never aimed at its destruction, which also explains why these struggles are almost always led by petit-bourgeois intellectuals, whose historical role in this age is to serve as the conveyors of bourgeois ideology to the masses.

To summarize, it is our belief that reformist struggles are the expression of objective contradictions between society and imperialism, and revolutionaries must therefore respond to them. But in no way do they offer the all-encompassing potential, the historical irreducibility that defines the struggle against austerity and the struggle against war (even if today the organization of the masses with regard to these issues is in the hands of the- bourgeoisie and the petite bourgeoisie).

7. According to this analysis of the state of affairs, what is the main focal point on which political work should concentrate? An understanding of the universal nature of all the problems our class confronts should be fostered: expanding understanding of imperialism as the final stage of the capitalist mode of production, of class struggle as the driving force of history, of the need to destroy the capitalist mode of production and establish the Workers’ State – socialism – as the only answer to our problems.

Soria3 (2)For the CCC, as for any logical revolutionary, the objective unity of interests for the proletarian class must therefore be given the spotlight, and, on that basis, the specific perspectives of the march toward socialism must be delineated.

The entire activity of the CCC leans in this direction by joining the anti-austerity and anti-war movements into a single class movement against capitalism, the maker of crises and wars, and by joining each portion of the whole into the struggle for socialism.

8. As we stressed earlier, any political development requires organizational development. Today, in an age when the effects of the crisis and the memory of the working class nurture a trend toward increasing worker awareness, when the development of a mass revolutionary strategy for seizing power is essential, and when imperialism has brought about a proletarization of the entire working world, the creation and building of a vanguard organization of all sectors is a very timely concern.

The appropriate political and military instrument for formalizing and optimizing the potential and the demands of the situation, the tool whose need is making itself felt with increasing gravity in all workers’ struggles, is the Combatant Proletarian Organization.

The establishment of this organization is the first great historic step to be taken, and the CCC will be one of its constituent elements.

9. The task of this organization, this organized form of the proletarian class and its struggle, is to provide political leadership for the class movement. This function has become essential because only the organization, already guided by the teachings of scientific socialism, is capable of seizing the entire class movement and of correctly organizing it out of the expression of a radicalized antagonism. The organization finds legitimacy in proletarian combat and becomes essential to the development thereof. It assumes concrete form in the disciplined unification of the vanguard and combatant elements under. the leadership of Marxism-Leninism. The merger of these two components is essential and will enable the organization to restore just and revolutionary leadership to mass combat, which, from the radicalization of the confrontation and the development of revolutionary forces, will necessitate and allow the establishment of the Combatant Communist Party, whose most important role will be to lead the proletariat onward to class dictatorship.

10. The qualitative, and, unavoidably, quantitative, leap, that the legitimate establishment of the organization represents for the class movement can therefore only result from, and be a reflection of, the qualitative and quantitative development of its forces. In concrete terms, this will be reflected in the field by Marxist-Leninist workers’ leadership, the establishment of numerous clandestine cells in the factories, utilities, unemployment offices, militant anti-war committees, and the labor union movement (its base!), etc.

This organizational work will be, as it already is for us today, clandestine, but we must explain here what we mean by this clandestinization. It is a mass clandestineness within the masses. It is clandestinization of revolutionary activity and not of revolutionary CCC14 (2)militants. The militants must remain inside the working world, the social universe of the proletariat, and must hide, with forethought, their militant activities within the organization with a discretion necessitated by the degree of repression the bourgeoisie exerts against the level of revolutionary development.

The repression conducted by the mercenaries of the bourgeoisie is inevitable when the Proletarian Organization develops a truly revolutionary policy, that is, is organized on the basis of destroying the bourgeois State and establishing; the workers’ state, destroying the capitalist mode of production and building socialism, and annihilating the bourgeois army and imposing the authority of the Red Army. Both political leadership and clandestinization of the masses require strict collective discipline unfettered by even the slightest dissent, which will knock out more than one democrat or liberal, but which will provide an objective indicator of serious revolutionary commitment and confidence.

11. How can revolutionary vanguards carry out this political and organizational work, and thereby claim legitimacy in this obligation? How can the mass movement make itself homogeneous and forge ahead in the revolutionary cause? We must henceforth advance the fundamental strategic options that can guide the mass movement under Marxist-Leninist leadership. For the CCC, historical materialistic analysis makes armed struggle the main strategic option for today, one that cannot be put off, and one that alone can bring about the qualitative and quantitative development of class combat for communism.

12. A word of caution is in order with regard to this point. When we say that armed struggle is the main strategic option for today, what is our position regarding other forms of struggle carried out by the workers? Our answer is that everything that contributes to strengthening the revolutionary process, to the growing penetration of theories of scientific socialism into the working world, to the ever more combative unity of the proletariat, is correct, even if the form of struggle is not armed.  We certainly do not regard the rifle as the gauge of correctness. We simply regard the waging of revolutionary armed violence as particularly suitable and useful in the fight for communism today.

13. It should be clear that the increasingly vital role played by armed struggle in the revolutionary process depends, on its offensive capacity, on the increasingly absolute evolution of the capitalist dictatorship, which has reduced a good number of formulas for ‘participatory’ struggle to uselessness or worse.

Today, because monopolistic capitalism is triumphant, and because, through its worldwide reach, it has made imperialism its hegemonistic form of the capitalist mode of production, the State’s merger with capital is on the rise, it is becoming a direct function of capital, and the latter is invading all areas of human life. The consequence is the widest possible spread of alienation and dehumanization, and an increasing merger of all superstructures, i.e., repressive tools of control, culture, ideology, communications, and the fragmentation/articulation of social groups. This makes any participation, even tactical, in running the State through ‘democratic’ institutions and mechanisms lead to the strengthening of this operation, and therefore to the power of the bourgeoisie, and it becomes completely unrealistic, given the homogeneity and the power of the ideological,
political, military and economic devices, to attempt to build awareness among the proletarian masses in order to overthrow State power by traditional means of peaceful class struggle, since the might of capital and its institutions is much too powerful to enable one to envision competition ever successfully striking a balance in the correlation of forces in this area.

14. One of the intrinsic assets of armed action (one at which people far too often stop) is that it is the direct, concrete destruction of the authorities of domination and of bourgeois power. It is true that the decommissioning of the essential cogs of bourgeois power clearly makes it possible to draw a very distinct line between the enemy and us.

15. But we think that today another asset should be accorded fundamental attention. Soria2 (2)Armed action reinforces and stimulates the awareness of the working class in that it may be the bearer of victories (even partial). For the first time in far too many years, it is no longer we, the workers and militants, who are taking it by the throat, but the bourgeoisie which is suffering defeat after defeat. Even if one thinks that these victories are fleeting in the course of events, after years of treachery, of defeats, of demonstrations leading to beatings, of prison, of hopeless plant or workshop occupations, of sacrifices during strikes in which we won nothing, all under the scornful eye of the lords’ who govern, the slightest victory counts in that it teaches how it was won, and opens the door to future victorious

16. The armed struggle for communism is a particularly effective vector of propaganda when it is conducted correctly. This strength lies in the fact that it carries with it a break with the democratic circus, in which the bourgeoisie writes the script, in that it is objective destruction among the enemy, in that it bears witnesses to the organization, albeit still limited, of organized proletarian forces for class struggle, and in that it is irreconcilable with the paid ideologies of bourgeoisie: ‘Deeds are stubborn!’

17. Furthermore, insofar as it is a revolutionary break, the waging of armed struggle anticipates and prepares for future stages of the revolutionary movement, the civil war, insurrection, for the seizure of power by the proletariat and the elimination of the bourgeoisie and its agents. The class movement, steeped in guerrilla struggle, will arrive at the decisive watersheds of its history with experience and organization, the genuine strengths of political, organizational, and even subjective maturity that are absolutely necessary.

18. The armed struggle for communism makes it possible at last to unmask with actions all the traitors in the workers’ movement, all those who never fail to side with the bourgeoisie and to denounce revolutionaries when the storm warning is heard! Armed struggle has a character of concrete anticipation of workers’ power, and it unmasks the politics of collaboration and integration of the labor union and reformist traitors.

19. Above all, armed struggle expresses the practice of genuine proletarian internationalism, because, in an age when the capitalist mode of production has made its dominion worldwide, in an age of imperialism, increasing unity has taken root between the vanguards and the masses of the ‘dominated countries and of the metropolises. This unity, confronting a common enemy, is born of revolutionary combat and makes it essential to attack the enemy on all fronts. At a time when so many of the world’s peoples are fighting the beast with weapons in hand, the revolutionaries in the metropolises must attack the imperialist machine from behind with the same determination.

20. To summarize, the armed struggle for communism is: destruction within the bourgeoisie camp; demonstration of and confidence in the capacity to win; an instrument of propaganda, the revelation of a class position and an objective class practice; the possibility for progress and evolution; an outlook for the proletariat; and an internationalist effort.

21. Since the time of Marx, and up until the end of the second world war, rational communists have defended the idea of the rapid seizure of power by the working class, in the form of an insurrection. Using the triumph of the October Revolution as its support, this idea was at the center of the establishment of the Third International (the Comintern), according to which the role of the communist parties was to develop a policy of awareness-building and organization of the masses on the basis of this deadline, and to do so either legally or ‘paralegally’.

The failure of’communist’ parties organized according to this idea forces us to look at why the PCI, PCF, PCE, [communist parties of Italy, France and Spain] and others have sunk, first into revisionism, then into the most imbecilic of reform movements, transforming themselves into social democratic parties.

This idea, in which insurrection is put off for better days, for a remote deadline for which one should be ‘ready’, has, gradually, or for years and years, led these parties to lose sight of and forget the purpose of their reason. The mushrooming of the licit work of ‘ ccc6awareness building’ has wound up encompassing the full range of activities of these parties, leading them, driven by an anxious populism, to move only within the arena ,of bourgeois legality, that is, to participate actively in its balance.

If, henceforth, the goal- the violent seizing of power by the proletariat – and the deadline are not taken into account in each of our actions, then, in fact, this deadline will become even more remote. ”

The ‘vanguards’ of the working class who do not conduct all their efforts with an aim to achieving the seizure of power by the masses and the waging of revolutionary violence quickly become ‘rearguards’, floundering in revisionism, reformism and treachery.

22. If, politically speaking, the limited concept of seizing power through insurrection and its relationship to an ever more remote and ideal deadline have opened the door of the worker parties to bourgeois and reformist lines of thought, today, moreover, it has lost all relevancy from a military standpoint. The overwhelming power of imperialism, its transnational politico-military organization of counter-insurrection (NATO), its constant vigilance against revolutionary initiatives through its policy of ‘preventive counter-revolution’, and the demonstrated impossibility of conducting revolutionary work within the legal framework of the bourgeois dictatorship, force communists to re-examine their strategic options.

For, if it is true that the final phase of process by which the working class seizes power remains violent mass insurrection, then the strategy guiding the vanguards and revolutionary forces toward this deadline cannot be merely ‘legal’ political preparation for this goal.

23. In order to close the door for ever more to revisionism and its betrayals and in order to provide concrete organization (politically and militarily), those working for the final confrontation with the exploiters (who for years have consequently been arming themselves), the revolutionary struggle in general, and the armed struggle in particular, must therefore adopt the form of a protracted people’s war.

24. It will be a war, because this entails a relationship of complete antagonism, with no room for mediation, there being nothing the belligerents have to share. Class warfare is a confrontation in which the existence of one party depends on the death of the other. In such a setting, the most extreme violence of the oppressed against the bourgeoisie expresses the greatest humanity, and the violence of the mercenaries of capital against the oppressed expresses the greatest savagery and barbarism.

25. It will be a people’s war, because a trend will take shape by which it will become the act Soria4 (2)of an ever-expanding stratum of people. There are two reasons for this. First, because it is the masses who decide history, and not a’ few groups, however well-motivated. The revolutionary process must be brought about by the mass movement and must cross all segments of the class. Second, because while the working class, especially the workers concentrated in the large factories, alone is capable, owing to its position within the mode of production, of completing the revolutionary process and the establishment of socialism, today it is the vast majority of people who, assembled around the working class who have an objective interest in overthrowing the bourgeoisie.

26. It will be protracted, because the road leading from the minority spark of revolutionary guerrilla war (even if truly welcomed by the masses), to popular insurrection is a long one, a lengthy process that will be forged by defeats and victories. The advanced sophistication of the power of the bourgeoisie and its might at all levels, political, military, ideological, repressive, etc., have raised mountains in the path of the revolutionary movement that will have to be moved and that will require great progress, and numerous tools, which remain to be built today! The process of political mobilization and organization of the working masses can never be accomplished within the space of a few days.

27. How can the revolutionary political vanguard mobilize and organize the masses toward the process of protracted people’s war? We have already seen that the political vanguard must emphasize at all times the confrontation with bourgeois power and mobilize workers in this area. We have also stressed training in the waging of armed struggle to carry out this work in the current situation. These two observations meet in the tactic of armed propaganda. What do we mean by this term?ccc2

28. An armed propaganda- action has a ‘demonstrative’ objective within a political goal. It demands the effective destruction (thus non-symbolic) of an important cog in the bourgeois system (this cog may just as well be a ship, a piece of equipment, a public official), chosen on the basis of the sectors of struggle that the masses have chosen for themselves, and on the basis of historically decisive confrontations.

This attack should make it possible to achieve a quantitative leap in the process of mobilizing the workers and increasing their awareness by raising qualitatively the level of spontaneous confrontation and by unifying the various forms of combat into an offensive and all-encompassing practice.

29. Only by expanding the actual waging of armed propaganda will the anti-austerity and anti-war movements be able to begin anew on just and offensive bases, to appraise critically the errors of the past, to create the political and practical instruments needed for this relaunching. The waging of armed propaganda, such as that in which the CCC engages through their attacks against imperialist militarism and the leaders of the crisis, unifies the working class within a new combat alternative: the armed struggle for communism.

30. In order for armed propaganda to attain every goal established, the CCC have chosen a mode of operating through campaigns (not the least of which is this May Day action). By ‘campaign’ we mean a series of politico-military operations defined around a central theme. We start from a genuine and specific contradiction and then gather a series of attacks around that theme that will connect this or that specific aspect of the chosen sector with the overall strategy of armed struggle for communism.

Our ‘first anti-imperialist campaign’ was therefore centered on the question of the imperialist war, linked to the issue of missile-basing, was aimed against the arms industry, the ruling bourgeois parties, NATO and the ABL, and successfully outlined the revolutionary political alternative against the imperialist war: the civil war!

Moreover, operating through campaigns makes it possible to connect aspects that directly affect daily life with more universal concerns that are absolutely decisive. Campaigns also make it possible to demonstrate the power of the main tactical principles of warfare, and set into motion extremely varied forms of struggle (from Molotov cocktails at M.A.N. to car bombs at SHAPE), of which some are accessible to those who have the political will to fight. There are no ‘high’ or ‘low’ forms of action. There are only right or wrong actions!

31. Armed conflict in general should be demystified. We have therefore written the Soria5 (2)document ‘Specific Answers to Specific Questions’, and we hope that it will contribute toward that end. The core problem is a political one, in that the decision to conduct guerrilla attacks can be made only on clear and sturdy political bases, after which point the technical procedures will be settled according to needs and capacities of each one.

It should again be recalled that our primary task is agitation and propaganda and that it is only important to steer a correct political line, to anchor it deeply amidst the masses, and to ensure that it reverberates there, before thinking about effectively dismembering the enemy.

We are not at the stage where defeating the full force of the bourgeoisie has become a priority. Actions aimed at harassment may nevertheless be conducted with limited means, against peripheral targets, if these attacks produce genuine progress in the revolutionary process.

32. To assume an objective vanguard position is one thing. To achieve the full range of possibilities offered to the revolutionary movement through this role is quite another. Whatever the result, the sole task to which the political vanguards should devote themselves is to advance the mass movements on the road of the revolutionary process. This makes it essential not to lose sight of the constant link between the vanguards and the masses, and to ensure that each movement, each aspiration of the masses, fits into the policy of the vanguard, and that this policy is able to restore an all-encompassing perspective, one that unifies the class along Marxist-Leninist lines.

33. Today, the CCC are still too weak a force, too limited a social reality, to be able to seize the fertile field of the class movement in Belgium. Struggles, numerous worker and militant struggles, are undertaken each day without our being able to establish constructive political and organizational ties with them.

All sincere militants must assume a revolutionary line and practice at their work places on their own. In each plant, in each workshop, in each partial struggle, comrades who know that the labor unions and reformist parties have always betrayed a Marxist-Leninist line should wage their combat from the stance of a protracted people’s guerrilla war. It is there that we will meet one another, and out of the strength of these struggles, out of the unification of a thousand CCCs, the Combatant Proletarian Organization will at last be born. Mao Zedong said ‘count on your own forces’, and it is from that vantage. point that the working class, its vanguard elements, should organize itself today.

34. ‘Conventional’ agitation and propaganda work should not disappear entirely; quite the contrary! This lawful work should always be conducted with all due seriousness, so that to whatever extent the bourgeoisie and its cops leave us the slightest possibility of public expression, we will exploit it to popularize our political stances to the widest possible ccc1extent. In this effort, the armed struggle waged by the guerrilla organization and the legal work of popularizing the revolutionary political line of Marxism -Leninism form a close dialectical relationship.

These two struggles are politically connected in that they are aimed at social revolution, and they must remain within reach of one another, nurturing and strengthening one another. This political bond must be even closer, since it alone is able to provide the link between the forum for legal agitation and revolutionary guerrilla warfare. An organizational link between legality and illegality is inopportune, which is something everyone can easily understand.

35. Conclusion: In October 1984, the CCC launched a radical and offensive alternative, one genuinely Marxist-Leninist in nature, as part of the class war. In a reform-minded militant setting, mired in the defeat and disorientation brought about by the infamous leaders of the petite bourgeoisie, we have uncovered the traitors and cleared the way for the mass anti-austerity and anti-war movements to coalesce. Sincere comrades, from this small step taken by the Cells, combatant workers must take a giant step! A giant step forward, following the Marxist-Leninist political and strategic line. ‘There are two methods that we communists must apply in any work. The first is to connect the general with the specific. The other is to connect the leadership with the masses.” This is very easy to understand. One must begin with specific situations and partial struggles (strikes, occupations, militant demands … ) to arrive at the totality of the problem, at the overthrow of the bourgeois dictatorship and the capitalist mode of production, by launching a comprehensive and historical alternative capable of responding to it. Marxism-Leninism must therefore be placed at the forefront of the class movement as a comprehensive political line and as a concrete weapon through the activities of organized communist vanguards.






1. The ‘Subversion’ Collective, Review No. I, ‘Against the Imperialist War, Long Live the
Armed Struggle for Communism!’

2. Mao Zedong, On Methods of Leadership.


April 1985

‘Concrete Answers to Concrete

ccc9This document is the one we are tempted to call the least important. Our decision to write it and to publish it is based on the need we felt, following numerous ‘public’ discussions, to illustrate what our struggle is about, in response to a number of persistent questions.

The armed struggle for communism is, of necessity, a clandestine struggle, and it is this forced clandestinity that gives rise to all sorts of false ideas, questions and ill-will. The only way this problem can be fully understood is through our actions and our political writings. It has become clear to us, however, that a more vivid, direct illustration may also make our struggle easier to understand.

We start with the specific to illustrate the general. In its 12 December 1984 edition, the newspaper Le Soir carried the headline ‘NATO PIPELINES SABOTAGED – MILITARY SECRETS IN THE HANDS OF THE CCC?’ In our communique on these actions, we felt it was more important to explain Belgium’s role in NATO and how NATO is the instrument of military and political imperialism than to describe how we located and destroyed the pipelines.


The media, of course, are not interested in such things, being a tool of ideological and imperialistic domination. This explains why the newspapers are adorned with headlines as stupid as this. There are actually three reasons for this.

The most fundamental reason lies in the materialistic sensationalism of the press, which affects not only us. Under capitalism, information is a consumer and market commodity, often confused with the marketing of intrigue. Enticing headlines are only one incentive among many inviting us to ‘air our laundry along with princes and movie stars’.

The second aim is to ham us politically by distorting the nature of our struggle, confusing the issue, and casting doubts and suspicion on it. The mobilization aspect of our policy throughout the proletarian world has become lost in the confusion over the source of our explosives or infiltration of the Canadian police in 1970. In a period of six months, we have been seen everywhere, linked to every fighting group or organization in Europe, and allied with the Libyan secret service, the CIA and KGB, the Mafia and its heroin trafficking and, the very latest, turned into anarchists!

Thirdly, and most insidiously, is the attempt to disassociate us from society and its everyday reality. The press has to portray revolutionary politics as inaccessible to the working class, a matter for ‘specialists’ in a Star Wars scenario. Nothing could be further from the truth, which is why we are going to describe some of our activities in an attempt to demystify this campaign in the press against our armed struggle.

In doing so, a great many journalists will come across as either complete jerks or as storm troopers, the former being the less contemptible.

The information we furnish will be lapped up by the cops and their devoted hacks, but they will be disappointed, for we are not pretentious, egotistical storytellers. What we did, perhaps not even an animal would do, but militants everywhere are talking about it!

How did we choose our targets for the first anti-imperialist campaign, and how did we gain access to them?

The choice of the targets we attacked was basically dictated by the political purpose of our campaign. The problem was one of making our attack one against that part of the economic sector linked directly with the war machine, against the political power of the bourgeois state, and against the domination and military organization of the imperialist apparatus.

This decision was unalterable and inalienable. There were also other considerations; to what level of revolutionary violence could we take the attack, given the degree of consciousness of the class movement and the actual size of our forces?

Since mobility is one of the tactical foundations of guerrilla warfare, we decided to attack ‘sector by sector’. We decided, in other words, that we would ‘never look back’ during our campaign. We undertook three actions against the economic sector, two against the political sector, and then three against the military sector. When we blew up the headquarters of the PRL/PVV, the cops expected us to be at SABCA, and when we hit NATO in Bierset, they thought we would be at the PSC headquarters.

The attacks on Litton, M.A.N. and Honeywell arose out of the same imperatives as for the American, Canadian and German revolutionaries who launched their own. All serious studies on the military industry or the issue of missiles point the finger at these multinationals, whose addresses can be found in the phone book.


We then went to examine these buildings, selected their ‘weak points’, analysed the police aspect of the problem (location of stations, frequency of patrols, etc.), and organised the operation taking all these details into account.

A little story will illustrate the stupidity of the questioning and intrigues of certain so-called journalists. In June, we had sized up the Honeywell building and observed that it enjoyed no special protection. At night, a team of watchmen was on duty in the east wing, which was perfect because our target was the international headquarters located in the west wing. Thus there would be no risk of either confronting the guards or injuring them in the explosion.

A few days before the attack, comrades who had gone back to the building to make sure nothing had changed were terribly upset when they discovered that hidden cameras had been installed just where we had decided to hide our explosive. .

Self-styled ‘journalists’ have said in this respect that we should have known that the cameras were not yet operating, and have written such idiocies as ‘the CCC are financed by Honeywell, which wants to get a new building for itself out of the insurance money’.

When we saw the cameras, we went out and bought identical hoods, jackets, pants and shoes for all our comrades involved in the operation so that they could all pass anonymously in front of the cameras. One other militant monitored the night watchmen, so that when the order was given to begin, it was certain that no one would be hurt.

The attack on the JR Foundation and on the Martens offices was dictated, as we stated in our communique, by their government participation. The telephone book (again) and a visit to a few Belgian cities allowed us to decide on Brussels and Ghent.

DOCOM1 (2)In Brussels, the garbage cans of the JR Foundation told us that there was a concierge, and we knew what floor her apartment was on by the light shining from the windows at night. This was why the bomb we placed was a weak one intended to destroy the offices alone. Without the concierge, we would have gained a certain degree of pleasure out of doubling the charges and blowing up the whole building.

In Ghent, we discovered that the main entrance was closed at night and at weekends by means of a shutter. To direct the force of our explosive towards the inside of the building, we had planned to cover it with five 50-kilo bags of sand out in the street, but we didn’t need to after all- the shutter was not closed that night!

The NATO targets were selected in the course of very pleasant Sunday outings in the country. The Bierset telecommunications pylons, rising 25 meters in the sky, were not hard to detect. What would really be difficult would be to miss seeing them! As far as the pipelines are concerned, we will offer a fuller explanation, since our attacks gave rise to the brilliant ‘conclusions’ we referred to at the beginning of this document.

We must first go back a few years; the beginning is not only simple, but funny.

Some comrades had read in Le Soir the misadventures befalling an audacious man
from the Kontich region who, driven by thrift and by the knowledge that the
NATO pipline passed through the back of his garden, decided to tap it for his
personal use. The man must have had more nerve than good sense, for his efforts
were crowned by a garden flooded in crude oil and a few problems with the authorities. .

Our first thought upon rereading the article had been to go and ask this handyman to point out to us the exact scene of his exploit so that we could stage a performance there ourselves.

Being methodical types and having considered the relative accessibility of the pipeline, we again consulted the top-secret telephone book – where, under ‘Ministry of National Defense’, every pumping station in the entire country is listed. We drew up our own list of all the towns these stations were located in, and decided to explore them during long walks in the countryside.

We set out with the idea of staging a direct attack on a particular pumping station, but closer examination revealed how difficult this would be. These facilities are extremely well protected (military guards, dogs, etc.) and require a large-scale attack. During our walks around these stations, searching for a crack in their armor, we were struck by how often we came across little orange hats set on top of stakes, similar to those out in the countryside that indicate where the gas pipes are.

These stakes have a telephone number printed on them to call in case of emergency, and the first three digits (016) tipped us off to the fact that Louvain would be where we would find the NATO pipeline headquarters in Belgium. We verified this (using the telephone book, again), and the number corresponded to the ‘La Gerbe de ble’ district in Louvain,

We thereupon decided to locate as many of these markers as possible throughout the country. We would then make a selection and dig down under the stakes to the line, where we would place our explosives.

Off we went in the heat of July with our list of pumping stations, trying to find the route of the pipeline. Not being blind, we naturally came across the valve chambers. They were imposing metal structures painted orange and perched on two metal posts. Access was DOCOM2 (3)restricted by means of a padlock!

Having made up our minds, off we went again merrily in search of the valve chambers. A few weeks later, we stuck a red tack on a map of Belgium for every chamber located, so that we could determine, in relationship to the military bases, ports and other installations, the nerve center that would have to be destroyed. We must admit that we did not really succeed in this, which explains why one of our attacks was a duplicate. Today, the full plans of the NATO network in Europe have been published – get ready for the fireworks!

A few days before our attacks, on Thursday, 6 December, to be precise, we forced open the trapdoor of the valve chamber at Ittre. Two questions remained: what were we really going to find inside these chambers, and what kind of explosive charge should we plan for? Moreover, what would happen if under this simple metal covering there was an armored door or an alarm system?

There was nothing at all, except for the pipeline and its valve just three meters away from us! We closed the trapdoor with a new padlock, careful not to lose the key, and returned every day to make sure that our visit and the change of locks had not been detected.

On the morning of 11 December 1984, the CCC attacked the NATO pipelines.

The enormous success of our actions was felt both in Belgium and abroad, and is a moment in our struggle of which we are extremely proud.

So much for the ‘military’ secrets’ in the hands of the CCC! So much for the pipeline plans we received from the Red Army Faction! The story illustrates, rather, how militants can strike NATO a very hard blow and do it again whenever they feel like it!

Intelligence gathering is nothing to be ashamed of; it is a totally necessary activity. We devote a great deal of our actual work to spying on the economic, political or military systems of the bourgeoisie. The more we do, the more we succeed in penetrating its ‘secrets’. In self-defense, the bourgeoisie says that this is impossible, and that our information came from the KGB or the Mafia! One final example of how we obtain our information comes from our attack on SHAPE at Sint-Stevens Woluwe.

The headline in La Demiire Heure of Wednesday, 16 January, read ‘Well Informed’, and the article began thus: ‘Somebody must have been fiendishly, incredibly well informed to discover that No. 13, Chaussee de Louvain in Sint-Stevens Woluwe housed a clandestine US military complex.’ This must be another of our ‘military secrets’!

Comrades travelling to Louvain by car noticed a brown van with US Army plates parked in front of the building. They transmitted this information to the CCC and we went to verify their report. Indeed, members of the US military were seen entering the building, and all the license plates on the vehicles parked in front indicated that they belonged to SHAPE. In addition, American MPs were guarding the entrance.

For further information, we went back to consult our ‘secret files’, that incredible phone book for the district of Zaventem! On page 1,216 you will find a list of the Yankee institutions at that address, which also explained why we had not known that the ‘US Benelux Contracting Directorate’ had moved out of the building shortly before, probably after the phone book was published.

The phone book is a number one best-seller, and the telephone itself is so easy and so convenient to use!

DOCOM4 (2)We wish to make one more thing clear regarding our attack on SHAPE. Having examined the problem of class consciousness, we decided that for our first campaign, our action would not include the execution of enemy leaders.

We did, however, wish to launch a direct attack on SHAPE, yet all its buildings are kept under military guard. The new militant consciousness served as the basis for our decision, after the attack on the pipelines, to risk wounding or killing the US military guards. We must admit that this new, offensive attitude surprised even us, yet the historical justification of our policy is a great incentive. After three months of struggle, therefore, favorable reactions to our efforts encouraged us to plan and to carry out the attack.

Since the MPs were not VIPs and it was not the purpose of the attack to execute them, we gave them the opportunity to desert their posts, which is what they did and why they are still alive. Desertion is the only way out for agents and mercenaries of capitalism.

This is not the only illusion we have to destroy, and the bubble we have to burst now is an important one. The police have made their assertions, but our comrades have often wanted to know from us, given our attitude in regard to the matter, which is not typically ‘leftist’, just how the CCC and their struggle are financed.

Accustomed to being taken for everything they have by leftist swindlers, many comrades are surprised upon meeting us that we do not proceed to empty their wallets. They all still remember that these past 20 years of the so-called leftist struggle have also been marked by the racket engaged in by certain printers or other money-hungry persons. The libertarian or socialist paradise was obtained during long nights of black marketing, the co-management of debts and bankruptcies or still other frauds. Those of the ilk of J-C Garot, Roger Noel and other pimps of militantism have corrupted everything they have touched, and no one has forgotten them!

Hence the question of how we are funded, since we will not pimp for a living. In the pile of junk that constituted the ‘investigation’ by J-P Colette in the issues of 12 and 13 January of Le Soir, into the financing of the revolutionary struggle, we find such phrases as ‘too costly for simple leftist’, ‘financed by a secret sponsor’, ‘crime does pay’, and ‘subversive patronage’. The first premise was correct, for our initial campaign did cost a great deal of money, and the development and operation of the cells requires a large monthly budget.

The first thing to do in attempting to stay within a budget, which is a political decision for communists, is to combat waste and mismanagement. This may seem naive, but it must be realized that for our militants there is no private property and that all our strengths and skills are devoted to the cells and to their political objectives.

This strict discipline means we can give a militant whose work brings in more than the starting salary of a teacher the choice of contributing his excess salary to the cells. We must say, however, that there are not many among us who earn that much – CCC members are not college teachers or white collar workers.

Comrades who are not militant members of the cells but who are attracted by our political struggle wish to show their solidarity with us by assisting us financially. We accept thisDOCOM5 (2) solidarity for the progress in communication and the political discussions it engenders.

However, most of the money the CCC need for their struggle is obtained from the ‘proletarian expropriations’ made by our militants from banks and their branches. The money taken from the bourgeoisie during these proletarian expropriations is administered by the cells for purposes of the struggle. We take from the bourgeoisie a small part of the spoils stolen from the workers, and return it to the proletariat through our revolutionary action.

The expropriation of bank funds, under the direction and in the service of the revolutionary struggle, is fair and has always been practiced. As Lenin said, ‘the confiscated funds are used partially for the needs of the Party, partially to buy weapons and prepare for insurrection, and partially to maintain the militants leading the particular struggle’. Comrade Stalin himself took part in bank expropriations and transporting funds for the Bolshevik Party, such as the famous 12June 1907 expropriation in Tiflis, which brought 341,000 rubles into the Party!

Proletarian expropriation is a military task implemented, as others are, under the direction of the organization. It is done conscientiously and seriously, with firmness and determination,. humbly and proudly.

We hope that those worried about our finances will be satisfied by our answer!

Those cops who were hoping we would publish a list of our proletarian expropriations will have hoped in vain. When we decide to claim credit for one of our fund-raisers, we will make the decision before, not after, the operation.

There is one other point. The reformist and legalist movement characterizing the entire political struggle in this country since the end of the Second World War has reinforced the notion of the invincibility of the domination by the bourgeoisie through its cops and its gendarmes. Do not try to deny this objective power, because anyone who believes that the revolutionary struggle can progress without the cops sooner or later arresting or killing our comrades is not only a dreamer, but also is dangerous.

Today, however, we are opposed by filth, and the ideology of the vanquished has so polluted the militant world that no one can imagine being victorious in combat; our initial campaign and its great success seem almost surrealistic! Let us leave surrealism to the artists and despair to the past. Who we are, where we come from, and why our first campaign was so successful can easily be understood and grasped by all authentic DOCOM6 (2)communist militants.

The petite bourgeoisie has the idea that the CCC do not ‘fit in’ with the present-day left in Belgium. This is quite true, yet what they have concluded is false, because the CCC are from Mars, at the very least. True, the CCC do not fit in with the present-day left in Belgium for the simple reason that they ‘fit in’ with the class struggle for communism. The ‘petit bourgeois’ seem to think that they are the center of the universe and that what they do not know does not exist.

In this section we will have to be quite discreet. Real comrades will understand that we cannot publish our family history without risking an unpleasant surprise.

The CCC first became a definite political and organizational entity in the struggle for communism in late 1982, and was the idea of a few comrades who had known each other for a long time through their militant or social activities. All had concluded, however, from thoroughly examining the national and international situation, that it was time to establish a communist guerrilla organization based on a critical evaluation of 15 years of armed struggle in the cities and on the restoration of Marxist-Leninism as a political objective.

The political and strategic plan and the unification of the cells emerged after numerous meetings, discussions, specific struggles; and when a certain level of development had been attained, a start was made on the organizational and clandestine work of the militant infrastructure.

As soon as their political unity was formally established, the cells attempted to stand on their own two feet with respect to matters of military organization, although this is not something that can simply be improvised. So, based on our meetings and critical discussions with other groups and organizations from abroad, we were able to establish, on minimal foundations, a distinct unity on matters of logistics.

What all the authors of detective stories believe will happen finally happened, when international revolutionaries raided the storage shelter of the Scouffleny quarry at Eccaussines. They seized 815 kilos of iremite, tolamite, triamite and dynamite: all the explosives used by the CCC during their first anti-imperialist campaign.

All the pompous nonsense we have heard about combinations of military explosives or other secret formulas can be attributed to either the incompetence of the Army’s munitions specialists or the shady dealings of the GIA-PTB.

Perhaps the future will provide other examples of comrades with more practical DOCOM7 (2)experience sharing their knowledge collectively. The CCC believe that a strong sense of solidarity among revolutionaries is just as important as the most radical of political criticisms.

Yet our most basic activity in 1983 and 1984 centered around our efforts at establishing a political approach and at expanding our operations. Our militants went out to explain the political purpose of the CCC to as many trusted comrades as possible, and learned how to listen to criticism, consider demands, and communicate their enthusiasm to others.

As our initial campaign began, we felt that we had taken our efforts as far as our forces and the situation allowed. The political positions of the CCC were set out in action communiques (an easy task) and our political militants were turned into guerrilla fighters (not quite as easy). The anti-imperialist campaign was the   culmination of the political work undertaken, and also made it possible to weed out the undecided and the adventurer-anarchists.

What simply must be understood, and explains why the petite bourgeois of the ‘left’ take a licking every time, is that the success of our struggle lies in its political orientation, not in any pathological paranoia. The resources we were able to assemble for our offensive came to us only when it became evident that they were essential for carrying out our political will.

‘We want another world and we are fighting to get it’ is not a cry of despair; it
expresses total confidence in the future of mankind, an objective attachment to the
theories of scientific socialism and their historical justification.

When members of the left grant interviews to the press and wax poetic over our struggle, we realize that they do not understand how we came on the scene as an aggressive political force, while they themselves lean more towards alcoholism and nervous depression. The PTB [Belgian Labor Party] cannot figure out where we came from, seeing that it became official in 1979, and that, outside the Party, nothing is possible. But let class differences and the objective strength they generate disturb their blind subjectivism and every single one of them falls flat on his face. This is the proof that they understand absolutely nothing and have no hope of ever improving their lot.

We noticed this defeatist attitude referred to above particularly at the time of the big [police] raid on 19 October. Some, in all sincerity, still cannot understand why we were not all arrested (gee, thanks!), why we did not then ‘respond’, why we have never said anything, and so forth. Others cannot believe that we haven’t been infiltrated by all the different police units or manipulated by the ghost of Goering. We get the feeling that when these people get up in the morning they do not face their day very optimistically.

To be provocative about it, we would be tempted to say that we have no comment on the 19 October raid. The only advice we could give to those interested is that it will certainly not be the last such raid and that the years of pacifist-social misery are coming to an end. Not as a result of our political-military battle, but because the crisis can only get worse, and will radicalize the antagonism between the classes and inevitably lead to an imperialist DOCOM8 (2)war or a revolution.

The political idealism with which the bourgeois democrats deceive the masses is an attempt to portray the historical types of bourgeois dictatorship as external to the traditional movement of capitalism. This is a fraud because it fails to attribute to economics and its contradictory laws a decisive role in social history while attributing a false authority to the role of political power.

Whether the democrats like it or not, the bourgeois dictatorship is characterized by selfish domination. It masquerades, as its interests dictate at different times and in different places, as bourgeois democracy or military fascism, or at times somewhere between these two extremes.

Bourgeois democracy is the form it takes when society is pacified to such an extent that no antagonism can be considered threatening.

Fascist dictatorship, with its police or military apparatus, is the way bourgeoisie defends its hegemony when irreconcilable class differences create a struggle in which class power is at issue.

The big raid of 19 October is an example of this situation. The bourgeoisie fears revolutionary politics because it knows how dangerous they are. And so, when confronted with a genuine demonstration of such politics for the first time in a very long time, it is forced to react very violently.

Parenthetically, when we say that the 19 October raid was a violent reaction, we do not wish to be grouped with those whining ecologists. Those who are always griping that their bourgeois honor has been violated will never understand, since they are so comfortable within the system, that they are part and parcel of imperialism and that it is thanks to them that the system is able to function.

There are two main reasons behind the 19 October raid. The first, and most obvious, involves a direct police action: arrest the CCC militants and destroy the guerrilla infra-structure. On that level, their failure is overwhelming. Why? Because we have thoroughly analysed the bourgeois dictatorship even in its democratic form, have evaluated the quality and objectives of our revolutionary struggle, and have organized ourselves accordingly.

After the raid, the ‘in’ thing to say in ‘leftist’ circles was ‘we expected it to happen’, whereas in truth none of these little democrats had done anything about it. This separates the true revolutionaries from those who are always running to their blessed mother DOCOM9 (2)democracy!

The second reason for the raid was to try to isolate us through large-scale police terrorism. This is not a new technique. The German police call it ‘drying up the swamp of sympathy’. Society must be terrorized so that it cannot sustain the revolutionary communists. This strategy is only effective against the petit bourgeois, who are the first to become traitors in their desire to maintain their little privileges. Since the policy of the CCC is directed by the cause of the proletariat and is developed directly within the working class, the cops are not isolating us; the opposite is true, for we are expanding.

We recall that immediately following the raid, the left regained some of its vigor by organizing a response to it. A number of meetings were held in various places and all were pathetic failures. Why? Because these little has-beens did not want to understand the terrorism of the bourgeois state, and followed a course of action, condemning our struggle, both frenzied and solitary.

No one followed them, and not only did they, for the nth time, as if this were necessary, give themselves away and cover themselves with ridicule, they destroyed any chances for a spontaneous revolt and the possibilities generated by the police aggression.

We said above that the police raid would certainly not be the last, but it would be more accurate to say that they have never stopped since October 1984. Search warrants, shadowing, phone-bugging, blackmail, etc., are here to stay and will only get worse.

One of the silliest explanations imaginable is being chanted by the media and mimicked by others who are really ignorant but don’t want to seem too dumb: ‘the revolutionary guerrilla movement hopes to bring about a situation of police fascism and thus provoke increasing social discontent.’ A statement like this reveals only the extent of the stupidity of those who make it.

There has never been any intention, especially by the CCC, to base an historic revolutionary strategy on the radicalization of the police. How stupid can you get?! What the Marxists know, however, is that the expansion of the class struggle inevitably leads to police and military repression. The issue, then, is not one of whether or not one ‘wants’ the exercise of repression, but of being prepared for it, because it will be increasingly evident as the revolutionary process continues.

The problem can only be expressed in the following terms: in order to vanquish the forces of the enemy and install) its own dictatorship, the proletariat and its vanguard must deploy superior forces, under the direction of the Communist Party. At our embryonic organizational level, the fact that the 19 October raid did not weaken us indicates that our political goals are right, and that our analysis of the situation and its requirements, as implemented by us, are correct. Our revolutionary policy is based on clandestine guerrilla warfare, the only path to choose.

DOCOM10 (2)Why did we make no ‘response’ to the raid? Simply because we do not engage in dialogue with the bourgeois State; we are, however, engaged in combating it. For the communists, it does not matter whether repression does or does not exist, since we know that there will be more and more of it! The task of the revolutionaries is to organize and lead the proletarian forces in the class struggle. In the class struggle, as in any other type of war, one side does not show its indignation when dealt a blow by the other side, unless the reason for fighting has been forgotten and all other reason has been lost.

This matter of , responding , to repression is indicative of political positions that remain mired in bourgeois legalism or an idealism based on a complete lack of understanding of the totally opposite interests of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie.

We do not wish to say at this time that we will never respond to the extortion of the enemy, but that is another matter and each situation must be thoroughly analysed to determine the political or military interests of each particular counter-attack. To conclude this discussion of the 19 October raid, we will say that our ‘response’ is permanent and is based on the continuity of our ongoing struggle.

Since we came on the scene in early October, a dubious game seems to have become disturbingly popular here in this little country – bomb scares, often attributed to us. We have several remarks to make on this subject.

‘Remarks’ is all we can offer because we can do little to change this situation.

Since we are directly involved, however, we would like to give our opinion.

We are the Fighting Communist Cells, a revolutionary political organization in which our comrades are collectively responsible for our militant activities. For us militants, the CCC organization is our identity, our struggle, and our entire life. It is dishonest, therefore, to attribute actions to us when we have had no part of them, even if carried out by anarchists with the best of intentions, and all hell breaks loose in the office of a government minister we do not accept such behavior and strongly criticize these immoral actions.

Our criticism is even stronger when our actions are claimed by those whose policy we protest against. We will not say that the police provocation of 16 October (Commando Delta) was such a case, but we do know that responsibility for our attack on the CVP in Ghent was falsely claimed by others, advocates of the Walloon federalist policy in Liege.

We said when we broached this subject that we cannot prevent this from happening, but we feel that some are using us, albeit in good faith. They do not know us and, although they are acting with the best of intentions, we ask that they immediately cease this practice which we entirely oppose.

We wish to say two things to those who are hoping to sabotage the operations of bourgeois institutions through a series of false alarms, even if our name is not used. First, they may think this is funny, but it still cannot be taken seriously and is rather unimaginative. The revolutionary organization and its struggle is more than just using the phone to send shivers down people’s spines. Second, this practice is shameful when workers are the ones who suffer as a result. In October, a false alarm on the Brussels- Tienen railroad immobilized all trains for several hours. Taking workers hostage simply in order to help somebody release his pent-up frustrations must have been the work of either’ irresponsible imbeciles or the cops.

Recent events require us to add one final point to our ‘concrete answers’. On 20 and 21 April, two attacks were carried out in Brussels on the NATO Assembly and  the multinational corporation AEG- Telefunken. The following week, these attacks were claimed by ‘FRAP’, a unit of the 20/4 [20 April).

We do not intend to analyse these actions or the FRAP, for all we know about them is what the media reported, however reliable that may be. We are not familiar with this group or its political orientation, but from what we read it appears to consist of insurgent DOCOM12 (2)anarchists. Time will tell.

Talking about these people and their actions is not important, however. What is important is to denounce the psychological battle the media have launched against us on the basis of those actions.

The 22 April edition of LeSoir asked, ‘FRAP-new name for the CCC?’ On the same day, in DH, we read, ‘A CCC splinter group?’ This morning, La Libre Belgique observed: ‘Some, not finding the CCC combative enough, perhaps created FRAP to carry on with these terrorist activities.’

We repeat, we do not know this group FRAP and have no contact with these militants. We wish to make it clear that no division has occurred within the ranks of the CCC, which happens to be expanding these days.

The communist has no fear of political clarification; if this becomes necessary at some future date it will never be refused, for otherwise the organization will have no future. Thus, if some day, as has happened many times in the past, the revolutionaries have to split from the revisionists, we will do so and inform the working class.

But how can anyone think that such a split within the CCC is possible today? Do the journalists believe that our political struggle and the committing of our lives to the revolution is a mere whim? They cannot make any sense out of what they write, e.g., ‘ … the sympathy they [the CCC] have garnered since then [the fall of 1984, the time of the political-military initiative) has probably increased their member-ship’.

The only excuse we can find for the ineptness of Roger Rosart, who wrote the above in La Libre Belgique, is that he has become so used to the show put on by the left that he has got them mixed up with us. Inasmuch as personal success is the criterion in all these different ‘Parties’, more communist than internationalist, the URDT included, the thing to do is to create as many little groups as there are potential members. The main activity of these little groups is casting aspersions on each other.

In the cells, however, the unifying activity is the class struggle for the communist revolution. Rather than wanting to split, we are increasingly eager to unity ourselves along the Marxist-Leninist line. Becoming a CCC militant and being willing to risk our lives and sacrifice our freedom for the revolution are highly responsible political decisions that can be made only when a strong political identity exists that does not change with the changing seasons.

This is the conclusion of our communication. The struggle continues and nothing will stop the proletarian offensive. We shall be victorious.

Fighting Communist Cells
Late April 1985

DOCOM3 (2)


Bombing of the Bank of

 America in Antwerp

4 December 1985

ccc9On 4 December 1985 the Fighting Communist Cells attacked and destroyed the offices of the Bank of America at Van Eyckel34 in Antwerp. The Bank of America is the second largest bank in the world and is one of the principal pillars of imperialism. Our action on 4 December was the fourth operation undertaken in the course of the ‘Pierre. Akkerman Campaign against bourgeois militarism and petty bourgeois pacifism’, following the attacks made against Infosermi, the pacifist leadership and the Motorola Corporation.

Before we say anything else, we think that we need to clarify a point which our choice of objective will certainly raise.

On 4 and 5 November the cells began their offensive against the financial oligarchy, in the cccboa1-001context of the ‘Karl Marx Campaign.’ We attacked the three largest banks in the country: the BBL, the SGB, and KB, as well as the MHB, one of the principal credit banks in the world. Now we are again attacking the banks, in the context of the ‘Pierre Akkerman Campaign.’

So why are there two campaigns, if they are aimed at the same objective, if they overlap in covering the same ground?

Our first appearance, in October 1984, opened the ‘October Anti-Imperialist Campaign’, thus indicating that from the beginning of our struggle we chose, both now and in practice, to organize our program in a very carefully arranged way. Regarding our armed struggle, Point 30 in ‘Documents of 1 May’ declared:

For our armed propaganda to achieve all of the goals established for it, the cells chose a system of operating by campaigns. By ‘campaign’ we mean a series of political and military operations of armed propaganda around a central theme. We started from a real and concrete contradiction in order to develop around it a series of operations which would connect this or that specific aspect of the sector chosen and the overall strategy of the armed struggle for communism. Furthermore, operating in terms of ‘campaigns’ makes it possible to connect those aspects which directly affect daily life and broader causes which are decisive.

Experience and the various lessons which we can draw from this first year of combat now strengthens our view that this tactic was correct. The organization of our political and military struggle by ‘campaigns’ became necessary in the sense that we are pursuing a very specific goal. That is, we started from the historical materialist analysis of the specific situation affecting the class struggle in our country and the world situation in order to change in an objective way the balance of forces between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. Thus, our whole struggle has been organized within an overall strategy, aimed at particular and progressive stages which are quantitatively and qualitatively favorable to the organization of the working class as a class by itself.

Contrary to the gossip in the media, which misrepresents our policy by presenting it as an accidental and anarchic congeries of operations by partisans, we always act after reflection and criticism, in a spirit of order and method, on the basis of precise analyses and as a function of the goals to be achieved, both political and organizational, immediate or historical

Although the objective reality affecting the Fighting Communist Cells does not yet make it possible for us to claim the historic role of a communist organization,  that is, the organism achieving the objective unity of the proletarian advanced guards and following the Marxist-Leninist line (whereas this is seriously lacking in the class struggle in our country), we must have an ‘action element’ in our organization, not only in our internal activity, above all. in our place within the proletarian struggle.

Therefore, we have noted the following:

cccboa3– Our first October anti-imperialist campaign led to the appearance of the cells and the resumption of the revolutionary struggle within the general contradiction: the people against imperialist war.

– the ‘Karl Marx Campaign’ posed the nature of the crisis: the failure of the capitalist system and the organization of the proletarian forces against the austerity program.

– The ‘Pierre Akkerman Campaign’ was a fighting initiative against bourgeois militarism, as well as a definitive criticism of petit bourgeois pacifism. It revealed the political and tactical correctness of our struggle and the development of our forces. On two occasions we made our offensive coincide with timely events and were therefore able to transform them: the anti-war mobilization and the Reagan visit. We will speak of these events again.

The course of events shed light on our work in this sense. The ‘Pierre Akkerman Campaign’ showed the progress made by the communist guerrilla movement against bourgeois militarism and the nature of petty bourgeois pacifism as seen through its failures. Our action taken against the Motorola Corporation was the best example of this.

However, the question still remains: why have we returned to the same objectives in different campaigns?

We returned to them quite naturally, in the sense that our various campaigns have all taken place within the class struggle and, in that way, they have confronted the same enemy: capitalism and the bourgeois dictatorship. Our correct analysis of imperialist war as a product of the system of capitalist production made it evident that sooner or later we were going to be faced with objectives in common with those of the ‘Karl Marx Campaign.’ In this case, the objective is financial capital.

However, we chose to attack banks as a function of the particular characteristics which linked them to each campaign: the BBL, the SGB, and the KB, which were directly identified by the proletariat as the bloodsuckers of the world of the workers, and the MHB as an aggressive representative of the imperialist economic order (in connection with Third World debt) for the ‘Karl Marx Campaign.’ The Bank of America was chosen for the ‘Pierre Akkerman Campaign’ as a ‘symbol’ of decadent, warmongering capitalism.

Now we will review another point: the progress made in our struggle.cccdutch2-001

After the Geneva Summit, a war summit between the two super imperialisms, Reagan passed through Brussels to report to his clique of accomplices the timing and the organization of an early war involving the European theater. And in the face of this imperial and provocative visit by this gangster who was engaged in brewing his evil schemes, with the help of the sixth Martens cabinet, who was there to face up to him?

The Fighting Communist Cells and their Marxist-Leninist, revolutionary policy, and no one else! We showed what should be – and always has been – the proper and exemplary attitude of communists toward the imperialist pigs: standing up straight, ready to fight, with weapons in our hands! And the petty bourgeois pacifists, the reformists and the revisionists in the PC, the PTB, the POS, and their related groups were only able to show their eternal and hypocritical sulky expressions. (We must recognize the honesty of the POS, which replaced its slogan of ‘Throw NATO Out; by the theme of ‘Let’s Get Out of NATO’ in its most recent electoral publicity. In the next stage its slogan will be, ‘Please, Mister Reagan.’)

However, the fact that the cells turned out to be the only organized force objectively fighting against US imperialism and the summit meeting held between the imperialist powers demonstrated much more than our offensive capabilities or voluntarist practices whose subjectivism would certainly be open to criticism. What is important to emphasize is the Marxist-Leninist, political foundation of our struggle. This struggle requires confrontation and a objective class struggle. This gives it a sense of direction, a reason, a leadership, a mature objective,absolutely contrary to the various versions of petit-bourgeois pacifism which misrepresent the historical facts of imperialist war, denying the class struggle, requiring an attitude of resignation and slave-like submission, and justifying a permanent process. of retreat. ‘

What are the reasons explaining the absence of the petty bourgeois pacifists when therecccboa2was a question applying their political line when Reagan paraded through the bunkers of NATO? In the first place and very simply because the objective reality of the brutality of this visit was based ‘on thousands of troops, and there was no longer any place for their illusions and their fine theories, as there cannot be any place for their poison in the consciences of sincere militants.

The Fighting Communist Cells attacked the visit by Reagan to NATO in a political and military way because our political line – in reality and not in theory – raises the question of imperialist war and the proletarian revolution. The cells were able to attack the Reagan visit in a political and military sense because they have learned, through the study of history and through the experience of daily life, that between the capitalists, the militarist, or the members of Parliament supporting them and the peoples of the world there is an abyss, an unconditional antagonism. Our final objective is the seizure of power by the proletariat under the leadership of their Communist Party. The attack against Reagan and the ‘Geneva Summit’ was a small, constructive step in this direction.

Pacifism and its supporters were not able to attack the Reagan visit because pacifism does not fight against anything (certainly not imperialist war but rather the anti-war movement). This is a policy organized by and logically emerging from the bourgeois dictatorship, in order to defend its interests more effectively. The objective of pacifism is to beg the warmongers for peace. For that reason we don’t really see why pacifism should attack its own masters.

When pacifists need to polish up the image of their mediocrity and their treason, they can do no more than turn themselves over to the bourgeois courts, acting like sheep that people suffering from insomnia count, in this case jumping over the fences of military bases to fall into the arms of the police! The self-paralysis of pacifism is a form of  collective desertion from the struggle.

The development of our revolutionary policy through the ‘Pierre Akerman Campaign’ and a clarification of the question of which is fighting against warmongering imperialism in opposition to the organizers of country picnics or other collectors of funds for the ‘party’ – these will become .increasingly clear within the contradiction between the workers of the world and the warlike project of the bourgeoisie. The future will favor the struggle, the organization of the proletarian, advanced guard, communist forces. The professional parasites and the traitors to the class struggle will be swept aside by this formidable movement!

We will now conclude this statement with a final point directly linked to reality.

In the same way that we have explained our offensive position against imperialism and bourgeois militarism by the proper kind of Marxist-Leninist leadership, and certainly not cccboa4by voluntarist subjectivism, we have been able to deliver blows against the enemy that are as incisive as they are destructive. Once again, the proper choice of tactics for the struggle rests on our political orientation. It has been determined as a function of our objectives and not by who knows what absence of military experience. We might mention parenthetically at this point the limited stupidity with which the ‘extreme left’ rambles on about our so-called military capabilities. This is only an admission of their own ignorance, their fetish for militarism, coupled with a limitless cowardice.

The choice we have made – and it is certainly not an absolute choice – to carry out our activities up to this point through the use of the revolutionary guerrilla movement is not a recipe regurgitated from Lumumba University in Moscow. Rather, it was adopted when our forces raised firmly and in a determined way the question of the struggle for communism within the class war here.

It is only with absolute confidence in the proletariat as a class, as well as with an objective attachment to historical and dialectical materialism, demanding human dignity in the struggle against exploitation, injustice, and misery, that our militants and our comrades have assembled the force and the intelligence which lead to victory.

We have certainly many criticisms to make of ourselves and we are learningf rom them. However, while distrusting a misplaced feeling of victory at hand, we can say that we are demonstrating now, by action, that the class enemy can be attacked and can be forced to suffer defeat and that maintaining a continued effort is possible in the offensive of the revolutionaries and the workers of the world!

The Fighting Communist Cells are showing that, starting from a position in which we were encircled, paralysed and controlled by the bourgeois enemy, we can go over to the offensive against those surrounding and attacking us. They are showing that even weak forces, guided by the demand for a proletarian victory, that is, in that framework of the march of history, and guided by the teachings of Marxism-Leninism, can be powerful forces for the workers. What is necessary is for this revolutionary policy to have an increasing impact on the proletariat.

We will say it once more. Let every militant of the anti-war movement – if he is sincere – open his eyes, without fear and without weakness, to the outcome of the years of pacifist errors, comparing them to the results of the recently begun struggle of the Fighting Communist Cells on the question of imperialist war. As far as we are concerned, the fight goes on, but we want to tell everyone that there are moments when history speeds up in the sense that during certain periods the outcome can be either a future of misery or a future of progress and of liberation! It is in such a situation that we must now make the choice which will determine the outcome of the imperialist war: a proletarian revolution or several more decades of imperialist barbarism!





The Fighting Communist Cells
For the Construction of the Fighting Organization of the Proletariat


6 December 1985

to the ‘Workers and

Comrades in France’

ccc9This morning, a group of the internationalist communists in France and the Fighting Communist Cells conducted three revolutionary guerrilla actions together, one at Versailles, two in Belgium. For the first time, the internationalist character of this offensive clearly shows our organization beyond national borders. Thus, having intervened in your situation, we wish to present and explain, although very briefly, the political project of the cells, our history, and our struggle.

This presentation seems necessary as a precaution: we already know that the media as a whole are sure to raise the specter of ‘international terrorism’, the KGB, or the ‘Bulgarian connection’, and, in particular, Direct Action. We are completely separate from all that Those who know something about our struggle and our political positions are aware that what separates us from DA is the insurmountable gulf between Marxism-Leninism and anarcho-radicalism.

What are the Fighting Communist Cells? We are a young – and still very weak – organization of militants fighting for the communist revolution.

Unfortunately, however, history is filled more and more with improper manipulations of the communist idea or betrayals of its essence: one of the two principal imperialisms shamefully always claims to be acting in its name: the Chinese counter-revolution is reinstating capitalism in the name of its ideal and perceptiveness: and, under its cover the PCF [Parti Communists Francais – French Communist Party], since 1920, has been peddling its social-democratic orthodoxy. We must therefore give some clarifications regarding our communist affirmation.

We fight for the communist revolution, for the destruction of bourgeois power,for the construction of a classless and stateless society – a society in which the exploitation of man by man will be abolished, a humanity without misery and without war …

For us Marxists, this is a very concrete objective that we consider attainable and know is inescapable in the evolution of humanity. Our entire commitment, identity and subjectivity are based on faith in the cause of the exploited, justified by so many heroicccclitton-001 pages in the struggle of the people; draw their strength from the need for a new world, and find their rationale in the theories of scientific socialism. Our entire political, strategic and tactical organization is united on those grounds and has but one aim: revolution!

The policy, strategy and practice of the Fighting Communist Cells are guided by the living teachings of Marxism-Leninism. Very briefly, this means:

– Human societies are organized fundamentally on the basis of historical economic conditions; that is, the organization and development of production methods. The hegemonic method of production characterizing this era is capitalism. In its current stage, monopolistic and world-wide, it is imperialism, the ‘highest stage of capitalism’.

– Capitalism is a class system in which the interests of the bourgeoisie and the proletariat are in opposition to each other, in an antagonistic way. The means of production and accumulated wealth are in the hands of a small band of parasites – the bourgeoisie – while the vast majority of the population is deprived of the fruit of its labor. At this stage of this absolute imperialism, we say that the principal contradiction propelling the movement of history is the one setting the world proletariat against the imperialist bourgeoisie.

The following issue emerges from history: the capitalist rationale no longer generates any progress in the development of productive forces. On the contrary, it can only  with increasingly tragic consequences, all its inherent defects: economic crises, over-exploitation of labor, unemployment, incessant wars, continent-wide famines, ecological catastrophes and disturbances, existential alienation and despair, etc.

– Therefore, it makes good sense and is of current interest to consider getting beyond the situation and causing the disappearance of this economic order, which is as absurd as it is criminal.

– The proletariat is the social class called upon to accomplish this revolution. It alone is able to do so because of its position in the economic contradiction, and, by organizing itself as a class for itself under the guidance of its Communist Party, to bring together the living strength and the proper proletarian direction for seizing power. When the working class seizes power it means absolute authority of the world of labor over all the economic and political sectors, particularly the disappearance of private property and the socialist organization of production.

– The proletarian revolution will be a violent revolution. The dictatorship of the
bourgeoisie is based inherently on the terrorist brutality of its mercenary armies, and at the time of the historical confrontation it will throw all its deadly madness into the battle. cccboa2To defeat the bourgeoisie and its police henchmen, the working class must acquire a great political, ideological and military unity capable of crushing the enemy forces. The Communist Party, guided by Marxism-Leninism, and the Red Army, placed under its direction, are the political and military instruments that the working class must acquire (and which must emerge from its midst) to impose its own dictatorship: the dictatorship of the proletariat. By establishing the dictatorship of the proletariat, the working class will eliminate the bourgeoisie and thus will create the conditions for its self-extinction as a class.

The Fighting Communist Cells are full-fledged participants in the class in Belgium. On the basis of the historical materialistic analysis of the social climate of our country and the potential and weaknesses of the proletarian movement – and taking into consideration the. international context – we are working on the ‘first task’: the construction of the Organization Combattante des Proletaires [Proletarian Fighting Organization], that is, the organizational unification of the proletarian avant-gardes into an offensive and revolutionary association.

The construction, in the class struggle, of the Proletarian Fighting Organization, is therefore a primary task that the communists must tackle in our country … and in yours! In our case, we have defined the current strategic period of the cells’ battle as one of ‘armed propaganda’.

The armed struggle for communism is a particularly effective propaganda vehicle when it is handled correctly. This force resides in the amount of change it causes in the democratic circus for which the bourgeoisie writes the program, in the extent to which it causes objective destruction to the enemy camp, in the fact that it attests to the still limited organization of proletarian forces organized for class war, and in that it is irretrievable insofar as the paid ideologues of the bourgeoisie are concerned: facts are facts!

Moreover, the practice of armed struggle as revolutionary change anticipates and prepares the future phases of the revolutionary movement, civil war, insurrection for the seizure of power by the proletariat, and elimination of the bourgeoisie and its agents. The class movement, immersed in the guerrilla war, will come to the decisive crucial moments of its history with experience and organization – the absolutely necessary real strengths of political, organizational and even subjective maturity.

‘The armed struggle for communism finally makes it possible, through events, to unmask all the traitors of the workers’ movement, all those who are sure to join the bourgeoisie and denounce the revolutionaries when the storm breaks! Armed struggle is characterized by real anticipation of worker power, it unmasks the policies of ‘collaboration’ and integration of union and reformist traitors.

‘And above all, the armed struggle expresses the practice of a true Proletarian Internationalism because, in the era of imperialism, increasingly greater unity is required among the avant-gardes and the masses of the dominated countries and the metropolises. This unity in the face of a common enemy is being achieved in the revolutionary struggle cccdutch3intercon-001and is necessary to attack the enemy on all fronts. At a time when so many nations of the world are fighting the beast with weapons in hand, the revolutionaries in the metropolises are duty bound to attack the rear of the imperialist machine with the same determination. (Items 16 to 19 of our ‘May 1 Document. Regarding Armed Struggle.’)

In practice, to date, our policy has taken shape in three campaigns:

1. The First October Anti-Imperialist Campaign raised the issue of the revolutionary policy emerging within the contradiction that opposes entire populations to imperialism: the imperialist war. In our country, a big mass movement was mobilized against NATO’s bellicose preparations, which are exemplified particularly by the establishment of US missiles on our territory. Through this campaign, we restored the question of imperialist war to its matrix: the capitalist mode of production. We took the offensive against three multi-nationals directly involved in the war industry, against the political parties in the government, the Christian-Socialists and the Liberals, and finally against NATO armed forces. We ended this campaign on 15 January 1985.

On 1 May. Labor Day, we attacked and destroyed the headquarters of the Federation des Entreprises de Belgique [Enterprise Federation of Belgium] in Brussels, the base of Belgian employers. In the course of our operation, the police were responsible for the death of two firemen, a tragedy to which we were only able to respond weakly a few days later by attacking the Logistics and Finance Administration of the police force, a special body of anti-worker repression under NATO command via ‘National Defense’. CCC11 (2)

On 1 May we also published a series of documents, the main one of which was an initial overall definition of our revolutionary strategy: ‘Regarding Armed Struggle’.

2. The ‘Karl Marx Campaign’ raised the issue of the workers’ struggle against austerity and the need for worker organization. We began it on 8 October last with the action against Intercom, a giant in the production and distribution of power (gas, electricity), responsible, along with its peers in Europe, for hundreds of deaths last winter from freezing and destitution. Next, we destroyed the head-quarters of Fabrimetal, a metallurgy employers’ union, and on the same day, still in Charleroi, we attacked the ‘Office of Direct Taxation’. On 4 and 5 November, the cells attacked and destroyed three main headquarters of the financial oligarchy: the three top banks in the country (already attacked on various occasions during worker demonstrations) and MHB, fourth largest credit institution in the USA, a veritable empire of the Third World. The ‘Karl Marx Campaign’ is still on today.

3. The ‘Pierre Akkerman Campaign, fighting bourgeois militarism and petit  bourgeois cccdutch2-001pacifism’, came about as a continuing progression of our first campaign. It is linked to recent current events: the anti-war mobilization of 20 October in Brussels, the inter-imperialist summit in Geneva, and Reagan’s untimely incursion into NATO on the 21st. On 19 and 20 October, we attacked Inforsermi, a military recruitment center, and then denounced in a practical way the infamous doings of the pacifist petits-bourgeois whose only reason is to betray the anti -war movement by enveloping it in defeatist legalism. While Reagan was strutting around in the NATO bunkers, under the protection of thousands of cops and soldiers, our organization destroyed the European headquarters of US Motorola, the military electronics corporation, and the day before yesterday we attacked the Bank of America in Antwerp. This morning’s three simultaneous actions ended the ‘Pierre Akkerman Campaign’, named after an internationalist communist who fell on 1 January 1937, in the battle of the international brigades.

Workers, Comrades,

This short presentation is certainly insufficient to inform you of the universality and characteristics of the Fighting Communist Cells. Nevertheless, we think it was proper to write it in that it is an approach that may tempt some of you to continue to ponder over the standard and path of the communist revolution’s battle. All we can do is address the same message to the workers of our country.

The Fighting Communist Organization, unifying those most ready to fight among the proletariat, is not born as a result of its own proclamation. The avant-gardes, with their wealth of experience and forces developed for the revolutionary finality, are unifying in the definite movement of battle. Today, we say to sincere comrades who are ready to fight: read, study and discuss the teachings of Marxism and Leninism: study and discuss the experiences of our class, read, study, circulate and criticize the political expression of revolutionaries in Europe and throughout the world today, enrich this heritage with your criticisms and in that context confront it in practice with the organization of the proletarian forces, and the doors of the future will open before you!

For communism,
Fighting Communist Cells


ccc9(an interview that Arm The Spirit translated but never published … originally published in Belgian magazine Le Peuple, 25/04/1987)

What is your system of detention at the present time?

A destructive system: complete isolation, a prison within a prison. Last year, because of the hunger strike and the mobilization that occurred around it, we gained certain improvements necessary for political tasks/work (information,  lectures, correspondence). But after some time, the situation is once again degrading considerably. But those thatcccdutch1-001  wish to discuss with us can still write directly to us.

Are you satisfied with the way in which the investigation regarding the rights of the defence is possible?

It is impossible for us to answer a question of this nature for two reasons:

First, since justice (the judicial machine and the Right) is a product of the current social system, it adopts the nature of the class system. This justice, it is the interests of the bourgeoisie instituted as law. In this situation we don’t grant these laws any legitimacy, and our only relation to them is through confrontation, through the continuation of the class struggle; our goal is the liberation of, not the oppression of, working people.

Second, and as a consequence, because we don’t have to “defend” ourselves from justice such as this, we stand firm in our belief that the bourgeoisie has no right to accuse us.
Revolutionary action is impossible! When the hearing comes it will be the bourgeoisie who will have to answer for their crimes, capitalism will have to answer for its invalidity, and imperialism will have to answer for its barbarity.

  Did you or did you not plant bombs?

We are militants of a revolutionary communist organization who, within the framework of ccc8armed struggle, carried out explosive attacks against political, economic, and military centers of bourgeois power. We individually and collectively, claim and assume the whole of the work of our organization.

Have you committed any acts of terrorism?

 The CCC has never committed the least act of terrorism!

Terrorism consists of paralysing the enemy through fear and this has nothing to do with communist propaganda. The political line and practice of the CCC contains the elements of theory, politics, and strategy necessary to anti-austerity and anti-war struggles if they are to overcome their current  ineffectiveness. We are the furthest thing from terrorism.

Now, it is possible to see the struggle to liberate ourselves from shackles and to embark on the road to Revolution as fruitless because of the collaboration of class and legalism, to be frightened of the bourgeoisie … but our goal is not to frighten the bourgeoisie; our goal is to uproot its power, to remove all  possibilities to exploit the proletariat, and to put a definite end to its filthy dealings.

What objectives are you pursuing?

In the end, the building up of a communist society, that is to say, a society where exploitation of man by man is banished, a society where production is put to the service of humanity and not the opposite, a society without class and without the state, a society where everybody contributes according to his or her means and where everyone receives according to his or her needs.

The only alternative to capitalism rests on embarking on the path to this society, that is to say, working towards the communist revolution. The latter,with its logic of profit reveals itself to be incapable of managing the productive forces and riches stemming from socialcccsoli8 work, in its dying logic the material possibility from now on open assures all inhabitants of the planet a decent life and better everyday, and is interpreted as crisis, welfare, exploitation, war, famine, etc.

For working people the choice is clear: either continue to be subjected to the convulsions of this system in agony, or work towards its overtaking through socialism. Between submission and the revolution, there’s nothing left …

Therefore it’s in a revolutionary perspective that the Cells found their politics. It consists (in brief) to contribute to the measure of their means to the emergence and the the development of necessary elements for the success of the revolutionary process

What are these elements?

Above all else, a “rearming” theory, politic, and ideology of the proletariat. We must break off with the collaborationist and/or defeatist logics in order to develop a reliable general strategy, an audacious and precise political .line, lucid and courageous analysis, adaptable and offensive tactics, etc. This “rearming” will bring a return to Marxist/Leninist principles.

Afterwards, at a practical level, the main objective is the foundation in the struggle of the communist combatant party.

 Do you have the impression that the inquest is being dragged on, whither is be before the arrests or afterwards?

Not at all.

In judicial circles it is said that you were linked with other branches of “international terrorism” (A.D., R.A.F.) … is this true?

 The CCC has numerous contacts with groups, organizations, as well as with militants and cccsoli3lone workers. As soon as political convergence (even weak) appears in the struggle, every effort is made to establish contact. This contact consists, above all, of confronting the political lines and options, exchanging critiques and discussions, and clearing up possible incomprehensions, etc.

Take the example of Action Directe. Considering the evolution of its discourse, we estimated in 1983 that a possibility of political encounter existed . The debate proved to us that this was not the case, and that too large a gap separated our Marxist­-Leninist line and the anarchist line of A.D. The contacts were then suspended.

What was the nature of these links?

That varied according to the degree of political unity estimated during the discussions and demonstrated in practice. Once unity appeared sufficient (or brought adequate progress) practical cooperation could be contemplated.

Was it a question of an exchange of information or of materials?

Yes, but unity can be carried much further. Let’s recall most notably the attack against the NATO network of pipelines in December 1985″ during our “Pierre Akkerman” campaign: cccdutch2-001this attack was undertaken simultaneously in Belgium by the Cells, and in France by a group of international militant communists (it’s no longer a question of A.D.)

There are other points to make.

It is political unity which, above all, will determine practical unity, never the opposite.

Communists are devoted to the “count on your own strength” principle, and in that sense,we can’t allow the struggle to depend on outside contributions.

Were you tied to other organizations (P.L.O., I.R.A.)?

You mention the PLO and the IRA. Why would we be tied to these organizations? We are communists, we only have links with comrades in other countries and with workers of our country. We have discussions with comrades engaged in the proletarian strugle even if thev don’t think that armed struggle should be undertaken today !We tell  them why we think otherwise, and why we think this struggle is necessary, and we try to make progress together.

But why would we link up with people or organizations that don’t have the same goals or principles as us, organizations which do not fight for the proletarian revolution (or who are sometimes directed by bourgeois factions)? Because they are engaged in armed struggle?’ That would be absurd!

cccsoli4Unity is founded on common goals and principles, and not on this or that form of struggle. There is no more a coaliton or union of bomb throwers (of “international terrorists”) than there is a union of pamphlet distributors, or a union of those who post flyers.

The confusion between political line and type of struggle is not innocent. Rather it is often provoked and upheld by the bourgeoisie; this allows them to depoliticise and defame armed struggle for communism and to associate armed struggle with matters which are foreign to it.

 Certain journalists have evoked possible links with other “terrorists” called “Killers Of Brabant Wallon.” Are there any contacts?

Here is an example of what we have just talked about. Having stuck the CCC with the generic label of “terrorists”, most ignoble and absurd combinations are made. Since gangsterism of killers is a product of the bourgeois ideology practice (massacre and pile up the populace), and since this constitutes the opposite of our practice, they try to defame our struggle by associating us with it.

A little after your arrests, a daily newspaper received a letter saying that “the struggle continues.” Is the struggle continuing?

Of course. The CCC were products of the economic and social conditions of Belgium in the 1980’s and these conditions don’t change because of some arrests: when a hundred men are hungry, it’s not by putting the first one who complains in prison that the other ccc7ninety-nine are satisfied! The interests of the proletariat are objective, and necessitate the reclamation of the offensive, the liberation of legalism, reformism, parliamentarianism, etc., and the organization of an open revolutionary process for the seizure of power. As long as the same problem remains, the same solutions will impose themselves. This said, the letter of which you speak, did not come from our organization .

Do you accept the theory of the Red Brigades: the state must be destabilized through terrorist actions to create the conditions of a strong power which will, by itself, give rise to the “proletarian revolution”?

This theory; fanciful’ as it is, comes from the police services. NEVER have the red Brigades envisioned such a theory and all those who have read or studied BR texts know this ..

Once a revolutionary organization follow a lines so clear, so just, and so adapted to the needs and wishes of the masses that it is useless for the boureoisie to try an open attack, the bourgeoisie must then invent out of all the pieces another line, and trumpet to all who want to listen that it’s the “real” line of the revolutionary organization. It’s a process as old as it is, pathetic.

This said, it is true that the revolutionary offensive does provoke inflexibility and harshness on the part of the bourgeoisie. This is normal, the bourgeoisie is attacked, the bourgeoisie defends itself. We know that the bourgeoisie organizes its domination democratically when the populace cowers, but when the populace decides to lift its head and take its future in its hand, the rose-colored candy of social peace gives way to the khaki of blatant domination. We have already experienced this in our country. ‘

cccsoli7bThe only real question which the proletariat faces is to be stronger than the bourgeoisie and to finally and definately shatter its reins.

Of course, the proper understanding of your question is made difficult by the clique of moaners who run in between the legs of the working class advocating submission and whining, in advance, the loss of their privileges; the privileges the bourgeoisie gives to its servants. But this mob has less and less credibility with the workers.

One last thing, this “theory” is also absurd since it presumes that something else (a “strong power”) would be needed for a mass revolutionary process to emerge. That is ridiculous: as if capitalist exploitation aggravated even by crisis and contention does not amply suffice to impose such a process!

The actions of the CCC were generally more cautious, less flagrant, than those of other movements of the same type. Was this the fruit of an analysis of the results obtained by these movements? If yes, which ones? If no, what is a good explanation?

First off, these actions were not flagrant at all. Each was aimed at an precise cog in the bourgeois machinery of exploitation and domination.

As for the fact that everything has been organized and planned so that the masses are not endangered by revolutionary actions; its simply the most basic communist moral: serve the people!

It is evident that we carefully study the experiences of armed struggle for communism elsewhere in Europe: and we mainly focus our attention on two struggles, which like our own, rigorously follow Marxist-Leninist principles; the Red Brigades in Italy, and the PCE(r) and GRAPO in Spain. The analyses and experiences of these struggles have played a cccstarmajor role in the building of our political line; at for us they are a major reference point, as rich in lessons as the Paris Commune, the Revolution of October 17, the Komintern, or the cultural proletarian revolution in China, for example. That’s why we never stop advising our comrades; all those for whom the proletarian revolution is not just a hollow word, to read texts of these organizations.

To return to your initial question, we will add that these organizations have a vigilance at least the equal of ours, to ensure that the masses are not endangered during guerilla

Has the action of the Sols A Bruxelles Road marked a turning point in your connection with public opinion?

Yes and No. The attack against the seat of the Belgian employers on May 1st was well received. How could it have been otherwise? For the first time in a long time the 1st of May  regained all of its meaning. But there was also the death of two firemen and the bourgeois manoeuvre to transfer onto the CCC the overwhelming responsibility of the police in this matter. This morbid manoeuvre (noteworthy of its author) had as its goal to
cynically exploit the legitimate indignation of the masses, and to transform it into a rejection of revolutionary politics. Following this manoeuvre, those who know the direction of our struggle, those who know the extreme vigilance of the Cells to the safety of the masses, or more simply, all those who have more faith in revolutionaries than in bourgeois propaganda: all these made a blockade around the CCC to counter this repugnant manoeuvre. However it is true that other workers, more vulnerable to the
propaganda of the “makers of public opinion” of the bourgeoisie were troubled by this manoeuvre.

Did you get the impression, at the beginning of your actions – I think notably of the action against the NATO pipelines – that there was a wave of sympathy in public opinion?

For sure: alot of people found this funny! The downcast expression of the ministers, the empty-handed police, the ridicule of operation mammoth,etc …. it was very amusing. But this is of very little interest. As time went on, those who only saw an exciting remake of cccpipeline2the David and Goliath became bored. However, those who were directly effected by, or concerned with, the struggle against austerity and militarism began thinking about the credibility, the rationality, the seriousness, and the potential for victory.

You claim to be communists … communists say your are mixed up. How do you respond?

Very simply. Look at who is communist in etiquette, and who is communist in combat! In other words, look at who betrays Marxism-Leninism and at who applies it: look at who sells out the workers for a minor parliamentary role and who struggles for the conquest of power for the workers; look at who collaborates in the domination of the bourgeoisie and supports this noxious democracy, and who fights for the disappearance of this parasitic class; or, finally, look at who pokes a hole in the soft nest of the capitalist regime and who struggles for communism, no matter what the consequences might be for the combattants.

This is the most serious way of looking at it, and we are composed regarding the the verdict of the workers once they have had their examination!

Interview With The CCC Prisoners Collective, 1998

ccc9The CCC (Cellulues Communistes Combattantes – Fighting Communist Cells) prisoners have been long forgotten. In the decade since their conviction in 1988 they have been left without support, except from the “Parents and Friends of the Communist Prisoners” (APAPC) and some groups and individuals abroad. The anarchist movement never did much for the prisoners of the CCC, neither to better their situation nor to work for their release.

There are a couple of reasons for this that are worth mentioning. First, the hostility of the entire classical leftist spectrum, also from self-defined revolutionary groups. There is a widespread theory that says that the CCC – together with the “Gang of Nijvel” – was part of a destabilization campaign by extreme right elements inside, or in cooperation with, state agencies. This thesis was systematically spread in papers and magazines and other publications, and a lot of anarchists believed this theory. There are lots of elements pointing towards the fact that “a strategy of tension” raged in Belgium in the middle of the 1980s.

We think the idea that the CCC was part of this “strategy” to be nonsense. There is no evidence whatsoever to support this. And there’s also this: What about the fact that four militants were arrested, brought before the courts, and  convicted? These people never renounced their beliefs and are still politically active. Those who spread these stories (and lets name them: these rumors were especially spread by the Maoists from the PTB – the Workers Party of Belgium) showed which side they are one (the side of the bourgeoisie) and to where sectarian logic leads. Attacked in their claims for power and truth, they threw overboard the most fundamental revolutionary principals: the defense of and solidarity with victims of state repression.

Secondly, there is the position of the CCC concerning the FRAP arrests, who they see as “anarchist adventurers”, possibly manipulated by Action Directe. Plus, at the trial they acted as “snitches”. Though there is much more that can be written about this, we don’t consider ourselves qualified to make statements. This because of the lack of background information on the internal affairs of the armed underground resistance groups, and because we don’t have the documents of the trial itself. We hope in the end that all persons concerned give clear answers about this matter.

Finally, there is the Marxist-Leninist ideology of the CCC, which we think is the main cause for their isolation. Because this entails a rather fundamental (theoretical, political, and ideological) discussion, we have chosen to answer on this later, in a direct answer to the CCC, which we will publish. We state clearly: Supporting the CCC does not mean we defend their political ideas. We have few illusions about those ideas and the concrete ccc8consequences they have (for us). Supporting the CCC prisoners points at one of the main purposes of the ABC: non-sectarian support and defense of revolutionary prisoners, this means those who carried out acts of resistance against a system based upon inequality of race, gender, class, etc., and who are heavily prosecuted because of that. The CCC prisoners have been victims of isolation, didn’t have a fair trial, and suffer even to this day under exceptional measures, and they are kept in confinement only because of their political ideas.

It doesn’t matter if their choice for the armed struggle is right or wrong – morally or empirically (politically or strategically) – what matters is the fact that people had the courage to act in consequence with their ideas and convictions, in other words people had the courage to be free. Let’s not forget that those who have chosen to go underground in the resistance are fully aware as an ever present probability that one day they will be arrested, or possibly killed (there are 28 dead RAF militants to remind us of this fact).


We have an impression that those who condemn the CCC because of this (the violence) are often the same ones who close their eyes to the massive structural violence which marks our society, and to the cold cynicism of those in power who use the most brutal and gruesome means to maintain their positions, and for the enormous interests behind this all. Anyone who faces this, who in other words looks the daily reality of class struggle, oppression of women, racist violence, the destruction of nature, etc., in the eye, loses either courage and hope, or every illusion that this system can be changed without violence. In general, in our democracy, unwelcome ideas are being fought by silencing them to death. If this doesn’t work – because the silence is being broken by some hard blows – they are being fought by locking up people, or more “thoroughly” by killing
them. As anarchists, we don’t believe that this is a solution. Ideas are defeated by open arguments and debate, and by putting your own ideas in practice. We are well aware that anarchists don’t own the truth. We are convinced that we still have a lot to learn from those who fought the struggle to its bitter consequences, and from those who continue doing this. Therefore we are willing to discuss with the CCC, and we invite others to
do the same.

Anarchist Black Cross
Gent, Belgium
June 1998

Q: Since the 1980s, the armed revolutionary struggle has almost disappeared in Europe (except for the IRA and ETA). Action Directe, GRAPO, the Red Brigades (BR), and the CCC all ended their activities. The RAF first announced it was suspending its political-military operations and has recently dissolved itself. Are you aware of this evolution? What do you think about this? Does this point to a new direction for the revolutionary left?

Of course we keep a close eye on the evolution of the revolutionary movement in Europe, but we don’t think that things are as simple as your question may suggest. Different groups have stopped for different reasons. The CCC and AD, for example, because they were military defeated. The BR because political reorganization was made impossible by grapopiceighteenrepression. The RAF because they have politically degenerated and dissolved themselves. The PCE(r) and GRAPO are still active, and communist and anti-imperialist guerrillas are very strong in Turkey and Greece. The revolutionary struggle never developed in a uniform and linear way. It’s a phenomenon of great complexity, subject to conjunctural and local influences, etc. At the end of the 60s and the beginning of the 70s, a big wave of struggle emerged in Western Europe, although it started to collapse since the mid-80’s, that’s a fact. But we do think that the next wave to come will be stronger, because of a more favorable socio-economical context as well as because of the rich heritage of experiences and reflections from the previous wave.

The most important merit of the struggle of the RAF in the 70’s, of the BR, the PCE(r) and GRAPO, and of the CCC, etc., is the fact that the first steps have been made towards the political orientation and the revolutionary strategy that are presently needed in the imperialist countries. Only by relying on a critical and constructive balance of these 15 years of struggle, and by valuing this decisive contribution, will it be possible for the revolutionary movement to resume the offensive for the overthrow of capitalism and the liquidation of the bourgeoisie.

Q: What makes you think that a new wave of armed struggle is on its way in Europe? This, considering – again – the self-dissolution of the RAF and the peace negotiations in Northern Ireland which seem to indicate the contrary?

These two examples divert our attention from the subject: The RAF already lost sight of the revolutionary objective 15 years ago (and turned in the direction of radical reformism), and the goal of the IRA has never been social revolution but the end of British dominationraflogo in Northern Ireland. We are only talking here about the armed struggle as an expression of the revolutionary contradictions within the capitalist society. We are Marxists, we think that social and historical phenomena are dictated by the evolution of objective circumstances, and in the last resort by the contradiction between the development of the forces of production and the mode of production. These contradictions dictate the necessity today of the overthrow of capitalism and the arrival of socialism. The central question is: How to bring about the step from capitalism to socialism? Historical study and Engels answer: “Violence is the midwife of the entire old society that bears a new society within. It is the means by which the social movement will make it and by which it smashes fossilized and dead political forms.”

The practical question is: Which strategy has to be applied for the struggle to accumulate the necessary forces to attain liberation? The experience of the class-struggle in this century and the characteristics of the situation answer: the continuous revolutionary war, of which the first phase is armed propaganda. Once there exists a revolutionary way out (sure, in this case, very difficult) in a situation which seems to be further completely blocked, one can be sure that this way out will be used one day or the other. First of all, this will be done by the avant-garde elements, later, once the road is laid, by growing parts of social groups which have an interest in rushing past capitalism.

All this, to say a couple of things very quickly, because the question is very complex. Among the tendencies where people think it opportune to take up weapons only when the masses have already done so and the partisans of “here and now” without any preparation (without a program or organization), one finds a diversity of analyses. Our analysis iscccsoli9 situated on a level in between, and one can also quote those who set the foundation of a real Leninist party as a condition to trigger off the armed struggle. We invite the comrades who are interested in our vision on this subject and in the various conclusions we made to take notice of the documents we have exchanged with the French revolutionary organization “Voice Proletarienne” devoted to this question in the debate.

Q: Can you give a short history of why and how you made the choice for armed struggle? Are you still convinced of the choice and the analysis made at the time?

The struggle of the CCC is situated in the spin-off of the break with Soviet revisionism that emerged in the 60s. In this period, the Chinese revolution and the struggle for liberation in the Third World stimulated a new revolutionary trend in the imperialist countries. This trend convicted the Communist Parties who walked behind the banner of the Soviet Union, and every other reformist orientation. At the start of the 70’s, the first movements came forward in West Germany and then in Italy, who openly questioned the use of revolutionary violence and the political-military practice to overthrow the power of the bourgeoisie. The CCC are the inheritors of these first experiences, with the advantage of the roads already travelled in the 70s, and they have tried to go even further by taking up the task of giving their share of the answers to the questions which are only putBR1 (2) forward by the revolution. In this respect it’s worthwhile to state that big theoretical advances often emerge from defeats: Bolshevism is the critical inheritance of the Paris Commune, the cultural revolution is the critical inheritance of the victory of the bourgeois powers in the Soviet Union of the 50s, etc. So far as militant commitment is concerned, we’ve never been attracted by violence or armed struggle in and of itself. Communism means peace, brotherhood, and it’s this kind of world we fight for. If we really want a world without war and without weapons, a world of brotherhood, then we have to begin to defeat the (fully armed) bourgeoisie in a class war. The rest is only hypocrisy.

Q: One often hears the remark that the CCC came out of nowhere. This is in contradiction with, for example, the militants of the RAF, who chose the armed struggle only after a long evolution among the ranks of the radical non-parliamentarian movement. Your answer is so abstract, it brings only forward purely theoretical considerations. Could you be a bit more concrete?

It is true that the cells aren’t the almost-spontaneous, empirical outcome of the radicalization of a non-armed movement, non-parliamentarian or otherwise. But why does it always have to be like that? The history of the international communist movement is not characterized by the eternal repetition of always the same processes but, on the contrary, by assimilation of the lessons from former experiences – and this is only for the better! To be able to talk explicitly about the foundation of the Cells, we have to state precisely: one person (with this political background) meets another (with a different political background) who knows a third person (with yet another political background), etc. We consider this of minor importance, but if you really insist, we can present things in the following order.

Pierre: This is the road I travelled as a militant. Informal participation in several struggle and protest movements from 1972 onwards; agitation in secondary schools and with students, the denunciation of the coup in Chile, opposition to the military budgets, the reaction against the last crimes of the Franquist regime, support of the workers of Glaverbel, etc. In 1975 we took part in “le Collectif pour la Liberte d’Expression” (struggle against the project Van den Poorten) and the first political trials. Co-founder in 1976 and subversionapril1982afterwards the driving force behind “Comite de soutien aux prisonniers de la RAF” (which changed its name into “Comite de defense des prisonniers politiques en BRD”). Organized the occupation of the Dutch embassy in Brussels to protest against the extradition of three RAF militants to the BRD in the spring of 1978. Arrested in Zurich in the summer of the same year because of the acquisition of ammunition and prohibited from residing in Switzerland under suspicion of “support for a terrorist organization” (in this case: the RAF). Founder of the militant press “Georgi Dimitrov”. Co-founder in 1981 of the magazine “Subversion (Revue Internationale pour le communisme)” and in the same period the organization DOCOM(DocumentationCommuniste) together with
mostly militants of Action Directe who had just been released from prison. Actively engaged in solidarity with French revolutionary Frederic Oriach who was imprisoned again in 1982. Co-founder of the magazine “Ligne Rouge”. Participation in the practical and political preparations for the construction of the “Cellules Communistes Combattantes”. Exclusive engagement in this struggle since 1983. Beginning in 1984 I went into complete clandestinity, 8 months before the start of the first political-military campaign of the organization. Armed arrest on December 16, 1985.

Bertrand: My history is somewhat shorter but illustrates clearly what we said in the beginning. I was fifteen years old when the RAF kidnapped H.M. Schleyer and sixteen BR2 (2)when the Red Brigade kidnapped Aldo Moro. The question of the armed struggle posed itself in other terms for a militant of my generation than for the militants of the former generation. They had to think first of the armed struggle in an imperialist country as a hypotheses and then they had to take the first steps. For me, the urban guerilla was already part of the political landscape. I took part in 1978 in the Committee For The Support Of The Prisoners Of The RAF, set up by Pierre; in 1982 I went into revolutionary clandestinity.

Pascale: Details about my militant and political career (which starts also in 1972 with my lr5participation in the movement of secondary schools against the project VDB) will not add anything to what just has been explained. I want though to make clear, if this interests you, that I did not take part in the construction of the Cells. In fact I only joined the Cells and their structures in the autumn of 1985. During the time of the construction and the first actions of the organization, I was an open militant in the collective of the periodical “Ligne Rouge” which made propaganda for the armed communist groups. With “Ligne Rouge” we, among other activities, reproduced the communiques of the Cells in the form of pamphlets which we then distributed them during demonstrations, gatherings, etc.

Q: In your communiques, the CCC describe themselves as a vanguard. Many people have criticized this vanguard concept, the leadership of your organization. The CCC were always willing to accept criticisms, but did you ever seek a real dialogue with the movement (like the RAF eventually did)? Do you still adhere to the principle of the “correct line”? Do you still think it’s true that power comes from the barrel of a gun? In other words, doesn’t the danger exist that the popular revolution could become dependent on the armed struggle and a political line chosen by a minority of people?

There are a lot of misconceptions here. The CCC never failed to carry their responsibilities, but they did not claim to be the sole authority, the leading party in the sense of Leninism. The name of the CCC itself points to a decidedly different reality in which it is impossible to take on the unifying task of such an organization. Also, the CCC sought to emphasize one of the priorities of the revolutionary movement, which we contributed to, namely reflection and working out political theory. We think that revolutionary success requires a vanguard organization. What do we mean by that? A fighting structure which brings together and strengthens the best forces from our camp, and this is to be at the head of the proletarian forces within the class struggle. The revolution is not an artwork, it is an historical task in which people must appear as winners. We need to give ourselves the objective, material, and ideological possibilities to achieve victory, and it is the revolutionary vanguard party which opens the first door towards this. Because organization is superior to non-organization, consciousness is better than unconsciousness, and so on. But the CCC were not this party, although they wanted to work towards building it eventually. The goal of this organizational attempt, the practice of armed propaganda, and the search for political confrontation with all groups with respect to the class struggle, all of this brought the CCC to conclude that they were the at the most advanced position in the country – when viewed objectively with respect to the vanguard – both theoretically and practically. And we still believe this today, even though we were defeated.

The political-military campaigns of the CCC in 1984 and 1985 took place within great popular and proletarian mobilizations. They were supported by an important theoretical-political production which called for struggle and critical debate and the triumph of correct analyses and ideas over false ones. For example, the stationing of American missiles in cccsolibFlorennes in 1985 was described by the CCC as imperialist war and a crass manifestation of capitalism, and the group criticized the illusions of petty-bourgeois pacifists. But there was no debate. Some silence, some protest, and even attacks by groups waving red or black flags were the answers we received. “Power comes from the barrel of a gun”, yes that’s true. But let’s not get everything mixed up. This truth is an exact reflection of human ideas and values in the objective world. Truth is the correct interpretation of reality, something which gives us the possibility of acting in an effective manner. Marxists do not operate on the basis of dreams or following their subjective preferences. They strive to know a historical and social situation as it is, to find the best method to intervene in it and control it (the “correct line”), and in so doing to bring to movement towards socialist revolution, the abolition of paid labor, and to come closer to the end of exploitation and

Q: Why do you never react on actual themes, for example the struggle of the Zapatistas in Chiapas, the congress of the “Autonomen” in Berlin, or, here in Belgium, the wave of strikes in the Forges de Clabecq, Renault-Vilvoorde, and so on?

As a general rule, when comrades ask us to react on a certain event or ask some advice on a certain subject, we do answer on the given question. But we don’t see why we should express ourselves about everything and more. Our imprisonment – and the length of it  removes us from the struggle and from the specific realities, and that is a serious limitation on the knowledge we have and on our ability to contribute in a creative
and original way. Searching for a common ground (even revolutionary ones) in an illusionary theater and inevitably always reacting too late on the events isn’t really motivating. But we sure don’t absent ourselves from the social actuality and struggles. For example, if we consider in “La Fleche et la Cible” the question of syndicalist action and the revolutionary perspectives of it, or if we write about the strategy for the struggle for the accumulation of the proletarian forces, etc., then we are intervening in the core itself of the questions brought to the fore by the conflicts such as those in Clabecq or
Vilvoorde. Isn’t this the only serious way to act, and the most constructive, also the only possible one today for us in jail? We can deplore this restriction, try to overcome it as much as possible, but it is there, and with the years always heavier to bear.

Q: “The merger of the militants of the CCC with the collaborators of the ‘FRAP’ is particularly false. The Fighting Communist Cells and this ‘FRAP’ are complete strangers to each other (this is, by the way, confirmed by the police investigation) and are even political enemies. This merger is a manoeuvre by the powers that be; they want to depoliticize the struggle of the CCC by tying it to the adventure of the ‘FRAP’, that is by insisting on the common point of one similar penal infraction.cccsolia Moreover, this merger gives the authorities the guarantee that two precious collaborators are present on the scene of the court. How can the farce otherwise be played?” This paragraph is an extract from the pamphlet “Freedom! Information For The Liberation Of Pierre Carette, Pascale Vandegeerde, And Bertrand Sassoye”, distributed by the APAPC. The CCC did distance themselves several times from the FRAP, can you give once more the main reasons for this?

This is a question that we have had to come back to on many occasions (we even edited a complete document in 1990, “Le ‘FRAP’, provocation et repentir”). This story is of minor interest, let us just recap the essential. Starting in 1985, three attacks took place in Brussels, claimed by a “Front Revolutionnaire d’Action Proletarienne”. In fact this “Front” didn’t really exist, it was a satellite of the French group Action Directe. The aim? To give the illusion of a real existing “West European Guerrilla Front” as called for by the RAF and AD some time earlier, and to which the CCC in Belgium (and GRAPO in Spain) had refused to join. When the police searched the bases of AD in Brussels, they found documents of the FRAP and they arrested two people. They claimed to be anarchists, but
confronted with the repression, they deny their little adventure and made an agreement with the Department of Justice. They were rewarded for this with minor sentences and were soon freed. End of the FRAP.

Q: Why did the CCC refuse to take part in the “anti-imperialist front” called for by the RAF and AD? This seems strange, especially when one knows that the CCC were very close to AD (especially via Frederic Oriach) and that your organization appeared for the first time with the “October First Anti-Imperialist Campaign“.

A small correction to begin with: Frederic Oriach was in prison for a long time in France as rzrafpic3-001a militant of the Noyaux Armes Pour l’Autonomie Populaire (NAPAP), the heirs of the
military organization of La Gauche Proletarienne (GP), which was founded long before Action Directe, and on a totally different political basis. He was only “close” to AD in police constructions (and its echoes in the media) which took care that he was jailed for a second time in 1982. In a long interview in 1983, in which he gives details about his rich history as a fighting internationalist communist, Frederic summarizes: “So it’s easy to understand that I have nothing to do, near or far, with AD in contradiction with those ludicrous constructions so often made up.”

In a famous piece of 1916, “Imperialism, The Highest Stage Of Capitalism”, Lenin continues the ingenious historical analyses of Marx and defines the nature of the “parasitism” and decay of capitalism. For the Cellules Communistes Combattantes, the term “imperialism” is situated in this Marxist-Leninist context. For the RAF and AD in the beginning of the 1980s, “imperialist” mainly describes the relationship between dominant countries and dominated countries, a bit like how the Third Worldists see things. So the difference is very big! And this is only one of the many differences above lots of other differences on a philosophical level, in connection with the historical and economic theory, in connection with the political line and the strategy to follow. For example the strategic concept of the “front” looks wrong to us. We believe in a party of the Leninist
type as most the important national organizational principle, and an ‘internationale’ of the Comintern-type as the transnational organizational principle.

In our work of 1993, “La Fleche et la Cible”, we have tried to work out our criticism on the concepts of the RAF and AD. In essence we reject it’s subjectivist character, their tension
towards the radical-reformism and to militarism. Beyond this we can remark that the rzrafpic4-001RAF, who were the driving force behind the “Front”, has dissolved itself (which made big headlines in the papers, of course), while GRAPO, who rejected the concept on a basis of fighting communist critics, last month did an daring armed propaganda operation in the heart of Madrid (which was the subject of a total media blackout, of course).

Q: Did you ever have the impression of being manipulated? We ask this question because it’s is often said that the actions of the CCC, together with the “Gang of Nijvel”, were part of a “strategy of tension” organized by the extreme right? In this case references are made to Pierre Carette’s brother and to weapons found in CCC safehouses, etc.

From the very start the CCC was subjected to a lot of filthy and contradictory slander from different corners, from the extreme-right (CCC=KGB) to the extreme-left (CCC=CIA), and it has stayed that way until this day. For some it was necessary, and still is, that the struggle of the CCC – where the goal is crystal clear – is interpreted as something suspicious, with an obscure ground and mysterious objectives, and this is to stop reflection about the political questions and revolutionary strategy. As long as one keeps on
talking in terms from bad spy novels, like “manipulations” and “destabilization”, one rejects the central question which really interests the proletariat: Which offensive strategy is best for the class struggle? One darkens this decisive truth, namely that the armed struggle is essential when restarting the revolutionary process, and they isolate these fighters. It’s a well-known trick, and one finds the same lies about the Red Brigades in Italy, the GRAPO in Spain, etc. In the early days they said Lenin was a “German spy”.
It has been asked before why we don’t systematically deny this slander. Let’s talk about the examples put forward in the question. Well, what is there to deny? Yes, Pierre has an older brother. So what? Yes, the CCC (and Action Directe and the RAF) were in the possession of arms taken from the attack on the army barracks in Vielsalm in May 1984. So what? Well, strictly put, absolutely nothing. In the end “one believes who one wants to

Q: “Pierre Carette has a brother”. Yes, but there are also rumors that he was a member of the secret service and that Pierre Carette was a militant together with his brother in extreme right groups.

We must leave guilt by blood relationship to the classical tragedies, and to the media liars of the PTB. We are not in a position to inform you about military careerist Henri Carette,
who was related with extreme right groups at the end of the 60s at the University of Brussels, because Pierre has got the least contact with him. It was their total and definitive ideological contradictions which was the ground for them breaking off all contact with each other.

Q: Why did the actions of the CCC stop after your arrests?

Simply because the objective vulnerability of our organization didn’t allow further resistance against the blows against our group and to take the initiative again. The police offensive of the winter of 1985/86 was not limited to our arrests. It was followed by the discovery of our operational bases, of garages and clandestine apartments, by the seizure of important material, and the paralyzing of comrades, etc. This certainly doesn’t concern a political decision. Reality has shown that the Cells were badly prepared for repression, on the level of simple structural security, and on a more general political-organizational level. Here we make an allusion to the militaristic deviation that has partly contaminated the CCC, a deviation we have admitted and criticized in “La Fleche et la Cible” and in the debate with Voie Proletarienne. But even more than our defeat, where we have to learn our
lessons, the experience of the CCC in Belgium has show how the practice of the armed propaganda can be an enormous uplift for revolutionaries.

Q: Can you give a more precise explanation about the split between you and Didier Chevolet?

Didier Chevolet was a militant of the Cellules Communistes Combattantes and after that a cccgraf3member of the collective of prisoners until the summer of 1995. At that time he let us know of his decision to leave the collective and his choice to try to be released in an apolitical way. We have tried, without success, to make him realize that his step was individualistic and in contradiction with our common interest, and that the “apolitical” character of his position was an illusion, because it came out of an objective political situation. We regret this schism very much. We have lost a comrade, and by losing our unity much more than a comrade.

Q: How is the treatment in prison? Are you being held in under special conditions (for example “high security”)? Do you have contacts with social prisoners? How are those contacts?

At the time of our arrests in December 1985, we were put in total isolation, a treatment never before seen in Belgium and this was condemned as torture by the well-known humanitarian organizations. In May/June (1986) we held a first collective hungerstrike, lasting 43 days, but without real results. We were held in isolation for three years, even until after our trial, and we only succeeded to reach a discontinuance after a second
long and hard hungerstrike. From then on we were integrated in the prison population,
but we were still held under exceptional limitations (for example, non-stop surveillance, opening of mail, limitation of visits, etc.). We must also point out that we are nocccgermanposter2 dependant upon the administrative authorities of the prison, but upon an obscure committee that works under the Department of Justice. Our contacts with social prisoners are a priority in solidarity. We try to answer in a positive way on posed questions and systematically we support the common demands and protest movements. During these exchanges we defend the proletarian interests and the principles of the communist morale. We try to develop a just reflection upon the nature of the system and the crime it brings, we fight racism, sexism, etc. But it’s still just a drop of water in a desert of misery.

Q: In prison you did several actions. Which and why? In the media there were no articles the left didn’t react. Is the left suspicious about you? Or you against the left? Were you (better) supported by foreign groups?

We held two important hungerstrikes, in 1986 and in 1988, to get out of isolation and to gain the possibility of prolonging our collective political work. The mainstream media were rather discrete about this struggle. What is there to wonder about? They are part of the system. The extreme left didn’t react. This needs a double comment. First of all this isn’t all that surprising coming from the institutional left (PCB, POS, PTD), it’s proof of the profundity of their political and ideological corruption. Secondly, we were surprised by the general leftist movement. The ball is in their camp: Why is there no solidarity, apart from political differences, with revolutionaries confronted with criminal repression in their own country? Isn’t this a sign of a terrible weakness? During the hungerstrikes we were actively supported by the “Association des Parents et Amis des Prisonnier(e)s Communistes”. On an international level we were supported concretely by groups and comrades from Germany, Switzerland, Denmark, etc. But the more spontaneous solidarity was clearly stronger on a European level. Once again: Who should draw their lessons?

Q: What can people do for your release?

At this time it is clear that the authorities are not prepared to release us and they will only be prepared to release us when they fear a growth in the mobilization for our cause. They could be worried about the growing interest in the experience of the Cells. In a message on the occasion of “the international day of revolutionary prisoners” we made following

“There are two important reasons why we are held. First of all to hold back from the communist movement fighting militants who have proven their dedication. Secondly they want to terrorize those who, tired of reformist deadend streets, want to go on the revolutionary path.

We will leave prison when these political motives are unmasked and the protest is so great that the powers that be will see it more advisable to release us than to appear in their real form, rather this than to attract the attention on the causes that force them to this hardness towards us, who are only three with many years in prison behind them.

This will be a long struggle where all good will is welcome. This struggle will be won, which will please us of course, but this above all will serve the general struggle of the proletariat. Without the last we wouldn’t afford ourselves such public calls for solidarity. But this solidarity fills us with force, trust, and enthusiasm.”

What needs to be done? It is necessary to develop a public militant agitation: set up local committees, organize information gatherings, make dynamic and well-sounding interventions, etc. Everything which can break the wall of silence, built and
maintained by the powers and their accomplices, will put us a step further towards freedom.

(Source: Anarchist Black Cross – Gent




ccc9We are now witnessing an immense political and ideological offensive throughout the  world by the capitalistic powers against the communist powers. This is nothing new but what is unusual about the importance of this campaign is that it is based on the decisive change of direction openly taken by both the governments of China and the East European  countries and which leads to a market economy and reactionary decadence. The propaganda media of the bourgeoisie and their allies screams “communism is dead”. We acknowledge that something died: namely corrupt socialism which displayed all the marks of capitalism {the hardening of leading institutions, the corruption of bureaucracy, the mess resulting from a chaotic management of the economy, exploitation and oppression of the people, etc)!

The international communist movement includes however many revolutionary grapopicthirteenorganizations who are emerging with greater legitimacy and activity because of what has happened to the refromists and revisionists in Eastern Europe and Asia. Among these organizations we welcome the Communist Party of Spain Reconstituted (PCEr), and the Anti-Fascist Group October 1 (GRAPO).

Proud that we may count among our comrades the militants of the PCEr and GRAPO we
here declare our solidarity, especially on the occasion of the hungerstrike which they have conducted in the Spanish prisons since November 1989. “Communism is dead”, and yet still the civilian democratic regimes do not cease to institute the worst forms of pressure against the imprisoned militants …!!

For more than 10 years the militants of PCEr and GRAPO have fought in the prisons to grapopicsixteenobtain and defend occupations and work which would fit in with their revolutionary identity: association, information and study, visits and mail, maintenance and expansion of the social and political relations with their comrades, their family, and the workers, healthy and hygienic living conditions, and appropriate medical care. And for more than 10, years the governments and institutions, in service of CAPITAL, have exhausted themselves trying to make the militants tasks and life impossible. To be more precise, the social democratic government of Felipe Gonzales (PSOE) has since a little more than two years ago been engaged in a plan of growing repression with as its goal the political, if not the physical, extermination of the communist prisoners.

Because of the strength of their exemplary battle which cost the health of many among them and caused the death of Gallende the comrades succeeded in forming real communes
in the prisons of Soira and Carabanchel, In July 1987 they were dispersed to all four corners of the country. This dispersion which was accompanied by unbelievable mistreatment had only one objective – the destruction of the gains of many years of battle and the disruption of the relationships which the prisoners in the Spanish proletarian movement as well as the international revolutionary movement had developed.

Once the contacts between the political prisoners and their comrades and families had
been reduced to a symbolic one in most prisons then from October 1989 many prisoners, among them the most fit and combatitive, became systematically isolated and subjected to forced intimidation procedures. This isolation was meant to break their collective political identity. Other comrades were distributed among groups of selected social prisoners when grapopiconethey were not placed in prisons which until then had been intended for the collectivization of the political prisoners. By this assimilation the civilian democrats tried to cover up and deny the existence of communist prisoners. Since then the militants because of their unshakeable determination are exposed to underhanded treatment, and to death threats and torture. They live in such conditions that in the summer of 1989 they began a new hungers trike in Almeria and Soira. The mobilization of this movement made it possible to obtain satisfying results. The PSOE government promised a return to more decent conditions.

It took only a few weeks for the government of Gonzales to once again break its word.
The few collective living and working accommodations of the PCEr and GRAPO prisoners were entirely destroyed and the comrades were dispersed all over the country. And they started first of all with those who began the hungers trike. The prisoners are therefore again on hunger strike, with greater numbers and increasing determination. It is abundantly clear that the civil powers ae trying to break this radical resistance at any cost, and that they feel themselves strengthened in this by the current campaign of organized brainwashing: For the Spanish social-democracy it is a matter of importance that they are able to present themsleves at the doors of Europe 1992 in accordance with the condition as they were drawn up by the TREVI and Ponpadeu groups, conditions which were erected by the ministries of justice and ministries of internal affairs of the 12 EEG countries. These conditions are necessary for the bourgeoise order in order to restrain and supress the proletarian uprising which will certainly double in force when Europe is monopolized by financiers and multi-nationals. All this is at the expense of the world of labor.

The civil democratic regimes are everywhere confronted with a steadily expanding
knowledge in the proletariat of the corruption of their states and institutions and of the illegitimacy of their power. They know that the communist organizations form a real concrete threat to the capitalistic order by means of the politics they conduct and the structure that they are building on towards a new society. This even more strongly because the spector of the East European regimes cannot any longer be pointed at for a better defense of capitalism.

Doomed by the development of its own production methods, the bourgeoisie has no
alternative but to supress more severly the social and political movements that oppose it and the imprisoned militants are, because of their example and their vulnerability in their situation as prisoners, of course the first to be exposed to the destructive attempts of the bourgeoisie.

Confronted with plans for the liquidation of the goal of the comrades who embody the
GRAPOLogo1 (2)political consciousness of the proletariat as well as the collective identity and revolutionary involvement with the emancipation of that class, and confronted with plans to exterminate all communist projects, we now call on all militants and workers to mobilize themselves around the comrades who are on the hunger strike from PCEr and GRAPO.

The solidarity and support at national and international levels has already shown strength on several occasions, towards getting the repressive attacks by the bourgeoisie governments against the imprisoned comrades reduced. Once again we have to go into action and force the Spanish social-democrats into giving the imprisoned militants asociation, to provide them with decent conditions and and environment that is in accord with their collective political identity so that they can continue to make their contributions to the development of revolutionary politics and the upbuilding of our
shared future,







Pierre Carette, Didier Chevolet, Bertrand Sassoye and Pascale Vandegeerde, militants from the Communist Combatting Cells for the organization of a Combatting Organization of the

20 January 1990

This entry was posted in Cellules Communistes Combattantes and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s