From the talk on September 8, 1979 with João Amazonas, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Brazil
After the greetings of the occasion, Comrade Enver Hoxha said:
I have followed with great satisfaction your visits throughout our country, Comrade Amazonas. You have seen many places, have visited museums, agricultural cooperatives, archaeological centres, etc.
Albania is a country which preserves its originality and its ancient traditions, but in the construction of socialism it has also developed new features which make it more beautiful. For example, you have seen the terraced hills at Lukova. Great things have been done there through the work of our wonderful youth, who in the main, have built or are building our railways, too.
However, we know that much remains to be done. Hence, we must still work a great deal more in all directions.
COMRADE JOÃO AMAZONAS: During our visit in Albania, Comrade Enver, we saw the great progress you have made in the construction of socialism in your country… On our way to Shkodra we met a group of students who were building a new railway.
COMRADE ENVER HOXHA: Yes, Comrade Amazonas. It is the new railway which will link our country with Montenegro in Yugoslavia and, from there, with Central Europe and other countries. We are building this line for commercial reasons, because we have difficulties in the shipment of goods by sea. We export various minerals, agricultural products and other goods, and their transport by rail is more convenient economically.
All our efforts are aimed at advancing the construction of socialism, regardless of the imperialist-revisionist encirclement of our country. The imperialists and revisionists deliberately misinterpret the development of our country trying to present it in a distorted light. At present, thinking that, after breaking with China, Albania has remained isolated, they claim that we are opening up to the West. All their political and ideological propaganda towards our country is geared in this direction. However, this neither astonishes nor worries us.
Of course we carry on trade with capitalist countries and will continue to do so. After the counter-revolutionary anti-Albanian act of the Chinese revisionist leadership against our country we have found new markets. Certainly we have difficulties in this direction, because the capitalists seek to carry on trade with us, but at the same time, through it they intend to make political capital by implying that Albania is now linking up with them! We did not start trade exchanges with the capitalist countries after falling out with China. Even before that we have sold and bought, that is, carried on trade, with the countries of Western Europe, and with the revisionist countries of Europe, with the exception of the social-imperialist Soviet Union.
When the split with China occurred, the capitalists became very excited and their appetite was whetted. They began saying that the Albanians would certainly open up in their direction. But we know that none of their desires and propaganda will be realized. In fact, in the field of trade relations we are advancing with difficulty, but advancing nonetheless, because the things we sell are good value and in great demand on international markets.
Nevertheless, our Party has always been careful not to give the bourgeois and revisionist propaganda any possibility or opportunity to deceive world opinion about our relations with them. Actually, as I just said, in the first moment of the split with China all this propaganda harped on one string: with whom would Albania link up now that it had fallen out with China?! Certainly, a time will come when the inspirers of this propaganda will have to make up their mind and desist from it.
We have said it openly and insisted that in our trade relations with foreign countries we would always pay in cash and would never accept credits.
Comrade João Amazonas spoke about the importance of Albania in Europe and the contradictions of its enemies with one another over its strategic position. After his intervention, Comrade Enver Hoxha went on:
Yes, Comrade Amazonas, you are right. The strategic position of Albania is very important because it is at the crossroads of the opposite interests of the great powers in the Balkans and the Mediterranean. This reminds me of what Stalin told me at one of the meetings I had with him after the Second World War. At that time the Greeks carried on provocations against Albania, the Italians did the same, the British provoked an incident at Saranda and together with the Americans refused to recognize our democratic government. They even sought to bring “aid” to the Albanian people. In the course of this talk I made a review of the situation and expressed the opinion of our Party.
Stalin replied: “I agree with your stand. You are right and need not be afraid. Britain can do nothing to you, so do not let it into your ports, the Americans cannot attack you, either, because otherwise the situation would become very tense. Italy is not in a position to attack you because you defeated it, and as for Greece it is also in no position to violate your border because you are defending it…”
Contradictions among our enemies, now as in the past, play a role and we exploit them always to the advantage of our country, while remaining loyal to our principles and our general strategy. In tactics we make the necessary moves in accordance with the interests of our strategy. Let us take the state of our relations with Greece for example: at present we have normal trade and cultural relations with the Greeks, although there are still people in Greece who talk about claims on the territory of our country, but as a government they declare that we are friends. Politically and ideologically, we are in conflict with the Yugoslavs but we still carry on trade with them, as well as some cultural exchanges.
Your coming to Albania will help us, too. Today also, I will avail myself of this opportunity to consult you about some common problems, although our views have always been and continue to be the same.
Perhaps I shall importune you a little, Comrade Amazonas. So, if you allow me, I will detain you a little longer. The question is about some problems which are known, but proceeding from them I will also take up some other questions, on which you can and should assist us with your opinions.
Our international communist movement faces many problems which, of course, have their importance. There are major and minor problems. We think, however, that unity on the basis of the principles of Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism is indispensable. It must be part of the strategy of our movement. Of course the tactics of the struggle may differ, but all of us are in agreement that the one and main strategic objective of all our movement, the Marxist-Leninist communist parties, is the preparation and triumph of the revolution, the overthrow of the bourgeoisie and capitalism, the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat and the building of socialism and communism.
The tactics for achieving this aim, as I said, may be different and may have their nuances, because the struggle of each Marxist-Leninist party is waged in a particular country which has its own characteristics of economic, political and cultural development, hence in the internal specific conditions of each country; it is also connected with the strength of local capital which differs from one country to the other, as well as with its links with foreign capital. Tactics depend also on the countertactics of the bourgeoisie, because the bourgeoisie, too, operates in most diverse ways to foil our tactics. Hence in our opinion, the Marxist-Leninist parties should constantly be as the French say, “sur la breche.”[1] This conditions the different forms of tactics in the struggle of the Marxist-Leninist communist parties of each individual country.
The Marxist-Leninist parties build their tactics so as to profit as much as possible from the new situations when these arise. No matter how much a Marxist-Leninist party is assisted by a leadership in emigration, this assistance is always negligible when compared with the assistance given by a leadership within its own country. Apart from this, through its presence in the country it can watch closely the important events that take place there, which frequently call for quick decisions and modifications of tactics. It takes a long time for a leadership operating abroad to be properly informed about the internal situation of its country and then to issue directives for action, and there is always the probability that, in the meantime, a new totally different situation is created there, which may require a different interpretation and directives.
The different tactics of struggle of the Marxist-Leninist communist parties must serve the strategy and the aims of the revolution. When they are not mistaken they serve not only as an example, but also assist the other parties and peoples, because they weaken imperialism and social-imperialism, and their links and interconnections with the local bourgeois regimes and capital.
There are many common problems which the Marxist-Leninist communist parties and the peoples with the working class at the head must attack frontally.
We think that now the anti-imperialist struggle, the national-liberation struggle and the bourgeois-democratic and proletarian revolution, as everybody knows, are on the order of the day. Hence the present situation represents a national moment at the same time.
The revolution is on the order of the day, and with the national moment I mean what I will explain below.
Occupation of a country and oppression of a people by the capitalist or imperialist great powers are not done everywhere by military force only. Colonization, oppression and exploitation are also carried out in other “new,” “modern” ways which are intended to cover up imperialist occupation and savagery.
The occupation of our country, Albania, by fascist Italy created a national moment which we exploited both for the national liberation and for the triumph of the people’s revolution. Hence, when we say that revolution is on the order of the day, we mean that it is linked with national moments which are becoming apparent in many countries of the world, that is, with their occupation by the capitalist and imperialist great powers by military force or by other indirect means. In this sense even countries like Italy or Brazil, etc., although they are not actually occupied by force of arms by foreign armies, are still under foreign rule.
So we must dispel all illusions about the so-called freedom, democracy and sovereignty of a country which is under a cosmopolitan capitalist regime and which is exploited by internal and foreign capital.
In fact peoples like the Spanish, Portuguese, Brazilian and others are oppressed and exploited. There is a bourgeois democracy in their countries, but the state there is bound hand and foot with foreign capital. The people and the working class enjoy no true democracy or sovereignty. They are not free.
In the Second World War, during the armed occupation of many countries by the nazi German army or the fascist Italian army, the quislings and collaborators in these countries joined the occupiers. Even now some of them or other quislings and collaborators, under other disguises and with other slogans, are in power and linked by a thousand threads with the new modern occupiers, the neo-colonialists and their capital.
Here I made an analogy of some kind in order to come round to the point that the revolution is on the order of the day and the peoples and the working class are under the heel of an oppressing and exploiting bourgeoisie and an occupier which, in general, has not occupied their country with soldiers, but has done so through joint companies, banks and capital investments, in collaboration with the local bourgeoisie.
So, just as they fought in the Second World War when they were occupied militarily, so the peoples and the working class should fight now against the same enemy. Naturally the Marxist-Leninist communist parties must without fail take part in this struggle.
That is our strategy. We must not lose sight of our prospects, nor let ourselves be deceived by some kind of reformism which is trumpeted about. One may slide into it, although one may not admit it in words.
At present, however, conditions are not identical in every country, so the tactics of each Marxist-Leninist party in individual countries must be different, too. There are countries in which fascist dictatorship and terror have been openly established, but there are also countries in which some few legal forms of the false bourgeois democracy can and must be exploited.
In the developed capitalist countries, the working class is the decisive force, the leading force which will carry out the revolution. In this context we think that all the Marxist-Leninist communist parties face some main tasks and in the first place that of strengthening the unity of the working class. These tasks are in opposition to the strategy and tactics of the capitalist bourgeoisie. It is known that the strategy and tactics of the capitalist bourgeoisie are aimed at splitting the working class so as to eliminate it as a striking force, whereas we struggle for the opposite aim, the unity of the working class. But how must this unity be achieved and built? It must be achieved through political actions and economic claims. I emphasize that political actions must occupy the main place. As a rule there should be no economic claim without political action, they must be closely linked with each other.
The second problem facing the working class is the struggle to break the chain of the worker aristocracy which, through the trade unions under its control, manipulates the working class in the interests of the capitalist bourgeoisie.
Tactics have great importance in this question. They must be defined according to the conditions of the country in which every individual Marxist-Leninist party militates and implemented by undertaking actions accordingly. The tactics of the struggle against trade union bosses is linked with both political actions and economic claims. It is precisely this that the worker aristocracy and the capitalist bourgeoisie are greatly afraid of. They fear the political struggle, because this struggle carries the working class forward and leads it to clashes and strikes. Properly carried out, political actions weaken the leadership of the capitalist bourgeoisie in the trade unions and break the rules and laws and everything it has established for the enslavement of the working class.
At present we see millions of people coming out on strikes and demonstrations, more about economic claims, which also, have their political undertones, because this struggle is directed against capitalism which would not let go any of its rights. In the end, however, all this struggle ends up with an agreement with the trade union bosses and, through them, with the capitalists who give the strikers a deceptive satisfaction. Whereas if a political character is given to these claims, the tools of capital in the trade unions and capital itself are put in a difficult position.
The objective of the struggle of the Marxist-Leninists must be to turn the present trade unions against capital. The struggle must be carried out within these trade unions, while, at the same time, there where possibilities exist, new trade unions must be set up. It is clear that these can have no other aim apart from the achievement of unity of the working class against the rule of capital, against its demagogy and its parties, but also against the rule of the worker aristocracy. This because in the capitalist countries there are trade unions under the leadership of the revisionist parties, and trade unions under the leadership of socialist, christian-democratic and other parties, hence there are three, four or five trade unions in one country. There may also be another grouping of workers molesting capital. Capital, however, is accustomed to such divisions. So, in my opinion, the aim of the new trade unions must be achievement of the unity of the working class through political actions and claims linked with economic claims in order to combat from outside the trade union bosses who manipulate them, to combat their capitalist organizations and turn them into revolutionary trade unions.
For the Marxist-Leninist parties operating in the capitalist countries this is a key problem, a problem of capital importance which must be solved in the interest of the revolution. The working class is the leading class and must be assisted, and this must be done by helping it sever all links with the capitalist and bourgeois mentality and Christianity. Of course, for this to be done we must introduce ourselves into its ranks and organize it, because without the working class there is no advance towards the revolution.
Another question to which, as far as we know, some parties do not pay great attention is the work that should be done in the army. Here I mean the bourgeois army. We think that every Marxist-Leninist party must have on its program the question of the demoralization of the bourgeois army which is generally considered a weapon of the bourgeoisie. The Marxist-Leninist communist parties must work in this army in which the bourgeoisie operates through the caste of officers who carry out there the same functions as the trade union bosses in the trade unions.
In other words, on the one hand there is the working class without which there can be no advance towards the revolution and on the other, the bourgeois army which suppresses the revolution. In the trade unions the bourgeoisie uses the worker aristocracy for its own aims, while in the army it uses the caste of officers for the same aims, with the difference that, while you are sacked for political activity and propaganda within the trade unions, in the army political work and propaganda are sternly prohibited and any activity in this direction may bring you before the firing squad. Hence political work in the army is as important as it is dangerous, so it is not so easy. For example, on a square on which tens of thousands of workers have come together and a trade union boss rises to speak, the Marxist-Leninist communist party, which has its men within the same trade union, can and must produce its representative who snatches the microphone, addresses the workers for some minutes and calls on them to engage in political actions. In this case he may be arrested and sacked, but in normal conditions he is in no danger of paying a higher price for having upset the trade union bosses and their patrons. Things, however, are different in the army. There, if you address the soldiers in this manner, you risk the firing squad.
Hence the bourgeois army is intended to suppress the revolution and the people. Still, even within the army a differentiation must be made between officers and men. The soldier is the son of the people, whereas the officer is the executive arm of the capitalist bourgeoisie. We should make the soldier revolt against the officer, refuse to execute orders and submit to army discipline and rules, and sabotage weapons so that these are not used against the people. The weapons should be turned against the caste of officers and when conditions mature, also against the rule of capital itself.
How will this be done? For this purpose, ways, roads and tactics must be found, and these, according to the conditions of each individual country, are found by the party. With the soldier, the son of the people, work must be done when he has not yet been called up to the army, when he is doing his military service, which is a somewhat more decisive phase, and finally when he is released from the army, because then he becomes a reservist. Work with the low-ranking officers must not be excluded, either, so as to separate them from the caste of senior officers and convince them not to raise their hand against the people.
Working within the army, are we Marxist-Leninist not capable of inspiring the soldier of the people, the son of the workers and peasants and others with our progressive ideology? This is a task that should be performed by the Party.
So the tactics of organizing the front of the youth, the peasants, the intellectuals and petty officials, who make up the majority of the army, assumes exceptional importance not only for the struggle on city squares and streets, but also for eroding and destroying the army which is an oppressive weapon in the hands of the bourgeoisie, that is, for preparing the soldier, the son of the people, against the leading caste of officers.
I think that this problem belongs to the strategy of foiling the war plans of the capitalist bourgeoisie, of preventing predatory wars and transforming them, if they break out, into civil and revolutionary wars. This happened with the army of the Tsar in the time of the October Revolution. The overthrow of Kerensky and his government, which wanted the continuation of the alliance with the Entente, Lenin’s Decree on Peace, the Decree on Land and its division among the poor peasants, etc. won the mass of peasant soldiers pressganged into the army over to the revolution, because they were the sons of the people, whereas most of those belonging to the caste of officers turned socialist-revolutionaries and white guards, that is, enemies. Such a strategy and tactic of struggle against the bourgeois army makes the struggle of the working class, the revolution, the anti-imperialist war and the national liberation war easier, encourages and promotes it.
Let us take another example, nearer in time, that of the army of the Shah of Iran and its caste of officers, which although armed to the teeth with the most sophisticated weapons, was unable to suppress the popular revolt and operate effectively in defence of the imperial regime. This shows that possibilities for the revolution exist, hence, we, the Marxist-Leninist parties, must think seriously about these situations. True, Islam has an influence in Iran, but the revolt of the people was a major and decisive factor for the downfall of the Shah.
Achievement of the unity of the working class in struggle and revolution, as well as disintegration, demoralization and destruction of the bourgeois army have decisive importance but must by no means make us neglect the other directions of the struggle of the Marxist-Leninist communist parties. On the contrary, they must contribute to the further strengthening of the work in these directions, too. This struggle leads to the exacerbation of contradictions between the working class and capital, the gradual creation of a revolutionary atmosphere in the midst of the class and the mass of the people, their unity in the revolutionary struggle and affirmation of the leading role of the Marxist-Leninist communist parties through action and struggle.
All the directions of the struggle must be coordinated and organized well. With this I want to say that the Marxist-Leninist communist parties, when they see it fit and feel themselves strong and prepared, should operate with armed units or create their own armies and expand them. This will serve their work just as the setting up of trade unions outside the capitalist and revisionist trade unions does. Apart from this, the army, which the party has the possibility to create, must represent a powerful weapon in its hands, while demoralizing the army of the bourgeoisie which, when it comes to blows, should have a confused and hopeless leadership, with the soldiers having been worked on in time.
It is natural that the struggle for carrying out the tasks facing the Marxist-Leninist communist parties is linked also with their strengthening and tempering, their real knowledge of the development of internal and external situations, their organization and the combination of legal work with underground work; the creation and strengthening around these parties of alliances with the peasantry, the progressive intelligentsia and students, who in our opinion, are very revolutionary in many countries. On the other hand, in no case should these parties cover up their personality. Their being in illegality, in semi-illegality or in complete legality is part of the forms of work these parties apply according to the local conditions. X party, for example, goes underground, but it should by no means conceal its personality allegedly for the sake of its alliance with progressive elements. Participating in this alliance, it should state openly that it is a Marxist-Leninist communist party, and this does in no way wipe out its personality.
In the time when our country was liberated from the foreign occupiers and we had good relations with the Yugoslavs, on Tito’s orders they tried to liquidate the leadership of our country, but they failed. They did not want the Albanian leadership to be known, to come out before its people, the Communist Party to come out into the open, because allegedly this would shy off the bourgeoisie and reaction! The Yugoslavs presented this as a tactical question, but it was not like that. On the contrary, the question was about a clearly defined revisionist and counter-revolutionary strategy. Even now they have stripped their party of all its prerogatives, although it has been legalized.
When I talked with him about this question, Stalin said: You should by no means accept it. The party must remain in legality so that the people and anybody else may see it.
At that time, we were actually in power and, if I tell you this today, I do not refer to the situation created in your country now.
Cooperation among Marxist-Leninist communist parties has great importance and should be developed by all manner of means. Meetings of representatives of these parties (and we agree that they should take place both for information and work) on both common and individual problems should, in our opinion, be carried out on an equal footing and in an atmosphere of sincerity. Talks and the conclusions reached through them must always preserve a comradely Marxist-Leninist character, although somebody may at times have a different opinion about tactics.
We think that meetings and discussions between two or more parties may not necessarily always be concluded with a communiqué or declaration, although these are not excluded when the requirements of the struggle call for them.
Ramiz Alia told you the opinion of our Party about the proposal on convening a general meeting. He also gave you the reasons why our leadership does not find the time convenient for such a meeting. Actually, in principle we are not against general meetings, as we have declared at the Congress of our Party, but in our case a meeting should be convened only when conditions are mature. Of course we must study these conditions and work for them to be created.
At this meeting with you I do not want to repeat what you talked with Comrade Ramiz, but I will only say that such a meeting may be both good and bad. Hence, we the Marxist-Leninist parties must measure our steps well and not back down on the pressure exercised on us at different meetings or through public opinion. Everything may be of use, but to us it is important that, when it is decided to act, this should be done only when concrete results are to be achieved.
Another important problem of the anti-imperialist revolutionary war, the national liberation war and the revolution is that of the African and Arab countries.
Africa, with its people mercilessly oppressed and exploited by imperialism and neo-colonialism and the local bourgeoisie, is a virgin soil as far as the Marxist-Leninist communist movement is concerned. On this continent, the true Marxist-Leninist theory, the leading force of the revolution, is both known and unknown, but I think the latter is more true. There are individuals and groups, revolutionary men who love communism and hate the oppressive regime and neo-colonialism, interested in the Marxist-Leninist theory, but knowing only a distorted version of it, as the revisionist parties, ranging from that of the Soviet Union to the Yugoslav, Cuban, Iranian and other parties, have presented it to them. So the cauldron is boiling on the African continent and in the Arab world, and situations are evolving. It is not accidental that the imperialist powers, the Soviet Union, the United States, France and their satellites are penetrating there.
The communist parties of Latin America have great experience in organization and illegal struggle up to the armed struggle against the local bourgeoisie and Yankee imperialism. A concrete example in this direction is the struggle in Araguaya in your country. This has great importance for the common struggle which is being carried out against the all-powerful Yankee imperialists and their gunboats after the Second World War to this day.
Although the struggle in Araguaya did not continue for reasons that are known, it served as a great experience. You in Latin America have this great experience, while the parties of Europe, without mentioning others, have neither the experience of illegal struggle nor that of organization of the party in illegal and active forms. With this I do not mean that they should put themselves “under glass” and do nothing, but, on the contrary, that they must be in permanent action and go towards organizing and carrying out the armed struggle. So, the Marxist-Leninist parties of Europe do not have this experience. It must be studied and applied by the parties in the conditions in which they operate, in legality or illegality, in order to prepare this struggle.
It is also necessary to know and study the experience of all parties. No party is allowed, under the pretext that it has fought on its own and has an experience of its own, to be conceited and despise the experience of others. True, this party has fought, but now conditions have changed. Lot us take, for example, the experience of the Civil War in Spain. This experience should be kept present and utilized not only by the Communist Party of Spain (Marxist-Leninist), but also by the other Marxist-Leninist parties.
In the future, too, as you said, your party will maintain its militant-revolutionary illegality, but will also use the form of semi-legal or legal struggle. All the Marxist-Leninist parties need this experience, so, in the future, too, it will be the subject of talks and exchanges of opinions between them.
Let us take up now the problem of anarchism, terrorism and banditism which are assuming broad proportions in the capitalist and revisionist countries. The actions of anarchist, terrorist and bandit groups are being used by reaction as a justification and a weapon for preparing and establishing the fascist dictatorship, for intimidating the petty-bourgeoisie and turning it into a tool and hotbed for fascism, for terrorizing the working class and maintaining it bound hand and foot in the chains of capital under the threat that otherwise it would lose even those crumbs it has been “donated.” These groups disguise themselves behind alluring names such as “proletarian,” “communist,” “red brigades” and other denominations which sow confusion and are not without effect even among some ideologically and politically unformed communists who, in one way or the other, support the theory of anarchism. These people talk also about all kinds of other theories like those of Bakunin, and others of his ilk.
There is also some party in Europe which says that “if we attack the terrorists, we put ourselves on a par with the rule of the bourgeoisie,” which allegedly combats them. They actually forget that there it is precisely the rule of the bourgeoisie that has created the terrorist groups. It must be made clear that the activity of these groups greatly hampers the illegal struggle of the Marxist-Leninist communist parties and the preparation of their armed struggle, because in its propaganda and laws, the bourgeoisie presents the communists, too, as terrorists, anarchists and bandits. So a Marxist-Leninist communist party in Europe which prepares itself for the armed struggle, which conceals weapons, printing presses, etc., is considered terrorist if these are discovered. Hence, the problem of anarchism, terrorism and banditism may become the subject of a discussion between two or three Marxist-Leninist communist parties in the countries in which this phenomenon has assumed alarming proportions.
There are many such problems facing our parties and the world Marxist-Leninist movement. We come across them and struggle with them every day. So the moments call on us to clearly understand that without a strong Marxist-Leninist party, with a Bolshevik structure, with a steel proletarian unity and discipline, imbued and consistently led by the Marxist-Leninist ideology, we cannot successfully cope with the furious wave of imperialism, capitalism and its rule. The more the fascist dictatorship approaches its death throes, the more savagely it kicks out.
Our Party has not, nor will it ever have, any claim of imposing itself on the other fraternal parties. If we did this, we would be setting out on a wrong course. In this case the fraternal parties should not let us err. As it has done up to now, our Party will continue to remain always loyal to Marxism-Leninism and proletarian internationalism.
At present our country is the only socialist country in the world. It is only here that the dictatorship of the proletariat exercises its rule, and the Party of Labour, a Marxist-Leninist party, is in power. We are encircled by enemies, but we are in power, so we must struggle at all times and moments to defend socialist Albania at all costs, making no mistakes either in policy or ideology, and defending the purity of Marxism-Leninism, because only in this way do we carry out our duty towards the Homeland and the world communist movement. We are convinced that, on this road, socialist Albania will be defended by all the Marxist-Leninist parties, and the progressive forces and peoples, because it remains loyal to the ideals of the revolution and communism.
I want to emphasize it once more, dear Comrade Amazonas, that our Party highly values the work and struggle of your party. Hence our contacts must be constant and frequent. The geographical distance which divides our two countries should be no obstacle to us. We need each other, and we need the close and sincere Marxist-Leninist cooperation that exists between our two parties.
Comrade João Amazonas highly assessed Comrade Enver Hoxha’s analysis of the problems of the Marxist-Leninist movement, expressed his opinions on various problems and thanked him for the reception and the warm and friendly conversation. Then Comrade Enver Hoxha spoke again:
You will return now to the warm bosom of your party and people. With our hearts and our best consideration, we will constantly follow the struggle you will wage, and rejoice at the successes your party will score. The successes you will achieve will be ours too. We are glad that you are doing well and wish you to be always in good health.
I thank you for your assessment of our Party, Comrade Amazonas, an assessment which we will try to deserve by working even more for the success of our common struggle. Goodbye!
Note
[1] Ready for struggle, Fr. in the original.
(Socio-Political Studies, No. 5, 1988, Tirana)