In general, the results of this tenth OAU summit seem very satisfactory to me. One of the most important aspects of the conference was the assessment of the work accomplished by the OAU over the past ten years, highlighting both the failures and the successes. And, when weighed, the successes outweigh the failures. More importantly, this ten-year review has shown that the OAU is a thriving organization, firmly established in Africa, with a definite and growing impact on the international stage. The doubt and uncertainty that hovered over the OAU during its early years has completely disappeared. 

An organization of African peoples, the first of its kind, truly exists. Its growing achievements have highlighted the concept of independence for Africa and underscored the importance of the struggle for the continent’s complete liberation, because this notion of independence for Africa remains incomplete as long as there are still colonized peoples. That is why, in his inaugural speech, the current president of the OAU, General [Yakubu] Gowon, identified the three main tasks that remain to be accomplished in the second decade, with the liberation of territories under colonial or racist domination being mentioned first. This is highly significant because the concept of Africa, as expressed by the OAU, remains incomplete. I believe that the assessment of the past ten years should enable the African peoples to recognize the shortcomings of the decade that has just passed, while at the same time drawing conclusions and, on this basis, adopting the correct methods to achieve the OAU’s objectives.

This tenth conference has also demonstrated the ability of member states to resolve inter-African problems.

The conscious intervention of the enemy in African affairs means that African countries are always at risk of being drawn into conflicts. We must not be under any illusions: the enemy will always try to create divisions in Africa, and we cannot prevent that. What is at stake is our ability to thwart these enemy attempts by resolving our own problems.

Regarding the issues of liberation struggles in Africa, several questions were brought to light during the tenth summit. The one that seems most important to me is the priority given to the situation in the Middle East in relation to the complete liberation of the continent. This issue in the Middle East has two aspects. First, it concerns the occupation of an African territory by “Israel.” Second (and this aspect is inseparable from the first), it involves the struggle of the Palestinian people, which is a fight for national liberation.

While it was observed during the summit that support for the struggle of African peoples against Portuguese colonialism and the racist regimes of Southern Africa was unconditional and unanimous, there were noticeable hesitations or perhaps differences in the degree of support for the Palestinian people’s struggle. It is therefore clear that the situation in the Middle East, in general, and its connections to African issues still require deep analysis and discussion.

The objective alliance that exists between South Africa and “Israel” should prompt greater understanding and closer scrutiny from the OAU member countries. The implications of this alliance for the broader struggle in Africa should obviously not be exaggerated, but it would also be dangerous to underestimate them.

From our perspective, first as a national liberation movement and then as a people who have been dispossessed of their land, Israel’s occupation of Egyptian territory and the struggle of the Palestinian people demonstrate that Israel and South Africa are two partners serving imperialism. The alliance between Israeli Zionism and South African racism is sustained and strengthened by the support each receives from imperialism. In fact, the Israel–South Africa alliance is a powerful expression of the same imperialism, which makes it all the more dangerous.

Israel and South Africa share another common trait: their aggressive nature. Just as South Africa’s acts of aggression against the peoples of Southern Africa are seen as an attack on the entire African continent, Israel’s acts of aggression against a certain number of Arab countries extend to the entire Arab world, parts of which are African. From which it follows that Israel’s aggressive policy is also directed against all African peoples.

It is from these premises that African countries should define collective positions regarding the Middle East question and thoroughly analyze this imperialist strategy of a pincer attack on its northern and southern flanks. They must carefully examine the aggressive policies of the two systems (South Africa and Israel) in order to develop appropriate methods of action. Naturally, these methods must take into account what each country is, or is not, capable of doing.

What must be understood is that imperialism does not localize its activities. It does not concentrate all its forces at a single point at the same time. It operates on a global scale and exploits every weakness of the anti-imperialist movement. It takes advantage of every gap in anti-imperialist forces to expand and strengthen its positions.

If we apply this reasoning to Africa, we see that Portuguese colonialism, which has benefited from massive imperialist support, is currently being challenged extremely intensely in all the parts of Africa where it still exerts domination. Significant victories have been achieved by revolutionary forces in territories under Portuguese rule.

However, it would be a grave mistake to assume that imperialist forces are not doing everything they can in Southern Africa to consolidate their positions and regain, in these regions, what has been lost in others, to compensate for what they have been forced to abandon by force in other parts of Africa. It is from this point that we must conceive our global strategy, as revolutionaries, and always keep in mind that when imperialism is defeated and driven out in one area, it attacks even more vigorously in another.