Re: ON INDEPENDENCE OF TINY NATIONAL GROUPS

["Ulhas Joglekar" <ulhasj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Nestor's by the way remarks regarding the socalled relative independence of
India in 60s are way off the mark.

Ulhas


----- Original Message -----
From: Nestor Miguel Gorojovsky <gorojovsky@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Mark Jones <mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2000 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: ON INDEPENDENCE OF TINY NATIONAL GROUPS


> En relación a Re: ON INDEPENDENCE OF TINY NATIONAL GROUPS,
> el 11 Mar 00, a las 19:11, Louis Proyect dijo:
>
>
> I need not recall the host of frontier skirmishes and conflicts waged
> between Russia and England on Iran and Afghanistan. Britain was
> always keen not to allow Russia to extend towards the sea, but also
> NOT TO ALLOW THE INDIAN PEARL OF THE EMPIRE TO BE
> THREATENED BY RUSSIA (a threat that in a sense the Indian bourgeoisie
> found very profitable and helped them follow a relatively independent
> path during the 60s, by the way). The support to the Afghan "Freedom
> Fighters" under Rambo/Reagan was not of a different intention and
> even symbolism.
>
> This is, at least, what I would call a Third World view of these
> issues.
>
> Néstor Miguel Gorojovsky
> gorojovsky@xxxxxxxxxxx
>