Tribute to Enver Hoxha – on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of his death

Enver Hoxha

Enver Hoxha

Tribute to Enver Hoxha – on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of his death

by Gjon Bruçi, Gazeta DITA, April 11, 2025

April 11, 1985 – Albania held its breath, lowered its flag and put on mourning clothes. The Leader had died – the National Pride, the Renaissance figure of modern times, the greatest man in the history of the Albanians, Enver Hoxha.

But who was Enver Hoxha? A communist? A partisan? A commander? A commissar? A leader of the people? A strategist and reformer? A legend? Or a truth?

‘History is made by the masses, individuals play a particular role’ – so teaches the history of human society. But Enver Hoxha’s role in the 50-year era of the new and modern Albania was immense. He embodied, in a single person, the highest and most refined virtues of the Albanian, while at the same time being the most brilliant fulfiller of his people’s aspirations.

In two thousand years of the New Era, the Arbër people produced dozens and hundreds of giants of both intellect and the sword. Among them shone the Hero of the Nation Gjergj Kastrioti-Skanderbeg. He was granted many titles by the chanceries of the time, such as: ‘Prince of Arbër,’ ‘Iskander,’ ‘Knight of Christ,’ and others. But his people called him with simple words – ‘The Bravest’ and ‘The Leader.’

Five hundred years later, Arbër – now Albania – would once again have its Heroes of the pen and the rifle, of thought and action, of movement and revolution, who stood up for the homeland in its most critical moments. Among them, like a mountain eagle, rose the Glorious Leader Enver Hoxha. Time gave this National Hero dozens of titles too, but the people who loved him so deeply simply called him ‘The Commander’ and ‘The Man of the Land.’

Writing about Enver Hoxha on a memorial anniversary is as easy as it is difficult. It is easy, because his monumental deeds are still alive – not only in the minds and hearts of us, his contemporaries, but also because, despite the slander of the bourgeoisie and its mercenaries, they rise like mountains and shine like the sun across the Albanian horizons and beyond. At the same time, writing about Enver Hoxha is extremely difficult, because our writings, no matter how beautifully crafted, cannot capture – in either quantity or quality – the work and legacy of this Colossus of Communism, this Great Man of Albanianhood. That is why I will attempt to focus only on two or three of the most significant moments of our unforgettable Commander and Commissar – moments which, when viewed today through the lens of time and the events we are experiencing, take on multiplied value, a value that exceeds the dimensions of an ordinary leader’s life and work.

Enver Hoxha was the most authentic embodiment of the well-known Albanian expression ‘The Man of the Land.’ To earn this title requires many qualities and high virtues that set a person apart from ordinary people. Among other things, to be or become such a man, one must possess wisdom, bravery and the courage of true men. These qualities – along with many others – Enver Hoxha possessed to the highest degree.

It was the harsh winter of 1943. In the mountains of Çermenika, the General Staff of the National Liberation Army was in a critical situation. The routes leading to the free zones were blocked by snow and by German and Ballist forces. British General Davies, who was stationed as an ally near the General Staff, was terrified by the dire conditions. In a debate with Enver Hoxha, he urged him to halt the war and surrender:

‘Mr. Hoxha, you’re mistaken… you’ve lost the war… you’re surrounded… you have only two options: either be killed or surrender…’

Enver Hoxha, who had been trying to calm the British ally, exploded when he heard those defeatist words:

‘Who lost the war? Who should surrender? Never! You, Mr. General, are a defeatist and a capitulator. The Albanian partisans do not know defeat, let alone surrender. They know only resistance and victory!’

And it was Enver Hoxha’s unmatched courage – his absolute conviction in victory – that led the General Staff of the National Liberation Army out of that fierce German-Ballist siege, during that unforgettable cold of late December 1943.

In 1946, at the Paris Peace Conference, the outcomes of the Second World War were being finalized. The great victors – the United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom and France – held the primary positions and were deciding the fate of nations. Little Albania, with fewer than one million inhabitants, arrived at this Conference with its head held high. Its contribution to the Anti-Fascist War, compared to its human and material capacity, was of the highest level. But neighbouring chauvinists refused to acknowledge this fact. The Greek representative at the Conference, Caldarisi, launched a storm of accusations against Albania, labelling it a collaborator of fascism in the attack against Greece. If these accusations were accepted as truth, then the territorial integrity of newly-liberated Albania would be called into question. As always, the great powers of the world had little concern for the fate of small countries and peoples. These could be traded among them, like gifts or relics exchanged at a simple celebration. Facing this potential threat to our country was Enver Hoxha. With unmatched courage, he declared at the Conference:

‘I solemnly declare that: Neither the Paris Conference, nor the Conference of the Four, nor any other Conference whatsoever, can take under consideration the borders of my country, within which there is not a single inch of foreign land… Let the whole world know that the Albanian people do not allow their borders and land to be discussed… The Albanian people have not sent their delegation to Paris to give an account, but to demand accountability from those who harmed them so greatly and whom they fought fiercely until the end!’

And after this historic declaration, Enver Hoxha walked out of the Conference proceedings, returning to the Homeland, to his people – from whom, like Antaeus, he drew endless strength and courage.

In November 1960, Enver Hoxha’s courage rose to legendary proportions. It was a moment of direct confrontation with a threat looming over the international communist movement and, at the same time, over socialist Albania. The clash was face-to-face with the leader of the vast state that made up one-sixth of the globe – the father of kukuruz (maize), Nikita Khrushchev. But this ‘Cyclops’ of the great Eurasian land, when confronted with Enver Hoxha in that bitter winter of the aged Kremlin, resembled the smallest copy of a Russian Matryoshka doll. The opposite was true for Enver Hoxha. His towering and expressive appearance matched perfectly the argument and truth he stood for, all accompanied by rare courage. This was because he came from Albania, where manhood is not measured by weight or position, but by resistance and bravery, by deeds and actions for the benefit of the nation. At the end of that fierce confrontation with Nikita Khrushchev, Enver Hoxha, with a loud and confident voice, would declare: ‘I defend the interests of my country!’

That phrase – delivered with Albanian fire and manliness, in front of Moscow’s treacherous leadership – needs no commentary. As history proved, the entire philosophy of Enver Hoxha’s life and work is encapsulated in that phrase: ‘I defend the interests of my country!’

For half a century, this ‘Man of the Land’ – like no one else in the old or modern history of the Albanians – defended and elevated Albania’s and his nation’s interests to the highest levels.

* * *

It cannot be said with certainty whether an era produces colossi, or whether colossi create an era. But in our case, we can declare without hesitation: Enver Hoxha created an era for Albania and the Albanian nation. An era that placed Albania on the map of the world, raising the Albanians and their country to the highest level of dignity as a nation!

The apologists of the bourgeoisie accuse us, the communists, of the ‘cult of personality’! But who created and continues to fuel the so-called ‘cult of personality’ for the leaders of the proletariat? It was – and still is – the dwarfs of history, starting from the bald Khrushchev to the confused, bearded, scarf-wrapped types of today, who, unable to climb the Great Mountain, spit at it from below – even though their spit only falls back on their own faces!

All the high epithets in the world would not be enough for Enver Hoxha, even if all the dictionaries of the world’s languages were combined. For nature has rarely crafted such a complete person – in stature and presence, in intellect and heart, in courage and bravery, in self-sacrifice and devotion, and above all in a monumental work for the benefit of his nation – as it did in Enver Hoxha.

The ‘cult of personality’? How laughable – and equally deceitful! For a priest said to have cured one or two blind people (surely with remedies unknown in ancient times), the Church and its propaganda perform canonization, and then raise a cult around him where thousands of believers pray. But for Enver Hoxha – who performed real, not imagined, miracles; who shifted history and created an era; who cured not one or two individuals of blindness, but three million Albanians; whose theoretical and practical work lifts not just two or three crippled men, but thousands and millions of proletarians across the world – we supposedly have no right to honour him with a cult?

Yes! Enver Hoxha fully deserves the cult. He is – and will remain – the cult of honourable Albanians. He is – and will remain – the cult of the members of the Communist Party and their supporters, because his majestic figure represents the true national ideals.

Our Albania today, as I wrote at the beginning of this piece, is without a Master of the House. A full 40 years without a master. And how can a house be without ‘its Master’? ‘See and write,’ says the people – and what is to be written is clear for all to see. In the absence of the ‘Master of the Hearth,’ the pack of wolves, along with the great she-wolf of capitalism, has overrun Albania and is tearing it apart without mercy – just as hyenas do in the dark!

On the eve of the March 22, 1992 elections – elections that marked the rise to power of the old bourgeoisie and its new offspring – the chairman of the Communist Party, the revolutionary poet Hysni Milloshi, made a call: ‘Albanian people, do not blindfold yourselves with a black cloth before the ballot box, because afterwards not even the cuckoo will be able to lament your fate!’ But the Albanian people, unfortunately, under the pressure of the horns and drums of ‘bourgeois democracy,’ did not heed the call of the chief communist of the time. With two fingers raised and their minds lowered, they cast their votes into the black bourgeois box – a box that for the past three and a half decades has darkened, and continues to darken, their lives in every aspect.

The Albanians must now remove this black cloth from their eyes. Three and a half decades are enough to understand that bourgeois democracy can bring nothing but the darkness into which the people have completely sunk. Until when will this continue? Has hope been lost for emerging into the light once again?

No! The Albanians will once again find the Master of the House – without whom the country, just like a family, cannot stand firm or move forward. It cannot be otherwise. History repeats itself. And in today’s world, this ‘repetition’ has a much shorter time span than in the past. Albania will soon give birth to the ‘Man’ who will lead it out of the tunnel of darkness – towards the true light!

(Translated by November Eighth Publishing House (Canada) from the Albanian original)

See also;

Enver Hoxha – Selected Works

Enver Hoxha – Speeches and articles

Enver Hoxha – Memoirs, Diary Selections and Compilations of Articles

Visiting Enver Hoxha’s grave in Tirana

People’s Socialist Republic of Albania

The Monument of the Heroes of the Fight for the Freedom of the People and the Homeland, for Socialism

Monument of the Heroes of the Fight for the Freedom

Monument of the Heroes of the Fight for the Freedom

The Monument of the Heroes of the Fight for the Freedom of the People and the Homeland, for Socialism

This is a monument situated on a high point, Filaret Hill, in Carol I park, (called Liberty Park during Romania’s attempt to construct Socialism). The park can be found to the south west of the centre of Bucharest (the Old Town).

The site was formerly the location of the Palace of Arts which later housed a military museum but this was damaged first by fire in 1938 and then by an earthquake in 1940. The structure was demolished in 1943 but it wasn’t until 1959 that work began on the monument – which was finally inaugurated in 1963. The structure follows the plans laid out by architects Horia Maicu and Nicolae Cucu. ‘The monument consists of a massive round base, with five slender arches clad in red granite, which reach a height of 48 meters’.

The necropolis is constructed of black and red granite from Sweden and consists of a central mausoleum with a semi-circle of crypts for the burial Heroes of the working class. Inside the central structure were placed the bodies of three, early, prominent Communist leaders – Gheorghe Gheorghiu-De (First Secretary of the Romanian Communist Party from 1944-1965), Constantin Ion Parhon (the first Head of State of the Romanian People’s Republic from 1947 to 1952) and Petru Groza (the country’s first Prime Minister). Their bodies were removed from the mausoleum after the counter-revolution in 1991 and reburied in the city’s cemetery.

There are no names on the tombstones, which are placed outside the semi-circular cloister, so I don’t know if any bodies interred there are still in place or whether they were also removed to other cemeteries.

Now, inside the central structure, in place of the Communist leaders stands a statue of Ferdinand Viktor Albert Meinrad (1865-1927) – the monarch of Romania during the First World War – and the Goddess Nike (representing Victory or the expensive trainers – I don’t know which). The mausoleum is open to the public on Heroes Day, celebrated on Ascension Day (40 days after Easter) and on Army Day, the 25th of October. This seems like a modern version of the ‘extirpation of idolatry’ practised by the Spanish in Peru.

For many years there was a discussion about destroying the monument but in 2006 the decision was taken to keep the structure but it was rebranded as the Memorial to the Heroes of the Nation.

The Tomb of the Unknown Warrior, the work of the Romanian sculptor Emil Wilhelm Becker, was placed in front of the original building and inaugurated on 17 May 1923. This commemorates those Romanians who died in the First World War. This was retained with the construction of the present structure of the late 1950s and is located on a platform in front of, and slightly lower, to that structure. Alongside it is an Eternal Flame which burns to this day. This tomb has a single Honour Guard which I assume, but don’t know for certain, is 24 hours a day. There’s a barracks underneath the whole structure with the entrance towards the back of the cloister.

Placed on the platform of the principal monument are various artillery pieces, ‘guarding’ the monument. They look like 76mm canons produced in the Soviet Union at the time of the Great Patriotic War in the 1940s.

Condition of the monument;

The principal structure looks in good condition but the general environment could be cared for better. There are tacky plastic strips to indicate that people shouldn’t enter the platform around the mausoleum and the cloister is dirty and used to store all kinds of building materials.

Location;

At the bottom end of the park just above a small lake with fountains, approached via a wide tree lined avenue and then a large flight of steps. The monument dominates the park.

GPS;

44.41151 N

26.09683 E

How to get there;

The northern end of the park is about a 20 minute walk from Unirii Park in the centre of Bucharest. Metro station Tineretului is the closest to the southern end of the park and the monument. It’s a walk, uphill west, of about 500m from the station entrance to the memorial.

Opening times;

The Monument is accessible 24 hours a day.

16th March 1968 – My Lai Massacre

My Lai Monument

My Lai Monument

More on the ‘Revolutionary Year’

View of the world

Ukraine – what you’re not told

16th March 1968 – My Lai Massacre

Just after dawn on the morning of 16th March 1968, when the peasants were starting off to tend their paddies and the children were starting to have their breakfast, the quiet of the spring morning was broken by the arrival of US helicopters firing into people’s homes. This was soon followed by the arrival of troop carrying helicopters who also started to fire indiscriminately at anything that moved. Four hours later, by the end of this ‘military action’ 504 Vietnamese civilians were killed and soon after a village structure that had existed for hundreds of years was wiped out. The Vietnamese knew this group of villages as Song My, the rest of the world, when the news finally broke 18 months later, were to know the site of this massacre as My Lai.

My Lai Massacre

My Lai Massacre

Earlier that year the US invading forces and their South Vietnamese lackeys had been taken by surprise by the Tet Offensive. This began on the night of the 29/30th January when units of the Vietnamese People’s Army (from the North Vietnam) and guerrilla units of the National Liberation Front (the NLF from the South) simultaneously attacked numerous military bases and cities in the south of the country, even coming out of the ground in the middle of Da Nang, the principal close to the border with the People’s Republic of the North.

The action didn’t achieve any lasting military objectives but the very fact that it could have been organised on such a scale in the first place started to create the realisation amongst the American imperialists that they wouldn’t be able to win the war. It would be another seven years before the panic-stricken Yankees and their hangers-on (literally as the last helicopters took off) fought tooth and nail against each other to get on the last helicopters from the roof of the American Embassy in Saigon as North Vietnamese tanks crashed through the compound gates.

But like a wounded animal, knowing it is about to die, the Americans lashed out with the aim of causing as much damage and suffering as possible. The cost of defeating the most powerful military nation on the earth would have to be paid for at a high price.

The area which encompassed Song My was considered to be more than just sympathetic to the NLF and was known by the Americans as ‘Pinkville’. The guerrilla units in the south followed the military principals of People’s War, developed by Mao Tse-tung in China in the war, first, against the Japanese Fascist invaders and then the reactionary, Western Imperialist supported, Nationalist Kuomintang.

Mao coined the phrase of the guerrilla army ‘swimming like fish amongst the people’ and the Vietnamese followed this lesson well. However, not only do revolutionaries learn from the experience of those who have gone before them. Reactionaries also learnt and decided that if the revolutionaries were swimming amongst the people then they would deny them the water. The fact that many innocent people would bear the cost of this approach wasn’t (and still isn’t – witness what has happened in the last 14 years with the imperialist wars of intervention in Afghanistan, Iraq and other countries of the Middle East) of concern to the American commanders in Vietnam nor their political masters in Washington. As far as they were concerned ALL the ‘gooks’ (their racist term for the Vietnamese) were guilty, if not for crimes of commission then for crimes of omission, even babies only a matter of a few weeks old or those yet to be born.

My Lai Massacre

My Lai Massacre

It’s difficult to imagine what went through the minds of those soldiers who carried out the massacre that covered three separate hamlets in Song My. There were no reports whatsoever that these brave troops came under any sort of enemy fire. In fact there was only one casualty amongst the G.I.s – and his wound was self-inflicted in an effort not to indulge in the blood lust.

My Lai Massacre

My Lai Massacre

Most of the troops involved were relatively new to the country and therefore couldn’t really argue that they were battle weary and bitter from what they had seen happen to their fellow conscripts – although I have heard one soldier argue that case. Neither could they use the excuse given in Northern Ireland by the British Paratroopers after the murder of Irish Republican demonstrators on ‘Bloody Sunday’ in 1972 when one reason given for them opening fire was that these ‘elite’ troops were frightened by being shot at.

My Lai Massacre

My Lai Massacre

The majority of US troops in Vietnam by this time of the war were conscripts. The majority of them were in their late teens or early twenties. The majority of them were from poor, working class backgrounds. A disproportionate number of them were poor working class black Americans (in a tableau in the My Lai museum they are given equal status to the whites in killing women and children), living in a society that was even more racist and segregationist than it is now. Yet these working class boys, under the orders of officers with little more stake in US society than the soldiers under their command, just went wild.

My Lai Massacre Museum

My Lai Massacre Museum

Shooting at everything that moved, regardless of age or gender; burning of buildings, sometimes with people inside alive; destroying all foodstuffs including domesticated animals; trapping people in confined spaces and then throwing in fragmentation grenades; gang raping of the women regardless of age and even those in late stages of pregnancy; killing babies only a few weeks old; mutilating the bodies of their victims including cutting out tongues, cutting off hands, disembowelment and taking scalps; pulling out unborn foetuses from pregnant women; shooting the wounded if they made the mistake of lettering their murderers know they were still alive; this orgy of death and destruction went on for hours until they had killed all that they thought was alive.

My Lai Massacre

My Lai Massacre

There was little evidence of any of the soldiers making any effort to put a stop to all this or to try to bring some element of civilisation back into their mission – although a few are said to have ‘not participated’ (but that begs questions about crimes of commission or omission). Apart from one exception. The three-man crew of one of the support helicopters put their machine between a group of G.I.’s and their intended victims. Whilst the gunner held his heavy machine gun on soldiers from his own side a handful of villagers were able to be escape the mayhem. One of the helicopter crew was killed soon after (in combat) but the two that survived were invited to the thirtieth anniversary commemoration at the Quang Ngai General Museum in 1998.

Even though the trials at Nuremberg (after World War Two) had, supposedly, rejected the argument of ‘just obeying orders’ as being no excuse or vindication for committing such atrocities this was the case put by many of those who attended (many didn’t) the Peers Commission that was set up more than 18 months after the event. Whatever orders might have been given that doesn’t excuse what these teenagers did, many of them going way above and beyond the ‘call of duty’, their obvious enjoyment of the opportunity to kill and maim with impunity being proof of that.

My Lai Massacre

My Lai Massacre

(This wasn’t the first time American soldiers had been given orders by their officers and then executing them with a gusto that bordered on fanaticism. On November 29th 1864 the American army carried out a similar massacre against, mainly, unarmed Cheyenne and Arapaho at Sand Creek in Colorado. The film ‘Soldier Blue’, released in 1970, making a clear parallel between the two events separated by just under a hundred years.)

My Lai Massacre

My Lai Massacre

So those who actually did the killing have no excuse (and shouldn’t be excused) but what were their orders? The same that had been given to other units before them, that is to go out and ‘search and destroy’ in what was designated as a ‘free fire zone’. This gave a virtual carte blanche for the soldiers to do whatever they wished and they would not be held responsible. This had been happening throughout the country for a number of years causing widespread devastation, through acts of the military on the ground, artillery bombardments, the widespread use of napalm and defoliation with chemicals such as Agent Orange. Therefore the idea of a ‘free fire zone’ was basically part of the philosophy of the American military and this would have been known by even such rookie troops as those that were sent into the Song My area.

My Lai Massacre

My Lai Massacre

At the same time the military did not act totally under their own volition and were under the control of the politicians in Washington. Even if the rest of the world wasn’t aware of what was happening in Vietnam those in the White House and the Pentagon certainly did. And the fact that the very villages were bulldozed soon after the massacre indicates that the commanders in the field knew that things had gone slightly to far.

My Lai Massacre

My Lai Massacre

So what made the My Lai Massacre different? It seems that news of what had happened was circulating very soon after the event. Although the murder of civilians and the destruction of their homes wasn’t new at Song My the Americans had taken their task of murder into a new league and it would have been impossible to have completely suppressed the news. At the same time the military would have wanted this news to have spread throughout the south of Vietnam as a warning, threat and promise to those Vietnamese who supported the NLF and the North Vietnamese.

My Lai Massacre

My Lai Massacre

The reports and letters that went around, both the military structure in Vietnam and the offices of politicians and newspapers in the United States were only words. By 1968 it was images that were to make the difference. Anyone who was of an age to watch and understand the TV images being shown everyday throughout the world in the late 60s and early 70’s will understand the importance of images. TV news programmes showed, daily, American wounded and dead being collected from the battlefield as well as the scenes played out on the streets of Saigon (such the summary execution by a bullet to the head of a Vietnamese guerrilla or the self-immolation of a Buddhist monk). The power of those images is the reason why, ever since, photographers and journalists are ’embedded’ – read controlled – by the US, UK or NATO armies.

My Lai Massacre

My Lai Massacre

Ron Haeberle, an army photographer, had only just started his tour of duty when he was sent to Song My. Although not believing what he saw he continued to take photos during the morning. After the massacre he handed in 40 black and white pictures to the military but kept 18 in colour. It was those pictures which were to make the written reports even more potent.

Wisely, for self-preservation reasons, Haeberle didn’t release those pictures until he had returned from Vietnam – war zones are very easy places to get yourself killed. Even though the extent of the furore after the release of his photographs was worldwide, to the best of my knowledge none of the other pictures he took that spring morning have ever been made public. However, it’s difficult to believe that any other pictures would tell us much more about what happened. The suppression, or destruction of his other pictures only goes to demonstrate the lack of openness of governments when caught out doing the direct opposite to what they say. (Most of the pictures on this page are from among those Haeberle kept to himself for the best part of 18 months.)

The Report of the Peers investigation set up when the news of the massacre was too widespread to be ignored seemed to give the impression that this was a ‘one off’, an aberration and not a matter of policy. However, the widespread deployment of ‘search and destroy’ missions, the ‘Strategic Hamlet Programme’ – whereby villagers were gathered together in virtual concentration camps in order to make contact between the ordinary peasants and the guerrillas that much more difficult – and the designation of huge swathes of the country as being ‘free fire zones’ meant that the lives of the Vietnamese people held no value in the minds of the occupation forces.

Atrocities carried out by the Americans and the South Vietnamese Army were not new, only the scale was different. Eighteen months before My Lai the Democratic Republic of Vietnam had produced a pamphlet, with photographs, of examples of war crimes committed by US troops and at about the time of the My Lai Massacre they produced evidence (presented to Bertrand Russell International Tribunal) claiming genocide on the part of the Americans. There’s no significant difference between the pictures in these pamphlets from those of Haeberle taken in March 1968.

After all the fuss, all the publicity, all the demonstrations on the streets throughout the world, all the words spoken, all the investigations carried out, all the crocodile tears of politicians, no one was held accountable for what happened at Song My/My Lai. A junior officer (Calley) was chosen as a scapegoat (which doesn’t mean him any less culpable) and found guilty but later given a Presidential pardon by Richard Nixon. The Peers investigation report was even told not to refer to it as a massacre and described it as an ‘incident’. Ultimately no one was held responsible.

And nothing has really changed in the policies of the American nor any other country that considers it has the right to enter in the internal affairs of another country. My Lai wasn’t the first of such massacres, neither was it the last.

For a period after defeat in Vietnam the US ‘sub-contracted’ the killing of innocent villagers, although really the concept of ‘innocence’ seems now to have been lost. In Latin America the fascist, right-wing murder squads ran amok throughout the 70s and 80s from Mexico down to the Tierra del Fuego. If these killers needed training they received that at the ‘anti-communist insurgency’ School of the Americas at Fort Benning. To keep their eye in the US invaded Granada and Panama, on both occasions civilians got in the way.

In the Middle East surrogates kept their populations quiet with the use of terror. Some of these lost the support of the US and have fallen. Others still carry out the will of the US although they would maintain they are independent nations. Sometimes things don’t need to be said for them to happen. Israel continues to murder Palestinians and destroy their homes. Indeed Israel was in the game of massacres before it was even established as a state, killing indiscriminately Palestinians in the village of Deir Yassin on 9th April 1948. The Zionists then sub-contracted the killing to the Christian militia in Lebanon and over two days in September 1982 they murdered thousands in the refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila.

Since the beginning of the 21st century the US has again got more directly involved and thousands have been killed in Afghanistan, Iraq and other countries of the Middle East following western government attempts at ‘regime change’. The Americans, and their allies, got around the embarrassment of large numbers of civilians being killed by not actually counting them, as they did in Fallujah.

And presently in India, the present and previous governments, since 2009, have been pursuing what they call ‘Operation Green Hunt’ against the dalits and adivasis (the ethnic and tribal groups) who in some of the most mineral rich areas of the country. However, in India the people are not just accepting this and are fighting back under the leadership of the Communist Party of India (Maoist).

If people thought that the massacre at My Lai was an aberration they should think again.

The voices of those who killed

On the occasion of the 40th anniversary of the massacre in 2008 the BBC’s Radio Four broadcast a programme in its Archive Hour slot which includes interviews with some of those involved in the murderous attack. Personally, I don’t have any sympathy whatsoever for those young soldiers who have subsequently suffered from Post-traumatic Stress Disorder for what they did that day so long ago.

Here is a recording of that programme, entitled The My Lai Tapes is presented in two parts, Part 1, Part 2.

See also:

The last child of My Lai. First published in March 2023 but still relevant.

Pamphlet and booklets issues by the Quang Ngai general Museum, the name given to the memorial garden on the obliterated site of the village;

Pamphlet

A look back upon Son My, (English), Quang Ngai General Museum, 1998, 63 pages.

Nhin Lai Son My, (Vietnamese), Quang Ngai General Museum, 1998, 63 pages.

More on the ‘Revolutionary Year’

An alternative view of the world

Ukraine – what you’re not told