TOTE 67 especially in the Middle East, into objects of particularly vicious exploitation and sources of fabulous profits for the international monopolies. The dominance of foreign capital m the petroleum industHy eatpe to be es* tablished mainly through the system of concessions wrenched by the? te^ perialists fr®m their dependencies on ^uch terms that they could safely be called predatory* After the Second World War, however, and especially since early 1950s, a widespread movement began in the countries where the petroleum monopolies had penetrated, for a basic revision of the entire pattern of relations with foreign capital. This movement spread, initially, throughout the Middle East. The success that crowned Egypt^s efforts to national^ ize the Suez Canal was of gre^t significance for the moverAent^ tor it demonstrated to the Arab nations the truth that in present-day conditions any oppressed and exploited country could wage a successful battle for its rights with the support of the Soviet Union and the entire socialist system, This struggle fosters a growing solidarity among the developing countries in their policy vis-a-vis the foreign petroleum monopolies. Thus the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) was set up in I960, with the participation of Arab countries, Venezuela and Indonesia and later, Nigeria. Conferences on petroleum and petroleum policies are periodically convened within the framework of the OPEC. Contradictions^ National and International The struggle to achieve economic independence has produced, in recent years, new patterns of relationship between the new national state and foreign capital. Spokesmen for the imperialist interests have repeatedly warned that capitulation of the colonial system would lead to a breakdown of the traditional pattern of economic relations so highly valued by the industrially developed capitalist countries, who depend on their colonies for vitally-needed raw materials and foodstuffs. These warnings were intended, inter alia, to influence the working masses in the metropolitan countries, to win them over to the colonial policy allegedly vital for the economic status and prosperity of Great Britain, France, Belgium and other countries. Actually, however, this thesis has always been merely one of the defensive weapons in the ideological arsenal of colonialism. The progressive elements in both the imperialist countries and the ex-colonies have time after time pointed out that the liquidation of colonial dependence would not sever the established relations, but would only change their nature. Under the colonial regime these relations were the tools of imperialist exploitation: now they are to be based on the principle of equal rights and mutual advantage. The new independent states, as well as those other countries which are seeking to develop their national economies are now fighting for a revision of their foreign economic relations along these lines. The internationalization of prcduction and capital is exerting a complex and extremely contradictory impact on the entire mechanism of