history

the unhappiness brought by the missile storm lingers in our minds and spoils our mood. In the past, we simply looked at our relationship with our Chinese brothers with naive eyes. We are happy to maintain such good contacts with them.

under the situation in 1957, the question of convening the International Communist Party and workers’ party conference is imminent. Let’s get ready. After consultation, the meeting was scheduled to be held to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the great October Socialist Revolution. A committee was set up to draft preparatory documents. Then we met in Moscow.

the Communist Party of China sent a delegation with a considerable lineup. The delegation was personally led by Liu Shaoqi,, Kang Sheng and others. Madam Soong Ching Ling is also a member of the delegation. Frankly speaking, we are quite confused about this, because I didn’t know whether she was a communist at that time or now. We thought she was a non party figure. Of course, she is a very progressive person. In the struggle of the Chinese people against the reactionaries, she has been standing on the position of the Communist Party for many years. We are not very upset about whether she is a regular Communist and whether she has a party card. Because in terms of faith, she is close to a communist. Soong Ching Ling also performed well in her attitude towards us, full of comradeship and brotherhood. Generally speaking, the work of the

,

,

and

representative conference has a high ideological and political level. There were no great differences among the representatives. The brotherly Party Congress is the most extensive since the Communist International. More than 80 party envoys came to Moscow. We discussed the international situation and the possibility of preventing World War. Missile nuclear war has always been the theme of such meetings. Once a world war breaks out, I don’t know whether the belligerents can insist on using conventional weapons and classic weapons, and whether the situation will evolve into a missile nuclear war. Because it will be difficult for the party that is about to fail and has nuclear missile weapons in reserve to stop it from using such weapons: it is willing to press “all buttons” in order to save itself. But it’s still a question of the future. I don’t want to predict the future now. I’m talking about the past.

Mao spoke on the issue of war at the meeting. The general content of his speech was as follows: don’t be afraid of war. Neither fear atomic bombs nor weapons. No matter what the war is, our socialist country will win. Specifically speaking of China, he said: “if imperialism imposes war on us, and we now have 600 million people, what if we lose 300 million of them? After a few years of war, we will cultivate new people and restore the population.” After he spoke, there was a grave silence in the meeting place. No one is prepared for such an attitude towards world war. On the contrary, everyone is thinking about what kind of ways to prevent World War. Opposing World War and striving for peaceful coexistence are the primary themes. However, Mao suddenly put forward the slogan of not afraid of war, saying that war will bring us victory. Even if there are losses, it doesn’t matter. War!

after the meeting, all delegations began to talk about their feelings. I still remember novotini novotini (1904-1975) was the first Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia and the president of Czechoslovakia. Comrade Mao Zedong said, “Comrade Mao Zedong said that they are going to lose 300 million of the 600 million people. What shall we do? We have only 12 million. We will lose all of them by then, and no one will restore our population.” Gomulka Gomulka (1905-1982) was the first Secretary of the Central Committee of the Polish unified workers’ party. Made a more intense response. However, the criticism from the representatives of the brotherly party had no impact on Mao.

Yugoslavia also sent a delegation, led by kader. Lankovich kader (1910 ~ 1979) was then the executive member of the Central Committee, the Secretary of the Secretariat and the member of the central presidium of the Communist union of Yugoslavia; Rankovic (born in 1909) is vice chairman of the Executive Committee of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and member of the Central Committee of the communist republic of Yugoslavia. Also in the delegation. He has a good and friendly attitude towards us, and we fully trust him in this regard. However, when we began to negotiate the final document of the conference, Mrs. nanslar raised the question of modifying several expressions. We don’t think so. Other communist parties supported us. They said that the declaration must be adopted according to the original. Those statements were drafted and revised by members of a committee composed of representatives of the brotherly party. At this time, Mrs. nansila said that they would not sign such a document. We had no choice but to bypass Yugoslavia and sign the document. We had been around this delegation for a long time, persuading them and demonstrating why it was necessary to sign the declaration in the form drafted by the committee, but Mrs. nanslar was ruthless. The reason why they insist on signing and revising the documents together is that they are not fully prepared for the normalization of international relations. Once they sign, they seem to lose their leading position among the so-called “third countries”, which take a special position between imperialist powers and socialist countries. At least I had this impression, because Mrs. nansila had no reasonable reason not to sign the text.

we discussed this issue with the Chinese side, and Mao also said: “that’s good. If you don’t want to, let them go. Let’s sign it ourselves.” So we signed the declaration, which did not intensify our relations with the Yugoslav delegation. We still hope that Mrs. nanslar will endorse this common document in the future and make every effort from her own side to normalize relations with Yugoslavia and make such relations based on brotherhood and trust. Our talks with the Chinese delegation and Mao himself were extremely friendly, even close and friendly. However, it became clear later that this was a trick played by the Chinese. When our relations with Yugoslavia finally achieved positive resultsAfter normalization, a Yugoslav Comrade told us that when they talked with Mao during the meeting, Mao made a rather contemptuous response to us. He discussed with us how to persuade Mrs. nanslar to sign the joint statement, but said in front of Mrs. nanslar: “well, you can’t sign this statement. Just do as you like. In fact, there’s no big deal here. It’s just that the representatives of our host Communist Party of the Soviet Union will get a little nervous. Then they will calm down.” In short, Beijing instigated the Yugoslav delegation behind us not to sign the common document and extended an encouraging hand to them, which we didn’t know at that time.

,

,

and

had differences when discussing the text of the declaration, but they were differences of another kind, and they were still differences with China. At that time, we thought the difference was insignificant. But later events showed that there were deep reasons for this disagreement. When drafting the declaration, our delegation, entrusted by the presidium of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, proposed to delete all references to the leadership of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in the world communist movement from the text. In my opinion, after exposing the mistakes of, a similar formulation, which is also written in an international declaration, may be understood as an attempt to pick up Stalin’s leadership style of the Communist movement, try to return our party to the old way and establish its leadership over other brotherly parties. This may be interpreted as changing the mutual relationship between the Communist parties of various countries based on the principle of equal cooperation.

almost all the representatives of the fraternal parties correctly understood our proposal and agreed with it. But it was the Chinese who suddenly opposed it. They claimed that the Communist Party of the Soviet Union was actually leading the world communist movement, which should be reflected in the conference documents; There must be a leader who coordinates the anti imperialist struggle policies of the Communist parties and the workers’ parties of all countries. We cannot agree with this formulation, and we suspect (later events confirmed our view) that it is not without reason. If all other parties identify a party as the leader, then the leader can also be changed. One today, another tomorrow. We believe that the Chinese are laying the groundwork for their future role. Therefore, we are grateful to the Chinese comrades for recognizing the achievements of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in the world communist movement, but we firmly say that we oppose the inclusion of such words. The other parties once again agreed with us. This is the end of the text discussion. However, this has proved that the current policy of the Communist Party of China is not suddenly produced out of thin air, but has been quietly brewing for a long time.