Group Title: Information bulletin.
Title: Information bulletin ; documents of the Communist and Workers' Parties : articles and speeches
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00089409/00001
 Material Information
Title: Information bulletin ; documents of the Communist and Workers' Parties : articles and speeches
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Publisher: World Marxist Review
Place of Publication: London
Publication Date: 1963
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00089409
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Full Text

\


Duments o th Con

and Workers' Parties

Articles and Speeches


3

WORLD
ARXIST REVIEW


CONTENTS:
Resolution
of the C.C., Communist Party of Ceylon
"The Main Forces of Progress",
an article from the Moroccan newspaper
A -M o u k a f ih
Resolution
of the C.C., Communist Party of Colombia
Report by Victorio Codovilla
"A Step Towards Peace", an article from the
Guatemalan newspaper V e r d a d
Article by Gus Hall
Resolution
of the C.C., Communist Party of Spain
Resolution
of the C.C., Communist Party of Luxembourg
Resolution
of the National Conference of the Swiss Party
of Labour


UII









Resolution of the Central Committee,

Communist Party of Ceylon






The Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ceylon thoroughly
examined the situation in the international communist movement and
adopted a detailed resolution in which it emphatically denounced the
present political line and the splitting activity of the leaders of the
Communist Party of China.
Reaffirming its fidelity to Marxism-Leninism and proletarian inter-'
nationalism, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ceylon
stresses in the resolution the need for all fraternal parties strictly to
adhere to the jointly adopted general line of the international commu-i
nist movement.
The general line of the international communist movement in the
present epoch, says the resolution, was laid down in the Statement and
Declaration of the meetings of Communist and Workers' Parties in 1957
and 1960. The conclusions set out in these historic documents were
accepted enthusiastically by all Marxist-Leninist parties, including our
own. The validity of these conclusions has been proved by experience.
While the overwhelming majority of the fraternal parties have
steadfastly and loyally sought to implement this general line, a situa-;
tion has unfortunately arisen where the leaders of the Communist Party
of China have recently begun to come out openly against fundamental
agreed conclusions which they themselves accepted in 1957 and 1960.
Their differences with the International Communist movement are not
concerned solely with separate or secondary questions but with the
general line of our movement.
The Central Committee of the Ceylon Communist Party cannot agree
with the positions and deeds of the Chinese comrades, which depart
from the agreed general line, spread confusion within fraternal par-)
ties, endanger the international positions and prestige of Communism,
and expose the international Communist, working-class and democratic
movements to the danger of splits and disruption.
During the course of 1962, the Chinese comrades started what they
called a "great debate" with several fraternal parties and principally
with the C.P.S.U. The characterisation and central. assumptions of
this "great debate" could not but evoke alarm and indignation from
the mass of the fraternal parties.

Abridged.








The Central Committee of the Ceylon Communist Party rejects as
an unfounded and unworthy slander the central assumptions on which
the Chinese comrades have proceeded in this "great debate" namely,
that the leadership of the C.P.S.U. and most of the other fraternal par-
ties have radically departed from Marxism-Leninism and proletarian
internationalism, degenerated to the position of "modern revisionism",
abandoned the revolutionary cause, and seek only to "prettify" and
collaborate with imperialism.
It is an equally unworthy slander for our Chinese comrades to
suggest, as they do in their letter of 14 June 1963 and other docu-
ments, that fraternal parties who do not agree with their positions
are mere marionettes who dance to "Moscow's baton".
Our Party welcomed the cessation of open polemics brought about
at the beginning of 1963 on the initiative of the C.P.S.U. But the June
14 letter of the C.C. of the C.P.C. came as a rude shock, dashing the
hopes of healing the differences of the Chinese leaders with the inter-
national communist movement.
The C.P.C. letter of June 14 and the refusal of the Chinese leaders
to continue mutual abstention from public polemics for a further pe-
riod after the talks between the C.P.S.U. and the C.P.C. were adjourned
at the sudden request of the Chinese delegation testify that the Chinese
comrades hold views that differ radically on many vital questions
from the general line of the international communist movement, its
strategy and tactics.
In the 1960 Statement, all the fraternal parties declared that "the
problem of war and peace is the most burning problem of our time."
They called on all Communist Parties to regard the fight for peace, to
prevent the outbreak of a new, thermonuclear world war, as their
"prime task".
The Chinese comrades, who once shared these views, now seem to
qualify or depart from them. In various ways, they underestimate and
even belittle the role that the fight for peace, for peaceful coexistence
and disarmament, for averting a third world war, plays in the world
revolutionary process. They tend to reduce this vital question for the
fate of mankind to a subordinate position, to counterpose the national
liberation struggle to the fight for peace.
The fraternal parties proceed on the basis that world war can be
and must be prevented. But the Chinese comrades continue to speak
of war and peace as though the outbreak of a new world war and the
maintenance of world peace are equally probable. Such an approach
can only diminish the determination of the peace forces to avert war
and encourage defeatism. It also overestimates the power of imperia-
lism and underestimates the power of the people. The divergence of
our Chinese comrades from the common line of our movement on vital
questions of war and peace is seen most clearly in their attitude to-
wards disarmament. They carry their opposition to general and com-
plete disarmament to absurd lengths when they argue that this will








impede the success of the national liberation movement by depriving
the oppressed peoples of the arms they need for their liberation
struggles.
The concrete and detailed proposals that the Soviet Union has advan-1
ced for general disarmament in stages do not in any way deprive the
national liberation movements that have taken this path of the arms
they use to defeat their oppressors. But they would certainly deprive
the imperialists of the major weapons and armed forces that they now
use to threaten world war and oppress national liberation movements.
What is more, our Chinese comrades assume that armed struggle is
the only and inevitable means by which an oppressed people can
achieve its national liberation from imperialism, ignoring the fact
that, thanks to the existence of the Soviet Union and the socialist camp
and the changed balance of class forces after the second world war,
many oppressed peoples, including the people of Ceylon, were able
to win their political freedom by forms of struggle other than armed
struggle.
The countries of socialism and the international communist move-
ment bear the main responsibility today for the destinies of millions
upon millions of human beings and spearhead mankind's fight for a
bright socialist future. It would be grave irresponsibility if the inter-
national communist movement sought to ignore reality by dismissing
thermonuclear weapons as "paper tigers" or consoling themselves with
calculations that, even if half of mankind perished in a thermonuclear
war, imperialism too would be destroyed.
Peaceful coexistence of countries with different systems or destruc-
tive war this is the alternative today. There is no other choice.
It is a matter of profound regret and shame that our Chinese com-
rades should accuse the C.P.S.U. and other fraternal parties, who are
firmly upholding the policy of peaceful coexistence, of "cowardice"
and "begging peace from the imperialists."
All fraternal parties have declared, time and again, that Lenin's
principle of peaceful coexistence applies only to the relations between
states with different social systems during the period of transition
from world capitalism to world socialism. It does not apply to the
relations between oppressor and oppressed classes within a single
state nor to the relations between* oppressor and oppressed nations.
This is shown in the immense moral, political and material aid, includ-i
ing aid in arms, which the C.P.S.U. and other fraternal parties have
rendered to national liberation struggles and their many acts of
solidarity with the class struggles of the workers of the capitalist
countries. It is baseless slander to suggest that fraternal parties -
and the C.P.S.U. in particular seek to damp down and discourage
the class and national liberation struggles of other peoples.
Far from damping down class and national liberation struggles, the
policy of peaceful coexistence is itself a form of class struggle be-
tween socialism and capitalism.








The struggle for peace and peaceful coexistence Is linked organ1-'
cally with the revolutionary struggle against imperialism. The de-
mand for peace is charged with immense revolutionary potential. We
have witnessed on more than one occasion how the very threat of war
by an imperialist aggressbr has produced revolutionary outbursts.
Neither the class struggle of the workers nor the national liberation
struggles of oppressed peoples need world war for success.
For all these reasons, the Central Committee of the Ceylon Com-
munist Party considers that the positions that our Chinese comrades
have adopted on vital questions of war and peace are both erroneous
and dangerous. They damage the identification of communism with the
fight for peace in the minds of the masses and impede the mobilisation
of the broadest forces to prevent a third world war.
Wholeheartedly approving the wise and statesmanlike handling by
the Soviet Union of the situation that arose at the time of the Caribbean
crisis in 1962, the Central Committee of the Ceylon Communist Party
sharply condemns the attempts of the Chinese leaders to denounce the
role played by the Soviet Union In saving peace and safeguarding the
Cuban revolution as well as their attitude to the Nuclear Weapons Test
Ban Treaty.
The Central Committee of the Ceylon Communist Party, the resolu-
tion goes on, rejects these views of our Chinese comrades. We firmly
uphold the correct positions of the 1957 and 1960 Declaration and Sta-
tement on the questions of war and peace which the C.P.S.U. and the
overwhelming majority of the fraternal parties are loyally seeking to
put into effect.
Recent statements of the Chinese comrades show that they have also
sharp divergences with the common understanding and general line
of the communist movement on fundamental questions affecting stra-
tegy and tactics.
The Chinese comrades have departed from the common conclusions
of the fraternal parties that the main contradiction of our epoch is
the contradiction between socialism and imperialism; that the decisive
role in the resolution of this contradiction is played by the internatio-
nal working class and its chief creation, the world socialist system;
and that the struggle between the two social systems is the central
point, the main battlefield of contemporary world history.
The Chinese comrades see the main contradiction of our epoch as
the contradiction between the national liberation movement and impe-
rialism. They give the national liberation movement the decisive role
in the world revolutionary process that the 1960 Statement gives to
the international working class and the world socialist system.
The fraternal parties of the socialist countries and of the developed
capitalist countries have always evaluated highly the tremendous signi-
ficance of the national liberation movement. They have supported
and assisted the struggles of the peoples and the fraternal parties
of Asia, Africa and Latin America. The fraternal parties of the three







continents, while taking active part in the liberation struggle, have
always solidarised with their class brothers elsewhere in the common
struggle for world socialism.
But it is incorrect and dangerous to consider, as our Chinese com-i
rades do, that "the whole cause of the international proletarian revo-i
lution hinges on the outcome of the revolutionary struggles of the
peoples of these areas".
The national liberation movements were able to triumph in vast
sections of the world only in the new historical epoch, when the world
system of socialist countries began to turn into the decisive factor of
international development. The existence of the world socialist system,
the tremendous assistance that the socialist countries have ren-i
dered to national liberation struggles, and the support of the interna-i
tonal working class have played a decisive part in the success of the
national liberation movement in the post-war period.
In all this, the Soviet Union and the C.P.S.U. have played an out-1
standing role, for which the peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America
have expressed their gratitude on more than one occasion.
The national liberation movements of Asia, Africa and Latin America
fulfil general democratic rather than class tasks. They are delivering
heavy blows at imperialism and breaking down the system of colonial
enslavement. But, for all that, the national liberation movement can-
not, by itself, defeat the socio-economic system from which imperla-4
lism springs namely, monopoly capitalism in the metropolitan coun-
tries. The loss of their colonies considerably weakens, but does not
automatically bring about the downfall of the monopoly capitalists
and the imperialists. This task must be fulfilled by the working class.
As a fraternal party of an Asian country, the Ceylon Communist
Party expresses its profound disagreement with the views of the
Chinese comrades on this matter and upholds the correct position of
the 1960 Statement. The erroneous views of the Chinese comrades can
do great damage to the success of both the national liberation move-i
ment and the socialist revolution of the proletariat. They isolate the
national liberation movement from the international working class
and the world socialist camp and disrupt the essential unity of the main
streams of the world revolutionary process today.
The Central Committee of the Ceylon Communist Party also protests
emphatically against the attempts made by the Chinese comrades to
isolate and segregate the democratic and working class organizations
of Asia and Africa from the Soviet Union and other socialist countries,
for such attempts can only weaken the effectiveness of the Afro-Asian
solidarity movement as a weapon of struggle against imperialism.
The national liberation movements of Asia, Africa and Latin Ame-i
rica have now entered a new stage. The majority of these peoples
have won their political independence and are concentrating on con-!
solidating their political gains, resisting attempts at neo-colonialist
penetration and winning economic independence as well. The success-i







ful completion of these tasks requires close co-operation with and
assistance from the socialist countries, just as do the struggles of
peoples who have yet to win their political independence.
The resolution then examines in detail, from Marxist-Leninist posi-'
tions, the ways and forms of the transition from capitalism to socia-
lism in specific historical conditions.
In dealing with the ways of transition from capitalism to socialism,
Marxists-Leninists have always proceeded on the basis that they vary
in different countries and can take both peaceful and non-peaceful
forms.
The Chinese comrades now question the unanimous conclusion of
the 1957 and 1960 meetings (to which they also subscribed] that "in
a number of capitalist countries" the working class has the opportu-
nity, given certain concrete conditions, to win state power and accom-
plish the tasks of the socialist revolution without civil war.
The question of whether the transition to socialism in any particular
country can be accomplished by peaceful or non-peaceful means should
be decided by the fraternal party of that country on the basis of a
Marxist-Leninist analysis of the actual situation prevailing in that
country. Insistence on armed struggle as the universal law governing
the transition to socialism can do great disservice to fraternal parties.
Lenin insisted that one should never play with revolution. He taught
that revolutions do not depend on whether anyone "wants" them or
not, but on a correct combination of objective and subjective factors.
Lenin always stressed that the socialist countries exercise their main
Influence in the world revolution by their economic construction and
the force of their example. It is precisely these tasks that the C.P.S.U.
and other ruling fraternal parties are performing.
The concluding part of the resolution deals with the unity of the
international communist movement and the need for vigorous defence
of its general line as the most important task of all fraternal parties.
While revisionism still remains the main danger from the long-term
point of view, the immediate danger to the unity and the general line
of the international communist movement comes from dogmatism and
nationalism. It is necessary at this moment to concentrate the greatest
attention on defending the international communist movement against
dogmatism and nationalism.
Our Central Committee expresses its satisfaction at the almost una-
nimous unity of views shown by the fraternal parties on all the ques-
tions of principle which lie at the heart of their activity.. We hope
most sincerely that the fraternal Communist Party of China will heed
this fact, return to the positions which they endorsed in the past and
march towards the triumph of the fight for peace, national liberation,
democracy, socialism and communism.








The main Forces of Progress

Article in the newspaper A l-M o u k a f i h, organ of the Central
Committee of the Communist Party of Morocco,
September 1963







After World War II some 50 newly Independent states arose on the
ruins of the old colonial empires. The political liberation of the former
colonies was the result of the anti-imperialist struggle of their peoples.
But the victories won in this struggle, and especially their consoli-
dation, became possible only thanks to the change in the balance of
world forces.
Imperialism which, at the turn of the century, dominated vast terri-
tories in Asia, Africa and Latin America, lost its privileges with the
emergence of the socialist world system which has inscribed on its
banner the slogan of liberating man from all forms of oppression.
Imperialism, of course, concentrated its main forces against the so-
cialist world system. The collapse of the colonial system is therefore
the result of the united efforts of world socialism which paralyzed
imperialism's main force and of the national-liberation movement.
Unless we realize that the balance of world forces has changed in
favour of socialism and to the detriment of imperialism, we shall not
be able to explain, for example, why India and Indonesia after winn-
ing independence were able to escape the fate that befell China be-
fore the revolution; why it was possible to nationalize the Suez canal,
the property of foreign monopolies in Indonesia, the oil refineries in
Burma and Ceylon and. finally, why the United States was unable to
crush the small heroic people of Cuba. The imperialist powers have
clearly realized that any military attempt to crush freedom will hence-
forth not go unpunished, that the powerful socialist system guards the
gains of the peoples.
The feature of our epoch is that the socialist world system is be-
coming the decisive factor in social development, that the forces
working for the socialist reshaping of society are becoming the main-
spring of human progress. In other words, the contradictions between
imperialism and the forces of world socialism are the basic contra-
dictions in world history today. "To be or not to be" is how the ques-
tion now stands with regard to imperialism.
How is this basic contradiction of our epoch going to be resolved?
"Communists," says N. S. Khrushchov, "are working for the complete
abolition of capitalism and the triumph of the socialist revolution. We

9







are confident that sooner or later all peoples will finish with this
rotten regime. But the question of the victory of socialism in each
country is decided by the people, the working class and the Marxist-
Leninist Party of that country, and not by peoples and parties in other
countries. And certainly not through a nuclear holocaust."
Soviet people are confident that the socialist system will prove its
advantages, over capitalism in peaceful competition, that it will con-
tinue to show these advantages in practice. The principle of peaceful
coexistence and economic cooperation between states with different
social systems, advanced by Lenin, has become the underlying prin-
ciple of Soviet foreign policy.
In the revolutionary struggle for man's transition from capitalism
to socialism, a struggle in which the international working class and
its offspring the socialist world system play the main role, the
national-liberation movement of the peoples is, of course, of signal
importance. Marxists-LcrLinii: tirelessly stress the historical signifi-
cance of the national-liberation struggle. But at the same time they
hold that a firm alliance with the countries of the socialist world
system, with the working-class movement In the capitalist countries, is
essential if it is to be victorious. Isolation of the national-liberation
struggle from the revolutionary working-class movement, underesti-
mation of the experience of social and national regeneration accu-
mulated by the socialist countries, can seriously injure this struggle.
Marxists-Leninists think It incorrect not to bear all this in mind when
assessing the role and place of the national-liberation movement in
the world revolutionary process.
The U.S.S.R. and other socialist countries regard the national-libe-
ration struggle as an integral part of the world revolutionary process
in the course of which capitalism will disappear. They are giving this
struggle the support required by the situation. The U.S.S.R. has shown
in practice that it does not stand aloof when peoples take action
against armed imperialism. The whole world knows of the aid which
Soviet people are rendering the peoples of Egypt, Algeria, Yemen, and
Cuba in their fight for Independence.
Now that most of the peoples of Asia, Africa and Latin America
have won political independence and on the order of the day Is eco-
nomic independence, the socialist countries are giving them increas-
ing economic, technical and cultural assistance. The Soviet Union is
helping Egypt to build the huge Aswan dam, Is building power stations,
institutes and hospitals in many countries of Africa, is prospecting
oil in India, building roads In the jungles of Indonesia. The peoples
of the newly emergent countries can always rely on the Soviet Union
and the other socialist countries.
The forces of socialism and the national-liberation movement are
united in the common anti-imperialist struggle which is bringing nearer
the day When the most progressive system, socialism, will triumph
on our planet.







Resolution of the C. C., Communist

Party of Colombia, on the Differences

in the World Communist and Working

Class Movement




After thoroughly discussing a report by Comrade Filiberto Barrero
on the differences in the Communist movement the 29th plenary meet-;
ing of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Colombia una-3
nimously adopted the following resolution:
The 29th plenary meeting, having reviewed the grave situation result-
ing .from the violation and distortion of the fundamental propositions
of the 1957 Declaration and the 1960 Statement of the meetings of the
Communist and Workers' parties, unanimously resolves:
1. To reject the erroneous deviationist policy pursued of late by the
leaders of the Communist Party of China, who are distorting the essence
of the principal theses of the warld Communist and working-class
movement unanimously approved by all, including the Chinese leaders
themselves.
The policy of the Chinese leaders, who arrogate to themselves the
right to give a new interpretation of these theses, minimizes the funda-1
mental importance of the peaceful coexistence of states with differing
social systems and at the same time envisages, as the perspective, the
fatal inevitability of another world war after which a "bright future
for mankind" would be built on the ruins.
These postulates of the Chinese leaders run counter to the policy
pursued by the world Communist and working-class movement on such
vital issue as the prevention of nuclear war with a view to ensuring
the triumph of the principle of peaceful coexistence.
2. To condemn the activity of the Chinese leaders who, openly vio-1
lating the principles of proletarian internationalism and the agree-i
ments they themselves signed together with all the Communist and
Workers' parties of the world, have launched a disruptive campaign
directly aimed at abolishing the Leninist standards and causing a split
in the world Communist and working-class movement.
The Chinese leaders, pretending to adhere to Marxism-Leninism,
while actually distorting it and trampling on its essence, are engaged

Published in La Voz de la Democracia, Organ of the Communist Party of Col
lombla, October 24, 1963.








in ideological, political and practical activities which have led them
to establishing direct contact with diverse groups of Trotskyites, rene-
gades and expellees from the Communist and Workers' parties. This
activity, at variance with Marxism-Leninism, is aimed at splitting the
world Communist and working-class movement; instead of championing
and propagating the great slogan of Marx and Engels, "Workers of all
Lands, Unite!", It is undermining this slogan.
3. To protest against the activity conducted on a world scale by the
leaders of the Communist Party of China who have put forward their
own policy and are denigrating and slandering the Communist Party
of the Soviet Union which is recognized by all including even the
Chinese leaders themselves as the vanguard of the world Commu-
nist and working-class movement. An example of such calumny is the
charge levelled against the Soviet Union a charge refuted by the
facts that it betrayed Cuba during the Caribbean crisis in 1962.
Such arrogant statements testify to self-conceit which has nothing
in common with Marxism-Leninism but, on the contrary, undermines
its principles and the prestige of the first socialist state in the world.
It should be said that the Chinese leaders never displayed such zeal
In conducting propaganda campaigns against imperialism, colonialism
and reactionaries generally as they do now in spreading slander all
over the world against the Soviet Union and the Communist and Wor-
kers' parties which reject their disruptive activity.
4. Expressing the determination of the Communist Party of Colombia
to fight for the unity of the world Communist movement, the plenary
meeting believes the convocation of a world conference of the Com-
munist and Workers' parties to be essential to discuss the differences
once again. All parties agree that this is the most expedient method,
and it is this method which is being violated today by the leadership of
the C.P.C.
The meeting also maintains that open polemics should be disconti-
nued and the ways for bringing together the two biggest parties, the
C.P.S.U. and the C.P.C., explored in order to ensure the success of
the future conference. In any case we hold that in view of the arbi-
trary methods employed by the Chinese leaders there is need for an in-
ternational conference which should be well prepared and held as
early as possible.
5. The Communist Party of Colombia must thoroughly study, assimi-
late and popularize the general theses of the world Communist move-
merit and apply them consistently in order ideologically to reinforce
its ranks and repel the extremist tendencies of the Chinese leaders
who seek to sow confusion and cause a split in the ranks of our Party
and the other Left forces.
6. The propaganda work of our Party must correspond to the poli-
tical line laid down by the Ninth Congress and the subsequent meetings








of the Central Committee. It is therefore wrong to publish and distri-
bute, at our own expense, materials which, like the materials of the
Chinese leaders, contradict our political line.
7. It is essential to heighten the revolutionary vigilance of our Party
in order to prevent the existing differences from providing a pretext
for the growth of factionalism, which is completely at variance with
the Leninist norms of organization.

Bogota, October 22, 1963.








The Marxist-Leninist Position with

regard to the Trotskyite Dogmatists

from the Communist Party of China








Report by Comrade Victorio Codovilla on the nature and extent
of the differences of the leaders of the Communist Party of China
with the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the other Marx-
ist-Leninist Communist parties, delivered at a meeting of the mem-
bers and alternate members of the Central Committee and Central
Control Commission of the Communist Party of Argentina, functio-
naries of the Central Committee and the leaders of the Federal
Capital, Buenos Aires, Santa Fe, Cordova, Mendoza, Tucuman and
other provincial committees.



The Open Letter of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of
the Soviet Union to the Party organizations and all Communists of the
Soviet Union as well as the Statement of the Soviet government on the
Chinese position with regard to the treaty banning nuclear tests in
the atmosphere, in outer space and under water have demonstrated with
utmost clarity the character of the disagreement of the leaders of
the Communist Party of China (C.P.C.) with the C.P.S.U. and other
Marxist-Leninist parties and exposed their intention to adopt an aggres-
sive, disruptive and anti-Leninist position incompatible with jointly
adopted documents.
My report accordingly is aired primarily at demonstrating the cor-
rectness of the position of the C.P.S.U., which position our Party fully
supports, and the rashness of the position adopted by the Chinese
leaders.
What are the problems in dispute? Differences have arisen, among
others, on the following questions:
regarding the appraisal of the main content of the present epoch and
the new balance of forces between the camp of imperialism and the
camp of socialism favouring the latter;
regarding the possibility of avoiding war and ensuring peace with
capitalism still in existence in a number of countries;








regarding the necessity and the possibility of peaceful coexistence
between states with differing political and social systems and peaceful
competition between socialism and capitalism;
regarding the basic contradiction of our time, or, in other words, is
the basic contradiction that between capitalism and socialism or that
between imperialist capitalism and the national-liberation movement;
regarding different ways of transition from capitalism to socialism,
or, in other words, whether or not it is possible in certain countries
and in certain conditions to go over from capitalism to socialism by
peaceful means;
regarding problems associated with the building of the material and
technological base of the Communist society in the Soviet Union and
the new content of the state and the Party, which are developing into
the state of the whole people and the Party of the whole people;
regarding the road followed by Yugoslavia and the Yugoslav League
of Communists, or, in other words, is Yugoslavia returning to capita-
lism or is it developing along socialist lines;
regarding the negative consequences for the world Communist move-
mentof the Stalin cult and personality cults in general.
These are the main questions on which the C.P.C. disagrees with
the C.P.S.U. and the other Marxist-Leninist parties.
It will be seen that these are not matters of second-rate importance,
not differences with regard to the tactics to be employed to ensure
the correct solution of one or another problem, but problems affecting
the general line, tactics and ideology of the world Communist move-
ment.
These problems should have and could have been thrashed out and
settled among ourselves, through bilateral or multilateral talks between
the parties, with a view to strengthening the unity of the Communist and
working-class movement. But, in addition to posing these problems
unilaterally and dragging them out for public discussion, the leaders
of the C.P.C. have adopted an aggressive tone which is impermissible
in debates between Communists.
The question naturally arises: what is their object in behaving in
this way? It is now clear to all that their aim is to impose their anti-
Marxist and anti-Leninist line of policy on the world Communist move-,
ment, and should this not succeed, to attempt to split that movement.
This is the aspect of the question which we propose to examine here.

The Chinese Leaders Violate Agreements

As we know, the representatives of the Communist and Workers'
parties of the whole world who met in Moscow in 1957 and 1960 laid
down the general programme principles of the Marxist-Leninist parties
of the proletariat for the present stage of the development of society.
These principles, the fruit of intensive joint work, were adopted una-
nimously.








But despite the fact that they signed the joint documents, the lea-:
ders of the C.P.C. have violated them. In words they pledged and con-
tinue to pledge their loyalty to the Declaration of 1957 and the State-
ment of 1960, in deeds they ignore or distort their meaning, replacing it
with their own line, as is clearly evident from the letter of the C.P.C.
of June 14, 1963, pompously entitled "On the question of the general
line of the international Communist movement." The said letter was
circulated by them in all countries and in all languages of the world,
which in itself was a breach of elementary rules of behaviour observed
in the relations between fraternal parties.
As we see, in their letter of June 14 the Chinese leaders interpret
the line of the 1957 Declaration and the 1960 Statement from a
dogmatic-nationalistic standpoint with the aim of imposing an anti-
Marxist and anti-Leninist course on the world Communist and working-
-class movement.
For this reason the Marxist-Leninist parties of the whole world,
including our own Party, reject the contents of this letter. On the
other hand, praise and applause for the letter comes from the sworn
enemies of Marxism-Leninism such as the Trotskyites from the so-
-called Fourth International and all renegades and nationalists of the
chauvinist type.
At the conference held in Brussels last July the Bureau of the
Fourth International adopted a decision to "give unconditional support
to the 25 programme points of the C.P.C." (contained in the above-
-mentioned letter of June 14], adding that "the plenum approved an
epoch-making line aimed at uniting with the Chinese and at struggle
for the establishment of a united front between the Fourth International
and the Chinese comrades." (United Press, August 20, 1963.]
The letter of the C.P.C. is the continuation of a process the first
open manifestations of which appeared already in 1959-60. Prior to
that time the C.P.C. formally declared its agreement with the line of
the world Communist movement on such vital issues as the significance
of the Twentieth Congress of the C.P.S.U., on questions of war, peace
and the struggle for peaceful coexistence, on the question of the Stalin
personality cult, etc.
In the beginning of 1960, however, the C.P.C. issued a collection
of articles entitled Long Live Leninism! in which it questioned the the-
ses of the 1957 Declaration on such basic problems as the content
of our time, the position of the world Communist movement on the
issues of war and peace, the forms of transition from capitalism to
socialism, etc.
Ever since then the leaders of the C.P.C. have been propagating
their dissenting views in the international mass organizations (World
Federation of Trade Unions, Women's International Democratic Fede-i
ration, the International Democratic Youth Federation, the World Peace
Movement, etc.) and engaging in factional activity which has damaged
inter-party relations, not only between the C.P.C. and the C.P.S.U. but








between the C.P.C. and the other Marxist-Leninist parties. And what is
still more serious, they have carried the differences over to the sphere
of state relations between the socialist countries.

Impermissible Methods of Conducting Polemics

We Communists all over the world were naturally astounded and
indignant when we saw the Chinese leaders, contrarylo their pledge
to observe the basic principles of the 1960 Statement and the methods
agreed upon for ironing out differences between parties without en-i
dangering the unity of the world Communist movement, going over,
step by step, from concealed sallies to open attacks and frankly en-i
couraging the Albanian leaders in their provocative actions.
This indignation grew with the continued publication by the Chi-i
nese leaders of articles and statements levelling, on the pretext of
combating opportunism and revisionism, vicious attacks against the
political and tactical line of the fraternal parties of the Soviet Union,
United States, France, italy and other countries, and against their
leaders Khrushchov, Thorez, Togliatti, and others. As you know, the
attacks against the Soviet Union and Comrade Khrushchov were step-
ped up towards the end of October last in connection with the Carib-i
bean crisis.
"The Cqtnmunists all over the world were particularly outraged by
the fact that the Chinese leaders; instead of engaging in a comradely
discussion of the questions of principle involved, resorted to invective,
hurling, in both disguised and direct form, false-accusations right and
left. Reading the Chinese materials one has an unhappy feeling that
they have resorted to the crudest slander and unwarranted accusations
in order to create among the Chinese people an atmosphere of hosti-:
lity towards the Soviet Unidh and the Communist and Workers' parties
of other countries.
Incredible though it may seem, in their letter of June 14 and other
documents the Chinese leaders, finding similarities between the argu-i
ments advanced by the Communist and Workers' parties of the various
countries, go so far as to accuse the leaders of these parties of "dancing
to the tune" of Moscow. In a schismatic frenzy, they have not hesita-,
ted to make use of the traditional slanderous allegations of the impe-1
rialists and their agents that the world Communist movement is run
'by "orders from Moscow". This is an old smear; the Trotskyites in their
time levelled the same charge against the leaders of Communist parties
who refused to climb on their counter-revolutionary bandwagon. One
can only say that the method of debate chosen by the Chinese leaders
shows that they have fallen low indeed. Perhaps they harbour the delu-
sion that invective and slander compensate for the absence of serious
and valid arguments.
Another characteristic method employed by the Chinese leaders is
attributing to the Soviet comrades and the leaders of other Communist








parties views they never held so as to have something to refute. In
this way they hope to sow confusion and to step up their splitting acti-
vities.
Here is a typical instance of how they misrepresent the true state of
affairs. Although it is common knowledge that the peaceful coexistence
discussed in the Declaration of 1957, the Statement of 1960, the Pro-
gramme of the C.P.S.U. and official documents of the Soviet govern-
, ment implies pfhceful coexistence of states with differing socio-eco-
nomic systems, the Chinese leaders claim that the Soviet comrades are
advocating peaceful coexistence of the exploiters and the exploited,
that they are persuading the peoples oppressed by imperialism to co-
exist with their oppressors.
As a matter of fact, in one of the replies to Comrade Thorez publis-
hed in Jenminfihpao we read:
"...They (the leaders of the C.P.S.U. and other Communist parties)
have gone so far as to try to extend peaceful coexistence of states
with differing social systems to the relations between the classes of
oppressors and oppressed."
And in the June 14 letter the following is said about the Soviet
comrades:
"They think that it is the destiny of the peoples, the destiny of hu-
manity, to cooperate with North American imperialism."
In other words, the unfounded accusation is levelled at thle Soviet
comrades that by their positive efforts towards peaceful coexistence
they are persuading the peoples to renounce the class struggle and that
they are pinning theirhopes on the "good sense" of the heads of the
Great Powers.
Yet neither the views voiced by the Soviet leaders nor the foreign
policy of the Soviet Union give any grounds for such absurd claims.
Moreover, the facts speak for Ahemselves.rhe Soviet Union and the
other socialist countries are rendering aid to all peoples that have
won or are still fighting for liberation from imperialism. All peoples
seeking to pursue an independent policy know that they can rely on
the generous help of the Soviet Union.
What do the Chinese leaders hope to achieve by pouring such foul
slander on Lenin's Party? By their irresponsible statements they are
objectively undermining the peoples' faith in the U.S.S.R. and the so-
cialist camp, and this means helping imperialism and not the national-:
liberation movement.
Moreover, how can the accusation that the Soviet leaders have put
their trust in the "good sense" of the imperialist chieftains be recon-
ciled with the vast and selfless effort which fhe Soviet Party, govern-0
ment and people are investing to ensure that their armed forces are
superior to the armed forces of imperialism in order' to be able to
defend not only the achievements of socialism in the Soviet Union but
the entire socialist camp, including China, in order to defend the
national-liberation movement and peace the world over? If they be-








lived, as the Chinese leaders say, in the good intentions of the impe-
rialist spokesmen, they would weaken their defence capability. The
facts, however, testify to the contrary. The imperialists themselves have
had to recognize true, very reluctantly the military might of the
Soviet Union. Had the U.S. imperialists been in a position during the
Caribbean crisis to deal a nuclear blow at the Soviet Union without
running the risk of a smashing retaliatory strike at the territory of
the United States, the outcome of the crisis would have been quite
different from what it was. Kennedy himself explained what it was that
impelled the U.S. government to refrain from invading Cuba. Military
action against Cuba would have been fraught with great danger and
risk, he said, and could have involved the whole world instead of re-:'
maining a limited conflict between the United States and a "Soviet
satellite" in the Western Hemisphere.*
Or take antoher example. The Chinese leaders are constantly repeat-i
Ing that the nature of imperialism has not changed and will not change.
But this is an elementary truth. The present debate is not about this
but about the changes in the balance of forces between the socialist
camp and the capitalist camp in favour of the former, changes which
make it possible in our time to prevent the unleashing of a thermo-i
nuclear third world war.
As we can see, the Chinese leaders have made the distortion of con-)
cepts and theses their permanent method of conducting the debate.
Typical in this respect is the way they have "refuted" Comrade Tog-i
liatti. They accuse him of "fostering illusions as regards imperialism",
"advocating class collaboration on the international arena", "being pre-i
pared to sacrifice revolutionary ideas for the saike of saving the peace",
"regarding the state asa supra-national organ", etc. Needless to say,
the materials and decisions of the recent congress of the Italian Com-
munist Party and Comrade Togllattl's writings give no grounds what-
ever for such accusations.
By using tricks of this kind the Chinese leaders find it easy to
refute everything under the sun. But what will they accomplish by
using this method? Unquestionably, nothing. For, as the proverb goes,
lies have short legs; the dogmatic contraband which the Chinese
leaders are trying to cover up by endless repetition of erroneous con-i
cepts shows through every camouflage.

The Moscow Treaty and the Incredible Position
of the Chinese leaders
*
The Communist Party of China revealed Its plans for bringing about
an open split plans obviously worked out well in advance in its
letter of June 14 and in the astounding and incredible statement in

SSee United Press dispatch of September 12, 1983.







which the Chinese government refused to sign the tripartite Moscow
treaty banning nuclear tests, in the atmosphere, in outer space and
under water and declared that the Soviet government had "betrayed
the interests of the Soviet people; betrayed the interests of the peoples
of the socialist camp, including the people of China; betrayed the inte-
rests of the peace-loving peoples of the whole world".
As is known, for years the governments of the socialist countries
and the world Communist movement have been working for peaceful
coexistence, fully aware that there is no other alternative to peaceful
coexistence than thermonuclear war. Until some time ago the Chinese
leaders too were in agreement with this policy. But now, when limited
agreement has been reached through the signing of the tripartite
Moscow treaty, which has been welcomed with a deep feeling of relief
throughout the world as evidence that progress can be made towards
peaceful coexistence, the leaders of the C.P.C. come out in opposition
to it, thereby opposing also the general line of the world Communist
and working-class movement.
It, should be noted that the position of the Chinese leaders coinci-
des with the position of the "wildmen" in the United States and of de
Gaulle, who said that "the Moscow treaty does not mean disarmament
but merely preserves the United States and Soviet monopoly of this
horror weapon".

The Chinese Leaders Want to Split the World
Communist Movement

Hence, at least two conclusions can be drawn from the materials
circulated by the Chinese leaders and their actions:
first, that their position is incompatible not only with the tactics
and strategy of the Iwiorld Communist movement but also with the
very essence of Marxist-Leninist ideology;
second, that they are trying to impose on the world Communist move-
ment a line which runs counter to the principles of Marxism-Leninism,
and failing in this, as indeed has happened, to set up groups support-
ing their policy in all countries.
As a matter of fact, in their letter of June 14 they no longer conceal
their intentions but openly declare:
"If the leadership of a party adheres to a non-revolutionary line and
turns its party into a reformist party (meaning if it does not accept
the line the. C.P.C. is pressingbn it), its place in the revolution must
be taken by. the Marxists-Leninists in the party or outside its ranks."
But can there beMarxists-Leninists, people who are guided by the
immortal principles of Marxism-TLeninism, outside the Party? Clearly,
there cannot.
Who, then, do the Chinese leaders have in mind if not people expl-b l
led from the various parties for their anti-party activities, bourgeois-i







nationalist intellectuals and, above all, Trotskyites? We shall return
to thit question later.
Is it not criminal for people whb call themselves "true" Marxists-
Leninists to engage in disruptive activity tending to weaken the world
socialist camp at a time when this camp is exerting an increasingly
decisive influence on the march of events? Is it not a crime to conduct
disruptive activities aimed at weakening the Communist and Workers'
parties at a time of an upswing in the world revolutionary movement
for peace, democracy, national independence and socialism? Who but
the reactionaries and imperialists can gain by this splitting activity? It
is because of this that the reactionary forces in all countries, and first
and foremost the U.S. imperialists, are working through their agents
to deepen the differences in the socialist camp and in the Communist
and Workers' parties. And precisely because of this the Communists,
the genuine Marxists-Leninists, dre closing their ranks around the
leadership of their parties in order to uphold the unity of these parties
and the entire international Communist movement.
At the present time defence of the unity of each Communist Party
in particular and of the world Communist movement in general requi-:
res Irreconcilable, principled struggle against the dangerous dogma-'
tic-nationalistic variant of revisionism which the Chinese leaders seelk
to spread throughout the world.
I shall now go over to a detailed examination of the problems on
which there are differences.

Assessment of the Main Content of Our Time

Cbrrect assessment of the main content of our time is of vital poll-i
tical importance to the world Communist and working-class movement.
The fact is that correctly to chart our political and practical line at
the given moment and to determine where the Communist parties and
all other progressive forces should concentrate their efforts in order
to press on resolutely towards the socialist reconstruction of the world,
we .Marxists-Leninists must make a thorough analysis of the specific
historical situation, its characteristic features, the general trend of de-
velopment and the balance of forces between the socialist camp and
the capitalist camp.
How does the 1960 Statement define the main content of our time?
"Today it is the socialist world system and the forces fighting against
imperialism, for a socialist transformation of society, that determine
the main content, main trend and main features of the historical de-.
velopment of society," the Statement says.
This definition underlies the approach to all other problems: the
question of war and peace, the ways of transition to socialism and the
national and social emancipation of the peoples oppressed by imperia-i
lism, etc.







The Twentieth Congress of the C.P.S.U., which the Chinese leaders are
now out to denigrate, was of the greatest historic significance because
it posed the basic problems of the contemporary revolutionary move-
ment in the light of this assessment of the epoch.
The documents of the C.P.C., on the contrary, do not contain even
a hint of an attempt to analyze the international situation as a whole
or the changes which have taken place in this situation since the Sec-
ond World War.
In the collection Long Live Leninisml the Chinese leaders adhere to
precepts which were correct at the time, which Lenin characterized
as the epoch of imperialist wars and proletarian revolution. At that
time this formulation played an important part in arming the Commu-
nist parties ideologically and in defining the practical tasks of the
world revolutionary movement. The Chinese leaders, however, apply
this formula in appraising the present time, ignoring the new situation
and the new world balance of forces.
Such an approach is characteristic of dogmatists who close their
eyes to the changing situation. They continue to juggle with formulas
elaborated at a time when imperialism was both economically and
militarily far stronger than socialism, when socialism was represented
by only one country, when the U.S.S.R. was not in a position to prevent
the imperialist export of counter-revolution to suppress the revolution-
ary movement of the colonial and dependent countries, and when
imperialism could decide questions of war and peace at will and with
impunity.
But today, with the formation of the socialist world camp; with the
development of national-liberation revolutions in the colonial and de-
pendent countries; with the rise of anti-monopoly movements in the
developed capitalist countries; with the growth of world-wide demo-
cratic movements, such as the peace movement; with the organizational
and ideological consolidation of the Communist parties in all countries
and the beginning of the building of communist society in the U.S.S.R.,
the socialist camp, headed by the Soviet Union, has become the decisive
factor of human development. Imperialism is less and less able tc im-
pose its solutions, to export counter-revolution, or to have the last
word in matters pertaining to war and peace. The balance of forces
today favours the socialist camp and is bound to become even more
favourable as time goes on; it has become unfavourable for the impe-
rialist camp and is bound to turn against it even more In the future.
"Today," Comrade Khrushchov has said, "the problems of the time
cannot be regarded solely from the standpoint of the operation of the
laws of capitalism."
Hence we can speak today of the possibility of averting war and
ensuring peace by organizing and mobilizing the peace-loving forces
of the world to fight for this aim.







Concerning the Possibility of Averting War and Preserving Peace
and the Possibility of Peaceful Coexistence of States with Different
Political and Social Systems

The world Communist movement has defined its line of action as re-:
gards the vital question of war and peace proceeding from the premise
that the balance of forces in the international arena between the camp
of socialism and the camp of capitalism has changed in favour of the
former.
"The time has come," the 1960 Statement declares, "when the attempts
of the imperialist aggressors to start a world war can be curbed.
World war can be prevented by the joint efforts of the world socialist
camp, the international working class, the national-liberation move-i
ment, all the countries opposing war and all peace-loving forces."
Accordingly, the Statement points out that "the Communist parties
regard the fight for peace as their prime task" and that it is essential
to build "the broadest possible united front of peace supporters."
This line of action was agreed upon by all, including the represen-'
tatives of the C.P.C. Yet today they declare in Point 14 of their letter:
"To regard general and complete disarmament as the basic way to
fight for world peace, to spread the illusion that the imperialists may
voluntarily lay down arms, and to try, under the banner of disarmament,
to do away with"the revolutionary struggle of the oppressed peoples
and nations means deliberately to deceive the peoples of the world and
to help imperialism to carry out its policy of aggression arid war."
But who poses the question in this way? Certainly not the Marxists-3
Leninists.
As I have already said, the leaders of the C.P.C. invent and develop
concepts no one has propounded merely in order to be able to refute
these concepts and to accuse their imaginary authors of "capitulation".
Clearly, imperialism and the "wildmen" operating in the various capi-1
talist countries will not voluntarily lay down arms and yield to the
forces of peace. All Marxists-Leninists know this full well. Because
of this the 1960 Statement speaks of determined and active struggle on
the part of the forces of peace against imperialism and war. And this
fight is waged by the Marxist-Leninist parties in all countries.
Why then, are the leaders of the C.P.C. raising non-existent ques-
tions? Because they want to discredit the idea that the supporters of
peace can prevent war.
An attempt is made in the documents of the C.P.C. to create the
impression that the C.P.S.U. and other Communist and Workers' par-'
ties, by rejecting the dogmatic position of the Chinese leaders and
condemning their criminal disruptive and anti-Soviet stand, have re-
nounced the struggle against imperialism in order to save the peace.
But such an interpretation of the Marxist-Leninist positions of the
C.P.S.U. and of the foreign policy of the Soviet government is nothing







but a crude distortion of the truth with nothing in common either with
serious analysis of these positions or with the actual state of affairs.
The fact is that the 1957 Declaration, the 1960 Statement and the
Programme of the C.P.S.U., the basic theses of which were repeated
in the Open Letter of the Central Committee of the Communist Party
of the Soviet Union to all Party organizations and Com-
munists of the Soviet Union, declare that the fight for peace is
closely connected with the struggle to abolish the colonial system
of imperialism and the imperialist system generally, with the struggle
for the final victory of democracy and the cause of national liberation
and socialism. And this conclusion is based not on vague generaliza-
tions and quotations taken out of context, but on a thorough Marxist-
Leninist analysis of the situation.
Furthermore, the policy of peaceful coexistence pursued by the
Soviet Union and other socialist countries is a basic component of the
struggle for peace waged by the peoples of the world.
This is clear to all but the Chinese leaders, who counterpose their
own line to the line of the world Communist movement.
Why do they do this? Because the Chinese leaders ignore the fact
that the present balance of forces favours the camp, of socialism and
peace, rejecting, in effect, the possibility of the peaceful coexistence
of differing politico-social systems.
This is why they write in their June 14 letter that ,lt is a mistake to
consider peaceful coexistence to be the general line of the foreign
policy of the socialist states". They hold that peace can be won only
through open struggle to abolish capitalism.
Actually, underlying their Leftist phraseology one of the literary
metaphors used is Mao Tse-tung's well-known description of the im-
perialists and the nuclear bomb as paperr tigers" is the concept
that whether there will be war or peace continues to depend on the
all-powerful will of the imperialist countries, and in particular of. the
United States, and that therefore war is inevitable. Hence their opposi-
tion to a policy of peaceful coexistence, which they regard as a subtle
tactical manouvre designed to lull the peoples combating the impe-
rialist warmongers.
The Open Letter of the C.C., C.P.S.U., declares:
"We realistically assess the world balance of forces and draw from
it the conclusion that although the nature of imperialism has not
changed and the danger of war has ngt been eliminated, the forces,
of peace, the mainstay of which is the community of socialist states,
can in the present conditions prevent a new world war by their joint
efforts."
Clearly, if the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries did
not pursue the active policy of peaceful coexistence which the leaders
of the C.P.C. are questioning and if the Communist parties and the
other progressive forces did ndt stand on guard of peace, war might
become inevitable.








Not believing that war can be prevented by organized mass action,
the leaders of the C.P.C. hold that nothing can stop the imperialists
from diverting international relations away from peaceful lines and
therefore adopt an adventurist, provocative position, as could be
clearly seen during the Caribbean crisis.
As Is known, during this crisis the leaders of the Chinese Communist
Party and government egged Cuba on to adventurist actions, which,
had they been taken, might have led to the outbreak of a world ther-i
monuclear war.
After the crisis was overcome and, thanks to the staunchness of the
Cuban people and the resolute yet flexible policy of the Soviet govern-
ment, Cuba's independence ensured and the danger of world war
warded off, the leaders of the C.P.C. declared in their statement of
November 30 that the Soviet government had "begged" for peace. To
say this is nothing short of outrageous, all the more so since the
Chinese leaders' much-lauded solidarity with the Cuban government was
limited in the given case merely to the organization of ineffectual
demonstrations in the streets of Peking.
Subsequent events showed that besides the preventing of criminal
armed aggression against revolutionary Cuba and of a world thermo-
nuclear war, the prospects improved for the solution of other issues
in dispute between the camp of socialism and peace and the camp of
imperialism and war through negotiation and mutual concessions, as
could be seen from the signing of the tripartite Moscow treaty, the
historic significance of which is becoming more and more obvious as
time goes on.
As regards Cuba, Comrade Fidel Castro, speaking in Havana after
his return from a visit to the Soviet Union, confidently declared that
his country had never been "as secure as now".
Earlier he had said in a speech at a meeting in Moscow: "With the
passage of time things have become clearer: the imperialist plans for
an invasion of Cuba failed and war was prevented. The danger remai-
ned that the imperialists might draw the wrong conclusions from
these events, but the timely and vigorous warning issued by the Soviet
Union in March this year cooled down the most hotheaded warmon-:
gers.
"The visit of our delegation to the Soviet Union has shown the impe-
-rialists how firm is the solidarity of the C.P.S.U. and the Soviet go-:
vernment and people with the Cuban revolution. In all its majesty will
shine the country which, to protect a small people many thousands of
miles distant from it, placed on the scales of thermonuclear war the
wellbeing forged of 45 years of creative labour and at the price of
iinmense sacrifices! The Soviet land, which lost more human lives in the
Great Patriotic War against the fascists than there are people in all of
Cuba in order to defend its right to exist and to develop its tremendous
wealth, did not hesitate to take the risk of a grim war in defence of








our small country History knows of no example :'f solidarity to match
it. This is internationalism! This is communism!"
Such is the truth which no distortions by the Chinese leaders can
conceal.
The fact remains that heroic Cuba is successfully building socialism
in the conditions of peaceful coexistence.
Obviously, the threat of aggression against Cuba has not been re-
moved since the United States government continues to encourage and
even to arm the counter-revolutionaries. But nevertheless the United
States was compelled publicly to pledge itself not to attack Cuba. And
this commitment will have to be honoured for, as the "wildmen" in the
U.S:A. have seen for themselves, in the event of an attack on Cuba the
Soviet Union and the other socialist countries will render it all the aid
necessary to defend it and to defeat the aggressor.



The Chinese leaders commit a dogmatic and anti-dialectical error
when they counterpose the struggle for peace to the national-libe-
ration movement of the peoples oppressed by imperialism. Their re-
presentatives did precisely this, for instance, at the Stockholm meeting
of the World Peace Council in December 1961 and at the World Con-
gress of Women in Moscow last June.
They hold that the fight for peace weakens the revolutionary struggle
of the peoples. They do not see, or do not wish to see, that the fight
for peace cannot be separated fron the peoples' fight for national and
social emancipation, that, as the 1960 Statement says and the facts
bear out, "in the conditions of peaceful coexistence favourable oppor-
tunities are provided for the development of the class struggle in the
capitalist countries and the national-liberation movement of the peo-
ples of the colonial and dependent countries. In their turn, the succes-
ses of the revolutionary class and national-liberation struggle promote
peaceful coexistence."
The Chinese leaders' line aimed at divorcing the struggle for peace
from the struggle for national liberation is linked with another postu-
late which leads to adventurism in foreign policy. We have in mind
the assumption underlying all their documents that imperialism can be
abolished only through world war.
"The victorious peoples," we read in the collection Long Live Lenin-
isml, "will create at an exceedingly rapid pace on the ruins of impe-
rialism (after a thermonuclear world war) a civilization a thousand
times higher than that under capitalism and build a truly radiant fu-
ture."
On their part the Troskyites, who, logically enough, support the
Chinese position, argue that there is no reason to fear war since
"nuclear war will be followed by revolution".
The leaders of the C.P.C. call themselves "true" Marxists-Leninists.







But how can this be if they ignore the fact that Marxism-Leninism
never held that the road to the social revolution necessarily lies
through war between states.
Hence the Marxists-Leninists and all others who are dedicated to
progress and peace ask themselves: "What right have the Chinese
leaders to gamble so irresponsibly with the fate of their own people
and the fate of all humanity? Are they ignorant of what thermonuclear
war would spell for mankind when the energy released by a single
hydrogen bomb of a few dozen megatons exceeds, according to phy-
sicists, the total destructive power of all the bombs exploded by all
the countries in all the wars in human history, including the First and
Second World Wars? How could anything splendid and radiant be
built on the ruins left by thermonuclear war which would destroy en-
tire nations and blot out the lives of no less than one-third of huma-
nity, not to speak of the deadly effect of the radioactivity to which
the human race would be exposed for many generations? How can
anyone not understand that at the present level of science and t.e-.h-
nology there is no other choice but that of which Comrade Khrush-
chov has repeatedly spoken: either we work for the victory of the
policy of peaceful coexistence or there will be a thermonuclear war
with all its frightful consequences.
Precisely because of their realistic approach to the problem, the
C.P.S.U. and other Marxist-Leninist parties are charged by the leaders
of the C.P.C. with "supporting" the Idea that the laws of social de-
velopment cease to operate with the advent of nuclear weapons and
occupying a "fetishist position in regard to nuclear weapons", as the
Jenminjzhpao puts it in its reply to Comrade Thorez. It hardly redounds
to the C.P.C. leaders' credit that on this issue too their views coincide
with those of the Trotskyites, who claim that "fear of nuclear war is
impelling Khrushchov to renounce revolutionary policy".
The question, then, is this: should the Marxists-Leninists take cogni-
zance of the progress made in science and technology in defining their
political and tactical line, or should they not? It goes without saying
that they should. And should the Marxists-Leninists, in examining the
questions of war and peace, take into account the destructive power
of nuclear weapons? The leaders of the C.P.C., proceeding from their
concept that the nuclear bomb is a "paper tiger", think that all this
is of secondary importance. We Marxists-Leninists, however, hold that
it is most important, inasmuch as it is the future of humanity that is
at stake.
Needless to say, so long as a considerable part of the world is under
imperialist rule, the laws of social development applicable to capital-
ism remain unchanged; nor will the social essence of war depend on
whether nuclear weapons are used or not. If the most diehard impe-
rialists succeeded in unleashing war, it would be an unjust war on
the.part of the imperialist aggressor and a just war on the part of the
socialist countries and other nations subjected to aggression. But for









all that the traditional concepts concerning war and its consequences
are changing.
The leaders of the C.P.C. argue that telling the people the truth about
the destructive power of nuclear weapons means instilling fear in
them and paralyzing their revolutionary resolve. Actually, however,
the very opposite takes place. For the prospect of being able to win
peace and peaceful coexistence through struggle gives them added
strength to work to prevent nuclear war.
As the people's movement for peace gains strength, the most re-
actionary, chauvinistic and bellicose imperialist circles will be isolated,
and this will compel the capitalist governments to take the way of
peaceful coexistence. And this in turn will give greater impetus to the
revolutionary national-liberation movements and the anti-monopoly
struggle waged by the peoples of the developed capitalist countries.
By its dogmatic diehard stand the C.P.C. is setting itself outside the
struggle waged by the peoples for world peace. This was revealed with
the utmost clarity by the Sino-Indian conflict, which could have been
settled through negotiation in the spirit of the five Bandung princi-
ples, and especially by the Chinese government's unprecedented state-
ment on the tripartite Moscow treaty describing it as nothing more
nor less than an instance of the Soviet government capitulating to im-
perialism.
The leaders of the C.P.C. are particularly infuriated by the fact that
they still are not in possession of nuclear weapons, and they hold the
Soviet Union responsible for this. But why this itch to lay hands on the
H-bomb when everybody knows, and the Soviet comrades have said so
time and again, that the thermonuclear weapons possessed by the
U.S.S.R. are designed not only for its own defence but for the defence
of all countries which may be attacked by the imperialists, including,
naturally, China?
Otherwise, as the Soviet statement points out, "it would be necessary
to pursue one policy in the West and another in the East; to fight, on
the one hand, against the nuclear armament of West Germany and the
proliferation of nuclear weapons, and, on the other hand, to supply
these weapons to the Chinese People's Republic".
Clearly, the leaders-of the C.P.C., by advancing the "all or nothing"
slogan, which is alien to Marxism-Leninism, have deserted the fight
to end the nuclear armament drive and to achieve universal disarma-
ment by stages. The "all or nothing" slogan implies either complete
and general disarmament at once or nothing at all.
The banning of nuclear tests in the atmosphere, in outer space and
under water proves the correctness of the Leninist policy of peaceful
coexistence which the Soviet Union and other socialist countries are
consistently pursuing. The Moscow treaty inspires the peoples to fight
with still greater energy to uphold peace inasmuch as it opens the
way to further agreements facilitating both partial and general dis-
armament And all this is happening not because the nature of impe-








Srialism has changed, but because the preponderance of strength en-
joyed by the camp of socialism and peace over the camp of imperial-
ism and war is growing from day to day.
On the other hand, the Soviet comrades know full well that the sign-
ing of this treaty has not removed the danger of a third world war.
But at the same time the Soviet comrades as well as the Communist
leaders in the various countries and the peace-loving peoples generally
believe and quite correctly that an important step has been taken
towards international detente, a step which has already 'benefited the
peoples by raising a barrier to the spread of radioactivive contamina-
tion in the atmosphere, under water and outer space and creating a
more favourable climate for the growth of democratic movements for
peace and national and social emancipation. They are confident that
if the socialist states consistently pursue a firm but flexible foreign
policy and if the peoples, guided and organized by Marxist-Leninist
parties, intensify their efforts for peace, for a ban on nuclear wea-
pons and for disarmament, the most reckless warmongers will be in-
creasingly isolated and the governments of the imperialist countries
can be compelled to take further positive steps towards peace and
peaceful coexistence.

Concerning the Main Contradiction of Our Time

Ever since the emergence of the first socialist country in the world
the Soviet Union all Marxists-Leninists have regarded the contra-
diction between socialism and capitalism as the main contradiction.
Proceeding from this Leninist thesis, we Argentine Communists have
considered, from the very inception of our Party, the attitude first
towards the Soviet Union and then to the entire socialist camp to be
the touchstone for the Communist parties and for the revolutionary
forces in general.
Lenin warned us that failure to bear in mind that the main contra-
diction is the contradiction between capitalism and socialism will
make it impossible correctly to pose either the national or the colonial
question.
As we know, Marxism holds that the main contradiction of modern
society is the contradiction between the proletariat and the bourgeoi-
sie. With the victory of the October Revolution in Russia in 1917 this
contradiction basically assumed the form of the contradiction between
the socialist world camp and the capitalist world camp, in view of the
fact that world socialism, as the 1960 Statement declares, is the chief
creation of the international working class. This Leninist thesis was
never questioned in the Communist and Workers' parties.
Today, however, it has been challenged by the leaders of the C.P.C.,
whose documents claim that the decisive role In the world revolution-
ary movement is played by the revolutionary movements in Asia, Afri-
ca and Latin America. According to the leaders of the C.P.C., the main







contradiction of our time Is between imperialism on the one hand and
the colonial and dependent countries on the other, and not between
the camp of socialism and the camp of imperialism.
As a matter of fact, the Central Committee of the C.P.C. in its June
14 letter practically reduces the significance of the socialist world
camp to nil, holding instead that "the contradictions of the contem-
porary world converge in the vast expanses of Asia, Africa and Latin
America". Earlier Jeminjihpao wrote in its polemics with Comrade
Togliatti:
"In the final analysis, owing to the present-day interests of the
imperialist powers, these contradictions (the contradictions in Asia,
Africa and Latin America) are more pressing and more direct in char-
acter than their contradiction with the socialist countries."
The contradictions between the less developed, colonial and de-
pendent countries and imperialism are unquestionably extremely sharp
and steadily growing sharper. The Declaration of 1957, the Statement
of 1960 and the Programme of the C.P.S.U., as well as the documents
of the Marxist-Leninist parties of other countries, pay particular
attention to this problem and offer a solution to it through creative
application of Marxism-Leninism.
The above-mentioned documents throw full clarity on
the role of the October Socialist Revolution in awakening the peoples
of the colonial and dependent countries and. bringing them into the
world revolutionary process;
the decisive role of the victory of the Soviet Union in the Second
World War in ensuring the triumph of the European People's Demo-
cracies and of the Chinese revolution and in the formation of the world
socialist camp;
the role of the socialist camp headed by the Soviet Union in the de-
velopment of revolutionary national-liberation movements and its Im-
portance as a reliable shield protecting the peoples which have freed
themselves from Imperialist rule;
the role of the solidarity of the international working-class move-
ment with the Chinese revolution and the other socialist revolutions
In Asia, Africa and Latin America, and also with the struggle of the
colonial and dependent countries which have won their freedom or
are still fighting for national and social emancipation.
But the C.P.C. leaders, who boastfully seek to replace the 1960 State-
ment with their own "general line of the world revolutionary move-
ment", make no effort in their letter to analyze the problem of na-
tional liberation, to examine it in the overall context of the interna-
tional situation or clearly to define the tasks and prospects arising
from this situation.
Assigning the national-liberation movements the leading role in the
struggle against imperialism in order to counterpose them to the so-
cialist camp and the revolutionary movement of the world proletariat,
the Chinese leaders do not attach the slightest importance to the








achievements of the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries in
economic upbuilding, in the production of material values, ignoring the
vast influence exerted by these achievements on the march of events
as a whole and the national-liberation movement in particular.
Without these successes, the socialist camp could not have become
a realible shield protecting the independent national development of
the liberated peoples. Were it not for these achievements, the Cuban
revolution, for instance, could not have consolidated its position and
could not have entered the stage of building socialism in view of the
proximity of Cuba's imperialist neighbour. The Chinese leaders, how-
ever, ignore this basic matter, and not only because of their incorrect
concept as regards the main contradiction of our time, but also be-
cause of their fallacious views on the ways in which socialism can be
built.
As regards the countries which have just embarked on independence,
the Chinese leaders claim in their letter that these countries can
solve their problems only by harnessing all their internal resources.
The principle as such cannot be disputed, but the Chinese leaders for-
get to say that these countries cannot ensure their political and eco-
nomic independence without aid from the socialist camp and primarily
from the Soviet Union aid which pursues no selfish ends. It is com-
mon knowledge that the U.S.S.R. and the other socialist countries extend
technical and economic as well as diplomatic and, when necessary,
military aid to all peoples fighting in one or another way for inde-
pendence as well as to peoples who have already won independence
but who would fall under neo-colonialist domination unless supported
by such aid.
Thus it is becoming clear to all that the practical activities of the
C.P.C. in the international arena are aimed at undermining the unity
of the world Communist and working-class movement, especially in
Asia, Africa and Latin America, that it Is aimed as isolating the na-
tional-liberation movements from the socialist countries and the revo-
lutionary movements in the capitalist countries.
What Is the purpose of all this? Obviously the Chinese leaders are
out to set up a bloc of Asian, African and Latin American countries
under their leadership in order to counterpose it to the revolutionary
movement in the rest of the world. This explains why they are resort-
ing to the most illicit devices to enlist on their side the Communist
and Workers' parties of the various countries or, falling in this, to split
them with the aid of elements they call "Marxists-Leninists outside the
parties", 1. e., renegades, bourgeois-nationalist intellectuals and Trots-
kyites. At the same time they use every opportunity to sow disunity
in the mass movements, such as the World Federation of Trade Unions,
the Women's International Democratic Federation, the Peace Movement
and the World Federation of Democratic Youth, In the hope of being
able to set up parallel organizations serving their insidious aims.
Pursuing their criminal disruptive aims, the leaders of the C.P.C.







less and less often refer to China as part of the socialist camp and
more and more often as an Asian country generally, thereby in effect
substituting the geographic and race concept for the political and
class concept.
True to their method, the Chines leaders are trying to cover up. their
revision of Marxism-Leninism (the most striking features of this revision
are dogmatism and nationalism) by slanderous misrepresentation of
the positions of the C.P.S.U. and other Communist and Workers' parties.
The Chinese leaders' letter actually accuses the Soviet Union of ad-
vising the oppressed peoples to give up the fight against imperialism
and to sit back with folded arms to wait for their liberation which will
come with the defeat of imperialism in its competition with socialism.
They also charge the Soviet Union with having taken a "negative, arro-
gant and passive position in regard to the struggle of the oppressed
nations for their liberation", etc.
I do not think it necessary to adduce proof of the groundlessness
of this slander since it so obviously runs counter to the facts.
Another deviation from Marxism-Leninism of which the dogmatic-
nationalistic Chinese leaders are guilty is the substitution of the race
and colour concept for the class concept. During the Afro-Asian peo-
ple's Solidarity Conference in Moshi, Tanganyika, the Chinese spokes-
men actually declared that the "Whites have nothing to do here" since,
from their point of view, the conference was a gathering of people
the colour of whose skin was other than white. In this way they are
replacing the class concept with the race concept.
Speculating on the fact that the Asian and African peoples are ex-
ploited by the European imperialist power? and the United States, they
are whipping up hatred among these peoples for the white race in
general. There are, of course, white imperialists who exploit coloured
peoples. But there are also people belonging to the black and yellow
races who exploit their own peoples. And there are whites who are
exploited by the capitalists of their own or other countries.
Where can this race policy lead? Part of the answer was given in
the editorial of the July 1963 issue of the Kommunist, the theoretical
journal of the C.P.S.U., which cited Kenzo Matsumura, a leader of the
Japanese Liberal Democratic Party, who, commenting on his conver-
sations with Chou En-lai and other Chinese leaders, said:
"The East will always be the East; the Asians must rectify world
history. We must march together, cementing the ties between our peo-
ples who have the same colour of skin and the same system of ideo-
graphy."
Coming from a Japanese bourgeois political leader, this is not at all
surprising. Statements of this kind are an expression of nationalistic
bourgeois ideology. But what is noteworthy is that this was published,
and without comment, in Jenminjihpao. Could it have been a simple
oversight? One might think so if the given instance were the only one







of its kind. But when manifestations of nationalism and racism are
repeated, it suggests that this is a definite line of policy, pointing
to the danger of a nationalist deviation.
As we know, nationalism is alien and inimical to Marxism-Leninism.
The Statement of 1960 especially warned against this danger.
The Statement points out that the interests of the cause of socialism
in the countries of the socialist camp "demand the proper combina-
tion of proletarian internationalism and socialist patriotism". It warns
against two dangers "disregarding national peculiarities" and "un-
due emphasis on the role of national peculiarities". In particular it
warns against manifestations of nationalism "which do not disappear
automatically with the establishment of the socialist regime", and ac-
cordingly emphasizes that the Communist and Workers' parties in po-
wer should "tirelessly educate the working people in the spirit of so-
cialist internationalism and intolerance of all manifestations of na-
tionalism, and chauvinism".
In the light of the above facts it is obvious that the Chinese leaders
have laid undue emphasis on the role of the specific features of the
revolution in their country. Consequently, instead of educating then
people in the spirit of proletarian internationalism, they have begun
to educate them in a spirit of nationalism and great power chauvinism,
which has led them to their present anti-Soviet sallies, sallies against
precisely the country that has set the loftiest example of proletarian
internationalism.

The Question of Different Ways of Transition
from Capitalism to Socialism

This question was thoroughly examined at the Twentieth Congress
of the C.P.S.U., in the 1957 Declaration, in the 1960 Statement and in
the Programme of the C.P.S.U. adopted at the historic Twenty-Second
Congress.
The Communist and Worker's parties seek to master all forms of
struggle and always closely follow the rapidly changing situation in
order to be prepared to go over from one form of struggle to another
when the circumstances demand it.
The leaders of the C.P.C., who formerly agreed with this thesis, con-
cede in words that all forms of struggle are admissible but actually
they stake everything on armed struggle alone. They hold that the li-
beration of countries dominated by imperialism can be achieved only
through partisan warfare and therefore they try to impel the Com-
munist and Workers' parties towards the use of force always and in
all countries, irrespective of the conditions existing In them. In prac-
tice this would lead to isolation from the masses instead of striking
deep roots in them.
No one doubts that in certain conditions partisan action as a com-
ponent of the mass movement is a form of the popular struggle, and







that, as experience has shown, it is a justified and necessary form.
But is goes without saying that if the objective conditions are not
favourable for waging an aPned struggle, partisan action will end in
failure and in the long run will damage the revolutionary movement.
The Chfnese leaders, having rejected the thesis of the Twentieth
Congress of the C.P.S.U. concerning the forms of transition from ca-
pitalism to socialism, do not bother to analyze in their documents the
concrete conditions giving rise to revolutionary situations. From the
correct view held by all the Marxist-Leninist parties that a revolutio-
nary situation Is maturing in the colonial and dependent countries
still under imperialist rule, they conclude that such a situation is de-
veloping evenly in all parts of the world. Proceeding from this con-
cept, whkch is part of the Trotskyite stock-in-trade and has nothing in
common with Marxism-Leninism, they hold that insurrections can be
staged on the basis of partisan action at any time and in all circums-
tances, without taking into account the degree of militancy and poli-
tical consciousness of the masses.
Mechanically applying Chinese experience to other countries and
Ignoring the level of economic and social development In these coun-
tries, they assume that the armed struggle in the colonial and de-
pendent countries must necessarily start in the countryside.
It is common knowledge that the Brazilian comrades had to com-
bat the dangerous delusion propounded in that country by the pro-
Chinese elements that it is the revolutionary peasants who are destin-
ed to bring the revolution to the big cities where the proletariat is
not yet prepared for it.
This fallacy is attended by another: the thesis that revolution should
be "stimulated" from without if the need for it is "not understood"
within the country.
The Marxist-Leninist view is that revolutionary situations mature in
all countries as a result of the operation of the objective laws of socio-
economic development when the internal contradictions are aggra-
vated to a point when they can be solved only by a radical revolution
(the objective conditions] and when the majority of the working class
and the people generally have a deep understanding of the necessity
of revolution and are prepared to sacrifice their lives for it (the sub-
jective conditions).*
Comrade Khrushchov correctly noted in his speech at the Sixth Con-
gress of the Socialist Unity Party of Germany that "for the victory
of revolution certain preconditions are essential. If a revolutionary si-
tuation has come into being, the working class, headed by its vanguard,
should utilize it to win power; if the exploiting classes resort to vio-
lence against the people, the people have the right to employ more


See V. I. Lenin, "Left-Wino" Communism, an Infantile Disorder.







-energetic methods, including armed struggle, to ensure the victory of
socialism".
As regards the position of our Party on the question of the peaceful
and non-peaceful ways, it has been clearly set forth at meetings of
our Central Committee, in the resolution of the Twelfth Congress and
In the Party Programme. The resolution of the Twelfth Congress points
out that although a revolutionary situation can be said to be maturing
in our country, the subjective conditions for the victory of the revo-
lution are still lacking. Further, it declares that "under all circumstan-
ces the Important thing is that our Party should master all forms of
struggle, legal and illegal, peaceful and non-peaceful, and be prepared
to go over from one form of struggle to another in the event of a
sharp change in the situation In the country".
The position adopted at the Twelfth Congress coincides with the
1957 Declaration, the 1960 Statement and the decisions of the Twenty-
Second Congress of the C.P.S.U. and has been unanimously approved
by branch meetings as well as district, city and provincial conferences.
Our Party Is thus steadfastly working to carry out its programme
of national emancipation with the aim of achieving socialism either
by peaceful means, which presupposes, as the Twelfth Congress noted,
"unremitting work to organize the mass struggle against the offen-
sive of reaction and fascism and for the inmedlate social, economic
and political demands of the masses, linking these demands with the
overall struggle to establish a governmental power of a new type", or
by non-peacefull means, if all other avenues of struggle for power will
be closed.
But in either case, whether the path followed is peaceful or non-
peaceful, the policy of our Party as outlined by the Twelfth Congress
is epitomized in the slogan "Through mass action to the winning of
power".
The leaders of the C.P.C. allege that the C.P.S.U. and the other Marx-
ist-Leninist parties claim that the revolution, always and everywhere,
today and in the future, will be carried out by peaceful means. Yet no
such conclusion can be drawn from the 1957 Declaration, the 1960 State-
ment, the decisions of the Twenty-Second Congress of the C.P.S.U.
or the documents of our Party or any other fraternal Party.
In their June 14 letter the leaders of the C.P.C. also accuse the
C.P.S.U. of allegedly propagating the erroneous thesis that imperialism
and the reactionaries are prepared to accept peaceful transition from
capitalism to socialism of their own free will. This accusation is a
crude falsification. No Marxist-Leninist Party holds that the imperial-
ists and the capitalists generally will voluntarily agree to go over to
socialism. The parties know full well that they will do everything in
their power to prevent this from happening. When the capitalists feel
that their regime is tottering, they try to cling to power, in some cases
by means of certain concessions and in others by resorting to violence
of every kind. We Marxists-Leninists know this perfectly well.


35







However, in the present international situation, as the 1980 State-
ment notes, in some countries and in certain conditions the working
class, led by its vanguard and supported by a broad working-class and
people's democratic and anti-imperialist front embracing the majority
of the nation, can paralyze the counter-revolutionary activities of the
ruling classes and win state power without civil war; but even then
it will have to have recourse to certain coercive actions in order to'
consolidate its power, neutralize the class enemies and build a new
life. All this is possible thanks to the existence of the socialist world
camp capable of preventing the imperialist export of counter-revo-
lution.
It follows from this, as the Open Letter of the Central Committee of
the Communist Party of the Soviet Union states, that the sacred duty
of the Communists of all the countries where Marxist-Leninist parties
are in power is to safeguard*the unity of the socialist camp and the
world Communist movement as the apple of their eye.
But the Chinese leaders have chosen a different course: they are
engaged in unbridled disruptive activity. Who but imperialism, the ex-
porters of counter-revolution, can benefit from this?

Concerning Problems Connected with the Establishment
of the Material and Technological Base of the Communist
Society in the Soviet Union

In their letter of June 14 the leaders of the C.P.C. extended the area
of their differences with the C.P.S.U. by introducing into the discussion
questions pertaining to the building of the material base of the Com-
munist society in the Soviet Union, the character of the state and the
Party in the period of transition from socialism to communism.
SAs you have no doubt observed, the Open Letter of the Central Com-
mittee of the C.P.S.U. analyzed the views of the Chinese leaders on this
score and demonstrated their groundlessness. It exposed the insidious
attempt of the Chinese leaders to apply to the period of transition from
socialism to communism the law discovered by Marx and Engels govern-
ing the transition from capitalism to socialism.
Wrongly interpreting that section of the Programme of the C.P.S.U.
which speaks of the Soviet state and the C.P.S.U. becomiing a state
and a party of the whole people, the Chinese leaders have the temerity
to assert that by declaring that the dictatorship of the proletariat has
fulfilled Its historic mission the C.P.S.U. has taken a step back and the
Soviet country is returning to a bourgeois structure of society.
Why do the Chinese leaders indulge in such a crude distortion of the
correct position of the C.P.S.U.? In order to "prove" that the transition
to the building of communism has not yet been effected in the Soviet
Union, and also to "justify" the failure of their own internal policy,
the policy of the "Big Leap" and the "people's communes".







By establishing the people's communes they wanted to show the
world- working-class and Communist movement that they were able to
skip stages and pass over directly to the communist society, omitting
the stage of building socialism. Everyone knows that in order to pass
over to communism it is necessary to build up a powerful material
and technological base, as .is being done in the Soviet Union, and in
this way to move forward, ensuring an abundance of material benefits
to society. In other words, exactly the reverse of what took place in
China, where as a result of the "leaps" economic difficulties retard-
ing the transition to communism were created.
It is symptomatic, however, that the greater these internal econo-
mic difficulties became in China, the more marked became the dog-
matist and nationalist position of its leaders and the more "leftist"
their foreign policy. One might ask: do the Chinese leaders, having
failed to take the correct path to the building of socialism, the path
already followed by the U.S.S.R. and other socialist countries in close
cooperation with fraternal countries and parties and by pursuing a po-
licy of peace and peaceful coexistence, believe that they will find the
way out of their difficulties by "prodding" revolutions in all parts of
the world or by choosing the course of global conflicts?
The accentuation of their dogmatic line, which is aggravated by in-
ternal and external difficulties, seems to suggest that the leaders of
the C.P.C. have lost faith in the ability of their own country to build
a socialist society and have executed a sharp sectarian-adventurist
turn In their home and foreign policy.
And It is here that their position coincides with that of Trotskyism.
In the first years of Soviet power when the young Soviet state faced
severe internal difficulties, the Trotskyites maintained that the revo-
lution could not be victorious in only one country, that the fate of
the Russian revolution depended on the immediate victory of the world
revolution, that Soviet foreign policy must "stimulate" the development
of the revolutionary movement in other countries, and so on.
Indeed, as experience has shown, Trotskyism did not believe in the
ability of the Russian proletariat, and still less of its main ally, the
peasantry, to consummate the revolution in the conditions of impe-
rialist encirclement and at a time when Russia was the only country
where the revolution had won. This lack of faith in the power and
ability of the working class and the Russian people, this scepticism
with regard to the perspectives of Russian revolutionary development
the Trotskyites covered up with pompous "ultra-revolutionary" phra-
ses. They were the most vociferous of all revolutionaries who excel
in phrasemongering and posturing.
The Chinese leaders are annoyed when they are reminded that In
some respects their position coincides with that of the Trotskyites.
Nevertheless this is a reality which should give pause to those who
have been deluded by that policy and induce them to return to the
correct path in good time.








Concerning the Policy Pursued by the C.P.S.U.
with Regard to Yugoslavia

One of the charges levelled by the Chinese leaders at the C.P.S.U.
in support of their claim that the latter has departed from Marxism-
Leninism is that the policy of the Yugoslav League of Communists
(YLC) Is leading to the building of capitalism in Yugoslavia instead
of socialism.
In their letter of June 14 the Chinese leaders refer to the Statement
of 1960 in justification of their present position. And they accuse the
C.P.S.U. of having violated the principles laid down in that statement.
We all know that the 1960 meeting severely criticized the revisionist
concepts elaborated in the programme of the Y.L.C. The meeting pled-
ged to intensify the struggle against revisionism, against Right-wing
opportunism which "distorts Marxism-Leninism, mirrors bourgeois ideo-
logy in theory and practice, and paralyzes the revolutionary will of
the working class".
What the Chinese leaders forget and advisedly is that it was
not they but the Soviet comrades who led the struggle against Yugo-
slav revisionist positions. They also forget that in criticizing the Yugo-
slav revisionist positions, the 1960 meeting proceeded from the fact
that Yugoslavia is a socialist country and that therefore it should not
be antagonized by extending the ideological discussion to the sphere
of relations between states.
The Statement says that revisionist mistakes "have exposed the
Yugoslav people to the danger of losing the revolutionary gains
achieved through a heroic struggle".
But have there been no changes in Yugoslavia since then? There have,
and very big changes.
It Is true, then, that the ideological differences between the C.P.S.U.
and the Communist parties of the whole world, on the one hand, and
the Y.L.C. on the other, have not altogether disappeared. However there
exist facts which the countries of the socialist camp and the world
Communist movement cannot ignore. And these facts show that Yugo-
slavia has been developing not in the direction of capitalism, as the
Chinese leaders irresponsibly assert, but in the direction of socialism.
Can a country in which the landlords and big capitalists have been
eliminated, whose industry and trade is predominantly state-owned,
whose industrial production has increased nearly fivefold as com-
pared with prewar, whose economy is planned and where parochial-
ism, which was a hangover of the former decentralization, is being
overcome, where cooperative farming is steadily growing in the coun-
tryside, where the leading role of the Party In the economic, political
and social life of the country is unquestionable, and where trade and
political ties with the U.S.S.R. and the other socialist countries are
being expanded can such a country be called capitalist? Certainly
not.







As regards the foreign policy of the Yug jlav government it coin-
cides basically with that of the U.S.S.R. and the other socialist coun-
tries. Taking all this into account, what course should the socialist
camp take? Should they isolate Yugoslavia, c.s the dogmatic leaders
of the C.P.C. are demanding, or facilitate its consistent adherence to
the socialist camp without, of course, making any concessions in
matters of principle?
The C.P.S.U. and the other parties of the socialist countries chose
the latter alternative, namely, that of including Yugoslavia in the so-
cialist camp. And, as we know, the Marxist-Leninist parties the world
over endorse this policy.

The Stalin Cult

As regards the arguments which the Chinese are now advancing In
defence of Stalin, these have been dealt with in detail in the Open
Letter of.the C.P.S.U., and I do not think there is any need to dwell on
them.
I shall, however, dwell once more on the change in the position of
the Chinese leaders on this question.
In the first place it should be said that the C.P.C., in common with
the rest of the Communist parties of the world, recognized the inter-
national significance of the Twentieth Congress of the C.P.S.U. and its
courageous exposure of the negative consequences of the Stalin cult.
Today the C.P.C. leaders, blinded by their animosity toward the
C.P.S.U., are exalting the man whose mistakes they but yesterday con-
demned.
What has caused them to change their minds so radically? The fact
is that some of the leaders of the C.P.C. are following in Stalin's foot-
steps. Comrade Khrushchov was quite right when at a recent Hunga-
rian-Soviet friendship meeting he said:
"We denounced Stalin for his abuses although he is dead and it
might seem useless to speak of these things now. Yet this condemnation
has a profound significance. Stalin is dead, but the Party lives, the
people are living, struggling and labouring. Hence we must condemn
methods which were possible during the period of the cult of the indi-
vidual in order to alert the Party and the people, to put them on their
guard lest anyone else adopt methods that have been condemned by
the Party as criminal.
"Therein lies the potency and significance of the decisions adopted
by the Twentieth Congress of the C.P.S.U. concerning the cult of the
individual and the eradication of its consequences. Anyone who would
place Stalin on a pedestal is acting against the wishes of our Party
and our people. Only those who approve of Stalin's methods could
do this. But we consider such methods reprehensible. Respect for the
Party and its leadership must be inculcated not through fear but by
earning that respect, by earning the love of the people, by winning








their support, by close kinship with the people, by sharing their la-
bours and struggles. This is the surest and most effective way of winn-
ing respect."
This, I believe, is clear.

Whither the Chinese Dogmatist Splitters?

As you have no doubt concluded from reading the documents of the
C.P.S.U. and from what I have said here, we are faced with a dogma-
tist-disruptive deviation which should not be under-estimated. It should
not be underestimated because the party guilty of this deviation
is one whose revolutionary past has earned it universal prestige, and
one moreover which wields the power in one of the biggest countries
on earth.
Many questions are being asked our Party leaders concerning the
nature and seriousness of the differences with the Chinese leaders.
Some of the commonest questions are: What do the leaders of the C.P.C.
want? What do they expect to achieve by their adventurist policy of
stimulating actions such as the incidents with India and Cuba that are
liable to spark off a thermonuclear world war? Perhaps they want
to cause a clash between, the United States and the U.S.S.R. in the
naive hope that they themselves would emerge unscathed from the
conflict in order to lead the world to communism, the sort of com-
munism they envisage, a communism which of course has nothing in
common with the communism which is being built in the U.S.S.R. and
which will be built in the other socialist countries? All these are more
than legitimate questions.
No one denies that the C.P.C. has outstanding revolutionary achieve-
jnents to its credit. But this does not entitle its leaders to claim the
right to "sinoize" Marxism, for such is the conclusion one can draw
from the works of Mao Tse-tunk which his eulogists describe as "a new
stage in the development of Marxism-Leninism", although in some of
these writings is expressed the dogmatist-nationalist line which the
Chinese leaders would like to impose on the world Communist move-
ment.
The only line which we Argentine Communists recognize is the line
elaborated jointly with the other Marxist-Leninist parties at the in-
ternational meetings of 1957 and 1960 at which it was declared that
the "C.P.S.U. was and remains the universally recognized vanguard
of the world Communist movement".
As we know, the Leninist Central Committee of the C.P.S.U. is headed
by Comrade N. S. Khrushchov against whom the Chinese are now aim-
ing their poisoned darts.
What is the reason for the aggressive and outrageous attitude the
Chinese leaders have adopted to Comrade Khrushchov? The expla-
nation is obvious if it is remembered that Comrade Khrushchov has







become the standardbearer of world peace, while the Chinese leaders
are upholding the idea of war.
There is no doubt that it is on the basis of the Marxist-Leninist
positions, to which the C.P.S.U. and all the Communist parties uns-
wervingly adhere, that we shall preserve the unity of the world Com-
munist and working-class movement, frustrate the imperialists' hopes
of taking advantage of the split in the Communist camp to further
their own ends, and shall move on to ever greater successes both on
a national and an international plane.


The principal deviation In the world Communist movement at the
present time is the sectarian-dogmatist line adopted by the leaders of
the C.P.C. and all those who follow them, whereas yesterday, for
example, the main deviation was revisionism, although the latter has
not yet been altogether eradicated. Both these deviations, however,
derive from bourgeois-nationalist ideas which their proponents are
endeavouring to introduce into the ranks of the Communist movement.
These deviations have their roots in the influence exerted by the
ideology of the class enemy on the proletariat. Hence the ideological
struggle against these deviations is an integral part of the class
struggle. It Is a matter of choosing between two lines of policy: the
proletarian line or the line adopted by those sections who are the pro-
ponenfs of ideas alien to Marxism-Leninism, ideas which in the final
analysis play into the hands of the bourgeoisie.
In this ideological struggle, which we know will be bitter and per-
haps long, we Argentine Communists will be guided by the interests
of the world Communist and working-class movement, and these inte-
rests demand above all the preservation of unity in the name of peace,
democracy, national independence, socialism and communism. We
shall do everything possible, all that is within our powers, to bring the
debate with the Chinese leaders and their supporters back within the
bounds established by the 1960 meeting, without, however, making any
concessions on matters of principle.
In order to put into effect their dogmatic and autocratic nationalist
policy, the Chinese leaders, as I have said before, are trying to split
the Communist and working-class parties which have rejected their
anti-Marxist and anti-Leninist course.
Experience shows, however, that the world Communist movement
is too mature ideologically and politically to be easily drawn into
disruptive manoeuvres. The Chinese leaders may be able to do some
harm here and there. They many succeed in weaning away from the
Party some unstable elements, principally those of petty-bourgeois ori-
gin; they may band them together with some renegades expelled from
the parties some time ago, or with some enemies of Marxism-Leninism
such as certain nationalist-minded bourgeois intellectuals and Trots-
kyites.







There Is no doubt, however, that the Chinese leaders will find them-
selves unable to pierce the solid front presented by all the Marxist-
Leninist parties against those who assail Marxism and Leninism. As
for the misguided elements who may follow the Chinese, there is no
doubt that the policy of patient explanation will help to dispel their
doubts, to rid them of their delusions and hence win them back for
the Marxist-Leninist line.

On Whom Do the Chinese Leaders Rely for Support
in Our Country

What sort of allies the Chinese leaders are gaining can be seen
from the case of our own country. Apart from the various small Trots-
kyite groups, they have won over certain elements who were expelled
from the Party, and in particular from the youth organization some
time ago, and a few petty-bourgeois nationalists. These are the "Marx-
Ists-Leninists" outside the parties, in the given instance outside our own
Party, who are being won over to the dogmatist-sectarian policy of
the C.P.C. leaders. These are the ones who unconditionally support the
position of the C.P.C. leaders.
"Trotskyism, the representative of Marxism-Leninism," we read in
the Statement of the self-styled political bureau of the Trotskylte
Workers' Party of Argentina, "foresaw this course and paved the way
for it by its revolutionary activity. Its role is of decisive importance
for the political and ideological revolution of the Chinese comrades,
for a return to Lenin, inasmuch as Trotskyism upholds the historical
continuity of Leninism against the bureaucratic and counter-revolu-
tionary degeneration of neo-reformism." And for this purpose they
"urge the workers to speak up at meetings in support of the theses
formulated in the 25 points by the Chinese comrades, to discuss and
analyze them. We call on the revolutionary and class wing of Peronism
to join our Party in discussing these theses in order to build up the
revolutionary leadership of the masses in our own country and in the
world".
Another group of renegades expelled from the Party supports the
Chinese leaders' proposal concerning "the general line of the interna-
tional Communist movement" as coming from a "fraternal party which
in the course of the revolutionary history of its people has achieved
the historic distinction of leading the working class, the peasantry and
the greater part of the population to socialism", "which proclaims
solidarity with the revolutionary struggle of the colonial peoples and
attaches the same importance to this world struggle as to the build-
ing of socialism in its own country". It urges "rejecting servile kow-
towing to the authority of chieftains" and setting up "an organi-
zation based on the principles of Marxism-Leninism and on the struggle
of the working class and the popular masses, an organization that
would maintain a high standard of national unity".

'42








Another Trotskyite grouping calls for support for C.P.C. policy on
the grounds that "the Chinese government represents the upsurge of
the world revolution" as distinct from the Russian government which
"reflects the world counter-revolution and hatred for the mass move-
ment". And it urges combating "the counter-revolutionary treaty sign-
ed by Washington and Moscow" since the "true purpose of the pact is
to prevent China from carrying out the nuclear tests that would enable
her to become a nuclear power".
Still another Trotskyite grouping attacks the peace policy pursued
by the Soviet Union, declaring that "the only thing that can effectively
prevent world war is a proletarian revolution in all countries of the
world".
These are a few samples of the "Marxists-Leninists outside the par-
ties" all of whom could fit into the palm of your hand on whom
in our country, and evidently in other parts of the world as well, the
Chinese leaders can rely upon for support in carrying out their policy.
As you see, comrades, the support the.Chinese leaders have won Is
questionable, both as regards quality and quantity. Nevertheless we
must not relax our vigilance and we must bear in mind that these mi-
nor groupings possess ample facilities for waging the struggle through
the medium of propaganda printed matter sent in from abroad or
published locally.
As for the propaganda published inside the country we have never
seen such a variety of publications defending a policy diametrically
opposed to the policy of the C.P.S.U. and our own Party.
As regards materials published in China, our country is being literally
flooded with them. Moreover, while Marxist-Leninist literature Is con-
fiscated by the postal authorities, these publications are being circu-
lated almost without hindrance.
As regards the reprints of C.P.C. documents put out in Argentina,
these too are circulated In large quantities with Introductions vilify-
ing the policy of the C.P.S.U. and the Communist Party of Argentina.
Some idea of how the C.P.C. circulates its publications in our country
may be gained from the following letter from Peking published in the
reactionary, anti-Soviet, anti-Communist newspaper Correo de la Tarde:
"Dear friend,
"In compliance with your request we shall be very glad to send
you our journal Peking Review regularly. To ensure better service
we would ask you to let us know at your convenience whether
or not you are receiving it regularly. We usually send the journal
by airmail on the day of publication or the following day."
After a few more remarks of this kind, the letter goes on:
"If you know of anyone who would like to subscribe to the jour-
nal for any length of time or for separate issues, kindly give us their
names and address and we shall send them the journal direct. In







token of our gratitude we are sending you a few jubilee stamps
which we hope will be of interest to you."

However, according to information our Party has received, not-
withstanding the flood of propaganda, the ideas of the Chinese leaders
have not penetrated the working-class and popular movement, with the
exception of the few minor groups I have mentioned above.
As regards our own Party, It is solidly united around its Central Com-
mittee and wholeheartedly supports the political and tactical line laid
down by the Twelfth Congress, the correctness of which is daily being
demonstrated with increasing clarity to the working class and the
whole people.








A Step Towards Peace









Recently a limited nuclear test-ban treaty was signed In Moscow,
the capital of the Soviet Union, as the culmination of negotiations con-
ducted over a long period of time by the Soviet Union, the United
States and Great Britain, the powers possessing nuclear weapons and
means for their delivery.
The Soviet Union and all other socialist countries, indeed all peo-
ples, have been waging a struggle against nuclear weapons tests, for
the prohibition and destruction of these weapons, ever since 1946. The
United States, howeveP, has opposed these legitimate demands, hoping
that nuclear weapons will enable it to realize its dream of world do-
mination, not to speak of the fact that the manufacture of these wea-
pons is a source of fabulous profits for a number of the biggest North
American companies. Britain has also been opposed to any satisfac-
tory agreement.
Several years ago the Soviet Union on its own initiative stopped
nuclear testing and the United States and Britain were compelled to
follow suit. There were no nuclear tests for more than two years, until
provocative moves by the Western powers and their threats to take
aggressive action in Germany and other areas of the world compelled
the Soviet Union to resume the tests it had unilaterally discontinued.
By doing so the Soviet Union issued a clear warning to the imperial-
ists that they would be destroyed if they unleashed war.
Long negotiations followed, with France refraining from taking part
despite the fact that it had already produced its own atom bomb. The
French government is opposed to any agreement concerning nuclear
weapons not only because it is pursuing an adventurist policy but
especially because it counts on being able to establish itself on a level
with the great powers of the world through possession of nuclear
weapons, by speaking in the language of "nuclear strength".
Needless to say, the French nuclear weapon is in no way comparable
to those created by the Soviet Union and the United States. But jin-
goistic nationalism impels the French government to continue Invest-
ing billions of dollars in its military nuclear programmes while increas-

Editorial in the August 22, 1963, Issue of Verdad, underground organ of the
Guatemalan Party ol Labour.







ingly hampering the achievement of an agreement which would take
the demand of the peoples into account.
The treaty signed in Moscow bans only testing in outer space, under
water and in the atmosphere, since the unacceptable demands put
forward by the Western powers made it impossible to agree on the
prohibition of underground tests. Nevertheless the treaty is a step
forward on the way to peace. Clearly, it is necessary to intensify the
struggle waged by the peoples and to redouble the efforts of the so-
cialist and other peace-loving governments in order to. take further
steps, such as the termination of underground tests, banning of nuclear
weapons, destruction of these weapons, etc. Peace cannot be achieved
in one leap, the road to it is a long way with a multitude of obstacles.
Peace has to be won, it has to be imposed on the imperialists.

The Discreditable Position of the Chinese

In connection with the conclusion of the partial test-ban treaty,
the government of the Chinese People's Republic issued an astound-
ing statement condemning the treaty as a fraud, an imperialist ma-
noeuvre, an instance of the Soviet Union submitting to imperialist diktat,
and, worst of all, as a conspiracy of the imperialists and the Soviet
Union against all countries that do not possess nuclear weapons.
Simultaneously with the violent campaign conducted by the Chinese
press against the treaty, the government of the Chinese People's Re-
public addressed a proposal to the governments of all countries that
a world conference be convened to ban nuclear weapons and to de-
cide on the destruction of these weapons, abolition of foreign war
bases, etc.
It would seem absurd for anyone advocating the prohibition of
nuclear weapons to condemn a treaty representing the first step to-
wards such a ban. The Communist Party of China knows well that
I the Soviet Union has on many occasions proposed that nuclear weapons
be destroyed, the aircraft and missiles serving as a means of delivery
of these weapons scrapped, foreign war bases abolished, etc. It is also
clear to everybody that to achieve such far-reaching aims tremendous
effort and years of struggle against imperialism are still needed. It
is also clear to all that so long as there is no agreement on general
disarmament, partial agreements are acceptable and very valuable. In
this sense the limited test-ban treaty is preferable a thousand times
over to continuation of tests. The conclusion of this treaty will no
doubt open the way to further negotiations.
Since all this is clear as daylight, the position adopted by the Chi-
nese Communists should be condemned inasmuch as it not only com-
pletely contradicts their earlier statements but also deepens the diffe-
rences in the Communist movement and violates the principles of pro-
letarian internationalism, subjecting the Soviet Union to crude accu-








stations which put it on a level with the imperialist powers. This has
nothing in common with ideological differences. Communists do not
go in for such attacks and we wish to make it clear that we reject
them.
At the same time we voice our confidence that the peoples will re-
double their efforts for the total prohibition and destruction of nuclear
weapons, for measures aimed at general disarmament, and for ne-
gotiations which would do away with the threat of war and strengthen
peace throughout the world. On this issue the governments of all
socialist countries, all other peace-loving governments and all demo-
cratic organizations, and in particular all the Communist and Workers'
parties which stand united under the international banner of Marxism,
the banner of Labour and Peace, must do everything in their power.








Excerpt from Article by Gus Hall











We must find the strength to raise the level of our work in these
times. This new political upsurge requires a higher standard. We must
adjust our regulators and governors upward. This means a higher
degree and quality of initiative, militancy and speaking out as a party.
We must also develop that quality which makes us stand out as part
of the parade.
We are not alone on the speedway, but our role must serve to ac-
celerate the whole procession. We should be neither reckless drivers
nor roadhogs. Reckless acceleration will drive us off the road. Our
task is to come fully abreast of the advance elements on this fast-
moving highway of mass action.
The fight for the Party is not an abstraction. It is a fight for this
Party and for the specifics of Party organization. The Party must al-
ways have an organizational form, for that which has no form does
not exist, and that which is beginning to lose its form is also starting
to disappear.
To speak of fighting for a Marxist-Leninist Party and not to fight for
this Party is demagogy. There are those who say they are eager to
build a new party if this one dies. But all experience shows that such
a demise would be used only to bury the science of Marxism-Leninism
itself. Fortunately, the wishful thinkers in the enemy camp who want
to exterminate this Party have been repeatedly disappointed, and both
the science and the Party live.
Not to fight for this Party is to accept the advice of "flee to the
wilderness". It is to accept the reasoning of the Monthly Review that
the working class today is not able to sustain a party of scientific
socialism. The two concepts together add up to no fight for our Party
and nothing else on the horizon.
Nor must any idea be permitted to take root that this is an "interim
party", to continue only until "something new" comes along. Such an
idea is a liquidationist death warrant. No serious Marxist-Leninist Party
can be an "interim party".

The Worker, November 17, 1963. The present article Is a section of an extended
report given in October to a gathering of leading personnel.







If any comrade has Ideas that there are competing trends of Marxism-
Leninism, such a comrade will not fight for the Party. We cannot
accept such a concept. There can be only one science of Marxism-
Leninism, only one scientific socialism.
That science cannot be correctly represented by two parties and two
policies in a single country. There are opportunistic swings from the
correct path of that science. There can be differences in tactics, as
the science is applied and as it develops, but there cannot be two
varieties of that science. One cannot fight for this Party and for
Marxism-Leninism if one has the idea that these are conflicting
entities.
More than any other aspect of politics, words are not enough when
it comes to Party organization. The test is how one fights for
organizational forms, for a system of Party organization, for Party
structure as well as for policy.







Enlarged Plenary Meeting

of the Central Committee

of the Communist Party of Spain
(November 1963)

Resolution on the Situation in the Communist Movement



For Unity of the International Communist
and Working-Class Movement

The Communist Party of Spain expresses its deep concern at the
sharp form the differences in the international Communist and work-
ing-class movement has acquired.
Our Party has done everything to keep the discussion on a principled
plane, has avoided making denunciatory statements that cannot be
retracted. Even at the present sharp stage of these differences it is
necessary to show great patience if unity is to be restored.
Confident that we express the thoughts of the worker and peasant
masses and of the progressive intellectuals of Spain we want to say
this to the Chinese comrades:
Discussion? Yes, but to the extent that it is necessary. Patience? Yes,
but to the extent that it is called for. But do not encroach on the unity
of the socialist camp Do not encroach on the unity of the international
Communist and working-class movement
This unity is sacred to us. Nobody has the right, no matter the pre-
text, to split the socialist camp, the international Communist and
working-class movement. Whoever does so will have much to answer
for to the forces of the revolution, democracy and world peace.
For us who have to carry on the struggle In conditions of Illegality,
who are fighting a regime of tyranny, a split would signify a real stab
in the back.

Question of War and Peace. Path of Revolution and Socialism
Eliminates Nuclear War

The central issue in the differences with the Chinese comrades Is
how should the character of the present epoch be. assessed. The
existence of the socialist world system (which decisively contributed
to the collapse of the colonial regime), and the alliance of the socialist
system with the newly emergent countries are the decisive factor of
our time. The sweeping scientific and technological revolution which






we are witnessing is also having Its tremendous Impact on contem-
porary developments and this impact will steadily grow.
This revolution creates more favourable conditions for the liberation
of man, confirms the truth of materialism and Marxist humanism that
human knowledge is infinite.
The scientific and technological revolution rests on the sum total
of knowledge accumulated by man. It is further stimulated by the
triumph and consolidation of the socialist revolution in the U.S.S.R.
and in a number of other countries, and by the victories of the
national-liberation movement. The socialist revolution acted as an
accelerator of scientific and technological progress. Even in the
developed capitalist countries the fact that they have to compete with
the socialist system has to a large extent spurred technological
progress.
We revolutionary Marxists-Leninists must be able to assess the
possibilities which our forces, the forces of the socialist system, the
forces acquired by the world revolution open before us; we must also
be able tQ assess the social impact of the new means of production.
The fundamental contradiction of our time is the contradiction be-
tween imperialism and socialism. With the rise of communism,
capitalism as a social system cannot exist indefinitely; its doom is
irrevocable. It can retard man's advance toward communism only at
the price of suicide, at the price of incalculable misfortune for the
whole of society.
If communism is to triumph it is essential to pursue a policy that
will take into account the following two elements: the might of the
socialist camp and the Imperative necessity to prevent nuclear power
from being used to destroy civilization instead of for the purpose of
promoting its further impressive advance.
The giant strides made in the development of the productive forces
is the basic reason why it has become the prime task of the Communist
movement to avert a thermonuclear holocaust.
What would such a war mean? Comrade Mao Tse-tung admits that
as a result of atomic bombing half of mankind would perish. Suppose
we accept this evaluation, terrible though it is, what about the other
half of mankind? What will happen to those who will remain alive?
In what kind of a world, on what material basis, with what means of
production, subsisting on what kind of food will they be able to begin
a new life?
It is said that imperialism will be destroyed. True enough. But who
can guarantee that its place will be taken by communism and that
there will not be a reversion to primitive society?
The thesis of the Chinese comrades regarding the so-called "two
possibilities of the transition to socialism"-one without a nuclear
war and the other through a nuclear war-apart from the fact that it
is a monstrous one, does not take into account reality and is utterly
wrong. We cannot accept it. The "second possibility", that of the







transition to socialism through a nuclear war does not exist, it is a
fatal mistake to think so. We reject the assertion that a nuclear war
will bring the triumph of world socialism. Socialism on a world scale
can be achieved only if a nuclear war is averted. There is only one
reliable possibility of advancing towards socialism on a world scale:
through peaceful coexistence.
Hence the fight to prevent a nuclear war is an essential component
of any genuine and effective struggle for revolution and communism.
When the C.P.S.U. and other Communist parties clearly and
realistically, without any embellishment, showed what would be the
fatal consequences of a nuclear war for human life, and hence for the
revolution and communism, the leaders of the Communist Party of
China accused them of "advocating capitulation to imperialism".
There could be nothing further from the truth. The path we propose
is the path of struggle by the peoples against the nuclear weapon,
against nuclear war.
We Communists are accustomed when mobilizing the masses to tell
them the truth and we do this because we before all else believe in
the masses, do not consider them merely an instrument, and appeal
to their reason and conscience. It is this that makes the masses an
invincible revolutionary force. Those who do not think It necessary to
tell the masses the truth, although in words they extoll them, thereby
show that they have no confidence in them.
Deliberately ignoring our position, the Chinese comrades accuse us
of "embellishing" imperialism and denying its aggressive nature, Just
the reverse is the case: the C.P.S.U., all the Communist parties have
always maintained, and this is repeated in the Statement of the 81
Parties, that the rapacious and aggressive nature of imperialism has
not changed. However, although it has not changed, it is held in check
today by the rockets and nuclear weapons in the possession of the
Soviet Union.
When the Caribbean crisis broke out in October 1962, it was the firm
policy of the Soviet Union, which based itself on its nuclear pdwer,
that enabled the socialist camp to prevent a new Munich which could
have had catastrophic consequences.
World peace and the Cuban socialist revolution were saved.
It is therefore utterly absurd to accuse the U.S.S.R. of adventurism
or capitulation as the Chinese leaders are doing. The Communists, the
working masses, and people of Spain who regard the Cuban revolution
as their vital concern and want to avert a war, express their support
of the policy of the Soviet Union and their gratitude to it.
The logic of facts is compelling the more sober-minded represen-
tatives of imperialism to realize that it has nothing to gain in a nuclear
war.
Imperialists unleash wars as a means of securing a new redivisio;
of colonies, as a means of obtaining new sources of raw materials and
new markets. Such was the case as regards wars in the past.







In our day, however, .the question is: will a world war give im-
perialism colonies, markets and raw material sources? Will a war from
their standpoint be a rational continuation of their usual policy 'of
plunder and domination?
A thermonuclear war would signify the physical annihilation of Im-
perialism's principal centres, of the markets It had planned to win,
the destruction of the productive forces it had planned to dominate
and exploit. In other words, such a war would, be suicidal for im-
perialism.
In the light of these facts how can one assert that the conditions
which in the past enabled the imperialists to regard war as a con-
tinuation of their.policy of rapine and domination have not changed?
With the appearance of the nuclear weapon and with the socialist
camp having possession of this weapon, the thesis that imperialist
world war is the continuation of imperialist policy no longer holds
true.
It is true that there are dangerous maniacs who dream of establish-
ing world supremacy with the help of the nuclear weapon. It is like-
wise true that in the imperialist groups there is, besides the trend of
the moderates who realize that a nuclear war spells terrible danger,
the trend of the "wildmen" who refuse to accept the fact that the
socialist system is growing stronger and consolidating itself.
But it Is precisely the battle for peaceful coexistence that is helping
to Isolate these "wildmen", to weaken their influence. And If the
people are told the truth about the effects and consequences of a
nuclear war it will only rouse them to take more vigorous and resolute
action against the imperialist warmongers. On the other haud, silence,
attempts to have people believe that a nuclear war would notbe very
much more destructive than the classical type of war, disarm and
lull the masses and untie the hands of the warmongers.
In short, with the appearance of the socialist system and the rapid
development of the means of production, of science and technology-
factors which act as a deterrent on imperialism's bellicose trends-the
question of-war and peace has to be treated differently.

Liberation Wars

If the imperialists are beginning to realize that a nuclear war would
be suicidal for them, if even the local wars started by them have not.
yielded the desired results, if the support which they have been giving
the reactionary ruling cliques waging civil war, as In South Vietnam,
for example, is boomeranging against them, undermining their own
prestige and interests, the liberation wars started by the peoples of
the oppressed countries where the objective and subjective conditions
for waging an armed struggle are ripe, have, on the contrary, proved
their effectiveness and have brought victory for the peoples concerned.
What does this signify? That civil and liberation wars where con-







ditlons favour this are the continuation of a just policy by other means,
a means which the oppressed classes and peoples do not reject and
have no reason to reject. Even more. The might of the socialist system
and the policy of coexistence limits the possibilities of intervention by
imperialism against the peoples concerned, clears the way to the
victory of these liberation wars. It was in such a situation that the
Chinese revolution triumphed in 1949 and later the revolution in Cuba
and Algeria, to cite the most significant examples.
The Chinese comrades allege that the C.P.S.U. and the other Com-
munist parties are by their position on the question of war and peace
"hindering" other peoples from carrying out a revolution. But they
Sdo not, and cannot for that matter, cite a single fact, a single concrete
instance to prove their assertion.
The Soviet Union and the other socialist countries have rendered,
and are continuing to render, every assistance to the fighting peoples,
without any fanfare.
In reality the Chinese comrades are reproaching us for not accepting
their thesis concerning the so-called "second possibility" of the tran-
sition to socialism on a world scale, that Is, their reckless idea that
we can achieve socialism through a nuclear war. We are also re-
proached for opposing the idea that a socialist state can start a
"revolutionary war" against bourgeois states, a purely Trotskyite idea
alien to Leninism and outrightly condemned by the international Com-
munist movement in the Statement of the 81 Parties which clearly
states that revolution cannot be exported.
The Chinese leaders consider that rejection of these two theses is
"modern revisionism". We, however, will continue to affirm that
Trotskyism and a nuclear catastrophe have nothing in common with
modern Leninism.

SThe Moscow Treaty

Peaceful coexistence is a multiform, complex and active policy, it is
a struggle. Peaceful coexistence Is not a matter of relations between
antagonistic classes within a country; it is a matter of relations be-
tween states with differing social systems, of class antagonisms in the
sphere of state relations.
The maintenance and consolidation of peaceful coexistence de-
mands, on the one hand, the broad mobilization of the masses and, on
the other, the conclusion of agreements, necessary compromises be-
tween socialist states and capitalist states.
In theory not even the Chinese comrades are opposed to concluding
such agreements with imperialism; they have as a matter of fact often
had recourse to them, even in the case of their mortal enemy Chiang .
Kai-shek.
How then account for the negative attitude of the leaders of the
Communist Party of China to the Moscow Treaty?

54








The Moscow Treaty contains a simple agreement to cease nuclear
tests in the atmosphere, outer space, and under water. It is, In the final
analysis, a question of stopping the pollution of the air we breathe
and the food we eat, of preventing the spread of illnesses produced by
radioactivity, of preventing the danger of the monstrous deformation
of the human race. It is a demand that conforms with the sentiments
of the peoples, a demand voiced by scientists, by the international
Communist and working-class movement, the Chinese comrades
included.
They condemn this treaty because, according to them, it deprives
the countries df the socialist camp of the possibility of carrying out
nuclear tests and hence of the possibility of producing the nuclear
bomb if they want to. But the socialist countries have had no need to
do so for they have been protected by the Soviet nuclear bomb.
The leaders of the Chinese People's Republic propose to produce their
own nuclear weapon. It is quite understandable when various imperialist
powers want to obtain possession of the nuclear weapon, heedless of
the fact that this would lead to the proliferation of this weapon to all
parts of the world. For the Imperialist camp is rent by antagonistic
contradictions. But this question cannot be raised in the same sense
when it is a matter of the socialist countries. They need the nuclear
weapon in order to compel imperialism to respect them, to compel it
to abandon all its intentions to attack them or the people who have
won their national liberation, in order to prevent war and to defend
the revolution.
The decision of the Chinese comrades to produce their own nuclear
weapon speaks of their desire to pursue an International policy dif-
ferent from the policy pursued by the socialist world system.
Their calls to organize a revolt inside the Soviet Union to over-
throw Comrade Khrushchov, the Central Committee of the C.P.S.U. and
the Government of the U.S.S.R.; their attacks on the policy of the
world Communist and working-class movement and their attempts to
split some of the parties represent an international policy aimed at
separation from the socialist camp, at breaking with it.

The Influence of Communist Ideas

The Chinese comrades are up in arms against the Twentieth Congress
of the C.P.S.U. and its epochmaking decisions which they themselves
wholeheartedly endorsed at the time. They have now changed their
tune and are taking exception to the condemnation of the cult of the
individual and the thesis concerning the peaceful transition to
socialism. They maintain that the Twentieth Congress was a source of
"contemporary revisionism" and that it undermined the faith of tie
masses in Communist ideas.
The Twentieth Congress marked the beginning of a new epoch not
only for the C.P.S.U. but for the world Communist movement as a








whole. It condemned the grievous consequences of the personality cult
and advanced important theses representing a sincere and courageous
effort to return to the original sources of Marx and Lenin, to restore
Marxist-Leninist principles and methods.
Our adversaries tried to take advantage of the initial shock caused
by the exposure of the Stalin cult to strike a blow at the parties and
undermine the prestige of communism in the eyes of the masses. But
this temporary trauma was overcome and the prestige and power of
attraction of communism became if anything greater than before. The
Twentieth Congress gave communism a fresh impetus. A profound and
unbiased explanation was given of the role of Stalin, in both its positive
and negative aspects. The strict observance of the principles of demo-
cratic centralism strengthened the Communist parties internally.
Ever since the Congress there has been a more creative approach to
the problems of our time.
On no account can we approve of the attempt to revive the cult of
the individual. We \lii!]eirliv object to Marxism being placed once
again on a dogmatic footing. We stand for the virile and creative spirit
of Marxism, which was Introduced by the Twentieth and later the
Twenty-Second Congresses of the C.P.S.U.
It was by applying the virile, creative and revolutionary spirit of
Marxism, and not sticking to the letter'of formulas that had been re-
jected by social development that Lenin led the great October Socialist
Revolution to victory and ushered In the socialist era in human history.
Guided by this same method, we musf today apply the living spirit
of Marxism-Leninism in face of the new features of social development,
the new problems arising as a result of the existence side by side of
two social systems, the collapse of the colonial system and the scien-
tific and technological revolution.
At the same time the Communist parties must be on their guard
against opportunistic tendencies that are liable to appear under cer-
tain conditions. We must not forget, however, that this is creative
work, that proceeding from what has already been accomplished, we
must develop and enrich Marxist thought through analysis of the new
experience.
Socialism today is not only a system of ideas, a political opposition
group; it is not even a single state encircled and attacked from all
sides. Socialism today is a practical reality, a social system existing
over a vast area of our planet and embracing more than a thousand
million people.
This reality exerts a permanent political and ideological influence
on the modern world, giving rise to new phenomena peculiar to our
epoch. Take the Algerian revolution for example: a political party, ,the
F.L.N., starting out as a petty-bourgeois nationalist movement, hostile
to Marxism, assumes the leadership of the liberation movement of its
people and, upon conquering power, discards its bourgeois leaders and,








while not accepting Marxism, behaves in many respects as a Marxist
party would by setting its sights on socialism.
The force of our ideas fortified by the existence and the achieve-
ments of the U.S.S.R. and the socialist world system is becoming an
increasingly potent factor in the world today.

Concerning the Possibility of the Peaceful Road

From this reality, from the tremendous impact of communist ideas,
the revisionists seek to draw such conclusions as, for example, that
socialism today can triumph as a result of the spontaneous play of
economic factors, viz., the scientific and technological revolution, and
that hence the struggle of the revolutionary vanguard, the organization
and militant action of the masses, in short, revolution, is no longer
necessary.
The international Communist movement and our party included has
always rejected such concepts.
But if mistakes of this kind are made by opportunists, the dogma-
tists, on the,other hacd, 'do not take into account the new factors,
they continue to repeat old formulas applicable to entirely different
situations; they do not see the new possibilities which the Communist
parties are afforded today for contact with the masses, they under-
estimate the power of our ideas and overestimate the strength of the
enemy.
The international Communist movement maintains that there exist
two possible ways of passing over to socialism in each country: the
peaceful way and the way of armed struggle.
The Twentieth Congress of the C.P.S.U. obviously laid the emphasis
on the peaceful way not because it excludes armed struggle but be-
cause throughout the preceding period the accent had been made
exclusively on the latter, because for so many years we regarded armed
struggle as the only way to socialism; this boiled down to the idea that
the revolution would triumph everywhere by following exactly the
same pattern as the Russian revolution. The Twentieth Congress of
the C.P.S.U. stressed the possibility of a peaceful transition to socialism
in some countries, the possibility that, given a revolutionary situation
and by combining mass action in the streets with parliamentary forms
of struggle, the conquest of power could be accomplished without re-
course to civil war.
Taking this concept and our own experience into account, the Sixth
Congress of the Communist Party of Spain set forth the perspective of
a peaceful transition to socialism in.our country.
Without excluding the path of armed struggle, without ruling out the
possibility of such an alternative, it was essential to examine and
analyze this new path.
The Twentieth Congress of the C.P.S.U. clarified the concept of the








dictatorship of the proletariat and freed it from schematism. It took
into account the experience of other socialist revolutions and revived
Lenin's thesis that in the future, the dictatorship of the proletariat in
other countries might take forms which would differ substantially from
the forms of the dictatorship of the proletariat in Russia.
The war of 1936-39 in Spain when the republican government
acquired the character of a people's democracy with a coalition of
parties based on parliament, also testifies that the present policy of
our party and the prospect that Spain will take its own way to social-
ism drawing simultaneously on the experience of other parties, are
deeply rooted in the rich experience of the Communist Party of Spain.
It is not excluded that after the fall of Franco a new coalition will
be formed which will avoid past mistakes, wage a vigorous political
struggle against reactionary forces and, combining the militant action
of the masses with parliamentary struggle, proceed to carry out struc-
tural changes of a democratic nature that will bring it to a point where
the dialectic of the struggle itself will confront it with the need for
socialist transformation. Besides Communists, such a coalition could
include the Socialist Party, petty-bourgeois groups and even some pro-
gressive Catholic forces.
Such a course would help to narrow down the camp of anti-com-
munism, to dispel apprehensions and overcome opposition within other
political groups by offering them the prospect of playing their part
under socialism and reassuring them that a victorious revolution would
not necessarily mean their withdrawal from the scene; this path, more-
over, would help bring over to the side of the revolution those forces
among whom reformist tendencies prevail at the present.
At the same time we do not rule out the possibility of armed struggle
should it be forced upon us by the stubbornness of the ruling classes
and the lack of understanding and resolution on the part of the leaders
of other groups whose participation in the peaceful transition to
socialism is both possible and desirable.
At any rate an open and positive course toward cooperation with
these groups would help to win over the broad masses to the side of
the revolution. And this is indispensable whatever path we take.
The Chinese comrades reject the peaceful path, saying that "this has
never happened before". This way of thinking is alien to our Marxist-
Leninist methods and conceptions. The Chinese comrades themselves
have at various times attempted to take the peaceful road. And if they
employed both forms alternately, by what right do they seek to impose
the thesis of "people's war" upon all peoples and in the most diverse
historical situations? Moreover we regard as impermissible the charge
of "modern opportunism" they have levelled at the C.P.S.U. and the
other Communist parties simply because these parties uphold the
theory of the possibility of the peaceful transition in definite coun-
tries and under definite conditions.








The New Perspectives


Today the masses are advancing towards communism along broader
and more diversified avenues than we could foresee in the past.
As the socialist system, proving its superiority over capitalism, be-
comes the determining force in world development, it will become
Increasingly possible that part of the Social Democratic rank and file
and even some of their leaders will break with the policy of class
collaboration and pass over to an effective policy of fighting for
socialism.
The Catholic masses are increasingly coming under the influence of
socialist ideas and awakening to the need for socialism.
What in the past used to be the position of the more farsighted or
non-conformist Catholics is becoming today a mass trend. But to con-
clude from this that the Church is leaning towards socialism is just as
absurd as to approach these questions in exactly the same way as 30
years ago, ignoring the realities of life.
Ours is a scientific, materialist ideology the soundness of which is
daily corroborated by the advance of science and which is steadily
forging ahead. We shall defend and popularize this ideology, but we
shall also respect the beliefs of others who set themselves lofty
humanist aims. We take full cognizance of every possible point of con-
tact between Christian humanism and Marxist humanism and, on this
basis, work for cooperation between Christians and Communists to
transform this "vale of tears" into paradise for man. If our struggle
to abolish exploitation under the banner of the hammer and sickle is
joined by those who pay obeisance to the cross, we shall only wel-
come them.
Today, as the popular masses are joining the nationalist movements
in our country, we can discern in them a growing trend towards
cooperation with the Communists and an increasing readiness to ac-
cept socialist solutions.
We must avoid repelling people who are gravitating towards social-
ism in ways different from those that predominated when its power
of attraction was less than it is now.
We should stimulate all trends tending towards socialism by means
of rational activities characterized by positive criticism, a desire :o
achieve mutual understanding and to help these trends find their way
forward, and not withdraw within a rigid dogmatic shell.
The development of the forces of communism is naturally linked
with the numerical, political and ideological strengthening of our Party
which is an essential condition of victory. But it is also linked with
the growing gravitation towards socialism on the part of other groups
with which we must establish close contact.
The rigidity which the Chinese comrades propound in an attempt to
fit all forms of the revolution into a few static patterns allegedly valid
for all countries and as sound today as they were 50 years ago, and







their denunciation of the Twentieth and Twenty-Second Congresses
of the C.P.S.U., congresses that marked the beginning of an open,
creative and profoundly Marxist-Leninist approach to the new pro-
blems and phenomena arising before the revolutionary movement, are
positions which are generally known in the Communist and working-
class movement as dogmatism; if these positions typified in the policy
of the Chinese comrades were allowed to gain ground, they would
present a formidable obstacle to the advance of the revolution and
socialism.
A movement for the regeneration and strengthening of democracy is
developing in the West-European countries. The great battles fought
by the working class in France, Italy, Belgium, Spain and other coun-
tries have risen to a new level. The peasant actions in the various
countries have demonstrated that the bourgeois and petty-bourgeois
sections are also becoming increasingly aware of the need to combat
the big monopolies. The alliance of the anti-monopoly forces and the
forces of peace and socialism is growing.
All this can lead to a situation rising in Europe which will greatly
intensify tne struggle for peace and for the revolution.
In view of this the scorn shown by the Chinese comrades for the
working class and the Communist parties of the capitalist countries,
and their total lack of understanding of the complex conditions in
which the revolutionary struggle is developing in these countries, are
to be regretted.
A dogmatic and disruptive policy of the kind the Chinese comrades
are pursuing would greatly increase the difficulties confronting the
Communist parties in Western Europe.

Combating the Methods of the Personality Cult

The denunciation of the personality cult has had a profoundly
beneficial effect on the Communist movement. The Stalin cult had
nothing in common with respect for leaders; genuine respect is per-
fectly compatible with keeping the masses informed of the reasons for
one or another decision.
There can be no return to a system when whatever a leader said
went merely because he had said it, to the "Party is me" principle. It Is
necessary to explain things, to convince people. The masses and the
Party rank and file deserve the greatest respect of the leaders: they
are not soldiers who blindly obey orders, still less are they "robots".
Lenin sa'd that the Party and the masses will correctly implement a
policy only when they understand it, when it becomes their own cause.
A revolutionary party must combine prompt action with discussion,
neither suppressing discussion nor indulging in idle talk, In the course
of its activity it must be able to display political initiative and rectify
its mistakes and shortcomings without delay. Hence action must be
combined with discussion, with criticism and self-criticism.






The Communist movement cannot turn back after the step forward
made by the Twentieth Congress of the C.P.S.U.; it must continue to
advance in the direction then taken. It cannot allow itself to regress
as regards assessment of the lawlessness of the Stalin period or com-
bating the methods that made that lawlessness possible.
The way the debate has been conducted by the Chinese comrades, who
have resorted to slander, condemnation, charges of betrayal and
capitulation and invective, and who have turned a comradely dis-
cussion into a "struggle against the enemies of the revolution", is
a continuation of such methods. Such a policy, no matter who pursues
it, is an insult to all Communists, all revolutionaries and progressives.

The World-Wide Impact of the Economic Advance of Socialism

The very existence of the socialist system renders decisive support
to the liberation struggle of the oppressed classes and peoples. It
would be a mistake to see this support consisting only of aid with
armaments to the embattled peoples or the newly-independent
countries.
The Leninist thesis that victorious socialism exerts its main influence
through economic construction, a 'thesis reaffirmed in the 81-Party
Statement, is, as experience has shown, the basic principle to be borne
in mind.
If one or another newly-independent underdeveloped country em-
barks on a non-capitalist or even a socialist path, this is due not only
to the fact that the masses and leaders of these countries suffered from
imperialist oppression, but to a large extent also to the fact that the
experience of the socialist countries shows that socialism makes it
possible to develop the means of production and the economy as a
whole far more rapidly than capitalism.
At the same time, in contrast to the neo-colonialist manoeuvres,
socialism renders the newly-emerging nations fraternal economic aid
which accelerates their economic advance and enables them to part
company with imperialism.
The rapid growth of the international prestige of the Soviet Union
in recent years has been partly due to its achievements in such new
branches of science and technology as the nuclear power industry and
space research.
The economic advance of socialism and the rising standard of living
which accompanies it are a magnet that attracts to socialism the sym-
pathies of people throughout the world.
Imperialism seeks to make the most of the fact that thanks to the
colonial exploitation of the greater part of mankind, the Imperialist
countries have accumulated vast wealth and achieved an economic
level enabling the masses to enjoy a relatively high standard of living.
But the successes achieved by socialism in spite of the difficulties
that have had to be overcome testify that the day is not far off when






the socialist countries will surpass the most developed capitalist states
in per capital production. This will signify the complete and absolute
victory of socialism over capitalism, i. e., our victory will be final in
the sphere of economic construction.
To claim, as the Chinese comrades do, that to defend this Leninist
principle means to count on economic competition spontaneously re-
solving the problem of the victory of the revolution, that it means
reducing the class struggle to economic competition of the two
systems, Is a distortion of the truth, as is the assertion that we
advocate a wait-and-see policy, passivity and class collaboration.
The C.P.S.U. and other Communist parties maintain that the revolu-
tion triumphs as a result of the growing mass struggle in each particular
country. Victory can be won provided both the objective and the sub-
jective conditions for it exist. It is not easy to create such conditions,
and as regards objective conditions, this depends not only on the will
of the revolutionaries. But this will, the conscious activity of the van-
guard, the militancy, organization and struggle of the masses In each
country represent the decisive force of the revolution, without which
not a single people can win its freedom, even if the international
situation in the sphere of the competition between the two systems
afforded the optimal conditions.
If such is the attitude of the C.P.S.U. and the Communist parties, why
misrepresent it? Why ascribe to us what we have never said or intended
to say?
But these errors which the Chinese comrades invent and ascribe to
others, are not the only possible errors in this sphere. It Is possible,
for example, that the real difficulties standing in the way of solving
the economic problems of socialist construction In an underdeveloped
country at the desired rate may give rise to a desire to postpone this
task until imperialism is finally abolished. If this error is made the
point of departure, any adventurist solution Is possible. War, even
nuclear war, may seem acceptable, and one may think: "Let us post-
pone economic construction which gives us so much trouble until we
put an end to imperialism."
The problems of economic construction are indeed extremely com-
plex; historical experience bears this out.
These problems can give rise to certain contradictions inside socialist
countries or between the countries of the socialist camp. Indeed, not
only the possibility but the actual existence of contradictions In the
socialist camp and within the socialist countries cannot be denied. As
a matter of fact progress is possible only on the basis of overcoming
contradictions. Were there no contradictions of some kind or other, life
would come to a halt.
Contradictions of the kind mentioned above do not originate in class
or national exploitation, but are caused by economic progress. They
are not antagonistic contradictions. but if they are ignored and left







unresolved, they can grow sharper, assume a malignant character and
develop into grave conflicts.
The Spanish Communists, like the Communists of other countries,
are anxious to know why the Chinese comrades started the controversy
in the international Communist movement and the socialist camp. We
ask: why have the Chinese comrades, who have carried out a great
revolution, who have set an example of sagacity and who have talented
leaders, committed such grave blunders?
It would be an over-simplification to say that there was a time when
they were "good" and that now they are "bad", i. e., to approach the
problem from the standpoint of abstract morals. Yet the fact remains
that at one time they contributed much to the common cause whereas
today they are committing errors detrimental to all of us.
We are not in a position to give an exhaustive explanation of the
causes that gave rise to such an attitude. This is one of the weak points
in our discussion. Only a self-critical attitude on the part of the
Chinese comrades would enable us to get to the root of the matter
now. Lacking this we are obliged to ask questions at the risk of failing
to find the clear answer. And if in the future it will be of paramount
importance to grasp these reasons, i. e., to make a thorough study of
the problem of contradictions In the socialist countries and in the
socialist camp as a whole, today we must tackle the most pressing
thing: answer the erroneous claims of the Chinese comrades and com-
bat their mistakes, their attempts to cause a split.
It is in the interests of our Party and the Communist movement as
a whole to do everything to keep the polemics within the bounds of
ideological and political discussion, of a struggle of principle.

Our Conclusions

Limiting ourselves, for reasons stated above, to criticizing those
erroneous theses of the Chinese comrades which most directly affect
the Communist movement as a whole, we arrive at the following con-
clusions:
We emphatically reject the Chinese thesis about the "possibility of
advancing to socialism through nuclear war". There is no other way
to socialism on a world scale than that of removing the danger of
nuclear war, the way of peaceful coexistence. The struggle for the
revolution and for socialism is, then, closely linked with the struggle
for peace and disarmament.
Hence it is necessary to work indefatigably to alert the peoples to
the consequences of nuclear war in order to heighten their vigilance,
stimulate their struggle and enable them to take action against the
possible instigators of war before they can unleash a war.
Nuclear war no longer is a continuation of policy'by other means.
It is necessary to remove the possibility of nuclear war by waging
a vigorous and incessant struggle for the prohibition and destruction








of nuclear weapons, for disarmament, for a world without armaments
and armies.
In view of this the Moscow test-ban treaty is a positive and valuable
step inasmuch as it creates a more favourable climate for international
negotiations. We support this treaty, which is an outcome of the
policy of peace pursued by the Soviet Union and other socialist coun-
tries and of the struggle of the peoples for peace.
The fundamental contradiction of our time is that between the
socialist system and the imperialist system. The socialist system is the
bulwark and vanguard of the entire revolutionary movement and the
struggle for peace. It is in the best interest of the labour movement in
the capitalist countries and the national-liberation movement to
strengthen their mutual link, to support and be supported by the
socialist camp, to repel all disruptive manoeuvres.
The decisions of the Twentieth and Twenty-Second Congresses of
the C.P.S.U. are of universal significance; this has been confirmed by
the march of events. We reaffirm our solidarity with these decisions.
We have condemned and shall continue to condemn the personality
cult and the methods and concepts associated with this distortion of
Marxism-Leninism. We oppose any return to the practices associated
with the cult, to the dogmatic concept embodied in the attitude of the
Chinese comrades, a concept which would divorce the Communist
parties from the masses and make it more difficult for them to fulfil
their historic revolutionary mission.
We reaffirm once again the thesis of the Communist movement con-
cerning the two ways-peaceful and non-peaceful-of transition to
socialism in each country, and hold that the Party of each country
should choose the best way, taking into account the objective and sub-
jective conditions.
To sum up, we declare: We Spanish Communists continue firoly to
adhere to the line of the 1957 Declaration and 1960 Statement of the
Moscow meetings, and resolutely support the decisions of the Twen-
tieth and Twenty Second Congresses of the C.P.S.U.
We protest against the slanderous attacks launched by the Chinese
leaders against Comrade Khrushchov, against the C.P.S.U. and the Soviet
Union, attacks that are also deeply insulting to the working people
and revolutionaries of Spain.
We vigorously reject the attempts of the Communist Party of China
to split the international Communist and working-class movement and
to counterpose the national-liberation movement to the socialist camp
and to the working-class and Communist movement.
This policy of our Party on international issues is by no means
motivated by the fact that we stand for the peaceful way of solving
the problems of our country. Should the situation change and compel
us to change our political line and take the path of armed struggle, we
shall continue to adhere to the same position on the question of the







polemics in the-world Communist movement, a position opposite to
that of the Chinese comrades. "
There is a precedent in the history of our Party which entitles us to
say so. At the time of the 1936-39 w"vagainst fascism our Party did,
not seek a solution in spreading the war to other countries, in turning
it into a global war. On the contrary, it opposed such adventurous ideas
which cropped up In Spain at that time. Fighting arms in hand, dying
in the trenches, our people took pride in the fact that they wese de-
fending world peace.
Our Party's traditions of working for peace did not prevent it from
taking to arms each time the need arose, or from playing an outstand-
ing and heroic role in the anti-fascist war our people waged for three
years.


We maintain that in the present circumstances it would be useful
to convene a conference of the world Communist movement. Early this
year, when things had not yet reached the point they have today, we
thought it necessary to conduct work before such a conference to bring
the diverging views and positions closer together and to lessen the
tension. Today the situation is different.
Since other means have failed, we must try to bring the viewpoints
closer together through collective discussion with the participation of
all parties.
If agreement is reached to hold such a conference, we shall attend
it not in order to sit in judgement of one or another party and to con-
demn It. We shall go to the conference prepared to engage in com-
radely discussion in order to achieve agreement on the basis of Marxist-
Leninist principles. And even should such an agreement prove Im-
possible at this juncture, we would come to the meeting with a desire
to strengthen and not break the existing ties, with a desire to promote
unity and to continue the discussion in a calmer atmosphere. We would
come with the conviction that only discussion and experience can help
the Chinese comrades rectify their mistakes and prevent a split in the
world Communist movement.







Resolution of the Central Committee

of the Communist Party of Luxembourg









The Central Committee of the Communist Party of Luxembourg
meeting in Esch-Alzette on September 1, 1963 and having heard and
discussed the report of Comrade D. Urbany on the situation in the
International Communist movement and on the talks between the Cen-
tral Committee of the Communist Party of Luxembourg and the Central
Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union
declares that it is in full agreement with this report and with the
conclusions contained in it;
states that the preservation of peace on earth, the relaxation of
international tension, the prohibition and elimination of nuclear
weapons, general disarmament and the promotion of peaceful coexis-
tence of states with differing social systems are the No. 1 tasks of the
international working-class movement, for in conditions of peace the
working class and oppressed peoples can successfully wage their
struggle for socialism, democracy and national freedom, whereas a
new world war, which would be a nuclear war, would throw the
working class and socialism a hundred years back;
welcomes therefore the wise and firm policy of the Communist Part;
of the Soviet Union, which is Imbued with a sense of responsibility,
a policy supported by the vast majority of the Communist and Workers'
parties, a policy which delivered the world from a new unprecedented
catastrophe and has led to the first success on the way to a detente
and disarmament-to the Moscow nuclear test-ban treaty;
regrets the incomprehensible attitude of the Communist Party of
China which underestimates the decisive significance of this policy for
the working class and oppressed peoples, negates and minimizes this
policy;
condemns the attempts of the leadership of the Communist Party of
China to cause confusion and a split in the ranks of the Communist
movement, to undermine confidence in the Communist Party of the
Soviet Union and to replace the policy of peaceful coexistence with an
adventurist and sectarian policy;

Zeitung vum Letzburger vollek, September 3, 1963.
j







stands for unbreakable unity of the international Communist move-
ment on the basis of Marxism-Leninism and firm friendship with the
Soviet Union and its Marxist-Leninist Communist Party.



The Central Committee of the Communist Party of Luxembourg is
firmly convinced that the policy for easing international tension and
steadily growing superiority of the socialist system over the capitalist
system give also the Luxembourg working class, the people of Luxem-
bourg generally, better possibilities for carrying but a social, demo-
cratic and national policy aimed primarily at
the complete abolition of obligatory military service,
the withdrawal of our country from disastrous military alliances,
the complete restoration of our national independence, i.e., com-
plete independence from foreign militarist and monopoly institutions
of the capitalist world,
and, last but not least, at overcoming the political and trade union
split In the ranks of the Luxembourg working class and for creating
a broad united front of all working people and peace-loving Luxem-
bourgians against monopoly capital and reaction.








For Peace and Socialism

Resolution of the 'National Conference of the Swiss Party of Labour


t




In 1957 and 1960 meetings of leading representatives of the Com-
munist and Workers' parties of nearly all the countries of the world
were held ip Moscow. The meetings discussed international develop-
ments and the tasks confronting the parties in the struggle for peace,
democracy, national independence and socialism and adopted docu-
ments defining the general line of the international Communist move-
ment.
The principal feature of international development is the rapid
growth of the socialist world, the disintegration of the colonial system
and the intensification of class struggle in the capitalist countries. The
superiority of the forces of socialism over the forces of capitalism, the
forces of peace over the forces of war is becoming increasingly more
marked.
The world socialist system has become the decisive factor in the
development of human society.
The most burning issue of our time is the issue of war and peace.
Since the last world war new and monstrous means of mass annihil-
ation have been developed. The use of these.weapons in another war
would wreak untold destruction and reduce key centres of industry and
culture to a heap of ruins. Hundreds of millions of people, entire
nations would be wiped out.
But the socialist, countries, th'e working class of the whole world,
the national-liberation movement, states and peace-loving men and
women opposing war can, by their joint efforts, prevent' another world
war.
The Communists therefore consider the struggle for peace their para-
mount and most urgent task.
Socialism has no need of war. The contest between the old and new
systems, between socialism and capitalism must be resolved not by
means of war but on the plaie of peaceful. competition, competition
for a higher level of economy, science and technology, culture and
living standards.
The alternative to a destructive nuclear war is peaceful coexistence.
The Communists are working for the termination of the cold war, the

Vorwirts, September 20, 1963.







dissolution of military blocs, the removal of war bases, general and
complete disarmament, the settlement of outstanding international
disputes through negotiation, for peaceful economic, political and,
cultural relations between states and peoples irrespective of their social
systems.
The peaceful coexistence of states with differing social systems or
a war of annihilation -that is how the matter, stands. There is no other
way oft.
But peaceful coexistence does not mean reconciliation between the
socialist and capitalist worlds, does not mean abandonment' of the
struggle for a socialist world; nor does peaceful coexistence mean
rejection by'the still dependent nations of struggle for their national
independence, rejection of the class struggle; on the contrary, it pre-
supposes Intensifying the struggle of the working class for its econo-
mic, political and cultural demands. None of the three main revolu-
tionary forces-the socialist countries, the colonial countries fighting
for their full independence and the working class in the countries still
under capitalism--should be under-estimated.
Both the 1957 and the 1960 documents stress the significance of that
struggle and point out in that connection that the main blow must be
directed against the big capitalist enterprises and monopolies which
are the bulwark of reaction, the arms race and aggression.
Both documents also contain the idea that a peaceful transition
from capitalism to socialism is possible, that under present conditions
the working class of one or another capitalist country may be able,
on the basis of cooperation, and alliance with other parties and
organizations and relying on the powerful mass movement, to win state
power without civil war and secure the transfer of the basic means of
production into the hands of the people.
The 1960 Statement ends with an appeal for unity of the inter-
national Communist movement. "The meeting," reads the Statement,
"sees the further consolidation of the Communist parties on the basis
of Marxism-Leninism, of proletarian internationalism, as a primary
condition for the unification of all working-class, democratic and pro-
gressive forces, as a guarantee of new victories in the great struggle
waged by the world Communist and working-class movement for a
happy future for the whole of mankind, for the triumph of the:cause
of peace and socialism."
The documents of 1957 and 1960 bear the signatures also of the re-
presentatives of the Communist Party of China. They too pledged to
carry out the principles laid down In these documents. It soon trans-
pired, however, that the leaders of the Communist Party of China have
taken a different stand. In an interminable flood of speeches, state-
ments, leaflets, party and government pronouncements they have been
giving their own interpretation, reading their own meaning into the
general line set forth in the documents. They interpret it in their own
way, which they consider to be correct, ignoring the actual situation







in ,the different countries, and disregarding the opinions of the other
Communist and Workers' parties. They even attempt to interfere in
Sthe internal affairs of other Communist and Workers' parties in order
to impose the line of the Chinese Communist Party on them or to win
supporters for that line. Although they did declare themselves in agree-
ment with the proposal made by Comrade Khrushchov at the VI Con-
gress of the Socialist Unity Party of Germany that both sides discon-
tinue the polemics and begin talks between the delegations of the
Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Communist Party of
China, they nevertheless continued the polemics, moreover in a tone
utterly impermissible between fraternal parties.
On March 30, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the
Soviet Union sent a letter to the Central Committee of the Communist
Party of China in which it reminded the latter of the agreement con-
cerning the talks, set forth some fundamental ideas essentially based
on the 1957 and 1960 documents and indicated the area of discussion.
The letter was couched in the most comradely terms, it contained no
polemics and was permeated with the spirit of complete confidence.
It concluded with these words: "We know that this meeting is being
looked forward to by our friends in all the countries of the world, who
pin great hopes on it. On us, on our will and reason depends whether
results gladdening our friends and disappointing the enemies of com-
munism will be achieved at the meeting. This will be our common con-
tribution to the cause of the struggle for the liberation of all the
oppressed, for the victory of peace and socialism on earth, for the
triumph of the great revolutionary doctrine of Marxism-Leninism."
The talks were scheduled to be held on July 5, and Communis'ts the
world over awaited positive results. But on June 14 there appeared
under the title "Proposals concerning the general line of the inter-
national Communist movement" the reply of the Central Committee of
the Communist Party of China to the letter of the Central Committee
of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union of March 30.
The leaders of the C.P.C. counterposed their own general line to the
general line of the world Communist movement.
The Chinese leaders hold that the decisive factor of revolutionary
development is not the socialist system but the struggle of the peoples
of Asia, Africa and Latin America for their national, political and
economic independence. Here, they aver, are the "storm-centres of
world revolution" and "in a sense, therefore, the whole cause of the
International proletarian revolution hinges in the final analysis on
the outcome of the revolutionary struggles of the people of these areas,
viho constitute the overwhelming majority of the world's population."
According to the leaders of the Chinese Communist Party, the peace
policy of the Soviet Union, its policy of struggle for disarmament,
peaceful coexistence and peaceful competition leads not to peace, but
to illusions of peace, to capitulation to imperialism, betrayal of the




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs