800.00b Communist International/10–2247: Airgram
The Chargé in the Soviet Union (Durbrow) to the Secretary of State
A–1081. Reference Embassy’s Despatch No. 1709, October 81 and telegrams Nos. 3007 of October 82 and 3015 of October 10,3 regarding new European Communist Party organization.
Central newspapers have now begun to print items purporting to describe reactions of Soviet people to establishment of Cominform. First reports appeared in Komsomolskaya Pravda of October 8 and 9, and a half-page spread of several items was printed in Pravda on October 11. Since that date both papers have carried daily one or more items on subject. It is noteworthy, however, that treatment of Cominform has been almost completely confined to those two Communist Party publications. A few other papers carried reprints of Pravda editorial treated in Embtel 3015 October 10, and October 15 Trud printed report of reaction among workers. This limitation of coverage would seem to confirm interpretation made in last sentence of Embtel 2993 of October 6, i.e. that effort is being made to characterize creation of Cominform as purely Party affair and keep alive old fiction of non-interdependence of CP and Soviet Government.
Accounts which have thus far appeared in Pravda and Komsomolskaya Pravda have all been similar in form and content, being reports from various factories, collective farms, and other economic organizations of their members’ reactions to establishment of Cominform. These reports usually describe meetings at which workers and/or Party members made speeches and expressed their opinions about new organization. Although some accounts gave impression that these meetings were spontaneous, others made no attempt to hide fact that they were organized by Party “agitators.” Indeed, an article in October 14 Pravda began: “The agitators in many undertakings and institutions of Moscow are continuing their little talks about the declaration of the nine Communist parties.”
[Page 601]As might be expected, each account expressed satisfaction, approval, or even “happiness” with which Soviet citizens greeted news of new association of Comparties and quoted remarks of individual workers on subject. These remarks conformed very closely to content and phraseology of communiqué and declaration announcing Cominform and to those of Pravda editorial mentioned above. Such close conformity is as might be expected, for narrowness of Party line and severity of penalties for mis-step encourage every Russian to stick closely to unquestionably authoritative source material when discussing political subjects. In present instance lack of variety in these “popular” comments on Cominform indicates paucity of such “safe” source material. For example, most speakers were reported as attacking warmongering of bourgeois imperialists, especially American; reiterating efforts of USSR to promote peace and proclaiming need for unification of all “progressive forces” like Communist parties for same purpose; promising greater efforts to strengthen Soviet Union, “the bulwark of peace”; repostulating that “the danger for the working class now lies in underevaluation of its strength and over-estimation of the strength of the imperialist camp”; and emphasizing that “no one will ever succeed in frightening us with atomic bombs.”
However, behind this flood of parrotings of official line there lurked a few indications of deeper and more genuine public sentiment. Fact that announcement of Cominform did indeed make profound impression on people was revealed by descriptions of audience reaction in such terms as: “They listened in absolute silence” and “one could see that every phrase entered into the very heart of the workers.”
Furthermore, strong desire of Russian people for peace was expressed again and again, more feelingly and far more frequently than phraseology of official propaganda would necessitate, making it appear that speakers had at last found a point on which their true feelings correspond with Party line and that they were making most of it. Phrase “our people do not want war” was repeated again and again; and one speaker said:
“We want to live in peace and friendship with the American people … We are sure that every honorable American will understand us: peace is dear to us, we need peace …”
Embassy believes this remark represents true feelings of all but small group of USSR’s population. However, these feelings cannot be expected to have appreciable effect on Soviet Union’s foreign policy; that policy is more accurately characterized by anti-bourgeois invective which dominates press items under discussion than by such genuine expressions of popular feeling as have crept into them.