893.00/12–648: Airgram

The Ambassador in China (Stuart) to the Secretary of State

A–293. Comparison of Mao Tse-tung’s98 article commemorating October revolution (which was commented on in Embtel 2273, Nov. 21) with his previous writings, brings to light still further evidence of parallelism of CCP foreign policy to that of Moscow. Evidence is so overwhelming that we can hardly see how Kremlin planners could wish for any improvement in professed CCP foreign policy.

Oct. 15 issue of Dept’s publication Monthly Review of Soviet Politics pointed out that “after more than 2 months of editorial silence regarding its split with Tito,”99 USSR in Sept. launched intensive propaganda campaign based on theme that first loyalty of all Communists is to USSR”. Pravda stated that only good Communist is one who “understands leading role of Soviet Union in world anti-imperialist camp, who unconditionally supports and defends USSR and carries out firm and consistent policy of cooperation and friendship with first country of victorious socialism in world”. New Time epitomized basic issue by title of its recent editorial “Are You For or Against the Soviet Union”.

We believe greatest significance of Mao’s Oct. Rev. article is that it deftly lifted CCP political theory onto new level necessitated by Soviet political and propaganda move referred to in preceding paragraph. Taking as baseline Mao’s article of Dec. 25, 1947,1 which was entitled “Present Situation and Our Tasks” and which was his [Page 632] last previous pronouncement on international affairs, we note these three shifts:

Dec. 25 article contained not the slightest hint that time has come for neutrals or “third forces” to get off the fence and to choose between world Capitalist and Communist camps. Its only thought in this regard was solely in reference to. Chinese domestic affairs and stated “If in 1946 there was still a section of people among intelligentsia of upper bourgeoisie and middle bourgeoisie under Chiang Kai-shek’s rule who still cherished ideas of a so-called Third Road, these ideas have now become bankrupt”. In contrast, article Nov. 7, 1948 specifically brought Soviet Union into picture and called upon people everywhere to make their choice between global counter-revolutionary front of “Imperialists” and People’s Revolutionary front against Imperialism. Liu Shao-chi’s article entitled “Nationalism and Internationalism”, which was also commented on in Embtel 2273, developed this thought still further.
In referring to struggle against “American reaction and Imperialism,” Dec. 25 article made only light mention of “anti-imperialist camp and democratic forces headed by Soviet Union”. In contrast, Nov. 7 article manifested much greater enthusiasm for primacy of Soviet Union in international communism by claiming that “all revolutionary forces within every country must unite with each other, revolutionary forces of all countries must unite with each other. They must organize anti-imperialist united front headed by Soviet Union and pursue a correct policy”.
Dec. 25 article gave as “The most basic political platform of CCP” that of “To organize a national united front to strike down the dictatorial govt. of Chiang Kai-shek and establish a democratic coalition govt”. In contrast, Nov. 7 article repeated same two points plus one new one. The new point, which was given first priority, was to “unite all revolutionary forces within whole country to drive out aggressive forces of American imperialism”.

We believe these shifts contain such complete evidence regarding coincidence of CCP foreign policy with that of USSR as to permit no further doubt on this score.

  1. Chairman of the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party.
  2. Marshal Josip Broz Tito, Yugoslav Premier, whose defection from the Cominform took place on June 28.
  3. Not printed; for summaries of article, see telegrams No. 26, 8 p. m., January 6, from the Ambassador in the Soviet Union, p. 9; and No. 65, January 9, 6 p. m., from the Ambassador in China, p. 28.