tir1944
22nd November 2011, 02:52
Excerpts from Enver Hoxha's Reflections on China
For those who might be interested in the matter...
Thanks to "The Red Republic" website
July 4th., 1962:
At the meeting he had with our comrades, Chou En-lai told them that it would be difficult for China to supply us with all the things concerning which agreements had been signed. Our comrades rejected this because it smelled of economic pressure. We must be very cautious and cool-headed, for the enemy is striving intensively to separate us from China, striving to isolate us.
December 23rd., 1962
At a dinner which the Chinese comrades put on in Peking for a group of our building specialists, Li Hsien-nien said in his speech that we would not be able to build and bring into production the new projects which we receive from China within the agreed time. And,speaking about modern revisionism, he said (without specifying them) that there were contradictions between the Party of Labour of Albania and the Communist Party of China, although they were in agreement on the general line. His statement about the construction of the new projects is untrue, since the work has not even begun. He might have mentioned that the Chinese had not delivered the blueprints on time: this is what is delaying the project.
August 21st., 1964:
The stand of the Chinese towards the centrist and revisionist outlook of the Romanians is mistaken and opportunist. In his talk with the Romanian ambassador, Chou En-lai took a wrong and nationalist stand towards the Soviet Union, teIling him of China's territorial claims against the Soviet Union and accusing it (in fact, Lenin and Stalin, for this "robbery" took place in their time) of having seized Chinese, Japanese, Polish, German., Czech, Romanian, Finnish and other territories.
These are not Marxist-Leninist,but national-chauvinist positions. Regardless of whether mistakes may or may not have been made, to raise such matters now, in the middle of the ideological struggle against Khrushchevism, assists Khrushchov.
What a line the Chinese have! On the one hand they defend Stalin on the other they call him a robber. It is clear now why the Chinese do not want us to hold the talks we had decided upon with the Romanians. It is because we are in opposition to the Chinese' positions!
September 4th., 1964:
We gave the Chinese our reply in connection with the question of invitations to the 15th anniversary of the proclamation of the
People's Republic of China. Firstly, we told them that we considered it unacceptable that the Romanian Workers'Party and Government should be invited to send a delegation to the celebrations, since until yesterday they were attacking all of us publicly, were in complete solidarity with all the modern revisionists, have the most friendly links with the renegade Tito, and are accepting credits from American and other imperialists.
The Romanians base their struggle against the Khrushchev group not on Marxism-Leninism, but economic and national-chauvinist considerations. Secondly, we wrote that we considered that official representatives of Marxist-Leninist Parties are excluded.
What will communists throughout the world think when they see the Romanians given pride of place at China's celebrations while the Marxist-Leninist Parties do not figure anywhere.
No tactical considerations can justify this action, which will be an astonishing thing beyond understanding for world opinion.
September 15th., 1964
Throughout the development of the struggle of Communist Party of China against the modern revisionists, it has displayed some astonishing vacillations in its tactics.
One remembers the Moscow Meeting of 1957, when Comrade Mao publicly supported Khrushchev approving his action in denouncing Stalin and in condemning the anti-Party group of Molotov, and advocating unity with the Khrushchev group.
When I met Comrade Mao in Peking in 1956; he criticised the "incorrect" actions of Stalin, particularly his actions in relation to Yugoslavia, describing the Yugoslavs as "good Marxists".
October 6th.,1964:
Certain unprincipled stands of the leadership of the CPC cannot fail to cause us anxiety. Certainly the enemies of our enemies can be our true friends when they are with us ideologically and politically. In other cases they may be our temporary allies on certain questions, although we must not give way to them on questions of principle.
But the enemies of our enemies may be our enemies, so that both have to be fought. We must take advantage of the contradictions between them, but we must not make concessions to them or be duped by their demagogy.
I am afraid the Chinese comrades are not always, very clear on these matters.
We must consider modern revisionism the main enemy in the international communist movement, or the "Major Devil" as the Chinese, call it. But this major devil comprises many devils, some greater and some smaller. Sometimes these devils appear united; sometimes they split because of the contradictions between them.
In the fierce and camp1icated struggle against modern revisionism, Marxist-Leninists have a wide range of tactics available, But these tactics must be based on proletarian principles, not bourgeois diplomacy.
Tito is just as dangerous as Khrushchev, if not more so, and must be fought determinedly. To underrate Titoism would be madness -- for to do so is to underrate American imperialism, which speaks through the mouth of Titoism in the ranks of international communism. To underrate Titoism is betrayal.
October 13th., 1964:
In reply to the request of our delegation for a reply to our letter concerning China's borders with the Soviet Union, Comrade Mao said:
"We are not going to reply to you, because if we did, 'polemics would arise. Perhaps after many years we shall reply to you".
This reply reflects an unprincipled, incorrect and uncomradely attitude towards the Central Committee of the Party of Labour of Albania. It shows that "Comrade Mao' does not like comradely criticism. The fact Chinese comrades are avoiding consultations with us.
October 31st.,1964:
Chou En-lai has declared:
"The polemics ceased on October 16th Thus, for the Chinese the fall of Khrushchev is everything. They say in effect; "With Khrushchev gone Khrushchev is dead. We must forget the past. Nothing remains but to pack our bags quickly and dash off to Moscow, to kiss one another at the celebrations of the October Revolution. What a comedy! What a dirty, feudal, fascist mentality!
All this is a provocation against us, for the Chinese comrades know very well that we shall not march with them along this treacherous road. So their intention is to go to Moscow and say: "The Albanians are no longer with us. We are the 'infallible' brain of the communist movement. Mao alone saw things correctly; all others were wrong -- Khrushchev, Stalin and so on. Now one must say 'Marx, Engels, Lenin, Mao!".
In no way will we accept the revisionist views of the Chinese. Cautiously and progressively, we must make the Party aware of this new situation. It will be impossible to prevent our disagreements, with the Chinese from spreading from the ideological and political field to our economic relations. Coercions, delays and pressures will gradually develop. We must not, therefore, go blindly into projects, or become blindly dependent on the credits they might grant us, for they might cut them off at the moment they consider most effective.
November 15th., 1964:
The Chinese are telling us nothing about the results of Chou En-lai's visit to Moscow. This is out of order, neither friendly, comradely nor Marxist.
November 21st., 1964:
Chou En-lai went to and returned from Moscow like Napoleon. He suffered an ignominious defeat. The Moscow revisionists provoked him, insulted him and humiliated him. What a disgrace for the Chinese. All their indescribable enthusiasm, their "profound judgments" -- all suffered fiasco. What will they do about the PLA? Will they admit their terrible mistake? They do not deign to give us an answer.
November 24th.., 1964:
The Soviets have offended the Chinese badly and have not made the slightest concession. Now the Chinese are very angry and have sworn their "implacable opposition" to the Soviet revisionists.
December 27th.., 1965:
We informed the Chinese comrades about the formation of the Communist Party of Poland. The CC of the CPC thanked us for the information, but pointed out that it does not have secret links with the Polish Marxist-Leninists and would not help them apart from the open stand in its press against revisionism. We believe, and have always believed, that the arousing of the masses to revolution in the revisionist countries of Europe is indispensable and, urgent. We do not interfere in the internal affairs of any state, but one of the most deadly blows we can inflict on the modern revisionists is the all round support and aid we must give all Marxist-Leninists without exception, wherever they are fighting.
August 9th., 1966
Marx condemned the cult of the individual as sickening. However, we observe with regret that in recent months the Chinese comrades have embarked on the wrong, anti-Marxist course,of turning the cult of Mao almost into a religion, exalting him in the most sickening way, without giving the least consideration to the great harm this is doing to our cause, not to mention the ridicule to which it is giving rise.
We condemn this unrestrained, non-Marxist propaganda. But the fact is that our criticism on this question to Chou En-lai on his last visit here had no effect at all. Are we dealing with Marxists or religious fanatics?
The question arises; why all this unrestrained propaganda? I can explain it only, as the deafening beating of a drum to conceal some hostile activity.
Further, the Chinese comrades, who in so many things show themselves cautious and slow to move, now begun to smash things with axes. We agree that the axe should be used, where necessary, but in China it is falling upon every work of art, every literary creation, regardless of its overall progressive spirit. Progressive world culture in general appears to have no value at all in the eyes of the Chinese comrades. To allow the students to display this terrible xenophobia, as is being done in China is a great mistake which has nothing in common with proletarian internationalism.
August 20th., 1966:
A great puzzle! Astonishing events, dangerous to the great cause of Communism are taking place. We have a problem with many unknown
factors; we have to try to see clearly into this dark Chinese forest with Marxist judgement .
The Proletarian Cultural Revolution against bourgeois elements in the field of culture should have been inspired by Marxist-Leninist, ideology.and organised and led by the Party. There should have been no smell of mysticism, metaphysics or idealism in its essence', its
forms or its tactics. For then it is no longer a Proletarian Cultural revolution ,but however it may be portrayed, its opposite.
Chinese propaganda presents it as a revolution launched spontaneously from below, by the masses. But in reality it had to be organised By whom? Here the figure of Lin Piao emerges. But how is it possible for such a Cultural Revolution to be launched by one person; while the Party and its Central Committee remain in the background? Only the Central Committee of the Party can take such decisions. It is a fact since 1956, when the 8th.Congress of the CPC was held, more than five years have elapsed since the time when the 9th. Congress should have been convened. Why is this?
Normally, also, Plenums of the Central Committee of a Marxist-Leninist Party are held twice a year; but the recent Plenum of the CC of the CPC was held after four years delay! Then who is leading the Party? I suspect that since 1956, Mao has been left on the sidelines and turned into a mere symbol. Recently the Party has been completely over-shadowed by the name of, Mao Tse-tung. Behind the fanaticisation around the person of Mao Tse-tung lies something very dangerous.
August 26th., 1966:
Today I read the 16-point document on the Cultural Revolution issued by the recent Plenum of the CC of the CPC. This implies that the enemy had deeply penetrated the party, to the point where it had taken over the leadership of whole Party committtees.
One thing worries me: the role of the CC and of the Party as a whole emerges as weak. Another thing, strikes the eye. Although school
pupils and students hold the initiative in the Cultural Revolution, the Party's youth organisation is not to be seen anywhere .What is
even more serious, there is no sign of the participation of the working class; it seems as if they are afraid of it.
Although power appears to be in the hands of the proletariat, it is possible that the borgeoisie is still powerful and dangerous. The
Chinese comrades admit this when the put the question: Which will win in China, socialism or capitalism.
Industry in China is declared to be socialist, but we see that the capitalists in enterprises still receive a fixed interest. This should not have been allowed. Instead of receiving crushing blows, all the enemies were "re-educated" and "placed in suitable jobs" where they could carry on hostile activity
September 1st., 1966
What this "Red Guard" is and why it is being created is not clear to us. It has been said that, it is being formed "to carry out a radical purge of capitalist and revisionist culture". But this task has been begun in an anarchic and confused manner.
Certain serious questions strike us at the start:
1.The "Red Guard" is composed mainly of youth, university students and school pupils. But it cannot be carried out by students alone.
2.If this is to be a revolution in favour of "proletarian culture", it is amazing that is the working class and peasantry are sitting by as onlookers! Whatever the, Chinese comrades say, nothing satisfactorily explains this.
3. What has become of the Communist Youth Its voice is not being heard at all. It seems as if it does not exist.
The only concrete thing which the "Red Guard" does is to praise Mao tse-tung to the skies, presenting him as a god: in the full sense of
the term.
September 20th., 1966
The true purpose of the "Red Guard" movement remains unknown to us. It is certainly acting without leadership or control.
The Chinese comrades simply must inform our Party about the full decisions of the recent plenum of the CC of the CPC. The "excuse" that
the Chinese ambassador in Tirana has been away from his post for five months "doing his physical labour" in China is unacceptable. Even if the Chinese comrades continue on this wrong, non-Marxist-Leninist course, we shall never allow our Party to be committed to the course of the cult of the individual.
January 29th., 1967:
It,is now clear that Mao found himself in a minority, and for this reason had to rely on the army. The military fist under the direction
of Mao and Lin Piao is the reality standing behind the Cultural Revolution.
April 7th., 1967:
The "new form" which emerged from the Cultural Revolution appears to be that the Chinese moving towards the "unification of" the Party
with the state"!?
April,28th.,1967
A Marxist-Leninist Party like ours, which is building socialism correctly, cannot proceed on the road advocated by the Chinese. A
Marxist-Leninist Party like ours deepens the revolution, but not like that which is going on in China today.
July 14th., 1967;
Posters in China say: "Mao Tse-tung Thought is the culmination of Marxism". Surely Mao himself cannot approve such wild exaggerations.
But the fact is that they are occurring.
Guided by hasty judgments, incorrect principles and ill-considered claims, the Chinese comrades could gravely damage the new
Marxist-Leninist groups and Parties which are in process of creation. In seeking to establish that "Mao is the world leader" of
international Communism,: it could happen that if some Marxist-Leninist group of Party does not put much emphasis on Mao and the Cultural Revolution while some deviators from Marxism-Leninism emphasise these things strongly, the Chinese comrades will prefer the latter. And the damage has been done. The Chinese have reached the conclusion that the little red book, "Quotations from Mao Tse-tung" is "the culmination of Marxist-Leninist science and philosophy". Such claims are infantile.
Today they are carrying on without an organised Party. How can they advise the Marxist-Leninists of the world how to form and consolidate new Parties.
August 15th., 1967:
The Chinese press is liquidating Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin and making a god of Mao, reaching the scandalous level of saying; Those who do no follow the road of Mao and the Cultural Revolution are "deviators". This wrong. This is not Marxism, but Trotskyism.
January 16th., 1968
We have almost no contact with the Chinese comrades and do not know official1y what is happening there. They withdrew their ambassador in Tirana on the grounds that he was implicated in the activities of the Liu-Teng group. When will he be replaced? There is no signal.
January 19th., 1968:
The main Chinese newspapers are publishing the directive on the reorganisation of the Communist Party arnd the mass organisations. Thus it is confirmed that up to now the CPC has been broken up and that the Cultural Revo1ution was in fact led by Mao and the "Main Group of the Cultural Revolution".
March 20th., 1968:
In the international arena the voice of China is almost, if not completely, silent. Thus it is not acting wisely For nearly a year they have not had an ambassador even here in our country. Can this be covered by the excuse: "We haven't a good man"? Or is it in order to reflect their silent dissatisfaction that we are not shouting `hosannas' to Mao and not following their mistaken tactic of silence
in the international field?
We see a similar superficial stand on the part of the Chinese comrades, towards the new Marxist-Leninist groups and Parties. They have contacts and give aid to many groups and Parties, even to those groups separate from or hostile to the new parties, justifying these un¬differentiated contacts by saying: "We assist all groups that fight imperialism and modern revisionism". But the struggle brings about differentiation, and this must, be followed up on a principled basis.
April 25th., 1968:
Under the cloak of the Cultural Revolution, the Chinese have shut themselves up completely in their own shell. They are merely publishing the quotations of Mao, in millions of copies, making millions of Mao badges, and spreading slogans in praise of him.
Nothing else, absolutely nothing else!
All China's contacts with the outside world have been completely frozen if not broken off altogether. All China's ambassadors have been
withdrawn from the countries where they were serving. Neither their newspapers, nor Hsinhua; nor Radio Peking, deal with any international question.
Even with us their closest friends, contacts are glacial. They don't allow our ambassador in Peking any contacts; he is isolated. An astonishing situation!
They have refused our invitation to send a delegation to the May Day celebrations, and have not invited any delegation from our side either. They carry on a "Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution", yet ignore the celebration of the proletarians! This too is astonishing!
June 8th., 1971
The Chinese have told us that: they have decided to allow American senators, businessmen, journalists, sociologists, etc., into China. The Soviets began this way too!
July 24th., 1971
Nixon is to go to Peking! We are not in agree¬ment. Therefore I think we should write to the Chinese a letter saying that we are opposed to this decision.
Nixon is an aggressor, a murderer of peoples, an enemy of socialism -- especially of Albania, which the USA has never recognised as a people' s democratic state and against which it has hatched a thousand plots.
The invitation to Nixon will benefit imperialism and world reaction, and will gravely harm the new Marxist-Leninist Parties which have looked upon China and Mao Tse-tung as the pillar of the revolution and as defenders of Marxism-Leninism.
July 26th., 1971:
The Sino-American honeymoon has begun. The matchmakers have had their penultimate meeting to prepare the wedding, the meeting between Mao and Nixon.
The content of the cordial talks between the old friend's Mao Tse-tung, Chou En-lai and Edgar Snow has been made known to Nixon, to Wall Street and, without doubt, to the allies of the USA. But the Chinese are keeping it a secret from the Albanians, China's "loyal allies".
What secrets are there in these talks that prevent us from being informed as to their content? The answer is simple: the talks have not been held in accordance with Marxist-Leninist principles. This is treachery; this is glaring revisionism. This is not "people's diplomacy", as the Chinese claim; it, is secret diplomacy with the heads of US imperialism.
July 27th., 1971:
The Chinese think that others ought to approve everything they say or do, and should consider every word or action on their part a, treasure of Marxism-Leninism, to be applied everywhere. The whole foreign policy of the People's Republic of China is chaotic. The Marxist-Leninist Parties which have been created are regarded as worthless by Chou. The Chinese comrades do not support and aid these parties but maintain contact with all sorts of groups, especially those which praise Mao Tse-tung and the Cultural Revolution, irrespective of what tendency these groups have.
Even the stand of the Chinese against the Soviets reflects great state chauvinist views and is not based upon Marxist-Leninist principles. For the Chinese whichever is anti-Soviet is fine. This anti-Marxist position will, unless it is stopped, lead to betrayal.
In seeking rapprochement with the USA, China is making a grave mistake in principle for which it and the world will pay a heavy price. We must try, if we can, to stop this adventurous course on China's part. The letter we are preparing for the CC of the CPC is one of those attempts. It may cost us dear, but we must make no concession over principles. We must defend the Marxist-Leninist principles of our Party to the end.
July 28th., 1971:
The Americans are continuing to wage one of the most barbarous wars the world has ever seen. But while this war is going on, while the
Americans are killing and bombing in Vietnam, China holds secret talks with the Americans at which it is agreed that Nixon shall go to Peking.
These disgraceful, anti-Marxist, uncomradely negotiations were held without tbe knowledge of the Vietnamese, let alone ourselves. This is scandalous and revolting, a betrayal of the Vietnamese and ourselves. The Khan of Pakistan was deemed worthy to be the first to be informed about the secrets of the gods".What shamelessness!
The North Koreans headed by Kim il Sung as the centrists they are p1eased with this political somersault on the part of the Chinese. This road cannot be defended, as the Chinese propagandists try to do, by saying "Lenin talked with the Germans at Brest" Tomorrow these same propagandists will be saying: "Stalin signed the non-aggression pact with Hitler". But neither Lenin nor Stalin ever fell into mistakes of principle; time,and the unerring theory of Marxism-Leninism have made this completely clear.
September 24th., 1971.
The news agencies are clamouring about something going on in China, alleging that Lin Piao has fled.
October 14th.,1971;
The CommunistParty of China is not sending a delegation to the 6th Congress of the Party of Labour of Albania. We did not expect such a thing.
October 26th., 1971:
The vote was taken yesterday at midnight, and our resolution -- calling for the admission of China to and the expulsion of the corpse of Chiang Kai-shek from the United Nations -- won by 78 votes against 350 We fought for a great and just cause and we were victorious. It is indirectly confirmed that something has happened to Lin Piao. The rumours cannot have been without foundation.
November 9th., 1971:
The 6th Congress of our Party has ended with extraordinary success, displaying unity both within the Party and with the people.
What was the attitude of the CPC towards this major event for our Party and people? Cold and insulting!
The decision not to send a CPC delegation to the Congress was clearly taken by Mao and Chou En-lai because of opposition to our Party's line.
November 19th., 1971:
The Hsinhua News Agenty reports that a delegation of the Spanish (revisionist) party, headed by its General Secretary Carrillo, has arrived in China.
This welcoming of the revisionist group of Carrillo will raise many problems for the Communist Party of Spain (Marxist-Leninist), for it will compel that Party in its struggle against Spanish revisionism to take up a position on the relations of the CPC with the revisionist party of Passionaria. The same situation will arise for the Marxist-Leninist Parties when delegations of revisionist parties visit China. Hence, a new, concrete danger threatens to undermine the new Marxist-Leninist Parties.
November 30th., 1971:
It is said that the Cultural Revolution has ended. We do not really know the situation in China, we know it only at the level of propaganda. But what can we do. They have not deigned to give us even the briefest reply to the letter we sent them.
January 3rd., 1972:
The Chinese are still not telling us anything about the disappearance of Lin Piao, which is now an undeniable fact. On this question an
impermissible silence is being maintained towards us.
February 13th., 1972;
Jacques Jurquet, the principal leader of the Communist Party of France (Marxist-Leninist) has avoided meeting our comrades in Paris for six months since his return from Peking. He did not come to our 6th. Congress. Jurquet has completely embraced the orientation of the Chinese.
February 22nd., 1972
Yesterday Mao received Nixon and talked with him for an hour. What they talked about is unknown.
February 24th., 1972:
Even Nixon's wife is joining in the propaganda. She is advertising Chinese cooking, Chinese silk pajamas and people's comnunes. Pat Nixon has become another Anna Louise Strong.
February 25th., 1972;
China is gradually abandoning its revolutionary line and has set itself on an opportunist, liberal, revisionist line. It is proceeding in the direction of agreement with US imperialism as a counterweight to the Soviets and to further its own consolidation as a major
capitalist power.
March 3rd.,1972:
I have carefully studied the Sino-American communique. It is clear that the Chinese have really deviated, just as Khrushchev did in his time.
March 4th., 1972:
Up to today the Chinese government has given us no information about Nixon' s visit and the talks held with him. Dead silence.
March 14th 1972;
Two weeks have gone by since Nixon left China, yet the Chinese have not bothered to give us any information. Meanwhile China's stand towards us is cold. It maintains no contact with us, either through our ambassador in Peking or through the Chinese ambassador in Tirana, who remains shut in his ivory tower.
If China really comes to an agreement with US imperialism, the contradictions and struggle with us will obviously increase.
March 21st., 1972:
The Chinese cleaned up the city prior to Nixon's visit, painted the shops in those streets through which he was to pass, removed "dangerous" slogans which, might have offended the honoured guest, displayed books of the Chinese and foreign classics, which disappeared from circulation for years. All these activities were done under the guise of the Chinese New Year, to herald the "Year of the rat".
The Chinese press had ceased all propaganda against US imperialism while awaiting Nixon. The whole capitalist world gave the journey great publicity, trying to create the impression that the journey of this rabid anti-Communist would "change the course of history".
The President had hardly recovered from his journey when he was received by Mao Tse-tung. As far as we know, this has never occurred previously: Mao has always received guests at the end of their visit. Mao received Nixon in his study, and on the table where the President leaned his elbows was a pile of books to let. Nixon know that he was dealing with "great thinker".
The banquet put on by the Chinese was magnificent". Chou En-lai spoke as though he were addressing an old dear friend and not an executioner. And the orchestra played "America the Beautiful".
Nixon' s visit to Peking and the welcome he received there constitute a victory for US imperialism and for Nixon personally.. The Sino-American communiqué issued at the end of the, visit is the most disgraceful document conceivable.
April 17th., 1972:
At the beginning of April a government delegation went to Peking to sign an agreement on Chinese agricultural credits to Albania. Chou En-lad received the delegation. He was completely silent about the victories of the Vietnamese people in their war with the Americans and their puppets. Why? Because relations, between China and Vietnam are not good, and there is no doubt that this is because of the course the Chinese are pursuing towards Nixon, whom the Vietnamese rightly regard as a war criminal.
April 22nd., 1972:
Yesterday our government delegation returned from China. On the economic front all went satisfactorily but on political questions there was complete silence.
The Chinese comrades say that the Vietnamese are "two-faced". Clearly the situation between China and Vietnam is unhealthy."
June 21st., 1972
Henry Kissinger, chief adviser to US President Nixon, has been in Peking for three days.
Many kinds of protocol can be observed. With the Albanians, whom the Chinese describe as their "closest friends", they apply the protocol of completely ignoring them.. We were told nothing of the fact that Kissinger was to go to Peking, let alone what was to be discussed. We learned of his visit only from the press.
July 22nd., 1972:
At last, after nearly eleven months, the Chinese comrades have given us some official information about the "ultra leftists" or "the Lin Piao plot".
According to this information, Lin Piao had conspired to assassinate Mao and had gathered, his men for an armed uprising. When this plot was discovered, on the morning of September 13th., 1971, he fled by aircraft in the direction of the Soviet Union, but the plane crashed and burned out in Mongolia. From what the Chinese say, Lin was "closely linked with the Soviets".
Was Lin Piao in agreement over the talks with Kissinger and the decisions which were taken? On this they are silent, not saying a word. Why?!
This very important point remains unexplained by the Chinese comrades. But this does not surprise us because it is neither the first, nor the last unexplained point.
How was it possible that the Minister of Defence of China and "Vice-Chairman of the Party, who entrusted the arrangements for his flight to his son, the Deputy-Commander of the entire Chinese air force should select an aircraft without a proper crew, without a radio, with insufficient fuel, which would crash in Mongolia and be burned out like a child's toy. Also, it seems surprising that Lin Piao took off so precipitously, while his main collaborators stayed behind to await arrest. Could Lin Piao have been the victim of a conspiracy, summoned urgently to Peking by air, kidnapped, flown towards the Soviet Union and liquidated on the way? Officially we accept what the Chinese say, but time will explain everything.
July 30th., 1972:
The charge d'affaires of the Chinese Embassy in Chile has told our ambassador there: "The friends of Mao killed Lin Piao and the aicraft was shot down in Mongolia".
October 15th, 1972:
Our ambassador in Peking has transmitted to us the text of a conversation he had with a Chinese official who reported to him the Chinese government's reply to our requests in connection with the economic plan for 1975-80. For the time being the government "does not consider it possible to agree to these requests, on the grounds of "lack of resources". These excuses of theirs are not valid.
For those who might be interested in the matter...
Thanks to "The Red Republic" website
July 4th., 1962:
At the meeting he had with our comrades, Chou En-lai told them that it would be difficult for China to supply us with all the things concerning which agreements had been signed. Our comrades rejected this because it smelled of economic pressure. We must be very cautious and cool-headed, for the enemy is striving intensively to separate us from China, striving to isolate us.
December 23rd., 1962
At a dinner which the Chinese comrades put on in Peking for a group of our building specialists, Li Hsien-nien said in his speech that we would not be able to build and bring into production the new projects which we receive from China within the agreed time. And,speaking about modern revisionism, he said (without specifying them) that there were contradictions between the Party of Labour of Albania and the Communist Party of China, although they were in agreement on the general line. His statement about the construction of the new projects is untrue, since the work has not even begun. He might have mentioned that the Chinese had not delivered the blueprints on time: this is what is delaying the project.
August 21st., 1964:
The stand of the Chinese towards the centrist and revisionist outlook of the Romanians is mistaken and opportunist. In his talk with the Romanian ambassador, Chou En-lai took a wrong and nationalist stand towards the Soviet Union, teIling him of China's territorial claims against the Soviet Union and accusing it (in fact, Lenin and Stalin, for this "robbery" took place in their time) of having seized Chinese, Japanese, Polish, German., Czech, Romanian, Finnish and other territories.
These are not Marxist-Leninist,but national-chauvinist positions. Regardless of whether mistakes may or may not have been made, to raise such matters now, in the middle of the ideological struggle against Khrushchevism, assists Khrushchov.
What a line the Chinese have! On the one hand they defend Stalin on the other they call him a robber. It is clear now why the Chinese do not want us to hold the talks we had decided upon with the Romanians. It is because we are in opposition to the Chinese' positions!
September 4th., 1964:
We gave the Chinese our reply in connection with the question of invitations to the 15th anniversary of the proclamation of the
People's Republic of China. Firstly, we told them that we considered it unacceptable that the Romanian Workers'Party and Government should be invited to send a delegation to the celebrations, since until yesterday they were attacking all of us publicly, were in complete solidarity with all the modern revisionists, have the most friendly links with the renegade Tito, and are accepting credits from American and other imperialists.
The Romanians base their struggle against the Khrushchev group not on Marxism-Leninism, but economic and national-chauvinist considerations. Secondly, we wrote that we considered that official representatives of Marxist-Leninist Parties are excluded.
What will communists throughout the world think when they see the Romanians given pride of place at China's celebrations while the Marxist-Leninist Parties do not figure anywhere.
No tactical considerations can justify this action, which will be an astonishing thing beyond understanding for world opinion.
September 15th., 1964
Throughout the development of the struggle of Communist Party of China against the modern revisionists, it has displayed some astonishing vacillations in its tactics.
One remembers the Moscow Meeting of 1957, when Comrade Mao publicly supported Khrushchev approving his action in denouncing Stalin and in condemning the anti-Party group of Molotov, and advocating unity with the Khrushchev group.
When I met Comrade Mao in Peking in 1956; he criticised the "incorrect" actions of Stalin, particularly his actions in relation to Yugoslavia, describing the Yugoslavs as "good Marxists".
October 6th.,1964:
Certain unprincipled stands of the leadership of the CPC cannot fail to cause us anxiety. Certainly the enemies of our enemies can be our true friends when they are with us ideologically and politically. In other cases they may be our temporary allies on certain questions, although we must not give way to them on questions of principle.
But the enemies of our enemies may be our enemies, so that both have to be fought. We must take advantage of the contradictions between them, but we must not make concessions to them or be duped by their demagogy.
I am afraid the Chinese comrades are not always, very clear on these matters.
We must consider modern revisionism the main enemy in the international communist movement, or the "Major Devil" as the Chinese, call it. But this major devil comprises many devils, some greater and some smaller. Sometimes these devils appear united; sometimes they split because of the contradictions between them.
In the fierce and camp1icated struggle against modern revisionism, Marxist-Leninists have a wide range of tactics available, But these tactics must be based on proletarian principles, not bourgeois diplomacy.
Tito is just as dangerous as Khrushchev, if not more so, and must be fought determinedly. To underrate Titoism would be madness -- for to do so is to underrate American imperialism, which speaks through the mouth of Titoism in the ranks of international communism. To underrate Titoism is betrayal.
October 13th., 1964:
In reply to the request of our delegation for a reply to our letter concerning China's borders with the Soviet Union, Comrade Mao said:
"We are not going to reply to you, because if we did, 'polemics would arise. Perhaps after many years we shall reply to you".
This reply reflects an unprincipled, incorrect and uncomradely attitude towards the Central Committee of the Party of Labour of Albania. It shows that "Comrade Mao' does not like comradely criticism. The fact Chinese comrades are avoiding consultations with us.
October 31st.,1964:
Chou En-lai has declared:
"The polemics ceased on October 16th Thus, for the Chinese the fall of Khrushchev is everything. They say in effect; "With Khrushchev gone Khrushchev is dead. We must forget the past. Nothing remains but to pack our bags quickly and dash off to Moscow, to kiss one another at the celebrations of the October Revolution. What a comedy! What a dirty, feudal, fascist mentality!
All this is a provocation against us, for the Chinese comrades know very well that we shall not march with them along this treacherous road. So their intention is to go to Moscow and say: "The Albanians are no longer with us. We are the 'infallible' brain of the communist movement. Mao alone saw things correctly; all others were wrong -- Khrushchev, Stalin and so on. Now one must say 'Marx, Engels, Lenin, Mao!".
In no way will we accept the revisionist views of the Chinese. Cautiously and progressively, we must make the Party aware of this new situation. It will be impossible to prevent our disagreements, with the Chinese from spreading from the ideological and political field to our economic relations. Coercions, delays and pressures will gradually develop. We must not, therefore, go blindly into projects, or become blindly dependent on the credits they might grant us, for they might cut them off at the moment they consider most effective.
November 15th., 1964:
The Chinese are telling us nothing about the results of Chou En-lai's visit to Moscow. This is out of order, neither friendly, comradely nor Marxist.
November 21st., 1964:
Chou En-lai went to and returned from Moscow like Napoleon. He suffered an ignominious defeat. The Moscow revisionists provoked him, insulted him and humiliated him. What a disgrace for the Chinese. All their indescribable enthusiasm, their "profound judgments" -- all suffered fiasco. What will they do about the PLA? Will they admit their terrible mistake? They do not deign to give us an answer.
November 24th.., 1964:
The Soviets have offended the Chinese badly and have not made the slightest concession. Now the Chinese are very angry and have sworn their "implacable opposition" to the Soviet revisionists.
December 27th.., 1965:
We informed the Chinese comrades about the formation of the Communist Party of Poland. The CC of the CPC thanked us for the information, but pointed out that it does not have secret links with the Polish Marxist-Leninists and would not help them apart from the open stand in its press against revisionism. We believe, and have always believed, that the arousing of the masses to revolution in the revisionist countries of Europe is indispensable and, urgent. We do not interfere in the internal affairs of any state, but one of the most deadly blows we can inflict on the modern revisionists is the all round support and aid we must give all Marxist-Leninists without exception, wherever they are fighting.
August 9th., 1966
Marx condemned the cult of the individual as sickening. However, we observe with regret that in recent months the Chinese comrades have embarked on the wrong, anti-Marxist course,of turning the cult of Mao almost into a religion, exalting him in the most sickening way, without giving the least consideration to the great harm this is doing to our cause, not to mention the ridicule to which it is giving rise.
We condemn this unrestrained, non-Marxist propaganda. But the fact is that our criticism on this question to Chou En-lai on his last visit here had no effect at all. Are we dealing with Marxists or religious fanatics?
The question arises; why all this unrestrained propaganda? I can explain it only, as the deafening beating of a drum to conceal some hostile activity.
Further, the Chinese comrades, who in so many things show themselves cautious and slow to move, now begun to smash things with axes. We agree that the axe should be used, where necessary, but in China it is falling upon every work of art, every literary creation, regardless of its overall progressive spirit. Progressive world culture in general appears to have no value at all in the eyes of the Chinese comrades. To allow the students to display this terrible xenophobia, as is being done in China is a great mistake which has nothing in common with proletarian internationalism.
August 20th., 1966:
A great puzzle! Astonishing events, dangerous to the great cause of Communism are taking place. We have a problem with many unknown
factors; we have to try to see clearly into this dark Chinese forest with Marxist judgement .
The Proletarian Cultural Revolution against bourgeois elements in the field of culture should have been inspired by Marxist-Leninist, ideology.and organised and led by the Party. There should have been no smell of mysticism, metaphysics or idealism in its essence', its
forms or its tactics. For then it is no longer a Proletarian Cultural revolution ,but however it may be portrayed, its opposite.
Chinese propaganda presents it as a revolution launched spontaneously from below, by the masses. But in reality it had to be organised By whom? Here the figure of Lin Piao emerges. But how is it possible for such a Cultural Revolution to be launched by one person; while the Party and its Central Committee remain in the background? Only the Central Committee of the Party can take such decisions. It is a fact since 1956, when the 8th.Congress of the CPC was held, more than five years have elapsed since the time when the 9th. Congress should have been convened. Why is this?
Normally, also, Plenums of the Central Committee of a Marxist-Leninist Party are held twice a year; but the recent Plenum of the CC of the CPC was held after four years delay! Then who is leading the Party? I suspect that since 1956, Mao has been left on the sidelines and turned into a mere symbol. Recently the Party has been completely over-shadowed by the name of, Mao Tse-tung. Behind the fanaticisation around the person of Mao Tse-tung lies something very dangerous.
August 26th., 1966:
Today I read the 16-point document on the Cultural Revolution issued by the recent Plenum of the CC of the CPC. This implies that the enemy had deeply penetrated the party, to the point where it had taken over the leadership of whole Party committtees.
One thing worries me: the role of the CC and of the Party as a whole emerges as weak. Another thing, strikes the eye. Although school
pupils and students hold the initiative in the Cultural Revolution, the Party's youth organisation is not to be seen anywhere .What is
even more serious, there is no sign of the participation of the working class; it seems as if they are afraid of it.
Although power appears to be in the hands of the proletariat, it is possible that the borgeoisie is still powerful and dangerous. The
Chinese comrades admit this when the put the question: Which will win in China, socialism or capitalism.
Industry in China is declared to be socialist, but we see that the capitalists in enterprises still receive a fixed interest. This should not have been allowed. Instead of receiving crushing blows, all the enemies were "re-educated" and "placed in suitable jobs" where they could carry on hostile activity
September 1st., 1966
What this "Red Guard" is and why it is being created is not clear to us. It has been said that, it is being formed "to carry out a radical purge of capitalist and revisionist culture". But this task has been begun in an anarchic and confused manner.
Certain serious questions strike us at the start:
1.The "Red Guard" is composed mainly of youth, university students and school pupils. But it cannot be carried out by students alone.
2.If this is to be a revolution in favour of "proletarian culture", it is amazing that is the working class and peasantry are sitting by as onlookers! Whatever the, Chinese comrades say, nothing satisfactorily explains this.
3. What has become of the Communist Youth Its voice is not being heard at all. It seems as if it does not exist.
The only concrete thing which the "Red Guard" does is to praise Mao tse-tung to the skies, presenting him as a god: in the full sense of
the term.
September 20th., 1966
The true purpose of the "Red Guard" movement remains unknown to us. It is certainly acting without leadership or control.
The Chinese comrades simply must inform our Party about the full decisions of the recent plenum of the CC of the CPC. The "excuse" that
the Chinese ambassador in Tirana has been away from his post for five months "doing his physical labour" in China is unacceptable. Even if the Chinese comrades continue on this wrong, non-Marxist-Leninist course, we shall never allow our Party to be committed to the course of the cult of the individual.
January 29th., 1967:
It,is now clear that Mao found himself in a minority, and for this reason had to rely on the army. The military fist under the direction
of Mao and Lin Piao is the reality standing behind the Cultural Revolution.
April 7th., 1967:
The "new form" which emerged from the Cultural Revolution appears to be that the Chinese moving towards the "unification of" the Party
with the state"!?
April,28th.,1967
A Marxist-Leninist Party like ours, which is building socialism correctly, cannot proceed on the road advocated by the Chinese. A
Marxist-Leninist Party like ours deepens the revolution, but not like that which is going on in China today.
July 14th., 1967;
Posters in China say: "Mao Tse-tung Thought is the culmination of Marxism". Surely Mao himself cannot approve such wild exaggerations.
But the fact is that they are occurring.
Guided by hasty judgments, incorrect principles and ill-considered claims, the Chinese comrades could gravely damage the new
Marxist-Leninist groups and Parties which are in process of creation. In seeking to establish that "Mao is the world leader" of
international Communism,: it could happen that if some Marxist-Leninist group of Party does not put much emphasis on Mao and the Cultural Revolution while some deviators from Marxism-Leninism emphasise these things strongly, the Chinese comrades will prefer the latter. And the damage has been done. The Chinese have reached the conclusion that the little red book, "Quotations from Mao Tse-tung" is "the culmination of Marxist-Leninist science and philosophy". Such claims are infantile.
Today they are carrying on without an organised Party. How can they advise the Marxist-Leninists of the world how to form and consolidate new Parties.
August 15th., 1967:
The Chinese press is liquidating Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin and making a god of Mao, reaching the scandalous level of saying; Those who do no follow the road of Mao and the Cultural Revolution are "deviators". This wrong. This is not Marxism, but Trotskyism.
January 16th., 1968
We have almost no contact with the Chinese comrades and do not know official1y what is happening there. They withdrew their ambassador in Tirana on the grounds that he was implicated in the activities of the Liu-Teng group. When will he be replaced? There is no signal.
January 19th., 1968:
The main Chinese newspapers are publishing the directive on the reorganisation of the Communist Party arnd the mass organisations. Thus it is confirmed that up to now the CPC has been broken up and that the Cultural Revo1ution was in fact led by Mao and the "Main Group of the Cultural Revolution".
March 20th., 1968:
In the international arena the voice of China is almost, if not completely, silent. Thus it is not acting wisely For nearly a year they have not had an ambassador even here in our country. Can this be covered by the excuse: "We haven't a good man"? Or is it in order to reflect their silent dissatisfaction that we are not shouting `hosannas' to Mao and not following their mistaken tactic of silence
in the international field?
We see a similar superficial stand on the part of the Chinese comrades, towards the new Marxist-Leninist groups and Parties. They have contacts and give aid to many groups and Parties, even to those groups separate from or hostile to the new parties, justifying these un¬differentiated contacts by saying: "We assist all groups that fight imperialism and modern revisionism". But the struggle brings about differentiation, and this must, be followed up on a principled basis.
April 25th., 1968:
Under the cloak of the Cultural Revolution, the Chinese have shut themselves up completely in their own shell. They are merely publishing the quotations of Mao, in millions of copies, making millions of Mao badges, and spreading slogans in praise of him.
Nothing else, absolutely nothing else!
All China's contacts with the outside world have been completely frozen if not broken off altogether. All China's ambassadors have been
withdrawn from the countries where they were serving. Neither their newspapers, nor Hsinhua; nor Radio Peking, deal with any international question.
Even with us their closest friends, contacts are glacial. They don't allow our ambassador in Peking any contacts; he is isolated. An astonishing situation!
They have refused our invitation to send a delegation to the May Day celebrations, and have not invited any delegation from our side either. They carry on a "Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution", yet ignore the celebration of the proletarians! This too is astonishing!
June 8th., 1971
The Chinese have told us that: they have decided to allow American senators, businessmen, journalists, sociologists, etc., into China. The Soviets began this way too!
July 24th., 1971
Nixon is to go to Peking! We are not in agree¬ment. Therefore I think we should write to the Chinese a letter saying that we are opposed to this decision.
Nixon is an aggressor, a murderer of peoples, an enemy of socialism -- especially of Albania, which the USA has never recognised as a people' s democratic state and against which it has hatched a thousand plots.
The invitation to Nixon will benefit imperialism and world reaction, and will gravely harm the new Marxist-Leninist Parties which have looked upon China and Mao Tse-tung as the pillar of the revolution and as defenders of Marxism-Leninism.
July 26th., 1971:
The Sino-American honeymoon has begun. The matchmakers have had their penultimate meeting to prepare the wedding, the meeting between Mao and Nixon.
The content of the cordial talks between the old friend's Mao Tse-tung, Chou En-lai and Edgar Snow has been made known to Nixon, to Wall Street and, without doubt, to the allies of the USA. But the Chinese are keeping it a secret from the Albanians, China's "loyal allies".
What secrets are there in these talks that prevent us from being informed as to their content? The answer is simple: the talks have not been held in accordance with Marxist-Leninist principles. This is treachery; this is glaring revisionism. This is not "people's diplomacy", as the Chinese claim; it, is secret diplomacy with the heads of US imperialism.
July 27th., 1971:
The Chinese think that others ought to approve everything they say or do, and should consider every word or action on their part a, treasure of Marxism-Leninism, to be applied everywhere. The whole foreign policy of the People's Republic of China is chaotic. The Marxist-Leninist Parties which have been created are regarded as worthless by Chou. The Chinese comrades do not support and aid these parties but maintain contact with all sorts of groups, especially those which praise Mao Tse-tung and the Cultural Revolution, irrespective of what tendency these groups have.
Even the stand of the Chinese against the Soviets reflects great state chauvinist views and is not based upon Marxist-Leninist principles. For the Chinese whichever is anti-Soviet is fine. This anti-Marxist position will, unless it is stopped, lead to betrayal.
In seeking rapprochement with the USA, China is making a grave mistake in principle for which it and the world will pay a heavy price. We must try, if we can, to stop this adventurous course on China's part. The letter we are preparing for the CC of the CPC is one of those attempts. It may cost us dear, but we must make no concession over principles. We must defend the Marxist-Leninist principles of our Party to the end.
July 28th., 1971:
The Americans are continuing to wage one of the most barbarous wars the world has ever seen. But while this war is going on, while the
Americans are killing and bombing in Vietnam, China holds secret talks with the Americans at which it is agreed that Nixon shall go to Peking.
These disgraceful, anti-Marxist, uncomradely negotiations were held without tbe knowledge of the Vietnamese, let alone ourselves. This is scandalous and revolting, a betrayal of the Vietnamese and ourselves. The Khan of Pakistan was deemed worthy to be the first to be informed about the secrets of the gods".What shamelessness!
The North Koreans headed by Kim il Sung as the centrists they are p1eased with this political somersault on the part of the Chinese. This road cannot be defended, as the Chinese propagandists try to do, by saying "Lenin talked with the Germans at Brest" Tomorrow these same propagandists will be saying: "Stalin signed the non-aggression pact with Hitler". But neither Lenin nor Stalin ever fell into mistakes of principle; time,and the unerring theory of Marxism-Leninism have made this completely clear.
September 24th., 1971.
The news agencies are clamouring about something going on in China, alleging that Lin Piao has fled.
October 14th.,1971;
The CommunistParty of China is not sending a delegation to the 6th Congress of the Party of Labour of Albania. We did not expect such a thing.
October 26th., 1971:
The vote was taken yesterday at midnight, and our resolution -- calling for the admission of China to and the expulsion of the corpse of Chiang Kai-shek from the United Nations -- won by 78 votes against 350 We fought for a great and just cause and we were victorious. It is indirectly confirmed that something has happened to Lin Piao. The rumours cannot have been without foundation.
November 9th., 1971:
The 6th Congress of our Party has ended with extraordinary success, displaying unity both within the Party and with the people.
What was the attitude of the CPC towards this major event for our Party and people? Cold and insulting!
The decision not to send a CPC delegation to the Congress was clearly taken by Mao and Chou En-lai because of opposition to our Party's line.
November 19th., 1971:
The Hsinhua News Agenty reports that a delegation of the Spanish (revisionist) party, headed by its General Secretary Carrillo, has arrived in China.
This welcoming of the revisionist group of Carrillo will raise many problems for the Communist Party of Spain (Marxist-Leninist), for it will compel that Party in its struggle against Spanish revisionism to take up a position on the relations of the CPC with the revisionist party of Passionaria. The same situation will arise for the Marxist-Leninist Parties when delegations of revisionist parties visit China. Hence, a new, concrete danger threatens to undermine the new Marxist-Leninist Parties.
November 30th., 1971:
It is said that the Cultural Revolution has ended. We do not really know the situation in China, we know it only at the level of propaganda. But what can we do. They have not deigned to give us even the briefest reply to the letter we sent them.
January 3rd., 1972:
The Chinese are still not telling us anything about the disappearance of Lin Piao, which is now an undeniable fact. On this question an
impermissible silence is being maintained towards us.
February 13th., 1972;
Jacques Jurquet, the principal leader of the Communist Party of France (Marxist-Leninist) has avoided meeting our comrades in Paris for six months since his return from Peking. He did not come to our 6th. Congress. Jurquet has completely embraced the orientation of the Chinese.
February 22nd., 1972
Yesterday Mao received Nixon and talked with him for an hour. What they talked about is unknown.
February 24th., 1972:
Even Nixon's wife is joining in the propaganda. She is advertising Chinese cooking, Chinese silk pajamas and people's comnunes. Pat Nixon has become another Anna Louise Strong.
February 25th., 1972;
China is gradually abandoning its revolutionary line and has set itself on an opportunist, liberal, revisionist line. It is proceeding in the direction of agreement with US imperialism as a counterweight to the Soviets and to further its own consolidation as a major
capitalist power.
March 3rd.,1972:
I have carefully studied the Sino-American communique. It is clear that the Chinese have really deviated, just as Khrushchev did in his time.
March 4th., 1972:
Up to today the Chinese government has given us no information about Nixon' s visit and the talks held with him. Dead silence.
March 14th 1972;
Two weeks have gone by since Nixon left China, yet the Chinese have not bothered to give us any information. Meanwhile China's stand towards us is cold. It maintains no contact with us, either through our ambassador in Peking or through the Chinese ambassador in Tirana, who remains shut in his ivory tower.
If China really comes to an agreement with US imperialism, the contradictions and struggle with us will obviously increase.
March 21st., 1972:
The Chinese cleaned up the city prior to Nixon's visit, painted the shops in those streets through which he was to pass, removed "dangerous" slogans which, might have offended the honoured guest, displayed books of the Chinese and foreign classics, which disappeared from circulation for years. All these activities were done under the guise of the Chinese New Year, to herald the "Year of the rat".
The Chinese press had ceased all propaganda against US imperialism while awaiting Nixon. The whole capitalist world gave the journey great publicity, trying to create the impression that the journey of this rabid anti-Communist would "change the course of history".
The President had hardly recovered from his journey when he was received by Mao Tse-tung. As far as we know, this has never occurred previously: Mao has always received guests at the end of their visit. Mao received Nixon in his study, and on the table where the President leaned his elbows was a pile of books to let. Nixon know that he was dealing with "great thinker".
The banquet put on by the Chinese was magnificent". Chou En-lai spoke as though he were addressing an old dear friend and not an executioner. And the orchestra played "America the Beautiful".
Nixon' s visit to Peking and the welcome he received there constitute a victory for US imperialism and for Nixon personally.. The Sino-American communiqué issued at the end of the, visit is the most disgraceful document conceivable.
April 17th., 1972:
At the beginning of April a government delegation went to Peking to sign an agreement on Chinese agricultural credits to Albania. Chou En-lad received the delegation. He was completely silent about the victories of the Vietnamese people in their war with the Americans and their puppets. Why? Because relations, between China and Vietnam are not good, and there is no doubt that this is because of the course the Chinese are pursuing towards Nixon, whom the Vietnamese rightly regard as a war criminal.
April 22nd., 1972:
Yesterday our government delegation returned from China. On the economic front all went satisfactorily but on political questions there was complete silence.
The Chinese comrades say that the Vietnamese are "two-faced". Clearly the situation between China and Vietnam is unhealthy."
June 21st., 1972
Henry Kissinger, chief adviser to US President Nixon, has been in Peking for three days.
Many kinds of protocol can be observed. With the Albanians, whom the Chinese describe as their "closest friends", they apply the protocol of completely ignoring them.. We were told nothing of the fact that Kissinger was to go to Peking, let alone what was to be discussed. We learned of his visit only from the press.
July 22nd., 1972:
At last, after nearly eleven months, the Chinese comrades have given us some official information about the "ultra leftists" or "the Lin Piao plot".
According to this information, Lin Piao had conspired to assassinate Mao and had gathered, his men for an armed uprising. When this plot was discovered, on the morning of September 13th., 1971, he fled by aircraft in the direction of the Soviet Union, but the plane crashed and burned out in Mongolia. From what the Chinese say, Lin was "closely linked with the Soviets".
Was Lin Piao in agreement over the talks with Kissinger and the decisions which were taken? On this they are silent, not saying a word. Why?!
This very important point remains unexplained by the Chinese comrades. But this does not surprise us because it is neither the first, nor the last unexplained point.
How was it possible that the Minister of Defence of China and "Vice-Chairman of the Party, who entrusted the arrangements for his flight to his son, the Deputy-Commander of the entire Chinese air force should select an aircraft without a proper crew, without a radio, with insufficient fuel, which would crash in Mongolia and be burned out like a child's toy. Also, it seems surprising that Lin Piao took off so precipitously, while his main collaborators stayed behind to await arrest. Could Lin Piao have been the victim of a conspiracy, summoned urgently to Peking by air, kidnapped, flown towards the Soviet Union and liquidated on the way? Officially we accept what the Chinese say, but time will explain everything.
July 30th., 1972:
The charge d'affaires of the Chinese Embassy in Chile has told our ambassador there: "The friends of Mao killed Lin Piao and the aicraft was shot down in Mongolia".
October 15th, 1972:
Our ambassador in Peking has transmitted to us the text of a conversation he had with a Chinese official who reported to him the Chinese government's reply to our requests in connection with the economic plan for 1975-80. For the time being the government "does not consider it possible to agree to these requests, on the grounds of "lack of resources". These excuses of theirs are not valid.