Reactions to the Prague Spring?

[Cicero]

Hi everyone, sorry if this is in the wrong place...

I was wondering about reactions to the Prague Spring among communist countries which were not closely aligned with the Soviet Union. Obviously a number of countries condemned the events that followed with the Warsaw Pact intervention, the declaration of the Brezhnev Doctrine, etc., but I'm curious to what extent there was a reaction, particularly on an ideological level, from nations like China, Albania, Romania, etc., as the extent of the Prague Spring became apparent but before the Warsaw Pact stepped in.

Thanks!

[Radical Atom]

Note that these sources should be taken with a grain of salt, not that they don't offer some insight.
On Albania from "Enver Hoxha The Iron Fist of Albania":

"Enver Hoxha was holydaying in Durrës, when Mehmet Sehu asked to see him urgently. Albania was officially a member of the Warsaw Pact, and, although it had not attended any meetings since 1961, the empty seat with the Albanian flag in front of it was a reminder of its membership. Tirana did not know anything about the invasion yet, but prime minister Shehu sensed something and expressed his concern for the staff of the Czech embassy, which was situated right across from the building of the Albanian Ministry of Interior.
The days of the invasion of Czechoslovakia must have been among the most difficult for Hoxha and Sehu. Brezhnev came up with the doctrine of the 'limited sovereignty' of Warsaw Pact member states, and Albania was under serious threat. Hoxha, Sehu and Kapo met for about 16 hours at Hoxha's house. A logbook of the leaders' security unit shows that the service was on red alert, as was the entire Albanian army. In late August 1968 Hoxha sent a message to Josip Broz Tito via Fadil Hoxha, as the latter testified without disclosing the communication channel. He asked for guarantees that Yugoslavia would not allow Soviet forces to pass through Yugoslavia in case of an attack on Albania. The answer came at the beginning of September - Yugoslav territory would not be open to any occupying force, and if such step were to be taken, both countries would fight together. On 13 September 1968 Albania announced its formal and unilateral withdrawal from the Warsaw Pact and denounced the attack on Czechoslovakia.

On China and Romania slightly from "Collateral Damage: Sino-Soviet rivalry and the termination of the Sino-Vietnamese alliance":

Beijing's response to the Soviet intervention was one of unqualified condemnation. In the 23 August issue of the People's Daily, new terminology was used to describe the Soviet Union. In a departure from previous characterizations of [...] a revisionist superpower, the People's Daily now referred to the Soviet Union as a "social-imperialist" superpower. On the same day, while attending a function celebrating the Romanian national day, a state that despite its Warsaw Pact membership was increasingly at odds with Moscow on a variety of issues, Zhou Enlai repeated the "social-imperialist" reference in his speech. He argued that the invasion of Czechoslovakia showed that the leadership of the Soviet Union had "degenerated into social-imperialism and social-fascism." Zhou further remarked that there should be no illusions about the nature of the Soviet Union: "That a big nation should have so willfully trampled a small nation underfoot serves a most profound lesson for those harboring illusions about U.S. imperialism and Soviet revisionism."
Why did the Chinese respond so vociferously to [it]? First, as Zhou stated in his Romanian national day speech, the Chinese perceived a qualitative change in the nature of the Soviet threat to China's allies in Eastern Europe. If the Soviets could invade Czechoslovakia, then the distinct possibility existed that other socialist states [...] could be targeted. In particular, Beijing, was concerned that Albania and Rumania, the two states in Eastern Europe that still mantained strong ties with China, could be possible targets.
[...]
Second, the ferocity of the Chinese [...] reflected Beijing's fears that China itself could be a target of a Soviet strike. On 17 September People's Daily noted that the Chinese Foreign Ministry had protested against Soviet violations of Chinese airspace. The Foreign Ministry's statement stressed that the occurence of these incidents after the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia was "absolutely not coincidental".

Since Yugoslavia was already on shaky ground with the SU since the Tito-Stalin split, and given the first quote on Albania one can guess their position on the matter
I hear Ceaușescu made a speech of condemnation, saying the invasion was a"grave error and constituted a serious danger to peace in Europe and for the prospects of world socialism" despite Romania's membership to the Warsaw Pact. Probably in part to make a show of "national strength", having an "independent" voice within the pact, and in part to stay in good relations with China. The Soviet threat of invasion being a given here.

[Cicero]

Thanks Radical Atom, very helpful! I don't suppose there's much more on attitudes prior to intervention though? Like, on an ideological level? I recall reading something from... I think Zhou Enlai, but I couldn't possibly say for certain, that seemed to assert that the changes presently occurring in Czechoslovakia were revisionism, but simply of the same variety as what the Soviets were already doing? It led from there somewhere to condemning the Brezhnev Doctrine for the same reasons you've elucidated.

[Radical Atom]

Thanks Radical Atom, very helpful! I don't suppose there's much more on attitudes prior to intervention though? Like, on an ideological level? I recall reading something from... I think Zhou Enlai, but I couldn't possibly say for certain, that seemed to assert that the changes presently occurring in Czechoslovakia were revisionism, but simply of the same variety as what the Soviets were already doing? It led from there somewhere to condemning the Brezhnev Doctrine for the same reasons you've elucidated.

There probably are, the main issue being their accessibility (lack of translation, unscanned documents and the sort), it seems most attacks on stalinist revisionism were directed at the SU and Yugoslavia, which flirted with the west and was usually at odds with Albania. The attacks on soviet revisionism could be applied to the states that were more soviet satellite-like, since most of their policies probably mimicked the Soviet Union's.
I think it's safe to assume that the Maoists were on the same anti-revisionist line as the Albanians (including here foreign pro-albanian parties) since before the Sino-Albanian split, which started around 1972 and four years after the invasion of Czechoslovakia, there weren't many ideological disagreements. They probably, as you said, denounced the deviations of the Czechoslovaks as much as the Soviets', that much seems to be true on the works after the fact:
Communist Party of Great Britain denounces Soviet Revisionist Renegade Clique's Armed Aggression on Czechoslovakia
[...] in terms of betrayal the real interests of the working people of Czechoslovakia there is nothing to choose between Novotny and Dubcek; but the latter incurred the wrath of the soviet leadership by trying to obtain additional economic advantages for his own faction through dealing directly with the western imperialist countries. It stresses: “as between the soviet revisionist leadership which has betrayed world socialism and the Czechoslovak revisionist leadership which has betrayed socialism in Czechoslovakia, the Communist Party of Britain (ML) does not support either as the lesser of two evils. That would be like the revisionist Communist Party of Great Britain ’urging its members to support the Labour party as a lesser evil than the Tory party when they are both parties of British imperialism and enemies of the working class. We utterly repudiate all revisionists everywhere. Our support is for the working people of the Soviet Union who under Lenin’s leadership made the October Revolution and will surely rise up against the revisionist faction which has betrayed them and their proletarian brothers all over the world. Our support is for the working people of Czechoslovakia who will surely learn from their recent experiences to denounce their own revisionist leaders, whether old-style Novotny or new-style Dubcek and re-establish the dictatorship of the proletariat so that their country can go forward in the great company of the peoples of China and Albania and all others who firmly reject the vicious exploitative system of capitalism and take the socialist road away from the exploitation in any form of man by man.”

Defeat USSR Imperialism-Czechoslovak Revisionism
[...]In the first place, the Soviets have abandoned socialism themselves. And second, the Soviets collude with the U.S. The Novotny clique had already destroyed socialism in Czechoslovakia. The struggle between the Novotny gang and the Dubcek clique was over which imperialist power the Czechs should be allied to. Novotny and Co. to the Soviets – Dubcek and Co. to the U.S. and West Germany. If the Novotny gang had been building socialism in Czechoslovakia it wouldn’t have aligned with the Soviets, and the door would have been slammed shut to counterrevolutionary action. Further, a socialist state would not surrender; it would organize armed struggle against an imperialist invasion.
The Dubcek clique was able to rally sections of the people to its banner because democratic centralism in Czechoslovakia had been reduced to centralism-fascism. Consequently, the new clique was able to exploit the grievances of the people and manipulate many to win power for themselves. Rest assured, if any Marxist-Leninist activity were to arise in Czechoslovakia both cliques would do their best to stamp it out ruthlessly. To be a Marxist-Leninist in the Soviet Union or in Czechoslovakia today would mean risking one’s life.

Peking Review: Soviet Revisionists Cooked Up Trety for Long-Term Military Occupation of Czechoslovakia
The Soviet revisionist renegade clique has recently forced the Czechoslovak revisionist clique to sign the Soviet-Czechoslovak treaty [...] This is another dirty deal the Soviet revisionist clique has made with the Czechoslovak revisionists at a time when it finds itself frustrated in its attempts to subjugate the Czechoslovak people [...] In the first half of October, the Soviet revisionist clique twice summoned Dubcek, Cernik and other Czechoslovak revisionist chieftains to Moscow [...] The treaty unscrupulously tramples on Czechoslovak sovereignty and reduces the country to a virtual vassalage of Soviet revisionist social-imperialism [...] Threatened by the bayonets of the Soviet revisionists, the Czechoslovak revisionist clique went further in its shameless betrayal of the Czechoslovak people. It meticulously carried out the “communique on the talks” and repeatedly urged the Czechoslovak people to yield to the Soviet revisionists. At the same time, under strong pressure from the Czechoslovak people’s resistance and in order to maintain its own ruling position, the Czechoslovak revisionist clique put up some resistance to certain dictates of the Soviet revisionists. Though they made use of it, the Soviet revisionists did not feel too sure of the Dubcek clique. Therefore, they racked their brains to rig up a new cast of more obedient puppets. The struggle in this regard, open and secret, between the Soviet and Czechoslovak revisionists has never ceased for a minute. [...]


As you can see they do not hold back on any of the cliques.
Now, I'm far from a Hoxhaist (like, not at all) but I've been finding this current quite fascinating for some reason, if only they had been as critical with themselves :grin:
If you are interested on more sources on either this subject or other typical "anti-revisionist" issues you might get something from the anti-revisionist archive: marxists.org -> /history/erol/erol.htm
That's pretty much it for the "anti-revisionist" camp.

When it comes to the "Non-aligned" "socialists" a la Tito or Ceaucescu (neither completely pro-soviet nor "anti-revisionist"), I'm not sure that as many documents that happen to be translated can be easily found, but who knows.

[Cicero]

Thanks man, I really appreciate this. I'm broadly familiar with the Cold War relations of the various "socialist" countries, but it's always interesting to get a deeper insight into how exactly they viewed the more nuanced issues arising between them. Interesting that they found themselves criticizing the Czechoslovakians and Soviets together as revisionists prior to events, but deeming the Soviets the greater concern later on through the interventionist Brezhnev Doctrine - even if they then rushed to make clear that the Czechs are just as bad all the same :lol::lol:

[Ismail]

The response of China and Albania to the entry of Warsaw Treaty troops into Czechoslovakia was more than a little hysterical. The Chinese compared it to the infamous "Rape of Nanking" while the Albanians compared it to Hitler's march into the Sudetenland. It also coincided with a move in Chinese and Albanian polemics from condemning the CPSU as revisionist to claiming that capitalism had actually been restored in the USSR and that it was an imperialist power no different from the USA, which had disastrous consequences for China's foreign policy in the 1970s as it allied with Pinochet, Mobutu, the Shah of Iran, and pretty much every other anti-Soviet force including even NATO against "Soviet social-imperialism" and "Soviet social-fascism."

Another silly thing about the polemics is the constant recourse to "national sovereignty" as a reason to oppose the entry of troops from other Warsaw Treaty signatories. This was stressed even more so in Yugoslav and Romanian condemnations. The Soviets, following Lenin, said that the issue of sovereignty must be assessed from a class standpoint. The overthrow of socialism in Czechoslovakia would have threatened all the other signatories of the Warsaw Treaty, including (even if they didn't realize this at the time) Romania, Yugoslavia and Albania. The USSR did not intervene to safeguard any "imperialist" interests in Czechoslovakia, nor did it impose anything on that country other than the removal of Dubček and his supporters. Considering that Dubček, Ota Šik, and other advocates of "socialism with a human face" became open anti-communists by the 1980s and were cited by Gorbachev as inspiring his own policies, I can't much validity in the Chinese, Albanian, Romanian or Yugoslav attacks on the USSR for what it did. The Cuban analysis was much more even-handed, pointing to its necessity as well as regretting that the only option left (after Dubček ignored the warnings of every other party) was to militarily intervene.