we are afraid of trouble and want to avoid complications nor should we enter into negotiations with our minds in a haze. We should be firm in principle; we should also have all the flexibility permissible and necessary for carrying out our principles. (Mao Tse-tung, Selected Works, FLPH, Peking, IV, p. 372.)

Internationally, in struggling against imperialism and reaction, the Chinese communists take the same correct attitude toward negotiations. In October 1951 Comrade Mao Tse-tung had this to say about the Korean armistice negotiations. "We have long said that the Korean question should be settled by peaceful means. This still holds good now. So long as the U.S. Government is willing to settle the question on a just and reasonable basis and will stop using every shameless means possible to wreck and obstruct the progress of the negotiations as it has done in the past, success in the Korean armistice negotiation is possible; otherwise it is impossible." (People's Daily, October 24, 1951.) Resolute struggle against the U.S. imperialists compelled them to accept the Korean armistice agreement in the course of negotiations. We took an active part in the 1954 Geneva conference and contributed to the restoration of peace in Indochina.

We are in favour of negotiations even with the United States, which has occupied our territory of Taiwan. The Sino-U.S. ambassadorial talks have been going on for more than eight years now.

We took an active part in the 1961 Geneva conference on the Laotian question and promoted the signing of the Geneva agreements respecting the independence and neutrality of Laos.

Do the Chinese communists allow themselves alone to negotiate with imperialist countries while opposing negotiations by the leaders of the CPSU with the leaders of the imperialist countries?

No, of course not. In fact, we have always actively supported all such negotiations by the Soviet Government with imperialist countries as are beneficial and not detrimental to the defence of world peace.

Comrade Mao Tse-tung said on May 14, 1960: We support the holding of the summit conference whether or not this sort of conference yields achievements, or whether the achievements are big or small. But the winning of world peace should depend primarily on resolute struggle by the people of all countries. (People's Daily, May 15, 1960.)

We favour negotiations with imperialist countries. But it is absolutely impermissible to pin hope for world peace on negotiations, to spread illusions about them and thereby paralysing the fighting will of the peoples, as Khrushchev has done.

Actually, Khrushchev's wrong approach to negotiations is itself harmful to negotiations. The more Khrushchev retreats before the imperialists and the more he begs, the more the appetite of the imperialists will grow. Khrushchev, who poses as the greatest devotee of negotiations in history, is always an unrequited lover and too often a laughing-stock. Countless historical facts have shown that imperialists and reactionaries never care to save the face of capitulationists. To sum up, our difference with the leaders of the CPSU on the question of war and peace is one between two different lines-whether or not to oppose imperialism, whether or not to support revolutionary

struggles, whether or not to mobilise the people of the world against the imperialist war plots and whether or not to adhere to MarxismLeninism....* *

*NOTE BY SUBCOMMITTEE STAFF.-More currently, the harsh Chinese Communist manner of expression in relations with the Soviet Union is manifested in statements of protest against an alleged Soviet violation of the northeastern Chinese border on March 2, 1969, which led to a clash of arms. A Peking Radio broadcast linked that bloody clash to Soviet maneuvers to exert its influence over Communist Parties in Eastern Europe and elsewhere. The Peking broadcast said:

The Soviet revisionist renegade clique

has not only succeeded the

czar, but has proved more sinister and evil than the czar, infringing upon and
violating the sovereignty of East European countries in an attempt to build
a social colonial empire.

...

It marched its troops into Czechoslovakia in an attempt to occupy the country forever. It has set up organizations to control the finances and economy of East European countries in the name of cooperation, and to plunder their national resources

It is trying to turn the Soviet Union into a larger colonial empire than the Russian Empire under the czar, and colluding with U.S. imperialism to dominate the world.

[From Article in commemoration of the 20th anniversary of victory in the Chinese People's war of resistance against Japan, People's Daily, September 3, 1965]

LONG LIVE THE VICTORY OF PEOPLE'S WAR*

By Marshal Lin Piao

(Vice-Chairman of the Chinese Communist Party; Minister of Defense)

Of the innumerable anti-imperialist wars waged by the Chinese people in the past hundred years, the War of Resistance Against Japan was the first to end in complete victory. It occupies an extremely important place in the annals of war, in the annals of both the revolutionary wars of the Chinese people and the wars of the oppressed nations of the world against imperialist aggression.

It was a war in which a weak semi-colonial and semi-feudal country triumphed over a strong imperialist country.

How was it possible for a weak country finally to defeat a strong country? How was it possible for a seemingly weak army to become the main force in the war?

The basic reasons were that the War of Resistance Against Japan was a genuine people's war led by the Communist Party of China and Comrade Mao Tse-tung, a war in which the correct Marxist-Leninist political and military lines were put into effect, and that the Eighth Route and New Fourth Armies were genuine people's armies which applied the whole range of strategy and tactics of people's war as formulated by Comrade Mao Tse-tung.

*NOTE BY SUBCOMMITTEE STAFF.-The significance of this statement by Marshal Lin Piao has been variously interpreted by Western scholars and officials.

Secretary of State Rusk testified on March 16, 1966, to a Subcommittee of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs:

Last fall, Lin Piao, the Chinese Communist Minister of Defense, recapitulated in a long article Peiping's strategy of violence for achieving Communist domination of the world. This strategy involves the mobilization of the underdeveloped areas of the world-which the Chinese Communists compare to the "rural areas"-against the industrialized or "urban" areas. It involves the relentless prosecution of what they call "people's wars.' The final stage of all this violence is to be what they frankly describe as "wars of annihilation." It is true that this doctrine calls for revolution by the natives of each country. In that sense it may be considered a "do-it-yourself kit." But Peiping is prepared to train and indoctrinate the leaders of these revolutions and to support them with funds, arms, and propaganda, as well as politically. It is even prepared to manufacture these revolutionary movements out of whole cloth.

Professor Donald Zagoria testified on March 21, 1966, to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations:

In fact, a cardinal point of Lin Piao's message is the Vietcong and other Communist revolutionaries throughout the world must make their revolutions on their own, that they should not count on Chinese or any other outside assistance. Far from giving notice of any intention to intervene aggressively, Lin Piao is rationalizing Peking's unwillingness to go to the aid of the Vietcong, in a struggle which-let there be no doubt-the Chinese Communists regard as just and which is taking place on their very borders.

Comrade Mao Tse-tung's theory of and policies for people's war have creatively enriched and developed Marxism-Leninism. The Chinese people's victory in the anti-Japanese war was a victory_for people's war, for Marxism-Leninism and the thought of Mao Tsetung.

Today, the U.S. imperialists are repeating on a worldwide scale the past actions of the Japanese imperialists in China and other parts of Asia. It has become an urgent necessity for the people in many countries to master and use people's war as a weapon against U.S. imperialism and its lackeys. In every conceivable way U.S. imperialism and its lackeys are trying to extinguish the revolutionary flames of people's war. The Khrushchev revisionists, fearing people's war like the plague, are heaping abuse on it. The two are colluding to prevent and sabotage people's war. In these circumstances, it is of vital practical importance to review the historical experience of the great victory of the people's war in China and to recapitulate Comrade Mao Tse-tung's theory of people's war.

THE PRINCIPAL CONTRADICTION IN THE PERIOD OF THE WAR OF RESISTANCE AGAINST JAPAN AND THE LINE OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF CHINA

In the summer of 1937 Japanese imperialism unleased its allout war of aggression against China. The nation-wide War of Resistance thus broke out.

Could the War of Resistance be victorious? And how was victory to be won? These were the questions to which all the Chinese people demanded immediate answers.

The defeatists came forward with the assertion that China was no match for Japan and that the nation was bound to be subjugated. The blind optimist came forward with the assertion that China could win very quickly, without much effort.

Basing himself on a concrete analysis of the Chinese nation and of Japanese imperialism-the two aspects of the principal contradiction -Comrade Mao Tse-tung showed that while the "theory of national subjugation" was wrong, the "theory of quick victory" was untenable, and he concluded that the War of Resistance would be a protracted one in which China would finally be victorious.

In his celebrated work On Protracted War, Comrade Mao Tse-tung pointed out the contrasting features of China and Japan, the two sides in the war. Japan was a powerful imperialist country. But Japanese imperialism was in its era of decline and doom. The war it had unleashed was a war of aggression, a war that was retrogressive and barbarous; it was deficient in manpower and material resources and could not stand a protracted war; it was engaged in an unjust cause and therefore had meagre support internationally. China, on the other hand, was a weak semi-colonial and semi-feudal country. But she was in her era of progress. She was fighting a war against aggression, a war that was progressive and just; she had sufficient manpower and material resources to sustain a protracted war; internationally, China enjoyed extensive sympathy and support. These comprised all the basic factors in the Sino-Japanese war.

He went on to show how these factors would influence the course of the war. Japan's advantage was temporary and would gradually diminish as a result of our efforts. Her disadvantages were fundamental; they could not be overcome and would gradually grow in the course of the war. China's disadvantage was temporary and could be gradually overcome. China's advantages were fundamental and would play an increasingly positive role in the course of the war. Japan's advantage and China's disadvantage determined the impossibility of quick victory for China. China's advantages and Japan's disadvantages determined the inevitability of Japan's defeat and China's ultimate victory.

On the basis of this analysis Comrade Mao Tse-tung formulated the strategy for a protracted war. China's War of Resistance would be protracted, and prolonged efforts would be needed gradually to weaken the enemy's forces and expand our own, so that the enemy would change from being strong to being weak and we would change from being weak to being strong and accumulate sufficient strength finally to defeat him. Comrade Mao Tse-tung pointed out that with the change in the balance of forces between the enemy and ourselves the War of Resistance would pass through three stages, namely, the strategic defensive, the strategic stalemate and the strategic offensive. The protracted war was also a process of mobilizing, organizing and arming the people. It was only by mobilizing the entire people to fight a people's war that the War of Resistance could be persevered in and the Japanese aggressors defeated. . . .

The concrete analysis of concrete conditions and the concrete resolution of concrete contradictions are the living soul of Marxism-Leninism. Comrade Mao Tse-tung has invariably been able to single out the principal contradiction from among a complexity of contradictions, analyse the two aspects of this principal contradiction concretely and, "pressing on irresistibly from this commanding height", successfully solve the problem of understanding and handling the various contradictions.

It was precisely on the basis of such scientific analysis that Comrade Mao Tse-tung correctly formulated the political and military lines for the people's war during the War of Resistance Against Japan, developed his thought on the establishment of rural base areas and the use of the countryside to encircle the cities and finally capture them, and formulated a whole range of principles and policies, strategy and tactics in the political, military, economic and cultural fields for the carrying out of the people's war. It was this that ensured victory in the War of Resistance and created the conditions for the nation-wide victory of the new-democratic revolution. . .

RELY ON THE PEASANTS AND ESTABLISH RURAL BASE AREAS

The War of Resistance Against Japan was in essence a peasant revolutionary war led by our Party. By arousing and organizing the peasant masses and integrating them with the proletariat, our Party created a powerful force capable of defeating the strongest enemy.

To rely on the peasants, build rural base areas and use the countryside to encircle and finally capture the cities-such was the way to victory in the Chinese revolution.