pose and combat the imperialists’ arms expansion and
war preparations, it is necessary to put forward the
‘proposal for general disarmament. Furthermore, it
is possible to cempel imperialism to accept some kind

agreement on disarmament through the combined
struggle of the socialist countries and the people of

-

If one regards general and complete disarmament
‘as the fundamental road to world peace, spreads the
illusion that imperialism will automatically. lay down
its arms and tries to liquidate the revolutionary strug-
gles of the oppressed peoples and nations on the pre-
text of disarmament, then this is deliberately to de-
ceive the people of the world and help the imperial-
ists in their policies of aggression and war.

In order to overcome the present ideological confu-
‘Sion in the international working-class movement on
the question of war and peace, we consider that
‘Lenin's thesis, which has been discarded by the modern
revisionists, must be restored in the interest of com-
bating the imperialist policies of aggression and war

and defending world peace.

‘The <a of the world universally demand the
prevention of a new world war. And it is possible to
— a new y world war.

: The question then is, what is the way to secure
world peace? According to the Leninist viewpoint,
world peace can be won only by the struggles of the
‘people in all countries and not by begging the im-
perialists for it. World peace can only be effectively
defended by relying on the development of the forces

the socialist camp, on the revolutionary struggles

the proletariat and working people of all countries,

the liberation struggles of the oppressed nations
and on the struggles of all peace-loving people and

Such is the Leninist policy. Any policy to the con-
trary definitely will not lead to world peace but will
- encourage the ambitions of the imperialists and

24 recent ‘years, pertin persons have been spreading
the argument that a single spark from a war of na-
tional liberation or from a revolutionary people’s war
will lead to a world age oay destroying the whole

Sie aes tik tect eee to what these persons
say, the wars of national liberation and the revolu-
tionary people’s wars that have occurred since World

II have not led to world war. The victory of
revolutionary wars has directly weakened the
forces of imperialism and greatly strengthened the
forces which prevent the imperialists from launching

‘world war and which defend world peace. Do not

facts demonstrate the absurdity of this argument?

The complete banning and destruction of nuclear
» is an important task in the struggle to defend
. er tm ao this oe.

Nuclear weapons are unprecedentedly destructive,

which is why for more than a decade now the U.S.

imperialists have been pursuing their policy of nuclear
blackmail in order to realize their ambition of enslav-
ee ee ee oe

_ But -when the imperialists threaten other countries
with nuclear weapons, they subject the people in their
ow | country to the same threat, thus arousing them
gainst nuclear weapons and against the imperialist
policies of aggression and war. At the same time, in
‘their vain hope of destroying their opponents with
nucle; ‘woepbree the Gneseialists stein Seeaiherting
RED ES SE ae SE : :

indeed exist. However, if the imperialists are forced
‘to accept an agreement to ban nuclear weapons, it
decidedly will not be because of their “love for hu-
— celia 8 ws ha eae i Si

of all countries and for the sake of their own vital
interests.

_In contrast to the imperialists, socialist countries rely
upon the righteous strength of the people and on their
own correct policies, and have no need whatever .to
gamble with nuclear weapons in the world arena. So-
cialist countries have nuclear weapons solely in order
to defend themselves and to prevent imperialism from
launching a nuclear war.

In the view of Marxist-Leninists, the people are the
makers of history. In the present, as in the past, man is
the decisive factor. Marxist-Leninists attach importance
to the role of technological change, but it is wrong to
belittle the role of man and exaggerate the role of
technology.

The emergence of nuclear weapons can neither arrest
the progress of human history nor save the imperialist
system from its doom, any more than the emergence
of new techniques could save the old systems from
their doom in the past.

The emergence of nuclear weapons does not and
cannot resolve the fundamental contradictions in the
contemporary world, does not and cannot alter the
law of class struggle, and does not and cannot puanes
the nature of imperialism and reaction.

' It cannot, therefore, be said that with the emergence
of nuclear weapons the possibility and the necessity
of social and national revolutions have disappeared, or
the basic principles of Marxism-Leninism, and especi-
ally the theories of proletarian revolution and the dicta-
torship of the proletariat and of war and peace, have
become outmoded and changed into stale “dogmas.”

16. -°- =

It was Lenin who advanced the thesis that it is pos-
sible for the socialist countries to practise peaceful
coexistence with the capitalist countries. It is well
known that after the great Soviet people had repulsed
foreign armed intervention the Communist Party of
the Soviet Union and the Soviet government, led first
by Lenin and then by Stalin, consistently pursued the
policy of peaceful coexistence and that they were forced
to wage a war of self-defense only when Ses by
the German imperialists.

Since its founding, the People's Republic of China too

has consistently pursued the policy of peaceful coexis-
tence with countries having different social systems,
and it is China which inisiatet the Five Principles of
Peaceful Coexistence.

However, a few years ago certain persons suddenly
claimed Lenin’s policy of peaceful coexistence as their
own “great discovery.” They maintain that they have a
monopoly on the interpretation of this policy. They

treat “peaceful coexistence” as if it were an all-inclu-

sive, mystical book from, heaven and attribute to it
every success the people of the world achieve by strug-
gle. What is more, they label all who disagree with
their distortions of Lenin’s views as opponents of
peaceful coexistence, as people completely ignorant of
Lenin and Leninism, and as heretics deserving to be
burnt at the stake.

How ‘can the Chinese Communists agree with this

view and practice? They cannot, it is impossible.

Lenin’s principle.of peaceful coexistence is Ey clear

and readily comprehensible by ordinary people. Peace-

ful coexistence designates a relationship between coun-

tries with different social systems, and must not be
interpreted as one pleases. It should never be extended

to apply to the relations between oppressed and op-

pressor nations, between oppressed and oppressor
countries or between oppressed and oppressor clas-
ses, and never be described as the main content of the
transition from capitalism to socialism, still less
should it be asserted that peaceful coexistence is man-
kind’s road to socialism. The reason is that it is one
thing to practise peaceful coexistence between countries
with different social systems. It is absolutely impermis-

sible and impossible for countries practising peaceful

coexistence to touch even a hair of each other's social
system. The class struggle, the struggle for national

liberation and the transition from capitalism to soc

ism in various countries are quite another thing. The
are all bitter, life-and-death revolutionary strugglt

which aim at changing the social system. Peaceful c
existence cannot replace the revolutionary struggles
the people. The transition from capitalism to sociali
in any country can only be brought about through
proletarian revolution and the dictatorship ol
proletariat in that country.

In thé application of the policy of peaceful coext
tence, struggles. between the socialist and imperiali
countries are unavoidable in the political, econom

_and ideological spheres, and it is absolutely impossiD!

to have “all-round cooperation.”

It is necessary for the socialist countries to eng
in negotiations of one kind or another with the impé
ialist countries. It is possible to reach certain ag
ments through negotiation by relying on the cor
policies of the socialist countries and on the press u
of the people of all countries. But necessary com
mises between the socialist countries and the im
ialist countries do not require the oppressed peo
and nations to follow suit and compromise with im
ialism and its lackeys. No one should ever demand
the name of peaceful coexistence that the oppre
peoples and nations should give up their revolution
struggles. .

The application of the policy of peaceful coexistent?
by the socialist countries is advantageous for achiev!
a peaceful international environment for socialist
struction, for exposing the imperialist policies
aggression and war and for isolating the imper
forces of aggression and war. But if the general
of the foreign policy of the socialist countries is
fined to peaceful coexistence, then it is impossibl

handle correctly either the relations between social

countries or those between the socialist countries —
the oppressed peoples and nations. Therefore it is w

to make peaceful coexistence the general line of

foreign policy of the socialist countries.

In our view, the general line of the foreign policy
the socialist countries should have the following
tent: to develop relations of friendship, mutual
tance and cooperation among the countries in
socialist camp in accordance with the principle
proletarian internationalism; to strive for peac
coexistence on the basis of the Five Principles
countries having different social systems and op)
the imperialist policies of aggression and war; an
support and assist the revolutionary struggles of
the oppressed peoples and nations. These three asp
are interrelated and indivisible, and not a single
can be omitted.

.

17

For a very long hisiorical period after the prole
takes power, class struggle continues as an obj
law independent of man’s will, differing only in
from what it was before the taking of power.

After the October Revolution, Lenin pointed ot
number of times that:

(a) The overthrown exploiters always try in a
sand and one ways to recover the “paradise” they.
been deprived of.

(b) New elements of capitalism are constantl

“spontaneously generated in the petty-bourgeois a

phere.

(c) Political degenerates and new bourgeois ele
may emerge in tthe ranks of the working clas
among government functionaries as a result of |
geois influence and the pervasive, SpErUp ng atmospP}
of the petty bourgeoisie.

(d) The external conditions for the continuance
class struggle within a socialist country are en
ment by international capitalism, the impe
threat of armed intervention and their subversi
Hpues to accomplish peaceful disintegration.

ie hele confirmed these conclusions of