ice Of American imperialist practice
her.
a U.S. pursues its changed course
China because, as Carter’s foreign
icy advisor, Brezhinski said, the U.S.
‘®s this as part of “a fundamental shift
~ world political relationships,’’ Soviet
‘Ader Brezhnev aptly called it the
Qhinese card’’, which the U.S. hopes
“th be used to shift the balance of forces
vay from peace, progress, indepen-

nce and socialism and into the camp of

tperialism.

Men Should have no illusions here

r: that is their aim. Whether they
accomplish that aim is a separate
ry entirely. But that is the purpose of
§ realignment.
esident Carter has declared that in-

re are no evil intentions against the
viet Union, that this is merely ‘‘nor-
‘Alization” between China and the
AA. ;

_ As far as we are concerned, we favor,
Wi have favored for many years, nor-
‘lization: and diplomatic relations be-
een Canada and China. We fought for
ly, campaigned on this issue and wel-.
‘med it when it happened. At the same
Ne we cautioned against it being mis-
Ad or abused.

Normalization between the U.S. and

-Quld have taken 30 years is an open
-x&stion. Why is the U.S. not normaliz-
t relations with Vietnam? Why is it not
‘malizing relations with Cuba?
‘The answer is obvious: Cuba doesn’t
“\y the knee to imperialism. Cuba
sn’t give up support for the national-
" kration struggle. Vietnam continues to
Aid a socialist system and to assist the
jonal-liberation movements and
Ans itself with the USSR and the
alist community of states. They have
Be cokes. anti-imperialist position and
“tod in the way of imperialism and its

Avers in Asia, That’s why U.S. im-°

‘Nalism is hostile to them, and toward
“tyid socialism.

Xe the U.S. now modifies its position
Wards China it’s because China has
Agified its. basic position. This should
\ be forgotten.

U.S. imperialism sees this develop-
Ant as perhaps one of the most signi-
“Ant in the post-war period — a shift
Yay, a change of relationship of forces
\g world scale. But they are calling the
Ne before the situation is there for them

Qt

ives it undertakes today is an éxpres-
An of its forced retreat.

| :

>

rnize its army.

ar as his government is concerned ~

‘Aina isa good thing providing it is not
ed against other countries. Why it -

‘\mperialism is in retreat and part of the

eo ®

, hopes the imperialist powers will make extensive credits available and help

a a eS eS

Q. Some argue that the United States
has given a little, too, on the issue of
Taiwan.

A: It’s asmall price to pay. Its actions
on Taiwan are like its action in some
other countries where it will sell out its
allies for a larger gain — which it did with
the Shah of Iran. This, of course, shows
the unprincipled position of the U.S.
administration.

The other side of the coin is that this is
part of the deal with the Chinese Maoists.
There was a deal. The U.S. agreed to
break~ off diplomatic relations with
Taiwan. On the surface there seems to be
amovement to have Taiwan become part
of China — but in actual fact this is not
likely to occur. China appears to have
agreed to a two-China policy. It has
recognized the USA’s special rights in
Taiwan.

What we see today is a bit of a poker
game in which each side gave something.
What U.S. imperialism received, how-
ever, was much more than what China
received, much more. The Chinese lead-
ers appear to have made far reaching
political and economic concessions to
U.S. imperialism.

Part of the terrible consequences of the’

wrong line pursued by the Chinese can
be seen in their hostility toward Vietnam.

. They have used the Pol Pot regime in
- Kampuchea as a means to try to force

Vietnam to change its internal policy and
its foreign policy — to break relations
with the socialist community and particu-
larly with the Soviet Union.

China wishes to prevent Vietnam from
asserting itself as a sovereign, indepen-
dent state. It armed the Pol Pot regime
with the aim of preventing a solution of
the border question between Vietnam

’ and Kampuchea and to provoke a con-

flict if possible. The border was to be a
“bleeding ulcer’ to be manipulated by it
in pursuit of its aims. . an
China has broken trade relations with
Vietnam. It has used the Vietnamese
people of Chinese descent to create pres-
sures on the Vietnamese- government

and people. It is interesting to note that ©

China has nothing to say about the
Chinese living in the capitalist world,
where they are exploited and face dis-
crimination. The Hoa question was
raised by them to influence the over 20
million: Chinese in South East Asia and
use them in turn as a fifth column against
governments they oppose.

Why is Vietnam the victim of this hos-
tile attitude? Because it undertook to
nationalize industry which is an essential
element if you want to build a socialist
system. And it nationalized industry
which in the main was owned by Viet-
namese of Chinese descent. Large-scale

> "7?

industry owned by Vietnamese was also
nationalized. :
The Chinese Maoists defend these
wealthy mandarins but close their eyes to
the. exploitation of Chinese workers in

’ the capitalist world. This is part of their

classless positions.

Take the present furor over the **boat
people’’. They're not boat people.
You're not dealing with fishermen or
people who earn their living. They are
Vietnamese of Chinese descent, most of
them of middle class origin. Interesting-
ly, enough they don’t go to China. No
one points the finger and says ‘“‘Doesn't
China have a responsibility in this!”
Doesn’t U.S. imperialism have a respon-
sibility in this? They point at Vietnam
because in the capitalist world there is a
systematic effort by U.S. imperialism to
build up hostility toward Vietnam. This
is part ofimperialism’s aim to bring about
a shift in forces, to develop hostility to-
ward socialism and the liberation strug-
gle. This may include their direct
involvement in aggression against Viet-
nam.

They try-to develop hostility toward
the USSR and the socialist camp because
together they are the guarantee, the

The USSR has no aims
detrimental to China’s
interests. Its aim has
always been to ensure
China would be a part of
the world socialist system,

strong point, for those who want to build
a socialist system, for those who would
maintain world peace, for those who
would achieve their economic, national
and social liberation.

[ESRSRCE Se oS eR ES

Q. Some journalists have described the
last four years in Cambodia as a “‘laborat-
ory for the Chinese cultural revolution’’.
Do you think that’s a fair comment?

A: Yes, I think that is a good way to

. put it. I think that’s the end result of a

kind of Maoist ‘‘cultural revolution”
being exported to other countries with all
its barbaric consequences. What you had
in Kampuchea were acts of genocide.

' When in Vietnam last summer, my
wife and I visited a Kampuchean refugee
camp which housed 9,000 people. These
people had fled because of the barbarity
of the Pol Pot regime. We held a meeting
and heard their stories. Women spoke
about the problems they faced — they
couldn’t marry the person they loved,
the state decided whom they would mar-

- ry. Families were separated, the people

driven out of the cities and into the coun-
tryside. Teachers described the closing
of schools, farmers talked about the
hardships in the.countryside.

When I spoke I said this is not
socialism, it has nothing to do with
scientific socialism. This is barbarism.
And that was and is the truth of it. The
speedy collapse of the Pol Pot regime
illustrates how little support it had in
Kampuchea.

Q. If the Chinese strategy is based on
the so-called “threat from the north’’,

would you outline the position of the Soviet -

Union toward China — not only today’s
position but over the years.

A: The Soviet Union’s position has
always been a position of principle. It has
opposed and combated the wrong
ideological views of the Maoists; it
criticized the ‘‘great leap’? and was
proven correct. It criticized the “cultural
revolution” which was one of the
blackest pages of Chinese history. Now
some sections of the Chinese leadership
are compelled to recognize this as well.

>

It criticized Maoism as being anti-
Marxist, anti-Leninist. Everything that
has happened has proven to the hilt the
soundness of that criticism, even though
there were some progressive-minded
people in Canada and elsewhere’ who
may have thought that the USSR was
being too sharp or that what was in-
volved was’a personal conflict.

There was no personality conflict in-
yolved. What was involved was: Which
way will China go? Will it go toward the
building of a socialist system based on
cooperation with the socialist world, or
will it go into an alliance it is now moving
toward — collusion with imperialism
against socialism, against the national-
liberation movements and against the
working class in the capitalist world?

This question is not yet resolved de-
spite the dangerous positions of the
Maoist leadership. There is a continuing
struggle in China. It would be an illusion
to think that the struggle for power in
China is over. There is a continuing
power struggle taking place. The last
Central Committee meeting suggested
that a sort of compromise was reached
between two contending forces repre-
senting different currents.

This is a temporary stalemate. The
struggle will develop further because
both internal and external factors will
stimulate it. The dangerous course being
taken by China will stimulate internal
opposition to it because it is a dead-end
policy which can bring no good to China
and will undermine whatever elements of
socialism havé been developed and
create great dangers internationally.

The Soviet Union’s position has been
two-fold: one, a principled ideolcgizal.
struggle against anti-Marxist-Leuiaist
conceptions combined with the necessity
of establishing good state relations be-
tween countries irrespective of differ-
ences they may have.

When the Maoists said they were pre-
pared to sit down with the USSR on the
basis of peaceful coexistence the USSR
agreed. But the Maoists then drew back.
The USSR told China if it fears the threat ©
of atomic war from the north they are
prepared to work out a treaty against the
use of nuclear weapons. China refused to
accept that.

_The Soviet Union, consistently, pa-
tiently and in a principled way continued
a struggle directed to show the world and
the Chinese people that it bears no hostil-
ity toward China. The USSR helped the
Chinese revolution to come to victory by
leaving all the Red Army’s weapons in
Manchuria following Japan’s defeat. It
insured that victory when it made billions
of roubles available, as did other socialist
countries, for China’s reconstruction.

The USSR has no aims detrimental to
China’s: interests. Its aim has always
been to ensure that China would be part
of the world socialist system.

The Chinese Maoists have preferred
to take their own course and have de-
veloped a rationale for it declaring there
is no socialist camp, that there is social-
imperialism — thus no socialism exists
except in China, a China, mind you, in
collusion with imperialism and with
NATO!

The end result of all this today is **Big
Mac’”’ and Maoism living side by side in
China. - Seals

And so, the Soviet Union's position
has been to combat wrong ideological
positions while striving to establish good
state relations. That still is the USSR’s
position, and that’s our position also.

We do not consider the ‘Situation in
China as being closed for all time. We
believe there are healthy forces in China
who will at some point assert themselves
and bring China back into the world
socialist camp and into the world com- .
munity of Communist and Workers’ Par-
ties united together in the struggle

‘against imperialism. woe

We believe this will develop. It will
take time for that to happen, but happen
it will.

PACIFIC TRIBUNE— FEBRUARY 9, 1979—Page 5