SSS Se ee ee

INTERVIEW WITH COMMUNIST LEADER

HINA'S AGGRESSION
MEANS ESCALATION
OF WAR DANGER

Following. the massive military inva-
sion of Vietnam by China on Feb. 17, the
Tribune interviewed William Kashtan,
general secretary of the Communist
Party of Canada, on his reaction to the
attack and its long-term and broader im-
plications for world peace.

* * *

Q: China claims its aggression against
Viemam is a ‘‘punitive action”. What is
your reaction to this?

A: When the Chinese leaders started
the invasion of Vietnam they said they
had “‘no territorial aims”’, that it was a
“‘punitive exercise’’ limited to a very
short time and space. Chinese vice pre-
mier Deng Xiaoping said it was directed
to ‘‘teach Vietnam a lesson’’, that the
punitive action was a limited one and
‘would not be extended or expanded in
any way’’.

This was over a week ago. They now
have more troops in Vietnam than U.S.
imperialism had at the height of its ag-
gression against Vietnam. Since then

Chinese leaders have stated they intend -

to correct the Chinese-Vietnamese bor-
der unilaterally.

Thus a so-called “‘punitive action” to
““teach Vietnam a lesson’ has turned
into large-scale occupation of Vietnam
while a limited war in time and space has
turned into a large-scale act of aggression
which can have extremely grave con-
sequences for peace, not only in South-
east Asia but in the world.

This day-by-day escalation of aggres-
sion against Vietnam is part of the
technique being used by the Chinese
colonialists to achieve their aims with a
minimum of opposition.

Canadians would make a serious error
were they to fall for this Chinese decep-

This act of aggression was prepared a
long time ago. To prepare for this, China
launched endless provocations on the
Sino-Vietnamese border and violated
that border 230 times this. year. Before
that, the Peking leadership used the Pol
Pot-Ieng Sary regime in Kampuchea to
attack Vietnam. The armed forces of
Kampuchea which were equipped with-
Chinese arms and guided by Chinese in-
structors, fought the Socialist Republic
of Vietnam. The aim here was to draw
Vietnam into a prolonged and exhausting
war, weaken it and prevent it from stand-
ing up to the pressures of the Maoist
leadership of China. This two front war
against Vietnam collapsed when the Pol
Pot-Ieng Sary regime collapsed.

Q: What was the purpose of these at-
tacks on Vietnam?

A: Peking did not like the emergence
of a united, independent and socialist
Vietnam. Neither did-it like the idea of a
group of independent states in Indochi-
na. The very existance of such states
constituted an obstacle to Peking’s ag-
gressive plans in Southeast Asia. Peking
opposed the very idea of a united Viet-
nam which stood in the way ofits plans of
expansionism and hegemonism.

Deng Xiaoping’s visit to Japan and to
the USA and the various agreements
signed with these countries were part of
the preparations for aggression against
Vietnam.

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—MARCH 9, 1979—Page 10

A: What is the role of the United States
in this aggression?

A: The USA is not an innocent by-
stander in the criminal act of aggression
by the Peking leaders. It knew of the
plans of the Chinese leaders but did no-
thing to stop them. Indeed, while Deng
Xiaoping declared the intention of China
to attack socialist Vietnam, the U.S.
government agreed to give strategic arms
to China. President Carter declared that
the ‘‘strategic interests and many goals
of the USA and China coincide’. At the
same time the U.S. government decided
to put the question of recognition of Vie-
tnam on the shelf and strove to prevent
U.S. business interests from going to
Vietnam. Even today, after almost two
weeks of Chinese aggression, after clear
declarations by the Chinese leadership of
their aims in Vietnam, the U.S. govern-
ment sent Treasury Secretary Blumen-
thal to Peking and the British Labor
government sent its representative to
Peking to discuss arms sales to China.

Where is the even-handedness and
neutrality the U.S. government claims to
adhere too? Obviously there is no neut-
rality. The U.S. government sides with
China in its aggression against socialist
Vietnam.

That this is so can be seen in the posi-
tion taken by the United States in the
United Nations Security Council. It calls
upon China and Vietnam to exercise
‘restraint’. It proposed a resolution cal-
ling upon China to withdraw fron Viet-
nam and Vietnam to withdraw from
Kampuchea. This is the so-called even-
handed way in which it covers up crimi-
nal Chinese aggression against a socialist
country.
~ One should not forget that it is not only
China which wishes to “‘teach Vietnam a
lesson’. The USA tried to do that for
years and failed. Now it is using China
for that purpose. Maintaining a high
moral tone U.S. imperialism, which has
troops all over the world and which to-

_day, through the voice of Defence Sec-

retary Schlesinger, declared its intention
to send its navy, air force and army into
the Middle East to uphold its “‘national
interests’, now dares to lecture Vietnam
on its alleged aggression in Kampuchea.
This is so much nonsense.

~Q: Would you comment on the West’s
effort to link China’s aggression against
Vietnam with Vietnam’s assistance to the
liberation struggle in Kampuchea?

A: Those who mix up two separate
events do so purposely. In Kampuchea a
civil war took place led by the United
Front for National Salvation. It over-
threw the Pol Pot regime and established
a new government. Vietnam gave sup-
port to the United Front for National
Salvation but that was not aggression. It
was support to a liberation struggle to get
rid of a barbaric regime doing enormous
harm to the Kampuchean people them-
selves. Vietnam now has a Treaty of
Friendship, Cooperation and Peace with
the Peoples Republic of Kampuchea.
This will ensure that border conflicts will
end and that Indochina can become an
area of peace, not conflict.

The systematic effort to counterpose
an act of liberation with an act of aggres-
sion is not accidental. This is a way of
justifying Chinese aggression and trying

to creat the impression that the changes
which took place in Kampuchea caused
the attack by China on Vietnam. This is
so much hogwash. Chinese Maoist aims
go beyond Vietnam. They are directed to
achieve hegemony in Southeast Asia and
well beyond it. This is the purpose of the
alliance the Chinese Maoists are striving
to effect with Japan, the USA and West-
em Europe.

It is prepared to act as a shock force for
imperialism against the Soviet Union,
Vietnam and the national liberation
movements. This is the aim of its call to
the USA, Japan and Western Europe for
a united front against socialism. Its ac-
tions are a direct threat to peace in the
world. China has betrayed the principles
of peace and cooperation as it has bet-
rayed the principles of socialism.

Q: The West seems to be conduting a
‘“‘business-as-usual”’ policy toward China

‘and, in some cases, even gloating over this

attack. What’s your view on this?

A: The media is making much of the
fact that ‘‘two communist states” are in
all out war, in order to denigrate social-
ism and show that not only imperialism,
but communism too, leads to war. If this
were true the world would be in a sorry
state.

China under Maoist leadership how-
ever has moved away from the basic
principles of socialism, indeed has
undermined socialism in China and
created the danger of capitalist restora-
tion in that country. The forces which are
presently at the helm of government,
state and Party are not Communists.
They are nationalists, petty bourgeois
radicals, whose policies are endangering
socialism in China and at the same time
threatening world peace. How can one
equate ‘‘we will punish. Vietnam” and
“*teach it a lesson’’ with Marxist-Lenin-
ist positions? This is the language of
imperialism. This is the language of those
who have lost their bearings and class
positions and have moved over to the
imperialist camp.

History will yet punish the Chinese
Maoists and teach them a lesson.

In the meantime, time waits for no
man. The dangerous actions of the Pek-
ing leadership which the whole world can

see, are still being supported by imperial- .

ism. In the name of trade it is preparing to
assist in the modernization of the armed
forces of China in the hope that thereby it
can tip the scales away from the forces of
peace, democracy, national liberation
and socialism and into the camp of
imperialism. It did that with Hitler. It is
now proposing to do that with the Peking
leadership despite the fact that Peking
speaks of the inevitability of war and
undertakes aggression. This is playing
with fire with vengeance. Even the To-
ronto Star was compelled to admit in an
editorial that ‘“‘this is political blindness
which the West may come to regret. The

perils before us are great, and if they -

come to our doorstep, at least some of
the blame will fall on our own leaders’’.

Q: What can Canadians do now to help
stop the war and pressure China to with-
draw from Vietnam?

A: The working class and democratic
forces, the trade union movement, all

‘Chinese troops leave Vietnam. They are

WILLIAM KASHTAN _

peace-loving Canadians, cannot leave i
to our leaders. They need to speak u
now in the strongest possible way to
compel China to get out of Vietnam.

They must compel the NDP and trade
union leaders-to speak up and break with ©
the Carter line of equating an act of liber-—
ation with an act of aggression. Parlia-
ment must be made to-speak up for an
end to Chinese aggression. The Cana-
dian government doesn’t come to the
present situation with clean hands. In- ~
stead of condemning Chinese aggression

it has called for a cease fire. ; i

Q: China has also proposed “talks”
with Vietnam on its so-called border
claims. What’s behind that? :

A: What do a cease fire or the latest |
maneouvres of the Chinese Maoists who”
say they want to negotiate mean in the”
present situation? It means to permit
Chinese occupation of Vietnam’s ter-—
ritory so it can use this to bargain. And
bargain for what? To foist another Pol
Pot regime on the Kampuchean people? -
To foist a Chinese puppet on the Laotian
people? ;

To force Vietnam to change its inter-
nal and external policies and break with
the socialist countries? To recognize the —
right of China to hegemony and
expansionist aims in Southeast Asia and ¢
elsewhere? To replace support for na-—
tional liberation by support for the —
Chinese Maoists ‘‘Three Worlds”’ ands
alliance with imperialism? :

The Vietnamese people will never
agree to this. ‘

They are prepared to negotiate once

not prepared to negotiate away their in-
dependence and territorial integrity or
their relations with other countries and
peoples. 4
They have learned from bitter experi- —
ence that ‘‘nothing is more precious than |
freedom and independence’. They
showed this in-their struggle against
French colonialism, against U.
imperialism, and they will likewise show —
this in their struggle against ‘chauvinism
and expansionism’’.
The Soviet Union which has a Treaty.
of Peace, Cooperation and Friendship
with Vietnam, other socialist countries,
the peace forces of the world which
helped Vietnam achieve victory over
U.S. imperialism, today stand with them —
in their determination to compel the
Chinese Maoists to get out of Vietnam. —
It is the duty and obligation of all
peace-loving Canadians, all who cherish —
the independence of Canada, to give all |
out support to the Vietnamese people in”
their unconquerable determination to de- _
fend the independence, sovereignty and
territorial integrity of their country. This”
we can do by making the demand ‘‘Get
Out Of Vietnam’’, “Hands Off Vietnam”
the demand of the overwhelming major-
ity of Canadians. .
Peace is in danger today arising from
Chinese aggression. While the struggle
takes place in Vietnam, Canada, like
other countries, is directly affected. Es-
calation of Chinese aggression means es-
calation of the war danger. The demand
that China get out of Vietnam uncon-
ditionally is an integral part of the fight
for peace and in defence ofisovereignty,
independence and territorial integrity.