The Khrushchevite revisionists have recently launched a major propagandist campaign to pose as firm supporters of tho heroic struggle of the Vietnamese people. They cried themselves hoarse claiming that they were real anti-imperialists, that woe to any who dared gainsay their word, that God only knows what they would not do if the imperialists failed to listen to their «threats»!
If one had not known who the Khrushchevite revisionists were and if people were judged by what they say rather than by what they do, this bombastic demagogy might have attained its objective. But such a thing cannot happen today. The liberation struggle in Viet Nam, the unflinching stand of the valiant and courageous Vietnamese people, their determination to achieve ultimate victory over the aggressors by all methods and means — all of these together have smashed not only the American imperialists’ but also the Khrushchevite revisionists’ hopes.
The stand towards Viet Nam has today become a matter of major importance, a matter of principle, an essential issue that serves as a criterion by which to tell friends from foes, revolutionaries from counter-revolutionaries, those who fight for socialism and peace from traitors and renegades, by which to judge which acts are to the interests of the powerful liberation movement and which acts are directed against it.
Through their opportunist and capitulating line, their treacherous attitude and acts towards the Vietnamese people, towards the higher interests of socialism and peace, the Khrushchevite revisionists have long placed themselves on the other side of the barricade. It has been amply proven that the new leaders of the Soviet Union have shown themselves willing to sacrifice the higher interests of the Vietnamese people, their blood and lives, for the sake of closer contact and collaboration with the United States. In all cases — and Viet Nam makes no exception — they are not ashamed to succumb to imperialist pressure, provided that their bargainings may, in one way or another, enter into Khrushchevite peaceful coexistence or into the orbit of Soviet-American collaboration. N. Khrushchev’s capitulation in the Cuban events is still very fresh in the memory of men. He was neither conscience-stricken nor ashamed when he proclaimed that this was a triumph of his policy of peaceful coexistence and when he held this out as a model of solving conflicts with imperialism in a wise way. The same thing is happening today with the stand of the Soviet revisionist leaders towards Viet Nam.
Khrushchevite revisionists knock at every door and turn every stone to oblige the Vietnamese people to accept the «peace» Johnson offers them. Posing as sincere friends of Viet Nam they plot together with the enemies of the Vietnamese people to rescue American imperialism from the inevitable defeat that awaits it. They have done and are doing their utmost to keep American military and political prestige from being affected, to preserve by all means the present international status quo at a time when American imperialism is continuing to keep whole peoples and regions of the world under bondage. They try, in a particular way, to avoid the military defeat of the United States in Viet Nam, which would turn to ashes and dust all myths of the Super-Powerful, of the decisive force of modem weapons, of the impossibility of national-liberation wars to triumph in the epoch of atoms, and, finally, of the Khrushchevite «peaceful coexistence» with imperialism, the foundation stone on which are based all the opportunist illusions of the capitulating policy of present day revisionism. And all this treacherous and capitulating line, which is the result of the further deepening of the ideological and political degeneration of Khrushchevite revisionism, the result of fear and servile kowtowing before imperialism, is couched, as all opportunists and renegades have made it their habit to do, in false revolutionary terms, in bombastic speeches, in hypocritical and cynic terms.
But every one notices that the problem to which the American imperialists attach least attention, not to say, no attention at all, is the anti-imperialist noise which the Soviet revisionists raise at present in connection with Viet Nam. Nearly every day Johnson makes speeches, grants numerous press conferences in order to justify his aggressive policy in Viet Nam or to oppose those who disapprove his acts. He smiles and threatens, he shows docility and brutality, as the case may require, he strives to intimidate the wavering and to persuade the dissidents. But in ail this stream of words of the American President or of his collaborators and even throughout the American press, one notes no uneasiness whatsoever about «the curses» and «threats» which the Khrushchevite revisionists level at them, or about the alleged supply of arms to Viet Nam by the Soviet Union, when some time ago the American President and the press of the USA raised a hue and cry about capturing in South Viet Nam.... a Chinese rifle. And in fact how can one account for all this placidity of the American imperialists in such a critical situation? It is not only logical but facts go to show that every act of the Soviet revisionists in the diplomatic and propagandistic field concerning Viet Nam is made in preliminary agreement with the United States.
Even prior to the visit to Viet Nam of the Soviet delegation headed by Kosigin, the new leaders of the Soviet Union had resorted to very significant gestures to show that their journey to the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam was not directed against the United States but against the People’s Republic of China, against the unity and compactness of the socialist countries of Asia. In their official statements before departure, the Soviet leaders made it very clear not only to the Americans but to others as well that their mission to Asia was directly connected with their plans cd sowing dissension and undermining the socialist camp and the international communist movement.
On the very first day that they replaced Khrushchev as head of the Party and of the Government of the Soviet Union the new leaders hurried to assure the United States of their unimpaired friendship which, as they affirmed, would be the basis of their foreign policy. For this friendship the Soviet leaders placed no conditions, no reserves, the Viet Nam problem did not even figure at first among the international problems which, they said, preoccupied them.
The Americans rebegan their bombardments on the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam when Kosigin was in Hanoi. At that time there were people among the uninformed who expressed the opinion that this was a demonstrative act directed against the Soviet Union and that this would compel the Soviet leaders to maintain a firm stand in favor of the anti-imperialist liberation war of the Vietnamese people. But very soon and in order to dismiss any misunderstanding and misinterpretation, the White House solemnly declared that these bombardments did not by any means affect Soviet American friendship and collaboration.
This was followed by the cruel suppression of student demonstrators in Moscow and Leningrad who protested bitterly against the bombardment of Viet Nam by the USA. This was another premeditated gesture of the Soviet leaders to assure Washington that, as far as the war in Viet Nam was concerned, they would go no further than issue lip service statements and general manifestations. Moreover, Khrushchevite revisionists gave official assurances to tiie United States that even in this they would not tolerate any gesture that might compromise, however little, their policy of getting closer to it.
An entirely friendly attitude is maintained by tile Soviet leaders towards such demonstrations of foreign students in the Soviet Union which are not contrary to the interests of their policy, as for instance the very recent manifestations of the Algerian students in Moscow. Such demonstrations, far from being suppressed, are encouraged by the Khrushchevite revisionists. Under these circumstances we say to the Algerian brothers: Hold your grounds with valor as in battle, for that is the only way that Algeria will triumph over the intrigues of foreigners. Our experience enables us to give full-mouthed expression to this great truth: Do not be intimidated, Algerian revolutionaries, by the pressures and blackmail of the imperialists and modem revisionists!
Today it has become clear that the aggravation and expansion of the war in Viet Nam is not only due to the policy of war and aggression of the American imperialists but also due to the policy of unprincipled compromises, capitulation and treason of the Khrushchevite revisionists.
The leaders of the Soviet Union continue to show full official disinterestedness in the legendary heroic struggle of the people of South Viet Nam. According to Khrushchev’s ways they consider this as a «dangerous hotbed of war» whose sparks must be quelled under all conditions lest they spread and «set the world ablaze». Johnson too speaks of this «hotbed of war» which must be quelled lest it develop into a world conflict. He proposes «unconditional talks* and the revisionists want «peaceful political settlement*. It is evident that these stands which harmonize do not in any way spring out of their «concern» to avoid a dash between the great atomic Powers. Confrontations have not taken place even for simple questions of procedure in UNO and how can they take place for bigger issues as American intervention in Cuba, Viet Nam or the Dominican Republic?
In fact this capitulating stand of cowards and opportunists is aimed at giving a free hand to American imperialism to perpetuate its colonial rule in South Viet Nam and, eventually, in the whole of Southeastern Asia.
The American imperialists have recently increased the number of their troops in South Viet Nam and have intensified their air raids on the territory of the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam. At the same time, they continue to make a lot of noise and threaten to extend their aggression towards the North. These grave acts of the USA, of course, reflect their hopeless situation in Viet Nam, their indignation and disappointment for their military, and political failure there. They are the howl of a beast in agony which has been dealt a deathblow and is no longer able to bite. But even in such a predicament American imperialism tries to find a way to save its skin by these acts. This is a two-fold tactics. On the one hand, in addition to extending its aggression in the South and in the North, they try to internationalize the conflict against the people of Viet Nam, by bringing there regular troops from the satellites of the USA like South Korea, Australia, New Zealand etc. On the other hand, it tries to carry out its fraud of imposing American peaceful solution through its allies as England, the Titoite clique and the Indian reactionaries. Thus, the American imperialists extend their hand to Soviet and Titoite revisionists to exert pressure for talks «in the name of peace and international security».
Thus, for instance, many political observers connect Joseph Broz Tito’s visit to the Soviet Union with the opportunist and capitulating stand which the Soviet leaders maintain towards the heroic struggle of the Vietnamese people. The Yugoslav President goes to Moscow in the wake of the visit of the Indian Prime Minister who together with Tito, were the initiators of the so-called proposal of 17 non-aligned countries for »peaceful talks in Viet Nam». During Shastri’s stay in Moscow the Soviet leaders indicated that they were very much in favor of his «peaceful» initiative in the Vietnamese question which was nothing but a copy of Johnson’s fraudulent proposals in his speech at Baltimore. Shastri stated in Moscow that «all efforts should be made to bring the interested parties around the conference table», and appealed for a cessation of bombardments on North Viet Nam for the purpose «of creating the necessary atmosphere for a peaceful solution». Such statements could of course be hailed by the White House which saw in them its own self, but why were they applauded by the Soviet leaders who urged Shastri to give «a new valuable contribution» regarding the sitution in Viet Nam? Neither Tito, nor Shastri could make such statements in Moscow without the approval and blessing of the Soviet leaders.
The game of the Khrushchevite revisionists in this case in not at all complicated. Fearing, for the time being, to come before the public with statements in favor of Johnson’s fraudulent maneuvers for «unconditional talks», they encourage Indian reactionaries and Tito’s clique to request such a thing allegedly in the name of the «peoples of Asia», of the «non-aligned countries», of «the third world» and so on, an initiative which the Soviet leaders might support, as they think, without any great danger of compromise. In this way, by hiding behind others, Khrushchevite re- yisionists exert pressure for talks and assist the policy of aggression of American imperialism against Viet Nam stabbing the heoric people of this country on the back.
American imperialists urge not only the modem revisionists but also the British Government to take such «peaoeful» initiatives. Wilson who is a close ally of the Americans and a firm supporter of their aggression against the Vietnamese people, tries to utilize the Conference of the Commonwealth, in which a number of heads of states from Asiatic and African countries take part, to persuade Viet Nam to accept Johnson’s unconditional talks. It is evident that the United States has orchestrated a whole policy which includes both bombs and demagogy in order to curb the war-like spirit of the Vietnamese people.
The opportunist and pro-Americzin stand of the Soviet leaders was manifested anew in their reaction to the mission of the heads of the governments of Britain, Ghana, Nigeria, Trinidad-Tobago organized by Wilson under American instigation for Viet Nam. They waited until others expressed themselves then, finally declared: «the USSR has been authorized by no one to carry on negotiations to settle the Viet Nam problem». This going halfway position of the Soviet Govemmait was considered as a major encouragement in the West, for it does not categorically reject Wilson’s diabolic and ill-fated maneuver and is not directed against it but takes the form of a pressure on the Vietnamese people. In short they say that if others waint they have nothing against it but unfortunately no one listens to them.
Air raids on the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam by the USA, landings of fresh American troops in South Viet Nam and their direct participation in battle, arrival of military units from the allies of the United States are also aimed at encouraging the Khrushchevite revisionists to use these factors as means of exerting pressure on the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam to accept the American solution of the Viet Nam issue. The Soviet revisiotnists will consider the American maneuver of allegedly stopping bombardments and «suspending the dispatch of troops of American allies to Viet Nam» as gestures of goodwill, as concessions, as favorable conditions to settle the Vietnamese problem through «peaceful talks». This revisionist logic does nothing but justify aggression, legalize the situation created by the American imperialists for definite purposes.
All of these joint plots of the imperialists and revisionists aim at creating a new Varkize at Viet Nam. The Khrushchevite revisionists have for this the experience of the Yugoslav Titoites who by their hostile acts undermined and liquidated the achievements of the national-liberation war of the Greek people.
The olive branch which Johnson shakes putting the mind of the Khrushchevite revisionists at ease is not less dangerous than the bundle of arrows which the USA hurls on Viet Nam. These are the two sides of the same Americsain aggressive policy towards the people of Viet Nam; two methods which he is unsuccessfully using to subdue and force them to their knees. Supporting one side, the so-called «peaceful» one, as the Khrushchevite revisionists are doing, is giving direct aid to American imperialism in the military field too, so it can maintain its sway in Viet Nam by force of arms.
But the Vietnamese people have baffled these diabolic maneuvers of the American imperialists both in the field of battle as well as in the field of diplomacy. Just as they rejected with contempt Tito’s and Shastri’s recommendations so did they mercilessly expose Wilson’s diabolic initiatives.
All facts go to show that the war in Viet Nam has become a true political business for Khrushchevite revisionists. They want to take advantage of the situation in Viet Nam in order to draw some political benefit for themselves. They look at the war that is being waged there as a favorable occasion to repeat Khrushchev’s outdated and unmasked slogans for «unity», for «cessation of pole- micsH- and so on. They try to use the Vietnamese problem as a pawn in their demagogical game and for commonplace political speculations, to pose as fighters for the unity of the international communist movement, as anti-imperialists and supporters of the national-liberation movement. Above all they try to utilize this matter in order to win some political advantage to escape further exposure as agents and close collaborators with imperialism. That is why the Khrushchevite revisionists are not only opposed to putting an end to American aggression in Viet Nam but, on the contrary, wish to have it prolonged as much as possible. They stand in need of gaining time and of maneuvering. Their objective is to accumulate strength and, at the appropriate time, to deal a harder blow on Marxism-Leninism and the socialist camp, to spread revisionism and to quell down the revolution. They cherish the hope that the longer the war goes on in Viet Nam, the graver the situation becomes there, the easier it will be to calm down tile just principled polemics which Marxist-Leninists level on them. It is in this prism that their demagogical cries for unity of action to allegedly help the war in Viet-Nam, must be seen.
In reality, Khrushchevite revisionists do not give a snap for the blood the people of Viet Nam axe shedding. All methods are justifiable provided they enable them to achieve their mean objectives. «The unity of action»- for which the revisionists raise a hue and cry, is nothing but an impudent and cynic speculation, a mockery of the sincere desire of peoples to consolidate the unity and compactness of all revolutionary forces to grapple with imperialist aggression, in general, and with that of the USA in Viet Nam, in particular.
At first sight it looks as if the revisionists give way, but in reality they intend to weaken the will of Marxist-Leninists in battle with modem revisionism, to draw our attention away from their being further esposed, to be let alone to get closer to and collaborate in peace with imperialism. This is the essence of their demagogy for «unity» and «aid» to the Vietnamese people.
The Soviet leaders, for instance, often demand that American bombardment of the Democratic Republic of Viet Nam be suspended. But suspension of bombardments can never be due to the mercy of imperialists, nor to the magnanimity of revi- aionists as intermediaries. Nor can it be the price for talks, as the revisionist friends and other allies of the USA would have desired. American imperialists may resort in Viet Nam to all arms and tactics of warfare. But nothing they will do will ever down the Vietnamese people. They will certainly be ousted from Viet Nam and peace will reign in that coim- try not when air raids are stopped, not when this or that tactics of warfare has been replaced, but when the last American weapon and the last American soldier shall have been removed from there.
The aim of the Khrushchevite revisionists and of the imperialists is by this simple trick to persuade Democratic Republic of Viet Nam to seperate the struggle of the Vietnamese people against imperialism into two parts — into that of the South and that of the North — and treat each part separately.
But this demagogical maneuver is doomed to failure. American imperialism has launched an aggression against all the Vietnamese people whose country is one and indivisible, just as one and indivisible is the war they wage against foreign aggression for freedom and independence. Revisionist advice is viperous venom aimed at splitting the combative unity of the Vietnamese people and aid American imperialism.
The present stand of the Soviet leaders towards Viet Nam is altogether a whole contradictory and hypocritical bluff masked by a refined demagogy and the basest of fraudulent maneuvers. As double- faced men they try, on one hand, to create illusions, to- pose as anti-imperialists and to deceive those that believe in them, and, on the other, to help the imperialists to put their aggressive policy into practice. Although they have been badly exposed, they still hope that the demagogy they practice regarding Viet Nam, their false slogans regarding ■«unity of action»- and «aid» may catch root somewhere and help others maintain a «wise» and «differentiated» attitude towards them. But where could such an erroneous, wavering stand towards these renegates of Mandsm-Leninism lead to? Let us refer to facts.
Nikita Khrushchev and his collaborators assailed Titoism, called it the agency of American imperialism re-establishing capitalism in Yugoslavia and so on. Later on they tuned down their polemics until they gave it up altogether under the faisfe pretext as if the Titoites were effecting a «change», as if they were opposing imperialism. Then the second stage began. They started saying that in relations with Yugoslavia it was necessary to first and foremost stress what united us and then what divided us. Later on they said they still had points of disagreement but in the main issues they had the same, or nearly the same views. Finally ■nto was triumphantly received in Moscow as a prominent leader of the international communist movement.
Now the Soviet leaders would very much like that their anti-imperialist demagogy eind their hypocrisy that Uiey allegedly support the struggle of the Vetnamese people, should be believed by true revolutionaries who should hope to take advantage of the occasion and get closer to and correct ttiem. But the Khrushchevite revisionists would embark as litle on the right road as Tito has done. Their flatt«ings resemble the threads of a spider where its victims fall and enmesh in its web. Whoever nurtured any illusions that the Khrushchevite revisionists can be corrected and, willy-nilly, would accept their stratagem, would, sooner or later, find themselves in the same position in which Khrushchev and his followers found themselves towards the Titoite clique, who, in their attempt to «correct» Tito, became themselves like the Titoites. Now what difference is there between Tito’s clique and the Soviet revisionist leaders? None. Probably in that that the former were open and veteran agents of American imperialism and that the latter are younger in the role of renegates and traitors to Marxism-Leninism and the socialist camp. Therefore it would be very contradictory and aenseless to call Tito alone an agent of American imperialism while the Khrushchevite revisionists to be considered as people who have erred and who, tmder specific conditions, might be corrected.
The heroic anti-imperialist battle of the Vietnamese people is steadily marching towards complete and ultimate victory. There is now no force to stop them to liberale their Fatherland and effect the unification of the country. This would be a major victory also for all the revolutionary peoples of the world, a blow that would frustrate both the global strategy of intimidation and terror of the American impmalists as well as the Khrushchevite «peaceful coexistence». Thus both the imperialists of the USA as well as Khrushchevite revisionists try their utmost to stop the Vietnamese people from winning, for they are well aware that a thing of the kind would mean the end of the strategy and tactics of their policy. It was precisely this end that President Johnson had in view when a few days ago he called cm the Soviet leaders «to join up with the United States of America to establish a lasting peace in the world». Their joint interests and aims in Viet Nam were also pointed out by the «New York Times» newspaper which usucdly expresses the views of the American Government. This, for instance, is what it wrote in its editorial on Jxme 15 of the current year: «Moscow and Washington have a major common interest in establishing peace in Viet Nam through negotiations. The problem is how to turn this common interest into coordinated action to stop war».
American imperialists request now openly and in public the collaboration of the Khrushchevite revisionists in their aggression in Viet Nam, since they see that all the paths of the capitulating policy of the revisionists lead to Washington, to the consolidation of the criminal revisionist-imperialist collaboration against the peoples of the world, against socialism and peace. They see and are well aware that whatever gesture of aid the Khrushchevite revisionists may make towards Viet Nam, it has a purely fraudulent nature, prompted by specific propaganda intentions that hurt no one. It is not casual that J[ohnson smiles upon and advances repeated proposals to the Soviet leaders to consolidate their friendship between them. He knows too well that whatever the Soviet leaders do, they do out of exigency rather than out of fondness for Viet Nam and its people. Their supply of arms to Viet Nam is of little material importance to the war being waged there, but it is of primary importance for the revisionists to illustrate their demagogical campaign of «unity of action against imperialism», of «ceasing polemics», of «unity of the communist movement» and so on.
It would be a great misfortune if there were people to believe such demagogy and fall into the trap set up by the revisionists.
Imperialist and revisionist actions in Viet Nam have been co-ordinated and harmonized. One side works externally by the force of arms, while the other internally by sowing dissension, by exerting pressure, by spreading the spirit of defeatism and so on. The United States exchange regular informations with the Soviet leaders on the military and politic steps they take in Viet Nam and are fully informed of the designs and intentions of the Khrushchevite revisionists. Even the list of aid sent to Viet Nam by the Soviet revisionists is first com- mimicated to the Americans.
The coordination of joint actions is especially noted in the various pressures both sides exert for «peaceful talks» which constitutes the last card to find a way out for the USA from the blind alley into which it has embarked in Viet Nam. Khnishchevite revisionists and other modem revisionists have these days joined up with imperialism and world reaction to block the way to the Second Afro-Asian Conference to beheld at Algiers, by invoking various pretexts and by utilizing the internal affairs in Algeria. But it is clear that the main reason for their systematic sabotage lies in the fact that the aggressiveness of American imperialism will be widely exposed and the just cause of the Vietnamese people will be resolutely upheld from this high forum. A thing of this kind is not to the interest of the American imperialists, nor of the Khrushchevite and Titoite revisionists.
All facts go to show that Khrushchevite revisionists are playing towards Viet Nam one of the dirtiest games ever known in modem history. Through their wily demagogy of «anti-imperialism», of hypocritical gestures of solidarity and empty promises for aid, they strive particularly to neutralize and paralyze the war-like and revolutionary spirit of the Vietnamese people, to utilize the situation created in Viet Nam and in Indo-China to set up a field of intrigues and plots against the People’s Republic of China and the liberation movement in Asia, to set up dangerous traps against Marxst-Leninist revolutionary forces which firmly uphold the just cause of the people of Viet Nam, against socialism and peace.
But these attempts of the Khrushchevite revisionists have failed and will fail. The people of the world are seeing ever so clearly that Khrushchevite revisionists have become collaborators of American imperialism in their aggression against the Vietnamese people, that their political degeneration is getting deeper and deeper.
Nevertheless the revisionists have not yet changed' their course. It is the sacred duty of all communist parties, of all Marxist-Leninists and all revolutionary forces of the world to expose and fight to the end against the fraudulent maneuvers of the Khrushchevite revisionists. This will be a major concrete aid also for the people of Viet Nam, a concrete contribution to winding up their just struggle with success. Time has proven that no collaboration and no point of contact can be had in either the political arena or the anti-imperialist front with the dangerous revisionist agents. The same tiling is true with regard to the fight against imperialist aggression in Viet Nam where no collaboration nor unity of action can be had with the supporters and allies of imperialism — the Khrushchevite revisionists.
Under these conditions it is the duty of all communists and
revolutionaries to intensify, as always, their vigilance and determined
fight to smash, as always, the diabolic maneuvers of the imperialists
and revisionists. The heroic Vietnamese people have chosen the path of
victory themselves; and they always keep their eyes open both towards
the schemes of the imperialists as well as towards revisionist
intrigues. The struggle may be long and hard but it will be crowned
with success. Siding with the people of Viet Nam are the peoples of the
socialist countries and of all the world, is the international working
class, are all revolutionaries and millions upon millions of
anti-imperialist fighters; on their side is justice and the future.
This is a powerful solidarity
and great help for Vietnamese people, whom the imperialists and
revisionists will never be able to down. The people of Viet Nam will
triumph with certainty over imperialist weapons and cunning; their
heroic war will smash also the diabolic maneuvres and plots of
Click here to return to the
index of archival material.