From Albania Today, 1977, 5

Enver Hoxha: Conversation with Chou En-Lai

This conversation was held in Tirana with Chou En-Lai who visited Albania in March 1965, at the head of a Chinese Party and Government delegation.

Dear comrade Chou En-Lai,

Dear comrades of the Chinese delegation,

Your coming here has caused great joy. Our people and party are celebrating, because, for the second time,1 they have in their midst comrade Chou En-Lai, the close comrade of Mao Tsetung, for whom our people and party have a special love and respect. Albania and China are closely linked on the basis of the principles of Marxism-Leninism, and they fight, live, triumph, and advance together.

Day by day we follow the vigorous and successful development of your great country, the internal and external policy of your party and government, your struggle against world imperialism and modern revisionism.

All our delegations which return from China, speak enthusiastically about everything, above all, especially about the warm and sincere friendship the Chinese people nurture for the Albanian people. All this rejoices and strengthens us, and gives us the possibility to follow the vigorous life and struggle of your people and Party closely.

In the international arena and in the international communist movement, in the national-liberation struggle which the peoples of the world are waging, the weight of People's China, its correct policy, the line which the Communist Party of China, led by comrade Mao Tsetung, has followed and is following, have become an important factor for progress, peace, the struggle for liberation and the struggle for socialism.

Important events are taking place in the world today, complicated problems are facing the peoples, struggles of various characters and intensities are being waged, alliances are being formed and dissolved, leaders are overthrown and others take their place, intrigues are being hatched up by the imperialist enemies and their allies, the revisionists and the other reactionaries of the whole world. But above all this, we see that the just cause of the peoples, enlightened by the doctrine of Marxism-Leninism, is advancing, and like a gigantic weight, is mercilessly squeezing the life out of the old world which is dying and giving up the ghost, bringing about the birth and strengthening of the new world. Seeing that this struggle is being waged on the basis of the principles of Marxism-Leninism, our Party and people consider it an honour to fight shoulder to shoulder with the fraternal Chinese Party and people, consider it an honour and their duty to make their modest contribution to this colossal struggle. The People's Republic of Albania and our Party will remain loyal to the end to Marxism-Leninism and to all those parties that, in their activity, proceed from the unshakable principles of our triumphant doctrine. Marching consistently on this road, we shall always be united and will strengthen our common struggle.

Your coming here and the exchange of views we shall have with you will help us to strengthen our many-sided struggle.

Allow me to speak about some of our ideas.

After acquainting the Chinese delegation with the problems of .the perspective development of the economy of the People's Republic of Albania, in general, and the draft of the 4th Five-year Plan (1965-1970), comrade Enver Hoxha dwelt especially onthe principal problems of the international situation:

How we see the international situation, the lessons we should draw and the measures we should take with regard to the developing situations.

We think that the Communist Party of China and the Government of the PR of China, the Party of Labour of Albania and the Albanian Government have not been taken by surprise by the development of international events, but in general, have foreseen them correctly, and acting in a revolutionary manner, have been able to influence them, to leave a marked revolutionary imprint on these situations, making many gains in strengthening the cause of socialism and communism, strengthening a sound peace, and strengthening the peoples' liberation struggles. At the same time, the ceaseless, unyielding, consistent, Marxist-Leninist struggle of our Parties has badly exposed the aggressive nature and warmongering activity of world imperialism, with US imperialism at the head, as well as the great betrayal by the modern revisionists, headed by the Soviet revisionists, in the eyes of the peoples and the communists of the world.

We think that the predominant feature of this stage is the ever more open collaboration and rivalry between US imperialism and the modern revisionists, led by the Soviet revisionists. In the Khrushchevite revisionists, US imperialism has found its allies and partners for the successful implementation of its world policy and strategy, for the struggle against, and the destruction of, the socialist camp and communism in general, for the division of the world into spheres of influence, for the creation of a new colonialism dominated by the two great powers, the United States of America and the Soviet Union.

While having the struggle against socialism as their common objective, each of these two world powers is striving, at the same time, to gain, to maintain, and strengthen its supremacy over the other, to strengthen the grouping of its satellites round itself, to combat the other's grouping of satellites with a view to the possible detachment of its allies, to strengthen its own grouping and, in alliance with the other, to jointly attack the socialist countries, China and Albania in the first place.

The Soviet-US alliance, which is developing and taking more concrete shape every day in the international arena, of course, not without difficulties and contradictions, is a political event which represents a great threat to the fate of the world, and for us comprises a major objective against which we must fight hard. This alliance is developing in all directions, in the political, ideological, economic and cultural spheres. In many directions, it has been formulated and approved in official documents, in treaties, agreements and contracts, and has been coordinated ideologically from both sides against the Marxist-Leninist doctrine. In all these aspects we shall soon be witness to the increase of agreements, the collaboration, and the coordination of plans between these two great powers, which will even go to such lengths as to conclude military treaties for the "stabilization” of their political-military "alliances". Of course, there are differences in the trends of activity of these two powers which want to dominate the world by suppressing socialism, and the freedom and the independence of the peoples. The United States of America is going about it with fire and steel, resorting to atomic blackmail and all other kind of pressure, ranging from war to corruption. Whereas the Soviet revisionists while submitting to the American pressure and blackmail, and opposing the aggressive actions of the USA in words, merely for the sake of appearances, are using all means and methods to create their sphere of influence, to establish their domination over the peoples. For the time being they have not resorted to the methods of open wars of repression, but the course they are following will undoubtedly lead them to that, too. At the same time, they think they will achieve their fiendish ends by fighting socialism and our countries concretely, in collaboration and in open rivalry with the United States of America.

The Soviet revisionists cannot think that they will avoid war with their general line of peaceful coexistence, but their intention is to gain time in order to combat socialism and our countries, and meanwhile, to strengthen their positions in the world in the directions we mentioned above. It is clear that the Soviet revisionists are playing with fire, because, in order to achieve their sinister aims, their intention is to weaken the Americans economically, militarily and politically, by leaving them to act with fire and steel against the peoples who are fighting to liberate and defend themselves. On the other hand, the Soviet revisionists are resorting to all their methods in order to undermine, corrupt, degenerate, dominate and enslave the peoples. But, naturally, these aims and actions of theirs are not developing and cannot develop just as they would like. Other colossal forces are active in the world, and they are the forces of socialism, of the peoples, which are ruining the plans of the imperialists and revisionists and inflicting great defeats on them, one after another.

The building of this new Soviet-US alliance cannot avoid the rivalry and the deep contradictions between them, cannot eliminate “the law of the jungle”. On the contrary, it is making the effects of that law harsher every day, and not only between these two imperialist-revisionist powers, the one, the United States, formed long ago, the other, the Soviet Union, which is rapidly assuming this form, but also among other capitalist states and countries where the modern revisionists are in power, such as the former socialist countries of Europe, which are also degenerating into capitalist countries. The degeneration of the Soviet Union and of the other former socialist countries of Europe brought the “law of the jungle” into their relations, too, and all of them, jointly or separately, are prowling like wolves in the international forest, together with the other imperialist wolves.

Now we are witnessing such phenomena as those of the decay of the old alliances existing among the imperialists, and the weakening of the Soviet influence in the socialist countries, as well as the splitting and the weakening of alliances between them. In short, the two groupings, imperialist and revisionist, are entangled in insurmountable contradictions, in strife with one another within the group, and in many insoluble external conflicts and contradictions of one grouping against the other.

These insurmountable contradiction; are reflected in every step they take, they are reflected in NATO, the United Nations Organization, the Common Market, the European Community, in their participation in the war in Vietnam, in Laos and the Congo, in the German problem, the Warsaw Treaty, in the March 1st Moscow meeting, in the Council of Mutual Aid, in the relations of the countries of “people's democracy” of Europe, both among themselves and with the still dominant Soviet power.

That is a maze of problems, but we must find our bearings in this wood, must carefully follow the thread, reach correct conclusions and build the strategy and tactics of the struggle against imperialism and revisionism on the basis of our unerring Marxist-Leninist science.

We must say that at present, the international situation in general is in favour of the forces of socialism and the peoples. Imperialism as a whole, and US imperialism in particular, is decaying, in decline, it is losing ground and becoming utterly exposed in all its activities. Modern revisionism, and especially Khrushchevite revisionism, which caused the crisis in the socialist camp and international communism, greatly harmed our great cause, but while admitting this fact, the exposure, the unmasking, and the fierce struggle we have waged and will continue to wage against this plague amongst as, has made it lose ground and lose strength from day to day.

The ever greater deepening of the contradictions among the imperialist powers is causing the continuous weakening of US imperialism, this great and chief enemy. The contradictions among the imperialists have always existed and always will exist, and this is eroding and weakening them, but at the moment they have become very acute.

When they emerged from the crisis of the Second World War, the imperialist countries required a relatively long time to recover and, willy-nilly, had to accept US “aid” accompanied with the domination of US imperialism. Nevertheless, over a long period, US imperialism, assisted by British imperialism, managed to incorporate its partners, weakened by the war, in military-political alliances, in which it dictated its own law. By means of these alliances, under the pretext of economic “aid” to restore the war-devastated economies of these countries, US imperialism set up its own bases in many capitalist countries of the world. At the same time the USA imposed its will on these countries in the field of their economy, investments, trade, etc. over a long period. There is no doubt that, in these conditions, the United States of America dictated the way of life, and political and ideological opinion in those countries. On the other hand, US imperialism financed the economic recovery of Bonn Germany and ensured that it was armed to the teeth, and that militarism, fascism and revanchism were revived. The idea of creating a powerful fascist Germany, which would be its ally to the end and the main striking force against socialism, and at the same time the force to intimidate and blackmail its wavering allies, has been and still is part of the plans and activity of US imperialism.

Thus, this capitalist re-grouping, under the absolute direction of the Americans, naturally constituted a dangerous potential threat of war. Even now it is still a threat of a world war of aggression but it is no longer the monolithic force it used to be.

Capitalist France now remains in NATO only formally; it has set out on the course of open opposition to US imperialism. Back on its feet again, big French capital cannot endure the American grip and dictate, and declines to be strangled. France feels strong enough to resist the USA, therefore the Americans are encountering France's opposition. Of course, this has greatly shaken and weakened the military and political strength of NATO. In fact, this positive existing situation is not just a result of the development of French capital, but a direct consequence of the struggle which our socialist countries are waging and of all the peoples' national-liberation struggles against US imperialism. Our struggle weakened it, and French capital seized the opportunity to oppose the domination of US imperialism. We Marxists should make use of this situation and this moment of grave crisis in the ranks of world capitalism. We have not the slightest illusion about French capitalism, which, although it has great contradictions with US imperialism, in essence, is the self-same capitalism it used to be, with the same aims of domination and with new tactics to fight socialism and communism, to oppress and exploit the peoples. The new phenomena in the contradictions that are showing up among the capitalist countries were foreseen by Stalin and now they are being realized just as he envisaged.2

We think that US imperialism is being weakened everywhere, and its aggressive actions, coupled with atomic blackmail, testify to its weakness and not to its strength. It has great troubles in Europe, and its dominating positions are not stable. It is trying to re-build new positions, relying heavily on and striving to hold on to Bonn Germany as its most powerful and aggressive support.

Bonn Germany, we think, is the corporal in capitalist Europe. The Americans are doing their utmost to keep the revanchist Erhardt3 government in pro-American positions, and in order to achieve this, they are doing everything possible to meet all its demands, and especially to equip it with atomic weapons. On the other hand, the Americans are doing their utmost to bring the Soviets to their knees in order to achieve the unification of the two German states according to the conditions of the Americans and of the Bonn revanchists. If the USA can achieve this, consequently it will have strengthened its positions in Europe, compensated for the weakening which France has caused it, and to some degree, isolated France. In this manoeuvre, the USA is aiming to isolate France, to prevent it from concluding any effective alliance with Bonn, and having made it impossible for France to achieve this, to destroy any attempt on the part of France to revive the old alliances with the Soviets, a thing that would isolate Bonn Germany, hence limit the American domination.

To sum it up, we can say that the USA is trying to defeat the aims of France, which is seeking to revive its old alliances with the countries of the East and Central and South-East Europe, and at the same time, to link itself with Bonn Germany, too, and, in this way, to be better placed to fight communism and the US domination. Thus, France is trying to extend its domination. This is the aim of the Gaullist approaches towards the countries of “people's democracy” in Eastern Europe, the granting of credits and the development of cultural relations with them.

In these situations the will and views of the other NATO members, with the exception of Bonn and London, are not taken into account. Whichever it is, whatever its colour, the British government will pursue its traditional policy of maintaining the balance, but the balance will always lean to the side of the Americans. Notwithstanding that the Americans have crushed Britain, impelled by the traditions, interests and the play of old alliances, and especially those of the last two great world wars, Britain will incline to the alliance with the Americans. Nevertheless, there are and will always be contradictions between them. As for the ambitions of the revanchist government in Bonn, they are known. It is trying to secure atomic weapons, to dominate Europe and NATO together with the USA, to gobble up Democratic Germany, to re-establish the old borders of the Third Reich, to reorganize new alliances in its favour, and to threaten and kindle a new war at the time Bonn and its partners find favourable. In a word, while pursuing two immediate main aims, that of being equipped with the atomic weapons and of gobbling up the German Democratic Republic, Bonn Germany supports the US policy, while trying not to tread on Britain's toes, and doing nothing to worsen or break its relations with De Gaulle, and is making secret and open attempts to begin talks and conclude agreements with the Soviet revisionists. On the other hand, Bonn is trading with, and granting credits to, the so-called countries of people's democracy, and even has trade exchanges with the German Democratic Republic.

As we can judge from such a development of the situation, the imperialist coalition in Europe is not ready for war. The French question upset the balance, and it will take some time before it is stabilized again. On the other hand, the capitulation of the Soviet revisionists, first of all, and their European satellites has created a new field of work, hopes, efforts, possibilities, and coalitions for the imperialists, which, for the time being, do not permit them to miss the favourable opportunities created by the Khrushchevites, and to start armed adventures and conflicts in Europe.

We may draw the conclusion that, at present, a dark cloud prevails over Europe, that it has become a field of imperialist-revisionist intrigues, and, despite the deep contradictions simmering among all these imperialist-revisionist states, the forces still have not developed in Europe which can take advantage of these contradictions to create a revolutionary situation there. The only completely revolutionary forces here are the Party of Labour of Albania, the People's Republic of Albania, and on a small scale, the Marxist-Leninist groups in some countries of Western Europe.4 Therefore, it is in the interests of the revolution and socialism that the great weight of the People's Republic of China should be felt powerfully in Europe, that these contradictions should be utilized.

The situation in the revisionist camp is also full of contradictions. We can say that their political-economic unity has been weakened, although it exists formally. The Warsaw Treaty exists, and we believe that it will continue to exist, as a “shield” for the expansionist policy of the Khrushchevite revisionists. They, the Soviet revisionists in the first place, will use this treaty in order to preserve their military hegemony, to have the forces and armaments of their partners under their control and supervision so that, for definite aims, they can dominate the weak partners, intimidated and “disarmed” by them, through their fear of “some attack”, and intervene, possibly jointly, in case any of their partners gets out of line.5 The Soviet revisionists have great hopes that through the Warsaw Treaty they will have the satellites' armies as cannon fodder, as an empty market for the sale of their outdated weapons, and above all, as a force to keep them under control.

In these situations of political instability, in these times of many-sided deals with the American and the other imperialists, in these situations of internal economic, political and ideological difficulties, the other revisionist partners need the Warsaw Treaty as a shield against any eventual external and internal threat. But we think that there is no harmony, no unity, in this camp, that there is dissatisfaction and distrust.

In their common aims to reach agreements with the imperialists, and in the first place, with the US imperialists, there are tendencies, especially on the part of the Soviet revisionists, to treat everything, every result they achieve, every deal they make, in such a way as to persuade the others that they must accept it. Of course, these attempts of the Soviet revisionists cannot be easily achieved, because there are centrifugal forces in action. Thus, there is the other tendency (of almost all the other revisionist states, which does not fully accept the Soviet dictate, and this is being fostered vigorously by the Americans, the French, the British, and Bonn). Sometimes these states negotiate and reach separate agreements, make individual efforts to influence the national state platforms and the national interests they deal with, in a word they impede, disrupt, sabotage, amend, and raise obstacles to the Soviet hegemonic line.

This tendency has sharpened the contradictions between the revisionist countries, and this is reflected in their internal and external weaknesses. The German problem is raised by them as the main political-military problem. They pretend to maintain the same, allegedly resolute stand. But this is not and cannot be the reality. It is true that all of them are concerned about this problem, but each of them wants to settle it according to his own views. They are all manoeuvring at the expense of the German Democratic Republic. The meetings of the Warsaw Treaty disregard Ulbricht's appeals and memoranda, and the communiques from the meetings are demagogy and bluff which do not reflect the truth. None of them is genuinely for the proper defence of the German Democratic Republic. They are all afraid of a fight, of war. Gomulka is ready to impose heavy conditions of capitulation to Bonn on the German Democratic Republic so long as the imperialist states officially recognise the Oder-Neisse border. Czechoslovakia, likewise, is moving towards the normalization of its old alliances, provided only that the Bonn revanchists give up their claims to the Sudeten. Hungary has no desire to be embroiled in war over the German problem. Its ambitions lie in other directions, on the territory of its neighbours and the strengthening of the capitalist regime it is restoring at home.

Therefore, it is very advantageous, both to the Soviets and to the others, for the German problem to be liquidated with little pain and much demagogy, and in return for this they ask for nothing but some sort of assurance, be it even temporary, that Bonn will keep a relatively low profile. In our opinion, during this period the German Democratic Republic is being used by the Soviet Union and its allies as a token to be bartered in the negotiations, blackmail and deals between the imperialists and the modern revisionists. Of course, this is another major cause which is deepening the contradictions between the revisionists and weakening their internal and external positions. They are ceaselessly exposing themselves.

As regards the political relations of the socialist countries with the other bourgeois states of the world, they are not following a common general line, but each of them is working on its own national account. Very often, one state, proceeding from the law “everyone for himself”, will do its revisionist partner in the eye in order to ensure economic or political gains, preserve its “prestige and secure support for itself”, continually violating principles, and trampling the interests of its partner, which, in most cases, is revisionist, too. Thus, “the law of the jungle” has been introduced in their relations. This, of course, deepens their contradictions, and weakens and exposes them.

The economic relations between the revisionists exist, and Soviet revisionism, as the biggest economic power, is still dominant and making the law, but not as in the past. It is dominating the weak economies of its partners with its economic power and with the establishment of some important keys and links, which, for the time being, its partners cannot break or escape from. This gives rise to the great Soviet pressure on them, and this pressure is not only economic. All these relations between the Soviets and their revisionist partners are enslaving capitalist relations. None is satisfied with the other, and there are quarrels, disagreements, blackmail and threats everywhere. Here there are many deep, insurmountable, undermining contradictions, and these exert an influence towards their further degeneration.

None of the revisionist states is guided by the internationalist principle of comradely aid in the economy; on the contrary, each is out to make the maximum profits from the other, in the capitalist manner. Thus, everything, all the economic relations between them are regarded and developed only in the capitalist spirit. But the economic crisis in the Soviet Union no longer permits it “to help”, and to cope with the ever growing needs of its revisionist allies, which are also caught in the crisis. In these conditions then, the way out for these new capitalists is to appeal for American, French, British and German foreign capital. American and other credits have begun to flow in, to increase, and to spread like leeches throughout the economy of the Soviet Union and the so-called countries of people's democracy in Europe. This inevitably brings with it political and ideological influence and leads to the degeneration of the regime, the political, economic and military swallowing of these countries, which gradually, sooner or later, become countries dependent on the various imperialists and are transformed into their spheres of influence.

Of course, this is adding to the contradictions between the revisionist countries of Europe and the Soviet revisionists, who are losing their absolute political and economic domination. This is adding to, and deepening, the contradictions between the people and the true Marxist-Leninists, on the one hand, and the revisionist chiefs of each country, on the other; it is impoverishing these countries, polarizing the forces of reaction and the forces of the people, and creating a wide field of conditions favourable to revolution in those countries.

How should we define the present ideological “unity” of the revisionists and the struggle they are waging against Marxism-Leninism and especially against the Communist Party of China and the Party of Labour of Albania?

The hostility of the modern revisionists to Marxism-Leninism and our two parties is relentless, and on this they have unity of thought and action. The revisionist chiefs, not only those who are at the head of the parties and states of the “people's democracy” of Europe, but also all the chiefs who are at the head of the communist parties in the capitalist countries, have set out on the anti-Marxist road and have become thoroughly and hopelessly compromised. They have crystallized their line of reformism and the degeneration of Marxism-Leninism, and their leadership is the Moscow revisionist clique; the 20th, 21st and 22nd Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union provide their orientation and basis. They implement this general line on the basis of the concrete situations in their parties and countries. Of course, around this general revisionist orientation, there are and will be various tendencies, which have been manifested and will be manifested, depending on the inclinations of these chiefs, which are dictated by the pressure of the bourgeoisie, by the resistance put up by the party, by the political-economic situation of the country, by the revolutionary movement and the level to which it has risen, as well as by many other factors.

While preserving their aims intact and fighting to achieve their anti-Marxist objectives, the modern revisionists are now displaying a number of markedly different trends. The Titoite revisionists are following a well-defined, avowed and undisguised road. They are acting in full and open unity with the capitalist bourgeoisie, with social-democracy, and in open alliance with and in the service of US imperialism. Things have gone so far with them that, although in fact the other revisionists are in full solidarity with the Yugoslav revisionists, although they take them as an example for action and adapt their Titoite forms to the degeneration of their own parties and states, they do not dare to rehabilitate them openly. Although they always collaborate with the Titoites closely, declaring that they agree with their policy, while applying the Titoite capitalist reforms in practice, still, they add that they “have some disagreements with them”. This is demagogy and deception. The fact is that the Titoite revisionist wing has gone over completely to the positions of the bourgeoisie, whereas the place of the extreme Right-wing, we can say, is being held currently by the Italian revisionists, the Togliattists. They have taken up the role of applying revisionism to the end in the capitalist countries, that of the liquidation of the party and the dictatorship of the proletariat, of avoiding the revolutionary struggle, of eliminating the contradictions with social-democracy, of unity with it, of merging with it, and of complete, ideological and political collaboration with the bourgeoisie. In a word, they are for the liquidation of the class struggle and for submission to the absolute power of the bourgeoisie. Since they are not in power, they want to go even further than the Titoites, who have state power in their hands and do not allow anyone else to share it. However, besides this total liquidation, the Italian revisionists are coordinating the actions of the revisionist states, from which they demand acceleration of their degeneration, the complete and consistent carrying out of the revisionist general line of the 20th Congress of the CPSU. The Italian revisionists think that they can achieve these results more quickly by developing their “polycentrist” theory, which, in fact, means to spurn the authority of the Soviet revisionists, to cause splits among the revisionists, in order to defeat the Soviet revisionists more thoroughly and more rapidly, in the general framework of the ideological offensive of monopoly capital for the complete degeneration of the revisionist parties and states. Of course, the Italian revisionists are adventurers in the full sense of the word. They want to speed up the process of degeneration. Certainly, the Soviet revisionists cannot support this tactic, which immediately deprives them of any demagogic weapon. Here, then, is the source of the contradictions and the differences in their tactics.

The ludicrous tactics of the Polish revisionists is demagogy intended to convince us, if possible, to tone down our polemic, and especially, to show their alleged “independence” from the Soviet revisionists in questions of tactics. But they must be ranked among the savagest enemies of Marxism-Leninism, the Communist Party of China, the Party of Labour of Albania, and our socialist states. They are the greatest chauvinists among the revisionists. The Soviets are counting heavily on them, despite the contradictions between them. The Soviets need them very much, because an open breaking away of Poland towards the imperialists would accelerate the final catastrophe of the revisionist camp.

Despite their nuances, which are more pronounced in Ulbricht and Kadar, the other European revisionists, generally, pursue more or less the Soviet course and tactics in the struggle against Marxism-Leninism, and especially against our two parties. However, in general, we can say that the former blind faith in the Soviet revisionists no longer exists. This can be said, also, of the other parties of the world dominated by the revisionists. Their trust in the Soviet leadership has been weakened; their trust and the force that attracts them depends on the roubles which finance them in their anti-Marxist and anti-socialist activities.

Of course, all the signs of opposition existing among the revisionists are nothing but attempts to ensure independence of activity, or new regional re-groupings.

The Soviet revisionists have suffered great defeats. We can say that the struggle of our parties against them has been the decisive factor in these defeats. Our principled militant stands exposed the Soviet revisionists, are a serious obstacle to their undermining activity, and are dispersing the choking fog of their poisonous demagogy. Our Parties and countries resisted and came out triumphant over their blackmail and pressures of every kind.

Our unyielding struggle hindered the acceleration of the treacherous activities of the revisionists, made, or is making, things clear to the communists of the world, told the peoples the truth and exposed the agreements reached between the Soviet revisionists and the American imperialists.

From the 20th Congress, the Soviet revisionists took the bit between their teeth, confident in their belief that they would not meet any serious resistance on their road of betrayal. And even if they did, with their views of great state chauvinism, they thought that, with their great economic and military potential, and by disguising and hiding themselves behind the great political and ideological prestige of the Soviet Union and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, they would quickly eliminate this resistance without much pain, or ado. On the other hand the Soviet revisionists were convinced that they would find a ready understanding on the part of the US imperialists who would immediately fall into line with their proposals and major concessions. Thus, the Soviet revisionists thought that their ideological and political revisionist line “would triumph and shine”. And thus before there was time to wink your eye, “the miracle” would be achieved, just like the conjurer's tricks at a fair, and to give the devil his due, Nikita Khrushchev, the head of the Soviet revisionists, played the game just like a real fairground clown.

Revisionism is the bearer of its own defeat. It spells defeat for those who have been infected by it, because revisionism means betrayal, defeatism, capitulation, rout. Modern revisionism, with Soviet revisionism at the head, brought all its evils in its wake. It weakened the Soviet Union, lowered its prestige and that of the Bolshevik Party of Lenin and Stalin, set about the ideological-political degeneration the Soviet Union, weakened the revolutionary forces, threw the socialist economy of the Soviet Union into continuous chaos and decline, made major concessions to US imperialism, and is continuing to destroy the Soviet power and to put it at the mercy of a new bourgeois capitalist class, which, day by day, is growing ever more dependent on the interests of international capitalism.

Their whole ideological line suffered fiasco in its ideological-organizational development, in the development of their external and internal policy, as well as in regard to the socialist camp and international communism.

It is a fact that before the emergence of the Khrushchevite revisionists, the unity of the socialist camp and the international communist movement was strong and stood monolithic against the bourgeois ideology, for the sole reason that it was guided by Marxism-Leninism. Before the advent of the revisionists to power, the Soviet Union was on the right road, was guided and inspired by the Marxist-Leninist revolutionary spirit and in turn inspired its comrades, friends, and allies in this spirit.

With the revisionists' advent to power the Marxist unity could exist no longer. Our correct thesis, that unity exists where Marxism-Leninism is in power, triumphed. The revisionist bluff and demagogy, their calumnies and slanders that allegedly Stalin, the “cult of Stalin”, “the terror”, “threats” were “the factors” of this unity that existed then, suffered ignominious defeat. The Marxist-Leninists have risen against the revisionists everywhere and are forging real unity under the guidance and inspiration of Marxism-Leninism, and we see that the Soviet revisionists have not only destroyed the unity of the socialist camp and international communism, but have also brought about the split, and it could not be otherwise. The revisionists are divided among themselves and will be divided even further. Revisionism is the kiss of death.

And when, as a result of our consistent Marxist-Leninist struggle, the Soviet revisionists found themselves facing the great defeat, facing the great evil, they preferred the lesser evil: they liquidated their leader and ideologist, Nikita Khrushchev. Indirectly, they loaded all the blame on to him, and, without changing any part of his old line, Khrushchev's comrades, collaborators and co-plotters, came on stage to carry on Khrushchevism without Khrushchev.

The time since the liquidation of Khrushchev has proved that the Soviet revisionists are just as much traitors as Khrushchev, and are following the treacherous anti-Marxist theses of Khrushchev with the greatest loyalty. Indeed they have outdone Khrushchev in treachery, because, while they are aware of Khrushchev's terrible mistakes, they have not mended their ways, even after his overthrow.

It is true that they are trying to create and carry out a “new” line, but it is just as revisionist and scandalous as that of Khrushchev.

First of all, their tactics differ only in formal and superficial things:

They have given up Khrushchev's boasting and beating the big drum. For the time being, the Soviet revisionists who replaced Khrushchev are not making speeches, are keeping quiet, to give the impression that they “are reflecting”, that they are “prudent and wise”, that “they are not a punctured drum”, but in practice the same step is being taken and the same drum is being beaten.

They are maintaining and strengthening their ties with the Americans, capitulating to them more and more each day. They did not strengthen themselves with the removal of Khrushchev, on the contrary, they discredited themselves. Now, Khrushchev's successors are trying to piece together what Khrushchev broke. They have no hopes that we will be deceived, but are worrying about their partners who are getting out of hand. They want to create a sort of “unity” between them, on a new basis, in order to face the catastrophe awaiting them. This is one of their main objectives at present. The factional March 1st meeting held in Moscow was intended, above all, to achieve precisely this objective. A common ideo-political platform among the revisionists, suitable to the new present circumstances, has to be found, rather than hope to deceive us. Naturally, in form, the communique issued after the March 1st meeting reflects the demagogy of their whole line, but I am of the opinion that their problem is more the creation of a “sort of revisionist unity”. This “unity”, the Soviets hoped, could be achieved after they had secretly assured their partners that they would change nothing in the line, and during this time they proved publicly with their stands that nothing had changed after Khrushchev's removal.

But was this unity, so greatly desired by the Soviet leadership, achieved? No, not in the least. As the revisionists they are, with unity the Soviet leaders mean domination, absolute dictate over the others. Unfortunately for the Soviet leaders, the others have become more independent than ever; they were not for Khrushchev, they were happy to be rid of him, because he was arrogant and threatened them. But after the downfall of Khrushchev the other revisionists wanted to be assured that some new Soviet leadership did not turn the clock back, “from our point of view”. They were terrified of this. When they were re-assured about this, their positions of independence from “the conductor” were strengthened, and according to information, there was no unity at their last meeting, although all of them are inveterate revisionists.

In the communique the modern revisionists issued, the confusion and panic that has seized them from the defeats we have inflicted on them and the fact that they have found nothing new to dish up to their adherents came out openly. It was shown that they do not have the initiative. They are broken, weak, and are on the defensive. The communique is a confirmation that the Soviet revisionists cannot openly dictate the law to their revisionist partners, cannot impose themselves as before: the split, “independence”, the slipping from their hands is great, the gap is deep. The Soviet revisionists will resort to indirect means to try to rescue their prestige and their authority over their partners, and will activate, encourage, organize and lead the struggle against our parties and states.

Thus, we can say that this period following the fall of Khrushchev has weakened the Soviet revisionists further. First of all, it is our militant stand, the continuation of the polemic by our parties which has brought about their defeat. This is one aspect of the fire that is playing havoc with the revisionists in disarray and the Soviet revisionists, together with all the problems which have them by the throat. During this period the Americans, also, made sure that, far from changing their positions, the Soviet revisionists become weaker, so they stepped up the dose of their blackmail in order to tie them to themselves more firmly, and to compromise them more thoroughly. The United States of America sees the Soviet “Da” (yes) to the alleged “anti-imperialist struggle” and the “anti-imperialist front” is mere demagogy, therefore US imperialism is making its aggressiveness more pronounced in order to back Soviet revisionists into a corner, so that they become more exposed and discredited and capitulate more quickly.

The Khrushchevite ideas of “peaceful co-existence”, of “a world without wars, without weapons” have been shown up in their true colours, and nobody believes them. The fact is that with the war in the Congo, Laos, South Vietnam, and now, with the piratical American bombing of North Vietnam, the Americans are not only bringing the Soviets face to face with capitulation and exposure, but from their terror of war, have also forced the Soviet leaders to undertake diplomatic actions in favour of imperialist theses about Vietnam and putting down the liberation war. Kosygin's trip to the Democratic Republic of Vietnam had fiendish demagogic aims of diversion, capitulation and deception. But he failed. The alleged aid to supply arms to the Democratic Republic of Vietnam is nothing but demagogy and a trap. On the contrary, in fact, the Soviet revisionists are striving to organize international conferences with the capitalist states about the Vietnam problem, without Vietnam. There must be serious thought and military preparations, because it is highly possible that the Soviet revisionists since the time of Khrushchev, or even now, might have reached an agreement with the Americans that the Soviets would leave the Americans a free hand to “escalate” the war to North Vietnam and go even further, that is to say, to extend the conflict. Perhaps, on the quiet the Soviet leaders are going to satisfy themselves with bombastic demagogic statements, may make noisy “protests”, and on the other hand, gather “facts and documents” alleging that the Democratic Republic of Vietnam and China did not allow the Soviet Union to give Vietnam concrete assistance in arms and men. Of course, the Soviet revisionists are playing with fire, but they think that in this way they may “gain”, by weakening the two sides, by getting China embroiled in war, encircling it with a ring of fire and a cordon of “friends” of the Soviet revisionists, such as the Indians. We should nip these plans in the bud.

We are of the opinion that “the problem of general disarmament”, “the problem of Germany and Berlin” are being raised and deliberately inflated by the revisionists in order to divert attention. In fact, for them these problems are a propaganda smokescreen to disguise themselves and to divert attention from Indochina and China, where the struggle against imperialism and revisionism is really on the boil. That is where our two main enemies have concentrated their efforts.

The Soviet revisionists, together with the Americans, the French and Bonn, are trying to keep the peoples of the developing countries occupied with regional problems and prevent them from concerning themselves with more acute problems, or from going on the attack everywhere, in a coordinated way. For example, we see how both the Americans and the Soviets are striving to confine the concern of the African countries to Africa problems only, and this is being concretized over the Congo issue, which is an important issue in itself; to get the Arabs to concern themselves only about the danger that Israel presents to them; to make Europe think only about whether to link up with Bonn or Ulbricht, and neglect or take little interest in Indochina and the problems of another continent. In Latin America, the Soviets keep their halter firmly round the neck of any self-styled “communist” leader, whose equivocal views, far from serving the unity of the genuine Marxist-Leninist revolutionary forces, weaken them, assist the revisionist chiefs of other communist and workers' parties of the Latin American countries and all the modern revisionists.

It seems to us that there is a general tendency on the part of the modern revisionists, in collaboration with imperialism, to disperse the revolutionary forces, and tie them up in separate problems, or to separate them deliberately in order to disorganize them.

The fact is that, in various meetings of an international character, this tendency is manifested in the countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America, which do not show coherence, are either defeated and isolated, or are “convinced” by the Soviets to raise a number of obstacles, so that the important international or regional meetings, the dates for which have been set, are postponed, or never held, etc. We think that this question should be reconsidered and new tactics should be worked out to revolutionize the situation.

How should we carry on our struggle in this general situation which we have tried to describe as we see it and on the basis of the current circumstances?

We think that we should step up our polemic against modern revisionism, and make it sharper, and first of all, against the Soviet revisionists. They are weakening and need a respite from the polemics. Our duty is to allow them no time to catch their breath but to attack and expose them unceasingly, ideologically and politically. We must expose every action of theirs in the international field and in the field of relations among them, in order to sharpen the divergencies eroding them, to prevent them from grouping together and undertaking joint or separate actions against the peoples, against the revolutionaries and against our parties and states. Any “concession” on their part, any “tactics” of alleged rapprochement with us, should be utilized in a Marxist-Leninist way in all directions, to expose them, disarm them, and make them capitulate.

We think that we must organize and. coordinate our struggle against them better. Even without organizationally coordinated work, our two parties have performed and continue to perform their full duty in the struggle, are clear about everything, and stand unflinchingly in the front line. But we cannot say the same of other Marxist-Leninist parties, which hold more or less sound positions. There are other parties, which have weak contacts, at least with our Party. There are some of them, which possibly consider the Party of Labour of Albania “hard”, while they consider themselves on the “correct” road, because they are “cautious”.

This “correct”, “cautious” line, we think, has nothing at all to do with Marxist maturity and real understanding of how events are developing and whom we have before us as opponents. It has nothing at all to do with a true appreciation of the dangerous nature of the opponent, of his cunning, his stubborn hostility towards our parties and countries and towards Marxism-Leninism, such as the Party of Labour of Albania makes of these problems.

In order to achieve unity of thought and action, or in order to explain and make clear to one another the reasons for the tactical actions of each party, we think that talks should be held among the parties. According to HSINHUA, you hold such talks with the parties of Asia, and this is a very good thing. We also practice this with you, and this is very good, too, but we do not do this with the parties of Asia, not because we do not want to, but because we have not had the opportunity. We have made use of every meeting we have had with the comrades of these parties which have participated in our celebrations, we have expressed our views, but these occasions have not been what bilateral talks, especially for discussion of problems and exchanges of views from the two sides, should be. It seems to us that this is a shortcoming.

We think that the communists always need explanations, always need a correct interpretation of events. The fact is that the genuine communists in bourgeois and revisionist countries are oppressed and under surveillance. Many of them know nothing about the truth, many are confused by lies and demagogy, many others can only guess, while some are clear, listen to our radio stations, draw conclusions, perhaps even organize themselves, organize the resistance in illegality, and so on. However, we must do our internationalist duty, because this is of exceptional importance to international communism.

The resistance and the organization of the Marxist-Leninists is the decisive factor in the countries where the revisionists rule. We shall help them from outside, through our propaganda by the radio, the press, etc. The work within the revisionist citadel must be carried out by the Marxists and the people of these countries, themselves.

In regard to our contacts with the new Marxist-Leninist parties and groups in the capitalist countries, they have been established to some extent. The revolutionary Marxist-Leninists in these countries are organizing themselves and are fighting, here with success, there with difficulty, with some natural vacillations and twists and turns. It is our duty to help them, because the comrades stand in great need of it. Of course, we have not interfered and must not interfere in their internal affairs, but must always display patience, tact, and vigilance, and whenever they seek it, we should give them our experience with the aim that they should avoid mistakes as much as possible. The revisionists are hindering us, the imperialists are hindering us, and both we and our revolutionary comrades in the capitalist and revisionist countries must bear this in mind, because pseudo-Marxists, agents of the revisionists and the capitalists, disguised as revolutionaries, will try to penetrate the ranks of the new parties to sabotage them. Therefore, our revolutionary comrades and we must sharpen our vigilance, must guard against the “ill-founded enthusiasm”, and “over-confidence” that somebody might manifest without giving proofs in struggle. We and they must guard against “the beautiful revolutionary words” of some people and put them to the test of practice.

The unity of the thought and action of our two parties has been and is complete, since it is based on the immortal principles of Marxism-Leninism.

We think that at a time when the US imperialists are extending the war in Vietnam, when they are aiming to attack great China, at a time when the revisionists, with the Soviet leaders at the head, are intensifying their treacherous activity against communism, the struggle of all the Marxist-Leninist parties against Soviet revisionism should be strengthened. Our opinion is that at those moments, when the enemies are attacking us and when we are on the verge of war, such as the American threat in Vietnam, the vague, or not very active, not to say passive, stands of some sister party and the Marxist-Leninists of some country do not help our common cause.

Our view is that every opportunity must be seized in every country to set the ground ablaze under the feet of the American imperialists and their allies, the revisionists, in the fire of the struggle of the peoples and the Marxist-Leninists.

It is clear that the overall concrete goal of US imperialism, the Soviet revisionists and the reactionaries of the world is to kindle the war in Asia, against China and other socialist countries of Asia, passing from local wars to a general conflagration. The Soviet revisionists and the American imperialists are arming the Indian reactionaries very quickly and with all their might, in order to have them as assault detachments in opening up new hotbeds of aggression. There is no doubt that, under the pretext of defending their country, the Soviet revisionists will build up their strength along the border with China, in order to bring continuous pressure and blackmail to bear upon it, and will try with every means to neutralize the states around it, if they cannot separate them entirely from their traditional friendship with China. On its part, US imperialism will strive to strengthen its ties and domination, its preponderance in Japan, in order to have it under its command, and if possible, to incite it to aggression. The Americans have great hopes of collaborating more closely with Britain for aggression, since its colonies in Asia are in jeopardy. In such situations, we are following the efforts and the correct policy pursued by the People's Republic of China of approaches to, and the consolidation of its friendship and relations with the other countries of Asia and Africa, in particular, where US imperialism is committing open aggression, and we have great confidence in their success. We think that we must make approaches to, and work with, the countries of South-East Asia, not only to make them conscious of the great danger of a war, which is assuming ever more acute forms, but also to bring them to actively oppose US aggression and its aims for the extension of the war.

For our own part, we are of the opinion that we should further intensify the struggle, the propaganda and the exposure of warmongering US imperialism, of the Soviet modern revisionists, the Titoites and their treacherous supporters. We must launch intensive attacks on their alliances and agreements, must call on the peoples of the Soviet Union and of the other countries to take measures and to paralyse and reject all these agreements with US imperialism, must call on them to completely isolate the aggressive imperialists, call on the peoples, the working class, the peasantry and the progressive intelligentsia of the world to throw their full weight into the struggle to isolate US aggression, this new Hitlerism that is threatening the world with fire and steel.

As for the heroic struggle of South Vietnam, as for the unwavering stand of North Vietnam, as for your resolute and correct stands towards the fraternal Vietnamese people, the aid and support you are giving them, we know these things. Your struggle is our struggle, it is the struggle of all the anti-imperialists, anti-revisionists, it is the struggle of socialism against imperialism and its servants, the modern revisionists and world reaction.

The fraternal Vietnamese people, who are waging an heroic struggle, deserve every support. US imperialism is even using poison gas against the South Vietnamese fighters, and is systematically dropping death-dealing bombs on North Vietnam. It is the sacred duty of all peoples and revolutionaries to defend the just cause of the fraternal Vietnamese people, and to help them with every means, to emerge triumphant.

In conclusion, we want to emphasize once again, what you express so correctly and openly in your recent attitudes towards the meeting of splitters in Moscow, that we should strengthen our unity of thought and action, should arm and temper ourselves more and more each day for the struggles awaiting us. We understand and give all-out support to your struggle which is based on the teachings of Marxism Leninism. We are fighting and will fight, together with you and with all the other Marxist-Leninist revolutionaries, for the triumph of our great cause. This is our final word, the word of the Albanian Party and people, we say this to you, to the fraternal Chinese people, to the Communist Party of China and to our comrade Mao Tsetung.

1 He visited the PR of Albania for the first time in January 1964.

2 “Outwardly everything seems to be “going well”: the United States of America has put Western Europe, Japan and the other capitalist countries on rations; Germany (West), Britain. France, Italy and Japan have fallen into the clutches of the USA and are meekly obeying its commands. But it would be a mistake to think that things can continue to “go well” for “all eternity”, that these countries will tolerate the domination and oppression of the United States endlessly, that they will not endeavour to tear loose from American bondage and take the path of independent development.” (J. V. Stalin “Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR”, Alb. ed., Tirana, 1968, p. 39).

3 At that time Erhardt was chancellor of the Federal German Republic.

4 This refers to the first groups of the years 1960-1965.

5 Life has fully confirmed this prediction. In August 1968, the Soviet Union used the forces of the Warsaw Treaty to occupy Czechoslovak, “which was getting out of hand”.

Click here to return to the index of archival material.