FINAL DECISION OF CCP CENTRAL COMMITTEE AGAINST ENEMY'S FIFTH ENCIRCLEMENT

Adopted at Tsun-i Conference of Political Bureau on 8 January 1935

8 January 1935

[Text] After listening to the summation report made by Comrade x x x on the fifth "encirclement and suppression" campaign and the supplementary report by Comrade x x x the enlarged session of the Political Bureau held that the report made by Comrade x x x is basically incorrect.

1. In its decision on the enemy's fifth "encirclement and suppression" the CCP Central Committee has clearly pointed out that the fifth "encirclement and suppression" is an ever more vicious offensive launched against the soviet revolutionary movement by imperialism and Kuomintang reaction.

It also pointed out at the same time that in this ferocious and decisive battle of the classes, the inner weaknesses of imperialism and the Kuomintang, and the new intensification of the revolutionary situation, has caused a new change in the relative strength of the classes in the country which is favorable to us, and it has arrived at the correct conclusion that "in the midst of the fifth "encirclement and suppression" we possess all the conditions for winning a decisive victory which are even more adequate than before" (CCP Central Committee decision 20 July 1933). But, in his report, Comrade x x x over-estimated objective difficulties. He placed the reason for the inability to smash the fifth "encirclement and suppression" in the central Soviet area on the strong and powerful forces of imperialism and the Kuomintang. But, at the same time, he did not adequately appraise the current revolutionary situation. This will certainly lead to an opportunistic conclusion that on the objective level, it will definitely be impossible to smash the fifth "encirclement and suppression".

2. The CCP Central Committee, in accordance with its own correct decision, has set forth concrete tasks for opposing the enemy's fifth "encirclement and suppression." One-and-a-half year's difficult struggle against "encirclement and suppression" has proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that the CCP Central Committee's political line is correct. Especially, the party committee in the central Soviet area, under the direct leadership of the CCP Central Committee, has achieved unprecedented results in mobilizing the broad masses of workers and peasants to participate in the revolutionary war. The movement to expand the Red Army has become an upsurge.

of the masses. The mobilization of worker and peasant activists, arming and sending them to the front, has reached over 100,000, thereby greatly expanding the Red Army. The model Red Youth Units are beginning to turn into rear support troops for the Red Army and the people's armed organizations of the Red Youth Units have achieved great growth. Under the slogan of "all for victory on the front" the party committee has resolved financial, food and all other material needs of the Red Army. The intensification of the class struggle inside the soviet area, the economic construction of the soviet and the thorough improvement of relations between the soviet government and the masses have even more vigorously developed the masses' enthusiasm and activism for participation in the revolutionary campaigns. All these have created favorable conditions for the thorough smashing of the fifth "encirclement and suppression." However, in his report, Comrade xx was clearly inadequate in his appraisal of these favorable conditions. Coming from this kind of inadequate appraisal it will be inevitable to reach the conclusion that on the subjective level we will have no ability to smash the "encirclement and suppression."

3. It should be pointed out that there are still many serious shortcomings in our work. With regard to the party's leadership of the broad masses of workers and peasants in opposing imperialism and the Kuomintang in the White area, and the leadership of the daily struggles, it still has not shown any marked progress. The development of guerrilla warfare and the work of collapsing the soldiers of the White army are still weak. The mutual help and coordination between the Red armies in the various Soviet areas given under a unified strategic purpose are still insufficient. All these weaknesses will undoubtedly affect the decision taken to oppose the fifth "encirclement and suppression" and it will become an important cause for our inability to smash the fifth "encirclement and suppression." The existence of these weaknesses absolutely must not be construed as the chief reason for the inability to smash the fifth "encirclement and suppression." But, in his report and conclusion Comrade x x x exaggerated on these weaknesses in the work. And yet he did not understand, nor did he acknowledge, the basically erroneous estimates made on the strategic and tactical levels of the military leadership. This has prevented us from understanding where the main reason for the inability of the main force of our Red Army to leave the central Soviet area and our inability to smash the fifth "encirclement and suppression" in this area was. It covered up the evil fruits of the erroneous line in the strategic and tactical area of our military leadership. With the courage and skill of the Red Army in combat, model rear area work and the support of the broad masses notwithstanding, it will be impossible to achieve a decisive victory in the war if we cannot apply correct strategy and tactics in our military leadership. Herein lies the principal reason for our inability to smash the fifth "encirclement and suppression" in the central Soviet area.

4. After suffering defeats in four "encirclement and suppressions," the Kuomintang, Chiang Kai-shek, and his imperialist military advisers have learned that it was extremely unfavorable to use the strategy and tactic of "penetrating deeply" to give us battle inside the Soviet areas. Therefore, in the fifth "encirclement and suppression," they adopted the strategy

of protracted warfare and blockhouse warfare in an attempt to gradually whittle away our effective strength and our material and financial resources, constrict our Soviet area, and finally, to search out our main force and engage it in decisive battle so as to achieve the objective of wiping us out.

Under these circumstances our strategic line should be defense through decisive engagements (offensive defense). Concentrate superior forces, select the enemy's weak spots, and, by using mobile warfare, confidently go about wiping out a part, a major part, of the enemy, destroying them one at a time and thoroughly smashing the enemy's "encirclement and suppression" thoroughly. In the campaign against the fifth "encirclement and suppression," defense through decisive engagements was substituted with the line of pure defense (defensive defense), mobile warfare was substituted with positional warfare and blockhouse warfare and the tactical principle of "short, swift thrusts" was applied to support this kind of strategic battlelines of pure defense. This enabled the enemy's strategy and tactic of protracted war and blockhouse warfare to achieve their objective and caused the main force of our Red Army to suffer partial losses and to withdraw from the central Soviet base area. It should be pointed out that this line is diametrically opposite to the basic principle of the strategy and tactics that would achieve victory for our Red Army.

5. At this present stage of the Civil War in China when we do not yet have the coordination of workers uprisings in big cities and towns and the mutiny of White soldiers, when our Red Army is still very inadequate in numbers, when our Soviet areas still constitute only a small part of China, when we still lack special weaponry such as planes and artillery, and when we are still in a situation of having to fight from interior lines, our strategic line, naturally, will be defense through decisive engagements when the enemy launches his "encirclement and suppression" and attacks us. That is, our defense will not be pure defense, but a defense making for a decisive engagement and then switching over to the counteroffensive. Pure defense can drain the enemy to a considerable degree and it can preserve territory for a certain period of time. But it will be impossible to protect the Soviet area by smashing the "encirclement and suppression" in the end, and there is no hope of achieving final victory. It is only by going from the defense to the counteroffensive (on a campaign and strategic level) and then to the offensive, winning victory in decisive engagements and wiping out enemy effective strength on a massive scale can we smash the enemy, protect the Soviet area and develop the Soviet revolutionary movement.

With this strategic line we should not immediately engage the attacking enemy in decisive battle as we are not confident of winning before we have discovered and exploited the weaknesses of the enemy. What we should do is to continue to confuse and lure the enemy on various fronts by using our secondary forces (such as guerrilla units, people's armed forces, independent battalions and regiments, and parts of the Red Army's main force). In this regard, the main thing is to contain the enemy with mobile warfare while the main forces withdraw to a suitable distance or move out on the enemy's

flanks or his rear areas, conceal and concentrate and seek favorable opportunity and launch surprise attacks on the enemy. Under the situation of fighting along interior lines, the withdrawal and concealment of the Red Army in the face of enemy attacks with superior forces will be fully adequate to tire out the enemy and cause him to become arrogant and careless and to commit errors and expose their weaknesses. This creates the condition for switching over to the counteroffensive and winning victory in decisive battles.

We must most carefully analyze and appraise the enemy situation so that the engagement will be properly planned and launched at a favorable time. Do not permit enemy's feints and provocations to make us unnecessarily deploy our forces and engage the enemy and become fatigued, thereby causing us to lose the opportunity for victory in decisive engagements toward a certain direction. In order to achieve victory, we do not have to block the path the attack is taking when the enemy begins his advance in accordance to (his) plan. We should wait until he has penetrated to a suitable distance and then encircle and wipe him out (that is, luring the enemy to penetrate deeply). For the purpose of achieving victory we will do whatever is necessary, temporarily abandoning parts of the territory of the Soviet area, even to the extent of having the main force withdraw temporarily from the Soviet base area, because we know that we will not only be able to recover abandoned territory, but also expand the territory of the Soviet area. If we only can annihilate the enemy and smash his "encirclement and suppression," all these are for the purpose of enabling the Red Army to always assume the active role and fight successfully against the enemy's attacks and "encirclement and suppression," and to always avoid a passive role and its ensuing unfavorable results.

All these principles, however, were flouted in the fifth battle. In February of last year a cable from the Communist International correctly expounded this: "We feel as if nearly all the plans and measures adopted by the military command during this period were frequently produced by the pressures brought to bear by the enemy. The enemy's provocations have caused us to engage in unnecessary reorganizations of our forces. Therefore, our forces were unable to participate vigorously in engagements with the enemy because of continuous changes. We feel that we should defeat the enemy in those areas where we have already won certain victories, and refrain from attempting to defeat the enemy on all fronts at the same time."

The leaders of the pure defense line were unable to understand this kind of instruction from the Comintern, therefore, the pure defense line, which was wholeheartedly willing to place itself in a passive role, did not, and was also unable to, plan to defeat the enemy on all fronts at the same time, but attempted to stop the enemy on all fronts at the same time. This was so not only prior to February of last year but also after the main force of the Red Army had to withdraw from the Soviet area. The slogan

"attack on all fronts" set forth in the past by Comrade x x x became resistance on all fronts during the fifth "encirclement and suppression." Strategically speaking, both of them are wrong. Politically, the slogan "do not abandon an inch of Soviet territory" is correct, but it becomes wholly erroneous when mechanically applied to strategy. It can easily become a camouflage for the line of pure defense.

6. In order to win victory in a decisive engagement it is absolutely necessary to concentrate superior forces. Currently, in a contrast between enemy forces and ours, the enemy has absolute superiority in troops. They often attack us with troops several times, or even seven to ten times, stronger than ours. But this is not something we have to fear because the enemy is situated on the exterior line and has adopted a strategic policy of encirclement, advancing along different routes and converging to attack. This creates the opportunity for us to defeat the enemy one at a time, and enables us to benefit from fighting along exterior lines in the campaign (localized exterior lines) while engaged in strategic interior line combat. That is, contain the enemy's one line or several lines of advance with part of our forces and concentrate the greatest force to encircle and wipe out one line of the enemy's advance, using this kind of method to defeat all. Individually smash his "encirclement and suppression." Under the situation of fighting along strategic interior lines, it is only by concentrating superior forces to seek victory in exterior line engagements in the campaign can we enable the Red Army constantly to grasp the initiative and force the enemy into a passive position, and finally to smash his entire plan.

In the past, however, the leaders of the pure defense line almost always scatter their forces (primarily the dispersement of the 1st and 3d Army Corps) in their resistance along all fronts against the enemy's advance. The result of this dispersement has frequently put us in a passive position, weakening our forces everywhere and proving advantageous to the enemy for defeating us one at a time. In the war of the fifth "encirclement and suppression" we were unable to achieve victories in many of the campaigns (such as the campaigns at Hsu-ch'ang [3326 0679], I-huang-ts'un [0997 2625] Chien-ning [1696 1337], and Tseng-fang [2582 0679] because our forces were not concentrated. The central task given the Red Army by the leaders of the pure defense line was to block the advance of the enemy in an attempt to wipe out part of the enemy with "short, swift thrusts, and it was not to seize the initiative, not to win victory in decisive engagements. The result was that the number of enemy (troops) wiped out by the Red Army was very small, and, in the end, the Soviet area was also ravaged by the enemy.

7. Wiping out the enemy in mobile warfare is the specialty of our Worker-Peasant Red Army. When the enemy's fifth "encirclement and suppression" began, the Comintern pointed out for us (in a cable sent in October of the year before): "In our actions we should not adopt the method of positional warfare, but adopt the method of mobile warfare on both flanks of the enemy." In last February's cable it was repeated: "Based on our experience, it is plain that our troops have won many great victories in mobile warfare,

but they were unable to win victory in battles fought by storming the blockhouse areas." These instructions from the Comintern were completely correct. Although we did not have the opportunity under the blockhouse warfare to use the enemy's fifth encirclement to adopt mobile warfare on a massive scale as was the case with the enemy's "deep penetration" in the first, second, third and fourth "encirclement and suppressions," the feasibility of mobile warfare still exists. This, in actual practice, has been proven many times (in the various campaigns of Hsiao-ch'i, T'ung-ts'un, Chin-ch'eng-chien [1142 6511 3013], Chien-ming, Wen-fang, Hu-fang [3275 0972], and, especially at the time of the 19th Route Army uprising. Nevertheless, the pure defense line which grew out of the fear of blockhouse warfare and Comrade Hua Fu's [5478 1133] theory of "short, quick thrusts" caused us to switch from mobile warfare to positional warfare during the fifth campaign. But this mode of positional warfare, at that time, was only beneficial to the enemy, and it was extremely disadvantageous to the Worker-Peasant Red Army.

Under current technical conditions, storming the enemy's blockhouses should be rejected. It is only in a situation where the blockhouses are weak, or isolated, or it is either for the purpose of striking at enemy reinforcements or to force the enemy to deploy his troops that attacks on enemy blockhouses are permitted. Frequently, assaults on enemy blockhouses have been undertaken lightly with hardly any affect. This is not surprising, because war has been taken as a child's game.

Due to underestimating the feasibility of mobile warfare in the fifth war, there was absolute separation of the enemy's fifth "encirclement and suppression" from his first, second, third and fourth encirclements. This, in turn, led to the absolute negation of past experiences in mobile warfare and to the absolute denial of the combat methods of luring the enemy in to wipe him out. This, in practice, led to the reluctant rejection of the correct instructions of the Comintern and these were natural rationale for the leaders of pure defense and short, quick thrusts.

8. Because of the overestimation of the enemy's blockhouse warfare and the underestimation of the feasibility of mobile warfare, the theory that victory can only be realized through tactics was born. It held that only tactical victory can be turned into a campaign victory, and, then victory in the campaign will bring about changes favorable to us strategically (Comrade Hua Fu's article and comrades x x and x x letters to Lin Piao and P'eng Teh-huai). It held that "under blockhouse warfare there can only be many small victories but no clear-cut victory" (see Comrade x x's speech to the Political Bureau and Comrade x x's "Red Star" article) and it also held that blockhouse warfare can be handled only by dividing the troops to resist and by short, quick thrusts. The theory and practice of all these strategies and tactics of opportunism in the revolutionary war became bankrupt during the fifth campaign.

We cannot deny that blockhouse warfare has created new difficulties for smashing the fifth "encirclement and suppression" (whereas they first reviled blockhouse warfare with the empty talk of the left--see Comrade x x's article in "Red Star"). We do not deny, but should prepare for, the

technical conditions of the Red Army (planes and artillery), especially the uprising of worker-peasant soldiers inside the blockhouse areas so as to overcome even more powerful enemy blockhouses in the future. However, blockhouse warfare can still be smashed even at present. Blockhouse warfare has fatigued the enemy's troops and dispersed his forces. It has fostered the enemy's dependency on the blockhouses, causing them to lose confidence of victory when they leave them.

At the same time the enemy cannot advance on us without leaving his blockhouses. Nor can he build enough blockhouses all over the country to restrict the movement of the Red Army. All these taken together create favorable conditions for us to overcome blockhouse warfare. The method to be applied by the Red Army toward smashing blockhouse warfare is still dependent upon mobile warfare, dependent upon unfolding guerrilla warfare all around the blockhouse lines in a coordinated wave with the Red Army, and dependent upon the intensification of the movement among the White soldiers. We wait inside the lines of the blockhouses for the enemy to advance and then destroy his troops on a massive scale outside the lines of the blockhouses, when the Red Army has moved to an area free of blockhouses to carry out its activities, to force the enemy to leave his blockhouses and engage us in mobile warfare. If we only apply the strategic and tactical principles of mobile warfare flexibly, skillfully and with strategem, we will then certainly be able to smash the enemy's blockhouse warfare. Only a correct strategic guideline can correctly lead and campaign and correctly apply tactics to smash blockhouse warfare and to smash the "encirclement and suppression." In pure defense and in "short, quick thrusts" victory is not mainly dependent upon correct leadership of the strategic campaign, but merely on tactics. This, in practice, is to surrender to blockhouse warfare, not to smash it.

9. The understanding of the leaders of the pure defense line is also incorrect with regard to the question of protracted war and waging war with quick, decisive engagements. The Chinese civil war is not a short-term war. It is a prolonged, protracted war. The Soviet Revolution was developed and consolidated on the midst of the continuous smashing of the enemy's encirclements. When favorable conditions occur, we should switch over completely from the defensive to the counteroffensive, and then to the offensive, wipe out the enemy and smash the "encirclement and suppression" (for example, the first, second, third and fourth wars, and prior to the Kuang-ch'ang [1684 2490] campaign). When unfavorable conditions arise we can temporarily withdraw to conserve our effective strength and then go over to the counteroffensive and offensive when other favorable conditions come into being (for example, after the Nan-hs'iong campaign in the fifth war). This is the first basic principle. Simultaneously, however, another principle must also be understood. In order to wage a protracted and prolonged war, all efforts must be made to achieve a quick and decisive battle situation in each of the "encirclements and suppressions" and in every one of the campaigns, because under the present balance of forces between ourselves and the enemy, it will be extremely disadvantageous for us to adopt the policy of protracted warfare toward each and every one of the "encirclement and suppressions" and toward each and every one of the campaigns.

We must apply a correct strategic policy and smash the enemy's plans when he uses protracted warfare against us (as in the fifth "encirclement and suppression") and win a decisive victory in a period of time so we can sustain to smash the enemy's "encirclements and suppressions." Using sources of manpower, material resources and munition supply to compare to what the Kuomintang has (the so-called competition with the enemy at attrition--see Comrade x x's article in "Red Star")--such understanding of protracted warfare is basically wrong. In such things we are at present situated in an absolutely "inferior position" and such comparison of figures can only give proof of contrary conclusions.

Precisely because we must wage protracted warfare in the long-range Civil War, and, at the same time, wage a campaign of quick decisions in every campaign, we must be especially careful in deciding upon our strategic campaign plans. The strategy of pure defense pursued during the fifth war was basically wrong, and the many battles of desperate recklessness fought under this erroneous strategy (such as the campaigns of Kuang-ch'ang, Mao-t'ien-shan [3029 0000 1472], Yun-chi-fang [0061 3305 0975] P'ing-hsing [1627 4670], and others) were similarly erroneous. The Red Army must avoid those battles which have no prospects of victory. Even though the battle decision was correct at that point of time we should immediately refuse to engage in such battles when the situation changes unfavorably against us. It is a heinous crime to play with uprisings, and it is also criminal to play with battle.

Exactly because we must wage protracted warfare and wage quick and decisive engagements in the campaign, we must provide the Red Army with the necessary time for resting its forces and for educating and training them. These are prerequisite conditions for victory in the war. It is wrong to say that it was not possible to rest and train during the fifth war. That is the inevitable conclusion of proponents of pure defense and short, quick thrusts. It is also incorrect to hold that in order to inject vigor into the Red Army activities we must have it fighting battles frequently and without stops, and there is no need to give attention to rest and training. Without the necessary rest and training we cannot then fight battles well and victoriously. The organization of the Red Army must be suitable to the environment of the current Civil War. It is wrong to establish many new segmental and divisional units before the main force has been brought up to strength. Only after the main force is up to strength should new units be established. It is not right to throw into battle all by himself a division of new troops who have no education or training and who have no combat experience. There should be a core of veteran soldiers in the division of new troops, and, in the initial stage, place them by all possible means under the command of a veteran army corps in order to have some combat experience drilling into them. The kinds of unnecessary, unwieldy, top-heavy organizations and those improperly equipped, should all be converted to light equipment, and the company and the leadership of units below divisional level must be strengthened.

Precisely because we must wage protracted warfare and fight short, decisive engagements in the campaign, we must oppose that kind of theory which places the need to conserve effective strength in opposition to the need to protect the Soviet area. The heroic sacrifice of the Red Army is entirely necessary for the purpose of fighting a victorious battle. This is the essence of the class armed forces, the foundation of victory for the revolutionary war. This kind of sacrifice is made in exchange for victory, and this kind of victory is worthwhile. This cannot be suitably applied to conduct a battle of desperation because we must understand that only by conserving our effective strength can we truly defend the Soviet area. Without a powerful Red Army the Soviet area cannot be protected, while with one we can, after all, recover, even if the Soviet area sustained partial loss temporarily. Furthermore, only by relying upon the Red Army can new Soviet areas be formed.

Under the principle of waging protracted warfare we must oppose the two kinds of erroneous tendencies which may arise after we have smashed the enemy's "encirclement and suppression" with counteroffensive engagements. One type is conservatism arising from fatigue and overestimation of the enemy's strength. This type of conservatism causes one to become dis-spirited and discouraged, causes one to stop and become immobile. It causes us to become unable to go over from the counteroffensive to the offensive to wipe out even more enemies, develop even bigger Soviet areas and expand the forces of the Red Army. It prevents us from being able to obtain adequate conditions to smash the new "encirclement and suppression" before its onset. The other is adventurism arising from overestimation of one's own victory and inadequate appraisal of enemy strength. This kind of adventurism prevents us from achieving victory from our offensives (such as offensives undertaken without prospects of victory, and unnecessary offensives against key cities), and even causes the victory already won to be wasted or go up in smoke. It causes excessive losses to the Red Army's effective strength, causes negligence in the mission to expand the Red Army, expand the Soviet territory and achieve the development and consolidation of strategic areas. This similarly prevents us from obtaining favor-able conditions to continue smashing the enemy before the coming of his "encirclement and suppression." Opposing these two erroneous tendencies is a serious problem for the party with regard to the question of strategic offensive. That is, in the period between the enemy's two encirclements.

Under the principle of waging quick, decisive engagements in the campaign we must oppose the opportunist tendency of hastily accepting battle, which has its roots in fear and panic, or of being instructed in the initial battle. We must oppose opportunists trend toward feeling that nothing could be done about it after failing to win victory in a battle against the enemy which was launched in the hope of knocking him out first, or not making adequate preparations on the pretext of launching a quick, decisive engage-ment, or not making all necessary preparations in a period of time that can possibly be sustained, against the enemy's encirclement. For a quick, decisive engagement ther are many necessary conditions (such as strategic

superiority, correctness of campaign leadership, mobile warfare, grasping the opportune moment and concentration of forces) to wipe out the enemy troops. Only by wiping out enemy troops can a battle situation be quickly resolved and cause the enemy's offensive and "encirclement and suppression" to be smashed.

10.  One of our important strategies for smashing the enemy's "encirclement and suppression" is to take advantage of every friction within the counterrevolution and vigorously widen the rift within their ranks so as to benefit our switching over to the counteroffensive and offensive. The incident of the 19th Route Army in Fukien Province was the crux to smashing the enemy's fifth encirclement. At that time, the CCP Central Committee adopted the correct political line of utilizing this contradiction within the Kuomintang. It concluded a cease-fire agreement with the 19th Route Army so as to impel it to oppose Japanese imperialism and Chiang Kai-shek. At that time, Comrade x and others, under the empty talk of the left, adopted an opposing policy on the strategic plane. They did not understand at all that utilizing the 19th Route Army incident politically and militarily was an important key to smashing the enemy's fifth "encirclement and suppres-sion." On the contrary, they felt that the Red Army's continuation of its activities on the eastern front and striking at the rear and flanks of Chiang Kai-shek's troops attacking the 19th Route Army was equivalent to helping the 19th Route Army. They deployed the main force of the Red Army in the east to engage in the useless effort of attacking the blockhouses in the Yung-feng [3657 0023] area and lost this precious opportunity. They basically did not comprehend that the existence of the 19th Route Army's people's government at that time was advantageous to us. Striking at Chiang Kai-shek's flanks and rear in direct coordination with the 19th Route Army was precisely for our own benefit. This was not because the 19th Route Army was a revolutionary army. On the contrary, it was merely a faction within the counterrevolution. This faction planned to use even more swindles and arbitrary propaganda, and even such terms as socialism, to preserve in entirety the rule of the landlord bourgeoisie. Only by demonstrating to the worker-peasant soldiers of the 19th Route Army with concrete action that we give aid to the anti-Japanese and anti-Chiang Kai-shek struggles of any faction can we even more easily expose the swindles of the warlords of the 19th Route Army and win the soldiers over to our side in the common war against Japan and Chiang Kai-shek.

Only by adopting on a military plane a policy of direct coordination with the 19th Route Army can we retain the opportunity, at that crucial point in time, to wipe out Chiang Kai-shek's main force. This kind of condition has no precedent in the many past battles. We did not utilize this militarily. For the leaders of pure defense this would not be out of the ordinary, because their objective originally was merely to resist the enemy's advance, as for using the frictions and contradictions within the enemy ranks to bring about our going over to the counteroffensive and the offensive was a rash move in their eyes.

11.  Similarly, error in principle was also committed on the question of changing strategy and carrying out the breakthrough of the encirclement. The first thing we should discuss is that when we saw that the possibility of achieving decisive victory by spotting aims to fight along interior lines in the central Soviet area had become remote, and, finally, had become im-possible (period between May and July 1934, that is, after the Kuang-ch'ang campaign). We should have altered our strategic policy without any hesita-tion and carried out a strategic withdrawal in order to conserve the effective strength of the Red Army's main force, and sought favorable opportunities in the vast blockhouselss area for an opportune moment to go over to the counteroffensive, smash the encirclement and create new Soviet areas to protect the old. In its 25 June cable the mainstream pointed out in this manner: "(the resources for) the mobilization of new armed forces in the central area have not dried up yet. The Red Army's strength to resist and the situation in its rear areas are not enough to make us panic.

Even speaking on the matter of the Red Army's main force in the Soviet area withdrawing, its only reason is to conserve its effective strength and avoid the possibility of being attacked by the enemy. On discussing the resolu-tions of the 5th Plenary Session of the Central Committee and the 13th Plenary Session of the Communist International the future prospects of the struggle and the current international situation as well as the flexible policy of the Red Army, is was, first of all, inclined toward the conserva-tion of effective strength, to consolidate and expand under new conditions and to wait for the opportunity to launch a massive offensive against imperialism and the Kuomintang. On this crucial point it was clear that our strategic policy was also incorrect. This question was not mentioned at all in the "strategic plan for the 3 months of May, June and July," although this problem was brought up in the "strategic plan for the 3 months of August, September and October" and preparations were also begun for withdrawing from the Soviet area, nevertheless, the basic principle of the new plan was still contrary to the strategic policy which should have been adopted at that time. "Use all available strength to continue with the defense of the Soviet area and win a massive victory in the campaign by doing so" and "launch guerrilla warfare and strengthen activities in the secondary direction to achieve a strategic change in the situation"--all these still remain as the second article and the first part of the basic principle of the new plan, and the question of conserving effective strength was completely ignored. Whereas this question was the foundation of the strategic policy on which the decision to withdraw from the Soviet area rests, the error in timing, plus the emergence of positional warfare in this cam-paign, caused heavy losses to the Red Army. This kind of contradictory attitude of preparing for a breakthrough on the one hand, and, on the other, "use all available strength to continue with the defense of the central area" is precisely the manifestation of the inevitable path of leaders of the pure defense line when they arrived at the crucial moment of change.

Of even greater importance are our activities for breaking through. In the mind's eye of Comrade Hua Fu they were basically irresolute and not combat orientated. It was a kind of panicky running away, home moving type of

activity. Precisely for this reason, not only was this massive changeover not conducted in accordance with the Comintern's instruction to carry out work directed at explaining the situation to the cadres and Red soldiers, it was not even brought up for discussion at the Political Bureau conference. The political objective of the mass movement of several million people was not considered to be a significant problem. The necessary time for rest, reorganization and training was not given to the main force of the Red Army for moving from the Soviet area to the White area and for changing from positional warfare to mobile warfare, and a hasty departure was made. They were silent from beginning to end with regard to the basic questions of what the present mission was, where they were going and why they were withdrawing from the Soviet area. Therefore, they were unable to heighten the enthusiasm and activism of the Red Army fighters on the military level, and, especially, on the political level. This cannot be but a grave error. The huge column of the military committee and other rear echelon departmental organizations of the Army Corps caused great difficulties to the Red Army fighting on the move, turning all combat troops into a covering force, slowing down movement and losing the opportunity for reaching the pre-designated area.

It was completely forgotten that the strategic switch-over carried out by the Red Army would encounter serious opposition from the enemy, that in the course of the long move it would have to fight many difficult and decisive battles with all of the pursuing and blocking enemy forces before being able to arrive at its objective. All these military, political and organiza-tional errors, especially the fact that the strategic policy was not based upon the principle of obtaining the necessary and opportune moment to engage the enemy in decisive battles, brought about a situation in which we find ourselves almost always being placed in a passive position and frequently subjected to enemy attacks and being unable to strike at the enemy with strength. It therefore turned the 3-month breakthrough campaign into a covering engagement everywhere, and there were no free rein offensives taken on our own initiative. Although "preparing for combat" was frequently on the lips, in practice, we were frequently deciding combat besides conduct-ing covering engagements. The morale of the Red Army could not be uplifted, there was over-fatigue from being unable to get a moment's rest. And it resulted in a decrease in personnel to an unprecedented degree. It also caused the correct slogan of "counteroffensive" to become, in practice, a camouflage for the relief of avoiding combat advanced by Comrade x and others. There was no preparation for actually seizing victory in the counteroffensive when it became necessary. We failed to compel the enemy to change his entire plan to attack the central Soviet area with the Red Army's change of strategy so as to protect the central area, smash the fifth "encirclement and suppression," establish the Hunan base and even to con-serve the effective strength of the Red Army at a high level. All these were the unavoidable result of basically avoiding avoidance of combat in the strategic policy. This strategic avoidance of combat stems from our erroneous viewpoints. That is to say the Red Army must first arrive at its designated area (western Hunan province), unload its baggage and then launch a counteroffensive to wipe out the enemy. Otherwise, it would not be possible.

In the pursuit of the enemy (for instance, the columns of Chou [0719] and Hsueh [5641], they were afraid to give battle even when the enemy became separated and they were fatigued. The source of this kind of erroneous viewpoint lies in not understanding the fact that the current situation does not allow us to go about our task in such a simple, nonchalant and straightforward manner as well as in overestimating the strength of the pursuing enemy. This way of doing things might be possible in a brief situation involving inconsequential movements of small units, but in a situation covering several thousand li of the fifth "encirclement and suppression" and involving the massive strategic relocation of the Red Army's main force it was impossible. Avoid battles with the enemy which are unnecessary and where no weaknesses can be exploited. Engagements with the enemy should not be avoided when the contrary arises. Herein lies the main reason for the failure to accomplish their own mission in the break-through activities. This error in principle kept on developing right up to the final stage of the breakthrough campaign. When the Red Army reached the borders of Hunan and Kweichow it still acted in a mechanical manner and wanted to advance into the area of the 26th Army Corps. They did not know how to change action guidelines with the situation that had already changed. When the Red Army arrived in the area of Weiching [3597 3068], they again did not know how to delineate the task of switching over to the counter-offensive in accordance with the changes in the new situation to wipe out the pursuing troops of Chiang Kai-shek, but only recognize the task of wiping out a handful of the enemy in Kweichow and some so-called bandits. Although the last two errors were corrected due to the resolute opposition of the majority of the comrades in the Political Bureau, they were enough to display the habitual opportunist tendencies of Comrade Hua Fu and others with regard to strategy.

The prospects in the development of the pure defense line are: Either it would be desperate recklessness or flightism. There could be nothing else.

12. The enlarged session of the Political Bureau believes that all the facts have substantiated that our line of pure defense in military matters is the principal reason for our inability to smash the enemy's fifth "encirclement and suppression." All attempts to defend the erroneous line with regard to military leadership with the party's correct line will be futile. The enlarged session of the Political Bureau holds that this kind of pure defense line in military affairs is a kind of concrete manifestation of right opportunism. It rises from inadequate appraisal of enemy strength, overestimating objective difficulties, especially the difficulties of pro-tracted campaigns and blockhouse warfare, underestimating one's own subjec-tive strength, especially the strength of the Soviet area and of the Red Army and from not understanding the characteristics of the Chinese revolu-tionary war.

The enlarged session of the Political Bureau holds that the struggle against the pure defense line in military matters is the concrete struggle in the party against right opportunism. This kind of struggle should be launched and intensified in the entire party. All attempts to turn this struggle into an unprincipled individual squabble will be severely dealt with.

13.  Furthermore, the enlarged session of the Political Bureau holds that Comrade x x, especially Comrade Hua Fu's, method of leadership was very poor. All the functions of the military committee were single-handedly monopolized by Comrade Hua Fu, the collective leadership of the military committee was abolished, there was a great increase of punitivism, and self-criticism was nonexistent. Not only all differing opinions on the military plane were completely ignored but repressive measures were adopted against them, and the ingenuity, expertise and creativity of lower level commanders were stifled. Many valuable experiences and legends of past revolutionary battles were thrown away under the pretext of switching strategy and tactics and labeled "guerrillaism." Although the majority of the comrades in the military committee made correct suggestions many times, and many internal debates have broken out, but, if. It did not affect Comrade Hua Fu and Comrade x x. All these contributed to the abnormal phenomenon within the military committee.

At the same time, the Political Bureau believes even more so that, in the past, the Secretariat and the Political Bureau's leadership of the military committee was extremely inadequate. The greatest part of the Secretariat's and Political Bureau's attention was focused on the huge Red Army and on matters concerning the assurance of material supply to the Red Army. Unprecedented great results were achieved in this respect (in these fields). Very little attention was given to strategy and tactics, placing this responsibility on the shoulders of a very few comrades, mainly Comrade x x and Comrade Hua Fu. We did not clearly understand that the question of conducting a war affects the overall situation of victory or defeat, and mistakes would turn achievements gained from the best rear area work into smoke. The mistake the Political Bureau made on this question should be admitted. All the comrades of the Secretariat should bear an even greater part of the responsibility because some of the important decisions or strategic plans were approved by them.

But the enlarged session of the Political Bureau especially set forth the grave errors of Comrade x x in this respect. Representing the CCP Central Committee, he directed the work of the military committee. With regard to the error in line committed by Comrade Hua Fu in directing battles and the abnormal phenomenon within the military committee, he not only did not correct it in a timely manner but vigorously supported and nurtured the development of this kind of error. The enlarged session of the Political Bureau considers that Comrade x x should bear the main responsibility in this respect. But Comrade x x, in his conclusion, did not admit his own errors, nor did he accept criticism of the great majority of the comrades. It must be pointed out that with regard to Comrade x x, this kind of error was not an error of the entire political line, but a partial and serious political error.

The enlarged session of the Political Bureau holds that the error committed in the past on military leadership must be thoroughly rectified in order to smash the enemy's encirclement campaign, create new Soviet areas and improve the method of leadership of the military committee.

14. The enlarged session of the Political Bureau holds that although our past erroneous leadership in military matters has caused us to be unable to smash the fifth "encirclement and suppression" within the central Soviet area and brought about the forced withdrawal, with partial losses, of our main force Red Army from the Soviet area. Nevertheless, the Red Army's main force still exists. We have the superior condition (sans) based on the masses, the correct leadership of the party, a relatively good area with regard to materials and terrain and the support of the broad masses throughout the country. In coordination with the victories of the Fourth Front Army and of the 26th Army Corps, plus the correct conduct of warfare, we believe all these difficulties can be overcome through the industrious efforts of the entire body of our comrades and the red commanders. At the same time the difficulties of the enemy have increased greatly and the area of our activities has become very distant from the counterrevolutionary base of the Nanking government. The blockhouse area, which was run by Chiang Kai-shek for many years and on which he placed his reliance, is now no more. The contradictions and disunity within the ranks of the warlords have further multiplied and the main force of our chief enemy, Chiang Kai-shek, has been weakened in the fifth "encirclement and suppression." The division of China by imperialism, the Kuomintang's policy of national betrayal and the unprecedented collapse of the national economy throughout the country have made it even more clear to the people of the nation that only the Soviet can save China. They, thereby, become even more sympathetic to the Soviet revolution and give it support, and more directly participate in struggles on behalf of the Soviet's political power. All these are favorable conditions for smashing the enemy's new encirclement campaign, creating new Soviet bases and developing a nation-wide Soviet movement. It must be pointed out, however, that the current situation has set critical tasks before the party and the Red Army. This is because at no time will imperialism and the counterrevolutionary warlords of the Kuomintang relax their drive against us. In the face of the new encirclement campaign we must recreate Soviet areas as there are no existing ones, and the central Red Army is not in the Yunnan-Kweichow area. Our victory must be won through arduous struggles of our own. The creation of new Soviet areas cannot be successful without going through bloody struggle. The current central problem is how to be victorious over the troops of Szechwan, Yunnan, Kweichow and Chiang Kai-shek. The movements of the Red Army must have a high degree of flexibility in order to fight successfully against these enemies.

The basic principles of revolutionary warfare have been decided and to accom-plish battle tasks it will be necessary to apply these principles in a flexible way. The special capacity of the Red Army for mobile warfare has been considerably weakened by protracted positional warfare in the battles of the fifth encirclement, and, right now, the various levels of Red Army commanders are required to have a high level of tactical skill in mobile warfare. The resolute and rapid change over from the tactics of positional warfare (short, quick, thrusts) to the tactics of mobile warfare is a very serious task. Necessary training in skills must be given to the fighters, especially the new ones. In political work everything must meet with the

current need of the movement in order to guarantee the accomplishment of every combat task. The Red Army needs even more to test up and reorganize during battles and also to expand itself in a big way. The Red Army should tighten up on its own discipline. It must maintain even closer relations with the broad masses of hard working worker-peasant masses and become as one with them and strengthen in a big way the work of the local people. The current situation demands that the leadership of the party and the Red Army should exert all efforts to resolve these basic questions con-cretely and positively.

The work of the party in the White area must be established and strengthened. There must be a thorough change in the leadership method of the mass struggle in the White area. The work of collapsing the White area must be launched in a positive manner. The propagation of large-scale guerrilla warfare is one of the party's most central tasks. The party must hold fast to the leadership of guerrilla warfare in the central Soviet area and the soviet areas of Hunan-Kiangsi and Hunan-Hupei-Kiangsi provinces, change past methods of work to conform with the new situation. Finally, even more close relationship must be established with the 25th Army Corps and the Fourth Front Army and also strengthen the leadership over them in order to achieve unified action of all the Red armies in the country and their coordination with each other.

The enlarged session of the Political Bureau believes that we can accomplish these serious tasks that have been placed before us, and their accomplishment ensures subsequent new victories in the revolution. New victories in the revolution will make our central Red Army create a new Soviet base area in the vast expanse of the three provinces of Yunnan, Kweichow and Szechwan, bring about the recovery of our old Soviet area, and the creation of a unified liaison between the Red armies in various areas with the Soviet areas. It will also bring about a change of the struggle of the worker-peasant masses throughout the country into a victorious revolution.

The enlarged session of the Political Bureau believes that the Chinese Soviet Revolution, having its rich historic source, cannot be wiped out and cannot be conquered by the enemy. The transformation of the central Soviet area, the Hunan-Kiangsi Soviet area and the Chekiang-Kiangsi Soviet area into guerrilla area is but a partial setback in the overall Soviet revolu-tion. Such setback is not enough to make us display alarm and panic about the progress of the Chinese Soviet Revolution. In practice, it will not be possible even for the Kuomintang and imperialism to contemplate temporarily stopping the advance of the Soviet revolution. The victories of the Fourth Front Army and the 25th Army Corps, the brisk activities of the Central Red Army in the three provinces of Yunnan, Kweichow and Szechwan, and the revolutionary struggle of the worker-peasant masses throughout the country testify that the entire Chinese Soviet Revolution is advancing.

The enlarged session of the Political Bureau pointed out that the past errors of the party in its military leadership are but partial errors when viewed from the standpoint of the party's entire line. This kind of error is not

enough to make us become dejected and discouraged. The party has courageously
exposed this kind of error and educated itself to it. It has learned how
to even better lead the revolution and battle to complete victory. The
party has not been weakened, but strengthened, after exposing such errors.

The enlarged session of the Political Bureau calls on all comrades to oppose
with the determination of a Bolshevik, all right-leaning opportunism of
alarm and panic, dejection and discouragement, and, foremost, to oppose the
line of pure defense. The enlarged session of the Political Bureau even
more urgently calls on all comrades to unite to a man around the CCP Central
Committee and struggle to the end for the CCP Central Committee's general
line. Victory will inevitably be ours.

° Reference Materials on the History of the Chinese Revolution, Vol 3,
The People's University of China, 1956.

▲ "Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung," Vol 1
Printed by the CCP Shansi-Hopeh-Shantung-Honan Central Bureau, 1948.

END