Conversation with American Scholar T. A. Bisson[1]

(June 22 and 23, 1937)

June 22

Question: How has Nanjing's policy toward Japan evolved since 1931? Can this development be divided into several stages?

Answer: It can be divided into two periods. The first period began on September 18, 1931, and lasted until the Second Plenary Session of the Kuomintang Central Committee in July 1936. During this period, the Kuomintang continued to implement its dictatorial policy of relying on imperialism, yielding step by step to imperialism, and suppressing the people.

After the September 18 Incident, it unconditionally abandoned Northeast China. As a result of the 1932 Shanghai War, the Chinese bourgeoisie was terrified by Japanese imperialism. They did not even build any defensive fortifications in the coastal provinces, preparing to hand over these provinces to Japan on a silver platter. During the Shanghai War, they were ready to move the capital to Luoyang as a provisional capital, and if necessary, to move it further to Xi'an. It was not until Nanjing discovered that Japan had launched the Shanghai War merely as a means to legitimize its occupation of the Northeast, and that the Japanese military had no intention of occupying the coastal provinces, coupled with some efforts by Britain and the United States to oppose Japan, that Nanjing decided not to relocate the capital. So, they returned to Nanjing but remained fearful of Japan until the developments in North China in November and December 1935.[1]

In 1935, Japan attempted to occupy North China in one fell swoop. Nanjing was terrified and had no choice but to sign the He-Umezu Agreement[2]. At the Kuomintang's Fifth National Congress held in November-December 1935, this attitude still prevailed. Nanjing still indicated at the time: as long as peace could be maintained, it did not want to fight, meaning it was prepared to make further capitulations.

It was only at the Second Plenary Session of the Kuomintang Central Executive Committee in July 1936 that Nanjing changed its tone toward Japan. At the session, it declared that if Japan did not further violate China's sovereignty or seize more territory, it would not fight. This signified a demand to maintain the status quo, thereby also clarifying the limits of the sacrifices it was prepared to make. The practical measure embodying this change in policy line was the negotiations between Zhang Qun and Kawagoe[3] from September 15 to December 3, 1936. During these negotiations, Nanjing rejected Japan's demands. This was the first sign, from 1931 to 1936, of a change in Nanjing's policy of capitulation.

Question: Was this period related to the political struggles within Nanjing? If so, what were the main factions involved in this struggle? What socioeconomic forces did they represent?

Answer: Now let us discuss the reasons for Nanjing's change in policy. There were three important factors contributing to this change:

[1] Japan's "North China Autonomy" movement provoked widespread demonstrations by students in Beiping and Tianjin, which spread throughout China and led to the formation of National Salvation Associations in major cities.
[2] The He-Umezu Agreement, signed on July 6, 1935, primarily granted Japan privileges in North China.
[3] Zhang Qun, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Kuomintang. Kawagoe, Japanese Ambassador to China.

(1) The anti-Japanese struggle launched by the Chinese people, the patriotic armed forces, the Communist Party, and the Red Army. This included: the Northeast Volunteer Army, the Nineteenth Route Army (in Shanghai in 1932), the troops of Ji Hongchang who fought the Japanese in Chahar in 1933, the troops of Fu Zuoyi who achieved victory in defending Suiyuan in 1936, student demonstrations, and the nationwide national salvation movement of the broad masses.

The Kuomintang believed that Japanese aggression was irresistible. We know that the Northeast Volunteer Army has resisted and continues to resist. The Kuomintang believed that the people's anti-Japanese movement would only give Japan a pretext for further aggression. In reality, this movement struck the Japanese so heavily that they were terrified and wavered in occupying more territory. The Kuomintang believed that China's military strength was insufficient to resist Japan. In fact, the Battle of Shanghai and the Battles at the Great Wall (in the Chahar and Suiyuan areas) had already proven that China could resist and had, for a time, halted Japanese aggression.

The Kuomintang regarded the Communist Party as an irreconcilable foe, rather than seeing the Japanese as the enemy. Therefore, the Kuomintang always sought to eliminate the Communist Party. However, the influence generated by the Communist Party's united front policy was so immense that it compelled the Kuomintang to confront the victories achieved by the Communist Party. This was the fundamental reason leading to the change in Nanjing's Japan policy. From this point, Nanjing began to realize that the true, entire national strength lay within the people. It began to feel somewhat bolder and braver, so it can be said that the united front reduced its fear of the Japanese.

(2) The second factor was the international situation. The Soviet Union's sympathy for China's resistance against Japanese aggression was a matter of course. The capitalist world of the time had also split into two opposing parts: one part hoping for peace and maintaining the status quo; the other part composed of fascist aggressors and instigators of a new world war. Corresponding changes in Britain's Far Eastern policy (featuring certain anti-Japanese actions) also exerted an influence on Nanjing. From these two factors arose the final factor that fostered Nanjing's transformation:

(3) The differentiation within the ruling class and the Kuomintang party itself. There were many groups and factions within the Kuomintang, but fundamentally there were two groups: the pro-Japanese group and the anti-Japanese group. Differentiation had begun in September 1931, but it was only after Japan's "North China Autonomy" movement in 1935 that the opinion that China must and could resist Japan formed public opinion within Kuomintang-controlled areas. Previously, this was a view held only by a relatively small minority; now, it became increasingly widespread. By 1936, it had become so extensive that it exerted the first truly powerful influence on Nanjing's politics and policy.

Question: Which factions or individuals in Nanjing favor or oppose the united front? What signs are there of the Nanjing government moving toward democratization? Along these lines, what further developments do you foresee in the near future?

Answer: Now, let us discuss the next stage, concerning the present and the future. The change in Nanjing's policy, which began to manifest during the Zhang Qun-Kawagoe negotiations, continued clearly at the Third Plenary Session of the Kuomintang Central Committee in February 1937. At this session, the Kuomintang's policy showed genuine changes in various respects. Its attitude towards Japan became considerably tougher, and it formally adopted a policy of domestic peace, i.e., no civil war. This development was directly related to the policy, long proposed by the Communist Party, of uniting all national forces to resist Japan.

Currently, the next most important step is a change in Nanjing's policy concerning democracy. The Kuomintang has not resolved to completely abandon the fundamental characteristic of its rule, namely its military dictatorship. Nanjing has not made this change. Achieving democratic reform is the primary task at hand. To consolidate domestic peace and national unity, democracy is the fundamental prerequisite. Without democracy, the arduous task of resisting Japanese aggression cannot be effectively advanced.

Therefore, the slogans of the popular masses today are: (1) domestic peace, (2) democratic reform, (3) the war of resistance against Japan. All these fall under the overarching slogan of the national united front and a democratic state. During this period, the three factors mentioned above that influence Kuomintang policy will exert an increasingly greater influence on the people of the whole country. With the help of these three factors, we can realize these three slogans.

As for those factions opposing the united front, we believe they can be viewed from the following three aspects:

(1) Internationally, the main one is Japanese imperialism. But Japan is not isolated; Germany also participates in this fascist bloc, along with Italy. They always seek to entice the Chinese ruling class into joining their camp. They want China not only to become a colony but also to serve as a force to be used against the peace front. This is the first threatening factor.

(2) The pro-Japanese faction within China's ruling class and the Trotskyites[1] in society. They vigorously oppose the united front and the three main slogans mentioned above. This is the second dangerous factor.

(3) The danger posed by irresolute, wavering elements. Such people exist within the ruling class and throughout society. In principle, they support resisting Japan, but they are unwilling to grant democratic rights to the people. Their difficulty is that they are straddling two boats; as a result, they will either drown or end up with both feet on the Japanese boat. It is precisely this situation that caused the student conflict at Beiping Normal University on May 4 and led to the imprisonment of leaders of the National Salvation Association. Yang Likui[2] of Beiping Normal University is one of these elements.

Internationally and domestically, these three groups essentially stand on the same ground: they fundamentally oppose the Chinese people's united front policy. Whether the tasks of the united front can be achieved depends on whether the anti-Japanese faction, the democratic faction advocating reform of the Nanjing system, and all those striving for unity can defeat these three opposition factions mentioned above. If they are defeated, these slogans will be realized; otherwise, the future will be fraught with difficulties. The outcome will be decided by the struggle between these two fronts.

As for how the struggle between the two sides will develop, it should be noted that the anti-Japanese front has already achieved an initial victory. The main indication is: China has been prevented from joining the fascist camp and has been turned towards the anti-fascist camp. On this crucial issue, Japan has already been defeated. From early on, the Communist Party spared no effort to prevent China from joining the fascist camp. This was demonstrated by its long-term dedication, even before the Xi'an Incident, to uniting all national forces within the united front; it was also demonstrated by the peaceful resolution of the Xi'an Incident, where we did not exploit this event for selfish gain in a civil war; it is further demonstrated by the policies and actions adopted by the Communist Party after the Xi'an Incident to unite all national forces to resist Japan.

Question: At the time of and following the Xi'an Incident, there was, as previously mentioned, the possibility of forming a Northwest Allied Army (a coalition of the Northeast Army and the Red Army against Nanjing). What political advantages would this have had?

Answer: First, China did not join the fascist camp (this threat had been foreshadowed by the ominous political turmoil in Nanjing led by He Yingqin when Chiang Kai-shek was detained in Xi'an). Second, as I just stated, initial victory was achieved in the work of uniting all patriotic anti-Japanese forces in China. Only by implementing such a policy can China be saved.

Question: After the Xi'an Incident, in the student elections at Yenching University, left-wing forces seemed uncertain about which policy to follow. They did not campaign vigorously, resulting in the reactionary students winning control of key positions in the student union; recently, at a student congress convened by the new leadership, a resolution was even passed to withdraw from the Beiping Student Federation. Could this be a sign of the difficulties the mass movement faces in understanding and correctly implementing this new line?

Answer: This situation reflects a kind of backlash triggered by the Xi'an Incident. The Xi'an Incident initially began as an anti-Chiang uprising; its character was changed only through our efforts. Later, it was transformed into a grand unity under the condition of recognizing Chiang Kai-shek's regime. It was the Red Army that turned a rebellion into a union. The Communist Party did not lose out because of this. On the contrary, the strength and influence of the Communist Party expanded significantly further throughout the country. At a superficial glance, it seems our influence at Yenching has waned somewhat, but this view is not comprehensive. If we look at universities and cities across the nation, the Communist Party's influence and prestige have actually not diminished but grown. We believe that the students will certainly see the overall situation and recognize the victory our policy achieved in the Xi'an Incident.

Question: Might recognizing Nanjing as the leader of all the nation's various forces create confusion among student organizations and other mass organizations? What course of action should be taken to avoid such difficulties?

[1] Trotskyites, ultra-leftist elements such as Zhang Guotao and others, had previously opposed the compromises necessary to establish the united front.
[2] Yang Likui, Head of the Physics Department at Beiping Normal University, who stirred up public opinion to attack the Beiping Student Federation, alleging it received subsidies from the CPC, but never produced any facts to substantiate his claims.

Answer: Regarding the question of leadership, the masses harbor no doubts. Leadership does not rely on the size of its strength, but on the program put forward by the leaders and the efforts they make. The Chinese Communist Party does not seek personal gain; it serves only the interests of the majority of the people, the nation, and the toiling masses. If the struggle is victorious and the Japanese are defeated, and if the situation develops in this direction, then it means that this movement is under the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party. The path pointed out by the Chinese Communist Party is the only way to save the nation, and no force can obstruct it. If the entire country follows the path charted by the Chinese Communist Party, even the iron will of the enemy's front will surely be shattered. Whether it is Japan's influence, pro-Japanese elements, or various vacillating elements, they will all be eliminated by the people's struggle led by the Chinese Communist Party. It is we, not they, who will endure forever. Our American friends will certainly see this outcome.

Question: Is Britain strengthening China's capacity to resist Japan in order to avoid war and protect its own interests, and by maintaining a balance of power between the opposing sides, to use both against the Soviet Union? Will not such support encourage the emergence in Nanjing of a fascist military dictatorship that will attempt to eliminate the Chinese Communist Party in the future?

Answer: Britain's strengthening of its influence in China is a contradictory phenomenon at present. In the anti-Japanese struggle, because China is in a colonial position, it is possible for a third country to strengthen its position in China at this time. Can it then be said that this is driving out the tiger through the front door while letting the wolf in through the back? No, that would be incorrect. This issue must be treated differentially.

Japan cannot be regarded as an imperialist country identical to Britain. One is aligned with the aggressive front, while the other is not. It is wrong to treat them as the same. If we regard them as identical imperialist countries, we would then have to fight both of them simultaneously, or fight all imperialisms at once. This is erroneous and dangerous. Only the Trotskyites would reach such a conclusion: that we must fight all imperialisms. On the surface, it seems very revolutionary, but in reality, it would drive Britain into Japan's camp. This is spinning a cocoon around oneself.

The policy of the Chinese Communist Party is precisely the opposite. We must obtain assistance from any country that opposes Japan in order to strike at Japan. We realize that if China is conquered by fascist states, as in the case of the Northeast, we will gain nothing from Trotsky's fine phrases. As for aid provided to China by other imperialist states, this support must be limited to a particular category. The policy of such a state must differ from Japan's, mainly in this respect: the preservation of China's sovereignty.

Formerly, Britain was the leader of the anti-Soviet crusade, and the sacred duty of the British Empire was to oppose Bolshevism. Now, Germany and Japan have taken over this mantle, and Britain is changing its attitude toward the Soviet Union. At present, it is pursuing a conservative policy of maintaining its existing position. Although Britain dislikes the Soviet Union, the new circumstances also prevent it from being overly fond of Germany and Japan. Of course, the Anglo-Saxon peoples have always prided themselves on their freedom of thought, and they may think as they like, but in the end, they are bound to reach this conclusion: it is better to safeguard their interests with the aid of the Soviet Union. Thought and action are not always one and the same.

Britain cannot achieve the Far Eastern balance of power you speak of. Indeed, Britain long ago adopted and has consistently followed a policy of balance of power. However, once the forces on the two sides of the balance are unequal, adjustments must be made here and there to achieve equilibrium. In the current world situation, any such balance can only be temporary. Britain wants to maintain such a balance in Europe, but if any balance emerges, the fascist states will undoubtedly destroy it. To save itself, Britain has no choice but to support the forces of the peace front and the democratic forces.

Under certain circumstances, because of the rapid development of fascist forces, Britain must make use of anti-fascist forces that are often revolutionary. Therefore, it cannot obstruct the growth of revolutionary anti-fascist forces. The policy of compromise and the policy of balancing power allows revolutionary forces to grow. The examples of France and Spain embody this process. In both countries, there are certain pro-fascist forces, but for Britain, allowing such forces to assume power would be too dangerous. Thus, although Britain dislikes united front governments, it must cooperate with them in some manner. There are many contradictions in Britain's current policy. Its acts of compromise have also abetted the rise of fascists, and the flood of fascism has in turn stirred revolutionary waves, raising the ship of the Soviet Union higher as a result.

Today's situation bears certain similarities to Franco's circumstances in Spain. The Whampoa clique (the military right wing in Nanjing) faces two enemies—the Chinese Communist Party and Japan. If it allies with Japan to oppose communism, it will play the role of Franco, as in Spain, and will then fight a civil war against the revolutionary forces of China. If the Whampoa clique resolves to resist Japan, it must extend the forces of Chinese national unity, and therefore it must accept the program of the Chinese Communist Party. Hence, it also cannot obstruct the development of the communist movement. Whichever course it takes, the influence of the Chinese Communist Party will grow.

As for the military dictatorship of the Kuomintang, it is clear that from the "September 18th" Incident in 1931 to the present, and even earlier, Nanjing has been practicing a military dictatorship, and until July 1936, the dictatorship was accompanied by a pro-Japanese policy. Now, the Kuomintang has changed its foreign policy, and it must also change its domestic policy. It is impossible for the Kuomintang simultaneously to suppress the people and to succeed in resisting Japan. Very likely, Nanjing is not willing to pursue an in-depth and sustained anti-Japanese policy. At present, there is no war of resistance and no democracy. This can only be a temporary situation. The current period has transitional characteristics; it is moving from one stage to another. We are in the midst of this transitional period.

Generally speaking, the situation is thus. Therefore, many unhealthy phenomena may also be observed. In China, we see the arrest and trial of leaders of the National Salvation Association, the suppression of mass movements, and remnants of old policies that have not yet been completely abandoned. On the other hand, there also exists a struggle in which healthy tendencies oppose the remnants of these maladies. We can still see this other side, so we need not be overly worried. One must observe objectively the struggle underway. This struggle is the essential characteristic of the current period. If certain members of the Kuomintang persist in old policies and refuse to reform, they are free to adopt such an attitude; but newly emerging anti-Japanese democratic forces are growing and expanding, and they will certainly check the actions of these individuals. Even a figure like U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice (Charles Evans) Hughes had to change, or else face only downfall and complete failure.

June 23

Question: What position should students and intellectuals take at present?

Answer: It is incorrect to pose this question as a matter of choosing between two alternatives—either following Nanjing or following the Chinese Communist Party. In the past, some students sided with the Chinese Communist Party, and some sided with Nanjing. Now, within the united front, within a unified democratic republic, there is a common future. Based on the program of opposing Japan and supporting the democratic front, we can unite the overwhelming majority of students and intellectuals. Only a small handful of rightists will vacillate.

In the past, intellectuals suffered under the double oppression of Japanese imperialism and Nanjing's military dictatorship. It is not only intellectuals who feel this oppression from within and without; the bourgeoisie, which also suffers from internal and external oppression, shares the same feeling.

Today, there is a new prospect. The current situation is that we abolish our soviet system, and the Kuomintang abolishes its autocratic dictatorship, with both sides uniting to create a democratic republic. This is the demand of the majority of the people. If this demand is not met, and if this program does not advance, Nanjing's position will grow increasingly weak, and it will become more and more difficult to maintain the status quo. Therefore, both sides must make efforts toward the same political goal—the anti-Japanese united front. At the same time, we must struggle against hostile forces—the united front of Japanese imperialism and Chinese pro-Japanese elements.

Question: How do you see the future development of the united front?

Answer: The united front is naturally composed of different groups, and the struggle between them will determine its future. It will advance through different stages that cannot be foreseen in detail. Its composition is basically, on one side, the proletariat, peasants, and petite bourgeoisie, and on the other side, the national bourgeoisie. They have some things in common and some that are different. Those points of commonality should and can unite both sides within the united front, but at the same time, their differences also bring struggle, and the development of this struggle is uneven. The issue must be viewed in this way.

Moreover, external events occurring on the international stage also influence the future development. Therefore, it depends on development on both the internal and the external fronts in China. But one point can be asserted with certainty: obviously, it must be one or the other—either the aggressive front of Japanese imperialism triumphs, or the Chinese united front triumphs. Everything depends on the outcome of the struggle between these two.

As for the near future, the main objective of the domestic united front in China is the establishment of a democratic republic. All the various groups have a share of interest in it. The basic task is to improve the livelihood of peasants, workers, and intellectuals. A further task is to resolve certain problems of the bourgeoisie, which is threatened by colonialism and bureaucratic capitalism. These are the tasks of the first stage of the united front program.

After the creation of the democratic republic, the next planned task is to carry out China's socialist revolution. China cannot become an imperialist or capitalist country. Its future is, first, a democratic republic; second, a socialist revolution.

Question: Why do you think China cannot become a capitalist country?

Answer: First, both in the past and in the present, China is a semi-colonial country. The Chinese bourgeoisie may dream of such a prospect, but neither China's current condition nor the demands of the present era allow it.

China is not prepared to remain in a semi-colonial status for long. That is a legacy of the past. But now it is preparing to strive for an independent status. Under the leadership of the proletariat, it strives to achieve

friendship. Your policy of struggling to prompt the United States to adopt a correct stance against Japan's aggression in China meets with our complete agreement.

The Chinese revolution cannot be viewed in isolation. It is only a part of the world revolution. Though it has its own particular characteristics, it is fundamentally the same as the struggles of the people in Spain, France, the United States, and Britain. The inherent characteristics of these struggles are all the same; they are all striving for world progress. The widespread sympathy of the American public for China demonstrates this commonality. They care about the fate of the Chinese people, and we also care about theirs. Please convey this sentiment to the American people. In China, there is oppression from imperialist and feudal forces; in the United States, there is also oppression, only from different sources. Therefore, our common wish is that the united struggle of our two peoples, joining together, can lead us to a brand new world.

Mao Zedong with foreign friends.

Talks with Nym Wales\[1\]

(June 24, July 4, and August 13, 1937)

(1) The political attitude and future of Chinese intellectuals. In the past, some intellectuals stood on the side of the Kuomintang, and some on the side of the Communist Party. Now there is a common goal, and everyone will stand on the side of the anti-Japanese national united front. "On the foundation of the anti-Japanese national united front, it is possible to unite the vast majority of students and intellectuals; only a tiny minority of rightists will waver." This united front opposes the pro-Japanese clique and Japanese imperialism. Within it, on one side are the workers, peasants, and petty bourgeoisie, and on the other side is the bourgeoisie. They have points in common, so they can unite; they also have their own differing interests, so within the united front there are also contradictions and struggles.

The future of Chinese intellectuals depends on China's internal and external situation. The War of Resistance Against Japan has two possibilities: either the Japanese aggressors triumph, or China's anti-Japanese front triumphs; the prospect of the second possibility is the establishment of a democratic republic. In the process of establishing the democratic republic, the problems of intellectuals, such as raising their standard of living, and the problems of the bourgeoisie, such as avoiding the danger of colonization, will all be resolved. After the democratic republic is established, the next

\[1\] Nym Wales is the pen name of American journalist and author Helen Foster Snow, former wife of Edgar Snow. She visited Yan'an in 1937 and interviewed Mao Zedong on three successive occasions. Based on the records of those interviews, she later wrote books such as *Notes from Yan'an*, *A Life of Revolution: Biographies*, and *Miscellaneous Notes on the Chinese Communist Party*. This excerpt is taken from *Notes from Yan'an*.

task will be to carry out the socialist revolution. China cannot become an imperialist or a fully-fledged capitalist country.

(2) How can China break away from capitalism and transition to socialism? China is a semi-colonial country. The bourgeoisie is weak and powerless, unable to lead the national democratic revolutionary movement against imperialism and feudalism. In China, without the leadership of the proletariat, it is impossible for any revolution to succeed. This condition makes it possible for China to skip capitalism and move into socialism in the future. The present war is a war against imperialism and fascism, a revolutionary war, and victory will certainly belong to the revolutionary side. The existence of the Soviet Union will have a decisive influence not only on China but also on other countries in the world. Add to this the leadership of the proletariat. Based on these three conditions, our conclusion is: China can avoid capitalism and directly realize socialism, but this will be a considerably long period. We are prepared to carry out a long-term struggle. In the course of development, it is impossible to avoid a certain degree of capitalist development, and it is also necessary, because it serves as one of the forces resisting imperialism. Through industrial development, it will strengthen the leadership and power of the proletariat.

(1) On the question of the various classes in China. Many of China’s bankers are compradors and semi-compradors. Small and medium-sized bankers have no ties with imperialism. T.V. Soong and H.H. Kung are bankers of state capital. The interests of some landlords and compradors are most directly linked with Japan, and they may become traitors. China’s petty bourgeoisie and intellectuals have played an important role in the revolution. In a semi-colonial society, intellectuals, as appendages, are in a position where their employment lacks security. Students are a very important part in the social revolution, but they do not play a decisive role; only the proletariat and the peasants play such a role. The peasants are a class situated between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. Under the leadership of the bourgeoisie, they will follow the bourgeoisie.