I. The New Stage of the War

The Second Imperialist War began long ago and has already been fought for several years.

Japanese imperialism began its invasion of China in 1931, first seizing the three northeastern provinces and then launching a large-scale invasion of China in 1937.

Italian imperialism invaded Abyssinia in 1935.

In 1936, Germany and Italy jointly invaded Spain.

In 1938, Germany occupied Austria and Czechoslovakia.

During this period, over five hundred million people in the East and the West were drawn into the war, yet imperialist countries such as Britain, the United States, and France did not participate.

Therefore, we call this period the first stage of the Second Imperialist War.

From now on—from the moment imperialist countries such as Britain and France join the war—it shall be called the second stage, because the situation has become entirely different.

If before it could not yet be called a world war, since it did not have a global scale, then now it is different; now it is an imperialist world war—this is the new stage of the imperialist war.

II. The Causes of the War

According to historical facts and Lenin's theory, in the era of imperialism, capitalist development is extremely uneven, and therefore wars among imperialist countries are inevitable.

Less than twenty years after the end of the First Imperialist War for the redivision of the world, the Second Imperialist War has broken out—once again, the imperialist countries are waging a war to redivide the world.

The initial stage of this new war, its first stage, was built upon the last worldwide economic crisis.

After the unprecedented world economic crisis of 1929 to 1933 passed, what followed was not prosperity but a special kind of depression.

Some imperialist countries—those that believed they had received too little spoils in the First World War, such as Japan and Italy, or those that believed they had lost spoils in the last war, such as Germany—rushed fully armed onto the stage of war, attempting to use war to escape the economic crisis and avoid the collapse of capitalism.

Thus the Second Imperialist War began to erupt and formed its first stage.

The second stage of the Second Imperialist War, in which countries such as Germany, Britain, France, and Poland have launched large-scale warfare, will directly or indirectly draw in all capitalist countries of the world—this is built upon a new economic crisis.

The new world economic crisis that began in 1937 has, in recent years, spread insidiously through the so-called "peaceful" countries like Britain, the United States, and France, and is now developing toward Germany, Japan, and Italy.

On top of the economic crisis, a severe political crisis has also emerged. The people are dissatisfied with capitalism and bourgeois dictatorship. Whether in countries that had long been fascistized or in those now using war to enforce fascistization, this political crisis and this popular discontent grow increasingly acute by the day.

On the other hand, socialist Soviet Union has grown so powerful as to be inviolable.

Under these circumstances, the bourgeoisie of all imperialist countries believes that the only way to escape the economic and political crises and to avoid their own demise is to expand the war, to transform a partial war into a total war, and to strike down their imperialist friends.

All of this represents the calculations of the world's bourgeoisie on the eve of their death.

As for the fact that this calculation—using a war to redivide the world to escape the economic and political crises and avoid their own destruction—will inevitably create even greater economic and political crises and hasten the day of their death, they are incapable of imagining it.

They are like mad dogs—already driven insane, utterly deranged by the capitalist system—compelled to lash out wildly against their enemies, against the walls of the world. This is the actual existence of the world's bourgeoisie today.

A brawl of mad dogs—this is today's imperialist war.

III. The Aims of the War

"War is the continuation of politics."

The nature of imperialism is plunder, and even in times of "peace," the policies of imperialist countries are always aimed at plunder.

But when the plundering policies of some imperialist countries encounter obstruction from other imperialist countries and cannot break through that obstruction by peaceful means, they resort to war to break through it, so as to continue their plundering policies.

Thus, plunder—this is the sole political aim of imperialist war.

The aim of the Second Imperialist War is the same as that of the First Imperialist War: to redivide the world—that is, to redivide colonies, semi-colonies, and spheres of influence, to plunder the people of the world, and to contend for the right to rule over the people of the world.

This aim of the Second Imperialist War, in both its past stage and its present stage, is entirely the same.

Aside from this aim, is there any other aim?

Is there any benevolent aim?

None whatsoever.

Whether it is Germany, Italy, and Japan, or Britain, the United States, and France, all imperialist countries directly or indirectly participating in the war have only this counter-revolutionary aim, this aim of plundering the people, this imperialist aim.

Japan's imperialist "perpetual peace," Hitler's "national self-determination," Chamberlain's "opposition to National Socialism," Daladier's "aid to Poland"—in truth, these are all just the word "plunder."

It is merely that, for the sake of sounding pleasant and deceiving the people, they ordered their secretaries to coin a few slightly more distinctive euphemisms.

IV. The Nature of the War

The nature of war is determined by its political aim.

All wars fall into two categories. According to Comrade Stalin, wars are divided into: (1) just, non-plundering wars of liberation, and (2) unjust, plundering wars.

The Second Imperialist War, like the First Imperialist War, belongs to the second category.

This is because the aim of both wars is to plunder the people of the world, with no other aim whatsoever, offering no benefit whatsoever to the people of their own countries or of other countries.

This is the plundering nature, the unjust nature, the imperialist nature of the war.

Both sides in the current war, in order to deceive the people and mobilize public opinion, shamelessly claim that they are just and that the other side is unjust.

In truth, this is nothing but a farce, a deception.

Only wars of national liberation and wars of people's liberation, as well as wars fought by socialist countries to aid these two kinds of liberation movements, are just wars.

This time, many people have become confused again. They think that while Germany is certainly unjust, Britain and France are democratic countries opposing fascist countries, and Poland is waging a war of national self-defense. They believe that the side of Britain, France, and Poland carries at least some element of progressiveness. This is an extremely muddled view.

This confusion stems from failing to clarify the aims of the war, and also from failing to clarify the different characteristics of the first and second stages of the war.

V. The Characteristics of the First Stage of the War

The characteristics of the first stage of the Second Imperialist War are as follows:

(1) In terms of the relations among the imperialist countries, a portion of the imperialist countries—the three fascist states of Germany, Italy, and Japan—launched frenzied wars of aggression, violating the interests of various weak and small nations, infringing upon the interests of various democratic countries, and instigating fascist threats within those democratic countries. Consequently, the people of the whole world demanded opposition to aggression and defense of democracy. They demanded that the other portion of imperialist countries, the so-called democratic countries of Britain, the United States, and France, come forward to intervene in the war of aggression and allow the people to preserve what little remaining democracy they had. The Soviet Union repeatedly proposed its willingness to form an anti-aggression united front with the various so-called democratic countries. If those so-called democratic countries had come forward at that time to intervene against the aggressors, if a war to intervene against the aggressors had occurred—for example, if they could have joined the Soviet Union in aiding the Spanish government forces to stop German and Italian aggression, and in aiding China to stop Japanese aggression—then such actions, such a war, would have been just and would have had a progressive character. Yet these so-called democratic countries did not come forward to intervene; they adopted a policy of "non-intervention." Their aim was to let both the aggressor countries and the victim countries exhaust themselves in the war, and then to come forward themselves to intervene and reap the benefits as a fisherman does. As for Britain and France handing over Austria and Czechoslovakia to Germany, this served as a bargaining condition—that is, as a condition in exchange for Germany's attack on the Soviet Union. Britain, the United States, and France wished to incite conflict between the Soviet Union and Germany, so that they might kill with a borrowed knife, leaving both sides wounded and exhausted, and then dominate the world alone. Due to their "non-intervention" policy, the war manifested itself with only a portion of the imperialist countries coming out to fight, while another portion of the imperialist countries "sat on top of the mountain and watched the tigers fight." This gave rise to the war's partial nature, its lack of universality, its character of non-intervention. The counter-revolutionary "non-intervention" policy of the bourgeois governments of the democratic countries was not abolished under the pressure of the people's strength, and thus this partial nature emerged. This was the first characteristic of the first stage of the war.

(2) But within this period, aside from the situation in which German, Italian, and Japanese imperialism waged unjust, plundering wars while the so-called democratic countries connived at such wars, there was also another situation: there were wars of national liberation. These were Abyssinia's war against Italian aggression, the Spanish Republic's war against German and Italian aggression, and the great war of resistance of China against Japanese aggression. The people of the entire world and the socialist Soviet Union sincerely aided these wars. These latter wars were just, non-plundering wars of liberation. This is the second characteristic of the first stage of the war.

The partial nature of the imperialist war and the existence of anti-imperialist wars—these are the two characteristics of the first stage of the Second Imperialist War.

VI. Our Revolutionary Policy During the First Stage of the War

Based on the characteristics of the first stage of the war, the revolutionary policy of this stage was undoubtedly to organize an anti-aggression united front in the aggressed countries to resist the aggressors' attacks; to organize the surging anti-fascist struggle among the masses in the various democratic countries to defend democracy; and, at the same time, not to abandon the struggle to organize an effort between the Soviet Union and the governments of the various democratic countries to halt the further development of aggression. On this last point—the point of organizing an anti-aggression united front between the Soviet Union and the governments of the democratic countries—even after Munich, due to the anger aroused by Spain's defeat and Czechoslovakia's destruction among the broad masses in both Britain and France, and even among left-wing bourgeois elements, there was still the possibility of forcing the governments of Chamberlain and Daladier to abandon the "non-intervention" policy and conclude an anti-aggression united front with the Soviet Union. This possibility had not yet been completely lost at that time.

In short, the general task of the revolution during this period was to organize all possible forces in the entire world into an anti-fascist and anti-aggression united front, so as to resist the frantic aggression of the three fascist countries and the attacks of fascism within each country.

Therefore, at that time, this united front had the following four possible components:

(a) In capitalist countries, a people's united front, a united front of the proletariat and the petty bourgeoisie;

(b) In colonial and semi-colonial countries, a national united front, a united front stretching from the proletariat to the bourgeoisie;

(c) The socialist Soviet Union;

(d) The bourgeoisie and their governments in the various democratic countries.

The reason this fourth component was still possible at that time was that the bourgeoisie of these democratic countries and their so-called democratic governments, in the face of the frantic aggression of the fascist countries, in the face of the threat of fascist forces within their own countries, and in the face of the existing danger of anti-Soviet action, shared a certain degree of common interest with their own people, with the people of their colonies and semi-colonies, and with the Soviet Union.

Among these components, the main force was the Soviet Union. If the Soviet Union and the various so-called democratic governments could have formed a truly effective united front, coordinating with the people's united fronts in various countries and the national united fronts in colonies and semi-colonies, it would have been possible to stop the further aggression of the fascist countries and delay the date of the great war's outbreak; if war had broken out, it would have been possible to defeat the fascist countries. And if this had been done, it would have truly benefited the people of the world, benefited all countries apart from the aggressors, and would have been endorsed by the international proletariat.

For this reason, the Soviet Union joined the League of Nations, concluded mutual assistance treaties with France and Czechoslovakia, and ultimately conducted negotiations with Britain and France. This revolutionary policy suited the international situation at the time; it was necessary, it was correct, and it was the only thing that could be done, with no other alternative.

VII. The Breakdown of the British-French-Soviet Negotiations and the Beginning of the Second Stage of the War

The bourgeoisie of the so-called democratic countries, on the one hand, feared that the fascist countries would harm their interests, but on the other hand, they feared even more the development of revolutionary forces.

They were afraid of the Soviet Union, afraid of their own people's liberation movements, and afraid of the national liberation movements in colonies and semi-colonies.

As a result, they rejected a genuine united front against aggression and a genuine anti-aggression war that included the Soviet Union, and instead formed a counter-revolutionary united front on their own and waged a predatory bandit war by themselves.

The negotiations between Britain, France, and the Soviet Union lasted more than four months, from April 15 to August 23, 1939, with the Soviet side showing every possible patience.

Yet Britain and France consistently refused to endorse the principle of equality and mutual benefit. They only demanded that the Soviet Union guarantee their security, while they themselves refused to guarantee Soviet security, declined to secure the small Baltic states so as to leave an opening for Germany to advance its troops, and refused to allow Soviet forces to pass through Poland to oppose the aggressor.

The Soviet Union naturally refused to sign a treaty of the sort proposed by Britain and France, which was entirely unsuited to revolutionary purposes and suited only to counter-revolutionary purposes.

And Britain and France stubbornly refused to sign the kind of treaty that the Soviet Union was willing to conclude—a treaty grounded in the principle of equality and mutual benefit, genuinely conducive to curbing further aggression, and truly beneficial to world peace.

This was the fundamental reason for the breakdown of the British-French-Soviet negotiations.

During this period, Germany abandoned its anti-Soviet stance and indicated its willingness to effectively renounce the so-called "Anti-Comintern Pact" and to recognize the inviolability of Soviet borders, whereupon the Soviet-German Non-Aggression Pact was concluded.

The utter lack of sincerity on the part of Britain and France in the negotiations with the Soviet Union, their complete lack of genuine intent to halt aggression, and their determination to break off the tripartite talks prove nothing but that Chamberlain was already resolved on war.

Thus the outbreak of the Great War was wanted not only by Hitler but also by Chamberlain, because if war were really to be avoided, the participation of the Soviet Union was absolutely necessary.

This point was understood even by Lloyd George, the British representative of the bourgeoisie.

Yet some fools still fail to comprehend this to this day, believing instead that Chamberlain’s war-making was not prepared in advance.

They still do not understand that the reason Chamberlain entered into the tripartite talks was solely to facilitate the mobilization of public opinion, to make it easier to tell the public: We, the British and French governments, have done everything humanly possible; since the tripartite alliance has failed, we have no choice but to open fire on Germany.

Under these circumstances, in early September, war broke out between Germany on the one side and Britain, France, and Poland on the other, thus initiating the new phase—the first phase—of the Second Imperialist War.

VIII. The Characteristics of the First Phase of the War
At this time, after the outbreak of the Great War, the situation has fundamentally changed, and the previous distinction between fascist countries and democratic countries has lost its meaning.

At present, based on their nature, countries can only be classified into two categories: (1) those waging an unjust, predatory imperialist war, and those actually supporting such a war—this is the first category.
(2) Those waging a just, non-predatory war of national liberation and people's liberation, and those aiding such a war—this is the second category.

A new classification must now be made according to the new circumstances, abandoning the old method of classification, because the situation has changed, and the bourgeoisie of the various democratic countries has finally refused to compromise with the people, refused to compromise with the Soviet Union, and has launched a predatory war.

Now the most reactionary country in the world has shifted to Britain, and the foremost ringleader opposing the Soviet Union, opposing communism, opposing democracy, opposing the people, and opposing small and weak nations is Chamberlain.

Under these circumstances, all Communists should understand that the period of striving to win over the bourgeoisie and their governments in the so-called democratic countries to establish a united front together with the Soviet Union, the peoples of all nations, and all colonial and semi-colonial countries has passed, and such a possibility no longer exists.

The only possibility now is for the Soviet Union, together with the people of all capitalist countries and all oppressed nations in colonies and semi-colonies, to establish a united front against war and aggression.

Now the so-called democratic countries' bourgeoisie is missing.

That this component has shifted from vacillation to finally joining the enemy camp, becoming one of the two camps in the imperialist war, constitutes a great change.

Thus the possible components for organizing a new united front have changed from four to three.

This change, first, has turned the Second Imperialist War from one-sided to all-out (from reactionary one-sidedness to reactionary all-outness); second, it has made the organizational components of the new united front against war and aggression change from complex to simple—these are the two characteristics of the first phase of the war.

Many comrades fail to pay attention to the changes in the situation, fail to note the specific features of the new events, think that things remain the same as before, let their thinking stagnate in the past phase, view the new events with old perspectives, and overlook the qualitative changes contained within the new events, thereby unconsciously falling into a completely mistaken position—falling into the position of the Social Democrats.

I hope those comrades who have committed this error will quickly correct themselves, and I also believe that they can do so as soon as they are alerted.

IX. Our Revolutionary Policy in the First Phase of the War
Given the characteristics of the first phase of the war, what should the revolutionary policy of the proletariat, and especially of the Communist Parties, be?

I believe it should be as follows:
(a) In the various belligerent countries waging imperialist war, the Party should call upon the people to rise up against the imperialist war, expose its imperialist character, treat the belligerents, whether Party A or Party B, as equally bandit-like, and especially oppose British imperialism, the chief bandit, awaken the people so they are not deceived by the imperialist bandits, propagate to the people the transformation of the imperialist war into a revolutionary civil war, and establish a people's united front against imperialist war.

In every belligerent country where there are Communist parliamentarians, they should all vote against war budgets, just as Comrade Liebknecht, the leader of the German proletariat, carried out a heroic and resolute struggle in the German parliament during the First Imperialist World War, and they must never vote in favor of the war, must never allow their own character to be confused with that of the Social Democrats.

For the Social Democrats in these countries are following the same old disastrous path as in the First Imperialist World War, shamelessly supporting the war under the slogan of so-called "defense of the fatherland" (the fatherland of the bourgeois bandit clique).

The Japanese Social Democratic Party, the so-called Social Masses Party, has long betrayed the proletariat and supported the Japanese warlords' war of aggression.

The Social Democratic Parties in Britain and France, now under the coercion and enticement of Chamberlain and Daladier, are betraying the British and French proletariat and supporting the bandit war of British and French imperialism.

The Polish Social Democratic Party is supporting the running dog bought off by Chamberlain—the Polish bourgeois reactionary government—and betraying the national interests of Poland.

In Poland, there is no doubt that the entire people should be mobilized, and an alliance with the Soviet Union formed, to resist the aggression of German imperialism and to fight for the defense of Poland and the liberation of the Polish nation.

But the Polish fascist government has suppressed the Polish national liberation movement, rejected the aid of the Soviet Union, and willingly led the Polish people to serve as cannon fodder for British and French financial capital, willingly turning Poland into a component part of the reactionary front of international financial capital.

There is no question that we sympathize with the Polish people, but we absolutely do not sympathize with the Polish reactionary government, and the support of the Polish Social Democratic Party for such a government is equally impermissible.

Therefore, whether in Germany, Japan, and Italy, or in Britain, France, and Poland, the Communist Parties in all belligerent countries can win over the masses, organize a revolutionary united front, and prepare to use revolutionary war to defeat counter-revolutionary war only by exposing this treacherous nature of the Social Democrats.

(b) In neutral countries, such as the United States, the Communists should expose before the people the imperialist policies of the bourgeois government—policies that are nominally neutral but in fact support the war and seek to make huge profits from it.

During the two-year Sino-Japanese War, U.S. imperialism has already made a fortune under the mask of neutrality, and now it wants to make huge profits again from the new war.

In my remarks on September 1, two weeks ago, I still thought the U.S. bourgeoisie would not yet, for the time being, abandon democratic politics at home and the peacetime economic life, but who would have known that in just these few short days it would declare the so-called "limited national emergency," thus already following in the footsteps of Britain and France and moving step by step toward reaction and war.

The Communist Party must oppose this fraudulent neutrality that actually aids imperialist war, oppose the fascistization of politics in these countries, oppose the treacherous acts of the Social Democrats in these countries, and oppose these countries' involvement in the war, so that the war zone does not expand without limit.

(c) In all colonial and semi-colonial countries, the task is to form a national united front, either to resist the aggressor (as in China) or to oppose the suzerain power (as in India), in order to achieve the goal of national independence.

Only by opposing the conduct of national traitors within these countries, who betray national interests, can the united front be developed and the enemy be defeated.

In the colonies of the various belligerent countries, we must oppose the treacherous acts of national traitors who support the war of the suzerain country, and oppose the mobilization of the colonial people to join the suzerain's battlefronts; the bitter experiences of participation in the First Imperialist War must be communicated to the colonial people.

In colonial and semi-colonial countries, if national traitors are not opposed, there is no hope for the national liberation movement.

X. The Prospects of the War
This war will be a protracted war.

I very much agree with Comrade Voroshilov's speech at the 18th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, in which he said: "Modern war will inevitably be a protracted, drawn-out, and exhausting war."

He also said: "Undoubtedly, in the inevitable general military conflict, there will come an unprecedented, life-and-death, do-or-die moment."

His estimate is very correct. This protracted nature embraces all sorts of circumstances, including both imperialist war and anti-imperialist war, counter-revolutionary war and revolutionary war, the continuation of war and local, temporary halts, the realignments and changes in the belligerent lines, and the destruction of participating states and the creation of new ones. Such varied, complex, winding, and changing circumstances constitute the protracted nature of the war.

The First Imperialist World War is an unprecedented great calamity for humanity; death, disease, hunger, unemployment, loss of education, the breakup of families and households, and all manner of tragic phenomena will fill the whole world.

Under these circumstances, without any doubt, the oppressed people of all capitalist countries and the oppressed nations of all colonies and semi-colonies will be aroused, will unite, and will oppose the imperialist war and organize a revolutionary war on a much larger scale than during the First World War.

During the First World War, there were no Communist Parties in any country except Russia. Now it is different: Communist Parties are distributed in several dozen countries and have grown strong both politically and organizationally.

During the First World War, there was no socialist country. Now it is different: the Soviet Union not only exists but has become a first-class power in the world, resolutely opposing imperialist war and resolutely aiding wars of people's liberation and national liberation.

It will play a great role, in this war, in safeguarding the interests of humanity and intervening against imperialism.

Now the world is clearly divided: all bourgeois elements directly or indirectly participating in the imperialist war are reactionaries who form a reactionary camp; the current imperialist war is a war between two factions of imperialist groups within this great reactionary camp.

The conflict between the two major reactionary factions within this great reactionary camp does not preclude the possibility that they will unite in the future to oppose the Soviet Union, oppose the people's liberation movements in all countries, oppose the national liberation movements in colonies and semi-colonies, and oppose the world revolution. It is a naive view to think that they will keep fighting forever and be easily overthrown by the revolutionary people.

This is one side—the side of the world reactionary front.

On the other side, there is the Soviet Union, there are the people's liberation movements in all capitalist countries, and there are the national liberation movements in the colonial and semi-colonial countries.

All of these constitute the revolutionary front, the revolutionary camp, whose aim is to overthrow the world reactionary camp, use revolutionary war to defeat the imperialist war, topple the chief instigators of war, overthrow the bourgeoisie, and liberate the oppressed peoples and oppressed nations of the entire world from capitalist oppression and from imperialist war. This is a great process of struggle, a difficult and protracted process of waging war, of educating the people, awakening the people, organizing the people, and leading the people in battle against the bourgeoisie.

The capitalist economy has reached a dead end; the era of great changes and great revolutions has arrived.

The present era is a new era of war and revolution, an era of transforming the entire dark world into a bright world. We are right in the midst of this era.

The Chinese nation, after two years of the War of Resistance Against Japan, is a component part of the world revolutionary camp—an important and powerful component part. The national liberation war of the 450 million people will certainly play a great role in the process of world transformation.

The imperialist war is disadvantageous both to the world and to China. However, the existence and development of the Soviet Union, the existence and development of the people's liberation movements in all capitalist countries of the world, and the existence and development of the national liberation movements in all colonies and semi-colonies are all good friends of China and reliable helpers in China's war of resistance.

China, the Soviet Union, the people's liberation movements of all countries, and the national liberation movements of all countries should form a solid united front. This is a revolutionary united front, to be used to oppose the counter-revolutionary united front.

The war among the imperialists and their mutual weakening, from this standpoint, is a favorable condition for the people's liberation movements of all countries, for the national liberation movements of all countries, for China's war of resistance, and for the Soviet Union's construction of a communist society.

Thus, the darkness of the world is temporary, and the future of the world is bright.

Imperialism will surely perish, and the liberation of the oppressed people and oppressed nations is beyond doubt.

China's future is also bright. As long as China's Anti-Japanese National United Front is further consolidated, and we strive and struggle under the slogans of persisting in resistance and opposing surrender, persisting in unity and opposing division, and persisting in progress and opposing retrogression, our enemy will surely perish as well, and a free and independent new China will emerge.