THE DANGER OF A WORLD WAR
MUST AND CERTAINLY CAN BE OVERCOME*
(September 8, 1948)
Regarding appraisal of the international situation. An appraisal of the
international situation was made at the meeting last December. There had
been no consensus then within the Party, nor even in the Central Committee.
There are two propositions: One is that there will be either peace or war; the
other, that the danger of war exists, but its outbreak is not probable. The view
as to the danger of war is identical, but it differs as to whether there will be
peace or war. The first proposition holds that the world people's strength is
not enough to prevent war, while the second maintains that the Soviet Union
and the world's people can mobilize enough strength to prevent a war. Since
the U.S.-British reactionaries have not fully prepared for war, we can work
against time for its prevention; thus it is our task to mobilize the world
people's forces for this purpose. The post-World War II situation being
different from that after World War I, there is greater possibility for war
prevention. The German and Japanese fascists have been defeated in World
War II, and it is not easy to revive them. The U.S.-British reactionaries are
indeed preparing for war, and the danger of war exists. Nevertheless, as the
world's democratic forces, headed by the Soviet Union, have become stronger
than the reactionary forces (as Molotov and Zhdanov said, though some
comrades in our Party, those in the middle in particular, are still unclear about
it), and continue to grow, the danger of war must and certainly can be
overcome, only it is conditioned on our effort. War will certainly be prevented
if we are given 10 to 15 years to work toward it. We should not see the
alternative as either compromise or split, but sooner or later, compromise, as
can be seen in the recent Berlin question.
In talking about compromise, we do not mean compromise on all issues
(for instance, a compromise on the resolution to eliminate colonies is impos-
* This is part of a report by Mao Zedong at a meeting of the Political Bureau of the
Central Committee of the Communist Party of China.
sible), but compromise is likely on some issues, international rather than
domestic issues, and only on some, including some important ones. In 1947
the Soviet Union, the United States and Britain reached a peace agreement
with Italy, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria and Finland. A peace agreement with
Germany, Austria and Japan, though rather difficult to reach, will be concluded in the end. Britain and France are likely to develop commerce and trade
with the Soviet Union, but this is less probable between the United States and
the Soviet Union.
Middle-of-the-roaders think that since the Soviet Union has compromised
with the United States, Britain and France on the basis of democratic
principles, we can also compromise with the Kuomintang, but to my mind, it
should not be put in such a way. The Soviet Union follows a policy of
noninterference in the internal affairs of other nations, and the Atlantic
Charter also acknowledges the right of every people to choose a political
system for their own state. It is not Chiang Kai-shek's system that the Chinese
people will choose. In the struggle of the Soviet Union and all democratic
forces against reactionary forces, compromise on the basis of democratic
principles is the result of that struggle. Then, is it true that people of every
country must compromise with the reactionaries? We say no. Supposing
Chiang Kai-shek were compelled to follow our practice, to disband fascist
organizations, to discard local tyrants and evil gentry, and to allow us to
strengthen our military forces and carry out our agrarian reform, wouldn't that
be wonderful? But Chiang Kai-shek, being a reactionary, will not agree. Since
olden days, reactionaries have dealt with democratic forces on two principles:
One, exterminate immediately all that can be exterminated; the other, wait
for a future opportunity to exterminate what cannot be exterminated right
now. Britain has now taken the initial step to exterminate Communists within
the government, but remains patient about exterminating Communists in
society. In dealing with the reactionaries, we should reciprocate the same two
principles; we are now implementing the first one.
These are the three estimations concluded in the meeting of last Decem-ber. World peace and no warfare for the Soviet Union are of considerable
benefit to people of the whole world. Chiang Kai-shek wishes that a third
world war will break out, and so do some people in our Party. If the people
of the Soviet Union and Eastern European countries can devote themselves to
peaceful production for 10 to 15 years, and if the Soviet Union can improve
its productivity and increase its annual steel output to 60 million tons, nobody
will even dare think of warfare. Three years have elapsed, and there are only
12 years to go. That is how the international environment stands.
(From the meeting minutes)