We welcome you to China.


We are glad that you have come.


We have your support and the support of fraternal parties from all countries.


Of course, we also support you and support all fraternal parties.


Today in the world, the front of Marxist-Leninist communist parties, whether in places where victory has been won or in places where victory has not yet been won, is united and consistent.


However, there have been times when it was not united.


There are ways in which we have let you down.


In the past, we went along with the opinions of the Cominform〔2〕. Although we did not join the Cominform, it was very difficult for us not to support it.


This happened in 1948.


In 1949, the Cominform denounced you as butchers and Hitler〔3〕-type elements, and we did not express any view on that resolution.


In 1948, we wrote an article〔4〕 criticizing you.


In fact, we should not have adopted that approach and should have consulted with you instead.


Suppose some of your views had been wrong. We could have talked them over with you and let you do the criticizing yourselves; there was no need to be in such a hurry.


Conversely, if you had opinions about us, you could also adopt this approach—the approach of consultation and persuasion.


There have been very few successful examples of criticizing a foreign party in the newspapers.


This incident provided a profound historical lesson for the international communist movement.


You suffered a loss, but for the international communist movement, it gained the lesson of having made a mistake.


We must fully recognize this mistake.


When you recognized the new China, we gave no reply, nor did we object.


Of course, we could not and should not have objected, and there was no reason to object.


When British imperialism recognized our country, we did not object, so what reason was there to object when you, a socialist country, recognized us?

At that time there was another reason for not replying to you, namely, our Soviet friends did not wish us to establish diplomatic relations with you.


Then, is China an independent country?

Of course it is an independent country.


Since it is independent, why should it listen to them?

Comrades!

At that time, when the Soviet Union made that suggestion, it was very difficult for us to handle even if we disagreed.


At that time, some people said there were two Titons〔5〕 in the world, one in Yugoslavia and one in China.


Of course, no resolution was passed stating that Mao Zedong was a Tito.


I told the Soviet comrades that they suspected I was half a Tito. Now they do not admit it.


Since when was the label of half-Tito removed?

It was only after resisting U.S. aggression and aiding Korea〔6〕 and striking at U.S. imperialism that this label was removed.


The Wang Ming line〔7〕 of the past was actually the Stalin line.


It wrecked about ninety percent of the strength in our base areas and almost one hundred percent of the strength in the White areas.


Comrade Shaoqi also touched on this point in his report to the Eighth Congress〔8〕.


Why did we not openly state that this was Stalin’s line?

There is a reason for this too.


The Soviet Union could openly criticize Stalin, but it would not be so good for us to do so openly.


We should maintain good relations with the Soviet Union.


Perhaps after some time it might be possible to raise this openly.


Things in the world are always like this—facts are facts.


At that time, the Third International〔9〕 did many wrong things.


The two periods at the beginning and the end of the Third International were fairly good, but the large middle period was not good: it was good when Lenin was alive, and it was also fairly good later when Dimitrov〔10〕 was in charge.


In China, the first Wang Ming line was carried out for four years and caused the greatest damage to the Chinese revolution.


Wang Ming is now recuperating in Moscow. We still want to elect him a member of the Central Committee.


He is a teacher of our Party, a professor, a priceless treasure that cannot be bought with money.


He taught the whole Party that it must not follow his line.


This was the first time we suffered at the hands of Stalin.


The second time was during the War of Resistance Against Japan.


Wang Ming could meet Stalin directly: he could speak Russian and was very good at flattering Stalin.


Stalin sent him back to China.


In the past he had pursued "left" deviationism, but this time he pursued right deviationism.


In cooperating with the Kuomintang, he was "all dolled up and delivered to their doorstep," submitting entirely to the Kuomintang.


He proposed a Six-Point Program〔11〕 to overturn the Ten-Point Program〔12〕 of our Party Central Committee, opposed establishing anti-Japanese base areas, and wanted us to have no army of our own, believing that once we had Chiang Kai-shek, peace would reign over the land.


We corrected this mistake.


Chiang Kai-shek also "helped" us correct the mistake.


Wang Ming was "all dolled up and delivered to their doorstep," and Chiang Kai-shek responded with "a slap in the face and threw him out the door."


Chiang Kai-shek was China’s greatest teacher, educating the people of the whole country and educating all our Party members.


He gave his lessons with machine guns, while Wang Ming gave his lessons with his mouth.


The third time was after the end of the Second World War and the surrender of Japan.


Stalin decided to hand over the whole of China to the United States and to Chiang Kai-shek. He held meetings with Roosevelt and Churchill〔13〕.


At that time, materially and morally, especially morally, Stalin did not support us Communists, but supported Chiang Kai-shek.


The decision was made at the Yalta Conference〔14〕.


Stalin told Tito about this matter, and the conversation appears in Tito’s autobiography.


After the dissolution of the Comintern, we were somewhat freer.


Before that, we had already begun criticizing opportunism, launching the rectification movement〔15〕, and criticizing the Wang Ming line.


The rectification movement was actually also a critique of the mistakes of Stalin and the Third International in guiding the Chinese revolution, but we did not mention a single word about Stalin or the Third International.


Perhaps in the near future it will be necessary to mention them.


There were two reasons for not mentioning them in the past: First, since the Chinese themselves listened to them, the Chinese themselves should bear the responsibility.


Who asked us to listen to them?

Who asked us to commit the mistakes of "left" and right deviationism?

There are two kinds of Chinese: one kind are dogmatists, who just listen to what Stalin said; the other kind do not listen to that and criticize the dogmatists.


Second, we did not wish to cause unpleasantness in our relations with the Soviet Union.


The Third International did not examine these mistakes, nor did the Soviet Union mention them. If we raised criticism, we would fall out with them.


The fourth time was when I was said to be a half-Tito or a quasi-Tito.


Not only in the Soviet Union, but also in other socialist countries and non-socialist countries, quite a number of people once doubted whether the Chinese revolution was genuine.


You may not quite understand why China still hangs portraits of Stalin.


The comrades in Moscow informed us that they would no longer hang portraits of Stalin and would carry only portraits of Lenin and other living leaders during parades. Of course, they did not say that China should do likewise.


We were in a very awkward position.


The Chinese people did not know about Stalin’s four mistakes, nor did our Party as a whole know about them.


This is different from your situation. Your affairs are known to your people and known to the entire world.


Our Party knew about the mistakes of the two Wang Ming lines, but the people did not know that these mistakes originated from Stalin.


As for Stalin’s mistakes of hindering the Chinese revolution and suspecting I was half a Tito, only our Party Central Committee knew about them.


We support the Soviet Union as the center; this benefits the socialist movement.


On this point, you may not agree.


When Khrushchev〔16〕 criticized Stalin, you welcomed it from top to bottom, but for us it was different—our people were not satisfied.


Therefore, China could not avoid hanging portraits of Stalin.


In the past during our parades, we carried portraits of Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin, of a few Chinese—Mao, Liu, Zhou, Zhu〔17〕—and of fraternal party leaders.


Now we have adopted the "down with everything" approach: we carry no one’s portrait.


Ambassador Popović was in Beijing during this year’s May Day parade. Did you not see that no portraits were carried during the parade?

But portraits of five deceased persons—Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, and Sun〔18〕—and of one living person, Mao Zedong, are still hung.


Let them be hung.


You Yugoslavs may say, the Soviet Union no longer hangs portraits of Stalin, yet you Chinese still hang them.


Even now, there are still people who doubt whether we can successfully build socialism, saying that we are fake Communists. What can be done about that?

After eating and sleeping, these people go around spreading propaganda, saying that the Chinese Party is not a genuine communist party, that China cannot build socialism, and that it would be a wonder if we could!

Look here, China might become an imperialist country. In addition to U.S., British, and French imperialism, a fourth imperialism will emerge—China!

At present, China has no industry and no capital, but after a hundred years, that will be formidable indeed!

Genghis Khan〔19〕 will come back to life, and Europe will suffer again. Perhaps we will fight all the way to Yugoslavia!

We must guard against the "Yellow Peril"!

Absolutely not!

The Chinese Party is a Marxist-Leninist party, and the Chinese people love peace.


We hold that aggression is a crime, and we will not encroach upon an inch of another’s land or a single blade of grass.


We love peace and are Marxist.


In the international arena, we oppose great-power chauvinism.


Although our industry is still modest, we are after all a big country, and so some people tend to hold their tails up.


We tell these people, "Don’t hold your tail up; behave yourself and tuck in your tail."


When I was young, my mother often taught me to "tuck in your tail and behave yourself."


This saying is very true, and now I often tell comrades about it.


At home, we oppose Han chauvinism.


This tendency harms unity among all the nationalities.


Great-power chauvinism and Han chauvinism are both forms of sectarianism.


Those with great-power chauvinism care only for their own country’s interests and disregard others.


Han chauvinism cares only for the Han nationality, regarding it as the highest, thus harming the minority nationalities.


In the past, some people thought that China did not want to be friendly with others, wanted to split from the Soviet Union, and would become a scourge.


Now, within the socialist countries, such people have become fewer, and their numbers began to decrease after the war to resist U.S. aggression and aid Korea.


For the imperialists, however, the stronger China becomes, the more they fear it.


But they also know that China’s industry is underdeveloped, that it relies only on its large population, and that this is nothing much to fear.


They fear the Soviet Union first, and only then fear China—fearing our politics and fearing our influence in Asia.


So they constantly say that China is insufferable, will commit aggression, and so on.


We are very prudent and careful, never overbearing, and we abide by the Five Principles〔20〕.


We were once bullied ourselves and know how unpleasant it feels to be bullied.


You may feel the same way, perhaps?

As for China’s future, it is to pursue socialism.


To make China a prosperous and strong country will require fifty to a hundred years.


Today, there is no longer any force that obstructs China’s development.


China is a big country whose population accounts for one quarter of the world’s population, but its contribution to humanity is not commensurate with that share.


This situation will change in the future, but that is not something for my generation, nor even for my sons’ generation.


What shape the future will take depends on developments.


China may also make mistakes, and may also become corrupt, developing from the present relatively good stage to a bad stage, and then from the bad stage to a relatively good stage.


Of course, even at its worst, it can never be as dark as the era of Chiang Kai-shek. Development is dialectical, that is, affirmation, negation, and the negation of the negation, progressing in such twists and turns.


Corruption, bureaucracy, great-power chauvinism, and arrogance—China may commit all these mistakes.

Today, the Chinese people adopt a modest attitude and are willing to learn from others. There are reasons for this as well — we simply do not have the capital to do otherwise. First, we originally had no Marxism-Leninism; it was learned from others. Second, we had no October Revolution; our revolutionary victory was achieved in 1949, thirty-two years after the October Revolution. Third, during the Second World War, we were a detachment, not the main force. Fourth, we were not industrialized; our economy was primarily based on agriculture and ramshackle handicrafts.

Therefore, even if some people want to get cocky, they lack the capital — at most, they might stick their tails up a meter or two.

But we must take precautions for the future. In ten or twenty years, it will become dangerous, and in forty or fifty years, even more dangerous.

Comrades, I advise you to pay attention to this as well.

Your degree of industrialization is relatively high and your development is fairly rapid. Stalin dealt harshly with you, but the reasoning was on your side, and the truth lies with you.

This could all become a burden for you.

The four mistakes Stalin made toward us, which I mentioned earlier, could also become a burden for us.

Decades from now, after China has industrialized, the possibility of getting cocky will be even greater.

When you go back, please tell your next generation that if China ever gets cocky in the future and sticks its tail up more than ten thousand meters, they should criticize it.

China must be supervised, and the whole world must supervise China.

By that time, I will no longer be here — I will have gone to attend a congress with Marx.

We wronged you in the past and owe you a debt.

A life for a life, a debt repaid.

We wrote articles criticizing you, so why should we remain silent now?

Before the criticism of Stalin, some issues could not be stated so clearly.

In the past, when I spoke with Popović, I could only say: If the Soviet Union does not criticize Stalin, it is hard for us to do so; if the Soviet Union does not restore relations with Yugoslavia, it is also hard for us to establish diplomatic relations with you.

Now it can be said. I have already spoken about Stalin's four mistakes with Soviet friends and with Yudin, and when I see Khrushchev in the future, I will tell him as well.

You are comrades, so I have told you too, but for now, it cannot be published in the newspapers or made known to the imperialists.

Later, perhaps one or two of these mistakes can be spoken about publicly.

We are different from you. In Tito's autobiography, Stalin's mistakes are mentioned because you had severed relations with the Soviet Union.

Stalin advocated dialectical materialism, but at times he lacked materialism and tended toward metaphysics. What he wrote about was historical materialism, but what he often practiced was historical idealism.

In some of his actions, he went to extremes — deifying individuals, humiliating people, and so on — none of which was materialist.

Before I met Stalin, I had no particular emotional attachment to him.

I did not much like reading his works. I read only *The Foundations of Leninism*, a long article criticizing Trotsky, *Dizzy with Success*, and a few others.

I was even less inclined to read the articles he wrote about the Chinese revolution.

He was different from Lenin. Lenin gave his heart to others and treated them as equals, while Stalin stood above others and issued orders.

An atmosphere of this kind pervades his writings.

After I met him, I felt even more displeased. When I was in Moscow, I quarreled fiercely with him.

Stalin had a temper, and at times when he got carried away, he would say some inappropriate things.

I wrote some articles extolling Stalin — three in all. One was written in Yan'an to celebrate his sixtieth birthday, the second was a congratulatory message in Moscow, and the third was requested by *Pravda* after his death.

I have never been fond of offering congratulations to others, nor do I like others congratulating me.

But when I went to Moscow to offer birthday congratulations, could I do anything other than praise him? Could I curse him instead?

After his death, the Soviet Union needed our support, and we had to support the Soviet Union, so I wrote that article singing his praises.

It was not directed at Stalin the individual, but at the Soviet Party.

For the article in Yan'an, I set aside personal feelings and regarded him as the leader of a socialist country.

That article still had some vitality; the other two did not stem from genuine intention, but from necessity.

A person's life is full of such contradictions — emotionally unwilling to write, yet rationally compelled to do so.

After Moscow criticized Stalin, we were able to talk about these circumstances.

Today, I have told you about his four mistakes, but in order to maintain relations with the Soviet Union, it is not convenient to discuss them openly in the newspapers.

In Khrushchev's report, regarding Stalin's mistakes toward us, only the issue of a sugar factory was mentioned, so it is still not convenient for us to speak publicly.

Contradictions will still exist.

Generally speaking, the Soviet Union is good overall.

It has four strong points: Marxism-Leninism, the October Revolution, the main force, and industrialization.

It also has its shadowy side and some mistakes.

Its achievements are primary, and its mistakes are secondary.

The enemy is exploiting the criticism of Stalin to launch an offensive worldwide, and we should support the Soviet Union.

Their mistakes will be corrected.

The mistakes regarding Yugoslavia have already been corrected by Khrushchev.

About Wang Ming's errors, they have come to understand now. In the past, however, when we criticized Wang Ming, they were unwilling to accept it.

They have also removed the label of "half-Tito" — one and a half Titos removed in total.

The removal of the label stuck on Tito made us very glad.

Regarding the criticism of Stalin, some among our people are still not satisfied.

But this kind of criticism is good. It has shattered the cult of deification and lifted the lid; it is a liberation, a "war of liberation." Now everyone dares to speak and can think things through.

This is also affirmation, negation, and the negation of the negation.

Liberty, equality, fraternity — these were bourgeois slogans, but now we are fighting for them instead.

Father-son parties or brother parties? In the past, they were father-son parties; now there is some flavor of brother parties, but there are still remnants of the father-son party.

That is understandable — the remnants cannot be cleared away in a single day.

After the lid is removed, people can think freely and independently.

Now there is a certain flavor of anti-feudalism.

The transition from father-son parties to brother parties opposes the patriarchal system.

Ideological control was very tight back then, surpassing even feudal rule.

Not a single word of criticism could be tolerated, whereas some enlightened monarchs in the past could listen to criticism.

You in Yugoslavia probably had such monarchs too — ones whom others could curse to their face with impunity.

Capitalist society is a step forward compared to the feudal era. In the United States, the two parties — the Republican Party and the Democratic Party — can hurl insults at each other.

In our socialist countries, we must think of some ways.

Of course, it is not possible to do without centralism and unity; consistency must be maintained.

The unity of the people's will is beneficial to us; it enables us to achieve industrialization in a short time and to deal with the imperialists.

But it also has a drawback — it makes people afraid to speak up, so we must give people opportunities to speak.

All the comrades in our Political Bureau are considering these questions.

In our country, few people openly criticize me. My shortcomings and mistakes are forgiven by the people.

This is because we are always serving the people and have done some good things for them.

Though we also have commandism and bureaucratism, the people feel that the good things we have done outweigh the bad, so they praise us more and criticize us less.

Thus, an idol is created. If someone criticizes me, the masses oppose him, saying he does not respect the leader.

Comrades in the Central Committee and I receive an average of about three hundred letters a day, among which there are always a few that criticize us, but they are unsigned or signed with false names.

They are not afraid that I will suppress them, but fear that those around me will.

You mentioned *On the Ten Major Relationships*. This was the result of my discussions with thirty-four ministers over a month and a half.

What opinions could I put forward on my own?

I merely summed up the opinions of others; it was not my creation.

To manufacture anything, raw materials are needed, as well as a factory.

But I am no longer a good factory — I am old, in need of renovation, in need of reequipping, just as British factories need refitting.

I am old now and can no longer play the lead role; I can only run errands.

You see, at this Party Congress, I am just running errands; the ones performing on stage are comrades like Liu Shaoqi, Zhou Enlai, and Deng Xiaoping.

〔14〕The Yalta Conference, also known as the Crimea Conference, was held from February 4 to 11, 1945, in Yalta on the Crimea peninsula of the Soviet Union, with the participation of the heads of state of the Soviet Union, the United States, and the United Kingdom—Stalin, Roosevelt, and Churchill.

The conference coordinated military plans for the final defeat of Germany, discussed postwar arrangements in Europe and the issue of operations against Japan, and signed the "Communiqué of the Crimea Conference of the Three Powers: The Soviet Union, the United States of America, and the United Kingdom." Agreements were reached on issues including the four-power (Soviet, American, British, and French) zonal occupation and control of Germany, as well as the Polish question.

During the conference, the "Agreement of the Three Powers: The Soviet Union, the United States of America, and the United Kingdom Regarding Japan" (abbreviated as the Yalta Agreement) was secretly signed, stipulating that the Soviet Union would enter the war against Japan within two or three months after the end of the European war. The United States and Britain pledged to maintain the status quo of the Mongolian People's Republic, restore the territories lost by Russia after the Russo-Japanese War of 1905 and its various rights and interests in Northeast China, and assign the Kuril Islands to the Soviet Union.

At the conference, the Soviet Union expressed its readiness to conclude a friendship and alliance treaty with the Chinese Nationalist government.

〔15〕On the Rectification Movement, see Note 13 on p. 59 of this volume.

〔16〕Khrushchev (1894–1971) was then First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

〔17〕Mao refers to Mao Zedong.
Liu refers to Liu Shaoqi.
Zhou refers to Zhou Enlai.
Zhu refers to Zhu De.

〔18〕Sun refers to Sun Yat-sen.

〔19〕Genghis Khan (1162–1227), first emperor of the Yuan dynasty, personal name Temüjin, unified the Mongol tribes in 1206 and established the Mongol Khanate, taking the title Genghis Khan. He repeatedly led expeditionary forces to invade Central Asia, Western Asia, Eastern Europe, and other regions, causing immense devastation to these areas.

〔20〕The Five Principles refer to the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, namely mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, mutual non-aggression, mutual non-interference in internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence. From December 1953 to April 1954, the Chinese government delegation held negotiations in Beijing with the Indian government delegation on the question of the two countries' relations in the Tibet region of China. These Five Principles were put forward by Premier Zhou Enlai during talks with the Indian government delegation at the start of the negotiations and were later formally incorporated into the preamble of the "Agreement Between the People's Republic of China and the Republic of India on Trade and Intercourse Between the Tibet Region of China and India" reached by both sides. The formulation of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence was adopted in the joint statement of Premier Zhou Enlai and Prime Minister Nehru of India in June 1954 and in numerous subsequent international documents. As norms governing relations between states, the Five Principles have been widely recognized and applied in the world.

〔21〕Yudin was then the Soviet Ambassador to China.

〔22〕This refers to Stalin's article "Trotskyism or Leninism?" (Collected Works of Stalin, Vol. 6, People's Publishing House, 1956 edition, pp. 281–309).

〔23〕This refers to "Stalin Is a Friend of the Chinese People" published in the New China News on December 20, 1939, the "Congratulatory Speech at the Moscow Celebration of Stalin's Seventieth Birthday on December 21, 1949," and "The Greatest Friendship" published in the People's Daily on March 9, 1953, in memory of Stalin.

〔24〕This refers to Khrushchev's secret report "On Overcoming the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences" delivered at the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union on February 25, 1956.

〔25〕Deng Xiaoping was then a member of the Political Bureau and Secretary-General of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China. At the First Plenary Session of the Eighth Central Committee of the CPC held on September 28, 1956, he was elected a member of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee and General Secretary of the Central Committee.