(Not reviewed by the author)

(November 15, 1957)







Władysław Gomułka (Polish: Władysław Gomułka, February 6, 1905 – September 1, 1982), a Polish politician, served as General Secretary of the Polish Communist Workers' Party (predecessor to the United Workers' Party) from 1945 to 1948. He was later removed from office for being accused of anti-Soviet tendencies. After the Poznań events of 1956, he became the First Secretary of the Polish United Workers' Party, and was ousted in 1970 due to failures in economic policy.



Time: Evening of November 15, 1957

Place: Residence of the Polish Delegation

Participants:

Polish side: Cyrankiewicz, Ochab, Zawadzki, Zambrowski

Our side: Yang Shangkun

Interpreter: Li Yueran

Recorder: Gao Peiyu




Chairman: What I just talked about, I have not yet discussed with Khrushchev or Comrade Deng Xiaoping; it just came to my mind. That is, to add the word "certain" before "aggressive blocs," and before "dominate the world," add "attempt to," and change it to "dominate the greater part of the world." This is my personal idea. Everyone has a head, and others may not agree with my opinion, and delegations from other countries may also not agree with this opinion. Today we are just exchanging views. Afterwards, I will go back and exchange views with other comrades. The declaration should be written to be more in line with the facts. Any resolution will have its shortcomings. It is much better now than during the time of the Third International and the Cominform; there is the possibility of equal consultation. As I said yesterday, when I first came to Moscow, the two parties were nominally brother parties, but in reality, they were father-son parties. It was probably the same for you. What could you say at that time?

(The Polish comrades begin to confer among themselves. Gomułka thinks adding certain words is acceptable, but there are other issues. "Certain ruling circles of the United States" should be changed to "certain aggressive circles of the United States"; someone adds that the Chinese comrade had just proposed this.)

The wording can be studied. In any case, there is no plenary session tonight. I suggest that tomorrow's meeting be held later, even in the evening is fine, to give the drafting committee time to work. What do you think? ...

Gomułka: We believe the situation in the drafting committee is: everyone against one country. If it weren't for the comrades from the Soviet and Chinese parties stepping in to mediate, a real quarrel would have broken out.

Chairman: It could also be said that it is one country against everyone.

Gomułka: That's how it is.

Chairman: We should still carry on with consultations. We still have many common points; over 90% of our views are in agreement, so an agreement is possible. Let them argue for another day tomorrow. The plenary session can be held at eight, nine, or ten tomorrow evening. The entire day tomorrow can be given to the drafting committee. ...

Chairman: We expose them. This can alert the people and intellectuals who do not want a capitalist restoration. These words are not for the imperialists and reactionaries, but for the people who do not want a capitalist restoration. If we don't say restoration, it can be changed to subversive activities.

Gomułka: We agree.

Chairman: The two terms have the same meaning. To subvert you, Gomułka, and me, Mao Zedong, is to restore. I agree to change it to carrying out subversive activities.

This is not something our country is afraid of. This summer, the rightists in our country tried to subvert the government. The counter-revolutionaries in Hungary have been suppressed, but the matter is not over; the bourgeois elements have not given up. I haven't spoken to anyone about this issue either. I will try to persuade them. If I can persuade them, that would be good. Otherwise, let them continue to argue. Having disputes is a good thing. If only one person can speak, there is no vitality. It was like that when Stalin was alive. We also had several quarrels with him. He was very stubborn. I waited for him for two and a half months, and in the end, most of our opinions were accepted. ...

Chairman: If you agree, then we can bring out Suslov's. I haven't read his report yet, it's too long, and I don't plan to.

Comrades, what do you think? Is the atmosphere of this meeting better than that of any meeting in history? Or do you feel that this time you are being oppressed by the majority?

Gomułka: We do have this feeling. I have already expressed this point.

We do not want to force others to accept our opinions. Each party can say whatever it wants in its own country. As for a common document, it can only include things that everyone agrees on. In this document, up to now, there are still some things we cannot agree with. We need to resolve some issues of principle; these are very important. Because if we must have the minority submit to the majority, then we are prepared not to participate in the meeting. Because we must first be responsible for the situation in our own country. In the past, there were many instances where we went against our own will, and the results were implemented in real life with very bad consequences. We will not go down that road again, because the price paid was too high.

Chairman: I can understand this point. We have also been through this process. It is better now.

Gomułka: Comrade Mao Zedong, the issue is still different. China is a big country. Socialist countries are not all the same; there are big ones and small ones. But the difference in size should not affect the opinions of communists. If only the opinions of big countries are valued and not those of small countries, that is not right.

Chairman: I agree. We submit to the truth. Marx and Engels were only two people, and Poland has over twenty million people, but we all submit to the writings of these two men. We do not submit to that big pile of people in the Second International, because these two men held the truth. I agree with your principle. We should not look at the size of the country, but at the truth. If the truth is with Albania and not the Soviet Union, then we must also submit to the former. ...

I suggest that we don't hold the plenary session tomorrow. The entire day should be given to the drafting committee. Everyone needs to make some concessions; we need to reach a consensus. We and the Soviet Union have also made mutual concessions. Comrade Gomułka, do you know how long we ground it out with the Soviet Union? From the 2nd until the 7th, there were also many places where we were sharply opposed, but in the end, an agreement was reached. I feel that the Soviet comrades have made great progress this time, also in the spirit of seeking common ground while reserving differences. They and we have both given up some of our own views and accepted some of the other's views, and only then was a common draft formulated. It has only been in the last five days that we began consulting with various countries, and there is still one more day tomorrow. Although there are only twelve signatory countries, more than that have been consulted. As far as I know, the opinions of France, Italy, Britain, Brazil, India, and Japan have also been sought. I have already spoken with Comrade Gomułka twice. Do you feel that I am trying to put pressure on you? (Gomułka smiles and replies: No). I am just trying to persuade you, and you are trying to persuade me. Neither of us intended to apply pressure.

Gomułka: I do not have that feeling.

Chairman: That's good.

Gomułka: Regarding the issue of the convener, what we proposed is: not that the Soviet Union should convene in general, but only that the next meeting be convened by the Soviet Union.

Chairman: This might not be good. It is better to have it fixed for one party to convene. In any case, it is only convening and not making decisions.

Cyrankiewicz: The issue is not about fearing danger. In the past, the CPSU, as the largest party, repeatedly proposed holding various meetings, and we always supported them and came to attend. We can also completely agree that the next meeting be convened by the Soviet Union. The issue is one of principle, to avoid giving the external impression that meetings are convened by only one party, the Soviet Union.

Chairman: I can convey this opinion. The original proposal was made by our party, and its origin is very early. In March of last year, when Comrade Mikoyan was returning to Moscow from India and passed through Beijing, he talked with us about the Soviet Party Central Committee's proposal for various countries to jointly publish a journal. You must also know about this. We did not approve of establishing a liaison bureau, because the impression left by the Third International and the Cominform in the past was too bad. We told them at the time, if you convene a meeting, we will come; if there is business, we hold a meeting, if not, we don't. We said, if we set up a liaison bureau now, it's not just the West that will be afraid; countries like India will also be afraid. You convene meetings, attended by the heads of the parties of various countries; this is different from the Third International. During the Cominform, the biggest head was Stalin, and his words were imperial edicts at the time. We don't want that kind of [head] now. We proposed that in the future, the Soviet Union should convene the meetings. The greatest necessity is to deal with the capitalist countries; the second importance is our own internal unity. If there are opinions, we can argue a bit, talk a bit, and also exchange views; so now there is no danger like during the time of the Third International and the Cominform. I hear that in the drafting committee this time, Suslov's attitude was to adopt the opinions of various countries as much as possible. The Soviet Union had proposed two drafts; looking at the current one, they have given up many of their opinions. Would this have been possible in Stalin's time?

We spent three days to draw up a draft, then spent five days exchanging opinions with them, mutually giving up some and mutually adopting some views, and now we are spending six days exchanging opinions with various countries. Now we still need to mutually give up and adopt some views.

Gomułka: Would it be possible to have an internal resolution, not written in the declaration, entrusting the Soviet Union to convene meetings? Of course, when the parties of various countries have opinions, they can also suggest convening a meeting.

Chairman: This can be considered. I don't know what the opinions of the Soviet Union and other parties are. Can you compromise on the three points discussed earlier? ...

Chairman: Putting it this way might be closer to your position. We have taken a step back; this shows we want to compromise. We'll write some more tomorrow. You can also write a draft. Finally, I want to make a declaration: many of the things I just said, such as the liaison bureau and China's proposal for the Soviet Union to convene, should be limited to our circle here, okay? Let's not expand it. What we just discussed, you can take it as something to consider, and we will also take it as something to consider. We still have to talk with the Soviet Union tonight, and the twelve countries will talk tomorrow.

This time, we should create an atmosphere of consulting on matters. I spoke with your ambassador about this point; I don't know if he relayed it? At that time, your anger was great, because it coincided with the October Revolution. Since Stalin's death, there have been great improvements in their domestic and foreign policies. This should be taken into account, and this change will continue to develop. We should help comrades like Khrushchev, treat them as our own brothers, help them, and support them.

Gomułka: We have no doubt about this point.






Source: *Newly Discovered Speeches of Mao Zedong from Classified Archives*, edited by Song Yongyi, Guoshi Press, July 2018.