Chairman: Have none of you ever been to China before?

Silva: This is our first visit to China.

Chairman: Once you’ve been here once, you can come again! It’s a good thing that journalists and people from our two countries are getting to know one another. Our governments haven’t yet established diplomatic relations, so your government may face some difficulties. Perhaps your government isn’t pleased with us.

Silva: No, they’re not displeased. Just recently, the Chilean government sold copper and nitrate to China—this in itself is proof of that.

Chairman: So there has been trade?

Silva: Yes.

Chairman: That’s good.

Silva: Not long ago, an exhibition of Chinese economic achievements was held in Santiago, arousing great interest among the Chilean public. Many workers, students, and office employees went to see it. They were able to observe numerous machines and other products that they had previously believed China was incapable of manufacturing.

Chairman: This is the first time I’ve heard from you that China held an economic exhibition in Santiago. It seems I’m rather bureaucratic.

Silva: As early as the previous century, Chinese people arrived on our shores. They were hardworking and highly respected. Our government champions democracy and practices it. We follow a policy of non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries. For example, we maintain diplomatic relations with Cuba, and there is a Chilean embassy in Havana.

Chairman: Is that so? Brazil used to have an ambassador in Cuba. Does it still?

Silva: No.

Chairman: Brazil has changed.

Vazquez: Brazil has undergone a complete reversal.

Chairman: The Brazilian coup authorities arrested a group of Chinese nationals—seven were businessmen and two were journalists. Why did they do this? What possible benefit could it bring to the ruling junta in Brazil?

Silva and Vazquez: None whatsoever. Chairman: Perhaps they hoped to gain some dollars.

Silva: That’s possible.

Chairman: There would be no advantage for them in such an action. Why resort to it at all?

Silva: I’d like to share something with Chairman Mao: Latin American newspapers are often influenced by U.S. news agencies, which frequently create a climate of fear, claiming that China is provoking or preparing for war. However, everything we have witnessed firsthand during our visit to China demonstrates that the Chinese people cherish peace, yearn for peace, and reject war. Yesterday, we had the opportunity to receive confirmation from Vice Premier Chen Yi that China seeks peace and opposes war. We have seen and verified that the Chinese people are building their nation on the foundation of peace.

Chairman: War serves no purpose for us. Our task is construction; war would only destroy what we have built. The Kuomintang waged a civil war against us for many years, and afterward we fought Japan for eight years. It wasn’t we who invaded Japan, but Japan that invaded China. Looking at it over the longer term, it has always been foreign powers that have attacked China. China fought several wars with Britain, including the Opium War in Guangdong in 1840, as well as the Eight-Nation Alliance campaign, when eight countries occupied Tianjin and advanced on Beijing. The Sino-Japanese War began in 1894 around Lüshun and Dalian in the Bohai Gulf. Subsequently, Japan occupied Northeast China. Even earlier, Tsarist Russia and Japan had fought on Chinese soil, primarily around Lüshun, Liaoyang, and Shenyang. Finally, during World War II, Japan came to occupy almost the entire country. In each of these instances, it was not China that initiated aggression; it was always foreign forces that launched attacks against us. Of course, there have been occasions when the Chinese themselves undertook military campaigns abroad—in ancient times, under the direction of imperial edicts—to wage war against Vietnam and Korea. Later, Japan occupied Korea, and France took control of Vietnam. In 1911, we overthrew the Qing dynasty, after which various warlord factions engaged in incessant conflict. At that time, there was no Communist Party in China. It was only after the Party’s founding that revolutionary warfare broke out—not because we sought war, but because imperialism and the Kuomintang were bent on unleashing it. For my part, I once worked as a journalist and a primary school teacher, yet I had no knowledge of the Communist Party and never imagined joining it. It was only in 1921, when the Communist Party of China was established, that I became a member. Even then, we were not preparing for war. I was an intellectual, a schoolteacher, with no military training—how could I possibly understand warfare? It was the Kuomintang’s White Terror that drove us to take up arms: unions and peasant associations were crushed, tens of thousands of Party members were killed or imprisoned. Faced with this terror, many comrades abandoned the struggle or fell into passivity, leaving only a few thousand to retreat to the mountains and launch guerrilla operations. After the Long March, they reached northern China. Our army had originally numbered 300,000, but by then fewer than 20,000 remained. Clearly, the Party was not rendered useless simply because its ranks had dwindled. Indeed, the numbers had been reduced twice—first in 1927 and again in 1934. The enemy rejoiced at our weakened state. Precisely at that moment, however, we corrected our mistakes and set ourselves on the right path. Our strength gradually recovered. When Chiang Kai-shek resumed his offensive after the Japanese withdrawal, he found himself facing an adversary that was far more formidable than before. Today, we have been engaged in peaceful nation-building for just fifteen years. China stands for peace. We support any movement that advocates for peace; we oppose war. However, we wholeheartedly back the anti-imperialist struggles of oppressed peoples. We supported Cuba, we supported Algeria’s revolution, and we backed the Vietnamese people’s resistance against U.S. imperialism—all movements that arose spontaneously, driven by the aspirations of those very peoples. Castro did not rise up at America’s behest, nor did Ben Bella. Were you led to believe that the United States or its agents instigated these revolutions? Or that we somehow compelled them? In fact, we hardly knew these leaders beforehand—we only came to truly understand them later. These movements emerged organically; the people formed provisional governments, and we recognized them and extended our support. Imperialism labels us “aggressors” and “warmongers,” and in some respects there is a grain of truth to that characterization. After all, we have supported Castro, Ben Bella, and the Vietnamese resistance. Another instance was between 1950 and 1953, when the United States invaded Korea. We stood with the Korean people in their fight against U.S. imperialism. This stance was openly declared and remains unchanged. To fail to support the anti-imperialist struggles of other nations would be a grave error—one that would disqualify one from being a Communist. You may recall that Egyptian President Nasser was not a Communist, yet he supported Algeria’s revolution. If someone who was not a Communist could lend his backing to Algeria, why should we hesitate simply because we are Communists? Consider the American Revolution: more than 170 years ago, when Washington rose up against British rule, France came to his aid. Were the French involved in that struggle communists? France had already become a republic at the time. In what year did the American Revolution achieve victory over Britain?

Vazquez: 1789.

Chairman: Was July 4, 1789, the day of the uprising, or the day of the decisive victory?

Vazquez: It was the day of the uprising.

Chairman: At that time, neither China nor the rest of the world had a Communist Party. The emergence of communism dates back to the nineteenth century. Thus, it seems we will continue to be branded as “warmongers” and “aggressors.” Ultimately, though, the root of this lies in our own domestic situation. Within China, we expelled Chiang Kai-shek—the U.S. puppet—and drove out U.S. influence as well. Naturally, the United States is not pleased with us. I am referring not to the American people, but to American capitalists. There are indeed Americans living in Beijing who are friendly toward us.

Do you really favor American capitalists so much?

Vazquez: Not at all.

Chairman: The United States aims to turn Latin America into its colony.

Silva: It will never succeed in that regard, though economically it might.

Chairman: I mean economically—and often politically as well. Take Brazil’s former president Goulart, whom I personally knew. His party was the Workers’ Party, not the Communist Party, yet the U.S. could not tolerate him and engineered his overthrow. Even Ngo Dinh Diem, who merely showed a hint of independence, was assassinated by U.S. forces. And even within the United States itself, the situation was far from peaceful. Diem’s brother was killed by the Kennedy administration; less than a month later, Kennedy himself was felled by an assassin. To this day, the identity of that killer remains unknown—was it a Communist, or someone else? The U.S. refuses to disclose the truth, and the case has never been solved.

The United States calls us “aggressors,” while we retort that it is the aggressor. They brand us “warmongers,” whereas we contend that it is the big capitalists within the U.S. government who are the true warmongers. The real question—who is the warmonger—should be left for the world to judge. All around us, U.S. military bases are proliferating. We certainly haven’t occupied any islands belonging to the United States; rather, it is the United States that has seized Taiwan from China. Neither Chile nor we have ever invaded any Latin American or African nation. Our only territorial expansion occurred in Asia—against China. (Laughter) After decades of struggle against imperialism, we finally drove it out. This development has deeply unsettled the United States, as well as other imperialist powers. Still, there is no practical way to remove us from the earth—just as there is no way to relocate you from your own country. Attempts to oust Cuba have likewise failed, and even smaller states like Albania cannot be forcibly displaced.

Chairman: How many people live in Chile?

Silva: About seven million—roughly the same population as Beijing.

Chairman: Beijing’s urban population is just over four million. Your total population is comparable to Shanghai’s, which exceeds seven million. Have you visited Shanghai?

Vazquez: Yes. On this trip to China, we also went to Shenyang, Anshan, Fushun, Changchun, Nanjing, Wuxi, and Hangzhou. Chairman: You’ve traveled to quite a few places. How long did the tour last?

Perez: Twenty-seven days. It was an extremely enlightening journey. In Chile, knowledge about China remains quite limited. During this visit, we toured factories, schools, and rural areas. Chairman: Did you also visit factories and schools?

Perez: Yes. Beyond factories and schools, we explored people’s communes, mines, oil refineries, steel mills, automobile plants, and the Shanghai Industrial Exhibition Hall.

Chairman: China’s industrial development has only just begun relative to our vast population, making it seem disproportionately small. Foreign observers have long maintained that China is backward—a claim we have consistently refuted. Overcoming this backwardness will require decades, if not longer. Is your country’s industry more advanced than ours?

Silva: Not really. Our industrial base, measured against our population, is still quite modest. We have textile and metallurgical industries, but they fall far short of Anshan Iron and Steel.

Chairman: Exactly—our industrial capacity is inadequate given our size. Although we possess Anshan Iron and Steel, it remains insufficient in scale.

Silva: Nevertheless, you have achieved remarkable progress. Chairman: Some progress has been made, though it is by no means extensive.

Silva: Our impressions, however, contradict what the Chairman has said. Under the leadership of the Party, we observed the Chinese people brimming with vigor and a spirit of self-sacrifice, wholeheartedly carrying out the tasks assigned to them.

Chairman: That is indeed the case. The Chinese people are highly organized and disciplined. Notice how few police officers we have—just a handful of traffic cops. Traffic management is largely carried out by the public themselves.

Vazquez: This deeply impressed us.

Chairman: In the old society, without a standing army and armed police, rampant robbery and theft would have been commonplace. Today, serious robberies have virtually disappeared in Beijing, though occasional petty thefts still occur—but they are far less frequent than before.

Silva: In a country with a population of 700 million, it is impossible for everyone to possess the same level of consciousness. Chairman: The people themselves monitor and report acts of thievery, maintaining order through collective vigilance.

Vazquez: We were particularly moved to see Young Pioneers on the streets and in schools helping to keep things orderly.

Chairman: In the early years following liberation, Beijing still experienced a fair number of traffic accidents. Now, such incidents are exceedingly rare, and fatalities caused by vehicles are almost unheard of.

Perez: That is absolutely true.

Chairman: There has certainly been improvement compared to the immediate post-liberation period. We have been training drivers to avoid accidents and educating pedestrians to cross roads safely. We also address corruption among government officials through criticism and self-examination—an effort we refer to as rectification. Preventing corruption among public servants is no easy task. We treat it as a contradiction within the ranks of the people, seeking to reform a small minority while trusting that the majority remain upright. Regardless of the country, those who engage in wrongdoing are always a small fraction, and even they can change. For example, Kuomintang generals captured during our wars have been rehabilitated and now no longer oppose us. Similarly, a former Qing emperor now works with the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, compiling historical and cultural materials. He is free to come and go, unlike when he was an emperor, confined and deprived of liberty.

Vazquez: Back then, he could only gaze upon distant hillsides; now he is liberated.

Chairman: As emperor, he dared not travel freely, fearing both popular opposition and the loss of his imperial dignity. How could a ruler wander at will? Clearly, people are capable of change—but it must be voluntary, not forced. The Americans accuse us of “brainwashing.” I confess I don’t fully understand what that entails. My own mind has been “washed”: I once adhered to Confucian and Kantian ideas, only to abandon them in favor of Marxism. In that sense, imperialism and Chiang Kai-shek played a role—they subjected me to indoctrination through violence. The Japanese, for instance, killed countless Chinese and occupied a large portion of the country, after which the United States and Chiang Kai-shek launched a nationwide campaign against us. All of these forces served to “wash” our minds, uniting the Chinese people in resistance and profoundly transforming their outlook. So tell me, who exactly “washed” Castro’s mind? (Laughter)

Silva: Speaking of “brainwashing,” I would like to express my gratitude directly to the Chairman: You have not only dispelled the false narratives propagated by the United States in our minds, but also opened our eyes to the reality of China.

Chairman: Before this visit, your understanding of China was likely quite limited. A single glimpse has clarified matters considerably. Perhaps you could return every five years to see whether we have made further progress.

Silva: Chairman, as the supreme leader of Marxism-Leninism, you have every reason to feel satisfied and proud. The people of this nation are disciplined and industrious, dedicating themselves wholeheartedly to the cause of national reconstruction. Over the past fifteen years, you have lifted the country out of centuries of poverty, oppression, and exploitation, achieving significant results. I am confident that even greater accomplishments lie ahead.

Chairman: Let us not overestimate our achievements. While I am gratified by our work, the progress we have made in industry, agriculture, culture, education, and science remains disproportionate to our immense population. This is an undeniable fact. We have only taken a step forward compared with the era of Kuomintang rule under Chiang Kai-shek. Furthermore, the U.S. claims that our government will either collapse this year or next—yet such predictions lack credibility. It seems unlikely that either scenario will materialize. Even if they were to arrive, the forces required to topple us—namely, the United States and Chiang Kai-shek—would need to invade and conquer us, a feat they have already attempted and failed to accomplish. South Vietnam today has a population of just fourteen million; any attempt to intervene there would prove equally futile, ending in stalemate or disaster. The United States also faces considerable headaches in Latin America. In this regard, we remain optimistic. Ultimately, the people of the world must rise up and take control of their own destinies, rejecting the domination of capitalist interests. Because we hold this conviction, those very capitalists naturally view us with suspicion. Yet why, then, do so many of them still seek to do business with us, despite our opposition to their interference in our internal affairs? The Americans want to trade with us, but we refuse; they wish to send journalists, but we block that as well. We believe that major issues should be addressed first, while minor ones can wait. That is precisely why Chilean journalists are welcome in China, whereas their American counterparts are not. However, one day, normal diplomatic relations will be established between our two countries. I estimate that will take another fifteen years, bringing the total to thirty since we began this process. If necessary, we will wait longer.

Silva: We are deeply grateful to you for taking the time to meet with us amidst your busy schedule. Hearing directly from the Chairman fills us with inspiration, and we will carry these words back home as a message of goodwill to our fellow citizens.

Chairman: Please extend my greetings to the people of your country, as well as to all who wish to befriend China.

Silva: Many of our people would indeed like to establish closer ties with China.

Chairman: I am convinced of that, and you yourselves serve as proof.

Silva: We in Chile have also hosted three delegations of Chinese journalists visiting our nation.

Chairman: Have Chinese journalists ever visited Chile?

Silva: Mr. Chang XX, who is present here, was a member of the very first delegation of Chinese journalists to come to Chile.

Chairman: The newspaper he represents, Ta Kung Pao, has a history of sixty-two years. It once served the Qing emperors, the Beiyang warlords, and Chiang Kai-shek, but now it speaks for the people.

Vazquez: My own newspaper was founded in 1902, the same year as Ta Kung Pao. However, it has yet to begin serving the public.

Chairman: It surely will. Wang Yunsheng, the editor-in-chief of Ta Kung Pao, is not a Communist, nor has he ever been. He previously worked for Chiang Kai-shek and other regimes, but now he serves the people. There are many others like him—professors, secondary and primary school teachers, and countless others—who were once affiliated with the Kuomintang but have since turned away. Without their cooperation, we would lack educators, journalists, actors, and artists. Fortunately, we have forged a broad united front comprising individuals who, though not members of the Party, stand united with us.

Vazquez: Those are all Chinese nationals.

Chairman: Exactly! But some Chinese figures are far from conciliatory—for example, Chiang Kai-shek. (Laughter) Many university professors, engineers, doctors, and journalists have chosen to serve the people. By rallying them together, we frustrate our adversaries. Let us conclude our discussion here.

Silva: It is an honor and a privilege to have met with the Chairman today. To come to China and not meet him would be tantamount to never having been here at all.

Chairman: If you wished to see me, I was happy to receive you. May you have a safe journey home.