(October 22, 1964)

After China successfully exploded its first atomic bomb, it evoked tremendous repercussions throughout the world. All people who oppose imperialism and love peace, especially the revolutionary people of Asia, Africa, and Latin America, are overjoyed and elated, warmly acclaiming this major achievement of the Chinese people and supporting the just measures taken by the Chinese people to oppose the nuclear blackmail and nuclear threats of U.S. imperialism.

The people of the socialist countries, the peace-loving people of the whole world, and especially the revolutionary people of Asia, Africa, and Latin America firmly believe that the nuclear weapons in the hands of socialist China are a powerful force for safeguarding world peace. They regard this victory of the Chinese people as their own victory.

China’s nuclear test has boosted the morale of the revolutionary people of the whole world and deflated the arrogance of U.S. imperialism. After China successfully exploded its first atomic bomb, U.S. President Johnson issued a statement opposing it within less than three hours, and said that China’s atomic bomb meant little and was insufficient to shake the U.S. nuclear hegemony; subsequently, in a televised speech on the 18th, he again attacked China. This time, however, he said, “This matter should not be taken lightly.” The U.S. government’s rare fluster and self-contradiction on a major international event precisely shows that China’s atomic bomb explosion is a head-on blow to the U.S. nuclear overlord.

The nuclear blackmail policy of U.S. imperialism is built on the foundation of nuclear monopoly. Once the U.S. nuclear monopoly is further broken, the U.S. nuclear blackmail policy becomes ineffective. Of course, China’s possession of nuclear weapons infuriates U.S. imperialism. It is not at all strange that they oppose China’s nuclear tests and its acquisition of nuclear weapons. What is strange is that Johnson, who has always been hostile to the Chinese people, this time puts on a sanctimonious posture, as if the reason the United States opposes China’s possession of nuclear weapons is not because China has broken the U.S. nuclear monopoly, but out of concern for the interests of the Chinese people.

According to Johnson, China’s nuclear weapons are “a tragedy” for the Chinese people, because China’s “limited resources” are used to build nuclear weapons and cannot be “used to improve the welfare of the Chinese people.”

What Johnson means is simply that China is a poor country and cannot afford to build nuclear weapons. Imperialism always underestimates the strength of the people. From the very first day of the founding of New China, they have constantly ridiculed China’s poverty and backwardness, saying that China cannot accomplish this or that. It is as though the Chinese people, unless they submit to their manipulation and rely on their aid and handouts, can achieve nothing at all. But the Chinese people, who have stood up, have high aspirations and are brave and hardworking. We deeply understand that if we cannot effectively resist imperialist aggression, all our resources will be nothing more than spoils for imperialism, and our peaceful labor will have no protection whatsoever. It is precisely the nuclear blackmail and nuclear threats of U.S. imperialism that have forced the Chinese people to rely on their own efforts, work diligently to strengthen the country, and finally overcome numerous difficulties to acquire the means to resist U.S. nuclear threats. If China’s first atomic bomb explosion can be called a tragedy, it is not a tragedy for others, but a tragedy for U.S. imperialism: its fond dream of turning the Chinese people into nuclear slaves has been shattered, and its nuclear monopoly has been fundamentally shaken.

Johnson also pretends to be very concerned about China’s security, saying that China’s possession of nuclear weapons “will only increase the Chinese people’s sense of insecurity.”

What is this about? Everyone knows that for a long time, U.S. imperialism has constantly subjected the Chinese people to nuclear threats, even stationing nuclear weapons right at China’s doorstep. The U.S. Seventh Fleet, equipped with nuclear weapons, prowls back and forth along China’s coast; the United States has established one nuclear base after another around China; and U.S. military and political leaders have arrogantly and recklessly threatened to drop nuclear bombs on China. According to Johnson’s argument, U.S. nuclear threats can increase the Chinese people’s sense of security, yet the Chinese people’s possession of nuclear weapons to counter U.S. nuclear threats will instead increase their sense of insecurity—what strange logic! According to this logic, if the Chinese people want to live in peace and stability, they must completely disarm and entrust themselves to the shelter of the U.S. “nuclear umbrella”; there is no other way out.

Let me tell you frankly, Mr. Johnson: When China had no nuclear weapons, it was never cowed by your nuclear threats. Now that China has nuclear weapons, it can indeed strengthen our national defense, but we have never based our sense of security on nuclear weapons. China has something more powerful than the atomic bomb: the invincible Mao Zedong Thought, the leadership of the glorious, great, and correct Communist Party of China, the highly awakened and firmly united 650 million Chinese people, and the superior socialist system. Relying on these, we can defeat any powerful enemy.

Johnson not only asserts that China’s nuclear test is of no benefit to the Chinese people, but also that it “is of no help to the cause of peace.”

According to Johnson, it seems that world peace can only be maintained under the domination and monopoly of the nuclear powers; once China possesses nuclear weapons and breaks the monopoly of the nuclear powers, chaos will break out in the world. But everyone knows that the United States develops nuclear weapons to launch aggression and dominate the world, while China develops nuclear weapons to defend itself and safeguard peace. Why is it that when the aggressor U.S. imperialism possesses nuclear weapons, it is a “gospel” for peace, but when peace-loving socialist China possesses nuclear weapons, it becomes a “disaster” for mankind? The United States, in pursuit of its policies of aggression and war, has been frantically developing nuclear weapons for 30 years and has conducted hundreds of nuclear tests. Why is it that your insane nuclear arms race is helpful to the cause of peace, while China’s nuclear test for self-defense is of no help to the cause of peace? This is turning right and wrong upside down—how utterly outrageous!

Johnson has said so much, but it all boils down to one thing: Only the United States should have nuclear weapons; China should not have them. This is truly the face of a tyrant and the tone of a complete hooligan.

Frankly speaking, China is not infatuated with possessing nuclear weapons. As long as U.S. imperialism does not engage in nuclear weapons, China will not either; however, as long as U.S. imperialism still has nuclear bombs in its hands, China must have them too. Whether Johnson deceives, intimidates, or slanders, he cannot change this position of the Chinese people.

Of course, there is a fundamental difference between the nuclear weapons in the hands of China and those in the hands of U.S. imperialism. China is a socialist country, and we have always formulated our foreign policy based on the interests of the Chinese people, the interests of the socialist camp, the interests of the national liberation movements in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, the interests of the revolutionary people of the world, and the interests of world peace. After possessing nuclear weapons, we will, as always, pursue a foreign policy of peace. We will neither use this to intimidate others or engage in any adventures, nor treat it as a ticket to join the “nuclear club” and do anything that harms the interests of the revolutionary people of the world or world peace. The 15-year history since the founding of New China has proved that socialist China is entirely trustworthy in the struggle against the imperialist policies of aggression and war, in supporting the revolutionary movements of the people of all countries, and in safeguarding world peace.

Johnson measures the stature of a gentleman by the yardstick of a petty man, going so far as to say that China intends to use its “small nuclear force” to “bargain” with the United States’ “powerful [nuclear] arsenal.” Mr. President, you are completely mistaken. China develops nuclear weapons not as capital to bargain with you or to strike some deal, but to break your nuclear monopoly, and thereby eliminate nuclear weapons, so as to forever remove the danger of nuclear war looming over humanity. This was made crystal clear in the Chinese government’s statement on October 16.

China’s stance on the nuclear weapons issue has been consistent. In the past, when China had no nuclear weapons, we advocated the complete prohibition and thorough destruction of nuclear weapons; now that China has nuclear weapons, we still advocate the same. After the explosion of China’s first atomic bomb, the Chinese government immediately solemnly declared that China will never be the first to use nuclear weapons at any time and under any circumstances. This stance of the Chinese government most clearly demonstrates that China’s development of nuclear weapons is entirely for self-defense, to resist U.S. nuclear threats, and in the final analysis, for the complete prohibition and thorough destruction of nuclear weapons.

The Chinese government also solemnly proposes: convene a summit meeting of world heads of government to discuss the issue of the complete prohibition and thorough destruction of nuclear weapons. As a first step, the summit meeting should reach an agreement whereby countries possessing nuclear weapons and those that may soon possess nuclear weapons undertake the obligation not to use nuclear weapons, not to use them against non-nuclear countries, not to use them against nuclear-weapon-free zones, and not to use them against each other.

The specific proposal of the Chinese government to first reach an agreement on the non-use of nuclear weapons is realistic, reasonable, simple, and easy to implement without involving the issue of supervision. If the countries concerned are all willing to undertake this obligation, the danger of nuclear war can be immediately reduced. This would mark a significant first step toward the ultimate goal of the complete prohibition and thorough destruction of nuclear weapons. After that, discussions can be held on the cessation of all nuclear tests, and the prohibition of the export, import, proliferation, production, stockpiling, and destruction of nuclear weapons. Obviously, if the U.S. government still has any desire for peace, there is no reason whatsoever to reject this proposal.

In his statement and televised speech, Johnson evaded the Chinese government’s proposal and indulged in bombastic talk, saying things like China should join the partial nuclear test ban treaty; that an agreement on verification should be reached to end all types of nuclear tests; that efforts should be made to avoid nuclear proliferation; and that other non-nuclear countries should accept the shelter of the U.S. “nuclear umbrella.” This whole array of things Johnson trots out, to borrow Rusk’s words attacking China, is nothing but a smokescreen to cover up the United States’ stubborn and feeble position of not daring to undertake the commitment of no first use of nuclear weapons.

The role of the tripartite treaty[1], after more than a year of testing, has long been exposed for what it truly is. It is a fraud to consolidate the U.S. nuclear monopoly. Even when the tripartite treaty was signed, we were not taken in. Now that we possess the means to break the U.S. nuclear monopoly, can you still expect us to walk into this trap ourselves? That is sheer fantasy.

Johnson seems very keen on preventing nuclear proliferation. In fact, the real proliferator of nuclear weapons is none other than the United States itself. The Johnson administration is actively pushing the so-called multilateral nuclear force plan, handing nuclear weapons over to the NATO countries, especially to the West German revanchists. This practice of the United States is aimed both at preparing for nuclear war and at tightening its nuclear control over its allies. To oppose the U.S. nuclear threats and to oppose the U.S. proliferation of nuclear weapons within its aggressive blocs, more and more peace-loving countries will surely respond to and support the propositions and proposals of the Chinese government. The U.S. nuclear monopoly can no longer be sustained. This is highly beneficial to the complete prohibition and thorough destruction of nuclear weapons. The hope for preventing nuclear war and prohibiting nuclear weapons lies not in consolidating the U.S. nuclear monopoly, but in breaking it. The more thoroughly the U.S. nuclear monopoly is broken, the greater the possibility of the complete prohibition and thorough destruction of nuclear weapons. Such is the dialectic of the development of things.

Nuclear weapons were not created by God. Since human beings can manufacture nuclear weapons, they can certainly eliminate them. We are firmly convinced that through the united struggle of the people of all countries, nuclear war can be prevented, and nuclear weapons can be banned. The people of the socialist camp countries must unite, the people of Asia, Africa, and Latin America must unite, and the people of the whole world must unite, and fight to the end to thoroughly smash the nuclear blackmail and nuclear threats of U.S. imperialism and to strive for the realization of the lofty goal of the complete, thorough, clean, and resolute prohibition and destruction of nuclear weapons!

[1] The tripartite treaty refers to the Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests in the Atmosphere, in Outer Space and Under Water, formally signed by the Soviet Union, the United States, and the United Kingdom in Moscow on August 5, 1963.