Mao Zedong (hereinafter referred to as Mao): I would like to ask you a question. Do you
have this feeling: What should be done with imperialism? In other words, should it start a
world war? Or should it hold off for now and fight later? Do you have this feeling in your
contacts with your country and European powers?
Hill (hereinafter referred to as Hill): I don't think they have made up their minds yet. They
are facing enormous difficulties. It seems they won't fight for the time being, at least they
don't have the power to launch a world-wide war. Most people share this view. On the other
hand, because they have lost their ability to make judgments, there is a risk of a major
conflict. But overall, they are not in a position to launch a major war for the time being.
Mao: If we have to fight, we can fight the two big powers, the United States and the Soviet
Union. Next are the defeated powers, Japan, West Germany, and Italy. As for Britain and
France, they don't really want to fight.
Zhou Enlai (hereinafter referred to as Zhou): Charles de Gaulle's [2] military budget has been
reduced a bit.
Mao: Even Japan and West Germany don't seem to want to fight. West Germany wants to
annex East Germany and unify Germany. Japan wants to take back Okinawa. In fact, Japan is
not yet independent.
Zhou: The United States controls them militarily, with numerous military bases there.
Mao: The situation after World War II seems somewhat different from that after World War
I. I'm not sure if these views are correct. After World War II, the defeated countries could not
separate themselves from the victorious powers, not only in finance and investment, but
also in international politics and military affairs. This is different from the situation after
World War I. After World War I, Hitler rose to power within a few years.
Zhou: He did not recognize the Treaty of Versailles.
Mao: He did not recognize the Treaty of Versailles. At the time, the workers, intellectuals,
and students in these countries still obeyed the government. Yet, Germany's large
Communist Party collapsed in an instant.
Zhou: The Italian Communist Party collapsed even more rapidly.
Mao: The Social Democratic Party is finished. Hitler established the National Socialist Party
[3] and the SA. As for the United States, following the pattern of the past two world wars, it



always waited two years before engaging in the conflict. Right now, the United States is
bearing the brunt of the fighting in both Korea and Vietnam, and still has 200,000 troops in
Europe, primarily in West Germany. The United States has 500,000 troops in South Vietnam,
two divisions totaling over 70,000 in South Korea, and also in Japan, Taiwan, the Philippines,
and Thailand. Its forces are already very dispersed. It has two hands stretched out, one in
Europe and the other in Asia, engaging in minor battles. Of course, the monopoly capitalists
still have their own plans.
Zhou: They can make money.
Mao: If there's no war for a long time, the monopoly capitalists will be unhappy. The
monopoly capitalists, including those in Australia, would like to contribute some troops, but
the numbers are limited.
Mao: It seems they are preparing to expand the war, whether it's the United States, the
Soviet Union, or other countries. Judging from these circumstances, it seems war is
imminent. I'm unsure about this question, so I'd like to ask you for your advice. I'm not
expecting a quick answer. Could you please observe this issue? We can discuss it again when
we meet again within a year. However, we must also take into account the people's
awareness.
The US halted its bombing of North Vietnam, and the American troops in South Vietnam
were delighted and cheered. This suggests their morale is not very high.
Twenty-three years have passed since Japan surrendered in 1945. In fact, wars of all kinds
have never ceased since World War II. As Lenin said, imperialism is war. It simply cannot do
without war.
There are two major powers in the world. They possess not only conventional weapons but
also atomic bombs. These weapons are not easy to tread, and they know it. Khrushchev's [4]
theory is that a nuclear war would destroy the earth, leaving no winners. The United States
agrees. These two major powers are nuclear powers. Our country can still be considered a
non-nuclear power, but our small number of nuclear weapons doesn't count. If we were to
fight, we would have to use conventional weapons. Because we are neither the US nor the
Soviet Chief of Staff, we have no idea what they are planning; we can only judge based on
their actions. The two countries have comparable populations, and even if a major war were
to take place, they would still feel a shortage of manpower. Even in a medium-sized war,
such as the one being fought in Vietnam today, the United States faces manpower
constraints, especially for pilots.
Mao: How long does it take to get from your home to Hong Kong?



Hill: The flight takes over ten hours. Australia to Hong Kong is 4,500 miles, about 7,000
kilometres.
Mao: I think the world needs to be unified. There are miles, nautical miles, kilometres, and
so many languages. But it's not easy to unify languages all at once. Once the world is unified,
things will be much easier. This planet will eventually be unified.
In the past, the Mongols, the Roman Empire, Alexander the Great, Napoleon, and the British
Empire in the West, and now the United States and the Soviet Union, all sought world
unification. Hitler also wanted world unification, and the Japanese sought Pacific unification,
but none of them succeeded. I don't think this possibility has been eliminated. Capitalism
forces people around the world to accept capitalism, which is one way to achieve
unification. A second option is for the people of all countries to rise up in revolution and
then unite. I think that will achieve unification. It probably won't be easy for internal
imperialism or revisionism to unify the world. Could we wage a world atomic war, annihilate
the world's population almost completely, and then have the two giants, the United States
and the Soviet Union, unify the world? But these two countries have small populations, and
if they were to disperse, they wouldn't have enough. They'd also be afraid of atomic war.
They wouldn't be afraid of annihilating other countries' populations, which would be a waste
of their own. Secondly, the countries in the intermediate zone—Britain, France, West
Germany, Japan, and Italy—would probably not be willing to fight. Ultimately, we'd probably
have to take the Marxist path, with revolution by the people of each country and then free
union. What about the US dollar, British pound, Australian dollar, franc, mark, and ruble?
Just lump them all together. Why bother with all these distinctions?
The Vietnam War differed from the Korean War in that all of Europe did not participate. In
the Korean War, Britain, France, Türkiye, and Belgium all participated.
I've only posed this question. I'd like to think about it. Should I also ask you to consider this
world issue, the issue of war, the question of war and peace? Is it war, or revolution? Does
war lead to revolution, or can revolution prevent war?

[1] Chapters 1 to 3 are part of the conversation between Mao Zedong and Hill, Chairman of
the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Australia (Marxist-Leninist).
[2] Charles de Gaulle, then President of France.
[3] The National Socialist Party, also known as the National Socialist German Workers' Party,
is abbreviated as the Nazi Party.
[4] Khrushchev, former First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of
the Soviet Union, was removed from his leadership position in October 1964.