(October 20, 1974)





　　【Poul Hartling (Danish: Poul Hartling, 1914–2000) was a Danish diplomat and politician. A member of the Liberal Party of Denmark, he served as Prime Minister of Denmark from 1973 to 1975. In 1978, Hartling became the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. In 1981, the UNHCR under his leadership was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, and he stepped down in 1985.】






　　Chairman: (to Ha) Sit down, please!

　　Ha: If I may, I would like to say that we are very pleased and honored to have this opportunity to meet with Mr. Chairman. This is our first visit to China, and although we have only been here for a short time, what we have seen and heard has already left a deep impression on us.

　　Chairman: China is not there yet—not good enough.

　　Ha: You say it’s not good enough, but I would argue that it already is. The entire world is deeply impressed by everything you have accomplished over the past 25 years. Might I ask, Mr. Chairman, what is your secret?

　　Chairman: There is no secret (laughter).

　　Ha: Then what, if anything, is the obvious reason?

　　Chairman: To be honest, I’m not entirely sure myself. All in all, China is now a socialist country. Previously, it was much like a capitalist society—there was an eight-grade wage system, distribution according to work, monetary exchange; these were not very different from the old order. The key difference lies in the change of ownership.

　　Let me ask you about Europe. Do you sense any particular problems there?

　　Ha: Well, I think the issues in Europe can be divided into those facing Western Europe and those in Eastern Europe. We belong to Western Europe and are also a Nordic nation. I believe our main challenge at present is economic. We’re experiencing some inflation, which has created certain difficulties. At the same time, our people and our country are relatively prosperous. There is no hunger. We have a robust social system that ensures care for the elderly and the sick.

　　However, from a political standpoint, there remains tension between East and West Europe. Over the course of this century, Europe has endured two world wars, and I happened to be born just in time to witness both. I was born in the year World War I broke out.

　　Chairman: 1914.

　　Ha: Yes. Having lived through two devastating wars, Europeans naturally fear another conflagration. That is why we welcome the current détente—the easing of tensions between Eastern and Western European nations is indeed a positive development.

　　If I might add one more point, this is also why Denmark is a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO. By joining NATO, we ensure that we possess sufficient strength to avoid being dominated by the Soviet Union.

　　Chairman: When do you think the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe will reach a successful conclusion?

　　Ha: Well, reaching a successful conclusion… the CSCE is currently making very slow progress and will still require time. Nevertheless, we hope for some tangible results. We anticipate holding additional meetings—in fact, a long series of further meetings—because the issues cannot possibly be resolved suddenly within a short period. Therefore, much work remains to be done. Our ability to participate in these discussions stems from the solid backing provided by NATO. At the same time, we are also members of the Nine-Nation European Community. Thanks to this strong cooperative framework in the West, we have the necessary leverage to engage in talks on security matters as well.

　　Chairman: (nods) I see. The world seems quite unsettled—far more so than in the past—no matter where you look, including here in China. Just recently, there was the Lin Biao incident.

　　Ha: What was that?

　　Chairman: Lin Biao was a power-hungry factionalist within our Party. (Brings the index fingers of both hands together and taps them lightly.)

　　Ha: …I have observed that one major distinction between China and many other countries is that China remains largely an agricultural nation. This raises several questions for me. Could it be that much of what is happening in China today is closely tied to the fact that the vast majority of its population resides in rural areas and leads an agrarian lifestyle?

　　Chairman: That’s correct. Farmers account for 80 percent of China’s population. We are currently restricting urban population growth. The urban population stands at around 200 million.

　　Ha: So urban residents make up roughly one-fifth or one-quarter of the total population.

　　Chairman: Including large, medium, and small cities.

　　Ha: If I may press further, could it be that your efforts to curb urbanization stem from a belief that the virtues and attitudes cultivated in the countryside are superior and more valuable? Might this encourage people to go out and explore the new ways of life emerging in rural areas?

　　Chairman: An overly large urban population presents significant challenges—supply becomes difficult. Today, our urban population is already quite substantial, nearly equal to that of the United States (laughter).

　　Ha: Indeed. It’s comparable to the total population of the entire European Community.

　　Chairman: Roughly so. China’s urban-rural structure is quite unique: a small urban population coupled with a massive rural base—quite unlike Europe.

　　Ha: Exactly the opposite of Europe.

　　Chairman: Precisely. Hence, having too many people concentrated in cities would be disadvantageous in the event of war.

　　Ha: Mr. Chairman, you just mentioned the issue of war again. Could you share your outlook on the future of the world and of China? Is there a possibility of war in the foreseeable future?

　　Chairman: That question doesn’t really need to be discussed.

　　Ha: Why is that?

　　Chairman: These days, everyone talks about peace precisely because they fear war.

　　Ha: That’s true (laughter).

　　Chairman: So peace and war coexist. If we weren’t afraid of war, what would be the point of talking about peace?

　　I am not in favor of so-called permanent peace. To my friends from Europe, I always advise them to prepare for war. Without preparation, they will suffer losses in the future. As for the current talk of peace, I’ve noticed that some are merely trying to buy time. The Americans, for example, tell me they are simply stalling. I believe this is a serious concern—one that occupies the minds of people all over the world right now.

　　Ha: I agree with you, Mr. Chairman. We face numerous challenges, including economic ones, but the question of war and peace remains the most perplexing of all. It is a topic that captures the interest, concern, and anxiety of the entire global community. Especially now, with weapons of mass destruction capable of annihilating the entire planet, the stakes could not be higher. We have already experienced two world wars, and each was truly horrific. War is always terrifying. Should another conflict erupt, it would constitute a catastrophic disaster on a global scale, a prospect we simply cannot ignore.

　　Chairman: Disasters are bound to happen, but they need not be as frightening as we imagine. Right now, the very idea of war seems terrifying. However, if hostilities were to break out, I don’t believe the actual consequences would be so dire. After all, the objective would be to occupy enemy territory and subjugate its people. If everyone were killed, there would be no one left to govern. The fighting would likely target military installations or smaller cities. For instance, the United States dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but it never attacked major urban centers like Tokyo or Osaka.

　　That about wraps it up?



Thanks to Ayana Sakura for collecting, entering, and proofreading.