Polemic on General Line of International ... - From Marx to Mao

very phrase ‘coexistence’ is both weird and presumptuous”and that “let us relegate to the scrap heap the concept of atransitory and uneasy coexistence”. 1 Why do they now showso much interest in Khrushchov’s general line of peaceful coexistence?Because the imperialists are clear on its usefulnessto them.The U.S. imperialists have invariably adopted the dualtactics of war and peace in order to attain their strategic objectivesof liquidating the people’s revolutions, eliminating thesocialist camp and dominating the world. When they find theinternational situation growing unfavourable to them, theyneed to resort increasingly to peace tricks while continuingtheir arms expansion and war preparations.In 1958 John Foster Dulles proposed that the UnitedStates should dedicate itself to “a noble strategy” of “peacefultriumph.” 2After assuming office, Kennedy continued and developedDulles’ “strategy of peace” and talked a great deal about“peaceful coexistence”. He said, “. . . we need a much betterweapon than the H-bomb . . . and that better weapon is peacefulco-operation.” 3Does this mean that the U.S. imperialists genuinely acceptpeaceful coexistence, or, in the words of the leaders of theCPSU, admit “the reasonableness and practicability of peacefulcoexistence”? Of course not.A little serious study makes it easy to see the real meaningand purpose of “peaceful coexistence” as advocated by theU.S. imperialists.What is its real meaning and purpose?1Former U.S. Under-Secretary of State Douglas Dillon’s address onU.S. foreign policy, April 20, 1960.2J. F. Dulles, Speech Before the California State Chamber of Commerce,December 4, 1958.3J. F. Kennedy Speech at the U.N. General Assembly, September 20,1963.290