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

On July 7, when the Moscow meeting had already begun,a mass rally was held in Peking at which the Chinese expelledfrom the Soviet Union for the unlawful distribution ofmaterials containing attacks on our party and the Sovietgovernment were hailed as heroes by Chinese officials.Seeking to instigate among the fraternal Chinese people sentimentsand feelings unfriendly to the U.S.S.R., the Chineseofficials tried, at this rally, to prove their right to violate thesovereignty of our state and the standards of internationalrelations. On July 10, the CPC Central Committee issuedanother statement, in which it justifies these actions and,in effect, tries to arrogate to itself the right to interfere inthe internal affairs of the Soviet Union, which the Sovietgovernment, naturally, will never allow. Such actions canonly aggravate relations and can do nothing but harm.In its leading article on July 13, the Peking People’s Dailyagain attacked our party and gave a distorted interpretationof the fact that the Soviet press did not publish the June 14letter of the CPC Central Committee.The frankly unfriendly actions of the CPC leaders, theirpersistent striving to aggravate the controversy in the internationalcommunist movement, the deliberate distortion of ourparty’s position, the misinterpretation of our motives intemporarily refraining from publishing the letter, impel us topublish the letter of the CPC Central Committee of June 14,1963, and to give our appraisal of it.Everyone who reads the letter of the CPC Central Committeewill see behind the fine phrases about unity andcohesion unfriendly, slanderous attacks on our party and theSoviet Union, a striving to play down the historic significanceof our people’s struggle for the victory of communism in theU.S.S.R., for the triumph of peace and socialism throughoutthe world. The document contains every manner of charge,direct and veiled, against the CPSU and the Soviet Union.Its authors permit themselves fabrications, unseemly andinsulting to Communists, about “betrayal of the interests of530