- BB 1 -

USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

229.1

SOVIET MAR. 30 NOTES ON GENEVA TALKS

Moscow, TASS, in English Hellschreiber to Europe, Mar. 30, 1959, 2140 GMT--L

(Text) On Mar. 30 the USSR Foreign Minister A. A. Gromyko summoned the U.S. Ambassador in Moscow L. E. Thompson and handed him a note of the Soviet Government to the U.S. Government on calling a foreign ministers conference and a summit meeting. On the same day, A. A. Gromyko received the British Ambassador in Moscow, P. Reilly, and the French Ambassador in Moscow A. Dejean and handed them corresponding notes of the Soviet Government to the Governments of Great Britain and France.

Follows the text of the Soviet Government's note to the Government of Great Britain of Mar. 30:

The USSR Government has studied the note of the British Government dated Mar. 26, 1959, and deems it necessary to state the following:

The Soviet Government notes with satisfaction that at present the Governments of Great Britain, the United States, France, and the USSR have reached agreement to start solving urgent international questions at a foreign ministers conference and a summit meeting which undoubtedly will promote the easing of tension in international relations and the improvement of the entire international climate, a cause for which the Soviet Government is known to have exerted consistent efforts.

As to the agenda, and also the date and venue of the foreign ministers conference, the Soviet Government is in accord with the British Government that the ministers conference should be called in Geneva--given the consent of the Swiss Government--on May 11, 1959, to consider questions related to Germany, including the peace treaty with Germany and the Berlin question, bearing in mind that both these concrete issues--as pointed out in the note of the Soviet Government on Mar. 2--are long awaiting corresponding decisions by the powers concerned.

The Soviet Government expresses regret that full understanding has not been reached presently on the question of the participation of the Polish People's Republic and the Czechoslovak Republic in the foreign ministers conference. Taking into account the attitude of the British Government, the Soviet Government deems it possible to settle the question of their participation at the conference itself, proceeding from Poland and Czechoslovakia's direct interest in the solution of the aforementioned questions as neighbors of the German states and the first victims of Hitlerite aggression.

- BE 2 -

USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

It follows from the exchange of views held that the question of the representation of the two German states--the GDR and the Federal German Republic--at the foreign ministers meeting which is to start on May 11 is a decided matter.

The Soviet Government expresses the hope that all the parties to the foreign ministers meeting will make their positive contribution to its efforts and that it will be an important step in establishing lasting peace in Europe. For its part, the Soviet Government will do everything possible to help achieve this goal.

An identical note of the Soviet Government has been forwarded to the U.S. Government.

The Soviet Government's note to the French Government is similar to the notes to the Governments of the United States and Great Britain. As distinct from then, however, it also points out that the Soviet Government proceeds from the premise that every government will be able, of course, to state its view on all questions related to the problems brought up for consideration at the meeting.

It further points out that the French Government declares in its note that it is ready to agree to a summit meeting if the foreign ministers conference suggests concrete progress. The Soviet Government presumes that progress at the foreign ministers conference, of which the French Government speaks, depends on the efforts of all the parties to it. For its part, the Soviet Government is ready to exert all efforts to make the meeting a success and hopes that the other participants will be ready to do likewise.

Should this readiness prove insufficient at the foreign ministers meeting, efforts to achieve success should not be discontinued, the Soviet Government believes, but, on the contrary, should be redoubled so that the summit meeting, which will be called to solve international problems, would bring positive results.

## KHRUSHCHEV MAR. 7 LEIPZIG SPEECH TEXT

Moscow, TASS, in English Hellschreiber to Europe, Mar. 26, 1959, 2350 GMT--L

(Editor's Note: The following speech was first published as a summary in a Berlin, Deutschlandsender, version which appeared in the Mar. 9 issue of the USSR & East Europe DAILY REPORT on p. FF 19 under the heading KHRUSHCHEV LEIPZIG CONFERENCE SPEAKER.)

(Text) Dear comrades, friends, allow me to express to you my heartfelt gratitude for this opportunity of meeting you, hearing your speeches and expressing some of my own thoughts.

- BB 3 -

USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

It may be that some people will speculate on my visit to you. How did it happen, they will say, that Khrushchev came to attend an All-German Workers Conference? (Laughter) Therefore, dear friends, allow me to legally justify my presence among you. Here is my mandate, allow me to read what it says. (Voices of approval) It says:

"Comrade N.S. Khrushchev, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU and Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, Mar. 4, 1959:

"Esteemed Comrade Khrushchev, the standing committee of the All-German Workers' Conference has learned with great joy that you are to come to the CDR and to visit the spring Leipzig fair. The Presidium of the standing committee takes the liberty of inviting you to attend the Ninth All-German Workers' Conference which will take place in Auensee House in Leipzig on Mar. 7, 1959.

"The standing committee of the All-German Workers Conference would like to ask you, if you find it possible to make the visit, to reply at our conference, before over 1,200 workers and trade union functionaries from both German states, to some questions relating to the peaceful solution of the German problem. We would be very gratified if you could accept our invitation.

"With friendly greetings, the standing committee of the All-German Workers Conference. "Signed: Bruehl (Secretary), on instructions of the President."

I did not think it possible to decline this invitation, and willingly accepted it. Let not Mr. Adenauer, and others, therefore, carp about my attending a conference of German workers. I could not decline such an authoritative mandate--very precious to me--as an invitation extended by my class brothers, German workers. Thank you comrades, thank you again. I shall willingly endeavor to reply to the questions which are of interest to you, and to express my considerations on a number of important problems of the moment.

There are people of various parties among you here. I am a communist, as you well know, and I speak to you as a representative of my party. The working class of the world is concerned primarily with the present international situation--with questions of peace and questions of preventing war. What is the situation in the world today? What do we think of it?

You all know that only recently the 21st Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union took place in our country. It reaffirmed in its decisions the highly important conclusion arrived at by the 20th Congress of our Party that war is not inevitable under the present circumstances. And it is not because imperialism has lost the taste for wars of conquest. By no means. Its appetite has not lessened. The point is that conditions have changed.

- BB 5 -

USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

So it was in our country in 1917 when a socialist revolution took place in Russia--a Russia that was economically and technically backward, with its illiterate peasantry, a Russia that was regarded as the stronghold of the old reactionary order. The insurgent people smashed the hated capitalist system, took power into their hands and took unswervingly to the road of socialist development. Our people acted in accordance with the laws of social development, the laws of life itself.

I have already told you that our enemies attacked us from all sides at that time. Nearly the whole world went to war against us. But it was the old world, the world of exploiters and drones, while the working class throughout the world supported our revolution. And we withstood the onslaught and defended the great gains of a great revolution against all enemies, both domestic and external.

The capitalists of the world and their ideologists did not, of course, reconcile themselves to our victory. But they are obliged to acknowledge that the Soviet Union exists and that it worthily defends its existence, defends it by every means at its disposal. We administer a shattering rebuff to all who interfere in our affairs. Having realized thus, the leaders of the capitalist world began to reason roughly thus: Yes, the workers and peasants of Russia did not want to bow to our might, the might of the old world. Let us adopt a different procedure. Let us give these stubborn workers and illiterate peasants who have seized power time to try to run their economy themselves. They will never cope with the difficult work of managing a country. Indeed, when we fight them, they have to defend themselves and this brings them closer together, argued the imperialists. And if we stop fighting them, they will be crushed under the weight of their own economic and political difficulties.

Well, we have not been crushed, as you can see.

Our people, led by their party, have scored tremendous achievements in the years of Soviet power. They have built up a mighty industry, a large-scale mechanized agriculture, and scaled great summits in the development of science, technology and culture. The living standards of the Soviet people are rising steadily. Our country for the first time in the history of mankind, has built socialism, realizing the age-old dream of working men.

The Soviet Union's achievements went against the grain of the imperialists. They had time and again attempted to solve the deep-lying contradictions between the capitalist states at the expense of our country, but were rebuffed vigorously every time.

- BB 6 - USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

International imperialism diligently fostered such a bloodthirsty beast as Hitlerism, and approved the nazi thugs when they fanned up hatred of communism and of the Soviet Union among the German people. The imperialists openly incited Nazi Germany against our country in their pursuit of far-reaching aims.

The imperialists ultimately succeeded in kindling the flames of World Wsr II, hoping to improve their affairs at the expense of the Soviet Union. But Hitler made his own correctives to the course of events. His first blows were struck not against the Soviet Union, as the West would have it, but against the Western powers themselves. Then, intoxicated by his easy victories, Hitler launched his predatory campaign in the East and attacked the Soviet Union.

The last war was extremely heavy. The speaker before me, our friend, spoke of war and its heavy consequences. I should like to call your attention to how the Western Powers waged the war. When Hitler sent his armies to the East and attacked the Soviet Union without a proclamation of war, the governments of the Western Powers concluded an alliance with us and extended us their assistance. We thanked them sincerely and being loyal to our duty as allies dutifully fulfilled our obligations in the anti-Hitler coalition. They sent us some materials we needed for war and awaited the developments.

The most reactionary circles in the West apparently reasoned thus: Let the war develop, let Hitler sap the forces of the Soviet Union, the forces of the socialist state, while we shall keep alive the Soviet people's hopes that we will aid them at the necessary moment by opening the so-called second front. The designs of American imperialism were frankly and cynically set forth by U.S. Senator Harry Truman, who later became President of the United States. He said that if the Germans began to win the Allies should help the Russians, and if the Russians began to win the Allies should help the Germans. Let them both kill as many as possible, he said.

What did the imperialists hope to achieve by this policy? They wanted to use the Germans, who were then under the spell of nazism, to destroy the gains of the Great October Revolution, to destroy the world's first socialist state of the working people. (They wanted?) the Germans to be bled white in that war so that Germany would cease to be a dangerous competitor of certain imperialist states. Thus, they wanted to kill two birds with one stone, as the saying goes. They wanted to destroy the Soviet socialist state of the working people, to drown in blood the best gains of the working class-of the working people, and at the same time to hamstring their German competitors. They wanted to insure for a long time to come the world rule of the imperialists of certain Western countries. I don't think there is any need to name these countries. This is an open secret.

- BB 7 - USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

But what happened? The Soviet Union mobilized all its forces to repulse fascism. The workers, the peasants, the intellectuals--all the Soviet people rose like a steel shield to the defense of their socialist motherland. They barred the road to nazism, began to rout Hitler's armies and then went over to a resolute offensive against the invaders who had penetrated deep into the Soviet Union.

It was then, when the course of World War II was radically reversed and when the events took such a turn for the Western Powers that if they had hesitated further in opening the second front that the Soviet troops might have reached not only Berlin but Paris, it was then that our Allies began to act--and in haste. It was then that the second front was opened. It looked as if our Allies were in haste to open it in order to prevent the peoples of West European countries themselves from smashing the occupationists with the help of the Soviet Army. This is how our partners in the anti-Hitler coalition fulfilled their obligations as Allies.

World War II ended. Our industry was largely destroyed. Many of our plants lay inruis. The country received no coal from Donbas, and the iron and steel mills in Donbas and almost everywhere in the south of the country had been blown up. It would seem that the Allies should have sided us, but what did they do? Instead of helping us, they started an economic blockade of our country,

Why did they do it? They thought that following such a devastating war, such destruction wrought by war in our country, the Soviet Union would not be able to overcome the postwar difficulties without outside assistance and would perish. This is why the blockade was started. However, you all know what came of it. The Soviet Union made striking economic, scientific and cultural progress. We broke the blockade by launching the world's first sputniks and the world's first man-made planet, created by the genius and industry of the Soviet people. We demonstrated to the world the mighty forces of socialism. The proletarian banner--the pennant and arms of the Soviet Union--are now soaring in boundless space as a symbol of the creative labor of the working class of the entire Soviet people.

This, dear friends, is how things stand today. On the one hand, there is the growing mighty camp of the socialist countries. On the other, there is the camp of imperialism. The appetite of the imperialists has not lessened, but the situation in the world has changed. The whole thing could be summed up as follows: The imperialists would like to destroy the socialist countries as a hungry wolf would like to kill a lion, but here is the rub: his stomach is too small and the teeth, too, are not what they were--worn down, you know.

- BB 9 - USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

Now the imperialists are conducting a cold war, holding the threat of a
new world war over the peoples. I believe they are doing so because they
fear the growing forces of socialism, because they lack confidence in
their victory in the economic competition between socialism and capitalism.

It was not the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries that
conceived and started the cold war. The first signal to that war was
sounded by Churchill in his Fulton speech. One should say that Churchill
is a worthy representative of his class. Now he has grown old, just as
the social system he is defending. But Churchill was clever, a smart
politician. He knew what is hot and what is cold, and so he launched
the cold war, and other aggressive imperialist circles started to push
it further vigorously. Now the peace-loving peoples are fighting to
liquidate the cold war.

To liquidate the cold war does not mean to go and build up a big bonfire.
Imperialists are waging a cold war even in hot countries. (But it is?)
clear to everyone that this is not a physical but a psychological
phenomenon. What do the imperialists need the cold war for? They need
it to step up the arms race, build up military blocs, to keep their own
peoples subjugated, and the peoples of their allies, to squeeze more and
more funds for armaments and, in the last analysis, to assure ever greater
profits for the monopolies.

In order to somehow justify the cold war the imperialists are using the
bogey of communism. They spend enormous sums for that purpose. And
there are quite a few people who give credit to this legend. Don't they
frighten religious people with the devil? But who has seen him? Who
can say how frightful he is? And though no one saw or could have seen
the devil, religious people are still frightened by this imaginary being.
It is the same thing with the "communist menace." They are frightening
people with communism but cannot explain why it is unacceptable. Is it
not a fact that many peoples in capitalist countries do not know what
communism means. What it gives to the people? The only thing they know
is that communism is something that did not exist before.

I believe all of you know that a person is often reluctant to part with
things he is accustomed to, although these things are old and must be
replaced. Look for instance how some people, especially middle aged
people, regard old shoes. A man buys new shoes but they pinch some.
He discards them and puts on the old ones because his feet are
accustomed to them. Figuratively speaking, some people regard
communism approximately the same way. A person may not be able to say
anything but about communism, he does not oppose it publicly, but thinks
to himself: let this communism be for the grandchildren; as for myself,
I will shift somehow under capitalism.

[L]

- BB 10 -

USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

In this connection I would like to tell you about an interesting talk I had with a prominent foreign representative. We had one distinguished visitor from a nonsocialist country in the Soviet Union. He came to our country for the first time. I shall not name him, so as to give him no offense. Our political views are different, but he is not a bad person, and I am not averse to meeting him again in the future.

During our talk he frankly told me the following: Mr. Khrushchev, when I was going to your country, some people in my country advised me against that because you have communism. But I decided to go nevertheless. And what did I see? You have no communism. I walked through your streets, saw Soviet people; they are clothed, shod, look well. You are building good new houses. So where is the communism? It is in our country where nearly all people go around half naked and hungry, that we have communism.

Comrades, this is not a joke I am telling you, but a description of a real conversation I had with a foreign public leader. Is it not an indication of the twisted ideas about communism with which bourgeois propaganda is indoctrinating human minds? Imperialist circles and their ideologists are doing everything in their power to keep up this old bogey. They are exploiting the political backwardness of some people and painting a wrong conception of communism. Although I am an atheist, I do not want to give offense to religious people. I think they will take no offence if I say: destroy the myth about the devil and the priest will be out of a job. Whom will he save the peoples from if they would not believe in the devil? As it is, however, there are people who believe in the existence of the devil. Unfortunately there are quite a few people who do not understand the real purposes of the construction of communism.

Popular traditions, legends, fiction--like Gogol for instance--say that the evil spirits go about their deviltry at night, in darkness. But as soon as the cock crows, the devils vanish somewhere, and no one knows where, but vanish they do, as the saying goes. Because the crowing of the cock foretells the coming of dawn, the rising of the sun from the east. When the sun rises and people begin to see better what is around them, they have no fear of mysterious devilish spells, and the people who cannot explain away the figment about the devil, created in order to exploit the backwardness and ignorance of people, feel themselves more calm and brave in plain daylight because they see what is surrounding them.

The same goes for the communist bogey. As sunreys scatter the darkness of night and make everything clear, so the ideas of communism penetrate ever more deeply into the conscience and hearts of people. As the sun rises daily from the east, so communism is irresistibly spreading over the earth.

- BB 12 -

USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

The moral-political unity of Soviet society, the friendship of peoples, Soviet patriotism, socialist internationalism--such are the inexhaustible founts of the strength of Soviet society. We are confident that we shall conquer capitalism. We shall conquer it not by war, but by demonstrating practically to all the working people the superiority of communism over capitalism. The working class has a great truth--the teaching of Marxism-Leninism. This truth will triumph.

Comrades, confronting the international labor movement are fundamental questions and those of a different nature. The questions of communism, the question of peaceful coexistence of countries with different social-political systems, are cardinal, fundamental problems of our time.

The German problem, however important, is a particular issue. Some might say, how come Khrushchev came here to Germany and declares that the German problem is a particular issue? I would like you to get me straight. The world population is about 2.5 billion, of which there are about 80 million Germans. The question of society's movement to communism bears upon all peoples of the world, whereas the German question bears mostly upon Germany. Naturally, it is an acute, an important question. We stand for German unity, and the German people need it. But can the peoples of the world exist without the reunification of the two German states? They can, and not badly. Can the Germans live without reunification? They can, and even well. Consequently this, though important, is not a fundamental question.

Why then do we nevertheless attach such great significance to the German problem? Because it is the focal point of the problem of war and peace, one of the principle sources of international friction and conflicts. Great armed forces of the countries of the West and East are concentrated in Germany. And when two armies stand ranged against each other, are in direct contact, any spark might touch off the conflagration of war, all kinds of unexpected contingencies may arise. This must be prevented. This is why we are pressing, and will continue to press consistently, for the normalization of the situation in Germany.

The most reasonable way out would be to sign a peace treaty with the two German republics. In the present circumstances that would be the most correct solution of the question. The signing of a peace treaty, without altering anything that came into being after the war, by putting on record the existing situation in Central Europe, would represent a decisive step toward normalizing the international situation, toward establishing a climate of confidence between the two sides. But the ruling circles of the Western Powers stubbornly cling to cold war positions, and are exploiting the German problem toward this end.

- BB 13 -

USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

Comrades, our countries twice within the last 50 years fought bloody wars against each other. I myself was with the army from the first days of the last war, and with my own eyes saw all the horrors of war. As a member of the military council of the Stalingrad front I was a witness to and participant in the Stalingrad rout of the nazi troops. As a result of the criminal orders of Hitler, who demanded that the encircled troops fight to the last man, German casualties were enormous. The city was literally carpeted with corpses of German soldiers. Casualties were also great in the Volga steppes, when Mannstein with his troops attempted to break through to relieve the army caught in the Stalingrad cauldron and was resolutely repulsed by our troops commanded by Marshal Malinovskiy. It was a terrible war indeed. Many millions perished in the war, and people perished not only on the front.

You are aware of the heinous crimes of the gestapo. You have heard about Czwiecim, Maidanek, Buchenwald, about death chambers, about massacres of defenseless prisoners of war and civilians. Is there anything the nazis left undone to poison the relations between the Soviet people and the Germans? But human reason prevails over obscurantism, despite all crimes of the past. Surely, even during the war quite a few German soldiers realized that Hitler had started a criminal aggressive war. I remember, for instance, the interrogation in 1943 at the Kursk salient, of a German soldier who went over to the Soviet side, He said that he hated Hitler and nazism, that nazism should be destroyed.

And now, after the war, when friendly and brotherly relations have been established between the Soviet people and the working people of the GDR, it is pleasant to see the friendly attitude toward the Soviet people in the GDR, to feel how correctly the working people of the GDR understand that the Soviet people are their best friends. I think that the Germans who have been to the Soviet Union since the war will confirm that our people have the most sincere feeling of friendship for you.

The Soviet Union, the Soviet people, always were and are for the unity of Germany. It was the rulers of the Western Powers who shouted in their time that Germany should be dismembered, and it was precisely their separatist actions that brought about a split of your country. Our government, Stalin, on the other hand, persistently advocated the idea of German unity. And we continue to abide by this decision today. But now, on what foundation should Germany be reunited? We are not for just any reunification. And you, too, will agree, I think, that the question of reunification should be approached primarily from class positions.

- BB 14 -

USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

Here is an example. After World War I when the young Russian republic was compelled to sign the Brest peace treaty, the counterrevolutionary central council in the Ukraine also signed a peace treaty with Germany. The Ukrainian state was dominated by the German imperialists. The people of some frontier villages were polled about what state they wanted to belong to, the Russian federation or the Ukraine.

The village where I was born lies on the frontier between the Ukraine and Russia. It is a Russian village, but most of its people--my father and myself included--worked in Donets mines and in cities in the south of the Ukraine. As a result there were many arguments among the peasants as to which of the two states to join. Many of the villagers wanted to join the Ukraine and if there were no "Gaidamaki" (Counterrevolutionary forces of the Central Ukraine Rada, active in 1918-1919--Ed.) there and if it were not ruled by capitalists and landowners, the people of our village would probably have voted to join the Ukraine. But when some peasants spoke for joining the Ukraine, the others said: We, too, prefer joining the Ukraine. The Ukraine is rich; we have become used to it and worked there. But there are "Gaidamaki" in the Ukraine today. A Gaidamaki detachment commanded by the son of our squire is billeted not far from here. He is reported to have said: Let the peasants cut down my woods provided they leave the hazel grove, so that I should have a rod to cane the peasants with. And the peasants finally voted to join the RSFSR. The peasants in some villages bordering on the Ukraine gravitated to the Ukrainians, but voted for Soviet power--for joining Soviet Russia, because the Ukraine was ruled by capitalists and landowners while Russia had established the power of workers and peasants. This was the class approach to the solution of the frontier problem.

Let us return to the question of German reunification, however. I myself am Russian; I come from among the workers and I naturally respect my nation and I respect other nations, too. But when it comes to class solidarity--to class struggle, I uphold the interests of the working class--the interests of the working people.

What does the reunification of Germany mean under present conditions when two German states are in existence? On what basis can it be achieved? He who reflects the interests of the working class cannot admit, even in thought, that the workers and peasants of the GDR, who have created a worker-peasant state and are successfully building socialism, should lose all their gains in consequence of reunification and should agree to live, as formerly, in capitalist slavery.

- BB 15 -

USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

Our consent to the reunification of Germany on a capitalist basis, comrades, would dishonor us workers in the eyes of the future generations. They would say: "This means that our forefathers, our fathers--blinded by nationalism--lost all class sense, ceased to defend the interests of their class, and reconciled themselves to the abrogation of socialist gains." Can we do this? Certainly not.

Can we agree when the capitalist world proposes to achieve the reunification of Germany at the expense of the GDR and thus narrow down the front of socialism? To do so would be to imitate the proverbial crucial care which wanted to jump into the pike's mouth, and in such a way as not to scratch its throat. We have not been and we do not live to yield to capitalism. We must firmly abide by the principles of proletarian internationalism. We live, as Lenin said, in the era of proletarian revolutions and the collapse of capitalism. The question can also be put thus: Why not reunite Germany by abolishing the capitalist system in West Germany and establishing there the power of the working class? But it would be unrealistic today. It would be even more unrealistic, however, to cherish any hopes for the liquidation of the socialist gains in the GDR, for the liquidation of the power of workers and peasants.

Representatives of the bourgeois world today don the mantle of champions of democracy. They say: We are for all-German elections. But in voicing this demagogical slogan they forget--but we cannot forget--that they have already compromised themselves once on a similar issue. I mean the Geneva agreement on elections in Vietnam. The struggle for liberation from the French colonialists waged by the people of Vietnam under the leadership of Comrade Ho Chi Minh, that great son of the people, ended in victory. The imperialists had to stop the war.

Agreement was then reached in Geneva on the holding of a general election in Vietnam within two years. These two years have long passed but no election has yet been held, because the imperialists are aware that if it were held all Vietnamese people would rally to the banner of the workers' and peasants' government. It should be noted that the United States made the biggest efforts to prevent free elections in Vietnam. This is how they honor their international agreements. And after all this they dare to reproach us with our alleged opposition to the so-called free elections. The imperialists themselves have violated the very international agreement they signed. They have done so for the sake of their class interests and for the sake of their comrades-in-class, the capitalists and landowners of South Vietnam. This is a class approach.

- BB 16 -

USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

If the capitalist class protects its class interests, then should not we, the workers, understand and protect our class interests? We must with all our strength protect the interests of the working people and their gains. I repeat, we are for German unity, and the German people will be reunited. This is only a question of time. At the same time, it is of course very important on what basis it will be reunited. Therefore, do not hurry, the wind does not blow in your face, consider everything thoroughly. Have patience, but also get. Do not be mere bystanders, so you will not have to blush before your children and grandchildren, but, on the contrary, be able to tell them that the working class of Germany had fought actively in defense of its class and national interests. If you want your children and grandchildren to remember you with gratitude, you should fight for the conclusion of a German peace treaty, which would be an important step toward the reunification of Germany.

What is necessary to be done? To sign a peace treaty with the actually existing two German states. If it were possible now to establish a confederation of both German states, it would also be well (several words indistinct) to representatives of Western powers, including representatives of various circles of the Federal Republic of Germany. I asked them: Why do you fear a confederation? If you, capitalists, are as strong spiritually and materially as you say, surely you could influence the socialist sector, digest it, and have a reunified Germany along capitalist lines. But the capitalists fear a confederation. They apparently have no faith in their capitalist stomachs, which cannot digest the socialist achievements of the GDR. What is it you want then, Messrs. Capitalists? You apparently want us, the Soviet Union and the other socialist countries, to help you destroy the GDR. No, gentlemen, we shall not assist you in this sinister work. We are warmly on the side of the German working class. The GDR is a republic of the working class. It is a republic of labor and peasantry, the homeland of all German workers.

And now, comrades, permit me to touch upon the question of frontiers. If Mr. Adenauer were asked whether he believed that the part of the German territory lost in consequences of the war started by the Nazis can be returned with the help of the policy of the cold war, he would apparently say "yes" at a meeting and "no" at home.

History teaches that it is not conferences that alter national frontiers. Conferences can only reflect in their decisions an established balance of forces resulting from victory or capitulation after a war, or other circumstances. Consequently, frontiers can be altered as a result of war. But the situation at present is such that both sides are reasonable enough to prevent hostilities over the question of frontiers. Consequently, the frontiers should apparently be recognized as they do exist.

- BB 17 -

USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

I realize that this is a painful question for you Germans. You may well say: It is all very well for Mr. Khrushchev to speak. It is not the Soviet Union but Germany that lost some territories as a result of World War II.

But I ask you, comrades, to regard me not only as a representative of my people. I am, above all, a communist, a member of the Communist Party. Do not think that the question about the frontiers is considered only by Germans to be sensitive. This question is also very acute for many capitalist states. With the victory of the socialist revolution the question of frontiers will assume a different character in a number of countries and will not be as acute as under capitalism. However, it does exist in socialist countries.

Let us take the Soviet Union and Poland. If one asks the Ukrainians or Byelorussians, they will say that even now several regions come within Poland's present territory which earlier belonged to the Ukraine and Byelorussia. Even such a "witness" as the late Lord Curzon would be able to confirm this: It is known that the so-called "Curzon Line" drew the Soviet-Polish frontier considerably more to the West than it runs at present. I do not by any means speak about this because some controversial territorial questions exist between the Soviet Union and Poland. There are no such questions, though I am convinced that there exist in Poland some members of the population who do not consider the existing frontier to be just and, apparently would like to see it run a little more to the east than it does at present.

Take also Yugoslavia and Hungary, as an example. Since the end of World War II part of the territory which used to belong to Hungary has been included in Yugoslavia, and approximately 1 million Hungarians live there. Or, take the question of Transylvania, where a considerable number of Rumanians as well as Hungarians live and where the interests of royal Rumania and Horthy's Hungary clashed very acutely. This could not but have had certain consequences which become apparent even at present.

It is known that part of the present Moldavian Soviet Republic had been grabbed by the Rumanian king and was some time ago reunited with Soviet territory. However, no argument about a frontier arises between the Soviet Union and the Rumanian People's Republic as both our countries are socialist and are guided by common interest, and they both advance toward one aim, communism. This, however, does not mean that among the Rumanian population there are not people who consider that Moldavia is part of Rumania.

- BB 13 -

USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

We do not close our eyes to the fact that such feelings can arise. At the same time, however, we consider that to us communists the question of frontiers are not of major importance and that there can be no conflicts about it between socialist countries. We Communists consider the aim of our life to be the construction of a communist society, the bright future of mankind. This society will have no classes, there will be no exploitation of man by man; material and spiritual benefits will belong to all the people; the entire wealth of the earth--no matter where it lies--will serve equally all mankind, freed from the fetters of capitalism. It cannot be otherwise under communism. Matters cannot be presented in such a way that, having built a communist society, we shall spike our frontiers with still more posts, shall maintain frontier troops and officials to issue frontier permits.

The question of frontiers is one of the most acute and complicated questions inherited by us from the old capitalist world. Today, old ideas about frontiers based on bourgeois legal norms still exist in the consciousness of millions of people building socialism, parallel with other remnants of capitalism. Even many communists are not free from these remnants. Therefore, at present we cannot but take this into consideration and we must lead the masses patiently to the understanding of this question from the position of communism. Communist society which will have at its disposal an abundance of material and spiritual riches will be able to satisfy equally the demands made by every individual as well as by every nation. I think that problems of providing people with the means of existence will not arise at all under communism. The most important thing will be to know how to utilize in the best possible and most rational manner, in the interests of all mankind, everything nature and labor can give to people, of all mankind, and not only to the one nation which has reached communism.

In these circumstances, earlier concepts of frontiers as such will gradually become outdated. With the victory of communism on a world-wide scale, state frontiers, as Marxism-Leninism teaches, will die off. Probably for the time being only ethnographical frontiers will remain, and even those will apparently only exist conditionally. Obviously, along such frontiers—if they can be called frontiers—there will be no frontier guards, no customs officials, and no incidents whatsoever. These frontiers will only fix the historically established living area of a people or nationality on a given territory. That this will be precisely what will occur is shown by the process which is taking place in the Soviet Union, a multinational state. Every one of the peoples, nationalities and national groups of the Soviet Union has its frontiers established by history, and by its own traditions and culture.

- BB 19 -

USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

But all the peoples of the union of autonomous republics of our country are united by their common vital interests within a single community and they are advancing together toward one goal, communism. Therefore, the borders between the union and autonomous republics integrated within the Soviet Union are gradually ceasing to mean what they used to mean.

As our country moved toward socialism, the borders between its individual republics were, in fact, vanishing, as it were. This process gained momentum as the gap between the development standards of the national republic was narrowed. If you ask any Russian, Ukrainian, or Byelorussian today whether the administrative boundaries of their republics are of any topical interest to them, I think most of them will be puzzled by this question. Why? I think it is because all the nations and nationalities enjoy equal rights within our socialist state; life is based on a single socialist system and the material and spiritual needs of every people and every nationality are met in equal measure.

Five years ago it was found expedient to bring the Crimea, until then a constituent part of the Russian Federation, within the Ukrainian Republic. This was done on an absolutely voluntary basis, and was supported by the Russians and the Ukrainians alike. Why? Because the action affected neither the interests of the Russians nor those of the Ukrainians, and the Crimea and its riches are as much a patrimony of all Soviet people as they were before.

The foundations for communist relationships between peoples have been laid in the Soviet Union and throughout the whole socialist camp. Examples of this are numerous. The peoples of the socialist nations are bound together by bonds of fraternal friendship and by their common concern in building socialism and communism. They are constantly giving each other selfless mutual aid and support. Among the sovereign states of the socialist camp, extensive cooperation is developing in all spheres of economic, social, political, and cultural life. Looking ahead, I think the future trend of development of the socialist countries will, in all probability, be one of consolidating a single world system of socialist economy. Economic barriers, which divided our countries under capitalism will be pulled down one after another the common economic base of world socialism will be consolidated. It will eventually make frontiers a pointless issue.

There is one fine catalyst of this process. It is the leveling-off in the general economic and cultural standards of socialist countries by advancing those who lag.

- BB 20 -

USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

The higher the living standards all the free peoples become and the fuller
the extent to which their material and spiritual needs will be met, the
sooner and the more easily will the relics of capitalism in the human minds
be eradicated and the faster will be the process of the peoples blending
within one communist community. The frontiers, as they are understood
today, will gradually cease to exist. No sovereign socialist country can
seclude itself within its frontiers and rely on its own potentialities
and wealth alone. If that were so, we would not be communist
internationalists but would rather become national socialists.

The leveling-off in the development standards of the nations where socialism
has triumphed and the gradual vanishing of the importance of frontiers
after the triumph of communism in all countries comprise one of the most
important questions of the Marxist-Leninist theory. The level of
development we have reached makes it imperative for us to get down to a
thorough consideration of this question in order to see well the prospects
that lie ahead and to understand better the problems which seem
insurmountable today, but will present no difficulty at all some years
hence.

It is certainly difficult for the bourgeois politicians, whose vision
is handicapped by the narrow limits of the ideology of the class they are
serving, to understand our internationalist position. In my talks with
representatives of the capitalist world I often had to answer the question:
What do you think, Mr. Khrushchev, of the fast increase of the population
in China? In replying, I said it was true that the birthrate in China
was very high. Its annual increase of population is about equal to the
entire population of Czechoslovakia. My interlocutors then cautiously
remarked: Does that not trouble you? There you have a typical sample
of bourgeois psychology. Why should we be frightened by the rapid increase
of the population in fraternal People's China or in any other country for
that matter? If all the peoples apply their creative powers, their intellect
and their potentialities to expanding the production of material and cultural
values, there will be enough to meet the needs of the peoples of the
whole world and the so-called "question of overpopulation" of our planet
will look absurd.

Incidentally, the bosses of the big imperialist states have been saying
a lot in the postwar period to the effect that the countries should
not care about their national sovereignty. The big imperialist powers
want the national independence of the other countries to be destroyed
so as to have a free hand for the economic and political enslavement
of the people of those countries which have a certain opportunity of
defending their interests with the help of frontier and customs regimes.

- BB 21 - USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

It is not difficult to see that the imperialist ringleaders and their ideologists, by calling for a limitation of national sovereignty and for a lowering of the customs barriers in other countries, are, in fact, pursuing a policy of bringing those countries into submission to the big imperialist monopolies. To consolidate the national sovereignty of those countries is a matter of progressive importance, contributing as it does to strengthening the national independence of the peoples. We communists firmly believe in the feasibility of our plans and we have a clear idea of the way international relations should develop on earth.

I wish to say just a few words about socialist democracy and bourgeois democracy. One has to revert to this question now and again because there is a good deal of confusion in the minds of the workers, peasants, and all the toiling people of the western countries. Bourgeois propaganda doing everything to prevent the people from getting the right idea of socialist democracy.

History offers a wealth of evidence for drawing comparisons between socialist democracy and bourgeois democracy. The point is to see objectively and without bias which democracy accords with the vital interests of the working people and promotes international friendship and peace. Does bourgeois democracy do that? No, it does not! Under bourgeois democracy, power is, in point of fact, in the hands of a handful of exploiters who are interested in preserving and consolidating their privileges, oppressing millions of workers and plundering the weaker peoples. Bourgeois democracy offers mankind no way out of the tragic impasses into which capitalism has landed them. It is seeking to slur over the contradictions of capitalist society; this is why we regard bourgeois democracy as one of the means the bourgeois ruling classes need now to dupe the masses.

Socialist democracy is a different thing. It insures the true rule by the people and the active participation of all the working people in deciding all the questions involved in running the state and the national economy. The workers, peasants, and all the working people of the socialist countries are the true masters of their destinies. They are shaping a new life for themselves and their children and are working with self-abnegation in the name of this great goal. Socialist democracy assures the working people the opportunity of widely sharing in running the country and in solving all the most important political and economic problems. The working people of the socialist countries are making extensive use of the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press in order to build socialism and communism still more effectively. In so doing, they are governed by their own interests and by the interests of hundreds of millions of people.

- BB 22 - USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

At this All-German Workers Conference, I should like to deal with the question of a peace treaty with Germany. It is known that the Soviet Government has put forward the proposal to conclude a peace treaty with the GDR and the Federal Republic of Germany. I will not take long in dealing with this question. The proposal has been made, and we are waiting for a reply. From our point of view, it would be better to sign the treaty with the two existing German states but should this not take place, we will have to sign a peace treaty with the GDR. What is wrong about that? Which is better, no peace treaty or one with the GDR? The signing of a peace treaty with the GDR will be of great constructive importance. The German people will get the long awaited peace treaty. Should the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany decline to sign a peace treaty, the position of the Federal Republic will become more complicated. Indeed, any honest person will have a legitimate question: Why is the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany unwilling to sign the peace treaty? That must be because it wants to keep up the state of cold war in order to start a hot war at an opportune moment. It is afraid of ending the cold war, because if there is none, NATO may well fall to pieces.

Our proposals for the conclusion of a peace treaty with the GDR and the Federal Republic of Germany, as well as the proposal for making West Berlin a free city, are said to have caused some disquiet among certain sections of the population of West Germany and West Berlin. But is there any reason for that disquiet? What will happen to West Berlin if it becomes a free city? Will the order of things change there? To this question one can reply: Nothing bad will happen. No one is going to make the population of West Berlin accept a scheme of things unacceptable to them. If they like the capitalist order of things, let it continue, by all means. Evidently the conditions are not ripe as yet for a new scheme of things there. There is a time for everything, however.

In our peaceful competition with capitalism, we shall influence the minds and hearts of the workers of the world by our achievements in the cause of socialist construction. In the near future we shall surpass the richest and most powerful capitalist countries in per capita production. We shall cut down the working day still further and gain further achievements in scientific and cultural development. All the people in the capitalist countries will then become still more convinced of the advantages of the socialist system and will decide for themselves whether they should tolerate the capitalist regime in their own countries any longer.

- BB 23 - USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

Comrades, the supreme task for all of us at the present time is to preserve peace. The forces of peace, far from being weaker than the forces of war, are even somewhat stronger. The forces of peace are growing all over the world with each passing day, and the future, undoubtedly, is with them. The preservation and consolidation of the unity and cohesion of the working-class of the whole world, including that of West Germany, are of particular importance for the battle of peace and against war. The German working class has suffered much because of its disunity. That was its real misfortune. In Germany, there always were so many trends and hues in the labor movement that--as the Russian saying goes--the devil himself would break a leg before he makes head or tail of it. The German bourgeoisie quite cleverly used this lack of working class unity for its own purposes. The division of the working class helps the imperialists to maneuver in order to perpetuate their rule. And I think that none of us wants to help the capitalists, and therefore we should give serious thought to uniting the efforts of the working class, of the working people in all countries in the interests of strengthening further the cause of peace and socialism.

I like very much the words of August Bebel: If the enemy praises you, think what folly you have committed, think what is he praising you for. I am happy that we communists need not trouble ourselves about this because we have never heard any praise from the capitalist world. I sincerely wish you the same.

Talking with representatives of the capitalist world I sometimes hear such remarks: Why, you want to put all of Germany under Walter Ulbricht, but he is an impossible person one cannot come to terms with him. I greet my friend, Comrade Ulbricht, for having such a firm character and for resolutely defendint the interests of the working class, the interests of the entire German people. I am proud of the fact that our friend, Comrade Walter Ulbricht, who loyally serves the working class, is not frightened by the difficulties involved in the struggle for the cause of the toiling people of Germany. In this case the invectiveive of the capitalists sounds as praise, as a reward for staunchness and courage.

I also recall that capitalist leaders stated more than once that they considered it impermissible for Otto Grotewohl to head the government of the entire German state. As for myself, I consider that that would not be a bad thing, even a very good thing. But if the people in West Germany are not prepared for that as yet, there must be no hurry. For the time being, let there exist two states: the GDR, a state of the workers and peasants, and capitalist West Germany.

- BB 24 -

USSR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Mar. 31, 1959

Peaceful competition should develop between these two states. Today a West German worker still earns somewhat more perhaps, but this "honeymoon" is already drawing to a close. Capitalist paralysis, crisis phenomena which lead to the shrinking of production and to the closing of factories and mines and the sacking of workers, is beginning to develop on an ever increasing scale in West Germany.

We workers, the toiling people, must be fully conscious of our class interests and rally our ranks more closely. We must be able to come to terms with our class brothers, to display a maximum of will and patience, exploit every means to convince those who today do not understand us yet. This is a case for will, ability, reason. But the capitalist world is a different proposition. In this case one must be on one's guard and not slide from class positions.

Dear friends, this is the first time in 40 years that I have seen such an audience as yours. Only in the first years after the 1917 revolution did we have meetings attended by communists and mensheviks and social revolutionaries and representatives of other parties. Your conference, too, is attended by communists and social democrats as well as representatives of other parties and nonparty people. I think that you hold differing opinions, differing views. And I am ready to listen exhaustively and patiently to each one of you. I have patience, but I would not be frank if I failed to tell you that, communist that I am, I will parry to the best of my ability everything I cannot agree with.

In conclusion, allow me to thank you once more for the cordial reception and attention. We are leaving today for Berlin and thence for the Soviet Union. I am very pleased with the visit to the Leipzig fair, the meetings with the people and with business circles. I am especially touched by the fact that you invited me to your conference and allowed me to listen to you, and to speak to you.

Friends, to the last beat of our hearts we shall be loyal to the working class, to the toiling people; we shall always fight for its freedom and happiness, for the triumph of the teaching of Marxism-Leninism, for the construction of a communist society! Long live proletarian solidarity! Long live the German working class which will free the peoples from the fetters of capitalism and establish a world in which the means of production will be common property, will belong to all the people, and consequently the exploitation of man by man will be abolished, where all men will be brothers. And that is what communism will be! Long live communism! Long live world peace!

Nikita Khrushchev's concluding words were met by stormy applause and cheers. After the speech all rose and sang the "international."

MONDAY, APRIL 13, 1959.

them are now employed by the union in posts ranging from business agent to state director.

A report submitted to the executive board by Mr. Dubinsky indicated the extent to which fresh faces were appearing in high ranking jobs in the union. All the officials have just been chosen for new terms by the rank and file of their districts in the union's general elections.

Among those named in the report were E. T. Kehrer, a 40-year-old former member of the faculty of the University of Michigan, now director of the union's Southeastern Department, and his assistant director, Nicholas Bonnana, 32, an alumnus of the training institute.

A lawyer, Edward Kramer, 46, heads the Eastern Department, and two other lawyers serve as assistant regional directors. Seven graduates of the training institute serve as local union managers, six as district managers, two as state directors, three as directors of organization, two as assistant department chiefs and one as special assistant to an area director.

## Election to Test Worth

Mr. Dubinsky said "the drying up" of the old sources of potential leadership inside the industry had forced increased dependence on such devices as the training institute. However, he emphasized that all future leaders had to prove their worth by standing for election. This represents a safeguard against "an elite corps" of leaders unresponsive to the will of the rank and file, he said.

Mr. Daniels, the new assistant to the president, was graduated from City College in 1942 and went to work in the union's research department. He studied law at night at New York University Law School and was admitted to the bar in 1950. He has served on advisory groups appointed by former Governors Thomas E. Dewey and W. Averell Harriman.

Another appointment, an-

opening today!

# SHERATON-DALLAS
## proudest host in Texas

in Southland Center

Make your next trip to Dallas an occasion you will never forget.

The Sheraton-Dallas is every inch a monarch — 600 large, richly-furnished, air-conditioned guest rooms; a whole floor of penthouse suites; three glamorous restaurants; two charming lounges; one of the world's most magnificent ballrooms ... and all the luxuries, a traveller could ever dream of.

The all-new Sheraton-Dallas ... the most luxurious hotel in the world today!

For Reservations
Call CHickering 4-0700