4. Political Objectives
3. Coordination of Policy
2. Division of Labor in the Soviet-Soviet Alliance
1. Importance of Non-Communist States
C. Conclusions

3. Soviet-Soviet Alliance
2. Balance of Power
1. China-Viet
B. Policy Considerations
D. Admission to the United Nations
a. Recognition
3. Specific Problems
2. Economic aid and technical assistance
1. Military aid and assistance
V. Patterns of Policy

III. United States Policy and Communist China

B. Onerous Chinese
E. Political Role in the Communist bloc
D. The Power Economy
C. Overburden
B. Decline of the Communist World
V. Role of the Intellectuals
II. Trends

3. Foreign Policy
3. Economic revolution
1. The centralized state
B. Ten Years of Communist China
V. Nature of the Problem
I. Communist China and the World Today

THE UNITED STATES AND COMMUNIST CHINA

CHINA POLICY

# I. Communist China and the World Today

## A. The Nature of the Problem

The United States policy towards Communist China has to be based upon a clear definition of the status of Communist China within the Sino-Soviet bloc, the nature of the Communist regime on the Chinese mainland, and the forces at work in non-Communist Asia.

It is particularly important to determine the character of this extraordinary combination of powers that includes the two major Communist states, the East European satellites, the republics of Inner Asia and the regimes of North Korea and North Vietnam. Is this a coalition of sovereign states allied for mutual convenience and short-range objectives? Or is the guiding force behind it an international movement of professional revolutionaries who are now in control of a number of countries and are working in many others in a coordinated manner for the ultimate domination of the world? Or is it a mixture of both?

It is the argument of this paper that the Moscow-Peking alliance is the heart of the Communist orbit, that it is the territorial, military, and ideological base area of a world-wide movement, a movement which is much more powerful today than at any time in its history. It is both an organization of states and a world movement; it operates efficiently as a unit in military, economic, and political affairs. We have to adjust our thinking to a protracted conflict very different indeed from the struggles for the balance of power of an earlier period. There is every reason to believe that the Communist movement is still centered mainly in Moscow, and that its commitment to Lenin's long-range objectives is a political fact of our time. The problem of our policy toward China, therefore, involves our view

time. The problem of our policy toward China, therefore, involves our view
the commitment to Mao's long-range objectives as a political fact of our
that the Communist movement is still centered mainly in Moscow, and that
balance of power of an earlier period. There is every reason to believe
to a protracted conflict very different indeed from the angle taken by
military, economic, and political allies. We have to adjust our thinking
on states and a world movement; if we operate efficiently as a unit in
more powerfully today than at anytime in its history. It is poor an organiza-
tional, political, and economic movement which is much
the part of the Communist party, that it is the territorial, military, and
It is the argument of this paper that the Moscow-becoming alliance is
of the world? Or is it a mixture of powers?
working in many others in a coordinated manner for the ultimate domination
revolutionaries who are now in control of a number of countries and are
the guiding force behind it an international movement of professional
states supplied for mutual convenience and short-range objectives? Or is
regime of North Korea and North Vietnam. Is this a coalition of sovereign
states, the East European satellites, the republics of Inner Asia and the
extraordinary combination of powers that includes the two major Communist
If it is particularly important to determine the character of this
forces at work in non-Communist Asia.

proc, the nature of the Communist regime on the Chinese mainland, and the
a clear definition of the status of Communist China within the Sino-Soviet
The United States definitely towards Communist China has to be passed upon
V. The Nature of the Problem

CHINA POLITICS

-2-

of the political world we live in and the general struggle in which we are
engaged.

Many difficulties can be avoided if we agree that the Soviet Union and Communist China are not nation states in the modern sense of the term as it is used to describe the United Kingdom or the United States. The Soviet Union is an empire in which the Russian Communists are imposing their will upon a vast collection of peoples of different cultures and traditions within the confines of the U.S.S.R. The Communists who control, with Russian military and ideological support, the satellite states of Eastern Europe have to manipulate indigenous nationalist movements, but they themselves are nationalists only in a very modified sense. Patriotism and love of country are low on their list of values. They use captive nationalism as a political tool, but this does not mean that they themselves are captives of nationalism as we understand it. Nationalism in the Communist states is not intimately associated with the things it grew up with in the west, such as popular sovereignty, the rule of law, respect for the dignity of mankind, peaceful transference of power, and recognition of the rights of minorities. We need new terms to describe the relationship in a Communist state between the individual and government, and even the sentiment that holds Communists together. Communist states do not behave in the same way as the traditional nation states of the democratic west in their domestic or foreign affairs; their foreign trade and their foreign policies are all structured in a different manner; and their ruling elites have important common interests, most significant of which is the war they wage against their own people.

The Chinese Communists, it is sometimes argued, are different from others in that they are more Chinese than Communist. The point, if it can

of course in that they are more Chinese than Communists. The point, if it can
be made against their own people.

have important common interests, most significant of which is the war they
belong to all structured in a different manner, and their ruling effices
in their domestic or foreign affairs; their foreign trade and their foreign
in the same way as the traditional nation states of the democratic west
sentiment that holds Communists together. Communist states do not behave
in a Communist state between the individual and Government, and even the
of the rights of minorities. We need new forms to describe the relationship
for the dignity of man kind, beautiful transference of power, and recognition
with in the west, and as popular sovereignty, the rule of law, respect
Communist states is not intimately associated with the things it grew
are captive of nationalisms as we understand it. Nationalism in the
nationalism as a political tool, put this does not mean that they themselves
take of country are low on their list of aims. They see captive
themselves are nationalists only in a very modified sense. Nationalism and
Eastern Europe have to manipulate indigenous nationalist movements, put them
with Russian military and ideological ances, the satellite states of
traditions within the confines of the U. S. A. The Communists who control,
their will show a vast collection of beacons of different cultures and
Soviet Union is an empire in which the Russian Communists are imposing
as it is need to describe the United Kingdom or the United States. The
and Communist China are not nation states in the modern sense of the term
Many difficulties can be avoided if we agree that the Soviet Union
enlarged.

of the political world we live in and the general arrangement in which we are
engaged.

-5-

be established, would be a very important one for the maker of American policy. But the weight of evidence does not seem to support it. The Chinese party began with the help of the Communist International, and throughout the long period of its rise to power, even when it was administratively in control of millions of people, a large army, and vast territories, it faithfully followed Soviet foreign policy and doctrine. This does not necessarily mean that the Chinese Communists, since they have acquired power, will necessarily follow the Soviet lead in everything; but it certainly means that the burden of proof is upon those who think that the Chinese Communist party was an indigenous nationalist movement. For thirty years the Chinese Communists fought the Chinese Nationalist movement and took positions which were hard to reconcile with the sentiments of most of their countrymen or with the general view of the national interest.

The Chinese Communists would certainly not be in power today if they had to rely entirely on their own efforts. The material, technical, and diplomatic assistance of the Soviet Union at the end of World War II was most certainly decisive in their conquest of the country. The Communists could never have conquered China without the surrendered Japanese arms in Manchuria, the assistance of Japanese and Russian technicians, the difficulties which the Soviet Union put in the way of the movement of nationalist troops to Manchuria, the bitter propaganda war on the United States, and the breaking of treaties with the Nationalist Government.

What of Chairman Mao's ideological independence? There is the view that Mao is the Lenin of China, a leader who contributed to Marxist doctrine and strategy in his own right. Careful examination of the record shows that "Maoism" in this sense is a myth. There is no evidence of any doctrinal

"Maoism" in this sense is a mark. There is no evidence of any doctrine and strategy in the own right. Careful examination of the record shows that Mao is the leader of China, a leader who contributed to Marxist doctrine what of Chairman Mao's ideological independence? There is the view preaching of treaties with the Nationalist Government.

Troops to Manchuria, the bitter propaganda war on the United States, and the fire which the Soviet Union put in the way of the movement of nationalistic Manchuria, the assistance of Japanese and Russian technicians, the difficultly could never have condensed China without the surrendered Japanese arms in meat certainly decisive in their combat of the country. The Communists diplomatic assistance of the Soviet Union at the end of World War II was had to rely entirely on their own efforts. The materials, techniques, and

their countriesmen on with the General view of the national interest.

Look back upon which were hard to reconcile with the sentiments of meat of bears the Chinese Communists taught the Chinese Nationalist movement and Chinese Communists began an indigenous nationalist movement. For thirty if certainly means that the pump of blood is upon those who think that the secured power, will necessarily follow the Soviet lead in everything put this does not necessarily mean that the Chinese Communists, since they have territories, it satisfactorily followed Soviet foreign policy and doctrine.

tratively in control of millions of people, a large army, and set
throughout the long period of its rise to power, even when it was adminis-
Chinese party began with the help of the Communist International, and
policy. But the weight of evidence does not seem to abhor it. The
be explained, would be a very important one for the maker of American

-3-

originality, but there is plenty of evidence of slavish doctrinal dependence on Moscow. If Mao is to be pictured as a Chinese nationalist fighting for the national interests of his country within the Communist bloc, his nationalism must have begun rather late in life, for when he came to power in 1949, he immediately signed a treaty with the Soviet Union in which he made China dependent entirely upon Moscow. The Chinese Communists, from the very beginning, shared with their Russian counterparts the same ideological debt to Marxism and Leninism, and it is hardly surprising that when they came to power they turned to the Soviet Union as an example of how to set up and run a Communist state. When Chairman Mao signed the treaty with the Soviet Union in August of 1950 as the ruler of the whole of mainland China, he was merely adding more territory and more people to the Communist movement. He did not link Peking to Moscow, as has been suggested only to avoid a sense of isolation or the dangers of widely varying external influences. The Chinese Communists had always been linked with Moscow and were merely continuing to do what they had been doing for thirty years.

From the very moment they siezed power the Chinese Communists identified themselves with the Soviet Union as members of the "socialist camp" and labeled the rest of the world as the enemy. It was their own political decision to rely entirely on the Soviet Union. They could have had economic assistance, technical help, and international trade from the west. The nationalist movements in the rest of Asia did not feel it necessary to shut the door against the west or to seek military support against the "imperialist" powers. Peking did not need military support from Moscow because it expected the United Kingdom or the United States to attack, but because it intended to carry the war to the west. American behavior in China during the civil war had certainly convinced the Chinese Communists that American military intervention was out of the question. The alliance with Moscow is designed