March 1975

Comrades, some comrades have talked not a little. All the points raised are very important and related to our future diplomatic operations. In diplomacy, I am inexperienced. I have to learn from the beginning just as I have had to learn “A.B.C.” in my study of English. I have to learn many things from you. Before the liberation, we dealt with foreigners in Nanking, Chungking, Shanghai, and Peking, but the contacts with them were not as wide and frequent as they are today. Dealing with foreigners has become the unavoidable work of the Party, and we must always place the subject on our agenda for our attention and fulfillment. The entire world will be affected if we do not work well.

Consequently, in every move, we have to consider whether our work conforms with the interests of the broad masses of the people of the world. All comrades have much experience in this. I am here to tell you what I have learned from Chairman Mao and to fulfill my responsibility as a member of the Party by relaying his messages to you because he is very busy. Even in passing on messages from the top to the bottom, I have encountered many problems because my cultural level is so limited that I cannot understand the messages correctly and so make mistakes. Please give me your help and comments.

In the past year the situation has undergone great changes. Facts have proven the correctness of Chairman Mao’s prediction that “we are in the great era of social transformation.” He made the prediction in the early years of the 1960’s. Chairman Mao clearly pointed out: “The focus of world contradictions lies between Asia and Africa.” He pointed out not only the orientation of the revolution but also its strategic problems. Only under the guidance of Chairman Mao’s correct line do we dare to struggle and not fear the containment, blockade, blackmail and intimidation, overt and covert interference, plots and sabotage.This guidance has made us good at struggle, flexible, and capable of talking as well as fighting.

We have two kinds of ideological preparations. In the great disturbance, great division, great reorganization, and great disorder of the world, we have never failed to adhere to our revolutionary principle in distinguishing ourselves from our enemies and friends and in understanding on whom we should rely, with whom we should unite, whom we should divide, whom we should disintegrate, whom we should isolate, and whom we should hit. As long as we can elevate our unity to the maximum, reduce the isolation and blows we suffer to the minimum, and adhere to the principle of unity and struggle to the last, we will be able to establish ourselves in an impregnable position.

The pith and soul of Marxism-Leninism-Mao Tse-tung Thought are adherence to the doctrine of class struggle and the implementation of the proletarian dictatorship. The final objective of the revolution is to establish communist society in the entire world. To reach this final goal, we must divide the revolution into several stages. The proletariat and its political party should make up their minds to continue the revolution and, in accordance with requirements of the different stages of the revolution and for every different historic period, formulate different policies and strategy. The former is the target, the latter the means to attain it.

For this historic period, we have presented, on the basis of the characteristics of the period, the view that “countries want independence, nations want liberation, and people want revolution.” The center of this view is people’s revolution. A proletarian regime can be established only under the leadership of the proletariat and its political party. The formation of the proletariat and the establishment and development of its political party depend on the revolutionary movement of the masses, which, blowing across the land like a storm of democracy and nationalism, seeks national independence and people’s liberation. We will support the movement of national independence and people’s liberation. We will help the poor and backward countries and support them to cast off political control, economic pillage, and cultural aggression by imperialism and colonialism because this is imperative for development of the national economy and for the establishment of proletarian troops, and furthermore for the organization of a revolutionary political party to lead this great class. This is the preliminary stage through which the revolution must go.

The debacle of colonialism and the collapse of imperialism are precursors and foreshadowing events of the socialist revolution. Poor and backward countries can cast off the control of imperialism and colonialism to achieve independence. However, they cannot spare themselves from the polarization and division brought upon them by the inequitable distribution of wealth in society. This division provides the material for lighting the fire of the proletarian revolution. The development of the national economy is a prerequisite to the establishment of proletarian troops and can ignite this flammable material. It is impossible to attain the final victory of the socialist revolution by departing from national independence and development of the national economy. It is on this point that we are different from opportunists. We have always adhered to the theory of continuing revolution and the division of stages in the progression of the revolution as envisaged in Marxism-Leninism. We must go on to understand the three sentences (countries want independence, nations want liberation, and peoples want revolution) by grasping talking as well as fighting.

By grasping this point, and, based on this point, we should go on to establish a positive diplomatic relationship with the Third World by supporting the countries morally and economically. As Chairman Mao has told Prince Sihanouk. Buy arms from us? No! We can give them to you, free of charge, on only one condition — revolution.” We will support the national liberation movements free of charge because our national diplomatic policy is decided by our social system, which requires us to fulfill our international obligation and seek a worldwide victory for socialist revolution. We may say that assistance is always reciprocal. We have assisted the countries that are struggling for national independence. In return, their struggle also has assisted us. The guerrilla warfare in South Africa against racial discrimination; the struggle in the Middle East against hegemony; the struggle in Latin America for national independence, democracy and liberation; the revolutionary struggle in East Europe for throwing off Russian control; and the struggle in Indochina for liberation, all have come into correlation. From east to west, south to north, these countries have been tightening the lasso on the necks of imperialism and socialist imperialism. Neither the US imperialists nor the Russian revisionists can raise their hands to cope with us. This has provided us with a peaceful environment not only for accelerating the construction of our country’s agriculture, and national economic and productive enterprises as a whole, but also for satisfactorily completing the socialist revolution on the political, ideological and cultural front lines. We have dragged out for struggle Liu Shao-chi, Lin Piao, and a handful of other capitalist agents in our party, wiped out all the demons in our society, consolidated the proletarian regime, and strengthened our national defense. Meanwhile, because the tide of national and democratic movements is rising, we have placed the emphasis of our diplomatic activities on “black friends,” “small friends,” and “poor friends.” They appreciate us and seek to return the kindness. Although we do not have “white friends,” “big friends” and “wealthy friends,” we are not isolated. In the UN voting on our admission to the world body, the big countries made a loud noise and exerted a threatening influence, but our small friends were greater in number and strident in their voices. We entered the United Nations at last, and then big countries came to our doorstep and called on us.

For scores of years, we have studied Chairman Mao’s “Theory of Contradictions” and “Theory of Practice.” We have learned that recognition and practice depend on each other and that opposition and unity of contradictions always are there in everything. Without contradictions, the world cannot progress. “Disorder” is the stirring state of contradictions, and “peace” is a moment of temporary unity of contradictions. “Disorder and then peace.” Without disorder, where does peace come from? If there is no disorder in the world, the reactionary class can maintain the situation in which it can squeeze and exploit the working people relentlessly and insatiably. Without disorder, the proletarian class cannot stand up, and the proletarian political party will either be divided, disintegrated, bought over, utilized, or made to change its nature and extinguished. This is hoped for by the reactionary class, but we would not like to see it happen.

When Chairman Mao met Nixon during the latter’s visit to China, he spent much of the time talking about philosophy with the American president. Kissinger met with our premier several times, and they also discussed philosophy in addition to Chinese and major world events.  It is not surprising that their views are different from ours. In the talks, Kissinger let on that the United States intended to abandon the Asia-Pacific region. We should view this question by dividing it into two. We believe that Kissinger can never depart from the criteria of a capitalist statesman. The basic points of his view are restricted by the intention of upholding the class interests. Consequently, he cannot comprehend and solve the multifarious contradictions emerging from the complex situation of the current world. Like all past statesmen of the reactionary class, Kissinger is an adventurist and a defeatist. Both Nixon and Kissinger have admitted that the US policy of the past, i.e., the policy of strength pursued after World War II, is unfeasible today. The United States should return to the world of reality and should not dabble in interfering with the sovereignty and interests of other countries. Kissinger advanced the premise of maintaining the balance of power.

Actually, this means he recognized the contradictions but did not strenuously pursue the way of struggle in solving these contradictions under the new conditions. On the contrary, he assumed an attitude of evasion in treating these contradictions. In a word, this policy is “ostrichism.” Evasion of contradictions is aimed at covering up the existence of these contradictions. Do the contradictions of today exist only in a colony or in an occupied land? Can the United States evade them? From another angle, we may say that the American retreat and the collapse of the old and neocolonialism resulted from developments which cannot be reversed by one or two politicians. Consequently, the proletariat and its political party can grasp this opportunity to expose incessantly the old and neo-colonialism and, at the same time, to adhere to a united front, including the work of seeking the internal disintegration of the enemy, as well as to armed struggle in the conviction that political power comes from the barrel of the gun. We should also adhere to the firm belief that by widely developing the mass movement under the leadership of the proletarian political party, a weak country can definitely defeat a strong one, and a small one can defeat a large one. At last it can seize political power and grasp the victory of socialist revolution. As diplomatic workers, we must publicize this revolutionary doctrine to the people of the whole world and, at the same time, clearly express our attitude that as long as it is revolution we will support it to the end. Our words mean what we say. Unlike the American imperialists and the Russian revisionists, we will never abandon friends who have stuck with us in times of distress. We will never engage in behind-the-scenes deals with any superpower and sell out our friends. Nor will we deceive, blackmail and plot to utilize our friends by victimizing them in exchange for ignominious gains.

Chairman Mao has seen the situation in Indochina clearly. He also has seen clearly the development of South Vietnam after the victorious liberation. He said: “Vietnam is a temple occupied by four chief monks who become masters of anyone who gives them food and clothing.” He has asked the Vietnamese ambassador to tell Tong Due Thanh, Le Duan, Pham Van Dong, Vo Vien Giap and also Nguyen Hun Tho and Huynh Tau Phap these words: “To oppose imperialism without opposing revisionism will eventually lead to a second revolution.” Do they comprehend this point? It is very difficult to say. When people talk about Vietnam, they always believe that Vietnam would not make it after Ho Chi Minh’s death. Chairman Mao has made this point clear. The Vietnamese comrades are revolutionaries who have in their hearts pains that we must comprehend.  We should not always say that they are not revolutionary.

They are fighting against the American imperialists who claim to be the strongest in the world. They have made great sacrifices in lives, and their spirit deserves our admiration. We should not criticize them before we can see the post-victory development.

The situation in Laos is quite good . . . . The situation in the whole of Indochina has become clear, and the horizon of hope looms before us. However, the solution of the three Indochinese countries marks only the first step of a 10,000-march. The world is developing; the revolution is progressing. But there is much to be done. We must do our utmost to enhance our self-awareness in executing the correct line so that we can meet the needs and requirements of the situation. Consequently, I have to comment specifically on the movement to “criticize Lin Piao and Confucius” on the diplomatic front line. The Fourth National People’s Congress pointed out in a press communique: “The People of our country should continue to broaden, and persevere in the movement to criticize Lin Piao and Confucius, and make sure that Marxism occupies all spheres of the superstructure.”

The task on the diplomatic front line is different from that on other front lines. Because diplomatic workers have to spend a considerably longer time working abroad, our demands of them cannot be the same as those on our people at home. You cannot go to the streets in New York or Paris to put up big-character posters criticizing the foreign minister or the ambassador. Nor can you interfere in the domestic affairs of others by presenting your views to the president of a foreign country or shelling him with heavy artillery. Consequently, we can only subject the specific situation to specific analysis and treatment. In previous times, the foreign ministry obtained good results by adopting such policies as “returning to the country to get the scripture and taking it abroad for preaching,” “placing emphasis on self-study and making oneself another’s teacher,” “preaching and teaching near and far and going around to preach the scripture,” and “making proper concentration for wide interchange.” From now on, we should improve what is not good and insist on what is good.

Today I want only to make a sketchy explanation of several major problems and make some demands. Please consider whether or not they are appropriate.

First, we must further strengthen the monolithic leadership of the party. An old Chinese saying has it: “A general fighting on the front is permitted not to heed the sovereign’s order.” In a socialist country there is no feudalistic ruler such as an emperor or a king. Certainly there is no such thing as “a general fighting on the front is permitted not to heed the sovereign’s order.” But, shall the diplomatic workers weaken (their relations with) or depart from the track of the monolithic leadership of the Party abroad? Certainly, they shall not. The situation today is different from that of several hundred years ago. Telegraph, telephone, radiophoto, and outer space communications are very convenient. If necessary, you may take a plane and return home in a few hours. Why don’t you use these facilities? Nevertheless, some of our comrades do not think this way. They stress the special nature of their work and negate its universal nature. Some embassies, consulates, and trade offices send in cables every day and letters and telephone calls every other day, but all the messages are about business. As for political study, they seem to think that the political movement is not their business and therefore leave it alone. This is especially true of the embassies in countries in Eastern and Central Africa. They even have not studied politics for half a year. They make no report on study. Nor do they report on the situation of each movement. In the past, Chairman Mao reiterated: “Often ask for direction, make more reports, don’t fear the trouble, and, if necessary, return to Peking frequently.” This is not intended merely for strengthening work connections. The main aim is to keep our diplomatic workers in contact with the center in order to strengthen the monolithic leadership of the party. This will also enable the multitude of diplomatic workers to catch up with the steps of the people at home so that they can plunge into the movement as do the people at home, enhance their awareness, oppose imperialism, guard against revisionism, and become down-to-earth red diplomats.

Previously we emphasized the leadership and education for staff members of newly established embassies in Europe and America in the belief that the embassies in African countries have a longer history and therefore have a more solid foundation. Now we see that we must grasp all of them well. It will be useless if we do not grasp them well. To grasp by whom? This calls for strengthening the monolithic leadership of the party. The liaison department of the party center and the ministry of foreign affairs should grasp the affair. Every ambassador and party secretary in each embassy should grasp the affair. It should be grasped at every level with thoroughness. As in various units on the domestic front lines, in the embassies the party secretary should take part in all work, and specifically designated persons should become responsible. We must grasp well, flexibly, and solidly the four things of formulating plans, establishing small group leadership, strengthening study, and making regular reports. If the heads continue to refuse to grasp the work and shirk their responsibilities, the central liaison department and the propaganda department should ask the party center to appoint people to discharge that duty on their behalf. In short, we must immediately change the phenomenon of “making accomplishments in diplomacy but remaining backward in the promotion of movements.” This is the first thing to be grasped on the diplomatic front.

Second, as for the content of study and the regulations governing movements, the party center on February 2 specifically insisted on the four “nots,” five “mays” and six “musts.” They are not to drag out people for struggle, not to seek the dismissal of an official, not to put up big-character posters, and not to engage in factionalism. However, you may dispatch small-character papers; you may send exposition letters home, bypassing your superior; you may present your views face to face with the head of your organization; you may exchange your experience in study, join up in presenting your views, or make reports, bypassing your superior rank; and for major events, you may request return home to make a report. In any case, you must unite in facing the outside, you must pay attention to investigations in any event, you must obey directions, you must consider the collective interest, you must safeguard national prestige, and you must uphold the monolithic leadership of the party. In addition, you are not permitted to act on impulse. You should seek great harmony and tolerate minor difference. You should never do anything that may “grieve friends and please enemies.” Meanwhile, when you confront special circumstances, you should understand the special circumstance in which some comrades are situated and their identities. You should not consider the ambassador as being eroded by the bourgeoisie after seeing him attend a capitalist’s dinner party as necessitated by the work of the united front.

As all of you stand on the first front in the anti-imperialist struggle, you will encounter various kinds of men. You must heighten your revolutionary vigilance against the enemy’s sugar-coated artillery shells and his plots to win you over. Pai Hsiang-kuo was never cut down by American and Chiang Kai-shek’s artillery shells during his scores of years of revolution, but he cannot resist the temptation of venomous snakes in the guise of beautiful women. This is a lesson for us to learn. Certainly, Pai Hsiang-kuo’s faults are not limited to this. We hope he can correct himself and continue to work. He himself holds the key.

Most of the ambassadors and other responsible officials we sent abroad have scores of years of revolutionary experience. Abundant is the experience, but heavy is their responsibility. They represent Chairman Mao, the premier, Chu the senior, the party center, and people of the whole country in their struggle with imperialist revisionism abroad, in counter-struggle, and in making revolution with the revolutionary people of the world. Achievements are the primary good. They will correct their faults as soon as people point them out. When you present your views, you must be motivated by kindness and allow them time to process and recognize your views. This point is rather important. The final objective of our movement is to educate people, not to trim them to death. We must make this point clear.

You have read Chen Chu’s report. You would have seen in it that the heads are rather vigorous in making revolution. One sentence in the report is very good: “Living in the busy city and facing imperialists, revisionists and reactionaries, I have the bright sun in my heart and will always follow the Party.”

Last, I should like to discuss the conduct of study classes. The foreign ministry and the propaganda department of the party have conducted a study class for diplomatic workers. It was very effective. Some embassies in Europe also have opened study classes. The conduct of study classes by diplomatic organs is a good way to further promote the movement to “criticize Lin Piao and Confucius.” It is also a good way to link theory with reality and to pay attention to both movement and operation. The embassy in France proposed to let the students “study mainly by themselves during busy times, collectively in slack times,” and to guide the students to “sum up their study in a certain period, and complement self-study with guidance.” This formula should be played up in the study classes.

Source: Classified Chinese Communist Documents: A Selection. (Taipei: Institute of International Relations, 1978), pp. 537-545.

Also: Marxism.org — Jiang Qing Archives.