CONCERNING SOVIET ATTITUDES TOWARD FOREIGN COMMUNISTS, COMMUNIST PARTIES, AND COMMUNIST STATES.
Document Type:
Collection:
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST):
CIA-RDP70B00338R000200040015-6
Release Decision:
RIFPUB
Original Classification:
K
Document Page Count:
4
Document Creation Date:
December 16, 2016
Document Release Date:
January 12, 2005
Sequence Number:
15
Case Number:
Publication Date:
October 23, 1968
Content Type:
REPORT
File:
Attachment | Size |
---|---|
![]() | 336.92 KB |
Body:
Approved For Release 2005/01/27 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000200040015-6
23 October 1988
Soviet Attitudes-Toward Foreign Communists,
1. Since the time of the revolution, the leaders of the
Soviet Union have always differentiated between their relations
with foreign communists whether members of individual parties
or rulers of other states and other foreigners and foreign
states. In practice, the Soviet leaders have demanded more
from foreign communists, been more harsh in punishing mis-
deeds, and more grudging in rewards than they have in their
dealings with representatives of non-communist and especially
"bourgeois states. Up through the 1920's, there was enough
academic freedom and tolerance for open discussion to permit
Soviet theorists to advocate openly ideas aimed at bringing
Soviet practice in dealing with the outside world into line
with the = theories of Marxism-Leninisse an a way of resolving
this contradiction in Soviet behavior. It was at this time,
for example, that legal theorists such as Pashuhanje and
uchka made their contribution to Soviet jurisprudence in
both international and national law. With the growth of Soviet
diplomatic and trade relations with foreign countries, these
theories =re denounced as anti-Soviet and continuing on
to the present time,- the Soviet Union has adopted an
increasingly conventional attitude-toward international law,
as applied to non-communist states and international organiza-
tions. But while the revolutionary element has almost dis-
appeared from Soviet writings concerning the formal rights
and obligations of states and other such matters, the
Cemimunist Party of the Soviet Union has consistently
maintained that the duty of ail, unists everywhere in to
support the Soviet state and---at times implicitly and at
times quite explicitly-that the leaders of the Soviet
CoMmAist Party had the right to demand obedience from
o imt parties and communist states. Perhaps the clearest
definition of the obligations of a communist was Stalin's
of 1927:
Approved For Release 2005/01/27 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000200040015-6
Approved For Release 2005/01/27 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000200040015-6
"A revolutionary is be who without arguments,
unconditionally, openly and honestly . . . is ready
to defend and strengthen the USSR, since the USSR
is the first proletarian, revolutionary state in
the world . . . an internationalist in he who,
unreservedly, without hesitation, without conditions
is ready to defend the USSR because the USSR is the
base of the world revolutionary movement, and to
defend, to advance this revolutionary movement is
impossible without defending the 'SSR."
Andrei Vimshinxky, the most vehement denouncer of Pashu
in the 19301s. wrote in 1948:
"At present the only determining criterion of
revolutionary proletarian internationalism iss :
are you for or against the USSR, the motherland of
the world proletariat? . . . Actual cooperation
with the USSR, the readiness of the workers of any
country to subject all their aims to the basic
problem of strengthening the USSR in its struggle--
this is the manifestation of revolutionary
proletarian internationalism. . . The defense of
the USSR, as of the socialist motherland of the
world proletariat, is the holy duty of every honest
man everywhere and not only of the citizens of the
USSR. "
These statements find their direct echo in the words o
Eric Ionecker, member of the last German Politburo, who
wrote on October 7 of this year in Prravda :
tione with the USSR, relations with the
are for us, as for all Leninists, the most
portant criterion by which a party pretending to
the right to call itself Marxist-Leninist is judged.
In our time, it is impossible to be a communist
without love for the land of Lenin, without
supporting its policy. ."
2. As the number of countries calling themselves communist
has Increased and divisions among them become more apparent,
Soviet writings have more and more tended to emphasize the
Approved For Release 2005/01/27 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000200040015-6
Approved For Release 2005/01/27 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000200040015-6
"complete equality" of all socialist states and the strict
observance among them of respect for independence and
national sovereignty. At the same time, however, the duty
of fealty to the Soviet Union has continued to be
explicitly part of the obligation of communists an spelled
out in major documents from the Soviet party and from
international conferences of parties under Soviet sponsor-
ship. The communique from the meeting of Communist
leaders in Moscow in November 1.957, for example, referpart
red
to "the invincible camp of socialist countries headed by
the Soviet Union." Further on the same communique said:
"The Communist and Workers' parties have a particularly
important responsibility with regard to the destinies of the
world socialist system . The . . .
lessl represented
at the meeting declare that they will tireparties
their unity and comradely cooperation with a view
y ptomfurther
consolidating the commonwealth of Socialist states."
3. The last such meeting, that of 1960, repeated the
same sentiments in its communique. "Today the restoration
of capitalism has been made socially and economically
impossible not only in the Soviet Union, but in the other
socialist countries as well. The combined forces of the
socialist camp reliably safeguard every socialist country
against encroachments by imperialist reaction." The drafters
of the, communique saw no contradiction between that statement
and the following: "Every country in, the socialist camp
is insured genuinely equal rights and independence," Only
two paragraphs on, the same communique also says : "Every
Communist party which has become the ruling party in the
state, bears historical responsibility for the destinies of
both its country and the entire socialist camp." This
sentiment was repeated several other times in the communique
in such phrases as: "Every party is responsible to the
working class, to the working people of its country, to
the international working class, and the Communist movement
as a whole." The only difference between this statement
and the preceding quotation is that in the latter every
party, regardless of whether it is a ruling party or not,
is bound to follow the dictates of the "movement as a whole."
in case there are any. doubts as to where the leadership of
the movement is to be found, the communique spells that
out too: "The Communist and Workers' Parties unanimously
declare that the Communist Party of the Soviet Union has been,
aid remains, the universally recognized vanguard of the
world communist movement."
Approved For Release 2005/01/27 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000200040015-6
Approved For Release 2005/01/27 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000200040015-6
4. Communiques of this sort have
t
no
been issued s
ince
1980 because some of the Ccemunist parties of the world have
been unwilli
ng to subscribe to such sentiments since then.
Even at that time, the Soviet Union had already withdrawn
its economic aid program from China As
a +consequence of
, the divisions among Communist parties, the doctrine of the
Obligations of communists to follow Soviet orders has not
been spelled out so explicitly since until the Soviet Union
van forced to rely on armed intervention to prevent
C echoslovakia from finding its own "path to socialism."
On the basis of the record, it appears that genuine Soviet
respect for the national sovereignty and independence of
others and Soviet willingness to observe international
the bourgeois and ;aZas.c.ris
Aerialist states It
f
i
s
~r
enda
. ct much harsher treatment.
Approved For Release 2005/01/27 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000200040015-6