SPEECH
BY V. M. MOLOTOV
Member
of the Presidium of the Central Committee of the C.P.S.U. and Foreign
Minister of the U.S.S.R. at the 20th CONGRESS of the
Communist Party of the Soviet Union February 18, 1956
Soviet
News Booklet No.6
Member
of the Presidium of the Central Committee of the C.P.S.U. and Foreign
Minister of the U.S.S.R. at the 20th CONGRESS of the
Communist Party of the Soviet Union
18 February
Comrades, a
broad and vivid picture of the events in which we have taken part
since the 19th Congress has been drawn by Comrade N. S.
Khrushchov, in the report of the central committee. The report
generalises the experience of our party’s activities in the present
period, and it gives a profound Marxist-Leninist analysis of the
international situation today and formulates the new principal tasks
confronting our party and the Soviet people.
Our people
have followed a glorious path. They built socialist society in the
main before the war and are now effecting the gradual transition from
socialism to communism. They encountered no few difficulties along
this path, and exceptional exertion of effort, and at times immense
sacrifices, especially during the war, were needed to overcome them.
We also know
that we still have big unsolved problems. But our country is marching
forward with a firm step, competently carrying out, under the
leadership of the Communist Party, the new and ever-more complicated
tasks on its road to communism.
The Soviet
people have successfully fulfilled the Fifth Five-Year Plan,
considerably exceeding its important targets for economic
advancement. Today new sweeping tasks of the Sixth Five-Year Plan
have been put on the order of the day, and all of us are confident
that they will be well accomplished.
The alliance
of the workers and peasants created by our Leninist party is the
well-spring of the strength and vitality of our great state. In our
times the mighty and unbreakable alliance of the working class and
the collective-farm peasantry is the basis of the remarkable moral
and political unity of our socialist society, the basis of the
friendship and brotherhood of the peoples of the Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics.
Since the 19th
Congress our party has done much to fortify still more the alliance
of the working class and the collective-farm peasantry. The attention
of the party was rightly focused on the advance of agriculture. This
was imperative, in so far as agriculture obviously lagged behind the
general development of the national economy, the rapid expansion of
industry.
To ensure the
early satisfaction of the increasing requirements of the population
in foodstuffs and of the food and the light industries in
agricultural raw material, the party and the Soviet government have
applied a number of new important measures. Among them, first of all,
are: greater material incentives to collective farms and their
members, machine and tractor stations and state farms to increase
agricultural production, with a corresponding adjustment of prices on
these products; extensive work to increase the mechanisation of
agriculture and expand the production of mineral fertilisers;
measures for the organisational consolidation of collective
farms, machine and tractor stations and state farms, and especially
the sending of new highly qualified personnel for leading work in the
collective farms, and also agronomists, mechanics etc.; the
organisational consolidation of party organisations in the
countryside. Of special importance was the successful implementation
of the bold plan for cultivating virgin and longfallow lands,
which has increased the sown area by 33 million hectares,1
chiefly under grain. The question of a decisive expansion in the
planting of maize, which is of exceptionally great importance for the
rapid development of livestock farming, was raised in a new way.
These and many other measures have opened up new prospects for the
progress of our agriculture and they are meeting with the full
support of the collective-farm peasantry.
It should be
noted that the party and the Soviet government are paying particular
attention to raising the living standards of the collective-farm
peasantry. In conformity with the tasks of building communism, the
state plans envisage that living standards in the countryside should
come closer and closer to those in the town. During the Fifth Five-
Year Plan real incomes of the collective farmers increased by 50 per
cent and real wages of factory, office and other workers by 39 per
cent. The Sixth Five- Year Plan calls for a further rise in the
incomes of the collective farmers of not less than 40 per cent on the
average, and of real wages of factory, office and other workers of
approximately 30 per cent on the average. This political line of the
party conforms to the interests of the further consolidation of the
alliance of the workers and peasants and will strengthen our state
still more.
Our party has
always worked for the utmost expansion and progress of industry and
transport. In so doing the party has invariably laid emphasis on the
priority development of heavy industry, since upon it depends the
advancement of agriculture and other branches of the national
economy, the strengthening of the defences of our socialist
motherland and the further improvement of the people’s wellbeing.
During the
past period the party has concentrated its efforts on the technical
advance of industry. It has been established that we have many
unutilised potentialities for raising labour productivity and
increasing industrial output. For this it is necessary first of all
that our industry produce the required quantities of really
up-to-date and greatly improved equipment, that old plant be replaced
in time by new. All this is also connected with the utmost
improvement in the organisation of production. Many shortcomings in
this respect have been brought to light at the plenary meeting of the
central committee and at a number of conferences with the
participation of industrial executives in which scientific and
technical personnel have taken an ever-greater part; the ways
have been outlined there for securing new, greater successes in
industry. The work done under the guidance of the central committee
should give a big impetus to the
advance of
industry and construction.
It is also
necessary to secure the smooth operation of industrial
establishments, without which it is impossible to eliminate many
losses and to reinforce accordingly the application of the principles
of planning in industry.
We know from
Comrade Khrushchov’s report that our industrial establishments
and offices will be transferred to a seven-hour day during the Sixth
Five-Year Plan. This and the further considerable rise in real wages
of factory, office and other workers, and a number of other measures
reflect the special concern which our party has always shown for
improving the life of the working people.
The party is
openly and boldly laying bare big shortcomings in all spheres of the
economy and culture. It is working to improve the state apparatus in
every way and to prune it at the same time, and also to ensure the
strictest observance of the law. In all these activities the party
relies on the support and energetic participation of the workers,
collective farmers and intellectuals.
1.
Fundamental Changes in the International Situation and the
Possibility of Preventing New Wars
The Second
World War was a supreme test of the Soviet socialist system of
society and state. And it proved that the socialist state, relying on
the selfless support of the people, possesses an inexhaustible
well-spring of spiritual and material forces.
Although the
Soviet Union was among the states which bore the main brunt of the
Second World War, in a short time after the war it has again emerged
on the highroad of rapid economic and cultural development. The
people’s democracies, which are building socialism, are also
successfully coping with their tasks.
Relations
between the U.S.S.R., the Chinese People’s Republic and the other
socialist countries are developing on the solid foundation of
friendship and unity of basic aims. The steady forward movement
of the socialist countries is assured by the tried and tested
leadership of the Communist and Workers’ Parties. Of all recent
developments we cannot but single out the successes in building
socialism in China, which have attained a vast scale, really worthy
of the great Chinese people. All this has made it possible to
establish the mighty camp of countries of peace, democracy and
socialism.
The
establishment of this camp is of exceptionally great international
significance. Demonstrating a diversity of ways in building
socialism, the experience of the states in this camp is extending to
an unprecedented degree the potentialities of socialism and the scope
of its influence. This camp is at the same time a reliable mainstay
of the working class and air working people in the capitalist
countries in their struggle for their rights and a better life. The
people of the colonies and dependent countries know that the might
and further strengthening of this camp are of immense: Importance for
winning and consolidating their freedom and national independence.
Today,
together with the capitalist world system, there also exists a
socialist world system. History has put on the order of the day the
question of peaceful co-existence between these systems. Naturally,
there must be regard for the fact that differences and disputes
between them are inevitable. Hence it is necessary to give a
clear-cut answer to the question as to how existing disputed issues
and those arising in the course of events should be settled.
To this end
there are only two ways: the way of negotiation and peaceful
settlement of differences or the way of war. There is no other
course. The course of war is resolutely rejected by the Soviet Union
and all the other socialist countries. Our aim is to have the
supporters of the opposite system, too, recognise the principle of
peaceful co-existence of the two systems, and we shall spare no
effort to settle, with the help of negotiation, urgent international
problems, and problems that may arise, our object being to promote
the maintenance and consolidation of peace and the security of the
nations.
It should be
stressed in this connection that Comrade Khrushchov’s report raised
in a timely manner a number of fundamental questions of the -present
international situation, specifically such an important problem as
the possibility of preventing war in the present era. Many millions
of people have themselves tasted the horrors of two world wars and
know very well their sanguinary results, the incalculable calamities
and toll of human life. As a result of the two world wars more than
80 million people were killed or maimed. In the present conditions
another world war would be immeasurably more devastating and
dangerous. There can be only one conclusion. We must do everything in
the interests of all mankind to uphold peace, not missing any
opportunity for this, explaining and exposing the intrigues directed
against peace, uniting and mustering the people against the
aggressive forces of imperialism, for peace, friendship and
co-operation among the nations.
We all
remember Lenin’s well-known thesis that as long as imperialism
exists wars are inevitable. Where imperialism dominates, states
cannot ‘resolve their contradictions otherwise than by force, that
is, ultimately through war.
Marxism-Leninism
teaches us that, on the one hand under imperialism there exists the
economic foundation of wars, and that, on the other hand, imperialism
itself engenders the social forces which strive to put an end to
imperialist wars and imperialism itself. Such social forces become in
certain conditions, sufficient and able to prevent war, to put an end
to imperialist wars.
Therefore
statements about the fatal inevitability of war are incorrect.
Of course, in
the present conditions, too, in so far as imperialism exists, there
is the danger of another world war, not to speak of other military
conflicts.
But it is one
thing when the war danger exists and there are no forces, or at least
there are no really big forces, to resist this danger. And it is
another thing when such forces-and not small ones at that-come into
being, when the emergence of these forces creates a real possibility
of preventing war.
It is
impossible, of course, not to reckon with the fact that the most
aggressive elements of imperialism are harbouring plans designed to
turn back the course of history. Such aspirations have been expressed
in the “containing” plans, and particularly in the “liberation”
plans, which are permeated with the spirit of aggression against the
socialist countries. But to make such plans, such fantastic plans,
for the forcible restoration of capitalism in the socialist
countries, is one thing, while the possibility of carrying them out
in the present conditions is an entirely different thing, because the
unreality of such plans has been splendidly proved by the entire
history and development of the U.S.S.R.
The deep-going
changes in the international situation since the First World War, and
particularly since the Second World War, are evident to all. Every
sensible person now sees how the correlation of class, political
forces has changed, to what extent the positions of imperialism have
been weakened and to what extent the positions of socialism, and at
the same time of the many other forces opposed to war, have been
strengthened. All this makes it possible to conclude that as regards
the question of whether war is to be or not to be, an entirely
different situation prevails now from that which prevailed before the
last world war and, all the more so, before the war of 1914-18.
In the past,
in the period preceding the First World War, the socialist parties of
the working class put forward the task of preventing war. The slogan
of “war on war” already at that time penetrated deep into the
masses of the people and gripped the minds of wide sections of the
working class in many countries. But at the decisive moment, when the
first imperialist world war was let loose, the international
proletariat was politically weakened and disorganised by the
treachery of the leaders of the parties of the Second International.
Only our Bolshevik, Leninist party adhered to the end to the position
of irreconcilable enemies of imperialism and imperialist wars and
only some socialists in other countries remained loyal to proletarian
internationalism. It is also a matter of record that this position of
our party played an exceptionally great part, not only in the victory
of the Great October Socialist Revolution, but also in expediting the
end of the First World War.
In the period
preceding the Second World War, the Soviet Union consistently
upheld the interests of peace and urged other states to unite to
resist the unleashing of another world war. Although German fascism
and its aggressive allies were preparing the Second World War before
the eyes of the whole world, other states did not support the
proposals of the Soviet Union for preventing war. They even tried to
direct the forces of German fascism against the Soviet Union and
made, as is known, plans for “having someone else pull the
chestnuts out of the fire for them”.
The forces of
the Soviet Union, the only socialist state at that time, and
peaceloving people in other countries sympathising with it, were at
that time insufficient to foil the war plans of the most aggressive
imperialist countries. That was the situation in which the Second
World War broke out. The results of that war demonstrated how right
Lenin was when he wrote, as far back as the middle of 1915:
“The
experiences of the war, like the experiences of every crisis in
history, of every great calamity and every sudden turn in human life,
stun and break some people, but they enlighten and steel others;
and, on the whole, taking the history of the whole world, the number
and strength of the latter, except in individual cases of the decline
and fall of this or that state, have proved to be greater than that
of the former” (Works, Russian Edition, Vol. 21, pp. 191-192).
The Second
World War, to a greater extent than the first, enlightened and
steeled many millions of people. In the course of the Second World
War and after it, new social and political forces have come into
being, have arisen and united in a number of countries, and their
emergence in the historical arena has radically changed the
international political situation. The war, which demanded of the
peoples an incredible exertion of effort, at the same time brought
about tremendous changes in political life, especially in the
countries of Europe and Asia.
There now
exist two world camps of states with profoundly different social and
political systems. A socialist world camp, embracing more than 900
million people in Europe and Asia, or over one-third of the
population of the globe, has grown up alongside the imperialist world
camp. Whereas the decisive role in the imperialist camp of countries
continues to be held by classes and groups which are striving to
retain their dominant and privileged position, even if this involves
the precipitation of another war, in the countries of the socialist
camp we see a totally different situation.
While the most
aggressive circles in certain imperialist countries are now busy
preparing another war, the countries of the socialist camp see their
chief aim to be the preservation and consolidation of peace,
organisation of the struggle for peace, friendship and co-operation
among nations. The Soviet Union, the Chinese People’s Republic, and
the other people’s democracies thus express the deepest, most
cherished, and truly vital interests of the peoples not only of their
own countries but of all other peoples, that is, of the real masses
of the people.
On the
question of peace, the interests of all peoples, regardless of the
social and political systems in the different countries, merge with
the interests of the countries of the socialist camp, which are
selflessly upholding the cause of universal peace, friendship and
co-operation among nations.
We must not
underestimate the danger of war, lull ourselves by the illusion that
peace and a tranquil life are guaranteed us under all circumstances.
We must be ever vigilant and keep a close eye on the aggressive plans
of the imperialists. We must not fall prey to the complacent thought
that fine speeches and peaceable programmes can influence the
imperialists. All this has significance only if, at the same time, we
pursue a correct home and foreign policy; if the working people in
each of the socialist states become an ever more closely knit family;
if the peoples of these states strengthen their fraternal alliance of
friendship and mutual assistance; if approval of our policy of peace
and international co-operation continues to grow among the peoples of
other countries; if we devote still more attention to improving
the wellbeing of the peoples and to all the various conditions which
effectively safeguard the security of the socialist states.
Nor must we
allow an underestimation of our forces, of our numerous possibilities
in upholding and ensuring peace. Underestimation of this would
prevent us from utilising in the interests of maintaining and
consolidating peace all the forces which have emerged, and are
steadily growing, in all areas of the globe since the Second World
War. On the other hand, a proper understanding of the new postwar
situation, and recognition of the tremendous growth of the material
and spiritual forces of the peoples which are striving to avert
another war and uphold peace, imposes great responsibility on us in
seeing to it that these forces are really prepared and organised,
strengthened and developed, in the interests of peace, friendship and
co-operation among nations, in the interests of averting another war.
The camp of the forces hostile to socialism also now knows well that
we possess countless material resources and technical achievements
-including resources and achievements in the sphere of the latest
types of the most powerful and diverse armaments- to stand up for
ourselves properly if the need should arise. We presume that our
opponents have given up many illusions on this score which they held
only recently. We must concern ourselves with becoming still
stronger, more organised and more powerful as regards material and
technical forces, including all the necessary and most up-to-date
means of safeguarding security and rebuffing aggression. We possess
these potentialities in no less degree than the other camp. Our
material resources, latest technical achievements, colossal manpower
resources and the firmer friendship among our peoples, their moral
and political unity, give us complete confidence in the invincibility
of the socialist camp.
This has now
become so obvious that it should influence the circles which still
nurture plans of a war to establish their domination over the world,
plans that have lost all real meaning in the present international
conditions and are dangerous above all for those who might try to
unleash. another world war. Moreover, there are not a few people
among the business circles in the capitalist countries to whom
gambles and irresponsibility in politics are alien and who prefer to
expand practical economic relations between countries, regardless of
differences in their social systems, for which there are such broad
opportunities.
We cannot, at
the same time, forget that the decisive role in the historical
periods of trial belongs to the people, to their unity and their
confidence in the righteousness of their cause. Our people gave a
particularly convincing demonstration of this in the heroic years of
the Civil War and the Great Patriotic War, when the very existence of
the Soviet State was at stake and when our people not only upheld
their socialist homeland but ensured momentous achievements in the
further growth of the forces of socialism.
We can now
speak with full justification of the steadily growing moral and
political unity of the peoples of the entire socialist camp. They are
united, their friendship is growing stronger and deeper, turning into
close and all-round fraternal co-operation between sovereign and
independent countries. This greatly increases the forces and
potentialities of each of these countries. Any aggressor who would
dare to attack one or another socialist state cannot fail to take all
this into account.
In the matter
of upholding peace, an international situation has arisen of which we
could only have dreamed ten or fifteen years ago.
The point is
not only that the days have gone when the U.S.S.R. was the only
socialist country, in hostile capitalist encirclement, and that now a
powerful bulwark of peace -the socialist camp of European and Asian
countries- has come into being. In the matter of upholding peace we
have a growing number of allies outside this camp as well.
Under the
present conditions the peoples who have united under the banner of
socialism are not the only ones who champion the cause of peace.
There are not a few other states, particularly among those who only
yesterday were completely dependent on imperialism and only now
have broken out on to an independent road of national life, who are
today openly against the plans of aggression. The peoples and
governments of these countries understand that the aggressive
circles’ policy of war preparations and building up of military
blocs constitutes a danger to the independence they have won.
The
world-historical significance of the disintegration now taking place
in the colonial system should be mentioned in this connection. The
formation of independent states in Asia and Africa contributes to the
strengthening of peace and international co-operation. It will be
sufficient to recall the five principles of peace which were
proclaimed by India, jointly with the Chinese people’s Republic, in
support of the freedom, independence and peaceful co-existence of
nations, and which subsequently have met with such a broad and active
response throughout the world. Mention should made here of the
Bandung Conference of twenty-nine Asian and African countries, a
conference which showed the extent to which the role of the Asian and
African peoples who have thrown off the colonial yoke -although not
yet completely everywhere- has grown in international affairs.
The developing
anti-colonial movement has encompassed the broadest masses of the
people of Asia, and is spreading more and more in Africa as well.
These masses are striving to improve their position and make maximum
use of the favourable opportunities for this which they have received
for the first time. They do not want another war, and, moreover, they
are imbued with a spirit of struggle against imperialism and
imperialist war. Everyone knows that a broad anti-war movement of the
masses of the movement of the peace supporters, has developed in the
capitalist countries too. Not only all the class-conscious workers
and sizable sections of bourgeois origin are taking part in this
movement. Merging with the movement of the peace supporters are the
voices of many other people who, although they are not taking part in
this movement, recognise the immeasurable dangers of another world
war.
Never before
have aggressors been confronted by such big difficulties in
implementing their plans, for now they can no longer count on the
submissiveness and obedience of the peoples while they pursue their
policy. But this should not lead to complacency or to counting on
things taking their own course.
We know what a
great variety of means the imperialists are still employing to
continue the arms drive and intensify war hysteria, so as to hatch
new plans for aggressive war in that atmosphere. We know how widely
the bourgeois press, radio, cinema, and all other propaganda media
are being utilised for that purpose. We must not underestimate all
this, so that the resistance and rebuff offered by the peoples to any
new plans for the preparation of war should not be weakened, but, on
the contrary, grow stronger in every way. We must do much more than
we have done hitherto to promote increasing activity and unity of the
progressive social forces and broad masses in all countries in
preventing another war.
We are far
from asserting that everything necessary to make another war
impossible is now being done. We are still often enslaved by
customary and stereotyped ideas having their origin in the past,
before the Second World War, and which now hinder the development of
new, broader, and more active forms of combating war. We still often
suffer from an under-estimation of the new possibilities that have
opened up before us in the post war period. This shortcoming has also
been displayed in the work of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and
the central committee of our party has pointed it out in good time.
We must put an end to this, put an end to the underestimation of our
immense potentialities in safeguarding peace and the security of the
peoples, potentialities based on the emergence and uninterrupted
growth of the forces of the socialist world camp, the unprecedented
upsurge in the struggle of the colonial and dependent peoples for
liberation, the militant working class movement in the capitalist
countries and international working-class solidarity, the broad
democratic movement of the peace supporters, the activity of the
democratic organisations of women and youth, and other forms of the
mass struggle in defence of peace and against war.
In the sphere
of foreign policy our party is guided by the need to take strict
account of the concrete conditions, by the need to understand the
given situation and the prospects of historical development. Lenin’s
combination of principle and flexibility in pursuing a course of
foreign policy-that is what assures our party success in the solution
of international tasks.
Our striving
to uphold peace and prevent another world war rests on the
invincibility of the community of socialist countries and on the
steadily growing support of those non-socialist countries which come
out against military blocs-the formation of which is contrary to the
interests of peace -and uphold the principles of peaceful
co-existence of states, regardless of differences in social and
political systems. Everyone knows how very important for the
strengthening of peace is the stand taken by such countries as India,
Burma, Indonesia, Egypt and others.
In our
struggle to disrupt the plans of the advocates of war, we must take
account, in the Leninist way, of the fact that economic and political
contradictions between the participants in the various aggressive
blocs exist and are growing, contradictions which are inevitable in
conditions when the strongest members of these blocs are endeavouring
to strengthen their imperialist positions at the expense of their
partners. These contradictions weaken the aggressive forces and
increase the possibility of upholding peace.
The interests
of peace and of the struggle against the danger of another war
require that both the Communist and the Socialist Parties focus their
attention on establishing the unity of the working class. The working
class cannot fail to draw a lesson from the fact that aggressive
forces have already twice taken advantage of the lack of unity in its
ranks in order to prepare and precipitate world wars. When it is a
matter of such a vital question as freeing the peoples from the
threat of another war, this lack of unity cannot be justified by the
fact that differences exist between the Communists and
Socialists in their understanding of ways and means of conducting
the struggle for socialism. International proletarian solidarity will
become an insuperable barrier to the forces of war if the working
class ensures the unity of its ranks. There will be no war if the
working class really unites its forces and displays to the full its
determination to uphold peace.
2. The
Soviet Union’s Struggle for Peace and International Security
After the
detailed analysis of the international situation made in Comrade
Khrushchov’s report, there is no need to dwell on current events
and the numerous measures in which the peaceful initiative of the
Soviet government has found expression during the past period. One
need only stress the enormous international importance of individual
events in the past year and our general foreign policy line of easing
international tension.
We have in
mind here the resumption of friendly relations with the fraternal
peoples of Yugoslavia, relations which are now developing better and
better, not only in the interests of our two countries, but also in
the interests of strengthening peace and international security. The
abnormal situation which had prevailed in the relations between the
Soviet Union and Yugoslavia for several years had simply brought
grist to the mill of the enemies of peace.
We have in
mind also the signing of the treaty with Austria and the agreement in
which Austria undertakes to pursue a policy of perpetual neutrality,
with which even those countries who are so obstinately forming more
and more aggressive military blocs in Europe and in other parts of
the world, had to agree. The establishment of diplomatic relations
between the U.S.S.R. and the German Federal Republic, together with
the further development of friendly relations between the Soviet
Union and the German Democratic Republic, also help to strengthen
peace in Europe. The proposal made by the Soviet Union for a
system of collective security in Europe met with a wide response. The
Soviet government wholeheartedly supports the proposals of the
Chinese People’s Republic for collective security in Asia. The
Soviet Union is continuing its consistent struggle to secure a
reduction of armaments and prohibition of atomic weapons.
A special
place is held by the Geneva meeting of the four heads of government
in July last year. This meeting strikingly demonstrated the real
possibilities for easing international tension, and for
improving the relations of the U.S.S.R. with the chief powers of the
other camp. The subsequent course of events, however, revealed that
there are still not a few obstacles to improving relations with these
countries, raised by the not very far-sighted supporters of the
“policy of strength”, which in relation to the Soviet Union and
the other socialist countries is doomed to failure.
It is common
knowledge that above all certain circles in the United States are the
inspirers of a series of aggressive military blocs in Europe and
America, in South-East Asia and in the Middle East, and also in a
whole number of other cases. Everybody knows the special role in this
respect of the North Atlantic pact military combination, headed by
the United States and Great Britain. It is under the intensified
pressure brought to bear by certain circles in the United States that
the governments of a whole number of member countries of the North
Atlantic bloc and other aggressive blocs are stepping up the arms
drive and swelling military budgets, putting on the tax screw and
artificially fomenting war hysteria among the population, and
circulating all over the world slanders about the aggressiveness of
the Soviet Union, the Chinese People’s Republic and the people’s
democracies.
Since the
collapse of Hitlerism and the rise of the peaceloving German
Democratic Republic there is not at the moment on the European
continent an aggressive state, which, in the given conditions, would
undertake to launch a new world war by attacking the Soviet Union or
any of the people’s democracies. The Europe of today is not the
Europe of pre-war years, when Hitler Germany, step by step, unleashed
the Second World War. We cannot, however, ignore the plans for
remilitarising Western Germany, which has already been incorporated
into such aggressive military combinations as the North Atlantic bloc
and the Western European Union. Undoubtedly the remilitarisation of
Western Germany aggravates the contradictions and the possibilities
of conflicts, including those between the imperialist countries
themselves.
New times have
come to the East, too. Since the defeat of militarist Japan and the
rise of the Chinese People’s Republic, which has fully
demonstrated its ability to uphold its national interest and
which is steadfastly pursuing a policy of peace, there is not at the
moment in Asia an aggressive power which would dare to unleash a
third world war. Today, if we omit South Korea, the danger of
aggression in Asia remains, chiefly, in connection with the fact
that Taiwan has been transformed into an American military base.
There would be no need for this base were it not for the plans of
aggression in relation to great China.
The facts
testify that there are not a few obstacles in the way of further
lessening the tension in international relations. However, in spite
of the existing obstacles, and also those which arise again and
again, the Soviet Union has expressed and continues to express its
willingness further to improve its relations with other countries.
We believe
that all countries, and the great powers in the first place, in spite
of their differences, should be united by the common interest of
preserving peace.
Everybody
realises the degree to which maintenance of universal peace depends
on a radical improvement in the relations between the Soviet Union
and the United States. We believe that, like the Soviet people, the
American people, and also the peoples of other countries are
interested in this. Guided by these considerations, the Soviet
government, in the messages addressed by Comrade N. A. Bulganin to
President Eisenhower of the United States, proposed the conclusion of
a Soviet-American treaty of friendship and co-operation. The attitude
of the United States government to this Soviet proposal testifies to
the strong positions in the United States of the supporters of those
circles which want to solve disputed questions, not by way of
negotiation, but through war, and to the fact that they exert a
certain influence on the President and the government. But surely the
interests of the American people, in exactly the same way as the
interests of other peoples, call for greater concern for peace. In
these conditions it is to be hoped that our efforts, aimed at
improving Soviet-American relations, will meet with proper
understanding in the United States.
In proposing
to the United States a treaty of friendship and co-operation, the
Soviet government has again demonstrated its sincere striving for
friendly Soviet-American co-operation in favour of peace and
universal security. This corresponds to the spirit and aims of the
United Nations Organisation, which seeks to extend co-operation
between all countries.
Unchanged,
too, is our striving to improve relations with Great Britain. The
forthcoming visit to Britain of the leaders of our country provides
new opportunities for achieving better understanding and for joint
efforts further to ease international tension. The Soviet Union seeks
to establish friendly relations with France, whose present government
has expressed a definite desire for an improvement in Franco-Soviet
relations. And since the government of France has displayed a special
interest in disarmament, we will strive jointly with France for a
definite advance in solving this problem The stronger position of the
democratic forces as a result of the recent general election, will,
it is to be hoped, contribute to this.
Our country
has always been for friendly relations with all countries-big
and small. In particular, it would like to have such relations with
Turkey and Iran, with Pakistan and Japan. Good relations between
these countries and the Soviet Union cannot but correspond to their
vital interests.
In order to
widen the front of struggle for peace as much as possible, our party
and the Soviet government have launched this struggle under the
banner of reducing international tension. This policy, the policy of
easing tension in international relations, is a specific expression
of the struggle for peace in present conditions. The policy of
securing a let-up in international tension is the most advantageous
and flexible method of fighting for peace and, in the given
conditions, opens up the widest possibilities for drawing into this
struggle different social strata, irrespective of their political
views. This policy extends the struggle for peace beyond its usual
boundaries, embracing the sphere of economic and cultural interests,
and the relations not only between state and public bodies, but also
between private individuals.
A contribution
to lessening international tension can be made not only by diplomats
and politicians, but also by economic and cultural leaders, by
official representatives of the countries and by all who are capable
of developing friendly relations and co-operation between the
countries in one sphere or another of state, public and personal
activity. It is not accidental that the aggressive circles are
expending so much effort in the attempt to prevent the development of
trade relations between the. countries. And, of course, it is not
accidental that in many countries so many obstacles are raised
against developing ordinary scientific, technical and cultural
contacts.
***
Comrades, our
party and the Soviet government are always on guard for the interests
of peace. The foreign policy of our country is carried out under the
leadership of the Communist Party and its central committee. And it
is to this that we are indebted above all for the success in
strengthening the international position of the Soviet Union and in
defending world peace.
Our big
successes in the internal life of the country and our important
achievements in the sphere of foreign policy are bound up with the
fact that since the 19th Congress the central committee
has adhered to the Leninist principle of collective leadership.
Supported by the entire party, the central committee has taken a firm
stand against the cult of the individual, which is alien to
Marxism-Leninism, and, which played such a negative role over a
certain period. One can express the certainty that the present
congress will wholeheartedly agree with this principle. With the aim
of easing international tension and strengthening the position of the
Soviet State, the leadership of the party have displayed truly bold
initiative and have undertaken a number of important measures. Never
before, perhaps, have the central committee of our party and its
presidium taken such an active part. in foreign policy matters as in
the recent period. All of us remember such facts as the visit of the
government delegation to Yugoslavia, headed by Comrades Khrushchov,
Bulganin and Mikoyan, which resulted in a radical turn in
Soviet-Yugoslav relations; the visit of Comrades Bulganin and
Khrushchov to India, Burma and Afghanistan, which was marked by
important successes in developing friendly relations between the
U.S.S.R. and these countries, their governments and their
peoples. We should recall also the talks in Moscow with the German
Federal Republic, and afterwards with the German Democratic Republic,
the talks which took place last autumn with Finland, Norway and
others. There have been more frequent meetings of Soviet leaders with
statesmen other countries, with foreign delegations and
representatives of the press. All this testifies to the activity in
the recent period of leading Soviet and Party figures in the sphere
of foreign policy. And precisely because of this we have had those
favourable results which have contributed to a certain easing of
international tension and which have paved the way for definite
possibilities of further success in this respect.
The party and
the Soviet government have recorded definite success in safeguarding
peace. At bedrock of this success lies the steady growth of the
material and spiritual forces of our people and of the entire
socialist camp.
This means
that every Soviet person and every citizen of the countries of the
socialist camp, by his successful labour and his achievements in
industry and on collective farms, not only in the big things, but
also in the small ones, makes his contribution to strengthening his
state and the entire socialist camp and, at the same time, to the
cause of maintaining and strengthening peace and international
security. When we record a rise in labour productivity in a factory,
or further success in raising crop yields and the productivity of
livestock farming on a collective or state farm, we have every right
to be proud of these successes in building communism. These successes
are, at the same time, a fundamental strengthening of the forces and
international positions of the entire socialist camp and they thereby
create the decisive conditions to ensure a peaceful and tranquil life
for the peoples.
Our successes
in economic and cultural construction inspire the peoples of the
whole world; they find satisfaction in them, and become assured that
for them, too, there is a reliable road, already travelled by
millions of people, leading to a new happy life. In all countries of
the world the ranks of our friends and allies are growing, people
who, just as we Communists, want to ensure peace, to put an end to
imperialist wars, and who are becoming more and more convinced that
to prevent another war much now depends on the consciousness and
activity of the peoples.
Together with
the other countries of the socialist camp the Soviet Union stands in
the front line of the struggle of peace and the victory of
communism. Our ranks are united and are confident of final
victory as never before!
The banner
under which we have been victorious, and will continue to be
victorious is the banner of Marxism-Leninism. Under this banner we
are advancing, confident of fresh success, of the triumph of
communism.
Our great
construction and our consistent struggle for peace correspond to the
interests of all peoples, of all mankind!
_________________________________________________________________
1 About
81 ½ million acres