Cable from the Chinese Embassy in Romania, 'Initial Reactions to Maurer’s Article'

Ministry of Foreign Affairs Incoming Telegram

[…]

Initial Reactions to Maurer’s Article

To the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Liaison Department of the CCCP Central Committee: 

Maurer, a member of the Romanian Politburo, published the article "The Unshakeable Foundation of the Unity of the International Communist Movement" in Problems of Peace and Socialism (the translation has been brought back by our delegation). Our initial thoughts on the article are as follows: 

(1) This is the first time in more than a year that Romania showed blatant favoritism and support for Khrushchev’s revisionism on the polemics in the international communist movement. At the same time, [he] indirectly criticized us. 

The article's arguments on issues such as war and peace, peaceful coexistence, disarmament, and nuclear proliferation are all Romania’s traditional views, which are basically the same as those of the Soviet Union. Romania defended Khrushchev on issues such as the Caribbean incident [Cuban Missile Crisis] and the three-nation nuclear test ban treaty [Partial Test Ban Treaty]. Romania took a further step backward in its attitude towards Yugoslavia. The article said: "It is absolutely unacceptable to describe a country as a non-socialist country when the nature of a social and political system of the country is socialist." The views expressed in the article are totally different from ours. The article also accused us of "attacking and using hurtful comments to distort the position of the fraternal parties” and “distorting [the Moscow statement] out of context,” and falsely accused us of "distorting the general line of the communist movement.” The article supports the proposal of the CPSU to stop the polemics and does not mention our correct attitude at all. Obviously, this article helped Khrushchev to suppress us. 

(2) However, Romania is still quite different from other Eastern European countries. The article did not give too much praise of the Soviet Union's domestic policies and still provided some room for us. Several places in the article reflect this: Romania used a personal title in this article to commemorate the third anniversary of the Moscow statement instead of using the name of the party to express their position. Romania only attacked us indirectly and did not point out us out by name. The tone of the article was milder than that of Ceausescu's speech on August 22. On some issues, such as fraternal party relations, the use of puns can be interpreted as either against the Soviet Union or against us. At the same time, the Romanian-Soviet conflict has not been entirely resolved. The article opposes integration when talking about the issue of the CMEA and emphasizes the principle of sovereign equality. This showed the criticism of the Soviet Union. The article also expresses Romania's fear of the Sino-Soviet split and its desire to strengthen unity. Romania called for an end to polemics and the resumption of Sino-Soviet talks. Meanwhile, Romania proposed to hold a meeting of fraternal parties next year. 

(3) Romania’s current position on Sino-Soviet differences is due to the fact that the leaders of Romania and the Soviet Union have basically the same views on major international issues. When Khrushchev encountered serious difficulties both inside and outside the country, Romania could not completely ignore them. On the other hand, it is due to the new deal between Romania and the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union continued to make concessions to Romania on the CMEA issue. Khrushchev made another secret visit to Romania not long ago and may have made some attempts to win over Romania and mad some promises. In return, Romania lent the Soviet Union 400,000 tons of wheat and supported Khrushchev.

(4) Although the article was published under the name of Maurer, it actually represents the majority opinion of the Romanian Party Central Committee and may represent the result of the Central Plenary Session. (Not long ago, both Ambassadors of Cuba and Albania heard that the Romanian Party held a Central Plenary Session, but they did not publish [resolution].) The article is not under the name of Gheorghiu-Dej. This matches his cunning technique of diplomacy over the years, which can satisfy Khrushchev and provide us some diplomatic potential.

[Chinese Embassy] in Romania

November 11, 1963