The Chinese Embassy in Moscow reports on Soviet policy toward Vietnam after Khrushchev's removal.
December 11, 1965
Cable from the Chinese Embassy in the Soviet Union, 'The Soviet Revisionists Have Greatly Strengthened their False Support for Vietnam'
This document was made possible with support from Henry Luce Foundation
.Soviet Union # [illegible] 18/10
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Telegram
From Moscow Station
Foreign Ministry (65) No. Hai-498
The Soviet Revisionists Have Greatly Strengthened Their False Support for Vietnam
To the Foreign Ministry:
The Soviet Revisionists very recently suddenly sharply increased their feigned support of Vietnam:
(1) Ever since December 3, mass “Solidarity with Vietnam” meetings have been held throughout the Soviet Union. Pravda has since December 4 dedicated a newspaper column, printed photographs, organized talks by people from all walks of life. Reporting by other Soviet newspapers has also increased considerably. According to the Soviet press, “250,000 people” took part in a December 8 Moscow mass meeting and demonstration and “130,000 people” took part in another one on December 9. There have been only a few few meetings this large since the new Soviet Revisionists leadership took power.
(2) The Soviet Revisionists proposed a draft letter from the two conference chairs to the countries participating in the Geneva Conference that “condemned” the U.S. War of aggression in Vietnam. On December 9, the Supreme Soviet also issued a declaration on the Vietnam issue.
However, all these various so-called “movements”, “declarations”, “resolutions” and “protests” are just insincere prattle. They are just repeating some catch phrases opposing imperialism. There is nothing new here. Yet the Soviet imperialists worry that some people will take them seriously. In recent days they have increased the security detail at the U.S. Embassy as well as increasing the number of plainclothesmen and regular police there.
Here are the real objectives behind the Soviet Revisionists' feigned support for Vietnam:
(1) To conceal the fact that they have sold out. Recently, the predicament of the U.S. Imperialists in Vietnam has become more difficult. They have loudly called for “peace talks” as cover for their plotting to [underlined by hand in archival copy] intensify and widen their war of aggression. The Soviet Revisionists, to satisfy the needs of the U.S., have increased their behind the scenes contacts with the U.S. and the U.K. Not long ago, Mansfield went to the Soviet Union for secret talks at nearly the same time that McNamara went to Vietnam. [underlined by hand in the archival copy] Our estimate is that the U.S. And the Soviet Union have reached a secret agreement on the next step forward on the Vietnam issue and have explained their bottom lines to one another. After Mansfield's visit to the Soviet Union, the Soviet press in a “Support Vietnam” article stealthily put up a peace balloon, spouting nonsense like “Many clear-headed U.S. politicians are saying [underlined by hand in the archival copy] more and more often there really must be found a peaceful solution to the Indochina issue.” According to what a foreign student studying here revealed to us, after Mansfield's visit, the Soviet Revisionists put more pressure on Vietnam for peace talks and spreading the word that now is the time for peace talks.
After Mansfield, Stuart also came to Moscow to plot with the Soviet Revisionists for peace talks. The Soviet Revisionists' joint communique with the U.K. Emphasized, with reckless disregard for the truth, that [underlined by hand in the archival copy] “the Vietnam issue is a threat to the cause of Peace.” The Soviet Revisionists also arranged for a television interview with Mansfield, allowing him to openly make the case that the Soviet Union and the U.K. have the responsibility to convene an international conference to settle the Vietnam issue.” The purpose of the large-scale feigned Soviet support for Vietnam is to hide its dirty dealing behind the scenes.
(2) To oppose China. Our People's Daily and Red Flag have published articles thoroughly exposing the various sell-outs the Soviet Revisionists are doing on the Vietnam issue and the Soviet people are realizing the truth. [underlined by hand in the archival copy] This has made the Soviet Revisionists very frightened. They are making a big show of feigned support in order to counteract the effect our articles are having on the Soviet people. The “Solidarity” with Vietnam mass activities organized recently by the Soviet Revisionists are designed to deceive the Soviet people so that they will “approve and support” their policy of selling out Vietnam. Moreover, the Soviet Revisionists have wild ideas that they can use this kind of feigned anti-imperialism and feigned support to continue to call for “joint action”, spread rumors and falsehoods in order to confuse public opinion and so accumulate political capital that can be used to promote its anti-China plotting.
[Chinese] Embassy Moscow
December 11, 1965
Distribution: Members of the Standing Committee of the Politburo; Comrades of the Secretariat (17), Dong Biwu, Chen Yi, He Long, Chen Boda, Bo Yibo, Nie Rongzhen, Central General Office Confidential Office, Central Committee Foreign Affairs Office, Central Committee Propaganda Department, Central Committee Investigation Office, Ministry of National Defense, Military Intelligence Office, Wu Lengxi, Zhu Muzhi
Zhang, Tan, Meng, Wang, Qiao, Han, Gong, Huan, The General Office, Research Department, Division of Soviet and European Affairs, Second Asian Division, Press, Ambassador, Confidential Office, Archive 82 copies printed
Received on December 11 at 23:19
Transcribed on December 12 at 13:40
Approved on December 12 at 15:40
Printed on December 12 at 21:20
The Chinese Embassy in Moscow analyzes Soviet policy toward Vietnam in the context of the Sino-Soviet split.
The History and Public Policy Program welcomes reuse of Digital Archive materials for research and educational purposes. Some documents may be subject to copyright, which is retained by the rights holders in accordance with US and international copyright laws. When possible, rights holders have been contacted for permission to reproduce their materials.
To enquire about this document's rights status or request permission for commercial use, please contact the History and Public Policy Program at [email protected].