[This article is reprinted from Peking Review, #5, Jan. 31, 1975, pp. 16-18.]
NINETEEN seventy-four was the year in which Soviet revisionist social-imperialism revealed its true colours more starkly than ever. The world was thus able to see with greater clarity the ugly features of social-imperialism. This it did from the new tsars’ tyrannical abuse and despicable performances in various places and on different occasions; also from their intensified contention with U.S. imperialism for world hegemony alongside frantic arms expansion and war preparations. Meanwhile, there was a new development in the struggle of the people of all lands against Soviet revisionist social-imperialism.
The outrages committed by the Soviet revisionist clique during the year are too numerous to list. A few salient examples are enough to bring to light its obnoxious features and sordid behaviour; they at the same time speak for the daily awakening of the world’s people and their in-depth struggle against hegemony.
1. Soviet revisionism was in desperate straits and isolation as its acts of clinging to hegemony and making troubles at international conferences were scathingly denounced by many third world countries.
At the Special Session of the U.N. General Assembly last April, Soviet revisionism, as one of the two biggest international exploiters and oppressors and in the hope of concealing its true features, opposed all efforts by other delegates to differentiate between poor and rich countries. It stubbornly opposed establishment of a new international economic order and crudely brought pressure on many third world countries in an all-out effort to keep superpower colonial interests intact. Then at the sea law conference between June and August, it reproduced with great enthusiasm the shop-worn imperialist claptrap of so-called “freedom of the high seas” by lauding “free navigation,” “freedom of fishing” and “freedom of overflight.” At first it openly expressed opposition to 200-nautical-mile maritime rights put forward by the third world countries; later it tried to emasculate the essence of this demand by finding fault with the proposal by the “group of 77” in order to preserve superpower maritime hegemony in every possible way. At the world population conference last August, it went so far as to trot out the long discredited Malthusian population theory and talked a great deal of nonsense to cover up the true root cause of poverty and hunger in many third world countries and absolve itself of responsibility. All this was a vain attempt to divert the people of the world from their struggle against hegemony. At all these conferences it worked hard to impose on others the stale theme of “detente” and “disarmament” and thrust these ideas into conference documents to lead people astray.
Soviet revisionism’s reactionary stand of antagonism to the third world caused strong resentment and opposition among the countries there. At the U.N. General Assembly special session, the third world countries were united as one in determined opposition to the two hegemonic powers. All the schemes of Soviet revisionism failed; its isolation and defeat at the United Nations were unprecedented. Its ulterior motives at the sea law conference were bared. More and more, people are getting tired of Moscow’s favourite “psalms of peace.”
2. As Soviet revisionism steps up contention witht U.S. imperialism for hegemony in Europe and as its tactics of “making a feint to the east while attacking in the west” become more evident, more and more European countries are heightening their vigilance against it.
Throughout the year, the Soviet revisionist clique kept talking about “detente” in Europe and its “concern” over European security. But synchronously the clique went ahead with the arms race with a vengeance and intensified contention with U.S. imperialism for nuclear superiority. To beef up its military muscle and the offensive capability of its conventional forces in Central Europe, it replenished and replaced in a big way old tanks, aircraft and guided missiles with new ones. Creating tension in the Balkan Peninsula, it carried out frequent troop movements and conducted big military exercises there; it flagrantly applied pressure on some countries, and even openly plotted to subvert sovereign states. Through its intensified military and diplomatic activities in Europe’s flank—the Mediterranean and the Middle East, Soviet revisionism caused increased instability in that area.
As a result, many European countries and people have begun questioning Soviet revisionism’s much-vaunted “detente” in Europe and recognized more clearly its manoeuvre of “making a feint to the east while attacking in the west” to contend for hegemony in Europe. They have come to realize that “the Soviet Union deploys its troops with its focus on Europe and Soviet troops receive training in accordance with the theory that the offensive will start from Europe and therefore armed, equipped and organized with West Europe as a mock battlefield.” It is exactly in these circumstances that both the “European security conference” and the “Central Europe force reduction conference” are deadlocked. The West European countries’ suspicion and alertness to Soviet revisionism’s rabid expansionist ambitions have grown. It was only a few months ago that Yugoslavia unearthed a clandestine anti-government organization aided and abetted by Soviet revisionism, and severely punished those involved according to law. This was a head-on blow to Soviet revisionism.
3. Soviet revisionism exploits Soviet Jewish emigration in pursuit of its own interests and thus undermines the Arab People’s struggle. This has further exposed the ugly features of social-imperialism.
It is common knowledge that Soviet revisionism sends Jews to Israel every year. Some 100,000 Soviet Jews have streamed into Israel in the four years since 1970. Public opinion in the Arab countries scathingly denounced this despicable act detrimental to the Arab people’s struggle. The Egyptian paper Al-Ahrum pointed out: “The Soviet Union’s decision could be interpreted as meaning permission for Soviet Jews to fight the Arabs.” The Kuwaiti paper Ar Rai al-Amm said: “It is a conspiracy jointly perpetrated by U.S. imperialism and Russia against the Arab people.” As to Soviet revisionism’s other ugly performances in the Middle East, they became quite notorious much earlier. It amassed ill-gotten wealth by selling arms in the Middle East and pressing buyers for repayment of debts on earlier purchases, which greatly angered the Arabs. In speeches made during the year, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat time and again accused the Soviet Union of making difficulties on the question of arms supplies and dunning Egypt with demands for repayment of debts in an effort to control Egypt through “aid.” The Egyptian President, however, made it clear that “we are not prepared to cede any part of our national will!”
4. In the Cyprus event, Soviet revisionism added fuel to the fire, seeking to fish in troubled waters. Its sinister designs were all too clear.
Following the outbreak of the event in July, Soviet revisionism supported one side at one time and the other side at another, trying hard to sow discord and complicate the situation. It Painstakingly tried to squeeze into the island, and, with no one showing approval, simply suggested giving itself the role of a U.N. “special mission.” Soviet revisionism’s histrionics were so very revealing that everyone could tell what it was concerned about: certainly not the “interests of the Cypriot people and world peace” but social-imperialist interests in aggression and expansion pure and simple, and its efforts to strengthen its position in contending with U.S. imperialism for hegemony in the Mediterranean. As an Algerian weekly pointed out, contention in the Mediteranean between the two superpowers in their own interests had complicated the Cyprus issue. The Argentine weekly Panorama believed that the Soviet Union wanted to realize the fond dream of the old tsars in the Mediterranean.
5. Soviet revisionism continues to create turmoil, maintains tension in the South Asian subcontinent and steps up contention in the Indian Ocean with U.S. imperialism.
A few years ago, it openly supported, India’s dismemberment of Pakistan and thus sowed the seeds of new turbulence in the subcontinent. Last September, it again supported India’s annexation of another sovereign state—Sikkim. This naked act of expansion on the part of the Indian Government has been strongly condemned by the people of South Asian countries and justice-upholding countries and people throughout the world. Moscow was the only one who cheered India’s action. The South Asian countries are well aware of this. The Pakistan daily Ta’Meer pointed out: “India would never have dared to swallow up an independent, sovereign state if the Soviet Union had not instigated India and tried to cover up the latter’s aggressive intentions or if it had withdrawn its military backing.” In the past year, Soviet revisionism which has shown unusual “enthusiasm” for “Asian security” has often played one nation against another in South Asia and thus stirred up disputes between nations. Although it often pays lip-service to “detente” and “peace,” it just does not have the nerve to vote in the United Nations for the proposal to make the Indian 0cean a peace zone. On the contrary, its constant huge naval presence there is intended as a show of force.
6. Soviet revisionism has not only seized Japanese territories with no intention of returning them but has posed repeated military threats against that country, arousing the Japanese people’s indignation and protest.
Last year, the Japanese people carried out a succession of campaigns demanding that the Soviet Union return the northern territories. Soviet revisionism not only refused to return the islands, but slanderously dismissed the Japanese people’s just demands as “revanchist agitation” and a “provocation.” It also repeatedly brought pressure to bear upon the Japanese Government and people with a view to making Japan give up sovereignty over these territories. Meanwhile, Soviet revisionism’s military planes and warships frequently encroached upon Japan’s territorial airspace and waters. Encroachments on Japanese airspace are reported to be 200-300 sorties a year, constituting a serious threat to Japan’s security. The Soviet revisionists sent their ships to cruise in waters off the Japanese coast at will, pollute the area, destroy fishing nets and resort to blackmail and extortion.
All this has given the Japanese people clear insight into the dangers from the north and made them pursue their campaign for the return of the northern territories more firmly. Japanese fishermen are demanding that their government take measures to stop the Soviet revisionists’ overlordism. The government has repeatedly asked the Soviet Government to cease conducting military exercises off Japan’s coast.
7. Soviet revisionism has made huge profits by speculating in the international market, doing many things detrimental to the interests of the third world countries.
Taking advantage of increased oil and grain prices, it engaged in many speculation deals in the world market throughout 1974. Not long ago, Iraq was forced to sell oil to Soviet revisionists at reduced price as payment for arms purchased from them in the October War. Before the oil had been delivered, the Soviet revisionists resold what they had bought with 13.8 million U.S. dollars to the Federal Republic of Germany for 41.5 million, which gave them a 200 per cent net profit on the deal. Similarly, they made huge profits by reselling natural gas sold to them by Iran. It is no wonder that foreign press reports referred to them by a new nickname—“the oil barons of capitalist Russia.”
Soviet revisionism helped send up world grain prices by rush-buying and resold at high prices large quantities of grain when prices went up. It was reported that it bought U.S. wheat at 60 U.S. dollars a ton, but charged double or even triple the price when reselling it to other countries. It continued to sell munitions at high prices and has become a leading munitions dealer in the world. With U.S. dollars earned from such deals, it lent money in the European monetary market at the exorbitant interest rate of over 10 per cent. Its tricks to speculate and profiteer has put old-line Western businessmen in the shade. The foreign press has pointed out that Soviet revisionism is more capitalistic than the No. 1 capitalist power. The Iranian press noted that “the Russians themselves have not been slow to profit by international price increases,” and described this as “open plunder and exploitation.”
8. Soviet revisionism’s cloak-and-dagger activities in all parts of the world which repeatedly were exposed and saw its spies expelled have aroused close attention and vigilance in many countries.
Moscow’s espionage network is widespread. In 1974, its spying activities were exposed by Ghana, Tunisia, Tanzania, Thailand, Japan, the Federal Republic of Germany, New Zealand and China. In these countries, Soviet spies, cloaked as members of “military missions,” “diplomats” and “journalists,” were uncovered and expelled one after another. The Thai press revealed that there were some 500 Soviet agents collecting intelligence in Thailand and other Southeast Asian countries and that Bangkok had become the centre for the espionage activities in Southeast Asia of both the United States and the Soviet Union. During the year, the latter kept sending trawlers, “scientific research vessels” and submarines into waters off Britain, France, Sweden, Ireland and Australia to carry out espionage; many of these were fined and forced to leave. According to an incomplete count, in the past ten years about 40 countries have expelled Soviet “diplomatic personnel” engaged in espionage and subversive activities. As the Thai weekly Asian News Review pointed out: “The disasters brought by agents from Moscow are no less hideous than those brought by the U.S. CIA.”
The examples listed are only some of the evil deeds and scandals perpetrated by the Soviet revisionists in the past year. They have done much damage to the world’s people, those of the third world in particular. But they also have accelerated the awakening of the people everywhere.
More and more people in the world today have come to see the real colours of Soviet revisionism. From Soviet revisionist double-dealing tactics—wearing one face in public and another in private, saying all fine things while doing all the vilest—and from its shameless behaviour—hostility to the third world on every issue and doing everything in its own interests—the third world countries and peoples have arrived at a clearer judgement through their own experience, which is that Soviet revisionism is not “socialism” but social-imperialism, not a “natural ally” but a dangerous enemy. Seeing that Soviet revisionism emphasizes “friendship” while sowing dissension and preaches “detente” while creating tension, many second world countries have become more and move aware of its ulterior motives and the need to be more on guard. Even partners in its so-called “big community” are openly expressing their increased complaint against Soviet-revisionism which, with a bent for hegemony, is always ready to leave others in the lurch. The growing understanding of the real nature of Soviet revisionist social-imperialism by the people of all lands is an important indication that the struggle against hegemonism is developing in depth and that the international situation is excellent.
It may be recalled that when U.S. imperialism rose to replace declining old-line colonialism in the early 1950s, there were some who for a while were not quite clear about what neocolonialism meant. But it did not take long for the people to see through U.S. imperialism from the chain of events that followed. A storm against it soon swept the whole world.
Today, Soviet revisionist social-imperialism is facing a fate similar to that of U.S. imperialism. After its bluffing and bamboozling all these years, it has run into a wall. Still with the same old signboard, it now finds itself in a completely changed situation in which the people’s struggle against Soviet and U.S. hegemonism is on the rise all over the globe. The outward bluster and swaggering posture of the Brezhnev clique cannot conceal its essential weakness of being beset with internal and external problems. As the contention between Soviet revisionism and U.S. imperialism further intensifies, the storm of the struggle against hegemonism launched by the people of all lands will rage still more fiercely. It is a certainty that social-imperialism will suffer heavier defeats than the old-time expansionists.
Return to Peking Review article list
MASSLINE.ORG Home Page