quotations and texts

arranged by Wolfgang Eggers

08. 08. 2019



Romania was "socialist" in name only.

(Enver Hoxha)

[from: The Khrushchevites]

* * *

The Romanian party was not a Marxist-Leninist party.

(Enver Hoxha)

[from: "Reflections on China" II]

* * *

Ceaucescu's regime is a regime of corruption, bankruptcy, the dictatorship of individuals and families. He lives from the pocket of all who pay him.

(Enver Hoxha)

[from: "Reflections on China" II]

* * *

We condemn the anti-Marxist, pro-American and pro-revisionist policies of the Romanian leadership

(Enver Hoxha)

[from: "Reflections on China" II]



The most important document about Romania

consists of two excerpts from his book

"The Khrushchevites"





The Marxist-Leninist Principled Stand of the PLA
at the Bucharest Meeting

excerpt of the "History of the PLA"





"The Superpowers"

I talked with Comrade Ramiz "Alia" about how we should prepare ourselves for the coming meeting in Bucharest.

I received the Soviet ambassador Ivanov who informed me that the proposed Bucharest meeting is postponed, and handed me a second letter from Khrushchev, dated June 7 which explains things. But this second letter requests that the representatives of the sister parties of the socialist camp should meet in Bucharest to decide the place and time when the coming meeting will be held. This business seems very complicated: "let us postpone" the meeting, and let us hold another, likewise, in Bucharest. Can there be some trickery behind this?! (After the savage attack launched at the 20th Congress of the CPSU (February 1956) by the Soviet leadership with Khrushchev at its head against Marxism-Leninism and against the work of Stalin through the ill-famed report against him, the Party of Labour of Albania watched attentively and carefully analysed each step of Khrushchev and his associates, who day by day stepped up their hostile activity against socialism and the international communist and workers' movement) in any case, the first thing I will discuss with the comrades of the Bureau is this: since the meeting of parties is being postponed, there is no need for me personally to go to Bucharest at the head of the delegations (Explaining why he did not go to the Meeting of Bucharest, Comrade Enver Hoxha pointed out to the 17th Plenum of the CC of the PLA (July 1960): "But why did the first secretaries of the parties of the socialist countries go to Bucharest, while I did not go? I did very well in not going, for I was carrying out the decision of the Political Bureau to avoid compromising our Party on questions that are not Marxist-Leninist. I would have presented there the opinions of the Political Bureau. which were very well transmitted by Hysni. My failure to go upset the Soviet leaders because everybody else went; only Enver did not go, because there was something fishy going on.,, (Enver Hoxha, Works, vol. 19, Alb. ed., "8 Nentori" Publishing House, Tirana 1975, p. 57.)). Another comrade should go, perhaps Comrade Hysni "Kapol" (The delegation of the Party of Labour of Albania, headed by Comrade Hysni Kapo, arrived in Bucharest on June 20, 1960) . He will take part in the Congress of the Rumanian Workers' Party, so let him take part also in the meeting of the representatives of communist parties to decide the place and time of the coming meeting.






"The Superpowers"

The meeting in Bucharest of representatives of communist and workers' parties who are attending the congress of the Rumanian Workers' Party is being transformed, in fact, into a plot against the Communist Party of China. We must smash this dangerous plot. (Contrary to the agreement reached, under which this meeting was to serve only as a preliminary gathering to decide the place and date of a meeting of the communist and workers' parties of the world, and in violation of all the Leninist organizational norms which governed the relations between communist parties, Khrushchev demanded that the meeting in Bucharest immediately discuss the disagreements which had arisen between the CPSU and the CP of China. As Comrade Enver Hoxha explains, through this plot hatched up in secret, Khrushchev, thinking that he had the Party of Labour of Albania in his pocket" and could subjugate it more easily, wanted to condemn the Communist Party of China and expel it from the world communist movement. But he was wrong in his calculations. .At the Bucharest meeting our Party played an important role. It was the only party to oppose what was being done there. And from then on the hostility against us, until then covert, came out in the open.. (Enver Hoxha. Works, vol. 19, Alb. ed., ."8 Nentori" Publishing House, Tirana 1975, p. 583))





"The Superpowers"

I received a series of radiograms from Hysni, in which he informs me about the development of events in Bucharest.

It is more than clear to us that in order to defend his opportunist-revisionist views Nikita Khrushchev is attacking Marxism-Leninism. He is deceiving all the leaders and representatives of the communist and workers' parties in Bucharest and getting them into the net of the plot which he is hatching up. But Khrushchev will never deceive our Party!.

I reported to the Political Bureau, informing it of what Hysni reported to me from Bucharest (Published in: Enver Hoxha, Works, vol. 19, Alb. ed., "8 Nentori" Publishing House Tirana 1975, p. 2). After carefully analysing the situation created, we decided what stand Hysni must adopt in the meeting, and communicated this to him urgently (Ibidem p. 8).



MONDAY JUNE 27, 1960


"The Superpowers"

Soviet ambassador Ivanov, who as always aims to feel our pulse, continues to come to me, but he goes away empty-handed.

Hysni returned from Rumania today and reported to us at length on the Meeting in Bucharest. This Meeting is a black stain on the history of the international communist movement. There Khrushchev and company revealed their real faces as renegades.

Thus, our struggle against the new, disguised revisionists has begun. It will be a long and difficult struggle, but we are not afraid of it, and we have the unshakeable conviction that we shall triumph, because we are on the right Marxist-Leninist road.


concerning the Bucharest Meeting in 1960:


Albania challenges Khrushchev revisionism

Enver Hoxha, Volume 19

Tirana 1976





When the Soviet revisionists had cancelled the diplomatic relations to Albania in 1961, Romania did not follow and the Romanian ambassedy in Tirana remained there.




From a conversation with Zhou Enlai
June 24, 1966

We think that the new bourgeoisie which has come to power through the counter-revolution in the Soviet Union, Poland, Czechoslovakia, the German Democratic Republic, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Rumania, Mongolia, etc., and which disguises itself with Marxist phraseology, cannot be overthrown except by means of a revolution.

As for the R u m a n i a n leaders, they are shame-faced revisionists who are trying to steer a middle course which they proclaim as a «wise and flexible» policy, although in fact it is a policy dictated by the great fear that haunts them. The Rumanians are afraid of the Soviets, the Bulgarians and the Hungarians and that is why they have linked themselves with Tito, with the imperialists and even smile at us when it suits them. This is what the Rumanians call a «special authentic Marxist-Leninist» course. According to them the lines of the Soviets, the Titoites, the Bulgarians, of K i m Il Sung, of the Japanese and many others are all «authentic Marxist-Leninist» lines.

The Rumanians raise a hue and cry against the Warsaw Treaty and present themselves as «boldly independent».

This is the line of Tito and the imperialists. If R u m a n i a left the Warsaw Treaty that would be fine. But where would it go? It would get out of the bed of one enemy to get into bed with another. Whether in N A T O or the Warsaw Treaty, it's all the same to us. As long as these treaties remain what they are, it makes no difference to us because both of them are fighting us. Even if they fuse into one, they are still our enemies because they are united against us. If on the other hand, they disintegrate and break up they do not do this in the interests of the revolution. What then is the purpose of the Rumanian leadership in raising this hue and cry? To show the Soviet Union that they are «strong», because they are with Tito and the imperialists. They do so to assert their territorial claims, (6) to get money from the imperialists as a reward for acting to weaken the Soviet Union, as well as to carry out the capitalist transformation of R u m a n i a before the Soviets can launch any attack. They play the Chinese card only for this political expediency and to the extent that it does not harm the policy and general strategy of imperialism.

The Rumanians are smiling at us too, they have invited me, several ministers and party workers for holidays, they invite us privately to the meeting of the Warsaw Treaty and similar nonsense. We do not swallow such bait. We shall reply to them openly so that they understand that these manoeuvres will get them nowhere.


JUNE 22, 1970


Reflections on China (VOLUME I)

Kadri [Hazbiu] returned from China and reported to us.
He had talks with Chou En-lai and Kang Sheng, among the main leaders who met him, and later with other leaders of lower rank. According to Kadri, his welcome was warm and friendly and they said good words about Albania and our Party.
The conversation made by Chou En-lai, at which Kang Sheng was also present, contained nothing new, only general ideas and phrases which are developed at greater length in the newspaper «Renmin Ribao», although the meeting had a high level character. No political assessment was given by the Chinese on a number of main problems in their activity:
1) Nothing about their visit to Korea and their assessment of this question.
2) Nothing about the talks with the Rumanian Bodnaras.
3) Nothing about the state of the talks with the Soviets or about their further development.
4) Nothing about the development of the situation in Indochina.
On these four problems, if not on others, we should have been given information, since the Chinese took the trouble to organize a high level meeting. If they were going to tell us nothing, why was this meeting held? It was the duty of the Chinese comrades to inform us about the talks with the Soviets, and the Rumanians especially.
We believe they have held lengthy and, indeed, cordial political and organizational talks with Bodnaras. Apparently, Chou En-lai is enthusiastic about the «skilful and resolute» revisionist policy which Bodnaras presented to him. Since the Chinese are telling us nothing, but indirectly we heard that they made the Rumanians a gift of about 50 million yuan, since they plan to give them armaments factories (Kang Sheng said this, adding that, «Later you (Albanians) may get arms from the Rumanians»), we have reason to think that the two sides have talked at length about «the Rumanian plans in the Balkans». These plans consist of «the Rumanian-Yugoslav-Albanian alliance» and other dirty revisionist deals unacceptable to us, but pleasant to Chou En-lai, provided only that these alliances and friendships are against the Soviets, while as to who Tito and Ceausescu are, that does not worry Chou.
However, we do not swallow this broth of Chou's, who thinks that, in the present situation, we are slipping from our correct principled Marxist-Leninist stand to what he desires. Chou takes his desires for reality, but they will never be realized because we shall never step on a rotten plank. Tito and Titoism are enemies of Marxism-Leninism,
they are anti-socialist and anti-Albanian. As revisionists the Titoites collaborate closely with the Americans, today they have some contradictions with the Soviet revisionists, tomorrow they smooth them out. Our stands towards the peoples of Yugoslavia today are correct and principled, they also assist the Albanians of Kosova to strengthen their positions against great-Serb chauvinism, while at the same time, becoming a defence for the People's Republic of Albania.
Of course, we shall not agree that the Rumanian revisionists should «supply us with weapons», because we cannot make the fate of our defence dependent on them, who are linked closely with Tito and the Americans at present, and tomorrow will reach agreement with the Soviet revisionists (if ever they have fallen out with them). All Chou En-lai's hopes in this direction are in vain.
It was not correct, indeed it was an utterly revisionist idea Which Chou En-lai expressed to Kadri, namely, «We are fighting Soviet revisionism by fighting American imperialism». This means in other words that we should cease the polemic. Thinking that the translation had not been accurate, Kadri asked for this phrase to be repeated, but no, the translation was in order. Such a thing demonstrates nothing but the traditional zig-zags of Chou En-lai.
We regret this greatly. However, they are continuing their polemic with the Soviets. Why do they speak in this way, without control, while on other things great control is exerted to ensure that nothing at all is said?
However, these are their ideas, we have our own. We shall try to convince them on those issues over which we disagree with the Chinese comrades.



JULY 7, 1970


Reflections on China (VOLUME I)

Rumania's Ceausescu, Tito's ally, has taken upon himself to play the role of the only person in a position to realize the «unity of the socialist countries in their ideological diversity».
In one of his recent speeches, this revisionist flew a ballon d'essai for deception.
The Soviet revisionists, are continuing their feverish efforts to encircle and gobble up Rumania, whereas on his part, Ceausescu pretends that he is the «architect of the unity» so much desired by the revisionists. Of course, alliance with and reliance on Tito and the «communism» of the latter failed to help Ceausescu pass his dub coin for gold, therefore he relies on his «friendship with China». The question of «unity» for the revisionists lies here: Who among them will manage to «soften» China's policy and bring it closer to his line.
China is being guided by the principle: «Approaches should be made to anyone who is anti-Soviet, the contradictions should be exploited». The exploitation of contradictions must not be neglected, but this must be done without ever forgetting with whom you have to do, without failing to take account of the current circumstances and thinking that you are exploiting the contradictions by urging this or that revisionist into temporary opposition to the Soviet revisionists. These contradictions among the revisionists may even be continuous because they are capitalists; however the exploitation of the contradictions in our favour must have as its aim not the strengthening of one side or the other to the detriment of socialism, but the weakening and exposure of the two sides.
The Rumanian revisionists are developing a clear anti-Marxist internal and foreign policy. They are up to their ears in debt to the United States of America, West Germany, France, and other capitalist countries. Naturally, these states provide credits when they see they will make economic and political gains. This is the basis of Ceausescu's «independent» policy. Independent of whom?
Independent of the Soviet revisionists who are not reconciled to this situation. Meanwhile Ceausescu, the consolidation of whose capitalist regime, «independent» of the Soviet capitalist revisionists, and dependent on American and western capitalists, is in jeopardy, pretends that socialism in Rumania is being threatened, and therefore, he is seeking support and friendship from China, us, etc.
This situation is clear to us, but not so clear to the Chinese. They have the illusion and believe that the Rumanian leaders are «fine fellows, strong men, resolutely anti-Soviet». We shall support the Rumanian people if they are threatened with invasion by the Soviets, but as for the other things, the countless proposals which the Rumanian leaders make about Balkans and international policy, we shall not support them at all. They are revisionist in everything, they are at one with the policy of Tito and trying to achieve what Tito failed to achieve and penetrate where Tito failed to penetrate. Ceausescu is a card which can still be played in the hands of the Americans. (Who knows, perhaps of the Soviets, too?)
The Chinese have been and are enthusiastic about the Rumanians. Bodnaras went there recently and told them a fine tale, indeed so fine that when Emil said to Mao, «If the Russians attack us we shall allow them to penetrate deeply and then crush them» (a thesis of Mao's), Mao said,
After his visit to China, Bodnaras emerged not only as an «accomplished politician and military strategist» but also as an «ardent pro-Chinese», an «ardent opponent of the Soviets», and certainly pledged to mediate with his close friend, Tito. Thus, «poor Emil» secured the friendship of China, secured a gift of 50 million yuan, secured arms factories, opened the way for the Rumanian minister of defence to go to Peking to secure other aid, etc., etc. There are rumours here and there that Chou En-lai may go to Rumania, too. All these and other actions of the Chinese are on the line of Ceausescu and do not constitute a cautious, well-studied support which assists our strategy.
Blatantly incorrect, also, is Chou En-lai's old idea according to which, «you Albanians, who are on the antiSoviet platform, when the Soviets threaten Yugoslavia, can form a military agreement with Tito», an idea which we immediately rejected, as well as the proposal of arms supplies from Rumania, which was made to us by Kang Sheng, allegedly as a man engaged in party questions (but on the suggestion of Chou, in order to imply that this was not the idea of Chou En-lai alone but of the Whole leadership, that is, of Mao, first of all). Hence the Chinese are dreaming and planning that Yugoslavia, Rumania and Albania will come to terms against the Soviets. We do not swallow this, Chinese comrades, we do not fall into these revisionist traps, do not place our Homeland in the mouth of wolves. Neither you nor Tito nor Ceausescu fool us in the least. We shall try to open your eyes to these mistaken plans, or these wrong tactics, which, we at least can say you are developing and which you must abandon, and be more vigilant.
Kang Sheng himself told our ambassador: «Don't be surprised if we turn on a magnificent welcome for some prince, don't be surprised if we welcome delegations from the French Government, don't be surprised if we welcome some Soviet delegation, but with you Albanians we are comrades-in-arms»! Why are these declarations made by Kang Sheng?! What are they preparing?! Softening? Cessation of their struggle?
We see that the Chinese are zealously sending their ambassadors to Yugoslavia, the Soviet Union and elsewhere. This appears normal, but what is hidden behind it?
For the Chinese, Kim Il Sung has now become the «great leader». The Chinese are easily enthused. At present, Kim Il Sung might have some contradictions with the Soviets, which, of course, must be utilized, but he is still maintaining normal relations with the Soviet revisionists, and we must not be surprised that he is exploiting this rapprochement with the Chinese towards the Soviets.
All these things, of course, compel us to be very vigilant and to carefully consider the steps we take because, in the situations which the revisionists and the Chinese comrades are creating, our correct stands appear sectarian to them. How can they fail to appear as such to those who see them through liberal and revisionist spectacles, and those who change tactics into wrong strategy, and in one way or another, demand that others, too, act as they do? No, we shall not fall into errors, whether some like it or not. We shall go straight ahead on the MarxistLeninist road.



JULY 24, 1970


Reflections on China (VOLUME I)

The Rumanian minister of defence has gone to Peking.
This revisionist is welcomed with great honours by the Chinese.
The Rumanian ambassador in Peking told our chargé d'affaires that at first the minister of defence had intended to stay three days on a simple courtesy visit on his way back from Korea, but was asked by the Chinese to stay 10 days because important talks would be held.
One day earlier, a certain director of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China told our chargé d'affaires:
«Now that the Rumanian minister of defence is coming, it has been decided to give Rumania factories for aircraft, tanks, missiles, artillery, heavy machine-guns, etc. A secret agreement is to be made with the Rumanians, also».
Things have reached the point of secret agreements!
But what sort of agreement it is, what character it has, we do not know, because they did not tell us.
As it appears, the Chinese are not limiting themselves only to giving Rumania minor aid, but are certainly extending this to the political sphere, and why not, the ideological sphere, too, since they are supplying it with arms and even reaching secret agreements?
Naturally, everything will come out very soon. The illusions of the Chinese are in vain, because the Rumanians are interested that the Soviet revisionists, first of all, should hear about the armaments they are receiving and the agreements which are being signed. It needs no brains to realize that the Soviet revisionists will be furious, and we can say that the Chinese have found «reliable and suitable» people to use these weapons.
In regard to maintaining the secrecy, Bodnaras went to Tito and reported on his negotiations with the Chinese, and it is very likely that he pleaded the cause of Tito to the Chinese. There is every possibility that Tito will have a share in the manufacture of these armaments, or later we may even see a «Chinese alliance with Tito», which will advance together with the Sino-Rumanian alliance. Anything is possible when you plunge into dirty revisionist waters.
The smiles of Tito and the Yugoslavs in our direction are not without ulterior motives. They want to advance to the improvement of relations with us as quickly as possible.
The Rumanian ambassador, who accompanied a delegation of the trade-unions of Rumania, told our comrades at a dinner that whoever is on good terms with Albania is on good terms with China, too.
We also understand the sudden change in the leader of the Rumanian trade-union delegation who, although we did not receive him, expressed a thousand eulogies about me, as if nothing had occurred. The Rumanians have a purpose in behaving in this way, but we understand their aims. We also understand the aims of the Chinese comrades, although on the question of their line they do not inform us, or inform us indirectly, or inform us in passing at a corner of some corridor, through some tenth-rate functionary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
A member of a Rumanian delegation told one of our comrades: At the time when Rumania was threatened with invasion by the Soviets, Tito met Ceausescu in Djerdap and signed a secret agreement, under which Tito would send the army up to Bucharest to help Rumania. I doubt whether this is true, because Tito knows the Rumanian leaders well and does not risk himself for them so readily.
To make a symbolic defence in words is something Tito does, but to come out against the Soviets with arms for the Rumanians is something he does not do. This is my opinion about this tricky revisionist.
However, what the Rumanian told us «in confidence», Bodnaras told Mao, Chou En-lai and Lin Piao in confidence, too, and I am sure that they have swallowed it and even said, «Bravo, Tito!». They may also have built new tactics and strategy of work with these cocky revisionists and «rabid enemies» of the Soviet revisionists who have quarrels with them today, but who tomorrow will kiss them and go to bed with them. The Chinese will be left alone lamenting. Perhaps they will say: What did we lose out of all this? Only a few armaments factories.
No, this is not the issue. If it were just a question of the armaments factories, although they are not putting them to good hands, either from the aspect of courage, or stability, or from the political and ideological aspect, we do not oppose their being given to the Rumanians.
If China has them, let it give them, but it is fair that it should first take account of its true friends. The problem lies in the hopes which are placed, in the trust which exists, which is being created and strengthened on the Chinese side, in these revisionist leaders, betrayers of Marxism-Leninism. And why? Simply because they have contradictions with the Soviet revisionists!
Betancourt who was in China, declared in Paris that Chou En-lai is to make a visit to France in the future.
This is another question which we shall follow to see how it develops. We must follow everything, we must be vigilant on everything, because the lofty interests of the people and the Party require this.



SEPTEMBER 11, 1970


Reflections on China (VOLUME I)

In a conversation which our ambassador in Rumania had with Emil Bodnaras, the latter dwelt on the main directions of their policy. Once again the judgement we have made is confirmed: the Rumanians are anti-Marxists, revisionists, nationalists, anti-Soviet (on a chauvinist basis) and anti-Stalinists. They are Titoites, not only because they have good relations in all fields with the Yugoslav revisionists and co-ordinate their actions with them, but also because they think in the same way ideologically.
While posing as anti-Soviet, these two anti-Marxist trends are trying, with their own forms and methods, to polarize the revisionist forces (the anti-Soviet dissidents) and to bring about their supposed rehabilitation in. the world communist movement. Apparently, the Rumanians have presented this development of contradictions in the ranks of revisionism to the Chinese as «contradictions» with the Soviets and have undertaken, to the Chinese, to deepen them and «to return the mangy goats to the flock». I suspect that such a thing pleased the Chinese and they must have taken joint measures, which the Rumanians are putting into operation, as for example, the contacts with the French, Italian and other communist parties. We must watch the actions of the Chinese.
Indirectly, Bodnaras advised that «Brezhnev should not be insulted». This, too, must have been discussed with the Chinese, because they are no longer talking about Brezhnev by name, or about Soviet social-imperialism.
Meanwhile he praised Tito and Titoite Yugoslavia to the skies, and advocated the Yugoslavia-Rumania-Albania alliance, which, according to Emil Bodnaras, «will change the situation in Europe».
The Titoites are working in this direction, too. Ribichich told the Chinese ambassador in Belgrade, who passed it on to us: «We Yugoslavs have made major mistakes about Albania, we have wanted to bring down the regime by any means, but we were instigated by the Soviets (Stalin), while now we shall try to improve our relations», etc. What a «self-criticism»! It is a self-criticism intended especially for the Chinese to make them think that «the Titoites are fine fellows», that «Stalin is to blame». Bodnaras went even further, when he told our ambassador: «We owe our independence to Roosevelt and Churchill, who opposed Stalin who was against it (at Yalta)».
It is clear that the Chinese are in danger of getting caught up in the gears of a wrong and anti-Marxist machine — they are discussing problems with the Rumanian revisionists who have sold themselves to American imperialism. However, the Chinese are making a great mistake that they are not properly assessing the true nature and weight of these revisionists. These revisionists are as cowardly as they are conceited, are so stupid in their cunning that, as I have said at other times, they are convinced that they are playing and will play the primadonna role in European and world politics and in the international communist movement. They pose as if they discovered China and as if their policy guides the policy of China, too.
Bodnaras spoke to our ambassador in such a haughty tone as if the whole policy rotates around them! The socalled resistance to the Soviets, which could even be a new tactic of Tito's, American imperialism, and the Soviets, for a long-range action against China, and against Marxism-Leninism in general, is serving the Rumanian revisionists, as it served Tito and Titoism, as a trump card to raise their prestige over their «courage», «adherence to principle», etc., etc. The Rumanian revisionists will bluff on this road as much as Tito has done and is doing, but the ideological aim is that these revisionists are trying to compromise China, to set it on their course, by nurturing its weak unclear aspects, and especially to ensure that, while allegedly intending to exploit the contradictions between the Soviets and the others, the Chinese lose their bearings and violate principles. Here lies the great danger: in order to conceal their understanding and peace with the Americans, the Soviet revisionists say about them: «There is nothing they can do to us, we are a big country». The Rumanian revisionists say: «Let us go up to our necks in debt, the imperialists can do nothing to us». The Chinese might make light of their mistaken tactics in policy, but they will fall into grave errors of principle. Watch out, Chinese comrades, do not fall into the traps of enemies!
The fact is that up till now, the Chinese comrades have not informed us about the talks which they held with Bodnaras and later with the minister of defence of Rumania. This is not normal between friends. Meanwhile Bodnaras told our ambassador: «The talk with Chou En-lai and Mao was very cordial, we discussed a lot of problems and were in agreement». In some corner, in the corridors of the Foreign Ministry of China, or at the end of some excursion in a boat (so that none of our people would have time to ask questions), a third-ranking personality tells one of our comrades a few general things, and indeed just as they are parting, says: «We also signed a secret agreement with Ionita»! All this is done in order to tell us nothing while seeming to observe rules.
The Chinese ambassador to Tirana has broken his leg, but a year has gone by without an ambassador from China, and we have no one to whom we can express our views on many problems, on which we have always spoken our minds to them openly. Perhaps the Chinese comrades like such a situation.
Among the Chinese ambassadors to the revisionist countries, we notice the tendency to speak about «the existence of contradictions in the local party and state against the Soviets». The work of Bodnaras and Tito is having its effect!
The Chinese ambassador to Belgrade up till now «has forgotten» (or has not received orders from Peking about what and how much to say) to tell our ambassador about the meeting he had with Tito, whereas he did not fail to tell him immediately what Ribichich said about us. Beautiful Bodnaras-Tito co-ordination: struggle against Stalin, «nice words» to our address. Bodnaras even told our ambassador that Tito ought to have spoken even better about Albania in Montenegro. When he returned from China, Bodnaras went to report to Tito, and they co-ordinated their activities together. We are not blind. Woe to those who do not want to see!


- PDF -


Reflections on China (VOLUME I)




AUGUST 15, 1971


Reflections on China (VOLUME I)





JUNE 22, 1971


Reflections on China (VOLUME I)

They call it information!

This came from a person ranking fourth or fifth in the Foreign Directory of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, and not from Keng Biao, as he himself had promised our ambassador, but did not do, allegedly because he was busy!
The information was full of general things about arrivals and departures, those things which Hsinhua has given and have been published in the newspapers, quotations from the public speeches of Li Hsien-nien and Ceausescu.
Then he went on to say that Ceausescu had gone to China to strengthen his position and that of Rumania in the world, to seek economic aid from the Chinese, «because Rumania was in difficulties», and the Chinese gave it 60 million dollars in hard currency and goods.
Ceausescu proposed to the Chinese that they should cease the polemic against «the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the other parties of the socialist countries», that they should join Comecon and take part in international organizations such as the World Federation of Trade Unions etc., and improve their relations with other revisionist parties of the world for the sake of the unity of the international communist movement.
Finally, as a conclusion, the Chinese told our ambassador that the talks ended successfully, that «the struggle against American imperialism and Soviet socialimperialism» was strengthened. Ceausescu spoke well in this regard about China, about the construction of industry and, as the Chinese put it, he said: «The Rumanian press is writing about these things and we have begun to educate the Rumanian people».
«Everything went fine with Ceausescu», the Chinese told our ambassador, «but we also had contradictions with him. We did not agree that we should stop the polemic with the Soviets, even after eight thousand years; we do not unite with them in the struggle against imperialism; we do not join the international organizations, and we shall fight the revisionists from outside these organizations, and not by taking part in them.»
These were the points on which they were opposed. On all other things, the talks went without a hitch. Ceausescu assured the Chinese that the Soviets were not going to attack them and that there was no further danger of a second Czechoslovakia. As can be seen, Ceausescu of Rumania brought the Chinese «every blessing».
What is the effect of all these things the Chinese whisper into our ear? On many questions Ceausescu imposed his pace on them. He did not allow the Chinese to attack the Soviet revisionists, was careful to ensure that neither the communiques nor the speeches implied that the Soviet Union was molesting the Rumanians, but proposed and was ready to help China open its arms to the Soviet revisionists. Ceausescu did not want to alter anything of his revisionist formulations. His aim of bringing the Chinese as close as possible to his views was clear.
Ceausescu tried to get endorsement of his views on how many countries were socialist, but the Chinese did not fall into this trap.
But can it be said that the Chinese understood who Ceausescu is? If they understood this, then why all that welcome, all that pomp and praise on their part?
Ceausescu even wanted to eliminate the term «the Marxist-Leninist parties», when the communique mentioned the two parties, and to substitute «sister parties» for it. The implication and his objective are clear. The Chinese, naturally, «took Ceausescu to the cleaners», insisting that the term «Marxist-Leninist party» be used.
And in this way the Communist Party of Rumania received the seal from the Chinese that it is a «Marxist-Leninist party», whereas it is a revisionist party from top to bottom.
What emerges from all this? It is clear that state relations prevailed over the ideological line of the Communist Party of China. The latter, the ideological line, was subordinated to the former. Many basic principles of ideology and line were violated, distorted, or overshadowed. These three things did not come about accidentally, but through complete ideological conviction. The equivocal phrases which they whisper «in our ear» that «in going through talks and the visit we learn who they are» (!), are of no importance. They were very slow to recognize them!! Have they not had time to recognize them before?!
They have had all the time they needed and plenty of deeds, which proved what Ceausescu and company were. But what importance has a whispered word, when the official stands say the opposite, when the decisions and actions of political, ideological, economic, and even military collaboration tell a different story? We are convinced that later events will prove us right. We look at everything from the political and ideological angle, do not confound state relations with party relations, but even state relations do not stand outside the sphere of the policy and ideology of the party, therefore in this direction, too, we take great care not to go beyond the bounds. The enemies make many efforts and use a thousand tricks to set you on the road of degeneration of the Marxist-Leninist line. It requires maturity, conviction, determination, and ideological formation in Marxism-Leninism to avoid slipping on the road of the enemy. If you have these qualities, you can go ahead without being sectarian or opportunist, you won't move towards isolation or slip into revisionism and into the lap of capitalism.



SEPTEMBER 29, 1975


Reflections on China (VOLUME II)

What are these Rumanian revisionists with Ceausescu at the head, whom the Chinese love and support so much?
In recent times top personalities of the Rumanian party and state come and go on visits to China as if to their own home, have meetings with top figures of the Political Bureau, give and take, embrace and shake hands, write to and praise one another.
There is no doubt that throughout history the Rumanian bourgeoisie has been renowned for its «love affairs». It has made «love» to all and sundry at all times. The bourgeoisie has done this with bourgeois France for example, the new revisionist bourgeoisie has done and is doing this with the Soviet Union of Khrushchev, with the China of Mao, with the Yugoslavia of Tito, with the United States of America, the Federal German Republic, and all that give it money. This is clear to everybody, except the Chinese. To the Chinese, Ceausescu's Rumania is «against the Soviet Union», therefore «it is a socialist country» and the «Rumanian party is a Marxist-Leninist party». All such ideas are without foundation. The opposite is the truth.
If there is the slightest trace of anti-Sovietism in Ceausescu, this comes from the fact that he is an adventurer of the Khrushchevite, Titoite, or similar type, who has got a job as a pander, indeed very likely with the knowledge and aid of the Soviets and the pander lives unharrassed by them in return for the services which he performs for them. He lives on the money he gets from the United States of America, the Federal German Republic and all those who pay him. The Ceausescu regime is a regime of corruption, bankruptcy, of personal and family dictatorship.
It is a disgrace for the Chinese that they call such a party Marxist-Leninist and such an adventurer as Ceausescu a «great politician»!
But why do the Chinese adopt these stands towards Rumania and Ceausescu? There is no other explanation: they get along well together, their policies bring them together in strategy and tactics. The Rumanians pose as being against the Soviets, the Chinese are against the Soviets. The Rumanians are friends of the Americans and intervened to bring about reconciliation between the Chinese and the Americans. Ceausescu and Bodnaras became the «god-fathers» of the Sino-American friendship, which is similar to the Soviet-Rumanian, or SovietAmerican relationships. They abuse one another for appearances' sake, but behind the wall they indulge in political, commercial and other sodomy.
The Rumanians are for a broad policy with the capitalists of Europe to which Rumania has sold itself, allegedly for protection from the Soviets. China, likewise, is for a policy of rapprochement with European reaction, but against the Soviets.
The tactic of the Chinese in this direction is: «Protect yourself Europe, or the Soviet Union will gobble you up with a war!»
Hence, Rumania and China have the one line. The former also takes credits from Europe, China doesn't do so yet, but nevertheless carries on «interesting» trade. Rumania has the United States of America as her powerful «husband» from whom she snatches dollars and other favours, while China carries on trade with the United States of America, buys and sells, welcomes more groups of all kinds of people than it sends, and welcomes them warmly.
Ceausescu has undertaken to make diplomatic royal tours of all countries of the world. Ceausescu is to be seen more outside Rumania than inside it. What does he do abroad? He buys and sells, makes and settles deals, receives a percentage and sometimes even a decoration. Ceausescu is replacing Tito as a go-between in the shady deals all over the continents. China is not conducting itself in the world like Rumania; it likes the tactic of «opening up and recognition», but for the time being it is not doing such shameful things as Rumania.
Rumania has rejected communism and the revolution. China, also, is heading in the same direction. China has declared itself part of the «third world», but if you are part of the «third world» you are also part of the «non-aligned world». As to what difference the «third world» has from the «non-aligned world» only the «theory» of Tito and the «theory» of Teng Hsiao-ping, who inaugurated the inclusion of China in «this world», know this.
Hence, all these and other things make Rumania «China's best friend»!
We condemn the anti-Marxist, pro-American and prorevisionist policy of the Rumanian leadership. Naturally, such a stand of ours causes the cooling of China towards us.
There is a great deal of pro-Rumania propaganda in China.
A person in Shanghai told a comrade of ours: «An attempt was made by Soviet agents in Albania to overthrow your government, but two Rumanian divisions came to your aid and saved the situation». I believe that he was not urged from above to say this, but must be an enemy element, or an element who heard about Beqir Balluku, linked his case with the «loyal ally of the Chinese - Rumania», and built up the story for himself.
Such is the international policy of Rumania and such are China's opinions about it. We are against the one and against the opinions of the other, and we base these stands on realistic analyses seen from the viewpoint of Marxism-Leninism.
Rumania is certainly carrying out a «great policy» in Europe and in the world, but it is also trying to take over the conductor's baton of the policy in the Balkans. This is the long and short of it: the Chaush* wants to become the BashChaush* of the Balkans by advocating a meeting of leaders of all the states of the Balkans, in which the United States of America should be invited to take part together with Italy.
The «little» Latin sister together with its big Latin sister, which are notorious for their collaboration with fascism and submission to American imperialism, dream of leading us into the fold of the Americans.
Rumania knows that this proposal it makes is no more than a soap bubble, but what of that! — before it bursts the bubble has «some rainbow colours».
What is Ceausescu's anti-Sovietism based on? On nothing important. Allegedly, he does not take part with troops in the Warsaw Treaty manoeuvres, but he takes part through army staffs. Rumania is in the Warsaw Treaty and there it will stay.
It is totally involved in Comecon, but raises some opposition, kicks out a little, but even the Bulgarians, who are as intimate with the Soviets as «their underpants», do this in Comecon.
Then, where is their anti-Sovietism expressed? Is it that they have not become like the Bulgarian leaders?! But they are just about as bad, if not worse. Sometimes the Bulgarians may do something unexpected and surprising, while the Rumanians are not «bold sp irits» of that sort.

* Sergeant, Sergeant-major (Turkish), a play of words with Ceausescu's name.



7th Congress of the PLA 1976

With Rumania, too, as a Balkan country, we want to have good relations and develop them normally. We hail the efforts of the fraternal Rumanian people for the progress and prosperity of their country.







Enver Hoxha mit G. Georgiu Dej, Generalsekretär der Rumänischen Arbeiterpartei, Peking, September 1956

* * *

(this picture is from 1956 - thus before Enver Hoxha had called Dej a submissive lackey of the Soviet revisionists)


The trend of present-day world development is
to the revolution and the triumph of socialism (Enver Hoxha)