Russia and Red China

Report Outline
Antagonism Between Communist Giants
Rise of Communist Influence in China
Red China's New Independent Policies

Antagonism Between Communist Giants

Possibility of Khrushchev-Mao Confrontation

Despite the violence of Premier Khrushchev's General Assembly speech, Oct. 1, demanding admission of Red China to the United Nations, it is doubted by foreign affairs analysts that he has any real desire to see a grant of membership to the Chinese Reds at this time. When a vote is taken on the pending United States resolution, the majority for postponing the question for another year may be smaller, proportionately, than last year's majority, but it is expected to be decisive. A United Nations seat for Red China would give that country parity with Russia in the world organization and would strengthen its position in an ideological struggle between Moscow and Peking that is deeply agitating the Communist world.

Events of the next few weeks may disclose whether or not the current differences will lead to an open split. When Khrushchev carries out his plan to visit North Korea in the middle of October, he may well find occasion on that trip to confer with Mao Tse-tung, chairman of the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party. The Supreme Soviet, Russia's nearest equivalent to a parliament, has been called to meet on Oct. 18. Shortly thereafter Communist leaders from all over the world will gather in Moscow to celebrate the Nov. 7 anniversary of the Bolshevik revolution. Out of these doings should come enough clues, if not definite information, to indicate more plainly the extent of the rift between the two Communist giants.

For a time after the Korean War, there was a tendency in the United States to welcome any friction between Peking and Moscow as pointing to development of a Chinese brand of Titoism which could be expected to put some restraint on Soviet conduct. It may be questioned now whether a break between China and Russia could be regarded in the West with equanimity. The subject of the present ideological quarrel is peaceful coexistence vs. the inevitability of war. And Khrushchev is championing the necessity of coexistence in a world which nuclear war might destroy, while Mao—leader of 650 million people under driving pressure to push forward on the path of industrialization—takes the more reckless position in defense of war as an instrument of Communist policy.