Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
http://www.enverhoxha.ru
THE FACTS
ABOUT
SOVIET-ALBANIAN
RELATIONS
1964
CONTENTS
T H E
S T A T E M E N T
O F
T H E
T H E P A R T Y O F L A B O U R
( O c t o b e r 20. 1961)
O N T H E R E L A T I O N S
OF A L B A N I A A N D
S L A N D E R S
F A C T S
1.
B E T W E E N T H E PEOPLE'S R E P U B L I C
T H E S O V I E T U N I O N (Documents)
FABRICATIONS
A b o u t the
The
(Zri
C A N N O T
S T A N D
U P
Popullit,
December
Popullit,
Truth
19,
D e c e m b e r 20,
About
the
T O
of the
Specialists
1961)
47
of the P a l a c e of
Culture
1961)
Students'
56
Issue
i Popullit, D e c e m b e r 3 0 , 1 9 6 1 )
NIKITA
K H R U S H C
S E T T L E
B U T
T
W I T H
OUR
P A R
(Zri
i Popullit, M a r c
45
Question
T h e T r u t h A b o u t the Question
(Zri
3.
O F
D O C U M E N T S
The Truth
(Zri
2.
A N D
A N D
C E N T R A L
C O M M I T T E E
O F A L B A N I A
H E V
H A S
M A D E
O
A G G R A V A T E
T Y
A N D
S T A T E
h 25, 1962)
65
EFFORTS
NOT
T O
T H E
DIFFERENCES
77
K H R U S H C H E V A G A I N IN T H E R O L E OF A D E M A G O G U E ,
A
S L A N D E R E R
A N D A S O W E R OF DISSENSION
(Zri
i Popullit, A p r i l 1 8 , 1 9 6 3 )
111
THE STATEMENT
OF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE
OF THE PARTY OF LABOUR OF
ALBANIA
October 20, 1961
Union
Khrushchev
of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a .
publicly
attacked
the
Party
H i s a n t i - M a r x i s t slanders a n d at-
the imperialists
Khrushchev,
and
l a y i n g bare before
the enemies the dispute long existing between the leadership of the C o m m u n i s t P a r t y of the Soviet U n i o n a n d
the P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a ,
brutally
violated the
By p u b l i c l y attacking the P a r t y of L a b o u r
He is f u l l y
responsible for this a n t i - M a r x i s t act and for a l l the c o n sequences arising f r o m it.
E v e r since our disputes arose w i t h the Soviet leadership,
the P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a , guided by the interests
of the u n i t y of the w o r l d communist movement and the
socialist camp, has striven w i t h great patience to solve
them in the correct M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t w a y , in the w a y
outlined b y the M o s c o w D e c l a r a t i o n .
chev
chose
the
anti-Marxist
way
of
Instead, K h r u s h aggravating
the
ON THE RELATIONS
BETWEEN
THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF ALBANIA
AND THE SOVIET UNION
Documents
Ministry
of
Foreign
Affairs
of
the
USSR,
on
T a k i n g into account the fact that the A l b a n i a n a u thorities have intentionally created such conditions that
the Soviet Ambassador in A l b a n i a is d e p r i v e d of the poss i b i l i t y of c a r r y i n g out his d i p l o m a t i c functions, the U S S R
Government is obliged to decide to r e c a l l the A m b a s s a dor E x t r a o r d i n a r y a n d P l e n i p o t e n t i a r y of the U S S R ,
Comrade Y . V . S h i k i n , f r o m A l b a n i a .
T h e M i n i s t r y o f F o r e i g n A f f a i r s o f the U S S R asks that
this decision of the U S S R G o v e r n m e n t be brought, w i t h out delay, to the k n o w l e d g e of the A l b a n i a n G o v e r n ment.
OF THE
SOVIET
REPUBLICS TIRANA
T h e M i n i s t r y of F o r e i g n A f f a i r s of the P.R. of A l b a n i a ,
u p o n order f r o m its Government, concerning the v e r b a l
communication made on N o v e m b e r 25th to the i n t e r i m
charg
of A l b a n i a by t h e V i c e -
The
Government
of
the
P.R.
of
Albania
notes
w i t h surprise and p r o f o u n d regret the Soviet G o v e r n ment's decision to r e c a l l its Ambassador to the P.R. of
A l b a n i a , S h i k i n , o n the groundless and t r u m p e d - u p pretext that conditions have allegedly been created w h e r e 10
side,
there was
also sent
with
Ambassador S h i k i n
an
act
which
cannot
be
understood
except
the further
stay
of the Ambassador
of A l b a n i a in
to
further
He has w o r k e d w i t h a l l his
strengthen
and
temper
the
lasting
13
1961 by the V i c e - M i n i s t e r of F o r e i g n
of the n o r m a l functions of every diplomatic representation, and even more so of a country calling itself a m e m ber of the socialist camp.
In this connection, the M i n i s t r y of F o r e i g n A f f a i r s of
the U S S R sharply protests to the A l b a n i a n Embassy in
M o s c o w and does not consider it a n y longer possible for
the Ambassador of the P.R. of A l b a n i a , N e s t i Nase to
stay in the U S S R .
At the same time, the M i n i s t r y of
F o r e i g n A f f a i r s of the U S S R is instructed to demand the
immediate suspension of the d i s t r i b u t i o n of anti-Soviet
materials by the A l b a n i a n Embassy in the U S S R , and the
c a r r y i n g out of hostile propaganda against the C P S U and
the Soviet U n i o n .
against the U S S R .
It is i n t e n t i o n a l l y c a r r y i n g out measures aimed at i m p e d i n g the n o r m a l activity of the E m bassy and the trade representation o f the U S S R i n A l bania.
T h e Soviet diplomats in the P.R. of A l b a n i a are
isolated.
T h e y are even deprived of the possibility of
m a i n t a i n i n g official contacts w i t h the A l b a n i a n i n s t i t u tions a n d organizations.
T h e A l b a n i a n authorities, for
provocative purposes, slanderously accuse the staff of the
Soviet representative institutions of conducting hostile
activity against A l b a n i a .
T h e most elementary rules of
international l a w are being violated in regard to the Soviet Embassy a n d the other Soviet institutions i n A l bania.
T h e Soviet side has more t h a n once d r a w n the attention of the A l b a n i a n G o v e r n m e n t to the inadmissible actions of the A l b a n i a n authorities w i t h regard to the
U S S R Embassy i n T i r a n a .
H o w e v e r the A l b a n i a n G o v ernment has not o n l y been u n w i l l i n g to take any measures, but also made the conditions of the sojourn of the
workers of the Soviet institutions in A l b a n i a more and
more complicated.
An unheard-of step in the relations between states,
p a r t i c u l a r l y between socialist states, is the groundless
demand of the A l b a n i a n G o v e r n m e n t that the personnel of the Soviet Embassy be reduced almost to a t h i r d .
T h e M i n i s t r y of F o r e i g n A f f a i r s of the U S S R has been
authorized to f i r m l y reject the entirely inadmissible demand of the A l b a n i a n G o v e r n m e n t to reduce the n u m b e r
of personnel of the U S S R Embassy in T i r a n a .
It is w e l l
k n o w n that international l a w does not recognize the r i g h t
of a country to a r b i t r a r i l y a n d u n i l a t e r a l l y l i m i t the
number of members of f o r e i g n diplomatic missions ac17
credited to it.
In contrast,
from
Albania.
Three
members
of
the
technical
staff w i l l b e left t o guard the b u i l d i n g s and other m a terials belonging to the Embassy a n d trade representat i o n o f the U S S R i n T i r a n a .
A s t o w h i c h state the Soviet G o v e r n m e n t w i l l charge
w i t h attending to the interests of the Soviet U n i o n and
its citizens i n A l b a n i a , the A l b a n i a n side w i l l b e i n f o r m e d
later.
T h e Soviet side considers that under the conditions in
w h i c h the A l b a n i a n G o v e r n m e n t is ever more consistentl y aggravating the relations w i t h the Soviet U n i o n , e x ploiting its diplomatic mission in the U S S R for purposes
of anti-Soviet activity, the f u r t h e r stay of the personnel
18
REPUBLICS
Tirana
mortal principles o f M a r x i s m - L e n i n i s m .
The Albanian
people, educated by their P a r t y of Labour, have a l w a y s
regarded the Soviet U n i o n as their liberator, and their
dearest f r i e n d . T h e P L A and the A l b a n i a n G o v e r n m e n t
have considered it a p r i m o r d i a l task to preserve and
continually strengthen this friendship, to increase and
ever more consolidate in the hearts of the A l b a n i a n
people, love for and faithfulness to the great homeland
of V.I. L e n i n and to the C o m m u n i s t P a r t y of the Soviet
Union.
In the years since the liberation of A l b a n i a , for a l o n g
period the relations between the People's R e p u b l i c of
A l b a n i a and the Soviet U n i o n have been extended and
developed in every field on the basis of the L e n i n i s t
principles of equality, m u t u a l respect, close cooperation
and m u t u a l fraternal aid.
T h e A l b a n i a n people w i l l a l ways be grateful to the f r a t e r n a l Soviet people f o r the
internationalist aid they have given our c o u n t r y d u r i n g
this period, and w h i c h has been an important factor in
the b u i l d i n g of socialism in A l b a n i a .
D u r i n g the course of these years, at a l l times and in
every situation, the People's R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a , a l o y a l
member of the socialist camp and the W a r s a w Treaty,
has strengthened its u n i t y w i t h the Soviet U n i o n ; it has
f i r m l y remained on the side of the Soviet U n i o n , against
a l l and every attack and slander by the enemies of the
land of Soviets; it has resolutely defended the peace
policy of the Soviet U n i o n and has done every t h i n g in
its power to contribute to its t r i u m p h .
T h e close ties of
cooperation i n the economic, political, c u l t u r a l and m i l i tary fields and the f r a t e r n a l friendship between our t w o
countries have created really internationalist and i n 20
to their knees in order to aggravate S o v i e t - A l b a n i a n r e lations, and in this w a y on the state level, t r a m p l i n g
under foot proletarian internationalism and a l l and every
rule
of international l a w
states.
governing
relations
between
Khrushchev
cancelled
He a r b i t r a r i l y violated and
broke
for
the
trade
agreement
1961;
he
unilaterally
T h u s , he has
The A l -
by further closing their ranks around the P a r t y of L a bour of A l b a n i a and their Government, by strengthening
their determination to b u i l d socialism and sharpening
their vigilance in defense of their victories and their
socialist homeland.
On November 25th, 1961, under N. K h r u s h c h e v ' s
dictates, the Soviet G o v e r n m e n t recalled its Ambassador
Y . S h i k i n f r o m A l b a n i a w i t h the fallacious excuse that
" h e had been placed in such a situation that he could no
more n o r m a l l y c a r r y out his government's instructions"
and that this situation became " u n b e a r a b l e " "especially
after the 22nd Congress of the C P S U " .
T h i s c l a i m is
absurd and is o n l y made w i t h bad intentions.
In fact
it is w e l l k n o w n that right f r o m the beginning, and right
up to the present, the Embassy of the U S S R in A l b a n i a
and the w h o l e of the staff, f r o m the Ambassador and
right d o w n to the most o r d i n a r y employee, have enjoyed
the most favourable conditions, w h i c h w e r e created for
them.
T h e U S S R representatives i n A l b a n i a have a l ways been treated not o n l y l i k e diplomatic representatives of the f r i e n d l y and allied country, the dearest to
the A l b a n i a n people, as the Soviet U n i o n has been and
still remains, but l i k e comrades and real brothers for
w h o m not o n l y the offices and establishments, but also
the hearts of the A l b a n i a n people, were open.
As to
Ambassador S h i k i n , too, as previously pointed out by the
A l b a n i a n Government, a l l the conditions necessary to
the c a r r y i n g out of his functions had been created; but
Ambassador S h i k i n , in the eleven months since he first
arrived in A l b a n i a , actually o n l y resided here five
months in a l l . S t i l l more astonishing is the c l a i m that
his situation became "unbearable after the 22nd Congress
23
measures of u n e x a m p l e d isolation and restriction towards the A l b a n i a n Embassy and the A l b a n i a n diplomats
in M o s c o w , the V i c e - M i n i s t e r of F o r e i g n A f f a i r s of the
Soviet U n i o n , N . F i r y u b i n , i n his v e r b a l communication
of December 3, 1961, claimed, w i t h open slander, that
"the Soviet diplomats in the People's R e p u b l i c of A l b a nia are isolated and deprived of even the possibility of
m a i n t a i n i n g o f f i c i a l contacts w i t h the institution and
organisations of A l b a n i a . "
T h e Embassy o f the People's R e p u b l i c o f A l b a n i a i n
M o s c o w has always observed the rules of the Soviet
Government concerning the distribution of propaganda
materials in the Soviet U n i o n and has never encroached
o n them.
T h e G o v e r n m e n t o f the People's R e p u b l i c o f
A l b a n i a rejects, as a shameless and provocative offence,
the allegation that the A l b a n i a n Embassy has sometimes
distributed anti-Soviet material.
A l l the materials it has
circulated have been distributed i n compliance w i t h the
rules in force, and always been inspired by the feelings
of A l b a n i a n - S o v i e t lasting friendship, by the principles
of M a r x i s m - L e n i n i s m , and based on the 1957 and 1960
M o s c o w Declarations.
It is indeed regrettable that, on
such a groundless pretext, they demanded the departure
of the Ambassador of a socialist state f r o m the Soviet
U n i o n , and at a time, w h e n the d i p l o m a t i c representations of the capitalist countries in M o s c o w are f r e e l y
distributing numerous materials.
J u s t as groundless is
also the charge made w i t h regard to the A l b a n i a n s t u dents in the Soviet U n i o n , w h o have been educated, by
the P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a , in the feelings of b o u n d less love towards the Soviet U n i o n , w h o have always
set an example by their behaviour and their observance
25
of the Soviet Embassy and trade representation in T i r a na. At the same t i m e he demanded the departure of
the staff of the Embassy and the trade counsellor of the
People's R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a in M o s c o w f r o m Soviet territory, simultaneously declaring that the Soviet G o v e r n ment w o u l d later i n f o r m the A l b a n i a n side w h i c h state
w o u l d be entrusted w i t h the care of the interests of the
Soviet U n i o n and its citizens in A l b a n i a .
T h e G o v e r n m e n t of the People's R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a
rejects, w i t h contempt and indignation, the shocking and
groundless slanders and inventions adduced i n N . F i r y u bin's v e r b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n as arguments to j u s t i f y this
hostile act w h i c h is unprecedented in the history of the
relations between socialist states.
T h e unilateral decision of N. K h r u s h c h e v ' s group to close d o w n the Soviet
Embassy and trade representation in T i r a n a , as w e l l as
the A l b a n i a n Embassy in M o s c o w , not o n l y expresses his
w i l l to break a l l and every relation between the Soviet
U n i o n and the People's R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a , but also
brutally violates the principles, on w h i c h the relations
between socialist states are based, as w e l l as the glorious
traditions of f r i e n d s h i p w h i c h the Soviet U n i o n has a l ways maintained towards other socialist countries, towards a l l the countries of the w o r l d .
Indeed, this decision is another pressure w h i c h is brought to bear upon
the People's R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a . It is a part and parcel of the a n t i - A l b a n i a n and anti-socialist policy, w h i c h
N. K h r u s h c h e v is p u r s u i n g w i t h unheard-of violence,
against the A l b a n i a n people a n d the People's R e p u b l i c
of A l b a n i a .
It can o n l y gladden the s w o r n enemies of
the A l b a n i a n people and the Soviet people, of socialism
and M a r x i s m - L e n i n i s m , the imperialists and their ser27
THE
P u b l i s h e d in
Zri
SOCIALIST
i Popullit,
Dec.
COUNTRIES
10th,
1961
A t the instigation o f N . K h r u s h c h e v the Soviet G o v ernment decided to recall the entire personnel of the
Soviet Embassy f r o m T i r a n a and to demand the departure of the entire personnel of the A l b a n i a n Embassy
f r o m Moscow.
T h i s u n e x a m p l e d hostile act against socialist A l b a n i a and the A l b a n i a n people is an unheard-of
action in the history of the relations between the socialist
countries, a n d a heavy b l o w against the u n i t y of the socialist c a m p and the international communist a n d w o r k ers' movement.
S u c h an act offends the feelings of deep
fraternal f r i e n d s h i p n u r t u r e d b y the C o m m u n i s t P a r t y
of the Soviet U n i o n and the Soviet peoples f o r our P a r t y
and people.
E v e r y A l b a n i a n and every honest m a n i n
the w o r l d i s justifiably shocked b y it. B y u n d e r t a k i n g
this action N. K h r u s h c h e v o n l y gives pleasure to our
common enemies and provides t h e m w i t h weapons to
discredit the C o m m u n i s t P a r t y , the Soviet State and their
traditional p o l i c y of f r i e n d s h i p among the peoples. T h i s
shows the extent of N. K h r u s h c h e v ' s hostile feelings t o w a r d s the P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a , the People's
R e p u b l i c o f A l b a n i a and the A l b a n i a n people w h o have
been, are, and w i l l r e m a i n l o y a l friends for l i f e of the
Soviet U n i o n .
31
the other socialist countries; at a time w h e n N. K h r u s h chev is stretching his hand and t r y i n g to establish close
ties w i t h even the most reactionary milliardaires, w i t h
princes and kings, not to mention his rapprochement
w i t h and embracing of the Y u g o s l a v revisionists and
the cordial greetings and the good wishes he also c o n veyed to the P o p e of R o m e . These facts w i l l convince
not only every communist, b u t also make every honest
m a n in the w o r l d recognize h o w hostile N. K h r u s h c h e v ' s
action is against the People's R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a , and
w h o m in fact this act serves.
N. K h r u s h c h e v ' s pretext for the recall of the entire
personnel of the Soviet Embassy f r o m T i r a n a , is that the
A l b a n i a n G o v e r n m e n t is conducting a hostile campaign
against the Soviet U n i o n and is aggravating the relations
between the two countries, i m p e d i n g the n o r m a l a c t i v i ties of the Soviet Ambassador in T i r a n a and creating an
unbearable situation for diplomats, etc. A l l these " s e r i o u s "
motives that pushed N. K h r u s h c h e v to such action are
entirely groundless, they are slanders and inventions
w h i c h are not substantiated by the real state of affairs.
Whoever is f a m i l i a r w i t h the press and the real situation
in our country must be aware that in it there is no w o r d ,
no expression, nor the least spirit of hostility against the
Soviet U n i o n and its Government.
On the contrary, it
is N. K h r u s h c h e v and his followers w h o create slanders
and inventions in order to sow e n m i t y and hatred against
our people.
F o l l o w i n g this procedure, a f e w days ago,
an article in the newspaper Pravda of December 2nd,
1961, w r i t t e n by Y. A n d r o p o v , alleges that an editorial
of the newspaper
Zri i Popullit, published on the
threshold of the 22nd Congress of the C o m m u n i s t P a r t y
34
W h y d i d the G o v e r n m e n t o f the P e o -
pended
all
the
credits
granted
to
our
country,
which
and
specialists f r o m A l b a n i a .
the
trade
relations
on
the
Soviet
recalled
Union
all
the
had
Soviet
clearing
basis.
He
suspended the stipends to a l l the A l b a n i a n c i v i l and m i l i tary students w h o were studying in the Soviet U n i o n .
He cancelled a l l the plans for c u l t u r a l and technologicalscientific
cooperation
between
the
two
countries.
He
established a strict blockade of silence and p o l i t i c a l isolation around the People's R e p u b l i c o f A l b a n i a and the A l banian people.
of
military
relations.
In
word
he
established a
As he failed
in
another
ple's R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a .
viet Embassy in T i r a n a , and the demand for the departure of the entire personnel of the A l b a n i a n
Embassy
himself,
not
only
The
L e n i n i s t principles of equality, independence a n d n o n interference in the domestic affairs of one another, are
used by N. K h r u s h c h e v as the means of bluff, because, in
fact, the P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a h a d o n l y to express
its v i e w p o i n t on some questions of present-day w o r l d
development and the international c o m m u n i s t movement
contrary to N. K h r u s h c h e v ' s revisionist conceptions, to
become the target for a barrage of abuse and a l l the
methods, i n c l u d i n g even those that have been, and are
38
Recently,
and
especially
since
the
22nd
Congress
of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Soviet
propaganda,
with
a
view
to
arguing
the
"hostile
attitude" allegedly taken by the Party of Labour of
Albania,
the
Government
of
the
People's
Republic
of
Albania
and
the
Albanian
people
against
the
Soviet
Union,
has
been
energetically
resorting
to
slanders and fabrications through the press and radio
to distort and falsify the truth about a series of
questions.
Among these we mention here only three:
the question of the Soviet specialists who were working in Albania, the question of the Palace of Culture
and the students' issue.
In order to shed light on
the truth, we publish here some of the facts and
documents
which
clarify
these
three
questions.
The
p u b l i s h e d in t h e n e w s p a p e r
D e c e m b e r 19, 1961
anti-Marxist
and
Zri
anti-Albanian
Popullit,
attacks
which
included slanders and fabrications concerning the question of the Soviet specialists w h o w e r e w o r k i n g in our
country.
O. K u s i n e n , member of the P r e s i d i u m of the C e n t r a l
Committee of the C o m m u n i s t P a r t y of the Soviet U n i o n ,
slanderously said that "the Soviet specialists in A l b a n i a ,
invited by the A l b a n i a n G o v e r n m e n t itself, w e r e expelled
by the latter f r o m A l b a n i a . " P. Pospelov, former alternate member of the P r e s i d i u m of the C e n t r a l Committee
of the Communist P a r t y of the Soviet U n i o n , w e n t s t i l l
further. H e fabricated the l i e : " D u r i n g the recent C o n gress of the P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a we encountered
a series of w h o l l y impermissible instances of open a n t i Soviet attacks by A l b a n i a n personalities, instances of a
derisive and
hostile stand
against
our
specialists,
geologists and Soviet sailors."
H a r p i n g on the same
tune, that the Soviet specialists had been " e x p e l l e d " by
the A l b a n i a n leaders, n o w after the 22nd Congress, N.
Khrushchev's propagandists t h i n k that something w i l l
come out of their slanders.
F o r truth's sake we are
obliged to refer to some facts w h i c h manifest themselves
in the course of events.
On December 21, 1960, the V i c e - C h a i r m a n of the
C o u n c i l of M i n i s t e r s of the People's R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a ,
Comrade A b d y l K l l e z i , sent the f o l l o w i n g letter to the
C h a i r m a n of the State Committee for E c o n o m i c Relations
w i t h F o r e i g n Countries under the U S S R C o u n c i l o f
Ministers, S. A. Skachkov:
" H i g h l y esteemed C o m r a d e C h a i r m a n :
On December 14, 1960, a list of the matters on w h i c h
the Government of the People's R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a r e quested the technical aid of the U S S R Government for
48
M i n i s t r y of F o r e i g n A f f a i r s
of
the
People's
Republic
of
Albania,
Abdyl
Economic
Relations
with
F o r e i g n Countries
January
20,
1961,
w h i l e our
Government
was
of
the
People's
Republic
of
Albania,
Adil
Economic
Relations w i t h F o r e i g n
the U S S R C o u n c i l of M i n i s t e r s
Countries
had decided to
A n d i n fact
T h e G o v e r n m e n t of the People's
specialists,
namely
Konstantin
Briantsev,
Semyon
Pogrebinsky a n d V l a d i m i r K u r o c h k i n , w h o displayed i n
this respect a f u l l spirit of cooperation.
As regards the second "argument", that the specialists
engaged in the compilation of the geological map had
been left w i t h o u t w o r k , it is entirely preposterous and
needs no refutation. We need o n l y to point out that the
A l b a n i a n authorities w e r e interested in the earliest
possible completion of the m a p and w e r e p a y i n g salaries
to the Soviet specialists for this purpose.
Therefore
there was no reason for the A l b a n i a n authorities to
raise obstacles, as alleged in the note of the Soviet
Embassy.
T h e real a i m of the Soviet side in fabricating the above
"arguments" is quite clearly s h o w n by the very note
of A p r i l 24, 1961 of the Soviet Embassy, the last p a r a graph of w h i c h reads:
" C o n s i d e r i n g the above, we cannot h e l p reaching the
conclusion that in the aide m e m o i r e and note of the M i n istry of F o r e i g n A f f a i r s of the People's R e p u b l i c of
A l b a n i a attempts are intentionally made to deny the i n disputable facts about the u n f r i e n d l y attitude towards
the Soviet specialists and there is s h o w n a lack of desire
on the part of the A l b a n i a n authorities to take the necessary measures w i t h a v i e w to creating n o r m a l conditions
for the w o r k of our specialists.
T h i s can be explained
only by the fact that t h e A l b a n i a n side, apparently, not
only has no interest in the aid of the Soviet specialists,
but also, by its u n f r i e n d l y actions towards them, is
directly seeking to b r i n g pressure to bear u p o n the S o viet side in order to oblige us to recall the Soviet specialists to the U S S R .
53
published
in t h e n e w s p a p e r
D e c e m b e r 20, 1961
Zri
Popullit,
of
the
out
In M a r c h - A p r i l 1959, r e p -
Soviet
side
came
to
Albania
to
"December
21".
In
April
1960,
Soviet
the
palace.
Together
with
the
designs
in
Tirana
These designs
approved by
Gosstroi
(the
State B u i l d i n g
Com-
the
Architectural-Town
Planning
Council
of
the
of the project was signed by the M i n i s t e r of Construction, J o s i f Pashko, on A p r i l 23, 1960 and handed over to
the director of the Mosproject, A. A. Osmer.
In M a y
meeting
as
newly
employed
on
the j o b and
not
yet
On
M a r c h 23,
such
manpower
circumstances,
and
machinery
ordered
and,
if
the
reduction
arrival
of
of
the
engineers,
which,
in
accordance
with
the
and to the violation of the agreement on the construction of the Palace of C u l t u r e on the part of the Soviet
Government.
N. Khrushchev's hostile attitude in b r i n g i n g a l l pressures to bear on the People's R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a and
the A l b a n i a n people is also apparent in this incident.
It
is clearly revealed by the Soviet Government's aide memoire in w h i c h K h r u s h c h e v slanderously lays the blame
on and attributes his malicious aims to others.
T h e aide
the
designing
and
construction
of
the
Palace
of
Culture.
" N a t u r a l l y , such a step of the A l b a n i a n Government
cannot but cause justified surprise, for it a l l o w e d u n i l a teral action towards the S o v i e t - A l b a n i a n agreement of
J u l y 3, 1959 on the construction of the Palace of C u l t u r e .
" N o w it has become quite clear that on this occasion
the A l b a n i a n Government has pursued entirely definite
aims, w h i c h by no means contribute to the betterment
of the relations between our countries.
It is no secret
people, i n c l u d i n g its
Such
Is it the
Albanian
to
Government,
which
was
obliged
take
3.
T H E T R U T H A B O U T T H E S T U D E N T S ' ISSUE
Article
published
in the n e w s p a p e r
D e c e m b e r 30, 1961
Zri
Popullit,
counter-revolution i n A l b a n i a .
H i s m a i n argument was
the question of the A l b a n i a n students and other A l b a nian citizens w h o w e r e s t u d y i n g in the Soviet U n i o n .
He presented the case as f o l l o w s :
65
our
and
the
Soand
" T h e A l b a n i a n leaders persecute those w i s h i n g to p r e serve the friendship between our parties and peoples,
w h i l e at the same time, in order to deceive the people,
they organize S o v i e t - A l b a n i a n friendship m o n t h .
This
happened in September.
" T h e y may say that these are their internal affairs
and that we should not interfere in them.
B u t we are
here in face of persecutions and reprisals against the
Albanians w h o defend the traditional f r i e n d s h i p w i t h the
Soviet U n i o n . A n d this concerns us directly. We cannot
remain indifferent, and we are obliged to express our
opinion".
Since the 22nd Congress certain Soviet propagandists
and their supporters have continued to slander us on the
question of the A l b a n i a n students w h o w e r e studying
i n the Soviet U n i o n .
*
ing
grief
that
many
Albanian
students
"were
not
which
the
Soviet
Union's
"friends"
in
R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a and of the A l b a n i a n
such an attitude, that such an opinion, is surprising b e cause in the logic of N. K h r u s h c h e v ' s followers there is
nothing surprising, n o t h i n g unexpected.
let
us
call
on
facts
and documents
There-
rather than
provocations
the
doors
and
of
blackmail
against
the universities
to
them,
them
on
who
the
T h r o u g h a note f r o m the M i n i s t r y of
the s t u -
international
communist
and
workers'
movement,
only 4 to 5 days before the beginning of classes, the A l banian students w e r e obliged to return to A l b a n i a .
F o r w h a t reasons, or rather under w h a t pretexts, d i d
the Soviet Government, under N. K h r u s h c h e v ' s dictate,
no longer a l l o w the A l b a n i a n students to pursue their
studies in the schools of the Soviet U n i o n ?
It is k n o w n that between the t w o governments of the
Soviet U n i o n and the People's R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a there
was concluded in J u l y 1952 an agreement on the education of the citizens of the People's R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a
at the higher c i v i l institutes of the Soviet U n i o n , stipulati n g (Article 5):
" T h e G o v e r n m e n t of the Soviet U n i o n covers the
expenses for the maintenance a n d study of the citizens
of the People's R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a at the institutions
of higher l e a r n i n g of the Soviet U n i o n " ;
and ( A r t i c l e 6):
69
on
March
16,
1960,
the
Soviet
Government
demanded a modification of the agreement and the c o n clusion of a n e w one, on a basis and conditions different
f r o m those of the 1952 agreement.
T h e Government of the People's R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a ,
taking into account the fraternal relations and close cooperation between the two countries, the specific c o n d i tions
of the People's
R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a ,
the urgent
A n d on J u n e 6, 1960,
at the scientific research institutes, took into consideration the request of the A l b a n i a n side and decided that
the conditions of the 1952 agreement remain in force."
T h u s the p r o b l e m was considered as settled and the
question closed.
T h e A l b a n i a n Government, as always, appraised this
just decision of the Soviet G o v e r n m e n t as a f r i e n d l y act
and precisely for this reason, as usual, d u r i n g the 19601961 academic year there were sent to the institutions of
higher l e a r n i n g of the Soviet U n i o n a considerable n u m ber of A l b a n i a n students and post-graduates, w h o by
August 1961 had completed their studies according to the
above-mentioned conditions.
T h e Soviet Government, however, at N. Khrushchev's
instigation, c o n t i n u i n g the repressive measures against
the People's R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a and w i t h a v i e w
to creating for our country d i f f i c u l t i e s also in the t r a i n i n g
of cadres, w e n t back on the o f f i c i a l promise it had given
to our G o v e r n m e n t on J u n e 6, 1960. T h i s is evident f r o m
the A u g u s t 26, 1961 Soviet note w h i c h , r a i s i n g again
the question of the study conditions of the A l b a n i a n s t u dents at the schools of the Soviet U n i o n and completely
ignoring the J u n e 6, 1960 o f f i c i a l communication, says:
" A s a result of the talks w h i c h took place between
the governments of the U S S R and other E u r o p e a n socialist countries, w i t h the exception of A l b a n i a , n e w
agreements have been concluded on the basis set f o r t h
in the M a r c h 16, 1960 note of the M i n i s t r y of F o r e i g n
A f f a i r s of the U S S R . A l t h o u g h almost one and a half
years have elapsed f r o m the time of the h a n d i n g over
of the note of the M i n i s t r y of F o r e i g n A f f a i r s of the
71
U S S R t o the A l b a n i a n Embassy i n M o s c o w , the A l b a n i a n Government has not thus far sent any w r i t t e n
reply to the Soviet note".
Carefully
note:
The
whole
"fault"
of
the
Albanian
W h e n d i d the verbal c o m m u n i c a -
When
the Charg d'Affaires of the People's R e p u b l i c of A l b a nia in M o s c o w asked N. P. F i r y u b i n to give h i m in w r i t ten f o r m his communication for the w i t h d r a w a l of the
staff of the Soviet Embassy in T i r a n a and the departure
of the staff of the A l b a n i a n Embassy in M o s c o w , N. P.
F i r y u b i n , on behalf of the Soviet Government, replied to
h i m that any verbal
or w r i t t e n
communication
of an
"Don't
do w h a t I do but do w h a t I say".
Therefore, one can easily see the entire falseness of
the
pretext
under
w h i c h the
72
Soviet
Government
has
In a
These
The
the schemes
of
their
enemies
whatever
the
Central
Committee
of
A l b a n i a , the Government of
the
Party
of
the People's
Labour
of
Republic
of
in
the t r a i n i n g
of
Albanian
75
cadres
in
the
Soviet
NIKITA KHRUSHCHEV
HAS MADE EFFORTS NOT TO SETTLE
BUT TO AGGRAVATE
THE DIFFERENCES
WITH OUR PARTY AND STATE
Article published in the newspaper
Zri i Popullit
March 25, 1962
80
and
of o p p o r t u n i s m
his
revisionist
conception
in
connection
with
the
has
the
directly or i n d i r e c t l y
line
of
our
Party
on
expressed
account
himself
of
its at-
rehabilitate such
Koi
Xoxe,
Panajot
Plaku
and
others
like
evidence.
by
repudiating
at the
same
time N i k i t a K h r u s h c h e v ' s proposals in regard to the question of the Y u g o s l a v revisionists and the rehabilitation of
the A l b a n i a n traitors in the service of the T i t o clique.
It
especially,
state
relationships
between
our
two
of
that
time,
M a r x i s t path.
proceeded
along
the
erroneous
anti-
following
the
Moscow
Conference
of
November
1960, the so-called " e f f o r t s " on the part of N i k i t a K h r u s h chev to normalize the relations w i t h the P a r t y of L a bour of A l b a n i a became s t i l l clearer; the credits that had
been granted to the People's R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a for its
five-year plan were suspended, the Soviet specialists w h o
were w o r k i n g i n A l b a n i a were recalled and a l l the A l banian students attending schools in the Soviet U n i o n
were chased out.
w h o , after
Welcome."
87
dictate
to
it
"...This
bringing
from
most important
question,
which
Comrade
study,
must
be
88
thoroughly
studied
and
to L e n i n i s t rules at the
1960.
Nikita
K h r u s h c h e v was
anti-Marxist
against
our
Party
and
country
which
had
with
camp,
undertaken
most
consciously
by
Nikita
Khrushchev.
P R E S S U R E A N D E F F O R T S T O D R A W T H E P L A INTO
N. KHRUSHCHEV'S PLOT AGAINST THE UNITY
OF
THE
SOCIALIST
COMMUNIST
CAMP
AND
THE
MOVEMENT
A r a d i c a l change was noted in the attitude of the Soviet leaders headed by N. K h r u s h c h e v towards the P a r t y
of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a and our c o u n t r y immediately after
89
the Bucharest M e e t i n g .
From
other
hand,
the functionaries
of the
Soviet
Embassy in T i r a n a , c a r r y i n g out N. K h r u s h c h e v ' s instructions w i t h regard to their radical change of policy towards A l b a n i a , launched a feverish attack on the M a r x i s t L e n i n i s t line of the P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a , t r i e d to
split our P a r t y and create panic and confusion a m o n g its
ranks, to separate the leaders f r o m the P a r t y and to i n cite against them the a r m y cadres and other cadres w h o
had studied in the Soviet U n i o n .
the international
communist
and
workers'
move-
the Soviet leaders, the Delegation of the P L A participating in the M o s c o w M e e t i n g , agreed to h o l d discussions
w i t h leaders of the C o m m u n i s t P a r t y of the Soviet U n i o n
on November 10 and 11, 1960, and on November 12, 1960
the entire Delegation headed by C o m r a d e E n v e r H o x h a
met N. K h r u s h c h e v and a g r o u p of Soviet leaders. F r o m
the beginning to the e n d of these meetings it was clear
that the a i m of the Soviet leaders was not to f i n d means
and methods of settling our differences but to s u b j u gate the P L A , to c o m p e l it by force to adopt the v i e w s
of N. K h r u s h c h e v ' s group, to make it give up its M a r x i s t Leninist principles.
T h e Soviet leaders d i d not retract
the slanders contained in the o f f i c i a l document they
distributed to the representatives of the 81 Parties, they
considered the pressure towards our P a r t y and the subversive activity of the officials of the Soviet Embassy in
T i r a n a as t r i v i a l , and f i n a l l y N. K h r u s h c h e v w e n t so far
as to declare that he could come to terms w i t h M a c m i l l a n
more easily t h a n w i t h the leaders of the P L A . T h a t he
can come to terms w i t h M a c m i l l a n , Eisenhower, K e n n e d y
and their lackey, T i t o , by m a k i n g compromises; concessions and f l a t t e r y is a personal credit to h i m w h i c h no
one envies.
B u t to compel the P a r t y of L a b o u r of
A l b a n i a to adopt his revisionist ways that has never
happened and can never happen.
T h e r e f o r e nothing
came of the " t a l k s " and N. K h r u s h c h e v and his c o m panions are to blame for that. T h i s was N. Khrushchev's
"second earnest 'effort' " to settle the dispute and harmonize the relations between our Parties, but in reality
it was his second earnest effort to alienate c u r P a r t y
f r o m M a r x i s m - L e n i n i s m and to subject it to his c h a u vinist dictates.
95
N . K h r u s h c h e v f o l l o w e d this f a i l u r e w i t h threats.
was, of course, to be expected.
This
He stated c y n i c a l l y that
He f o l l o w e d
Ideological differences w e r e h u r -
At the t i m e w h e n
F o r e i g n T r a d e and
of the
Khrushchev's e x a m p l e and
instigation, l a i d a l l
f r o m a b o v e " etc. t i l l
for
Foreign
Trade
of
I. Semichastny,
the
USSR,
in
Deputy Minister
conference
with
" T h e M i n i s t r y o f F o r e i g n T r a d e i s authorized t o
state to the A l b a n i a n Delegation that it is advisable
to r e t u r n later to the question of s i g n i n g the long-term
1961-1965 T r a d e A g r e e m e n t and the Agreement of
credits accorded to A l b a n i a since it is necessary to discuss these matters on a higher l e v e l . "
A n d w h e n the People's R e p u b l i c o f A l b a n i a was about
to send
to M o s c o w Comrade K o o Theodhosi,
C h a i r m a n of the C o u n c i l
Deputy
of M i n i s t e r s of the People's
R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a and Candidate M e m b e r of the P o l i t ical B u r e a u o f the C e n t r a l Committee o f the P a r t y o f L a bour of A l b a n i a , to head the E c o n o m i c Delegation and
to
conclude
the
Agreements,
the
Soviet
Government
"could
between
Practically,
this
be
our
discussed
two
meant
only
Parties
that
the
at
and
top-level
con-
Governments".
Soviet
Government
becomes
even clearer
if
we
take
into
account
T h u s , it is
clear that the Soviet leaders w e r e m a k i n g use of the question of economic assistance as a means of p u t t i n g pressure on the P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a on the eve of its
97
1961, to
This
The
H e n c e f o r t h the
. . . As
. . ."
N.
Khrushchev's group
T h e Soviet
This is
Labour
of
Albania
which
was
disturbed
by
the
undesirable
and
very
of L a b o u r of
of
created
the
Soviet
with
Union
coolness
Central
Albania
is
Committee
of
the
to
and
examine
take
the
necessary
. . . T h e P l e n u m of
Party
of
Labour
of
We place our
A n d so it ac-
of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a
and
very
far
indeed
in
committing
the
The unfor-
revisionist views
and acts
that
his
the
104
and
N.
"cannot
have
the
desired
universal
validity"
(in
other w o r d s : "a document of compromise of no v a l u e "
as N. K h r u s h c h e v labelled it in its draft f o r m in October,
1960), o n l y in this w a y can the u n i t y of the socialist
camp, w h i c h N. K h r u s h c h e v ' s a n t i - M a r x i s t group is
t r a m p l i n g under foot and seriously damaging, be m a i n tained.
N. K h r u s h c h e v and his propagandists are t r y i n g in
vain to reproach our P a r t y in a slanderous w a y w i t h
anti-Soviet tendencies.
O u r P a r t y does not confuse N.
K h r u s h c h e v ' s a n t i - M a r x i s t group w i t h the glorious
Soviet U n i o n and w i t h the f r a t e r n a l Soviet people.
To
be f r i e n d l y towards the Soviet U n i o n and l o y a l to
it does not mean to shut y o u r eyes and f o l l o w b l i n d l y
in the a n t i - M a r x i s t footsteps of N. K h r u s h c h e v even w h e n
those footsteps lead to perdition and cause great damage
to the communist movement, to the socialist camp and
to the interests and prestige of the Soviet U n i o n itself.
B y combating N . K h r u s h c h e v ' s a n t i - M a r x i s t v i e w s and
doings, the P L A fights t o safeguard A l b a n i a n - S o v i e t
friendship.
"A f r i e n d in need is a f r i e n d i n d e e d , " as a
popular A l b a n i a n saying goes. O u r P a r t y and our people
have g i v e n tangible proof, not o n l y in w o r d s but in deeds
as w e l l , that they are staunch friends of the Soviet U n i o n
and of the f r a t e r n a l Soviet people, that they have stood
and w i l l continue to stand f i r m l y by the Soviet U n i o n
at every moment and under a l l circumstances, in days of
joy and of sorrow.
T h i s has been, is and w i l l always be
our u n w a v e r i n g stand.
N.
K h r u s h c h e v ' s propagandists are n o w t r y i n g to
justify the attacks made at the 22nd Congress of the
C o m m u n i s t P a r t y of the Soviet U n i o n and a l l the subse109
KHRUSHCHEV AGAIN
IN THE ROLE OF A DEMAGOGUE,
A SLANDERER
AND A SOWER OF DISSENSION
Article published in the newspaper
Zri i Popullit
April 18, 1963
year,
our letter containing the proposal of the Central C o m mittee of the Soviet U n i o n
for
a bilateral meeting.
Later on, apparently after t h i n k i n g it over, the A l b a nian leaders sent a letter in w h i c h they speak of such
a meeting under a number of reservations and conditions.
in
Albanian-Soviet
relations.
They
try
once
THE
SO-CALLED
CASUAL
"ALBANIAN
AND
ISSUE"
ISOLATED
IS
NOT
INCIDENT
"Albanian
issue"
which
"cannot
and
But
a t r u m p e d - u p affair of K h r u s h c h e v ' s w h o wants to c o n ceal his o w n hostile acts and attitude towards the P a r t y
of L a b o u r and the People's R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a and to
115
Labour of A l b a n i a , m a i n t a i n i n g a correct M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t
attitude, was s i l e n t l y at variance w i t h t h e m on a number
of important issues, such as the stand towards J. V. S t a l i n
and his w o r k , towards the Y u g o s l a v revisionists a n d so
on. A l t h o u g h the P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a opposed in
silence K h r u s h c h e v ' s activities in a number of matters,
it w a g e d an open resolute fight against the Y u g o s l a v
revisionists and m a i n t a i n e d a clear-cut attitude towards
them as renegades f r o m M a r x i s m and enemies of socialism, thus c o m i n g into open conflict w i t h K h r u s h c h e v ' s
attempts to rehabilitate the T i t o i t e clique, to reconcile
and get close to t h e m .
K h r u s h c h e v has ever since seen
clearly enough that the P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a was
a stumbling-block in his w a y to realizing his a n t i - M a r x i s t
ends.
T h i s determined also his disguised hostile attitude
towards the P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a for its correct l i n e
of action in general and especially f o r its resolute clearcut stand towards the Titoite clique, K h r u s h c h e v ' s
f u t u r e allies. Nevertheless the so-called " A l b a n i a n issue"
had not yet come to the fore.
T h e " A l b a n i a n issue"
came up w h e n K h r u s h c h e v openly set out to split the
u n i t y of the socialist camp and of the international c o m munist movement, w h e n he strove to force his revisionist
line on t h e m by u s i n g rude and a n t i - M a r x i s t methods.
T h i s came about at the J u n e 1960 Bucharest meeting and
at the meeting of the 81 communist and w o r k e r s ' parties
in M o s c o w in N o v e m b e r of the same year w h e r e the
P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a together w i t h other fraternal
parties persistently opposed the s p l i t t i n g attempts of
K h r u s h c h e v , criticized his hazardous a n t i - M a r x i s t views,
attitude and acts, courageously u p h e l d the M a r x i s t - L e n i n ist l i n e of the international communist movement and its
117
unity.
It was f r o m here on that K h r u s h c h e v aired in
public the ideological differences between the P a r t y of
L a b o u r of A l b a n i a and his group, that K h r u s h c h e v ' s
group and their followers started the open and u n p r i n c i pled fight against the P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a , a
fight w h i c h became more and more bitter, reaching its
culmination w i t h the p u b l i c attacks f r o m the r o s t r u m of
the 22nd Congress of the C o m m u n i s t P a r t y of the Soviet
U n i o n and in the press and subsequent congresses of
certain other parties.
Thus, the so-called " A l b a n i a n issue" came into being
as an aspect of the struggle between M a r x i s m - L e n i n i s m
and revisionism, between the Parties w h i c h f o l l o w the
revolutionary line and the revisionists, K h r u s h c h e v ' s
group and their followers. In reality, therefore, this is
an issue concerning the general l i n e of the international
communist movement w i t h w h i c h K h r u s h c h e v , openly o r
in disguise, has always been at variance; it is connected
w i t h the question whether this movement w i l l develop
along the l i n e of M a r x i s m - L e n i n i s m or that of r e v i s i o n ism.
THE
PARTY
OF
LABOUR
OF
ALBANIA
HAS
COMMUNIST
MOVEMENT
The
Party
of
Labour
118
of
Albania
has
strictly
international aggressors. T h e P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a
has v i e w e d the struggle f o r peace as a f i g h t against the
imperialists, headed by the U n i t e d States, because they
are opponents of peace and it is precisely f r o m t h e m that
the danger of w a r comes. T h e P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a
has been of the opinion, and continues to believe that
peace and peaceful coexistence cannot be expected to
be offered as a gift by the imperialists. Peace and
peaceful coexistence cannot be attained by flattery and
concessions, but o n l y by determined struggle of a l l the
peace-loving forces of the w o r l d f o r c i n g this on the i m perialists.
T h e P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a has been and continues
to be in f a v o r of easing international tension and of
solving outstanding problems that are faced today, such
as disarmament, nuclear test ban, conclusion of the
peace treaty w i t h G e r m a n y and the t u r n i n g of West
B e r l i n into a free and demilitarized city, etc. T h e s o l u tion of these problems requires that meetings and talks
be held a m o n g the representatives of the various states,
but these should be combined w i t h the struggle of the
peoples as the m a i n force to oblige the imperialists to
go to these meetings and talks, so that they m a y y i e l d
concrete results.
T h e P a r t y o f L a b o u r o f A l b a n i a has v i e w e d the n a tional l i b e r a t i o n movement of the peoples against i m perialist oppression and for f r e e d o m and national independence as one of the major movements of our times
that undermines the positions of the imperialists, weakens
and narrows d o w n their sphere of action.
B u t our P a r t y
is of the o p i n i o n that the colonial system of the i m p e r i a l ists has not yet been done a w a y w i t h , that m i l l i o n s u p o n
121
D E S P I T E HIS D E M A G O G Y , K H R U S H C H E V I S
U N A B L E T O C A M O U F L A G E HIS O U T - A N D OUT REVISIONIST LINE
B u t w h a t is this l i n e w h i c h K h r u s h c h e v has striven
to force on the
international
communist
and
workers'
group
continue
to
spread
their
anti-Marxist
of
popular
and
the
Moscow
predatory
Declarations
nature of
that
"the
imperialism
has
antinot
changed", that "the A m e r i c a n imperialists are n o w e x ercising the functions of an international gendarme", that
"because of their predatory nature the imperialists cannot
free themselves f r o m the tendency to settle contradictions
in the international arena t h r o u g h w a r s " and so on and
so forth.
124
peace and of their national l i b e r a t i o n and social e m a n cipation, as warmongers w h o " a r e eager to h u r l the w o r l d
into a nuclear catastrophe", w h o w i s h to score victory
over the imperialists " t h r o u g h w a r s among states, t h r o u g h
ravage and destruction, t h r o u g h bloodshed and the death
of millions of people".
In order to make people give up their just struggle
against the imperialists, in order to paralyze the r e v o l u tionary movement and the national l i b e r a t i o n w a r of the
peoples, K h r u s h c h e v has become a v o l u n t a r y propagandist
for the p o l i c y of atomic b l a c k m a i l w h i c h the A m e r i c a n
imperialists pursue, a t h i n g w h i c h goes to show that he
is scared to death, that he has slid i n t o the m i r e of d e featism, that he has lost a l l f a i t h in the t r i u m p h of socialism and c o m m u n i s m in the w o r l d at large. Is this not
borne out by K h r u s h c h e v ' s speech to the A u s t r i a n Soviet Society on J u l y 2, 1960, w h e r e he is recorded as
saying: "If i n this w o r l d w e cannot l i v e a s the l i v i n g
beings c o u l d l i v e in Noah's A r k but begin to settle
differences among states by means of w a r w h o dislikes
socialism
and
who
dislikes
capitalism then
w e w i l l w r e c k our Noah's A r k , our terrestrial globe."
He reiterated the same ideas in 1963 w h e n speaking
at the 6th Congress of the G e r m a n Socialist U n i t y
Party.
He stated:
" A c c o r d i n g to the accounts of the
scientists, 700 to 800 m i l l i o n persons w o u l d be k i l l e d
as a result of the first attack alone.
A l l the large cities,
not o n l y of the t w o superior atomic powers the U n i t e d
States and the Soviet U n i o n but also of France, E n g land, G e r m a n y , Italy, C h i n a , J a p a n and of m a n y other
countries of the w o r l d , w o u l d be destroyed and razed to
the ground.
T h e consequences of atomic and hydrogen
129
w a r w o u l d be felt throughout the l i f e of m a n y generations of men, causing diseases, deaths and l e a d i n g to the
ugliest development of m a n . " Statements of this k i n d
abound in Khrushchev's speeches as w e l l as in the p r o p aganda materials of his group.
A n d what do a l l of these show? S u c h pessimistic and
capitulationist stands serve o n l y the imperialists and cause
great damage to the struggle of the peoples in defense of
peace. A n d t r u l y enough, w h a t good comes f r o m the
propaganda of atomic b l a c k m a i l w h i c h K h r u s h c h e v also
joins w h e n the imperialists threaten the peoples w i t h
w a r and aggression? A r e the people of the socialist
countries and the other peace-loving people to be trained
and cultivated in this spirit of defeatism, so that in case
the imperialists l a u n c h a war, they should surrender u n conditionally and hoist the w h i t e flag?
W h a t does this
have in common w i t h the M o s c o w Declarations? Is it not
demagogical for K h r u s h c h e v , therefore, to state that " w e
w i l l constrain the imperialists not to forget that if they
l a u n c h a w a r to settle by f o r c e of arms the issue of w h i c h
path m a n k i n d w i l l f o l l o w the capitalist or the socialist
this w i l l be the f i n a l w a r in w h i c h i m p e r i a l i s m w i l l be
crushed"? T h e r e is no doubt that K h r u s h c h e v ' s demagogy
and sophistry w i l l f a i l to intimidate and deceive the
M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t s and the peoples.
K h r u s h c h e v speaks a great deal about peaceful coexistence, its L e n i n i s t meaning and its practical application
in conformity w i t h the terms of the M o s c o w Declarations.
A n d , to give the d e v i l "his due", he has even stressed
recently that coexistence "presupposes u n i n t e r r u p t e d
ideological, political and economic struggle between the
two social systems, the class struggle w i t h i n the countries
130
of their leaders.
K h r u s h c h e v has said,
(Pravda,
August
12,
1960).
liberation
wars,
Khrushchev
and
his
group
in
reality m a i n t a i n the point of v i e w that peaceful coexistence and economic competition between the t w o systems
are the m a i n and more effective means for a c h i e v i n g n a tional liberation and social emancipation of the peoples.
A. R u m y a n c h e v , member of the C e n t r a l Committee of the
Communist P a r t y of the Soviet U n i o n , has said, " P e a c e f u l coexistence and that alone is the best and o n l y acceptable w a y to settle the problems of v i t a l importance
that
society
faces"
(Problems
of
Peace
and
Socialism,
N o . 1, 1962).
W i t h such a n t i - M a r x i s t views, K h r u s h c h e v has distorted the M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t conception of peaceful coexistence, on the one hand by p r o c l a i m i n g it as " t h e general
l i n e " of the f o r e i g n policy of the socialist countries, w h i l e
on the other hand, by attempting to force it "as a general
l i n e " o n the w o r l d revolutionary and l i b e r a t i o n m o v e 132
ILLUSIONS A N D OPPORTUNIST A T T I T U D E S H A V E
HAMPERED THE ACHIEVING OF GREATER RESULTS
IN THE CAUSE OF THE PEOPLES, OF PEACE A N D
OF SOCIALISM
T h e demagogy of K h r u s h c h e v ' s group, their revisionist
views and activities regarding the above issues extend
into all the other cardinal issues of the time w h i c h p r e occupy the international communist movement and the
w h o l e of m a n k i n d .
T h e y a l l prove eloquently but one
t h i n g that by openly d e f y i n g the M o s c o w Declarations,
they have caused great damage to the w h o l e international
revolutionary and liberation movement of the w o r l d .
134
ended
1961.
Towards
the
end
of
1962 on
and to strengthen his demagogy by attacking the " w a r mongering dogmatists" of the P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a
and others, by posing the pathetic question: " B u t w h y ,
do you w i s h us to settle matters by resorting to w a r ? "
It is futile for K h r u s h c h e v to slander the P a r t y of L a b o u r
of A l b a n i a and the other M a r x i s t parties.
T h e P a r t y of
Labour of A l b a n i a has never n u r t u r e d the idea that i n t e r national issues should be settled by war.
It has thought
and continues to t h i n k that there is o n l y one w a y to settle
them, namely by c a r r y i n g out to the letter the joint d e c i sions of the M o s c o w Declarations both as regards specific
cases such as that of the peace treaty w i t h G e r m a n y as
w e l l as a l l the problems that face m a n k i n d today.
This
is w h a t our P a r t y has demanded and continues to d e mand.
K h r u s h c h e v ' s demagogy and t r i c k e r y w i l l never attain
their goal, for if they d i d they w o u l d greatly jeopardize
the w h o l e international communist movement.
Therefore it is essential to point out the sore spot, to p u t
things in order, to lay bare the t r u t h w i t h courage, so
that our movement may forge ahead more p o w e r f u l l y in
order to f u l f i l l its mission in history.
T h i s is precisely
what the M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t parties and true r e v o l u t i o n aries w i l l do.
T h e l i n e of K h r u s h c h e v ' s group is f a c i n g a grave risk,
the risk of being f u l l y unmasked.
A n d it could not h a p pen otherwise.
T h e revisionist trumpeters w i l l one day
b l o w themselves hoarse and the opportunist " h e r o e s " w i l l
clash w i t h the M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t s w i t h i n the ranks of their
o w n parties and w i t h the international communist movement.
T h e i r revisionist l i n e of action, f o l l o w e d w i t h so
m u c h zeal, has brought a n u m b e r of d i f f i c u l t i e s to the r e v i 142
cannot
be
covered
up
for
long
by
demagogy
His
Pravda, as the trumpeter of anti-Stalinism. B u t K h r u s h demagogical manoeuvres do not easily and for
long deceive the B o l s h e v i k s and the Soviet people, nor
the communists and peoples of other countries.
chev's
Nevertheless
there
are
people
who
can
is even m o r e positive;
there
are
also those w h o
in conflict w i t h
their Parties,
They
The sworn
revisionists have unsheathed their daggers and are shamelessly p l a c i n g these people in a d i l e m m a : either to f o l l o w
a course of complete betrayal or to be removed f r o m
the scene as
Stalinists,
anti-Marxists,
tionalists!
143
dogmatists,
na-
trary happened. T h e M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t s , true revolutionaries and the people are daily realizing more and more
that since the question of Stalin is inseparable f r o m the
safeguarding of L e n i n i s m it is a matter of p r i m a r y i m portance and p r i n c i p l e in the fight between M a r x i s t s
and revisionists.
F o r w i t h o u t reinstating Stalin and his
work, our revolutionary movement and the cause of
M a r x i s m - L e n i n i s m can make no headway.
T h e truth
cannot be obscured, for it is a g l o w i n g light; lies, slanders
and demagogy are the weapons of plotters, the weapons
of darkness.
YUGOSLAV
REVISIONISTS
In the letter of the Central Committee of the C o m munist P a r t y of the Soviet U n i o n to the Central C o m mittee of the C o m m u n i s t P a r t y of C h i n a , a so-called
" A l b a n i a n q u e s t i o n " is not o n l y mentioned but placed
on the same l e v e l w i t h the Y u g o s l a v question. In other
words, the People's R e p u b l i c of A l b a n i a is equated w i t h
Titoite Y u g o s l a v i a and the P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a
w i t h the renegade clique of Belgrade.
It is a k n o w n fact that K h r u s h c h e v has persistently
pursued the l i n e of approach, of a f f i l i a t i o n and complete
union,
of
all-round
collaboration
towards
Yugoslavia,
A g a i n e m p t y words,
velopment of events and the attitude of T i t o i t e Y u g o slavia towards various international issues has noticed
that the attitude of the Y u g o s l a v revisionists has had in
each and every instance nothing in c o m m o n w i t h the attitude of the socialist countries.
T h i s is borne out by
the
in w h i c h
the
In w h a t
matters does the policy of the Y u g o s l a v revisionist r e n egade c l i q u e " c o i n c i d e " w i t h the foreign policy of the
socialist countries?
R e p u b l i c of
Hungary?
Or are the Y u g o s l a v
W h e n the
All facts show that by t r a m p l i n g underfoot the M o s cow Declarations K h r u s h c h e v ' s group have not only
given up exposing the Y u g o s l a v revisionists but have
long since pursued the l i n e of complete understanding,
f o r m i n g in this w a y a joint revisionist front w i t h them.
A n d this has come about not because the T i t o clique has
" c h a n g e d " but because the attitude of K h r u s h c h e v and
his group has changed to positions of revisionism, of a n t i M a r x i s m . T h i s is clearly borne out by their stand towards
another thesis of the M o s c o w Declarations, namely, towards the thesis that specifies revisionism as the p r i n cipal menace to the international communist and w o r k ers' movement.
W i t h regard to this, too, K h r u s h c h e v claims that he
abides by the M o s c o w Declarations and that he even
wages a struggle on two fronts, against revisionism and
against dogmatism. B u t w h a t are the facts? It is w e l l
k n o w n that in addition to the Y u g o s l a v renegade r e v i sionist clique, the leaders of the Italian C o m m u n i s t Party,
headed by T o g l i a t t i , have also embraced revisionist views
that have f o u n d expression in numerous o f f i c i a l d o c u ments and w r i t i n g s of theirs. K h r u s h c h e v and his group
have not uttered a single w o r d of reproach for these
opportunist views; on the contrary, they have smiled
upon and lost no opportunity to praise the revisionist
line of T o g l i a t t i and his companions, describing it as an
example of "creative M a r x i s m " .
A n o t h e r of the ugliest
manifestations of m o d e r n revisionism is Dange's group
in India, w h o have become obedient servitors of the most
reactionary circles of the Indian bourgeoisie and have
crossed over to open betrayal and social chauvinism.
K h r u s h c h e v and his group have not uttered a single w o r d
149
156
in passing,
that
workers'
parties.
Therefore the
above
letter
of
rejected as unacceptable.
It is f u r t h e r
of disdain and of disregard towards our P a r t y , considering it not as an equal and independent party, but as an
158
the P a r t y of L a b o u r and the People's R e p u b l i c of A l bania can pass so easily, y o u are gravely m i s t a k e n !
B u t K h r u s h c h e v and his group are not sincerely i n terested in talks and in the settlement of differences w i t h
the P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a . T h i s is evident also f r o m
the fact that even w h e n speaking of talks and the settlement of differences, the Soviet leaders continue their
attacks and calumnies against the P a r t y of L a b o u r of
Albania.
T h e y accuse the A l b a n i a n leaders of c o n t i n u i n g " t h e i r s p l i t t i n g activities" and " l a u n c h i n g slanderous
attacks" against the C o m m u n i s t P a r t y and the people of
the Soviet U n i o n .
By accusing the P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a as splitters,
K h r u s h c h e v ' s g r o u p are t r y i n g to cover up the tracks of
their o w n s p l i t t i n g activities.
W h a t does K h r u s h c h e v
mean by the " s p l i t t i n g a c t i v i t i e s " of the A l b a n i a n leaders?
C a n the fact that the P a r t y of L a b o u r of A l b a n i a refused
to submit to K h r u s h c h e v ' s dictates at the Bucharest and
the M o s c o w meetings, that it had the courage to express
its o w n v i e w s and to criticize K h r u s h c h e v ' s a n t i - M a r x i s t
v i e w s and acts at a meeting of the international c o m munists, be called splitting activities, w h i l e Khrushchev's
plots against fraternal M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t parties behind
their backs and the endeavors to inveigle other Parties
into these plots through threats and pressures are to be
called M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t acts f a v o r i n g u n i t y ?
W h y are
we to praise as " M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t elasticity" K h r u s h c h e v ' s
outright violation of the M o s c o w Declarations, w h i l e the
observance of these documents by the P a r t y of L a b o u r of
A l b a n i a and by other M a r x i s t - L e n i n i s t parties should be
called splitting activities?
No, n o ! it is not the P a r t y of
L a b o u r of A l b a n i a but K h r u s h c h e v ' s g r o u p that have
161