STALIN & CHAIRMAN MAO

When generals (or politicians) run out of ideas on how to win a fight, they are apt to lean heavily on the hope that the enemy will collapse from some weakness in his own ranks. U.S. foreign policy strategists comfort themselves with just such a hope. Secretary of State Dean Acheson has called Tito's defection from Moscow the most hopeful development in the battle between Russia and the West; what is implied is that Yugoslavia's Tito--and future Titos elsewhere--may do the U.S.'s job of defeating Communism. U.S. policymakers particularly cherish the notion that Mao Tse-tung will pull a Tito, and at least partly undo the greatest political disaster which the West (largely because of the blindness and timidity of U.S. policy) has suffered in the 20th Century, i.e., the passing of 450 minion Chinese under the sway of Moscow.

Last week the Mao-is-a-Tito theory was strongly back in the news, and calling for serious attention. If Red China and Red Russia are indeed having a falling out--or even if there is a serious probability that they will have one--U.S. policy should in that case do everything to widen the breach. The danger: the U.S. may let itself be talked into softening its stand against Mao without solid evidence that Mao is breaking away. If that happens, all Asia might go the way of China.

Is there any solid evidence of trouble between Mao and Stalin?

Tokyo's Hope. Two influential sources last week said yes. General Ridgway's headquarters in Tokyo put out a statement designed to show a cleavage between Moscow and Peking. Russia., said the statement, had inveigled the Chinese into the Korean war in order "to slash the strength of China . . . because a strong China on Russia's southern frontier is the Kremlin's nightmare . . . China fought and bled while Russia looked on. To Mao Tse-tung this could hardly look like bosom comradeship ... It may mean China eventually goes the way of Yugoslavia . . . The Reds have been so busy looking for cracks in the structure of the democracies they have not noticed the perch they are sitting on is swaying and slowly crumbling . . . They cannot survive."

The Ridgway statement did not report a situation; it expressed a hope, and its tone and content strongly suggested that it is an effort by some psychological warfare strategists to make a split where there is none.

China & Czechoslovakia. Last week's second report of an impending Mao-Stalin divorce was more thorough, and was certainly no move in psychological warfare. It came from Columnists Joseph and Stewart Alsop, close followers of the State Department's foreign policy line, whose influential column runs in the New York Herald Tribune and nearly 200 other U.S. papers. The Alsops' evidence of what they called "serious trouble" between Moscow and Peking:

P:Communist Chinese speeches, articles and slogans mention Comrade Stalin much less frequently than Chairman Mao.

P:Recent articles by Chinese Communist bigwigs say, among other things, that Chairman Mao has started a new kind of Communist revolution in China which is "a new contribution to the treasury of Marxism-Leninism . . . The classic type of revolution in imperialist countries was the October Revolution [in Russia]. The classic type of revolution in colonial and semi-colonial countries is the Chinese revolution."

From this, the Alsops conclude that Chairman Mao considers himself "the equal, and in an ideological sense the superior of Joseph Stalin," that China will not suffer herself to be treated as a satellite, and that "Mao is in effect saying to Stalin: 'Europe is yours. But Asia is mine. Keep out.' "

The Alsops' clincher: "Imagine, then, that Klement Gottwald, Communist President of satellite Czechoslovakia, suddenly announces 'the Gottwald theory of revolution,' hailing his 'theory' as the greatest contribution to Marxist doctrine since Lenin's death" (which Mao does not say even in the Alsops' column).

Vice President for Asia? No one outside the Communist world can ever be certain how its devious balances of power stand. But such facts, signs & portents as are available on China flatly contradict the Alsop thesis.

P:From all the evidence, Stalin has no intention of treating Mao Tse-tung as a Gottwald or of mistaking China for Czechoslovakia. China is different not only because of her size, but because she has her own army and police. This fact, as Tito's Yugoslavia showed, may indeed encourage defection from Moscow. But the same fact also works to make Stalin particularly careful to prevent another Titoist split, which would be a major calamity for World Communism. By all appearances, the Russians have encouraged Communist China to believe that it enjoys a special status, have given Peking some genuine independence.

P:Mao has indeed developed his own style of Red revolution--a special model for Asia. The gist: In underdeveloped countries without much industry, Communism cannot work through the industrial proletariat as it did in Russia and the West, but must win power through arming and organizing the peasants. From 1927-30, Mao fought for this concept against the orthodox type of Marxism represented by his rival Li Lisan. With specific approval of Stalin, Mao won the fight.

P:There is evidence that Stalin is more than satisfied to give Mao a reasonably free hand as Vice President-in-charge-of-Asia within the great Communist corporation--as long as he can be sure that Mao will not try to go into business for himself. Stalin knows very well that for a long time Mao will be in no position to do that--and Mao knows it too. As the Korean war has shown, Communist China desperately needs economic and military help from Soviet Russia.

The possibility of a split between Mao and Stalin cannot be entirely ruled out. But it would be a terribly dangerous gamble for the U.S. to let itself be guided by hope for such a split. For Mao to rebel against Stalin, or for Stalin to force Mao into a rebellion, would be a blunder bordering on insanity. Both Mao and Stalin have made big mistakes before, but there is little in their long, successful careers to indicate that they are likely to commit such a whopper.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.