Stenographic records of a meeting of Soviet Communist Party officials and activists in the regions bordering the People’s Republic of China. They respond to news of the meeting between Aleksei Kosygin and Zhou Enlai in Beijing on 11 September1969. Although they all applauded Kosygin’s meeting with Zhou, some speakers noted that little change in the border situation had been observed since their encounter eleven days before. Relations along the border remained tense with regular incursions from Chinese citizens into Soviet territory.
September 22, 1969
Information Report Sent by Khabarovskiy Kray (Territory) Committee to CPSU CC
This document was made possible with support from Leon Levy Foundation
Proletariat of all countries, unite!
COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE SOVIET UNION
KHABAROVSKIY KRAY
COMMITTEE
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
City of Khabarovsk
(Sent 9/22/69)
CENTRAL COMMITTEE
OF THE CPSU
DEPARTMENT OF
ORGANIZATIONAL-PARTY WORK
INFORMATION
regarding the familiarization of the electoral aktiv of the Khabarovskiy Kray party organization with the Information from the CC CPSU about the trip by the Soviet party-governmental delegation to Hanoi and comrade A.N. Kosygin’s discussion with Zhou Enlai on 11 September 1969
On 22 September 1969 a regional meeting of the party electoral aktiv was held to acquaint them with the Information from the CC CPSU regarding the trip by the Soviet party-governmental delegation to Hanoi and comrade A.N. Kosygin’s discussion with Zhou Enlai on 11 September 1969.
The First Secretary of the regional party committee read the Information from the CC CPSU.
7 people spoke at the meeting. The participants noted with great satisfaction that our party, its Central Committee, persistently and consistently, in the spirit of the decisions of the Moscow Conference of Communist and Workers’ parties [in June 1969], take a hard line on strengthening of the peace and security of peoples, consolidating the ranks of the international communist movement, and overcoming the difficulties and disagreements within it. They [the members of the aktiv] unanimously approved the initiative of the CC CPSU and the Soviet government, directed at taking concrete measures to normalize Soviet-Chinese relations, settle disputed issues through negotiations and the organization of the meeting in Peking.
The Secretary of the Khabarovsk city committee of the CPSU V.S. Pasternak said in his remarks:
“The communists and all the workers of the city were particularly attentive to the news of the meeting in Beijing between the president of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, A.N. Kosygin, and the president of the State Council of the PRC, Zhou Enlai. Khabarovsk residents always steadfastly follow the development of Soviet-Chinese relations, [and] angrily judge the great power, adventuristic course of the PRC leaders. The armed raids by the Maoists on the Soviet-Chinese border, the malicious slander against our Soviet people, our state, the Communist party, deeply trouble the workers of our city.
The initiative by the CC CPSU and the Soviet government to stabilize Soviet-Chinese relations and organize a meeting in Beijing in such a difficult current situation once again vividly affirms the wise policy of our party to resolve disputed issues by peaceful means.
The city party organization aims to improve the ideological work among the workers in every possible way, to mobilize the collectives of firms, construction companies, and institutions to fulfill socialist responsibilities in a manner worthy of the meeting in honor of the 100th anniversary of V.I. Lenin’s birth.”
I.P. Kadochnikov, member of the regional committee of the CPSU, a milling cutter at the Khabarovsk heating equipment plant, stated:
“We cannot passively observe the course of events in China, where the leaders increasingly aggravate relations with our country and the situation on the Soviet-Chinese border. We, Far Easterners, eagerly approve the practical steps by our party and government towards the normalization of Soviet-Chinese relations.
Our workers work calmly, confident in their own strength and in the durability of the Soviet borders. I feel this every day, every hour, working among with the collective of many thousands at the plant.”
The rector of the Khabarovsk pedagogical institute, N.V. Sverdlov, noted:
“The Information concisely and clearly states all the proposals by the Soviet Union to settle the disputes and conflicts in Soviet-Chinese relations and to improve the situation on the Soviet-Chinese border and expand economic ties between our countries. These timely, reasonable, and fair proposals, which stem from our mutual interests, combine firmness and flexibility of policy, and, most importantly, are capable of fostering the correct resolution of intergovernmental disputes, of course, under circumstances when the other side expresses a similar understanding of the situation and the desire to find a way out of it.”
E.A. Plotkin, member of the regional party committee of the CPSU, director of the construction bureau of the Khabarovsk Energomash plant, stated:
“The trip to Beijing by the president of the Council of Ministers, A.N. Kosygin, was very brief, but we understood how important this meeting was for the Soviet and Chinese peoples. The search for paths to stabilization, the reasonable resolution of foreign policy questions, which the Central Committee of the CPSU and our government put forth meet with approval at the plant.”
The head of the political department of the Krasnoznamennyi border district, I.K. Bokan’, expressed the thoughts and feelings of the border guards as follows:
“The troops of the Krasnoznamennyi Far Eastern border district reacted to the report of the meeting between the president of the Soviet of Ministers of the USSR, comrade A.N. Kosygin, with the premier of the State Council of the PRC, Zhou Enlai, with feelings of deep understanding and satisfaction and consider that this discussion was useful for both sides. One of the central questions at this meeting was the question of the mitigation of the situation on the Soviet-Chinese border.
Relations along the border exemplify the relations between the states. The Maoists’ provocative violations of the Soviet-Chinese border and their intervention in Soviet territory attest to the adventuristic policy of the Chinese leadership, their aim to decide disputed questions through force.
The border forces in the district have at their disposal all that is necessary to fulfill their sacred duty before the Fatherland in an exemplary way. In these days of preparation for the 100th anniversary of the V.I. Lenin’s birth, we will demonstrate our level of decisiveness by increasing the military preparedness of the troops in order to honorably merit the great trust of the party, government, and people, as well as of the military forces in the Army and Navy, to guarantee the inviolability of the Far Eastern border of our beloved Motherland.”
The following resolution was approved by the participants in the meeting:
1. Completely and fully approve the initiative by the CC CPSU and the Soviet government about the meeting between the president of the Council of Ministers of the USSR A.N. Kosygin and the premier of the State Council of the PRC Zhou Enlai, aimed at ameliorating the state of relations between the USSR and China, and consider that this meeting was useful.
2. Unanimously support the actions of the CC CPSU and the Soviet government, directed at normalizing relations with China, and rebuffing any encroachments by the Chinese leadership on the interests of our state, on the interests of our people.
Secretary of the Khabarovsk (A. Shitikov)
regional committee of the CPSU
Soviet Communist Party officials and activists in the regions bordering the People’s Republic of China respond to the news of Aleksei Kosygin’s 11 September 1969 meeting with Zhou Enlai in Beijing and efforts to defuse the growing rupture with China.
Author(s):
Associated Places
Associated Topics
Subjects Discussed
Related Documents
Document Information
Source
Original Archive
Rights
The History and Public Policy Program welcomes reuse of Digital Archive materials for research and educational purposes. Some documents may be subject to copyright, which is retained by the rights holders in accordance with US and international copyright laws. When possible, rights holders have been contacted for permission to reproduce their materials.
To enquire about this document's rights status or request permission for commercial use, please contact the History and Public Policy Program at HAPP@wilsoncenter.org.