Emperor of the Blue Ants
By George Raloczi-Horvath
Doubleday & Co., New York, 1963
393 pp., $5.75
Reviewed by Charles C. Clayton
This new biography of Mao Tse-tung depicts the ruler of Communist China as one of the world's great megalomaniacs, comparable in history to Napoleon or Hitler, or in Chinese history to the ruthless Chin Emperor Shih Huang Ti. In fact, it is the author's conclusion that Mao now has lost all touch with reality and is suffering from illusions of power.
The author is a Hungarian refugee who has made himself an authority on the Communist bloc. It is his thesis that during most of the period when Mao rose to power in China, the policy of the United States was predicated on the false assumption of full cooperation between Moscow and the Chinese Communists. It was this false premise that led to the fatal errors in America's China policy.
However, Raloczi-Horvath insists that Mao never had any intention of accepting direction from the Kremlin. He writes: "From 1927 until 1943 when the Comintern was dissolved, the Chinese Communist party did not carry out Comintern directions. Red China never joined the Communist bloc."
In the author's eyes, Mao was too egotistic and too national-minded ever to be willing to accept dictation from either Stalin or Khrushchev. In this biography Mao emerges as a conceited and ruthless revolutionary who reciprocated the resentment and hostility of Russia's leaders. The author suggests that there never was any basic solidarity between the Russian and the Chinese Communists—a conclusion which seems fairly obvious in the light of the recent relations between the two strongholds of Communism.
It is the author's contention that the split between Moscow and Peiping can be traced back more than a decade and that current developments are only a manifestation of the earlier cleavage. He suggests that Stalin dictated the Korean venture, both to involve the United States in a war in Asia and in the hope that in the conflict Mao could be overthrown and replaced by someone who could be controlled from Moscow. By the same reasoning, he insists that the Chinese Communists briefly backed the Hungarian revolt in the hope that the United States would come to the Hungarians rescue and involve Russia in a war that might upset Stalin.
Such assumptions are intriguing, but they must be substantiated by more convincing evidence than is now available. On the subject of the Chinese people, the author is on firmer ground. He believes that they cannot be held responsible for the acts of Mao and his dictatorial regime. However, he is on shaky ground in his conclusion that the way to overthrown Mao is to accept Red China in the family of nations and open the channels of free trade.
As a portrait of the undisputed ruler of the mainland of China, this is a provocative biography. It underscores the traits of character that have brought Mao to power, and which will eventually defeat him. It reveals him, not as a superman, but as a supreme egotist who dreams of world power, but who like his predecessors in history is doomed to defeat and failure.
CHINA'S CULTURAL DIPLOMACY
By Herbert Passin
Frederick A. Praeger, New York
131 pages.
Reviewed by Geraldine Fitch.
The slender volume by Herbert Passin, professor of sociology at Columbia University, is not for popular reading. It is a compact and useful monograph—thoroughly documented—on the experiences of many countries in cultural exchanges with Communist China. It covers the period to mid-1960 and in some cases a bit further, but the Moscow-Peiping rift, the shifts within the Communist bloc resulting therefrom, and the rapidly deteriorating internal situation in China are not here. Footnotes can be bypassed in whole or in part in many books. Not in this. The footnotes give specific information, such as the books and articles written by visitors to Red China, often with spicy comments. Indeed, some may find the footnotes the most interesting part of the book.
Since 1949, the Peiping regime has been engaged in a sustained and massive program of cultural diplomacy to make friends and influence people. Probably from 75,000 to 100,000 persons have visited Red China, and perhaps half that number of Chinese have gone abroad, mostly in delegations. The visitors have come from 122 countries and "regions," most from the Communist bloc but many from free Asia, in 1,500 delegations and groups. Most of the Chinese go to countries of the Communist bloc, but also to South and Southeast Asia. More than 400 such groups have participated in international sports, drama and film festivals, musical contests, exhibitions and activities to commemorate famous persons in cultural history.
Take the year 1956. A total of 5,200 foreigners from 75 countries visited Red China. This included 543 trade unionists from 43 countries. Japan led (with 247 in a single group), the Soviet Union came second, and an Arab workers' group third. Trade unionists came that year for the first time from Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Peru, and West Africa. There were smaller groups of youth, of scientists, of writers and artists. Two thousand Chinese students went abroad to study, and at least 700 came from abroad to study in China. The Chinese Reds sent 21 kinds of exhibits to 24 countries.
This cultural exchange varied in accordance with the political climate of China. During the "hundred flowers" period, restrictions were relaxed. In the anti-rightist period which followed, it was difficult to visit Communist China. During the Suez crisis, the number of Arab visitors increased markedly. After crises in Cuba and Africa, the numbers of Cubans, Latin Americans, and Africans rose sharply.
Scholars of renown (greatly sought after by the Red Chinese) visit the mainland, but usually in technical delegations, medical or scientific, or as "peace" delegates. Except for a few Communist sympathizers (such as Dr. Joseph Needham), scholars rarely find opportunity to do any real scholarly research. Either they are not admitted for a long enough period, receive no cooperation, or are denied materials except for official reports. Even though French intellectual and academic circles are extremely friendly toward Communist China, resulting in many "friendship" missions to the mainland, there is very little serious scholarly research or academic exchange. With the exception of a few persons regarded as "reliable" friends, i.e. Edgar Snow, persons who know China well, speak the language, and can make independent and comparative judgments are excluded.
Since the conquest of Tibet, many of the persons who were lavish in their praise and uncritical in their estimate of Red China have put forth a different view. This and the border conflict have greatly changed Indian opinion. Most of the students from India who went to Red China for study were either pro-Communist or sympathetic to the regime. Now, recalling the doctrinarism, the thought control, the universal spying, their isolation from Chinese students, and the obtrusive militarism, most of them have changed their minds. Many visitors had a favorable impression at first but absorbed contrary impressions that were brought out by later circumstances. Many, of course, think they have "seen with my own eyes" and remain ardent apologists for Communist China.
On the other hand, there have been keen Indian observers who were dissenters from the first. Journalists such as Frank Moraes and Raja Hutheesingh (brother-in-law of Mr. Nehru), or trade unionists such as Shastri and the population expert, S. Chandrasekhar, or Mukherjee (who said many in his delegation did not know that India had bigger dams or river valley projects than they saw in China)— these were not taken in. The number and quality of Indian delegations have declined, so it is mostly the Communist sympathizers who visit the mainland today.
That same year of 1956 saw six organized delegations from Australia to Red China, and four from Red China to Australia. The same numbers held for New Zealand. The Australian Communist Party is stronger than its counterparts in Canada and the United States and more influential in politics, trade unions, and university life. Two Australian newsmen, Wilfred Burchett and Alan Winnington, remain in Red China, favored the Communists in the Korean War, and even advise the (Red) Foreign Ministry in Peiping. At least one medical group went from Australia for non-political study. Few scholarly groups have gone, and they have been well controlled. Church groups have usually been deceived into believing there is "freedom of religion" (as guaranteed in the Communist constitution). They worship in a Shanghai church filled to overflowing, unaware that of 250 churches there in the old days, only eight remain open. Four MP's led by Leslie Haylen returned full of praise for the regime. Dr. Richard Walker has written of these groups under the caption: "Australians in Wonderland".
East Germany is very important to Red China. The value of East German deliveries is almost double that of all Soviet satellites put together. The Red Chinese are very anxious to have East Germany in the pro-Peiping bloc, to have the benefits of its industrial program, and to have its support in their intra-bloc ideological dispute.
No Sinologist from West Germany has gone to Communist China. Four were invited in 1958, but after passports were obtained and preparations advanced, the invitation was withdrawn. Germany had a long and distinguished tradition of Sinological study and research before the war, with German academic centers in Peiping and Nanking, and branches of the Chinese Institute of Frankfort in many Chinese cities.
Objective throughout, the author comes to several conclusions in his final chapter. He says when it is learned that an applicant for visitor's visa has been in Red China before and knows the language, he often is turned down. (This was true in 1960 of an expert on Oriental art, Walter Exner, who wanted to take the Tun-Huang Caves' exhibit to Germany.) Passin also says: "Many acute observers (think) more information can be obtained in Hong Kong than in the mainland." This is because all official radio broadcasts are monitored, all significant material is translated from Communist newspapers, and one may interview hundreds of refugees still fleeing the mainland, who alone are free to speak the truth.
Mr. Passin shows how most groups and even individuals are controlled. They think they have freedom of movement and observation because they are courteously asked: "What field are you most interested in? What would you like to see? Whom would you like to meet?" Some visitors propose substitutes for the suggested places, but the Red Chinese are prepared with alternatives, too. If it is not desirable that the visitor see someone, the Communists stall. Each day they say, "We are contacting .... " The days go by. Time is up.
However, many visitors are flattered by the VIP treatment they get. Some think they have managed to get off the beaten path, only to learn later that others have seen the same "unusual" but pre-selected places. Most tours are so full of receptions, meetings, briefings, exhibits, cultural events, and sightseeing that visitors have no time for independent walks or talks. There is always a designated guide.
The author is not against visits to Red China. He still thinks it is better to see with one's own eyes, whether the result is favorable or unfavorable, but the difficulties of getting at the real state of affairs are almost insurmountable. "Every effort is made", he says "to protect (the visitor) from direct contact with the people." Those who are seen, as Robert Loh revealed after his escape, dare not tell the facts, because of reprisals against them or their families. As Loh put it after many staged interviews, "My job was to save my neck." He added, "I do not see how any really intelligent foreigner can expect to have a private conversation with anyone on the mainland of China today."