Basic HTML Version
sians developed nuclear weapons.
Tbere were two superpowe rs. We
had a bipolar world. Ove r the years,
three additional power centers have
emerged. Japan and Westem Europe
certainly are giant economic powers,
and China, by virtue of its size, can
be considered another powe r center.
How do you view the world's power
balance now?
A.
My picture is that we have two
triangles, and the only power par–
ticipating in both triangles is the
United States. First there is the big
triangle - the United States. China
and Russ ia. Then t he re is the
smaller triangle consisting of the
United States, Japan and Europe.
T his latter triangle I consider very
important, because this is a triangle
in which we can - if we agree - do
something. We cannot inftuence Pe–
king. We cannot infiuence Moscow.
But Washington, Brussels and To–
kyo are more or less free in their
decisions. If we manage to create
out of this relationship a functioni ng
triangle, then it would not be so
dangerous if the Red Giants moved
closer together again within the big
triangle. But misunderstandings, as
the "Nixon shock," would have to
be avoided and the economic issues
between the three, which are very
serious, would have to be solved or
at leas t mi tigated.
I would consider the Sino-Sovie t
quarrel not as a permanent phe–
nomenon, but as something that is a
phase and will pass. Therefore the
small triangle (Japan, Europe,
U.S.A.) shouJd be developed in the
meantime. with all its combined en–
ergy.
Q .
How long bave you been actively
involved
in
s tudying the relationsbips
of Russia and China - especially
China - with the rest of the world?
A.
To name a precise date, it was in
1926 when I made up my mind -
together with my professor at the
University of Berlín - to work for a
Ph.D. degree with a disserta tion that
dealt with Russian, Chinese and
14
Japanese relations. So that would
make it 47 years.
In 1929, that is 3 years after the
start of that research. 1 visited the
Soviet Union for the first time as
weU as China and Manchuria (a
part of China at that time). That
was 44 years ago. I have lived over
these 44 years more than
5
years in
Russia and more than
5
years in
and his interpretation of communism
on the one hand and tbe Soviet
brand of communism on the otber,
do you see in the future any healing
of tba t dialectical breacb?
A .
1 see one event coming up
sooner or later, the death of Mao.
The ideological hosti lity is, to a
good deal, based upon the person
and views of Mao. Whether
~~The
enormous numbers
ofJapanese businessmen
with portfolios al/ over
Southeast Asia make
people think ofa
Japanese economic
.
.
,,
lnVaSIOn.
China. I traveled over large parts of
China , but during the longes t
stretch I lived in Shanghai.
Q.
With tbis perspective of history,
what do you feel is the real reason
for the conftict tbat now exists a long
the Sino-Soviet border?
A.
My persona l thesis is that there
would be no contlict on the bordee if
t h e Russians a nd th e Chinese
agreed on essentia ls. The Germans
and the French fought each other
for a thousand years and every incb
of that border seemed terribly im–
portant and was soaked with blood.
But now the Germans and the
French agree on essentials, on
building a European community.
The border has therefore entirely
lost its significance.
As long as Sino-Soviet tension is
as strong as it is now, there will be
fights even for ridicuJously small is–
lands on which nobody lives. But if
they should agree on essentials, then
1 think that there, also, the border
issue would lose its bitterness.
Q .
In view of the great chasm or
difference of opinion between Mao
Ploin Truth
Maoism, which is very mucb anti–
Soviet communism, will continue
after Mao is a question nobody can
answer. I assume that it will con–
tinue. But I would also think that it
would be less hostile to the Soviet
Union. 1 imagine an improvement
of Sino-Soviet relat ions in the
period after Mao.
Q .
Mao is, of course, getting quite
old. Premier Chou En-lai is a lso ad–
vanced in years - as well as most of
the top leadership in Peking. Do you
think Mao has indelibly stamped bis
ideology on the Chinese today? Or
could there be a major sbift in
China's foreign policy after tbeir
passing?
A.
My imagination into the future
only just reaches as long as Mao
and Chou En-Jai act on the world
stage. Pa rticularly Chou En-lai , who
is responsible for the day-by-day
political decisions - whether to
have Nixon invited or not, or
whether or not to get into the
United Nations. ALI this is, 1 think.
not a major concern of Mao, but the
dai ly work of Chou En-lai. Once
PLAIN TRUTH November 1973
.