Russia and China, by J.V. Davidson-Houston

[p019] Russia and China—From the Huns to Mao Tse-tung. By J. V. Davidson- Houston, Robert Hale Ltd., London, 2ls. There is at the moment what might be called a boom in books on China. The market for this type of book has increased in both America and the UK. Also several translations from French works on China are being made and find a big market abroad. The quality of the books varies from the authors sponsored by grants from foundations (particularly in America) to the travelogues that are sweeping the market. It is interesting that the books written by authors outside China are of a higher standard generally than those written as a result of a visit. Dr. Chao, in his study of the agrarian programmes of the Chinese Communist Party, has contributed an excellent work to the 1960 Chinese library. His historical material from the 1927 period, the Soviet decade (1930s), and the programme of the Party after the Revolution is well documented and factual, without imposing anywhere the author’s own opinions. The most informative section is on current agrarian policy, with some real meat on the communes. Most of Dr. Chao’s material is drawn from official sources but is presented self- critically. He confirms the viewpoint that the communes in their present form are only an administrative structure imposed on the countryside and in no way represent a ‘leap’ from primitive agricultural methods to mechanized farming. For instance, the lowest organ of the commune, i.e., the ‘ production team’, corresponds to the early mutual aid team, the next level, i.e., the ‘ production brigade’, likewise is only a disguised form of Agricultural Producers’ Co-operative, while the commune itself replaces the State Administrative Unit. The book is completed with a good appendix giving translations of important documents on agrarian matters. Verdict: recommended. Another excellent study is Allen Whiting on China’s role in the Korean war. What is interesting for socialists is the place that the United Nations had in the military and diplomatic actions of the imperialists and the Soviet Union and China. The United Nations Organization is exposed as a agency of the foreign policy of US imperialism. The fact that a war was waged to ‘ defend Freedom’s frontier’ (as Dulles put it), with the Labour bureaucrats of this country jumping on the anti-North 57 Book Reviews Korean wagon as devotedly as any- body else, and the recent overthrow of Syngman Rhee which exposed him him for what he was—a corrupt oppressor of even basic human rights, should show every socialist just what sort of ‘ world government’ U N O is. Unfortunately the role of UNO is still not understood by all socialists. Korea was important for US imperialism as a military base on the Asian continent. The Soviet Union is only 100 miles from the North Korean border and the road from Japan through Korea to the rich industrial province of Manchuria was of strategic value to the Pentagon. For North Korea, with US forces so close to the borders and the possi- bility of armed intervention from teactionaries in South Kiorea, the control of the Korean peninsular was of strategic importance also. One thing that Whiting brings out is the comic-opera diplomacy at UNO, of which both the Soviet Union and China were guilty. Because US imperialism ‘recognized’ only Chiang Kai-shek’s regime on Formosa and dutifully accorded Chiang a seat in UNO?’s security council, the Soviet Union boycotted the Council for months. In their absence the US delegate pushed through the O.K. for intervention in Korea at the start of hostilities, thus covering up for the military actions of the US. -: This confused the issue all over the world. After the UN entry into the Korean war, Malik, the Soviet Union’s delegate, returned to the Security Council, with nothing gained! Meanwhile China was trying its hest to get into U NO. The early advances of the North Korean armies were halted at Pusan by lack of military material to give the final push to the port itself. Thus US

[p020] - cannot be 38 imperialism held the port and spent some months building up troops, etc. With the Inchon landings and a drive from Pusan the North Korean offensive was broken. Near the Yalu, China entered the war in defence of its borders. But again the war materials were not forthcoming from the Soviet Union, which had them. Heroic actions by the People’s Liberation Army and the North Koreans could not compensate for a lack of heavy artillery and bomber aircraft. Also, China main- taimed its best amphibious troops opposite Formosa, troops which could have been decisive in landings behind the US lines. The conclusion from the book is that some heavy artillery at Pusan would have decided the issue in the first year, or a combination of artillery and bomber aircraft in the second year. The Soviet Union could have supplied this; instead, nearly four years of bloody indecisive war at great cost to China and North Korea, four years of diplomatic ‘warfare’ at UNO, and an eventual conclusion substantially the same as the situation in 1950 when it began. Two books for lighter reading, but still informative, are