Kremlinology revisited: the nuances of reporting on China in the Eastern bloc press

Abstract

Based on the assumption that the media was part of the intra-bloc diplomacy in eastern Europe, we explore the official portrayal of China in the East German, Hungarian and Polish press. Focusing on the Great Leap Forward, Sino-Indian War and Cultural Revolution, we analyse not only what was reported, but also how news were structured and what language was used. Disparities indicate that the uncertainty of future relations between Moscow and Beijing, combined with disagreements between Moscow and its satellites, forced the leaderships to adapt to new circumstances but simultaneously created leeway for their own political agendas.

Keywords:

• China
• Soviet Union
• Poland
• Hungary
• German Democratic Republic
• 1956-1969
• Sino-Soviet split
• press

Notes

¹ ‘Auszug aus einem Bericht unserer Korrespondentin in Peking,’ 14 September 1962, Bundesarchiv Berlin-Lichterfelde (Barch), DY/30/IV 2/2.028/82.

² On Kreminology as a method, cf. Alec Nove, Was Stalin Really Necessary? Some Problems of Soviet Political Economy (London: Allen & Unwin, 1964), 40–51.

³ Cf. Zbigniew K. Brzezinski, The Soviet Bloc: Unity and Conflict (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1960).

⁴ As argued by Rosanne Klass, ‘The Great Game Revisited,’ in Rosanne Klass (ed), Afghanistan: The Great Game Revisited (New York: Freedom House, 1987), 1–30.

⁵ See Michael Minholz/Uwe Stirnberg, Der Allgemeine Deutsche Nachrichtendienst (ADN): Gute Nachrichten für die SED (München: Saur, 1995).

⁶ In his study, The Sino-Soviet Alliance, Austin Jersild also urges the community of Soviet historians to adopt a more transnational approach. See Austin Jersild, The Sino-Soviet Alliance: An International History (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2014), 21.

⁷ Sheila Fitzpatrick, Stalin’s Peasants: Resistance and Survival in the Russian Village after Collectivization (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994), 62–5.

⁸ On Sovietization, see E. A. Rees, ‘Introduction: The Sovietization of Eastern Europe,’ in Balázs Apor et al. (eds), The Sovietization of Eastern Europe: New Perspectives on the Postwar Period (Washington: New Academia Publ., 2008) 1–28.

⁹ On the socialist press in general, and Soviet press in particular, see Jukka Pietiläinen, The Regional Newspaper in Post-Soviet Russia (Tampere: Tampere University Press, 2002) 99–119.

¹⁰ Austin Jersild, ‘The Soviet State as Imperial Scavenger: “Catch Up and Surpass” in the Transnational Socialist Bloc, 1950–60,’ The American Historical Review, Vol. 116, No. 1 (2011) 110. There are, however, different opinions on the extent to which European communist states used this disagreement between Moscow and Beijing to gain leverage for their own political goals. Cf. Péter Vámos, ‘“Mi történt a kínaikkal?” A magyar-kínai kapcsolatok 1956–66 között,’ Kül-Világ, Vol. 6, No. 1 (2009) 1–25.

¹¹ ‘Document No. 27: Jan Svoboda’s Notes on the CPSU CC Praesidium Meeting with Satellite Leaders, October 24 1956,’ in Csaba Békés, Malcolm Byrne, and János M Rainer (eds), The 1956 Hungarian Revolution: A History in Documents (Budapest: Central European University Press, 2002) 226.

¹² 1967 was the year ‘Interkit’, a policy coordination effort with China experts from the USSR, its Warsaw Pact allies, and other nations aligned with the Kremlin, was established. Cf. James Hershberg et al., ‘The Interkit-Story: A Window into the Final Decades of the Sino-Soviet Relationship,’ Cold War International History Project Working Paper, No. 63 (February 2011).

¹³ Pravda, the organ of the Central Committee of the CPSU, will be used only as a reference point to assess the autonomy of reporting. Chinese newspapers will be left aside.

¹⁴ David Tompkins recently examined images of China in East Germany and Poland. David Tompkins, ‘The East is Red? Images of China in East Germany and Poland through the Sino-Soviet Split,’ Zeitschrift für Ostmitteleuropa-Forschung, Vol. 62, No. 3 (2013) 393–424.

¹⁵ Thomas P. Bernstein, ‘Introduction: The Complexities of Learning from the Soviet Union,’ in Thomas P. Bernstein/Hua-Yu Li (eds), China Learns from the Soviet Union (Lanham: Lexington Books, 2010) 17.

¹⁶ Tompkins, ‘The East is Red?,’ 400–8.

¹⁷ Cf. Andrzej Werblan, ‘The Polish October of 1956: Legends and Reality,’ in Jan Rowinski (ed), The Polish October 1956 in World Politics (Warsaw: Polski Instytut Spraw Miedzynarodowych, 2007) 13–42.

¹⁸ E.g. ‘Posłannik przyjaźni,’ Trybuna Ludu, 11 January 1957, 2.

¹⁹ For Zhou’s visit, cf. L.W. Gluchowski, ‘Poland, 1956: Khrushchev, Gomulka and the “Polish October”,’ Cold War International History Project Bulletin, No. 5 (1995) 43–5.

²⁰ E.g. ‘Spotkanie delegacji polskiej z tow. Mao Tse-tungiem,’ Trybuna Ludu, 9 April 1957, 1.

²¹ Lorenz M. Lüthi, ‘China and East Europe, 1956–1960,’ Modern China Studies 22, No. 1 (2015) 243–9; Zhihua Shen/Danhui Li, ‘The Polish Crisis of 1956 and the Polish-Chinese Relations Viewed from Beijing,’ in Jan Rowinski (ed), The Polish October 1956 in World Politics (Warsaw: Polski Instytut Spraw Miedzynarodowych, 2007) 75–113 passim; Tompkins, ‘The East is Red?,’ 413–5.

²² Jersild, Sino-Soviet Alliance, 20.

²³ E.g. ‘Jak wygląda kwestia małżenstwa w Chinach,’ Trybuna Ludu, 4 September 1957, 2; ‘Daleko od Pekinu,’ Trybuna Ludu, 30 September 1957, 4.

²⁴ For example reports on increases in trade, e.g. ‘Polsko-chińska współpraca gospodarcza,’ Trybuna Ludu, 13 February 1958, 2; cultural exchange, e.g. ‘Sukces “Mazowsza” w Pekinie,’ Trybuna Ludu, 9 February 1960, 1; or Poland’s support of China’s admission to the United Nations that appeared regularly in the paper, ‘Poska domaga się natychmiastowego przyznania ChRL należnego jej miejsca w ONZ,’ Trybuna Ludu, 7 December 1960, 3.

²⁵ ‘Díszünnepség a Kínai Népköztársaság megalakulásának 10. Évfordulója alkalmából a Csepeli Sportcsarnokban,’ Népszabadság, 1 October 1959, 1.

²⁶ ‘A magyar párt és kormányküldöttség látogatása egy Peking környéki népi kommunában,’ Népszabadság, 4 October 1959, 5.

²⁷ ‘Látogatásunk a baráti Kínában,’ Népszabadság, 13 October 1959, 3.

²⁸ Cf. Jersild, Sino-Soviet Alliance, 109 and 119–20; Zhihua Shen/Yafeng Xia, ‘New Evidence for China’s Role in the Hungarian Crisis of October 1956,’ The International History Review, Vol. 31, No. 3 (2009) 558–75.

²⁹ Péter Vámos, ‘Sino-Hungarian Relations and the 1956 Revolution,’ Cold War International History Project Working Paper 54 (November 2006) 9, 20–2.

³⁰ Vámos, ‘Sino-Hungarian Relations,’ 23; Hermann Wentker, Außenpolitik in engen Grenzen: Die DDR im internationalen System 1949–1989 (München: Oldenbourg, 2007) 167.

³¹ Vámos, ‘Mi történt a kínaikkal?,’ 3.

³² Cf. Kádár’s first visit to China as Hungarian leader. ‘Nagygyűlés Pekingben a magyar kormányküldöttség tiszteletére,’ Népszabadság, 4 October 1957, 1.

³³ ‘A kínai népgazdaságban folytatódik az ugrásszerű fejlődés,’ Népszabadság, 27 October 1959, 4.

³⁴ ‘Dobi István elvtárs beszéde Pekingben,’ Népszabadság, 20 October 1959, 3.

³⁵ ‘Kínai barátainknál,’ Népszabadság, 8 November 1959, 3.

³⁶ The text ‘Long Live Leninism’ appeared in Hongqi (Red Flag) on 16 April 1960. On the ideological warfare in Beijing and Bucharest, cf. Lorenz M. Lüthi, The Sino-Soviet Split: Cold War in the Communist World (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008) 167–74.

³⁷ ‘Mächtiger Verbündeter und Freund,’ Neues Deutschland, 22 January 1959, 1.

³⁸ The interview appeared on 4 June 1960 in Thüringische Landeszeitung.

³⁹ Barch, DY/30/J IV 2/2/709, ‘Protocol 28/60 Politburo meeting 28.06.1960.’ The Soviet article ‘Eine geistige Waffe des Kommunismus’ appeared in Neues Deutschland, 15 June 1960, 5. An article condemning any notion that the GDR was considering the introduction of people’s communes followed two days later: ‘Zur Klärung einer Frage,’ Neues Deutschland, 17 June 1960, 3. For a more general picture on the different layers of bilateral relations see Nicole F. Stuber-Berries, East German China policy in the Face of the Sino-Soviet Conflict: 1966–1966 (PhD dissertation: Geneva University, 2004).

⁴⁰ E.g. reports on cultural and sporting events ‘Tömegverseny ötvenezer részvevővel – Pekingben,’ Népszabadság, 13 November 1959, 12.

⁴¹ The arrival of the Chinese delegation was celebrated with a picture on the front page: ‘Pénteken 14 ország testvérpártjának küldöttsége érkezett Budapestre az MSZMP kongresszusára,’ Népszabadság, 28 November 1959, 1.

⁴² ‘A Magyar Szocialista Munkáspárt Központi Bizottságának beszámolója és a párt feladatai,’ Népszabadság, 1 December 1959, 3–11.

⁴³ ‘Őszintén kívánjuk a magyar népnek, arasson új győzelmeket a szocializmus építésében,’ Népszabadság, 2 December 1959, 1–4. The speech delivered by the CCP central committee secretary was much shorter. ‘Tan Csen-lin, Kína Kommunista Pártja Központi Bizottságának titkára,’ Népszabadság, 3 December 1959, 1–2.

⁴⁴ E.g. ‘Decyzje plenum KC Komunistycznej Partii Chin,’ Trybuna Ludu, 18 December 1958, 1–2.

⁴⁵ ‘Obrady parlamentu chińskiego,’ Trybuna Ludu, 18 December 1959, 1–2.

⁴⁶ ‘Plan rozwoju gospodarczego Chin,’ Trybuna Ludu, 31 January 1960, 1.

⁴⁷ Zhihua Shen/Yafeng Xia, ‘The Great Leap Forward, the People’s Commune and the Sino-Soviet Split,’ Journal of Contemporary China 20, No. 72 (2011): 874–5.

⁴⁸ ‘Zbiory w ChRL lepsze niż w latach ubiegłych,’ Trybuna Ludu, 18 September 1962, 2.

⁴⁹ ‘Nowy Rok w Chinach,’ Trybuna Ludu, 26 January 1963, 3.

⁵⁰ Frank Dikötter, Mao’s Great Famine: The History of China’s Most Devastating Catastrophe, 1958–1962 (New York: Walker & Co., 2010).

⁵¹ Vámos, ‘Sino-Hungarian Relations,’ 7–9, 19–20.

⁵² Vámos, ‘Mi történt a kínaikkal?,’ 4; ‘Közlemény a magyar párt és kormanyküldöttségnek a Kínai Népköztársaságban tett látogatásáról,’ Népszabadság, 7 May 1959, 1.

⁵³ For a general view of the border dispute, see Xuecheng Liu, The Sino-Indian Border Dispute and Sino-Indian Relations (Lanham: University Press of America, 1994).

⁵⁴ E.g. quoting Mao Zedong on the occasion of an official Indian state visit to China, ‘Mao Tse-tung o stosunkach chińsko-indyjskich,’ Trybuna Ludu, 20 September 1957, 2.

⁵⁵ ‘Premier Czou En-lai przybył z wyzytą do Indii,’ Trybuna Ludu, 20 April 1960, 1; ‘Wspólny komunikat o rozmowach Czou En-lai – Nehru,’ Trybuna Ludu, 26 April 1960, 2; ‘Chiny – Indie,’ Trybuna Ludu, 28 April 1960, 2.

⁵⁶ Reasons why Moscow remained neutral in the border war are given in Lüthi, Sino-Soviet Split, 144–6.

⁵⁷ ‘“Prawda”: Porozumnienie ChRL i Indii wykazałoby siłę zasady pokojowego współistnienia,’ Trybuna Ludu, 26 October 1962, 2.

⁵⁸ A single article, relying equally on information from the two major press agencies Xinhua and Press Trust of India about the warfare, was the only exception. ‘Sytuacja na granicy chińsko-indyjskiej,’ Trybuna Ludu, 1 November 1962, 2.

⁵⁹ ‘“Prawda” o konieczności uregulowania w drodze rokowań konfliktu indyjsko-chinskiego,’ Trybuna Ludu, 6 November 1962, 2.

⁶⁰ E.g. ‘List premiera Czou En-laia do premiera Nehru,’ Trybuna Ludu, 2 December 1962, 2.

⁶¹ ‘Poważne ognisko napięcia w Azji,’ Trybuna Ludu, 20 September 1963, 2. See also Hyer, The Pragmatic Dragon.

⁶² ‘A népek érdekében az általános béke nevében,’ Népszabadság, 26 October 1962, 5; ‘Konfliktus a kínai-indiai határon,’ Népszabadság, 26 October 1962, 5.

⁶³ Relying mainly on Xinhua news agency press releases, Népszabadság printed Chinese governmental statements without mentioning similar Indian declarations. E.g. ‘A Kínai Népköztársaság kormányának nyilatkozata a kínai-indiai határincidensekről,’ Népszabadság, 27 October 1962, 5.

⁶⁴ ‘A tárgyalások utat nyitnak a konfliktus rendezéséhez,’ Népszabadság, 6 November 1962, 4.

⁶⁵ Based on a TASS announcement on a meeting between Leonid Brezhnev and the new Indian ambassador to the Soviet Union. ‘India és Szovjetunió kapcsolata példa a békés együttélés elveinek megvalósítására,’ Népszabadság, 6 November 1962, 5.

⁶⁶ Stuber-Berries, East German China Policy, 84–5.

⁶⁷ ‘Wir marschieren gemeinsam zum Sozialismus,’ Neues Deutschland, 29 September 1959, 3. On the seriousness with which the Indian government followed the Eastern bloc’s press, see ‘Sino-Indian border incidents – Attitude of countries of East Europe,’ National Archives of India, New Delhi (NAI), List No. 258 S. No. 314 3/96/Eur.E/59.

⁶⁸ Johannes H. Voigt, Die Indienpolitik der DDR: Von den Anfängen bis zur Anerkennung (Köln: Böhlau, 2008) 293–6.

⁶⁹ ‘Informationsbericht des ADN-/ND-Korrespondenten in Neu Delhi zum Besuch Lübkes,’ 30 November 1962, Barch, DY/30/IV 2/2.028/84.

⁷⁰ By placing the news on page seven, Neues Deutschland’s editors seemed at first to downplay the conflict: ‘Heftige Kämpfe im Grenzgebiet,’ Neues Deutschland, 21 October 1962, 7. ‘Erklärung Volkschina,’ Neues Deutschland, 25 October 1962, 5.

⁷¹ ‘Im Interesse der Völker, im Namen des Weltfriedens,’ Neues Deutschland, 26 October 1962, 1.

⁷² ‘Neues Verhandlungsangebot Volkschinas an Indien,’ Neues Deutschland, 8 November 1962, 7.

⁷³ ‘Verdächtige Betriebsamkeit,’ Neues Deutschland, 10 November 1962, 5.

⁷⁴ Sometimes as part of more comprehensive coverage, e.g. ‘Ogólnopolski Zjazd Towarzystwa Przyjaźni Polsko-Indyjskiej,’ Trybuna Ludu, 22 January 1962, 2.

⁷⁵ Politisches Archiv des Auswärtigen Amtes (PA AA), A6763, ‘Vorschläge zur künftigen Gestaltung der Berichterstattung über Probleme der Volksrepublik China in der DDR-Presse,’ 15 May 1961.

⁷⁶ Wentker, Außenpolitik in engen Grenzen, 168–9.

⁷⁷ ‘Artykuł “Prawdy” w 14 rocznicę układu o przyjaźni z ChRL,’ Trybuna Ludu, 16 February 1964, 2.

⁷⁸ In a similarly negative tone: ‘W 16 rocznicę podpisania układu o przyjaźni między ZSSR i ChRL,’ Trybuna Ludu, 15 February 1966, 2.

⁷⁹ E.g. ‘Święto narodu chińskiego,’ Trybuna Ludu, 1 October 1963, 4 (quotation); ‘Święto narodu chińskiego,’ Trybuna Ludu, 1 October 1964, 2.

⁸⁰ In 1966 the Polish party newspaper ran a Pravda story with an unequivocal criticism of the Chinese leadership. ‘Dziennik “Prawda” o 17 rocznicy ChRL,’ Trybuna Ludu, 2 October 1966, 2.

⁸¹ ‘Minek félrevezetni az embereket?,’ Népszabadság, 31 January 1964, 8.

⁸² ‘Moszkvai lapok a szovjet-kínai szerződés évfordulójáról,’ Népszabadság, 15 February 1964, 1.

⁸³ ‘Antonin Novotny elvtárs beszéde,’ Népszabadság, 3 October 1964, 3–4.

⁸⁴ ‘Wymiana listów między KC KPZR i KC KP Chin,’ Trybuna Ludu, 14 March 1963, 2. A Soviet response, the CC CPSU letter of 30 March followed suit. ‘List KC KPZR do KC KP Chin’ , Trybuna Ludu, 3 April 1963, 4–5. ‘List otwarty KC KPZR do organizacji partyjnych i do wszystkich komunistów w ZSRR,’ Trybuna Ludu, 15 July 1963, 2–5; ‘List KC KP Chin z dnia 14 czerwca 1963 r.,’ Trybuna Ludu, 15 July 1963, 5–6. Although Beijing’s position had not been concealed from the Polish public, it was always put into context of the Soviets reacting to shape and formulate the public’s perception in the desired direction. Népszabadság saw especially intense reporting on the Sino-Soviet dispute in July 1963 and was clearly in favour of the Soviet Union. E.g. ‘Testvérpártok az SZKP nyílt leveléről,’ Népszabadság, 21 July 1963, 2; and ‘Különös módszerek,’ Népszabadság, 21 July 1963, 4.

⁸⁵ ‘Magyar államférfiak üdvözlő távirata kínai vezetőkhöz,’ Népszabadság, 1 October 1965, 5; ‘Dobi István üdvözlő távirata a kínai nemzeti ünnep alkalmából,’ Népszabadság, 1 October 1966, 3; ‘Üdvözlő táviratak a kínai nemzeti ünnep alkalmából,’ Népszabadság, 1 October 1967, 3; ‘Üdvözlő távirat a kínai nemzeti ünnep alkalmából,’ Népszabadság, 1 October 1968, 2.

⁸⁶ ‘A kormány távirata a Kínai Népköztársaság Államtanácsához,’ Népszabadság, 1 October 1969, 3.

⁸⁷ Beda Erlinghagen, ‘Anfänge und Hintergründe des Konflikts zwischen der DDR und der Volksrepublik China: Kritische Anmerkungen zu einer ungeklärten Frage,’ Beiträge zur Geschichte der Arbeiterbewegung 49, No. 3 (2007) 118.

⁸⁸ Stuber-Berries, East German China policy. See also Erlinghagen, ‘Anfänge und Hintergründe,’ 115.

⁸⁹ ‘Kommuniqué der 3. Tagung des Zentralkomitees der Sozialistischen Einheitspartei Deutschlands,’ Neues Deutschland, 31 July 1963, 1.

⁹⁰ E.g. after the World Peace Council meeting in Stockholm in December 1961 or the VI SED Party Congress in January 1963. Cf. ‘Protokoll Nr. 1/62 der Sitzung des Politbüros der SED, Anhang 4, Auftreten der chinesischen Delegation auf der Tagung des Weltfriedensrates’, Barch, DY/30/J IV 2/2/808; ‘Schreiben des Ersten Sekretärs des ZK der SED, Walter Ulbricht, an den Vorstizenden der KP Chinas, Mao Zedong, zum Auftreten der chinesischen Parteitagsdelegation auf dem VI. Parteitag der SED,’ 12 February 1963, Barch, DY/30/3607.

⁹¹ See e.g. Letter to Walter Ulbricht on a report by ADN chief editor Pötschke, 28 April 1964, Barch, DY/30/IV A 2/2.028/70.

⁹² Vámos, ‘Mi történt a kínaikkal?,’ 14–6.

⁹³ Wentker, Außenpolitik in engen Grenzen, 273.

⁹⁴ ‘Zutritt zum Pekinger Sportsaal verwehrt,’ Neues Deutschland, 29 August 1963, 8.

⁹⁵ ‘Informationsbericht des ADN-Korrespondenten in Peking [Gerda Lindner],’ 3 September 1963, Barch, DY/30/IV A 2/2.028/70.

⁹⁶ See ‘Vermerk über ein Gespräch mit dem Leiter der Fernöstlichen Abteilung im Ministerium für Auswärtige Angelegenheiten der UdSSR, Genossen Tugarinow am 8.3.1962,’ 10 March 1962, PA AA, G-A315.

⁹⁷ On such exchanges, e.g. PA AA, G-A 317, G-A 338, G-A 339.

⁹⁸ ‘Vermerk über Gespräche auf einer Cocktail-Party zu Ehren des neuen Korrespondenten der ungarischen Telegraphenagentur am 15.9.1961 in der ungarischen Botschaft,’ 16 September 1961, PA AA, A6744.

⁹⁹ E.g. ‘Dalsze wystąpienia “czerwonogwardzistów” w Pekine,’ Trybuna Ludu, 15 October 1966, 2.

¹⁰⁰ Summer and fall 1966 were the heyday of reporting on the Cultural Revolution in the East German party paper. In September 1966 alone, Neues Deutschland published 23 articles on this topic, compared with just two to three per month between June and August.

¹⁰¹ ‘Újabb felszólítás a “vörösgardisták” Pekingből való távozására,’ Népszabadság, 4 November 1966, 2.

¹⁰² ‘A Szovjetunió Kommunista Pártja Központi Bizottságának közleménye a Kínában folyó szovjetellenes kampányról, a kommunista mozgalom egységének kérdéseiről,’ Népszabadság, 1 September 1966, 1.