From The Political And Cultural Evolution Of The Sino-soviet Relations In The 1950s And 1960s

The evolution of Sino-Soviet Relationship during the two decades between 1949 and 1969 makes a very important case for study in the history of international relations. In a relatively short time, the bilateral relations of these two countries experienced a dramatic change, from "Comrades plus Brothers" to ideological debate and national confrontation.The author believes that the cause of this change is not the political faux pas, but rather the systematic cause led these two countries dramatically changed their bilateral relations, because the similar phenomena took place several times within the Communist Camp during the period of cold war. This dissertation assumes that the fundamental reason for the Sino-Soviet tragedy lies in the conflict between different system-unit political cultures. Communist Camp is a subsystem in the arena of international relations. Proletarian Internationalism is the very medium that ties all communist countries together as a block. However, while national identity makes the most important base of modern international system, Proletarian Internationalism defined their slogan as "Proletarians have no motherland", thus namely replaced national identity by class identity. This caused the deep-rooted conflict between the political culture of proletarian internationalism system and those political cultures, which is mostly characterized by national identity, of different countries as units of such a system. Although individual communism party of each country managed to solve this problem within their domestic politics by justifying Proletarian Internationalism with national interests, with the best examples as the "One country's Socialism" of Soviet Union and the "Maoism" of China, the conflict remained in the domain of relations among communist countries. The dualistic identity of communist countries resulted in an awkward situation: when two communist countries shared similar national interest or strategic aims, they were "comrades plus brothers", but when they did not, ideological debate and national conflict immediately came up.By the end of 1950s, the development of the international arena demonstrated new trends, which necessitated a proper adjustment of the Communist Camp. In the process of such adjustment, serious disputes emerged between CCP and CPSU. Both sides tried their very best to narrow these disputes, however, the fundamental problem still lay in that the perspectives they used to perceive Proletarian Internationalism is based on their own national interest. Thus, they both firmly held their own belief and expected the other side to accept his "correct general line" by giving up its own stand.International Communist Movement long has the tradition of ideological debate for the achievement of theoretical unity. According to Lenin, wheat would not grow well if the grass is not cleared. Heavily influenced by this political culture-thinking template, and with the emerging dispute about the "correct revolutionary approach" and "proper construction model", both Chinese and Russians insisted on the legitimacy of their own understanding. This finally resulted in an intensive public ideological debate.Meanwhile, it is the Party's responsibility to indoctrinate advanced idea into proletarians and push its influence through the whole society in communist countries. This characteristic decides that the will of the Party becomes the will of the nation, and the inter-Party relations will also determine the relationship between communist countries.In the 20 years between 1949 and 1969, the conflict of system-unit political cultures among Communist Camp has not only led the generation of the dispute between CCP and CPSU, but also the development and intensification of such a conflict. In general, Proletarian Internationalism seriously conflicts with the basis of modem nations. The handling of relations among communist countries from the perspective of Proletarian Internationalism will result in nothing but disaster. The tragedy of Sino-Soviet Relations in 1950s-1960s told us...