munist Party of the Soviet Union Central Committee (CPSU CC), which provide the official, written chronicle of the relationship. These archives, like any in the world, present the researcher with various problems and questions, which are detailed below, so I have augmented the official record with interviews with Soviets who actually worked for the program in China. This often includes both the person who administered the program for the Soviet government and a number of the advisers themselves.
|
In this chapter, the archival information, the interviews, and advisers' unpublished memoirs are all used to sketch the outlines of the Soviet Advisors' Program. The sources are combined and checked against each other as much as possible, and the result is rather like a bumpy, handmade weaving. Since this is a slightly unusual approach, the next sections detail the problems and opportunities that each source presents.
|
The documentary evidence for this chapter comes mostly from the CPSU CC International Department, which oversaw and managed the Soviet Union's relationships with other countries.
1 In using these files extensively, three problems arose.
|
First, there is the problem of bias and omission. The Communist Party's very structured hold on Soviet society during the 1950s ensured that reports filed to the CPSU CC would be biased. Almost all sources of information in the archives emanated from Communist Party members, whether diplomats, both Soviet and from other socialist countries, government officials, officers of the Committee of State Security (KGB), journalists, members of youth groups, or trade union officials. In the 1950s the Communist Party carefully selected and screened the people it sent abroad, and moreover, all of the chosen understood what could and could not be reported back to the CPSU CC.
|
The situation is best illustrated by looking at the period we now know as the beginning of the demise of the Sino-Soviet friendship, the mid-to late 1950s. Sometime after 1956, the Chinese began to discuss openly and frankly in the press the problems they had with the "Soviet model" and its implementation. While this type of discussion no doubt bothered the Soviet Communist Party, little evidence of it appears in the Central Committee files from the same period. Instead, the reports filed to the CPSU CC reported "business as usual." It is not clear to researchers whether this indicates a simple lack of honest information on the part of the Central Committee's informants, or whether the files were altered before scholars gained access. In any case, whole periods of time pass without mention in the files, while in other files, memoranda are alluded to but not available.
|
|