Sino-Soviet Relations and the "Problem" Parties

The tense relations between the Soviet Union and China, characterized in the past decade variously as a dispute, conflict, or rift, have implications not only for the other Communist countrie's and for nonruling parties, but for the rest of the world as well. Readers of Studies in Comparative Communism are likely to be particularly interested in the effect of this momentous development in the history of Communism upon the Communist movement as a whole. While most Communist parties have taken sides in the dispute (the majority--especially European parties--siding with Moscow), a number of Communist parties have found themselves torn between the two Communist power centers or have used the dispute to carve out for themselves more room for maneuver. Some have found it possible to pursue an independent role, balancing their relations with the ,two Communist superpowers, while other parties have alternated support of Moscow with support of Peking, or have moved toward a neutral position. Still other parties have split into pro-Moscow and pro-Peking groups, in some instances giving birth to even more than two Communist parties. (See, for example, Sally Ray's article "Communism in India: Ideological and Tactical Differences Among Four Parties" in the previous issue of this journal.)

The Editors have therefore decided to explore the behavior of what might be called the "problem" parties toward Moscow and Peking, and have commissioned a series of studies, each dealing with a specific "problem" party and ,the way in which it has tackled the ticklish relationship with Moscow and Peking, not only on the ideological but also on the practical level. Perhaps after many such studies some pattern of behavior will emerge which will make a contribution to the study of comparative Communism and will provide

372 STUDIES IN COMPARATIVE COMMUNISM

insights into the role the "problem" parties play in the developing international system.

A study focusing on the role of Rumania, often described as a maverick among Communist parties, inaugurates this new series. It will be followed in subsequent issues of the journal by studies treating the role of Yugoslavia. Albania, North Korea, North Vietnam, Cuba, and the Pathet Lao, among others. The articles will be accompanied by a selection of key documents (or excerpts) illustrating the positions taken by the parties in question, and providing quotations emanating from Moscow and Peking. We are also commissioning the compilation of a series of detailed chronologies pinpointing the relations of the "problem" parties vis-a-vis Moscow and Peking. These will be published at the end of the series as a special supplement to the journal.

The assignment of party studies is still in progress. Manuscripts and communications on this broad topic will be given prompt consideration.

P.B.