The Sino-Soviet schism (1960-1989)


The Sino-Soviet schism (1960-1989)

The deterioration of political and ideological relations between the People’s Republic of China and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics during the cold war. In the 1960s, China and the Soviet Union were the two largest communist nations in the world. The ideological divergence stems from the Chinese and Russian national interests, and from the interpretation of both systems of Marxism: Maoism and Marxism-Leninism.

In the 1950s and 1960s, the ideological debate between the Communist parties in Russia and China was also important for the possibility of peaceful coexistence with the capitalist West. However, for Chinese public opinion, Mao Zedong proposed a hostile attitude toward capitalist countries and a principled rejection of peaceful coexistence, which he saw as Marxist reactionary from the Soviet Union. Moreover, since 1956, China and the Soviet Union have increasingly diverged from the Marxist ideology. By 1961, when ideological differences appeared incomprehensible, the Communist Party of China officially condemned the Soviet version of communism as a product of “reactionary traitors” The Soviets, led by Nikita Khrushchev.

The Sino-Soviet border dispute refers to a series of confrontations between the Soviet Union and the People’s Republic of China at the height of the Soviet-Chinese divide in 1969. The most serious of these border clashes took place in March 1969 near the island of Nabao. In the river Osorio, also known as the island of Domanski in Russia. It is common among Chinese historians to refer to the conflict in the name of the incident of the island of Nabao. The dispute was finally resolved with the post-border demarcation.

The split in the international communist movement at that time opened the way for the warming of US-China relations in 1971. Relations between China and the Soviet Union remained strained until the mid-1980s, and Pressa did not even see the visit of Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev to Beijing in 1989.




Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here