SOVIET ACTION IN HUNGARY

Press, Volume XCIV, Issue 28130, 20 November 1956, Page 14

SOVIET ACTION IN HUNGARY

View Of Leading N.Z. Communist “A DISASTROUS BLUNDER’’ (New team no Pres.*. Association) AUCKLAND, Nov. 19. Mr S. W. Scott, a member of the national and political committees of the New Zealand Communist Party, said in a statement today that the Soviet Government’s armed intervention in Hungary was a blunder, ‘‘a blunder disastrous, not only for Hungary, but for the peoples of the. Soviet Union and the whole world.”

Mr Scott has long been one of the Communist Party's leading theorists. He was for many years editor of the '‘Workers’ Weekly” and the “People’s Voice.” In the last 12 years he has edited the party’s monthly journal, the “Labour Review.” “I cannot be silent concerning the tragic events in Hungary,” his statement begins. “The action of the Soviet Government in intervening in the internal affairs of Hungary by force of arms is fraught with evil consequences infinite in scope. “Let me make my personal position clear. I have been an ardent supporter _o£ the -Soviet Union over the whole "of my political and most of my actual life. As a boy. I welcomed the Russian Revolution, feeling as Charles James Fox said of the French Revolution, ‘How much by far is this the best and greatest thing this world has .ever known.’

“I was one of the first to sell proSoviet literature in Auckland. I was an active member of the Russian Famine Relief Committee in 1921, and some years later I initiated and helped to launch the Friends of the Soviet Union. I am also a foundation member of the New .Zealand Communist Party, with a record of unswerving friendship for the Soviet Union extending over almost 40 years.

"Too Much to Accept” “I swallowed the Soviet-German non-aggression pact in 1939, and regretfully but loyally accepted the war against Finland, but in keeping with a number of other Communists in New Zealand and elsewhere, I find the Soviet action in Hungary too much to accept. “All the evidence —and it is considerable —proves that the rising in Hungary is a popular one, commenced and solidly backed by industrial workers, students. peasants, and middle-class people. There can be no reasonable doubt that the Nagy Government expressed the almost unanimous will of the people when it asked the Soviet Government to withdraw the Red Army, leaving the Hungarian people to settle their own affairs. “The peoples of Central and Eastern Europe (with the possible partial exception of Czechoslovakia) from the start resented Soviet domination of their internal affairs. It has also become evident —and it should have been evident years ago—that Communist governments and policies have been imposed on Poland, Hungary, Rumania, and probably Bulgaria, from on top and from outside. "I do not doubt that Soviet policy m Eastern Europe at the conclusion of the war was adopted with the idea of raising a barrier against renewed attacks from the West, but leaving aside ethical considerations the bankruptcy of such a policy of ‘export ing communism’ is now apparent. Stalin ’in 1927 spoke of the export ol communism as ‘nonsense.’ It is ironical that he should have sponsored a post-war policy of exporting communism so disastrous to everyone concerned. “It may be wondered why I and other Communists have been so tardy in reaching these conclusions. I can only say that the process of reassessment was brought to a head by the Khrushchev revelations at the closed session of the twentieth Congress of the Soviet Communist Party, revelations which pointed to the need for a fundamental re-evaluation of the history and policies of the Soviet Union from the beginning of Stalin domination in the early 1920’5. Intervention In Egypt “One further point: I am not onb opposed to Soviet action in Hungary. I am also opposed to the AngloFrench intervention in Egypt. Policies of force are wrong and dangerou.', no matter who uses them. One of the consequences of Soviet policy in Hungary is that Russia has lost al! logical right to be morally indignant about Anglo-French actions in the Middle East. The two policies combined constitute a terrible danger to world peace and to peaceful co existence. If I have dealt with the Hungarian affair alone, it is because .1 feel a heavy load of personal responsibility owing to my leading position in the Communist movement in New Zealand. ‘‘l still admire the Soviet peoples and wish them well. A great interna! struggle is undoubtedly taking place in the Soviet Union to achieve more democratic policies. I urge that whatever views people may have on the present international situation, however great their moral indignation against one side or the other, they should realise that differences between varying social systems are not easily resolved, but that the interests of world peace should be kept in the forefront of their minds.”