". . .The way the white book tampers with and falsifies historical records is rare in international relations. Any country which has to deal with the leaders of Hanoi should be on its guard against them, because its statement today can be distorted or even larded with fabrications by them tomorrow in the form of a white book. They allege that China supported Lon Nol and 'discarded Mr. Sihanouk' when Lon Nol staged a coup in 1970, distorting the well known fact that China had extended firm support to Samdech Sihanouk. The Chinese support was confirmed by Samdech Sihanouk in his memoirs where he said, 'Premier Zhou Enlai had convoked the entire diplomatic corps, which was lined up for my arrival. "You remain the Head of State," he said. "The only one. We will never recognize another."' In fact, the awkwardness in the Vietnamese Foreign Ministry's white book is self-evident. No wonder that foreign correspondents in Hanoi, when commenting on the white book, said that the Vietnamese authorities even do not know how to make rumours.

"Why did the Vietnamese authorities issue this white book at this time? The answer is: the need of policies pursued by them both at home and abroad. At home, they try to deceive the Vietnamese people, blur their memory of the Sino-Vietnamese friendship, and mollify their dissatisfaction with the actual life and the policy pursued by Hanoi towards China. In the days of the war for national liberation, what many Vietnamese soldiers, cadres and civilians ate, wore and used were provided by China and the weapons in their hands were made in China. Today, China-supplied vehicles are still seen running in Viet Nam, the Chinese-aided projects are still to be found in various places north of the 17th parallel, the remains of many Chinese martyrs are still buried there, and the friendship between the two countries can still be sensed in various aspects of Vietnamese life. All these are great obstacles to the anti-China policy followed by the Vietnamese authorities which try to defend their anti-China policy by claiming that China has never been a friend of Viet Nam but an 'enemy from generation to generation.'

"Internationally, they try to escape from the difficult predicament resulting from their aggression in Kampuchea, occupation of Laos and expansion into the Southeast Asian nations and to divert the attention of the international community. Now, the 200,000 Vietnamese troops in Kampuchea are launching a dry season offensive there and are posing a threat to the security of Thailand's border areas. The Vietnamese authorities have been severely condemned by world opinion. In such circumstances, the author of the white book racked his brains to sow dissension between China and other nations--particularly the Southeast Asian nations--alleging that China wants to annex Southeast Asia, and 'Southeast Asia has been a traditional target for Chinese expansion throughout the centuries.' The author believes that his book will make the Southeast Asian nations and the whole world deaf to the shootings and bombardments in the Kampuchean-Thai border areas as well as the groans of the hundreds of thousands of Kampuchean people being trampled underfoot by the Vietnamese occupation troops. This is just like someone who plugs his ears while stealing a bell.

"The white book further shows that Viet Nam's attempt to achieve hegemony in Southeast Asia and its anti-China policy are two aspects of one and the same thing. The Vietnamese authorities want to lord it over Indochina and the Southeast Asian region but China disagrees. So Viet Nam has become hostile to China and consequently the conflicts between the two countries have occurred. Since the Vietnamese regional hegemonists who failed to get their needed foreign aid from China have turned to the Soviet Union for help, they have not hesitated to follow Moscow more closely in hostility to China, acting as the 'Cuba of Asia' and serving the southward thrust policy of Soviet hegemonism. . ."

". . .The drastic worsening of Sino-Vietnamese relations after Viet Nam's reunification is the result not of China's 'hostile policy' towards the reunified Viet Nam as is alleged by the Vietnamese authorities, but of their own hostile policy towards China owing to their regional hegemonist ambitions.

"After the reunification, Hanoi paid no heed to its people's pressing desire for the rehabilitation of the country devastated by 30 long years of war. Instead, it embarked on a course of aggression and expansion, trying to rig up an 'Indochinese federation,' dip its finger in the Gulf of Siam and dominate Southeast Asia. It has blustered that 'the emergence of a strong state of Viet Nam will surely open a new chapter in history and contribute to a radical change in the political situation in the Southeast Asia region. This region has for a long time remained in the rear and a target in the scramble of the imperialist forces.'

"Kampuchea and Laos, Viet Nam's two neighbours, became the first victims of the Vietnamese authorities' aggression and expansion. In June 1975, the Vietnamese authorities went back on their pledge repeatedly stated in the sixties that they would recognize the existing Kampuchean-Vietnamese boundary. Their naval and ground forces occupied Kampuchea's Way Island. This marked the beginning of frequent Vietnamese incursions into Kampuchean territory facing the Gulf of Siam. From that year up to 1978, Hanoi had been engaged itself in infiltration and subversion in Kampuchea in an attempt to overthrow the Government of Democratic Kampuchea.

"Meanwhile, tens of thousands of Vietnamese troops and large numbers of officials, advisers and secret agents were sent to Laos in the name of 'special relationship' to exercise tight control of all central departments of the Lao Party, government and army as well as those in the localities. By ruthlessly purging and hounding patriotic Lao officials and suppressing the people, Hanoi has managed to place that country under its domination.

". . .A crucial factor contributing to the drastic deterioration of Sino-Vietnamese relations is the fact that at the time when the Vietnamese authorities stepped up an armed aggression for the annexation of Kampuchea, China sided with the Kampuchean people instead of the Vietnamese authorities--a fact which sent those in Hanoi into a rage. Since September 1977, Hanoi has repeatedly sent large numbers of troops to invade Kampuchea and finally mobilized more than 100,000 troops to overrun Kampuchea's capital Phnom Penh as well as vast tracts of its land. It is only natural for China, a socialist country, to extend sympathy for and support to the Kampuchean people's struggle against Vietnamese aggression. That is why the Vietnamese authorities harbour a burning hatred for China and consider it the main obstacle in the way of their aggression and expansion abroad. This, in turn, has prompted them to take even wilder anti-China measures. Beginning from April 1978, a large-scale campaign against China and Chinese nationals was started by Hanoi. To date, well over 200,000 refugees including many Chinese residents in Viet Nam have been driven into China. In the Sino-Vietnamese border areas, the Vietnamese authorities have deliberately provoked disputes and made troubles, nibbled away pieces of Chinese territory, and wounded or killed Chinese frontier guards and inhabitants. All this seriously threatens peace and security in China's border areas.

". . .In mounting aggression and expansion and pursuing hegemony after the reunification of their country, the Vietnamese authorities have counted on the support of the Soviet superpower hegemonists. The Soviet Union, seeking global hegemony, has regarded Viet Nam as a cat's paw in its drive into Southeast Asia. Hanoi, on its part, considers the Soviet Union as its backer in its own quest for hegemony in Southeast Asia. Ganging up with and using each other, these two countries have endangered the peace, security and stability of the region. In face of this obvious fact, it is futile for the Vietnamese authorities to attempt to vilify China by claiming in the white book that China is practising 'big-nation hegemonism.' It is equally futile for them to attempt to hoodwink people and make use of the so-called Sino-Vietnamese relations issue to gloss over their own and the Soviet Union's aggression and expansion in Indochina and Southeast Asia."