Mao Zedong
别了，司徒雷登
18 August 1949
It is understandable that the date chosen for the publication of the US White Paper was 5 August, a time when Leighton Stuart[1] had departed from Nanking for Washington but had not yet arrived there, since Leighton Stuart is a symbol of the complete defeat of the US policy of aggression. Leighton Stuart is an American born in China; he has fairly wide social connections and spent many years running missionary schools in China, he once sat in a Japanese gaol during the War of Resistance; he used to pretend to love both the United States and China and was able to deceive quite a number of Chinese. Hence, he was picked out by George C. Marshall, was made US ambassador to China and became a celebrity in the Marshall group. In the eyes of the Marshall group he had only one fault, namely, that the whole period when he was ambassador to China as an exponent of their policy was the very period in which that policy was utterly defeated by the Chinese people; that was no small responsibility. It is only natural that the White Paper, which is designed to evade this responsibility, should have been published at a time when Leighton Stuart was on his way to Washington but had not yet arrived.
美國的白皮書，選擇在司徒雷登[1]業已離開南京、快到華盛頓、但是尚未到達的日子——八月五日發表，是可以理解的，因為他是美國侵略政策徹底失敗的象徵。司徒雷登是一個在中國出生的美國人，在中國有相當廣泛的社會聯繫，在中國辦過多年的教會學校，在抗日時期坐過日本人的監獄，平素裝著愛美國也愛中國，頗能迷惑一部分中國人，因此被馬歇爾看中，做了駐華大使，成為馬歇爾系統中的風雲人物之一。在馬歇爾系統看來，他只有一個缺點，就是在他代表馬歇爾系統的政策在中國當大使的整個時期，恰恰就是這個政策徹底地被中國人民打敗了的時期，這個責任可不小。以脫卸責任為目的的白皮書，當然應該在司徒雷登將到未到的日子發表為適宜。
The war to turn China into a US colony, a war in which the United States of America supplies the money and guns and Chiang Kai-shek the men to fight for the United States and slaughter the Chinese people, has been an important component of the US imperialist policy of world-wide aggression since World War II. The US policy of aggression has several targets. The three main targets are Europe, Asia and the Americas. China, the centre of gravity in Asia, is a large country with a population of 475 million; by seizing China, the United States would possess all of Asia. With its Asian front consolidated, US imperialism could concentrate its forces on attacking Europe. US imperialism considers its front in the Americas relatively secure. These are the smug over-all calculations of the US aggressors.
美國出錢出槍，蔣介石出人，替美國打仗殺中國人，借以變中國為美國殖民地的戰爭，組成了美國帝國主義在第二次世界大戰以後的世界侵略政策的一個重大的部分。美國侵略政策的對象有好幾個部分。歐洲部分，亞洲部分，美洲部分，這三個是主要的部分。中國是亞洲的重心，是一個具有四億七千五百萬人口的大國，奪取了中國，整個亞洲都是它的了。美帝國主義的亞洲戰線鞏固了，它就可以集中力量向歐洲進攻。美帝國主義在美洲的戰線，它是認為比較地鞏固的。這些就是美國侵略者的整個如意算盤。
But in the first place, the American people and the peoples of the world do not want war. Secondly, the attention of the United States has largely been absorbed by the awakening of the peoples of Europe, by the rise of the People’s Democracies in Eastern Europe, and particularly by the towering presence of the Soviet Union, this unprecedentedly powerful bulwark of peace bestriding Europe and Asia, and by its strong resistance to the US policy of aggression. Thirdly, and this is most important, the Chinese people have awakened, and the armed forces and the organized strength of the people under the leadership of the Communist Party of China have become more powerful than ever before. Consequently, the ruling clique of US imperialism has been prevented from adopting a policy of direct, large-scale armed attacks on China and instead has adopted a policy of helping Chiang Kai-shek fight the civil war.
可是，一則美國的和全世界的人民都不要戰爭；二則歐洲人民的覺悟，東歐各人民民主國家的興起，特別是蘇聯這個空前強大的和平堡壘聳立在歐亞兩洲之間，頑強地抵抗著美國的侵略政策，使美國的注意力大部分被吸引住了；三則，這是主要的，中國人民的覺悟，中國共產黨領導的武裝力量和民眾組織力量已經空前地強大起來了。這樣，就迫使美帝國主義的當權集團不能採取大規模地直接地武裝進攻中國的政策，而採取了幫助蔣介石打內戰的政策。
US naval, ground and air forces did participate in the war in China. There were US naval bases in Tsingtao, Shanghai and Taiwan. US troops were stationed in Peiping, Tientsin, Tangshan, Chinwangtao, Tsingtao, Shanghai and Nanking. The US air force controlled all of China’s air space and took aerial photographs of all China’s strategic areas for military maps. At the town of Anping near Peiping, at Chiutai near Changchun, at Tangshan and in the Eastern Shantung Peninsula, US troops and other military personnel clashed with the People’s Liberation Army and on several occasions were captured.[2] Chennault’s air fleet took an extensive part in the civil war.[3] Besides transporting troops for Chiang Kai-shek, the US air force bombed and sank the cruiser Chungking, which had mutinied against the Kuomintang.[4]All these were acts of direct participation in the war, although they fell short of an open declaration of war and were not large in scale, and although the principal method of US aggression was the large-scale supply of money, munitions and advisers to help Chiang Kai-shek fight the civil war.
美國的海陸空軍已經在中國參加了戰爭。青島、上海和台灣，有美國的海軍基地。北平、天津、唐山、秦皇島、青島、上海、南京都駐過美國的軍隊。美國的空軍控制了全中國，並從空中拍攝了全中國戰略要地的軍用地圖。在北平附近的安平鎮，在長春附近的九台，在唐山，在膠東半島，美國的軍隊或軍事人員曾經和人民解放軍接觸過，被人民解放軍俘虜過多次[2]。陳納德航空隊曾經廣泛地參戰[3]。美國的空軍除替蔣介石運兵外，又炸沈了起義的重慶號巡洋艦[4]。所有這些，都是直接參戰的行動，只是還沒有公開宣佈作戰，並且規模還不算大，而以大規模地出錢出槍出顧問人員幫助蔣介石打內戰為主要的侵略方式。
The use of this method by the United States was determined by the objective situation in China and the rest of the world, and not by any lack of desire on the part of the Truman-Marshall group, the ruling clique of US imperialism, to launch direct aggression against China. Moreover, at the outset of its help to Chiang Kai-shek in fighting the civil war, a crude farce was staged in which the United States appeared as mediator in the conflict between the Kuomintang and the Communist Party; this was an attempt to soften up the Communist Party of China, deceive the Chinese people and thus gain control of all China without fighting. The peace negotiations failed, the deception fell through and the curtain rose on the war.
美國之所以採取這種方式，是被中國和全世界的客觀形勢所決定的，並不是美帝國主義的當權派——杜魯門、馬歇爾系統不想直接侵略中國。在助蔣作戰的開頭，又曾演過一出美國出面調處國共兩黨爭端的文明戲，企圖軟化中國共產黨和欺騙中國人民，不戰而控制全中國。和談失敗了，欺騙不行了，戰爭揭幕了。
Liberals or ‘democratic individualists’ who cherish illusions about the United States and have short memories! Please look at Acheson’s own words:
對於美國懷著幻想的善忘的自由主義者或所謂「民主個人主義」者們，請你們看一看艾奇遜的話：
When peace came the United States was confronted with three possible alternatives in China: 1) it could have pulled out lock, stock and barrel; 2) it could have intervened militarily on a major scale to assist the Nationalists to destroy the Communists; 3) it could, while assisting the Nationalists to assert their authority over as much of China as possible, endeavor to avoid a civil war by working for a compromise between the two sides.
「和平來到的時候，美國在中國碰到了三種可能的選擇：（一）它可以一乾二淨地撤退；（二）它可以實行大規模的軍事干涉，幫助國民黨毀滅共產黨；（三）它可以幫助國民黨把他們的權力在中國最大可能的地區裡面建立起來，同時卻努力促成雙方的妥協來避免內戰。」
Why didn’t the United States adopt the first of these policies? Acheson says:
為什麼不採取第一個政策呢？艾奇遜說：
The first alternative would, and I believe American public opinion at the time so felt, have represented an abandonment of our international responsibilities and of our traditional policy of friendship for China before we had made a determined effort to be of assistance.
「我相信當時的美國民意認為，第一種選擇等於叫我們不要堅決努力地先做一番補救工作，就把我們的國際責任，把我們對華友好的傳統政策，統統放棄。」
So that’s how things stand: the ‘international responsibilities’ of the United States and its ‘traditional policy of friendship for China’ are nothing but intervention against China. Intervention is called assuming international responsibilities and showing friendship for China; as to non-intervention, it simply won’t do. Here Acheson defiles US public opinion; his is the ‘public opinion’ of Wall Street, not the public opinion of the American people.
原來美國的所謂「國際責任」和「對華友好的傳統政策」，就是干涉中國。干涉就叫做擔負國際責任，干涉就叫做對華友好，不干涉是不行的。艾奇遜在這裡強姦了美國的民意，這是華爾街的「民意」，不是美國的民意。
Why didn’t the United States adopt the second of these policies? Acheson says:
為什麼不採取第二個政策呢？艾奇遜說：
The second alternative policy, while it may look attractive theoretically and in retrospect, was wholly impracticable. The Nationalists had been unable to destroy the Communists during the ten years before the war. Now after the war the Nationalists were, as indicated above, weakened, demoralized, and unpopular. They had quickly dissipated their popular support and prestige in the areas liberated from the Japanese by the conduct of their civil and military officials. The Communists on the other hand were much stronger than they had ever been and were in control of most of North China. Because of the ineffectiveness of the Nationalist forces which was later to be tragically demonstrated, the Communists probably could have been dislodged only by American arms. It is obvious that the American people would not have sanctioned such a colossal commitment of our armies in 1945 or later. We therefore came to the third alternative policy… .
「第二種供選擇的政策，從理論上來看，以及回顧起來，雖然都似乎是令人神往，卻是完全行不通的。戰前的十年里，國民黨已經毀滅不了共產黨。現在是戰後了，國民黨是削弱了，意志消沈了，失去了民心，這在前文已經有了說明。在那些從日本手裡收復過來的地區里，國民黨文武官員的行為一下子就斷送了人民對國民黨的支持，斷送了它的威信。可是共產黨卻比以往無論什麼時候都強盛，整個華北差不多都被他們控制了。從國民黨軍隊後來所表現的不中用的慘況看來，也許只有靠美國的武力才可以把共產黨打跑。對於這樣龐大的責任，無論是叫我們的軍隊在一九四五年來承擔，或者是在以後來承擔，美國人民顯然都不會批准。我們因此採取了第三種供選擇的政策……」
What a splendid idea! The United States supplies the money and guns and Chiang Kai-shek the men to fight for the United States and slaughter the Chinese people, to ‘destroy the Communists’ and turn China into a US colony, so that the United States may fulfil its ‘international responsibilities’ and carry out its ‘traditional policy of friendship for China’.
好辦法，美國出錢出槍，蔣介石出人，替美國打仗殺中國人，「毀滅共產黨」，變中國為美國的殖民地，完成美國的「國際責任」，實現「對華友好的傳統政策」。
Although the Kuomintang was corrupt and incompetent, ‘demoralized and unpopular’, the United States nevertheless supplied it with money and guns and made it fight. Direct armed intervention was all right, ‘theoretically’. It also seems all right ‘in retrospect’ to the rulers of the United States. For direct armed intervention would really have been interesting and it might ‘look attractive’. But it would not have worked in practice, for ‘it is obvious that the American people would not have sanctioned’ it. Not that the imperialist group of Truman, Marshall, Acheson and their like did not desire it—they very much desired it—but the situation in China, in the United States and in the world as a whole (a point Acheson does not mention) did not permit it; they had to give up their preference and take the third way.
國民黨腐敗無能，「意志消沈了，失去了民心」，還是要出錢出槍叫它打仗。直接出兵干涉，在「理論上」是妥當的。單就美國統治者來說，「回顧起來」，也是妥當的。因為這樣做起來實在有興趣，「似乎是令人神往」。但是在事實上是不行的，「美國人民顯然都不會批准」。不是我們——杜魯門、馬歇爾、艾奇遜等人的帝國主義系統——不想乾，乾是很想的，只是因為中國的形勢，美國的形勢，還有整個國際的形勢（這點艾奇遜沒有說）不許可，不得已而求其次，採取了第三條路。
Let those Chinese who believe that ‘victory is possible even without international help’ listen. Acheson is giving you a lesson. Acheson is a good teacher, giving lessons free of charge, and he is telling the whole truth with tireless zeal and great candour. The United States refrained from dispatching large forces to attack China, not because the US government didn’t want to, but because it had worries. First worry: the Chinese people would oppose it, and the US government was afraid of getting hopelessly bogged down in a quagmire. Second worry: the American people would oppose it, and so the US government dared not order mobilization. Third worry: the people of the Soviet Union, of Europe and of the rest of the world would oppose it, and the US government would face universal condemnation. Acheson’s charming candour has its limits and he is unwilling to mention the third worry. The reason is he is afraid of losing face before the Soviet Union, he is afraid that the Marshall Plan in Europe,[5] which is already a failure despite pretences to the contrary, may end dismally in total collapse.
那些認為「不要國際援助也可以勝利」的中國人聽著，艾奇遜在給你們上課了。艾奇遜是不拿薪水上義務課的好教員，他是如此誨人不倦地毫無隱諱地說出了全篇的真理。美國之所以沒有大量出兵進攻中國，不是因為美國政府不願意，而是因為美國政府有顧慮。第一顧慮中國人民反對它，它怕陷在泥潭里拔不出去。第二顧慮美國人民反對它，因此不敢下動員令。第三顧慮蘇聯和歐洲的人民以及各國的人民反對它，它將冒天下之大不韙。艾奇遜的可愛的坦白性是有限度的，這第三個顧慮他不願意說。這是因為他怕在蘇聯面前丟臉，他怕已經失敗了但是還要裝做好像沒有失敗的樣子的歐洲馬歇爾計劃[5]陷入全盤崩潰的慘境。
Let those Chinese who are short-sighted, muddle-headed liberals or democratic individualists listen. Acheson is giving you a lesson; he is a good teacher for you. He has made a clean sweep of your fancied US humanity, justice and virtue. Isn’t that so? Can you find a trace of humanity, justice or virtue in the White Paper or in Acheson’s Letter of Transmittal?
那些近視的思想糊塗的自由主義或民主個人主義的中國人聽著，艾奇遜在給你們上課了，艾奇遜是你們的好教員。你們所設想的美國的仁義道德，已被艾奇遜一掃而空。不是嗎？你們能在白皮書和艾奇遜信件里找到一絲一毫的仁義道德嗎？
True, the United States has science and technology. But unfortunately they are in the grip of the capitalists, not in the hands of the people, and are used to exploit and oppress the people at home and to perpetrate aggression and to slaughter people abroad. There is also ‘democracy’ in the United States. But unfortunately it is only another name for the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie by itself. The United States has plenty of money. But unfortunately it is willing to give money only to the Chiang Kai-shek reactionaries, who are rotten to the core. The United States, it is said, is and will be quite willing to give money to its fifth column in China, but is unwilling to give it to the ordinary run of liberals or democratic individualists, who are much too bookish and do not know how to appreciate favours, and naturally it is even more unwilling to give money to the Communists. Money may be given, but only conditionally. What is the condition? Follow the United States. The Americans have sprinkled some relief flour in Peiping, Tientsin and Shanghai to see who will stoop to pick it up. Like Chiang Tai Kung fishing,[6] they have cast the line for the fish who want to be caught. But he who swallows food handed out in contempt[7] will get a bellyache.
美國確實有科學，有技術，可惜抓在資本家手裡，不抓在人民手裡，其用處就是對內剝削和壓迫，對外侵略和殺人。美國也有「民主政治」，可惜只是資產階級一個階級的獨裁統治的別名。美國有很多錢，可惜只願意送給極端腐敗的蔣介石反動派。現在和將來據說很願意送些給它在中國的第五縱隊，但是不願意送給一般的書生氣十足的不識抬舉的自由主義者，或民主個人主義者，當然更加不願意送給共產黨。送是可以的，要有條件。什麼條件呢？就是跟我走。美國人在北平，在天津，在上海，都灑了些救濟粉，看一看什麼人願意彎腰拾起來。太公釣魚，願者上鈎。嗟來之食，吃下去肚子要痛的[6]。
We Chinese have backbone. Many who were once liberals or democratic individualists have stood up to the US imperialists and their running dogs, the Kuomintang reactionaries. Wen Yi-to rose to his full height and smote the table, angrily faced the Kuomintang pistols and died rather than submit.[8] Chu Tse-ching, though seriously ill, starved to death rather than accept US ‘relief food’.[9] Han Yu of the Tang Dynasty wrote a ‘Eulogy of Po Yi’,[10] praising a man with quite a few ‘democratic individualist’ ideas, who shirked his duty towards the people of his own country, deserted his post and opposed the people’s war of liberation of that time, led by King Wu. He lauded the wrong man. We should write eulogies of Wen Yi-to and Chu Tse-ching who demonstrated the heroic spirit of our nation.
我們中國人是有骨氣的。許多曾經是自由主義者或民主個人主義者的人們，在美國帝國主義者及其走狗國民黨反動派面前站起來了。聞一多拍案而起，橫眉怒對國民黨的手槍，寧可倒下去，不願屈服[7]。朱自清一身重病，寧可餓死，不領美國的「救濟糧」[8]。唐朝的韓愈寫過《伯夷頌》[9]，頌的是一個對自己國家的人民不負責任、開小差逃跑、又反對武王領導的當時的人民解放戰爭、頗有些「民主個人主義」思想的伯夷，那是頌錯了。我們應當寫聞一多頌，寫朱自清頌，他們表現了我們民族的英雄氣概。
What matter if we have to face some difficulties? Let them blockade us! Let them blockade us for eight or ten years! By that time all of China’s problems will have been solved. Will the Chinese cower before difficulties when they are not afraid even of death? Lao Tzu said, ‘The people fear not death, why threaten them with it?’[11] US imperialism and its running dogs, the Chiang Kai-shek reactionaries, have not only ‘threatened’ us with death but actually put many of us to death. Besides people like Wen Yi-to, they have killed millions of Chinese in the last three years with US carbines, machine-guns, mortars, bazookas, howitzers, tanks and bombs dropped from aeroplanes. This situation is now coming to an end. They have been defeated. It is we who are going in to attack them, not they who are coming out to attack us. They will soon be finished. True, the few problems left to us, such as blockade, unemployment, famine, inflation and rising prices, are difficulties, but we have already begun to breathe more easily than in the past three years. We have come triumphantly through the ordeal of the last three years, why can’t we overcome these few difficulties of today? Why can’t we live without the United States?
多少一點困難怕什麼。封鎖吧，封鎖十年八年，中國的一切問題都解決了。中國人死都不怕，還怕困難嗎？老子說過：「民不畏死，奈何以死懼之。」[10]美帝國主義及其走狗蔣介石反動派，對於我們，不但「以死懼之」，而且實行叫我們死。聞一多等人之外，還在過去的三年內，用美國的卡賓槍、機關槍、迫擊炮、火箭炮、榴彈炮、坦克和飛機炸彈，殺死了數百萬中國人。現在這種情況已近尾聲了，他們打了敗仗了，不是他們殺過來而是我們殺過去了，他們快要完蛋了。留給我們多少一點困難，封鎖、失業、災荒、通貨膨脹、物價上升之類，確實是困難，但是比起過去三年來已經松了一口氣了。過去三年的一關也闖過了，難道不能克服現在這點困難嗎？沒有美國就不能活命嗎？
When the People’s Liberation Army crossed the Yangtse River, the US colonial government at Nanking fled helter-skelter. Yet His Excellency Ambassador Stuart sat tight, watching wide-eyed, hoping to set up shop under a new signboard and to reap some profit. But what did he see? Apart from the People’s Liberation Army marching past, column after column, and the workers, peasants and students rising in hosts, he saw something else—the Chinese liberals or democratic individualists turning out in force, shouting slogans and talking revolution together with the workers, peasants, soldiers and students. In short, he was left out in the cold, ‘standing all alone, body and shadow comforting each other’.[12] There was nothing more for him to do, and he had to take to the road, his briefcase under his arm.
人民解放軍橫渡長江，南京的美國殖民政府如鳥獸散。司徒雷登大使老爺卻坐著不動，睜起眼睛看著，希望開設新店，撈一把。司徒雷登看見了什麼呢？除了看見人民解放軍一隊一隊地走過，工人、農民、學生一群一群地起來之外，他還看見了一種現象，就是中國的自由主義者或民主個人主義者們也大群地和工農兵學生等人一道喊口號，講革命。總之是沒有人去理他，使得他「煢煢孑立，形影相弔」[11]，沒有什麼事做了，只好挾起皮包走路。
There are still some intellectuals and other people in China who have muddled ideas and illusions about the United States. Therefore we should explain things to them, win them over, educate them and unite with them, so they will come over to the side of the people and not fall into the snares set by imperialism. But the prestige of US imperialism among the Chinese people is completely bankrupt, and the White Paper is a record of its bankruptcy. Progressives should make good use of the White Paper to educate the Chinese people.
中國還有一部分知識分子和其它人等存有糊塗思想，對美國存有幻想，因此應當對他們進行說服、爭取、教育和團結的工作，使他們站到人民方面來，不上帝國主義的當。但是整個美帝國主義在中國人民中的威信已經破產了，美國的白皮書，就是一部破產的記錄。先進的人們，應當很好地利用白皮書對中國人民進行教育工作。
Leighton Stuart has departed and the White Paper has arrived. Very good. Very good. Both events are worth celebrating.
司徒雷登走了，白皮書來了，很好，很好。這兩件事都是值得慶祝的。
Source
From the online Selected Works of Mao Tse-tung. For the original, see 别了，司徒雷登.
Notes
[1] John Leighton Stuart, who was born in China in 1876, was always a loyal agent of US cultural aggression in China. He started missionary work in China in 1905 and in 1919 became president of Yenching University, which was established by the United States in Peking. On July 11, 1946, he was appointed US ambassador to China. He actively supported the Kuomintang reactionaries in prosecuting the civil war and carried out various political intrigues against the Chinese people. On August 2, 1949, because all the efforts of US imperialism to obstruct the victory of the Chinese people’s revolution had completely failed, Leighton Stuart had to leave China quietly. 司徒雷登（一八七六——一九六二），美國人，生於中國杭州。一九○五年開始在中國傳教，一九一九年起任美國在中國興辦的燕京大學的校長。一九四六年七月十一日，出任美國駐中國大使，積極支持國民黨反動政府進行反人民內戰。一九四九年四月南京解放後，司徒雷登留在南京觀望。同年八月二日，由於美帝國主義阻撓中國人民革命勝利的一切努力都已徹底失敗，司徒雷登不得不悄然離開中國。
[2] Following the Japanese surrender in 1945, the armed forces of the United States, with the purpose of aggression against China’s territory and sovereignty and of interference in her domestic affairs, landed in China and stationed themselves at Peiping, Shanghai, Nanking, Tientsin, Tangshan, Kaiping, Chinwangtao, Chinghai, Tsingtao and other places. In addition, they repeatedly invaded the Liberated Areas. On July 29, 1946, US troops in Tientsin, in co-ordination with Chiang Kai-shek’s bandit troops, assaulted the town of Anping, Hsiangho County, Hopei Province; this is the Anping Incident referred to in the text. On March 1, 1947, US troops made a military reconnaissance of the position of the People’s Liberation Army at Hohsipao, situated between Changchun and Chintai in northeastern China. On June 16, 1946, US troops at Tangshan, Hopei Province, raided Sungchiaying and other places; in July they raided Sanho Village, Luanhsien County, and Hsihonan Village, Changli County, both near Tangshan. Of the numerous attacks on the Eastern Shantung Peninsula, the most widely-known were two, one by US aircraft and warships on Langnuankou and Hsiaoli Island, Mouping County, on August 28, 1947, and the other by US forces on Wanglintao Village, north of Chimo County, on December 25, 1947 in co-ordination with Chiang Kai-shek’s bandit troops. In all these cases in which the US forces committed acts of aggression by invading the Liberated Areas, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army or the local people’s armed forces took just action in self-defence. 一九四五年日本投降以後，以侵略中國領土主權和干涉中國內政為目的的美國軍隊即在中國登陸，侵駐北平、上海、南京、天津、唐山、開平、秦皇島、靜海、青島等地區，並不斷地向解放區進犯。本文中所舉的安平鎮事件，是一九四六年七月二十九日駐天津美軍配合國民黨軍隊進攻河北省香河縣安平鎮的事件。九台事件，是一九四七年三月一日美軍向長春和九台間的和氣堡人民解放軍陣地進行軍事偵察的事件。唐山事件，是指一九四六年六月十六日駐唐山美軍向宋家營等地侵擾，和同年七月間，在唐山附近的灤縣三河莊子、昌黎縣西河南村的侵擾。美軍對膠東半島的侵犯，前後發生多次，著名的有兩次，一次是一九四七年八月二十八日美國的飛機和軍艦向牟平縣浪暖口、小里島侵犯；一次是同年十二月二十五日美軍配合國民黨軍隊進攻即墨縣北的王疃院。對於上述美軍進犯解放區的侵略行為，中國人民解放軍或地方人民武裝，都曾採取了嚴正的自衛行動。
[3] Claire Lee Chennault was at one time US adviser to the Kuomintang government’s air force. After the Japanese surrender, he organized a group of the US 14th Air Force personnel into an air transport corps to help the Kuomintang fight the civil war. His air transport corps took a direct part in the criminal reconnoitring and bombing of the Liberated Areas. 陳納德，美國人。抗日戰爭時期，曾任國民黨政府空軍顧問，並組織「美國志願航空隊」（又稱「飛虎隊」，後改為第十四航空隊），支持中國抗戰。日本投降後，他率領美國第十四航空隊一部分人員，組織空運隊，幫助國民黨進行內戰。
[4] See ‘On the Outrages by British Warships—Statement by the Spokesman of the General Headquarters of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’. 見《中國人民解放軍總部發言人為英國軍艦暴行發表的聲明》。
[5] On 5 June 1947, US Secretary of State George C. Marshall made a speech at Harvard University, putting forward a plan for so-called US ‘aid’ to rehabilitate Europe. The ‘European Recovery Programme’ subsequently drawn up by the US government on the basis of the speech was known as the ‘Marshall Plan’. 第二次世界大戰結束後，西歐由於戰爭破壞和自然災害的影響，政治動蕩，經濟衰退。為了控制西歐和擴大國外市場，美國國務卿馬歇爾在一九四七年六月五日的一次演說中，建議歐洲國家共同擬訂一個「復興」計劃，由美國予以「援助」。七月，英、法、意等十六國在巴黎開會，決定接受馬歇爾建議，成立歐洲經濟合作委員會（後改為歐洲經濟合作組織），提出「歐洲復興方案」。由於這個方案是根據馬歇爾的建議制訂的，故又被稱為馬歇爾計劃。一九四八年四月杜魯門總統簽署美國《一九四八年經濟合作法》（即「一九四八年對外援助法」）後，馬歇爾計劃正式執行。一九五一年底，美國宣佈提前結束執行這個計劃。
[6] Chiang Tai Kung lived in the Chou Dynasty. According to a legend, he once fished in the Weishui River, holding a rod without hook or bait three feet above the water, and saying, ‘The fish that is destined to be caught will come up.’ (From Stories About King Wu’s Expedition Against the Yin Dynasty.) 「太公釣魚，願者上鈎」，是一個民間傳說。據傳周朝姜太公曾在渭水河邊用無餌的直鈎在水面三尺上釣魚，說：「負命者上釣來！」（見《武王伐紂平話》卷中）。
[7] ‘Food handed out in contempt’ refers to alms handed out as an insult. It is an allusion to a story in the Book of Rites, which tells of a hungry man in the State of Chi, who would rather starve to death than accept food given him insultingly. 「嗟來之食」，是指一種帶侮辱性的施捨。齊國的一個飢民因為不吃嗟來之食而餓死的故事，見《禮記·檀弓下》。
[8] Wen Yi-to (1899-1946), famed Chinese poet, scholar and university professor. In 1943 he began to take an active part in the struggle for democracy out of bitter hatred for the reaction and corruption of the Chiang Kai-shek government. After the War of Resistance Against Japan, he vigorously opposed the Kuomintang’s conspiracy with US imperialism to start civil war against the people. On 15 July 1946, he was assassinated in Kunming by Kuomintang thugs. 聞一多（一八九九——一九四六），湖北浠水人，著名的詩人、學者和教授。一九四三年以後，由於痛恨國民黨政府的反動和腐敗，積極參加爭取民主的鬥爭。抗日戰爭結束後，積極地反對國民黨勾結美帝國主義發動反人民的內戰。一九四六年七月十五日在昆明被國民黨特務暗殺。
[9] Chu Tse-ching (1898-1948) Chinese man of letters and university professor. After the War of Resistance, he actively supported the student movement against the Chiang Kai-shek regime. In June 1948 he signed a declaration protesting against the revival of Japanese militarism, which was being fostered by the United States, and rejecting ‘US relief’ flour. He was then living in great poverty. He died in Peiping on August l2, 1948, from poverty and illness, but even on his death-bed he enjoined his family not to buy the US flour rationed by the Kuomintang government. 朱自清（一八九八——一九四八），原籍浙江紹興，生於江蘇東海，現代文學家、教授。抗日戰爭結束後，他積極支持反對蔣介石統治的學生運動。一九四八年六月簽名於抗議美國扶植日本和拒絕領取「美援」麵粉的宣言。當時他的生活非常困苦，這年八月十二日終因貧病在北平逝世。在他逝世以前，還囑咐家人不要買國民黨政府配售的平價美援麵粉。
[10] Han Yu (768-824) was a famous writer of the Tang Dynasty. ‘Eulogy of Po Yi’ was a prose piece written by him. Po Yi, who lived towards the end of the Yin Dynasty, opposed the expedition of King Wu of Chou against the House of Yin. After the downfall of the House of Yin, he fled to the Shouyang Mountain and starved to death rather than eat of Chou grain. 韓愈（七六八——八二四），中國唐代著名的大作家。《伯夷頌》是韓愈所寫的一篇散文。伯夷，殷末人，周武王進軍討伐殷王朝，他曾經表示反對；武王滅殷後，他逃避到首陽山，不食周粟而死。
[11] A quotation from Lao Tzu Chapter LXXIV. 見《老子》第七十四章。
[12] A quotation from Li Mi’s ‘Memorial to the Emperor’. 見李密《陳情表》。