14. Le Manh Trinh, “Dans le Kouang Toung,” p. 110.
15. Glimpses/Life, p. 36; Nguyen Viet Hong, “Nguyen Ai Quoc co hay khong ve nuoc nam 1929?) [Did Nguyen Ai Quoc return to his country or not in 1929?”], in Tap chi Xua va Nay [Yesterday and Today] (Hanoi), no. 4 (July 1994), p. 15. Also see Hoang Van Hoan, A Drop in the Ocean: Hoang Van Hoan’s Revolutionary Reminiscences (Beijing: Foreign Languages Press, 1988), p. 47, and Tran Lam, “De la fable à la réalité,” in Souvenirs, pp. 122–23.
16. Li Xianheng, “Ywe Nan Geming jen canjia Guangzhou qiyi de jingguo” [The case of Vietnamese revolutionaries taking part in the Canton uprising], unidentified article in my possession, p. 333.
17. Information on the competition between the various groups is contained in Contribution à l’histoire des mouvements politiques de l’Indochine Française, 6 vols. (Hanoi: Imprimerie de l’Extrême Orient, 1933).
18. See “Déclarations dernières de Nguyen Dinh Tu—dit provisoirement Pham Van Cam, dit Van Cam dit Nguyen Van Cam—sur sa vie depuis Juin 1925 jusqu’à son arrestation en date du 5 août 1929 à Ha Tinh,” pp. 44–49, in Dossier 2690, Carton 335, CAOM. According to this source, Lam Duc Thu was elected president at that meeting. Also see William J. Duiker, The Comintern and Vietnamese Communism (Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Center for International Studies, 1975), p. 14.
19. Tran Van Cung has given his version of the issue in his memoirs, Buoc ngoat vi dai cua lich su cach mang Viet Nam [A great step for the history of the Vietnamese revolution] (Hanoi: Ban nghien cuu lich su Dang, n.d.), pp. 105–19.
20. See Phan Than Son, “Le Mouvement Ouvrier de 1920 à 1930,” in Jean Chesneaux, ed., Tradition et Révolution au Vietnam (Paris: n.p., 1971), pp. 169–70. For information on Thang, see Christophe Giebel, “Telling Life: An Approach to the Official Biography of Ton Due Thang,” in K. W. Taylor and John K. Whitmore, eds., Essays into Vietnamese Pasts (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Southeast Asia Program, 1995), pp. 246–71.
21. For a trenchant discussion of the impact of the Sixth Congress on the league, See Gareth Porter, “Proletariat and peasantry in Early Vietnamese Communism,” Asian Thought and Society 1, no. 3 (December 1976).
22. I. N. Ognetov, “Komintern i revoliutsionnoe dvizhenie vo V’ietname” [The Comintern and the revolutionary movement in Vietnam], in Komintern i Vostok [The Comintern and the East] (Moscow: n.p., 1969), p. 428, Nguyen Van Tao may have been selected as an FCP delegate at the suggestion of Nguyen Ai Quoc—see Hong Ha, V Strane Sovetov, p.128. At one time, many observers in Vietnam thought that An was Nguyen Ai Quoc; see, for example, Nguyen Kien Giang, Viet Nam nam dau tien sou each mang thang tarn [Vietnam in the first years following the August Revolution] (Hanoi: Su that, 1961), p. 215. Nguyen Van Tao has since discussed his attendance at the Sixth Congress in his memoirs. His topic was evidently picked on the instructions of his superiors. See “Recalling the days spent attending the Sixth Congress of the Communist International,” in Tap chi Cong san [Communist Review], no. 7 (July 1983), translated in JPRS, no. 84,288. One of the delegates at the congress, Nguyen The Binh, did not like Tao and, when he was later seized by the French, provided information about the congress. See “note concernant Ngo Duc Tri et Nguyen The Binh,” in dossier labeled “Les élèves Annamites a l’école Staline et le Pacte Franco-Soviétique du 29 novembre 1932,” in SLOTFOM, Series III, Carton 44, CAOM.
23. Whether Le Hong Son’s fear of Chinese retaliation was justified must remain a matter of speculation. There is some evidence that Chinese officials tolerated the activities of the league so long as it was restricted to the Vietnamese community and directed specifically at the colonial regime in Indochina, toward which Chiang Kai-shek harbored a deep distrust. The creation of a formal Communist Party, though, would obviously stretch Chinese official tolerance to its limits. It is also possible, in the light of events that will be discussed below, that by this point Le Hong Son had strong suspicions that Lam Duc Thu was actively betraying the league to its enemies. For a list of the delegates present at the congress, see “Les Associations anti-Françaises en Indochina et le propagande communiste: Historique,” in SLOTFOM, Series III, Carton 48, CAOM. This source, a series of classified reports known as “Notes Périodiques,” was issued periodically by the Sûreté Générale in Hanoi from 1929 until the eve of World War II; they provide a valuable insight into Vietnamese nationalist activities and the French attempts to control them. The Sûreté reported that Le Hong Son himself had initially wanted to change the name of the organization to the Vietnamese Communist Party when he had moved the headquarters of the organization briefly to Guangxi in 1928. See “Note Périodique: Historique,” p. 62, in ibid.
24. For this statement, see Tran Huy Lieu, Tai lieu tham khao Lich su cach mang Can dai Viet Nam [Historical research materials concerning the revolution in modern Vietnam], vol. 4 (Hanoi: n.p., 1958), pp. 170–73. For references to the meeting in Hong Kong, see Tran Van Cung Buoc ngoat, and Quang Hung and Quoc Anh (Tran Van Cung), “Le Hong Son: Nguoi chien si xuat sac thuoc the he nhung nguoi cong san dau tien o Viet-nam” [Le Hong Son: The most outstanding fighter of his generation among the first communists in Vietnam), in NCLS, no. 184 (Jan-Feb 1979), pp. II–16. A French intelligence report on the conference, “Note Périodique,” no. 4, January 1930, is located in SLOTFOM, Series III, Carton 48, CAOM.
25. The letter of request is contained in appendix no. 3, Contribution à l’histoire, vol. 4. Moscow’s negative reply came in December 1929—see appendix 7, ibid.
26. This information is from the dossier on Duong Hac Dinh, undated, in SPCE, Carton 367, CAOM. Duong Hac Dinh, the only member of the Tonkin regional committee not to leave the congress in May, later became a French agent.
27. Quang Hung and Quoc Anh, “Le Hong Son,” p. 19.
28. The decision to send Le Duy Diem (code name Le Loi) to find Nguyen Ai Quoc was reported in the dossier on Duong Hac Dinh, in SPCE, Carton 367, CAOM. Diem had once been a member of the Tan Viet. For the transformation of the Tan Viet Party into the Indochinese Communist League, see Tran Huu Chuong, “Memoirs concerning the Indochinese Communist League,” in Tap chi Cong san, no. 2 (February 1983), translated in JPRS, no. 83,452.
29. The Comintern directive of October 27, 1929, titled “On the Problem of Forming an Indochinese Communist Party,” is contained in a Vietnamese version in Tran Van Cung, Buoc ngoat, pp. 68–74 and in Van kien Dang (1930–1945) [Party documents, (1930–1945)], vol. 1 (Hanoi: Ban nghien cuu lich su dang truong uong, 1977) pp. 9–17. For an English translation, see Vietnam Documents and Research Notes (U.S. Mission in Vietnam, Saigon), document no. 100, part II, pp. 247–52.
30. Correspondence between the two parties contained in the Annex to the report of the governor-general to the ministry of colonies, February 12, 1930, in SLOTFOM, Series III, Carton 129, CAOM.
31. Do Ngoc Dzu provided information on his trip during an interrogation by the French. See “Dossier on déclaration de Do Ngoc Du,” August 10, 1931, in SPCE, Carton 367, CAOM. Do Ngoc Dzu, also known as Phiem Chu, was born in Hai Duong province in 1907. Born in an educated family, he attended the Collège du Protectorat and was expelled in 1928 for taking part in school strikes. He then joined the league and attended its training class in Canton during its second term, from October 1926 to January 1927. Then he attended the Whampoa Academy and was sent back to Vietnam to work in Hanoi with Duong Hac Dinh. See Huynh Kim Khanh, Vietnamese Communism, 1925–1945 (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1982), p. 124.
32. The formation of the Federation of Communist Groups of Insulinde and the visit of the “Chinese inspector” in November were noted by the French in a report titled “L’Action déterminante de Nguyen Ai Quoc dans la création du Parti National Communiste Annamite,” undated, in SPCE, Carton 367, CAOM. According to French sources, Le Hong Son and his colleagues were also unhappy at being placed under Chinese supervision as the result of reports that the CCP was making its followers work in factories or mass associations to weed out weaker members. See
the Note Périodique dated November 1929 in ibid. For information on the formation of the Shanghai branch of the Far Easrern Bureau, see Gunther Nollau, International Communism and World Revolution (New York: Praeger, 1961), p. 141. Also see Frederick S. Litten, “The Noulens Affair,” China Quarterly, no. 138 (June 1994), p. 503. According to Nollau, the first head of the Shanghai branch was the American Communist Earl Browder. He was succeeded by the German Gerhard Eisler sometime in 1929.
33. Note Périodique, January 1930, p. 6, in SLOTFOM, Series III, Carton 48, CAOM; Note Confidentielle, no. 1725/SG, March 17, 1930, in SPCE, Carton 368, CAOM. Some observers have speculated that the Comintern representative might have been Nguyen Ai Quoc. In fact, it is probable that the visitor was a Ukrainian going by the name of Hilaire Noulens, who had arrived in Shanghai to work at the Bureau in 1928 and was reportedly out of the city on a tour of the region during the winter of 1929–30. As we shall see, he returned to Shanghai in February or March 1930. See Litten, “Noulens Affair,” pp. 502–3,
34. Quoc’s letter to the CPI is in Letter of Nguyen Ai Quoc to leaders of DDCSD [Dong duong Cong san Dang, or CPI], contained in report of Sûreté Générale, December 31, 1929, in SPCE, Carton 368, CAOM. Nguyen Ai Quoc’s account of his trip is contained in his letter to the FEB, February 18, 1930, in the Ho Chi Minh Museum in Hanoi. For a French account, see “L’Action déterminante …,” in SPCE, Carton 367, CAOM. Also see Kobelev, p. 96, and Hong Ha, V Strane Sovetov, p. 135.
35. Presumably Nguyen Ai Quoc was traveling on a false passport. For one account of his trip, see “Interrogation of Hong Son,” October 24, 1932, in SPCE, Carton 367, CAOM. Nguyen Ai Quoc’s own account is contained in his letter to the FEB, February 18, 1930, in the Ho Chi Minh Museum in Hanoi. For a French version compiled by the Sûreté, see “L’Action déterminante …,” in SPCE, Carton 367, CAOM. In his letter, Quoc gave December 23 as the date of his arrival, but that date was based on the lunar calendar—see Huynh Kim Khanh, Vietnamese Communism, p. 125n. According to Contribution à l’histoire, vol. 4, p. 24, he arrived in Hong Kong in January. In his interrogation by the French, Le Hong Son declared that Quoc arrived in February, and that the unity conférence took place in March.
36. Dossier on Duong Hac Dinh, in SPCE, Carton 367, CAOM. For Kobelev’s version, see p. 94. Nguyen Ai Quoc apologized for not coming sooner, and explained that he had tried without success to enter Vietnam via Siam. Nguyen Ai Quoc’s meeting with members of the CCP is described briefly in HZYZ, p. 43. The invitation to various cadres to come to Hong Kong for a unity conference was sent by Ho Tung Mau on November 29, 1929. On January 15, 1930, CPI responded that it would sent two representatives. See Contribution à l’histoire, vol. 4, p. 24.
37. The representatives from the ACP were Chau Van Liem and Nguyen Thieu. Trinh Dinh Cu and Nguyen Duc Canh represented the CPI. For the mishaps of the Indochinese Communist League delegates, see T.C., “Cac co so bi mat cua co quan lanh dao Dang Cong san Dong duong” [The clandestine foundations of the leading organs of the Indochinese Communist Party], in NCLS, no. 37 (April 1962), p. 20.
38. Huynh Kim Khanh, Vietnamese Communism, p. 125, stated that there were a few days of invective befote agreement to unite was reached. But Le Hong Son said the program was accepted by unanimous vote in one day. See his interrogation, October 24, 1932, in SPCE, Carton 367, CAOM.
39. The note of January 6, 1930, is contained in the Ho Chi Minh Museum in Hanoi and is reproduced in Van kien Dang toan tap [Complete Party Documents], vol. 2 (Hanoi: Chinh tri Quoc gia, 1998), Huynh Kim Khanh, Vietnamese Communism, p. 125n, noted that with the new name of the Party, they adopted the Vietnamese form, putting the word “party” first, instead of in Chinese fashion, with “party” last. Also see Van kien Dang, vol. 1, p. 191.
40. This is not the same document that had been sent by the Comintern from Moscow in October—see 29, above. For a reference to the arrival of the December report in Saigon, see Nguyen Nghia, “To chuc va phat dong phong trao dau tranh o Nam ky sau khi Dang ra vua moi thong nhat ra doi” [The organization and mobilization of the struggle movement in the South after our newly united Party was formed], in NCLS, no. 67 (October 1964), p. 59. Since Nghia makes no mention of being aware of the report’s existence during the meeting in Hong Kong, presumably Nguyen Ai Quoc had not seen a copy at that time.
41. For a French-language version, see Contribution à l’histoire, vol. 4, appendix 7. A Vietnamese-language version exists in Hanoi. Excerpts are cited in the report titled “L’Action déterminante …” in SPCE, Carton 367, CAOM. It was also cited in Note Périodique of December 1929, p. 4, in SLOTFOM, Series III, Carton 48, in ibid.
42. A Vietnamese version of the appeal is in Toan Tap II, vol 2., pp. 307–8. An abridged English-language version is contained in Viet Nam Social Sciences (January 1985), pp. 170–71.
43. For this strategy document, see Toan Tap II, vol 2., pp. 297–98.
44. The letter to Noulens is in the Ho Chi Minh Museum in Hanoi. It is printed in a Vietnamese language version in Van kien Dang Toan tap, vol. 2, pp. 18–25. In a report to Moscow on the results of the conference, Nguyen Ai Quoc remarked that it was a mistake to have abolished the league—see “Bao cao tom tat hoi nghi” [Summary report on the conference] in ibid., pp. 10–13.
VI | Red Nghe Tinh
1. Copies of both letters are contained in the Ho Chi Minh Museum in Hanoi. For a Vietnamese version of the letter to the Dalburo, see Toan Tap I, vol. 3, pp. 9–11. Also see Pierre Rousset, Communisme et Nationalisme Vietnamien (Paris: Editions Galilée, 1978), p. 199.
2. Information on Nguyen Ai Quoc’s Stay in Thailand is contained in Hoang Van Hoan, A Drop in the Ocean: Hoang Van Hoan’s Revolutionary Reminiscences (Beijing: Foreign Languages Press), pp. 52–54. The Comintern had decided to abolish the South Seas Communist Party on the grounds that the Chinese Communist Party had neglected its responsibilities in the area. The South Seas Party, which was composed primarily of ethnic Chinese residing in Malaya and Singapore, had decided to cultivate the overseas Chinese community there because the Malay peoples were allegedly “lazy and contented.” See Noce Périodique, no. 5 (February-March 1930) in SLOT-FOM, Series III, Carton 48, CAOM; also see Charles B. McLane, Soviet Strategies in Southeast Asia (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1966), pp.131–36. McLane cites British government sources to the effect that Nguyen Ai Quoc felt that the failure of the South Seas party was a consequence of its inability to resolve the racial question.
3. French official reports on the uprising are contained in dossier 2614, SPCE, Carton 322, CAOM. For a succinct account of the mutiny, see Thomas Hodgkin, Vietnam: The Revolutionary Path (New York: St. Martin’s, 1981), pp. 240–42. For a Vietnamese point of view, see Hoang Van Dieu, Viet Nam Quoc Dan Dang [Vietnamese Nationalist Party] (Saigon, Khai Tri, 1970), pp. 89–104.
4. Diep Lien Anh, Mau trang—mau dao: Dot song doa-day cua phu cao-su mien dat-do [Latex and blood: The wretched life of the rubber plantation workers in the red-earth districts] (Saigon: Lao Dong Moi, 1965), pp. 35–40, cited in Ngo Vinh Long, Before the Revolution: The Vietnamese Peasants Under the French (New York: Columbia University Press, 1991), pp. 109–12.
5. Nguyen Ai Quoc, Le procès de la colonisation française is included in English in Bernard B. Fall, ed., Ho Chi Minh on Revolution: Selected Writings, 1920–1966, p. 81. Also see Report of M. Favre, special commissioner of the Sûreté at Vinh, June 27, 1931, in dossier 2686, Carton 333, SPCE, CAOM.
6. See the report of M. Billet, June 27, 1931, in SPCE, dossier 2686, Carton 333, CAOM. For an analysis of the impact of French policies on rural income, see Robert L. Sansom, The Economics of Insurgency in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1970), and Truong Chinh and Vo Nguyen Giap, The Peasant Question (1937–1938), (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Southeast Asia Program, 1974), data paper no, 94, pp. 35–37. For Nguyen Ai Quoc’s report on the seizure of land, see “Annamese Peasant Conditions,” in Fall, On Revolution, p. 37.
&nb
sp; 7. Interrogation of Thai Van Giai, June 28, 1931, in SPCE, dossier 2686, Carton 333, CAOM. Giai, a native of Ha Tinh province, was a graduate of the National Academy at Hué and a former school teacher. Other official accounts of these incidents are contained in dossier 2628, Carton 323; dossier 2641, Carton 327; and dossier 2684, Carton 332, all in CAOM. Also see Tran Huy Lieu, Les Soviets du Nghe Tinh (Hanoi: Foreign Languages Press, 1960), pp. 19–21.
8. Interrogation of Thai Van Gai, June 28, 1931 in SPCE, dossier 2686, Carton 333, CAOM.
9. See Nguyen Luong Bang’s article in Souvenirs, p. 63, and “Bao Cao gui Quoc te Cong San,” in Van kien Dang Toan tap [Complete Party Documents], vol. 2 (Hanoi: NXB Chinh tri Quoc gia, 1998), p. 34. For Nguyen Ai Quoc’s comment in Siam, see Le Manh Trinh, “Dans le Koung Tung et au Siam,” in Souvenirs, p. 117. The French intelligence report is in Note Périodique, February—March 1930, in SLOTFOM, Series III, Carton 48, CAOM. One Party history described the VNQDD mutiny as a glorious “clap of thunder,” but according to the VNQDD historian Hoang Van Dao, Communist agitators actually distributed leaflets to alert the French to the pending attack.
10. The provincial committee directive is contained in Tran Huy Lieu, Lick su tam muoi nam chong Pbap [A history of eighty years of struggle against the French], vol. 2 (Hanoi: Van su dia, 1958), pp. 66–67.
11. An official French report on the incident, dated December 31, 1930, is contained in SPCE, dossier 2634, Carton 325, CAOM.
12. Details on the formation of the members of the provisional central committee can be found in T.C., “Cac co so bi mat cua co quan lanh dao Dang Cong san Dong duong” [The clandestine foundations of the leading organs of the Indochinese Communist Party], in NCLS, no. 37 (April 1962); Nguyen Nghia, “Gop them mot it tai lieu ve cong cuoc hop nhat cac to chue cong san dau tien o Viet Nam va vai tro cua dong chi Nguyen Ai Quoc” [Some additional materials on the unification of the first Communist organizations in Vietnam and the role of comrade Nguyen Ai Quoc], in ibid., no. 59 (February 1964); and Nguyen Nghia, “Cong cuoc hop nhat cac to chuc cong san o trong nuoc sau hoi nghi Huong Cang va viec to chuc ban trung uong lam rhoi dau tien” [The unification of the Communist organizations in the country after the Hong Kong meeting and the organization of the first provisional central committee] in ibid, no. 62 (May 1964). These sources do not explain the reasons that the conference did not take place in April, as originally scheduled. In all likelihood, local branches of the VCP had been unable to select their delegates by then.
Ho Chi Minh Page 86
