As
early as 1927, Mao Zedong realised the revolutionary potential of China’s
peasants. In the Yanan period, he developed new agrarian policies, which
helped win the support of millions of peasants in the war against Japan and
then, during the civil war in the forties. When the Communist Party led by
him united the country and came to power in 1949, he set about on a
wholescale reform of China’s agriculture.
The
establishment of agricultural cooperatives became the key factor of
development. The Chinese leaders believed that transforming small peasant
holdings into large collective farms by itself would lead to higher
production because it would permit better organisation of farming
operations, hasten adoption of new techniques and make available large
labour power for intensive cultivation.
To
create a favourable environment, the government established institutions to
purchase farm products at prices notified in advance of the harvest. This
ensured the amount of income available to the farmer. Institutions were set
up to supply consumer articles to the farmer - this stimulated greater
effort on the farm. Credit cooperatives stimulated his savings which were
supplemented by the credit made available by the state institutions.
Agriculture
was collectivised in a short span of five to seven years in distinct stages.
After the absentee landlords were deprived of their landholdings, all
farmers became peasant proprieters. They were placed in three categories -
rich, middle and poor. The latter two were persuaded to set up mutual aid
teams and then elementary cooperatives where size of landholding in addition
to labour, counted for income. Intense propaganda and discreet use of
monopoly sale, purchase and credit institutions were utilised for this
purpose by the Party and state authorities. Soon these were forward by
cooperatives of the higher type of collectives where payment was based on
labour alone and the landholding was no longer relevant. By mid-1956,
ninety-two per cent of the farmers had joined the cooperatives: nearly
sixty-two percent belonged to the higher type, where not only the land but
draught animals, large toots etc. were handed over to the cooperatives. It
was claimed that the cooperatives, by themselves, had increased the
productivity of the farm by fifteen to twenty percent. The target for the
first five year plan ending in 1957 was an increase of a little over
twenty-three per cent.
In
some respects, condition of agriculture in India resembled the condition in
China. A limited quantity of land supported a large population. The size of
farms was small. The farmer relied on higher productivity to raise his
income. The success of cooperatisation in China stimulated interest in
India. The second five year plan of India postulated that a large proportion
of agricultural land would be farmed on a cooperative basis and this would
be achieved over a decade or so. At Indian request, China agreed to receive
two delegations to study the development and rote of cooperative
institutions and to study the programme and methods of raising agricultural
productivity in China. The latter delegation was at the ministerial level
and included senior officials dealing with agriculture and planning. Both
delegations arrived in China in the summer or 1956.
The
two delegations met Premier Zhou En-lai. He was much concerned with the
increasing population of China and showed interest in the family planning
programme in India. Concerning agriculture, he ruled out large scale
mechanisation since this would be expensive and displace labour.
Productivity of land would be increased through use of manpower and animal
power. He insisted on the need for careful experimentation and not to be
carried away by enthusiasm alone.
Premier
Zhou was asked about the relative merits of large and small cooperatives in
the context of motivation of the farmer, which was an important
consideration since the productivity of land was based on the farmers effort
and not on mechanisation. He accepted that the question was valid - the
cooperatives allowed cultivation of small individual plots by farmers, whose
produce was sold in the open market. Further, he did not envisage a farm
labour surplus in the near future as there was considerable scope for
building infrastructure in the villages, e.g. roads, water conservancy
works. (The establishment of communes two year later did not correspond with
his ideas expressed at this time.)
The
Indian agricultural delegation was intrigued by the methods of collection of
data relating to farm size and production. The methods relied on visual
survey and peasant memory. The delegation felt there was an unwitting bias
towards overstating the results, especially since the countervailing methods
like crop cutting sample surveys were not used. This bias influenced
fixation of planned targets of production too. Despite this, the delegation
felt that agricultural productivity had indeed increased. India could
introduce some of the techniques in its agriculture even though
collectivisation on the Chinese model was not envisaged. India was committed
to peasant ownership of land.
Spring
and summer of 1958 saw a massive mobilisation of all sections of society to
build water conservancy projects in the countryside of China. About fifty
kilometres from Beijing, in the vicinity of the tombs of the Ming emperors
the soldiers of the Peoples Liberation Army launched a project to build a
reservoir. Soon, they were joined by the workers from factories and shops in
Beijing. Staff of the government and members of the Communist Party
volunteered in the effort. The mood of the country was electrified when
Chairman Mao Zedong took part in the voluntary labour. The Afro-Asian
diplomats did not want to be left out and requested the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs to arrange for their participation. On the appointed day, the trip
was suddenly cancelled since appropriate arrangements could not be made. It
is unlikely the project suffered a delay in completion due to our
non-participation.
About
this time, there was an occasion when help of the diplomatic corps was
actually sought. The Chinese authorities were
much concerned at the loss of foodgrains due to the depredations of the
pests. Sparrows were considered to be a pest. It was discovered that the
sparrows died if they did not rest after flying a certain number of hours.
The citizens of Beijing were
mobilised
to prevent resting space to the sparrows so that they were forced to fly
until death resulted due to exhaustion. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs
summoned a meeting of the representatives of the diplomatic missions to
request that the sparrows be denied refuge in the diplomatic compounds! This
was an unusual request. Some representatives were sceptical and were
convinced only when they personally saw a senior Vice-Minister standing on
the roof of the Ministry shooing off the sparrows. Not all the missions were
wholly cooperative. Unknowingly they helped by, saving some sparrows - it
was soon discovered that the sparrows played a role in eliminating some
insect pests.
The
main centre of action was in the rural areas which saw frenetic activity
that year. In early September, the Ministery of Foreign Affairs invited the
diplomatic corps to visit Mi Yun, the site of a reservoir under
construction, north of Beijing, and to the east of the Great Wall. The
reservoir was being constructed at the confluence of two rivers and
envisaged construction of eleven dams. It was a tremendous effort centred on
the mobilisation of peasants who were going to be the main beneficiaries. A
fortnight later, the Ministry organised visit to a commune.
The
organisation of communes had received official approval in August. The seeds
had been sown earlier when several collectives had pooled their manpower and
other resources to jointly build water conservancy works. The commune which
was shown to the diplomatic corps was also in the vicinity of Beijing. We
were shown the community dining hall, the kindergarten and the experimental
rice plot, where five thousand kilos of rice per mou (a sixth of an acre)
were being produced. This was an incredible achievement.
The
reservoir and the commune had been visited by the Indian Ambassador, Mr. G.
Parthasarathi. After consultation within the Embassy, the Government of
India were asked to send a group of experts to study the technique of
raising the farm yield, the mobilisation of rural labour to build irrigation
and drainage works, and to study the methodology of amelioration of land
lying uncultivated. The Government of China readily agreed to receive the
experts who arrived in late January, 1959 and were in China for nearly forty
days. The Ambassador had me included in the group.
The
group travelled nearly five thousand kilometres by air, over three thousand
kilometres by train and half that by road. The group visited agricultural
exhibitions, agricultural colleges, research and training institutes,
experimental centres, newly completed projects, construction sites and
several communes. Most of these visits were concentrated along the
Beijing-Guangzhou Axis. The study of communes per se was not on the agenda
since the approaches of the two countries to peasant proprietorship were
different. Yet, a study of agricultural practices could not be divorced from
some knowledge of the communes.
One
of the largest communes was located in the vicinity of Tianjin. It had
eighty-thousand members. Of whom, sixty-four thousand were able-bodied. The
rest were old or sick and able to perform light duties only. The members
elected a representative board of two hundred and fifty. In turn, the board
elected a managing committee of thirty-three members, including thirteen
leading cadres, director and his deputy. The director was paid by the state.
Nearly
half of the total income of the commune was expended MI capital construction
and procurement of seeds, fertilisers and machinery. The remainder was used
to supply food, clothing etc. to the members and their families. The food
was supplied by the communal kitchen releasing women for labour in the
fields. The sick and the old could receive food at home. The
members
also received a cash supplement averaging five yuans per month. The quantum
depended on the nature and quality of work. Men received two and woman four
holidays a month.
The
commune also provided free education and medical aid. It ran schools,
hospitals and maternity homes and paid the staff employed for this purpose.
The
primary activity in this commune was farming. At the next commune, in Guan
Shan in Henan province, the accent was on preventing soil erosion in a
hilly, coal-mining area and providing irrigation facilities. The commune had
a population of about sixty-thousand. On the other hand, the commune in
Chusan village had a strength of four thousand members only. They were
divided into working groups. The commune had organised a special
construction brigade of seventy workers, which was engaged in afforestation
as part of soil conservation work. At the 80 Hu Xiang commune, we were
explained the advantages of deep ploughing, i.e. ploughing to a depth
ranging from forty centimetres to more than a metre. The wells were the
source of irrigation in this commune. Their number had increased from
twenty-three thousand in 1956 to nearly thirty-eight thousand in 1959. The
data on irrigated area related more to potential created than to what was
actually achieved.
Still
in Henan province, the Jiliyan commune of twenty-thousand people, owned and
managed a hydroelectric station with a fall of three metres and three
turbines. The commune had a large cotton growing area and proposed to set up
a textile mill!
The
Ankou country had three hundred and ninety villages with over ninety-two
thousand peasant households. The total arable area was nearly nine hundred
thousand mu. The land was
irrigated by wells, both deep and shallow. The average yield of foodgrains
had increased from two hundred and thirty-two kilos per mu
in 1957 to seven hundred and twenty-seven kilos per mu
in 1958 as a result of implementation of the eight point charter. The eight
points were Irrigation; Use of Manures and Fertilisers; Deep Ploughing and
Improvement of Soil; Seed Selection and Seed Breeding; Close Planting; Plant
Protection; Reform of Tools; Farm Management.
The
villages of the county were grouped into eight people’s communes. Out of
the total population of four hundred and twenty-seven thousand, only one
hundred and eighty-three thousand were able-bodied men and women, i.e.,
within the age group of eighteen to fortyfive. Percents between fortyfive
and sixty were classified as semi-able received no specific tasks. Ten
percent of the able-bodied were employed in local industry and the remainder
in farming and related activities. In the following year, 1954-60, only
fifty percent were to be engaged on farm-related work, the remaining fifty
percent to be employed in industry, i.e., iron and steel, machine building,
electrical industry, etc. (A campaign had been launched to build iron and
steel furnaces in the backyard in the rural areas. This quickly proved to be
a failure. The visit of an Indian team to study this programme was
cancelled.)
Construction
programme of the Cheng Ho reservoir in Hubei province provided an example of
the mobilisation of labour on a large scale. Twenty-four communes located in
five counties took part in construction. Eight out of these twenty-four
communes were from Quemoyi country, which was the main beneficiary. One
hundred thousand workers were engaged on the project. Construction was to be
completed in two winters’and two springs, i.e., during the slack farming
period. The conmunes were responsible for provision of food and lodging to
the labour. The commune members were to build their own lodgings with
materials supplied by the commune. Medical personnel were provided by the
communes. Medicines were provided by the government, which also provided
construction machines. The labour brought its own small tools and
implements. While the toots and implements were transported on trucks
provided by the government agencies, the workers came on foot, in some cases
from as far away as two hundred kilometres.
Cha
Kao commune in Guangdong province provided an example of utilising water
power. The commune with over ten thousand families had constructed three
electricity generating stations, seventeen water power and electricity
generating stations and seven water power stations. The commune utilised
wooden turbines, pulleys, shafts etc. manufactured locally. The agricultural
experimental stations we visited, were engaged in summing up the
“experience of masses” in soil conservation and in increasing the
agricultural production. The agricultural exhibitions provided the norm or
the ideal for comparing the situation in the field. There was considerable
variation between the norm and the reality on the ground. This variation
might have adversely affected agricultural production.
The
major characteristic of the communes was the ability to mobilise large
numbers of local people to construct water conservancy works. Water
conservancy was the key element in agricultural production and the
government sought to bring all cultivable land under irrigation, hence the
mass mobilisation. A small corps of enthusiastic men played a key role in
motivating the labour force. For this, objectives were dearly defined and
explained. Concentration on water conservancy and soil amelioration, it
seemed, affected adversely the normal agricultural operations. There were
instances where harvesting of paddy and processing of cotton were delayed,
affecting in turn the agricultural operations for the ensuing season.
The
group of Indian experts was impressed by the use of local materials and
indigenous tools, which could be practised in India too. Similarly, local
people could be mobilised for small irrigation works designed by competent
engineers. While most elements of the agriculture characters could be
practised in India, the group felt that deep ploughing and close planting
needed further testing at the experimental stations.
Some
of the statistics provided to the group stretched the imagination. It was
said that the total area of arable land was 1,600 million mu.
Upto 1957, nearly thirty-one percent was under irrigation. By 1958, this had
increased to over fifty percent. One hundred and fifty-four million mu were protected against soil erosion upto 1957. In 1958, an
additional area of sixty-five million mu
had been protected. In the four provinces of Henan, Jiangsu, Hubei and
Hunan, the average yield of rice had increased to five thousand catties per
mu in 1958, the year of Leap Forward, as compared to one thousand catties
per mu earlier. Consequently, the government was thinking of earmarking only
a third of the cultivated area to food crops!
The
rapid establishment of communes probably dislocated the rhythm of
agricultural operations. The harvest was nowhere near the claimed figures. A
subsequent drought led to scarcity of supply of food in the urban as well as
rural areas, especially during 1960 and 1961.The Chinese friends spoke about
the shortages and consequent hardships, which were shared unevenly. The
scale of shortages was however unknown.
The
premise that collectivisation by itself would lead to rise in farm output
had not been proved by the establishment of communes. Crop failures led to a
reversal of the policies. Ownership of land and means of production reverted
back to the old cooperative or production team level, with the right to
manage resources at its disposal. Communal kitchens were closed down. Family
became an important production unit too by means of private plots, domestic
rearing of animals, etc. The reversal of the policies was a cause of the
schism which later developed in the Chinese Communist Party.
