[lit-ideas] Negotiations with the Bolsheviks.
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "Lit-Ideas" <Lit-Ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2007 12:45:29 -0800
Absent any sign of a world wide Communist revolution, ". . . the Bolsheviks
also struck conciliatory notes. Maxim Litvinov, Chicherin's deputy, was
smooth and agreeable. He had lived in London for several years, eking out a
living as a clerk and marrying a novelist, Ivy Low, from the fringes of
Bloomsbury. On Christmas Eve 1918, he sent Wilson a telegram from
Stockholm. It spoke of peace on earth, of justice and humanity. The
Russian people, Litvinov went on, shared Wilson's great principles. They
had been the first to cry out for self-determination and open diplomacy.
All they wanted now was peace to build a better society. They were anxious
to negotiate, but Allied intervention and the Allied blockade were causing
terrible misery. The Bolsheviks found themselves obliged to use terror to
keep the country afloat. Would not Wilson help them?
"Wilson was deeply impressed. So, when he saw the telegram, was Lloyd
George. An American diplomat, William Buckler, was dispatched to talk to
Litvinov. Buckler's report, which Wilson brought to the Supreme Council on
January 21, was encouraging. The Soviet government, as it was now calling
itself, was ready to do much for the sake of peace, whether that meant
paying at least part of the repudiated foreign debts or granting new
concessions to foreign enterprises. It would drop its calls for worldwide
revolution; it had only been forced to use such propaganda as a way of
defending itself first against Germany and more recently the Allies."
"Well, see," I can hear Irene saying if she were to read this far. The
Bolsheviks wanted to negotiate but those evil Allies just wouldn't. But
read on.
"Wilson and Lloyd George had some reason, then, to expect that the
Bolsheviks would welcome the invitation to Prinkipo. The two statesmen
chose their delegates: a liberal journalist and a defrocked clergyman for
the United States, and for Britain a delighted Borden - 'A great honour to
Canada.' (He did not know that Lloyd George was having trouble finding
someone to go.) They all waited. The Soviet government's reply arrived on
February 4. Not for the last time the Bolsheviks misjudged the West. They
craftily, but transparently, avoided agreeing to a cease fire, one of the
preconditions laid down by the Supreme Council. They did not bother to
comment on the appeal to high principles in the invitation. Clearly
thinking that capitalists understood only one thing, they offered
significant material concessions, such as raw materials or territory. After
all, it had worked with the Germans at Brest-Litovsk. Wilson was taken
aback: 'This answer was not only uncalled for, but might be thought
insulting.' Lloyd George agreed. 'We are not after their money or their
concessions or their territory.'"
This was but the beginning of long years of negotiating from different world
views. Such Leftists as Irene blame the West for not being accommodating
enough, but the facts say otherwise. Soviet Russia sought world domination.
The West sought for all nations to be free. Even today one must choose
between these two concepts. Anti-Americans never come out and oppose
freedom. They put matters in other terms. We didn't do something quite
right, or we offended someone, or someone made a profit. But the bottom
line is that one side stands for freedom (intrinsic in Liberal Democracy)
and the other side stands for world domination (some totalitarian form of
government). That was true when Wilson and Lloyd George sought to
negotiate with the Soviets at Prinkipo in 1919 and it is true of any
prospective negotiations with the Iranians today.
Lawrence
Other related posts:
