Stalin and the birth of Ukraine
 |
| During the revolutions of 1917 and the Civil War, the idea of the autonomy of the Donbass as part of Russia became widespread among the local Bolsheviks. Map From the Bolshevik Archives |
March 2014
"There is not and cannot be a conflict between the Ukrainian and Russian peoples. The Ukrainian and Russian peoples, like the rest of the peoples of Russia, consist of workers and peasants, soldiers and sailors. All of them together fought against tsarism and Kerenskyism, against landowners and capitalists, against war and imperialism. All of them together shed their blood for land and peace, for freedom and socialism. In the struggle against the landowners and capitalists, they are all brothers and comrades. In the struggle for their vital interests, they do not and cannot have a conflict. Of course, it is advantageous for the enemies of the working people to present the conflict with the Rada as a conflict between the Russian and Ukrainian peoples, because with such a representation it will be easiest to set the workers and peasants of kindred peoples against each other to the delight of the oppressors of these peoples. But is it difficult for class-conscious workers and peasants to understand that what is beneficial to the oppressors of the peoples is harmful to the peoples." Stalin, "An answer to comrades Ukrainians in the rear and at the front"
After the Great October Revolution, a new government was formed - the Council of People's Commissars (SNK or Council of People's Commissars) consisting of 15 people's commissars. Joseph Stalin became the head of the first institution of this level in history dealing with issues of nationality.
Before we move on to the main question, let us first consider two others: 1) why there was a need for such an institution; and 2) why it was Stalin who took this position.
1). By October 1917, the country was falling apart. “A year ago, even before the October Revolution, Russia, as a state, presented a picture of collapse. The old "vast Russian state" and along with it a number of new small "states" pulling in different directions - such was the picture. (Stalin)
The reason was the development of capitalism, which leads to the development of the national bourgeoisie, national self-determination; and economic ruin, a consequence of a severe protracted war; and the weakening of central authority; and the rejection of the national outskirts by the Germans.
The incitement of ethnic hatred began long before 1917, and the result was the pogroms of the Germans at the beginning of WWI, and Jewish pogroms, and uprisings on the national outskirts, the largest of which was the Central Asian uprising of 1916, to suppress which the wartime government had to use military units in deep rear. Stolypin's reform also laid a heavy burden on national relations. His resettlement policy was carried out at the expense of the native population, as the deputies of the then State Duma claimed. In order to provide fertile land to Russians resettled from the central regions, it was often necessary to drive the local population from this land. And then an order was to be issued to the Russians to protect against local 10 rifles per 100 families. Yes, there was such an order. This, did not contribute to the "friendship of peoples." And for the local Ibragim, it was not Nicholas 2, not Stolypin, who became guilty of oppression, but Ivan and Peter who “came in large numbers” and seized his land.
“With all this, tsarism has generated among the local national masses the deepest distrust, sometimes turning into hostility, towards everything Russian.” (Stalin)
Of course, all sorts of nationalist sentiments were supported and fueled from outside. Not without it. Playing the national card in geopolitics is a classic trick.
“The Austro-German imperialists, who then took the leading role, deftly playing on the disintegration of the former Russia, abundantly supplied the border governments with everything necessary to fight the center, occupied the border regions in places and generally contributed to the final disintegration of Russia. The imperialists of the Entente, not wanting to lag behind the Austro-Germans, took the same path. (Stalin)
After the February Revolution, there was an explosion of separatist sentiments. This is especially evident in political parties. By the time of the elections to the Constituent Assembly, almost all parties in Russia, except for the Bolsheviks, had broken up into national parties and went to the elections on separate lists. Many national delegations went to the Constituent Assembly with an order to separate from the Central Power. The closure of the Constituent Assembly by the Bolsheviks prevented this question from being raised either. Despite the efforts of the Bolsheviks, national sentiment continued to rise. If we consider the map of the country in 1917-1919, then the number of states formed on the territory of the Republic of Ingushetia reached three dozen, and this is not counting that each Pan Gritian of Tauride declared his own republic.
The issue of the unity of the country required an early and thorough solution. This was what the new people's commissariat was supposed to do.
“The opponents of the Bolshevik Party laid the blame for the collapse, of course (of course!), on the Soviet government. But it is not difficult to understand that the Soviet government could not and did not want to counteract the inevitable process of temporary disintegration. The Soviet government understood that the forcible unity of Russia, supported by imperialist bayonets, was bound to disintegrate with the fall of Russian imperialism: without changing its nature, the Soviet government could not maintain unity by the methods of Russian imperialism. The Soviet government was aware that for socialism not all unity is necessary, but fraternal unity ... ”(Stalin)
2) One of the main problems facing the party that took power in October was the question of cadres. It was not for nothing that the Cheka, created to protect the gains of the revolution, was fully deciphered as the "Extraordinary Commission for Combating Counter-Revolution and Sabotage."
There were not enough party cadres to work. There were not enough necessary people - educated, devoted, corresponding to the position they hold - even for the role of people's commissars. Only 3 people's commissars immediately found themselves in their place and were not replaced by others in the first five years of the existence of the Soviet government - Lunacharsky (enlightenment), Semashko (health) and Stalin (nationalities).
In the people's commissariats of finance, trade, agriculture, post offices, the leadership changed five times in 5 years. Of course, this is not as common as with the Provisional Government, up to eight times in 9 months, but comparable to tsarist times, where ministers also changed quite often. Take the Ministry of the Interior. Starting from 1895 and ending in 1917, this position was occupied by: Goremykin, Svyatopolk-Mirsky, Pyotr Durnovo, Shcherbatov, Stürmer, Alexander Khvostov, Sipyagin, Plehve, Stolypin, Bulygin, Makarov, Maklakov, Alexei Khvostov and Protopopov. So, under any authority, it was not easy to find the right person for an important position. We can still see this in our modern governments.
National and separatist passions raged throughout the country and Stalin, along with Ukraine, was also dealing with other issues. Important and urgent. It was he who wrote the "Declaration of the Rights of the Peoples of Russia", adopted a week after the revolution by the Council of People's Commissars.
So far, things indicate that Stalin had the ability to successfully resolve state issues, but why precisely national ones? The fact is that Stalin was one of the main specialists of the Bolshevik Party on national issues. He, Shaumyan and, of course, Lenin. True, I will make a reservation that many Bolsheviks wrote and spoke on the national theme, but there is one problem here. It was Stalin's vision of resolving this issue that Lenin supported in every possible way, and Lenin did not agree with the opinion of other socialists. Stalin's work "Marxism and the national question", published in 1913, became a classic, the first, which, in addition to Lenin's articles, gave a theoretical battle to the supporters of "cultural-national autonomy". Since then, Stalin has become a universally recognized specialist on national issues. In support of the above, we can quote from a letter from Lenin to Maxim Gorky dated February 1913:
“As for nationalism, I completely agree with you that we need to deal with this more seriously. One wonderful Georgian has settled down with us and is writing a long article for Enlightenment, having collected all the Austrian and other materials*. We'll put it on. But that our resolutions (I'm sending them to the press) are "replies, red tape", it's you who deign to swear in vain. No. This is not a rebuttal. In our country and in the Caucasus, the Social-Democrats Georgians + Armenians + Tatars + Russians worked together, in a single Social-Democrat. organization for over ten years. This is not a phrase, but a proletarian solution of the national question. Only decision. So it was in Riga: Russians + Latvians + Lithuanians; only the separatists, the Bund, separated. Also in Vilna. No, we will not have the abomination that is in Austria. Let's not let go! And there are more of our brother, Great Russians, here. We will not allow the “Austrian spirit” with the workers.”
The “wonderful Georgian” whom Lenin mentions in this letter is Stalin, and the article he wrote is “The National Question and Social Democracy.” As we can see, Lenin considered Stalin not only a practitioner, but also a theoretician. It was not for nothing that Stalin repeatedly acted as editor of the main Bolshevik newspaper Pravda. And since January 1912, at the suggestion of Lenin, he was elected a member of the Central Committee. With such baggage, he becomes a member of the first Bolshevik government.
And what about Ukraine? First, let's get rid of the myth that Ukraine was invented by the Bolsheviks.
I won’t be able to tell you when this term appeared for the first time, but Grushevsky was especially deeply involved in the issue of the self-identity of the Ukrainian nation from a scientific point of view. He came from an old Cossack family, was a historian, taught at universities, wrote scientific papers, developed his own history of the creation of the Old Russian state. As can be seen from the title of one of his works “Vimki z dzherel do istorii Ukrainya-Rus” (published in 1895), both the name “Ukraine” and the Ukrainian language were quite used in scientific literature.
Grushevsky had many like-minded people, followers, and students in Ukraine. One of them was the notorious Semyon Petliura. Grushevsky himself, immediately after the February Revolution, went to Kyiv, where on March 4 the creation of the Central Ukrainian Rada was proclaimed and became the head of the Rada. Note that the new government in Moscow was created only on March 1, and after 3 days the Rada in Kyiv proclaimed itself.
The Rada immediately begins to seek autonomy for Ukraine, over time, appetites grow, the Rada is supported by the parties of the Ukrainian Socialist-Revolutionaries, the Ukrainian Social Democrats (Mensheviks), the Peasant Split Party.
On November 7 (20), the third Universal was adopted, according to which the creation of the Ukrainian People's Republic was announced. On November 10 (23), it was announced that the Council of People's Commissars in Petrograd was not a government recognized by the majority of the population; On November 11 (24), Petliura (the military leader of the Council) in a telegram to the commanders of the Russian armies demanded to announce to the Ukrainian units that the appeals of the "People's Commissioners of Petrograd" to the army "are not subject to execution."
Stalin reports the situation to Sovnarkom, the Council of People's Commissars, prepares a draft Manifesto for the people of Ukraine.
“The Rada is moving and recalling Ukrainian units from the front by unilateral orders,” the Manifesto said, “thus destroying the united common front to the point of disengagement, which can only be achieved through an organized agreement between the governments of both republics,” “The Rada has begun to disarm the Soviet troops stationed in Ukraine "," provides support to the Kadet-Kaledinsky conspiracy and uprising against Soviet power.
“Becoming on this path of unheard-of betrayal of the revolution ... The Rada would force us to declare war on it without any hesitation ...”.
The Manifesto demanded an answer from the Rada: whether it is ready to stop all actions directed against Soviet power. The answer of the Rada, containing attacks against the Soviet government, was recognized by the Council of People's Commissars as unsatisfactory.
Reading old documents, the names of cities and the essence of the events taking place, it begins to seem that history repeats itself:
“Detachments of the General Secretariat attacked the Soviet troops at night in Kyiv and disarmed them. There were similar attempts in Odessa, in Kharkov, and these attempts failed, as they encountered resistance. But we know for certain that the General Secretariat is gathering troops against Odessa and Kharkov in order to disarm the Soviet troops. We know for certain that in a number of other less significant cities, Soviet troops have already been disarmed ... ”(Stalin)
In December, the Rada ordered the closure of Ukraine's borders with Russia, and was preparing in Kyiv for the opening of the British Consulate General.
All these problems were entrusted to Stalin to solve . And he solved them, yes this finally happened in 1945, but he fulfilled Lenin's order. One may ask: what about the principle of self-determination of nations? Those who ask this have never read Lenin. Lenin himself, for those who were especially dull, explained the principle of self-determination of nations by the example of the family:
we are for the right of a person to divorce, but does it follow from this that we are in favor of divorce? No! “To accuse the supporters of freedom of self-determination, i.e. the freedom of secession, of encouraging separatism is just as stupid and as hypocritical as to accuse the supporters of freedom of divorce of encouraging the destruction of family ties” (Lenin)
If one can read the theoretical works of Lenin and Stalin on the national question, should just take a closer look at their deeds. From a crumbling empire, they managed to create a great power, the largest in recent history. I hope no one will argue with the obvious?
“The demand for the separation of the border regions from Russia, as a form of relations between the center and the border regions, must be excluded, not only because it contradicts the very formulation of the question of establishing an alliance between the center and the border regions, but, above all, because it fundamentally contradicts the interests of the people the masses of both the center and the outskirts. (Stalin)
So, the question of self-determination of Ukrainians, according to the Bolsheviks, was to be decided by the people of Ukraine, and not by the bourgeois government that sits in Kyiv. And the people, represented by the 1st All-Ukrainian Congress of Soviets in Kharkov, which on December 12 proclaimed Ukraine a Republic of Soviets of Workers', Soldiers' and Peasants' Deputies and decided to establish federal relations with the RSFSR, denied the Central Rada legitimacy. On December 15, Stalin publishes in Pravda an article “On the Ukrainian Rada”:
“The real divergence between the Council of People’s Commissars and the Rada occurred on the following three points.
The first question: the pulling together of Ukrainian units on the Southern Front...The reorganization of the front according to nationalities, with disrupted transport, would lead to the complete destruction of the front ...
The second question: about the disarmament of the Soviet troops in the Ukraine...
Finally, the third question: about the impediment of Soviet troops against Kaledin, around whom all the counter-revolutionary forces of Russia have gathered. ... At the same time, the Kalinin Cossack units are freely allowed by the Rada to the Don. At the moment when our comrades are being shot in Rostov and in the Donetsk Basin, the Rada prevents us from sending them help...”.
"Of course, our interference in the internal affairs of Ukraine, if this is not caused by military necessity, is undesirable."
This was the time of the first period of negotiations on the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk with the Quarter Union. The Germans, and especially the Austrians, also needed peace, and at first peace conditions were more acceptable to Russia, when suddenly messages came from the Rada about its non-recognition of the peace treaty. The tone of the German delegation immediately changed. The Rada's telegram became a stab in the back to us. At the same time, betrayal followed at the front.
On December 14, Commander-in-Chief Krylenko reported to the All-Russian Central Executive Committee that “Petliura’s policy led to the complete disorganization of the front, to the unauthorized withdrawal of units that loaded the railways and suspended the supply of food,” that the three armies stationed here were actually taken by Petliura to starve.
On January 1, representatives of the Ukrainian Workers' and Peasants' Republic arrive in Petrograd from Kharkov to take part in the Brest negotiations. They met with Lenin and Stalin.
On January 4, after the policy of the Rada at the Brest talks drive the delegation to a dead end, Trotsky sent a letter to Lenin by courier:
The Rada "is pursuing an obviously treacherous policy",
And one more thing: “Today a delegation of the Kharkov Ukrainian CEC is leaving for you, which assured me that the Kyiv Rada is breathing its last.”
Lenin replies:
"I would like to consult Stalin first before answering your question."
After a discussion with Stalin, Trotsky is offered to announce a break and leave for St. Petersburg.
On January 8, the delegation of the Ukrainian Soviet Republic arrives in Brest and joins the Russian delegation, declaring that they will act in full agreement with the Russian delegation, and that any obligations assumed by the Central Rada will not be recognized by the authorities of the Soviet Ukraine, which they represent here.
On January 12 (25) the Central Rada publishes the IV Universal, which announced the independent state of Ukraine. On January 16, an uprising of workers begins in Kyiv. Ten days later, the center of Ukraine passes under the authority of the Ukrainian SSR. Despite this, the Germans recognize the separate Rada, although all its sovereignty at that time lies in the territory occupied by its delegation in Brest, and on January 27, representatives of the Central Rada signed a secret separate peace treaty with Germany and Austria-Hungary, on the basis of which Ukraine was occupied Austro-German troops. For bread and food, the Rada is promised military assistance.
The German delegation in Brest receives instructions from Berlin, hiding the signing of a separate peace with the Rada, to issue an ultimatum to the Russian delegation. Trotsky refuses and leaves.
On February 18, the Germans went on the offensive along the entire front, the old army was completely demoralized and was fleeing, and the Bolsheviks had not yet managed to create a new one at that time.
On February 21, Stalin sends a directive to the People's Secretariat of the Ukrainian Soviet Republic:
“The situation is more serious than it might seem to you - for us there is no doubt that the German gangs want to take a walk from St. Petersburg to Kyiv and there, only there, in these capitals, talk about peace negotiations ... Once again: without wasting a minute, get down to business without debate and show everyone that the Soviet government is capable of defending itself.
After a heated debate, the Bolsheviks were forced to sign the "obscene" Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. On February 24, Stalin sent a note by direct wire:
““We assess the current situation in connection with the advance of the Germans and the flight of our troops as follows: ... we have temporarily fallen into the clutches of foreign imperialism, against which we must now prepare forces for organizing a Patriotic War ...For such preparation, a minimum respite is needed ... These considerations guided the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of Soviets, which decided today at 3 o'clock in the morning to conclude peace on brutal terms and instructed the Council of People's Commissars to send a delegation to Brest, which is done today. The Central Executive Committee decided that only under such conditions would it be possible to preserve Soviet power. In the meantime, prepare and prepare again for the organization of a sacred war against German imperialism ... ".
In the same note, Stalin writes:
“We all believe that your People’s Secretariat should send its delegation to Brest and declare there that if Vinnichenko’s adventure is not supported by the Austro-Germans, the People’s Secretariat will not object to the basics of the treaty of the old Kyiv Rada. Such a step ... would preserve Soviet power in Ukraine, which is a huge plus for the entire international revolution. We would very much like you to understand us and agree with us on these cardinal issues of the unfortunate world.”
The Brest peace stipulated, albeit terrible, but specific borders on which the German army should stop in Russia, while the peace signed by the Rada gives the Germans the right to occupy all of Ukraine without exception, and since the borders of Ukraine are not defined, then under the guise of "Ukrainian territory" and on the basis of a signed peace with the Rada, the Germans also occupy Russian territories, destroying Soviet power there.
Formally observing the conditions of the Brest Peace, Lenin sends telegrams to Ukraine:
“The immediate evacuation of grain and metals to the east, the organization of subversive groups, the creation of a united front of defense from the Crimea to Great Russia with the involvement of peasants in the cause, a resolute and unconditional reorganization of our units available in Ukraine in the Ukrainian way - such is the task now. It is necessary to forbid Antonov to call himself Antonov-Ovseenko - he must be called simply Ovseenko. The same must be said about Muravyov (if he remains in office) and others.
As for the Donetsk Republic, tell comrades Vasilchenko, Zhakov and others that no matter no matter how they manage to separate their region from Ukraine, it, judging by the geography of Vinnichenko, it will still be included in Ukraine and the Germans will conquer it.
In view of this, it is absolutely absurd on the part of the Donetsk Republic to refuse a single united defense front with the rest of Ukraine. Mezhlauk was in St. Petersburg, and he agreed to recognize the Donets Basin as an autonomous part of Ukraine; Artem also agrees with this; therefore, the stubbornness of a few comrades from the Donetsk Basin resembles an inexplicable and harmful whim, completely unacceptable in our party milieu. Push it all in, comrade Sergo, to the Crimean-Donetsk comrades and achieve the creation of a united front of defense.
The Red Army under the flag of the Ukrainian army, snarling, rolls back to the borders. In the course of stubborn battles, Kyiv was captured and the power of the Central Rada was restored. But it did not last long.
On April 29, the Germans organized a coup d'état and instead of "democratic" talkers they installed a hetman Skoropadsky, who was more convenient for them.
As Stalin said:
“This revolution was inevitable. The reason for it was rooted in the contradictory position of the Central Rada, which, on the one hand, played socialism, on the other hand, called on foreign troops to fight the workers and peasants of Ukraine. The Central Rada placed itself in financial and military dependence on Germany and at the same time made a lot of promises to the Ukrainian workers and peasants, with whom they soon began a stubborn war. With this last step, the Ukrainian Rada created such conditions for itself that at the critical moment of the onslaught of the bourgeois-landlord circles on it, it had no one to rely on.
As for the attempt of the Ukrainian Soviet Republic to make peace with the Germans, as Stalin writes in Izvestiya:
“According to the agreement signed by the former Kyiv Rada, Ukraine must release 30 million poods of grain to Germany by the end of April. We are no longer talking here about the "free export of ore" demanded by Germany.
The People's Secretariat of the Soviet Ukraine, of course, was aware of this clause of the treaty, and he knew what he was getting into when he officially agreed to sign the Vinnichenko peace. However, the German government ... refused to enter into peace negotiations with the People's Secretariat, recognized by all the Soviets of Ukraine, urban and rural. It preferred an alliance with the dead, an alliance with the overthrown and exiled Kyiv Rada, to a peace treaty with the People's Secretariat recognized by the Ukrainian people.
This means that the purpose of the Austro-German invasion is not only to obtain bread, but also, mainly, to overthrow Soviet power in the Ukraine and restore the old bourgeois regime."
Under the pretext of ensuring the power of the "legitimate government", the Germans, after the signing of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk with the RSFSR, continued their offensive in Ukraine.On March 12, the Austrians occupied Odessa, March 17 - Nikolaev, March 20 - Kherson.German troops entered Kharkov on April 5, at the end of April- In early May, they entered the Crimea and the southern part of the Don region, capturing Simferopol on April 22, Taganrog on May 1, and Rostov-on-Don on May 8, causing the fall of Soviet power on the Don.
By the way, in Crimea, our people were stabbed in the back by the Crimean Tatar nationalists who revolted and captured the leadership of the Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars of the Tauride SSR. They were first tortured and then shot.
(How often episodes in history are repeated: at the beginning of the 20th century, in its middle, no matter how they repeat again, at the beginning of the 21st century)
On April 30, 1918, the Soviet Socialist Republic of Taurida was liquidated and a puppet government headed by the former tsarist lieutenant general Sulkevich was created.
On the Don, the Germans helped establish the power of Ataman Krasnov. Using the absence of a border treaty between Soviet Russia and Ukraine as a formal pretext, German troops captured a number of key points on Russian territory: Unecha, Gotnya, Belgorod, Valuyki.
On April 22, Lenin instructed Trotsky to organize the defense of the eastern border of the Kharkov province, ending the order with the words: "Speak with Stalin about the details."
On April 27, Stalin, Manuilsky and others set off for Kursk to conclude a peace treaty with the Central Rada, on whose behalf the Germans are acting, and to stop the advance of German troops on our territory.
In the shortest possible time, the delegation achieved a cessation of hostilities in the Bryansk, Voronezh and Kursk directions. But for this world again it had to pay. Pay with the Black Sea Fleet.
“Chicherin gave me the text of the note that Ioffe sent on his own behalf to the German government, agreeing to the return of the ships of the Black Sea Fleet (that is, to withdraw them from Novorossiysk to Sevastopol) on condition only of peace with Ukraine. Meanwhile, our government, in a clear note (communicated by radio to Ioffe) recognized it as possible to agree to the withdrawal of ships to Sevastopol on different conditions, namely: 1) peace on all three fronts, i.e. with Ukraine, Finland and Turkey; 2) non-annexation of Sevastopol.
How could Joffe make such a mistake? How could he make such a bad bargain? How it was possible to send a note on such an important issue from oneself without consulting, I don’t understand ...”(Lenin)
But for Ukraine itself, the struggle was just beginning. As Stalin wrote in December 1918: “The Austro-German imperialists were the first to go for the occupation of Ukraine. “Rada” and “hetmanship” with their “independence” were just a toy, a screen…(Hetman- Polish or Cossack military commander)
While German imperialism is living its last days, and the “hetmanate” is going through its last convulsions, Anglo-French imperialism is concentrating troops and preparing a landing force in the Crimea for the occupation of the Ukraine. They, the Anglo-French imperialists, want to take the now vacant place of the German occupiers of the Ukraine.
At the same time, the “Ukrainian Directory”, headed by the adventurer Petliura, is rising to the surface, with the slogan of the old “independence” in a “new” way, a new, more convenient than the “hetmanate”, a screen for the new Anglo-French occupation of Ukraine! The real struggle in Ukraine is yet to come.”
Only in the spring of 1919 did Soviet power return to the land of Ukraine, On March 19, the Ukrainian Socialist Soviet Republic was proclaimed as an independent state.
And on December 29, 1922, the Ukrainian SSR signed the Treaty on the Formation of the USSR, which laid the foundation for the establishment of the USSR.
The capital of the Ukrainian SSR from 1918 to 1934 was in Kharkov, after which it was moved to Kyiv.
Stalin's speech at the IV Conference of the CP(B) of Ukraine:
"Now that Ukraine has been liberated from the most fierce enemy .., you are faced with another no less important and difficult task - the task of restoring the destroyed economy of Ukraine."
The Bolsheviks were concerned not only with the economic and political power of the state, and of Ukraine as its constituent part, but also with the fate of individuals, including Ukrainians.
Let's remember that the Tsar paid off the Entente for granting loans with the lives of his subjects. “The representative of the military commission of the French Senate, G. Doumergue, suggested that the tsarist government of Russia send 400,000 Russian officers, non-commissioned officers and soldiers to the Western Front, to France, in exchange for the weapons and ammunition missing from the Russian imperial army.” Not 400 thousand were sent as payment to the allies, but only about 46 thousand, but judging by the uprising of Russian soldiers in France a year later, they had a hard time in a foreign land and they really wanted to return. And when they cry about the fate of white emigrants, let them remember the fate of these soldiers, and the methods by which they tried to return them to their homeland, including Ukrainians.
From Lenin's telegram to the Ukrainian authorities in Odessa:
"It is criminal to allow the unauthorized departure of foreigners ... Not a single Frenchman should be released until the soldiers return from France, among whom there are many Ukrainians."
Summing up the article, here is what policy Stalin pursued after the revolution in solving the national question:
“It may seem strange that the article resolutely rejects the demand for the separation of the border regions from Russia as a counter-revolutionary undertaking. But in essence there is nothing strange in this. We are for the secession of India, Arabia, Egypt, Morocco and other colonies from the Entente, because secession in this case means the liberation of these oppressed countries from imperialism, the weakening of the positions of imperialism, the strengthening of the positions of the revolution. We are against the separation of the border regions from Russia, because separation in this case means imperialist bondage for the border regions, a weakening of the revolutionary might of Russia, and a strengthening of the positions of imperialism. (Stalin)
The result of which was the creation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
***
Notes from 2022
The idea of autonomy and independent existence of Donbass from Ukraine - the largest industrial center of late imperial Russia, which includes the Donetsk coal and Kryvorozh iron ore basins and metallurgical plants of southern Russia - was developed shortly after the February Revolution of 1917.
In the summer of 1917, the Kyiv Central Rada, during negotiations with the Provisional Government, presented claims to the Kharkov province and the provinces of Novorossiya, -entitled "Ukrainian Autonomy and the Donetsk Basin".
The idea of Donbas autonomy was supported by part of the Bolshevik leadership of the region. During the IV regional congress of the Soviets of the Donetsk and Kryvorozh basins, which took place in Kharkiv on January 27-30, 1918, the majority of votes adopted the decision to create a republic. As reported by Sergeev (Artem) on January 31, 1918 in a telegram to the Chairman of the Central Committee of the Central Committee of the Russian Federation, Ya.M. Sverdlov, "the Congress of Soviets adopted a resolution on the establishment of the Council of People's Commissars of the Donetsk Kryvorozh Basin as part of the All-Russian Federation of Soviets.
The Center did not immediately decide on a position on the advisability of the existence of a republic separate from Ukraine. Y.M. Sverdlov in his telegram to Artem on February 17, 1918 was concise: "We consider allocation harmful."
Lenin's opinion turned out to be the key to the fate of the Donetsk-Kryvoroz Soviet Republic. On March 14, 1918, in a letter to the temporary emergency commissar of the Soviet People's Committee in Ukraine H.K. Ordzhonikidze directly pointed to the Ukrainian affiliation of the region (doc. No. 1). On the next day, March 15, 1918, a meeting of the Central Committee of the RCP(b) took place, where this opinion was approved (doc. No. 2). The question of the republic was closed on February 17, 1919 at a meeting of the Council of Workers' and Peasants' Defense (doc. No. 3).The center has put an end to the project of Donbass autonomy within Russia.
In early May 1919, Yu.Kh., a member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine, arrived in Moscow. Lutovinov5, who drew the attention of V.I. Lenin on the problem of "independence" of the Bolsheviks of Donbass. On May 7, 1919, the Organization Bureau of the Central Committee of the RCP(b) heard Lutovynov's message (doc. No. 4). On the same day, Lenin sent a sharp telegram to V.I. Mezhlauk and Artem with an urgent demand to stop the "games" around Donbass (doc. No. 5).
The last unsuccessful attempt to join Donbass to Russia was made in the spring of 1920, as evidenced by the memoirs of the former chairman of the Donetsk regional committee, V.P. Antonov-Saratovsky6 (doc. No. 6).
Several reasons influenced the decision to liquidate the republic and incorporate it into Ukraine. The key importance for the leaders of the Bolsheviks was the realization of the ideas of the "world revolution", in light of which border demarcation within the Soviet republics was considered a secondary circumstance. Also, in the conditions of the German offensive on Ukraine in the spring of 1918, an important role was attached to the unification of military forces into a united front. Finally, the Ukrainian Bolsheviks became a decisive opponent of the autonomy of Donbass, for whom the inclusion of the proletarian and industrial region in the structure of their republic was a fundamental moment: without Donbass, Ukraine would have turned into a "petty-bourgeois peasant republic"7. As a result, the idea of an autonomous Donbass within Russia was blocked by the Bolshevik leadership.
Published documents are stored in RGASPI (F. 2, 17, 19).
No. 1. From the letter of V.I. Lenin G.K. Ordzhonikidze
March 14, 1918
Comrade Sergo!
I am asking you to pay serious attention to Crimea and the Donetsk basin in the sense of creating a united front against the invasion from the West.
[...]
As for the Donetsk Republic, tell Comrades Vasylchenko, Zhakov and others that, no matter how they manage to separate their region from Ukraine, it, judging by the geography of Vynnychenko, will still be included in Ukraine and the Germans will conquer it. In view of this, it is completely ridiculous for the Donetsk Republic to refuse a single defense front with the rest of Ukraine. Mezhlauk was in St. Petersburg, and he agreed to recognize the Donetsk Basin as an autonomous part of Ukraine; Artem also agrees with this; therefore, the persistence of a few comrades from the Donetsk basin is like an inexplicable and harmful caprice, completely unacceptable in our party environment.
Push it all in, comrade. Sergo, to the Crimean-Donetsk comrades and achieve the creation of a united defense front.
Lenin. 14(1). III. 1918.
[...]
RGASPI F. 2. Op. 1. D. 5486. L. 1-1 vol. The original Autograph of I.V. Stalin, signature and inscription - autograph of V.I. Lenin
No. 2. Resolution of the Central Committee of the RCP(b) on Ukraine
March 15, 1918
Listened. 1. Ukraine.
Decided
After the exchange of opinions on the state of party work and the state of Soviet organizations in Ukraine, the exchange with the participation of of Ukraine (Shakhray13, Zatonskyi14), after clarifying the relationship between the Ukrainian Council of State and the Donetsk Republic, a decision was made: to the convened Ukrainian congress of the Soviets of Workers', Soldiers' and Christian Deputies must travel from all over Ukraine, including from the Donetsk basin.
At the congress, it is necessary to create one government for the whole of Ukraine.
All party workers are charged with the duty to work together on the formation of a united defense front. The Donetsk Basin is considered part of Ukraine. When the Germans approach the coal district, coal and workers are taken away, mines are filled with water.
It has been decided to postpone the declaration of independence of the Crimean Republic.
Comrade Sergo is the representative of the Central Committee in Ukraine.
RGASPI F. 17. Op. 2. D. 1. L. 1-1 ob. The original Handwritten text.
No. 3. Resolution of the Council of Workers' and Peasants' Defense on the Liquidation of the Donetsk-Kryvoroz Republic (Kryvdonbass)
February 17, 1919
[...]
Llistened.
3. Comrade Stalin's report on the organization of route trains for the transport of grain and coal.
Decided
[...] 3z. Asks Comrade Stalin through the Bureau of the Central Committee to carry out the dissolution of Kryvdonbass.
RGASPI F. 19. Op. 3. D. 20. L. 4. Original. Typewritten text.
No. 4. Resolution of the Organizational Bureau of the Central Committee of the RCP(b) on separatist tendencies in Ukraine
May 7, 1919
Listened. 3.
Comrade Lutovinov reports on the separatist tendencies that exist in Ukraine among the people of Kyiv and the people of Kharkiv, about the desire of the latter to form the Donets[ko]-Kryvor[ozh] republic, about the need to send an authoritative and firm person to Kharkiv to restore order and save Donbass.
Decided
Noted.
RGASPI F. 17. Op. 112. D. 4. L. 14. Original. Typewritten text.
No. 5. Letter of V.I. Lenina V.I. Mezhlauk
May 7, 1919 in cipher
Kharkiv, Zamnarkomvoen Mezhlauku, copies to Artyom.
I received from Lutovynov yet another confirmation that you are playing for independence and local republics, refusing to immediately send all military forces and all mobilized workers of Kharkiv to Donbass, defending yourself with Podvoisky's idiotic prohibitions.
I declare that you will be handed over to the party court and expelled from the party if you do not abandon this game and immediately send all the military forces of Kharkiv and all mobilized workers to the aid of Donbass.
Answer immediately with the performance cipher, how much and when you send.
You will be responsible for the delay. NR 159/A. Lenin.
RGASPI F. 2. Op. 1. D. 25505. L. 1. Copy. Typewritten text.
https://stalinism.ru/stalin-i-gosudarstvo/stalin-i-rozhdenie-ukrainy.html
.jpg)
No comments