War, Kellogg Pact and the Soviet Union Foreign Policy of a Revolutionary Workers’ » State That Is Surrounded by Imperialist Powers by Max Shachtman Separable
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
War, Kellogg Pact and the Soviet Union foreign policy of a revolutionary Workers’ » State that is surrounded by imperialist powers By Max Shachtman separable. That the demand for disarmament al was outlined a decade and more ago by the leaders ways results in actually disarming the working class Bolshevism, Lenin and Trotsky. Its course is di poses upon its participants certain obligations of a peace before its class enemy, because capitalism w ill not ful character, it has without delay adhered to it.” (Soviet and cannot disarm. That those who create the im rected to warding off all interventionist and coun Union Review, Feb. 1929, page 31.) pression that capitalism can disarm “as the only es ter-revolutionary movements no matter what their And this is not meant as polite diplomatic rig sential element of peace guarantee,” are drugging form may'be, so that the Workers’ State may be marole, for Litvinov repeats it in worse form to the the w orking class. T h a t the only real road to peace .able to lengthen the period in which it strengthens Central Executive Committee of the Soviet Union the -socialist forces in the country as against-the on December TO, 1928: is the overthrow of the bourgeoisie and the victory o f socialism. T h a t the appeal fo r disarmament is forces of capitalism while the revolutionary pro “O ur. government took into consideration the fact that letariat in the imperialist countries gathers suf thè states signing thé Kellogg Pact thereby placed them reactionary utopianism. Lenin said a thousand ficient strength to overthrow their own bour selves under a certain moral (sol) obligation to public times: opinion with respect to non-aggression.” (Inprecor, geoisie. The Soviet power must therefore aim to “The Kautskyan preaching of ‘disarmament’, 'which is December 20, 1928, page 1703.) aid in every possible way the revolutionary move addressed chiefly to the present governments of the If this is not enough to make a cat laugh, as imperialistic great powers, is a vulgar piece of opportun ment in other countries, to help free the masses Stalin would say, it is at least enough to throw ism, pf bourgeois pacifism, actually calculated— in . spite everywhere from the “democratic” and “pacifist” Messrs. Briand, Chamberlain, Stresemann, Musso of the good intentions' of the gentle Kautskyans— to di illusions cultivated by the bourgeoisie, to expose vert the workers h-om the class struggle. For such a pro lini and Hoover into convulsive fits. The Kellogg. the, imperialist machinations of the foreign bour- paganda is calculated to inspire the workers with the Pact is Supposed to “impose upon its participants thought that the present ■ bourgeois governments of the oisie, to arouse the workers against them, and .certain Obligations erf a peaceful character”, yea, Imperialistic powers are N O T bound b y . thousands - of ireby hecpmé a rallying center for tjbe wgfkers f fio rai oWigatians”! Why doesn’t thè Soviet threads, of finance capital and tens or hundreds ..of. cor and 'Apgj&g&fc fweopM» rtf the wprid. ’Sytih # responding (i. e., predatory, greedy, preparatory.to sUnjóQ 'fig u ré e inmamo Pact, or join the World course, ip' 4üe Brest-litovsk Be; imperialistic, agression) SE C R ET T R E A T IE S between Court, or the League of Rations? Don’t they atì g ) ilge fl&atfuQty of the .German ’Káis.er. themrives ” (Lenin, The Disarmament Cry, SbotnikfSo- vimpo9e. p w fi dbligatiQQs p fa peaceful character rrial-Demokrata, December 1916.) Sew¿ tip&'feter;, ¿bfc.9& e pgbriy 0ifi- oo their participants”? C^r'perh^js Litvinov (read: #5tsorijSP« Making of Mep sjh^vism I f the Workers’ State does not constantly ex S^hn-RyAov) would--have us 'believe-that the Kel from Georgia and the establishment of a 'Soviet pose tine inherent counter-revolutionary nature of logg Pàct is less the instrument of the imperialist J^epnblie. I to . thei struggle against the B&ck to' the imperialist powers, but, on the contrary, cre bandita and war mongers than the VersaillesTreaty ate^ .the impression thatthese powers can be made' hahátiqwdLíiC and the League o f Nations? .to.-disarm and establish peace, who is deceived? ist totaiJaftopaí T Does pot this babble fly to the face of. all Boi Certainly not the Hoovers, the Briands, the Cham > ■ 19m» aEHgiiiilr'o/ Kellogg' Baei: hy Soviet berlains •_ " They laugh Lento said -ih»» toe.^riet-pbw eïv'oh the to th e ir sleeves atotfce'.''.fjpfy idea o f disarmament iij-.the..receWt in fget-frmarke..a^garture question ofpeace, or peace and at all. the .pitiful talk pf Litvinov. .fromi-.this rt^^uth>niry-.'patK .Instead of destroy-- “Would deelafe th^t-it expects-nothing good from the They are secretly or openly preparing'for the'next ing, bourgeois illusions. it strengthens them. ; In -. bourgeois, governments and proposes to thè workers of all countries to. overthrow them and transfer all political imperialist war as they must by their very nature, stg$d .of, stre^jheniog,, the r?Y9lwtippary. mover JHrwef to Soviets of workers deputies.” (Lenin, - How to as well as for a war to crush the workers’ repub n^ht¿n .q^erf,eauntries¿ , it weakens it iinsstead .of Attain- Peace, March 29, 1917.) lic. A ll their pacts, conferences and treaties are «xp«>ring?the ri^ re n tly .reactionary an<J. warrinak- It is true that the Soviet Union has a rcserva- window-dressing to hypnotize the workers while- irig chttiacternfriihperiahsm it concealá it. TTo be titoi, ©ri the Pactt Its note says further: they themselves work feverishly for the proper of the authors of this Summariring whatt has been said ’ above, one must moment. But the workers, to whom the authority course,bB£, Arid the latter state me; abseiice 'in the-compact of . obligations concern of the Soviet Union" is great, .are. deceived by the is the importantquestion. ing disarmaments,; whiçh ; is the only (I), essential ele- meit of peace guarantee.” (Current History, October disarmament palaver. Their illusions about peace In the official reply of the Soviet Government, : 1928* page 6.) under capitalism, about the possibilities of disarm signing thfc-K^lp^'-Pacti given out jby Litvinov on - W e suppose that this, unbelievable clap-trap (we ament, are deepened when the Soviet U nion; signs August 31, 1928, is contained a series of-the most Will -not use a harsher term) is accepted as very the Kellogg Pact. And the Communist Parties are astounding statements.. Says the Soviet Commis ‘klever’’ Soviet diplomacy-m some quarter, a type disarmed. It becomes almost impossible for them sar., fo r Foreign A ffa irs on the reservations made of- Machiavellian stroke that outwits everybody— to denounce effectively the Kellogg Pac^ as an ini- by Great Britain: Except the bourgeoisie for whom it is apparently perialist, war-mongeririg document, when the “This reservation the Soviet Government cannpU 'bui. intended. bourgeoisie can easi]y reply: “Dear friends, your consider as an attempt to use the Compact -itself, as an The Communists have persistently striven to per own Soviet Union has signed it and hailed it as instrument of imperialist policy.” (Current History, Octo a step towards peace". ber 1928, page 6 .) meate the proletariat with the idea that disarma An “attempt"! .We must take it, therefore, that ment talk under capitalism is the worst crime of For when the Soviet Union praises the imperial the “compact itself” is not an instrument of im the bourgeois pacifists. That capitalism, arma ists as “our friendly neighbors” how can the Com perialist policy, but that the rascally British are ments, war and militarism arc synonymous and in- munists in other countiies expose their bourgeoisie making an "attempt” to use it for this purpose. If as enemies of the Soviet Union who are preparing this analysis is advanced before the .w orking class to . crush it? When the Communist member of with all the authority of the Soviet Union behind Reichstag, Stoecker, denounces German imperial it, what becomes of the daily agitation in the press ism’s war preparations against the Soviet Union, which continues to repeat—and correctly so— the social-democratic Chancellor, Mueller, triumph that “Versailles, Locarno, the Anglo-French agree antly replies with ment, the Kellogg Tcace’ Pact are all steps to “The words of M .T. Kalinin, president of the Soviet ward, a war of all imperialist powers against Soviet Union, who on his recent reception to the new German Ambassador to Moscow, Dr. Herbert von Dircksen, as Russia”? (See Dally Worker, March 6, 1929). serted that the relations between the Soviet Union and Millions read the proclamations of the Soviet the German Republic were thoroughly peaceful anc’ Union, where only a handful read the Communist friendly.” (New York Herald-Tribune. February 27, press. Even if this were not so, the theory that 1929.) the Workers’ State can talk one way and the wor The Communist deputy was unable to reply to kers another way, is fundamentally false. this. Mueller could also have quoted Litvinov’.- B ut this" is not the w orst. T h e Soviet note says speech (Inprecor, December 20, 1928, page 1706) furth er: in which the German bourgeoisie is praised as th-r friend of Russia. Mussolini, in reply to the Italiar “ Nevertheless, in.-smuch as the Pact of Paris objective ly imposes certain o b !i~ r!on* on the powers before pub Communists, can also quote Litvinov’s speech; lic opinion and gives the Soviet Government a new “An example of the possibility of maintaining norma’ chance to put before all the participants of the