The CHAIRMAN. Who were the four at that moment?
Mr. BULLITT. M. Orlando, Mr. Lloyd George, M. Clemenceau, and the
President. This extremely mild proposition, which really had almost no
chance of life, was, you will see, in no sense a reply to these
proposals of the Soviet Government. This is my attempt to doctor up
the Auchincloss-Miller proposition. In spite of every effort I could
make to obtain definite action on it, the reply was made to me that
this reply to the Nansen proposal would be a sufficient reply to that
proposal of the Soviet Government. [Reading:]
DEAR SIR: The misery and suffering in Russia described in
your letter of April 3 appeals to the sympathies of all
peoples. It is shocking to humanity that millions of men,
women, and children lack the food and the necessities, which
make life endurable.
The Governments and peoples whom we represent would be glad
to cooperate, without thought of political, military, or
financial advantage, in any proposal which would relieve
this situation in Russia. It seems to us that such a
commission as you propose would offer a practical means of
achieving the beneficent results you have in view, and could
not, either in its conception or its operation, be
considered as having any other aim than the "humanitarian
purpose of saving life."
There are great difficulties to be overcome, political difficulties,
owing to the existing situation in Russia, and difficulties of supply
and transport. But if the existing local governments of Russia are as
willing as the Governments and the peoples whom we represent to see
succor and relief given to the stricken peoples of Russia, no
political obstacle will remain. There will remain, however, the
difficulties of supply and transport, which we have mentioned, and
also the problem of distribution in Russia itself. The problem of
supply we can ourselves hope to solve, in connection with the advice
and cooperation of such a commission as you propose. The problem of
transport of supplies to Russia we can hope to meet with the
assistance of your own and other neutral Governments. The problem of
transport in Russia and of distribution can be solved only by the
people of Russia themselves, with the assistance, advice, and
supervision of your commission.
Subject to such supervision, the problem of distribution should be
solely under the control of the people of Russia themselves. The
people in each locality should be given, as under the regime of the
Belgian Relief Commission, the fullest opportunity to advise your
commission upon the methods and the personnel by which their community
is to be relieved. In no other circumstances could it be believed that
the purpose of this relief was humanitarian, and not political, under
no other conditions could it be certain that the hungry would be fed.
That such a course would involve cessation of all hostilities within
the territory of the former Russian Empire is obvious. And the
cessation of hostilities would, necessarily, involve a complete
suspension of the transfer of troops and military material of all
sorts to and within these territories. Indeed, relief to Russia which
did not mean a return to a state of peace would be futile, and would
be impossible to consider.
Under such conditions as we have outlined we believe that your plan
could be successfully carried into effect, and we should be prepared
to give it our full support.
REPLY OF PRESIDENT WILSON, PREMIERS CLEMENCEAU, LLOYD GEORGE, AND
ORLANDO, TO DR. NANSEN, APRIL 17, 1919
DEAR SIR: The misery and suffering in Russia described in
your letter of April 3 appeals to the sympathies of all
peoples. It is shocking to humanity that millions of men,
women, and children lack the food and the necessities which
make life endurable.
The Governments and peoples whom we represent would be glad
to cooperate, without thought of political, military, or
financial advantage, in any proposal which would relieve
this situation in Russia. It seems to us that such a
commission as you propose would offer a practical means of
achieving the beneficent results you have in view, and could
not, either in its conception or its operation, be
considered as having any other aim than the "humanitarian
purpose of saving life."
There are great difficulties to be overcome, political
difficulties, owing to the existing situation in Russia, and
difficulties of supply and transport. But if the existing
local governments of Russia are as willing as the
Governments and people whom we represent to see succor and
relief given to the stricken peoples of Russia, no political
obstacle will remain.
There will remain, however, the difficulties of supply,
finance, and transport which we have mentioned? and also the
problem of distribution in Russia itself. The problem of
supply we can ourselves hope to solve, in connection with
the advice and cooperation of such a commission as you
propose. The problem of finance would seem to us to fall
upon the Russian authorities. The problem of transport of
supplies to Russia we can hope to meet with the assistance
of your own and other neutral governments whose interests
should be as great as our own and whose losses have been far
less. The problems of transport in Russia and of
distribution can be solved only by the people of Russia
themselves, with the assistance, advice, and supervision of
your commission.
Subject to your supervision, the problem of distribution
should be solely under the control of the people of Russia
themselves. The people in each locality should be given, as
under the regime of the Belgian Relief Commission, the
fullest opportunity to advise your commission upon the
methods and the personnel by which their community is to be
relieved. In no other circumstances could it be believed
that the purpose of this relief was humanitarian, and not
political; under no other condition could it be certain that
the hungry would be fed.
That such a course would involve cessation of all
hostilities within definitive lines in the territory of
Russia is obvious. And the cessation of hostilities would,
necessarily, involve a complete suspension of the transfer
of troops and military material of all sorts to and within
Russian territory. Indeed, relief to Russia which did not
mean a return to a state of peace would be futile and would
be impossible to consider.
Under such conditions as we have outlined, we believe that
your plan could be successfully carried into effect, and we
should be prepared to give it our full support.
V.E. ORLANDO.
D. LLOYD GEORGE.
WOODROW WILSON.
G. CLEMENCEAU.
Senator KNOX. I want the reply of Auchincloss to Nansen to go into the
record.
The CHAIRMAN. Let all that correspondence be printed in the record.
Senator KNOX. Dr. Nansen's proposition, and then the reply,
(The letters referred to are inserted above.)
Mr. BULLITT. The Nansen letter was written in Mr. Hoover's office.
Nansen made the proposition. I wrote the original of a reply to Dr.
Nansen, which I believe would have led to peace. Col. House indicated
his approval of it, but wished to have it considered from the
international legal standpoint, which was then done by Mr. Auchincloss
and Mr. Miller, who proposed a reply that had no resemblance to my
proposal. I then objected to that as it was on its way to the
President. It was not sent to the President, and I was ordered to try
to doctor it up. I attempted to doctor it up and produced a doctored
version which was finally made the basis of the reply, with the change
of two or three words which made it even worse and even more
indefinite, so that the Soviet Government could not possibly conceive
it as a genuine peace proposition. It left the whole thing in the air.
Senator KNOX. We would like to have you see that these documents to
which you have just now referred are inserted in the record in the
sequence in which you have named them.
Mr. BULLITT. Yes, I shall be at the service of the committee in that
regard.
Senator HARDING. Lest I missed something while I was out of the room I
am exceedingly curious to know why the Soviet proposal was not given
favorable consideration.
Senator KNOX. Mr. Bullitt has stated that.