Comrades: Upon Soviet Russia has fallen the task not only to construct
the new but also to recapitulate the old to a certain degree, or,
rather, to a very large degree--to pay all bills, first of all the bills
of the war, which has lasted three and a half years. The war put the
economic power of the belligerent countries to a severe test. The fate
of Russia, a poor, backward country, in a protracted war was
predetermined. In the terrible collision of the military machines the
determining factor, after all is said and done, is the ability of the
country to adapt its industries to the military needs, to rebuild it on
the shortest notice and to produce in continuously increasing quantities
the weapons of destruction which are used up at such an enormous rate
during this massacre of peoples. Almost every country, including the
most backward, could and did have powerful weapons of destruction at the
beginning of the war; that is, it obtained them from foreign countries.
That is what all the backward countries did, and so did Russia. But the
war speedily wears out its dead capital, demanding that it be
continuously replenished. The military power of every single country
drawn into the whirlpool of the world massacre was, as a matter of fact,
measured by its ability to produce independently and during the war
itself, its cannons and shells and the other weapons of destruction.
If the war had decided the problem of the balance of power in a very
short time, Russia might conceivably have turned out to be on that side
of the trenches which victory favored. But the war dragged along for a
long time, and it was not an accident that it did so. The fact alone
that the international politics were for the last fifty years reduced to
the construction of the so-called European "balance of power," that is,
to a state in which the hostile powers approximately balance one
another, this fact alone was bound--when the power and wealth of the
present bourgeois nations is considered--to make it a war of an
extremely protracted character. That meant first of all the exhaustion
of the weaker and economically less developed countries.
The most powerful country in a military sense proved to be Germany,
because of the strength of the industries and because of their modern
and rational construction as against the archaic construction of the
German State. France, with its undeveloped state of capitalism, proved
to be far behind Germany, and even such a powerful colonial power as
Great Britain, owing to the conservative and routine character of the
English industries, proved to be weaker than Germany. When history put
before the Russian Revolution the question of the peace negotiations, we
had no doubt that in these negotiations, and so long as the decisive
power of the revolutionary proletariat of the world had not interfered,
we should be compelled to stand the bill of three and a half years of
war. There was no doubt in our minds that in the person of the German
imperialism we were dealing with an opponent who was saturated with the
consciousness of his immense power, which was strikingly revealed during
the present war.
All the arguments made by bourgeois cliques that we might have been
incomparably stronger if we had conducted these negotiations together
with our allies are absolutely without foundation. In order that we
might at an indefinite future date conduct negotiations together with
our Allies, we should first of all have had to continue the war together
with them. And if our country was weakened and exhausted, the
continuation of the war, a failure to bring it to a conclusion, would
have still further weakened and exhausted it. We should have had to
settle the war under conditions still more unfavorable to us. In the
case even that the combination of which Russia, owing to international
intrigues of Czarism and the bourgeoisie, had become a part--the
combination headed by Great Britain--in the case even that this
combination had come out of the war completely victorious--let us for a
moment admit the possibility of such a not very probable issue--even in
that case, comrades, it does not mean that our country would also have
come out victorious. For during further continuation of this protracted
war, Russia would have become even more exhausted and plundered than
now. The masters of that combination, who would concentrate in their
hands the fruits of the victory, that is, Great Britain and America,
would have displayed toward our country the same methods which were
displayed by Germany during the peace negotiations. It would be absurd
and childish to appraise the politics of the imperialistic countries
from the point of view of any considerations other than those
considerations of naked interests and material power. Consequently, if
we, as a nation are at present weakened before the imperialism of the
world, we are weakened, not because of extricating ourselves from the
fiery ring of the war, having already previously extricated ourselves
from the shackles of international military obligations: no! we are
weakened by that very policy of the Czarists and the bourgeois classes,
which we, as a revolutionary party, have always fought against before
this war and during this war.
You remember, comrades, under what conditions our delegation went to
Brest-Litovsk last time, right after one of the sessions of the Third
All-Russian Congress of the Soviets. At that session, we reported on the
state of the negotiations, and the demands of our opponents. These
demands, as you remember, were really no more than masked, or, rather,
half-masked annexationist aspirations at the expense of Lithuania,
Courland, a part of Livonia, the Isles of Moon Sound, as well as a
half-masked demand for a punitive war indemnity which we then estimated
would amount to six, eight or even ten milliards of rubles. During
interruption of the sessions, which continued for about ten days, a
considerable disturbance took place in Austria-Hungary; strikes of
masses of workers broke out, and these strikes were the first
recognition of our methods of conducting peace negotiations that we met
with from the proletariat of the Central Empires, as against the
annexationist demands of the German militarism. We promised here no
miracles but we did say that the road we were pursuing was the only road
remaining to the revolutionary democracy for securing the possibility of
its further development.
There is room for complaint that the proletariat of the other countries,
and particularly of the Central Empires, is too slow to enter the road
of open revolutionary struggle, yes, it must be admitted that the pace
of its development is all too slow--but, nevertheless, there could be
observed a movement in Austria-Hungary which swept the entire state and
which was a direct echo of the Brest-Litovsk negotiations.
Leaving for Brest-Litovsk, it was our common opinion that there was no
ground to believe that just this wave would sweep away the Austro-German
militarism. If we had been convinced that this could be expected, we
would gladly have given the promise that several persons demanded from
us, namely, that under no circumstances would we sign a separate peace
with Germany. I said at that very time, that we could not make such a
promise, for it would amount to taking upon ourselves the obligation of
vanquishing the German militarism. The secret of attaining such a
victory was not in our possession. And inasmuch as we would not
undertake the obligation to change the balance of the world powers at a
moment's notice, we frankly and openly declared that revolutionary power
may under certain conditions be compelled to agree to an annexationist
peace. A revolutionary power would fall short of its high principles
only in the event that it should attempt to conceal from its own people
the predatory character of the peace, but by no means, however, in the
event that the course of the struggle should compel it to adopt such a
peace.
At the same time, we indicated that we were leaving to continue
negotiations under conditions which were seemingly improving for us and
becoming worse for our enemies. We observed the movement in
Austria-Hungary, and there were signs indicating (this was made the
basis for statements by representatives of the German Social Democracy
in the Reichstag) that Germany was on the eve of similar events. We went
with this hope. During the first days of this visit to Brest-Litovsk the
wireless brought us from Vilna the first news that in Berlin an enormous
strike movement was developing; this movement as well as that of
Austria-Hungary was directly connected with the course of negotiations
in Brest. However, as is often the case, by reason of the dialectic of
the class struggle, just this conspicuous beginning of the proletarian
rising, which surpassed anything Germany had ever seen, was bound to
push the property classes to a closer consolidation and to greater
hostility against the proletariat. The German dominating classes are
saturated with a sufficiently strong instinct of self-preservation to
understand that concessions in such an exigency as they were in, under
the pressure of the masses of their own people--concessions however
small--would amount to capitulation before the idea of the revolution.
That is why, after the first moment of perplexity and panic, the time
when Kuehlmann deliberately dragged out the negotiations by minor and
formal questions, had passed--as soon as the strikes were disposed of,
as soon as he came to the conclusion that for the time being no imminent
danger threatened his masters, he again changed front and adopted a tone
of unlimited self-confidence and aggression.
Our negotiations were complicated by the participation of the Kiev Rada.
We called attention to this last time, too. The delegation from the Kiev
Rada appeared at a time when the Rada represented a fairly strong
organization in the Ukraine and when the way out of the war had not yet
been predetermined. Just at that time, we made the Rada an official
offer to conclude a definite treaty with us, making as one of the
conditions of such a treaty the following demand: that the Rada declare
Kaledin and Korniloff to be counter-revolutionists and put no hindrance
in the way of our waging war on these two leaders. The delegation from
the Kiev Rada arrived, just when we hoped to reach an understanding with
it on these matters. We declared that as long as the people of the
Ukraine recognized the Rada, we considered its independent participation
in these negotiations permissible. But with the further development of
events in Russian territory and in the Ukraine, and the more the
antagonism between the Ukrainian masses and the Rada increased, the
greater became the Rada's readiness to conclude any kind of treaty with
the governments of the Central Empires, and, if need be, to drag German
imperialism into the internal affairs of the Russian Republic, in order
to support the Rada against the Russian revolution.
On the 9th day of February (N. S.) we learned that the peace
negotiations carried on behind our backs between the Rada and the
Central Powers, had been signed. The 9th of February happened to be the
birthday of Leopold of Bavaria, and, as is the custom in monarchical
countries, the triumphant historical act was timed--with or without the
consent of the Kiev Rada for this festive day. General Hoffmann had a
salute fired in honor of Leopold of Bavaria, having previously asked
permission to do so of the Kiev delegation, since by the treaty of peace
Brest-Litovsk had been ceded to Ukraine.
Events had taken such a turn, however, that at the time General Hoffmann
was asking permission for a military salute, the Kiev Rada had but very
little territory left outside of Brest-Litovsk. On the strength of the
telegrams we had received from Petrograd, we officially made it known to
the Central Powers' delegation that the Kiev Rada no longer existed, a
circumstance which certainly had some bearing on the course of the peace
negotiations. We suggested to Count Czernin that his representatives
accompany our officers into Ukrainian territory to ascertain whether the
Kiev Rada existed or not. Czernin seemed to welcome this suggestion, but
when we asked him if this meant that the treaty made with the Kiev
delegation would not be signed before the return of his own mission, he
hesitated and promised to ask Kuehlmann about it. Having inquired, he
sent us an answer in the negative.
This was on February 8th. By the 9th, they had to sign the treaty. This
could not be delayed, not only on account of Leopold's birthday, but for
a more important reason, which Kuehlmann undoubtedly explained to
Czernin: "If we should send our representatives into the Ukraine just
now, they might really convince themselves that the Rada does not exist;
and then we shall have to face a single All-Russian delegation which
would spoil our prospects in the negotiations."... By the
Austro-Hungarian delegation we were advised to put principle aside and
to place the question on a more practical plane. Then the German
delegation would be disposed to concessions.... It was unthinkable that
the Germans should decide to continue the war over, say, the Moon
Islands, if you put this demand in concrete form.
We replied that we were ready to look into such concessions as their
German colleagues were prepared to make. "So far we have been contending
for the self-determination of the Lithuanians, Poles, Livonians, Letts,
Esthonians, and other peoples; and on all these issues you have told us
that such self-determination is out of the question. Now let us see what
your plans are in regard to the self-determination of another
people--the Russians; what designs and plans of a military strategic
nature are behind your seizure of the Moon Islands. For these islands,
as an integral part of an independent Esthonian Republic, or as a
possession of the Federated Russian Republic would have only a defensive
military importance, while in the hands of Germany they would assume
offensive significance, menacing the most vital centers of our country,
and especially Petrograd."
But, of course, Hoffmann would make no concessions whatsoever. Then the
hour for reaching a decision had come. We could not declare war, for we
were too weak. The army had lost all of its internal ties. In order to
save our country, to overcome this disorganization, it was imperative to
establish the internal coherence of the toilers. This psychological tie
can only be created by constructive work in factory, field and workshop.
We had to return the masses of laborers, who had been subjected to great
and intense suffering--who had experienced catastrophes in the war--to
the fields and factories, where they must find themselves again and get
a footing in the labor world, and rebuild internal discipline. This was
the only way to save the country, which was now atoning for the sins of
Czarism and the bourgeoisie. We had to get out of the war and withdraw
the army from the slaughter house. Nevertheless, we threw this in the
face of the German militarism: The peace you are forcing down our
throats is a peace of aggression and robbery. We cannot permit you,
Messrs. Diplomats, to say to the German workingmen: "You have
characterized our demands as avaricious, as annexationist. But look,
under these very demands we have brought you the signature of the
Russian revolution." Yes, we are weak, we cannot fight at present. But
we have sufficient revolutionary courage to say that we shall not
willingly affix our signature to the treaty which you are writing with
the sword on the body of living peoples. We refused to affix our
signature. I believe we acted properly, comrades.
I do not mean to say, friends, that a German advance upon Russia is out
of the question. It were too rash to make such an assertion in view of
the great strength of the German imperialistic party. But I do believe
that the stand we have taken in the matter has rendered it far more
difficult for German militarism to advance upon us. What would happen if
it should advance? To this there is but one thing to say: If it is
possible in our country, a country completely exhausted and in a state
of desperation, to raise the spirits of the more revolutionary energetic
elements; if a struggle in defence of our Revolution and the territory
comprised within it is still possible, then this is the case only as a
result of our abandoning the war and refusing to sign the peace treaty.