THE EX·TSAR IN THE GARDEN OF HIS VILLA AT TSARSKOE SELO. (Under guard by revolutionary soldiers during his walks).

MR. WILL T HORNE, M.P., AND MR. O'GRADY, M. P. , CONVEYING BRITISH LABOUR'S GREETINGS TO THE PROVISIONAL GOVERNMENT

STREET SCENE IN PETROGRAD DURING THE REVOLUTION: LENINISTS FIRE ON THE CROWD

A TTEMPTS TO REVIVE PATRiOTISM IN THE RUSSIAN ARMY. Officers addressing the troops


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-allies-and-russia-nv7gkqfgb?CMP=TNLEmail_118918_1957007

The Allies and Russia

The new regime has also its traitors who desire to “stop the war” at any price and to prepare, through anarchy, the revival of reaction

May 12, 1917

At no time since the Russian Revolution has it been more necessary than it now is for the friends and Allies of the Russian people to face the situation calmly. Whether the reports that reach us from day to day seem favourable or unsatisfactory, the thing chiefly needful is to remember that the work of consolidating government authority in a vast country which the late regime had in many respects wilfully disorganized is bound to take time and to be attended by many fluctuations.
While welcoming assurances like those of the President of the Duma, M Rodziano, and of Prince Lvoff, the Prime Minister of the Provisional Government, we should not be overcome by alarm at the earnest warnings ufttered by M Gutchkoff, the Minister of War, or draw forthwith dark conclusions from the decision of the Workmen’s and Soldiers’ Delegates to convene an International Socialist Conference in a neutral country. It has been clear from the beginning that, sooner or later, the multiplicity of authorities set up in thc first days of the Revolution would have to give place to some unitary executive organ.
Otherwise the danger that what M Gutchkoff calls “polyarchy” might degenerate into anarchy could scarcely be avoided. The only questions were how the process of unification could be carried through, and how long it would take. Of these two questions, that of time was the more important. Time is the essence of the military problem which confronts Russia and the Allies, a problem that anarchy in Russia would sorely aggravate.
“It is not too late to cure the disease”, M Gutchkoff declares, “but not a moment must be lost.” From the standpoint of the Allies - among whom the United States of America must be assigned a foremost place - it is comparatively unimportant whether the unification of authority be effected by the approximation of the views of the Provisional Government to those of the more responsible leaders of the Council of Workmen’s and Soldiers’ Delegates, or vice versa. But however the indispensable unification be accomplished, it. is necessary that the Government should enjoy the support of the great majority of honest and sober-minded citizens.
M. Gutchkoff tasks the pacifist elements with having raised the subversive cry of “Peace at the front and war in the country” - a cry which, he declared, must be smothered by another, “War at the front and peace within the country”. We do not doubt that the great bulk of Russian civilians and soldiers will rally to the latter cry - though before its ascendancy is clearly demonstrated there may be much confusion of counsels, and some oscillation in action.


The old regime had its traitors who brought the country to the verge of an artificial famine, and were engaged in dishonourable negotiation with the enemy.
The new regime has also its traitors who desire to “stop the war” at any price and to prepare, through anarchy, the revival of reaction. With these traitors there will undoubtedly be a reckoning. Those who believe in the future of Russia as a free and efficient democracy, will watch the vindication of the new regime with patient confidence and earnest sympathy.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-troubles-of-russia-j6dr2td95?CMP=TNLEmail_118918_1957007

The Troubles of Russia

While the Cadets have acted constitutionally, if imprudently, the Maximalists have adjured the people and the garrison of Petrograd to descend into the street

July 19, 1917

The temporary withdrawal of General Korniloff across the Lomnitza, rendered necessary by the sudden rise of that river in his rear, does not lessen the importance or the significance of the brilliant successes which the armies under the command of General Brusiloff have lately achieved. They have exercised a very curious influence upon the internal politics of the country.
On the one hand, the Cadets, or Constitutional Democrats, appear to have rushed to the conclusion that this marked revival of patriotic energy in the Southern Armies signified a general revulsion from the “advanced” revolutionary doctrines which had inspired the advocates of a “ German peace “ and had paralysed for a time the military forces of the nation. On the other hand, the Maximalists and the German and reactionary agents, whose tools the Maximalists are, perceive that these successes are both imperilling their own position and thwarting the military plans and the political intrigues of their German patrons.
Cadets and Maximalists have accordingly decided that now or never is the moment to upset the Provisional Government and its supporters, the Council of Workmen’s and Soldiers’ Delegates, or the Soviet, as the Russians more conveniently term that body, and the Council of the Peasants’ Delegates. The action of the Maximalists is consistent with the principles they profess. 31. Lenin and his associates are the declared enemies of order and the uncompromising apostles of peace without annexations and without indemnities, in the Berlin sense of that ambiguous formula.
In a striking message to “the great” Russian people” which appears today Mr Roosevelt, Mr Hughes, Mr Wickersham, and other eminent Americans expose its fallacious character in the name of the American Rights League, and demonstrate once again the incompatibility of a Lenin peace with the fundamental teachings of true democracy or with its most vital interests. The reasoning of the American League will not affect the paid emissaries of Germany or the Russian fanatics who are their dupes, but it is well calculated to impress the multitude of Russians who believe in American freedom and who have confidence in the good will and in the sagacity of American statesmen.
The conduct of the Cadets seems less logical than that of the Maximalists. A desire on their part to return to power and to promote the moderate views they entertain is natural and even laudable. But the adoption of steps which inevitably tend to impair the authority of the Government, at a moment when the whole future of the country in its external relations, as well as in its internal affairs, hangs manifestly in the balance, seems to be scarce worthy of patriotic politicians who have played an honourable part in the recent past and who may be called upon to serve the country again in the future. The position which they have taken up is above reproach in constitutional theory but it is sometimes a patriotic duty and the essence of practical wisdom not to push the most unimpeachable of principles to their logical conclusions.
The Cadets have separated from the Provisional Government and its allies on the very important question of the Ukraine. That region, stretching from the borders of Poland to the Black Sea, has long been the scene of Austrian and of German intrigue. Its 32,000,000 of people are distinguished by a good many local characteristics from the inhabitants of “Great Russia”, and they have always entertained aspirations for a large measure of autonomy. It has been the policy of the Central Powers, even under the old regime, to play upon this sentiment for the purpose of weakening “the Eastern neighbour”, and since the war they have redoubled their efforts in this kind.
The separatist movement has borne fruit. Some weeks ago the Ukraine set up a National Assembly of its own, known as the Rada, and this body proceeded to nominate something very like a Cabinet, with Departments of War and of Foreign Affairs. The Provisional Government in Petrograd adjured their brethren of the Ukraine not to follow the fatal path leading to disruption and not to strike a mortal blow at emancipated Russia. They sent four of the Ministers to Kieff, including M Terestchenko, Minister for Foreign Affairs, M Kerensky, the Minister of War, and M Tseretelli, to investigate the position.
The Ministers appear to have given a large interpretation to their mission, and to have agreed to concessions to Ukrainian “particularism” of a very extensive character. The Provisional Government in Petrograd accepted these terms, and amongst them the establishment, in agreement with the Rada, of a special Secretariat-General, which was granted wide powers, the formation of military units wholly Ukrainian, and the addition of Ukrainian delegates to the War Cabinet and the General Staff.
It is upon the grant of these terms that the Cadets took issue with their colleagues. They maintained with considerable plausibility that the Ministers dispatched to Kieff had exceeded their powers, which only authorized them to prepare a scheme for consideration, that the declaration in which the concessions are announced is ambiguous, that the concessions make the Ukraine practically independent, and that no authority less than the Constituent Assembly has the right to determine the relations of the Ukraine to the rest of Russia.
The abuse which the Finns are making of the wide autonomy lately granted to them must undoubtedly add weight to the protest of the Cadets. While the Cadets have acted constitutionally, if imprudently, the Maximalists have adjured the people and the garrison of Petrograd to “descend into the street”. They have succeeded in provoking bloodshed, but to what extent we cannot pretend to state. Their pretext was the action of the Provisional Government in disbanding certain regiments which had behaved disgracefully at the front. There was shooting in the streets on Monday and Tuesday, but it seems to have been fitful, and only certain regiments are reported to have taken part in the disturbances.
The Government, the Soviet, and the Committee of Peasants’ Delegates have issued a batch of appeals which, so far as words go, are energetic enough. They brand the disturbers as traitors and enemies of the Revolution, who “strike a dagger’s blow in the back of the Revolutionary Army”, they demand that all acts of this nature should be ended once and for all, and they forbid all demonstrations.
It remains to be seen whether words will suffice to overawe the Maximalists, and whether, if words fail, the Provisional Government and its supporters, or the new Government which seems to be under construction, will have the will and the power to employ more drastic arguments. The future of free Russia seems to depend very largely upon the answer.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-situation-in-russia-xd0snrdgc?CMP=TNLEmail_118918_1957007

The Situation in Russia

M Kerensky’s position therefore appears to be that so far no prominent General is definitely associated with his side

September 12, 1917

The news from Russia is obscure, and it must again be pointed out that we are hearing only one side of the story. M Kerensky’s latest statement claims, indeed, that evidence of the loyalty of the troops and people to the Provisional Government is being received from all the provinces, and that the superior officers are everywhere acting in agreement with the revolutionary commissaries and committees at the front. But confirmation of this sanguine account must evidently be awaited. General Korniloff has also issued a proclamation, but the outside world has merely learned of its existence through a speech delivered by M Skobeleff, the Minister of Labour, to the Central Executive Committee of the Soviet. The proclamation declares, according to M Skobeleff, that the Provisional Government and M Kerensky are “not capable of dealing with the situation,” and that Germanophiles form a section of the Government. As the country is threatened with disaster, General Korniloff considers it necessary to get rid of the Government and to take power in his own hands. This version of the proclamation is probably accurate so far as it goes, though M Kerensky has previously told us that General Korniloff proposes “to form a new Government”.
In pursuance of his intentions General Korniloff is marching on Petrograd. His exact whereabouts are not definitely known, but it must be assumed that he assured himself of a considerable amount of military support before delivering his ultimatum. The Soviet, which appears to control the situation in Petrograd, has sent parties to destroy the railway some distance from the capital. The entire Cabinet has resigned, in order to give M Kerensky “complete liberty of action”, but the Ministers continue to fill their offices “provisionally”.
Such a situation cannot endure very long. A significant fact is that M Kerensky has apparently been unable to find a successor to General Korniloff in the post of Commander-in-Chief. It is stated that General Klembovsky cannot assume the supreme command, because it is impossible for him to proceed to General Headquarters, but as he was specifically ordered to remain at Pskoff, the excuse, if it was ever offered, sounds a little thin. Overtures have also been made to General Alexeieff, but there is no word of his acceptance.
M Kerensky’s position therefore appears to be that so far no prominent General is definitely associated with his side, that the whole of this Ministerial colleagues have resigned in a rather odd way, and that he relies more than ever on the Soviet, which in the past has incessantly obstructed his desperate efforts to restore order in Russia. On the other hand, he claims that the Baltic Fleet supports him. The value of the support of the demoralized seamen of the Fleet cannot be rated very high. The thousands of men from Kronstadt who joined in the Maximalist outbreak in Petrograd in July were quickly cowed by the Cossacks. The position of M Savsinoff, the Acting Minister of War, is still puzzling. He has become Military Governor of Petrograd, and has issued an appeal to the inhabitants which implies hostility to General Korniloff, with whom he has hitherto been in close association.
A curious feature of the situation has been the outward calm of Petrograd. On Monday the city was strangely quiet and apparently expectant. Travellers returning from Russia say that the bulk of the people are weary of the existing chaos and intensely anxious about the threatened famine. They would welcome any development which restored stability, and to that extent their views are undoubtedly shared by the watching Allies.
We have examined impartially the position of the two factions, but nothing entirely trustworthy is yet known about the attitude likely to be adopted by the bulk of the Army. The story that a deputation of Cossacks is endeavouring to mediate between General Korniloff and M Kerensky may be discounted for the present. The bulk of the Cossacks are unquestionably backing General Korniloff, and that is one of the reasons why the situation is so paradoxical. Superficially it may seem that General Korniloff, with Cossack help, is aiming at a military dictatorship, while M Kerensky stands for the democratic principle of civil control.
The facts do not support this view. The one constitutional body in Russia is the Duma, which has not ceased to exist. although it has been elbowed aside. The Provisional Govemment had no conventional mandate for the authority it exercised, and on Monday it practically voted itself out of existence. In June the Soviet decreed the abolition of the Duma, but at a subsequent private meeting the Duma flatly declined to “cease to exist as an organ of national representation”. The “Congress of Cossacks of all Russia” next day passed a resolution approving of the refusal of the Duma to consent to its own abolition by the Soviet. At subsequent gatherings during the third week in August the Cossack Congress made declarations which were strictly constitutional.
While we are waiting for the outcome of the present struggle for power, let us at least be clear about the deductions to be drawn from the facts already made public. This is not a simple conflict between a would be military dictator and the advocates of civil control of a constitutional nature. There is no Government at all in Russia at the moment. There are two rival dictators, General Korniloff and M Kerensky, and the supporters of the soldier appear to advocate a reversion to constitutional methods.