No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Distrust and suspicion cloud the views of many on future relations with Soviet Russia. The perfunctory general praise of the Red Army and its successes cannot counteract or even eliminate this distrust which may, in the long run, exercise an important influence in world affairs. There are even some who believe that a war with Russia is at least probable, and whose minds are consciously or unconsciously obsessed by the fear of the Russian threat. They argue: in 1939 England went to war in order to prevent German domination in Europe; we were driven into the war by our help to England and by Japan's plan to dominate Asia—but what will be the result? The rise of a power, the USSR, which will try to dominate Europe as well as Asia—and perhaps even other continents. Prime Minister Churchill is simply not believed when he claims that we can trust the Soviet leaders. The causes of this lack of confidence in Russia must be frankly stated; for only considering first the proofs for that pessimism which does not believe in the possibility of a lasting cooperation with Russia, can a solidly optimistic attitude be justified.
1 Cf. Czubatyi, Niklas: “The Modern Ukrainian Nationalist Movement,” Journal of Central European Affairs. Vol. IV, No. 3 (10 1944)Google Scholar . Czubatyi is editor of The Ukrainian Quarterly.
2 Cf. Bloom, S. F.: The World of Nations. A study of the national implications in the world of Karl Marx (New York, 1941). p. 151 fGoogle Scholar.
3 D. J. Dallin, the author of Soviet Russia's Foreign Policy, The Real Russia, etc. was from the beginnnig against the Soviet regime, being a Menshevik.
4 Boris Souvarine, 's Stalin (American edition: New York, 1939)Google Scholar is a very valuable study of the background, rise and development of the Soviet regime. This must be recognized even by those who would not agree with all interpretations. Souvarine is a most competent student of Russian history. It is to be hoped that this book will be reissued soon, not only with the bibliographical survey of the original French edition, but with an enlarged bibliographical apparatus and with additional chapters covering recent years.
5 Cf. Burnham, James, “Lenin's Heir,” Partisan Review. Vol. XII, No. 1 (Winter, 1945)Google Scholar.
6 Cf. my article “The Foreign Policy of Soviet Russia,” The Review of Politics, vol. 5, no. 2. 04 1943Google Scholar and the books of D. J. Dallin. Also note Scott, J.: Duel for Europe (Boston, 1942)Google Scholar.
7 Professor O. Halecki's article in this issue of The Review of Politics presents the Polish accusations against the Soviet regime. Cf. also his article in The Review of Politics V, No. 3. (07, 1943.)Google Scholar
8 Prof. M. Karpovich has emphasized the influence of democratic-constitutional forces in some periods of Russian history—cf. his review of Sumner, 's Short History of Russia in The Slavonic and East European Review, (10, 1944)Google Scholar —but that does not disprove the view on the role of terrorism imposed from above in periods of crisis.
9 The best study on the Red Army is White, D. Fedotoff, The Croath of the Red Army (Princeton, 1944)Google Scholar.
10 Cf. The Department of State. Papers Relating To The Foreign Relations of The United States (1926). Vol. 3, p. 406Google Scholar ff. B. Bakhmeteff writes: “The Soviet Government is not recognized by any civilized nation and has no authority to act in the name of the Russian people nor to dispose of Russian territory.” “The Riga Treaty is an act pregnant with disturbance and conflict; a menace to future world peace. It is in particular a flagrant violation of the principles announced by the United States as guiding its policy towards Russia.”
11 Cf. Forman, Harrison: Report from Red China (New York, 1945)Google Scholar.
12 Most interesting are the remarks of Owen Lattimore on the necessity of American-Russian-Canadian cooperation in the Arctic (America anJ Asia(Claremont.1943). p. 41f).
13 The Working Principles of The Soviet Economy (New York, 1943), p. 29Google Scholar.
14 Cf. e.g. Dwight Macdonald's monthly. Politics.
15 Cf. Moore, Barrineton jr “The Communist Party of USA.” (The American Political Science Review, vol. 39, No. 1 (02 1945)CrossRefGoogle Scholar . “The success of revolutionary Marxism in Russia spelled its death in the United States, and in varying degrees in other parts of the world… the revolutionary impetus will have to come from another source.” (P. 41).
16 Borkenau, Franz: World Communism. A History of The Third International (New York, 1939)Google Scholar . Borkenau is today a contributor to the Dublin Review.
17 “DrGriffin, Bernard, Roman Catholic Archbishop of Westminster… asserted that a break between Russia and the West today would void all the sacrifices of the last live years…” Chicago Daily Tribune, 03 6, 1945Google Scholar.