Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T19:34:17.542Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Foundation of the Communist Movement in Eastern Galicia, 1919-1921

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2017

Roman Solchanyk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

On the evening of October 31, 1921, a special edition of Gazeta Lwowska reported the sensational news of the arrest of all the delegates to a “Communist congress” that had convened only a few hours earlier on the grounds of St. George’s Cathedral in Lviv (Lwów in the Polish version). According to the newspaper, “the congress had been in preparation for some time [and] was attended by various Communist organizations, although central leadership was in the hands of the Ruthenians.” On the following day the events in Lviv were reconstructed, rather loosely, by the leading newspapers in Poland. Cracow’s Ilustrowany Kuryer Codzienny—exclaiming that “the hajdamacy [Ukrainian bandits] have even turned over the church for Bolshevik purposes“—related that among those arrested were members of the secret Ukrainian organizations KUM and Volia.

Type
Articles
Information
Slavic Review , Volume 30 , Issue 4 , December 1971 , pp. 774 - 794
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies. 1971

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

I would like to express my gratitude to Professor Roman Szporluk, of the University of Michigan, in whose seminar this article originated.

1. Kowalczyk, Józef, Wielki proces (Warsaw, 1963), pp. 5–6.Google Scholar Similar arrests were conducted throughout Eastern Galicia during the next two months, and ultimately thirtynine persons, including the twenty-six participants in the congress, were charged with high treason in the so-called St. George's Trial (Nov. 22, 1922-Jan. 11, 1923). For a full list of the defendants, among whom were such notables of the Polish Communist movement as Królikowski, Stefan and Cichowski, Kazimierz, see Proces komunistów we Lwozvie (Sprawa świętojurska): Sprawosdanie stenograficzne (Lwów, 1923), pp. 3–4.Google Scholar

2. Toward the end of 1923 the KPSH was renamed the Communist Party of Western Ukraine (KPZU), and its sphere of activity was enlarged to include Volynia, Polissia (Polesie), Pidliashshia (Podlasie), and the Kholm (Chelm) region, which were transferred to Poland by virtue of the Treaty of Riga.

3. Although there is a constantly growing body of periodical literature devoted to various aspects of KPSH-KPZU history, the party as such has not received adequate treatment in either Polish or Soviet historiography. This is explained in large part by the KPZU's “unparty” status following its dissolution along with the Communist Party of Poland (KPP) by the Comintern in 1938. Partial rehabilitation came in the course of the Twentieth Congress of the CPSU in 1956, and full rehabilitation only in 1963. See “Zaiavlenie,” Pravda, Feb. 21, 1956, p. 9, and “Za pravil'noe osveshchenie istorii Kommunisticheskoi partii Zapadnoi Ukrainy,” Kommunist, 1963, no. 10, pp. 37-47. Sources dealing with the KPSH-KPZU may be gleaned from the following: Lawrynenko, Jurij, Ukrainian Communism and Soviet Russian Policy Toward the Ukraine: An Annotated Bibliography, 1917-1953 (New York, 1953), pp. 278–91;Google Scholar Dziewanowski, M. K., The Communist Party of Poland: An Outline of History (Cambridge, Mass., 1959);Google Scholar żanna Kormanowa, Materialy do-bibliografii polskiego ruchu robotniczego (1918-1939), vol. 1: Druki zwafte (Warsaw, 1960), pp. 176-77; Zlupko, S.N, “Istoriia Zapadnoi Ukrainy v epokhu kapitalizma v noveishikh sovetskikh issledovaniiakh,” Istoriia SSSR, 1968, no. 4, pp. 86–92 Google Scholar; V. V. Mashotas', Komunistychna partita Zakhidnoi Ukrainy: Bibliohrafichnyi pokazhchyk materialiv i publikatsii za 1919-1967 rr. (Lviv, 1969); and Halushko, Ie. M., “Dzherela z istorii KPZU (1919-1928 rr.),” in Zahrava voli: Z istorii Komunistychnoi partii Zakhidnoi Ukrainy (Lviv, 1970), pp. 274–88.Google Scholar

4. Majstrenko, Iwan, Borot'bism: A Chapter in the History of Ukrainian Communism (New York, 1954).Google Scholar Pelenski, Cf. Jaroslaw , “Soviet Ukrainian Historiography After World War II,” Jahrbilcher fiir Geschichte Osteuropas, n.s., 12, no. 3 (October 1964): 408–9.Google Scholar

5. The main source on the IRSDM is V. S. [Roman Rozdol's'kyi], “Do istorii ukrains'koho livo-sotsiialistychnoho rukhu v Halychyni (Pidchasvoienni ‘Drahomanivky’ 1916-18 rr.),” Vpered: Ukrains'ka robitnycha haseta (Munich), 1951, no. 3-4, pp. 11-12. See also O. Iu. Karpenko, “Do pytannia pro vynyknennia i orhanizatsiine oformlennia Komunistychnoi partii Skhidnoi Halychyny (1919-1923 rr.),” in Z istorii zakhidnoukrains'- kykh zemel' (Kiev, 1957), 2: 166-67, and Adrian Hoshovs'kyi, “Zasnovnyky i diiachi KPZU,” in Ukrains'kyi Kalendar 1965 (Warsaw, 1965), pp. 185-87.

6. For a general survey of the development of Ukrainian political parties in Eastern Galicia see Rudnytsky, Ivan L., “The Ukrainians in Galicia Under Austrian Rule,” Austrian History Yearbook, 3, pt. 2 (1967): 408 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7. Irchan, Myroslav, V burianakh: Spohady, in Vybrani tvory, 2 vols. (Kiev, 1958). 1: 325.Google Scholar

8. V.S., “Do istorii ukrains'koho livo-sotsiialistychnoho rukhu,” p. 11.

9. See Krilyk-Vasylkiv’s testimony in Proces komunistów, pp. 79-80. Significantly enough, the Vistnyk condemned the Bolshevik takeover of Kiev in February 1918 and, characterizing the Red Army as an occupation force, came out in defense of the Central Rada. See V.S., p. 12, and Malanchuk, V., Torzhestvo lenins'koi natsional'noi polityky (Komunistychna partita—orhanisator rozviasannia natsional'noho pytannia v zakhidnykh oblastiakh URSR) (Lviv, 1963), p. 169.Google Scholar

10. For valuable biographical sketches of some of the IRSDM activists, see Hoshovs'kyi, “Zasnovnyky i diiachi KPZU,” pp. 189-91. In this connection it is worth noting that the overall retrenchment in the USSR has not left researchers of the KPSH-KPZU unaffected. Aside from the consistently poor quality of recent publications, certain titles have been withdrawn from bookstores and presumably from libraries as well. The latest such case is a three-hundred-page anthology of biographies of leading party figures. See Kolasky, John, Two Years in Soviet Ukraine (Toronto, 1970), p. 154.Google Scholar

11. Leninskii sbornik, 35 (1945): 93-94. According to one of the official KP(b)U historians, the “most harmful and most dangerous” aspect of this agitation was the demand for a separate Soviet Ukrainian army apart from the Red Army. See Popov, M. M., Narys istorii Komunistychnoi partii (bil'shovykiv) Ukrainy, 5th rev. and enl. ed. (Kharkiv, 1931), p. 214.Google Scholar For the Comintern's role in the dissolution of the Borotbisty see the interesting chapter entitled “Die unmittelbare ‘Einmischung’ des Exekutivkomitees der Kommunistischen Internationale in die Angelegenheiten der verschiedenen angeschlossenen Partien,” in Sinowjew, G., Bericht des Exekutivkomitees der Kommunistischen Internationale an den zweiten Weltkongress der Kommunistischen Internationale ([Berlin], 1920), p. 20–21.Google Scholar

12. Stefan Volynets’s speech in “Protokoly IV Konferencji Komunistycznej Partii Polski (1925),” Z Pola Walki, 1962, no. 3, p. 140Google Scholar, and Arsenych, P. I., “Zasnovnyk KPSH K. M. Savrych (Maksymovych),” Ukrains'kyi istorychnyi shurnal, 1969, no. 1, p. 126.Google Scholar

13. It is indicative of the ideological differences between the Borotbisty and the KP(b)U that initially Savrych-Maksymovych and Sirko stood at the head of different and opposing groups. See Sirko, I. M., “Shliakhom Zhovtnia,” in Na choli vyzvol'noi borot'by: Spohady kolyshnikh aktyvnykh diiachiv Komunistychnoi partii Zakhidnoi Ukrainy (Kiev, 1965), p. 32.Google Scholar

14. Kotmnunisticheskaia partiia Ukrainy v rezoliutsiiakh i resheniiakh s“ezdov i konferentsii, 1918-1956 (Kiev, 1958), p. 43.

15. The practice of sending groups such as these to Eastern Galicia apparently became quite common beginning in the spring of 1919. Reports dating from this period refer to “our comrades arriving in Galicia” or simply “our people.” See Grazhdanskaia voina na Ukraine 1918-1920: Sbornik dokumentov i materialov, 3 vols. (Kiev, 1967), 2: 67, 74.

16. The program for Galicians interned in Turkestan, for example, included a wide array of lectures, meetings, concerts, and even special publications such as Shcvchenko and the Communist Revolution. For details see Proces komunistów, pp. 5-6.

17. A frank statement of Soviet aims in Eastern Galicia just before the Red Army's advance may be found in Piddubnyi, H. [Tolmachiv, H.], Rozbyite kaidany! (Slovo do halyts'kykh selian i robitnykiv) (Vienna and Lviv, 1920), pp. 14 ff.Google Scholar

18. For a concise analysis of the ZUNR as one of the succession states of Austria- Hungary, see Batowski, Henryk, Rozpqd Auslro-W ęgier 1914-1918 (Sprpwy mrodowofciowe i dzialania dyplomatyczne) (Wroclaw, Warsaw, and Krakow, 1965), pp. 213–20. Cf.Google Scholarthe controversial article by Karpenko, O. Iu., “Do pytannia pro kharakter revoliutsiinoho rukhu v Skhidnii Halychyni v 1918 r.,” in Z istorii zakhidnoukrains'kykh zemel' (Kiev, 1957), 1: 59–90.Google Scholar

19. In due time, however, certain KPSH leaders began to espouse a theory which had become quite popular among Ukrainian social democrats—namely, that the Ukrainian nation, having sprung from a “single stream” (iedynyi potok), was “bourgeoisieless.” See, for example, O. Vasyl'kiv, . “Natsional'ne vyzvolennia a ukrains'ke dribnomishchanstvo,” Nasha pravda, 4, no. 1 (January. 1924): 6.Google Scholar

20. The only significant industrial center in Eastern Galicia was the Drohobych- Boryslav petroleum basin, which figured prominently in the plans of both Polish and Ukrainian nationalists in 1918-19. See Deruga, Aleksy, Polityka wschodnia Polski wobec ziem Litwy, Bialorusi i Ukrainy (1918-1919) (Warsaw, 1969), pp. 225–26,Google Scholar and Dziewanowski, M. K., “Joseph Pilsudski, the Bolshevik Revolution and Eastern Europe,” Polish Review, 14, no. 4 (Autumn 1969): 25–26.Google Scholar

21. Baraba, Hr. [Ivanenko, Hryhorii] and Myroniv, Bruno [Mykhats, Hryhorii], Drohobyts'ke povstannia 14-15 kvitnia 1919 r. (Lviv, 1929), p. 31.Google Scholar

22. Ibid., p. 32.

23. “Comrade M. Freilich’s Report (Eastern Galicia),” The Communist International, no. 4 (Aug. 1, 1919), pp. 127-28.Google ScholarThis report, presumably written after the Stanislav conference, attests to the complete lack of coordination among the several underground groups. Thus, upon the defeat of its resolution, the faction headed by Freilich proclaimed the formation of a Communist Party of Eastern Galicia and then declared “the fact of our joining the III International,” obviously unaware of the developments in Stanislav. Subsequently the KPSH dated its membership in the Comintern with the publication of Freilich’s report. See Iaroshenko, A. D., “V. I. Lenin i Komunistychna partiia Skhidnoi Halychyny,” Ukrains'kyi istorychnyi shurnal, 1965, no. 4, p. 36.Google Scholar

24. Borodaiko, V, “Do 10-tyrichchia ‘Zakhidno-Ukrains'koi Respubliky, ’” Litopys revoliutsii, no. 6 (October-December 1928), p. 309 Google Scholar; also Sirko, “Shliakhom Zhovtnia,” pp. 33-34.

25. See, for example, Grashdanskaia voina, vol. 1, pt. 1, pp. 675, 677, 678; vol. 2, pp. 67, 74.

26. For details, see Baraba and Myroniv, Drohobyts'ke povstannia, pp. 46-52.

27. Iwański, Gereon, “Z dziejów Komunistycznej Partii Galicji Wschodniej,” Z Pola Walki, 1967, no. 4, p. 28.Google Scholar Between May and June 1919 both the Provisional Committee of Communists of Eastern Galicia and the Galician Revolutionary Committee underwent a series of changes in connection with the participation of Ukrainians from Bukovina in their activities. For details see Kucherov, N. K., “K voprosu o vozniknovenii i organizatsionnom oformlenii Kommunisticheskoi partii Vostochnoi Galitsii (1919-1923 gg.),” Voprosy istorii KPSS, 1965, no. 12, p. 63.Google Scholar

28. Grashdanskaia voina, 2: 88-89.

29. Hoshovs'kyi, , “Zasnovnyky i diiachi KPZU,” p. 187; also Grashdanskaia voina, 2: 121–22.Google Scholar

30. [Mikhail] Levitsky, “Polozhenie v Galitsii i Bukovine,” Vestnik 2-go Kongressa Kommunisticheskogo Internatsionala [supplement to Pravda], no. 2 (July 29, 1920), p. 1.

31. It was presumably in Prague that Krilyk-Vasylkiv met Petro Diatliv, the first KPSH “publisher.” On Diatliv see Iaroshenko, A. D., “Nevtomnyi soldat revoliutsii (Do 80-richchia z dnia narodzhennia P. Iu. Diatlova),” Ukrains'kyi istorychnyi zhurnal, 1963, no. 1, pp. 94–96 Google Scholar, and Voloshko, Ievhen, “Taiemnychyi emihrant,” Vitchyzna, 1967, no. 9, pp. 127–35.Google Scholar

32. For details, see Grazhdanskaia voina, 2: 291-92.

33. Ibid., pp. 447-48.

34. Levytskyi and Baral, like Baran, were Galicians by birth, although they spent very little time there. The first two represented the KPSH at the Second Congress of the Comintern and worked for the most part in Moscow; Baran forged his career in the ranks of the RSDRP and held leading posts in the Red Army in the Ukraine. On Baral, who was also a leading member of the Austrian Communist Party, see Turok, V. M., “Dokumenty o deiatele mezhdunarodnogo kommunisticheskogo dvizheniia A. G. Barale- Savko (1890-1957),” Novaia i noveishaia istoriia, 1961, no. 1, pp. 182–83.Google Scholar

35. Grazhdanskaia voina, 3: 271.

36. Halushko, Ie. M., Narysy istorii ideologichnoi ta orhanizatsiinbi diial'nosii KPZU v 1919-1928 rr. (Lviv, 1965), p. 43 Google Scholar (hereafter cited as Halushko, Narysy istorii KPZU).

37. Kucherov, M. K., “Komunistychna partiia Skhidnoi Halychyny—orhanizator radians'koho budivnytstva v 1920 r.,” Ukrains'kyi istorychnyi zhurnal, 1964, no. 4, p. 82.Google Scholar

38. Halushko, Narysy istorii KPZU, pp. 51-52. The KP(b)U's views on organizational questions had already been articulated as early as May 1919, at which time a plenum of the TsK KP(b)U resolved to “recognize the formal independence of the Galician party organization” while “regarding it as an oblast organization of the KPU.” See Grazhdatiskaia voina, 2: 88-89.

39. Palashchuk had been corresponding with Volodymyr Vynnychenko, one of the leaders of the pre-Bolshevik government in the Ukraine, on the subject of the latter's “taking the leadership of a new movement” (Halushko, Narysy istorii KPZU, p. 59).

40. Iaroshenko, A. D., Komunistychna partiia Zakhidnoi Ukrainy—orhanizator i kerivnyk revoliutsiino-vysvol'noi borot'by trudiashchykh zakhidnoukrains'kykh zemel' (Kiev, 1959), P. 19.Google Scholar

41. Iwański, “Z dziejów Komunistycznej Partii Galicji Wschodniej,” p. 21.

42. Halushko, Narysy istorii KPZU, p. 78. For details on the structure and organization of the ECCI and its Small Buro see Degras, Jane, ed., The Communist International, 1919-1943: Documents, 3 vols. (London, 1956-65), 1: 271–73.Google Scholar

43. On December 3, 1920, the Sejm included the territory of Eastern Galicia into the Lwów, Krakow, Tarnopol, and Stanislawów voevodships, but it was not until March 15, 1923, that the Conference of Ambassadors in Paris granted Poland sovereignty over these territories. Cf. Leo J. Haczynski, “Two Contributions to the Problem of Galicia,” East European Quarterly, 4, no. 1 (March 1970): 103.

44. Because of the difficulties connected with the war, the KPRP was unable to send its official representatives outside of the country until 1921. Hence the differences of opinion between such unofficial representatives as members of the RKP(b)'s Polish Buro and the KC KPRP. See Józef Kowalski, Zarys historii polskiego ruchu robotnicsego w latach 1918-1929, pt. 1: Lata 1918-1928, 2nd enl. ed. Warsaw, 1962), p. 204.

45. Halushko, Narysy istorii KPZU, pp. 78-79.

46. Ibid. The KP(b)U, on its part, refused to acknowledge the revised version of the agreement.

47. Iwanski, “Z dziejow Komunistycznej Partii Galicji Wschodniej,” p. 32.

48. “Just as nationalism was an unsuitable bed-fellow for Socialist aspirations, so peasant discontent could only divert the energy of working-class Socialism into petit- bourgeois channels. In RoSa Luxemburg's view the primary role of the proletariat in the Russian revolution of 1905-6—a conception shared fully by the Bolsheviks-necessarily led her to refuse alliances with peasants and nationalists just as firmly as with the bourgeois liberals.” Nettl, J. P., Rosa Luxemburg, 2 vols. (London, 1966), 2: 851.Google Scholar For an excellent discussion of this problem See Chlebowczyk, Józef, “W sprawie genezy stariowiska KPP w kwestii narodowej,” Z Pola Walki, 1968, no. 4, .pp. 143–47;Google Scholar

49. KPP: Uchwaly i rezolucje, 3 vols. (Warsaw, 1954-56), 1: 42-43.

50. Ibid., p. 72. The editors inform us that “the advancement of the slogan of ‘nationalization of large and middle-sized landed estates’ as opposed to ‘land to the peasants without compensation’ resulted from an incorrect position on the agrarian question, which maihtained that the middle peasantry is by nature reactionary and cannot be an ally of the proletariat.” Cf. I. Khrenov, “Kommunisticheskaia rabochaia partiia Pol'shi na putiakh prevrashcheniia v partiiu novogo, leninskogo tipa (1918-1923 gg.), “in Iz istorii pol'skogo rabochego dvizheniia (Moscow> 1962), pp. 237-38.

51. II Zjasd Komunistycznej Partii Robotnicsej Polski (19.IX.-2.X. 1923): Protokoly obrad i Uchwaly (Warsaw, 1968), pp. 175-80 (hereafter cited as II Zjazd KPRP).

52. It has been impossible to determine the exact position of the Khomyn-PaSternak faction on the organization question during the early stages of the controversy. Thus, with the exception of Karpenko and Halushko, who maintain that this group thought in terms of some sort of territorial autonomy for the KPSH, all other sources refer to its desire to “unite with the KPRP.” Herasymenko, M. and Dudykevych, B. in Borot'ba trudiashchykh Zakhidnoi Ukrainy za vozz“iednannia z Radians'koiu Ukrainoiu (Kiev, 1960), p. 43 Google Scholar, go so far as to say that these “Communists considered themselves KPRP members.”

53. Świetlikowa, Franciszka, Komunistyczna Partia Robotnicza Polski, 1918-1923 (Warsaw, 1968), p. 101.Google Scholar

54. Halushko, Narysy istorii KPZU, p. 81.

55. Thus Rozenberg, reacting to Leszczyński's statement that economic considerations must be taken into account before advancing the slogan of self-determination, remarked that, as applied to Eastern Galicia, “this smells of Boryslav oil” ( II Zjazd KPRP, p. 245). See also Lenowicz, Aleksander, “Na II Zjezdie KPRP (Wspomnienia uczestnika),” Z Pola Walki, 1958, no. 2, p. 146 Google Scholar, on the bitter arguments between Krilyk-Vasylkiv and Franciszek Grzelszczak.

56. Vytvytsky, S. and Baran, S., “Western Ukraine Under Poland,” Ukraine: A Concise Encyclopaedia, vol. 1 (Toronto, 1963), p. 840a.Google Scholar

57. Rozenberg's report in II Zjazd KPRP, p. 87.Google Scholar

58. It was quite possible, for example, for Rozenberg, who had been a member of Poale Zion in 1911-20, to represent the wasylkowcy at the Second Congress of the KPRP, while Khomyn, Mykhats, Ivanenko, and others felt equally at home among the kapeerpowcy.

59. “In order to bring to light the extent to which the national-revolutionary movement influenced the KPZU, one must pose the question of the social significance of the national movement in Galicia in 1918-19 and especially the national war of 1919 between the Polish Democratic Republic and the Western Ukrainian Peoples’ Republic (ZUNR).” Skrypnyk, M., Dzherela ta prychyny rozlamu v KPZU (Kharkiv, 1928), p. 69.Google Scholar

60. II Zjasd KPRP, p. 129.

61. Toward the end of 1920 the Sejm enacted legislation facilitating the military colonization of the “eastern borderlands” (kresy wschodnie). For details see “Ustawa z dnia 17 grudnia 1920 r. o nadaniu ziemi żołnierzom Wojska Polskiego,” Dsiennik Ustazv Rscczypospolitej Polskiej, no. 4 (Jan. 12, 1921), pp. 40-41.

62. Kos, , “Proty hastroiv,” Nasha pravda, 4, no. 1 (January 1924): 21–22 Google Scholar, and Dąbal, Tomasz, “Ruch partyzancki w Polsce,” Nowy Przegląd, 1924-1925 (repub.; Warsaw, 1959), pp. 291–302.Google Scholar

63. Indeed, there Was a precedent for this line of thinking. In late August 1920 Fedir Bekesh, a, former officer in the ZUNR army, crossed the border from Czechoslovakia and initiated an uprising which produced the short-lived (one week) Boiko Soviet Republic. See Dehtiar'ov, Pavlo, “Zhovtnevyi vidhomin u Beskydakh,” Zhovten', 1969, no. 1, pp. 54–64;Google Scholar also “V vdstochrioi Galitsii: Pbvstancheskoe dvizhenie,” Pravda, Sept. 11, 1920, p.1.

64. II Zjazd KPRP, pp. 67-68.

65. Królikowski in II Zjazd KPRP, p. 223.Google Scholar

66. “Among a significant segment of Polish workers there was a desire to see an independent Polish state. Surely Polish workers, Communist sympathizers, left Socialists, and all those who desired social liberation and socialism and who, in this, agreed with the KPP program must have found themselves in a difficult situation, desiring at the same time an independent Poland which they did not find in the KPP program, but which was included in that of the PPS [Polish Socialist Party].” Lucjan Kieszczyński in “Ewolucja myśli marksistowskiej w kwestii narodu i państwa,” Z Pola Walki, 1966, no. 3, p. 129.Google Scholar

67. Królikowski, for example, warned his listeners that “it must not be forgotten that a segment of the Polish workers in Eastern Galicia, rifles in hand, helped in the subjugation of this country, stifling militarily the liberation struggle of the oppressed, and that it is not long past that the Polish worker voted to drive out the Ukrainian worker from the shop” ( II Zjazd KPRP, p. 359). See also Jerzy Czeszejko-Sochacki's speech (pp. 334-35).

68. Ibid., p. 32S.

69. “Comrade Pstrąg [Tadeusz Żarski] has doubts about how the two nationalisms, Polish and Ukrainian, will be resolved, how we will manage with Lwow and Wilno… . The time will come when Polish patriots will gladly rid themselves of Lwow and Wilno in order to retain Warsaw” (Dluski in 77 Zjazd KPRP, p. 246).

70. It is indeed paradoxical that the national problem, which contributed significantly to the debilitation of parliamentary government in interwar Poland, should have had an equally deleterious effect on the KPRP. Thus the active participation of Jews and Ukrainians in the Polish Communist movement, coupled with the heritage of “Luxemburgism, “ was successfully exploited by the government to discredit the KPRP as a tool of “foreign interests.” On the ramifications of the national question on Polish domestic politics see Groth, Alexander J., “The Legacy of Three Crises: Parliament and Ethnic Issues in Prewar Poland,” Slavic Review, 27, no. 4 (December 1968): 564–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar and idem, “Dmowski, Pilsudski and Ethnic Conflict in Pre-1939 Poland,” Canadian Slavic Studies, 3, no.1 (Spring 1969): 69-91.

71. On January 11, 1921, the Politburo of the TsK KP(b)U had approached the RKP(b) to request support for its letter to the ECCI wherein it asked to be given control over party work in Eastern Galicia and Bessarabia. See Halushko, Narysy istorii KPZU, p. 82.

72. Krilyk-Vasylkiv in II Zjazd KPRP, p. 329. Cf. Świetlikowa, Komunistyczna Portia Robotnicza Polski, pp. 102-3.

73. Iwariski, “Z dziejów Komunistycznej Partii Galicji Wschodniej,” pp. 39-41.

74. At the Second Congress of the KPRP, Krilyk-Vasylkiv stated that “although we felt that the agreement was bad, that it would be harmful to our movement, we nevertheless submitted to it since it had been dictated by the International” ( II Zjasd KPRP, p. 329). It is significant, however, that no one from the KPSH of either faction signed the document. See “Soglashenie mezhdu Kommunisticheskoi Partiei Ukrainy i Kommunisticheskoi Rabochei Partiei Pol'shi,” in Deiatel'nost' Ispolnitel'nogo Komiteta i Prezidiuma I.K. Kommnwnisticheskogo Internatsionala ot 13-go iulia 1921 g. do 1-go fevralia 1922 g. (Petrograd, 1922), p. 51.

75. “Raz''iasnenie,” ibid., p. 52.

76. Karpenko, in Z istorii sakhidnoukrains'kykh zemel', 2: 187.

77. Lenin, V. I., “Pis'mo pol'skim kommunistam,” Kommunist, 1962, no. 6, pp. 16–17 Google Scholar, and “List Komitetu Wykonawczego Międzynarodówki Komunistycznej do Komunistycznej Partii Robotniczej Polski,” in KPP: Uchrvaly i resolucje, 1: 179-88.

78. See “Korespondecja Marii Koszutskiej (Wery Kostrzewy) z lat 1922-1924: Część I (styczeiń 1922-marzec 1923 r.),” Z Pola Walki, 1965, no. 2, pp. 162-67.

79. “Resolution on National Question in Central Europe and Balkans,” The Communist International, n.s., no. 7 (December 1924-January 1925), p. 95.