SOVIET MINORITIES

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP75-00001R000300360027-7
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: November 11, 2016
• Document Release Date: November 3, 1998
• Sequence Number: 27
• Publication Date: November 19, 1953
• Content Type: PREL

b3
Sanitized - Approved For Release : CIA-R
I read with great interest
your editorials on the national-
ity problem of the Soviet Union.
It is obvious that the nationali-
ties are the Achilles heel of the
U. S. S. R. and, therefore, our
natural ally.
Although, as you said on No-
vember 4, "Americans who at-
tempt to study this problem will
find it almost incredibly com-
plicated," and we will add-
intentionally obscured by Rus-
sian professors and politicians to
the benefit of the Holy Russian
Empire-your information was
for the greater part correct.
It is true, as you said July 26,
that the Russians (Muscovites)
are a minority of the population
of the Soviet Union, which is
formally a union of multina-
tional states. Indeed, the word
"Russia" used so widely and
improperly in this country dis-
appeared from the official title
of the Soviet Union 35 years
ago. The Red Russians are
busy Russianizing the non-Rus-
sian majority of the Soviet
Union in the same way that
the Czarist regime did. You
stated correctly that the Uk-
rainian people are of a different
culture and character than the
Russians, having been forced
for centuries to struggle for the
preservation of their national
identity and political independ-
ence in the face of the brutal
Russian methods which even
include genocide.
The name of the ancient
Kievan state was improperly
translated from the old Ukrain-
ian "Rus" to the Ukraine and
even today remains in use in
some of the conservative regions
of Ukraine. Therefore, the cul-
ture of the Kievan state was not
Russian as you state in your
November 4 editorial, but was
the earliest form of Ukrainian
culture.
Today's Russia is synonymous
with Muscovy, which emerged
as late as the twelfth century
in the north-eastern colonial
territories of the old Rus-Ukrain-
ian empire. Inhabited by a
population of a different cul-
ture and even partially of a
non-Slavic ethnical origin, it was
only superfi.dally civilized by
the Kievan civilization, and
therefore, naturally separated it-
self from the ethnically Ukrain-
ian south when the Kievan Em-
pire was weakened by the
invasions of the barbarians from
Asia. By culture and spirit Kiev
was always a part of Europe
Moscow a part of Asia as the
Russian writer Alexey Tolstoy
himself stated in the nineteenth
century. Moscow as a sub-
servient vassal of the Mon
olian
g
mpire increased its power,
Soviet Minorities
adopted the Mongolian methods
of government and developed
successfully its ambition to ab-
sorb its former ruler-Ukraine.
Ukraine, however, stubbornly
fought for its freedom and inde-
pendence, taking advantage of
every opportunity to throw off
the yoke of Moscow. In 1917
the revolution which in Russia
was a purely social revolution,
became a liberation revolution on
the territories of the non-Rus-
sian peoples. Ukraine, as early
as January 22, 1918, declared its
independence from Russia, and
one year later, after the down-
fall of the Austro-Hungarian
Empire, brought about the uni-
fication of all its territories
(western and eastern) on Jan-
uary 22, 1919. These acts of in-
dependence and unification were
brought about through demo-
cratically elected representatives
of the Ukrainian people.
? They evoked such strong sup-
port from the Ukrainian masses
that the Bolsheviks, after oc-
cupying Ukraine by force and
communization, were unable to
revert to the restoration of a
one and indivisible Russia, but
were forced to transform the
former Russian empire into a
union of Soviet Republics, grant-
ing Ukraine a constitutional
right to secede from the Union.
In order to satisfy the Ukrain-
ians, Stalin was forced to intro-
duce Ukraine as a member of
the United Nations (19). These
are historical facts wh h do not
contradict but rather supple-
ment your statements.
We cannot, however, agree
with the conclusions drawn in
your editorial "Russians and
Ukrainians" of November 3.
They contradict your previous
assertions. In the face of these
historical facts where is the
logic of the principle of non-
predetermination created by the
American Committee for Libera-
tion from Bolshevism? The fate
of the former Russian Empire
was decided in 1918-19. The in-
divisible Russian Empire no
longer exists. The Russian
(Muscovite) Republic exists to-
day in association with 15 other
national Republics in the Soviet
Union. Two other Republics
(Ukraine and Byelorussia) are
even members of the United
Nations. Red Moscow, of
course, through the centraliza-
tion of the Communist Party,
exercises dictatorial c o n t r o l
throughout the Soviet Union.
The Ukrainian people are en-
slaved by the Russian Com-
munists in their own republic,
but despite this there exists no
problem of a repetition of the
process of self-determination by
FOIAb3b
the non-Russian peoples. The
only problem is how to install
the governments chosen by the
people themselves. The s a m e
problem exists also in the
satellite countries of Moscow.
Mr. Kerensky and his follow-
ers have been politically asleep
for the past 35 years if they still
dream of the one and indivisible
Russian empire. This dream is
totally unrealistic and contrary
to the trend of modern history,
which brought about the dissolu.
tion of all empires-even those
built on primitive territories.
If the American Committee
for Liberation from Bolshevism
chooses to ignore the clearly ex-
pressed will of the Soviet
peoples, and the millions of vic-
tims fallen in their century-long
struggle for liberation, it will
only create for itself sisyphean
work. Of course, it will in this
way win the favor of bankrupt
Russian imperialist exiles, but
it never will unify the repre-
sentatives of the nations of the
Soviet Union for the struggle
against America's worst enemy
-Soviet Russia.
NICHOLAS CHUBATY,
Editor. The Ukrainian Quarterly.
New York.
Editor's Notes: (1) The quar-
rel here seems mainly one of
terminology. According to best
authorities, the names Rhosia
and Rhus were first employed by
the Byzantine Greeks to desig-
nate the territory and the in-
habitants of the old Kingdom of
Kiev, who in the time of St.
Vladimir the Great (c. A.D. 956-
1015) were converted to the
Orthodox form of Christianity.
Thus Dr. Chubaty is correct in
stating that "by culture and spirit
Kiev was always part of Europe,"
if by "Europe" is meant the
Graeco-Roman and Christian tra-
ditions: Similarly, the terms
Ruthene and Ruthenian, em-
ployed to designate the Galician
and Carpatho-Ukrainians, and
sometimes the Ruthenian (Uniat)
Catholic Church, are derived from
a Latinized form of "Russian."
(2) The conclusion in the edi.
torial of November 3, from which
Dr. Chubaty dissents, was simply
that the political destiny of the
Ukrainian peoples, after the pre-
sumptive fall of communism, is
for' Ukrainians themselves, and
not for Americans or for either
Russo-Americans or Ukrainian-
Americans to decide. This was
the position taken by the Ameri-
can Committee for Liberation
from Bolshevism, which now
finds itself caught in the middle
of the controversy between Mr.
Kerensky and other Great (Mus-
covite) Russian emigrees on the
one side and the Ukrainian-Amer-
CPYRGHT
Sanitized - Approved For Release : CIA-RDP75-00001 R( 00300360027-7