setting, in this respect, a good example. A certain Rousseau-like simplicity came to prevail in the towns and among the more educated. These and other relatively good qualities of Bolshevism must be recognized by just and sober observers of Russian evolution; but they are offset by the moral degeneration, the decline of the schools and of education, the anarchy in morals and culture which make up a great and, to my mind, the greatest deficit. Besides, the question arises why there had to be in Russia so violent an awakening from Tsarist slumber—a question to be pondered by all who love Russia; not least by the adherents of Tsarism and of the Church.
What I have said applies especially to the first period of Bolshevism. Subsequently, Communism developed or, rather, attempts were made to apply it, albeit at the cost of public welfare. As to foreign intervention in or against Russia, I am still a non-interventionist. Bolshevism is an internal Russian crisis which cannot be overcome by action from without; though the Bolshevist yearning for de jure recognition by bourgeois governments encourages interventionist tendencies.
The Ukraine.
From the moment that the Bolshevists opened peace negotiations—they did so formally on December 3, 1917, by asking for an armistice, the Peace of Brest-Litovsk being signed on March 8, 1918—it was clear to us that our army had nothing more to do in Russia. Therefore we began as early as possible to march out of the Ukraine into Russia on the way to Vladivostok and France.
As long as Russia ruled in the Ukraine, our position was simple. Russia gave us the opportunity to organize and arm our Corps and to provide it with the necessary stores. In return we mounted guard over military material of all sorts, particularly in Kieff, and kept order.
But, soon after the Bolshevist revolution, the Ukraine began to grow independent. On November 20, 1917, the third “Universal” was proclaimed, declaring the Ukraine a Republic and an autonomous part of the Russian Federation. Hence the necessity of negotiating with the Ukrainian Government; and we made with it, on January 15, 1918, the same terms as we had made with Russia. At first, the relationship between the Ukraine and Russia was vague, and our relations to the Ukraine were therefore vague. But, on the whole, there were no unpleasant incidents, though difficulties arose on
M
