EXECUTIONS IN RUSSIA

Hokitika Guardian, 25 January 1930, Page 6

EXECUTIONS IN RUSSIA

A IIEIGN OF TERROR STATEMENT bTm. KERENSKY . LON DON, December 10. . M. Alexander Kerensky, who for the past live years has been editing a Russian newspaper in Paris, in oh a visit to London to awaken public interest in what he describes as the present “Reign of Terror” prevaling in Russia. Re has come as. the spokesman of t'.ic Russian Socialists and Democrats, and complains that the politicians in England are ' so preoccupied with the question of recognition that they are giving no attention to that of the number of executions which are being carried out all over Russia, at the rate of over live daily. “Very little about these executions appears in the Russian Press,” said M. Kerensky, in an interview with a repi represeitative of the “Observer,” “but, according to the official" Bolshevik ’newspapers, between October Ist and November loth no fewer than 220 i people of both sexes were put to death in various parts of Russia. The bulk of the victims were peasants, who were l;executed, for opposing the' Bolshevik 'policy of forcibly taking their wheat and paying them only one-tenth of its market value. Tlie victims also included women and priests and five professors, members or the Military Academy. The majority were executed bv order of the ‘Gnu,’ of political police, without any trial at all. “Some idea of the state of the peasantry,” continued M. Kerensky, “may be gained from the fact that when the German peasants went to their Consul in Moscow, and asked to be sent out of the country, a number of Russian peasants also beseiged the Consul, and prayed him to do some...ling for them. He void them lie was unable to do anything, as they were not Germans. Executions have been going on for the last lour of five years, but during the past six or seven months the number lias been enormously increased—since, in fact Stalin gave up the New Economic Policy, and went back to the policy of military Communism that existed in. Russia between 1919 and 1921. This policy, however, is now known as the Socialist constructive policy, to be carried o ( ut in the coming five years. ."-V.

MORAL INTERVENTION

“T have been surprised to find that these facts do not seem to make any impression on the leading members of the Labour Party here. I explain it by the fact that the main interests, in England seems to .be centred on the question of recognition. I think the opinion of. the representatives of the Russian Anti-Bolshevik Democracy should >-e made known in this country. While the attention of the British public life is directed to the question of recognition, which it is diverted from other matters that are vital to the I interests of Russia, I think it is a eight poliev ?to renew diplomatic delations. although the reasons for the resumption may be different from . Ibe English, and Russian standpoints. Whntf however, is. far more important -,froi». our point, of view is that flic people of England should realise what is actually taking place in Russia at the present time, which is more vital than the question of recognition. In Continental Europe, where’ the attention of representative's of Conservatives and Labour opinions is not diverted by the question of recognition, one is able to influence the leaders of both factions Tor the purpose of using, moral intervention to prevent what is now taking place in Russia.”