MOSCOW EXECUTIONS.

Taranaki Central Press, Volume IV, Issue 402, 8 April 1937, Page 2

MOSCOW EXECUTIONS.

Why Stalin Does Not Dare to Shoot

Radek.

Trotsky’s Challenge to Stalin to Extradite Him.

Leon Trotsky, the exiled Rus- - sian leader, accused as the chief conspirator in the Moscow trial in 1 which seventeen persons were found guilty of treason against the Stalin regime, commenting on the decision, here demands that the Russian Government should endeavour to secure his extradition. In a forecast that I made before the verdict (writes Leon Trotsky in an overseas journal), I wrote that “it is possible that two or three of the defendants would be spared in order to avoid extreme monolithism. The most important of the accused will, in any case be condemned to death.” The last cable says' that four are to be spared, 25 per cent, more than I supposed. But I must recognise that I did not foresee that amongst those already spared in the verdict of the Court should be Radek and Sokolnikov. Similarly to Kamenev, they took upon themselves the crime of terrorist action, Including the assassination of Kirov.. But more than that, they pleaded guilty also to the charge of high treason. Sokolnikov confessed, or more correctly, culminated hirpself to the accusation that he transmitted, military secrets to Japanese dipfo-2 mats. 2 -I Why Lives Are Spared. Why are they granted their lives? Only one explanation is possible. They are too well known In the western world as well as in the east. One" cannot avoid seeing a partial retreat on the part of Stalin before interua--tional public opinton. I say Stalin because it is not possible to entertain

► the slightest doubt that the verdicts were agreed upon in the political bureau' arid communicated by Ulrich by secret telephone. Not only does Stalin not dare to shoot Radek and Sokolnikov in the present situation, but he found it impossible even to condemn them to death in the first instance. By comparison with the proceedings in the trial of the first sixteen, we cannot avoid observing here a retreat dictated by a feeling of uncertainty. Thirteen are condemned to .death. Piatakov occupies first place among them. It is possible that among the accused, unknown to us, there are genuine traitors and spies drawn into the affair only for the purpose of amalgamation, but Piatakov, Serebriakov, Mouralov, Bobuslavsky and Drobnis are guilty of terrorism and high treason no more than are Radek and Sokolnikov. They are not guilty at all. Why then is the verdict assassination for them? Burning Indignation. Let us remember that they are accused above all of industrial sabotage. We must suppose that, in the depths of the working masses, the numerous industrial catastrophes costing huutireds of lives have aroused a burning indignation. The ruling clique needs, therefore, expiatory victims, hence the verdict fen - Piatakov and the other saboteurs. It remains to be seen if the verdict is definite or if, by means of appeal, Stalin will commute the death sentences to terms of imprisonment. If the five old Bolsheviks mentioned above are spared, and we ardently hope so, this weakness will reveal the

false character of the accusations and at the same time the increasing uncertainty of the ruling clique. It seems to us, however, that Piatakov, above all, is in danger. Not only because he must pay with his head for all the mistakes of the administration of State Industry, but because he has incomparably compromised the trial by his description of his voyage to Norway. So long aS Piatakov lives this very embarrassing discussion will continue. It is unfortunately quite possible that Stalin will attempt to extricate himself from this impasse by assassinating Piatakov. One asks no questions of the dead. Welcomes Extradition Move. i In official Moscow circles they beI gin to imply, although in a very vague i manner, the possibility of the demand i for my extradition. I welcome this I idea warmly. What is more, for my I part I demand that the Russian Government present such a request. During the trial of the sixteen, I I asked Moscow to present their proofs i to Norwegian justice for the purpose of my extradition. In my deposition as witness before the Norwegian Courts, on December 11, 1936, with regard to the Fascist attack on my home, I unmasked under judicial oath the criminal Moscow frame-up. Unfortunately the doors were closed. I am now ready to repeat the action with very much more detail, and with the doors wide open before a Mexican Court of Law. I cannot imagine a better solution of the whole matter. The truth is that in none of the trials has here figured an authentic letter, i document or any irreproachable testimony. We can only imagine what passed behind the closed doors. But in the public session all the judicial proofs are based upon the confessions of the defendants. Made Martyrs in Gaols. The trials have for their only and exclusive base the so-called voluntary confessions of the defendants. The leftist opposition has existed for fourteen years. For it thousands have been imprisoned, deported and made martyrs in gaols and in exile. If the opposition is in truth so hostile to the Soviet Union and to Socialism, if it is at the servee of enemy countries, if it employs terrorism, etc., then the G.P.U. should have been able to accumulate in these fourteen years •of punishments, arrests and violation of. correspondence a great number of real proofs. The G.P.U. had no way of obliging

the true oppositionists to capitulate, even under pain of death, so, in order ot take a trial against Trotskyism, capitulators, my most ferocious enethey have been obliged to use the mies.