Stalin Digital Archive

Back to Search

Stalin digital archive

Back to Search

Table of Contents

< Previous document Next document >

21 January

- Export Citation
- Export Annotation

View:

By Liakhovetsky, Ivan Mikhailovich (Maisky)

The Complete Maisky Diaries: Volume 2

Image view

Print
Save
Share
Cite

Translation Transcription

Translation

21 January

I’ve been receiving information in the last few days that a dispute has emerged in Labour circles concerning Finland and the Soviet Union. There was a long and confusing debate on this matter at the meeting of the Executive Committee of Parliamentary Labour on 16 January. In the end, no decision was taken. The general mood among the members of the Executive Committee was that the Finnish conflict should be settled by ‘mediation’. What kind of mediation? On whose behalf? Opinions varied. Some wished the Labour Party to assume the role of ‘mediator’, while others thought that the party should put the question before the British government. Attlee said that a few days before the meeting he had, on his own initiative, raised the subject of ‘mediation’ with Chamberlain, who had responded with sympathy to his proposals. The members of the Executive Committee showed interest in their leader’s communication, but the matter was taken no further. What was quite clear was that all those present were frightened by the prospect of war between England and the USSR.

At about the same time Jordan, high commissioner for New Zealand in London, informed me through a third party that if the Soviet government desired ‘mediation’ in the Finnish conflict, he was prepared to offer his services. He understood that the USSR could not accept the ‘mediation’ of a major imperialist power, such as England or the United States, but hoped that it might accept the ‘mediation’ of small non-imperialist New Zealand, which is ruled by a socialist government. Jordan reminded me of his friendly relations with Soviet representatives in Geneva, where his plebeian openness and backing of the Soviet delegation have indeed upset the British apple-cart on more than one occasion. Naturally, I had to explain to Jordan, through the same third party, the full inappropriateness of his proposal.

Today, meanwhile, Lord Strabolgi arrived unexpectedly, in sports clothes, straight from the skating rink. After emphasizing that he was acting in a private capacity, Lord Strabolgi (formerly Kenworthy) first began asking whether the Soviet government might wish to invite a trade union–Labour delegation like the one which had left for Helsinki on 19 January at the invitation of Finnish trade unions and cooperatives (Citrine, Noel-Baker and Downie

John Downie, Scottish representative of the cooperative movement.

)? Labour

Page 730

would like to be entirely ‘impartial’ and hear out both sides. I expressed my astonishment at his suggestion and made it clear to him that there were no chances whatsoever that it might be accepted.

The Labour delegation to Finland was headed by Citrine. They visited the front and met Marshal Mannerheim. After their return, Halifax was struck by their belligerent mood ‘full of the admirable morale of the Finns … complete contempt for the Russians’ and convinced that the Finns ‘would hold their own’. Attlee and Greenwood, on the other hand, strongly argued with him against a declaration of war; Halifax papers, diary, A7.8.3, 9 Feb. 1940, and TNA FO 800/281, pp. 369–72, Halifax to Chamberlain, 10 Feb. 1940.

Strabolgi changed the subject and set about impressing on me that the British government wants to maintain good relations with the USSR, that Finland alone stands in the way, that the Soviet–Finnish conflict could be settled by ‘mediation’, and that if the matter in question is the replacement of the government in Finland, this too could be discussed, although such a move would, of course, be fairly problematic. I had to disappoint Strabolgi once more and declare quite frankly that it made no sense to speak of ‘mediation’ in the Soviet–Finnish conflict.

Who stands behind Strabolgi and Jordan?

First and foremost, of course, the Labour Party, but not only. Some hints dropped by Strabolgi suggested that his visit to me had the blessing of the Foreign Office. No wonder! At this very moment, when the situation on the Finnish front is not in our favour, the British government would like to kill two birds with one stone: to reinforce the ‘blow to the prestige of the Red Army’ and gain a reputation as ‘peace-maker’.

As for Jordan, I’m not sure there is anyone behind him. He is a very unusual and original man. A former London policeman, he emigrated to New Zealand many years ago, joined Labour there, made a career for himself, and four years ago, when the Labour government came to power in this dominion, came to London as high commissioner. Jordan, as one would expect of a policeman, is tall, strong and rough-mannered. He looks like a bear and has a gruff voice and red hair. Politically, he is very primitive and direct. He doesn’t understand diplomacy and always likes to shoot straight from the hip. He could easily have thought up this scheme all by himself.

Transcription

Document Details

Document Title21 January

AuthorLiakhovetsky, Ivan Mikhailovich (Maisky)

RecipientN/A

RepositoryN/A

ID #N/A

DescriptionN/A

Date1940 Jan 21

AOC VolumeThe Complete Maisky Diaries: Volume 2

Login Required

Your subscription has expired.