May 5, 1919

Yesterday Kerensky, prime minister of the short-lived liberal Provisional government (July-November, 1917), came in, this time bubbling over with optimism. The Colonel let him bubble for about ten minutes and then turned him over to me.

“This news is so important,” said the Colonel, “that I shall ask you to draw up a formal memo to be distributed to our delegation and to others.”

Well, this is what Kerensky said: “The Bolsheviki are at the end of their rope. Their complete overthrow is more a matter of weeks than of months. Admiral Kolchak is sweeping the country, but I fear that success is mounting to his head like strong wine. I fear that the excited admiral will inaugurate a regime as repressive and as sanguinary as did the Bolshe. The danger is clear, and none too soon I must point out that the true interests of Russia, and of the civilized world, demand that Kolchak be curbed. Control must be transferred to a truly democratic government based upon and recruited from all the parties that have remained true to the principles of the March Revolution (1917), excluding definitely the Bolshe at one extreme and the reactionary monarchists at the other.”

Kerensky then began to see red and declared that the British and the French, or at least their agents, were constantly aiding the reactionary elements who surround Kolchak. “The Associated governments cannot hope to save Russia from continuing anarchy unless they agree on a common policy such as we drew up when preparing for the conference at Prinkipo. In that way we would achieve a democratic coalition and stand foursquare against the extremists of all parties. And I must add that owing to the fact that it has no commitments in power politics, the United States alone is in a position to launch such a policy.”

Longuet, left-wing editor, and also Cachin, leader of French radicals, are furious at what they consider the attitude of the Allies toward Russia which they say shows open hostility to the People’s government. I protest that we are really doing nothing but watching and waiting, and I admit I think this is the wise course to pursue.

Whereupon, yesterday Longuet flounced out of my office with the ultimatum, which I shall not pass on to those more immediately concerned, that “unless the Big Four abandon their criminal design to destroy the Russian Peoples government there will be revolution in France and anarchy in England.” Cachin’s parting words were: “I am a disillusioned man. If the peace that is being handed out by the Four had been what the President promised the people, there would have been no need for all these vexatious reservations and obscure supplementary guarantees.”

I throw no stones, but to my diary I admit that the “acid test” has been too much for us. We are leaving the Russian problem unsettled and certainly unsolved just about as it was dumped on our doorstep months ago. But the problem is not worse than it was then and the people most directly concerned are tackling it—more power, and above all, more common sense to them. It can at least be said that during the long months of “delay and dawdle,” as it is called here, we have learned to appreciate the difficulties of the situation and if we do go in later, we might act intelligently. In the meantime, the strange dark people about whom we hear so much and know so little have a chance to save Mother Russia in their own way. I sincerely hope they will rise to the urgent occasion and that the era of famines and mass murders, of incredible filth and indescribable squalor under the Tsars, of which I saw so much, will never be revived.