Movements for Autonomy in Siberia

Title

Movements for Autonomy in Siberia

Creator

Unknown

Identifier

WWP22336

Date

1918 April 22

Source

Library of Congress, Woodrow Wilson Papers, 1786-1957

Text

C O P Y
Compared copy
LSS-MRC
MEMORANDUM
Subject:-Movements for autonomy in Siberia.There have been three movements for autonomy in Siberia.
1. The Siberian Provincial Assembly which first met at Tomsk in January.
2. The movement in Harbin which centers around General Horvath.
3. The Military venture of Semenoff to put down the Bolsheviki, which has no clear political purpose but which is supported in funds and munitions by Japanese, British and by Russians who back Horvath.
1. The Department has been trying to get clear information about what may be called the "Tomsk" movement ever since it was first reported by Mr. Francis when a delegation appealed to him in January. The attached telegram from Harbin, badly garbled, is the most detailed statement yet obtainable. The movement is weak in leadership but the Consul reports that it has undoubted popular support.
The merit of this movement would seem to lie in its claim to represent the Zemstvos, municipalities and cooperative societies of Siberia, as well as numerous national and social bodies.
2. General Horvath's movement claims the support of several influential Russian liberals but its impetus is wholly from outside of Russia; it has no mandate from any body or section of the population within Russia. General Horvath himself, for many years head of the Chinese Eastern Railway, is a survival of the old regime, a man of statesman-like view who is puzzled as to how anything but the monarchial idea can satisfy in the mind of Peasant Russia the void created by the sudden elimination of the Tsar The Little Father. He is a typical Russian Colonial Administrator of the best type. Any movement headed by him might be expected to be open to the charge of "Counter Revolutionary."
3. Colonel Semenoff is a young Cossack officer who started an independent attempt to produce order by opposing the Bolsheviki. His force is a miscellaneous collection of soldiers, Buriat Cossacks, and officers not more than 1,000 men. General Horvath has recently proclaimed General Pleshkoff Commander-in-Chief of all Russian forces in Siberia and, on paper, Semenoff is now acting under him. There is no evidence that Pleshkoff has been able to accomplish anything tangible as yet.
The French Government has received an appeal from the Tomsk movement similar to that received by this Department, and which is attached to this memorandum. It appears that the French Consul at Irkutsk however, has telegraphed he is not yet satisfied with the outlook, (April 13), and that the Russian Ambassador at Paris, Mr. Maklakoff, has advised against doing anything at present. Mr. Boris Bakhmeteff, the Russian Ambassador here, seems to be of the same opinion although he regards both the Tomsk and Horvath movements as encouraging indications. He seems to know all of the men whose support is claimed by Horvath but knows only two of those who are stated to be definitely committed to the Tomsk movement.
The suggestion has been made that so long as the Bolsheviki are not antagonized by the Allies, they and the Austrian prisoners-of-war who are joining them in Siberia may be regarded as co-belligerents with us against autocracy. This also suggests what are the facts about prisoners-of-war. In the whole Russian Empire there are at most 80,000 German soldiers and 1,300,000 Austrian soldiers. Of these, only about 10,000 Germans and 80,000 Austrians are in Siberia. The reported influence of Germany over these prisoners-of-war seems to be greatly exaggerated. Recent telegrams show that practically all the Germans want to go home. The Austro-Hungarians on the other hand are joining the Bolsheviki. There is no indication however, that the arming of prisoners is extensive. The Austro-Hungarians are reported to be dismissing their own officers. When we had charge of German-Austrian interests our representatives reported numerous instances of disaffection among the Austro-Hungarians both officers and men towards their own government.
It would appear therefore that with some adjustment of leadership a coalition of 1. and 2. above, might offer some promise of gaining popular support.
B. M.

Original Format

Enclosure

Files

http://resources.presidentwilson.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/WWI1003A.pdf

Collection

Citation

Unknown, “Movements for Autonomy in Siberia,” 1918 April 22, WWP22336, World War I Letters, Woodrow Wilson Presidential Library & Museum, Staunton, Virginia.