Paris Peace Conference 180.03101/2
Secretary’s Notes of a Conversation held in M. Pichon’s Room at the Quai d’Orsay on Sunday, January 12, [1919,] at 4 p.m.
B. C.–A 1
- Present.—France: M. Clemenceau, M. Pichon, M. Dutasta, M. Berthelot, M. Bearn, Capt. Portier.—Great Britain: The Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd George, The Rt. Hon. A. J. Balfour, Lt.-Col. Sir Maurice Hankey.—Italy: Signor Orlando, Baron Sonnino, Count Aldrovandi, Major A. Jones.—United States: President Wilson, Mr. R. Lansing, Mr. A. H. Frazier.—Interpreter: M. Mantoux.
(Note: This meeting was a continuation of a meeting of the Supreme War Council commenced earlier in the afternoon, procès-verbal of which has been prepared separately5)
. . . . . . .
The representation of Russia at the Conference.
M. Sonnino said that the whole question of Bolshevism was involved.
M. Pichon did not agree. He pointed out that there were various representatives of Russian opinion in Paris—for example, M. Sazonoff,6 [Page 5] Prince Lvoff6 and others, including Socialists, who represented every shade of opinion. These asked to be represented. His opinion was that this could not be done. We should first have to acknowledge the Omsk Government, whom they came to represent. At present it seemed impossible to recognise this Government as the Government of Russia. It was not strong enough to be regarded as representative of Russia as a whole. But this was no reason why these personalities should not be allowed to put their views unofficially. His suggestion, then, was that Russia as a State should have no representation, but that the Conference should be allowed to hear such persons as he had mentioned.
Mr. Lloyd George said that this had to be dealt with in one way or another, because at present the Allies had got themselves in a fix for the reason that they had no definite policy in Russia. They ought to decide whether to withdraw their troops or to reinforce them. Unless reinforced, they were of no use whatsoever. He had nothing to say against these people, Prince Lvoff, &c. We were told they represented every shade of opinion. As a matter of fact, they represented every opinion except the prevalent opinion in Russia.
President Wilson pointed out it was prevalent in some respects.
Mr. Lloyd George said he feared the fact that it was prevalent must be accepted. The peasants accepted Bolshevism for the same reason as the peasants had accepted it in the French Revolution, namely, that it gave them land. The Bolshevists were the de facto Government. We had formally recognised the Czar’s Government, although at the time we knew it to be absolutely rotten. Our reason had been that it was the de facto Government. We recognised the Don Government, the Archangel Government and the Omsk Government, although none of them were good, but we refused to recognise the Bolshevists. To say that we ourselves should pick the representatives of a great people was contrary to every principle for which we had fought. It was possible that the Bolshevists did not represent Russia. But certainly Prince Lvoff did not: neither did Savinkoff, although he was a good man. The British Government made exactly the same mistake when they said that the emigrés represented France. This led them into a war which lasted about twenty-five years. The Russian peasants probably felt towards Trotsky much as the French peasants did towards Robespierre. This question must now be settled. He hoped that the Allies would not separate and announce that they [Page 6] had made perpetual peace when Siberia, which formed about half Asia, and Russia, which formed about half Europe, were still at war. He, himself, would make proposals in due course, but, in the meantime, he wishes to protest against an attempt to select representatives for some hundred million people.
M. Pichon quite agreed that the persons he had named should not be admitted as representatives of Russia. He only wished to take advantage of their presence to hear what they had to bring forward.
Mr. Lloyd George said that to do so would give the public the impression that we considered they represented Russia. The fact that they had been seen by the Conference would be known. If we wished to hear their views, we could obtain a memorandum from them or have a private conversation.
M. Pichon agreed.
Conclusion: It was agreed that Russia should not be represented at the Conference, but that the persons named by M. Pichon and others could be interviewed personally or asked to supply memoranda.
. . . . . . .
Paris , January 12, 1919.
- Not printed.↩
- S. D. Sazonov, who had been Tsarist Minister of Foreign Affairs, 1910–1916, served as Minister of Foreign Affairs for the Volunteer Army of Denikin and later for Kolchak. Prince George E. Lvov, from March to May 1917 Russian Prime Minister, was at this time head of the Russian Political Bureau in Paris, of which Sazonov was a member.↩
- S. D. Sazonov, who had been Tsarist Minister of Foreign Affairs, 1910–1916, served as Minister of Foreign Affairs for the Volunteer Army of Denikin and later for Kolchak. Prince George E. Lvov, from March to May 1917 Russian Prime Minister, was at this time head of the Russian Political Bureau in Paris, of which Sazonov was a member.↩