The 1917-18 Envoys' Plot and its
consequences in Russia Part Six
Description of
persons involved.
Described in part one, two,
three, and four, it remains the most audacious spy plot
in British and American history, a bold and extremely dangerous operation to
invade Russia, defeat the Red Army, and mount a coup in Moscow against Soviet
dictator Vladimir Ilich Lenin. After that, leaders in Washington, Paris, and
London aimed to install their own Allied-friendly dictator in Moscow as a means
to get Russia back into the war effort against Germany. Along with the British
and the French the plot we now know had the “entire approval” of also President
Woodrow Wilson. As he ordered a military invasion of Russia, he gave the
American ambassador, the U.S. Consul General in Moscow, and other State
Department operatives a free hand to pursue their covert action against Lenin.
The result was thousands of deaths, both military and civilian, on both sides.
As the Left SR plot was unfolding in Moscow, a Right
SR plot was being launched simultaneously on the Volga northeast of the
capital. The latter was the work of Boris
Savinkov, the former commissar who had been Kerensky’s acting war minister
during the Kornilov affair. After the October Revolution, Savinkov had traveled
to the Don and made contact with Generals Alekseev and Kornilov. A more
impatient soul than they, Savinkov formed his own “Union for the Defense of
Fatherland and Freedom” and pitched plans for an anti-Bolshevik rebellion to
the Allies. The French ambassador gave Savinkov 2.5 million rubles, which he
used to recruit former officers, including a formidable war hero, Lieutenant
Colonel A. P. Perkhurov. Savinkov’s idea was to seize
Yaroslavl, northeast of Moscow on the only direct rail line to Murmansk, and
hold it until the Allies would reinforce him from the north. Subsidiary risings
would be launched at nearby Rybinsk and Murom, a
station on the eastbound Moscow–Kazan railway. At around two a.m. on July 6,
Savinkov’s organization took up arms, seizing Yaroslavl (where the competent
Lieutenant Colonel Perkhurov was in charge) with
ease.1
Back in Moscow at two
o’clock that afternoon, two killers recruited by Spiridonova, posing as Cheka
agents, entered the German Embassy.
So shocking was the
crime, so potentially damaging to Soviet relations with Berlin, that Lenin
himself went to the German Embassy at five p.m. to express condolences to Riezler (who had survived the assault) in person. It was an
extraordinary scene, not least because Riezler was
the very man who had overseen the Germans’ Lenin policy in 1917 while stationed
in Stockholm, only to turn against the Bolsheviks after he had seen Lenin’s
regime up close in May–June 1918. Unimpressed with Lenin’s apology, on July 10 Riezler requested permission from the Wilhelmstrasse to
“temporarily” break off relations until the Bolsheviks showed “proper atonement
for the murder.”2
Meanwhile, the Left
SRs used the assassination as a springboard to a rebellion, of sorts. Cheka
headquarters, in Lubyanka Square, were seized by Left SR sailors, who took the
Cheka chief, Dzerzhinsky, hostage. After seizing the Telegraph Bureau, the Left
SRs sent out a message over the national wires claiming credit for the murder
of Mirbach and denouncing the Bolsheviks as “agents
of German imperialism.” At seven p.m., the Congress of Soviets reopened in the
Bolshoi Theater with a passionate speech by Spiridonova. Were the Left SRs
going to seize power? No one seemed quite sure. Toward midnight, Lenin summoned
Vatsétis, commander of the Latvian Rifles, who, after
reinforcing Perm and the Volga region, had only about 3,300 men left in the
Moscow area, facing 2,000 or so armed sailors fighting for the Left SRs. At
five a.m. on July 7, the Latvians stormed the city center, reconquered the
Lubyanka, and surrounded the Bolshoi Theater. Although the Germans still wanted
justice for Mirbach’s murder, the rebellion was
over.3
The crisis of
authority Lenin’s government faced in July 1918 unleashed the beginning of what
became known as the Red Terror. Food requisitions in the countryside were
stepped up. In Moscow, Petrograd, and nearby towns, 650 Left SR party members
were arrested. In Moscow, the Bolsheviks had 13 ringleaders executed, although
they showed clemency to Spiridonova, who retained a certain mystique as a hero
of 1905. The crackdown in Yaroslavl was more serious, owing to the brutal
nature of the fighting there. Only on July 21 was Yaroslavl retaken by the Red
Army, after days of shelling that “gutted” the ancient city center. This time,
no mercy was shown. Although Perkhurov himself
escaped, another 428 of Savinkov’s followers were shot, in the first mass
execution carried out by the Bolshevik regime.4
By 2 p.m. Saturday,
what the Bolsheviks already were calling the left
SR “uprising” had been suppressed, chiefly by Captain Berzin and his
Latvian Rifle Brigade. The Bolsheviks arrested Spiridonova and the rest of the
left SR delegates and executed several whom they supposed to be ringleaders.
(They spared Spiridonova.) And they launched a furious attack upon the
“Anglo-French imperialists” whom they judged to have inspired and funded the
assassination.
The Soviets called
the 1918 Allied coup attempt the Conspiracy of the
Ambassadors because of the American, French, and British diplomats
involved, Francis, Poole, Noulens, Grenard, and
Lockhart. Others have called it the Reilly Plot because Sidney took it over
from Lockhart and paid the Latvians. It could also be the Cromie Conspiracy
since he set the whole thing up. And why not the Poole Plot, since DeWitt had
first tried to organize it in 1917? Or maybe the Lansing Plot, since it was his
idea originally? Or the Wilson Plot, because he was the head of state who
okayed it?
Once again, however,
soon Lockhart thought the climax approached. “As this may be the last telegram
I may be able to send I would once more impress on you vital necessity for
immediate action [by which he meant occupation of the ports]. I would also beg you
to give me power immediately to spend up to 10 million rubles [worth
approximately £125,000 then, the equivalent of nearly £6,875,000 today] in
supporting those organizations which may be useful to us in event of
intervention.”5
From Czech's to the Latvian Rifle Brigade
Whatever Lockhart may
have known about SR intentions, it seems impossible that he did not know what
Boris Savinkov meant to do now. He would have discussed and coordinated with
Cromie in Petrograd, and with Savinkov’s agents, whom he continued to meet in
Moscow. Apparently, Savinkov had not known precisely what the left SRs were
planning. He believed, because of talks with ambassador Noulens,
and because of Lockhart’s encouragement and money, however, that the Allies
would occupy Archangel that very week aided by an uprising from within and that
then, aided by Czech Legionnaires, they would
take Vologda, from which point they could menace both Moscow and Petrograd.
“Bountiful promises of both men and money were held out” to Savinkov, Lockhart
later confessed.6 The great conspirator did not know, and neither did Bruce
Lockhart, that British General Frederick Cuthbert Poole, who arrived in
Murmansk from Britain late in May, had despaired of the Czechs reaching Vologda
in time. Poole judged his own numbers too few to proceed without them. He had
nothing like the two divisions that Lockhart, Cromie, and Garstin
all had fixed upon as necessary for a successful invasion. He could not contact
Savinkov to tell him, or Bruce Lockhart either, however, for British
telegraphic traffic from Moscow to Murmansk had been temporarily interrupted
(to this day no one knows why or by whom). Nor did the French, whose lines of
communication remained intact, tell Savinkov that the Allies had postponed
action. The great conspirator later suspected that Noulens
kept the information from him because he had been “trying to time our operation
with the [left SR] revolt in Moscow.”7 Surely, he was right.8
Mistakenly assuming,
then, that Allied reinforcements were in the offing, and just as the left SR’s
were detonating their bomb in Moscow, Savinkov launched a three-pronged
insurrection in Yaroslavl, Rybinsk, and Murom. Had he
taken those towns, and had the Allies taken Vologda, then Moscow would have
faced from northwest to northeast, a partially encircling belt. The belt might
have tightened if sympathetic uprisings had broken out in the south and if the White
Army of General Alexeyev in the South Don region likewise had taken action.
Then the belt would have formed a circle and might have choked the Revolution
to death, without regard to the success or failure of the left SR action in
Moscow.
The British agent met
with the leader of the National Center
on July 13, which is to say shortly after the suppression of Savinkov’s
revolt.9
Three days later,
this time accompanied by Fernand Grenard, he attended another clandestine
meeting and, on his own authority, gave the organization one million rubles
(worth approximately £12,500 then, £687,000 today). The Frenchman made a like
contribution. And the two planned to combine forces to find for it the
astonishing additional sums of eighty-one million rubles (a little over a
million pounds then, or £57 million today), and ten million rubles more for
General Alexeyev who now proposed to join forces with the Czechs if some of
them would turn back toward Vologda after all, and half a million yet again for
Savinkov, hiding underground.10 Lockhart had devised a method for transferring
his share of these vast amounts: writing Foreign Office checks in pounds to a
British firm in Moscow, Camber-Higgs, and Company, which cashed them in rubles
and submitted them to London for repayment.11
The recent twin
debacles had led him to rethink the interventionist scheme, however. Previously
he had believed the Czechs were key to a successful
intervention, because, as they traveled west to confront the Bolsheviks,
they would be establishing Allied control, symbolically planting the Allied
flag, all along the Siberian Railway. “The man who controls central Siberia
will be economic master of Russia,” he had coached the Foreign Office.12 But
the Czechs, who were focused upon their nationalist goals as always, had let
down Boris Savinkov as badly as the Allies had done. If they would not play the
role for which the anti-Bolsheviks had cast them, who would? Then Bruce
Lockhart thought of the Latvian Rifle Brigade.
It is unclear when
Lockhart first began to think the Latvians might be ripe for recruitment into
the counter-revolutionary movement. In June, as part of the British effort to
support local opposition to German occupiers everywhere, he had wanted to channel
funds to the Latvian Provisional National Council, which intended to raise a
brigade to expel the invaders from their country.13 Perhaps this planted the
idea in his mind.14 Or perhaps the seed took root a month later, in July, when
General Poole in Murmansk grew impatient of Czechs, and began trying to enlist
Latvians to help him fight Bolsheviks in the north.15
Because he was in
close touch with Captain Cromie it is likely he knew that the naval attaché was
recruiting Latvian sailors to help him scuttle Russia’s Baltic fleet. He must
have known by then too that that several of Savinkov’s chief lieutenants had served
previously as officers in the Latvian Rifle Brigade. And surely, he discussed
the matter with Sidney Reilly, who claimed to have understood from his first
moment in Bolshevik Russia that: “If I could buy the Letts, my task would be
easy.”16
Everyone knew that
Lenin would send the Latvian Rifle Brigade to stem the Allies when they marched
south from Archangel. At some time during that summer Lockhart asked himself
the following questions: What if the Latvians did not stem the Allies? What if
they stood aside and let them pass, because the Allies had won them over with
bribes and inducements—such as a promise to help establish an independent
Latvia? The Latvian Rifle Brigade came to occupy in Lockhart’s mind the space
previously taken by Czechs.
Felix Dzerzhinsky’s
sensitive antennae picked up some of this. “Rumors about the attempt of the
Anglo-French to bribe the command staff of [the Latvian Rifle] division,”
reached him even before Savinkov mounted his abortive insurrection at the
beginning of July.17 If the rumors were true, if the Latvian Riflemen did prove
susceptible to Allied bribes, the results could be fatal for Bolshevism. How
could the Cheka stymie this latest gambit of the Allies? Could they even turn
it to an advantage? Felix Dzerzhinsky began to devise a plan.18
George Hill (who also
worked for the Secret Intelligence Agency) and Reilly would now work together
on the conspiracy Lockhart had set in motion. Reilly led the way.
By getting involved
with the Latvians however, Reilly was exceeding his instructions. London had
told him only to survey the situation and get out of the country. Now he had
taken over the role of a paymaster in the scheme. Reilly later defended his
drifting away from his original instructions by claiming that the planned coup
was an opportunity that couldn’t be allowed to slip away. Russian draftees were
deserting the Red Army in droves, he said. They didn’t like high ting before,
and the Soviets’ new forced conscription hadn’t changed their minds. He
intended to take advantage of that. He did have a point. Building the new Red
Army was slow going for Trotsky. The provisional government’s Russian
Revolutionary Army had been lost in a dust cloud after Lenin turned it into a
mob of deserters in late 1917, and after that, the ranks of the temporary
Bolshevik army had to be propped up with German deserters and Chinese
mercenaries. The Red Guards hadn’t been much help, either. They tended to be
insolent and undisciplined. Many were criminals who continued their activities
under the color of law. They were being minimized and would soon be disbanded
altogether. The Latvians were the most reliable professional troops the Soviets
had in Moscow. But like the Chinese, the Latvians had no patriotic ties to the
Reds. They served for money. Whoever paid them controlled the capital. Reilly
resolved to be their new commander. He saw himself as a reincarnated Napoléon.
“And why not?” he asked. “A Corsican lieutenant of artillery trod out the
embers of the French Revolution. Surely a British espionage agent, with so many
factors on his side, could make himself master of Moscow?”19
Hill thought that he
“knew the situation better than any other British officer in Russia, and as
also he had the more delicate threads in his hand, I therefore agreed to
cooperate with him and leave the political control and our policy in his
hands.”20 It is worth quoting Hill’s report again: “The proposed turning of the
Lettish troops to our cause . . . could not be achieved without very seriously
affecting the Moscow and Petrograd centres. The
simultaneous change on the fronts and at Moscow and Petrograd would have
destroyed the Soviet Government.”21 Precisely so: whatever disclaimers
Whitehall might produce at the time or later about invading Russia only to
protect supplies from the Germans and to reconstitute an Eastern Front, in fact
they aimed to destroy Soviet power from the moment Poole embarked from
Murmansk, if not from long before.
The plan was
audacious and ruthless, and reflected the realization that bread riots had
helped to spark the February Revolution and could spark yet another. Thus,
Allied agents, who previously had deployed their skills as saboteurs against
the Germans in occupied regions of Russia, would deploy them now against the
Bolsheviks. Reilly may not have known that General Lavergne had just requested
from the Deuxième Bureau in Paris “poison for livestock and rot for cereals and
potatoes [sent in] reduced packets, by preference boxes of conserves,”22 but he
told the two Latvians of plans to destroy bridges and rail lines to interrupt
food supplies. The hungry people of Petrograd and Moscow, including the Latvian
Riflemen, would understand only that the present regime could not feed them.
Meanwhile, Reilly claimed, other Allied agents would be stockpiling food in
depots close to the big cities. It would be released, and people fed,
immediately after the counter-revolution.
That was the
backdrop, the precondition for revolt. As for the main outlines: Reilly wanted
Berzin to arrange the transfer of two Latvian regiments from Moscow to Vologda.
There they would perform the job originally intended for the Czech Legion:
capture the city and turn it over to General Poole and his forces when they
arrived. Then there would be an uprising in Moscow, either at a meeting of the
Sovnarkom (Council of People’s Commissars), or at a joint plenary session of
the TsIK (Central Executive Committee) and the Moscow
Soviet. Lenin, Trotsky, and other important Bolsheviks would be present on both
occasions. A small group of desperados, led by Reilly himself, but backed by
another brigade of Latvians ostensibly guarding the event, would arrest them
all. “In case there was any hitch in the proceedings,” Reilly promised, “the
other conspirators and myself would carry grenades.”23 Simultaneously,
additional Latvian regiments would be capturing the Moscow state bank,
telephone and telegraph offices, and main rail stations. Then the leaders of
the coup would declare a military dictatorship, pending the arrival of Allied
troops from Vologda.
The conspirators did
not rely entirely upon the Latvians. As we know, Lockhart and Reilly already
had links with the underground White Guards of the Moscow National Center. In
his “autobiography” Reilly claimed that 60,000 of them, led by a former Tsarist
officer, General Yudenich, would emerge from hiding as soon as the coup began.
In fact, Yudenich was involved with the Petrograd plotters at this time. Later,
he would organize the White forces in the Baltic provinces against the
Bolsheviks. Probably, he would have played no role in Moscow events, but the
Moscow White Guards most certainly would have. Reilly said they would form up
in pre-arranged units to patrol the city and maintain order in working-class
districts where resistance might be expected.24 Lockhart and Reilly also had
established links with the Russian Orthodox Church, as we know. The Patriarch
Tikhon, to whom they had delivered a suitcase of money earlier in the summer,
had arranged for public prayers and sermons supporting the coup. The Patriarch
himself would announce a prayer of thanksgiving on the morrow of the uprising.
From the other side,
American Consul-General Poole sent a cyphered telegram (the Bolsheviks had not
broken American codes) to Washington, DC. He anticipated acts of sabotage
carried out by the conspirators, then Allied intervention, clashes between
Whites and Reds and between General Poole’s advancing army and the Reds. The
telegram said in part: “every effort must be made to remove allied
functionaries and nationals from that part of Russia controlled by the
Bolsheviks . . . this territory must be regarded as hostile."25
On Wednesday, 28
August, Berzin took the train to Petrograd, as we have seen. Reilly followed
the next night. On Friday, the 30th, Reilly had the meetings (in the street and
in his flat) with Berzin, whom perhaps he no longer trusted. According to his
best biographer, he met sometime that day with Captain Cromie as well.26 So may
have Berzin, separately.
The 1917-18 Envoys' Plot and its consequences in
Russia Part One
The 1917-18 Envoys' Plot and its consequences
in Russia Part Two
The 1917-18 Envoys' Plot and its consequences
in Russia Part Three
The 1917-18 Envoys' Plot and its consequences
in Russia Part Four
The 1917-18 Envoys' Plot and its consequences
in Russia Part Five
The 1917-18 Envoys' Plot and its consequences in
Russia Part Seven
1. Pipes, Russian
Revolution,1991, 646–649. For more on the Savinkov plot, see also Richard H.
Ullman, The Anglo-Soviet Accord, p.189–190, 230–231; Winfried Baumgart,
Deutsche Ostpolitik, 1966, 228.
2. Riezler: cited in Baumgart,
Deutsche Ostpolitik, 225.
3. John W.
Wheeler-Bennett, Brest-Litovsk the Forgotten Peace, March 1918, 337–338.
4. “Executions at
Moscow,” from Novaia Zhizn’,
July 14, 1918, and “Executions at Yaroslavl,” Pravda, July 26, 1918, reproduced
in James Bunyan, Intervention, Civil War, and Communism in Russia,
April-December 1918, pp. xv, 594 Johns Hopkins Press, 1936., 227–228.
5. The National
Archives, London (TNA), FO 371/3287, Lockhart to Foreign Office, July 7, 1918.
6. University of
Indiana , Lilly Library (UILL), Lockhart Collection, Bruce Lockhart, “The
Counter-Revolutionary Forces,” p. 4.
7. Trial
of Savinkov, p. 20.
8. TNA, FO 371/3287, Lockhart to Foreign Office,
July 13, 1918.
9. Ibid., July 16,
1918.
10. Stanford
University, Hoover Institute, SUHI, Lockhart Collection, Box 10,
‘Questionnaire.’
11. TNA, FO 371/3324,
Lockhart to Foreign Office, June 14, 1918.
12. Geoffrey Swain,
“‘An Interesting and Plausible Proposal’: Bruce Lockhart, Sidney Reilly and the
Latvian Riflemen, Russia 1918,” Intelligence and National Security, Vol. 14,
No. 3 (1999), p. 86.
13. Ibid., pp.
81–102. See also Geoffrey Swain, “The Disillusioning of the Revolution’s
Praetorian Guard: The Latvian Riflemen, Summer–Autumn, 1918,” Europe-Asia
Studies, Vol. 51, No. 4 (June 1999), pp. 667–86.
14. Historia.lv atbalstitaji, http://www.historia.lv/raksts/v-october-1917-october-1918,
p. 12.
15. TNA, FO 371/3333,
Lockhart to Foreign Office June 6, 1918.
16. See, e.g., TNA,
FO 175/1, Lindley to Foreign Office, August 13, 1918, but referring to earlier
organizing efforts.
17. Reilly, The
Adventures of Sidney Reilly, p. 21.
18. “Report
by . . . Peterson to VTsIK,” quoted in V. A.
Goncharov and A. I Kokurin (eds.), Gvardeitsy Oktiabria. Rol’ korennykh narodov stran Baltii v ustanovlenii I ukreplenii bol’ shevistskogo stroia, Moscow, 2009, p. 147, trans. Andrey Shlyakhter.
19. Reilly, Britain’s
Master Spy, 21
20. Kings College,
Little Hart Center, KCLHC, Poole Collection, Captain Hill’s Report, p. 25.
21. Ibid., p.
37.
22. Occleshaw, Dances in Deep Shadows, p. 204.
23. Sidney Reilly,
The Adventures of Sidney Reilly, London, 1931, p. 30.
24. Ibid., p. 21.
25. TNA, FO 371/3336,
Poole to Washington, August 26, 1918.
26. Richard B.
Spence, Trust No One: The Secret World of Sidney Reilly, 2002, p. 227.
For updates click homepage here