Customer Reviews

Kronstadt, 1921 (Studies of the Russian Institute, Columbia University)

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Many years after its first publication, Paul Avrich's "Kronstadt, 1921" remains one of the best books written about one of the most important events of the Russian Revolution. The book is a detailed history of the Kronstadt 'mutiny' of March 1921, in which many see the seeds of Stalin's future dictatorship.

Basically, what happened is this: following a wave of strikes and discontent in Russia caused by the repressive methods of "War Communism," the sailors at the Kronstadt naval base in the Baltic Sea published a document proposing the deconstruction of the Bolshevik Party's single-Party Dictatorship (if not necessarily the Party itself). The Bolsheviks responded by attacking the base and executing those behind this 'mutiny.' Since 1921, there has been a continuing debate between Leninists and anarchists/libertarian socialists as to whether this constituted a betrayal of the principles of socialism and the ideals of the Russian Revolution.

The Leninists claim that the Kronstadters were mutineers who needed to be "crushed by the iron hand of the proletariat." The anarchists and libertarian socialists hold that it was the Bolshevik Party itself that betrayed the Revolution and laid the base of Stalin's purges, gulags, and authoritarian dictatorship by attacking the base Leon Trotsky had once called "the Pride and Glory of the Russian Revolution."

As a result of this lasting antagonism, most histories of the uprising tend to be slanted in favor of one side or the other - but Paul Avrich here makes an attempt to cut through the partisan wrangling and establish the factual history of the base once and for all. He reaches the conclusion that the Bolsheviks reacted to Kronstadt's challenge to their authority with unnecessary intransigence and brutality, but does mention the pressures of the Russian Civil War of 1918 - 1920 to help explain their actions. Mr. Avrich also rips apart much of the official propaganda surrounding the myth of Kronstadt (for example, that the mutiny was organized and led by a Tsarist General).

"Kronstadt, 1921" is a well-written account of one of the most important and interesting events in the history of the Russian Revolution and the formation of the Stalinist Soviet Union. Recommended reading for anyone interested in Russia or its history. Five stars.

In March 1921, the sailors of Kronstadt, a naval base outside Petrograd (St. Petersburg), rose in rebellion against the Russian Bolshevik regime. The revolt was suppressed after only two weeks. Trotsky much later called the Kronstadt uprising "a mere episode". He was, of course, wrong. The rebellion took place at the very doorstep of Petrograd, following a large strike movement among the workers in that important Russian city. If successful, Petrograd and Bolshevik power would have become sitting ducks. Many Russian émigré groups attempted to aid the rebels (in the event, unsuccessfully). Also, the Kronstadt mutineers turned out to have an elaborate political program and even managed to publish a newspaper. The program sounded left-wing but anti-Bolshevik, accused the Bolsheviks of betraying the ideals of the revolution, and called for the legalization of all socialist parties (but not right-wing groups).

This wasn't your everyday little peasant disturbance, of which there were many during the Russian Civil War and its aftermath.

Ever since 1921, Communists (with only a few exceptions) have condemned the Kronstadt rebellion as counter-revolutionary. For instance, the Socialist Workers Party has published a collection of articles by Lenin and Trotsky on the subject, available from Pathfinder Press. On the other hand, anarchists have turned Kronstadt into part of their political mythology, alongside the Makhnovists and the Spanish Revolution. The classical anarchist works on the subject are "The Kronstadt Commune" by Ida Mett and "The Unknown Revolution" by Voline.

Paul Avrich, a historian with anarchist political sympathies, has attempted to steer a middle course, and actually write an objective historical account of the uprising. The book deals with both the actual course of events during the uprising, Bolshevik and anti-Bolshevik reactions to it, and the historical context in which the rebellion took place, i.e. War Communism and the future New Economic Policy (NEP). He uses Bolshevik and anarchist sources to paint a portrait of the principal leaders of the rebellion, which turns out to be easier said than done. None of them were particularly well-known people.

Avrich believes that the Kronstadt uprising was a spontaneous event, and that none of the opposition parties to the Bolshevik regime were involved. The political program of the rebellion didn't resemble those of the SRs or the Mensheviks. Avrich calls it anarcho-populist. It reflected ideas current among the Russian peasantry, which tended to oppose both the White Guards and the Bolsheviks, and indeed had a deeply-rooted suspicion of state power in general, in favour of a nebulous conception of libertarian self-government. The author also points out that the principal leaders of the Kronstadt Revolutionary Committee were of Ukrainian nationality. The principal leader, Petrichenko, was a Ukrainian peasant nicknamed "Petliura" for his nationalist ideas. However, the rebellion as such wasn't nationalist in inspiration, and most of the participants were Russians. Discontent with War Communism was what triggered the mutiny.

The Bolsheviks claimed, already at the outset, that the mutiny was organized by the White Guards. They even named the ringleader, a certain General Kozlovsky. As already mentioned, Avrich doesn't believe that White groups were directly involved in the rebellion. However, they were certainly active. A secret memorandum from the National Center, a Russian émigré organization associated with the Kadets, actually laid out plans for a mutiny on Kronstadt several months before it happened! The author of the memorandum, probably a Russian Red Cross official named Tseidler, claimed that a small group of émigré agents were already stationed at Kronstadt, waiting for an opportune moment to act. Tseidler was in touch with Grimm, another Red Cross official who had humanitarian contacts with Petrichenko during the actual uprising. However, it's unclear whether Petrichenko knew about the Russian Red Cross being a front for the National Center. Kozlovsky - there was such a person - is a more likely candidate for the secret mole at Kronstadt. He was a former Czarist officer who turned coat during the revolution, only to join the Kronstadt mutiny later on. Ironically, Petrichenko and the Revolutionary Committee refused to listen to Kozlovsky's expert military advice about how to deal with the Bolshevik threat. The secret memorandum of the National Center prophetically warned that if the uprising would break out too early, before the ice melted, it would probably be defeated. That is precisely what happened, suggesting that the counter-revolutionary agents at the naval base didn't have much leverage. This also points to Kozlovsky and his closest aides. The unruly Russian soldiers tended to distrust officers and generals.

What is clear is that Petrichenko and some of his associates *did* join the National Center in Finland after fleeing the Bolshevik attack on Kronstadt. They also volunteered their services to General Wrangel, who sent them a favourable letter. Apparently, Grimm was Wrangel's representative in Finland. Curiously, Petrichenko's program still sounded very left-wing but apparently contained a secret clause that a temporary military dictatorship would be necessary after the victory of the anti-Bolshevik forces, presumably headed by Wrangel himself! Avrich also quotes reports from the Russian secret police, according to which Petrichenko recruited several people to Wrangel's organization. These even managed to enter Russia and reach Petrograd, where a clandestine Wrangelite group was active. However, the Cheka managed to expose and liquidate them. Interestingly, Ida Mett's pamphlet on Kronstadt contains a short article by Petrichenko published in a Left SR magazine in 1926, denying that the Russian Red Cross was a White Guard front. Obviously, Petrichenko was lying, since by this time he surely knew the truth!

Ironically, Avrich's book has been used by Communists to "prove" their case that the Kronstadt rebellion was indeed counter-revolutionary. By contrast, some anarchists have accused Avrich of sloppy scholarship! Anarchists tend to think of the Kronstadt uprising as immaculate, and apparently don't want their rosy illusions smashed.

What Avrich's book really shows are the problems confronting non-Bolshevik leftists during the Russian Civil War, squeezed between "the dictatorship of the proletariat" and the Czarist and landlordist White Guards. Rejecting both proved to be easier said than done. The Kronstadt uprising was defeated by the revolution and its leadership derailed by counter-revolution.

That was the tragedy of Kronstadt.

March 17th marks the anniversary of the crushing of the Kronstadt rebellion by the Bolsheviks. The saga of Kronstadt is a microcosm of the Russian Revolution. It had been an early supporter and practitioner of soviet power, forming a free commune in 1917 which was relatively independent of the authorities. The Kronstadt sailors had been in the vanguard of the revolutionary events of 1905 and 1917. In 1917, Trotsky called them the "pride and glory of the Russian Revolution."

In 1921 he and Lenin crushed their revolt.

For anarchists, Kronstadt exposes the myth that Bolshevism was a genuine form of socialism. It marked the death of the Russian Revolution.