The New World of Islam Part 21

"Peasants of Anatolia! The English, French, and Italian Governments hold Constantinople under the mouths of their cannon. They have made the Sultan their prisoner, they are obliging him to consent to the dismemberment of what is purely Turkish territory, they are forcing him to turn the country's finances over to foreign capitalists in order to make it possible for them better to exploit the Turkish people, already reduced to a state of beggary by the six-year war. They have occupied the coal-mines of Heraclea, they are holding your ports, they are sending their troops into your country and are trampling down your fields.

"Peasants and workers of Armenia! Decades ago you became the victims of the intrigues of foreign capital, which launched heavy verbal attacks against the ma.s.sacres of the Armenians by the Kurds and incited you to fight against the Sultan in order to obtain through your blood new concessions and fresh profits daily from the b.l.o.o.d.y Sultan. During the war they not only promised you independence, but they incited your merchants, your teachers, and your priests to demand the land of the Turkish peasants in order to keep up an eternal conflict between the Armenian and Turkish peoples, so that they could eternally derive profits out of this conflict, for as long as strife prevails between you and the Turks, just so long will the English, French, and American capitalists be able to hold Turkey in check through the menace of an Armenian uprising and to use the Armenians as cannon-fodder through the menace of a pogrom by Kurds.

"Peasants of Syria and Arabia! Independence was promised to you by the English and the French, and now they hold your country occupied by their armies, now the English and the French dictate your laws, and you, who have freed yourselves from the Turkish Sultan, from the Constantinople Government, are now slaves of the Paris and London Governments, which merely differ from the Sultan's Government in being stronger and better able to exploit you.

"You all understand this yourselves. The Persian peasants and workers have risen against their traitorous Teheran Government. The peasants in Mesopotamia are in revolt against the English troops. You peasants in Anatolia have rushed to the banner of Kemal Pasha in order to fight against the foreign invasion, but at the same time we hear that you are trying to organize your own party, a genuine peasants' party that will be willing to fight even if the Pashas are to make their peace with the Entente exploiters. Syria has no peace, and you, Armenian peasants, whom the Entente, despite its promises, allows to die from hunger in order to keep you under better control, you are understanding more and more that it is silly to hope for salvation by the Entente capitalists. Even your bourgeois Government of the Dashnakists, the lackeys of the Entente, is compelled to turn to the Workers' and Peasants' Government of Russia with an appeal for peace and help.

"Peasants and workers of the Near East! If you organize yourselves, if you form your own Workers' and Peasants' Government, if you arm yourselves, if you unite with the Red Russian Workers' and Peasants'

Army, then you will be able to defy the English, French, and American capitalists, then you will settle accounts with your own native exploiters, then you will find it possible, in a free alliance with the workers' republics of the world, to look after your own interests; then you will know how to exploit the resources of your country in your own interest and in the interest of the working people of the whole world, that will honestly exchange the products of their labour and mutually help each other.

"We want to talk over all these questions with you at the Congress in Baku. Spare no effort to appear in Baku on September 1 in as large numbers as possible. You march, year in and year out, through the deserts to the holy places where you show your respect for your past and for your G.o.d--now march through deserts, over mountains, and across rivers in order to come together to discuss how you can escape from the bonds of slavery, how you can unite as brothers so as to live as men, free and equal."

From this summons the nature of the Baku congress can be imagined. It was, in fact, a social revolutionist far more than a nationalist a.s.sembly. Of its 1900 delegates, nearly 1300 were professed communists.

Turkey, Persia, Armenia, and the Caucasus countries sent the largest delegations, though there were also delegations from Arabia, India, and even the Far East. The Russian Soviet Government was of course in control and kept a tight hand on the proceedings. The character of these proceedings were well summarized by the address of the noted Bolshevik leader Zinoviev, president of the Executive Committee of the Third (Moscow) International, who presided.

Zinoviev said:

"We believe this Congress to be one of the greatest events in history, for it proves not only that the progressive workers and working peasants of Europe and America are awakened, but that we have at last seen the day of the awakening, not of a few, but of tens of thousands, of hundreds of thousands, of millions of the labouring cla.s.s of the peoples of the East. These peoples form the majority of the world's whole population, and they alone, therefore, are able to bring the war between capital and labour to a conclusive decision....

"The Communist International said from the very first day of its existence: 'There are four times as many people living in Asia as live in Europe. We will free all peoples, all who labour.'... We know that the labouring ma.s.ses of the East are in part retrograde, though not by their own fault; they cannot read or write, are ignorant, are bound in superst.i.tion, believe in the evil spirit, are unable to read any newspapers, do not know what is happening in the world, have not the slightest idea of the most elementary laws of hygiene. Comrades, our Moscow International discussed the question whether a socialist revolution could take place in the countries of the East before those countries had pa.s.sed through the capitalist stage. You know that the view which long prevailed was that every country must first go through the period of capitalism ... before socialism could become a live question. We now believe that this is no longer true. Russia has done this, and from that moment we are able to say that China, India, Turkey, Persia, Armenia also can, and must, make a direct fight to get the Soviet System. These countries can, and must, prepare themselves to be Soviet republics.

"I say that we give patient aid to groups of persons who do not believe in our ideas, who are even opposed to us on some points. In this way, the Soviet Government supports Kemal in Turkey. Never for one moment do we forget that the movement headed by Kemal is not a communist movement.

We know it. I have here extracts from the verbatim reports of the first session of the Turkish people's Government at Angora. Kemal himself says that 'the Caliph's person is sacred and inviolable.' The movement headed by Kemal wants to rescue the Caliph's 'sacred' person from the hands of the foe. That is the Turkish Nationalist's point of view. But is it a communist point of view? No. We respect the religious convictions of the ma.s.ses; we know how to re-educate the ma.s.ses. It will be the work of years.

"We use great caution in approaching the religious convictions of the labouring ma.s.ses in the East and elsewhere. But at this Congress we are bound to tell you that you must not do what the Kemal Government is doing in Turkey; you must not support the power of the Sultan, not even if religious considerations urge you to do so. You must press on, and must not allow yourselves to be pulled back. We believe the Sultan's hour has struck. You must not allow any form of autocratic power to continue; you must destroy, you must annihilate, faith in the Sultan; you must struggle to obtain real Soviet organizations. The Russian peasants also were strong believers in the Czar; but when a true people's revolution broke out there was practically nothing left of this faith in the Czar. The same thing will happen in Turkey and all over the East as soon as a true peasants' revolution shall burst forth over the surface of the black earth. The people will very soon lose faith in their Sultan and in their masters. We say once more, the policy pursued by the present people's Government in Turkey is not the policy of the Communist International, it is not our policy; nevertheless, we declare that we are prepared to support any revolutionary fight against the English Government.

"Yes, we array ourselves against the English bourgeoisie; we seize the English imperialist by the throat and tread him underfoot. It is against English capitalism that the worst, the most fatal blow must be dealt.

That is so. But at the same time we must educate the labouring ma.s.ses of the East to hatred, to the will to fight the whole of the rich cla.s.ses indifferently, whoever they be. The great significance of the revolution now starting in the East does not consist in begging the English imperialist to take his feet off the table, for the purpose of then permitting the wealthy Turk to place his feet on it all the more comfortably; no, we will very politely ask all the rich to remove their dirty feet from the table, so that there may be no luxuriousness among us, no boasting, no contempt of the people, no idleness, but that the world may be ruled by the worker's h.o.r.n.y hand."

The Baku congress was the opening gun in Bolshevism's avowed campaign for the immediate Bolshevizing of the East. It was followed by increased Soviet activity and by substantial Soviet successes, especially in the Caucasus, where both Georgia and Armenia were Bolshevized in the spring of 1921.

These very successes, however, awakened growing uneasiness among Soviet Russia's nationalist proteges. The various Oriental nationalist parties, which had at first welcomed Moscow's aid so enthusiastically against the Entente Powers, now began to realize that Russian Bolshevism might prove as great a peril as Western imperialism to their patriotic aspirations.

Of course the nationalist leaders had always realized Moscow's ultimate goal, but hitherto they had felt themselves strong enough to control the situation and to take Russian aid without paying Moscow's price. Now they no longer felt so sure. The numbers of cla.s.s-conscious "proletarians" in the East might be very small. The communist philosophy might be virtually unintelligible to the Oriental ma.s.ses. Nevertheless, the very existence of Soviet Russia was a warning not to be disregarded.

In Russia an infinitesimal communist minority, numbering, by its own admission, not much over 600,000, was maintaining an unlimited despotism over 170,000,000 people. Western countries might rely on their popular education and their staunch traditions of ordered liberty; the East possessed no such bulwarks against Bolshevism. The East was, in fact, much like Russia. There was the same dense ignorance of the ma.s.ses; the same absence of a large and powerful middle cla.s.s; the same tradition of despotism; the same popular acquiescence in the rule of ruthless minorities. Finally, there were the ominous examples of Sovietized Turkestan and Azerbaidjan. In fine, Oriental nationalists bethought them of the old adage that he who sups with the devil needs a long spoon.

Everywhere it has been the same story. In Asia Minor, Mustapha Kemal has arrested Bolshevist propaganda agents, while Turkish and Russian troops have more than once clashed on the disputed Caucasus frontiers. In Egypt we have already seen how an amicable arrangement between Lord Milner and the Egyptian nationalist leaders was facilitated by the latter's fear of the social revolutionary agitators who were inflaming the fellaheen. In India, Sir Valentine Chirol noted as far back as the spring of 1918 how Russia's collapse into Bolshevism had had a "sobering effect" on Indian public opinion. "The more thoughtful Indians," he wrote, "now see how helpless even the Russian _intelligentsia_ (relatively far more numerous and matured than the Indian _intelligentsia_) has proved to control the great ignorant ma.s.ses as soon as the whole fabric of government has been hastily shattered."[304] In Afghanistan, likewise, the Ameer was losing his love for his Bolshevist allies. The streams of refugees from Sovietized Turkestan that flowed across his borders for protection, headed by his kinsman the Ameer of Bokhara, made Amanullah Khan do some hard thinking, intensified by a serious mutiny of Afghan troops on the Russian border, the mutineers demanding the right to form Soldiers'

Councils quite on the Russian pattern. Bolshevist agents might tempt him by the loot of India, but the Ameer could also see that that would do him little good if he himself were to be looted and killed by his own rebellious subjects.[305] Thus, as time went on, Oriental nationalists and conservatives generally tended to close ranks in dislike and apprehension of Bolshevism. Had there been no other issue involved, there can be little doubt that Moscow's advances would have been repelled and Bolshevist agents given short shrift.

Unfortunately, the Eastern nationalists feel themselves between the Bolshevist devil and the Western imperialist deep sea. The upshot has been that they have been trying to play off the one against the other--driven toward Moscow by every Entente aggression; driven toward the West by every Soviet _coup_ of Lenin. Western statesmen should realize this, and should remember that Bolshevism's best propagandist agent is, not Zinoviev orating at Baku, but General Gouraud, with his Senegalese battalions and "strong-arm" methods in Syria and the Arab hinterland.

Certainly, any extensive spread of Bolshevism in the East would be a terrible misfortune both for the Orient and for the world at large. If the triumph of Bolshevism would mean barbarism in the West, in the East it would spell downright savagery. The sudden release of the ignorant, brutal Oriental ma.s.ses from their traditional restraints of religion and custom, and the submergence of the relatively small upper and middle cla.s.ses by the flood of social revolution would mean the destruction of all Oriental civilization and culture, and a plunge into an abyss of anarchy from which the East could emerge only after generations, perhaps centuries.

FOOTNOTES:

[284] For these early forms of unrest, see A. Le Chatelier, _L'Islam au dix-neuvieme Siecle_, pp. 22-44 (Paris, 1888).

[285] D. H. Dodwell, "Economic Transition in India," _Economic Journal_, December, 1910.

[286] Bipin Chandra Pal, "The Forces Behind the Unrest in India,"

_Contemporary Review_, February, 1910.

[287] J. Chailley, _Administrative Problems of British India_, p. 339 (London, 1910--English translation).

[288] Dr. Ronald Ross, "Wretchedness a Cause of Political Unrest," _The Survey_, 18 February, 1911.

[289] A. Yusuf Ali, _Life and Labour in India_, pp. 3, 32 (London, 1907).

[290] E. W. Capen, "A Sociological Appraisal of Western Influence on the Orient," _American Journal of Sociology_, May, 1911.

[291] P. Khorat, "Psychologie de la Revolution chinoise," _Revue des Deux Mondes_, 15 March, 1912; L. Bertrand, _Le Mirage orientale_, pp.

164-166; J. D. Rees, _The Real India_, pp. 162-163.

[292] Albert Metin, _L'Inde d'aujourd'hui: etude sociale_, p. 276 (Paris, 1918).

[293] Albert Metin, _L'Inde d'aujourd'hui: etude sociale_, pp. 339-345.

[294] J. Ramsay Macdonald, _The Government of India_, pp. 133-134 (London, 1920).

[295] Georges Foucart. Quoted in _The Literary Digest_, 17 August, 1907, pp. 225-226.

[296] A. Van Gennep, _En Algerie_, p. 182 (Paris, 1914).

[297] _The Englishman_ (Calcutta). Quoted in _The Literary Digest_, 21 February, 1914, p. 369.

[298] For these larger world-aspects of Bolshevik propaganda, see Paul Miliukov, _Bolshevism: An International Danger_ (London, 1920); also, my _Rising Tide of Colour against White World-Supremacy_, pp. 218-221, and my article, "Bolshevism: The Heresy of the Under-Man," _The Century_, June, 1919.

[299] See Chapter V.

[300] See Chapter VI.

[301] For events in Afghanistan and Central Asia, see Sir T. H. Holdich, "The Influence of Bolshevism in Afghanistan," _New Europe_, December 4, 1919; Ikbal Ali Shah, "The Fall of Bokhara," _The Near East_, October 28, 1920, and his "The Central Asian Tangle," _Asiatic Review_, October, 1920. For Bolshevist activity in the Near and Middle East generally, see Miliukov, _op. cit._, pp. 243-260; 295-297; Major-General Sir George Aston, "Bolshevik Propaganda in the East," _Fortnightly Review_, August, 1920; W. E. D. Allen, "Transcaucasia, Past and Present," _Quarterly Review_, October, 1920; Sir Valentine Chirol, "Conflicting Policies in the Near East," _New Europe_, July 1, 1920; L. Dumont-Wilden, "Awakening Asia," _The Living Age_, August 7, 1920 (translated from the French); Major-General Lord Edward Gleichen, "Moslems and the Tangle in the Middle East," _National Review_, December, 1919; Paxton Hibben, "Russia at Peace," _The Nation_ (New York), January 26, 1921; H. von Hoff, "Die nationale Erhebung in der Turkei," _Deutsche Revue_, December, 1919; R.

G. Hunter, "Entente--Oil--Islam," _New Europe_, August 26, 1920; "Taira," "The Story of the Arab Revolt," _Balkan Review_, August, 1920; "Voyageur," "Lenin's Attempt to Capture Islam," _New Europe_, June 10, 1920; Hans Wendt, "Ex Oriente Lux," _Nord und Sud_, May, 1920; George Young, "Russian Foreign Policy," _New Europe_, July 1, 1920.

[302] Ikbal Ali Shah, _op. cit._

[303] For events in the Caucasus, see W. E. D. Allen, "Transcaucasia, Past and Present," _Quarterly Review_, October, 1920; C. E. Bechhofer, "The Situation in the Transcaucasus," _New Europe_, September 2, 1920; "D. Z. T.," "L'Azerbaidjan: La Premiere Republique musulmane," _Revue du Monde musulman_, 1919; Paxton Hibben, "Exit Georgia," _The Nation_ (New York), March 30, 1921.

[304] Sir V. Chirol, "India in Travail," _Edinburgh Review_, July, 1918.

Also see H. H. The Aga Khan, _India in Transition_, p. 17 (London, 1918).

[305] Ikbal Ali Shah, _op. cit._

CONCLUSION