"Petliura and the pogroms", a letter from Vladimir Zhabotinsky to the newspaper "Latest News" first published in Russian on October 11, 1927 in Paris
and then in Yiddish in the Warsaw Haint daily on October 16, 1927
and then in Hebrew, in Haaretz on October 21, 1927
In English:
Part of the Ukrainian press, discussing the Schwartzbard case, completely misinterpreted my position on the issue of Petliura’s responsibility for the pogroms of 1917-1920.
There were two reasons for this:
1) In the summer of 1926, I published an article in the New York newspaper Morgen-Journal, in which I said that, although I had never seen Petliura, I did not, however, consider him a convinced pogromist; and that in general I saw pogroms as the result not so much of the subjective “anti-Semitism of people” as of the objective “anti-Semitism of things”.
2) In the autumn of 1921, I signed an agreement with Maksym Slavinsky, the Prague representative of Petliura's then-exile government, establishing a special Jewish gendarmerie within Petliura's army (the remnants of which were then encamped in Galicia) specifically to prevent pogroms. (This agreement was never implemented, as Petliura's army was soon liquidated.)
From all this, a section of the Ukrainian press has concluded that I consider Petliura not responsible for the pogroms. I believe it would be useful to explain to this section of the Ukrainian press that they are profoundly mistaken.
The question is not whether Petliura was a supporter of pogroms at heart. I have expressed my hypothesis and consider it plausible. But even if my hypothesis is correct, I insist most emphatically that it has no bearing on the question of Petliura's responsibility for the pogroms. Petliura was the head of the Ukrainian government and the Ukrainian army for two years or more; pogroms continued for almost the entire time; the head of the government and army failed to suppress them, did not punish the perpetrators, and did not resign. Therefore, he bears responsibility for every drop of Jewish blood spilled. This is so clear that no excuses will suffice.
Petliura's apologists won't be helped by arguing that, from the perspective of the philosophy of history, pogroms are a consequence not so much of "the anti-Semitism of individuals" as of "the anti-Semitism of things." Every sociology textbook claims that theft, banditry, and the like are explained not so much by the evil will of individuals as by the pressure of social conditions. But no one has ever concluded from this that an individual thief or bandit is "innocent" and not guilty and not subject to punishment.
The pogromists who slaughtered Jews during Petliura's reign were also guilty and subject to severe punishment. Petliura didn't punish them, even though he was the head of the government and the army. The philosophy of history has nothing to do with this: such a head of government, such a head of the army, is guilty of an unheard-of and unforgivable crime against the Jewish people, the Ukrainian people, and all of humanity.
That Petliura, if he had seriously wanted to, could have taken measures to truly suppress the pogroms is best proven by my agreement with his authorized representative, Mr. Slavinsky. This agreement stipulated the establishment of a Jewish gendarmerie. In other words, the legalization of Jewish self-defense and the right to maintain order by force of arms. This means there is a remedy against pogroms. But this very remedy was already available in 1917-1920. Jewish self-defense organizations existed in Ukraine even then. Therefore, they could have been legalized, armed, and all Jewish youth could have been called upon to participate. But Petliura did not take advantage of this remedy. On the contrary, the Jewish self-defense, under the pretext of eradicating Bolshevism, was exterminated by his own soldiers.
Whatever Petliura's inner self, responsibility for the pogroms falls on him; to deny it is to misunderstand the nature of the head of government and the army.
If a portion of Ukrainian society concludes from this explanation that I have become an enemy of the Ukrainian national movement, it will be as absurd as the suggestion that I considered Petliura "innocent."
I remain a friend of the Ukrainian movement. I will continue to strive to allay the righteous indignation pent up in the Jewish soul, even if it means invoking the philosophy of history or constructing hypotheses about the psychology of figures I don't personally know. Moreover, I will continue to seek an agreement with the Ukrainian movement—as I did, incidentally, in the agreement with M.A. Slavinsky—despite this movement's grave sin against the Jews. But I consider it unacceptable to deny this sin or to treat it as a trifle. And if there are people or groups in the Ukrainian movement who think that pogroms are a forgivable trifle, that one can tolerate the systematic slaughter of Jews and still remain heroes and pure—then I am not a friend to such people and groups, but an enemy, and I warn Ukrainian society that such people or groups are not its friends, but its enemies.
^
Posts
