STALIN AND THE MODERN EPOCH

STALIN AND THE STRUGGLE AGAINST TROTSKYISM

By K.P. Islamov, member of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks (AUCPB)

Beginning with the sad memory of the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), all kinds of slanderous tall stories about the events of the 1930-s have been incessantly hammered into the minds of ordinary people, by the rightist- Khrushchevite revisionists (or more accurately, the Khrushchevite-Trotskyites) and in particular, the latest Zionist “democrats”.
For unmasking and denying theses tall stories, we need to turn to several very important and educational fragments from the history of the USSR.
However strange this may seem, one has to begin by mentioning separate areas in a book that was written by V.D. Uspensky, Doctor of Historical Sciences entitled “The leader’s secret advisor” [1]. This book contains quite a lot of filth surrounding Stalin’s name. But the book also contains true pearl grains. These are in those areas where Uspensky casts light on the essence of Trotskyism and of Trotsky himself. They are extremely important pieces of evidence and are the key starting points for understanding all our post-October history.
The first and main starting point is that Uspensky says the following about Zionism using Stalin’s words: “Zionism and Zionists make up the shock expansionist detachment of world imperialism. For their domination over Russia, the Trotskyites are carrying out against us (that is, against the Bolsheviks – K.P.) an irreconcilable battle on all bastions: ideological, economical and national” [2]. We shall ourselves add to this by saying first of all, that it was a battle for the placement of their own cadres into the high levels of leadership of the party, and taking over the party’s Central Committee.
The second important starting point is that Uspensky reveals Trotsky’s direct connection with clans of Zionists in Europe and the USA. Uspensky says that while in emigration, Trotsky never felt any financial hardship, having during this time been in and around the private offices of leading activists of these clans in London, Paris, Madrid and New York. It therefore logical that he had to fulfill the task set before him by these clans – the seizure of all power inside Russia by way of revolution, quickly and economically.
This is the most important evidence of the Doctor of Historical Sciences, V.D. Uspensky. For it is not Trotsky’s “works” and the labeling of Trotskyism as a “petty bourgeois trend” inside the communist movement, but this connection (and this task), which reveals all there is to know about the essence of the struggle of the Trotskyites against the Bolsheviks, inside the party and in the international arena.
It is from here the fact becomes clear that Trotsky and the Trotskyites in 1917 joined not with their own relatives, the Mensheviks, but with their opponents, the Bolsheviks. Why? Because, neither the Mensheviks nor the Socialist Revolutionaries (SR-s) intended taking power (via the Soviets) into their own hands. The Bolsheviks had already aimed themselves towards carrying out this task.
The third important point is this snatching up by the Trotskyites, in the years of revolution and civil war, of the many leading posts and positions at higher and mid-levels within the army, organs of repression, mainly the NKVD (and a smaller number inside Dzerzhinsky’s VCHK –OGPU), and also inside the bodies of judicial enquiry. All of these organs were saturated (to a certain extent) by the Trotskyites right up to the end of the 1930-s. This is a very important point in the understanding of those tragic events of 1937 – 1938, and the tragedy of 1941 at the start of the war.
The struggle of the Trotskyites for complete control of the leadership in the USSR and primarily in the party leadership (“the battle for the Central Committee”), can be sharply divided into two stages:
The first stage - An open, legal ideological-political struggle up to 1927;
The second stage – A hidden, illegal struggle having been disguised by the Trotskyites, and by now, not so much an ideological struggle, as a sabotage-terrorist struggle and the carrying out subversive work – after 1927.
The first stage [3] is characterized by the aim of the Trotskyites of attracting over onto their side the majority (if only a relative majority) of party members by way of so-called “general party discussions”.
The first of these attacks at the end of 1920 (the discussion on the trade unions) was repelled by Lenin, but it did manage to split for a time, the small-numbered at that time (in all 19 people) Central Committee, where Lenin ends up in the minority.
The second discussion unleashed by Trotsky against the party, was the general party discussion on the “46th platform” at the end of 1923, when Lenin, very ill at the time, was excluded from this struggle. The discussion was a difficult one for the party, and most of the difficulty in repelling this frenzied attack by the Trotskyites fell onto Stalin’s shoulders. But Stalin carried out the task splendidly and the ideological and organisational attack by the Trotskyites was repelled resulting in cadre losses for them in the army, political headquarters of the Republic (PHR) and the Revolutionary Military Soviet of the Republic (RMSR). Stalin also smashed ideologically a discussion, which followed in autumn 1924 by the Trotskyites, and this resulted in Trotsky himself losing an important post for him as Chairman of the RMSR.
Trotsky went quiet for a time, but not for long.
In 1925 the “New Opposition” surfaces, headed by Zinoviev and Kamenev (N.K. Krupskaya joined them, as Kamenev to Krupskaya was a close friend back in emigration), and at the start of 1926 the Trotskyite – Zinovievist faction was formed. Krupskaya breaks with the opposition. In the period 1926 – 1927 a fierce fight takes place between this faction and the Leninist –Stalinist majority Central Committee, and another attempt made at unleashing a general party discussion, including carrying out a true Trotskyite referendum inside the party, leads to a most disgraceful and deadly result for those same Trotskyites. And as a consequence of this, the final ideological- organisational destruction of Trotskyism took place together with a subsequent (and very significant!) cadre reshuffle and movement of several activists of the faction according to the party line, to outlying districts, like for example, Smigly and others.
Here it is extremely important to bring to the forefront, several of the instructions and directives of the leaders of the faction to their own supporters during this fight. Here they are, documentarily recorded by history:
1. Zinoviev’s words at the plenary session of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolshevik) in July 1926:
“The faction that we have is serious and is going to be with us for a long time!” [4].
What is true must be true. Secretly de-facto, the activity of this anti-Stalin faction did continue to function for a long time and was serious. And the 20th Congress of the CPSU in 1956 as well as the events that followed it is in essence, the continuation of the activity of this faction under new conditions, in another form and with new faces.
2. During the ideological-organisational defeat of Trotskyism and cadre movement of several activists of the faction to the outlying districts, the Trotskyites in blind malice lost their heads and all sense of measure. Their leader Trotsky openly declares the “Clemenceau thesis”. The concept of this thesis lies in Trotsky’s threat of carrying out a military coup, threatening that in the case of a war (the imperialists against the Soviet Union), and the enemy reaching even only a few tens of kilometres from the capital, they (the Trotskyites) will carry out a change in party and Soviet leadership”. In essence, Trotsky repeats this same “Clemenceau thesis” in his accompanying letter to the “83rd platform” to the CC and CCC (Central Control Commission) (May-June 1927) [5].
In order for the enemy to get close to the capital the corresponding conditions need to be created by way of treacherous acts being carried out in the highest ranks of the Workers’ and Peasants’ Red Army (RKRA), as was exactly spotted by A.A. Rumintsev in his famous article entitled “Stalin’s time”. And considering the well-known presence of the Trotskyites inside these ranks (since Trotsky and his ilk had led the Red Army for a long time), the “Clemenceau thesis” was by far no empty threat!
And the tragedy of 1941 is, to a significant extent, the realization of this “Clemenceau thesis” inside the army by the hidden Trotskyites!
3. The third document distributed (and by now illegally!) during the ideological-organisational defeat of the faction, were instructions by the leaders of the faction to their confederates on disguising themselves, where in particular, it says: “Keep voting for the Central Committee until your hands wither away, and at the same time, carry out work in building an opposition of most active members” [6]. In other words – disguise yourselves! And disguise themselves they do!
The crossing over to illegal work by the Trotskyites began back in 1926 [7]. From 1928 the disguising was carried out in the form of mass declarations to the Central Committee about a “break with Trotskyism”. And quite a few Trotskyites on the strength of this, remained at their various leading posts, desperately clinging on to power. But the carefully conspired Trotskyites within the party, army and NKVD, one can assume, started forming their own cadres even earlier, in the form of all those Yagods, Khrushchevs, Yezhovs, Melisovs, Frinovskys, and Uboreviches etc.
4. The fourth important document is Trotsky’s directives to his by now already secretly disguised confederates, including those who were in the process of disguising themselves. He laid out these directives in two letters sent to Berlin, allegedly for making copies of, under the name of Petr Pereverziev. These letters were intercepted (possibly via the OGPU and quite possibly with Trotsky’s help) and quickly published on 15th January 1928 in the newspaper “Pravda”. Let us remind ourselves that at the time, the chief editor of “Pravda” was N.I. Bukharin. What were these instructions? In the first letter Trotsky attacks the “capitulators”, that is, those who had really broken away from the opposition. He demands that they carry out the instructions and directives of the faction’s leaders and not those of the Central Committee of the ACP(B). Trotsky declares that anyone who does not carry out these directives is a conscious opponent, and demands a merciless struggle be waged against them. What was this merciless struggle? Was it to be an ideological one? But Trotsky had already been beaten and finally defeated by Stalin in the ideological struggle, not long before. No, this merciless struggle by the Trotskyites was in the form of terror and no other. And this terror being brought about by them was carried out via the organs of repression (NKVD), by their own people who had been planted there, their secret confederates and moreover, under the flag of struggle against the…Trotskyites. The final result would be – either get shot or end up inside a camp supervised by Trotskyites and under a regime where one would had not have survived for long…
But Trotsky did not direct his merciless struggle against his own former confederates. This was only the background on which such a struggle and terror had to be carried out against all “Stalinists” at all leadership levels. It is namely against them that Trotsky directs this merciless struggle, this terror, which was in his second letter. In it, he directly states that if you, the opposition, the disguised Trotskyites place yourselves in opposition to the USSR as to a bourgeois state, and oppose the ACP(B) like opposing a “petty bourgeois party”, then you are transforming yourselves into a sect (which is what happened in reality –K.P.). “No, you Trotskyites have to carry out a struggle towards taking over the ACP(B)”, orders Trotsky. Trotsky without any hesitation gives cynical advice: For this, you need to strike the leadership of the ACP(B). Strike hard. And strike hard they do! [8].
The second stage in the struggle by the Trotskyites for seizing power in the USSR is none other than the large-scale bloody attempt at fulfilling this directive. We shall examine how this took place.
In 1934 the OGPU unified with the NKVD into the single Peoples Commissariat of the NKVD (NARKOMAT). Secret Trotskyite Henreich Yagod becomes the Peoples’ Commissar of the NKVD (some called him Hershel Iyeguda) having sneaked into the “top” using relation ties with Y.M. Sverdlov, by this time already dead. What then happened was something that the Trotskyites had been striving to achieve for a long time. Now they could begin striking at the Stalin leadership at all levels, striking at the leadership on an All-Union scale. And on 1st December 1934 in Smolny, a shot thunders out: - S.M. Kirov is murdered, Stalin’s most reliable support in his battle against Trotskyism, not just his friend, but also the closest person to him.
The short-lived investigation by the NKVD was murky. Stalin, who had been shaken by this murder, insists on the forming of a commission on clarifying the situation concerning the affairs and activity of the NKVD in general.
To start with, this commission of the CC seals up Yagod’s office and safe [9]. And documents are found there, proving the tendency and actions of Yagod making him guilty, and his connection (and of those of other leaders of the NKVD) with the now underground opposition, which had been formed and headed by those occupying major posts, Zinoviev, Kamenev and Enukidze. We note that at the start of the work of the commission, Yagod is not arrested, but is transferred to other work and designated as Peoples’ Commissar for Communications. Gradually the amount of saturation by the Trotskyites inside the high ranks of the NKVD is revealed [10]. Krupskaya, having become familiar with the material of the work of the commission is horrified, and demands on the pages of “Pravda” “the severest punishment for those grass snakes”. Bukharin, Preobrazhensky, Radek and others having earlier “repented”, demand the same on pages of newspapers [11]. But the investigation also reveals trails leading from Zinoviev and Enukidze into the army. Trotskyite Putna, head of the Soviet Military Mission in Berlin is arrested. He had kept quiet for nine months, and it was only after documents obtained from Czechoslovakia were presented to him, did he begin talking.
So, the military Trotskyite conspiracy in the high ranks of the Red Army was revealed; at the head of the conspiracy was the extremely vain Marshall of the Soviet Union, Deputy Chief of General Staff (that is, of A.I. Yegorov), M.N. Tukhachevsky. On 1st June 1937 he puts an end to his evidence – a true confession made, covering many pages. Many surnames appear in it including those one we already know – Trotsky, Enukidze, Putna… At the end, Bukharin’s surname is called [12]. But a long time before this, the investigation and work of the commission of the Central Committee revealed that somewhere, some threads would reach out towards Bukharin, Preobrazhensky, the same Radek and other officials.
Gradually, a true underground organisation is revealed together with its own people in the outlying regions (Faizula, Khodzhaev in Uzbekistan), with connections in the army (Tukhachevsky and others), and in the NKVD. For a solution as to what to do with Bukharin’s organisation and its leaders, a special commission of the CC is set up, with J.V. Stalin, N.K. Krupskaya, M.I. Ulyanov, N.S. Khrushchev and N.I. Yezhov as its members. The presence of Lenin’s widow and his sister gave sufficient guarantee as to the objectiveness of the commission’s work – they did not forgo the truth. For everybody understands who is of whom, and that not one hair will fall unnoticed without a conclusion being drawn by the commission.
And still nobody finds out the true face of such people in the high echelons as N.S. Khrushchev, promoted to a position of responsibility by L.M. Kaganovich, storming up the hierarchal ladder by 1937 – first secretary of the Moscow State Committee of the ACP(B), like L.Z. Mekhlis - at one introduced by the Trotskyites to the post of Stalin’s secretary, in 1937 – Head of GPU of the RKRA (Workers and Peasants Red Army), like N.I.Yezhov, having in 1936 become Peoples’ Commissar on the NKVD. All that power in their hands! What possibilities they possessed!
One can safely confirm that it was Mekhlis together with Yezhov who were the organizers of the mass repressions inside the Red Army relating to those heads of the military who were devoted to the Soviet Motherland, the Party and Stalin, and thereby fulfilling Trotsky’s same directive.
And some of their first victims were outstanding military leaders, like the one closest to Stalin, Marshal of the Soviet Union, Chief of Staff of the RKRA A.I. Yegorov, accused of conspiracy, although no such evidence was found relating to this, and probably did not even exist. Arrested by Mekhlis and Yezhov’s men, Yegorov hastily shoots himself. Blyukher, another prominent military chief, also a Marshal of the Soviet Union, is arrested and dies in prison [13]. A “case” is made against First Secretary of the CP(B) of the Ukraine, Kosier, who then also quickly shoots himself. His post is then occupied by N.K. Khrushchev the one and only. Having become master of a republic with a size, population and industry equal to that of France and together with this, having occupied a post in the Politburo of the Central Committee, he quickly gets down to work. What sort of work? One can judge this in a letter he sent to Stalin (the letter was first published in April 1992 in the newspaper “Dyelo”, chief editor being A.A. Rumyantsev): “Dear Comrade Stalin! The Ukrainian and Kiev party organisations (in essence, Khrushchev himself – K.P.) are monthly sending out to Moscow, lists for the repression of 15 –17 thousand people; Moscow confirms only 2 – 3 thousand. Please take immediate action”.
As we can see, this threesome – Khrushchev, Yezhov and Mekhlis carried out Trotsky’s shady directive. No matter how paradoxical and annoying this seems, the Trotskyites here, were even assisted by Stalin’s report at the plenary meeting of the CC in March 1937, published in newspapers and directed towards the unmasking by the party and people, of those Trotskyite double-dealers who were disguising themselves behind a party membership card. A good report, but the tragedy was in that within the highest ranks of leadership, this threesome and their ilk were in there with them. The Trotskyites are assisted in all this, by all kinds of petty quarreling and rowing inside the collectives, by all kind of informing and slandering…
Already in 1937, letters start finding their way into the Central Committee concerning groundless arrests and expulsions from the party. And in January 1938 a resolution passed by a plenary meeting of the CC is published, where attention is drawn to all these facts. And immediately, letters and complaints started streaming out about the ghastly affairs, which had been going on by the NKVD. Once again, the CC works on verifying the activity of the NKVD in accordance to what was in these letters. Yezhov is removed from his post of NARKOM of the NKVD and is designated for a time the post of NARKOM of river transport. The commission of the CC, Supreme Court, procurator and various commissions check the “cases” of those repressed…. Terrible cases. Yezhov is arrested. An investigation follows…. Yezhov, somehow unnoticed by the Soviet people disappears from the field of vision. Nothing more is heard of him…. The resolution of the SOVNARKOM of the USSR and CC ACP(B) of November 1938 “On arrests, procurator surveillance and the carrying out of investigations”, also remained unknown to the Soviet people. This was where all these facts about flagrant despotism where arrests, “investigations” about mass repressions had taken place, were summarized. The CC of the party had all the grounds to declare in this “resolution” that: “the enemies of the people (that is, the Trotskyites along with their ilk) having sneaked into the organs of the NKVD in the center of the country as well as in the outlying regions and continuing their subversive work, have been attempting in any way possible, to complicate the investigations and intelligence affairs. They have been deliberately distorting Soviet laws, carrying out forgeries and falsifying documents of investigations, subjecting to arrest on trivial grounds, and even without any grounds whatsoever, formed with provocation in mind, “cases” against innocent people, and at the same time have taken all steps to conceal and save from destruction, their own accomplices in anti-Soviet activity”. We owe it to R.I. Kosolapov’s book entitled “A word to Comrade Stalin”, for our awareness of this important document.
A question is often asked as to why millions of Soviet people did not know, and still do not know about all the documents listed here, including the ones about the Trotskyites and about the affair of Yezhov? It seems the answer is clear: because it helped the remaining organizers, except Yezhov, of this vile anti-Soviet wave of Trotskyite repressions of 1937 – 1938 escape responsibility (then). And it was a success. We note that in the November (1938) “resolution”, a question circulates concerning the activity at that time, of the Main Political Directorate of the RKRA – Mekhlis and other such “die-hards” inside the party as, Khrushchev. For L.M. Kaganovich is visible behind them and these scoundrels are hiding behind his broad shoulders with party membership cards in their pockets (and not just Kaganovich, but Molotov and Voroshilov too, having proved themselves to have been of political shortsightedness by not figuring out Yezhov and Mekhlis). But it was not only this!
The concealing of all these documents allowed the Trotskyites, having survived inside the party, to further organize themselves, and with a lucky combination of circumstances, attack Stalin using slander using the usual method of the Zionists - Trotskyites of shifting their own sins over onto their opponents. This slander is the “ideological” weapon of the Gorbachev-Yeltsinist anti-Soviet counter-revolution. These are those bastions, redoubts and long-time hotspots, which the counter-revolution is clinging onto now, using its monopoly over the mass media. Therefore it is of paramount importance, the sacred affair for communist parties (if they in fact true Communist, Bolshevik parties) to organize and carry out, figuratively speaking, a powerful arch-preparation for the destruction of these long-time hotspots of the counter-revolution. And this “preparation” is conceived in the form of publishing in large numbers, small brochures with all the material on this subject published in them, including the preparation of material for publication. Much needed for the realization of the “preparation”, is a working meeting of the leadership of all such communist parties in order to find a practical solution to the formation of a united publishing fund, where all the necessary funding would be transferred from theses parties, corresponding to pre-determined quotas for each party. The question on who will head the fund will also be decided.
Returning to those distant 1920-s and 1930-s, it needs to be emphasized that by far not all officials of Jewish nationality were Trotskyites (agents of Zionism) in the high and mid-leadership levels of personnel. Quite a few of them were Soviet people – hard line supporters of Leninist-Stalinist policy, such people as for example, Emelyan Yaroslavsky, Sergei Ivanovich Gusyev (Yakov Davidovich Drabkin), Aron Alexandrovich Solts and Isaac Izrailevich Shvarts. Working inside the Central Control Commission (CCC) and in the apparatus of the CC, these old Bolsheviks lost a lot of blood to the Trotskyites and other opponents in Stalin’s battle against Trotskyism. And such words as: “It’s all the same to me whether or not this or that leader is a Jew. It is probably even better that he is a Jew”, were often heard. Why was this so? Because of the simple reason that the person saying it is attentive to the “rank and file person”, he does not deceive, is honest and in short, is a true Bolshevik.
And Doctor of Historical Sciences V.D. Uspensky in his “Secret advisor” does not get around to this question in silence. He especially emphasizes that: “starting from my own clear formula: there are no good or bad nationalities, but there are good and bad people” (from the political point of view, of course). Joseph Vissarionovich led a clear cut borderline between Jews as representatives of one of the nationalities of the world, and between carriers of Zionism. He said that “the main mass of the Jewish population are like everybody else. Zionism is another thing. Zionism is the shock expansionist detachment of world imperialism. And Trotsky and his supporters are aggressive agents of Zionism. For domination over Russia, the Trotskyites are carrying out against us (that is, the Bolsheviks –K.P.) an irreconcilable battle on all bastions – on the ideological, economical and national ones”.
Since Trotsky’s death, Trotskyism has not disappeared, since imperialism still remains, and with that, and Zionism too (in the form of Zionists in their majority, financial clans, oligarchs of the USA and the European “Seven” of NATO). Trotskyism is only constantly altering its appearance, coming out “under other labels”, as Uspensky puts it, and today inside Russia these are the “democrats”. After the victory of their counter-revolution, the Zionists in our country are acting openly and cynically as well as arrogantly. They, together with the so-called “Russian nationalists” are morally terrorizing Soviet people of Jewish nationality, therefore when unmasking Zionism one should not slide into fanatical anti-Semitism. Do not forget that agents of imperialism were and always will be of any nationality, from bourgeois nationalists to all kinds of anti-Soviets. And do not forget also that agents of Zionism always knew how to disguise themselves with unpardonable demagogy, cloaking themselves every time in a mask, which is the most convenient one for that moment, so at the right time they can strike a blow against their opponents. Figuratively speaking, agents of Zionism are political chameleons, armed with the sting of a scorpion. That is why the struggle against Zionism is such a hard one.

NOTES
1. References are to the book by Doctor of Historical Sciences, V.D. Uspensky. Part 1 came out immediately after the GKChP provocation of August 1991, entitled “Bravery”, published as a monthly journal.
2. See 1, part 1, ch.12.
3. Much has been written about the first stage of the struggle by the Trotskyites (up until the end of 1927). Here we refer to Emelyan Yaroslavsky’s “History of the ACP(B)”, Part 2 by “Partizdat” publishers, 1934, and the book “The TsKK in the struggle for party unity and purity in the party ranks”, by Irina Mikhailovna Moskalyenko, published by Politicheskaya Literatura, Moskva 1973.
4. See Emelyan Yaroslavsky’s “History of the ACP(B)”, Part 2, p.173, “A short course on the history of the ACP(B), published in 1938, and also I.M. Moskalyenko’s book “The TsKK in the struggle for……….”. These words of Zinoviev are kept silent.
5. About Trotsky’s “Clemenceau thesis”, see Emelyan Yaroslavsky’s “History of the ACP(B)”, Part 2, p. 190 and also I.M. Moskalyenko’s book “The TsKK in the struggle for……….”, p.128. Nothing is mentioned in “A short course on the history of the ACP(B)”.
6. See I.M. Moskalyenko’s book “The TsKK in the struggle for……….”, p.115, about the instructions of the Trotskyites on disguise.
7. As in 6, but ch.IV, pp.107, 109, 112-116, 129. See also Emelyan Yaroslavsky’s “History of the ACP(B)”, Part 2, pp. 174, 183, 198.
8. The main thesis of Trotsky’s directives, see Emelyan Yaroslavsky’s “History of the ACP(B)”, pp. 203-204, I.M. Moskalyenko’s book “The TsKK in the struggle for……….”, but in “A short course on the history of the ACP(B)” nothing is mentioned about this.
9. About the Commission of the Central Committee on the investigation into the activity of the NKVD, see V. Aleksyeev’s article “Witness” in the newspaper “Borba” (The Struggle) No 6, 1992, and also A.T. Ribin’s book “Next to Stalin”, publisher, “Veteran” 1992, p. 58 and 72.
10. See A.T. Ribin’s book “Alongside Stalin”, pp. 57, 62, and 73.
11. See V. Aleksyeev’s article “Witness” in the newspaper “Borba” (The Struggle) No 6, 1992.
12. See the journal “Molodaya Gvardiya” (Youth Guard) No 10, 1994.
13. The claim that there was no participation, or neither could there have any participation by Marshall of the Soviet Union, Chief of Staff of the RKRA, Alexander Ilyich Yegorov, (the same applying to Blyukher) in the military-Trotskyite conspiracy, is based on M.N. Tukhachevsky’s evidence (see note 12). We here cite the words about a conversation with Yakir, concerning Blyukher:
“Yakir asked me what I thought concerning Blyukher’s mood. I answered him by saying that he had grounds to be dissatisfied and disgruntled with the central apparatus (machinery of power) and the leadership in the army, but that Stalin’s attitude towards him was very good.
Yakir said that he knows Blyukher well and at the first opportunity tries to ascertain what his mood is like. I do not know if such probing took place”.
And so, the Trotskyites had practically no hope of banking on Blyukher, not to speak of Yegorov, of whom Tukhachevsky does not even mention. There was no reason to. Both of them – Tukhachevsky and Yakir know well that Alexander Ilyich Yegorov is a “Stalinist”, his relationship and attitude are of the warmest, one may even say the friendliest, going back to the period of the Civil War. V.D. Uspensky talks about this in his book “Secret Advisor”: “…He (Stalin) fully trusted Yegorov in all military affairs….with Yegorov there was no wavering whatsoever….such was the complete, open and headlong trust by Stalin. Such trust is simply impossible to alter, impossible not to justify. But such an honor was awarded only to a few.
Such characteristics that Yegorov and Blyukher possessed were sufficient for the Trotskyites to deal with the Stalinists”. It was so fast and efficient, that Stalin was shocked by the conspiracy in the high ranks of the Red Army – right up to the Deputy Chief of General Staff, Tukhachevsky and the A.I. Yegorov’s deputy – in the turmoil of arrests then, it was simply obvious that Stalin did not figure out the essence of the affair in time, and so did not defend Yegorov and Blyukher in time.