File 1341/1921 Pt 1 'Khorassan Intelligence Summaries 1921-1922' [‎483r] (613/1080)

13
c
*/
APPENDIX I.
Izvestia, published at Tashkent, July 17th, 1921
A Systematic Lie.
article
TheEnghsh paper Civil and Military Gazette of the 8th February publishes the following
The plenipotentiary representatives of Soviet Russia have now been some time in Afghan
istan, Persia, Bokhara and China. °
Let then the English administrators in India who are so well acquainted with the work of
these plenipotentiaries m Eastern countries, prove by a single fact that the representatives of
the Soviet have violated treaties and occupied themselves with Communist propaganda or
generally speaking, have interfered with the internal affairs of the countries they have been
accredited to.
There are no such facts and the cleverest spies of the English organization will not dis
close them.
If, m Ind a the revolutionary movement is spreading and penetrating deeper, if that deepen-
ing appeals even the leaders of Indian nationalism, forcing them to effect a compromise with
the English administration, the fault lies with the English themselves—it is the fault of their
policy in India.
This is what Gandhi, the leader of Indian Nationalists, writes to George Connaught
“We consider it incompatible with our self-respect further to subject ourselves to this
spirit of superiority and predominance which is ruling herer in opposition to the
wishes and feehngs of a population of thirty crores of people. Such is degrading
to us, and it can be no source of pride to you that a population of thirty crores of
Indians lives from day to day trembling before a thousand Englishmen and calling
themselves their subjects.
“ Your Royal Highness came here not to make away with the above mentioned system
of Government but to assist and to maintain its sorcery.”
While terrifying Afghanistan and Persia with predictions of interference by the Soviet
Government in their internal affairs, the English papers in India forget that the East has learnt
to believe not in deeds but in words and that it values appeciatively the conduct of the Soviet
in Bokhara, Turkestan, China, Persia and Afghanistan, perceiving, in fact, a colossal
difference between the policy of Soviet Russia in its relations with the countries of the East and
that of England.
There is not a single Russian at the head of the Govermnent in Bokhara while the whole of
the Bokharan Soviet of Chiefs, and also the Revolutionary Committee, consists of Muslims
born in Bokhara.
Is not then Bokhara an absolutely independent Republic, carrying out her own policy under
her own observation and in harmony with Soviet Russia ?
Only slanderers can deny this.
CA29FD