RUSSIA'S REPLY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 18089, 13 May 1922, Page 9

RUSSIA'S REPLY.

DEBT ACCEPTED,

WAR COSTS REPUDIATED

RAISING COUNTER. - CLAIM.

QUESTION OF PROPAGANDA.

QUALIFIED PROMISE ONLY. By Telegraph—Press Association—Copy rit hi.

(Received 9.50 p.m.) A. and N.Z. LONDON. Mav 12. A summary of tho Russian reply to the 'Allies shows that it points out that the main point of the reconstruction of new Russia has been subordinated to dealing •with past matters, in which a certain group of foreign nations have not any interest. Tho Allies made such a wido incursion into old matters that they produced lively controversies among themselves, and many incidents havo occurred in the last few days, notably on tho oil question, which showed that purely material interests were interlaced with purelv political considerations.

The delegation cannot accept tho prohibition regarding propaganda, unless it is forbidden by tho law of tho land, i Russia will discuss with tho Powers interested the request to refrain from disturbing tho territorial or political status quo. Russia cannot be compelled to assume responsibility to the nationals of foreign Powers for tho annulment of her public debts and the nationalisation of private property. A revolution is force majeure, 3nd there is no obligation to compensate, but in a spirit of conciliation tho principle of tho Cannes reso'ution is accepted and Russia accepts liability for the public, but not tho war debt, on condition that tho losses caused by foreign wars and blockades are recognised.

Russia considers reference to an arbitral tribunal of the questions of war debts, the moratorium, and pre-war debts, makes the • sovereignty of the Soviet the sport of fortune. She agrees that the former owners of property should enjoy preferential rights in RussiaClaims and counter-claims, past and present, should be entrusted to a mixed committee of experts nominated by the conference.

M. Tchitcherin, Interviewed concerning • the reply, said : »»e have now gone as far as possible in the direction of concessions. The expression of opinion which came from Eussia was too imperative for us to go beyond a certain limit. This omni&tateable opinion has; been constantly expressed by oiw workers on tho question of nationalisation without compensation. Publication of the London memorandum provoked considerable feeling in Russia, the Government being inundated by resolutions ' from local Soviets, workers' assemblies, and army regiments. The army is a strong political force, and it must not be forgotten that tho period of intervention and invasion had the result of attaching peasants and workers closer to the present regime, which had become for them the symbol of complete national independence." j