Foreign Relations of the United States, 1947, Eastern Europe; The Soviet Union, Volume IV

861.00/5–3047: Telegram

The Chargé in the Soviet Union (Durbrow) to the Secretary of State

confidential

Moscow, May 30, 1947—8 p. m.

1942. Embtel 1922, May 27.¹ It is noteworthy that decree of Presidium of Supreme Soviet of May 26 abolishing death penalty in peacetime is not innovation in Soviet criminal law. Death penalty had been twice abolished earlier and twice reinstituted. It was first abolished at outset of revolution, but in 1918 revolutionary tribunals were again empowered to pronounce death penalty. It was abolished once more in 1920 only to be declared “temporarily” permissible in 1922 in struggle against most serious types of crime against foundations of Soviet system.² It was pointed out at that time that its reintroduction constituted a temporary measure “pending complete abolition.” This complete abolition which has now taken place after 25 years may be said to represent latter-day return to revolutionary ideal. It is in this historical perspective that Trud statement that “Soviet Government has always regarded death sentence as provisional measure” must be viewed.

Under articles 58 and 59 of criminal code of RSFSR, two types of state crimes have heretofore been punishable with death by shooting: counter-revolutionary (political) crimes and crimes especially dangerous for USSR against administrative order. As present decree is applicable to all crimes carrying death penalty under “laws effective in USSR”, there is no reason to doubt that its intent is to substitute 25-year imprisonment in corrective labor camp for death penalty with, regard to political as well as other crimes.

Decree’s propaganda value is manifest both for internal and external consumption. Internally, it constitutes most positive official attempt to offer sop to Soviet people for “patriotic unity” displayed during war. By restoring a revolutionary ideal, it must rekindle certain hopes that despite continued oppressive measures Soviet state is headed in right direction. It serves as renewed opportunity for Soviet Govt to assuage popular tension engendered by constant press propaganda of new “imperialist” inspired war by expressing its confidence in durable peace based upon its own “decisive” influence in international affairs.

From standpoint of foreign propaganda, decree appears primarily designed to eradicate abroad any impression of internal weakness. By this act of confidence in and gratitude for its citizens Soviet Govt endeavors to demonstrate that it considers itself in strong internal position.³ Composite picture of self-confident, powerful Soviet state backed by its citizenry determined to move in direction of liberalization of society must likewise furnish ammunition to “liberals” of Wallace⁴ type as to Soviet progressiveness despite hundreds of thousands Soviet citizens who joined Wehrmacht during war.

Picture is enhanced by alleged trade union sponsorship of decree obviously designed as gesture of WFTU to show doubting Thomases that Soviet trade unions have influence with govt and independent voice in govt affairs. Its effect should not be discounted, moreover, in dispelling certain qualms of potential but hesitant repatriates. It is finally instrumental to Soviet propaganda in making invidious comparison with Anglo-Saxon capitalist systems, where it is inferred that death penalty is still retained as instrument of political terror.⁵

Of particular interest is decree’s declaration that “peace may be considered secured for long time.” While this statement is clearly calculated to advertise Soviet peaceful intentions and to reduce war phobia at home and abroad, it may also be adduced as positive evidence that Truman Doctrine has had its desired peaceful effect.

Durbrow

1. Not printed. The text of the decree was herein contained.
2. Regarding the ukaz of April 19, 1943, providing for death by hanging in wartime situations, see Foreign Relations, 1943, vol. iii, footnote 70, p. 849.
3. As sent in telegram 1922 from Moscow the text of the decree began: “Historic victory of Soviet people over enemy demonstrated not only growing power of Soviet state, but especially exceptional devotion to Soviet Fatherland and Soviet Govt of entire population of Soviet Union.” (861.00/5–2747)
4. Henry Agard Wallace was Vice President, 1941–1945, and Secretary of Commerce until his resignation was requested by President Truman on September 20, 1946, because of conflicting views on foreign policy. Regarding Wallace’s letter of July 23 and his speech of September 12, 1946, see telegrams 3484 and 3532 from Moscow, Foreign Relations, 1946, vol. vi, pp. 782 and 783.
5. In a lead editorial in Pravda for May 27, 1947, Andrey Yanuaryevich Vyshinsky, who had been the Prosecutor General of the Soviet Union (1935–1939) during the time of the great purges, had written as reported in telegram 1922: “This punishment (death) was established as an exceptional measure in the general system of criminal punishments. This fact already demonstrates that in Soviet legislation as distinguished from legislation of overwhelming majority of other states, including such nations as USA, and Great Britain, application of such a criminal punishment as death penalty has always been considered not as an ordinary measure of punishment in the general system of criminal corrective measures, but as an exception called forth by necessity created by circumstances also of an unusual order.” (861.00/5–2747)