Skip to main content

February 25, 1918 - Serious news about Russia from Eliot Arthur Sproul

Don Martin diary entry for Monday, February 25, 1918: 
Rather a dull day. Did some work at the office. Had sort of a grouch for no apparent reason and “jumped on” the fogies at the office for not being “on their jobs.” Had dinner at Simpson’s with Judge Neal of Chicago and at 7:30 walked over the Waterloo Bridge to see the women and children lining up to get into the subway in case of an air raid. Saw but few. Good night for an air raid but none given up to midnight (The hour now). Went to the office, got the Morning Telegraph proofs and came to the hotel.
Weather sharp but pleasant.
      Don Martin wrote up his second interview with Arthur Eliot Sproul about his tour in Russia and cabled it to New York. It was published in New York Herald on Tuesday, February 26, 1918.
CALLS  ON ALLIES TO BREAK HUNS’ GRIP ON RUSSIA
American Business Man in London explains the Seriousness of Greatest Tragedy
[Special Despatch to the Herald via Commercial Cable Company’s System]
Herald Bureau, No. 130 Fleet Street, London, Monday
     “A world and not a domestic crisis is existing in Russia,” says Arthur Elliot Sproul, an American just back from Russia. “Under the eyes of the Allies the most stupendous tragedy in the history of the world is being played. Germany, with her usual greed and skill, is fastening herself upon Russia, whose better element is unable to act, hoping the world will rescue Russia from the avaricious conqueror.
     “Unless steps are taken soon the greatest markets and the most fertile region will pass under German control and for the Huns to exploit for years to come. This means the Germanizing of a territory and a population vastly in excess of Germany’s fondest hopes before the Russian collapse, which was due to German influence.
     “Who gets Russia really has won the world war, no matter what the developments on the western front, and the Allies should send a friendly commission to Russia at once to bring order from chaos and enable Russia to rescue herself from the Bolsheviki and the Germans.
     “Germany has skilfully diverted the Allies’ attention from Russia under the threat of a gigantic western offensive and meanwhile has engineered a fake peace conference at Brest-Litovsk and schemed for the downfall of Russia to pave the way for a German conquest of Russia, the big feature of the war.

     “Germany can afford to restore Belgium and make almost any terms elsewhere when she is sure of having Russia, which means that unless the Hun ingenuity and mailed fist are thwarted Germany will have material in future for an army big enough to sweep through Europe. The only way the Allies can get payment of their great loans is to frustrate the German schemes now.”

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

‘New war with Israel at any moment’, ‘still digging through rubble’

The news about Iran has taken an ominous tone in the last couple days. Here is some reporting and commentary.  Newsweek on August 18, 2025, reported that Yahya Rahim Safavi, senior military adviser to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, said ‘ We are not in a ceasefire; we are in a stage of war. No protocol, regulation, or agreement has been written between us and the U.S. or Israel. A new war with Israel could break out at any moment .’  Yonah Jeremy Bob commented in The Jerusalem Post on August 19, 2025, that ‘ Khamenei can either “drink from the poisoned chalice” of diplomatic concessions … or face more airstrikes, possibly next time some targeting him directly ’.   Bob also noted that ‘ right now Iran is still digging through rubbl e’. The U.S. attacked Fordow, Natanz and Esfahan on June 22. Two months of digging. No surprise that there has been no public news about that.
Post a Comment
Read more

Assessing possible outcomes of the snapback mechanism

The initiation by the E3 of the 30-day snapback mechanism in the UN Security Council makes everything more difficult and there is great uncertainty about the outcome. Will it be peaceful with a new nuclear deal with Iran, negotiated by the U.S., endorsed by the UNSC and verified by IAEA, or will Iran withdraw from NPT with further military action by Israel and the U.S.?                 To perhaps shed a little light on what the outcome will be, here is my analysis of how the players - Iran, U.S. and E3 - may be assessing the acceptability of the range of outcomes. Four levels of acceptability were used: 1 Fully acceptable; 2 Less acceptable; 3 Just acceptable; and 4 Not acceptable. Four near term 30-day outcomes are listed, and two optimistic outcomes with an interim U.S.-Iran agreement reached within a 6-month extension.                 For the 30-day near term, the best outcome would b...
Post a Comment
Read more

‘Making nuclear fuel’ under the NPT

It is with some hesitation that I take issue with the latest publication of the renowned Henry Sokolski and Sharon Squassoni on August 15 in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, titled: “ Actually, the NPT doesn’t guarantee a right to make nuclear fuel .”  But someone should defend the IAEA and international safeguards! Here are points in question.            ‘ The [NPT] treaty was designed to prevent dangerous bombmaking activitie s.’  NPT is far more complex than that. It is common to state the three pillars of NPT: nuclear disarmament; nuclear nonproliferation; and peaceful uses of nuclear technology. Nonproliferation involves the commitment of non-nuclear states not to pursue nuclear weapons and to accept IAEA inspection to confirm that commitment is being followed. Perhaps Sokolsky intends to refer to INFCIRC/153, which lays out how IAEA and the state cooperate to carry out that confirmation. If so, INFCIRC/153 is not designed to ‘prevent’...
Post a Comment
Read more