Nabat Confederation of Anarchist Organizations Набат конфедерація анархістських організацій України | |
|---|---|
| Leader | Peter Arshinov Aron Baron Vsevolod Volin |
| Governing body | Secretariat |
| Founded | 16 November 1918 (1918-11-16) |
| Dissolved | 26 November 1920 (1920-11-26) |
| Headquarters | Kharkiv |
| Newspaper | Nabat |
| Ideology | Synthesis anarchism |
| Political position | Far-left |
| Movement | Makhnovshchina |
| Part ofa series on the |
| Makhnovshchina |
|---|
 |
Organisations Institutions Military organisations Political organisations |
TheNabat Confederation of Anarchist Organizations, better known simply as theNabat (Ukrainian:Набат; English:Alarm), was a Ukrainian anarchist organization that came to prominence during theUkrainian War of Independence. The organization, based inKharkiv, had branches in all of Ukraine's major cities. Its constitution was designed to be appealing to each of the differentanarchist schools of thought.
The Nabat worked closely with theMakhnovist movement, often taking leading roles within the movement's institutions. But conflicts between the political leadership of the Nabat and the military leadership of theRevolutionary Insurgent Army led to a rupture between the two, before they were both suppressed by theBolsheviks in November 1920.
In exile, former members of the Nabat became involved in providingprisoner support for their members still in Soviet prisons. They were also embroiled in debates over what to learn from their experiences, with one faction led byPeter Arshinov advocating forplatformism, and the other led byVolin advocating forsynthesis anarchism.
Following the outbreak of theFebruary Revolution, a number of Russian and Ukrainian anarchists returned from exile to the country.[1] Theanarcho-syndicalistVolin arrived inPetrograd and began lecturing about the need for anarchist unity against the rise ofBolshevism.[2]Aron Baron, along with his wifeFanya, moved toKyiv, where they participated in the localSoviet. Following theBolshevik occupation of Kharkiv during theOctober Revolution, Fanya and Aron moved to the city, where they helped to launch theUkrainian anarchist movement.[3] Meanwhile,Peter Arshinov had been released fromButyrka prison and moved toKaterynoslav, joining the anarchist movement inDonbas and giving lectures to the region's miners and factory workers.[4]
As the new Russian government became increasingly hostile, many anarchists decided to leave Russia and move to Ukraine, where they could enjoy greater freedom and put their ideas into practice.[5] By the fall of 1918 the Nabat Confederation of Anarchist Organizations had established its headquarters inKharkiv, Ukraine.[6] Over the subsequent months, the Nabat grew to include branches in a number of other major Ukrainian cities, includingKaterynoslav andOdesa,[7]Yelyzavethrad,[8] andKyiv.[9]
On 12–16 November 1918, the Nabat held its founding conference inKursk.[10] The conference resolved to create an all-Ukrainian federation of anarchist groups,[11] united together under a unified platform to take advantage of the opportunities for societal reform offered by the ongoingRussian Civil War.[12] At the conference,Volin was tasked with creating a "declaration of principles" that would be agreeable to all of the major schools of anarchism,[13] most importantlysyndicalists,communists, andindividualists.[14] Volin's platform of "united anarchism" was criticised by many of his own anarcho-syndicalist comrades in Russia,[15] who feared the dominance of the anarcho-communists in such an arrangement.[3]
The conference proclaimed that theRussian Revolution was the beginning of aworld revolution that would overthrowcapitalism and replace it withcommunism. But they criticised the Bolshevik model of achieving this through the "dictatorship of the proletariat", instead proposingnon-party councils,factory committees andpoor peasant committees to oversee aself-managed economy.[11] The conference also resolved to establish anarchist partisan bands to fight against thecounter-revolutionaryWhite movement,[16] recognising the insurgent forces underNestor Makhno to be the best option for creating an anarchist armed force.[17] The Nabat cautioned Makhno against launching an uprising without aid and urged him to wait for thearrival of the Bolsheviks to Ukraine, but Makhno pressed on with his insurgency, not wanting to lose the initiative against the Central Powers.[18]
In January 1919, the Nabat made contact withViktor Bilash, who brought the organisation into the fold of theMakhnovshchina. The Nabat established a branch in the Makhnovist capital ofHuliaipole, providing the movement with literature and activists.[19] It came under Bolshevik harassment after publishing an appeal to soldiers of theRed Army that urged them to mutiny and overthrow the Soviet government. The organisation appealed for help from the Makhnovists, but harassment continued.[8] On 12–16 February 1919, delegates from the Nabat participated in theSecond Regional Congress of Peasants, Workers and Insurgents, which criticised the repressive actions of the Bolsheviks in Ukraine and established aMilitary Revolutionary Council as the executive organ of the Makhnovist movement.[20]
In March 1919, the Nabat took up editorship of the Makhnovist movement's newspapers, which were printed in theRussian language from Kharkiv.[21] In response to the spread ofepidemic typhus, a decree was published inNabat that demanded the improvement ofpersonal hygiene, under threat of punishment.[22] In that same month, theNabat also published an advertisement that it was forming its own armed regiment in Huliaipole.[8]
On 2–7 April 1919, the Nabat held its first congress in Yelyzavethrad,[23] where the organisation resolved to commit itself fully to participating in the Makhnovist movement.[8] When the congress discussed the alliance between the Makhnovists and Bolsheviks, the congress was notable for being relatively pro-Soviet, with the exception of oneanti-communist delegate from Huliaipole.[24]Senya Fleshin denounced the Bolsheviks for seizing control of theworkers' councils and for establishing apolice state in Russia.[25] As a result, the congress opposed anarchist participation in the Bolshevik-dominatedSoviets, due to their tendencies towardscentralisation.[26] When discussion turned to the organisation of aRevolutionary Insurgent Army, the congress called for it to be established from the bottom-up on a voluntary and egalitarian basis, opposing the hierarchical and militarist conception of theRed Army, which the Nabat believed would inevitably becomereactionary.[27] But Makhno himself did not abide by the decisions of the Yelyzavethrad congress, which were taken without his presence.[28]
By this time, the Nabat was facing increasing political repression by theCheka, which harassed anarchists in Kharkiv and arrested a number of its members in Katernyoslav, including one member of the secretariat.[8] In mid-May 1919, the Nabat secretariat decided to move its headquarters from the hostile climate in Kharkiv to safety in Huliaipole. Other Russian anarchists, includingPeter Arshinov andAron Baron, also began to flee to southern Ukraine, seeking refuge in the area under Makhnovist control.[29] There, Arshinov joined the Nabat and began work editing the Makhnovist movement's main newspaperThe Road to Freedom.[30]
In May 1919, the Makhnovists issued a proclamation that denounced the rebel leaderNykyfor Hryhoriv as acounter-revolutionary and anantisemite,[31] in an article that Peter Arshinov signed,[32] and published inNabat.[31] Members of the Nabat, such asYakiv Sukhovolski,[33] publicly blamed the rise of Hryhoriv on theauthoritarian policies of the Bolshevik party, which it claimed had driven insurgents away from its own cause.[34] Volin himself became embroiled in a polemic withLeon Trotsky,[35] with the two publishing articles denouncing the other respectively in theNabat and theZvezda.[36]
Following the break between the Bolsheviks and the Makhnovists in June 1919, theNabat newspaper was banned by theCheka for criticising the Bolsheviks[37] and the organisation itself was dispersed by the government, forcing more of its members into the arms of the Makhnovshchina.[38] In August 1919, more members of the Nabat joined the Makhnovshchina during its retreat toUman.[39] One Makhnovist detachment was even dispatched to rescue Volin, who was a prisoner of theUkrainian People's Army.[40] Upon arrival, Volin was quickly elected as chairman of theMilitary Revolutionary Council and joined the editorial board ofThe Road to Freedom.[41] From these positions, Volin took a leading role in civilian affairs, while military command remained in the hands of Nestor Makhno himself.[42]
After the insurgent victory at thebattle of Peregonovka, the insurgents occupied much of southern Ukraine, where they proclaimed the extension offreedom of speech andfreedom of the press to all socialist organisations.[43] This allowed theNabat to resume publication in November 1919, beginning its new run by declaring that athird revolution had been initiated by the Makhnovshchina.[44] As theRed Army moved into Ukraine at the end of 1919, the Nabat called for the revolutionary elements of the Red Army to unite with the Revolutionary Insurgent Army, in order to work together in a mass movement against thecounter-revolution.[45] Despite the Nabat's pleas for Makhno to prevent it, the Insurgent Army began to disintegrate in the face of the Red advance.[45]
In February 1920, the Nabat's secretariat held a secret meeting in Kharkiv,[45] where they dissaffiliated themselves from the Makhnovshchina, declaring Nestor Makhno himself unfit to lead the movement.[46] Although they still maintained contact with the Makhnovshchina, they decided to shift their attentions from supporting the Makhnovist movement to concentrating on fomenting revolution in the cities.[45] At another meeting the following month, the Nabat declared the need for anarchists to participate in the revolutionary struggle, but they disputed the anarchist character of the Insurgent Army, highlighting issues ofalcoholism andantisemitism within the ranks.[47]
But in April 1920, the Nabat held a larger meeting in Kharkiv, which reversed the course set by the secretariat. Renewed political repression by the Bolsheviks had forced them to again shift their attentions back towards the countryside and start working closer with the Makhnovists,[48] resolving to intensify their work within the Makhnovist movement in order to shape it into a specifically anarchistrevolutionary vanguard.[47] In their newspaper, the organisation declared that Ukrainian anarchists needed to close ranks with the Makhnovshchina, in the face of theadvance by theWhite movement.[49] At the beginning of June 1920, the secretariat of the Nabat attempted to negotiate an armistice with the Ukrainian Soviet government, but their offers were rebuffed.[50]
The Nabat considered it necessary for the Makhnovshchina to stop fighting a mobile guerrilla insurrection and instead to permanently capture territory, where it could begin construction of aclassless society.[51] The Nabat dispatched a delegation, consisting ofAron Baron,Isaac Teper andYakiv Sukhovolski, to secure an agreement with Makhno on these terms. Now integrated into the centre of the Makhnovshchina, the three delegates began to clash with the insurgent command. As the newde facto political leader of the movement, Baron began to interfere with military decisions and argued with Makhno over which territory they would capture to establish anarchism - with Makhno insisting on it being his home region.Dmitry Popov, frustrated with the influence of these "outside anarchists", even threatened to kill the delegates himself.[51] Makhno himself became frustrated with the Nabat members, whose intermittent presence in the movement and lack of participation in the armed struggle led Makhno to label them as "tourists".[42]
On 3–8 September 1920, the Nabat held a conference inKharkiv.[52] A fresh sense of disillusionment with the Makhnovist movement permeated the conference, which was dominated by the three delegates. Baron passed a resolution against the Makhnovshchina, although this was opposed by a minority that still supported Makhno, including Yakiv Sukhovolski,Yosif Gotman and Peter Arshinov. Sukhovolski and Gotman were dispatched to repair ties with the Makhnovists, but disappeared en route.[53]
In October 1920, theStarobilsk agreement between the Bolsheviks and the Makhnovists was ratified, promulgating an amnesty for anarchist political prisoners, allowing for the release of the Nabat's members from prison and extending them the right tofreedom of association.[54] On 4 November 1920, theNabat newspaper resumed publication and the organisation immediately began planning an anarchist congress to be held in Kharkiv at the beginning of December.[55] Volin, having been released from prison, began negotiating with the government of Christian Rakovsky over the implementation of the agreement's fourth clause, which would have providedautonomy to the Makhnovshchina.[56] But following the Soviet victory at thesiege of Perekop, on 26 November, the Bolsheviks carried out a surprise attack against the Makhnovshchina and arrested almost all of the Nabat's members in Kharkiv, destroying the organisation.[57]
The leaders of the Nabat were transferred to the prisons ofMoscow,[58] where they staged a hunger strike in order to attract the attention of syndicalist delegates to theProfintern congress.[59] Amid widespread protest against their imprisonment, they were finally released in January 1922, by order ofVladimir Lenin, who decreed they leave the country immediately.[60] Other prominent anarchists within Ukraine were arrested and killed without trial. The environment of fear created by the Bolshevik party caused many surviving prominent anarchists to flee the country for a safer environment outside of Soviet control.[61]
Exiled inBerlin, Volin and Arshinov established a monthly journalThe Anarchist Herald (Russian:Анархический Вестник),[62] published aHistory of the Makhnovist movement,[63] and worked together withAlexander Berkman to provideprisoner support for anarchist political prisoners in theSoviet Union.[64] On 22 July 1923,Halyna Kuzmenko signed a statement requesting that the Bolshevik government release remaining Nabat members from prison and cease political repression against the anarchist movement, in return for the cessation of hostile operations by the insurgents, but her request was not granted.[65]
The exiled anarchists of the Nabat turned their attentions to answering why their movement had failed in Ukraine.[66]Mark Mratchny began to advocate for a "transitional economy andpolitical stage for the revolution", to be handled byfree soviets.[67] Levandovsky accused the Makhnovists of operating its ownCheka, in the form of theKontrrazvedka, and accused Makhno himself of running amilitary dictatorship.[68] Meanwhile,Isaac Teper claimed that it had been the Nabat itself that directed the Makhnovshchina, depictingAron Baron as the movement's dictator.[69] On 20 June 1926,Peter Arshinov published hisOrganizational Platform, which advocated for anarcho-communists to form a tightly coordinated organisation, based on the principles oftactical andtheoretical unity,collective responsibility andfederalism.[70]Volin fiercely criticised thisPlatform, considering it be an attempt to form an anarchist political party alongbureaucratic andcentralist lines.[71]
Nabat had a rigid and disciplined organizational structure. The purpose of this organization and discipline was to make Nabat a healthysyndicate and rise above the differences of opinion of the various schools of thought of anarchism. It was organized by federal principles, with regional components that were answerable to each other about decisions made during the general Assemblies, even when such decisions were passed by a simple majority. The Secretariat, a small leading body, oversaw the workings of Nabat. The Secretariat was seen as “technically executive” but had rather expansive duties, including guiding the Confederation ideologically, managing the monies of Nabat, publishing the newspaper and otherpropaganda activities, and controlling what militants the Confederation had.[72] The organization was described by Volin as "union, on a basis of federalism with some of the elements of a natural, free, and technical centralization, which is to say...fusion between fraternal and free discipline and collective responsibility."[73]
The Nabat had branches in many of Ukraine's major cities. It also helped establish a Union of Atheists and developed a youth wing, which grew particularly large in southern Ukraine.[9]
