New-York tribune., 1918-02-01
Why the Ukraine Reuozted
Demands Recognition Separate Nationality in Federal
Russian Republic
The Mem York Tribune Foreign Press Bureau
From 1.-The London Times''

fore, to mark off the Russian peasant from
the ukrainian. With the peasant the vital
question is not one of nationality, but of land
tenure; his main interest is that the land
which he holds should not be taken away from
him, and that he should continue to hold it
according to the system he has grown accus-
toned TO.
The opposition of the Ukraine to the Rus
sian government came from two sources. The
nationalist leaders in the Rada, drawn from
group of intellectuals who had been foolshy
prosecuted by the old Russian government,
were indignant with the imperialism, or CEN
tralism. of the cadets, who refused to recog-
nlze their national and political claims; while
the Ukralnian peasants looked askance at the
land policy of NJ. Thernoff, who ignored local
conditions and sought to intro uce a uniform
land system over the whole of Russia. II was
on the latter point that the Ukranians made
common with the Cossacks who viewed
the socialism of Petrograd with alarm as
threatening their traditional rights to the
land. On the other hand, the Cossacks, who
had formed political alliance with the
cadets, had little sympathy with the national
aspect Of the Ukrainian question Thus, in
proportion as the influence of the Socialists
IN Petrograd grew stronger. the Ukrainians
and Cossacks drew closer together, both &C.
cepting the principle of a federal Russian
republic. In the Congress of Nationalists
that met at Keff last September both Cos
sacks and Ukrainans joined in resolution
in favor Of federalism.
Heading Off Bolshevism
The collapse of the Provisional Govern
ment IN Petrograd at the beginning Of No
vember set the Ukrainian Rada entirely free
to go its own way All danger of Russian
imperialism was removed. and the principle
OF "selt-determi Of peoples" procla imed
by the Bolshevists could be applied without
restraint. The Rada lost nc time in grasping
the situation. The first danger TO be avoided
was the spread of Bolshevism from Central
Russia to kef. The Ukrainan government
was Soclalist-bourgeois coalition under N
Ninnltchenko himself a Social Democrat, but
IN the prevailing atmosphere OF revolution it
was essential to emphasize the >sociB.i.t char
acter of the government ". Nin..4tchenko
and Professor Hrushevsk. had befose them
the fate of NJ. kerenshy, wto. IN Ia, eyes OF
the masses, had become associa with the
bourgeosie and had failed to car~y through
the demands of the peasants and workmen
The lkrainlan government ct rmined TO
make no such mistake and IN the "Universal." "
published in kieff November 20, it pro-
claimed not only the transferrcncc of the land
TO the peasants, but the establishment of an
cight-hour day and of Labor control over in
dustry. BY so doing it has taken out of the
hanos of the Bolshevists their only instru-
ment for agitation Petrograd may denounce
the bourgeois government Of the Ukraine,
but the Bolshevists of Kieff find little to
justify their demand for the dissolution OF
the Rada and the transferrencc Of power to
tho Sovets of Kcff.
The Ukrainian government, in the face Of
immense difficulties, is making bold stand
against the spread of anarchy TIE task is
difficult one. the spirit Of unrest is
strangely infectious, but it has behind it the
support of the Ukrainian troops Of the Ru-
manan army and of the Cossack federation.
Together with the Cossacks, it is endeavoring
to control the eastern portion OF the terri
tory from kharkoff 10 Rostoff, which it claims
as part of the Ukraine republic If it sue
ceeds in overcoming the forces OF the Bolshe-
visits, it may we'll justify it's claim to govern
from kietf to Odessa, from Odessa to Rostoff.
and from Rostoff to kharkoff as an indc-
pendent state in the future Russian republic