![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Abstract
British commercial and political hopes to expand trade in the new Soviet state after 1920 were to an extent disappointed. Despite successful ventures by individual companies, in aggregate business fell short of expectations, especially compared with German and American competitors. The reasons were both (micro and macro) economic variables and political factors, in Britain and the USSR. From 1926 the Soviet regime was committed to rapid industrialization and a pattern of imports in which Germany enjoyed some comparative advantage. But, in contrast to major rivals, British governments occasionally tried to use trade as a political instrument to the disadvantage of commercial operations.
Acknowledgements
I wish to acknowledge advice from Dr Christine Clark and Professor Michael Sanderson in the preparation of this article.
Notes
1 NEP was introduced in 1921 and effectively came to an end as a policy in 1928.
2 Data from Dohan, thesis, 152.
3 This is best described in C. White, British and American Commercial Relations with Soviet Russia. US supplies had increased during the war and were more expensive than those from Russia were expected to be.
4 Gay, “Anglo-Russian Economic Relations,” 213–37.
5 Goldstein, America's Opportunities for Trade and Investment in Russia. Goldstein had formerly held a chair at Moscow University.
6 C. White, British and American Commercial Relations with Soviet Russia.
7 By 1927/28 imports were 84 per cent of 1913 levels and exports 41 per cent. See Dohan, thesis, 470.
8 For example, Fischer, Russia's Road from Peace to War; Ullman, The Anglo Soviet Accord; and Coates and Coates, History of Anglo-Soviet Relations, which adopts a highly sympathetic attitude to the Soviet position. More recent are Gorodetsky, The Precarious Truce and S. White, Britain and the Bolshevik Revolution.
9 Williams, Trading with the Bolsheviks.
10 For instance, Flory, “The Arcos Raid,” 707–23.
11 Shishkin, Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i strany zapada v 1917–1923 gg; idem, Polosa priznanii i vneshneekonomicheskaya politika SSSR 1924–1928 gg; Yusupov, thesis.
12 S. White, Britain and the Bolshevik Revolution.
13 C. White, British and American Commercial Relations with Soviet Russia.
14 C. White, “British Business in Russian Asia,” 86.
15 Heywood, Modernising Lenin's Russia.
16 Carstensen, “Foreign Participation in Russian Economic Life, 140–58.
17 Guildhall Library, MSS 10,364, Anglo-Russian Cotton Factories, vols. 1, 2. Petrovsky and Spassky were spinning and weaving plants, Schlusselburg a calico printing factory where most of the product was finished.
18 The papers are in Leeds Russian Archive (hereafter LRA), MS 1178. See also Hernes, “A British Memorial in Estonia,” 351–3.
19 Queen, “The McCormick Harvesting Machine Company in Russia,” 164–81; Carstensen, American Enterprise in Foreign Markets.
20 Ransomes Records at University of Reading, Rural History Centre (hereafter RHC), TR/RAN AD 7/18, Analysis of Export Trade for 1913.
21 Garrett's records at Suffolk County Record Office in Ipswich (hereafter SRO), (I)) HC 30 B1/ General order books, HC 30 B4/ Export machinery order books, 1908–1928.
22 This is taken from an unpublished memoir, “R.P. Elworthy and Family,” by H.M. Clarkson Webb (née Elworthy), made available to me by M.R. Clarkson Webb. I wish to record my gratitude for this. The reference to 50 branches (which I take to mean selling agents) is on page 8. Carstensen refers to ‘28 stores’ in “Foreign Participation,” 156.
23 Grace and Phillips, Ransomes of Ipswich, 8.
24 RHC, TR/RAN AC/9/6. There was some property in the Odessa branch.
25 Whitehead, Garrett 200, 193. It was driven to amalgamate with ten other companies to avoid bankruptcy but this lasted only until 1931.
26 RHC, TR/RAN MF 54, Directors' Minute Book, 1884–1937, 243, 258, 265.
27 Hernes, “British Memorial,” 351.
28 Ibid., 352, and see LRA, MS 1178.
29 Clarkson Webb, “R.P. Elworthy and Family,” 12.
30 A major reason for intervention was to try to stop supplies falling into German hands. Some trade continued through Scandinavia, though on a small scale.
31 Niemann, “Russian Business in the Brüning Era,” 77.
32 Kochan, Russia and the Weimar Republic, 38–41.
33 C. White, British and American Commercial Relations with Soviet Russia; Heywood, Modernising Lenin's Russia, 85.
34 Carlback-Isotalo, “Ekonomicheskie svyazi sovetskoi Rossii i Shvetsii v 1917–1924 gg”, 36.
35 Heywood, “Industrialisation from Without?,” 27; idem, Modernising Lenin's Russia. Heywood estimates that 220 million gold roubles were spent abroad on railway equipment (between 1920 and 1923/24; this was 30 per cent of all reserves in 1920) compared with 20 million for famine relief.
36 Itogi vneshnei torgovli SSSR 1923–4, 177.
37 Shishkin, Sovetskoe gosudarstvo, 57. The articles of association in 1920 specified three shareholders: Krasin, Nogin and Rosovsky, but it was from the beginning an official Soviet trade delegation.
38 Some of this came from unwritten remarks by R.W. Davies. He noted that in 1921 and 1922 imports amounted to 478 million gold roubles, exports only 102 million.
39 His widow, Lubov, in her biography of him, suggested that this was a major factor behind the treaty: Krassin, Leonid Krassin, his Life and Work, 128–9. Variations of spelling are in the original.
40 O'Connor, The Engineer of Revolution, 245.
41 UK Parliament, Trade Agreement between Britain and RSFSR, March 1921, 458.
42 Glenny, “The Anglo-Soviet Trade Agreement of March 1921,” 82.
43 C. White, British and American Commercial Relations with Soviet Russia, 227.
44 O'Connor, Engineer, 275. Curzon had accused Comintern of spying and of anti-British agitation in India, amongst other things.
45 Public Record Office (hereafter PRO), FO 371/9368 1924.
46 White, thesis, 351.
47 Yusupov, thesis, 10.
48 Baldwin's cousin was Chairman of Becos Traders, a trading company representing British companies in Russia.
49 Torgovye otnosheniya, 131.
50 Yusupov, thesis, 9.
51 Cambridge University Library, Vickers Archive, R 215 46A 286.9, Jan. 1924.
52 PRO, BT 60 10/1, “Export Credit Guarantee Scheme: Proposed Extension to Russia;” Letter from British Mission in Moscow, 4 Nov. 1925; Vickers 10 Nov. 1925; Letter from Babcock & Wilcox Ltd, 8 April 1926.
53 Torgovye otnosheniya, 135.
54 Haigh, Morris and Peters, German–Soviet Relations, 133–4, Hiden, Germany and Europe, 1919–1939, 96.
55 Niemann, “Russian Business,” 94.
56 Documentation Referring to Foreign Economic Relations of USSR, 30.
57 Trade and Engineering Review (1927), 28.
58 Shishkin, Polosa priznaniya, 223–4.
59 Flory, “Arcos Raid,” 720.
60 Dohan, “Foreign Trade,” 223.
61 Carr and Davies, Foundations of a Planned Economy, vol. 1, 747.
62 The reasons for this have been the subject of long running historical debate as an aspect of the grain procurement crises that form the background to collectivization at the end of the decade.
63 PRO, FO 371/9352 1923, 185.
64 Itogi vneshnei torgovli SSSR 1923/4, 137.
65 Ibid., 130.
66 LRA, MS 1010, John Bury.
67 Jones and Trebilcock, “Russian Industry”, 61–103.
68 Ibid., 96.
69 Vickers Archive, R 215 46A 286.9, Letter from Berlin, 18 Jan. 1924.
70 Ibid., 98–9, 117–8.
71 Ibid., K 612 4/6/30, report on a visit by Sir Noel Birch and a British delegation to USSR. The credit granted was more generous, with 50 per cent payable over 2–3 years.
72 Jones and Trebilcock, “Russian Industry,” 91.
73 Dummelow, Metropolitan – Vickers, 107.
74 Vickers Archive, R 190, Russian Business - Oil cracking settlements, 30 June 1931–9 March 1936, 113, 116, 117, 173.
75 The central plans, which came to characterize the Soviet command economy, were drawn up by Gosplan, and formally began in 1928. The political commitment to planning is more appropriately dated from 1926.
76 Dohan, “Foreign Trade,” 222.
77 Krasin unsuccessfully tried to persuade party colleagues at the Twelfth Party Congress in 1923. See Carr, Socialism in One Country, 472.
78 The agreements were of three types: ‘pure’ concessions where a foreign company undertook to invest in a particular project and was (theoretically) able to take profits but without having rights to ownership; the mixed concession where there was a roughly equal share between a foreign and Soviet company, and the technical assistance agreement. The most detailed account is given in Sutton, Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development.
79 PRO, FO 371/8161 1922, Concessions of Agricultural Machinery, 100, 17 March 1922.
80 Ibid., 119, 13 March 1922 reporting on Sadet's works in Kharkov.
81 See Sutton, Western Technology, 132–7 and C. White, “Ford in Russia.”
82 Sutton, Western Technology, 150–163 covers this subject in some detail.
83 Johansson, “Swedish Branch Factories in Imperial Russia.”
84 Torgovye otnosheniya, 138.
85 Sutton, Western Technology, 220–2.
86 Latsus, Sel'skokhozyaistvenye kontsessii, 22.
87 Sutton, Western Technology, 114–6.
88 Lena Goldfields records at Companies House, no. 98,785, vol. 4, Report of Directors, 16 Dec. 1929.
89 Ibid., 66–67.
90 Sutton, Western Technology, 96.
91 McKay, “Foreign Enterprise in Russian and Soviet Industry,” 352.
92 Davies, The Soviet Economy in Turmoil, 1929–1930, 33.
93 McKay, “Foreign Enterprise,” 252.
94 Davies, Soviet Economy, 35–36.
95 Butkovskii, Inostrannye kontsessii v narodnom khozyaistve SSSR, 80.
96 Belousov, thesis, 12 and 14.
97 Sutton, Western Technology, 96. One of the few truly profitable ventures, according to Sutton's findings, was the Hammer stationery and pencil concession.
98 Lena Goldfields Ltd, Report of the Directors, 16 Dec. 1929.
99 PRO, BT 3127379/183599.
100 PRO, BT 31 24432 153435.
101 LRA, MS 1178/25, Concession agreement, 15 June 1926. Curiously Sutton makes no mention of this agreement.
102 PRO, BT 31 32687/206055.
103 Soviet Union Yearbook 1930, 207.
104 Before 1930 German businesses had made 32 such agreements, American 24 but British only two; see Soviet Union Yearbook, 211.
105 This is a subject of some debate amongst economic historians. It is well summarized by Dohan, “Foreign Trade.”
106 PRO, BT 60 22/1, Trade Delegation to Russia. This appears to be the same visit made by Vickers which resulted in orders for armaments.