The Problem of the Correlation between Ideological Declarations and the Pragmatic Policy of the USSR in the Issue of the Chinese Eastern Railway (1919–1924)

The subject of the study is the problem of the status of the Chinese Eastern Railway (CER) in Soviet–Chinese relations in the early 1920s. The object of the research is Soviet–Chinese diplomatic relations in the context of resolving the issue of the CER as a key economic, transport, and strategic asset in Manchuria. The article analyzes the contradiction between the officially proclaimed renunciation by the Soviet state of unequal treaties and the actual practice of maintaining control over former Russian positions in China. Particular attention is paid to the manifesto of L. M. Karakhan of July 25, 1919, which became an important instrument of Soviet diplomacy under conditions of international isolation, as well as to its subsequent transformation and revision in the early 1920s. The central research problem is to explain the reasons and mechanisms behind the transition of the Soviet state from anti-imperialist rhetoric and the declared readiness to transfer the CER to China to a policy aimed at preserving its dominant position on the railway through the agreements of 1924 concluded with the Beijing government and the government of Zhang Zuolin. The significance of this issue is reinforced by its historiographical debatability. Scholarly literature offers various interpretations of both the content of Karakhan’s manifesto and the motives of the Soviet side, ranging from the influence of the military-political situation during the Civil War to a deliberate combination of ideological and pragmatic considerations. The study employs the method of historicism, which предполагает analyzing phenomena in their development, interconnection, and conditionality within specific historical contexts. The novelty of the research lies in the use of both published sources and newly introduced archival materials from the Archive of Foreign Policy of the Russian Federation (AVPRF), allowing the author to examine understudied aspects of Soviet–Chinese relations related to the CER issue in 1919–1925. Special attention is given to the contradiction between official Soviet declarations on the renunciation of unequal treaties and the actual diplomatic practice aimed at preserving control over the Chinese Eastern Railway. Based on archival documents, the article analyzes the content and political significance of Karakhan’s manifesto, the negotiation process between the USSR, the Beijing government, and the authorities of Manchuria, as well as the mechanisms that enabled the Soviet side to consolidate its influence over the CER through the agreements of 1924.