Greetings, Comrade Kaganovich!

1) I received Patek's draft and the record of Karakhan's "conversation" with Patek. I am returning both documents. As is evident, Karakhan conducted himself during the "conversation" stupidly and improperly. Karakhan failed to understand that after the episode with the French (the TASS denial issued a month and a half ago), no state would dare to take the initiative on a non-aggression pact without risking "unpleasantness" from the "opposition." Karakhan failed to understand that the Poles are attempting to begin negotiations with us on a pact, but to begin in such a way that the initiative does not formally come from them. Karakhan failed to understand that in the end it is immaterial to us on whose initiative the negotiations take place, so long as the pact we need is signed. And so, instead of seizing upon the opening provided by Patek and his draft, Karakhan -- out of stupidity -- pushed Patek away and ruined the matter. As for Patek's draft, it is no worse than the original French draft that served, as is well known, as one of the bases for negotiations between us and the French.

It is clear to me that Karakhan and Litvinov have committed a grave error, the rectification of which will require a more or less prolonged period of time.

Incidentally, why was Patek's draft handed to Karakhan rather than to Litvinov or Krestinskii? Be sure to investigate this matter and let me know, please.

2) Please find out what the following figures are: (a) the volume of industrial production (including the food industry) for August compared with July 1931; (b) the volume of industrial production for August compared with August 1930; (c) the volume of industrial production (including the food industry) for the first eight months of this year compared with the first eight months of last year -- and communicate the figures to me by telegraph.

Regards,

I. Stalin

---

Source: Stalin and Kaganovich: Correspondence, 1931-1936, pp. 88-89.

RGASPI. F. 81. Op. 3. D. 99. L. 21-23.

Note: In the record of Karakhan's conversation with Patek on August 23, Karakhan reported: "As he was leaving, he remarked that he would still like to hope that his conversation would serve as a certain impetus to move the matter of the pact forward. I immediately remarked to him that I did not think this could be an impetus or could move the matter forward, inasmuch as what he had conveyed to me contained nothing new and was merely a statement of the point at which we had been unable to reach agreement."

See: Letter to L.M. Kaganovich, August 30, 1931.