Strictly secret.

To all members of the CC of the RCP

To Deputy Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars Comrade Tsyurupa,

To Deputy Chairman of Gosplan Comrade Pyatakov.

Regarding the letters of Comrade Trotsky dated 24/XII and 26/XII.

(On Gosplan and the STO)

First, some factual remarks.

1) In his letters on Gosplan -- both the December 1922 and April 1922 ones (when Comrade Trotsky polemicized with Comrade Lenin) -- Comrade Trotsky has invariably championed the idea of assigning Gosplan the leading role in the work of the state's economic organs. This was expressed with particular clarity in his letter of 24/XII-22, where he proposed that Gosplan be brought closer to "the role of practical unifier and director of the activities of the organs of the state economy." Who should direct the state economic organs -- the STO or Gosplan -- that is the crux of the matter, and not the granting to Gosplan of this or that administrative authority. This is precisely how Comrade Trotsky's proposal was assessed at the CC plenums both at the beginning and at the end of 1922. There are therefore no grounds, in my view, for accusing CC members of having misunderstood Comrade Trotsky.

2) Comrade Trotsky's assertion that the CC confines itself to ascertaining the chaos in the direction of our economic organs is, in my view, completely incorrect (see Comrade Trotsky's letter of 24/XII: "...I consider it a crime to confine oneself to ascertaining the chaos, and that is what was done at the plenum by almost everyone, and not to seek ways out"). It turns out that in a year the CC has done nothing to find a way out of the "chaos." Meanwhile, it is well known that over the past year we have made considerable progress in liquidating the "chaos" by creating the institution of deputy chairmen of the Council of People's Commissars and concentrating the task of coordinating the work of our economic organs in the hands of the STO and its directors -- the deputy chairmen. Hardly any unprejudiced CC member would dare deny that in the course of the year (from early 1922 to its end) we advanced from "chaos" toward order, precisely thanks to the work of the deputy chairmen, both in the STO and in the Finance Committee. The situation would, of course, be even better had we had Comrade Trotsky among the deputy chairmen. But why is Comrade Trotsky not among the deputies, and whose fault is it? It is Comrade Trotsky's own fault, for in response to Comrade Lenin's proposal (11/IX-22) to appoint Comrade Trotsky as deputy, Comrade Trotsky replied with a categorical refusal, whereupon the Politburo was forced to take note of Comrade Trotsky's refusal and limit itself to appointing Comrade Kamenev. Where lies the crime (to use Comrade Trotsky's language) -- in the fact that the CC, seeking to accelerate the liquidation of "chaos," proposed Comrade Trotsky as deputy, or in the fact that Comrade Trotsky, notwithstanding the "chaos," nonetheless refused the deputyship -- let the CC members judge.

And now let us proceed to the substance of the matter.

1) In my view, Comrade Trotsky's plan to grant Gosplan a de facto leading role in the national economy, on the condition that the chairman of the VSNKh be appointed chairman of Gosplan and that the current structure of the existing central regulatory organs be preserved in its details, is unacceptable. It is unacceptable because:
a) under such conditions Gosplan would either be turned into a subsidiary instrument of the VSNKh, as a result of which Gosplan would lose all authority with the other economic commissariats (the People's Commissariat of Food Supply, the People's Commissariat of Finance with the State Bank, the People's Commissariat of Transport, the People's Commissariat of Foreign Trade), which would be inexpedient and incompatible with the nature of Gosplan;
b) or Gosplan, which is a commission of the STO, which in turn is a commission of the Council of People's Commissars, would be turned into a genuinely directing organ of the national economy (and not merely of industry), in which case the Council of People's Commissars and the STO would, strictly speaking, have nothing to do, which fundamentally disrupts the foundations of the structure of our central organs of power (I will not even mention that it is impossible to hand over the national economy to an organization of specialists, which Gosplan undoubtedly is and will remain in the future, however much we may change the composition of its leadership);
c) it is generally impossible to seriously improve the regulation of our economic organs while completely bypassing the question of the composition and some restructuring of certain of our central regulatory organs.

Proceeding from the above, I think the following should be done:

1) Concentrate the task of coordinating and directing the activities of our economic organs not in Gosplan but in the STO, and transform the STO from an interdepartmental conciliatory commission into a supradepartmental directing commission, introducing into its membership exclusively deputy chairmen of the Council of People's Commissars, plus the chairman of Gosplan, plus the People's Commissar of Finance, thereby transferring to the STO the functions of the Finance Committee as well;

2) Retain Gosplan as a commission of the STO, providing recommendations to the STO;

3) Place Comrade Pyatakov at the head of the VSNKh and give him Comrade Bogdanov as one of his deputies (it is clear to me that Comrade Bogdanov has not been and will not be able to bring the trusts that have gotten out of hand under his control);

4) Appoint Comrade Trotsky deputy chairman of the Council of People's Commissars (Comrade Lenin's proposal), placing the VSNKh under his special care.

I believe that these changes could facilitate our work of liquidating the "chaos."

Member of the CC --

I. Stalin

January 6, 1923

Sakharov V.A. "The Political Testament" of Lenin: Historical Reality and Political Myths. Pp. 658-660.

RGASPI. F. 5. Op. 2. D. 274. L. 1-2.