Why did Russia sell Alaska? The geopolitical reason was outlined by Muravyov-Amursky. It was important for Russia to maintain and strengthen its positions in the Far East. Britain's ambitions for hegemony in the Pacific also caused concern. Back in 1854, the RAC, fearing an attack by the Anglo-French fleet on Novo-Arkhangelsk, entered into a fictitious agreement with the American-Russian Trading Company in San Francisco for the sale of all its property for 7 million 600 thousand dollars for three years, including land holdings in North America. Later, a formal agreement between the RAC and the Hudson's Bay Company was concluded on the mutual neutralization of their territorial possessions in America.
Historians call one of the reasons for the sale of Alaska the lack of finances in the treasury of the Russian Empire. A year before the sale of Alaska, Finance Minister Mikhail Reitern sent a note to Alexander II, in which he pointed out the need for strict savings, emphasizing that for the normal functioning of Russia a three-year foreign loan of 15 million rubles was required. in year. Even the lower limit of the transaction amount for the sale of Alaska, set by Reutern at 5 million rubles, could only cover a third of the annual loan. Also, the state annually paid subsidies to the RAC; the sale of Alaska saved Russia from these expenses.
The logistical reason for the sale of Alaska was also outlined in Muravyov-Amursky’s note. “Now,” wrote the Governor General, “with the invention and development of railroads, we must be more convinced than before that the North American States will inevitably spread throughout North America, and we must bear in mind that or later they will have to cede our North American possessions.”
Railways to the East of Russia had not yet been built and the Russian Empire was clearly inferior to the states in the speed of logistics to the North American region.
Oddly enough, one of the reasons for selling Alaska was its resources. On the one hand, there is their disadvantage - valuable sea otters were destroyed by 1840, on the other, paradoxically, their presence - oil and gold were discovered in Alaska. Oil at that time was used for medicinal purposes, and the “hunting season” for Alaskan gold was beginning on the part of American prospectors. The Russian government quite rightly feared that American troops would follow the prospectors there. Russia was not ready for war.
In 1857, ten years before the sale of Alaska, Russian diplomat Eduard Stekl sent a dispatch to St. Petersburg in which he outlined a rumor about the possible emigration of representatives of the Mormon religious sect from the United States to Russian America. American President J. Buchanan himself hinted at this to him in a joking manner.
Joking aside, Stekl was seriously afraid of the mass migration of sectarians, since they would have to provide military resistance. The “creeping colonization” of Russian America really took place. Already in the early 1860s, British smugglers, despite the prohibitions of the colonial administration, began to settle on Russian territory in the southern part of the Alexander Archipelago. Sooner or later this could lead to tension and military conflicts.
December 1868. There is a robbery in New York. Treasury Secretary Robert Walker was robbed of $16,000 by unknown people right on the street—a gigantic sum at that time. Newspapers immediately become interested in where a civil servant gets that kind of money?
Corruption scandal
Walker was known for passionately campaigning in the press and in the corridors of power for the purchase of the Alaska Peninsula from Russia. A special Congressional commission is also investigating, after which a huge corruption scandal erupts in America.
I have in my hands a list of bribe takers identified by a special commission of the Congress of the United States of America.
All of them, for a certain reward, somehow intervened in the process of buying and selling Alaska.
So, 10 members of Congress received a bribe totaling $73,300. About 40 thousand are owners and editors of American newspapers, and more than 20 thousand are lawyers. But who gave them these bribes, and for what?
It is noteworthy that in the midst of the American corruption scandal, something unusual is happening in Russia. The man who signed the treaty with the Americans on the cession of Alaska, the former Russian ambassador to Washington, Edward Stekl, is literally fleeing the country.
Circumstances of the Russian Empire selling its territory to the Americans
At the end of March 1867, editors of St. Petersburg newspapers received a message from the United States via the Atlantic telegraph. It says that Russia ceded Alaska to America. The editors are sure that this is an outrageous rumor spread by the Americans. And this is exactly how this news is presented in newspaper releases. But soon the information is confirmed: Russia really sold its lands to America and did it in such a way that almost all high-ranking officials in St. Petersburg, as well as the rulers of Russian settlements in Alaska itself, were completely unaware.
In the Russian Empire, only six people know about the sale of the peninsula. They were the ones who made this historic decision five months earlier.
December 16, 1866. Russian Empire, city of St. Petersburg. The meeting in the main hall of the Foreign Ministry is scheduled for one o'clock in the afternoon. The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Prince Gorchakov, the Minister of Finance, Reitern, the head of the Naval Ministry, Vice Admiral Krabbe, and, finally, the Tsar’s brother, Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, gather in the hall. The last to enter was Emperor Alexander II himself.
Vladimir Vasiliev
Negotiations on the sale of Alaska and all aspects related to the discussion, both in American ruling circles and in circles close to Alexander II, were part of a secret process at that time. This must be understood very well. Negotiations and all decisions were made in complete secrecy.
After a short discussion, the Russian Ambassador to America, Edward Stoeckl, who was present in the hall, was instructed to inform the US government that Russia is ready to cede Alaska to them.
None of the meeting participants object to the sale.
Secret meeting that decided the fate of Alaska
The meeting that decided the fate of Alaska was so secret that no minutes were taken. We could find a mention of him only in the diary of Alexander II, there are only two lines:
At one o'clock in the afternoon Prince Gorchakov has a meeting on the matter of the American company. It was decided to sell to the United States.
Most likely, the country's leadership made the decision to sell Alaska in the strictest confidence, because it did not want to prematurely advertise the news about the alienation of as much as 6% of Russian territory. After all, there has never been such a precedent in Russian history. But this whole story was kept secret for many other reasons.
Immediately after this meeting, Russian Ambassador Stekl leaves for the United States. He is tasked not only with informing the American government of Russia’s readiness to cede Alaska, but also with conducting all negotiations on behalf of the Russian monarch.
Edward Andreevich Stekl. Russian diplomat, Belgian by birth, who had no Russian roots and was married to an American. This very mysterious character played one of the main roles in the history of the sale of Russian America. Many historians come to the conclusion that while in the service of Russia, Stekl actually worked on two fronts.
Vladimir Vasiliev
Doctor of Economics, Chief Researcher at the Institute of the USA and Canada of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Probably, Russia needed some person who was well versed and oriented in American affairs. This need for such a representative also had its downside, because somewhere, starting from the very beginning of his diplomatic activities, Steckl actually pursued a line that was aimed at the interests of the United States of America.
In the USA, Stekl asks US Secretary of State William Seward for an urgent secret meeting, at which he informs him of the Russian emperor’s decision on Alaska, but at the same time emphasizes that the official proposal to purchase the peninsula must come from the American side. The Secretary of State, delighted by Stekl's visit, promises to talk with the President in the near future. But when the ambassador and the secretary of state meet a few days later, it turns out that President Johnson is not in the mood to buy Alaska, he has no time for it right now.
Alexander Petrov
The Civil War in the United States, a bloody civil war, has just ended. When the state, I want to emphasize this so that it is understood, it was torn apart by internal contradictions. Is it to Alaska? When the world was falling apart over the question of whether slavery would continue or not. What to do with the southerners? What to do with the northerners? Herculean efforts were made within the United States to preserve the country.
Seward and Steckle are not at all embarrassed by President Johnson's position on Alaska. These two diplomats are determined to get the deal done no matter what. They set out to jointly make sure that the highest circles of the United States want to buy Alaska - this harsh land that Russian pioneers spent decades developing at the cost of their own lives.
History of Alaska: discovery of the territory by Russian travelers
At the turn of the 17th-18th centuries, Russian travelers persistently moved to the East. Peter I, who sent them to the shores of the Pacific Ocean, is haunted by the unknown land located east of Chukotka. Whether it is the American continent or not, Peter will never know.
Russian ships under the command of Vitus Bering and Alexei Chirikov would reach Alaska after the death of the autocrat in the summer of 1741.
Vladimir Kolychev
Peter's plan was to open America in order to continue to develop relations with, say, Spain (it was known that it was here, on the Pacific coast, Californian Spain). Both China and Japan were of great interest to Peter I. The instructions were given to the head of the expedition, Bering and Chirikov, to look for some more or less precious metals during, say, the exploration of this coastline and a possible landing on the shore...
“Alaska” comes from the Indian word “alasakh” - “whale place”. But it is not whales and precious metals that ultimately attract dozens of Russian merchants to the peninsula.
But this is what interested Russian merchants in Alaska from the very beginning: the skins of the sea beaver that lives there - the sea otter.
This fur is the thickest in the world: there are up to 140 thousand hairs per square centimeter. In Tsarist Russia, sea otter fur was valued no less than gold - one skin cost as much as 300 rubles, about 6 times more expensive than an elite Arabian horse. Sea otter fur was in particular demand among the richest Chinese mandarins.
The first person who proposed not just to extract furs in Alaska, but to firmly establish a foothold here, was the merchant Grigory Shelikhov.
Thanks to his efforts, Russian settlements and a permanent mission of the Orthodox Church appeared on the peninsula. Alaska was Russian for 125 years. During this time, the colonists developed only a small part of the vast territory.
Alexander Petrov
Chief Researcher at the Institute of General History of the Russian Academy of Sciences
There were indeed, one might say, heroes of their time. Because they not only ruled, but they managed to interact peacefully with the local population. There were, of course, armed clashes. But if you imagine tens of thousands of natives and a handful of Russians scattered over vast distances, the forces are, to put it mildly, unequal. What did they bring with them? They brought with them culture, education, new attitudes towards the aborigines...
Alaska is inhabited by several tribes. But most quickly, Russian settlers find a common language with the Aleuts and Kodiaks, who have unique skills in catching sea beaver. There are few Russian women in these harsh regions, and colonists often marry local girls. Orthodox priests also help unite Russians with aborigines. One of them, Saint Innocent, was subsequently canonized.
He arrived in Alaska as a simple priest, leaving a good parish in Irkutsk when he learned that there was no one to perform divine services in Russian America.
Later, when he was Metropolitan of Moscow, he recalled: “What I experienced on Unalaska - even now I get goosebumps, remembering it in a Moscow house by the fireplace. And we had to ride dog sleds and sail in small kayaks. We swam across the ocean for 5-6, 8 hours, and there were big waves there...” And so Saint Innocent traveled around the islands; he never refused to visit this place.
Creation of the Russian-American Company by Paul I
In 1799, the new Russian autocrat Paul I decides to restore order in Russian America and take control of the merchants there. He signs the Decree on the creation of the Russian-American Company in the image of the British East India Company.
In fact, the first monopoly joint-stock company in history appears in the country, which is controlled not by anyone, but by the Emperor himself.
Alexey Istomin
The Russian company acted in a kind of dual state: on the one hand, it was actually an agent of the state, and on the other hand, it was also, as it were, a privately owned institution.
In the 40s of the 19th century, the shares of the Russian-American Company were among the most profitable in the entire empire. Alaska generates enormous profits. How could this land be ceded to the United States?
The first people in Russia and the USA to talk about the transfer of Alaska
The idea of selling Alaska was first voiced in government circles by the Governor-General of Eastern Siberia, Nikolai Muravyov-Amursky.
In 1853 he wrote to St. Petersburg:
The Russian Empire does not have the necessary means to protect these territories from US claims.
And he offered to cede Alaska to them.
Yuri Bulatov
A certain threat, a hypothetical threat, has existed since the creation of the United States of America. The threat that all lands located on the territory of the North American continent must enter this structure, which began to call itself the North American United States. The Monroe Doctrine set itself the task of pushing Europeans out of the American continent.
The first person in the United States to propose annexing Alaska would be Secretary of State Seward.
The same one with whom the Russian envoy Stekl will subsequently negotiate the sale of Russian America.
Alexey Istomin
Candidate of Historical Sciences, Leading Researcher at the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology named after N. N. Miklouho-Maclay RAS
The idea of selling Alaska did appear in the USA. That is, Stekl, the Russian envoy to the United States, subsequently reported that the Americans had been offering to sell Alaska for several years. There was a refusal on our part; we were not yet ready for this idea.
This map was created 37 years before the sale of Alaska, in 1830This map was created 37 years before the sale of Alaska, in 1830.
It clearly shows that Russia completely dominates the North Pacific Ocean. This is the so-called “Pacific horseshoe”, it is ours. And the United States, if you please, is at this time about 2.5 times smaller than it is now.
But within 15 years, the United States will annex Texas, after another 2 years it will annex Upper California from Mexico, and 4 years before the purchase of Alaska it will include Arizona. The American States expanded mainly due to the fact that millions of square kilometers were bought for next to nothing.
As history has shown, Alaska has become one of the most valuable acquisitions for Americans, and perhaps the most valuable.
Reasons for Russia's sale of Alaska
The Crimean War pushed us to sell Alaska. Then Russia had to stand alone against three powers at once - Great Britain, France and the Ottoman Empire. The main supporter of the sale of Russian America would be Alexander II's brother, Grand Duke Constantine, who headed the naval department.
Vladimir Kolychev
President of the Moscow Historical and Educational Society "Russian America"
He pursued his own policy. He had to create in the Pacific Ocean, in the Baltic, in the White Sea, in the Black Sea, he had enough worries. That is, for Prince Constantine, of course, Russian America was most likely like a headache.
Grand Duke Constantine insists that Alaska must be sold before the Americans take it by force. At that moment, the United States already knew about the gold found on the peninsula. In St. Petersburg they understand: sooner or later, American gold miners will come to Alaska with guns, and it is unlikely that several hundred Russian colonists will be able to defend the peninsula; it is better to sell it.
However, some modern historians are sure: the arguments of Grand Duke Constantine were unfounded. The civil war-torn United States would not be able to capture Alaska for another 50 years.
Vladimir Vasiliev
Doctor of Economics, Chief Researcher at the Institute of the USA and Canada of the Russian Academy of Sciences
There were no military or economic forces in America, it was all exaggerated. Subsequent events clearly showed this. It was here that Stekl played, if you like, the role of such a bluff, disinformation, as they say today, fake news, in order to influence a change in the views of the Russian leadership.
It turns out that the Russian envoy in Washington, Edward Stoeckl, acting in the interests of supporters of American expansion, is deliberately encouraging the Russian leadership to abandon Alaska.
The Russian envoy Edward Steckl, in his insistence on getting rid of Alaska, goes so far as to write in his next telegram to St. Petersburg:
If the United States doesn't want to pay for Alaska, let them take it for free.
Alexander II did not like these words, and in his response letter he angrily reprimanded the presumptuous envoy:
Please do not say a single word about a concession without compensation. I consider it reckless to expose American greed to temptation.
Apparently, the Emperor guessed whose field his Washington envoy was actually playing on.
Secret negotiations: trade and the final amount of the deal
Despite the fact that the US leadership has not yet approved the purchase of Alaska, Russian Ambassador Stekl and American Secretary of State Seward begin to secretly bargain.
Seward offers $5 million. Stekl says that such a sum will not suit Alexander II, and proposes to increase it to 7 million. Seward is trying to reduce the price. After all, the higher it is, the more difficult it will be to convince the government to make this purchase. But suddenly he unexpectedly agrees to the conditions of the Russian ambassador.
The final amount of the transaction is 7 million 200 thousand dollars in gold.
The true price and motives for buying and selling
When the amount of the transaction becomes known to the American Ambassador in St. Petersburg, Cassius Clay, he will be pleasantly surprised, which he will inform Secretary of State Seward about in a reply letter.
Vladimir Vasiliev
Doctor of Economics, Chief Researcher at the Institute of the USA and Canada of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Clay replied: “I admire your brilliant work. According to my understanding, the minimum price for this region is 50 million dollars in gold, and I am even amazed that such a transaction took place on these terms.” I quote almost verbatim his telegram or an excerpt from his message, which he sent to the State Department. Thus, even the Americans themselves at that time estimated the cost of Alaska as 7 times greater...
But how could it be so cheap? The fact is that the purchase and sale of Alaska occurs in conditions where both parties - both the seller and the buyer - are in debt. The treasuries of Russia and the United States are virtually empty. And this is not the only way the two states are similar at that time.
In the mid-19th century, it was believed that the Russian Empire and the United States were developing on a parallel course.
Both Christian powers are also solving the same problem - liberation from slavery. On the eve of the sale of Alaska, mirror events took place on both sides of the ocean.
In 1865, President Lincoln was fatally shot in the head in the United States.
A year later, an attempt was made on the life of Alexander II in Russia, who miraculously survived.
The new American President Johnson, as a sign of support, sends a telegram to the Russian Emperor, and after it a delegation led by Deputy Secretary of the US Navy Gustav Fox.
Vladimir Vasiliev
Doctor of Economics, Chief Researcher at the Institute of the USA and Canada of the Russian Academy of Sciences
The Tsar receives the American delegation, they tour Russia, they are enthusiastically greeted everywhere - by the governors and the people. And this trip was even extended - the American delegation visited Kostroma, which at that time was considered the homeland where the Romanovs came from. And then the concept or idea of the idea arises that a union of two states has taken shape...
The Russian Empire at that time was in dire need of allies against Great Britain. But has the country’s leadership really agreed to cede Russian America to the United States in order to gain their support in the future? Historians are sure that the main initiator of the sale of Alaska, Grand Duke Constantine, had another motive.
Alexander Petrov
Chief Researcher at the Institute of General History of the Russian Academy of Sciences
If we knew what was in Konstantin Nikolaevich’s head, we could close the study of Russian America for a certain time and say: “The problem is solved.”
The puzzle has not yet come together.
It is possible that the hidden motives of Grand Duke Constantine were written on the pages of his diary, which has survived to this day. But the pages that were supposed to describe the period of the sale of Alaska have mysteriously disappeared. And this is not the only loss of important documents.
After Russian America goes to the United States, all archives of the Russian-American Company will disappear from the peninsula.
Yuri Bulatov
Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor, Dean of the Faculty of International Relations at MGIMO
The Americans, as they say, packed in advance the true reasons for the purchase of this territory, the true reasons and sales, including on our part, when in the agreement related to the sale of Alaska there was a clause, the essence of which was that all archives, all documents that are in the Russian-American company at that time, everything should be completely transferred to the Americans. It was obvious that there was something to hide.
Signing and ratification of the treaty for the sale of Alaska
March 1867. Washington. Russian envoy Stekl sends an urgent encryption message to St. Petersburg. He is in a hurry to report on his agreements with Secretary of State Seward, sparing no money on a very expensive service - a transatlantic telegraph. For about 270 words, Stekl pays an astronomical sum: 10 thousand dollars in gold.
Here is the decrypted text of this telegram:
Alaska is sold within the boundaries of 1825. Orthodox churches remain the property of parishes. Russian troops are withdrawing as soon as possible. Residents of the colony could remain and enjoy all the rights of American citizens.
A response message is being prepared in St. Petersburg:
The Emperor agrees to these terms.
As soon as Stekl receives final consent to the deal from St. Petersburg, he goes to the American Secretary of State Seward and finds him playing cards. Seeing Glass, Seward immediately stops playing and, despite the late evening, offers to sign an agreement for the sale of Alaska immediately.
Glass is at a loss: how can we do this, since it’s night outside? Seward smiles in response and says, if you gather your people immediately, then I will gather mine.
Why was the United States Secretary of State in such a hurry to sign the treaty? Did you want to put an end to this matter quickly? Or was he afraid that the Russians would change their minds?
Around midnight, lights come on in the windows of the State Department. Diplomats work all night to draft a historical document called the Treaty of the Cession of Alaska. At 4 o'clock in the morning it was signed by Steckle and Seward.
Yuri Bulatov
Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor, Dean of the Faculty of International Relations at MGIMO
What's surprising here? First of all, we are talking about the fact that the level of signatories, of course, does not correspond to the solution of such a very serious task. On the American side - the Secretary of State, on our side - the Ambassador. You know, ambassadors in the past and present will sign such documents, then our territory will quickly shrink...
Due to the rush, no one pays attention to this flagrant violation of diplomatic protocol. Seward and Steckle do not want to waste a minute, because the treaty still has to be ratified in the Senate - without this it simply will not come into force. Any delay can ruin the deal.
Alexey Istomin
Candidate of Historical Sciences, Leading Researcher at the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology named after N. N. Miklouho-Maclay RAS
They understood that if they were a little late, a powerful campaign against this deal would begin.
To ratify the treaty as quickly as possible, Seward and Steckle act quickly and decisively. Seward conducts secret negotiations with the right people, and Stekl, with the approval of the Russian Emperor, gives them bribes.
Alexey Istomin
Candidate of Historical Sciences, Leading Researcher at the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology named after N. N. Miklouho-Maclay RAS
The Russian side, through Stekl, gave bribes, firstly, to the media in the person of their leaders; secondly, to congressmen so that they vote in favor of this decision. Which is what was done. And it took about 160 thousand dollars in gold. Quite a large amount.
Ambassador Stekl will subsequently withhold the money for bribes from the millions that the Americans will pay for Alaska. Even a check has been preserved, which was written out in the name of Edward Stoeckl.
Whose money was used to buy Alaska?
Judging by the date, the United States settled accounts with the Russian Empire only 10 months after ratification of the treaty. Why did the Americans delay payment? It turns out that there was no money in the treasury. But where did they get them from? Many facts indicate that Alaska was purchased with money from the Rothschild family, who acted through their representative, banker August Belmont.
August Belmont (1816 - 1890) - American banker and politician of the 19th century. Before moving to the USA in 1837, he served in the Rothschild officeYuri Bulatov
Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor, Dean of the Faculty of International Relations at MGIMO
August Belmont is one of the talented financiers, according to the Rothschilds for whom he worked, who headed one of the banks in Frankfurt. Closer to the date of the transaction, he moves to the United States, establishes his own bank in New York and becomes a consultant to the President of the United States on financial and economic issues.
According to the agreement, the US authorities must pay Russia in Washington, but the check indicates New York, the city in which Belmont opens the Rothschild bank. All monetary transactions in Alaska involve accounts exclusively with private banks. However, in such serious settlements between two countries, as a rule, it is not private, but public financial organizations that appear. Strange, isn't it?
Yuri Bulatov
Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor, Dean of the Faculty of International Relations at MGIMO
The Americans, when they bought Alaska, because until 1959 they did not determine its status - what kind of territory is it, how should it be viewed? She worked there both under the military department and within the civil departments. What to do with it, how to manage it? The Americans never got around to Alaska, but Rothschild, naturally, took advantage of his position. After all, on the eve of the sale of Alaska, both gold and oil were known... Therefore, the Rothschild investments paid off many times over - that’s for sure.
An interesting coincidence: the Russian Empire at that time was also closely connected with the Rothschilds through financial ties. Russia took a loan from them in order to patch up holes in the economy, undermined by the Crimean War and the abolition of serfdom. The amount of this loan was many times higher than the price for which Russian America was sold. Or maybe the Russian Empire gave Alaska to the Rothschilds to pay off the huge national debt? Ultimately, Russia received 7 million 200 thousand in gold for the peninsula. But what is their fate?
Where did the millions from the sale go?
A document recently discovered in the State Historical Archives has put an end to the debate about where the millions from the sale of Alaska went.
Before this, there were persistent rumors that Russia did not receive anything at all from the Americans, because the ship carrying gold was caught in a storm and sank. A version was also put forward that Russian officials led by Grand Duke Constantine took all the proceeds for themselves.
So, thanks to this document, it became clear that the money from the sale of Alaska was credited to the Russian Railway Construction Fund.
The document, found by historian Alexander Petrov in the Historical Archive of St. Petersburg, is a small note. To whom it is addressed and who its author is is unknown.
For the Russian possessions in North America ceded to the North American States, 11,362,481 rubles were received from the said States. 94 kopecks Of the number 11,362,481 rubles. 94 kopecks spent abroad on the purchase of accessories for the railways: Kursk-Kyiv, Ryazansko-Kozlovskaya, Moscow-Ryazanskaya, etc. 10,972,238 rubles. 4 kopecks The rest are 390,243 rubles. 90 kopecks arrived in cash.
Alexey Istomin
Candidate of Historical Sciences, Leading Researcher at the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology named after N. N. Miklouho-Maclay RAS
The money from the sale of Alaska went, first of all, to the purchase of railway equipment for the construction of railways leading from Moscow in radial directions, including the Kursk Railway. The same road that, if it had existed during the Crimean War, then perhaps we would not have surrendered Sevastopol. Because it was possible to transfer so many troops along it that the situation in Crimea, a strategic war, would simply change qualitatively.
A note on the expenditure of funds from the sale of Alaska was found among the papers on the remuneration of those who took part in signing the treaty with the Americans. According to the documents, the Order of the White Eagle and 20 thousand in silver were received by the envoy Stekl from the Emperor. However, after the sale of Alaska to Russia, he did not stay long. It is unknown whether he himself left public service or was fired. Stekl spent the rest of his life in Paris, bearing the stigma of a man who sold Russian land.
Vladimir Vasiliev
Doctor of Economics, Chief Researcher at the Institute of the USA and Canada of the Russian Academy of Sciences
The further fate of Stekl once again emphasizes the whole background and all the true driving forces and reasons for this deal, which was definitely very subtly and skillfully carried out at that time by the ruling circles of the United States of America, which skillfully took advantage of the sentimental or naive ideas of the Russian leadership about that it is possible to build a union of two Christian peoples, and, in general, they caused, so to speak, economic and, if you like, moral, as we see 150 years later, geopolitical very serious damage to Russia.
American Alaska – former Russian land
October 18, 1867, USA. A ceremony of transferring Alaska to the United States is being held in Novo-Arkhangelsk. All residents of the city gather on the main square. The Russian flag begins to be lowered to the beat of drums and 42 salvos from naval guns. Suddenly an unexpected incident occurs: the flag clings to the flagpole and remains hanging on it.
Metropolitan of Kaluga and Bobrovsky, Chairman of the Publishing Council of the Russian Orthodox Church
Everyone noticed that there was a problem; they couldn’t easily lower the Russian flag. And they took this, that this was a sign that we were staying with Russia, that this would not happen, they didn’t even believe it yet...
After Alaska becomes American, the rapid oppression of the indigenous people will begin. As a result, the Tlingit Indians, who were previously at enmity with the Russians, will bury the hatchet and begin to convert en masse to Orthodoxy, just so as not to accept the religion of the Americans.
Vladimir Kolychev
President of the Moscow Historical and Educational Society "Russian America"
I know that at the entrance to, say, a store or bar, it was written “Whites Only.” The Protestant school prohibited the use of the Russian language, which was used by both the Aleuts and the Tlingits in part, and it also prohibited its native language. If you spoke Russian, then the teacher immediately sent you a message.
Soon after the sale, a gold rush would begin in Alaska. Gold miners will mine several thousand times more gold than the American government once paid to purchase the peninsula.
Today, 150 million tons of oil are produced here annually. Fish and expensive crabs are caught off the coast of Alaska. The Peninsula is the largest supplier of timber and furs among all US states. For a century and a half now, Alaska has not been Russian land, but Russian speech can still be heard here. Especially in Orthodox churches, the number of which has doubled since the times of Russian America.
Alexander Petrov
Chief Researcher at the Institute of General History of the Russian Academy of Sciences
The Russian language is still preserved, Russian churches and Russian culture are preserved. This is a phenomenon that we are still trying to comprehend. It is unique in world history.
A century and a half after the sale of Alaska, we can conclude that the Russian government took this step, guided primarily by political considerations. Alexander II was firmly convinced that by selling Alaska to the Americans, he was strengthening the alliance between our countries.
But, as history has shown, the Emperor's good intentions did not come true. The Americans made unimportant allies. The first thing they did when they found themselves in Alaska was to station their military units there.
5 (100%) 1 vote
150 years ago, on October 18, 1867, in the city of Novoarkhangelsk (now called Sitka), the Russian flag was lowered and the US flag was raised. This symbolic ceremony sealed the transfer of our American territories to the United States. Alaska Day is a holiday celebrated in the state on October 18th. However, disputes about the advisability of selling the territory have not subsided to this day. Why Russia abandoned its possessions in America - in the RT material.
- Signing of the Treaty for the Sale of Alaska, March 30, 1867
- © Emanuel Leutze / Wikimedia Commons
In the early 60s of the 19th century, Russia was in crisis, which was associated with defeat in the Crimean War (1853-1856). Russia suffered, if not a crushing, but extremely unpleasant defeat, which exposed all the disadvantages of the political and economic system.
This land was ours: how Alaska was sold
On March 30, 1867, an agreement was signed in Washington on the sale by Russia of Alaska and the Aleutian Islands to the United States of America. Solution…
Much needed reforming. Nicholas I, who died before the end of the war, left his heir, Alexander II, many unresolved issues. And to get out of the crisis, boost the economy and restore authority in the international arena, strength and money were required.
Against this background, Alaska did not look like a profitable asset. The economic rationale for the development of American territories was primarily the fur trade. However, by the middle of the 19th century this resource was largely exhausted. Russian industrialists, being far from the “sovereign eye,” did not care about preserving natural wealth. The sea animal sea otter, whose fur represented the most valuable resource, was already on the verge of destruction due to uncontrolled fishing.
Pragmatic calculation
Neither the Russian government nor the residents of Russian Alaska had any idea that the region was rich in gold and oil. And the value of oil in those years was not at all the same as it is today. Alaska was located many months by sea from St. Petersburg, so the government had no real opportunity to control it. Skeptics can also be reminded that Russia properly began to develop the northeast of the Asian part of the country only in the Soviet years. It is unlikely that Alaska would have been developed faster and more efficiently than Chukotka.
- Russian church on Kodiak Island off the southern coast of Alaska. The ground is covered in volcanic ash after the eruption of Mount Katmai
- © The Library of Congress
Finally, only shortly before the sale of Alaska, Russia concluded the Aigun and Beijing treaties. According to them, the state included significant territories of the Far East, all of present-day Primorye, a significant part of the modern Khabarovsk Territory and the Amur Region. All these lands required intensive development (this is precisely why Vladivostok was founded).
The Aigun Treaty was the merit of an outstanding administrator, the Governor-General of Eastern Siberia, Count Nikolai Muravyov-Amursky, whom every Russian today knows by the image of his monument on the five-thousandth banknote. It was he who initiated the idea of selling Alaska. And it’s hard to blame Muravyov-Amursky for his lack of patriotism. His position boiled down to a rational choice, well expressed in the proverb “If you chase two hares, you won’t catch either.”
- "Map of the Arctic Sea and Eastern Ocean", drawn up in 1844
- © The Library of Congress
Russia had to either gain a foothold in the rich Far East, or continue to cling to remote Alaska. The government understood: if the Americans or the British from neighboring Canada took the remote outpost seriously, it would not be possible to fight on equal terms with them - the distances were too great to transport troops, the infrastructure was too vulnerable.
Alaska in exchange for empire
The sale of remote territories was not some unique Russian practice. At the beginning of the 19th century, France sold the United States a much warmer Louisiana, closer to the metropolis and rich in obvious resources at that time. Recent and not the best examples were Texas and California, which Mexico ceded for next to nothing after direct American aggression. Between the Louisiana and Texas options, Russia chose the first.
To the gallery page
In the 60s of the 19th century, the United States and Russia were at the peak of friendly relations. Reasons for political conflicts between states have not yet appeared; moreover, Russia supported Washington during the civil war. Therefore, negotiations on the sale of Alaska took place in a calm tone and on mutually beneficial terms, although there was some bargaining. The United States did not exert any pressure on Russia, and did not have any grounds or tools for this. The transfer of American territories to the United States, although secret, became a completely transparent deal for the participants themselves.
Russia received about 11 million rubles for Alaska.
The amount was significant at that time, but still they gave less for Alaska than, for example, for Louisiana. Even taking into account such a “thrift” price on the American side, not everyone was sure that the purchase would justify itself.
The money received for Alaska was spent on the railway network, which was then just being built in Russia.
So, thanks to this deal, the Russian Far East developed, railways were built, and the successful reforms of Alexander II were carried out, which provided Russia with economic growth, returned international authority and made it possible to get rid of the consequences of defeat in the Crimean War.
Dmitry Fedorov
For some reason, most people believe that Catherine 2 sold Alaska to the United States. But this is a fundamentally wrong opinion. This North American territory was transferred to the United States almost a hundred years after the death of the great Russian Empress. So, let's figure out when and to whom Alaska was sold and, most importantly, who did it and under what circumstances.
Russian Alaska
The Russians first entered Alaska in 1732. It was an expedition led by Mikhail Gvozdev. In 1799, the Russian-American Company (RAC) was founded specifically for the development of America, headed by Grigory Shelekhov. A significant part of this company belonged to the state. The goals of its activities were the development of new territories, trade, and fur fishing.
During the 19th century, the territory controlled by the company expanded significantly and at the time of the sale of Alaska to the United States amounted to more than 1.5 million square kilometers. The Russian population grew and numbered 2.5 thousand people. Fur fishing and trade provided good profits. But in relations with the local tribes, everything was far from rosy. So, in 1802, the Tlingit Indian tribe almost completely destroyed Russian settlements. They were saved only by a miracle, since by chance, just at that time, a Russian ship under the command of Yuri Lisyansky, possessing powerful artillery, which decided the course of the battle, was sailing nearby.
However, this was only an episode of the generally successful first half of the 19th century for the Russian-American Company.
The beginning of problems
Significant problems with overseas territories began to appear during the Crimean War, which was difficult for the Russian Empire (1853-1856). By that time, income from trade and fur mining could no longer cover the costs of maintaining Alaska.
The first to sell it to the Americans was the Governor-General of Eastern Siberia, Nikolai Nikolaevich Muravyov-Amursky. He did this in 1853, arguing that Alaska is a natural zone of US influence, and sooner or later it will still end up in the hands of the Americans, and Russia should concentrate its colonization efforts in Siberia. Moreover, he insisted on transferring this territory to the United States so that it would not fall into the hands of the British, who threatened it from Canada and were at that time in a state of open war with the Russian Empire. His fears were partially justified, since already in 1854 England attempted to capture Kamchatka. In connection with this, a proposal was even made to fictitiously transfer the territory of Alaska to the United States in order to protect it from the aggressor.
But until then, Alaska needed to be maintained, and the Russian Empire of the second half of the 19th century was not financially able to support such a program. Therefore, even if Alexander II knew that in a hundred years they would begin to extract oil in huge quantities there, it is unlikely that he would have changed his decision to sell this territory. Not to mention the fact that there was a high probability that Alaska would be taken from Russia by force, and due to the remoteness in the distance, it would not be able to defend this distant territory. So it is quite possible that the government simply chose the lesser evil.
Rental version
There is an alternative version according to which the Russian Empire did not sell Alaska to the United States, but simply leased it to the States. The term of the deal, according to this scenario, was 99 years. The USSR did not demand the return of these territories when the deadline came, due to the fact that it abandoned the legacy of the Russian Empire, including its debts.
So, is Alaska sold or leased? The version of temporary use has few supporters among serious specialists. It is based on a supposedly safe copy of the contract in Russian. But it is common knowledge that it existed only in English and French. So, most likely, this is just speculation by some pseudo-historians. In any case, there are currently no real facts that would allow us to seriously consider the version of the lease.
Why Ekaterina?
But still, why did the version that Catherine sold Alaska become so popular, although it is clearly wrong? After all, under this great empress, overseas territories had just begun to be developed, and there could be no talk of any sale then. Moreover, Alaska was sold in 1867. Catherine died in 1796, that is, 71 years before this event.
The myth that Catherine sold Alaska was born relatively long ago. True, it refers to the sale to Great Britain, not the United States. However, this still has nothing to do with the real situation. The postulate that it was the great Russian Empress who made this fatal deal was finally entrenched in the minds of the majority of our compatriots after the release of the song by the Lyube group “Don’t be a fool, America...”.
Of course, stereotypes are a very tenacious thing, and once a myth reaches the people, it can begin to live its own life, and then it is very difficult to separate truth from fiction without special training and knowledge.
Results
So, in the course of a little research about the details of the sale of Alaska to the United States, we dispelled a number of myths.
Firstly, Catherine II did not sell overseas territories to anyone, which only began to be seriously explored under her, and the sale was made by Emperor Alexander II. In what year was Alaska sold? Certainly not in 1767, but in 1867.
Secondly, the Russian government was well aware of what exactly it was selling and what mineral reserves Alaska had. But despite this, the sale was regarded as a successful deal.
Thirdly, there is an opinion that if Alaska had not been sold in 1867, it would still be part of Russia. But this is too unlikely, given the significant distances to the central parts of our country and the proximity of North American claimants to this territory.
Should we regret the loss of Alaska? More likely no than yes. The maintenance of this territory cost Russia much more than it received from it at the time of sale or could have in the foreseeable future. Moreover, it is far from a fact that Alaska would have been retained and would still have remained Russian.
View No. 1: “Liberal” or “The communists are to blame for everything”
All my adult life I have come across articles about Alaska. They intricately intertwined two versions. The first - the rotten tsarist regime, criminally wasting the “national property”, sold Alaska for pennies. And another - America leased Alaska and was obliged to return it.
The versions are mutually exclusive and both are refuted by very serious circumstances.
No matter how rotten the tsarist regime was, until its last days it fiercely clung to all its conquests and did not show any willingness to give it back. Among the great powers, Russia needed money the least.
Well, the “totalitarian” Soviet regime, with all its “internationalism,” did not miss the opportunity to grab some piece. Why was the leadership of the USSR so indifferent to the “end of the lease” and did not try to return Alaska back?
It was interesting, but not so interesting that I would try to sneak into the archives or even hang out in the Public Library. But some information fell on me and a “version” emerged from it:
In the second half of the 19th century, Russia occupied territories that it could not develop and protect. The situation was especially bad with Alaska, where it was extremely difficult to reach through Siberia and all contacts had to be made through England. The British were tolerant of this until the demand for furs and leather products began to grow in the world (other riches had not yet been discovered). This is where England began to openly work towards enlarging “its” Canada, taken from France, at the expense of Alaska.
Alaska began to fill with English hunters and merchants, and the next step would be the introduction of British troops “to protect English subjects.”
The Russian government decided to use the United States to keep Alaska for Russia by leasing it to them for a long period of time. But the young American democracy was not so naive as to work for Russia, and even pay for it. The Americans wanted Alaska forever, not for a century. They didn't want to hear about rent.
However, they dealt with sophisticated Russian diplomacy, including with such a brilliant politician as Pushkin’s classmate, Prince Gorchakov. They explained to the Americans that Russia was ready to give them a royal gift in the form of Alaska (otherwise it would be lost anyway), but if England was able to take Alaska away from Russia, then it would be even easier to take it away from the then weak United States. Renting it out created two owners for it. The British Empire would have to deal with an alliance between Russia and America, to which all the enemies of England would join.
In conversations with American politicians and reporters, the Russians talked about the sale of Alaska, covered by a lease agreement. The main thing that should have convinced the Americans was the lease terms. The agreement was accompanied by a whole series of secret articles that have not yet been published. But the essence was known. The Americans immediately paid a million dollars, which was a lot of money back then. For Russia it was a trifle. More important was the right to take Alaska back at the end of the lease. At the same time, a million was considered as a long-term loan with decent interest. 99 years is a long time and the amount during this time should have reached almost a billion dollars. At that time, this seemed to be an almost fabulous sum to the Americans, and they were sure that no country would be able to pay it. However, the Russians were confident that after 99 years they would be able to repay this money without difficulty. Agree that now even one Abramovich or Khodorkovsky could easily pay a billion “greens”!
The Russians knew that no one would remember all their statements about the sale in 100 years, but the provisions of the agreement would remain. They also knew that treaties are easily violated if there is no real force behind them. It took 99 years to create such a force. Plans were developed for the development of the Northern Sea Route, and most importantly, the railways were supposed to reach Chukotka, and in two versions - along the coast of the Arctic Ocean and through Southern Siberia. The difficulties were enormous, but the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway inspired confidence (during the entire period of Soviet power, we did not even come close to the record and scope of this construction, and of the highways to Chukotka we built only three small pieces, the northernmost Dudinka - Norilsk). After the construction of the route to Vladivostok, Alaska became quite achievable, and the powerful Pacific Fleet could well guarantee the implementation of any agreements.
Russia's plan was a brilliant success. England had to leave Alaska alone, but then the sadly intelligent and disinterested politicians who sacrificed their careers and reputations for the future of Russia were supplanted by the stupid and greedy “patriots of the Kuril Islands,” demagogues who wanted everything for themselves now and were indifferent to the fate of future generations.
After the revolution of 1917, through confiscation and simple robbery, the Bolsheviks concentrated enormous wealth in currency, securities, gold, etc. in their hands. However, they could not buy weapons for the Red Army: the West banned trade with Russia. To “break through” this blockade, Lenin offered the United States renunciation of claims to Alaska in exchange for lifting the trade ban. As a guarantee, Lenin offered to give the Americans all copies of the signed agreements kept in Russia and confirming its rights to Alaska. So Alaska was actually sold for the first time.
During the war against fascism, Stalin made a statement in Yalta that the USSR would not lay claim to Alaska, which surprised the Americans, who believed that this issue had been finally settled under Lenin. Stalin simply wanted to portray that he was making a concession for the USSR's right to take control of the countries of Central Europe. So Alaska was sold a second time...
Finally, under Brezhnev, the lease term came to an end. Despite everything that had gone before, it was still possible to try to lay claim to Alaska. It was only necessary to officially declare that these two, so to speak, politicians, Lenin and Stalin, did not have the right to sell Alaska, their actions were never confirmed by the Supreme Council and, therefore, legally invalid from the very beginning. And of course, present the money for payment! However, the General Secretary of the CPSU was not capable of this...
The historians, who in a patriotic frenzy began to publish articles demanding the return of Alaska, were lightly shouted at to shut up... And they shut up. As far as I know, they are still silent.
This is how Alaska was sold for the third and final time.
Fomchenko Vadim Ivanovich
http://historic.ru/news/item/f00/s09/n0000909/
Program participants:
Sergei Kan, professor of anthropology at Dartmouth College
Andrey Znamensky, professor of history at the University of Alabama
Richard Dauenhauer, linguist, poet and translator, professor at the University of Southeast Alaska
Andrey Grinev, professor at the St. Petersburg Humanitarian University of Trade Unions
The program was hosted by Inna Dubinskaya.
Sergey Kan: Under favorable circumstances this is possible, and today it is more possible than 20 years ago. But there are still many obstacles.
Andrey Znamensky: Alaska can become a bridge for cooperation if we remove the last political and economic barriers.
Andrey Grinev: Alaska can be a bridge, and technically it’s not that difficult - you can, after all, dig a tunnel between Chukotka and Alaska and make a transcontinental road. This is a big impetus for the development of the economies of the regions and in general of Siberia and North America with access to East Asia. This is very promising.
Richard Dauenhauer: Politically, I think not, but culturally, yes.
“G.A.”: To begin with, it’s worth reminding our listeners why we decided to devote the program to this topic. In November, economic columnist for the reputable Washington Post newspaper Steven Pearlstein published a column in the business news section entitled “Alaska will feel more comfortable in Russia.” In it, he outlined, in his own words, “a brilliant plan that would immediately close the federal deficit, resolve the dispute over oil exploration in the Arctic and streamline the budget allocation process.” The plan is to sell Alaska to Russia, which once owned the territory, for one trillion dollars. “Now is the right time for this,” Pearlstein continued with a serious face. – Russia does not know what to do with petrodollars. And the Kremlin, saddened by the loss of republics with unpronounceable names, is looking for something to satisfy President Putin’s imperial appetites. The acquisition of Alaska in this sense will be timely.”
The humor with which Pearlstine often peppers his serious analyzes is familiar to American readers, and they accepted his “brilliant plan” as expected - with a smile. The Russian media, although they admitted that the idea of buying Alaska sounded like a joke, rushed to discuss it with all the fervor. As one would expect, Deputy Zhirinovsky added fuel to the fire. According to the Deputy Speaker of the State Duma, the return of Alaska will become a great national holiday for Russia, and Russia will then be present on three continents. Zhirinovsky mentioned that Alaska, “as is known,” was leased to the United States. Similar statements have flooded Russian-language Internet sites. Professor Grinev, let's dot the i's regarding the lease and sale of Alaska.
A.G.: Discussions that Alaska was allegedly not sold in 1867, but leased for 99 years, have been going on since World War II in Russia and the USSR. But there is no basis for this, because, according to the treaty that was concluded in 1867, Alaska unambiguously, finally and irrevocably becomes the full property of the United States. It is unlikely that it will ever come back, even for a trillion dollars, which are not in the Russian treasury.
“G.A.”: Where did the talk about rent come from then?
S.K.: It seems to me that the myth that Alaska was not sold is somehow connected with the declaration of the Soviet government in 1917 that it did not recognize the agreements concluded by Tsarist Russia. But these myths and dreams feed nationalism. It seems to me that this is the Stalinist empire, which developed very strongly after the war. Under this sauce it was very good to say that this is “ours”, that it can be returned. And when now Putin’s government also has a very imperial lining... this is attractive. Zhirinovsky may laugh, but he is not alone.
A.Z.: I would like to highlight two points. First, before Alaska was sold, there was talk about leasing it, and this was discussed in journalism. Maybe this kind of journalistic myth survived until Stalin’s times, and then was renewed in connection with Russian-Soviet nationalism.
“G.A.”: Or maybe this was due to the fact that 12 years before the sale, during the Crimean War, the board of the Russian-American company feared that England might seize Alaska. And then the board formalized the sale of the Alaska properties to the United States for a period of three years with the right to buy. Which is exactly what happened. Does this episode of history influence the formation of the rental myth?
A.Z.: Of course. This is exactly the second point that I wanted to draw attention to - how myths are formed. The first is newspapers, the second is fiction. After all, no one reads historical works except for a narrow group of specialists.
<Звонок из Казани>: Wouldn't it be better to first find out the opinions of US citizens living in Alaska through a survey or referendum? If they speak out for self-determination, could the US consider the citizens' views and allow Alaska to self-determinate?
“G.A.”: It was no coincidence that we invited our experts to the studio: they were the ones who conducted the surveys. In particular, Professor Kahn is the author of a book published in America in English, “Eternal Memory: Tlingit Culture and Russian Orthodox Christianity over Two Centuries.” What can you say about the spiritual and physical connections of the Alaska Native population with Russia?
S.K.: Without any survey, 99.9% of Alaskans probably won’t want to be part of Russia. By the way, emigration is so far going in one direction - there are many Russian citizens in Alaska who do not intend to return, they live well, and I have not met any Americans who would permanently settle on that side.
R.D.: I agree with Professor Kahn. I would like to add that without Baranov and without the Russian-American company, Alaska would have become part of England or Canada. In general, Alaska belongs to the indigenous people.
“G.A.”: Professor Grinev, in your book “Tlingit Indians in Russian America,” which was published in English translation last year, it is said that the first meeting of the indigenous Tlingit population with the Russian explorer Alexei Chirikov in the coastal zone in the southwest Alaska occurred in 1741. How did the presence of Russian, and then British and American travelers and salesmen affect the culture and social status of the indigenous peoples of Alaska?
A.G.: The question is very ambiguous, because the Russian presence had a very significant impact on certain native groups. First of all, these are the Aleuts, who were all baptized Orthodox and are still so, a lot of words and cultural elements were borrowed. The Kodiak Eskimos were very strongly affected. To a lesser extent, the Chugach Eskimos and Tanaina Indians. The same Tlingits - they were influenced not only by the Russians, but also to a large extent by the British and Americans. The same can be said about the Bering Sea Eskimos. The inland Athapascans were influenced by the Russians and the British. Thus, the aborigines were influenced from different sides, and the influence of the Russians was maximum on four peoples - the Aleuts, Kodiak Eskimos, Chugachs and Tanaina.
S.K.: I agree with Professor Dauenhauer. When we say who owns Alaska, it actually belongs to the original indigenous people. But now we can’t turn back. On the issue of Russian influence, my position is centrist. I do not accept the complete denigration of Russian influence, which Russian historians and writers have done. But I also do not agree with the idealization of Russian America of this period. In addition, it is necessary to separate the influence of the Russian Church from the behavior of employees of the Russian-American company. Many of the same Aleuts died at the hands of the Russians; they were, to some extent, turned into serfs of the company. Therefore, it is understandable that there was resistance.
<Звонок из Беларуси>: Why doesn’t anyone have a question about granting independence to Alaska?
S.K.: In Alaska, the majority of the population is non-native. Therefore, the option of indigenous people having their own government is absolutely unrealistic. There are representatives of these residents in the Alaska parliament, who play a fairly large role in politics and economics. But it is absolutely impossible to imagine the state of Alaska under the leadership of only indigenous people. Also, Alaska is very dependent on the federal government, and I think if Alaska declared independence, its economy would suffer greatly.
R.D.: Yes, I agree.
“G.A.”: How great is the influence of Russian culture and Orthodoxy in Alaska today?
R.D.: The influence is very great. Soon there will be a holiday of the Nativity of Christ according to the old style. The custom of carols is preserved, especially among the Eskimos and Aleuts. And of course, Easter traditions, Easter cake, and also a bathhouse.
<Звонок из Риги>: What can you say about the legalization of marijuana in Alaska?
R.D.: Currently, growing marijuana is illegal, but it used to be legal for many years. This issue comes up quite often during elections.
“G.A.”: Since the topic of our conversation is quite hypothetical, I want to ask a question: what fate would befall Alaska if it remained part of Russia?
A.G.: There would be what was in Eastern Siberia during the times of Tsarist Russia and the USSR. There would be collective farms, a Gulag department, missile bases...
A.Z.: I see a slowdown in economic development, stagnation and a nationalist policy in Russia aimed at expanding territories. We would get “developed socialism” there.
S.K.: We must not forget that Siberia and Chukotka in Tsarist Russia were the end of the world. Alaska was also so far from Russia that it would have been a second Sakhalin, there would have been some kind of penal servitude, then the Gulag. The indigenous people would have suffered greatly - they would have been arrested for spying for America and Canada.
“G.A.”: Could modern Alaska fit into modern Russia?
S.K.: I don’t think so. When you started the show, you mentioned the bridge. It is interesting that after the fall of the Union and during perestroika, there were attempts to establish tourism between Alaska and Siberia. Residents of Siberia, including indigenous people, came to Alaska with pleasure. It was possible to fly to Magadan, but my American friends said that there was nothing to do there - it was boring and uninteresting. I think that Alaska, with all its problems, the indigenous people have their own grievances against both the state and federal governments. However, this is a democratic state where the rights of indigenous people are respected, they have advantages in finding work, and a strong political voice.
It seems to me that such a situation does not yet exist for the indigenous inhabitants of Chukotka and the Far East. I'm not even talking about the traditions of democracy, which contrasts with the tradition of a “strong hand”. On the one hand, Moscow continues to try to control the Far East and Siberia, on the other hand, everyone points to the Governor of Chukotka Abramovich, how he perfectly arranged everything there. I'm not sure how wonderful it is. Plus, you can’t put everything on a person. It seems to me that the Russian political system still places great emphasis on the individual: he’s a good governor. What will happen tomorrow? In Alaska, the model is American: one governor is good, another is worse, but the life of the state does not fundamentally change due to a change in leader.
The economy is completely different. Maybe someday, when the Russian economy truly becomes a market one, and the political system becomes truly democratic, then hypothetically we can say that Alaska will somehow fit in. Today, Alaskan citizens, including native residents, live much better and calmer than most residents of the outskirts of Siberia and the Far East. Of course, I'm not talking about the so-called new Russians and people who earn big money on the other side of the Bering Strait. For the average resident of Magadan or Anadyr, life is much more difficult in all respects from the point of view of preserving traditional culture than for the average resident of Alaska.
R.D.: I agree with Professor Kahn. Things got better for indigenous peoples after the Cold War. They were able to travel to Russia, and people from Siberia traveled to Alaska. We feel close to Siberia and the Far East. There is an exchange between Anchorage and Khabarovsk, Juneau and Vladivostok. This is very good.
<Звонок из Казани>: How close is the relationship between Chukotka and Alaska now?
“G.A.”: The collapse of the USSR made it possible to restore ties between Chukotka and Alaska. Although, as it turns out, even in the darkest Stalinist times these connections were not interrupted. In the Politburo archive there is a report to Suslov from 1947 that the Chukchi travel to Alaska and return with the news that “the stores have everything.” And Suslov ordered to strengthen political work in Chukotka.
S.K.: It seems to me that the connection is not yet very powerful. More natives are coming to Alaska, not the other way around.
“G.A.”: What can such cooperation bring to Chukotka and Alaska?
A.G.: This is a question more likely for an economist than for a historian. In Chukotka, in addition to the development of tourism, perhaps some joint projects for the development of natural mineral resources, infrastructure development, cultural exchanges. The deep regions of Siberia can also be included here. In this wide range, cooperation can be quite favorable for both Alaska and Chukotka.
A.Z.: While working in Alaska, I met groups of indigenous people who came to vacation in Anchorage. When I asked them why they didn’t go south or to the sea, they answered that Alaska was better for them than the Black Sea. Communication between hospitals has been established and is growing.
“G.A.”: In the United States, there is concern for the environmental future of Alaska. Any project for the economic development of the region’s riches is subject to biased analysis - and is often rejected as threatening traditional culture, fauna or other aspects. Is it possible – and is it necessary – to explore Alaska? Wouldn’t it be more profitable to leave it as a cultural and natural reserve, since tourism to Alaska is gaining growing popularity?
A.Z.: Of course, it’s good to leave it environmentally friendly. But the debate over resource development comes as access to Middle Eastern oil resources becomes more difficult. We do not know how this issue will be resolved. Hence the attention to Russian oil resources, which Russia is now very actively exploiting for its own benefit.
A.G.: I agree: indeed, it would be good to leave Alaska as untouched land, where the indigenous people could at least partially reproduce their traditional culture. But I’m afraid that this will not work, because the world’s consumption of oil, gas and other mineral resources is growing, and sooner or later the American government will have to open Alaska’s storehouses and begin efficient and vigorous production. Alaska will lose its nature reserve status.
S.K.: On environmental issues, I also remain on a centrist position. It seems to me that turning Alaska into a nature reserve is impossible. Alaskans themselves, including Natives, would say that Alaska will become a playground for wealthy people from San Francisco. When the debate over the Arctic Wildlife Refuge was going on, the Athabascans, who still hunt deer, were very unhappy and fought it. And the Inuit were in favor. This does not mean that nature should be destroyed, but people need work, and it is very difficult to find it in Alaska. The state is very dependent on the federal government and oil money.
“G.A.”: At the end of the program, I would like to recall the fate of the seven million dollars for which Russia sold Alaska. The Russian Ambassador in Washington received a substantial bonus. One hundred thousand dollars were written off, as stated in the documents, “for needs known to the emperor.” In fact, this money was paid to American newspaper publishers for articles proving the usefulness of the Alaska acquisition. The US public was against it. There were voices in Congress: “Why spend money on snowdrifts?”
Eighty percent of the money was claimed by Russia in gold. The ingots were loaded onto the American ship Orkney, which mysteriously sank in the Baltic Sea in complete calm. The surviving sailors were silent about what happened. The most bizarre rumors were circulating. So, perhaps the official of the financial department in St. Petersburg was right when he put forward the most original argument against the sale of Alaska: “They will steal it anyway”... Nothing more is known about this.
http://www.voanews.com/russian/archive/2006-01/2006-01-21-voa2.cfm
View #3: Facts
The idea of the sale came from Russia, its author was Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich (younger brother of Alexander II), who first voiced this proposal in the spring of 1857 in a special letter to the Minister of Foreign Affairs A. M. Gorchakov. The position of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was to study the issue, and it was decided to postpone its implementation until the expiration of the RAC privileges in 1862. And then the issue temporarily became irrelevant due to the American Civil War.
On December 16, 1866, a special meeting was held, which was attended by Alexander II, Grand Duke Constantine, the ministers of finance and the naval ministry, and the Russian envoy in Washington, Baron Eduard Stekl. All participants approved the idea of sale. At the proposal of the Ministry of Finance, a threshold amount was determined - no less than $5 million. On December 22, 1866, Alexander II approved the border of the territory. In March 1867, Steckle arrived in Washington and formally approached Secretary of State William Seward.
The signing of the treaty took place on March 30, 1867 in Washington. The transaction cost was $7.2 million in gold. The entire Alaska Peninsula, a coastal strip 10 miles wide south of Alaska along the western coast of British Columbia, passed to the United States; Alexandra archipelago; Aleutian Islands, islands in the Bering Sea: St. Lawrence, St. Matthew, Nunivak and the Pribilof Islands - St. Paul and St. George. The total size of the land territory ceded to Russia was 1,519 thousand square meters. km, which amounted to 0.0004 cents per square meter.
The US Senate, represented by the Foreign Relations Committee, expressed doubts about the advisability of such a burdensome acquisition, especially in a situation where the country had just ended a civil war. However, the deal was approved with 37 votes in favor and two votes against. On May 3, the treaty was signed by Alexander II (ratified). On June 8, the instruments of ratification were exchanged in Washington.
On October 18, 1867, Alaska was officially ceded to the United States. On the Russian side, the transfer protocol was signed by Captain A. A. Peschurov, after which the flag of the Russian Empire was lowered and the US flag was raised.
On the same day, the Gregorian calendar in force in the United States was introduced. Thus, Alaskans went to bed on October 6th and woke up on October 18th. The feasibility of acquiring Alaska became obvious thirty years later, when gold was discovered in the Klondike and the famous “gold rush” began.
The decision to allocate funds provided for in the treaty was made by the House of Representatives of the US Congress a year later. On August 1, 1868, Stekl received a check from the Treasury. He transferred the amount of 7 million 35 thousand dollars, according to instructions, to London. The remaining 165 thousand were overhead expenses (including 21 thousand - Stekl's remuneration from the government). It is believed that about $100 thousand of this amount was spent on bribing American officials.
March 30, 1867
Treaty concerning the Cession of the Russian Possessions in North America by his Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias to the United States of America; Concluded March 30, 1867; Ratified by the United States May 28, 1867; Exchanged June 20, 1867; Proclaimed by the United States June 20, 1867.
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
A PROCLAMATION.
Whereas a treaty between the United States of America and his Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias was concluded and signed by their respective plenipotentiaries at the city of Washington, on the thirtieth day of March, last, which treaty, being in English and French languages , is, word for word as follows:
(the French version is omitted for brevity)
The United States of America and His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, being desirous of strengthening, if possible, the good understanding which exists between them, have, for that purpose, appointed as their Plenipotentiaries: the President of the United States, William H. Seward, Secretary of State; and His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, the Privy Councilor Edward de Stoeckl, his Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to the United States.
And the said Plenipotentiaries, having exchanged their full powers, which were found to be in due form, have agreed upon and signed the following articles:
ARTICLE I.
His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias agrees to cede to the United States, by this convention, immediately upon the exchange of the ratifications thereof, all the territory and dominion now possessed by his said Majesty on the continent of America and in the adjacent islands , the same being contained within the geographical limits herein set forth, to wit: The eastern limit is the line of demarcation between the Russian and the British possessions in North America, as established by the convention between Russia and Great Britain, of February 28 - 16, 1825, and described in Articles III and IV of said convention, in the following terms:
"Commencing from the southernmost point of the island called Prince of Wales Island, which point lies in the parallel of 54 degrees 40 minutes north latitude, and between the 131st and the 133d degree of west longitude, (meridian of Greenwich,) the said line shall ascend to the north along the channel called Portland channel, as far as the point of the continent where it strikes the 56th degree of north latitude; from this last-mentioned point, the line of demarcation shall follow the summit of the mountains located parallel to the coast as far as the point of intersection of the 141st degree of west longitude, (of the same meridian;) and finally, from the said point of intersection, the said meridian line of the 141st degree, in its prolongation as far as the Frozen ocean. "IV. With reference to the line of demarcation laid down in the preceding article, it is understood -"1st. That the island called Prince of Wales Island shall belong wholly to Russia," (now, by this cession, to the United States.)
"2d. That whenever the summit of the mountains which extend in a direction parallel to the coast from the 56th degree of north latitude to the point of intersection of the 141st degree of west longitude shall prove to be at the distance of more than ten marine leagues from the ocean, the limit between the British possessions and the line of coast which is to belong to Russia as above mentioned (that is to say, the limit to the possessions ceded by this convention) shall be formed by a line parallel to the winding of the coast, and which shall never exceed the distance of ten marine leagues therefrom."
The western limit within which the territories and dominion conveyed, are contained, passes through a point in Behring's straits on the parallel of sixty-five degrees thirty minutes north latitude, at its intersection by the meridian which passes midway between the islands of Krusenstern , or Ignalook, and the island of Ratmanoff, or Noonarbook, and proceeds due north, without limitation, into the same Frozen ocean. The same western limit, beginning at the same initial point, proceeds then in a course nearly southwest through Behring"s straits and Behring's sea, so as to pass midway between the northwest point of the island of St. Lawrence and the southeast point of Cape Choukotski, to the meridian of one hundred and seventy-two west longitude; then, from the intersection of that meridian, in a south-westerly direction, so as to pass midway between the island of Attou and the Copper island of the Kormandorski couplet or group in the North Pacific ocean, to the meridian of one hundred and ninety- three degrees west longitude, so as to include in the territory conveyed the whole of the Aleutian islands east of that meridian.
ARTICLE II.
In the cession of territory and dominion made by the preceding article are included the right of property in all public lots and squares, vacant lands, and all public buildings, fortifications, barracks, and other edifices which are not private individual property. It is, however, understood and agreed, that the churches which have been built in the ceded territory by the Russian government, shall remain the property of such members of the Greek Oriental Church resident in the territory, as may choose to worship therein. Any government archives, papers, and documents relative to the territory and dominion aforesaid, which may be now existing there, will be left in the possession of the agent of the United States; but an authenticated copy of such of them as may be required, will be, at all times, given by the United States to the Russian government, or to such Russian officers or subjects as they may apply for.
ARTICLE III.
The inhabitants of the ceded territory, according to their choice, reserving their natural allegiance, may return to Russia within three years; but if they should prefer to remain in the ceded territory, they, with the exception of uncivilized native tribes, shall be admitted to the enjoyment of all the rights, advantages, and immunities of citizens of the United States, and shall be maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty, property, and religion. The uncivilized tribes will be subject to such laws and regulations as the United States may, from time to time, adopt in regard to aboriginal tribes of that country.
ARTICLE IV.
His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias shall appoint, with convenient despatch, an agent or for the purpose of formally delivering to a similar agent or agents appointed on behalf of the United States, the territory, dominion, property, dependencies and appurtenances which are ceded as above, and for doing any other act which may be necessary in regard thereto. But the cession, with the right of immediate possession, is nevertheless to be considered complete and absolute on the exchange of ratifications, without waiting for such formal delivery.
ARTICLE V.
Immediately after the exchange of the ratifications of this convention, any fortifications or military posts which may be in the ceded territory shall be delivered to the agent of the United States, and any Russian troops which may be in the territory shall be withdrawn as soon as may be reasonably and conveniently practical.
ARTICLE VI.
In consideration of the cession aforesaid, the United States agree to pay at the treasury in Washington, within ten months after the exchange of the ratifications of this convention, to the diplomatic representative or other agent of his Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, duly authorized to receive the same, seven million two hundred thousand dollars in gold. The cession of territory and dominion herein made is hereby declared to be free and unencumbered by any reservations, privileges, franchises, grants, or possessions, by any associated companies, whether corporate or incorporate, Russian or any other, or by any parties, except merely private individual property holders; and the cession hereby made, conveys all the rights, franchises, and privileges now belonging to Russia in the said territory or dominion, and appurtenances thereto.
ARTICLE VII.
When this convention shall have been duly ratified by the President of the United States, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, on the one part, and on the other by his Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, the ratifications shall be exchanged at Washington within three months from the date hereof, or sooner if possible.
In faith whereof, the respective plenipotentiaries have signed this convention, and thereto affixed the seals of their arms.
Done at Washington, the thirtieth day of March, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-seven.
WILLIAM H. SEWARD.
EDOUARD DE STOECKL.
And whereas the said Treaty has been duly ratified on both parts, and the respective ratifications of the same were exchanged at Washington on this twentieth day of June, by William H. Seward, Secretary of State of the United States, and the Privy Counsellor Edward de Stoeckl, the Envoy Extraordinary of His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, on the part of their respective governments, Now, therefore, be it known that I, Andrew Johnson, President of the United States of America, have caused the said Treaty to be made public, to the end that the same and every clause and article thereof may be observed and fulfilled with good faith by the United States and the citizens thereof.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.
Done at the city of Washington, this twentieth day of June in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-seven, and of the Independence of the United States the ninety-first.
ANDREW JOHNSON
By the President:
William H Seward, Secretary of State
* * *
View #4: Investigative Journalism
The issue of ceding Alaska was postponed for many years. During this time, an initiative group of supporters of the sale was formed: Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, Minister of Finance M.H. Reutern and the envoy to the United States of North America, Baron E.A. Stekl.
Each of them has their own role: the Grand Duke initiates the issue through the Minister of Foreign Affairs Gorchakov; Reitern intimidates the emperor with a financial crisis, offering to turn to Western countries for a loan as a way out; Baron Steckl is in contact with the United States government.
It is amazing that these government officials could spend ten years of their lives solving, in the sense they needed, a single issue - the sale of part of the territory of the Russian Empire! This indicates the enormous importance attached to the issue. It’s a joke: to get Russia to secede, and voluntarily, six percent of its territory (in 1860, the Russian Empire occupied 375 thousand square miles, since the sale of Alaska to the United States gave 23 thousand)!
Alaska is the key to the Pacific Ocean, as many American politicians of that time believed. The conspirators handed over this key to the United States for only $7,200,000 in gold. On the one hand, 7 million gold coins, and on the other, the gold reserves of Russian America worth hundreds of millions of rubles, coal, oil, fisheries and fur industries. By the time of the sale (1867), the Russian-American Company (RAC) had begun mining coal and gold, but its financial capabilities were limited. The state could not provide her with adequate support. But there was a way out. It is obvious - to eliminate the monopoly of the RAC on the development of Alaska and open access to the wealth of Russian America for Russian private capital and private entrepreneurship.
At the end of the 60s of the last century, there were persistent rumors in Russia that high-ranking officials had received bribes. And such officials could only be those who directly lobbied for this issue - Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, Minister of Finance Reitern and envoy to the United States Baron Stekl. Let's put it mildly: each of them had a very serious personal interest in a positive solution to the issue of selling Alaska to the United States. Otherwise, there is simply nothing to explain their business activity.
Indeed, why didn’t Russia offer to buy Alaska to Great Britain? Answer: Great Britain is our political enemy. But our American possessions bordered precisely on the possessions of Great Britain. By making such an offer to her, we could well have acquired a political ally, especially since Great Britain was able to pay much more, and the treasury of the United States was empty after the Civil War.
Therefore, the United States government is a fictitious buyer. Behind him is the one who gave the money. During the preparations for signing the treaty, the name of August Belmont flashed through.
Belmont arrived in the United States at the age of twenty-three. Before this, the young man, who showed great promise, had already worked in Frankfurt as a manager of a branch of the De Rothschild Frere bank. In New York, Belmont bought a bank for the Rothschilds and became its manager.
And soon he became not only an adviser to US presidents on economic issues, but also a creditor to the government. Consequently, the Rothschilds, through their agent, gave the government money to buy Alaska.
At the same time, it is necessary to put pressure on Russia. And in September 1866, Minister of Finance M.Kh. Reitern informs the emperor with a note that in the next two to three years the treasury will have to collect 45 million rubles to pay off debts. There is nowhere to get money. There is only one way out: to pay off debts with new foreign loans.
Then everything is simple. Obtaining a loan is made dependent on Russia's compliance on the issue of selling Alaska to the United States. Or a little differently: if you sell Alaska, we will defer the payment of your debts. Most likely, this is exactly the case.
In October 1866, Baron Stekl left Washington and came to St. Petersburg. The initiative group meets with Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich. Pressure continues on Prince Gorchakov. The figure that the United States is willing to pay for all Russian possessions in Alaska is also ready - 5 million dollars in gold.
On December 16 at 13:00, all the actors meet in strict secret at the Minister of Foreign Affairs Gorchakov. The Emperor, who attended the “secret mass” at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, agrees to the sale of Russian possessions in North America. No minutes of the meeting are kept. In the diary of Emperor Alexander II there are a couple of lines about this: “At 1 o’clock in the afternoon, Prince Gorchakov has a meeting on the matter of the American company. It has been decided to sell to the United States” International monthly “Top Secret!”; article by journalist Alexander Zinukhov “Criminal deal. How Alaska was sold", No. 04, 2000.
But the management of the Russian-American company knew nothing about the decision made. Only after the agreement was signed and its text began to be commented on in the foreign press, was the RAC board informed about this. Neither the Council of Ministers nor the State Council knew anything about the plans of the high-ranking conspirators.
Baron Stekl was authorized to negotiate and sign the agreement (see Appendix No. 4). There is nowhere to fall further! The most important interstate agreement is signed not even by the Russian Foreign Minister, but by the envoy to the United States, who has the rank of Privy Councilor. Moreover, Steckl received no written instructions. Reitern verbally told him: “Ask for five million dollars.”
The terms of the agreement were actually dictated by the American side. Five of the seven points of the agreement say what the US government will receive as a result of its conclusion, and only two say what will remain the property of the Orthodox Church in Alaska and what kind of reward Russia will receive.
If in December 1866 the Russian conspirators agreed to give up Russian America for 5 million dollars, then by the end of March the figure of 7 million arose, and Baron Stekl almost enthusiastically described how successfully he bargained and received 2 million more than expected. The Baron does not hide the fact that certain “influential Americans” helped him in this. Could anyone really believe these stories? Stek knew that it was impossible to verify his message. He made it clear to his accomplices that of the 2 million that he allegedly negotiated from the Americans, some of it belonged to him personally. In St. Petersburg they thought differently. The emperor sent the baron an order and 25 thousand rubles in silver.
Stekl is offended, in a letter to his friend and patron in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs V.I. Westman complains: “As for my monetary reward, I think it could have been more generous, considering that I achieved more than the maximum that was established, and that in order to complete this business I lost my post in Europe, and only God knows , will I have another chance…” International monthly “Top Secret!”; article by journalist Alexander Zinukhov “Criminal deal. How Alaska was sold", No. 04, 2000.
From the same letter it is clear that the baron has not yet lost hope of improving his financial situation: if the emperor could not properly appreciate the contribution of his envoy, then he needs to take what is possible on his own.
If the money had been paid in accordance with the letter of the agreement, then he would not have been able to do anything, but the payment by the US government was made with certain violations of both the terms and the form of payment. This could only be the case when both sides - both the United States and Russia, represented by their top officials - knew where the money would go.
The first mention of where the money received from the sale of Alaska should be sent appeared in an encrypted telegram from the Minister of Foreign Affairs A.M. Gorchakov to Baron Stekl in Washington on March 14, 1867: “The Emperor authorizes the sale for 7 million dollars and the signing of an agreement...” International monthly “Top Secret!”; article by journalist Alexander Zinukhov “Criminal deal. How Alaska was sold", No. 04, 2000.
This is a response to Stekl’s extensive telegram listing the terms of the agreement with the Americans.
From the full text of the answer it is obvious that the conspirators at that moment were no longer interested in any conditions. Apparently, there were serious fears that secret negotiations with the US government would become known and then difficulties would arise in transferring money from the government to the personal pocket.
Gorchakov then briefly indicated where to direct the cash flow: “Try to receive payment at a closer time and, if possible, in London to Baring. Conclude without agreement." This meant that if the Americans agreed to send money to London Baring, then almost any conditions would be accepted.
The criminal deal was approaching its climax. The Americans received Russian possessions in North America immediately after ratification, without waiting for the allocation of funds by the US Congress, in perpetuity and without any conditions or obligations.
However, US Secretary of State William Seward did not agree to pay the money in London. He didn't want to take part in a financial scam. He probably knew that the personal money of the Romanov family was kept in the Baring Brothers Bank of London. State ones were kept in the Bank of England.
The purchase and sale agreement for Russian America was signed on the night of March 29-30, 1867 by Secretary of State Seward and Russia's envoy to the United States, Glass.
The sixth article of the agreement concerned payment. Most likely, it was written down in the version proposed by Seward. At the same time, quite unexpectedly, the amount of 7 million 200 thousand dollars appeared in the text of the agreement. No one knows exactly why Seward decided to increase the transaction amount by $200 thousand.
An interesting version is given in his book “The Invisible Hand” by American researcher Ralph Epperson. “The Tsar of Russia,” he writes, “for his part in saving the government of the United States by sending his fleet to American waters during the war, and probably in accordance with the agreement made with Lincoln, demanded payment for the use of his fleet. Johnson did not have the constitutional authority to transfer American dollars to the head of a foreign government. And the costs for the fleet were quite high: $7.2 million.
Therefore, in April 1867, Johnson, through Secretary of State William Seward, negotiated the purchase of Alaska from Russia.
Those historians who were not familiar with the real reasons for the purchase of Alaska unfairly called this act “Seward’s stupidity”; to this day, Secretary of State Seward is criticized for purchasing what was then a piece of worthless land. But the land purchase was only a way for Seward to repay the Tsar of Russia for the use of his fleet, an action that likely saved the country from a more serious war with England and France.
We are talking about the appearance of Russian warships off the coast of North America at the end of the summer of 1863. Two military squadrons - the Atlantic under the command of Rear Admiral Lesovsky and the Pacific under the command of Admiral Popov - completely unexpectedly for England and France, entered the ports of New York and San Francisco.
Given the sharp polarity of opinions on the question of the actual goals of this enterprise, the point of view about the existence of a secret agreement between President Lincoln and Emperor Alexander II was not commented on at all. The Soviet historian M. Malkin argued back in 1939 that “the published documents, along with American documentation, cover Russian-American relations with sufficient completeness and allow all sorts of versions about sending squadrons in 1861 or 1863 to provide assistance to the North, about the existence of a secret alliance between the United States and Russia..."
Russian warships sailed off the coast of the United States for almost a year. How much did this cost the treasury? According to the Ministry of the Navy, a year-long stay of a 44-gun frigate off the coast of America cost the treasury 357,469 rubles. For convenience, let's round up to 358 thousand. In total, there were twelve ships in both squadrons. More than half had fewer guns and fewer crew. It turns out that during the entire expedition about 4 million rubles were spent on maintaining the squadrons. However, we must take into account that the frigate Novik was lost in San Francisco Bay. This must be added to the total expenses. In addition, thirteen sailors died during the Atlantic crossing. Dozens suffered from scurvy and were treated for a long time. About a hundred sailors and two officers fled from the ships. After the ocean crossing, many ships required serious repairs.
It is likely that the missing 3 million rubles could have been added when all expenses were taken into account. Consequently, if Russia received $7,200,000 for military assistance to the United States during the Civil War, then Alaska was included in the load, that is, for nothing.
If two objects of the Russian purchase were able to pay once, then maybe we were not paid at all? But it turned out that everything was fine. Americans still keep the check with which the US government paid Russia for Alaska. It was demonstrated at the exhibition “Russian America”, launched in 1990 in the town of Tacoma near Seattle.
How did the check come about?
Article VI of the treaty reads: “By virtue of the above-established concession, the United States undertakes to pay at the Treasury in Washington, within ten months from the time of the exchange of the ratification of this convention, to the diplomatic representative or other person duly authorized by the Emperor of All Russia, seven million two hundred thousand dollars in gold coin. The above-decreed cession of the territory and the supreme right to it is hereby recognized as free and exempt from any restrictions, privileges, benefits or ownership rights of Russian or other companies, legally or otherwise established, or the same rights of partnerships, with the exception of only property rights owned by private persons, and this concession, hereby established, contains all the rights, benefits and privileges now belonging to Russia in the said territory, its possessions and appurtenances” International monthly “Top Secret!”; article by journalist Alexander Zinukhov “Criminal deal. How Alaska was sold", No. 04, 2000.
It is necessary to note several fundamental aspects of financing arising from this article of the agreement. The payer is the United States Treasury. This point was completed accurately. The place of payment is the city of Washington. The place of payment on the check is New York.
$7,200,000 was to be paid in cash and in “gold coin.” There were no marks or entries on the check indicating that this was gold cash.
The payee on the check is the name of Baron Edward de Steckle. According to the terms, he could receive the money as a diplomatic representative of Russia, but immediately after the ratification of the treaty, Foreign Minister Gorchakov transferred all powers to complete this matter to the Ministry of Finance. The latter was obliged to send its representative to Washington, who had the appropriate power of attorney. The representative was obliged, having received cash “gold coins,” to deliver them to a Russian warship and, upon arrival in St. Petersburg, transfer them to the state treasury. Instead, Baron Steckl, without even trying to protest, received a check for 7,200,000 greenbacks, which were quoted significantly lower than gold dollars. In fact, the baron's "misstep" cost $1,800,000. In terms of gold cash, he received 5,400,000 gold dollars.
The difference remained in the US treasury. In fact, this is a price for silence. At the same time, the Russian government also took a vow of silence. The payment deadlines have long passed, and the American Congress still could not decide whether to pay under the agreement. While they were debating, the payment deadline expired. The practice of international treaties in such cases involves penalties or cancellation of obligations. Nothing of the sort happened. The Russian government is silent. Baron Stekl in a letter to the Minister of Foreign Affairs A.M. Gorchakov on July 15/27, 1868 writes: “The American people will fully pay tribute to the imperial government for its grateful and generous position: it did not protest or complain, as it had the right to do, because refusal to pay remuneration on time was, according to in fact, a clear violation of the contract."
It seems that if Baron Stekl represented Russia, and not a group of “influential people,” then the agreement would indicate the actions of the parties in such circumstances and this agreement would be considered invalid.
The conspirators in Russia do not need an international scandal - it will attract public attention, and this may entail the disclosure of the entire plan.
On August 1, 1868, Baron Steckl gave a receipt to the US Treasury that he had received $7.2 million in full. The money was transferred to Riggs' bank. The latter, testifying in the US Congress, claimed that he transferred only 7.035 thousand dollars to a representative of Baring Brothers Bank in New York; Baron Eduard Stekl took 165 thousand dollars for himself.
Russian policy was once stated in the proud words of Nicholas I: “Where the Russian flag was once raised, it should never be lowered” International Monthly “Top Secret!”; article by journalist Alexander Zinukhov “Criminal deal. How Alaska was sold", No. 04, 2000.
Only the firmness and absolute power of Alexander II made the peaceful sale of Alaska possible. In Russia, especially in the Russian-American company, there were many opponents of this. Admiral Zavoiko, the hero of Petropavlovsk, had to resign from service and retire to his estate for refusing to sign transfer documents as a director of the company. The last governor of Alaska, Prince Maksyutov, was equally adamant. Baron Theodor Osten-Sacken, the Russian consul general in New York, protested against the emperor's decision. The Russian press was indignant.
The deal, needless to say, is remarkable: a country that did not want to sell sold to a country that did not want to buy. And yet this one event destroyed the balance in the Russia-Britain-United States power triangle in the Pacific Ocean, the United States overnight gained a paramount strategic position, the full significance of which may be impossible to comprehend even now.
It was a cold, foggy day in October 1867 when the final transfer of affairs in Novoarkhangelsk took place: it would soon cease to be Russian Arkhangelsk, becoming the American city of Sitkha. In the harbor, three American ships returned the gun salute on Castle Hill while United States Marines stood at attention near Castle Baranoff. High above their heads, the blue and white St. Andrew's flag began to slowly slide down the flagpole. Almost at the very bottom, he became entangled in the halyards, and the Marine had to quickly climb up and unfasten him. For one more moment the flag fluttered over Russia's furthest outpost before it was subdued and thrown to the people below.
The flag fell into the hands of the beautiful Princess Maksyutova, the governor’s wife, and she sobbed quietly, crumpling the lowered flag and watching the stars and stripes slowly rise up. The thunder of another volley of saluting ships came from the harbor; it echoed again and again along the islands and channels until it died away in the distance over the vastness of the Pacific Ocean...