February 5, 1903.

I am sending a copy of the Union’s letter and of our draft reply. The reply has been sent to Plekhanov in order that he wait for your letter from Paris. Immediately arrange a conference with P. Andr. and Boris and reply to Plekhanov as soon as possible, whether you agree with the reply or changes are required. It would be desirable, of course, not to delay the reply to the allies, while in the event of voting on changes the delay would be considerable: perhaps unimportant changes could be left aside. But, of course, if there is a difference on substance, then the reply must be delayed (I am writing about this to Plekhanov as well) and voted upon by all.

In my opinion (V. I. and L. Gr. agree with it), the most important thing here is precisely that 1) the section abroad of the O.C. should be precisely a department of the Russian Organising Committee. The allies, it seems, envision two departments with equal rights: the Russian and the foreign; we can in no way and unconditionally accept or allow such an interpretation. The Russian O.C. must act cautiously (in this respect its announcement is composed in an exemplary manner), but in all affairs and in all approaches to it must comport itself with the utmost importance and the utmost strictness, i.e., so that it, the Russian O.C., is in charge of everything and no one in the party can do anything of an all-party nature, anything universally binding, except on the instructions of the Russian Organising Committee.

With their letter the allies do recognise (or almost, by ¾, recognise) the O.C., and the more they recognise it, the stricter and firmer the Organising Committee must hold itself. It is highly important from the very outset to adopt the right tone and to place oneself in such a way that the party position becomes clearly defined: either recognition of the given O.C. and submission to it, or war. Tertium non datur. And now there are many chances of obtaining general recognition, without offending or teasing anyone, but without yielding an iota.

2) The O.C. must reduce the functions of its section abroad to a minimum. The section abroad only “is in charge of” (in the sense of preparing unification) foreign affairs and assists the Russian. In any other question, even slightly outside these limits, the section abroad of the Organising Committee must ask for the opinion and decision of the Russian Organising Committee. Therefore I emphatically insist that the Russian O.C. write as quickly as possible a letter to the Union, the League and the Bund with a proposal to form its own department for conducting such-and-such functions. It is necessary that precisely the Russian O.C. indicate the “limits of the competence” of its section abroad, and I propose below a draft definition of these functions by three and only three strictly limited points. I very much request that you quickly discuss this draft with P. A. and Boris and affirm (respectively put changes to the vote) it. (We shall send all these data also to Yury, asking him to await the arrival of P. A. and Boris, who must speed up this arrival of theirs with all their might.) (Of course, P. A. could write a letter here to the League, the Union and the Foreign Committee of the Bund, but I think that this is highly undesirable, for they would suspect manipulating and fiction. It is better to wait a week or two, but to ensure that the letter is sent without fail from Russia.) I also think that it is necessary to consider the election from among us of a member to the O.C. (section abroad) and to vote in advance, for with the collegium being in different places this may take a lot of time and it would be unpleasant to make people wait because of this. For my part, I cast my vote for L. Gr.

I positively have no time to write more to Plekhanov. You simply forward to him immediately both this letter and the reply to the Union, while I will scribble a couple of words to him in the meantime.

I shake your hand. Lenin