The arraignment of Zinoviev and Kamenev was in line with an established and well-rehearsed Soviet tradition, inspired in part by the political trials of radicals staged by Tsarist Russia in the late nineteenth century.68
The first trial was of the leaders of the Socialist Revolutionary party in 1922, accused of being involved in armed struggle and subversive activities against the state. That same year priests and lay believers who had resisted the Bolsheviks’ expropriation of church valuables were tried. In 1928 a large group of engineers and managers in the North Caucasus town of Shakhty were tried for conspiracy to sabotage the town’s coal mines. At the ‘Industrial Party’ trial of 1930, Soviet scientists and engineers were accused of conspiring with foreign powers to wreck the USSR’s economy. In 1931 a group of ‘Menshevik’ economists was tried for using disinformation to undermine the first five-year plan. In 1933 six British employees of Metro-Vickers, a company contracted to install electrical equipment, were prosecuted for economic wrecking and espionage.But the charges levelled against Zinoviev and Kamenev in 1936 were far more serious, since those indicted were Old Bolshevik leaders who had once been among Stalin’s closest comrades-in-arms. It was a piece of crude political theatre whose none-too-subtle message was that even top leaders could turn out to be traitors and that no enemy of the system could hide from state security.
In January 1937 Stalin staged a trial of members of an ‘Anti-Soviet Parallel Trotskyist Centre’ – said to be a reserve network in the event the Trotskyist-Zinovievite Centre was exposed. The main defendants were the former deputy commissar for heavy industry, Georgy Pyatakov, former
It is hard to credit that Stalin actually believed the absurd charges levelled against these former members of the Soviet political elite or that he gave any credence to the fantastical confessions upon which they rested. But, to paraphrase that adage about supporters of President Donald J. Trump, while Stalin took the confessions seriously he did not take them literally. Arguably, while his general belief in the existence of an anti-Soviet conspiracy was unshakeable, the detailed veracity of the specific confessions was another matter entirely.
In their analysis of the Great Terror, J. Arch Getty and Oleg Naumov distinguish between Yezhov, who truly believed in the existence of the enemies he hunted down on Stalin’s behalf, and Bukharin, who chose to serve Stalin by falsely confessing to being one. Yezhov, who was appointed head of the NKVD in September 1936, embraced official discourse as a description of reality; to Bukharin it was an invention, a drama in which he was prepared to play his prescribed role in order to safeguard the Soviet system.70
Stalin seems to have been a hybrid case. For him the conspiracy against Soviet power was as real as it was for Yezhov but he knew the truth was more complex and contradictory than the story framed for the show trials.It was the February–March 1937 plenum of the party’s central committee that set the scene for a general purge of Soviet polity and society. In 1937–8 alone there were a million and a half political arrests and hundreds of thousands of executions. Stalin told the plenum that the ‘wrecking and diversionist-espionage’ activities of foreign agents had impacted on nearly all party and state bodies, which had been infiltrated by Trotskyists.