This outburst must have taken Molotov by surprise. Polling was standard practice in Soviet decision making. As recently as January 1941, Stalin himself had criticized the Sovnarkom for “parliamentarianism,” by which he meant that its members were having too many meetings. As everyone involved surely noticed, Stalin offered only one example of “incorrect” polling—and not a particularly compelling one, as the question of the Sakhalin pipeline probably did not require detailed discussion at a bureau meeting. The charges leveled in the April memorandum sounded frivolous, and Molotov and the other Politburo members must have realized that they were a pretext. The discussion of Stalin’s memorandum led to a Politburo decision, dated 4 May 1941. It read in part as follows:
I. In the interests of full coordination between Soviet and party organizations and the unconditional assurance of unity in their work as leaders, as well as to further enhance the authority of Soviet bodies given the current tense international situation, which demands every possible effort by Soviet agencies in the defense of the country, the Politburo unanimously resolves:
1. To appoint Com. I. V. Stalin Chairman of the Council of People’s Commissars [Sovnarkom] of the USSR.
2. To appoint Com. V. M. Molotov Deputy Chairman of the USSR Sovnarkom and to place him in charge of the foreign policy of the USSR, leaving him in the post of People’s Commissar for Foreign Affairs.
3. Inasmuch as Com. Stalin, who, on the insistence of the Central Committee’s Politburo, retains the position of first secretary of the TsK VKP(b) [Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks)], will not be able to allot sufficient time to work in the TsK Secretariat, to appoint Com. A. A. Zhdanov Com. Stalin’s deputy in the TsK Secretariat, relieving him of his duties overseeing the TsK VKP(b) Directorate for Propaganda and Agitation.61
No documents or memoirs have been located that shed light on the discussions leading up to this resolution, but some clues are offered by its wording, which equates the reorganizations with a return to the Leninist revolutionary model of leadership. The leader of the party and the country, it states, should head the government, especially at a time of looming war. If Stalin had fully bought into the logic that it was important to adhere to the original Soviet model, he would have had to renounce the post of Central Committee secretary since Lenin was the founder and leader of the party but did not hold that post. But he chose to take both the top party and government posts for himself.
At last the dictatorial system of government was complete. At the top of the hierarchy stood the dictator himself. With the title of general secretary of the party added to that of chairman of the government, the supreme power he had been exercising for some time was made official. The Politburo’s leading group—a subset of its membership hand-picked by Stalin—would serve as his consultative body. One step down the hierarchy were two governing bodies: the secretariat of the party’s Central Committee, headed by Zhdanov, and the Sovnarkom Bureau, headed by Voznesensky. These two bodies served as the dictator’s arms. They took care of the routine running of the country and brought consequential matters to Stalin for approval.
This reorganization was undoubtedly motivated by more than a desire for efficiency. Stalin’s decision to give himself, the leader of the party, the added title of chairman of the government told the country and the world that at a time of international instability, the Soviet Union had consolidated its leadership. Again, Stalin’s personality—his hunger to possess not only real power, but also all of its accouterments and his tendency to regard even his closest comrades with suspicion—also has to be taken into consideration. The latter quality was surely a factor in his decision to accelerate the advance of the younger generation and put Zhdanov and Malenkov in charge of the Central Committee apparat. Voznesensky—not Molotov, the logical choice—was appointed to serve as Stalin’s first deputy in his role as government chairman. Beria, another member of the new generation, oversaw the network of security agencies. Stalin’s old comrades, even those who remained at the upper echelons of power, suffered significantly diminished standing as they made way for their younger colleagues.
Molotov was a particular target of Stalin’s displeasure. After long years of devoted service and exceptional closeness with the vozhd, Molotov was deprived of the Sovnarkom chairmanship and was not even appointed Stalin’s first deputy. Stalin took every opportunity to demonstrate his disdain for Molotov. One of the last recorded manifestations of his irritation toward his longtime comrade occurred not long before the outbreak of war. In May 1941, at a meeting of the newly constituted Sovnarkom Bureau, Stalin took Molotov to task. Yakov Chadaev, the Sovnarkom’s chief of administration, who was taking minutes at the meeting, recalls:
Stalin did not conceal his disapproval of Molotov. He very impatiently listened to Molotov’s rather prolix responses to comments from members of the Bureau.… It seemed as if Stalin was attacking Molotov as an adversary and that he was doing so from a position of strength.… Molotov’s breathing began to quicken, and at times he would let out a deep sigh. He fidgeted on his stool and murmured something to himself. By the end he could take it no longer:
“Easier said than done,” Molotov pronounced in a low but cutting voice. Stalin picked up [Molotov’s] words.
“It has long been well-known,” said Stalin, “that the person who is afraid of criticism is a coward.”
Molotov winced, but kept quiet—the other members of the Politburo sat silently, burying their noses in the papers.… At this meeting I was again convinced of the power and greatness of Stalin. Stalin’s companions feared him like the devil. They would agree with him on practically anything.62
What was behind this abusive treatment of a faithful colleague? Perhaps Stalin was taking out his frustrations over the state of Soviet foreign relations. Or perhaps, in the lead-up to war, he was making an example of his old comrade to keep the rest of the leadership in line. In any event, the result was a further centralization of power and a top leadership afraid to voice dissent. Critical questions of war and peace, concerning the fates of millions, rested solely in the dictator’s hands.
On 5 May 1941, the day after his appointment as chairman of the government, Stalin went to meet with members of the Soviet military at a traditional Kremlin reception for graduates of military academies. At a similar event six years earlier, on 4 May 1935, Stalin had come out with the slogan, “Cadres solve everything!” This time the watchword the vozhd shared with his military guests was classified and did not appear in the press. In May 1941, just six weeks before the outbreak of war with Germany, he called for a switch from a defensive to an offensive posture enabled by a powerful Red Army.63
While these remarks have attracted the particular interest of scholars, it is important to note that he had made similar comments in the past. In October 1938, for example, he told a gathering the following:
Bolsheviks are not just pacifists who long for peace and reach for arms only if they’re attacked. That’s not true. There will be times when Bolsheviks are the invaders; if the war is just, if the situation is right, and if the conditions are favorable, they will go on the offensive themselves. They are by no means against invading, against any war. The fact that we’re now shouting about defense—that’s a veil, a veil. All countries mask their true selves: “If you live with wolves, you have to howl like a wolf.” [Laughter.] It would be stupid to spill your guts and lay them on the table.64