Russia was incapable of simply bringing Russian culture to the West, but created a paranoia of intentions wherever they went. In the beginning, the relationship between Russia and France through the arts was a testimony to their political allegiances. “French critics acknowledged a shared choreographic heritage: French ballet had migrated to Russia in the nineteenth century, only to return, decades later, under the guise of the Ballets Russes. The company, then, moored in a history that intertwined both nations, not only contributed to a cultural programme of exchange. The Ballets Russes were a testament to Franco-Russian cooperation, goodwill and support; they represented ‘un nouveau resserrement de l’alliance’ (a further strengthening of the alliance).” However, the relationship made a negative turn when duplicity amongst the alliance arose. While Russia continued to borrow money from the French banks, “the Russians no longer interested in supporting French culture and colonial politics.” This duplicity gave fuel for the paranoia and lack of trust we see in the relationship concerning the arts. The Parisian press spoke of the Ballets Russes in terms of both “enchantement’, ‘bouleversement’ and ‘fantaisie’. Yet they also invoked metaphors of invasion, describing the company’s Parisian presence in terms of ‘assaut’ (onslaught) and ‘conquete’ (conquest).” The dual-faceted relationship can be seen in this expression of both enrapture and contention. One French journalist, Maurice Lefevre, called on his fellow Parisians to see the reality of the Russian invasion as though it was an infestation, “We need to do some soul-searching and ask whether our guests are not about to become our masters.” To imply that Russia was about to take over France through performing arts seems to be irrational, but evidence would suggest the fears were real among those in Paris.