What's new

Adolf Hitler and the side of History never before seen.

Stalin = SATAN!
Lenin = Satan!
Komminizm (Soviet Union) = Satanism!


Glory Duce!
Glory of the Fuhrer!


Our people (Caucasians, Rusi, Slavic, Baltic, etc.) - 30/70% support Freedom! Down with Stalin!

Russian Empire, the Soviet Union (especially during and after the war) -
Genocide ours, and deportation of our Nations in cold Siberia!

Communists - destroyed - Islam, Christianity, etc..

Communists have shed so much blood!
capitalists = Satan!

National Socialism = success and victory!:angel:

my opinion.



x_657167a4.jpg

:partay:
 
I rest my case.

If you had been unfortunate enough to have made this case to an audience containing Zhukov, for instance, you might have faced at worst physical assault, at best obscene abuse. You seem to have discounted an obvious factor.


Zhukov was dismissive of the German generals, partly because of their pro-Nazi politics but mainly because those who survived annoyed him with their memoir claims that they had lost the war because of Hitler's strategic errors, the severity of the Russian weather, and the Red Army's sheer weight of numbers, which enabled the Soviets to absorb far more casualties than the Wehrmacht. What none of them would admit, according to Zhukov, was that superior Soviet generalship was the primary reason they had lost the war.

You might like to think about it.
 
No doubt about that, you would be spot on to state that the overall the average German soldier was much more disciplined and better trained than his counterpart. But i would argue that the Soviets were more determined than the Germans, after all they were defending their 'Mother Land'. It was their superior determination at Stalingrad where they stubbornly resisted despite the overwhelming odds which gained them the momentum they needed to put an end to Nazi Offensives.
No doubt.

But the most interesting fact, that no body seems to take note of, is that this Nationalist sentiment that was once upon a time a crime punishable by death under Stalin and his predecessors, was now all of a sudden permitted, but that too only for a limited time. Once the war was over, these same soldiers, who were a part of the second Echelon, were sent back to the Gulags to work to death.



Actually they were more afraid of the Germans than they were of Stalin. The German Invasion and occupation was nothing short of 'barbaric' against the Slavs. The Slavs were considered lesser than animals which convinced the average Soviet citizen that Stalin's rule despite barbaric was much better compared to that of the Nazis.

Well, first lets get a few things into perspective:

1). Olga Shatunovskaya, a member of the Soviet Commission of Party Control, and head of a special commission during the 1960s appointed by premier Khrushchev, has similarly concluded: "From January 1, 1935 to June 22, 1941, 19,840,000 enemies of the people were arrested. Of these, seven million were shot in prison, and a majority of the others died in camp."

Robert Conquest, the distinguished specialist of Soviet history, recently summed up the grim record of Soviet "repression" of it own people:34

It is hard to avoid the conclusion that the post-1934 death toll was well over ten million. To this should be added the victims of the 1930-1933 famine, the kulak deportations, and other anti-peasant campaigns, amounting to another ten million plus. The total is thus in the range of what the Russians now refer to as 'The Twenty Million'."

2). As a result of Stalin's own orders of a "Scorched Earth" Policy following the German invasion, as well as him keeping a tight lid on the news of the Red army's failures, millions of Russians were completely unaware of the situation at hand and thus were caught in the midst of the battles. Stalin's orders of "no retreat" applied to the civilian population just as much as it did to the Red Army soldiers and officers.

And as usual, the Red army was permitted to confiscate food from its own civilian population.


Stalin, it seems, was putting Hitler to shame by slaughtering his own people BEFORE the war even began, and what not to talk about during the war, if one man can kill 20 million of his own people during peace time and get away with it, then i'm sure he most likely killed 20 million more during the war. Its just that Stalin got someone to use as a scapegoat this time and Hitler seemed to be the perfect many for the job.

Now, after Stalin's death, the Soviets themselves, under Nikita Kruschev carried out investigations on the number of people killed at the orders of Stalin and his cronies, and estimation was somewhere between 40-60 million due to the numbers of mass graves being discovered as well as the ones that were yet to be discovered. From mass executions, to mass starvations, from forced collectivization, to to forced labor till death.


Now you mentioned that the Germans considered the "slavs lesser than animals", well to be specific, the Germans considered the Red army lesser than animals and they were justified in doing so. The Red army (as you yourself stated) lacked discipline of any kind, they were pure reckless savage barbarians who raped, pillaged, tortured, looted, massacred and killed on their way to Berlin. Terror was one hell of a tool in psychological warfare when it came to the Red Army.

Keep in mind, the Soviet Union was not a signatory to the Geneva Convention with regards to treatment of enemy POW's as well as it's own soldiers who were captured by the apposing side (in this case Germany).


Now, this fact must be new to you, but close to 2 million Russians (slavs) fought alongside the Germans against the Soviet regime, and they fought proudly and loyally under the command of the Germans and their Russian Allies, who themselves were former Red Army Generals and officers.

Ostlegionen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15th_Waffen_Grenadier_Division_of_the_SS_(1st_La tvian)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/20th_Waffen_Grenadier_Division_of_the_SS_(1st_Es tonian)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15th_Waffen_Grenadier_Division_of_the_SS_(1st_La tvian)

Turkestan legion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Russian Liberation Army - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



The Insignia of the POA (Russian Liberation Army)Русская освободительная армия:

RussianLiberationMovement.png



POA Generals, officers, and troops:

image007.jpg


12609469_roa_zb.jpg


bedbtefrdbgtrbgtrbtrg.jpg


2986100359_1_3_op5BY4ZR.jpg


attach.asp


x_8e341bb0.jpg


 
Last edited by a moderator:
More Russian volunteers in the German Armed Forces:

tafel_05_links_01_gross.jpg


Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-178-1538-05A,_Griechenland,_Appell_von_Hilfstruppen_der_Wehrmacht.jpg


koreanischersoldatdr2.jpg


BergKaukasien33.jpg


captured by the British (or Americans?)

Turkestan2.jpg
 
Ukrainian Cossacks in the German Armed Forces:


Dr Joseph Goebbels meeting with prominent Cossack leaders:


cossacks_and_goebels1944.jpg


25282169f5eb.jpg


tumblr_mde6fgrDOG1qgc8rio1_500.jpg


tumblr_lhpjs24Zkg1qeuhhmo1_500.jpg


101I-297-1704-10.jpg


reading_cossacks_1_lg.jpg





PannwitzHelmuthv_Oberst_RK_EL_o_Muetze.jpg


Pannwitz surrendered on May 11, 1945, to British forces near Völkermarkt in Carinthia, Austria, and made every effort to ensure that his men would remain in the custody of the Western powers. But by mid-May it was becoming obvious that the Cossacks would be handed over to their deadly enemies, the SMERSH, an action often referred to as The Betrayal of Cossacks. The same fate overtook the members of the Kazachi Stan at Lienz, another 30,000 old folk, women, and children. All were executed, were sent to GULAG prison camps, or committed suicide to avoid being repatriated.

Pannwitz was a German national, and under the provision of the Geneva Convention not subject to repatriation to the SMERSH. But on May 26, he was deprived of his command and placed under arrest while the forceable loading of the Cossacks into trucks began and continued through the following days. Although many escaped from their camps following these actions, General von Pannwitz and many of his German officer cadre did not want to leave their men alone and shared the uncertain fate of the Cossacks who had been comrades in combat for more than two years, so these Germans surrendered with the Cossacks to the NKVD at Judenburg.

Pannwitz was executed in Moscow on January 16, 1947, having been convicted by a Soviet court of war crimes in Yugoslavia.


"I was with the Cossacks in good times and I will stay with them in bad times." - Helmuth von Pannwitz
 
Last edited by a moderator:


Russian Volunteers in the German Wehrmacht in WWII

by Lt. Gen Wladyslaw Anders and Antonio Munoz

It is not known when and where exactly the first units of volunteers from the USSR, and from the countries annexed by Russia after 1939, were organized to fight against the Soviets on the German side. Their beginnings were shrouded in great secrecy, for fear of Hitler who was categorically opposed to any form of participation of Soviet citizens in the war against Russia. But needs of the army on the Eastern Front, and the enthusiastic desire shown by hundreds of captured and escaped officers, by thousands of Soviet soldiers, and by almost the entire local population induced German commanders to accept the services of volunteers to fight the Soviet regime even against the clear orders of the Supreme Command. When the existence of numerous formations of Eastern volunteers came to light with the passing of time, Hitler was unpleasantly surprised. The hopeless military situation of the Reich forced him to approve this state of affairs.

The creation of eastern volunteer formations was patronized - secretly, of course - by the Section of Foreign Armies East of the Intelligence Department of the Army General Staff, the so-called "Fremde Heere Ost" Section; Officers of this section saw the importance of an anti-Soviet Russian Army fighting on the German side and its possible effect on the outcome of the war. The idea was fully appreciated also by the propaganda section of the Supreme Command, the "Wehrmacht Propaganda IV," or WPrIV for short, which dealt with propaganda on both sides of the eastern front and had under its control special camps for selected prisoners who were being trained for active propaganda in psychological warfare against Soviet Russia.

A number of German generals also supported the organization of eastern volunteer formations, but for a long time without success. In the autumn of 1941, Field Marshal von Bock had sent to Hitler's Headquarters a detailed project for the organization of a Liberation Army of some 200,000 Russian volunteers, and for the formation of a local government in the province of Smolensk; It was returned in November 1941 with the notation that "such thoughts cannot be discussed with the Fuehrer," and that "politics are not the prerogatives of Army Group Commanders." Of course, Field-Marshal Keitel, who wrote this notation, did not show the project to Hitler.(1)

The forerunner of the volunteer formations was a voluntary auxiliary service, of a para- military character, which was started in the autumn of 1941 by the German Commands on the front. On their own initiative, they organized auxiliary units of various services, made up of Soviet deserters, prisoners, and volunteers from among the local population. These so-called "Hilfswillige," or "Hiwi," were employed as sentries, drivers, store- keepers, workers in depots, etc. The experiment surpassed all expectations. In the spring of 1942 there were already at least 200,000 of them in the rear of the German armies, and by the end of the same year their number was allegedly near 1,000,000.(2)

The next step taken by the German Commands in the east behind Hitler's back was the organization of voluntary military troops, called "Osttruppen," clad in German uniforms and designed to guard communication lines, fight Soviet partisans in the rear of the German armies, and sometimes even hold less important sectors of the front. These troops seldom exceeded the strength of a battalion. In the middle of 1942, there were already 6 such battalions in the rear of Army Group Center alone.

One of the first Russian volunteer formations was RONA - Russian National Army of Liberation - which was organized in the winter of 1941-1942 under the command of a Soviet captain called Kaminski, who was promoted by the Germans to Major-General. His army - which in fact never exceeded the strength of a division - at first fought against Soviet partisans, and later on the front. In the summer of 1944, after considerable losses, RONA was withdrawn to East Prussia, where Himmler took it over from the Wehrmacht and reorganized it into an SS brigade.

Kaminski's brigade earned the worst possible reputation among all who had anything to do with it, not excluding Russians from other formations. A particularly gruesome fame was gained by this brigade during the quelling of the Warsaw Rising in 1944. Only the infamous SS Dirlewanger Brigade, composed of criminal volunteers from German prisons and concentration camps, could match the deeds of Kaminski's Brigade.(3) After the Warsaw Rising, Kaminski was shot by order of his protector Himmler, and the remnants of his brigade were sent to the Vlasov Army which was then being formed.

At almost the same time as RONA there was organized in Byelorussia [White Russia] the Gil-Rodionov Druzhina, and near Smolensk, at the end of 1941, the Russian National People's Army, RNNA. The first, an SS formation, was disbanded in 1943; The second, known as the Boyarski Brigade and backed by the Wehrmacht, met with the same end in 1943. Besides these formations, a number of volunteer battalions, companies and squadrons were formed. At first they had un-official status, but later they were fully recognized. The majority of them, composed of volunteers of Russian nationality, were later incorporated into the Russian Army of Liberation- ROA- which was not an army in the organizational meaning of the word, but a name given to all Russian voluntary formations which recognized General Vlasov as their leader.

In a better condition were the Eastern Legions, the so-called "Ostlegionen" which, according to Rosenberg's conception, contained only non-Russian volunteers. Hitler limited them to nationalities living far from the frontiers of the "Great Reich." On December 30th, 1941 a top secret memorandum ordered that the Supreme Command was to create, first the Turkestani Legion from volunteers of the following nationalities: Turkomans, Uzbeks, Kazakhs, Kirghiz, Karakalpaks, and Tadjiks. Second, the Caucasian-Mohammedan Legion, from Azerbaijanis, Daghestans, Ingushes, Lezghins, and Chechens. Third, the Georgian Legion; And fourth, the Armenian Legion.(4)

In contrast to the unofficial formations, the Eastern Legions had national committees from the start. It must be explained that a "legion" was not a tactical formation, but a training center where national units, mostly battalions, were organized and trained. It seems that the largest formation was the 162nd Turkoman Infantry Division, composed of Germans, Turkomans, and Azerbaijanis, which according to its commander, was as good as a normal German Division.(5) According to the testimony of Caucasian leaders, the number of volunteers from the Caucasus who fought on the German side was 102,300.(6)

German commanders had great sympathy for the Cossacks, although these did not conceal their political ambition to build their own state, Kazakia. Their bravery, their generally known hatred of the Soviets, and the services rendered from the very beginning particularly in fighting Soviet partisans, gave quick results. As early as the middle of 1942, a Cossack cavalry formation existed in Mohylev, under the command of a former Soviet major, Kononov, who had crossed over to the Germans at the first opportunity with the greater part of his regiment, and began service on the side of the Germans by guarding the line of communications against Soviet partisans.(7)

When in the summer of 1942 the front in the south was moving fast toward the Caucasus and the Volga, the German armies entered territories inhabited by the Cossacks. Composed of many tribes, these had during the civil war in Russia in 1917-1920 formed six federated republics: the Cossacks of the Don, of the Kuban, of Terek, of Orenburg, of the Ural, and of Astrakhan. The republics had been liquidated by the Bolsheviks with extreme cruelty.

The Cossacks, therefore, greeted the Germans as liberators. The entire population of towns, villages and settlements went out to meet the German troops with flowers and gifts of all kinds, singing their national anthems. Cossack formations of the Red Army were coming over to the Germans in a body, new formations were springing up, apparently from nowhere, in traditional uniform and armed with swords, pistols, daggers, and rifles that had been buried for years.

One of the old and well-known atamans (Cossack leaders), Kulakov, who since 1919 had been believed dead, came out of hiding and, accompanied by hundreds of Cossacks in resplendent dress and on magnificent horses, made a triumphant drive into Poltava. Thousands of Cossacks in POW. camps offered their services in the first against the Soviets. Even the remnants of the Kalmuk tribe, estimated at some 60 to 80 thousand people, formed and equipped 16 cavalry squadrons which cleared the steppes of the remaining Soviet units, showing no mercy. General Koestring, who knew Russia well and in August 1942 became Governor of the Caucasus, thought he was dreaming or watching a great historical film.(8) Such was the Cossacks' revenge for years of terror at the hands of the NKVD.

The recruiting of Cossacks for the fight against the Soviets was patronized by the Cossack National Movement of Liberation, whose aim was the rebuilding of an independent Cossack state. In the summer of 1943, the 1st Cossack Division was formed under the command of General von Pannwitz. It had six cavalry regiments. Shortly afterwards the division was expanded into the XVth SS Cossack Cavalry Corps, which numbered some 50,000 men. Further, two Cossack brigades and 12 Cossack reserve regiments were formed, and a number of smaller units were attached to German formations. In all, Cossack troops on the German side numbered about 250,000 men.(9)

It should be explained here that the granting of the SS status to the Cossack Corps was Himmler's device, quite often applied, for barring the Wehrmacht's influence in political concerns of the foreign formations. The Germans used the Cossacks to fight Soviet partisans, to cover the rear of their armies, and sometimes for action on the front. Later on, some Cossack formations were moved to France and Yugoslavia. The Cossack command objected, on the ground that the Cossacks should fight only against the Soviets, but in vain.

Meanwhile, a small group of German officers and civil servants, in spite of many failures and difficulties, continued their effort to create a Russian Liberation Army out of the hundreds of thousands of Russian volunteers who wanted to fight against the Soviets. Their hopes were revived when at last a Russian "de Gaulle" was found: the Soviet General Andrey Andreyevich Vlasov, former commander of the Thirty-seventh and Twentieth Soviet Armies, and later Deputy Commander of the front on the river Volkhov.(10)

General Vlasov was the son of a Russian peasant from the Nizhni, Novgorod district who, although far from rich, had been classed by the Bolsheviks as "kulak" and treated accordingly. The young Vlasov finished school with the financial aid of his brother, and began to study first theology and later at the Agricultural College of the University at Nizhni Novgorod. In the spring of 1919 he was called into the Red Army. After a few weeks in a regiment, Vlasov was posted to an officers school and finished a four-month course, gaining a commission. As a second lieutenant he was sent to the front to fight against the "Whites."

He did not join the Communist Party until 1930, but from then on his career was swift, since he no doubt had great ability. In 1938, already a major-general, Vlasov acted as Soviet Military Advisor to Chiang Kai-Shek in China. In December 1939, he returned to Russia and was given command of a division. During the war with Germany he commanded in turn a tank corps and an army, taking part in the battle of Kiev and in the defense of Moscow. In March, 1942 he became Deputy Commander of the Volkhov Front. In mid-June of 1942, the Soviet forces operating on the Volkhov River were surrounded in the woods and marshes, without food and supplies, and by the end of the month surrendered to the Germans. General Vlasov became a prisoner of war.(11)

The IV Propaganda Section of the Wehrmacht, WPrIV, realizing that Vlasov was one of the outstanding officers of the Red Army, took immediate interest in him. He was transferred to a special, comfortable camp for important prisoners, where he was subjected to a subtle propaganda which played on his aversion to the Soviet system. Soon the German supporters of collaboration with the anti-Soviet movement were convinced that their prisoner was the man they were looking for.

His personal charm, his effective manner of speaking, his manners and abilities, and particularly his gift of inspiring confidence as well as his last important position in the Red Army, clearly predestined him to stand at the head of the Liberation Movement and Army, which in spite of Hitler's strict orders was coming into being. In September, 1942, still in the POW. camp, General Vlasov wrote a leaflet calling on the officers of the Red Army and the Russian intelligentsia to overthrow the Soviet regime of Stalin whom he accused of being guilty of all the disasters which had befallen Russia. However, the leaflet also contained some Nazi propaganda, included without Vlasov's knowledge.(12)

This leaflet was dropped by the Luftwaffe in thousands of copies. The German protectors of General Vlasov attached great hopes to it. They expected that the results of this appeal would finally force Hitler to agree to the formation of the Liberation Army, and the results were indeed great. Day after day, the German Supreme Command received reports from all army groups that thousands of deserters from the Red Army who were coming over to the Germans, were asking for General Vlasov, and wanted to fight against the Soviets.

But these reports infuriated Hitler; on his orders, Field-Marshal Keitel forbade everybody, not excluding the General Staff, to present any kind of memorandum or report on the subject of General Vlasov and Russian formations.(13) This failure did not discourage the German supporters of the anti-Soviet movement. They decided to take what constituted a very unusual step under Hitler's regime. Without official authorization they brought into being in December, 1942 the Russian National Committee, with General Vlasov as chairman.

This was no easy achievement, in view of the strong opposition of the non-Russian nationalities. It was decided that the seat of the Committee would be Smolensk, from where the already prepared "Smolensk Manifesto" was to be broadcast. In its 13 points, the Manifesto declared and promised the following: (1) abolition of compulsory labor, (2) abolition of collective farms, and land grants to the peasants, (3) reintroduction of private commerce and handicraft, (4) termination of terror, (5) personal freedom, (6) freedom of faith, conscience, speech, press, and assembly, (7) free choice of work, (8) guarantee of free development for all nationalities, (9) release of all political prisoners, (10) rebuilding of towns, villages and factories at the expense of the state, and (11) a guarantee of minimum subsistence for all invalids and their next of kin.

Moreover, the Manifesto stated that "Germany, led by Adolf Hitler, pursues the aim of creating a New Order in Europe without Bolsheviks or capitalists," which, of course, was an addition put into the Manifesto by the German propaganda. The Manifesto ended with an appeal to the soldiers and officers of the Red Army to join the Liberation Army which was fighting on the German side. Thus the promoters of the German-Russian collaboration wanted to present the German authorities with an accomplished fact.(14)

The venture largely misfired. None of the papers controlled by the Germans even mentioned the creation of the Committee and the Manifesto; broadcasting the Manifesto was forbidden; Smolensk was rejected as the residence of the Committee. Soviet citizens in the occupied territories got to know about the Committee and its Manifesto from leaflets which were intended for the other side of the front and were dropped on the German side only "by mistake."

However, in January 1943 the leaflet campaign had yielded such good results that the Command of Army Groups Center and North invited General Vlasov, on their own initiative, to go on a tour of their areas and deliver speeches to prisoners of war, Soviet volunteers, and the local population.

In March, 1943, General Vlasov, who had gained personal freedom, visited Smolensk, Mohylev, Bobruisk, Borisov, Orsha, and other places; Everywhere his speeches brought him thousands of supporters. Later, after a short rest, he toured the areas of Army Group North. In March also, his letter appeared in a newspaper; In it, he gave his reasons for taking up the fight against Bolshevism. In the second half of April the storm broke. Field- Marshal Keitel demanded to know who had allowed General Vlasov to issue a political proclamation; he also threatened grave consequences if it proved true that General Vlasov was appearing in public, and was being called "the future leader of the Russians."

A few days later, Keitel issued a new order in which he stated: Vlasov is only a prisoner of war, his "shameless" speeches infuriated the Fuehrer who forbade mentioning the name Vlasov in his presence; The latter should immediately be sent back to the POW. camp, and should be kept under special surveillance; If, in future, Vlasov appeared anywhere in public he would be arrested and handed over to the Gestapo.(15)

Yet the friends of General Vlasov succeeded in gaining permission for his further stay in Berlin - under "surveillance," which in fact was rather fictitious. In the meantime the leaflet campaign was in full swing. Soon all Army Groups and some of the armies reported that the publication of a political declaration and a change of attitude toward the anti-Soviet volunteers were a necessity; Otherwise the occupation of the eastern territories would prove an impossible task. Attempts were made also to find a way to Hitler's reason through Rosenberg; But the difficulty was that Rosenberg regarded the creation of the Russian National Committee as contrary to his own conceptions.

After a few months, Rosenberg's opposition relaxed, as General Vlasov abandoned his previous stand of the "one and undivided Russia," consented to the principle of self- determination of the non-Russian peoples, and agreed that Russia, in a peace settlement, would renounce her claims to the Ukraine and the Caucasus.(16) Before Rosenberg's planned intervention, Hitler once more repeated his view on this question. On June 8th, at a conference with his military advisors and chiefs of services, he declared that the Liberation Army was a dangerous folly.

He did not need such an army and would never consent to its organization. The setting up of any states in the occupied territories was out of the question. There were, unfortunately, too many supporters of such ridiculous schemes in Rosenberg's circle and in the Army too. Instead of forming volunteer troops from them, the Russians would be sent to Germany to work in coal mines, replacing Germans. Vlasov was needed for propaganda work at the front - any activity of his in the rear was inadmissible. Losses in German formations could be replaced by volunteers from the east only on a very small, never a large scale.(17 & 18) After that conference, Field-Marshal Keitel wrote Rosenberg a very sharp letter in which he informed him of Hitler's decision and asked him to forget the planned intervention.

Thus Hitler, for the time being, reduced the Russian National Committee, and the Liberation Army which in fact existed only in name, to a mere center of propaganda, controlled by Germans and working mainly by means of newspapers and pamphlets edited in Russian. However, the result of this propaganda was that, in spite of Hitler's intervention, the Committee and the Liberation Army became a symbol of the Russian nation's fight against the Soviet yoke. The lot of Soviet prisoners in German captivity improved.

During 1943 the number of volunteers in the eastern formations increased allegedly to some 800,000.(19) In September of that year, a new blow fell upon these formations.(20) According to exaggerated comments on German reports, Soviet troops broke through German lines chiefly because of the "treacherous" behavior of the Russian volunteer formations. Hitler flew into a rage; He ordered that all eastern formations be immediately disbanded, and that 80,000 of them, as first contingent, immediately be sent to France as coal-diggers.

He also demanded that the progress of the disbanding was to be reported to him every 48 hours. The Chief of the General Staff was also furious and at first did not want to hear of any delay in carrying out the order. However, when he was finally convinced that the facts were greatly exaggerated, and that it was impossible to withdraw from the front more than 3-5 thousand men, he decided to intervene. After three days Hitler modified his order; Only formations from the broken sector of the front were disbanded.

According to a statement of the General of Eastern Troops, seemingly made at that time, there were then on the entire Russian Front 427,000 ex-Soviet soldiers serving in the eastern formations, who would have to be replaced by German soldiers in case they were disbanded.(21) This figure did not include over 100,000 "Hiwi" who were not recognized as soldiers, nor Latvian, Estonian and Ukrainian formations. A few days later, when Hitler seemed appeased, he issued a new order: the Eastern Troops were to be withdrawn from the Russian Front and sent to other theaters of operation. Thus, in the autumn of 1943, some 70 to 80% of the Eastern troops were gradually withdrawn from the Russian front and moved to Poland, France, Italy, the Balkans, etc. In this way Hitler deprived the eastern formations of their essential reason for existence- the fight against the Soviets.

At the end of April, 1943 the formation of the Ukrainian Division began. This deviation from Hitler's policy was the result of the deterioration of the general situation on the Eastern Front, and the appearance of Soviet partisans in the southeastern territories of Poland. The decision to form the Ukrainian Division did not meet with the general approval of the Ukrainian population which, discouraged by the German administration, was divided into two camps. The leaders of the underground movement were against the recruitment, but one main consideration turned the scales in its favor: the fear that if the venture was boycotted, the Ukrainian youth would be deported to Germany as laborers or enrolled in German auxiliary formations.(22)

The Germans, on their part, did not grant special concessions to the Ukrainians. The formation was called the 14th SS Grenadier Division (Galician No.1), which meant that it was under Himmler's control and formally deprived of its national character. However, the Ukrainians received an assurance that the division would be used only on the Soviet front. In June, 1944 the division was engaged, was encircled, and suffered heavy losses fighting its way out. Voluntary enlistment was later replaced by conscription.(23)

In the autumn of 1944, the Germans at last agreed to change the name of the formation to "1st Ukrainian Division," and in March, 1945 it became a part of the Ukrainian Army.(24) At the end of 1943, a small Ukrainian Legion was organized, which a year later was disbanded by the Germans for refusing to fight the Polish Home Army. The Commander of the Legion was shot by the Germans.(25) Among the eastern formations may also be classed the "Russian Defense Corps" of Serbia, composed of volunteers from among old Russian immigrants living in Yugoslavia. The corps' strength [at its peak- the editor] was about 15,000 men. It had quite a different character from the majority of the eastern formations which were mainly composed of Soviet citizens. The creation of the corps was preceded by long endeavors, because Hitler was opposed to the participation of old Russian [ex-Czarist] immigrants in the fight against the USSR. He limited the activities of the corps to operations against the local partisans in Yugoslavia, which of course deprived the corps of its raison d'être.

The enforced captivity of the Russian National Committee, and of General Vlasov, continued in spite of many efforts on the part of the German sympathizers of the anti- Soviet movement.(26) An attempt to influence Hitler was made by the "Gaulieter" of Vienna, Baldur von Schirach, who had been won over to the idea of the Liberation Army. Hitler left Schirach's written interpolation without a reply. In the autumn of 1943, the order appeared which directed the eastern formations from the Russian Front to other theaters of operations; General Vlasov was asked to publish an open letter to the Russian volunteers in which he was to explain that the withdrawal from the eastern front was a temporary measure, dictated by the necessity of giving them repose and time for reorganization. When General Vlasov refused his signature, the "letter" was printed and distributed without his knowledge.

To sum up, by the middle of 1944 the situation of the anti-Soviet movement was as follows: ROA, the Russian Army of Liberation, was not a formation in the sense of a military organization. Units which bore its name were mostly commanded by German officers, and were dispersed all over Europe; General Vlasov and the Russian National Committee had no influence whatsoever, and were not recognized by the German government; But the soldiers of the ROA saw in them their leaders.

In July, 1944 a sudden turn occurred. Himmler, always a great enemy of General Vlasov and the Liberation Army, finally came to the conclusion that in the critical situation of the Reich it was worth while to try a course of policy different from the official one that had so far prevailed. His change of mind was brought about mainly by his closest SS lieutenants. At that time Himmler was, after Hitler, the most important and powerful person in the Reich. He was Chief of the SS, Hitler's praetorians, Chief of the Police, including the secret Gestapo, Minister of the Interior and, since the attempt on Hitler's life on July 20th, also Commander of the Reserve Troops [Home Army- the editor]. He had the full confidence of Hitler, who gave him a free hand in dealing with General Vlasov.

The meeting between General Vlasov and Himmler was to take place on July 21st. But this date almost coincided with the attempt on Hitler's life; the meeting therefore took place two months later, on September 16th. It resulted in Himmler's consent to the creation of a new committee, called KONR - Committee for the Liberation of the People's of Russia (27), and the KONR Army under General Vlasov's command. The Committee and Army were to embrace all Soviet citizens living under German rule, in order to unite their political and military activities in the fight against Bolshevism.

General Vlasov confirmed his declaration in the Smolensk Manifesto, that in the new Russia "every people will obtain national freedom, including the right of self- determination. The realization of this right to national independence and freedom is possible, however, only after destroying Stalin and his clique."(28)

Himmler agreed to this interpretation and promised to help with the formation of the KONR Army. To start with, 5 divisions were to be organized from among prisoners and workers brought to Germany from the occupied territories in the east; their number reached almost 5 million. As the majority of the Eastern Troops (ROA) were engaged at various fronts, their transfer to the KONR Army was to take place gradually. Thus the new Committee and its Army owed their creation to Himmler who, by taking them under his wing, removed them from the sphere of influence of the Wehrmacht and Rosenberg, both of whom he hated.

The creation of the Committee for the Liberation of the People's of Russia, and the consent to the organization of its Army, met strong opposition in many influential German circles, chiefly because the Committee and Army were led by a Russian, general Vlasov, and were to embrace nationals of all the peoples of Russia. Not only Rosenberg opposed this but also many high officials and officers. Vlasov's strongest opposition, however, came from the representatives of the non-Russian nations, whose aim was to cut off all bonds with Russia and create their own independent states.

In their eyes the KONR was mainly a Russian enterprise and controlled by Russians whom they did not trust. The declaration of "equality of all peoples of Russia and their real right for national development, self-determination, and state inde- pendence" (29) was regarded as merely a concession to circumstances which in the future, as so often in the past, would be forgotten. This time, the non-Russian representatives expressed the experience of hundreds of years of relations between their peoples and Russia.

Thus, although Himmler - who wanted only one all-Russian committee rather than several national committees - exercised pressure and made various threats, the following nationals refused to join KONR: Ukrainians, White Ruthenians, Georgians, Cossacks. The Kalmuks, who were grouped as "Cossacks", decided to join KONR. General Vlasov however, prompted by his closest friends, came to an understanding with certain Ukrainians, White Ruthenians, Cossacks and Georgians who pretended to be "representatives" of their nations. Thus, for example, the Russian General Balabin joined KONR as "representative" of the Cossacks although his only ground for "representation" was that he had served some time ago in the Cossack troops.

General Vlasov by the way, had no illusions; He realized fully his defeat. When one of the Germans congratulated him on the "satisfactory" solution of the non-Russian representatives, he replied sadly: "Those?" "The others are only the shadows of their peoples, but those are the shadows of the shadows."(30) The majority of the old Russian emigrants who declared themselves against KONR and General Vlasov, describing his program as "Bolshevistic" because it stressed the preservation of the fruits of the 1917 Revolution. However, those factions of the old emigrants which realized that a return to the state of affairs before 1917 was impossible, backed General Vlasov. Yet KONR remained to the end under the influence of the Russians who were Soviet citizens; It was the expression of their protest against the tyranny of Stalin.

On November 14th, 1944 the Committee for the Liberation of the Peoples of Russia held its inaugural meeting in Prague. Here the Prague Manifesto was proclaimed. In it the aims of the KONR were described: "a) The overthrow of Stalin's tyranny, the liberation of the peoples of Russia from the Bolshevik system, and the restitution of those rights to the peoples of Russia which they fought for and won in the people's revolution of 1917; b) Discontinuation of the war and an honorable peace with Germany; c) Creation of a new free people's political system without Bolsheviks and exploiters."(31)

The political program was almost identical with that of the Smolensk Manifesto of December, 1942; But it stressed in its very first point the right of the peoples of Russia to self-determination and full national independence. The Manifesto stated further that it "decisively rejects all reactionary projects connected with a limitation of the peoples' rights,"(32) and that it welcomed Germany's help under conditions which would not impair the honor and independence of Russia. The declaration ended with an appeal to officers and soldiers of the Red Army to stop the war of aggression and turn their arms against the Bolshevik usurpers, and to "brothers and sisters" in the "motherland," to continue in the fight against Stalin's tyranny and the war of aggression.

After its first meeting, the Committee for the Liberation of the Peoples of Russia met a few more times in Prague, but it had no opportunity to develop its activity. The end of the Third Reich was approaching with great speed; Besides, German control was constantly hampering the Committee's work, and all decisions and instructions had to be "coordinated" with the appropriate German commissar. Nevertheless, the publication of the Prague Manifesto made a deep impression on the Russians. First of all, it brought forth a great number of voluntary applications for service in the Liberation Army, a number surpassing all expectations. in one single day, the 20th of November, about 60,000 applications were received.(33)

Particularly large was the number of volunteers from among prisoners of war and Soviet refugees who had left their native land voluntarily with the retreating German armies, preferring a wandering life in strange and perhaps unfriendly lands to a return under the NKVD yoke. What is still more puzzling, the desertion from the Red Army to the Germans increased after the publication of the Manifesto, although no one any longer doubted the defeat of Germany.(34) Whatever can be said today about this hope and belief, it remains a fact that it was widespread, particularly in the Red Army.

The KONR Army, called persistently though wrongly "ROA," Russian Army of Liberation - no such army ever existed as a united military force - had begun to form in November 1944, six months before the end of the war. Its birth was accompanied by shortages of arms and equipment,(35) and by the chaos of the disintegrating Reich. Its short-lived protector, Himmler, realizing that the venture was belated, abandoned it to the Wehrmacht. The German armies were delaying the transfer of their eastern troops to General Vlasov's command; Many of these formations were by then destroyed or had suffered heavy losses on the western front.(36) The leaders of the German economy were protesting against the recruiting of [eastern] workers to the Liberation Army. As a result, the 5 divisions to be organized were cut by the Germans to two [eventually 2 1/2 plus a small "Air Force"- the Editor]. The KONR Army would have never been formed, even as a small force, in such a short time but for the great influx of enlistment's, the enthusiasm of the volunteers, and the existence of a skeleton staff which General Vlasov had managed to form during the two years of inactivity.(37)

In spite of all difficulties, General Vlasov formed the Army Headquarters, two motorized divisions, one reserve brigade, and engineer battalion, and a few officers units, with a total strength of some 50,000 men.(38 & 39) On January 28th, 1945 he officially took command of the army. Shortly afterwards, the German insignia was removed and replaced by the army's own insignia.

The 1st KONR Division, under the command of General [Sergei Kuzmich] Bunyachenko, was given the name of "600th Panzer-Grenadier Division"(40) Its organization began in November, 1944 in Muensingen [Troop Training Grounds Muensingen, Wehrkreis V - the Editor]. Operational readiness was reached in mid- February, 1945. Because of the Wehrmacht's reluctance to part with their eastern formations, mentioned before, the nucleus of the division consisted of the remnants of the 30th SS Infantry Division (Russian No.2), which was greatly reduced during the fighting in France, and the remnants of the infamous Kaminski SS Division, which was in fact a band of outlaws and not a military formation. When this rabble arrived at the camp where the division was being formed, gangs of armed and un-armed men in all kinds of uniforms, accompanied by women in fancy dresses and bejeweled from head to foot stepped out of the carriages; officers were distinguished from men only by the number of watches on their wrists - from three to five; order and discipline did not exist.(41) At the sight, General Bunyachenko exclaimed in anger: "So this is what you're giving me - bandits, robbers, thieves. You'll let me have what you can no longer use!"(42)

Although the division soon was operationally up to strength, there were acute shortages of arms, equipment, and supplies.(43) There were allegedly only some 50% of the required books, so that only half of the soldiers could leave the barracks for exercises, while the other half had to wait their turn.(44) After finishing its training, the Division waited until the beginning of March for marching orders, and a month later reached the front on the Oder. These delays were mainly the result of general chaos in Germany. On the way to the front the division was joined by a few thousand Russian laborers and soldiers from the Eastern formations.

The 2nd KONR Division, under the command of General G. A. Zveryev , was named the 650th Panzer-Grenadier Division;(45) Its formation began in January 1945 in Baden, some 43 miles from the camp of the 1st Division.(46) Owing to the shortages in arms and equipment, it never really reached operational readiness. The base of the division consisted of a few battalions withdrawn from Norway, and some recently captured Russian prisoners.(47)

The KONR Army's Headquarters, the reserve brigade, the engineer battalion, the officers' school and other units, in all some 25,000 men, were being formed in the same area as the 2nd Division. The organization of the 3rd Division was begun in Austria, but its strength apparently never exceeded 2,700 men.

The Cossack Cavalry Corps of General von Pannwitz, which had about 50,000 men, and the Russian Defense Corps of Serbia, about 15,000 strong, were also to be included in the KONR Army; but the Cossacks joined the 2nd Division when it was all over, and the Defense Corps of Serbia never joined Vlasov's forces.(48) From the KONR formations only two took part in the fighting: a small [light armored] detachment of Colonel Sakharov's, in the beginning of February, 1945; and in mid-April, the 1st Division which, after reaching the front, was given the task of capturing the Soviet bridgehead in the area of Frankfurt-on-Oder.(49)

This bridgehead had been previously attacked by the Germans, but without any success. The attack of the 1st Division also failed, with heavy losses owing to the lack of adequate artillery and air support.(50) From the time the division left the training camp, General Bunyachenko had been delaying the execution of all orders issued by the Germans, each time waiting for General Vlasov's approval.

After the failure of this attack, he withdrew the division on his own authority,(51) and a few days later began the march towards the frontier of Czechoslovakia, together with Sakharov's detachment [regiment] and Russian volunteers which brought his forces from the initial 12,000 to over 20,000 men. On the way, the Germans tried in vain to induce him to obey their orders. At the end of April, the division reached the frontier of Czechoslovakia. There General Vlasov joined Bunyachenko.

On May 2nd, they stopped at a distance of 30 miles from Prague. There a German emissary reached General Vlasov and informed him that the Army's Headquarters, the 2nd Division and the remaining formations of the KONR, were on their way through Austria to Czechoslovakia; and that the Germans no longer needed the 1st Division but wanted to be assured it would not turn against them.(52)

At that time, Prague seemed to be the objective of American and Soviet armies which were approaching from two directions. This induced the Czechoslovak National Council to call [for] an uprising against the Germans. It began on May 5th. On the same day, Czechs implored the Allies by radio to come to their aid because Prague was threatened by the Germans. Their call was in vain. On the strength of the agreement with the Kremlin which included Czechoslovakia in the sphere of Soviet influence, the Americans had stopped. The Red Army did the same, probably in order to give the German SS men time to deal in their own way with the anti-Soviet insurgents. Thus the Russians repeated what they had done in August and September [1944] during the Warsaw rising.

Receiving no reply to their call for help, the Czechoslovak National Council turned for help to General Bunyachenko. In the morning of May 6th, the 1st Division joined the fight, and by evening cleared Prague of the German SS men.(53) The Czechs greeted Vlasov's men joyfully, but on the next day, General Bunyachenko was informed that Prague would be occupied by the Red Army, not by the Americans as he had expected,(54) and that the Czechoslovak National Council was being replaced by the Benes government; the latter demanded that the forces of General Vlasov were either to await the Red Army's entrance in order to surrender, or leave Prague as soon as possible. In the morning of the 8th, General Bunyachenko's troops began to march toward the same area from which they had come to Prague only four days before.(55)

Meanwhile, on April 19th, the 2nd Division and the Army's Headquarters received marching orders to proceed to Linz. from there they were to go on the front after being armed and equipped. On its way, the division passed a POW. camp of Soviet soldiers who, seeing the marching columns of their comrades, began to break the fences and join the troops. The German sentries opened fire which was returned by the Russian volunteers. German liaison officers succeeded in settling this incident. On May 1st, the division reached the area of Linz. Hitler was already dead. The end of the war was a question of days.(56) At approximately the same time, two emissaries of General Vlasov, one of them a German officer, reached the Headquarters of the 7th American Army.

The command of the Army instructed them to await the decision of his government, and after a few days they were told that they were prisoners. General Vlasov, having no news from his emissaries, lost all hope of saving his soldiers from vengeance of the Kremlin. He was a completely disillusioned man. A few days after leaving Prague, the 1st KONR Division laid down its arms in the small Czech village of Schluesselburg, in the American zone. Soviet emissaries spared no effort to induce General Bunyachenko to surrender to the Red Army. General Bunyachenko played for time, trying to convince the Americans that they should intern his soldiers and not hand them over to the Soviets. However, on May 12th he was informed that Schluesselburg would be included in the Soviet zone, and that the local American commander did not consent to letting the division march beyond the new demarcation line.

The only possible solution, suggested by an American officer, was that soldiers of KONR might try to cross over to the American zone individually. General Bunyachenko immediately disbanded the division, advising subordinates to try their luck on their own. During the flight however, many were shot by Soviet troops, the majority were captured by the Red Army, and others were handed by the Americans.(57) Some 17,000 of them are said to have been deported to Russia, where they met death or imprisonment for life. General Vlasov fell into Soviet hands on May 12th, [1945]. After the change in demarcation line, he was going by car from Schuesselburg to the American zone. There are various versions, not much different from each other, as to the circumstances under which he was captured, but all agree that he was a victim of ill luck, and was not purposely handed over by the Americans.(58)

The 2nd KONR Division split in two parts; the greater part, together with the Cossack Corps of General von Pannwitz, surrendered to the British on May 12th, in Austria, to be interned in the area of Klagenfurt - St. Veit. One regiment of the 2nd Division and the Army's Headquarters reached the American zone after a long and weary journey, and were interned at Landau, in western Bavaria. The commander of the 2nd Division, General Zverev, had fallen into Soviet hands on May 11th, 1945. Wanting to stay with his dying wife, he had locked himself in his quarters with his aide-de-camp and decided to fight it out. In the exchange of shots with Soviet soldiers, the aide-de-camp was killed, and General Zverev [was] wounded and captured.(59)

On May 27th, in accordance with the agreement signed in Vienna by British and Soviet authorities, the British began to hand over to the Soviets the interned soldiers of the Eastern formations as well as the Cossacks. On that day, in Graz, there were handed over the generals von Pannwitz, Krasnov, and Shkuro. All three hoped to the last that they would be spared this fate, for the first was a German, and the other two old [Czarist] Russian emigrants.(60)

At the same time, the British commander arrived at the command post of the 2nd KONR Division and announced that on the following day the prisoners would leave the camp in national groups. Asked whether this was the first step on the way to Siberia, he replied in the affirmative and began to explain that politics sometimes compel a soldier to perform actions with which he does not agree in his soul.(61) During the night, the Germans from the liaison section [of the Division] and a few hundred prisoners, mainly Cossacks, escaped from the camp with the help of a British officer and some British soldiers.

The majority remained, because they either could not make up their minds or lacked the strength to risk such an adventure. In the morning they were loaded on trucks and handed over to the NKVD. On their way, already in the Soviet zone, many tried to escape, but almost all were shot, either by the members of the convoy or by Soviet patrols in the country. After the arrival in Vienna, the surviving prisoners were sent by rail to Russia.(62) The number of Cossacks delivered to the Soviets, reported in a written statement of a Cossack immigrant, merits special attention. The delivery of the interned to the Soviet authorities began on May 28th.

On this day a conference was called in the little town of Spittal in Austria, to which the British commander had invited the entire officers' corps from the Cossack camp: 35 generals, 167 colonels, 283 lieutenant-colonels, 375 captains, 1,752 subalterns, 136 military functionaries and doctors, two chaplains, two band leaders, two photographers, and two interpreters, in all 2,756 persons. At the time of the departure from the camp, 2,201 reported ready for the journey, the remainder having refused to be loaded on the trucks, or having disappeared.

On the way to Linz, 55 of them committed suicide; 2,146 were handed over to the NKVD. Among them were 1,856 Cossack officers, 176 Russians, 63 Ukrainians, 31 Caucasians, and a handful of other nationals. As to the fate of those delivered: 12 generals were sent to Moscow, 120 officers were shot on the way to Vienna by Soviet soldiers of the convoy, 1,030 officers died during the interrogations by the NKVD, 983 officers were "passed along"; many of this group were sent to mines in the Urals, and deprived of the right to come out to the surface of the earth.

Two Cossack generals were killed in their quarters on the day of delivery to the Soviets. On June 1st, about 25,000 people were handed to the Soviets from the Cossack camp in Linz which held 32,000 persons, mainly old men, women, and children who were in fact refugees, though among them were also Cossack soldiers. Even after the specified period of the delivery of prisoners, Soviet military missions made unexpected raids on Displaced Persons camps in the American and British zones, and took from them many people by force. In all, over 150,000 Cossacks were handed over to the USSR.

The fate of the Cossacks was shared by the 162nd Turkoman Division which surrendered to the British in Italy,(63) and by almost all prisoners - Soviet citizens - from other Eastern formations. As late as February 1946, the same happened to that part of the 2nd KONR Division which together with the Army's Headquarters, had been interned by the Americans in Landau. The commanders of these formations tried to persuade the American authorities to sponsor the remnants of the KONR Army, keeping their character of anti-Soviet formations. The Americans explained that this was quite impossible, and often pointed out that there was always the possibility to escape from the poorly guarded camp.

Many of the interned availed themselves of this opportunity, but some 3,000 decided to stay put. In the autumn, the prisoners were moved to Regensberg and later to Platting. There, one Sunday at 6 o'clock in the morning, began the forcible delivery of the prisoners to the Soviets. This was a terrible surprise to the prisoners, who did not think they would be forcibly handed over. The camps at Kempton, Landshut and other places were liquidated in a similar way.(64) Half of the leaders of the Vlasov movement were handed over to the Soviets.(65) The statement of the Cossack emigrant mentioned before quotes the impressions of a British sailor given here without alteration:

"I took part in the evacuation of Dunkirk. Our soldiers felt very badly. I helped to fish out Germans from the sunken Bismarck, which received the greatest number of torpedoes in history. I saw the population of Malta sitting in the cellars for many weeks. I saw Malta being bombed incessantly and deafened by explosions of bombs and shells. They were exhausted from constant explosions and alarms. I lived through the sinking of my own ship. I know about jumping into the water at night, dark and without bottom, and the terrifying shouts for help of the drow- ning, and then the boat, and looking for the rescue ship. It was a nightmare. I drove German prisoners captured during the invasion of Normandy. They were almost dying from fear. But all that is nothing. The real, terrible, unspeakable fear I saw during the convoying and repatriation of people to Soviet Russia. They were becoming white, green and gray with the fear that took hold of them. When we arrived at the port and were handing them over to the Russians, the repatriates were fainting and losing their senses. And only now I know what a man's fear is who lived through hell, and that it is nothing compared to the fear of a man who is returning to the Soviet hell."

The Russian Defense Corps of Serbia which surrendered to the British escaped the terrible fate. Its soldiers were saved by the fact that they were old Russian emigrants or sons of such emigrants(66) In a similar way the soldiers of the Ukrainian Division were saved. As the majority of them were Polish citizens and the others claimed the same privilege, they did not, in the eyes of the Western governments, fall into the category of "traitors" to the Soviet Union.

However, before this decision was reached, in May 1946, the Ukrainians lived through a dreadful period of uncertainty. Nor were the soldiers of the Estonian and Latvian formations delivered to the Soviets, since they were citizens of states whose annexation by the Soviet Union in 1939 was not formally recognized by the Western powers. On August 2nd, 1946 the first mention of the Vlasov movement appeared in the Soviet Press. The last page of Pravda, Moscow's greatest newspaper, announced the death by hanging of the following: Vlasov, Malyshkin, Zhilenkov, Trukhin, Zakutny, Blagoveshchenski, Meandrov, Maltsev, Bunyachenko, Zverev, Korbukov, and Shatov. "All accused admitted their guilt in the charges made against them... The sentence has been executed."(67)

The Vlasov Movement was one of the strongest ideological movements known in modern history, because of the number of supporters it gained and of the drastic form in which it expressed itself: the fight with arms in hands against its own government at the side of the enemy of its own nation. And yet, in spite of its force and vitality, it did not bring the expected results and gave the Germans more trouble than advantages. The reasons were not so much in the movement itself as in the circumstances in which it was born and had to exist.(68)

Up to the middle of 1944, during three years of war with the Soviets, Hitler fought the Vlasov Movement and the national anti-Soviet movements as well as Stalin. And even when these movements finally gained his approval, it was never a full one. As late as January 27th, 1945 he said in a tirade against dressing foreigners in German uniforms, particularly people from the USSR: "One has no sense of honor around here. Every wretch is put in German uniform. I was always against it."(69)

Nor was the development of the anti-Soviet movement stopped by the bad treatment the Eastern formations received from many German commanders.(70) All too often they were regarded as third class troops which deserved no care. Not until the middle of 1944 did the Chief of the General Staff of the Army issue instructions for the treatment of soldiers and volunteer troops which guaranteed them the rights and privileges of soldiers.(71) Even so, in many cases when these troops were in action they were left on their own instead of being withdrawn in time; this often resulted in disaster for them. Many of them perished in this way during the fighting in Normandy. At the end of August 1944, the Americans alone had some 20,000 prisoners from the Eastern formations.(72 & 73)

And yet, in spite of all this, the Eastern formations were growing almost to the end. What is still more extraordinary: their development escaped not only Hitler's notice but even that of his watchful policeman, Himmler. When in October 1944 the General of Eastern Troops informed Himmler that at the time of the Anglo-American invasion of the continent over 800,000 Eastern volunteers served in the German Army and about 100,000 in the Navy and Luftwaffe, Himmler simply could not believe it, nor conceal his fear that this mass constituted a threat to the Germans.(74)

Hitler knew even less; on March 23rd, 1945 he exclaimed at a conference in great surprise: "We just don't know what is floating around. I have just heard for the first time, to my amazement, that a Ukrainian SS Division has suddenly appeared. I don't know a thing about this."(75) If then, the Vlasov Movement and the anti-Soviet non-Russian movements did not give the results they could have given, Hitler is first of all to blame for it. To the very end, neither he nor his henchmen ever learned the lesson. Even the last attempt to change their policy was unsuccessful, because they did not understand [nor care about] the aspirations of the non-Russian nations who rejected the Soviet system as well as the rule of Russia over their countries. This is reason why the rallying of all anti- Soviet movements under the banner of General Vlasov, so strongly forced by Himmler, miscarried.

True, the Prague Manifesto acknowledged the right to independence of all nations under the [anti-Communist] Russian rule, but the lack of confidence in Russia stopped the separatists from joining the Russians. As a result, the Committee for the Liberation of the Peoples of Russia was mainly a Russian venture. Its army had even a stronger Russian flavor.

The tragedy of the Vlasov Movement was that it was fighting one totalitarian system at the side of another, that it was fighting for the liberation of its own nation at the side of another nation which wanted to enslave it. Its liberal programs were a kind of paradox. The same held true for the national anti-Soviet movements of the non-Russian peoples have not met with understanding in the West. In those days, all Soviet citizens who took up arms against the USSR were in the eyes of the West traitors to their country who did not deserve leniency. This was of course, a much too simple way of looking at the whole question.

From the moral point of view, the Ukrainians, Byelorussians, Cossacks, the Georgians, Armenians, and Turkomans, and the members of all the other non-Russian nations were not traitors. No matter under which government they were born and in which part of the world, they all fought against a government which was not their government and against a country which was not their country, but which had enslaved them. By contrast, the Russians of General Vlasov fought only against their government but not against their own nation; what is more, they fought for the liberation of their nation from the system which enslaved it. One could say of them that they were traitors to their government but not traitors to their nation, and in Soviet Russia the government and the nation are not the same, as in the West.

There never was in Russia a government of the people, the affairs of the state are not controlled by the people, and the state (and government) does not exist for the people but the other way around. General Vlasov and the thousands of his soldiers and millions of his supporters were good Russians and not Hitler's hirelings which, unfortunately, they appeared to be and which Hitler wanted them to be. Already in the autumn of 1942, the German Foreign Office stated in a memorandum that General Vlasov "is not....a mere seeker after political glory and accordingly will never become a purchasable hireling and will never be willing to lead hirelings."(76)

General Vlasov did not become the leader of the mutiny against the Soviet system because of personal grievances; far from it, to the very end of his service in the Red Army he was making an excellent career. Treason does not come easy even to people of a low moral level. At the side of General Vlasov almost a million Soviet citizens were fighting shoulder to shoulder with the invader, and millions of others were showing sympathy for the invader: there must have been very important reasons for this phenomenon.

In my opinion there is one reason which explains everything: the general hatred of the Soviet system, a hatred greater than inborn patriotism and loyalty to one's own government. Those who have not seen the limitless degradation of man in what was the Soviet hell cannot understand that a moment may come when a man out of sheer desperation will take up arms against the hateful system even at the side of an enemy. The responsibility for his mutiny falls on the system and not him. Here the notions of loyalty and treason lose their meaning. If, in the eyes of many people, Germans who fought against Hitler were not traitors, why should the Russians who fought against the Soviet system be traitors?

How little public opinion in the West understood the real state of affairs is perhaps best shown by the text of the leaflets, addressed to Soviet soldiers in German uniform, which were dropped by the Allied Air Forces in France in the summer of 1944. These leaflets called for the cessation of fighting and promised as a reward - speedy repatriation of prisoners to the USSR! The effect was of course, such that some of the Eastern troops fought desperately to the last man.(77) Thus, for example, an Armenian battalion perished completely in bitter fighting.(78) Soldiers of the Eastern formations were the unhappiest soldiers of the Second World War. Deprived of their fatherland, scorned by their protectors, regarded generally as traitors, although in their consciences they were not traitors, they fought often for an alien and hateful cause; the only reward which they eventually received for their pains was toil and death, mostly in a foreign land, or "repatriation" to the hell from which they had tried to escape. Old General [Ernst] Koestring, in a conversation with an American colonel, has allegedly said:

"We Germans, owing to our lack of reason, our limitless appetite, inability and ignorance, have lost the greatest capital that existed and can exist in the fight against Bolshevism. In the imagination of countless Russians we have thrown the picture of European culture into the mud. And yet, we have left certain capital which in future could grow. You will not understand me today when I tell you that during the last few weeks you have destroyed this capital for the second time, not only in the material sense, but also in the souls of all those who had counted on your help and understanding after the Germans let them down. It may easily happen that in the near future you will be calling for what is now perishing."(79)

So ends the Story of The Russian Volunteer in the service of the German Armed Forces in WWII.

Footnotes:

1 "Wen Sie Verderben Wollen," pp. 82-83.

2 "Soviet Opposition to Stalin," p.45.

3 "Panzer Leader," p.356; "Ukraincy a Likwidacja Powstania Warszawskiego," pp. 76-78; "Soviet Opposition to Stalin," pp. 42-43.

4 "Soviet Opposition to Stalin," p. 48.

5 Ibid., pp. 48-49.

6 Ibid., p. 51.

7 "Wen Sie Verdeben Wollen," p. 80.

8 Ibid., pp. 118-119.

9 "Ukraincy a Likwidacja Powstania Warszawskiego," p. 80.

10 Steenberg, Sven. "Vlasov." Alfred A. Knopf: New York, 1970. Page 21. According to Sven Steenberg, a former German officer intimately involved in the Russian Liberation Army, General Vlasov was appointed acting commander in chief of the entire Northwest Front on March 6, 1942.

11 General Vlasov's personal history is quoted here mainly from "Soviet Opposition to Stalin," pp. 26-32.

12 "Vlasovskoye Dvizhenye v Svieti Dokumentov," p. 78.

13 "Wen Sie Verderben Wollen." p. 173-174.

14 "Soviet Opposition to Stalin," pp. 58-60.

15 "Wen Sie Verdeben Wollen," p. 220.

16 "Soviet Opposition to Stalin," pp. 62-63.

17 Ibid., p. 63; Also Appendix II, pp.176-187.

18 Apparently, this rule was ignored by the divisional commander of the German 134th Infantry Division who, according to the author, Alexander Dallin ["German Rule in Russia, 1941-1945"] stated that its personnel consisted of 50% Russian and other eastern volunteers by late 1942.- the editor.

19 "Soviet Opposition to Stalin," p. 45.

20 "Wen Sie Verdeben Wollen," pp. 283-285.

21 "Soviet Opposition to Stalin," p. 45.

22 According to a German officer in the Division [Wolf-Dietrich Heike], the Division absorbed the 4th-8th "Galician" (Ukrainian) Police Regiments. - the editor.

23 According to the author's R. J. Bender & H. P. Taylor, the initial batch of Ukrainian volunteers for the division turned out to be around 80,000 men, out of which only the fittest 13,000 were chosen. - "Uniforms, Organization And History of the Waffen-SS" Vol. IV. R. James Bender Publishing: San Jose, 1975. Page 22.

24 "Prawda o Ukrainskiej Dywizji.".

25 "Ukraincy a Likwidacja Powstania Warszawskiego," p. 85.

26 This initially included most of the staff of "Fremde Heer Ost" (Foreign Armies East) headed by Reinhard Gehlen, but including officers that were 200% committed to realizing a Russian Liberation Army, like Captains Wilfried Strik-Strikfeldt, Sven Steenberg, and Egon Peterson (among the more "active" elements), but later included most of the higher ranking generals on the Russian Front, as well as officers within the SS organization and within the Nazi political leadership. - The Editor.

27 "Komitet Osvobozhdyeniya Narodov Rossii" - the Editor.

28 Soviet Opposition to Stalin, p. 74.

29 Ibid, "Prague Manifesto," Appendix IV, p.196.

30 Wen Sie Verderben Wollen, p. 424.

31 Soviet Opposition to Stalin, "Prague Manifesto," pp. 196-199.

32 Ibid, pp.196-199.

33 Ibid, p. 96. Kasantsev states in his Tretia Sila, p. 290, that the number of applications that day was 62,000 , in November grew to 300,000 and at the end of December was 1,000,000.

34 This is one of the most perplexing occurrences in the whole story of the eastern volunteer movement. In one particular incident, which occurred in December, 1944 and entire Soviet regiment deserted en-masse from the Red Army and went over to the [German raised] XVth Cossack Cavalry Corps in Yugoslavia. The same thing happened when a Red Army Air Force squadron landed behind the German lines, ready to serve under the KONR! - the Editor.

35 Although for German 1944/45 standards, the only two divisions and one brigade which it created were magnificently manned (around 20,000+ men per division) and equipped (the two infantry divisions even had their own armored compliment in the form of T-34 tanks and tank destroyers!). - the Editor.

36 For a more complete listing and description of these units of eastern troops who were absorbed into the two KONR divisions, please see "Hitler's Eastern Legions, Vol.II - The Osttruppen" by Antonio J. Munoz, Axis Europa, Inc.: New York, 1997.

37 This was based on the so-called "Dabendorf" group who had organized a training school for Russian volunteers by that same name and staffed by Russian officers. - the Editor.

38 Soviet Opposition to Stalin, p. 97.

39 -

40 According to field post records however, the unit was listed as an infantry division [600. Infanterie-Division (russ.)], but as the appendix shows, it was a "magnificently" equipped infantry division, having even an armored complement! - the Editor.

41 While General Anders' comments about the condition of the Kaminski Brigade at Muensingen, and its comportment in Warsaw, Poland are true, it (1) never did get incorporated into the Waffen-SS, although Himmler was planning to do it; and (2) It did in fact perform exemplary as a tough anti-partisan unit while it operated in the area of Lokot (Bryansk region). Its spiral downwards into an un-disciplined, mercenary mob did not begin until its transfer to White Russia in late 1943. For a more detailed study of this fascinating and esoteric unit, please see: "The Kaminski Brigade: A History" by Antonio Munoz (Axis Europa: Bayside, 1995). - the Editor.

42 Wen Sie Verdeben Wollen, p. 441.

43 Again, perhaps General Anders may have been speaking of the unit's condition at the beginning of its formation, for as the appendix at the end of this book shows, the division was excellently supplied with all types of weapons and arms that would make it the envy of any German unit. By April 2nd, 1945 the arms listed in this appendix were under the division's control. - the Editor.

44 Tretia Sila, p. 302.

45 Again, German records listed the unit as an infantry division [650. Infanterie-Division (russ.)].- the Editor.

46 Once again, German records list the unit as being in Wehrkreis V, but stationed at Troop Training Ground Heuberg, later being transferred to Muensingen. - the Editor.

47 This is not exactly the whole picture, for the German military historian, Joachim Hoffman states that several Ost-bataillonen were added to this division: 427, 600, 642, 667, 851, IIIrd Bataillon/ (russiche) Grenadier Regiment 714, and Bau Pioneer (Construction Engineer) Bataillon 851. ["Die Geschichte der Wlassow-Armee" von Joachim Hoffman. 1986 Rombach: Verlagshaus KG, Freiburg im Breisgau]. - the Editor.

48 This is very true. On March 29th, 1945 the men of the Cossack Cavalry Corps unanimously voted to place all Cossack formations under Vlasov (after naming von Pannwitz as the first ever non-Cossack Ataman in all history), and to suspend the Cossack administration headed by General Krasnov. As General Anders relates here, however, this transfer of command did not take place, because it was not immediately approved by Himmler until April 28th, 1945. By that time, the end of the war was just a week away. It was impossible, therefore, for the Cossacks to reach the Vlasov divisions, let alone merge with them.- the Editor.

49 Actually, Anders was not aware of a third KONR contingent, sent from Denmark which one military historian has identified as the 1064 Russian Grenadier Regiment of the 599th Russian Brigade, while another author states that it was the 1604 Russian Regiment of the same brigade [which was simply the re-designated Grenadier Regiment 714th (Russian)]. Also, the 1st KONR Division fought at Furstenberg-Erlenhof (which is about 30 kilometers south of Frankfurt an Oder). Additionally, Colonel Sakharov's command of the 150-strong light armored contingent lasted from February 9th, 1945 until the end of the month and beginning of March, when it was returned to Muensingen. The unit initially fought against a Soviet bridgehead in Neulowin and then in Pomerania, where it gained notoriety, capturing many prisoners. Colonel Sakharov was assisted by Count Grigory von Lamsdorf. Both of these officers next set off for Denmark, where they gathered together one of the three regiments under the 599th Russian Brigade (transport by rail was only available for one of the regiments), and set off in the direction of Stettin. It was there that they came under the command of Otto Skorzeny, who had meanwhile taken up the defense of that city on the River Oder. The regiment under Sakharov & Lamsdorf fought just south of Stettin from March 10th through April 10th, when it was pulled out of the lines by Sakharov and directed south (towards Vlasov and the 1st & 2nd Divisions). It is a mistery still, how Sakharov could have achieved this, but he, Lamdsdorf, and their regiment reached Vlasov's command around April 19th, at Rodeberg (near Dresden).- the Editor.

50 In fact, Vlasov had told the 1st Division's commander, General Bunyachenko that the attack was an impossibly mission, and that he should just make an attempt, then withdraw immediately. The attack had to go on however, since Vlasov had been told by Himmler that the future expansion of the KONR depended on the initial employment of its combat ready units in order to "prove" themselves. The Russians attacked for four hours, then withdrew. In all fairness to Bunyachenko and the men of the 1st KONR Division, the area was not suitable for attack (which began at 5am on April 14th), mainly due to (1) the swampy and very narrow avenue of attack, (2) barbed-wire defenses that the Reds had thrown up, and (3) the flanking and artillery fire that the KONR men were subjected to from the opposite bank of the river, with its higher elevation.- the Editor.

51 General Vlasov had meanwhile became conveniently "un-available" (so the Germans didn't have any means to officially countermand Bunyachenko's withdrawal).- the Editor.

52 According to Sven Steenberg ("Vlasov" Alfred A. Knopf: New York, 1970), the German OKH or Army High Command, had mobilized the 2nd Division, the staff and personnel of the officers school, and the replacement brigade, and sent them towards Linz, Austria to join Army Group Rendulic. At around this time (late April, 1945) the 1st KONR Division was also marching south.- the Editor.

53 The Czechs had made assurances to Bunyachenko that he and his division would be given asylum in Czechoslovakia if they intervened in their favor, but Vlasov didn't believe that even the Czech Democrats would act without America's OK, and as things stood, the US was not willing to negotiate with what their current Communist allies in Moscow were calling "treasonous turncoats." After a heated argument, Vlasov relented and let Bunyachenko have his way, since the majority of the division's men were is a mood to "repay" their German benefactors back for years of ignorance, lost opportunities, and humiliations.- the Editor.

54 Or been led (conveniently for the Czechs) to believe. - the Editor.

55 In the description of the 1st Division's activity I rely mainly on "Soviet Opposition to Stalin", pp. 98-102.

56 The fate of the 2nd KONR Division is described according to "Wen Sie Verdeben Wollen", pp. 514-517.

57 Ibid., pp. 117-118.

58 Ibid., pp. 117-118. In addition, this region was controlled by the Third U.S. Army, which was led by General George S. Patton, whose anti-Communist beliefs were widely known. In fact, Patton's wish to continue the war (this time against the Soviets) was a much publicized "scandal," which was played up in the papers- the Editor.

59 "Wen Sie Verdeben Wollen," p. 564.

60 In fact, international law specifically stated that only those people who were Soviet citizens as of June 22nd, 1941 were to be handed back. This excluded most of the men who had formed the Russian Guard Corps (in Serbia); but apparently, the Communists and British had their own agenda about who qualified for this law!- the Editor.

61 Personally, this sounds very much like the alibi that many Germans gave regarding the Jewish holocaust. To these wretched and dejected men, their handover by Britain and the US to the "tender" mercies of Stalin and his henchmen, represented a 2,000,000-man "holocaust," and is very well documented in Nicholas Bethell's classic study: "The Last Secret" (Basic Books, Inc.: New York, 1974).- the Editor.

62 "Wen Sie Verdeben Wollen," p. 571-572.

63 "Soviet Opposition to Stalin," p. 116.

64 Ibid, pp. 116-117.

65 Ibid, p. 119.

66 Although as mentioned earlier, this "law" was circumvented by the Allies and Russians whenever it suited them, as in the case of Germen General von Pannwitz and Czarist-era Cossacks like Shkuro, Krasnov, Klych, and Girey. Shkuro was a well known officer even to the British, who had awarded him a senior British military honor in 1919, so it wasn't that the British were un-awares of who he (and the rest of these men) were. Yet, they were handed over to the Communists anyway.- the Editor.

67 Soviet Opposition to Stalin, p. 120.

68 For an excellent discussion as to the initial success and ultimate failure of the Eastern volunteer movement, please see the book, "Hitler's Eastern Legions, Volume II - The Osttruppen" by Antonio J. Munoz (Axis Europa: Bayside, 1997).- the Editor.

69 Soviet Opposition to Stalin, p. 96.

70 Not to mention the regular German NCO or enlisted man, who often times showed great insensitivity and a lack of understanding when dealing with the Eastern volunteers.- the Editor.

71 "Wen Sie Verdeben Wollen," p. 325.

72 Ibid, p. 402.

73 Between June-December, 1944 the western Allies captured about 74,000 Eastern volunteers, with an additional 30,000 being taken from January-April, 1945.- ("Hitler's Eastern Legions, Vol. II - The Osttruppen." Axis Europa: Bayside, 1997. Page 30. - the Editor.

74 "Wen Sie Verdeben Wollen," p. 410-411.

75 "Soviet Opposition to Stalin," p. 96.

76 Ibid, p. 36.

77 Ibid, p. 116.

78 This is in complete contrast to an Armenian battalion which revolted in Holland. (see "Eastern Troops in Zeeland, Netherlands 1943-1944" by Hans Houterman).- the Editor.

79 "Wen Sie Verdeben Wollen," p. 579.
 
Not necessary agree or disagree with this person just sharing it with co-releation with this thread.



 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you had been unfortunate enough to have made this case to an audience containing Zhukov, for instance, you might have faced at worst physical assault, at best obscene abuse. You seem to have discounted an obvious factor.



You might like to think about it.


I am not denying that Zhukov's great policies were crucial for Red army especially Operation Uranus was very brilliant plan which resulted in encirclement of the 6th army and winning Stalingrad.


But contribution of greater soviet manpower and much superior production capacity of Soviet Military Industrial Complexes and ability of Soviets to produce tanks,fighters, Katyusha MRLs in great numbers can't be ignored either.

I know many German generals, after war, wrote in their memories that Kursk was victory of Soviet numerical superiority only. I don't believe it.
 
Institute for Historical Review


The Jewish Role in the Bolshevik Revolution
and Russia's Early Soviet Regime


Assessing the Grim Legacy of Soviet Communism

by Mark Weber
In the night of July 16-17, 1918, a squad of Bolshevik secret police murdered Russia's last emperor, Tsar Nicholas II, along with his wife, Tsaritsa Alexandra, their 14-year-old son, Tsarevich Alexis, and their four daughters. They were cut down in a hail of gunfire in a half-cellar room of the house in Ekaterinburg, a city in the Ural mountain region, where they were being held prisoner. The daughters were finished off with bayonets. To prevent a cult for the dead Tsar, the bodies were carted away to the countryside and hastily buried in a secret grave.

Bolshevik authorities at first reported that the Romanov emperor had been shot after the discovery of a plot to liberate him. For some time the deaths of the Empress and the children were kept secret. Soviet historians claimed for many years that local Bolsheviks had acted on their own in carrying out the killings, and that Lenin, founder of the Soviet state, had nothing to do with the crime.

In 1990, Moscow playwright and historian Edvard Radzinsky announced the result of his detailed investigation into the murders. He unearthed the reminiscences of Lenin's bodyguard, Alexei Akimov, who recounted how he personally delivered Lenin's execution order to the telegraph office. The telegram was also signed by Soviet government chief Yakov Sverdlov. Akimov had saved the original telegraph tape as a record of the secret order.1

Radzinsky's research confirmed what earlier evidence had already indicated. Leon Trotsky -- one of Lenin's closest colleagues -- had revealed years earlier that Lenin and Sverdlov had together made the decision to put the Tsar and his family to death. Recalling a conversation in 1918, Trotsky wrote:2

My next visit to Moscow took place after the [temporary] fall of Ekaterinburg [to anti-Communist forces]. Speaking with Sverdlov, I asked in passing: "Oh yes, and where is the Tsar?"

"Finished," he replied. "He has been shot."

"And where is the family?"

"The family along with him."

"All of them?," I asked, apparently with a trace of surprise.

"All of them," replied Sverdlov. "What about it?" He was waiting to see my reaction. I made no reply.

"And who made the decision?," I asked.

"We decided it here. Ilyich [Lenin] believed that we shouldn't leave the Whites a live banner to rally around, especially under the present difficult circumstances."

I asked no further questions and considered the matter closed.

Recent research and investigation by Radzinsky and others also corroborates the account provided years earlier by Robert Wilton, correspondent of the London Times in Russia for 17 years. His account, The Last Days of the Romanovs - originally published in 1920, and reissued in 1993 by the Institute for Historical Review -- is based in large part on the findings of a detailed investigation carried out in 1919 by Nikolai Sokolov under the authority of "White" (anti-Communist) leader Alexander Kolchak. Wilton's book remains one of the most accurate and complete accounts of the murder of Russia's imperial family.3

A solid understanding of history has long been the best guide to comprehending the present and anticipating the future. Accordingly, people are most interested in historical questions during times of crisis, when the future seems most uncertain. With the collapse of Communist rule in the Soviet Union, 1989-1991, and as Russians struggle to build a new order on the ruins of the old, historical issues have become very topical. For example, many ask: How did the Bolsheviks, a small movement guided by the teachings of German-Jewish social philosopher Karl Marx, succeed in taking control of Russia and imposing a cruel and despotic regime on its people?

In recent years, Jews around the world have been voicing anxious concern over the specter of anti-Semitism in the lands of the former Soviet Union. In this new and uncertain era, we are told, suppressed feelings of hatred and rage against Jews are once again being expressed. According to one public opinion survey conducted in 1991, for example, most Russians wanted all Jews to leave the country.4 But precisely why is anti-Jewish sentiment so widespread among the peoples of the former Soviet Union? Why do so many Russians, Ukrainians, Lithuanians and others blame "the Jews" for so much misfortune?

A Taboo Subject

Although officially Jews have never made up more than five percent of the country's total population,5 they played a highly disproportionate and probably decisive role in the infant Bolshevik regime, effectively dominating the Soviet government during its early years. Soviet historians, along with most of their colleagues in the West, for decades preferred to ignore this subject. The facts, though, cannot be denied.

With the notable exception of Lenin (Vladimir Ulyanov), most of the leading Communists who took control of Russia in 1917-20 were Jews. Leon Trotsky (Lev Bronstein) headed the Red Army and, for a time, was chief of Soviet foreign affairs. Yakov Sverdlov (Solomon) was both the Bolshevik party's executive secretary and -- as chairman of the Central Executive Committee -- head of the Soviet government. Grigori Zinoviev (Radomyslsky) headed the Communist International (Comintern), the central agency for spreading revolution in foreign countries. Other prominent Jews included press commissar Karl Radek (Sobelsohn), foreign affairs commissar Maxim Litvinov (Wallach), Lev Kamenev (Rosenfeld) and Moisei Uritsky.6

Lenin himself was of mostly Russian and Kalmuck ancestry, but he was also one-quarter Jewish. His maternal grandfather, Israel (Alexander) Blank, was a Ukrainian Jew who was later baptized into the Russian Orthodox Church.7

A thorough-going internationalist, Lenin viewed ethnic or cultural loyalties with contempt. He had little regard for his own countrymen. "An intelligent Russian," he once remarked, "is almost always a Jew or someone with Jewish blood in his veins."8

Critical Meetings

In the Communist seizure of power in Russia, the Jewish role was probably critical.

Two weeks prior to the Bolshevik "October Revolution" of 1917, Lenin convened a top secret meeting in St. Petersburg (Petrograd) at which the key leaders of the Bolshevik party's Central Committee made the fateful decision to seize power in a violent takeover. Of the twelve persons who took part in this decisive gathering, there were four Russians (including Lenin), one Georgian (Stalin), one Pole (Dzerzhinsky), and six Jews.9

To direct the takeover, a seven-man "Political Bureau" was chosen. It consisted of two Russians (Lenin and Bubnov), one Georgian (Stalin), and four Jews (Trotsky, Sokolnikov, Zinoviev, and Kamenev).10 Meanwhile, the Petersburg (Petrograd) Soviet -- whose chairman was Trotsky -- established an 18-member "Military Revolutionary Committee" to actually carry out the seizure of power. It included eight (or nine) Russians, one Ukrainian, one Pole, one Caucasian, and six Jews.11 Finally, to supervise the organization of the uprising, the Bolshevik Central Committee established a five-man "Revolutionary Military Center" as the Party's operations command. It consisted of one Russian (Bubnov), one Georgian (Stalin), one Pole (Dzerzhinsky), and two Jews (Sverdlov and Uritsky).12

Contemporary Voices of Warning

Well-informed observers, both inside and outside of Russia, took note at the time of the crucial Jewish role in Bolshevism. Winston Churchill, for one, warned in an article published in the February 8, 1920, issue of the London Illustrated Sunday Herald that Bolshevism is a "worldwide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality." The eminent British political leader and historian went on to write:13

There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders. Thus Tchitcherin, a pure Russian, is eclipsed by his nominal subordinate, Litvinoff, and the influence of Russians like Bukharin or Lunacharski cannot be compared with the power of Trotsky, or of Zinovieff, the Dictator of the Red Citadel (Petrograd), or of Krassin or Radek -- all Jews. In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astonishing. And the prominent, if not indeed the principal, part in the system of terrorism applied by the Extraordinary Commissions for Combatting Counter-Revolution [the Cheka] has been taken by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses

Needless to say, the most intense passions of revenge have been excited in the breasts of the Russian people.

David R. Francis, United States ambassador in Russia, warned in a January 1918 dispatch to Washington: "The Bolshevik leaders here, most of whom are Jews and 90 percent of whom are returned exiles, care little for Russia or any other country but are internationalists and they are trying to start a worldwide social revolution."14

The Netherlands' ambassador in Russia, Oudendyke, made much the same point a few months later: "Unless Bolshevism is nipped in the bud immediately, it is bound to spread in one form or another over Europe and the whole world as it is organized and worked by Jews who have no nationality, and whose one object is to destroy for their own ends the existing order of things."15

"The Bolshevik Revolution," declared a leading American Jewish community paper in 1920, "was largely the product of Jewish thinking, Jewish discontent, Jewish effort to reconstruct."16

As an expression of its radically anti-nationalist character, the fledgling Soviet government issued a decree a few months after taking power that made anti-Semitism a crime in Russia. The new Communist regime thus became the first in the world to severely punish all expressions of anti-Jewish sentiment.17 Soviet officials apparently regarded such measures as indispensable. Based on careful observation during a lengthy stay in Russia, American-Jewish scholar Frank Golder reported in 1925 that "because so many of the Soviet leaders are Jews anti-Semitism is gaining [in Russia], particularly in the army [and] among the old and new intelligentsia who are being crowded for positions by the sons of Israel."18

Historians' Views

Summing up the situation at that time, Israeli historian Louis Rapoport writes:19

Immediately after the [Bolshevik] Revolution, many Jews were euphoric over their high representation in the new government. Lenin's first Politburo was dominated by men of Jewish origins

Under Lenin, Jews became involved in all aspects of the Revolution, including its dirtiest work. Despite the Communists' vows to eradicate anti-Semitism, it spread rapidly after the Revolution -- partly because of the prominence of so many Jews in the Soviet administration, as well as in the traumatic, inhuman Sovietization drives that followed. Historian Salo Baron has noted that an immensely disproportionate number of Jews joined the new Bolshevik secret police, the Cheka And many of those who fell afoul of the Cheka would be shot by Jewish investigators.

The collective leadership that emerged in Lenin's dying days was headed by the Jew Zinoviev, a loquacious, mean-spirited, curly-haired Adonis whose vanity knew no bounds.

"Anyone who had the misfortune to fall into the hands of the Cheka," wrote Jewish historian Leonard Schapiro, "stood a very good chance of finding himself confronted with, and possibly shot by, a Jewish investigator."20 In Ukraine, "Jews made up nearly 80 percent of the rank-and-file Cheka agents," reports W. Bruce Lincoln, an American professor of Russian history.21 (Beginning as the Cheka, or Vecheka) the Soviet secret police was later known as the GPU, OGPU, NKVD, MVD and KGB.)

In light of all this, it should not be surprising that Yakov M. Yurovksy, the leader of the Bolshevik squad that carried out the murder of the Tsar and his family, was Jewish, as was Sverdlov, the Soviet chief who co-signed Lenin's execution order.22

Igor Shafarevich, a Russian mathematician of world stature, has sharply criticized the Jewish role in bringing down the Romanov monarchy and establishing Communist rule in his country. Shafarevich was a leading dissident during the final decades of Soviet rule. A prominent human rights activist, he was a founding member of the Committee on the Defense of Human Rights in the USSR.

In Russophobia, a book written ten years before the collapse of Communist rule, he noted that Jews were "amazingly" numerous among the personnel of the Bolshevik secret police. The characteristic Jewishness of the Bolshevik executioners, Shafarevich went on, is most conspicuous in the execution of Nicholas II:23

This ritual action symbolized the end of centuries of Russian history, so that it can be compared only to the execution of Charles I in England or Louis XVI in France. It would seem that representatives of an insignificant ethnic minority should keep as far as possible from this painful action, which would reverberate in all history. Yet what names do we meet? The execution was personally overseen by Yakov Yurovsky who shot the Tsar; the president of the local Soviet was Beloborodov (Vaisbart); the person responsible for the general administration in Ekaterinburg was Shaya Goloshchekin. To round out the picture, on the wall of the room where the execution took place was a distich from a poem by Heine (written in German) about King Balthazar, who offended Jehovah and was killed for the offense.

In his 1920 book, British veteran journalist Robert Wilton offered a similarly harsh assessment:24

The whole record of Bolshevism in Russia is indelibly impressed with the stamp of alien invasion. The murder of the Tsar, deliberately planned by the Jew Sverdlov (who came to Russia as a paid agent of Germany) and carried out by the Jews Goloshchekin, Syromolotov, Safarov, Voikov and Yurovsky, is the act not of the Russian people, but of this hostile invader.

In the struggle for power that followed Lenin's death in 1924, Stalin emerged victorious over his rivals, eventually succeeding in putting to death nearly every one of the most prominent early Bolsheviks leaders - including Trotsky, Zinoviev, Radek, and Kamenev. With the passage of time, and particularly after 1928, the Jewish role in the top leadership of the Soviet state and its Communist party diminished markedly.

Put To Death Without Trial

For a few months after taking power, Bolshevik leaders considered bringing "Nicholas Romanov" before a "Revolutionary Tribunal" that would publicize his "crimes against the people" before sentencing him to death. Historical precedent existed for this. Two European monarchs had lost their lives as a consequence of revolutionary upheaval: England's Charles I was beheaded in 1649, and France's Louis XVI was guillotined in 1793.

In these cases, the king was put to death after a lengthy public trial, during which he was allowed to present arguments in his defense. Nicholas II, though, was neither charged nor tried. He was secretly put to death - along with his family and staff -- in the dead of night, in an act that resembled more a gangster-style massacre than a formal execution.

Why did Lenin and Sverdlov abandon plans for a show trial of the former Tsar? In Wilton's view, Nicholas and his family were murdered because the Bolshevik rulers knew quite well that they lacked genuine popular support, and rightly feared that the Russian people would never approve killing the Tsar, regardless of pretexts and legalistic formalities.

For his part, Trotsky defended the massacre as a useful and even necesssary measure. He wrote:25

The decision [to kill the imperial family] was not only expedient but necessary. The severity of this punishment showed everyone that we would continue to fight on mercilessly, stopping at nothing. The execution of the Tsar's family was needed not only in order to frighten, horrify, and instill a sense of hopelessness in the enemy but also to shake up our own ranks, to show that there was no turning back, that ahead lay either total victory or total doom This Lenin sensed well.

Historical Context

In the years leading up to the 1917 revolution, Jews were disproportionately represented in all of Russia's subversive leftist parties.26 Jewish hatred of the Tsarist regime had a basis in objective conditions. Of the leading European powers of the day, imperial Russia was the most institutionally conser-vative and anti-Jewish. For example, Jews were normally not permitted to reside outside a large area in the west of the Empire known as the "Pale of Settlement."27

However understandable, and perhaps even defensible, Jewish hostility toward the imperial regime may have been, the remarkable Jewish role in the vastly more despotic Soviet regime is less easy to justify. In a recently published book about the Jews in Russia during the 20th century, Russian-born Jewish writer Sonya Margolina goes so far as to call the Jewish role in supporting the Bolshevik regime the "historic sin of the Jews."28 She points, for example, to the prominent role of Jews as commandants of Soviet Gulag concentration and labor camps, and the role of Jewish Communists in the systematic destruction of Russian churches. Moreover, she goes on, "The Jews of the entire world supported Soviet power, and remained silent in the face of any criticism from the opposition." In light of this record, Margolina offers a grim prediction:

The exaggeratedly enthusiastic participation of the Jewish Bolsheviks in the subjugation and destruction of Russia is a sin that will be avenged Soviet power will be equated with Jewish power, and the furious hatred against the Bolsheviks will become hatred against Jews.

If the past is any indication, it is unlikely that many Russians will seek the revenge that Margolina prophecies. Anyway, to blame "the Jews" for the horrors of Communism seems no more justifiable than to blame "white people" for Negro slavery, or "the Germans" for the Second World War or "the Holocaust."

Words of Grim Portent

Nicholas and his family are only the best known of countless victims of a regime that openly proclaimed its ruthless purpose. A few weeks after the Ekaterinburg massacre, the newspaper of the fledgling Red Army declared:29

Without mercy, without sparing, we will kill our enemies by the scores of hundreds, let them be thousands, let them drown themselves in their own blood. For the blood of Lenin and Uritskii let there be floods of blood of the bourgeoisie -- more blood, as much as possible.

Grigori Zinoviev, speaking at a meeting of Communists in September 1918, effectively pronounced a death sentence on ten million human beings: "We must carry along with us 90 million out of the 100 million of Soviet Russia's inhabitants. As for the rest, we have nothing to say to them. They must be annihilated."30

'The Twenty Million'

As it turned out, the Soviet toll in human lives and suffering proved to be much higher than Zinoviev's murderous rhetoric suggested. Rarely, if ever, has a regime taken the lives of so many of its own people.31

Citing newly-available Soviet KGB documents, historian Dmitri Volkogonov, head of a special Russian parliamentary commission, recently concluded that "from 1929 to 1952 21.5 million [Soviet] people were repressed. Of these a third were shot, the rest sentenced to imprisonment, where many also died."32

Olga Shatunovskaya, a member of the Soviet Commission of Party Control, and head of a special commission during the 1960s appointed by premier Khrushchev, has similarly concluded: "From January 1, 1935 to June 22, 1941, 19,840,000 enemies of the people were arrested. Of these, seven million were shot in prison, and a majority of the others died in camp." These figures were also found in the papers of Politburo member Anastas Mikoyan.

Robert Conquest, the distinguished specialist of Soviet history, recently summed up the grim record of Soviet "repression" of it own people:34

It is hard to avoid the conclusion that the post-1934 death toll was well over ten million. To this should be added the victims of the 1930-1933 famine, the kulak deportations, and other anti-peasant campaigns, amounting to another ten million plus. The total is thus in the range of what the Russians now refer to as 'The Twenty Million'."

A few other scholars have given significantly higher estimates.35

The Tsarist Era in Retrospect

With the dramatic collapse of Soviet rule, many Russians are taking a new and more respectful look at their country's pre-Communist history, including the era of the last Romanov emperor. While the Soviets -- along with many in the West -- have stereotypically portrayed this era as little more than an age of arbitrary despotism, cruel suppression and mass poverty, the reality is rather different. While it is true that the power of the Tsar was absolute, that only a small minority had any significant political voice, and that the mass of the empire's citizens were peasants, it is worth noting that Russians during the reign of Nicholas II had freedom of press, religion, assembly and association, protection of private property, and free labor unions. Sworn enemies of the regime, such as Lenin, were treated with remarkable leniency.36

During the decades prior to the outbreak of the First World War, the Russian economy was booming. In fact, between 1890 and 1913, it was the fastest growing in the world. New rail lines were opened at an annual rate double that of the Soviet years. Between 1900 and 1913, iron production increased by 58 percent, while coal production more than doubled.37 Exported Russian grain fed all of Europe. Finally, the last decades of Tsarist Russia witnessed a magnificent flowering of cultural life.

Everything changed with the First World War, a catastrophe not only for Russia, but for the entire West.

Monarchist Sentiment

In spite of (or perhaps because of) the relentless official campaign during the entire Soviet era to stamp out every uncritical memory of the Romanovs and imperial Russia, a virtual cult of popular veneration for Nicholas II has been sweeping Russia in recent years.

People have been eagerly paying the equivalent of several hours' wages to purchase portraits of Nicholas from street vendors in Moscow, St. Petersburg and other Russian cities. His portrait now hangs in countless Russian homes and apartments. In late 1990, all 200,000 copies of a first printing of a 30-page pamphlet on the Romanovs quickly sold out. Said one street vendor: "I personally sold four thousand copies in no time at all. It's like a nuclear explosion. People really want to know about their Tsar and his family." Grass roots pro-Tsarist and monarchist organizations have sprung up in many cities.

A public opinion poll conducted in 1990 found that three out of four Soviet citizens surveyed regard the killing of the Tsar and his family as a despicable crime.38 Many Russian Orthodox believers regard Nicholas as a martyr. The independent "Orthodox Church Abroad" canonized the imperial family in 1981, and the Moscow-based Russian Orthodox Church has been under popular pressure to take the same step, in spite of its long-standing reluctance to touch this official taboo. The Russian Orthodox Archbishop of Ekaterinburg announced plans in 1990 to build a grand church at the site of the killings. "The people loved Emperor Nicholas," he said. "His memory lives with the people, not as a saint but as someone executed without court verdict, unjustly, as a sufferer for his faith and for orthodoxy."39

On the 75th anniversary of the massacre (in July 1993), Russians recalled the life, death and legacy of their last Emperor. In Ekaterinburg, where a large white cross festooned with flowers now marks the spot where the family was killed, mourners wept as hymns were sung and prayers were said for the victims.40

Reflecting both popular sentiment and new social-political realities, the white, blue and red horizontal tricolor flag of Tsarist Russia was officially adopted in 1991, replacing the red Soviet banner. And in 1993, the imperial two-headed eagle was restored as the nation's official emblem, replacing the Soviet hammer and sickle. Cities that had been re-named to honor Communist figures -- such as Leningrad, Kuibyshev, Frunze, Kalinin, and Gorky -- have re-acquired their Tsarist-era names. Ekaterinburg, which had been named Sverdlovsk by the Soviets in 1924 in honor of the Soviet-Jewish chief, in September 1991 restored its pre-Communist name, which honors Empress Catherine I.

Symbolic Meaning

In view of the millions that would be put to death by the Soviet rulers in the years to follow, the murder of the Romanov family might not seem of extraordinary importance. And yet, the event has deep symbolic meaning. In the apt words of Harvard University historian Richard Pipes:41

The manner in which the massacre was prepared and carried out, at first denied and then justified, has something uniquely odious about it, something that radically distinguishes it from previous acts of regicide and brands it as a prelude to twentieth-century mass murder.

Another historian, Ivor Benson, characterized the killing of the Romanov family as symbolic of the tragic fate of Russia and, indeed, of the entire West, in this century of unprecedented agony and conflict.

The murder of the Tsar and his family is all the more deplorable because, whatever his failings as a monarch, Nicholas II was, by all accounts, a personally decent, generous, humane and honorable man.

The Massacre's Place in History

The mass slaughter and chaos of the First World War, and the revolutionary upheavals that swept Europe in 1917-1918, brought an end not only to the ancient Romanov dynasty in Russia, but to an entire continental social order. Swept away as well was the Hohenzollern dynasty in Germany, with its stable constitutional monarchy, and the ancient Habsburg dynasty of Austria-Hungary with its multinational central European empire. Europe's leading states shared not only the same Christian and Western cultural foundations, but most of the continent's reigning monarchs were related by blood. England's King George was, through his mother, a first cousin of Tsar Nicholas, and, through his father, a first cousin of Empress Alexandra. Germany's Kaiser Wilhelm was a first cousin of the German-born Alexandra, and a distant cousin of Nicholas.

More than was the case with the monarchies of western Europe, Russia's Tsar personally symbolized his land and nation. Thus, the murder of the last emperor of a dynasty that had ruled Russia for three centuries not only symbolically presaged the Communist mass slaughter that would claim so many Russian lives in the decades that followed, but was symbolic of the Communist effort to kill the soul and spirit of Russia itself.

Notes

Edvard Radzinksy, The Last Tsar (New York: Doubleday, 1992), pp. 327, 344-346.; Bill Keller, "Cult of the Last Czar," The New York Times, Nov. 21, 1990.
From an April 1935 entry in "Trotsky's Diary in Exile." Quoted in: Richard Pipes, The Russian Revolution (New York: Knopf, 1990), pp. 770, 787.; Robert K. Massie, Nicholas and Alexandra (New York: 1976), pp. 496-497.; E. Radzinksy, The Last Tsar (New York: Doubleday, 1992), pp. 325-326.; Ronald W. Clark, Lenin (New York: 1988), pp. 349-350.
On Wilton and his career in Russia, see: Phillip Knightley, The First Casualty (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1976), pp. 141-142, 144-146, 151-152, 159, 162, 169, and, Anthony Summers and Tom Mangold, The File on the Tsar (New York: Harper and Row, 1976), pp. 102-104, 176.
AP dispatch from Moscow, Toronto Star, Sept. 26, 1991, p. A2.; Similarly, a 1992 survey found that one-fourth of people in the republics of Belarus (White Russia) and Uzbekistan favored deporting all Jews to a special Jewish region in Russian Siberia. "Survey Finds Anti-Semitism on Rise in Ex-Soviet Lands," Los Angeles Times, June 12, 1992, p. A4.
At the turn of the century, Jews made up 4.2 percent of the population of the Russian Empire. Richard Pipes, The Russian Revolution (New York: 1990), p. 55 (fn.).
By comparison, in the United States today, Jews make up less than three percent of the total population (according to the most authoritative estimates).
See individual entries in: H. Shukman, ed., The Blackwell Encyclopedia of the Russian Revolution (Oxford: 1988), and in: G. Wigoder, ed., Dictionary of Jewish Biography (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1991).
The prominent Jewish role in Russia's pre-1914 revolutionary underground, and in the early Soviet regime, is likewise confirmed in: Stanley Rothman and S. Robert Lichter, Roots of Radicalism (New York: Oxford, 1982), pp. 92-94.
In 1918, the Bolshevik Party's Central Committee had 15 members. German scholar Herman Fehst -- citing published Soviet records -- reported in his useful 1934 study that of six of these 15 were Jews. Herman Fehst, Bolschewismus und Judentum: Das jüdische Element in der Führerschaft des Bolschewismus (Berlin: 1934), pp. 68-72.; Robert Wilton, though, reported that in 1918 the Central Committee of the Bolshevik party had twelve members, of whom nine were of Jewish origin and three were of Russian ancestry. R. Wilton, The Last Days of the Romanovs (IHR, 1993), p. 185.
After years of official suppression, this fact was acknowledged in 1991 in the Moscow weekly Ogonyok. See: Jewish Chronicle (London), July 16, 1991.; See also: Letter by L. Horwitz in The New York Times, Aug. 5, 1992, which cites information from the Russian journal "Native Land Archives."; "Lenin's Lineage?"'Jewish,' Claims Moscow News," Forward (New York City), Feb. 28, 1992, pp. 1, 3.; M. Checinski, Jerusalem Post (weekly international edition), Jan. 26, 1991, p. 9.
Richard Pipes, The Russian Revolution (New York: Knopf, 1990), p. 352.
Harrison E. Salisbury, Black Night, White Snow: Russia's Revolutions, 1905-1917 (Doubleday, 1978), p. 475.; William H. Chamberlin, The Russian Revolution (Princeton Univ. Press, 1987), vol. 1, pp. 291-292.; Herman Fehst, Bolschewismus und Judentum: Das jüdische Element in der Führerschaft des Bolschewismus (Berlin: 1934), pp. 42-43.; P. N. Pospelov, ed., Vladimir Ilyich Lenin: A Biography (Moscow: Progress, 1966), pp. 318-319.
This meeting was held on October 10 (old style, Julian calendar), and on October 23 (new style). The six Jews who took part were: Uritsky, Trotsky, Kamenev, Zinoviev, Sverdlov and Soklonikov.
The Bolsheviks seized power in Petersburg on October 25 (old style) -- hence the reference to the "Great October Revolution" -- which is November 7 (new style).
William H. Chamberlin, The Russian Revolution (1987), vol. 1, p. 292.; H. E. Salisbury, Black Night, White Snow: Russia's Revolutions, 1905-1917 (1978), p. 475.
W. H. Chamberlin, The Russian Revolution, vol. 1, pp. 274, 299, 302, 306.; Alan Moorehead, The Russian Revolution (New York: 1965), pp. 235, 238, 242, 243, 245.; H. Fehst, Bolschewismus und Judentum (Berlin: 1934), pp. 44, 45.
H. E. Salisbury, Black Night, White Snow: Russia's Revolutions, 1905-1917 (1978), p. 479-480.; Dmitri Volkogonov, Stalin: Triumph and Tragedy (New York: Grove Weidenfeld, 1991), pp. 27-28, 32.; P. N. Pospelov, ed., Vladimir Ilyich Lenin: A Biography (Moscow: Progress, 1966), pp. 319-320.
"Zionism versus Bolshevism: A struggle for the soul of the Jewish people," Illustrated Sunday Herald (London), February 8, 1920. Facsimile reprint in: William Grimstad, The Six Million Reconsidered (1979), p. 124. (At the time this essay was published, Churchill was serving as minister of war and air.)
David R. Francis, Russia from the American Embassy (New York: 1921), p. 214.
Foreign Relations of the United States -- 1918 -- Russia, Vol. 1 (Washington, DC: 1931), pp. 678-679.
American Hebrew (New York), Sept. 1920. Quoted in: Nathan Glazer and Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Beyond the Melting Pot (Cambridge, Mass.: 1963), p. 268.
C. Jacobson, "Jews in the USSR" in: American Review on the Soviet Union, August 1945, p. 52.; Avtandil Rukhadze, Jews in the USSR: Figures, Facts, Comment (Moscow: Novosti, 1978), pp. 10-11.
T. Emmons and B. M. Patenaude, eds., War, Revolution and Peace in Russia: The Passages of Frank Golder, 1913-1927 (Stanford: Hoover Institution, 1992), pp. 320, 139, 317.
Louis Rapoport, Stalin's War Against the Jews (New York: Free Press, 1990), pp. 30, 31, 37. See also pp. 43, 44, 45, 49, 50.
Quoted in: Salo Baron, The Russian Jews Under Tsars and Soviets (New York: 1976), pp. 170, 392 (n. 4).
The Atlantic, Sept. 1991, p. 14.;
In 1919, three-quarters of the Cheka staff in Kiev were Jews, who were careful to spare fellow Jews. By order, the Cheka took few Jewish hostages. R. Pipes, The Russian Revolution (1990), p. 824.; Israeli historian Louis Rapoport also confirms the dominant role played by Jews in the Soviet secret police throughout the 1920s and 1930s. L. Rapoport, Stalin's War Against the Jews (New York: 1990), pp. 30-31, 43-45, 49-50.
E. Radzinsky, The Last Tsar (1992), pp. 244, 303-304.; Bill Keller, "Cult of the Last Czar," The New York Times, Nov. 21, 1990.; See also: W. H. Chamberlin, The Russian Revolution, vol. 2, p. 90.
Quoted in: The New Republic, Feb. 5, 1990, pp. 30 ff.; Because of the alleged anti-Semitism of Russophobia, in July 1992 Shafarevich was asked by the National Academy of Sciences (Washington, DC) to resign as an associate member of that prestigious body.
R. Wilton, The Last Days of the Romanovs (1993), p. 148.
Richard Pipes, The Russian Revolution (1990), p. 787.; Robert K. Massie, Nicholas and Alexandra (New York: 1976), pp. 496-497.
An article in a 1907 issue of the respected American journal National Geographic reported on the revolutionary situation brewing in Russia in the years before the First World War: " The revolutionary leaders nearly all belong to the Jewish race, and the most effective revolutionary agency is the Jewish Bund " W. E. Curtis, "The Revolution in Russia," The National Geographic Magazine, May 1907, pp. 313-314.
Piotr Stolypin, probably imperial Russia's greatest statesman, was murdered in 1911 by a Jewish assassin. In 1907, Jews made up about ten percent of Bolshevik party membership. In the Menshevik party, another faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party, the Jewish proportion was twice as high. R. Pipes, The Russian Revolution (1990), p. 365.; See also: R. Wilton, The Last Days of the Romanovs (1993), pp. 185-186.
Martin Gilbert, Atlas of Jewish History (1977), pp. 71, 74.; In spite of the restrictive "Pale" policy, in 1897 about 315,000 Jews were living outside the Pale, most of them illegally. In 1900 more than 20,000 were living in the capital of St. Petersburg, and another 9,000 in Moscow.
Sonja Margolina, Das Ende der Lügen: Russland und die Juden im 20. Jahrhundert (Berlin: 1992). Quoted in: "Ein ganz heisses Eisen angefasst," Deutsche National-Zeitung (Munich), July 21, 1992, p. 12.
Krasnaia Gazetta ("Red Gazette"), September 1, 1918. Quoted in: Richard Pipes, The Russian Revolution (1990), pp. 820, 912 (n. 88).
Richard Pipes, The Russian Revolution (New York: 1990), p. 820.
Contrary to what a number of western historians have for years suggested, Soviet terror and the Gulag camp system did not begin with Stalin. At the end of 1920, Soviet Russia already had 84 concentration camps with approximately 50,000 prisoners. By October 1923 the number had increased to 315 camps with 70,000 inmates. R. Pipes, The Russian Revolution (1990), p. 836.
Cited by historian Robert Conquest in a review/ article in The New York Review of Books, Sept. 23, 1993, p. 27.
The New York Review of Books, Sept. 23, 1993, p. 27.
Review/article by Robert Conquest in The New York Review of Books, Sept. 23, 1993, p. 27.; In the "Great Terror" years of 1937-1938 alone, Conquest has calculated, approximately one million were shot by the Soviet secret police, and another two million perished in Soviet camps. R. Conquest, The Great Terror (New York: Oxford, 1990), pp. 485-486.;
Conquest has estimated that 13.5 to 14 million people perished in the collectivization ("dekulakization") campaign and forced famine of 1929-1933. R. Conquest, The Harvest of Sorrow (New York: Oxford, 1986), pp. 301-307.
Russian professor Igor Bestuzhev-Lada, writing in a 1988 issue of the Moscow weekly Nedelya, suggested that during the Stalin era alone (1935-1953), as many as 50 million people were killed, condemned to camps from which they never emerged, or lost their lives as a direct result of the brutal "dekulakization" campaign against the peasantry. "Soviets admit Stalin killed 50 million," The Sunday Times, London, April 17, 1988.;
R. J. Rummel, a professor of political science at the University of Hawaii, has recently calculated that 61.9 million people were systematically killed by the Soviet Communist regime from 1917 to 1987. R. J. Rummel, Lethal Politics: Soviet Genocide and Mass Murder Since 1917 (Transaction, 1990).
Because of his revolutionary activities, Lenin was sentenced in 1897 to three years exile in Siberia. During this period of "punishment," he got married, wrote some 30 works, made extensive use of a well-stocked local library, subscribed to numerous foreign periodicals, kept up a voluminous correspondence with supporters across Europe, and enjoyed numerous sport hunting and ice skating excursions, while all the time receiving a state stipend. See: Ronald W. Clark, Lenin (New York: 1988), pp. 42-57.; P. N. Pospelov, ed., Vladimir Ilyich Lenin: A Biography (Moscow: Progress, 1966), pp. 55-75.
R. Pipes, The Russian Revolution (1990), pp. 187-188.;
The Nation, June 24, 1991, p. 838.
Bill Keller, "Cult of the Last Czar," The New York Times, Nov. 21, 1990.
"Nostalgic for Nicholas, Russians Honor Their Last Czar," Los Angeles Times, July 18, 1993.; "Ceremony marks Russian czar's death," Orange County Register, July 17, 1993.
R. Pipes, The Russian Revolution (1990), p. 787.

From The Journal of Historical Review, Jan.-Feb. 1994 (Vol. 14, No. 1), pages 4-22


About the Author

Mark Weber was born and raised in Portland, Oregon. He studied history at the University of Illinois (Chicago), the University of Munich, Portland State University and Indiana University (M.A., 1977).
Home Support the IHR Contact Us Books & Discs Search
 
Hitler should be regarded as the Gretest leaders of Germany including Rodolf Hass ,Hermen Goering , Himler .istead all of them were murdered through western courts .


Are you out of your damn mind

Hero of Germany my ***
 
More ** volunteers in the German Armed Forces:
BergKaukasien33.jpg

This North Caucasians Aryans ! ! !

(Dagestanis: Avars, Dargin, Lezgins, Laks; Vainakhs: Chechens, Ingush; Circassians) ! ! !

http://vk.com/public43930386
vk.com/public43930386


1kzPWqlJI9I.jpg


I am from Russia. I'm from the North Caucasus.
I'm from Dagestan. I'm from Lezgistan (freedom)
we are brothers Caucasians-Aryans! Dagestan, Chechnya and Ingushetia, Circassia!

* together we beat and beat - the occupiers and the Khawarij sect (emisarov).
I Djigit Highlander (Caucasian), Muslim, Sunni
(all Caucasians Sunni Muslim Sufi Hanafi and Shafi'i 60-70%. others Wahhabi and Shi'a)

:victory: :dance3: :victory1:


1kzPWqlJI9I.jpg


http://www.defence.pk/forums/europe-russia/225101-news-caucasian-albania-lezgistan.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/europe-russia/224278-imam-yaraliev-dagestanis-derbent-5000-years.html

lezgistan.tv
flnka.ru
http://vk.com/public43930386
antituran.com
tarnama.org
XOCALI: A show of unseen forgery and falsifications
TolishPress.org

Lezgistan is not Azerbaijan | Facebook
facebook.com/Lezgistan

Interesting sites are right (and others) :tup:
write anything any of your and other people's question, I will answer, my friends =)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Back
Top Bottom