|
|
RUSSIA: Exhuming Secrets
By Paul R. Gregory and Maciej Siekierski
Moscow is still trying to hide what really happened in the 1940 Katyn massacre. Why the truth won’t stay buried. By Paul R. Gregory and Maciej Siekierski.
The Katyn forest massacre, one of the many dark chapters of the Second World
War, is a chapter still unfinished. Sixty-five years after the discovery of the
mass graves of thousands of Polish officers was announced to the world, and
almost seventy years after the killings themselves, the truth about Katyn is
both available and hotly denied. It was covered up from the beginning: after
Hitler
’s soldiers found the graves in 1943 near Smolensk, Nazi propaganda czar Joseph
Goebbels blamed Stalin
’s troops, but the Soviets denied it, turning the blame back on the Germans.
Decades would pass, and the Iron Curtain would fall, before the world
understood that this time the Nazis had been telling the truth.
Katyn today is a bitter memory for Poles and a major irritant in Russian-Polish relations. Emotions flare when it is mentioned. Polish filmmaker Andrzej Wajda’s 2007 film, Katyn, won international film awards and an Oscar nomination for best
foreign-language film, but almost no one has seen it in Russia, where it has
yet to find a distributor. The Katyn case calls forth angry demonstrations by
Russian nationalists and cults of Katyn deniers. Poland
’s parliament continues to demand justice for the victims of Katyn and punishment
for the perpetrators. Russian courts respond by minimizing Katyn as a rogue
operation and insisting that the case is closed.
Father Stanislaw Jasinski, representative of the bishop of Krakow, and two other Poles pray
over the bodies of their countrymen in this photo from the 1943 German investigative report.
|
Since April 1943, the successive regimes of Stalin, Nikita Khrushchev, Leonid
Brezhnev, Yuri Andropov, Konstantin Chernenko, Mikhail Gorbachev, and Vladimir
Putin have pursued the same strategy: deny Russian responsibility for Katyn
outright until denial was no longer possible, and then admit as little as
possible. This strategy continues to the present day.
The denials began before the graves were even discovered. In December 1941,
Stalin told the visiting head of the London-based Polish government in exile,
General Wladyslaw Sikorski, that all Polish POWs captured by the Soviets during
the German and Soviet invasion of Poland in September 1939 had been released
from the camps. Some might have escaped before liberation, he added—possibly to Manchuria. On reoccupying Smolensk and the surrounding territory in
September 1943, Stalin hastened to orchestrate an alternate Soviet version of
the now-disclosed massacre to contradict the German version. The Burdenko
Commission (named after its head, Nikolai Burdenko, the president of the Soviet
Academy of Medicine) concluded that German occupying forces had massacred the
Polish officers in the fall of 1941 (not Soviets in the spring of 1940).
Burdenko’s report had a veneer of credibility: more than a hundred witnesses were
interviewed, bodies exhumed, and documents examined. The war thus ended with
two competing versions of the truth.
The Russian strategy continues to this day: deny responsibility for Katyn
outright until denial is no longer possible, and then admit as little as
possible.
This put the postwar Nuremberg prosecutors in an uncomfortable position. The
Polish government in exile, marshaling its own evidence, argued that the
Soviets were to blame. But its Western allies had already recognized the
Soviet-dominated government in Warsaw, and the efforts of the Poles in exile
were largely ignored. For their part, Soviet prosecutors touted the
“overwhelming” evidence of the Burdenko Commission. Faced with the prospect of either
participating in a judicial fraud or embarrassing their Soviet ally, the
British and the Americans chose not to investigate the matter. As the Iron
Curtain descended over Eastern Europe, Stalin
’s successors expected their Polish communist comrades to let sleeping dogs lie.
When the Katyn incident refused to die, the Soviets launched a disinformation
offensive in the late 1960s. Out of the many thousands of villages and
settlements destroyed by the Nazis in Belarus, Soviet authorities picked the
village of Khatyn, whose name is very similar to Katyn, as the site for a
memorial commemorating the victims of Nazi atrocities. (German troops, along
with Ukrainian and Belarussian collaborators, massacred 149 Khatyn villagers in
March 1943.) Khatyn became an obligatory stop for groups of foreign visitors
paying their respects. The disinformation campaign scored a major success in
the summer of 1974 when President Richard Nixon paid Khatyn a visit. Following
the lead of Soviet publications, entries for
“Khatyn” displaced “Katyn” in Polish encyclopedias and historical dictionaries.
Top-secret Soviet documents chronicle the efforts to contain the Katyn fallout
and deflect periodic charges of Soviet guilt. In April 1971, Leonid Brezhnev,
KGB head Yuri Andropov, and Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko instructed their
ambassador to Berlin to suppress an upcoming BBC film based on a
“scurrilous” book on Katyn by telling the English “that Hitler’s forces have been proven responsible for this crime by an authoritative special
commission, which carried out an investigation immediately after German
occupation forces were driven out of the Smolensk region. In 1945–46, the Nuremberg tribunal pronounced German military criminals guilty of the
policy of extermination of the Polish people and, in particular, of the
shooting of Polish prisoners of war in the Katyn forest.” The Nuremberg claim was false, of course. As incriminating books and documents
continued to appear, in 1976 the Politburo ordered a joint declaration with the
Polish Communist Party
“to prevent the opposing side from using polemics for anti-Soviet purposes,” and the KGB warned, through “unofficial channels,” that the “use of anti-Soviet falsifications would be considered as a provocation intended
towards worsening the international situation.”
Katyn played a central role in Mikhail Gorbachev’s belated balancing act with respect to Poland. Continued Soviet stonewalling
had played into the hands of the anti-Soviet opposition to General Wojciech
Jaruzelski, Moscow’s embattled friend. Gorbachev tried to aid Jaruzelski without admitting Soviet
guilt: in 1987 he formed a joint historical commission, supposedly to get to
the bottom of the Katyn tragedy. It was too late, however, to create a new
Soviet version. Polish underground presses, most associated with the Solidarity
movement, and even state-owned publishers were already publishing works
pointing to Soviet responsibility.
Major Adam Solski was the quartermaster of the 57th Infantry
Regiment from Poznan.
|
Historians consider this document the “smoking gun” showing Soviet
responsibility for the Polish massacres.
|
Gorbachev’s Politburo persisted, proposing in 1988 to build a memorial to the victims of
the massacre
“executed by Hitlerites in Katyn” alongside a memorial to the five hundred Soviet POWs purportedly killed at
Katyn by the Germans (a myth created by the Burdenko Commission). He offered
the Poles a
“simplified procedure” for relatives wishing to visit the sites where their loved ones lay buried. But
Gorbachev
’s denials became increasingly belabored as tenacious Polish historians dug into
the records and as the Catholic Church in Poland labeled Katyn
“one of the worst crimes in the history of mankind.”
Faced with the prospect at Nuremberg of either participating in a judicial
fraud or embarrassing their Soviet ally, the British and the Americans
chose not to investigate Katyn.
The crack in the official Soviet line came with the March 1989 frank assessment
of Valentin Falin, Gorbachev
’s trusted adviser: “We thought that the joint commission of Soviet and Polish scholars could work
out a consensus on Katyn. After one and a half years, however, the commission
cannot even begin its work because our scholars are not authorized to cast
doubt on the official version. In the meantime the Polish side has introduced
its own evidence against the 1944 Burdenko report. . . . Now, without waiting
for our response, the Polish side is publishing their version in their press.
The problem will not go away.
”
A similarly bleak assessment two weeks later by Falin, Foreign Minister Eduard
Shevardnadze, and KGB deputy director Vladimir Kriuchkov informed Gorbachev
that the Jaruzelski government, under extreme pressure, had officially declared
that
“the liquidation of the Polish officers was the responsibility of the USSR,
although the guilt was laid on Stalin
’s NKVD and not on the Soviet government. . . . To further drag out this business
will turn into a millstone around our necks, not only for the past but also for
current Soviet-Polish relations. It would be wise to say what really happened
and who was concretely responsible, and thus close the matter. In the final
analysis, this would cause less damage than the current course of doing
nothing.”
Gorbachev waited until the symbolic date of April 13, 1990, forty-seven years
after Berlin Radio had announced the discovery of the graves, to issue a
declaration on Katyn and to hand over two boxes of evidence to the Poles. The
Soviet
“confession” was limited and deceptive: the Katyn massacre was the work of NKVD head
Lavrenty Beria and his subordinates. No evidence of an order from higher-ups
had been found. The skeptical Poles were asked to believe that NKVD mavericks
had on their own decided to execute more than 20,000 Polish nationals in
occupied territory.
Shortly after authorizing this limited admission, Gorbachev directed the Academy
of Sciences and other government agencies to search for evidence of possible
Polish crimes against the Soviet side. Such documentation was to be utilized in
future negotiations with the Poles.
Within a year and a half of Gorbachev’s “confession,” the Soviet flag had been lowered from the Kremlin walls and the story had
shifted to Boris Yeltsin. The Yeltsin years were the zenith of Russian candor
about Katyn. In October 1992, Yeltsin transferred
“newly found” secret documents to Polish President Lech Walesa, including for the first time
a
“smoking gun”—a Politburo order dated March 5, 1940, in which Beria was ordered to execute
thousands of Polish prisoners. In August 1993, a commission of experts from the
Russian Military Procuracy officially concluded that Polish officers were
executed by Beria in 1940, not by Germans in 1941. In June 1998, Yeltsin and
Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski agreed to construct memorials at Katyn
and Mednoye, another NKVD mass-burial site of Poles on Russian territory.
Yeltsin himself visited Warsaw
’s Katyn monument in 1993. Frictions remained, though, particularly when Russia
claimed that the deaths (through communicable diseases) of some 16,000 to
20,000 Russian POWs in Polish camps between 1919 and 1924 were the moral
equivalent of the Katyn massacre.
The cover-up continued to operate in Putin’s Russia, where, after more than a decade of evidence gathering and
deliberation, Russia
’s chief military prosecutor, Alexander Savenkov, issued a ruling on Katyn on
March 11, 2005. In light of Putin
’s demonstrated ability to obtain the decisions he wants from prosecutors and
courts, Savenkov
’s report represents Putin’s own position on Katyn. The ruling states the following:
First, NKVD troikas found 14,542 Polish citizens held in NKVD camps guilty of
committing state crimes and
“made a decision” to shoot them in the spring of 1940.
Second, the deaths of 1,803 Polish POWs had been confirmed, of whom 22 were
identified.
Stamps like this one, focused on the Nazi-Soviet pact of 1939 that preceded
the Katyn mass executions, were produced clandestinely and sold to
support Poland’s underground opposition.
|
Third, a number of Soviet officials “abused their authority, which entailed heavy consequences under aggravating
circumstances,
” but criminal cases against them had been closed because the guilty parties had
died.
Fourth, the Polish side’s claim of genocide was rejected because the “actions of the NKVD officials in regard to Polish citizens were based on
criminal-legal motives and did not pursue the goal of extermination of any
demographic group.”
Fifth, the Russian Military Prosecutor’s Office agreed to turn over 67 of the 183 volumes of evidence. Two-thirds of
the evidence was to remain classified.
Wiktor Sukiennicki (1901–83) was a Polish legal scholar and Sovietologist and a professor at Stefan Batory University (today’s
Vilnius State University) in Lithuania.
|
In sum, the Savenkov report did not identify the perpetrators, declined to say
how high the responsibility went, and finally closed the case against the
culprits anyway, because they were dead.
The Polish parliament was outraged. It demanded that Russia’s Katyn archives be declassified and that Russian courts rule that Katyn was an
act of genocide. Rejecting the genocide charge, the parliament said, would mean
that Russian authorities were diminishing its importance. Moreover, it would
mean that the statute of limitations on Katyn had expired and that no one would
ever be held to account.
The Russian judgment also provided fertile soil for a growing cult of Katyn
deniers. Savenkov admitted that NKVD courts had ordered some 15,000 Polish
citizens shot but could find evidence that fewer than 2,000 were actually
executed. What happened to the remaining 13,000? The report encouraged many
Russians to believe that the Katyn victims survived until the Nazis invaded,
put them in work camps, and then executed them after they had completed their
work. In another, even more bizarre, version, the Katyn victims were said to
have been executed to suppress the whereabouts of a secret bunker they had been
forced to build.
Katyn denial should not come as a surprise. In recent years, the Russian press
has fed a voracious Russian appetite for UFOs, the occult, and conspiracy
theories. Katyn deniers have a ready-made audience.
In late 2007 and early 2008, Russian newspapers began to print articles once
again implicating the Nazis in the crime. There was no evidence that the
articles were sponsored by the Kremlin, but they served to rekindle doubt among
Russian readers, many of whom would have welcomed blame being diverted to the
Nazis.
The deniers have an uphill battle. The most troublesome piece of evidence for
them remains Beria
’s matter-of-fact March 5, 1940, report to Stalin titled “Question of the NKVD,” one of the most prominent documents copied in the Hoover Archives microfilm
collections. In it, Beria informs Stalin that 14,736 Polish
“officers, officials, police officials, gendarmes, and prisoner officials” were being held in camps in occupied Polish territory and that 18,632 similar
people were being held in camps in the western provinces of Ukraine and
Belarus. Beria requested permission to shoot them:
“Taking as true the fact that all of them are hardened and unredeemable enemies
of Soviet power, the NKVD recommends that their cases be examined in special
order with the application of the highest measure of punishment
—shooting.” The examinations should be done “without summoning the arrested parties and without the posting of charges.”
“To further drag out this business will turn into a millstone around our
necks, not only for the past but also for current Soviet-Polish relations,”
Mikhail Gorbachev was advised in 1989.
Stalin’s “In Favor” and bold signature are scrawled at the top of Beria’s “question.” Politburo members Kliment Voroshilov, Anastas Mikoyan, and Vyacheslav Molotov
also signed. Two absent members, Mikhail Kalinin and Lazar Kaganovich, were
canvassed and their affirmative votes recorded in the left margin. The
Politburo records show that the question was formally approved. The relevant
excerpt from the Politburo minutes was directed to Beria, placing the
responsibility on the first special department of the NKVD to carry out the
executions. The document was labeled top secret, requiring recipients to return
their copies within twenty-four hours. Copies were placed in the
“special files” of the Politburo, where they remained for Stalin’s successors. The executions began a month later.
The underground magazine Biuletyn Katynski, published in the 1980s,
was among the efforts to keep the Katyn investigation alive.
|
Given such evidence, the only possibility for Katyn deniers has been to argue
that faked documents had been slipped into the secret Politburo archives. The
most likely suspects were said to be Yeltsin himself, who needed such documents
to discredit the Communist Party, and Khrushchev, who was thought to have
“cleansed” the secret archives to remove evidence of his own crimes. The Katyn deniers
zeroed in on one suspicious fact: Gorbachev had told the Poles in 1990 that
there was no such smoking gun in the Politburo records. It was also alleged to
be suspicious that Yeltsin, when handing over the document to Walesa, said that
it had been recently discovered in the archives.
Gorbachev’s and Yeltsin’s statements can be explained. Soviet leaders from Khrushchev through Gorbachev
had those documents in their hands; we know this because the Politburo’s Katyn file records the names of those who checked them out.
Khrushchev was briefed on the file by his interior minister, Alexander Shelepin,
in a memo dated March 20, 1959:
The Committee of State Security of the Council of Ministers, USSR, has held
since 1940 case files and other materials regarding prisoners and interned
officers, policemen, gendarmes, military settlers, landowners, etc., persons
from former bourgeois Poland who were shot in the same year. In all, on the
basis of the decision of a special Troika of the NKVD USSR, 21,857 people were
shot. . . . The entire operation was carried out on the basis of the decision
of the Central Committee of March 5, 1940. Since 1940, no information from
these files was released to anyone, and all of the files, numbering 21,857,
have been stored in a sealed location.
To Soviet organs, all of these files represent neither operational interest nor
historical value. It is also doubtful that they could be of any real value to
our Polish friends. Quite the contrary, any unforeseen incident may lead to
revealing the operation with all the undesirable consequences for our state.
This is especially so because regarding those shot in the Katyn forest, there
is an official version supported by an investigation carried out on the
initiative of the Soviet state in 1944 by the [Burdenko] commission . . . which
concluded that all of the Poles liquidated there are considered to have been
killed by the German invaders.
The materials of the investigation of that time have been widely covered in the
Soviet and the foreign press. The conclusions of the commission became firmly
established in the international public opinion. On the basis of what has been
presented, it seems appropriate to destroy all of the records regarding the
persons shot in 1940 in the above-mentioned operation.
Shelepin’s recommendation to purge the records applied to the tens of thousands of
individual case files. He added that the relatively few Central Committee and
NKVD documents pertaining to Katyn
“may be preserved” and “kept in a special file.” Thus, as of 1959, Soviet records would have been purged of the 22,000
individual case files but would have retained the
“smoking gun” Beria memo and Politburo execution order.
Instead of clarifying history, a 2005 Russian investigation provided fertile
soil for a growing cult of Katyn deniers.
Gorbachev’s assurances to his Polish “friends” thirty-one years later that evidence only of Beria’s complicity had been found were given despite his closest advisers’ advice to come clean. Instead, Gorbachev chose to go no farther than the
conclusions of his chief procurator, N. S. Trubin, who noted in 1990, with
apparent regret, that Soviet historians were about to publish evidence to prove
Soviet culpability using NKVD transport records and lists of prisoners
“departing” for the execution sites. Trubin wrote:
Soviet archival documents confirm the fate of the interned Polish officers even
in the absence of evidence of orders to shoot and bury them. The material
uncovered by our historians, and they have uncovered only a part of our little
secrets, in conjunction with the materials uncovered by the Polish side would
scarcely allow us to hold to our earlier version. . . . Communicate to
Jaruzelski that as a result of a careful archival review, we have not found
direct evidence of orders, directives, etc., allowing us to establish the
concrete time and guilty parties of the Katyn tragedy. However, in the main
archive of the NKVD and also in the administration of convoy forces of the
NKVD,
“indices” have been uncovered that raise doubts about the Burdenko report of 1944. On the
basis of these indices we can conclude that the execution of the Polish
officers in the Katyn region was the work of the NKVD and personally Beria and
[his deputy Vsevolod] Merkulov.
The Polish democratic reform movement Solidarity dedicated these
protest stamps ““to Polish officers and soldiers murdered by the Red Army
in the spring of 1940.”
|
Neither Stalin nor his Politburo colleagues were mentioned, of course.
Gorbachev’s later memoirs are more candid. In them, he claims that he handed the
smoking-gun document to Yeltsin on December 24, 1991, as he resigned the Soviet
presidency. If this account is true, why did Yeltsin wait until October 14,
1992, to give the smoking gun to the Poles? Yeltsin and his advisers probably
would have deliberated long and hard about their Polish strategy. Having
decided to transfer the documents to the Poles, they then had little choice but
to say that they had been recently discovered, deep in the archives.
For Russians, full disclosure about the massacre would dilute national
pride in the Soviet victory in the Great Patriotic War. To Poles, Katyn
symbolizes all the tragic events that were directly caused by the Soviet
regime.
What sustains the Katyn furor today? It runs deeper than a mere historical
argument. For Russians, Katyn touches a raw nerve—full disclosure would dilute national pride in the Soviet victory over the Nazis
in the Great Patriotic War. Gorbachev’s closest advisers captured that concern when they advised him in 1989 to admit
as little as possible, warning that Poles could be convinced
“that the Soviet Union was no better and may have been worse than Germany during
the war and bears no less responsibility for the war.”
In the Polish historical consciousness, Katyn symbolizes all the tragic events
in Polish history during the past century that were directly caused by the
Soviet regime. The collapse of the Soviet Union and the reappearance of Russia
were greeted with much hope in Poland. Poles were greatly disappointed to
realize that, after the initial steps taken by Gorbachev and Yeltsin to come to
terms with the morbid legacy of the Soviet period, Putin was moving to rebuild
an authoritarian Russia on the foundations and traditions of the Soviet state.
Katyn evokes that larger legacy. Poles remember that during the 1930s, hundreds
of thousands of Poles living in the western reaches of the Soviet Union were
the first national group marked for persecution by Stalin
—execution or deportation to Central Asia. The Soviet invasion of Poland, in
concert with Nazi Germany in September 1939, was followed by waves of arrests
and deportations to the East. When the Katyn massacre was taking place,
hundreds of thousands of Poles, mostly the better-educated and economically
active elements, were already in Siberia or Central Asia or were heading there
in horribly crowded freight trains. At least a fifth of them died during the
first months of this brutal experience. When Nazi Germany attacked its
erstwhile Soviet ally in the summer of 1941, summary killing by NKVD guards of
prisoners at the front included thousands of Polish victims. Then, as the war
was reaching an end, the Soviets withheld assistance to Warsaw during the
bloody August 1944 uprising against the Germans. As Poland became a Soviet
satellite, Soviet agents arrested leaders of the Polish underground army and
government.
Katyn represents only a small part of the macabre story that Stalin’s successors did not wish to be told, either at home or abroad. The crimes of
the Stalin regime have never been placed before an international tribunal. The
Katyn incident represents one of the last opportunities to do so, either in the
court of public opinion or at the European Court of Human Rights, which has
been urged to take up the case by relatives of the victims.
For Putin, striving to resurrect Russian patriotism, the symbolism of Katyn is
most unwelcome. Besides tainting Soviet wartime heroism, a frank discussion of
the years of Nazi-Soviet collaboration and Stalin
’s own imperial ambitions represents an inconvenient truth that the leaders of
the new Russia—post-Soviet but never de-Sovietized—would prefer to leave buried.
Special to the Hoover Digest.
Available from the Hoover Press is Lenin’s Brain and Other Tales from the Secret Soviet Archives, by Paul R. Gregory. To order, call 800.935.2882 or visit www.hooverpress.org.
Paul Gregory, a Hoover Institution research fellow, holds an endowed professorship in the Department of Economics at the University of Houston, Texas, and is a research professor at the German Institute for Economic Research in Berlin.
Maciej Siekierski is curator of the East European Collections at the Hoover Institution Archives.
|
QUICK LINKS:
FREE ISSUE
EMAIL ALERT
CONTACT US
TOOLS:




|