TASK FORCE RUSSIA -- BIWEEKLY REPORT 18-31 JULY 1992 2ND REPORT
TASK FORCE RUSSIA (POW/MIA)
REPORT TO THE U.S.-RUSSIAN JOINT COMMISSION ON POW/MIAs
31 JULY 1992
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
Introduction
Part I: Background: The Moscow Office, Task Force Russia
Part II: Summary of Significant Interviews
Part III: Conclusions and Recommendations
Appendix: Report of Visit to Russian Archives
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This second report by Task Force Russia to the US-Russian Joint Commission on POW/MIAs consists of a detailed examination of the activities of the Task Force's Moscow Office from May, 1992 to July, 1992. The report provides a historical summary of the establishment of the Moscow Office, followed by a synopsis of interviews conducted by Moscow Office and Commission personnel. The report ends with a number of conclusions and recommendations based upon our initial months of experience operating on the ground in the Russian capital.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Handling Instructions
This report has been prepared for the use of the Commission in pursuit of our mission. While it is an unclassified document in accordance with Department of Defense classification guidelines for POW/MIA information, it nonetheless contains casualty-related information and should not be disseminated outside of Commission channels pending efforts by the Department of Defense Executive Agent to locate and notify as many next of kin as feasible.
INTRODUCTION
This is the second report prepared in support of the Joint US-Russian Commission on POW/MIAs (referred to hereafter as the Commission). The initial report, dated 17 July 1992, provided a detailed readout of Russian archives obtained by the Joint US- Russian Commission on POW/MIAs from February to July 1992. This follow-on report contains a comprehensive summary of the Task Force's other source of information during this same period--interviews with Russian officials and private citizens by personnel of the Task Force's Moscow Office. Both reports were prepared by the Analysis and Production Unit, Task Force Russia (POW/MIA), Headquarters, Department of the Army, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel, pursuant to the Army's role as the Department of Defense Executive Agent for POW/MIA affairs as they pertain to support of the Commission.
(Note: For a detailed description of the mission, functions, and methodology employed by the Task Force, see Chapter 1 and Appendix A of the 17 July 1992 "Initial Report").
The report consists of three parts, commencing in Part I with a history of the establishment of the Task Force's Moscow Office. Part II is the body of the report, which contains a summary of significant interviews that have been conducted in Moscow by Moscow Office personnel or by members of the Joint Commission or their staff persons during visits to Moscow between May and July 1992. These interviews took several forms. Some were conducted with Russian officials who might shed light on how the former Soviet Union handled POW/MIA personnel; other interviews were conducted of Russian citizens who had served with the Soviet military in Southeast Asia; finally, some interviews focused on Russian citizens who responded to Commission-sponsored media appeals for information on American POW/MIA personnel. Such appeals included newspaper advertisements in KRASNAYA ZVEZDA (Red Star) and NEZAVISIMAYA GAZETA (Independent Gazette), as well as a joint television appearance by Ambassador Malcolm Toon and General Dmitri Volkogonov, which was broadcast on 28 June 1992. Regardless of the type of interview, we have elected to report an unclassified synopsis of every one in this report, in order to provide Commission members a feel for the operational environment on the ground in Moscow. In most cases, the interview was the subject of a message originated by the Moscow Office. In some cases, the message reporting the interview was classified, a practice which we are taking steps to eliminate whenever possible. To assist the reader in referring to the full message, should this be necessary, we have included the message cite at the end of each interview synopsis.
The report concludes with Part III, which contains our conclusions and observations on the overall results of the interview program to date, and suggests where we might place our emphasis based upon our experiences thus far. In addition, we have included in an appendix a 10 June 1992 report produced by Commission member Trudy Peterson, which recounts the details of a visit made by her and other Commission personnel to four Russian archives.
I. Background: The Moscow Office, Task Force Russia
The Moscow Office traces its roots to the February, 1992 visit to Moscow by Senators John F. Kerry and Robert Smith, Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs, and the subsequent establishment of the Joint US-Russian Commission on POW/MIAs in March 1992. This was followed by a Russian Vice-Presidential decree appointing the Russian members of the Commission. (Note: The decree establishes an "interdepartmental commission for clarifying information concerning US citizens missing in action on the territory of the USSR during and after World War II.")
Until that time, the Defense Attache's Office (DAO) at the American Embassy in Moscow had handled any matters dealing with POW/MIA affairs. CAPT Serge Yonov, Naval Attache, had responsibility for POW/MIA in the DAO. In March 1992, he was joined in Moscow by Mr. Michael Hess, of the Defense Intelligence Agency's Southeast Asia POW branch. In April, Mr. Hess was replaced by Major William Burkett, USA, also of DIA, who had traveled on temporary duty to Moscow.
In late April, American Embassy Moscow Deputy Chief of Mission Jim Collins and MAJ Burkett met with GEN-COL Dmitri Antonovich Volkogonov, Chairman of the Russian side of the Joint Commission, to discuss joint POW/MIA operations. On 14 May, Mr. Al Graham, detailed from the Library of Congress to represent the Senate Select Committee, arrived in Moscow. It was decided that Mr. Graham and MAJ Burkett would work together under the aegis of the Joint Commission in identifying and interviewing Russians who might have knowledge of possible U.S. POW/MIAs and in pursuing leads resulting from these interviews. Further, it was becoming clear that a permanent joint office in Moscow would be required to accomplish this. At an 18 May meeting between Mr. Graham and Major Burkett with Vladimir Petrovich KOZLOV, Deputy Chairman of the Russian side of the Joint Commission, and Vladimir TARASOV, Head of the International Relations Department of the Russian State Archives, the POW/MIA representatives raised the issue of the Russians providing space for a joint office, with the US side providing computer and copier support.
With the arrival of CAPT James Connell, USNR (Ret.) as acting head of the Joint Office on 27 May 1992, the POW/MIA team assumed operational responsibility for POW/MIA affairs under the guidance of the DCM and the DATT. CAPT Connell was on loan from the Navy Maritime Intelligence Center. COL Bill Saxe, USAF, of DIA, arrived in late May to replace MAJ Burkett. The proposal for office space was formally raised at the Joint Commission meeting on 28 May. On Monday, 8 June, GEN VOLKOGONOV announced that the POW/MIA Team would be Provided office space at a suitable site.
The Russians provided office space at Ilyinka 12, near Staraya Ploshchad (Old Square), in the former headquarters building of the Central Committee of the CPSU, the same building housing ROSKOMARKHIV (the office responsible for all archives in the Russian Federation) and the offices of GEN VOLKOGONOV and DR KOZLOV. By June 10, the room was furnished and accessible to the POW/MIA Team. Tatiana Koltovich was appointed liaison with the team. Since occupying the office, the team has obtained a 386 personal computer with Word Perfect in Russian and English, a laser printer, a FAX machine and a Rank Xerox copier. The telephone is hooked to an answering machine, with the number (206-22-04). This is the number that is advertised as the POW/MIA hot-line.
On a daily basis, the Ilyinka office is manned by Ms. Koltovich. There are plans to assign at least one full-time Russian interviewer, provided by the Russian side, and a bi- lingual secretary, to be paid for by the American side. At present, interviews are conducted in the Office by the three person POW/MIA team, Al Graham, Bill Saxe, and Jim Connell. Routine meetings with representatives of the Russian side are also held there. When LTC William O'Malley, US Army historian, and Mr. Richard Jacobs, archivist, arrive in Moscow on or about 10 August, their principal offices will be at Ilyinka. To supplement this modest office, the team is working with the Embassy to obtain additional office space in the former US Embassy building. Finally, COL Ed Pusey, currently stationed in Washington, has been named the new Chief of the Moscow Office. He will assume his duties on 1 September 1992.
II. Summary of Significant Interviews (May 92 to present)
A. Interviews with Russian officials:
1. On 27 May 92, COL Aleksandr Konstantinovich NIKONOV, Director, Central Museum of the Armed Forces, was interviewed at the Central Military Museum, Moscow, by Bill Saxe and Al Graham. NIKONOV provided photos received from the late GEN-MAJ Pavel Ivanovich SUSLOV, a political advisor in Vietnam in 1971-73. One photo showed the personal weapon and radio of an American F-111 pilot; a second photo showed a US transport plane picking up POWs for departure home in 1973. Nikonov was reinterviewed on 24 July by the same interviewers. During this interview, Nikonov called SUSLOV's daughter at her dacha. She promised to check the general's effects for any other photos that the general may have had of American POWs in Vietnam or from the Vietnam War. COL NIKONOV also provided the names of several other officers who might have further information on American POWs (Colonels Leonid Ivanovich Ambrosov, Boris Aleksandrovich Voronov, and Nikolay Nikolayevich Kolesnikov). Ref: 091632Z JUN 92 and 290816Z JUL 92.
Action Taken and Recommended Follow-up: The photos, which did not appear to depict any legible serial numbers on the equipment, were passed to DIA. Team will maintain contact with COL NIKONOV after his forthcoming trip to the US, and request his assistance in determining other relevant information from General SUSLOV's daughter (e.g. Identities of other officers who served in Vietnam with her father.) Contact Colonels Ambrosov, Voronov, and Kolesnikov.
2. On 28 May 92, Parliamentarian Sergey Adamovich KOVALEV, Chairman of the Human Rights Committee, was interviewed by Al Graham at his office to determine other possible sources for interviews. Since Kovalev was unable to assist, no report was filed on this interview. While not able to provide any interview candidates, Kovalev expressed strong support for the POW/MIA search.
Follow-up: Recontact Kovalev, who is working for more cooperation from the special services archives.
3. On 9 Jun 92, GEN-MAJ Ruslan Sultanovich AUSHEV, Chairman of the Soviet War Veterans Committee, was interviewed at his office in the Russian White House by Al Graham. AUSHEV passed a list of Soviet Afghanistan war veterans who have serious medical problems. He would like for them to receive treatment in US VA Hospitals.
Follow-up: GEN AUSHEV's letter was passed to the Department of State. We will stay in contact with the general.
4. on 23 Jun 92, Yevgeny N. PRIMAKOV, Head of the Foreign Intelligence Service, was interviewed in his office by Amb. Toon. Primakov stated that searches of former KGB archives have revealed no relevant information to date. Ref: 231804Z JUN 92.
Follow-up: Continue to press for information from the Foreign Intelligence Service at both the working and Commission levels.
5. On 25 Jun 92, LTGEN Yevgeny TIMOKHIN, Chief of the GRU (Chief Intelligence Directorate), was interviewed at his office by Ambassador Toon. No substantive results were generated during this interview. Ref: 300703Z JUN 92.
Follow-up: The POW/MIA team plans no direct; contact with TIMOKHIN. Contacts have made with working level officials who are knowledgeable of the GRU archives. They have not reported any information relating to American POWs.
6. On 26 Jun 92, F. N. BARANNIKOV, Minister of Security of Russia, was interviewed at his office by Ambassador Toon. Barannikov said the appropriate archives had been checked, but no POW/MIA information had been revealed so far. Ref: 301324Z JUN 92.
Follow-up: Continue to press for info from Ministry of Security at both the working and Commission levels.
7. On 26 Jun 92, Aleksandr RUTSKOY, Vice-President of the Russian Federation, was interviewed in his office by Ambassador Toon. RUTSKOY said a bi-lateral agreement should be signed calling for a review of archives. Ref: 292106Z JUN 92.
Follow-up: The POW/MIA team plans no direct contact with Vice President RUTSKOY.
8. On 2 Jul 92, Viktor N. BLAGODETELEV, Executive Editor of RESURRECTION magazine, formerly SOVIET UNION, was interviewed in his office by Jim Connell. BLAGODETELEV said SOVIET UNION magazine has never had a Khmer language edition, and provided names of two offices that could be contacted to verify this. Both offices were contacted, and confirmed that no Khmer language publications had been printed in the Soviet Union since 1975.
Follow-up: Reinterview Blagodetelev concerning new information that has surfaced on the "Three Amigo" photograph.
9. On 7 and 8 Jul 92, LTCOL Aleksey Nikolaevich SHLAGIN, Deputy Chief for Operations at PL 350/5 (the Pechora camp), was interviewed in the Joint Commission Office by Al Graham, Jim Connell, and Bill Saxe. Present for the interview were LTCOL Sergei Nikolayevich OSIPOV, COL Vladimir Stepanovich GOYSA, Vladimir Konstantinovich PARKHOMENKO, Viktor Viktorovich PUGANTSEV, and Tatiana KOLTOVICH. SHLAGIN could recall no Americans at Pechora nor an older prisoner by the name of David Markin. Ref: 100516Z JUL 92.
Follow-up: If there is another trip to Pechora, reinterview Shlagin.
10. On 13 Jul 92, COL Vladimir Stepanovich GOYSA, Deputy Chief of the Main Directorate of Corrective Labor Institutions of the MVD, was interviewed by Jim Connell, Al Graham, and Bill Saxe. He provided a series of statements from Pechora prison administrators attesting that no Americans had been interned in PL 350/5 during their respective tenures, as well as a document stating that hospital records were destroyed by fire in 1990. Ref: 211916Z JUL 92.
Follow-up: We are pressing Pechora for additional addresses of possible interview candidates who could shed light on the Markin issue.
11. On 15 Jul 92, Grigory Mikhailovich CHUDAKOV, Editor-in-Chief of FOTOGRAFIYA magazine, formerly entitled SOVIET FOTO, was interviewed at his office in Moscow, by Jim Connell. He had no information on the "Three Amigos", photo but promised to survey his staff and professional associates concerning the origin of the photo. (Note: This photo, allegedly showing three Vietnam-era US POWs, has been denounced as a hoax by Department of Defense.)
Follow-up: The Moscow team will reinterview CHUDAKOV on 1 AUG.
12. On 22 Jul 92, Viktor Petrovich KOZLOV, Deputy Chairman of the Russian side of the Joint Commission, was interviewed at the Joint Commission office by Jim Connell, Bill Saxe, and Al Graham. KOZLOV gave a detailed explanation of problems besetting archival work in Russia. KOZLOV heads ROSKOMARKHIV, which controls eighteen main national archives under the purview of the Russian Federation. However, outside the present purview of ROSKOMARKHIV are four ministerial archives: KGB, Ministry of Internal Security, Ministry of Defense, and Ministry of Foreign Affairs, four archives which are of high interest to the Commission. KOZLOV noted that the effort is hampered by the lack of funds to pay Russian personnel to review, declassify, and release files. Ref: 231241 JUL 92.
Follow-up: We have made the Russian problem of resource constraints known to the Commission. We will continue working with Russian side of the Commission to maximize archival work and release of pertinent materials to the US side of the team.
13. On 12 Jun 92, Ed ARTIS, television producer and humanitarian activist, was interviewed by Jim Connell, Al Graham, and Bill Saxe, at a dacha in suburban Moscow. Artis provided details of his quest to reunite Viktor Hamilton, the NSA defector found in a Soviet mental institution, with his family.
Follow-up: None planned unless Artis provides POW-related info.
B. Interviews with Russian citizens conducted during the 27 May-3 June Joint Commission meeting in Moscow. (These citizens came to the attention of Commission authorities 25 a result of conversations with Russian officials, who identified them as persons who served as military advisors in Vietnam.)
1. On 1 Jun 92, Yury Alekseyevich SMIRNOV, a parliamentarian and Chairman of the Veterans' Sub-Committee of the Committee on Human Rights, was interviewed in the Hall of Colleagues by Al Graham, Bill Saxe, and Gary Tabach. SMIRNOV expressed the conviction that archival searches to date which have not revealed any information on American POWs have been conducted in a superficial manner. Through his own contacts, SMIRNOV has come across a person who was Chief of Counterintelligence for the 54th Air Defense Regiment, which served in Korea during the Korean War. This individual has information on how American POWs were interrogated in Korea and is willing to meet with the POW/MIA team. SMIRNOV also claims to know of another person who may have participated in the interrogation of three American POWs in Vietnam. However, SMIRNOV related that this person, a major, would have to be ordered to talk to the POW/MIA team. Ref: 081542Z JUN 92.
Follow-up: We will pursue both leads, subject to our priority on the Vietnam War. The alleged major who may have interrogated US POWs in Vietnam should be identified. Smirnov is perhaps the most potentially lucrative source of POW/MIA information that we have surfaced as a result of the interview program.
2. On 1 Jun 92, GEN-COL Vladimir Nikitovich ABRAMOV, Commander of Soviet Forces in Vietnam from Aug 67 to Dec 68, was interviewed in the Hall of Colleagues by Al Graham, Bill Saxe and Gary Tabach. He stated that Soviet forces in North Vietnam were not allowed to interrogate American POWs. However, the Soviets provided a questionnaire on tactical military items which the Vietnamese asked American POWs on behalf of Moscow. ABRAMOV stated that copies of the completed questionnaires were sent to the following addresses in Moscow: General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Secretary of the Presidium, Secretary of the Supreme Soviet, Minister of Defense, Commander in Chief of Soviet Air Defense Forces, Commander in Chief of Soviet Air Forces, Chief of the Soviet General Staff, Chief of the 10th Department of the Soviet General Staff. ABRAMOV denied telling US Senate staffers that the Vietnamese had told him in May 75 that there were still American POWs in Vietnam. In May 92, ABRAMOV asked the Vietnamese about American POWs and was told there were none. He is convinced there are no Americans left in Vietnam. Ref: 051724Z JUN 92.
Follow-up: ABRAMOV is head of the Association of Vietnam Participants, which is sponsoring a reunion on 5 Aug 92. ABRAMOV stated that he will raise the issue of American POWs at the reunion. Moscow team members have been invited to the reunion and will attend. We should request the Russians to query appropriate archives of the organizations that received the alleged questionnaire in order to locate any extant copies.
3. On 1 Jun 92, GEN-LT Boris Ivanovich SMIRNOV, a military advisor for a North Vietnamese air defense regiment in 1968-69, was interviewed at the Hall of Colleagues by Al Graham, Bill Saxe, and Gary Tabach. He provided the following information. GEN SMIRNOV was told that black pilots would always resist capture or commit suicide. He heard that there were eleven camps for American POWs. On 16 Feb 69, while in a Hanoi hospital, GEN SMIRNOV was told that a person he saw was an American POW pilot. However, he had no direct contact with that person. SMIRNOV said he will ask other veterans of the Soviet involvement in Vietnam to speak to the POW/MIA team. Ref: 041454Z JUN 92.
Follow-up: We obtained a physical description of the American POW seen by Smirnov in the hospital and included it in the message report of interview to assist in correlating this sighting, if possible, with known shootdowns. In addition, we will follow up with Smirnov concerning his commitment to intercede with other veterans of the Soviet Vietnam involvement on our behalf.
4. On 1 Jun 92, COL Viktor Nikitinovich ARTYUSHKOV, an advisor during the war in Vietnam, was interviewed in the Hall of Colleagues, Ilyinka, 12, Moscow, by Al Graham, Bill Saxe, and Gary Tabach. He provided no information of value concerning American POWs.
Follow-up: None.
5. On 1 Jun 92, COL Valentin Nikolaevich KOSAREV, an advisor during the war in Vietnam, was interviewed in the Hall of Colleagues by Jim Connell. He provided no information of value concerning American POWs.
Follow-up: None.
6. On 1 Jun 92, COL Vitaly Georgievich SELEZNOV, a Deputy Commander of an engineering regiment in Vietnam in 1970-71, was interviewed in the Hall of Colleagues by Al Graham, Bill Saxe, and Gary Tabach. In Nov 71, after the shootdown of an F-4 near the Noi Bai Airfield, he saw the two Americans who parachuted out of the plane. They were both "big guys" and neither appeared injured. They were taken prisoner by the Vietnamese. He was told later that one was a major and the other a lieutenant colonel. He could provide no other information of value concerning American POWs. Ref: 081559Z JUN 92.
Follow-up: As with all interviews, the message report of this interview was sent to DIA and other appropriate headquarters responsible for the Southeast Asia POW/MIA mission to facilitate cross-checking of incident-related facts such as provided by Seleznov.
7. On 1 Jun 92, COL Genady Ivanovich DAVYDOV arrived for an interview and said that he respectfully declined to be interviewed.
Follow-up: None.
8. On 2 Jun 92, COL Yuri Viktorovich FOMIN, a military advisor in Vietnam in Sep 69, was interviewed in the Hall of Colleagues, Ilyinka, 12, Moscow, by Jim Connell and Bill Saxe. COL FOMIN stated that he never saw any Americans. He could provide no other information of value concerning American POWs and appeared uncomfortable discussing this subject. Ref: 081600Z JUN 92.
Follow-up: None.
9. On 2 Jun 92, LTCOL (Dr.) Geniy Mikhailovich SHERSHKOV, who was a physician in Hanoi in 1962, was interviewed in the Hall of Colleagues by Jim Connell and Bill Saxe. SHERSHKOV did not personally know of the circumstances of any American POWs. After 1965, he stated that Soviet medical personnel received no information from the Vietnamese on American POWs. He recommended the Moscow POW/MIA team contact the Kirov Military Medical Academy, the Department of Military Surgery in St Petersburg and the Central Military Medical Administration in Moscow for further information on American POWs. Ref: 081600Z JUN 92.
Follow-up: Arrange to meet with officials of the organizations mentioned by SHERSHKOV.
10. On 2 Jun 92, LTCOL Vadim Evgenyevich LVOV, an air defense specialist in Vietnam in 1972-73, was interviewed in the Hall of Colleagues by Jim Connell and Bill Saxe. He was aware of three shootdowns of American planes which resulted in the American pilots being taken prisoner. However, LVOV had no direct contact with Americans POWs. At an unspecified date, a Vietnamese sergeant pointed out to him a prison where, he said, American prisoners were held. This building was two km SW of the Hotel Kimlin.
According to LVOV, the Vietnamese carefully collected bodies of dead American pilots, buried them and kept meticulous records, receiving rewards for doing so. They knew that after the war the Americans would pay them well for the bodies. It was reported that the American government would pay 80 kg of gold for a live American pilot. LVOV stated that a General-Lieutenant BABINKO was the commander of Soviet forces in Vietnam in Dec 72. Ref: 081559Z JUN 92.
Follow-up: Ask the Russian side of the Commission to contact BABINKO. Re-contact LVOV to elicit the names of other Soviets or Vietnamese knowledgeable of American POWs. Lvov was debriefed concerning the details of the above-mentioned shootdowns. His information, which was sketchy, was included in the message report of the debriefing, which was routed to DIA and other appropriate organizations responsible for the Southeast Asia POW/MIA mission.
11. On 2 Jun 92, COL Aleksey Aleksandrovich RUBTSOV, an air defense specialist in Vietnam in 1972, was interviewed in the Hall of Colleagues by Jim Connell and Bill Saxe. Although RUBTSOV never saw any Americans himself, he had knowledge of a POW camp located under a bridge over the Red River near Hanoi. He could provide no other information of value concerning American POWs. Ref: 081559Z JUN 92.
Follow-up: None.
12. On 2 Jun 92, COL Vyacheslav Vasilyevich AGAYEV, a Soviet advisor in Laos in 1962, was interviewed in the Hall of Colleagues, Ilyinka, 12, Moscow, by Jim Connell and Bill Saxe. He could provide no information of value concerning American POWs Ref: 021727Z JUL 92.
Follow-up: None.
13. On 2 Jun 92, COL Nikolai Yakovlovich SMOYLAKOV, who served as a military advisor in Southeast Asia, was interviewed in the Hall of Colleagues, Ilyinka, 12, Moscow, by Jim Connell and Bill Saxe. He provided no information of value.
Follow-up: None.
14. On 2 Jun 92, COL Aleksey Pavlovich AFANASYEV, a military advisor in Southeast Asia, was interviewed in the Hall of
Colleagues, Ilyinka 12, Moscow, by Jim Connell and Bill Saxe. He, too, provided no information of value on American POWs.
Follow-up: None.
C. Interviews with Russian officials responding to media appeals (e.g. Such as solicitations printed in KRASNAYA ZVEZDA and NEZAVISIMAYA GAZETA, or the Ambassador Toon-General Volkogonov "Panorama" television program)
1. On 18 May 92, Nguyen Mi, a Vietnamese academic from Hanoi who lives in Moscow, contacted the US Embassy. He was interviewed at the Consular section by Al Graham and MAJ Burkette. Mi stated that he had information on the remains of twenty US servicemen held by Vietnamese villagers. On 8 June 1992, he was reinterviewed by Jim Connell and Al Graham. The substance of Mi's deposition is that he desires a business visa to the US to buy computers, and would like to negotiate the sale of the above-mentioned remains for 75000 dollars each. Ref: 081506Z JUN 92.
Follow-up: The Team informed our headquarters of the Mi overture and received guidance that his overture is not within the purview of Task Force Russia. We have been instructed to introduce Mr. Mi to the appropriate Embassy authorities, which we shall do.
2. On 21 May 92, Anatoly POPOV, a mechanic and part-time newspaper reporter from Krasnoyarsk, was interviewed at the Aerostar Hotel by Al Graham. He had read about the POW/MIA issue in the Russian press, and said that he had information on Americans in prison in Norylsk. In January 1976, Popov tried to hijack a Soviet airliner to Israel. He then spent 12 years in prison in Norylsk where guards told him there were American POWs in the prison. Popov has a number of enterprises he desires to undertake as a paid employee of the Joint Commission, none of which appear prudent. These include: paying a friend of his who is an employee of a former KGB archive to snoop in the files; providing him a camera so he can take a picture of a man in a local village who he claims is an American living undercover (he would like to forcibly bring this man to Moscow); employing a man he claims is training to be an illegal insert into Austria to help us, and setting up a liberally-funded branch office of the Joint Commission in Krasnoyarsk under the auspices of a local governor. Popov's plans envision an organization of eight investigators who would fan out into the countryside and look for POWs, who he claims exist.
Follow-up: We will not deal with Popov in the future, and we have entered him on what could develop into a sizeable list of swindlers and others who see the POW/MIA issue as an opportunity to better their circumstances.
3. On 8 Jun 92, Viktor Viktorovich PUGANTSEV, a taxi driver from Chernovtsy, Ukraine, who walked into the Embassy, was interviewed in the Consular Section by Jim Connell and Al Graham. PUGANTSEV stated that he was a prisoner in the Pechora PL-350/5 labor camp in Siberia from 1982-86. During this time, Pugantsev stated that he knew a fellow prisoner who claimed to him that he was an American Korean War pilot POW named David Markin. Ref: 0815062 JUN 92, 111432Z JUN 92, and 231140Z JUN 92 (Pechora visit).
Follow-up: A Russian-organized trip to the Pechora Camp by American and Russian officials resulted from this interview. During this trip, camp personnel and inmates were interviewed, most of whom remembered Pugantsev, but none of whom had any memory of an elderly prisoner named "David Markin" as described by Pugantsev.
4. On 1 Jul 92, at the suggestion of Pugantsev, Vladimir BAGEYEV, a timber worker from near Elista, Kalmykia, Russia, was interviewed in his home in Kalmykia by Al Graham and Gary Tabach in the presence of Valentin PARKHOMENKO, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and COL Viktor Vasilyevich BORISENKO, MVD Chief for Elista. While BAGEYEV, a former inmate of the Pechora camp, recalled a fellow prisoner named "David Markin," he was unable to state that the man was an American. Ref: 031342Z JUL 92.
Follow-up: Stay in touch with Bageyev pending further developments in David Markin case.
5. On 6 Jul 92, Nikolai Vasiliyevich SEREBRYAKOV, a former MIG-17 pilot from Moscow, was interviewed in the Joint Commission Office by Jim Connell, Al Graham, and Bill Saxe in the presence of Tatiana Koltovich. He described his shootdown of a Navy P2V in 1954. His deposition correlates with a 4 September 1954 shootdown of a Navy P2V in which one crewman's body was not recovered. Ref: 072107Z JUL 92.
Follow-up: Query the archivists of the Ministry of Defense to search the records of the 22nd Regiment of the Pacific Fleet for information concerning shootdowns of American aircraft.
6. On 6 Jul 92, COL Georgy Kuzmich PLOTNIKOV, an assistant to Soviet military advisors in North Korea, was interviewed in his home by Jim Connell, Al Graham, and Bill Saxe, in the presence of Tatiana Koltovich. He stated that Chinese and North Koreans retained the American prisoners they captured under separate control. Plotnikov also told of interviewing an American Army infantry captain in Korea in 1952 (Whom he recalled as possibly a unit commander from the 24th Infantry Regiment). He stated that a senior Soviet general who had been the Senior Military Advisor to the North Koreans had told him that Americans had been transported to the Soviet Union. PLOTNIKOV, citing privacy considerations, refused to name this general, but did promise to ask the general to speak to the POW/MIA team. PLOTNIKOV said that files on American POWs would be found in the 16th fond of the archives of the Main Operational Directorate of the GRU. He also claimed that had any American POWs in Korea been sent to the Soviet Union, this would have been done by the NKVD. Further, he pointed out that the results of any interrogations of American POWs would have been sent to the NKVD archives, presently located near Dynamo Stadium in Moscow. PLOTNIKOV stated that General Lieutenant Georgy Agayevich LOBOV, now retired, was the commander of the 64th Fighter Corps and may have more information on American POWs in North Korea. PLOTNIKOV also mentioned Generals PLOTNIKOV (not related) and SEYENIN as persons who might be able to provide more information on the POW/MIA issue. Ref: 170720Z JUL 92.
Follow-up: Re-contact COL PLOTNIKOV for access to the Soviet general officer advisor to the North Koreans. Relay to the archivists, both Russian and American, to look into the specific fond of the GRU, and the files of the Ministry of Defense for the 64th Fighter Corps. Query the Russian side of the Commission to make contact to Generals LOBOV, PLOTNIKOV, and SEYENIN, and other senior officers who served with the North Koreans. If we obtain the name of the former Senior Advisor to the North Koreans from Plotnikov, work with the Russian side to arrange an interview with him.
7. On 9 Jul 92, Oleg Leonidovich BOGACHEV provided an Embassy guard 21 Vietnam-era dogtags which were forwarded to DIA. None corresponded to missing Americans. Ref: 090941Z JUL 92.
Follow-up: None.
8. On 9 July 92, Valentina Grigoryevna PAVLENKO, a citizen from a village about 100 kilometers from Moscow, was interviewed at the Aerostar Hotel by Al Graham, Bill Saxe and Jim Connell. Pavlenko came forward as the result of hearing an appeal at a gulag survivors' conference in Moscow on 21 May 1992. PAVLENKO had given birth to a child by an American merchant seaman in Arkhangelsk in 1946 and, as a result, spent 6 years in a gulag. Her only information of value was the fact that she was in the prison hospital with Swedish activist Raoul Wallenberg in the spring of 1947. This information has been turned over to the Swedes. Ref: 131417Z JUL 92.
Follow-up: We will introduce PAVLENKO to Swedish authorities on Aug 10.
9. On 16 Jul 92, Inessa Vasilyevna SEMENYCHEVA, a researcher for the President of the Moscow Art Union, was interviewed in her office by Jim Connell, Al Graham, and Bill Saxe, in the presence of Tatiana Koltovich. Semenycheva turned over a ring given to her by a Vietnamese pilot in 1963-64. Ref: 201346Z JUL 92.
Follow-up: The ring, fashioned crudely from a light metal, had the letters "F105D" printed on it, and no other identifying marks. It was passed to DIA. No further contact planned.
10. On 16 Jul 92, COL Valery Ivanovich UKOLOV, who was a teenager in Port Arthur, China in 1952, was interviewed in the Joint Commission Office by Jim Connell, Al Graham, and Bill Saxe, in the presence of Tatiana Koltovich. He told of seeing an American pilot in 1952 at a military hearing in Port Arthur, who had parachuted onto Soviet controlled territory rather than risk his fate with the Chinese. UKOLOV never heard anything more about the American. UKOLOV stated that Port Arthur was run by General BELOBORODOV from 1945-53. The general's son and two brothers presently live in Moscow. The gene al's political officer, VASYAGIN, is also alive. Reference: 211059Z JUL 92.
Follow-up: We will confirm that General Beloborodov is deceased, and contact his former political officer, General VASYAGIN to clarify, if possible, the Port Arthur incident.
III. Conclusions and Recommendations: The Task Force has learned a number of important lessons as a result of our initial experiences on the ground in Moscow.
a. On some occasions, we made the mistake of interviewing Russian citizens spontaneously, such as by meeting unilaterally in a public place. This practice tends to reinforce residual Russian conservative suspicions about our activities (i.e. that our team is involved in inappropriate intelligence collection activities). We will not repeat this error.
b. On the other hand, as should be clear from the series of unproductive interviews conducted on 2 June 1992 in the Ilyinka 12 offices (the interviews of former Russian advisors in Southeast Asia), the environment of the Ilyinka 12 office is not particularly conducive to productive interviews. (The building is the former Central Committee headquarters.) For example, during the 2 June interviews described in this report, Team members and interpreter report that the former Russian officers who were mustered by the Russian side of the Commission to be interviewed were almost to the man quite frightened and reluctant to talk. Our challenge is to adhere to the principle of bilateral, open interviews, while somehow overcoming the natura' reluctance and fear of many citizens to discuss such matters in such a setting so soon after the demise of Soviet power. We therefore strongly recommend that emphasis be placed on the acquisition of office space in a US-controlled area such as the former Embassy building, in which we can conduct interviews of Russian citizens. We would, of course, adhere to the principle of bilateralism and invite our Russian colleagues to be present for all interviews; however, we believe that interviews will not yield a free exchange of views as long as they are conducted in Ilyinka 12.
c. Concerning those interviews that were conducted in response to media appeals and public affairs efforts, we note that while such programs do tend to attract swindlers and assorted kooks, we also have netted some genuinely sincere and helpful Russian citizens. We believe that the price of sorting out the former from the latter is worth it, and recommend that we work with the Commission to develop a program of high profile public appeals and other public relations initiatives that will keep our issue visible in Russia. On balance, we see the prospects of meaningful assistance from the citizenry as perhaps more hopeful than what we may expect from Russian officialdom in the current environment.
d. Of the interviews conducted thus far, the Team was most impressed with Yury Alekseyevich Smirnov, the parliamentarian and Chairman of the Veterans' Sub-Committee of the Committee on Human
Rights, who seems to take a sincere and dedicated interest in our issue. Similarly, we were impressed with the statements of Colonel Plotnikov concerning Korean War events. We will follow up closely with both of these men.
e. The Pugantsev allegations concerning "David Markin" pose a problem for us that may never be resolved. We note, however, in reviewing the matter, that Pugantsev never stated categorically that "Markin" is an American, but rather that "Markin" told him that he was an American. Consensus of the Moscow Office team members who have had considerable close contact with Pugantsev is that he is telling the truth, and that, at a minimum, the elderly prisoner named "Markin" existed, as confirmed by Pugantsev's colleague, Bageyev. The fact that Russian officialdom, for whatever its motives, seems determined to deny "Markin's" existence completely, does not necessarily mean that the man is an American. The Russian bureaucracy could be engaged in a campaign to discredit Pugantsev for any number of reasons, one of which could be the bad press that could result if "Markin" is located, regardless of his nationality. Once married to the position that Pugantsev is a hoaxter, and that "Markin" did not exist, it would not be easy for our Russian colleagues to admit to the contrary. We will continue to judiciously pursue this matter by interviewing an American journalist in the United States (an emigre) who was instrumental in referring Pugantsev to our team. We must be conscious, however, that we may be reaching a point in time when aggressive pursuit of this matter could be counterproductive.
f. In general, we note that there have been several useful correlations between information obtained during interviews and information obtained from the small sample of archives described in our 17 July 1992 "Initial Report." In some cases, the archival information confirms what we have learned during an interview, while in other cases we note apparent contradictions. For example, common to the archives and the interviews is the role of the Soviet 64th Combat Aviation Regiment in Korea during the war; inconsistent is the archival depiction that no direct interrogations of Americans were permitted, compared to the statements of two interviewees that they witnessed such interrogations. Clearly the interview program is a vital part of our efforts to get at the truth. In this connection, we should remember that the large Russian emigre population in the United States, as well as in other countries (such as Israel), poses a potentially lucrative source of information to supplement that which we are able to collect in Russia.
g. Finally, as the disappointing interviews of Primakov, Timokhin, and Barannikov demonstrate, we face an uphill battle for access to the archives of the intelligence and security services. This fact not only makes the pursuit of a cohesive archival search strategy of those archives to which the Commission does enjoy access particularly critical to the accomplishment of our task, but it also underscores the need for a well-orchestrated and persistent interview program.
National Archives Washington, DC
Date: JUN 10 1992
Reply to Attn of: NN
Subject: Visit to four Russian archives
To: The Record
The U.S. delegation visit 4 archives: Special Archives; State Archives of the October Revolution; Archives of the Ministry of Defense; and Archives of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD). In each case the delegation was shown documents selected by the Russian hosts; in all but October Revolution we visited at least one storage area where documents are housed; in each visit we discussed the work done so far and inquired about the work plans.
I. Special Archives.
The Special Archives was visited by Trudy Peterson, Jim Connell, and Mike Spinello. The Archives has two main sections: records captured by Soviet troops during World War II and the records of the Central Office of Interned and POW Affairs, 1945-55. Within the latter section, the archivists believe that the records of the Fond of the Repatriation Department ("fond" is the Russian term for a series of documents originating in a single administrative unit and organized in a single filing order, usually in a common physical form and with a common general subject matter) contain important information on U.S. citizens who were in Soviet repatriation camps during and immediately after World War II. This fond has ca. 900 files; the Russians agreed that a U.S. working group member could read the finding aid for the fond, select files that appear pertinent, and read them.
In addition, the Russians agreed to give the American delegation on Wednesday a list of all the fonds in the POW section of the Special Archives. They confirmed that each fond has one or more finding aids ("opisi," in Russian). It is reasonable to assume that we can select the fonds for which we wish to review the opisi and ask to read them. We toured the reading room, which is in a separate building and to which selected opisi and files will be brought.
The Special Archives proposed a research strategy of selecting the appropriate fonds, looking through the documents in their reference departments for leads (for example, they found in reference files some documents regarding a U.S.-requested search in 1949 for Americans in camps), finding documents that are pertinent, and creating a file card on which is extracted information from the documents found. The U.S. side emphasized that, while the extracts are useful, the U.S. requires original documents with full citation. The Russian archivists agreed that copies could be made, but not in the reading room. The U.S. side agreed to provide xerox equipment, paper, toner, as required.
The Russian archivists also suggested tracing the index cards on persons repatriated (ca. 4 million cards, which identify the nationality for each person) and computerizing them to search for U.S. citizens. This is projected to be a 2 1/2 year effort. Then asked how U.S. citizenship was determined, the archivist's said it was self-definition; when asked if a U.S. citizen in Nazi uniform was U.S. or German, they said self-definition; when asked if a U.S. citizen who was a Jew would be listed as U.S. or Jew they said U.S. They showed us two rooms of computers where they are computerizing cards for Austrians and Italians (they have completed a Japanese project).
II. The Archives of the October Revolution.
The Archives of the October Revolution was visited by Trudy Peterson, Jim Connell, and Mike Spinello. The visit did not include a tour of the storage area. It did include an examination of several files selected by the archivists. Three files (delos 137, 137-l, 137-2) of the fond of the Directorate of the Authorized Person of the Council of Ministers of the Soviet Union on the Matters of Repatriation appeared to be the correspondence file of Lt. Gen. Golikov who directed the repatriation commission. While much--if not all--of this correspondence was with the U.S. Military Mission in Moscow, making it likely that the documents are also in the U.S. National Archives, there may be additional information in the Russian file and a comparison of the documents in the Russian files with the documents in the U.S. files may be a useful check on the completeness of the respective files. The U.S. side asked permission to copy these three files, providing copiers, paper and toner, and Tatiana Pavlova, the Acting Director of the Archives of the October Revolution, agreed.
Another file from the same fond (delo 4, index 83, "papka" 56) gave statistics on repatriation of American citizens:
1945 22,449 persons
1946 22 persons
1947 10 persons
We also saw file 37 of a fond of the Special Department, Gulag of the Ministry of the Interior of the USSR. The U.S. side asked to review the finding aids for the fonds of the Gulazg. Ms. Pavlova said the finding aids would not assist U.S. researchers because the finding aids are "blind," apparently referring to a practice in USSR archives of deliberately incompletely describing files. She also said that while the "theme" of the gulag "now is open," the documents still are classified and can only be researched by archives staff members.
The American side then suggested that a member of the U.S. side read some of the files that are not classified. We suggested the files in the fond of the Soviet Red Cross Association, the 150 "cases" of documents identified in the Prison Department sub-fond of the fond of the NKVD, and the 829 "cases" of documents of correspondence between prisoners and camps in the fond of the Gulag--all review that Ms. Pavlova had stated on May 29 needed to be done. She grudgingly said it would be possible but believed the archivists could do it more efficiently because the reader needed to be experienced in working with Russian documents and needed to be able to understand file citations and to track cross references. She suggested that we pay members of the archives staff to work two hours before the beginning of their normal work day. She said that she believed in this way "by the end of this year" Russian archives staff "will be able to look through all the documents." The U.S. all made no commitment to hire Russian archives staff.
The U.S. side asked for a description of the fond of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR. Ms. Pavlova said that the fond has documents through 1976, but not all are stored in October Revolution because of lack of space. She said the records are transferred in 4 year blocks corresponding to the sessions of the Supreme Soviet. Finding aids are based on the same 4 year blocks but again are "blind."
The U.S. side asked for a description of the fond of the Council of Ministers. Ms. Pavlova said the archives has not received transfer of records in this fond for the Korean War Period and following. She said that the records are still in the Kremlin, that the fond is controlled by the President of Russia, and that General Volkoganov knows the status of the fond.
III. The Archives of the Ministry of Defense.
The Archives of the Ministry of Defense was visited by Trudy
Peterson, Ed Ross, David Sisson, Al Graham, and Mike Spinello. The Archives was established in 1936 in Moscow, was evacuated in 1941, and located in Podolsk in 1946. It keeps the records of military "units and special establishments" from 1941, according to Colonel Nikolai Petrovich Brilov, the Director of the Archives. He said the archives holds 18 1/2 million files in 15 depositories located on a 40 hectare site. It has a staff of more than 1000 persons. He denied that the archives holds the archives of the GRU ("in Moscow," he said) or the records of strategic forces (also "in Moscow"). (This conflicts with Gen. Volkoganov's statement on May 29 that GRU archives are par of MOD.) The archives holds only the records of ground and air forces; the records of the Navy are in a separate archives in St. Petersburg. When asked if the archives holds the records of military advisers to foreign governments, Col. Brilov replied that records regarding the advisers remain in the department where they originated and are not transferred to the archives. He also said the orders of the General Staff of the Ministry of Defense are in the Central State Archives of the Soviet Army, 1918-World War II; the non-permanent records of the General Staff are stored in Podolsk. He did not make clear where the permanent post-World War II records are stored, leading to the impression that they remain in the possession of the General Staff.
The Archives of the Ministry of Defense maintains the records by the principle of provenance, that is, that the records of each unit or establishment are held together and not mingled with the records of another organization. Each military district has its own file room and stores its records for 15 years. After that time documents that are scheduled to be kept for 75 years or more are to be transferred to the Archives of the Ministry of Defense. There are finding aids for each body of records (regiments, hospitals, educational establishments, etc.).
The U.S. side requested access to and copies of the filing manual for the Ministry of Defense, in each version from World War II through the Vietnam War. Col. Brilov said that the manual is reissued every ten years, agreed that a representative of the U.S. side could read the versions, but said he could not provide copies unless through the Joint Commission. He also promised research access to "reference books" on all military units which include information on where they were stationed when, their "path in war," and similar information.
Col. Brilov discussed records of courts martial. The Archives of the Ministry of Defense has records of courts martial at the level of regiments, divisions, fronts and armies, World War II to present. Records of higher level courts martial are in the Archives of the Military Board of Courts Martial. The Archives of the Ministry of Defense also has a card file with biographical data on persons accused in the lower level courts martial. Brilov said he could not state with 100% certainty that no Americans are in the index, only that the archives staff has not seen cards on foreigners. We volunteered to take a sample of the cards if we desired to see if Americans were included.
With regard to the records of repatriation affairs, Brilov said the Archives of the Ministry of Defense has one fond with one finding aid to it. He also said he has a copy of the document from the 1950s dividing the records among various archives. Upon request, he said a copy of that document could be provided to U.S. side through the Commission.
We visited a storage area and viewed the work in progress on World War II POWs. The archivist explained that all camps, both front line and transit, were under the authority of the Directorate of Matters of Repatriation. At the front assembly points two identical cards were made on each person in the camp. When a sufficient number of persons was assembled, the group was sent to a transit point. One copy of the card went with the individual to the transit point and the other copy went to the registration department of Repatriation Affairs. When the person left the territory of the USSR, the card at the transit camp was stamped and sent to the registration department to be matched to its card on the individual. Different camps apparently made the cards in different ways. (These cards are almost certainly those in the Special Archives.)
The Archives of the Ministry of Defense has a fond of the records of the camps. The archivist said there were 14 transit camps and 44 front assembly points that dealt with personnel of allied forces (other camps were for Germans, Soviets returned from Germany, etc.). He said that if a U.S. person was picked up in a German uniform he would be considered German for camp allocation purposes.
Col. Brilov said each camp had its own volume(s) of orders and all camp order books are in the Ministry of Defense Archives. The orders show when an individual was moved, whether to a transit point, a hospital, died, etc. The orders normally would be explicit about destination (number of hospital, number of camp), although if the hospital was within the same general geographic area as the camp the information may not be explicit but implied. In addition the military hospital records are in the Archives, so the person can be traced there. The U.S. side was shown the order book of the 139th lager (the Russians used the German "lager" for cam?). The order book was file 20, and contained orders from a part of the Year 1945.
The plan of work is to have the archivists read the order books and when an individual is identifies as an American the archivist will prepare an index card extracting the information on the individual plus the number of the fond, finding aid, file, and page. The U.S. side received a copy of the form card. So far 2901 cards have been created. At the conclusion of the work the archivists will prepare lists: those who went to hospital, those who died, those whose fate is unclear, etc. The U.S. side asked to make a copy of the cards when the work is completed; Col. Brilov said yes but the U.S. side will need to provide equipment. The U.S. agreed. Col. Brilov stated he did not need additional staff for the work.
Finally, with regard to military units from the Korean War and later, Col. Brilov said the records of all units are relatively complete up to 1980. The records of units that withdrew from Eastern Europe transferred their records through 1989. The records of units that were stationed in Ukraine, Georgia, etc., are currently just where they were at independence; the Russian archives would like them returned to complete the fond on the unit to independence, while the new nations want at least copies of the unit records currently held by the archives of the Ministry of Defense.
IV. The Archives of the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
The Archives of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD) was visited by Trudy Peterson and Al Graham; the visit was conducted by Yuri D. Shevchenko, the Deputy Chief of Main Information Center. He was accompanied by the archivist, deputy archivist and a computer specialist. Shevchenko said the archives reports to the main information center. It holds the records of both the USSR MVD and the Russian State MVD.
The visit was difficult and the following information may be unreliable.
Shevchenko said the records procedures remain unchanged from the period of World War II to the present. The "ordinary procedure is that records are concentrated at the local level." Records are also maintained at the central level of MVD if the sentence is "heavy," which was defined as a crime which, if convicted, carries a sentence of more than three years. He said that because the USSR paid "special attention" to foreigners, records on them (even if the sentence was not "heavy") would be sent to the central level of MVD. He also said that military persons apprehended could end up in MVD control.
At the time an investigation is begun, an investigative file is opened and a card is created. The charge is shown on the card, along with biographical information on the individual, the organization. that started the case if other than MVD, etc. The cards are filed alphabetically. The volume of cards in local offices is unknown; there are said to be 25 million central index cards in a single alphabetical index dating from 1917 to the present. Shevchenko denied that a second card index existed organized in some other fashion, such as by nature of the charge. The alphabetical card index leads the archivist to the individual file.
At the first "encounter" with the suspect, he is fingerprinted. Again, the local MVD holds the fingerprint cards for petty crime (sentences below 3 years) and the central MVD holds fingerprint cards for those accused of "heavy" crime and, presumably, foreigners. The central fingerprint file dates from about the World War II period and consists of 17 million fingerprint cards. Shevchenko commented that the difference between 25 million central index cards and 17 million fingerprint cards reflects the later introduction of routine fingerprinting. This may be the single best source for discovering Americans by name.
If, after investigation, a prosecutor "gives permission to follow a case," the actual investigative case file is transferred to the court (one of three types: court, court martial, or "special tribunal") and the card is annotated to show where the file is. The court's papers are added to the investigative file as a section.
It is said to depend on the court as to whether the file is returned to the MVD. If it is a "high court martials the file stays with the court. The implication is that in the remaining cases the file is returned. Asked what happens if a case is considered by political powers, such as the Politburo or Council of Ministers, the archivist claimed he could not think of such a case.
It is unclear whether the "central cards" are annotated with the sentence. What is clear is that new cards are made for persons sentenced. These appear to be filed by nature of incarceration: prison, "labor correctional camps," or internal exile. Again, it is claimed that for sentences of less than 3 years, the "registration of conviction" (which includes making the card) is handled at the local level with no duplicate forwarded to the central card file. The central card files are for cards on persons with "heavy" sentences and, presumably, foreigners. The U.S. representatives were shown the cards on internal exiles.
The prison, labor camp, and internal exile cards are said to contain biographical information, the name of the organization that started the case, the name of court that sentenced the person, the terms of punishment, the place of punishment, death if occurred at the place of incarceration, and execution if carried out.
Shevchenko refused to divulge the number of fonds in the MVD archives. The U.S. side observed fond numbers above 100 in the storage areas in the single building visited. In addition, many cases of documents had no fond numbers. Shevchenko said there was a fond for persons convicted, one for persons "convicted and rehabilitated" and one for persons "repressed" (not further explained). This may imply that a new case file on the individual is created following sentencing. He said there was no fond on repatriation affairs.
Asked if he followed Glavarkiv (former central archival administration of the USSR) description practice, Shevchenko said the MVD archives did not take direction from "archival organs," saying MVD was a "different archives." Finding aids were sitting on top of the card files of the internal exiles; each said "2-P," and then was annotated by year. Some volumes of 2-P contained several years, others took several volumes for a single year. Asked if, as in the Special archives, the "p" indicated "prisoner," Shevchenko refused to answer.
The U.S. side asked for a description of the fond of the Special Department of Gulag. All the archivist would describe was information on burials. As a rule, he said, all burial information is held at both the local level and the central level of the MVD. Documents about the exact location of a grave are usually only at the local level.
The Russian side said that to conduct further research it needed computer assistance. Asked what they want to computerize, they said in priority order 1) index cards to persons convicted; 2) files; 3) fingerprint card index. Asked if they planned to computerize the finding aids, they said no, they wanted to computerize the whole test of a file by either typing or scanning. Asked how putting the whole text into a computer w help this project, the Russian side responded that names mentioned can be found by a search program. The U.S. side pointed out that documents contain handwriting and that is hard for scanners to pick up; the Russian side said that some programs help that problem.
Asked how the files will be chosen for input, the Russian side replied that they had identified 50,000 files that may deal with the project. Asked what fonds the files were coming from, the Russian side replied that the fond of the Registration Department of MVD contains information regarding personal registration of persons contained in "colonies and camps," persons released from prison to exile, persons transferred from prison to prison or camp to camp. The Russian side also said their first priority is to review the files in the fond of the First Special Department of the MVD, which dates from the end of the 1930s to the present. There are approximately 4000 files with a variety of types of documents: statistics, correspondence on transferring the convicted; memos from "colonies and camps" to the MVD; regulations on registration of various groups of convicts; regulations on executions and amnesties; "a lot" of correspondence between local bodies and the First Special Department.
Asked for a plan of work and estimate of time required, the Russian side responded that until they assessed the amount and type of equipment needed (scanners, computers, copiers, and computer software) they could not predict the amount of time required. Asked if computer training would be required, the Russian side responded that they "have trained persons."
/signed/
TRUDY HUSKAMP PETERSON
Assistant Archivist
for the National Archives