• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
MRAKoris said:
Anti-Katyn is the project which USSR developed foreseeing the problems with Katyn case, in order to have a good defence stance the atrocities during Soviet-Polish war were taken as the basis for fututre claims to Poland. But during Soviet times for the sake of peoples' friendship in Soviet camp this case was silenced until "better" times.
What strikes me the most with this case is the lack of documents (at least so far). There are lots of assumptions and not so many serious documents.

Just imagine: for 45 years the Soviets could do practically anything both with Poland and with Polish archives. And, in fact, they did. Also, both the Soviet and the Polish commie propaganda was bashing the blood-thirsty, short-minded Polish imperialists. The "Polish concentration camp" of Bereza Kartuska was one of the main topics of in commie history books about pre-war Poland. In addition, there was a strong cult of both the Red Army soldiers and the poor communists massacred by the "Polish colonels". There are monuments to Soviet soldiers on every corner of the street in Poland and almost as many monuments to Polish commies.

So, why the hell didn't the Soviet propaganda mention the supposed mass murder of Soviet soldiers? Why was the case started in 1990? Also, why didn't the Soviets (be it RKKA, NKVD, Smiersh, KGB, GRU or anyone) simply take the Polish archives and publish them as evidence of the crimes? Why the soldiers who died in the POW camps during the Polish-Bolshevik War had to wait for 1989 to have a monument commemorating them?

De Slard said:
to Halibutt

You didn't mention my last link.
I did. You simply added those links later.
Cheers
 
Halibutt said:
First of all, there are lots of contradicting numbers mentioned in that article. Let alone the Chicherin's note since it's not backed up by anything (130.000 POWs, 65.000 died in captivity...). This seems rather not credible because his note was sent on September 9th, 1921, that is before the repatriation of POWs ended.
On the other hand Commies didn't like to show huge numbers of their losts.


Halibutt said:
Next, we have the "Гриф секретности снят: потери Вооруженных Сил СССР в войнах, боевых действиях и военных конфликтах" publication, which lists 94 880 officers and soldiers of Western and South-Western Fronts that were declared missing in 1919 and 1920.

Small note. Reread my psot number 14

К сожалению, до сих пор не ясны потери сторон в войне 1919—1920 гг. Согласно польским данным, польская армия только с апреля по октябрь 1920 г. потеряла 184 246 человек, правда, о каких потерях идет речь, не уточняется{217}. Потери Красной армии неизвестны. Известно лишь, что за время войны польские войска взяли в плен более 146 тыс. человек, содержание которых в Польше было очень далеко от каких-либо гуманитарных стандартов.


Losts of Red Army are unknown. The Arhive documents can give us some data, but for historian who clear know situation of Civil war it is only reference point.


Halibutt said:
Then the author mentions that according to the data of the 2nd Department of the Polish HQ (intelligence and counter-intelligence), there were more than 146.000 Russian POWs captured. I would like to see some backup for that claim, since it's completely different number that the author drew from the same sources Karpus was using.

Is it only your supposition? Karpus didn't mentioned the 2nd Department of the Polish HQ in Russian article. Karpus write without any links on documents.
Russian historian gives links on documents for each number he was using.

Halibutt said:
Then he mentions Mukhitina, who also published some numbers, quite different from those above. According to her, there were 165.500 POWs taken by the Polish side, including 13.000 in 1919 (Karpus quotes 7096 POWs in November of 1919), 30.000 in April-July of 1920 and 117.550 taken immediately after the battle of Warsaw in mid-August of 1920.


Then the author mentions a difference in the number of repatriated POWs by the end of October of 1921. Polish data gives the number of 65.797 men (and some 2.000 that were left as a warrant of safe return of additional 3.000 Poles stille held in Russian captivity; these were returned two months later). On the other hand, the Mobilisation Authority of the Red Army quotes 75.699 repatriated by the end of November of 1921. So, in other words, if we assume that both these numbers are correct, the Russians received some 10.000 more POWs than Poles sent them. This could be due to the fact, that many of the Russian POWs volunteered for service with the ill-fated Ukrainian and White Russian units that crossed the demarcation line after the cease-fire and wanted to continue the fight, but were defeated soon afterwards. Some of them returned to Poland (and were yet again put in the POW camps, BTW) but others might've been taken by the Reds and counted as former Polish POWs. However, this is but my assumption.

It s only asumtion. POWs were passed to Commies and have ability to fight on Russian territory?

Halibutt said:
Then the writer passes on to the question of difficult situation within the POW camps. He mentions an YMCA report (yup, YMCA had a division devoted to POWs during and after WWI), in which it is said that the POWs were kept in barracks that were not suitable for that purpose. The report also mentions lack of linen and that some of the POWs don't have it at all while others have not received fresh linen in three months. It also mentions that in the transit camp of the Polish 18th infantry division most of the POWs were not given any civilian clothing.

The report does not mention, however, that Poland did not build any POW camps. Those that were used in 1919 and 1920 were simply Russian and German POW camps from WWI.

The author also mentions a report of certain "RFSR representative to Warsaw", who on January 5th, 1922, wrote that "overnight of 18th - 19th of December there was a systematical slaughter of Russian POWs and citizens in the camp (in of Strzałkowo - Halibutt). It came down to shooting at the barracks, and in the result one prisoner, Korney Kalita who was sleeping in his bed was wounded.(...)"

This report is somehow strange, not only because there were no Bolshevik POWs there any more (the repatriation ended months before), but also that I don't understand what a Bolshevik representative was doing in a camp where White Russian and Ukrainian POWs were held.

Then the author mentions some mysterious letter from Polish commander of all the POW camps to general Sosnkowski, in which he mentions that 22.000 Russians died in Strzałkowo. I would really like to know the source of that document, since it would solve many questions.

Russian author write that he could to quote evidences of Polish barbarities from former POWs, but it is Russian data and Pole don't belive them (it is written shorter, but the meaning of it as I write). so he uses only non-Russian data.

Сожаление, естественно, относится к автору статьи в "Независимой газете". Можно утомить читателя перечислением документов и фактов об ужасном (это еще мягко сказано), а не "довольно трудном" положении военнопленных красноармейцев в польских лагерях. Об этом неоднократно говорилось в нотах российского Наркоминдела, но сошлемся в основном на другие, не российские источники, которые вряд ли могут быть недоступны польскому ученому-историку.


Halibutt said:
Then he also mentions a report of some Bolshevik commission that was supposedly dispatched to various POW camps in Poland in... February of 1923. That report, according to the author, mentions beatings and other acts of maltreatment of defenceless POWs. The problem is the same as with the previous documents - according to the Polish sources mentioned by Karpus, there were no Bolshevik POWs in Poland then.

Same argument we can use about Katyn...

Anyway. He write about report that was done according all data collected for previous years. Not report from revision of POW's camp in 1923.

May be you had trouble with translation from Russian?
 
Halibutt said:
[*]Poland did not organise her own administration in the Ukraine during the offensive. All administration was organised by the Ukrainian government.

So when Polish army robbed population we must blame puppet Ukranian government?

Halibutt said:
[*]One can hardly call the Ukrainian government the occupant of... Ukraine. And, I must tell you that most of my Ukrainian friends feel quite happy under Ukrainian yoke. But perhaps in 1920 it was different...

He don't write about Ukrainian government as occupants. Incorrect translation from Russian

In the occupied areas of Ukraine the oppressors pillaged all they could, burnt whole villages, shot to death or hanged innocent people.
He authors write about Polish army as occupants.

The pillage of Ukraine, covered by the alliance with Petlura
by agreement of alliance with Petlura...

Authors again write about Polish army...

Halibutt said:
[*]In order to strengthen the forming Ukrainian army, the Poles did not draw any recruits nor requisitioned food and horses from the areas east of the Zbruch river - all necessary supplies were delivered from Poland to the depots in Koziatyn, Kharkov and some other towns. Some of these depots were even captured by the Bolsheviks during their counter-offensive. I have no idea where did the author took the whole "requisition" thingie, but if it really happened, it must've been against direct orders. And it would've been pointless, since what the Polish army was lacking were uniforms, shoes, ammo and equipment, not horses and food.
May be you don't marked it, but author gives sources of any own statements
All documents were mentioned at the end of book.

Halibutt said:
[*]I have yet to see any proof that the Polish Army organised pogroms. Especially that there was a large number of Jews fighting in it. Even Petlura's pogroms are quite controversial, not to mention supposed "Polish pogroms".
So brave and honest Poles occupied land and then his ally did all crimes as second-line troops. Poles can't be accused for it?

Halibutt said:
[*]I don't have any data about the Soviet collaborators and what was done with them, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Ukrainians shot many of them.
It was Civil War. In our memory it is... Brother kills brother, Father kills sons
(Brat shel na brata, otez shel na sina).

Again you are trying to hold up author to shame and don't want to discuss his sources and documents.
 
De Slard said:
On the other hand Commies didn't like to show huge numbers of their losts.
So the huge numbers quoted should be even greater?

Losts of Red Army are unknown. The Arhive documents can give us some data, but for historian who clear know situation of Civil war it is only reference point.
So the only documents that would give any factual backup is not credible?

Is it only your supposition? Karpus didn't mentioned the 2nd Department of the Polish HQ in Russian article. Karpus write without any links on documents. Russian historian gives links on documents for each number he was using.
I'm still looking for his book.

It s only asumtion. POWs were passed to Commies and have ability to fight on Russian territory?
No. Let me put it this way:

Red Army -> captured -> POW camp -> White units allied to Poland -> Polish-Bolshevik Front -> cease fire -> cross the border and fight the Bolsheviks -> captured -> counted as former Polish POWs

Russian author write that he could to quote evidences of Polish barbarities from former POWs, but it is Russian data and Pole don't belive them (it is written shorter, but the meaning of it as I write). so he uses only non-Russian data.
Which does not support his thesis....

Same argument we can use about Katyn...
Do you mean that according to Soviet sources there were no camps for Polish POWs in 1940? Absurd or a lie.

Anyway. He write about report that was done according all data collected for previous years. Not report from revision of POW's camp in 1923.

May be you had trouble with translation from Russian?
So, were the Russian commisions allowed to POW camps during the war? Or afterwards? Who and when?

De Slard said:
So when Polish army robbed population we must blame puppet Ukranian government?
Prove it right, my friend.

He don't write about Ukrainian government as occupants. Incorrect translation from Russian
В оккупированных районах Украины = In the occupied areas of Ukraine. Sorry De Slard, but you're wrong here.

He authors write about Polish army as occupants.
And why is it so?

So brave and honest Poles occupied land and then his ally did all crimes as second-line troops. Poles can't be accused for it?
I don't say that such deeds did not happen or were not probable, I simply say that I've never seen any proof that the Polish army organised pogroms and even the Petlura's pogroms are widely disputed.

It was Civil War. In our memory it is... Brother kills brother, Father kills sons (Brat shel na brata, otez shel na sina).
So, when the Red Army invades Ukraine and conquers it (it was a different country, you know) - it's a civil war and Russian internal affair. If Poland signs alliance with the same government invaded by the Bolshevist Russia - she is the intruder... Strange logic my friend. But quite typical.

Again you are trying to hold up author to shame and don't want to discuss his sources and documents.
Nope, I'm questioning his interpretation of history.

Cheers
 
As to the Polish pillage of Ukraine, the only source that would back up such a revelation I could find was this commie propaganda poster
picture$12.jpg


The text reads: Petlura's mercenary sold Ukraine to the Polish pans*! The pans burnt and pillaged Ukraine - death to pans and Petlurists!

Pan or Polish pan is a Russian derogatory term for Poles, used extensively by the Soviet propaganda. It refers to the Polish standard honorificative form "pan" meaning "sir" or "mister". However, in Soviet propaganda it was more or less equivalent to "master" or "lord".
Cheers
 
Do all imperialists have moustache? :)

Reminds me of General Żeligowski portrayed as a pig by Lithuanian propaganda in the twenties. Which doesn't mean that Żeligowski indeed was a pig. He was most certainly a human.
Cheers
 
Ok, I have the book now and I started to read it. So far it seems quite credible, especially that almost every statement is supported by a footnote leading to various archives, mostly the Central Military Archive and New Documents Archive in Warsaw, both of which are opened to the public.

On an interesting note: the book Jeńcy i internowani rosyjscy i ukraińscy na terenie Polski w latach 1918-1924 is also available in other languages:


I know nothing about the English translation, but the Russian translation is available from the Warsaw University Library, so I guess some university libraries in Russia should have it too.

I'll let you know when I'm ready with it.
Cheers
 
A few notes while we await Halibutt book review (and given that I have worked with Halibutt for almost a year on Wikipedia, I have no doubt it will be a good and impartial review).

Note 1: Polish-Soviet War was a taboo in the communists time. It meant not only that you there was virtually no research going on for 50 (70 in case of USR) years, but that one could go to prison for disscussing it. Thus majority of useful publications in that area were done on the West, based mostly on pre-IIWW Polish sources. Which means that majority of publications relevant to PSW are, suprisingly, often written first in English and then retranslated into Polish or Russian. What is strange, then, is that no such findings were publicized (*discovered*) in English earlier, although there has always been a pro-leftist/communist/Soviet movement in the West, which would have surely used this in publications regarding PSWar and KAtyn. Makes one wonder why absolutely none of the Western historians writing about this period (A J Taylor, Norman Davies, et al) wrote about this. Neither do I recall any major findings surfacing after 1990s neither in Poland nor Russia, and given the current Russian government policy of subjugating historical findings to political needs (Anty-Katyn...how sad, how familiar...), I have would approach any Sovie...Russian new revelations and sources with some doubt. Especially as the talk about Polish POW camps has surfaced, accidentally, at the same time as the Katyn Anniversairy and Polish involvement in the Oragne Revolution in Ukraine.

Note 2:This does not mean, of course, that Soviet POWs didn't die in Polish camps. They died - but from ilness, not any executions. Polish government - and do remember that it was formed just on the eve of the war, in 1918, on a territories belonging to 3 former empires, ravaged by 4 years of IWW, and was engaged in conflicts on all borders (including a war for survival with bolsheviks) - was unable to provide much medicine and healthcare, as what resources it could was first directed to Polish civilian and military hospital. POW camps received whatever was left, thus no wonder that the rampaging post-IWW Spanish Flu claimed a rather disproportianaly high casualties in POW camps. I am sure that Poles in SU camps suffered similarly, as did various POWs from many smaller conflicts in Central/Eastern Euroope, that erupted in the wake of German withdrawal from Ober-Ost.

Note 3: I am pretty sure Polish army requisitioned food, horses and anything they needed - in Ukraine, Poland, or elsewhere. Same as Red Army did. This was war, and when supplies got scarce (and neither side had good supply lines), the local population would suffer. It is a sad constant of war.

Note 4: Ummm. Is this a joke?
The author also mentions a report of certain "RFSR representative to Warsaw", who on January 5th, 1922, wrote that "overnight of 18th - 19th of December there was a systematical slaughter of Russian POWs and citizens in the camp (in of Strzałkowo - Halibutt). It came down to shooting at the barracks, and in the result one prisoner, Korney Kalita who was sleeping in his bed was wounded.

A systematic slaughter (...) in the result one prisoner (...) was wounded.

Note 5: Ukraine was neither Polish nor Soviet/Russian. At first it was invaded by both Poles and the Soviets, and thus Poles were the invaders (although one should remember that while Ukraine countryside was dominantly Ukrainian, their cities had mostly a major Polish population, thus the struggle for Lwow and such). However, after Ukrainian goverment (of Peltura) signed a treaty with Poland, one can hardly refer to Poles as invaders/occupiers - unless somebody follows the Soviet logic 'truth is what is useful for us, same with logic and such irrelevant concept, viva propaganda, communism will triumph' :>

Note 6: There was, of course, pro-Soviet Ukrainian government, as well as a pro-Soviet Polish division (or 2-3) fighting in the Red Army, that believed in the commies cause, and fought for the worldwide revolution, Red Ukraine Soviet Republic and Red Poland Soviet Republic. Same with Lithuanian and others. In both cases, they commanded a much smaller forces then their pro-national (an important distinguishing point - Poland and Peltura's Ukrainians fought for a sovereign, democratic state, while bolshevicks codemned the very ideals like nationality or democracy), so I don't think we can make a point of Ukrainina Cilvil War (and most certainly not Polish Civil War). It was, at first, after German withdrawal from Ober-Ost, in 1918-1919, a giant free for all border conflict, and later, in 1920, the Polish-Soviet all out war (that nobody planned and happened 'by accident' - a very interesting war that was...).

Note 7: Well, ok, in 1920 there was also the Polish-Lithuanian border conflict, but it was not really a war. There were border conflicts aplanty in C/E Europe in those years, from Germany/Poland and Italy/Hungary (or Romania, I don't remember) border in the east to Balkan conflicts in the south to Baltic conflicts in the north. But only the PSW was the real, major war, both in terms of fighting personell and victory consequences (just think what would happen if Soviets had won....).
 
That is...? I'm sorry, but I don't understand your comment.

BTW, I'm still reading the book. It's not that long, but the guy is more of a historian than a writer and his style is quite fuzzy. And there are at least 5 footnotes on every page, which adds up to the confusion.
Cheers