JHK 2003

The International Newsletter of Communist Studies

Jahrbuch für Historische Kommunismusforschung | Seite 357-458 | Aufbau Verlag

Der Internationale Newsletter der


Le newsletter international des recherches sur le communisme

Международные исследования по коммунизму

(Former: The International Newsletter of Historical Studies on

Comintern, Communism and Stalinism)

Published by The International Workshop of Communist Studies

Vol. IX (2003), no 16

New: The International Newsletter of Communist Studies – Online

The online version of The International Newsletter of Communist Studies is available since the 2001 issue. Since issue 14 (2001), the online Newsletter is put on the Internet every three months after the publication of the paper version. Thanks to the assistance of Christian Melbeck and the Computer department of the Mannheim Centre for European Studies You may visit the online Newsletter in PDF format together with the improved homepage of the Jahrbuch für Historische Kommunismusforschung. Have a look at the startsite: www.mzes.uni-mannheim.de/projekte/JHK-news/ (The software required is Acrobat Reader).

Editorial Board

Executive Editor:

Bernhard H. Bayerlein, Köln-Cologne/Mannheim

Editorial Board and Correspondents:

Aldo Agosti (Torino) agosti@cisi.unito.it, Leonid Babicenko (Moscow), Claus Baumgart (Leipzig) Douaiado@aol.com, Lars Björlin (Stockholm) lars.bjorlin@swipnet.se, Cosroe Chaqueri (Paris), Sonia Combe (Paris) Sonia.Combe@u-paris10.fr, Putnik Dajic (Belgrade) putnikd@eunet.yu, Gérard Donzé (La Chaux-de-Fonds) Gerard.Donze@ne.ch, Jean-François Fayet (Geneva) jean-francois.fayet@lettres.unige.ch, Jan Foitzik (Berlin) foitzik@ifz-muenchen.de, Maria Goretti Matías (Lisboa), José Gotovitch (Bruxelles) jgotovit@ulb.ac.be, Sobhanlal Datta Gupta (Calcutta) sovanlal@vsnl.net, Gabriella Hauch (Linz) Gabriella.Hauch@jk.uni-linz.ac.at, John Haynes (Washington) jhay@loc.gov, Victor Heifets (St. Petersburg) world@rosbalt.ru, Gerd-Rainer Horn (Coventry) g.r.horn@hud.ac.uk, Peter Huber (Geneva) peterhuber80@hotmail.com, Fritz Keller (Vienna) ug@ug-oegb.at, Klaus Kinner (Leipzig) RosaLuxemburgStiftung.Sachsen@t-online.de, Todor Kuljic todorunbg@ptt.yu, Avgust Lesnik (Ljubljana) avgust.lesnik@guest.arnes.si; Roland Lewin (Grenoble) infodoc@iep.upmfgrenoble.fr, Marcel van der Linden (Amsterdam) mvl@iisg.nl, Aurelio Martin Najera (Madrid) fpi@infornet.es, Kevin McDermott (Sheffield) K.F.McDermott@shu.ac.uk, Barry McLoughlin (Vienna) barry.mcloughlin@chello.at, Kevin Morgan (Manchester) Kevin.Morgan@man.ac.uk, Jorge Nóvoa (Salvador da Bahia) crisnova @ufba.br, oficihis@ufba.br, Alexander Pantsov (Columbus, Ohio) apantsov@capital.edu, Maria de Fátima Patriarca (Lisbon), Tauno Saarela (Helsinki) tauno.saarela@helsinki.fi, Wolfgang Schlott (Bremen) schlott@osteuropa.uni-bremen.de, Daniela Spenser (México DF) spenser@servidor.unam.mx, Dubravka Stajic (Belgrade) ies@eunet.yu, Brigitte Studer (Berne) brigitte.studer@hist.unibe.ch, Frantisek Svátek (Prague) frantisek.svatek@cuni.cz, Carola Tischler (Berlin) Carola.Tischler@Geschichte.HUBerlin.de, Reiner Tosstorff (Frankfurt am Main) rtosstorff@hotmail.com, Feliks Tych (Warsaw) tych@it.com.pl, Berthold Unfried (Vienna) berthold.unfried@univie.ac.at, Zdenek Vasicek (Prague) vasicek@bet.iline.cz, Aleksandr Vatlin (Moscow) vatlin@mail.sitek.ru, Gerrit Voerman (Groningen) voerman@ub-mw.ub.rug.nl, Marc Vuilleumier (Genève) mvuilleu@cui.unige.ch, Markus Wehner (Moskau), Rolf Wörsdörfer (Darmstadt) reinecke@pg.tu-darmstadt.de, Serge Wolikow (Dijon) Serge.Wolikow@wanadoo.fr

Advisory Board:

Prof. Dr. Siegfried Bahne, Bochum; Prof. Dr. Marjan Britovsek, Ljubljana; Prof. Dr. Pierre Broué, Grenoble; Prof. Dr. Marc Ferro, Paris; Prof. Dr. Dietrich Geyer, Tübingen; Prof. Dr. Lazar Heifets, St. Petersburg; Prof. Dr. Charles Kecskeméti, Paris; Prof. Dr. André Lasserre, Lausanne; Prof. Dr. Rein van der Leeuw, Amsterdam; Prof. Dr. Richard Lorenz, Kassel; Prof. Dr. Vera Mujbegovic, Belgrade; Prof. Dr. Jutta Scherrer,

Paris-Berlin; Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Hermann Weber, Mannheim

Editorial Adress

Dr. Bernhard H. Bayerlein

Arnulfstr. 14

D-50937 Köln

Telefon: 0049 (0) 221/422706

Fax: 0049 (0) 221/422866

E-Mail: Dr.Bayerlein@Uni-Koeln.de – Bernhard.Bayerlein@mzes.uni-mannheim.de

The International Newsletter of Communist Studies IX (2003), no 16

Published jointly with

Jahrbuch für Historische Kommunismusforschung 2003

This issue notifies information concerning communist studies of the following countries and regions

Diese Ausgabe enthält Informationen zur historischen Kommunismusforschungüber die folgenden Länder und Regionen:

Argentina, Belgium, Brasil, Colombia, France, Germany, Iran, Latin America, México, Mongolia, North-Corea, Peru, Russia, Spain, Switzerland, Turkestan, United States of America, Venezuela, Yugoslavia,

This issue contains the following sections Diese Ausgabe enthält die folgenden Rubriken:

Section I: Preserve for all time? Archival Problems – New Archival Projects – Institutions and Funds

Section II: Regional Communist Studies

Section III: Biographical Studies

Section IV. Workshop – Projects in Progress

Section V: Reviews and Reports on New Publications

Section VI: Events of Interest around the World

Section VII: Survey of Periodicals

Section VIII: Links-Links-Links. Interesting websites

Section IX: Miscellaneous

Section I Preserve for all time? Archival Problems – New Archival Projects – Institutions and Funds

John Haynes, Washington:

170 000 Names for the INCOMKA Database of the Comintern Archives[1]. The Result of International Cooperation

One hundred and sixty-seven scholars from fifty-four nations have contributed their time and knowledge to improving the accuracy of a new electronically searchable database for the archive of the Communist International. The opening, in the early 1990s, of the archives of the Communist International made available to scholars around the world a tremendously rich resource. The twenty-million pages of Comintern records, located at the Russian State Archive of Social-Political History (RGASPI) in Moscow, provided documentation on the history of political, trade union, and left-wing cultural activities in scores of nations where the Comintern and affiliated communist parties or »sympathizing organizations« operated during the period from 1919 to 1943. The great size of the Communist International archive, however, slowed exploration of this valuable source of original documentation. Even the finding aids (opisi) prepared by RGASPI archivists totaled more than twenty-thousand pages of description of the Comintern’s records. Scholars, whose principal interest was in the politics of a particular country, also found the Russian language of the RGASPI finding aids a barrier as was the difficulty in traveling to Moscow.

The INCOMKA project

The International Committee for the Computerization of the Comintern Archive (INCOMKA) undertook a project to facilitate research into the Comintern archive. Begun by the International Council on Archives, its partners are the Russian State Archive of Social-Political History, Federal Archival Service of Russia, Archives of France, Federal Archives of Germany, State Archives of Italy, National Archives of Sweden, Federal Archives of Switzerland, Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport of Spain, Library of Congress of the USA, and the Open Society Archives of Hungary. The INCOMKA project has two parts: first, to digitize as images 5% (one million pages) of the most used and the most significant documents chosen by the project partners of the Comintern and, second, to digitize the finding aids of the Comintern collections at RGASPI into an electronically text-searchable database. The scanning of the documents was undertaken by RGASPI archivists who also prepared the Russian-language database. The database is essentially an edited electronic version of the printed finding aids allowing computer searches using file descriptors, key words, and personal or organizational names. The database allows rapid location of file descriptions of the entire twenty-million pages of the Communist International archive at RGASPI, not just the one-million pages electronically scanned for the INCOMKA project.

The INCOMKA database of personal names and cadre files

However, to facilitate international use, INCOMKA determined that the database was to be electronically searchable in both Cyrillic-alphabet Russian and Latin-alphabet English. The U.S. Library of Congress agreed to be the lead agency for translation of the database with Dr. Ronald D. Bachman, the Library’s Polish and East European area specialist serving as the supervising linguist. Library of Congress linguists found that translating most of the descriptors from Russian to English to be an uncomplicated translation task although accurate translation of some Comintern organizational titles and operational »jargon» required consultation with historians familiar with Comintern history. However, Library of Congress linguists quickly found that translation of more than 170,000 personal names that occurred in the database was a more difficult task.

These personal names occurred in descriptions of files of various Comintern secretariats and agencies. The greatest number, however, came with more than 100,000 personal files maintained by the Comintern, the so called cadre files. These files are background files for persons for whom for one reason or another the Comintern at some point set up a biographical file. Many are for Comintern personnel, students at Comintern schools, and senior members of foreign parties. However, many files were also established for persons who were prominent opponents of the Communist movement. For example, the Comintern maintained a biographical file on J. Edgar Hoover, a strong anti-communist who headed the USA’s Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Comintern established files on thousands of persons who were simply of political importance such as major political or governmental figures, journalists, diplomats, trade union officials or others who were of interest to the Communist International for whatever.

Methodological problems of translation

While the Library of Congress made the initial translation of most national personal file lists, the Archives of France, the Federal Archives of Germany, and the Federal Archives of Switzerland undertook the initial translation of their respective national lists. In those cases, the Library of Congress provided only a computer transliteration from Russian to the Library of Congress phonetic Cyrillic to Latin alphabet transliteration system. Here is the translation problem. The Comintern labeled its personal files in Russian: all English, French, Spanish, Japanese, German, Finnish and other language names were transliterated into Russian by Comintern files clerks with varying linguistic ability and with differing transliterating habits. Linguists now faced the task of translating these Cyrillic-alphabet Russian names into Latin-alphabet English. Thus a non-Russian name originally spelled with a non-Cyrillic alphabet, say Hungarian for example, had been translated into Russian and affixed to a Comintern file now located at RGASPI. The Russian name on the file is now being translated into English. The inherent problems of this double translation is compounded in that in English phonetically identical names can often be spelled with different combinations of letters with equal linguistic accuracy. Consequently when linguists translated these names from Russian into English, while most were entirely accurate, a portion will inevitably not be spelled correctly compared to the original non-Russian spelling. This will cause problems for someone searching under one spelling and not realizing that it may be in the database under a variant spelling.

The problem cannot be eliminated entirely. To go back into the files to verify the native language spelling of more than one-hundred thousand names was not a practical possibility. INCOMKA sought to reduce the extent of the problem by sending the translations prepared by Library of Congress linguists to scholars who know the Comintern and the national parties and can match the translations with their knowledge of names of real persons.

The American personal files for example

The American personal file list illustrates the nature of the problem and the usefulness of having the translations reviewed by subject area scholars. The Comintern maintained personal files on more than 6,800 Americans. One of the files has the name, in Russian, of »БРАУДЕР, EАРЛ.« The linguist working on the list rendered that into »Brauder, Earl«. When historians reviewed the translation, they recognized this as a translation garble for »Browder, Earl«, the man who headed the Communist Party, USA from the early 1930s to 1945. This was not a linguistic error on the part of the translator: »Brauder« and »Browder« are phonetic equivalents in English. Rather, the translator simply picked a variation in English spelling that was not the one Earl Browder actually used. Similarly, the translator rendered the Russian »BАГЕНКНЕХТ, АЛ’ФРЕД« as »Vagenknekht, Alfred«. Historians recognized that as a leading member of the party in the 1920s he spelled his name in English as »Wagenknecht, Alfred«. Again, this is not an error but the sort of inevitable garble one occasionally gets when phonetically translating Russian into English with the variety of ways names can be spelled in English.

The engagement of international specialists

The INCOMKA project sought out specialists throughout the world to review and correct garbles and misspellings in the lists of personal files. Sometimes the specialists were also able to identify files that were labeled with a pseudonym and supply the correct real name. By any measure it was highly successful example of international cooperation. Thousands of translation garbles and misspellings of personal names have been corrected. Researchers for decades to come who will be using the INCOMKA database will be spared frustration, wasted time, and missed files due to this international effort. For that, the international community of scholars should be truly grateful. The Incomka project is now in its final stage, and it is anticipated that the final product will be available for research use at each member institution by mid-2003.

National biographical file lists – personal/biographical file titles for 100 countries with 130,000+ individually named biographical files[2]

Initial Translations made by Library of Congress specialists under the supervision of Ronald Bachman; John Haynes coordinated sending the translations to reviewers.

Afghanistan: fond 495-192, 34 files; initial translation by Library of Congress (LoC). Reviewed by A. R. Rahin.

Albania: fond 495-188, 230 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Stephen Schwartz and Shaban Sinani.

Algeria: fond 495-189, 140 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Emmanuel Sivan and Allison Drew.

Argentina: fond 495-190, 476 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by David Rock.

Australia: fond 495-186, 216 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by David McKnight and Peter Day.

Austria: fond 495-187, 3136 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Barry McLoughlin and Hans Landauer.

Bangladesh: fond 495-300, 24 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by John Haynes.

Belgium: fond 495-193, 704 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Jose Gotovitch.

Bolivia: fond 495-196, 101 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Robert Alexander, Marc Becker and Andrei Schelchkov.

Brazil: fond 495-197, 386 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Marco Aurelio Santana and Andre Ancona Lopez.

Bulgaria: fond 495-195, 2636 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Vernon Pedersen and Evelina Kelbetcheva.

Burma: fond 495-194, 127 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Bertil Lintner and Robert Taylor.

Cameroon: fond 495-298, 8 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by by John Haynes.

Canada: fond 495-222, 1315 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by George Bolotenko and Ed Laine.

Catalonia: fond 495-223, 142 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Jose Manuel Gonzalez and Guillermo Alonso Fernandez.

Ceylon: fond 495-271, 117 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by John Haynes.

Chile: fond 495-273, 443 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Corinne Pernet and Peter Winn.

China: fond 495-225, 3,328 files; received from RGASPI in July 2001, initial translation by LoC. Review by Chong Zhao, Li Minghua and colleagues of the Chinese archives.

Colombia: fond 495-227, 148 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Robert Alexander.

Comintern Administrative Department, fond 495-65a, 14,750 files. Largely the names of Soviet cadre of the Comintern with a few non-Soviets who had CPSU membership. Because these names are largely of Russian origin or were the names of Soviet national minorities often with Russified names in the original, this list has been computer transliterated with review by John Haynes.

Communist University of Toilers of the East: fond 532-11, 4,496 files; fond 532-12, 5, 900 files; fond 532-14, 117 files; and fond 532-15, 29 files; initial translation by LoC. Because these names are largely of Russian origin or were the names of Soviet national minorities often with Russified names in the original, this list has been computer transliterated with review by John Haynes.

Communist University of National Minorities of the West: fond 529-5, 18 files; fond 529-6, 112 files; fond 529-7, 92 files; fond 529-8, 73 files; fond 529-9, 80 files; fond 529-10, 59 files; fond 529-11, 71 files; fond 529-12, 158 files; fond 529-13, 183 files; fond 529-14, 209 files; fond 529-15, 263 files; fond 529-16, 249 files; fond 529-17, 247 files; fond 529-18, 363 files; fond 529-19, 89 files; fond 529-20, 48 files; fond 529-29, 26 files; fond 529-30, 405 files; fond 529-31, 2,033 files; fond 529-38, 506 files; initial translation by LoC. Because these names are largely of Russian origin or were the names of Soviet national minorities often with Russified names in the original, this list has been computer transliterated with review by John Haynes.

Costa Rica: fond 495-229, 74 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Robert Alexander, Jussi Pakkasvirta, Erik Ching and Avi Chomsky.

Cuba: fond 495-230, 375 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Robert Alexander and Margalit Bejarano.

Cyprus: fond 495-224, 52 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Marios Hadjianastasis and Sinan Kuneralp.

Czechoslovakia: fond 495-272, 8,267 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Pavol Salamon.

Denmark: fond 495-208, 466 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Morten Thing.

Dominican Republic: fond 495-209, 19 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Robert Alexander.

Egypt: fond 495-210, 200 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Rifaat Said and Joel Beinin.

El Salvador: fond 495-256, 62 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Erik Ching and Aldo Santiago.

Ecuador: fond 495-276, 75 files; initial LoC translation complete. Reviewed by Marc Becker, Alexei Páez, and W. F. Santiago-Valles.

Finland: fond 495-269, 1,987 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Kimmo Rentola, Tauno Saarela and Joni Krekola.

France: fond 495-270, 9,180 files; initial computer transliteration made by LoC. Translation and review by Georges Mouradian.

Germany: fond 495-205, 14,608 files; initial computer translation made by LoC. Translation and review by Gerlinde Grahn, Helma Kaden, and Bernhard H. Bayerlein.

Ghana: fond 495-283, 11 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by John Haynes.

Great Britain: fond 495-198, 1,963 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Kevin Morgan, Barry McLoughlin, John McIlroy and Alan Campbell.

Greece: fond 495-207, 1,100 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Haris Vlavianos.

Guadeloupe: fond 495-203, 48 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Robert Alexander, Jean-Pierre Sainton, Frederick Ivor Case and Myriam Cottias

Guatemala: fond 495-204, 65 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Stephen Schlesinger.

Haiti: fond 495-202, 48 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Christian Alcindor, Frederick Case, Jean-Pierre Sainton, Andre Alizee, and Myriam Cottias.

Honduras: fond 495-206, 40 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Erik Ching and Robert Alexander.

Hungary: fond 495-199, 7011 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Katalin Petrak.

Iceland: fond 495-219, 134 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Jon Olafsson.

India: fond 495-213, 790 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Subramanian Swamy.

Indonesia: fond 495-214, 260 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Joop Morriën and Ruth McVey.

Iran: fond 495-217, 895 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Cosroe Chaqueri.

Iraq: fond 495-216, 255 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Cosroe Chaqueri.

Ireland: fond 495-218, 77 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Kevin Morgan, Barry McLoughlin, and Emmet O’Connor.

Israel: fond 495-212, 389 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Shlomo Avineri and Joel Beinin.

Italy: fond 495-221, 3,888 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Sergio Bertolissi, Lapo Sestan, and Sergio Minucci.

Japan: fond 495-280, 661 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Robert Scalapino and Josephene Fowler.

Jordan: fond 495-215, 37 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Joseph Massad.

Korea: fond 495-228, 1,724 files; initial LoC translation made. Reviewed by Bruce Cumings, Haik Soon Paik and Jongsoo Lee.

Laos: fond 495-231, 36 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Ben Kiernan and Joseph Zasloff.

Lebanon: fond 495-232, 127 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Habib Malik.

Lesotho: fond 495-297, 4 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by John Haynes.

Libya: fond 495-234, 5 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by John Haynes.

Luxembourg: fond 495-233, 50 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Serge Hoffmann.

Malaya: fond 495-235, 12 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Laurent Metzger and Amarjit Kaur.

Malta: fond 495-236, 2 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by John Haynes.

Manchuria: fond 495-238, 65 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by John Haynes

Martinique: fond 495-240, 36 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Robert Alexander, Frederick Ivor Case, Dominique Taffin, and Myriam Cottias.

Mauritius: fond 495-237, 4 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by John Haynes.

Mexico: fond 495-241, 346 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Daniela Spenser, Robert Alexander, Devra Weber, and Susan Richards .

Mongolia: fond 495-242, 652 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Batsaikhan Ookhnol.

Morocco: fond 495-239, 51 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Adbelmajid Benjelloun.

Nepal: fond 495-243, 16 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Bahadur Thapa.

Netherlands: fond 495-244, 647 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Gerrit Voerman.

New Zealand: fond 495-246, 66 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by David McKnight, Kerry Taylor and Anne-Marie Brady.

Nicaragua: fond 495-245, 53 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Erik Ching, Robert Alexander, Michael Gobat, and Richard Grossman.

Norway: fond 495-247, 665 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Sven Holtsmark.

Oman: fond 495-248, 2 files; received from RGASPI in July 2001, initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by John Haynes.

Panama: fond 495-249, 74 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Erik Ching.

Paraguay: fond 495-250, 64 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Kevin Chambers.

Peru: fond 495-251, 96 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Marc Becker and Francisca da Gama.

Philippines: fond 495-268, 51 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Patricio Abinales.

Poland: fond 495-252, 11,970 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Włodzimierz Batóg and Maciej Siekierski.

Portugal: fond 495-253, 161 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Carlos Cunha.

Puerto Rico: fond 495-254, 37 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by W. F. Santiago-Valles.

Romania: fond 495-255, 2646 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Keith Hitchins and Eduard Mark.

Saudi Arabia: fond 495-191, 3 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by John Haynes.

Senegal: fond 495-284, 50 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Vincent Foucher, Mohamed Mbodj, Sylviane Diouf, Nikolai Dobronravine, and Papa Seydina Ndiaye.

Singapore: fond 495-257, 3 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Laurent Metzger.

South Africa: fond 495-279, 144 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Robert Edgar, Allison Drew, Irina Filatova, and Linda Duvenage.

Spain: fond 495-220, 4,058 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by José Manuel González and Guillermo Alonso.

Sudan: fond 495-259, 21 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by John Haynes.

Sweden: fond 495-275, 750 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Lars Björlin.

Switzerland: fond 495-274, 387 files; initial LoC computer translation; translation and review by Brigitte Studer.

Syria: fond 495-258, 171 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Habib Malik.

Tannu Tuva: fond 495-263, 12 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Alan Leighton.

Thailand: fond 495-260, 55 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Kevin Hewison, Pasuk Phongpaichit, Chris Baker, Kasian Tejapira and Thongchai Winichakul.

Trieste: fond 495-262, 11 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by State Archive of Italy.

Turkey: fond 495-266, 322 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Irvin Schick, Meta Tuncay, Rasih Ileri and the Social History Research Foundation of Turkey.

Tunisia: fond 495-265, 52 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Kenneth Perkins. Tuva: fond 495-264, 77 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Alan Leighton.

Ukraine (Western Ukraine): fond 495-281, 218 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Nataliya Martynenko.

Uruguay: fond 495-267, 268 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Christine Ehrick, Gerardo Leibner and Vania Markarian.

USA: fond 495-261, 6,846 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by John Earl Haynes, Harvey Klehr and Maurice Isserman.

Venezuela: fond 495-200, 151 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Robert Alexander.

Vietnam: fond 495-201, 139 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by Sinh Vinh.

Xingjiang: fond 495-226, 88 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by John Haynes.

Yemen: fond 495-211, 44 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by John Haynes.

Yugoslavia: fond 495-277, 2,527 files; initial translation by LoC. Reviewed by John Krajlic and Avgust Lesnik.

List of persons (167) who have assisted in the translation of Comintern Archives[3]. Personal/biographical file names [4]

1.     Abinales, Patricio. Kyoto University, Japan. Review of personal names for the Philippines.

2.     Akiba, Yoko. Library of Congress, USA. Translation of Japanese serial titles.

3.     Alcindor, Christian. Rutgers University, USA. Review of personal names for Haiti.

4.     Alexander, Robert. Rutgers University, USA Review of personal names for Bolivia, Columbia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Guadeloupe, Honduras, Martinique, Mexico, Nicaragua, Venezuela.

5.     Alonso, Guillermo Ministry of Education, Culture, and Sport, Spain. Review of personal names for Catalonia and Spain.

6.     Avineri, Shlomo. Hebrew University, Israel. Review of personal names for Israel.

7.     Bachman, Ronald. Library of Congress, USA. Transliteration/translation coordinator and editor. Initial translation of personal names for Afghanistan, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Cameroon, Ceylon, China, Ghana, Guadeloupe, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran, Korea, Laos, Lesotho, Luxembourg, Malaya, Malta, Manchuria, Martinique, Mauritius, Mongolia, Philippines, Poland, Senegal, Singapore, Tannu Tuva, Trieste, Tuva, USA, Vietnam, Xingjiang. Translation of RGASPI descriptors.

8.     Baker, Christopher. Independent scholar, Thailand. Review of personal names for Thailand.

9.     Batóg, Włodzimierz. Jan Kochanowski, Pedagogical University, Poland. Review of personal names for Poland.

10.  Batsaikhan, Ookhnol. Mongolian Academy of Sciences, Mongolia. Review of personal names for Mongolia.

11.  Bayerlein, Bernhard H. University of Mannheim and University of Cologne, Germany. Review of personal names for Germany and recruitment of reviewers.

12.  Becker, Marc. Truman State University, USA. Review of personal names for Bolivia, Ecuador, Peru.

13.  Beinin, Joel. Stanford University, USA. Review of personal names for Egypt and


14.  Bejarano, Margalit. Hebrew University, Israel. Review of personal names for Cuba.

15.  Benjelloun, Adbelmajid. Faculté de Droit, University of Rabat, Morocco. Review of personal names for Morocco.

16.  Bertolissi, Sergio. Istituto Universitario Orientale, Italy. Review of personal names for Italy.

17.  Björlin, Lars. University College of Södertörn, Sweden. Review of personal names for Sweden.

18.  Bolotenko, George. National Archives of Canada, Review of personal names for Canada.

19.  Brady, Anne-Marie. University of Canterbury, New Zealand. Review of personal names for New Zealand.

20.  Cagnoli, Fedora. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal names for Iberia (Spain and Portugal) and Latin America.

21.  Campbell, Alan. University of Liverpool, United Kingdom. Review of personal names for Great Britain.

22.  Case, Frederick Ivor. University of Toronto, Canada. Review of personal names for Guadeloupe, Haiti, Martinique.

23.  Castellano, Guillermina. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal names for Iberia and Latin America.

24.  Chambers, Kevin. Gonzaga University, USA. Review of personal names for Paraguay.

25.  Chaqueri, Cosroe. Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris, France. Review of personal names for Iraq and Iran.

26.  Ching, Erik. Furman University, USA. Review of personal names for Costa Rica, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Panama.

27.  Chomsky, Aviva. Salem State College, USA. Review of personal names for Costa Rica.

28.  Cottias, Myriam. Université des Antilles et de la Guyane, Martinique, France. Review of personal names for Guadeloupe, Martinique, and Haiti.

29.  Cumings, Bruce. University of Chicago, USA. Review of personal names for Korea.

30.  Cunha, Carlos. Dowling College, USA. Review of personal names for Portugal

31.  Da Gama, Francisca. Massey University, New Zealand. Review of personal names for Peru.

32.  Day, Peter. Writer and independent scholar, Sydney, Australia. Review of personal names for Australia.

33.  Deeb, Mary Jane. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal name for Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, and Yemen.

34.  Diouf, Sylviane. New York University, USA. Review of personal names for Senegal.

35.  Dobronravine, Nikolai. St. Petersburg State University, Russia. Review of personal names for Senegal.

36.  Drew, Allison University of York, United Kingdom. Review of personal names for South Africa.

37.  Duvenage, Linda. Independent researcher, South Africa. Review of personal names for South Africa.

38.  Edgar, Robert. Howard University, USA. Review of personal names for South Africa.

39.  Ehrick, Christine. University of Louisville, USA. Review of personal names for Uruguay.

40.  Fedor, Helen. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal names for Czechoslovakia.

41.  Filatova, Irina. University of Durban, South Africa. Review of personal names for South Africa.

42.  Firsov, Fridrikh. Independent scholar, Lynn, Massachusetts, USA. Consultant on descriptors.

43.  Foucher, Vincent. University of London, United Kingdom. Review of personal names for Senegal.

44.  Fowler, Josephene. University of Minnesota, USA. Review of personal names for Japan.

45.  Gawdiak, Ihor. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal name for Western Ukraine.

46.  Gobat, Michael. University of Iowa, USA. Review of personal names for Nicaragua.

47.  González, José Manuel. Ministry of Education, Culture, and Sport, Madrid, Spain. Review of personal names for Catalonia and Spain.

48.  Gotovitch, José. Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium. Review of personal names for Belgium.

49.  Grahn, Gerlinde. Stiftung Archiv der Parteien und Massenorganisationen der DDR im Bundesarchiv, Berlin, Germany. Translation and Review of personal names for Germany.

50.  Grossman, Richard. DePaul University, USA. Review of personal names for Nicaragua.

51.  Grunberger, Michael. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal name for Israel.

52.  Hadjianastasis, Marios. University of Birmingham, United Kingdom. Review of personal names for Cyprus.

53.  Harris, Grant. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal name for Albania and Romania.

54.  Haynes, John Earl. Library of Congress, USA. Coordinated recruitment of reviewers. Reviewed descriptors, Bangladesh, Cameroon, Ceylon, Ghana, Libya, Sudan, Yemen, and USA.

55.  Hewison, Kevin. City University of Hong Kong, China. Review of personal names for Thailand.

56.  Hitchins, Keith. University of Illinois, USA. Review of personal names for Romania.

57.  Hoffmann, Serge. Archives Nationales, Luxembourg. Review of personal names for Luxembourg.

58.  Holtsmark, Sven. Institute for Forsvansstudier, Oslo, Norway. Review of personal names for Norway.

59.  Htway, Khin. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal name for Burma.

60.  Ileri, Rasih Nuri, and the Social History Research Foundation of Turkey. Review of personal names for Turkey.

61.  Isserman, Maurice. Hamilton College, USA. Review of personal names for USA.

62.  Kaden, Helma. Stiftung Archiv der Parteien und Massenorganisationen der DDR im Bundesarchiv, Berlin, Germany. Translation and Review of personal names for Germany.

63.  Katzoff, Beth. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal names for Japan.

64.  Kaur, Amarjit. University of New England, Australia. Review of personal names for Malaya.

65.  Kecskeméti, Charles. INCOMKA, France. Recruitment of reviewers.

66.  Kelbetcheva, Evelina. American University in Bulgaria. Review of personal names for Bulgaria.

67.  Kiernan, Ben. Yale University, USA. Review of personal names for Laos.

68.  Klehr, Harvey. Emory University, USA. Review of personal names for USA.

69.  Krajlic, John. Independent scholar, Flushing, New York, USA. Review of personal names for Yugoslavia.

70.  Krekola, Joni. University of Helsinki, Finland. Review of personal names for Finland.

71.  Kuneralp, Sinan. Isis Press, Turkey, Review of personal names for Cyprus.

72.  Laine, Ed. Independent scholar, Ottawa, Canada. Review of personal names for Canada.

73.  Landauer, Hans. Documentation Archive of Austrian Resistance and Association of Austrian Republican Volunteers in the Spanish Civil War, Vienna, Austria. Review of personal names for Austria.

74.  Larson, Everette. Library of Congress, USA. Transliteration and translation coordinator for Iberia and Latin America, i.e., Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Catalonia, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Portugal, Puerto Rico, Spain, Uruguay, and Venezuela.

75.  Lee, Jongsoo. Harvard University, USA. Review of personal names for Korea.

76.  Lee, Sonya. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal name for Korea.

77.  Leibner, Gerardo. Tel Aviv University, Israel. Review of personal names for Uruguay.

78.  Leich, Harold. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal name for Australia, Bulgaria, Canada, Cyprus, Great Britain, Greece, Ireland, New Zealand, and USA. Translation of RGASPI descriptors.

79.  Leighton, Alan. Independent researcher, Bochum, Germany. Review of personal names for Tuva and Tannu Tuva.

80.  Lesnik, Avgust. University of Ljubljana, Slovenia. Review of personal names for Yugoslavia.

81.  Lintner, Bertil. Writer/researcher with the Far Eastern Economic Review, Thailand. Review of personal names for Burma.

82.  Li, Minghua. Central Archives of China (PRC). Review of personal names for China.

83.  Lopez, André Ancona. Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Brazil. Review of personal names for Brazil.

84.  Lu, Judy. Library of Congress, USA. Translation of Chinese serial titles.

85.  Luaces, Nora. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal name for Iberia and Latin America.

86.  Malik, Habib. Lebanese American University, Lebanon. Review of personal names for Lebanon, Syria.

87.  Mark, Eduard. U.S. Air Force History Office, USA. Review of personal names for Romania.

88.  Markarian, Vania. Columbia University, New York, USA. Review of personal names for Uruguay.

89.  Martynenko, Nataliya. Kharkov State Medical University, Ukraine. Review of personal names for Western Ukraine.

90.  Massad Joseph. Columbia University, USA. Review of personal names for Jordan.

91.  Mbodj, Mohamed. Manhattanville, College, USA. Review of personal names for Senegal.

92.  McIlroy, John. University of Manchester, United Kingdom. Review of personal names for Great Britain.

93.  McKnight, David. University of Technology, Australia. Review of personal names for Australia and New Zealand.

94.  McLoughlin, Barry. University of Vienna, Austria. Review of personal names for Austria, Great Britain, and Ireland.

95.  McVey, Ruth Independent scholar, Siena, Italy. Review of personal names for Indonesia.

96.  Mezzabotta, Liliana. Centrale Beni Archivistici, Roma, Italy. Recruitment of reviewers.

97.  Metzger, Laurent. University of La Rochelle, France. Review of personal names for Malaya and Singapore.

98.  Minucci, Sergio. Independent Researcher, Italy. Review of personal names for Italy.

99.  Mouradian, Georges. Archives de France, Paris and Centre des Archives du Monde du Travail, Roubaix, France. Translation and Review of personal names for France.

100.        Morgan, Kevin. University of Manchester, United Kingdom. Review of personal names for Great Britain, Ireland.

101.        Morriën, Joop. Independent scholar, Amsterdam, Netherlands. Review of personal names for Indonesia.

102.        Murphy, Christopher. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal names for Turkey.

103.        Ndiaye, Papa Seydina. University of Cheikh Anta Diop, Senegal. Review of personal names for Senegal.

104.Neubert, Michael. Library of Congress, USA. Development of the computer program to generate Library of Congress romanizations of Russian Cyrillic spellings.

105.        Nguyen, Hoa. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal name for Vietnam.

106.        Nyirady, Kenneth. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal names for Hungary.

107.        O’Connor, Emmet. University of Ulster, United Kingdom. Review of personal names for Ireland.

108.        Olafsson, Jon. University of Iceland. Review of personal names for Iceland.

109.        Olave, Carlos. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal names for Iberia and Latin America.

110.        Oldenhage, Klaus. Bundesarchiv, Koblenz, Germany. Recruitment of reviewers.

111.        Páez Cordero, Alexei, Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales, Ecuador. Review of personal names for Ecuador.

112.        Paik, Haik Soon. Sejong Institute, Korea. Review of personal names for Korea.

113.        Pajic, Predrag. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal names for Yugoslavia.

114.        Pakkasvirta, Jussi. Instituto Renvall, Finland, Review of personal names for Costa Rica.

115.        Pedersen,Vernon. American University in Bulgaria, Sofia. Review of personal names for Bulgaria.

116.        Perez, Juan Manuel. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal names for Iberia and Latin America.

117.        Perkins, Kenneth. University of South Carolina, USA. Review of personal names for Tunisia.

118.        Pernet, Corinne. Universität Zürich, Switzerland. Review of personal names for Chile.

119.        Petrak, Katalin. Institute of Political Science, Hungary. Review of personal names for Hungary.

120.        Phongpaichit, Pasuk. Chulalongkorn University, Thailand. Review of personal names for Thailand.

121.        Pourhadi, Ibrahim. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal names for Iran.

122.        Rahin, Abdul Rasoul, Afghanistan Cultural Association, Stockholm, Sweden. Review of personal names for Afghanistan.

123.        Ramos, Carla. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal names for Iberia and Latin America

124.        Rentola, Kimmo. University of Helsinki, Finland. Review of personal names for Finland.

125.        Richards, Susan. Independet scholar, Albuquerque, USA. Review of personal names for Mexico.

126.        Rock, David. University of California, Santa Barbara, USA. Review of personal names for Argentina.

127.        Rony, Abdul. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal name for Indonesia.

128.Saarela, Tauno. University of Helsinki, Finland. Review of personal names for Finland.

129.        Said, Rifaat. Independent scholar, Cairo, Egypt. Review of personal names for Egypt.

130.        Sainton, Jean-Pierre. Université des Antilles et de la Guyane, Martinique, France. Review of personal names for Guadeloupe, Haiti.

131.        Salamon, Pavol. Open Society Archives of Central European University, Hungary. Review of personal names for Czechoslovakia.

132.        Santana, Marco Aurelio. University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Review of personal names for Brazil.

133.        Santiago, Aldo. College of the Holy Cross, USA. Review of personal names for El Salvador.

134.        Santiago-Valles, W.F. Western Michigan University, USA. Review of personal names for Ecuador and Puerto Rico.

135.        Sestan Lapo. Istituto Universitario Orientale, Italy. Review of personal names for Italy.

136.        Scalapino, Robert. University of California, Berkeley, USA. Review of personal names for Japan.

137.        Schaeffer, Sirikanya. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal name for Laos and Thailand.

138.        Schelchkov, Andrei. Institute for Universal History, Academy of Sciences,Moscow, Russia. Review of personal names for Bolivia.

139.        Schick, Irvin. Harvard University, USA. Review of personal names for Turkey.

140.        Schlesinger, Stephen. New School University, USA. Review of personal names for Guatemala.

141.        Schwartz, Stephen. Independent scholar, Washington, USA. Review of personal names for Albania.

142.        Siekierski, Maciej. Hoover Institution, USA. Review of personal names for Poland.

143.        Sinani, Shaban. National Archives, Tirana, Albania. Review of personal names for Albania.

144.        Sivan, Emmanuel. New Hebrew University, Israel. Review of personal names for Algeria.

145.        Solsten, Eric. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal name for Italy, Netherlands, and South Africa.

146.        Spenser, Daniela. Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropologia Social, Mexico City. Review of personal names for Mexico.

147.        Spiegel, Taru. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal name for Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden.

148.        Studer, Brigitte. Universität Bern, Switzerland. Translation and review of personal names for Switzerland.

149.        Swamy, Subramanian. Harvard University. Review of personal names for India.

150.        Taffin, Dominique. Archives of Martinique, Martinique, France. Review of personal names for Martinique.

151.        Taylor, Kerry. Massey University, New Zealand. Review of personal names for New Zealand.

152.Taylor, Robert. Independent scholar, United Kingdom. Review of personal names for Burma.

153.        Tejapira, Kasian. Thammasat University, Thailand. Review of personal names for Thailand.

154.        Thapa, Bahadur. Tribhuvan University, Nepal. Review of personal names for Nepal.

155.        Thing, Morten. Roskilde Universitetsbibliotek, Denmark. Review of personal names for Denmark

156.        Thrasher, Allen. Library of Congress, USA. Initial translation of personal names for Bangladesh, Ceylon, India, Nepal.

157.        Tuncay, Meta. Istanbul Bilgi Universitesi, Turkey. Review of personal names for Turkey.

158.        Van Oudenaren, John. Library of Congress, USA. Recruitment of reviewers.

159.        Vinh, Sinh. University of Alberta, Canada. Review of personal names for Vietnam.

160.        Vlavianos, Haris. Decree College, Greece. Review of personal names for Greece.

161.        Voermann, Gerrit. University of Groningen, Netherlands. Review of personal names for Netherlands.

162.        Weber, Devra. University of California, Riverside. USA. Review of personal names for Mexico.

163.        Winichakul, Thongchai. University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA. Review of personal names for Thailand.

164.        Winn, Peter. Tufs University, USA. Review of personal names for Chile.

165.        Workman, Shaunetta. Library of Congress, USA. Formatting of files into tables, word-processing support and advice throughout the project.

166.        Zasloff, Joseph. University of Pittsburgh, USA. Review of personal names for Laos.

167.        Zhao, Cong, and colleagues of the State Archival Administration of China. Review of personal names for China.

Fifty four countries of the historians, scholars, researchers, linguists, and other specialists who translated or reviewed the translations of the personal names of the Comintern biographical file lists for the INCOMKA Project

1.              Afghanistan      28.       Luxembourg

2.              Albania 29.       Martinique (France)

3.              Australia          30.       Mexico

4.              Austria 31.       Mongolia

5.              Belgium           32.       Morocco

6.              Brazil   33.       Nepal

7.              Bulgaria           34.       Netherlands

8.              Canada 35.       New Zealand

9.              China (PRC)     36.       Norway

10.           Cyprus 37.       Phillippines

11.           Czech Republic 38.       Poland

12.           Denmark          39.       Portugal

13.           Ecuador           40.       Puerto Rico (USA)

14.           Egypt   41.       Russia

15.           Finland 42.       Senegal

16.           France  43.       Slovenia

17.           Germany          44.       South Africa

18.           Greece 45.       Spain

19.           Hungary           46.       Sweden

20.           Iceland 47.       Switzerland

21.           India    48.       Thailand

22.           Ireland  49.       Turkey

23.           Israel    50.       Ukraine

24.           Italy     51.       United Kingdom (Great Britain)

25.           Japan   52.       Uruguay 26.     Korea (ROK)    53.       USA

27.       Lebanon                                          54.       Vietnam

Alexandre Courban, Paris

A Journey into the Archives of the Communist Party of France (PCF)

This article is a contribution to the history of communism. Whilst preparing a Phd in history about the French newspaper L’Humanité, the author has been given responsibility of the PCF archives of the inter-war period. Since 1997, he has been developing a database on the leadership archives. At the same time, he took an interest in all questions regarding the archives[5].

In 1993, the Communist Party of France (PCF) opened its archives from the period 1944 to 1972. The archives before World War II have been opened since the 1980s. In the early 1970’s the Institute of Marxism-Leninism of Moscow handed over some of the archives concerning the activities of the PCF before 1939 as microfilm copies. These contain most of the leadership meetings, letters and correspondence of all kind, as well as documents about the activity of the different working sections (agit-prop, work amongst peasants, work amongst women and so on).6 We know now that the Soviets at the time handed over 865 files (not always in a complete form) out of over 2055 files existing at the Russian State Archive of Social and Political Studies (RGASPI )[6].

A new database. The choice to index the leadership archives

In January 1997, the archives department of the PCF, the Marxist library in Paris and the Institute of Contemporary History of the University of Burgundy (Dijon - UMR CNRS 5605) decided to create a database of the archives of the leadership of PCF (Secretariat and Politburo) as a whole.

One of the main interests of those archives lies in the fact that they are complete, only very few documents are missing. Their formal aspects changed according to the period. Until 1935, most of the documents are typewritten minutes of the governing bodies’ meetings. From 1935 on, we find mostly short summaries of the decisions taken at the meetings. From 1920 to 1938, the whole archives consist of microfilm copies, the original documents can only be found in Moscow at the RGASPI. From 1944 on, the user may find original documents. The archives of the Central Committee contain typewritten documents and microfilms of reports and interventions until 1953. From that date on, the archives consist of audio recordings.

These archives have their own history. The different ways chosen to record the meetings are of importance. Since the typewritten minutes of the meetings were abandoned in favour of the summaries of decisions, many relevant debates and other details for the database have been lost.

A study of these archives without an appropriate methodological approach could only reinforce the myth of a perfect communist organisation.

The high number of decisions and directives is, at the first glimpse, presenting a kind of infallible machinery. On the other hand, the repetition of the same directives at more than one or two meetings could imply that they have still not been executed. In these cases, the archives give more information about the institution than the event. As an example, in the early 1930’s, a contribution or intervention at the Central Committee’s meetings always began with » I do agree with comrade X report...«.

In the heart of indexing

However, the database is a research tool which opens some perspectives. Historians and archivists have participated in the conceptual elaboration of the database initiated by the Institute of Contemporary History of the University of Burgundy. Rosine Fry has conceived the technical adaptation of a 4d computer program, the indexing is being done by some Phd students.

The aim of this project is shown through the description by a multitude of indexing fields. In order to identify each meeting, we are indicating the type of governing body (Secretariat, Politburo, Central Committee) in the author’s field, followed by the date, the type of document (typewritten minutes, decisions) and the references. The main topics are also described in a specific field. This previous work allows – through a fast and clear reading – a good knowledge of the different meetings.

Through the index three specific fields are created: »authors«, »thematic words« and »locations«. All geographical sites are indexed. The geographical thesaurus allows any inquiry down to the regional subdivision of each country. Through a single and specific research, it is possible to find other links to enlarge the geographical scale. For example, starting from the entries matching with the town of Marseilles the user will be able to look for any meeting concerning the departement Bouches-du-Rhône.

The indexing by key words is the principal analytic contribution to the inventory. The indexing allows to interrogate with reliability the documents whose characteristics are a special terminology which has evolved in time. This thesaurus inserts a dimension which respects the linguistic evolutions. This bears a whole range of possiblities for synthetic and exhaustive researching.

Using the thesaurus, one can find, for example, all the meetings regarding the various strikes. Of course, if the word »strike« matches different meetings, it does not say anything about the importance of the debate about the strike.

Finally, the proper names are not only indexed but also specified in different categories relying on the function assumed by the respective person, as author, speaker, simply quoted or present in the meeting. This makes it possible to search only for the corpus of meetings where the specific person intervenes, or meetings where he is simply present or quoted. For example, one can find Maurice Thorez as a speaker at the sessions of the Politburo or the Secretariat. One may then become interested about Maurice Thorez quoted rather than speaker. One can also make a research about the perception of international leaders of the communist (as Stalin) or the worker’s movement (as Léon Blum).

New perspectives

As this kind of an innovative inventory permits larger reflections, it simplifies a more comparative approach. The systematic text treatment opens new perspectives. Without modifying the classification, the computerization enables the user to make inquiries which are beyond the possibilities offered by classical inventories. This database allows a more transversal and thematic approach. Without pretending here to outline a multidisciplinary research program, we can however suggest a few methods of reflections. For example we can imagine major contributions for a social history that would follow social categories as for example the railway employees in order to study their number, their influence and their force.

This database could also support oral history. For example, the Secretariat’s appended documents from 1944 on are rich in authorizations to travel abroad, that makes it possible to study individual travellers in Eastern Europe, for example. All kinds of useful data for biographical research may be obtained via this database.

Facing the number of documents (more than 75000 pages microfilmed), this database may be a useful tool, introducing at the same time a new way of working: we do not have to systematically read the entire meetings reports.

This database enables us to digitise the whole of the original document of these leadership archives. Finally, a link between the thesaurus and the digitised document will then be possible. In this way, the project follows the program defined by Georges Haupt: »To forge working tools, inventory sources, to write biographies, to publish documents, to elaborate monographies«[7].

The Records of the Communist Party of the USA in the Comintern Archives

DC Publishers is pleased to announce it is expanding its offering of source materials from the Comintern Archives in Moscow. The Library of Congress obtained the records of the CPUSA on microfilm for research use and preservation with no right of additional reproduction. However, in recognition of the importance of these materials to the scholarly community, the Russian State Archive of Social and Political History (RGASPI) granted IDC Publishers the exclusive worldwide right to distribute these microfilms. Many of the documents in this collection are unique; the records are very detailed regarding the history of the CPUSA, particularly its origins in the 1920s and the early and middle 1930s. IDC Publishers makes this very important resource available for research. This collection provides a strong basis for reconstructing an accurate picture of American communism and anti-communism. Including an online finding aid.

Source: www.idc.nl/catalog/referer.php;

Contact: Willemijn Lindhout. IDC Publishers. P.O. Box 11205. 2301 EE Leiden The

Netherlands. E-mail: wlindhout@idc.nl

Neue Veröffentlichungen und Ressourcen zum Archivwesen

Stefan Creuzberger, Rainer Lindner (Hrsg.): Russische Archive und Geschichtswissenschaft. Rechtsgrundlagen – Arbeitsbedingungen – Forschungsperspektiven, Köln, Verlag Wissenschaft und Politik, 2003.

Geplanter Inhalt des Bandes: Einleitung (Stefan Creuzberger, Rainer Lindner). Theoretische, politische und rechtliche Grundlagen: Arbeit an der Geschichte. Vom Umgang mit den Archiven (Jörg Baberowski). Reflektierte Archivarbeit – der »Königsweg« osteuropäischer Zeitgeschichte. Die übersichtliche »Welt der Modelle« und die »konstitutive Widersprüchlichkeit« des Sowjetsystems (Klaus Gestwa). Archives in the Former Soviet Union Ten Years After; or, Still »Caught between Political Crossfire and Economic Crisis« (Patricia Grimsted). Institutionen, Archive, neue Bestände: Vom Zentralen Parteiarchiv (CPA) zum Russischen Staatsarchiv für Sozial- und Politikgeschichte (RGASPI) (Andrej V. Doronin). Das Russische Staatsarchiv der Neuesten Geschichte (RGANI). Bemerkungen zu Freigabe und Nutzung seiner Dokumente (Michail Ju. Prozumenščikov). Das Staatsarchiv der Russischen Föderation (GARF). Freigabe und Nutzung neuer Bestände (Oganes V. Marinin); Das Moskauer »Volksarchiv«. Persönliche Reflexionen über die Idee und die Geschichte eines außergewöhnlichen Dokumentationszentrums (Boris S. Ilisarov). Zur »Deutsch-Russischen Historikerkommission« – Aufgaben und Projekte (Eberhard Kuhrt). 100(0) Schlüsseldokumente der russischen Geschichte. Ein Kooperationsprojekt der »Deutsch-Russischen Historikerkommission« im Internet: Das Beispiel Rapallo-Vertrag (Helmut Altrichter, Christoph Mick). Neue Quellen zum Stalinismus: Eine neue Stadtgeschichte der Sowjetunion und Mikrostudien – Ideen zu den Beständen des Zentralen Staatlichen Archivs St. Petersburgs (CGA SPb) (Julia Obertreis). Auf der Suche nach der Erfahrung. Autobiographisches Material aus dem Russischen Staatsarchiv für Wirtschaft (RGAĖ) (Susanne Schattenberg). Herrschaft und Technik in der spätund poststalinistischen Sowjetunion. Machtverhältnisse auf den »Großbauten des Kommunismus«, 1948–1964 (Klaus Gestwa). Das Rätsel der »Sozialistischen Stadt«. Archivarbeit in der Republik Belarus’(Thomas M. Bohn). Außenpolitik und Internationale Beziehungen von der Zwischenkriegszeit bis zum Kalten Krieg: Geschichtsforschung und Kommunismusforschung. Streifzüge um das Kominternarchiv (Bernhard H. Bayerlein). Die sowjetische Außenpolitik der Zwischenkriegszeit im Spiegel russischer Archivquellen (Viktor Knoll). Wehrmachtsdokumente und Feldpostbriefe im ehemaligen »Zentrum zur Aufbewahrung historisch-dokumentarischer Sammlungen« des Russischen Staatlichen Militärarchivs in Moskau (Polly Kienle). Foreign policy and the archival experience in Russia (Donal O’Sullivan). Zur Geschichte der sowjetischen Rüstungsindustrie von 1945 bis 1965. Das Russische Staatsarchiv für Wirtschaft (RGAĖ) und seine Bestände (Matthias Uhl). Sowjetische Besatzungsverwaltung in Deutschland. Aktenbestände zur Geschichte der SMAD in russischen Archiven (Johannes Raschka). Perspektiven der Archivarbeit zur Sowjetgeschichte: Neue Forschungsfelder zur sowjetischen Geschichte (Stefan Creuzberger, Rainer Lindner). Anhang: Internetressourcen zu Archiven in Rußland, in der Ukraine und in Belarus – eine Auswahl. Abkürzungeverzeichnis. Autorenverzeichnis.

The Archives of the Communist Party of Italy (PCI)

The Archival Department of the Foundation Institute Gramsci (Fondazione Istituto Gramsci), Rome has acquired a copy on CD of the documents of the Italian CP stored in RGASPI, Moscow. This is an important step in order to complete the historical Archive of the Italian Communist Party from 1921 to 1991.

Contact: Archivio@fondazionegramsci.org. Homepage www.fondazionegramsci.org

Section II Regional Communist Studies

Avgust Lešnik, Ljubljana:

1948 Yugoslavia and the Cominform Fifty Years Later. Petar Kačavenda (ed.): The Yugoslav Soviet Conflict in 1948. Collection of Works from the Scientific Conference / Jugoslovensko-sovjetski sukob 1948. godine. Zbornik radova sa naučnog skupa. Beograd: Institut za savremenu istoriju / The Institute of Modern History, 1999, 326 pp. This book represents a compilation of some works made on the basis of contributions presented at the congress of historians, organized by the Institute of Modern History and held on rhe 15th and 16th of October, 1998, in Belgrade under the title »The Yugoslav Soviet Conflict in 1948«. At the congress, eminent Yugoslav and foreign historians presented thirty contributions. The congress was organized to mark fifty years since the outbreak of the conflict between Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union, a crucial political event in the postwar history of Yugoslavia, whose repercussions directly affected the fate of the Yugoslav state and the lives of its inhabitants in the decades to come. The breach between the two leading communist parties and their countries also had an important international aspect, particularly in regard to the relations between the Eastern and Western military and political alliances on the eve of the Cold War. The Institute wished to provide, on the occasion of this anniversary, an opportunity for historians and other experts dealing with this question to present the results of their research, in view of the fact that archival material and historical distance offer a solid basis for a more objective and thorough study of this complex matter.

The breach, which began in 1948 when the leaders of the Soviet Communist Party embarked on a period of severe criticism directed at Yugoslav political and party leaders, soon developed into a conflict deeply affecting not only the mutual relations between Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union and their communist parties, but also those between Yugoslavia and the communist parties and countries belonging to the group of the people’s democracies and to the Cominform. Former studies have definitely demonstrated that the roots of the conflict lay in the hegemony of the first country of socialism in international relations, in the monopolistic attitude of the Soviet Communist Party and Josif Vissarionovich Stalin, in the mutual relations between certain parties and leaders of socialist countries, and in the personal relations between Stalin and Tito, the greatest authorities of the Eastern European countries, Stalin as the first figure of world communism, and Tito as a confirmed opponent of fascism. The roots of the conflict between Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union, which broke out in 1948 after the Cominform Resolution and came as a surprise not only to the ordinary people and leaders of Yugoslavia, but also to the international community, lay in Moscow’s reaction to the Yugoslav Communist Party just before World War Two, in the course of the Yugoslav struggle for national liberation, and in the immediate after war periode, when Tito’s Yugoslavia took certain steps in internal and foreign policy without the »big brother’s« knowledge and guidance.

The studies published on this subject provide certain answers regarding the causes and effects of this conflict in relation to the subsequent relations among socialist countries and their communist parties. This collection of studies and presentations of the scientific conference demonstrates that historiography has already achieved substantial results in discerning the causes, the course, and the consequences of these events which marked a turning point in Yugoslav postwar history. Undoubtedly this book will encourage further research of this challenging historical subject.

The Historical Significance and Repercussions of the Year 1948 (Ranko Petković)

Yugoslavia’s separation from the socialist camp for a period of four years had lasting historical and political repercussions, best viewed within the frame of the combined internal and external effects of this political decision. Internally, the Yugoslav population profited from the country’s new foreign policy by enjoying higher standards of living than those typical of the other socialist states. This improved status included greater political freedom, more opportunity for travel and work abroad, and a series of other privileges. Furthermore, the separation from the Eastern bloc reinforced Yugoslavia’s position and reputation in international politics, manifested by the growing interest of both superpowers in intensifying cooperation with Yugoslavia and by the country’s leading role in the non aligned movement, and its exceptional popularity among Asian, African and Latin American countries.

Despite the fact that Yugoslavia’s decision definitely caused a number of negative effects (an insufficient level of democracy, a system of repression which in some instances, such as Goli Otok, exceeded the repressive measures employed in other socialist countries, and close ties with the most brutal autocratic regimes, such as that of Idi Amin, Haile Selassie, and Bocassa), there is no doubt that the positive results of the separation outweighed the negative ones.

Causes and Effects of the Conflict (Sava Živanov)

The essay deals with the causes and effects of the conflict between Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union in 1948. The break in Soviet-Yugoslav relations came as a result of a number of accumulated differences, from those regarding socialist theory and practice to questions of foreign policy, particularly Yugoslavia’s role in the Balkans, which culminated in 1948. The breach between Tito and Stalin had multifarious effects. Following the conflict with the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia abandoned the Soviet model of social order and set the foundations of a new and specific type of socialism in the form of the »system of self-government«, which served as a cornerstone for Yugoslavia’s social and political development for several decades ahead. The precedent set by Yugoslavia affected the situation and existing relations within the communist camp, prompting some of the country-members toward attempts at social reform. In the sphere of foreign politics the conflict with the Soviet Union enabled Yugoslavia to assume a new position in international relations, between the opposing political blocs, and to the subsequent development of Yugoslav foreign policy along the principles of nonalignment.

Great Britain and the SovietYugoslav Conflict (Djoko Tripković)

Great Britain played a leading role in Western policy regarding Yugoslavia during World War Two. The British statesmen Winston Churchill and Anthony Eden sought to maintain Western positions and influence in Yugoslavia and to counter the increasing Soviet penetration in Eastern Europe. Their efforts appeared, however, to have little effect. The ascendance to power of the communist regime headed by Tito immediately after the war signified Yugoslavia’s complete turn towards Moscow. Soviet influence became absolute, since the Yugoslav communists thoroughly applied the Soviet model of government as the most faithful allies of Stalin and the USSR. Soviet predominance lasted until 1948 and the break between Tito and Stalin, which soon evolved into a severe political conflict. The British government saw the breach as a chance to restore Western positions in Yugoslavia and, together with the American administration, hastened to formulate a new political strategy for Yugoslavia. Initially the new policy, figuratively referred to as »keeping Tito afloat«, offered guarded support to Tito’s regime. Following Tito’s promise of denying further assistance to Markos’ partisans in Greece, the West intensified the economic and subsequent military aid offered to Yugoslavia, through the program of Tripartite Aid. Yugoslav relations with the West reached their highest point in this period, as demonstrated by Tito’s visit to Britain in March 1953, his first trip to a Western country since the end of the war. Stalin’s death, however, which coincided with Tito’s return from London, caused an abrupt turn in the situation, leading to Yugoslavia’s speedy reconciliation with the Kremlin. The process of normalization in the relations between Yugoslavia and the USSR was concluded in 1955/56. At the same time, Tito formed a long-term foreign policy based on Yugoslavia’s non aligned position between the East and West. Great Britain and the US could not but accept Tito’s position, and continued their program of cooperation and aid as the price that had to be paid to prevent him from returning into the Soviet orbit.

Western Economic and Military Aid at the Time of Yugoslavia’s Conflict with the Cominform (Dragan Bogetić)

Yugoslavia’s cooperation with the West in the early 50s represented a novelty in international relations and a precedent difficult to accept at the time of the world’s severe polarization. Economic relations with the West were the basis for Yugoslavia’s new foreign policy directed at overcoming the isolation from the international community, and the main factor of its political regime’s internal consolidation. Needless to say, these relations were not founded on the principles of true economic cooperation between equal partners, but rather took the form of unilateral aid to Yugoslavia, almost exclusively motivated by Western military and political interests. The aid offered to Yugoslavia, however, was also used to direct Yugoslavia toward Western principles of economy, which would serve as a basis for subsequent credit relations between the two sides and for the introduction of more realistic economic programs in Yugoslavia.

Albania in the Cominform Campaign against Yugoslavia 1948-1950 (Djordje Borozan) The contribution, based on information obtained from archival sources and relevant literature, deals with the exceptionally strong Albanian propaganda employed in supporting the accusations against the Yugoslav leaders contained in the Cominform Resolution of 28 June 1948. Albania’s radical break of political, economic, and military ties with Yugoslavia confirmed Yugoslav misgivings regarding Enver Hoxha’s regime. Hoxha’s swift to affiliation with the Soviet Union and the countries of the Eastern bloc showed him to be an unreliable economic and political ally, and revealed his underlying hopes of using the new alliance to achieve the forcible annexation of Kosovo and Metohia to Albania. The failure of the Cominform campaign against Yugoslavia marked the beginning of Albania’s definite alienation from Yugoslavia.

The Balkan Federation and the Comintern (Slavoljub Cvetković)

The author considers this subject from the point of view of the mutual collaboration of liberation movements in the Balkans in the course of the Second World War, and the attempts at forming a Balkan Communist Federation based on new principles. The question of the Balkan Federation is also viewed from the perspective of Soviet and Western allies’ solutions to the problem of the Balkans. The idea of the Balkan Federation, conceived by Tito and Dimitrov and effectuated in the period 1946-1948, embodied the old communist concepts of internationalism. These ideas challenged the Soviet policy of expansionism, which in the Balkans was reflected in the beginning of the Greek civil war in March 1946, and the attempts at constituting a Macedonian socialist republic as part of the Soviet Union. If the ideological and political implications of the Truman Doctrine were set aside, the situation in the Balkans should be viewed in terms of this policy of 1946, in which case the conflict between the USSR and Yugoslavia in 1948 can be seen as the Balkan manifestation of opposing Soviet and Western global interests.

The Cominform and YugoslavBulgarian Relations 1945-1953 (Novica Veljanovski) Relations between Yugoslavia and Bulgaria represented a constant and important factor in the comprehensive relations of Balkan countries, which became particularly evident at the time of Yugoslavia’s conflict with the Cominform. During the period 1945 to 1947 the relations between Yugoslavia and Bulgaria went through several phases. Josip Broz made use of the opportunity presented by Bulgaria’s isolation from the international community to form relations with this country, and to build his own authority as statesman and military commander. A military alliance between the two countries was established at a meeting in Pehchev on 23 September 1944, in addition to which the Yugoslav side requested Bulgaria’s definitive attitude regarding the decisions of the ASNOM (Antifascist League of National Liberation of Macedonia) and the proclamation of the Macedonian republic. The conclusions reached at Pehchev included the demobilization of Macedonians from the Bulgarian army, whose implementation required a second meeting between Josip Broz and the Bulgarian delegation in Kraiowa. The latter meeting marked the beginning of closer relations between Yugoslavia and Bulgaria still marred, however, by the Macedonian question, as it became evident at the Paris Peace Conference in 1946. Edvard Kardelj did not formally open the debate concerning the Macedonian issue but Moša Pijade initiated the discussion by opposing Greek demands for the annexation of Pyrenean Macedonia. The decision made at the Tenth Plenum of the BRP/k/ (Bulgarian Labor Party) was in favor of allowing greater cultural autonomy to members of the Macedonian nation, mainly as a result of Stalin’s view that Pyrenean Macedonia should be given cultural autonomy within Bulgaria. The Lake Bled Agreement represented a culmination in the positive relations between Yugoslavia and Bulgaria. Later, however, Bulgaria took advantage of Yugoslavia’s unfavorable situation to favourise its own interests, causing a rapid deterioration of the two countries’ diplomatic relations and an increasing number of border incidents. The process of normalization in Yugoslav Bulgarian relations began after Stalin’s death in 1953.

The Cominform in Slovenia and Subsequent Political Liberalization (Božo Repe) Despite the fact that only a small number of Communist Party members in Slovenia were favourable to the Cominform, many of those criticizing the official policy were branded as »Cominformists«, the number of people who were arrested on such charges was far less than in other Yugoslav republics. When the process of liberalization began in Yugoslavia in the fiftties, Boris Kidrič was one of the Slovenians most actively involved in the ensuing programs of reform. Likewise the Djilas case was felt in Slovenia but (it) also passed without a large number of political trials. The first steps in the political liberalization in Slovenia involved the rehabilitation of the »Osvobodilna fronta« (Liberation Front). The number of political prisoners in the period from 1952 to 1953 decreased ten times in comparison to the period between 1948 and 1950. At the peak of the process of collectivisation only 5% of the rural population formed part of agricultural cooperatives, but only until 1951 when members began withdrawing from the cooperatives in large numbers. The Videm (Udine) Agreement concerning the border traffic between Yugoslavia and Italy signed in 1955 was particularly important as the first agreement of this sort since the beginning of the cold war. Comparisons with Western standards of living, made possible by the open border to the West, placed greater pressure on the Slovenian leaders than on those in other parts of Yugoslavia, to improve the living standards of their own population. This soon became evident in the progress of the Slovenian consumer industry in the fifties. Consequently, the difference between Slovenia and the other Yugoslav republics was not manifested in the political life in Slovenia, which basically evolved along the same single-party ideological and political principles characteristic of other East European socialist countries, but rather in a different approach to property rights, higher living standards, the introduction, to a certain extent, of a market economy, the development of a consumer mentality, and the rising national awareness.

The MoscowBelgrade Rupture in Relation to Franco’s Regime and the Communist Opposition 1948-1951 (Havier Gari & Alessandro Gori)

One of the most confusing and disturbing developments which joined the starting of Cold War was undoubtedly the rupture between Moscow and Belgrade in 1948. This event, which was little understood in its broad dimension even by the Western powers with more experience in the region, generated some rare consequences, as it had to be expected. As an example we have illustrated the indirect relationship (and reticence) between Yugoslavia and Spain at that time. They were two countries that never met themselves in the game of European geopolitics before. But then, in the framework of the emergent Cold War, the rupture of Yugoslavia with the Soviet Union and the willingness of Spain to overcome its isolation put both countries in the centre of the intense and tense international geopolitics of this period. Nobody could have expected the situation that followed. Franco’s government used to entitle itself as »Custodian of the West« and ideologically it was very close with the most conservative trends in the United States’ administration. However, Franco’s government entered in competition with a communist state for a favourable geopolitical position in the new order generated by the Cold War against the Soviet Union and its satellite countries. Although that situation neither caused acute tensions nor lasted for a longer period, the agreements between Spain and the United States for the installation of military bases did not close until 1953, despite high pressures of militarisation of every corner in Europe. Yugoslavia’s geopolitical situation was analogical. The Yugoslavian government was proud of its relationships with the Spanish communists in the exile, especially based on sentimental-like reasons after the Yugoslavian participation in the Spanish Civil War. However, these comrades themselves rejected Tito’s government of 1948. In order to preserve the revolutionary image existing before the rupture with Moscow, Belgrade stopped supporting the Spanish Republican government in exile which had no diplomatic recognition and excluded carefully all communists. According to the Slovenian researcher J. Pirjevec, there seemed to be signs that Yugoslavia, in 1959, even established some modest diplomatic relations with Franco’s Spain. If that proves true, it would mean that the Tito government arrived to its pragmatic relationship with the Spanish in a surprisingly short time. It seems that these relations consisted in just commercial contacts which may have existed from the times of Castiella as Foreign Affair’s Minister, who opened the Spanish regime to contracts with Eastern Europe. In fact, Madrid had some contracts at that time with most of the Eastern countries. In any case, these commercial contacts represented a paradoxical counterpoint. Less than one decade before, the Yugoslavian delegate Vlahović strongly opposed Spain’s readmission to the United Nations and Yugoslavian-Spanish reticence was at its peak. Both countries had rejected each other as either Fascist or Communist, both had struggled for Western support and aid, and both played against each other through diplomatic activity and contacts with the other’s opposition movements. Yugoslavia’s and Spain’s national and international political relations in the emergence of the Cold War illustrate a world that was becoming highly polarised, where the attachment to one of the extremes seemed vital for escaping isolation and thus surviving in a world that nobody knew where it was going to.

Agrarian Policy after the Conflict with the Cominform (Momčilo Pavlović)

Moscow’s criticism of the Yugoslav leadership, particularly in respect to CPY agrarian policy, although denied, nevertheless led to the revision of the former policy, and subsequently to a stronger repression in relation to the country’s rural population. Soviet disapproval prompted the Yugoslav Communist Party leaders to take immediate measures in order to prove ideological constancy and their devotion to the idea of introducing socialism in rural areas. The new policy intensified class struggle in the villages, and openly struck against wealthy farmers (kulaks), who were subjected to greater repression, accelerated collectivisation, increasing pressure to reach the plans for the coercive purchase of farming products, etc. The slow progress of the new agrarian policy and the farmers’ passive resistance led to a long period of arrests, torture, and confiscation, which culminated in 1950.

The country’s turn towards the West, and Western aid in food in 1950 and 1951 reduced the Party’s pressure on the villages, leading to the gradual elimination of certain measures in the system of coercive purchase until 1952, when it was finally abandoned. At the same time the campaign to force farmers to join agrarian cooperatives became less intense. By abandoning the policy of coercive purchase and the policy of collectivization and granting amnesty to many of the farmers arrested, the Party leadership practically admitted that the attempted introduction of socialism in villages had failed. Nevertheless, the Party’s agrarian policy had lasting negative effects on the country’s villages.

Searching for New Paths the Yugoslav Social and Cultural Experiment Following 1948 (Predrag Marković)

The basic question posed in this contribution is to detect the reasons for adding internal social and political transformations to those made in the country’s foreign policy after the conflict with the Soviet Union in 1948. Could Yugoslavia have maintained a Stalinist dictatorship, such as that introduced later in Enver Hoxha’s Albania, despite its break with Moscow? Was the liberalization in Yugoslav society primarily the result of external pressure, or was it proof of the Yugoslav leadership’s genuine ambition to create a new type of socialism? Before the conflict with the Soviet Union the Yugoslav leaders boasted that their country had gone furthest among the people’s democracies in implementing the Bolshevist model of government. After the conflict Kardelj claimed that Yugoslav democracy was the best in the world, since it was based on the citizen’s direct participation, unlike that in multiparty systems. The Yugoslav Communist Party was said to maintain its leadership by benevolent persuasion and education, without having to resort to violent measures. After 1953, however, political liberalization in Yugoslavia came to a standstill. From that time until the dissolution of the state the country’s political organizations remained unchanged. The reason for this probably lies in Yugoslavia’s reconciliation with the Soviets. Nevertheless, social and cultural liberalization continued. Unlike the other East European countries (Poland, Hungary), the process of liberalization in Yugoslav society and culture was permanent. The greatest benefit of the liberalization process for the common people was the freedom to travel. The liberty of Yugoslav citizens to travel was partly a result of Tito’s own ambitions in international politics, and partly of the large incomes arriving from Yugoslavs working abroad. Least of all was the progress resulting from liberalization in the field of economy. Despite ample foreign aid Yugoslav economy during the communist regime was less developed than at the time of the monarchy prior to World War II. The Yugoslav liberalization experiment was most successful in the sphere of culture. Art and science in Yugoslavia were entirely open to new trends and forms of expression, short of overt criticism directed against the regime. The lenient cultural policy was intended to uphold the desired image of a different, better socialism, when in fact social and cultural liberalization was tolerated only to the extent to which it did not compromise Party authority in the main segments of government, i.e., politics and the economy.

YugoslavSoviet Relations 1953-1956 Thawing, Reconciliation, Disillusionment (Ljubodrag Dimić)

Political, ideological, economic, military, and strategic interests led to Yugoslavia’s rapprochement with the Soviet Union. That such a process, which evolved from March 1953 to November 1954, had begun is evident of the secret correspondence between the two party leaderships. These were followed by frequent, long, and extensive meetings between Josip Broz and Nikita Sergeievich Hrustchev, with the single purpose of reconciliation, and drawing Yugoslavia back into the Eastern camp. The differences arising from opposing views of relations between socialist countries provoked suspicions between the two party leaderships, and disagreement concerning the Hungarian »problem« led to open disappointment. The author of this contribution attempts to determine the phases of reconciliation, to provide answers to numerous questions marking the complex and difficult relations between the two countries and their parties, to point to the foreign political framework in which the reconciliation was achieved, to determine the point at which the resolution to abandon the Stalinist heritage reached a climax, to show the numerous ideological differences resulting in the disillusionment and finally to discern the specific relationship between the two important historical figures of Nikita Sergeievich and Josip Broz.

Bernhard H. Bayerlein, Germany: Lazar and Victor Kheyfetz, Russia:

Re-reading Anew… The History of the Comintern and Communist Parties of Latin America in Contemporary Studies. A Review of Some Contributions of the X. Congress of the Federation of the Latinamericanists and Caribbeanists[8]

The historiography of Latin American communism was practically born simultaneously with the Third (Communist) International and its first national sections in the New World. It appeared as a consequence of an innate will of both the Bolsheviks and their supporters and also of their ideological adversaries to express their opinions and estimations about the newly founded movement and the arising number of supporters of the Comintern. There is no doubt that these were persons who were directly involved with the situation that they were examining. Therefore, the first books on the history of Latin American Communism (such as »Pugnas de la gleba« by Rosendo Salazar and »Relatorio de Delegacia a Russia« by A.B. Canellas) have up until now been an important ressource for researchers as a reliable and well-documented base for studies.[9]

The first attempts of a methodical analysis of the history of Latin American Communism from the Marxist point of view were undertaken inside the very Comintern structures at the end of the 1920s and the beginning of the 1930s. However, already the first studies made by Stanislav Pestkovsky (»A. Volsky«, »S.Ortega«), Georgiy Skalov (»Sinani«), Genrich Yakobson (»G. Ya-n«), August Guralsky, Maurice Chaskin and Vladimir Miroshevsky, despite all their worthiness, suffered from one serious deficiency, which subsequently for a long time became the Achilles heel of the Marxist historiography of the Third International. While examining the socio-economic and political development of Latin America and analyzing the genesis of Latin American Communism, the Marxist historians carefully bypassed the major question: to what extend and in what forms had the Third International participated in the formation of communist parties in New World. It was to some extent a paradox as this very issue was the problem they knew best. All of these authors were working in the Latin American Country-Secretariat of the ECCI and it was they who were coordinating, for the »General staff of world revolution«, the activity of the communist parties of the continent from the Moscow headquarters of the Comintern. The reasons for this attitude were mainly due to the interest which arose about Latin American Communism in the USSR which coincided with the beginning of a new stage (Stalin’s) of Comintern activity. Many of the facts which had been freely discussed before, even by the international communist media (»The Communist International«, »Inprekorr«, »The Red International of the Trade Unions«), and especially in Latin American »La Correspondencia Sudamericana«, the 1920s, became taboo from this moment onwards. Culminating in the Stalinization-process of international communism, the Marxist researchers of communism became more and more reduced to the analysis of the struggle against »opportunism« and »revisionism« inside the communist movement. The organizational part of the Communist Party’s, always remained behind the framework of these studies. Thus the major consideration was ignored as it was simply impossible to analyze and describe the history of the »world communist party« (the Third International) – not only on the regional and peripheral level – without dealing with the investigation of the functioning of its organizational structure. This is the condition sine qua non in order to study the mechanism of interaction between the supreme bodies of the Comintern and its national sections.

Unsurprisingly, this aspect of the activity of the Third International was selected at the same time as a central objective of study by historians creating another historiography, which we might name the »anti-Stalinist« one. After the end of World War II a lot of fundamental works were published (Victor Alba, Robert J. Alexander, Boris Goldenberg, and later – Manuel Caballero). One of the basic ideas of these studies were the paths of penetration of communism – both in theory and practical activity of the Latin American communists – from Moscow and through the efforts of the Comintern representatives. The most vulnerable point of these studies, though, was the lack of empirical proofs of what such penetration-processes were. As the doyen of this sector of historiography Robert J. Alexander had self-critically written, this means the fact that the historians were

<s>                                                                                                 </s>

and her life in Mexico, the Russian historian got a chance to realize finally how precise R. Salazar was when he describedsome events of the first years of Mexican Communism.

compelled to base their studies on »assumptions and guesses«.[10] Though in many respects these studies were quite valid and were extensively supported by memoirs and interviews, their insufficient documentary evidence gave to many Marxist opponents of »anticommunist and renegade« historiography the possibility to confirm that the work done by their ideological adversaries in the West was determined by some kind of idée fixe, the assumption of a kind of »unnaturalness«»innaturality« of communism for the New World, that was deliberately brought into Latin America by »external forces«.[11]

 The absence of original documents about Latin-American communism was due not only to the existing censorship in the USSR which put obstacles for the access to the Comintern archive in Moscow (and also interfered with the publication of the documentary sources). Simultaneously the lack of information was caused by other objective reasons. The majority of the communist parties of Latin America had to work in conditions of severe governmental persecution, sometimes they had to act in deep underground and consequently they were unable to keep their own archives. Some of the parties disappeared as a result of reprisals and were sometimes revived again with other leaders (for example, the communist parties of Paraguay, Guatemala and Bolivia). Frequently the new generation of communist militants simply knew nothing about the activity of their predecessors. In the same measure the governmental and police archives of the Latin American countries were poorly accessible for unofficial consultation though this access would have given the possibility to look at the history of the communist parties from other points of view.[12]

The situation has changed sharply in the 1990s. With the collapse of the USSR and the CPSU the new authorities of the Russian Federation have opened the archives for investigation, and this massive amount of documentation includes also the collection of the Comintern documents stored in the Russian State Archive of a Social and Political History (RGASPI). In various countries the »archival revolution« has caused a new wave of interest for studies of the history of Latin American Communism and its relations with Moscow. One of the pioneers in this RGASPI-oriented research of the mechanism of the functioning of the Third International in the Western hemisphere was the German scientist Jürgen Mothes, who before his premature death was able to plan the basic directions of analysis of this aspect of the history of the Comintern in Latin America, and also managed to establish some connections between colleagues in various countries and today this spiritual framework allows them, to a certain degree, to work in common for further scholarly activities. However, during a long period of time, this kind of cooperation remained virtual because of the lack of possibilities to meet each other and to discuss the achievements and problems of their respective works.[13] The Congress of the International Federation of Latinamericanists and Caribbeanists (Moscow, June, 2001) for the first time allowed to bring together a great number of experts on the history of Latin American Communism. On the occasion of the symposium »Comintern and left mouvements of the Latin America« (coordinator Dr. Lazar Kheyfetz ), in which scholars from 14 countries took part, discussions took place not only about the latest scholarly achievements, but also the concrete circumstances and the new methodology of using the documents from RGASPI. The meeting served as an information exchange concerning projects and joint publications. In the opinion of the participants of the symposium, the Moscow meeting should produce a new impetus to investigate the history of the Comintern and its interaction with the national sections in Latin America.[14]Nota: La Universidad de Chile fue designada como organizadora y sede del 51º Congreso de Americanistas en el año 2003 (13-18 de Julio) – »Repensando las Américas en los umbrales del siglo XXI«.

Igor Yanchuk: The 1931 elections in Peru according to the documents from the Comintern Archives

The opposition of political forces after the overthrow of the dictator Leguia by L. M. Sánchez Cerro in August of 1930 continued under conditions of permanent political crisis, and massive, mostly spontaneous demonstrations. Several political blocks were formed in order to fight for power. The block concentrated around Sánchez Cerro and his »Revolutionary Union« represented the traditional interests of the oligarchy. On the side of the the Aprist party with V. R. Haya de la Torre as the principal figure were the national industrial bourgeoisie, small holders of the mining industry, workers from the sugar plantations and others. The anti-imperialism of the Aprists (the followers of the APRA) was linked to the replacement of the national producers of sugar by the businessmen from Northern America and Germany.

The archival materials concerning Peru were created in the period from September 1930 to October 1931. From the point of view of the Comintern and its Peruvian section, these documents demonstrate the tense political struggle in Peru and the difficulties of the party in taking decisions about the strategic and tactical lines of political activity. There were constant changes of political guidelines depending on the estimation of the situation in Peru by the central organs of the Comintern and it’s South-American Bureau. In Peru itself the party was directed by the representatives and often contradictory instructions sent by the IC. As a consequence, the political line in the main part was spontaneous and it is impossible to speak about the domination of any viewpoint or political course. The reasons for the electoral failure of the party were its weaknesses in organization and theory. Ideological confusion in the South-American Bureau and in the party about the character of the revolutionary situation (socialist or bourgeois) and the way of democratic revolution was one of the reasons for the weakness of the party’s influence within the working class. The orientation towards insurrectionist uprising (not towards concrete activities) disorientated the masses. Revolt was an everyday phenomenon in Peru in 1930-1931, but the party failed to conquer solid positions in the principal centers of the country. The absence of cooperation with APRA kept the party far from the workers. Repression by the government of Sánchez Cerro and the anti-communist propaganda made their task difficult, the main leadership and the most active members of the party were imprisoned and exiled.

Erik Ching, History Department, Furman University: The Intersection of Local, National and International in the First Communist Parties in Central America, 1925–1935

Invaluable to studying the history of any communist party are traditional questions relating to the party’s decisions and actions. However, equally important, if not more fundamental, are questions about the party’s own perceptions of its surroundings. The present paper looks at how the first communist parties in Central America conceived of their social world and why they were obliged to view their world in a particular way. The paper proposes that communism should be viewed as a narrative that shaped party members’ perceptions of their social world regardless of their conscious intent. The narrative of communism cut across geographical boundaries such that actors at the local, national and international levels were mutually participant in the constant process of constructing and reconstructing the meaning of their collective. In the late 1920s and early 1930s, communist parties were newly formed in four of the five nations in Central America. Each of these parties was affiliated with the Comintern. The central premise is that, contrary to the beliefs of contemporary communist theorists and strategists, communism was a discourse rather than an immutable doctrine. As such it allowed actors to borrow from and adapt meanings according to their respective interests. The parties in Central America sometimes held views in common with one another and with the Comintern. At other times, they focused on the uniqueness of their situations and interpreted communist theory from their own perspectives. This led to occasional disagreements with the Comintern and the Caribbean Bureau. At the same time, local communists were subject to communism’s linguistic and semiotic constructions, particularly those emanating from Comintern leaders in Moscow. When they employed words or signs associated with communism, they potentially employed meanings and narrative frames of which they were not fully aware. Thus, to analyze communist movements in a given region, such as Central America, we must consider the manifold complexities influencing the making of political identity and the motivation of political action. Different actors had the potential to consciously accept or reject varying theoretical interpretations. They also had the potential to be shaped by semiotic forces beyond their conscious control.

Contact: Erik Ching, History Department, Furman University, Greenville, SC 29613, erik.ching@furman.edu

Diego Frachtenberg, Argentina: The Impact of the Russian Revolution on Argentinian Intellectuals, 1918–1925.

The discussion about the issue of Russian Bolshevism (Maximalismo) was started by the famous speech made by José Ingenieros in November of 1918 when he declared that the importance of the Russian Revolution came out beyond Russia’s borders; this famous intellectual marked a fundamental point for the understanding of Bolshevism (a turning point in the development of a the »new moral conscience of the humanity«). The 1917 revolution in Russia was interpreted by the Argentinian intellectuals of all kinds through the filter of local events, first of all within the bounds of the recent democratic presidential elections of 1916. Amongst the intellectual elite of the country the concept of democracy was redefined at that very moment – from the most radical attitudes of those who joined the Communist Party of Argentine to the broad sector of the supporters of the Radical Government. For the PCA, militants such as J. Ferlini, A. Cantoni, A. Palcos, A. Mendoza and J. Penelón were seeking the establishment of an efficient workers’ government through the dictatorship of the proletariat. The non-communist sympathizers with the Revolution such as A. Palacios and others also denied formal (representative) democracy, but looked for a functional democracy oriented towards the workers’ factory self-management. The third group (Galvez, Roldán and Peña) welcomed the Maximalist experience of Russia defending at the same time the necessity of political democracy as well. All of these groups shared Ingenieros’ conviction of facing a crucial historical moment, the crush of the brutal capitalist society and the expectation of the rapid progress of humanity. However, there were also influential groups of intellectuals denying the Soviet experience and emphasizing the worthiness of Democracia socialista/Democracia burgues (intellectuals from the Socialist and Radical parties). They were monopolizing the elective posts displacing the conservatives and closing the entrance for the Communists. The Russian Revolution and the development of Maximalismo opened the discussion about the very nature of the violence and about the degree of its necessity in Argentina at the moment of revolution. To a certain extent, these debates, unfortunately, are still as intense in today’s Argentina.

Dorothea Melcher, Mérida, Venezuela: The Venezuelan Left and the Comintern The left-wing movement in Venezuela surged as the opposition to the dictatorial regime of Gomez (1908-1935). Mainly the students influenced by modernizing positivism and idealism were those who broadly accepted the democratic and social-democratic tendencies. Finally they were pushed into political exile in France, the United States of America, Central America, and in Spain, where their most radical sector established contacts with the Comintern through the All-American Anti-Imperialist League. Despite the fact that they composed the oppositionist slogans with social criticism, the movement maintained the traditional caudillist methods of invasion and rebellion because the size of the working class at this time was very small and Venezuela’s population consisted mainly of poor peasants linked to caudillist groups. Thus, the ideological and political theories and concrete plans of the students led them to the necessity to separate from other opposition groups while their fidelity to the Comintern was camouflaged by their alliances with the conservatives. In the crucial year of 1929 two invasion movements were formed, though on the basis of different criteria. The left-wing invasion was planned despite Comintern objections, provoking a visible controversy with the Comintern representatives. The consequent failure of this attempt was transformed into the argument against their leaders during the process of Stalinization of the Third International when the Partido Revolucionario de Venezuela leaders were accused of not constructing the Communist Party of Venezuela as the revolutionary vanguard. The CPV, founded only in 1931, with mainly Caracas militants, reflected the new political line taken by the Comintern. It was soon dismantled as the communist party activists were jailed or assassinated by the dictatorship. Later, the CP was reconstructed including the political forces of the exile during a constant process of rivalry between them, the Communists inside the country and the Caribbean Bureau of the Comintern. As the CPV was a Stalinist party it found itself in political isolation while other left-wing groups emerged, mainly among the exiled students. Some cooperation with the Communist Party resulted from the new Popular Front policy decided in Moscow.

Victor Kheyfetz, Dr. Lazar Kheyfetz, Institute of Latin America, Moscow: The Failure of a Continental Revolution – the First Steps of Mexican Communism, 1919–1922

The creation of the Mexican communist movement in August-November 1919 was the result of both the internal development of the working-class movement of the country and the external influence exercised by the Comintern emissaries. After the split suffered by the Communist movement in the Fall of the same year and the emergence of the parallel Mexican Communist Party (headed by M. N. Roy, Ch. Phillips and J. Allen) and the Communist Party of Mexico (led by Gale), the responsibles of the central bodies of the Third International were obliged to search for a solution of the crisis: they gave the basic Moscow support to the Mexican Communist Party, with the intention of creating a coordinating center for continental communist activity (while the figure of Roy was to be used for the organization of a anti-British movement in Asia). The belief in the strong potential of Mexican Communism and the presence of a revolutionary situation in Mexico induced the Comintern leaders to create the Panamerican bureau (American Agency) (whose members were Sen Katayama, Louis Fraina and Karl Janson) with the aim of uniting the communist movement, build up a continental federation of the communist parties, and to develop the Red Trade-union movement. The re-formation of the Communist Party (this time as a united one) appears as one of the few achievements of the Third International in the Western hemisphere. However, despite their constant efforts to send emissaries to different Latin American countries and to spread the movement throughout the continent, the Panamerican bureau members proved unable to organize the intended continental Communist Federation. Having finally recognized that Mexico was not on the eve of revolution, the Comintern leaders excluded from their immediate plans the idea of a rapid development of Mexican Communism as the basis for a broader organizational and propagandistic activity of the Third International.

Lazar Kheyfetz, The Leningrad Region Institute of Economy and Finances, Institute of Latin America, St.-Petersburg: The Comintern in Latin America, Latin America in the Comintern. In memoriam of Jürgen Mothes

The creation of the World Communist Party (the Third International) reflected the major tendency of development on the left spectrum of the revolutionary movement to internationalize its activity. The desire to transfer the Bolshevik experience of the functioning of one political party in a single country to a world-wide scale changed considerably all habitual organizational mechanisms. In search of the optimum structures of organization for the international proletarian movement, and influenced by the ideas of the October revolution of 1917 in Russia and by the Bolshevik Party, the Comintern and its sections experimented constantly. Latin America became a laboratory for the attempt to improve a kind of continental model of a communist party. Thus the world model of such a mechanism was gradually decreasing and regionalizing. The practice of gradual delegating of paternalism was born: the International Socialist Party of Argentina in 1918 was founded as a »continental International« with the aim to unite all the supporters of Bolsheviks in neighbouring countries. The Latin American Bureau of the Third International was created as a result of M. Borodin’s mission to Mexico in 1919 with the purpose to create later on a continental Federation of Communist Parties. The American Agency organized in 1920 was replaced very soon by the Bureau for the Communist Propaganda. In 1925 the South American Secretariat of the ECCI was established on its basis. The experience of »the party-senior brother« was extended throughout the continent. This system of coordination and direction of the Comintern’s national sections was constantly changing on the basis of this experiment with many errors just as was happening within the other international bodies of the Executive Committee of the Third International in Moscow. The bodies dealing with Latin American Communism were reorganized several times during the 1920s and 1930s. However, the Comintern, while delegating to its regional bodies a part of authority, reserved to itself the right to determine the »political line«, the final strategy. Whereas the character of mutual relations between parties and the International in the first years of their existence was not an absolute dictatorship coordinated from the very center, at the end of its existence, the World Communist Party had reached this stage.

Gerardo Leibner, Tel Aviv University: The Myth of the World Revolution and the Destruction of the Mariátegui’s Project in Peru

José Carlos Mariátegui, the founder of Peruvian Marxism, had drawn out an original political and cultural project based in re-foundation and re-formulation of Marxism from the Peruvian and heterodox perspective. At the center of his proposal was the idea about the existence of the particular socialist potential among the Andean Indians which was possible from their own peculiar historical development. This attitude and also his flexibility in theoretical issues and political initiative clashed, at the end of 1920s with the tendency of the Communist International and its emissaries to organize and discipline the Latin American Communism and its national Communist Parties on a more or less uniform ideological and organizational basis. This tendency which appears clearly in the Trade Unions Conference in Montevideo and in the First Latin American Communist Conference in Buenos Aires in May-June of 1929, was a consequence of the new orthodoxy which was crystallizing in Moscow and the efforts to carry it out. Supposedly the pressure exercised over the Peruvian delegation in the conferences in 1929, the pressure made by the South American Bureau of the Comintern (in Buenos Aires) and Eudocio Ravines’ arrival to Lima who had already aligned with the »correct« ideological line, determined that immediately after the death of Mariátegui the Peruvian Socialist Party changed its name to Communist Party (April-May of 1930) and rapidly abandoned all the original ideas of their theoretical founder with a purpose to assume the Comintern’s ones. However, some letters found in Lima, apart from some internal polemics, show to scholars that the attitudes of Mariátegui were in reality questioned by some of his principal fellows inside Peru; and that took place before the forum in Buenos Aires. In practice, the tendency to align in accord with what was considered to be the carrying out of the directives of the Comintern even before they were received in an explicit form demonstrates the power of seduction exercised by the myth of revolution directed internationally as a founding myth for the identity of the Peruvian Communists; this myth was able to destroy their own vision, which they had been developing. Alberto Flores Galindo had already described the political and ideological isolation suffered by Mariátegui during the last months of his life. Our studies confirm this development deepening and extending towards the previous period. Our interpretation is that the realignment of the Peruvian Communists was more a consequence of their own turn towards the USSR and towards the myth of World Revolution than a result of an institutional and ideological pressure exercised by the Comintern and some of its emissaries. Considering this, it should not be a surprise that the pressure exercised since June of 1929 was welcomed by some of Mariátegui’s own fellows who were unable to triumph over the theses of their teacher with their own forces.

Klaus Meschkat, Hannover University, Germany: Revolutionary Socialism in Colombia and the Communist International.

Among the Socialist organizations in Latin America which were inspired by the example of the October Revolution of 1917 in Russia, the Revolutionary Socialist Party founded in 1926 presents the very important case of successful relations between the newly born working class movement and a broad popular mobilization. It is necessary to stress that in Colombia at the end of 1920s surged a mass party affiliated to the Communist International, a party able, according to many of its contemporaries, to seize power. Starting with the discussion of Colombian issues at the First Latin American Communist Conference in Buenos Aires (June1929) there was more active penetration, by the Communist International, into the affairs of Colombia’s revolutionary socialists. An important person in this relation is Guillermo Hernández Rodríguez who studied in Moscow from the end of 1927 and later returned to Colombia to become First Secretary of the Communist Party pretending to overcome supposed errors of the previous phase. On the basis of the research through the documents of the Comintern Archive in Moscow it is now possible to discuss what were the consequences of the imposition of a new organization of Leninist type for the destiny of the revolutionary movement in Colombia.

Peter Huber, Hannover University, Germany: Jules Humbert-Droz and Latin America

Two Swiss men played an important role in the elaboration and implementation of the political line of the Communist International in Latin America. The first of them, Edgar Woog (known by the pseudonym »Stirner«) never conflicted with Moscow’s »general line« and after World War II was made the General Secretary of the Swiss Communist Party. The second one, Jules Humbert-Droz, on the other hand, since 1928 had sharp divergences with the line laid down by Moscow; he would, later on, become the Central Secretary of the Swiss Socialist Party. Until the year of 1966, the Soviet historians simply preferred not to mention Humbert-Droz’s contribution to the Comintern’s policy in Latin America or they tried to hide it. In the 1970s Humbert-Droz was still considered by the Soviets to be a »renegade« who had attempted to change the Comintern’s line toward Latin America. However, in the same epoch, Latin American historians pointed to Humbert-Droz as Moscow’s confidential person who, with an iron hand, ruled the Latin American sections of the Third International carrying out the wishes of Moscow. Recently (especially through the publication of his Swiss archives and the opening of the archives in Moscow) there arose the possibility to estimate more precisely and objectively the role played by Humbert-Droz. First of all, his journey to Montevideo and Buenos Aires in April-June of 1929 cannot be simply interpreted within the stereotype of his intact fidelity to Moscow. During the discussions about the theses made by José Carlos Mariategui, Humbert-Droz used a conciliatory tone and made all possible efforts with the purpose not to come to a rupture in the dialogue. Only after Humbert-Droz’s return from Moscow and his dismissal from his posts occupied in the Comintern did the abrupt change in the relations between the headquarters of the Third International and its Latin American sections take place. The concepts and methods forged by Stalinism led still weak parties to their failure. Slogans such as »accelerated continuation of the revolution«, »the struggle against the national-reformism« and »the struggle against the conciliators« did not correspond adequately to the reality, neither in Latin America nor in Europe.

Reiner Tosstorff, Mainz University, Germany: The Red Trade Unions International and Latin America – the First Steps of Latin American Communism While the European workers’ movement was dominated after World War II by the Amsterdam International (the reformist one), the (weaker) Latin American workers’ movement was more influenced by the anarchist and revolutionary syndicalist forces, while the strong and reformist American Federation of Labor several times attempted to form the Panamerican Federation of Labor with the help of the Mexican Confederación Regional de Obreros Mexicanos (CROM, sponsored by the government). The Profintern had been interested in Latin America even before its formal foundation. In the summer of 1920 during the Second Comintern Congress the idea arose to form a world-wide alternative to Amsterdam where Latin America was to play a significant role. Simultaneously with the attempts to organize a continental Communist Party, the Moscow emissaries Katayama, Phillips and Fraina were also charged with the task to develop propaganda for a future Profintern congress. The idea to found a Latin American Trade Union Confederation was formulated for the first time. Latin America was, in effect, represented in the First Congress of the Profintern in 1921 by delegates from the Mexican CGT and the Argentinean FORA. However, very soon both of them broke with Moscow claiming autonomy and supported by the Berlin International. Since the Fall of 1921, Profintern had to cancel the idea to use Mexico as the center due to the orientation of the workers’ movement to reach the rupture, the Communists’ weakness and governmental persecutions. The Profintern turned towards Argentina where Moscow expected to have better prospects since there arose a tendency for unification inside many unions. However, these hopes did not transform into reality and the Communist minority inside the newly founded USA (Unión Sindical Argentina) broke away. After the Profintern’s decision to cooperate with the left-wing of the Amsterdam International this policy was also extended into Latin America. In 1925 an attempt was made to establish closer contacts with the CROM which also planned to develop links with Amsterdam and Moscow. However, the Mexican Conference organized in 1926 did not bring unity and finally the idea collapsed after the failure of the miners’ strike in Great Britain in the same year. Since that failure the Profintern leader Lozovsky developed the idea to form the Latin American Trade Union Confederation (CSLA) for the unification of all Moscow supporters in the region founding parallel structures throughout the whole continent. The creation finally occurred in 1929. But in most of the cases, this policy led to a disconnection with the existing workers’ unions (many of the CSLA branches were mere re-editions of local communist parties). In some cases, the new Confederation proved able to organize some new groups of workers. The next important strategic change was the installation of the Popular Fronts policy in 1934/35 supported seriously by the trade union cadres and prepared during these previous years.

Svetlana Rosenthal, RGASPI, Moscow, Russia: Latin America in the Comintern Archives

The Russian State Archive of Social and Political History allowed researchers to access the Comintern documents stored there. Since the opening of the archive a lot of previously unknown documents were introduced into scholarly circulation and several thousands of documents were published in the thematic collections provided with a series of indices. Also a brief guide for the archive collections and registers was published. The scientific and reference apparatus of the Comintern archive is continually modernized and the process of computerization is very close to its accomplishment. Eventually, this shall make it easier in the search of necessary documents. The inflow of researchers to the archive does not stop, which shows the inexhaustible interest in Comintern history, including the interest in the history of the Latin American working-class movement. In the documents referring to Latin America there can be found 108 archive registers (from a total number of 527), while 25 registers are exclusively »Latin American«. Nowadays some themes present a great interest for study; one of these topics is the activity of the international revolutionary organizations such as the Communist Youth International, the Profintern, the International Workers Relief, the Krestintern, etc., whose history has not been fully up until now. As these organizations worked legally, their activity was more various and versatile than the activity of the communist parties who in almost all of the countries of the continent functioned underground. Frequently these organizations served as a legal covering for the communists and their leadership was composed of communist party cadres. While today the OMS of the Comintern documents collection is still in confidential storage, the documents of the OMS of the Profintern were always accessible and they contain a lot of data about the cadres and the coordination of illegal connections with the national Profintern and Comintern sections. Latin American trade unions and their relations with Moscow are one of the most interesting areas of the world working class history. In the Profintern documentary collections one can find the documents written by D. Rivera, D. A. Siqueiros, V. R. Haya de la Torre, A. C. Sandino and other famous persons. Such subjects as the functioning of the Latin American Confederation of the Workers (CSLA) and the activity of Profintern representatives in Latin America are poorly investigated and are also in need of research. While the Comintern representatives’ activity in Latin America is partially studied in the world historiography (Lazar and Victor Kheyfetz, Jurgen Mothes), nothing has been written about the Profintern emissaries. They were frequently quite independent from Moscow and were not afraid to take independent decisions which could affect the communist parties and trade-union life. In their correspondence with Moscow there were some critical remarks respecting the communist parties and central bodies of the Profintern (for example, bad organization of the work in countries, delays in financing of trade union activity, etc.). They write about the absence of serious work from the communist parties, the infringements of financial discipline, the lack of support for the communist parties’ leaders by the rank and file. The most significant Profintern representatives in Latin America were two Polish communists: V. Lovsky (Michrovsky) who played an important role during revolutionary fights in Cuba during the overthrow of G. Machado and J. Mariansky (Dutlinger) who carried out the Profintern missions in Southern America till the mid 1930s. Both of them faced tragic destinies and were assassinated in the USSR in 1937. The documents regarding the peasant movement are also poorly researched while they are important for the mainly agricultural Latin American countries. The subject of the Revolutionary Sports Movement in Latin America is also expecting scholarly research. Some rather interesting documents (in the Red Sports International Collection) show that the activities concerning sports were capable to to pull young workers away from bourgeois influence.

Victor Kheifets, Institute of Latin America, Moscow: In Search of an Adequate Strategy. Comintern and Soviet Diplomacy in Mexico in the 1920s

From the very moment of the foundation of the Comintern, Moscow tried to find an adequate form of a combination of activity of its agents and the Soviet diplomats; Mexico became an example of that constant search. The Soviet General Consul Michael Borodin (Gruzenberg) played an important role in the creation of the Mexican Communist party in 1919 and in the process of its recognition by the leading bodies of the Comintern. Even before he attempted to start his diplomatic mission, moreover, Borodin tried unsuccessfully, to involve the Mexican President Carranza into the Third International structures created in the country. In the USSR (and by the Comintern) the Mexican Revolution was considered to be related to the October one. This belief resulted in further attempts to integrate diplomacy and revolutionary work especially after the diplomatic relations between Mexico and the USSR were reinitiated in 1924. The Soviet Plenipotentiary Representative Stanislav Pestkovsky, (being at the same time the representative of the Third International) (»Andrey«), directly coordinated the activity of the Communist Party of Mexico and was one of the most important actors within the internal party quarrels and the different attempts at reconciliation. The Soviet diplomats believed that, apart from the »official relations« and the non-interference into the domestic affairs of the respective country, there also existed the relations between the workers and peasants of the different countries (and consequently, a right to participate in the activities of Communist Parties). However, this did not suit at any extent to the Mexican ruling elite and the government of the USSR finally had to replace Pestkovsky with Alexandra Kollontai who insisted on the necessity of a clear differentiation between the diplomatic and the Comintern’s functions. However, subsequent changes in the Comintern rhetoric and its increasing critical attitude towards the Mexican government (while the Soviet diplomats started to participate more actively in the work of rapidly radicalizing the Communist PArty of Mexico in 1928-1929) resulted in the inevitable deterioration of Soviet-Mexican relations leading to their final break in 1930. This unexpected event created, in practice, serious problems for the communist movement.

Bernhard H. Bayerlein, Mannheim Centre for European Studies, Mannheim University, Germany: A Glimpse of Latin America in the Humbert-Droz-Archives and the Dimitrov-Diaries

The Archives of Jules Humbert-Droz have been published in five volumes between 1970 and 2001. After the Bulgarian version, The Dimitrov Diary (1933-1943) was issued at the end of 2000 in a new and revised German translation by Aufbau Verlag in Berlin. While the Humbert-Droz Archives belong to the most important internal sources of Comintern documents preserved in Western Europe, the Dimitrov-Diaries, kept secret in Bulgarian archives, are considered by specialists like Narinskij, Besymenskij and Leonhardt belonging to the most important sources about Stalin as a personality and politician as well as Soviet and Comintern politics before and during the Second World War. The Humbert-Droz archives edition include documents and among them parts of private correspondence, the Dimitrov diary is mainly a personal working journal. For the Swiss »Tolstoist« (Lenin), Latin America was a main preoccupation. Humbert-Droz as Latin Secretary of the ECCI relates Comintern interventions until 1930 concerning Mexico, Argentina, Venezuela, the Mella-case (who as we know now, has been expelled from the Cuban PC), and the turn to putschismo during the »third period«. These documents reflect not only bureaucratism but also parts of the social and cultural heritage of Latin America (the First Communist Conference at Buenos Aires and the discussions about the Indian tradition and the role of small farmes in revolutionary transformations). Dimitrov reflects clearly the heritage of Stalinism (also in Latin America). Some notes apparently without importance nevertheless are revealing a close colaboration between Comintern and Soviet services. He notifies his contacts with top officials of the NKVD like Sudoplatov, the operative reponsibles for the assassination of Trotsky on behalf of Stalin and Berija. Caridad Mercader, mother of Ramón, who educated her son to be a murderer, was recruited by Dimitrov as a member of the »Kaderreserve« of the Comintern. Dimitrov probably also met »Carlos« (i.e. Vittorio Vidali) when he was leaving Moscow to perform assassinations but without explaining the type of mission. These examples show that the notes of Dimitrov require a special form of reading (they were of course not available to the public). Concerning Latin America there are allusions to Jesús Hernández, Earl Browder and Luís Quintanilla. The importance of the Latin American subcontinent was increasing with the Spanish Civil War, Dimitrov asked for a major role to be assumed by the Latin-American communist parties’ antifascist campaign as a consequence of the Munich pact of 1938. But the »antifascismo« was abandonned in 1939 – instead, the Dimitrov diaries show how he had to »translate« for the Comintern the consequences of the pact between Stalin and Hitler (August 1939) and the cynical so called German-Russian friendship. Under much different circumstances the »Great Patriotic War« implied that from 1941 on the new strategy of a united front of all nations against Hitler, increased the importance of Latin America for the Soviet Union and the Comintern.

Section III Biographical Studies Vladimir Vladimirovich Ryskulov, Moscow: Turar Ryskulov’s Paths between Turkestan, Russia and Mongolia

Turar Ryskulovich Ryskulov was born on December 14 (26), 1894, into a family of Kazakh nomads of the Eastern-Talgarskaya region, Vernensky district, in the Semirechenskaya (nowadays named Almatinskaya) area. Ryskul Dzhilkaidarov, his father, driven to despair by need and the mockeries of his family, shot the volost administrator and was condemned to penal servitude for 10 years. On the way to Sakhalin, having killed a sentry, he escaped to Kazakhstan where he died of illness. In 1906 Turar was taken in by his uncle. On leaving a three-year Russian-Kazakh boarding school, in 1910 he worked as an assistant of a judicial inspector in Merke. From October 1910 till September 1914 Turar went to the Pishpek (Bishkek) agricultural school. After that he worked some time for hire in Merke and Auliye-Ata (nowadays named Dzhambul) and then as a gardener in the environs of Tashkent. At the height of the Central Asian revolt of 1916[15] he was arrested as one of its organizers, however, he was soon released due to lack of evidence. He then entered the Tashkent teachers’ institute, but in spring of 1917 he was arrested by the local authorities for propaganda work directed against the Provisional Government.

A Turkoman revolutionary

At that time, Ryskulov made close contacts with the social-democrats and created the »Revolutionary Union of the Kazakh youth«. In September 1917 he became a member of the Bolshevist Party. By April 1918, Ryskulov had become vice-chairman of the Auliye-Atinsky Soviet.[16] At the 6th congress of the Soviets of Turkestan (October 5-14, 1918) he was a member of the Central Executive Committee (CEC) of the Soviets of the Republic of Turkestan and was nominated people’s commissar of public health services. On November 28, 1918, Ryskulov headed the Far East central commission on the struggle against famine in Turkestan, which was created on his proposal. In December 1918 Ryskulov was elected the first vice-chairman of the CEC of Turkestan, in March 1919 he heads the Mussulman Bureau of the Territory Party Committee and in January 1920 he was elected chairman of the CEC of Turkestan.

At the 3rd territory conference of the Mussulman organizations held under the leadership of Ryskulov and at the 5th territory conference of the Communist Party of Turkestan he offered to call the Soviet Socialist Republic of Turkestan in future the »Turkic« Soviet Republic and the Communist Party of Turkestan - the »Communist Party of Turkic peoples«. But his proposals were rejected by the Turkoman Commission (Turkcommission) and the Central Committee of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks). Persisting in his position, on May 17, 1920, Ryskulov, as head of the delegation, left for Moscow submitting at first his memorandum and then the report with his proposals to the CC of the RCP (B). On May 23, 1920, Ryskulov with N. Khodzhaev and G. BekhIvanov as members of the delegation, submits »the Draft Statute of the Autonomous Soviet Republic of Turkestan of the Russian Socialist Federation« to the CC of the RCP (B). On May 24, 1920, Lenin met Ryskulov and Khodzhaev. On May 25, 1920, a session of the Political Bureau of the CC of the RCP (B) on the Turkoman question was held. Sh. Z. Eliava and Ia. E. Rudzutak, chiefs of the »Turkcommission«, T. R. Ryskulov, chairman of the CEC of Turkestan, were invited to the session and took part in its work. But almost another month of work of the special commission including G. V. Chicherin, N. N. Krestinsky and Sh. Z. Eliava as outstanding figures of the party, was necessary in order to prepare a decision of the party’s CC on the Turkoman question.[17][18] On June 13 and 22, 1920, the Politburo of the CC of the RCP (B) considered once again the draft decisions on the Turkestan questions again. Having studied all the documents closely, Lenin made some essential amendments. »It is necessary, on my sight«, - he writes on June 13, 1920, - »to reject the draft of Comrade Ryskulov, to accept the draft of a commission...«[19] The recommendations and the advice of Lenin underlay the decision of the Central Committee of the party dated June 29, 1920 entitled »About the basic tasks of the RCP (B) in Turkestan«. During his stay in Moscow, Ryskulov had an opportunity to read the »Initial sketch of the theses on national and colonial questions« prepared by Lenin for the 2nd congress of the Comintern (Communist International). On June 16, 1920, T. Ryskulov with N. Khodzhaev from Turkestan, A. Validov and Kh. Yumagulov from Bashkiria, and A. Baitursunov and A. Yermekov from Kirghizia (Kazakhstan) redacted the »Additions of the representatives of the Communists of Bashkiria, Turkestan and Kirghizia to the theses of Comrade Lenin on colonial and national questions«.[20]

High ranking Soviet official

After he returned from Moscow on July 18, 1920, at the session of the Territorial Committee of the Communist Party of Turkestan he resigned his duty as member of the Territorial Committee and chairman of the Turkoman CEC by himself. His colleagues on work in the Mussulman Bureau of the Communist Party of Turkestan sent in their resignation too. But the CC of the RCP (B) and the »Turkcommission« did not remain indifferent to Ryskulov. On April 14, 1920, V. Frunze wrote to V. I. Lenin: »Ryskulov is the most outstanding representative of these Mussulman Communists from the Kirghiz (Kazakhs - V. R.) (…) as besides his mind, he has a strong energy and a remarkable character«.[21] V. V. Kuibyshev, member of the »Turkcommission«, wrote in a letter, dated August 9, 1920, to E. D. Stasova, secretary of the CC of the RCP (B): »Ryskulov is an uncommon figure and he may become a remarkable Communist in Moscow … Therefore we believe that his trip to Moscow at the disposal of the CC is necessary«.[22]On August 24, 1920, T. R. Ryskulov was nominated second substitute of I. V. Stalin, at the time the People’s Commissar on Nationalities of the RSFSR. But before this, and after a recommendation of the CC of the party, Ryskulov was sent to participate in the First congress of the peoples of the East in Baku where he was elected chairman of the Presidium of the Communist fraction of the congress.23 On September 1, 1920, according to the agenda, »Comrade Ryskulov opens the congress with the announcement of welcome to Comrade Zinovyev and other members of the Comintern«.[23] His speech on the 5th of September was highly appreciated by the participants of the congress. According to the memoirs of E. D. Stasova, the secretary of the CC of the RCP (B), G.K. Ordzhonikidze considered Ryskulov with bright attention and heat.[24] A. I. Mikoian, in his memoirs mentioned the impression which Ryskulov’s passion and conviction had made on the delegates.[25] At the congress Ryskulov became a member of the Council of Action and Propaganda in the East.[26]

On May 14, 1922, I. V. Stalin, in a telegram sent to G. K. Ordzhonikidze to Tashkent, wrote: »... there is no need of indulging the commissars of Turkestan, they have not deserved it, the last two years have shown that all of them taken together are below Ryskulov to whose return I do not object to«.[27] In September 1922, by the decision of the CC of the RCP (B) Ryskulov became a member of the Central Asia Bureau of the RCP (B) (Sredazbiuro)29 and finally, he was appointed chairman of the Council of People’s Commissars (CPC) of Turkestan. At the 12th congress of the RCP (B) on April 23, 1923, Ryskulov intervened in the debate on the national question.[28] The delegates of the congress elected him as candidate-member of the CC of the RCP (B). On February 4, 1924, the Politburo of the CC of the RCP (B) recommends Ryskulov for responsible work in the Executive Committee of the Communist International (ECCI). On the 15th of April he is nominated assistant (substitute) of the chairman of the Middle-East Section of the Eastern Department of the ECCI.[29] Later he would become assistant (substitute) of the chairman of the Eastern Department of the ECCI as a whole.32

Comintern representative in Mongolia

On October 6, 1924, he arrived in Mongolia as representative of the ECCI. Soon he wrote to Moscow: »According to the instructions of the Comintern, understanding well my tasks, I decided at first to put myself in an appropriate position. The Mongols thought that I was to be a simple specialist-instructor of the Comintern near them, that I should write the reports and instructions they would wish – and to accept and, when they would not wish – to reject them«. Further on, Ryskulov specifies, that »thus put himself gradually in a position of a man actually managing the activities of the CC of the People’s Party… The Mongols have become accustomed, now that - first of all - I put forward proposals on important questions, and second, that such a proposal has to be accepted, third, that it will be necessary to respect the discipline of the Comintern as the People’s Party is in the hands of the Comintern«.[30]

In Urga (now named Ulhan-Bator) Ryskulov worked until July 1925. He redacted the drafts of the country’s Constitution, the main decisions on financial and economic policy, the new program and the charter of the MPRP (Mongolian Revolutionary People’s Party). In November 1924, during the working session of the First Great People’s »Khural«, which ratified the Constitution of Mongolia, he took an active part in the discussion about the agenda, including giving a new name to the capital of the country. It was his proposal to call the capital of Mongolia Ulhan-Bator (»Red Bogatyr«). In the spring of 1925 Ryskulov visited China as a member of the delegation of Mongolia to negotiate with General Fyn Yuisian about transit deliveries of weapons coming from the USSR.[31]

Ryskulov’s conflict with Elbek-Dorzhi Rinchino

It is also necessary to mention the serious personal and political conflict Ryskulov had with Elbek-Dorzhi Rinchino, a Buryat communist, who was sent to Mongolia in 1921 on behalf of the Far Eastern Secretariat of the Comintern as adviser of the government, but who was by then already was occupying the functions of chairman of the Council of War of Mongolia, member of the Presidium of the CC of the MPRP and member of the Presidium of the government. Rinchino was supported by A. N. Vasilyev, the Soviet plenipotentiary representative in Mongolia, who had known Ryskulov in Turkestan and was his enemy.[32] The situation turned gradually into a hot conflict. On June 15, 1925, a closed session of the CC of the MPRP decided to send Ryskulov and Rinchino to Moscow.[33] On July 6, 1925, G. N. Voitinsky arrived at Urga in order to examine the matter. In a letter to F. F. Petrov (Raskolnikov), chief of the East Department of the ECCI, dated July 9, he stated about the essence of the conflict between Ryskulov and Rinchino: »... The purpose of Comrade Ryskulov’s mission to Mongolia was to deepen the work of party construction in Mongolia, to stronger democratize the state building and to release the Mongols gradually from Rinchino’s influence«. Further he mentioned that during his mission, Ryskulov had encountered Rinchino’s resistance to the fulfillment of these necessary measures, »…resulting from his nationalistic and pan-Mongolist moods and his populist ideology covered by revolutionary phrase«. The instruction of the CC of the MPRP for the delegation to Fyn Yuisian, whose author was Rinchino, and the appeal for revolt in internal Mongolia demonstrates this: »…At the sessions of the CC of the PRP, Rinchino made constant opposition to Ryskulov owing to his view of the development of the revolutionary movement among the peoples of the Far East«. Voitinsky continued: »In this complex situation, it must be said, Ryskulov could not find the appropriate tactical line. At first (when Rinchino… did not act correctly on basic questions) he aspired to have a good collaboration with Rinchino, partly even to rely on him, and then he sharply turned against him. Ryskulov also overestimated his influence regarding the CC and the group which, as he believed, supported him ideologically. And therefore he mechanically amongst the group of his followers, created frustration about Rinchino’s leadership. Ryskulov thought in an abstract way that such processes as the differentiation and the stratification among the Mongolian masses were in a certain sense directly reflected in the CC of the PRP and that it was therefore being urged to build a fraction in the CC. His drastic methods of work in the CC itself, the pressure exercised on some members of the CC imploring the authority of the Comintern etc. were some of the consequences. Rinchino, hiding his basic disagreements with Ryskulov behind personal questions took advantage of these mistakes in full measure«. G. Voitinsky mentioned that »… without Rinchino Ryskulov’s bad working methods […], that he (Ryskulov) would work on good terms with the Mongols. Each day of Rinchino’s stay in Mongolia meant a blow to Ryskulov’s fruitful work as a whole. Due to the support of Rinchino by the plenipotentiary representation there has been a struggle between the representation of the People’s Commissariat of Foreign Affairs and the Comintern in Mongolia for the last months. The Mongols, apparently, understood this and only for this reason they decided to vote the resolution as a response to our representative«.[34]

The resolution of the CC of the MPRP accepted on July 8, 1925, marking the positive results of Ryskulov’s activity in Mongolia, nevertheless considered the conflict between him and Rinchino unsolvable and decided »… to ask the Comintern for a response of Comrade Ryskulov and to send another representative instead of him, and to direct Comrade Rinchino to Moscow«.38 Soon Vasilyev also left Mongolia.[35] However, G. V.

Chicherin, the People’s Commissar of Foreign Affairs of the USSR, giving his impression about Ryskulov’s activity in Mongolia, wrote to Ia. Kh. Peters in August 1925: »His political line in general is profoundly correct and should be supported by us«.40

Highlights and end of Ryskulov’s career

On May 28, 1926, Ryskulov was appointed as third vice-chairman of the Council of People’s Commissars (CPC / Sovnarkom) of the RSFSR. He remained in this official function until the end of his life. In these years he was also nominated as delegate at the 15th, 16th and 17th congresses of the party, at all Soviet congresses of the RSFSR and was a member of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and the Central Executive Committee of the USSR. He was also elected as deputy of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR and the RSFSR. Being in the rank of vice-chairman of the Russian Sovnarkom,41 Ryskulov was the chairman of the Cotton Committee at the Economic Meeting (ECOSO) of the RSFSR (1926-1930) and later vice-chairman of the ECOSO of the RSFSR, chairman of the Committee of assistance for the construction of the TurkestanSiberia railroad at the CPC of the RSFSR (1927-1930), chief of the Central Board of municipal services at the CPC of the RSFSR (1930-1931), he headed the Export Meeting of the RSFSR (1930-1934), the Council of assistance to public catering at the CPC of the RSFSR (1930-1934), the Committee for the domestic industry and business cooperation at the ECOSO of the RSFSR (1932-1934) and other state bodies.

On September 29, 1932, and March 9, 1933, Ryskulov sent Stalin two letters criticizing the disastrous consequences of collectivization in Kazakhstan. And though Ryskulov was considered »Stalin’s favourite«, the superior leader did not forgive him for that. On May 21, 1937, Ryskulov, on a holiday in Kislovodsk, was arrested. The trial held in Moscow on February 8, 1938, under the chairmanship of Ulrikh only lasted 14 minutes. The Military Board of the Supreme Court of the USSR found Ryskulov guilty of committing crimes specified in the clauses 58-1 (high treason), 58-8 (terror), 58-9 (sabotage) and 5811 (participation in a counter-revolutionary organization). He was »sentenced to the utmost measure of punishment - the execution with confiscation of all the property belonging personally to him«. According to the information of the bodies of the People’s Commissariat of Internal Affairs the sentence about the execution was carried out in Moscow on February 10, 1938.

Turar Ryskulov was rehabilitated on December 8, 1956. On February 6, 1957, by the decision of the Bureau of the Moscow City Committee of the Communist Party of the USSR. He was also rehabilitated in the party order.42

<s>                                                                                                     </s>

Dorzhi Rinchino about Mongolia. Selected Works], Ulhan-Ude, 1998, p. 89, 103, 105, 108-109, 112-113, 182.

40  . S. Beisembaev, S. Kulbaev, op. cit., p. 28-29.

41  The Soviet Government.

42  RGASPI, fond 589, inv. 3, file 15599, vol. 2, sh. 92.

Biographical notes of some of the persons mentioned

Baitursunov, A. (1873-1937) - Kazakh poet, journalist, linguist, one of the leaders of the bourgeois-nationalistic party »Alash«. 1919 member of the Kirghiz (Kazakh) Revolutionary Military Committee. 1920 vice-chairman of the Kirghiz (Kazakh) Revolutionary Committee. 1925 lecturer of Kirghiz (Kazakh) University in Alma-Ata. He was arrested in 1929, banished to Solovki, 8 years later he returned to Alma-Ata where he was shot in 1937.

Bekh-Ivanov. G. G. State and party figure of the Republic of Turkestan, of Russian nationality. 1920 member of the party court of Turkestan, member of the Presidium and the secretary of the CEC of Turkestan. 1921 functionary of the representation of Turkestan in Moscow. 1924 representative of the People’s Commissariat of Foreign Trade of the USSR in Central Asia, then at work in the agriculture field in Kirghizia, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. 1929 representative on State grain purchase in Tajikistan (later removed from this post).

Eliava, Sh. Z. (1883-1937). State and party figure. In February 1919 chairman of the Special Temporary Commission of the CPC of the RSFSR on Turkoman Affairs. October 1919 - July 1920 chairman of the Turkoman Commission (Turkcommission) of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and the Sovnarkom of the RSFSR, the plenipotentiary representative of the RSFSR in Turkey and Persia. In August 1920 member of the Turkoman Bureau (Turkbiuro) of the Central Committee of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) or the CC of the RCP (B). 1923 chairman of the CPC of Georgia. 1927 chairman of the CPC of the Transcaucasian Soviet Federal Socialist Republic. Candidate member of the CC of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (B) - CPSU (B) from 1927. 1931 substitute of the People’s Commissar of Foreign Trade of the USSR. 1936 - substitute of the People’s Commissar of Light Industry of the USSR. Subjected to repression. Rehabilitated in 1956.

Fyn (Fen) Yuisian (1882-1948). Chinese general. October 1924 head of the revolution in Peking, commander-in-chief of the national armies and commander of the First National Army in Northern China. 1926, after a trip to the USSR, he entered the »Gomindan« party. Further military and party posts. Died in an accident.

Khodzhaev, N. I. (1885-1942). Uzbek national figure. 1918-1919 member of the Central Committee (CC), the Mussulman Bureau, the Territorial Committee of the Communist Party of Turkestan and the Central Executive Committee (CEC) of Turkestan. September 1919 vice-chairman of the Turkoman CEC. 1920 in the staff of the Central Control Commission (CCC) of the Communist Party of Turkestan. After the Civil War member of the Turkestan CEC. In 1931 he graduated from the economic faculty of the Central Asian State University and became a member of the Presidium of the State Planning Committee (Gosplan) of Uzbekistan. 1932 chairman of the Committee on protection of monuments of the ancient time and art of Uzbekistan.

Kuibyshev, V. V. (1888-1935). State and party figure. 1919-1920 vice-chairman and chairman of the Turkcommission and plenipotentiary representative of the RSFSR in the People’s Republic of Bokhara. 1922 secretary of the CC of the RCP (B). 1923 chairman of the CCC of the CPSU (B) and People’s Commissar of WPI of the USSR, simultaneously vice-chairman of the CPC and the PLDC of the USSR in January - November 1926. 1926 chairman of the Supreme Economic Council (SEC). 1930 chairman of the Gosplan of the USSR and vice-chairman of the CPC and the PLDC of the USSR. 1934 chairman of the Commission of the Soviet Control at the CPC of the USSR and first vice chairman of the CPC and the PLDC of the USSR. 1921-1922 candidate member of the CC of the RCP (B). 1922-1923 member of the CC and the secretariat of the CC of the RCP (B). 1927 member of the CC and the Politburo of the CPSU (B). In 1922-1923 and 1934-1935 member of the Orgburo of the CC.

Peters, Ia.Kh. (1886-1938). State and party figure. 1917-1919 member of the board and vice-chairman of the All-Russian Far East Commission (AREC) and chairman of the Revolutionary Tribunal. 1920-1922 member of the »Turkburo« and plenipotentiary representative of the AREC in Turkestan. Simultaneously, in 1921 member of the Turkcommission. 1922 chairman of the Eastern Department of the State Political Administration, from 1923 on member of the board of the Joint State Political Administration. 1930-1934 chairman of the Moscow Control Commission of the CPSU (B). Subjected to repression. Rehabilitated in 1956.

Raskolnikov, F. F. (real surname - Ilyin) (1892-1939). State and military figure, diplomat and writer. 1918 substitute of the People’s Commissar on Sea Affairs. 19191920 commander of the Volga-Caspian navy. 1920-1921 commander of the Baltic navy. 1921-1923 plenipotentiary representative in Afghanistan. 1924-1928 head of the Eastern Department (Secretariat) of the ECCI under the pseudonym of Petrov. 1930-1938 trade representative in Estonia, Denmark and Bulgaria. 1938 recalled but stayed abroad because of threat of arrest and protested against Stalin’s mass political repressions. Excluded from the party in his absence, treated as »people’s enemy«, deprived of the Soviet citizenship, he was perhaps killed by order of Stalin. Rehabilitated in 1963.

Rinchino, Elbek-Dorzhi (1888-1938). Buryat national figure, active participant of the revolutionary and partisan movement in Siberia. 1920 head of the Mongol-Tibetan Section of the Far Eastern Secretariat of the ECCI. In April 1921 he arrived in Mongolia, participated in the revolutionary uprising and contributed to the defeat of the antirevolutionary troops of von Ungern-Steinbergs and Bakich (the »white guard generals«). 1925 after returning from Mongolia in 1925, he was sent to the Institute of Red Professors, Moscow. 1927 lecturer of the Communist University of the Workers of the East. 1934 professor of the Faculty of political economy. Subjected to repression. Rehabilitated in 1957.

Rudzutak, Ia. E. (1887-1938). State and party figure. 1920-1921 general secretary of the All-Russian Central Council of Trade Unions (ARCCTU). Simultaneously in 1919-1921 member and chairman of the Turkcommission, in March - October 1921 chairman of the Turkbiuro. 1922-1923 head of the Central Asian Bureau of the CC of the RCP (B). 1923-1924 secretary of the CC of the RCP (B). 1924-1930 People’s Commissar of Transport. 1926-1937 vice-chairman of the CPC and the PLDC of the USSR, simultaneously 1931-1934 chairman of the CCC of the CPSU (B) and People’s Commissar of the Workers’ and Peasants’ Inspection (WPI) of the USSR. 1920-1937 member of the CC of the party, 1926-1932 of the Politbiuro (candidate 1923-1926 and 1934-1937). Member of the Organizational Bureau (Orgbiuro) of the CC in 1921-1922 and 1923-1924 (candidate in 1921 and 1922-1923). Subjected to repression. Rehabilitated in 1956.

Validov, A.-Z. (Validi) (1890-1970). Bashkir national figure. 1917-1918 head of the counter-revolutionary bourgeois-nationalistic government of Bashkiria. In January 1919 he passed over to the side of the Soviet authorities. February - May 1919 and February June 1920 chairman of the Revolutionary Committee of the Bashkir Soviet Republic. Dissatisfied with the policy of Moscow concerning Bashkiria, he became one of the ideologists of the basmatch movement (till February 1923). In 1920 he escaped with a group of his adherents to Turkestan, then to Turkey. Subsequently became a professor at the Istanbul University.

Vasilyev, A. N. (1880-1941). Soviet diplomat and functionary of the Comintern. 19231925 plenipotentiary representative and trade representative of the USSR in Mongolia. 1925-1926 General consul of the USSR in Mukden, China. 1926 in the staff of the Eastern Department of the ECCI continuing the diplomatic work.

Voitinsky, G. N. (real surname - Zarkhin) (1893-1953). Soviet Party and Comintern figure. 1920-1921 representative of the Foreign Department of the Far Eastern Bureau of the RCP (B), the Section of the Peoples of the East of the Siberian Bureau of the RCP (B) in China and member of the Presidium of the Far Eastern Secretariat of the Comintern. 1923 one of the heads of the Far Eastern Secretariat of the ECCI and deputy head of the Eastern Department of the ECCI. 1924-1927 representative of the ECCI in China

(with interruptions). 1926-1927 responsible secretary of the Far Eastern Secretariat of the ECCI and chairman of the Far Eastern Bureau of the ECCI in Shanghai. 1927-1929 attached to work in the economic field. 1923-1934 secretary of the Pacific Secretariat of the Profintern (Red International of Trade Unions). 1934 research and pedagogic work.

Yermekov, A. (1891-?). Kazakh national figure. One of the founders of the »Alash« party, belonging to the »Alash-Orda« government. Assistant professor at Kirghiz (Kazakh) University in Alma-Ata. 1930 arrested, sentenced to imprisonment.

Yumagulov, Kh.Yu. (1891-1937). Bashkir national figure. 1918-1922 member of the CPSU (B), then excluded for »nationalistic« activities. 1927 again candidate, 1931 member of the party again. May 1919 - February 1920 chairman of the Revolutionary Committee of the Bashkir Soviet Republic. Later working in the economic and Soviet fields.

Contact: Vladimir Vladimirovich Ryskulov, the native grandson of T. R. Ryskulov, born on December 4, 1957, graduated from the historical and philological faculty of the Institute of the Countries of Asia and Africa at Moscow University, teaches Arabian, English and French languages. Home address: f. 241, h. 11, Dekabristov Street. 127-566 Moscow, the Russian Federation. Home phone: (095) 404-19-51. E-mail: latakia@online.ru; aachen_r@mail.ru; aachen_r@rambler.ru.

Dainis Karepovs, São Paulo: The Fate of the First Brazilian Brigadist in Spain. A Biographical Note about Alberto Bomilcar Besouchet

The list of the victims of Stalinist repression during the Civil War in Spain is extensive. It is enough to indicate the names of the main ones here: the former minister of Justice of Catalunha Andrés Nin, the members of the POUM Juan Hervas, Jaime Trepat, the Trotskyists Erwin Wolf and Hans Freund, the former Trotskyist, the Austrian Kurt Landau, the Anarchists Alfredo Martínez and Camillo Berneri, the Russian Socialdemocrat Marc Rein, the American teacher José Robles and the officer Gaston Delasalle, perhaps also the German former deputy of the Reichstag Hans Beimler and the Italian former deputy Guido Picelli (the latter were all members of the International Brigades). One of the victims of Stalins men in Spain was probably also the soldier Alberto Bomilcar Besouchet, the first Brazilian volunteer who arrived in Spain in order to fight for the republican government against the Francoist troops.

Apolino de Carvalho, in his Memoirs, tells that Besouchet, his colleague in the Military School of Realengo, had been »cowardly killed« at the end of 1938, but he does not specify by whom.[36] We try here to emphasize the »modus operandi« through which the repression of the NKVD defined its vitims and to show the paradox of a situation where idealistic militants gave their active solidarity to the cause to defend the Spanish Republic but were then eliminated by supposed companions because their ideas were not considered »appropriate«. However they executed their engament in the best possible way, and the military curriculum of many of them is the best proof of that, including that of Alberto Besouchet. Born in 1912, Alberto was the youngest of four children. Like him, his brothers and sister Augusto, Lídia and Marino, were also militants of the Communist Party of Brazil (PCB). They were expelled from the party because of their criticism of the irresponsible way the party prepared the movement that resulted in the »putsch« organized by the communists in November 1935, in the cities of Natal, Recife and Rio de Janeiro. Together with Barreto Leite Filho, author of a well-known letter to the leader of the uprising, Luiz Carlos Prestes, where such critics are articulated[37], and Phoebus Gikovate, they were the main leaders of the Trade Union Section of the PCB. Thereafter, this group approached the Brazilian Trotskyist movement, and was then associated with the »Internationalist Communist League«. Later they created the »Leninist Workers Party« of Brazil.

Alberto, who, like his father, followed a military career, joined the PCB in 1933, as a student at the Military School. In the first hours of November 24, lieutnant Alberto Besouchet integrated the group of civilians and military that rebelled against the 29th Batallion of Hunters of the Floriano Peixoto Military Ville in Socorro, near Recife, and then organised a march on the capital of Pernambuco. In doing so he was wounded in both his legs. Besouchet succeded in escaping without being arrested. He arrived in Rio de Janeiro, where he tried to work as a journalist in the »Diários Associados«. Like his brothers and sisters, who were already very close to Trotskyism, Alberto Besouchet approved some of the conceptions defended by Leon Trotsky’s followers in Brazil, among them the criticisms of the uprising movement under Luis Carlos Prestes in November 1935. However, from the Trotskyist side, it was said that Besouchet »(...) still believes in the possibilty of a regeneration of the Communist International«.[38]The outbreak of the Spanish Civil War, with the beginning of the formation of the International Brigades, that were organized from October 1936, saw him make the decision to use his knowledge and military experience in favour of the Spanish revolutionaries, participating in what was called the »last of the great crusades«. Before leaving for Spain, however, Besouchet decided to redact an open letter to his comrades in the Brazilian Communist Party, which, finally, resulted in fatal consequences for him. In this letter, Besouchet, saying farewell to his companions arrested by the dictator Vargas, exhorted them to continue the fight for a just and human regime, while he, at the same time would give his contribution in Spanish lands. Besouchet tried to make the PCB diffuse this document, but, knowing of his relationship with the Trotskyists, the communists refused to do it. In the only existing testimony about this episode, the attitude of the PCB is described as returning Besouchet’s text characterizing him as »rabble« and as a »trickster«.[39]

Although formally, the PCB had sent him, at his own request, to Spain, Besouchet left Brazil with a recommendation letter signed by Mario Pedrosa, one of the main leaders of the Trotskyist movement of Brazil, and directed to Andres Nin, in Barcelona. He left Buenos Aires, going through Uruguay, embarking with a Cuban passport (on the name of Ernesto Torres) together with a group of German volunteers, to Antwerp, where he arrived in December of 1936. He proceeded to Paris, where he remained for two days, and then to Perpignan. He went to Spain by ship in February of 1937.

At the same time that Besouchet arrived in Spain, a confidential report was received by the Communist Party of Spain (PCE), dated January 24, 1937, sent from Valencia by the functionary of the International Red Help, »Maria«. This was the nickname of Tina Modotti, who also occupied a position attached to the chairman for counterespionage in the headquarters of the International Brigades in Albacete. Shortly before going back to Spain, Tina Modotti received in Paris a message, in which the Brazilian Communist Party mentioned the open letter episode: »Lieutnant Alberto Besouchet is now in Spain. After his departure from Brazil it was discovered that Besouchet had turned Trotskyite. He left a proof that is a true provocation against the revolution of national liberation and it is also of great importance to notify all comrades so that the do not allow him to use the name of the Communist Party of Brazil.«[40]

Besouchet arrived in Spain already stygmatized as s Trotskyite. After his arrival he reestablished his true identity and integrated into the International Brigades, after having looked for the POUM-leader Andrés Nin, also branded as a Trotskyite, though without foundation. Besouchet went on to carry out his aims: He fought on the fronts of Aragón, Andujar, Carabanchel, Córdoba and Sevilla. During the battle of Guadalajara he was wounded in the leg by a grenade splinter. When he disappeared he had already been promoted colonel and integrated to the staff of General Miaja.

The inquisitorial methods created serious problems, specially for those arriving after the events of Barcelona of May 1937.48 Two foreigners that were expelled from Brazil, the Polish Jewish barber Ejber Bajnerman and the German Ernest Joske,49 who were arrested in São Paulo after the »putsch« of November 1935 for their involvment, both were active members in their respective unions, they were expelled by the Brazilian govenment in June 1936. After they succeeded in escaping before arriving to their home countries, they went to Paris to enroll in the International Brigades. They arrived in Spain at the end of May 1937. On August 8 the Communist Party of France communicated to the Spanisch Communist Party, suppplying the address of Joske in Albacete, asking them »to do all what was nessary to help the Brazilan comrades, except for Bajnerman and Joske, about whom are made some restrictions, since formerly they were active Totskyites, and even if they had recognized their mistakes, they tried to go to Mexico, what demonstrates that they didn’t give up their ideas.

Joske seems to have succeeded in undoing the »suspicions« about him. Among the documentation about the Brazilian Brigade members in the Comintern files in Moscow a report from the beginning of 1938 indicates that he passed through unharmed at the Commissariat of War of the International Brigades headquarters in Barcelona, making his way through the Brigades and indicating his intention to go to Chile or to Mexico.

This was not the case for Besouchet and for Bajnerman, for whom there is no documentary evidence later than August 1937, and not for Besouchet. A report of January 15, 1939, signed by E. M. Elliott reproduces an information given by the Major Costa Leite concerning Besouchet that he had a relationship with Trotskyists and that he was killed during the May events of 1937 in Barcelona. There is no concluding information about the date of his death, however there is no doubt about the responsibility of the communists. Later, the Besouchet family received the information that Alberto had been shot during the final retreat of the International Brigades from Barcelona (in October 1938), together with Anarchists and Trotskyistes arrested there.[41]

Among the documents in his dossier in the Moscow files, there is a letter that allows us to speculate that his death probably did not occure after May 1937. The letter was sent by Castro, the nickname of Honório Freitas Guimarães, member of the Politburo of the PCB (also known as »Martins«), when he was waiting in Paris for his visa to enter the Soviet Union, dated in Paris, 24.9.1937. Not only the handwriting served to identify »Castro«; Guimarães had been educated in England (Eton), the letter was written in English, usually Brazilian communists communicated with the Comintern or the other sections in Castillan or in French. It is also worthwile to remember that Guimarães participated in the judgment and execution of Elza Fernandes in 1936, her own comrades who falsely accused her of having delivered information to the police allowing the arrest of Arthur Ewert (she was the companion of the then general secretary of the PCB, Adalberto Fernandes Miranda). Finally, in this correspondance concerning Besouchet, classified as a »leftist«, a report was made about the episode of the open letter published in A Luta de Classe. Guimarães also informed that the Uruguayan communists were alerted that Alberto’s brother Augusto, had become one of the main leaders of the Trotskyist movement in Brazil. As leader of the PCB, Guimarães gave the following instructions: »I suggest that measures [should] be taken to control his activities and that if nothing more serious is found, that our Spanish comrades make him understand that he must cut all relations with people who are entirely on the other side of the barricade.

It would be very good if he could be brought to make written declarations against Trotskyism and his brother’s position which he could publish in our press.«[42]

This allows us to raise the question if it was not at that time that Besouchet has been arrested during some »interrogation« and if Guimarães’ letter can be considered as an element to construct an accusation record against Besouchet. The information about him had been requested by »Jack« (there is only a hypothesis that »Jack« could have been Vittorio Vidali). after the latter had received it verbally. If this hypothesis is true, Guimareas’ letter may also be considered a death sentence for Besouchet.

What we cannot doubt is that, if there was opportunity, it was looked for, through the most brutal tortures, on one hand, »to make Besouchet understand« and on the other hand to »extract« declarations against the Trotskyites. But in the same way as it had happened with others put in the same situation, nothing could be extracted from Besouchet.

If no concrete evidence could be obtained about how Besouchet was eliminated, the elements presented here show some of the murderers’ footprints exported from the Soviet Union and covered by the Spanish State.

C. Chaqueri, Paris:[43] A Triple Gaffe. Throwing a Light on Avetis Sultanzade (Mikhailian), Intellectual, Theoretician and Leading Personality of the Iranian Communist Party.

In light of the Soviet suppression of Stalin’s opponents and victims, the identity of the Iranian Communist Party’s leading theoretician, Avetis Sultanzade, has often been confused, at times deliberately. One such time was the attempt by George Lenczowski, an »Iran expert«, at the Hoover Institution in the US, who presented Sultanzade as having been the same as his close collaborator, S. Jafar Javadzadeh[44] (present along with him at the third Comintern congress in 1921) who in 1945 led the Autonomous Government of Azerbaijan in northern Iran. In addition to the decades of dirt that Soviet historians threw at Sultanzadeh as a »German agent«, now a former Tudeh member[45] has confused him with an NKVD agent who was also Armenian, a certain Orbeliani, and a Comintern operative, possibly also an NKVD agent in Iran. These three short biographies should throw light on the three persons the former Tudeh cadres confuses.

Sultanzade (Mikailian), Avetis

Avetis Sultanzade (1889–1938), the leading personality in the Iranian Communist party, was not Muslim, nor was he merely a revolutionary practitioner; he was an intellectual and theoretician. Born into a poor family of the Maraqeh region, his mother was Armenian and his father was Muslim. After five years of study in his native town, he went to the Armenian ecclesiastical school, Jamaran, at Ejmeyasin near Yerevan. On graduating, he joined the labor movement in the Caucasus and became a member of the Bolshevik faction of the Russian Social Democratic Workers party.[46]

After the October revolution, he worked for the Soviet government. In 1919, like his rival in the party, Haidar Khan, he was sent to Central Asia to mobilize Iranian workers for the Iranian Communist Party (ICP). There he recruited Iranian emigrants for the Iranian Red Army and organized, in early 1920, the Tashkent Adalat conference and the ICP congress in Anzali in June 1920. His theoretical and political contributions constituted the ICP’s main line of action until his withdrawal in 1922. He led the party’s radical wing and called for immediate land reform in Gilan. He disagreed with those who collaborated with Kuchek Khan, the leader of the Jangali revolutionary movement.[47]

Aside from leading positions in the ICP and the Communist International, he worked for the Soviet banking system until 1927. At this time, the radical turn of the Comintern permitted his return to the ICP, which he reorganized and led until it was dismantled by the Soviets in 1932. He was then censured as a «deviationist anti-Leninist» by the Stalinist ideological apparatus. Nevertheless, he continued to battle with the Comintern and the Soviet bureaucracy until 1935, when he denounced those in charge of Iranian affairs in the Comintern. On July 16, 1938, he was shot as a «German agent», but his reputation was rehabilitated during the Khrushchev era.

Sultanzade was the author of numerous articles and books on varied subjects, but due to Stalinist repression, he remained fairly unknown until the mid-seventies. His works on Iran and the East were quite novel and remain today a valuable source for the study of Iran’s political and economic situation in the early twentieth century.

Orbeliani, Ervend Ohanevich[48]

Ervend Ohanevich Orbeliani (alias Ebrahim[49]) was born on 5 February, 1898, into the family of an Armenian school teacher of Tabriz, Ohanes Norsesevich, whose father had been master gun-maker, and Sophia Markarovna Khagikian. Armeno-Iranian, he went to an Armenian school in Tabriz for five years (1906–10) before his parents moved to Mashhad, where his elder brother worked at the customs office. From 1910 to 1914 Orbeliani continued his studies on his own, particularly learning foreign languages, notably Russian, English and French. Thereafter, due to his family’s poverty, he worked, until 1917, as an employee of the local finance office. From 1917 till 1920 he was an employee of the British-owned Imperial Bank of Persia. Between 1921 and 1923 he worked as a translator for the Soviet diplomatic service in Tehran; then for the next five years he was in the employ of the Soviet diplomatic service, notably at the TASS agency, producing a radio bulletin in Persian and Russian. In 1924 he was recruited by the GPU/OGPU (future NKVD). In 1928 he moved to the USSR and worked, until 1935, as an operative agent at the NKVD. Between September 1935 and September 1936 he was in charge of the Iranian section at the KUTV (The Moscow Communist University of Toilers of the East), however, because of its closure, he became unemployed. From the moment of filling out his questionnaire in 1936, he was in charge of the secretariat of the Comintern editorial board while remaining a special reserve agent of the NKVD. Orbeliani’s »revolutionary activity« began in 1917 when he, under the influence of the October revolution and in opposition to British rule in Iran, joined a group of Iranians in the nationalist circles. He took part in the struggle against the British imposed AngloIranian 1919 Agreement (at this time he was working for the British bank in Iran). He read Bolshevik literature and entered into contact with »comrades« coming from the Soviet Union to Mashhad. He was arrested and imprisoned for four months after the British-led 1921 coup. He joined the Armenian Workers’ Party in 1923 and, through contacts with ICP activist Seyfi, also the ICP in 1924. Thereafter he became active among left-wing Armenians who in 1923 created the Armenian Workers’ Party which dissolved itself in 1927 and whose most faithful and resilient members joined the ICP. Then, on the orders of the CC, he created a legal Armenian party, named Nor-Ugi, in order to continue anti-Dashnak activities among Armenians. He was also active in the labor movement and was in charge of publishing secret declarations and night-flyers for the party (presumably printed at the TASS headquarters). He was arrested in 1925 in connection with his activities within the two communist parties but released through the intervention of Soviet envoy Yurenev. In 1928 he was exiled from Iran upon the revelations by several former communists of his publishing activities for the party. Upon his arrival in Moscow, Wagner of the Eastern Section of the Comintern sent him to the CPSU so that his membership could be transferred from the ICP. He became a candidate for membership and passed the two year training period, however his membership was withheld due to the new rules and the purges in 1932.

Orbeliani married a Russian (Armeno-Russian) in 1920. His mother, sister and brother remained in Iran. The latter, a government employee, was active among the Armenians. Beginning as a Danshnak, he became a convinced Bolshevik in 1920 and was in contact with the Soviet consul in Mashhad. He made a speech at the mourning ceremonies held for Lenin in 1924. He was arrested in 1932, and condemned to fifteen years imprisonment for his political activities and on additional charges that his brother, Ervend, was an NKVD operative. Hewas the Comintern official in charge of Iran to whom Shoureshian (»Mazloum«) reported on the occasions of his clandestine trips to Iran. His name was mentioned in the investigation and trial of the »Fifty-three« Group. His fate after 1936 is not known, but it is not difficult to assume that he was liquidated during the Stalinist purges.

Aslani, Nasrollah

Nasrollah Aslani, (known as Kamran, alias Abdolsamad Motash [alias at the 7th Comintern congress?]), born in 1904 in Qazvin[50], was the son of a peasant. He grew up in Qazvin, received a high-school education, and began working in the post office of the city. He was recruited by A. Kambakhsh into the Anjaman-e Parvaresh of Qazvin, a cultural society organized by leftists and communists.[51] As a result of his activities in that society, he was, in 1926, appointed by his post office superiors to a far-off post out of town. During his service in the post office in 1925–1926 he came into contact with the Russian consul Kaufamann, first through a consular employee and later meeting him directly. Kamran made the claim that he helped revolutionaries during the events in Gilan by passing their mail through the British censure in Qazvin – a claim that is very difficult, if not impossible, to verify (at the time he was no more than sixteen years of age). In his personal questionnaire filled out for the Seventh Comintern Congress, he claims to have joined the All-Russian Communist Party in 1928, but the ICP in 1922, which is in contradiction with his statement that he was recruited by Kambakhsh who joined the party in 1924.

In 1926 Kamran went to the USSR and studied until 1930 at KUTV as an ICP student, where he was »always first« in his class and a member of the Partcommissia of the leadership of foreign students at KUTV. In 1930 he was sent by the Comintern to Iran to carry out party activity. Until 1931, as member of city bureau of the ICP, he did party work in Isfahan, where he was engaged as an iron-smith (or lock-smith) at the Kazerouni textile factory. Here he claims to have organized the workers into a union and led the 1931 strike in that factory.[52] He must have done this in collaboration with party leader Abdol-Hussein Hesabi (Dehzad) who was at this time in Isfahan on party assignment (see his biography). Arrested, along with other labor leaders, he was banished to Abadeh, from whence he was recalled to Tehran for further interrogation. He claimed to have managed to elude his police escort and to have escaped on the way to Tehran. He lived in the capital for a year in secret and then returned to the USSR in May 1932. There he re-entered the KUTV as an »aspirant« (teaching candidate) and also studied for a year in the »special course« until 1934.[53] He claimed that he was, in the beginning also a member of the Paykar editorial board – a claim that does not correspond to the facts, as this journal’s life in Berlin came to an end in October 1931, and the new series published in handwritten composition in Vienna between mid-August 1932 and February 1933 were ostensibly published without the consent of the Comintern on which Kamran depended.

In spring 1934 Kamran was also made »Director« of Section XV of KUTV, overseeing the education of its students.

In October 1934 (on the eve of the publication of Donya) Kamran was dispatched on a mission by the EKKI to Iran, through the mountains of Khorasan bordering Soviet Turkestan. The aim of the mission was the »constitution of party organization« in Tehran, Tabriz, Qazvin, Mazandaran, Isfahan, and Khuzistan. He remained in Iran until May 1935. In Tehran he met with Dr. Arani. He formed »support points« (noqtehha-ye etteka’i) in these localities. He adds in his reports that he and his colleague (presumably Soviet official Hakimov) also »won« the review Donya, the student union, and the youth union over to the newly communist organization that was to replace the ICP. (The Soviet encyclopedias assert that Donya was the organ of the ICP!)

Upon his return to Moscow in 1935 he attended a superior course at KUTV, joined the »editorial staff« of the German Communist leader Wilhelm Pieck, and took part in the Seventh Congress of the Comintern as a delegate of the ICP.

According to his own account, Kamran was married to a Russian, a salesperson, who was not a party-member, whose father was a tailor. (It is thus incorrect to assert, as some have, that he was married to an Iranian female communist named Mahin or Maliheh). Kamran was excluded from the Comintern apparatus on the 15th of June, 1937, and arrested by the NKVD.[54] He was still alive November 1941 after the Soviet occupation of northern Iran and the formation of the Tudeh party. Though he disappeared some point in 1942, along with a number of other Iranian Communists who had survived earlier purges. According to the Secret Report to Dimitrov, there was even a suggestion that, after an urgent »reexamination« of his case by the NKVD, he should have been sent to Iran to help the Tudeh party, since in his personal records there were »many positive reports« of his work in the Iranian underground.[55]

Kamran was said to have been »greatly interested in the questions of the All-Russian Communist Party, the Comintern, and the [Iranian Communist] Party.« He was characterized as a »disciplined, very active, and experienced« cadre who participated in social organizations and of possessing a »good attitude toward studying«. He had good relations with his comrades, he was also capable of »independent work«. However, Dr. Arani expressed his dislike for him during his defense speech in Reza Shah’s tribunal, referring to him as »hammal« (literally porter, meaning a person lacking any culture whatsoever).[56]

Section IV Workshop – Projects in Progress Annette Leo, Berlin: »Wolfgang Steinitz (1905–1967). Jude, Bildungsbürger, Wissenschaftler, Kommunist«.

Prof. W. Benz, Zentrum für Antisemitismusforschung, Technische Universität Berlin, erhält Fördermittel der Thyssen-Stiftung für das Forschungsprojekt »Wolfgang Steinitz (1905-1967). Jude, Bildungsbürger, Wissenschaftler, Kommunist«. Projektmitarbeiterin und Autorin der geplanten Biografie ist Dr. Annette Leo.

Im Zentrum des Forschungsvorhabens steht der international angesehene Finnougrist, Volkskundler und Slawist Wolfgang Steinitz, der als Wissenschaftsorganisator und langjähriger Vizepräsident der Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR eine Vielzahl von bedeutsamen Forschungsprojekten angestoßen hat.[57] Steinitz gehört zu jenem DDRspezifischen Typ des jüdischen linken Intellektuellen der in den zwanziger Jahren politisiert und unter Sogwirkung der sozialistischen Idee von einer gerechten Ordnung zum Kommunisten wird. Anhand seiner Lebensgeschichte wird auch deutlich, wie bruchlos bei Vertretern dieser Generation kommunistisches Engagement und konspirative Tätigkeit für die Komintern bzw. einen sowjetischen Geheimdienst ineinander übergingen. Offensichtlich wurde die Biografie von Wolfgang Steinitz von diesen Verbindungen mehr geprägt als zunächst angenommen. Sein Emigrationsweg führte Steinitz während der nationalsozialistischen Zeit zunächst in die Sowjetunion. In den Wirren der »Säuberungszeit» wird er als unerwünschter Ausländer nach Schweden abgeschoben. Nach der Rückkehr aus dem Exil beteiligt er sich aktiv und enthusiastisch am Aufbau des Sozialismus in der SBZ/DDR. Von der Verfolgung und Ausgrenzung der Westemigranten und Juden Ende der vierziger/Anfang der fünfziger Jahre bleibt er verschont. Seine Kritik an der SED-Führung nach der Niederschlagung des Aufstands vom 17. Juni 1953 und sein selbstbewußtes und undogmatisches Auftreten machen ihn jedoch verdächtig und führen noch zu seiner Zeit als Mitglied des Zentralkomitees der SED zur geheimdienstlichen Bearbeitung im Rahmen eines »Operativ-Vorgangs«. Steinitz zieht sich daraufhin von seiner politischen Tätigkeit zurück und konzentriert sich auf seine wissenschaftliche Arbeit. Eine erneute Konfrontation mit der Staats- und Parteiführung im Zusammenhang mit seiner Weigerung, dem Ausschluß Robert Havemanns aus der Akademie zuzustimmen, wird durch seinen Tod im Jahre 1967 beendet.

Die geplante Steinitz-Biografie versteht sich als wahrnehmungs- und erfahrungsgeschichtliche Untersuchung. Sie hat zum Ziel, den politischen Lebensweg eines jüdischkommunistischen Intellektuellen im 20. Jahrhundert nachzuzeichnen und die Bewältigung historischer Umbrüche durch Eliten zu untersuchen. Dabei werden die Ereignisse aus der Sicht von heute betrachtet, ohne den damaligen Kontext und Zeitgeist außer acht zu lassen. Aber es soll von der Frage ausgegangen werden, welche Spuren das Wirken von Wolfgang Steinitz in den einzelnen Wissenschaftsgebieten, in der Geschichte der Institutionen und in den Erinnerungen seiner Angehörigen, Freunde und Kollegen hinterlassen hat. Dabei ergeben sich durchaus widersprüchliche Befunde, die in ihrer Ambivalenz ernstgenommen werden müssen. Auch die Schwierigkeiten der Erinnerung an eine solche Persönlichkeit während der DDR-Zeit und danach sind Teil des Themas. Es geht dabei um die Darstellung eines Spannungsfeldes zwischen den eigenen Visionen und der Loyalität gegenüber dem Regime, um eine schwierige Balance zwischen Selbstverwirklichung und Unterwerfung. An Steinitz’ Beispiel sollen die Möglichkeiten und Hindernisse für die Realisierung eines sozialistischen Programms geprüft und die Auswirkungen von Karriereangeboten und Privilegien sowie das Ineinandergreifen von Partizipationsmöglichkeiten und Zwangsmaßnahmen hinsichtlich Resistenz bzw. Kritikfähigkeit beleuchtet werden.

Die Quellenlage ist mehr als günstig. Neben zahlreichen wissenschaftlichen Publikationen von und über Wolfgang Steinitz finden sich in seinem Nachlaß nicht nur große Teile des privaten und beruflichen Briefwechsels von seiner Studentenzeit in den zwanziger Jahren bis zu seinem Tod, sondern auch die Auseinandersetzungen in der Universität, in der Akademie sowie im Zentralkomitee der SED sind gut dokumentiert. Außerdem existiert eine Anzahl von Gesprächsprotokollen, die der Filmemacher Hans Bunge bereits in den siebziger Jahren mit Kollegen, Freunden und Angehörigen von Wolfgang Steinitz geführt hat zur Vorbereitung einer Biografie, die zu DDR-Zeiten jedoch nie geschrieben wurde. Erschwert und begünstigt zugleich werden die Arbeiten an der Biografie durch die Tatsache, daß Familienangehörige von Wolfgang Steinitz in Israel, in den USA und Italien, angestoßen durch die Recherchen des Forschungsprojekts weitere neue Briefe und andere Dokumente ausfindig machen und zur Verfügung stellen.

Aurélio Martín Najera, Madrid:

Obras Completas de Francisco Largo Caballero

Están próximas a publicarse las obras completas de quien ha sido el único obrero que desempeñó la Presidencia del Gobierno de España: Francisco Largo Caballero. Largo Caballero nació en Madrid en 1869. Siendo niño comenzó a trabajar en la construcción, especializándose en el oficio de estuquista. En 1890 ingresó en la Unión General de Trabajadores y en 1894 en el Partido Socialista Obrero Español. Educado sindical y políticamente en el círculo más cercano a Pablo Iglesias, ocupó puestos directivos de carácter nacional en la UGT y en el PSOE desde 1899 y desempeñó los cargos públicos de concejal del Ayuntamiento de Madrid (1905), diputado provincial (1911) y diputado nacional (1918). Miembro del Instituto de Reformas Sociales, desde su creación en 1904 hasta su disolución con la Dictadura de Primo de Rivera en 1924, participó en la elaboración de toda la legislación de carácter social en España. Acudió a la Conferencia fundacional de la Organización Internacional del Trabajo (OIT) en Washington en 1919 asistiendo posteriormente a todas las Conferencias Internacionales del Trabajo hasta 1936.

Al proclamarse la Segunda República en 1931 fue diputado por Madrid en 1931, 1933 y 1936 y Ministro de Trabajo y Previsión Social en el bienio republicano-socialista entre abril de 1931 y septiembre de 1933. Estuvo en la cárcel en varias ocasiones: durante la huelga general tras los sucesos conocidos como la Semana Trágica de Barcelona en 1909; la huelga general minera de Vizcaya de 1911; la huelga general de agosto de 1917; la sublevación pro-república de diciembre de 1930 y la revolución de octubre de 1934. Al estallar la guerra civil fue elegido Presidente del Gobierno y Ministro de la Guerra desde septiembre de 1936 hasta mayo de 1937. Finalizada la contienda pasó a Francia donde fue detenido, confinado y finalmente deportado a Alemania e internado en el Campo de Concentración de Oranienburg de 1943 a 1945. Al finalizar la Segunda Guerra Mundial fue liberado por las tropas soviéticas regresando a París, donde falleció a los pocos meses, en marzo de 1946.

Sus obras completas serán publicadas por la Fundación Francisco Largo Caballero de Madrid coincidiendo con el XXV aniversario de la constitución de la misma. La edición está prevista realizarla en tres bloques documentales. El primero recogerá sus escritos y discursos hasta 1939; el segundo abarcará sus escritos en el exilio (1939-1946) y el tercero reunirá la correspondencia personal que se ha conservado del mismo.

A finales de junio de 2003 aparecerá el primer bloque, que constará de 6 volúmenes (2.700 páginas) estructuradas en los siguientes apartados: I. Escritos y discursos: 1910– 1918; II. Intervenciones parlamentarias: Legislatura 1918–1919; III. Escritos y discursos: 1919–1924; IV. «Presente y futuro de la Unión General de Trabajadores de España». 1925; V. Escritos y discursos: 1925-1931; VI. La experiencia de Gobierno: Declaraciones, discursos e intervenciones parlamentarias del Ministro de Trabajo y Previsión Social: Legislatura 1931–1933; VII. «Discursos a los trabajadores». 1934; VIII. Escritos y discursos: 1934–1939; IX. Índices: alfabético de personas, alfabético de instituciones, organizaciones, periódicos, cargos y lugares, geográfico, temático y alfabético de títulos.

La obra ha sido preparada por Aurelio Martín Nájera (Director, Archivo y Biblioteca, Fundación Pablo Iglesias y Agustín Garrigós Fernández (Archivo y Biblioteca, Fundación Pablo Iglesias) y será presentada por Cándido Méndez, Secretario General de la Unión General de Trabajadores.

Madrid, 14 de febrero de 2003

Contact: Fundación Pablo Iglesias fundac.pabloiglesias@uah.es

Section V Reviews and Reports on New Publications

Corinna Kuhr-Korolev, Stefan Plaggenborg, Monica Wellmann (Hg.): Sowjetjugend 1917–1941. Generation zwischen Revolution und Resignation. Essen, Klartext Verlag, 2001. 310 S. Von Wolfgang Schlott, Bremen

Der auf der Grundlage des Forschungsprojektes »Jugend und Gewalt in Sowjetrußland 1917–1932« entstandene Band besetzt eine Leerstelle in der intensiven kulturwissenschaftlichen Untersuchung der frühsowjetischen Gesellschaft (vgl. Sheila Fitzpatrick: Cultural Revolution in Russia 1928–1931, London 1978; id.: Education and Social Mobility in the Soviet Union 1921–1934, London 1979; Ann Todd Baum: Komsomol Participation in the Soviet First Five Year Plan, London 1987). Während die hier zitierten Publikationen die Jugend als gesellschaftliche Gruppe mit über 40% Anteil an der sowjetischen Gesamtbevölkerung in den späten 20er Jahren zu den Trägern des entstehenden Stalinismus zählten, untersuchten die nach 1990 in Westeuropa und den USA publizierten Werke die weitverbreitete Unzufriedenheit der jugendlichen Bevölkerung mit der Politik der »Neuen Ökonomischen Politik«. Beide Forschungsansätze erwiesen sich nach Einschätzung von Corinna Kuhr-Korolev auf Grund nicht vorhandener Quellen, ideologischer Vorbelastung und einschränkender Betrachtungsweisen als nicht ausreichend, um das differenzierte Spektrum der jugendlichen Bevölkerungsgruppe umfassend einzuschätzen. Der erste Ansatz wertete jugendliche Kohorten als williges Unterstützungspotential für die kommunistischen Machthaber, der zweite ging von der revolutionären Einstellung der jungen Bürgerkriegskämpfer wie auch der idealistischen Einstellung jener Komsomolzen aus, die sich wegen ihrer fehlenden Kampferfahrung auf die reinen Ideale der kommunistischen Bewegung konzentrierten. In beiden perspektivischen Einstellungen blieb das relativ hohe Potential an Widerwille und Widerstand gegen das kommunistische Regime ausgeblendet. Heiko Haumann greift in seinem Beitrag »Jugend und Gewalt in Sowjetrußland zwischen Oktoberrevolution und Stalinismus im lebensweltlichen Zusammenhang« diesen Widerspruch mit Hilfe von zwei methodischen Vorüberlegungen auf. Er beschreibt zunächst eine Reihe von literarischen Quellen (»Selbstmörder« von Erdman, »Vierte Prosa« von Mandelstam), in denen subjektive Betroffenheit und Lynchjustiz der frühen Sowjetmacht thematisiert werden. In einem zweiten Schritt verweist er auf Samuel Eisenstadts Untersuchung »Revolution und die Transformation von Gesellschaften«, in der als Folge von Umwälzungen nichtregulierte Aggressionen und Gewalt auftreten. Die dort gewonnenen Erkenntnisse (stark erhöhtes Gewaltpotential nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg in Deutschland) überträgt er auf die Sowjetunion der 20er Jahre, in der Partei und Komsomol die erhöhte Aggressivität der Jugend mit verbalen Repressionen (sozialdarwinistische Verunglimpfungen durch Aufteilung in »gesunde« und »kranke« Jugendliche, Einrichtung von Arbeitskolonien, psychiatrische Kliniken) zu bekämpfen versuchten. Auf diese Weise habe das stalinistische Regime den nicht kasernierten, das heisst den nicht traumatisierten Jugendlichen den scheinbaren Schutz unter dem »Ganzheitspanzer des totalitären Leibes Sowjetunion« (S. 60) angeboten.

Wie riesig die Kluft zwischen jenen Kohorten war, die noch die Revolutionswirren und den Bürgerkrieg als Akteure im Kampf gegen die Feinde der Sowjetmacht erlebten, und jenen, die nicht mehr vom Pathos der Revolution zehren konnten, zeigt Gabor T. Rittersporn in seinem Beitrag »Between Revolution and Daily Routine«. Der auf zahlreichen Quellennachweisen basierende Aufsatz untersucht die Reaktionen der vom Regime produzierten großen Anzahl entwurzelter Kinder und Jugendlicher (mehr als 2 Millionen) auf die verheerenden sozialen Umstände und die fehlenden Perspektiven. Das wachsende Gewaltpotential versuchten die Behörden mit Einweisung in Arbeitslager und Verschärfung der Strafen (1935 standen fast eine Million Jugendlicher unter Polizeiaufsicht) in den »Griff zu bekommen«.

Welche Formen der Gewalt sich in den 20er und 30er Jahren entwickelten, zeigt Sergej Zuravlev in seinem empirisch belegten Beitrag. Unter der Einwirkung von Propaganda, Filmen mit Legenden über große Bürgerkriegshelden und der schulischen Erziehungsmuster (»Sucht und vernichtet den Saboteur!«) nahm die Zahl der schweren Delikte im schulischen und außerschulischen Feld sehr stark zu, was u. a. eine soziologische Untersuchung aus dem Jahr 1931 belegte. Auch ein weiterer Beitrag über die »Militarisierung der Jugend und jugendliche(n) Radikalismus in Sibirien« beschreibt den Gewaltkult als dominantes Merkmal der geistigen und politischen Kultur der sowjetischen Gesellschaft in diesem Zeitraum. Bei der Deutung des Phänomens verweist Viktor Isaev auf die Erkenntnisse der amerikanischen Psychologen Beyron und Richardson, die in ihrer Publikation »Aggression« (russ. »Agressija«, Moskau 1998) die Ursache für Gewaltanwendung auf einen inneren Konflikt der Täter zurückführten.

Die zweite Regionalstudie (Aleksandr Rozkov: Die Jugend im Kuban-Gebiet in den 1920er Jahren zwischen Tradition und Modernisierung) analysiert ausgehend von auffälligen sozialhistorischen Fakten (hohe regionale Identität auf Grund der langen Siedlungsgeschichte der Kosaken, frühe Eingliederung von Kindern und Jugendlichen in den bäuerlichen Arbeitsprozeß, Aufspaltung der Sympathie auf »Rote« und »Weiße« während des Bürgerkriegs 1919–1922) die Zerstörung von Traditionen durch die bolschewistischen Machthaber. In diesem von zahlreichen Widersprüchen getragenen Prozeß löste sich die männliche jugendliche Bevölkerung von den Unterdrückungsmechanismen ihrer Kosaken-Väter und geriet in die Modernisierungsfänge des Komsomol. Eine Studie, die durch ihre zahlreichen dokumentarischen Belege besticht!

Über jenes jugendliche Klientel, das sich dem hohen Aggressionstrieb ihrer Umwelt entziehen wollte, berichten zwei bemerkenswerte Beiträge von Monica Wellmann und Vera Spiertz. Die eine untersuchte Abschiedsbriefe junger Selbstmörder aus dem Moskau der 20er Jahre, die andere setzte sich mit geheimen Berichten über den Freitod junger Rotarmisten von 1923 bis 1927 auseinander. Beide zeigen eindrucksvoll, wie junge Menschen unter der Einwirkung von Willkür (Ausschluß aus dem Komsomol aus fadenscheinigen Gründen; soziale Deklassierung) und Erniedrigung durch Funktionäre/ Offiziere jeglichen psychischen Halt verloren und sich das Leben nahmen.

Nach dem Zusammenbruch des zaristischen Regimes und dem Verlust der tradierten Moralvorstellungen sollte die Sowjetjugend durch einen von oben vorgegebenen Sexualund Moraldiskurs an die neuen Werte angepaßt werden. Wie Corinna Kuhr-Korolev verdeutlicht, ging es den Machthabern dabei im Kampf gegen den »sexuellen Nihilismus« vor allem um die Kontrolle männlicher Energie, die in einem Selbstdisziplinierungs- und Erziehungsprozeß in drei Schritten erreicht werden sollte: »erstens rational die Schädlichkeit triebhaften Lebens und die Notwendigkeit der Selbstkontrolle erfassen; zweitens in der Durchsetzung dieser Einsicht den eigenen Willen stärken und drittens sich die Triebkontrolle durch Training aneignen und automatisieren.« (S. 284) Mit diesem von Leo Trockij (Literatur und Revolution, 1925) bis zur absurden Kontrolle aller Körperfunktionen zugespitzten Konzept wurde die Sowjetjugend in den gesteuerten Wahnsinn der Fünfjahrespläne getrieben.

In Stefan Plaggenborgs abschließenden diskursanalytischen Reflexionen über »Jugend in Sowjetrußland zwischen den Weltkriegen« wird die Frage nach der Relevanz von abweichendem jugendlichen Verhalten in einem autoritär-totalitärem Regime in in vier Aspekten abgehandelt. Der zentrale Begriff ›Devianz‹, nicht aber Jugendprotest, erfaßt dessen sozialpsychologische Dimension als Verlust an Identität (Widerspruch zwischen Ideal und Enttäuschung über politische Realität). Jedoch wertet Plaggenborg das hohe Ausmaß an Adaption an das Regime auf Kosten der Selbstzerstörung der Ich-Struktur als Voraussetzung für den stalinistischen Assimilierungsprozeß, der für alle jene, die ihn nicht nachvollzogen, in den Repressionsmühlen der Behörden endete. Daß solche tiefgreifenden psychomentalen Prozesse nicht nur jugendliche Kohorten erfaßten, sondern auch die Lebenswelt der Erwachsenen betrafen, veranlaßt den Autor zu einer Reihe von Differenzierungen. Man habe es mit einer relativ breiten Altersgruppe zu tun, in der spezifische jugendliche Grunderfahrungen nicht prägend gewesen seien. Vielmehr habe in den 20er Jahren »die junge Generation gewissermaßen aus sich heraus einen Teil separiert« (S. 303). Dabei habe eine Teilung in Junge und Jüngere stattgefunden. Die rasche Vereinnahmung dieser Kohorten im Prozeß der Bürokratisierung der Apparate und der Einbeziehung in Herrschaftsmechanismen führten zu unterschiedlichen Erfahrungswelten, in denen die einen dem Druck nicht standhielten und deviant wurden, die anderen die Mitläufer und Repressionskader bildeten.

Das besondere Verdienst des Sammelbandes besteht nicht nur in der methodischen Herangehensweise (Jugend und Gewalt als sozialhistorisches Problem unter spezifischen jugendsoziologischen Fragestellungen, Benutzung von authentischen Quellen auf der Suche nach Ursachen für Devianz, Durchbruch zu neuen Forschungsfeldern), sondern vor allem in der Entdeckung einer – in sich sehr differenzierten – Sowjetjugend, die, zwischen revolutionärem, blindem Eifer und Resignation zerrissen, zum Diener und Opfer eines totalitärem Regime wurde. Damit ist nicht nur eine Forschungslücke geschlossen worden, vielmehr öffnet sich der Blick auf eine Zwischenkriegszeit, in der bislang die »Revolutionsgeneration« überwiegend als begeisterte Anhänger der kommunistischen Idee dargestellt wurde. Daß sie in Widersprüche verwickelt und von Selbstzweifel erfüllt war, an Identitätsverlusten litt und eine hohe Suizidrate aufwies, zeigen die in dem Band versammelten Beiträge mit einer Ausnahme überzeugend.

Todor Kuljić: Tito A Sociological-Historical Study (Tito – sociološkoistorijska studija), Beograd, 1998, 394 pp. /in Serbo-Croatian/. A Review by Avgust Lešnik, Ljubljana. By Avgust Lešnik, Ljubljana

This study is a sociological-historical research into the political culture, ideology and organization of Tito’s rule. The regime in question was set up on the one-party, yet complex multi-national system, and the multi-player pattern of integration. In this framework, Tito as leader played the part of an extraordinary active, energetic, and prominent linking element, remarkable for the domineering components of personal authority. However, no matter how personal, a rule has never been determined just by the activities and the will of the leader alone. Even the most influential figures had to face insurmountable limits set by their own time, pre-conditioned by the ideological horizon of the epoch, or by the power of tradition. Such structures are analytically examined in this study in order to define more clearly the autonomy of influential figures. Also a rather neglected side of the Yugoslavian socialism was investigated: its relative place in long-term historical processes, Tito’s role and the basic patterns of political culture. Tito’s role in short and long-term processes in the Balkans was studied from a perspective of historical understanding developed on the Marxist line of thinking by Braudel’s French school and German structural-historic stream (J. Kocka, H. Wehler). In the first perspective it is not the events but the processes that are studied.

Chapter 1 summarizes the settings by which one-party regimes in the contemporary world acted as agents of modernization. Tradition imposed on this specific modernization a truncated and authoritarian form. On the Balkans, a solution for the ethnic question was a condition not only for the development of society, but for its survival. In consequence of a tradition of ethnic conflicts, the national sentiment is easily politicized; politics take hold of the roots of the being during social crises, because they are connected to survival and basic existential interests. The role of a ruler in a multiethnic state, burdened by militant uncompromising ethic mentality, is unusually complex, so a reliable judgment of his historical achievement must be differentiated from that of his cultic figure. This problem is broadly discussed in the first chapter »The Authoritarian Modernization«..

The second chapter, entitled »Tradition Related Components of the Balkans’ Charismatic Leaders«, discusses the main patterns of political culture during the Balkans’ liberation in which the ideas of the leaders had a pivotal integrating role. In the permanently insecure and war-state background, a leader in the Balkans was a tested warrior who laid claims to unrestricted authority on the ground of his recognized merits in liberation efforts. Regarding political culture, the Balkans’ monarchy and republican regimes of personal power, however distinct content-wise, derive more or less indirectly from this basic leadership-liberator model. This relationship is demonstrated in chapter 3 by a diachronic comparison of Prince Miloš (1783-1860), Nikola Pašić (1845-1926) and Tito (1892-1980), the key political figures of Serbia and Yugoslavia of the 19th and 20th century. Although they transported distinct class and national visions of a desired society, an element which these rulers had in common was a similar political tradition and culture. Chapter 4 exposes a critical assessment of Tito’s role in the period before he came to power (1937-1945), given from the standpoint of structural history. It also discusses the impact of national and class structures on Tito’s behavior (a vision of a federation void of a leading nation and the Bolshevik culture), but also the alternating degree of independence in the periods of underground activity and war (Tito as a party leader, army leader and diplomat).

Chapter 5, entitled »Tito and the Political Culture of Bolshevism«, summarizes Tito’s understanding of the party, the character of the party purges, the role of the army, the ruling techniques, and finally the patterns of the legitimation and justification of power. It also draws a distinction between the stages in which the communist political culture urged modernization, from those in which it started to block modernization.

Tito’s national policy, a variant of a modern and democratic idea of the Balkans as one indivisible state entirety, is the subject matter of chapter 6 which highlights Tito’s successful efforts and failures in the attempt of a cosmopolitization of the Balkans. This chapter also discusses the role of the Yugoslav national idea, it outlines the main economic causes of nationalism in the socialist Yugoslavia and finally summarizes Tito’s extraordinary active super-national role. This last element figures as a rather successful and progressive attempt of cosmopolitization of the Balkans, as exemplary for the leftist spirit of the epoch. The British historian Taylor called Tito »the last Habsburg« because he ruled a country with eight major ethnic groups, gave them »cultural autonomy«, and restrained their secessionist antagonisms. Judging through its multiethnic structure, Tito’s Yugoslavia was, no doubt, most similar to the Austro-Hungarian Empire, but the integrative ideas (Marxism and Catholicism) were essentially different. Furthermore discussed are the international and cosmopolitan implications of Marxism in the pacification of an explosive Balkan space.

Chapter 7 »Tito’s Foreign Policy« discusses this policy, from the standpoint of long-term historical processes, as a rare example of a relatively successful and independent break through of the hierarchical relationships on an international level, as well as of the unavoidable hierarchical subordination of small countries to the interests of great powers. The main stages of Tito’s foreign policy are outlined as built upon the principles of equidistance, with a special focus on the the crisis of the Yugoslav-Soviet relationship, and also the relationship with the West and the non-alignment policy.

Chapter 8, »Structure and Function of Tito’s Authority, Charisma and Cult« , gives a dialectic analysis of the progressive-modernizing, and of the conservative functions of Tito’s charisma. His charisma neutralized tensions of an ethnically mixed and explosive region, while in the sphere of foreign policy Tito’s personal authority contributed to the build up of the state ranking. The party leader and head of state was a symbol of the radical change in the social structure, i.e. the acceleration of horizontal and vertical mobility, which is an important aspect of modernization. The undoubtedly progressive active role of Tito’s charisma in mobilizing the resistance to fascism and Stalinism has already been mentioned. The accelerated post-war development was facilitated by the state’s and Tito’s respectability in the whole world. But also the conservative patterns of Tito’s cult should not be neglected. Uncritical elevation and admiration of Tito as leader of a monopolistic party with no competition caused an irrational idolatry for an infallible individual and developed an illusion of his role of savior. The basically rationalistic Marxist ideology was an important defense against Tito’s irrational deification. Broadly discussed are the forms of Tito’s deification, at the same time they are compared with Stalin’s cult.

In chapter 9 the chief patterns of the relationship of creative intellectuals towards Tito are presented: (1) M. Krleža’s glorification of Tito, stemming from the Croatian tradition of the Yugoslav national idea, (2) demonization of Tito by D. Ćosić and Serbian nationalism, and (3) differentiated judgment by M. Djilas that sprang from the non-national liberal critics of Bolshevism. Krleža’s glorification of Tito was deeper than Ćosić’s demonization, and together with Djilas’s differentiated judgement, it gives an interesting testimony about the relationship of contemporary intellectuals towards Tito.

Chapter 10 treats Tito’s self-understanding and personal traits which effected his rule, and the last chapter (11) gives a judgement about the function of Tito’s rule and the role of his personal achievements.

The historical and theoretical framework of this book is the permanent comparison and evaluation of the two opposite sides of Tito’s rule. In other words, the historical judgment of Tito’s role goes in the sense of a differentiation between its progressive and its conservative components. History will, probably, give more weight to Tito’s charisma as a means of integrating a complex state, than as an expression of his personal ambitions without thereby denying that the growing charisma induced return effects and encouraged immoderate political ambitions. History will register the deeper enlightening and state-integrative goals of the party management more than the small group career interests that were protected by the leader’s cult. Personal glorification and the instrumental use of the ruler’s cult are a historically more ephemeral and less important aspect in comparison to the objective role of the charisma. Tito’s charisma was an important base for state centralization and, during his first stage, for accelerated technological and economic modernization of the country as well. The super-ethnic elevation of the leader’s cult encouraged cosmopolitization, deprovincialization and pacification of the chaotic Balkan spaces. This is the central historical function of Tito’s rule, but it cannot be separated from its ideological basis. As a specific version of a super-ethnic cosmopolitan ideology, Marxism certainly played an important role in bringing closer together traditionally related, but also conflictual, ethnic groups. As a means of self-protection of several small ethnic groups from cultural and linguistic discrimination, isolation and provincialism, Yugoslavia (contra today’s nationalisms) found in Marxism a strong instrument of modernization. Internationalistic ideology and the cult of a super ethnic class leader were inseparable components of the uneven and contradictory process of the Balkan cosmopolitization.

In this process the role of Tito’s personality was active. As a wise, penetrating and flexible politician, by skillfully using his own authority in foreign and domestic politics, Tito as a ruler managed to keep the Yugoslav ethnic groups together in a common state for the longest period of time, and gave Yugoslavia its most lasting state form. In the history of the left, he will be remembered as a ruler who, in the framework of his times, tried to democratize one-party socialism. This attempt was inspired far more by the direct democratic plebeian tradition of socialism than by a search for an institutionally and legally regulated division of power. In a relatively conflict-less way and with the help of a monopolistic party, Tito developed a specific regime of personal power and then became its captive, convicted that his life-long rule was the irreplaceable core of integration. Despite the civil war in Yugoslavia in the 1990s and the downfall of multiethnic Yugoslavia, it seems that, like in many similar historical examples, immeasurable personal power remains always in the shadow of historical achievements of some kind of modernization. This book by Prof. T. Kuljić (Faculty of Arts, Belgrade) is undoubtedly the basic work for every researcher who is dealing with the post war problematique of Tito’s Yugoslavia. It is highly deplorable that this exceptional study is at the moment available only in the Serbo Croatian language.

Contact: todorunbg@ptt.yu

Achim Kilian: Einzuweisen zur völligen Isolierung. NKWD-Speziallager Mühlberg / Elbe 1945-1948 (Forum Verlag Leipzig), 3. Auflage 2000; id.: Mühlberg 1939-1948. Ein Gefangenenlager mitten in Deutschland, Köln, Böhlau, 2001. Von Karl Wilhelm Fricke, Köln

Es existierte nur neun Jahre, das Lager Mühlberg – von September 1939 bis September 1948 –, aber es wurde zum Paradigma zweier Diktaturen. »Neun Jahre lang lebten Zigtausende von Menschen in diesem Lager, immer wieder andere, aber immer in derselben tristen und engen Barackenstadt auf ebenem Grund mit schnurgerader Lagerstraße, ohne Bäume und Büsche, allseits umgeben von Stacheldraht und Lichterketten, ständig bewacht von bewaffneten Posten.« So Achim Kilian in dem vorliegenden Buch. Historische Wahrheit muß konkret sein.

Seinen Namen erhielt das Lager nach dem seinerzeit dreieinhalbtausend Einwohner zählenden Städtchen Mühlberg nahe dem Ostufer der Elbe, zwischen Riesa und Torgau gelegen und vom Lager allerdings rund vier Kilometer entfernt. Erbaut »mitten in Deutschland«, war es ursprünglich als Durchgangs- und Stammlager für Kriegsgefangene der deutschen Wehrmacht gedacht. Seine amtliche Bezeichnung lautete »Stalag IV B«. Während des Zweiten Weltkrieges wurden hier von der Wehrmacht bis zu 29 000 Kriegsgefangene gleichzeitig festgehalten. Sie kamen, dem Kriegsverlauf folgend, aus vielen Nationen. Polen waren die ersten, die eingewiesen wurden, danach kamen Franzosen, Briten, Sowjetrussen, Serben, Italiener. Mehr als 3 000 Kriegsgefangene starben hier hinter Stacheldraht. Mit mehr als 2 300 hatten die Russen die meisten Toten zu beklagen. Ihr Gefangenendasein war am erbärmlichsten. Sie litten an Hunger, Läusen, Mißhandlungen. Achim Kilian macht ihr physisches und moralisches Elend mit seinen Einblicken in den Lageralltag auf eindringliche Weise anschaulich.

Von Truppen der 1. Ukrainischen Front wurde das Lager Mühlberg am 23. April 1945 befreit, aber es war eine Befreiung eigener Art, denn sie bedeutete jedenfalls für Tausende gefangener Rotarmisten nur den Wechsel in ein sowjetisches Zwangsarbeitslager. Stalin, der jeden Sowjetsoldaten in deutscher Kriegsgefangenschaft für einen »Deserteur« hielt, verbannte viele seiner befreiten Untertanen nach ihrer »Heimkehr« in den Archipel


Aber auch in dem ehemaligen Stalag Mühlberg blieb das Leiden heimisch, denn es wurde ohne Verzug einer neuen Bestimmung zugeführt. Nachdem hier zunächst aus der Sowjetunion nach Deutschland verbrachte »Ostarbeiter« und Angehörige der »Russischen Befreiungsarmee« des Generals A. A. Wlassow gefangengehalten worden waren, nutzte das NKWD/MWD im September 1945 das Lager für ihre Zwecke. Mühlberg wurde in sowjetischer Terminologie »Spezial-Lager Nr. 1«, in dem für rund drei Jahre vorwiegend internierte Deutsche festgehalten wurden, vermeintliche und tatsächliche Funktionsträger der NSDAP und »Hitler-Jungen«, die unter (im Regelfall unbegründetem) Verdacht von Werwolf-Aktivitäten standen. In der ersten Zeit wurden auch deutsche Kriegsgefangene hier eingeliefert, die jedoch sämtlich in die Sowjetunion verbracht wurden, ebenso wie mehrere Tausend arbeitsfähige Internierte übrigens.

Im November 1948 wurde das Lager aufgelöst. Zuvor war ein Teil der Internierten aus Mühlberg entlassen, genau 7 060, mehrere Tausend aber kamen noch in das bis 1950 fortbestehende Spezial-Lager Buchenwald. Kilian beziffert die Zahl der Internierten in Mühlberg nach sowjetischen Quellen auf insgesamt 22 000 bis 24 000, darunter ungefähr 1 500 Frauen und Mädchen. Es sind Schätzungen, denn wie viele Gefangene unter dem Regime des NKWD/MWD tatsächlich festgehalten, in die Sowjetunion deportiert, entlassen oder in andere Lager verbracht wurden, ist ebenso wenig exakt zu belegen wie die Zahl der Toten. Die Hinterbliebenen erhielten keine Nachricht. Kilian schätzt die Zahl der an Hunger und Krankheit Verstorbenen auf 7000.

Bei der Einschätzung dieser Zahlen ist zu berücksichtigen, daß das Geschehen in Mühlberg bis 1990 im Osten strengster Geheimhaltung unterlag und endgültig erst erforscht werden kann, wenn sich die Archive des KGB uneingeschränkt öffnen. »Die deutschen Kommunisten haben das unter Stalin begonnene Verleugnen bis zum Ende der DDR strikt befolgt und alles getan, um das Lager und dessen Gräberfeld vergessen zu machen.« Dieser Feststellung des Autors ist nichts hinzuzufügen.

Achim Kilian hat sich mehr als ein Jahrzehnt mit der Geschichte des Lagers befaßt. Seine erste, Anfang der neunziger Jahre unter dem Titel »Einzuweisen zur völligen Isolierung« erschienene Monographie zum NKWD-Speziallager Mühlberg zog schon damals viel Aufmerksamkeit auf sich, weil sie solide fundiert war und erstmals sowjetische Dokumente und Archivalien zur Lagergeschichte herangezogen hatte. Dieser Linie ist der Autor auch in seinem zweiten Buch treu geblieben. Indes liegt sein besonderer Erkenntniswert darin, daß er die Lagergeschichte von 1939 bis 1945 auf NS-Akten gestützt genau so fundiert und mit derselben akribischen Gründlichkeit aufgearbeitet hat wie ihre Fortsetzung in den Jahren 1945–1948. Seine sachliche Auseinandersetzung mit der Thematik nötigt um so mehr Respekt ab, als der Autor selbst Betroffener war. Auch ihm selber wurde Mühlberg zum Schicksal. Als Achtzehnjähriger wurde er zu Unrecht als Werwolf verdächtigt und am 25. Juli 1945 im Vogtland in russische Haft genommen. Auf dem Umweg über mehrere Gefängnisse wurde er in Mühlberg zur Internierung eingeliefert. Ohne je vor Gericht gestellt zu werden, wurde er am 6. August 1948 entlassen.

Ein Schicksal von Tausenden. Für den Autor wurde es zur selbst auferlegten Verpflichtung, die Geschichte des Lagers in ihrer Gesamtheit aufzuarbeiten. So entstand eine Mühlberg-Monographie, die in der Kriegsgefangenen- und Interniertengeschichtsforschung von Bestand sein wird, die aber zugleich einen wissenschaftlichen Beitrag zur vergleichenden Diktaturforschung überhaupt darstellt – und ein mahnendes »Nie wieder«.

Der Autor ist am 4. Oktober 2002 im 76. Lebensjahr gestorben. Eine Rezension ist kein Nachruf. Gleichwohl sei eine Bemerkung erlaubt: Mit seinem letzten Buch hat sich Achim Kilian selbst ein bleibendes Erinnerungsmal gesetzt.

Achim Kilian (1926–2002)

Ein Nachruf von Andreas Eberhardt[58]

Das Bewegende bei der Beschäftigung mit der Vergangenheit sei gewesen, »sich selber dann zu finden«. Das erzählte mir Achim Kilian in einem langen Gespräch über seine Recherchen zum Lager Mühlberg/Elbe, das zunächst ein Gefangenenlager der Deutschen Wehrmacht gewesen war, und dann von der sowjetischen Militäradministration bis 1948 als Speziallager genutzt wurde. Achim Kilian, geboren am 31. 12. 1926 in Oelsnitz, wurde dort zwischen 1945 und 1948 gefangengehalten.

Zunächst als Schüler in der Hitler-Jugend, war er als junger Mann noch 1944 zur Wehrmacht eingezogen worden und am Kriegsende in amerikanische Gefangenschaft gekommen. Aus ihr wurde er sehr schnell wieder entlassen, aber nach Abzug der Amerikaner und dem Einrücken der Roten Armee als vemeintlicher »Werwolf« denunziert und vom sowjetischen NKWD inhaftiert. Weder ein Haftbefehl noch eine Anklage wurden ihm jemals vorgelegt.

Er übersteht die schwere Zeit im Lager, die geprägt war von mangelhafter Ernährung und Hygiene, Enge, erzwungener Untätigkeit und dem Tod zahlreicher Mitgefangener. Neben den schrecklichen Erfahrungen bewahrt er sich aber auch die Erinnerungen an Beispiele menschlichen Verhaltens durch sowjetische Bewacher. Nach der Entlassung verläßt er bald die sowjetisch besetzte Zone, will verlorene Zeit aufholen, erarbeitet sich ein Stipendium für einen Studienaufenthalt in den USA, studiert an der TH Stuttgart, später in Mannheim. Über die Zeit in Mühlberg spricht er eigentlich nur in Arkansas, danach widmet er sich Ausbildung und Beruf. Als Diplom-Kaufmann wurde er schließlich Geschäftsführer in einem großen Unternehmen.

Die Feiern zum vierzigsten Jahrestag der DDR bedeuten einen ersten Einschnitt. Aber: »Ich habe bis zur Wende dieses Thema für mich behalten.« Nach seiner Pensionierung schreibt er seine 1948 zu Papier gebrachten Erinnerungen neu. Er beginnt, sich intensiv mit der Geschichte Mühlbergs zu befassen. Das schließt auch die Geschichte des Kriegsgefangenenlagers der Deutschen Wehrmacht ein. Zahlreiche Kontakte zu ehemaligen Gefangenen werden in verschiedene Länder geknüpft. Zur Recherche besucht Kilian sogar nun zugängliche Archive in Moskau. Es entsteht eine umfassende Geschichte des Lagers. Hermann Weber, der Nestor der DDR-Forschung, lernt Achim Kilian als peniblen Historiker schätzen. Er steuert zu dem schließlich von ihm herausgebrachten Band »Einzuweisen zur völligen Isolierung – NKWD-Speziallager Mühlberg/Elbe 1945– 1948« das Vorwort bei. Trotz einer immer wiederkehrenden schweren Krankheit folgen – stets unterstützt von seiner Ehefrau – zahlreiche Aufsätze, er arbeitet an dem dreibändigen Standardwerk zur Geschichte der Speziallager in der SBZ mit. Zuletzt erscheint von ihm »Mühlberg 1939–1948. Ein Gefangenenlager mitten in Deutschland«. Seine eigenen Erfahrungen läßt er dabei kaum durchscheinen. Er versteht sich als Chronist.

Man könnte sagen, der Lebenslauf von Achim Kilian ähnelt den vielen Biographien der sogenannten »HJ-Generation«: Hitler-Jugend, Kriegsteilnahme, Gefangenschaft, Aufbau und berufliche Karriere. Herausragend aber war seine von tiefem Humanismus geprägte Suche nach der Geschichte, nach den Menschen jenseits aller Grenzen, die sein Leben mitbestimmt und mit-geschrieben haben. Eine Geschichte, die ihren Anfang nahm in der Verführung und dem Mißbrauch einer Generation, die sich fortsetzte in Kriegs- und Lagererfahrungen. Dieser Umgang – nach Fakten suchend, penibel, offen, fordernd und auch streitbar, aber immer ohne Feindbild oder Haß – bleibt allen, die ihn kannten, als Beispiel in Erinnerung. Mich hat er tief beeindruckt.

Nach langer und schwerer Krankheit ist Achim Kilian am 4.Oktober 2002 gestorben.

Dieter Nelles: Widerstand und internationale Solidarität. Die Internationale Transportarbeiter-Föderation (ITF) im Widerstand gegen den Nationalsozialismus, Essen, Klartext, 2001. 457 S. (Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für soziale Bewegungen, Schriftenreihe A: Darstellungen Bd. 18).

Von Reiner Tosstorff, Mainz

Dieter Nelles’ Arbeit ist zum einen ein Beitrag zur Organisationsgeschichte der Internationalen Transportarbeiter-Föderation (ITF) und deren Rolle im deutschen Widerstand nach 1933. Zum anderen ist sie auch ein Beitrag zur Sozialgeschichte der internationalen Arbeiterbewegung, da sie in überzeugender Weise den Großteil dieser Aktivitäten in eine syndikalistische Dimension einordnet. Die Beziehungen zur Kommunismusgeschichte ergeben sich daraus, daß die wichtigsten Seeleutekader der KPD 1935 mit der Partei brachen und ihre Arbeit im Rahmen der ITF fortsetzten. Die KPD konnte sie aufgrund ihrer Verankerung und ihres Einflusses nicht frontal angreifen, daher orientierte sie sich im wesentlichen auf ihre »Umarmung« im Rahmen der Volksfronttaktik.

Die Internationale Transportarbeiterföderation war zwar ein von sozialdemokratischen Organisationen dominiertes, mit dem Internationalen Gewerkschaftsbund (»Amsterdamer Internationale«) verbundenes Internationales Berufssekretariat (eine BranchenGewerkschaftsinternationale), sie wurde jedoch von einem ausgesprochenen Linkssozialisten, dem Niederländer Edo Fimmen, geführt. Er war politisch immer mehr auf Distanz zur Sozialdemokratie gegangen, hatte in den zwanziger Jahren zunächst die Ak tionseinheit mit den Kommunisten gesucht und tendierte nun politisch zu den »Zwischengruppen«. Dabei ergab sich eine gewisse Differenz zwischen seinen politischen Positionen und den Aktivitäten der ITF als Gewerkschaftsinternationale, die er im übrigen intensiv führte. In der Unterstützung des deutschen Widerstands fand er zudem ein Terrain, in dem er seine politischen Ansichten ohne Beschränkungen durch die Organisationszwänge zu verwirklichen versuchte.

Das unrühmliche Verhalten der Gewerkschaftsführung in Deutschland im Jahre 1933 hatte seine Abneigung gegen den sozialdemokratischen »Reformismus« noch verstärkt. Von Anfang an hatte er zwar den (wenigen) Aktivisten der sozialdemokratischen Transportgewerkschaften, vor allem der Eisenbahner, die volle Unterstützung angedeihen lassen (wozu bereits einige Arbeiten vorliegen), doch drängte er zugleich auf Distanz zur Vergangenheit. Eine andere Situation ergab sich, als sich eine Gruppe von Seeleuten, die als Flüchtlinge in Antwerpen aktiv waren und soeben mit der KPD gebrochen hatten, an ihn wandte. Ihre Wortführer verfügten über einen legendären Ruf unter den deutschen Matrosen, den sie zum Aufbau eines breiten Vertrauensleutenetzes nutzten. Durch eine besondere Struktur dieses Berufszweigs, der auf engem persönlichen Kontakt beruhte, war hier eine »Arbeitsplatzmoral« jenseits staatlicher Regulierungsversuche ausgebildet (wenn man das so nennen will), die zur direkten Aktion hindrängte, was natürlich den Nationalsozialisten eine Kontrolle sehr erschwerte. (Damit war allerdings diese Berufsgruppe nicht gerade typisch für die Arbeiteropposition oder gar den -widerstand.)

Fimmen war von der ex-KPD-Gruppe so beeindruckt, daß er ihr die verhältnismäßig großen Möglichkeiten der ITF zur Verfügung stellte. Hier glaubte er, die »revolutionäre Seele« der deutschen Arbeiter gefunden zu haben. Es ergab sich eine Annäherung im Zeichen gemeinsamen Mißtrauens gegenüber sozialdemokratischer und kommunistischer Parteipolitik und des alleinigen Vertrauens in die Kraft einer »proletarischrevolutionären Gewerkschaft« (eine Hinwendung zu syndikalistischen Standpunkten, die nicht mit dem Anarchosyndikalismus gleichzusetzen ist).

Daß es dann ganz anders kam, ist bekanntlich den viel stärkeren Gegenkräften zuzuschreiben. Die Zeit des Weltkriegs, in dem die ITF-Kader, darunter am Rande auch Willy Brandt im skandinavischen Exil mangels deutscher Revolution einen kleinen, aber wertvollen Beitrag zur Unterstützung der Alliierten leisten, ist nicht ausgespart – allerdings schied Fimmen kurz vor Kriegsausbruch wegen seiner angeschlagenen Gesundheit bereits aus. Nach dem Krieg fanden nur die wenigsten ITF-Aktivisten einen neuen Platz in der deutschen Gewerkschaftsbewegung, die nicht den erhofften Neuanfang machte, sondern sich in die Kontinuität der Jahre der Weimarer Politik stellte.

Äußerst detailliert, unter Auswertung einer Vielzahl von Archiven über das eigentliche ITF-Archiv hinaus (das in seiner Komplettheit übrigens eine große Ausnahme unter Gewerkschaftsarchiven darstellt), hat Nelles die bisher weitgehend unbekannte Geschichte aufgearbeitet. Die Entwicklung der Organisation wird umfassend unter Einschluß der Bezüge zum sozialen Umfeld und zum politischen Handeln aller Akteure dargestellt (einschließlich der Verfolgungsmaßnahmen durch die Nazis, die sich am konspirativen Geschick der Gruppe trotz ständig angesetzter Spitzel ziemlich die Zähne ausbissen). Sogar eine kleine Verbindungslinie zum Kreis des »20. Juli« ließ sich dabei finden.

Wenn bei Nelles von ITF die Rede ist, sollte man sich allerdings darüber im klaren sein (was vielleicht nicht immer deutlich genug ausgedrückt wird), daß die deutschen Widerstandsaktivisten zwar legitimerweise unter ihrem Namen auftraten. Auf Seiten der ITF hat jedoch fast ausschließlich Fimmen diese Aktivitäten mitgetragen und unterstützt (wobei er allerdings auf den Ressourcen der Internationale aufbauen konnte). Zwar wurde dies von den ITF-Mitgliedsorganisationen gebilligt, doch einen aktiven Beitrag dazu leisteten sie nur in Ausnahmefällen. Gemessen an den Gesamtaktivitäten der ITF in jenen Jahren beanspruchte die deutsche Widerstandsarbeit nur einen kleinen Teil. Doch dies kann das Verdienst der Arbeit nicht schmälern. Nelles ist es jedenfalls gelungen, eine wichtige Forschungslücke zu schließen und eine Reihe von historischen Akteuren dem unverdienten Vergessen zu entreißen.

Pavel Poljan. Ne po svojej vole... Istorija i geografija prinuditel’nych migracij v SSSR [Nicht nach eigenem Willen ... Geschichte und Geografie der Zwangsumsiedlungen in der UdSSR], Moskau (OGI Memorial) 2001, 328 S. Von Wolfgang Schlott, Bremen

Die mit finanzieller Unterstützung der Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung entstandene Forschungsarbeit zu einem der schrecklichsten Phänomene des 20. Jahrhunderts strebt die Lösung von fünf Aufgaben an: 1. Untersuchung der einzelnen Operationen und Etappen der Zwangsumsiedlungen und deren kritischer Betrachtung; 2. Schaffung einer Datenbank zu den Zwangsumsiedlungen in der UdSSR, in der die Chronologie und die räumliche Zuordnung der administrativen Prozesse erfaßt wird; 3. Analyse der Deportationspolitik;

4. Analyse der Geschichte und der Geografie der Zwangsmigrationen in der UdSSR und 5. die historisch-geografische Charakteristik der Ergebnisse der Zwangsmigrationen in der UdSSR und die Klärung ihrer räumlichen Gesetzmäßigkeiten. Bei der Umsetzung seines ehrgeizigen wissenschaftlichen Vorhabens entwickelt Poljan, der auf Grund einiger Publikationen zur Geschichte der Deportation polnischer Bürger in die UdSSR und der Sowjetdeutschen nach Kasachstan als Fachmann auf diesem Gebiet gilt, ein stringentes Begriffsnetz von Kategorien, die die komplizierten Zwangsprozesse beschreiben. So unterscheidet er bei der Zwangsmigration zwischen direkter und indirekter, wobei er den zweiten Begriff als »zielgerichteten administrativen Druck auf die Willensbildung« definiert. Deportation als gewaltsame Migration ist eine der besonderen Formen von politischer Repression, der in der Regel eine gesamte religiöse, ethnische oder klassenrelevante Gruppe ausgesetzt war. Poljan vermeidet bewußt den Begriff ›ethnische Säuberung‹, wie er im Falle der Bürgerkriege in Jugoslawien benutzt wurde, weil er zu ungenau sei und zudem viele Arten von Deportationen keinen ethnischen Charakter gehabt hätten. Deportation als Repression war nach Poljan ein administrativer Akt ohne rechtliche Grundlagen. Ihre ausführenden Organe (Parteiführer und Regierungsmitglieder nebst OGPU, NKWD und KGB) schufen eine Vielzahl von Verordnungen zur Umsetzung eines gigantischen Arbeits- und Zwangslagersystems, den Archipelagi GULAG und GUPVI.

Den doppelten Forschungsansatz, historische Analyse der Prozesse und deren geografische Bewertung, begründet Poljan mit der traditionell hohen und durch ökonomische Zwangsmaßnahmen bedingten Mobilität der sowjetischen Bevölkerung. Das Aufeinandertreffen der Zwangsmigrationen und der Erforschung »klassischer« Migrationen würden einem solchen Ansatz a priori einen geografischen Charakter verleihen. Aufgrund der historischen Verklammerung des sowjetischen Zwangslagersystems der 20er bis frühen 50er Jahre mit den Zwangsdeportationen der nationalsozialistischen Diktatur, die Poljan im zweiten Abschnitt des 1. Kapitels untersucht, differenziert die Arbeit nach inneren Zwangsdeportationen und internationalen Zwangsdeportationen. Im ersteren Fall wird die Geschichte der Deportationen innerhalb der Sowjetunion, von der etwa sechs Millionen Menschen zwischen 1919 und 1955 erfaßt waren, im zweiten Fall die Deportation der 3,2 Millionen sowjetischer Bürger in das Deutsche Reich beschrieben. Die damit avisierte Doppelgleisigkeit der Untersuchung belegt Poljan mit der ausführlichen Kommentierung der Forschungsliteratur zu diesem Thema, dessen wichtigste Protagonisten Robert Conquest (»Soviet Deportations of Nationalities«, London 1960) aus westlicher Perspektive und Aleksander Nekric (»The Punished Peoples. The Deportation and Fate of Soviet Minorities at the End of the Second World War«, New York 1979) aus exilrussischer Sicht waren. Poljan stützt sich bei seinen Untersuchungen auf die nach 1991 in der Russischen Föderativen Republik einsetzende umfangreiche Forschung zur Zwangsdeportation, russische Archive und neuere amerikanische wie auch deutschsprachige Literatur. Besondere Aufmerksamkeit widmet der Autor dem territorialen Aspekt und den historisch-geografischen Besonderheiten der ZwangsdeportationsProzesse.

Im Rahmen des ersten Kapitels untersucht Poljan systematisch alle Zwangsdeporta tionsprozesse aus zwei Zeitperioden. Für die Zeit von 1919 bis 1939 macht er vier Phasen aus: a) die Umsiedlungen und Deportationen von 1919 bis 1929, b) die sog. Kulakenverbannung, c) die »Kulakenverbannung« und die Folgen der Hungerkatastrophen (1932–1934) und d) die Grenzbereinigungen und andere Zwangsmigrationen (1934– 1939). Besonders die Darstellung der Phase d) bringt neuere Erkenntnisse. Sie beruhen auf den Details über die Aussiedlung sog. regimefeindlicher Kräfte aus grenznahen Gebieten (Leningrad), von ethnisch verwandten Gruppen (Ausweisung der finnischstämmigen Bevölkerung aus Karelien) oder von politisch unzuverlässigen Ethnien wie den im Südosten von Sibirien lebenden etwa 130 000 Koreanern, die 1937 nach Kasachstan deportiert wurden.

Unvergleichbar größere Menschenmengen wurden während der Deportationen im Zeitraum von 1939 bis 1953 bewegt. Poljan unterscheidet zwischen den sog. Stichproben-Deportationen (aus verschiedenen sozialen Schichten und aus politisch unzuverlässigen Kreisen wurden willkürlich Menschen verschleppt) aus den von der Roten Armee annektierten Territorien Polens, der baltischen Länder und Rumäniens 1939 bis 1941, den totalen präventiven Deportationen der Sowjetdeutschen, Finnen und Griechen 1941 bis 1942, den »Vergeltungs«-Deportationen der Völker des Kaukasus und der Krim 1943 –1944, den Kompensations-Deportationen 1941–1946 und den ethnischen Deportationen nach 1945 bis 1953. Die zuletzt genannten Zwangsvertreibungen (Litauer, Letten, Esten, Ukrainer) riefen den bewaffneten, zähen Widerstand der Betroffenen hervor, der von sowjetischen Spezialabteilungen oft bis zum Ende der 40er Jahre unterdrückt wurde. Zu den besonderen Verdiensten der Untersuchung gehört die geografische Ortung der in verschiedene Regionen der UdSSR vertriebenen Völker. Tabellen und Umrißkarten (S. 148 f.) geben Aufschluß über die Anzahl der Deportierten in den sowjetischen Großregionen zwischen 1938 und 1958 wie auch die quantitative Belastung von Städten, in denen am Stichtag 1. Juli 1970 Deportierte hausten.

Poljan bezieht auch die formale Rehabilitierung der Sowjetdeutschen, der Krimtataren und der Mescheten in seine Darstellung ein, wobei er die Repatriierung der Kalmyken und der vier nordkaukasischen Völker (Tschetschenen, Inguschen, Kabardiner und Balkaren) detailliert untersucht. Ein Beispiel für die zynische Administration der Stalinisten ist die Auflösung der tschetschenisch-inguschischen ASSR 1944, wodurch die benachbarten Osseten einen großen Landstrich erhielten, der nach der Rückkehr der Inguschen nicht mehr der entstehenden Inguschischen Sowjetrepublik zugeschlagen wurde. Der damit antizipierte ethnische Konflikt brach 1992 aus und führte zu bewaffneten Auseinandersetzungen zwischen beiden Ethnien. Nach dem Zerfall der UdSSR kam es in den 90er Jahren häufiger zu solchen interethischen Konflikten.

Das zweite Kapitel ist dem riesigen Deportationsstrom gewidmet, der sich nach dem Zusammenbruch des Deutschen Reichs in die UdSSR wälzte. Die Nazis hatten nach 1941 3,2 Millionen »Ostarbeiter« für ihre Rüstungsbetriebe und die Landwirtschaft zwangsverpflichtet, nach 1945 wurden 5,4 Millionen Sowjetbürger und deutsche Kriegsgefangene als »Westarbeiter« repatriiert und mußten als Häftlinge meist schwerste physische Arbeit leisten. Poljan beziffert diese gigantische Menschenverschiebung unter schrecklichen Bedingungen mit rund 6 Millionen Poljan für die inneren Deportationsströme, die internationalen Zwangsvertreibungen mit fast 9 Millionen Menschen. An den Folgen solcher irrsinnigen, von Haß und Vergeltung, blinder Wut und wahnhafter totalitärer Politik gespeisten Maßnahmen leide die RFR nach 1991 in vieler Hinsicht. Prägend ist der Verlust an kognitiver Kompetenz auf Grund der Auswanderung von jüdischer und deutschstämmiger Bevölkerung, die gewaltsame ethnische Durchmischung in vielen Landstrichen ohne begleitende Strukturhilfen, die Auslöschung kultureller Traditionen, die kriegerischen Konflikte in Folge der barbarischen Verschiebung von Völkern, ganz zu schweigen von der gigantischen Vergeudung von Arbeitskraft zu Gunsten von schwachsinnigen Großprojekten (Eisenbahnlinien im ewigen Eis, Bau von überflüssigen Stauwerken etc.).

Die Untersuchung listet außerdem in zwei umfangreichen Anlagen detailliert die einzelnen Deportationszüge auf und zeichnet die Chronologie der einzelnen »gesetzgebenden« Akte unter Verweis auf die Archivquellen auf. In zwei weiteren Anlagen werden einerseits die unsinnigen Entscheidungsabläufe bei der Umsiedlung von Kulaken aus dem Kursker Gebiet 1938 dokumentiert, andererseits die Deklaration des Obersten Sowjet der UdSSR vom 14. 11. 1989 abgedruckt, in der die ungesetzlichen und verbrecherischen Repressionsakte gegen Völker verurteilt werden, die der Zwangsumsiedlung ausgesetzt waren.

Die vorliegende Abhandlung stellt einen schier unglaublich gigantischen Prozeß in seinen zahlreichen Verästelungen übersichtlich dar, wobei das Übergewicht auf die Beschreibung der Deportationen und deren Konsequenzen fällt. Die ausgewerteten Archivmaterialien und die deutsch-, russisch- und englischsprachige Sekundärliteratur belegen den Forschungsansatz eindrucksvoll. Die vom Autor beabsichtigte geografische und demografische Evaluation (d.h. die Darstellung der katastrophalen Folgen der verbrecherischen Maßnahmen) sollte allerdings in einer hoffentlich bald erscheinenden deutschen Ausgabe noch einmal überarbeitet werden. Auch die Rechtschreibung der deutschsprachigen Titel müßte dabei an zahlreichen Stellen korrigiert werden. Solche rasch zu redigierenden kleinen Mängel können den überzeugenden Gesamteindruck der Publikation jedoch nicht schmälern.

Hermann Weber (in Zusammenarbeit mit Gerda Weber): Damals, als ich Wunderlich hieß. Vom Parteihochschüler zum kritischen Sozialisten. Die SEDParteihochschule »Karl Marx« bis 1949. Berlin, Aufbau Verlag 2002, 445 S. Rundfunkbeitrag von Karl Wilhelm Fricke, Köln. Moderation von Marcus Heumann[59]

Der Mannheimer Politikwissenschaftler Hermann Weber, meine Damen und Herren, dürfte für die Stammhörer unseres Senders ein alter Bekannter sein. Als Verfasser vieler Standardwerke zur Geschichte der DDR ist sein Expertenwissen besonders in unseren zeithistorischen Sendungen immer wieder gefragt – zumal Weber von 1947 bis 1949 als Student der Parteihochschule »Karl Marx« in Kleinmachnow die Stalinisierung der SED selbst miterlebt hat. 1949 wurde Weber von der FDJ zur »Westarbeit« in die Bundesrepublik geschickt – aber schon kurz darauf vom damaligen FDJ-Chef Erich Honecker geschasst. 1954 wurden er und seine Frau aus der westdeutschen KPD ausgeschlossen, und schon 1955 trat Hermann Weber der SPD bei. Nun hat er unter dem Titel »Damals, als ich Wunderlich hieß« so etwas wie seine Memoiren vorgelegt – damit zugleich aber auch eine wissenschaftlich wertvolle Studie insbesondere über die Frühzeit der SED. »Die Absichten Hermann Webers und die Absichten der europäischen Reaktion, die Absichten, wie sie Hitler einst auch zu verwirklichen versuchte, sind die gleichen. Damit ist Weber nicht nur als Feind der Sowjetunion, als Feind der Kommunistischen Partei, als Feind jeden Fortschritts entlarvt, er ist auch entlarvt als bewußtes Werkzeug der Kriegstreiber. Weber ist in einer Mitgliederversammlung der Ortsgruppe MannheimSandhofen einstimmig aus der KPD ausgeschlossen worden.«

Ein Zitat aus dem KPD-Blatt »Badisches Volksecho« vom 22. September 1954. Hermann Weber gibt das unsägliche Verdikt als Faksimile in seinem jüngsten Buch wieder. Bis zum Parteiausschluß galt er als zuverlässiger Genosse, den die KPD für so förderungswürdig hielt, daß sie den damals 19jährigen 1947 zum Studium an die Parteihochschule »Karl Marx« in Liebenwalde/Kreis Oranienburg delegierte. Hier in diesem EliteInternat der SED, das im Februar 1948 nach Kleinmachnow im Kreis Potsdam umgesetzt wurde, absolvierte Hermann Weber den ersten Zwei-Jahres-Kurs zur Ausbildung ideologisch gestählter Parteikader, den die SED in der Nachkriegszeit eingerichtet hatte. Von den insgesamt 79 Parteihochschülern seines Lehrganges kamen sieben aus dem Westen, aus Mannheim außer Hermann Weber noch Herbert Mies, beide damals Freunde und Genossen der KPD, die sich später für politisch gegensätzliche Lager entschieden. Während Mies Partei-Karriere machte, zuletzt als langjähriger DKP-Chef, und heute vor den Scherben einer gescheiterten Politik steht, wurde Hermann Weber als Universitätsprofessor in Mannheim zum Nestor der deutschen Kommunismusforschung.

Der Titel seines druckfrischen Buches »Damals, als ich Wunderlich hieß« erklärt sich aus dem Decknamen »Wunderlich«, den die SED ihm aus konspirativen Gründen oktroyiert hatte. Grundthema seiner Erinnerungen ist der Wandel vom Parteihochschüler zum kritischen Sozialisten. Seine Intention charakterisiert der Autor selber so: »Mir kam es darauf an, den Versuch zu machen, wie der Historiker gewissermaßen als auch Zeitzeuge beides unter ein Dach bringt, also als Zeitzeuge erlebt zu haben, wie die Spaltung Deutschlands, die Stalinisierung der SED, deren Übergang zur Diktatur, der Kalte Krieg ... wie man das erlebt hat als Zeitzeuge, wie man es natürlich inzwischen sehr gut kennt als Historiker. Ich dachte mir, wenn man beides mal vereinbaren kann, dann ist es eben auch ein zeitgeschichtliches Buch und nicht nur einfach Erinnerung.«

Webers Memoiren sind mithin eingebunden in den zeithistorischen Kontext. Im Umbruch der Parteihochschule »Karl Marx« zur Kaderschmiede spiegelt sich die Formierung der SED zur stalinistischen Partei neuen Typus wider – ihre Denaturierung jenseits aller Hoffnungen auf eine sozialistische Massenpartei mit demokratischen Prinzipien, die sie bei ihrer Entstehung 1946 aus der Vereinigung von KPD und SPD zu werden versprach. Weber schildert diesen Umschmelzungsprozeß faktenreich, akribisch und ohne persönliche Ressentiments: Ein Historiker in eigener Sache. »Es kam mir darauf an, weder eine Abrechnungsschrift zu schreiben noch eben eine Rechtfertigung, weil beides schien mir nicht am Platze und auch nicht nötig, sondern so objektiv wie möglich meine Erinnerungen zu befragen, natürlich auch andere Zeitzeugen ... und eben anhand der Akten, die wir nun erfreulicherweise haben, ein Bild der Situation zu geben.«

Konkret zeichnet der Autor seine politische Sozialisation nach. Jahrgang 1928, in einem proletarischen Elternhaus herangewachsen, der Vater Metallarbeiter, aktiver Kommunist, von den Nazis verfolgt und ins Gefängnis geworfen, wird Hermann Weber mit 17 selber Genosse der KPD. Durchdrungen von antifaschistischer Gesinnung, aber auch fasziniert vom revolutionären Nimbus der Partei, steigt er zum kommunistischen Jugendfunktionär auf. 1946 besucht er einen Vier-Wochen-Kurs an der FDJ-Schulungsstätte Bogensee bei Berlin. Im Juni des gleichen Jahres zählt er zu den Delegierten des I. Parlaments der FDJ, wo er Erich Honecker erlebt, den Vorsitzenden der Freien Deutschen Jugend. Folgerichtig wird er im Jahr darauf für ein Studium an der Parteihochschule der SED für würdig befunden. Nach dem Examen wird er Chefredakteur des »Jungen Deutschland«, der Zeitung der Freien Deutschen Jugend in Westdeutschland, um freilich schon nach kurzer Zeit zum Kulturredakteur herabgestuft zu werden. Intellektuell unabhängig und längst kritisch eingestellt, hatte er zu eigenständig agiert. Wenn es nicht schon in dieser Situation zum Bruch mit der KPD kam, so infolge eines fatalen Intermezzos. Nach dem Verbot der FDJ in Westdeutschland wurde Weber im März 1953 für sieben Monate wegen Verdachts auf illegale Tätigkeit in Untersuchungshaft genommen. An seinem 25. Geburtstag saß er in Essen im Gefängnis. Nicht zuletzt vor diesem biographischen Hintergrund wohl hatte Hermann Weber beim Abfassen seines Buches primär den jungen Leser im Sinn: »Ich dachte vor allem an jüngere Leser, weil es einem ja selber früher so gegangen ist: Das sind ferne, ferne Zeiten. Aber es sind Probleme da entstanden, die sich ein ganz junger Mensch – wenn ich an die Situation der Ernährung usw. denke – gar nicht mehr vorstellen kann, aber die doch wichtig ist, was die politische Situation, was den Ausgangspunkt [angeht] ... Da dachte ich, wenn man dann eben so persönliche Geschichten reinbringt, was ein bißchen auflockert und spannend ist, mit der Dokumentation kommt das vielleicht besser an, als wenn man eine rein wissenschaftliche Untersuchung vorlegt.«

Die Schulungsakademie als Internat der Partei-Elite – den Alltag in Liebenwalde und Kleinmachnow macht Webers Buch anschaulich. Die Kursanten – so wurden die Parteistudenten nach sowjetischen Vorbild genannt – lebten gemeinsam in Drei-BettZimmern, sie wurden verpflegt, gut verpflegt sogar, was in der Not der Nachkriegszeit viel bedeutete, sie konnten materiell sorglos lernen. Die Parteihochschule gliederte sich in Fakultäten für Philosophie, Geschichte, Ökonomie und Grundsatzfragen. Außer den Professoren und Dozenten des Lehrkörpers mit ihren ständigen Vorlesungen und Seminaren erschienen unregelmäßig Spitzenfunktionäre der SED zu Gastvorlesungen –Pieck, Ulbricht, Grotewohl, Ackermann, Oelßner, Hager – ihnen allen, die später in der Politbürokratie der SED hohe Funktionen ausübten, ist Hermann Weber begegnet. Zudem traf er hier auf seine spätere Ehefrau, auf Gerda Röder aus Perleberg, auch sie war Kursantin an der Kaderschmiede, wo sie Geschichte studierte. Einer ihrer Dozenten sollte ihr besonders unvergesslich bleiben:

»Den engsten Kontakt bekam ich zu Wolfgang Leonhard, der in der Geschichtsfakultät inzwischen mein Klassenlehrer war und bei dem es immer besonders munter zuging. Er war zugleich der jüngste unter den Lehrkräften, und er hat uns nicht nur wegen seiner Herkunft und Erziehung imponiert. Vielmehr hat er es uns Anfängern mit seiner in der Sowjetunion verinnerlichten Methode auch ziemlich leicht gemacht ›mitzukommen‹, wenn er erstens, zweitens (oft bis fünftens) – ›»Kern-‹ oder besser ›Merk‹sätze aufzählte.« Wolfgang Leonhard, 1945 als Mitglied der legendären »Gruppe Ulbricht« aus sowjetischer Emigration nach Deutschland heimgekehrt, blieb allen Kursanten unvergeßlich, denn am 12. März 1949 verließ der hoffnungsträchtige Genosse illegal die Parteihochschule. Eine Demonstration gegen den Stalinismus. Über Jugoslawien flüchtete er nach Westdeutschland. Hier erschien sechs Jahre später sein Bestseller »Die Revolution entlässt ihre Kinder«. In Kleinmachnow allerdings beschwor sein Weggang Denunziantentum und Diffamierung herauf. Stalinistische Wachsamkeit war fortan gefragt. Auszug aus einer bei Weber zitierten Resolution von Lehrern und Kursanten: »Wie berechtigt die Mahnung zur Wachsamkeit war, kam noch erschreckender dadurch zum Ausdruck, daß ein Lehrer der Parteihochschule, Wolfgang Leonhard, als niederträchtiger, trotzkistischer Agent der imperialistischen Reaktion an der Parteihochschule sein Unwesen treiben konnte.«

In einer solchen Atmosphäre der Verdächtigung und der Unduldsamkeit mußten Skepsis und Zweifel auch bei Hermann Weber und Gerda Röder bis zum Bruch mit der Partei heranreifen. 1954 wurden sie von der KPD verstoßen. Den einleitend zitierten SchmähArtikel druckte das »Badische Volksecho« unter der Schlagzeile: »Legt den Agenten das Handwerk«. Auf die Frage, ob ihn die deutschen Kommunisten auch heute noch als Verräter diffamieren, antwortet der Autor gelassen: »Ich bin mir da nicht so ganz klar. Inzwischen haben ja doch einige wohl etwas gelernt aus dem Zusammenbruch des Kommunismus. Die werden sicher nicht so weit gehen wie ich, wenn ich sage, das war einmal der Traum dieser Bewegung für eine bessere Welt, und dann wurde es zum Alptraum – für mich jedenfalls – des barbarischen Stalinismus. Aber mancher wird doch gesehen haben, daß das, was er sich früher mal vorstellte, eben nicht gekommen ist, und hat vielleicht dann auch eine andere Einstellung. Aber das ist schwer zu sagen. In Einzelfällen merkt man das. Ich hatte jetzt in Potsdam das Buch vorgestellt, und da tauchte jemand auf, den ich Jahrzehnte nicht gesehen habe, und der hat sich veranlaßt gesehen, eben dieser Verrätertheorie entgegenzutreten.«

Jede andere Haltung wäre grotesk, um nicht zu sagen: lächerlich, denn selten hat die Geschichte einem Historiker so recht gegeben wie Hermann Weber. Sein Buch, mit Sorgfalt ediert, legt Zeugnis davon ab.

Chol-Hwan Kang, zus. mit Pierre Rigoulot: Les Aquariums de Pyongyang. Dix ans au Goulag nord-coréen, Paris, Robert Lafont, 2000, 237 S. Von Klaus-Georg Riegel, Trier

Nordkorea gehörte bis vor kurzem zu den letzten, von der Außenwelt hermetisch abgeschirmten Bastionen des Stalinismus. Erst zu Beginn der 90er Jahre machte die stalinistische Despotie seines Führers Kim Il-sung und Thronerben Kim Jong-il durch Hungerkatastrophen wieder auf sich aufmerksam. Sie kosteten nach Schätzungen der internationalen Hilfsorganisationen ca. 2 bis 3 Millionen Menschen das Leben. Die zu Tausenden zählenden, vor dem Massensterben flüchtenden Untertanen, welche die Grenze zu China, den Yalu Fluß, überqueren konnten, schufen dort ein bisher unbekanntes und von der Weltöffentlichkeit weitgehend ignoriertes Flüchtlingsproblem. Sie berichteten von einer gut gerüsteten und ernährten Armee und Geheimpolizei, welche die innere Sicherheit gewährleisteten. Das Heer der ohne Familie, Nahrung und Unterkunft vagabundierenden Kinder und Jugendlichen werde in abgelegene Kasernen deportiert und dort sich selbst überlassen. Ein dichtes Netz von Denunzianten und Spitzeln und von Konzentrationslagern, in denen zwischen zwei- und dreihunderttausend politische Gefangene vegetieren, sorge zusätzlich dafür, daß keine Hungerrevolten ausbrechen und Ansätze einer freien Zivilgesellschaft im Keim erstickt würden. Nordkorea bliebe ein Armenhaus, das sich aber den Luxus leiste, eine Atomindustrie und ein Raketenprogramm zu entwickeln. Ob das gegenwärtige »Tauwetter« zwischen Nord- und Südkorea wesentlich diesen stalinistischen Anachronismus, ein Hungerregime mit nuklearen Ambitionen, im Kern aufweichen wird, dürfte auf lange Sicht hin eine offene Frage bleiben.

Vor diesem düsteren Hintergrund kommt es einer Sensation gleich, daß ein Überlebender dem nordkoreanischen Gulag entfliehen und einen detaillierten Bericht über das Totenreich der politischen Gefangenen Kim Il-sung’s liefern konnte. Kang Chol-hwan wurde 1977 zusammen mit seiner Familie im Alter von neun Jahren in das Konzentrationslager Yodok deportiert, wo er zehn Jahre bis zu seiner Entlassung um sein physisches und psychisches Überleben zu kämpfen hatte. Seine Großfamilie gehörte in Japan zu der koreanischen Exilgemeinde, die es zu Wohlstand und Ansehen gebracht hatte. Vor allem auf Betreiben seiner Großmutter, einer glühenden Kommunistin und Verehrerin Kim Il sung’s, kehrte die Familie nach Pjöngjang zurück, spendete das beträchtliche Vermögen des Großvaters der Partei und konnte für einige Jahre die Privilegien der Nomenklatura genießen. Kang spricht denn auch in diesem Zusammenhang von einer glücklichen Jugend im Schatten des Großen Führers. Erst die Denunziation und Verhaftung des Großvaters zerstörte diese Kinderwelt. Die Familie des kleinen Chol-hwan wurde getrennt. Die Mutter, eine verdiente Parteiaktivistin, ließ sich scheiden und blieb in Pjöngjang, während der Vater, die siebenjährige Schwester, die Großmutter und der Onkel im Zuge der Sippenhaftung für die ›Verbrechen‹ des Großvaters eine zehnjährige Haftstrafe in Yodok antreten mußten. Den geliebten und als Vorbild bewunderten Großvater hat Kang nie mehr gesehen, dafür konnte er jedoch sein Aquarium (daher der Titel des Buches), auf dem sein ganzer kindlicher Stolz beruhte, zusammen mit ein paar wenigen Habseligkeiten mit ins Lager nehmen.

Der grauenhafte Lageralltag wird in allen Einzelheiten beschrieben. Die Familie hatte zunächst Glück. Ihre ›Verbrechen‹, so die offizielle Version, konnten durch ›Arbeit und Studium‹ ›korrigiert‹ werden. Sie bezog deshalb mit vier anderen Familien eine Holzbaracke und entging damit dem Los der anderen Häftlinge, die als Minenarbeiter Tag und Nacht in den Schächten zu Tode geschunden wurden. Die tägliche Maisration von 400g zwang jeden, der überleben wollte, zu zusätzlicher Nahrungssuche (Ratten, Schlangen, Frösche etc.), um bei extremer Kälte, fehlender Schutzkleidung, permanenter Arbeit, Krankheiten (ohne Medikamente und ärztliche Betreuung) ein Minimum an physischer Widerstandskraft zu entwickeln. Die hohe Sterblichkeitsrate, besonders auch die häufigen Selbstmorde, unter den zwei- bis dreitausend Häftlingen war eine Folge dieser barbarischen Bedingungen. Hunger, Unterernährung, totale Erschöpfung, klirrende Kälte im Winter bildeten aber nur den äußeren Rahmen für die in Lumpen und Fetzen gekleideten Elendsgestalten. Ausführlich geht Kang auch darauf ein, wie er im Laufe seiner Lagerkarriere das Repertoire an psychischen Verhaltens- und Reaktionsformen erworben hatte, um sich den zahlreichen Spitzeln zu entziehen, die prügelnden Aufseher zu täuschen und winzige zusätzliche Rationen aus dem Lagerdepot zu stehlen. Minutiös werden auch die öffentlichen Hinrichtungen geschildert, das Ritual der regelmäßig abgehaltenen Kritik- und Selbstkritiksitzungen notiert und die stumpfsinnige, mit Prügeln und Schikanen gespickte ideologische Schulung beobachtet, die für die Kinder der Häftlinge an einigen Tagen in der Woche inszeniert wurde. Bewegend fallen die Kapitel aus, in denen der heranwachsende Kang über erste Freundschaften und Beziehungen zu gleichaltrigen Jungen und Mädchen im Lager berichtet. Nach seiner Entlassung aus zehnjähriger Lagerhaft (1987), die Kang bitter mit ›Merci Kim Il-sung’ kommentiert, wird die Familie in ein Dorf in der Nähe von Yodok einquartiert, überwacht und kontrolliert. Trotz anfänglicher Erfolge, erste Schritte gesellschaftlicher Aktivitäten zu unternehmen, droht eine erneute Verhaftung, der sich Kang durch eine abenteuerliche Flucht nach China und schließlich nach Südkorea zu entziehen weiß.

Hannah Arendt hat die Konzentrationslager als die Laboratorien totalitärer Herrschaft bezeichnet. Wer das nordkoreanische Experimentierfeld der Inhumanität aus der Nähe betrachten möchte, sollte diesen Bericht lesen. Er gehört sicher zu den klassischen Zeugnissen der condition humaine unter totalitären Bedingungen.

Erwin Könnemann und Gerhard Schulze: Der Kapp-Lüttwitz-Ludendorff-Putsch.

Dokumente. München, Olzog Verlag, 2002. 1137 S.

Von Hermann Weber, Mannheim

Der Kapp-Putsch vom März 1920 war der mißglückte Versuch, die junge Weimarer Republik zu zerschlagen und durch eine Rechtsdiktatur zu ersetzen. Nicht nur der Putsch, auch seine rasche Überwindung durch den Generalstreik der Arbeiter, Angestellten und Beamten, ist seit Jahrzehnten ein Thema der Forschung, inzwischen gibt es darüber eine breite Literatur.

Im Westen wurde der Kapp-Putsch, seine Zerschlagung und der Aufstand der »Roten Ruhrarmee« stets unterschiedlich interpretiert. 1967 z.B. von Johannes Erger beschrieben, ist dieses historische Ereignis von Richard Löwenthal (in der Einleitung zu George Eliasberg[60]) präzise zusammenfassend bewertet. Ebenso wurden auch Dokumente veröffentlicht.[61] Und natürlich hat der Putsch in der Gesamtdarstellung der Gewerkschaften, der Sozialdemokratie oder der Republik einen beachtlichen Platz.

In der DDR erschienen hingegen zum Kapp-Putsch eine Fülle meist propagandistischer Publikationen. Darin sollte sowohl die Richtigkeit der kommunistischen Politik 1920 bewiesen, als auch der Generalstreik wie der Ruhraufstand in die Tradition der SED gestellt werden.

Die erste (natürlich »parteiliche«) Dokumentation legte in der DDR 1971 Erwin Könnemann vor und 1972 wurde seine Dissertation zum gleichen Thema veröffentlicht. Er hat sich dort am meisten mit der Thematik befaßt. Seither ist die Literatur zum KappPutsch erheblich angewachsen. Nunmehr hat Könnemann zusammen mit Gerhard Schulze eine weit umfassendere Quellenedition publiziert. Im Anhang des Buches haben die Autoren in der Literaturauswahl den Forschungsstand registriert, auf den hier verwiesen werden kann.

Der imposante Band mit über 1100 Seiten enthält fast 700 Dokumente. Diese sind chronologisch in drei Abschnitte gegliedert. Zunächst werden die Vorbereitungen des Umsturzes belegt, im zweiten, dem umfangreichsten Teil der Verlauf des Putsches, die Gegenmaßnahmen der Regierung sowie die Haltung der Parteien, der Militärs und der Bevölkerung von Berlin und Umgebung. Zum Schluß werden die Abwehrreaktionen in den verschiedenen Gebieten Deutschlands dokumentiert. Im Anhang ist die riesige Zahl von Archivalien und Zeitungen genannt, die ausgewertet wurden. Eine unwahrscheinliche, Jahre dauernde Fleißarbeit. Außerdem wird das umfangreiche Werk durch ein Schlagwort- und ein Personenregister hervorragend erschlossen sowie durch ein Verzeichnis der geographischen Namen ergänzt.

Hier können nur zwei Besonderheiten erwähnt werden, mit denen Könnemann über die bisherigen Forschungen hinausgeht. Während meist vom Kapp-Lüttwitz-Putsch gesprochen wird, weist er jetzt nach, daß der eigentliche Drahtzieher des Staatsstreiches Ludendorff war. Obwohl dessen Nachlaß für die wissenschaftliche Benutzung noch immer nicht zugänglich ist, kann Könnemann seine Einschätzung vom »Kapp-LüttwitzLudendorff-Putsch« überzeugend belegen.

Noch bemerkenswerter ist die These, daß die Putschisten eine »Wirtschafts- und Militärkonvention« mit Sowjetrußland planten. Danach sollten »über alle ideologischen Gegensätze hinweg auf Kosten Polens weitgehende Vereinbarungen zwischen den russischen Revolutionären und den deutschen Gegenrevolutionären getroffen werden«. Da Ludendorff aber im Februar 1920 öffentlich für einen gemeinsamen antisowjetischen Feldzug mit den Westmächten plädierte, düpierte er Moskau und es kam zu keiner Kooperation. Immerhin zeichneten sich spätere nationalbolschewistische Strategien und Ansätze der Zusammenarbeit zwischen Rechtsradikalen und Kommunisten (wie etwa der »Schlageter-Kurs« von 1923) schon früh ab.

Die riesige Zahl der in diesem Band zusammengestellten Dokumente kann nicht nur neue Einsichten stützen. Natürlich bleibt zu berücksichtigen, daß die Dokumente aus sehr verschiedenen Provenienzen stammen, daher die Bedeutung oder der Wert durchaus unterschiedlich sind. Aber ohne Zweifel wird mit dieser Quellenedition das Wissen, aber auch die Einschätzung des Kapp-Putsches erheblich vorangebracht.

Leider ist die Einleitung von Könnemann sehr knapp gehalten. Zwar kann er damit seine Sicht gut belegen, aber ein Problem bleibt verschwommen. Es geht um die Einschätzung der Radikalisierung der Gegner des Staatsstreichs. Wie kam es nach der raschen Beendigung des Generalstreiks durch die Gewerkschaften dennoch zur Fortführung der Kämpfe durch die Radikalen – bis hin zum Ruhrkrieg? Könnemann bringt (S. 158, Dokument 105) selbstverständlich die erste Stellungnahme der KPD-Führung. Deren politische Bedeutung und Gewicht neben SPD und USPD wird meist überschätzt. Auch in dieser Dokumentation wird die KPD zu stark hervorgehoben. Die Überschrift des Dokuments: »Verurteilung des Putsches durch die Zentrale der KPD« verdeckt ein Problem, denn die KPD war die einzige der drei »Arbeiterparteien«, die mit diesem Dokument vom 13. März 1920 zunächst den Generalstreik ablehnte. Gerade diese Tatsache brachte ja die SED-Geschichtsschreibung mit ihrer Legendenbildung in Schwierigkeiten.

Für die Kommunismusforschung bleibt heute das Verhalten der früheren SEDHistoriographie zum Kapp-Putsch interessant, denn bei den Legenden und Verfälschungen zeigte sich ihre Rolle als Instrument der Politik. Da »die Partei hat immer recht« ideologische Maxime der SED war, hatte diese These auch für die Rolle der KPD im Kapp-Putsch zu gelten. Im »Grundriß« der Geschichte der Arbeiterbewegung von 1963 stellten es die Parteihistoriker so dar, als habe die KPD den Generalstreik seinerzeit mitinitiiert. Und auch 1966 fehlte der jetzt von Könnemann abgedruckte Aufruf vom 13. März 1920 in der Dokumentation der achtbändigen SED-Geschichte der Arbeiterbewegung. Er wurde zwar im gleichen Jahr in der Reihe »Dokumente und Materialien zur Geschichte der deutschen Arbeiterbewegung« (Bd. 7) abgedruckt. Doch während die achtbändige Geschichte in einer Riesenauflage herauskam, erschien diese Reihe fast unter Ausschluß der Öffentlichkeit. Deshalb wäre bei diesem Dokument jetzt ein entsprechender Hinweis nötig gewesen. Auf jeden Fall ist die Überschrift »Verurteilung des Putsches« irreführend. Die Richtigstellung der Rolle Ludendorffs beim Staatsstreich, die geplanten Beziehungen der Putschisten zu Sowjetrußland, das sind neue Überlegungen, die Könnemann hier in ausgezeichneter Weise vorträgt. Doch für die Historische Kommunismusforschung nicht weniger aufschlußreich ist die Haltung der (relativ unwichtigen) KPD zum Generalstreik und zum Ruhrkrieg. Hier fehlt die Interpretation.

Insgesamt ist die vorliegende Dokumentation ein riesiges Werk mit enormer Bedeutung für die Erforschung der Weimarer Republik, für die Geschichte der Arbeiterbewegung und ebenso über den damaligen Rechtsradikalismus. Die große Zahl der Dokumente bietet einen hervorragenden Überblick über die verschiedensten Probleme, die mit dem Kapp-Lüttwitz-Ludendorff-Putsch zusammenhängen, über die Niederschlagung des Staatsstreichs und ebenso über die darauf folgenden Ereignisse (wobei die Versuche der Gewerkschaften für eine »Arbeiterregierung« vielleicht etwas verkürzt behandelt werden). Auch die im allgemeinen gute Erschließung der Dokumente vertieft die Einsichten über diesen Putsch und dessen Folgen. Daher belegt die fundierte Dokumentation, was Erwin Könnemann in der Einleitung völlig richtig anführt: »Der Kapp-LittwitzLudendorff-Putsch ist als ein Ereignis in die Geschichte eingegangen, das beweist, daß es gegen den entschlossenen Abwehrwillen der Volksmehrheit nicht möglich ist, ein autoritäres Regime zu etablieren. Die 1918/19 gewonnene Demokratie im Innern und der Frieden nach außen waren zu offensichtlich von jenen Kreisen bedroht worden, deren

Wirken im Weltkrieg jedermann noch in unheilvoller Erinnerung stand.«

Notizen über neue Bücher

Mary Low & Juan Bréa: Rotes Notizbuch. Deutsche Erstausgabe. Aus dem Englischen übersetzt von Jürgen Schneider, Hamburg, Edition Nautilus, 224 S.

Eine junge Britin australischer Herkunft und ihr kubanischer Lebensgefährte begeben sich nach Spanien, kurz nach Beginn des Kampfes gegen den faschistischen Putsch der Franco-Truppen 1936. Sie schildern uns das Alltagsleben während der Revolution, die ansteckende Lebensfreude der Menschen, die fest daran glaubten, daß es möglich ist, die Welt zu verändern und ein Leben ohne Armee und ohne Grenzen zu gestalten. Das Notizbuch ist Vorlage für Ken Loachs Spielfilm »Land und Freiheit«. Mary Low ist 24 Jahre alt, und sie hat schon viel von der Welt gesehen, als sie mit Juan Bréa nach Barcelona geht: sie ist mit ihm nach Kuba gereist, nach Prag, Wien, Belgrad, Istanbul, Bukarest, London und immer wieder nach Paris, wo die beiden sich kennengelernt haben. Sie verkehren, wo immer sie auch sind, in den Kreisen der Surrealisten und linker Opposi tionsgruppen. In Spanien kämpfte Juan Bréa in einer der internationalen Milizen an der Aragonien-Front gegen die Franco-Truppen, während Mary Low als Journalistin in Barcelona arbeitete. Ihre Augenzeugenberichte sind direkt und farbig, voller Details und Enthusiasmus. Wer Ken Loachs eindringlichen Film »Land und Freiheit« kennt, wird in ihnen die Filmhelden David und Clara wiedererkennen. Viele der Filmszenen sind von diesen poetischen und hellsichtigen Reportagen inspiriert. »Mehrere Monate lang glaubten große Massen daran, daß alle Menschen gleich sind, und konnten diesem Glauben gemäß handeln. Das Ergebnis war ein Gefühl von Freiheit und Hoffnung, das in unserer auf dem Geld beruhenden Gesellschaft schwer vorstellbar ist. Und das ist das bedeutende am Roten Notizbuch. Durch eine Reihe von intimen Alltagsbildern zeigt dieses Buch, wie die Menschen sind, wenn sie sich wie menschliche Wesen benehmen und nicht wie Rädchen in der kapitalistischen Maschine. Niemand, der in diesen Monaten in Spanien war, als die Leute noch an die Revolution glaubten, kann diese seltsame und bewegende Erfahrung vergessen. Sie hat etwas hinterlassen, was keine Diktatur, auch nicht die von Franco, je wird auslöschen können.« (George Orwell)

Mary Low (geb. 1912), Britin australischer Herkunft, Surrealistin und Trotzkistin, Weltreisende, Latinistin. Lebte von 1940 bis 1964 auf Kuba und heute noch in Miami. Weitere Veröffentlichungen: La saisons des flûtes (Gedichte, 1939), La Verdad Contemporanea (Essays, zusammen mit Bréa 1943), Tres Voces (1957), Where the Wolf sings (1994) u.a. Juan Ramón Bréa (1905–1941), Kubaner französischer Herkunft, Surrealist, in Opposition zum Diktator Machado, im politischen Exil in Mexiko und Spanien. 1932 Mitbegründer der kommunistischen Opposition auf Kuba, erneut Flucht nach Europa. 1936 zusammen mit Mary Low in Spanien. 1937 Erstveröffentlichung des Red Spanish Notebook in London. 1938–1939 mit Low in Prag bei den Surrealisten, 1940 Flucht vor den Nazis nach Havanna.

Mirjana Stancic: Manès Sperber. Leben und Werk, Frankfurt am Main – Basel, Stroemfeld, 2003. 687 S. (Nexus. 63).

Zum Buch einige Auszüge aus einer vom Verlag veröffentlichten Beschreibung von Michael Rohrwasser: »Mirjana Stancic, Literaturwissenschaftlerin und Schriftstellerin aus Zagreb, hat eine nicht nur vom Umfang her große Biographie über Manès Sperber verfaßt. Man kann dies einen Glücksfall nennen, denn die Bedeutung des Buches reicht über den überschaubaren Kreis jener hinaus, die sich für das Leben und Werk des Kulturpolitikers, Essayisten, Schriftstellers und Kritikers interessieren, den man zwar mit gutem Grund eine Jahrhundertfigur nennen kann, der aber nie die gebührende Aufmerksamkeit erfahren hat. Erst die Verleihung des Büchner-Preises 1975 und seine Dankrede bei der Entgegennahme des Friedenspreises des Deutschen Buchhandels 1983, in der er vor einem arglosen Pazifismus warnte und womit er in die Mühlen einer bundesdeutschen Intellektuellenfehde geriet, haben ihm zeitweilig ein größeres Publikum beschert. Sperbers Leben spielte sich ab zwischen dem ostgalizischen Schtetl Zablotow (in der Nähe von Joseph Roths Brody), Wien, Berlin und Paris, zwischen der Schweiz, Rußland und Jugoslawien. Zehn Jahre lang hielt er sich im Umfeld von Alfred Adler und dessen individualpsychologischer Schule auf, bevor er sich von diesem Kreis abwandte, und zehn Jahre lang arbeitete er als Parteifunktionär der KPD und Komintern, bevor er hier 1937 den Schlußstrich zog. Aber die Auseinandersetzung mit den totalitären Systemen verfolgte ihn bis zu seinem Lebensende. Die Politisierung Sperbers hat ein Datum: Es ist der 15. Juli 1927, der Brand des Wiener Justizpalastes, der für ihn vor allem das Debakel der österreichischen Sozialdemokratie war. Die Beschreibung nimmt nicht nur eine ›Scharnierstelle‹ in seinen Erinnerungen ein, sondern hat ausstrahlende Bedeutung für seine späteren Essays, die man neben der düsteren Komintern-Saga ›Wie eine Träne im Ozean‹ mit gutem Grund für das bedeutendste Element seines Werks halten kann. Mirjana Stancic hat ihre facettenreiche, detailgenaue und darüber hinaus lesbare Arbeit den Versuch genannt, ›aufs Ganze zu gehen‹, weil sie nicht nur ein Panorama entfalten, sondern unerschlossenes Terrain betreten wollte. Sie erschließt viele unbekannte Dokumente aus dem Nachlaß, darunter Sperbers ›Abschiedsbrief‹ von 1937 an die Pariser Parteifreunde oder die Briefe zur Kontroverse zwischen Hans Sahl und Sperber, und sie zitiert aus den Akten und Dossiers, die sie dem Archivstaub entrissen hat, die von Sperbers Konfrontationen mit jener Internationale der Polizei erzählen, der er in ›Wie eine Träne im Ozean‹ auf der Spur war.«

Hermann Weber, Bernhard H. Bayerlein (Hg.): Der Thälmann-Skandal. Geheime Korrespondenzen mit Stalin, Berlin, Aufbau-Verlag, 2003. 25 Abb. 368 S. (Archive des Kommunismus – Pfade des XX. Jahrhunderts. Band 2).

Unter der Headline Der mißbrauchte Held: »Geheime Korrespondenzen um Stalin und den Thälmann-Skandal« heißt es zu dem im März 2003 erscheinenden Buch in der Verlagsvorschau: »Im September 1928 wurde Ernst Thälmann, Vorsitzender des Zentralkomitees der KPD, durch einen einstimmigen Beschluß eben dieses ZK seines Amtes enthoben. Man beschuldigte ihn, Unterschlagungen seines Hamburger Freundes und Platzhalters John Wittorf der Partei verschwiegen zu haben. Zwei Wochen später wurde ›Teddy‹ durch persönliche und geheime Intervention Stalins trotz nachgewiesener Korruption wieder eingesetzt und später auch voll rehabilitiert.

Die Studien der Herausgeber sowie zahlreiche erstmals veröffentlichte Briefe von Stalin,

Thälmann, Molotow, Clara Zetkin, Walter Ulbricht, Nikolai Bucharin und anderen Personen der Zeitgeschichte belegen, wie Stalin die Thälmann-Legende begründete, um sich die Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands zu unterwerfen. Enthüllt wird ein paradoxes Beziehungsgeflecht: Der zum Charismatiker stilisierte Arbeiterführer war instrumentalisiert worden für eine Kriminalisierungs- und Ausschlußwelle Tausender ›Rechter und Versöhnler‹ in der KPD. Die neue Parteispitze sorgte für die Durchsetzung des von Stalin und Molotow mit Hilfe Thälmanns international inszenierten Linksschwenks und erklärte die Sozialdemokraten zu den Hauptgegnern der Kommunisten. So erwies sich die Thälmann-Episode als Einfallstor des Stalinismus in Deutschland und in der Komintern – ein riskantes Spiel in Zeiten der Bedrohung durch den Nationalsozialismus. In der DDR wurde der Skandal verschwiegen und bis in die achtziger Jahre ein wahrer Thälmann-Kult inszeniert. Die Lektüre der Dokumente und Studien lenkt den Leser auf die Abgründe und Paradoxien verdrängter Geschichte.«

Section VI

Events of Interest around the World

More information and links to the following events or institutions may be consulted via the on-line Communist Studies Newsletter. For other events in 2002 see: The International Newsletter of Communist Studies (2002),15, p. 448-450.

Moscow, Russia 2002–2003

Centre franco-russe en sciences sociales et humaines de Moscou. Seminaires, débats, conférences, Programme 2002–2003. e.a. Colloque sur l’histoire des relations scientifiques entre la Russie et l’Europe occidentale, en particulier la France, du XVIIIème au XXème siècle.

Potsdam, Germany, 15. – 17. 03. 2002

Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Exilforschung

Paris, France, 29. 03. 2002

Seminaire central du Centre d’étude du monde russe, soviétique et post-soviétique

(EHESS). Chaque vendredi de 16h á 18 h 54, Bd Raspail, salle 801

Berlin, Germany, 20. – 21. 04. 2002

»Klassen – Revolution – Demokratie. Karl Marx: Der 18. Brumaire des Louis Bonaparte anlässlich des 150. Jahrestages der Erstveröffentlichung in New York«. Wissenschaftliche Konferenz, Berliner Verein zur Förderung der MEGA-Edition e.V., »Helle Panke« zur Förderung von Politik, Bildung und Kultur e.V. Berlin, und den Beiträgen zur Marx-Engels-Forschung, Berliner-Congress-Center

Moscow, Russia, 23. – 25. 04. 2002

Deutsch-Russisches Seminar zur Methodik der Erschließung von Archivdokumenten und der Schaffung eines wissenschaftlichen Rechercheapparates am Beispiel der SMAD-Überlieferung

Berlin, Germany, 26. – 27. 04. 2002

»Wissenschaftlicher und politischer Umgang mit den Geheimpolizeiarchiven des Kommunismus. Vergleichende Analyse des deutschen und des polnischen Modells«. Centre Marc Bloch, Deutsch-Französisches Forschungszentrum für Sozialwissenschaften in Zusammenarbeit mit der Bundesbeauftragten für die Unterlagen des Staatssicherheitsdienstes der ehemaligen DDR

Lausanne, Switzerland, 6. – 7. 05. 2002

»Questionner le totalitarisme et ses représentations«. Colloque organisé par l’Institut d’histoire économique et sociale (SSP, Unil), Faculté des Lettres (Unil), Département d’histoire, Université de Genève. Sous la direction de: J. F. Fayet, G. Haver, S. Prezioso, Université de Lausanne, Bâtiment central

Potsdam, Germany, 9. – 10. 05. 2002

»Die DDR als Fußnote der deutschen Wirtschaftsgeschichte?« Konferenz, Zentrum für Zeithistorische Forschung

Paris, France, 17. 05. 2002

»Exils et migrations dans l’histoire des communisme«. Centre d’Histoire sociale du XXe siècle, Université de Paris I, Journée d’étude, 9, rue Malher, Paris

Budapest, Hungary, 1. – 12. 07. 2002

»Ethnic Relations and Democratization in Eastern Europe (Secession, Federalism and Minority Rights)«. University of Budapest, CEU Summer University

Budapest, Hungary, 8. – 19. 07. 2002

Global Mappings: Symbolic Geographies Revisited, University of Budapest, CEU Summer University

Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany, 25. – 27. 07. 2002

»Vater Rhein und Mutter Wolga ...« Region, Nation und Gender – Identitätsdiskurse in Deutschland und Rußland. Wissenschaftliche Tagung, Slavisches Seminar, Universität Freiburg i.Br.

Bochum, Germany, 06. 09. 2002

Rosa Luxemburg und die Demokratie nach dem Kalten Krieg. Internationale Tagung an der RUB Institut für soziale Bewegungen der Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Clemensstr. 17-19, 44789 Bochum

San Diego, California, 03. – 6. 10. 2002

Twenty-Sixth Annual German Studies Association Conference

Leipzig, Germany, 06. – 08. 10. 2002

»Jüdische Kultur(en) im Neuen Europa. Das Beispiel Wilna 1918–1939«. Geisteswissenschaftliches Zentrum Geschichte und Kultur Mitteleuropas, Universität Leipzig

Tübingen, Germany, 24. – 26. 10. 2002

»Südostforschung im Schatten des Dritten Reiches (1920–1960)«. Institutionen, Inhalte, Personen, Südostdeutsche Historische Kommission,Tübingen, München. Internationale Tagung der Südostdeutschen Historischen Kommission in Verbindung mit dem Bundesinstitut für Geschichte und Kultur der Deutschen im östlichen Europa (Oldenburg), dem Institut für donauschwäbische Geschichte und Landeskunde (Tübingen), dem Institut für deutsche Kultur und Geschichte Südosteuropas (München) und dem Südost-Institut (München)

Dijon, France, 06. 11. 2002

»Histoire du mouvement ouvrier: possibles et alentours«. Seminaire de l’ICH, de 14 h à 17 h, salle du conseil de lettres

Paris, France, 06. 11. 2002

Journées d’Etudes doctorales. Centre de recherches en histoire des Slaves, Institut Pierre Renouvin, Université de Paris I Panthéon Sorbonne, Centre Panthéon

Geneva, Switzerland, 07. 11. 2002

»Les Archives et l’écriture de l’histoire, Archive und Geschichtsschreibung«. Table ronde, Université de Genève, Faculté des Lettres, Dèpartment d’Histoire Générale, Archives

Fédérales – Schweizerisches Bundesarchiv

Manchester, UK, 15. 11. 2002

»The Comintern and the Colonies«. The International Centre for Labour Studies, in conjunction with the Communist History Network, University of Manchester, Williamson Building

Paris, France, 22. 11. 2002 – 13. 06. 2003

»Epistémologie comparée du discours sur la langue: URSS/ Europe occidentale, années 1920–1930«. Séminaire de Patrick Sériot, Professeur à l’Université de Lausanne, à l’EHESS, Paris, année 2002–2003

Berlin, Germany, 28. 11. 2003

»Von der Neuen Industrie zur New Economy«. Berlin, Bielefelder Institut für Weltgesellschaft

Otzenhausen, Germany, 29. 11. – 17. 12. 2003

»Der ›Fall Sorge‹ – Krieg, Revolution, Friede, Liebe: ein gelöstes oder ungelöstes Geheimdienstproblem?« Deutsch-japanisch-russische Konferenz, Sozialwissenschaftliches Forschungsinstitut der Europäischen Akademie Otzenhausen Union Stiftung e. V., Saarbrücken, ASKO Europa-Stiftung, Otzenhausen, Europäisches Bildungszentrum

Otzenhausen (ebz), Europahausstraße, 66620 Nonnweiler-Otzenhausen

Dijon, France, 17. 12. 2002 – 14. 06. 2003

»Les Archives du XXe siècle«. Séminaire de la Maison des Sciences de l’homme de Dijon. Groupe de travail »Patrimoines du XXe siècle (archives, mouvements sociaux et images)« de la MSH de Dijon, avec le concours de la Direction des Archives de France

Berlin, Germany, 01. 2003

Berliner Gesellschaft für Faschismus und Weltkriegsforschung e.V., Haus der Demokratie und Menschenrechte, 10405, Berlin. Veranstaltungen 30. 01. 2003 – 10. 06. 2003 in der Gedenkstätte Deutscher Widerstand

Berlin-Tiergarten, Stauffenbergstrasse. Halbjahresprogramm

Paris, France, 01. 2003

»Le Caucase entre les empires, XVIe-XXe siècles Impact des enjeux régionaux et des pratiques impériales sur les peuples, les Etats et les sociétés du Caucase«. Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales. Centre d’études du monde russe, soviétique et post-soviétique, Paris, Séminaire organisé par Claire Mouradian, CNRS les 1er, 3e et 5e

jeudis du mois, 10h-12h Paris, 54, bd Raspail – 75006 Paris

Paris, France, 16. 01 – 19. 07. 2003

Groupe de recherche anthropologie des espaces post-soviétiques. Séminaire de travail, le troisième jeudi du mois, La Maison des Sciences de l’homme, 52, boulevard Raspail 75006 Paris

Paris, France, 20. 01. 2003

»Des liens du proche aux lieux du public«. Séminaire ouvert, Programme International de Coopération Scientifique CNRS Franco-Russe

Leipzig, Germany, 02. 2003

III. Ständiges Kolloquium zur Historischen Sozialismus- und Kommunismusforschung, Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung Sachsen, Leipzig

Paris, France, 03. 02. 2003

»Comment regarder le cinéma soviétique?« Le Centre d’études du Monde russe, soviétique et post-soviétique, et l’Observatoire des Etats postsoviétiques de l’INALCO. Table ronde autour de Naoum Kleiman, directeur du musée du cinéma de Moscou. 3 février, l’EHESS, 54 Bd Raspail, 75006 Paris Berlin, Germany, 03. 02. 2003 – 07. 07. 2003

Vortragsreihe und Diskussion zur DDR-Geschichte. Haus der Demokratie und Menschenrechte, Berlin, an jedem ersten Montag im Monat, 19 Uhr, im RobertHavemann-Saal

Paris, France, 07. 02. – 21. 02. 2003

Séminaire du Centre d’études du monde russe, soviétique et post-soviétique (EHESSCNRS). Le vendredi de 16.00 à 18.00, EHESS, 54, Bd Raspail, 75006 Paris

Potsdam, Germany, 12. 02. – 14. 02. 2003

»...zum Beispiel 17. Juni 1953. Die 50er Jahre – Geschichten aus der Geschichte«. Gemeinsamer Workshop Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung, Zentrum für zeithistorische Forschung, Potsdam

Berlin, Germany, 18. 02. 2003

»Von der Last der Erinnerung zur Chance der Versöhnung. Vom Umgang mit kommunistischer Diktaturvergangenheit in Deutschland und Polen«. Diskussion aus der Reihe »Wege zum Nachbarn«. In Zusammenarbeit mit der Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung. 19.00 Uhr

Paris, France, 24. 02. 2003 – 23. 06. 2003

»Les Juifs dans l’Empire russe: un siècle d’évolution, 1860–1940. Culture, politique, exil«. Séminaire, Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales. Centre d’études du monde russe, soviétique et post-soviétique, Paris

Lutherstadt Wittenberg, Germany, 27. 02. – 01. 03. 2003

»Die Zukunft eines untergegangenen Staates. Die DDR als Gegenstand von Forschung, Lehre und der Politischen Bildung«. Konferenz, Institut für Hochschulforschung (HoF), Lutherstadt Wittenberg, in Zusammenarbeit mit der Stiftung zur Aufarbeitung der SED-Diktatur, Berlin, Lutherstadt Wittenberg. Stiftung Leucorea, Collegienstraße 62

Paris, France, 05. 03. 2003

»Goulag – Sources et secrets«. Journée d’étude, Maison des Sciences de l’homme, 54, boulevard Raspail, 75006 Paris, réalisée en association avec le Centre d’Etudes du Monde Russe Soviétique et Post-soviétique EHESS-CNRS.

Bristol, UK, 15. – 16. 03. 2003

»Stalin’s Cultural Heritage«. Organised by the Centre for Russian and East European Cultural Studies (CREECS), Conference, University of Bristol, at the History of Art

Department, University of Bristol 43 Woodland Road, Bristol BS8 1UU

Potsdam, Germany, 18. – 20. 03. 2003

»Militär, Staat und Gesellschaft in der DDR, Forschungsfelder, Ergebnisse, Perspektiven«. Potsdam, 45. Internationale Tagung für Militärgeschichte, Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt (MGFA), Potsdam

Berlin, Germany, 21. – 23. 03. 2003

»Kollegen, reiht euch ein, wir wollen freie Menschen sein! Der 17. Juni 53 und die Folgen«. Konferenz, Evangelische Akademie zu Berlin, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Verein Berliner Mauer e.V., August-Bebel-Institut, Berlin, Haus Schwanenwerder, Adam-vonTrott-Haus

Nanterre, France, 31. 03. 2003

»Mémoires de la Guerre d’Espagne. Mythes, enjeux et transmissions«. Table ronde, Bibliothèque de Documentation Internationale et Contemporaine. Musée d’Histoire contemporaine, Paris, Auditorium du Musée de l’Armée (Hôtel national des Invalides) London, UK, 24. – 26. 04. 2003

»Everyday Socialism. States and social Transformation in Postwar Eastern Europe 1945–

1965«. The Open University Conference Centre, 354-355 Gray’s Inn Road

Leeds, UK, 02. – 03. 05. 2003

»International Trade Unionism in a Network Society: What’s new about the ›new labour internationalism‹?« Conference, Leeds, UK, organised by the Leeds Working Group on International Labour Networking: Miguel Martinez Lucio (University of Durham), Steve Walker (Leeds Metropolitan University), Stuart Hodkinson (University of Leeds). Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, 02. – 05. 05. 2003

»Culture and the State: Past, Present, and Future, Labour Culture, Union Culture and the Culture of Resistance«. Conference, Edmonton, Alberta

Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 10. – 14. 06. 2003

»What’s History Got To Do With It?« 2003 Annual Conference of the Association of Canadian Archivists (ACA)

Leipzig, Germany, 17. 06. 2003

»50. Jahrestag des 17. Juni 1953 in Leipzig«. Aufruf der Arbeitsgruppe an Zeitzeugen zur Vorbereitung der Ausstellung »Ausnahmezustand. Der Volksaufstand am 17. Juni

1953 im Raum Leipzig«, Stadtgeschichtliches Museum Leipzig, Bürgerkomitee Leipzig Moscow, Russia, 21. – 22. 07. 2003

»The Anti-totalitarian Left, Past and Future«. The Praxis Research and Education Centre International Research Conference, Moscow. This conference is being organised to coincide with the re-opening of Moscow’s library of democratic and libertarian socialism, the Victor Serge Library.

Lutherstadt Wittenberg, Germany, 11. 07. 2003 – 13. 07. 2003

»Intelligence and Political Enemies, Intelligence and Terrorism in the 20th Century«, International Intelligence History Association (IIHA), Leucorea, Wittenberg Annual

Conference at LEUCOREA, Lutherstadt Wittenberg, Germany

Santiago de Chile, Chile, 14. – 18. 07. 2003

»Repensando las Américas en los umbrales del siglo XXI«. 51 Congreso Internacional de Americanistas – International Congress of Americanistas

Ottawa, Canada, 07 – 09. 08. 2003

»Reading the Emigrant Letter: Innovative approaches and interpretations«. An interdisciplinary conference to be held at Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada, Department of History

Ljubljana, Slovenia, 08. 2003

13th International Congress of Slavists, University of Ljubljana

Bozeman, Montana, USA, 09. 2003

»Class and Class Struggles in North America and the Atlantic World, 1500–1800«. Conference, Department of History & Philosophy, Montana State University, Bozeman

Salzburg, Austria, 28. 09. – 01. 10. 2003

»Kunst – Kommunikation – Macht«. 6. Österreichischer Zeitgeschichtetag 2003, Institut für Geschichte der Universität Salzburg, Büro des Österreichischen Zeitgeschichtetages

Bern, Switzerland, 01. – 04. 10. 2003

»Das Verhältnis von Individuum und System im Stalinismus«. Internationaler Kongreß, Prof. Dr. Heiko Haumann, Universität Basel, Prof. Dr. Brigitte Studer, Universität Bern

Pennsylvania, USA, 10. – 11. 2003

»The Self as Scientific and Political Project in the Twentieth Century. A Symposium on the Human Sciences between Utopia and Reform« at the University Park campus of Penn State University National Science Foundation and Penn State University, Pennsylvania

Detroit, USA, 16. – 18. 10. 2003

»Labor, War, and Imperialism«. Twenty-Fifth Annual North American Labor History Conference, Wayne State University, Department of History

Vienna, Austria, 23. – 29. 08 2004

»Archives, Memory and Knowledge«. 15th International Congress on Archives, Vienna, Austria, International Council on Archives

Berlin, Germany, 25. – 20. 07. 2005

International Council for Central & East European Studies (ICCEES). Seventh World


Section VII

Survey of Periodicals

American Communist History – A new journal. The »Historians of American Communism« have begun a new journal, American Communist History, in partnership with Carfax/Taylor & Francis, U.K.

More Information on the journal can be found at:


The new journal will initially appear twice a year. The existing HOAC Newsletter will shift from quarterly publication to twice a year. American Communist History will publish substantive articles, essays on documents and archival resources, reviews of media and books, bibliographies, and the full array of material common to research journals. American Communist History will be the impartial, leading journal for scholarship about the history of the Communist Party in the United States and its social, political, economic and cultural impact on its members, on its opponents, and the public at large. The journal will deal with the American party and with the various outside influences which have dealt with its representation, with the controversial folklore that has been engendered about it, and with the many differing views about its antecedents, and its diverse opponents on the left and right. While rooted in the United States, the journal welcomes contributions which are transnational or international in scope. Subscription to American Communist History will be included in HOAC dues, which will rise from $15 for individuals to $25 a year (subscription for non-members will be $56).

EDITOR: Daniel J. Leab. EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD: Wlodzimierz Batog, Jan Kochanowski Pedagogical University, Poland; Bernhard Bayerlein, University of Mannheim and University of Cologne, Germany; Thomas Devine, California State University, Northridge; Melvyn Dubofsky, State University of New York, Binghamton; John Earl Haynes, Library of Congress, Washington, DC; Norbert Finzsch, University of Cologne, Germany; Maurice Isserman, Hamilton College, New York; Edward P. Johanningsmeier, University of Delaware and Temple University; Harvey Klehr, Emory University, Georgia; Alex Lichtenstein, Florida International University; James J. Lorence, Gainesville College, Georgia; Vernon L. Petersen, American University in Bulgaria; Richard Gid Powers, College of Staten Island of the City University of New York; Roy Rosenzweig, George Mason University, Virginia; Steven Rosswurm, Lake Forest College, Illinois; James G. Ryan, Texas A&M University, Galveston; Stephen Whitfield, Brandeis University, Massachusetts. MEDIA

EDITORS: Tony Shaw, University of Hertfordshire, U.K., and Steve Ross, University of Southern California. DOCUMENTARY EDITOR: David C.

Engerman, Brandeis University, Massachusetts. BIBLIOGRAPHY EDITOR: Peter Filardo, Tamiment Library/Wagner Labor Archive, New York University.

SOMA Berichtenblad/ Bulletin du CEGES, no 37 bis automne 2002

The Newsletter of the CEGES/SOMA is a free communication medium published twice yearly. It keeps the reader informed on the new acquisitions of the Centre d’Etudes et de documentation »Guerre et sociétés contemporaines« / Studie- en Documentatiecentrum Oorlog en Hedenaagse Maatschappij and its various activities. From 1997 the strictly chronological limits of the Second World War have been abandoned and the Newsletter has been retitled Bulletin de Nouvelles ‘30-’50/Berichtenblad ‘30-’50. Each odd-numbered issue gives a survey of the latest acquisitions (archives, library, photo archives), outlines the current research projects and scientific activities, announces or gives an account of colloquia, seminars, exhibitions and other events and provides an overview of current events. The even-numbered issues are of a more technical nature. They give a systematic and exhaustive survey of all acquisitions of the past year, of the publications of the researchers and of new research being carried out in the reading room. They also include a bibliography of the publications published during the past year concerning Belgium and the Second World War, providing an essential research tool for students and researchers.

Contact: To receive our free Newsletter 02/287.48.11, fax 02/287.47.10. e-mail: lv.daele@cegesoma.be

Aktuelles aus der DDR-Forschung. Der Newsletter www.stiftung-aufarbeitung.de/newsletter.html

Zusammengestellt von der Stiftung zur Aufarbeitung der SED-Diktatur, Berlin. Erscheint seit 1994. Redaktion: Ulrich Mählert. Aktuelles aus der DDR-Forschung erscheint dreimal jährlich in der Zeitschrift Deutschland Archiv. Er enthält Beiträge (mit einer Länge von maximal einer Manuskriptseite), Hinweise auf Neuerscheinungen, die nicht über den Buchhandel erhältlich sind, Konferenztermine, insbesondere aber Projektmeldungen. Aus Platzgründen können Diplom-, Magister- oder Staatsexamensarbeiten leider keine Berücksichtigung finden.

Contact: Stiftung zur Aufarbeitung der SED-Diktatur, zu Händen Herrn Dr. Ulrich Mählert, Otto-Braun-Str. 70-72, 10178 Berlin, Tel. (030) 23 24 72 07, Fax (030) 23 24 72 10, Email: u.maehlert@stiftung-aufarbeitung.de.

Newsletter of the Historians of American Communism, 2002, Volume 21, No 2. Dan Leab, General Secretary – Ronald Cohen, President – John Earl Haynes, Editor

This issue of the Newsletter contains among the Research Queries And Research In Progress information about the 1930s activities of Michael Ross, the biography of Louis Budenz, a graduate student conference on The Red Scare after 1945 and the Reconsidering the Cold War and a call for papers of The Society for the Study of Working-Class Literature. The Archival column comprises a note on the Paperless Archives and on Bruce Craig’s The Hiss/ Chambers Controversy: Records of the House Un-American Activities Committee. The column about Web Sites, Videos And Documentaries contains notes on Freda Utley, the On-line edition of the British Communist History Network Newsletter, the Communist Chronicles, a Web site founded by Norwegian, Russian, and British historians, the Communism in Washington State-History and Memory project about The Cold War and Red Scare in Washington State. The column Writings On The History Of American Communism redacted by John Earl Haynes lists articles, books, papers, and films relevant to American communism, splinter movements, and domestic anticommunism, some of them with a short commentary, such as: Alexis Albion on Politics and Culture in the Spy Stories of the 1960s, Arnold Beichman on the Gouzenko affair, Marcella Bencivenni about Italian American Radicalism in New York City, Don Binkowski on Leo Krzycki and Polish Americans in the American Labor Movement, Gordon Black on the Unemployed movement in the Early 1930s, Puhle Buhle and Dave Wagner on The Left and Popular Culture (Film and Television), Anthony Carew et al. on The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, George Cerny on the reaction of Maryland Communists to Venon Pedersen’s Communist Party in Maryland, Frank K. Clarke on Cold War AntiCommunism at the Toronto Board of Education, 1948–1951, Donald T. Critchlow and Agnieszka Critchlow on excerpts from Gulag survisor literature that shaped the views on American anti-Communists, Stéphanie Curwick on War and Red Scare (1940–1960), Victor G. Devinatz on Walter Reuther’s affiliation with the Communist Party in the latter half of the 1930s, Joshua B. Freeman on New York’s left culture in the 1940s and early 1950s, A. Gounot on the structures and characteristics of the Red Sport International, 1921–1937, James Gregory on the History of Communism in Washington State, Brian Grijalva on the unemployed movement in the 1930s and 1940s, John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr on the Myth of ›Premature Antifascism‹ concerning Brigades veterans in British covert operations against Nazi Germany prior to the Nazi attack on the USSR, Maurice Isserman and Ellen Schrecker on evidence of espionage from Major Andre’s Boot to the Venona Files, Daniel Kelly about the Life of James Burnham, Roger Kimball on Burnham’s contributions to anticommunism, Michael Kimmage on William F. Buckley and the intellectual origins of ›Populist Conservatism‹, Harvey Klehr and John Earl Haynes Critique on Paul Buhles essays on Communist secret work in the Enclopedia of the American Left, Daeha Ko on the »Rough Beginnings« in the 1920s, Helen Laville on U.S. representations of Soviet women in film, Gerda Lerner on her role in the CPUSA, Andree Levesque on »la culture internationale et l’identitaire communiste au Canada pendant l’entre-deux-guerres«, Timothy McCarthy, Timothy Patrick and John McMillian on the American radical tradition, Erik McDuffie on four black women activists in the American Communist movement during World War II, John McIlroy and Alan Campbell on the »New Revisionism«, and the history of the Communist International and the Communist Party of Great Britain, 1920–1930, on David McKnight and his book on The Conspiratorial Heritage in the communist movement, Marica Mitchell and Thomas Mitchell on the Judith Coplon Story, Joshua Muravchik on the Rise and Fall of Socialism, Dennis Overbye on new details emerging from the Einstein files, Ronald Radosh about Left-Wing Culture and Patriotism, Esteron Reiter on the »Secular Yiddishhait« in left politics, culture and community, Jason Roberts on new evidence in the Alger Hiss Case, Rachel Scharfman on the »The Race- and Gender- Conscious Socialism of Hubert Harrison and Crystal Eastman, 1901–1920«, Bernice Schrank on the Rosenbergs after Venona, Stephen Schwartz on »Communists and Islamic Extremists – Then and Now«, and also on the resurrection of the Novels of Victor Serge, Edward Shapiro in an essay-review of the literature on »The Failure of American Socialism« and Alan Wald on the Strange Communists from the Literary Left.

Contact: Historians of American Communism: Membership/subscription is $25.00 (individuals) and $29.00 (libraries) plus $5.00 for foreign service. Includes subscription to American Communist History, a biannual journal as well as this Newsletter. Send subscriptions to the General Secretary, Dan Leab, HOAC, PO Box 1216, Washington, CT 06793. This Newsletter allows students of American communism, anticommunism, and related topics to share information. Readers are urged to send items of interest, research in progress, queries, and archival notes to: John Earl Haynes, 10041 Frederick AV,

Kensington, MD 20895-3402; e-mail: johnearlhaynes@comcast.net

Section VIII Links-Links-Links. Interesting websites

Osteuropa-Netzwerk, Deutschland www.osteuropa-netzwerk.de

Das Osteuropa-Netzwerk will einen integrierten Zugang zu Datenbanken, Mailinglisten, Veranstaltungen und Sammlungen von Internetquellen (»Linksammlungen«) bieten, die im deutschsprachigen Raum zur Unterstützung der wissenschaftlichen und wirtschaftlichen Kooperation mit Osteuropa erstellt wurden. In der startpage heißt es: »Die in den Sammlungen von Internetquellen präsentierten Hinweise auf Linksammlungen sind nach Ländern/Regionen und darin nach Informationsarten strukturiert und führen Sie in die Angebote der Netzwerkteilnehmer. Somit können Sie gezielt die Linksammlung ansteuern, die für Ihr Interessengebiet und Frageprofil relevante weiterführende Links zu und in Osteuropa auflistet. Netzwerkteilnehmer sind die Abteilung für Südosteuropäische Geschichte der Universiät Graz, baltic consult, Neufeld Wirtschaftsnachrichtendienste, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Osteuropakunde e.V. (DGO), Berlin, Deutsches Institut für Internationale Pädagogische Forschung (DIPF), Frankfurt am Main, Deutsch-Russischer Austausch e.V. (DRA), Berlin, Deutsch-Russisches Forum e.V., Berlin, e-politik.de, München, Netz-Kommunikator für Politik, Gesellschaft, Politikwissenschaft, GESISAußenstelle, Berlin, Außenstelle der Gesellschaft Sozialwissenschaftlicher Infrastruktureinrichtungen e.V., Geisteswissenschaftliches Zentrum Geschichte und Kultur Ostmitteleuropas (GWZO), Leipzig, Institut für Agrarentwicklung in Mittel- und Osteuropa (IAMO), Halle, internationale-kooperation.de, Bonn (im Auftrag des Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung – BMBF), Information Service Accession States, EUQuerschnittskontaktstelle des BMBF (ISA), Bonn, Das Netzwerk für Junge Osteuropa Experten »JOE-List«, Bonn, Osteuropa-Abteilung der Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Osteuropa-Institut, Berlin.

Freie Universität Berlin, Ost-West-Institut, Universität Koblenz, Ost-WestWissenschaftszentrum (OWWZ), Universität Kassel, Südosteuropa-Gesellschaft e.V. (SOG), München, Brücke/Most-Stiftung zur Förderung der deutsch-tschechischen Verständigung und Zusammenarbeit (tschechien-portal | nemecko-portal.info, Dresden), Professur für Politikwissenschaft, insbesondere auswärtige und internationale Politik osteuropäischer Staaten, Universität der Bundeswehr, Hamburg.

Über die im Pool vertretenen Organisationen und Gremien werden Informationszugänge zu Datenbanken zu Osteuropa, Linksammlungen nach Ländern / Regionen, Mailinglisten zu Osteuropa und Veranstaltungen in / zu Osteuropa geboten.

International Contact Group Research in Former Soviet Archives on Issues of Historical Political Economy. www.soviet-archives-research.co.uk Secretary: Mark Harrison

By maintaining this site the International Contact Group aims to promote academic research in the archives of the former Soviet Union, especially by younger scholars, on issues of historical political economy including topics in economic history, economic and political institutions, and decision-making of all kinds, and also research on comparative and international lines. In conjunction with the University of Warwick’s Department of Economics, the International Contact Group disseminates new research through the PERSA Working Papers. The website contains: • Archive Guides (Part 1, Moscow): M. J. Berry and M.J. Ilic, Using the Russian Archives: an Informal Practical guide for Beginners Based on Users’ Experience. British Academic Committee for Collaboration with Russian Archives, in association with the Centre for Russian and East European Studies, University of Birmingham, first published July 1999, revised for electronic publication in December 2002. • Archive Links: Other Web-based information on Russian Archives. • History Links: Links to other Russian History Sites. • Meetings: Forthcoming and recent meetings notified to the Contact Group. • PERSA Papers: Political Economy Research in Soviet Archives Working Paper Series. • Publications by Members of the Contact Group. • Research: Current projects by members of the Contact Group.

Communist History Network Newsletter (CHNN), University of Manchester – les1.man.ac.uk/chnn/

The on-line edition of the Communist History Network Newsletter (CHNN) is a twice-yearly publication concerned with all aspects of current historical research into the life and work of communists and communist parties across the world. The CHNN serves both as a means of contact between researchers active in this area and a forum for sharing the results of new research. The Newsletter includes reports on conferences, recently completed theses and ‘work in progress’, details on new archival findings and other sources, and reviews of new publications in the field. The CHNN is made available in three formats: on-line, as a paper document and via e-mail.

Contents, Issue 13, Autumn 2002: Editors’ introduction. Announcements: The CPGB and Bengali Immigrants. Communist Studies on-line. Pathé Digital News Archive. Seminar Summaries: Comintern Colonial Politics, John Callaghan. Bolshevizing Communist Parties – the Algerian and South African experiences, Allison Drew. The Comintern and the Hidden History of Indian Communism, Sobhanlal Datta Gupta. Research notes: A note on James Barke, John Manson. Features: Schizophrenia at Sachsenhausen, Archie Potts. The Comintern and the Indian Revolutionaries in Russia in the 1920s, Sobhanlal Datta Gupta. Reviews: British Communist Biography and Autobiography, Gidon Cohen. Stephen Woodhams, History in the Making, reviewed by Antony Howe. Matthew Worley Class Against Class, reviewed by Willie Thompson.

Section IX


Echanges Maison des Sciences de l’homme, Paris – Académie des sciences de la Russie Les chercheurs français souhaitant se rendre en Russie pour y mener des projets de coopération scientifique avec des chercheurs de l’Académie des sciences de Russie peuvent solliciter le soutien de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme de Paris. Dans le cadre de son programme d’échanges scientifiques avec l’Académie des Sciences de Russie, la MSH peut obtenir la prise en charge de leurs frais de séjour à Moscou (logement et versement de per diem). Cette aide peut être demandée par tous les chercheurs en sciences sociales, quel que soit leur rattachement institutionnel.

Contact: Pour toute information, contacter Sonia Colpart : colpart@msh-paris.fr ou 0149-54-22-99. Source: Centre franco-russe en sciences sociales et humaines, Moscou Email : obsmoscou@yahoo.fr

Forschungs- und Fördermöglichkeiten der EU für junge Wissenschaftler. Eine Zusammenstellung des EU-Büros Weser-Ems der Universität Oldenburg

Die Europäische Kommission vergibt Stipendien an Nachwuchswissenschaftler sowie unter bestimmten Bedingungen auch an erfahrene Forscher, die ein Forschungsprojekt im Ausland durchführen möchten. Ziel dieser Maßnahme ist die Mobilität von Wissenschaftlern in Europa einerseits und deren Ausbildung durch Forschung andererseits. Es stehen folgende Fördermöglichkeiten zur Verfügung.

Fördermöglichkeiten innerhalb des 5. Forschungsrahmenprogrammes:

1.   Marie Curie Forschungsstipendien - IHP

2.   Japan-Stipendien - INCO

3.   Stipendien für Nachwuchswissenschaftler aus Entwicklungs- und Schwellenländern -


Sonstige Fördermöglichkeiten:

4.   Zusammenarbeit mit Mittel- und Osteuropa - Tempus/Phare

5.   Forschungsstipendien für Wissenschaftler aus den neuen unabhängigen Staaten derfrüheren Sowjetunion - INTAS

6.   Hochschulkooperationsprogramm mit Lateinamerika - Alfa II

7.   Hochschulkooperationsprogramm mit China

8.   Mobilitätsförderung für Doktoranden - Sokrates/Erasmus

9.   Mobilitätsförderung von Graduierten - Leonardo da Vinci

10.Forschungspreise der EU

11.Weitere Fördermöglichkeiten

Portal: www.eu-buero.uni-oldenburg.de/frp-jungewissensch.shtml


[1] INCOMKA – International Committee for the Computerization of the Comintern Archives

[2] Including 3 special Comintern Institutions.

[3] From Cyrillic Russian to Latin Alphabet English.

[4] Of these 167 persons, 32 are U.S. Library of Congress staff and 134 are not, 70 are resident in the USA (including LoC staff) and 97 are resident outside the USA, with a total of 54 countries represented.

[5] Translated in English by Albin Pontet. This article was first published in: Cahiers d’histoire, Revue d’histoire critique, n°86 (2002) [Cahiers d’histoire, 64 boulevard Blanqui, 75013 Paris, France]. This contribution is the result of a collective reflection with Pascal Carreau (responsible of the PCF archives), Catherine Bensadek (librarian), Lucie Fougeron (responsible of the posters database), Rosine Fry (University of Bourgogne), Cécile Jacquet and Tania Régin (who participated in the elaboration of the database) and Serge Wolikow (Professor of History at the University of Bourgogne, UMR CNRS 5605). I sincerely thank Albin Pontet and also Amelie and Simon Wade. 6 www.internatif.org/EspMarx/BMP/IML%20WORD/Annees.htm [consulted the 14/ 02/2002].

[6] Kratkij putevoditel': fondy i kollekcii, sobrannye Central'nym partijnym archivom / [Sost.: Amiantov, Ju. N. ...]; Gos. Archivnaja Sluzba Rossijskoj Federacii, Rossijksij Centr Chraneneija i Izucenija Dokumentov Novejsej Istorii, Moskva, Izd. "Blagovest", (1993), XIII + 200 pp. (Spravocno-informacionnye materialy k dokumental'nym fondam RCChIDNI. 1), p. 102. To have a complete view concerning the PCF see also. RGASPI 517/1, André Marty (517/2, 61 files); Maurice Thorez (517/3, 34 files) and documents about World War II (517/4, 16 files). www.iisg.nl/~abb/abb_b12.html [consulted the 14/02/2002].

[7] Haupt, Georges: L’historien et le mouvement social, Paris, Maspero, 1980, p.18.

[8] X FIEALC – Congreso Mundial de Latinoamericanistas y Caribólogos, Moscow, June 25–29 2001)

[9] Many years ago, one of the authors of this review (Lazar Kheyfetz) was quite surprised by the «unlimited fantasies« of R. Salazar describing in his book the activity of a mysterious Russian agent in Mexico named «Natasha Michaelova« in 1920 (!); this fact led L. Kheyfetz to doubt about some other parts of Salazar’s study. And only after some years had passed, after reading the memoirs written by Manuel Gomez (Charles Phillips) and thanks to a scrupulous research of the Comintern archive documents which contain information about Gomez’ wife, Natalia Michailova,

[10] During a long time many historians were referring to E. Ravines’ memoirs «The Yennan way« (which are not absolutely reliable); this book was practically an exclusive source for description of the mechanism of functioning of the Comintern’s supreme bodies in Moscow and of the South American Secretariat of the ECCI in Buenos Aires and Montevideo.

[11] Among the most fruitful studies of the Latin American Communism made by the Soviet Marxists we should name first of all the works by A. Zorina, V. Ermolaev, S. Semenov, B. Koval and A. Shulgovsky that were published during the 1940s – 1980s.

[12] An exception is the collection of documents of the Communist Party «Libro Rojo« published by the Venezuelan government already in the 1930s, yet it should be noted that the originally planned goal of «disclosure of subversive communist activity« and marked tendentiousness in selection of materials decrease seriously the scientific significance of the book.

[13] The first attempt to organize such a conference was made thanks to the initiative of some Russian scholars who convoked a «Round Table« in the journals »Latinskaya Amerika« and »Clio«. Not only Russians reports but also some western researchers like B. Carr, E. Ching, D. Spencer and A. Saborit made public the results of their studies; unfortunately, many of them could only send the texts of the reports by mail.

[14] Unfortunately not all the scientists studying the history of Comintern and its national sections and willing to take part in the Congress had the opportunity to come to Moscow (we didn’t see Barry Carr /Australia/, Jussi Pakkasvirta /Finland/, Jean Ortiz /France/, Rina Ortiz, Antonio Saborit, Enrique Arriola Woog, Ricardo Melgar Bao /Mexico/, Gary Tennant /Ireland/, Elisabeth Burgos /Venezuela/, Christine Hatzky (Germany). We don’t give up the hope that the next meeting will be more representative.

[15] From July to October 1916 Middle Asia and Kasachstan was the site for revolutionary and nationalist upraisings against Tsarism

[16] RGASPI (Russian State Archive of Social and Political History), Moscow, fond 5, inventory 1, file 2920, sheet 50-53-back-56.

[17] Ibid, sh. 26a-back-28, 29-49, 57-109; fond 17, inv. 84, file 88, sh. 1-6; file 89, sh. 1-10; file 90, sh. 1-102; fond 589, inv. 3, file 15599, vol. 4, sh. 131; T. R. Ryskulov: [Collected Works in Three Volumes], Almaty, 1997-1998, p. 182-187, 411-412; Vladimir Ilyich Lenin: [Biographical Chronic.

[18] -1924], Vol. 8, 1977, p. 575, 589.

[19] V. I. Lenin: [Complete Works], vol. 41, p. 435.

[20] RGASPI, fond 5, inv. 3, file 3, sh. 14-15, 21-26; fond 489, inv.1, file 14, sh. 89-100.

[21] Ibid, fond 589, inv. 3, file 15599, vol. 3, sh. 65; vol. 4, sh. 132-134.

[22] Ibid, fond 79, inv. 1, file 160, sh. 1-1 back; S. Beisembaev, S. Kulbaev: Turar Ryskulov, AlmaAta, 1974, p. 21. See also about T. Ryskulov: V. M. Ustinov: [Service to the People], Alma-Ata, 1984; id.: [The Vice-Chairman of the Sovnarkom of the Russian Federation], Alma-Ata, 1988; id. Turar Ryskulov, Almaty, 1996; Sherkhan Murtazaev: [Fiery Arrow], Moscow, 1982; id. [Fiery Arrow. The Novel Trilogy], Alma-Ata, 1988; T. R. Ryskulov: [Selected Works], Alma-Ata, 1984. 23 RGASPI, fond 544, inv. 2, file 9, sh. 12.

[23] Ibid, sh. 20.

[24] E. D. Stasova: [Memoirs], Moscow, 1969, p. 109

[25] A. I. Mikoian: [On the Way of Struggle], vol. I, Moscow, 1971, p. 586.

[26] RGASPI, fond 544, inv. 2, file 4, sh. 15; fond 61, inv. 1, file 10, sh. 7.

[27] [Bolshevist Leaders. Correspondence 1912-1927. Collected Documents], Moscow, 1996, p. 252. 29 Ibid, p. 255-256.

[28] [Twelfth Congress of the RCP (B), April 17-25, 1923. Shorthand report], Moscow 1968, p. 510515.

[29] RGASPI, fond 495, inv. 18, file 228, sh. 148. See also: G. M. Adibekov, E. N. Shakhnazarova, K. K. Shirinia: [The Comintern's Organizational Structure. 1919-1943], Moscow, 1997, p. 72-74. 32 RGASPI, fond 17, inv. 9, file 1946, sh. 222 back; fond 495, inv. 65a, file 11021, sh. 6; fond 589, inv. 3, file 15599, vol. 4, sh. 214.

[30] Ibid, inv. 152, file 24, sh. 30.

[31] Ibid, file 31, sh. 9-11, 20; file 33, sh. 1-69; file 37, sh. 19

[32] . Ibid, file 31, sh. 8, 24, 43-44, 48, 58-61, 66, 130-138; file 32, sh. 1-8, 180, 248-264, 269-272; file 33, sh. 70-116, 129-222; file 34, sh. 28-29; file 39, sh. 1, 7-35, 52-back-53.

[33] . Ibid, file 33, sh.139-141, 203-204.

[34] . Ibid, file 31, sh. 26-30. 38 . Ibid, file 37, sh. 43-44.

[35] S. K. Roshchin: [A Political History of Mongolia 1921-1940], Moscow, 1999, p. 128. See also: [The Role and Importance of the Help of the International Communist Movement in the Formation and Development of the MPRP], Moscow-Ulhan-Bator, 1978, p. 143, 146, 155; [Elbek-

[36] Apolônio de Carvalho: Vale a pena sonhar, Rio de Janeiro, Rocco, 1997.

[37] José Nilo Tavares e.a.: Novembro de 1935. Meio século depois, Petr´polis, Vozes, 1985, 145161.

[38] A Luta de classe, Rio de Janeiro, 33, november 1936.

[39] A Luta de Classe, Rio de Janeiro, no. 33, november 1936.

[40] Arquivo Edgar Leuenroth, UNICAMP, microfilm received by RCCHIDNI, Moscow. 48 The May-events in Barcelona , the armed uprising of the pro-communist against the mainly anarcho-syndicalist and »poumist« forces were described by George Orwell in his eyewitnessaccount: My Catalunya www 49 DEOPS-SP, no. 1698 and 509 www.

[41] Folha de São Paulo, 13.7.1988, 18.

[42] Arquivo Edgar Leuenroth, UNICAMP Microfilm received by RCCHIDNI, Moscow.

[43] Cosrow Chaqueri, Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris. E-mail: shakeri@ehess.fr

[44] See Russia and the West in Iran, Ithaca, NY, 1948, p. 224; for a detailed rebuff, see C. Chaqueri, vol. 4, Introduction.

[45] Rad: »Dar jostojou-ye Arabali«, Negah-e no, no 8, 2002.

[46] For details, see C. Chaqueri, »Sultanzade: The Forgotten Revolutionary Theoretician of Iran: A Biographical Sketch,« Iranian Studies, 2-3 (1984); for Sultanzade’s works see Historical Documents: The Workers, Social Democratic, and Communist Movement in Iran, ed. C. Chaqueri (Florence and Tehran, 1969-1994), vols. 4, 8, 20; Le Mouvement Communiste en Iran (Florence, 1979) and Sultanzade, The Forgotten Theoretician (Life and Works), ed. C. Chaqueri (Paris, 1985).

[47] For the Jangali revolutionary movement in Iran, see C. Chaqueri, The Soviet Socialist Republic of Iran. Birth of the Trauma, Pittsburgh University Press, Pittsburgh, 1995.

[48] Based on the questionnaire (»Anket«) filled out in 1936 and his »Avtobigrafia« written in the same year for the Comintern in RGASPI (Russian State Archive for Social and Political History, Moscow ), 495/217/387.

[49] The Comintern operative in Iran Shoureshian claims that he had two other pseudonyms, namely, Arabali and Mohammad-Ali. Farzanheh, Parvandeh, p. 160. These two are not mentioned by him in his Comintern files!

[50] Based on his autobiography written for the archives of the Comintern cadres, RGASPI, 495/217/199, pp. 59-61; ibid. 494/1/495, pp. 219ff.; Kambaksh Secret Report to the NKVD and the Comintern, RGASPI, 495/74/194.

[51] In his biographical note on Kambakhsh written for the archives of the Comintern cadres, Kamran states that he had been recruited in Qazvin into the ICP by Kambakhsh in the first place. Kamran (Aslani), »A. Kambakhsh,« RGASPI, 495/217/4, p. 133.

[52] For the ICP accounts of the strike, see Paykar (no. 9, 1931, and Nahzat (no. 1, 1932), repr. in Chaqueri, Historical Documents XXII and VI, respectively.

[53] The NKVD Report to Dimitrov puts his year of finishing the KUTV as 1933.

[54] Report to Dimitrov by I. Kozlov, RGASPI, 495/74/192.

[55] RGASPI, 495/74/192.

[56] Kambaksh Secret Report to the NKVD and the Comintern, RGASPI, 495/74/194, p. 34.

[57] Siehe zur neueren biographischen Forschung über den betreffenden Personenkreis: Karin Hartewig: Zurückgekehrt. Die Geschichte der jüdischen Kommunisten in der DDR, KölnWeimar- Wien, Böhlau, 2000; Mario Keßler: Exilerfahrung in Wissenschaft und Politik. Remigrierte Historiker in der frühen DDR, Köln-Weimar-Wien, Böhlau, 2001.

[58] Gegen Vergessen. Für Demokratie 34-35, Dezember 2002. Mit freundlicher Genehmigung des Autors.

[59] Gesendet am 25.3.2002. Deutschlandradio. Politische Literatur. Mit freundlicher Genehmigung des Autors.

[60] George Eliasberg: Der Ruhrkrieg von 1920. Bonn 1974.

[61] Etwa in Bd. 2 der „Quellen zur Geschichte der Gewerkschaftsbewegung im 20. Jahrhundert“, Köln 1985, bearbeitet von Michael Ruck.

Inhalt – JHK 2003


Eventuell enthaltenes Bildmaterial kann aus urheberrechtlichen Gründen in der Online-Ausgabe des JHK nicht angezeigt werden. Ob dieser Beitrag Bilder enthält, entnehmen Sie bitte dem PDF-Dokument.