<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { margin-top: 0 ; margin-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>Re: RES: a trip to North Korea</title></head><body>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>Brad DeLong wrote,<br>
<br>
> I thought that the CWIHP had new information about Commie
germ<br>
> warfare charges--internal Kremlin documents saying that
they were<br>
> false...<br>
<br>
Nonsense. It was U.S. scientists who documented
the germ warfare<br>
conducted by "United Nations" forces, and who published
their findings in a<br>
U.S. journal (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, if memory serves),
and who<br>
were prosecuted for that publication by the Eisenhower U.S.
government. Brad<br>
is just doing as he always does, regurgitating any anticommunist
claim no</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>matter how groundless...</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br>
Ken Lawrence</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>http://cwihp.si.edu/cwihplib.nsf/16c6b2fc<span
></span>83775317852564a400054b28/12e1d74dd8ecb7da<span
></span>8525677d00533461?OpenDocument</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><font face="Times New Roman" size="+1" color="#800000">Subject:
New Russian Evidence on the Korean War Biological Warfare
Allegations: Background and Analysis, by Milton
Leitenberg</font><font face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><b><br>
Author:</b> Milton Leitenberg<b> Date:</b> 03/01/99<b><br>
Origin:</b> CWIHP Bulletin<b> File Size:</b> 94007</font></div>
<div><font face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><br></font></div>
<div><font face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">...<font
size="+1"><b> The Soviet Documents</b><br>
Twelve Soviet-era documents (or excerpts from them) on the BW
controversy have become available. The first, dated 21 February 1952,
appears to be no more than a fragment. All the rest date from 13
April 1953 to 2 June 1953, in the months following Stalin's death.
Obviously all the rest-decisions and communications relating to the
BW allegations between 21 February 1952 (or earlier) and April
1953-is still missing. It is also evident that other relevant
documents dating from late April are missing from the available
material.<br>
<i>The first document</i> (21 February 1952), a message from Mao to
Stalin, states that the US has used BW, delivered by aircraft and
artillery.<br>
<i>The second document</i> (13 April 1953) is a memo to Lavrenti
Beria from Glukhov of the MVD, formerly a Soviet advisor to the DPRK
Ministry of Public Security. It states that the Chinese government
informed the North Korean government in February 1952 that the US was
using BW in Korea and in China, and that China would publicize this.
The North Koreans insisted on being the first to make a statement,
and "the North Koreans, with the assistance of our advisors,
created false areas of exposure." In advance of the ISC's
arrival, "[t]wo false areas of exposure were prepared."
Cholera bacteria were obtained from corpses in China. So that the ISC
delegation would not remain on site overly long, "an unworkable
situation was created for them in order to frighten them and force
them to leave:" This was achieved by Soviet advisors with the
KPA setting off explosions near the location of the ISC.<br>
<i>The third document</i> (14 April 1953) is a memo to Beria from Lt.
Selivanov, an advisor to the Military-Medical Department of the
Korean People's Army until April 1952. He informs Beria that he had
been the one to help North Korean medical personnel to compose the
statement in 1951 alleging that the US had spread smallpox. He says
that the North Koreans felt that the BW allegations were necessary to
compromise the Americans, and that they had asked three Soviet
advisors, Smirnov, Malov, and himself, to help in "creating
sites of infection," which they feared they had not succeeded in
doing before the arrival of the lawyer's commission. (No mention is
made of the Chinese "Commission" which should be present in
North Korea at this time.) Selivanov also reports that he responded
in March 1952 to a query from Gen. Shtemenko, Chief of Staff of the
Soviet Armed Forces, and from the Soviet General Staff, that he
reported that there have been no outbreaks of plague and cholera in
China,<i> no</i> examples of bacteriological weapons, and that if any
were found, they would be sent to Moscow immediately.<br>
<i>The fourth document</i> (18 April 1953) is a memo to Beria from
Lt. Gen. Razuvaev, the Soviet ambassador to the DPRK and Chief Soviet
Military Advisor to the KPA. Razuvaev claims that when the North
Korean government consulted him about the BW allegation information
they had received from China, Soviet advisors had been unable to
confirm the information and that he informed Kim Il-Sung of this, but
nevertheless the North Koreans and Chinese went ahead with their
public statements. He says that General Shtemenko did not inform the
Soviet Foreign Ministry of the information that he received. Despite
Razuvaev's skepticism about the Chinese material, the North Koreans
pressed him for advice, and with the cooperation of Soviet advisers a
plan was worked out for action by the Ministry of Health. False
plague regions were created, burials of bodies of those who died and
their disclosure were organized, measures were taken to receive the
plague and cholera bacillus. The adviser of the DPRK MVD [Ministry of
Internal Affairs] proposed to infect with the cholera and plague
bacilli persons sentenced to execution.</font></font><font size="+1"
color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font face="Times New Roman" size="+1" color="#000000">Further
details are provided as to what was done in advance of the arrival of
the commission of jurists and the ISC. Razuvaev also adds that a
Soviet investigation of Chinese allegations that the US was using
poison gas disproved the charges.<br>
<i>The fifth document</i> (21 April 1953) is a memo from Beria to
Malenkov and to the CPSU CC Presidium. It states that Smirnov and
Glukhov had reported in March 1952 to USSR Minister of State Security
S.D. Ignatiev "that with the help of General . . . Razuvaev two
false regions of infection were simulated for the purpose of accusing
the Americans of using bacteriological weapons in Korea and
China," and that "Ignatiev did not report this memorandum,
which had special political importance, to anyone. As a result, the
Soviet Union suffered real political damage in the international
arena. I discovered this document in the archive of the MGB USSR...at
the beginning of April 1953."<br>
<i>The sixth document</i> (21 April 1953) is from V. Molotov to the
CPSU CC Presidium and is identifiably incomplete. It begins with the
opening line: "[On] 22 February 1952, the DPRK received an
intentionally false statement from the Chinese about the use of
bacteriological weapons by the Americans." It further suggests
that the Soviet embassy in North Korea may have informed Vyshinsky
that the BW allegations were not true. Molotov proposes that the
Central Committee direct Vyshinsky, now in late April 1953, that
"it is inadvisable to show interest in discussing this question
or even more in 'fanning the flames' of this question" at the
ongoing session of the UN General Assembly. (This is, however,<i>
after</i> the USSR had already offered to withdraw their BW
allegations in the UN Political Committee on 7 April 1953, a date
that<i> preceeds</i> any of the documents in this latter
group.)</font><font size="+1" color="#000000"><br>
<font face="Times New Roman"><i>The seventh document (2</i> May 1953)
is the message to Mao Zedong, brusquely informing the Chinese leader
that the USSR and CPSU had been "misled" (implicitly by the
Chinese themselves) about the "false" and
"fictitious" charges of BW use that had been lodged against
the Americans, and recommending that the international anti-American
campaign on the subject be immediately dropped.<br>
<i>The eighth document</i> (undated, but subsequent to reports by
Glukhov and Smirnov indicated as having been given on April 24) is a
protocol of the CPSU CC Presidium, recommending that "for
unauthorized actions of a provocatory character which caused
significant damage to the interests of the state," Gen. Razuvaev
be relieved of his ambassadorship, stripped of rank, and prosecuted;
Ignatiev to be dropped from the CPSU CC and investigated; the USSR to
draft its subsequent position on the allegations of BW use by the US,
and to prepare a report on the subject to be sent to Mao Zedong and
Kim Il Sung.<br>
<i>The ninth document</i> is a telegram to Molotov reporting on the
conversation of the Soviet ambassador in Beijing with Mao Zedong and
Zhou Enlai on 12 May 1953. Mao blames the allegations on reports from
Chinese front line commanders in Korea, whose authenticity it would
now be difficult to verify, and says that "[i]f falsification is
discovered, then these reports from below should not be
believed." (The suggestion that the elaborate preparations and
falsification-a BW "Potemkin village"-the extraordinary
media campaign, the international commissions, etc. could have been
organized "from below" in<i> either</i> the China or the
USSR governed by Mao and by Stalin is highly implausible.)<br>
<i>The tenth document</i> (17 May 1953) concerns the CPSU's internal
investigations of Ignatiev. Ignatiev claims that he showed the
message from Glukhov and Smirnov to Stalin in July or August 1952,
and that since he believed "the published material," he did
not believe the information contained in their message and "did
not attach any significance" to it.</font><br>
<font face="Times New Roman"><i>The eleventh document</i> (1 June
1953) is the telegram to Molotov from the Soviet ambassador in North
Korea on the discussions with the Secretary of the DPRK Central
Committee, Pak Chang-ok, who "expressed great surprise at the
actions and positions of V.N. Razuvaev. . . . We were convinced that
everything was known in Moscow. We thought that setting off this
campaign would give great assistance to the cause of the struggle
against American imperialism. In his turn, Pak Chang-ok did not
exclude the possibility that the bombs and containers were thrown
from Chinese planes, and [that] there were no
infections."</font></font></div>
<div><font face="Times New Roman" size="+1" color="#000000"><i>The
twelfth document</i> (2 June 1953) indicts Ignatiev, the former
Minister of State Security of the USSR.</font><font size="+1"
color="#000000"><br>
<font face="Times New Roman"><b>What Remains to be Disclosed?</b><br>
A great deal still remains to be revealed, including:</font><br>
<font face="Times New Roman">1. All of the Chinese documentation,
which would demonstrate just how the entire affair was decided upon,
organized, and carried out.<br>
2. The Soviet documentation between 21 February 1952 and 13 April
1953, and even before the February 21 cable from Mao to Stalin. These
documents would establish exactly whose idea the false allegations
were-the USSR's or China's-and provide a more detailed understanding
of the nature and degree of the technical assistance that Soviet
advisers contributed to the entire process.<br>
The available documents imply a Chinese and then North Korean
initiative, with Soviet personnel as collaborators. This should
remain an open question until it is possible to understand the
operations of the USSR Ministry of State Security at the time, its
collaboration with analogous Chinese government organs, their
elaboration of "active measures" and so forth. It is clear
that there is a chain in the allegations that even preceded the onset
of the Korean War, although the decision to charge the U.S. with
using BW could only have been made in the context of the war. The
all-important question is the degree of consultation and cooperation
in the area of propaganda between the USSR and China in the period
not covered by the documents-between February 1952 and April 1953,
and while Stalin was alive.</font></font><br>
<font face="Times New Roman" size="+1" color="#000000"></font></div>
<div>-- <br>
<br>
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
--<br>
"Now 'in the long run' this [way of summarizing the quantity
theory of money] is probably true.... But this <br>
long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. **In the long
run** we are all dead. Economists set themselves too easy, too
useless a task if in tempestuous seasons they can only tell us that
when the storm is long past the ocean is flat again."<br>
<span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span
> <span
></span> --J.M. Keynes<br>
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
--<br>
J. Bradford DeLong; Professor of Economics, U.C. Berkeley;<br>
Co-Editor, Journal of Economic Perspectives.<br>
Dept. of Economics, U.C. Berkeley, #3880<br>
Berkeley, CA 94720-3880<br>
(510) 643-4027; (925) 283-2709 phones<br>
(510) 642-6615; (925) 283-3897 faxes<br>
http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/<br>
<delong@econ.berkeley.edu></div>
</body>
</html>