Mykola Hlushchenko and Vasyl Perebyinis. Agent Lessons

The archives of the Foreign Intelligence Service of Ukraine contain materials showing how the nkvd of the ussr tried to use well-known Ukrainian artists abroad to carry out its operative actions against emigration centers, monitor individual figures of the national liberation movement, and conduct information and propaganda campaigns. Previously unknown declassified documents reveal how the chekists played on weaknesses, ambitions, certain character traits, financial and family problems of representatives of the artistic community in order to persuade them to cooperate, create a situation of dependence, and force them to carry out the tasks assigned to them.

Ukrainian Flavor in Montmartre

In the 1920s and 1930s, Paris became one of the centers that attracted representatives of Ukrainian political and cultural-creative emigration. According to materials from the letter-coded case “Ukrainian Emigration in France”, for a certain period of time, the State Center of the Ukrainian People’s Republic in exile, and the Society of Former Soldiers of the UPR’s Army, the Association of Ukrainians in France, the Ukrainian People’s Union in France, and other organizations, the First Ukrainian Printing House publishing house, and the magazines “Ukrainske Slovo”, “Tryzub” and others were located in the capital of France. Ukrainians rallied around Simon Petliura, Viacheslav Prokopovych, Oleksandr Shulhin, Mykola Kapustianskyi, Oleksandr Udovychenko, and many other well-known and influential figures who were forced to emigrate from Ukraine after the defeat of the liberation struggle.

At the same time, many Ukrainian writers, artists, architects, and theater figures who did not accept the moscow-bolshevik regime settled in Paris. Among them there were sculptor Oleksandr Archypenko, writer Ulas Samchuk, choreographer Vasyl Avramenko, artists Mykola Hlushchenko, Mykhailo Andriienko-Nechytailo, Vasyl Khmeliuk, and others. Artists were perhaps the most numerous among the creative people. They gathered in the cafes of the Latin Quarter, and Montmartre, participated in art exhibitions, sometimes alongside Picasso, Modigliani, and Matisse, published art albums, collaborated with famous French directors in theaters to prepare set designs, developed their own schools, and opened their own art salons, like Mykola Hlushchenko for one.

One archival document points out that in January 1931, M. Hlushchenko wrote a letter to the All-Ukrainian Society for Cultural Relations with a proposal to organize an art exhibition in Kharkiv and Kyiv featuring paintings by Ukrainian emigrants living in Paris. In the letter, he wrote that there were about 25 such artists. He provided a separate list and noted that he had sent detailed information about each of them and photographs to the publishing house “Literature and Art”. He wrote that they all wanted to exhibit their works in the Ukrainian ssr.

The gpu immediately became aware of M. Hlushchenko’s letters. A case was opened on him under the code name “Artist” and they began to gather information, study his capabilities and close contacts. In 1933, they formally established relations with him as a foreign agent of the soviet intelligence under the pseudonym “Yarema”. Work with him was carried out in two directions. The official, visible part consisted of maintaining normal relations with the soviet diplomatic mission in France on the basis of fulfilling artistic commissions. He was entrusted with a mission aimed at strengthening Franco-soviet friendship and winning the French intelligentsia’s sympathy to the ussr. He then painted a series of portraits of French figures who were friends of the soviet union.

The invisible, hidden part of his activity was to provide information about émigrés who were of interest to the soviet intelligence and with whom he periodically met in France and other countries. In particular, his art salon was visited by Austrian Archduke from the Habsburg dynasty and a sincere supporter of the Ukrainian cause, Vasyl Vyshyvanyi; member of the OUN Provid Dmytro Andriievskyi; former head of the Directory of the Ukrainian People’s Republic Volodymyr Vynnychenko, and others. Employees of the Paris residentura of the nkvd of the ussr tried to obtain valuable information about the processes in the Ukrainian political emigration community through “Yarema”, but very soon realized that nothing would come of it.

The agent’s reports and character references pointed out that he did not have a deep understanding of the activities of the Ukrainian People’s Republic and the OUN and was not particularly interested in political activities, being concerned only with creativity and maintaining friendly contacts with a wide circle of compatriots. Besides, having obtained soviet citizenship, he wanted to return to soviet Ukraine as soon as possible. Therefore, the residentura was tasked with finding, through “Yarema”, an artist who would have a deeper understanding of those issues and could  actually  replace him after his leaving for the ussr.

M. Hlushchenko recommended Vasyl Perebyinis from among his fellow painters. After getting to know him better, the chekists realized that there was no better candidate. They therefore decided to play on the candidate’s vulnerabilities to force him to cooperate. M. Hlushchenko’s main motive for cooperation was to facilitate his return to his homeland and to obtain lucrative commissions through the soviet diplomatic mission. V. Perebyinis also wanted to return to Ukraine. But for him, it was much more complicated.

“Start with Vasyl Vyshyvanyi...”

The Paris nkvd residentura’s report reads as follows: “Among “Artist”’s mutual acquaintances, we first of all focused on Perebyinis, who, according to the ‘Artist’, expressed a desire to return to Ukraine, where he has a family, and, most importantly, because he is closely associated with Tokarzhevskyi-Karashevych, V. Vyshyvanyi, and has access to the Polish consulate through the artist Povel.”

The report goes on to describe how M. Hlushchenko led an officer to V. Perebyinis. In particular, it states the following:

“The ‘Artist’ informed Perebyinis that he had met a scientist fellow in Paris who had seen their joint art exhibition in Kharkiv. Perebyinis himself expressed a desire to meet with the visitor, warning the ‘Artist’ that no one should know about the meeting.

My meeting with Perebyinis took place on November 2, 1932. After a general conversation about his work and the work of Ukrainian artists in Paris, I asked him directly what he planned to do in Paris next. Perebyinis stated that he was afraid to go to Ukraine, and as for work here, his prospects were few. In addition, under certain circumstances, he had ties to the Ukrainian emigration and had not yet severed them. I made it clear to him that he could atone for his guilt by debunking the activities of the Ukrainian emigration.

After a long conversation on this topic, Perebyinis, after much hesitation, agreed to help expose the emigration community on the condition that he would not write anything at the initial stage.

(FISU. – F. 1. Case 11448. – P. 48).

The residentura agreed to this, did not pressure him, and did not demand from him to write a report immediately. According to the case file opened on him, unlike in the case of M. Hlushchenko, they did not even take his cooperation agreement. They gave him the code name “Tonin”, under which he subsequently appeared in operational documents. His recruitment was documented in November 1933.

It was then that the nkvd of the Ukrainian ssr opened a case file on Ivan Tokarzhevskyi-Karashevych, a descendant of an ancient Lithuanian princely family, historian, diplomat, philosopher, and Ukrainian public and political figure, who was mentioned in the residentura’s report. At that time, he was living in France (from 1924 to 1936) and trying to be useful to the Ukrainian cause. He was a member of the “France-East” Committee, editor of the “France-Ukraine” bulletin, secretary general of the French Society for Ukrainian Studies, contributed to various magazines, and gave lectures on historical topics.

I. Tokarzhevskyi had an acquaintance at the Polish consulate in Paris, whom he introduced to V. Perebyinis. Having learned this, the residentura intended to use him to obtain information about the activities of this diplomatic institution. However, as it soon became clear, nothing came of it.

Another object of interest was V. Vyshyvanyi, with whom V. Perebyinis had developed a good relationship. The residentura instructed V. Perebyinis to deepen their contacts. The directives from moscow also insisted that he begin his work in his new capacity with V. Vyshyvanyi, since, as noted, he had his trust. Meanwhile, there are no reports from “Tonin” about V. Vyshyvanyi in the case file. There are only references from residentura’s employees citing “Tonin” as saying that they have a good relationship and that the Archduke himself asked to be kept informed of all matters concerning the Society of Former Soldiers of the Army of the Ukrainian People’s Republic.

One of those who closely monitored the development of the new contact from the central apparatus of the nkvd of the ussr was P. Sudoplatov. According to archival materials, not only a personal agent file was opened on V. Perebyinis. Along with this, a form file was also opened. The resolution to open the file, drafted by P. Sudoplatov, stated that V. Perebyinis had served in Petliura’s army and had extensive connections among the leaders of the Ukrainian emigration. Therefore, efforts were directed at finding out where and with whom he had served, and what his actual beliefs were.

The Artist’s Difficult Path to Recognition

Based on the accounts of M. Hlushchenko and V. Perebyinis himself, the chekists prepared a biographical report on him. It showed that there were many similarities in the biographies of both artists. The paper tells that V. Perebyinis was born in 1896 in the village of Mali Puzyrky, Zaslavsky povit, Volyn province (now Khmelnytskyi district, Khmelnytskyi region). After studying at a parish school, he entered the school of drawing and painting at the Pochaiv Lavra. There, from 1910 to 1913, he received his initial education in painting. He continued his studies at the Kyiv Art School and the Academy of Arts in St. Petersburg.

Having completed his studies, he worked, as mentioned in one of the documents, at the so-called Lukyanivka People’s House and  at the M. Zankovetska and M. Sadovskyi Theatre. In 1919, with the establishment of soviet power in Kyiv, he was enlisted in the 132nd Railway Regiment, where he was the club manager. At the same time, he joined the underground Petliura organization. Having a good relationship with the Regiment’s Commander, he helped several members of the Ukrainian underground to enlist. Soon, the organization was exposed by the Kyiv provincial cheka.

“Fleeing exposure and arrest,” reads the report, “Tonin” left Kyiv and joined the so-called General Mykytka’s Ukrainian Galician Army, and when it merged with Denikin’s forces, he ended up in the White Army.” (FISU – F. 1. Case 11448. – P. 72–76). In reality, there was no merger. In November 1919, the UGA signed an agreement with Denikin’s forces to cease hostilities. Some of the UGA troops who found themselves in territories controlled by Denikin were interned and formally incorporated into the Volunteer Army. V. Perebyinis  was among them. During the same period, M. Hlushchenko was forcibly mobilized into the Volunteer Army, and they could have met somewhere by chance. They later reminisced that period in exile.

After some time, as stated in the paper, V. Perebyinis, together with Galicians, joined the Red Galician Army, and in 1920 – the Army of the Ukrainian People’s Republic. He served at the Headquarters of the 6th Reserve Rifle Brigade under the command of Hnat Porokhivskyi, with whom he later maintained good relations. He was friends with senior officers of the 6th Sich Division of the Army of the Ukrainian People’s Republic under the command of Marko Bezruchko. After the forced retreat of the Ukrainian Army, he found himself in Poland. There he enrolled in the Krakow Academy of Arts, where he studied from 1921 to 1926, and later – in the Paris branch of the Krakow Academy of Arts, where he studied from 1928 to 1929.

M. Hlushchenko ended up in Poland with the remnants of the White Guard units. Not wanting to return to the front, he fled to Germany. There, in Berlin, he first graduated from a private art school and then from an art academy. In 1924, he moved to Paris. V. Perebyinis moved to the capital of France in 1927.

During one of their first meetings, an employee of the Paris residentura of the nkvd asked him to name Ukrainian figures whom he knew and could contact. The list of political figures provided by V. Perebyinis greatly impressed the chekists. Apart from Vyshyvanyi and Tokarzhevskyi-Karashevych, he was acquainted with  Shulgin, Shumytskyi, Yeremeiev, Milotskyi, Nikitiuk, Kosenko, and others. These were from the UPR camp. He also knew leading figures of the OUN, such as Boikiv, Stsiborskyi, and Fedak. Outside Paris – Levytskyi, Lototskyi, Salskyi, Bazyevskyi, Kushch, Chykalenko, Montrezor, Murskyi, Makohin, Kozhevnikov, Meleshko, Dontsov, Andriievskyi, and many others.

After this had been reported to moscow, instructions were received to obtain detailed information from the agent about the circumstances of his acquaintance with each person and to ask him to provide a detailed description of all of them. All this took a long time. According to the case files, “Tonin” provided general information that was already known to the residentura. The exclusive materials included photographs from the Congress of the Society of Former Soldiers of the Army of the Ukrainian People’s Republic. He received them from a photographer who photographed all events involving figures of the Ukrainian People’s Republic in France. “We hope to obtain through him an album covering the entire period of Petliura’s stay in Paris,” said one of the directives from moscow. Some of the photographs provided to the residentura have been preserved in the case file.

There is no information in the case file that V. Perebyinis received money for this. At the same time, it is noted that he was experiencing financial difficulties. Therefore, it cannot be ruled out that the residentura could have played on such sensitive issues. In addition, the Chekists began to gather information on his mother, who lived in Ostroh povit, and on his wife and daughter, who remained in the ussr and at that time lived in the city of Velizh,  Smolensk region of the Belarusian ssr. They intended to use the information obtained in case “Tonin” refused further contact. That is, it could be either threats of repression against his relatives or encouragement to cooperate in exchange for providing certain assistance to his relatives.

It took many months to compile such a dossier. Meanwhile, while the residentura was deciding how best to use him, he disappeared. As noted in one of the papers, contact with him was lost in 1937 for unknown reasons.

Letters to Mykola Hlushchenko

“Ukrainian artist M. Hlushchenko. 14 Volodymyrska Street, Flat 6, Kyiv.” Letters with such inscriptions on the envelope and a return address in English began arriving from London in early 1963. The sender’s surname was spelled as follows: “V. Perebyinis”. The kgb of the Ukrainian ssr checked the person against all operational records and realized that it was Vasyl Perebyinis, who had disappeared from view for a quarter of a century. This was confirmed by M. Hlushchenko, who had remained in operative contact with the kgb all along.

From the letters, they learnt that V. Perebyinis lived near Toulouse from 1939 to 1942. Then he returned to Paris. In 1942, he was caught in a raid and taken to Berlin for forced labor. He worked at one of the factories, where he was seriously injured. In the hospital, he met his future wife, Tetiana. In 1947, they moved to London. Vasyl worked for some company. In his free time, he painted portraits, imaginary Volyn landscapes, still life paintings, and drawings for Ukrainian magazines.

In one of his first letters, he wrote emotionally: “Bravo, Mykola! I am happy for you that you are still a Ukrainian Artist.” He was happy that M. Hlushchenko’s son, Oleksandr, was also passionate about drawing. He promised to buy both of them the best paints from the British brand “Windsor & Newton”, which were ideal for exquisite work and had a bright palette. He was going to send fabric for sewing suits, coats, and other items. Once, at an auction where the possessions of bankrupt millionaires were being sold, he bought a beautifully illustrated old Bible at a bargain price. It was large, weighing 10 pounds (about 4.5 kg). Four artists had supposedly worked on its design for ten years. The edition itself was a hundred years old (1863). He also bought an equally beautifully illustrated book, “Old England”, in two volumes.

When V. Perebyinis began to ask his acquaintances how those publications could be sent to the ussr, he was told that they would not be allowed across the border because they were considered antiques. In his letter, he asked M. Hlushchenko to use his authority to decide how best to proceed. He insisted that the books would be very useful for both the artist and the students of the Kyiv Art Institute. Eventually, as shown by archival documents, he himself applied to the soviet diplomatic mission in London for assistance. They already had all the necessary information about him. They also knew that he was concerned about how to send the books. So, they promised to provide him with this service. But first, they had a long conversation with him. They asked him about his life, work, relatives, and acquaintances in the ussr. They pointed out that, come the need, they could also help with other issues.

An employee of the soviet embassy, who introduced himself as Andrii, even asked to visit his home. During his visit, he was especially interested in the activities of the main organization of the Ukrainian diaspora – the Union of Ukrainians in Great Britain (SUB –Soyuz Ukraintsiv u Velykiy Brytanii – Transl.), of which V. Perebyinis was a member. He said that this was necessary to better establish cultural ties and strengthen soviet-British friendship.

After several such meetings and additional study of V. Perebyinis, his views, beliefs, and position in the SUB, the kgb residentura in London came to the following conclusion: “The residentura considers it inappropriate to resume agent relations with “Tonin”, believing that it is better to use him simply as Andrii’s contact if necessary.”(FISU. – F. 1. Case 11448. – P. 97).

What made kgb officers in London, moscow, and Kyiv give up their previous plans?

“All My Relatives Have Always Been Hostile To Moscow...”

In order not to reveal their operational interest in V. Perebyinis to M. Hlushchenko, Kyiv kgb came up with a cover story about how to give him the books. This was done on behalf of an employee of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Ukrainian ssr who had allegedly just returned from Great Britain. In reality, a kgb officer played that role. During the meeting, he mentioned that V. Perebyinis had also handed over his monograph. But he could not give it along with the other books because “it contains a number of nationalist fabrications”. The monograph could only be read immediately and then returned.

M. Hlushchenko expressed his dissatisfaction with that. He stated that times had changed. Moreover, he knew V. Perebyinis only as a talented artist. At this he added that his acquaintance’s views had recently changed for the worse. Allegedly, he made harmful statements in his letters, although he was generally loyal to the ussr.

The kgb interpreted the “harmful statements” mentioned by M. Hlushchenko somewhat differently. A report based on an analysis of the artist’s monograph stated that V. Perebyinis, when describing his family tree, constantly pointed out that all his relatives were proud of their Ukrainian origins and tried to counteract the russians’ imperialist ambitions.

He wrote that one of his ancestors was Colonel Maksym Kryvonis-Perebyinis of the Zaporizhzhia Cossack Army. Allegedly, in the 17th century, he received an estate in the village of Perebyinosy, near the village of Velyki Zozulyntsi in Starokostiantyniv povit, from Grand Duke Kostiantyn Ostrozkyi. His great-grandfather, Stepan Perebyinis, allegedly appealed to Napoleon during the war of 1812 with a proposal to raise an uprising against moscow on Ukrainian lands. For this, after the defeat of the French, he was arrested, exiled to Siberia, and died there, while the village of Perebyynosy and the surrounding farms were burned down. In 1906, his grandfather Kyrylo got into a quarrel with Tsarist General Arkhangelsky. The latter told an “indecent joke about Ukrainians” at a card club in Zhytomyr. For this, Kyrylo hit him with a candlestick. After a criminal case was opened, part of his grandfather’s land was taken away and given to the aggrieved general.

“My brother and uncle Anton,” he wrote in his monograph, “died like knights in battle with bolsheviks for Ukraine’s independence.” The kgb report also quotes other excerpts from the monograph, including the following: “While in exile since 1921, I held several art exhibitions and always remained an uncompromising opponent of Ukraine's enemies — both Poles and muscovites, regardless of their political affiliation.”

The conclusions state that the entire biography was written by “Tonin” in a nationalistic spirit. “He repeatedly emphasizes that all his relatives have always and under all circumstances been hostile to russians (muscovites) and have been subjected to repression for this.” And further: “I also know that I have been personally on the muscovites’ special register since my departure into exile, and when I move from one country to another, the file with reports on me follows me from one soviet embassy to another.”

At the end of the document, the following phrase from his interview with the newspaper “Vilne Slovo” is highlighted: “Although I am already quite old, I believe that I will return to Ukraine, free from the dictatorship of the proletariat, and work for the arts with the younger generation of our artists.” (FISU. – F. 1. Case 11448. – P. 99–103).

It was because of such statements that kgb officers did not want to give the monograph to M. Hlushchenko. They were afraid that other artists with whom he was friends would read it. But six months later, V. Perebyinis took advantage of a meeting in London with writer Vadym Sobko and handed over another copy through him.

According to declassified documents, all this took place under the control of the kgb. To the last day of his life, V. Perebyinis was kept under constant surveillance. They even took advantage of his wife’s visit to her relatives in Kharkiv region. Through employees of the Society for Cultural Relations with Ukrainians Abroad, they encouraged her to write an article praising the soviet way of life after her return to London. The text was coolly received by the Union of Ukrainians in Great Britain. After that, the Perebyinis couple were no longer invited to various events. Perhaps this was the effect the kgb had hoped for.

At the same time, they tracked down V. Perebyinis’ first wife. She was living with her daughter in the Moldavian ssr. And even though almost 50 years had passed, they still wanted to come up with something to influence or pressure him. They developed operational plans related to V. Perebyinis’ intention to come to the Ukrainian ssr for a month and stay with M. Hlushchenko. On this occasion, the artists corresponded, again under the control of the kgb.

V. Perebyinis wrote that on January 1, 1965, he would turn 70 and that he was preparing anniversary exhibitions in London, Canada, and the United States. In particular, 58 works would be exhibited in New York, Chicago, and Colchester. He pointed out that he could also send his paintings to an exhibition in Kyiv. In general, as he noted in his monograph, during his stay in Great Britain, he painted 150 paintings and about 100 sketches. He did this mostly on weekends.

In 1966, while V. Perebyinis was preparing for his trip to the ussr, the kgb residentura in London received information that he was in contact with leading figures of the OUN(B), Stepan Lenkavskyi and Yaroslav Stetsko. In particular, it was reported that Y. Stetsko had visited him several times during his stay in London and that they stayed in touch through correspondence. This having been reported to moscow, instructions were received to obtain those letters at any cost and to return to the question of the possibility of renewing agent contact with him at any cost – either through bribery, blackmail, or intimidation. But this was not possible.

V. Perebyinis suddenly fell ill. Soon, doctors diagnosed cancer. He died on November 13, 1966. Hence, the kgb issued a decision to close the case and terminate the operational cultivation. In the generalized reports about him, there were no assessments of his creativity, the value of his artistic works, or his role in the artistic community. For the kgb, his value lay solely in his numerous contacts and his ability to provide information about events in the Ukrainian émigré community.

Meanwhile, modern biographical references about V. Perebyinis allow us to better understand his difficult life path and evaluate his artistic work. It is pointed out that he was a member of the Association of Independent Ukrainian Artists. In his creative work, he evolved from classicism and realism to cubism and constructivism. His works include paintings, numerous landscapes, portraits, and book illustrations. He was the author of a large number of scenery and costume designs for theaters in Krakow and Paris. Many of his works were destroyed during and after World War II. In particular, works transferred for exhibition to the National Museum in Lviv were destroyed under soviet rule. He participated in exhibitions in Lviv, Paris, Vienna, Krakow, Prague, London, and Philadelphia. His works are kept in many public and private collections in Ukraine, Austria, the Czech Republic, Poland, France, Great Britain, and the United States.