“Prevent  Information About the Famine in Ukraine from Leaking Abroad”

In the archives of the Foreign Intelligence Service of Ukraine, there are documents which show how in the 1980s the kgb of the Ukrainian ssr had been monitoring very closely the Ukrainian diaspora’s activity aimed at drawing the attention of the world community to the 1932-1933 Holodomor in Ukraine and had been trying to prevent it in every possible way. Circulars and instructions from Kyiv to regional kgb departments told what agent-operational measures should be taken “to counter hostile actions by foreign national centers”.

In the early 1980s, kgb residenturas in the United States, Canada, and some European countries began to report that Ukrainian emigrant organizations such as the World Congress of Free Ukrainians, the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America, the Committee of Ukrainians in Canada, the Association of Ukrainians in Great Britain, the State Center of the UPR in Exile, the OUN, and others decided to consolidate their efforts to draw the world's attention to the Holodomor in Ukraine. Thus, they began preparations to honor the victims of this terrible tragedy and the crimes of the stalinist regime.

Among the archival documents there is a letter entitled “On Anti-Soviet Plans of Foreign OUNs,” dated June 2, 1983, signed by chief of the kgb of the Ukrainian ssr Stepan Mukha, and addressed to all chiefs of departments in the regions. It states that on March 10, the kgb of the Ukrainian ssr “has already informed about hostile actions of the OUN members abroad in connection with the “50th anniversary” of the so-called “artificial famine in Ukraine”. These phrases were deliberately put in quotation marks in the document to emphasize once again that there was no anniversary to speak of; it was not an artificial famine, it was caused by drought, crop failure, and certain distortions in rural policy; it was a “so-called famine”, not a large-scale Holodomor.

“According to latest information”, the document pointed out, “foreign centers of the OUN, along with the growing anti-soviet hysteria, are making attempts to make this slanderous campaign a long-term one. They are gestating the provocative idea of creating a permanent center called the “Ukrainian Holocaust” to “perpetuate the memory of the victims of the 1932-1933 artificial famine in Ukraine” in the likeness of the Zionist Yad Vashem Institute (Jerusalem), where all publications about the “famine,” photographs and names of the “victims”, and records of witness testimony should be concentrated. To this end, a campaign was organized in the West to identify “witnesses of the famine” and compile lists of names of Ukrainians who “suffered from the famine” (BSA of the SZR of Ukraine. - F.1. - Case 15680. - Vol. 1 – P. 139).

As an example of such activities, the paper cites the story of Z. Zhyzhko, an activist of the Association of Ukrainians in Great Britain from the English city of Cambridge. The kgb had been intercepting and reading his letters to relatives who lived in Donetsk region. In his letters, he asked for help in obtaining lists of all those who died in 1933. At this, he recommended his relatives to act in a secretive manner, and somehow justify their interest in the eyes of the environment. They had to explain that this was done in order to commemorate the dead in local churches. The kgb interpreted this fact as a purposeful collection of information about the Holodomor victims. In view of this, it was ordered to take measures to prevent the leakage of such information abroad, using agents, proxies, and other operational capabilities.

Another document, which was soon sent to all regional departments of the kgb of the Ukrainian ssr, was entitled “Excerpt from Measures to Counter Hostile Actions of Foreign National Centers in Connection with the “50th Anniversary” of the So-Called “Artificial Famine in Ukraine”, Approved on June 28, 1983 by chief of the kgb of the Ukrainian ssr, lieutenant general comrade Mukha S. N.”. One of the measures was to train and send abroad several tens of experienced agents who were to be tasked with “obtaining information about the plans and specific perpetrators of hostile actions of foreign OUNs”. Along with this, it was planned to conduct a targeted survey of soviet citizens returning from trips abroad to find out what they might know about the preparation of such actions.

Another task was to monitor foreigners who came to the Ukrainian ssr to find out whether they were interested in the Holodomor. Those who showed an increased interest were to be involved in active operational cultivation, and when leaving the ussr, they were to be subjected to thorough customs inspection to prevent smuggling of any materials, lists, documents, or photographs. The controllers of operational and technical units were also instructed to detect attempts to transfer such information via international telephone lines. “In appropriate cases”, the document stated, ‘in accordance with the established procedure, limit and stop the use of communication channels for subversive purposes” (BSA of the SZR of Ukraine. - F.1. - Case 15680. - Vol. 1 - P. 140-142). The kgb had enough ways to do this.

At the same time, it was recommended to take measures to organize trips of foreign delegations to advanced collective and state farms, agricultural industrial enterprises of the republic in order to show the high standards of living of Ukrainians on the ground and emphasize that this was the case before, and no signs of famine had been observed anywhere in the past. Similar manipulations were carried out by the nkvd in 1933, when they brought foreign journalists or other figures to villages specially prepared for the purpose. Food was brought there in advance to the stores, and all the weak, sick, and beggars were taken to other places.

In order to divert the world's attention from the Holodomor in Ukraine, one of the points was to select a number of students from Asia and Africa who would give interviews to the press to debunk “the imperialist states’ neocolonialist policy, which leads to a decline in living standards and hunger in the homeland of foreigners”.

To implement these measures, separate plans were developed locally. This was an established practice. A typical example in this regard is the case of Omelian Pritsak, the founder and first Director of the Ukrainian Research Institute at Harvard. In 1980, he asked for assistance in visiting the ussr at the invitation of the ussr Academy of Sciences to establish business scientific contacts, exchange literature, and study the achievements of science and culture in soviet Ukraine. He had previously received such permission in Kyiv. But in late 1981, everything changed. A cipher telegram from the kgb of the Ukrainian ssr from Kyiv to moscow pointed out: “...in connection with the publication in the nationalist magazine “Suchasnist” (Issue 9 of 1981) of an article with sharp anti-soviet fabrications about the 1500th anniversary of Kyiv, as well as materials of similar content about the so-called “artificial famine” in Ukraine in 1932-33, prepared by the above-mentioned Institute of Harvard University, we consider it expedient to deny him entry to the ussr, to cancel his entry visa and on behalf of the ussr Academy of Sciences to officially inform O. Pritsak about the decision through the ussr mission to the UN ” (BSA of the SZR of Ukraine. - F.1. - Case 11041. - Vol. 3. - P. 217).

At the time, the kgb received information that O. Pritsak had proposed to create a permanent center at the Ukrainian Research Institute at Harvard University, which would collect information about the famine in Ukraine, lists of victims, eyewitness accounts, and other materials, as well as organize the publication of scientific works, brochures, books, hold conferences, and introduce a special educational course on the Ukrainian Holocaust. This became decisive in the attitude to the scientist. In February 1982, a document was sent to the kgb in moscow with a request that, through the ministry of foreign affairs of the ussr, O. Pritsak be officially banned from entering the territory of the ussr.

In general, the denial of the Holodomor and the silencing of this issue was a well-organized disinformation campaign conducted by soviet authorities with the participation of special services. A lot of money was invested in it, numerous events were held both domestically and abroad, and writers, journalists, and other figures were involved. The bolshevik-communist government discredited those people in the world who tried to get to the bottom of the truth. But the truth about that large-scale crime could not be hidden. After Ukraine gained its independence, the real picture of that tragedy was investigated and made public. At the same time, russia's policy of denying and silencing the Holodomor in Ukraine continues to this day.