By Michael Averko
Katherine and Viktor Yushchenko
I've been holding on to a piece of history which was forwarded to me by an informed and trusted source. It's an August 23, 1983 Washington Times letter by Katherine Chumachenko, who is now married to Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko. Since it is not archived on the internet, Chumachenko's letter was submitted to me in the form of a transposed email attachment. I see no reason to second guess its authenticity. Should anyone prove differently (doubtful), then please inform me and I will issue an immediate retraction.
LETTERS Washington Times, August 23, 1983Russia, captor nation, not captive nation
In his Aug. 17 letter, "Russia, captive of the USSR," Alexis Bogolubov urges the revision of the "Captive Nations Week Resolution" of July 17, 1959 to include Russia as another "captive nation."
At the time of the enactment to the resolution, other anti-Communist leaders in this country assailed this historical document for the omission of Russia. They were justly refuted by legislators, government officials, and academics with the following facts:
Although millions of Russians suffered and continue to suffer from Communist oppression, the overall direction of the Soviet Russian empire, employing aggressive foreign and domestic policies, is overwhelmingly in Russian hands. The Russians provide the blood and sinews of the Soviet regime. They dominate the KGB, the Soviet armed forces and the scientific, technical, and economic institutions; they are incessantly endeavoring to Russify the conquered non-Russian nations and to create a "Soviet man" a euphemism for a converted Russian. The anti-Communist Russian democratic forces under the Russian provincial government in 1917 never considered Bolshevism an alien force, but a Russian political phenomenon.Therefore, there was no attempt on the part of the anti-Communist Russians to establish a Russian government-in-exile.
In contrast, after the re-conquest in 1920 by Communist Russia of all the non-Russian nations of the former Russian empire (excluding Finland and Poland) their legitimate governments withdrew to the West and continued to function as governments-in-exile in waging their struggle for the liberation of their home countries. Today the governments-in-exile of Ukraine, Byelorussia. Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia continue to struggle for their countries' liberation. In 1940, when the USSR brutally invaded and annexed the three Baltic countries of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, representatives of these nations also formed governments in exile.
The anti-Communist Russians were the only major political emigration to fail to establish an anti-Communist government-in-exile, because they believed Bolshevism to be at worst a Russian internal phenomenon which, sooner or later, would either fade away or be defused by the "moral" Russian people.We will be marking the 25th commemoration of Public Law 86-90. It would be a great disservice to have any attempt made to revise the law. This would be a disservice to the Congress and to our president, who is especially sympathetic and supportive of Captive Nations Week. It would also be a devastating blow to the ideals of freedom everywhere in the world. Great comfort would be given to the en-slavers in Moscow should any attempt be made to revise or amend Public Law 86-90.
Katherine C. Chumachenko
Acting Chairman and Executive Secretary
National Captive NationsCommittee Inc.
Washington
Mrs. Yushchenko giving the V for Victory sign
At the time of this letter's appearance, Chumachenko headed the neo-Nazi Captive Nations Committee. In my view, the term neo-Nazi is inclusive of fomenting hatred against Russia and Russians. My last Russia Blog article A Primer on Yulia Tymoshenko briefly touched on the Captive Nations Committee and why I loathe it as a Russian-American. It's disconcerting for me to see how many otherwise well-meaning Americans overlook the CNC's history of anti-Russian bigotry.
As I mentioned in my Russia Blog article On Being Russian, I come from a multi-ethnic background, with Russian Orthodox Christian being 1/4 of my heritage. Without a doubt, it's this side which has received the most discrimination in American mass media, academia and body politic.
Yulia Tymoshenko at left, with the Yushchenko family
During Ukraine's so called "Orange Revolution," (which was more like a conflict between two different factions of oligarchs) three articles dealing with Chumachenko stuck out to me as intellectual eyesores. Bruce Bartlett wrote about her as a partisan friend. Moscow Times journalist and Ekho Moskvy radio talk show host Yulia Latynina flippantly claimed that the Kremlin didn't trust Yushchenko because Chumachenko is American-born. Like Bartlett, the American mass media preferred Latynina (whose views often clash with the majority of Russians) and didn't pick up on why Putin and a good many Russians don't hold a favorable view Chumachenko. Jake Rudnitsky of the Moscow-based English language web magazine eXile took a different approach. In one of his articles, the wife of Yushchenko's political opponent (Viktor Yanukovych) is briefly mentioned in an uncomplimentary piece about the Russocentric east Ukrainian city of Donetsk, which is the political home base of the Ukrainian Blue candidate. Another eXile article by Rudnitsky confirms his pro-Orange bias, which is open to considerable debate. I don't see how Donetsk is more "fascist" than the west Ukrainian Orange stronghold of Lviv. I can't imagine Yanukovych's wife being anymore off the wall than Yushchenko's.
Yushchenko in politically happier times
Under Communism, the Russian Orthodox Christian part of my family suffered tremendous hardships at the hands of a good many non-Russian and Russian Soviets alike. Enter the Cold War and along comes the Galician Ukrainian-dominated Captive Nations Committee, falsely claiming that the USSR benefited Russians at the expense of other Soviet nationalities. Through passionate lobbying, the CNC persuaded Congress to approve an official holiday (Captive Nations Week), recognizing every Communist country as being captive -- with the exception of Russia. Adding insult to this oversight, the CNC resolution recognized such Nazi World War II creations as "Cossackia" -- divide and conquer puppet states that had never existed before 1941. In the CNC's literature, Russians of any stripe are portrayed as an inherent threat to the West. I have the organization's guiding book, "The Captive Nations" authored by Bernadine Bailey. Out of respect for Russia Blog's younger and sensitive readers, I can't print what I think of that book's contents at this venue.
My family-influenced politics are pro-Russian/anti-Communist, as opposed to the anti-Russian/anti-Communist stance of the CNC. I'm well aware that some present day Russians think it's cool to fly the Soviet flag. The anti-Russian/anti-Communist crowd disingenuously downplays the number of former Soviet non-Russians who feel the same way. They demagogically note that Russians were the largest ethnic group in the CPSU without noting how Russians were also the largest ethnic group in the USSR, and that per capita, non-Russians were well represented in the Communist Party apparatus. Fortunately, extreme Soviet nostalgia is limited among present day Russian and non-Russian former Soviet citizens.
Chumachenko's Washington Times letter blatantly downplays the anti-Soviet Russian opposition, relative to some other non-Russian/anti-Soviet movements. The Russian Civil War era Whites, Vlasov Army of World War II and Cold War dissident activities of people like Alexander Solzhenitsyn and Andrei Sakharov confirm a prolonged Russian opposition to the Soviet dictatorship (like other anti-Communist nationals, some of the mentioned Russians had fault lines).
I love (not) how Chumachenko overlooks the number of Ukrainian Communists, while never acknowledging that the Ukrainian Supreme Soviet communicated in Ukrainian. For that matter, there was an attempt to linguistically Ukrainianize the Russian speaking Donbas region in the late 1920s (this no doubt enhanced the popularity of the Russo-Ukrainian dialect known as Surzhyk).
The bottom line is that the USSR couldn't have succeeded to the degree it did without the willing assistance of a number of non-Russian Communists. Contrary to Chumachenko's claim, The New Soviet Man wasn't a euphemism "for a converted Russian." I recall how Soviet propaganda would periodically feature all of the Soviet ethnic groups in their respective native costumes. Russians on the other hand would be shown wearing modern day "global" (if you may) business attire. This is just one of many examples showing how Russian cultural identity was suppressed under Communism.
Chumachenko suggests that Russian-Americans didn't petition to have Russia listed as a captive nation. Yet, her letter was written in reply to a Russian-American desiring such. She's very wrong to suggest that anti-Communist Russian organizations didn't exist during the Cold War. How effective they were (and remain) at Capitol Hill lobbying is another matter. Russians at home and abroad aren't a monolithic group. In fact, it's not uncommon to have similarly minded Russians arguing over what outsiders might consider to be as moot points.
Proud Russian-Americans (a greater number than some believe) don't want to to be affiliated with an organization promoting a hatred of Russia and Russians. In this sense, Chumachenko is correct.
Michael Averko is a New York based independent foreign policy analyst whose commentary has appeared in Eurasian Home, Johnson's Russia List, Intelligent.Ru, The Moscow Times, New York Times and Newsday.
"Proud Russian-Americans (a greater number than some believe) don't want to to be affiliated with an organization promoting a hatred of Russia and Russians. In this sense, Chumachenko is correct."
I agree with this last statement.
Me too Tanya.
I'm a big Mishka fan.
Mishka, what about Vlasov? Didn't he collaborate with the Nazis?
An interesting commentary of the past which relates to the present.
I would be interested in getting a reply from Mike on Vlasov's army (I vaguely remember him discussing it somewhere else).
Mike
Captive Nations Week wasn't a popular "holiday." It's still distressing that Chumachenko's organization had its way with congress. A most ugly letter on her part.
Interesting post Michael. It is interesting to note the following people's ethnicity:
Stalin - Georgian
Khrushchev - Ukrainian
Beria - Georgian
Yezhov - Polish/Lithuanian?
Yagoda - Jewish
Then again, the guy that started all the trouble in the last century was Lenin, a Russian.
Looking at Russia as a geographical entity, though, it surely has been a very bad neighbor to the other countries surrounding it. This is why Russians get the reputation for being bad neighbors, I think.
Some very good comments which I will address later when I have more time (for whatever reason, many prefer the private email route to me).
Jason - NSK was an ethnic Russian from Ukraine and I disagree with your view that Russia has been bad to its neighbors. Some of Russia's neighbors have been bad and this has provoked a response. Not that Russia has always been innocent. Show me a historically great power which has been.
The Brits benefit from Edgar Rice Burroughs and Ian Fleming like propagandists. In comparison, Russians have never really played the propaganda game well.
Uh oh, Mr. Mike is brewing up something for later on.
Jason, the Germans transfered Lenin from Switzerland to Russia during World War I. Lenin supported Rusia leaving that conflict. This view supported German war aims. It's doubtfull he would have gotten back to Russia on his own. The train car carrying Lenin was locked during the trip. The Germans obviously felt that they were transporting some kind of a disease.
Glad to see a thought provoking discussion. Regarding Andrei Vlasov and some other issues related to my above article, I'm providing the below links which offer further insight. The first link is an online October 16, 2005 discussion I had with Intelligent.ru Editor Sergei Roy on Andrei Vlasov. The links which follow are an ongoing recent discussion with a person of Polish origin and yours truly.
http://english.intelligent.ru/cgi-bin/loadtext.pl?id=8875&file=letters/letter_e0111.htm
http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@612.zYvsjwC2OhB.18@.77480649/2264
http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@612.zYvsjwC2OhB.20@.77480649/2279
There has been a good deal of quality primary and second source material written about Andrei Vlasov. I have carefully reviewed it. He wasn't a Nazi and his forces did very little fighting against the Soviets. Vlasov's army was very much involved in the liberation of Prague as noted by esteemed historians like A.J.P. Taylor.
Look, America and Britain were Soviet allies during WW II. This didn't make those two Western nations Communist. Similarly, not everyone allied with Nazi Germany was a Nazi.
I should add to Mike's comment here that Bulgaria, a country officially allied with Nazi Germany during WWII, saved the vast majority of its Jewish population (the Bulgarian region of Thrace was administered by the Nazis due to their occupation of Greece and therefore its Jewish population was deported). I learned this while travelling in Bulgaria.
I would recommend the book "Beyond Hitler's Grasp" by Michael Bar-Zohar to our readers. My free copy came courtesy of the Anti-Defamation League.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1580620604/002-8221763-6854457?v=glance&n=283155
Good point Charlie.
It's also true that some Bulgarian forces outside of Bulgaria were involved in the rounding up of Jews, who were then sent to death camps (I understand this to have been particularly evident in Macedonia).
Along with Serbia and Montenegro - Bulgaria is a country which doesn't see Russia in the same manner as a good many in Latvia, Estonia, Poland and Hungary.
In the Balkans - Russia has played the role of liberator. The anti-Russians among us will say that this wasn't altruitic as much as it was Machiavellian. This point is no more true of Russia when compared to how other great powers have pursued some diplomatic actions.
Mishka make a compelling case for Vlasov. Soviet history has accuracy gaps and there is an anti-Russian bias outside of Russia.
The Russian side needs some good communicators.
Mishka?
Surprising to see no Russia haters replying to Mike's article. They can't be happy about it. Plenty of them here
http://www.ukraine.com/forums
Zhana, it's not my call on who will be among the communicators for "the Russian side."
Mind you, I'm an American, who is pro-Russian because it's in America's best interests to be.
I've some ideas on what should be done to improve the coverage. I feel that there's resistance among some on "my side." It's distressing for me to see the same mistakes repeated over and over again. Maybe my next article will deal with this matter.
Alexandra, that site banned me because I took issue with the anti-Russian bias there.
That site is affiliated with http://www.russia.com/forums where I periodically participate. The moderators at russia.com are on the more Russia friendly side.
I like this site http://orangeukraine.squarespace.com because diverse views can go at it in a fair manner (I say this as someone who has political differences with the editor of that site). That's what media should be about.
As for people not challenging me on this article - perhaps I should send it to some Chicago outlets where Katherine Chumachenko is from.
Yushchenko's wife worked on a number of projects with different Eastern European groups:
http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/resource/findaid/chumache.htm
No Russians though.
Mike is always looking for a rumble.
It's a shame how a good many prefer to not challenge others and opt for only talking to those in agreement.
Alexandra, that link in your most recent comment does reference Yushchenko's wife doing some work with Russian issues. It doesn't give specifics.
I also note that she did work with an organization known as the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations (ABN). This isn't surprising because the two were closely linked during the Cold War. They seem to have joint members among them. The pro-Captive Nations Committee book (cited in my article) by Bernadine Bailey references the ABN.
In more recent times, I recall the ABN being featured on a North American produced West Ukrainian influenced television show called Kontakt, which aired throughout North America back in the early to mid 1990s on some local public television affiliates. The mentioned feature on the ABN showed that organization hosting an anti-Russian demonstration relating to the conflict in Chechnya. It has been reported that West Ukrainian nationalists have fought in Chechnya on the side of the separatists.
Chumachenko's Washington Times letter is mild when compared to Bailey's book. The two are bigoted. The latter is out and out bigotry, with Chumachenko's letter being very much influenced by it.
Both sources would be immediately written off as crackpot if Jews were substituted for Russians. Specifically, that the USSR benefited Jews at the expense of others. A classic Nazi propaganda line. The Cold War neo-Nazi propaganda of the CNC took out the Jewish element while maintaining the anti-Russian referencing.
Bailey's book portrays the Galician Ukrainian nationalist World War II leader Stefan Bandera as a hero (the referred to Kontakt show frequently did as well). Many Poles and Jews with roots in Galicia view Bandera differently, as do a good number of Ukrainians from other parts of Ukraine. Bandera's army committed atrocities against Poles, Jews and non-Jewish citizens of the USSR opposing Bandera. Bailey's book is soft on the World War II Croat Ustashe leader Ante Pavelic.
I WANT TO KNOW MORE ABOUT RUSSIAN HISTORY BECAUSE THEY ARE SOME INTERESTING PEOPLE OVER THERE AND I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN FACINATED BY THE COLD WAR DURING RONALD REGANS TIME IM AN AMERICAN CITIZEN AND I WANT TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THE COLLAPSE OF THIS COUNTRY AND IT,S PEOPLE AND IT,S MILITARY AND WHY THESE WOMEN ARE TRYING SO DEPERATELY TO GET TO THIS COUNTRY AND MARRY ANY ONE TO DO SO
1. I think it is intellectually dishonest to call Committee of Captive Nations a “neo-Naziâ€. You can call it “right wings†and it will be correct, but this way is look like pro-Kremlin propaganda.
2. Your last name, Averko, show, that your roots are Ukrainian (even if you call it Russian), and it was very funny to see “small – Ukrainians†even in the United States, try to defend his occupier. Its look very similar, to some African slaves, which tried to defend his colonial master. Unfortunately, it’s happen also with some Ukrainians.