Tuesday, August 26, 2014

How extensive was Western complicity in Soviet crimes?

            Diana West has again raised the question of Western complicity in Soviet crimes in "American Betrayal: Nuremberg and the Nazi-Soviet Pact."  This is the 75th anniversary of the Nazi-Soviet Pact.  This particular case involves the suppression by the American and British authorities of evidence contained in the secret protocol of the Hitler-Stalin Pact.  It was a widely known historical fact that the Soviets had come to an agreement with the Hitler regime to divide Poland between them.  The German invasion of Poland was the immediate cause of the Second World War.  It was followed two weeks later by the Russian invasion of their agreed upon eastern part of Poland.

            It was necessary to suppress this evidence because the German high command  was being charged with “conspiracy to wage aggressive war.”  It would damage the image of the Nuremberg trail as a "model of international justice" if it was pointed out that the Soviets, sitting in judgment of the Germans, were themselves guilty of the same crime.  The Soviets originally planned to charge the Germans with committing the Katyn Forest Massacre.  This was the execution in Katyn Forest and other locations of 25,700 Polish prisoners captured by the Soviet.  Their case was so weak that they thought it wise to not include it.  The whole proceeding was described by Judge Learned Hand  as "A step backward in international law."

            The Western officials had good reason to protect their Soviet "allies."  They were trying to maintain the good will of their Russian counterparts.  They also did not want other matter to come to light.  Diana West mentions the forced repatriation of over two million eastern Europeans to the Soviet Union.  But there is much more they wanted to conceal.  The Western role in the slave trade and the engineered famine are the two most indefensible policies.  Germany was transformed into a paradise for looters.  Even the chief U.S. Prosecutor and Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson took part in this orgy of looting, obtaining two grand pianos at bargain basement prices.    

            She points out that the perpetrators of these crimes were "allowed to slip away unrecognized, unjudged, unpunished."  Why would these criminals, whose death toll exceeded the Nazis, be allowed to escape judgment after the fall of the Soviet Union?  Diana West provides a partial answer.  The decisive opposition to a Nuremberg style trial came from the West.  What did the leaders of the West have to hide?

Thursday, August 7, 2014

Is There An The Invisible Man

Diana West has opened a can of worms.  Few people are interested in investigating this further.  Some powerful people are interested in closing this can as quickly as possible.  One commentator remarked, "think about what exactly would unravel, should the official version of events regarding the war be exposed as lies and propaganda?"  This could be scary.  Diana only scratched the surface of this dilemma.  She mentions 500 Soviet agents in the U.S. government.  Vasili Mitrokhin  lists about 1,000. There are several subjects she deals with only superficially (U.S. POWs, slave labor, engineered famine.)  You can only cover so much material in 400 pages.   

Now to the "Invisible Man."  It is quite possible that after careful consideration writers and editors decided that publishing favorable articles about American Betrayal would not be wise.  On the other hand it is possible that they produced their work and were quickly contacted by someone who informed them that they had made a mistake (you might call this a conspiracy.)  David Horowitz published an article by Mark Tapson favorable to the book.  It was quickly withdrawn and the author, a Frontpage staff writer, labeled an "incompetent."  Clare Lopez wrote an article favorably mentioning American Betrayal on the Gatestone site.  Apparently, Gatestone's editor, Nina Rosenwald, was initially impressed with the article.   Shortly after that the article was pulled and Clare Lopez was given a pink slip by Gatestone.  Andrew McCarthy wrote a somewhat balanced article on the book and was chastised by Conrad Black.  He responded by praising Black and asserting that he was misunderstood.

Diana West's responses to her critics have been published in Gates of Vienna and Breitbart.  Few other publications have covered the controversy.  The case of The American Thinker is unique however.  It has published several articles dealing with American Betrayal that have been critical.  Yet its editor gave what amounted to a refusal to Diana West's request to respond. 

The problem Diana's critics have is that their position is untenable.  Diana West's supporters believe in "conspiracy theories."   As all informed "experts" know the Communists never conspired.  They may have sat around and drank vodka, ate borsch and chatted, but they never conspired.  I offer two quotes that sum up the oppositions position.  Harvey Klehr speaking for himself and John Haynes: "In our more than twenty years of archivally based research on Soviet espionage in America, we have uncovered ample documentation of Soviet intelligence obtaining American technical, military, and diplomatic information but very little indicating successful policy manipulation."  Conrad Black has written: "There is not one scintilla of acceptable historical evidence that the supposed 500 Soviet agents, 'many of them operating at the very highest levels of the federal government,' existed in such numbers or influenced American foreign policy in these most important matters at all, or that any actual policymaker from Roosevelt down thought of anything except the national interest of the United States and the desirability of the reign of democracy within countries and of international law among them."

In response I would like to offer The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Policy.  I am not trying to promote the sale of my book.  Please get a copy from the interlibrary loan.  It details extensive Soviet influence on American policy.  It has footnotes and even a bibliography.