Vlasov Morok

Homeland, collaborator, memory

On November 14, in the Prague City, in the beautiful Rudolph Gallery, historians and archivists from Moscow, St. Petersburg, Prague, Yekaterinburg, Pskov, Pleshcheyev gathered. The 70th anniversary of the Prague Manifesto was dedicated to a three-day conference organized by the Russian Tradition Society (leader Igor Zolotarev) and the Russian Word magazine (editor-in-chief Marina Dobusheva).

Everything that is connected with Vlasov is still little clarified in the national mind, sometimes intentionally confused by propaganda and is perceived as a large-large myth. The myth of the hero and the traitor, about the Savior of hundreds of thousands of Soviet prisoners of war and the Nazi washing. About a figure that few wanted to hear, and nonhumans, which there was nothing to listen to. The Vlasov Morok still covers the gaze of a Russian person.

The figure of General Vlasov, or rather, his affairs were in the center of attention of our conversation with Moscow historian Andrei Martynov, who emphasizes his traditional views on Vlasov as a traitor and rejects all revisionism. The book of A. Martynov "On both sides of Pravda: the Vlasov movement and the domestic collaboration" is printed by the Moscow publishing house "Veche".

The sound and text of this issue of "myths and reputations":

Your browser does not support HTML5

Myths and reputation. Facing Hitler, the back of the head to Stalin

The next issue of "myths and reputations" reflected a different view of this story. The 70th anniversary of the Prague Manifesto, today's organizers managed to celebrate in the hall that could only be dreamed of-in the Rudolph Gallery. The very idea that the emigrant public organization will achieve such a premises in the Czech capital of such a room. And the argument about the Vlasovites as the "Savior of Prague" did not convince anyone. But this happened.

What the speakers talked about, you will learn by listening or reading the program.

Your browser does not support HTML5

Myths and reputation. Vlasov Morok

And I would like to remind the main tasks of the Vlasov Committee (or the Committee for the Liberation of the Peoples of Russia, abbreviated Konr), in which in the fall of 1944 more than a hundred people were included: generals and commanders of the Red and White Army, clergy and public. I will quote one of the interviews with historian Kirill Alexandrov, who is undoubtedly leading today's specialist in the Vlasov topic:

"Vlasov and his environment believed that the committee was to become a unifying representative body for all anti -Soviet forces, which would widely declare its political program, capable of, as its authors seemed to attract compatriots on both sides of the front.

At the same time, Condr proceeded to create his own army - it was assumed that Soviet people would go to its side under the influence of the program. The Vlasovites were convinced of the inevitability of the conflict between Stalin and the Anglo-American coalition. And until that moment they hoped to maintain the organization and replenish their strength.

The manifesto was supposed to play the role of a trendy letter for Western allies

The manifesto was supposed to play the role of a trendy letter for Western allies, to which all the opponents of Stalin, united in the framework of the common army, were going to go over to the side. So it happened to a large extent: most troops of the CONR troops surrendered to the allies in Bavaria, the Czech Republic and Austria. Only no one assumed that the allies would begin to force Vlasovites to the Soviet Union. Finally, with their manifesto, the leaders of CONR wanted to leave a certificate of their goals and priorities. "

What goals did the committee of the liberation of the peoples of Russia set himself in his Prague Manifesto?

The overthrow of the Stalinist tyranny, the liberation of the peoples of Russia from the Bolshevik system and the return of Russia to the people who were won by them in the 1917 people's revolution.

The cessation of the war and the conclusion of the honorary world with Germany.

The creation of a new free people's statehood without Bolsheviks and exploiters. The basis of the new statehood, Konr proposed to put the equality of all the peoples of Russia and their actual right to national development, self -determination and state independence, the elimination of forced labor, the establishment of inviolable private and labor property, and ensuring social justice. The peasants Konr promised to eliminate collective farms and transfer land to private property free of charge. The intelligentsia is an opportunity to freely create for the benefit of their people. All citizens - free education, medical care and provision of old age. However, no specific mechanism for the implementation of the stated goals and objectives in the manifesto was indicated.

Was this program feasible? Many called her manin - and this is the softest criticism

Was this program feasible? Many called her manin - and this is the most mild criticism. Was General Vlasov so naive utopian? Or did he, according to some researchers, expected Hitler to use Hitler to free the homeland from Stalinism?

No matter how to evaluate the most contradictory figure of Russian history, not moral assessments were made in the Rudolph Gallery, but a scientific conversation about the "uncomfortable" pages of the past.

On the last day of the Jubilee Conference (November 16), Kirill Alexandrov caused a storm of emotions from all the audience. In his final word, he just suggested being correct in his formulations. But these amendments to whom they knocked out the usual soil from under the feet.

In order not to break anything, I will reproduce the words of K. Alexandrov on a tape recorder:

“Of course, in private conversations you can use the phrase“ liberation movement ”, but at the academic level, we will be honest, it seems not entirely correct. Because this phrase“ Liberation movement ”itself causes a lot of issues not only from the unenlightened public, but even from professional historians.

It seems to me that the most important idea that I want to voice now (I did not talk about it at the conference, there was no place in the report) - you understand what the matter is, it is completely pointless to talk about the human tragedy that we are talking about, related to the history of emigration, with the history of Soviet citizens who participated in the battles on the side of the enemy, respectively, with the history of the Vlasov movement and so on, outside the context of the domestic history, Russian, Russian, Russian The stories of the first half of the twentieth century. Roughly speaking, the reference point should be the 80-90s of the XIX century, when all these people were born, and 1955, when an amnesty was declared. It is only if you clearly imagine what happened in these 70 years, only then the actions, the motivation for the behavior of our characters of all that we spoke about, become intelligible and understandable.

The Vlasov movement, or the liberation movement, as the second wave or the Vlasovites themselves called it, is only an episode, small, very tragic, very bloody, bright, dramatic, but this is an episode of resistance

The Vlasov movement, or the liberation movement, as the second wave or the Vlasovites themselves called it, is only an episode, small, very tragic, very bloody, bright, dramatic, but this is an episode of the resistance of sub-Soviet people, which essentially began in the late 1920s. All theses of the Prague Manifesto, the provisions are found in documents, underground leaflets of the anti-Stalinist opposition of the 1930s. I will not touch now what these people are in the Red Army, former party workers, students, intellectuals and so on, no matter. Accordingly, the anti -Stalinist protest was preceded by a white movement and the first wave of Russian emigration.

There would never have been so strong, bright if the search for the language between the new Russia and the old, two Russia had not begun. Unfortunately, I cannot, This statement is very serious, it needs strong correction. What period are we talking about?

Vladimir Melikhov (from the hall): 1944.

1943-44. But even in 1943, the motivation of people who submitted a report to the ROA was completely different. I declare this with all responsibility. But there is another problem there: a person filed a report to the Eastern Troops of the Wehrmacht or Roa, somewhere else, his motivation changed in the process. Guided by the survival strategy, he came to the ROA school with a conscious conclusion. I talked with one Vlasov, who told me: "I became a real Vlasov man only on Kolyma in 1949."

No Russian liberation army never existed - this is a myth, this term can not really be used. The Russian Liberation Army is a propaganda stamp

Therefore, there should not be any extreme assessments. In turn, not only Hitler is to blame for the tragedy of Soviet prisoners, but Stalin is obvious. Therefore, you need to be correct in the wording, accurate. No Russian liberation army never existed - this is a myth, this term can not really be used. The Russian Liberation Army is a propaganda stamp, it is a conditional fictitious designation of all Russian battalions as part of the eastern troops of the German Wehrmacht, who had its own commander-in-chief of the inspector of the Eastern troops, at first it was Hermikh, and then from January 1, 1944, General Ernst Kestning. Vlasov does not fit here - this was, until a certain point, a person who performed a propaganda function, hoped that all these eastern parts would be retrained to him. And what we call the Russian Liberation Army is, in fact, these are the troops of the Committee for the Liberation of the Peoples of Russia.

I tried yesterday in the report to briefly outline who they consisted of, how many they were. In total, these are only 10% of Soviet citizens who carried military service on the side of the enemy during the Second World War. There are approximately 1,200,000, and there are about 120 thousand of them, who can be called the Vlasovites.

As a matter of fact, Vlasovites in February 1944 can be counted on the fingers. This is then the Cossacks, on the other hand, the ranks of the Russian corps, as of the spring of 1945, can and should be called the Vlasovites, because legally their status has changed. It is clear that only the first division, which was only one eighth of the total number of the Vlasov army, took part in the battles for Prague.

Nobody liberated Prague, neither the Vlasovs, nor the Red Army

Nobody liberated Prague, neither the Vlasovites, nor the Red Army. Because the first division entered Prague, intelligence units - on May 6, on May 7, the entire division pulled up. On the morning of May 8, the second regiment of Artemyev Vyacheslav Pavlovich covered the retreat of the division when she left Prague. After that, at about 10-11 in the morning of May 8, the Prague units of the SS troops entered Prague, Prague was again occupied by the Germans. And only at 16 o’clock in the afternoon, on May 8, the Germans surrendered, signed an act of surrender, it was published by Czech historians. At 18 o’clock in the evening, battles ceased in the city. At 0 hours 45 minutes on May 9, Germany officially capitulated, already in Moscow time, and not Berlin. Only at half past five in the morning on May 9, the first mechanized brigade of the third or fourth guards tank army appeared. From 8 a.m., Prague was occupied by units of the three Soviet armies-13, 4, 34th Guards Tank.

That is, by the time the Vlasovites from Prague left, Prague was not yet free, and when the Red Army came, the war ended de jure, the Germans capitulated the Czech National Council.

Therefore, it is more correct to say that the first division saved the city from destruction, it delayed the main forces of the German garrison and, accordingly, there would be much more victims among the civilian population and residents of the city, if not for the first division. But it is impossible to say that the Vlasovites freed Prague. This is not my thesis, this is the thesis of the late Stanislav Alfredovich Auska, who wrote about this in 1982 when the publication of his book in Russian was published. Therefore, the accuracy of the formulations is needed here, it is better to correct ourselves than to indicate and object our ideological opponents.

Contemporaries noted his rudeness, mother, a lover of women, a lover of drinking - it all had a place to be

Probably the last thing I wanted to say. The position of General Vlasov during the Prague uprising. Do not scare those present here, no documents that could radically change the impression of Vlasov, cannot be published. The maximum that did not remain published, and I know about what is lying there is documents about Vlasov’s service in China and the materials of the closed party meeting at which his behavior was discussed. But the materials of this party assembly were disavowed with two party characteristics of Vlasov after arriving from China and checking the nomenclature of the Central Committee of the All -Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks in February 1942, when the Vlasova Sector of the Central Committee certified the future deputy commander of the Volkhov Front, for Stalin this note was preparing. It says black and white there that during the service during the operational management of the army of the Chinese republic, it is characterized positively. Vlasov has never been the main military adviser in China, so he could not turn the course of hostilities at the front, he was an adviser to the governor Yan Sishan - this is a completely deaf province. Instead of the laid for 6 months, he spent almost 18 in China. His business trip was constantly extended - this is the best evidence of his merits. The personality of Andrei Andreyevich is difficult, in no case do I need to idealize it, I constantly write about it. Contemporaries noted his rudeness, mother, a lover of women, a lover of drinking - all this had a place to be. Some even said - duplicity, acting.

On the other hand, it was a completely disinterested man. When, forgive me, they arrested him, he had 30 thousand of the Reichsmarks, a golden engagement ring was found - this is really about anything. Soviet generals who were in Germany plundered millions of brands, all documents were published. Vlasov was a man who could give the last cigarette a stranger to a completely visitor. Smokers know what it is. It was a person in fact for no luxury that never sought. His cooperation with Shtrik-Schitrikfeld and the decision to take part in the liberation movement was sincerely. His position in relation to Prague was motivated by two very significant arguments: one cannot interfere in the Prague uprising, because it would not let the division go into the American zone, and Vlasov was afraid that the Germans would use aviation and heavy artillery against other poorly armed units of the Vlasov army, and this would disrupt their movement along the route that the committee was developed. All. The position is completely normal for the commander in chief and natural.

Since it so happened that we must note the role of the Vlasovites, then this, of course, needs to be done. ”

So said in his final word historian Kirill Alexandrov. It seems to me that these words also help to scatter the Vlasov Morok.