Forced Repatriation,Operation KeelHaul and Bleiburg Tragedy

[willy marevic]

as i'm of croatian background i had the chance to talk to the family members who had been at bleiburg when the croatian army surrendered and handed in there weapons to the british i was told that the partizans came out of the bushes and started shooting at the unarmed soldeirs and civilians and the british troops in the vicinity did nothing, plus from what i know those who ask for political protection should be given protection in we look and articles from the geneva covention they have been abused by both sides of the axis and allies just wantedc you to know

(might makes right) ( what goes around comes around)

*OFF TOPIC AND INFLAMMATORY PARAGRAPH DELETED BY MODERATOR. PLEASE STICK TO THE TOPIC AT HAND, WHICH DOES NOT INCLUDE THE VIETNAM WAR*

[Allen Milcic]

Allen -

The classified AFHQ cables that I referred to are even more revealing than your Tolstoy passage. I would certainly suggest a visit to one of the three archives I mentioned for those having a further interest in this unfortunate affair. The sudden change in behavoir at British 5th Corps in South Austria was due to the arrival of urgent instructions from London cabled to the senior British political officer attached to AFHQ headquarters in Caserta. The instructions contained in that cable were then reissued to the British field commands in the form of an order. As I recall, I could not find a paper copy of that order and the evidence was that it was passed on by telephone. As you go through those cables, it's like a great mystery playing out before you and when you have finished the plot in unmistakeable clear but you are still short the much sought after "smoking gun."

--Larry

Hi Larry:

It was always my belief (thoroughly unsubstantiated by any formal documentation) that the change in British attitude towards the NDH POW's was due to negotiations between Churchill and Tito vis-a-vis Trieste and the southern portions of Austria (all claimed at the time by the Communists); I also believe, though, that sheer volume of massive excesses committed by Tito's men on the repatriated NDH soldiers were completely unexpected in the higher British command structure. I note that, after the first giant wave of repatriations, the number of NDH soldiers and politicians sent back to Yugoslavia suddenly became a trickle (and only of higher-ranking individual members, never en-masse), before completely stopping. I believe the British were aghast with what had occurred.

Best regards,
Allen/

[Larry D.]

Hrvat -

First, let me fill you in on the background. In October 1985 I was hired by Radoslav Artukovic and his attorneys to investigate the veracity of the charges brought against his father, Dr. Andrija Artukovic, by the Yugoslav government and the U.S. Justice Department. I spent the next 7½ years digging through documents in the three places I mentioned in my previous post, plus archives in Zagreb, Ljubljana and Freiburg im Breisgau, and interviewing witnesses.

Now to your specific question. At one time I had photocopies of many of the documents from AFHQ Caserta and well as from other commands that are relevant to the Bleiburg tragedy. In 1996 I removed those files from my office and stored them in banker's boxes in my garage, and then in spring 2003, 10 years after my work on the Artukovic case ended, I purged a very large number of those files in the believe that I would never have cause to refer to them or need them again.

I will check what I have left in my garage and see what remains, but I fear that it won't be much. I will get back to you on this thread after I have examined the remaining files.

--Larry

[Larry D.]

Hrvat -

I am afraid there wasn't anything left of the files I mentioned earlier. However, here is a more precise list of some of the material I examined. If there is any way you could get to these archival repositories, then I would certainly recommend it, especially if your paper is a Ph.D. dissertation. If, on the other hand, it's just a MA thesis or undergraduate paper, then the expense probably wouldn't be worthwhile.

NARA WashDC:
Record Group 84, Records of the Foreign Service Posts of the Department of State, USPOLAD Caserta (the Honorable Alexander Kirk), several boxes of fascinating high-level correspondence concerning “Keelhaul” and related matters; Kirk reported directly to the U.S. Secretary of State in Washington. Some of this correspondence, classified Top Secret, directly concerns the butchery of Croatians at Bleiburg and the events leading up to it, including notes on a number of conversations he had with the British POLAD at Caserta (Harold MacMillan? I forget....it has been many years).
Record Group 331, Records of Allied Force Headquarters (AFHQ), 1942 – 1947; 361 linear feet of paper records and 4,544 rolls of microfilm.
Roll R-1-L War Criminals and Crimes – Incidents Jun 43 – Jul 45.
Roll R-2-L War Criminals and Crimes – Incidents Jun 45 – Feb 47.
Roll R-512-A Croats and Ustashi, “Keelhaul” vol. I, Jun 45 – Oct 46; “Keelhaul” vol. II, Oct 46 – Feb 47; Anti-Tito Activities, Dec 45 – Jan 47.

Air Force Historical Research Agency (AFHRA) Maxwell AFB, Montgomery (AL), Records of Mediterranean Allied Air Force (MAAF), Decimal 622, MAAF Intelligence Section, microfilm roll 263, “War Crimes and Atrocities, 4 Jan 45 – 26 Jul 45.

Other Sources:
- Official and private correspondence of Air Vice Marshal A.S.G. Lee, chief of the British Military Mission to Yugoslavia (these papers are in England).
- Official records of the UNRRA Mission to Yugoslavia, which arrived in-country 20 March 1945 (these records are at the U.N. Archive in New York).

IIRC, I also found a lot of good material in the Top Secret AFHQ and MAAF "Redline" incoming and outgoing message files for the mid-April 1945 to the end of June 1945.

Sorry that this probably isn't going to help you very much. Some day, long after most of us are gone, this material may be up on the internet. Until then, it is still necessary to go to the various archives and dig it out.

Good luck with your paper,

--Larry

[Larry D.]

Hi Larry:

It was always my belief (thoroughly unsubstantiated by any formal documentation) that the change in British attitude towards the NDH POW's was due to negotiations between Churchill and Tito vis-a-vis Trieste and the southern portions of Austria (all claimed at the time by the Communists); I also believe, though, that sheer volume of massive excesses committed by Tito's men on the repatriated NDH soldiers were completely unexpected in the higher British command structure. I note that, after the first giant wave of repatriations, the number of NDH soldiers and politicians sent back to Yugoslavia suddenly became a trickle (and only of higher-ranking individual members, never en-masse), before completely stopping. I believe the British were aghast with what had occurred.

Best regards,
Allen/

Hello Allen,

The instructions from London were related to the deteriorating discussions between Churchill and Tito, but I can no long recall to what extent.

Your appreciation of the British mind-set regarding the level, volume and intensity of the butchery is quite correct, according to my reading of the situation. However, the handwriting was clearly on the wall as scattered reports of atrocities and summary executions began to filter in to Caserta from the Allied liaison officers in the field with the Yugoslav forces beginning around 25 April, and the abrupt dismissal of most of these teams that were traveling with the JA army and corps headquarters that were advancing toward the Austrian border. The dismissals were immediate, threatening and without explanation. In some cases, the liaison personnel were disarmed, blindfolded and hurriedly driven out of the area. By 5 or 6 May, AFHQ knew that something evil was afoot, but it's true that they did not know the scope of what was about to happen. Reports were also being received of Tito's people killing Allied aircrew personnel in Istria and the Littoral at the time the Yugoslav 4th Army rolled up that area during late April and early May. Those reports really caused a flury or excitement.

Interesting and stimulating stuff, Allen.

Kind regards,

--Larry

[David Thompson]

I also believe, though, that sheer volume of massive excesses committed by Tito's men on the repatriated NDH soldiers were completely unexpected in the higher British command structure. I note that, after the first giant wave of repatriations, the number of NDH soldiers and politicians sent back to Yugoslavia suddenly became a trickle (and only of higher-ranking individual members, never en-masse), before completely stopping. I believe the British were aghast with what had occurred.

This is my belief as well. I'm familiar with the events mentioned by Larry D.:

However, the handwriting was clearly on the wall as scattered reports of atrocities and summary executions began to filter in to Caserta from the Allied liaison officers in the field with the Yugoslav forces beginning around 25 April, and the abrupt dismissal of most of these teams that were traveling with the JA army and corps headquarters that were advancing toward the Austrian border. The dismissals were immediate, threatening and without explanation. In some cases, the liaison personnel were disarmed, blindfolded and hurriedly driven out of the area. By 5 or 6 May, AFHQ knew that something evil was afoot, but it's true that they did not know the scope of what was about to happen. Reports were also being received of Tito's people killing Allied aircrew personnel in Istria and the Littoral at the time the Yugoslav 4th Army rolled up that area during late April and early May. Those reports really caused a flury or excitement.

but as far as I can tell, the allies didn't know what these events portended, or whether they were part of a general scheme or plan. I think this issue needs further study and a lot more documentation before folks start getting self-righteous about British and US involvement in the repatriations.

[David Thompson]

Some additional information, from Earl F. Ziemke, The US Army in the Occupation of Germany 1944-1946, pp. 288-291, Center of Military History, US Army, District of Columbia 1990.
http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/wwii/Occ-GY/

For three weeks after the surrender the only Soviet nationals being repatriated were the 28,000 captured in German uniform during 1944. The shipment, which had started in late March, went by boat from England and from Marseille to Odessa. The ships returned with troops of the Western Allies whom the Soviet armies had liberated, including 2,858 Americans.49 On Soviet insistence, SHAEF exchanged the Russians' German uniforms for US clothing before embarkation.50 To carry out its obligations under the Geneva Convention, and also because of qualms over the reception the men would get in the Soviet Union, SHAEF had ordered that the Russians would be returned only on a voluntary basis. Until the surrender, SHAEF also had to be concerned about giving the Germans a possible excuse for reprisals against the US prisoners they held. On 10 May, through the Military Mission Moscow, Lt. Gen. K. D. Golubev, Soviet Deputy Plenipotentiary for Affairs of Repatriation, complained about the "abnormal attitude toward Soviet citizens." The Russians, he said, were being asked such questions as " 'Who wants to go home?' . . . I especially insist," he concluded, "on the return of all Soviet citizens without depending on their agreeing to return home." 51 SHAEF then revised its procedure and permitted the men only to be asked whether they claimed Soviet citizenship and were willing to relinquish their prisoner of war status.52

In the first week of June, Eisenhower reported to the JCS that the number of Soviet citizens captured while serving in the German forces and still under SHAEF control was under a thousand. He proposed, since the "danger of German reprisals on our own prisoners" no longer existed, to turn them over to the Soviet Union; and in the following week he ordered "German prisoners of war . . . who are claimed to be Soviet citizens and whose citizenship as such has been established will be transferred to Soviet authorities for repatriation." 53 He did not, however, broach the obvious next question, whether force was to be used against those who could not be repatriated any other way; it was a question that would also have to be answered sooner or later for some of the DPs and for the additional thousands of Russians in German service who had come into SHAEF's hands after the surrender. The 12th Army Group, for example, was holding a contingent of 45,000 Cossacks and 11,000 of their camp followers who had surrendered with the German armies in Austria. In Czechoslovakia, Third Army had 7,000 Russians who had fought on the German side and could claim prisoner of war status because they had surrendered before V-E Day.54

From beginning to end, probably the

[288]


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

least edifying aspect for SHAEF of having Soviet citizens of any variety in its custody was the endless shower of carping complaints from the Soviet authorities. Already before V-E Day, SHAEF had investigated so many baseless charges from the chief Soviet liaison officer, Maj. Gen. V. M. Dragun-among them one that 850 Russians bound for Odessa had been diverted to North Africa and forcibly enlisted in the Foreign Legion-that it refused to accept any more without some evidence to substantiate them. In May, Moscow took over. On the 2d, Pravda printed an interview with Col. Gen. P. I. Golikov, the Plenipotentiary for Affairs of Repatriation, in which Golikov asserted that all Soviet-liberated US and British troops, "except for small groups," had been repatriated but that the Americans and British were holding Russians in camps and mistreating them. Subsequently, his deputy, Golubev, alleging "rude" violations of the Yalta agreement, leveled a series of charges at SHAEF : Soviet citizens were being kept in prisons, given "miserable" rations, denied medical treatment, poisoned with methyl alcohol, and fed poisoned food.55

On 16 May, Maj. Gen. Ray W. Barker, SHAEF G-1, went to Halle, twenty miles northwest of Leipzig, to meet General Golubev, coming from Moscow via Berlin, and to arrange with him a system for exchanging DPs and liberated prisoners of war across the demarcation line. Barker had with him Brig. Gen. Stanley R. Mickelsen, Brig. R. H. S. Venables, and a small party of technical services officers. Golubev came with forty officers, including six major generals, and fifty enlisted men in a convoy that included a U.S.-built armored car and a fully equipped radio truck. The Russians were armed with pistols, submachine guns, and rifles. The next morning, at their first meeting, Barker proposed sending airplanes at once to bring out the US and British prisoners of war. After making some excuses about there not being serviceable airfields-which Barker knew was not true and said so-Golubev made it "very clear that neither now, nor any time in the future, would they permit Allied Airplanes to be used for movement into or out of their territory of prisoners of war or DPs . . . ." The Russians then brought out their plan for the exchange. Obviously written in Moscow, it was cast as a legal document, and its tenor was "to extract compliance to the last degree" with its provisions and with the agreements made at Yalta. Among its specific provisions were some that would have allowed Soviet repatriates to take with them unlimited amounts of "personal effects" and up to 600 pounds of food per person, that would have required SHAEF to provide each repatriate with three days' rations at the exchange point, and that would have prohibited any movement of the repatriates on foot as long as they were on SHAEF territory.

When Barker insisted that he had not come to renegotiate the Yalta agreements but to work out the technicalities of the exchange, Golubev agreed to have a drafting committee set up to work out a plan. The committee met all day and all night on the 17th and into the morning of the 18th and accomplished nothing. The Soviet members were obviously not allowed to depart even in details from the text they had brought with them. Thereafter, Barker ne-

[289]


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gotiated directly with Golubev. The going was slow, since Golubev himself apparently could not make substantive decisions without approval from Moscow. On the 19th and 20th, the talks stalled for twenty-four hours on the question of how far the Soviet repatriates could be required to walk. Finally, in the early morning hours on 22 May, Barker and Golubev completed and signed a plan. Under it, SHAEF would set up reception-delivery points on its side of the demarcation line at Wismar, Wustmark, Ludwigslust, Stendal, Magdeburg, Leipzig, and Plauen; and the Russians would set up points at corresponding locations on their side. As the plan worked out, the Soviet repatriates did not have to walk very much. SHAEF agreed to transport them to its delivery points by rail, truck, and air and to carry them across the line to the Soviet reception points by truck.56

During the talks at Halle, Barker proposed converting his and Golubev's groups into a permanent committee to deal with repatriation questions. Golubev refused but announced that he wanted to send Maj. Gen. S. Y. Vershinin and 162 Soviet contact personnel into western Germany to minister to the "hundreds of thousands of Soviet citizens [there] under difficult conditions and more than ever in need of the support of our officers." When Barker asked him whether he would let the French, for example, do the same on Soviet territory, Golubev was noncommittal. Barker later told General Deane at Military Mission Moscow, "A scheme such as this amounts to creation of a Soviet empire in the SHAEF area, which would give them boundless opportunity for criticism-also intelligence." When Golubev, several days later, cabled from Moscow to "demand insistingly an immediate decision," Barker told him that General Dragun, the chief Soviet liaison officer, already had 153 Soviet liaison officers under him and no new organization was needed.

After the Halle conference, Golubev toured five DP camps in SHAEF territory. He had agreed to let one of Barker's officers tour five Soviet camps on the same day, but when the US officer visited the first camp, the Soviet major accompanying him produced an order with Golubev's signature limiting the tour to that one camp only. Later Golubev cabled from Moscow that he had not found the treatment of Soviet citizens satisfactory in a single one of the five camps he had visited. 57

The exchange had begun before the Halle agreement was signed. On 20 May, the Soviet forces turned over 2,000 liberated US and British prisoners of war. By the 26th, 60,000 eastbound DPs had passed through the SHAEF delivery points, and by the 28th, all of the 28,662 liberated US troops reported in Soviet hands had been returned.58 In June the rate of repatriation of Soviet DPs reached 250,000 a week, and on 9 June, SHAEF G-5 reported that the repatriation of all DPs had passed the halfway mark. As of 1 July, 1,390,000 Soviet citizens had gone east, and the Soviet forces had delivered 300,000 western European DPs and prisoners of war. The western

[290]


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Europeans still in camps under 12th Army Group control were then down to 6,583. The number of Soviet citizens left in western Germany was below 700,000 and being reduced fast, leaving 871,000 Poles, the largest national DP group. The Soviet authorities had not included them in the east-west exchange, and the Warsaw government had so far not made any arrangements to have them returned.59
_______________________________________________________________________

49 The Exchange with the Soviet Forces of Liberated Personnel-World War II, in CMH files, pp. 4 and 9.

50 Memo, Hqs, ETOUSA, Provost Marshal, for G-1, sub: Uniforms for Liberated Soviet Citizens, 1 May 45, in SHAEF G-1, 383.618-8.

51 Cable, Military Mission Moscow to SHAEF Main, Opns Div, 10 May 45, in SHAEF G-1, 383.6/8.

52 Cable, SHAEF Main to Military Mission Moscow, 15 May 45, in SHAEF G-1, 383.6/9.

53 Cable, SHAEF Forward, Eisenhower to AGWAR for JCS, 5 Jun 45, and Cable, SHAEF Main to ALFNOR, 10 Jun 45, in SHAEF G-1, 383.6/8-8.

54 (1) Cable, SHAEF Forward to AFHQ, 12th AGp Msg, 17 May 45, in SHAEF G-1, 383.6/3-19. (2) XII Corps, Report of Operations, 9 May-27 Oct 45, in XII Corps, 212-0.3.

55 (1) Cable, SHAEF Main to Military Mission Moscow, 15 May 45, in SHAEF G-1, 383.6/9. (2) Memo, SHAEF, Political Adviser, for CofS, 2 May 45, in SHAEF G-1, 383.6/8-8. (3) Cable, Military Mission Moscow, from Deane to Eisenhower, 7 Jun 45, in SHAEF G-1, 383.6/8.

56 (1) Memo, SHAEF, ACofS G-1, for CofS, sub: Report on Conference with Russian Officials, 23 May 45, in SHAEF G-1, 337/2. (2) SHAEF, G-5 Div, DP Br, DP Report No. 32, 28 May 45, in SHAEF G-5, 6.

57 Cable, Military Mission Moscow to SHAEF Main, 5 Jun 45 ; Ltr, Barker to Golubev, 9 Jun 45 ; Ltr, Barker to Deane, 9 Jun 45 ; and Cable, Military Mission Moscow to SHAEF Main, 18 Jun 45, in SHAEF G-1, 383.6/8.

58 The latter figure includes those returned earlier through Odessa.

59 (1) SHAEF, ACofS G-5, Min of Meetings with Branch Chiefs, 9 Jun 45, in SHAEF G-5, 3573, Jacket 2. (2) Memo, SHAEF G-5, DP Br, sub: Russian DPs, 9 Jul 45, in SHAEF G-5, 29.2. (3) Hqs, 12th AGp, ACofS G-5, Narrative Summary for Month of June, 9 Jul 45, in SHAEF G-5, 17.16, Jacket 13.

[just anotherguy]

Talking about rules or conventions about treating POWs is a little silly for may 1945, specially after concentration camps were discovered. It was payback time as it was all around Europe

Slovenian and Croatian colaborators were return because of agreement between big guys, to return colaborators to their country.
Second, because of allies representatives at partizan forces my guess is ( dont know for proof ) that allies in Koroška knew about active role of slovenian and croatian colaborators in fight against partizans together with Germany and about their war crimes
Third , those people returned to Yugoslav forces had no value for western allies. Those were just thousands who need food and water and place to sleep, and in exchange they could not make offer. higher ranking members including war criminals manage to escape with help of Vatican or other countries
And last , not just partizans who were revenging to enemies, there is another thing. Many of colaborators run to Koroška together with their families, and when returned, they were killed. But those families of colaborators who stayed at their home survived in most cases. Partly responsible for massacre is also that propaganda


And dont forget also, after several years in forest, mostly hungry,some with burned homes , some with killed families, there was no need for reason at the end of war for revenge , or for officer to get group of loyal and not educated partisans for dirty work. Aftre years of war where was no mercy for captured partisans.

[Hrvat]

pay back? for what, for the fact that they were not ready to be ruled by Communist 'Yugoslavs'?

these were for the most part civilians with no blood on thier hands, take the words of a 1979 interview with former partizan vice president Djilas' who said

....The great majority of the people the British forced back from Austria were simple peasants. They had no murders on their hands. They had not been Ustashis or Slovenian ‘ home guards’. Their only fear was of communism and the reputation of the communists. If the British had handed over to us ‘ quisling’ leaders such as Nedic, and police agents who had collaborated wit the Nazis who had collaborated with the Nazis in torturing and killing people, there could be no question of the morality of their British action. But this was not what they did. They forced back the lot – and this was profoundly wrong

....British– guilty of a mixture of indifference, lack of political imagination and plain imbecility? Imbecility above all- they ought to have looked at the character of our government, such as it was at the time and draw their own conclusions. Yes the British did the wrong thing in putting these people back across the border, as we did completely the wrong thing in shooting them all. In wartime I make no secret of my view that these killings were senseless acts of wrathful revenge

....Yugoslavia was in a state of chaos and destruction. There was hardly any civil administration. There were no properly constructed courts. There was no way in which the cases of thousands could have been reliably investigated. So the easy way out was to have them all shot, and have done with the problem. (tolstoy 357)

no need for revenge as u claim is laughable at best for didnt communist commisair Bakaric (president of the people republic of CROATIA !) say The Croatian People must die so that yugoslavia can live (those loyal to ndh at least) and die they did as thousands other s rotted in prisons such as goli otok,lepoglava etc. thoughout the decades

saying ther was no reason or will for revenge, or that post war attrocity did not happen is a complete joke

[mr]

pay back? for what, for the fact that they were not ready to be ruled by Communist 'Yugoslavs'?

these were for the most part civilians with no blood on thier hands, take the words of a 1979 interview with former partizan vice president Djilas' who said

....The great majority of the people the British forced back from Austria were simple peasants. They had no murders on their hands. They had not been Ustashis or Slovenian ‘ home guards’. Their only fear was of communism and the reputation of the communists. If the British had handed over to us ‘ quisling’ leaders such as Nedic, and police agents who had collaborated wit the Nazis who had collaborated with the Nazis in torturing and killing people, there could be no question of the morality of their British action. But this was not what they did. They forced back the lot – and this was profoundly wrong

....British– guilty of a mixture of indifference, lack of political imagination and plain imbecility? Imbecility above all- they ought to have looked at the character of our government, such as it was at the time and draw their own conclusions. Yes the British did the wrong thing in putting these people back across the border, as we did completely the wrong thing in shooting them all. In wartime I make no secret of my view that these killings were senseless acts of wrathful revenge

....Yugoslavia was in a state of chaos and destruction. There was hardly any civil administration. There were no properly constructed courts. There was no way in which the cases of thousands could have been reliably investigated. So the easy way out was to have them all shot, and have done with the problem. (tolstoy 357)

no need for revenge as u claim is laughable at best for didnt communist commisair Bakaric (president of the people republic of CROATIA !) say The Croatian People must die so that yugoslavia can live (those loyal to ndh at least) and die they did as thousands other s rotted in prisons such as goli otok,lepoglava etc. thoughout the decades

saying ther was no reason or will for revenge, or that post war attrocity did not happen is a complete joke

both bakaric and djilas said that , only bakaric said croatian people must die and djilas croatian army must die , and it wasn't a revenge it was preorganized extermination of croatian people ordered by tito he eliminated his ''interior enemies''

[Alex (F)]

You cannot judge the events of May 1945 with the rules of 2005. As an American who lived during the World War II years, although as a child, I can factually state that the majority of British and American civilians were exhausted after 4+ years of bloodshed, rationing and sacrifice, and if Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt wanted to indirectly kill off the fascists and their supporters then that was O.K. with them. Take your mind and your emotions back to those years and try to put yourself in the shoes of those who experienced the events of World War II, either on the battlefield or on the home front. If you can do that, while also considering the laws and social attitudes that applied then, it will give you more balance in the issues you are weighing.
--Larry

I think any crime remains crime and emotions can only justify private individuals (eg. a man who lost his family can be treated more leniently when he kill an enemy's POW, but never remained unpunished). Something that can be understood among individuals cannot be understood among politicians. Politicians cannot be justified by emotions. In this case we are talking not only about enemy's POWs, but also civilians who were handed to Partizans. So we can talk about refugees, so a different convention should be applied. The British could suspect (even if they didn't know in 100%) what can happen to the people they handed to Partizans. If they had any doubt they could make some enquire and there is no sign they even tried to do this. Of course it would be difficult (altohugh not impossible) to prove their legal responsibility, but their MORAL responsibility cannot be questioned.

[zz000ter]

Interesting discussion! Thank you for the information.

Does anyone have any information about involvement of the CANADIAN Army in Op Keelhaul and specifically the Croatians at Bleiburg.

Thanks in advance for your help

Z