Finland and "Final Solution" in WWII?

Hurricane · Post by **Hurricane** » 28 Nov 2003 09:10

Aleksei22 wrote:Hello, all

Just a lift up, only.

Hi, did you translate the letter I presented to you? (http://www.yle.fi/dokumentti/ryssa/djakov_1.htm)

Juha Tompuri · Post by **Juha Tompuri** » 29 Nov 2003 12:37

Aleksei22 wrote: - Hmmm …. What do you mean when you say "Russification".

http://www.tln.schulnetz.org/fr/EetuIsto.htm

Regards, Juha

Juha Hujanen · Post by **Juha Hujanen** » 29 Nov 2003 23:45

Off topic,but a more personel account of Ingrian people.During war an elderly
Ingrian granny was located to house where i live now.She hap plenty of obsolete Czar era Rubles with her,i guess she hoped that someday they would be again legal currency.

/Juha

Juha Tompuri · Post by **Juha Tompuri** » 30 Nov 2003 00:40

Hi Juha,

Similar memories here.
There was an Ingrian family (Grandparents, a mother and children) at our farm during the war too. Among with two Swedish volunteers and some Soviet POWs. The Father of the Ingrian family came later (during the war) here dressed in a German uniform. Perhaps he was one of the ones "exchanged" to the Soviet POWs? Later the Ingrian went to the JR 200, AFAIK. When the war ended, the Ingrian family went back to the USSR, after spendind all their money to fishing nets and agricultural equipment. But the train they got in, never stopped at where they used to live...
One "our" Soviet POW never went back. He disappeared (as there were no guards) when the war ended. He probably went to Sweden.

Regards, Juha

Tapani K. · Post by **Tapani K.** » 30 Nov 2003 09:26

Juha, if this Ingrian chap was wearing a German uniform he most likely was one of the Ingrian men recruited by the Germans in 1941 for the Finnische Sicherungsgruppe 187, later renamed Ost-Bataillon 664. This battalion served in the German rear until 1943, when they were transferred to the Finnish army and named Erillinen Pataljoona 6 (Er.P 6). If you are interested, try to find Vaiennetut sotilaat by Pekka Mutanen, which is an account of these men.

regards,
Tapani K.

Harri · Post by **Harri** » 30 Nov 2003 19:20

I'm not quite sure if Ingrians had been in JR 200, because it was Estonian regiment (probably only those who had lived in Estonia before the war?). Like tapani said there are other more probable units, like Er.P 6 (Separate Battalion 6). If I would be Heikki Ylikangas I would first check how many relieved ones ended up to this battalion. It is a bit premature to assume that all relieved POWs would have been sent to death camps or died in these camps without any evidences.

I think also that most "relieved" POWs were not given to Gestapo, but German military authorities, like Abwehr, but because all Germans are/were "bad" of course it was Gestapo

. It has not yet mentioned that Germans had POW camps also in Finland but Finns had nothing to do with these camps. It is likely any Jews met there were directly shot or sent to Germany. POWs for example built railways and roads in the north together with German builder formations.

Most POWs Finns relieved were NCOs or Officers and many had been in special (technical) duties in Red Army which suggests that Germans wanted to interrogate (or use?) them because of their knowledge or skills.

Today there was a story about the Syyspohja "POW Camp number 3" in local newspaper Etelä-Saimaa written by editor Antti O. Arponen (who has wrote an excellent book about the happenings of 1918 in South Karelia). Camp was for about 300 POWs and was commanded by Lt. L. Holopainen. Personnel was eight officers, nine military officials, 27 NCOs and 98 men. Most sentries were so called "B men" i.e. not suitable for combat/front duties. There were only four large barracks, each for about 80 prisoners: two for Russians, one for "tribe soldiers" and one for women (I think all Soviet female soldiers Finns captured were there).

There were two "mass escapings" in Syyspohja Camp during the war: on 7.6. and on 21.6.1943. The first case started when six POWs killed Finnish sentry Private T. Tillaeus. Four pows were shot during a chase, Private A. Shilov was caught and executed afterwards and one managed to escape. It is unclear if he (or she?) never reached USSR - probably not.

It is said there that Lt. Holopainen would have liked to move to other duties but his requests were not accepted. In autumn 1943 Commandant Holopainen together with his assistant and four sentries were sentenced to guardroom punishment in military court because they "had neglected their duties" in the last summer!!

----

It is an interesting "nuance" that the Chief of POW Office of Home Troops Staff at the beginning of war was Capt. Eljas Erkko, our former Foreign Minister (just before Winter War). He said in court after the war that this camp was not under his "command".

Juha Tompuri · Post by **Juha Tompuri** » 01 Dec 2003 22:19

Thans and sorry Tapani and Harri,

I messed some (all) things: I asked from my father about the "foreigners" at our farm during the WWII (1943-44), and he corrected my memory. A lot.
At those days my father was 9-10yr old. This is what he remembered:
(1943) came the Ingrian family. The elder ones: Juho (?) and Alexandra(?), their adult daughters "Pola" (Polagenya?) with her 2yr old daughter "Vala" (?) and "Nasse" (Natasha?) They (exept Nasse who was a teacher) were farmers and fishermen. Now the interesting part: Polas husband who came later to us, dressed into a German uniform, was according to my father a Soviet POW from Germany. He, "Vanja" (Ivan?) was Russian and first worked ( he was a car mechanican) at our farm, and after that at Kouvola at some car repair-shop. He didn´t join Finnish Army. When Vanja came to our farm Alexandra imediately took his trousers and coat off, and then dyed them black. ( I think it was not just the colour that made her act so)
When the war ended, the Ingrians (specially the elder ones) were very eager to go back to their home. They have had many fishing nets when they came to Finland, they sold all of them and bought farming equipment, a cow and a calf. We gave them also two pigs and two lambs.
Vanja didn´t go back. My father remembers that he once pointed his forehead with his finger as an answer what would be his fate in USSR if he returns there.
There also were two Swedish volunteers helping us at the farming.
The first one Karl Anders Winnarve(?) from Visby, Gotland was very much liked here. He worked summer-43. The other guy (?) was here only for few days: the thunder-like Soviet artillery noise from Carelian Isthmus and the news of Soviet attack June-44 made him leave.

I hope I got everything right this time, Juha

Gespenst · Post by **Gespenst** » 04 Dec 2003 16:48

I think this will mostly be off-topic too, but more on topic than Aleksei22's queries on Finnish and Russian history.
There is a mention about the ca. 3000 POWs that have now caused commotion.

In Aikalainen Nro. 19 / 24.11.2003
Some S. Lindström from Turku writes a fiery reply to an article about a book "Salaisen poliisin valtakunta. KGB, FSB ja suhteet Suomeen" by Kuorsalo/Susiluoto/Valkonen.
Has anyone read this book? Is it good?
I do not take this fellow for an academic, but it would be nice to have some input from you people on this subject.

Here is the text. I will provide English translation if i have
the skills and time for that.

Miksei kirjoiteta Gestaposta?

Tiede- ja kulttuurilehti Aikalainen 16/2003 julkaisi arvostelun kirjasta Anne Kuorsalo - Ilmari Susiluoto - Martti Valkonen: Salaisen poliisin valtakunta. KGB, FSB ja suhteet Suomeen.

Kirjassa erikoistutkija Ilmari Susiluoto VTT ja Martii Valkonen VTM selittävät lähihistoriaa tarkoitushakuisesti totuutta salaten ja vääristellen. He suomettavat, mustamaalaavat sodanjälkeistä aikaa. Vaikka se oli Gestapon aikaan verrattuna hyvää aikaa. Suomi-Neito pääsi toipumaan saksalaisten aseveljien julmasta raiskauksesta. Ja maassa pääsi inhimillinen elämä versomaan.

Kerrotaan kauhutarinoita KGB:stä. Mutta ollaan vallan vaiti natsien Gestapon suhteista Suomeen. Vaikka Saksan Gestapon Suomen osasto toimi täällä jo 1936. Asia paljastui noitaoikeudenkäynnin ns. Antikaisen jutun yhteydessä.

Hitlerin Gestapolla oli Suomessa silmät ja korvat kaikkialla; urkintaverkostot. Suomalaisten apuriensa avulla Gestapo valvoi meidän suomalaisten puheitakin. Esim. kun Kemijärven kirkkoherra Lauri laitinen puhui jotain saksalaisia vastaan, niin hänet vedettiin oikeuteen. laitiseen lyötiin kommunistileima. Ja oikeus langetti hänelle kuuden kuukauden kuritushuonetuomion. Sitten kirkkoherra Laitisen oli paettava Ruotsiin. Dagens Nyheter kirjoitti asiasta.

SS-miehenä palvellut Sakari Lappi-Seppälä kertoi kirjassaan Haudat Dneprin varrella, että Gestapo oli hommassa mukana toimittamassa suomalaisia miehiä Hitlerin SS-joukkoihin. Ja Lappi-Seppäläkin joutui kokemaan kauheita. - Myöhemmin Gestapo toimitti täältä tuhansittain ihmisiä natsien käsiin.

Gestapo-päällikkö natsikenraali Himmler vieraili suomessa heinä-elokuun vaihteessa 1942. Mannerheim otti päämajassaan Mikkelissä vastaan Himmlerin. Himmleriä kohdeltiin kunniavieraana, kumarreltiin - totta kai! Mutta silti Himmler raivostui syksyllä 1943 ja nimitti meidän maatamme täivaltioksi.

Kyllä suomalaisen henki oli tosi halpa siihen aikaan, kun Gestapo meitä valvoi. 1943 - siis 60 vuotta sitten Suomi oli surkeassa alennustilassa ja hirveässä vaarassa Hitlerin sotajoukkojen temmellyskenttänä. Hitler rahtasi Suomeen n. 250 000 saksalaista ja hirveän sotakoneiston sekä suunnattomat määrät pommeja, miinoja, kranaatteja, räjähteitä. Hitler loi Suur-Saksaa muitten maita valtaamalla.

Paasikivi on sanonut: Onneton sota on omien militaristien aikaansaama pääosin. - Oikeisto: kokoomuspuolue, AKS ja IKL saivat sodan aikaan vaikka keskustaporvarit kamppailivat 30-luvulla sotahankkeita ja natsilaisuutta vastaan.

Professori Yrjö Ruutu sanoi: Oleellisesti oikeistomme on ollut sillä linjalla, jolle se vuonna 1918 lähti. Siitä on seurauksena kymmenientuhansien nuorten miesten ennenaikainen hauta ja silvottu isänmaa. - Saksa on kaksi kertaa vakavasti uhannut Suomen itsenäisyyttä, sanoi Ruutu kirjasessa Suomen politiikka 1939-44

Nyt suomen sivistyneistö selittää koko sodan ryssän syyksi yksin! Vaikka oltiin Hitlerin armeijan kanssa idän ristiretkellä siirtämässä miekalla Euroopan itärajaa Uraliin - piirittämässä Pietaria - miehittämässä Neuvosto-Karjalaa. Mutta sieltä ajettiin pois.

Olisiko Yliopistolla velvollisuus tuoda tosiasioitakin julki?

S. Lindström
Turku

There's the text, but i must run now.
I'll be back later to comment on it.

taivaansusi · Post by **taivaansusi** » 04 Dec 2003 19:30

Gespenst wrote:In Aikalainen Nro. 19 / 24.11.2003
Some S. Lindström from Turku writes a fiery reply to an article about a book "Salaisen poliisin valtakunta. KGB, FSB ja suhteet Suomeen" by Kuorsalo/Susiluoto/Valkonen.
Has anyone read this book? Is it good?

Haven't yet. But I must say that mr. Lindström has memorized his soviet propaganda well. I can't explain his anger in any other way than a) he is a former KGB informer or sympathiser b) he is an ardent communist, who hadn't noticed that Soviet Union doesn't exist anymore.

Harri · Post by **Harri** » 04 Dec 2003 21:42

Well, mr. Lindström seems to forget the whole Winter War - or was that also the fault of Finnish right wing parties?

Also he forgets the activities of local Communists and the espionage of USSR. If Germans probably knew all about Finnish military, so did the Soviets. Anyway Finland was only a piece in the game of the super powers - and in that game no-one asks anything from the small and weak ones...

I think the horrors of NKVD (KGB) and the sufferings of Finnish people (and everyone else in Finland) would have been much greater if USSR would have captured/conquered Finland (one way or another). There is no doubt that Stalin would have tried again if the situation had been right for his plans. Someone has said that Stalin only understood "power" - and that's what he got. Maybe he also learnt something?

Wasn't that Gestapo thing handled already at the beginnig of 1970? I think there is a book called "Vakoilu Suomessa" [Espionage in Finland] and also a book (IIRC) "Gestapo Suomessa" [Gestapo in Finland] but I don't remember who wrote them. It is clear that both Germans and Soviets had espionage activity in Finland but I doubt if Germany was as interested in Finland as USSR.

Gespenst · Post by **Gespenst** » 05 Dec 2003 01:00

Aye, the author sounds like a strong Soviet sympathizer.
Everyone is titled to his or her own opinion about matters, but
trying to preach all nazi hell on Finland because the rewiev was on
a book that mainly did not concern cooperation with Germany
- voluntary or forced, but forced cooperation with a totalitarian
nation that had "gun to our head" at that time is a little far-fetched.

Of course certain similarities can be found in the roles of both Gestapo
and NKVD in Finland, mainly because they were, obviously, agencies of
the two major powers of Europe.

Suomi oli surkeassa alennustilassa ja hirveässä vaarassa Hitlerin sotajoukkojen temmellyskenttänä. Hitler rahtasi Suomeen n. 250 000 saksalaista ja hirveän sotakoneiston sekä suunnattomat määrät pommeja, miinoja, kranaatteja, räjähteitä. Hitler loi Suur-Saksaa muitten maita valtaamalla.

Finland was in miserable state of humiliation and in grave danger as the playground of Hitler's armies. Hitler hauled to Finland ca. 250 000 Germans and a horrendous amount of war materiel, countless bombs, mines, grenades and explosives. Hitler was in creation of a Greater Germany by taking other countrie's land

Translation mine, not perfect and i cannot duplicate the hilarious, almost poetic message that has the ever-repeated proof-stamp cliche sound of the uneducated press.

timoa · Post by **timoa** » 06 Feb 2004 15:16

2. - "POW Organizing Camps" ??????? Mmmmmmm…. May be KZ ???

why do you keep thinking that POW's were put into KZ's and that KZ's existed in Finland?

timo

Earldor · Post by **Earldor** » 06 Feb 2004 22:31

This is the summary of the report that the president of Finland ordered from professor Ylikangas re: Elina Sana's book "Luovutetut:

"Elina Sana’s book Luovutetut — Suomen ihmisluovutukset Gestapolle (‘Surrenders of prisoners
of war and detainees to the Gestapo’) (2003), which caused a great stir both in Finland
and abroad, is a documentary work based on investigative journalism. It sheds light on the
subject area in the title from a number of angles and also provides stimuli and poses challenges
for conventional historical research, which in Finland has been committed, for an exceptionally
long time, to defending “Finland’s honour”, in other words the decisions of wartime
leaders. As a result, the darker side of war has received less attention. However, in order
to defend the “honour” of today’s Finland, it is essential to address unpleasant aspects of
war, too.

Sana’s book deals with two areas which are important in themselves: the handover of civilian
refugees by the Finnish State Police and of prisoners of war by the control unit of Finnish
military headquarters. With respect to the former, Sana’s book does not add much to the
information contained in Taimi Torvinen’s 1984 work Pakolaiset Suomessa Hitlerin valtakaudella
(‘Refugees in Finland during Hitler’s Rule’). The 76 to 79 refugees who were extradited
over include the eight Jews, whose handover had been taken up by Sana previously
(1979). The statement concludes with an interpretation indicating that the Jews in question
were surrendered because Finland was economically and militarily dependent on Germany
and mainly to make the Germans more willing to take detainees who were considered more
problematic: citizens of the Soviet Union who had defected from Finland to the Soviet Union
and then returned in secret to Finland. They formed the largest subgroup of those handed
over. Most — but not all — of them had already been punished for working on behalf of a
foreign power in Finland. Although they had served their sentences, the Finnish authorities
did not dare to release them.

The most important new material in Sana’s book is related to the exchange of prisoners with
the Germans. Prior to Sana, this topic has been treated only in unpublished theses at various
universities; in published research the theme has barely been touched on. Sana concludes
that a total of 2,829 persons were turned over to the Germans in this way. The number is
significantly higher than the figure of 2,661, given in the records demanded by the Allied
Control Commission immediately after the war.

It is in this part of the book that the cause of the international stir over the themes treated in
it comes to light. It is now clear that there were also Jews among the prisoners turned over
by Finland to Germany. As a consequence of the massacre of Jews carried out by Nazi Germany,
international public opinion is still extremely sensitive to anything related to the Second
World War and to the treatment of Jews. This is the reason for the furore.
Sana presents 74 as the number of Jews surrendered to the Nazis, citing the Israeli researcher
Serah Beizer as her source. This figure relies in part on identification based on
names and is therefore unreliable. More exact overall information is not yet available. More-
over, the reason for the handover of the Jewish prisoners is unclear. The theses that deal
with the subject state that the reason was not one of race or ethnic origin, but related to
some other factor such as a detainee’s status as an officer or agitator or to political activity.
This view cannot be fully confirmed although there are strong arguments supporting it. (The
majority of Jewish prisoners were not handed over. ) The Germans had in fact obtained lists
of prisoners from Finland and may have demanded the handover of certain persons on the
basis of this information.

Jews also died in Finnish POW camps. The death rate among prisoners rose as high as 30%,
the hardest hit being the ‘Great Russians’, among whom the Jews were at first included, and
who were treated the worst, along with political prisoners. It is estimated in the statement,
although the sources are inadequate, that approximately 100 Jews died in the camps. Hence,
the total number of Jews would be 170.

Sana’s work does not take up the reasons for the exchange of prisoners in more depth. It
only quotes statements indicating that the Germans wanted information about the operations
of the NKDV, the Soviet secret police, and the Finns wanted prisoners of Finnish ethnicity
who could be used to settle the conquered areas of Soviet Karelia. First of all, with regard to
the aforementioned prisoners, the statement claims that at least 16,000 of them volunteered
to fight in the Finnish or German armies or to participate in their intelligence-gathering missions.
Harsh conditions in prison camps and the severe punishment meted out under Soviet
legislation to returning POWs were the principal motive for these requests. Probably a considerable
number of those turned over to the Germans were chosen from this group. Since
the overwhelming majority of those surrendered to the Germans represented minority nationalities
in the Soviet Union, it may be assumed that the Germans recruited volunteers from
among their number to serve in foreign auxiliary units on the eastern front. Secondly, both
the Germans and the Finns sought instructors and trainees from among these volunteers for
training as secret agents. These persons were to be sent on intelligence-gathering missions
across the border. It is also evident that some of the prisoners handed over to the Germans
were used for labour.

There are references to these interpretations in other related literature and sources. To confirm
them, however, would require a thorough scholarly analysis. It should, in particular, be
established who among the prisoners were executed and who ended up in concentration
camps. The political officers (118) had the worst prospects and the Jews (74) came right
after them, with the communists (400-500) in third place. The rest of the surrendered prisoners,
some 2,000 persons, most probably escaped immediate execution or internment in
concentration camps.

Despite massive destruction of sources, a sufficient basis for more extensive research does
exist. The statement mentions that in general one or perhaps two research projects would be
justified. The first of these would take three years to complete and would attempt to explain
the handover of civilian and military prisoners to Germany and the Soviet Union (immediately
after the war), decision-making at different levels, the legality of the procedure, and — if
possible — the deaths in prison camps in Finland and, in the case of Finnish prisoners, in the
Soviet Union, too. Finnish soldiers listed as missing should also be included in the study. A
second, separate project would involve a joint effort with Russian researchers and would
concentrate on the fate of the Ingrians after they had been returned to the Soviet Union.
over, the reason for the handover of the Jewish prisoners is unclear. The theses that deal
with the subject state that the reason was not one of race or ethnic origin, but related to
some other factor such as a detainee’s status as an officer or agitator or to political activity.
This view cannot be fully confirmed although there are strong arguments supporting it. (The
majority of Jewish prisoners were not handed over. ) The Germans had in fact obtained lists
of prisoners from Finland and may have demanded the handover of certain persons on the
basis of this information.

Jews also died in Finnish POW camps. The death rate among prisoners rose as high as 30%,
the hardest hit being the ‘Great Russians’, among whom the Jews were at first included, and
who were treated the worst, along with political prisoners. It is estimated in the statement,
although the sources are inadequate, that approximately 100 Jews died in the camps. Hence,
the total number of Jews would be 170.

Sana’s work does not take up the reasons for the exchange of prisoners in more depth. It
only quotes statements indicating that the Germans wanted information about the operations
of the NKDV, the Soviet secret police, and the Finns wanted prisoners of Finnish ethnicity
who could be used to settle the conquered areas of Soviet Karelia. First of all, with regard to
the aforementioned prisoners, the statement claims that at least 16,000 of them volunteered
to fight in the Finnish or German armies or to participate in their intelligence-gathering missions.
Harsh conditions in prison camps and the severe punishment meted out under Soviet
legislation to returning POWs were the principal motive for these requests. Probably a considerable
number of those turned over to the Germans were chosen from this group. Since
the overwhelming majority of those surrendered to the Germans represented minority nationalities
in the Soviet Union, it may be assumed that the Germans recruited volunteers from
among their number to serve in foreign auxiliary units on the eastern front. Secondly, both
the Germans and the Finns sought instructors and trainees from among these volunteers for
training as secret agents. These persons were to be sent on intelligence-gathering missions
across the border. It is also evident that some of the prisoners handed over to the Germans
were used for labour.

There are references to these interpretations in other related literature and sources. To confirm
them, however, would require a thorough scholarly analysis. It should, in particular, be
established who among the prisoners were executed and who ended up in concentration
camps. The political officers (118) had the worst prospects and the Jews (74) came right
after them, with the communists (400-500) in third place. The rest of the surrendered prisoners,
some 2,000 persons, most probably escaped immediate execution or internment in
concentration camps.

Despite massive destruction of sources, a sufficient basis for more extensive research does
exist. The statement mentions that in general one or perhaps two research projects would be
justified. The first of these would take three years to complete and would attempt to explain
the handover of civilian and military prisoners to Germany and the Soviet Union (immediately
after the war), decision-making at different levels, the legality of the procedure, and — if
possible — the deaths in prison camps in Finland and, in the case of Finnish prisoners, in the
Soviet Union, too. Finnish soldiers listed as missing should also be included in the study. A
second, separate project would involve a joint effort with Russian researchers and would
concentrate on the fate of the Ingrians after they had been returned to the Soviet Union."

You can find the full text in html- and pdf -form in http://www.vnk.fi/vn/liston/vnk.lsp?r=5 ... fi&old=915 but you need to know Finnish.

Harri · Post by **Harri** » 06 Feb 2004 23:19

The report was criticised by Professor Ohto Manninen who said that this case was already researched for the History of Continuation War which was published since 1990's.

Earldor · Post by **Earldor** » 07 Feb 2004 00:20

Harri wrote:The report was criticised by Professor Ohto Manninen who said that this case was already researched for the History of Continuation War which was published since 1990's.

To make it absolutely clear: Manninen only criticized the fact that Ylikangas and the media thought that the pow exchanges had not been mentioned before Sana's book.

To my knowledge, Manninen hasn't directed any criticism towards the report itself.

Axis History Forum

Finland and "Final Solution" in WWII?

Re: Just a lift up, only.