Amendment to the Decision of Council of People’s....

[Oleg Grigoryev]

My imperfect translation

Secret
Guidelines for handling of POWs
Amendment to the Decision of Council of People’s Commissars of USSR #1798-800c from July 1st of 1941
I. General guidelines
I. ÎÁÙÅÅ ÏÎËÎÆÅÍÈÅ
1. People that considered to be POWs are:
a) persons that belong to the armed forces of the forging powers that are in a state of war with the USSR, who were captured during combat, as well as citizens of the above-mentioned foreign powers, that are interned on the territory of the USSR.
b) persons that belonged to the armed groups which do not belong to the regular army of opposing side but who carry arms openly

c) civilians that are accompanying army or navy of the opposing side with an explicit permit of opposing side such as reporters, suppliers and others captured in the course of the combat.
2. It is forbidden:
a) to insult POWs and cruelly handle them;
b) to force POWs to divulge information regarding the situation in their countries under the threat of brute force
c) to take uniforms, clothing, footwear, and other personal property as well personal identifications and decorations. Valuables can be taken form POWs in exchange of the official receipt and only by the official who has the specific authority to do so.
3. Instruction and regulations published by NKVD of USSR as a follow up of these guidelines are to be posted in such places where they could be read by all POWs. This instructions and regulations as well as orders regarding the POWs are to be read to them in Russian and the language that is familiar to them .

II Evacuation of POWs

4. POWs upon their capture shall be sent to the POW camps as soon as possible
5. Upon their capture, registration of the POW shall be done where he must tell his real last and first name, age , place of birth , and personal number . This data shell be passed alongside with POW to the collection points
6. Sick and wounded POW, that are in need of medical attention or hospitalization, shall be immediately directed toward the nearest hospital. Upon their recovery these POW shall be sent to the POW camps.
7. Supplying and servicing of POWs (food, medical services etc) is a responsibility:
a) prior to the arrival to the POW camps –by the army
b) after that by NKVD of the USSR
III Conditions in which POWs are to be held and their rights
8. Collection points are to be deployed in the army’s rear area in accordance with orders of the army command; camps are to be deployed out of the combat area in accordance with orders of NKVD of the USSR and in agreement with People’s Commissar of Defense

9. POWs are to be provided with housing, clothing, footwear, food and other necessities as well as with money in accordance with norms given by Directorate of the POW an interned affairs of NKVD of USSR. Lists of the goods and foodstuffs that POWs are eligible for shall be posted in such way that they can be well seen. Third party aid to POWs shall not be used as an excuse to cut their state-provided norms in any way.
10. Captured officers and other persons that are equated to them shall be placed separately and shall be provided with housing, clothing, footwear, foodstuffs and other necessities as well as with money in accordance to active norms.
11. POWs are allowed to wear their uniforms ranks and decorations. POWs are forbidden to have or carry weapons.
12. Medical service of POWs is to be conducted on the same level as that of the Red Army personnel. It is allowed in addition to standard staff of the camps to use captured enemy medical personal.
13. POW have rights:
a) at the first opportunity to communicate his capture to his country.
b) to buy at his own expense food, clothing, footwear and other necessities
c) to receive, free of any kind of duties, aid from his country and from neutral countries
d) to receive money from his country and from neutral countries.
14. For maintaining of internal order and in order to communicate with POWs, administration of the camp shall appoint representatives out of the POWs, which are to communicate all the problems to the camp administration.
15 Mail sent and received by POWs is to be sent free of postage fees in accordance with instructions by Directorate of the POW an interned affairs of NKVD of USSR
16. Money sent in form of foreign currency is to be exchanged in accordance with existing course. POWs are allowed to have money on hands in the amount which is to be determined by Directorate of the POW an interned affairs of NKVD of USSR. Money over this limit is to be placed into the saving accounts . In special cases administration of the camps can allow for additional money to be given to POWs
17. POWs can write their wills. Order in which the fact of the death of POW was determined as well as the place of burial shall be properly documented.
18 Savings and personal belongings of dead POWs shall be given to the Red Cross in order for the later to pass them to the next of kin. Food parcels that arrive for the dead POWs shall be distributed among other POWs.
19. POWs must oblige the administration and follow all the regulations and orders written in present guidelines and in ones published by Directorate of the POW an interned affairs of NKVD of USSR
IV POWs labor
20. POW belonging to file and rank as well as unter-officers can be give work in camps as well as outside of them in agriculture and industry of the USSR in accordance with special rules that currently are being developed by Directorate of the POW an interned affairs of NKVD of USSR. Officers and persons equated to them can only be given work if they agree to that.
21. POWs that are used for work are subjects to labor protection laws which are used by local administration for the Soviet citizens.
22. POWs that are used for work in various sections of economy are to be paid the salaries envisioned by Directorate of the POW an interned affairs of NKVD of USSR, minus the sum that is used to pay for the shelter, food etc.
23. Industrial Works and factories that POWs are working for are responsible for providing them with housing and utilities.
24. From the moment POWs starts working he is no longer eligible for the state-provided aid.

25. It is forbidden to use POWs in the areas of active combat, personal needs of administration, and other higher ranking POWs.
V. Criminal and Disciplinary responsibility of POWs
26. Crimes committed by POWs are subject to jurisdiction of military tribunals in accordance with laws of the USSR or the Republic. Refusal to follow orders , resistance, or assault on Soviet personnel while the later does its duty is equal to the corresponding military crime.

27. For the misdeeds that are not classified as criminal , in the way jurisprudence defines it, POWs can be subject to disciplinary punishment. Kinds of punishment are defined by the rules written by Directorate of the POW an interned affairs of NKVD of USSR.
28. POWs which are being investigated or who were sentenced by the court or who were disciplined, cannot be subjected to additional measures for the same misdeeds.
.
29. Every case of court sentencing shall be reported to the Executive Committee of the red cross no later than 20 after the passing of the sentence. In case of sentencing to the capital punishment -it shall be reported to the executive committee of the red immediately and cannot be fulfilled before such a notice.
VI In regards to lists of POWs and aid for them
30. The exchange of list of POWs and communications in regards of the POWs matters with foreign and international red cross organizations or information bureaus shall be done by the executive committee of the Red Cross. For this purposes central bureau of POWs, attached to the executive committee of the Red Cross, shall be created in agreement with Peoples Commissariat of Foreign Affairs.
31. Representatives of foreign and international red cross organizations can be granted access to the USSR territory in order to provide aid to POWs, with special permission of with Peoples Commissariat of Foreign Affairs.

[David Thompson]

Oleg -- Thanks for that very interesting document (and the translation was workable, too). Is this document dated 1 Jul 1941 or is it an annex or attachment to an earlier document which was dated 1 Jul 1941?

[Oleg Grigoryev]

Thanks David it is an attachement to the document that was dated by the July 1st.

[michael mills]

Very interesting, Oleg Dmitrievich.

But were those admirable provisions adhered to?

Remember the Stalin Constitution of 1936? It was very democratic in its provisions. There were to be contested elections with multiple candidates (not only Communists), and the entire population was to have the vote, including former proscribed groups such as Whites and Kulaks, who had previously been excluded. Nation-wide elections were scheduled for December 1937.

But precisely at that time the Great Terror raged. Despite the democratic facade created by the new constitution, 1.5 million people were arrested and about 700,000 executed.

If the 1936 Constitution could not protect the people of the Soviet Union from arbitrary terror, arrest and execution, then I strongly doubt that the provisions in the document posted by Oleg would have provided much protection to German servicemen who fell into the hands of the NKVD.

[Oleg Grigoryev]

Very interesting, Oleg Dmitrievich.

But were those admirable provisions adhered to?

Remember the Stalin Constitution of 1936? It was very democratic in its provisions. There were to be contested elections with multiple candidates (not only Communists), and the entire population was to have the vote, including former proscribed groups such as Whites and Kulaks, who had previously been excluded. Nation-wide elections were scheduled for December 1937.

But precisely at that time the Great Terror raged. Despite the democratic facade created by the new constitution, 1.5 million people were arrested and about 700,000 executed.

If the 1936 Constitution could not protect the people of the Soviet Union from arbitrary terror, arrest and execution, then I strongly doubt that the provisions in the document posted by Oleg would have provided much protection to German servicemen who fell into the hands of the NKVD.

But were those admirable provisions adhered to?

not always. But then again Beria was on the regular basis hitting his subordinates over the head for not following. For instance order #0371 from 8.15.41 signed by him demoted and removed from the position the commandant of Temnikov POW camp Kadishev and sent his deputy Kuzmin straight to the military tribunal for the abuse and mistreatment of POWs. I am currently translating actual NKVD regulations regarding POW that effectively a follow-up to the previous document, devised by Soprunenko and confirmed by Serov. The great black irony of course that both were knee-deep involved in the Katyn affair.

As for Stalin constitution, was not exactly as simple as you paint it out to be. But patience one of these days I will translate Zhukov article on the subject in full – no I can only direct you towards what I already have posted. http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... =scarecrow

[michael mills]

Oleg,

Thank you for the link to the thread "Stalin's scarecrow". I had not come across it before (the forum is simply too big to read all the different issues that are introduced into it).

Zhukov certainly does present an interpretation of the history of the Soviet Union in the 1930s and Stalin's role in it that runs counter to everything else that I have read. Of course, I am not competent to judge which interpretation is correct.

As to Beria's action against Kadishev and Kuzmin, that does not surprise me at all. The whole history of the period is full of examples of subordinates being blamed for the repressions committed by the rulers of the Soviet Union, for so-called "violations of Soviet legality", and punished for them.

It seems to me that in the Soviet Union there was a fundamental conflict between theory and reality. The theory was that the socialist system had liberated all the people of the Soviet Union and enabled them to live a happy life; the reality was that a small elite enjoyed power and privilege at the expense of the common people, which could only be maintained through massive repression and terror.

The conflict between theory and reality could only be resolved by regularly purging the power structure and blaming subordinates for the terror and repression that the men at the top needed to stay in power. The claim was made that repression and terror were not an integral part of the system, but were "distortions" created by subordinates who were acting against the wishes of Stalin and the other leaders. Thus, when the Great Terror had run its course and Stalin's objectives (whatever they really were) had been achieved, the whole thing was blamed on Ezhov, who was accused of illegal acts and of having repressed totally innocent people.

Thus, the members of the Soviet security organs faced a terrible dilemma; should they exercise terror against alleged "enemies of the people", or should they hold back?

If they did the former, they risked later being blamed for the repressions and accused of having gone against the will of the leadership (eg Ezhov, Beria). If they did the latter, they ran the risk of later being accused of lack of vigilance (eg Iagoda, Abakumov).

It is an irony of history that this conflict between theory and reality did not occur in National Socialist Germany. Since the National Socialist Government did not pretend to be democratic or libertarian, and openly proclaimed that it would establish an unequal society in which a "master race" would rule over others, it could openly give its servants carte blanche to carry out acts of terror and repression, and those servants could carry out those acts without fear of later being made scapegoats by the Government.

Thus, if Beria punished some of his subordinates for infringement of the rules for the treatment of POWs, I do not think that demonstrates that the rules were meant seriously, or that the punished subordinates were acting contrary to the wishes of the Soviet Government. It was yet another case of the subordinates being made the scapegoats for their implementation of the real wishes of the Soviet Government, as opposed to the facade of legality.

The fact that only a small minority of the German servicemen who became POWs in Soviet hands between the beginning of the German invasion and 1944 survived their captivity (eg the prisoners taken at the surrender of 6th Army at Stalingrad) suggests that the regulations for their treatment were actually adhered to.

Although between 60 and 70% of the total German POWs in Soviet hands survived, these were almost all servicemen taken prisoner in the last year of the war or after the final German surrender in May 1945. Of those taken prisoner before 1944, about 90% perished.

[Panzermahn]

But then again Beria was on the regular basis hitting his subordinates over the head for not following. For instance order #0371 from 8.15.41 signed by him demoted and removed from the position the commandant of Temnikov POW camp Kadishev and sent his deputy Kuzmin straight to the military tribunal for the abuse and mistreatment of POWs

Wow, is this the proof that the NKVD under Beria did actually concern for POWs under their own Gulag?????

And wow, i didn't knew that the NKVD under Beria can even punished their men for mistreatment of POWs as it contradicts what they did at Katyn to those Polish POWs under them......

[Oleg Grigoryev]

As to Beria's action against Kadishev and Kuzmin, that does not surprise me at all. The whole history of the period is full of examples of subordinates being blamed for the repressions committed by the rulers of the Soviet Union, for so-called "violations of Soviet legality", and punished for them[/quote ] Mr Mills if you have something that would in fact prove that Kadishev and Kuzmin received some other secret directive upon which they acted and consequently were prosecuted to cover up – you are most welcome to bring this up. Before that actually happens I don’t see why the whole occasion should not be treated other than what it appears to be –two criminally incompetent and negligent officials that getting reprimanded.

The conflict between theory and reality could only be resolved by regularly purging the power structure and blaming subordinates for the terror and repression that the men at the top needed to stay in power. The claim was made that repression and terror were not an integral part of the system, but were "distortions" created by subordinates who were acting against the wishes of Stalin and the other leaders. Thus, when the Great Terror had run its course and Stalin's objectives (whatever they really were) had been achieved, the whole thing was blamed on Ezhov, who was accused of illegal acts and of having repressed totally innocent people.

Yes but all that was done publicly in order to create the needed impression and there is in fact official documents that implicate Stalin and others high-ranking Soviet officials; here we have two rather minor officials being prosecuted without any great publicity and without chain reaction which was the main characteristic of the purges. The same things actually also happened prior to great terror. For instance entire administration of Solovki was put in prison in the early 30s for letting hard core criminals ran amok in the camp – that is even before the first NKVD purge –this one was also done without any publicity.

If they did the former, they risked later being blamed for the repressions and accused of having gone against the will of the leadership (eg Ezhov, Beria). If they did the latter, they ran the risk of later being accused of lack of vigilance (eg Iagoda, Abakumov).

while they would be accused in any case that in turn meant that they pretty much meant that they should be doing what they were told - that was especially true for low-level functionaries. Consider that prior to Katyn one of the camps commandants was bombarded by Poles with requests to treat them in accordance with Geneva convention; he had no idea what the convention was so he requested the text from the Moscow. He was of course replied that he should use internal NKVD regulations instead. Speaking of Katyn –when Moscow wanted to exterminate POWs –it simply ordered it. There is no reason to believe that situation was any different in 1941 than it was in 1940, especially considering the fact that the process was in the hands of the same people.

Thus, if Beria punished some of his subordinates for infringement of the rules for the treatment of POWs, I do not think that demonstrates that the rules were meant seriously, or that the punished subordinates were acting contrary to the wishes of the Soviet Government. It was yet another case of the subordinates being made the scapegoats for their implementation of the real wishes of the Soviet Government, as opposed to the facade of legality.

that would be the case if the purge followed or if the whole affair was made public, but I am willing to bet that you (and you certainly have more interest in the whole subject than the average person does) never heard names Kadishev and Kuzmin before , nor did you hear about the Camp in question. As a matter of fact have you ever heard prior to my post of the Soviet official being prosecuted for the mistreatment of POWs?

The fact that only a small minority of the German servicemen who became POWs in Soviet hands between the beginning of the German invasion and 1944 survived their captivity (eg the prisoners taken at the surrender of 6th Army at Stalingrad) suggests that the regulations for their treatment were actually adhered to.

German POWs at Stalingrad upon their capitulation were bunch of extremely exhausted, suffering from dystrophy infection-ridden people. Maybe in ideal situation more could be saved but I doubt it would be much more. That said high mortality rate alarmed Soviet authorities who immediately published subsequent amendments to instructions on POW handling. I do not know if anyone was held responsible for high mortality rate of the 6th army though.

Although between 60 and 70% of the total German POWs in Soviet hands survived, these were almost all servicemen taken prisoner in the last year of the war or after the final German surrender in May 1945. Of those taken prisoner before 1944, about 90% perished.

1941-1942 were generally bad years for the entire Soviet population as sad as the death of German POWs it is lies very much in line with rest of the Soviet civilians. Former German POWs themselves wrote of numerous occasion when Soviet civilians were begging them for food –kind of speaks for itself.

[Oleg Grigoryev]

But then again Beria was on the regular basis hitting his subordinates over the head for not following. For instance order #0371 from 8.15.41 signed by him demoted and removed from the position the commandant of Temnikov POW camp Kadishev and sent his deputy Kuzmin straight to the military tribunal for the abuse and mistreatment of POWs

Wow, is this the proof that the NKVD under Beria did actually concern for POWs under their own Gulag?????

I know I know, you are not very knowledgeable - but here is your opportunity to learn.

And wow, i didn't knew that the NKVD under Beria can even punished their men for mistreatment of POWs as it contradicts what they did at Katyn to those Polish POWs under them......

That is because at katyn execution of POWs was specifically ordered , and in this case the mistreatment was specifically forbidden. but God look at me I am asking you to use your head, how inhumane of me - I am really sorry.

[David Thompson]

Panzermahn -- You said:

And wow, i didn't knew that the NKVD under Beria can even punished their men for mistreatment of POWs as it contradicts what they did at Katyn to those Polish POWs under them......

Your surprise is surprising. The SS did exactly the same thing in the case of SS-Untersturmfuehrer Max Taeubner. See the discussion on the first page of this thread:
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=33515

[Panzermahn]

That is because at katyn execution of POWs was specifically ordered , and in this case the mistreatment was specifically forbidden.

Wow, Bolshevik ways of handling things...

Mistreatment of POWs is specifically forbidden but executions are allowed and ordered....

Your surprise is surprising. The SS did exactly the same thing in the case of SS-Untersturmfuehrer Max Taeubner. See the discussion on the first page of this thread:
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=33515

Thanks for the link, David

[Oleg Grigoryev]

Panzermahn, the more I read your post the sadder I feel for the trees that have to be cut in order to make paper for your “book”. So here I go again, one more time, for especially gifted, NKVD personnel in both cases acted upon specific instructions; executions of POWs were not allowed, and in case of Katyn were had to be specifically ordered. Now what exactly is so hard to understand?

[michael mills]

Oleg wrote:

that would be the case if the purge followed or if the whole affair was made public, but I am willing to bet that you (and you certainly have more interest in the whole subject than the average person does) never heard names Kadishev and Kuzmin before , nor did you hear about the Camp in question. As a matter of fact have you ever heard prior to my post of the Soviet official being prosecuted for the mistreatment of POWs?

You are right. I had never before heard of Kadishev and Kuzmin, or of the camp in question, or of any Soviet official being punished for mistreatment of POWs.

By the way, did the International Red Cross ever visit any of the POW camps in the Soviet Union, in accordance with article 31? Did the Soviet Union inform the Red Cross of the names of POWs who died while in captivity, and hand over their personal possessions, in accordance with article 18?

If it did not, were there factors that prevented that?

[Caldric]

Let us not make Beria out to be some hero shall we?

[Dan]

Panzermahn, the more I read your post the sadder I feel for the trees that have to be cut in order to make paper for your “book”.

Off topic. That was very, very funny! And I will add that to my collection of mild and internationally acceptable insults.