LETTER TO LEON MOORE FROM ALLEN W. DULLES RE LETTER OF OCTOBER 4TH WITH ENCLOSU

Created: 10/12/1955

OCR scan of the original document, errors are possible

Mr. Leonark Avenue Newew York

Dear Leon:

I read with interest your letterctober with enclosure on the'fake' Litvinovee no reason whatever why yon should not consult Bob McDonald.ave not aeen the changes made, it ia hard for me to pass upon their serlooaaeaa.on't knowan do about the publication of the diary itaelf. Possibly you coulday ofletting aome friends in the presa know about it so that they can be cautious in their reviews.

What do you think about Molotov'a self-coofesslon?hould be interested in your views and whether you think this does or does not mean that his political life ia coming to an end.

Sincerely,

5

W. Dulles Director

AWD:ji D

d* 7

rL21

*

October5

Dear Allen,

Iopy of my answer to Lord Strang about Lltvinov's "diary."

It is really amazing how two publishingn New York and Inould print such an evident fake.

I feel quite disturbed that in the footnotes they- repeat the insinuations about myself which appear in the text of theonderhould react to it.

Don't you thinkught to consult Bob McDonald on the subject?

Best regards.

Sincerely

DS Enc

Koore

Dear Lord Strang:

I hare read tbe American edition of "Notesbtained before the arrival of the copy you sent aa. It is the sane Materialentioned to you in ay letter ofh and which was given to aa by Charles Bohlen in February or Marchnfor your,esoranduarote about this material in How, after tha evident failure to soli this fakehe author revised it substantially,ot of new things. It evidently did not matter to tha author that Lltvinov died early He oontlrmed to write the "diary" oven after3ast saw it. Far Instance in theawhero was noof myself. m honoredrominent place in it. Tho sane applies to many others. At the same time soma material was eliminated, for example, the conflict between Bessedovsky and the Sorlet financial agent in Paris on account of tha letter's wife. Bat basically it Is the saae cheap, naive, and primitive falsification written In Its aain part, or In the Viola by Bessedovsky, wio broke away late9 taking with him all the Embassy and Ukraine funds he could put bio hands on.

after hisfrom the Embassy, Bessedovskyeries of articlesook of memoirs in two volumes. While doib lug the Soviet Paris Embassy, he mentioned my name many times, because, from tho end7 until tho ende served together, never connecting ns with any activities

Now in tho "revised* edition of the "diary* boot ofstatements. Inas never connected with CCPO activities in any way either in Moscow or In Paris or elsewhere. Ambassador RakoTsky could not have "insisted" on ay recall6 aa ths "diary" claims onAmericannly arrived in Parisareer diplomat and after returning froa Paris to Moscow lateas immediately appointed Vice Director of the Anglo-Roman Department in ifiichemained for four years until my transfer to tho Embassy in Rome and in which position you knew me in Moscow. Consequently, Lltvinov could not have discussed my employment in the Foreign Office and could not have appointed me Director of lha Central European Departmentever had anything to do with. All the other stories are similarly false like the statement that my wife was born in Riga, or that sheatvian citlsanoho waaoviet citlsan, that we were aarrled in Riga, that bar aaldan name was Sophia Shats, oras secretary to Trotsky, or had anything to do with the disappearance of Kutapovall these stories and others about our defense of tho Soviet Embassy are false from beginning to end.

Beaoedovsky, withas in Paris for two years, knew lltUe fragments off truth and partly remembers some minor factsi for instance,as born in the Poltava region sndnew Trotsky, and, not having enough materialrote all this nonsense. But would LitrinoT, who for so many years played an important part in Sovietdescribe all these unimportant events, which he did not even know, whan bo had such very interesting things to write in his diary?

Another change from3 manuscriptoticed is that many people are called only by their fathers* first names,ave never heard in Russian before. As you know, the usual way toerson in Russia is to call him by his first nana together with tha first name of his father. For instance, Trotsky would be called Lev Davidovlch; Kamenev, Lev Borissovltch, etcetera. Close relatives and ths closest friends would call each other by their first names alone, but no one would ever call anyone by the first name of his father. The revised edition of th* "diary" calls Trotskyamenev,Toffs, "Abraaovitch" etcetera. Thisure nonsense and could never have been used by Litrlnor.

The fact that the "diary" startshe year when Bessedovsky entered into Soviet foreign service, is significant, an like Litvinov would start hia diary8 whan he was appointed Soviet Ambassador to England and would continue through the most Interesting years of ths Revolution and tha development of the Soviet Regime in which ha was Assistant Commissar of Foreign Affairs. But Bessedovsky, who now makes hia living by falsifications, doss not know anything about this period. Be waa in tha Ukraine and through some connections got anin the Soviet Embassy in Poland. At this tine several Soviet embassies abroad had positionskrainian representative. ew months, Bessedovsky was transferred to Tokyo and by the end7 waa appointed counselor in Paris. Consequently, he had soma material regarding Poland, the Far Eastern Soviet Policy, and finally, knew of tha Soviet relations with France7 this whole period, Bessedovsky gives from time to time sons genuine facts but thi* coverseriod of four years, while the "diary"to describeears. Furthermore, Bessedovsky never worked in the Soviet Foreign Commissariat in Moscow and had no knowledge either of tha personnel or of the system off relations between the Foreign Commissariat, tha othernriasariats, and tha Central Committee of tha Party. When Bessedovsky was in Japan, tha head of the Far Eastern Department was Helnlkov (who like myself, contrary to tbe "diary's" assertion, waa not related to Litvinov in any way). Baaedovsky did not know that after hi* break, Helnlkov was transferred to Harbin and Mr. Koslovsky was appointed head of tha Far Eastern Department. That ia why, Al through th* "diary" Litvinov is consulting helnlkov in Moscow on Far Eastern Affairs without even mentioning Koslovsky's name.

litvinov was always supported by combers of the collegium of the foreign commissariat, rothstein and later stosoniakov (the latter was one of lltvinov's closest friends and, for many years, hisut he is hardly even mentioned in theitvinov, defending the concept of cooperation with france, england, united states, etc. emphasised that these democracies could eventually become closer to the soviet regime, and that their economic help was indispensable for the industrial anddevelopment of the soviet union.

the fight over these two basic concepts, which brought about abreak between lltvinov and chlcherin personally to the extent that they were not even on speaking terms6 on, is not even mentioned in this "diary." on the contrary on pageheeferring to the endtatest "the year is closingad note; chlcherinwill leave ua soon, his health is deteriorating. hall have to take over the people'so not relish the prospect. ould have preferred to resign and take up some academic activity but koba would not listen." all these lines are stupid fakes. lltvinov wasabout taking caicherin's place but stalin (koba) did not want to give it to him as yet. for several years lltvinov remained in ad interimand only finally in august or september0 was he appointed commissar. itreat day'in his lifeemember it very well. returning to his office after the Domination (simultaneously krestinsky was appointed his firstltvinovittlewith his closest associates; stein, rub loin, ounansky, myself, and several others were present.

don't you think that it is rather amazing that lltvinov did not mention in his "diary"ong awaited event, which was theof his career?

there are plenty of other facts

the fulfillment of the long-cherished desire to enter the league of rationsu for which lltvinovpeech that he called the most importantis life is not even mentioned', in the "diary." theconferences on disarmament, and the large and small conflicts in the league of nationsall would be too long to enumerate hereare also not mentioned. lltvinov's trip to washington3 to meet president roosevelt and the negotiations to establish diplomatic relations between the soviet union and the united states; litvinov's return and conferences with mussolini which broughton-aggression and friendship pact between italy andone of these are mentioned. innumerable other important facts about relations between the soviet onion and otherare not in the "diary. '

5

rather, in this sc-callad "diary" werimitive and stupid compilation of notes, hastily made froa old newspapers, mentioning the different events of international life at mat tins.

if litvinov desired to write sensational stories about various happenings around the soviet coranlasariat in moscow, he had plenty of factual data availablobut none of this is even mentioned in theon't you think that the trialhich was tha highest point of the anti-french policy and which happenedould have bean or tha mstro-yikars trial in which you and sir esmond oveyso much? such trials ware not only the culmination of anti-french or anti-british propaganda; but alsoictory of the secret police over the foreign commissariat.

if litvinov wanted to include such sensational stories, would ha not mention that through practically all these years the british* was broken and ha could read all the instructions which the british embassy^ received froa london even before you or sir esmond got them? he couldot of real stories which were happening in tha diplomatic corps in moscow.

the same time, don't you think that litvinov would mention in hiasuch very important events aa the visits of eden, harriot, laval, ismet inounu (the turkish primeierre cot, and others to moscow? important negotiations wore connected with these visits, sons of them involving molotov and stalin, and not even one of these visits isin tha "diary." m really amazed that two publishing houses inand haw york spent money on this fake without preliminary share arm plenty of people who would understand that this "diary" is ihey could ask you, bohlen, kennan, snd other experts. they could ask me or alexander baroine, who is tha head of tha russian division of the voice of america in washington. barmins waa in paris at ths same time as bessedovsky and myself.

wiat is annoying is that tha publisher, in footnotes, which oan bo attributed to editors only, repeats the same falsehoods1 about me which appear in the text.

i would disregard then in tha "diary" because it is such an obvious fakea not sure that should be the same doa1tion taken about ths footnotes.

best regards.

lord William strang evenlode

stone afield, oxfordshire

B!cCS

Original document.

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA