Читать книгу “If we had wings we would fly to you” - Kiril Feferman - Страница 14

CHAPTER 1.3

The Holocaust in the North Caucasus¹

1. JEWISH COUNCILS, GHETTOS, AND CAMPS

In the North Caucasus, Jewish councils (Judenräte) were set up in the towns and cities with the largest Jewish communities: Essentuki, Kislovodsk, Krasnodar, and Stavropol.² In Cherkessk and Novorossiisk, their functions were assigned to a single person, the starosta.³ Jewish councils were set up soon after the beginning of the occupation. Occasionally, the Germans explained this by citing the need “to protect the interests of the Jewish population” (Stavropol),⁴ to ensure the proper arrangement of the Jewish community (Krasnodar),⁵ or even “to improve the life [byt] of the Jews and to enable them to trade” (Novorossiisk).⁶ Jewish Councils in the Caucasian towns were a convenient instrument in the German hands for the smooth enactment of the whole complex of anti-Jewish measures: from registration of the Jewish population⁷ to assigning Jews to forced labor.⁸ Finally, the Germans compelled the Jewish Councils to collaborate with them in gradually depriving fellow Jews of their property⁹ and in forcing the Jews to assembly places before being assigned to forced labor or killed.¹⁰

In the North Caucasus, the policy of confining Jews to ghettos was applied only to a few of the towns containing medium-sized (some hundreds) and small-sized (up to one hundred people) Jewish communities.¹¹ In the ghettos, the Jews were placed in separate locations hardly fit for human habitation and were forbidden to leave without the authorization of the Germans or the local administration, unless they were sent to perform forced labor.¹² The Jewish councils were not involved in running the ghettos: there were no councils in the town that had ghettos. The life of the ghettoized Jews was regulated solely by the Germans. The ghetto inmates did not work in industrial production, but only in humiliating jobs, such as cleaning lavatories and sweeping streets.¹³ There were no payments in return for their labor. In order to survive, the Jews had to sell their possessions and rely on handouts from the local people when they went out to perform forced labor. As a result, the Jews suffered terribly from undernourishment.¹⁴ In almost all ghettos in the North Caucasus, Jews were subjected to physical mistreatment and continual theft of their property.¹⁵ Almost all the Jews in the ghettos were liquidated during the big wave of extermination in August–September 1942.¹⁶

2. TOWNS

The Germans’ initial methods for dealing with the Jewish population differed from place to place. At times, the Germans personally approached the Jewish public or individual Jews in order to assuage their fears that Jews would be singled out in German orders.¹⁷ The Germans also promised that absolute compliance with their orders would safeguard the Jews’ future.¹⁸ In many places, the Germans assured the Jews that the aim of “resettlement” was simply to send them to some other locality.¹⁹ This policy should be regarded as part of their camouflage tactics.

Concurrently, the Germans’ policy sometimes also involved threats against entire communities or individual Jews, such as Judenräte members. In such instances, the Germans warned the Jews that non-compliance with their orders would lead to heavy retribution, including capital punishment.²⁰

It must be emphasized that in all of the aforementioned cases, the Germans were determined to prevent Jews from escaping from the occupied areas. In terms of the Germans’ genocide policy—unlike an ordinary Soviet citizen, whose presence or absence usually mattered little to the Germans—a Jew was to be caught and killed in every town or village.

The German onslaught against the Jews in the North Caucasus involved several steps. First, in most Caucasian towns, immediately after occupation, the Germans forced the entire Jewish population to register.²¹ This appeared to be a relatively mild step at first, because mass assembly of the Jews—for forced labor, ill-treatment, and eventual extermination—was not immediately ordered. Usually the registration process was organized by the Jewish Council, but sometimes the Germans themselves carried it out.²² The local police only rarely participated in enforcing the registration orders.²³

After registration, the next stage involved forcing adult Jews, including children over twelve years old, to wear six-pointed stars as identification badges.²⁴ The Germans applied this policy in most Caucasian towns.²⁵ In most cases, Jews were ordered to wear the stars immediately upon registration.²⁶ However, sometimes there was a short interval between the two procedures, as the Germans faced problems in applying the identification order.²⁷ This was due to anti-Jewish measures being poorly synchronized in some Caucasian towns located close to one another.

In the initial phases of the War, Caucasian Jews were occasionally physically ill-treated by their German oppressors.²⁸ This included German guards beating Jews and raping Jewish women in places where the non-Jewish population could not witness the abuse, such as in the apartments of Jews and in detention centers.²⁹ But sometimes Jews were beaten in public or while performing forced labor.³⁰

If the Jews in the Caucasian towns were not killed immediately, they were compelled to perform forced labor.³¹ The forced labor orders applied to almost the whole Jewish population, including children over ten years old, pregnant women and those with small children, and old people up to ninety years of age.³² It was impossible to evade labor on medical grounds.³³

The Jews were only occasionally exploited for relatively easy work, for example, maintaining satisfactory sanitary conditions in the occupied towns, such as cleaning and sweeping the streets³⁴ or burying the corpses of dead people and animals.³⁵ Jewish labor was sometimes used for construction projects of military significance.³⁶ However, for the most part, the Jewish population was exploited for the most difficult and most humiliating work: cleaning lavatories and carrying huge stones.³⁷ In some occupied Soviet territories, the Germans paid the Jewish forced laborers, either with money or food, but in the Caucasian towns there was no payment.³⁸ Jews were exploited over the course of a lengthy working day, often without breaks,³⁹ and with no food supplied.⁴⁰ Jews fared better if the labor order was enforced by the Jewish Councils or heads of Jewish communities.⁴¹ They fared far worse when either local collaborators or the Germans themselves were involved in enforcing the order.⁴² Jews herded into small ghettos underwent the harshest treatment during their forced labor, as their entire lives (before, during, and after the day’s labor) were regulated by a vicious German administration.⁴³

In the North Caucasus, the Germans widely resorted to exerting economic pressure on the Jews. Imposition of monetary indemnity (kontributsiia) on the Jewish communities was one such measure.⁴⁴ The price of indemnity was high: for example, the community of Kislovodsk had to pay 100,000 rubles, the Jews of Cherkessk, 135,000 rubles, and the Jews of Mikoyanshakhar, 500,000 rubles.⁴⁵ The sum demanded bore no relationship to the actual number of Jewish inhabitants of the town in question: there were 2,000 Jews registered in Kislovodsk, while there were 820 in Cherkessk and only 129 in Mikoyanshakhar. The enormous size of the indemnity can be explained by the German assumption that the Jewish population, which consisted mainly of the evacuees from large Soviet cities, was well-off.

The indemnity order was combined with other German steps aimed at dispossessing the Jews. The example of Kislovodsk underscores this point. Alongside the indemnity worth “100,000 rubles in cash,” the German authorities demanded that the Jewish committee delivered “530 articles made of gold or silver, rings, watches, cigarette cases, 105 dozen silver spoons, 230 pairs of shoes, men’s suits, coats, and carpets.”⁴⁶ Usually “organized” plunder took on the form of orderly arranged “requisitions,” effected largely by means of the Judenräte⁴⁷ or under the pretext of legal searches of Jewish apartments for weapons or for unregistered Jews.⁴⁸ It is noteworthy that there exists no record of “non-organized” plunder of Jewish property in the Caucasus. The reason is the strictly enforced discipline in the Wehrmacht, which was also extended to the local population of the Caucasian towns under German control. In many localities, the Germans confiscated all Jewish property.⁴⁹ In other places, similarly to many other occupied Soviet regions, less valuable articles were left for the local policemen,⁵⁰ and then sometimes distributed, sold, or left for the local population.⁵¹

In a few Caucasian towns, regardless of the size of the Jewish population, Jews were subjected to various forms of economic or political boycott. However, this boycott was far from being a comprehensive and consistent policy in the Caucasian towns. Rather, it seems that, given the brevity of the period prior to the annihilation of the Jews in the North Caucasus, the majority of the Jewish population did not suffer from boycotting. Nevertheless, even single events of this kind could influence the public opinion about the Jewish population.

As mentioned above, the Germans sometimes employed segregation, another component of their restrictive policy towards the Jews in the Caucasus, against the background of general residence and movement restrictions. The German restrictive policies were relatively lenient in the region, but there were several deviations from this pattern.⁵²

After the Germans occupied a town, it took them from one or two weeks to four months between registering the Jews and ordering their assembly and mass extermination.⁵³ Jews were often threatened with severe physical punishment for failure to comply with register and assembly orders.⁵⁴ Jews were required to leave most of their belongings in their apartments, but were permitted to take with them a certain amount of money, valuables, and personal possessions.⁵⁵

The German administration normally proclaimed the order to assemble, although very occasionally the local authorities or the Jewish Council issued the order.⁵⁶ For the most part, the Germans openly intervened only at the assembly points, which they did by ordering armed guards to prevent the Jews from leaving these locations.⁵⁷ In cities and bigger towns, the Germans assembled the Jews in the urban squares, and then immediately marched them out towards execution sites.⁵⁸ In smaller towns, they herded the Jews into one location and kept them there for up to two days, usually without food or water, before driving them to extermination sites or placing them in gas vans.⁵⁹

The Germans conducted killing operations in the Caucasian cities and towns throughout almost the whole of the occupation period. Annihilation of the Jewish population was only limited by the logistics necessary for the Germans to prepare the ground, so that the extermination actions could be carried out smoothly (most specifically, by the deployment of the Einsatzgruppe forces). In August, killing operations began against the Jews of Stavropol and Krasnodar, the most populous and presumably the most important regional centers of the German-controlled Caucasus. In Stavropol, 4,000 Jews were murdered.⁶⁰ The number of victims in Krasnodar was either 1,800 to more than 3,000 Jews, according to various estimations.⁶¹

In one month, September 1942, the Germans wiped out the bulk of Caucasian Jewry, primarily in the four neighboring resorts of Stavropol region: Essentuki, Kislovodsk, Mineralnye vody, and Pyatigorsk. There were almost 10,000 victims in total.⁶² After that date, the pace of annihilation of the Jews in Caucasian towns slowed down. The last large-scale wave of actions swept the towns in the form of “mopping-up” operations, in light of a possible German withdrawal from the North Caucasus.⁶³

After the extermination actions in the Caucasian towns and cities, the Germans found some Jews still in hiding, following all-encompassing security steps directed against the general population. However, due to the relatively mild character of the occupation in the Caucasus, the Germans rarely conducted such searches. Round-ups of Jews in the Caucasian towns,⁶⁴ in which whole areas were cordoned off for house-to-house searches in the wake of the extermination action,⁶⁵ were rare. Most of the Jews in hiding were caught as a result of denunciations by Russian and Ukrainian civilians.⁶⁶

On the whole, the milder nature of the German occupational regime in the Caucasus in comparison to other areas⁶⁷ and the short time that it lasted did enable some Jews to survive. The swift withdrawal of the German forces from the region in late 1942 contributed to the rescue of a certain number of people who were already in detention; in all probability, there were also some Jews amongst them.⁶⁸

3. RURAL AREAS

In the rural Caucasian areas, Jews were required to register only in some villages. At times, German orders included explicit threats directed not only against any Jews who failed to register, but also against any local people who gave shelter to Jews.⁶⁹ The registration of Jews was ordered primarily by the military administration.⁷⁰ Sometimes it demanded that Jews wear identifying stars immediately upon having being registered.⁷¹ But infrequently, Jews were not required to register at all, only to wear identifying bands.⁷²

The Germans widely employed Jewish forced labor in rural areas, primarily for gathering the harvest⁷³ and, to a much lesser extent, for military construction work⁷⁴ or for humiliating cleaning jobs.⁷⁵ Their conditions while performing forced labor depended on the extent to which the German occupying forces were present. When the Germans supervised the laborers, their existence was made unbearable and involved physical cruelty, allocation of the most difficult assignments, and dangerously unsanitary conditions, which resulted in a high mortality rate.⁷⁶ Jews faced very long working days and unachievable production norms.⁷⁷ The Germans gave them no food and stopped the local population from giving them any.⁷⁸ The Jews were better off, relatively, when the local collaborators supervised their labor.⁷⁹

In contrast to the towns, in the villages the Germans and their local collaborators looted Jewish property, without restraint, in addition to carrying out orderly “requisitions.”⁸⁰ The German military and security command seemed to tacitly approve of this free-hand policy. It applied not only to those whose direct responsibility it was to “handle” the Jewish question (the officers and soldiers of the Einsatzgruppen⁸¹ and Kommandaturen),⁸² but also to other sectors of the German army, which only had casual contacts with the Jewish population,⁸³ and to local collaborators.⁸⁴ The German commanders were less concerned with local public opinion in the countryside. Thus, they turned a blind eye to the lawless behavior of the Wehrmacht personnel, assisted by the local collaborators, who looted Jewish property. In addition, the German authorities hoped to gain the sympathies of the local inhabitants by distributing the looted property to those who the Germans defined as having been discriminated against under the Soviet regime.⁸⁵ Furthermore, in many cases the local population in the rural areas was more ill-disposed towards Soviet power and everything associated with it, including Jews, and therefore was more inclined to adopt a favorable stance towards the German onslaught against the Jews.⁸⁶

Occasionally, Jews living in the rural areas were subjected to movement and residence restrictions. The Germans tried to register the entire rural population in the Caucasus, in order to prevent the infiltration of Soviet agents.⁸⁷ The German regulations contained a special emphasis on idnetifying those who had arrived in a given locality after the outbreak of the War, meaning evacuees or refugees: “Heads of municipalities have to draw up [lists]. … The second list encompasses strangers in a given locality who settled down there after June 23, 1941. Jews and foreigners have to be specially marked.”⁸⁸ The local authorities in the villages were also required to state the nationality of the newcomers, with a particular emphasis on Jews.⁸⁹ This was followed by the murder of the registered Jews.⁹⁰

The local authorities ordered those Jews who were staying in the Caucasian villages to present themselves at assembly points, which were mainly in public buildings, such as schools⁹¹ or Kommandaturen posts.⁹² The Germans only rarely used enforcement measures, mostly to ensure that the Jews did not try to evade the order to assemble.⁹³ After the assembly, Jews were isolated for some time and then marched out to be murdered—usually in the immediate vicinity of the village.⁹⁴ Jewish women were sometimes raped during the killing operations.⁹⁵ On the whole, during the Holocaust in rural Caucasian areas, the small German forces carried out this final stage of the annihilation of the Jews quite smoothly, as compared to the previous stages.

Jews were murdered in the Caucasian villages throughout the whole period of the German occupation of the region. In September and October 1942, hundreds of Jews were murdered, and the bulk of the rural Jewish population was destroyed. The pace of annihilation decreased in November, but in December 1942 the North Caucasian villages were swept by a new wave of killings. As in the towns, it consisted of last-minute mopping-up actions in the whole region (on the eve of the possible German withdrawal from the Caucasus), and the “cleansing” of all undesirable elements, including Jews. Remnants of the legally registered Jewish population, such as inmates of camps⁹⁶ and those detected as a result of intensified searches, were killed during the German retreat from the region in January 1943.⁹⁷

1 This chapter is a summary of my research on the Holocaust in the North Caucasus, as reflected in my book The Holocaust in the Crimea, 173–230.

2 Essentuki, Kislovodsk, Krasnodar. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Essentuki, July 10, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 1. V. Karl, “The destruction of the Caucasian Jewry (descriptions of the Soviet writer Alexey Tolstoy following the eyewitnesses’ testimonies of the anti-Jewish atrocities),” Ha-tsofe, no. 1842, January 26, 1944 [Hebrew]. Questioning of Nikolai Poznansky, January 10, 1944, GARF: 7021/16/462, p. 205.

3 Statement of the Commission of the Town of Cherkessk, July 13, 1943, GARF: 702/17/12, pp. 68–69. Memorandum of the Command of Krasnodar Group [kust] of Partisan Detachments, October 1942 (?). In Beliaev and Bondar′, Kuban′ v gody Velikoi Otechestvennoi voiny, 557.

4 Report of Abram Nankin, in Chernaia kniga o zlodeiskom povsemestnom ubiistve evreev nemetsko-fashistskimi zakhvatchikami vo vremenno-okkupirovannykh raionakh Sovetskogo Soiuza i v lageriakh unichtozheniia Pol′shi vo vremia voiny 1941–1945 gg., ed. Vasilii Grossman and Il′ia Erenburg (Jerusalem: Tarbut, 1980), 272–273.

5 Questioning of Poznansky, GARF: 7021/16/462, p. 205.

6 Statement of the Commission of the Town of Novorossiisk, October 18, 1943, GARF: 7021/16/11, p. 1.

7 Essentuki, Krasnodar. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Essentuki, July 10, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 1. Statement of Anna Sokolitskaya-Vasser, January 11, 1944, GARF: 7021/16/462, p. 204.

8 Statement of the Commission of the Town of Cherkessk, July 13, 1943, GARF: 702/17/12, pp. 68–69. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Pyatigorsk, GARF: 7021/17/3, p. 8.

9 Kislovodsk, Pyatigorsk. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Kislovodsk, June 21, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/5, p. 39. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Pyatigorsk, GARF: 7021/17/3, p. 8.

10 Krasnodar. NKVD Administration, Intelligence survey no. 21, October 6, 1942. In Beliaev and Bondar′, Kuban′ v gody Velikoi Otechestvennoi voiny, 461.

11 Elista, Zheleznovodsk. Report of the ESC, GARF: 7021/8/26, pp. 10–11. Statement of the Commission of the town of Zheleznovodsk, July 12, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/6, p. 1.

12 Cherkessk, Elista. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Cherkessk, July 13, 1943, GARF: 702/17/12, pp. 68–69. Report of the ESC, GARF: 7021/8/26, pp. 10–11.

13 Mikoyanshakhar—First ghetto, Zheleznovodsk. Statement of the Commission of the town of Mikoyanshakhar, June 20, 1943. GARF: 7021/17/10, p. 195. Statement of Kairov, GARF: 7021/17/6, p. 4.

14 Statement of the Commission of the Town of Mikoyanshakhar, June 20, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/10, p. 195.

15 Elista, Mikoyanshakhar, Zheleznovodsk. Report of the ESC, GARF: 7021/8/26, pp. 10–11. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Mikoyanshakhar, June 20, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/10, pp. 195–196. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Zheleznovodsk, July 12, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/6, pp. 1–2.

16 Statement of the Commission of the Town of Cherkessk, July 13, 1943, GARF: 702/17/12, pp. 68–69. Report of the ESC, GARF: 7021/8/26, pp. 10–11. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Mikoyanshakhar, June 20, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/10, p. 196. Statement of Kairov, GARF: 7021/17/6, p. 4.

17 Krasnodar, Novorossiisk. In Krasnodar, the registration of the whole population took place in September 1942, that is, more than two weeks after the registration and destruction of the Jews. NKVD Administration, Intelligence survey no. 6. In Beliaev and Bondar′, Kuban′ v gody Velikoi Otechestvennoi voiny, 460–461.

18 Cherkessk, Stavropol. Landesgericht München I, Urteil gegen Johannes Schlupper, Heinrich Winterstein, Rudi Eschenbach, July 24, 1974, YVA: TR.10/956, pp. 34–35. Document of the Stavropol medical institute, July 2, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/294, p. 7.

19 Essentuki, Mineralnye vody. Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee [based on letters from the local inhabitants], “Caucasian Jews Crying Out,” Ha-tsofe (Tel Aviv), no. 1702, August 4, 1943 [Hebrew]. Statement of Matvei Makogonenko, August 13, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/2, pp. 14–15.

20 Cherkessk, Stavropol. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Cherkessk, July 13, 1943, GARF: 702/17/12, pp. 68–69. Statement of the Commission of the City of Stavropol, July 11, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/1, pp. 95–96.

21 Elista, Krasnodar. Report of the ESC on the atrocities of the German Fascist occupiers in the occupied ulusy and the town of Elista, no later than September 10, 1943, GARF: 7021/8/26, pp. 10–11. Statement of the Commission of the City of Krasnodar, June 30, 1943, GARF: 7021/16/5, p. 12.

22 Kislovodsk, Mineralnye vody. Testimony of Sklyar, YVA: 0.3/3934, p. 6. “How the Jews Are Murdered,” Ha-tsofe, April 8, 1943 [Hebrew].

23 Testimony of Ya. Talyansky, no date, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 31.

24 Kislovodsk. Testimony of Sklyar, YVA: 0.3/3934, p. 6.

25 Armavir, Zheleznovodsk. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Armavir, January 28, 1943, Tsentral′nyi arkhiv Ministerstva Oborony Rossiiskoi Federatsii (henceforth TsAMO RF): 51/958/52, pp. 91–92. Courtesy of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (henceforth USHMM). Statement of the Commission of the Town of Zheleznovodsk, July 12, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/6, p. 1.

26 Kislovodsk, Mineralnye vody. Testimony of Sklyar, YVA: 0.3/3934, p. 6. Statement of Pavlov, GARF: 7021/17/2, p. 13.

27 Essentuki and Krasnodar (?). Testimony of Belenkov, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 24. Testimony of Krechetovich, YVA: 0.33.C/5961.

28 Cherkessk, Mikoyanshakhar. Statement on the atrocities and abuse committed by the German Fascist occupiers towards the peaceful population of Pregradnensky raion, June 28, 1943. In Stavropol’e v Velikoi Otechestvennoi voine 1941–1945 gg. Sbornik dokumentov i materialov (Stavropol: Knizhnoe izdatel′stvo, 1962), 135. Testimony of Nikeeva, GARF: 7021/17/10, p. 204.

29 For apartments, see Essentuki. Testimony of Faina Gulyanskaya, July 2, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 17. For detention centers, see Statement of the Commission of the Town of Cherkessk. July 13, 1943, GARF: 702/17/12, pp. 68–69. Statement on the resort Teberda, GARF: 7021/17/7, pp. 4–5.

30 For the public, see Mikoyanshakhar. Testimony of Nikeeva, GARF: 7021/17/10, p. 204. For forced labor, see Essentuki. Testimony of Belenkov, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 23. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Essentuki, July 10, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 1.

31 Essentuki, Kislovodsk, Zheleznovodsk. Letter by the painter L. N. Tarabukin and his wife D. R. Goldshtain to the writer Yu. Kalugin, [1943], YVA: M.35/25, p. 86. Testimony of Sklyar, YVA: 0.3/3934, p. 7. Statement of T. Z. Kairov, 1943 (?), GARF: 7021/17/6, p. 4.

32 Nalchik. “Nazis’ Atrocities” [Hebrew], Ha-tsofe, no. 1717, August 19, 1943, p. 2 [source: Soviet diplomatic representatives in Washington; testimonies of fourteen Nalchik Jews on the fate of the Jews there]. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Essentuki, July 10, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 1; Nalchik. Testimony of Avgosh Shamilova, January 8, 1998. In Danilova, Iskhod gorskih evreev, 26.

33 Essentuki, Zheleznovodsk. Testimony of Belenkov, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 23. Statement of the doctor K. T. Gavrilova, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/6, p. 25.

34 Essentuki, Kislovodsk. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Essentuki, July 10, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 1. Report of Evenson, YVA: P.21.2/1. Testimony of Sklyar, YVA: 0.3/3934, p. 6.

35 Zheleznovodsk. Statement of Kairov, GARF: 7021/17/6, p. 4.

36 Elista, Kislovodsk, Nalchik. Report of ESC, GARF: 7021/8/26, pp. 10–11. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Kislovodsk, July 5, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/5, pp. 35–36. In Dokumenty obviniaiut. Sbornik materialov o chudovishchnykh zverstvakh Germanskikh vlastei na vremenno-okkupirovannykh Sovetskikh territoriyakh (2nd ed., Moscow: Gospolitizdat, 1945), 140–142. Testimony of Shamilova, in Danilova, Iskhod gorskih evreev, 26.

37 Armavir, Essentuki. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Armavir. January 28, 1943, TsAMO RF: 51/958/52, pp. 91–92. Courtesy of USHMM. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Essentuki. July 10, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 1.

38 Kislovodsk, Pyatigorsk. Statement, July 5, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/5, pp. 35–36. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Pyatigorsk, GARF: 7021/17/3, p. 8.

39 Statement of the Commission of the Town of Essentuki, July 10, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 1.

40 Essentuki, Nalchik. Ibid. See also Testimony of Shamilova. In Danilova, Iskhod gorskih evreev, 26.

41 Statement of the Commission of the Town of Pyatigorsk, GARF: 7021/17/3, p. 8. Statement of the Commission of the City of Cherkessk, July 13, 1943, GARF: 702/17/12, pp. 68–69.

42 Nalchik, Tikhoretsk. Testimony of Shamilova. In Danilova, Iskhod gorskih evreev, 26. See also Beliaev and Bondar′, Kuban′ v gody Velikoi Otechestvennoi voiny, 464–465.

43 Elista, Mikoyanshakhar, Zheleznovodsk. Report of the ESC, GARF: 7021/8/26, pp. 10–11. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Mikoyanshakhar, June 20, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/10, p. 195. Statement of Kairov, GARF: 7021/17/6, p. 4.

44 Cherkessk (?), Essentuki. Landesgericht München I, Urteil gegen Schlupper, YVA: TR.10/956, p. 63. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Essentuki, July 10, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 1.

45 Commission of the Town of Kislovodsk, June 21, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/5, p. 39. Testimony of Nikeeva, GARF: 7021/17/10, p. 204. To the best of my knowledge, there is no authoritative source on what the ruble was worth compared with major international currencies during the War.

46 Statement, July 5, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/5, pp. 35–36.

47 Essentuki, Kislovodsk. Statement of Professor Vladimir Dik, June 27, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 9. Report of Evenson, YVA: P.21.2/1.

48 Essentuki, Nalchik. Testimony of Belenkov, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 24.

49 Cherkessk, Mikoyanshakhar. Statement of the Commission of Pregradnensky Raion, June 28, 1943. In Stavropol′e, 135. Testimony of Nikeeva, GARF: 7021/17/10, p. 204.

50 Pyatigorsk, Stavropol. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Pyatigorsk, GARF: 7021/17/3, p. 8. Report of Nankin, in Grossman and Erenburg, Chernaia kniga, 272–273.

51 Elista, Essentuki. Statement of D. Babkina, July 20, 1943, GARF: 7021/8/27, p. 91. Testimony of Belenkov, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 26.

52 Essentuki, Novorossiisk. Statement of the Commission of the City of Essentuki, July 10, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 1. Questioning of Alekseeva, GARF: 7021/16/11, p. 77. Cf. Alexei Tolstoi, “Korichnevyi durman,” Pravda, August 5, 1943.

53 Krasnodar, Stavropol. NKVD Administration, Intelligence survey no. 21, October 6, 1942. In Beliaev and Bondar′, Kuban′ v gody Velikoi Otechestvennoi voiny, 461. Report of Nankin. In Grossman and Erenburg, Chernaia kniga, 272–273. Essentuki, Kislovodsk. Statement of the Commission of the Town Essentuki, July 10, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 1. In Dokumenty obviniaiut, 140–142; Statement of the Commission of the Town of Cherkessk, July 13, 1943, GARF: 702/17/12, pp. 68–69; Statement on the Resort Teberda, GARF: 7021/17/7, pp. 4–5.

54 Essentuki, Stavropol. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Essentuki, July 10, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 1. Statement of the Commission of the City of Stavropol, July 11, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/1, pp. 95–96.

55 Kislovodsk, Pyatigorsk, Teberda. Testimony of Sklyar, YVA: 0.3/3934, p. 7. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Pyatigorsk, GARF: 7021/17/3, p. 8. Statement on the Resort Teberda, GARF: 7021/17/7, pp. 4–5.

56 Statement of the Commission of the Town of Essentuki, July 10, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/4, p. 1. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Pyatigorsk, GARF: 7021/17/3, p. 8; Cherkessk. Der Untersuchungsrichter 115 Ks 6a-c/71, Strafsache gegen Schlupper, Vernehmungsniderschrift Schluppers, December 14, 1971, YVA: TR.10/1081, p. 56; Krasnodar. NKVD Administration, Intelligence survey No. 21. In Beliaev and Bondar′, Kuban′ v gody Velikoi Otechestvennoi voiny, 461.

57 Cherkessk, Novorossiisk. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Cherkessk, July 13, 1943, GARF: 702/17/12, pp. 68–69. Questioning of Silina, GARF: 7021/16/11, p. 28.

58 Stavropol. Statement, July 14, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/1, pp. 3, 5.

59 Cherkessk, Essentuki. Statement of the Commission of the Town of Cherkessk, July 13, 1943, GARF: 702/17/12, pp. 68–69. Testimony of Belenkov, GARF: 7021/17/4, pp. 25–26.

60 GARF: 7021/116/11a, p. 24.

61 NKVD Administration, Intelligence survey No. 21, October 6, 1942. In Beliaev and Bondar′, Kuban′ v gody Velikoi Otechestvennoi voiny, 461. Statement of the Commission of the City of Krasnodar, June 30, 1943, GARF: 7021/16/5, pp. 11–12, 14. Military court of the North Caucasian Front, Krasnodar trial, July 14–17, 1943. In Dokumenty obviniaiut, 104.

62 Statement of the local Commission on the investigation of the Nazi German atrocities, January 21, 1943, TsAMO RF: 51/958/52, p. 85. Courtesy of USHMM.

63 Statement of the Commission of the Town of Mikoyanshakhar, June 20, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/10, p. 195. Statement on the Resort Teberda, July 5, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/7, pp. 4–5. Dokumenty obviniaiut, 163–164.

64 Stavropol. Strafsache gegen Bierkamp, Auswertung der Vernehmungsprotokolle russischer Zeugen von Bl. 1/92-65/40 d. Acte. B. 7–8, Iwan D. ab Okt. 41 bei der Tataren-Komp, Woroschilowsk—K, YVA: TR.10/1147, p. 576.

65 Stavropol. “Those are the First News … What the Nazis Do towards the Jews before their Retreat from Russia,” Davar (Tel Aviv), no. 5366, February 24, 1943 [source: Moscow, special telegram to Davar dated February 22, 1943]. [Hebrew].

66 Kislovodsk, Krasnodar. Testimony of Leina Faina, no date, GARF: 7021/17/206, p. 85. Krasnodar trial. Interrogation of Ivan Paramonov, June 26, 1943, Akademiia Federal′noi Sluzhby Bezopasnosti Rossiskoi Federatsii: H-16708, p. 657. Courtesy of USHMM.

67 On the German Judenpolitik in another Russian area (Pskov district in the North-Western part of Russia), see Johannes Enstad Due, Soviet Russians under Nazi Occupation. Fragile Loyalties in World War II (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018), 60–87.

68 Mozdok. Testimony of Alexander Guseev, after 1976, YVA: 0.3/6970, pp. 4–5.

69 Statement of the Commission of Stanitsa Novo-Aleksandrovskaya, GARF: 7021/17/11, p. 28.

70 Statement of the Commission of Stanitsa S[taro?]-Shcherbinskaya, GARF: 7021/16/12, p. 195.

71 Villages Blagodatnoe and Zolskoe. Statement of the Commission of Shpakovsky Raion, GARF: 7021/17/12, p. 55. Statement no. 90, GARF: 7021/7/109, p. 186.

72 Stanitsy Labinskaya and Gulkevich. Conversation of the ESC member V. Grizodubov with Mariya Doragan, June 4, 1943, YVA: M.33/298, p. 17. Questioning of Anastasy Gur (Kondrat′ev), May 15, 1944, GARF: 7021/16/435, p. 130.

73 Stanitsy Bekeshevskaya and Sovetskaya. Statement of the Commission of Suvorovsky Raion, GARF: 7021/17/12, p. 3. Statement of the Commission of Stanitsa Sovetskaya, August 15, 1943, GARF: 7021/16/435, p. 184.

74 Statement of the Commission of Stanitsa of Novo-Aleksandrovskaya, GARF: 7021/17/11, p. 28.

75 Vorontsovo-Aleksandrovskoe village. Statement of Lidiya Brailovskaya, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/10, p. 33.

76 Statement of the Commission of Stanitsa of Novo-Aleksandrovskaya, GARF: 7021/17/11, p. 28. Statement of the Commission of the Village Menzhinskoe, June 27, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/10, pp. 155–156.

77 Menzhinskoe village, stanitsa Bekeshevskaya. Statement of the Commission of the Village Menzhinskoe, June 27, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/10, pp. 155–156. See also Statement of the Commission of Suvorovsky Raion, GARF: 7021/17/12, p. 3.

78 Stanitsa Bekeshevskaya. Statement of the Commission of the Village Menzhinskoe, June 27, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/10, pp. 155–156.

79 Stanitsa Sovetskaya and Troitskoe village. Statement of the Commission of Stanitsa Sovetskaya, GARF: 7021/16/435, p. 184. Testimony of Lilia German, August 16, 1943, GARF: 7021/8/27, p. 55.

80 Villages Olginskoe and Stepnoe. Statement of A. Kureshov, June 25, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/10, p. 162. Statement of the Commission of Stepnoe Village, July 22, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/11, p. 147.

81 On the Einsatzgruppen, see C. Earl Hilary, The Nuremberg SS-Einsatzgruppen Trial, 1945–1958 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 4–8; See also Peter Klein (ed.), Die Einsatzgruppen in der bezetzten Sowjetunion 1941/42: Die Tätigkeits- und Lagerberichte des Chefs der Sicherpolizei und des SD (Berlin: Edition Hentrich, 1997), in particular Andrej Angrick’s “Die Einsatzgruppe D,” ibid., 88–110.

82 Stanitsa Aleksandriiskaya, Sukhoe village. Statement of the Commission of Stanitsa Aleksandriiskaya, GARF: 7021/17/9, p. 12. Statements of the inhabitants of Sukhoe village: N. Zhdanova, A. Parashuk, O. Sankova, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/10, p. 137.

83 Izobilnensky raion, Stavropol territory. Statement of the Commission of Izobilnensky Raion, June 29, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/10, pp. 121–122.

84 Villages Beluevsky in Libknekhtovsky raion (?) and Blagodatnoe. Statement of Nina Zaitseva, 1943, GARF: 7021/17/10, p. 166. Statement of the Commission of Shpakovsky Raion. GARF: 7021/17/12, p. 55.

85 Clarification of Krivokhatsky, the Oberbürgermeister of Stavropol, sent to the starosta of Spitsevka village to inquire about the property of the murdered citizens, October 1942. In Stavropol′e v period nemetsko-fashistskoi okkupatsii (avgust 1942–ianvar′ 1943): Dokumenty i materialy Komiteta po delam arkhivov Stavropol′skogo kraia, Gosudarstvennogo arkhiva Stavropol′skogo kraia, Tsentra dokumentatsii noveishei istorii Stavropol′skogo kraia, ed. Valeriia Vodolazskaia, Mariia Krivneva, and Nelli Mel′nik (Stavropol: Knizhnoe izdatel′stvo, 2000), 48.

86 Anlage zu II./Pol.Rgt., Einsatz- und Tätigkeitsbericht des Batallions für die Zeit vom 1.–31.8.1942 (Auszug aus dem KTB), September 12, 1942, Rossiiskii gosudarstvennyi voennyi arkhiv (henceforth RGVA): 1358/1/9, p. 106. Cf. Merkblatt für das Verhalten gegenüber kaukasischen Völkern, no date, RGVA: 1323/2/263, p. 219.