The “Eastern Action” of the OUN(B) and the Anti-Jewish Violence in the Summer of 1941: the Cases of Smotrych and Kupyn

The “Eastern Action” of the OUN(b) and the Anti-Jewish Violence in the Summer of 1941: The Cases of Smotrych and Kupyn

by Andriy Usach

Abstract The article analyses the role of the OUN(b) activists in the commission of the anti-Jewish violence ȱȱęȱ ȱȱ£ȱȱȱǯȱȱ ȱȱǻǼȱȱĴȱȱȱ minority on the eve of the war between the Third Reich and the USSR? How was the commission ȱ ȱ Ȭ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¡ ȱ¢ȱȱȱȱ ȱ¢ȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱ ǵȱȱ ȱȱ ȱȱȬ ȱǵȱȱȱěȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱ¡ ȱȱȱȱĴȱ¢ȱȱǻǼȱȱȱȱȱȱ ¢ȬȱŗşŚŗȱ ȱȱȱ ȱ¢ȱȱ ¢ǯ

Key words: ȱ ǰȱȬ ȱǰȱȱǰȱǻǼǰȱȃȄ

ȱȱĴȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ęȱ ȱ ȱ ǯȱȱęȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱ ¡ȱ¢ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱǻǼȱ ȱ ȱ ǻSluzhba bezpeky Ukrainy – SBU). ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ŗşŚŖȬŗşŚŗǰȱ ȱ ȱ ȱȬ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ŗşŚŗȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱęȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱȱȱǯ2 The high relevance Ĵȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱǯ ȱȱȱȱǯȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱȱȱ ǰȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȃȱȄŗ ȱ ȱ ǻǼȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ŗşŚŗȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ěȱ ȱ ¡ȱ ȱȱȱ ȱǯ3ȱȱȱȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ǻ ǰȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱȱǰȱ ȱȱ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ Ǽȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱǯ ȱ ȱ ŗşřşǯȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ȭ 2 Forȱ¡, s eeǱȱ ¢ǰȱȱ ȱ ǯ Ukraintsi v ppyyolitsii v Dystrykti ȱȱ ȱȱȱȱǯȱȱ “Halychyna” (Chortkivskyi Okruh): Nimetskyi ȱȱȱȱȱȱȬ ȱ okupatsiinyi rezhym v pivdennykhy raionakh Ternopilshchynyp y y u 1941-1944 rr. Ǳȱ Ȭ ȱȱȱ ȱȱ¢ȱȱ ¢ ǰȱ ŘŖŗŘǲȱ ǰ Alti. “A Villageg Massacre: ȱȱ ¢Ȭ¢ȱȱȱȱęȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¡ǯ” ǯȱ ¢ȱ ȱ Geissbühler. In Romania and the Holocaust: Events, ȱȱ£ȱǰȱȱȱȱȱ Contexts, Aftermathǯȱ Ǳȱ ȱ ǰȱ ŘŖŗŜǱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ śşȬŞŞǲȱǰȱKai. Deutsche Herrschaft, ukrainischer Nationalismus, antijüdischej Gewalt: Der Sommer 1941 ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ in der Westukraine. BerlinǱȱȱ ¢ȱ, ŘŖŗśǯ £ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǯȱ ȱ ¢ 3 For more details seeǱȱ ¡ǰȱ £ǯȱ “ȱ ȱ Ǳȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ŗ ȱȱȱȃȱȄǰȱ: Ȭȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǯ” Slavic Review ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ 75, ́ȱ řȱ ǻŘŖŗŜǼǱ ŜŖŜȬŜŘşǲȱ ǰȱ ǯ “Local ȱ ȱ ǻ¢ȱ¢¢¢ £¢ ȱ ȱ Ǳȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢¢ȱ¢¢ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǻŗşŚřȬŗşśřǼǯ” Cahiers du Monde russe ¢ȱȮȱǼǰȱǯȱřŞřřǰȱǯȱŗǰȱǯ ŗŚǰȱǯȱŗśǯ Śşǰȱ́ȱŘȬřȱǻŘŖŖŞǼǱȱřŚŗȬřŜŚǯ

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 63 Andriy Usach

In general terms, the fate of the Jewish to provide further details about Kupyn. communities of Kupyn and Smotrych during Therefore, it made him show the engagement the Second World War has already been of OUN(b) activists in the anti-Jewish violence highlighted in the historiography of the merely as a “breech on the part of local Holocaust.4 However, the facts considered activists” of decisions of the Directorate of the in this text have not been introduced into OUN(b).7 On the whole, authors frequently the research discourse before. It was only in tend to withhold the role of Ukrainian 2000 when a local historian Yuriy Oliynyk nationalists in persecutions of Jewish people mentioned in one of his publications that during the Second World War by selectively the members of the OUN(b) who came to quoting inconvenient sources, ignoring them Smotrych in the beginning of Nazi occupation or even negating their authenticity.8 “took active part in exterminating Jewish On the contrary, the issue of anti-Jewish population,” with no further details provided.ś violence on the recently occupied territory In May 2016, in Kyiv, a public discussion of Ukraine in summer 1941, including also on “Ukrainian Nationalism and Jews the involvement of Ukrainian nationalist ǻŗşŘŖȬŗşśŖǼȄȱȱȱ ȱ ȱȱ groups in these events, has been repeatedly preliminary research results from studying raised by Western scholars. It was most often the episodes of summer 1941 in Smotrych and ¡ęȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Kupyn.6 One of the participants of the public and Northern Bukovina, and more seldom discussion, the head of Ukrainian Institute of Ȯȱȱȱ¢ǯ9 As to the role of the National Memory, Volodymyr Vyatrovych, 7 I hereby express my gratitude to Oksana took part in a conference in March 2017 “The Cerisier for ě a video recording of the speech ȱȱȱȮȱ ȱȱȱȱ of Vyatrovych at the conference in Paris. A slightly ę text of his report was later published Misfortunes of the 20th century.” In his report, on a Ukrainian web portal “²”: Viatrovych, Volodymyr. “Chy bula OUN antysemitskoiu”. he repeated some of the statements I voiced ². April 19, 2017. https://zbruc.eu/node/64962 during the public discussion. Vyatrovych 8 Derevinskyi, Vasyl. Stavlennia OUN(b) i UPA do susidnikh narodiv ta natsionalnykh menshyn. mentioned the events in Smotrych, but failed Kyiv: Instytut istorii Ukrainy NANU, 2006; Patryliak, Ivan. “U poloni stiikykh stereotypiv: 4 Kruglov, Aleksandr, Andrey Umanskiy i stavlennia Orhanizatsii Ukrainskykh Natsionalistiv Igor Shchupak. Kholokost v Ukraine: Reykhskomissariat do yevreiskoi menshyny v mizhvoiennyi period i “Ukraina.” Gubernatorstvo “Transnistriya”. Dnipro: pershi roky Druhoi svitovoi viiny”. Drohobytskyi Ukrainskiy institut izucheniya Kholokosta kraieznavchyi zbirnykǰȱ˖˔ʺˢʵˆ˔˙˖ˊȱʧʧȱǻŘŖŗśǼǱȱşŚȬŗŖŞǲȱ “Tkuma”ǰȱ ŘŖŗŜǱȱ śŚŝǲȱ ǰȱ ¢ǰȱ ȱ Viatrovych, Volodymyr. Stavlennia OUN do yevreiv: Martin Dean, eds. Encyclopedia of Camps and Ghettos, formuvannia pozytsii na tli katastrofy. Lviv: Ms, 2006. 1933-1945. Vol. 2. Bloomington: Indiana University 9 For more on Eastern Galicia, see: Himka, Press, 2012: 1470-1471; Spector, Shmuel, and John-Paul. “The Lviv Pogrom of 1941: The Geoffrey Wigoder, eds. The Encyclopedia of Jewish Germans, Ukrainian Nationalists, and the Carnival ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ . Vol. II. New Crowd.” Canadian Slavonic Papers śřǰȱ́ȱŘȬŚȱǻŘŖŗŗǼǱȱ York: NYU Press, 2001: 690-691; Ibid. Vol. III: ŗŘŖśǯ 209-243; Struve. Deutsche Herrschaft. On Northern ś Oliinyk, Yurii. “Borotba OUN-UPA proty Bukovina, see: Geissbühler, Simon. ȱ ǯȱ okupatsiinoho rezhymu na Khmelnychchyni”. §ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Materialy X-oi Podilskoi istoryko-kraieznavchoi Massenmord an den Juden 1941. Padeborn: Ferdinand konferentsii, prysviachenoi 55-ii richnytsi peremohy Schöningh, 2013; Rodal. “A Village Massacre”: u Velykii Vitchyznianii viini. Kamianets-Podilskyi: śşȬŞŞǲȱ ǰȱ ǯȱ “Patterns of Violence: Kamianets-Podilskyi derzhavnyi pedadohichnyi The Local Population and the Mass Murder of ¢ǰȱŘŖŖŖǱȱŝśǯ Jews in Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina, July- 6 Public discussion “Ukrainian Nationalism August 1941.” Kritika: Explorations in Russian and and Jewsȱ ǻŗşŘŖȬŗşśŖǼǯ” https://www.youtube.com/ Eurasian HistoryȱŞǰȱ́ȱŚȱǻŘŖŖŝǼǱȱŝŚşȬŝŞŝǯȱOn Western ǵƽ ǭƽřśśŘ (Last accessed: Volhynia, see: Snyder, Timothy. “The Life and September, 14, 2017). ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ¢ǰȱ ŗşŘŗȬŗşŚśǯ”

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 64 Andriy Usach

OUN(b), there is a noticeable trend to explain “Clearing Our the Area from the Foe actions of its acivists rather through the Elements”: Views of OUN(b) on the Jewish prism of ideological motivation only.10 It is Minority, 1940-1941 ȱ¢ȱęȱ¡ǯȱȱǰȱ the level of ideological indoctrination of the ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ĵȱ ȱ OUN(b) activists, especially those who joined Ukrainian nationalists towards the Jewish the organizational activity only in summer minority started becoming more radical 1941, or not long before that time, requires after 1933.12 It was obviously not a one-time more detailed study. episode. It was related in a number of both Presently, there are very few studies reaching external and interal factors. However, it beyond Western Ukraine. The texts by Wendy ȱȱȱęȱ£ȱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ěȱ ȱ not only with the early period of the Second promising prospect of studying these issues World War, but also with the internal crisis beyond the common territorial framework within the OUN, which led to its split, and and timeline.11 This text will place particular the further development in 1940/41 of two emphasis on an absolutely understudied separate same-name organizations under the region in this respect, the Kamyanets-Podilskyi guidance of the chief (vozhd) Andriy Melnyk, region (oblast’). On the one hand, it was part and a leader (providnykǼȱȱȱȮȱȱ of the Ukrainian SSR before the events of OUN(m) and OUN(b), respectively. For the September 1939, which made it impossible to ǻǼȱę¢ǰȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱ ȱ¢ȱĚȱȱȱȱ political struggle with their rivals as well as ideas in the interwar period. On the other hand, active preparation for the expected military due to its borderline location, it was one of the Ěȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ęȱȱ ȱ¢ȱȱȱȱ Soviet Union which was treated as an impetus in summer 1941, when it was turned into a sort to initiate “Ukrainian nation building.” Since of staging area for the “Eastern Action.” the late 1940s at the latest, all activities of the OUN(b) were aligned with the prospects of the forthcoming war.13 Ed. by Ray Brandon and Wendy Lower. In The Shoah in Ukraine: History, Testimony, Memorialization. ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ĵȱ ȱ ȱ ǻǼȱ Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2008: 91- towards the Jewish community in this period 93; Spector, Shmuel. The Holocaust of Volhynian Jews, 1941-1944. Jerusalem: Yad Vashem, 1990: 64-71. 10 For more, see an illustrative review by 12 For more details, see: Carynnyk, Marco. Grzegorz Rossolinski-Liebe on the monograph “Foes of Our Rebirth: Ukrainian Nationalist by Kai Struve, and the further discussion Dȱ ȱ ǰȱ ŗşŘşȮŗşŚŝǯ” Nationalities between them: Rossolinski-Liebe, Grzegorz. “K. Papersȱ řşǰȱ ́ȱ řȱ ǻŘŖŗŗǼǱȱ řŗśȬřśŘǲȱ ǰȱ ¢ǯȱ Iz Struve: Der Sommer 1941 in der Westukraine.” kryvdoiu na samoti: ukrainsko-yevreiski vzaiemyny na http://www.hsozkult.de/publicationreview/id/ zakhidnoukrainskykh zemliakh u skladi Polshchi (1935- rezbuecher-24974 (Last accessed - September, 14, 1939)ǯȱǱȱ¢ȱ¢ǰȱŘŖŖśǲȱ ¢ǰȱTaras. 2016). “The ‘Jewish Question’ in the Ukrainian Nationalist 11 Lower, Wendy. “Pogroms, Mob Violence Discourse of the Inter-War Period». Polin: Studies in and Genocide in Western Ukraine, Summer 1941: Polish JewryȱŘŜȱǻŘŖŗŚǼǱȱŘřřȬŘśŞǲȱǰȱǯȱ Varied Histories, Explanations and Comparisons.” ¢ȱ ¢ȱ £ȱ ǻŗşŘŖȬŗşřŖȬȱ Journal of Genocide Researchȱ ŗřǰȱ ́ȱ řȱ ǻŘŖŗŗǼǱȱ ŘŗŝȬ roky). Narysy intelektualnoi istorii. Kyiv: Krytyka, 246; Melnyk, Oleksandr. “Stalinist Justice as a Site 2013. of Memory: Anti-Jewish Violence in Kyiv’s Podil 13 Sectoral State Archive of the Security District in September 1941 through the Prism of Service of Ukraine (Haluzevyi derzhavnyi arkhiv Soviet Investigative Documents.” Jahrbücher für Sluzhby Bezpeky Ukrainy Ȯȱ ȱ Ǽǰȱ fǯȱ śǰȱ spr. Geschichte OsteuropasȱŜŗǰȱ́ȱŘȱǻŘŖŗřǼǱȱŘŘřȬŘŚŞǯ 67418, t. 3, ark 12.

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 Ŝś Andriy Usach

is considered to be a fragment from the In order to have a deeper insight into the ȱȱȱʧʧȱ ȱ¢ȱȱȱ contents of the resolutions, they must 1941: be considered within the context of the prevailing moods among the leading activists Jews in the USSR present the most devoted of the OUN(b). Except for the statements of ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǰȱ ȱ ¢ȱ the OUN(m), there is no other information ȱȱȱȱ Ȭȱȱȱ on Yaryi’s engagement in the phrasing of the ǯȱȬ ȱĴȱȱȱ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ʧʧȱ ȱ ¢ǯȱ ȱ Bolshevik authorities in order to distract the focus young Ukrainian nationalists Ivan Mitrynha, of the Ukrainian masses from the actual cause Yaroslav Stetsko, Dmytro Myron, and Yaroslav of tribulation, so that in the time of disruption Starukh were most actively involved.17 During ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǯȱ ȱ 1940/41, at least three of them produced £ȱȱȱȱęȱ ȱ ¡ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ Ĵȱ because of their support of the Moscow Bolshevik towards the Jewish community. ǰȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ In the text “Our Road of Struggle” published the masses that Moscow is the main enemy.14 in 1940, Mitrynha described Jews as “internal enemies” and had no doubts about them being The fragment clearly indicated the completion among those who would oppose the building ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ęȱ ȱ ęȱ of the Ukrainian state.18 On the whole, he image of Jews as sheer supporters of the Soviet suggested introducing a discriminatory policy regime and Russian imperialism. A negative on ethnic minorities in the future Ukrainian Ĵȱ ȱ ȱȱ ȱȱ State. According to Mitrynha, the “evidently therein as destructive and inspired from non-Ukrainian elements” should be on the outside. It is also notable that it was the reason lowest social standing: for derision on the part of political rivals from the OUN(m), alleging that the USSR “Jewish This element, provided they live in Ukraine and government” could not a priori “propagandize work in the allocated areas of life of Ukrainian anti-Jewish”ŗś sentiments. They adduced this people, will be entitled on the Ukrainian land to fragment in the abovementioned resolutions as ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ a result of deliberate insinuations of one of the deem fair.19 leading members of the OUN(b), Rik Yaryi, a “Jewish skinchanger Yaryi” who allegedly “in Along with it, he set the objective to cleanse a mysterious way, wishes to save his semitic “non-Ukrainian elements”, but failed to ȱȱȱȱęȱȱȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ęȱ ǯ20 As regards the USSR.”16 the Jewish minority, Mitrynha stated that “the 14 Dziuban, Orest, upor. Ukrainske derzhavotvorennia: Akt 30 chervnia 1941. Zbirnyk 328. dokumentiv i materialiv. Lviv; Kyiv: Piramida, 2001: 17 Archive of the Center for Research on the 11. Liberation Movement (Arkhiv Tsentru doslidzhen ŗś HDA SBU, f. 13, spr 376, t. 9, ark 101. ¢£ȱȱȮȱ), f. 2, t. 1, od. zb. 1, 16 Ibid., ark. 100 rev. The assumed Jewish ark. śŞǯ origin of Yaryi, as well as his marriage with a 18 Oreliuk, Serhii [Mitrynha, Ivan]. Nash baptized Jewish woman were a popular topic in shliakh borotby. part 2. s.l.: s.n., 1940: 11. anti-Bandera propaganda of the OUN(m). For more 19 Ibid., part 1: 98-99. details, see: Carynnyk. “Foes of Our Rebirth”: 327- 20 Ibid., 79, 83-84.

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 66 Andriy Usach

issue should be addressed separately.”21 State.”Řś It is notable that he made a similar In the same year of 1940, Myron published statement in the late 1930s.26 Parallel to it, his text “Idea and Actions of Ukraine.” Like Stetsko divided ethnic minorities into four Mitrynha, he advocated for the need to Ǳȱ ŗǼȱ ǲȱ ŘǼȱ ȱ ȱ ęȱ “cleanse Ukrainian lands from the outside against the occupants but are either not in hostile elements of occupant states foreign favour, or do not care about the creation of the to Ukraine, such as Poles, Moscals, Magyars, Ukrainian State; 3) the oppressors themselves; Romanians, and Jews.”22 In this respect, Myron and 4) “occupants’ aids.” He also included claimed: ȱ ȱ ȱ Ĵȱ ¢ǯȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ to understand how the hierarchy developed ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ by Stetsko was supposed to agree with the minorities in Ukraine in the way they treat the following passage, almost identical to what ȱȱȱȱȱǯȱ ¢ȱȱ ĴǱȱ Only those representatives of other nationalities ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ The position of the Ukrainian State towards ethnic ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ minorities will be determined by their conduct in Ukrainian lands.23 a time of national revolution, and in the period of ȱȱǯ27 ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ę¢ȱ ȱ ȱ Jewish minority: It appears that at least between Stetsko and Myron there was certain consensus on this ȱȱȱęȱ¢ȱȱĴȱȱȱ ǯȱ issue. However, while at this stage it was ȱȱȱȱęȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱ really planned to grant to ethnic minorities ȱ ǰȱ ȱ ę¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ a chance to prove their loyalty, there was ȱȱȂȱȱȱȱ nothing mentioned about how it could be of the Communist doctrine.24 implemented in practice. At the same time, not only did the texts by ȱȱ¡ȱȃȱȱȱĴȱȱȱȱȱ Stetsko and Myron render their personal Ȅȱ Ĵȱȱȱȱȱǰȱȱ ideas, but also, to a certain extent, shaped principally assured that the government the ideological environment inside the of the future Ukrainian state “in respect to OUN(b). They had not lost their relevance national minorities is not going to have any during the initial stages of the war between extermination policy, but will provide for their the Third Reich and the Soviet Union.28 For cultural and economic development within instance, on 20 July 1941 Starukh, in his report integrity and sovereignty of the Ukrainian on organizing the printing of nationalist literature in the Kyiv region, expressed the

21 Oreliuk, Serhii [Mitrynha, Ivan]. Nash Řś TsDAVOV, f. 3833, op. 2, spr 39, ark. 19. shliakh borotby. part 2. s.l.: s.n., 1940: 94. 26 Zaitsev. ¢ȱ¢ȱ£: 22 Orlyk, Maksym [Myron, Dmytro]. Ideia 280. i chyn Ukrainy (Nacherk ideolohichno-politychnykh 27 TsDAVOV, f. 3833, op. 2, spr. 39, ark. 19. osnov ukrainskoho natsionalizmu). s.l.: s.n., 1940: 48, 28 Stasiuk, Oleksandra. Vydavnycho- śŗǰȱŗŗşǯ propahandyvna diialnist OUN (1941-1953 rr.). 23 Ibid., 119. Lviv: TsDVR; Instytut ukrainoznavstva im. I. 24 Ibid., 119. Krypiakevycha, 2006: 22-23.

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 67 Andriy Usach

intention to republish both of Stetsko’s texts ȱ ȱ ęǰȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȃȱ ȱ ȱ Ĵȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ȅǰȱ Bolshevik Moscow imperialism.33 but with the “brief supplement on Jews.”29 Unfortunately, there is no knowledge on the It undoubtedly implied that “Ukrainian state nature of this supplement or whether it was building” had to be accompanied with mass republished at all. violence against ethnic minorities as based on ȱȱʧʧȱ ȱ¢ǰȱȱȱ the principle of collective responsibility. At of the OUN(b) activist group for the expected the same time, it must also be kept in mind, ¢ȱĚȱęǯ30 It is known that according to the guidelines, that there are Stetsko was one of those who in May 1941 factors, which are major supporters of the personally developed the guidelines “Struggle NKVD powers and Soviet rule in Ukraine and Activities of the OUN in Wartime” that and must be destroyed during the period were supposed to regulate the activities of the of establishing a new revolutionary order ǻǼȱȱȱĴȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ in Ukraine. The factors are the following: Soviet Union. Bandera, Roman Shukhevych, “... 2. Jews, both individually, and as a national and Stepan Lenkavskyi also contributed to the group.”34 It was considered within the guidelines.31 In the guidelines, the hierarchy OUN(b) as a precondition for the successful of ethnic minorities was much simpler than implementation of their plans to create the ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ Ȯȱ ȃȄȱ ȱ Ukrainian state and destroy the possible “foes” only. It is also notable that Jews were opponents of this process. included in the “enemy ethnic minorities,” along with Poles and Russians. Among other “Nasty, dirty, and Jewish”: Activities of the things, there were plans to register, isolate, Marching Groups of the OUN(b) and dismiss them from almost all positions, as well as to apply other discriminatory The so called ‘marching’ cells or groups measures, including executions at the slightest were supposed to be the striking force in suspicion of sabotage or loyalty to the Soviet implementing “Ukrainian state-building” ǯȱ ȱ ȱ ę¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ on the territories that used to be part of the possibility for assimilation of Jews would Ukrainian SSR before September 1939, thus ȱ ę¢ȱ ǯ32 In the course of ȱȱȱĚȱȱȱǯȱ “cleansing the territory from the foe elements”, The OUN(b) Leadership (Provid) put forward the following statements were made: this idea at the end of 1940.řś With the start of war, they were supposed to advance following ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ǰȱ ȱ ȱ ěȱ the front line, establish local governments and ȱ ȱ ȱ ǰȱ ǰȱ keep them under their control, disseminate 29 Dziuban. Ukrainske derzhavotvorennia: 221. nationalist propaganda, organize the network 30 Klymyshyn, Mykola. V pokhodi do voli. Spo- myny. vol. 1. Toronto: Liha Vyzvolennia Ukrainy; Doslidnyi in.stytut “Studiium”ǰȱŗşŝśǱȱřŖŜǯ 33 Dziuban. Ukrainske derzhavotvorennia: 37. 31 ATsDVR, f. 2, t. 1, od. zb. 1, ark. śşǰȱŜŞȬŜşǲȱ 34 HDA SBU, f. 13, spr. 376, t. 49, ark 2. Carynnyk. “Foes of Our Rebirth”: 329. řś Matla, Zynovii. Pivdenna pokhidna hrupa. 32 HDA SBU, f. 13, spr 376, t. 6, ark 301-302. Ǳȱȱ ¢£ǰȱŗşśŘǱȱřǲȱǰȱ¢ǯȱ For a more detailed analysis of these guidelines, Vid Sianu do Dnipra. Prychynky do istorii Pivdennoi see: Carynnyk. “Foes of Our Rebirth”: 329-332; pokhidnoi hrupy OUN 1941-1942 rrǯȱ Ǳȱ ɩǯȱ ʵǯǰȱ Struve. Deutsche HerrschaftǱȱŗŞŞȬŗşśǯ 1994: 8.

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 68 Andriy Usach

of the OUN(b), and engage therein the local and respect our laws.”39 population on a mass scale. Thus, accrediting In total, three marching groups were mass support for their activities, the OUN(b) established: the 1st North Group in Przemysl expected the Third Reich to recognize the land, the 2nd Central Group in Chelm land, and Ukrainian State. The people needed for the the 3rd South Group in the Lemkivshchyna establishment of the marching groups started area. Each of them were given a distinctive in the early 1941 were selected from Ukrainian mark to help recognize one another: it was nationalists who were staying on the territory supposed to be a seam, or a stitching thread of of the Governorate-General.36 In Cracow, the respective color, barely noticeable on the they created a Planning Center for Marching ǯȱȱȱ ȱ ȱȱęȱ Groups of the OUN(b), including Vasyl to help connect the members of the marching Kuk, Roman Malashchuk, and Zenon Matla, Ǳȱ ȃȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ǵȄȱ Ȯȱ ȃȱ who were in charge of their administration, where the pillars prop the skies.”40 Their total ȱǰȱȱǰȱȱęȱ number was about 700 persons.41 destinations for every member, and the The 3rd South Marching Group of the OUN(b) functions they had to perform upon arrival.37 (Pivdenna pokhidna hrupaȱȮȱPPH) was the most Depending on the assigned roles, the selected successful in its activities. It is also the best ěȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ described group in available memoirs.42 The training courses. Special emphasis was placed person in charge of its establishment was on studying the Russian language, Soviet Tymish Semchyshyn, “Myroslav Richka”, a literature, the peculiarities of state structure county leader (okruzhnyi providnyk) of OUN(b) of the Ukrainian SSR, and customs of the local population.38 It is known that at least Stetsko 39 Pavlyshyn, Luka. “Na hrani dvokh svitiv…” Spohady viiskovyka-banderivtsia. Lviv: Spolom, 2010: personally met the future members of the 162. 40 HDA SBU, f. 6, spr. 74327-FP, t. 1, ark. marching groups. He laid emphasis, among 67-68; Ibid., t. 2, ark. 28; Klymyshyn. V pokhodi do other things, on the following: “Only those voli: 319-320; Lysiak, Oleh. “Povernemos.” Homin Ukrainyǰȱ ́ȱ Řşȱ ǻŗşśŝǼǱȱ şǲȱ ǯȱ Pivdenna pokhidna will be able to live in our nation state who hrupa: 7; Rehei. Vid Sianu do Dnipra: 9. recognize our traditions, culture, language, 41 Lebed. «Orhanizatsiia protynimetskoho oporu»: ŗśŖǯ 42 In addition to the abovementioned, see: 36 Archive of the Security Service of Ukraine Zovenko, Orest [Khovailo, Osyp]. Bezimenni. in Lviv Region (Arkhiv upravlinnia Sluzhby Spohad uchasnyka novitnikh vyzvolnykh zmahan. £¢ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ȯȱ), s.l.: s.n., 1946; Lysiak, Oleh. “Den 30 chervnia f. 6, spr. P-36200, t. 2, ark. 106; Lebed, Mykola. 1941 i pershi dni pislia toho (Spohad uchasnyka “Orhanizatsiia protynimetskoho oporu OUN 1941- pokhidnykh hrup OUN).” Shliakh Peremohy,ȱ́ȱ 1943 rokiv”. Suchasnistǰȱ́ȱŗȬŘȱǻŗşŞřǼǱȱŗŚşǯ řŗȱ ǻŗşŝşǼǱȱ Řǰȱ śȬŜǲȱ ¢ǰȱ ǯȱ ȃȱ ȱ 37 Klymyshyn. V pokhodi do voli: 307; marshrutu (Spomyn uchasnyka pokhidnykh Malashchuk, Roman. Z knyhy moho zhyttia. Spomyny. hrup)“. ȱ ȃ ȱ ¢Ȅȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ŗşŜŗ. vol. 1. Toronto: Homin Ukrainy; Doslidnyi instytut Ǳȱ ȱ ¢ǰȱ ŗşŜŗǱȱ ŗŚŜȬŗśŖǲȱ ¢ǰȱ “Studiium”, 1987: 227-228; Matla. Pivdenna pokhidna Roman. “Intsydent na dorozi do Krymu”. Vyzvolnyi hrupa: 3, 7, 8. Shliakhǰȱ ́ȱ ŝȱ ǻŗşşŞǼǱȱ ŞŗŝȬŞŗŞǲȱ ǰȱ ¢ǯȱ 38 HDA SBU, fǯȱ śǰȱ spr 67418, t. 3, ark. 12; “Prozirky z moho tverdoho zhyttia». red. Mykhailo Ibid., f.6, spr 74327-FP, t. 1, arkǯȱŜśǲȱǯȱPivdenna Marunchak. V borotbi za Ukrainsku derzhavu. Esei, pokhidna hrupa: 4; S.-Chartoryiskyi, Mykola [Sydor, spohady, svidchennia, litopysannia, dokumenty Druhoi Mykola]. Vid Sianu po Krym (Spomyny uchasnyka III svitovoi viiny. Winnipeg: Svitova liha ukrainskykh pokhidnoi hrupy-Pivden)ǯȱ ȱǱȱ ǰȱŗşśŗǱȱ ¢¢ȱ £ǰȱ ŗşşŖǱȱ śŜşȬśŝśǲȱ ǰȱ 100; Chubai, Mstyslav [Dzyndra, Yaroslav]. Reid Yaroslav. “Pivdenna pokhidna hrupa OUN. orhanizatoriv OUN vid Popradu po Chorne more (Iz Storinky spohadiv”. Dzvinǰȱ ́ȱ ŞȬşȱ ǻŗşşŞǼǱȱ ŞŝȬşŗǲȱ zapysnyka roiovoho). Munich: Nasha knyhozbirnia, Tselevych, Uliana. “Pokhidni hrupy v Ukraini”. ŗşśŘǱȱŘŜȬŘŝǯ Shliakh Peremohyǰȱ́ȱŘŜȱǻŗşŜŝǼǱȱśǯ

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 69 Andriy Usach

in Lemkivshchyna. He learned about the plan ȱȱ ǰȱ ȱśȱȱŗŘȱȱȱ to establish marching groups in February 1941 each. The swarm included a leader and his from the OUN(b) leader in the Governorate- deputy, the Security Service (Sluzhba Bezpeky General Yaroslav Khomiv, “Limnytskyi.” Ȯȱ SB) referent, a propagandist, an economic He ordered Semchyshyn in April 1941 to provisor, an overnight vigilant, a person in start establishing the swarms (roi) of the charge of establishing local authorities, and future PPH from the Ukrainian nationalists a signalman. Upon arrival to destinations, subjected to him. The respective lists were they established regional, county and district compiled, and the swarm leaders (roiovi) were authorities of the OUN(b).47 Members of the appointed. For this purpose, every participant PPH travelled on foot, but more often, rode ȱ ȱ ȱ ęȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ bicycles, on carts, and one of the swarms ȱǰȱȱȱǰȱ ȱęȱ even used a bus for several days.48 The of the future Ukrainian state he preferred communication between the PPH command working in.43 The core of the PPH consisted of ěȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ the members of the Unit of Young Men (Kurin the help of a special password: “What is molodiǼȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ĵȱ ¢ȱ¢ǵȄȱȮȱȃ ȂȱȂǰȱȱ¢ǯȄ49 (Ukrainskyi Dopomohovyi Komitet) in Sanok, a Besides, every swarm had its encoded legal youth entity headed by the same person, name that was indicated in black ink on the Semchyshyn.44 In May 1941, he received from landmarks along the route to inform those Cracow 10 copies of the guidelines “Struggle who followed.śŖ and Activities of the OUN in Wartime” that he In fact, within the two weeks upon the Third sent out to his subordinates, and personally Ȃȱ Ĵȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǰȱ ȱ ȱ controlled how they studied them. Two or managed to go through all of East Galicia ȱ¢ȱȱȱĴȱȱȱȱȱ of which had already left by that time for ě on the Soviet Union, Semchyshyn received an destinations in East Galicia (Lviv, Drohobych, order to appoint him as leader of the PPH, and Sambir, Skole, Ternopil, a.o.): Dziuban. Ukrainske derzhavotvorennia: 217; TsDAVOV, f. 3833, op. 1, ȱ ȱ ȱ ěȱ ȱ ȱ spr. 14, ark. 22-24. Among the persons who had left ęȱ ȱ Ȯȱ ǰȱ ¢ǰȱ ǰȱ the PPH was, for example, Bohdan Pidhaynyi. He left for Lviv where he applied to be a Wehrmacht communications, and propaganda, and a interpreter, on the orders of the land leader (kraiovyi typist lady. In addition, they were also joined providnykǼȱ ȱ ǻǼȱ ȱ ¢ȱ Ȯȱ ȃȱ Legenda”: Pidhainyi, Bohdan. “Haudeamus”. by a member of the OUN(b) Leadership, Visti Kombatantaǰȱ ́ȱ řȱ ǻŘŚřǼȱ ǻŘŖŖśǼǱȱ śśȬśŝǯȱ Two Matla.Śś other participants of the PPH who left for Lviv, the brothers Volodymyr and Yevhen Kachmarski, Initially, the numerical composition of the enrolled to local police: Rich, David Alan. “Armed Ukrainians in L’viv: Ukrainian Militia, Ukrainian PPH was up to 300 persons, but it soon went Police, 1941 to 1942.” Canadian-American Slavic down to 200.46 Members of the PPH were Studies ŚŞǰȱ́ȱřȱǻŘŖŗŚǼǱȱŘŞŘȬŘŞřǯ 47 HDA SBU, f. 6, spr. 74327-FP, t. 2, ark. 26- ŘŝǰȱśŖǲȱǯȱReid orhanizatoriv OUN: 6. 43 HDA SBU, f. 6, spr. 74327-FP, t. 1, ark. ŜśȬ 48 Information sheet ́ 1, 13 July 1941, 66. ATsDVR (not compiled), ark. 1; Lysiak. ”Den 30 44 Rehei. Vid Sianu do Dnipra: 4. chervnia”: 2; Matla. Pivdenna pokhidna hrupa: 9; Śś HDA SBU, f. 6, spr. 74327-FP, t. 1, ark. 64, Rehei. Vid Sianu do Dnipra: 10. 66-67. 49 HDA SBU, f. 6, spr. 74327-FP, t. 2, ark. 28. 46 AUSBULO, f. 6, spr. P-36200, t. 2, ark. śŖ For example, the swarm, that included 108; HDA SBU, f. 6, spr. 74327-FP, t. 1, ark. ŜśǯȱAs members of the ȱěȱȱPPH was called of July, 9, 1941, Semchyshyn was aware of 286 “ɫŗ”: HDA SBU, f. 6, spr. 74327-FP, t. 1, ark. 68; participants in the PPH who crossed the Sianǰȱşśȱ TsDAVOV, f. 3833, op. 1, spr. 14, ark.ȱŘŖǰȱŘśǯ

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 70 Andriy Usach

up to Ternopil, where they stayed for several their destinations from there, particularly the days. When summarizing the activities over ȱ ȃɼŗȄȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ this period, Semchyshyn emphasized the £ȱ ȱ ȱ ŗśȱ ¢ȱ ŗşŚŗȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ following functions which the subordinate Kamyanets-Podilskyi through Skala-Podilska swarms were performing: “liquidating the and Husiatyn.śŜȱȃȱȱ ¢ǰȱȱ ȱȃɼŗȄȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǻ ȱ Ĝǰȱ entered the villages, held public meetings, secret agents, Jews, Poles, and Moskals).”śŗ ȱ ȱĜȱȱȱȱ They then received more detailed instructions who remain”, as Kozak reported on 31 July on activities in that respect. “We were 1941.śŝ authorized to grant awards for good deeds, The impressions of Ukrainian nationalists and assign punishment for infringements of their stay on the territory of Kamyanets- against the Nation”, as the swarm leader Podilskyi region could be implied from the Mykola Sydor mentioned in his memories.śŘ In notes of a female member of the PPH about fact, the MSG was only supposed to engage in ȱ ęȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ Ǳȱ ȃ¢ȱ its activities after crossing the former Polish- leaves a bad impression. A dilapidated Jewish Soviet border along the Zbruch river.śř In and dirty town.” The description she left about ǰȱ ȱ ęȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ the next stop, the town of Proskuriv, was ȱ¢ȱȱȮȱȱȱ¢ȱȱ similar: “Nasty, dirty, and Jewish. You don’t the recently occupied Kamyanets-Podilskyi even feel like staying longer.”śŞ In line with region. The “Information Bulletin” of the the guidelines “Struggle and Activities of the ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ĵȱ ȱ ǰȱ ȱ OUN in Wartime,” members of the PPH had ȱȱȬȱĴǱȱȃȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱĴȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱ¢ȱęȱǯȄśŚ local population, in order to identify contact It obviously contrasted with the events in points that could be used to disseminate Western Ukraine resulting in a wave of nationalist propaganda among them. Initially, Jewish pogroms in summer 1941, including in it was not an easy task. Local people treated localities that the PPH itinerary ran through, them suspiciously, taking them for Poles or such as Dobromyl, Sambir, Drohobych, Stryi, even Germans who could speak Ukrainian, Rohatyn, Berezhany, Ternopil, among others.śś and in order to convince them of the contrary, ȱ ǰȱ ¢ȱ ę£ȱ ȱ Ȭȱ ȱ they had to take much time.śş In their reports, the swarms of the PPH that had to leave to ȱȱȱ ȱȱȱĴȱȱȱ population towards Jews. For instance, we śŗ Information sheet ́ 1, 13 July 1941, ATsDVR (not compiled), ark. 1. read about the Proskuriv district: śŘ S.-Chartoryiskyi. Vid Sianu po Krym: 101. śř AUSBULO, f. 6, spr. P-36200, t. 2, ark. 109. śŚ Information ȱ ́ȱ ŗǰȱ ŗřȱ ¢ŗşŚŗ, ATsDVR (not compiled), ark. 2. śŜ HDA SBU, f. 6, spr. 74327-FP, t. 2, ark. 37; śś The most holistic information on the Lysiak. “Den 30 chervnia”: 2; Orderȱ́ȱŗŘǰȱŗśȱ ¢ȱ ȱȱȱĴȱȱȱ¢ȱ: 1941, ATsDVR (not compiled), ark. 1, 4; Reportȱ́ȱśǰȱ Struve. Deutsche Herrschaft: 216-234, 433-442, 446- July, 20, 1941, ATsDVR (not compiled), ark. 1. ŚŜŚǰȱŚşŘȬŚşŜǰȱśŖŘȬśŗśǰȱśşŗȬŜŘŗǯȱThe fact that the PPH śŝ TsDAVOV, f. 3833, op. 1, spr. 14, ark. 13. members were at least the eye-witnesses of the anti- śŞȱ Dziuban. Ukrainske derzhavotvorennia: 239. Jewish violence in Dobromyl and Stryi ȱęȱ śş HDA SBU, f. 6, spr. 74327-FP, t. 1, ark. in the memoirs of the swarm leaders Mykola Sydor 77; Dziuban. Ukrainske derzhavotvorennia: 239; and Yaroslav Dzyndra: S.-Chartoryiskyi. Vid Sianu ǯȱ£ǱȱŜśȬŜŜǲȱǯȱ“Prozirky”: po KrymǱȱ ŘşȬřŖǰȱ śŜǰȱ śşǲȱ ǯȱ Reid orhanizatoriv śŝŖǲȱǯȬ¢¢ǯȱȱȱȱ ¢ǱȱŗŗŘȬŗŗŚǲȱ OUN: 18. Chubai. Reid orhanizatoriv OUN: 29, 33.

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 71 Andriy Usach

ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȃɧŗȄȱȱȱȱȱȱ¢ǯȱ ȱȱȱȱȱ ȱǯȱȱȱȱ ȱ ȱ ǰȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ĵȱ ȱ starvation, Jews in cities had bread to eat. People are describing relations with Jewish community happy when the Germans shoot the Jews down.60 of Felshtyn and even gave a detailed account on how one local Jew he calls Solomon ȱ Ĵȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ Moyseyovych murdered another one, Motya described in the following way: ¢ǯȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ Ĵȱ ȱ revenge for his collaboration with the Soviet ȱǰȱȱȱȱ ǰȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱ regime.63 Ukrainian nationalists, according towns. And they threaten to bathe in Ukrainian to Sydor, did not support such murders, blood. That is why residents in some localities of and even sentenced Solomon Moyseyovych the Volochysk district do not even sleep at homes, ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Řśȱ ǯ64 He did as they fear the Jews.61 not mention a word about his personal ȱȱĴȱȱȃȱȱ In the report on the situation in Felshtyn of the Jewish community.” After all, it fully ǰȱ ȱȱęȱȱ ȱǱȱ ęȱ ȱ ȱ Ȭ ȱ ȱ ǯȱ Instead, in her testimonies, a Felshtyn Jewish ȱȱȱȱȱęȱȱȱ ȱ lady Etya Tsalevich, presents the stay in the ȱ ȱ ǯȱ ǰȱ ȱ ȱ town of a “police subdivision of Western ¢ȱ ȱ ǰȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ukrainians” (as she called the visiting ¢ȱ ȱ ǯȱ ǰȱ ȱ ǰȱ Ukrainian nationalists) in an absolutely ¢ȱ ǰȱĴȱȱ ȱȱǯǯǯȱȱ ěȱǯȱȱȱǰȱȱ¢ǰȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱ ǰȱȱȱȱ they robbed and killed several Jewish families. ¢ȱȱȱȱ ǯ62 Tsalevich eye-witnessed one of the murders herself. They were a father and two sons It is known that in Felshtyn district the swarm Bukivkers who were killed not far from their Ŝś 60 Extracts from reports, 19 July 1941, house, and a mother was injured. ATsDVR (not compiled), ark. 1. Upon the whole, the main manpower of 61 Ibid. It is notable that the same attitudes were recorded by the members of the Nachtigall the PPH did not stay long on the territory battalion consisting of OUN(b) activists. Viktor of the Kamyanets-Podilskyi region, and Kharkiv, a commander of one of Nachtigall’s detachments, wrote in his autobiography about on 24 July 1941 they had to be around the events during transit through the Kamyanets- Vinnytsia.66 Parallel to this, the Land Podilskyi and Vinnytsia region: “During our march, we personally saw the victims of Jewish Bolshevik leadership (Kraiovyi provid) of the OUN(b) was terror. It intensified our hatred to Jews so much that in two villages we shot down all the Jews we came organized in Lviv and sent additional swarms across. I recall an episode. During our march, before to follow the PPH. One of them was headed by one village, we saw many wandering people. When asked, they replied that Jews were threatening them and they are afraid to sleep over in their homes. As a result, we shot down all the Jews we came across 63 S.-Chartoryiskyi. Vid Sianu po Krym: 129- there.”: Patryliak, Ivan. Viiskova diialnist OUN(b) 140. u 1940-1942 rokakh. Kyiv: Instytut istorii Ukrainy 64 Ibid., 139. NANU, 2004: 362 (the text is verified according to Ŝśȱ ȱȱȱǻȱȮȱǼǰȱ ȱǱȱǰȱǯȱřŞřřǰȱǯȱŗǰȱǯȱśŝǰȱǯȱ ǯřȦřŝřŚǰȱ ¢ȱ ǯȱ ǯǱȱ ȱ ǰȱ ǯȱ śǰȱ ǯȱ 17). 66889, t. 3, ark. 67-67 rev. 62 Extracts from reports, 19 July 1941, 66ȱ ȱ ́ȱ ŗŜǰȱ ŗşȱ ¢ȱ ŗşŚŗǰȱ ȱ ǻȱ ATsDVR (not compiled), ark. 2. compiled), ark. 1.

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 72 Andriy Usach

Volodymyr Zbrozhyk-“Bolotov.”67 In Chortkiv several more dozen arrivals enlisted in in the Ternopil region, they received blue and the militia or other entities in Kamyanets- ¢ ȱ Ěȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǰȱ Podilskyi.71 Kozak instructed them to show up money, and armed security from a special at work on time and to “honestly and duly” unit established by the OUN(b) to help the ęȱ ȱ ǯ72 Eventually, the OUN(b) “Eastern Action.” On 19 July 1941, they arrived managed to rather quickly cover with its in Kamyanets-Podilskyi where Zbrozhyk activities basically all southern districts of the took the position of the regional leader Kamyanets-Podilskyi region. In the district (oblasnyi providnyk) of the OUN(b). After they centers and villages, Ukrainian nationalists familizarized themselves with the situation in advocated the idea of Ukrainian statehood, the city, Ukrainian nationalists reported on created local authorities, such as militia the ethnic composition of the local population: units.73 Among other things, it helped them “60 % - Jews, 20 % - Moscowized Ukrainians, to successfully overcome their political 10 % - good Ukrainians, 10 % - Moskals.”68 On rivals from OUN(m) who were also trying Řŗȱ ¢ȱŗşŚŗǰȱȱ ȱȃɼŗȄȱȱȱȱ ȱ ¡ȱ ȱ Ěȱ ȱ ȱ ǯȱ Kamyanets-Podilskyi, and its leader Kozak ȱ ȱ ȱ Ĵȱ ǻBukovynskyi replaced Zbrozhyk in the position of regional kurin) arrived in Kamyanets-Podilskyi in the leader of the OUN(b).69ȱ ȱȱęȱǰȱ¢ȱ second half of August 1941 on the initiative started an active propaganda campaign. A local of the OUN(m), their activities were not only Ukrainian man, Ivan Marunchak, reporeted neutralized but several dozens members were ȱ ȱ ęȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ £ȱ ȱ also drawn over to the side of the OUN(b).74 of Kamyanets-Podilskyi: “I also saw there ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǰȱ ȱ ęȱ ¢ȱ ěȱ Ĵǰȱ ȱ ȱ ȃȱ ȱ Ěȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ £ȱ ȱ ǷȄǰȱ ȃȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ authorities.ŝś Considering the suspicious ǷȄǰȱȃ ¢ȱȱȱǷȄǰȱ Ĵȱ ȱ ȱ ǰȱ ȱ ȃȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ȯȱ ȱ ȱ nationalists were forced to postpone the ǷȄ70 Ukrainian nationalists received implementation of a number of their initiatives. from the German occupant administration For instance, the military referent of a PPH, a permit to establish a Kamyanets-Podilskyi Metodiy Pavlyshyn-“Viktor Lisovskyi”, regional administration and militia. Zbrozhyk told that his duties initially included was appointed as commander of the regional ǯȱ ȱ ęȱ ȱ £Ȃȱ ȱ ȱ 71 Archive of the Security Service of Ukraine in Ternopil Region (Arkhiv upravlinnia seize local authorities and trying to address £¢ȱ£¢ȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȮȱ ǼǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱřŘřŝŘǰȱǯȱŗǰȱǯȱŗřŖǲȱ£ǯȱ all issues “from a nationalist standpoint,” Ukrainske derzhavotvorennia: 308-309, 313. 72 Ibid., ark. 13. Regarding the composition 67ȱ ǰȱǯȱ řŞřřǰȱ ǯȱ ŗǰȱ ǯȱ ŗŚǰȱ ǯȱ ŗśǯȱ of swarm ɼŗ, see: Lysiak. “Day of 30 June”: 2; Order Regarding the composition of Zbrozhyk swarm, ́ȱŗŘǰȱŗśȱJuly 1941, ATsDVR (not compiled), ark. 1. see: Ibid., ark. 34. 73 Marunchak, Ivan. Kurkulskyi nedobytok. 68ȱ ǯǰȱǯȱŗśǯ Spohady. Kyiv: Vseukrainske tovarystvo 69 Ibid., ark. 13. Regarding the composition politychnykh viazniv i represovanykh, 2002: 62. ȱ ȱ ɼŗǰȱ Ǳȱ ¢ǯȱ ȃ¢ȱ ȱ ǰȱ řŖȄǱȱ Řǲȱ 74 Archive of the Security Service of ȱ́ȱŗŘǰȱŗśȱ ¢ȱŗşŚŗǰȱȱǻȱǼǰȱ Ukraine in Ternopil Region (Arkhiv upravlinnia ark. 1. £¢ȱ£¢ȱ¢ȱȱȱȱȮȱ 70 Marunchak, Ivan. Kurkulskyi nedobytok. AUSBUTO), fǯȱśǰȱspr. 32372, t. 1, ark. 130; Dziuban. Spohady. Kyiv: Vseukrainske tovarystvo Ukrainske derzhavotvorennia: 308-309, 313. politychnykh viazniv i represovanykh, 2002: 62. ŝś TsDAVOV, f. 3833, op. 1, spr. 14, ark. 33.

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 73 Andriy Usach

establishing the units so called “Sich” out of their literature and conducting any the volunteers of local population, as military propaganda activities in general. They garrisons on the district, county and regional were primarily expected to help with levels. They had to act as nuclei of the harvesting.79 “We are treated as mere future Ukrainian Army. During his stay in workforce. It was said that we only have to Ternopil in July 1941, Pavlyshyn received ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ £Ȅȱ Ȯȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ȯȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȃȄȱ ǰȱ one of the intermediaries between the since the Germans had not recognized the Germans and the regional OUN(b) Ukrainian state, and therefore prohibited administration, Denys Prytuliak.80 On 29 the creation of any army.76 Despite this, the July 1941, Kozak anticipated that they would PPH members still created on the territory have to leave the territory of the Kamyanets- of the Kamyanets-Podilskyi regional units Podilskyi region, and emphasized the need to called “Sich,” which only had the militia more actively create a network organization.81 functions.77 After all, the local population His prognoses were not without any used to call the OUN(b) activists “Sich grounds. On 31 July 1941, Field-Commandant ęȄȱǻsichovyky).78 Later, the contradictions Jozef Meiler informed the commanders further increased. In Kamyanets-Podilskyi, that Ukrainian nationalists arrived in Ukrainian nationalists banned printing ¢Ȭ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ěȱ local authorities. “Please, provide clear 76 For example, regarding activities in instructions as soon as possible, - he wrote, the district centers Dunayivtsi and Orynyn, see: - whether we have to tolerate them here or AUSBUTO, fǯȱśǰȱǯȱřŘřŝŘǰȱǯȱŗǰȱark.ȱŗŖŞȬŗŖşǰȱŗŗŚȬŗŗśǰȱ 129 rev. -131 rev. For Stara Ushytsia, see: AUSBUTO, send them back to Lviv.”82ȱȱśȱȱŗşŚŗǰȱ f. 6, spr. 10634-P, ark. 14-14 rev., 16 rev. -17; Archive a secret order was issued to the 17th Army, of the Security Service of Ukraine in Khmelnytskyi Region (Arkhiv upravlinnia Sluzhby bezpeky obliging the prevention of the penetration of ¢ȱȱ ¢ȱȱȮȱ Ǽ, fǯȱśǰȱ spr. 24118, ark. 33 rev.; Havryliuk, Osyp. “Ne skuie Ukrainian nationalists further into the regions dushi zhyvoi...” Ivano-Frankivsk: Nova Zoria, 2012: beyond Zbruch. They had to be detained and 93-99. 83 77 OUN Archive in Kyiv, f. 1, op. 2, spr. 440, ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ŗʈȱ ǯ ark. 20; Veryha, Vasyl. “Bukovynskyi kurin 1941”. In Kamyanets-Podilskyi, the actvitities of the Pid red. Kost Melnyk, Oleh Lashchenko ta Vasyl Veryha. Na zov Kyieva. Ukrainskyi natsionalizm u II OUN(b) activists were terminated within a svitovii viini: Zbirnyk stattei, spohadiv i dokumentiv. month upon their arrival in the city. Formal Toronto; New York: Vydavnytstvo “Novyi Shliakh”, ŗşŞśǱȱ ŗŗŗǲȱ , Andrii i Volodymyr Staryk. reasons for this were disputes over land and the Bukovynskyi kurin v boiakh za Ukrainsku derzhavnist activities of Ivan Nanenko, the then head of the 1918-1941-1944. Kyiv; Chernivtsi: Tovarystvo “Ukrainskyi narodnyi dim v Chernivtsiakh”ǰȱŗşşśǱȱ 78-79. 79 Dziuban. Ukrainske derzhavotvorennia: 78 308, 313. Oliinyk. “Borotba OUN-UPA”ǱȱŝŚȬŝśǯȱȱȱ 80 Ibid., 313. men received blue and yellow armbands with the 81 Ibid., 308. ‘Sich” inscription. For example, see: AUSBUKhO, 82 Hoppe, Bert, und Hildrun Glass, bearb. ǯȱ śǰȱ ǯȱ ŘŖŚşşǰȱ ǯȱ ŗŝȬŗŝȱ ǯǲȱ ¢ȱ ȱ Die Verfolgung und Ermordung der europäischen Southern California Shoah Foundation Institute Juden durch das nationalsozialistische Deutschland ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ǻȱ Ȯȱ ȱ ȱ ŗşřřȬŗşŚśǯȱ ȱ ŝǱȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ǽǰȱ Ǜȱ ŗśŞŗŚǰȱ ¢ȱ ǯȱ ȱ ȱ Gebieten I: Besetzte sowjetische Gebiete unter PPH also were wearing blue and yellow armbands: deutscher Militärverwaltung, Baltikum und ȱǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŜŜŞŞşǰȱǯȱřǰȱǯȱŞǰȱŗŖǲȱ£ǯȱ Transnistrien. Munich: Oldenburg Verlag, 2011: Ukrainske derzhavotvorennia: 378; Chubai. Reid 221. orhanizatoriv OUN: 20-21; Yaroslavskyi. “Vid 83 Dziuban. Ukrainske derzhavotvorennia: Sianu po Dinets”: 18. 378.

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 74 Andriy Usach

Kamyanets-Podilskyi Land Administration. of August, 1941, local Jews were tossed Despite the fact that Nazi occupation ȱ ȱ Ĵǯ87 According to the available administration envisaged to preserve the testimonies, local militia men were engaged in collective farms system, the OUN(b) activists ȱĴȱȱȱȱ proceeded to liquidate the collective farms, ȱ Ĵǰȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ to allocate the land, equipment and the ȱȱȱȱěȱȱȱȱ¢ȱ collected harvest among the paesants. and beating them while doing so.88 Between 26 Nanenko, who was in charge of the land issue, and 28 August 1941, the command squadron requested explanations from Kozak but he of the supreme head of police and SS “Russia- replied that he was executing the orders of ȄȱȱȱȱĴȱřŘŖȱȱ ȱ his Leadership. Nanenko then complained 23,600 local Jews in Kamyanets-Podilskyi, directly to the Field-Commandant Meiler, while Jews were also deported from Hungary. who ordered Ukrainian nationalists to At the time, it was the largest scale execution, leave the territory of the Kamyanets- while in the Holocaust historiography it Podilskyi region within 24 hours. is referred to as the one that marked the ȃ ȱ ȱȱęȱ ȱȱȱȱ transition to the complete extermination of reasons, as I did not agree with their actions,” Jewish communities, not only some individual Nanenko later reported.84 categories.89 This evidently extended to the Activities of the OUN(b) in the southern ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ŘśŖȱ ȱ ȱ parts of the Kamyanets-Podilskyi region in Orynyn.90 On 30 August 1941, the same coincided with the initial stage of carrying 87 For more, see: Eikel, Markus, and out the Holocaust in the region. There are Valentina Sivaieva. “City Mayors, Rayon Chiefs testimonies that Hungarian soldiers forced and Village Elders in Ukraine”, 1941-4: How Local Administrators Co-operated with the German Jews to exhumate bodies of the victims of the Occupation Authorities”. Contemporary European ¢ȱŘřǰȱ́ȱřȱǻŘŖŗŚǼǱȱŚŘŖȬŚŘřǯ Soviet regime discovered in the Kamyanets- 88ȱ ǰȱ ǯȱ śǰȱ ǯȱ şŞŚǰȱ ǯȱ ŗřǰȱ ŗŞȬŗŞȱ Podilskyi fortress.Şś These events might be rev.; Ibid., spr. 20964, ark. 13 rev. -14; USC SFI VHA, ǛȱŗśŞŗŚǰȱ ¢ȱ ǯ related to the mass killings that Zbrozhyk 89 For more, see: Mallmann, Klaus- swarm members witnessed on 20 July 1941, Michael. “Der qualitative Sprung im Vernichtungsprozess: Das Massaker von Kamenez- the second day after their arrival in the city: Podolsk Ende August 1941». Jahrbuch für ȃ¢ȱ Ĵȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Antisemitismusforschung 10 (2001): 239-264; Pohl, Dieter. “Schauplatz Ukraine: Der Massenmord shot down about 700 Jews.”86 In the beginning an den Juden im Militärverwaltungsgebiet und im Reichskommissariat 1941-1943”. Hrsg. von 84ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǰȱ ǯȱ Ŝǰȱ ǯȱ ȬŘŞŖşśǰȱ ǯȱ ŗǰȱ ǯȱ Christian Hartmann, Johannes Hürter, Peter Lieb 30-32. On removing OUN(b) activists from und Dieter Pohl. Der deutsche Krieg im Osten Kamyanets-Podilskyi and the surrounding 1941-1944: Facetten einer Grenzüberschreitung. settlements, see also: AUSBUTO, f. 6, Oldenbourg: Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag, spr. 10634-P, ark. 17-17 rev.; Havryliuk. “Ne 2009: 162-164. According to official reports, 4,200 skuie dushi zhyvoi...”: 99-102; Korbutiak, Jews were killed on August 26; 11,000 on August ¢ǯȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ǯȱ ¢ǯȱ ɩǯȱ ːǯǱȱ ɩǯȱ 27; 7,000 on August, 28. The report dated August ʵǯǰȱ ŗşşşǱȱ ŗŞŗǲȱ ǯȱ ¢ȱ ¢Ǳȱ 30, 1941 specified that the total number of victims ŜŚǲȱǰȱȱǯȱřŞřŜǰȱǯȱŗǰȱǯȱŜśǰȱǯȱŗǯȱ was 23,600 persons: Kruglov, Aleksandr. sost. Şś Marunchak. Kurkulskyi nedobytok: 63. Sbornik dokumentov i materialov ob unichtozhenii 86ȱ ǰȱǯȱ řŞřřǰȱ ǯȱ ŗǰȱ ǯȱ ŗŚǰȱ ǯȱ ŗśǯȱ natsistami evreyev Ukrainy v 1941-1944 godakh. According to other data, 400 Jewish men were Kiyev: Institut iudaiki, 2002: 244-246. killed: Tenneblat, Bina. “Ya ostalas sovershenno 90 According to the available report, it was odna...”. Sost. Boris Zabarko. in Zhivymi ostalis obviously a consequence of activities of the same tolko my. Svidetelstva i dokumenty. Kiyev: Institut battalion 320 that on the same day it was busy iudaiki, 1999: 413. studying the locality and preparing fo action

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 ŝś Andriy Usach

Ĵȱ řŘŖȱ ȱ ŘǰŘŖŖȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ǰȱ of Western Ukraine, mostly in the Ternopil and 380 more Jews on the next day in the region, too.94 In July 1941, a large group of such villages of Velykyi Zhvanchyk and Sokilets.91 activists arrived in Kamyanets-Podilskyi. It During the mass killings, the OUN(b) active included the 27-year-old Volodymyr Balatsko, core were displaced from the Kamyanets- a teacher from Tovste district. In August 1948, Podilskyi region. It is indicative, though, that he was arrested by Soviet special forces, and during the killings in Kamyanets-Podilskyi, during interrogations he gave a detailed Orynyn, Mynkivtsi, and Velykyi Zhvanchyk, account of what he was doing in summer the involvement of local collaborators was 1941, when appointed to the position of the documented, mostly those who were serving OUN(b) district leader (raionnyi providnyk). in the police stations.92 Along with the other four subordinates, Ivan Lesiv, Dmytro Antoshkiv, Tymko “No special order to exterminate the Jews Svynarchyn, and Oleksa Fedoryshyn, he left was issued by the OUN Top Leaders”: Anti- for the district center of Smotrych, northwards Jewish Violence in Smotrych and Kupyn from Kamyanets-Podilskyi. Upon arrival, they convened a meeting of local people The PPH members arriving in Kamyanets- and established a district administration Podilskyi region perceived an essential lack ĜǰȱȱȱȱȱȃȄȱęȱȱ of people needed to carry out their activities, by Kostiantyn Tsikhotskyi. The squad also especially in rural areas. In order to reduce registered two new arrivals, Svynarchyn and the load on the OUN(b) bodies that only were Fedoryshyn. Instead, Lesiv and Antoshkiv beginning to organize here, some districts became propagandists with the assignment of the Kamyanets-Podilskyi region, such as to organize local government in rural areas of Yarmolyntsi, were even put under direct the Smotrych district.şś After some time, the control of the neighbouring Ternopil region.93 OUN(b) regional headman Kozak informed Moreover, in order to reinforce the PPH ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ěȱ ȱ ȱ ȱěǰȱȱ ȱȱȱȱ the Nazi occupation administration and the OUN(b) activists recruited on the territory start of arrests of Ukrainian nationalists. ȱǰȱȱȱ¢ȱȱĴȱȱ around Kamyanets-Podilskyi: Kruglov. Sbornik developing a covert network of OUN(b) and dokumentov: 246. 91 Kruglov. Sbornik dokumentov: 247-248. engaging local citizens for this purpose. The 92 For Kamyanets-Podilskyi, see: contact with them was established with the ǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱşŞŚǰȱǯȱŗŞȱǯǰȱřśȬřśȱǯǲȱ Ibid., spr. 20964, ark. 16 rev., 17 rev. -18; Shvartsman, ȱ ȃȄȱȮȱ ȃ ǯȄ96 Under Moysey. “Sam ne znayu kak ya vyzhil…”. Zabarko. Zhivymi ostalis tolko my: 483-484; Tenneblat. “Ya such conditions, their activities in Smotrych ostalas sovershenno odna...”: 413; USC SFI VHA, # lasted for about a month. ŗśŞŗŚǰȱ ¢ȱ ǲȱ ǰȱǛȱřŖŘŞŝǰȱȱ ǯȱ ȱ¢¢ǰȱǱȱ ǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŘŚŘŗŗǰȱǯȱ In the end of July 1941, Balatsko returned ŗśȬŗŜȱǯǰȱŘşǯȱȱ¢ǰȱǱȱǰȱǯȱśǰȱ to Smotrych after a trip to rural areas and ǯȱ şśşǰȱ ǯȱ Řşǲȱ ǰȱ ǯȱ “Minkovetskikh ¢ȱ ȱ Ȅǯȱ Ƿȱ ¢ȱ found in the town a combat group (boivka) ȱ ȱ¢ȱ£ȱȱĴȱ ȱ ȱ ǻǼȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ęȱ ǯȱ ȱ i kontslagerey. Rekhovot: s.n., 2013: 92-93. On ¢¢ȱ ¢ǰȱ Ǳȱ ǰȱ ǯřȦŞŜśŞǰȱ ȱ Barak-Birnbaum. 94ȱ ǯǰȱŘŘśǯ 93 Dziuban. Ukrainske derzhavotvorennia: şśȱ ǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŜşŞŖǰȱǯȱśŞȬśşǯ 328. 96 Ibid., ark. 61-64, 70-72.

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 76 Andriy Usach

commander of the combat group introduced Ukrainian nationalists, eye-witnesses also himself as a “Strila” and declared that while mentioned other participants in the pogrom, he was away he took the liberty “to manage ȱ ȱ ȃȄȱ ęȱ ¢ǰȱ ¢ȱ things for a while,” that is to commit a Batiukevych, Hryhoriy Hrebeliuk, and Fedir Jewish pogrom by killing several persons. Nebesnyi. We managed to identify in the Archive of the Security Service of Ukraine in ȱȁȂȱȱǰȱȬȱȱęǰȱȬȱȱǰȱ ¢¢ȱ ȱ ęȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱǽȱǾȱȱȱȱ ȱ ȱȱȱȮȱ¢ȱȱ ǯȱ county administration of the OUN was specially ȱ ȱ ȱ Ĵȱ ȱ ȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ in the mass killings on the Smotrych river, ȱȱȱȱȱ¡ȱȱ ȱȱ even though eye-witnesses insisted on this ȱȱȱȱǯ97 in both cases. Hrebeliuk even swore that the killings were executed only by Ukrainian On the next day, the combat group members nationalists.100 ȱ ǰȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȃȄȱ ęȱ While the descriptions of circumstances of the Ĵȱ ȱ ǯ98 During mass killings coincide in all available sources, interrogations, Balatsko did not provide the number of victims is not consistent therein. information about the methods used. During interrogations, Balatsko mentioned the However, the events could be reconstructed numbers of 80 or 100 persons.101 The number in detail due to other sources. According to 100 persons was also mentioned by the eye- them, the detained Jews were convoyed to witness Mykola Osadchuk.102 In later accounts, the suburbs of the town, to the Smotrych he mentioned that several hundred persons ǰȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ȯȱ were convoyed to the river, and ‘dozens of one with old people and men, and another ȱȂȱ ȱȱĚȱȱǯ103 Raissa one with women and children. According to ȱ ęȱ ȱ ŗşŚŝȱ ȱ ŘŖȱ ȱ ȱ ȱǰȱ¢ȱ ȱęȱȱȱ£ȱȱ forced into the river, and 10 of them were the shore, and then they were told to cross killed, but in 1960, she mentioned 100 and the river. Those who were able to were told ŗśȱ ȱ ¢ǯ104 Basia Bohomolets they could go back home. People started (Perepletchikova) reported 20 casualties.ŗŖś making a row cry that was heard even in There were also injured persons.106 All bodies ¢ǯȱ ȱ ǰȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ęȱ ǯȱ were collected by local people, loaded onto Some people managed to escape, while others carts, taken to a Jewish cemetery, and buried were shot down or drowned.99 In addition to in a mass grave.107

100ȱ ǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŞřŝǰȱǯȱŜřȱǯǰȱŞŞǰȱ 97ȱ ǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŜşŞŖǰȱǯȱŜśȱǯȱȬȱŜŜȱ 116 rev., 143 rev. -144. rev. 101ȱ ǰȱǯȱśǰȱȱŜşŞŖǰȱǯȱŗśǰȱŜŜȱǯǰȱ 98 Ibid., 66 rev. 67. 99ȱ ȱ ȱ Ǳȱ ǰȱ ǯȱ śǰȱ ǯȱ 102 Ibid., ark. 161. ŜşŞŖǰȱ ǯȱ ŗśşȱ ǯǰȱ ŗŜŗǲȱ ǰȱ ǯȱ śǰȱ ǯȱ 103 Shymanskyi. Knyha skorboty Ukrainy: ŞřŝǰȱǯȱŜřǰȱŞŞǲȱ ǯǰȱǯȱŘśŚŚǰȱǯȱŘśȱǯȱȬŘŜǰȱŘşȱ 313. rev. -30, 34; Shymanskyi, I. red. Knyha skorboty 104ȱ ǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŞřŝǰȱǯȱŞŞǰȱŘŗŖȬŘŗŗǯ Ukrainy: Khmelnytska oblast. vol. 1. Khmelnytskyi: ŗŖśȱ ȱ ȱ ǰȱ Ǜȱ ŘŝŗśŜǰȱ ȱ ǰȱ ŘŖŖřǱȱ řŗřǲȱ ǰȱ ǯŚŞȦŘŝřǯŘśǰȱ ¢ȱ Perepletchikova. ǲȱ Ȭ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǻȱ Ȯȱ 106ȱ ǰȱǛȱŜśşǯ ǼǰȱǛȱŜśşǲȱ ǯǰȱǛȱŜśŗǲȱȱ ȱ ǰȱǛȱŘŝŗśŜǰȱ 107 Shymanskyi. Knyha skorboty Ukrainy: Basia Perepletchikova. řŗřǲȱ ǰȱǛȱŜśŗǯ

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 77 Andriy Usach

For several days after the mass killing, the still staying there in August 1941.110 Bohomolets family hid in the house of their In the beginning of August 1941, Balatsko acquaintance Nestor Kiyovskyi. When she ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȃȄȱ ęȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ returned home, Bohomolets had a talk with of Kupyn, Smotrych district, to proclaim the Ukrainian nationalists who claimed the Ukrainian state therein. Upon their return, following about the mass killings: “It was Fedoryshyn recounted that one of the local not us. It was the others.”108 Balatsko also Jews called him obscene names. Fedoryshyn stated during interrogations that all of it was ȱ ęȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ commited without any permission on his part. him in the neck.

Since I personally never received any orders on ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ £ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ǰȱ Ȯȱ ȱ ęǰȱ Ȯȱ ęȱ ȱ ǯ [explained Balatsko] I on the next day I left for the city of Kamyanets- asked about the reason why it failed. I was told that Podilskyi to meet the leader Kozak. He answered the Jews who lived in the town of Kupyn resisted ¢ȱȱ¢ȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱ ȱȱǯ111 orders from the OUN Leadership to exterminate ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¡ȱ ȱ He gathered an even larger group of “Sich” Jewish population was within the authority of the ęǰȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ǯȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ¢ȱĴȱȱǯȱȱ also joined by a Melnyk who had recently ȱ¢ȱ ȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱ ȱ come to Smotrych with a yellow and blue ¢ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ armband and the documents for the position ȱȱȱ£Ȃȱȱǯ109 of gardening inspector of the Kamyanets- Podilskyi regional administration. He In fact, Kozak forwarded the message of the called himself an “authorized operative.”112 guidelines “Struggle and Activities of the Further events were described by Balatsko as OUN in Wartime” mentioned above that he follows: undoubtedly should have been aware as a member of the PPH. Kozak ordered Balatsko First, we wanted to search for the Jewish person who to immediately return to Smotrych and to send was wounded by Fedoryshyn but he disappeared. to him the “Strila.” But he was not available ȱ ǰȱ ȱ Ĵȱ ȱ ȱ ǯȱ ȱ any longer. Along with his combat group, he recently arrived Melnyk played an active role in was transferred to another district. Due to the ȱǯȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱ ¢ȱ abovementioned events, Balatsko arranged and was well aware of the location and addresses of with the director of the sugar factory in the ȱ ǯȱȱȱǰȱȱę¢ȱȱ town of Vyshnivchyk (Smotrych district), 110 Ibid., ark. 67. Symko was executed in Fedir Symko, whom he enrolled as a OUN(b) March 1943, along with all of his family.: D. Kys. member, and with the head of the Judenrat in [Kyslytsia, Dmytro]. “Pryiazn mizh Kovpakom i E. Kokhom. Z podii 1943 roku na Podilli“. Na Smotrych, Tsukerman, to send local Jews to £ǰȱ́ȱřȬŚȱǻŗşŚŞǼǱȱŗŚǯ the sugar factory. According to him, they were 111ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŜşŞŖǰȱǯȱŜŝȬŜŝȱǯ 112 It is most probably about Leontiy Melnyk from Kupyn who was referred to by the fellow 108ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱ ǰȱǛȱŘŝŗśŜǰȱȱȬ villagers as a “Ukrainian nationalist”: AUSBUKhO, kova. ǯȱśǰȱǯȱŘŘŝŚŚǰȱǯȱŞŞȱǯǲȱ ǯǰȱǯȱŘřŜŞřǰȱǯȱŚŚǰȱ 109ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŜşŞŖǰȱǯȱŜŜȱǯȱȬŜŝǯ ŚŝȱǯǰȱśŘȱǯǰȱśşǯ

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 78 Andriy Usach

ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǰȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ with the principle of collective responsibility ȱȱȱȱȱęȱǯ113 that the OUN(b) was publicly declaring at the time.118 At the same time, it is doubtful Among participants of the mass killing, he that the Kupyn Jews could actually manifest ȱ ȱ ȃȄȱ ęȱ ǰȱ any resistance at all, and whether the case Fedoryshyn, Tsikhotskyi, Nebesnyi, Stakh recounted by Fedoryshyn took place at all. Vitkovskyi, Zayets, a.o.114 It is known that at that time, in Kupyn, local Just like with the mass killings in Smotrych, authorities had been created, which also ȱ ȱ ěȱ ȱ ȱ included a squad of “Sich” headed by Anton casualties in Kupyn during interrogations, Bobrovskyi.119 Under such circumstances, the ȱȱŗŖȱȱśŖȱǯȱ ȱĴȱ Jewish community could hardly be an actual that the exact number of murdered persons part of the local community. could not be known to him, since it all took It is also notable that in both Smotrych and place in the evening and it was dark outside.ŗŗś ¢ǰȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ĵȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȃȄȱ ęȱ ȱ ȱȱȮȱ ȱ ȱȱȱȱȱ Kupyn that we managed to identify in the where some of them drowned and others ¢¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ěȱ were shot down. In the many centuries of any reasonable grounds to specify the history of anti-Jewish violence, such cases circumstances of the events. The documents ȱęȱȱȱȱǰȱȱȱ ęȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȱ punishment for rejecting to do so.120 On the Ukrainian nationalists and Smotrych “Sich” territory of the present day Ukraine, the ęȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ŗşŚŗǯȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ęȱ ¢ȱ witness claimed they detained a group of documented during the Cossack unrest of the Kupyn Komsomol members and Jews, who 17th century.121. However, most evidence comes were forced to the river and victimized there.116 from the period of mass pogroms starting in The facts about the nature of victimization as 1918 and lasting into the 1920s. Such cases well as the number of persons killed as a result are often related to porgrom activities of the cannot be found in the available evidence. 118 The orders disseminated since the Only the murders of a Jewish man Zeide and beginning of July 1941 by the Land leader of OUN(b), Komsomol members Ivan Varshavskyi and Klymiv, introduced the notion of “collective responsibility (by family and by ethnicity) for all Kazymyr Vyshnevskyi are mentioned.117 offenses to the Ukrainian Army and Ukrainian On the whole, Balatsko most probably state”: Dziuban. Ukrainske derzhavotvorennia: 131. regarded his actions as the punishment of 119ȱ ǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŘŘşŝǰȱǯȱŗŝȬŗŝȱǯǲȱ ǯǰȱǯȱŘřŜŞřǰȱǯȱŚŚȬŚŚȱǯǰȱśŗȱǯ Kupyn Jews for “sabotaging the activities of 120 Klier, John Doyle. “The Pogrom Paradigm the organization,” in compliance with the in Russian History”. Ed. by John Doyle Klier and Shlomo Lambroza. Pogroms: Anti-Jewish Violence orders received from Kozak. It was fully in line in Modern Russian History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992: 13. 121 Yakovenko, Nataliia Red. Hlybokyi mul. 113ȱ ǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŜşŞŖǰȱǯȱŜŝȱǯ Khronika Natana Hanovera. Kyiv: Dukh i litera, 114 Ibid., ark. 22 rev. -23, 72 rev., 74. 2010: 102; Sukhykh, Lidiia and Viktor Strashko, ŗŗśȱ ǯǰȱǯȱŗśǰȱŘŘȱǯǰȱŜŝȱǯ upor. Natsionalno-vyzvolna viina v Ukraini 1648- 116ȱ ǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŘŘŝŚŚǰȱǯȱŞŞȱǯ ŗŜśŝǯȱ ¢ȱ £ȱ ¢ȱ ¢ȱ ¢ǯȱ 117 Ibid., spr. 2297, ark. 17 rev. -18; Ibid., spr. Kyiv: Derzhavnyi komitet arkhiviv Ukrainy; 22744, ark. 41 rev., 87, 88 rev. -89, 118 rev. -120; Ibid., TsDIAK, 2008: 123-124; Spector and Wigoder. The ǯȱŘřŜŞřǰȱǯȱŚśǯ Encyclopedia of Jewish Life. Vol. II: 667.

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 79 Andriy Usach

insurgent headman Ilko Struk, for example ǯǯǯȄȱȱȱȱęȱ ȱȱȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ Ĵȱ ¢ȱ name. Afterwards Batiukevych mocked them: his subordinates in spring 1919 in the town “Not all the Soviet people would take a stand, of Chornobyl. In fact, the expression “to but all the Jews people would stand for the the river” was increasingly understood by freedom of the homeland.”ŗŘś the Jews as the threat of imminent death.122 Anti-Jewish violence in Smotrych and Kupyn During anti-Jewish massacres in summer resulted from a number of factors. The fast 1941, cases of mass killings by drowning advance of the German troops at the start were not uncommon. They are recorded on of war created a certain power vacuum. quite a large territory, including East Galicia, The active core of the OUN(b) took this Northern Bukovina, and Volhynian Polissia ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ěȱ ȱ ȱ as well.123ȱ ȱ ȱȱȱ£ȱȱĴȱ previously inaccessible areas, trying to take during the pogrom in the town of Olevsk.124 control over establishing local authorities ȱĴȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ and determining their further functioning. possible and to dehumanize them to animals The local population would also often ask for were fully in line with the position of the help from Ukrainian nationalists in various perpetrators as they could regard their actions ways since they were disoriented due to the ȱȱȱȱȃȄȱȱȱ ȱěǰȱ new reality of the occupation regime.126 Even real or alleged, from the Soviet regime that ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ěȱ ȱ ȱ £ȱ was associated with the Jews. According to occupation administration, they managed ȱ ȱ ȱ ǰȱ ȱ ȃȄȱ ęȱ to legally operate for some time in rural tried to stage overexaggerated theatrical anti- areas far away from big cities. The fact that Jewish violence in Smotrych before the mass in parallel they continued to persecute local killing. Once they rounded up older Jews and Jews implies they were also implementing made them sing the song “If the war comes their own policies not related to the Holocaust policy or trying to win some trust from the 122 Milyakova, Lidiya. red. Kniga pogromov. 127 Pogromy na Ukraine, v Belorussii i evropeyskoy Germans to this end. Moreover, none of chasti Rossii v period Grazhdanskoy voyny, 1918- the available testimonies have any records 1922 gg. Sbornik dokumentov. Moskva: ROSSPEN, ŘŖŖŝǱȱşśȬşŞǰȱŗŖŖǰȱŗŖŘǰȱŗŗŖȬŗŗŗǯȱȱȱǰȱǱȱ on the participation or presence of the Nazi Gilley, Christopher. “The Ukrainian Anti-Bolshevik occupation administration during mass Risings of Spring and Summer 1919: Intellectual History in a Space of Violence.” Revolutionary killings in Smotrych and Kupyn. That is why ȱŘŝǰȱ́ȱŘȱǻŘŖŗŚǼǱȱŗŖşȬŗřŗǯ the events also should be considered in the 123 Razenblat, Jawgjen. “Stawljen’nje pol’skaga i bjelaruskaga nasjel’nictva da gabrejaw context of the planned violence against ethnic na Paljes’si w pjershyja tydni pas’lja napadu ¢¢ȱ ȱ ȱ £ȂȂǯȱ ǰȱ ́ȱ minorities OUN(b) contrived back in spring śȱ ǻŘŖŗŖǼǱȱ śŜŞȬśŜşǲȱ ǰȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ǯȱ 1941. Despite the fact that pogroms as a method Kholokost v Ukraine: 111; Spector and Wigoder. ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ǯȱ ǯȱ Ǳȱ śśŝǰȱ śŝŖǲȱ ǯȱ ȱ Ǳȱ ŜśŚȬŜŜŗǯȱ ȱ ȱ ŗŘśȱ ǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŘśŚŚǰȱǯȱŘşȬŘşȱǯȱ cases after summer 1941, see: Spector and Wigoder. See also: Shymanskyi. Knyha skorboty Ukrainy: ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ǯȱ ǯȱ Ǳȱ śşŗǰȱ ŞśŖǰȱ 313. ŗŖśŞǯ ŗŘŜȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ ǯǰȱǯȱŜşŞŖǰȱǯȱŜśȱǯǲȱȱ ȱ ǰȱ 124 McBride, Jared. “Ukrainian Holocaust ǛȱŘŝŗśŜǰȱȱǯ Perpetrators Are Being Honored in Place of Their 127 Such an explanation of the involvement of ǯȄȱ ǯȱ ȱ ŘŖǰȱ ŘŖŗŜǯȱ ĴǱȦȦ ǯ OUN(b) activists in carrying out the Jewish pogrom tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/208439/ in Lviv in the beginning of July 1941 is offered by holocaust-perpetrators-honored John Paul Himka: Himka. “The Lviv Pogrom”: 234.

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 80 Andriy Usach

were not stipulated, the ambiguous wording own backgrounds, skills, or even intuition. of the policy documents and guidelines of the As for Balatsko, it is known that he became ǻǼȱ ȱ ȃęȄǰȱ ȃȄǰȱ involved with the nationalist ideas back in ȃȄȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ě¢ȱ his teen years. In 1930, he became a member by the lower level leaders. This was even of the Youth Section of the OUN. In 1934, he more the case when they were followed by was sentenced to 18 months in prison for that. anti-Semitic propaganda and the approval Afterwards, Balatsko resumed his cooperation of the principle of collective responsibility. with Ukrainian nationalists for a short time That is why, considering the conditions of ȱȱę¢ȱȱȱȱȱ ¢ȱŗşŚŗȱ the summer 1941, there were people among and became an OUN(b) member, nicknamed Ukrainian nationalists who were both ready to “Lulka” (Smoking Pipe).130 In the 1930s, he kill all Jews without exception and opponents read the underground magazines “Bulletin of such methods. It is obvious that both were of the OUN Land Leadership” (“Biuleten acting in line with the guidelines received from Kraiovoi Ekzekutyvy OUN”), “Surma”, above. In his analysis of the developments and “Nation Development” (“Rozbudova of “Ukrainian National State-Building”, the Natsii”); “Nationalism” by Dmytro Dontsov, author pen-named “M. Homin,” wrote about “Kholodnyi Yar” (Cold Ravine) by Yuriy them rather critically in summer of 1942. Horlis-Horskyi, etc.131 The experience must Among other things, he complained about the have shaped a major argument when he was following: granted the position of district leader of the OUN(b) in July 1941 in Kamyanets-Podilskyi. ȱ ȱ ȱ ǰȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Hardly anything is known about the other ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ persons arriving along with him. At least ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ǰȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ one of them, Antoshkiv, had been a OUN(b) ȱ ¢ȱ ǯȱ ǰȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ member since 1940.132 The fact that they had when some politically immature Ukrainian been actively involved in the organization’s ȱȱȱȱȱȱȱ activities in the period of the greatest operations.128 radicalization towards the Jewish minority ȱěȱȱ ȱǯȱȱ It is clear that those persons who were hastily recounted that Ukrainian nationalists spread recruited, just like Balatsko, on the territory of anti-Semitic propaganda in Smotrych.133 In Western Ukraine and sent to the Kamyanets- addition, other persons, who were not OUN(b) Podilskyi region did not have any special members, were also sent to the Kamyanets- training such as that of PPH members. Their ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ęȱ ¢ǯ129 130 AUSBUTOǰȱ ǯȱ śǰȱ ǯȱ ŜşŞŖǰȱ ǯȱ ŗŚȱ rev., 16 rev. - 19 rev.,ȱ řŖȬŚśǯȱ For the arrest and court Therefore, many things depended on their hearing for the Balatsko case, see also: Diloǰȱ ́ȱ řŚŜȱǻŗşřřǼǱȱŚǲȱ ǯǰȱ́ȱřśȱǻŗşřŚǼǱȱŝǲȱǰȱǯȱ 128 HDA SBU, f. 13, spr. 372, t. 24, ark. 114. Narys istorii Orhanizatsii Ukrainskykh Natsionalistiv. 129 AUSBUTOǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŜşŞŖǰȱǯȱŘŖǰȱśŖȱrev. vol. 1. Munich; London; New York: Ukrainske Ȭśŗǲȱ See also testimonies by Osyp Havryliuk who Vydavnytstvo, 1968: 416, 421. arrived to Kamyanets-Podilskyi in the same group 131 Ibid., ark. 31-31 rev., 39 rev. - ŚŖǲȱǰȱ́ȱ with Balatsko and was further sent as a district řśȱǻŗşřŚǼǱȱŝǯ leader of the OUN(b) to the town of Stara Ushytsia: 132 AUSBUTOǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŜşŞŖǰȱǯȱŗŝŖǯ AUSBUTO, f. 6, spr. 10634-P, ark. 16-16 rev., 26 rev. 133ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǰȱ Ǜȱ ŘŝŗśŜǰȱ ȱ Ȭ -27, 41; Havryliuk. “Ne skuie dushi zhyvoi...’“: 87. chikova.

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 81 Andriy Usach

Podilskyi region. Their task was to serve in the the witnesses informed that he arrived to “Sich” only. Among the Balatsko subordinates, Smotrych wearing plain peasant clothes, but this included Fedoryshyn.134 soon after he possessed many suits plundered We failed to identify whether anyone of them from the Jews.139 It is notable that in the report had already been involved in anti-Jewish of the OUN(b) underground on the situation ȱȱȱǯȱȱęȱ in Kamyanets-Podilskyi region dated August that he was aware of the killings of Jews by 1942, the results of activities of Ukrainian OUN(b) activists in the villages of Anhelivka nationalists in summer 1941 were quite and Tsapivka of the Tovste district.ŗřś Similar criticized. In particular, they were reproached ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ Ĵǯȱ ȱȱȱȱȱȱěǱȱ By contrast, in the district center of Tovste, the pogrom was prevented by a group of local ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ activists, among them Ukrainian nationalist ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ǯȱ ȱ ȱ Stepan Andrushchyshyn.136 Despite such cases, ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ěȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ it was more common for this period to witness robberies, executions, arrests, and the like there. It the brutalization of methods and activities is obvious that all of that had an impact on the local ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ęȱ population.140 as enemies. For instance, at interrogations, Balatsko repeated the words Kateryna The regional headman of OUN(b), Kozak, Liakhovetska - “Halychanka” told him. She back in July 1941, complained about his was one of the members of the combat group predecessor Zbrozhyk, who later became a of SB under “Strila”: “Liakhovetska boasted to regional commander of police, claiming he me that despite being a woman she was able to was a kind of person who “was not merely kill a person who turned out to be her personal fond of dressing up exotically, but pulling enemy or an enemy of her nation.”137 clothes together from everywhere.”141 However, it would be naive to believe that The material component of anti-Jewish the activities of Ukrainian nationalists were violence was also an important motivation for only motivated by ideological reasons. The the local population of Smotrych and Kupyn available testimonies prove that they were ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ęȱ ǰȱ ȱ also actively pillaging Jewish property and ȱȱȃȄȱęǯȱȱȱ were supposedly sending it back home to about Tsikhotskyi and Nebesnyi as those who Western Ukraine.138 As for Balatsko, one of were most actively involved in robberies. They even ignored his warnings against doing so.142 134 AUSBUTIǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŜşŞŖǰȱǯȱśŖȱrev.ȱȬśŗǰȱ śŘǯ On the whole, they tried to enroll the ŗřś Ibid., ark. 47-48 rev. anti-Soviet local citizens into the “Sich.” 136 See more at: Struve. Deutsche Herrschaft: śśŚȬśśśǲȱ , Andrzej. “Anti-Jewish Pogroms Therefore, it is not surprising that the “Sich” in Occupied Territories of Eastern Poland, June- ęȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ ȱ July 1941.” Ed. by Lucjan Dobroszyckiȱȱ ě¢ȱ S. Gurock. The Holocaust in the Soviet Union: Studies and Sources on the Destruction of the Jews in the Nazi- 139 AUSBUTOǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŜşŞŖǰȱǯȱŜŝǰȱŗśśȱrev. Occupied Territories of the USSR, 1941-1945. Armonk: ȬŗśŜǰȱŗśş rev. M. E. Sharpe, 1993: 179. For Andrushchyshyn, see: 140 Dziuban. Ukrainske derzhavotvorenniaǱȱŚśŗȬ Klymenko and Tkachov. Ukraintsi v politsii: 66. ŚśŘǰȱŚśŚǯ 137 AUSBUTOǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŜşŞŖǰȱǯȱŝŜǯ 141 TsDAVOV, f. 3833, op. 1, spr. 14, ark. 13. 138 AUSBUKhOǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŘśŚŚǰȱǯȱŗŜǯ 142 AUSBUTOǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŜşŞŖǰȱǯȱŝŘȱrev., 74.

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 82 Andriy Usach

awaited the arrival of German troops for many before, they stopped obeying him. When years, that they had disseminated anti-Soviet Balatsko left Smotrych at risk of arrest in ǰȱȱȱĴȱȱȱ August 1941, Tsikhotskyi and the group of as poisoning horses from collective farms.143 ȱ ȃȄȱ ęȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ However, it is unknown how truthful their hand him over to the Germans.146 With respect statements were. It is probable that in most to local comabatnts involved in anti-Jewish cases they were just saying something that violence, it is important to understand that ȱȱęȱȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱȱȬȱĴȱ¢ȱ circumstances. In fact, their biographies ȱ¢ȱȱȬȱĴǯȱȱ appear more complicated and controversial. of the fellow villagers told about the former For instance, Tsikhotskyi told that he used to “Sich” commander Bobrovskyi from Kupyn: study in the Youth School of the Ukrainian People’s Republic Army in Kamyanets- ȱ ¢ȱ ¢ȱ ǰȱ ¢ȱ ȱ Podilskyi, was persecuted by Soviet secret ȱȱȱȱȱ ȱȱȱ units, but at the same time was cautious to of Red Terror. He would say that when Soviet speak out about his past to the Germans. In rule comes to Ukraine the Jews would abuse and order to save himself, he reportedly gave away ȱȱȱǯ147 his own father who was banished to Siberia.144 Nebesnyi told about being involved with the Batiukevych was also described in the same Union for the Liberation of Ukraine (Spilka vein. At the same time, before the war he used vyzvolennia UkrainyȱȮȱSVU). Before the war, to live nearby the Jewish families and was on he worked as a carpenter in the NKVD in the good terms with them.148 Drohobych region. “He seems to be a smart It is obvious that the range of motivations and clever person, - Balatsko described him, - of immediate perpetrators of mass killings he was always happy about everything, always in Smotrych and Kupyn was quite wide. ęȱ ȱ¢ǯȄŗŚś It is obvious that ȱ ȱ ȱ ěȱ ȱ he realized the frequent hypocrisy of such the newcoming Ukrainian nationalists revelations. That is why he had not accepted and their local assistants, for example in any of the mentioned persons as OUN(b) terms of ideological or political convictions. ǯȱ ȱ ǰȱ ȱ Ěȱ ȱ ȱ ǰȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ęȱ ȃȄȱ ęȱ ȱ ȱ ǯȱ ȱ ȱ from the Jewish possessions. Both of them as they stopped seeing him as a representative actively indulged in such opportunities. of occupation authorities, as they believed The radicalization of the OUN(b) towards the Jewish community culminating in 1940/41 143 ǰȱǯŚŞȦŘŝřǯŘśǰȱSemyon Faingold. resulted in plans to be implemented upon 144 AUSBUTOǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŜşŞŖǰȱǯȱŝŘȬŝřǯ ŗŚś Ibid., ark. 74. Balatsko was also informed the start of the war between the Third Reich by other persons about their belonging to or connections with the SVU. Current research proves that no such organization existed. It was 146 AUSBUTOǰȱ ǯȱ śǰȱ ǯȱ ŜşŞŖǰȱ ǯȱ ŝŘǯȱ invented by Soviet secret services as the basis Eventually, Tsikhotskyi was executed along with for repressions of prospective opponents of the his family, in December, 1942.: AUSBUKhOǰȱ ǯȱ śǰȱ regime: Prokopchuk, Viktor. “Kamianets-Podilska ǯȱŞřŝǰȱǯȱŗśǰȱřŖ rev.; Shymanskyi. Knyha skorboty filiia ‘Spilky vyzvolennia Ukrainy“: do istorii UkrainyǱȱřśŜǯ falsyfikatsii». Z arkhiviv VUChK-HPU-NKVD-KHB, 147 AUSBUKhOǰȱǯȱśǰȱǯȱŘŘşŝǰȱǯȱŘŘ rev. ́ȱŗȬŘȱǻŘŖŗřǼǱȱŗŘŜȬŗŚśǯ 148ȱ ǯǰȱǯȱŘśŚŚǰȱǯȱŗŜǰȱŘśȱrev., 33 rev.

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 83 Andriy Usach

and the Soviet Union. The plans stipulated to the currently available approaches to the mass violence against the ethnic minorities causes and nature of anti-Jewish violence in recognized to be potentially disloyal, including ȱęȱȱȱȱ£ȱǯ the Jews. The marching groups of OUN(b) who ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Ěȱ of Ukrainian nationalism in the earlier inaccessible regions of Ukraine directly were involved in violent acts. Local citizens also яќѢѡȱѡѕђȱюѢѡѕќџ played an impotant role there. The context of ˲¢ȱȱȱȱǯǯȱȱȱȱ ¢ȱȱ the pogroms in Smotrych and Kupyn in July- the Ukrainian Catholic University and works ȱŗşŚŗȱ ȱ¢ȱěȱȱ ȱ as a research fellow at the Memorial Museum research analyses reveal about similar cases „Territory of Terror“ (L‘viv, Ukraine). He in Western Ukraine. Here, they were neither is currently working on PhD dissertation directly preceded by mass killings of prisoners „Local Collaboration and the Holocaust in Ĵȱ ¢ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ¢ȱ Nazi-Occupied Ukraine: Kreisgebiet Bar, Germans. It goes beyond any doubt that the 1941-1944.“ under the supervision of Prof. OUN(b) activists were organizers of the two Oleksandr Zaitsev. His academic interests ǰȱ ȱȱȱęȱ¢ȱȱȱ include: the Nazi occupation regime in of the same method of mass execution. Further Ukraine, the Holocaust, the role of local research on similar cases taking place beyond collaborators in persecution of Jews, the post- Western Ukraine could add more insights war trials of the perpetrators of the Holocaust in the USSR.

Euxeinos, Vol. 9, No. 27 / 2019 84