The Evidence for: In 1956, the CIA, MI6, and UDB foment Nazi insurgency in Hungary
Nazi Panzerwaffe troops stationed in Titoist Yugoslavia, together with MI6-backed Horthyite insurgents, enter and rape Hungary, ethnically cleanse tens of thousands of Jews.
The History of the USSR & the Peoples’ Democracies
Chapter 20, Section 13 (C20S13)
Saed Teymuri
The Titoization Speech of 1956 greatly emboldened the Hungarian intelligentsia and agitated them with the anti-communist speech needed for a colour revolutionary action against the Hungarian state:
After the 20th Party Congress in the USSR, a completely different mood came into being. Among the writers and other intellectuals, so-called isolated groups came into existence; these groups organized debating evenings, with their main motive being that Hungary must again become master of its own house and that the interests of the Hungarian people should again be put first. A writers' newspaper was again published, originally once per month, later weekly. In this paper the government was strongly criticized and mistakes were traced. (…). The writers' newspapers came to be read more and more by industrial workers in Budapest and Csepel, and the newspaper boys who for the sake of security always hid these newspapers under the official newspapers, made three or four times the price for the writers' newspapers. (‘PRE-REVOLT CONDITIONS 2. HUNGARIAN REVOLT IN OCTOBER 1956 3. ADVANCED EDUCATION’, CIA, February 7, 1958, pp. C-6 to C-7) (IMG)
As the MI6 officer Michael Smith recalled, once the American intelligence obtained a copy of Khrushchev’s full speech,:
Copies of the speech were run off in their thousands and were distributed clandestinely throughout eastern Europe, fuelling demands for reform, particularly in Poland and Hungary. (‘New Cloak, Old Dagger’, Michael Smith, 1996. p. 123) (IMG)
The result of spreading such ‘information’ was greater colour revolutionary unrest by the liberal intelligentsia:
As details of the secret speech became more widely known, the clamour for reforms began to grow. (‘New Cloak, Old Dagger’, Michael Smith. p. 123) (IMG)
Titoist Yugoslavia utilized the Khrushchev group’s Titoization drive to agitate the Hungarian intelligentsia into a Titoist colour revolutionary movement:
In April 1956 a Hungarian, rather Communistic transmitter came on the air; this transmitter was on Yugoslavian soil. The chief doctrine of this radio station was that Hungary should build up its own [Titoist] [pseudo-]socialist state. The official Yugollavian transmitters were hindered from 1948 until the beginning of 1956 by jammers. (‘PRE-REVOLT CONDITIONS 2. HUNGARIAN REVOLT IN OCTOBER 1956 3. ADVANCED EDUCATION’, CIA, February 7, 1958, p. G-4) (IMG)
At the same time, the Moscow Titoists, in collusion with the Belgrade Titoists, worked to install the Hungarian Titoists onto power:
conferences were being carried on between the Russian leaders and Tito. Tito had demanded that the reparation payments, among others those from Hungary, which had been stopped by Stalin in 1948, should be resumed, and that the relationships with Hungary should be improved. His great enemy in Hungary, RAKOSI, immediately fell along with his supporters as a victim of the de-Stalinization and was succeeded by GERO. (‘PRE-REVOLT CONDITIONS 2. HUNGARIAN REVOLT IN OCTOBER 1956 3. ADVANCED EDUCATION’, CIA, February 7, 1958, p. C-7) (IMG)
Khrushchev and Mikoyan personally were involved in ousting Rakosi and promoting the Titoist foes of Rakosi. As the CIA stated:
The extreme de-Stalinization pronouncements of Khrushchev and Mikoyan at the 20th congress of the Soviet Communist Party dealt a drastic blow to the Rakosi regime and encouraged his opponents into renewed efforts to oust him and institute liberalized policies. (FACTIONALISM IN THE HUNGARIAN WORKERS (COMMUNIST) PARTY (1945-1956), CIA, January, 28, 1957, p. III) (IMG)
The party was shattered as the result of a series of Soviet policy moves culminating in the de-Stalinization pronouncements of Khrushchev and Mikoyan at the 20th congress of the Soviet Communist Party. These measures split the party into hostile factions and precipitated dissension in the organization from top to bottom. (FACTIONALISM IN THE HUNGARIAN WORKERS (COMMUNIST) PARTY (1945-1956), CIA, January, 28, 1957, p. I) (IMG)
Mikoyan reportedly arrived on 14 July, rejected Rakosi's proposal for the arrest of some 400 persons, including some forty writers and … Imre Nagy, and apparently was sustained in his verdict by Khrushchev. It strongly appears that Rakosi was forced to resign as party chief when his plans for coping with the opposition were rejected. Rakosi's subsequent references to his guilt of “cult of personality” suggests that Mikoyan may have lectured him on the subject during his visit to Budapest. (FACTIONALISM IN THE HUNGARIAN WORKERS (COMMUNIST) PARTY (1945-1956), CIA, January, 28, 1957, p. 72) (IMG)
Gero was Hungary’s Malenkov equivalent; in other words, he was a Titoist but of the kind that was somewhat more coopted by the communists, unlike Nagy who was not really coopted by the communists much. Nonetheless, during the Gero era, the,:
the rehabilitation of [Yugoslav-backed Nazi anti-Semite] RAJK with complete restoration of honor took place…. (‘PRE-REVOLT CONDITIONS 2. HUNGARIAN REVOLT IN OCTOBER 1956 3. ADVANCED EDUCATION’, CIA, February 7, 1958, p. C-6) (IMG)
The rise of the Titoist faction in Hungary led to the elevation of the fascist agents into the Hungarian military and intelligence apparatus, an elevation that was reinforced morally by the criminalization of the Hungarian counter-intelligence service which had hunted the Nazi agent Rajk down. As the CIA document had stated, RAKOSI, immediately fell along with his supporters as a victim of the de-Stalinization’. At the same time, this gave the pro-Nazi elements the operational freedom they needed for counter-revolutionary action against the people of Hungary. Then,:
In October 1956 GERO and some of his close fellow workers made the trip to Belgrade [just when a rebellion had started in Hungary]. Meanwhile revolt had started in Hungary also…. (‘PRE-REVOLT CONDITIONS 2. HUNGARIAN REVOLT IN OCTOBER 1956 3. ADVANCED EDUCATION’, CIA, February 7, 1958, p. C-7) (IMG)
With the planned absence of Gero, Hungary’s Malenkov equivalent, the non-coopted Titoists gained much greater operational freedom and engaged in a colour revolution. With the support of Hungary’s Titoist leadership, the Hungarian intelligentsia first staged rallies, which – very importantly – were supported by the counter-revolutionary elements of the AVH. This is important because it shows that the Titoist elements had indeed risen in the ranks of the Hungarian security apparatus. The colour revolutionary intelligentsia moved towards Hungary’s radio station in order to be able to further agitate the intelligentsia. However, the doors were locked. The reactionary elements in the Hungarian security, AVH, intervened, shot the guards, and allowed the colour revolutionary students to continue their measures. The CIA reported:
a movement of sympathy with the Poles arose; this was supported by the [the Titoist] Hungarian leaders for reasons of opportunism. A mass meeting was to be held by Hungarian youth at the Joseph Behm Square, where the statue of this Polish freedom hero stands. A great many people got time off to attend the this meeting and rather small Behm Square could not contain this mass of people. Meanwhile GERO, who was just returning from Belgrade, had ordered that the meeting could not be held, but shortly thereafter permission was given. The meeting took place on 23 October in the afternoon. Before that, the Petofi club had called upon the Disz (Communist Youth Organization) to close ranks with it on a number of points containing the demands of the Hungarian youth for more democracy. The crowd met in the square by the Parliament building. The Budapest students had decided on this, and the leadership of the Disz had joined them. Here it was demanded that the program of the Hungarian youth should be made known over the radio, for which purpose the mass moved to the radio station in Budapest. When this building appeared to be completely locked, people tried by force to get access to the station. Some young officers tried to intervene but were shot down by AVH troops who had arrived in the meantime. (‘PRE-REVOLT CONDITIONS 2. HUNGARIAN REVOLT IN OCTOBER 1956 3. ADVANCED EDUCATION’, CIA, February 7, 1958, p. C-7 to C-8. Bold added) (IMG)
The colour revolutionary uprising of the intelligentsia, timed with the arrival of Gero to Belgrade and the opportune time for Nagy to launch the rebellion, was far from spontaneous, especially considering how supported it was by the Titoist elements in the AVH and the Hungarian military. And furthermore, as reported by The Independent, the MI6 officer Michael Smith said:
The [British intelligence] officers I spoke to said there was an intention to cause an uprising in Hungary. (MI6 trained Rebels to fight Soviets in Hungarian Revolt, The Independent, Christopher Bellamy, October 22, 1996) (IMG)
Hence came the colour revolution. The colour revolution created the pressure from below with which the Nagy gang were able to conquer power and purge the communist faction:
Confronted with this crisis, the party central committee and politburo were called into hasty session on the night of 23-24 October. (…). During the stormy all-night session several Stalinists were thrown out of the political committee … and replaced by two moderates (Szanto and Kobol) and one Nagyist, Losonczi. In the early morning hours, Nagy was chosen premier. The following day – 25 October – with the fighting mounting in violence, Erno Gero was deposed as party first secretary and Janos Kadar elected in his place. (FACTIONALISM IN THE HUNGARIAN WORKERS (COMMUNIST) PARTY (1945-1956), CIA, January, 28, 1957, p. 79) (IMG)
Contrary to what is often claimed, there is no evidence of a major involvement of the Hungarian proletarians in the colour revolution. Certain segments of the Hungarian workers surely did involve in the colour revolution, of course.
The 1953 Titoist New Course de-emphasized heavy industry and producer goods, and promoted economic decentralization. The effects of this were clearly reflected in the situation in Hungary. The Titoization agenda and the New Course, caused an economic disaster in Hungary. Hungary was seeing steady and high level of economic growth until 1953, but the growth began to slow down after the 1953 introduction of the Titoist ‘New Course’. With the purge of the Beriaites and the rise of the Gero group, which was coopted by the Rakosi faction in 1954, growth partially resumed, but by 1955, when the Khrushchev faction reasserted influence, growth in Hungary ceased and in fact the economy began to sharply decline.
(‘LIGHT INDUSTRY IN HUNGARY 1947-57’, Economic Intelligence Report, Office of Research and Reports, CIA, July 31, 1957, p. 8)
|
Join Sovinform’s Mailing List by emailing sovinform.tech@gmail.com Place the following phrase in your email subject/title ‘Join Mailing List’. No further comment necessary. |
Follow Sovinform on |
Unrest, therefore, began to grow. However, even then, the discontent did not grow into the active participation of the workers, unlike what the Trotskyites often claim. Recall from C10S7, that even those proletarians who had become enthusiastic members of the Nazi Party ended up serving as a major communist fifth column, a pool of spies for the KPD and the USSR, as well as Strasserite rebels waging a shadow war against the Hitler gang. If even those ‘Nazified’ proletarians ended up serving as a de facto anti-Nazi fifth column inside the Nazi Party, what reason is there to believe that the Hungarian proletariat would become a horde of diehard Titoist fascist counter-revolutionaries? There is no reason to believe such, nor is there any evidence that such a thing occurred. Despite the slight involvement of Hungarian workers, the core of the so called ‘proletarian revolution’ was not at all by the proletariat but by the Hungarian intelligentsia. Some workers’ councils were reportedly established but even then, the workers in such councils did not engage as much in the colour revolution. The core of the ‘revolution’ was by the intelligentsia and was mainly based not in the factories but in the universities:
the leaders of the revolution at the universities were the following, among others: Ladislaus POSZNAR, Alex PERGEL, Johann VINCE, Johann VARGA, Edith MOLNAR, Eduard NEMETHY, Alex SAL, and Zoltan MEREY, all of whom were taken prisoner by the KADAR regime. Bela JANKO, and Ladislaus GRUBER were in this central leadership. these people were representatives of the various faculties of the Budapest University and the Technical High School. There was also a group of intellectuals occupied with the complete reconstruction of Hungary. Leading figures among them were Georg ADAM, a writer; Ladislaus KARDOS and Georg MARKOS, professors. The revolutionary council of the Medical University consisted of representatives of the professors, lecturers, and assistants and students. The first one was represented by Dr. Stephan PATAKY and Dr. Zoltan ZSEBLK…. (‘PRE-REVOLT CONDITIONS 2. HUNGARIAN REVOLT IN OCTOBER 1956 3. ADVANCED EDUCATION’, CIA, February 7, 1958, p. C-9) (IMG)
Then events followed very fast. People quit work everywhere, and in the shortest possible time, in all offices, places of work, plants, and so forth workers’ councils were chosen by free and secret written ballot. In the meantime the fighting groups had gotten a great number of weapons from the Kilian barracks, where a young Captain had taken over the leadership and opened up the stores of weapons. Also supplies of weapons came freely from the factory militias of the large plants in and around Budapest. Then government had lost its power and shortly before his resignation GERO, on the basis of the Warsaw Pact, called in the help of the Russian troops. In the meantime the leaders of the revolution at the universities kept themselves busy trying to create a nucleus out of the writers to form a coordinating organ between the various revolutionary councils, which at first worked completely independently. This was, of course, a result of the great spontaneity of the revolution. Couriers instituted communications between the various councils and after some days, there really was coordination. Also, close contact was maintained with the NAGY government. At the urging of the coordinating organ NAGY reported that as quickly as possible discussions would be opened with the Russians concerning the withdrawal of the Russian troops. (‘PRE-REVOLT CONDITIONS 2. HUNGARIAN REVOLT IN OCTOBER 1956 3. ADVANCED EDUCATION’, CIA, February 7, 1958, pp. C-8 to C-9. Bold added.) (IMG)
The above CIA report itself contained a number of anti-Soviet and anti-communist biases, of course, presenting the fascist war in Hungary as a ‘pro-democracy’ uprising. However, even in that biased CIA report, no evidence was provided of an active ‘proletarian’ involvement in the ‘revolutionary’ efforts of the Hungarian intelligentsia. The maximum amount of ‘evidence’ was that ‘People quite work’ – which could easily be due to the feeling of unsafety as a result of the ‘revolution’ – and that “workers’ councils” were formed in the factories. The formation of workers’ councils and the self-management of factories would reduce economic discipline but could hardly be the active ‘proletarian revolution’ which the Trotskyites describe. The ‘revolution’ in Hungary was mainly done by the intelligentsia, and the involvement of the pro-‘revolution’ elements among the proletarians was at best conservative and limited to mere formation of ‘councils’ in factories. Again, when even the Nazi-minded among the German proletarians served as a crypto-anti-fascist fifth column in the Nazi movement, what reason is there to believe that Hungary’s proletarians would suddenly become active pro-Horthyite warriors? Historical experience has shown many a time that those proletarian masses indoctrinated with reactionary pro-fascist anti-communist propaganda end up not fighting as much the progressive and communist forces and direct their hawkish rhetoric towards the imperialists, accusing the latter of allegedly not being anti-communist and chauvinist ‘enough’. In the United States, this fake ‘anti-communism’ of the proletarians is concentrated in the Trump’s electoral base, which preaches American supremacy while actually accusing the American corporations and American intelligence of being run by ‘Marxists’. In Israel, the post-2005 pro-Putinist ‘far-right’ movements, which receive the support of the Hebrew proletarians, are anti-Arab and anti-communist in rhetoric but have struck the IDF, CIA, Mossad, and private banks tens of times more than they have struck the Arab civilians and the communist cause. In short, some individual proletarians, many from parasitic class backgrounds such as kulaks, would be serious anti-communists, but the bulk of those proletarians influenced by anti-communist or pro-fascist ideas tend to direct their energy towards combat against the actual fascists and anti-communists, all the while being soft on the real communists and real anti-fascists. It follows that the fascist ‘revolution’ in Hungary could not possibly be anything close to an ‘uprising of the proletarians’ and that the formation of councils was the maximum level of ‘proletarian defiance against the regime’.
Another noteworthy member of the Nagy regime was Georgi Lukacs, the Titoist ‘philosopher’ and ‘sociologist’ whose elevation was clearly indicative of the elevation of the liberal intelligentsia in the Hungarian regime apparatus and the inherent links of the intelligentsia with the MI6-backed Nazis:
Lukacs returned to Hungary in 1945 and though his record with non-Party intellectuals during the Cold War is not emblemished, he did in 1956 become a minister of the brief communist revolutionary government of Imre Nagy, which opposed the Soviet Union. (Moscow, the Fourth Rome, Katerina Clark. p. 347. No Image)
Nagy undertook the radical Titoization of the Hungarian system:
Nagy from the outset took a more extreme position than the moderates. On 28 October [four days since the start of the rebellion] he declared that the bloody fighting between revolutionaries and Soviet and AVH forces was due to "mistakes and crimes" of the past ten years, and denied that counterrevolutionary elements were behind the insurrection. (…). He assented to the suspension of collectivization (28 October) and abolition of the crop collection system (30 October). (FACTIONALISM IN THE HUNGARIAN WORKERS (COMMUNIST) PARTY (1945-1956), CIA, January, 28, 1957, p. 81) (IMG)
With the high level of influence over the military and intelligence bodies by the Titoists elevated by Khrushchev, Mikoyan, and Tito, the resources of the Hungarian military were being diverted by rogue Hungarian military officials directly to the colour revolutionaries as stated previously. The Titoist colour revolutionary intelligentsia were armed by the CIA and MI6 via Austria. The vehemently anti-Soviet MI6 official Michael Smith wrote:
On 23 October 1956 a student demonstration calling for free elections, the withdrawal of Russian troops and the return of Nagy brought a quarter of a million people on to the streets of Budapest. Large numbers of weapons began to appear in the crowd. Some came from the American arms caches in Austria and other almost certainly were British. Fighting broke out with security forces. In an attempt to placate the demonstrators, Nagy was reappointed Prime Minister. There was sporadic fighting for several days, followed by a series of reforms introduced by Nagy, including the disbandment of AVH secret police…. (‘New Cloak, Old Dagger’, Michael Smith, pp. 123-124) (IMG)
Long before the colour revolution, the CIA and MI6 had been preparing for such a day:
American intelligence had stepped up its covert operations in Eastern Europe in the twelve-month period leading to the Hungarian uprising, training the ‘Red Sox’ teams of Polish, Hungarian, Czech and Romanian emigres for covert action inside their home countries. Allen Dulles, the head of the CIA, told the National Security Council that ‘developments in the satellites present the greatest opportunity for the last ten years both covertly and overtly to exploit the situation’. (‘New Cloak, Old Dagger’, Michael Smith. p. 122) (IMG)
Prior to the uprising:
MI6 had been active behind the scenes for some time providing covert assistance to potential Hungarian rebels and was aware that they were planning an uprising. (New Cloak, Old Dagger. Michael Smith. p. 123) (IMG)
The British had been in close contact with dissident elements inside Hungary for some time, spiriting them across the border into the British zone of Austria for resistance training preparation for a future uprising. (‘New Cloak, Old Dagger’, Michael Smith. p. 123) (IMG)
In fact:
Certainly MI6 planned to support resistance fighters in both Hungary and Czechoslovakia. The SIS representatives in Prague and Budapest went out into the woods burying stay-behind packs like those that were being hidden in the Austrian Alps by Preston and Giles. (‘New Cloak, Old Dagger’, Michael Smith. p. 123) (IMG)
Describing the details of the MI6 involvement, Smith stated:
But dissidents appear to have made their own way across the border rendezvousing with their contact in true Cold War fashion, often quite literally under a certain lamp-post in a backstreet of a border town. A military officer working for MI6 would then take them up into the mountains for a four-day crash course in a variety of military skills before they were infiltrated back into Hungary. (‘New Cloak, Old Dagger’, Michael Smith. p. 123) (IMG)
British intelligence had stumbled on a startlingly easy way of getting people of out Hungary and into Austria. An illegal frontier crosser admitted that her nephew, a driver on one of the trains taking Soviet staff officers from Hungary to their HQ in Austria, had smuggled her across the border in the cab. (‘New Cloak, Old Dagger’, Michael Smith. p. 123) (IMG)
As The Independent reported,:
the weapons used were American, and others almost certainly British. (MI6 trained Rebels to fight Soviets in Hungarian Revolt, The Independent, Christopher Bellamy, October 22, 1996) (IMG)
Smith further stated that the:
MI6 and the CIA had buried arms caches in the woods around Prague and Budapest for use by “stay-behind” parties or fifth columnists in case of war. (MI6 trained Rebels to fight Soviets in Hungarian Revolt, The Independent, Christopher Bellamy, October 22, 1996) (IMG)
A British intelligence officer interviewed by Smith recalled:
We were taking them up into the mountains and giving them a sort of ... crash course. I would be told to pick somebody up from a street corner at a certain time of night in the pouring rain. Graz was our staging point. Then, after we'd trained them - explosives, weapons training - I used to take them back ... We were training the agents for the uprising. (MI6 trained Rebels to fight Soviets in Hungarian Revolt, The Independent, Christopher Bellamy, October 22, 1996) (IMG)
Meanwhile, the Anglo-American imperialist press propagated the myth that the Hungarian ‘revolution’ was completely spontaneous, that the ‘revolutionaries’ got virtually no assistance from the Anglo-American intelligence organizations supposedly because the Anglo-Americans could only focus on the Suez Crisis at the time and not on Hungary, and that the ‘revolution’ was by the proletarians. The Anglo-Americans kept on denying involvement in the events in Hungary in order to present it as spontaneous, so that more Hungarians participate in it without fear of foreign schemes – and this too was a part of the media work. The colour revolution that Nikita Khrushchev and other Kremlin Titoists had helped ignite also gave them the excuse to ‘be busy’ with Hungary so to not come to the aid of the Masriyin in the face of the Anglo-Israeli invasion of Egypt. Yet, it was not just the CIA and MI6 which had a role in the colour revolution. Recall that Yugoslavia had set up a radio to agitate the intelligentsia towards a colour revolution. Yugoslav involvement did not end there.
The Nazi German Panzerwaffe troops harbored by Titoist Yugoslavia were then deployed to Budapest to launch the massive anti-communist terror operations and anti-Semitic pogroms:
two trucks with panzer troops had been on the way from Yugoslavia to Budapest. This would have been after 4 November, and it is said that the trucks with the panzer troops, which had surrounded Budapest, were taken prisoner. (‘PRE-REVOLT CONDITIONS 2. HUNGARIAN REVOLT IN OCTOBER 1956 3. ADVANCED EDUCATION’, CIA, February 7, 1958, p. G-3) (IMG)
The role of the Yugoslav regime in instigating the colour revolution had also been confirmed by the Warsaw Pact media at the time, by the Red Army officials, as well as by the memoirs of Enver Hoxha. The gang of the Gestapo agent Tito went farther than mere incitement and even served as the harbourer of the Nazi Wehrmacht’s Panzerwaffe troops deployed to Hungary for fighting supposedly on behalf of the Hungarian people.
|
Join Sovinform’s Mailing List by emailing sovinform.tech@gmail.com Place the following phrase in your email subject/title ‘Join Mailing List’. No further comment necessary. |
Follow Sovinform on |
Numerous Nazi-aligned Horthyites participated in the colour revolution along with the UDB-backed Panzerwaffe troops. The CIA reported:
Of course, some individuals who took an active part in the revolution have a background in the days of the [pro-Nazi] Horthy regime: for instance, army officers who joined the freedom fighters or provided them with weapons, have been officers in Horthy’s army…. (Some Lessons of the Hungarian Revolution, CIA, p. 5) (IMG)
Fierce nationalism, as the CIA pointed out, played a prominent role in the rebellion:
These events [in Hungary] encouraged the fierce nationalism which had characterized all of Hungary’s history. (…). Nationalist symbols (the flag, the anthem, the coat of arms) played a significant role throughout the recent events. (Some Lessons of the Hungarian Revolution, CIA, p. 2) (IMG)
Specifically providing the defining characteristics of the kind of fierce nationalism spoken of, the CIA stated:
Hungarian nationalism is anti-Slav, anti-Rumanian, anti-Czechoslovakian, anti-Semitic, and anti-Communist. On the positive side it is Christian, pro-German … and pro-Western, consisting of a deeply ingrained sense of the historic role of Hungary as a Christian nation and an outpost of Western civilization and culture. The establishment of Roman Catholicism as Hungary’s national religion in 1000 A.D. oriented not only religious feeling but also the nation’s culture and political development toward the West…. (Resistance Factors and Special Forces Areas Hungary, CIA, August, 1957, p. 4. Bold added) (IMG)
The kind of ‘fierce nationalism’ manifest in those protests was an anti-Semitic one:
rejection of Hungarian [territorial] revisionist ambitions, [and] the disproportionate number of Jews in high official positions, … are forceful illustrations that Communism is the very antithesis of Hungarian nationalism. (Resistance Factors and Special Forces Areas Hungary, CIA, August, 1957, p. 4) (IMG)
The CIA confirmed that the vast majority of Hungary's Yiddish population had an extremely low counter-revolutionary potential and that the Yiddish-Hungarians supported the Red Army intervention and the communist-coopted Kadar group. The US intelligence also confirmed that the Hungarian 'revolutionaries' launched many pogroms. As always, a large minority of the Yiddish, some of the Yiddish intelligentsia and most Yiddish bureaucrats, were collaborating with the Nazis against the proletarian majority of Hungary’s Yiddish population. Jewish pro-Nazi organizations subservient to American imperialism credibly claimed that a large minority of the Yiddish population in Hungary actively supported the 'revolutionaries' (Yugoslav-harboured Panzerwaffe troops). The following is an excerpt of the CIA document:
One U.S. Jewish spokesman, apparently well-informed, has claimed that sone 25,000 Jews in Hungary joined in the revolt against Comnunism. Another source, also well-informed, claims that 16,000 Jews were among the great tide of Hungarian refugees which crossed the frontier and found haven in Austria. Granted these allegations are true, the question remains as to what part was taken in the rebellion by the remaining 100,000 or more Jews in Hungary. No conclusive answer is possible, but the available information suggests that while many of these Jew took no action either for or against the government, a large percentage actively supported the Kadar regime and the Soviet intervention. In this connection it may be noted that the … Hungarian secret police (AVH), which [mostly] remained loyal to the Communist Party throughout the rebellion and was the principal target of revolutionary fury, is believed to have been staffed in considerable measure by Jewish [proletarian] personnel.
Under present conditions existing in Hungary, both the resistance potential of the Hungarian Jews and their possible utility to Special Forces appear to be exceptionally poor. A large proportion, possibly the majority, of the Jewish population is apparently loyal to the Kadar regime either through conviction or desire to live in peace. Of the Jews who sympathized with or aided the recent revolt, it seems likely that many have been badly shaken by the anti-Semitic outbursts of the revolutionaries and now ask themselves whether the position of the Jews in a liberated Hungary would be any better than under a Communist government.
(Resistance Factors and Special Forces Areas Hungary, CIA, August, 1957, pp. 97-98. Bold added.) (IMG)
The Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) too confirmed that pogroms throughout Hungary were taking place during the ‘revolution’, although, ever the propaganda weapon of the Anglo-American imperialist agencies, the JTA claimed that the attacks were ‘sporadic’ rather than pervasive and systematic:
The revolution saw sporadic attacks on Jews in small towns across the country, with some targeted as representatives of the regime and others simply for being Jews. In Budapest, a few soap-box orators raged against “the Jews,” and some elderly Jews say they feared the revolution would turn against them. All told, some 200,000 Hungarians, or some 2 percent of the population, fled the country, including an estimated 20,000 Jews, or one-fifth of the Jewish population. (1956 crises decimated two Jewish communities, in Hungary and Egypt, Michael Jordan, October 25, 2006. Bold added.) (IMG)
For the Gestapo agent Tito and his Nazi terror band, the Holocaust was not enough. Tito and his gang felt thirst for the blood of a seventh million. For them, the quota of the seventh million was a measure of career success. Nowhere and never did they miss the chance to directly and materially support the pogromists, be they the Gestapo torturers in Yugoslavia, the Nazi Wehrmacht’s Panzerwaffe troops in Hungary, the infamous Nazi spy General Marian Spychalski in Poland, the Gestapo agent Anwar Sadat in Egypt, the PLO terrorists in Lebanon, and the Saddamite Iraqi regime. So correctly the Stalin-era Soviet Foreign Ministry describe Tito, that proud Nazi in the closet, as Hitler’s successor:
The Tito fascist clique is an abominable product of the darkest forces of international reaction. The imperialists rightly regard Tito as Hitler’s successor. It is no accident that when the fascists captured power in Germany the Tito-Rankovic clique was in the service of the Hitlerite Gestapo which later turned over the Yugoslav traitors to the secret services of other imperialist powers. (Tito-Rankovic Clique Has Established Fascist Regime in Yugoslavia, A. Kalinin, April 14, 1950. In: Information Bulletin, Soviet Union. Posol聞stvo (U.S.), p. 221) (IMG{Titoist Yugoslavia})
The Yugoslav regime staffed its UDB fascist secret service with Gestapo cadres. The Titoist-Nazi Yugoslav regime agitated for such an anti-Semitic pogromist ‘revolution’ and harboured the Panzerwaffe troops that carried out the anti-Semitic terror as part of the systematic annihilation campaign against Hungary’s pro-communist loyalist Yiddish population. All this time, the CIA-funded media propagated the myth that Titoist Yugoslavia, the dictatorship that picked up the mantle of Himmler and Eichmann, was Eastern Europe’s ‘most philo-Semitic’ ‘socialist’ state under the ‘benevolent’ reign of which the Semitic communities culturally ‘flourished’.
A prominent Nazi anti-Semitic commander of the CIA-backed MI6-backed Hungarian fascist rebels was Bela Kiraly. Nagy released Bela Kiraly and made him the leader of the Hungarian rebel armed forces and planted other counter-revolutionary fascist agents to become prominent leaders of the Hungarian government:
He permitted the revolutionary reorganization of the Defense Ministry and the appointment of revolutionaries (Maleter and Kovacs) and ex-prisoners (e.g., Bela Kiraly) to top military posts. (FACTIONALISM IN THE HUNGARIAN WORKERS (COMMUNIST) PARTY (1945-1956), CIA, January, 28, 1957, p. 81) (IMG)
Bela Kiraly was a former Nazi commander in Hungary. According to ‘The Independent’,:
Kiraly stayed with the army when Hungary's leader, Miklos Horthy, was removed from power by the pro-Nazi Arrow Cross movement in October 1944 after he had ordered Hungarian forces to cease fighting. On Hitler's orders the Arrow Cross were determined to continue the war to the end. Days before that end came for Hungary, in March 1945, Kiraly was put in charge of defending the town of Koeszeg on the Austrian border. (Bela Kiraly: Soldier who led Hungarian resistance against the Soviet Union during the 1956 uprising, The Independent, Gabriel Patros, Saturday 11 July 2009, underline added) (IMG)
For his Nazi activities, he was:
a victim of the old Stalinist regime…. (Bela Kiraly: Soldier who led Hungarian resistance against the Soviet Union during the 1956 uprising, The Independent, Gabriel Patros, Saturday 11 July 2009) (IMG)
Kiraly attended:
Kiraly was released weeks before the 1956 Revolution, and was in hospital recovering from an operation when fighting erupted in Budapest on 23 October. Five days later he was smuggled out of hospital, against doctors' orders, to attend a national gathering of armed revolutionary groups. Such was his reputation both in military terms and as a victim of the old Stalinist regime, that he was almost immediately elected Commander-in-Chief of the newly formed National Guard which brought together the various revolutionary groups with sympathetic units from the established security forces. (Bela Kiraly: Soldier who led Hungarian resistance against the Soviet Union during the 1956 uprising, The Independent, Gabriel Patros, Saturday 11 July 2009) (IMG)
True, the USSR had collapsed in early 1956 and Eurasia was a dictatorship of the comprador bourgeoisie, but the membership composition of the Titoist ‘CPSU’ was such that the Titoist white-collar elements only had a slight margin over the non-white-collar elements, the proletarians and kolkhozniks. They were in the weaker position, but had power enough so as to raise vigilance against the fatal dangers of Titoization and to coopt some of the Titoist agents in the ‘CPSU’ against Titoization, if Khrushchev showed an unacceptably poor a performance. The communist loyalists that operated within the Eurasian state apparatus and the ‘CPSU’ could persuade enough ordinary elements in the Party, even them who would have normally sided with Khrushchev, and to coopt enough the Titoists under the pressure of the proletarians to temporarily ‘cross the floor’ and side with the communist faction, and thereby form the majority with which to compel Khrushchev to take proper action. Indeed, a memorandum from the US National Security Council (NSC) stated:
Following this development there had been a flood of intelligence material alleging new and serious rifts over the Yugoslav problem among the Soviet leaders. It was the burden of many of these reports that Khrushchev was now completely isolated in support of the new and more liberal approach to Yugoslavia. Certain Yugoslav sources were insisting that Khrushchev’s opponents are arguing that Tito’s policies are dangerously weakening the control of the USSR over its satellites. Whatever the precise truth of all these rumors, General Cabell said that the CIA believed that recently Soviet policy toward the satellites had given rise to concern and that the Soviet leaders believed they will now have to shift their course and again tighten their controls. On the other hand, General Cabell pointed out that Bulganin and Mikoyan had been at least as closely associated with the new policy of liberalism toward the satellites as Khrushchev himself. (Memorandum of Discussion at the 298th Meeting of the National Security Council, Washington, September 27, 1956. In: ‘Foreign Relations of the United States, 1955-1957’, Vol. 26, Central and Southeastern Europe, US Department of State, p. 747) (IMG)
As such, Khrushchev was eventually, and with much reluctance and delay, compelled to engage against the Hungarian colour revolutionaries by sending the Red Army. In late October 1956, there was:
full-scale fighting between AVH troops and the rioters (24 October), Soviet troops intervened. (FACTIONALISM IN THE HUNGARIAN WORKERS (COMMUNIST) PARTY (1945-1956), CIA, January, 28, 1957, p. IV) (IMG)
On November 1, 1956, Nagy officially announced the withdrawal of Hungary from the Warsaw Pact and appealed to the US-led camp for support:
On 1 November, presumably under the influence of extreme revolutionaries and faced with the build-up of Soviet armies, Nagy took the extreme step of proclaiming Hungary's withdrawal from the Warsaw pact and asking for the neutralization of Hungary under the protection of the United Nations. (FACTIONALISM IN THE HUNGARIAN WORKERS (COMMUNIST) PARTY (1945-1956), CIA, January, 28, 1957, p. 81) (IMG)
Red Army troops entered Hungary and obliterated many of the fascist forces led by Nagy. Fearing execution by the superior Red Army troops,:
Nagy and most of his ministers sought refuge at the Yugoslav embassy. With no one left to take orders from, Kiraly led several thousand members of the National Guard out of his headquarters in the centre of Budapest, first to the outskirts of the city and then to the Bakony mountains in western Hungary. (Bela Kiraly: Soldier who led Hungarian resistance against the Soviet Union during the 1956 uprising, The Independent, Gabriel Patros, Saturday 11 July 2009, underline added) (IMG)
Tito’s gang gave refuge to Nagy. The communist forces in Eurasia later compelled Tito’s gang to release Nagy from the Yugoslav embassy, upon promise of not hurting Nagy. Nagy was subsequently executed.
The Yugoslav regime continued to insist that the Red Army must leave Hungary. According to the research wing of the CIA’s RFE/RL:
The Yugoslav delegate UN, Jozhe BRILEY, sprung a last night by joining the growing demand from the non-Communist world that Soviet troops be withdrawn from Hungary and the Hungarians be permitted to manage their own affairs.
BRILEY told an emergency session of the General Assembly that his government was opposed to intervention of foreign forces in any country. "The less interference, from whatever source, the better for the Hungarian people."
(YUGOSLAV REACTION TO HUNGARY, Evaluation and Research Section, Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty Research Institute, November 9, 1956, p. 1. In: Open Society Archives, Budapest, Hungary) (IMG)
Click here for Screenshots of Source Documents
_________________________________
Join Mailing List by
emailing sovinform.tech@gmail.com
Place the following phrase in your
email subject/title ‘Join Mailing List’.
No further comment necessary.
_________________________________
Follow Sovinform on
_________________________________
The book The History of the USSR & the Peoples’ Democracies
is now available for easy print.
_________________________________
Image Credits
Caption from LIFE. "Firing at secret police, insurgents emplace old machine gun in a doorway on Rakoczi Avenue, where they had taken hasty refuge from police fusillade."Michael Rougier—The LIFE Picture Collection/Getty Images https://time.com/3878232/the-hungarian-revolution-of-1956-photos-from-the-streets-of-budapest/