Washington, D.C., Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Induced Famine, Death for Millions, Genocide. 1932-1933
Ukraine Remembers - The World Acknowledges! Nov 2009
Europe to read Gareth Jones again
By Ihor Siundiukov, The Day Weekly Digest #33
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, 17 November 2009
Note from Nigel Linsan Colley, Gareth Jones's Grand Nephew
E-mail From: Nigel Linsan Colley, [email protected]
To: [email protected]; Cc: [email protected]
Newark, Nottinghamshire, UK, Monday, November 16, 2009 
Walter Duranty, Gareth Jones, and the Pulitzer Prize
By Prof. James Mace, Consultant to The Day
The Day Weekly Digest, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, July 15, 2003
Action Ukraine History Report (AUHR), Washington, D.C., Tue, Nov 17, 2009
Ukrainian Canadian Civil Liberties Foundation (UCCLF)
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, Monday, 16 November 2009

18th Annual Genocidal Famine Memorial in New York City
Consistory Office of Public Relations, Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA
South Bound Brook, New Jersey, Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Europe to read Gareth Jones again

By Ihor Siundiukov, The Day Weekly Digest #33
Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, 17 November 2009

The BBC ( reports that Trinity College, Cambridge, has put on public display the diary of Gareth Jones (1905—1935), a Welsh journalist who dared to say the truth about the Holodomor horrors that he saw in the spring of 1933.
Not only a top-class professional but also an honest and humane person, a Cambridge graduate who had been publishing since 1930 his USSR reports in The Times of London as “An Observer’s Notes,” Gareth Jones decided later in 1932 to find by all means the root cause of the food situation in the Soviet Union, the truth about the famine in a huge country.
Traveling by railway to Ukraine as a private individual, he got off the train on the Ukrainian soil, walked about 40 miles, spent two weeks on the apocalyptic famine-stricken territory, speaking to people and sleeping in their houses. He was gripped with the indescribable horror of what he saw.

On March 30, 1933, Manchester Guardian published Jones’s report on the horrors he had seen. “I walked alone through villages and twelve collective farms. Everywhere was the cry, ‘There is no bread; we are dying’...,” the journalist wrote.

The truth about the Great Famine which Gareth Jones, a well-known journalist in Europe, a reporter who interviewed Hitler and Mussolini, and mingled with British premiers, dared to tell the world will always remain in the history of the world press as a striking example of a high human morality, courage and professional ethics.

The public display of Gareth Jones’s diaries in London is really an outstanding event that has a direct bearing on Ukrainian journalism in general (the level of its maturity, responsibility and proficiency, all the more so in comparison with Jones, is a matter of a very serious talk) and the newspaper Den/The Day in particular. This deserves a few words.
The bold exploit of Gareth Jones and the very name of his became known to Ukrainians (and not only to them – this also applies, in a way, to the US and Europe) thanks to the article “A Tale of Two Journalists” by James Mace, an unforgettable historian, political journalist, public figure, and an outstanding researcher of the Ukrainian Holodomor.
First published in Den on July 16, 2003, it immediately became assigned reading. This article was repeatedly reprinted in Den/The Day and the books Day and Eternity of James Mace and Extract 150 of The Day Library series. This text also served as a basis for a special journalist course at Den/The Day’s partner universities and is manual of sorts for trainees at our Summer School of Journalism.

In “A Tale of Two Journalists,” Gareth Jones stands opposed to the New York Times journalist Walter Duranty who, in contrast to Jones, wrote articles which lulled the world community into complacency and made them shut their eyes to that-time horrors in Ukraine, for which he was awarded the Pulitzer Prize. Den/The Day wrote a letter, together with James Mace, to The New York Times with an urgent call to posthumously deprive Duranty of this prestigious journalistic prize. Unfortunately, we are still waiting for an answer.

Stanislav KULCHYTSKY, a well-known researcher of the 1932 - 933 Holodomor problem; deputy direc­tor, Institute of the History of Uk­rai­ne, Na­tional Academy of Sciences, Ukrai­ne: “This is an extremely important event because Gareth Jones one of the few Western journalists who stayed here during the 1932—1933 famine and tried to put the truth across to the Western public.
"Unfortunately, by a horrible twist of fate, Jones was killed in rather a young age. I must say that we knew very well that this journalist published articles, but nobody knew about his diaries. So they are one of the few sources that are immensely important for studying the Holodomor’s history. Last year the Kyiv Mohyla Academy published two diaries of Ukrainian eyewitnesses as part of a large monograph on the Holodomor. I can say such documents provide a lot of information.”
Note from Nigel Linsan Colley, Gareth Jones's Grand Nephew

----- Original Message -----
From: Nigel Linsan Colley, [email protected]
To: [email protected]; Cc: [email protected]
Newark, Nottinghamshire, UK, Sent: Mon, Nov 16, 2009 6:36 PM
Subject: Thank You again, Morgan

Dear Morgan,
I am here yet again writing to you to thank you tremendously, for not only your continued support, for not only your crucial 2003 e-mail to us, 'is this the 'fabled' Gareth Jones who exposed the Holodomor'  when you first found our new website about Gareth Jones, but also your initial leap of faith in being the first to put us personally in touch with James Mace. 
I am sure he is smiling down upon us, like Gareth too as the pen is indeed at long last proving to be mightier than the Soviet sword. From little acorns do indeed mighty oak trees grow, but I wonder whether we are just half way up the mountain; who knows the height of the summit of what we have unleashed together?
To date, the Cambridge PR machine has gotten the Wren story into 165 newspapers worldwide (and John Burns, the UK, NYT correspondent is currently writing a considered article for later this week, though whether it is published is another matter. Watch this space; miracles do occasionally happen). BTW -  I saw that the Moscow Times also ran the story today with a legible photo of one of the diary pages – somewhat poignant don’t you think, that GJ’s incriminating diaries have come back to the scene of the crime and with such prestige!
FYI - The UK premiere of The Living on the Friday night was full - 200 people and then there was a Q&A session afterwards for about half an hour with Siriol and I, followed by a cheese and wine reception. I was given a room at Trinity Masters' Lodge be-decked with antique furniture and along with a 300-year old, four poster bed!  My goodness, when they say that academics lived in a cloistered world, they were not wrong!
On the Saturday morning, my family all went to The Wren to see the exhibit in situ, which is being displayed for the Michaelmas term, then who knows, maybe we ought to consider touring it (security, professional handling and insurances permitting)? BTW I have just updated the Gareth Jones website with a picture of Siriol and I at the Wren, along with Irish-American, Rory Finnan, the Lecturer in Ukrainian Studies at Cambridge, who made it all happen:

Anyway, enough from me, bar to let you know that I am off States-side on Saturday to give a speech at the UN at the opening of an Holodomor exhibition there on the 24th; these are heady days for us all...
As ever, with kindest regards (and hope we meet soon, but please do keep up the good work as without your help along the way, we would not be where we are today). Thank you!
Nigel Linsan Colley, Newark, Nottinghamshire, UK, E-mail: [email protected]
AUHR FOOTNOTE:  Nigel Linsan Colley is Gareth Jones's grand nephew.  Dr. Margaret Siriol Colley is copied on this e-mail from Nigel Linsan Colley.  Dr. Margaret Siriol Colley is Gareth Jones's niece and Nigel Linsan Colley's mother.  Do not miss the tremendous amount of very important material on the Gareth Jones website:
Walter Duranty, Gareth Jones, and the Pulitzer Prize
Article by Prof. James Mace, Consultant to The Day
The Day Weekly Digest, Kyiv, Ukraine, Tuesday, July 15, 2003
On June 24 the Pulitzer Prize Committee was sent an open letter by Dr. Margaret Siriol Colley and Nigel Linsan Colley, Bramcote, Notts, UK, too long to be recounted here in full, but which can be read on the Internet at
The lady is the niece of one Gareth Jones (1905-1935), a journalist who had the courage to tell the truth about the despicable things he had seen in Ukraine in the spring of 1933. For his courage he paid with his professional reputation and being long all but forgotten.
The hatchet man in this tale was one Walter Duranty, winner of the 1932 Pulitzer Prize for writing stories from the Soviet Union, reportage that he had already freely confessed "always reflected the official Soviet point of view and not his own." And here begins a tale of one journalist being crushed for his honesty and another rewarded for his mendacity. It is a tale that touches directly both on the ethics of journalism and the history of Ukraine.
Journalists often like to think of themselves as fearless fighters for the public's right to know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. To reward those who actually did so an extremely successful Hungarian-born American journalist named Joseph Pulitzer willed that his legacy be used in part to fund prizes in his name for outstanding achievements in drama, letters, music, and journalism. The prizes, modest in money but tremendous in terms of the honor they convey on their recipients, have been awarded annually since 1917.
In reality, journalists, like everyone else, are rarely completely faithful to the ideals they profess. And prizes, even prestigious ones like the Pulitzer, sometimes go to scoundrels. Dr. Colley demands the revocation of the Pulitzer Prize from the scoundrel that led a campaign for Stalin's Soviet Union from the most prestigious newspaper in the United States, the New York Times, to discredit her uncle for honestly trying to do what journalists are supposed to do, for telling people the truth.

Walter Duranty, born in Liverpool (England) in 1884, was always something of a scoundrel and openly relished in being able to get away with it. In S. J. Taylor's excellent biography, "Stalin's Apologist: Walter Duranty: The New York Time's Man in Moscow" (Oxford University Press, 1990), he is seen lying even about his own family origins, claiming in his autobiography to have been an only child orphaned at ten, neither of which was true: his mother died in 1916 and his sister fourteen years later, a spinster; when his father died in 1933, he left an estate of only г430.

After finishing his university studies, he drifted to Paris, where he dabbled in Satanism, opium, and sex on both sides of the bed-sheets. By the time World War I broke out, he had a job as a reporter for the New York Times and could thus avoid actual combat. Duranty seems to have known that the key to success in journalism can often be in first determining what the readers want and then gauging how the facts might fit in with it. His reportage was always lively, eminently readable, and usually - but by no means always - had some relationship to the facts.
Still, he realized that in the American free press, newspapers are made to make money for their owners, and the reporter's job is to write something people would want to read enough that they would go out and buy his employer's newspaper. It is the classic relationship between labor and management in a market economy: the more effective a worker is at helping his employer make more money, the better chance he stands of getting higher pay, a better job, or other attributes of worldly success.

For Duranty, this system seems to have worked quite well. After the war, he was sent to the new independent Baltic states and in 1921 was among the first foreign reporters allowed into the Soviet Union. This latter achievement was a major one, for the Soviet Union was never shy about exercising control over who could come or leave. A Western reporter in the Soviet Union always knew that if one wrote something offensive enough to the Soviet authorities, he would be expelled and never allowed to return.

There was thus a strong professional incentive not to be that person. Duranty understood this better than anyone else, but just in case someone among the journalists forgot this simple truth, there was a Soviet press officer to remind him. During the First Five Year Plan, the head of the Soviet Press Office was Konstantin Umansky (or Oumansky: he liked it better the French way).

Eugene Lyons, who had known Umansky at a distance since he had been a TASS correspondent in the United States and the latter chief of its Foreign Bureau, probably knew this little man with black curly hair and gold teeth as well as any of the foreign correspondents. He described the system as more one of give- and-take with the foreign correspondents sometimes backing the censor down through a show of professional solidarity (it would have been, after all, too much of an embarrassment for the Soviets to expel all the foreign correspondents), often in a spirit of give- and-take and compromise. But the telegraph office would simply not send cables without Umansky's permission.
Moreover, convinced that the Soviet experiment was so much superior to the all too evident evils of capitalism, a huge segment of the West's intellectuals wanted desperately to look with hope on the Soviet experiment, which, for all its failures, seemed to offer a beacon. And in a world where access to newsmakers is often the only thing between having something to print or not, access to power itself becomes a commodity. As Lyons himself put it his memoir, "Assignment in Utopia" (1937):

"The real medium of exchange in Moscow, buying that which neither rubles nor dollars can touch, was power. And power meant Comrade Stalin, Comrade Umansky, the virtuoso of kombinatsya, the fellow who's uncle's best friend has a cousin on the collegium of the G.P.U. To be invited to exclusive social functions, to play bridge with the big-bugs, to be patted on the back editorially by Pravda, to have the social ambitions of one's wife flattered: such inducements are more effective in bridling a correspondent's tongue than any threats... Whether in Moscow or Berlin, Tokyo or Rome, all the temptations for a practicing reporter are in the direction of conformity. It is more comfortable and in the long run more profitable to soft-pedal a dispatch for readers thousands of miles away than to face an irate censor and closed official doors."

Both Lyons and Duranty knew the rules of this game so well that both had been rewarded before the Holodomor by being granted an interview with Stalin himself, the Holy Grail of the Moscow foreign press corps. Umansky knew how to award and punish foreigners. Perhaps this is why he would later move on into the diplomatic "beau monde" of Washington, DC.

Lyons, who came to Russia as an American Communist sycophant, then becoming a disillusioned anti-Communist, paid the price. His lady translator, it seems, brought to his attention an item in "Molot," a newspaper from Rostov-on-the-Don, designed to cow the local inhabitants but not for foreign consumption, announcing the mass deportation of three Ukrainian Cossack "stanitsas" from the Kuban. Nine months after he broke the story, he was gone from the Soviet Union for good.

Into this world walked a young English socialist, Malcolm Muggeridge, who had married the niece of Sidney and Beatrice Webb, then icons in the Soviet Union for their work to turn the Soviet experiment into an icon for socialist intellectuals in the West. Coming from such a background, young Malcolm and his wife even sold their furniture, convinced that they would remain in the Soviet Union as he reported for the "Manchester Guardian." Yet, when he arrived, he quickly saw that the Five Year Plan was not quite all it was cracked up to be.
Perhaps the first inkling of the panoply of characters he happened onto was at a reception at the British Embassy in Moscow in the fall of 1932 when he found himself sitting between old Soviet apologist Anna Louise Strong and the Great Duranty, the most famous foreign correspondent of his day and fresh from his Pulitzer Prize.
Miss Strong, he wrote in his memoirs, "Chronicles of Wasted Time" (1972), "was an enormous woman with a very red face, a lot of white hair, and an expression of stupidity so overwhelming that it amounted to a strange kind of beauty," adding, "Duranty, a little sharp-witted energetic man, was a much more controversial person; I should say there was more talk about him in Moscow than anyone else, certainly among foreigners.
"His household, where I visited him once or twice, included a Russian woman named Katya, by whom I believe he had a son. I always enjoyed his company; there was something vigorous, vivacious, preposterous, about his unscrupulousness which made his persistent lying somehow absorbing. I suppose no one - not even Louis Fischer - followed the Party Line, every shift and change, as assiduously as he did. In Oumansky's eyes he was perfect, and was constantly held up to the rest of us as an example of what we should be."

"It, of course, suited his material interests thus to write everything the Soviet authorities wanted him to - that the collectivisation of agriculture was working well, with no famine conditions anywhere; that the purges were justified, the confessions genuine, and the judicial procedure impeccable. Because of these acquiescent attitudes - so ludicrously false that they were a subject of derision among the other correspondents and even (Soviet censor - Author) Podolsky had been known to make jokes about them - Duranty never had any trouble getting a visa, or a house, or interviews with whomever he wanted."

Such subservience to a regime that was one of two truly evil systems of the twentieth century, for which the term "totalitarianism" is most often applied, was marked by a veneer of objective analysis and certainly not without insight - he was the first to have "put his money on Stalin," as he put it, and is even credited with having first coined the word "Stalinism" to describe the evolving System - and he was always fascinating to read, even more to talk to.
He was the most famed foreign correspondent of the time; a nice apartment in Moscow complete with a live-in lover, by whom he did indeed beget a son, and an oriental servant to do the cooking and cleaning; was the social center of the life of foreigners in Moscow; and took frequent trips abroad, as he put it, to retain his sense of what was news.

Simultaneously, there was a strange sort of honesty to his privately admitting that he was indeed an apologist. In the 1980s during the course of my own research on the Ukrainian Holodomor I came across a most interesting document in the US National Archives, a memorandum from one A. W. Kliefoth of the US Embassy in Berlin dated June 4, 1931.
Duranty dropped in to renew his passport. Mr. Kliefoth thought it might be of possible interest to the State Department that this journalist, in whose reporting so much credence was placed, had told him "that, 'in agreement with the "New York Times" and the Soviet authorities,' his official dispatches always reflect the official opinion of the Soviet government and not his own'."
Note that the American consular official thought it particularly important for his superiors that the phrase, in agreement with the "New York Times" and the Soviet authorities, was a direct quotation. This was precisely the sort of journalistic integrity that was awarded the Pulitzer Prize in 1932.

Into the world of Moscow journalism, a world where everybody had to make his own decision on the moral dilemma Lyons' framed as "to tell or not to tell," came one Gareth Jones, a brilliant young man who had studied Russian and graduated with honors from Cambridge and became an adviser on foreign policy to former British Prime Minister David Lloyd George.
At the age of 25, in 1930 he went to the Soviet Union to inform his employer what was happening there, his reports were considered so straightforward that they were then published in the London "Times" as "An Observer's Notes." The following year he returned and published some of the materials under his own names. Having gained a reputation for integrity in honestly trying to get to the bottom of things, in 1932 he wrote with foreboding about the food situation as people asked, "Will their be soup?"

By the early spring of 1933, the fact that famine was raging in Ukraine and the Kuban, two-thirds of the population of which happened to be Ukrainian, was common knowledge in Moscow among foreign diplomats, foreign correspondents, and even the man in the street. In response to Lyon's "revelations" from the regional official Soviet press, a ban had imposed in foreign journalists traveling to the areas in question.
Upon checking with his colleagues in Moscow what they knew - on the understanding, of course, that their names would never be mentioned - Jones decided it was worth it to defy the prohibition and buy a ticket at the train station to the places affected as a private person, which was not forbidden. Once there, he employed his simple but logical method of getting off the train and walking for several hours until he was certain he was off the beaten track and start talking to the local.

He spent a couple of weeks, walked about forty miles, talked to people, slept in their huts, and was appalled at what he saw. Rushing back to Moscow and out of the Soviet Union, Jones stopped off first in Berlin, where he gave a press conference and fired off a score of articles about the tragedy he had seen firsthand. "I walked alone through villages and twelve collective farms. Everywhere was the cry, 'There is no bread; we are dying.' ..." ("Manchester Guardian," March 30, 1933).

Young Muggeridge, who would live to a ripe old age and become one of the most revered journalists of the twentieth century, had done much the same, sent his dispatches out through the British diplomatic pouch, and published much the same earlier but under the anonymous byline of "An Observer's Notes," created barely a ripple because his story was the unconfirmed report of some unknown observer.
Yet, now stood young Mr. Jones, the confidant of prime ministers and millionaires, a young man who was able to get interviews with Hitler and Mussolini. Here Mr. Umansky and his superiors in the Soviet hierarchy encountered a problem that could not be ignored. But Soviet officialdom already had a trump up its sleeve, one certain to bring into line any recalcitrant members of the Moscow press corps infected by an excess of integrity, at least for the duration of their stay.

A couple of weeks earlier, the GPU had arrested six British citizens and several Russians on charges of industrial espionage. Announcement was made that public trial was in preparation. This was news. Putting their own people in the dock was one thing, but accusing white men, Englishmen, of skullduggery was something else.
This promised to be the trial of the century, and every journalist working for a newspaper in the English-speaking world knew that this was precisely the type of story that their editors were paying them to cover. To be locked out would have been equivalent to professional suicide. The dilemma of to tell or not to tell was never put more brutally.

Umansky read the situation perfectly, and Lyon's summed up what happened in a way that needs no retelling:

"On emerging from Russia, Jones made a statement which, startling though it sounded, was little more than a summary of what the correspondents and foreign diplomats had told him. To protect us, and perhaps with some idea of heightening the authenticity of his reports, he emphasized his Ukrainian foray rather than our conversation as the chief source of his information...

"Throwing down Jones was as unpleasant a chore as fell to any of us in the years of juggling facts in order to please dictatorial regimes-but throw him down we did, unanimously and in almost identical formulas of equivocation. Poor Gareth Jones must have been the most surprised human being alive when the facts he so painstakingly garnered from our mouths were snowed under by our denials.

"The scene in which the American press corps combined to repudiate Jones is fresh in my mind. It was in the evening and Constantine Umansky, the soul of graciousness consented to meet us in the hotel room of a correspondent. He knew that he had a strategic advantage over us because of the Metro-Vickers story. He could afford to be gracious. Forced by competitive journalism to jockey for the inside track with officials, it would have been professional suicide to make an issue of the famine at that time. There was much bargaining in the spirit of gentlemanly give-and-take, under the effluence of Umansky's gilded smile, before a formula of denial was worked out.

"We admitted enough to sooth our consciences, but in round- about phrases that damned Jones as a liar. The filthy business having been disposed of, someone ordered vodka and zakuski, Umansky joined the celebration, and the party did not break up until the early morning hours. The head censor was in a mellower mood than I had ever seen before or since. He had done a big bit for Bolshevik firmness that night."

Duranty took the point position in the campaign against Jones. On March 31, 1933, "The New York Times" carried on page 13 an article that might well be studied in schools of journalism as an example of how to walk the tightrope between truth and lie so masterfully that the two seem to exchange places under the acrobat's feet.
It is called "Russians Hungry, But Not Starving" and begins by placing Jones' revelations in a context that seems to make everything quite clear: "In the middle of the diplomatic duel between Great Britain and the Soviet Union over the accused British engineers, there appears from a British source a big scare story in the American press about famine in the Soviet Union, With 'thousands already dead and millions menaced by death from starvation.' "

Of course, this put everything in its proper place, at least enough for the United States to extend diplomatic recognition to the Soviet Union in November of that year. So much so that when a dinner was given in honor of Soviet Foreign Minister Maksim Litvinov in New York's posh Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, when it came time to pay tribute to Duranty, the cheers were so thunderous that American critic and bon-vivant Alexander Woolcott wrote, "Indeed, one quite got the impression that America, in a spasm of discernment, was recognizing both Russia and Walter Duranty."

At the same time that Duranty was so actively denying the existence of the famine in public, he was quite open in admitting it in private. On September 26, 1933 in a private conversation with William Strang of the British Embassy in Moscow, he stated, "it is quite possible that as many as ten million people may have died directly or indirectly from lack of food in the Soviet Union during the past year."
The little Englishman indeed seemed to have gotten away with it. But his further career was a gradual sinking into obscurity and penury, his Katia in Moscow berating him for taking no interest in the education of their son and asking that he send more money, that is, of course, when he could. He married on his deathbed in late September 1957.
A week later, on October 3, he died from an internal hemorrhage complicated by pulmonary emphysema at the age of seventy-three. Nothing further of his son is known. Jones had attempted to defend himself in a letter to the "New York Times" and Malcolm Muggeridge, once out of the Soviet Union declined to write a letter in support of Jones, although Jones had publicly commended Muggeridge's unsigned articles in the Manchester Guardian. Various organizations, mostly on the Right, took up the cause of the telling the world about the Great Famine of 1932-1933, but within two or three years the issue faded into the background and was largely forgotten.

Gareth Jones was himself nonplussed. In a letter to a friend who intended to visit the Soviet Union, Gareth wrote: "Alas! You will be very amused to hear that the inoffensive little 'Joneski' has achieved the dignity of being a marked man on the black list of the O.G.P.U. and is barred from entering the Soviet Union. I hear that there is a long list of crimes which I have committed under my name in the secret police file in Moscow and funnily enough espionage is said to be among them. As a matter of fact Litvinoff [Soviet Foreign Minister] sent a special cable from Moscow to the Soviet Embassy in London to tell them to make the strongest of complaints to Mr. Lloyd George about me."

Jones and those who sided with him were snowed under a blanket of denials. When one by one the American journalists left the Soviet Union, they wrote books about what they had seen. Muggeridge wrote a thinly disguised novel, "Winter in Moscow" (1934), in which the names were changed, but it was clear who everybody was. Only Jones, it seems, was really concealed in the fact that the character of such integrity, given the name of Pye by the author, was older, a smoker, a drinker, none of which the real Jones was.
In his memoirs, Muggeridge seems to have forgotten altogether the man who actually broke the story of the Ukrainian Holodomor Famine-Genocide under his own name. Perhaps he felt a little guilty that his courage in this situation was not quite as great as the Welshman who had the bad luck to have been murdered in China in 1935, probably to prevent him from telling the world that the new state of Manchukuo was not nearly as nice a place as its Japanese sponsors wanted the world to believe.

There is perhaps something of a parallel to the story of Gareth Jones. There was also in 1981 another young man, then twenty- nine years old and a newly minted Ph.D. from the University of Michigan, hired by the Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute to study the Holodomor. After nearly a decade, when the Commission on the Ukraine Famine was wrapping up, he was informed that the fellowship he had been offered for an academic year had been cut back to a semester.
Having nowhere else to turn, he settled for that. "We expected he'd refuse, but he accepted," a colleague was told. The next year he was invited for a yearlong fellowship to the University of Illinois. A fund of well-meaning Ukrainian-Americans was ready to donate a million dollars to endow a chair for this man. Those who taught Russian and East European history led him to understand, however, that, while they would be quite happy to take the money, whoever might get the chair, it would certainly not be he.

It is unknown who exactly played the role of Umansky in this particular tale or whether vodka was served afterward, but the carrot and stick are fairly obvious: access to scholarly resources in Moscow vs. the veto of any research projects. In a world where a number of scholars slanted their journal articles and monographs as adroitly as Duranty did his press coverage, I am tempted to someday venture my own counterpart to Winter in Moscow, based on the published works that make the players all too easy to discern. For I was that once young man. But in contrast to Jones, I have found a place to live, married the woman I love, teach, and have and a forum from which I can from time to time be heard.

Despite Duranty's prophesies, the Ukrainians did not forget what had happened to them in 1933, and seventy years later the Ukrainian- Canadian Civil Liberties Association and the Ukrainian World Congress, with support from a number of other leading Ukrainian diaspora organizations, have organized a campaign to reopen the issue of Walter Duranty's 1932 Pulitzer Prize with a view to stripping him of it. They have sent thousands of postcards and letters to the Pulitzer Prizes Committee at Columbia University, 709 Journalism Building, 2950 Broadway, New York, NY, USA 10027.

We invite our readers who might have any thoughts on the matter to join them in so doing, in English, of course. Meanwhile, as a professional courtesy, the editors have already sent an e-mail of this article to all the members of the Pulitzer Prizes Committee in the hope that it might help them in their deliberations on this issue.

The whole story of denying the crimes of a regime that cost millions of lives is one of the saddest in the history of the American free press, just as the Holodomor is certainly the saddest page in the history of a nation, whose appearance on the world state was so unexpected that there is, in fact, a quite successful book in English, "The Ukrainians: Unexpected Nation."

Still, it would be only appropriate if that nation, which was for so long so safe to ignore and then appeared so unexpectedly, expressed itself on the fate of a man who also was victimized so unexpectedly, simply for trying honestly to find out and then tell the truth. Ukrainians abroad want justice done by stripping that young man's chief victimizer of a Pulitzer Prize that makes a mockery of any conceivable ideals of journalism.
They have been joined by a host of respected journalists in the West. Is it not only right that the people most affected by the events in which the struggle between truth and falsehood, idealism and cynicism, were so blatant that it reads almost like a melodrama, also make its collective voice heard? By asserting justice in the past, we help attain it for ourselves.

Action Ukraine History Report (AUHR), Washington, D.C., Tue, Nov 17, 2009

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Vol 1, Issue 2 of the new journal "Holodomor Studies," Roman Serbyn, Editor, has been published by Charles Schlacks, Idyllwild, CA.  Issue 1 was published in the winter-spring of 2009.  Copies of both issues of the "Holodomor Journal" are available for purchase.  Information about annual subscriptions and the purchase of individual copies is found below.  Please order your copy today.  More subscriptions are needed to keep the journal in publication. 
The table of contents for "Holodomor Studies," Vol 1, Issue 2 is shown below:
EDITOR’S FOREWORD:Roman Serbyn                                                          
       Introductory Remarks: Cormac O'Grada                                                                      
       Holodomor – the Ukrainian Genocide: Roman Serbyn                                                    
       Investigating the Holodomor: Stanislav Kulchytsky                                                                          
       Hunger of 1932-1933 – a Tragedy of the Peoples of the USSR:  Viktor Kondrashin                          
       Causation and Responsibility in the Holodomor Tragedy: Stephen Wheatcroft                                    
       The 1932-1933 Holodomor in the Kuban: Evidence of the Ukrainian Genocide: Volodymyr Serhijchuk
       A Selection of Soviet Documents on the Holodomor                                            
              Compiled, edited and introduced by Roman Serbyn
       Public Pressure on the International Committee of the Red-Cross as it Waited for the Soviet Reply on the Ukrainian Famine
              Compiled, edited and introduced by Roman Serbyn
Two Forceful Collections and Documents on the Ukrainian Famine-Genocide of 1932-1933. Yaroslav Bilinski
Affirmation and Denial: Holodomor-Related Resources Recently Acquired by the Library of Congress: Jurij Dobczansky
Papers from Holodomor Conferences at University of Toronto and Harvard: Andrew Sorokowski
Vasyl Barka and his Zhovty kniaz: Bohdanna Monczak
SUBSCRIPTION RATES:  The journal "Holodomor Studies" is published semi-annually.  Annual subscription rates are: institutions - $40.00; individuals - $20.00 - Postage in the USA is $6.00, in Canada it is $12.00; and foreign postage is $20.00.  Sent payment to:  Charles Schlacks, Publisher, P. O. Box 1256, Idyllwild, CA 92549-1256, contact: [email protected].  Order your copy of the new journal "Holodomor Studies" today!
ARTICLES FOR PUBLICATION:  Contributions submitted for possible publication should be sent to the editor, Roman Serbyn, in e-mail format to [email protected].

Ukrainian Canadian Civil Liberties Foundation (UCCLF)
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, Mon, 16 November 2009

OTTAWA - An educational campaign recalling the Great Famine of 1932-1933 in Soviet Ukraine, known as the Holodomor, was launched today.

Thousands of postcards are being sent to embassies and consulates internationally, urging governments to officially recognize that this famine was an act of genocide perpetrated by the Soviet regime of Joseph Stalin. Canada is one of the few countries that has already recognized the Holodomor as genocidal.

Drawing upon the writings of Dr. Raphael Lemkin, the "father of the [UN] Genocide Convention," who described the "destruction of the Ukrainian nation" as the "classic example of Soviet genocide," the Ukrainian Canadian Civil Liberties Foundation and partner groups around the world are mailing postcards featuring a pastel drawing of Lemkin and an excerpt from his 1953 speech "Soviet Genocide in the Ukraine," an effort timed to coincide with the annual day of mourning for the Holodomor's victims (28 November).

Commenting, Professor Lubomyr Luciuk, editor of the book "Holodomor: Reflections on the Great Famine of 1932-1933 in Soviet Ukraine," said: "Many
millions of men, women and children suffered agonizing deaths in Soviet Ukraine in 1932-1933 during what was arguably one of the greatest acts of
genocide to befoul 20th century European history. To this day there are Holodomor-deniers attempting to obfuscate what happened, continuing to cover
up this Communist crime against humanity.

"This educational effort is therefore aimed at reminding governments everywhere that the father of the United Nations Convention on Genocide was
personally convinced of the genocidal character of Soviet rule in Ukraine. We are also calling upon countries that believe in upholding the relevance
of the UN Genocide Convention to officially recognize the truth of what happened during the Holodomor."

NOTE: For the full text of Dr. Raphael Lemkin's speech and to see the postcard, please go to (Sources & Issues: Great Famine section)
or click on To contact Dr. Lubomyr Luciuk, please e-mail: [email protected]
18th Annual Genocidal Famine Memorial in New York City
Consistory Office of Public Relations, Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA
South Bound Brook, NJ, Tuesday, November 17, 2009
The Ukrainian Holodomor of 1932-1933: "The Worst Holocaust the World has even known." With these powerful words, Senator Charles Schumer, Senior United States Senator from the state of New York, described and defined the genocide committed against the Ukrainian Nation and her people 76 years ago in 1932-33. 
He declared that the communist regime of Russia was not simply attempting to force the Ukrainian people into collective farming, or to erase the small land owners – the kulaks, or to wipe out the “intelligentsia”.  The real goal of the genocide was to “completely eradicate Ukraine as a nation”. 
Senator Shumer was participating in the annual Genocidal Famine Memorial, which takes place each year at St. Patrick Cathedral, New York City, during the month of November. 
This was the 18th year in a row that Ukrainians-Americans and others from New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Connecticut and as far away as Washington, D. C. joined together in prayer, commemorating those ten million men, women and children lost in Josef Stalin’s horrifying effort to destroy a people – a nation – long proud of their rich land, which was known as the “bread basket of Europe”. 
The weather held down the attendance this year, which was only about one-half the normal size, but those present were sincere in their petition to God for the repose of the victims’ souls in that place where the “Light our Lord’s Countenance shines upon them” and their memory will be eternal.
The annual commemoration is hosted each year by the Eastern Eparchy of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA and the Stamford Eparchy of the Ukrainian Catholic Church of the USA in which the city of New York is located and the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America, centered in New York City.  Archbishop Antony of our Church and Bishop Paul of the Stamford Eparchy are the host hierarchs. 
The Archbishop opened the commemoration this year declaring that “we have no right to forget those who perished senselessly” in spite of the attempts of the government of Russia today, along with those of some other nations to categorize the famine as a ‘natural phenomenon” for which the godless regime bore no responsibility.” 
The Archbishop continued: “We will continue to remind all mankind of the sanctity of life and the God-given rights of every individual human being.  We will remind the world’s political leaders that they no longer have unlimited and unquestioned power to destroy life…in Ukraine or in any other nation of the world.”

Five hierarchs participated in the Memorial Service, which followed:  His Beatitude Metropolitan Constantine of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, His Eminence Metropolitan Stefan of the Ukrainian Catholic Church, His Grace Bishop Emeritus Basil of the Ukrainian Catholic Church and His Grace Bishop Daniel of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. 
They were joined by over thirty priests and deacons of the two churches in beseeching God’s loving mercy for the victims of the famine.  The Dumka Ukrainian Chorus, under the direction of Vasyl Hrechynsky beautifully sang the responses for the Panakhyda and the prayer for our Ukrainian nation, “Bozhe Velykyj”
Tamara Gallo Olexy, President of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America, offered opening remarks and served as Master of Ceremonies for the program that followed the memorial service.  She spoke of the consequences of the famine for Ukraine and the effect it has had on all succeeding generations of the Ukrainian population.  Mr. John Love, of the U.S. State Department, read the statement issued by President Barack Obama on the occasion of the Famine Commemoration. 

Representatives of the government of Ukraine – His Excellency Oleh Shamshur, Ambassador to the USA and His Excellency Yuriy Sergeyev – Ambassador to the United Nations – also spoke.  Mr. Shamshur announced that the Ukrainian government will provide funding for the establishing of a Famine Monument in the heart Washington, D.C. across from the United States Capitol building and Union Station.  Mr. Sergeyev spoke of continued efforts at the United Nations aimed at educating the world about the darkest hour of our Ukrainian history. 
Metropolitan Stefan (Soroka) made concluding remarks about the history of the famine and its never ending effect upon Ukrainian history.  The Metropolitan also expressed gratitude to all who participated in the memorial services and program, as well as to His Excellency Archbishop Dolan, the head of the Roman Catholic diocese of New York, for his kindness in providing the Cathedral for this ecumenical service. 

CONTACT: His Grace Bishop Daniel, Consistory Office of Public Relations, Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA, P.O. Box 495, South Bound Brook, NJ, Web:; E-mail: [email protected].
ARCHIVES NOTE:  Several hundred articles about the Holodomor can be found at: Action Ukraine Report (AUR) archive, over 900 issues, years 2003-2009,;  Action Ukraine History Report (AUHR) archive;
NOTE: If you do not wish to be on the e-mail distribution list for the Action Ukraine History Report (AUHR) send an e-mail to [email protected].
Mr. E. Morgan Williams, Director, Government Affairs,
Washington Office, SigmaBleyzer;
President/CEO, U.S.-Ukraine Business Council (USUBC);
Publisher & Editor, Action Ukraine Report (AUR);
Publisher & Editor: Action Ukraine History Report (AUHR);
Founder/Trustee: Holodomor: Through The Eyes of Ukrainian Artists;
Founder/Trustee: Gulag, Through The Eyes of Ukrainain Artists;
1701 K Street, NW, Suite 903, Washington, D.C. 20006
Telephone: 202 437 4707; E-Mail:
[email protected]