Quiet courtyards

In Moscow, just some 10-12 km from the Kremlin, there is an area built by captured Germans. His name is Kuryanovo. It preserved the architecture of that time - two-story houses, quiet comfortable courtyards, thoughtful streets, etc.

wooden fences

Some houses are even surrounded by wooden fences with gates,

and here is a small garden.

For the convenience of residents, even small sheds were built so as not to store seasonal items in apartments. Here, even a shell from the time of Luzhkov has been preserved.

Parking in the yards

With parking in the courtyards, unlike most areas of Moscow, there are no problems at all.

They continue to dry clothes outside, as in the good old days.

House of Culture.

It is said that under it is a bomb shelter. Well, it's quite possible.

Monument to Lenin in Kuryanovo

Opposite is a monument to our leader. Interestingly, the captured Germans also installed it here?

Moscow streets

Typical Moscow streets.

Desert courtyards with playgrounds.

This store is very similar to a station store in a small town.

In principle, the Pererva railway station is very close here.

And this building, judging by the poster on it, was planned to be restored back in 2013.

Something is being pulled.

Mail

Post office building. Russian Post obviously did not get here with its rebranding.

This cottage (or maybe several rooms in it) is for sale. Wouldn't you like to appreciate? There is also a phone number.

Entrances in this area are not closed everywhere, what if the cat returns from a walk, and even hungry?

The romance of brick five-story buildings

Along the perimeter of the district, more modern houses have been built - brick five-story buildings. Imagine, you wake up in the morning, go to work somewhere in your office in Moscow City, drink coffee, and some kind of freight train passes right in front of your eyes in the window. Romance…

Why are there no dilapidated and dilapidated houses in Kuryanovo?

Why does this area of ​​the green zone (see satellite imagery) surrounded by the Moskva River still exist, and neither Luzhkov at one time, nor Sobyanin now found dilapidated and dilapidated houses that should have been demolished for a long time, but in their place rebuild another sleeping area?

I think that everything is very simple. Despite such a nice location on the map, the area is actually surrounded by industrial zones from almost all sides, and on the one hand by the railway. In addition, it is located in close proximity to, which seems to have been closed and cleaned last year, but in fact it safely continues to remind of itself with typical landfill smells.

For a long time, the area was in a dead end road. It was possible to leave it only in one direction - to the Pechatniki metro station, and the road itself could take at least 40 minutes. Most recently, this one was finally extended to, but you can’t get there quickly either.

Spirit of captured German soldiers

So the Kuryanovo district safely continues to live its own life, that's just the spirit of the prisoners German soldiers is still hanging around here.

Would you like to live in such an area?

The pursuit of justice is one of the most important human aspirations. In any at least somewhat complex public organizations the need for a moral assessment of interactions with other people has always been extremely great. Justice is the most important motivating motive for people to act, to evaluate what is happening, the most important element in the perception of oneself and the world.

The chapters written below do not claim to be any complete description of the history of the concepts of justice. But in them we have tried to focus on the basic principles, of which in different times people came out, evaluating the world and themselves. And also on those paradoxes that they encountered when implementing certain principles of justice.

Greeks discover justice

The idea of ​​justice appears in Greece. Which is understandable. As soon as people unite in communities (polises) and begin to interact with each other not only at the level of tribal relations or at the level of direct domination-subordination, there is a need for a moral assessment of such interaction.

Until then, the whole logic of justice fit into a simple scheme: justice is following the given order of things. The Greeks, however, also largely adopted this logic - the teachings of the sages-founders of the Greek city-states somehow boiled down to an understandable thesis: "Only what is in our laws and customs is fair." But as cities developed, this logic became noticeably more complex and expanded.

So, what is right is that which does not harm others and is done for the good. Well, since the natural order of things is an objective good, then following it is the basis for any criteria for evaluating justice.

The same Aristotle wrote very convincingly about the justice of slavery. Barbarians are naturally destined for physical labor and submission, and therefore it is very fair that the Greeks - naturally destined for mental and spiritual labor - make them slaves. Because it is good for barbarians to be slaves, even if they themselves do not understand this due to their unreasonableness. The same logic allowed Aristotle to talk about a just war. The war waged by the Greeks against the barbarians for the sake of replenishing the army of slaves is just, because it restores the natural state of affairs and serves for the good of all. Slaves get masters and the opportunity to fulfill their destiny, and the Greeks get slaves.

Plato, proceeding from the same logic of justice, proposed to closely monitor how children play and, according to the type of play, determine them into social groups for the rest of their lives. Those who play war are guards, they must be taught the military trade. Those who govern are philosopher-rulers, they must be taught Platonic philosophy. And all the rest do not need to be taught - they will work.

Naturally, the Greeks shared the good for the individual and the common good. The second is certainly more important and significant. Therefore, for the common good there has always been primacy in the assessment of justice. If something infringes on other individuals, but presupposes the common good, this is certainly fair. However, for the Greeks there was no particular contradiction here. They called the common good the good for the policy, and the cities in Greece were small, and not at the level of abstraction, but at a very specific level, it was assumed that the one whose good was infringed, for the good of all, would return him as a member of the community, with profit. This logic, of course, led to the fact that justice for your own people (the inhabitants of your policy) was very different from justice for strangers.

Socrates who confused everything

So, the Greeks figured out what good is. Understand what the natural order of things is. Understand what justice is.

But there was one Greek who liked to ask questions. Good-natured, consistent and logical. You already understood that we are talking about Socrates.

In Xenophon's Memoirs of Socrates there is an amazing chapter "A conversation with Euthydemus about the need to study." This chapter ends with the following words: "And many, driven to such despair by Socrates, no longer wanted to deal with him." questions that Socrates asked the young politician Euthydemus about justice and good.

Read this brilliant dialogue by Xenophon himself, or perhaps even better, by Mikhail Leonovich Gasparov. However, you can do it right here.

"Tell me: to lie, to deceive, to steal, to seize people and sell them into slavery - is this fair?" - "Of course, it's not fair!" - “Well, if the commander, having repelled the attack of the enemies, captures the prisoners and sells them into slavery, will this also be unfair?” - "No, perhaps that is fair." - "And if he plunders and devastates their land?" - "It's also fair." - "And if he deceives them with military tricks?" “That's also fair. Yes, perhaps I told you inaccurately: both lying, and deceit, and theft are fair in relation to enemies, but unfair in relation to friends.

"Wonderful! Now I think I'm starting to understand. But tell me this, Euthydemus: if the commander sees that his soldiers are discouraged, and lies to them that allies are approaching them, and this encourages them, will such a lie be unfair? - "No, perhaps that is fair." - “And if the son needs medicine, but he does not want to take it, and the father deceives him into food, and the son recovers, will such a deception be unfair?” - "No, also fair." “And if someone, seeing a friend in despair and fearing that he would lay hands on himself, steals or takes away his sword and dagger, what can I say about such theft?” “And that's fair. Yes, Socrates, it turns out that again I told you inaccurately; it was necessary to say: both lies, and deceit, and theft - this is fair in relation to enemies, but fair in relation to friends when it is done for their benefit, and unfair when it is done for them to harm.

“Very well, Evfidem; now I see that before I can recognize justice, I must learn to recognize good and evil. But do you know that, of course?" - “I think I know, Socrates; although for some reason I'm not so sure about it anymore. - "So what is it?" - “Well, for example, health is good, and illness is evil; food or drink that leads to health is good, and that leads to illness is evil.” - “Very well, I understood about food and drink; but then, perhaps, it would be more correct to say about health in the same way: when it leads to good, then it is good, and when it leads to evil, then it is evil? - "What are you, Socrates, but when can health be evil?" - “But, for example, an unholy war began and, of course, ended in defeat; the healthy went to war and perished, while the sick remained at home and survived; what was health here - good or evil?

“Yes, I see, Socrates, that my example is unsuccessful. But, perhaps, we can already say that the mind is a blessing! - “Is it always? Here, the Persian king often demands smart and skilled artisans from Greek cities to his court, keeps them with him and does not let them into his homeland; Is their mind good for them?" - "Then - beauty, strength, wealth, glory!" - “But the beautiful ones are more often attacked by slave traders, because beautiful slaves are valued more; the strong often take on a task that exceeds their strength, and get into trouble; the rich are pampered, fall prey to intrigues, and perish; fame always arouses envy, and this also causes a lot of evil.

“Well, if that’s the case,” said Euthydemus despondently, “then I don’t even know what I should pray to the gods about.” - "Do not worry! It just means that you still don't know what you want to tell the people about. But do you know the people yourself?” “I think I do, Socrates.” - “Who is the people made of?” - From the poor and the rich. - "And who do you call poor and rich?" “The poor are those who do not have enough to live on, and the rich are those who have everything in abundance and beyond.” “But doesn’t it happen that the poor man can do very well with his small means, and the rich man is not enough of any wealth?” - “Right, it happens! There are even tyrants who lack their entire treasury and need illegal requisitions. - “So what? Shall we classify these tyrants among the poor, and the economic poor among the rich?” - “No, it’s better not to, Socrates; I see that here I, it turns out, know nothing.

“Don't despair! You will still think about the people, but you, of course, have thought about yourself and your future fellow speakers, and more than once. So tell me this: after all, there are such bad orators who deceive the people to their detriment. Some do it unintentionally, and some even on purpose. Which ones are better and which ones are worse? - "I think, Socrates, that intentional deceivers are much worse and more unjust than unintentional ones." - “Tell me: if one person deliberately reads and writes with errors, and the other not on purpose, then which one of them is more literate?” - "Probably the one that is on purpose: after all, if he wants, he can write without errors." “But doesn’t it mean that an intentional deceiver is better and more just than an unintentional one: after all, if he wants, he will be able to speak with the people without deception!” “Don’t, Socrates, don’t tell me that, even without you I now see that I don’t know anything and it would be better for me to sit and be silent!”

Romans. justice is right

The Romans were also concerned with the problem of justice. Although Rome began as a small settlement, it quickly grew into a huge state that dominates the entire Mediterranean. The Greek logic of polis justice did not work very well here. Too many people, too many provinces, too many interactions.

Law helped the Romans cope with the idea of ​​justice. A rebuilt and constantly being built up system of laws to which all the citizens of Rome obeyed. Cicero wrote that the state is a community of people united by common interests and agreement in relation to laws.

The legal system combined the interests of society, and the interests of specific people, and the interests of Rome as a state. All this has been described and codified.

Hence the law as the initial logic of justice. What is right is what is right. And justice is realized through the possession of the right, through the opportunity to be the object of the right.

"Don't touch me, I'm a Roman citizen!" - the man included in the system of Roman law proudly exclaimed, and those who wanted to harm him understood that all the power of the empire would fall upon them.

Christian logic of justice or Everything has become more complicated again

« New Testament” Again, everything is a little confused.

First, he set the absolute coordinates of justice. The Last Judgment is coming. Only there will true justice be revealed, and only this justice matters.

Secondly, your good deeds and a just life here on earth can somehow affect the very decision of the Supreme Court. But these deeds and a just life must be an act of our free will.

Thirdly, the requirement to love your neighbor as yourself, declared by Christ as the main moral value of Christianity, is still something more than just a requirement to try not to harm or to have a disposition for the good. The Christian ideal presupposes the need to perceive the other as oneself.

And, finally, the New Testament abolished the division of people into friends and foes, worthy and unworthy, those whose destiny is to be a master, and those whose destiny is to be a slave: “In the image of Him who created him, where there is neither Greek nor Jew , no circumcision, no uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free, but all and in all Christ ”(Epistle to the Colossians of the Holy Apostle Paul, 3.8)

Based on the logic of the New Testament, now all people should be perceived as equal subjects of justice. And the same criteria of justice must be applied to all. And the principle of "love of one's neighbor" requires more from justice than simply following the formal criteria of the good. The criteria of justice cease to be the same, for everyone they turn out to be their own. And then there is the Last Judgment in the inevitable future.

In general, all this was too difficult, it required too much mental and social effort. Fortunately, religious logic itself made it possible to perceive the world in the traditional paradigm of justice. Following the traditions and prescriptions of the church leads more reliably to the kingdom of heaven, for this is both good deeds and a just life. And all these acts of good free will can be omitted. We are Christians and believe in Christ (no matter what he says), and those who do not believe - our criteria of justice do not fit those. As a result, Christians, when necessary, justified the justice of any wars and any slavery no worse than Aristotle.

However, what was said in the New Testament somehow still exerted its influence. And on the religious consciousness, and on the whole European culture.

Don't do what you don't want to be done to you

“Therefore, whatever you want people to do to you, do also to them, for this is the law and the prophets” (Matt. 7:12). These words of Christ from the Sermon on the Mount are one of the formulations of a universal moral maxim. Approximately the same formula is found in Confucius, in the Upanishads and in general in many places.

And it was this formula that became the starting point for thinking about justice in the Age of Enlightenment. The world has become more complicated, people who speak different languages, believers in different ways and in different ways, engaged in different things, more and more actively collided with each other. Practical reason demanded a logical and consistent formula of justice. And found it in a moral maxim.

It is easy to see that this maxim has at least two very different variants.

"Don't do what you don't want to be done to you."

"Do as you would like to be treated."

The first was called the principle of justice, the second - the principle of mercy. The combination of these two principles solved the problem of who exactly should be considered the neighbor who should be loved (in the Sermon on the Mount, it is the second option). And the first principle provided grounds for a clear justification of just actions.

All these reflections were summed up and brought out into the categorical imperative by Kant. However, he had to (as the consistent logic of his reflections demanded) slightly change the wording: “Act in such a way that the maxim of your will could be a universal law.” The author of the famous “Critic” has another option: “Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, both in your own person and in the person of everyone else, as well as an end, and never treat it only as a means.”

How Marx put everything in its place and justified the struggle for justice

But with this formula, in any of its formulations, there were big problems. Especially if you go beyond the Christian idea of ​​the highest (divine) good and the highest judge. But what if others do just the way you would not want them to do to you? What do you do if you are being treated unfairly?

And further. People are very different, "what is great for a Russian is a karachun for a German." Some passionately want to see the holy cross on Hagia Sophia in Constantinople, while others don’t care at all, for some it’s vital to control the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles, and for others it’s important to find somewhere half a shot of vodka.

And then Karl Marx helped everyone. He explained everything. The world is divided into warring (no, no longer cities like Aristotle), but classes. Some classes are oppressed, while others are oppressive. Everything the oppressors do is unfair. Everything that the oppressed do is just. Especially if these oppressed are the proletariat. Because science has proven that it is the proletariat that is the highest class, behind which the future belongs, and which represents the objectively good majority and the logic of progress.

So:

First, there is no justice for all.

Secondly, what is done for the benefit of the majority is just.

Thirdly, that which is objective, immutable (cf. the objective laws of the universe among the Greeks) and progressive is just.

And finally, it is fair that for the benefit of the oppressed, and therefore requires a struggle. Requires the suppression of those who are against, those who oppress and stand in the way of progress

Actually, Marxism became for many years the main logic of the struggle for justice. Yes, and still is. True, with one important change. Justice for the majority has fallen out of modern Marxist logic.

The American philosopher John Rawls created the theory of "just inequality", which is based on "equality of access to fundamental rights and freedoms" and "priority in access to any opportunities for those who have less of these opportunities." There was nothing Marxist in Rawls' logic, rather the opposite - this is an obviously anti-Marxist doctrine. However, it was precisely the combination of the Rawls formula and the Marxist approach that created the modern foundations for the struggle for justice to annihilate

The Marxist logic of the struggle for justice is based on the right of the oppressed. Marx reasoned in the category of large groups and global processes, and the oppressed was the proletariat - the logic of progress was destined to be the majority. But if we shift the focus a little, then in the place of the proletariat there may be any other oppressed marginal groups, which are not necessarily the majority. And so, from Marx's desire to achieve justice for all, the struggle for the rights of any minorities grows, turning the ideas of the German from the century before last inside out.

About how many Nazis, as well as soldiers and officers of the armies who fought on the side of Germany, were captured, historians still argue. Little is known about their life in the Soviet rear.

Orava had the right

According to official data, during the years of the war, 3 million 486 thousand military personnel fell into the hands of the Red Army. German Wehrmacht, SS troops, as well as citizens of countries that fought in alliance with the Third Reich.

Of course, such a horde had to be placed somewhere. Already in 1941, through the efforts of employees of the Main Directorate for Prisoners of War and Internees (GUPVI) of the NKVD of the USSR, camps began to be created where former soldiers and officers of the German and Hitler-allied armies were kept. In total, there were over 300 such institutions. As a rule, they were small and accommodated from 100 to 3-4 thousand people. Some camps existed for a year or more, others for only a few months.

They were located in various parts of the rear area. Soviet Union- in the Moscow region, Kazakhstan, Siberia, on Far East, in Uzbekistan, Leningrad, Voronezh, Tambov, Gorky, Chelyabinsk regions, Udmurtia, Tatarstan, Armenia, Georgia and other places. As the occupied regions and republics were liberated, prisoner-of-war camps were built in Ukraine, the Baltic States, Belarus, Moldova, and Crimea.

The former conquerors lived in conditions that were new to them, in general, tolerantly, if we compare the Soviet prisoner of war camps with those of the Nazis.

The Germans and their allies received 400 g of bread per day (after 1943 this rate increased to 600-700 g), 100 g of fish, 100 g of cereals, 500 g of vegetables and potatoes, 20 g of sugar, 30 g of salt, and also a little flour, tea, vegetable oil, vinegar, pepper. Generals, as well as soldiers with dystrophy, had a richer daily ration.

The length of the working day of the prisoners was 8 hours. According to the circular of the NKVD of the USSR of August 25, 1942, they were entitled to a small allowance. Ordinary and junior commanders were paid 7 rubles a month, officers - 10, colonels - 15, generals - 30 rubles. Prisoners of war who worked in normalized jobs were given additional amounts depending on the output. Overfulfilling the norms was supposed to be 50 rubles a month. Brigadiers received the same additional money. With excellent work, the amount of their remuneration could grow to 100 rubles. Money exceeding the permitted norms, prisoners of war could keep in savings banks. By the way, they had the right to receive money transfers and parcels from their homeland, they could receive 1 letter per month and send an unlimited number of letters.

In addition, they were given free soap. If the clothes were in a deplorable state, then the prisoners received padded jackets, trousers, warm hats, boots and footcloths for free.

The disarmed soldiers of the armies of the Nazi bloc worked in the Soviet rear where there were not enough workers. The prisoners could be seen at the logging site in the taiga, on the collective farm fields, at the machines, at construction sites.

There were also inconveniences. For example, officers and generals were forbidden to have batmen.

From Stalingrad to Yelabuga

The Krasnogorsk operational camp contained important people who were captured, for example, Field Marshal Paulus. Then he "moved" to Suzdal. Other well-known Nazi military leaders who were captured near Stalingrad were also sent to Krasnogorsk - Generals Schmidt, Pfeiffer, Korfes, Colonel Adam. But the main part of the German officers captured in the Stalingrad "cauldron", after Krasnogorsk, was sent to Yelabuga, where camp N 97 was waiting for them.

The political departments of many prisoner-of-war camps reminded Soviet citizens who guarded there, worked as communications technicians, electricians, and cooks that the Hague Convention on Prisoners of War must be observed. Therefore, the attitude of Soviet citizens towards them in most cases was more or less correct.

Saboteurs and pests

The bulk of the prisoners of war behaved in the camps in a disciplined manner, labor standards were sometimes overfulfilled.

Although there were no large-scale uprisings, there were incidents in the form of sabotage, conspiracies, and escapes. In camp N 75, which was located near the village of Ryabovo in Udmurtia, the prisoner of war Menzak shied away from work, feigned. At the same time, doctors recognized him as fit for work. Menzac tried to flee, but was detained. He did not want to put up with his situation, cut off his left hand, then deliberately delayed the treatment. As a result, he was transferred to a military tribunal. The most inveterate Nazis were sent to a special camp in Vorkuta. The same fate befell Menzac.

Prisoner of war camp N 207, located in the Krasnokamsk region, was one of the last to be disbanded in the Urals. It lasted until the end of 1949. There were still prisoners of war in it, whose repatriation was delayed due to the fact that they were suspected of preparing sabotage, atrocities in the occupied territories, connections with the Gestapo, SS, SD, Abwehr and other Nazi organizations. Therefore, in October 1949, commissions were created in the camps of the GUPVI, which identified among the prisoners those who were engaged in sabotage, were involved in mass executions, executions, and torture. One of these commissions also worked in the Krasnokamsk camp. After checking, some of the prisoners were sent home, and the rest were tried by the Military Tribunal.

Fears about committed Nazis ready to prepare sabotage and other crimes were not unfounded. Obersturmführer Hermann Fritz, who was held in Berezniki camp N 366, stated during interrogation that as early as May 7, 1945, a special order had been issued for the SS division "Dead Head": in case of capture, all officers had to "organize sabotage, arrange sabotage, conduct espionage intelligence work and do as much damage as possible."

Within the limits of the Tatar Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, camp No. 119 was located in the Zelenodolsk region. Roman prisoners of war were also kept here. In the autumn of 1946, an incident happened in the camp, which became known in Moscow. Former Romanian lieutenant Champaeru publicly inflicted several blows with a board to his fellow countryman for signing an appeal to the well-known Romanian anti-fascist Petru Groza. Champaeru said that he would deal with other prisoners of war who signed this document. This case was mentioned in the Directive of the NKVD of the USSR signed on October 22, 1946 "On the identified fascist groups that counteract anti-fascist work among prisoners of war."

But such sentiments did not receive mass support among the prisoners, the last of whom left the USSR in 1956.

By the way

From 1943 to 1948, 11,403 prisoners of war escaped in the entire GUPVI system of the NKVD of the USSR. Of these, 10,445 people were detained. 3% remained uncaptured.

During the arrest, 292 people were killed.

During the war years, the Red Army surrendered about 200 generals. Such well-known Nazi commanders as Field Marshals Friedrich Paulus and Ludwig Kleist, SS Brigadeführer Fritz Panzinger, and General of Artillery Helmut Weidling ended up in Soviet captivity.

Most of the captured German generals were repatriated by mid-1956 and returned to Germany.

In Soviet captivity, in addition to German soldiers and officers, a considerable number were representatives of Hitler's allied armies and SS volunteer units - Austrians, Finns, Hungarians, Italians, Romanians, Slovaks, Croats, Spaniards, Czechs, Swedes, Norwegians, Danes, French, Poles, Dutch , Flemings, Walloons and others.

The topic of German prisoners of war was considered delicate for a very long time and was shrouded in obscurity for ideological reasons. Most of all, German historians have been and are engaged in it. In Germany, the so-called "Series of Prisoner of War Tales" ("Reihe Kriegsgefangenenberichte") is published, published by unofficial persons at their own expense. A joint analysis of domestic and foreign archival documents carried out over the past decades makes it possible to shed light on many events of those years.

GUPVI (Main Directorate for Prisoners of War and Internees of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR) never kept a personal record of prisoners of war. At army posts and camps, counting the number of people was done very poorly, and the movement of prisoners from camp to camp made the task difficult. It is known that at the beginning of 1942 the number of German prisoners of war was only about 9,000 people. For the first time, a huge number of Germans (more than 100,000 soldiers and officers) were captured at the end of the Battle of Stalingrad. Remembering the atrocities of the Nazis, they did not stand on ceremony with them. A huge crowd of naked, sick and emaciated people made winter crossings of several tens of kilometers a day, spent the night in the open and ate almost nothing. All this led to the fact that no more than 6,000 people remained alive at the time of the end of the war. In total, according to domestic official statistics, 2,389,560 German soldiers were taken prisoner, of which 356,678 people died. But according to other (German) sources, at least three million Germans turned out to be in Soviet captivity, of which one million prisoners died.

A column of German prisoners of war on the march somewhere on the Eastern Front

The Soviet Union was divided into 15 economic regions. In twelve of them, hundreds of prisoner-of-war camps were created on the principle of the Gulag. During the war, their situation was especially difficult. There were interruptions in the food supply, medical care remained at a low level due to a lack of qualified doctors. Household arrangements in the camps were extremely unsatisfactory. The prisoners were housed in unfinished buildings. Cold, tightness and dirt were commonplace. The mortality rate reached 70%. It was only in the post-war years that these figures were reduced. In the norms established by the order of the NKVD of the USSR, for each prisoner of war, 100 grams of fish, 25 grams of meat and 700 grams of bread were supposed. In practice, they are rarely followed. A lot of crimes of the security service were noted, ranging from theft of food to non-issuance of water.

Herbert Bamberg, a German soldier who was a prisoner near Ulyanovsk, wrote in his memoirs: “In that camp, prisoners were fed only once a day with a liter of soup, a ladle of millet porridge and a quarter of bread. I agree that the local population of Ulyanovsk, most likely, was also starving.”

Often, if the required type of product was not available, then it was replaced with bread. For example, 50 grams of meat was equal to 150 grams of bread, 120 grams of cereal - 200 grams of bread.

Each nationality, in accordance with traditions, has its own creative hobbies. In order to survive, the Germans organized theater circles, choirs, and literary groups. In the camps, it was allowed to read newspapers and play non-gambling games. Many prisoners made chess, cigarette cases, caskets, toys and various furniture.

During the war years, despite the twelve-hour working day, the labor of German prisoners of war did not play a big role in national economy USSR due to poor organization of labor. In the postwar years, the Germans were involved in the restoration of factories destroyed during the war, railways, dams and ports. They restored old and built new houses in many cities of our Motherland. For example, with their help, the main building of Moscow State University in Moscow was built. In Yekaterinburg, entire districts were built by the hands of prisoners of war. In addition, they were used in the construction of roads in hard-to-reach places, in coal mining, iron ore, uranium. Particular attention was paid to highly qualified specialists in various fields knowledge, doctors of sciences, engineers. As a result of their activities, many important rationalization proposals were introduced.
Despite the fact that Stalin did not recognize the Geneva Convention for the Treatment of Prisoners of War of 1864, there was an order in the USSR to save the lives of German soldiers. There is no doubt that they were treated much more humanely than the Soviet people who ended up in Germany.
Captivity for Wehrmacht soldiers brought a strong disappointment in Nazi ideals, crushed the old positions in life, brought uncertainty about the future. Along with the drop in living standards, this turned out to be a strong test of personal human qualities. It was not the strongest in body and spirit that survived, but those who learned to walk over the corpses of others.

Heinrich Eichenberg wrote: “In general, the problem of the stomach was above all else, soul and body were sold for a bowl of soup or a piece of bread. Hunger corrupted people, corrupted them and turned them into beasts. Stealing food from their own comrades has become commonplace.

Any non-official relationship between Soviet people and prisoners was regarded as a betrayal. Soviet propaganda for a long time and stubbornly exposed all Germans as beasts in human form, developing an extremely hostile attitude towards them.

A column of German prisoners of war is being led through the streets of Kyiv. Throughout the journey, the column is being watched by residents of the city and servicemen free from service (on the right)

According to the memoirs of one prisoner of war: “During a working order in one village, one elderly woman did not believe me that I was a German. She told me: “What kind of Germans are you? You don't have horns!"

Along with the soldiers and officers of the German army, there were also representatives of the army elite of the Third Reich - German generals. The first 32 generals, led by the commander of the sixth army, Friedrich Paulus, were captured in the winter of 1942-1943 straight from Stalingrad. In total, 376 German generals were in Soviet captivity, of which 277 returned to their homeland, and 99 died (of which 18 generals were hanged as war criminals). There were no attempts to escape among the generals.

In 1943-1944, the GUPVI, together with the Main Political Directorate of the Red Army, carried out hard work to create anti-fascist organizations among prisoners of war. In June 1943, the Free Germany National Committee was formed. 38 people were included in its first composition. The absence of senior officers and generals caused many German prisoners of war to doubt the prestige and importance of the organization. Soon, the desire to join the SNO was announced by Major General Martin Lattmann (commander of the 389th Infantry Division), Major General Otto Korfes (commander of the 295th Infantry Division) and Lieutenant General Alexander von Daniels (commander of the 376th Infantry Division).

17 generals, led by Paulus, wrote back to them: “They want to make an appeal to the German people and to the German army, demanding the removal of the German leadership and the Nazi government. What the officers and generals who belong to the Soyuz are doing is treason. We deeply regret that they have taken this path. We no longer consider them our comrades, and we resolutely refuse them.

The instigator of the statement, Paulus, was placed in a special dacha in Dubrovo near Moscow, where he underwent psychological treatment. Hoping that Paulus would choose a heroic death in captivity, Hitler promoted him to field marshal, and on February 3, 1943 symbolically buried him as "who died a heroic death along with the heroic soldiers of the Sixth Army." Moscow, however, did not abandon attempts to involve Paulus in anti-fascist work. The "processing" of the general was carried out according to a special program developed by Kruglov and approved by Beria. A year later, Paulus openly announced the transition to anti-Hitler coalition. The main role in this was played by the victories of our army on the fronts and the “conspiracy of the generals” on July 20, 1944, when the Fuhrer, by a lucky chance, escaped death.

On August 8, 1944, when Field Marshal von Witzleben, a friend of Paulus, was hanged in Berlin, he openly declared on Freies Deutschland radio: “Recent events have made the continuation of the war for Germany tantamount to a senseless sacrifice. For Germany, the war is lost. Germany must renounce Adolf Hitler and establish a new state power which will stop the war and create conditions for our people for further life and the establishment of peaceful, even friendly
relations with our current adversaries.

Subsequently, Paulus wrote: "It became clear to me: Hitler not only could not win the war, but should not win it, which would be in the interests of mankind and in the interests of the German people."

The return of German prisoners of war from Soviet captivity. The Germans arrived at the Friedland border transit camp

The field marshal's speech received the broadest response. The Paulus family was offered to renounce him, publicly condemn this act and change their surname. When they flatly refused to comply with the requirements, the son Alexander Paulus was imprisoned in the fortress-prison Kustrin, and his wife Helena Constance Paulus was imprisoned in the Dachau concentration camp. On August 14, 1944, Paulus officially joined the SNO and began active anti-Nazi activities. Despite requests to return him to his homeland, he ended up in the GDR only at the end of 1953.

From 1945 to 1949, more than one million sick and disabled prisoners of war were returned to their homeland. At the end of the forties, they stopped releasing captured Germans, and many were also given 25 years in the camps, declaring them war criminals. Before the allies, the government of the USSR explained this by the need to further restore the destroyed country. After a visit to our country by German Chancellor Adenauer in 1955, a Decree “On the early release and repatriation of German prisoners of war convicted of war crimes” was issued. After that, many Germans were able to return to their homes.

In the USSR, the topic of captivity of German soldiers and officers was actually banned from research. While Soviet historians they condemned the Nazis with might and main for their attitude towards Soviet prisoners of war, they did not even mention that during the war crimes against humanity were on both sides of the front.

In fairness, it should be noted that it is little known only in our country (by “us”, the author means not only Ukraine, but the entire “post-Soviet space”). In Germany itself, the study of this issue was approached with purely German thoroughness and pedantry. Back in 1957, a scientific commission was set up in Germany to study the history of German prisoners of war, which published, starting in 1959, 15 (!) plump volumes of the series “On the History of German Prisoners of War in World War II”, seven of which were devoted to history of German prisoners of war in Soviet camps.

But in the topic of captivity of German soldiers and officers was actually banned from research. While Soviet historians denounced the Nazis with might and main for their treatment of Soviet prisoners of war, they did not even mention that during the war, crimes against humanity were on both sides of the front.

Moreover, the only Soviet research on this topic (though published in Germany) was the work of Alexander Blank - the former translator of Field Marshal Friedrich Paulus during the latter's time in Soviet captivity - Die Deutschen Kriegsgefangenen in der UdSSR (published in Cologne in 1979). Her theses were later included in the book The Second Life of Field Marshal Paulus, published in Moscow in 1990.

Some statistics: how many were there?

In order to try to deal with the history of German prisoners of war, one should first of all answer the question about their number in. According to German sources, approximately 3.15 million Germans were captured in the Soviet Union, of which approximately 1.1-1.3 million did not survive the captivity. Soviet sources give a much lower figure. According to official statistics of the Directorate for Prisoners of War and Internees (September 19, 1939, it was organized as the Directorate for Prisoners of War and Internees (UPVI); from January 11

1945 - Main Directorate for Prisoners of War and Internees (GUPVI) of the USSR; from March 18, 1946 - the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR; from June 20, 1951 - again UPVI; On March 14, 1953, the UPVI was disbanded, and its functions were transferred to the Prison Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR) from June 22, 1941 to May 17, 1945, only 2,389,560 military personnel of German nationality were taken prisoner by Soviet troops, of which 376 were generals and admirals, 69,469 officers and 2,319,715 non-commissioned officers and soldiers. To this number should be added another 14.1 thousand people immediately placed (as war criminals) in the special camps of the NKVD, not included in the UPVI / GUPVI system, from 57 to 93.9 thousand (there are different figures) German prisoners of war who died even before they got into the UPVI / GUPVI system, and 600 thousand - released right at the front, without being transferred to camps - an important caveat, since they are usually not included in the general statistics on the number of prisoners of war in the USSR.

The problem, however, is that these figures do not indicate the number of Wehrmacht and SS soldiers taken prisoner by the Soviet side. UPVI / GUPVI kept records of prisoners of war not by their citizenship or belonging to the armed forces of any country, but by their nationality, in some cases, and ethnicity, in others (see table). As a first approximation, the number of Wehrmacht and SS troops who fell into Soviet captivity is 2,638,679 people, and together with 14.1 thousand war criminals, 93.9 thousand who did not live to be placed in the camp, and 600 thousand released, past the camp, gives a figure of 3,346,679 people. - which is even somewhat higher than the estimate of German historians.

It should also be noted that German prisoners of war actively tried to “disguise themselves” among other nationalities - as of May 1950, such “camouflaged captured Germans”, according to official Soviet data, were identified among prisoners of war of other nationalities 58,103 people.

At the same time, it should be noted that the summation of "national strings" does not give an accurate picture. The reason is simple: the statistics (even those intended purely for internal needs) of the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs itself are lame. Some certificates of this department contradict others: for example, in the certificate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of 1956, the number of prisoners of German nationality taken into account was 1,117 people. less than was recorded "on fresh tracks" in 1945. Where these people went is unclear.

But this is a minor discrepancy. There are other documents in the archives, showing both the government-level manipulation of data on the number of prisoners of war, and a much larger inconsistency in reporting.

Example: USSR Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov wrote in a letter to Stalin dated March 12, 1947 that “there are 988,500 German prisoners of war in the Soviet Union, 785,975 people have been released from captivity to date. (that is, in total at that time there were 1,774,475 living prisoners of war of German nationality, including those already released - out of 2,389,560 people; how does this compare with the fact that out of the number of German prisoners of war in the UPVI / GUPVI system, it seems that only 356 died 768 people - again, it is not clear. - S.G.). We consider it possible to announce the figure of German prisoners of war in the Soviet Union, with a reduction of about 10%, given their increased mortality.

But... in a TASS statement dated March 15, 1947, it was said that “at present, 890,532 German prisoners of war remain on the territory of the Soviet Union; since the surrender of Germany, 1,003,974 German prisoners of war have been released from captivity and returned from the USSR to Germany ”(that is, it was announced that 218 thousand more prisoners of war were released than they were released according to Molotov’s note; where did this figure come from and what was intended to hide this figure - also unclear - S.G.). And in November 1948, the leadership of the GUPVI proposed to the First Deputy Minister of the Interior of the USSR, Colonel-General Ivan Serov, "to write off from the general operational and statistical records 100,025 released German prisoners of war", allegedly ... registered twice.

In general, historians believe that the repatriation of at least 200 thousand Germans "was not properly documented by the Soviet side." That is, it may mean that these prisoners did not exist, and then (this is more likely) that they died in captivity, and then (this is even more likely) that there is a combination of these options. And this one short review, apparently only indicates that the statistical aspects of the history of German prisoners of war in the USSR not only have not yet been closed, but probably will never be completely closed.

"The Hague-Geneva Question"

A little about the international legal status of prisoners of war. One of the debatable issues in the history of Soviet prisoners of war in Germany and German prisoners of war in the USSR is the question of the obligatory / optional implementation of the Hague Convention "On the Laws and Customs of War on Land" dated October 18, 1907 and the Geneva Convention "On the Maintenance of Prisoners of War" dated October 18, 1907. June 27, 1929

It comes to the point that, intentionally or out of ignorance, they confuse the already mentioned Geneva Convention "On the Maintenance of Prisoners of War" of 06/27/1929 with the Geneva Convention - also of 06/27/1929 - "On improving the lot of the wounded, sick and injured shipwreck, from the armed forces at sea." Moreover, if the USSR did not sign the first of the mentioned Geneva Conventions, then it joined the second in 1931. Therefore, the author will try to clarify this issue.

The prerequisites for the mandatory implementation of the Hague Convention "On the Laws and Customs of War on Land" are:

1) signing and ratification by the contracting parties of this convention;

2) participation in the land war only of the parties that are contracting parties (“clausula si omnes clause” - “on universal participation”).

The prerequisites for the obligatory execution of the Geneva Convention "On the Maintenance of Prisoners of War" of 1929 were only the signing and ratification of this convention by the contracting parties. Her Art. Article 82 stated: “The provisions of this convention shall be observed by the high contracting parties in all circumstances. If, in case of war, one of the belligerents is not a party to the convention, nevertheless, the provisions of such remain binding between all the belligerents who have signed the convention.

Thus, the articles of this Convention not only do not contain clausula si omnes, but also specifically stipulate the situation when the belligerent powers C1 and C2 are parties to the Convention, and then the C3 power, which is not a party to the Convention, enters the war. In such a situation, there is no longer a formal possibility of non-compliance with this Convention by the C1 and C2 powers between them. Should the C1 and C2 powers comply with the Convention in relation to the C3 power - directly from Art. 82 should not.

The results of such a "legal vacuum" were not slow to tell. The conditions established first by Germany for Soviet prisoners, and then by the USSR in relation to prisoners of war from among the Wehrmacht and SS troops, as well as the armed forces of Germany's allied states, could not be called human even in the first approximation.

So, the Germans initially considered it sufficient for the prisoners to live in dugouts and eat mainly “Russian bread”, made according to the recipe invented by the Germans: half from sugar beet peelings, half from cellulose flour, flour from leaves or straw. It is not surprising that in the winter of 1941-42. these conditions led to the mass death of Soviet prisoners of war, aggravated by an epidemic of typhus.

According to the Directorate for Prisoner of War Affairs of the High Command of the German Armed Forces (OKW), by May 1, 1944. total number exterminated Soviet prisoners of war reached 3.291 million people, of which: 1.981 million people died in the camps, 1.03 million people were shot and killed while trying to escape, 280 thousand people died on the way. (most of the victims occurred in June 1941 - January 1942 - then more than 2.4 million prisoners died). For comparison: in just 1941-1945. the Germans captured (there are different data, but here is the figure considered by the author to be the most reliable) 6.206 million Soviet prisoners of war.

Initially, the conditions of detention of German prisoners of war in the USSR were just as difficult. Although, of course, there were fewer victims among them. But only for one reason - there were fewer of them. For example, as of May 1, 1943, only 292,630 military personnel of the German and allied armies fell into Soviet captivity. Of these, 196,944 people died by the same time.

In conclusion of this chapter, I note that as early as July 1, 1941, the government of the USSR approved the "Regulations on prisoners of war." Prisoners of war were guaranteed treatment appropriate to their status, the provision of medical care on an equal footing with Soviet military personnel, the possibility of correspondence with relatives and receiving parcels.

Even money transfers were formally allowed. However, Moscow, widely using the "Regulations on prisoners of war" for propaganda aimed at the Wehrmacht, was in no hurry to implement it. In particular, the USSR refused to exchange lists of prisoners of war through the International Red Cross, which was a fundamental condition for them to receive assistance from their homeland. And in December 1943, the Soviet Union broke off all contacts with this organization altogether.

Long Russian captivity: stages of liberation

German prisoners of war returning home, April 1, 1949. Ethat photo was provided by Wikimedia Commons German Federal Archives (Deutsches Bundesarchive)

August 13, 1945 State Committee Defense (GKO) of the USSR issued a decree "On the release and return to their homeland of 708 thousand prisoners of war private and non-commissioned officers". The number of prisoners of war to be sent home included only the disabled and other disabled prisoners.

The Romanians were the first to be sent home. On September 11, 1945, in pursuance of the GKO resolution, it was ordered to release from the camps of the GUPVI of the NKVD of the USSR 40 thousand Romanians of war of ordinary and non-commissioned officers "according to the attached requisition for regions and camps", "to start sending the released Romanians of war from September 15, 1945 ... and finish no later than October 10, 1945". But two days later, a second document appears, according to which soldiers and non-commissioned officers of a number of nationalities are to be sent home:

a) all prisoners of war, regardless of physical condition, of the following nationalities: Poles, French, Czechoslovaks, Yugoslavs, Italians, Swedes, Norwegians, Swiss, Luxembourgers, Americans, English, Belgians, Dutch, Danes, Bulgarians and Greeks;

b) sick prisoners of war, regardless of nationality, except for acutely contagious patients, except for Spaniards and Turks, as well as except for participants in atrocities and persons who served in the SS, SD, SA and Gestapo troops;

c) prisoners of war Germans, Austrians, Hungarians and Romanians - only disabled and weakened.

At the same time, “they are not subject to release ... participants in atrocities and persons who served in the SS, SD, SA and Gestapo troops, regardless of their physical condition.”

The directive has not been fully implemented. In any case, such a conclusion can be drawn from the fact that prisoners of war of many nationalities mentioned in it were prescribed for release by order of the NKVD of January 8, 1946. According to it, Czechoslovaks, Yugoslavs, Italians, Dutch, Belgians, Danes, Swiss, Luxembourgers, Bulgarians, Turks, Norwegians, Swedes, Greeks, French, Americans and British.

At the same time, "persons who served in the troops of the SS, SA, SD, Gestapo, officers and members of other punitive bodies" are not subject to dispatch, but with one exception - "French prisoners of war are subject to dispatch without exception, including officers."

Finally, on October 18, 1946, an order appeared to repatriate to their homeland the officers and servicemen who served in the SS, SD and SA of the nationalities listed in the order of January 8, as well as all Finns, Brazilians, Canadians, Portuguese, Abyssinians, Albanians, Argentines and Syrians. In addition, on November 28, 1946, 5,000 Austrian prisoners were ordered to be released.

But let's get back from foreign prisoners from among the Wehrmacht and Waffen SS soldiers to the Germans themselves. As of October 1946, 1,354,759 German prisoners of war remained in the GUPVI camps, special hospitals of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and working battalions of the Ministry of the Armed Forces of the USSR, including: generals - 352, officers - 74,506 people, non-commissioned officers and privates - 1,279 901 people

This number has declined rather slowly. For example, in pursuance of the decree of the Council of Ministers of the USSR of May 16, 1947 “On the dispatch to Germany of disabled prisoners of war of the former German army and interned Germans” it was ordered (May 20): “to release in 1947 from the camps of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, special hospitals, worker battalions of the Ministry of the Armed Forces and battalions for internees and send to Germany 100 thousand disabled prisoners of war of the former German army (Germans) and 13 thousand disabled German internees. At the same time, some of the officers were also subject to release - in the rank up to and including the captain. The following were not exempt:

a) prisoners of war - participants in atrocities who served in parts of the SS, SA, SD and Gestapo, and others who have relevant compromising materials, regardless of their physical condition;

b) interned and arrested groups "B" (this group included Germans arrested by the Soviet authorities in Germany during and after the war, in respect of whom there were reasons to believe that they were involved in crimes against the USSR or Soviet citizens in the occupied territories);

c) non-transportable patients.

A little earlier, the captured Germans were required to remove shoulder straps, cockades, awards and emblems, and the captured junior officers were equated with soldiers (although they left the officer's ration), forcing them to work on a par with the latter.

Nine days later, a directive from the Ministry of Internal Affairs was issued, ordering in May-September 1947 to send home a thousand anti-fascist Germans who had proven themselves to be excellent production workers. This dispatch was of a propaganda nature: it was ordered to widely inform the prisoners of all camps about it, emphasizing the labor achievements of the liberated. In June 1947, a new directive of the Ministry of Internal Affairs followed to send 500 captured Germans of anti-fascist sentiments to Germany according to personal lists. And by order from

On August 11, 1947, an order was given to release all captured Austrians from August to December, with the exception of generals, senior officers and SS men, members of the SA, employees of the SD and the Gestapo, as well as persons under criminal investigation. Non-transportable patients were not subject to dispatch. By order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of October 15, another 100,000 captured Germans are repatriated - these are mainly transportable sick and disabled military personnel from privates to captains inclusive.

By the end of 1947, it was possible to determine with sufficient clarity the policy of the USSR in the matter of liberating prisoners - to return prisoners to their homeland gradually and precisely those categories that could least influence the development of political life in Germany and other countries that fought against the USSR in a direction undesirable for the Soviet Union.

The sick will be more concerned with their health than with politics; and soldiers, non-commissioned officers and junior officers can influence events at home much less than generals and senior officers. As the pro-Soviet government became established and strengthened in the eastern part of Germany, the flow of returned prisoners increased.

The order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of February 27, 1948 determined the procedure and deadline for sending the next 300 thousand German prisoners to their homeland. First of all, all weakened soldiers, non-commissioned officers and junior officers, sick and disabled senior officers were subject to release. Also, captured soldiers, non-commissioned officers and junior officers over 50 years old and senior officers over 60 years old were released.

Further, healthy (suitable for heavy and medium physical labor) soldiers, non-commissioned officers and junior officers under 50 years old, healthy senior officers under 60 years old, generals and admirals are kept in captivity. In addition, military members of the SS, members of the SA, Gestapo officers, as well as German prisoners of war sentenced to punishment for military or ordinary crimes, for which criminal cases were being conducted, and non-transportable patients, remained in captivity.

In total, by the end of 1949, 430,670 German military personnel remained in Soviet captivity (but German prisoners of war brought from the USSR to Eastern European countries for restoration work were detained). This was a clear violation of the obligations assumed by the USSR: in 1947, the fourth session of the Conference of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Great Britain, France, the USSR and the USA decided to complete by the end of 1948 the repatriation of prisoners of war located on the territory of the Allied Powers and other countries.

In the meantime, the German generals also began to be liberated. By order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of June 22, 1948, five generals of the Wehrmacht were released from captivity - Austrians by nationality. The next order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (dated September 3 of the same year) was six "correct" German generals (members of the National Committee "Free Germany" and the "Union of German Officers"). On February 23, 1949, the order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR No. 00176 was issued, which determined the timing and procedure for sending all German prisoners to their homeland during 1949. Military and criminal criminals, persons under investigation, generals and admirals, non-transportable patients were excluded from this list.

In the summer of 1949, armed guards were removed from the prisoner-of-war camps and self-guards were organized from prisoners (no weapons, only whistles and flags). A very curious document appears on November 28, 1949. This is the order of the Ministry of Internal Affairs No. 744, in which the Minister of the Interior, Colonel-General Sergey Kruglov, demands to put things in order in the registration of prisoners of war, since it was revealed that there is no proper registration and search for those who have fled, many prisoners of war are treated alone in civilian hospitals, independently settle and work at various enterprises, in institutions, including regime ones, state farms and collective farms, marry Soviet citizens, and in various ways evade registration as prisoners of war.

On May 5, 1950, TASS broadcast a message about the completion of the repatriation of German prisoners of war: according to official data, 13,546 people remained in the USSR. - 9,717 convicted, 3,815 under investigation and 14 sick prisoners of war.

The solution of the issue with them dragged on for more than five years. Only on September 10, 1955, negotiations began in Moscow between a delegation of the German government, headed by Federal Chancellor Konrad Adenauer, and representatives of the USSR government. The West German side asked for the release of 9,626 German citizens. The Soviet side called the convicted prisoners of war "war criminals".

Then the German delegation reported that without a solution to this issue it would be impossible to establish diplomatic relations between the USSR and the FRG. When discussing the issue of prisoners of war, the chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR Nikolai Bulganin made claims regarding the repatriation of Soviet citizens in West Germany. Adenauer recalled that these people settled in West Germany with the permission of the occupation authorities - the former allies of the USSR, and the German representatives did not yet have power. However, the federal government is ready to check their cases if the relevant documents are provided at its disposal. On September 12, 1955, negotiations on the issue of prisoners of war ended with a positive decision.

However, the concession of the USSR at these negotiations was not spontaneous. Anticipating the possibility of Adenauer raising the issue of prisoners of war, the Soviet government in the summer of 1955 created a commission to review the cases of convicted foreign citizens. On July 4, 1955, the commission decided to agree with the Central Committee of the Socialist Unity Party of Germany on the advisability of repatriating to the GDR and the FRG (in accordance with the place of residence before captivity) all convicted German citizens in the USSR, and it was proposed to release most of them from further serving their sentence, and those who committed grave crimes on the territory of the USSR should be handed over as war criminals to the authorities of the GDR and the FRG.

The First Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU, Nikita Khrushchev, in a secret letter to the First Secretary of the Central Committee of the SED, Walter Ulbricht, and the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the GDR, Otto Grotewohl, said that “the question of prisoners of war will undoubtedly be raised during negotiations with Adenauer on the establishment of diplomatic relations ...", and in the case successful completion negotiations with the Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, the authorities of the USSR intend to release 5,794 people from further serving their sentences. (that is, somewhat less than was eventually released).

On September 28, 1955, in connection with the establishment of diplomatic relations between the USSR and the FRG, the Decree of the Presidium of the USSR Armed Forces “On the early release of German citizens convicted by the judicial authorities of the USSR for the crimes they committed against the peoples of the Soviet Union during the war period” was signed. In 1955-1956. from places of detention in the USSR, 3,104 people were released early and repatriated to the GDR, 6,432 people to the FRG; 28 Germans were detained at the request of the KGB (their further fate not traced in the sources), four people were left in connection with the initiation of applications for the admission of Soviet citizenship. The release of prisoners of war was one of the first successes of the German government in the international arena.

The following year, 1957, the last of the captured Japanese returned to their homeland. This page called "captivity" for the soldiers of World War II, finally ended.