The Soviet sojourn of Citizen Oswald
Washington Post
By Richard E. Snyder, Published:January
31, 2012
http://www.washingto...jIgQ_story.html
What does an American diplomat do about a 20-year-old boy who wants to defect? After all the conspiracy theories and speculations, our man inMoscow
in 1959 now tells his side.
First publishedApril 1, 1979 .
“Oswald appeared at the office of Richard E. Snyder, the senior consular official. . . well and favorably known to me . . . ‘I had a traitor on my hands!’ said Snyder, ‘and his arrogance was unbelievable.’ — Henry J. Taylor, syndicated columnist
“Richard E. Snyder, who had joined theCIA
in June 1949 as an intelligence operative, then had served in Tokyo under State
Department cover and was now acting as senior consular official in Moscow,
recalled that Oswald banged his passport down on snyder’s desk.” — Edward J.
Epsstein, “Legend”
The House Select Committee on Assassinations has just released its findings on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Will we be the better off for it, as is the report destined to be new grist for the mills of the conspiracy industry? The above quotations from the recent literature illustrate why I pose the question: in each we are given not the author’s own opinion, to which he is entitled, but the author’s own facts, to which he is not entitled.
Washington Post
By Richard E. Snyder, Published:
http://www.washingto...jIgQ_story.html
What does an American diplomat do about a 20-year-old boy who wants to defect? After all the conspiracy theories and speculations, our man in
First published
“Oswald appeared at the office of Richard E. Snyder, the senior consular official. . . well and favorably known to me . . . ‘I had a traitor on my hands!’ said Snyder, ‘and his arrogance was unbelievable.’ — Henry J. Taylor, syndicated columnist
“Richard E. Snyder, who had joined the
The House Select Committee on Assassinations has just released its findings on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Will we be the better off for it, as is the report destined to be new grist for the mills of the conspiracy industry? The above quotations from the recent literature illustrate why I pose the question: in each we are given not the author’s own opinion, to which he is entitled, but the author’s own facts, to which he is not entitled.
In fact, columnist Taylor’s conversation is fanciful; I never met
Facts alone, for that matter, will not resolve all the questions about the at matter, will not resolve all the questions about the Kennedy assassination; for some questions there simply aren’t enough facts to go around. But where we have them, they can be helpful. My purpose in this article is to help the reader rescue facts from fiction in an important corner of the Oswald mystery-his sojourn as a defector in the
As the senior American consul in
The American Embassy in
“
Nothing in particular distinguished the young man before me from any proper American tourist, unless it was perhaps a certain determined pursing of his lips. I recall him as of medium height and slender build. A clean-shaven face was set off by neatly groomed dark-brown hair. By his own account he wore a light coat against the late October chill. A buttondown collar shirt and a pair of gloves which he carried reinforced an image of prim conventionality.
He had come, he said in an assertive tone, to give up his American citizenship. So saying, he thrust at me a note written in a scrawling hand on a sheet of stationery of
“I Lee Oswald do hereby request that my present citizenship in the
“I have entered the
“My request for citizenship is now pending before the Surprem (sic) Soviet of the
“I take these steps for political reasons. My request for the revoking of my American citizenship is made only after the longest and most serious considerations.
“I affirm that my allegiance is to the
Taking up his passport from where it lay on the edge of my desk, I read: Lee Harvey Oswald, shipping export agent, born
The young man’s demeanor was an invitation to confrontation. He let me know in a determined manner that he did not need or want advice, but desired only to renounce his citizenship and leave. When I offered to explain to him the provisions of law on the subject, Oswald declined, saying that he knew all about that and needed no lecture on the seriousness of the step. But the speaker’s high-pitched, reedy voice poised on coils of tension undercut the cocksureness that his words asserted.
Oswald was insistent at first that he would not answer questions about his personal affairs. But I would need, I said, at least his home address in order to prepare the document for his renunciation. His home addressm he reluctantly conceded, was
Gradually the defenses slipped. Oswald revealed that he had gotten out of the Marine Corps on early discharge in September on the grounds that his mother needed his supoort. But he had barely stopped by to see her before taking ship at
What were his reasons for wanting to live in the
Toward the end, probing for a new lead, I stumbled onto a revealing sensitivity on Oswald’s part. I asked what grade he had held in the Marine Corps. He was a corporal, he said. (In fact, Oswald had only made private first class during his three years of service, and had been demoted once from that.) Did he feel that he should have had a higher grade? His reply took me by surprise.
Oswald said that he had been a radar operator in the Marines.Then, almost casually, he added that he had told Soviet officials that as a Soviet citizen he would make known to them whatever he knew about the Marine Corps and his specialty in radar. He intimated that he might know something of special interest.
What caused Oswald to flaunt disloyalty in so gratuitous a manner can only be guessed at. My consular colleague John McVickar, a witness from his desk across the room, thought Oswald was trying to goad me. Or was he “getting even” with the Marine Corps for the corporal he never became? He might also, as it turned out later, have thought he was establishing credibility with Russian ears-in-the-wall, his offer to be made good “when I become a Soviet citizen.”
Was Oswsald, in fact, alluding to the then-secret U-2 operation? In May 1960, Francis Gary Powers was shot down over
As for Oswald’s request, I could not in good conscience make up on the spot the simple legal form by which he with my witness could renounce his American citizenship.
Although I judged that Oswald was competent and intelligent,
and appeared to be acting in a deliberate manner, still, he was only 20 and
about to make a serious mistake.
I also had an unsettling sense of deja-vu. Within a matter of weeks I had already handled two similar cases of American defectors. (The loaded word “defector” has become attached to all such persons; I won’t try to fight it.) One had already returned home; the other would do so about the same time Oswald did. These experiences had prompted me to write some thoughts on the handling of such cases in an informal letter to the officer in charge of Soviet affairs in the State Department. I proposed, in effect, to be guided in my handling of defector cases by a bit of Talleyrand’s dictum of “surtout pas de zele” (above all, no zeal). Among the humanitarian and political considerations in such cases was the naivete of the principals. A common characteristic of those who chose the
The thoughtful reply, which I received several weeks after the Oswald case had opened, had little to add to the subject, but sensibly left it up to me to “consider every case on its merits and follow through in accordance with your own best judgment, keeping, however, the Passport Office thoroughly informed so they can interpose other instructions if they think this is necessary.”
One limitation was imposed on me by law: I had no authority to refuse to accept a renunciation. I could, however, delay.
I first suggested to Oswald that he wait until he received Soviet citizenship; he would then automatically lose his American citizenship.By renouncing his citizenship now he would be left stateless. Failing in that approach, I told him I would have the legal form prepared if he came back on a workday when I had clerical help. It was by then afternoon on Saturday. Oswald would have at least a day and a half to think it over.
Oswald left frustrated over my refusal to take legal steps for his renunciation on the spot. I did not know that 10 days earlier Oswald had been admitted to
I placed Oswald’s passport in my file cabinet. Should he change his mind and decide to go home, he could have it back. If not, he would not be in a position to use it or dispose of it.
The youthful defector did not return on Monday. Instead, on Nov. 3 he wrote to Ambassador Llewellyn Thompson again requesting that his citizenship be “revoked,” and protesting the earlier refusal to do so. I answered the letter for the ambassador, assuring Oswald of his legal right to renounce his citizenship, and telling him he was free to come to the embassy any time during business hours. Privately I took his letter as a sign of waffling, a resort to rhetoric instead of action.
Finally, on Oct. 16 — he had been in
The
The
During five days I spent in
In April 1961, Oswald married Marina Prusakova, a pharmacist who lived with her aunt and uncle just up the street. From
It was not long, however, before Oswald found doubt and disillusionment setting in. He wrote in his after-the-fact “diary” of being homesick, of hating the long, cold winters. He chafed at the demands of a collective society and the restrictions of Soviet life. Once the novelty of the new life, the initial attention, the ego-satisfying sense of privilege faded, the expatriate faced the drabness and the monotony of an obscure existence in a land not his own. Familiarity bred discontent. The syndrome is a familiar one in the annals of
On
Reading Oswald’s letter, I could not help noticing the contrast between its concluding sentence —— with the close of his parting letter of
“My application requesting that I be considered for citizenship in the
Oswald’s letter was the first word I had had of him in the 15 months since my last news of him in
I also supplied Oswald’s
Oswald’s next letter must have been written immediately on receipt of my reply. It was postmarked
In it he said he could not come to Moscow for an interview because he was not allowed to leave Minsk without permission, and he suggested I put preliminary questions to him by mail:
“I understand that personal interviews undoubtedly make the work of the Embassy staff lighter than written correspondence, however in some cases other means must be employed,” he commented rather tartly.
Reading between the lines I surmised he might already have been rebuffed by the
My correspondence with Oswald, and I presumed his with me, was written with one eye to the Soviet authorities: all mail and telephone communications with foreign embassies in
Two months later, on May 24, a third Oswald letter arrived. Again he appeared to be bargaining with me:
“In regard to your letter of March 24, I understand the reasons for the necessity of a personal interview at the embassy, however, I wish to make it clear that I am asking not only for the right to return to the United States, but also for full guarantees that I shall not, under any circumstances, be persecuted (sic) for any act pertaining to this case . . .
“As for coming to Moscow, this would have to be on my own initiative and I do not care to take the risk of getting into an awkward situation unles I think it worthwhile. Also since my last letter I have gotten married.”
Overblown language, it had appeared to me, was a mask with which Oswald concealed his anxiety. I surmised that the “awkward situation” he feared was burning his bridges to the front and to the rear. By his correspondence with the embassy he had jeopardized his future in
I delayed replying to Oswald to give
Saturaday afternoon,
Two years as consul in
Oswald was waiting as I came out of the elevator into the gloomy, high-ceilinged box-like space that served as reception room both for the consular offices and for the chancery upstairs. Once again Oswald had chosen to arrive unannounced on a Saturday afternoon.The meeting was brief and matter-of-fact. There was little I could accomplish on the spot, and I wanted to refresh myself on the details of his case before getting down to matters of substance. He accepted amicably my invitation that he return during office hours.
Once Oswald had not come back on Monday and thereby had preserved his American citizenship. This Monday 20 months later he did come back to claim the fruit of his original omission. Awaiting him in the foyer was another person who stood to benefit from that omission, his wife Marina. Reassured by his reception on Saturday, he had called her to join him.
Apart from looking a little older, Oswald appeared not to have changed greatly. He sat in the same chair he had occupied on his first visit. My room, however, was smaller and more private as the result of a partition that now separated my office from the rest of the large room. The visitor’s boyish face was cleanshaven as before, the short dark hair neatly groomed but showing signs of thinning where part and forehead met on the left.
The most noticeable difference was the absence of the tension he had displayed at our first meeting. After 20 months of life in
I felt that these statements had the ring of sincerity. It took no act of faith to accept the objective reality behind Oswaldhs words. Furthermore, they were uttered without particular emotion and with no evident effort to impress me.
It was quickly evident that he was most worried about what might happen to him if he went home; would he face possible “lengthy imprisonment”? I presumed that what was on his mind was his statement to me about passing information to the Soviet authorities. As I noted earlier, I had queried
Neither leaving one’s country nor condemning it is an offense against law in the American democracy. As for Oswald’s statement of intent to pass on information, he did not dispute it when I reminded him of it. He denied, however, that he had passed on any information. As a matter of fact, he said, he had never been questioned by the Soviets about his life before coming to the
The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1950 provides that an American citizen may lose his nationality by committing certain acts. Those acts likely to apply in Oswald’s circumstances were (1) renouncing, (2) acquiring Soviet citizenship and (3) indicating formal allegiance to the Soviet state by such acts as voting, registering as a citizen, accepting employment in the government, and the like.
It was in the researching of this article that I first encountered conspiracy buffs’ fascination with Oswald’s recovery of his passport. Suspicions of dark doings abound.
Some writers like Epstein hint at
The facts are more prosaic. I had to determine from the facts available whether Oswald had done anything which could lead to loss of his American citizenship under the law. In such matters the consul’s writ does not run to the dispensing of rewards and punishments; the consul is to serve, not to judge.
As a first step in determining citizenhip status I had Oswald fill out a sworn questionnarie covering each of the expatriating acts specified in the law. (Oswald admitted to none of them.) I then questioned him in greater detail.
I knew that Oswald had not lost his citizenship by renunciation. This could only be done under law by formal declaration “before a diplomatic of consular officer . . . in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State.” It was that form which I had refused to make up for him on his first visit.
I was also satisfied that Oswald had not acquired Soviet citizenship. The fact that his Soviet identity document was of a type issued to foreigners was prima facie evidence that the Soviet government did not regard Oswald as a Soviet citizen. He had applied (and been turned down, it was later learned, but only accepting is an ex-patriating act).
Finally, my questioning of Oswald produced no evidence that he had done anything that might constitute a formal declaration of allegiance to the
Oswald was, I was sure, acutely aware of what was at stake in his replies to my questions. I had no reason to suppose that he would be unfailingly candid in his statements. I was bound to question him as thoroughly as I could, and to take official notice of anything he might tell me; beyond that I could not go.
Lee Harvey Oswald was, I concluded, still an American citizen. As my last official act as consul in
In returning the passport to Oswald I had acted contrary to an instruction from the Passport Office in
At one minute to
Lee Harvey Oswald was relegated to a forgotten corner of my mind until just before dawn of
Why, an acquaintance once asked me, did we let a guy like Oswald back into the country? The answer is that an American doesn’t need permission to return to his own country. Unlike some, the American state has no power to banish those it thinks unworthy.
But more important than the answer is the question itself;
it contains within it the germ of suspicion of quite ordinary things, a
suspicion which bedevils public understanding of Oswald the defector as
distinct from Oswald the assassin. Some suggest, for example, that much was
done to “facilitate” Oswald’s return. Nothing was, to my knowledge, beyond what
should be expected. True, I delayed acting on his renunciation. But I had done
that in similar cases, including one a few weeks before Oswald. Was advancing
him funds as was done later to help meet his transportation costs home a
special favor?
Consuls commonly do that all over the world; “worthiness” is
not a consideration.
But isn’t it suspicious, some ask, that the Russians let the Oswalds out? Actually, the Soviets had stepped up their granting of exit permits for persons with relatives abroad following Vice President Nixon’s visit in July 1959.Based on my experience I assumed that the couple would sooner or later get permission also.
But isn’t it suspicious, some ask, that the Russians let the Oswalds out? Actually, the Soviets had stepped up their granting of exit permits for persons with relatives abroad following Vice President Nixon’s visit in July 1959.Based on my experience I assumed that the couple would sooner or later get permission also.
Was Oswald’s defection arranged by the
This does not rule out the possibility that at some point some element of Soviet intelligence may have attempted to use Oswald before, during of after his defection. The question is beyond proving or disproving. More probable is that Oswald’s defection was an administrative nuisance to the Soviet authorities.
Finally, was Oswald working for the
Healthy skepticism is one thing; national paranoia is another. One powers a drive to know, the other feeds on artful invention. It may turn out, as has been said, that the American people are the only jury that Lee harvey Oswald will ever have. If so, the verdict may depend ultimately on how many of us insist on our own facts.
“Oswald’s apartment . . . was one of the finest in Minsk . . . He had his own apartment with a separate living room gaily decorated with flowered wallpaper, tiled floors and modern furniture. It also had a magnificent view of the bend of the
“Decision after decision, the (State) Department removed every obstacle before Oswald . . . self-proclaimed discloser of classified information . . . on his path from
“Historians may well ask the question of how any one could have made the fatal mistake of readmitting a defector who . . . would murder the president of the
“Oswald had worked with the Marines at Atsugi air base in
“The burden of evidence in fact lends considerable credence to Marguerite Oswald’s constant thesis that her son had gone to the
Is it irrational to suggest that the American and Soviet intelligences cooperated in the American governmental game of killing the president?
Biography: http://educationforu...?showtopic=5809
No comments:
Post a Comment