Why were there so few prisoners in the Finnish "cauldrons"?

PART X11. CHAPTER 2

Early in the morning they again read out the list of those mobilized, lined up, and we moved to the Gorky Station. There was already a train with freight cars there for us. I said goodbye to my wife; it was a separation from my family for 14 years. In the carriages where we were placed, they had previously carried livestock; the garbage was not removed, only two-story bunks were built. I got the upper bunk, next to me was a young man, 3rd year student at the Gorky Pedagogical Institute Gennady Knyazev. An artist from the Gorky Drama Theater was lying nearby, and along the window was a teacher from the Gorky Pedagogical Institute. Swaying rhythmically to the sound of the wheels, I tried to assess the situation. I was confident that in the long and difficult war with Germany, the Soviet Union would win. The sacrifices will be enormous: for the tyrant sitting in the Kremlin, people’s lives had no value. German fascism will be crushed, but there will be no strength to get rid of the Stalinist fascists.

Our train stopped in an open field near the town of Segezha. We were brought here to evacuate the Segezha paper mill, but it turned out that the mill had already been evacuated. We had nothing to do, we walked around the empty city, the population was evacuated along with the plant. We saw a lot of bomb craters. On the other side of the railway track there was a large Karelian-Russian village, in which there were also old men and women who refused to leave their homes. They said: “We want to die here, where our grandfathers and great-grandfathers died.” Cows, chickens and ducks roamed the streets of the village; chicken could be bought for pennies. We bought several chickens, immediately plucked them and roasted them over the fire. The train stood still for several days; no one needed us. The echelon commissar, a Gorky railway worker, tried to find our owner, Gorky refused to send us back. In the end, we found an owner, it became the 20th field construction of the Karelo-Finnish Front. It was located on the shore of Segozero. We were unloaded from the cars and driven to the location of the 20th field construction. The authorities ordered an overnight stay in the open air. Everyone was dressed for summer, I was wearing a light gray mackintosh. A cold wind blew from the lake, and I felt very cold. Knyazev also shivered in his cloak, his face turned blue. Everyone settled in for the night as best they could. Not far from the lake we found stacks of boards from which we built sunbeds.

We were driven from the village to Maselskaya. We were moving along a difficult road, a lot of rubble, large and small boulders. These are traces of glaciers. Thoroughly exhausted, we reached the regional center of Maselskaya. This town is located south of Segezha and southeast of Segozero. By this time, units of the Finnish army had already captured the city of Sortavala in the north of Lake Ladoga and the city of Suoyarvi in ​​the northeast and were moving in the direction of Maselskaya. In this way, the Finns bypassed Petrozavodsk from the north. This is probably why the 20th Field Construction, using our detachment of Gorky militias, decided to strengthen this strategically important point. This was another stupidity of our “strategists”: the motley mass of Gorkyites, completely untrained, did not constitute a combat unit. All this testified to the complete confusion not only of the 20th field construction, but also of the entire Karelo-Finnish Front in the fall of 1941. We were put in charge of digging trenches and trenches; there weren’t enough shovels, so we dug in turns. When the construction work was completed, a three-inch cannon was brought from somewhere, and we were given rifles. I was appointed squad commander. They brought a field kitchen to our trenches and fed us hot cabbage soup with meat. The secret of such generous feeding was simple. At Maselskaya station there was an ownerless food warehouse, abandoned by panicked business executives. A lot of flour, pasta, and butter were stored in the warehouse. Units of the Red Army, mostly untrained youth, passed through Maselskaya. The soldiers were poorly dressed: old overcoats, torn boots, and Budyonnovkas on their heads. Many had chafed feet and could barely move. These are the units that were thrown against the Finnish army.

Suddenly a Karelian scout appeared and reported that the Finns were 10 kilometers from Segozero. Panic set in, and from that moment on the doctor didn’t show up, although Knyazev had a second attack of appendicitis, and my temperature stayed at 39-39.5. Early in the morning we heard noise, the stomping of people running, hysterical screams of women and children. Despite our serious condition, Knyazev and I got out into the street. We saw how a large group of people, among whom was our doctor, along with children and things, got into trucks. Two loaded cars drove off, the last car remained. Knyazev and I asked to be taken in, but they told us that they imprison people only according to the list. Then we moved to Segozero, but we were too late there - the tug with the barge had already moved away from the shore, taking away children, women and a group of military men. Knyazev and I felt rejected. But something had to be done. We wandered to Maselskaya station. We walked along the shore, where did the strength come from? With great difficulty we walked about 5 kilometers and suddenly saw a line of soldiers dressed in gray overcoats and boots. We took them for our Karelian units. They soon realized that they were mistaken, they were Finns. Knyazev and I rushed into the forest and lay down in a hole half filled with water. They didn’t notice us; at that time the Finns were engaged in tugboat work on Segozero. Finnish officers looked at the tug and barge with binoculars, one of them shouted: “Moor to the shore, nothing will happen to you, you will stay in your place.” But the tug continued to move away. The Finnish officer shouted: “If you don’t stop, we will shoot.” The tug was moving away. Then the Finns began shooting at the tug with a small cannon and immediately hit the target. We heard the heartbreaking screams of women and children. Many threw themselves into the water. The Finns stopped shelling, the officer, who spoke Russian, said: “It’s your own fault.” Knyazev and I continued to lie in the hole, we even forgot about our illnesses. Looking out of the hole, I saw someone swimming up to the shore, but waving his arms in a strange way; he was drowning. I whispered to Knyazev that we needed to save the drowning man. Knyazev tried to hold me back, saying that the Finns would notice us. But I still crawled to the shore and pulled out a completely exhausted boy of 12-13 years old by his hair. We both lay down on the ground and crawled to the hole. Knyazev was right, the Finns noticed us. Several people approached the pit and, laughing, began shouting: “hu”ve paive (hello).” We stood up, water dripping from our clothes, our faces and hands covered in dirt. We were led out onto a wide asphalt road. Here I saw for the first time a regular part of the Finnish army. Several officers, dressed rather lightly, walked ahead, followed slowly by motorcyclists, and then a column of cars and trucks with officers and soldiers. On the road they gathered about 100 prisoners. We witnessed a funny scene. Among the prisoners was a Karelian coachman with a horse and carriage. The carriage was loaded with boxes of oil. The coachman, in a language understandable to the Finns, asked them to take the butter and let him go home. One of the officers ordered the oil to be distributed to the prisoners. The prisoners, among whom were officers, rushed to the cart, grabbed the boxes, angrily tore off the lids from them, began to greedily eat the butter and stuff their pockets with it. The Finns, seeing this scene, laughed. Gennady and I did not approach the cart. It was sickening to see all this. One Finnish officer came up to us, pointed his finger towards the stroller and said: “olka hu”ve (please take it).” I shook my head. Then one of the prisoners in a military overcoat ran up to us and tried to put oil in our pockets. I abruptly removed the hand of this helpful man. After this, the Finns began to look at me with interest.

PART X11. CHAPTER 3

Ever since the first war with Finland, provoked by Hitler, Soviet newspapers have been full of articles about the brutal treatment of Russian prisoners by the Finns, allegedly having their ears cut off and their eyes gouged out. I didn’t believe the Soviet press for a long time, but still, in some brain cells, suspicion was deposited towards the people who call themselves Suomi, that is, the people of the swamps. I knew well that Finland gave shelter to many Russian revolutionaries who fled from Russia. Lenin returned from exile through Finland. During the struggle against the tsarist autocracy in Finland, a strong Social Democratic Labor Party was formed and was active. Lenin repeatedly found refuge in Finland.

In the previous chapter, I wrote that a group of prisoners ended up on the highway. A small convoy led us north from Segozero. Knyazev and I decided to run away, hide in the forest, and then get to Maselskaya or Medvezhyegorsk. They gradually began to fall behind the column, but the convoy did not react to this. We quickly lay down on the ground and began to crawl towards the forest. We walked through the forest for about two kilometers and unexpectedly came across Finnish soldiers. They surrounded us, we decided that this was the end. But two soldiers calmly led us onto the highway, caught up with the column of prisoners and handed us over to the convoy. The guards just shouted: - pargele, satana (damn, devil) - this is a common curse word among Finns. No one even laid a finger on us, only Knyazev and I were placed in the first row of the column. One of the guards pulled photographs out of his pocket and, pointing his finger at them, said in broken Russian: “This is my mother, this is my fiancée,” and at the same time smiled broadly. Such a scene could be mistaken for the fraternization of soldiers of enemy armies. We were brought to a village abandoned by its inhabitants. Not a soul on the street. They placed 5 people in each hut and strictly punished us not to touch anything in the huts. Our hut was in complete order, there were neatly folded pillows on the bed, on the wall there was a wooden cabinet in which there were plates, cups, pots, an icon with the image of Christ hung in the corner, with a wick in oil still burning on a stand under it. There are curtains on the windows. The hut is warm and clean. The impression is that the owners went out somewhere. There were homemade rugs on the floor, on which we all lay down. Despite the fatigue, I did not sleep, I kept thinking about escape. My train of thoughts was disturbed by noise; a new batch of prisoners was brought in; these were passengers from the tug that had been fired upon. Dawn came, the door swung open, and 4 Finnish officers entered the hut. We all stood up. One of the officers said in Russian that we should leave the hut because its inhabitants were returning to the village, rescued by Finnish soldiers after the tug was fired upon. We were placed in a large barn, where there were already several people. In the middle, a bandaged girl lay on the straw, moaning loudly. During the shelling of the tugboat on Segozero, this girl stood near the steam boiler. The shell hit the boiler and she was scalded by steam. The girl's face was red and blistered. The boy we saved ended up in the same barn; he rushed to me and with tears in his eyes said that his mother and sister were not saved, they drowned in Segozero. A Finnish officer came in and brought a large pot of soup and biscuits. The bandaged girl refused to eat and asked for water. Before going to bed, they brought a tank of boiling water and gave everyone two lumps of sugar. Knyazev and I did not sleep, my young friend asked me what the Finns could do to us. Soviet newspapers wrote that the Finns brutally dealt with prisoners of war. But so far we have been treated quite humanely. In the morning, 5 Finnish officers entered the barn. One of them addressed us in broken Russian: “Get ready, now we will cut off your ears, noses and gouge out your eyes.” We prepared for the worst. And then all the officers and soldiers standing near the open doors began to laugh loudly. The same officer said: “Your newspapers are slandering us, portraying us as fanatics. We will not do anything bad to anyone, you are our prisoners, you will be treated as prisoners, you will work until the end of the war, and then we will send you to your homeland.” Everyone breathed a sigh of relief and began to smile. They brought breakfast: porridge, tea and two pieces of sugar. An ambulance arrived and took away the burned girl, two sick people and the boy we saved. He ran up to me and began to say goodbye with tears. I stroked his blond hair and turned away. It's always hard to see children suffering. Mental confusion and duality seized me in captivity, my thoughts were confused, I could not concentrate. I saw that the living conditions in Finnish captivity cannot be compared with the conditions in Soviet concentration camps. In Finland they did not mock or humiliate prisoners, but in their homeland they constantly make it clear to a political prisoner that he is not a human being, but a slave who can be treated as you please. But one thing constantly bothered me, and that was the Jewish problem. No people on our planet have been persecuted like the Jews. Is it because they did not want to bow their heads to stupidity? Is it because, having given Christians a human god, the Jews did not want to kneel before him, turned into an idol? Never has the Jewish question been so acute, one might say fateful. as after the Nazis came to power in Germany. I was tormented by the question: does democratic Finland really take the same position towards Jews as fascist Germany? My heavy thoughts were interrupted. Everyone from our barn was put into cars, and two Finnish soldiers got in with us. We moved along a wide asphalt road. There are many oncoming vehicles with soldiers and supplies. The driver of one of the oncoming cars threw two large boxes of biscuits onto the road and shouted something in Finnish. Our driver stopped the car, shouted for us to get off, pick up the boxes and divide the biscuits among ourselves. A small episode, but very characteristic. In the evening we arrived at the large Suoyarvi camp, where prisoners, military and civilian, were kept. Among the administration of this camp there was a small group of fascists who immediately showed themselves towards the prisoners. In the morning, all the prisoners were lined up in twos to receive breakfast. A group of fascists kept order, they shouted, demanded that we look at the back of each other’s heads and not talk. One prisoner, for unknown reasons, was out of action. One of the fascist officers shot and killed him. We all tensed up. But then something happened that was difficult for us to imagine. Let me explain something. In Finland, some citizens refused on principle to take part in the war. some - due to moral convictions, others - due to religious convictions. They were called “refuseniks” and were punished in a very unique way: if he was a soldier, his shoulder straps and belt were removed and, together with the deserters, they were placed in a separate tent on the territory of the prisoner of war camp. There was such a tent in the Suoyarvi camp; there were 10 people in it, tall, strong guys with meaningful faces. When they saw that the officer had killed the prisoner, these guys jumped up to the shooting officer and began to beat him, snatched his pistol, which they threw over the camp fence. The camp commandant, an elderly sergeant major, calmly walked up to the beaten fascist lying on the ground, picked him up by the collar, led him to the camp gate and kicked him out of the gate with a strong blow to the backside and shouted: “poisch, pargele, satana (get away, devil, devil) ." Then the commandant approached our line and loudly declared in broken Russian: “People like this fascist who shot are a disgrace to our people, we will not allow anyone to mock you, you are not responsible for your rulers.” The behavior of the “refuseniks” and the camp commandant made a very strong impression on me.

After this event, something became clear to me. It became clear to me that Finland is a country where compliance with laws is mandatory for everyone, that the Finnish people do not have roots for the widespread spread of the ideology of fascism and anti-Semitism. I realized that shameless lies were published about Finland in Soviet newspapers. A day after these events, the prisoners were taken to a neighboring village to wash in a bathhouse. At the bathhouse we were given fresh linen. After the bath we did not return to the previous barracks; we were placed in a large barracks, where there was not much crowding, although the bunks were double. I found myself on the upper bunk between Gennady Knyazev and Vasily Ivanovich Polyakov, a native of the city of Tambov. He was captured near Sortavala and said that the Finnish army occupied Petrozavodsk without a fight, but did not advance further, although the Germans demanded that the Finnish command move its units to Leningrad, which was surrounded by German troops. Somewhat later, I learned from the Finns that the deputies of the Finnish Sejm from the Social Democratic Party categorically demanded that the government be guided by the strategic interests of Finland, and not Germany. It turns out that the commander-in-chief of the Finnish army, Mannerheim, and the President of Finland, Rutti, were members of the “progressive” party, which arose during the years when Finland was part of the Russian Empire. And what surprised and pleased me very much was the position of the Finnish government on the Jewish issue. Despite great pressure from Nazi Germany, Finland did not allow Jews to be persecuted or discriminated against in any way on its territory. Moreover, Jews served in the Finnish army. In a situation where Finland was an ally of Germany in the war and when German fascism proclaimed the genocide of the Jews as the main direction of its activities, Finland's position required very great courage from its leaders.

On February 11, 1940, the general offensive of the Red Army began, as a result of which the Mannerheim Line was broken and, as a result, the Finns were forced to sign a peace agreement on Soviet terms.
I reflected my view on the Soviet-Finnish war in a short essay “Why did Finland provoke the Winter War?”
Now I wanted to draw attention to one point that anti-Soviet people do not write about - the number of prisoners.
If we take the version of events of the Soviet-Finnish war officially accepted in modern Russia, then during the battles in Finland the 163rd, 44th, 54th, 168th, 18th rifle divisions and the 34th tank brigade were surrounded . This is a huge mass of people!!!

Moreover, the personnel of the 44th Infantry Division mostly died or were captured. The fate of the surrounded 18th Infantry Division and 34th Tank Brigade was even worse.
I quote Wikipedia: “As a result, out of 15,000 people, 1,237 people left the encirclement, half of them wounded and frostbitten. Brigade commander Kondratyev shot himself.”

At the same time, it is known that at the end of the Winter War the parties exchanged prisoners: 847 Finns (20 remained in the USSR) and 5,465 Soviet soldiers and commanders returned to their homeland.
These are also official numbers!

A huge mass of Soviet military personnel was surrounded, several formations were completely defeated, and only five and a half thousand Red Army soldiers were captured by the Finns.

Isn't it surprising?

At the same time, without having been in a single “cauldron,” the Finns managed to “surrender” almost a thousand of their military personnel into Soviet captivity.
I, of course, understand that the Russians do not surrender, but even in the Brest Fortress, the majority of the surrounded Red Army soldiers surrendered and only a small part continued to resist for a long time.
Until now, readers are horrified by the official figures for the number of dead and missing Red Army soldiers. These numbers have always confused me. Some kind of wild discrepancy: a huge number of Red Army soldiers trapped in cauldrons, entire divisions crushed and almost completely destroyed, and such a tiny number of prisoners.
How did this happen?

It is also surprising that no one has ever tried to explain this phenomenon. In any case, I know nothing about such attempts.

Therefore, I will express my assumption: the discrepancies in the numbers of dead and prisoners arose due to the fact that significantly more Soviet soldiers and officers were captured than the Finns reported. If we take the usual Great Patriotic War figures for the number of prisoners in cauldrons, tens of thousands of Soviet troops should have been captured in Finnish “cauldrons”.

Where did they go?

Perhaps the Finns executed them.
This is where the Red Army suffered such huge losses in killed and such meager losses in prisoners. The Finns do not want to admit to war crimes, and our historians do not approach the numbers critically. Whatever the Finns write, they take it on faith. Because there was no command to criticize Finland. Now, if our people had fought against the Turks in the Winter War, then yes.
But in the Finnish topic there is no relevance yet.

THE WAY HOME

No war can last forever. One day the moment comes when the shots stop and representatives of the warring parties sit down at the negotiating table. But not only political and territorial issues must be resolved by the high contracting parties; each of them also bears responsibility for their citizens who, by force of circumstances, find themselves in prisoner of war camps. After all, no matter how hard it is in captivity, a person always has a glimmer of hope that the state remembers him and the day and hour will come when he returns home. This faith helped prisoners of war go through the agony of being in the camps.

The above discussed issues related to the conditions of detention, accounting, medical care and labor use of prisoners of war in camps during the Winter War and the Continuation War. Some aspects of political work with prisoners of war and the possibility of realizing their spiritual needs in captivity were touched upon. Now the turn has come to put a final point in the history of the stay of Finnish and Soviet prisoners in camps in the USSR and Finland and consider issues related to their repatriation

Activities of the commission for the post-war exchange of prisoners of war. 1940

On March 12, 1940, an agreement was signed between the Soviet Union and Finland to cease hostilities. However, some complications immediately arose: despite the truce, separate groups of Finnish military personnel who did not have time to retreat beyond the line of contact of the troops were taken prisoner by units of the Red Army. Such actions continued, according to some sources, until April - May 1940. After the ceasefire, the Red Army captured at least 30 soldiers of the Finnish army, and at least three soldiers and commanders of the Red Army voluntarily went over to the Finnish side.

As we remember, both states generally adhered to the 1907 Hague and 1929 Geneva conventions on prisoners of war. In accordance with these international legal instruments and the domestic legislation of both countries, the peace treaty included a provision providing for the return of all prisoners of war to their homeland as soon as possible.

On April 8, People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs of the USSR Vyacheslav Molotov notified the Commissioner of the Government of Finland, Juho Kusti Paasikivi, of the Soviet side's consent to the creation of a Mixed Commission for the exchange of prisoners of war between the Soviet Union and Finland.

"To Mr. Paasikivi

Commissioner of the Government of the Republic of Finland

Mister Commissioner,

I have the honor to inform you that the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics agrees to the following procedure for the mutual return of prisoners of war - Soviet citizens and Finnish citizens:

1. The return of prisoners of war will begin on April 15 of this year and must be completed as soon as possible

2. The transfer of seriously wounded or seriously ill persons, whose health condition does not allow transportation from one place to another, will be carried out as these persons recover; the parties immediately communicate to each other lists, indicating the names and surnames of these persons.

3. Prisoners of war who have committed any kind of punishable acts are also subject to immediate return.

4. For the practical implementation of the return of prisoners of war, a mixed commission of three representatives of the USSR and three representatives of the Republic of Finland is established in the city of Vyborg.

5. The above-mentioned commission has the right to send its representatives to the field to facilitate the speedy departure of prisoners of war to their homeland.

6. The Mixed Commission will establish regulations for its work, determine through which border points the return of prisoners of war will take place, and establish the procedure and conditions for the evacuation of prisoners of war.

Please accept, Mr. Commissioner, the assurances of my utmost respect for you.

/IN. Molotov/".

The tasks of this intergovernmental body included: 1) approval of regulations for its activities; 2) determination of border points through which the return of prisoners of war will take place; 3) establishing the procedure and conditions for the evacuation of prisoners of war.

To facilitate the speedy departure of prisoners to the USSR and Finland, the commission was empowered to send its representatives to places where prisoners of war were held. However, the exchange of prisoners proceeded quite smoothly and without complications, and therefore neither the USSR nor Finland considered it advisable to control the sending of prisoners of war on the spot and were satisfied with the lists presented by both sides.

However, not all Soviet prisoners of war sought to return to the “tender embrace” of their homeland. Throughout the Finnish captivity, Soviet soldiers and commanders were offered to stay in Finland or leave its borders after the end of hostilities, citing the fact that prisoners in the USSR would still be shot. The emigrants painted tempting pictures of life in a free Finland for the Red Army soldiers.

“...The priest said that after 5 years of working as a farm laborer you will receive citizenship. You will be given 4 cows, a house, land, 3 horses with payment of their cost in installments. Those who do not want to stay in Finland can go to any other country.”

Those who did not want to return to the USSR wrote petitions. The characteristic features of the appeals and petitions of prisoners of war addressed to the Finnish authorities are, firstly, the desire of the writers to prove that they are ideological opponents of the existing regime in the Soviet Union: (“Being a subject of the USSR, living there from the day of my birth, throughout my entire adult life I in understanding the political system in the USSR, I did not and do not share my personal beliefs and views with the state-political system of the USSR,> (petition of A. Semikhin) 5. Secondly, references to promises of the Finnish government and the Red Cross to send them to any other country, or leave in Finland. Thirdly, fears that death awaits them in the USSR as traitors to their homeland, and they appeal to the humane feelings of the Finns (“If you decide that I should not be here, I ask you to kill me for revenge if they will always kill me in the race but at least I will suffer there in prison<…>

I only thought that if I succeed in moving to Finland, then as long as I live I will accept and thank the entire Finnish Government and all the people<…>

But please don’t send Mine to the S.S.S.R.” (petition from N. Gubarevich) 7.

Here are some examples of such requests and petitions (spelling and style have been preserved. - D.F.).

“To the Finnish Red Cross Society from Russian prisoners of war who have not returned to their homeland.

Petition.

In March of this year, before the exchange of prisoners, we were offered, through representatives of the Red Cross and Finnish military authorities, the right not to return to our homeland and, along with this, conditions were offered. And they promised to send us to another country according to our wishes. We, being somewhat averse to the Soviet government, willingly took advantage of the offer. But 5-6 months have passed since then and today, 21/VIII-40, to our misfortune, we are still within the walls of prison and no one undertakes to predict our fate.

In addition, we lost our homeland and citizenship and thus found ourselves completely helpless. But despite all this, we have not yet lost our human appearance and we are still living beings, and therefore we resort to the Red Cross Society, an organization that fairly protects the interests of human life. And we earnestly ask for your intervention and your petition to the Finnish government to release us from prison.

Where to determine the place of residence, we cannot ask anything now and trustfully entrust you and the Finnish Government.

We kindly ask you not to refuse requests on behalf of all prisoners

/Groshnitsky/

In May 1940, prisoners of war compiled a list of those who refused to return to the USSR and handed it over to the Finns.

“List of prisoners who do not want to return to the USSR.

1) Gorbuyanov, Vasily A. soldier

2) Grammar Konstantin D.

3) Erofyev Dmitry D.

4) Zavitskov Nikolay.

5) Zubaev Makar.

6) Ivankov Vasily T.

7) Kadulin Zakhar V.

8) Ksenontov Nikolay K.

9) Kumeda Anton T.

10) Ladovsky Alexey F.

11) Lugin Alexander T.

12) Malikov Alexander T.

13) Malyastrov Vasily P.

14) Mezgov Andreevich I.

15) Popov Stepan I.

16) Nikolaev Yakov A.

17) Rakhmanin Ivan S.

18) Svetsov Ignat A.

19) Utarev Khalidulla.

20) Khrenov Matveev (? - D.F.) TO.

21) Shadagalin Selim.

22) Shemna Mikhail V.

23) Yablonovsky Andrey I.”

However, no decision was made on their request until August 1940. Then they wrote a second petition:

“To His Excellency!!!

Prime Minister of Finland

From Russian prisoners who have not expressed their desire to return to Russia

Petition.

We would like to inform Your Excellency that in the month of March of this year, before sending Russian prisoners to their homeland, we were offered, through the Finnish authorities and through the organization of the Red Cross, the right to remain in Finland or go to another country of our choice, along with this we were promised a number of conditions.

Having sufficient hatred for our government (Soviet), we greeted with great joy the offer of the Finnish Government not to return to our homeland, in the hope of soon settling our lives under the protection of the fair Laws of Finland or another country. But 5-6 months have passed since then and 8/8/40 we are still within the walls of the prison and no one dares to predict our fate and what awaits us tomorrow. Who, even today, we experience the attitude towards us that in our face they only see their enemies, who came along with the war to devastate Finland. Although this is true, we ask you to believe that we are less to blame for this, that this is the fault of the state and the F. government. And that we ourselves suffered in this more than the Finnish people, which made us turn away from our homeland and disgust the Soviet government. Therefore, taking into account all of the above and our suffering in prison, we kindly ask you to draw the attention of Your Excellency and the Finnish government to release us from imprisonment. To determine our place of residence, leave it in Finland or send us to another state, we rely on your mercy and as it pleases Your Excellency and the Finnish government.

We kindly ask you not to refuse your request. By authorization from 23 Russian prisoners

1) Gromitsky,

2) Gorbunov,

3) Xenophon.

And we also earnestly ask you to respond to our request as soon as possible, since many of our experiences depend on this.”

The Soviet prisoners of war remaining in Finland remained in the country's camps and prisons for quite a long time, waiting for their fate to be decided. During the Continuation War, some of them worked as translators, orderlies, and doctors in prisoner of war camps (Karvia, Kemi, Kokkola, etc.).

Both sides determined the city of Vyborg as the place of work of the Mixed Commission for the Exchange of Prisoners of War. Three representatives from each side were delegated to the commission. Even before the start of the meetings, the USSR and Finland agreed on some nuances for the return of prisoners. Firstly, the transfer of seriously wounded or seriously ill prisoners of war, whose health condition does not allow transportation from one place to another, will be carried out as these persons recover. In this case, both sides had to immediately transfer to each other lists indicating the names and surnames of these prisoners. Secondly, the Soviet side urgently demanded the immediate transfer of prisoners of war who had committed various types of criminal acts. I think most likely the USSR feared that these prisoners would refuse to return to the Soviet Union after serving their sentences in Finland. In practice, during the work of the Mixed Commission, this issue was raised both directly and indirectly several times. Thirdly, the USSR and Finland agreed that the return of prisoners of war should be completed as soon as possible.

Initially, in accordance with Molotov’s note, the work of the commission was supposed to begin on April 10, and the first batch of prisoners of war was transferred on April 15. But by mutual agreement, the start of the activities of this intergovernmental body was postponed to a later date - April 14. It was on this day that the first meeting took place. The commission from the Finnish side included: General Uno Koistinen, Lieutenant Colonel Matti Tiyainen and Captain Arvo Viitanen. The Soviet side was represented by brigade commander Evstigneev (representative of the Red Army), state security captain Soprunenko (head of the UPVI NKVD of the USSR) and representative of the People's Commissariat of Foreign Affairs (NKID) Tunkin. Thus, the USSR delegated to work in the commission representatives of those structures that, by the nature of their activities, were closely connected with prisoners of war. The army captured soldiers of the Finnish army, the UPVI was responsible for their maintenance in camps and reception centers, and the NKID regulated international legal aspects of the reception and repatriation of Finnish prisoners.

Due to the fact that the commission worked on Soviet territory, most of the costs of its maintenance were borne by the USSR. On April 14, 1940, brigade commander Evstigneev sent a telegram to Moscow with a request to transfer 15 thousand rubles to maintain the headquarters of the commission. The report on the work of the commission noted that the employees of the Soviet delegation received 30 rubles a day for food and 15 rubles for travel expenses. For five breakfasts (250 rubles each) for representatives of the Finnish delegation, 1250 rubles were allocated.

The Mixed Commission for the exchange of prisoners of war between the USSR and Finland carried out its activities from April 14 to April 28, 1940. During the work, six meetings were held - April 14, 15, 16, 18, 27, 28, 1940, at which attempts were made to resolve the following issues:

The procedure for transferring prisoners of both armies;

Return of prisoners of war of the Finnish army captured after 12 o'clock on March 13, 1940, that is, after the cessation of hostilities;

Making inquiries about missing persons;

Timing of transfer of sick and wounded prisoners of war.

At the first meeting of the commission, both sides exchanged data on the number of prisoners of war held on their territory. The Soviet Union announced 706 Finnish prisoners of war, and Finland announced 5,395 Soviet prisoners. At the same meeting, members of the commission established approximate dates for the transfer of prisoners. The Soviet Union stated that it was ready to repatriate 106 Finnish prisoners of war on April 16 and 600 on April 20. The Finnish side undertook to hand over Soviet prisoners of war within the established time frame:

April 25 - all other prisoners of war, except the sick and seriously wounded, who were to be transferred as they recovered.

At the fifth meeting of the commission (April 27, 1940), the parties also agreed on the timing of the return of the last category of prisoners of war. The first transfer was supposed to take place on May 10. According to the commission's estimates, the Finnish side could return a group of 70-100 people to the USSR, and the Soviet Union - about 40 Finnish sick and seriously wounded prisoners of war. The next exchange was planned for May 25, when all other prisoners whose health condition allowed transportation should be transferred. As can be seen from the above figures, both sides did not yet have complete information about the exact number of prisoners of war they held. But the data was clarified, and by the time the work of the Mixed Commission ceased, the parties already had more complete and accurate information about the number of prisoners of war.

In addition to the exchange of prisoners of war, the commission was engaged in the search for missing Red Army soldiers, Finnish soldiers, officers, foreign volunteers who served in the Finnish army, as well as civilians.

Before the last, sixth meeting of the Mixed Commission (April 28, 1940), brigade commander Evstigneev received a lightning telegram signed by Dekanozov. In particular, it noted several points to which the Soviet delegation should have paid special attention:

1. In accordance with the principles of international law of the 1907 Hague Convention “On the Laws and Customs of War” and the 1929 Geneva Convention on Prisoners of War, demand that the Finnish side return all personal documents, personal property and money of Soviet prisoners of war;

2. Return to the USSR all prisoners of war who are on trial, under investigation, in prisons and other places of detention;

3. To achieve inclusion in the minutes of the meeting of the facts of the Finnish side using Soviet prisoners of war for defensive work in Finland;

4. Demand from the Finns a certificate about all Soviet prisoners of war who have not yet been returned, who have died and who did not want to return to the USSR.

It is also advisable to note that during the work of the commission and the exchange of prisoners, issues related to the return of personal property and funds seized from prisoners at reception centers and in prisoner of war camps in the USSR and Finland were resolved. The Soviet side stated that the following were taken from Russian prisoners of war in Finland:

money - 285,604.00 rubles;

passports - 180;

Komsomol tickets - 175;

party documents - 55;

union cards - 139;

military tickets - 148;

work books - 12;

hours - 305;

ID cards - 14.

In addition, during the exchange of prisoners of war in the USSR, 25 former Soviet prisoners were transferred as part of one of the groups, who stated that 41,374 Finnish marks were confiscated from them in Finland. Most likely, judging by the special equipment and equipment taken from them, some of them were members of sabotage and reconnaissance groups, agents of the intelligence department of the North-Western Front. This is confirmed by the Red Army soldiers who returned from Finnish captivity:

“When we were getting ready to be sent home, we saw our paratroopers... 21 people dressed in Finnish uniforms... These comrades asked us to tell our government about them...”

On May 14, 1940, a telegram from the Leningrad Military District came to the address of state security captain Soprunenko, signed by the head of the LVO, brigade commander Evstigneev, and the commissar of the RO LVO, battalion commissar Gusakov:

“I ask for your order to allow prisoners of war who returned from Finland, former agents of the intelligence department of the North-Western Front and armies, who were detained at various times in Finland while on special duty, to be interviewed. assignments, which is extremely necessary to find out the reasons for failure and take into account shortcomings in preparation. Major Comrade is sent to conduct the survey. Pomerantsev. Reason: Telegraphic order of the Deputy People's Commissar of Defense, Divisional Commander Comrade. Proskurov."

The Finnish side, in turn, stated that personal property was taken from Finnish prisoners of war on the territory of the USSR - watches, gold rings, feathers, etc. in the amount of 160,209 Finnish marks and money of 125,800 Finnish marks. A total of 286,009 Finnish marks. On April 21, 1940, the Soviet commissioner, senior political instructor Shumilov, transferred 19,873 marks 55 pennies to the Finnish side. Thus, each of the Finns at the time of capture should have had on average about 150 marks. However, despite the fact that, according to existing instructions in the USSR, personal belongings, currency and valuable items had to be registered and stored, over one hundred thousand Finnish marks mysteriously disappeared in the depths of the NKVD. However, it is unknown whether the money ended up in the NKVD or with the looters, or whether the Finns inflated the amount of things taken from them. It is also advisable to note that the Finnish side transferred to the USSR before the end of the work of the Mixed Commission only a small fraction of the personal belongings taken from Soviet prisoners. Unfortunately, researchers do not have accurate information about the return of the remaining property to Finnish and Soviet prisoners of war after the Winter War.

Homecoming Organization (Winter War)

The main exchange of prisoners took place at Vainikkala station. During this time, 847 Finns (20 remained in the USSR) and 5,465 Soviet soldiers and commanders returned to their homeland (according to V. Galitsky - 6,016).

Speaking about Soviet prisoners of war during the Winter War, it should be noted that the problem of the relationship between the Soviet state and its compatriots who were captured went through several stages. The Russian Empire in the 19th and 20th centuries signed all the major conventions on the treatment of prisoners of war. At the same time, considerable attention was paid to our own soldiers and officers captured by the enemy. Those who returned home were greeted as heroes. After the 1917 revolution, the situation gradually began to change. Russia announces its withdrawal from the war, but the problem of prisoners remains. The Soviet state declared responsibility for the fate of prisoners of war, and already in April 1918, in accordance with the decree of the Council of People's Commissars, the Central Commission for Prisoners and Refugees (Tsentroplenbezh) was created under the People's Commissariat for Military Affairs.

In July 1918, at the V All-Russian Congress of Soviets, delegates accepted “greetings to Russian prisoners of war in various places.” This document ordered all provincial councils to create special departments for organizing assistance to prisoners, which were to conduct their work in close contact with Tsentroplenbezh. The departments had to immediately begin collecting bread and basic necessities to send them to prisoners of war. Moreover, the Council of People's Commissars, in its resolutions of November 16, 1918, May 18, 1919, June 9, 1920 and August 5, 1920, appointed monetary compensation to Russian prisoners of war of the First World War and servicemen of the Red Army and Navy who returned from enemy captivity. Financial assistance was also provided to family members of prisoners.

However, the Civil War made its own adjustments, and despite the fact that the RSFSR guaranteed humane treatment of prisoners of war regardless of state and nationality, this provision was not always observed. The extremely brutal nature of the war, in which both sides suffered colossal losses, and the uncompromising nature of the political struggle often made it impossible to observe the most basic standards of treatment of prisoners of war. Both the Reds and the Whites allowed massacres and torture of prisoners.

Since the mid-1920s, a climate of general mistrust, suspicion and spy mania has developed in the USSR. All this was naturally reflected in the Criminal Code of the USSR in relation to prisoners of war. Since the 1920s, articles have appeared in Soviet criminal legislation providing for liability for surrender. In this case, servicemen of the Red Army and the Workers' and Peasants' Red Fleet were subject to the 58th and 193rd articles of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR, which provided for the death penalty with confiscation of property for treason - espionage, betrayal of military and state secrets, escape abroad, crossing on the side of the enemy and the invasion of the territory of the USSR as part of armed gangs. Family members of a serviceman were also subject to repression if they knew about his intentions but did not bring this to the attention of the authorities. In this case, they were sentenced to up to five years with confiscation of property. The remaining family members were deprived of voting rights and were subject to deportation to remote areas of Siberia for a period of five years.

Similar actions committed by military personnel were prescribed in more detail in Article 193 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR, which provides for punishment for military crimes. In accordance with this article, military crimes were recognized as acts directed against the established procedure for military service, committed by military personnel and those liable for military service in the reserve of the Workers' and Peasants' Red Army, as well as by citizens who were members of special teams formed in wartime to serve the rear and the front.

Encircled privates and junior commanders during the Winter War were often charged with “unauthorized abandonment of a unit or place of service,” “escaping from a unit,” or “unauthorized abandonment of a unit or place of service in a combat situation” (Article 193-7-193-9). Officers and political workers fell under Article 193-21 ​​- “the commander’s unauthorized retreat from the orders given to him for battle, in order to assist the enemy.”

Article 193-22 provided for execution for unauthorized abandonment of the battlefield, refusal to use weapons during battle, surrender and defection to the enemy. There was a clause here: “surrender not caused by a combat situation.” Thus, it was understood that there were some circumstances, such as injury, etc., in which capture was not considered a criminal act. But in reality everything turned out to be wrong. Even injury often did not entail release from liability for surrender.

Criminal liability, or rather execution, was provided for in Article 193-20: “Surrender to the enemy by the chief of the military forces entrusted to him, abandonment to the enemy, destruction or rendering unusable by the chief of the fortifications entrusted to him, warships, military aircraft, artillery, military warehouses and other means waging war, as well as the failure of the commander to take appropriate measures to destroy or render unusable the listed means of warfare when they are in immediate danger of being captured by the enemy and all methods of preserving them have already been used, if the actions specified in this article were committed in order to assist the enemy...”

We could list for a long time the parts and paragraphs of Article 193 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR, but the result will be the same: in most cases it provided for “the highest measure of social protection with confiscation of property” for committed offenses.

Analyzing Article 193, one can come to an interesting conclusion: while providing for harsh penalties for the surrender of Red Army soldiers, it at the same time made the position of foreign prisoners of war more secure. Thus, paragraph 29 (paragraphs A and B of this article) provided for imprisonment for a term of up to three years or the application of punishment in accordance with the rules of the disciplinary charter of the Red Army for “mistreatment of prisoners, or associated with special cruelty or directed against the sick and wounded, and equally negligent performance of duties in relation to these sick and wounded persons who are entrusted with their treatment and care for them.” These are, in brief, the main provisions of the articles of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR concerning punishment for military crimes, if captivity can be considered a crime at all. But the Soviet legislation of that time was characterized by an accusatory bias. After the end of the Winter War, almost all former Soviet prisoners of war, by decision of the Special Meeting of the NKVD of the USSR, were sentenced to imprisonment in forced labor camps of the Gulag system. Thus, initially the Soviet state viewed its citizens who found themselves in enemy captivity as criminals.

From the moment they crossed the state border line, conversations and interrogations were carried out with former Soviet prisoners by special groups of military interrogators consisting of political instructors. Analyzing the “Acts of the sanitary condition of prisoners of war, reports on conversations with them and information on the number of valuables and documents taken by the Finnish authorities,” we can identify several main groups of questions that were clarified with special care from former Soviet prisoners:

1. Food supply standards for Soviet prisoners of war in Finland, food for prisoners in camps and prisons.

2. Treatment of Soviet prisoners of war in camps, temporary detention centers and prisons in Finland by civil and military authorities.

3. Anti-Soviet work with prisoners of war.

4. Identification of traitors and traitors to the Motherland from among Soviet prisoners of war.

5. Finding out the names and surnames of Soviet prisoners of war who did not want to return to the USSR after the end of hostilities.

6. The mood of prisoners of war returning to the Soviet Union.

Further events developed like this: on April 19, 1940, a decision of the Politburo (signed by Stalin) ordered all prisoners returned by the Finnish side to be sent to the South camp of the NKVD of the USSR (Ivanovo region), previously intended for Finns. “Within three months, ensure thorough implementation of operational security measures to identify among prisoners of war persons processed by foreign intelligence services, dubious and alien elements and those who voluntarily surrendered to the Finns and then bring them to trial.” From the moment of crossing the state border with former Soviet prisoners of war, operational work began.

Information about “defectors” was obtained from prisoners of war. "Prisoner of War Mikhet<…>knows the name of the tank driver who surrendered along with the tank, without resistance.” Or: “Second Lieutenant Antipin ... stayed and dressed in Finnish clothes, sent to an unknown destination. I agreed to write memoirs.” Gradually, on the basis of such testimony, the names of the defectors were revealed. On June 6, Soprunenko sends to Moscow “a list of persons who were held captive in Finland and refused to return to the USSR.”

Based on interrogations in April 1940, the USSR presented Finland with a list of its prisoners of war held on its territory, consisting of 99 names. However, Finnish authorities stated that they had 74 prisoners of war. Of these, Finland transferred 35 people to the Soviet side. The corresponding document from the Finnish side contained the following digital data:

RETURNED

Russians 33 people.

Belarusians 1 person

Georgians 1 person

Armenians 1 person

Jews 1 person ·

Latvians 1 person

Bulgarians 1 person

Komi 1 person

Total 39 people.

NOT RETURNED

Ukrainians 21 people.

Tatars 2 people

Uzbeks 2 people

Bashkirs 1 person

Olonets and southern 1 person.

Tver 1 person

Ingrians 1 person.

Poles 1 person

Total 35 people.

Thus, Finland was in no hurry to hand over non-Russian prisoners of war. The Russians were transferred faster. Apparently, there were fears that the USSR would persistently demand the extradition of Russians.

However, the document contained an interesting note regarding persons not included in this general list of prisoners of war returned by Finland:

“There are approximately 30 additional Russian defectors who will not be returned because the prison officials promised them that they would not be returned. Captain Rusk announced them on 15/4-40, the Minister of Foreign Affairs (inaudible) 16/4 prisoners were sent to Kokkola.”

That is, there were at least 30 more people in Finland who not only did not want to return to the USSR, but who were given a promise that they would not be extradited to the Soviet authorities. However, this did not bother the Soviet authorities. They persistently made every effort to return them to their homeland. In particular, on November 18, 1940, the Finnish mission received a request “to inform the Finnish government that the Soviet side insists on the return to the Soviet Union of the 20 prisoners/prisoners from the Red Army who remained in Finland.”

The Finns did not respond to this demarche. But these requests from the USSR did not stop. He insisted on extraditing to him those who did not want to return to their homeland. And despite the fact that some Soviet prisoners of war several times submitted petitions to various government authorities in Finland to be left there, most of them, under pressure from the Soviet authorities, were repatriated to the Soviet Union. Moreover, some of them were simply exchanged for Finnish citizens who remained in the USSR

The last such exchange occurred on April 21, 1941. Then private Nikifor Dmitrievich Gubarevich, who lived in Belarus before the Winter War and was in the prison of the city of Mikkeli since March 21, 1940, despite the fact that four times he petitioned not to be sent to the USSR, was exchanged for Finnish citizen trader Yurie Nikolai Nieminen.

But only with the beginning of the continuation war was the fate of the 20 Soviet prisoners remaining in Finland decided. The head of the Headquarters organization department, Colonel S. Isaacson, and the head of the government department, Major Tapio Tarjanne, informed the Foreign Ministry that since the mentioned Soviet prisoners of war “did not express a desire to return to the USSR in an organized exchange of prisoners of war after the war of 1939-40, they are no longer prisoners of war, located in Finland. They should be treated as foreign nationals residing in the country, about whom the Government issues orders.” At the same time, in response to possible reproaches from the USSR regarding its national security, the document emphasized in advance: “The headquarters also declares that none of them can be used for defense work.”

After the exchange of prisoners of war ended, the government authorities of both Finland and the USSR made many efforts to investigate the circumstances of the disappearance of military personnel and their further fate on the territory of the warring countries. Both sides did not forget about those who did not return from combat missions.

So, for example, on July 17, 1940, the Plenipotentiary Representative of the USSR in Finland asked the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Finland to inquire about the presence of pilot M. I. Maksimov among the prisoners of war, who made a “landing on the Gulf of Finland” on February 21, 1940. . A similar request was contained in the appeal dated November 25, 1940 regarding the pilot N.A. Shalin, who made an emergency landing on the Finnish side on March 8, 1940. But it was apparently not possible to find out what happened to these pilots due to the passage of time or due to the lack of witnesses. Both requests from the Soviet side that we cited have a short and unambiguous note from the Finnish authorities: “There is no information about captivity.” This was conveyed to the Soviet commissioner.

One of the special issues that Soviet investigators paid quite a lot of attention to was the question of beatings and abuse of Red Army soldiers in captivity. Former prisoners said that they were abused not only by the Finnish guards, but also by some of their own fellow prisoners. According to investigators, “Karelian prisoners of war” were especially rampant. Political reports noted: “The former junior commander, now a prisoner, Orekhov, having been captured, was appointed barracks foreman, he mercilessly beat prisoners of war... Didyuk, a Karelian, was a translator, beat prisoners of war... Gvozdovich from the city of Kalinin, was the foreman of the ward, beat his own, took away Soviet money, lost it at cards, bought himself a command tunic from a captured commander<…>" And there are a lot of such testimonies. But still it was not a system. Not all Karelians were traitors. It is worth considering the circumstances under which this information was obtained. It is safe to say that they did enjoy some privileges as a “friendly nation” (according to the Finnish classification). And since many understood the Finnish language, they were appointed barracks leaders, translators and assistant guards.

Operational work continued in the Yuzhsky camp. By June 1940, there were 5,175 Red Army soldiers and 293 commanders and political officers transferred by the Finns. In his report to Stalin, Beria noted: “... among the prisoners of war, 106 people were spies and suspected of espionage, 166 people were members of the anti-Soviet volunteer detachment, 54 provocateurs, 13 people who mocked our prisoners, 72 voluntarily surrendered.” For the security officers, all prisoners of war were a priori traitors to the Motherland. Senior Lieutenant of the 18th Infantry Division Ivan Rusakov recalled these interrogations as follows:

“...The investigators did not believe that most of us were captured surrounded... Asks:

“I’m shell-shocked and frostbitten,” I answer.

This is not a wound.

Tell me, am I guilty of being captured?

Yes, guilty.

What is my fault?

You swore an oath to fight until your last breath. But when you were captured, you were breathing.

I don't even know if I was breathing or not. They picked me up unconscious...

But when you came to your senses, you could have spat in the Finn’s eyes so that they would shoot you?

What's the point in this?!

So as not to disgrace. The Soviets do not surrender."

After an investigation into the circumstances of the captivity and behavior in captivity, 158 people from among the former prisoners of war in the camp were shot, and 4,354 people, who did not have sufficient materials to transfer them to the court, but were suspicious due to the circumstances of their captivity, were sentenced to imprisonment by decision of the Special Meeting of the NKVD of the USSR in forced labor camps for a period of five to eight years. Only 450 former prisoners, who were captured wounded, sick and frostbitten, were released from criminal liability.

Finnish prisoners of war

The repatriation of Finnish prisoners of war began in accordance with the deadlines established at the meetings of the Mixed Commission. On April 16, 1940, the first batch of Finnish prisoners of war, numbering 107 people, crossed the state border. On the same day, Deputy People's Commissar of Internal Affairs Chernyshov, who, as we remember, oversaw the work of the UPVI, ordered the preparation of Finnish prisoners of war held in the Gryazovets camp for shipment to Finland. In accordance with this order, brigade commander Evstigneev sends a lightning telegram with the following content to the head of the 3rd department of the headquarters of the Leningrad Military District, brigade commander Tulupov:

“I ask you to transfer 600 Finnish prisoners of war from the prisoner of war camp to Gryazovets, Eshelon submit to the station. Gryazovets of the Northern Railway on the basis that by 9.00 on April 20, 1940 he should be on the border at the Vainikkala station, on the Vyborg - Simola railway.” Convoying and food supply of Finnish prisoners during transportation to Vyborg was entrusted to the camp leadership.

Two days later, on April 18, 1940, Evstigneev ordered no later than April 24 to transfer all healthy Finnish prisoners of war located in the Borovichi hospital to the Sestroretsk reception center for subsequent transfer to their homeland. Already by April 23, a convoy from the NKVD troops was waiting for the Finns at the military hospital in Borovichi, and at the railway station there were four heated cars, which were supposed to deliver them by seven o’clock in the morning on April 26 to the Vyborg station. The hospital management was ordered to provide the prisoners with food for the journey for four days. This group included 151 members of the Finnish army who were transferred to Finland under the terms of the peace treaty.

It is also advisable to note that in accordance with the “Temporary Instructions on the work of NKVD points for receiving prisoners of war” dated December 29, 1939 and Chernyshov’s order, the train with prisoners (20 cars) from the Gryazovets camp, in addition to the convoy, was accompanied by the head of the camp, the heads of the special and accounting departments and an employee sanitary department of the camp - paramedic. Each prisoner of war was given dry rations for the journey. It included: 3 kg of bread, herring or canned food - 700 g, tea - 6 g, sugar - 150 g, soap - 100 g, shag - 1 pack, matches - 2 boxes. As we can see from the above figures, the amount of food given to the Finns for the journey exceeded the norms for food supply to prisoners of war established by the Economic Council under the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR on September 20, 1939. On April 20, 1940, a group of 575 prisoners of war from the Gryazovets camp was transferred to the Finnish military authorities.

The direct exchange of prisoners of war took place at the border one kilometer east of the Finnish railway station Vainikkala. On the Soviet side it was carried out by Captain Zverev and senior political instructor Shumilov, and on the Finnish side by Captain Vainyulya.

On May 10, 1940, the Soviet side, in accordance with the accepted agreements, transferred to Finland five Swedish volunteers, soldiers of the Finnish army, held in the Gryazovets NKVD camp: three officers, one sergeant and one private. And on May 16, 1940, the head of the UPVI Soprunenko sent an order to the head of the Sverdlovsk NKVD to immediately send, accompanied by a convoy and medical personnel, three Finnish prisoners being treated in the Sverdlovsk hospital.

Analyzing the documents related to the activities of the Soviet-Finnish commission for the exchange of prisoners of war, it should be noted that its work took place without any particular complications. On June 9, 1940, the chairman of the intergovernmental commission for the exchange of prisoners of war, brigade commander Evstigneev, summing up the results of its activities, presented the “Report on the work of the mixed commission for the exchange of prisoners of war between the USSR and Finland.” This document, in particular, noted that the exchange of prisoners of war took place on the following dates: the transfer of Finnish prisoners of war took place on April 16, 20 and 26, May 10 and 25, June 7, 1940, and the reception of Soviet prisoners of war took place on April 17, 20, 21, 22 , April 23, 24, 25 and 26, May 10 and 25, June 7, 1940.

838 former prisoners of war of the Finnish army were transferred to Finland and 20 expressed a desire not to return to their homeland. Among the prisoners of war transferred to Finland were:

Commanding staff - 8 people,

Junior command staff - 152 people,

Privates - 615 people.

Among the wounded prisoners of war who were in hospitals on the territory of the USSR:

Commanding staff - 2 people,

Junior command staff - 8 people,

Privates - 48 people.

However, although the commission completed its work in April, the exchange of former prisoners of war and interned civilians continued throughout the interwar period of 1940–1941. Both sides have repeatedly sent inquiries to each other, trying to establish the fate of the missing. However, it is quite obvious that the USSR never handed over all its citizens to Finland after the end of the Soviet-Finnish military conflict of 1939–1940, since back in the 50s Finns who were captured during the Winter War returned to their homeland.

Working with those returning from captivity (Winter War)

And finally, former Finnish prisoners of war crossed the new state border line and ended up in Finland. The captivity is over. But the Finnish servicemen, returned under the terms of the peace treaty, did not get home immediately. First, they had to undergo testing at filtration points for former prisoners of war. Unlike the Continuation War, when all prisoners were concentrated in the Hanko camp, after the Winter War there was no single place for filtration checks. Most of the former Finnish prisoners of war were interrogated in Helsinki. However, testimony was taken from Finnish prisoners transferred in the fall of 1940 - spring of 1941, for example in Imatra, Kouvola, Mikkeli and other places.

From the moment they crossed the state border, former Finnish prisoners of war were interviewed and interrogated by special groups of military interrogators. We can highlight several basic questions that were clarified with special care from soldiers and officers of the Finnish army who returned from captivity.

1. Circumstances of capture.

2. Treatment of prisoners of war at the time of capture.

3. Conditions of escort and security during transportation to places of temporary and permanent accommodation of prisoners.

4. Conditions of detention in camps and reception centers for prisoners of war.

5. Food supply standards for prisoners in the USSR, food for Finnish prisoners of war in NKVD prisons of the USSR.

6. Medical care in camps and hospitals on the territory of the Soviet Union.

7. Personal property and funds confiscated from prisoners of war.

8. Use of photographs of Finnish prisoners of war in leaflet propaganda of the Red Army.

9. Conditions and content of interrogations of prisoners conducted by NKVD officers.

10. Recruitment of Finnish prisoners of war by the USSR state security agencies.

11. Propaganda work with Finns in camps and reception centers.

12. Propaganda work of Finnish communists among prisoners of war.

13. Finding out the names and surnames of Finnish prisoners of war who did not want to return from the USSR after the end of hostilities.

14. Finding out the names and surnames of defectors.

15. Armament and size of the enemy army.

16. Treatment of Finnish prisoners of war in camps, detention centers and prisons by civilian authorities.

17 The mood of prisoners of war returning to Finland.

The above list is not official, it is compiled by me based on the most frequently asked questions. It is quite natural that in some interrogation reports it is presented in its entirety, in others only selectively. However, it gives an idea of ​​what most interested Finnish military interrogators.

After an investigation into the circumstances of the captivity and behavior in captivity, 35 former Finnish prisoners of war returned to Finland from the USSR were charged on suspicion of espionage for the USSR and treason. 30 former prisoners of war were convicted by the court and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment - from four months to life. Most of those convicted received sentences ranging from six to 10 years in prison. Five people were released due to insufficient evidence against them.

Information obtained from interviews with former Finnish prisoners of war was used by Finnish military and civilian authorities for various purposes, but mainly in the development and planning of a propaganda campaign in the lead-up to and during the Continuation War.

Return of prisoners of war to their homeland Continued

In September 1944, the war, which lasted almost three and a half years, ended. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and Finland concluded a truce. Many people were waiting for this event, but especially the Finnish and Soviet prisoners of war who were in the camps of the USSR and Suomi.