Andrew Bostom Diana West US History

ANDREW BOSTOM ON AGENT 19, HENRY HOPKINS: FDR’S TRAITOR……?

 

A traitor who had FDR’s ear to whisper in.

The more arrows slung at Diana West for her thorough research in American Betrayal, that uncovers some of the most egregious breaches of US national security during FDR years and afterwards, the more we become enlightened by facts dug up by Diana herself and her supporters as they rally in defense of her. Thank Andy for this latest treat.

NOTE: Ron Radosh has made great hash of Harry Hopkins role as ‘agent 19′, Diana says otherwise, that he was indeed a crucial player in spying for the Soviets as FDR’s closet adviser. Andrew Bostom proves that other serious scholars took note of Hopkins’ role as key spy and notorious traitor, making Radosh’s bellicose rants at Diana West for her position on Hopkins as being agent 19, crass and foolish.

More definite than surmises about No. 19 was the revelation of KGB defector Oleg Gordievsky that Hopkins had been named in Russia as a Soviet intelligence agent. In a book by British historian Christopher Andrew, Gordievsky was quoted as recalling a lecture by veteran KGB operative Iskhak Akhmerov, a longtime “illegal” in the United States operating under a commercial cover. In this lecture, Akhmerov discussed his relationship with Alger Hiss and other Soviet agents but said that “the most important Soviet war-time agent in the United States” was Hopkins.

Harry_Hopkins_Josef_Stalin_Tehran_1943-e1370475428675

FDR’s Traitor?

Andrew G. Bostom

A controversy has re-ignited over Franklin Delano Roosevelt “co-President” Harry Hopkins’s potential role as an agent promoting Soviet influence operations during World War II. Diana West, in her new book, American Betrayal (and summarized here), makes the case that Hopkins was a conscious agent; Ronald Radosh rejects this contention .

The career trajectory of the late Herbert Romerstein (who died May 7, 2013), Cold War authority par excellence, was encapsulated by his obituarist, Professor Paul Kengor, as follows:

Herb knew the Cold War and communist movement unlike anyone. He understood it because he lived it and breathed it. Born in Brooklyn in 1931, he himself had been a communist, having joined the Communist Youth League before becoming a card-carrying member of Communist Party USA (CPUSA). He broke ranks over 60 years ago, the final straw being the Korean War, which made clear to him that he was dealing with inveterate liars, whether in Korea, Moscow, or among communists on the home-front. He went on to become one of America’s best anti-communists and most respected authorities, regularly testifying before Congress. He became a chief investigator for the House Committee on Internal Security. In the 1980s, he joined the Reagan administration, where his full-time job at the U.S. Information Agency was to counter Soviet disinformation, a duty for which few were so well-equipped or enthusiastic. He relished the role of taking on professional Soviet propagandists such as Georgi Arbatov and Valentin Falin. Later, he did the highly touted analysis of the Venona transcripts, which he published as The Venona Secrets.

Romerstein’s final work, Stalin’s Secret Agents, co-authored with journalist and Cold War era scholar, M. Stanton Evans, was just published in this past November, 2012.

After enumerating a litany of Harry Hopkins’s pro-Soviet activities, on  pp. 113-119 of  Stalin’s Secret Agents, Romerstein and Evans offer this self-evident summary assessment:

The obvious net meaning of these episodes is that Hopkins was a zealous advocate for Stalin. [emphasis added]

They segue immediately from this recounting of Hopkins’s “zealous advocacy” for the Soviet dictator, to their own discussion of the distinct likelihood that Hopkins was KGB agent 19.

More here.

2 Responses

  1. Seen from this point of view, the historical pieces of the WWII jigsaw puzzle that never jibed all of a sudden fit into a clear, logical pattern; add to it the fact that Stalin’s pact with Hitler in 1939 was intended to ignite war in Europe expected to be a long and protracted struggle so he could attack Germany in or around July 1941 and eventually Sovietize Europe from the Urals to the Channel. Unfortunately, the Germans disposed of the French and the English quickly, enabling Hitler to hastily assemble Operation Barbarossa in June 1941 and devastate the Soviet divisions, vulnerable in their offensive jumping off positions. We exchanged one monster for another. Who won WWII?: Stalin

  2. Dear Rene- If Stalin won WWII, then where is the Soviet Union today? What happened to all those big bronze statues of “Uncle Joe” so common in the 50s and 60s? Regarding the (fact?) ” that Stalin’s pact with Hitler was intended to ignite a war in Europe”, I can only ask, what about the Anschluss, the rape of Czechoslovakia, Bohemia and Moravia, etc., all of which happened before the 1939 Non-Aggression Pact? You seemed to have forgotten that both England and France both pledged to support Poland in the event of invasion.

    Regarding the comment “…..the Germans disposed of the French and English quickly”, no one ever bothered to tell the English that they were disposed of. I can only ask, exactly who were those chaps who defeated Rommel in North Africa and were somehow miraculously resurrected to take part in the invasion of Normandy? To paraphrase: “the reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated”.

    To suggest that Hitler “hastily” assembled Operation Barbarossa is a real howler. How could 3.9 million German and axis troops be “hastily assembled”, not to mention 600,00 motor vehicles and 750,00 horses? And to further suggest that “Soviet divisions (were) vulnerable in their offensive jumping off positions” is ludicrous. Explain exactly how they were “vulnerable”? Never mind that the accepted formula for successful offensive operations a 3 to 4 to one advantage over your opponent. Never mind that the 3.9 million German and axis troops faced a Soviet force of 2.6 million, hardly an “offensive” force.

    I have a few shares left in a modest investment deal for a bridge, the Brooklyn model. Please let me know if you are interested.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *