Twenty-five years later, I had the conversation which was
to lead the retrieval of the Goebbels diaries in Moscow, and
indirectly to our presence here in these Courts today. In May 1992, I invited a long-time friend, a leading
historian at the Institut für Zeitgeschichte, to have
lunch with me at a restaurant in Munich. We had been good
friends since 1964, and she is still in the Institute's
employ. As my diaries show, this friend and colleague, Dr.
Elke Fröhlich, had dropped several hints during the
previous twelve months that she had traced the whereabouts
of the missing Goebbels diaries. We all knew, those of us who had engaged in research in
Hitler, Goebbels, and the Third Reich, that Dr. Goebbels had
placed these diaries on microfiches -- photographic glass
plates -- in the closing months of the War, to ensure that
they were preserved for posterity. But they had vanished
since then. His Private Secretary, Dr. Richard Otte, whom I
had questioned over twenty years earlier in connection with
our search in the forest in East Germany, had told us about
these glass plates. I should mention that he was one of the
small burial party who had hidden the jar, but he was unable
to accompany us, as at that time he was still in West German
government employment. We could only presume that the glass
plate microfiches were either destroyed in the last weeks of
the War, or that they had been seized by the Red Army. During this lunchtime conversation in Munich in May 1992,
Dr. Elke Fröhlich revealed to me that the latter
supposition was correct. She had seen them herself a few
weeks previously -- had held them in her hands! -- on a
visit to the archives in Moscow. My recollection of the conversation at this point is,
that she continued by saying that the Institute's Directors
were unwilling to fund a further expedition to procure these
diaries. Now that I have seen some of the documentation provided
to the defendants in this action by the Russians and by the
Institute, it is possible that my recollection on this point
is wrong. My recollection of the following is however secure: Dr.
Fröhlich informed me that the Director of the Russian
"trophy" archives, as they were known, Dr. Bondarev, was in
a serious predicament, as he was faced with the economic
consequences of the collapse of the Soviet system; he no
longer had the means necessary for the upkeep of the
archives and the payment of his staff. The plates, in my view, were seriously at risk. Dr.
Fröhlich indicated that if I were to take a sufficient
sum of foreign currency to Moscow, I could purchase the
glass plates from Dr. Bondarev. It was clear from her
remarks that Dr. Bondarev had already discussed this
prospect with her. Dr. Fröhlich added that the glass plates were in a
fragile condition and needed to be rescued before they came
to serious harm. I recall that she said "If you are going to
this deal with the Russians, you will have to take a lot of
silk paper with you from England, to place between the glass
plates. The plates are just packed into boxes -- with
nothing between them." I asked how much money we were talking about, and either
she or I suggested a figure of 20,000 U.S. dollars. I
immediately contacted my American publishers in New York,
who seemed the most immediate source of money; I informed
them of this likely windfall, and asked if we could increase
the cash advance on my GOEBBELS manuscript accordingly. My manuscript of the Goebbels biography was at that time
complete, and undergoing editing by myself. It was already
ready for delivery to the publishers. The American publishers responded enthusiastically at
first, and upon my return from Munich to London I began
negotiations through intermediaries with the Russian
archivist Dr. Bondarev. (Dr. Bondarev will not,
unfortunately, be called by either party in this action; he
seems to have vanished, and is certainly no longer at the
trophy archives). The first intermediary I used was a Russian-language
specialist employed by Warburg's Bank in Moscow; he
undertook the preliminary negotiations with Dr. Bondarev. I
instructed him to tell Bondarev as openly as was prudent of
my intention to come and look at the glass plates, and also
to make it quite plain that we were coming with a
substantial sum of hard currency. Many American institutions
were currently engaged in the same practice, as I knew from
the newspapers. At about this time it became plain that the German
Government was also keen to get its hands on these glass
plates. Naturally I desired to beat them to it: first,
because of professional pride, and the desire to have a
historical scoop: and secondly, years of working with the
German Government Archives had proven both to me and many
scholars that as soon as high-grade documents like these
dropped into their hands they vanished for many years while
they were assessed and catalogued and indexed; and sometimes
they were even squirreled away for later exploitation by the
Chief Archivists themselves (the "Hossbach Papers" were one
case in point). These vital Nazi diaries would therefore vanish from the
public gaze possibly for five or ten years; my fears in this
respect had been amply confirmed by events, because many of
those glass plates which I saw in Moscow in 1992 have since
vanished into the maw of the German Government and the
Munich Institut für Zeitgeschichte and they are still
not available even now. I considered therefore that I should be rendering to the
historical community the best service by doing the utmost
that I could to extract those glass plates, or failing that
copies of them, or failing that copies of the maximum number
of pages possible, by hook or by crook, from the KGB
archives before a wind of change might suddenly result in
the resealing of all these former Soviet archives (and once
again this apprehension has been largely confirmed by the
attitude of the Russian Archive Authorities, who have
resealed numbers of these files and made them once again
inaccessible to Western historians). The second intermediary upon whom I relied was the former
KGB Officer, Lev Bezymenski. I have known Mr. Bezymenski for
about thirty-five years, and over these years we have
engaged in a fruitful exercise of exchanging documents: I
would hasten to add that the documents which I furnished to
Mr. Bezymenski were entirely of a public-domain nature: Mr.
Bezymenski in return extracted from Soviet archives for me
vital collections of documents, for example, their
diplomatic files on Sir Winston Churchill, and the private
papers of the Commander in Chief of the German Army,
Colonel-General Werner von Fritsch. From the Russian
archives I obtained, via Mr. Bezymenski, Fritsch's personal
writings during and about the "Blomberg--Fritsch scandal" of
1938, which had historic consequences for Germany, for
Hitler and ultimately for the world. I immediately donated a
complete set of those Fritsch papers to the German
Government archives, where they can still be seen. Dr. Bezymenski proved unfortunately to be something of a
"double agent". Fearing that Dr. Bondarev was not properly
getting my message, I asked Mr. Bezymenski to approach him,
and to inform him that there were certain documents he held
in which I was interested, and that I was coming as a
representative of the Sunday Times, well armed with foreign
currency. Mr. Bezymenski inquired what those documents were;
I refused to tell him, and he replied, "You are referring to
the Goebbels diaries I presume". This I affirmed. Ten minutes after this telephone
conversation from me in London to Mr. Bezymenski in Moscow,
I received a telephone call from Dr. Fröhlich in
Munich, complaining very bitterly that I had revealed our
intentions to Mr. Bezymenski. Instead of acting as I had
requested, my friend had immediately sent a fax to the
Institut für Zeitgeschichte to alert them to what I was
"up to." This set the cat among the pigeons, and the
Institut für Zeitgeschichte left no stone unturned to
prevent the Russians from providing me with the diaries or
other materials, for reasons which this Court can readily
surmise. I had in the meantime approached the Sunday Times after
my American publishers got cold feet, and I had succeeded in
persuading Mr. Andrew Neil that I could obtain The Goebbels
Diaries from the Moscow archives, and that I was by chance
one of the very few people capable of reading that
handwriting. Two years previously, in 1990, my Italian publisher,
Mondadori, had commissioned me to transcribe the
hand-written 1938 diary volume of Dr. Goebbels, a copy of
which they had purchased from a Russian source. I was thus
acquainted with the difficult handwriting of the Nazi
propaganda Minister. At that time there were probably only
three or four people in the world who were capable of
deciphering it. The negotiations with Andrew Neil proceeded smoothly. He
did express at one stage nervousness at the prospect of
entering into another "Nazi diaries" deal -- his newspaper
group having been made to look foolish for its purchase and
publication in 1983 of the forged "Hitler Diaries". I
pointed out that I had warned them in writing months ahead,
in 1982, that the diaries were fakes. I added "I am offering
the 'Sunday Times" the chance to rehabilitate itself!" Armed with the prestige and the superior financial
resources of the Sunday Times I went to Moscow in June 1992,
and negotiated directly with Dr. Bondarev and his superior,
Professor Tarasov, who was at that time the overall head of
the Russian Federation Archival System. Dr. Bondarev expressed willingness to assist us, although
there could no longer be any talk of the clandestine
purchase of the plates which we had originally hoped for,
since Mr. Bezymenski had let the cat out of the bag. I say
"clandestine," but I understand that the same archives sold
off many other collections of papers, for example to the
Hoover Institution in California, and to U.S. publishing
giants, and to my colleague the late John Costello. But my
own little deal was not to be. Professor Tarasov is one of the witnesses in this case,
My Lord, and your Lordship will be able to study the
documents exhibited by him to his Witness Statement; I
confess that I fail to see the relevance of very many of
them, but no doubt we shall see that difficulty removed by
Mr. Rampton in due course. The Moscow negotiations were not easy. We negotiated with
Professor Tarasov for access to the glass plates. The
negotiations were conducted in my presence by Mr. Peter
Millar, a freelance journalist working for the Sunday Times,
who spoke Russian with a commendable fluency. He will also
be giving evidence in this action. With my limited "O"-level
Russian, I was able to follow the gist in conversation and
also to intervene, speaking German, after it emerged that
Professor Tarasov had studied and taught for many years at
the famous Humboldt University in Communist East Berlin. By now both Dr. Bondarev and Tarasov were aware, if they
had not been aware previously, that these Goebbels Diaries
were of commercial and historical value. The negotiations
took longer than I had expected. I produced to Professor Tarasov copies of the Soviet
edition of my books, which had been published years earlier,
and I donated to him, as well as later to the Archives
staff, copies of my own edition of the biography of HITLER'S
WAR. This established my credentials to their satisfaction,
and Tarasov gave instructions that we were to be given
access to the entire collection of the 'Dr. Goebbel's
Diaries'. It was quite evident to me, when I finally saw the glass
plates, that the diaries had been hardly examined at all. It
seemed to me, e.g. from the splinters of glass still trapped
between the photographic plates, that there had been little
movement in the plates for nearly fifty years; the boxes
were the original boxes, the brown paper around them in some
parts was still the original brown paper. The plates were in
total disarray and no attempt had been made to sort them. I
have seen no work of history, Soviet or otherwise, that has
quoted from them before I got them. My excitement as an historian, getting my hands on
original material like this, can readily be imagined. There is now a dispute as to the nature of the Russian
permission, -- and this alleged agreeement is one of the
issues pleaded by the Defendants in this action. It is difficult for me to reconstruct seven years later
precisely whether there was any verbal agreement exceeding a
nod and a wink, or what the terms were, or how rigid an
agreement may have been reached. There is no reference to
such an agreement in my contemporary diaries. Certainly the
Russians committed nothing to paper about such an agreement.
Professor Tarasov's word was law, and he had just picked up
the phone in our presence and spoken that word to
Bondarev. My own recollection at the time was that the arrangement
was of a very free-wheeling nature, with the Russians being
very happy, and indeed proud, to help us in the spirit
reigning at that time of GLASNOST and PERESTROIKA, and
extreme co-operativeness between West and East; they were
keen to give us access to these plates, which they had
hitherto regarded as not being of much value. Tarasov did
mention that the German Government were also interested in
these plates, and that they were coming shortly to conduct
negotiations about them. I remember clearly, and I think that this is also shown
in the diary which I wrote on that day, that Tarasov
hesitated as to whether he should allow us access without
first consulting the German Authorities; I rather
mischievously reminded Dr. Tarasov of which side had won the
War, and expressed astonishment that the Russians were now
intending to ask their defeated enemy for permission to show
to a Third Party records which were in their own archives,
and this unsubtle argument appears to have swayed him to
grant us complete access without further misgivings. There was no signed agreement, either between the Russian
authorities and us, or at that time between the Russians and
the German Authorities. I would add here that I was never shown any Agreement
between the Russians and the German Authorities, nor was I
told any details of it; nor of course could it have been in
any way binding upon me. We returned to the archives the following morning, Mr.
Millar and I, to begin exploiting the diaries. Millar went off on his own devices. I had brought a
German assistant with me to act as a scribe. Her diary is also in my Discovery, and I admit I have not
yet found time to read it (I have an odd aversion to reading
other people's diaries). I must admit that I was rather
perplexed by the chaotic conditions that I found there -- in
the Russian archives. There was no technical s means
whatever of reading the diaries, which the Nazis had reduced
to the size of a small postage stamp on the glass
plates. Fortunately, Dr. Fröhlich had alerted me about this
possibility, and I had bought at Selfridges a 12 x
magnifier, a little thing about the size of a nail clipper,
with which by peering very hard I could decipher the
handwriting. It was even more alarming to someone accustomed
to working in Western archives -- with their very strict
conditions on how to handle documents, and cleanliness and
security -- to see the way that the shelves and tables and
chairs were littered with bundles of papers; at one stage
the Archivist brought in bottles of red wine and loaves of
bread and cheese which were scattered among the priceless
papers on the tables for us to celebrate the end of the
week. That would have been unthinkable in any Western
archive building. My German assistant had worked with me in the U.S.
National Archives previously. We spent the first day
cataloguing and sifting through all the boxes of glass
plates and identifying which plates were which --
earmarking, figuratively speaking, the glass plates which
were on my shopping list to be read and copied. Very rapidly, we began coming across glass plates of the
most immense historical significance, sections of the
diaries which I knew had never been seen by anybody else
before. I was particularly interested in the Night of Broken
Glass, November 1938, and the Night of Long Knives, June
1934. I also found the glass plates containing the missing
months leading up to and including the outbreak of World War
Two in 1939, diaries whose historical significance need not
be emphasised here. Given the chaotic conditions in the Archives, I took the
decision to borrow one of the plates overnight and bring it
back the next day, so that we could photograph its contents.
I shall argue about the propriety of this action at a later
stage. I removed the plate, its contents were printed that
night by a photographer hired by the Sunday Times, whose
name was Sasha, and the glass plate was restored to its box
the next morning, without loss or damage. The Sunday Times editor Andrew Neil was coincidentally in
Moscow at this time, and I showed him one of the glass
plates at his hotel, the Metropol. He stated, "We really
need something spectacular to follow the Andrew Morton book
on Princess Diana, and this is it!" The next day Dr. Bondarev formally authorised the
borrowing of two more such plates anyway, so it was clear to
me that nobody would have been offended by my earlier
action. I returned to London and over the next few days a
contract was formalised between myself and the Sunday Times
under which the newspaper was to pay me £75,000 net for
procuring the diaries, transcribing them and writing three
chapters based on the principle extracts from the diaries.
The contract with the Sunday Times contained the usual
secrecy clauses -- nobody was to learn of the nature of the
contract, or its contents, or the price, or of the existence
of the diary. For reasons beyond my knowledge the Sunday Times, when it
came under extreme pressure from international and British
Jewish organisations, subsequently put it about that I had
only been hired to transcribe the diaries -- with the
implication that they had obtained them on their own
initiative. I was not, however, just a hired help: this was
my project which I took to them and which they purchased, as
the documents before this Court make quite plain. It may be felt that seventy-five thousand pounds would
have been a substantial reward for two weeks' work; but my
response would be that it was for "thirty years plus two
weeks' work" -- we are paid for our professional skills and
expertise and experience and reputation. For our
track-record, in short. I returned to London, with arrangements to revisit Moscow
in two or three weeks' time. The Court will find that I have have stipulated, in what
I believe is known in legal terms as an Admission, that I
carried with me two of the glass plates from the Moscow
archives to the Sunday Times in London -- informally
borrowing them in the same manner as previously --, namely
those vital records recording the 1934 Nazi "Night of Long
Knives". The reasons for doing so I have already hinted at earlier
--the fear that they would either vanish into the maw of
German Government, or be resealed by the former Soviet
archives, or be sold off to some nameless American
trophy-hunter, and thus never see the light of day
again. I took these two borrowed plates straight to Munich, to
the Institute of History (the Institut für
Zeitgeschichte), where I knew that they had a microfiche
printer and reading machine; together with the institute's
Dr. Zirngiebel, who was their expert in the archives, we
inserted the appropriate lenses in the microfiche printer
for a microfiche of this magnification, and I printed out
two copies of each of the hundred or so documents on those
two microfiches. There was no secrecy about this. I at once sent two of
these pages upstairs to the experts in the Institute of
History itself, and two more to the German Federal Archives,
with the written request that they formally identify these
pages as being in the handwriting of Dr. Joseph Goebbels.
This was a necessary part of agreement with the Sunday
Times, who were being no less cautious than I. The other principal reason that I had borrowed these two
glass plates temporarily from the Russian Archives was in
order to put them to London forensic experts for the
purposes of authentication; in the same manner that others
had tested the "Adolf Hitler diaries" and I the Canaris
diaries, the Sunday Times quite properly wished to have
final proof that the glass plates were indeed of wartime
manufacture: namely, that the glass was of wartime origin,
and that the photographic emulsion was of wartime
chemicals. The Court may marvel at these precautions that we as, as
non-scholars, took; but it seemed perfectly natural to me
and to the officials of the Sunday Times. After all, not
only were large sums of money involved but also the
reputations of myself and a major international newspaper
group. We wished to be absolutely certain. On my return from Moscow and Munich to London, in June
1992 therefore the two glass plates were sent their separate
ways, heavily wrapped and protected; one to an Agfa
photographic laboratory which tested the age of the
emulsion, in a non-destructive manner, and the other to the
Pilkington Glassworks, whose laboratory specialists carried
out similar tests on the age of the glass. Their reports are
part of my Discovery, and these confirm that the tests were
appropriate under the circumstances. My Lord, if I may just anticipate by a few paragraphs
what happened to those two glass plates: I returned to
Moscow at the end of June, the glass plates were brought out
to Moscow personally by a courier of the Sunday Times as son
as the tests on them were complete, and handed to me,
standing outside the Archives building, as my diary records;
and within three minutes I had taken them back into the
Archives building and replaced them in the box where they
had been for the last forty-seven years. What follows is not strictly relevant to the glass
plates, but it is relevant to this case and it is best
inserted here because of its chronology. When I returned to
London with the remaining diaries which the Sunday Times had
requested, an awkward situation had developed. Our secrecy
had been compromised by an astute reporter of The
Independent, a Mr. Peter Pringle, who was based in Moscow at
the time that I was using the archives. He too has submitted
a witness statement, for the Defendants. He stalked me into
the Archives, confronted me and learned from Dr. Bondarev of
my work on the Goebbels Diaries. The resulting scoop in the The Independent set the press
world about its ears, and before I returned to London on
July 4, 1992 the entire Fleet Street press and the broadcast
media fell over themselves to print stories about the
diaries and my own participation. In order to blacken the
name of the Sunday Times and its unpopular editor, I was
described with every possible epithet. It is of relevance to this action, in my submission,
because the same organizations which had gone to great
lengths to furnish the Defendants with the material they
needed to blacken my name in the book, Denying the
Holocaust, now applied heavy pressure to Andrew Neil and to
Times Newspapers Ltd. to violate their contract with me, and
to pay me nothing of the monies which were due to me under
the contract. Under this pressure, which Mr. Neil described to me at
the time as the worst that he had ever experienced in his
life, the Sunday Times (having in fact paid me the first
instalment), welshed on the rest of the payments. I was
forced to sue them in these courts for breach of contract.
The financial consequences of this violation of the
contract, in round terms about £65,000, were serious
for me. When I reviewed all the press clippings, and read all the
statements made by these various bodies, boards, campaigns,
agencies, and organisations attacking my name both during my
absence in Moscow and upon my return, I could only say,
sadly, from a lengthening experience: "The gang's all
here". The same gang, whom I loosely describe as the traditional
enemies of free speech, were to be seen on the following
days behind the metal police barricades thrown up outside my
apartment, screaming abuse at myself and other leaseholders
in our building, spitting, harassing passers by, and holding
up offensive placards and slogans including one reading, in
the most execrable taste, "GAS IRVING" -- it can be seen in
the newspaper photos. From the photographs of this
demonstration, it appears that representatives of every
ethnic and other minority were present in these. It was the
most disagreeable experience. On my second visit to Moscow, as Your Lordship will find
from the relevant passages of my diary, I found a frostier
atmosphere. The boxes with which I had so readily been
provided on my previous trip, were said to be "missing" and
not found. For three or four days I was unable to do
anything, and then one box was released to me, which I
devoured rapidly. On the last day but one it became plain that I had
jealous and envious rivals in Munich to thank for the
difficulties that the Russians were now making. Dr.
Bondarev's Secretary came into the Reading Room and said
that there were allegations that I had "stolen" the glass
plates. I assured her that while I had borrowed some, every
glass plate which had been in my custody was at that moment
back in the Archives and that nothing was missing -- which
was true. I also voluntarily wrote a Statement, which was
handed to Dr. Bondarev. Your Lordship will find that this document in both
Russian and English, in my handwriting, is in the Discovery
both of myself and of the Defendants, as an exhibit to the
report by Professor Tarasov. Professor Tarasov is to be
giving evidence before your Lordship, and I shall examine
him with particular pleasure. Dr. Bondarev's secretary came back a few minutes later,
and said that this was just what they required. She now
vouchsafed to me the information: "The information came from
Munich." Your Lordship will see from the "information" which came
from Munich, which is in the Defendants' Discovery, that the
Institut für Zeitgeschichte had faxed to Moscow a
particularly hateful letter about me in an attempt to
destroy my relationship with the Russians. However I already had all the documents that had been on
my shopping list. Either in longhand, or by dictating them
on to a hand-held tape recorder, or typed onto my portable
typewriter, or as photocopies of a few pages of November
1938, or as photographic prints obtained from the glass
microfiches, I had collected several hundred pages of the
most important Goebbels diary entries that had been missing
ever since the end of the war, and I see no reason not to be
proud of this achievement. It is indicative of the general attempt to blacken my
name, and to silence me, that when I spoke to a meeting
organised by my private "supporters' club," the Clarendon
Club, on the evening of July 4, 1992 -- my return from
Moscow -- the hall in Great Portland Street was subject to
violent demonstrations outside which required a very large
police presence to protect the members of my audience. This
will be one of the photographs in the bundle that I shall
shortly be submitting to your Lordship. Later on that year when I addressed a further meeting in
a West End Hotel, there even more violent
demonstrations. Such demonstrations do not occur spontaneously. Somebody
has to pay for the printing and the billposting and the bus
rentals. I might mention that on one of the days that
followed I was violently attacked by three men who
identified themselves to me as Jews when I was having a
Sunday at a public restaurant in Mayfair: they had laid an
ambush for me. I only recently learned that on the Monday morning after
my return from Moscow, July 6, my long-time publishers,
Macmillan Ltd, seeing the clamour and coming under pressure
from unnamed members of the Jewish community, panicked and
issued secret instructions for the destruction of all
remaining stocks of my books, without ever informing me that
they had done so. This particularly repulsive act by a publisher,
reminiscent of the Nazis in 1933, cost me of course many
tens of thousand of pounds in lost royalties. At the same
time as they were taking these secret decisions to destroy
all my books, at the cost to themselves of hundreds of
thousands of pounds, my Editor at Macmillan's continued to
write me ingratiating letters expressing interest in the
early delivery of my GOEBBELS biography. It was altogether a most unhappy period. My Lord, I would also add one further brief example of
how different is my attitude to such documents as the
Goebbels Diaries from the attitude of my rivals and the
scholars. Dr. Ralf Günther Reuth approached me, saying that he
who was preparing a 5 volume abridged edition of the other
Goebbels diaries for Piper Verlag in Germany and had nothing
for 1938, and that there were large gaps in the other years
too; I foolishly allowed him to have photocopies of some of
the most important passages which until that moment we had
been exclusive to myself and my as yet unpublished Goebbels
biography. The thanks that I received for this generous act
were scant indeed. I provided copies to the German Federal Archives of the
entire Goebbels diary extracts that I had brought back from
Moscow on July 1, 1993. Ten minutes later the Director of
the Archives informed me, in extreme embarrassment, that on
the instructions of the Federal Ministry of the Interior I
was permanently banned from the selfsame Archives forthwith
and in perpetuity, which is to my knowledge the only time
that such a sanction has been ever been applied to a
historian. He explained that this was "in the interests of
the German people". I mention these facts, My Lord, to show that it was not
just one single action that has destroyed my career but a
cumulative, self-perpetuating, rolling onslaught, from every
side -- engineered by the same people who have propagated
the book which is the subject of this action. |