Torah in dozens of communities across the United States where Jews and non-Jews alike participated.

On December 6 there will be a special women's appeal in 27 cities across the country, and 1 week later on December 13 the eastern seaboard will participate in a mass demonstration in Madison Square Garden called "Freedom Lights for Soviet Jewry."

One of the ways the Soviet Union has shown it is sensitive to this program is to mount a propaganda offensive against it.

When a group of Soviet visitors came here recently to tour the United States some of them were meant to offset criticism of Soviet policy. However, in each local Jewish community where they visited the Jews met them with "truth squads" and invited them to take part in Jewish life that is not available to Soviet Jews. This was aimed at Gen. David Dragunsky, an avowed atheist, as well as other Soviet apologists in the group.

Permit me to suggest that we think that certain things can be done by our Government. First of all, we welcome some of the initiatives the U.S. Government has taken this past year on behalf of Soviet Jews, especially the actions of Mrs. Rita Hauser, the U.S. representative to the Human Rights Commission, and Mr. Arthur Fletcher, a member of the U.S. delegation to the U.Ń. General Assembly. The clarification by the Attorney General as to whether existing parole procedures in our immigration laws will apply to all Soviet Jews who leave is also most welcome as a recognition of the needs of Soviet Jews.

But much more should be done. For example, I can cite Soviet Jews and non-Jewish intellectuals who have gotten out of Russia recently who have told us that the Voice of America broadcasts about news of Jewish interest was relatively ineffectual. That was so because the broadcast did not go on at regular times with the result that interested listeners could never know when to tune in, nor did the broadcasts take into account the needs and aspirations of Soviet Jews, notably the new dissidents and activists. Although this may be a relatively minor point, Voice of America content can and should be improved with some Yiddish component in the broadcast.

A SEPARATE ISSUE

Mr. ROSENTHAL. Can we skip some of that because the VOA broadcasts are a separate issue? I think it is most important for the committee, in view of events, to concern itself with the conditions, and the problems. Maybe Mrs. Gluzman can enlighten us. Can you direct yourself to what the conditions are and the prognosis if we don't take any action?

Mr. MAASS. All right, sir. Perhaps I could indicate the condition of Jews in the Soviet Union by citing one case and then going on perhaps to a number of other instances in recent months.

The most recent instance of Soviet harrassment trials of Jews occurred quite recently with the trial of Boris Azernikov who was tried and convicted for anti-Soviet activity. He was graduated from the Kalinin Medical Institution in 1969. After a short time working in Siberia and Asia Minor, he moved to the outskirts of Leningrad

2 A newsletter by the American Jewish Conference on Soviet Jewry concerning the trial of Boris Azernikov, appears on p. 302.

where he became involved in Jewish activities. He attended an Ulpan and became a member of a group of Jews who clustered around Hillel Butman, one of the defendants in the second Leningrad trial.

In June 1970 he went to Kishinev with Lev Yagian to participate in Youth Summer Camp. Shortly thereafter, Yagman was arrested. In the course of the next few months, Azernikov was interrogated as many as 25 times by the Soviet secret police (KGB). Not only was he threatened at interrogations by the chief investigator of the Burman group, but he was called as a witness for the first and second Leningrad trials. At both appearances he gave testimony in the defense of his fellow Jews. Contesting many of the facts presented by the prosecutor, he denied any anti-Soviet nature of the Jewish organization. Azernikov was also summoned by the KGB to appear for a trial in Kishinev on June 6, 1971. However, after his arrival in Kishiney he was neither admitted to the witness room nor was he called to appear. Apparently the KGB changed its mind about the relevance of Azernikov to its case.

At the end of June 1971, Boris Azernikov submitted his documents to the office of visas and permits, known as OVIR. Only then was he arrested. During the course of Azernikov's subsequent trial, the prosecutor entered into evidence a book of Bialik's poems, a Hebrew calendar and the copy of a letter protesting the denial of exit visas. While Azernikov admitted possessing these items, he denied that they were anti-Soviet.

THE LENINGRAD CONSPIRACY

The state also attempted to link him with those involved in the two earlier Leningrad trials. However, from all available evidence, it seems that Azernikov was merely tangential to the Leningrad conspiracy. The evidence would indicate that he was arrested for applying for a visa. He was sentenced to 32 years at a strict regime camp. Of the four types of prison camps in the Soviet Union, a camp of strict regime is

next to worst.

Prisoners are required to work long hours at hard labor on small rations. They are also denied most contact with the outside world.

Why was the sentence so severe? In general, the present Soviet regime has been tightening control throughout society, without of course reinstating the worst terror of the Stalinist period. The same applies to the matter of dissenting Jews. Mr. Chairman, I could go on into a further exposition of the tightening of controls on all forms of activity which would seem to indicate any groups of people getting together either for the purpose of continuing their cultural and historic heritage or perhaps even applying for the right to emigrate.

In recent months there have been indications that selective arrests will be made by Soviet authorities of Jews who wish to gather for purposes of memorializing those who have died in past years or gathering together on holidays. It was only in the past months that selective arrests were made of Jews who were traveling by train to attend memorial meetings at the time of Simchath Torah. It is a selective approach to try to discourage Jews from applying for permits for emigration.

(Mr. Maass complete statement and supplementary material referred to follows:)

STATEMENT BY RICHARD MAASS, CHAIRMAN OF THE AMERICAN JEWISH CONFERENCE ON SOVIET JEWRY

Mr. Chairman, you have already heard the testimony of a number of rabbis from different communities. These men represent organizations which, for the most part, are affiliated to our Conference. They also come from communities linked into the daily operation of the national American Jewish Conference on Soviet Jewry.

AN ORGANIZATION OF ORGANIZATIONS

I come to you today as the chairman of the Conference and I have with me Jerry Goodman, executive director of that organization, as well as Mrs. Rita Gluzman, a former Soviet citizen. Our group represents a mobilization of nearly 40 major national Jewish organizations as well as hundreds of local community groups acting on behalf of Soviet Jews. Our aim is to bring about the removal of the restrictions and deprivations imposed upon Jews in the Soviet Union. By exposing those restrictions to the world, we hope to bring a knowledgeable and concerned public opinion to focus upon the Soviet Government for redress. To this end, we cooperate with similar groups throughout the world.

In addition to our goals of public education and social action in the United States, we also have recently undertaken direct assistance to Soviet Jews. This became a problem because Soviet Jews who have appealed to emigrate have been fired from their jobs. Also families of Jewish political prisoners sentenced to jail need economic assistance. While this may be true of many prisoners in the Soviet Union, the punishment meted out against these families is twice as cruel because these prisoners are not criminals and didn't want to destroy the Soviet state. All they wanted was out. For the record I enclose a list of prisoners.3

Let me sketch in some background on the problem of Soviet Jewry. Since Joseph Stalin destroyed the remnant of Jewish institutional life in 1948, Soviet Jews have been denied religious and cultural freedom and deprived of their basic human rights, including the right to emigrate to Israel or elsewhere where they can live as Jews. For the record, I am submitting a Conference Fact Sheet on Soviet Jewry, as well as a copy of the first edition of our Conference Newsletter to indicate the scope of this problem today.

What is apparent is that many religious and national minorities in the Soviet Union suffer different forms of discrimination, but that the Jews, as both a religious community and as a national group in Soviet society, are the object of special discriminatory practices. This could lead to their spiritual and cultural extinction. In addition, there has been an increase in discrimination against individuals on the job, in schools, and in residential neighborhoods.

INCREASING MILITANCE

The situation has changed somewhat recently in that there has been an increase in the militant assertion of Jewish identity, expressed by Soviet Jews in national and, to some extent religious terms. This is especially true among young Jews. I might add that the liberation movement born among young Soviet Jews relates in some ways to what is now going on in our country among young people seeking identity.

Some young Soviet Jews have also recruited their parents who were afraid to be vocal in their demands because they remembered and feared the repressions of the Stalin regime. The reaction among Soviet officials has been widespread harassment to counter this militancy. The series of trials of Jews last December and this past Spring were designed essentially to break the back of the Jewish resistance movement and especially of the group of Jewish activists in the city of Leningrad. These have, simply, been harassment trials. The Soviet Union punished those Jews who wanted to leave for Israel by firing them from their jobs, by humiliating them and, in some cases, by having neighbors organize hostile acts against them.

All of this has helped contribute to what I can only describe as "terror of the spirit."

Let me point out, Mr. Chairman, the most recent instance of Soviet harassment-a new trial. This one is from our Newsletter, which I have submitted

3 A list of Jewish prisoners in the Soviet Union appears on p. 229.

for the record, and it deals with the trial of Boris Azernikov who was tried and convicted for "anti-Soviet" activity.

A SEVERE SENTENCE

What has shocked most observers is the severity of the sentence-31⁄2 years at a "strict regime” camp. Of the four types of prison camps in the Soviet Union, a camp of "strict regime" is next to the worst. Prisoners there are required to work long hours at hard labor on rations, which, at 2,400 calories a day, means semistarvation. They are also denied most contact with the outside world. Why was the sentence so severe? In general, the present Soviet regime has been tightening the reins of control throughout society without reinstating the terror of the Stalinist period. The same applies to the matter of dissenting Jews. The Jewish community is certainly more vocal today, but the Soviet authorities are hesitant to respond with the full range of Stalinist techniques. With regard to Azernikov, it would appear that the Soviet government had figured that world concern about the plight of the Jews had somewhat died down.

In this connection it is worth noting, however, that in the U.S., the international Jewish dental fraternity, Alpha Omega, in cooperation with the American Jewish Conference on Soviet Jewry, launched an extensive campaign in support of Azernikov. In the Soviet Union several petitions of protest from other Jews were sent to the Soviet authorities.

Hoping to exploit what they thought was a situation of lessened concern, the Soviet authorities wanted to make an example of Azernikov: the refusal of his visa application and his subsequent prison sentence would, it was hoped, serve to discourage other Jews from applying for visas and would break, once and for all, the back of the militant Jews in Leningrad.

Further light is shed on the sentence and on the situation of the Jews in the Soviet Union, if one considers that atheism is a basic part of Soviet ideology. However, most religious prisoners, e.g. Old Believers and dissident Baptists, are sent to less strict camps. This would seem to indicate that the Soviets feel more threatened by the Jews-most likely because of Israel and because of their persistent demonstrations than by other groups. The official reaction, as is evident from the trials in the past year, has therefore been more severe.

But the Soviet Jews have not given in. They persist. And we in this country are continuing to respond. For years, Jews and non-Jews in the United States have participated in a wide variety of activities of a public and private nature. These have escalated in the last year in response to the resurgence of Jewish identity among Soviet Jews, and Soviet hostility towards this phenomenon. Recently, there were demonstrations of solidarity on the Jewish holiday of Simchath Torah in dozens of communities across the United States where Jews and nonJews alike participated. On December 6 there will be a special women's appeal in 27 cities across the country. And on December 13, the Eastern seaboard will participate in a mass demonstration at Madison Square Garden, "Freedom Lights for Soviet Jewry." That week also marks the first anniversary of the Leningrad Trial, last December.

One of the ways the Soviet Union has shown its sensitivity to this program is to mount a counter-propaganda offensive. When a group of Soviet visitors came here recently to tour the United States, some of them were meant to offset criticism of Soviet policy. Local Jewish communities where they visited met them with "truth squads" while they also invited the "tourists" to take part in the Jewish life that our country offers that is not available to Soviet Jews. This was particularly aimed at General David Dragunsky, a self avowed atheist and nonparticipant in Jewish life, as well as other Soviet apologists in the group.

ROLE OF OUR GOVERNMENT

What do we think can be done by our government? First of all, let me say that we welcome some of the initiatives the United States Government has taken on behalf of Soviet Jews, especially the actions of Mrs. Rita Hauser, the United States Representative to the United Nations Human Rights Commission, and Mr. Arthur Fletcher, a member of the present United States delegation to the United Nations General Assembly. The recent clarification by the Attorney General as to whether existing parole procedures in our immigration laws will apply to all Soviet Jews who leave is also most welcome as a recognition of the needs of Soviet Jews.

But much more can and should be done. I might cite in this context that Soviet Jews and non-Jewish intellectuals who have left the Soviet Union recently have told us of Voice of America broadcasts about news of Jewish interest that were relatively ineffectual. That was so, they reported, because the broadcasts did not go on at a regular time, with the result that interested listeners did not know when to tune in; and because the contents often did not take into account the special needs and aspirations of Soviet Jews-notably the new dissidents and activists. Although this may be a relatively minor point, the Voice of America content can and should be improved. Some Yiddish should be included in these broadcasts at least as a symbolic gesture to the cry for Jewish culture.

It should be pointed out that we, at the American Jewish Conference on Soviet Jewry, advocate militant concern and action. But, like other reasoning and concerned people, we reject violent action. Such action in this country by any individual or group is not different in kind from the behavior of the oppressors of Soviet Jews. We also believe that it helps alienate support of intellectuals in the United States, as well as Soviet intellectuals who are of assistance to Soviet Jews.

AN INTERNATIONAL ISSUE

While we also reject anything that will defeat efforts to achieve world peace, we can not allow the United States Government to forget the oppression of Soviet Jews. Our Government and its representatives have to continue to make this an international issue. We must take the lead, as we have in other instances of the violation of minority rights going back to the 19th century. Other governments should join with the United States at the United Nations General Assembly, where the entire question of discrimination against Soviet Jews, especially their right to leave the country, should be raised before the Assembly of Nations. At UNESCO, the issue of the demand of many Soviet Jews to maintain their education in the Soviet Union should be brought up. And at the Human Rights Commission, the whole problem of religious, cultural and social discrimination against Soviet Jews, by denying them facilities and institutons, should be asserted.

In addtion to public action by our government, there must be private efforts so that when members of the Cabinet, or other ranking officials visit the Soviet Union their authorities will realize that there are many people in this country who, although they welcome increasing contacts, are reluctant to see three million Jews lost. We do not believe that this would jeopardize relations between our two great nations-not if issues of trade expansion and arms reduction are of fundamental importance to Moscow.

The American Jewish Conference on Soviet Jewry welcomes increased contact with the Soviet Union, but such contacts, both cultural and otherwise, should also be platforms for a greater response by the Soviet Union on the question of Soviet Jewry.

If our government does not take the initiative on this issue it is, in effect, saying that the only way out is with the mindless militant and with violent action. It would be saying we in the American Jewish Conference on Soviet Jewry, representing the bulk of American Jews and working in concert with many non-Jews in the United States, do not have the leverage of those individuals who engage in violent disruption, such as shooting into the Soviet Mission in New York City.

The problem of the violent militant is not ours, of course. It is the problem of Soviet authorities who deny full equality to Soviet Jews, and of our own government when it does not respond sufficiently to the human issues of the plight of Soviet Jews.

In conclusion, I would like to quote from some of the remarks made by Congressman Jack Kemp of New York in submitting a Concurrent Resolution on emigration to the House of Representatives:

"One of the most important among the human rights that define a free society is the dual right to emigrate from and also return to one's country. It is a right that all of us (except those under some kind of due legal process) as Americans enjoy, even though it is not featured in bills and declarations

"It is my hope that by focusing world attention on this issue, the nations that have so blatantly infringed upon this basic human right will take notice of world opinion and cease these reprehensible policies."

It is sincerely to be hoped that the Soviet Government will act soon to free its Jewish population, on the demands of an elightened and outraged public opinion.