Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T12:27:22.002Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Col. Philip R. Faymonville and the Red Army, 1934-43

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2017

James S. Herndon  and
Joseph O. Baylen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Prior to the establishment of formal diplomatic relations between the United States and the Soviet Union in 1933, American military intelligence on the Red Army was limited to what it could glean from foreign military sources and travelers who had observed the Red Army inside the Soviet state. Thus, from 1920, the end of the period of Russian Civil War and Allied Intervention, to 1933, information on the Soviet military establishment was gathered by American military attachés from European diplomatic and military officials in Riga, Berlin, and Warsaw. To a lesser extent, intelligence on the Red Army was also available in London, Paris, Vienna, Stockholm, Tokyo, and Peking. American military intelligence dispatches and reports during the period reflected the heavy reliance upon secondary and indirect sources, although the information was often remarkably accurate. But with the American diplomatic recognition of the Soviet Union and the opening of an American embassy in Moscow, American military intelligence gained the opportunity to supplement information received from foreign military sources with data received directly from the American military attaché.

Type
Articles
Information
Slavic Review , Volume 34 , Issue 3 , September 1975 , pp. 483 - 505
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies. 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. On the career of Philip R. Faymonville, see War Department Bio Data Sheet, 2S-7387S-50, January 15, 1946, U.S. Army Center of Military History. Hereafter cited as War Dept. Bio Data, 25-73875-50. See also “Brig. Gen. Philip Faymonville, Expert on Soviet Union, is Dead,” Neiv York Times, March 31, 1962, p. 25; Admiral William F. Standley and Rear Admiral Arthur Ageton, A., Admiral Ambassador to Russia (Chicago: Henry Regnery Co., 1955), p. 238 Google Scholar; Bess, Demaree, “General Called the Turn,” Saturday Evening Post, 225 (August 29, 1942): 101 Google Scholar.

2. Standley, , Admiral Ambassador, p. 238 Google Scholar.

3. Capt. David R. Nimmer, “Report to the Director of Naval Intelligence, November 17, 1934,” Record Group 38, Military Intelligence Division, National Archives. We are indebted to Mr. Charles J. Weeks for the information on Capt. Nimmer used in this article.

4. Nimmer, “Report to the Director of Naval Intelligence, February 5, 1935,” ibid.

5. Nimmer to Director of Naval Intelligence, August IS, 1934, R.G. 38, as cited in Charles J. Weeks, “American Views of the Soviet Navy, 1917-1941,” (M.A. Thesis, Georgia State University, 1972), pp. 215-16. Indeed, Nimmer early characterized the Russians as the “greatest procrastinators in the world.” [Nimmer, “Report to the Director of Naval Intelligence, July 9, 1934,” R.G. 35, M.I.D., N.A.] Nimmer was subsequently recalled from Moscow and the post of American naval attaché remained vacant until the early 1940s.

6. For example, see the following intelligence reports and articles which appeared in American military journals during the 1924-34 decade: Lt. Col. Stone, Charles B. Jr., “Russian Model Infantry Company,” Infantry Journal, 25 (September 1924): 246–49Google Scholar; Capt. Appleton, Daniel S., “The Russian Army of Today,” Infantry Journal, 25 (October 1924): 415–17Google Scholar; Col. A. L. Conger, “Report 9187 on Soviet Army Maneuvers of 1927, December 23, 1927,” 2037-1754/9; “Danger Zones—Russia. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics,” Infantry Journal, 32 (January 1928): 9-15; Col. Edward Carpenter, “Report 9837 on Red Army Maneuvers, December 5, 1928,” 2037-1910/14; Maj. E. P. Pierson, “Report 934 on Soviet Military Situation, August 27, 1930,” 2037-1947/1; Maj. Emer Yeager, “Report 1210 on Russian Combat Estimate for 1931, January 5, 1931,” 10641- 333/12; Capt. John C. MacArthur, “Report 30066 on British Officer's Views of the Red Army, February 28, 1931,” 2657-D-997/1; “Professional Notes: Russia,” US. Naval Institute Proceedings, 57 (December 1931): 1714; “Professional Notes: Russia,” ibid., 58 (January 1932): 122; Maj. George E. Arneman, “Report 7895 on Development of Motor-Mechanized Units in the Red Army, February 8, 1932,” 2037-1972/2; Maj. Smith, R. C., “Russian Ideas on the Use of Modern Tanks,” Review of Military Literature, 12 (March 1933): 97–100 Google Scholar; Maj. W. E. Shipp, “Report 8363 on the Progress of Motor- Mechanization in the Red Army, June 29, 1933,” 2037-1972/10; Shipp, “Report 8387 on 'Infantry Fire Power’ of the Red Army, July 10, 1933,” 2037-1793/57; Shipp, “Report 8451 on Red Army Training and Tactics, September 20, 1933,” 2037-1984/11; and Lt. Col. Cortlandt Parker, “Report 34794 on Soviet Military, November 17, 1933,” 2037- 2006/1. All of the intelligence reports listed above are located in Record Group (R.G.) 165, Military Intelligence Division (M.I.D.) of the National Archives (N.A.) in Washington, D.C.

7. Maj. W. E. Shipp, “Report 8862 on Soviet Tank Tactics, October 2, 1934,” R-G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-1972/23, N.A.

8. Lt. Col. Philip Faymonville, “Report D-74 on Soviet Maneuvers, October 5, 1934,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-2017/1, N.A.

9. Faymonville, “Report D-101 on Red Army Parade on November 7, 1934, November 20, 1934,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-2020/1, NA.

10. Col. Albert Gilmor, “Report on the Competence of Soviet Officers, April 18, 1935,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-1692/91, N.A.

11. Capt. James C. Crockett, “Report 14232 on ‘Russian Infantry, ’ August 8, 1935,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-1709/28, N.A.; Shipp, “Report 8933 on the Education and Training of Red Army Officers, December 21, 1934,” ibid., 2037-2026/1; Shipp, “Report 9198 on Red Army Training, July 26, 1935,” ibid., 2037-2040/5; and Shipp, “Report 9424 on French and Italian Views of the Red Army, January 17, 1936,” ibid., 2037-2057/1.

12. For example, see Maj. Johnson, Alexander L. P., “The Foreign Military Press,” Infantry Journal, 42 (May-June, 1935): 279–80Google Scholar; During, Maj. F., “Cooperation between Tanks and Airplanes,” Review of Military Literature, 15 (June 1935): 36–37 Google Scholar; and Shipp, “Report 9199 on Progress of Mechanization in the Red Army, July 26, 1935,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-1972/32, N.A.

13. Shipp, “Report 8957 on Strength of Red Army, January 10, 1935,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-1159/351, N.A.

14. Shipp, “Report 8961 on Soviet Tank Tactics, January 18, 1935,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-1973/24, N.A.

15. Faymonville, “Report 341 on the Seventh Congress of the Comintern and Military Implications of the United Front, September 19, 1935,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 10058-342/279, N.A.

16. Erickson, John, The Soviet High Command, A Military-Political History, 1918- 1941 (London: Macmillan and Co., 1962), p. 394 Google Scholar.

17. For example, see Duranty, Walter, “Soviet War Games on a Big Scale,” New York Times, September 15, 1935, p. 24 Google Scholar; “Soviet Initiates Parachute Attack,” New York Times, September 16, 1935, p. 8; and “Russia's War Umbrellas,” New York Times, September 19, 1935, p. 24.

18. Erickson, , Soviet High Command, p. 237 Google Scholar.

19. See Shipp, “Report 8924 on Soviet Paratroopers, November 23, 1934,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-2015/2, N.A.

20. “Soviet Armies End Vast Maneuvers,” New York Times, September 17, 1935, p. 12; and Lt. Col. H. H. Fuller [American military attaché in Paris], “Report 12, 846-W on Soviet Maneuvers, September 19, 1935,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-2034/3, N.A. Although the report was signed by Fuller, it was written by his assistant, Maj. J. A. Lester.

21. Duranty, Walter, “General Loiseau of France is Impressed by Red Army's Mechanized Forces,” New York Times, September 19, 1935, p. 12 Google Scholar.

22. Col. Spaulding, D. L., “Air Infantry Landing,” Command and General Staff School Quarterly, 18 (June 1937): 85–87 Google Scholar.

23. Faymonville, “Report 366 on Red Army Maneuvers, October 22, 1935,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-2034/8, N.A.

24. Faymonville, “Report 520 on ‘Relationship of Red Army to Soviet Government, ' March 4, 1936,” ibid., 2037-1854/29.

25. Faymonville, “Report 525 on Soviet Army Maneuvers, March 24, 1936,” ibid., 2037-2059/1.

26. Faymonville, “Report S40, April 16, 1936,” ibid., 2277-D-64/17.

27. Gen. Golovine, Nicholas, “The Red Army,” Infantry Journal, 43 (July-August 1936): 303–9.Google Scholar

28. Col. F. H. Lincoln, “Memorandum to Chief of Infantry on Soviet Complaint regarding Publication of General Golovine's Article, ‘The Red Army, ’ August 1, 1936,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-2066/2, N.A.

29. FaymonviUe, “Critique of General Golovine's Article, ‘Military Forces of the U.S.S.R., ’ July 8, 1936,” ibid., 2037-2060/2.

30. Faymonville, “Report 648 on Red Army Artillery Training, October 7, 1936,” ibid., 2037-1995/2.

31. Joseph E. Davies, Mission to Moscow (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1941), p. 83. The German military attaché, Köstring, enjoyed a distinguished reputation as a “military expert” on the Red Army in the Moscow diplomatic community. According to the German diplomat, Herbert von Dirksen, Köstring's parents had owned an estate in Russia before 1914 and “he had spent his youth in that country and had acquired, quite apart from a perfect command of the language, a deep and almost instinctive understanding of the Russian mentality.” Highly respected, Köstring was “the model of an old-type Prussian cavalry officer, straight, chivalrous, intelligent, and courageous [and] enjoyed the unlimited confidence of the Red Army commanders as well as [that of] his colleagues.” Dirksen, Herbert von, Moscow, Tokyo, London: Twenty Years of German Foreign Policy (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1952), p. 121 Google Scholar.

32. Faymonville, “Report 792 on Physical Training in the Red Army, March 11, 1937,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-2075/1, N.A.

33. Hu Shih, “The Changing Balance of Forces in the Pacific,” Foreign Affairs, 15 (January 1937): 257; Maj. G. B. Guenther, “Report 9661 on Strength of Red Army, January 16, 1937,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-1159/371, N.A.; Davies, Mission to Moscow, pp. 20-29; Berchin, Michel and Ben-Horin, Elishu, The Red Army (New York: W. W. Norton, 1942, p. 20–21 Google Scholar; Kournakoff, Sergei, Russia's Fighting Forces (New York: Duell, Sloane and Pearce, 1942), p. 69 Google Scholar; Werner, Max [Schiffrin, Alexander], Military Strength of the Powers (New York: Modern Age Books, 1939, p. 33 Google Scholar; Balticus, “The Russian Mystery: Behind the Tukhachevsky Plot,” Foreign Affairs, 16 (October 1937): 58.

34. Dirksen, , Moscow, Tokyo, London, p. 130 Google Scholar.

35. For example, see Erickson, , Soviet High Command, pp. 449–509 Google Scholar; Kolkowicz, Roman, The Soviet Military and the Communist Party (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1967, p. 56 Google Scholar; Liddell Hart, Basil H., The Liddell Hart Memoirs, 2 vols. (New York: G. P, Putnam's Sons, 1965), 1: 198 Google Scholar; Hart, Liddell, ed., The Red Army, 1918-1945 (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1956), p. 2 Google Scholar; Medvedev, Roy A., Let History Judge: The Origins and Consequences of Stalinism (New York: Vintage Books, 1973, pp. 209–14 Google Scholar; O'Ballance, Edgar, The Red Army (London: Faber and Faber, 1964), p. 131 Google Scholar; Shapiro, Leonard, “The Great Purge,” in Hart, Liddell, ed., The Red Army, 1918-1945, pp. 70–71 Google Scholar; and Wolfe, Bertram D., An Ideology in Power: Reflections on the Russian Revolution (London: G. Allen and Unwin, 1969), p. 35 Google Scholar.

36. Faymonville, “Report 847 on Red Army Appointments, May 14, 1937,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-1692/94, N.A.

37. Loy Henderson to the secretary of state, June 8, 1937, U.S. Department of State, Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, Diplomatic Papers, The Soviet Union, 1933-1939 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1952), pp. 376–78Google Scholar. Hereafter cited as F.R.U.S., 1933-1939.

38. Henderson to the secretary of state, June 11, 13, and 23, 1937, ibid., pp. 378-86.

39. Faymonville, “Report 852 on ‘Military Soviets, ’ May 18, 1937,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-1692/95, N.A.; and Guenther, “Report on Organization of Red Army, May 28, 1937,” ibid., 2037-1692/96.

40. Erickson, , Soviet High Command, p. 468 Google Scholar.

41. Guenther, “Report 10248 on Morale of Red Army, October IS, 1938,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-1833/69, N.A.

42. Blackstock, Paul W., “The Tukhachevsky Affair,” Russian Review, 28 (April 1969): 188 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

43. Henderson to the secretary of state, February 18, 1938, F.R.U.S., 1933-1939, pp. 519-20.

44. Vagts, Alfred, The Military Attaché (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1967, p. 64 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

45. Demaree Bess, “General Called the Turn,” p. 102.

46. Vagts, , Military Attaché, pp. 66 and 332 Google Scholar.

47. Report 1341 from Ambassador Davies to the secretary of state, “Final Summary and Report on the Soviet Union Prior to Departure,” June 6, 1938, Davies, , Mission to Moscow, p. 409 Google Scholar. For the complete text of Davies’ report, see F.R.U.S., 1933-1939, pp. 556-58.

48. Davies, , Mission to Moscow, p. 168 Google Scholar.

49. Vagts, , Military Attache, p. 58 Google Scholar.

50. Carr, Edward H., “From Munich to Moscow,” Soviet Studies, 1 (June 1949): 5 Google Scholar.

51. Guenther, “Report 10244 on Red Army, October 13, 1938,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-1840/28, N.A.

52. Hugh Byas, “Soviet Weakness is Seen,” New York Times, July 3, 1937, p. 2. See also Harold Denny, “Soviet Withdraws Force from Amur Scene of Fight,” ibid., pp. 1-2; James, Edwin L., “Russia and Japan Ease Tension on Amur River,” New York Times, July 4, 1937, sec. 4, p. 3 Google Scholar; and Westcott, Allan, “Notes on International Affairs,” U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings, 53 (August 1937): 1179 Google Scholar.

53. Faymonville, “Report 913 on Trans-Siberian Railway, August 16, 1937,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2462-D-125/32, N.A.

54. Faymonville, “Memorandum on Soviet Industry as a Support for the Red Army, October 18, 1937,” ibid., 2655-D-549/1.

55. Faymonville, “Report 1043 on Soviet Army Parade, November 9, 1937,” ibid., 2037-2049/4. A dispatch later received from Maj. Guenther in Latvia confirmed Faymonville's analysis of the condition of the Soviet soldiers and attributed their fine physical condition to the work of the civilian para-military training organizations. See Guenther, “Report 9922 on Physical Instruction in the Red Army, December 2, 1937,” ibid., 2037- 2675/2.

56. Report 735 from Davies to the secretary of state on the Celebration of the Twentieth Anniversary of the Soviet Revolution, November 15, 1937, Davies, , Mission to Moscow, p. 326 Google Scholar.

57. See Lobanov-Rostovsky, André, “Some Aspects of the Far Eastern Crisis,” Slavonic and East European Review, 16 (April 1938): 573 Google Scholar.

58. Faymonville, “Memorandum to the Ambassador on Possible Military Action in the Soviet Far East, March 2, 1938,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-1962/11, N.A.

59. See Guenther, “Report 9870 on the Strength and Efficiency of the Red Army, October 20, 1937,” ibid., 2037-2081/1.

60. See Davies to the secretary of state, April 1 and 6, 1938, F.R.U.S., 1933-1939, pp. 547 and 556.

61. Faymonville, “Report 1164 on Marshal K. Y. Voroshilov, March 30, 1938,” R.G. 165, M.I.D., 2037-2029/13, N.A.; and “Report 1165 on Marshal S. M. Budyonny, March 30, 1938,” ibid., 2037-2029/14.

62. Faymonville, “Report 1222 on Red Army Equipment, May 13, 1938,” ibid., 2037- 2049/6.

63. Maj. Lowell M. Riley, “Report P-758 on Russia, June 1, 1938,” ibid., 2657-D- 1034/3.

64. War Dept. Bio Data, 25-73875-50. Alfred Vagts asserts that Faymonville was recalled from Moscow in 1939 because many officials in Washington doubted the validity of his reports on the Red Army. Vagts, , Military Attaché, pp. 85 and 332 Google Scholar.

65. War Dept. Bio Data, 25-73875-50.

66. Walter Thurston to the secretary of state, March 20, 1942, U.S. Department of State, Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, Diplomatic Papers, 1942, vol. 3: Europe (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1961), p. 422.

67. Vagts, , Military Attaché, p. 85 Google Scholar. Yeaton's pessimistic report on October 10, 1941, that “the end of Russian resistance is not far away,” was rejected by Harry Hopkins as unrealistic. See Sherwood, Robert, Roosevelt and Hopkins: An Intimate History (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1948, pp. 195–96 Google Scholar.

68. Pogue, Forrest C., George C. Marshall: Ordeal and Hope, 1939-1942 (New York: Viking Press, 1966, p. 72 Google Scholar; and Grew, Joseph C., Ten Years in Japan (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1944, p. 395 Google Scholar.

69. Standley, , Admiral Ambassador, p. 239 Google Scholar.

70. “Army and Navy: Personnel, First Thirty Years,” Time, 42 (November 29, 1943): 65-66. The chief of the American military mission in London, Maj. Gen. Raymond E. Lee, later noted in his diary (September 10, 1941) that U.S. Military Intelligence was convinced that a Soviet defeat was a matter of weeks and had leaked this opinion to the American press in mid-July 1941. Leutze, James, ed., The London Journal of General Raymond E. Lee, 1940-1941 (Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1971), p. 393 Google Scholar.

71. Vail Motter, T., The United States Army in World War II. The Middle East Theater. The Persian Corridor and Aid to Russia (Washington, D.C.: OCMH, Department of the Army, 1962), pp. 22–23 Google Scholar. Hereafter cited as Persian Corridor and Aid to Russia.

72. Ibid., pp. 25 and 65.

73. Sherwood, , Roosevelt and Hopkins, p. 395 Google Scholar.

74. On September 14, 1941, Faymonviile complained to Gen. Lee that Miles was “behind the times, and stupid and completely out of the picture as far as the pace of events is concerned… .” Leutze, , Journal of General Lee, p. 398 Google Scholar.

75. Motter, , Persian Corridor and Aid to Russia, pp. 25 and 66 Google Scholar.

76. Sherwood, , Roosevelt and Hopkins, p. 395 Google Scholar.

77. Motter, , Persian Corridor and Aid to Russia, p. 25 Google Scholar.

78. Ibid., pp. 66-67; War Dept. Bio Data, 25-73875-50.

79. Jones, Robert H., The Roads to Russia: United States Lend-Lease to the Soviet Union (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1969), pp. 63, 128-31Google Scholar.

80. Standley, , Admiral Ambassador, pp. 127, 237-51, 305–15Google Scholar. For another account of the Faymonville-Standley-Michela feud, see Pogue, Forrest C., George C. Marshall: Organizer of Victory, 1943-1945 (New York: Viking Press, 1973, pp. 288–90 Google Scholar.

81. War Dept. Bio Data, 2S-7387S-S0; “Army and Navy: Personnel, First Thirty Years,” pp. 65-66.

82. “Brig. Gen. Philip Faymonville, Expert on Soviet Union, is Dead,” p. 25.

83. Pogue, , Marshall: Organizer of Victory, p. 288 Google Scholar.

84. Gen. Deane, John Russell, The Strange Alliance: The Story of Our Efforts at Wartime Cooperation with Russia (New York: Viking Press, 1947, p. 88 Google Scholar.

85. White, Dimitri Fedotoff, Growth of the Red Army (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1944, p. 383 Google Scholar.

86. Yakovlev, Alexander, The Aim of a Lifetime: The Story of Alexander Yakovlev, Designer of the YAK Fighter Plane (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1972, p. 161 Google Scholar.

87. Vagts, , Military Attaché, pp. xiii and 82 Google Scholar.

88. Col. R. Ernest Dupuy, U.S.A., Ret., to J. S. Herndon, August 23, 1973. See also Bess, “General Called the Turn,” pp. 12, 101-2; “Army and Navy: Personnel, First Thirty Years,” pp. 65-66; “Brig. Gen. Philip Faymonville, Expert on Soviet Union, is Dead,” p. 25.

89. Vagts, Alfred, A History of Militarism: Civilian and Military (New York: Free Press, 1967, p. 16 Google Scholar.