This important work historically to set the record straight and for future generations, if there are any, to study the past and learn from it for a hopefully better world.
Klarenberg’s article is provocative, sometimes overstated, but important. He touches on truths that mainstream narratives prefer to forget, especially the murky intersection of Cold War intelligence and postwar moral revisionism in Eastern Europe. I don’t agree with every conclusion, but I value his persistence in forcing uncomfortable history into public view. His work reminds me that sharp questions, even imperfect ones, can expose the reflexes of institutional denial.
This is another important brick in constructing a wall of understanding how these agencies in the current day "NATO" are so closely tied to nazists across Europe, and even why the deep state has been for so ong installing the decendants of these fascists groups in charge its own work.
Who are "we" and what the h#ll are we actually fighting for, at the huge costs we spend on it, Because it's clearly not a fight against authoritarianism, when these are the groups we are allied, with - and when our own nations are increasingly openly authoritarian themselves.
Its the rotten nature of the actual mission of all this warring that induces the so called west to repeatedly construct cartoon like villains and then spread them all over the media. It's "Putin" this and "Xi" that. Because without these cartoonish depictions fo pantime villains, there would be too much space to ask real questions about what the actual agenda is here.
I often wonder about the Russophobic 'leadership' in the Baltic states, as well as anti-Soviet activities throughout Eastern Europe, that they represent the failed bourgeoisie and land owners in these states. After all, why would a peasant or worker represent a government that worked in their favor?
Thank you for that very thorough article about a forgotten, or almost never known, chapter of the ongoing World War against Russia and the USSR no matter what the place is called.
I am sure you know of SS General Eastern Front, Reinhard Gehlen, who after the war was invited by the OSS and played a key role, I believe, in not only the founding of the CIA but in its rabidly anti-Soviet, anti Russian direction.
I wonder why you chose not to include that very sinister and shadowy figure in your essay on Bandera and The Ukraine?
There used to be a lot more on Wiki about Gehlen than there is now. But if you dig you will find things.
Kim Philby played a critical and damaging role in sabotaging Western efforts to infiltrate agents into the Baltic States and Ukraine during and after World War II. As a high-ranking British intelligence officer secretly working for Soviet intelligence, Philby passed on vital information about British and American espionage operations to Moscow. He informed the Soviets in advance of plans to penetrate Soviet-occupied Baltic countries and Ukraine, allowing Soviet counterintelligence to effectively neutralize these infiltration attempts.
Specifically, Philby headed the British SIS Section IX, responsible for operations against the Soviet Union, and he warned Moscow about upcoming infiltrations by agents drawn largely from émigré groups from the Caucasus, Ukraine, and the Baltic States. Rather than allowing these agents to succeed, Soviet border guards often "let in" some agents to flip them, arrested others after identifying their networks, or killed agents attempting to cross the border. None of the British agents reportedly died during these operations, underscoring the extent to which they were compromised early on. Philby also worked closely from London and even later from the United States with Western intelligence officials, gaining access to secret operations and passing them to Moscow, ensuring that Western subversive plans failed.[1][3]
Philby's deceptions extended to his role in other espionage activities and sabotage training. He was involved in complex clandestine struggles including handling defectors and countering anti-Soviet resistance groups. His interception and manipulation of agents were part of broader Soviet security strategies to maintain control over the Baltic countries and Ukraine, which were seen as crucial parts of the USSR.[3][5][1]
In summary, Kim Philby was centrally involved in betraying Western intelligence operations aimed at inserting agents into the Baltic States and Ukraine, effectively thwarting efforts to build resistance or collect intelligence against Soviet control in these regions through early and detailed warnings to Soviet counterintelligence.[7][1][3]
One of the good things Philby did. He even fooled the virulent anticommunist James Jesus Angleton and became his drinking buddy in Washington. I have studied the Cambridge spies extensively over the years and have respect for how well Philby fooled the secret services for decades.
Apologies for taking this off a tangent. I am wondering whether there are scholarly definitions of what "open" or "public" means. Even if sth is in the public domain technically, it may be known by such a small fraction of the people that its impact on public discourse is undistinguishable from it being still a secret. Is there a way to conceptualize "open" as a matter of degree? Can the mechanisms that change this degree be studied in an interesting way? One thing that this blog is doing is changing this degree, if only a little. Could that be a way of studying the role of journalism in society? This sounds like sth that could have been done ...
The ex-spy and novelist John le Carre glorified the Baltic fighters in the character of General Vladimir, who gets murdered in "Smiley's People". Figures, since MI6 was financing the fascists against the Soviet Union.
And the same “Banderite story” everywhere. So sad!
This important work historically to set the record straight and for future generations, if there are any, to study the past and learn from it for a hopefully better world.
Similar to Baltics, in parallel CIA was running the operation Aerodynamic in Ukraine!
https://open.substack.com/pub/freiheit07/p/the-final-solutions-upgrade-when?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=647faf
Klarenberg’s article is provocative, sometimes overstated, but important. He touches on truths that mainstream narratives prefer to forget, especially the murky intersection of Cold War intelligence and postwar moral revisionism in Eastern Europe. I don’t agree with every conclusion, but I value his persistence in forcing uncomfortable history into public view. His work reminds me that sharp questions, even imperfect ones, can expose the reflexes of institutional denial.
Why do people in the Baltic States harbour Nazi Nostalgia? Is it a cultural thing?
This is another important brick in constructing a wall of understanding how these agencies in the current day "NATO" are so closely tied to nazists across Europe, and even why the deep state has been for so ong installing the decendants of these fascists groups in charge its own work.
Who are "we" and what the h#ll are we actually fighting for, at the huge costs we spend on it, Because it's clearly not a fight against authoritarianism, when these are the groups we are allied, with - and when our own nations are increasingly openly authoritarian themselves.
Its the rotten nature of the actual mission of all this warring that induces the so called west to repeatedly construct cartoon like villains and then spread them all over the media. It's "Putin" this and "Xi" that. Because without these cartoonish depictions fo pantime villains, there would be too much space to ask real questions about what the actual agenda is here.
I often wonder about the Russophobic 'leadership' in the Baltic states, as well as anti-Soviet activities throughout Eastern Europe, that they represent the failed bourgeoisie and land owners in these states. After all, why would a peasant or worker represent a government that worked in their favor?
The Forest Banderists of the Ukraine need a separate article.
https://www.kitklarenberg.com/p/stepan-banderas-sinister-mi6-alliance
Thank you for that very thorough article about a forgotten, or almost never known, chapter of the ongoing World War against Russia and the USSR no matter what the place is called.
I am sure you know of SS General Eastern Front, Reinhard Gehlen, who after the war was invited by the OSS and played a key role, I believe, in not only the founding of the CIA but in its rabidly anti-Soviet, anti Russian direction.
I wonder why you chose not to include that very sinister and shadowy figure in your essay on Bandera and The Ukraine?
There used to be a lot more on Wiki about Gehlen than there is now. But if you dig you will find things.
And Gehlen was specifically recruited by CIA director Allen Dulles, a rabid anticommunist and traitor.
LOL Wild Bill Donovan head of OSS at the time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_J._Donovan
Outstanding. Timely. Need to earn $ to take ya to coffee ☕️ 😏
Thank you! Your praise and support is more than sufficient comrade!
Am I offbase in wondering if their might be a continuity with Green Berets who professs Norse religion?
The more I read about the aftermath of WW2 the more I’m convinced the Nazis won
𝗥𝗼𝗹𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗞𝗶𝗺 𝗣𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗯𝘆 𝗶𝗻 𝘀𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘁𝗮𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗲𝗳𝗳𝗼𝗿𝘁𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗶𝗹𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗕𝗮𝗹𝘁𝗶𝗰 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗨𝗸𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗲
---------------- AI
Kim Philby played a critical and damaging role in sabotaging Western efforts to infiltrate agents into the Baltic States and Ukraine during and after World War II. As a high-ranking British intelligence officer secretly working for Soviet intelligence, Philby passed on vital information about British and American espionage operations to Moscow. He informed the Soviets in advance of plans to penetrate Soviet-occupied Baltic countries and Ukraine, allowing Soviet counterintelligence to effectively neutralize these infiltration attempts.
Specifically, Philby headed the British SIS Section IX, responsible for operations against the Soviet Union, and he warned Moscow about upcoming infiltrations by agents drawn largely from émigré groups from the Caucasus, Ukraine, and the Baltic States. Rather than allowing these agents to succeed, Soviet border guards often "let in" some agents to flip them, arrested others after identifying their networks, or killed agents attempting to cross the border. None of the British agents reportedly died during these operations, underscoring the extent to which they were compromised early on. Philby also worked closely from London and even later from the United States with Western intelligence officials, gaining access to secret operations and passing them to Moscow, ensuring that Western subversive plans failed.[1][3]
Philby's deceptions extended to his role in other espionage activities and sabotage training. He was involved in complex clandestine struggles including handling defectors and countering anti-Soviet resistance groups. His interception and manipulation of agents were part of broader Soviet security strategies to maintain control over the Baltic countries and Ukraine, which were seen as crucial parts of the USSR.[3][5][1]
In summary, Kim Philby was centrally involved in betraying Western intelligence operations aimed at inserting agents into the Baltic States and Ukraine, effectively thwarting efforts to build resistance or collect intelligence against Soviet control in these regions through early and detailed warnings to Soviet counterintelligence.[7][1][3]
[1](https://jamestown.org/program/the-cambridge-five-helped-moscow-fight-ukrainian-nationalists/)
[2](https://coldspur.com/kim-philbys-german-moonshine/)
[3](https://cambridge5.org/page23312977.html)
[4](https://journalonbalticsecurity.com/journal/JOBS/article/5/file/pdf)
[5](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Philby)
[6](https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/kim-philby-defects)
[7](https://www.declassifieduk.org/when-mi6-betrayed-ukraines-resistance-to-russia/)
[8](https://spyscape.com/article/kim-philby-britains-most-notorious-spy-reveals-how-he-duped-mi6)
[9](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerrilla_war_in_the_Baltic_states)
[10](https://english.elpais.com/international/2025-01-14/the-last-secrets-of-kim-philby-the-soviet-double-agent-who-betrayed-the-uk.html)
One of the good things Philby did. He even fooled the virulent anticommunist James Jesus Angleton and became his drinking buddy in Washington. I have studied the Cambridge spies extensively over the years and have respect for how well Philby fooled the secret services for decades.
These forest brothers, Banderites with Nazi connections must come to light.
To be fair MI6/CIA sponsorship was for decades an open secret.
Apologies for taking this off a tangent. I am wondering whether there are scholarly definitions of what "open" or "public" means. Even if sth is in the public domain technically, it may be known by such a small fraction of the people that its impact on public discourse is undistinguishable from it being still a secret. Is there a way to conceptualize "open" as a matter of degree? Can the mechanisms that change this degree be studied in an interesting way? One thing that this blog is doing is changing this degree, if only a little. Could that be a way of studying the role of journalism in society? This sounds like sth that could have been done ...
IIRC, it was one of those things that was officially denied, but everyone involved knew better.
Similar examples include the coup in Chile and the coup in Iran.
The ex-spy and novelist John le Carre glorified the Baltic fighters in the character of General Vladimir, who gets murdered in "Smiley's People". Figures, since MI6 was financing the fascists against the Soviet Union.