Did the Soviets torpedo ships with Jewish immigrants in WW2?

[communard resolution]

Over at Mideastweb, a website that -at least it its intent- attempts to present an unbiased account of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, I found the following information about Jewish immigration to Palestine during the Holocaust (emphasis added by me):


The Struma vessel that had left Constanta in Rumania with about 769 refugees, got to Istanbul on December 16, 1941. There, it was forced to undergo repairs of its engine and leaking hull. The Turks would not grant the refugees sanctuary. The British would not approve transshipment to Mauritius or entry to Palestine. On February 24, 1942, the Turks ordered the Struma out of the harbor. It sank with the loss of 428 men, 269 women and 70 children. It had been torpedoed by a Soviet submarine, either because it was mistaken for a Nazi ship, or more likely, because the Soviets had agreed to collaborate with the British in barring Jewish immigration. If the above speculation is true, then this would mean that the Soviets, much like the British, couldn't care less about the Jewish Holocaust. In fact, it would mean that it wasn't even below them to accelerate it a tiny bit when it seemed in their interest to do so.

I wonder if anybody has more information on this or related events. In particular, can anybody tell me something about the Soviet-British agreement mentioned in the sentence I emphasised? What were the Soviets' motifs and interests in that agreement?

To get this over with as efficiently as possible, I suggest the following:

1) Please don't just shout "bourgeois source, full of lies". You'll have to do better than that - present some solid counterclaim for instance.

Mideastweb is not a leftist website, but I haven't detected any particularly anti-communist, anti-Palestinian, or anti-Isreali agenda in their entire text. My impression is that these folks view themselves as 'pacifists' and are doing their damnedest to remain unbiased - perhaps naively so, but they're trying.

2) Please keep in mind that the text I quoted tells the story of some 800 people desperate to escape certain extermination when no country in Europe seemed willing to help them - it's not the story of some evil Zionists scheming to set up an Israeli state in order oppress the Arabic natives. So let's not discuss the legitimacy of the Israeli state in this thread. This is about Jewish refugees and Soviet-British arrangements in regards to illegal immigration.

LINK (http://www.mideastweb.org/briefhistory.htm) to the original text. Scroll down to 'Illegal Immigration' to find the excerpt I quoted.

[Panda Tse Tung]

Well there's no proof provided either, so i cant scream it's full of truths either.
It is completely speculative. They are suggesting it is 'more likely'. Very kinky strategy bourgeouis scholars often use.

Edit: on a side-note a lot of Jews we're allowed to leave the SU during and before the war if i recall correctly, i'll source it later.

[communard resolution]

Well there's no proof provided either, so i cant scream it's full of truths either.

Of course not, but someone might have some kind of information on this. My plea was basically: if you don't know anything about this issue, remain silent instead of just going into USSR-defense mode and sending an automated message about bourgeois sources.


It is completely speculative. They are suggesting it is 'more likely'. Very kinky strategy bourgeouis scholars often use.[The possibility that the ship was torpedoed for that reason is speculative and they aren't claiming otherwise. I think they speak in certain terms about the British-Soviet arrangement, though - hence my request for more info.

Also, note that they attribute the same policies to the British as they do to the Soviets. So what exact faction of the bourgeoisie do you think are they trying to defend here? The Nazis perhaps?

[Panda Tse Tung]

The possibility that the ship was torpedoed for that reason is speculative and they aren't claiming otherwise.


But they are suggesting without any basis of proof that it is more likely.



Also, note that they attribute the same policies to the British as they do to the Soviets. So what exact faction of the bourgeoisie do you think are they trying to defend here?


Because it's a Bourgeouis source does not mean it can't be self-critical nor truthfull. I'm just saying it is extremely suggestive. And it sounds pretty unlikely to me looking at the general policy towards Jews in the USSR at that time.

[communard resolution]

But they are suggesting without any basis of proof that it is more likely.

And we'll probably never find out for sure why that particular ship was torpedoed unless we meet the men who were on board of the Soviet submarine. So perhaps the British-Soviet arrangement in regards to illegal Jewish immigration would be more interesting. Anyone got info?

[Charles Xavier]

Stalin made a direct order to attack single civilian ship in the the middle of a war. Right..

Anyways its very very unlikely this was deliberate considering the policies the soviet union had towards the Jewish people.

[redguard2009]

Yeah, this really makes no sense. Why would the Soviets torpedo a Rumanian ship in a Turkish port headed for Palestine carrying Jewish refugees? What possible motive would the Soviets have for preventing people who were never its citizens from reaching a country it has no stake in?

Though I'd also like to know about the Soviet Union's position towards Jewish immigration to Palestine and in general its policy towards Jewish migration during/after WW2.