[104-10211-10001.pdf — page 26]
# TOP SECRET628. NOSENKO, with a few exceptions (notably the compromise of PENKOVSKIY and the ASIDIAN visit to the dead drop site), could not supply specific or approximate dates for operational activities during the period of his service in the U.S. Embassy Section. Beyond recourse to the phrase "1960, 1961," he refused to estimate the dates or to associate these activities with the time of the year or events in his personal life.(iii) Evasion, Improvisation, and Other DefensesIn the debriefings before the interrogations, NOSENKO avoided questions and topics not of his own choosing, saying that he would give full details "later," when systematic debriefing began. When the question or topic came up anew in a later debriefing, the would plead fatigue or boredom and propose: "This morning we drink; tomorrow we work." Prior to 4 April 1964 he provided only accounts of operations selected by himself; it was only after 4 April 1964 that he could be constrained to reply to detailed questioning on other matters.From that point on, other evasive tactics became familiar to his interrogators. He would try to change the subject or to shift from the specific event to a generalized account of how such things were done in principle. He would claim bad memory on grounds that, for example, operations against U.S. Embassy personnel were hopeless and useless anyway. lie would dismiss the details or the entire operation as unimportant (for example, the microphones in the U.S. Embassy). He would set out reasons for his ignorance of things he admittedly should have known (his own "poor performance," preoccupation with other matters, inattention to duty, absence from the KGB while on vacation, lack of time to master details because he was a supervisor). Unable to name or talk about KGB indigenous agents working against Americans, including those in operations under his supervision, NOSENKO disparaged the quality of, such agents ("they never reported anything of interest on anyone"); he cited their low educational level and their inferior status as servants and employees as one reason none of them could give the KGB operationally useful information. In fact, the record of many indicated previous employment which would demand at least the equivalent of a college degree or certificate from a technical institute. Numerous maids were former school teachers, one was formerly a chemist.When evasion failed, it seemed to the interrogators that NOSENKO improvised his answers. Some of these evident improvisations led him into unacceptabie statements or positions. To use his responses to the questioning on John V. ABIDIAN as an example: Not knowing about ABIDIAN's car, he said the KGB could not get at it. (In fact, the car was held by Soviet customs for two weeks, and later NOSENKO himself spoke about the way the KGB used Embassy chauffeurs for access to cars.) Not knowing of ABIDIAN'S trips out of the USSR, he claimed that the KGB had no way to find out where Embassy officers went when they made trips out of the country. (In fact, ABIDIAN had told his language teacher each time and she, as NOSENKO said, was a KGB agent; also, ABIDIAN arranged his trips by long-distance phone from Moscow to his destination abroad, and the KGB can cover such calls.) Not knowing of ABIDIAN's trip within the USSR, he spoke of a vacation which he latter admitted to be false. Asked why he did not know personal