(404-10178-10189 Iannmnnnnnnnnnnannnmanennggenl ae eo. ae ¢ pry yf ‘ a ece sss e . a) ° > ® SEP i:Bu MEMORANDUN FOR THE RECORD SUBJECT: Spas Todorov RAIKIN ig-\e 1. A review of Subject’s 201 file (201-282538) reveals that many reports emanating from Kavalla Base] are miscing or rather had never been included in the file and that subsequent activities of” his in Switzerland and the United States had never been reported. Iz 7 \5- 2. The ‘undersigned was directly involved with subject's initial refuge in Greece, as the undersigned was Base Chief at Kava at the tine and participated in the interrogation of Subject and the others who defected with him due to the suspicious nature of their escape story. During later years, in the course of debriefing various contects and consultants, Subject's name came up during these discussions and the undersigned was able to piece together the sequence of affairs from the time of RAIKIN's escape until the present. © 3. During the summer of 1951, Subject, along with two other individuals who were all Erudovaks working on airfields’ in Bulgaria, escaped to Greece. In connection with their escape, four other individuals likewise escaped to Greece. During Subject's interrogation and the interrogation of his friends, it was felt that the escape story needed clarification from a CE standpoint. To the best of our knowledge, however, none of the individuals, including Subject,appeared to be connected with the BIs. There was a poss- ibility which was mentioned. at the tine, that, 5 Subject, due to his educational background, may have been a “sleeper” type agent. During Subject's initial interrogation he stated that politically he was partial to, although not @ member of, the Nikola Petkov faction (left wing) of the Agrarian party. It was likewise determined that Subject's interest precluded operational use as a cross border agent and neither he nor his colleagues vere recruited. The other four individuals who escaped separately to Greece were, however, recruited. 4, Upon arrival in the DP camp in Athens (Lavrion) Subject becam involved in political discussions and at that time claimed to be an adherent of the Dinitur Gichev faction (righ: wing) of the Agrarian party, which aad been outlawed upon the event of comsunism in Eulgearia. His political mach- inations caused splitting of the refugees into eplinter groups and rather than succeeding in effecting unity, it caused disunity. Again the thought came up as to whether Subject was a provocation agent or not. However, no evidence was uncovered to substantiate thia theory. cr m4 oD i)
14-00000 Due to his educational teciground in religion, dubject was nevertheless leoked up to by his more illiterate and unfortunate compatriots, due primarily to his faculty cf speech and education. In seeking ways of getting out of Greece, and che unhappy lot of 4 refugee. he vas able to go to Switzerland where he stuciyed In a theological seminary under the auspices of the World Couneii of Churches (WCC). 5. During 1953, while visiting COLONSSOME in Svitcerland, she told the undersigned that she hei heard of Subject from other friends and that they had been highly suspicious of him and felt that he might te a BIS agent or something. This was predicated on Subdjeet’s discussiors and activities while in Switeeriand. 6. Subject next came to the undersigned’s attention after Subject’s arrival in the United States and his affiliation in work concerning refugees. By this time Subject professed to be-a staunch nationalist and republican ~ and condemned anybody who hai belonged to Acrarian factions, especially those from a center to left. According to Poria Clarz, a former contract employee of this Agency who was also stationed in Greece as an interrogator nd later resigned to take a position in Pittsburgi, Psa. involved in the helping and settling of Sulsarian refugees coming to the United States, Subject used his legitizcate tusinesn as a cover for selfeassrandizenent and political prestige in the Titserian emigre groups. foth Clark end his wife complained bitterly to Dean baccruff, then Chief of the Bulgarian Eranch, end Clark alse complained te the undersigned concerning RATAON's activities, which in view of what he was suspected to be doing, were highly suspect. According to the Clerk's, dotliect's activities could indicate that his Job was to create chaos end division among Bulgarian exigres and vhibh could logically be a requirement of the 3I5. 7. In 1956, SUROCI (P) 2 contract acent of this Agency, inforned the undersigned that Subject had fsined the Bulgarian National Front and vas speaking loud and dtrorng for the return of a monarchy when Bulgeria is lite erated. By this time, sutlest had made. a 180° tern politically from left ng Agrarian to monarc’ fret cationalist. SUROCI Jikevise sdvised that Subject was continuing his eDorts to dominate the Fulgerian chirch group and in go doing had caused fisscre@sin the Nationalist Bloch, vhich et best was teing held together by nerely threads. SUROCI could offer no proot, but felt that Subject may have teen actifg on behalf of the present regine or E13 in causing chaos in the exizres or vas doing it strictly for self- aggrandizement and 2molumeat. 8. Over a period of tize avtiect has been the topic of conversation - between DILABBIO (P}, a cons. tam: of this Agency, and the undersigned. won Prior to coming to Kashington {2 15355, DILAUSIO had been very active in the Crurch activities of the Eulesrtan Church in America. Te was the lay president of the Church group and had tes.n a rapprochement between the Macedonian and the Sulvarian church. DILALIIG hai been asked by Eishoy Anive, head of tne uigerien Church in North America including Macedoria, to corsider study for the priesthood ani with a vier ‘placing A.dre upon che lattiers death. FIATBIO turned down this pre since he felt he vourll prefer to remein is ea the educational field, but teli Andre he would continue to Biatiiin as the eTAReT
oR lay leader of the church. During thin tine DILABZIO reported to the undersigned that Subject, upon arrtvoel in the States had gone to great lengths to talk to each of the indivildesl] Lulgarian 4nd Macedonian presidents in the various cities and leter on attempted to get them td back him (Subject) for the futuré job of Bishop. A long fight developed between RAIKIY and the Bishop when the bishop atated that he did not f el Subject qualified to handle. the Jobs due to his activities , intSulcafian Church in North Americe almost disintcyrated as a cohesive unit. When .- ‘ the matter finally came to a vote and it developed Subject would not get the job, but would be offered a pricotheed, he suddently decided, despite the years and money spent on him by WCC in theological training, that he aid not want to be a pricat anyway and, a few veeks later, turned around and married «a girl in-New York. This act, of course, prohibits him from ever aspiring to be Bishop. Since that time on numerous oecasions, Subject using his offices in WCC as a cover, has gent ‘denunciatory letters con- cerning other Bulgarians to various US Government agencies if these Bulg- arians happened to have crossed him or if he has taken a dislike to them. By the same token, he has written letters concerning Bulgarians whom. he espouses to various agencies in order to obtain asulateance in the grant- ing of visas and of obtaining jobs. 9. The undersigned, like all other sources involved,cannot offer any evidence that Subject is an agent of the Bulgarian Communist regime, but feels that hia activities have certainly played into their hands and have been such as they would have conducted through a provocation or sleeper type agent. To be frank, the undersigned feels that perhaps Subject is an over ambitious, mercenary, megalomaniac, who is not content unlesa he is stirring up things in which his name will appear in prominence ' and from which he can derive some benefit. he M. SECE LT