HW 53216 7. Penetration of CIA (This is a topic for later elicitation from NOSENKOG,) 8. VASSALL Case {ANATOLE believes NOSENKO should be asked to reconstruct completely in detail everything he knows about the VASSALL case: times, sources, officers, etc., at one taped session. Simultaneously ANATOLE says we should construct a conplete chronology of everything NOSENKO has said about the VASSALL case since June 1962, including the questions or comments put to NOSENKO about VASSALL. An analysis comparison of these two papers will follow. ANATOLE proposes it may be possible to demonstrate how a possible penetration of CIA could have precluded NOSENKO's safety from 1962 to 1964, This may assist us to solve our : problem and also be ultimately useful in confronting NOSENKO on the point of his dispatch and apparent immunity. | 9. Boris BELITSKIY Case (ANATOLE approved elicitation - and questioning on the basis of the summary and questionnaire. ANATOLE stresses the need to confine the questioning to. the questionnaire and the fact that NOSENKO is not to be given . additional infornation about the case, its origins, ectc., either as we knew it or now know it from ANATOLE. There will be some tie-in to the elicitation about Vladimir Luovich ARTEMOV and Aleksandr Konstantinovich KISLOY but other than the questions as set forth in the papers ANATOLE reviewed there should be no ron a uestions asked which brief MOSENKO or relate the three or . any other persons. DoclId:32404748 Page 11
HW 53216 a een | saé ia fs ea . ‘ “ ANATOLE needs a photograph of ARTEMOV to make certain of identification and he needs photos otners in the delegation with BELITSKIY to try to determine if there were other KGB officers in the delegation who might have been in onsthe case or the disinformation aspect) 10. The 1960 period of NOSENKO's career. “This is to be an elicitation topic later after we have summarized what we can about NOSENKO's story of this period, In reply to ANATOLE's question based on his review of the paper NOSENKO Timetable and Associates I told ANATOLE - the researcher had found it impossible to date to sort out and isolate NOSENKO's 1967-68 statements about his career during the period 1960 to 1962. ANATOLE was told this was obviously a priority job but that it just had been an im- ' possible task without additional research and analysis. We will discuss this fully when the isolation is completed and in conjunction with other topics. . 11, Vadim Viktorovich KOSOLAPOV ts November 1960 trip. This item is for later elicitation after more research is completed about the code clerks, perhaps a reinves- tigation to make positive identifications, etc. “ANATOLE asked if KOSOLAPOV's trip to Copenhagen was confirmed (N-167 pg. 16) and’ I told him I thought it was under a different name. ANATOLE would like details. DoclId:32404748 Page 12
HW 53216 12, The Robert Lee JOUNSON case. ANATOLE considers this an iixportant aspect of NOSENKO's throw-away material.. He again questions why the SCD would lend technicians to the FCD and wants NOSENKO to explain this in detail as well as to fully detail again how, from whom, etc. NOSENKO learned. of this case. ANATOLE is of the opinion new questions can be asked but agreed to defer elicitation on this case primarily because I pointed out . that in 1965 a paper was written setting forth apparent inherent security weaknesses in the Johnson case some of which at least suggested strongly that, in addition to Johnson's . “Jack of access at one time, the KGR could have anticipated a blow at any moment. JI outlined some of the points f recall about the weaknesses of the principals and quite frankly I told ANATOLE that I doubted that anyone currently of the opinion NOSENKO is bona fide would be any more inclined to credit the 1965 paper today than he has in the past. I agreed that it might be useful to again attempt to get NOSENKO's story about the JOHNSON case when this story would be exclusively NOSENKO' s. 43. Aleksey Hikhaylovich GORBATENKO. | | ANATOLE wants NOSENKO to tell in detail everything | he knows about GORBATENKO. ANATOLE notes the 1955 promotion is a key element but stresses no mention of this is to be made to NOSENKO. Despite previous mentions of GORBATENKO, which should be collated, NOSENKO is te restate everything completely. it ote DocId: 32404746 Page 13
14, Serafin Nikalayevich LYALIN Elicitation about LYALIN is to follow later. AL] references to LYALIN by NOSENKO should be collated with collateral information about him. If there is a photograph of LYALIN, ANATOLE wants to see it to verify any NOSENKO identification. 15. Vladislav Mikhaylovich KOVSHUK. ANATOLE considers NOSENKO's information about KOVSHUK most important as a later elicitation point. He does not want NOSENKO asked “any questions about KOVSHUK which may relate to KOVSHUK's trip to the U.S.A. or KOVSHUK's association with KISLOV. I£ . NGSENKO in connection with detailing the biographies of his friends includes any of this about KQVSHUK he is NOT to be questioned on this matter or about the woman trouble previously mentioned, HW 53216 ANATOLE needs exact dates KOVSHUK was in the U.S. and any details of activities he can be given from FBI reporting. In connection with our discussion about KOVSHUK possibly working with and associating with journalists ANATOLE said he recalled. an incident which he thinks took place in 1959 when he met_ ‘KOVSHUK on the street not far from the KGB offices when KOVSHUK Signalled him not to speak. ANATOLE did not and observed KOVSHUK meet a Soviet journalist in an apparent agent type nceting,. DoclId: 32404748 Page 14
HW 53216 CLL -14- ANATOLE said he had forgotten this incident and he never spoke to KOVSHUK about it. NATOLE cannot recall the name of ‘the journalist but said he recalls knowing him slightly. He will try to recall the name. (Note for SM check: did KOVSHUK per NOSENKO work vs. Americans with journalists and specifically Ed Stevens?) 16. Eugene Peter SHREBRENNIKOV, ANATOLE says what NOSENKO has said is clear but that this needs full research and analysis - what he said contrasted with what NOSENKO said and what SEREBRENNIKOV said -_ before asking NOSENKO about this again. 17. Adan BROCHES Case ANATOLE was told this lead information was being reviewed in detail. That there was some apparent confusion and possibly misinterpretation or misunderstanding about his lead information. ANATOLE ‘reiterated his point that the KGB wanted to reestablish relations which had been broken after BROCHES left France. ANATOLE knows about this from reading ZARUBIN paper and he knows that the KGB wanted to talk to ZARUBIN about this. ; ANATOLE said ‘that he would leave the decision about when NOSENKG would be asked about BROCHES again to SM - it could be lamediately when the review was completed or later. The review is in process and we will have to see what FBI 3, d may have asked receatly. DoclId:32404748 Page 15
HW 53216 18, Viktor KOPEYKIN. A later topic. 19. The CHEREPANOV Papers ANATOLE stresses the importance of this case but says this must be a later topic for NOSENKO probably in interrogation although it may be useful to have NOSENKO | review his knowledge again in detail before confrontation, ANATOLE referred to the need to analyze the results of the. BOWDEN investigation before proceeding too far with HOSENKO. In this connection ANATOLE was told State — Security was securely organizing this investigation and that it was currently planned that interviews would commence with - BOWDEN first including mention to BOWDEN about: his mention in the CHEREPANOV papers. In response to ANATOLE's question he was told that to my knowledge the FBI did not yet know "about the BOWDEN investigation since to date it was a State. Department inquiry based on a need to clarify certain possible problems. ANATOLE said that he saw CHERBPANOV after CHEREPANOV had transferred to the American Embassy Section wearing a Lt. Col. military uniform. ANATOLE said this was unusual and’ it suggests to him that CHEREPANOV was engaged in an operation, perhaps a contact posing as a military beginning in 1959. He said CHEREPANOV had as a constant companion a young man in the American Department but ANATOLE cannot recall the young man's name. {ANATOLE suggests Later NOSENKO be asked if CHEREPANOY wore a military uniform and‘who was his companion, DoclId:32404748 Page 16
® @ ant probably in operations.) I told ANATOLE IT did not know if. NOSENKO- had named any friends of CHEREPANOV but would check for names. ANATOLE said he recailed also there was a big change in CHEREPANOV'’s attitude and demeanor between carly 1959 to mid - 1969 or, more probably, Dec. 1950 when ANATOLE sew Cherepanov again. ANAT TOLE said he can only interpret that CiEREPANOV was in a better mood, more confident in personality because he may have had some operational success. ANATOLE is of the opinion that CIEREPANGV’s change in demeanor and mood could only relate to American Enbassy operations. 29. The ANATOLE says this is not really a crucial question although an important case which needs resolution eventually along lines set forth in the paper NOSENKO - Homosexual Aspects but not on the basis of the homosexual ee ep tne angle (see separate discussion re homosexual aspects). 21. The FOPROY and PENROVSKIY Cases ANATGLE says both of these cases should be delayed bey until later. They require special consideration anu more h and discussion. We are not ready now to delve into these and it is his opinion he may have tonded to obscure some sae jitn PENROVSEEY in Janugseyv. . lis believe: HW 53216 Docld:32404748 Page 17
HW 53216 and we should continue to examine all aspects of the cases 4 but he concedes a better base of understanding should be laid before it will be possible to make a meaningful tie to DoclId:32404748 Page 18
- ~18- ANATOLE emphasized the need to get from NOSENKO comple te details about his friends or claimed friends. ANATOLE agreed with the line of inquiry outlined in the paper "Knowledge Because . of Association with other KGB Officers” and said elicitation should include information sufficient to give us in one place a perspective on NOSENKO's associates and friends. This topic can be covered immediately. ANATOLE stresses real importance of Guk, Kovshuk and Churanov to NOSENKO. He notes Guk's wife was the daughter of a minister and asks if NOSENKO could have introduced them.- He also points out'CHURANOV in school with . NOSENKO, Lead. ANATOLE agreed elicitation on this teple should segin immediately and was most interested in the possible significance of this case vis a vis disinformation. He noted, of course, the different perspective on the case and that apparently when this case was considered in the context of support to NOSENKO's bona fides analysis had not taken into account the actual origins and development of the case. ANATOLE immediately connected the SLAVACHENS KAYA angle to the PENKOVSKIY case and speculated that tne KGB may have been attempting to establish a separate ostensibly canfirmatory source to the FBI to holster PENKOVSKTY HW 53216 Docld:32404748 Page 19
who was in contact with the British and CIA. ANATOLE emphasized his view that NOSENKO should not be given a hint about the actual becinnings of the case to prevent NOSENKO from modifying his story or being led to explanations. NOSENKO should retell his account 4 : ia Mm case and then be asked the questions listed (See N-24 - This a later topic) ANATOLE requests everything available about GINSBURG and snecific ally everything NOSENKO has ever said. After the research ANATOLE thinks he can spot something in connection with GINSBURG which is signif icant but which he says eludes him at this time. ee me me Soe GRA A RN ANATOLE stresses importance again as he did in KY 25. The Military Attache Incident. transcripts. He persists in thinking there may be more here than we have covered - that one of the MA's may have been re- cruited or someone else was recruited and advised about the trip. He refers to N-32, and maintains this incident needs reexamination and that probably after research the Attaches should be questioned — again. ANATOLE says it his recollection that the KGB knew . exactly the device they were looking for; that the KGR did not > have a detection device which contd have heen effective and that red 8 the use of a hox which looked like a detection machine was stag HY 53216 DoclId:32404746 Page 20
. . Me ~20- to cover up fact KGB knew exactly where to Find the device and S, hat it was. He says his recoliection is that KGR Fnew where to look and there was no search or monitoring. They just went to the right place. This means to ANATOLE a human not a machine see cm source. He says questioning NOSENKO abont this can only follow research. Sonpite Btte eg ent hasan arte an ‘ATOLE asked if the information about the Japanese Colonel in intelligence had heen reported to the Japanese and what was the outcome. ANATOLE was told I did not know - would check.) - 26. ANATOI LE was interested in this but we did not dwell on this subject. ANATOLE believe it a give away diversion although prohably true. Decision re additional elicitation to be made by SM on basis time and Framing questions. ficrophones in Anerican Embassy “ee 27. AN ATOLE, still suggests review this information fron NOSENKO- and requestioning particularly to establish ex cact ly what NOSENKO said when and if he said anything about SONT: rry Wing. Decision re timing of questioning by SM. 28. WATKINS - Canadian Anbassador Case. ANATOLE thinks it necessary NOSENKO retell in detail yf everything he knows about WATKINS in same way he to be asked HW 53216 DoclId:32404746 Page 21
HW 53216 exactly what ANATOLE said and what NOSENKO said. out importance of early information from given backgro thinks this can begin early in ground information or leading questions. elicitation or be ANATOLE points NOSENKO before he was ANATOLE done later. Deci sion re timing by SH. : (ANATOLE thinks it might be helpful fer him to review what NOSENKO has said about Svetlana STALINA “AGETEUR VA one ee This s speculative but ANATOLE recalls or was told NOSENKO should or did know something and he thinks there may be some clue here about NOSENKO? De a Me ED Sg Co eal of importance. } 29, Code Clerxs - 29762 ANATOLE again emphasizes of results of investigation of all + ” convinced there may be a‘case here missed or overlooked. detail and that it is only when he dates, significance. that cases - could not for orderly review. ANATOLE was is a matter of time and neopic. only he done DoclId:32404748 Page 22 S associates lie says he.c much work had been done but that, told ANY ater. . friends, etc., possibly his need to see a full review the cede clerk cases. He is and that the clues have heen annot recall the necessary can be stimnlated with names,’ etc., that he may be able to pinpoint some angle of ANATOLE was told we were also bothered about these quite frankly, J estimate how long it would take to assemble the information this is on the agenda - it “ahout Ly cuestioning of NOSENKO