CIA Director Allen Dulles's plan is one of the most famous texts associated with the post-Soviet era. We check its authenticity.

Plan Dulles as an independent text for the first time published in the magazine “Roman-Gazeta” in February 1993. It was part of the anti-Gorbachev pamphlet “Prince of Darkness” by writer and late Soviet party functionary Boris Oleynik. Since since 2016 the full text in Russia included to the Federal List of Extremist Materials; we will not list it here in its entirety.

The main task of the Americans, according to the Dulles plan, usually dating back to 1945, was to create chaos and confusion in the administration of the Soviet state. To do this, it was necessary to fool people by replacing their values with fake ones. It was proposed to support only those artists who would “drill into human consciousness the cult of sex, violence, sadism, betrayal - in a word, all immorality.”

It was supposed to quietly cultivate official bribery, bureaucracy, red tape, lies, rudeness, drunkenness and drug addiction. And those few who guessed what was happening had to be turned into a laughing stock and declared the scum of society. It was proposed to begin the destruction of morality with young people, who can easily be corrupted, corrupted, corrupted, turned into cynics, vulgarities and cosmopolitans.

All the phrases of the Dulles plan can be found in the novel “The Eternal Call” (1981 edition) Soviet writer Anatoly Ivanov. Moreover, in the book it is put in the form of separate remarks into the mouth of a former Russian gendarmerie officer, and at the time of the statement, SS Standartenführer Lakhnovsky. Ideas expressed in the text, researchers find and earlier: in the 1964 novel by another Soviet writer Dold-Mikhailik and even in "The Possessed" by Dostoevsky. However, Ivanov has no direct textual matches with them. Therefore, with a high probability, the compilation from “The Eternal Call” is the original source of the plan - however, without any connection with CIA Director Allen Dulles.

"Wikipedia" And modern researchers agree that for the first time an abbreviated text of the plan indicating the authorship of Dulles was published in one of speeches Metropolitan of St. Petersburg and Ladoga John (Snychev) in the newspaper “Soviet Russia” on February 20, 1993. Most likely this is not true. Oleinik’s pamphlet “Prince of Darkness” in Roman-Gazeta was also published in February and, most likely, earlier than the article in Sovetskaya Rossiya, because the February issues were signed for publication back in January.

Since it is unlikely that the idea of attributing this text to the authorship of Dulles almost simultaneously occurred to both the writer Oleinik and Metropolitan Snychev, then, apparently, Snychev simply read it on the pages of the Roman Newspaper, where it was attributed to Dulles, and a few days later used it for his article. Here we can make another assumption: the text, compiled by an unknown person from the phrases of the character in “Eternal Call”, before it came to Oleinik, circulated as a separate document in lists or in samizdat (which in itself is not excluded), and the same or another “hero” unknown to us decided to attribute it to Dulles. And then it happened that almost simultaneously it came to two different people who published it. But it seems that there are too many assumptions for such a version.

Another remarkable detail. In the second publication of “The Prince of Darkness” in July of the same 1993 in the magazine “Young Guard”, Oleinik gives the text of the Dulles plan explanation, which was not in the first edition: “The writer Anatoly Ivanov, as we learned, included these ominous words in the text of the second book of the novel “Eternal Call.” But for ten years these words were thrown out of all publications by the censorship, which was under Kremlin-Zionist control...”

It is noteworthy here that the editor-in-chief of the Young Guard magazine at that time was precisely that same writer Anatoly Ivanov. Apparently, he recognized his own text and pointed this out to Oleynik. A legitimate question arises: why, then, did Dulles’ authorship remain in the pamphlet? Alas, we do not have an exact answer. As far as we know, Ivanov never explained this during his lifetime.

Modern authors of a patriotic orientation still are sure, that the plan was that it leaked from one of the secret meetings with Soviet intelligence officers, and then through the KGB got to a writer who gave it literary form. The secrecy is explained by the danger of revealing the source of the leak.

However, if for the 50s and 60s such an explanation could still be plausible, then during perestroika and especially in the 90s, when the KGB archives were partially opened, there was no reason to hide the identity of a person who, due to his age, could not remain among the living. The document could serve as a source of pride for Soviet intelligence. Moreover, with its help they could try to stop the penetration of Western values into the USSR. But nothing of the kind happened. And this forces one to be satisfied with a simpler and more verifiable version.

And one last thing. Neither Oleynik nor Snychev directly used the phrase “Dulles plan.” Why did the text go to the people under this name? Perhaps the reason is that the phrase “Dulles plan” itself was well known to Soviet historians and people interested in international politics and diplomacy. We found out that it is many times meets in the literature, starting from the 50s, in relation to the proposals of the US Secretary of State John Foster Dulles (Elder Allen's brother) to resolve the Suez Crisis of 1956. So contamination could have occurred, that is, a mixing of an expression known in relatively narrow circles with a new meaning.