British officer, Major DenisnHills, who was unsympathetic [!]nto the notion of repatriation.nBritish policy, however, wasnclear: if any of the Ukraniansnwere Russians, they would benreturned [my italics].nPoor Major Hills! Unsympathetic to thennotion of murder! He must have been anUkrainian, not a Russian like Mr.nGecas or Mr. Linnas . . .nBut back to Count Tolstoy. On Januaryn25 of this year, the London Standardnreported:nThe wise and kindly NigelnNicholson, who’s just turned 71,nis not a man to enter lightly intona fray. But he heads a list ofnsome striking grandees who’llnbe supporting Nigel Watts andnCount Nikolai Tolstoy in thenlibel courts before long.n. . . Nicholson . . . providednTolstoy with important militaryndocuments on which the author.npartly based his attack onnAldington in the book. He saysnthat if necessary he’ll supplynfurther documents, kept secretnsince his time as an ArmynIntelligence Officer in centralnEurope immediately after thenwar. He denies that he isncourageous to join the attacknon the nation’s war heroes atnsuch a late hour. “I wouldn’tnclaim courage,” he says. “I wasna witness to it and it’s my dutynto give evidence,” he says.nAt the end of January, students atnCambridge were looking forward tona Cambridge Union debate: “ThisnHouse sees Glasnost as a step towardsnfundamental reform in the SovietnUnion,” with Count Tolstoy, LordnBethell, and Vladimir Bukovsky schedulednto speak in opposition. I wasnlooking forward to having lunch withnNikolai Dmitrievich, to hear the latestnnews of the lawsuit.nOn January 22, the Union SocietynPresident, Stephen Greehalgh, wrote tonCount Tolstoy:nI have extremely disappointingnnews about the forthcomingndebate on Clasnost.nThe disappointing news was that LordnBethell had refused to speak in thensame debate with the litigious CountnTolstoy, who explained to me that thenonly conceivable reasonnfor Lord Bethell’s otherwiseninexplicable behaviour is that henis very frightened indeed thatnLord Aldington may choose tonsue him as well, in connexionnwith the forthcoming libel casenin which I am engaged. Thisnseems to me not only less thanncourageous, but also a whollynmistaken view. Since LordnAldington was compelled againstnhis will to sue me, it is scarcelynlikely that he will go out of hisnway to undertake actions againstnothers. . . . That is LordnBethell’s affair, however, andndoes not concern me. Whatndoes is the extreme badnmanners of the UnionnPresident, who chose tonwithdraw the invitation extendednto me. … It all seems a far crynfrom the days when my fathernwas President of the Union inn1935, which was also the yearnof my birth.nAnd a far cry it was. The debate, onnFebruary 12, took place in what thenSoviets call a “friendly, constructivenatmosphere,” in keeping with the spiritnof glasnost.nAndrei Navrozov is poetry editor fornChronicles.nHelp Linda Shapiro CompletenHer Husband’s Rnal RimnAmerican filmmaker Lee Shapiro was making a documentarynin a dangerous place—Afghanistan. He wanted to tell a story of couragenand love, the story of the Afghan freedom fighters’ battle againstnthe brutal Soviet occupation of their country.nOn October 9th, 1987, Lee was nearly finished with his secondnfilm trip, when four Soviet helicopter gunships ambushed his group.nLee was wounded in the leg, and lay unarmed as Russian soldiers seizednhis film, cameras, and journals. They shot him twice in the chest.nLee died three hours later.nLee’s widow, Linda, needs your help to finish her husband’s final film.nAdditional funds are needed to complete film development and editing.nWith your assistance, this powerful documentary can reach the Americannpeople before May 1,1988.nPlease send your tax-deductible donations or write for more information to:nAfghanistan Documentary Film Projectn3620 Lincoln Tferrace North Bergen, New Jersey 07047n(201)865-0409nnnMAY 1988 I 53n