FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

Why Our Mother, Ethel Rosenberg, Should be Exonerated

Our parents, Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, were executed on June 19, 1953, after being convicted of conspiracy to commit espionage. That was the formal legal charge, but in the public’s mind they were executed for providing our archenemy, the Soviet Union, with the ability to destroy our country with atomic bombs. Theirs was the most sensational case of the McCarthy period.

Last month, the grand jury testimony of our uncle David Greenglass, who died last year, was made public, the latest in a trove of material released since 2008 after we and others filed a legal action. Back then, we concluded that our father was legally guilty of the conspiracy charge, but not of atomic spying, and we maintain that neither of our parents deserved the death penalty.

The newly released 46-page transcript — along with previously released testimony and other records — demonstrates conclusively that our mother was prosecuted primarily for refusing to turn on our father. We now call on President Obama to acknowledge that Ethel Rosenberg was wrongly convicted and executed.

The evidence presented against Ethel at the trial, in March 1951, consisted mainly of testimony by her brother, David, and his wife, Ruth. They testified that in November 1944, Ethel helped Julius persuade Ruth to recruit David (an Army machinist working at the weapons installation in Los Alamos, N.M.) into Julius’s espionage ring. They testified that Ethel participated in a executionfamilySeptember 1945 meeting at which David gave a sketch to Julius of a cross-section of the bomb, and at which Ethel typed David’s handwritten notes explaining the diagram.

The record refutes these claims. David’s grand jury testimony, on Aug. 7, 1950, made no mention of any such meeting with Ethel, much less the typing.

Responding to questions about spying, David told the grand jury: “My sister has never spoken to me about this subject.” The transcript shows that David had no doubts about this: “I said before, and say it again, honestly, this is a fact: I never spoke to my sister about this at all.”

The new transcript affirms what we know from Ruth’s own grand jury testimony, on Aug. 3, 1950, in which she made no mention of a September meeting. While she said that David had passed information to a courier in New Mexico in June 1945, she asserted that they transferred no material to our father afterward. The very next day, Aug. 4, David told a prosecutor that he had given the cross-section sketch to Julius sometime that fall in New York City. Three days later, we now know, David repeated this story under oath, contradicting Ruth’s account. By the time of the trial, this story had grown into the Sept. 25 meeting at the Rosenbergs’ apartment.

Decades later, David, who served 10 years in prison for conspiracy to commit espionage, admitted to the New York Times reporter Sam Roberts that he had lied about his sister in an effort to protect his wife, though David refused to authorize the release of the grand jury transcript before his death. (Ruth, who was never charged, died in 2008.)

We believe that David and Ruth invented the Sept. 25 meeting to shift blame to our parents for leaking the bomb sketch. Our careful analysis of Soviet and American files suggests that Ruth had planned to share the materials with a K.G.B. agent (without any Rosenberg involvement) on Dec. 21, 1945. Soviet archives reveal that the materials arrived in Moscow six days later. Decryptions of Soviet cables by the National Security Agency reveal that the K.G.B. gave Ruth a code name and considered her a spy.

The flimsy case against our mother began after Julius’s arrest in July 1950. An assistant attorney general told the F.B.I. that there was “insufficient evidence” to charge Ethel, but that she could be used “as a lever against her husband.”

In February 1951, a month before the trial, a federal prosecutor told a congressional committee: “The case is not too strong against Mrs. Rosenberg. But for the purpose of acting as a deterrent, I think it is very important that she be convicted too, and given a stiff sentence.”

Even now, some observers insist that both Julius and Ethel recommended the recruitment of Ruth as a spy and that Ethel had knowledge of and agreed with her husband’s activities.

It is impossible to prove that someone played no role in a secret conspiracy. Yes, the evidence indicates that Ethel was at least generally aware of Julius’s activities. When Julius importuned Ruth to ask David to spy, Ethel encouraged her, according to Ruth. The K.G.B. files, however, tell a different story. They report that Ruth felt it was a “privilege” to be asked. They also note that rather than encouraging Ruth, Ethel urged caution. Assuming the K.G.B. files’ accuracy, this could indicate that Ethel, rather than Ruth, was the reluctant one, or it could have been part of Ethel’s effort to protect the secrecy of their work.

Other skeptics point to the Venona intercepts, intelligence cables from Soviet agents in the 1940s that were released in 1995. One snippet stated that “Liberal” — Julius’s code name — “and his wife” recommended Ruth. (Scholars mostly agree that the intercepts show that Julius was a spy, but don’t agree on the extent of Ethel’s involvement.)

We will never know what our parents told each other in private, but we are certain of this: The Greenglasses’ lies were necessary to obtain Ethel’s conviction; the K.G.B. did not give her a code name, and evidently did not consider her a spy; and the prosecution’s strategy was to use Ethel to coerce her husband to confession.

Shortly before he died in 2001, William P. Rogers, who was deputy attorney general of the United States at the time of our parents’ execution (and later secretary of state under President Richard M. Nixon), admitted to Mr. Roberts, who wrote a book about David, that the government’s objective was never to kill the Rosenbergs, but to get them to talk. He said of Ethel, “She called our bluff.” This statement shocks the conscience.

Our mother was not a spy. The government held her life hostage to coerce our father to talk, and when that failed, it extracted false statements to secure her wrongful execution. The apparent rationale for such action — that national security demanded it during a time of international crisis — has disturbing implications in post-9/11 America. It is never too late to correct an egregious injustice. We call on the government to formally exonerate Ethel Rosenberg.

This article originally appeared in the New York Times.

Michael Meeropol­ is professor emeritus of economics at Western New England University and editor of “The Rosenberg Letters.” Robert Meeropol is the founder of the Rosenberg Fund for Children and author of “An Execution in the Family.” They are the authors of “We Are Your Sons.”

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550
August 22, 2019
George Ochenski
Breaking the Web of Life
Kenneth Surin
Boris Johnson’s Brexit Helter Skelter
Enrique C. Ochoa – Gilda L. Ochoa
It’s About Time for Ethnic Studies in Our K-12 Schools
Steve Early
A GI Rebellion: When Soldiers Said No to War
Clark T. Scott
Sanders And Bezos’s Shared, Debilitating, Basic Premise
Dan Corjescu
The Metaphysics of Revolution
Mark Weisbrot
Who is to Blame for Argentina’s Economic Crisis?
Howard Lisnoff
To Protect and Serve
Cesar Chelala
A Palestinian/Israeli Experiment for Peace in the Middle East
Binoy Kampmark
No Deal Chaos: the Brexit Cliff Face and Operation Yellowhammer
Josue De Luna Navarro
For True Climate Justice, Abolish ICE and CBP
Dean Baker
The NYT’s Upside Down Economics on Germany and the Euro Zone
August 21, 2019
Craig Collins
Endangered Species Act: A Failure Worth Fighting For?
Colin Todhunter
Offering Choice But Delivering Tyranny: the Corporate Capture of Agriculture
Michael Welton
That Couldn’t Be True: Restorying and Reconciliation
John Feffer
‘Slowbalization’: Is the Slowing Global Economy a Boon or Bane?
Johnny Hazard
In Protest Against Police Raping Spree, Women Burn Their Station in Mexico City.
Tom Engelhardt
2084: Orwell Revisited in the Age of Trump
Binoy Kampmark
Condescension and Climate Change: Australia and the Failure of the Pacific Islands Forum
Kenn Orphan – Phil Rockstroh
The Dead Letter Office of Capitalist Imperium: a Poverty of Mundus Imaginalis 
George Wuerthner
The Forest Service Puts Ranchers Ahead of Grizzlies (and the Public Interest)
Stephen Martin
Geopolitics of Arse and Elbow, with Apologies to Schopenhauer.
Gary Lindorff
The Smiling Turtle
August 20, 2019
James Bovard
America’s Forgotten Bullshit Bombing of Serbia
Peter Bolton
Biden’s Complicity in Obama’s Toxic Legacy
James Phillips
Calm and Conflict: a Dispatch From Nicaragua
Karl Grossman
Einstein’s Atomic Regrets
Colter Louwerse
Kushner’s Threat to Palestine: An Interview with Norman Finkelstein
Nyla Ali Khan
Jammu and Kashmir: the Legitimacy of Article 370
Dean Baker
The Mythology of the Stock Market
Daniel Warner
Is Hong Kong Important? For Whom?
Frederick B. Mills
Monroeism is the Other Side of Jim Crow, the Side Facing South
Binoy Kampmark
God, Guns and Video Games
John Kendall Hawkins
Toni Morrison: Beloved or Belovéd?
Martin Billheimer
A Clerk’s Guide to the Unspectacular, 1914
Elliot Sperber
On the 10-Year Treasury Bonds 
August 19, 2019
John Davis
The Isle of White: a Tale of the Have-Lots Versus the Have-Nots
John O'Kane
Supreme Nihilism: the El Paso Shooter’s Manifesto
Robert Fisk
If Chinese Tanks Take Hong Kong, Who’ll be Surprised?
Ipek S. Burnett
White Terror: Toni Morrison on the Construct of Racism
Arshad Khan
India’s Mangled Economy
Howard Lisnoff
The Proud Boys Take Over the Streets of Portland, Oregon
Steven Krichbaum
Put an End to the Endless War Inflicted Upon Our National Forests
Cal Winslow
A Brief History of Harlan County, USA
Jim Goodman
Ag Secretary Sonny Perdue is Just Part of a Loathsome Administration
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail