If we go for the "must be a murder" theory, few of the main questions I see reasonable are:
1. Who is responsible for that brutal act?
2. What was the motive?
3. Where was/were the murderer/s?
4. What happened to their own traces?
5. Who is pulling the strings of the investigation and why the participants of the search/investigation had to sign a 25 year prohibition to disclose information
1. Who is responsible for that brutal act ?
In some sense, one could say symbolically that the responsible is the voucher:
Igor Dyatlov has " a travel certificate and a trade union voucher, in which he addressed the leaders of Soviet, party and public organizations, "to render all possible assistance" in providing the Dyatlov group of hikers campaign XXI° Congress of the CPSU, the opening of which was scheduled for January 28, 1959.e from the leadership of the settlement-colony.In Serov, Ivdel and Vizhay Dyatlov's group had exhibited its voucher
- Note the difference with Blinov's group which did not show a voucher. Thus the 9 hikers appeared as to be
official (or semi official) representatives of the Soviet government
in the eyes of :
a) - Hypothesis N°2
- A few foreign ex-zeks and patriots from countries suffering from Soviet oppression who had not yet been allowed (or able) to leave the Vizhay region.
b) - Hypothesis N°2-bis
- A few Stalinist Russians opposed to the reforms which had become more pronounced since the XXth (1956) Congress of the Communist Party in 1956 who lived in the Vizhay region.
2. What was the motive ?
Indeed for historians, the period 1953-1964, (which is called the Khrushchev epoch or the Khrushchev thaw), is particularly complicated (and also not well known) because Khrushchev met opponents in all (Stalinist) strata of Russian society (Army, Gulag Administration, Nomenklatura, etc.). See by way of introduction:https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=433.msg10160#msg10160
It should not be forgotten that for military theorists a terrorist attack is a form of asymmetric warfare, with various motivations (revenge, intimidation, example, provocation, tactics ....) and consequences very variable and always difficult to predict.
DPI should be classified in the vast category of terrorist attacks in the broad sense. In any case, 61 years after the DPI compelled the current Russian authorities to make a fool of themselves with manifestly absurd statements. Hypothesis N°2External (international) opposition
of patriots from countries in conflict with Russian and Soviet oppression who saw themselves as unfiltered warriors in a war that was not yet over. Hypothesis N°2-bisInternal Stalinist opposition
coming from several Gulag leaders, and powerful camp commanders, who with Khrushchev's reforms were losing their power and privileges. These Stalinists also feared that the XXI° st (1959) Congress of the PCUS would be even more devastating for them (this was inaccurate).
because the XXI° st Congress of the PCUS had little influence on the desalinization.
3. Where was/were the murderer/s ? Hypothesis N°2
Three ex-Zeks who lived and worked in the Vizhay region who grabbed this wonderful opportunity for them (since the route of the 9 hikers was approximately known in Ivdel) to succeed in a spectacular action.
It is hard to determine whether these ex-zeks were : Chechens, Ingush, Crimean Tatars, Poles, Czechoslovakians, Hungarians, Romanians, Moldovans, Ukrainians, Koreans, Germans, Bulgarians, Estonians, Lithuanians, Latvians... or from other countries ?
The Poles are well positioned because of Katyn (1940) and the Polish October (1956), followed by the pro-Soviet politics of Gomulka, which discouraged some Polish ex-zeks from returning to Poland.
There is also Maslennikov's sybilline allusion : Reasons for leaving...from the tent..."come out one by one, run (Caucasus)
."https://forum.dyatlovpass.com/index.php?topic=464.msg9152#msg9152 Hypothesis N°2-bisAleks Kandr
proposes a complete and coherent explanation (but it is in Russian, which is hard for me to read). See
There was one commanditaire (client) that remained in Ivdel "which could be one of the leaders of the colony 64 at the SCh/349-Ivdellag" (USh/349 or SCh/349).
The commanditaire (client) had hired three mercenary killers who were guards (or former guards) of one of the Gulag camps. These former guards specialized in pursuing the few prisoners who escaped over the barbed wire. The high Soviet administration had naturally forbidden to entrust firearms to such guardian-killers, who were efficient but whose loyalty to the regime was not assured.
4. What happened to their own traces ?
• On February 26th, on the slope of the Kholat Syakhl as well as around the cedar, all traces had been erased by the wind, except for a few due to random effects (chance) which are intrinsic to Fluid Mechanics.
• In the Auspiya Valley the attackers (or murderers if you prefer) carefully followed the tracks of the hikers from North-2 to the tent.
• On February 2, 1959 the attackers first cut the tent before leaving. To get from the tent to North-2 the attackers carefully followed the same tracks (which had been marked by 12 skiers = 9 hikers + 3 attackers).
5. Who is pulling the strings of the investigation
(Why the participants of the search/investigation had to sign a 25 year prohibition to disclose information. ---> Read the explanations in the posts of WAB
Khrushchev ---> Khrushchev's close collaborators in Moscow ---> In the Sverdlovsk region the KGB and the CPSU ... whatever the details, the main thing is to remember that the DPI had been a bitter failure for the KGB
, which had been proved incapable of protecting the 9 hikers...
To be continued -works in progress - go to : Altercation on the pass > Altercation on the pass