Posted on 05/03/2015 3:27:19 AM PDT by WhiskeyX
As May 9th, Victory Day in many post-Soviet states, approaches, decency demands that we celebrate the defeat of Adolf Hitler’s Germany and honor the millions of soldiers and civilians who gave their lives to rid the world of the scourge of Nazism.
At the same time, if we truly want to honor the dead, we must take heed of the historical lies that the Kremlin, both in its Soviet and post-Soviet hypostases, promotes about the USSR’s relationship with Nazi Germany.
For starters, the Moscow-controlled Communist International, and its sidekick, the Communist Party of Germany, made Hitler’s rise to power possible, if not indeed inevitable, by tarring the German Social Democrats as “social fascists” who threatened to split the proletariat and were, thus, a greater evil than the Nazis. Had the German left remained united against the real threat—Nazism—Hitler might not have come to power. (Many leftists make a similar mistake today, preferring Vladimir Putin’s fascism to American capitalism and thereby promoting war in Europe.)
(Excerpt) Read more at worldaffairsjournal.org ...
In 1938 the great powers met in Munich to determine the fate of the Sudetenland, a territory belonging to Czechoslovakia. Even though the Soviet Union was a great power, and had an obvious interest in the region, it was not invited to the conference.
As we all know, Britain and France caved in to Hitler. Stalin learned a lesson from all that. The British and French were weak. The initiative belonged to Germany.
So Stalin allied with Hitler, not out of any common cause, but because the West would not stand up to Germany.
(Again, this is a Devil's Advocate viewpoint...just something to think about.)
What a crock. The Nazis were Leftists the same as the Communists. They were two scorpions in a bottle fighting for power. The Nazis won.
Can we thusly blame the Republican Party with their loser platform, their ABSOLUTE COMPLETE LOSER candidates and the traitorous quislings which they have seated in the US Senate and House for the national nightmare of Øbama?
YES WE CAN!
Stalin actually were actively looking for alliance with both British and France against Germany just prior to Molotov-Ribbentrop which is itself anything but alliance. It was actually a non-aggression pact, not alliance.
.....the Moscow-controlled Communist International, and its sidekick, the Communist Party of Germany, made Hitler’s rise to power possible, if not indeed inevitable, by tarring the German Social Democrats as “social fascists” who threatened to split the proletariat and were, thus, a greater evil than the Nazis.
I recommend Stephen Koch's book on Willi Münzenberg, Stalin's man in the West: Double Lives: Stalin, Willi Munzenberg and the Seduction of the Intellectuals
The book relies on several memoirs and testimonies from agents defecting from the Soviet "Apparat" (Soviet Secret Services). But one can also read Arthur Koestler's autobiographies "Arrow In the Blue" and "The Invisible Writing" to learn how closely Stalin and Hitler cooperated, and how that facilitated Hitler's power grab in Germany.
Then we have the collaboration between the German Army and the Soviets that started already in the 1920's, and without which the Wehrmacht never had been able to grow so mighty.
The point you bring up (I know you are playing the Devil's advocate) is the typical left-wing defence of Stalin (See Wikipedia) and the 1939 deal between Nazi-Germany and Soviet-Russia:
Joseph Stalin was also upset by the results of the Munich conference. The Soviets, who had a mutual military assistance treaty with Czechoslovakia, felt betrayed by France, who also had a mutual military assistance treaty with Czechoslovakia. The British and French, however, mostly used the Soviets as a threat to dangle over the Germans. Stalin concluded that the West had actively colluded with Hitler to hand over a Central European country to the Nazis, causing concern that they might do the same to the Soviet Union in the future, allowing the partition of the USSR between the western powers and the fascist Axis. This belief led the Soviet Union to reorient its foreign policy towards a rapprochement with Germany, which eventually led to the signing of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in 1939.
There is definitely a point there - but only if one disregards the earlier and ongoing German and Soviet collaboration and the diplomatic play by the Soviets during the years preceding the Munich conference.
The Soviet Union and France had both defence treaties with Czechoslovakia. The official Soviet history (edited by Gromyko and Ponomaryov) unsurprisingly states that the USSR all the time was prepared to carry out its treaty obligations.
However, the German diplomats who reported to the German FO were totally convinced that the Soviet Union did not intend to assist Czechoslovakia in September 1938. It should also be noted that the Soviets offered Germany a non-aggression pact already in 1935.
One should also note the little remembered affair of the Czechoslovakian mobilization in May 1938. Not only did it harden Hitler's demands, but the reasons for it also turned out to have been erroneous; the Nazis were not mobilizing against Czechoslovakia at that time.
The Czech historian Igor Lukes writes about this episode here:
Stalin's Diplomatic Maneuvres During the 1938 Czechoslovak Crisis
This essay is well worth a read - it gives some important answers to your question, and it shows the Soviet Apparat involved in high politics, and not unlike the foreplay to the Six-Day War in 1967, it appears that the Soviets played a client nation into committing a premature military action; in May 1938 Czechoslovakia, in May 1967 Nasser's Egypt.
But that's another story....
I find it interesting that the author of this article used the theological term “hypostasis” in describing the current Post-Soviet Russian regime.
It is a term used in traditional Christiology describing the nature of Christ as 100% God and 100% Man at the same time, existing in reality with one another. In our own time-space continuum, nothing can be 100% one thing and 100% another thing at the same time, but in Christ, we accept it by Faith.
In the context of post-Soviet Russia, is the author implying that it is still 100% communist even though it claims to be 100% NOT?
I found the use of the term fascinating! :-)
USSR didn’t even have a boundary with CS. Poland was in between, and Poland, in the most astonishing short-sightedness, did not support CS but instead joined in feasting on the remains. Poland, reasonably enough, was about as suspicious of Stalin as Hitler. They had, after all, fought a war with USSR in the aftermath of WWI in which Warsaw was very nearly taken.
I wonder who the Poles thought would be next on the menu.
the Moscow-controlled Communist International, and its sidekick, the Communist Party of Germany, made Hitler's rise to power possible, if not indeed inevitable, by tarring the German Social Democrats as "social fascists" who threatened to split the proletariat and were, thus, a greater evil than the Nazis. Had the German left remained united against the real threat -- Nazism -- Hitler might not have come to power. (Many leftists make a similar mistake today, preferring Vladimir Putin's fascism to American capitalism and thereby promoting war in Europe.)The National Socialist Party was socialist, would tolerate no other parties, and the dictator would tolerate no rivals or NGOs. IOW, it is NO WONDER that Stalin and his USSR backed Hitler until Operation Barbarossa started.
Treaty of Nonaggression Between Germany and the Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics [1939]
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/nonagres.asp
“Stalin actually were actively looking for alliance with both British and France against Germany just prior to Molotov-Ribbentrop which is itself anything but alliance. It was actually a non-aggression pact, not alliance.”
That is a Soviet-Russian black propaganda used as disinformation. Stalin sought a Soviet alliance with Britain and France which would include terms which would preclude Britain and France from interfering with Soviet efforts to reconquer former Imperial Russian territories and dependencies in places such as the Baltic republics, Finland, Bessarabia, Czechoslovakia, and so forth. Britain and France were committed to defending the WWI Armistice terms and were therefore opposed to Soviet/Russian revanchist ambitions in Eastern Europe.
Statements claiming: “the Molotov-Ribbentrop which is itself anything but alliance. It was actually a non-aggression pact, not alliance.” are blatant lies. Stalin and the Soviet Union were deeply involved in an alliance with Germany beginning long before Hitler and the NAZIs came to power in Germany. Stalin and the Soviet Union had concluded an alliance with Germany in the 1920s to covertly train the German army and air force in violation of the terms of the WWI Armistice agreement. The Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement broadened this more than decade old alliance between the Soviet Union and Germany by agreeing to give the Soviet Union a freehand in the Soviet conquests of Eastern Poland and other Eastern European territories in exchange for Germany’s conquests of various Eastern European territories. In the event the Soviet Communists failed to win favorable influence inside the German officer corps and enlisted ranks and/or win control of the German government, Stalin prepared to followup its political campaign in Germany with military campaigns into Western Europe. Stalin’s alliance of the Soviet Union with Germany was a temporary measure to prepare the way for Soviet territorial and political expansion into Eastern Europe, Central Europe, and Western Europe.
Your link to the Molotov-Ribbentrop non-aggression treaty linked to the official treaty. The next page shows the Secret Additional Protocol whereby Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union divided Poland, the Baltic states, and parts of southern Europe (Bessarabia) between themselves. World War II had in fact started as soon as the signatures had been affixed to the treaty:
Stalin knew the Western allies were weak when they did nothing to stop communism in Spain in 1936, and they let Germany re-arm (with Soviet help) throughout the late 30s. In 1939 they divided Poland between them (though for some reason the western allies didn’t declare war on the USSR - only Germany); they also stood by while Stalin invaded the Baltic states and part of Finland.
While Americans have proud moments in our history, the years leading up to WWII are not among them.
You are giving us “New Russian Bullshit”. Soviet Union denied the existence of the secret protocols to the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact until the 90s. Once they were published the cat is out of the bag and Russian trolls have to tell the new story saying these doesn’t matter and the agreement under which Nazi Germany and Soviet Union invaded Eastern Europe and held joint victory parades at agreed lines is really nothing.
Thanks SB, the conquest and division of Europe was the mutually held goal of the allies, Stalin and Hitler.
“Stalin knew the Western allies were weak when they did nothing to stop communism in Spain in 1936, and they let Germany re-arm (with Soviet help) throughout the late 30s.”
Stalin knew the “Western allies were weak,” because they actually were economically weak and correspondingly weak in morale and political will due to the aftermath of the First World War. Stalin’s Soviet Union and Germany were also weak, but their authoritarian governments were able to dictate, override, and inspire revenge against the war weariness of the populace. Stalin and the Soviet Union were also in the position of being able to expropriate the financial resources necessary to industrialize and mobilize a new military force by starving and exterminating the Soviet populace possessing those resources. Germany remained militarily weak until 1938 and the beginning of the Second World War. Germany was able to build its military forces only by using its authoritarian government to put Germany’s economy deeply in a debt which was destined to bankrupt Germany by around 1944, if Germany’s conquests failed to produce enough loot from the conquered territories to keep the Germany economy going.
“In 1939 they divided Poland between them (though for some reason the western allies didn’t declare war on the USSR - only Germany); they also stood by while Stalin invaded the Baltic states and part of Finland.”
Britain and France had previously contemplated Poland and Czechoslovakia could support each other while France and Britain conducted their campaigns against Germany along Germany’s Western front. Germany and France lost that support for Poland when they acquiesced to the surrender of Czechoslovakia to Germany. This left Poland isolated and beyond the reach of any French and British expeditionary forces of any substantial strengths. Their only ability to influence NAZI Germany was by the deterrent capability on Germany’s western front. This deterrence later proved to be fatally inadequate.
Britain did attempt to find ways in which to oppose the Soviet invasion of Finland, but the Scandinavian neutralities limiting access to Finland and Britain’s own precarious circumstances made such efforts not feasible.
“While Americans have proud moments in our history, the years leading up to WWII are not among them.”
In some respects, yes, but in most other respects the United States simply did not have enough military forces and economic power to serve as a deterrent or as an effective military force.
A Greek friend once asked why the United States did not come and help to defend Greece against the German invasion of Greece. When I pointed out that the U.S. Army at that time was much smaller than Greece’s own army, he was astonished and refused to believe it until I showed him the actual numbers.
The United States Government was in bad financial condition due to the British and other European allies failure to repay their war debts to the United States and the economic failures which followed those loan defaults. The United States was able to better recover from the World War Two debts only because the destruction of the European, Japanese, and Chinese industries and economies left the United States without effective economic competitors for a few decades and the restructuring of the world’s economic systems to end the currency blocs encouraged free trade.
The acquiescence to Stalin in the late 1930s, only to impose rationing on Americans to rescue beloved “Uncle Joe” later, was ridiculous. We prepared our future enemy for both the Korean & Vietnam Wars.
I understand why Europeans after WWI never really got behind wars/military actions; they understood that governments are not trustworthy enough to send their young to die for them.
“The acquiescence to Stalin in the late 1930s, only to impose rationing on Americans to rescue beloved “Uncle Joe” later, was ridiculous. We prepared our future enemy for both the Korean & Vietnam Wars.”
Britain and the United States made half-hearted attempts to support anti-Communist forces in Russia during the Russian Civil War, but those anti-Communist forces failed to achieve independence from the Bolshevik Communists. When FDR’s Administration came into power in the United States in 1933, it was generally and for the most part covertly sympathetic to socialism and communism. Although Americans were generally not sympathetic with Communists, those in FDR’s Administration who were not disposed to regard the Soviets as anything but an enemy of Americans and democracy did tend to agree the enemy of our enemy was a friend in need during the hostilities with Germany. So, even if the Soviets tended to be a reluctant and hostile ally of the United States, any contribution to mutual victory over Germany was seen to be beneficial to the Allied war effort, and at worst the denial of Soviet resources and manpower that could be used by Germany against the Allies was useful.
To put it all in another way, the most important purpose of accepting the Soviet Union as an ally during World War Two was to deny Germany the opportunity to use the Soviet territories, bases, natural resources, industries, manpower, and military forces against the Western Allies and their overseas forces in the worldwide theaters of war. Keeping the Soviet Union as an ally also denied Germany the opportunity to maintain a line of communications with Japan or routes of attack against Allied bases and resources in Southwest Asia.
I will acknowledge those Red Army soldiers who fought for their Motherland against a hideous foe, despite their leadership, they didn’t choose their leaders, they were fighting for their families.
I refuse to praise Stalin, or the system that needlessly killed millions more than needed to be killed. And the oppression they brought on so many nations after the war.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.