October 1941: the Turks were waiting for the Germans in Moscow

Special diplomacy

As you know, after the dramatic events in Moscow on October 16, 1941, the capital was transferred to a state of siege by the decision of the USSR State Defense Committee. Among other measures, this was preceded by the transfer from Moscow of a number of government and party institutions, as well as the transfer of foreign embassies to Kazan and Kuibyshev.

The diplomats were taken out of the capital in just five days - from 15 to 19 October, but not everyone was happy about that. So, the Turkish embassy categorically objected to the complete evacuation. It seems that Turkish diplomats were not too worried about the possible fall of the Soviet capital ...

This is understandable: Turkish policy towards the USSR in 1940-1943. was, as you know, on the verge of an invasion of Turkish troops in the Caucasus. Let us remind you that the Turkish-German Treaty "On Friendship and Non-Aggression" for a period of 10 years, signed on June 18, 1941, came into effect from the moment of its signing.

That is, literally on the eve of the Nazi aggression against the USSR. So the haste with the entry into force of this document was justified ... Moreover, Ankara denounced this treaty only on August 2, 1944.

And plans for a military invasion of Transcaucasia from the fall of 1941 were being worked out by Turkish strategists, as you know, not only together with Germany, but also with the western allies of the USSR (see. Fuhrer's Caucasian Gambit).

The last attempt by Berlin to involve Turkey in the war against the USSR was the Wehrmacht maneuvers in the presence of the leadership of the Turkish General Staff, at the end of June 1943 in the Poltava-Kharkov-Belgorod region. That is, on the eve of the Battle of Kursk.

The Turkish delegation at these maneuvers was led by the head of the Turkish National Defense Committee, General Cemil Toydemir (in the photo he is next to Field Marshal Rundstedt). But the results of the Battle of Kursk did not contribute to the Turkish aggression in the Transcaucasus.

The last diplomat

As for the Turkish diplomats in Moscow in October-November 1941, they assured Ankara of the imminent fall of Moscow and were not very worried about their prospects. October 12, 1941 - from the report of the Turkish military attaché in the USSR, Colonel R. Hangioglu to the Turkish General Staff:

“... Moscow is a sight, as during the“ last judgment ”. Complete turmoil. Huge transports of the wounded are moving from Moscow to the east. We spend the nights in the bomb shelters assigned to us. The city is gradually turning into a city of death and fires. Together with the Ambassador, I will go to Kazan in 1-2 days. Almost nothing remained of the stations. The entire Soviet army retreats to Moscow from the western and southwestern directions. The tactics of concentrating large masses of troops in cities in order to detain German troops there is senseless.

This tactic was chosen and carried out personally by Stalin. A defense carried out according to such a system will lead to the catastrophe of the Soviet cadre army. Events are developing very quickly and will obviously bring victory to the Germans. " (GA RF, F. R-9401, Op. 2, D. 100, L. 418-420)

October 14, 1941 - from the report of the Turkish Ambassador to the USSR A.Kh. Acted by the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Defense:

“... We are waiting for the wagons that Vyshinsky ordered us to give. The documents will be sent with one of the embassy officials. German pressure has increased tremendously, raids continue incessantly aviation... Among the population and among the soldiers and officers sent to the front, there are moods that cause fear. Death hangs over Russia and over her heart - Moscow.

... Embassy Counselor Kamil Mumtaz Bey will stay in Moscow for some time and will go after the documents have been sent. Valuable items will be placed in Kazan, in a specially designated building. " (GA RF, F. R-9401, Op. 2, D. 100, L. 422-424)

Kamil Mumtaz Bey was the last foreign diplomat who remained in Moscow at that time, leaving for Kazan only in mid-November!

We will help you as much as we can

November 22, 1941 - from the report of the Turkish Ambassador to the USSR A.Kh. Aktay (from Kazan) to the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Defense:

“... In Moscow, very harsh measures have been taken against those who incite riots. Many people are shot every day. The food crisis is getting worse every day. There is almost no sugar, meat, butter. In Leningrad, the food situation is very difficult. "

And in the epilogue of the ambassador (pictured), there is a deliberate falsification:

“... It is believed that since Stalin leaves the city, his defenses will collapse. The Soviets are taking action to blow up bridges in and around Moscow. " (GA RF, F. R-9401, Op. 2, D. 100, L. 425-428)

However, the Turkish side practically helped the invasion of Germany with its satellites in the USSR. So, the Soviet air defense in the Caucasus since October 1941 more and more often recorded violations of the Soviet borders by the Turkish Air Force, which increased until mid-July 1943 inclusive. Such violations, like military incidents on the land border with the USSR, were especially frequent in June-October 1942.

And in May 1942, as noted by the Russian and Azerbaijani historian Jamil Hasanli,

“In a conversation with V.M. In London, W. Churchill told Molotov that "Germany can strike through Baku to the Caucasus: this explains the concentration of Turkish troops along the Caucasian borders."

Accordingly, in the spring of 1942, the political workers of the Transcaucasian Military District resumed a campaign among its soldiers and officers about the growing Turkish danger. On the territory of Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia, the number of Soviet troops was increased by the beginning of autumn 1942 to 25 fully equipped divisions. "

It is also characteristic that until January 1945, inclusive, Ankara, under various pretexts, refused to allow the Allies to let their cargo convoys to Soviet ports or to the railways of Transcaucasia. Although the transports of Germany, Italy and Romania ply freely in 1941-1944. through the Turkish (Aegean-Black Sea) straits.

Moreover, Churchill and Roosevelt were unable to convince I. Inonu, the then President of Turkey, on these issues in Cairo in December 1943 during trilateral negotiations. And yet, Ankara did not dare to directly participate in the Nazi aggression against the USSR ...

Comments

[knn54]

- Moreover, Churchill and Roosevelt were unable to persuade I. Inonu, the then President of Turkey, on these issues, in Cairo in December 1943 during trilateral negotiations.
Convince, well, well.
In 1939, London and Paris, in response to Stalin's pact with Hitler, prepared a bombing raid on Baku, and on October 19, 1939, a British-French-Turkish military alliance of mutual assistance was concluded.
Therefore, Stalin's attempts to "put pressure" on Inenu after Tehran were unsuccessful - London and Washington stood behind the Turkish president.

[Egoza]

If you "rummage" the country during the Second World War, then who just did not hope for Hitler! And then they immediately became "friends"! Corrupt ... you get the idea! Now they are silent, but they are dreaming little by little, well, at least someone, just to destroy Russia!

[Shurik70]

Turkey has always been on its own mind.
She was an unpleasant opponent. Forced to be reckoned with.
And as an ally she is good only in peacetime.

[Martin]

Quote: Shurik70

And as an ally she is good only in peacetime.

As an ally, she is bad at all times. In peace with her, there may be some common political and economic interests, but even those with a constant eye for a possible setup.

[w70]

Even Stalin was friends with Giler until he got it in his teeth

[Alien From]

There has never been anything good from the Turks and never will be! Thanks to the author for this series of articles.

[sakuz]

Even Peter 1 said: "Don't believe in Turku ..."

[Maki Avellevich]

Quote: sakuz

Even Peter 1 said: "Don't believe in Turku ..."

yes, but who did he say you can trust?

[kind]

In Russia, the word Turks was a dirty word. Worse than a thief and a robber.

[Stas157]

Quote: Maki Avellievich

yes but whom he said you can believe?

Are you hinting at the Jews?

[Maki Avellevich]

Quote: Stas157

Are you hinting at the Jews?

I'm hinting at what they never say: believe this!

and they rightly say, one must believe only in Gd, and the rest is shaky.

[Stas157]

Quote: Maki Avellievich

you only need to believe in Gd, and the rest is shaky

Our God is Putin. But I don't believe him. And about his tales of getting to heaven - too.

[Dym71]

Quote: Stas157

Our God is Putin.

Bust

Quote: Commandment two

Do not make for yourself an idol and no image of what is in the sky above, and what is on the earth below, and what is in the water below the earth; do not worship or serve them.

[andrewkor]

Probably Peter thought so before the Prut campaign of 1711, when the Turkish Pasha mercifully, for a bribe, purely according to concepts, let him go and the whole surrounded army.

[Sergey-1950]

Quote: sakuz

Even Peter 1 said: "Don't believe in Turku ..."

A link should be placed under such statements. But most importantly, the era of Peter is more than 200 years distant from the events described. To refer to his phrase (even if he said something like that) is a bit strange. Your post with Peter was cleverly used by the troll Boxer, who threw three long messages in response to you. What made it difficult to read the forum. In addition, there were shorter messages, but in a fairly large number.

[svp67]

Lenin, with his strong-willed decision, supported Turkey and its leader Ataturk in their difficult years

Upon the conclusion of an agreement on "friendship and brotherhood" in Moscow on March 16, 1921 (according to which a number of territories of the former Russian Empire, the Kars region and the Surmalinsky district, were transferred to Turkey), an agreement was also reached to provide the Ankara government with gratuitous financial assistance, as well as assistance with weapons. in accordance with which the Soviet government during 1921 sent 10 million rubles to the disposal of the Kemalists. gold, more than 33 thousand rifles, about 58 million cartridges, 327 machine guns, 54 artillery pieces, more than 129 thousand shells, one and a half thousand sabers, 20 thousand gas masks, 2 naval fighters and "a large number of other military equipment" [30]. The government of the RSFSR made a proposal in 1922 [34] to invite representatives of the Kemal government to the Genoa conference, which meant de facto international recognition for the VNST.

And that's how they repaid it then. And now Erdogan has the audacity to say that five countries won in that war, that's nothing ...

[Konnick]

And that's how they repaid it then. And now Erdogan has the audacity to say that five countries won in that war, that's nothing ...

The guarantor of the covenants, among which was the prohibition in no case to fight against Russia, Kemal Ataturk and the secular constitution of the Turkish Republic were the military, who, when encroaching on the principles laid down by Ataturk, made military coups. Erdogan does not like a secular state, he would be happy to turn Turkey into a theocratic state, being an Islamist and the military tried to overthrow him, or rather even kill him, but a small narrow-minded ruler of a neighboring country intervened, who helped Erdogan escape ... "big" thanks to him for that.

[Flooding]

Quote: Konnick

the military tried to overthrow him, or rather even kill him, but a small, narrow-minded ruler of a neighboring country intervened and helped Erdogan escape ... "big" thanks to him for that.

Is it true that the United States was behind the "good" Turkish military who wanted to overthrow Erdogan?
or bullshit?

[Konnick]

were the USA?
or bullshit?

Well, it was said in our official media. So draw your own conclusions.

[Flooding]

Quote: Konnick

Well, it was said in our official media. So draw your own conclusions.

I made that conclusion.
and Erdogan's cool relationship with the US administration confirms him (my conclusion).
and in what cases do you believe our official media?
for example, they are writing about rockets for the second day.
lie?
and when you wrote about Russia's non-involvement in the tragedy with Boeing, you also did not believe?
Skripal poisoning?
tell me when to believe is right and when is wrong.

[Stas157]

Quote: Flood

and in what cases do you believe our official media?
for example, they are writing about rockets for the second day.
lie?

And if they write about pensions that they will increase (as a result of the robbery of the elderly)?
He lies to the authorities at every step as regards the aspirations of the people!

Quote: Flood

Boeing tragedies

Quote: Flood

Skripal poisoning?

These things are so far from the common people and not obvious. Their veracity cannot be verified, like store prices, wages and inflation. But if they lie in one place, they can easily do it in another.

[Flooding]

Quote: Stas157

These things are so far from the common people and not obvious.

And the conspiracy against Erdogan, then, is close to the common people.
Turkish, probably.
Stop writing out of place.

[Stas157]

Quote: Flood

Stop writing out of place.

I accept applications only in the format of the application. And in a polite manner! Try again.

[Flooding]

Quote: Stas157

I accept applications only in the format of the application. And in a polite manner! try again

what a petition to the devil!
you try to understand the essence of the correspondence before joining it.
and do not get excited by isolated words and phrases.

[Stas157]

All right.

Quote: Flood

А conspiracy against Erdogan, which means it is close to the common people.

Yes, close. The people are suspicious of the knife stick. And therefore it is the secret desire of the people.

[Flooding]

Quote: Stas157

The people are suspicious of the knife stick. And so this is the secret desire of the people

understood your logic
Therefore, any news from the official Russian media about NATO countries can be considered a lie, because the common people of Russia are suspicious of potential enemies.
Well, what can I say?
Bravo!

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: svp67

And that's how they repaid it then.

How did they repay? Is it really attacked? They didn't even declare war, unlike the Bulgarians, for example.

[komuso]

For those who are in a tank, Bulgaria did not declare war on the USSR, even the Bulgarian embassy in the USSR worked. But the USSR declared war on Bulgaria on September 7, 1944.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: komuso

For those who are in a tank, Bulgaria did not declare war on the USSR, even the Bulgarian embassy in the USSR worked

Yes? Thank you, I didn't know, the Bulgarians were no worse than the Turks, but about the same. Like now.

[antivirus]

because of the enormity and wealth, and so on, the Russian Federation will never sit out.

do not hope all the "envious of the monkeys"
Russia is always in the center of events and its decision is a verdict on two or three opposing sides.

that's why we will always be ... and an eternal battle, we only dream of peace ...

[Gardamir]

When, we will discuss

You are a little late. Here is yesterday
https://topwar.ru/188190-lavrov-rossija-priostanavlivaet-sotrudnichestvo-s-nato-v-otvet-na-vysylku-rossijskih-diplomatov.html

[zenion]

Nice headline. The Turks were waiting for the Germans in Moscow. The Turks captured Moscow and waited for the Germans there.

[Knell wardenheart]

In general, Hitler was let down by greed. Had he promised the Turks mountains of gold and pinched them off some momentary preferences-blessings, who would then condemn him for what is called the sonorous word "kidalovo"? After all, he had already thrown Poland and the USSR with these "non-aggression pacts" - he could use the Turks as well, until the moment when they were no longer needed. In total, it was necessary to equip their army - for which, in general, there were arsenals of conquered Poland and controlled France. And the captured stocks of Soviet weapons were more than enough. Instead, conceit overshadowed the eyes of the Germans - it seemed to them that they themselves would throw their hats over. What a closeness!
Meanwhile, the opening of the Caucasian front could have been that drop that would have tipped the balance in a direction unfavorable for us. Fortunately, this did not happen - however, I still do not understand why ..

[Luminman]

He promise the Turks mountains of gold

Even if Hitler had promised the Turks two mountains of gold, they would not have entered the war - there was nothing to fight with. And all that was was English weapons. But comrade. Stalin would surely have been delighted with Turkey's entry into the war on the side of Germany - after the war, the USSR would have been guaranteed to receive the straits

[Luminman]

well nifiga you are an optimist

According to the results of the war, the Germans Vost. Prussia and Silesia were taken away, Eastern Europe was redrawn as they wanted, and the Turks had straits, how could they do it. Nobody would have uttered a peep ...

[sidoroff]

in the wake of euphoria from victories near Moscow, they were going to occupy Turkey in the spring and summer of 1942, like Iran in August-September 1941.
but a catastrophe struck near Kharkov - and there was not enough of the Turks. and the Turks sat quietly even when before the Wehrmacht in Transcaucasia
was just a stone's throw away.

[rocket757]

October 1941: the Turks were waiting for the Germans in Moscow

... The Turks are the enemy, always and in everything ... who else needs to be convinced that they are hampered only by fears, to get hit by the horns, again and again?

[Xlor]

Turkish Air Force violations of Soviet borders

I read somewhere that Turkey had no aviation at that time. As there were no armored vehicles ...

[Andrey VOV]

It was ... the aviation was definitely

[komuso]

The Turks even had the FW-190.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Xlor

I read somewhere that Turkey had no aviation at that time. As there were no armored vehicles ...

Turkey bought the first tanks in the 20s in France - it was a living classic Renault FT (20 units). These tanks did not end up in line units, but were used to study, master and develop tactics.
Then, in the early 30s, Turkey turned to Britain and began to buy other classics - three dozen Carden Loyd tankettes, about a dozen Vickers 6-ton light tanks, as well as Vickers Carden Loyd floating tankettes and a dozen Vickers Mk VI light tanks. Purchases stretched over the entire 30s.
But the most massive source of armored vehicles for the Turkish army of the 30s was the USSR. In the mid-30s, Turkey bought from the Union 2 T-26 two-turret, 64 T-26 single-turret and 60 BA-6 (or BA-3). Turkish T-26s went to the 1st tank battalion.

Museum of the Turkish Army in Istanbul.
Further, the collection of equipment around the world continued. The next supplier was again France - in 1940 Turkey received a hundred Renault R-35s.
The number of connections in the BTV also grew.

... by mid-1940, the Turkish army had three armored formations - the 1st battalion, the 1st regiment and the 1st tank brigade. A separate battalion at that time operated only 16 T-26 tanks and the same number of BA-6 armored cars. The 1st Tank Regiment used Vickers Mk VI and R-35 tanks, and the brigade had almost all types of equipment in service.

© VO. "Renault FT, T-26 and others. Early history of the tank forces of Turkey".
By the 40s, the Turkish BTT had become quite obsolete. But Turkey received new cars only in 1943, and from two sides at once:

Germany handed over to a potential ally more than 50-55 Pz.Kpfw.III medium tanks, 15 Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.G tanks and other equipment. The United Kingdom and the United States responded by supplying their own armored vehicles. In the shortest possible time, the Turkish army sent 220 light tanks M3, 180 infantry Valentine, 150 light Mk VI and 25 medium M4. Together with them, 60 Universal Carrier armored personnel carriers, self-propelled guns, etc. were transferred.

© ibid.

In general, for 1941-1943. Turkey has a BTV on paper. And in fact - one more or less combat-ready tank regiment on the R-35.

[Xlor]

In the mid-30s, Turkey bought from the Union 2 T-26 twin-turret, 64 T-26 single-turret and 60 BA-6

It came as a shock to me! I never would have thought ...

[Moore]

The current "sultan" has annealed today in full accordance with the policy pursued during the Second World War: "We affirm that the fate of mankind cannot and should not be thrown at the mercy of a handful of victorious countries in World War II."
In principle, everything is clear with this. But since the main thing is babosiks, we will continue to supply him with air defense systems and turn a blind eye to Turkish meanness. The partner is ...

[Gardamir]

The current "sultan" annealed today

Mr. Purgin stood up to protect the Sultan. He said he had to read it in Turkish, like the Sultan was misunderstood.

[DenVB]

Quote: Moore

The current "sultan" annealed today

It should be noted that there is a reason in his words. There is not a single Islamic country among the permanent members of the UN Security Council. Although Islam today represents a much more serious force in the world arena than at the time of the creation of the UN.

[kamakama]

The UN Security Council in its current form is like the signatories of the Washington and London agreements on the fleet. Reflects the ratio of forces and sides as of a long-standing historical event. But the world is changing ...

[Ross xnumx]

So you read this whole story, and you start asking questions like: "Why do we need such a planid?" Someone puffs up every time, tries to prove their worth ... Maybe it should have been like in North America - the aborigines were wiped out and became "legitimate" full-fledged masters of the continent ...
Maybe after 1945 we had to force all the defeated to restore Russia for rations?
Did the Turks try to fight on the side of Hitler? Enemies! Rip up the entire empire, and at the same time sympathizers (the benefit of ammunition was immeasurable).
What right did the United States have in the division of the Reich's property? With whom did they fight there? What victories did you win?
Who needs Russian nobility today? Does anyone remember how Russian soldiers with their bodies covered them from sabers and knives? I no longer understand why in Orthodoxy such hatred for the Gentiles is not brought up. What is it that needs to be changed in the mentality for Russians to become non-Orthodox friends? How much more need to prove and convince? Why do you need to create a weapon, if with its help it is impossible to achieve respect by the right of the strong.
There remains, apparently, one thing - to finally turn into a herd of rams, which are devoured, sheared and torn apart by wolf packs under various kinds of pretexts.
Will we need a world where there will be no place for Russians?

[parusnik]

They shit, of course, just in case, but no detailed plans of Turkey's attack on the USSR have been found in the Turkish archives to this day. Germany - fascist Italy. Both countries had views of the same territory, including Libya and the Balkans. Moreover, back in the 1940s, Italy was looking at the Turkish possessions proper, wanting to bite off the same Smyrna (Izmir) with its surroundings. Yes, and Hitler did not promise anything to the Turks, he himself had plans for the Transcaucasus. And then the Turks at that time did not have a modern army at all. At the beginning of the Second World War, all the Turkish armed forces numbered no more than 1920 thousand soldiers with rifles of the First World War, 200 frankly outdated aircraft, only 131 more or less trained pilots, the only cruiser in the fleet was the former German Goeben. Three cavalry brigades and only one mechanized brigade.

[Covid]

If Turkey cautiously approached Hitler, the USSR did it quickly and decisively just before the start of the World War, signing all possible agreements with the Nazis. Japan, being in the war with the USA and with the USSR in neutrality, even received a little oil from the USSR. This is how neutrality he is. But the fact that the Turks did not let the German submarines in the World Cup was very good. even good.

[Covid]

Judged by deeds. In reality, Turkey was neutral until the end of the war. And this is the main point.

[Sergey-1950]

Quote: Covid

Judged by deeds. In reality, Turkey was neutral until the end of the war. And this is the main point.

Its neutrality is a copy of that of Germany in 1940-1941.
They were forced to keep 25 full-blooded divisions in Transcaucasia. These are three armies. And three armies are already a front. Wow neutrals.

[Covid]

And what does the Turks have to do with it? "Forced to hold." Sounds ridiculous. There were such times. The USSR stabbed the Poles in the back on September 17, 1939. The Finns were also neutral, but the USSR attacked them. So that's it. Reality is above all. Turkey did not attack. And Japan did not attack and the divisions were held there.
Who could you trust?
And the USSR and Germany were not neutral either. in "1940 - 1941" They were allies. More precisely, this is from August 23, 1939 to June 22, 1941.
1) non-aggression pact between the USSR and Germany of August 23, 1939 ("Molotov-Ribbentrop pact")
2) the treaty of friendship and the border between the USSR and Germany of September 28, 1939.
3.) The vast trade relationship between the countries was signed.
Facts and reality. And speculation, if only it were an alternative history.

[Sergey-1950]

Quote: Covid

And what does the Turks have to do with it? "Forced to hold." Sounds ridiculous. There were such times. The USSR stabbed the Poles in the back on September 17, 1939. The Finns were also neutral, but the USSR attacked them. So that's it. Reality is above all. Turkey did not attack. And Japan did not attack and the divisions were held there.

Turkey openly discussed in the press the seizure of our Volga region. She had a large army under arms, stationed at our borders. At the same time, she could easily increase the number of her troops to one million.
Japan. Openly claimed the Far East and Siberia. These claims were recognized by Nazi Germany. Where the border between the Reich and Japan would lie is another matter. But, by the time of the German attack on the USSR, they AGREED this border.
Germany has shown what a treaty of neutrality signed by Japan is by trampling on the Non-Aggression Pact. ! "Neutral" Japan kept a huge Kwantung army near our Far East. It far exceeded the number of our Armed Forces in the Far East. But the Japanese army had a huge advantage - the supply routes of the Kwanstun army were once shorter than the ONLY railway along which we could supply the Far Eastern army.
A neutral country does not keep an invading army on your border at a time when you are facing military defeat.
China (the unoccupied western regions) was neutral. There was no need to keep ANY troops there. There was no need to keep troops on the border with Mongolia.

So talking about the neutrality of Turkey and Japan is ridiculous. They two pulled back 45-50 Soviet divisions.

"Neutral" Finns ... well, this case has already spread out in the historical community.
You, apparently, have been engaged in propaganda not so long ago and did not see this moment.

Quote: Covid

And the USSR and Germany were not neutral either. in "1940 - 1941" They were allies. More precisely, this is from August 23, 1939 to June 22, 1941.
1) non-aggression pact between the USSR and Germany of August 23, 1939 ("Molotov-Ribbentrop pact")
2) the treaty of friendship and the border between the USSR and Germany of September 28, 1939.
3.) The vast trade relationship between the countries was signed.
Facts and reality. And speculation, if only it were an alternative history.

I don't even want to comment on this nonsense. This has been sorted out many times too.

[Covid]

I'm tired of answering that. Everyone and Always wants something. But the bottom line is who did what. Neither the Turks nor the Japanese captured anything, and the USSR seized Konigsber from Germany and the Japanese of the Kuril Islands.
And what is the nonsense about the Treaties with Germany, they weren't? They were!
Or are there simply no arguments? It's hard to reformat yourself after decades of zombies. 10 was enough for me.
There is not a bad video on the topic, with documents and facts.

[Boxer]

1. Well, the behavior was actually like this:
"As the situation in the Balkans aggravated, when German troops were concentrated in Romania in January 1941, Turkish representatives began to constantly warn the Soviet leaders that Germany might soon launch an offensive against the Soviet Union. Charge d'Affaires of the Turkish Republic in Germany F On January 13, 1941, Alkend told the plenipotentiary of the USSR in Berlin Dekanozov that “the Soviet Union cannot remain passive in the event of Germany's occupation of the Balkans, since the occupation of the Balkans will be followed by the occupation of Turkey, and Turkey may be followed by Russia. Alkend expressed the hope that "if Turkey is in danger, the Soviet Union will not be indifferent" "(DVP. Vol. 23, book 2, part 1, p. 328.)
2. And the fears of the Turks had grounds:
"On March 3-4, the Wehrmacht High Command considered the preparation of a possible operation against Turkey and further advance to the Middle East."
(Grak V.N.German policy in the Middle East (December 1940 - April 1941) // International relations in modern times. Sverdlovsk, 1972. P. 166 - 167)
3. "In a conversation with the plenipotentiary of the USSR, the British representatives noted that the Turkish government has not received an answer from Moscow to its desire to expand Soviet-Turkish relations and to a proposal to start negotiations on this matter." (Fiberboard. T. 23, book 2, part 2. P. 445.)

[Sergey-1950]

Quote: Boxer

1. Well, the behavior was actually like this:
"As the situation in the Balkans aggravated, when German troops were concentrated in Romania in January 1941, Turkish representatives began to constantly warn the Soviet leaders that Germany might soon launch an offensive against the Soviet Union. Charge d'Affaires of the Turkish Republic in Germany F On January 13, 1941, Alkend told the plenipotentiary of the USSR in Berlin Dekanozov that “the Soviet Union cannot remain passive in the event of Germany's occupation of the Balkans, since the occupation of the Balkans will be followed by the occupation of Turkey, and Turkey may be followed by Russia. Alkend expressed the hope that "if Turkey is in danger, the Soviet Union will not be indifferent" "(DVP. Vol. 23, book 2, part 1, p. 328.)

Turks are old provocateurs. They needed a clash between Germany and the USSR, in order to warm their hands on the ashes later. The Turk would have arranged a defeat for either side: the USSR would be defeated, then it would be possible to seize the Caucasus and try to seize the Volga region. Germany will be defeated, then capture the Balkans. The main thing is to join the winner in time.

Quote: Boxer

2. And the fears of the Turks had grounds:
"On March 3-4, the Wehrmacht High Command considered the preparation of a possible operation against Turkey and further advance to the Middle East."
(Grak V.N.German policy in the Middle East (December 1940 - April 1941) // International relations in modern times. Sverdlovsk, 1972. P. 166 - 167)

"Considered" does not mean decided yet. Moreover, such issues are not within the competence of the military. This is a question for politicians. This Grak should have commented on his information accordingly. If he did not, then the price of his "research" is appropriate.

Quote: Boxer

3. "In a conversation with the plenipotentiary of the USSR, the British representatives noted that the Turkish government has not received an answer from Moscow to its desire to expand Soviet-Turkish relations and to a proposal to start negotiations on this matter." (Fiberboard. T. 23, book 2, part 2. P. 445.)

O! You have at hand volume 23, book 2 of fiberboard ... Respect! Respect. Chapo, as the natives of France say.
If it's not difficult for you, write who exactly are these English representatives and when did they talk? And with whom.
Or maybe it was the employees of the English firm "We'll buy everything and sell everyone" and they talked with the guard of the Zagotpushnina.

[Dkuznecov]

I didn’t read the material, because not one
from photos has no annotation.
And the first one seemed to me to be staged.

[Luminman]

I didn’t read the material, because none of the photos has annotations.

You should consider "Murzilka" or, say, "Funny Pictures"

[Dkuznecov]

I don't know who you are protecting,
into whose mill you pour water.

I didn't say anything rude or offensive.

But, generally accepted rules for publishing content
(content) has not been canceled.

You can always refer to the original source.
find copies with better resolution or with add. comments.

Please explain yourself, dear "Luminman".

Personally, I started reading in 1975,
if it matters.

[Luminman]

Please explain yourself, dear "Luminman"

I explain. When you meet a girl, do you pay attention to cosmetics or something more essential? What I mean is that the text and content are primarily important in the article. And the pictures are just distracting ...

[Dkuznecov]

dear "Luminman". Perhaps you just didn't notice
that the announcement (I wrote about this) allows significantly
"deepen" the study of the issue.
I absolutely do not understand why you are a supporter of "anonymous" publications.
archival materials.
Thank you.
Kuznetsov.

[Luminman]

I absolutely do not understand why you are a supporter of "anonymous" publications.

If you open a newspaper, you will see dry information in it, almost without references to primary sources and archives. If you turn on the TV, you will find the same thing there. The same applies to online publications and radio. Links to archival materials are usually used in scientific works, and reading such an article, abundantly "smeared" with links to archives, and even with numbers and pages indicated, will not be interesting for a layman. Something like this...

[Avior]

The first is similar to a still from the film and is illustrative.
The second and third are described in the text of the article.

[the finish]

At that time, my grandfather already had 6 children and he was not taken to the active front, but sent to serve in the reserve divisions in Gyumri. So he served there until the end of the war. But his younger brother was taken away and he reached Czechoslovakia.

[Sergey-1950]

Thanks to the author for an interesting article.
But there is a small remark: Turkey's behavior on the eve of the war and in the first summer months was not considered.
The fact is that the Turkish press in 1940 actively discussed the annexation of the Soviet Turkic-speaking autonomous republics to Turkey: the Tatar ASSR and the Bashkir ASSR. Some authors generally wrote about the annexation of the entire Volga region. The Turks thus pushed Germany to war, hinting at a probable participation in the campaign, and at the same time voiced the price of this participation - the Volga region.
It is generally accepted that Turkey was waiting for the moment when it would be safe to join Germany and, at the same time, not too late to have the right to demand something.
But I think the question is more complicated here. The Turks did not even understand that they would receive a piece of the territory of the USSR not in gratitude for participating in the war, but in the case when Germany could not refuse (or prevent the seizure of territories). And for this it is necessary that Germany not only won, but won through the utmost exhaustion of forces. Therefore, the Turks pondered and paid advances until mid-1943. They all hoped for their script.

[Basarev]

Events are developing very quickly and, obviously, will bring victory to the Germans.

An extremely stupid hope. Obviously, the Turk was not aware that it was impossible in principle to defeat Russia by an external military invasion, for such are the lofty laws of the universe. More precisely, there is a skillful triad: by the will of heaven, the Russians are an immortal people, therefore Russia is indestructible and eternal, therefore no external aggressor can defeat Russia.

[Boxer]

Quote: sakuz

Even Peter 1 said: "Don't believe in Turku ..."

Is there an exact source of this saying attributed by Internet propagandists to Peter the Great? Or is it from the series grandmother used to say? By the way, it was not the Turks who actually saved Peter I during the notorious "Prut sitting" by releasing (on my word of honor - no longer returning to the lands of the Ottomans) Peter himself and his wife, his entire General Staff, and the remnants of his army from the encirclement ? Moreover, the Ottomans ordered their vassal, the Crimean Khan Devlet Giray, not to attack the exhausted Russian army on the way back to his homeland. Logically, like Peter the 1st, there was nothing to complain about in this sense?)
The most interesting thing is that the Turks did not want to fight with Russia from the very beginning and offered peace and land so as not to lead to war ...
"The Prut campaign ... The Sultan, fearing a general uprising of Christians, offered Peter peace through the mediation of the Patriarch of Jerusalem and Brankovan (who went over to the side of the Turks). Turkey offered Russia all the lands up to the Danube: Novorossia with Ochakov, Bessarabia, Moldavia and Wallachia. Peter I refused ... "
Source: http://histerl.ru/periudi_istorii/petr_pervie/pru
tskie_poxod.htm

[Boxer]

Quote: sakuz

Even Peter 1 said: "Don't believe in Turku ..."

The same author writes:
"After the victory over Charles XII, who at that time was considered the best commander in Europe, Peter I apparently believed in the power of his army and in his abilities as a strategist. And not only he himself believed this, but his entire court, government and even his As a result, only some miracle allowed him, his wife Catherine, and members of the Petrine government, who for some reason dragged along with the army, to stay alive, but Peter lost the army that defeated the Swedes. ... Here are the words of Peter's contemporary, FI Soimonov: "... the Tsar's Majesty did not order to join the general battle ... He ordered ... to put a white flag among the trenches ..." The white flag meant surrender. Peter ordered his envoy , P.P. Shafirov, to agree to any conditions "except slavery", but insist on immediate signing. Anopol in 1713) Despite the fact that the Crimean Khan was very dissatisfied with the signed document, he still did not destroy the remnants of the tsarist army during the retreat, although he could easily do it. thousands of people completely demoralized. "
Source: http://histerl.ru/periudi_istorii/petr_pervie/pru
tskie_poxod.htm

[Boxer]

I wonder who orders such articles? It's strange, when you read serious researchers, you find out that Turkey had completely different concerns and completely different relations with the USSR.
"In the works of Soviet historians, the opinion is expressed that" the Turkish government, despite all sorts of tricks of the opponents of the Soviet-Turkish rapprochement, generally understood that in the person of the Soviet Union and it could find an ally to suppress Hitler's aggression in the Balkans. " facts: Sarajoglu, in an interview with an American diplomat on January 15, 1941, said that "Turkey has every reason to count on Russian assistance," and on January 8, 1941, the Turkish ambassador to London T.R. Ministry of Foreign Affairs that "Ankara is confident that Russia is ready to help Bulgaria and Turkey in the event of a violent German attack on them."
According to the historian P.L. Moiseev, these hopes of the Turks for Soviet support were not groundless, since the 1925 treaty of friendship and neutrality was in force between the USSR and Turkey, the validity of which was extended by 1935 years in 10. "
The Treaty of Friendship and Neutrality, signed in Paris (later extended) of December 17, 1925, provided in Article 2 for the observance of neutrality, a non-aggression regime and non-participation in hostile groups in the event of military clashes, and so on ...
Sources:
1. Fiberboard. T. 23, book. 2, h. 1.S. 413.
2. I am M. Galiakbarova SOVIET-TURKISH RELATIONS IN THE CONDITIONS OF THE GERMAN EXPANSION IN THE BALKANS (DECEMBER 1940 - June 1941)
3. A. Fedosov. Information on existing and current political treaties and
agreements between the USSR and Turkey as of January 1, 1944, 25.01.1944/XNUMX/XNUMX

[Stas157]

Quote: Konnick

but a small, dim-witted ruler of a neighboring country intervened, helped Erdogan be saved ... "big" thanks to him for that.

This series can be continued. Gave the go-ahead for the entry of Turkish troops into Syria, builds a nuclear power plant at his own expense, sold strategic air defense (S-400), threw gas pipes, instead of laying them directly to Europe ...

Will Erdogan repay it with good? I do not think so! In addition to knives in the back, in the form of a shot down plane, the murder of the ambassador, military supplies to the Bandera, nothing can be expected from him.

[Moskovit]

Turks are not the same as Turks. Within Turkey itself, there is quite a serious opposition to Erdogan. The middle class and business do not like imperial manners, which make Turkey incur significant costs. Plus refugees from Syria.
As one Turk said, we always rely on our military if they stage a coup again. Plus, the Turks say that Erdogan's health is not the same ... but this is the east. There are all the cunning

[Boxer]

Quote: Sergey-1950

Quote: Boxer

1. Well, the behavior was actually like this:
"As the situation in the Balkans aggravated, when German troops were concentrated in Romania in January 1941, Turkish representatives began to constantly warn the Soviet leaders that Germany might soon launch an offensive against the Soviet Union. Charge d'Affaires of the Turkish Republic in Germany F On January 13, 1941, Alkend told the plenipotentiary of the USSR in Berlin Dekanozov that “the Soviet Union cannot remain passive in the event of Germany's occupation of the Balkans, since the occupation of the Balkans will be followed by the occupation of Turkey, and Turkey may be followed by Russia. Alkend expressed the hope that "if Turkey is in danger, the Soviet Union will not be indifferent" "(DVP. Vol. 23, book 2, part 1, p. 328.)

Turks are old provocateurs. They needed a clash between Germany and the USSR, in order to warm their hands on the ashes later. The Turk would have arranged a defeat for either side: the USSR would be defeated, then it would be possible to seize the Caucasus and try to seize the Volga region. Germany will be defeated, then capture the Balkans. The main thing is to join the winner in time.

Quote: Boxer

2. And the fears of the Turks had grounds:
"On March 3-4, the Wehrmacht High Command considered the preparation of a possible operation against Turkey and further advance to the Middle East."
(Grak V.N.German policy in the Middle East (December 1940 - April 1941) // International relations in modern times. Sverdlovsk, 1972. P. 166 - 167)

"Considered" does not mean decided yet. Moreover, such issues are not within the competence of the military. This is a question for politicians. This Grak should have commented on his information accordingly. If he did not, then the price of his "research" is appropriate.

Quote: Boxer

3. "In a conversation with the plenipotentiary of the USSR, the British representatives noted that the Turkish government has not received an answer from Moscow to its desire to expand Soviet-Turkish relations and to a proposal to start negotiations on this matter." (Fiberboard. T. 23, book 2, part 2. P. 445.)

O! You have at hand volume 23, book 2 of fiberboard ... Respect! Respect. Chapo, as the natives of France say.
If it's not difficult for you, write who exactly are these English representatives and when did they talk? And with whom.
Or maybe it was the employees of the English firm "We'll buy everything and sell everyone" and they talked with the guard of the Zagotpushnina.

Again from a sore head)) If a person convinced himself of something, he does not need any facts, there are already stories about Peter the Great carrying some kind of nonsense about Turks drinking with some women. Enviable my friend?) Those Turks who actually released Peter and Zhinka and the remnants of the army) Well, Turkey is your adversary - it didn't want to give up the straits and Istanbul in good health. How is I. Krylov doing? On a hot day, a lamb went to the stream to get drunk)
On the eve of World War II, Turkey rejected the proposals of the Third Reich to join the Axis countries (the Nazi bloc led by Berlin). In addition, Ankara has extended the treaty of friendship and cooperation with Moscow. As Abdullah from "White Sun" said, what else do you need? So no, the comrade thinks (since he remembers Petro's dictum, which he never said), it turns out that everything is not clean here. They were up to something) By the way, what did the Turks provoke you to? was? Inject)

[Boxer]

Quote: Sergey-1950

Quote: Boxer

1. Well, the behavior was actually like this:
"As the situation in the Balkans aggravated, when German troops were concentrated in Romania in January 1941, Turkish representatives began to constantly warn the Soviet leaders that Germany might soon launch an offensive against the Soviet Union. Charge d'Affaires of the Turkish Republic in Germany F On January 13, 1941, Alkend told the plenipotentiary of the USSR in Berlin Dekanozov that “the Soviet Union cannot remain passive in the event of Germany's occupation of the Balkans, since the occupation of the Balkans will be followed by the occupation of Turkey, and Turkey may be followed by Russia. Alkend expressed the hope that "if Turkey is in danger, the Soviet Union will not be indifferent" "(DVP. Vol. 23, book 2, part 1, p. 328.)

Turks are old provocateurs. They needed a clash between Germany and the USSR, in order to warm their hands on the ashes later. The Turk would have arranged a defeat for either side: the USSR would be defeated, then it would be possible to seize the Caucasus and try to seize the Volga region. Germany will be defeated, then capture the Balkans. The main thing is to join the winner in time.

Quote: Boxer

2. And the fears of the Turks had grounds:
"On March 3-4, the Wehrmacht High Command considered the preparation of a possible operation against Turkey and further advance to the Middle East."
(Grak V.N.German policy in the Middle East (December 1940 - April 1941) // International relations in modern times. Sverdlovsk, 1972. P. 166 - 167)

"Considered" does not mean decided yet. Moreover, such issues are not within the competence of the military. This is a question for politicians. This Grak should have commented on his information accordingly. If he did not, then the price of his "research" is appropriate.

Quote: Boxer

3. "In a conversation with the plenipotentiary of the USSR, the British representatives noted that the Turkish government has not received an answer from Moscow to its desire to expand Soviet-Turkish relations and to a proposal to start negotiations on this matter." (Fiberboard. T. 23, book 2, part 2. P. 445.)

O! You have at hand volume 23, book 2 of fiberboard ... Respect! Respect. Chapo, as the natives of France say.
If it's not difficult for you, write who exactly are these English representatives and when did they talk? And with whom.
Or maybe it was the employees of the English firm "We'll buy everything and sell everyone" and they talked with the guard of the Zagotpushnina.

Was this provocation by chance meant?)
"At the June (1957) Plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU N. Khrushchev moved to
attack on Molotov: “After all, we had a relationship with the Turks
close friends after the bourgeois revolution. Honorary Citizen
mountains. Izmir was Voroshilov. They have not given up on it yet, but they
have reason to refuse. They defeated the Germans. My head was spinning.
Turks, comrades, friends. No, let's write a note, and right away
The Dardanelles will be given back. There are no such fools. The Dardanelles are not Turkey, there
sits a node of states. No, they took a special note and wrote that we
we terminate the friendship agreement, and spat in the face of the Turks. Now
we say the words, and they say why they spat, it means they thought something.
On what grounds? It was the Georgians who provoked it, Beria and others.
They began to prove that Georgia had once passed there. but
we have lost friendly Turkey and now have American bases in
south, which keep our south under fire. What's so smart about that? Comrade
Molotov was a minister. I wonder what reasons he had when the note
I prepared this one. " Then N. Khrushchev noted the grave consequences of this
politicians who have been of great help to American imperialism. "
Sources:
1. Speech by NS Khrushchev at the 11th meeting of the June (1957) Plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU //
RGANI, f.2, op.1, d.161, sheets 223-224.
2. Molotov, Malenkov, Kaganovich 1957. Transcript of the June Plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU and
other documents. Ed. acad. A.N. Yakovlev. M., 1998, p. 47.

[Alexander Maltsev]

Turkey and England have always been and are Russia's worst enemies.

[Michael CBAT]

Two powerful dogs, huskies, can stop any bear, and even eat a wounded one. Hitler was one, and where was the other? There were mongrels that galloped near our border from west to east and, nevertheless, Russia had to keep dozens of combat-ready divisions in these directions, which could throw out the Germans in the first days of the war.

[The pilot's son]

For that time, the USSR was perceived by all countries with a capitalist economy as an alien element. Elementary logic and sober calculation suggested: wait until Germany squeezes the Russians, join in time and take part in the fat pie section. This position was held by many from Turkey to Japan and Afghanistan. And if Hitler had not been ousted near Moscow, FIG knows how it would have ended.

[Sergey-1950]

Quote: The son of a pilot

For that time, the USSR was perceived by all countries with a capitalist economy as an alien element. Elementary logic and sober calculation suggested: wait until Germany squeezes the Russians, join in time and take part in the fat pie section. This position was held by many from Turkey to Japan and Afghanistan. And if Hitler had not been ousted near Moscow, FIG knows how it would have ended.

What now? Russia is now more capitalist than any Western country (out of the golden billion). And the hostility in Russia is much stronger than towards the socialist USSR. So it's not the case.

[Sergey-1950]

There is a good book on this topic by the Soviet historian P.P. Sevostyanov "Before an influential test. Foreign policy of the USSR on the eve of the Great Patriotic War. September 1939-June 1941."
Moscow, Publishing house of political literature, 1981.
The book details the ravages of relations with all countries that bordered the USSR at that time from Finland to Japan.
The book is on www.militera.lib.ru

[Valery Volkov]

The Turks will never be with us, they are always against us, so one should not delude ourselves with their "ostentatious" desire to take Russia as an allies, Erdogan is trying very hard, but this is all temporary and he will still show himself in all ... " "...

[Dkuznecov]

Turks are the only one to benefit from the results
World War II country is unique.
1. We sold tobacco with raisins and dried apricots to the Reich - once. For currency.
On advances, of course.
2. They took money for passes to the Black Sea.

3. Not a single soldier was lost.
4. Restored demography (and at the same time - the economy)
after the end of the second world war.

Yes, handsome, there is no other way to name it.