Military Review

Did the USSR fight on the side of Hitler?

Did the USSR fight on the side of Hitler?If you believe the current "progressive public", such as the former court historian of the CPSU, and then the anti-Soviet emigre Alexander Nekrich, having concluded a non-aggression treaty with Germany, the USSR not only betrayed the ideals of freedom and democracy, but also became an ally of Hitler.

“In the first period of the war, the Soviet Union had an unfinished military-political union with Germany. It should be considered incomplete, since no formal military alliance was concluded, ”Nekrich reports mournfully, and further asserts that the Soviet troops actually fought on the German side:“ Poland fell, its territories were divided between Germany and the USSR. People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs Molotov did not fail to boast to the deputies of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR the success of a joint military action with Germany. Deputies applauded. Thus, the Soviet Union entered 17 on September 1939 of the year, not 22 of June of 1941 of the year, as is commonly believed ... The war against Finland was the second purely military action of the Soviet Union in the outbreak of world war. In addition, in accordance with secret agreements with Germany, the Soviet Union carried out a takeover of the Baltic states in 1939 – 1940, occupied Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina (its occupation was not provided for by an agreement with Germany). Thus, in the first period of the Second World War, the USSR acted hand in hand with Germany in changing the existing order in Europe in the border areas with military means ”(Nekrich AM, 1941, 22, June. 2 ed. M., 1995 .С.208 – 209).

Today, this legend about the baleen tyrants who have divided peace-loving Europe has become an official point of view. Let's see how it corresponds to reality.


So, September 1 1939 of the year in 4: 30 am The German Air Force struck a massive attack on Polish airfields, and 15 minutes later German troops invaded Poland. It seemed that the plans of Hitler once again justified. However, the British and French governments, after hesitant hesitations, were forced to yield to the public opinion of their countries. In 11: 00 3 September, England declared war on Germany, and in 17: 00 France joined it.

At first, this step caused confusion in Berlin. Still, after all, the planning of the Polish company was based on the assumption that there would be no Western Front. However, it was soon the turn of the Poles to be surprised, since after the formal declaration of war on the Franco-German border nothing had changed.

History knows many examples when a conscientious ally performed his duty even to the detriment of himself. So, exactly 25 years before the events described, after the start of the 1 World War I, Russian troops, rushing to the aid of France, without completing the mobilization, invaded East Prussia. It is clear that to expect such sacrifices from “civilized nations” would be naive. But maybe the Western allies of Warsaw, unable to immediately hit Hitler, deliberately sacrificed Poland in order to gain time to deploy their troops?

No, the forces for the offensive were quite enough. By early September 1939, French troops on the German border totaled 3253 thousand people, 17,5 thousand guns and mortars, 2850 tanks, 3000 aircraft. In addition, over a thousand British planes could be involved against the Germans. They were opposed by 915 thousand German troops, which had 8640 guns and mortars, 1359 aircraft and not a single tank. The construction of the so-called West Wall or the Siegfried Line, on which these troops were supposed to rely, has not yet been completed.

“He (Hitler — I.P.) was lucky again,” noted Wehrmacht Major General Burkhart Muller-Gillebrand, who worked at the General Staff, “because the Western powers had missed an easy victory as a result of their extreme slowness. It would have been easy for them, because along with other shortcomings of the German Army of wartime and a rather weak military potential, which the next volume will deal with, the ammunition stocks in September 1939 were so insignificant that in a very short time the war continued for Germany impossible ”(Müller-Hillebrand B. Land Army of Germany 1933 – 1945 M., 2003. C.144 – 145).

So, the opportunity to defeat Hitler was. There was no most important thing - desire. More precisely, on the contrary, there was a desire not to provoke hostilities with the Germans in any way. Thus, on the front of Saarbrucken, the French hung huge posters: “We will not shoot the first shot in this war!” There were numerous cases of “fraternization” of French and German soldiers who visited each other, exchanging food and spirits. And in order that any hotheads foolishly not start military operations, the advanced parts of the French were forbidden to charge weapon shells and ammunition.

“I was surprised at the calm that reigned there,” noted French writer Rolan Dorgelès, who visited the front line. “The gunners, stationed at the Rhine, calmly watched the German trains with ammunition plying on the opposite bank, our pilots flew over the smoking pipes of the Saar factories without dropping bombs. Obviously, the main concern of the high command was not to disturb the enemy ”(Dorgeles R. La drole de guerre. Paris, 1957. P.9).

Behaved similarly and aviation. On the evening of September 6, the Polish command asked the Allies to deliver bombing strikes on German territory. On September 7, Warsaw received a French response, according to which “tomorrow, and at the latest morning the day after tomorrow, a strong attack by the French and English bombers will be carried out against Germany, which, perhaps, will be extended even to the rear structures on the Polish front” (Projector D.M. Aggression and catastrophe. The top military leadership of fascist Germany in the Second World War. M., 1972. S. 91). On September 10, a Polish military mission in London was notified that British planes had allegedly begun bombing Germany.

However, it was all a blatant lie. The only battle episode took place on September 4, when the British Air Force attacked German warships in the Kiel area, causing the light cruiser Emden to be slightly damaged, and the Adapt.Sheer was disabled by a catapult on the pocket battleship. The rest of the time, British and French aircraft were limited to reconnaissance flights, and, in the words of Churchill, "threw leaflets calling for the morality of the Germans." From 3 to 27 September, only the British Air Force bombarded German inhabitants 18 with millions of leaflets. As the air marshal Arthur Harris, who later became famous for the carpet bombing of German cities, self-critically noted: “The only thing we achieved was to meet the needs of the European continent in toilet paper for five long years of war” (Mason D. “Strange war” // From Munich to Tokyo Gulf: A look from the West at the tragic pages of the history of the Second World War. M., 1992. C. 82).

Attempts to push the Allied aircrafts to real hostilities were vigorously suppressed. When, in early September, one of the Labor leaders, Hugh Dalton, suggested setting fire to the Black Forest fire bombs to deprive the Germans of their timber, the aviation minister Kingsley Wood categorically refused, citing the fact that such actions contradict the Hague Convention.

A prominent leader of the Conservative Party, Leopold Emery, who turned to Wood with a similar proposal on September 5, was also refused. Struck by the legal illiteracy of his party member, Sir Kingsley indignantly stated: “That you, this is impossible. This is private property. You still ask me to bomb the Ruhr "(Mosley L. Lost time. How the Second World War began / Contrast. From the English. E. Fedotov. M., 1972. C. 373).

He also opposed the bombings of industrial facilities and Churchill. So, in a letter to Prime Minister Chamberlain of 10 September 1939, he spoke out quite definitely: “I still think that we should not be the first to launch a bombardment, except for the area immediately adjacent to the area of ​​operation of the French troops. should help ”(Churchill W. World War II. T. 1: The Looming Storm. M., 1997. C. 220).

However, according to the chief of the French General Staff, General Maurice Gamelin, expressed by him on the eve of the war, such a development of events should only make Poles happy:

“In the early stages of the conflict, we can take very little against the Germans. However, the mobilization in France itself will be a certain relief for the Poles, tying up some German units on our front ... In the early stages, the very fact of mobilization and concentration of our troops can help Poland, which is almost equivalent to our entry into the war. In fact, Poland is interested in the fact that we declare war as late as possible, thus creating the possibility of maximum concentration of our troops ”(Mosley L. Lost time ... S.309).

Finally, on the night of September 7, French search groups crossed the German border west of Saarbrücken for the first time. Not meeting the resistance of the German troops, who were ordered to dodge the battle, the French advanced several kilometers, after which September 12 received from General Gamelin, who had become commander-in-chief by that time, an order to stop the offensive and begin to dig in.

This little walk was inflated by Western propaganda to an epic scale. A report issued in the evening of September 8 official communique of the French General Staff modestly stated: "It is impossible, however, to list exactly already occupied the terrain and position" (Agence Havas of hostilities France // True 10 September 1939 №251 (7936) S.5... ).

And indeed, this was impossible if we consider that the real advance of the French troops was 7 – 8 km on a front of about 25 km. Otherwise, the French command, as in the well-known joke, would have to report on the seizure of "strategic objects" like a forester’s house.

However, it came to this. The following communique proudly said: “September 9, evening. The enemy resists on the entire front line. There have been several local counterattacks on his part. The brilliant offensive of one of our divisions provided us with the occupation of an important fold of the terrain ... "(The hostilities between Germany and France // Pravda. September 11 1939. No.252 (7937). С.5). In fact, if we report that we broke through the Siegfried line, as the British United Press news agency did on 7 of September, then you look and they will catch a lie. And so, "they occupied an important fold in the area" - simply and with taste.

On September 10, the commander-in-chief of the Allied forces in France, General Maurice Gamelin, assured the Polish leadership that “more than half of our active divisions of the Northeast Front are fighting. After crossing the border with us, the Germans opposed us to strong resistance. Nevertheless, we have moved forward. But we are stuck in a positional war, having against us an enemy preparing for defense, and I still do not have all the necessary artillery. From the beginning, the air force abandoned to participate in positional operations. We believe that we have against ourselves a significant part of German aviation. Therefore, I had time to fulfill his promise to attack the powerful main force on 15-th day after the announcement of the French mobilization "(Dashichev VI Bankruptcy of German fascism strategy. T.1. Preparation and deployment of Nazi aggression in Europe 1933-1941. M. , 1973. C.354).

On the same day, the United Press correspondent in Paris claimed that Germany had deployed at least six divisions from the Eastern Front to counteract the French offensive. In fact, not a single German soldier, not a single gun or tank was deployed from the Polish front. Other journalists reported that the Germans 7 September launched a “fierce counterattack” against the French forces, throwing into battle “70-ton tanks with 75-mm guns” (Transfer of German military forces to the Western front // Pravda. 11 September 1939. №252 (September 7937) .C.5). It should be noted here that the heaviest T-IV tanks in service with the German army, really armed with an 75-mm cannon, weighed about 20 tons. In addition, all these tanks, like their counterparts of other models, were thrown against Poland. At the time, the Germans did not have tanks at all on the Western Front.

Despite the fact that on September 12 the French offensive stopped, the press continued to spread stories about the "successes" of the Allied forces. So, September 14 reported that “military operations on the Western Front between the Rhine and the Moselle are continuing. The French surround Saarbrücken from the east and west ”(Dashichev VI. Bankruptcy of the strategy of German fascism. T.1. C.354). 19 September was followed by the message that “battles that were previously limited to the Saarbrucken district now covered the entire front with a length of 160 km” (Ibid.).

Finally, on October 3 – 4, the French forces left Germany. October 16 returned to their original positions and advanced units of the Wehrmacht. In general, the results of this “heroic” campaign were as follows: “In a summary of the German high command from October 18, the total losses of the Germans on the Western Front were declared: 196 people killed, 356 wounded and 144 missing. During the same period 689 was captured by the French. In addition, 11 airplanes were lost ”(Tippelskirch K. History of the Second World War. M., 1999. C.49).

At one time, our free-thinking intellectuals, sitting in the kitchens, adored telling jokes about the newspaper Pravda. However, as we see in the "free world" media can lie so famously that the Communists never dreamed of.

The parody of hostilities, called the “strange war,” could have only one explanation: influential circles of the English and French leadership tried hard, in spite of everything, to create a common front with Hitler to fight against the USSR. For this they actually betrayed Poland, once again showing the whole world the true price of their "guarantees". It is not hard to guess what the USSR expected if, instead of concluding the “Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact,” we, as advised by the current liberal fraternity, would trust such “allies.”


Leaving the western border of a weak barrier, Hitler was able to throw against Poland the main forces of the German army. In addition to a numerical superiority, the Germans had a significant advantage over the Polish troops, three times exceeding them in the number of tanks and aircraft.

Another factor reducing the low combat capability of the Polish army was national. The mobilized Ukrainians and Belarusians were by no means eager to die for an “independent Poland,” who treated them as disfranchised cattle. Their attitude to the outbreak of the war can be judged by the Belarusian ditty:

You are nya dumaytse, palyaki,
You nya budzem baranits,
We sit down at akopah
I gareku budzem pits.

In the meantime, the Polish leadership, led by the “leader of the nation,” Marshal Edward Rydz-Smigly, sensing in the very first days of the war that things smell like kerosene, was concerned only about saving his own skin. 6 September the Polish government moved to Lublin. From there it left 9 September to Kremenets, then 13 September moved to the city of Zaleschiki located near the Romanian border, and finally, 17 September, leaving the still resisting army, cowardly fled to Romania.

Despite repeated hints from Germany, in the first two weeks of the war the Soviet Union carefully refrained from any intervention. The situation changed after the flight of the leadership of Poland from the country. In 5: 40 in the morning of September 17, Red Army units entered the territory of Western Ukraine and Western Belarus. The reasons for this step were set out in detail in a note of the Soviet government handed over to 3: 15 that same morning to the Polish ambassador in Moscow, Vatslav Grzybowski:

“The Polish-German war revealed the internal failure of the Polish state. Within ten days of military operations, Poland lost all its industrial areas and cultural centers. Warsaw, as the capital of Poland, does not exist anymore. The Polish government fell apart and shows no signs of life. This means that the Polish state and its government virtually ceased to exist. Thus, the agreements concluded between the USSR and Poland were terminated. Left to itself and left without leadership, Poland has become a convenient field for all sorts of coincidences and surprises that could pose a threat to the USSR. Therefore, being hitherto neutral, the Soviet government can no longer be neutral about these facts.

The Soviet government also cannot be indifferent to the fact that the short-lived Ukrainians and Belarusians living in Poland, abandoned to their fate, remain defenseless.

In view of this situation, the Soviet government ordered the High Command of the Red Army to order the troops to cross the border and take under their protection the lives and property of the population of Western Ukraine and Western Belorussia ”(Pravda. September 18 1939. No. XXUMX (259). C. 7944).

Today, liberal writers love to rant about how in September 1939, Hitler and Stalin jointly dealt with the Polish state. For example, here is what Nekrich already quoted writes: “Enlisting a quiet rear in the east, Germany attacked Poland's 1 in September. In pursuance of an agreement with the Germans, the Soviet armed forces of September 17 struck the Polish army from the rear ”(Nekrich AM, 1941, June 22. 2 ed. M., 1995. C.208).

Still, it's amazing how much hatred for one's country blurs one's brains. It would seem that those who have chosen military history as their specialty should understand what rear is. Yes, and in the geographical atlas, at least occasionally look. How could Germany, having gathered to fight with Poland, be able to “enlist a quiet rear in the east,” if its troops would advance from west to east? In the east, they did not rear, and the front. A quiet rear of Germany just in the west, thanks to the "valiant" allies of Poland.

Another thing, if Hitler decided to deliver the first blow against France. Then the German rear would really be in the east. However, even in this case, it was not in our power to make him “restless”, since we were reliably separated from the Germans by Polish territory. However, the revelation Nekrich more flowers compared with the nonsense that bears Andrew Shmalko, better known under the pseudonym of Valentine, to talk about the "impact of Soviet troops from the east to disrupt the Polish counter-offensive" (Valentinov A. Marsh Anahron // Valentine A. constellations Canis: Selected Works. M., 2002. C.454 – 455).

What can you say about this? First, Soviet troops entered Polish territory (or rather, the territory captured by Poland in the 1919 – 1920 years of Western Ukraine and Western Belorussia) only after the Polish government fled the country, thereby admitting its defeat in the war with Germany . Second, let's compare the contribution of the Wehrmacht and the Red Army to the defeat of the Polish army. Against Germany, Polish troops lost 66,3 thousand killed and 133,7 thousand wounded, against the USSR - 3,5 thousand killed and 20 thousand wounded. And this ratio is not surprising. Indeed, by September 17 the Germans had routed or surrounded almost all the units of the Polish army. The only exception was the Polesye operational group deployed in the eastern regions, which included the 55 and 60 infantry divisions. However, her Red Army without interference missed to act against the Germans.


So the war began. Hitler attacked Poland. On the Western Front bored French soldiers are drinking wine and playing cards: in large garrisons and railway stations to urgently establish military sobering-up stations, six months later - 26 February 1940 years - will be published a decree on the abolition of indirect taxes on the playing cards designed for current ( rather, inactive) army. Slowly, the British troops catch up: the first two divisions arrived at the front only at the beginning of October, and the first soldier of the British expeditionary corps would only be killed on December 9 of the year 1939. What should the Soviet Union do under these conditions? What alternatives do those who condemn Stalin's actions offer?

1) Join the war on the side of Poland. But first, they didn't ask us about it. Moreover, Soviet aid was categorically rejected - as Marshal Rydz-Smigly once said: "With the Germans, we risk losing our freedom, with the Russians we would lose our soul" (Baldwin H. Battles won and lost. A new look at major military campaigns of World War II / Transl. from English. A.N.Pavlova. M., 2001. S.24).

Secondly, since the main forces of Germany thrown on the Eastern Front, the work of their defeat will fall solely on us. At the same time, the French, with the British who joined them, will continue to play cards quietly, watching with pleasure how the Russians and the Germans kill each other. But all the fruits of victory, of course, will go to them.

However, this development fully corresponds to the masochistic ideals of the anti-national Russian intelligentsia, which believes that Russia's purpose is to constantly sacrifice themselves for the prosperity of the “civilized West”.

2) Stay on your borders. Then Germany will capture all of Poland, including the territories of Western Ukraine and Western Belarus, and then the Baltic states. After all, the Directive on the uniform training of the armed forces for the war on 11 – 1939, approved by Hitler 1939 on April 1940, stipulated that after the defeat of Poland Germany should take control of Latvia and Lithuania. As mentioned in the Annex to the Directive: "The position of limitrophe states will be determined by military needs in Germany. With the development of events, it may be necessary to occupy the limitropic states up to the border of the old Courland and to include these territories in the empire ”(Dashichev V.I. Bankruptcy of the strategy of German fascism. T.1.S.362).

There is no place for idealism in world politics. However, those who call for sacrificing the interests of Russia in the name of certain abstract principles, be it “Lenin's foreign policy norms” or “universal human values”, as a rule, are only agents of influence, surreptitiously spoiling the country in which they had the misfortune to be born. If we proceed from state considerations, then Stalin’s actions seem to be fully justified. The Poles are not our friends. In the 1920 year, taking advantage of the ongoing civil war in our country, Poland occupied vast territories inhabited by Ukrainians and Belarusians. And only in 1939 did the Soviet Union take its back.

The fact that there were good reasons for the entry of the Red Army into Poland was compelled to admit even such a figure far from sympathy for the USSR, like Winston Churchill. Speaking on the radio 1 October 1939, he declared:

“Russia is pursuing a cold policy of its own interests. We would prefer the Russian armies to stand in their current positions as friends and allies of Poland, and not as invaders. But to protect Russia from the Nazi threat, it was clearly necessary for the Russian armies to stand on this line. In any case, this line exists and, therefore, the Eastern Front was created, which Nazi Germany would not dare to attack ... ”(W. Churchill. World War II. T. 1. C. 218).

I would note that if a state wants to preserve its independence, then it should be pursuing a “cold policy of its own interests,” rather than dragging chestnuts out of the fire for others.

In addition, there was another reason for the introduction of Soviet troops, about which the Soviet propaganda, true to the principles of "friendship of nations", tried not to speak then or later. Ukrainians and Belarusians living in the territories occupied by Poland have not forgotten many years of humiliation and humiliation. As 20 noted in September in his report to Stalin, the Chief of the Red Army Political Department Mehlis, the Polish officers “fear Ukrainian peasants and the population, who became more active with the arrival of the Red Army and deal with Polish officers, like fire. It got to the point that in Burshtyn, Polish officers sent by the corps to school and guarded by a small guard asked to increase the number of guards as prisoners, fighters, in order to avoid possible reprisals against the population ”(Meltyukhov M.I. Soviet-Polish wars. Military political opposition 1918 – 1939 M., 2001. C. 368).

And here is what the 12 of September of the NKVD of the Byelorussian SSR NKVD of the USSR reported on the situation on the adjacent territory: “In the border districts of the Vilna province, in the Dokshitskaya and Parafievsky volosts we note attempts to organize partisan groups with the intention of destroying estates, kulaks, institutions ... Deep, Lutki, arsons, damage to telegraph and telephone wires took place ”(Bodies of USSR State Security in the Great Patriotic War. T.1939. On the Eve. Book 1. November 1 - December 1938 M., 1940. С.1995) .

Thus, among other things, the arrival of Soviet troops stopped the growing massacre of people of Polish nationality, and most importantly - restored the historically fair western border of our country.


As is known, the revolution 1917 years and followed it foreign intervention and civil war, Russia has lost a number of areas. However, one should not think that the Bolsheviks deliberately distributed the lands of the Empire right and left. On the contrary, they conscientiously tried to restore the unity of the country. However, unfortunately, there were not enough forces to return all fallen away national suburbs. As a result, the so-called limiting countries emerged: Poland, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.

Inspired by the idea of ​​the world proletarian revolution, Lenin did not pay much attention to such trifles as the lost territories. As for Stalin, then, in contrast to the "Leninist Guard", he was not under a delusion about the international solidarity of the working people. But in his country he behaved like a zealous owner. And as soon as an opportunity arose, he began to collect lands that were squandered during the unrest.

Naturally, people of liberal beliefs do not like this terribly. Still would! After all, their ideal of a Russian statesman is Bunsha’s social activist from the famous comedy “Ivan Vasilyevich Changes Profession,” generously giving Kemskaya volost to the Swedes. Here is what some Rapoport and Geller write, for example:

“Territorial seizures of 1939 – 1940. the countries adjacent to the USSR, which previously occupied a buffer position, were thrown into the camp of a potential enemy. First of all, this concerned Romania and Finland. The Germans calmly reacted to the annexation of Bukovina, Bessarabia and the Karelian Isthmus, although it was not specified in the secret articles of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Now Bucharest and Helsinki were turning into Berlin’s natural allies in the upcoming war. Germany received new bridgeheads for the invasion and additional human contingents, which she particularly needed. There is also no doubt that the Romanian episode contributed to the strengthening of German influence in two other Balkan states - Hungary and Bulgaria ”(V.N. Rapoport, Y.A. Geller. Treason to Motherland. M., 1995. C.348).

But maybe we really made our enemies? That's a great picture, symbolizing the crusade then "united Europe" against our country. In the direction of the USSR directed 12 arrows. Who took part in this noble event? The uninformed reader is waiting for a considerable surprise. France, Belgium, Denmark, Norway ... And the current, and Soviet propaganda portray these countries the unfortunate victims of Nazism. Meanwhile, France gave the German armed forces a SS division "Charlemagne", no less than 200 thousands of French fought in the Wehrmacht divisions. The Dutch divisions “Netherlands” and “Landstorm Netherlands”, the Belgian “Wallonia” and “Langemark”, and the Scandinavian “Norland” fought in the SS forces on the Eastern Front. In addition, thousands of European volunteers fought in the SS divisions "Viking" and "Nord." Hundreds of thousands more people from Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Denmark, the Czech Republic, Croatia, Bosnia and Poland from the territories included in Germany were added to the army units of the Reich. Well, what to do, do not like us in Europe.

Everything is clear about Slovakia and Croatia - these are puppet states created after the occupation of Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia by Hitler. In principle, they are unable to carry out an independent policy, and therefore obediently send their soldiers to the East.

Franco reigns in Spain, having just won the civil war in which Soviet pilots and tankers fought against him, and on his side were German and Italian troops. It is not surprising that Spain participated in the crusade, but that it was expressed only in the sending of the "blue division" to the Eastern front.

Italy joined the Anti-Comintern Pact even 6 November 1937 of the year. Hungary is also a member of the Anti-Comintern Pact since February 24 of 1939, and, by the way, a member of the Czechoslovak section. Forcibly nobody pushed her into the arms of Hitler.

Let's look at the poster again: of the 12 arrows, only 3 are marked with swastikas. In addition to Germany, this is Slovakia, as well as Finland. And unlike the Tiso puppet regime sitting in Bratislava, no one forced the hot Finnish guys to put on a swastika: they did it voluntarily.

Of course, someone might argue, they say, the blue swastika is the original symbol of the ancient Finnish civilization. However, at the end of 1930's, it already meant something else, indicating that it belonged to the Hitler bloc. In addition, Finland has been hostile to us since independence, as our newspaper has already written about (Y. Nersesov. The Dream of an Imperial Chukhonts / // Special Forces of Russia. 2003. No. XXUMX, 3).

Finally, Romania was also initially hostile towards the USSR. The reason is simple: taking advantage of the civil war in Russia, Romania occupied Bessarabia, which belonged to our country, really did not want to give it back and therefore constantly sought to be friends with someone against the Soviet Union. March 3 1921 was signed by a clear anti-Soviet thrust Polish-Romanian agreement on mutual assistance. 26 March 1926, this contract was extended for the next five years, then it was similarly extended in 1931 and 1936.

True, before World War II, Romania really hesitated. But not between the USSR and Germany, but between the orientation towards Germany or England with France. It was the fact that the Western democracies, with an enviable constancy, "threw" all the partners who trusted them, be it Czechoslovakia or Poland, and forced Bucharest to eventually take the side of Hitler. Moreover, the Fuhrer promised after the victory to generously reward his vassal by the Soviet territories.

By the way, relations between Bucharest and Berlin have improved even before we managed to “offend” the unfortunate Romanians. So, 23 March 1939 was signed the Romanian-German agreement on the development of economic relations. In accordance with it, the Romanian government pledged to allocate “free zones” for the needs of German industrial and commercial firms, to fully encourage the activities of German-Romanian oil companies, to take measures to increase oil production and refining for its supply to Germany. Germany received the right to build roads and railways in Romania. The secret annex to the treaty provided Romania with the supply of German military materials in the total amount of 200 – 250 million marks.

In May, an oil pact was signed by 1940, under which Romania pledged to supply Germany with 6 million tons of oil annually. At the same time, according to the secret Romanian-German protocol of 28 in May of the same year, Romania refused to collect customs duties for these supplies.

Well, who in the end held a “buffer position” and who did we drop “into the camp of a potential enemy”? Yes, no one! Anyone who ultimately took part in the war against the USSR would have done so anyway. So we did not offend anyone and did not push away, but on the contrary, we acted extremely expediently.

Finally, as their last argument, democratic historians use "strategic considerations":

“The inclusion of new areas in the USSR led to the emergence of the Soviet-German border, which is hundreds of kilometers long. - Thoughtfully reasoning already cited Rapoport and Geller. - It was an undeniable strategic disadvantage. The danger of a surprise attack from Germany has increased many times. The aggressor could now, at his own discretion, choose where in the border to strike, and the defender was forced to defend it along its entire length, which required enormous strength. Previously, in order to get in touch with the Soviet troops, the Germans had to overcome the territory of Poland or the Baltic countries. In these conditions, the attack could not be completely sudden. The Red Army received some time to prepare for retaliation. As for possible points of invasion, they could have been foreseen to one degree or another ”(Rapoport, VN, Geller, Yu.A. Treason to Motherland. C.347).

As Aristotle said, nature does not tolerate emptiness. If the Red Army had not occupied these territories, the Wehrmacht would have occupied them. As a result, the Soviet-German border would still have arisen. Here it would just go much east. Just these hundreds of kilometers were not enough for the Germans to reach Moscow. And near Leningrad, the Finnish army would launch an offensive from near Beloostrov, 30 km from the city. It is precisely about this development that an impression is created, and in the depths of their hearts Nekrichi, Gellers and other Rapoports are sorry, hoping that the German owners would provide their lackeys with Bavarian beer no worse than the sponsors from the CIA and the Soros Foundation who replaced them.
Originator:"rel =" nofollow ">

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Celestis
    Celestis 6 February 2011 15: 26
    Well done author! Keep it up! I have been convinced from my own experience that the position of any liberal simply crumbles after the facts are presented to him.
  2. a guest
    a guest 6 February 2011 16: 18
    Hmm, but their names (of liberals) are Russian (Alekseeva, Novodvorskaya, etc.), and their mugs are rootless cosmopolitans, that’s a revolution, that with a ben-drunk - a jerky rabble!
  3. Alex
    Alex 19 June 2014 16: 49
    An excellently reasoned article, written with knowledge of the material and a solid dose of sarcasm. To the author "+", respect and respect fellow hi !