Military Review

America vs England. Part of 5. At the crossroads

4
America vs England. Part of 5. At the crossroads

Arson Reichstag



In February, the 2014 of the year in Ukraine as a result of a coup d'état for the first time in the entire post-war history European neo-Nazis came to power. As in the case of Hitler, America and Europe again stand behind them. It is hoped that such a frank presentation of the Nazis in modern Europe will not only meet with a fitting rebuff, but also serve as a warning for neo-Nazi inclinations in the Baltic countries.

In January, 1933, Hitler faced two urgent tasks. The first thing he needed was to establish the power of the Nazis in Germany. The second is to decide on your strategic choice. Whether to enter into an alliance with Great Britain against the Soviet Union, or with the Soviet Union against Great Britain.

"In January, 1933, Hitler was made chancellor - it is true that he and his associates really took power, this has not meant so far" (Preparata GD Hitler, Inc. How Britain and the United States created the Third Reich // http: // litrus. net / book / read / 103531? p = 70). In order to seize power in its entirety, “1 February 1933, the parliament was dissolved early and new elections were scheduled for March 5” (Economic History of Foreign Countries: Textbook. Manual: 3 ed., Additional and revised. - Minsk: InterPressservice : Eco Perspective, 2002. - C. 315). "On February 2, all rallies or demonstrations of the German Communist Party were banned, and the seizure of the hidden weaponsbelonging to the Communists "(Churchill U. World War II. - M .: Voenizdat, 1991 // http://militera.lib.ru/memo/english/churchill/1_05.html). Despite the repression of their political opponents while securing a majority in the Reichstag, the Nazis sought to “give their rule a certain respectability” (Economic History of Foreign Countries. Decree. Op. - C. 315).

On February 15, 1933, while visiting Miami, F. Roosevelt was assassinated by Giuseppe Zangara, an unemployed bricklayer of Italian descent. The mayor of Chicago Cermak was fatally wounded, and four others were injured. Roosevelt remained unharmed. "What is this, an incident or the first shot in an armed struggle for power?" - a question not idle in the then electrified atmosphere to the limit "(Yakovlev NN Unknown Roosevelt. A new course is needed! // http://www.litmir.net/br/?b=195390&p=42).

17 February 1933 of the year Hoover demanded assurances from Roosevelt that “there will be no inflation and the budget will remain balanced, the government will not undertake the financing of overdue farmers' mortgages, and will not give loans to municipalities for public works. ... Hoover admitted in a private letter: "If the newly elected president makes these statements, he ratifies the main program of the republican administration and 90 percent of the so-called new course will be discarded." ... Roosevelt refused "(Yakovlev NN Ibid.). The stabilization of the American, and after it and the world economy, knocked the ground out from under the Nazis, demanded that they usurp power and cancel the elections.

“February 20 in a narrow meeting with major industrialists - Krupp, Fegler, Bosch, and others. Goering assured the monopolists that if the fascists won the elections,“ these will be the last elections in Germany for 10 years, and maybe for 100 years old". Monopolists supported the fascists both morally and financially. In their support, rallies, demonstrations, torchlight processions were organized. 5 days before the election, on the night from 27 on February 28, an arson attack on the Reichstag was organized in order to discredit the political rivals - the communists. In this case, 10 thousand people were arrested, including the famous George Dimitrov, who brilliantly defended himself and was acquitted by a German court.

The next day after the Reichstag was set on fire by extraordinary decree, the president abolished the most important democratic rights and freedoms: the communist and social democratic press were banned, personal immunity, freedom of speech, assembly, and press were eliminated. However, despite the terror, demagoguery and fraud in the counting of votes, 22 million voted against the fascists, i.e. more than half of voters ”(Economic history of foreign countries. Decree. Op. - C. 315). 17,27 million voters or 43,91% voted for the Nazis. As a result, from the 647 mandates, they got only 288.

By taking 4 March 1933, the White House FD Roosevelt proposed to the United States a "series of liberal reforms known as the" new course. " The theoretical basis of the “new course” was the views of the English economist J.M. Keynes on the need for state regulation of the capitalist economy to ensure the smooth operation of the market mechanism. ... The devaluation of the dollar, the removal of gold from private hands, access to credit helped raise prices and created a mechanism for the inflationary development of the American economy, at the same time giving the state funds for reforms in other sectors of the economy ”(Economic history of foreign countries. Decree. cit. - C. 291-292, 294).

“Meanwhile, we should not forget about the help of these countries of Nazi Germany, which played a significant role in the withdrawal of the USA and Britain from the crisis. The USA helped Germany to organize the production of both conventional high-octane and synthetic fuels, rubber, aluminum, magnesium, nickel and other strategic materials, actively exchanged various technical information, and developed German aircraft and automobile construction. ” ... The British did not lag behind the American monopolies either. England ranked second after the United States for capital investments in Germany "(History of the Great Patriotic War of the Soviet Union 1941-1945. In 6 t. T. 1. Preparation and unleashing of war by the imperialist powers. - M .: Military Publishing House of the Ministry of Defense of the USSR, 1963. - - C. 32-35).

At the international conference on arms reduction and limitation, convened by the decision of the Council of the League of Nations 2 February 1932 in Geneva, France sought to maintain its military superiority over Germany, Great Britain - Germany maintained its leading position and sea power, demanded equality in armaments. "Her project was supported by the United States and Britain, who believed that to maintain the balance in Europe, we need a strong Germany, able to resist France, but mainly the Soviet Union." (Protopopov A.S., Kozmenko V.M., Elmanova N.S. The History of International Relations and Russian Foreign Policy (1648-2000). Textbook for universities / Edited by AS Protopopov. - Moscow: Aspect Press , 2001. - C. 126).

The French “Tardieu Plan” called for the creation of an international army under the auspices of the League of Nations, in which France would play a leading role. In response, on March 16, 1933, England put forward a plan, named after its author and mastermind, MacDonald. The size of the French and German armies was subject to equalization. Moreover, if the French army was reduced from 500 thousand to 200 thousand, then the German from 100 thousand, respectively, increased to the same size. French heavy weapons were subject to reduction and aviation. As a result, Great Britain and the United States gained great advantages in the naval and air forces.

In turn, 18 in March 1933, Mussolini in Rome, presented to the British Prime Minister MacDonald and Foreign Minister Simon "the draft agreement between Italy, Germany, England and France. The project provided for the possibility of revising the peace treaties, recognizing Germany’s equality in the field of armaments and adopting a similar decision regarding Austria, Hungary and Bulgaria, pursuing a policy of cooperation of the four powers in all European and non-European issues, including and the colonial, as well as the impact of the pact participants on other European countries "(Diplomatic Dictionary //
http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/dic_diplomatic/927/%D0%9F%D0%90%D0%9A%D0%A2).

The Pact of Four was a real alternative to the Hitler plan of the Anglo-German-Italian alliance to overthrow Britain from the political Olympus. Later, it was again implemented as a result of the Munich Agreement. “The American author Farnia, relying on the materials of the secret archives of the State Department and published diplomatic documents of the USA and England, came to the conclusion: the information contained in these sources“ almost leaves no room for doubts that the origin of the Covenant of Four is originally connected with the Macdonald government ”(Ovsyany ID Mystery in which the war was born. - M., Politizdat, 1971 // http://militera.lib.ru/research/ovsyany/02.html).

According to Igor Ovsyan, “it is easy in Article I to distinguish a tetrahedral tip directed against the Soviet Union. The diplomatic combination conceived by the Foreign Office was as follows: the fascist powers participating in the pact would take upon themselves the task of saving Europe from the "Bolshevik danger." Western democracies are committed to generously reward their mercenaries. Article II established in fact that payment must be made by foreign lands and foreign freedom under the pretext of “revising” the Versailles borders.

True, it contained a reference to the Charter of the League of Nations. But, explaining the true meaning of the article to the Secretary of State of the German Foreign Ministry Bulov, the Italian ambassador in Berlin Cherruti said: the idea of ​​the pact was to "carry out an audit [of the peace treaties] by agreement between the four powers, bearing in mind that this would then only be confirmed League of Nations. Article III was the most odious and in the light of further events, it is impossible not to say the most criminal. She envisioned a “gift” to Hitler, whom he did not dare to even dream of. The Western powers agreed to the elimination of the military restrictions of Versailles "(Ovsyany I.D. Ibid.).

It is not surprising that, “characterizing the position of the ruling circles of England, the Soviet embassy in London informed 25 of April 1933 in Moscow that in recent months they are intensifying“ the tendency to revitalize the idea of ​​creating an anti-Soviet front. These trends are growing ... on the basis of the triumph of Hitlerism in Germany, the growing aggressiveness of Japan in the Far East. " The policy of England is to “strike with a fist in the Russian question.” This was the course of making a "sacred union" in order to liquidate the Soviet state.

Lord Lloyd said, outlining the plans of the British ruling elite: “We will give Japan freedom of action against the USSR. Let it expand the Korean-Manchurian border down to the Arctic Ocean and take over the Far Eastern part of Siberia ... We will give Germany the freedom of armaments ... We will open Germany to the east and thereby provide the much-needed opportunity for expansion. In this way, it will be possible to divert Japan and Germany from us and keep the USSR under constant threat. ” In a conversation with the British ambassador in Moscow, Lord Chilston, the USSR Commissar for Foreign Affairs found it necessary to draw his attention to these anti-Soviet statements by Lord Lloyd, which meant the incitement of Japan and Germany against the USSR. Similar thoughts, the People's Commissar noted, express the Morning Post, the Daily Mail, the Daily Express and other British newspapers (Sipols, V.Ya. Diplomatic struggle on the eve of the Second World War. - Moscow: International Relations, 1979 // http://militera.lib.ru/research/sipols1/01.html).

“In March 1933 of the year, after Poland demonstrated its military force in Danzig, Marshal Pilsudski expressed to the French the idea of ​​the desirability of a joint preventive war against Germany” (Shearer U. The rise and fall of the Third Reich (Volume 1) // http: //www.razlib) .ru / istorija / vzlet_i_padenie_tretego_reiha_tom_1 / p32.php), thereby trying to drive a wedge between the Germans and the French. Poland was certainly not against territorial expansion at the expense of the USSR. And did not refuse to cooperate with the Nazis. Poland was categorically against the fact that England entrusted Italy to lead the process, and not to her. Poland must be great, it must determine policy. She should point, not her. Poland undertook to torpedo a MacDonald-Mussolini plan pursuing one single goal — to destroy the project with its minor participation and to offer England its no-alternative plan for the destruction of the Soviet Union.

Out of fear of the French-Polish intervention, “Hitler, in his government statement in the 23 March, 1933, declared his intention to“ maintain friendly relations with the USSR ”(SA Gorlov, Top Secret: Alliance Moscow-Berlin, 1920-1933. - M .: OLMA-PRESS, 2001 // http://militera.lib.ru/research/gorlov1/05.html). However, “Moscow did not dare to maintain relations with the regime, which spoke from extreme positions of anti-communism, anti-Sovietism and anti-Semitism, and established in the short term the most brutal terror within the country. War Minister Blomberg ... she could hardly - unlike Schleicher - be considered as a guarantor of the preservation of the former quality of relations between the USSR and Germany ”(Ibid.).

“March 17 1933 ... Schacht again led the Reichsbank, replacing G. Luther in this post” (Schacht, Yalmar // http://ru.wikipedia.org). Subjecting thereby German finance, Hitler set about securing his own unlimited political influence within Germany. The absence of a majority in parliament predetermined the emergence of a bill empowering Hitler with extraordinary powers. To ensure the necessary quorum, “a special decree banned the Communist Party of Germany, the mandates that should have been given to Communist Deputies (81 mandate) following the last election, were revoked, about a quarter of the SPD’s opposition to the Nazis were arrested, sent or underground.” As a result, “the number of deputies of the Reichstag will be reduced from 647 to 566 and the adoption of the act of changing the constitution” required not 423, but only 378 votes (Emergency Powers Act (1933) // http://ru.wikipedia.org).

Voting for the bill took place in an environment where the building in which deputies sat was surrounded by CA troops. Hitler held talks with the leader of the Center Party, Ludwig Kaas, and persuaded him to support the bill in exchange for the oral guarantees of freedom of the church received from Hitler. The Social Democrats planned to disrupt the quorum by boycotting the meeting, but the leadership of the Reichstag, headed by Hermann Goering, changed the procedure according to which the absence for a disrespectful reason was not taken into account as the basis for determining the quorum. Thus the boycott lost its meaning and the Social Democrats took part in the meeting. 441 MPs voted for the law, all 94 MPs from the SPD voted against ”(ibid.). Thus, “24 March, 1933, the new parliament gave Hitler’s government extraordinary powers, which essentially abolished the Weimar Constitution of the Republic” (Economic history of foreign countries: Decree. Op. - 315).

25 March 1933 of the Year “The Permanent Council of the Minor Entente [created by 1920-1921, an alliance of Czechoslovakia, Romania and Yugoslavia - SL] spoke out against revising the peace treaties. Poland took a similar position. The Pact of Four project was also sharply criticized in the English House of Commons and the French Chamber of Deputies (Diplomatic Dictionary, ibid.). What kind of revision in question. Apparently, in exchange for the abolition of reparations, the return of the German Sudet, the Polish corridor and the provision of colonies in Russia and Ukraine, the countries of the directory were to force Germany to defeat the Soviet Union. Together with Germany, Czechoslovakia and Poland were to come out, who would receive part of the Soviet territory in compensation for their territories returned to Germany. Japan in the East and dreaming of the creation of Great Powers Finland, Romania and Hungary in the West were to take part in the campaign against Russia.

“April 8 1933, the first French military attache Colonel Mendras arrived in Moscow, friendly received by Voroshilov, Egorov and Litvinov. Hitler, trying to keep Moscow from rapprochement with France, made another gesture towards the USSR - 13 on April 1933, after the dissolution of the Reichstag, ratified the Moscow Protocol of 24 on June 1931 to extend the Berlin non-aggression treaty and neutrality. But the train has already left ”(S. Gorlov, Ibid.).

In April 1933, the head of the American delegation at the conference Norman Davis, together with Allen Dulles in Berlin, met with Hindenburg, Hitler and Foreign Minister Neurath. After that, “German propaganda minister Goebbels, who was ... in Geneva in connection with the Conference on the reduction and limitation of armaments, suggested in an interview with Polish Foreign Minister U. Beck to settle German-Polish relations on this basis: Poland will give Germany the“ corridor ”, and she herself will get access to the sea at the expense of Lithuania and Latvia. Then both countries will come out against the USSR, and as a result of the seizure of Ukraine, Poland will also gain access to the Black Sea, including Odessa ”(Sipols V.Ya. Ibid.). Meanwhile, unlike Moscow, Warsaw found it possible to cooperate with the Nazis.

Following Poland, the Nazis began to establish their relations with England. Of course, on anti-Soviet grounds. “Alfred Rosenberg’s last visit to London took place in May 1933, this time as one of the representatives of Hitler’s new government. Rosenberg went straight to Buckhurst Park estate near Ascot, owned by Sir Henry Deterding, head of Royal Dutch Shell and perhaps the most influential businessman in the world. According to the British press, a warm and lively conversation took place between them. Rosenberg first met Dederding during his London trip, 1931. Royal Dutch Shell maintained close contact and provided support to the German NSDAP. Although the details were kept secret, reliable British sources of the time argued that Deterding had provided significant financial support to the “Hitler Project” at the crucial initial stage of its implementation ”(Engdahl U.F. Centenary of War: Anglo-American Petroleum Policy and the New World Order // http://www.warandpeace.ru/ru/news/view/9097/).

In addition to Deterding, Alfred Rosenberg’s close associate of Hitler and ideologist of the NSDAP on foreign policy issues talked in London and “with the British Foreign Secretary John Simon and outlined Hitler’s territorial takeover plan in Eastern Europe to the British leadership. The fact that this plan was met favorably is evidenced by an interview with the secretary of the German embassy in London, O. Bismarck, to the Canadian newspaper Toronto Daily Star, which was given to them when the Hitler emissary had not yet left for Berlin. Bismarck argued that Germany would receive a “Polish corridor” without a war, for which Poland would be given a sector in Gdansk, free of customs duties, and territorial compensation at the expense of Ukraine. ... Since Hitler's plans did not contradict the strategic objectives of British foreign policy, but on the contrary lay in their course, London politicians had to figure out how serious they are and how they can be implemented in practice. Moreover, this was to be done without fanfare, because due to the negative attitude of the British public to Nazi Germany in general and to Rosenberg’s visit, in particular, official London was forced to deny the fact that anti-Soviet negotiations were being held. This delicate mission was entrusted to Secretary of the Cabinet of Ministers and the Committee of Imperial Defense, "the man of secrets" Maurice Hanky, who visited Germany in the summer of 1933.

Upon returning home, he presented the Government with “Notes on Hitler’s Foreign Policy in Theory and in Practice,” which outlined possible prospects for the implementation of Nazi foreign policy, taking into account British strategic interests. It turned out that the Fuhrer's eastern plans largely corresponded to the foreign policy preferences of the British ruling circles — Hitler received “Lebensraum” [living space — SL] in the East and refused claims to British imperial ownership ”(Morozov SV, the secret annex to the Polish-German declaration of 26 in January 1934 of the year // www.lawmix.ru/comm/1987/).

The threat of the USSR came not only from the West, but also from the East. “Having embarked on the path of aggression in 1931, the Japanese imperialists seized Northeast China (Manchuria). There they formed the puppet state of Manchukuo. Along with the plans for the continuation of aggressive actions in China, Japanese samurai turned greedy eyes also towards the Soviet Far East and the Mongolian People's Republic. Japan has repeatedly rejected Soviet proposals for the conclusion of a non-aggression treaty between the USSR and Japan. The Minister of War of Japan, General Araki, zealously advocated an attack on the USSR. In the 1933 year at a meeting of governors, he stated that "in pursuing its state policy, Japan must inevitably face the Soviet Union" and that "Japan needs to master the territories of Primorye, Transbaikalia and Siberia by military means" (Sipols V.Ya. Ibid.).

The English military attache in Tokyo, E. James, stated that those circles that represent Araki proceed from the fact that it is better to “start a war against Russia earlier than later.” James believed that there was a danger of war in the near future. The note, presented in May 1933, by the Foreign Office of the English government, also noted that "the Japanese army is focusing its attention on the future war with Russia." ... The Minister of War of Japan, General Araki, zealously advocated an attack on the USSR. In the 1933 year at a meeting of governors, he stated that "in pursuing its state policy, Japan must inevitably face the Soviet Union" and that "Japan needs to master the territories of Primorye, Transbaikalia and Siberia by military means" (Sipols V.Ya. Ibid.).

In May 1933 of the year France ratified the Soviet-French non-aggression pact concluded on 29 of June 1932 of the year, and Poland “began an active probe of Germany to normalize relations, which found a definite response in Berlin. ... The normalization of German-Polish relations on economic issues and in relation to Danzig began. It is clear that many observers interpreted this as the beginning of German-Polish cooperation "(Meltyukhov MI Soviet-Polish Wars. Military-political confrontation 1918-1939. - M .: Veche, 2001 // http: //militera.lib .ru / research / meltyukhov2 / 02.html).

The defeat of Poland and Germany by the Soviet Union increased the importance of Germany and diminished the importance of France, and also removed the German threat to the British colonies to the East and, ultimately, strengthened the position of England on the world stage. Strongly unwilling to promote the strengthening of England. “16 in May of 1933, two months after coming to power, the new American government established the first direct contact with the USSR.

On this day, F. Roosevelt sent messages to the heads of 53 states participating in the World Economic Conference in London and the Conference on Arms Reduction and Armaments in Geneva, including the Chairman of the USSR Central Executive Committee M. I. Kalinin. Speaking for taking concrete measures to strengthen peace, the American president proposed that all countries conclude a non-aggression pact among themselves. Three days later, a response message was sent to M. I. Kalinin to Roosevelt, in which the struggle that the USSR consistently led for peace and disarmament was briefly described. ... Considering that some powers, first of all Japan and Germany, hatched aggressive plans, however, it was not necessary to count on the implementation of Roosevelt's proposal ”(Sipols V.Ya. Ibid.).

Meanwhile, “the attitude of the Anglo-American ruling circles to the new government has become extremely benevolent. When Hitler refused to pay reparations, which naturally called into question the payment of war debts, neither Britain nor France made any claims to him about payments. Moreover, after the trip delivered again at the head of Reichsbank J. Mine in the USA in May 1933 and his meetings with the president and major bankers on Wall Street, America allocated new loans to Germany totaling $ 1 billion. And in June in while traveling to London and meeting with M. Norman Schacht, he is seeking an English loan of 2 billion dollars and a reduction and then termination of payments on old loans. Thus, the Nazis got what the previous governments could not achieve ”(Y. Rubtsov, World War II, Hitler took America from // http://svpressa.ru/war/article/13438/).

“7. VI 1933 The text of the Covenant of Four, based on the French version, was initialed in Rome by Mussolini and the ambassadors of England, France and Germany. On the same day, French Foreign Minister Paul-Boncour sent notes to the envoys of Czechoslovakia, Romania and Yugoslavia in Paris, containing assurances that 7 was initialed. VI of the "Covenant of Four" excludes the principle of revising treaties, allowing only consideration of proposals for enhancing the effectiveness of art. 19 Statute of the League of Nations. A declaration of similar content was sent by Paul-Boncourt 8. VI to the Polish government, which declared that it retains freedom of action ”(Diplomatic Dictionary, ibid.).

On June 8, 1933, the MacDonald Plan was adopted by the General Commission of the Geneva Conference on Disarmament as the basis for a future disarmament convention. Feeling the support of England and America, Germany went to aggravate their relations with the USSR. On June 16, 1933, Minister of Economy of Germany A. Hugenberg (Hugenberg) handed over a memorandum to the Chairman of the International Economic Conference in London, H. Collin. “In it, Hugenberg, under the pretext of overcoming the economic crisis, along with the demand to return Germany the lost colonies, demanded that Germany be provided with“ new territories for colonization ”at the expense of the USSR. He called on the Western powers to put an end to "the revolution and internal disruption that found their starting point in Russia." ... The “Hugenberg Memorandum” completely cut off the path to a return to “rapallic politics”, - a call for war against the USSR sounded almost openly in it. After this, the reorientation of the USSR from Germany to France and Poland became already only a “matter of technology” (Gorlov SA, ibid.). “Already in June 1933, the USSR announced to Germany the cessation of military cooperation. In the future, Soviet-German relations continued to deteriorate ”(AR Dyukov,“ Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact ”in questions and answers / Foundation“ Historical memory ”. - M., 2009. - P. 11). “Between July 20 and September 4, liquidation took place tank schools in Kazan. ... The liquidation of the German presence in Lipetsk began on July 19 and was completed on September 11. ...

15 July 1933 France, England, Italy and Germany, bypassing the Geneva Conference on Disarmament, signed in Rome a “pact of four” that provided for cooperation between its participants, a revision of the Versailles Treaty, Germany’s gradual achievement of equality in armaments. However, the “pact of four” was not ratified by the signatories of the powers ”(SA Gorlov, Ibid.).

Due to aggravation of relations with Germany, “at the beginning of July 1933, Moscow suggested Paris to enter into a tacit and oral bilateral gentlemen's agreement on the mutual exchange of information on the most important problems of the situation in Europe, as well as on agreements that each of the parties had intended to conclude with third countries. In August, the USSR 1933 removed part of the troops from its western border with Poland and sent them to the Far East, provided Poland with large orders for the supply of iron ”(S. Gorlov, Ibid.). The decision to redeploy troops to the East was dictated by the increased threat to the Soviet Union from Japan. In particular, “the American ambassador to Tokyo, J. Grew, wrote 18 on July 1933 that the Japanese military clique might well decide to“ come out before Soviet Russia becomes stronger ”. ... 7 of September of the same year, he noted in his diary, referring to this issue, that the apparatus of the American military attache in Japan considered the Japanese attack on the USSR "absolutely inevitable." Japan was intensively preparing for war against the USSR. Manchuria and Korea captured by it were turned into a huge military springboard. The number of troops entering the Kwantung Army in Manchuria increased, military installations, roads, warehouses, barracks, and airfields were built. In 1933, after capturing Manchuria and parts of northern China, the General Headquarters of the Japanese Army clarified and detailed its plan for preparing for war (the Otsu plan): from the 30 divisions that were supposed to be formed, 24 were allocated for military operations against the Soviet Union. In the war with the USSR, it was planned to seize Primorye first, after which it was planned to strike in order to capture the area of ​​Lake Baikal ”(Sipols, V.Ya. Ibid.).

“The deep imperialist contradictions between the parties to the pact, primarily between France and Germany, prevented the ... ratification” of the “Pact of Four” (Ovsyany I.D. Ibid.). Following him, his appendage in the form of the “MacDonald Plan” became unnecessary. In September, during the new meeting of Goebbels with Beck, the negotiations on the joint German-Polish attack on the Soviet Union were continued, but “at a conference in Geneva ... Germany demanded immediate recognition of the principle of equality in armaments and the consent of the powers to increase the size of the ReichSwer in 1933 . (up to 3 thousand) ”(Gorlov SA Ibid.).

October 10 F. Roosevelt sent M.I. Kalinin received a new message in which he reported that he considered it desirable to end "with the present abnormal relations" between the USA and the USSR. He expressed readiness to discuss this question with a representative of the Soviet government. M.I. Kalinin noted in his reply message that this abnormal situation in relations between the two countries adversely affects the general international situation, making it difficult to consolidate peace and encouraging the aggressors. The message informed that M.M. was appointed the representative of the Soviet government for negotiations with F. Roosevelt. Litvinov. The exchange of messages between Roosevelt and MI Kalinin caused wide responses ”(Sipols V.Ya. Ibid.).

Meanwhile, “the French had the courage to insist that the destruction of their heavy weapons was delayed by four years. The British government accepted this amendment on the condition that the consent of France to destroy its artillery will be recorded in a special document that must be signed immediately. France complied with this demand, and 12 of October 1933 of the year, Sir John Simon, complaining that Germany has changed its position in recent weeks, submitted a draft of these proposals to the Conference on Disarmament ”(Churchill U. ibid.).

“On October 12, Poland asked Germany if it was ready to offer a non-aggression pact to Warsaw, because otherwise the commander-in-chief of the Polish Army“ will be seriously concerned. ” If we take into account that at the end of October 1933, the personal representative of Pilsudski L. Morshtin was sent to Paris with an unofficial mission to clarify the position of France in the case of the German-Polish war, it should be admitted that from the Polish side it was a veiled ultimatum to Berlin ”( Meltyukhov MI Soviet-Polish wars. Military-political confrontation 1918-1939 (ibid.).

“The result was completely unexpected” (Churchill W. Ibid.). October 14 1933. "The German leadership announced the withdrawal of its representatives from the conference on disarmament, and there was a threat that the League of Nations would apply sanctions against Berlin" (Meltyukhov M.I. 17 September 1939. Soviet-Polish conflicts 1918-1939. - M. : Veche, 2009. - S. 168). “That was the fate of the McDonald Plan (W. Churchill, ibid.). “On the same day, Poland assured Germany that it would not join any sanctions by spoiling it. 19 October, Germany withdrew from the League of Nations and announced its readiness to sign non-aggression pacts with everyone. It is clear that in these conditions, Berlin was interested in an agreement with its eastern neighbor, which would allow to strike at the system of the French unions in Eastern Europe and demonstrate its peacefulness. ... The withdrawal of Germany from the Conference on Disarmament and the League of Nations led to its international isolation, which was viewed by Poland as a favorable moment for reaching an agreement. The Polish leadership once again decided to show its strength and ability for independent politics. Notifying Berlin in the absence of intentions to participate in any sanctions against him, Warsaw received German assurances of a desire to normalize relations "(Meltyukhov MI September 17 1939. Soviet-Polish conflicts 1918-1939. Decree. Op. - C. 168- 169).

“In November, 1933 ... by presenting to the editor-in-chief of the French newspaper Жour, L. Tomi, his assessment of the international situation ... Benes [who was“ at that time the foreign minister of Czechoslovakia ”. - S.L.] touched upon the issue of the “Covenant of Four”. The position of France, which signed the treaty and thereby betrayed the interests of its Eastern European allies, caused deep discontent among the ruling circles in the Minor Entente countries. This prompted the Czechoslovak minister to utter several phrases that violated the tacit persuasion of bourgeois political figures not to touch on sensitive issues related to the anti-Soviet designs of the West. Addressing his remarks to Mussolini, Benesh actually criticized the position of the French government.

“When Mr. Mussolini took a diplomatic action related to the Covenant of Four,” said Benes, “he meant a certain idea, plan, project. The world, in his view, should be secured by dividing the entire globe. This section provided for Europe and its colonies to form four zones of influence. England had an enormous empire; France maintained her colonial possessions and mandates; Germany and Italy divided Eastern Europe into two large zones of influence: Germany established its dominance in Belgium and Russia, Italy received a sphere that included the Danube countries and the Balkans. Italy and Germany believed that with this large section they would easily agree with Poland: she would give up the Corridor in exchange for a part of Ukraine ... You probably remember the statement of the Huguenberg in London in connection with this ... If you ask me now, What would be the consequences of this broad plan for the division of the world, I would tell you directly that this broad plan would cause a series of wars before it was implemented ”(Ovsyany ID, ibid.).

Thus, despite the use of administrative resources and non-parliamentary methods of dealing with their political opponents, the Nazis failed to win a parliamentary majority in the March 5 1933 election. And only by adopting the Emergency Powers Act of 24 in March did the Nazis gain unlimited power and, in effect, destroy the Weimar Democratic Republic.

Hitler's initial desire to maintain relations with the Soviet Union was greeted in Moscow coldly and with restraint. While Warsaw expressed a strong desire to establish relations with Germany on anti-Soviet grounds. England, in addition to Germany, incited the Soviet Union and Japan. And only the United States of America, out of unwillingness to help strengthen Britain, went towards rapprochement with the Soviet Union.

Due to Moscow’s intransigence and its unwillingness to cooperate with the Nazis, along with the willingness of Britain and Poland to cooperate with Nazi Germany, Hitler chose an alliance with Great Britain against the USSR, an explosion of international relations, rampant weaponry and preparation for war. At the same time, the English plan for the creation of an Anglo-French-German-Italian alliance, and after it the plan for increasing the German army, failed. These plans were destroyed by Poland, dissatisfied with the secondary role assigned to it in the Anglo-Italian process. In pursuance of its great-power ambitions, Poland in parallel launched its own no-alternative flirtation with the Nazis, which ended in the Munich Agreement.
Author:
Articles from this series:
Unknown Great War
America vs England. Part of 2. From the Great War to the Great Depression
America vs England. Part of 3. Great break
America vs England. Part of 4. How Dallas and Papen Hitler brought to power
4 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. tokin1959
    tokin1959 April 10 2014 10: 53
    +1
    from fifth to tenth.
    messy.
  2. Morgan
    Morgan April 10 2014 13: 07
    +1
    the form suffers, but essentially true. I put +!
  3. parus2nik
    parus2nik April 10 2014 16: 05
    +1
    Moreover, if the French army was reduced from 500 thousand to 200 thousand, the German from 100 thousand, respectively, increased to the same size. That is, in other words, the USA and England planned the future defeat of France ...
  4. tforik
    tforik April 10 2014 20: 18
    +1
    Very capacious and interesting material. Polit relations were then more difficult than today ...
    Thanks to the author!