Military Review

America vs England. Part of 6. The split of the anti-Soviet camp

America vs England. Part of 6. The split of the anti-Soviet camp

Adolf Hitler and the Polish Ambassador to Germany, Jozef Lipsky. Source:,1,941545.html

В stories America and Russia were different periods - both friendship and open military confrontation. Widely known was the help of Russia to the northerners during the American Civil War, when the Russian fleet off the coast of America essentially prevented British intervention on the side of the southerners. At the same time, the story of how America saved the USSR from the invasion of the European hordes and hordes in the 1934 year is forgotten.

"In November, 1933 of the Year ... Warsaw proposed a military agreement to Prague" (Meltyukhov M.I. 17 of September 1939. Soviet-Polish conflicts 1918-1939. - M .: Veche, 2009. - C. 188), and November 15 1933 of Germany proposed Poland and Czechoslovakia to conclude an agreement on "correction", presumably at the expense of the Soviet Union, the Versailles Treaty regarding borders with Germany (Shirokorad AB the Great Intermission. - M .: AST, 2009. - C. 215) - Poland and Czechoslovakia return to Germany their German-populated territories in exchange for the subsequent seizure of land from the Soviet oyuza during a joint German-Polish-Czechoslovak intervention under the auspices of the UK.

“A verbal agreement was reached between the Polish ambassador in Berlin, Y. Lipsky and Hitler, on refusing to use force, which, according to the Reich chancellor, could later be transformed into a treaty” (M. Meltyukhov, Soviet-Polish Wars. Military-political confrontation 1918-1939 - M .: Veche, 2001 //, and on “November 16 a German-Polish communiqué was published, in which both sides pledged not to“ resort to violence to resolve disputes between them ”(ibid.). The German proposal has split the world into two irreconcilable camps - supporters and opponents of Nazi Germany.

The defeat of Germany, Poland and Czechoslovakia to the Soviet Union increased the importance of Germany and downplayed the importance of France, and also took the German threat to the British colonies to the East and, ultimately, strengthened the position of England on the world stage. Strongly unwilling to help strengthen Britain literally the next day after Germany’s proposal to Poland and Czechoslovakia to conclude an agreement on “rectifying the Treaty of Versailles regarding the border with Germany”, the newly elected President of the United States Franklin Delano Roosevelt turned abruptly, abandoning the anti-Soviet policy of his predecessor, President Herbert Hoover and 16 on November 1933 of the year established diplomatic relations between the United States and the Soviet Union (Sayers M., Kahn A. The Secret War against Soviet Russia. - M .: Algorithm, 2012. - S. 190-191).

Neglecting the unequivocal support of the United States of the Soviet Union on November 27, 1933, Poland began negotiations with Germany (Meltyukhov M. Soviet-Polish wars. Military and political confrontation 1918-1939 there), and already, “November November 28, rotermy's Daily Mail "Raised a question that soon became dominant in British foreign policy:" Strong young German Nazism is a reliable guard of Europe against the communist danger ... Germany needs living space. If Germany switches its energy surplus and its organizational skills to Bolshevik Russia, then it will help the Russian people return to civilized existence and, perhaps, even direct world trade to the path of a new heyday ”(Sayers M., Kan A. Decree. Op. - S. 1933).

However, in England, the Rotermy course toward rapprochement with the Nazis was far from supported by all. “In December, Churchill 1933 defiantly broke with his conservative colleagues and exposed Nazism as a threat to the British Empire. In response to Lord Rothermir’s statement that “strong young German Nazism is a reliable guard of Europe against the communist danger,” Churchill said: “All these gangs of strong young Teutons marching through the streets and roads of Germany ... are looking for weapons“But believe me, they will demand the return of the territories taken away, the lost colonies, and this kind of demand will inevitably shake, if not ruin, many countries” (Sayers M., Kan A. Decree. Op. - S 187).

Meanwhile, if Czechoslovakia, with an eye on US support for the USSR, the German proposal rejected, after which the Polish proposal of the Czechoslovakia military alliance "ended at the sounding level" (Meltyukhov MI September 17 1939. Soviet-Polish conflicts 1918-1939. Decree. Op. - S. 188), then Poland supported the United States of the Soviet Union ignored and accepted the German invitation. “The Nazis declared to the Poles their willingness to pledge non-aggression against Poland and began to raise the issue of cooperation between Germany and Poland in order to seize the Soviet lands and divide the Baltic states. Polish rulers enthusiastically greeted such proposals. Y. Pilsudski, in an interview with Hitler's emissary Raushning, put 11 December 1933 on the question of forming an alliance between Germany and Poland, pointing to the inevitability of war between them and the USSR ”(Sipols V.Ya. Diplomatic struggle on the eve of the Second World War. - M .: International Relations, 1979 //

14 December 1933 of the USSR “invited Poland to sign a joint declaration on the interest of the inviolability of the Baltic states, but Warsaw rejected the proposal” (Dyukov A. R. “Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact” in questions and answers / Historical Memory Foundation. - M., 2009 - S. 28) after the publication of the Polish-German declaration of non-aggression on 3 in February 1934. “Moreover, at the direction of J. Beck, the Polish Ambassador to Berlin J. Lipsky informed 9 in January 1934 of the German Foreign Minister K. von Neurath about that Poland will not do anything agreement with the USSR, without first agreeing with the German government ”(Sipols V.Ya., Ibid.).

26 January 1934 Poland and Germany concluded a declaration on the peaceful settlement of disputes and the non-use of force between Poland and Germany for a period of 10 years. "The head of the Foreign Office D. Simon congratulated 29 on January 1934 of the Polish ambassador to London K. Skirmunt and in absentia Beck on behalf of the English government and praised the policy that led to the signing of the 26 declaration of January 1934. He said that he conveyed the same congratulations to Hitler "(Morozov, SV, On the Question of the Secret Annex to the Polish-German Declaration of January 26 on 1934, //

According to S.V. Morozov “the form of the declaration (and not the treaty) was applied at the insistence of the German side, which allowed Berlin to avoid stating in the non-aggression pacts which treaties serve as the international legal basis for relations between its participants. In other words, Germany declined to provide guarantees of the Polish-German border. The refusal of the use of force against each other, not supplemented by guarantees of immutability of borders, allowed the possibility of its use for the revision of the territorial status quo of third states. The declaration had some peculiarity. Unlike the Soviet-Polish non-aggression pact of 25 in July 1932, as well as from the accepted diplomatic practice, the Polish-German declaration did not contain an article that would deal with the termination of the declaration if one of the parties entered into armed conflict with a third country, which under certain conditions could give it the character of an offensive alliance ”(S. Morozov, Ibid.).

Not surprisingly, after the signing of the Lipsky-Neurath declaration, “the Polish government no longer considered it necessary to conduct any negotiations on cooperation with the USSR against German aggression” (Sipols V.Ya. Ibid.) And “February 3 1934 ... informed the Soviet Government which considers the question of the Soviet-Polish declaration to have disappeared ”, A. Hitler immediately postponed the implementation of the plan to increase the army from 1937 to the autumn of 1934 (Muller-Hillebrand B. Land Army of Germany 1933 - 1945 - M .: Izografus, 2002. - S. 31), and the general staffs of both states relations have begun to develop plans for a joint war with the USSR.

Apparently, all this was done in accordance with the secret addendum to the declaration, according to which, according to Soviet intelligence, “in exchange for Germany’s sacred obligation not to oppose Poland either alone or in coalition with other powers, Poland took itself with respect to Germany, which has the following wording (the text of this secret appendix is ​​written in German and Polish):

“In the event of a direct or mediocre attack on Germany, Poland will observe strict neutrality even if Germany, due to provocation, was forced to launch a war on its own initiative to protect its honor and security.” This addendum is the “liquidation on the part of Germany of the Rapala Treaty in exchange for Germany’s commitment not to raise the question of revising its eastern borders at the expense of Poland, i.e. due to the Corridor, Danzig and Upper Silesia, otherwise. As soon as peacefully - by voluntary voluntary agreement ”, behind which were the aggressive plans of both allies in relation to the eastern neighbors - the transfer of the Polish Pomerania of Germany to Zamen for the seizure of Ukraine and Lithuania by Poland. The secrecy of the agreement was conditioned by the expectation by the Polish leadership of the repulse of the entire Polish public to Beck’s criminal foreign policy (Secrets of the Polish Policy 1935-1945. Declassified documents of the Foreign Intelligence Service of the Russian Federation. - M .: RIPOL-Classic, 2010. - C. 21, 35-36 ).

"On Saturday, April 20, ... on the eve of the signing of the Soviet-French mutual assistance agreement of 2 in May 1935 ... on the front page of the central Soviet newspapers (Pravda and Izvestia) was reprinted from the provincial French newspaper Bourbonne Republique for 18 April 1935 was the text of the secret Polish-German treaty concluded on February 25 of the year 1934, that is, immediately after the ratification of the Lipsky-Neurath declaration. The text of the said agreement was provided to the newspaper named by the deputy and former Minister Lamure. The text read:

“1. High contracting parties undertake to agree on all matters that may entail international obligations for both parties and to pursue a permanent policy of effective cooperation.
2. Poland in its external relations undertakes not to take any decisions without coordination with the German government, and also to observe the interests of this government in all circumstances.
3. In the event of international events threatening the status quo, the high contracting parties undertake to communicate with each other in order to agree on measures that they find useful to take.
4. High contracting parties pledge to unite their military, economic and financial forces to repel any unprovoked attack and provide support in the event that one of the parties is attacked.
5. The Polish government is committed to ensuring the free passage of German troops on its territory in the event that these troops are called upon to repel a provocation from the east or from the northeast.
6. The German government pledges to guarantee by all means at its disposal the inviolability of the Polish borders against any aggression.
7. High contracting parties undertake to take all measures of an economic nature that can represent common and private interests and that can enhance the effectiveness of their common defensive means.
8. This treaty will remain in force for two years, counting from the date of the exchange of ratifications. It will be considered as renewed for the same period if neither of the two governments denounces it with a warning 6 months before the expiration of this period. As a result, each government will have the right to denounce it by means of a statement preceding the 6 months for the expiration of a full period of two years (Prav. 1935. 20 Apr; News. 1935. 20 Apr) ”(S. Morozov).

The original text of the declaration has not yet been published anywhere. His texts entered into scientific circulation differ from each other and literally do not coincide. Poland stubbornly avoids the question of its existence, preferring, as in the case of the destruction of Soviet prisoners of war in Polish captivity, to blame Russia for the secret protocol of the Soviet-German non-aggression treaty 1939 of the year. Some historians believe that the declaration existed, some doubted its existence, some believed that it never existed. In any case, there was a protocol, or the Polish leadership coordinated its actions with the German leadership in some other way, but Poland went to rapprochement with Germany only after its aggressive aspiration to the east, and after signing the declaration Lipsky-Neurath began joint preparations for an attack on Czechoslovakia . At one time, the Soviet Union also for a very long time, until it still found strength, courage and civil society, refused to recognize the existence of a secret annex to the non-aggression pact with Germany 1939 of the year. Only official Warsaw and the Polish public can finally resolve this issue.

Since Czechoslovakia refused to cooperate with Germany and Poland, in addition to the USSR, this treaty was also directed against Czechoslovakia, to which Cieszyn Silesia was claimed by the Poles, and the Sudetenland by the Germans. It is natural that “another surge of anti-Czechoslovak attitudes in Poland occurred at the beginning of 1934, when the press launched a massive campaign to return the original Polish lands” (Shirokorad A., B. Decree. Op. - C. 242), “which naturally caused concern Czechoslovak leadership, suspecting that there is a secret agreement on the German-Polish cooperation. ...

In addition, Warsaw saw in Czechoslovakia the main obstacle to the fact that it was Poland that occupied the leading position in Eastern Europe and achieved the status of a great power. ... The discontent of the Polish leadership, who constantly feared a threat to their interests in Eastern Europe, led Czechoslovakia to recognize the Soviet Union de jure and establish diplomatic relations with it. ”9 June 1934 of the Year (Meltyukhov M.I. 17 September 1939. Soviet- Polish conflicts 1918-1939. Decree. Op. - C. 188;). Meanwhile, for the guaranteed defeat of Czechoslovakia and the subsequent campaign against the USSR, A. Hitler first needed to annex Austria to Germany, which, according to Winston Churchill, “opened the door for Czechoslovakia and the wide gates to South-Eastern Europe” (Churchill U. World War II. - M .: Voenizdat, 1991 //

In addition to Germany, began the rapprochement of Poland and Japan. "On the eve of the ratification of the Lipsky-Neurath pact, at the beginning of the third decade of February 1934, the chairman of the foreign commission of the Sejm, Senator Janusz Radziwill, told like-minded people from the conservative Krakow newspaper Hour," that the situation in Germany and the threat of the USSR from Japan were good for Poland . ...

Less than a month later, on March 16, some secret intentions of Berlin and Warsaw were noted by Wick in London, who reported that there was a general agreement between Poland and Germany regarding the Rosenberg plan. The agency added that over the past 2 weeks all these assumptions have received new food due to the fact that Japan has suddenly taken a more threatening position towards the USSR. In conclusion, she drew attention to the open support of Japan by the British circles, who sent a delegation of British industrialists to Manzhou Go and published a number of articles in The Times (Morozov. Decree. Op.). Consolidated with the policies of Poland and Germany were the leaders of the British Union of Fascists, who planned the seizure of power in Great Britain for the summer of 1934 (Siegmund AM Women of the Third Reich: G. Bormann, L. Heydrich, J. Mitford, H. Reich, V. Wagner , K. Rascher. - M .: AST; Astrel, 2005. - S. 128-129.).

“22 March 1934, I.M. Maisky stated in a conversation with L. Collier, Director of the Northern Department of the Foreign Office, that the militaristic circles of Japan, who openly expressed their thoughts about the attack on the USSR, "are confident of sympathy from influential circles of the British ruling classes ... for their aggressive plans. The Japanese militarists think that in the event of an attack on the USSR they can count on assistance from England in a wide variety of forms ”(Sipols V.Ya. Ibid.). In the Soviet Union, the plenipotentiary said, there is a strong suspicion that the British ruling circles are encouraging a Japanese attack on the USSR. Throughout the conversation, the plenipotentiary to Moscow wrote, Collier never directly and openly stated the British government’s negative attitude towards Japan’s aggressive plans, “although such a statement was a very good case. This is very significant ...

Now that the English secret archives of the prewar years have become available to historians, the outlined political course of England can be confirmed by completely indisputable documents. Two of the most influential members of the English government, N. Chamberlain and J. Simon, submitted a memorandum for his consideration, in which they spoke for improving relations with Japan, in particular for concluding a non-aggression treaty with her. Their main argument was as follows: “As for Russia, everything that reinforces a sense of security in Japan encourages its aggressiveness towards Russia” (Sipols V.Ya. Ibid.).

December 28 1933, concerned about the negotiations between Poland and Germany, the Soviet Union “offered to conclude a regional agreement on mutual assistance with the participation of the USSR, France, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Finland” (“Eastern Pact” // http: // www / sobyt / 1900sob / 1934pakt.php) - the so-called "Eastern Pact" or "Eastern Locarno" - a project to create a lasting barrier against Hitler’s aggression in Eastern Europe. “April 17 1934 France interrupted negotiations on disarmament and equality, as it saw in the German military budget (published March 7 1934 March 28) violation of the Versailles Peace Treaty” (Muller-Gillebrand B. Decree. Op. - C. XNUMX).

“As a result of the Franco-Soviet negotiations that took place in May 1934, France will join the [Eastern] Pact as its guarantor, and the USSR will join the Locarno Pact in the same capacity. 14 June 1934, the Soviet Union sent a formal invitation to Germany and other interested states to become a party to the pact. The Hitler government was slow to answer ”(Diplomatic Dictionary // % D0% A9% D0% 7D% D0% AB% D9% 0). In order to ensure the defeat of Czechoslovakia and the subsequent campaign against the USSR, A. Hitler needed to annex Austria to Germany, and not to enter into a defensive pact promising tranquility to Europe.

“At this moment, in the face of the German threat, a glimpse of European unity appeared. February 17 The British, French and Italian governments published a joint declaration in support of Austrian independence. 1934 March Italy, Hungary and Austria signed the so-called Rome Protocols, which provided for mutual consultations in the event of a threat to any of the three contracting parties. But Hitler was getting stronger, and during May and June, subversive activity increased throughout Austria. Dolfus immediately sent a message about these terrorist acts to Mussolini’s chief foreign affairs adviser, Suvic, along with a note that expressed regret about the adverse effect they had on the Austrian trade and on tourists ”(Churchill U. Ibid.).

Thus, at the end of 1933, England once again tried to organize a pan-European crusade against the Soviet Union. However, the German-Polish-Czechoslovak union that was already outlined was destroyed by America, which recognized the Soviet Union and split a single anti-Soviet camp. As a result, Czechoslovakia refused to join the Polish-German alliance, and the establishment of England itself was divided into opponents and supporters of Nazi Germany. From that moment on, the world rushed to a new world war.

Without Czechoslovakia, Poland and Germany could not immediately invade the Soviet Union. Thus arose the need for the defeat of Czechoslovakia by Poland and Germany, supported by joint territorial claims to it. Meanwhile, for the successful defeat of Czechoslovakia in Germany, it was extremely necessary first to carry out the invasion of Austria.

It should be noted here that there are many talks about the anti-Polish orientation of the Soviet-German non-aggression treaty of the 1939 year, with almost no discussion of the anti-Soviet orientation of the Polish-German declaration of the non-aggression 1934 of the year. At the same time, you can with a high degree of probability say that without the 1934 contract of the year, there would not be the 1939 contract of the year. It should be noted that, unlike the 1939 agreement of the year, the 1934 agreement of the year was concluded not to prevent an external threat, but for the sake of Poland's realization of its great-power ambitions at the expense of the Soviet Union.

As for America, the current situation is fundamentally different from the old one in that if it had previously only achieved world domination, now it has achieved its goal and by all means seeks to stay in power longer. And the pawn, knocked out in the queens, now there is no need to save Russia from anyone or for anything. The leader changed, but his goal remained unchanged. Let us paraphrase Stanislav Jerzy Lec: if an ogre once saved a man from the shark's mouth, this does not mean that the rescued should not be afraid of him.
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
America vs England. Part of 5. At the crossroads
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. parusnik
    parusnik April 18 2014 09: 05
    Poland and Czechoslovakia are returning to Germany their territories occupied by Germans in exchange for the subsequent seizure of land from the Soviet Union during a joint German-Polish-Czechoslovak intervention under the patronage of Great Britain. Gentlemen, the liberals are silent about this, but they scream that the USSR, since its inception, has hatched aggressive plans for the whole world ...
  2. Prometheus
    Prometheus April 18 2014 11: 23
    The Polish military was cruelly deceived in their expectations. And the people after WWII got the opportunity to build a new society.
  3. Mareman Vasilich
    Mareman Vasilich April 18 2014 12: 59
    Anglo-Saxons can not peck their own eyes.
  4. Docent1984
    Docent1984 April 18 2014 13: 41
    The article is very informative, many interesting facts, confirmed by links. The author has done a great job. Great advantage.
    The only thing you can disagree with is the opinion about the real US motives in this matter. That is why - if we imagine (hypothetically) that aggression against the USSR with the participation of Germany, Czechoslovakia and Poland would be undertaken in 1934, we will try to think about the result. Germany in 1934 and Germany in 1941 are roughly the same as the Georgian army and the Russian army 2008 in terms of size, armament, combat training and experience. Poland are still warriors, remember how many days they heroically resisted the Wehrmacht in 39? Now) Perhaps Czechoslovakia was the most combat-ready of all these countries. And the most unmotivated to aggression - as shown by the subsequent course of events. It is clear that the Red Army in 34 was also noticeably inferior to the 41 model, but not at all so radically. In this regard, there is an opinion that the outcome of such a possible aggression, at least, raises doubts, but in reality - everything would end much faster than 45 year. Most likely, the United States in this matter just defended its brainchild - Nazi Germany - from a disease of early growth. But history does not tolerate subjunctive moods ...
  5. qwert
    qwert April 18 2014 14: 33
    Everything can be. Although Roosevelt really treated the USSR better than all the other presidents. Of course, he pursued exclusively the interests of the states, but saw the benefit for the states in normal relations with the USSR. Given that it was he who pulled America out of the crisis, and recreated the economy, perhaps he, like Stalin, still wanted the development and prosperity of his country, and not an arms race. Those. improving living standards, the development of social programs. The lack of dissatisfaction of citizens and the lawlessness of the mafia. Truman, just acted in the interests of large arms manufacturers, this is certainly the most profitable business, but ....
  6. Fedya
    Fedya April 18 2014 20: 30
    What a news ! On the other hand, it becomes clear why the gentry frenziedly participated in tearing Czechoslovakia to pieces! They don’t really like to remember now how the Teshin region was chopped off.