So what exactly in that wiki shows that the communists didn't hold a coup and then call in the Soviets to help them?
A Plea for Caution From Russia
- Thread starter onthebottom
- Start date
Here is another historical perspective on Russians. The Jewish inmates in the concentration camp were overjoyed at the prospect of their immediate liberation. Their joy turned to bitter disappointment when they learned their liberators were Russians (memories of pogroms), not Americans.
Although in fairness these were not the frontline troops (almost entirely ethnically Great Russians) but rather second string troops.
pour exemple:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ors-Marianne-Faithfull-hate-sex-30-years.html
Further one should recall that Captain Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn had his first trip to the Gulag because he strongly complained about this sort of behaviour to his superiors.
I'm not sure why you are asking this question when you can read what happened. And you are changing what you originally insisted. Couple of things:
1.) The PDP was not officially a communist party. Though I'm sure communists where in it, it was a diverse party.
2.) The relationship with the USSR and the monarchy was just fine before any coup, in fact it was Afghanistan's primary trading partner. So the USSR had no desire to force a hand in any change. It was entirely an Afghan affair up until 1980.
3.) The coup that overthrew the monarchy was led by Daoud, and established a republic. PDP supported it and was part of the government.
4.) Mouhajadine started an uprising before the PDP got power.
5.) PDP only took power because Daoud stabbed them in the back.
6.) The USA sent in arms and supported a jihad by helping foreigners enter Afghanistan before the USSR intervened
7.) There was no "disposed" of rebels by the PDP who where "fighting back"; it was mostly extremists fuelled by the CIA. It was the PDP that fought for their lives, and they had every right to defend the legitimate republic from both Daoud's autocracy and extremist terror. Unless you consider overthrowing tyranny illegitimate.
8.) PDP changed leadership throughout this and at one point may have actually been led by a covert CIA operative, who may or may not have been killed by the USSR and replaced with someone more moderate to the ideas of the masses.
9.) The USSR tried their best to stay out of it, but ultimately had little choice. Would you do nothing to stop a neighbour from placing canons on his lawn pointed at your house after evicting the original occupant who you are good friends with? Oh, and it's your worst enemy who is paying for the move and supplying the canons.
Yes, but Solzhenitsyn is a known liar who has just straight up made stuff up. He is a fictional writer, not a historian, statistician, Sovietologist, etc. and the man has publically supported and justified fascism.
As for Katyn, I am no expert but as far as I know there has never been an official admittance from Russia and there are plenty of papers out there arguing that it was not the Soviets who perpetrated it. Let's not forget who started WW II by invading Poland in the first place.
Wow!
Yes, there most certainly was an official admittance of culpability by the Soviets although it did take them almost a half a century lying through their teeth most of that time.
Oh and although Germany was the first to invade Poland in 1939, it was only 16 days later that the Soviets also invaded Poland.
I may get back to you on Katyn.
As for Poland, what choice did the USSR have other than to war Germany on it's own? Aside of which, Poland fucked themselves. USSR only signed a pact because it was their last option (and they were the last to make a pact):
"The Polish signed in 1934 and the French and British of course had their Munich appeasement in 1938. In 1938, Stalin offered to attack Hitler over Czechoslavakia if either England or France sided with him and if the Polish granted passage through their territory. Instead, what happened is Poland took a slice of Czechoslavakia--the Teschen district--in a deal with the Nazis." - Critique of the Black Book of Communism
Not an expert myself, but they saw Stalin's signature on the execution orders.
This part of history is not in dispute.
Guess who else agrees with Vlad "The Hammer" Putin.
Troops oppose strikes on Syria by 3-1 margin
http://www.militarytimes.com/intera...009/Troops-oppose-strikes-Syria-by-3-1-margin
:hippie:
Troops oppose strikes on Syria by 3-1 margin
http://www.militarytimes.com/intera...009/Troops-oppose-strikes-Syria-by-3-1-margin
:hippie:
The Soviets were a German Ally in 1939. Holy Cow, you are saying that the Poles deserved to be invaded by the Soviets? Further, you base this upon statements by the Maoist Internationalist Movement!
No, they were not. It was a non-aggression pact. If you are going to say this about the USSR than you should hold the same position for every other country that signed pacts before the USSR did, and probably to USA as well for allowing companies like GM, Ford and IBM (among others) to sell goods to the nazis.
No more than they deserved to be attacked by the nazis. However they made a deal with the nazis, and than got screwed. Stalin was ready to commit to war on Germany in 1938, but no one else would step up. The Polish would not even grant them passage. USSR had little options left, and taking a buffer zone in Poland and Finland was very necessary. Barbarossa would have likely been much more devestating otherwise.
Hitler had in fact wanted to launch the campagn earlier, this was delayed by the purging of some 40,000 officers in the Red Army. Many of who were ready to defect large portions over to the nazis. Another brutal but necessary move by Stalin.
Yes, so? Everything there can be verified. Even if you prefer bourgeois scholars and/or journalists, it's not a hard chain of events to piece together.
Here are two great articles:
Anniversary of the Soviet-German Non-Aggression Pact,
August 23, 1939
Smash the Falsifications on
the Origins of the Second World War!
On August 23, 1939, the Soviet Union signed what is now known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Non-Aggression Pact with Germany which stipulated that Germany would not attack the Soviet Union and the Soviet Union would not attack Germany. Future events proved the farsightedness of Stalin in signing the pact. It was the best of all available alternatives. It provided the Soviet Union with 22 months of peace so as to prepare herself to withstand the inevitable German invasion and it put an end to the Anglo-American and French policy of egging Hitler toward the East in what would have resulted in a completely isolated Soviet Union facing massive German forces.
The Nazis did eventually invade the Soviet Union as expected but not until June 22, 1941 in the largest German military operation of the war. The heroic and protracted Soviet resistance against the Nazis culminated in the great Soviet victory at Stalingrad on February 2, 1943, that concluded with the encirclement and surrender of a German army of 300,000 troops. This was followed by another decisive Soviet victory at Kursk. These triumphs began a powerful counteroffensive that drove the German Hitlerites steadily backward until the final demise of the Third Reich in Berlin. On May 9, 1945 the anti-fascist forces of the world with the Soviet Union and communists of all lands at the head of the Resistance Movement declared victory over the Hitlerite Nazis. Fascist Germany acknowledged defeat and declared unconditional surrender.
Completely ignoring these undisputed facts, the reactionaries of today are using the anniversary of the non-aggression pact not to once again acclaim the great victory of the world's people over Nazi Germany but to follow their mentor Goebbels by making such fascist claims as, "On August 25, 1939 the Soviet Union and Germany signed the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact which led to the second world war, the killing of millions of people and the Holocaust."[1]
Such big lies should not be treated with indifference because they are not harmless and need to be opposed. The aim can only be to create a climate which will assist the same kind of Hitlerite and fascist forces to rise once again. In fact, those carrying out this propaganda today are the descendants of the very same fascist forces.
To suggest that Stalin's signing of the non-aggression pact with Germany was the cause of World War II is the basest infamy. First, it should be noted that Britain and France had already issued a joint declaration of non-aggression with the Germans in 1938. Of all the non-aggressive Great Powers in Europe, the Soviet Union was the last to agree to a pact with the Germans. Second, "The history of events in 1937, both before and after Hitler's occupation of Austria in March show that the Soviet Union, as it had done in earlier years, made many efforts to persuade Britain and France to maintain collective mutual assistance and in particular to carry our their undertaking to defend Czechoslovakia against aggression .The Soviet Union was not only willing to join forces with France to defend Czechoslovakia, if France would keep her word, but was prepared to defend Czechoslovakia on her own, even if France refused"[2]
All these efforts failed and the British and French refused to sign the collective mutual assistance pact with the Soviet Union. Instead, they signed the September 29, 1938, Munich Pact with Germany which permitted Germany to incorporate the Sudeten, ordered the Czechs not to resist Nazi aggression and gave the Nazis the green light to launch their attacks across Europe.
Of course the reactionaries never want to discuss the Munich Pact because it was such a blatant betrayal of the world's people that even Winston Churchill accused Prime Minister Chamberlain in the British Parliament: "You were given the choice between war and dishonour. You chose dishonour and you will have war."
It is indisputable that faced with the British and French betrayal, the Soviet Union had no choice but to take whatever measures it could to defend itself and the cause of peace.
All these facts can be verified. They are all available in reports, speeches, accounts and documents of that time. Just to give one example, Memo #8604, which was sent to Moscow by Russian intelligence from Prague several days before the signing of the Munich Agreement reads: "On September 19, British Ambassador Newton and French Ambassador De Lacroix conveyed to Milan Hodza (Czechoslovak prime minister in 1935-1938) the following on behalf of Chamberlain and Daladier, respectfully: 'Guided by the lofty principles of preserving peace in Europe, they consider it necessary for Germany to incorporate the Sudeten region. A system of mutual aid pacts with other countries should be cancelled.'"[3]
The nefarious actions of the Anglo-Americans and the French, behind the back of the Soviet Union, which had mutual aid agreements with Czechoslovakia and France, destroyed the existing elements of the collective resistance system against Nazi Germany. It was the Munich Pact which was the final cowardly act that led to the second world war, the killing of millions of people, and the Holocaust. The judgment of history points to the truth about the Anglo-American and French betrayal of the world's people and to the truth about the heroic role of the Soviet Union and J. V. Stalin in defeating the Nazis. "In the end, the resistance of the Soviet peoples led by Stalin and the Communist Party broke the back of the Nazi aggressors. Some 50 million people died and another 35 million were seriously wounded during the Anti-Fascist War with the peoples of the Soviet Union bearing the brunt of the casualties."[4]
1. Stalin 'planned to send a million troops to stop Hitler if Britain and France agreed pact': Stalin was 'prepared to move more than a million Soviet troops to the German border to deter Hitler's aggression just before the Second World War', Nick Holdsworth, Telegraph UK, October 18, 2008
2. Bains, Hardial. Causes and Lessons of the Second World War. Toronto: MELS, 1990, p. 54.
3. Russian Foreign Intelligence Service Declassifies Munich Agreement Papers, Valery Harmolenko, RIA Novosti, September 29, 2008.
4. "The overthrow of the imperialist system is the only guarantee for peace." The Marxist-Leninist Daily, May 11, 2010.
Declassified USSR Documents Expose Shameless
European Cowardice at Munich Selloff 1938
Russian Foreign Intelligence Service Declassifies Munich Agreement Papers
- Valery Yarmolenko, RIA Novosti, September 29, 2008 -
The Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR in Russian abbreviation) has declassified archive materials related to the 1938 Munich Agreement, which triggered the most dramatic events of the 20th century.
Head of the SVR press office Sergei Ivanov allowed Yarmolenko to familiarize himself with the declassified documents.
"The declassified intelligence documents reflect the political processes which took place before and after the Munich Agreement of September 30, 1938, which is also called the 'Munich conspiracy,'" Ivanov explained.
These documents were kept in the archives as top secret for 70 years. They show that the Soviet political leadership was informed about the preparations for the meeting of Neville Chamberlain and Eduard Daladier, on the one hand, and Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini, on the other, and predict its potential military and political consequences for Europe. The papers show what unprecedented pressure Britain and France brought to bear on Czechoslovakia, demanding that it ceded Sudeten to Germany.
"Moscow was receiving secret reports to the effect that the British and French ambassadors in Prague were persuading the Czechoslovak president to give over the Sudeten region to the Germans. Moreover, Prague was offered to cancel mutual assistance pacts with other countries," Ivanov said.
Memo #8604, which was sent to Moscow by Russian intelligence from Prague several days before the signing of the Munich Agreement reads: "On September 19, British Ambassador Newton and French Ambassador De Lacroix conveyed to Milan Hodza (Czechoslovak prime minister in 1935-1938) the following on behalf of Chamberlain and Daladier, respectfully:
"Guided by the lofty principles of preserving peace in Europe, they consider it necessary for Germany to incorporate the Sudeten region. A system of mutual aid pacts with other countries should be cancelled. Instead, all of Czechoslovakia's neighbors, plus France and Britain will guarantee the inviolability of its frontiers."
These actions destroyed the existing elements of the collective resistance system. The Western policymakers did this behind the back of the Soviet Union, which had mutual aid agreements with Czechoslovakia and France.
The 1938 declassified documents also reveal the details of the correspondence between European embassies and their foreign policy departments.
For example, the British ambassador in Warsaw warned the Foreign Office that if Germany invaded Czechoslovakia, the Polish leadership would seize the Tesin region, and that is what exactly happened. Having enlisted Germany's support, Poland took part in dismembering Czechoslovakia. Later, Poland also fell victim to Germany.
The Finnish ambassador in London reported that if Hitler moved his troops to Czechoslovakia, France would not be able to render it effective military aid.
"The Soviet Union was ready to render such support to Czechoslovakia, but because of the heavy pressure from London and Paris, Prague did not dare address Moscow with such a request," Ivanov recalled.
Soviet intelligence sources reported that many capitals closely watched the geopolitical situation in Europe after the conclusion of the Munich Agreement as well.
"As early as November 1938, diplomatic missions of a number of countries reported to their departments that Britain and France would not prevent Germany's eastward expansion," Ivanov said.
SVR veteran, Maj.-Gen. Lev Sotskov (Ret.), who sorted the archive documents, is confident that the Munich Agreement eventually destroyed the collective security system in Europe and led to the outbreak of WWII.
Sotskov served in the Foreign Intelligence Service since 1956 both abroad and in the central office. Now he is studying the archives on the history of intelligence. He wrote "Operation Tarantella" and "Unknown Separatism," and took part in the compilation of a collection of documents, entitled "Baltic Countries and Geopolitics."
Sotskov believes that the declassified documents make it possible to take a new and deeper look at the role the world leaders played in the late 1930s in Europe.
"The documents received after the Munich conspiracy are particularly valuable. They analyze the post-Munich situation in Europe and clearly show that Britain was trying to draw Germany and the Soviet Union into active hostilities," Sotskov emphasized in an interview with RIA Novosti.
In a memo on December 21, 1938, Lavrenty Beria reported to Stalin about the Soviet-seized documents, which included reports of Finnish envoys to London, Paris, and Warsaw on Germany's eastward expansion, and the position of the British, French, and Polish governments on this issue.
Thus, Finnish Ambassador in London Grippenberg reported to his Foreign Ministry: "I heard the opinion that German propaganda of colonies is false. As Britons put it, it is a smokescreen to cover the preparations of a plan concerning Soviet Ukraine. Hitler himself told French Ambassador Francois-Poncet that he was not even thinking about any colonies," the document reads.
Later, on November 25, Grippenberg reported his conversation with a British government member who assured him that Britain and France would not interfere in Germany's eastward expansion.
"Britain's position is as follows: let's wait until Germany and the USSR get involved in a big conflict," the document reads.
Commenting on it, Sotskov explained that despite the circumstances, the Soviet Union was still trying to set up some system for resisting the Nazi aggression. As a result, Britain and France had to send their military missions to Moscow for negotiations.
"Moscow presented very detailed information about the resources which it could use against Hitler's Germany. In the event of an anti-Hitler agreement with Britain and France, the USSR was ready to employ 120 infantry divisions, 16 cavalry divisions, 5,000 tanks and as many aircraft," Sotskov said.
However, despite this, the talks with Britain and France failed. It became obvious that they were working toward their super goal, he noted.
The documents make it abundantly clear that both Britain and France realized that their position was driving the USSR into a corner and that Moscow would have to come to terms with the Germans.
As a result, the USSR signed the Nonaggression Pact with Germany, which allowed it to move its border to the West and gain some time for the preparations to repel the aggression, Sotskov explained.
"It became obvious that a policy of appeasing Hitler did not work, and that concessions only encouraged him further. This compelled the Soviet leadership to look for ways of ensuring national security in this foreign policy environment," he pointed out.
"The Western model of appeasing the aggressor (the Munich Agreement) failed to achieve the desired effect, and the war broke out in the West. France surrendered to Hitler, and the cabinet of ministers changed in Britain. The anti-Hitler coalition took shape later under the pattern suggested by the Soviet Union in 1935: the United States, Britain, the Soviet Union, and later de Gaulle's France," Sotskov said.
He believes that Europe should draw conclusions from the events around the Munich Agreement, as well as from the events in the Balkans and the recent crisis in the Caucasus (South Ossetia).
"First of all, appeasing any aggressor, whether big or small, is a flawed policy. The United States wants to dominate the world, and it does not matter whose model, Hitler's or Bush's, it is using to achieve this goal," he said.
Unless aggressive actions are nipped in the bud, the region and probably the entire continent will be in for big trouble, Sotskov believes.
He is convinced that Europe needs a system of collective security, and this is the second lesson. "The bloc system no longer works. However, it transpires that the lesson has not been learned. Instead of curbing Georgia, the aggressor, the United States suggests encircling Russia," he summed up.
Anniversary of the Soviet-German Non-Aggression Pact,
August 23, 1939
Smash the Falsifications on
the Origins of the Second World War!
On August 23, 1939, the Soviet Union signed what is now known as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Non-Aggression Pact with Germany which stipulated that Germany would not attack the Soviet Union and the Soviet Union would not attack Germany. Future events proved the farsightedness of Stalin in signing the pact. It was the best of all available alternatives. It provided the Soviet Union with 22 months of peace so as to prepare herself to withstand the inevitable German invasion and it put an end to the Anglo-American and French policy of egging Hitler toward the East in what would have resulted in a completely isolated Soviet Union facing massive German forces.
The Nazis did eventually invade the Soviet Union as expected but not until June 22, 1941 in the largest German military operation of the war. The heroic and protracted Soviet resistance against the Nazis culminated in the great Soviet victory at Stalingrad on February 2, 1943, that concluded with the encirclement and surrender of a German army of 300,000 troops. This was followed by another decisive Soviet victory at Kursk. These triumphs began a powerful counteroffensive that drove the German Hitlerites steadily backward until the final demise of the Third Reich in Berlin. On May 9, 1945 the anti-fascist forces of the world with the Soviet Union and communists of all lands at the head of the Resistance Movement declared victory over the Hitlerite Nazis. Fascist Germany acknowledged defeat and declared unconditional surrender.
Completely ignoring these undisputed facts, the reactionaries of today are using the anniversary of the non-aggression pact not to once again acclaim the great victory of the world's people over Nazi Germany but to follow their mentor Goebbels by making such fascist claims as, "On August 25, 1939 the Soviet Union and Germany signed the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact which led to the second world war, the killing of millions of people and the Holocaust."[1]
Such big lies should not be treated with indifference because they are not harmless and need to be opposed. The aim can only be to create a climate which will assist the same kind of Hitlerite and fascist forces to rise once again. In fact, those carrying out this propaganda today are the descendants of the very same fascist forces.
To suggest that Stalin's signing of the non-aggression pact with Germany was the cause of World War II is the basest infamy. First, it should be noted that Britain and France had already issued a joint declaration of non-aggression with the Germans in 1938. Of all the non-aggressive Great Powers in Europe, the Soviet Union was the last to agree to a pact with the Germans. Second, "The history of events in 1937, both before and after Hitler's occupation of Austria in March show that the Soviet Union, as it had done in earlier years, made many efforts to persuade Britain and France to maintain collective mutual assistance and in particular to carry our their undertaking to defend Czechoslovakia against aggression .The Soviet Union was not only willing to join forces with France to defend Czechoslovakia, if France would keep her word, but was prepared to defend Czechoslovakia on her own, even if France refused"[2]
All these efforts failed and the British and French refused to sign the collective mutual assistance pact with the Soviet Union. Instead, they signed the September 29, 1938, Munich Pact with Germany which permitted Germany to incorporate the Sudeten, ordered the Czechs not to resist Nazi aggression and gave the Nazis the green light to launch their attacks across Europe.
Of course the reactionaries never want to discuss the Munich Pact because it was such a blatant betrayal of the world's people that even Winston Churchill accused Prime Minister Chamberlain in the British Parliament: "You were given the choice between war and dishonour. You chose dishonour and you will have war."
It is indisputable that faced with the British and French betrayal, the Soviet Union had no choice but to take whatever measures it could to defend itself and the cause of peace.
All these facts can be verified. They are all available in reports, speeches, accounts and documents of that time. Just to give one example, Memo #8604, which was sent to Moscow by Russian intelligence from Prague several days before the signing of the Munich Agreement reads: "On September 19, British Ambassador Newton and French Ambassador De Lacroix conveyed to Milan Hodza (Czechoslovak prime minister in 1935-1938) the following on behalf of Chamberlain and Daladier, respectfully: 'Guided by the lofty principles of preserving peace in Europe, they consider it necessary for Germany to incorporate the Sudeten region. A system of mutual aid pacts with other countries should be cancelled.'"[3]
The nefarious actions of the Anglo-Americans and the French, behind the back of the Soviet Union, which had mutual aid agreements with Czechoslovakia and France, destroyed the existing elements of the collective resistance system against Nazi Germany. It was the Munich Pact which was the final cowardly act that led to the second world war, the killing of millions of people, and the Holocaust. The judgment of history points to the truth about the Anglo-American and French betrayal of the world's people and to the truth about the heroic role of the Soviet Union and J. V. Stalin in defeating the Nazis. "In the end, the resistance of the Soviet peoples led by Stalin and the Communist Party broke the back of the Nazi aggressors. Some 50 million people died and another 35 million were seriously wounded during the Anti-Fascist War with the peoples of the Soviet Union bearing the brunt of the casualties."[4]
1. Stalin 'planned to send a million troops to stop Hitler if Britain and France agreed pact': Stalin was 'prepared to move more than a million Soviet troops to the German border to deter Hitler's aggression just before the Second World War', Nick Holdsworth, Telegraph UK, October 18, 2008
2. Bains, Hardial. Causes and Lessons of the Second World War. Toronto: MELS, 1990, p. 54.
3. Russian Foreign Intelligence Service Declassifies Munich Agreement Papers, Valery Harmolenko, RIA Novosti, September 29, 2008.
4. "The overthrow of the imperialist system is the only guarantee for peace." The Marxist-Leninist Daily, May 11, 2010.
Declassified USSR Documents Expose Shameless
European Cowardice at Munich Selloff 1938
Russian Foreign Intelligence Service Declassifies Munich Agreement Papers
- Valery Yarmolenko, RIA Novosti, September 29, 2008 -
The Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR in Russian abbreviation) has declassified archive materials related to the 1938 Munich Agreement, which triggered the most dramatic events of the 20th century.
Head of the SVR press office Sergei Ivanov allowed Yarmolenko to familiarize himself with the declassified documents.
"The declassified intelligence documents reflect the political processes which took place before and after the Munich Agreement of September 30, 1938, which is also called the 'Munich conspiracy,'" Ivanov explained.
These documents were kept in the archives as top secret for 70 years. They show that the Soviet political leadership was informed about the preparations for the meeting of Neville Chamberlain and Eduard Daladier, on the one hand, and Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini, on the other, and predict its potential military and political consequences for Europe. The papers show what unprecedented pressure Britain and France brought to bear on Czechoslovakia, demanding that it ceded Sudeten to Germany.
"Moscow was receiving secret reports to the effect that the British and French ambassadors in Prague were persuading the Czechoslovak president to give over the Sudeten region to the Germans. Moreover, Prague was offered to cancel mutual assistance pacts with other countries," Ivanov said.
Memo #8604, which was sent to Moscow by Russian intelligence from Prague several days before the signing of the Munich Agreement reads: "On September 19, British Ambassador Newton and French Ambassador De Lacroix conveyed to Milan Hodza (Czechoslovak prime minister in 1935-1938) the following on behalf of Chamberlain and Daladier, respectfully:
"Guided by the lofty principles of preserving peace in Europe, they consider it necessary for Germany to incorporate the Sudeten region. A system of mutual aid pacts with other countries should be cancelled. Instead, all of Czechoslovakia's neighbors, plus France and Britain will guarantee the inviolability of its frontiers."
These actions destroyed the existing elements of the collective resistance system. The Western policymakers did this behind the back of the Soviet Union, which had mutual aid agreements with Czechoslovakia and France.
The 1938 declassified documents also reveal the details of the correspondence between European embassies and their foreign policy departments.
For example, the British ambassador in Warsaw warned the Foreign Office that if Germany invaded Czechoslovakia, the Polish leadership would seize the Tesin region, and that is what exactly happened. Having enlisted Germany's support, Poland took part in dismembering Czechoslovakia. Later, Poland also fell victim to Germany.
The Finnish ambassador in London reported that if Hitler moved his troops to Czechoslovakia, France would not be able to render it effective military aid.
"The Soviet Union was ready to render such support to Czechoslovakia, but because of the heavy pressure from London and Paris, Prague did not dare address Moscow with such a request," Ivanov recalled.
Soviet intelligence sources reported that many capitals closely watched the geopolitical situation in Europe after the conclusion of the Munich Agreement as well.
"As early as November 1938, diplomatic missions of a number of countries reported to their departments that Britain and France would not prevent Germany's eastward expansion," Ivanov said.
SVR veteran, Maj.-Gen. Lev Sotskov (Ret.), who sorted the archive documents, is confident that the Munich Agreement eventually destroyed the collective security system in Europe and led to the outbreak of WWII.
Sotskov served in the Foreign Intelligence Service since 1956 both abroad and in the central office. Now he is studying the archives on the history of intelligence. He wrote "Operation Tarantella" and "Unknown Separatism," and took part in the compilation of a collection of documents, entitled "Baltic Countries and Geopolitics."
Sotskov believes that the declassified documents make it possible to take a new and deeper look at the role the world leaders played in the late 1930s in Europe.
"The documents received after the Munich conspiracy are particularly valuable. They analyze the post-Munich situation in Europe and clearly show that Britain was trying to draw Germany and the Soviet Union into active hostilities," Sotskov emphasized in an interview with RIA Novosti.
In a memo on December 21, 1938, Lavrenty Beria reported to Stalin about the Soviet-seized documents, which included reports of Finnish envoys to London, Paris, and Warsaw on Germany's eastward expansion, and the position of the British, French, and Polish governments on this issue.
Thus, Finnish Ambassador in London Grippenberg reported to his Foreign Ministry: "I heard the opinion that German propaganda of colonies is false. As Britons put it, it is a smokescreen to cover the preparations of a plan concerning Soviet Ukraine. Hitler himself told French Ambassador Francois-Poncet that he was not even thinking about any colonies," the document reads.
Later, on November 25, Grippenberg reported his conversation with a British government member who assured him that Britain and France would not interfere in Germany's eastward expansion.
"Britain's position is as follows: let's wait until Germany and the USSR get involved in a big conflict," the document reads.
Commenting on it, Sotskov explained that despite the circumstances, the Soviet Union was still trying to set up some system for resisting the Nazi aggression. As a result, Britain and France had to send their military missions to Moscow for negotiations.
"Moscow presented very detailed information about the resources which it could use against Hitler's Germany. In the event of an anti-Hitler agreement with Britain and France, the USSR was ready to employ 120 infantry divisions, 16 cavalry divisions, 5,000 tanks and as many aircraft," Sotskov said.
However, despite this, the talks with Britain and France failed. It became obvious that they were working toward their super goal, he noted.
The documents make it abundantly clear that both Britain and France realized that their position was driving the USSR into a corner and that Moscow would have to come to terms with the Germans.
As a result, the USSR signed the Nonaggression Pact with Germany, which allowed it to move its border to the West and gain some time for the preparations to repel the aggression, Sotskov explained.
"It became obvious that a policy of appeasing Hitler did not work, and that concessions only encouraged him further. This compelled the Soviet leadership to look for ways of ensuring national security in this foreign policy environment," he pointed out.
"The Western model of appeasing the aggressor (the Munich Agreement) failed to achieve the desired effect, and the war broke out in the West. France surrendered to Hitler, and the cabinet of ministers changed in Britain. The anti-Hitler coalition took shape later under the pattern suggested by the Soviet Union in 1935: the United States, Britain, the Soviet Union, and later de Gaulle's France," Sotskov said.
He believes that Europe should draw conclusions from the events around the Munich Agreement, as well as from the events in the Balkans and the recent crisis in the Caucasus (South Ossetia).
"First of all, appeasing any aggressor, whether big or small, is a flawed policy. The United States wants to dominate the world, and it does not matter whose model, Hitler's or Bush's, it is using to achieve this goal," he said.
Unless aggressive actions are nipped in the bud, the region and probably the entire continent will be in for big trouble, Sotskov believes.
He is convinced that Europe needs a system of collective security, and this is the second lesson. "The bloc system no longer works. However, it transpires that the lesson has not been learned. Instead of curbing Georgia, the aggressor, the United States suggests encircling Russia," he summed up.
Sorry товарищ the website of the Marxist - Leninist Party of Canada is neither a reputable nor reliable historical source.
http://www.cpcml.ca/Tmld2010/100823-FalsificationsofOriginsofWWII.html
Your bias is to put it mildly extreme!
http://www.cpcml.ca/Tmld2010/100823-FalsificationsofOriginsofWWII.html
Your bias is to put it mildly extreme!
A non-aggression pact where they agree to divide up another country between them is an alliance, at least a temporary one.
Is it true that almost all captured Russians (military and civilian) repatriated back to Russia after WW II were killed by Stalin soon after their return?
Still waiting for some explanation of how Poland fucked themselves into being invaded by the Soviets and Germany.
If Josef V. Dugashvili was so farsighted, why were the Soviets so unprepared after 22 months, was it perhaps in part due to the Stalinist Purges of the Officer Corps.
Really communists were at the head of all anti-Nazi Resistance Movements?
Saying that the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact led to World War II not the same as saying that the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was the sole cause of the World War II as the article miscategorizes western historical opinion.
Western historians do not dispute that the Munich Pact lead to the War.
Likewise there is no dispute that the majority of those killed were on the Eastern Front.
One would never know from the article that following the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, both the Czech and Polish governments claimed that the whole of Cieszyn Silesia belonged to them.
And finally if it wasn't so nasty one would laugh, Lev Sotskov a retired SVR Major General has the nerve to say that Georgia rather than Russia was the aggressor in their last spat.
Really communists were at the head of all anti-Nazi Resistance Movements?
Saying that the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact led to World War II not the same as saying that the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was the sole cause of the World War II as the article miscategorizes western historical opinion.
Western historians do not dispute that the Munich Pact lead to the War.
Likewise there is no dispute that the majority of those killed were on the Eastern Front.
One would never know from the article that following the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, both the Czech and Polish governments claimed that the whole of Cieszyn Silesia belonged to them.
And finally if it wasn't so nasty one would laugh, Lev Sotskov a retired SVR Major General has the nerve to say that Georgia rather than Russia was the aggressor in their last spat.
It doesn't matter who writes the book, it's the content. Can you deny anything in the article? If so I am willing to listen, without jumping to conclusions based on who you are quoting. The root source is the main thing to look at.
No, an alliance is when you agree on defending one another. There was no such agreement. How many countries did the US make pacts with only to attack later?
