Hitler&Stalin pact against Europe

Sep 2019
404
Slovenia
Making of the pact

Pact between two totalitarian regimes enabled Hitler to start WW2 with the help from Stalin. First victim of the pact was Poland which was divided between Germany and USSR and both regimes made horrible war crimes against humanity there already in 1939-41.
Preparations for the pact started first on Soviet initiative. Already in May 1939 Molotov told to German ambassador that he does not see trade agreements between Germany and USSR as useful until they will get some new political background and added that both governments should think what that would be. So Molotov just replaced Litvinov and immediately signaled new political attitude. Then in June 1939 Bulgarian ambassador in Berlin told to Germans that Soviets told him that they are weighting between pact with the west and pact with Germany. They are still afraid because of Hitler's plans from Mein Kampf about so called Lebensraum in the east but if Germany would make a contract that it will not attack USSR then they will not sign any pact with the west. At first Berlin was sceptical, specially Hitler, but later when it was already obvious that war with Poland is near he became convinced that Germany should avoid war on two fronts for any cost. In August 1939 Ribbentrop was working very hard for a deal with USSR. When on 10th August 1939 he asked Moscow about possibility of talks about interests of both states in Poland he got quickly a positive reply.

So called non-aggression pact was in fact just a facade for much bigger thing, that is how to divide Europe between two totalitarian regimes national socialism and communism. Molotov told to German ambassador Schulenburg on August 18th 1939 that Moscow would like to see non-aggression pact adapted with special agreement about political issues in foreign policy. Nazis were in a hurry because of the preparations for war with Poland and immediately agreed. When Ribbentrop came to Moscow on 22th of August 1939 pact was quickly signed by both sides. Negotiations were so easy because interest on both sides was so great. Non-aggression pact or its draft was written by Soviets and already accepted by Hitler in his personal letter to Stalin on 20th of August.

Special and top secret protocol to non-aggression pact was signed together with the pact on 23th of August 1939. According to the protocol, Romania, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Finland were divided into so called German and Soviet spheres of influence. In the north, Finland, Estonia and Latvia were assigned to the Soviet sphere. Poland was to be partitioned in the event of its "political rearrangement": the areas east of the Pisa, Narev, Vistula and San rivers would go to the Soviet Union, while Germany would occupy the west. Lithuania, adjacent to East Prussia would be in the German sphere of influence, although a second secret protocol agreed to in September 1939 reassigned the majority of Lithuania to the USSR. Because Soviet side showed interest for parts of Romania ( Bessarabia ) Germans confirmed that they have no interests there.


Hitler and Stalin Pact against Europe, written by Johann Wolfgang Brugel, published in Ljubljana, 2019, pages 42-83 ( in fact translations of original documents ).

to be continued...
 

deaf tuner

Ad Honoris
Oct 2013
14,675
Europix
Still crusading, professor?

to be continued...
Maybe better not?

Maybe it's better to stop a bit and think at:
is how to divide Europe between two totalitarian regimes national socialism and communism
Europe was divided, and not by two totalitarian regimes, but by democratic regimes atogather witha totalitarian regime, remember? I wagually remlember 1956, 1968 .... but I don't remember that well any reactions or reactions from the democratic regimes.

Now that we're talking about, I remember also 1938. I think I remember democratic regimes not only agreeing with a divide, but moreover, pressing a democratic regime to accept the dictat of a totalitarian regime;

but yes, it's realy very unconvienient for us, "westerners", "democrats" to remember the "München Diktat" (funny, even wiki is calling it Munich "agreement" ... ). Better to stick to Ribentrop-Molotov. we can sleep better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: At Each Kilometer

macon

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
4,198
Slovenia, EU
Still crusading, professor?



Maybe better not?

Maybe it's better to stop a bit and think at:

Europe was divided, and not by two totalitarian regimes, but by democratic regimes atogather witha totalitarian regime, remember? I wagually remlember 1956, 1968 .... but I don't remember that well any reactions or reactions from the democratic regimes.

Now that we're talking about, I remember also 1938. I think I remember democratic regimes not only agreeing with a divide, but moreover, pressing a democratic regime to accept the dictat of a totalitarian regime;

but yes, it's realy very unconvienient for us, "westerners", "democrats" to remember the "München Diktat" (funny, even wiki is calling it Munich "agreement" ... ). Better to stick to Ribentrop-Molotov. we can sleep better.
Democrats had not invaded anyone together with nazis and had not committed mass executions . What about this "little starting difference"?

Yes, better stick to Soviet-German pact because there was a big difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AnonymousProfesor

MG1962a

Ad Honorem
Mar 2019
2,211
Kansas
Making of the pact

Pact between two totalitarian regimes enabled Hitler to start WW2 with the help from Stalin. First victim of the pact was Poland which was divided between Germany and USSR and both regimes made horrible war crimes against humanity there already in 1939-41.
Worth noting Poland had a totalitarian regime as well
 

deaf tuner

Ad Honoris
Oct 2013
14,675
Europix
Democrats had not invaded anyone together with nazis and had not committed mass executions . What about this "little starting difference"?

Yes, better stick to Soviet-German pact because there was a big difference.
No, my friend: without a München "agreement", there wouldn't have been a Ribbentrop-Molotov pact, nor an invasion of Poland.


But besides all that, the professor's premise
So called non-aggression pact was in fact just a facade for much bigger thing, that is how to divide Europe between two totalitarian regimes national socialism and communism.
is false.

None of the signatory parts signed it in the intention of dividing Europe between them. And tha's basic history.
 

macon

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
4,198
Slovenia, EU
No, my friend: without a München "agreement", there wouldn't have been a Ribbentrop-Molotov pact, nor an invasion of Poland.
Yes, yes, Soviets and Germans were scarred of French/ British to not land their armies in Poland to defend it after they would invade it from west and east. Especially Soviets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AnonymousProfesor

deaf tuner

Ad Honoris
Oct 2013
14,675
Europix
Authoritarian. Were they having concentration camps?
No, they hadn't.

But I think the future victim (=Poland) didn't had that much trouble to join the dismemberiong of Chekoslovakia and taking a chunk for itself.

But I might be wrong, and my memory could fail me.
 
May 2019
214
Northern and Western hemispheres
Fairly accurate post Anonymous Professor. You should also take into consideration that Mussolini who had signed the pact of steel with Hitler and already invaded Albania earlier in 1939 and Ethiopia a few years prior to that.
 

deaf tuner

Ad Honoris
Oct 2013
14,675
Europix
Yes, yes, Soviets and Germans were scarred of French/ British to not land their armies in Poland to defend it after they would invade it from west and east. Especially Soviets.
No, my friend: in the late '30's, URSS was trying to get out of its isolation, of its ostracised, "paria-rogue" like state position. It was it's official (and actual) diplomatic policy and efforts.Not for "the good of humankind", simply because it simply desperatily needed it. And the first openings we'ren't towards Germany. Germany was really the last on the list.


C'mon, macon, if we try to look objectivelly, right in the face at history, it doesn't mean that we're absolving any Soviet crimes. Ignoring history doesn't serve anything.

Actually, one of the neo-Nazi and neo-Commie propaganda's best tools are exactly this kind of blindly emotional, twisted, biased, pseudo-historical POV!