« Ruminations - 19may2011 | Main | Ruminations - 22may2011 »

20 May 2011

Comments

Dixon Cruickshank

Probably a very good move on their part

Todd Juvinall

George, the left will attack this as being NOT politically correct and call the Europeans racists. Just watch.

Steven Frisch

Just another historical correction--Great Britain and France had mutual aide treaties with Czechoslovakia and Poland, but not Hungary. They sold out the Czech's, but didn't they declare war on Germany after the invasion of Poland? Isn't that how WWII actually started? It certainly was not the mutual aide the Poles wanted, but considering the state of their military it may have been the best they could do. Hungary was not invaded by Germany, they voluntarily joined the Axis in 1940, and took part in the invasion of Russia (Operation Barbarossa).

I admit, I am less clear on the mutual aide arrangement with the Baltic states--but I have read several histories of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact and I don't remember an existing mutual aid agreement.

Just kind of bothers me when people are not accurate about these things--now I may be wrong--and if historic references can be cited I would recant my critique.

read history

for the one above me : uk and france declared war on germany but they remained only with the declaration. remember france was occupied (vichy regime)and GB was attacked day and night untill hitler invaded Russia. big aid for poland hmm

Todd Juvinall

The Baltic States were given to the USSR by the hidden treaty if I recall.

George Rebane

Yes, the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact assigned the Balric states to the USSR after start of hostilities.

Todd Juvinall

Well I guess my memory hasn't vacated my brain yet. I read that forty years ago. Thanks George.

Steve Frisch

My original comment still stands, until George can provide evidence in the historical record that shows Great Britain and France had mutual aid treaties with the Baltic States or Hungry. All of my reading on pre-WWII diplomatic history says they did not. Thus the original statement was historically inaccurate. I would love to proved wrong!

George Rebane

Under the Briand-Kellog treaty of 1928, to which Great Britain, France, Estonia, and a number of other countries (including the United States) were signatories, aggression by force was renounced as a solution to international problems between the signatories (confirming that WW1 was “the war to end all wars”). Even though no specific sanctions were spelled out against violators, it was understood by the signatories that a violating nation would suffer the forceful opposition of the remaining signatories. This understanding was explicitly confirmed by the USSR, which in the spring of 1939 attempted to get “consent” from Great Britain and France (in the so-called Moscow Negotiations) that they would not retaliate in the event that the USSR abrogated its existing non-aggression treaties with the Baltics, and invaded them under the guise of “guaranteeing its own security”. Great Britain and France refused to give the USSR such guarantee. Nevertheless, when, under the concurrently forged secret Ribbentrop-Molotov pact, spelling out the division of eastern Europe, the USSR did invade the Baltics, Great Britain and France recognized that they were impotent against the German/Soviet alliance and did nothing to fulfill their tacit obligations to defend the Baltics and the other invaded signatories.

stevenfrisch

Kind of a dissembling answer George--So lets make this short and sweet--by your own admission, there was absolutely no provisions for sanctions in the Kellog-Briand Pact; Estonia was not a signatory, they filed a declaration of adherence, as did the Soviet Union; and Great Britain and France had no treaty obligating them to come to the mutual aid of the Baltic States or Hungry.

I hate to be a nudge, but being of Estonian origin, I would assume you wish to be accurate.

I must note that your response bears little resemblance to the issue I raised. The short answer was "Yes Steve, you are correct, here is the actual diplomatic situation in 1939".

(Please note that my defense of British and French obligations is half-hearted, and is not intended to in any way condone the criminal acts of the Soviet Union in the 'secret protocol')

stevenfrisch

By the way I must note that a new effort including a treaty obligating the central European powers to mutual aid and defense is probably a good thing, if it coordinates it activities with NATO. In 30 years I will be very happy to have a new block in central and eastern Europe acting as a counter-balance to a perennially hegemonic Russia.

Todd Juvinall

George, the hubris of the left is too silly to even take seriously. I guess you, being a 13 year of escaping from your country just can't compete with the smartest fellow in Truckee. My condolences.

Steven Frisch

Well Todd, when one is correct they are correct, because there are things called FACTS. Sorry to disappoint you.

The comments to this entry are closed.