A World at Arms (16 page)

The Germans themselves had some ideas on small adjustments in the new border, in particular at the southern end, where they would greatly have liked to obtain the Polish oil fields across the agreed line at Borislav-Drogobic. The Soviet leaders would make additional concessions on oil shipments to Germany, and they even agreed to give the Germans a small additional piece of Poland at the other end of the border by letting them have the Suwalki area, which included a lovely forest for the disappointed German Foreign Minister to hunt in; but they were insistent on
retaining the San river line and thus the oil fields as provided in the secret protocol of August 23.
³⁸
On the other hand, in the middle portion of the new border they themselves proposed a major change. They would turn over to the Germans a substantial portion of central Poland between the Vistula and Bug rivers in exchange for the Lithuanian state, which the two powers had previously agreed to enlarge by the Vilna area.

From the Soviet point of view, such a shift would bring the Germans substantially further east in the central part of their common border while pushing them further west at the northern end. It would leave the Soviet Union with very large stretches of east Poland in which, however, the non-Polish portion of the population–the Belorussians and the Ukrainians–constituted a majority. It would place all three Baltic States within the Soviet sphere, something Stalin might have preferred from the beginning. If that had been his preference, he could not easily insist on it in the August negotiations, in which the Germans had originally proposed dividing them in such a fashion that each would get all of one and half of the middle one by dividing Latvia at the Dvina river. The Germans had agreed to cede all of Latvia to the Soviet Union at that time, but if Stalin wanted Lithuania already then, he clearly found it wiser to postpone asking for it. Now he offered a large part of Poland in exchange.

From the German point of view, the advantages of such a trade were not as obvious. The Germans were planning to take control of the enlarged Lithuania along lines that, as far as can be determined, would have been somewhat similar at the beginning to those governing Germany’s relations with the puppet state of Slovakia.
³⁹
Whether it would suit her diplomatically to do so right away–as the Soviets were doing with Estonia and Latvia–was unclear. The possibility of additional territories for German settlement directly adjacent to East Prussia was more attractive than the geographically more remote portion of Poland being offered; on the other hand, the latter was considered considerably better agricultural land. The possibility of friction with the Soviet Union in regard to Polish questions if the central area of Polish population remained divided between the two countries had to be weighed against the disadvantage of appearing to the outside world as the primary element in the subjection of Poland. Hitler authorized von Ribbentrop to agree to the trade, possibly influenced by the recalcitrant attitude of the Lithuanians when they had been asked to join the attack on Poland.
⁴⁰

In the negotiations on this question during his second trip to Moscow, von Ribbentrop secured a small piece of Poland on the right bank of the Bug river in order to straighten out the line created
by the rivers, as well as a piece of Lithuania to round out the Suwalki area–territories Stalin could afford to give up as he was getting back the Vilna portion of east Poland previously scheduled to go to Germany when it took Lithuania. Before the other portions of the series of new German-Soviet agreements of September 28 are discussed, it should be noted that the new German-Soviet border would not only include all three Baltic States in the Soviet sphere but have major implications for the subsequent fate of Poland, its relations with the Soviet Union, and the latter’s relations with the rest of the world.

The other agreements worked out by the German and Soviet governments at the end of September 1939 reflected their joint interest in supporting each other’s desire for a rearrangement of Eastern Europe in accord with the preference of Berlin and Moscow but without regard for those of either the smaller countries of the area or the Western Powers as the basis for their friendship with each other. They promised to suppress any and all attempts of the Poles to regain their independence. The good relations the two powers would have with each other were to be cemented by population exchanges at the new boundary between them; and, in accordance with this principle, those of German descent in the Baltic States which were now all in the Soviet sphere were to be allowed to move to Germany (which could then settle them in portions of Poland to replace dispossessed or murdered Poles).
⁴¹
New economic arrangements were to be worked out and these would be designed to assist Germany if her war with the Western Powers continued. But the two new joint masters of Eastern Europe called upon the West to withdraw from the war, accepting the end of the independence of Poland, Czechoslovakia, and the Baltic States as Germany and the Soviet Union had just arranged and agreed.
⁴²

Both proceeded to move forward with this program, rearranging Eastern Europe to suit their preference and launching a combined propaganda campaign calling on the British and French to make peace on that basis. While the Germans took steps to rearrange the enormous portions of Poland they had seized, the Soviet government consolidated its hold on eastern Poland, pressured the Baltic States into accepting Soviet military and diplomatic control, and began a diplomatic campaign of pressure on Romania, Bulgaria, and Finland to extend Soviet territory and influence in those directions in accord with the German-Soviet agreements.
⁴³

While the two powers reordered the affairs of Eastern Europe and waited to see whether their call for a return to peace under the newly
changed circumstances would be rewarded by a favorable answer, their relationship with each other could proceed on several levels. They worked out a series of new economic agreements in further detailed negotiations, not only to implement their prior economic treaty of August 19 and the special oil delivery and railway transit agreements growing out of the discussions of the Borislav-Drogobic oil fields,
⁴⁴
but going far beyond such relatively minor matters to a massive exchange of Soviet raw materials for German manufactured products, technical designs and equipment, and other specialized items. The formal new economic treaty was not signed until February 11, 1940, and in the intervening weeks there had to be extended and at times rather difficult further negotiations, conducted for the most part in Moscow and with the repeated personal involvement of Stalin. When signed, it provided the economic basis with which Germany could be confident of her ability to attack in the West–there would be enough oil for her tanks, enough manganese for her steel industry, and enough grain for her soldiers and workers.
⁴⁵
And in regard to those products which the Soviet Union could not supply from her own resources, she would assist Germany by purchasing them for her elsewhere in the world or transporting them across Soviet territory to Germany if the latter purchased them herself.
⁴⁶

Even while the economic relations of the two powers were being worked out, the Soviet Union supplemented its political support of the combined peace propaganda campaign–in which the Comintern played a prominent part–with direct assistance to Germany in the naval sphere. An extensive series of measures supported German naval warfare against the Western Powers; it included the provision of a special naval base at Western Litsa Bay near the major Soviet port of Murmansk, the use of other Soviet ports, and, eventually making possible the movement of a German auxiliary cruiser around Siberia into the northern Pacific to prey on Allied shipping.
⁴⁷
Simultaneously, the Soviet government rebuffed the slightest gestures which might imply better relations with the Western Powers; the long-term advocate of better British-Soviet relations, Sir Stafford Cripps, could not even get a visa to visit the country.
⁴⁸

In return, the Soviets demanded, and within limits the Germans agreed to assist in, the building up of Soviet naval power on which Stalin personally and repeatedly insisted. Before the war, the Soviet leader had looked primarily to the United States for technical and construction help in the development of a Soviet blue-water navy. He had sought and obtained some naval supplies, especially for submarines, from the Third
Reich,
⁴⁹
but he had tried unsuccessfully to have a battleship built in the United States and had made other attempts at receiving American assistance for a modernized and enlarged fleet.
⁵⁰
Now he turned to Germany, which found it expedient to use naval equipment, naval plans, and even an uncompleted cruiser as part payment for raw materials delivered by the Soviet Union.

Here too the contrasting perspectives of Hitler and Stalin are revealed. The Soviet leader was willing to help Germany fight its current war with the Western Powers while looking to the long-term buildup of Soviet power, in this instance in the naval field, in a world torn by war only among the capitalist powers. Hitler, on the other hand, wanted whatever assistance he could get to win the war with the West, which he had always considered the great and difficult prerequisite for unlimited territorial expansion eastwards. He was confident that any improvements the Russians could make in their navy in the interim would make no difference in the outcome of Germany’s big move east when it came.
⁵¹
If the Soviets would trade oil for the engineering plans of the German battleship
Bismarck,
he was certain of accomplishing his aims long before the Soviets could build their version of the
Bismarck
or even complete the unfinished cruiser
Lützow.
⁵²
What counted was the immediate situation in the West.

THE WAR IN THE WEST AND AT SEA

What was the situation in the West? There the Germans were formally at war with Great Britain and France. The two Western Powers were committed to defending Poland against unprovoked attack, France by a long-standing treaty of alliance, England by a promise publicly made at the end of March and confirmed by the alliance signed in late August of 1939. When the news of the German invasion of Poland reached London and Paris early on the morning of September 1, decisions had to be made promptly in both capitals. Because these decisions were based on contradictory advice from their respective military advisors, the two governments found it difficult to harmonize their immediate diplomatic steps.
⁵³

The London government was from the beginning insistent on a withdrawal of German forces from Poland if general war were still to be averted; the French government, because of some residual inner divisions, was not quite as clear. Since the Italians attempted some last-minute efforts at restoring peace and the Germans hoped that the news of quick and substantial military victories might yet discourage Britain and France from honoring their pledges to Poland, there was another
day’s delay in implementing the decision for war. The British military advisors were telling their government to move with speed from any ultimatum to a formal declaration of war because of their concern about a possible German surprise air attack in the interval. This concept of a possible knock–out blow on London from the air being struck by waves of German planes at the height of a crisis–something on the order of a Pearl Harbor attack on England’s most important city–had haunted British military thinking in prior years.

The French government was hearing opposite advice from its military advisors. They were concerned about air or land attacks interfering with French mobilization, and therefore wanted a maximum amount of time in order to complete as much of the mobilization process as possible before any declaration of war. Here was a divergence between the prospective allies at the very beginning of a war that was certain to strain both, one especially hard to resolve in a situation where Chamberlain faced a parliament overwhelmingly determined to move quickly–but which could hardly be enlightened about the divergent military advice received in London and Paris. Under these circumstances, the British moved ahead of the French but not so much as to make it too obvious that they were pulling a still partially reluctant French government behind them. At the last minute the expiration time of the French ultimatum to Germany was moved up twelve hours so that, although still a few hours after the British, the two declarations of war on Germany came on the same date: September 3, 1939.

It was of enormous importance for the conduct of the war which began that day, that the cumulative experience of others with Germany in prior years was to bring in on the side of London and Paris allies who came to share a significant portion of the war’s burden. Australia, New Zealand, and a few days later Canada declared war on Germany. In the Union of South Africa (as it was then called), the government in power did not wish to join in. There was a bitter parliamentary fight; a new government under Jan C. Smuts replaced that of James B. M. Hertzog; and that Dominion also declared war on Germany on September 6.
^b

The British-controlled government of India declared war on Germany without consulting the representatives of the major Indian political parties, a step that was to have important repercussions subsequently. The Irish Free State, on the other hand, refused to join the other Dominions
and proclaimed its neutrality. In some relatively minor areas of military affairs, the Irish Free State would make supportive gestures, preferably in secret, to assist Britain,
⁵⁴
but on major issues–such as Britain’s use for anti-submarine warfare of the treaty ports which had originally been reserved for the Royal Navy and had only recently been turned over to full control from Dublin–the Prime Minister of Ireland, Eamon de Valera, would resist all pleas from London.
⁵⁵
Here was a subject reopened repeatedly during the war; de Valera never budged, and this, too, had repercussions not only during World War II but into the rest of the century.