The Super Summary of World History (62 page)

Compare 1914 and 1939

At this point, we should analyze the major similarities and differences between 1914 and 1939:

In both cases, horrible wars exploded from Central Europe and engulfed the world. In both wars, the major players were practically the same. Germany was the centerpiece in Western and Eastern Europe in both wars. England, France, and Russia fought in 1914 for the Allies, but in 1939 the USSR signed a peace treaty with Hitler leaving France and England alone to face Germany until June 1941. In 1914, Japan was with the Allies; however, in 1941 they were with the Axis. In both wars the United States of America attempted to remain neutral, eventually entering the wars with decisive consequences.

Prior to World War I, the “Concert of Europe,” an informal system of conflict resolution, encouraged great powers to work out disagreements through diplomatic exchanges thus resolving threats of war. This was a balance of power system. In 1914 the system of diplomacy utterly failed after the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, and nations moved on impulse rather than rationality.
[212]
From 1919 to 1939, the League of Nations failed to act in several cases of aggression by Japan, Italy, and Germany, consistently losing credibility. Compounding the League’s inaction was the policy of
appeasement
adopted by England and France in the hope of avoiding war; however, this lack of resolve led the Axis partners to increasingly belligerent actions.

World War II was the
direct
result
of Hitler’s appointment to German Chancellor in 1933. Excluding the USSR, nations fighting for the West in the Second World War opposed the governmental philosophy of the Nazis in every possible way.
[213]
Totalitarian dictatorships of the Axis fought to rule the world against democracies fighting to shield their way of life. Japan’s policies mimicked Hitler’s with Japan openly stating that totalitarianism was superior to democracy. It was a winner-takes-all contest. As such, the worldwide battles determined if democracy and individual freedom would survive. Never was the purpose for war clearer.
[214]

In 1900, the world was a relatively stable place; however, in 1939, the world faced turmoil from China to Europe due to revolutionary ideologies and power-hungry dictators. The “old order” was still in place prior to WWI and it tended toward conservative and practical government. The Great War of 1914-1918 shattered European societies and revolutionary leftist movements, such as communism, gained substantial popular support. The backlash from anti-revolutionaries supported rightist movements like the fascist
[215]
trying to block the march of the communists to power. The problem with the revolutionary movements of the 1930s (communist, socialist) was their adoption of violence to achieve their ends. With labor strikes and armed force, the revolutionaries threatened governments and industry alike. The response of the right wing anti-revolutionary parties (fascist) was to adopt force to restrain the left. Undeclared civil wars broke out in many European nations, and governments were not stable enough or strong enough to control the situation. In Japan, the violent nature of militarism resulted in the assassination of two prime ministers and the endless war in China. Pre-World War I this was not taking place, as internal or external forces struggling for primacy could not easily challenge the established governments.

Japan had strove for recognition as a major world power since 1900. By skillfully playing her position Japan gained colonies from World War I, but not the recognition she craved. Before World War II, Japan defined itself as a “have not” nation believing America and Britain remained wedded to the status quo to maintain their imperial power. Japan decided to act with naked force to establish itself as a “have” nation. It would do so to shatter the status quo and the imperial powers; hence, avoiding being forever blocked by the old order. The same reasoning held true in Germany and Italy. All the Axis powers believed
they
had
to
challenge
the
status
quo
to gain economic power, resources, and respect. To the Axis, the Western nations supported the status quo and argued for peace, morality, and humanity only because it maintained their power. Axis leaders believed without a change in the power structure, through war if necessary, they would always be second tier nations.

Prior to World War I, European great powers aimed at peace. No major nation in World War I supported violence as a key component of national policy. Prior to World War II the fascists and communists proclaimed violence was well within the purview of their philosophies. The communist, socialist, fascist, and militarist claimed democracy was failing and caused exploitive imperialism, the Great Depression, the Great War, and created vastly unequal classes. The radicals said democracy had the working poor dying and starving while war profiteers grew rich on the peoples’ blood. These claims found ready support among the dispossessed of Europe and within the “have not” nations of the Axis. Communists leftist established violent revolutionary cells all over Europe trained in pushing an international revolution, and they struggled to seize governments by subversive means. Meanwhile, the fascists won elections, took control of entire nations, and used national power to smash the leftist. The fascist tactics established repression and violence as suitable policies for national control. Most Europeans welcomed the end of chaos, even by an oppressive government. Oppression of the people was a given under the radical left or right. The communist, fascist, or militarist nations all embraced violence to control their dominions.
[216]
Post 1919, the Soviets, Germans, Italians, and Japanese abandoned all philosophical niceties and just conquered whom they wished. Power alone was lord.

In World War I, the Russian Empire helped the Allies from the first and played a critical role in staving off Allied defeats in 1914. Prior to Hitler’s invasion of Poland in 1939, Stalin signed a peace treaty with Hitler allowing the Nazis to strike west without the threat of a two-front war. In 1914-1918 France held the line against Germany at tremendous cost. In 1940, France fell six weeks after the German assault began. The fall of France had major repercussions, as Japan decided to assail Allied interests in the Pacific, and England was left fighting alone until the Nazis invaded the USSR in the summer of 1941.

Comparing 1914 and 1939: in
1914,
war
was
outright
foolish
.
In
1939,
it
was
a
necessity
. By avoiding a European war in 1914 the world could have progressed along paths of democracy and steady increases in personal liberty and wealth. If democracy continued sidestepping war with Hitler in 1939, the Axis may have created a world hell itself would envy.

Deciding
Factors

Some of the deciding factors of the war in
order
of
importance
were:

1)    
Poor
decisions
by
Hitler
, the leader of Nazi Germany,

2)    
The
breaking
of
the
German
and
Japanese
codes
by English and US code breakers,

3)    The amazing
performance
of
the
Soviet
Union
against the German Army in 1941,

4)    The considerable
industrial
might
of
the
United
States
,

5)    The
unbreakable
will
of the English people,

6)    The
quality
of
Allied
leadership
—they made good decisions,

7)    The
fall
of
France
, and

8)    The
good
luck
of the Allies.

Some of this will need explaining.

1)    
Better
decisions
by
Adolph
Hitler
would
have
changed
everything
. One example should suffice for now. If Hitler had followed his general staff’s war plan for the invasion of the Soviet Union, he may have been able to knock the USSR out of the war (obtain a favorable peace) by 1942, thereby releasing enormous numbers of veteran troops and their equipment to defend his Western European empire.

2)    
The
code
breakers
were
critical
. Assume for one moment that Hitler broke the Allies’ codes, and the Allies did not break the Nazi codes. One can see German submarines accurately directed to Allied convoys, Allied bombing raids consistently intercepted, massed Axis units throwing the D-Day invasion into the sea, the Battle of Stalingrad stalemated, and Rommel stopping Montgomery at El Alamein. Just defeating the D-Day invasion would have changed the war and the world immensely. Had Japan broken the American codes, she could have annihilated the US carriers at Midway and intercepted the US invasion force steaming for Guadalcanal.
Outside
of
Hitler’s
incredibly
poor
decisions,
breaking
the
Axis
codes
was
the
most
important
event
of
the
war
.
[217]

3)    
The
USSR’s
miraculous
performance
saved
the
West
. The USSR suffered horrifically in 1941 when the Germans invaded. German generals were right to be happy with the way the war was going; after all, they destroyed an army at least their size and seized enormous amounts of territory. How could anyone believe a nation could take that kind of punishment and survive—much less turn and destroy the invader? Nevertheless, the Soviets did just that. In 1941 the USSR absorbed the loss of over 2 million troops, nearly all of its air force, huge numbers of tanks plus other military equipment, and moved its heavy industry east so the Germans could not capture it (this alone was a miracle). The Soviets lost vast amounts of farmland, resources and numerous cities. By winter the Germans reached Moscow, but were too exhausted to storm the city. The Russians held on and successfully counterattacked the Germans pushing them back from Moscow. They later amassed new armies with better equipment, aircraft, and artillery to smash the Nazis. Had the USSR quit in 1941 or 1942, a considerable number of German troops would be released (1 to 2 million) to Western Europe. These veteran German troops could have prevented any successful invasion of Western Europe. Hitler would own Europe, and the United States and England could not have taken it away. The Wehrmacht was never the same after 1941, because their best men perished in the Soviet maw.

4)    
The
industrial
might
of
the
United
States
of
America
supplied war production in enormous amounts to all Allied forces. The United States fought a two-front war, in the Pacific and Europe, and supplied them both. In addition, America imagined a wealth of new designs, then produced them in great quantities with superb quality. Without the influx of US equipment, the Soviet war against Hitler might have faltered; the English may have lost at El Alamein (they used huge numbers of US tanks and artillery); the postponement of D-Day was certain; and every sinking of an Allied supply ship would increase in importance. Everything changes without abundant supplies from the United States of America.

5)    
If
England
had given up the war and made peace with Germany in 1940, after the fall of France, Hitler could turn on the USSR with all his forces, including an undamaged air force, and may have prevailed. England’s defiance was critical for the West’s eventual victory. Without England, an invasion of Europe would be almost impossible. England held on with no allies while Hitler bombed them and sank large numbers of their merchant ships. The will of the English people, fighting on against the odds in 1940, doomed the Nazis.

6)    
Allied
leadership
made
good
decisions
throughout the war. World War II was a technological war, and the Allies recognized this and began developing the winning technology right away (Hitler had ordered long-term research stopped). The Allies ordered a total war status when the war started (Hitler did not), and Allied leaders usually refrained from interference with the professionals in waging war. Hitler interfered with his generals constantly. Eventually, Hitler began running the war in detail ignoring the expertise and the decades of experience possessed by his professional warriors (another very bad decision by Hitler). Overall, Allied decision making was excellent. The Axis decision making was deeply flawed.