Magazine: Canadian Journal of History, August 2000
GRAND DELUSION (BOOK REVIEW)
----------------------------
Modern Europe
Grand Delusion: Stalin and the German Invasion
of Russia, by Gabriel Gorodetsky. New
Haven, Connecticut. Yale University Press, 1999.
xvi, 408 pp. $29.95 U.S.
Gabriel Gorodetsky is a professor of history at the
Tel Aviv University and
has written previous books on Anglo-Soviet relations
between the world
wars. Grand Delusion is an elaboration of an earlier
manuscript translated
from English into Russian and published as Mif "Ledokola"
(The Icebreaker
Myth). Gorodetsky's purpose is to refute the Russian
emigre and former
Soviet intelligence agent, Viktor Suvorov, who has
asserted since the
mid-1980s, that the real aggressor of World War
II was I.V. Stalin, who
planned a general offensive against Nazi Germany
as part of a strategy to
spread communist revolution in the west. Stalin's
offensive was only
forestalled by Adolf Hitler's invasion of the Soviet
Union on 22 June 1941. As
Gorodetsky points out, the implications of Suvorov's
proposition are
startling: "...in executing his foreign policy Stalin,
like Hitler, was pursuing a
master plan which sought world domination by transforming
the Second
World War into a revolutionary war" (p. x). Hitler
merely acted in
self-defence, as he claimed at the time, when he
ordered the pre-emptive
invasion of the Soviet Union. Nazi Germany is vindicated;
Hitler was
misunderstood and really stood as a bulwark of the
"civilized world" against
Bolshevism and "the abhorrent Stalinist regime"
(p. xi). You can see where
Suvorov wants to go: Hitler was not so bad. Stalin
was the real devil who
connived at the Nazi rise to power, always preferred
an "alliance" with
Hitler which he would use as an "icebreaker" to
spread communism in the
west. If Suvorov is right, the anti-communist emigres
and the cold war
historians of the United States, Igor Lukes, Adam
Ulam, R.C. Tucker, and
R.C. Raack, for example, will have found vindication.
As most readers will
know, these historical questions are also political,
part of western
ideological constructions which justified and still
justify the cold war after
1945.
But Gorodetsky doubted Suvorov's line, and, as he
says in his book, set
about to gather evidence from Soviet archives and
elsewhere to disprove
it. This he has done very well in Grand Delusion,
dissecting Suvorov limb by
limb and making a contribution to the dismantling
of some of the Cold War
canards of Ulam, Raack, and others. Thus it is,
that the Nazi-Soviet
non-aggression pact was not a "stab in the back"
or the revolutionary
"blueprint", or the "alliance" which Stalin had
preferred all along. Rather the
pact was the result of profound Soviet mistrust
of Britain and France, who
might have betrayed Poland in 1939, as they had
Czechoslovakia in 1938,
and encouraged Nazi eastward expansion against the
Soviet Union. This
latter fear was not Soviet paranoia, but a possibility
contemplated or
dreamed of by no lesser lights than British prime
ministers Stanley Baldwin
and Neville Chamberlain, and the French foreign
minister Georges Bonnet,
among other notables. The Soviet decision was not
ideological in the least,
according to Gorodetsky, but "one of level-headed
Realpolitik ... Stalin
always exploited opportunities as they appeared
at a given moment.
Throughout most of the 1930s he adhered to collective
security [against
Nazi Germany], in an attempt to protect Russia from
a disastrous war, until
he despaired of its success at the end of the decade"
(p. 7).
After dealing with these preliminaries, Gorodetsky
gets to the main points
of shis story, the lead up to the Nazi invasion
of the Soviet Union, for this
was not pre-emptive German self-defence, but a sweeping
act of aggression
aimed at Russian annihilation and the establishment
of Nazi hegemony in
Europe and beyond. The author reports on the enormous
quantities of early
Soviet intelligence pointing to the Nazi military
build-up in eastern Europe
which began after the fall of France in June 1940.
With such advance notice
of Nazi intentions, how could the "cautious and
pragmatic" Stalin leave the
Soviet Union unprepared to face a Nazi invasion?
According to Gorodetsky,
it happened because Stalin recognized the weaknesses
of Soviet armed
forces -- created in large measure by his own bloody
purges of the Soviet
officer corps --and sought time to rebuild. He did
not believe the Red Army
could face the Wehrmacht on equal terms until 1943.
Therefore, Stalin
delayed war as long as possible to gain time, much
as prevalent historic
interpretation holds that Britain and France sought
to do in pursuing the
appeasement of Hitler.
But Gorodetsky points out that there was more to
the story than Stalin's
funk, for he profoundly mistrusted Britain and suspected
that the British
government was attempting to drag the Soviet Union
into the war, allowing
the British to escape the main burdens of fighting.
In the worst case
scenario, Britain might attempt to conclude a separate
peace with Nazi
Germany. Stalin's suspicions were not lessened by
Winston Churchill's
appointment as prime minister in May 1940, for whatever
Churchill said
about fighting to the finish, there were advocates
of appeasement still in
government who might displace him. And Stalin feared
that Churchill would
be content to let the Soviet Union do most of the
fighting, a suspicion
justified in large measure by subsequent actual
events. While Britain did
seek to embroil the Soviet Union in the war, it
could not offer the real
support which might have swayed the always calculating
Stalin into
changing directions. For the British were barely
able to avert defeat in the
summer and autumn of 1940, and the British army
was repeatedly beaten by
the Wehrmacht in north Africa and the Balkans in
1941. From the Soviet
point of view Britain was a poor and unreliable
partner, certainly not worth
the risk of war with Germany. So when the British
government sent
warnings of a Nazi military build-up in the spring
of 1941 -- something
Soviet intelligence knew early on anyway -- Stalin,
ever suspicious, thought
it a ruse to drag the Soviet Union into war. And
Nazi disinformation was
designed to increase Stalin's suspicions. As Gorodetsky
stresses, the worst of
situations developed, for Britain and the Soviet
Union needed one another,
however much each side disliked the other, and yet
in spite of the
enormous dangers, mutual suspicions kept them apart.
Stalin wanted to
avoid war at all costs and therefore denied the
obvious message of his own
well-informed intelligence services, quite apart
from the information
provided by Britain. When his generals, increasingly
alarmed, wanted to
mobilize, Stalin held them back, ridiculing their
anxieties and accusing them
of wanting war. When Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet
Union in the early
morning of 22 June 1941, the Red Army was therefore
caught in the worst
possible position of late or half-measures of mobilization.
This unhappy story of Soviet failure to prepare for
the Nazi invasion is
marred only by Gorodetsky's determination to crush
Suvorov once and for
all. He thus gives more detail and more evidence
than he needs to
accomplish his main objective. The reader may be
tempted to skip ahead
having read already many times about the details
of the Nazi military build
up on Soviet frontiers. The author might also have
illuminated a little more
his experiences in obtaining access to Russian archives
(pp. xiii-xiv). A pity
Gorodetsky does not say more, for readers may have
missed an interesting
sub-plot on the ways and whimsies of work in Russian
archives.
As for Suvorov, he is slain. Gorodetsky shows that
there was no Nazi-Soviet
"alliance" between 1939 and 1941, only a marriage
of convenience based on
short term territorial advantages and security.
There was no sweeping
Stalinist plan for world communist domination, only
limited, traditional
Russian foreign policy objectives in eastern Europe.
Instead of hungering
after war at the opportune moment, Stalin wanted
to stay out of it at
almost any cost, just like Chamberlain and Bonnet.
Gorodetsky lays a heavy
responsibility on Stalin for Soviet vulnerability
in June 1941. He is not the
first to do so. The Russian historian Roy A. Medvedev
likened Stalin to a sea
captain who did everything he could to run his ship
on the rocks, but
somehow failed to do so. Gorodetsky only adds the
rejoinder that Soviet
options were limited in 1941; as he says, it is
difficult now to see what
alternatives Stalin might have pursued to avert
catastrophe (p. 323).
~~~~~~~~
By Michael Jabara Carley, University of Akron
****** Copyright of the publication is the property
of the publisher and the
text may not be copied without the express written
permission of the
publisher except for the inprint of the video screen
content or via the print
options of the software. Text is intended solely
for the use of the individual
user.
Copyright of "Grand Delusion (Book Review)." is the
property of Canadian
Journal of History. Its content may not be
copied without the copyright
holder's express written permission except for the
print or download
intended solely for the use of the individual user.