Reynning remilitarizatsiyasi - Remilitarization of the Rhineland

Joylashgan joy Reynland bilan belgilanadigan Versal shartnomasi, bo'ylab Reyn
Germaniyaning hududiy evolyutsiyasi
20-asrda
  1. Versal shartnomasi 1919
  2. Polsha-Sovet urushi 1919
  3. Trianon shartnomasi 1920
  4. Rapallo shartnomasi 1920
  5. Frantsiya-Polsha ittifoqi 1921
  6. Rimda mart 1922
  7. Korfu voqeasi 1923
  8. Rurning ishg'oli 1923–1925
  9. Mein Kampf 1925
  10. Liviyani tinchlantirish 1923–1932
  11. Dawes rejasi 1924
  12. Lokarno shartnomalari 1925
  13. Yosh reja 1929
  14. Katta depressiya 1929–1941
  15. Yaponlarning Manjuriyaga bosqini 1931
  16. Manchukuoning pasifikatsiyasi 1931–1942
  17. 28 yanvar voqeasi 1932
  18. Qurolsizlanish bo'yicha Butunjahon konferentsiyasi 1932–1934
  19. Buyuk devorni himoya qilish 1933
  20. Rex jangi 1933
  21. Germaniyada fashistlarning hokimiyat tepasiga kelishi 1933
  22. Tanggu sulh 1933
  23. Italo-Sovet shartnomasi 1933
  24. Ichki mo'g'ul kampaniyasi 1933–1936
  25. Germaniya-Polsha tajovuz qilmaslik shartnomasi 1934
  26. Frantsiya-Sovet o'zaro yordam shartnomasi 1935
  27. Sovet-Chexoslovakiya o'zaro yordam shartnomasi 1935
  28. U-Umezu shartnomasi 1935
  29. Angliya-Germaniya dengiz shartnomasi 1935
  30. 9-dekabr harakati
  31. Ikkinchi Italiya-Efiopiya urushi 1935–1936
  32. Reynning remilitarizatsiyasi 1936
  33. Ispaniya fuqarolar urushi 1936–1939
  34. Kominternga qarshi pakt 1936
  35. Suiyuan kampaniyasi 1936
  36. Sian voqeasi 1936
  37. Ikkinchi Xitoy-Yaponiya urushi 1937–1945
  38. USS Panay hodisasi 1937
  39. Anschluss 1938 yil mart
  40. May inqirozi 1938 yil may
  41. Xasan ko'li jangi Iyul-avgust. 1938 yil
  42. Bled shartnomasi 1938 yil avgust
  43. E'lon qilinmagan Germaniya-Chexoslovakiya urushi 1938 yil sentyabr
  44. Myunxen shartnomasi 1938 yil sentyabr
  45. Birinchi Vena mukofoti 1938 yil noyabr
  46. Chexoslovakiyani Germaniya tomonidan bosib olinishi 1939 yil mart
  47. Vengriyaning Karpato-Ukrainaga bostirib kirishi 1939 yil mart
  48. Litvaga nemis ultimatumi 1939 yil mart
  49. Slovakiya-Vengriya urushi 1939 yil mart
  50. Ispaniya fuqarolar urushining so'nggi hujumi Mart-aprel. 1939 yil
  51. Dantsig inqirozi Mart-avgust. 1939 yil
  52. Polshaga ingliz kafolati 1939 yil mart
  53. Italiyaning Albaniyaga bosqini 1939 yil aprel
  54. Sovet-Britaniya-Frantsiya Moskva muzokaralari Aprel-avgust. 1939 yil
  55. Chelik shartnomasi 1939 yil may
  56. Xalxin Gol janglari May-sentyabr. 1939 yil
  57. Molotov - Ribbentrop pakti 1939 yil avgust
  58. Polshaga bostirib kirish 1939 yil sentyabr

The Reynni remilitarizatsiya qilish (Nemis: Reynlandbesetzung) 1936 yil 7 martda Germaniya harbiy kuchlari kirib kelganida boshlandi Reynland, to'g'ridan-to'g'ri zid ravishda Versal shartnomasi va Lokarno shartnomalari.

Tugaganidan keyin Birinchi jahon urushi, Reynland ostida qoldi Ittifoqchilarning ishg'oli. 1919 yilgi Versal shartnomasiga binoan nemis harbiylari g'arbiy qismidagi barcha hududlardan taqiqlangan Reyn va undan 50 km sharqda. 1925 yilgi Lokarno shartnomalari Reynning doimiy harbiysizlashtirilgan maqomini tasdiqladi. 1929 yilda Germaniya tashqi ishlar vaziri Gustav Stresemann ittifoqchi kuchlarni olib chiqish bo'yicha muzokaralar olib bordi. Oxirgi askarlar Reyndan 1930 yil iyun oyida chiqib ketishdi.

1933 yilda fashistlar hokimiyatni qo'lga kiritgandan so'ng, Germaniya qayta qurollanish va Reynni remilitarizatsiya qilish bo'yicha ish boshladi. Dan foydalanib 1936 yil 7 martda Frantsiya-Sovet o'zaro yordam shartnomasi bahona sifatida kantsler va Fyer Adolf Gitler buyurdi Vermaxt 3000 nemis qo'shinlarini Reynga olib borish, Germaniya bo'ylab quvnoq bayramlarga. Frantsiya va Buyuk Britaniya hukumatlari, urush xavfiga duchor bo'lishni istamay, shartnomalarning bajarilishini rad etishdi.

Remilitarizatsiya Evropadagi kuchlar muvozanatini Frantsiyadan va uning ittifoqchilaridan Germaniyaga nisbatan o'zgartirib, Germaniyaga G'arbiy Evropada Reynning demilitarizatsiya qilingan maqomi bilan to'sib qo'yilgan bosqinchilik siyosatini olib borishga imkon berdi.

Angliya va Frantsiyaning aralashmaganligi Gitlerni fashistlarning tashqi siyosatiga xalaqit bermaydi, deb ishontirdi. Bu unga Germaniyani urushga va Evropada hukmronlik qilishga tayyorgarlikni tezlashtirishga qaror qildi.[1] 1936 yil 14 martda Gitler Myunxendagi nutqi paytida: "Hech qanday tahdid yoki ogohlantirish meni yo'limdan ketishga to'sqinlik qilmaydi. Men Providens tomonidan tayinlangan yo'l bilan uxlab yotgan odamning instinktiv ishonchliligi bilan boraman ".[1]

Fon

Qo'shimcha ma'lumotlar: Xalqaro aloqalar (1919–1939)

Versal va Lokarno

WW I (1919-1926) dan keyin Frantsiya va Germaniya o'rtasidagi chegara.

1919 yil 42, 43 va 44-moddalariga muvofiq Versal shartnomasi tomonidan Germaniyaga yuklatilgan Ittifoqchilar keyin Birinchi jahon urushi, Germaniya "chap qirg'og'ida ham har qanday istehkomni saqlash yoki qurish taqiqlangan Reyn yoki Reyn sharqiga ellik kilometr masofada joylashgan chiziqning g'arbidagi o'ng sohilda "Agar ushbu moddaning" qandaydir bir tarzda "buzilishi sodir bo'lsa, bu" dushmanlik harakati deb hisoblanadi ... va dunyo tinchligini buzish uchun hisoblangan ".[2]The Lokarno shartnomalari Germaniya, Frantsiya, Italiya va Angliya tomonidan 1925 yil oktyabrda imzolangan bo'lib, Reynland harbiysizlashtirilgan maqomini doimiy ravishda davom ettirishi kerak.[3] Lokarno, Germaniyaning Reynlandiyaning demilitarizatsiya qilingan maqomini ixtiyoriy ravishda qabul qilishi bilan muhim deb hisoblandi. Diktat Versal.[3][4][5][6] Lokarno shartlariga ko'ra, Angliya va Italiya Frantsiya-Germaniya chegarasini va Reynning demilitarizatsiya qilingan holatini "aniq buzilish" ga qarshi aniqroq holda kafolatlashdi.[7] Germaniyaning Frantsiyaga hujumi Angliya va Italiyani Lokarno boshchiligida Frantsiyaga yordam berishga majbur qiladi, frantsuzlar hujumda Germaniya Angliya va Italiyani Germaniyaga yordam berishga majbur qildi.[5] Amerikalik tarixchi Gerxard Vaynberg Germaniyaning g'arbiy qo'shnilariga hujum qilishiga yo'l qo'ymaslik orqali Reynlandiyaning demilitarizatsiya qilingan maqomini "Evropada tinchlikning yagona muhim kafolati" deb atadi va demilitarizatsiya qilingan hudud Germaniyani G'arbda himoyasiz holga keltirganligi sababli Germaniyani tark etib, sharqiy qo'shnilariga hujum qilishning iloji yo'q. agar Frantsiyaning halokatli hujumiga ochiq bo'lsa Reyx Sharqiy Evropada frantsuz ittifoq tizimi tomonidan kafolatlangan har qanday davlatni bosib olishga harakat qildi kordon sanatoriyasi.[8]

Versal shartnomasida 1935 yilgacha ittifoqdosh harbiy kuchlar Reyndan chiqib ketishi ham ko'zda tutilgan edi. Ammo Germaniya tashqi ishlar vaziri Gustav Stresemann 1929 yilda Germaniya 1928 yilni ratifikatsiya qilmasligini e'lon qildi Yosh reja 1930 yilda ittifoqchilar Reyndan chiqib ketishga rozi bo'lmasalar, tovon to'lashni davom ettirish. Germaniya bo'yicha Gaaga konferentsiyasida ingliz delegatsiyasi urushni qoplash 1929 yilda Germaniya tomonidan to'lanadigan tovon puli kamaytirilishini va Angliya va Frantsiya kuchlari Reyndan evakuatsiya qilishni taklif qildilar. Oxirgi ingliz askarlari 1929 yil oxirida, oxirgi frantsuz askarlari esa 1930 yil iyunida jo'nab ketishdi. Frantsuzlar Reynni egallashni davom ettirar ekan, bu "garov" shakli sifatida ishlagan, frantsuzlar nemislarning har qanday urinishlariga javob qaytarishlari mumkin edi. Reynni qo'shib, ochiq qurollantirish. 1930 yil iyun oyida so'nggi frantsuz askarlari Reyndan chiqib ketishganida, endi u o'zining "garov" rolini o'ynay olmadi, bu esa Germaniyani qayta qurollantirish uchun eshiklarni ochdi. Frantsiyani qaror qildi Maginot Line 1929 yilda frantsuzlarning 1930-yillarda katta miqyosda qayta qurollanish jarayoni boshlanishi va Reyn daryosining ertami-kechmi remilitarizatsiya qilinishi vaqt masalasidir.[9][10] Dan aql Deuxième byurosi Sovet Ittifoqining katta yordami bilan Germaniya 1920-yillarda Versalni buzganligini ko'rsatdi. Frantsuz qo'shinlari Reyndan chiqib ketgandan so'ng, Germaniya Versalni buzganlik haqida ochiqroq bo'lishini kutishi mumkin edi.[11] Maginot chizig'i, o'z navbatida, Frantsiya xavfsizligi nuqtai nazaridan Reynning demilitarizatsiya qilingan maqomining ahamiyatini pasaytirdi.

Tashqi siyosat

Ning tashqi siyosati Fashistik Italiya barcha yirik davlatlarning "hal qiluvchi og'irlik" dan foydalanish uchun "teng masofadagi" pozitsiyani saqlab turishi kerak edi, shu bilan italiyani birlashtirishni tanlagan kuch Evropadagi kuchlar muvozanatini qat'iy ravishda o'zgartiradi. Bunday kelishuv narxi Italiyaning Evropada va / yoki Afrikadagi ambitsiyalarini qo'llab-quvvatlaydi.[12]

Sovet Ittifoqining tashqi siyosiy maqsadi belgilangan Jozef Stalin 1925 yil 19-yanvardagi nutqida, agar kapitalistik davlatlar o'rtasida yana bir jahon urushi boshlangan bo'lsa: "Biz oxir-oqibat kurashga kiramiz, og'irligimizni taroziga tashlaymiz, bu og'irlik hal qiluvchi bo'lishi kerak".[13] Kommunizmning global g'alabasiga olib keladigan ushbu maqsadni ilgari surish uchun Sovet Ittifoqi Germaniya Versal tizimiga qarshi kurashda Germaniyani yashirincha qayta qurollantirishga yordam berib, Frantsiya bilan juda keskinlikni keltirib chiqaradigan siyosatni qo'llab-quvvatladi. Frantsiya-Sovet munosabatlaridagi qo'shimcha muammo Rossiya qarz masalasi edi. 1917 yilgacha frantsuzlar eng katta sarmoyador bo'lgan Imperial Rossiya va Rossiya qarzining eng katta xaridorlari va shuning uchun qaror Vladimir Lenin 1918 yilda barcha qarzlardan voz kechish va ruslarga yoki chet elliklarga tegishli bo'lgan barcha xususiy mulklarni musodara qilish frantsuz biznes va moliya dunyosiga juda yomon ta'sir qildi. Sovet qarzdorligini rad etish va Sovet millatlashtirish siyosatidan ta'sirlangan frantsuz korxonalari uchun tovon puli masalasi 1930 yillarning boshlariga qadar Frantsiya-Sovet munosabatlarini zaharladi.

Urushlararo frantsuz diplomatiyasining markaziy qismi bu edi kordon sanatoriyasi Sharqiy Evropada, bu Sovet Ittifoqini ham, Germaniyani ham Sharqiy Evropadan tashqariga chiqarmaslik edi. Shu maqsadda Frantsiya 1921 yilda Polsha bilan, 1924 yilda Chexoslovakiya, 1926 yilda Ruminiya va 1927 yilda Yugoslaviya bilan ittifoq shartnomalarini imzoladi.[14] The kordon sanatoriyasi davlatlar Frantsiyaning bosh sharqiy ittifoqchisi sifatida Imperial Rossiyaning jamoaviy o'rnini bosish uchun mo'ljallangan edi. Ular Frantsiyaning siyosiy, harbiy, iqtisodiy va madaniy ta'sir doiralari sifatida paydo bo'ldi.[14][15]

Germaniya haqida, har doim davlatlar tomonidan qabul qilingan kordon sanatoriyasi agar Germaniya ularning birortasiga hujum qilsa, Frantsiya bunga javoban Germaniyaning g'arbiy qismiga hujum boshladi. 1933 yildan ancha oldin Germaniyaning harbiy va diplomatik elitalari Reynlandning demilitarizatsiya qilingan maqomini faqat vaqtinchalik deb hisoblashgan va birinchi qulay diplomatik imkoniyatda Reynni remilitarizatsiya qilishni rejalashtirishgan.[16] 1918 yil dekabrda Germaniyaning etakchi generallarining yig'ilishi bo'lib (Germaniya armiyasi "davlat ichidagi davlat" vazifasini bajargan), asosiy maqsadi "jahon qudrat maqomini" qo'lga kiritish uchun yangi urush boshlash uchun Germaniya harbiy kuchini tiklash edi. bu Reyx so'nggi urushda g'alaba qozona olmadi, ammo muvaffaqiyatsiz bo'ldi.[17] 20-asrning 20-yillari va 30-yillarning boshlarida, Reyxsver Reynni remilitarizatsiyalashni taxmin qilgan Frantsiyani va uning ittifoqchisi Polshani yo'q qilish uchun urush rejalarini ishlab chiqqan edi.[18] Germaniya hukumati remilitarizatsiyaga tayyorgarlik ko'rish uchun qadamlar qo'ydi, masalan, sobiq baraklarni yaxshi holatda saqlash, harbiy materiallarni maxfiy omborlarda yashirish va osongina kuzatish va avtomat postlariga aylantiriladigan bojxona va o't o'chirish minoralarini qurish. chegara.[19]

1919 yildan 1932 yilgacha Buyuk Britaniyaning mudofaa xarajatlari O'n yillik qoida, kelgusi o'n yil ichida hech qanday katta urush bo'lmaydi deb taxmin qilgan, bu siyosat ingliz harbiylarini suyakka aylantirishga olib keldi.[20] Britaniyada "kontinental majburiyat" g'oyasi jangga katta armiyani yuborish Evropa qit'asi Germaniyaga qarshi hech qachon aniq rad etilmadi, ammo unga ma'qul kelmadi.[21] Birinchi jahon urushida olingan og'ir yo'qotishlarning xotirasi ko'pchilikni 1914 yilgi "kontinental majburiyat" ni jiddiy xato deb bilishiga olib keldi. Urushlararo davrning aksariyat qismida inglizlar Sharqiy Evropada xavfsizlik bo'yicha majburiyatlarni qabul qilishdan juda bosh tortishgan va mintaqani juda beqaror deb hisoblashgan va Britaniyani istalmagan urushlarga olib kelishi mumkin. Angliya ko'pi bilan G'arbiy Evropada faqat cheklangan xavfsizlik majburiyatlarini olishga tayyor edi va shunda ham "kontinental majburiyat" dan imkon qadar qochishga harakat qildi. 1925 yilda Buyuk Britaniya tashqi ishlar vaziri ser Ostin Chemberlen, Lokarno konferentsiyasida jamoat oldida taniqli deb aytgan edi Polsha koridori "bitta ingliz grenaderining suyaklariga arzimaydi".[22][23] Shunday qilib, Chemberlen Polsha koridorini Germaniyaga qaytarish kerakligi sababli Britaniya Germaniya-Polsha chegarasiga kafolat bermasligini e'lon qildi. Inglizlar hatto Lokarno bo'yicha o'z majburiyatlarini ham jiddiy qabul qilmasliklarini Uaytxollning Buyuk Britaniya harbiy boshliqlari Germaniya, Frantsiya va Italiya harbiylari bilan shtab-kvartirasi bilan Lokarnoni "qo'pol ravishda buzish" sodir bo'lgan taqdirda nima qilishni taqiqlashidan ko'rish mumkin edi.[24] Umuman olganda, 20-asrning 20-yillari va 30-yillarining aksariyati uchun Angliya tashqi siyosati asos qilib olindi tinchlantirish Versal tomonidan o'rnatilgan xalqaro tizim Germaniyaning ushbu xalqaro tartibni qabul qilishiga erishish uchun Germaniya foydasiga qayta ko'rib chiqilishi va shu bilan tinchlikni ta'minlashi kerak edi. Britaniyaliklarning Lokarnoning asosiy maqsadlaridan biri Germaniyaning Sharqiy Evropada hududiy revizionizmni tinch yo'l bilan davom ettirishi mumkin bo'lgan vaziyatni yaratish edi.[25] Inglizlarning fikriga ko'ra, agar Frantsiya-Germaniya munosabatlari yaxshilansa, Frantsiya asta-sekin bu munosabatlardan voz kechadi kordon sanatoriyasi.[25] Bir marta Frantsiya Sharqiy Evropadagi ittifoqchilaridan Germaniya bilan yaxshi munosabatlar narxi sifatida voz kechgan bo'lsa, polyaklar va chexoslovaklar Germaniya talablariga moslashishga va Germaniya da'vo qilgan hududlarni tinch yo'l bilan topshirishga majbur bo'ladilar, masalan. Sudetland, Polsha koridori va Dantsigning ozod shahri (hozir Gdansk, Polsha).[25] Inglizlar odatda frankofil ser bilan frantsuz qudratini bo'rttirib ko'rsatishga moyil edilar Robert "Van" Vansittart, Tashqi ishlar vazirligining doimiy kotibining o'rinbosari, 1931 yilda Angliya Evropaning "chidab bo'lmas" frantsuz hukmronligi bilan yuzma-yuz kelganligini yozgan va frantsuz kuchini muvozanatlash uchun nemis kuchini tiklash zarur edi.[26] Germaniyaning kuchli tomonlari oldida Frantsiyaning iqtisodiy va demografik zaif tomonlari, aholisi va iqtisodiyoti shunchalik katta bo'lganligi bilan bir qatorda, Frantsiyaning ko'p qismi Birinchi Jahon urushi tufayli vayron bo'lganligi va Germaniya asosan zarar ko'rmagan holda qutulganligi Uaytxollda juda kam baholandi.

Evropa holati (1933-1936)

Diplomatiya

1933 yil mart oyida Germaniya mudofaa vaziri general Verner fon Blomberg remilitarizatsiya uchun tuzilgan rejalari bor edi.[27] Blomberg, 1933 yil kuzida bir qator harbiy harbiylarga ega bo'lishni boshladi Landspolizei maxfiy harbiy tayyorgarlikdan o'tgan va remilitarizatsiyaga tayyorgarlik ko'rish uchun harbiy qurol bilan jihozlangan Reyndagi qismlar.[28] Umumiy Lyudvig Bek Germaniyaning xavfsizligini ta'minlash zarurligi to'g'risida 1935 yil martdagi eslatma Lebensraum (yashash maydoni) Sharqiy Evropada remilitarizatsiya diplomatik imkoniyati bo'lganidan keyin amalga oshirilishi kerakligini qabul qilgan.[27] Umuman olganda, Germaniya harbiy, diplomatik va siyosiy elitalari tomonidan 1937 yilgacha remilitatsiya qilish mumkin emasligiga ishonishgan.[29]

1933 yilda Germaniyada rejim o'zgarishi Londonda xavotirga sabab bo'ldi, ammo Gitlerning uzoq muddatli niyatlari to'g'risida juda noaniqliklar mavjud edi. Gitlerning 1939 yilgacha bo'lgan tashqi siyosatdagi niyatlari Buyuk Britaniyaning Germaniyaga nisbatan siyosatining aksariyat qismida rang-barang bo'lib turardi. Gitler Versalni shunchaki qayta ko'rib chiqyaptimi yoki Evropada hukmronlik qilishga intilishning qabul qilinmaydigan maqsadi to'g'risida inglizlar hech qachon aniq qaror qabul qila olmas edilar. Angliyaning Germaniyaga nisbatan siyosati bu bilan "umumiy kelishuv" ga erishishga qaratilgan ikki tomonlama siyosat edi Reyx unda Versal shartnomasi bo'yicha Germaniyaning "qonuniy" shikoyatlari ko'rib chiqilishi kerak edi, ammo inglizlar Germaniya bilan kuchli pozitsiyadan muzokara olib borish, Gitlerni urushni variant sifatida tanlashdan qaytarish va Buyuk Britaniyaning eng yomon holatda tayyor bo'lishini ta'minlash uchun qayta qurollanishadi. Gitlerning haqiqatan ham Evropani zabt etishni istashi. 1934 yil fevral oyida Mudofaaga talablar qo'mitasining maxfiy hisobotida Germaniya Britaniya qurollanishiga qarshi qaratilgan "yakuniy potentsial dushman" sifatida aniqlandi.[30] Garchi Germaniyaning Britaniyaning shaharlariga qarshi bombardimon hujumlari ehtimoli boshqa tomonda do'stona kuchga ega bo'lishning ahamiyatini oshirgan bo'lsa ham Ingliz kanali, ko'plab britaniyalik qaror qabul qiluvchilar "kontinental majburiyat" g'oyasiga nisbatan sovuqqonlik bilan, hattoki ochiqdan-ochiq dushmanlik qilishdi.[31] 1934 yilda Britaniyaning qayta qurollanishi boshlanganda armiya mablag 'jihatidan havo kuchlari va dengiz flotidan keyin eng past ustuvorlikni oldi, qisman variant sifatida "kontinental majburiyat" ni istisno qildi.[32] Borgan sari inglizlar "cheklangan javobgarlik" g'oyasini ma'qullay boshladilar, agar unga ko'ra "kontinental majburiyat" olinadigan bo'lsa, Angliya mumkin bo'lgan eng kichik ekspeditsiya kuchini Evropaga yuborishi va urushga qaratilgan asosiy harakatlarini saqlab qolishi kerak edi. havo va dengizda.[33] Buyuk Britaniyaning Birinchi jahon urushi bilan bir xil miqyosdagi "qit'a majburiyatini" qabul qilishdan bosh tortishi frantsuzlar bilan ziddiyatlarni keltirib chiqardi, ular Germaniyani yana bir yirik "kontinental majburiyatisiz" mag'lub etish mumkin emas deb hisobladilar va ular kerak degan g'oyani chuqur yoqtirmadilar. janglarning asosiy qismini o'z erlarida qiling.

1934 yilda Frantsiya tashqi ishlar vaziri Louis Barthou Germaniyani o'rab olish uchun mo'ljallangan ittifoqlar tarmog'ini barpo etish orqali har qanday mumkin bo'lgan nemis tajovuzlarini tugatishga qaror qildi va u Sovet Ittifoqi va Italiyaga overtures qildi. 1933 yilgacha Sovet Ittifoqi Germaniyaning Versal tizimiga qarshi urinishlarini qo'llab-quvvatladi, ammo Germaniya rejimining aniq antikommunizmi va uning da'vosi Lebensraum Sovetlarga Versal tizimini saqlab qolish masalasida pozitsiyalarni o'zgartirishga rahbarlik qildi. 1933 yil sentyabrda Sovet Ittifoqi 1921 yilda boshlangan Germaniya qurollanishini yashirin qo'llab-quvvatlashni tugatdi. Kollektiv xavfsizlik niqobi ostida Sovet tashqi komissari Maksim Litvinov Sovet rahbarlari Germaniyani "qul qilish" kapitalistik fitnasi deb qoralagan Versal tizimini maqtay boshladi.

1920-yillarda, Benito Mussolini o'ng qanotga subsidiya berishni boshlagan edi Geymwehr ("Uy mudofaasi") harakati Avstriyada va kantslerdan keyin Engelbert Dollfuss 1933 yil mart oyida diktatura hokimiyatini egallab olgan, Avstriya Italiya ta'sir doirasiga tushib qolgan.[34] Avstriyalik natsistlar tomonidan Germaniyaning ochiq ko'magi bilan ultrakonservativ Dollfuss rejimiga qarshi olib borilgan terrorchilik kampaniyasi uni ag'darishga qaratilgan edi. Anschluss Rim va Berlin o'rtasida jiddiy ziddiyatlarni keltirib chiqardi.[34] Mussolini Gitlerga bir necha marotaba Avstriya Germaniya emas, balki italiyaliklar ta'sirida bo'lganligi va nemislar uning himoyachisi Dollfussni ag'darishga urinishni to'xtatishi kerakligi to'g'risida ogohlantirgan edi. 1934 yil 25-iyulda Iyul Putsch Vena Dollfussni Avstriya SS tomonidan o'ldirilganini va avstriyalik natsistlar tomonidan e'lon qilinganini ko'rgan. Anschluss yonida edi. Avstriyalik natsistlar butun Avstriyada hokimiyatni egallashga urinishdi va Bavariyada joylashgan SS Avstriya legioni Germaniya-Avstriya chegarasi bo'ylab bosqinchilik boshlanishiga o'xshab chegara postlariga hujum qila boshladi. Bunga javoban Mussolini Italiya armiyasini safarbar qildi va bir nechta bo'linmalarni birlashtirdi Brenner dovoni va Gitler Italiyani Germaniyaga qarshi urush olib borishi haqida ogohlantirdi putch Avstriyani bosib olish bilan.[34] Avstriyada tug'ilgan Gitler, garchi Mussolinining tug'ilgan joyi Germaniyadan tashqari boshqa biron bir davlatning ta'sir doirasidadir, degan ochiqchasiga da'volaridan qattiq xafa bo'lgan bo'lsa-da, u o'zini haqoratli chekinishni mag'lub etishdan boshqa hech narsa qila olmasligini tushundi. Uning nafratiga ko'ra, u buni taqiqlashi kerak edi Putsch u buyruq bergan va hukumati uni tor-mor qilgan Avstriyaga bostirib kirib, uni ta'qib qila olmaydi Putsch avstriyalik fashistlar tomonidan.[34]

Bartho 1934 yil 9 oktyabrda o'ldirilgandan so'ng, uning Sovet Ittifoqi va Italiya bilan Germaniyaga qarshi ittifoq tuzishga urinishi davom etdi. Per Laval. 1935 yil 7-yanvarda Rimda bo'lib o'tgan sammit paytida Laval Mussoliniga aslida ""erkin qo'l" "ichida Afrika shoxi va Frantsiya italiyaliklarning bostirib kirishiga qarshi bo'lmaydi Habashiston.[34] 1935 yil 14 aprelda Buyuk Britaniya bosh vaziri Ramsay MacDonald, Frantsiya Bosh vaziri Per Laval va Italiya bosh vaziri Benito Mussolini uchrashdi Stresa shakllantirish Stresa jabhasi 1935 yil mart oyida Germaniya Versal shartnomasining V yoki VI qismlariga rioya qilmasligini aytgandan keyin Versalni Germaniya tomonidan buzilishlariga qarshi turish.[34] 1935 yilning bahorida Germaniya va Germaniyaga qarshi harbiy ittifoq tuzish maqsadida Frantsiya va Italiya o'rtasida qo'shma shtab muzokaralari boshlandi.[34] 1935 yil 2-mayda Laval sayohat qildi Moskva u erda u Sovet Ittifoqi bilan ittifoq shartnomasini imzoladi.[35] Bir vaqtning o'zida Germaniya hukumati Frantsiya-Sovet shartnomasiga qarshi zo'ravon matbuot kampaniyasini boshladi va bu Lokarnoning buzilishi va bu juda katta xavf ekanligini da'vo qildi. Reyx.[35]

1935 yil 21 maydagi "tinchlik nutqida", Adolf Gitler "Xususan, ular [nemislar] Lokarno shartnomasidan kelib chiqadigan barcha majburiyatlarni bajaradilar va bajaradilar, agar boshqa tomonlar ushbu bitimga rioya qilishga tayyor bo'lsalar".[36] Gitler nutqidagi ushbu satrni tashqi ishlar vaziri Baron yozgan Konstantin fon Neyrat 1935 yil mart oyida Germaniyani qurolsizlantirgan Versal shartnomasining V qismining Germaniya tomonidan denonsatsiya qilinishi tahdidini his qilgan chet el rahbarlarini tinchlantirishni xohlagan.[36] Shu bilan birga, Neurat Reyn daryosining oxirigacha remilitarizatsiyasi uchun ochilishni xohlamoqda va shuning uchun Lokarnoga itoat etish va'dasini faqat boshqa kuchlar xuddi shunday qilgan taqdirda himoya qildi.[36] Gitler har doim Germaniya o'zini bog'liq deb hisoblamagan yo'nalishni tanlagan Diktat Versaldan, ammo Germaniya Reynni abadiy qurolsizlantirishga va'da bergan Lokarno kabi istak bilan imzolagan har qanday shartnomani hurmat qiladi. Shunday qilib, Gitler har doim o'zining "tinchlik nutqlari" paytida Versaldan farqli o'laroq Lokarnoga bo'ysunishga va'da bergan.[37]

Habashiston inqirozi

Asosiy maqola: Habashiston inqirozi

1935 yil 7-iyun kuni MakDonald sog'lig'i yomonligi sababli bosh vazir lavozimidan iste'foga chiqdi va uning o'rnini egalladi Stenli Bolduin. Rahbariyat o'zgarishi Britaniyaning tashqi siyosatiga hech qanday ta'sir ko'rsatmadi. 1935 yil 3 oktyabrda Italiya Habashistonga bostirib kirdi va shunday boshladi Habashiston inqirozi. Angliya jamoatchilik fikri tomonidan kuchli bosim ostida edi jamoaviy xavfsizlik, Britaniya hukumati Millatlar Ligasi Italiyaga qarshi sanktsiyalar uchun.[38] Bolduinning jamoaviy xavfsizlikni ta'minlash yo'lidan borishga qaror qilishida asosan ichki siyosat turtki bergan. Hozirgina g'alaba qozongan 1935 yil 14-noyabrda bo'lib o'tgan saylov kollektiv xavfsizlikni qo'llab-quvvatlaydigan platforma bilan, Bolduin hukumati Habashistonga bostirib kirgani uchun Italiyaga qarshi sanktsiyalarni talab qildi. Liga assambleyasi Buyuk Britaniyaning Italiyaga qarshi sanktsiyalarni qo'llash to'g'risidagi taklifiga ovoz berdi va 1935 yil 18-noyabrda darhol kuchga kirdi.

Kollektiv xavfsizlikni ta'minlash kerak degan inglizcha yo'nalish Parij va London o'rtasida katta ziddiyatlarni keltirib chiqardi, chunki frantsuzlar Mussolini emas, Gitler tinchlik uchun haqiqiy xavf edi va agar Stresa frontini davom ettirish narxi qabul qilinayotgan bo'lsa, Habashiston, to'lashga arziydi. Britaniyalik tarixchi Korrelli Barnett Lavalga yozishicha, "aslida fashistlarning Germaniyasi muhim edi. Uning nigohi Reynlandiyaning demilitarizatsiya qilingan zonasida edi; uning Lokarno kafolatlari haqidagi fikri. Habashiston singari savol tufayli Lokarno davlatlaridan biri bo'lgan Italiyani bekor qilish. Lavalning Auvergnat dehqon ongiga ".[39] Parij va London italiyaliklarning bostirib kirishiga to'g'ri javob berish masalasida ochiqdan-ochiq kelishmovchiliklar bilan, Rim va London o'rtasidagi jamoat kelishmovchiligi haqida hech narsa demaslik uchun, Germaniyada Reynni remilitarizatsiya qilish uchun ochilish ko'rildi.[38] Bahs fransuzlarni noqulay ahvolga solib qo'ydi. Bir tomondan, Britaniyaning "qit'a majburiyatini" olishdan bir necha bor bosh tortishi G'arbiy Evropada Germaniyaga qarshi katta qo'shin qo'shishga qodir bo'lgan yagona xalq sifatida Italiya frantsuzlari uchun qiymatni oshirdi.[40] Boshqa tomondan, Britaniya iqtisodiyoti Italiya iqtisodiyotidan ancha kattaroq edi, demak, bu uzoq muddatli frantsuz nuqtai nazaridan Angliya ancha yaxshi ittifoqdosh edi, chunki Angliya Italiyaga qaraganda ancha katta iqtisodiy qudratga ega edi. boshqa guerre de la longue durée ("uzoq muddatli urush") Germaniyaga qarshi.[40] Amerikalik tarixchi Zak Shor shunday deb yozgan edi: "rench rahbarlari o'zlarini bir-biriga mos kelmaydigan ikkita ittifoqchining harbiy hamkorligini izlashda noqulay vaziyatga tushishdi. Italiya va Angliya O'rta er dengizida manfaatlar to'qnashganligi sababli, Frantsiya boshqasini begonalashtirmasdan bittasi bilan ittifoq qila olmadi". .[40] Angliya bilan umuman buzilmaslik uchun Frantsiya Liga Kengashi a'zosi sifatida veto huquqidan foydalanmadi, ammo sanktsiyalarga ovoz berdi. Biroq, Laval sanktsiyalarni to'kish va Italiyani mayib qilishi mumkin bo'lgan neft va ko'mir kabi moddalarni sanktsiyalar ro'yxatidan olib tashlash uchun frantsuz vetosining tahdididan foydalangan.[41] Shunga qaramay, Mussolini Frantsiyadagi do'stlari tomonidan xiyonat qilganini his qildi; u Britaniyadan keyin sanksiyalar uchun eng ko'p g'azablangan mamlakat edi. Biroq, Mussolinining sanktsiyalardan g'azablanishiga qaramay, ular asosan samarasiz edi. Amerika Qo'shma Shtatlari va Germaniya-L, ikkalasi ham Liga a'zolari emas, sanktsiyalarga rioya qilmaslikni tanladilar va shu sababli Amerika va Germaniya bizneslari Italiyaga Liga sanktsiyalar ro'yxatiga kiritilgan barcha tovarlarni etkazib berishdi italiyaliklar uchun muammolardan ko'ra ko'proq bezovtalik.[42]

Italiyalik kriptograflar 1930-yillarning boshlarida Britaniyaning dengiz va diplomatik kodlarini buzgan edilar va shuning uchun Mussolini Angliya urushni tahdid qilishi mumkinligi kabi harakatlarni kuchaytirish kabi harakatlarni bilar edi. O'rta dengiz floti 1935 yil sentyabr oyida inglizlar Hech qachon Habashiston uchun urushga bormaslikka qaror qilishgan edi.[43] Ushbu bilimga ega bo'lgan Mussolini 1935 yil oxiridan boshlab Britaniyaga qarshi har xil yovvoyi tahdidlar bilan shug'ullanish va o'z bosqinini to'xtatishdan ko'ra butun dunyoni "alanga ichida ko'tarilishini" ko'rishni bir vaqtning o'zida erkin deb bildi.[44] Mussolinini tez-tez yo'q qilish bilan tahdid qilish Britaniya imperiyasi agar inglizlar uning urushiga qarshi turishda davom etsa, 1935 yil oxiri - 1936 yil boshlarida Angliya va Italiya urush yoqasida ekanligi haqida taassurot qoldirgan edi.

1935 yil oxirida Neurat Germaniya Reynni remilitarizatsiya qilishni ko'rib chiqayotgani haqida mish-mishlarni boshladi Frantsiya-Sovet shartnomasi 1935 yil may oyida Neyrat Germaniyaga tahdid soladigan Lokarnoning buzilishi deb turib oldi.[36] Shu bilan birga, Neurat nemis diplomatlariga Reynlandning remilitarizatsiyasini oqlaydigan huquqiy ma'lumotnomalarni tuzishni boshlashni buyurdi, chunki bu shartnoma Locarnoni buzgan.[36] Bunda Neyrat Gitlerning buyrug'isiz harakat qilar edi, ammo Angliya-Italiya munosabatlaridagi inqiroz tufayli remilitarizatsiya uchun vaqt yetib keldi degan umidda.[36] Hal qilish uchun Habashiston inqirozi, Robert Vansittart Britaniya Tashqi ishlar vazirligining doimiy maslahatchisi tashqi ishlar vaziriga taklif qildi Semyuel Xare nima sifatida tanilgan Hoare-Laval pakti Habashistonning yarmi Italiyaga berilishi kerak edi, qolgan qismi imperator ostida nominal ravishda mustaqil edi Xayl Selassi. Vansittart ishtiyoqli frankofil va bir xil darajada g'ayratli germanofob edi va u o'zining haqiqiy xavfi deb bilgan Germaniyaga qarshi Stresa frontini saqlab qolish uchun Habashistonni qurbon qilmoqchi edi.[45][46] Vansittartning tarafdori bo'lgan Xankida kuchli ittifoqdoshi bo'lgan realpolitik, Italiyaga qarshi sanktsiyalarni qo'llash g'oyasini aqldan ozgan deb bilgan.[47] Vansittart yondashuvining afzalliklariga ishongan Xoar rejaga rozi bo'lgan Laval bilan uchrashish uchun Parijga yo'l oldi. Biroq, Aleksis Sent-Leger, da Bosh kotib Quai d'Orsay, aksariyat frantsuz rasmiylaridan farqli o'laroq, italiyani qo'llab-quvvatlovchi, fashistik Italiyani ichki organlar tomonidan yoqtirmaydigan kam sonli kishilardan biri edi. Shuning uchun u rejani frantsuz matbuotiga etkazish orqali sabotaj qilishga qaror qildi.[48] Sankt-Leger har qanday ma'noda "juda g'alati" xarakterga ega edi va ba'zan u rad etgan siyosiy tashabbuslarni tanladi.[49] G'alati nosimmetriklikda Vansittart Frantsiya yondashuvi uchun Stresa jabhasini davom ettirish uchun Italiyaning istilosiga yo'l qo'yishga arziydi, Sankt-Leger esa inglizlarning Stresa jabhasiga zarar etkazish xavfi ostida ham jamoaviy xavfsizlikni qo'llab-quvvatlashi uchun edi. . Mussolinini mukofotlash rejasi haqidagi xabar Britaniyaga etib kelganida, bunday g'alayon ko'tarilib, Xoare sharmandalik bilan iste'foga chiqishga majbur bo'ldi; u o'rnini egalladi Entoni Eden va yangi saylangan Bolduin hukumati deyarli orqada qolganlarning qo'zg'oloni bilan ag'darildi. Bolduin jamoat palatasini, vazirlar mahkamasi bu rejadan bexabarligini va Xoare yolg'onchi vazir bo'lib, o'z-o'zidan harakat qilayotganini aytdi. Frantsiyada ham jamoatchilik fikri Britaniyadagi kabi rejadan g'azablandi. Lavalning ichki devalvatsiya siyosati Frantsiya iqtisodiyotiga deflyatsiyani majburlash, Frantsiya eksportini ko'paytirishga qarshi kurashish uchun Katta depressiya uni allaqachon mashhur bo'lmagan qilgan, ammo Xare-Laval rejasi uning obro'siga yanada putur etkazgan. Deputatlar palatasi rejani 27 va 28 dekabrda muhokama qildi va Xalq jabhasi buni qoraladi, bilan Leon Blum Lavalga: "Siz berishga va saqlashga harakat qildingiz. Siz o'zingizning tortingizni olib, uni iste'mol qilmoqchi edingiz. Siz so'zlaringizni amallaringiz bilan va amallaringiz bilan so'zlaringiz bilan bekor qildingiz. Siz hamma narsani tuzatish, fitna va silliqlik bilan kamsitdingiz ... Buyuk axloqiy muammolarning ahamiyatiga etarlicha sezgir emassiz, siz hamma narsani o'zingizning kichik uslublaringiz darajasiga tushirdingiz ".[50]

Mussolini Xare-Laval rejasini rad etdi, chunki u faqatgina Habashistonga emas, balki uning yarmiga bo'ysunmoqchi edi. Hoare-Laval rejasining fiyaskosidan so'ng, Angliya hukumati Parij va ayniqsa Rim bilan munosabatlarga jiddiy zo'riqishlarni keltirib chiqargan Italiyaga qarshi yarim ruhiy sanktsiyalarni qo'llash bo'yicha avvalgi siyosatini davom ettirdi. Italiyaning provokatsion munosabatini hisobga olib, Angliya Italiya bilan bo'lishi mumkin bo'lgan urush uchun Frantsiya bilan xodimlarning muzokaralarini boshlashni xohladi.[51] 1935 yil 13-dekabrda Neyrat Buyuk Britaniya elchisi Serga aytdi Erik Pipps Berlin nafaqat Germaniya, balki faqat Italiyaga qarshi qaratilgan bo'lsa ham, Germaniya bo'lmagan har qanday ingliz-frantsuz muzokaralarini Germaniyani Reynni remilitarizatsiya qilishga majbur qiladigan Lokarnoning buzilishi deb hisoblagan.[51] 1935 yilda Italo-Germaniya munosabatlari juda do'stona bo'lmagan bo'lsa-da, Germaniya Italiya bosqinining ashaddiy tarafdori edi va Mussoliniga xayrixoh betaraflikni taklif qildi.[52] Oq ustunlik va fashizm bayrog'i ostida Gitler Italiya bosqini uchun kuchli chiqdi va Liganing sanktsiyalariga qaramay italiyaliklarga turli xil xom ashyo va qurollarni etkazib berishni amalga oshirdi.[53] Gitlerning fathni qo'llab-quvvatlashi unga Rimda yaxshi niyatni qozondi.[53] Aksincha, Lavalning Italiyani qo'llab-quvvatlovchi fitnalari va Angliyaning Italiyaga qarshi sanktsiyalarni qo'llash harakatlarini buzishga qaratilgan harakatlari inglizlar va frantsuzlar o'rtasida doimiy ishonchsizlik muhitini yaratdi.[54]

Germaniya remilitarizatsiyasi

Neurat va maxfiy razvedka

Buyuk Britaniya tashqi ishlar vaziri Entoni Eden 1940 yilga kelib Germaniyani qaytib kelishga ko'ndirishi mumkin deb taxmin qilgan Millatlar Ligasi, qurol cheklovlarini qabul qilish va Evropadagi Reynlandni remilitarizatsiya qilish, Germaniyaning sobiq Germaniya mustamlakalarini qaytarish va Germaniyaning "Dunay bo'ylab iqtisodiy ustuvorligi" evaziga o'z hududiy da'volaridan voz kechish.[55] Tashqi ishlar vazirligi xodimi Ralf Vigram Germaniyaga Reynlandni remilitarizatsiya qilishga "havo shartnomasi" dan tashqari bombardimon qilish va Germaniyaning o'z chegaralarini o'zgartirish uchun kuch ishlatmaslik va'dasi evaziga ruxsat berilishi kerakligi to'g'risida maslahat berdi. Biroq, "Vigram hamkasblarini yoki vazirlar mahkamasini ishontira olmadi".[56] Edenning maqsadi "yigirmanchi yillarning odatiy holatiga qaytish va Gitler Stresemann singari o'zini tutishi mumkin bo'lgan sharoitlarni yaratish" ga intilgan "umumiy kelishuv" maqsadi deb ta'riflangan. (Gustav Stresemann Germaniya kantsleri, Veymar respublikasi davrida tashqi ishlar vaziri va demokrat)[57] 1936 yil 16-yanvarda Frantsiya premersi Per Laval taqdim etdi Frantsiya-Sovet shartnomasi ratifikatsiya qilish uchun Deputatlar palatasiga.[58] 1936 yil yanvar oyida Londonga Qirolning dafn marosimida ishtirok etish uchun tashrifi paytida Jorj V, Neyrat Edenga shunday dedi: "Agar Lokarno paktini imzolagan boshqa davlatlar yoki kafillar Lokarno paktining ruhiga zid bo'lgan ikki tomonlama shartnomalar tuzishlari kerak bo'lsa, biz o'z munosabatimizni qayta ko'rib chiqishga majbur bo'lishimiz kerak."[59] Edenning Neyratning Germaniya Reynlandiyani remilitarizatsiya qiladi, degan Frantsiya-Sovet shartnomasini ratifikatsiya qilishi haqidagi tahdidiga javoban, agar Germaniya remilitarizatsiya qilinsa, u holda Angliya Frantsiyaga qarshi Germaniyaning tarafini oladi deb Neuratni ishontirdi.[59] Lokarno shartnomasida, agar uni imzolagan vakolatli davlatlardan biri boshqa vakolatlar Lokarno bilan mos kelmaydigan deb hisoblagan shartnomani imzolagan bo'lsa, majburiy xalqaro arbitrajni talab qiladigan band bor edi.[60] Neyrat ham, uning davlat kotibi ham shahzoda Bernxard fon Byulov suhbatlashgan har bir chet el diplomatiga Franko-Sovet shartnomasi Lokarnoning buzilishi ekanligini ta'kidladilar, biroq shu bilan birga ikkalasi ham Gitlerga xalqaro hakamlik sudiga murojaat qilmaslikni qat'iy tavsiya qildilar. Frantsuz-Sovet shartnomasi haqiqatan ham Lokarnoning buzilishi edi.[60] Xalqaro hakamlik sudiga murojaat qilish Germaniya uchun "yutqazish" holati edi: bir tomondan, agar Frantsiya-Sovet shartnomasi Lokarno bilan mos emas degan qaror chiqarilsa, unda frantsuzlar bu shartnomadan voz kechishlari va shu bilan Germaniyani uzrli sababdan mahrum qilishlari kerak edi. remilitarizatsiya qilish; boshqa tomondan, agar Franko-Sovet shartnomasi Lokarno bilan mos keladi, deb qaror qilingan bo'lsa, Germaniya ham remilitarizatsiya uchun uzrli sabablarga ega bo'lmaydi.[60] Neurat 1936 yil boshida o'tkazilgan matbuot anjumanlarida Germaniya Frantsuz-Sovet shartnomasi Locarno-ni buzganligi to'g'risida chet elda jamoatchilik fikrini ishontirishga yordam berish uchun Locarno-dagi hakamlik bandidan foydalanishni rejalashtirayotganini ta'kidlagan bo'lsa ham, Germaniya hukumati hakamlik bandini hech qachon chaqirmagan. .[60]

Shu bilan birga, Neurat 1936 yil 10-yanvarda Gotfrid Asmanning boshlig'i tomonidan razvedka hisobotini oldi. Auswärtiges Amt 1936 yil yanvar oyining boshlarida Parijga tashrifi chog'ida Frantsiyaning iqtisodiy muammolari Frantsiya harbiy modernizatsiyasini orqaga qaytarganligini va Frantsiya Frantsiyani ochiqchasiga eslatib o'tgan, Lav Lavalining yaqin do'sti bo'lgan Jan Montini ismli kichik frantsuz siyosatchisi bilan suhbatlashgan matbuot bo'limi. agar Germaniya Reynni remilitarizatsiya qilsa, hech narsa qilmas edi.[61] Neyrat Gitlerga Aschmanning hisobotini etkazmadi, lekin u bunga katta ahamiyat berdi.[62] Neyrat fashistlar tuzumi ichidagi mavqeini yaxshilashga intilgan; Reyndagi inqiroz paytida Gitlerga frantsuzlar Gitlerga o'z-o'ziga ishonch manbasini aytmasdan hech narsa qilmasligiga bir necha bor ishontirish orqali, Neurat g'ayritabiiy sezgi bilan barakali diplomat bo'lib, Gitler bilan mavqeini yaxshilaydi.[63] An'anaga ko'ra Germaniyada tashqi siyosat yuritish ishi bo'lib kelgan Auswärtiges Amt (Tashqi ishlar vazirligi), ammo 1933 yildan boshlab Nurats fashistlarning "diplomatiyaga aralashadiganlar" tahdidiga duch keldi, chunki turli NSDAP agentliklari o'zlarining tashqi siyosatini mustaqil va ko'pincha ularga qarshi olib borishni boshladilar. Auswärtiges Amt.[64] "Diplomatiyaga aralashganlar" ning eng jiddiylari bu edi Dienststelle RibbentropBoshqargan NSDAP bilan chambarchas bog'liq bo'lgan bir xil alternativ tashqi ishlar vazirligi Yoaxim fon Ribbentrop bu ishni agressiv ravishda qisqartirishga intildi Auswärtiges Amt har qadamda.[65] O'rtasidagi raqobatni yanada kuchaytirmoqda Dienststelle Ribbentrop va Auswärtiges Amt was the fact that Neurath and Ribbentrop utterly hated one another, with Ribbentrop making no secret of his belief that he would be a much better foreign minister than Neurath, whereas Neurath viewed Ribbentrop as a hopelessly inept amateur diplomat meddling in matters that did not concern him.[66]

Baron Konstantin von Neurath in 1939. As Foreign Minister in 1936, Neurath played a decisive role in German decision-making that led to the remilitarization.

The decision to remilitarize

During January 1936, the German Chancellor and Fyer Adolf Gitler decided to remilitarize the Rhineland. Originally Hitler had planned to remilitarize the Rhineland in 1937, but chose in early 1936 to move re-militarization forward by a year for several reasons, namely: the ratification by the French National Assembly of the Frantsiya-Sovet shartnomasi of 1935 allowed him to present his coup both at home and abroad as a defensive move against Franco-Soviet "encirclement"; the expectation that France would be better armed in 1937; the government in Paris had just fallen and a caretaker government was in charge; economic problems at home required a foreign policy success to restore the regime's popularity; The Italo-Efiopiya urushi, which had set Britain against Italy, had effectively broken up the Stresa jabhasi; and apparently because Hitler simply did not feel like waiting an extra year.[67][68] In his biography of Hitler, the British historian Sir Yan Kershou argued that the primary reasons for the decision to remilitarize in 1936 as opposed to 1937 were Hitler's preference for dramatic unilateral coups to obtain what could easily be achieved via quiet talks, and Hitler's need for a foreign policy triumph to distract public attention from the major economic crisis that was gripping Germany in 1935–36.[69]

The German War Minister General Werner von Blomberg.

During a meeting between Prince Bernhard von Bülow, the State Secretary at the Auswärtiges Amt (who is not to be confused with his more famous uncle Chancellor Bernxard fon Bylow ) and the French Ambassador André Fransua-Poncet on 13 January 1936, where Bülow handed François-Poncet yet another note protesting against the Franco-Soviet pact, François-Poncet accused Bülow to his face of seeking any excuse, no matter how bizarre, strange or implausible to send troops back into the Rhineland.[70] On 15 January 1936, a top-secret NKVD report was sent to Jozef Stalin entitled "Summary of Military and Political Intelligence on Germany", which reported – based on statements from various diplomats in the Auswärtiges Amt – that Germany was planning on remilitarizing the Rhineland in the near-future.[71] The same summary quoted Bülow as saying that if Britain and France made any sort of agreement concerning military co-operation that did not involve Germany: "We would view this as a violation of Locarno, and if we are not dragged into participating in negotiations, we will not consider ourselves bound by Locarno obligations concerning the preservation of the Rhine demilitarized zone".[72] The Soviet report warning of German plans for remilitarization was not passed on to either the British or French governments.[72]

On 17 January 1936 Benito Mussolini – who was angry about the League of Nations sanctions applied against his country for aggression against Efiopiya – told the German Ambassador in Rome, Ulrix fon Xassell, that he wanted to see an Austro-German agreement "which would in practice bring Austria into Germany's wake, so that she could pursue no other foreign policy than one parallel with Germany. If Austria, as a formally independent state, were thus in practice to become a German satellite, he would have no objection".[73][74]

By recognizing that Austria was within the German sphere of influence, Mussolini had removed the principal problem in Italo-German relations.[74] Italo-German relations had been quite bad since mid-1933, and especially since the Iyul Putsch of 1934, so Mussolini's remarks to Hassell in early 1936 indicating that he wanted a rapprochement with Germany were considered extremely significant in Berlin.[73] In another meeting, Mussolini told Hassell that he regarded the Stresa jabhasi of 1935 as "dead", and that Italy would do nothing to uphold Locarno should Germany violate it.[73] Initially German officials did not believe in Mussolini's desire for a rapprochement, but after Hitler sent Xans Frank on a secret visit to Rome carrying a message from the Fyer about Germany's support for Italy's actions in the conquest of Ethiopia, Italo-German relations improved markedly.[73] On 24 January, the very unpopular Laval resigned as premier rather than be defeated on a motion of no-confidence in the National Assembly as the Radical Socialists decided to join the left-wing Popular Front, thereby ensuring an anti-Laval majority in the Chamber of Deputies.[75] A caretaker government was formed in Paris led by Albert Sarrout until new elections could be held. The Sarraut cabinet was a mixture of men of the right like Jorj Mandel, the center like Jorj Bonnet and the left like Jozef Pol-Bonkur which made it almost impossible for the cabinet to make decisions.[76] Immediately, the Sarraut government came into conflict with Britain as Eden started to press the League for oil sanctions against Italy, something that the French were completely opposed to, and threatened to veto.[77]

On 11 February 1936, the new French Premier Albert Sarrout affirmed that his government would work for the ratification of the Franco-Soviet pact.[58] On February 12, 1936, Hitler met with Neurath and his Ambassador-at-Large Yoaxim fon Ribbentrop to ask their opinion of the likely foreign reaction to remilitarization.[59] Neurath supported remiltarization, but argued that Germany should negotiate more before doing so whereas Ribbentrop argued for unilateral remilitarization at once.[78] Ribbentrop told Hitler that if France went to war in response to German remiltarization, then Britain would go to war with France, an assessment of the situation with which Neurath did not agree, but one that encouraged Hitler to proceed with remiltarization.[78]

On the 12th of February Hitler informed his Urush vaziri, Feldmarshal Verner fon Blomberg, of his intentions and asked the head of the Army, General Verner fon Fritsh, how long it would take to transport a few piyoda askarlar batalyonlar va artilleriya batareyasi into the Rhineland. Fritsch answered that it would take three days organization but he was in favour of negotiation, as he believed that the German Army was in no state for armed combat with the French Army.[79] Bosh shtab boshlig'i, general Lyudvig Bek warned Hitler that the German Army would be unable to successfully defend Germany against a possible retaliatory French attack.[80] Hitler reassured Fritsch that he would withdraw his forces if there were a French countermove. Weinberg wrote that:

"German military plans provided for small German units to move into the Rhineland, joining the local militarized police (Landespolizei) and staging a fighting withdrawal if there were a military counter-action from the West. The story that the Germans had orders to withdraw if France moved against them is partially correct, but essentially misleading; the withdrawal was to be a tactical defensive move, not a return to the earlier position. The possibility of a war was thus accepted by Hitler, but he clearly did not think the contingency very likely."[81]

The operation was codenamed Winter Exercise.

Unknown to Hitler, on 14 February Eden had written to the Quai d'Orsay stating that Britain and France should "enter betimes into negotiations...for the surrender on conditions of our rights in the zone while such surrender still has got a bargaining value".[82] Eden wrote to the British cabinet that the end of the demilitarized zone would "not merely change local military values, but is likely to lead to far-reaching political repercussions of a kind which will further weaken France's influence in Central and Eastern Europe".[83] In February 1936, the Deuxième byurosi started to submit reports suggesting that Germany was planning on sending troops into the Rhineland in the very near-future.[84] Because François-Poncet's reports from Berlin indicated that the German economic situation was quite precarious, it was felt in Paris that sanctions against Germany could be quite devastating, and might even lead to the collapse of the Nazi regime.[85]

Along with Ribbentrop and Neurath, Hitler discussed the planned remilitarization in detail with War Minister General Verner fon Blomberg, Chief of General Staff General Lyudvig Bek, Hermann Göring, Army Commander-in-Chief General Verner fon Fritsh va Ulrix fon Xassell.[86] Ribbentrop and Blomberg were in favor; Beck and Fritsch were opposed and Neurath and Hassell were supportive, but argued that there was no real need to act now as quiet diplomacy would soon ensure remilitarization.[87] That Hitler was in close and regular contact with Hassell, the ambassador to Italy all through February and early March, showed how much importance Hitler attached to Italy.[87] Of the three leaders of the Stresa front, Mussolini was easily the one Hitler most respected, and so Hitler viewed Italy as the key, taking the view that if Mussolini decided to oppose the remilitarization, then Britain and France would follow.[58] Not withstanding Mussolini's remarks in January, Hitler was still not convinced of Italian support, and ordered Hassell to find out Mussolini's attitude.[88] On 22 February, Hassell wrote in his diary that the pending ratification of the Franco-Soviet pact was just a pretext, writing: "it was quite clear that he [Hitler] really wanted the ratification to use as a platform for his action".[89] That same day, Hassell held a meeting with Mussolini, where Il Duce stated if oil sanctions were applied against Italy, he would "make Locarno disappear of its own accord", and that anyhow Italy would not act if German troops were to enter the Rhineland.[90]

At the same time, Neurath started preparing elaborate documents justifying remilitarization as a response forced on Germany by the Franco-Soviet pact, and advised Hitler to keep the number of troops sent into the Rhineland very small so to allow the Germans to claim that they had not committed a "flagrant violation" of Locarno (both Britain and Italy were only committed to offering a military response to a "flagrant violation").[91] In the statement justifying remilitarization that Neurath prepared for the foreign press, the German move was portrayed as something forced on a reluctant Germany by ratification of the Franco-Soviet pact, and strongly hinted that Germany would return to the League of Nations if remilitarization was accepted.[91] After meeting with Hitler on 18 February, Baron von Neurath expressed the viewpoint "for Hitler in the first instance domestic motives were decisive".[92]

At the same time that Frank was visiting Rome, Göring had been dispatched to Warsaw to meet the Polish Foreign Minister Colonel Jozef Bek and to ask the Poles to remain neutral if France decided on war in response to the remilitarization of the Rhineland.[93] Colonel Beck believed that the French would do nothing if Germany remilitarized the Rhineland, and thus could assure those in the Polish government who wished for Poland to stay close to its traditional ally France that Poland would act if France did while at the same time telling Göring that he wanted closer German-Polish relations and would do nothing in the event of remilitarization.[93]

On 13 February 1936 during a meeting with Prince Bismarck of the German Embassy in London, Ralf Vigram, the head of the Central Department of the British Foreign Office stated that the British government (whose Prime Minister from 1935 to 1937 was Stenli Bolduin ) wanted a "working agreement" on an air pact that would outlaw bombing, and that Britain would consider revising Versailles and Locarno in Germany's favor for an air pact.[59] Prince Bismarck reported to Berlin that Wigram had hinted quite strongly that the "things" that Britain were willing to consider revising included remilitarization.[59] On 22 February 1936 Mussolini, who was still angry about the League of Nations sanctions applied against his country for aggression against Efiopiya, told von Hassell that Italy would not honour Locarno if Germany were to remilitarize the Rhineland.[94] Even if Mussolini had wanted to honour Locarno, practical problems would have arisen as the bulk of the Italian Army was at that time engaged in the conquest of Ethiopia, and as there is no common Italo-German frontier.

Historians debate the relation between Hitler's decision to remilitarize the Rhineland in 1936 and his broad long-term goals. Those historians who favour an "intentionist" interpretation of German foreign policy such as Klaus Xildebrand va kech Andreas Xillgruber see the Rhineland remilitarization as only one "stage" of Hitler's stufenplan (stage by stage plan) for world conquest. Those historians who take a "functionist" interpretation see the Rhineland remilitarization more as maxsus, improvised response on the part of Hitler to the economic crisis of 1936 as a cheap and easy way of restoring the regime's popularity. The British Marxist historian Timoti Mason famously argued that Hitler's foreign policy was driven by domestic needs related to a failing economy, and that it was economic problems at home as opposed to Hitler's "will" or "intentions" that drove Nazi foreign policy from 1936 onwards, which ultimately degenerated into a “barbaric variant of social imperialism", which led to a "flight into war" in 1939.[95][96]

As Hildebrand himself has noted, these interpretations are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Hildebrand has argued that although Hitler did have a "programme" for world domination, the way in which Hitler attempted to execute his "programme" was highly improvised and much subject to structural factors both on the international stage and domestically that were often not under Hitler's control.[97] On February 26 the French National Assembly ratified the Franco-Soviet pact. On February 27, Hitler had lunch with Hermann Göring va Jozef Gebbels to discuss the planned remilitarization, with Goebbels writing in his diary afterwards: "Still somewhat too early".[98] On February 29 an interview Hitler had on February 21 with the French fascist and journalist Bertran de Jouvenel gazetada chop etildi Paris-Midi.[99] During his interview with a clearly admiring de Jouvenel, Hitler professed himself a man of peace who desperately wanted friendship with France and blamed all of the problems in Franco-German relations on the French who for some strange reason were trying to "encircle" Germany via the Franco-Soviet pact, despite the evident fact that the Fuhrer was not seeking to threaten France.[99] Hitler's interview with de Jouvenel was intended to influence French public opinion into believing that it was their government that was responsible for the remilitarization. Only on March 1 did Hitler finally make up his mind to proceed.[100] A further factor in Hitler's decision was that the sanctions committee of the League was due to start discussing possible oil sanctions against Italy on 2 March, something that was likely to lead the diplomats of Europe to be focused on the Habashiston inqirozi at the expense of everything else.[101]

The Wehrmacht marches

Not long after dawn on March 7, 1936, nineteen German infantry battalions and a handful of samolyotlar entered the Rhineland. By doing so, Germany violated Articles 42 and 43 of the Treaty of Versailles and Articles 1 and 2 of the Treaty of Locarno.[102] They reached the river Rhine by 11:00 a.m. and then three battalions crossed to the west bank of the Rhine. At the same time, Baron von Neurath summoned the Italian ambassador Baron Bernardo Attoliko, the British ambassador Sir Erik Pipps and the French ambassador André Fransua-Poncet uchun Wilhelmstrasse to hand them notes accusing France of violating Locarno by ratifying the Franco-Soviet pact, and announcing that as such Germany had decided to renounce Locarno and remilitarize the Rhineland.[103]

Qachon nemis razvedka learned that thousands of French soldiers were congregating on the Franco-German border, General Blomberg begged Hitler to evacuate the German forces. Under Blomberg's influence, Hitler nearly ordered the German troops to withdraw, but was then persuaded by the resolutely calm Neurath to continue with Operation Winter Exercise.[104] Following Neurath's advice, Hitler inquired whether the French forces had actually crossed the border and when informed that they had not, he assured Blomberg that Germany would wait until this happened.[105] In marked contrast to Blomberg who was highly nervous during Operation Winter Exercise, Neurath stayed calm and very much urged Hitler to stay the course.[106]

The Rhineland coup is often seen as the moment when Hitler could have been stopped with very little effort; the German forces involved in the move were small, compared to the much larger, and at the time more powerful, French military. Amerikalik jurnalist Uilyam L. Shirer wrote if the French had marched into the Rhineland,

... in March 1936 the two Western democracies, were given their last chance to halt, without the risk of a serious war, the rise of a militarized, aggressive, totalitarian Germany and, in fact – as we have seen Hitler admitting – bring the Nazi dictator and his regime tumbling down. They let the chance slip.[107]

A German officer assigned to the Bendlerstrasse during the crisis told H. R. Knickerbocker davomida Ispaniya fuqarolar urushi: "I can tell you that for five days and five nights not one of us closed an eye. We knew that if the French marched, we were done. We had no fortifications, and no army to match the French. If the French had even mobilized, we should have been compelled to retire." The general staff, the officer said, considered Hitler's action suicidal.[108] Umumiy Xaynts Guderian, a German general interviewed by French officers after the Second World War, claimed: "If you French had intervened in the Rhineland in 1936 we should have been sunk and Hitler would have fallen."[109]

That Hitler faced serious opposition gains apparent weight from the fact that Ludwig Beck and Werner von Fritsch did indeed become opponents of Hitler but according to the American historian Ernest R. May there is not a scrap of evidence for this at this stage.[110] May wrote that the German Army officer corps was all for remilitarizing the Rhineland, and only the question of timing of such a move divided them from Hitler.[111] May further noted that there is no evidence that the German Army was planning on overthrowing Hitler if he had been forced to order a withdraw from the Rhineland, and the fact that Mussolini utterly humiliated Hitler during the Iyul Putsch in 1934 by forcing Germany to climb-down on Austria without leading to the slightest effort on the part of the Reyxsver to overthrow Hitler must cast further doubt on the thesis that Hitler would have been toppled if only he been forced to withdraw from the Rhineland.[111]

Writing about relations between Hitler and his generals in early 1936, the American historian J.T. Emerson declared: "In fact, at no time during the twelve-year existence of the Third Reich did Hitler enjoy more amicable relations with his generals than in 1935 and 1936. During these years, there was nothing like an organized military resistance to party politics".[112] Keyinchalik Ikkinchi jahon urushi, despite the increasing desperate situation of Germany from 1942 onwards and a whole series of humiliating defeats, the overwhelming majority of the Wehrmacht stayed loyal to the Nazi regime and continued to fight hard for that regime right up to its destruction in 1945 (the only exception being the putch of July 20, 1944, in which only a minority of the Wehrmacht rebelled while the majority remained loyal).[113] The willingness of the Wehrmacht to continue to fight and die hard for the National Socialist regime despite the fact Germany was clearly losing the war from 1943 onwards reflected the deep commitment of most of the Wehrmacht to National Socialism.[114]

Furthermore, the senior officers of the Wehrmacht were deeply corrupt men, who received huge bribes from Hitler in exchange for their loyalty.[115] In 1933, Hitler had created a slush fund known as Konto 5 run by Xans Lammers, which provided bribes to senior officers and civil servants in exchange for their loyalty to the National Socialist regime.[115] Given the intense devotion of the Wehrmacht to the National Socialist regime and its corrupt senior officers who never got quite enough in the way of bribes from Hitler, it is very unlikely that the Wehrmacht would have turned on their Fuhrer if the Wehrmacht were forced out of the Rhineland in 1936.

Reaksiyalar

Germaniya

Gebbels, Hitler, and fon Blomberg

On 7 March 1936 Hitler announced before the Reyxstag that the Rhineland had been remilitarized, and to blunt the danger of war, Hitler offered to return to the League of Nations, to sign an air pact to outlaw bombing as a way of war, and a non-aggression pact with France if the other powers agreed to accept the remilitarization.[100] Uning murojaatida Reyxstag, Hitler began with a lengthy denunciation of the Treaty of Versailles as unfair to Germany, claimed that he was a man of peace who wanted war with no-one, and argued that he was only seeking equality for Germany by peacefully overturning the unfair Treaty of Versailles.[116] Hitler claimed that it was unfair that because of Versailles a part of Germany should be demilitarized whereas in every other nation of the world a government could order its troops to anywhere within its borders, and claimed all he wanted was "equality" for Germany.[116] Even then, Hitler claimed that he would have been willing to accept the continued demilitarization of the Rhineland as Stresemann had promised at Locarno in 1925 as the price for peace, had it not been for the Franco-Soviet Pact of 1935, which he maintained was threatening to Germany and had left him with no other choice than to remilitarize the Rhineland.[116] With his eye on public opinion abroad, Hitler made a point of stressing that the remilitarization was not intended to threaten anyone else, but was instead only a defensive measure imposed on Germany by what he claimed were the menacing actions of France and the Soviet Union.[116] At least some people abroad accepted Hitler's claim that he been forced to take this step because of the Franco-Soviet pact. Buyuk Britaniyaning sobiq bosh vaziri Devid Lloyd Jorj da ko'rsatilgan Jamiyat palatasi that Hitler's actions in the wake of the Franco-Soviet pact were fully justified, and he would have been a traitor to Germany if he had not protected his country.[117]

When German troops marched into Kyoln, a vast cheering crowd formed spontaneously to greet the soldiers, throwing flowers onto the Wehrmacht while Catholic priests offered to bless the soldiers.[118] Kardinal Karl Jozef Shulte of Cologne held a Mass at Köln sobori to celebrate and thank Hitler for "sending back our army".[116] In Germany, the news that the Rhineland had been remilitarized was greeted with wild celebrations all over the country; the British historian Sir Yan Kershou wrote of March 1936 that: "People were besides themselves with delight … It was almost impossible not to be caught up in the infectious mood of joy".[119] Gacha emas victory over France in June 1940 was the Nazi regime to be as popular as it was in March 1936. Reports to the Sopade in the spring of 1936 mentioned that a great many erstwhile Social Democrats and opponents of the Nazis amongst the working class had nothing but approval of the remilitarization, and that many who had once been opposed to the Nazis under the Weimar Republic were now beginning to support them.[119]

To capitalize on the vast popularity of the remilitarization, Hitler called a referendum on 29 March 1936 in which the majority of German voters expressed their approval of the remilitarization.[119] During his campaign stops to ask for a yes vote, Hitler was greeted with huge crowds roaring their approval of his defiance of Versailles.[119] Kershaw wrote that the 99% ja (yes) vote in the referendum was improbably high, but it is clear that an overwhelming majority of voters did genuinely chose to vote yes when asked if they approved of the remilitarization.[120] Amerikalik jurnalist Uilyam L. Shirer wrote about the 1936 election:

"Nevertheless, this observer, who covered the "election" from one corner of the Reyx to the other, has no doubt that the vote of approval for Hitler's coup was overwhelming. Va nima uchun bunday emas? The junking of Versailles and the appearance of German soldiers marching again into what was, after all, German territory were things that almost all Germans naturally approved of. The No vote was given as 540, 211."[121]

In the aftermath of the remilitarization, the economic crisis which had so damaged the National Socialist regime's popularity was forgotten by almost all.[122] After the Rhineland triumph, Hitler's self-confidence surged to new heights, and those who knew him well stated that after March 1936 there was a real psychological change as Hitler was utterly convinced of his infallibility in a way that he not been before.[122]

Frantsiya

General Maurice Gamelin, the French Supreme Commander, 1936

Historians writing without benefit of access to the French archives (which were not opened until the mid-1970s) such as Uilyam L. Shirer uning kitoblarida Uchinchi reyxning ko'tarilishi va qulashi (1960) va The Collapse of the Third Republic (1969) have claimed that France, although possessing at this time superior armed forces compared to Germany, including after a possible mobilization 100 infantry divisions, was psychologically unprepared to use force against Germany.[123] Shirer quoted the figure of France having 100 divisions compared to Germany's 19 battalions in the Rhineland.[124] France's actions during the Rhineland crisis have often used as support of the décadence thesis that during the interwar period the supposed decadence of the French way of life caused the French people to degenerate physically and morally to the point that the French were simply unable to stand up to Hitler, and the French in some way had it coming when they were defeated in 1940.[125] Shirer wrote that the French could have easily turned back the German battalions in the Rhineland had the French people not been "sinking into defeatism" in 1936.[103] Historians such as the American historian Stephen A. Schuker who have examined the relevant French primary sources have rejected Shirer's claims, finding that a major paralyzing factor on French policy was the economic situation.[126] France's top military official, General Moris Gamelin, informed the French government that the only way to remove the Germans from the Rhineland was to mobilize the French Army, which would not only be unpopular but also cost the French treasury 30 million francs per day.[127] Gamelin assumed a worst-case scenario in which a French move into the Rhineland would spark an all-out Franco-German war, a case that required full mobilization. Gamelin's analysis was supported by the War Minister, General Louis Maurin who told the Cabinet that it was inconceivable that France could reverse the German remilitarization without full mobilization.[128] This was especially the case as the Deuxième byurosi had seriously exaggerated the number of German troops in the Rhineland when it sent in a report to the French cabinet estimating that there were 295,000 German troops in the Rhineland.[118] The Deuxième byurosi had come up with this estimate by counting all of the SS, SA va Landespolizei formations in the Rhineland as regular troops and so the French believed that only a full mobilization would allow France to have enough troops to expel the alleged 295,000 German troops from the Rhineland.[118] The real number was actually 3,000 German soldiers.[104] Frantsuz tarixchisi Jan-Baptist Duroselle accused Gamelin of distorting what the Deuxième Bureau's intelligence in his report to the cabinet by converting the SS, SA and Landespolizei units into fully-trained troops to provide a reason for inaction.[129] Neurath's truthful statement that Germany had sent only 19 battalions into the Rhineland was dismissed by Gamelin as a ruse to allow the Germans to claim that they had not committed a "flagrant violation" of Locarno to avoid having it invoked against Germany, and he also claimed that Hitler would never risk a war by sending such a small force into the Rhineland.

Albert Sarraut, the French prime minister at the time of the crisis

At the same time, in late 1935 to early 1936 France was gripped by a financial crisis, with the French Treasury informing the government that sufficient cash reserves to maintain the value of the franc as currently pegged by the oltin standart in regard to the US dollar and the British pound no longer existed, and only a huge foreign loan on the money markets of London and New York could prevent the value of the franc from experiencing a disastrous downfall.[130] Because France was on the verge of elections scheduled for the spring of 1936, devaluation of the franc, which was viewed as abhorrent by large sections of French public opinion, was rejected by the caretaker government of Prime Minister Albert Sarrout as politically unacceptable.[130] Investors' fears of a war with Germany were not conducive to raising the necessary loans to stabilize the franc, and the German remilitarization of the Rhineland, by sparking fears of war, worsened the French economic crisis by causing a massive cash flow out of France, with worried investors shifting their savings towards what were felt to be safer foreign markets.[131] The fact that France had defaulted on its World War I debts in 1932 understandably led most investors to conclude that the same would occur if France was involved in another war with Germany,. On March 18, 1936, Wilfrid Baumgartner, the director of the Mouvement général des fonds (the French equivalent of a permanent under-secretary) reported to the government that France, for all intents and purposes, was bankrupt.[132] Only by desperate arm-twisting from the major French financial institutions could Baumgartner manage to obtain enough in the way of short-term loans to prevent France from defaulting on its debts and to keeping the value of the franc from sliding too far, in March 1936.[132] Given the financial crisis, the French government feared that there were insufficient funds to cover the costs of mobilization and that a full-blown war scare caused by mobilization would only exacerbate the financial crisis.[132] The American historian Zach Shore wrote, "It was not lack of French will to fight in 1936 which permitted Hitler's coup, but rather France's lack of funds, military might, and therefore operational plans to counter German remilitarization".[133]

An additional issue for the French was the state of the Frantsiya havo kuchlari.[134] The Deuxième byurosi deb xabar berdi Luftwaffe had developed considerably more advanced aircraft than what France had and that the superior productivity of German industry and the considerably-larger German economy gave the Luftwaffe had a three-to-one advantage in fighters.[134] Problems with productivity in the French aircraft industry meant the French Air Force would have a great deal of trouble replacing its losses in the event of combat with the Luftwaffe.[134] Thus, it was believed by the French military elite that if war came, the Luftwaffe would dominate the skies, attack French troops marching into the Rhineland and even bomb French cities. Yet another problem for the French were the attitudes of the states of the kordon sanatoriyasi.[135] Since 1919, it had accepted that France needed the alliance system in Eastern Europe to provide additional manpower (Germany's population was one-and-half times that of France's) and to open up an eastern front against the Reyx. Without the other states of the kordon sanatoriyasi, it was believed impossible for France to defeat Germany. Faqat Chexoslovakiya indicated firmly that it would go to war with Germany if France marched into the Rhineland. Polsha, Ruminiya va Yugoslaviya all indicated that they would go to war only if German soldiers entered France.[135] French public opinion and newspapers were very hostile towards the German coup, but few called for war.[136] Most French newspapers called for League of Nations sanctions to be imposed on the Reyx to inflict economically-crippling costs force the German Army out of the Rhineland and for France to build new and to reinforce existing alliances to prevent further German challenges to the international status quo.[136] One of the few newspapers to support Germany was the royalist Frantsuz aksiyasi, which ran a banner headline reading: "The Republic Has Assassinated the Peace!" and went on to say that the German move was justified by the Franco-Soviet Pact.[137] On the other ideological extreme, the communists issued a statement calling for national unity against "those who would lead us to carnage" who were the "Laval clique", which was allegedly pushing for a war with Germany, which would supposedly be good for capitalism.[138]

Georges Mandel in 1932. The combative conservative Mandel was the only French minister to advocate war in response to the remilitarization.

Upon hearing of the German move, the French government issued a statement strongly hinting that military action was a possible option.[128] From 9:30 am to noon on 7 March, a meeting of the French cabinet took place to discuss what to do; it ended with the conclusion that the Frantsiya tashqi ishlar vaziri, Per Etienne Flandin, should meet the ambassadors of the other Locarno powers to discuss their reaction.[139] Jorj Mandel was the sole voice in the French cabinet demanding France to march at once into the Rhineland to expel the German troops, regardless of the costs.[140] Later that day, another cabinet meeting was called with General-Secretary Alexis St. Leger, representing the Quai d'Orsay and Maurice Gamelin, who represented the military. Both decided to issue a statement that France reserved every option to oppose the remilitarization.[139] Flandin, upon hearing of the remilitarization, immediately went to London to consult British Prime Minister Stenli Bolduin, as Flandin wished, for domestic political reasons, to find a way of shifting the onus of not taking action onto British shoulders.[141] Baldwin asked Flandin what the French government had in mind, but Flandin said that it had not yet decided. Flandin went back to Paris and asked the French government what its response should be. They agreed, "France would place all her forces at the disposal of the League of Nations to oppose a violation of the Treaties".[142] 8 mart kuni Bosh vazir Albert Sarrout "Frantsiya hukumati nomi bilan, men Frantsiya va Belgiya xavfsizligining Lokarno shartnomasi bilan tuzilgan Angliya va Italiya hukumatlari tomonidan imzolangan ushbu kafolati saqlanib qolganligini ko'rish niyatidamiz. Strasburgga nemis qurollaridan o'q uzilishiga yo'l qo'ymaslik kerak ".[143] Shu bilan birga, Frantsiya Vazirlar Mahkamasi: "Biz barcha kuchlarimizni, moddiy va ma'naviy jihatdan Millatlar Ligasi ixtiyoriga beramiz ... bitta shart bilan bizni tinchlik uchun kurashda ularga hamroh bo'lish sharti bilan. Reynland paktida buni amalga oshirishga aniq bog'langanlar ".[144] Boshqacha qilib aytganda, Frantsiya Angliya va Italiya ham shunday qilgan taqdirdagina Germaniyaga qarshi harakat qiladi.[144]

Inqiroz paytida Frantsiya tashqi ishlar vaziri Pyer-Etien Flandin

Frantsiya hukumati iqtisodiy sabablarga ko'ra safarbarlik va urushni Gitlerning Reyndagi to'ntarishining orqaga qaytarish usuli sifatida allaqachon chiqarib tashlaganligi sababli, Frantsiya ushbu vaziyatda qila oladigan eng yaxshi narsa inqirozdan "kontinental majburiyat" olish uchun foydalanish edi. , Buyuk Britaniyaning Birinchi Jahon urushi miqyosida Frantsiyani mudofaasiga katta quruqlik kuchlarini yuborish majburiyati.[145] Flandinning strategiyasi inglizlarning Reynland masalasi bo'yicha Germaniya bilan urushga kirishga tayyorligini inglizlarga qat'iy nazarda tutgan edi, chunki inglizlar o'zlarining Lokarno majburiyatlarini ularni nemislar bilan urushga olib borishini ko'rishni xohlamaydilar. ko'plab inglizlar nemislarni qo'llab-quvvatladilar. Shunday qilib, Flandin London Parijga nisbatan "cheklov" uchun bosim o'tkazishini kutgan.[146] Reynland provokatsiyasiga nisbatan frantsuzcha "cheklov" ning narxi, Versal va Lokarno shartnomalarini ochiqdan-ochiq buzganligi, Buyuk Britaniyaning xavfsizligini Frantsiya xavfsizligi bilan aniq bog'laydigan va "Buyuk Britaniyani yana bir yirik ekspeditsiyani yuborish majburiyatini olgan" kontinental majburiyat "bo'ladi. Germaniyani hujumiga qarshi Frantsiyani himoya qilish uchun kuch.[147]

Londonga Britaniya Bosh vaziri bilan maslahatlashish uchun tashrifi chog'ida Stenli Bolduin va tashqi ishlar kotibi Entoni Eden, Flandin Kanadalik tarixchi nimani amalga oshirdi Robert J. Young u "bir umrlik ishlash" deb nomlangan, unda u Germaniyaning harakatidan juda g'azablanganligini, Frantsiya bu masala bo'yicha urush boshlashga tayyorligini ochiqchasiga aytgan va ingliz xostlarini frantsuzcha "cheklash" talablari uchun qattiq tanqid qilgan. . Biroq, u frantsuz uchun hech narsa qilishni taklif qilolmadi sécurité (xavfsizlik).[148] Flandin kutganidek, Eden frantsuzlarning harbiy choralar ko'rishiga qarshi edi va frantsuzcha "cheklov" so'rab murojaat qildi.[148] Frantsiya harbiy amaldorlari Flandinning nima qilishga urinayotganidan bexabar bo'lib, hukumatdan Flandinga uning tilida gapirishini aytishni talab qilishdi.[149] Flandinning taktikasi oldida 1936 yil 19 martda Buyuk Britaniya hukumati Britaniya xavfsizligini Frantsiya xavfsizligi bilan bog'laydigan noaniq bayonot berdi va Birinchi Jahon Urushidan beri birinchi marta Angliya-Frantsiya xodimlarining juda cheklangan doiradagi muzokaralariga rozi bo'ldi. .[146] Frantsuzlar frantsuzlar juda oz deb hisoblagan inglizlarning takliflaridan ko'ngli qolgan bo'lsa-da, frantsuzlar 1936 yilda inglizlarni qo'llab-quvvatlash va'dalarini munosib yutuq deb hisobladilar, ayniqsa, iqtisodiy sabablarga ko'ra safarbarlik 1936 yilda haqiqiy variant deb hisoblanmadi.[147] Quay d'Orsay kabi frantsuz rasmiylari directeur politique (siyosiy direktor), Rene Massigli Angliya-frantsuz ittifoqi g'oyasiga nemis ekspansionizmini to'xtatishning eng yaxshi usuli deb ishongan, Buyuk Britaniyaning frantsuzlar uchun ko'proq ish qilishga tayyor emasligidan juda xafsalasini pir qildi. sécurité.[150] Massigli Flandinga qilgan hisobotida, agar frantsuzlar remilitarizatsiyani qabul qilsalar, polyaklar, yugoslavlar va ruminlar Germaniya orbitasiga o'tib ketishadi va chexoslovaklar 1924 yilgi Frantsiya bilan ittifoqqa sodiq qolish uchun qo'llaridan kelganicha harakat qilishadi va bu faqat Germaniyaning Avstriyani qo'shib olishidan oldin vaqt masalasi.[151] Xususan, Massigli, agar nemislar Reynni mustahkamlasa, ularga asosan Sharqiy Evropaga kengayish uchun erkin qo'l berilishini ogohlantirgan.[151] 1919 yildan buyon Frantsiya tashqi siyosatining asosiy maqsadi bo'lgan uzoq kutilgan "kontinental majburiyat" yo'lida ko'proq narsani ta'minlashga qaratilgan sa'y-harakatlarning bir qismi sifatida Gamelin Angliya harbiy attaşesiga:

"Frantsiya o'z janglarini o'zi olib borishi va shuningdek, Belgiyaga zudlik bilan qo'shimcha kuchlarni yuborishi mumkin edi, ammo agar bu Britaniya ekspeditsiya kuchlari yo'lda ekanligi aniq ma'lum bo'lgan taqdirdagina. Bunday kuchning etishmasligi Frantsiya o'z majburiyatlarini qayta ko'rib chiqishi kerak degan ma'noni anglatadi. Belgiyada, so'ngra ikkinchisini o'zi bilan ta'minlash uchun qoldiring ... Bunday harakatlar Germaniyaga potentsial havo bazalarini va Angliyaga qarshi havo hujumlarini o'tkazish imkoniyatini berishni anglatadi, biz ularga deyarli befarq bo'lolmas edik. "[152]

Frantsiya armiyasining generalissimi, Moris Gamelin, agar Frantsiya nemis kuchlariga qarshi tursa, Frantsiya uzoq urushda yakka kurashda g'alaba qozona olmaydi va shuning uchun Angliyaning yordamiga muhtoj bo'ladi. Frantsiya hukumati yaqinlashib kelayotgan umumiy saylovni hisobga olgan holda generalga qarshi qaror qabul qildi safarbarlik Frantsiya armiyasining.[153] Remilitarizatsiya Frantsiyaning Germaniya ustidan so'nggi turg'unligini olib tashladi va shu bilan Frantsiya Versal shartnomasidan olgan xavfsizlikni tugatdi. Reyn daryosi qurolsizlantirilgan ekan, frantsuzlar bu hududni osongina egallab olishlari va iqtisodiy ahamiyatga ega bo'lgan tahdid qilishlari mumkin edi. Rur sanoat zonasi, agar Frantsiya Germaniya holati tahdidga aylanadi deb hisoblasa, bu bosqinchilik uchun javobgar edi.[154]

Birlashgan Qirollik

Shuningdek qarang: Tinchlantirish siyosati

Britaniyadagi reaktsiya har xil edi, ammo ular remilitarizatsiyani zararli deb hisoblamadilar. Lord Lotian mashhur nemislar o'zlarining hovlisiga kirib borishdan boshqa narsa emasligini aytishdi. Jorj Bernard Shou xuddi shu tarzda Angliya qayta ishg'ol qilganidan farq qilmaydi Portsmut. 23 martdagi kundalik yozuvida, Garold Nikolson Deputat ta'kidlashicha, "[jamoatlardagi] tuyg'u dahshatli nemisparastlikdir, bu urushdan qo'rqish demakdir".[155] 1936 yildagi Reynland inqirozi paytida, Reynlandni remilitarizatsiyalashga qarshi norozilik namoyishi bo'lib, biron bir joyda ommaviy yig'ilishlar yoki mitinglar o'tkazilmadi va buning o'rniga Angliyadan inqirozni hal qilish uchun urush ishlatmaslik talab qilingan bir necha "tinchlik" mitinglari bo'lib o'tdi.[156] Iqtisodchilardan beri Jon Maynard Keyns eng ko'p sotilgan kitobini nashr etgan edi Tinchlikning iqtisodiy oqibatlari 1919 yilda - unda Keyns Versalni chidab bo'lmas darajada qo'pol deb tasvirlagan Karfagen tinchligi qasoskor ittifoqchilar tomonidan tayinlangan - Britaniya jamoatchilik fikrining tobora ko'proq qismi Versal shartnomasi Germaniyaga nisbatan "adolatsiz" ekanligiga ishonch hosil qildi.[157] 1936 yilga kelib, nemis qo'shinlari Reynga qaytib borganlarida, inglizlarning aksariyati Gitlerning "adolatsiz" Versal shartnomasini buzganligi haq edi va Britaniyaning "adolatsiz" shartnomani qo'llab-quvvatlash uchun urushga kirishi axloqiy jihatdan noto'g'ri bo'ladi. Versal.[157] Britaniya urush kotibi Alfred Duff Kuper - dedi Germaniya elchisiga Leopold fon Xesh 8 mart kuni: "inglizlar orqali Germaniya Frantsiya hududiga bostirib kirgan taqdirda, ular Frantsiya uchun kurashishga tayyor edilar, ular yaqinda Reyn daryosini bosib olganligi sababli qurol ishlatmasdilar. Xalq bu haqda juda yaxshi bilmas edi. demilitarizatsiya qoidalari va ularning aksariyati, ehtimol nemislarning o'z hududlarini egallab olishlari to'g'risida "ikkita naycha" ga ahamiyat bermaydilar "degan fikrni qabul qilishdi.[157]

Bosh vazir Stenli Bolduin, noma'lum sanasi

Bosh vazir Stenli Bolduin Britaniyaning shartnoma kafolatlarini amalga oshirish uchun mablag 'etishmasligi va jamoatchilik fikri baribir harbiy kuchni qo'llab-quvvatlamasligini ko'zlarida yosh bilan da'vo qildi.[158] Buyuk Britaniya shtab boshliqlari Germaniyaga qarshi urush o'n yillik qoida tomonidan kiritilgan chuqur qisqartirish va qurollanish faqat 1934 yilda boshlanganligi sababli, aksariyat hollarda Buyuk Britaniya urush holatida amalga oshirishi mumkin degan ma'noda ogohlantirgan edi. uch haftalik tayyorgarlikdan so'ng Frantsiyaga orqaga qarab jihozlangan ikkita bo'limni yuborish.[159] Bundan tashqari, Uaytxollda Angliya urush boshlasa, degan qo'rquv paydo bo'ldi Germaniya, keyin Yaponiya 1931 yildan beri yaponlarda bo'lgan Manjuriyani egallab oldi Uzoq Sharqdagi yagona kuch deb da'vo qilayotgan Xitoy, urushdan foydalanib Britaniyaning Osiyo mustamlakalarini egallashga kirishishi mumkin edi.[160]

Buyuk Britaniya tashqi ishlar vaziri, Entoni Eden, frantsuzlarning harbiy harakatlaridan voz kechdi va Germaniyaga qarshi har qanday moliyaviy yoki iqtisodiy sanktsiyalarga qarshi bo'lib, darhol frantsuz elchisi bilan uchrashdi Charlz Korbin frantsuzlarni tiyib turishga chaqirish.[151] Eden buning o'rniga Germaniya ramziy sonli qo'shinlardan boshqasini, birinchi navbatda qo'yamiz, deb aytgan sonidan boshqasini olib chiqib ketishini va keyin qayta muzokara o'tkazishini xohladi.[161] Britaniya siyosatiga ta'sir ko'rsatgan qo'shimcha omil - bu Dominion tomonidan qo'llab-quvvatlanmaganligi. Londondagi Dominion Oliy Komissarlari, bilan Janubiy Afrika va Kanada bu borada ayniqsa ochiqchasiga gapirib, ular Reynlandning demilitarizatsiya qilingan maqomini tiklash uchun urushga kirishmasliklarini va agar Angliya shunday qilsa, u o'z-o'zidan bo'lishini aniq ko'rsatib berdi.[156] Amerikalik tarixchi Gerxard Vaynberg deb yozgan edi ... "13 martga qadar Britaniya dominionlari, ayniqsa Janubiy Afrika Ittifoqi va agar Kanada urush boshlasa, Angliya bilan tura olmaydi. Ayniqsa, Janubiy Afrika hukumati Germaniya va boshqa Dominion hukumatlaridagi pozitsiyasini qo'llab-quvvatlash bilan band edi ".[162] Ham Janubiy Afrika Bosh vaziri J. B. M. Xertzog va Kanada bosh vaziri Uilyam Lion Makkenzi King mos ravishda ichki saylov okruglariga duch kelishlari kerak edi Afrikaliklar va Frantsuz kanadaliklari, ularning aksariyati Germaniyaga qarshi boshqa "inglizlar urushida" kurashishga chuqur e'tiroz bildirishgan va Xertzog ham, Makkenzi King ham bunday urushdan qochishning eng yaxshi usuli sifatida tinchlanish tarafdorlari bo'lgan. Hertzog ham, Makkenzi King ham Angliya imperiyasiga sodiqlik va urush boshlasa, britaniyaliklarga qarshi saylovchilar bilan muomala qilishni tanlashni xohlamadilar. Beri Chanak inqirozi 1922 yilda Angliya Dominionni qo'llab-quvvatlashni endi avtomatik ravishda qabul qilib bo'lmasligini juda yaxshi bilar edi va Dominionlarning 1918 yilgi g'alabada o'ynagan ulkan rolini eslab, Dominion ko'magisiz yana bir yirik urushni boshlash haqida o'ylab bo'lmaydi.

Buyuk Britaniya Tashqi ishlar vazirligi o'z navbatida Gitlerning London muzokaralar olib borishni taklif qilgan narsalarini bir tomonlama olish borasidagi harakatlaridan juda ko'p umidsizliklarni bildirdi. Tashqi ishlar vazirligi eslatmasidan shikoyat qilgani kabi: "Gitler bizni unga imtiyoz berish imkoniyatidan mahrum qildi, aks holda biz boshlashimiz kerak bo'lgan Germaniya bilan umumiy muzokaralarda qo'limizda foydali savdolashish vositasi bo'lishi mumkin edi".[163] Reynland inqirozi Gitlerning 7 martdagi nutqidagi takliflari Germaniya bilan "umumiy kelishuv" uchun asos bo'lgan deb hisoblagan Eden va Gitler yomon niyat bilan muzokaralar olib borayotganini ta'kidlagan Vansittart bilan o'zaro munosabatlarni tugatdi.[164] Eden va Vansittart Habashiston inqirozi paytida Edenning Italiyaga qarshi sanktsiyalarni qo'llab-quvvatlashini qo'llab-quvvatlagan bo'lsa, Vansittart Italiyani Germaniyaga qarshi ittifoqchi bo'lishini xohlagan. Vansittart Gitler bilan "umumiy kelishuv" istiqboli yo'qligini ta'kidladi va eng yaxshi narsa Germaniyaga qarshi turish uchun frantsuzlar bilan aloqalarni kuchaytirish edi.[165] Germanofob Vansittart har doim nemislarni yomon ko'rar edi va ayniqsa tsivilizatsiyaga tahdid sifatida ko'rgan fashistlarni yoqtirmas edi. Vansittart Edenning Reyndagi inqirozni yumshatish bo'yicha harakatlarini qo'llab-quvvatlagan edi, chunki inglizlar qayta qurollanishi endigina boshlangan edi, ammo shiddatli frankofil Vansittart hukumatni inqirozni Germaniyaga qarshi Frantsiya bilan harbiy ittifoq tuzishni boshlash imkoniyati sifatida ishlatishga undadi.[165] 1936 yil bahorida Vansittart Germaniya bilan "umumiy kelishuv" mumkin emasligiga ishonch hosil qildi va Gitler dunyoni zabt etishga intilmoqda. Tashqi ishlar vazirligi xodimi Ouen OMalley Angliyaga Germaniyaga G'arbiy Evropadagi status-kvoni qabul qilish haqidagi va'dasi evaziga Germaniyaga "Sharqda erkin qo'l" berishni taklif qildi (ya'ni Germaniyaning butun Sharqiy Evropani bosib olishini qabul qiling).[166] Vansittart javoban Gitler dunyoni zabt etishga intilayotgani va Germaniyaning butun Sharqiy Evropani zabt etishiga imkon berishi Reyx Germaniyani ingliz blokadasidan immunitetga keltirish uchun yetarli xom ashyo, bu nemislarga G'arbiy Evropani bosib olishga imkon beradi.[166] Vansittart Germaniyaning Sharqiy Evropani zabt etishiga imkon berish "Evropada erkinlik va demokratiyaning yo'q bo'lib ketishiga olib keladi", deb izohladi.[166] Aksincha, Eden Britaniyaning manfaatlarini faqat G'arbiy Evropaga tegishli deb bildi va Ganserning yakuniy niyati nima bo'lishi mumkinligi to'g'risida Vansittartning e'tiqodiga qo'shilmadi.[166] Eden ham, vazirlar mahkamasining qolgan qismi yoki britaniyaliklarning aksariyati Vansittartning Angliya Sharqiy Evropaga befarq bo'lishga qodir emasligi haqidagi fikriga qo'shilmadi.[166]

Garchi inglizlar frantsuzlarning "cheklovi" narxi sifatida frantsuzlar bilan kadrlar muzokaralariga rozi bo'lishgan bo'lsa-da, ko'plab ingliz vazirlari ushbu muzokaralardan norozi bo'lishdi. Ichki ishlar vaziri janob Jon Simon Eden va Bolduinga yozishicha, Reyndagi remilitarizatsiyadan keyin xodimlar frantsuzlar bilan o'tkazilishi kerak bo'lgan muzokaralar frantsuzlarni quyidagilarni anglashiga olib keladi:

"Ular bizni shu qadar bog'lab qo'yishdi, ular Germaniya bilan munozaralar buzilishini kutishlari mumkin edi. Bunday sharoitda Frantsiya har doimgidek xudbin va to'ng'iz boshli bo'ladi va Germaniya bilan kelishuv istiqbollari xira va xira bo'lib qoladi. ".[167]

Simonning e'tirozlariga javoban, inglizlar frantsuzlar bilan xodimlarning muzokaralarini boshlaganidan besh kun o'tib tugatdilar; Angliya-frantsuz xodimlarining muzokaralari 1939 yil fevraligacha bo'lgan voqeadan keyin takrorlanmasligi kerak edi Gollandiyalik urush qo'rquvi 1939 yil yanvar. Angliya-frantsuz shtati muzokaralari kabinetdagi qarshiliklardan tashqari, qattiq tanqidlarga sabab bo'ldi Devid Lloyd Jorj va ular singari Biverbrook va Rothermere presslari Daily Mail "Boshqalarning chaqirig'i bilan bizni urushga majbur qiladigan harbiy kelishuvlar" tufayli uni rahbarga qo'ying.[168] Bundan tashqari, Gitlerning favqulodda maxsus topshiriqlar bo'yicha elchisi Yoaxim fon Ribbentrop Bolduin va Edenga Germaniya Angliya-Frantsiya xodimlarining muzokaralarini o'lik tahdid deb bilishini ogohlantirgan edi va agar muzokaralar davom etadigan bo'lsa, Germaniya bilan "umumiy kelishuv" ga bo'lgan har qanday umid abadiy tugaydi.[169] Biroq, Britaniyaning xavfsizligini frantsuz bilan bog'laydigan Britaniyaning juda xavfli iboralari sécurité bu ingliz tarixchisi sifatida Angliya-Frantsiya munosabatlariga tuzatib bo'lmaydigan darajada zarar etkazishi mumkinligidan qo'rqib, taqiqlanmagan. A. J. P. Teylor agar Frantsiya Germaniya bilan urushga kirishishi kerak bo'lsa, demak, 1936 yil 19 martda Buyuk Britaniyaning Frantsiya tomonida jang qilishi haqidagi bayonoti tufayli kamida kuchli axloqiy ish bo'ladi.[170]

Tomonidan bayonotiga qadar Nevill Chemberlen 1939 yil 31 martda Polshaning "kafolati" ni taqdim etganida, britaniyaning xavfsizlik majburiyatlari bo'lmagan Sharqiy Evropa Millatlar Ligasi Ahdidan tashqari. Biroq, Sharqiy Evropada frantsuz ittifoq tizimi tufayli, deb nomlangan Kordon sanatoriyasi, Germaniyaning Frantsiyaning Sharqiy Evropa ittifoqchilariga har qanday hujumi Frantsiya-Germaniya urushini keltirib chiqaradi va 1936 yil 19-martdagi bayonot tufayli Frantsiya-Germaniya urushi Angliya Frantsiya tomoniga aralashish uchun kuchli bosim yaratadi. Bu holat yanada kuchaygan edi, chunki Lokarnodan farqli o'laroq, Angliya Frantsiya mudofaasiga faqat Germaniya hujum qilgan taqdirda kelishga majbur bo'lgan, Britaniyaning 19 mart kungi bayonoti iloji boricha noaniq bo'lish uchun qilingan harakatning bir qismi sifatida faqatgina Angliya Frantsiyaning xavfsizligini hayotiy muhim ehtiyoj deb bildi va Germaniyaning Frantsiyaga qarshi hujumi va Frantsiya Germaniyaga qarshi urushga kirishini Germaniyaning bir a'zosiga hujum qilishda farq qilmadi. kordon sanitariyasi. Shunday qilib, shu tarzda, 1936 yil martdagi inglizlarning bayonotida nafaqat Frantsiyani himoya qilish bo'yicha to'g'ridan-to'g'ri Angliya majburiyati (juda noaniq tilda ifoda etilgan bo'lsa ham), balki bilvosita Sharqiy Evropa davlatlariga ham taklif qilindi. kordon sanatoriyasi. Shu tarzda Britaniya hukumati 1938 yildagi Markaziy Evropa inqiroziga tushib qoldi, chunki 1924 yildagi Frantsiya-Chexoslovakiya ittifoqi har qanday Germaniya-Chexoslovakiya urushi avtomatik ravishda Frantsiya-Germaniya urushiga aylanishini anglatardi. Ushbu bilvosita xavfsizlik majburiyati tufayli inglizlar Germaniya-Chexoslovakiya mojarosi Buyuk Britaniyaga bevosita aloqasi yo'q degan keng tarqalgan fikrga qaramay, 1938 yildagi Markaziy Evropa inqiroziga o'zlarini jalb qilishdi.[171]

12-mart kuni Xalqaro ishlar bo'yicha qo'mita yig'ilishida, Uinston Cherchill, a orqa o'rindiq Konservativ Deputat, Reynning remilitarizatsiyasiga qarshi kurashda Frantsiyaga yordam berish uchun Millatlar Ligasi bo'yicha Angliya-Frantsiya koordinatsiyasini qo'llab-quvvatladi,[172] ammo bu hech qachon sodir bo'lmagan. 6-aprel kuni Cherchill remilitarizatsiya to'g'risida: "Frantsiya chegarasiga qarama-qarshi qal'alar chizig'ini yaratish nemis qo'shinlarini ushbu yo'nalishda tejashga imkon beradi va asosiy kuchlarning Belgiya va Gollandiyani aylanib o'tishiga imkon beradi" deb aytdi. The Frantsiya jangi.[108]

Belgiya

Belgiya 1920 yilda Frantsiya bilan ittifoq tuzdi, ammo remilitarizatsiyadan so'ng Belgiya yana betaraflikni tanladi. 1936 yil 14 oktyabrda qirol Belgiya Leopold III nutqida shunday dedi:

"Reynlandiyani qayta ishg'ol qilish, Lokarno kelishuvini tugatish bilan bizni urushdan oldingi xalqaro mavqeimizga qaytarishga deyarli olib keldi ... Biz faqat va faqat Belgiya siyosatiga amal qilishimiz kerak. Siyosat bizni faqat janjallardan tashqarida joylashtirishga qaratilgan bo'lishi kerak. bizning qo'shnilarimiz ".[173]

Germaniya rahbarlari Angliya ham, Frantsiya ham Belgiya betarafligini buzmasligini yaxshi bilganliklari sababli, Belgiya betarafligini e'lon qilish, Germaniya yana urush boshlashi kerak bo'lsa, G'arbda ittifoqchilar hujumi xavfi yo'qligini anglatardi. Zigfrid chizig'i ularning Frantsiya bilan chegarasi bo'ylab.[174] Aksincha, xuddi 1914 yilgacha bo'lganidek, Germaniya rahbarlari Belgiya betarafligini buzishga tayyor edilar.[174] Belgiya neytralligi Belgiya harbiylari va boshqa xalqlar o'rtasida hech qanday xodimlar bilan muzokaralar olib borilmasligini anglatar edi, ya'ni 1940 yilda Germaniya kuchlari Belgiyaga bostirib kirganda, Belgiya kuchlari harakatini Frantsiya va Angliya harbiylari bilan muvofiqlashtirish rejalari yo'q edi. nemislarga hujumda boshlanishini ta'minladi.[174]

Polsha

Polsha, deb e'lon qildi Frantsiya-Polsha harbiy ittifoqi 1921 yilda imzolangan sharafga sazovor bo'lar edi, ammo shartnomada Polsha Frantsiyaga faqat Frantsiya bosib olinadigan bo'lsa yordam berishi kerakligi ko'rsatilgan edi.[175] Polkovnik Bek frantsuz elchisini ishontirayotgan bir vaqtda Leon Noël Frantsiya-Polsha ittifoqiga sodiqligi va Polshaning Frantsiya bilan birga bo'lishga tayyorligi to'g'risida u Germaniya elchisiga grafga ham aytgan Xans-Adolf fon Moltke Germaniya Frantsiyani bosib olishni rejalashtirmaganligi sababli, Frantsiya-Polsha ittifoqi kuchga kirmaydi va agar Frantsiya harakat qilsa, Polsha hech narsa qilmaydi.[175] Bek Poltaga Lokarno bilan shartnoma imzolashga ruxsat berilmaganligini va Lokarno uchun urushga kirmasligini va 1934 yildagi Germaniya-Polsha hujum qilmaslik paktining me'morlaridan biri sifatida u o'zining do'sti ekanligini ta'kidlab, Moltkeni ta'kidladi. Reyx.[176] Bek 9 mart kuni Moltkega uning Frantsiya bilan urush boshlash haqidagi va'dasi "amalda, samarasiz" ekanligini aytdi, chunki bu faqat nemis qo'shinlari Frantsiyaga kirganida kuchga kirdi.[177] Vaynberg, Reyndagi inqiroz paytida Bekning "dublyaji", Germaniya va Frantsiya elchilariga Polsha nima qilishi haqida "... Bekning shaxsiy obro'si uchun hech narsa qilmadi va juda katta xavf tug'dirdi ..." deb aytdi.[178] Polsha birinchi navbatda Frantsiya bo'lsa, o'z kuchlarini safarbar qilishga rozi bo'ldi, ammo ular Millatlar Ligasi Kengashida remilitarizatsiyaga qarshi ovoz berishdan bosh tortdilar.

Qo'shma Shtatlar

Reynland inqirozi davrida izolyatsionist Amerika hukumati hech narsa qilmaslik uchun qat'iy "qo'llar" siyosatini oldi.[179] Inqiroz paytida Prezident Franklin D. Ruzvelt "diplomatik jihatdan qulay" kengaytirilgan baliq oviga jo'nab ketdi Florida uning ma'muriyati Evropadagi inqirozga javoban nima qilishni rejalashtirgani to'g'risida jurnalistlarning savollariga javob berishdan qochish.[179] AQSh hukumati tarkibidagi umumiy kayfiyat Truman Smit, Gitler Evropada faqat Frantsiyaning hukmronligini tugatishga intilgan va Frantsiyani kuch sifatida yo'q qilishga intilmagan, deb yozgan Berlindagi Amerika harbiy attaşesi.[179] Smitning hisobotida shunday xulosa qilingan: "Versal o'lgan. Ehtimol, Germaniya halokati va yangi Versal bo'lishi mumkin, ammo u 1920 yildan beri Evropada qora bulut kabi osilgan Versal bo'lmaydi".[179]

Sovet Ittifoqi

Jamiyat oldida Sovet hukumati Germaniya to'ntarishini tinchlikka tahdid sifatida qoralashda qat'iy yo'l tutdi.[180] Shu bilan birga Sovet tashqi komissari Maksim Litvinov Millatlar Ligasi Bosh assambleyasi oldida nutq so'zlab, jamoaviy xavfsizlikni maqtagan va butun dunyoni Gitler to'ntarishiga qarshi chiqishga da'vat etgan, Berlindagi sovet diplomatlari o'zlarining hamkasblariga Auswärtiges Amt ularning tijorat aloqalarini yaxshilash istagi, bu esa o'z navbatida siyosiy munosabatlarni yaxshilashga olib kelishi mumkin.[181] Faqat remilitarizatsiyadan so'ng, Sovet Bosh vaziri Vyacheslav Molotov Shveytsariya gazetasiga intervyu berdi Le Temps Sovet Ittifoqi Germaniya bilan munosabatlarni yaxshilashni xohlashiga ishora qilmoqda.[180] 1936 yil aprelda Sovet Ittifoqi Germaniya bilan Sovet Ittifoqi savdosini kengaytirishni nazarda tutuvchi tijorat shartnomasini imzoladi.[180] Sovet Ittifoqining Germaniya bilan urushga kirishishidagi asosiy muammo bu umumiy nemis-sovet chegarasining yo'qligi edi, bu Polsha va Ruminiya hukumatlaridan tranzit huquqini berishni talab qiladi. Qizil Armiya.[182] Ular bilan ishlashga tayyor ekanliklariga qaramay Vermaxt, Narkomindel urush boshlanganda polshaliklar va ruminlar bilan tranzit huquqlari to'g'risida muzokaralar olib borishni istashdi, chunki ular muzokaralar muvaffaqiyatsiz bo'lishini istashdi, bu esa Germaniyaning Sovet Ittifoqining Germaniyaga qarshi qattiq yo'nalishi shunchaki pozitsiyada edi.[183] Ruminiyaliklar va hattoki polshaliklar, agar Germaniyaga qarshi kurashish yo'lida Qizil Armiya o'z mamlakatlariga tranzit huquqlari bilan kirishga ruxsat berilsa, urush tugagandan so'ng ular tark etmasliklaridan juda qo'rqishgan; Narkomindel ushbu masalada ishonchli ishonchni ta'minlay olmadi.

Millatlar Ligasi

Londonda Millatlar Ligasi Kengashi yig'ilganda, uni qo'llab-quvvatlovchi yagona delegat sanktsiyalar Germaniyaga qarshi edi Maksim Litvinov, Sovet Ittifoqi vakili. Germaniya endi Liga a'zosi bo'lmasa-da, Ribbentropga 19 mart kuni Liga Assambleyasi oldida nutq so'zlashga ruxsat berildi, u Germaniyaning xatti-harakatlarini tanilgan narsa sifatida oqlashga harakat qildi. Reyx Frantsiya-Sovet paktiga binoan va Germaniyaga qarshi sanktsiyalarni qo'llash uchun ovoz bergan davlatlar uchun jiddiy iqtisodiy oqibatlarga olib kelishi haqida ogohlantirdi.[184] 1936 yilga kelib Sharqiy Evropa, Skandinaviya va Lotin Amerikasining bir qator mamlakatlari iqtisodiyoti og'ir ahvolda bo'lgan. Katta depressiya o'z iqtisodiyotini ushlab turish uchun Germaniya bilan savdo-sotiqqa juda bog'liq bo'lib qoldi, bu faqat iqtisodiy sabablarga ko'ra Germaniyani xafa qilishni istamadi.[185] Prezident Federiko Paes ning Ekvador ga qarshi sanktsiyalar g'oyasini e'lon qilgan nutq so'zladi Reyx "bema'ni" bo'lish.[186] O'sha paytda Buyuk Britaniya tashqi ishlar vazirligi butun dunyoda Germaniya, sanktsiyalarni qo'llashni istagan yagona davlatlar Angliya, Frantsiya, Ruminiya, Belgiya, Chexoslovakiya va Sovet Ittifoqi deb hisoblagan.[187] Shvetsiya, Daniya, Norvegiya, Polsha, Gollandiya, Yunoniston, Shveytsariya, Turkiya, Chili, Estoniya, Portugaliya, Ispaniya va Finlyandiyaning Ligadagi elchilari barchasi Germaniyaga qarshi sanktsiyalarni o'z mamlakatlari uchun "iqtisodiy o'z joniga qasd qilish" deb bilganliklarini ma'lum qilishdi. .[188] Italiyaga qarshi qo'llanilgan Liga sanktsiyalaridan hanuzgacha g'azablangan Mussolini nutq so'zlab, Reynni remilitarizatsiya qilgani uchun Germaniyaga qarshi hech qanday sanktsiyalarga qo'shilmasligini aniq aytdi.[189] 1935 yil kuzida Angliya Ligani Italiyaga nisbatan cheklangan sanktsiyalarni qo'llashga muvaffaq bo'ldi, ammo 1936 yil qishning oxiriga kelib, iqtisodiyoti Italiyadan to'rt baravar katta bo'lgan Germaniyaga qarshi keng qamrovli sanktsiyalarni qo'llash g'oyasi Germaniyani Germaniyaga aylantirdi. Tentaklari butun dunyo bo'ylab bo'lgan "iqtisodiy ahtapot" ni butun dunyo uchun tasavvur qilib bo'lmasdi.[190] Bundan tashqari, sanktsiyalarning ishlashi uchun Qo'shma Shtatlar 1935 yilda Amerika hukumati AQSh Liga a'zosi bo'lmaganligi sababli Italiyaga nisbatan sanktsiyalarga rioya qilmasligini e'lon qildi, bu AQShning majburiy qo'shilish fikri uchun umidvor bo'lgan ibrat edi. Germaniyaga qarshi sanktsiyalar. Argentina faqat Qo'shma Shtatlar qo'shilishga va'da bergan taqdirda Germaniyaga qarshi sanktsiyalarga ovoz berishini e'lon qildi.[186] Kengash, bir ovozdan emas, ammo remilitarizatsiya Versal va Lokarno shartnomalarini buzganlik deb e'lon qildi. Gitler Evropa xavfsizligi uchun yangi sxemani rejalashtirishga taklif qilingan va u "Evropada hech qanday hududiy da'volarim yo'q" deb da'vo qilib, 25 yillik muddatni talab qilmoqda tajovuz qilmaslik to'g'risidagi pakt Angliya va Frantsiya bilan. Ammo, Britaniya hukumati ushbu taklif qilingan pakt haqida ko'proq so'raganda, ular javob olmadilar.[191]

Ahamiyati

Remilitarizatsiya kuchlar muvozanatini qat'iy ravishda foydasiga o'zgartirdi Reyx.[192] Germaniyaning kengayishi yoki tajovuziga qarshi kurashda Frantsiyaning ishonchliligi shubha ostida qoldi. Frantsiyaning harbiy strategiyasi butunlay mudofaa edi va u Germaniyani bosib olish niyatida emas edi. Buning o'rniga u himoya qilishni rejalashtirgan Maginot Line. Reynlandga bitta bo'linmani ham yuborolmagani bu strategiyani butun Evropaga ishora qildi. Sharqiy Evropadagi potentsial ittifoqchilar endi Frantsiya bilan ittifoqqa ishona olmas edilar, unga ishonib bo'lmaydiki, Germaniyani bosqinchilik xavfi bilan to'xtatib qo'yishadi. bunday to'xtovsiz ittifoqchi harbiy jihatdan nochor edi. Belgiya Frantsiya bilan mudofaa ittifoqidan voz kechdi va betaraflikka tayandi. Parij Maginot chizig'ini 1940 yilda Germaniya bosib olgan Belgiya chegarasini qoplash uchun e'tibordan chetda qoldirdi. Mussolini ilgari Germaniya ekspansiyasiga qarshi turdi, endi u Frantsiya bilan hamkorlik istiqbolsiz ekanligini tushundi, shuning uchun u Berlin foydasiga tebranishni boshladi. Frantsiyaning barcha do'stlari hafsalasi pir bo'ldi - hatto Papa ham frantsuz elchisiga: "Agar siz nemislar egallab olgan zonaga zudlik bilan 200 ming kishini olib kirishga buyruq bergan bo'lsangiz, barchaga juda katta yaxshilik qilgan bo'lar edingiz", dedi.[193]

Reynland remilitarizatsiya qilinganidan so'ng Germaniya qurilishini boshladi Zigfrid chizig'i bu degani, agar Germaniya har qanday shtatlarga hujum qilgan bo'lsa kordon sanatoriyasi, Frantsiyaning bosqinga tahdid qilish qobiliyati shu sababli cheklangan edi.[194] Chexoslovakiya Prezidenti kuchlari muvozanatiga remilitarizatsiyaning ta'siri shunday edi Edvard Benesh Frantsiya bilan ittifoqdan voz kechish va uning o'rniga Germaniya bilan yaqinlashishga intilish haqida jiddiy o'ylab, faqat Gitler bilan yaqinlashish narxi uning mamlakati mustaqilligini samarali ravishda yo'qotish bo'lishi aniq bo'lganida, bu g'oyadan voz kechdi.[194] Xuddi shunday, shoh Kerol II Ruminiya, Ruminiya Frantsiya bilan ittifoqdan voz kechishi va uning mamlakati Frantsiya ta'sir doirasidan Germaniyaning ta'sir doirasiga o'tishi kerakligini qabul qilishi kerak degan xulosaga keldi.[194] Qachon Uilyam C. Bullitt, Amerikaning Frantsiyadagi yangi elchisi 1936 yil may oyida Germaniyaga tashrif buyurdi va u Baron fon Neyrat bilan uchrashdi. 1936 yil 18-mayda Bullitt prezident Ruzveltga quyidagicha xabar berdi:

"Von Neyrat" Reynland hazm bo'lmaguncha "tashqi ishlarda faol hech narsa qilmaslik Germaniya hukumatining siyosati ekanligini aytdi. U Frantsiya va Belgiya chegaralarida nemis istehkomlari qurilmaguncha, shuni anglatishini tushuntirdi. Germaniya hukumati Avstriyada fashistlar hujumini rag'batlantirish o'rniga, oldini olish uchun barcha imkoniyatlarni ishga soladi va Chexoslovakiyaga nisbatan tinch yo'l tutadi. "Bizning istehkomlarimiz qurilishi bilan va Markaziy Evropa mamlakatlari Frantsiya Germaniya hududiga kira olmasligini anglashdi. barcha davlatlar tashqi siyosatiga nisbatan boshqacha munosabatda bo'lishni boshlaydilar va yangi yulduz turkumi paydo bo'ladi ", dedi u.[195]

1936 yil 15–20 iyun kunlari shtab boshliqlari Kichik Antanta Chexoslovakiya, Ruminiya va Yugoslaviya uchrashuvi o'zgargan xalqaro vaziyatni muhokama qilish uchun uchrashdi. Ular Vengriya bilan urush uchun hozirgi rejalarini davom ettirishga qaror qilishdi, ammo Reyn okrugi remilitarizatsiya qilinganligi sababli, Germaniya bilan urush bo'lgan taqdirda frantsuzlarning samarali harakatlariga umid kam bo'lgan degan xulosaga kelishdi.[196] Uchrashuv Sharqiy Evropada hozirda faqat ikkita buyuk kuch, ya'ni Germaniya va Sovet Ittifoqi bor degan xulosalar bilan yakunlandi va umid qilish mumkin bo'lgan eng yaxshi narsa bu o'z millatlarining mustaqilligini yo'qotishini anglatadigan boshqa urushdan qochish edi. , kim g'olib bo'lishidan qat'iy nazar.[192]

Vaynberg butun nemis elitasi va ko'p nemis xalqining munosabati, har qanday yangi urush faqat Germaniyaga foyda keltiradi va Reynning qurolsizlangan maqomiga barham berish faqat yaxshi narsa bo'lishi mumkin, deb yozgan edi, chunki u yangi urush boshlash uchun eshik ochdi. nihoyatda uzoqni ko'ra oladigan, o'zini o'zi buzadigan va ahmoqona munosabat, hatto tor nemis nuqtai nazaridan ham.[8] Vaynbergning ta'kidlashicha, Germaniya 1945 yilda mustaqilligini yo'qotgan va uning ostida ancha ko'p hududlarni yo'qotgan Oder-Naysse liniyasi 1945 yilda Versal davrida bo'lgani kabi, millionlab o'lganlar va uning shaharlari vayron qilingan. Shunday qilib, Germaniya nuqtai nazaridan, eng yaxshisi Versalni qabul qilish yangi urush boshlash o'rniga bo'lar edi - Germaniya butunlay tor-mor etilishi, bo'linishi va bosib olinishi bilan tugagan urush.[8]

Izohlar

  1. ^ a b Richard J. Evans (2012 yil 26-iyul). Hokimiyatdagi uchinchi reyx, 1933 - 1939: fashistlar millat yuragi va ongini qanday yutishdi. Penguin Books Limited. p. 637. ISBN  978-0-7181-9681-3.
  2. ^ Martin Gilbert va Richard Gott, Appeasers (Feniks Press, 2000), p. 41.
  3. ^ a b Kallis, 112–113 betlar.
  4. ^ Emmerson, 22-23 betlar
  5. ^ a b Sohil, p. 7.
  6. ^ Duroselle, 116–117 betlar
  7. ^ Emmerson, 23 va 97-betlar.
  8. ^ a b v Vaynberg (1970), p. 239.
  9. ^ Emmerson, p. 25.
  10. ^ Yosh (1996), 19-21 betlar.
  11. ^ Yosh (1996), p. 21.
  12. ^ Kallis, 129 va 141-betlar.
  13. ^ Ueberschär, Gerd & Myuller, Rolf-Diter Gitlerning Sharqdagi urushi, 1941–1945: Tanqidiy baho, Oksford: Berghahn Books, 2002 yil 14-bet
  14. ^ a b Yosh, (1996), 17-18 betlar.
  15. ^ Duroselle, 172-182 betlar.
  16. ^ Kallis, 78-79 va 82-83 betlar.
  17. ^ Myuller, Klaus Yurgen 1933–1945 yillarda Germaniyada armiya, siyosat va jamiyat, Manchester: Manchester universiteti matbuoti, 1987sahifa 48.
  18. ^ Kallis, p. 79.
  19. ^ Emmerson, p. 28.
  20. ^ Obligatsiya, 197-198 betlar.
  21. ^ Obligatsiya, p. 198.
  22. ^ (inglizchada) Endryu Rotshteyn (1980). 1919 yilgi askarlarning ish tashlashlari. Basingstoke: Macmillan nashriyoti. p. 35. ISBN  0-333-27693-0.
  23. ^ Artur Xarris 1945 yilda xuddi shu iborani ishlatgan va tarixchi Frederik Teylor p. 432 dyuym Drezden: seshanba, 13 fevral, 1945 yil tomonidan ishlatilgan mashhur jumlaning qasddan aks-sadosi ekanligini eslatib o'tdi Otto fon Bismark: "Butun Bolqon yarim Pomeraniya grenaderining suyaklariga arzimaydi".
  24. ^ Emmerson, p. 24.
  25. ^ a b v Schuker (1999), 48-49 betlar.
  26. ^ Bennett, Edvard Germaniya qurollanish va G'arb, 1932–1933, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2015 yil 109-bet
  27. ^ a b Kallis, p. 82.
  28. ^ Emmerson, 28-29 betlar.
  29. ^ Kallis, p. 83.
  30. ^ Keyt Nilson; Greg Kennedi; Devid frantsuz (2010). Urushdagi ingliz yo'li: kuch va xalqaro tizim, 1856–1956: Devid frantsuz sharafiga insholar. Ashgate. p. 120. ISBN  9780754665939.
  31. ^ Obligatsiya, 198-199 betlar.
  32. ^ Obligatsiya, p. 199.
  33. ^ Obligatsiya, 200–201-betlar.
  34. ^ a b v d e f g Sallivan, Barri "Ko'zga tashlanadigan narsa: Efiopiya urushi va Ikkinchi jahon urushining kelib chiqishi" 178–203 betlar Ikkinchi jahon urushining kelib chiqishi qayta ko'rib chiqilgan A.J.P. Teylor va tarixchilar, London: Routledge, 1999 yil 179 bet
  35. ^ a b Emmerson, p. 33.
  36. ^ a b v d e f Heinemann, p. 112.
  37. ^ Vaynberg (2013), p. 188.
  38. ^ a b Vaynberg (2013), p. 171.
  39. ^ Korrelli Barnett, Britaniya hokimiyatining qulashi, London: Metxuen, 1972, 353 bet.
  40. ^ a b v Sohil, p. 8.
  41. ^ Duroselle, p. 109.
  42. ^ Duroselle, p. 114.
  43. ^ Smit, p. 261.
  44. ^ Smit, p. 262.
  45. ^ Doerr, Pol Britaniya tashqi siyosati, 1919–1939 yillar, Manchester: Manchester universiteti matbuoti, 1998 yil 137-bet
  46. ^ Nevill, Piter Gitler va tinchlanish: inglizlarning Ikkinchi jahon urushining oldini olishga urinishlari, London: A&C Black, 2006 yil 138 bet
  47. ^ Pratt, Larri Malta sharqida, Suvayshning g'arbiy qismida: Britaniyaning O'rta er dengizi inqirozi, 1936–1939 yy, Kembrij: Kembrij universiteti matbuoti, 1975, 26-27 betlar
  48. ^ Duroselle, p. 111.
  49. ^ Keyns, Jon "Frantsiya, Buyuk Britaniya va qishki urush muammosi haqidagi mulohazalar, 1939-1940" 269-285 betlar, dan 1940 yildagi frantsuz mag'lubiyati Joel Blatt tomonidan tahrirlangan, Berghahn Books: Providence, Rod-Aylend, 1998 yil 285-bet
  50. ^ Jefri Uorner, Per Laval va Fransiyaning tutilishi (Nyu-York: Makmillan, 1969), p. 126.
  51. ^ a b Emmerson, p. 35.
  52. ^ Emmerson, p. 37
  53. ^ a b Kallis, p. 144-145.
  54. ^ Pratt, Larri Malta sharqida, Suvayshning g'arbiy qismida: Britaniyaning O'rta er dengizi inqirozi, 1936–1939 yy, Kembrij: Kembrij universiteti matbuoti, 1975 yil 26-bet
  55. ^ Krozye, Endryu Tinchlanish va Germaniyaning mustamlakalar uchun so'nggi taklifi Macmillan Press: London, Buyuk Britaniya, 1988 p. 33.
  56. ^ Emmerson, 62-3 bet.
  57. ^ Krozye, Endryu Tinchlanish va Germaniyaning mustamlakalar uchun so'nggi taklifi, Matbuot: London, Buyuk Britaniya, 1988 p. 32.
  58. ^ a b v Vaynberg (1970), p. 247.
  59. ^ a b v d e Heinemann, p. 113.
  60. ^ a b v d Vaynberg (1970), p. 241.
  61. ^ Sohil, 5-6 bet.
  62. ^ Sohil, p. 6.
  63. ^ Sohil, p. 12-13.
  64. ^ Sohil, p. 13-14.
  65. ^ Sohil, 14-15 betlar.
  66. ^ Sohil, 14-16 betlar.
  67. ^ Emmerson, 72-74 betlar.
  68. ^ Vaynberg (1970), p. 246.
  69. ^ Kershaw (1998), 582-586 betlar.
  70. ^ Emmerson, p. 39
  71. ^ Sohil, p. 10.
  72. ^ a b Sohil, p. 11.
  73. ^ a b v d Strang, G. Bryus "Urush va tinchlik: Mussonlini Myunxenga boradigan yo'l" 160-190-betlar Myunxen inqirozi, 1938 yil edited by Igor Lukes & Erik Goldstein, Frank Cass: London, 1999 page 173.
  74. ^ a b Cassels, Alan "Mussolini and the Myth of Rome" pages 57–74 from The Origins of the Second World War Reconsidered A.J.P. Taylor and the Historians, London: Routledge, 1999 page 63.
  75. ^ Duroselle, pp. 112–113.
  76. ^ Duroselle, p. 113.
  77. ^ Duroselle, p. 115.
  78. ^ a b Heinemann, p. 114.
  79. ^ Rupert Matthews, Hitler: Military Commander (Arcturus, 2003), p. 115.
  80. ^ Rupert Matthews, Hitler: Military Commander (Arcturus, 2003), p. 113.
  81. ^ Weinberg (1970), p. 252.
  82. ^ Emmerson, p. 66.
  83. ^ Kagan, p. 212.
  84. ^ Duroselle, pp. 122–123.
  85. ^ Duroselle, p. 123.
  86. ^ Kershaw (1998), p. 584.
  87. ^ a b Kershaw (1998), pp. 584–585.
  88. ^ Weinberg (1970), p. 247-248.
  89. ^ Weinberg (1970), p. 250.
  90. ^ Weinberg (1970), p. 249.
  91. ^ a b Heinemann, p. 114–115.
  92. ^ Kershaw (1998), p. 581.
  93. ^ a b Weinberg (2013), p. 194.
  94. ^ Neville, Peter Mussolini, London: Routledge, 2004 p. 135.
  95. ^ Kallis, p. 165.
  96. ^ Kershaw (2000), pp. 7, 88 & 165–166.
  97. ^ Kershaw (2000), p. 143.
  98. ^ Kershaw (1998), p. 585.
  99. ^ a b Duroselle, p. 122.
  100. ^ a b Kershaw (1998), p. 586.
  101. ^ Weinberg (2013), p. 196.
  102. ^ Parker (1956), p. 355.
  103. ^ a b Shirer, p. 291.
  104. ^ a b Kallis, p. 113.
  105. ^ Rupert Matthews, Hitler: Military Commander (Arcturus, 2003), page 116.
  106. ^ Heinemann, p. 115.
  107. ^ Shirer, pp. 293 & 295
  108. ^ a b Knickerbocker, H.R. (1941). Ertaga Gitlermi? Insoniyat jangi to'g'risida 200 ta savol. Reynal va Xitkok. pp. 26, 148. ISBN  9781417992775.
  109. ^ J. R. Tournoux, Petain et de Gaulle (Paris: Plon, 1964), p. 159.
  110. ^ May, Ernest R.: G'alati g'alaba, New York: Hill & Wang, 2000 page 37.
  111. ^ a b May, Ernest R.: G'alati g'alaba, New York: Hill & Wang, 2000 pages 35–36.
  112. ^ Emmerson, p. 36
  113. ^ Bartov, Omer "Soldiers, Nazis and War in the Third Reich" pages 133–150 from The Third Reich The Essential Readings edited by Christian Leitz, London: Blackwell, 1999 pages 137–139 & 144–146
  114. ^ Bartov, Omer "Soldiers, Nazis and War in the Third Reich" pages 133–150 from The Third Reich The Essential Readings edited by Christian Leitz, London: Blackwell, 1999 pages 138–139.
  115. ^ a b Goda, Norman "Black Marks: Hitler's Bribery of his Senior Officers During World War II" from pages 96–137 from Corrupt Histories, Toronto: Hushion House edited by Emmanuel Kreike, & William Chester Jordan, 2005 page 102
  116. ^ a b v d e Kershaw (1998), p. 587.
  117. ^ House of Commons, July 27, 1936: https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debate/?id=1936-07-27a.1207.1
  118. ^ a b v Kershaw (1998), p. 588.
  119. ^ a b v d Kershaw (1998), p. 590.
  120. ^ Kershaw (1998), p. 590–591.
  121. ^ Shirer, p. 294.
  122. ^ a b Kershaw (1998), p. 591.
  123. ^ Shirer, p. 291–293.
  124. ^ Shirer, p. 293.
  125. ^ Young, (1996), p. 146.
  126. ^ Schuker (1997), pp. 223 & 236–37.
  127. ^ Schuker, (1997), p. 235.
  128. ^ a b Young (1978), p. 121 2.
  129. ^ Duroselle, p. 125-126.
  130. ^ a b Schuker, (1997), p. 237.
  131. ^ Schuker, (1997) pp. 237–238.
  132. ^ a b v Schuker, (1997), p. 238.
  133. ^ Shore, pp. 7–8.
  134. ^ a b v Emmerson, pp. 108–109.
  135. ^ a b Emmerson, p. 119.
  136. ^ a b Emmerson, p. 116.
  137. ^ Duroselle, p. 129.
  138. ^ Duroselle, p. 128.
  139. ^ a b Parker (1956), p. 356.
  140. ^ Emmerson, p. 104
  141. ^ Schuker, (1997), pp. 238–239.
  142. ^ A. J. P. Teylor, Ikkinchi jahon urushining kelib chiqishi (Penguen, 1991), p. 130.
  143. ^ Parker (1956), p. 357.
  144. ^ a b Parker (1956), p. 358.
  145. ^ Schuker, (1997), p. 239.
  146. ^ a b Young (1978), p. 124.
  147. ^ a b Young, (1978), pp. 124–25.
  148. ^ a b Young (1978), p. 123.
  149. ^ Young (1978), pp. 123–124.
  150. ^ Ulrich, Raphäelle "René Massigli and Germany, 1919–1938" pp. 132–48 from Frantsiyaning tashqi va mudofaa siyosati, 1918-1940 yillar Buyuk kuchning tanazzuli va qulashi edited by Robert Boyce, London, United Kingdom: Routledge, 1998 p. 144.
  151. ^ a b v Weinberg (1970), p. 254.
  152. ^ Young (1978), p. 125
  153. ^ Teylor, A.J.P. Ikkinchi jahon urushining kelib chiqishi Penguin: London, 1991 page 131.
  154. ^ Korrelli Barnett, Britaniya hokimiyatining qulashi (Pan, 2002), p. 336.
  155. ^ Garold Nikolson, The Harold Nicolson Diaries: 1919–1964 (Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2004), p. 139.
  156. ^ a b Emmerson, p. 144.
  157. ^ a b v Weinberg (1970), p. 259.
  158. ^ Teylor, A.J.P. Ikkinchi jahon urushining kelib chiqishi, London: Penguin 1961, 1976 p. 132.
  159. ^ Kagan, p. 213.
  160. ^ Emmerson, p. 139.
  161. ^ "The German Occupation of The Rhineland, 1936". Oniy rasmlar. O'qish egri chizig'i. Milliy arxiv. Arxivlandi asl nusxasi 2009-05-06 da.
  162. ^ Weinberg (1970), p. 258.
  163. ^ Medlikott, VN Britain and Germany Athlone Press: London, United Kingdom, 1969 page 24.
  164. ^ Roi, pp. 128–129.
  165. ^ a b Roi, pp. 128–130.
  166. ^ a b v d e Roi, p. 130.
  167. ^ Parker (1997), p. 214.
  168. ^ Emmerson, p. 217.
  169. ^ Emmerson, pp. 215–216.
  170. ^ Teylor, A.J.P. Ikkinchi jahon urushining kelib chiqishi, London: Penguin 1961, 1976 p. 148.
  171. ^ Overy, Richard va Wheatcroft, Endryu Urushga yo'l, London: Macmillan, 1989 p. 86.
  172. ^ Martin Gilbert, Cherchill: hayot (Pimlico, 2000), p. 552.
  173. ^ Charles Cheney Hyde, 'Belgium and Neutrality', Amerika xalqaro huquq jurnali, Jild 31, No. 1. (January 1937), p. 82.
  174. ^ a b v Weinberg (1970), pp. 283–284.
  175. ^ a b Weinberg (1970), p. 255.
  176. ^ Emmerson, p. 158.
  177. ^ Emmerson, p. 159.
  178. ^ Weinberg (1970), p. 256.
  179. ^ a b v d Taklif, p. 415.
  180. ^ a b v Jiri Hochman, The Soviet Union and the Failure of Collective Security 1934-1938 (1984) p. 104.
  181. ^ Hochman, p. 122.
  182. ^ Hochman, p. 57.
  183. ^ Hochman, p. 76.
  184. ^ Emmerson, pp. 170–171.
  185. ^ Emmerson, pp. 171–172.
  186. ^ a b Emmerson, p. 166.
  187. ^ Emmerson, p. 171.
  188. ^ Emmerson, p. 172.
  189. ^ Kallis, p. 144.
  190. ^ Emmerson, pp. 171–171.
  191. ^ Teylor, p. 133.
  192. ^ a b Weinberg (1970), p. 262.
  193. ^ Jeffrey Record (2007). The Specter of Munich: Reconsidering the Lessons of Appeasing Hitler. Potomak kitoblari. 27-29 betlar. ISBN  9781597970396.
  194. ^ a b v Weinberg (1970), p. 261.
  195. ^ Shirer, p. 295.
  196. ^ Weinberg (1970), pp. 261–262.

Adabiyotlar

  • Korrelli Barnett. Britaniya hokimiyatining qulashi, London: Pan, 2002.
  • Brian Bond. "The Continental Commitment In British Strategy in the 1930s" pp. 197–208 from Fashistlarning da'vati va tinchlantirish siyosati tomonidan tahrirlangan Volfgang Mommsen and Lothar Kettenacker, London: George Allen & Unwin, 1983, ISBN  0-04-940068-1.
  • Alan Bullok. Gitler: Tiraniyada ish, London: Odhams, 1962.
  • Jean-Baptiste Duroselle. France and the Nazi Threat: The Collapse of French Diplomacy 1932–1939, Nyu-York: Enigma kitoblari, 2004, ISBN  1929631154.
  • J.T.Emmerson. The Rhineland Crisis 7 March 1936 A Study in Multilateral Diplomacy, Ames:Iowa State University Press, 1977.
  • Martin Gilbert. Cherchill: hayot, London: Pimlico, 2000.
  • Martin Gilbert and Richard Gott. The Appeasers, London: Phoenix Press, 2000.
  • John Heinemann. Hitler's First Foreign Minister: Konstantin Freiherr von Neurath, Diplomat and Statesman, Berkeley : University of California Press, 1979 ISBN  0-520-03442-2.
  • Hochman, Jiri. The Soviet Union and the Failure of Collective Security 1934-1938. (1984)
  • Hyde, Charles Cheney. 'Belgium and Neutrality', Amerika xalqaro huquq jurnali, Jild 31, No. 1. (January 1937), pp. 81–5.
  • Kershou, Yan. Gitler Xubris, New York: Norton, 1998. ISBN  978-0393320350.
  • Kershou, Yan. Natsist diktaturasi: talqin muammolari va istiqbollari, London: Arnold, 2000.
  • Medlikott, VN Britain and Germany: The Search For Agreement 1930–1937, London: Athlone Press, 1969.
  • Nikolson, Garold. The Harold Nicolson Diaries: 1919–1964, London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2004.
  • Offner, Arnold. "The United States and National Socialist Germany" pages 413–427 from Fashistlarning da'vati va tinchlantirish siyosati edited by Wolfgang Mommsen and Lothar Kettenacker, George Allen & Unwin: London, United Kingdom, 1983.
  • Parker, RA.C. "The First Capitulation: France and the Rhineland Crisis of 1936" pages 355–373 from Jahon siyosati, Volume 8, Issue # 3, April 1956.
  • Parker, RA.C. "Alternatives to Appeasement" pp. 206–21 from Ikkinchi jahon urushining kelib chiqishi edited by Patrick Finney Edward Arnold: London, United Kingdom, 1997.
  • Roi, Michael Lawrence. Alternative to Appeasement: Sir Robert Vansittart and Alliance Diplomacy, 1934–1937, Westport: Greenwood, 1997.
  • Schuker, Stephen. "France and the Remilitarization of the Rhineland, 1936" pp. 206–21 from Ikkinchi jahon urushining kelib chiqishi edited by Patrick Finney, London: Arnold Press, London, 1997. ISBN  0-340-67640-X.
  • Schuker, Stephen. "The End of Versailles" pages 38–56 from The Origins of the Second World War Reconsidered: A.J.P. Taylor And The Historians edited by Gordon Martel, London: Routledge: 1999.
  • Shirer, William. Uchinchi reyxning ko'tarilishi va qulashi, New York: Viking.
  • Shore, Zach. "Hitler, Intelligence and the Decision to Remilitarize the Rhine" pages 5–18 from Zamonaviy tarix jurnali, Volume 34, Issue #1, January 1999.
  • Smith, Denis Mack. "Appeasement as a Factor in Mussolini's Foreign Policy" from Fashistlarning da'vati va tinchlantirish siyosati edited by Wolfgang Mommsen and Lothar Kettenacker, London: George Allen & Unwin, 1983.
  • A. J. P. Teylor. Ikkinchi jahon urushining kelib chiqishi, London: Penguin, 1976.
  • Teynbi, Arnold J. Survey Of Inteenational Affairs: 1935 Volume I (1937) pp 352–69 onlayn
  • Watt, D.C. "The Reoccupation of th Rhineland" Bugungi tarix (April 1956) 6#4 pp 244-251
  • Gerxard Vaynberg. Gitler Germaniyasining tashqi siyosati Evropada diplomatik inqilob 1933–36, Chikago: Chikago universiteti matbuoti, 1970 yil.
  • Weinberg, Gerhard. Hitler's Foreign Policy 1933–1939: The Road to World War II, New York, Enigma Books, 2013.
  • Robert J. Young. In Command of France; French Foreign Policy and Military Planning, 1933–1940, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1978, ISBN  0-674-44536-8.
  • Yosh, Robert. Frantsiya va Ikkinchi jahon urushining kelib chiqishi, New York: St. Martin's Press, 1996, ISBN  0312161867.

Tashqi havolalar

  • Evropa xaritasi showing political situation during Hitler's remilitarization of the Rhineland at omniatlas.com