By Victor Davis Hanson
Thursday, February 18, 2016
World War II broke out when Nazi Germany invaded Poland
on September 1, 1939. A once preventable war had become inevitable — and would
soon become global — due to three fatal decisions.
Most infamously, the Western European democracies had
appeased Hitler during the late 1930s in hopes that he would quit gobbling up
his neighbors. Unfortunately, the Nazis considered Western appeasement as
weakness to be manipulated rather than magnanimity to be reciprocated.
After the bloodless annexation of Austria and the
dismemberment of Czechoslovakia, Hitler assumed that Britain and France would
not go to war at all if he went into Poland. Or, if they did, that they would
not fight very seriously.
Yet Western appeasement did not alone guarantee the
outbreak of World War II.
The Germans invaded Poland only after a guarantee from
Josef Stalin that the Soviet Union would soon join in attacking the Poles from
the east. The two dictatorships could then divvy up the country.
Stalin’s Communist Russia had foolishly gambled that by
making a deal with Nazi Germany, Hitler would leave the Soviets alone. At
first, Stalin hoped that Germany would turn its war machine loose only on the
Western European democracies.
Yet Stalin’s collaboration with Hitler eventually
guaranteed that Russia also would be double-crossed — less than two years after
signing an agreement with the Third Reich, Germany surprise-attacked the Soviet
Union, on June 22, 1941. Due to Stalin’s collaboration, almost 30 million Russians
would die on the Eastern Front over the next four years.
But it was more than Western appeasement of Hitler and
Soviet collaboration that made World War II inevitable. Nazi Germany still
remained relatively weak in 1939. The populations, economies, and territories
of its likely enemies were collectively far greater than those of the Third
Reich and its allies.
A third, fatal decision was necessary to ensure a war.
The United States had entered World War I late in April 1917, and it revived
the sagging Allied effort, helping to crush the Germany army and win the war by
November 1918.
But by 1919, America had rapidly disarmed and forgotten
its key role in World War I. Americans had tired of the Europeans. They were
sick of the endless horse-trading that had led to the postwar Versailles
Treaty.
By the start of the Great Depression in 1929, America was
mostly unarmed and determined never to get involved in European feuding again.
Most Americans complained that the huge death toll of World War I had led to
neither perpetual peace nor even a peaceful Germany.
America’s isolationism and disarmament also helped prompt
another global war. Had the U.S. kept its military strong after World War I,
and had it entered into a formal alliance with its former World War I partners,
Germany never would have risked a second war against the combined strength of a
fully armed Britain, France, and United States.
Instead, Hitler assumed the U.S. either could not or
would not offer much military help to his intended European targets.
Why, then, did a relatively weak Nazi Germany between
1939 and 1941 believe that it could take on much of the world, and inspire Axis
partners such as Italy and Japan to follow its suicidal lead?
The answer is obvious. British and French appeasement,
Soviet collaboration, and American isolation had together convinced Hitler and
his Axis allies that the victors of World War I were more eager to grant
concessions at any cost than were the defeated.
The world of 2016 is eerily beginning to resemble the
powder keg of 1939 Europe.
Iran, China, and North Korea, along with radical Islamic
terrorist groups, all have particular contempt for Western democracies. Almost
daily, various aggressive nations or organizations seek provocation by shooting
off intercontinental missiles, boarding American boats, sending millions of
young male Middle Easterners into the West, and issuing unending threats. China
is creating new artificial islands to control commercial routes to and from
Asia.
The European Union is largely unarmed. Yet it still
trusts that it can use its vaunted “smart diplomacy” to reason with its
enemies.
Meanwhile, Vladimir Putin’s Russia cuts deals with Iran,
Syria, and most of the enemies of the West. Like Stalin before, Putin cynically
assumes that his triangulations will turn aggressive powers exclusively against
the West. Recently, he warned the West of a “new world war” starting in the
Middle East.
America is slowly withdrawing from involvement abroad,
using the same isolationist arguments heard in the 1920s.
Past interventions in the Middle East have worn on the
nation. Ingrate nations did not appreciate American sacrifices. In tough
economic times, some contend that defense spending should be diverted to more
social programs.
Appeasement, collaboration, and isolationism always prove
a lethal mix — past and present.
No comments:
Post a Comment