[Seite: - 1 - ]

GERMANY AND EUROPE

IN THE POST - WAR - WORLD

Contents:

The Treatment of Germany after the War

No New Frontiers, but a New Europe

The Atlantic Charter and Germany

Annexations and Partitions a Guarantee of Peace ?

Strategic Frontiers

The Exchange of Populations

Economic Misery and Nationalism Guarantors of Peace ?

Lasting Peace Through a Democratic Europe

- * -

[Seite im Original:] - 2 -

GERMANY AND EUROPE IN THE POST-WAR-WORLD

At a meeting of the London Group of German Social Democrats held on Friday, 16 th June, 1944

HANS VOGEL
Chairman of the Social Democratic Party of Germany
gave a talk on international policy with special reference to statements and suggestions on the position of Germany in the post-war world.

At the outset, Vogel referred to the various statements previously made by the Social Democratic Party of Germany either alone or in conjunction with the other Socialist German groups united in the Union of German Socialist Organisations in Great Britain, on their attitude to the war and to post-war problems.

Those statements embody numerous practical suggestions which, in our opinion, might go far to prevent any future policy or aggression on Germany's part. We have demanded the most severe punishment of those responsible for crimes committed, and pledged ourselves to do everything to secure retribution and reparation for the victims of these crimes. Further we regard it as our duty and our task as international socialists to contribute to any international discussions on the shaping of Germany and Europe after the war.

The question of

the treatment of Germany after the war

cannot be solved as an isolated problem. It is the most important part of a problem that has to be solved in the framework of an all-European complex. This is nothing new to us. We have always regarded it as one of the essential tasks of the German Social Democrats to educate our followers and the German people as a whole to be good Europeans and good world-citizens too. We have never worked for a Germany which would dominate Europe; rather has it been our aim to fit Germany into the community of European

[Seite im Original:] - 3 -

peoples. The liberation and re-shaping of Europe is now again the real problem. Much hard thinking and practical work will have to be done so as to ease the tension and heal the breaches within Europe.

In the discussion of this problem at present, two main concepts are apparent: (1) that the three Great Powers agree on the domination of Europe; and (2) that there should be a new Europe based on the solidarity and the mutual interests of the European nations. While agreeing that the cooperation of the three Great Powers will be necessary even after the war, Vogel confessed his belief in the latter solution of the European problem.

The age-long conception of "divide and rule", of the "balance of power", and the splitting-up of Europe into spheres of influence and power ought not to find a place in the post-war world. The European problem cannot be solved on a satisfactory and permanent basis by fixing new frontiers between the various European states, and by proceeding in this way to follow Hitler's methods. Hitler's original idea was to solve the problem of national minorities by annexing territory, and by restricting the civil rights in these national states to members of a certain race or national group. Hitler's method has been to drive masses of the populace from one territory to another as he pleased, without regard to their culture, traditions and human needs. Hitler thinks that only one Great Power can rule in any world zone, and that the weaker and smaller nations have simply to yield to such rule.

No new Frontiers, but a new Europe

The real problem is how to rebuild Europe in a better way, and how to give new life and new prosperity to a Europe which is a cultural and historical unit and the source of a civilisation which goes even beyond the bounds of Europe. The true problem is not how to draw new frontiers between the European nations, but rather how to find ways and means of preventing national frontiers in Europe from being prison-walls.

[Seite im Original:] - 4 -

It should be the task of all good Europeans to coordinate the social and cultural life of Europe into new organic and creative units, and to organize the economic life of Europe's people on a rational basis. The tasks that lie ahead are so vast that no one country alone will be able to solve them; what is wanted is a united Europe, plus an all-embracing world organization.

We Socialists are not alone in the struggle for a new and better world. Recently, English clergymen, led by the Archbishop of Canterbury, strongly advocated the creation of a new Europe where the human rights of all, even of the defeated peoples, would be respected. A programme of American scholars sponsored by two hundred well-known names, demands a world organization transcending the ideas of the old League of Nations for the purpose of re-establishing international law and the foundations of permanent peace in an international legal systems.

The voices of those clergymen and scholars have a familiar ring to us Socialists, for they recall the speeches made at former international congresses of Socialists. If August Bebel, Jean Jaurès and Arthur Henderson were still living, they would certainly have added their own names to those of the scholars referred to. They always advocated the uniting of workers and scholars, and the reconciliation of Socialism with true and genuine Christianity. Another encouraging sign is the fact that the Socialist underground movements in all occupied countries, without exception, are endeavouring to achieve the newly realized aims and tasks, in the traditional spirit of the Socialist workers' movements, and with true Socialist sentiment.

Some concern is being felt that the United Nations have not yet come to any definite decisions on post-war problems. Their not having done so may have certain advantages: the peoples of Europe who are still oppressed will naturally want some say in the matter, for they experienced Fascism from within, and they will have come to certain conclusions.

[Seite im Original:] - 5 -

We shall realize that the many material changes that have taken place in Europe have been accompanied by a spiritual revolution. The survivors of this war will see to it that justice does not remain an empty word, that freedom takes on a new meaning, and that order is something very different to what the rulers of the past wished it to be. The chaos left behind by Hitler can be overcome only by the power of an idea which creates fresh spiritual values, and by mobilizing heart, brain and hands. It is our great hope and our firm belief that this idea will evolve into a Socialism that is both freedom-loving and creative.

The Atlantic Charter and Germany

Besides causing destruction, misery and terror, this war has brought forth some great and promising events. One such event was the announcement of the Atlantic Charter by Churchill and Roosevelt. The meaning ascribed to it, the solemnity of its proclamation, and the announcement that all its clauses would apply to big and small nations, victors and vanquished, made it a great historical event. The whole world regarded it as the fundamental law for the post-war world and for a permanent and just peace. This meaning of the Atlantic Charter was specially emphasized by Mr. Maisky, the Soviet Ambassador in London, when the Charter was signed by representatives of the United Nations on 24th September 1941.

The world was greatly surprised by the Commons speech of Mr. Churchill on 22nd February, 1944, when he announced that he approved Stalin's demand at the Teheran Conference, viz., the ceding of territories of pre-war Poland and the compensation of Poland for the loss of her eastern territories by territories in the north and west. As matters stand at present, it rather looks as though the world is going to have another old-fashioned peace - a peace bargained by the big nations at the expense of the small ones, and by the small ones at the expense of the defeated nations. Even now there is some opposition by the smaller countries to this policy of the great Powers, as evidenced, among others, by a declaration made by the Dutch Foreign Minister van Kleffens on 31st May, 1944.

[Seite im Original:] - 6 -

In his speech on 22nd February, 1944, Mr. Churchill explained that the formula of "unconditional surrender" does not mean the enslavement and annihilation of the German people. But it did mean that the Allies will not be bound by any treaty or commitment towards Germany at the time of her capitulation. Hence the Atlantic Charter could not be regarded as the result of a mutual agreement binding the Allies with regard to Germany. No serious objection can be raised to this interpretation of the legal relation between the Allies and Germany. No agreement is of course possible with Hitler and his generals; but the main point is whether the original spirit of the Atlantic Charter should be applied to the shaping of Germany after the war. If all the plans as to the treatment of Germany at the conclusion of peace, and all rumours current in the Allied camp on this subject were to become realities, the future position of Germany would not be far from enslavement and annihilation.

Annexations and Partitions a Guarantee of Peace?

Plans are being discussed and advocated which go far beyond Churchill's declaration. "The "League of Polish Patriots" in Moscow is not satisfied with the agreement made by Churchill and Stalin regarding the separation of East Prussia from Germany. The League also demands Silesia and the greater part of Pomerania.

In an interview, published on 2nd June, 1944, Mr. Mikolajczyk[1], Polish Prime Minister, stated that "the question of Poland's western frontier is not merely a matter of compensation, but of Polish security. There ought to be no Germans in the future territory of Poland. The Poles do not blame a party or the German Army for the terror inflicted by the German Army, the Gestapo, the officials and the courts, but they hold Germany and the German people responsible. Poland must demand the incorporation of East Prussia and Silesia into the Polish state for reasons of security. Silesia with its old Polish history has become a major danger spot for Poland, because part of Germany's heavy industry, including synthetic oil

[Seite im Original:] - 7 -

production, has been transferred there." The German population remaining outside the Reich borders as a result of the new fixing of frontiers should be expelled. This would affect three to eleven millions of Germans, the exact number depending on the final adjustment of frontiers. These Germans would be sent into the remaining territory of the Reich, reduced and weakened in its productive capacity.

The press has reported on a plan of the Russian Professor Varga. According to this plan, Germany should not only be compelled to make almost fantastical financial reparations, but her industrial plants should be dismantled and deprived of a large part of their machines for shipment to Russia. The same plan provides for the deportation of millions of German workers to Russia to do forced labour there, as press reports have stated.

Then repeated mention is made of the partition of Germany into five independent countries, military occupation over a long period of years, and the setting-up of a civil administration by the Allied authorities of occupation. Certain plans even go so far as to suggest that the German Trade Union movement should be subjected to Allied supervision. It is impossible to distinguish between the guilty and innocent in Germany, said Sir Walter Citrine at the International Labour Office Congress in Philadelphia. Millions of German workers ought to be punished with the leaders, since they helped Hitler to power in the elections and condoned at least Germany's behaviour by tacitly tolerating it.

Only one remark should be made on all these opinions of the collective guilt of the German people with regard to Hitler's war. Is Fascism a purely German phenomenon, or is it not a spiritual and political disease which affected large parts of other nations as well? Is Germany, as some people state, really the only trouble-maker of the last century? During the last fifty years there have been two wars with Germany as the focal centre. No discussion is needed on the guilt of Hitlerite Germany as regards the outbreak of the present war. In the case of the first world war, how-

[Seite im Original:] - 8 -

ever, the responsibility for its outbreak must be shared by Imperial Germany, the Habsburgs and czaristic Russia. During the same period, however, there were four Balkan wars, two Polish-Russian wars - - England with the Boer Republic, Spain with the United States, and Russia with Japan, not to mention the countless smaller colonial wars. History has no evidence to support the theory that peace can be guaranteed by weakening any one power; nor can peace be ensured by the planning of strategic frontiers; and it is by her request for

strategic frontiers

that Russia justifies her claim to East Polish territories.

The same argument was advanced by the Polish Prime Minister when claiming the cession of East Prussia and Silesia. The bone of contention in the Russo-Polish controversy is the Curzon Line. In 1919 this line was merely a suggestion made by Lord Curzon, British Foreign Secretary, for a demarcation line between two fighting armies. The Treaty of Riga, signed in March, 1921, gave the territories now in dispute to Poland.[2] In 1939, Hitler guaranteed them to Stalin in an agreement concluded at Stalin's request. During the whole of the time between 1921 and 1939, Russia never felt that this frontier line hampered her in any way. In 1932 Russia concluded a solemn and voluntary pact of non-aggression with Poland by the terms of which this frontier was guaranteed as permanent. On 30th July, 1941, shortly after the invasion of Russia by Hitler, the Soviet Government declared by treaty that the German-Russian treaties of 1939 and the territorial changes in Poland thereby involved had lost their validity. At Moscow's request, this treaty was extended for a further ten years in 1943.

At the outbreak of the First World War, the Russian frontier was much farther west than the frontier now demanded by Stalin. When Hitler attacked Russia in 1941, Russia had everything which she is asking for. In neither case did the possession of "strategic frontiers" provide any guarantee against attack. This example shows that real security cannot be achieved by the unprincipled shifting of territories and frontiers on the pretext of creating strategic frontiers.

[Seite im Original:] - 9 -

The Exchange of Populations

Another matter closely bound up with the cession of territories is the exchange of populations. An exchange of this kind is being frequently justified nowadays by referring to the Greek-Turkish exchange of 1923. It is alleged that the Greek Government themselves and the great philanthropist Fritjof Nansen even agreed to it. But, in reality, the Greeks were compelled, by necessity to give their assent, since they saw no other way of saving the Greek minority in Turkey from the worst. Nansen described the appalling misery of the uprooted people in moving words when speaking to the League of Nations. Even the British Foreign Secretary, Lord Curzon, declared that the agreement was a bad mistake, and that he regretted it deeply.

Economic Misery and Nationalism Guarantors of Peace?

There is no need to enter into a detailed discussion on the results of a destruction of Germany's industrial potential and of the forced labour of millions of German workers in countries at present occupied. Experience shows that forced labour is the least productive and most wasteful form of labour. Dismantling existing works and factories and transferring used machines can only be justified as a counsel of despair, if there were no other way of reparation. Carrying out these two measures would mean condemning a nation of seventy million people in the heart of Europe to a low standard of living, and pretty well eliminating that nation as a buyer and seller. Germany would be prevented from contribution to the speedy recovery of European prosperity. Since German workers are among the most skilled of the world's workers, their elimination would still more reduce the economic prosperity of all.

On the other hand, a people whose standard of living has been reduced to a minimum cannot regain political stability; and it will remain a centre of danger and unrest, even to its neighbours.

In this way, one of the essential aims of a future peace - the prevention of further aggression by Germany - an aim for which we German Socialists are prepared to fight with all our strength and resource,

[Seite im Original:] - 10 -

would be jeopardised at the very outset of post-war development.

Any peace imposed on Germany by the United Nations needs a partner on the German side - a partner who is not only prepared to sign it, but will guarantee that the treaty is loyally observed and carried out.

One of America's outstanding journalists, Dorothy Thompson, reviewing the plan of Germany's partition in to five independent countries, wrote that a peace of this kind could only be supported by Quislings and maintained by British, American and Russian bayonets. Any democratic government would be impossible in this kind of a Germany. German nationalism with an underground movement would do its dangerous work, and to carry out such a plan would mean complete unity and immense sacrifices on the part of the Allies for a long time to come.

None of the essential problems of the re-shaping of Europe after the war has reached a final settlement; everything is still in a flux.

Lasting Peace through a Democratic Europe

We are still convinced that the only real way to win the war and secure a lasting peace is by establishing a fighting democracy in all the countries of Europe. We still feel that this war has all the characteristics of an ideological war - an embittered war for freedom against tyranny.

Hitler's system and its ideology cannot be finally destroyed unless and until its social foundations and supporting forces are destroyed as well. This method of overcoming National Socialism may be regarded as a revolutionary event. For this reason, the post-Hitler world cannot be the world of pre-war days. Europe's fate depends upon each one of its individual states, and Europe cannot be saved for the future without the co-operation of the European nations; and within each nation is required the active cooperation of all those men and women who opposed Fascism and its doctrines, and who are called upon to be the true representatives of a New Europe. We exiled German Socialists are fully aware of the burden which Germany must bear, and of our great responsibility.

[Seite im Original:] - 11 -

We can only repeat our determination to cooperate with all our strength in safeguarding a lasting peace in the future, inside a post-war Germany liberated from Hitlerism and militarism, and in the general framework of a European and international policy of peace. The conversion of a majority of the German people to this policy will depend very largely on the opportunity the German people will have for shaping their own initiative. Much, very much, depends on whether the Allies, when deciding on the possibilities of a new democratic Germany, will realize that the best guarantee against future aggression and peace-breaking is to safeguard the economic and national possibilities of life and of full internal political freedom for all nations.

Our earnest hope is that our generation will be capable of doing the great work that lies ahead; and that an international Socialist movement, spiritually reborn, stout of heart, united and resolved, may realize its great historical mission.

- * -

[Veröffentlichungshinweis]

"THE INTERNATIONAL POLICY OF GERMAN SOCIALISTS",
statement, issued by the

"Union of German Socialist
Organisations in Great Britain"

will be sent on application.

[Spendenaufruf]

Contributions
toward the costs of our publications
will be received with gratitude by

Wilh. Sander
33, Fernside Ave., London N.W.7.

[Seite im Original:] - 12 -

Other Publications:

FIRM OUR VIEW - FIRM OUR AIM
(The Struggle of German Social Democrats against Hitler)

STRUGGLING REFUGEES
(The Problem of Interned Refugees. - Radio-talk to the German workers by Hans Vogel)

THE THIRD REICH DURING THE SPRING AND SUMMER OF 1942

HITLERITE GERMANY DURING THE AUTUMN OF 1942

TOTAL WAR IN HITLERITE GERMANY

HITLER'S TOTAL WAR AND THE REACTIONS OF THE GERMAN PEOPLE

AT THE TURNING POINT OF THE WAR (Early Summer 1943)

GERMANY A BATTLEGROUND

Inside Information and Reports by the Executive Committee of the Social Democratic Party of Germany, London Headquarters.

CONFERENCE OF GERMAN SOCIAL DEMOCRATS IN ENGLAND
(Speeches and Messages by Hans Vogel, J. S. Middleton, Louis de Brouckère and Erich Ollenhauer)

10 YEARS OF NAZI DICTATORSHIP
(Speeches by H. Vogel, Rt. Hon. David Grenfell, M.P., Walter Schevenels and Louis de Brouckère)

GERMANY'S FUTURE IN THE LIGHT OF WORLD OPINION
(Speech delivered by Hans Vogel)

"SOZIALISTISCH MITTEILUNGEN" - News for German Socialists in England -
This monthly has been a regular source of information for German Social Democrats in Great Britain and has also found many readers in oversea countries. The first issues of this news-letter appeared shortly after the outbreak of war.

* * *

Issued by the London Representative of the German
Social Democratic Party, 33, Fernside Avenue, London N.W.7.

Zu den Inhaltsverzeichnissen