WW II: Whose War was it?

The time between the beginning of the first and the end of the second world war is more and more called what it actually was: The third Thirty Year War (1914-1945) for the destruction of Germany, which since the end of the 19^th century had been becoming a scientific and economic super power. This fact, however, is hidden behind a veil of ongoing war propaganda by the media, historians and politicians. The reason for this propaganda is that the entire post-war order depends on hiding this fact. The historical truth, however, demands a correction of the historiography of both world wars: Germany did not unleash any world war.

1. Is Germany's guilt for two world wars an illusion?

The almost identical victorious powers of both world wars against Germany understood and labeled both world wars as a “Thirty Year War”, of course not without reason (Winston Churchill, Herbert Gladwyn, John Major, Alfred M. de Zayas, Charles de Gaulle). Lord Gladwyn[1] even called the two world wars the “third Thirty Year War.” In order to fend off embarrassing questions, the Allies made a response to the question in the headline of this article easy: without historical substantiation and against better knowledge, they decreed the responsibility for both wars on the vanquished. Article 231 of the “peace dictate” of Versailles reads as follows:[2]

By treating the question of responsibility for the war this way, moral values, trust and justice were destroyed as a basis for peasceful coexistence and for politics between the nations. Because this era was, by declaration, the era of a “Thirty Year War”, the French scientist Jacques Bainville, who was known for anti-German attitude, could declare in 1920 in his best selling book Les conséquences de la paix (The consequences of the peace):

In accordance with the demands for “unconditional surrender” as agreed upon in Casablanca in 1943, the victorious powers did not even attempt to enter into peace negotiations during or at the end of World War II, but let the German Wehrmacht first surrender, then disarmed it, subsequently simply arrested the German Dönitz-government, and finally and illegally seized power in Germany according to the 'Berlin Declaration' of June 5, 1945. Moreover, they did not forget to state:[4]

At this point it can simply be noted: The German Reich did not surrender in 1945. No documentary evidence exists for this. To the contrary: in the declaration of Monheim of July 5, 1945, the last head of state of the German Reich Admiral Karl Dönitz, who had been arrested by the allies, protested against the illegal seizure of power by the allies.[5]

The exclusive responsibility, which was placed arbitrarily to the Germans by the victorious powers at the end of both world wars, is historically without proof, not justifiable by international law and therefore politically untenable. Only one year after the termination of the Re-Insurance Treaty between Germany and Russia in 1890, a security treaty between France and Russia came about, and already in 1892 a military alliance was forged between France and Russia, which resulted in a twenty year long preparation for the first world war. With time, more alliance partners joined this alliance, leading to the encirclement of Germany. In all the decades following the end of hostilities in 1945, no international peace treaty with Germany was signed, which, as should be known, can only be signed by the German Reich which is still incapacitated. Hence, the so-called “Two-plus-Four-Agreement” from 1991, signed by the four allied powers and the two German post-war satellite countries, cannot be considered as anything close to a peace treaty. One could therefore just as well speak of a hundred year war against Germany (1891-1991).

The following critical remark is quoted from a book entitled Teufelszeug von A bis Z (Devil's Stuff from A to Z) by Carl-August Moser:[6]

Regarding the question about the responsibility for the war, the victorious powers' acting toward the German nation and the German people in Versailles, Nuremberg or elsewhere is best described by a sentence of Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach: “The justice of the stronger is the greatest injustice.”[7] From the outset, the dragon seed of Versailles[8] and revengeful justice of Nuremberg[9] were a challenge to the cultivated and civilized nations asking for correction.

When delving into the background of the problem of responsibility for the wars, it becomes clear why Hugo Wellems titled his book The Century of the Lie,[10] and what Winfried Martini wanted to make clear to the re-educated reader with his book title: The Victor Writes the History.[11] It is only the 'tip of the iceberg' when the British Lord Buckmaster (1915/16 Lord Chancellor) says about the treaty of Versailles:[12]

Senator Robert T. Taft (1889-1953) made a similar statement in the beginning of October 1946 during a university event in Ohio. Right after the judgments of October 1946 were announced, this respected jurist and honorable republican spoke of the legal monstrosities and historic falsifications of the Nuremberg International Military Tribunals:[13]

It is really as U.S. President Ronald Reagan expressed it in Bitburg (Eifel) on May 5, 1985:

Thus, a correction regarding the question of responsibility for the war is now overdue. Let us move therefore The Century of the Lie to the century of the truth!

2. Germans are addicted to self-accusation

The inaccuracy with which the victorious powers of both world wars decreed Germany's war guilt has been convincingly proven through an abundance of documents, facts, witnesses, and testimonies as well as a large amount of expert literature from all over the world. One has to wonder therefore, why top representatives of the Federal German authorities, which can easily be recognize by their false arguments, still seem to live in the fairy tale world of the early enemy propaganda. If German Federal Chancellor Gerhard Schröder had read only a few of the 21 books listed in the table below, he would not have exposed himself as ignorant during the conference for security policy in February 1999 in Munich. During this meeting of international 'insiders,' he had stated that Germany has to carry the burden of responsibility for both world wars.[14]

It does not seem to interest the representatives of the German people, their government officials, or historians in the Federal Republic of Germany, whether the American historian Harry E. Barnes ascertained in his thoroughly researched book The Genesis of the World War (New York 1929):[15]

whether a common declaration drafted during a German-British conference of historians in 1955 in Bamberg about the subject “Germany and England 1904-1914” stated:[16]

whether in 1928, the American historian S. B. Fay came to the conclusion that:[17]

or whether the Deutsch-Amerikaner (The German American, Chicago)[18] introduced the basic theses of the book by R. F. Keeling, Cruel Harvest – The Expensive Attempt to Exterminate the German People (Chicago 1947) in November 1973 with the following words:[19]

It does also not seem to interest representatives of the Germans that Winston Churchill declared in November 1939 to the British people on the radio:[20]

Around Christmas 1970, on occasion of the preparation of the so-called German East Treaties with Poland and the Soviet Union, the German historian Emil Maier-Dorn prepared a compilation of 1000 statements by politicians, militaries, and historians of the victorious powers. In their statements, they expressed their desire for war and their subsequent satisfaction about the escalation of a local conflict into a world war. Maier-mailed this Dorn compilation to each German member of parliament and requested that they notify him of error or falsifications, but the entire parliament stayed mute.[21]

Seen from an international perspective, this behavior of the carriers of responsibility of the great German people after the second world war is completely abnormal. It caused American historian Prof. H.E. Barnes, who visited Germany in the spring of 1964, where he had just published his book The German Question of War Guilt in Tübingen, to express the following full of surprise:[22]

In his book, H.E. Barnes also appreciated the fundamental research results of Prof. Dr. L. Hoggan:[23]

This myth of the federal German policy that Germany has to carry the burden of responsibility for both world wars of the 20^th century contradicts the current results and knowledge of national and international scholarly research. In 1963, it caused the British attorney and historian F.J.P. Veale to make the following attempt to explain:[24]

War Calendar between 1792 and 1945

Great Britain 1803-1815 France 1807 Denmark 1812-1814 North America 1839 Afghanistan 1840-1842 Opium war 1849-1850 Greece 1850 Africa (Kaffern) 1854-1856 Crimean War 1856-1858 China 1857-1858 India (Sepoys) 1860 China 1860 New Zealand 1816-1862 Mexico 1867 Ethiopia 1878-1879 Afghanistan 1879 Africa (Zulus) 1880-1881 Boer War 1882 Egypt 1884-1885 Sudan 1885-1886 Burma 1893 Africa (Matab.) 1895 India-Tschiral 1896-1899 Sudan (Mahdi) 1897 India (Afridi) 1899-1902 Boer-War 1900 China (Boxer) 1904 Tibet 1914-1918 First World War 1939-1945 Second World War France 1798-1801 Turkey (Egypt) 1805 Austria 1806-1807 Prussia, Russia 1807-1814 Spain, Portugal 1809 Austria 1812-1814 Russia 1813-1814 Prussia, Austria, Great Britain a.o. 1815 Nap.’s 100 Days 1823-1828 Spain 1827-1840 Algeria 1844 Morocco 1851 Morocco 1854-1856 Crimean War 1858-1862 Amman 1859 Austria 1860-1861 Syria 1863 Mexico 1867 Italy 1870-1871 Prussia 1881 Tunisia 1882 Amman 1883-1885 China 1884-1885 Madagascar 1895 Madagascar 1900 China (Boxer) 1914-1918 First World War 1939-1945 Second World War Russia 1794 Poland 1796 Persia 1799 France 1800 Great Britain 1804-1813 Persia 1805-1807 France 1806-1812 Turkey 1806 Sakhalin 1808-1809 Sweden 1812-1814 France 1813 Georgia 1820 Kazakhstan 1826-1828 Persia 1828-1829 Turkey 1833 Constantinople 1839 China 1847 Kazakhstan 1850 Kosh-Kurgan 1853 Ak-Metched 1853 Kokand 1853-1856 Crimean-War 1860-1866 Kokand 1865 Tashkent 1866-1868 Bukhara 1868 Samarkand 1873-1875 China 1877-1878 Turkey 1880-1881 Turkmenistan 1884-1885 Afghanistan 1901 Mandchuria 1904-1905 Japan 1914-1917 First World War Soviet Union 1917 Finland 1918 Baltics 1919 White Russia 1919 Ukrain 1920-1921 Poland 1920-1921 Caucasus 1921 Georgia 1939 Poland 1939-1940 Finland 1941-1945 Germany 1945 Japan

3. The 'Riddle's' Solution: Illegal Re-Education of the German People

During his visit to Germany in 1964, American historian H.E. Barnes was able to observe a war guilt feeling without parallel in history, accompanied with an incomprehensible addiction for self-accusation. That this has not changed after 35 more years have passed is indicated by German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder with his 1999 statement that Germany has to carry the burden of responsibility for both world wars of the 20^th century. Thus, this phenomenon must have deeper reasons, particularly when considering that its people are generally considered to make up the land of 'Poets and Thinkers'. We find a clue for this in F.J.P. Veale's statement of 1963, when he noted that the solution of the question of war guilt, which is of unique importance for the future, is neither a mere academic problem nor a question of finding the truth, and hence cannot be left up to historiography for resolution. Because it became clear to the politicians that the victor's point of view must remain generally accepted for at least a quarter of a century in order to fulfill its usefulness (which one, for what?). This effort is reflected in the scientifically indefensible statement by Prof. Eschenburg of March 1960, which shows a complete adaptation to the Zeitgeist:[25]

In 1965, during the XII^th International Congress of Historians in Vienna, the German historian Prof. B.V. Richthofen declared to the applause of the large majority of participants:[26]

The striking contradiction between the war guilt allegation, declared as “politically useful,” and the repeated scholarly refutation of this allegation on an international level is clearly explained by the re-education of the entire German population during the time of occupation between 1945 and 1952, which was planned well in advance. The basic prerequisite for this was an “unconditional surrender”, not provided for by international war. This is also evident when comparing the different perceptions of history of the war and immediate post-war generation on one hand and the succeeding generations on the other hand. Thanks to the 'mercy of late birth,' the latter generations were fully hit by the 'curse of the re-education'.

The chief editor of the New York World, Walter Lippmann (1889-1974), explained the planned re-education as follows:[27]

No occupational power was legitimized for this brain manipulation and other encroachments.

4. Thoughtful Ideas for the 21^st Century

The 20^th century came to an end. “It could have been Germany's century”, said the French sociologist Raymond Aron and the German-American historian Fritz Stern jointly in West-Berlin in 1979. It did not become a “German”, but an “American” century. For the aspiring Germany, it became the Century of the Lie (H. Wellems). Envy and hate perfidiously triggered two unnecessary world wars. The victors decreed Germany's war guilt. These were the two lies of the century. International historiography has refuted them both long ago. Why is the truth kept silent? Let us start now into the century of enlightenment and truth.

Those who belong to the generation sharing the 'mercy by late birth' usually do not know that they are also victims of the 're-education.' One focus of the 're-education' of Germans is also the de-nationalization and the belief in the war guilt. The victors' historical perception and the 'moral' category of their war propaganda was meant to be planted into the minds of the vanquished. When the history books have been rewritten in this style, cinemas, theaters, churches, unions, and all media observe their tasks to teach and the new generation believes, then the process of re-education was successful. In May 1945, the intended ruthless application of atrocity propaganda was explained to Prof. Friedrich Grimm by a high official of the allied victors as follows:[28]

Check yourself, whether you have become confused, and then struggle for the truth.

In November 1999, the writer Heinz Mahncke submitted a petition to the German Parliament requesting the forming of a “commission consisting of selected historians and scientists” with the task to investigate “dubious historical post-war allegations,” The applicant was thinking among others of the following:

1. Research about war guilt and war cause.
2. Coming to terms with all inhumanities of the last war, including the cruelties which befell the German people during expulsion, mass rapes, and territorial annexation.
3. Coming to terms with the question of guilt of the terror bombing against German civilians.
4. Investigation of the forced labor question, including the German slave workers abroad.
5. The whole complex of questions regarding anti-Semitism.

At the beginning of the 21^st century, the German people as the political sovereign of the country should cooperate more intensely with its representatives and state officials and request more information from them.

Because according to Prof. H.H. von Arnim:

Let us check this out!

Hitler's, Churchill's, Roosevelt's, or Stalin's War?

Many of the following books, which are decisive for a thorough understanding of WWII, never appeared in English

Notes

First published in Vierteljahreshefte für freie Geschichtsforschung 4(2) (2000), pp. 179-185; translated by Fabian Eschen.