InoСМИ.ru with reference to "The Financial Times", (The United Kingdom).
Stefan Wagstyl is correct to criticise the recent Russian view that Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was just a tactical move by Stalin to win time to prepare for war against Hitler, but not for the reason he gives ("Stalin still looms large over eastern Europe", August 31).
Prior to the pact western governments, led by the British government, and, also incidentally, the City of London, consistently favoured Hitler. To quote Lord Lloyd's 1939 justification of the British declaration of war in The British Case :
"However abominable . . . [Hitler's] methods were, however deceitful his diplomacy, however intolerant he might show himself of the rights of other European peoples" the possibility of an ultimate settlement still remained. Why? Because Hitler served a supposed common interest in protecting "traditional institutions and habits" from communism.
By making a pact with Germany, Stalin was able to destroy Hitler's credibility as a bulwark against Bolshevism. Overnight Stalin did more to undermine Hitler's influence in ruling western circles than had been done by years of lectures and sermons on "the evils of Nazism". As Lord Lloyd said at the time: "The conclusion of the German-Soviet pact removed even this faint possibility of an honourable peace [with Hitler]".
Without the pact, not only might the Soviets have found themselves at war far sooner than was historically the case, they might well have done so with Britain and France looking on as neutrals; just as they had during the Spanish civil war. This would have allowed Germany to supply itself from the entire world market. Much as Stalin later berated the British for their reluctance to open a second front, he had much to be thankful for in that the Royal Navy maintained a blockade on Germany.
So the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was not just a tactical move. It was a brilliant strategic coup and should be celebrated as such.
George Hallam,
Department of International Business
Greenwich Business School.
Opinions expressed in this article may be different of those held by Trend