Leon
Trotsky: Fragments from the First Seven Months of the War
1940
[Writing
of Leon Trotsky, Vol. 14, New York 1979, p. 872-879]
At
the present time the books in fashion in the military sphere are
those which say that defense is the best offense. We see on the
Western front the significant sight of all the big military powers
intently defending themselves against a nonexistent enemy.
★ ★ ★
At
sea, Germany is conducting a guerrilla war of the weak against the
strong. On the land in general, there is no war. It is as though the
countless masses armed to the teeth were intimidated and subdued by
their own technology and the fortifications they have created. It
might seem at first glance the realization of the old pacifist
prophecy that the development of arms has reached such limits as to
make the conduct of war impossible. But this is an optimistic
fiction.
★ ★ ★
Mussolini
does not have an international political strategy. He lives from day
to day. Globed plans are beyond his capacity. Hence the constant
zigzags in his orientation and propaganda. He tried from the very
beginning to spurn Hitler’s advances, but in the end he yielded and
began to follow Hitler’s lead. At the beginning of the
Soviet-Finnish war Mussolini sharply underscored his independence
from Germany by attacking the Soviet Union and demonstratively aiding
Finland. Now (March 16) Mussolini is again turning toward the Soviet
Union.
Neither
has Stalin any international political strategy. First and foremost
he wants to keep out of the war. This determines his maneuvers.
Both
belligerent democracies [England and France] are trying to defend
themselves. That is what their world policies boil down to.
Everything else is vague and empty talk, which no one believes.
Only
Hitler has a global political plan. This plan will lead in the end to
a catastrophe, not only for the National Socialist regime, but for
German capitalism as well. But on the road to catastrophe, unity of
strategy gives the whole policy of Germany exceptional strength. The
only government leader who knows what he wants is Hitler.
★ ★ ★
The
entire policy of Hitler is subordinated to the struggle for
Lebensraum.
This is dictated by the powerful development of German industry, for
which the boundaries of the national state have long become
unbearably restrictive. Many journalists excel at catching Hitler in
contradictions, when statements in his book Mein
Kampf
differ from his current speeches. These contradictions are numerous
and undeniable. But they are, all the same, superficial.
★ ★ ★
It
is absolutely obvious, even to Hitler himself, that he overestimated
the military power of France and underestimated the strength of
resistance from the Soviet Union. His analysis [in Mein
Kampf]
was made more than ten years ago. Now it is necessary to reexamine a
whole series of quantities. France’s hegemony in Europe has been
overthrown, without a war. Hitler did not expect this. The objective
situation and the relationship of forces proved to be significantly
more favorable for his plans than he calculated.
Regarding
the Soviet Union, things have shaped up differently than Hitler
imagined in 1926. The revolutionary strength of Moscow has not only
receded but has been totally eliminated in the recent past. Hitler,
better than anyone, is able to appreciate the significance of the
[Moscow] trials where the leaders of Bolshevism and the civil war,
mortally hostile to him, were depicted as his paid agents. The legend
that Jews rule the Soviet republic has been shattered by the growth
of anti-Semitism within the ruling caste and the removal of Jewish
officials from all posts of any responsibility. (In his book, Hitler
called Bolshevism the progeny of Hell and defined its historical
meaning as follows: “In Russian Bolshevism we must see an attempt
undertaken by the Jews in the twentieth century to seize world power”
[p. 751].)
★ ★ ★
Finally,
in a technical sense, the Soviet Union has had great successes. Now
numerous factories are producing motor vehicles; the arming of the
military has reached significant heights; aviation has advanced; and
war industry has developed into a powerful force.
It
is possible that Hitler decided to make a turn in the direction of
Moscow, i.e., radically change his strategy, abandon colonization of
the East, and shift his attention to the colonies. To make a turn is
not easy. Quite a long interval of silence is needed. It is precisely
this interval that the Nazi government is now passing through. In all
speeches and newspaper articles, there is virtually no mention of the
Kremlin. Hitler made absolutely no mention of the East, or the Soviet
government, in his programmatic speech on April 28 of this year
[1940]. This could be interpreted as preparation for a radical change
of the entire policy of Germany.
★ ★ ★
In
a speech to the Reichstag on October 6, [1939,] Hitler raved that
“the assertion that Germany has plans to expand into Ukraine and
Romania and so forth is a fabrication.”
★ ★ ★
For
Stalin, the alliance, or more precisely, the pact with Germany was
necessary to safeguard his own position of neutrality. All that
Stalin has agreed to and can offer Hitler is a free hand in foreign
policy in the West and to the South, i.e., in the direction of the
colonies. The Moscow protocols of September 29 [1939] are aimed at
helping Hitler obtain the surrender of France and England but in no
way tie Stalin’s hands with a pledge of military aid to Hitler. And
this is no accident. To Hitler, this is not enough. To rush into a
struggle with England and France — and the United States at the
first opportunity — with Italy as his only ally would be too
light-minded. In the Mediterranean Sea, Italy could in a very short
time be put out of action. Germany would be left alone. Behind her
would be a neutral Russia. To what degree could this neutrality be
relied on? Hitler cannot pursue such a combination now, expecting to
obtain more later, as events put pressure upon Moscow. This
transitional state of affairs explains Moscow’s policy toward
Berlin, a policy of flirting, biding time, delaying — and the
policy of Berlin, which can be characterized as an interval of
silence.
[It
is suggested] that Hitler has by no means abandoned his idea of
marching eastward, and is only observing silence now so as not to
drive the Soviet Union into England’s arms. This assumption would
be more believable and convincing if [Hitler’s anti-British
campaign] had not taken on such a rabid and provocative character.
The question of colonies has been advanced to the forefront. Maritime
relations have been broken off; Hitler clearly indicates that he
intends to test his strength against England’s at sea; for that he
needs to know his home front is secure. In criticizing Germany’s
prewar foreign policy, Hitler persistently repeated that its failing
had been its inability to find the necessary allies. Germany suffered
a defeat because it left them to the enemy camp. It should have found
a common language with Great Britain or at least buttressed itself
upon Russia. It did neither, and that was its fundamental crime. It
cannot be supposed that Hitler forgot all these lessons and now
intends to become an ally of Stalin and challenge the whole world.
★ ★ ★
The
campaign against Great Britain is being conducted now in the German
press in virtually the same tones as it always was during a war and
never before a war. At the center of this campaign is what one might
call a history of English colonial plundering. In Arbeitertum,
the official organ of the Labor Front, we find a series of articles
which depict the cruelties committed by the English during the
colonization of various parts of the world. It points up the
contrasts between the lavishness of official buildings and the
poverty of the Hindu masses, provides photos of Hindu poverty, and so
on. In a word, the lowly race of Hindus has no better friends and the
Anglo-Saxon aristocrats no sterner critics than the German National
Socialists.
The
British government has been so astounded by Germany’s propaganda
against Britain and against Britain’s efforts to encircle and
strangle Germany that it has fully revealed its own naivete —
expecting gratitude from Hitler for services it had rendered him.
★ ★ ★
[But
at the same time another note is being sounded.] Hitler commented in
his April 28 speech to the Reichstag that his struggle, his
persistent desire to bring friendship and collaboration between
Germany and England, were dictated by his own personal feelings… .
“Throughout all my political activity, I have never ceased
defending the need for close friendship and collaboration between
Germany and England.”
★ ★ ★
In
Poland, Hitler simply condemns millions of people to physical
annihilation in order to clear the arena for Aryan settler colonies …
thus preparing and expanding his base for a strike to the East.
★ ★ ★
In
the German-Italian alliance, Italy represents the immeasurably weaker
side as a result of its geographic position as well as the level of
its economic development. Italy stands to suffer the hardest blows
and even in the event of success, will be limited to receiving only
crumbs. In Spain, the role of Italy was immeasurably more significant
than the role of Germany; however, right now, in the economic
benefits derived, Germany leaves Italy far behind.
For
this reason, Spain resists joining the Axis in every way it can,
since Spain’s lot as a member would be to pull chestnuts out of the
fire for its more powerful allies.
★ ★ ★
Of
course, the USSR can cope with Finland, but the blow dealt to the
Kremlin’s prestige in the eyes of the world will to a certain
extent be reproduced within the country.
★ ★ ★
The
fate of this same country, Finland, shows that now it is not so easy
to unite Europe under the fascist fist. Moreover, on this course,
Germany will meet in its first steps the uncompromising opposition of
the United States. A victory for Germany and its unification of
Europe means only Germany’s move toward an open struggle for
domination of the world, including Latin America, with the support of
Nazis inside the United States.
★ ★ ★
In
which countries can one first of all expect a revolution? Obviously
in those where a weaker economic foundation is subject to destruction
by war earlier than in other countries. Such was czarist Russia
during the last war, and after it followed Austria-Hungary. Then came
Germany’s turn: in spite of the high productivity of labor, its
lack of raw materials undermined its lopsided economic foundation.
Sumner
Welles is going to Europe February 17 to hold talks on a future world
that will rest “on a firm and stable basis.” This is easier said
than done.
Republican
Senator Johnson from California even thinks there is no reason to
send Sumner Welles to Europe: “We should mind our own business.”
Unfortunately, Mr. Johnson does not indicate where the borderlines of
“our own business” have been drawn. The borders of “our own
business” include the same space that Hitler calls the Nazis’
Lebensraum.
Wars occur because different nations want to draw the borders of
their own vital space in a different way.
On
February 16, the chairman of the Republican [National] Committee in
the United States, John Hamilton, said: “Today some nine million
unemployed walk our streets. Another ten million are dependent upon
government for their food and shelter, chained to made work which
they must either take or starve. And why? Because the great
masterminds of the New Deal said that our system of free American
enterprise had reached the end of the road, that the law of supply
and demand had been abrogated, that our only salvation lay in aping
the European systems of planned economy and abandoning the American
way which had led us to the heights we attained during a 150-year
journey.”
This
same Hamilton said February 16: “What a pathetic spectacle it is to
see those in high places preaching the necessity of saving democracy
everywhere but in the United States.”
It
is impossible to possess with impunity the most powerful industry,
more than two-thirds of the world’s gold reserve, and ten millions
of unemployed.
Americans
of varying political orientations visit me in my seclusion. I follow
the press in the United States closely. My general impression of the
ruling class of the great North American republic is its general
disorientation. One can heap as many severe condemnations on
foreigners as one wants. But that is not enough. What is necessary is
a program for humanity to get out of the blind alley it is now in,
moreover a blind alley that ends with an abyss. A program is
necessary. I hold that neither the ruling class of Europe nor that of
America has such a program. In this fact alone lies the strength of
the extreme wings. One may, like [Herbert] Hoover, equate Bolshevism
with the plague. However, strong words alone are not enough to
resolve great historical problems.
★
★ ★
A
totalitarian regime does not at all mean that the entire people has
suddenly grown foolish. It means that the best part of the people has
been suppressed and intimidated but has not stopped thinking.
At the opposite pole, part of the population has an interest in
maintaining the totalitarian regime. Between these two extremes is
the disoriented mass of the people, which awaits further developments
before joining one side or the other.
★ ★ ★
Of
course, the Soviet Union in its present form is in no way an
indication of the road that the peoples of the world must take in the
future. However, the experience of all other countries, the
experience of the most civilized countries at least, since the war
and the Versailles peace also clearly shows people what road not to
take.
★ ★ ★
The
present world convulsions are the tragic confirmation of Marx’s
prognosis and at the same time an unmistakable sign that the
denouement is drawing near. After terrible historical experiences,
humanity will come out onto a new road, for which all of its previous
development has laid the foundation. The seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries opened the way for reason into technical areas and, in
part, the governmental sphere. But the bourgeois revolution proved
incapable of bringing reason into the realm of economic relations. In
this area, the unlimited dominion of blind market forces has
continued. In order to deliver humanity from chaos and insanity, it
is necessary that the rule of reason not be restricted to science and
technology but become firmly established in the realm of economic
relations. Society will be constructed on a rational model, just as
machines are now. State barriers will be knocked down. Natural
resources will begin to be exploited in keeping with the interests of
all humanity, as a socialist federation of peoples.