Erkki Hautamäki

Discussions on the Winter War and Continuation War, the wars between Finland and the USSR.
Hosted by Juha Tompuri
User avatar
Sven-Eric
Banned
Posts: 130
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 19:05
Location: Sweden

Erkki Hautamäki

Post by Sven-Eric » 23 Jul 2005 14:10

I am curious to know if any of the Finnish members have read Erkki Hautamäkis book "Kansio S-32". In that book he claims that Stalin and the Western allies were in alliance already in October 1939.
Regards,
Sven-Eric

Tuco
Member
Posts: 375
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 19:38
Location: East TN USA

Post by Tuco » 25 Jul 2005 03:55

I have not read the book but could this be about the talks between England, France, and the USSR? France and England were working with the Soviets in the same time frame as the Germans. It is interesting as what they were talking about was a mutual assistance pact in case of German attack or aggression. What is worth noting is that Stalin also wanted to add the Baltic States and Finland as a part of this pact, even if the governments of these nations wished to remain neutral. This would allow Stalin to invade any of those listed nations and use the mutual defense pact as an excuse, stating that Finland or the Baltic States had been taken over by German interests which constituted aggression. France was willing to go along with this from the start while the Brits took issue with these provisions for months before giving in to Stalin’s demands. By that time the point was moot as Stalin and Hitler had come to terms so the French, British, USSR triple alliance did not take place. Is this maybe what he is referring to?

User avatar
Sven-Eric
Banned
Posts: 130
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 19:05
Location: Sweden

Post by Sven-Eric » 25 Jul 2005 10:28

Dear Tuco, no it is not what his book is about. It is something completely new. Hautamäki bases his work on a folder by Mannerheim, "S-32" and also on a book by Viljo Tahvanainen released in 1971.

It is said that on 15 October 1939 the Soviets concluded a secret agreement with the Western powers signed by Churchill. In this agreement the Western allies accepted a Soviet occupation of Finland and the Baltic states in exchange for themselves to occupy Denmark, Norway and Sweden. The end purpose was then a mutual attack on Germany in the summer of 1940. The military help offered by the Allies to Finland during the Winter war was just a cover to make the occupation of Norway and Sweden easier and to take control of the Swedish ore fields, but also to establish contact with the Red Army and force Hitler to counteractions.

The purpose for the Allies was to keep the Swedish troops busy so they could not help Finland which at the same time would be occupied by the Soviets. According to Hautamäki found out about these plans in February 1940 when a Soviet aircraft on a secret mission to London on its way back to Moscow was forced to land on German territory and the Germans captured documents about these plans.

Personally I find this a bit too thick. Hitler and the Germans would most certainly have mentioned this after the outbreak of Barbarossa and it would have been essential in his war propaganda against the Allies. What do you people think?

Regards,
Sven-Eric

User avatar
Hanski
Financial supporter
Posts: 1887
Joined: 24 Aug 2002 19:18
Location: Helsinki

Post by Hanski » 25 Jul 2005 19:30

I have not read Erkki Hautamaki's book. However, it is conspicuous how the author, not himself a professional historian, is presenting rather sensationalist allegations. Why doesn't he present his evidence to the normal forum of historical scientific debate? Presenting his original material for scholarly research should be his moral duty if he feels he is right, and if there is any truth in his allegations, they should stand the test of scientific scrutiny. As far as I know, his book has not been taken seriously by qualified historians.

Tuco
Member
Posts: 375
Joined: 12 Mar 2002 19:38
Location: East TN USA

Post by Tuco » 26 Jul 2005 00:25

It sounds as if he is using part of what I mentioned but adding facts to it. Again I have not read this work but it sounds to be far - fetched.

Mikko H.
Financial supporter
Posts: 1657
Joined: 07 May 2003 10:19
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Post by Mikko H. » 27 Jul 2005 12:24

For me it's enough that Hautamäki bases his work on Tahvanainen's fantasies, which have been thoroughly discredited.

John T
Member
Posts: 1193
Joined: 31 Jan 2003 22:38
Location: Stockholm,Sweden

Post by John T » 19 Sep 2005 22:48

Mikko H. wrote:For me it's enough that Hautamäki bases his work on Tahvanainen's fantasies, which have been thoroughly discredited.
Yes a lot of it is crap or rather old Nazi-German propaganda, but does anyone know about the claims he made that Germany forced the Russians to negotiate peace in March 1940?


Regards
/John T.

Uncle Joe
Banned
Posts: 510
Joined: 12 Oct 2004 20:09
Location: Finland

Post by Uncle Joe » 04 Nov 2005 14:44

Mikko H. wrote:For me it's enough that Hautamäki bases his work on Tahvanainen's fantasies, which have been thoroughly discredited.
Have you actually read Hautamäki´s book? If you did, you would know that Tahvanainen isn´t his only source. Hautamäki also admits the weaknesses of Tahvanainen as a source. As for "not taken seriously qualified historians", well, whose soup you eat, his soings you sing. If qualified histoarians mean people like Narikka-Max J-son, they have devoted their life to propagandize on behalf of the winners. Truth means nada to them.

Interestingly, following comment is to be found in Karl Baur´s memoir (page 184 in the English edition):"The search for the plane was unsuccesful. When I reported to Hitler, he was very upset because one of his servants, of whom he was especially fond, had flown on that plane. Hitler remarked:"I had sent extremely important documents and papers to him that were to explain my actions to posterity!" This in April 1945.

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11541
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Post by Juha Tompuri » 04 Nov 2005 20:26

Mikko H. wrote:For me it's enough that Hautamäki bases his work on Tahvanainen's fantasies, which have been thoroughly discredited.
Same here.

Erkki Hautamäki wrote:"- Punaisena lankana ovat Vilho Tahvanaisen Mannerheimin S-32-kansion sähkeistä ja raporteista tekemät kopiot, jotka olen käynyt läpi kronologisessa järjestyksessä. Sieltä löytyy totuus. Näiden asiakirjojen rinnalle olen kerännyt lisätietoa maailmankirjallisuudesta."
("The red line has been the copies of the telegrams and reports Vilho Tahvanainen has made from the Mannerheim's file S-32, of which I have read thru at chronogical order. The truth is found there. In addition to these documents I have gathered information from the world literature.") http://www.promerit.net/

The book ... is based on the contents of the so-called file S-32 of Marshal Mannerheim and is copied from there by the Marshal’s secret agent Vilho Tahvanainen
http://www.prokarelia.net/en/?x=article ... &author=10

Erkki Hautamäki wrote:"Kotoisempi salattu asia on Rovaniemen palon todellinen aiheuttaja lokakuussa 1944. Palonhan aiheutti suomalaisen tiedustelupartion räjäyttämä ammusjuna."
("Secret issue more domestic, is the true cause of the burn of Rovaniemi at October 1944. The burn was caused by a ammunition train, blown up by a Finnish recce unit.")
http://www.promerit.net/
Apparently Erkki H. has read the book of Erkki K: http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... ght=#88131





Uncle Joe wrote:As for "not taken seriously qualified historians", well, whose soup you eat, his soings you sing. If qualified histoarians mean people like Narikka-Max J-son, they have devoted their life to propagandize on behalf of the winners. Truth means nada to them.
8O
Max Jakobson wrote:Finland went into the Continuation War on the coat-tails of the strength of Germany. It was believed that Germany would save us from the fate of the Baltic States. The brutality of the Nazi regime, the violations of the rights of small nations - all of these were swept under the carpet.
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend." Throughout the ages this rule has been a guiding light for states and nations in moments of peril.
One typical case was the comment made by Winston Churchill when Germany attacked the Soviet Union "If Hitler invaded Hell, I would make at least a favourable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons."
From the Finnish point of view, Hitler had invaded Hell.
emphasis on mine.
http://www2.helsinginsanomat.fi/english ... 0031118IE7

Regards, Juha



A small most probably unintentional mistake:
...kun Mannerheimin aisamiehenä toimineen Vilho Tahvanaisen...
(...Vilho Tahvanainen, Mannerheim's hmmm...:oops: :oops: :oops: my dictionary doesn't have the correct expression... (asiamies = messenger)
http://www.promerit.net/

Uncle Joe
Banned
Posts: 510
Joined: 12 Oct 2004 20:09
Location: Finland

Post by Uncle Joe » 05 Nov 2005 02:58

Ahh, quoting a review from Helsingin Sanomat, the leading forum of American propaganda in Finland. That review just confirmed how low Narikka-Max has sunk. Much more truthful review on Sana´s Ehrenburgian pamphlet can be found in Sotilasaikauslehti.

User avatar
Topspeed
Member
Posts: 4780
Joined: 15 Jun 2004 15:19
Location: Finland

Post by Topspeed » 05 Nov 2005 17:24

I think Hesari is anything but US propaganda...only commies in Finland can think like that.

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11541
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Post by Juha Tompuri » 05 Nov 2005 20:56

Gentlemen,

Let's follow the Forum guidelines, start acting more politely and stop name-calling. OK?

Ohto Manninen, Professor in the National Defence College, who also writes at Sotilasaikakauslehti, describes the main source/red line of Erkki Hautamäki, at his book "Stalinin Kiusa, Himmlerin Täi" (Nuisance of Stalin, Louse of Himmler) as:
"Tapaus Tahvanainen" kuuluu kaunokirjallisuuden agenttitarinoiden joukkoon. Siinä joukossa se ei liene huonoimpia, ja sen elinkyky Suomen julkisessa sanassa on kunnioitettava.
In English something like:
"Case Tahvanainen" belongs to the group of secret agent stories of fiction literature. It's not the worst at that group and it's ability to live at the public media of Finland is honoured.
Regards, Juha

Uncle Joe
Banned
Posts: 510
Joined: 12 Oct 2004 20:09
Location: Finland

Post by Uncle Joe » 05 Nov 2005 22:40

Juha, Manninen wrote that piece in 1995 (check the date at the end of the article) and based his comments on what was available to him at that time. Of course, the easiest way to prove/disprove Hautamäki´s thesis would be COMPLETE and UNLIMITED OPENING of ALL Russian, French, American and British archives. And this should be done by surprise without giving time for cleansing the docs by various interest groups. But apparently those who benefit from the status quo won´t allow that to happen for the foreseeable time.

Topspeed, most important contributors to Hesari include people like Tomi Ervamaa, Max J-son and Olli Kivinen who all are fanatic America lovers.

User avatar
Juha Tompuri
Forum Staff
Posts: 11541
Joined: 11 Sep 2002 20:02
Location: Mylsä

Post by Juha Tompuri » 05 Nov 2005 23:11

Joe,
Uncle Joe wrote:Juha, Manninen wrote that piece in 1995 (check the date at the end of the article) and based his comments on what was available to him at that time.
Yes, for the first time. The book I quoted, as you know, was published three years ago. And after that no evidence of Tahvanainen being an "secret agent man" 8) have been brought up.
Uncle Joe wrote: Hautamäki also admits the weaknesses of Tahvanainen as a source.


Even the Colonel Erkki Nordberg who had (been fooled to ?) wrote the preface to the Hautamäki book, didn't believe his theories:
"Mikäli kirjan perusteesi osoittautuu aikanaan oikeaksi..."
Translation:
"If the basis of your book proves in the future to be correct...
http://www.promerit.net/

Regards, Juha

Uncle Joe
Banned
Posts: 510
Joined: 12 Oct 2004 20:09
Location: Finland

Post by Uncle Joe » 06 Nov 2005 03:00

Do note that Manninen´s book´s articles have not been updated! I read the very book a week ago. So the book´s publication date is meaningless. As for Nordberg, please tell me where Nordberg says he does not believe Hautamäki´s theory? I just read his preface and I cannot come to your conclusion, unless I am to employ Ehrenburgian methods. You simply took a part of sentence out of context. If I judged some holohöpö book on the same basis, retribution would be fierce.

Return to “Winter War & Continuation War”