Mannerheim was afraid of being convicted of war crimes

Discussions on the Holocaust and 20th Century War Crimes. Note that Holocaust denial is not allowed. Hosted by David Thompson.
Philip S. Walker
Member
Posts: 1113
Joined: 06 Jan 2011, 18:44

Mannerheim was afraid of being convicted of war crimes

#1

Post by Philip S. Walker » 06 Apr 2011, 18:34

(Split from German Army troops under Romanian command?)

Thanks udar

I hadn't thought of this until now, but the parallels between Atonescu and Mannerheim are actually pretty striking.
Ion Victor Antonescu (June 15, 1882 – June 1, 1946) was a Romanian soldier, authoritarian politician and convicted war criminal*. The Prime Minister and Conducător during most of World War II, he presided over two successive wartime dictatorships. A Romanian Army career officer who made his name during the 1907 peasants' revolt and the World War I Romanian Campaign, the antisemitic Antonescu sympathized with the far right and fascist National Christian and Iron Guard groups for much of the interwar period. He was a military attaché to France and later Chief of the General Staff, briefly serving as Defense Minister in the National Christian cabinet of Octavian Goga. During the late 1930s, his political stance brought him into conflict with King Carol II and led to his detainment. Antonescu nevertheless rose to political prominence during the political crisis of 1940, and established the National Legionary State, an uneasy partnership with the Iron Guard's leader Horia Sima. After entering Romania into an alliance with Nazi Germany and the Axis and ensuring Adolf Hitler's confidence, he eliminated the Guard during the Legionary Rebellion of 1941. In addition to leadership of the executive, he assumed the offices of Foreign Affairs and Defense Minister. Soon after Romania joined the Axis in Operation Barbarossa, recovering Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina, Antonescu also became Marshal of Romania.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_Antonescu

*Mannerheim was never convicted of war crimes, but he himself feared for the remaining part of his life after the War that he would be.

User avatar
Tiwaz
Member
Posts: 1946
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 11:36
Location: Finland

Re: German Army troops under Romanian command?

#2

Post by Tiwaz » 07 Apr 2011, 06:10

Do you really have to try to turn even topic related to Romanians and Germans into Mannerheim slandering?
With unsourced claims of him being afraid as well...


Philip S. Walker
Member
Posts: 1113
Joined: 06 Jan 2011, 18:44

Re: German Army troops under Romanian command?

#3

Post by Philip S. Walker » 07 Apr 2011, 10:35

I'm not trying to slander Mannerheim. I'm trying to make people like you understand how the Germans perceived him, which is easier for me because I grew up in a country (Denmark) with a common history and common border with Germany, while Finland is a long, long way from Germany.

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 12:19

Re: German Army troops under Romanian command?

#4

Post by Sid Guttridge » 07 Apr 2011, 11:46

The essential difference between Antonescu and Mannerheim is that under the former's regime some 200,000 Jews died in Basarabia and Transnistria due to malign neglect or execution, whereas nothing like this was alleged against Mannerheim or his subordinates.

That is the main reason why Mannerheim had a much better post-war reputation than Antonescu.

Philip S. Walker
Member
Posts: 1113
Joined: 06 Jan 2011, 18:44

Re: German Army troops under Romanian command?

#5

Post by Philip S. Walker » 07 Apr 2011, 12:34

The essential difference between Antonescu and Mannerheim is that under the former's regime some 200,000 Jews died in Basarabia and Transnistria due to malign neglect or execution, whereas nothing like this was alleged against Mannerheim or his subordinates.
I think Mannerhiem & Co would have had a mighty big problem finding 200.000 Jews to kill in Finland and Karelia, even if they had wanted to (which I don't believe they did). I think there were some 2000 in the area all together.

So that comparison is a bit off the mark. There are of course other differences between Mannerheim and Antonescu worth noting, but also some remarkable similarities of a kind that would have appealed to the Nazis at the time, which is obviously why they were both in the spring of 1941 offered the remarkable and otherwise unheard of opportunity to take command over substantial German troop contingents in the up-and-coming invasion of Russia. As it turned out, Antonescu accepted and Mannerheim said no, not because of political reasons as far as we know, but purely because he didn't like the thought of being under the German supreme command.

That's all I'm saying.

User avatar
Tiwaz
Member
Posts: 1946
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 11:36
Location: Finland

Re: German Army troops under Romanian command?

#6

Post by Tiwaz » 07 Apr 2011, 13:01

Philip S. Walker wrote:I'm not trying to slander Mannerheim. I'm trying to make people like you understand how the Germans perceived him, which is easier for me because I grew up in a country (Denmark) with a common history and common border with Germany, while Finland is a long, long way from Germany.

Then perhaps you could present to us your credible sources regarding your claims.
Where have you come up with the theory of Mannerheim being afraid? Or is this again one of your interpretations on how things are seen elsewhere...

Philip S. Walker
Member
Posts: 1113
Joined: 06 Jan 2011, 18:44

Re: German Army troops under Romanian command?

#7

Post by Philip S. Walker » 07 Apr 2011, 17:16

Then perhaps you could present to us your credible sources regarding your claims.
As far as I know I have already presented sources of all my claims. If I have missed some, please point them out to me.
Where have you come up with the theory of Mannerheim being afraid?
I haven't, but since he was a human being after all I suppose he would at least once in a while have been afraid of something. Perhaps to be found out, as discussed on this thread: http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 80&start=0

User avatar
Tiwaz
Member
Posts: 1946
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 11:36
Location: Finland

Re: German Army troops under Romanian command?

#8

Post by Tiwaz » 08 Apr 2011, 08:21

Philip S. Walker wrote:
Then perhaps you could present to us your credible sources regarding your claims.
As far as I know I have already presented sources of all my claims. If I have missed some, please point them out to me.
Where have you come up with the theory of Mannerheim being afraid?
I haven't, but since he was a human being after all I suppose he would at least once in a while have been afraid of something. Perhaps to be found out, as discussed on this thread: http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 80&start=0
You made statement that Mannerheim was afraid of being put to trial as warcriminal for rest of his life.

That demands sources to back up instead of your own fantasy thinking. Sorry, but that's how it is.

Or else I could make statement that 'Bomber' Harris spent rest of his days fearing that he shall be put to trial as warcriminal.
He must have, because humans are afraid of things.

Not to mention that you started this thread regarding German troops under Romanian command. Just to jump into "Mannerheim this, Mannerheim that". Who at no point was Romanian nor part of Romanian command.

Granted, should not have posted here myself either, but this constant obsession on Finland/Mannerheim bashing is wee bit annoying. Specially when one claims to do it because they think they have "better understanding of what Germans thought". It is kind of clairvoyant-argument if one does not back this up with actual memoirs or comments of Germans mentioned, in which case everyone could read their thoughts without relevance to their place of birth/upbringing.

Philip S. Walker
Member
Posts: 1113
Joined: 06 Jan 2011, 18:44

Re: German Army troops under Romanian command?

#9

Post by Philip S. Walker » 08 Apr 2011, 10:36

Not to mention that you started this thread regarding German troops under Romanian command. Just to jump into "Mannerheim this, Mannerheim that". Who at no point was Romanian nor part of Romanian command.
I started this thread (and others) to find if there were any significant parallels to Hitlers offer to Mannerheim to take command over substantial amounts of German troops during the invasion of the Soviet Union. It turned out that the closest we could get was Romania's Antonescu, and we are now looking at those parallels. Since all we're getting from the Finnish thread in these matters is the same old "we did nothing wrong whatsoever and Mannerheim was a great stateman" singsong it would be nice for once to find out what others are thinking, i.e. people with some expertise in Romanian history.
You made statement that Mannerheim was afraid of being put to trial as warcriminal for rest of his life.
I honestly thought that was common knowledge among people like you. I've read this several times without making notes of the sources, but I did a two minute google search in your (and Mannerheim's) honor and found this:
Although Mannerheim had been elected president for an emergency period, he did not wish to resign immediately after the parliamentary elections of spring 1945, for example. This was partly because the world situation was still unclear, with the war in Europe continuing until May 1945, and partly because Mannerheim feared that he would be convicted in the war-guilt trials provided for by the interim peace treaty and now being pressed forward by the Allied Control Commission. It was, however, in the interests of both the Finns and the Soviet Union to spare Mannerheim from such a fate, and after this matter had been cleared up, he resigned in March 1946.
http://www.kansallisbiografia.fi/english/?id=625

You will notice that according to this source it wasn't because of his innocence that Mannerheim avoided being convicted for war crimes, but because of practicalities.
Granted, should not have posted here myself either, but this constant obsession on Finland/Mannerheim bashing is wee bit annoying.
The annoying bit is many Finnish members of this forum trying to convince the world that the only country in WWII that did NOTHING wrong was the white-clad heroes of Suomi. Get real and be a human being along with the rest of us, and then we can start talking realistically.

In any case, I have not been "bashing" Mannerheim, just trying to find out how the German Nazis at the time viewed him. All things point at them having enormous respect for the man and putting colossal amounts of trust in him, exactly as they did with Antonescu. Clearly, that was a misjudgment on their behalf (Mannerheim turned down various prestigious offers from the Nazis and later on, along with the other Finnish leaders, betrayed them), which I have also pointed out again and again, so I honestly can't see where the "bashing" comes in.
Last edited by Philip S. Walker on 08 Apr 2011, 12:18, edited 1 time in total.

Sid Guttridge
Member
Posts: 10158
Joined: 12 Jun 2008, 12:19

Re: German Army troops under Romanian command?

#10

Post by Sid Guttridge » 08 Apr 2011, 11:59

Hi Philip,

You seem to be saying that the only thing preventing Mamnnerheim from overseeing the deaths of 200,000 Jews like Antonescu was lack of opportunity. What was the fate of Finland's Jews? How many died at the hands of Mannerheim's Finnish subordinates? Any?

Mannerheim didn't betray the Germans. Finland was not a member of the Axis and was conducting a parallel war.

Even Antonescu, who was a member of the Axis, didn't betray the Germans. Indeed, it was the Germans that failed in their contractual guarantee to protect Romania.

In using the word "betray" there is a tendency to assume that other nationalities and national leaders had some sort of over riding obligation towards Germany. They didn't. They only had an over riding obligation to their own nations and national interest.

Philip S. Walker
Member
Posts: 1113
Joined: 06 Jan 2011, 18:44

Re: Mannerheim was afraid of being convicted of war crimes

#11

Post by Philip S. Walker » 08 Apr 2011, 12:44

Major T: You seem to be saying that the only thing preventing Mannerheim from overseeing the deaths of 200,000 Jews like Antonescu was lack of opportunity.
I said the opposite:
Philip: I think Mannerhiem & Co would have had a mighty big problem finding 200.000 Jews to kill in Finland and Karelia, even if they had wanted to (which I don't believe they did).
My point being that the lack of anti-Semitism in Finland was not an issue in the eyes of Berlin at the time and wouldn't have compromised Mannerheim according to their way of viewing things, i.e. they would not have seen any relevant difference between Antonescu and Mannerheim in this respect.
Mannerheim didn't betray the Germans.
So if you team up with someone and agree to fight a common enemy in close cooperation, and then one day in the middle of fighting your partner suddenly abandons you to join your enemy and start fighting with him against you, that does not count as betrayal in your book?
In using the word "betray" there is a tendency to assume that other nationalities and national leaders had some sort of over riding obligation towards Germany. They didn't. They only had an over riding obligation to their own nations and national interest.
I can't agree with this "tendency" at all. If you go into close partnership with someone, of course you have an obligation towards your partner.

In any case, what we have here is yet another obvious parallel between Marshal Mannerheim and Marshal Antonescu.

Philip S. Walker
Member
Posts: 1113
Joined: 06 Jan 2011, 18:44

Re: Mannerheim was afraid of being convicted of war crimes

#12

Post by Philip S. Walker » 08 Apr 2011, 19:43

And here's another good reason why Mannerheim would fear being convicted as a war criminal, like Antonescu was. In 1941, Winston Churchill wrote him a letter threatening him with exactly such a scenario:
"I wish I could convince Your Excellency that we are going to beat the Nazis. I feel far more confident than in 1917 or 1918. It would be most painful to the many friends of your country in England if Finland found herself in the dock with the guilty and defeated Nazis."
http://kirjasto.sci.fi/cgmanner.htm

David Thompson
Forum Staff
Posts: 23722
Joined: 20 Jul 2002, 20:52
Location: USA

Re: Mannerheim was afraid of being convicted of war crimes

#13

Post by David Thompson » 09 Apr 2011, 16:50

For interested readers -- see the related discussion on Finland and the Nazis at http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=65867

Philip S. Walker
Member
Posts: 1113
Joined: 06 Jan 2011, 18:44

Re: Mannerheim was afraid of being convicted of war crimes

#14

Post by Philip S. Walker » 10 Apr 2011, 11:20

Thanks David. I had overlooked that thread. It's a classic for collectors of bad excuses, particularly from here on ...

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 7&start=75

User avatar
Marcus
Member
Posts: 33963
Joined: 08 Mar 2002, 23:35
Location: Europe
Contact:

Re: Mannerheim was afraid of being convicted of war crimes

#15

Post by Marcus » 10 Apr 2011, 12:00

If you want to discuss the posts in that thread, please do so in that thread and not in this one. Please keep this one focused on the original topic of Mannerheim being afraid of being convicted of war crimes.

/Marcus

Locked

Return to “Holocaust & 20th Century War Crimes”