Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

Discussions on High Command, strategy and the Armed Forces (Wehrmacht) in general.
Post Reply
ljadw
Member
Posts: 15584
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

#46

Post by ljadw » 21 Sep 2021, 08:36

That Germany's POTENTIAL enemies were becoming stronger and that Germany was reaching its economic limits does not mean that his potential enemies would be more inclined to say no to Hitler and to risk a war,a war which would mean the end of them as superpowers.Their rearmament was essentially defensive and they also were reaching their economic limits .
They did not say yes to Hitler because they were weak,but because what Hitler did and wanted was not a threat to them .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15584
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

#47

Post by ljadw » 21 Sep 2021, 08:52

Some excerpts from ''Poland in British and French policy in 1939 :determination to fight -or avoid war ?''
1'' The aim of the guarantee was to persuade Hitler not to attack Poland and to take what he wanted from Poland by way of so-called negotiations . ''
Thus : a new Munich .
2 ''Later, Halifax said that Poland was never under any illusion that it might receive concrete help from Britain .''
3 '' Even after the German invasion, Britain and France tried to avoid war with Germany .''
4 '' In July Chamberlain told Ironside that he envisaged the return of Danzig to Germany as a Free City . ''
5 '' On 20 May Halifax told Daladier and Bonnet that the guarantee did not say that Danzig was a vital Polish interest . ''
Cadogan wrote in his diary : ''naturally our guarantee does not give any help to Poland .......''
Britain gave a guarantee to a country that was not in danger and said that the guarantee did not give any help .Unwillingly Britain gave this country a loan of a few million pounds, but promised Germany a loan of one BILLION pounds if it would not attack Poland and invited the German number two (Goering ) to London to negotiate .
Nowonder that Hitler was surprised when Britain declared war .


User avatar
Steve
Member
Posts: 982
Joined: 03 Aug 2002, 02:58
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

#48

Post by Steve » 22 Sep 2021, 00:41

It is hard to understand how Hitler could have been surprised by the British ultimatum followed by a declaration of war but his actions seem to show that he was. After returning from the Reichstag on September 1st he had Goering summon Dahlerus a Swedish business man who Goering had used as a personal emissary. Hitler had also met him in the early hours of August 27th when the rant about U boats etc had taken place. Before seeing Dahlerus he sent Mussolini a telegram saying he did not want his mediation probably because he did not want another Munich. According to Dahlerus Hitler was in a nervous state with a strong odour coming from his mouth. After going on about breaking Polish resistance and annihilating the Poles he said that he was prepared for further negotiations if the British wanted them. Hitler then apparently rambled on in ever more hysterical tones about fighting Britain. It does seem that he was a very agitated man which is surprising as he should have been expecting Britain’s reaction given that the British had made it clear how they would react. If Dahlerus’s account is correct it sounds as if the realisation that he was soon going to be at war with Britain and France had suddenly dawned on Hitler.

Taken from Hitler 1936 1945 Nemesis by Ian Kershaw page 222, he used Dahlerus’s book as his source. Dahlerus was asked at the Nuremburg trials on the 19th of March 1946 if his book was correct and he answered “Yes, it was written with the greatest care. The contents are absolutely accurate and correct”.

Sir Nevile Henderson the British ambassador met Hitler and Ribbentrop several times during the months leading up to war. Henderson gave his account of what had gone on in Failure of a Mission published in 1940. He had been clear that Britain would honour its commitment and Chamberlain made it plain in a letter to Hitler on August 22 that Britain would fulfil its commitment to Poland. In July the British had announced fleet exercises the underlying idea being that they would convince Hitler that Britain was ready for war. “It apparently failed to convince Ribbentrop, who to the last continued to assert that England would never fight. I say “apparently” with intention, since I am still unable to credit even Ribbentrop with being so obstinately foolish as seriously to believe that England would fail to honour her obligations. There is no shadow of doubt that he was all the time saying so, to Hitler and to everyone.”

If Henderson is right about Ribbentrop and Hitler believed him then he would have been very surprised by Britain’s reaction. On September 2nd an approach was made to the British inviting a close friend of Chamberlain Sir Horace Wilson to Berlin for talks, presumably the idea of using Dahlerus had been dropped.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15584
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

#49

Post by ljadw » 22 Sep 2021, 06:52

Wilson was the mouthpiece of Chamberlain ,that he was a close friend is unproven and irrelevant .He was strongly involved in the appeasement policy .

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 8753
Joined: 29 Dec 2006, 21:11
Location: Poland

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

#50

Post by wm » 03 Nov 2021, 21:22

ljadw wrote:
20 Sep 2021, 16:35
The Anglo-Polish military alliance had no military importance, even no military significance at all and both,Halifax and Beck ,knew it .

It had no military importance but still led to a world war. Strange, no?
And the fact that Chamberlain wrote this to Hitler just a few days before the war:
apparently, the announcement of a German-Soviet Agreement is taken in some quarters in Berlin to indicate that intervention by Great Britain on behalf of Poland is no longer a contingency that need be reckoned with. No greater mistake could be made.
Whatever may prove to be the nature of the German-Soviet Agreement, it cannot alter Great Britain's obligation to Poland, which His Majesty's Government have stated in public repeatedly and plainly, and which they are determined to fulfill.

It has been alleged that if His Majesty's Government had made their position more clear in 1914 the great catastrophe would have been avoided. Whether or not there is any force in that allegation, His Majesty's Government are resolved that on this occasion there shall be no such tragic misunderstanding. If the need should arise, they are resolved and prepared to employ without delay all the forces at their command, and it is impossible to foresee the end of hostilities once engaged.

It would be a dangerous delusion to think that, if war once starts, it will come to an early end, even if a success on any one of the several fronts on which it will be engaged should have been secured. At this time I confess I can see no other way to avoid a catastrophe that will involve Europe in war. In view of the grave consequences to humanity which may follow from the action of their rulers, I trust that Your Excellency will weigh with the utmost deliberation the considerations which I have put before you.
The Second World War: Vol. 1, The Gathering Storm
Was he lying?

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15584
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

#51

Post by ljadw » 03 Nov 2021, 22:19

You must not judge Chamberlain on what he was saying (after all he was a politician ),but on what he was doing .
The fact remains that Britain would have declared war on Germany,even WITHOUT the Treaty with Poland and an other fact is that Poland's refusal to yield to Hitler's demands had nothing to do with the British guarantee,which was only blahblah for domestic use .Poland said no to Hitler in the winter of 1938/1939 and during that period there was no British guarantee .
The British guarantee did not cause WW2 ,but WW2 was caused by the German invasion, not of Poland ,but of a neighbour .Britain would also have declared war if Germany had attacked another country .
The aim of the guarantee was to preserve peace,to prevent a German attack and to prevent a British DOW .
Without the guarantee and without the letter you are citing, Britain would still declare war .
In September 1938, there was no guarantee to Czechoslovakia, but still Britain would have declared war if Germany had attacked the Czechs .
In 1914,there was no British guarantee to Russia and no British DOW when Germany attacked Russia, no British guarantee to Belgium ,but still a British DOW when Germany attacked Belgium .
States do not fight for pieces of paper .
No one took the guarantee serious.
All Britain could do (guarantee or no guarantee ) was to send 2 divisions, ON THE CONDITION that France also would declare war .

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 8753
Joined: 29 Dec 2006, 21:11
Location: Poland

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

#52

Post by wm » 04 Nov 2021, 22:44

If Britain declared war in absence of any obligation once and was ready to do it again in similar circumstances later it's obvious it would do that when an obligation existed.

I don't quite understand that "for domestic use" thing. The entire world knew and more appeasement would result in a massive loss of face and political credibility.
And it wasn't a mere guarantee - it was preceded by (quite long) negotiations with the Poles as to what it exactly meant. The British chose to call it a guarantee to not provoke Hitler, for political reasons.

It was 2 divisions but they planned for a long war - the British Fleet, the French Army, and massive American loans were reasonably good enough for that.

SloveneLiberal
Member
Posts: 399
Joined: 23 Jul 2018, 13:54
Location: Slovenia

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

#53

Post by SloveneLiberal » 04 Nov 2021, 23:44

Chamberlain lost his trust with Hitler and his companions when just after Munich agreement and his promises, Hitler/Germans occupied the rest of Chezchoslovakia and demanded Danzing from Poland. From that moment on he knew sooner or later there will be war with Third Reich. There was no appeasement policy after this. Hitler may want it will return but without success and realistic hopes in fact.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15584
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

#54

Post by ljadw » 05 Nov 2021, 06:57

Appeasement lasted till 3 September 1939 (Wohltat conversations in August ) .
Besides, immediately after Munich Britain expected that Germany would occupy Czechia and they did not care about it .

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15584
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

#55

Post by ljadw » 05 Nov 2021, 07:16

wm wrote:
04 Nov 2021, 22:44
If Britain declared war in absence of any obligation once and was ready to do it again in similar circumstances later it's obvious it would do that when an obligation existed.

I don't quite understand that "for domestic use" thing. The entire world knew and more appeasement would result in a massive loss of face and political credibility.
And it wasn't a mere guarantee - it was preceded by (quite long) negotiations with the Poles as to what it exactly meant. The British chose to call it a guarantee to not provoke Hitler, for political reasons.

It was 2 divisions but they planned for a long war - the British Fleet, the French Army, and massive American loans were reasonably good enough for that.
A long war would not help Poland: what Poland wanted was
A that Britain would prevent a German attack
B that,if there was still such an attack, a British army would be in Berlin,before the Germans would be in Warsaw .
And, about the domestic use : anti-appeasement elements in the Foreign Office and MI6 told the tabloids that Germany planned an attack against Poland in March 1939 (which was a lie ) and ,of course the tabloids published this lie .
The reply of Chamberlain was masterly (it was an election year ) : they told the word that if Hitler attacked Poland,they would declare war (at the stupefaction of Hitler ) and the public liked the reply (Hitler was brought into line without war ) and Attlee remained silent .This would save a lot of marginal constituencies .
About obligations : obligations are promises : countries do not fight because of promises ,but because of threats to their interests.
There was something as a guarantee to Czechia after Munich,but no one declared war on Germany when Hitler occupied Czechia in March 1939 .Appeasement continued : Attlee did not ask for a declaration of war in March 1939 .

SloveneLiberal
Member
Posts: 399
Joined: 23 Jul 2018, 13:54
Location: Slovenia

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

#56

Post by SloveneLiberal » 05 Nov 2021, 11:40

We know also from German documents that there was progressive deterioration of British attitude toward Germany which started just after Munich agreement. For example H. von Dirksen wrote in his report to Ribbentrop that it would be wrong to have illusions that British attitude toward Germany was not changed. ( 18.3. 1939 ) Also it was clear to Germans that British replied with new rearmament just after Munich, when Hitler broke his obligations and immediately put pressure on the remains of Czechoslovakia and on Poland concerning Danzing -already in October/November 1938.

However it seems Hitler had indeed some illusions/prejudice that the British are weak after Munich. Mussolini had them too. Ciano for example wrote in his diary in January 1939 when Chamberlain came to Italy that he was talking with Musssolini and both agreed Britain has weak leaders, not fighters and that they will lose its empire.

It seems that dictators took the message from Munich in the way that Britain has weak leaders, they were warned against such prejudice, but still kept them.

Chamberlain however did not believe and trust to dictators after broken promises at Munich that they will keep their words and solve problems on peacefull way with diplomacy as it was before Munich.
Last edited by SloveneLiberal on 05 Nov 2021, 12:52, edited 1 time in total.

SloveneLiberal
Member
Posts: 399
Joined: 23 Jul 2018, 13:54
Location: Slovenia

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

#57

Post by SloveneLiberal » 05 Nov 2021, 12:23

Something else maybe. Also Soviet communists apparently underestimated Chamberlain, seeing him as weak after Munich. For example Mayski wrote in his report in early 1939 that ''Chamberlain is a hopeless case. He can not mend his ways and should be replaced if Britain would change its foreign policy''.

ljadw
Member
Posts: 15584
Joined: 13 Jul 2009, 18:50

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

#58

Post by ljadw » 05 Nov 2021, 13:19

SloveneLiberal wrote:
05 Nov 2021, 11:40
We know also from German documents that there was progressive deterioration of British attitude toward Germany which started just after Munich agreement. For example H. von Dirksen wrote in his report to Ribbentrop that it would be wrong to have illusions that British attitude toward Germany was not changed. ( 18.3. 1939 ) Also it was clear to Germans that British replied with new rearmament just after Munich, when Hitler broke his obligations and immediately put pressure on the remains of Czechoslovakia and on Poland concerning Danzing -already in October/November 1938.

However it seems Hitler had indeed some illusions/prejudice that the British are weak after Munich. Mussolini had them too. Ciano for example wrote in his diary in January 1939 when Chamberlain came to Italy that he was talking with Musssolini and both agreed Britain has weak leaders, not fighters and that they will lose its empire.

It seems that dictators took the message from Munich in the way that Britain has weak leaders, they were warned against such prejudice, but still kept them.

Chamberlain however did not believe and trust to dictators after broken promises at Munich that they will keep their words and solve problems on peacefull way with diplomacy as it was before Munich.
On the other hand,see the letter of Halifax from November 1 1938 to Phipps (ambassador in France ) ,where he said :''German predominance in Central Europe was inevitable .'
And Halifax told the same to Hitler a year before : he said that Britain would not oppose German domination of Central Europe, AS LONG it happened peacefully .
Chamberlain had no illusions about Hitler,but that was irrelevant for appeasement which started almost immediately after Versailles . Why was the guarantee irrelevant ? Because no one in Britain thought that the loss of Poland as a threat for Britain .
Chamberlain had also no illusions about the cabinet,if he trusted the cabinet, he would not remain PM for a week .
And, about the influence of the guarantee on Polish foreign policy :
''The Polish decision to stand and fight,if need be,was made on March 24 1939,six days before Britain gave her guarantee to Poland ."
Source :Cianciala : Poland in British and French Policy in 1939 .
Poland said no to Hitler,because it was convinced that Stalin would never allow Hitler to conquer Poland .
The guarantee did not influence Poland, not Stalin, not Hitler,its only result was that the polls became positive for the Tories for the elections of November 1939. This was not only the result,but also the aim of the guarantee,because there was no need for the guarantee .

SloveneLiberal
Member
Posts: 399
Joined: 23 Jul 2018, 13:54
Location: Slovenia

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

#59

Post by SloveneLiberal » 05 Nov 2021, 16:34

Ok...but as Long as it Will happen without war as Halifax Said was not realistic in the case of Poland.

Also French side had on the other hand alliance with Poland. Gamelin promised already in May 1939 French offensive in the West if Germany would attack Poland. Also he Said in July to the British that he would like to see conflict between Poland and Germany would escalate slowly, so that England and France are really prepared good. But his interest was basically in war with Third Reich.

User avatar
wm
Member
Posts: 8753
Joined: 29 Dec 2006, 21:11
Location: Poland

Re: Was Hitler really surprised when England and France followed thru and declared war?

#60

Post by wm » 05 Nov 2021, 18:34

ljadw wrote:
05 Nov 2021, 07:16
A long war would not help Poland
Strangely that long war led to the destruction and total pacification of Germany, the eternal enemy of Poland as Germany was called then.
And the disintegration of the other not-so-eternal enemy - Russia, as a result of postwar developments triggered by the war.
So how come it didn't help Poland.
No pre-war Polish leader even dared to dream about such a victory.


ljadw wrote:
05 Nov 2021, 07:16
: what Poland wanted was
A that Britain would prevent a German attack
B that,if there was still such an attack, a British army would be in Berlin,before the Germans would be in Warsaw .
That's totally untrue.
Poland sought a defensive alliance because of its deterrence potential but expected to be conquered by the Germans in a few months anyway (there was no relieving offensive in the Franco-Polish alliance). The decision to resist was made well before any French or British promises and was unaffected by them.


ljadw wrote:
05 Nov 2021, 07:16
About obligations : obligations are promises : countries do not fight because of promises ,but because of threats to their interests.
There was something as a guarantee to Czechia after Munich,but no one declared war on Germany when Hitler occupied Czechia in March 1939 .Appeasement continued : Attlee did not ask for a declaration of war in March 1939 .
The guarantee was a political one, it guaranteed the borders in a political sense. There was no war in it.
During the British-Polish talks it was stated plainly that Britain would declare war, and Poland would declare war too in case of an attack on Britain or Belgium.

Post Reply

Return to “German Strategy & General German Military Discussion”