Alone, Grand Alliance, Triumph and Tragedy — Churchill on II World War

Some time ago I finished reading Churchill's multiple volume account on II World War. As I wrote before, Churchill narration is excellent and if you want to know the history of one of the most tragic periods of human history — his books are invaluable.

I do not support those who claim that Churchill was not „objective” in his relation of the war time. First, as we well know, there is no such thing as objectivity. History is played by people and is written by people. Their worldview and events they participated in always shape it. Second, I was amazed how honest Churchill was in his account. Of course, he toots his own horn, but he does not avoid writing about the sins and errors of his own nation and his own! It was the author himself, who wrote about his work: „This is not history, this is my case.” Well, I have many objections to the books, but I will write about them at the very end of this review.

In „Alone” (which, in the first edition, was called „Their Finest Hour”) Churchill writes about the Fall of France and about the two crucial battles of the II World War — the air battle of Britain and the sea battle of the Atlantic. Unfortunately for French people, his relation of French attitude to the war and to Hitler is shameful. He reveals the lack of any preparation to the war on French part, their lack of coordination and flat collaboration of many of French influential circles with Nazis. One of the most interesting parts of this volume
is about Dunkirk and the amazing evacuation of about 300 thousands soldiers (including about 120 thousands French) to Britain. Having in mind the power of  Hitler at that time of the war (May 1940) that was indeed a miracle. The narration about the Battle of Britain and RAF bravery is fantastic. It is here were we can read, firsthand, about emotions and gratitude that led Churchill to the famous saying:

„Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few”.

We then move to the North Africa and Middle East, just to discover how important the region was during the war, and how big was Britain effort not to allow Hitler to grow too much there. Here comes the part about Field Marshal Archibald Wavell, the great British soldier. This account is special — because Wavell was in fact dismissed by Churchill after unsuccessful operation „Battleaxe”. Churchill writes about Wavell in high esteem. The book ends with the vivid arration about the treacherous behaviour of Soviet Russia in the war — until the later time, when they were attacked by Hitler, what was called „The Soviet Nemesis”. Reading this part, I was amazed how shallow is human memory... Today, Russia's role is remembered as the part of the great alliance that conquered Hitler. And that is fine and true. However, we tend to forget (with great aid of
Soviet, and later and even today, Russian propaganda) that it was for Stalin’s policy that Hitler could gain so much in the beginning of the War. Were they not attacked, they would stay on Hitler's side... It is amazing that we don't see Russian's afterthoughts about that shameful part of their history ...

„Grand Alliance” is an epic tale about the turn in the fate of war and the formation of the alliance between Britain, United States, and now on the attacked side, Soviet Russia. It is extremely detailed and fine written part.  Sometimes I lost sense that it is historical account, because it reads like a novel.

„Triumph and Tragedy” describes the finale of the war and the German defeat. However, as the title goes, the joy of victory was spoiled by the tragedy of divided Europe, that was the result and, as Churchill suggests, the price of the war. As in many parts of the entire set, here we also get sincere admission to allies own blunders. Churchill seems to be an outspoken narrator of both the glory and the sin...

For example, when he writes about Poland and the tragic fate of Warsaw and the treacherous behaviour of Stalin and his puppet communist government (Lublin committee) it becomes clear that Allies simply indulged to Stalin’s whims and demands. BTW, I'm not entirely sure if Churchill did not try to exonerate himself from these sins in some way or another, but no one can deny he is honest in his narration...

However, there is deeply disturbing issue about the book, well, about all the books of the set. It is a complete silence about Holocaust... As we now know, Shoah, the mass murder of almost 6 million Jews during the war and about 5 to 11 million other ethnic or social groups was one of the major efforts of Germans, both logistically, politically and militarily. It is startling that Churchill does not write anything about it. I do not suspect him of anti-Semitism, though one of only two mentions about Jews in the entire set is a petty joke ..., but this ignorance is hard to understand.

There is no doubt that both Churchill and Roosevelt new about the systematic extermination well. Jan Karski, Polish underground fighter, informed western powers about that. There are evidences that both most important Polish Government in Exile figures, like Mr. Mikołajczyk had frequent talks with Anthony Eden, Churchill's right hand. So why such omission? Maybe it explains Churchill handling of the case of Jewish refugees coming to then being-born state of Israel?

I do not know, but this ignorance casts a deep shadow on Churchill's account, despite the paradoxical greatness of the books and the well deserved Nobel price in literature he won...

This review was written in Paris, between 25 and 29 of May, 2011 with lots of  thoughts about France, Europe and the bad past they came through ...

The dark side of British handling of the Palestine just after the war - a story told by Yoram Kaniuk

„Commander of the Exodus” by Yoram Kaniuk, Jewish writer and journalist is a book that shows the darker and much less known side of the immigration to Palestine of the Holocaust survivors.

It is a story of  brave Palestine-native hero — Yossi Harel, who in the course of 1947-48 brought about 20000 Shoah survivors to Palestine. There would probably be nothing strange in the story if it was not for British Navy and, more generally, British Mandate authorities to actively oppose the coming of the survivors to their land....

Kaniuk, who demonstrates the unusual talent of combining true historical account with a great story telling talent, does not seem to be anvengeful or even biased against British. He just coldly relates the episode of the complicated history o the birth of the state of Israel. This relation is, nevertheless, quite disturbing and embarrassing for the British — who verbally declared support to the Zion Cause, but did very little to help the nascent State to start its life in peace. The ships coming to Palestine from Europe were harassed and often turn back, not without fighting, to Europe. In the most dramatic stories, some Holocaust survivors were sent back to Europe and deported to the former Nazi camps!

Even calling these events „ironic” seems to be outrageous.
I have found the article that tells the true account of these events. The following picture of „Exodus 1947” ship comes from it:

„Commander of the Exodus” does not even try to explain why the events had such a turn there and at that time. The book focuses on the valour of its main hero and the brave people who believed they come to their dreamed off homeland — but were met by hostility of those in whose hands the fate of millions was endowed...

I must admit that I write this review long time after I read the book. And I write it now, because the another great book — that by Winston Churchil („The Second World War”) — sheds some light on the matters, and I will be reviewing it shortly. I will try to give my own theory in that forthcoming review....

The third part of „The WWW Trilogy” — Just another flop ...

I tuned to the audio rendering of Robert J. Sawyer third part of his famous „The WWW Trilogy”. After „Wake” — the opening part, „Watch” — the second tome, here comes „Wonder” — the concluding part.

Honestly, after „Watch” I already had suspicion that the trilogy could and should be reduced to the single „Wake” part and would stay in our memories ...

However, it is not a first time in the genre that the sequel or, worse still, the second and third parts — are a far cry from the first book.

As you can read in my previous reviews (Wake, Watch), the „The WWW Trilogy” is about the emerging artificial mind born out of existing Web infrastructure. The theme itself is interesting, touches many current trends like AI, Semantic Web, knowledge representation, mind-body relation etc.

Unfortunately, while wandering from „Wake” to „Wonder” it arrives to extremely naive, almost childish story, possibly good to kids in the preschools...

The WebMind starts to talk to politicians, overthrows China government, works for peace, health and prosperity of humanity and so on, so on....

At some passages it is easy to identify some strange episodes that make me think that  the author indulges in „product placement” activity. Repeated references to „a single iPhone button” or the advice WebMind gives to US president to use FireFox instead of Internet Explorer — are explicit „signals” of such activities...

Well, why I read it after all ?

I tuned to it only to get something lighter and less serious than my recent war-time reading...
I now regret I spent several hours listening to it. There are better books to spend time with ....

What to do with a dove thrown into the nest of snakes ...

I know this is a strange title. My language skills in the tongue which was not my mother's seems to be limited to express what I feel after reading this book. I will try to express it as clearly as I can:

It is about an incredible person. Probably the one among the best who was walking the earth ...
Yet his story left me in fear and sadness.  It is about Dietrich Bonhoeffer. And about the book: „Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy: A Righteous Gentile vs. the Third Reich”.  The author is Eric Metaxas.

Please let me warn you. Be that as it may, I truly admire Bonhoeffer. I was surprised how deep his religiousness was. And how deeply, being faithful to Christianity, he understood Jewish roots of his religion — what, among other things, brought him to total denial of German ant-Semitism amplified and explored by the Nazi. I could only wish there were more such priests and monks and Christian laymen...

I have to write about my admiration, because in the later part of this review I will be critical also of Bonhoeffer !
So why I have such strange feelings and thoughts ?

Let me now tell you few basic fact — I do not intend to write long, typical review. Eric Metaxas’ work is a very good record of the life and struggle and martyrdom of Dietrch Bonhoeffer. Dietrich was German pastor and theologian. He was born in 1906 in Wrocław (Breslau). He came from very prestigious family of Professor Karl Bonhoeffer, the neurologists and psychiatrist. His decision to become a theologian, and later the priest came when he was only fourteen. His other talents were in music (was a very good pianist) and in sports (was quite good athlete).

The story of Bonhoeffer's life tells the tragic truth about that dark period in German, and more generally, in human history. He opposed the Nazi regime, he did it long before the war and during it. Despite his apparent pacifism and priesthood he conspired to kill Hitler. For his involvement in the plot against Hitler he was sentenced to death and executed by hanging on April 9th, 1945, just few weeks before the end of the war ...

For all interested in details there is a very good article about him on Wikipedia.

Now, let me come to the essence of my feelings. The biography relates also what was the attitude of the Churches to Hitler and his Nazi regime. And here came first shock. How little we know about the “German Christians” whose coat-of-arms had Nazi swastika inscribed into the cross! And how popular that movement was among German Protestants of that times. How little we know about Ludwig Müller — who became Reich’s Bishop in 1933. And let’s not blame only protestants. Catholic Church with all its majesty entered into specific state contract with Hitler — The Concordat. This shameful act, negotiated by pope-to-be, Eugenio Pacelli, was signed when it became quite clear what are true Hitler’s intentions... Do we really know, that it was never revoked by the Holy See? How can we really think of WORDS in the Pius XI encyclical „Mit brennender Sorge” when the ACT was still in place?

Of course there were Christians who opposed Hitler, of course there were priests murdered by Nazism. But what is the shocking truth, is that even in “Confessing Church” the opposition against anti-Semitism was relatively week, and its famous Barmen Declaration even does not list anti-Semitism as a crime!

I know I will tell harsh and strong words here — but all that represents nothing less than a total failure of Christianity in Europe in XX century. When you know all that facts, and spend some hours contemplating on them — what do you think when some European politicians speak about “Christian roots” of Europe?

I will not give answers to these burning questions — I know they would be too blatant...

It seems to me, that Bonhoeffer knew about this total failure, and to me it is clear from his letters, where we can find the term that latter become, somehow improperly, an emblem of his theology: Religionless Christianity:

Our whole nineteen-hundred-year-old Christian preaching and theology rest on the "religious a priori" of mankind. "Christianity" has always been a form--perhaps the true form--of "religion." But if one day it becomes clear that this a priori does not exist at all, but was a historically conditioned and transient form of human self-expression, and if therefore man becomes radically religionless--and I think that that is already more or less the case (else how is it, for example, that this war, in contrast to all previous ones, is not calling forth any "religious" reaction?)--what does that mean for "Christianity"?

Many “Christian” critics of Bonhoeffer thought of his ill will in these thoughts...

Did they know the history? Did they know how many of Hitler’s Willing Executioners (a suggestio to the book is intentional) were devote Christians?

I think that the Bonhoeffer notion of religion which possibly could be built upon ruins of Christianity — is the only true hope for Christianity — at least this is my private, and certainly heavily biased, opinion — of the person who equally intentionally left Christianity years ago ...

On these thoughts I seem to be in line with the author of the biography, though he avoids making such strong statements as I did here.

But there is also something in this book that is even more disturbing. Several times in the book, almost casually, its author relates Bonhoeffer’s and his circles, including his family, opinion about the First World War and the “unjust” treatment Germans got in and after the Treaty of Versailles... Imagine — the people who caused the first round of horrors in XX century, and who, including its best people, to whom Bonhoeffer certainly belonged, did not even accept the historical punishment they got ! Were they blind ?

Are we all blind? Were there only few doves and all that remained was the nest of snakes ?

Written in Paris, London & Lodz....

Not all states are ready to admit their sins of the past... Russian Shame.

I usually don't write here on current affairs, even less I am a political blogger...
But what happened today is a bad example of  some states and nations inability to seek the truth and absolution from the sins of the past.

Here is what happened:

Tomorrow there is a day of remembrance for Poles who, on April 10, 2010 had lost their 96 political figures including the President in the plane crash near Katyn, the place of Polish POWs and intelligencia genocide committed by Soviet NKVD (Russian Secret police). The delegation was going there for 70 anniversary of the massacre. At the place of the crash there was a big stone and an inscription on a honours board explaining in Polish, who died there, when and what was the trip goal (i.e. commemoration of the massacre).

Just one day before the anniversary today's Russian authorities, under the cover of the night, removed the board and replaced it by another board with Polish and Russian inscription that writes the same... with the sentence about the goal of the trip (i.e. the mention of genocide) removed...

What problem it was for them? Was this small plaque able to change the classification of this massacre from war crime to genocide (what Russians vehemently oppose) ? Never. It is clear that it was a political act. But I'm not going to comment on that. I hate politics.

What is interesting however, is how week and frail is Russian's will to admit to their Stalin-era crimes.
Even if the only remainder of that crimes is a small plaque in Polish that would not even come noticed by many... Imagine ...

One could think that because they entertain some form of open society — the atonement for their PAST sins and totalitarian-era atrocites should be easy... It is not...Why ???  Is Homo Sovieticus still alive ?

Its a shame, but the shame that recently falls on many groups and circles in many countries. Take recent numerous pronouncements of  German politician Erika Steinbach who promotes the view that Hitler was the only evildoer of II World War ...

Sometimes I'm worried. Badly worried. If nations, particularly big nations allow for the historical "forgetfulness" — the bad times are ahead of us....

Milestones of Disaster

A couple of weeks ago I finished reading the first volume of four of Winston Churchill „The Second World War. Milestones to Disaster”. First and foremost, I was greatly surprised what a good writer Churchill was !
I must say that he fully deserved the Nobel Prize for Literature, he got in 1953. Some may argue about it and probably did, denying  his literary merits. But I believe one can hold such views only until he or she discovers his narration. Was it not about the greatest tragedy of XX century, I would say it is really fantastic and captivating story.

The tome describes the years that led to the war and its beginning, sometimes called by the term that Churchill coined „Twilight War” (see Phoney War)

I'm not going to relate the content of the book in this review — but rather prefer to focus on the most important conclusion of the book: It is true that the Second World War broke due to the madness of Hitler and his willing German, Italian or Japaneese helpers, the German guilt for it and all its atrocities including Holocaust, is unquestionable.

But, as Churchill proves, it was possible also because of so many errors and forbearances and the fundamental moral weakness of the alies in the period after the end of the First World War...

The list of incredible and literaly stupid things the Allies committed is long. When Hitler started to grow into power, British entered into shameful Naval Agreement with Germany. Americans passed the infamous Neutrality Act. When Hitler defied both Versailles and Locarno treatises and entered with arms into RhineLand, both French and English have full legal justification for a prevention. Nothing happened, even to the amazement of Hitler himself...

Churchill writes about all these facts openly and frankly. There is no hidden agenda to show British as heroes. Oppositely, he plainly condemns these acts, and the overall tone of his narration is that of seeking the truth, not the good opinion about his own flock.

One of the most deplorable act committed by French and English just at the dawn of the tragedy, was the Munich Betrayal, where Chamberlain along with Daladier, essentially allowed Hitler to partition and annex Czechoslovakia.

The true value of the book lies in the fact that most of these facts are not well known or publicised. The media style of portaying the Allies as heroes has dominated and still dominates the collective memory of Europeans. Churchill debunks the cheap, pseudo heroism of his own nation. Of course, where and when the English and French  soldiers fought, they deserved the admiration, and Churchill does not avoid it.

His demeanour can be a paragon of how any responsible politician should behave: first find your own nations sins, errors and attrocities — and speak about them openly an frankly and repent. Without such attitude the world can not become a better place...

All in all - „Milestones to Disaster” is a must for all who are interested in XX History.

Written in Paris, April, 3rd, 2011.

While there I also finished reading  Eric's Metaxas „Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy (2010)” and I'm deeply shocked by its implications. A review to come soon...

Why I do not write for a while ...

In fact, I have recently read a number of good books worth reviews. But as it sometimes happens, I am in a period of some reluctance to the Web and electronic communication...

That was perhaps caused by an unexpected death of my friend Jan Bereza OSB (A Benedictine Monk) who passed away almost this hour last week ...

Here is Jan's:

---

For my dear readers, I have a stock pile of books read that include:
Jehoshua Ozjasz Thon's Sermons (in my mother's tongue)
Yoram Kaniuk's „Commander of the Exodus”
Carlos Ruiz Zafón  first novel „The Prince of Mist”
John Ratey's „Spark: The Revolutionary New Science of Exercise and the Brain”
Michael M. Lewis's „The New New Thing”

My current reading is Winston Churchil's „The Second World War: Milestones to Disaster”

Mirek@Munich

Black Swan — one of the best movies I've seen

As you know, I rarely review films here. But for the „Black Swan” I wanted to make an exception. Probably one of the best movies of Darren Aranofsky, it tells an imaginative story of a ballerina (featured by Natlie Portman) by of the New York City ballet company. She is so deeply engaged in her role in „Swan Lake” that her entire life is turned around it, and ultimately consumes her entirely... It is however hard to relate the „plot” of  the movie, largely because of the role of confusing, ambiguous turns of the action that flows on a brink between reality and dreams or hallucinations...

The beautiful filming, fantastic music and the great actor's craft make the movie one of my best ....

„Night” by Elie Wiesel

It is a book that, just after I started reading, made me quickly to relinquish it. And I had real difficulty to return ...

Written by famous Elie Wiesel, the Holocaust survivor and Nobel prize winner, „Night” is very realistic account on the tragic fate of Jews during Shoah. But the realism it is written with is almost unbearable.

Don't take me wrong, though. I do not mean I could not read it or that it is bad book. But to apply a typical slogan „Great Book” or „Nice reading” is in fact an act of betraying the author ...

In short, it describes the events since the beginning of the war that happened in Sighet, through the liquidation of Ghetto in that Romanian town. We are taken on a journey to Auschwitz, Buna (Monowice —Auschwitz III) and to Buchenwald. Despite the fact that the fate saved the narrator of the book, he lost his faith in G-d, in humanity and in himself. As more about the book can be found in the good Wikipedia article, I will not elaborate on it more...

In fact, when I finished it I was in a kind of trauma for several hours...

See the ending of it:

„At six a clock that afternoon the first American tank stood at the gate of Buchenwald. Our first act as free men was to through ourselves onto the provisions. That's all we thought about. No thought of revenge or parents, only of bread. And even we were no longer hungry, not one of us thought of revenge.
(...)
One day when I was able to get up I decided to look at myself in the mirror on the opposite wall. I had not seen myself since the Ghetto. From the depths of the mirror, a corpse was contemplating me. The look in his eyes as it gazed at me, has never left me...”

Paris, January 30, 2011

The pile grows ...

Oh yes, the pile of  books I have read but haven't  reviewed starts to grow.

Quite recently I read John J. Ratey's „Spark” - a very interesting, grounded in science book about the importance of physical exercises for our ... brain.

And very recently I finished Michel Lewis 2000 account „The New New Thing” about Jim Clark.
Very well written and fascinating story of the Internet Era most admired entrepreneur....

On this pile (on its bottom) there is still Joseph Conrad „Nostromo”...

Hope to have some time on the coming weekend in Paris ....

Sense & Sensibility — Good Writership or Naiveté ?

I just finished  Jane Austen's first novel „Sense and Sensibility”. And I must say, I'm confused. It is a well written novel, no question. But the level of naivete, of narrowness of the characters' outlook of life — and what is more — of admiration of the gentry-mindedness and heroes idleness — keeps me away from writing a positive, or even any longer review. It also overshadows some passages of true irony and good comedy, that, perhaps give the true value to this book !

I'm not literary critic, so my opinion may not be taken too seriously. And I know, that many bright people (like Leo Strauss) admired Jane Austen's prose. Maybe, I could change my mind after reading some other of Austen's novel. But I still have in mind the another book of the genre and of Victorian age — Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontë. Only 30 years between them, while the difference is of enormous proportions in favour of Bronte....