Another week of crisis begins. How much longer can this go on? The most significant news from the weekend concerns another round of shuttle diplomacy -- this time it's the French Premier, Édouard Daladier, and Foreign Minister, Georges Bonnet, who have flown to London to consult with their British counterparts. The official communique, which can be read above (Manchester Guardian, p. 11) is pretty bland and just says that France and Britain are in complete agreement as to their policy over Czechoslovakia, without saying just what that is. But the Manchester Guardian's diplomatic correspondent has some more information. It seems that they are cooling on the idea of a plebiscite of the Sudeten people to see what they want to do, and warming to the idea of ceding at least part of the Sudetenland to Germany. Of course, the Czech government hasn't been consulted at this stage. No decision has been made on the question of an international guarantee of Czechoslovakian guarantee after a settlement. Henlein, in exile in Germany, has called for his followers to take arms and rebel against their Czech oppressors, but (perhaps surprisingly) they seem to have ignored him (p. 14).
...continue reading →

Now events are moving with a startling rapidity: all the more startling because it is Britain's sober, solid, unexciting prime minister, the 69-year old Neville Chamberlain, who is pushing them along. He has stunned the press by announcing, as can be seen in today's headlines from The Times above (p. 10), that he will fly to Germany to meet with Hitler in person, to see if they can't sort out the Sudeten crisis together, face to face. This is a very novel method of conducting diplomacy -- though not quite as novel, perhaps, as is often made out: the victorious Allied leaders had become used to summit meetings after the war, beginning with the Paris Peace Conference itself. But there's no doubt that, coming at such a critical juncture, it is seen as a bold and highly imaginative attempt to cut through the darkening atmospheres of racial incidents and veiled threats, to prevent war by rational, and personal, discussion.
...continue reading →

So, Hitler's big speech -- summarised in the Manchester Guardian (p. 11), above -- turned out to contain no new demands or proposals, nothing at any rate that was not implicit in Henlein's Carlsbad speech. But it's not so much the content as the tone which is worrying: his rhetoric was angry, violent and menacing. The demand he did make was:

I demand that the oppression of 3,500,000 [Sudetens] in Czecho-Slovakia shall end or the right of self-determination shall take its place.

He did not exclude negotiation; indeed, he said that it's up to Prague to make an agreement with the Sudetens. But he also said:

If the democracies should be convinced that they must protect with all their means the oppressors of the Germans, then this will have grave consequences.

Although it could be read a number of ways, this sounds like a clear warning that Germany is willing to risk war with Britain and France over the Sudetenland. But still there is nothing definite: as the diplomatic correspondent says, 'The question "war or peace" remains unanswered.' And that's the big question, isn't it?
...continue reading →

I'm cheating slightly today; the above headlines -- from the Daily Mail (p. 7) -- aren't, strictly speaking, about Czechoslovakia, but refer to speeches made by Nazi leaders at the Nuremberg rally on the weekend. But of course they were always going to be interpreted in the light of the continuing Sudeten crisis.

Hermann Goering was of course the head of the Luftwaffe as well as, at this time, probably second only to Hitler himself in terms of the Nazi hierarchy. Among other things, he called the Czech government 'ridiculous dwarfs' who were backed by 'Moscow -- the eternal, Jewish Bolshevist demons of destruction'. And he reassuringly noted that:

Germany's air fleet is the strongest in the world. Never before in history has Germany been so strong and united as now.

Hitler didn't refer directly to Czechoslovakia, but referred to the Anschluss of Austria in March, and added:

But this is only the beginning of our task. There are many great tasks before us which must still be solved.

Conflating these bits -- which the Daily Mail has done by referencing them together in the headline -- makes them sound like a threat.¹ Which, let's face it, they almost certainly were, but let's not forget the power of selective editing to fabricate apparent meaning.
...continue reading →

1. The Mail subeditor's habit of saying ‘So-and-so's "Thing that they said"’ or ‘So-and-so & "Other thing that they said"’ in their headlines really gets on my pip. I couldn't even say why, it's just annoying. [↩]

The headlines from the Manchester Guardian (p. 11) indicate that the situation is the same as yesterday, or a bit worse. The Sudeten leadership is still refusing to negotiate with the Czechoslovakian government, ostensibly because of the latter's inability to maintain order in the country. This is despite a meeting between the Sudetens and the Czech Premier, Hodza, who promised that those responsible for the incident at Mährisch-Ostrau (reported yesterday) would be punished severely, and an official Czech investigation confirming that Sudetens have indeed been mistreated in the area. According to the Guardian's diplomatic correspondent (p. 11), incidents like this could be used by the Sudeten German party to declare that the breakdown of law and order has forced them to assume control of the Sudetenland, which in turn could be a prelude to secession and union with Germany.

The view from London is grim (p. 11):

The fear is growing here [presumably in the Foreign Office] that Hitler does not desire a genuine settlement, and if there is a settlement of any sort it will only have the purpose of tiding over the period that will lead to the long-anticipated and long-prepared attack on Czecho-Slovakia.

Chamberlain is back from Scotland, and Halifax has put off his trip to Geneva (presumably something to do with the League of Nations), which was planned for tomorrow. There will be a Cabinet meeting on Monday to discuss the crisis. On the other hand, there is evidence of resistance to war inside Germany, as information given to the Geneva correspondent (p. 11) from a German source suggests that General Ludwig Beck, the Chief of the Staff of the German Army, has resigned because of his belief that 'an attack on Czecho-Slovakia would involved Germany in a war with England, France, and Russia, and perhaps other countries'. (True: Beck did resign for just this reason.) Also, 'There is reason to believe that General Beck's opinion is shared by other German military leaders'. Maybe Hitler can be restrained by his own army's unwillingness for war?
...continue reading →

These headlines from the Manchester Guardian (p. 9) could be summarised: Yeah, but no, but yeah … The Sudeten leadership agreed to accept the Czech autonomy proposals (as revealed yesterday) as the basis for negotiations. Which sounds very promising! But at that point, news was received of an incident at Mährisch-Ostrau, where two Sudeten deputies (i.e. MPs in the Czech parliament) were insulted by a Czech mounted policeman during an attempt to break up a demonstration regarding Sudetens who had been arrested for possession of illegal firearms. One of the deputies claimed to have been kicked and struck by a horsewhip. The Czechs claim this was an accident, as the policeman attempted to restrain his horse. Whatever the real truth, the Sudeten leaders used this incident as a reason to break off the negotiations before they had even begun, as their communique explains:

The incident at Mährisch-Ostrau demonstrates that the Government does not control the situation sufficiently to begin the discussions in detail in the present circumstances with any success or with a possibility of bringing them to a peaceful conclusion.

Perhaps I’m cynical, but this seems like an attempt by the Sudetens to have their cake and eat it too. Even The Times, in its leading article today, calls this move ‘childish’ and a ‘pretext’ (p. 13).
...continue reading →