Unfortunately, I feel this is not a good analysis.
The war was an evolving situation, and Britain and France only firmly committed to the warpath after the March 14th, 1939 German annexation of Czechoslovakia. Its only then did they give the guarantee to Germany's next target Poland.
Before that they had largely folded before German demands. That the USSR would join their coalition was no given factor in 1939. In fact, the allies were planning to bomb the Baku oil fields in 1940 after the winter war to disrupt Soviet shipments to Germany. Ironically, Hitler's invasion of France saved the allies from self-detonation. A bombing of Baku by French and British bombers could've brought the Soviets into the war.
While Canada and the ANZACS were in theory British colonies and compelled to fight, they were de facto independent countries and their enthusiasm for the war was lukewarm at best following the experience in ww1.
Hell, even Britain itself was non-commital about the war at first, and only sent a small expeditionary force to aid the French, hesitant about tangling itself to another bloody land war like 1939.
The allies were right to fear Germany in light of her growing size and strength. Germany had annexed Austria and all of Czechoslovakia by 1939 and Hungary had drifted into its economic orbit.
Germany in 1939 had 79 million ethnic Germans under its control.
Compare that to 47 million Brits + 42 million Frenchmen.
There was no guarantee that the Poles could realistically hold out for long and it wouldn't end up being another Germany v Franco-British war like ww1. This is what ended up happening as Poland collapsed in one month in the face of the German invasion.
So, 89 million vs 79 million for a potential long war.
Even there, the bulk of the land war would fall on the shoulders of 42 million Frenchmen.
The industrial balance was even more concerning.
Germany even in 1936 was the second largest economy in the world in national terms and by 1939 it had added Austria and the industrial base of Czechoslovakia to itself.
German GDP was 411 billion vs 287 for the UK and 199 for France.
So, the actual balance of power between the Franco-British Entente and the German Reich was far closer than you'd imagine.
From the perspective of France and Britain in the Spring of 1939, it was perfectly rational to become alarmed as Germany was blobbing in strength while the allies had largely flatlined.
Germany's next potential victim was Poland, which had a GDP that was 50% larger than Czechia. Allowing the Germans to take over Poland unopposed would lead to an even stronger Reich.
Furthermore, Balkan states like Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria were increasingly drifting towards the German orbit by 1939. Italy similarly was drifting towards the Germans and had plans for future wars with the allies.
Allowing Hitler to take Poland unopposed and economically integrate the three Balkan countries would mean fighting a proto-European union in 1945. One with an 82 million-strong Germany at the head with a much strengthened Italy, Romania, Hungary, and Bulgaria in support.
In hindsight, it was really foolish of Hitler to risk war in 1939 as the board was moving in his favor in the long run due to independence movements in the British Empire.
Austria voted to join Germany, only Czechia was annexed, Slovakia was given independence. Hungary and Romania allying with Germany would not have swept the war in Germany's favor alone, the other nations joined the Axis either due to the Allies (their refusal to work with Mussolini) or the Soviets (their constant conquest). If annexing Poland was a concern the Allies should have forced them to give up Danzig (Hitler's line in the sand), which is debatable if it was Polish and not independent, and it wasn't even their biggest port by the time Danzig voted to rejoin Germany. Hitler was an Anglophile so he had no desire to go to war with Britain and by extension Western Europe. While Britain and France vs big Germany might be close (which means it was more foolish to declare war on Germany), add the USA or the Soviets to the Allies and it swings in their favor as the article states.
Great article Ryan. I saw you said that Germany had offered to withdraw from the Russian part of the USSR at various points in WW2 just as they offered to withdraw from Western Europe and Poland, I was wondering what the source for Russian offer was.
The specific reason war was declared on Nazi Germany was that France and Britain feared that there was basically no end to Germany's expansionary aims, and stopping them now would be easier to do than later. This was basically true, and Britain and France would have been better off if they had declared war on Nazi Germany even earlier, they had an opportunity to do so in 1936 with the remilitarisation of the Rhineland, but probably did not want to appear to be warmongers.
In 1936 the political equation was different. Britain and France were still reeling from the great depression and war was extremely unpopular on the homefront.
The French could've pushed the Germans out of Rhineland but it would've required a full mobilization that would've crashed France's already reeling economy. Furthermore, there was fear of a genuine mass uprising and homefront collapse due to how unpopular the prospect of a war was at this stage.
The British in 1936 were not fully opposed to Germany taking a more assertive role in the European continent. France had become the lead player by handing out guarantees to Poland, Czechia and Romania, and the British hoped to balance France out with a stronger Germany.
Hey I have a question alternative hypothesis this guy claims the right is more dangerous than the left could you respond to him https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1aZDrVTLJtE
If they didn't genuinely fear Germany, why did they decide to go to war anyways? Was it just foreign policy inertia in the British elite? A few insane politicians (churchill halifax etc.) hell bent on destroying Germany? Jewish influence in US/UK? Desire to crush "Fascism" before it could spread elsewhere? MIC influence in the elite?
Hi, Ryan, longtime fan here.
Unfortunately, I feel this is not a good analysis.
The war was an evolving situation, and Britain and France only firmly committed to the warpath after the March 14th, 1939 German annexation of Czechoslovakia. Its only then did they give the guarantee to Germany's next target Poland.
Before that they had largely folded before German demands. That the USSR would join their coalition was no given factor in 1939. In fact, the allies were planning to bomb the Baku oil fields in 1940 after the winter war to disrupt Soviet shipments to Germany. Ironically, Hitler's invasion of France saved the allies from self-detonation. A bombing of Baku by French and British bombers could've brought the Soviets into the war.
While Canada and the ANZACS were in theory British colonies and compelled to fight, they were de facto independent countries and their enthusiasm for the war was lukewarm at best following the experience in ww1.
Hell, even Britain itself was non-commital about the war at first, and only sent a small expeditionary force to aid the French, hesitant about tangling itself to another bloody land war like 1939.
The allies were right to fear Germany in light of her growing size and strength. Germany had annexed Austria and all of Czechoslovakia by 1939 and Hungary had drifted into its economic orbit.
Germany in 1939 had 79 million ethnic Germans under its control.
Compare that to 47 million Brits + 42 million Frenchmen.
There was no guarantee that the Poles could realistically hold out for long and it wouldn't end up being another Germany v Franco-British war like ww1. This is what ended up happening as Poland collapsed in one month in the face of the German invasion.
So, 89 million vs 79 million for a potential long war.
Even there, the bulk of the land war would fall on the shoulders of 42 million Frenchmen.
The industrial balance was even more concerning.
Germany even in 1936 was the second largest economy in the world in national terms and by 1939 it had added Austria and the industrial base of Czechoslovakia to itself.
German GDP was 411 billion vs 287 for the UK and 199 for France.
So, 411 billion vs 486 billion.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1334676/wwii-annual-war-gdp-largest-economies/
So, the actual balance of power between the Franco-British Entente and the German Reich was far closer than you'd imagine.
From the perspective of France and Britain in the Spring of 1939, it was perfectly rational to become alarmed as Germany was blobbing in strength while the allies had largely flatlined.
Germany's next potential victim was Poland, which had a GDP that was 50% larger than Czechia. Allowing the Germans to take over Poland unopposed would lead to an even stronger Reich.
Furthermore, Balkan states like Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria were increasingly drifting towards the German orbit by 1939. Italy similarly was drifting towards the Germans and had plans for future wars with the allies.
Allowing Hitler to take Poland unopposed and economically integrate the three Balkan countries would mean fighting a proto-European union in 1945. One with an 82 million-strong Germany at the head with a much strengthened Italy, Romania, Hungary, and Bulgaria in support.
In hindsight, it was really foolish of Hitler to risk war in 1939 as the board was moving in his favor in the long run due to independence movements in the British Empire.
Austria voted to join Germany, only Czechia was annexed, Slovakia was given independence. Hungary and Romania allying with Germany would not have swept the war in Germany's favor alone, the other nations joined the Axis either due to the Allies (their refusal to work with Mussolini) or the Soviets (their constant conquest). If annexing Poland was a concern the Allies should have forced them to give up Danzig (Hitler's line in the sand), which is debatable if it was Polish and not independent, and it wasn't even their biggest port by the time Danzig voted to rejoin Germany. Hitler was an Anglophile so he had no desire to go to war with Britain and by extension Western Europe. While Britain and France vs big Germany might be close (which means it was more foolish to declare war on Germany), add the USA or the Soviets to the Allies and it swings in their favor as the article states.
Hi Ryan, nice post. If you want the argument fleshed out more I highly recommend reading Guido Preparata's "Conjuring Hitler", which is summarized here: https://neofeudalreview.substack.com/p/british-and-american-machinations
That's a much larger post. This is a "101" post.
Also: Who set Hitler against Stalin? by Nikolay Starikov
Great article Ryan. I saw you said that Germany had offered to withdraw from the Russian part of the USSR at various points in WW2 just as they offered to withdraw from Western Europe and Poland, I was wondering what the source for Russian offer was.
The specific reason war was declared on Nazi Germany was that France and Britain feared that there was basically no end to Germany's expansionary aims, and stopping them now would be easier to do than later. This was basically true, and Britain and France would have been better off if they had declared war on Nazi Germany even earlier, they had an opportunity to do so in 1936 with the remilitarisation of the Rhineland, but probably did not want to appear to be warmongers.
So this is very much incorrect. But that's going to be another post.
In 1936 the political equation was different. Britain and France were still reeling from the great depression and war was extremely unpopular on the homefront.
The French could've pushed the Germans out of Rhineland but it would've required a full mobilization that would've crashed France's already reeling economy. Furthermore, there was fear of a genuine mass uprising and homefront collapse due to how unpopular the prospect of a war was at this stage.
The British in 1936 were not fully opposed to Germany taking a more assertive role in the European continent. France had become the lead player by handing out guarantees to Poland, Czechia and Romania, and the British hoped to balance France out with a stronger Germany.
Hey I have a question alternative hypothesis this guy claims the right is more dangerous than the left could you respond to him https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1aZDrVTLJtE
If they didn't genuinely fear Germany, why did they decide to go to war anyways? Was it just foreign policy inertia in the British elite? A few insane politicians (churchill halifax etc.) hell bent on destroying Germany? Jewish influence in US/UK? Desire to crush "Fascism" before it could spread elsewhere? MIC influence in the elite?
you watch too much porn.