July 12, 2007
Three letters by GWA members printed in Newsweek
An English Connection?
Evan Thomas makes a good point that the British-American language ties contributed to the Anglo-American hegemony in the 20th century ("Ties of Blood and History," Feb. 26). But 92 years after the outbreak of World War I, readers are entitled to a more balanced approach to the causes of these conflagrations. The Manichaean good/bad perspective does not help us understand the complexities, and the statement "the English-speaking peoples have been seriously threatened by force four times: twice by German aggression, once by Soviet totalitarianism and most recently by Islamic fanaticism" casts Anglo-Americans as "good guys," without trying to understand the problems and interests of the "bad guys." The first shot in World War I was fired by a Bosnian Serb who murdered the heir to the Austrian throne, Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife, Sophie, on June 28, 1914. Serbian support of the murder and Russia's support of Serbia caused the war, when Austria insisted on obtaining satisfaction from Serbia. Other culprits of the outbreak of the war were Russia's ally France, that, far from trying to avoid a war, connived at it; and Britain, which took advantage of the opportunity to knock out Germany, its principal naval and commercial competitor. It is wrong to blame the war on Kaiser Wilhelm II, who demonstrably tried to avert the war. Alas, he had an alliance with Austria, as France had with Russia, and when Russia mobilized, the slaughter began. Please don't put all the blame on Germany: the consequences of such generalizations are the continuation and propagation of stereotypes and prejudices, which lead to harassment of Germans.
Kearn Schemm
President, German World Alliance
Arlington, Virginia
British-American language ties certainly contributed to U.S. political and economic hegemony in the 20th century. But let us not oversimplify things and cast ourselves in the role of the good guys. The Brits have a less than honorable colonial past-in Africa, India and elsewhere. We Americans have an imperialistic past of aggression in Cuba in 1898, imposing the Monroe Doctrine on Latin America, and expanding into Hawaii and the Philippines at the expense of the self-determination of other peoples. Our policies were not guided by a desire to bring "democracy" to others but by our need for economic expansion. As to the first world war, Germany was certainly not the war-monger, for it had nothing to gain and did try to contain Austria's justified outrage over the murder of the heir to the throne, Franz Ferdinand, and his wife, Sophie, by a Serb nationalist. It is a matter of record that Kaiser Wilhelm II undertook a lot of diplomatic footwork to avert the disaster. That he did not succeed does not make him guiltier than those who actually wanted and connived at the war. On a scale of "guilt,"
surely Serbia comes first, followed by Russia, whose Pan-Slavic western expansion was notorious; then France, that again wanted to grab Alsace-Lorraine, which had been taken from the Holy Roman Empire by successive French wars of aggression, and which Germany had recovered in 1871, and Britain, which coveted Germany's colonies in Africa and wanted to knock it out as a commercial competitor. Austria and Germany are at the bottom of the list. It is a travesty of history that the Versailles Treaty attributed all fault to Germany. Ninety-two years after the outbreak of that great calamity, it would be wise for us to refrain from chauvinism.
Prof. Alfred de Zayas
Geneva School of Diplomacy
Geneva, Switzerland
You say that since 1900, "the English-speaking peoples have been seriously threatened twice by German aggression." Please spare us this "Germany, the aggressor" stuff. The "British Empire's designs on Africa" were never threatened by Germany; we, France, Belgium and Portugal had the pick of the colonies long before the kaiser joined in the scramble for Africa. He was not a "power-grabber"-the Prussian royal family had ruled that kingdom for centuries and united Germany, which did not start World War I. Serbia, backed by Russia and France, precipitated the "war to end all wars." Russia was the first of the major participants to mobilize. Germany tried to prevent the conflict, acting as a restraining influence on Austria after the intolerable provocation of the Sarajevo assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife. France wanted Alsace-Lorraine back, and Russia and Serbia both wanted a chunk of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. These three nations, with the support of Britain, were the parties to starting WWI.
Also, Britain wasn't threatened by German aggression in WWI: as you point out, the German Navy was too small to challenge the Royal Navy's command of the seas, so an invasion of Britain was never a realistic prospect. Rather, Germany was threatened by Britain's allies. Britain invaded and took over Germany's colonies, not the other way round. And America felt "threatened"
by German "aggression"? It did not join the war until it was three years old! Unlike Al Qaeda, Germany has never attacked America. Unlike the Soviet Union, Germany has never pointed missiles at the States. The Versailles Treaty imposed punitive conditions on Germany, and the concurrent Trianon and St. Germain treaties did away with the old Austrian Empire altogether.
The terrible socioeconomic conditions in Germany in the 1920s, along with a massive reparations bill, and no help or guidance from outside, paved the way for Hitler's power grab in 1933 and were the prime causes of World War II.
The Hitler years were an aberration in German history and contrary to the legacy of tolerance built up by Prussia and other states when they became safe havens for immigrants and refugees from other countries. Because of Hitler, Germans have had to endure vilification and demonization. They-even those born after 1945-are still held "collectively guilty" of Nazi crimes.
We don't condemn ordinary Iraqis for Saddam's atrocities or blame ordinary Russians for Stalin's and Lenin's mass murders or revile ordinary Cambodians for Pol Pot's excesses. Yet we apply collective guilt to Germans who suffered enormously after WWII. In the east, they had to endure mass murder, rape, torture, mutilation, armed robbery and ethnic cleansing by the Red Army; in the west, the Allied soldiers embarked on an orgy of looting, while German citizens were often forced from their homes at gunpoint as the houses were commandeered. We never hear about the tragedy that befell Germany's citizens, but we are constantly reminded of Nazi crimes.
Steve Lister
Baughurst, England