German-Soviet Boundary and Friendship Treaty, September 28, 1939.
The Government of the German Reich and the Government of the U.S.S.R. consider it as exclusively their task, after the collapse of the former Polish state, to re-establish peace and order in these territories and to assure to the peoples living there a peaceful life in keeping with their national character. To this end, they have agreed upon the following:
ARTICLE I.
The Government of the German Reich and the Government of the U.S.S.R. determine as the boundary of their respective national interests in the territory of the former Polish state the line marked on the attached map, which shall be described in more detail in a supplementary protocol.
ARTICLE II.
Both parties recognize the boundary of the respective nation interests established in article I as definitive and shall reject any interference of third powers in this settlement.
ARTICLE III.
The necessary reorganization of public administration will be effected in the areas west of the line specified in article I by the Government of the German Reich, in the areas east of this line by the Government of the U.S.S.R.
ARTICLE IV.
The Government of the German Reich and the Government of the U.S.S.R. regard this settlement as a firm foundation for a progressive development of the friendly relations between their peoples.
ARTICLE V.
This treaty shall be ratified and the ratifications shall be exchanged in Berlin as soon as possible. The treaty becomes effective upon signature.
Done in duplicate, in the German and Russian languages.
Moscow, September 28,1939.
For the Government of the German Reich:
J. RIBBENTROP.
By authority of the Government of the U.S.S.R.:
W. MOLOTOV.
Confidential Protocol
The Government of the U.S.S.R. shall place no obstacles in the way of Reich nationals and other persons of German descent residing in the territories under its jurisdiction, if they desire to migrate to Germany or to the territories under German jurisdiction. It agrees that such removals shall be carried out by agents of the Government of the Reich in cooperation with the competent local authorities and that the property rights of the emigrants shall be protected.
A corresponding obligation is assumed by the Government of the German Reich in respect to the persons of Ukrainian or White Russian descent residing in the territories under its jurisdiction. Moscow, September 28,1939.
For the Government of the German Reich:
J. RIBBENTROP
By authority of the Government of the U.S.S.R.
W. MOLOTOV.
Secret Supplementary Protocol
The undersigned Plenipotentiaries declare the agreement of the Government of the German Reich and the Government of the U.S.S.R upon the following:
The Secret Supplementary Protocol signed on August 23,1939, shall be amended in item to the effect that the territory of the Lithuanian State falls to the sphere of influence of the U.S.S.R., while, on the other hand, the province of Lublin and parts of the province of Warsaw fall to the sphere of influence of Germany (cf. the map attached to the Boundary and Friendship Treaty signed today). As soon as the Government of the U.S.S.R. shall take special measures on Lithuanian territory to protect its interests, the present German-Lithuanian border, for the purpose of a natural and simple boundary delineation, shall be rectified in such a way that the Lithuanian territory situated to the southwest of the line marked on the attached map should fall to Germany.
Further it is declared that the economic agreements now in force between Germany and Lithuania shall not be affected by the measures of the Soviet Union referred to above.
Moscow, September 28,1939.
For the Government of the German Reich:
J. RIBBENTROP
By authority of the Government of the U.S.S.R.:
W. MOLOTOV.
Secret Supplementary Protocol
The undersigned plenipotentiaries, on concluding the German Russian Boundary and Friendship Treaty, have declared their agreement upon the following:
Both parties will tolerate in their territories no Polish agitation which affects the territories of the other party. They will suppress in their territories all beginnings of such agitation and inform each other concerning suitable measures for this purpose. Moscow, September 28,1939.
For the Government of the German Reich:
J. RIBBENTROP
By authority of the Government of the U.S.S.R.:
W. MOLOTOV
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Memorandum of a Conversation Held on the Night of August 23d to 24th, Between the Reich Foreign Minister Ribbentrop, on the One Hand, and Herr Stalin
Memorandum of a Conversation Held on the Night of August 23d to 24th, Between the Reich Foreign Minister Ribbentrop, on the One Hand, and Herr Stalin and the Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars Molotov, on the Other Hand
VERY SECRET!
STATE SECRET
The following problems were discussed:
1) Japan:
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER stated that the German-Japanese friendship was in no wise directed against the Soviet Union. We were, rather, in a position, owing to our good relations with Japan, to make an effective contribution to an adjustment of the differences between the Soviet Union and Japan. Should Herr Stalin and the Soviet Government desire it, the Reich Foreign Minister was prepared to work in this direction. He would use his influence with the Japanese Government accordingly and keep in touch with the Soviet representative in Berlin in this matter.
HERR STALIN replied that the Soviet Union indeed desired an improvement in its relations with Japan, but that there were limits to its patience with regard to Japanese provocations. If Japan desired war, it could have it. The Soviet Union was not afraid of it and was prepared for it. If Japan desired peace-so much the better! Herr Stalin considered the assistance of Germany in bringing about an improvement in Soviet-Japanese relations as useful, but he did not want the Japanese to get the impression that the initiative in this direction had been taken by the Soviet Union.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER assented to this and stressed the fact that his cooperation would mean merely the continuation of talks that he had for months been holding with the Japanese Ambassador in Berlin in the sense of an improvement in Soviet-Japanese relations. Accordingly, there would be no new initiative on the German side in this matter.
2) Italy:
HERR STALIN inquired of the Reich Foreign Minister as to Italian aims. Did not Italy have aspirations beyond the annexation of Albania-perhaps for Greek territory? Small, mountainous, and thinly populated Albania was, in his estimation, of no particular use to Italy.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER replied that Albania was important to Italy for strategic reasons. Moreover, Mussolini was a strong man who could not be intimidated.
This he had demonstrated in the Abyssinian conflict, in which Italy had asserted its aims by its own strength against a hostile coalition. Even Germany was not yet in a position at that time to give Italy appreciable support.
Mussolini welcomed warmly the restoration of friendly relations between Germany and the Soviet Union. He had expressed himself as gratified with the conclusion of the Non-aggression Pact.
3) Turkey:
HERR STALIN asked the Reich Foreign Minister what Germany thought about Turkey.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER expressed himself as follows in this matter: he had months ago declared to the Turkish Government that Germany desired friendly relations with Turkey. The Reich Foreign Minister had himself done everything to achieve this goal. The answer had been that Turkey became one of the first countries to join the encirclement pact against Germany and had not even considered it necessary to notify the Reich Government of the fact.
HERREN STALIN and MOLOTOV hereupon observed that the Soviet Union had also had a similar experience with the vacillating policy of the Turks.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER mentioned further that England had spent five minion pounds in Turkey in order to disseminate propaganda against Germany.
HERR STALIN said that according to his information the amount which England had spent in buying Turkish politicians was considerably more than five million pounds.
4) England:
HERREN STALIN and MOLOTOV commented adversely on the British Military Mission in Moscow, which had never told the Soviet Government what it really wanted.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER stated in this connection that England had always been trying and was still trying to disrupt the development of good relations between Germany and the Soviet Union. England was weak and wanted to let others fight for its presumptuous claim to world domination.
HERR STALIN eagerly concurred and observed as follows: the British Army was weak; the British Navy no longer deserved its previous reputation. England's air arm was being increased, to be sure, but there was a lack of pilots. If England dominates the world in spite of this, this was due to the stupidity of the other countries that always let themselves be bluffed. It was ridiculous, for example, that a few hundred British should dominate India.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER concurred and informed Herr Stalin confidentially that England had recently put out a new feeler which was connected with certain allusions to 1914. It was a matter of a typically English, stupid maneuver. The Reich Foreign Minister had proposed to the Führer to inform the British that every hostile British act, in case of a German-Polish conflict, would be answered by a bombing attack on London.
HERR STALIN remarked that the feeler was evidently Chamberlain's letter to the Führer, which Ambassador Henderson delivered on August 23 at the Obersalzberg. Stalin further expressed the opinion that England, despite its weakness, would wage war craftily and stubbornly.
5) France:
HERR STALIN expressed the opinion that France, nevertheless, had an army worthy of consideration.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER, on his part, pointed out to Herren Stalin and Molotov the numerical inferiority of France. While Germany had available an annual class of more than 300,000 soldiers, France could muster only 150,000 recruits annually. The West Wall was five times as strong as the Maginot Line. If France attempted to wage war with Germany, she would certainly be conquered.
6) Anti-Comintern Pact:
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER observed that the Anti-Comintern Pact was basically directed not against the Soviet Union but against the Western democracies. He knew, and was able to infer from the tone of the Russian press, that the Soviet Government fully recognized this fact.
HERR STALIN interposed that the Anti-Comintern Pact had in fact frightened principally the City of London and the small British merchants.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER concurred and remarked jokingly that Herr Stalin was surely less frightened by the Anti-Comintern Pact than the City of London and the small British merchants. What the German people thought of this matter is evident from a joke which had originated with the Berliners, well known for their wit and humor, and which had been going the rounds for several months, namely, "Stalin will yet join the Anti-Comintern Pact."
7) Attitude of the German people to the German-Russian Non-aggression Pact:
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER stated that he had been able to determine that all strata of the German people, and especially the simple people, most warmly welcomed the understanding with the Soviet Union. The people felt instinctively that between Germany and the Soviet Union no natural conflicts of interests existed, and that the development of good relations had hitherto been disturbed only by foreign intrigue, in particular on the part of England.
HERR STALIN replied that he readily believed this. The Germans desired peace and therefore welcomed friendly relations between the Reich and the Soviet Union.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER interrupted here to say that it was certainly true that the German people desired peace, but, on the other hand, indignation against Poland was so great that every single man was ready to fight. The German people would no longer put up with Polish provocation.
8) Toasts:
In the course of the conversation, HERR STALIN spontaneously proposed a toast to the Führer, as follows:
"I know how much the German nation loves its Führer; I should therefore like to drink to his health."
HERR MOLOTOV drank to the health of the Reich Foreign Minister and of the Ambassador, Count von der Schulenburg.
HERR MOLOTOV raised his glass to Stalin, remarking that it had been Stalin who-through his speech of March of this year, which had been well understood in Germany-had brought about the reversal in political relations.
HERREN MOLOTOV and STALIN drank repeatedly to the Non-aggression Pact, the new era of German-Russian relations, and to the German nation.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER in turn proposed a toast to Herr Stalin, toasts to the Soviet Government, and to a favorable development of relations between Germany and the Soviet Union.
9) When they took their leave, HERR STALIN addressed to the Reich Foreign Minister words to this effect:
The Soviet Government takes the new Pact very seriously. He could guarantee on his word of honor that the Soviet Union would not betray its partner.
HENCKE
Moscow, August 24, 1939.
Questions:
What did both sides think of the military Power of Great Britain?
What did both sides think of the military power of France?
Where did Stalin suspect the Italians might go next after their conquest of Albania? Did the Reich Foreign Minister (RFM) say anything to lessen Stalin’s fears? Explain.
What was Stalin’s attitude toward Japan? What did the RFM offer to do?
What do you think the RFM was trying to do by either encouraging or downplaying Stalin’s fears of Germany’s allies? What advantage could Germany gain from this?
Although the RFM said that “the German people desired peace”, he made it clear that they had grown impatient with one nation and were more than willing to make war on it. What nation was that? Did the RFM offer any reason for this?
Both sides in this discussion appeared to be united in their opposition to Great Britain. What particular charges did they make against British international goals and methods of achieving those goals? What groups within Britain did they see as responsible in part for Britain’s foreign policy?
What did the RFM and Stalin say about the attitude of the German people toward the USSR and toward the just-signed German-Russian Non-Aggression Pact? How did the RFM explain earlier tensions between Germany and the USSR?
Do you think that the RFM and the Soviets were being honest with one another? Explain your reasons. Why might it be in the interests of both sides to be either honest or dishonest in these negotiations?
VERY SECRET!
STATE SECRET
The following problems were discussed:
1) Japan:
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER stated that the German-Japanese friendship was in no wise directed against the Soviet Union. We were, rather, in a position, owing to our good relations with Japan, to make an effective contribution to an adjustment of the differences between the Soviet Union and Japan. Should Herr Stalin and the Soviet Government desire it, the Reich Foreign Minister was prepared to work in this direction. He would use his influence with the Japanese Government accordingly and keep in touch with the Soviet representative in Berlin in this matter.
HERR STALIN replied that the Soviet Union indeed desired an improvement in its relations with Japan, but that there were limits to its patience with regard to Japanese provocations. If Japan desired war, it could have it. The Soviet Union was not afraid of it and was prepared for it. If Japan desired peace-so much the better! Herr Stalin considered the assistance of Germany in bringing about an improvement in Soviet-Japanese relations as useful, but he did not want the Japanese to get the impression that the initiative in this direction had been taken by the Soviet Union.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER assented to this and stressed the fact that his cooperation would mean merely the continuation of talks that he had for months been holding with the Japanese Ambassador in Berlin in the sense of an improvement in Soviet-Japanese relations. Accordingly, there would be no new initiative on the German side in this matter.
2) Italy:
HERR STALIN inquired of the Reich Foreign Minister as to Italian aims. Did not Italy have aspirations beyond the annexation of Albania-perhaps for Greek territory? Small, mountainous, and thinly populated Albania was, in his estimation, of no particular use to Italy.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER replied that Albania was important to Italy for strategic reasons. Moreover, Mussolini was a strong man who could not be intimidated.
This he had demonstrated in the Abyssinian conflict, in which Italy had asserted its aims by its own strength against a hostile coalition. Even Germany was not yet in a position at that time to give Italy appreciable support.
Mussolini welcomed warmly the restoration of friendly relations between Germany and the Soviet Union. He had expressed himself as gratified with the conclusion of the Non-aggression Pact.
3) Turkey:
HERR STALIN asked the Reich Foreign Minister what Germany thought about Turkey.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER expressed himself as follows in this matter: he had months ago declared to the Turkish Government that Germany desired friendly relations with Turkey. The Reich Foreign Minister had himself done everything to achieve this goal. The answer had been that Turkey became one of the first countries to join the encirclement pact against Germany and had not even considered it necessary to notify the Reich Government of the fact.
HERREN STALIN and MOLOTOV hereupon observed that the Soviet Union had also had a similar experience with the vacillating policy of the Turks.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER mentioned further that England had spent five minion pounds in Turkey in order to disseminate propaganda against Germany.
HERR STALIN said that according to his information the amount which England had spent in buying Turkish politicians was considerably more than five million pounds.
4) England:
HERREN STALIN and MOLOTOV commented adversely on the British Military Mission in Moscow, which had never told the Soviet Government what it really wanted.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER stated in this connection that England had always been trying and was still trying to disrupt the development of good relations between Germany and the Soviet Union. England was weak and wanted to let others fight for its presumptuous claim to world domination.
HERR STALIN eagerly concurred and observed as follows: the British Army was weak; the British Navy no longer deserved its previous reputation. England's air arm was being increased, to be sure, but there was a lack of pilots. If England dominates the world in spite of this, this was due to the stupidity of the other countries that always let themselves be bluffed. It was ridiculous, for example, that a few hundred British should dominate India.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER concurred and informed Herr Stalin confidentially that England had recently put out a new feeler which was connected with certain allusions to 1914. It was a matter of a typically English, stupid maneuver. The Reich Foreign Minister had proposed to the Führer to inform the British that every hostile British act, in case of a German-Polish conflict, would be answered by a bombing attack on London.
HERR STALIN remarked that the feeler was evidently Chamberlain's letter to the Führer, which Ambassador Henderson delivered on August 23 at the Obersalzberg. Stalin further expressed the opinion that England, despite its weakness, would wage war craftily and stubbornly.
5) France:
HERR STALIN expressed the opinion that France, nevertheless, had an army worthy of consideration.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER, on his part, pointed out to Herren Stalin and Molotov the numerical inferiority of France. While Germany had available an annual class of more than 300,000 soldiers, France could muster only 150,000 recruits annually. The West Wall was five times as strong as the Maginot Line. If France attempted to wage war with Germany, she would certainly be conquered.
6) Anti-Comintern Pact:
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER observed that the Anti-Comintern Pact was basically directed not against the Soviet Union but against the Western democracies. He knew, and was able to infer from the tone of the Russian press, that the Soviet Government fully recognized this fact.
HERR STALIN interposed that the Anti-Comintern Pact had in fact frightened principally the City of London and the small British merchants.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER concurred and remarked jokingly that Herr Stalin was surely less frightened by the Anti-Comintern Pact than the City of London and the small British merchants. What the German people thought of this matter is evident from a joke which had originated with the Berliners, well known for their wit and humor, and which had been going the rounds for several months, namely, "Stalin will yet join the Anti-Comintern Pact."
7) Attitude of the German people to the German-Russian Non-aggression Pact:
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER stated that he had been able to determine that all strata of the German people, and especially the simple people, most warmly welcomed the understanding with the Soviet Union. The people felt instinctively that between Germany and the Soviet Union no natural conflicts of interests existed, and that the development of good relations had hitherto been disturbed only by foreign intrigue, in particular on the part of England.
HERR STALIN replied that he readily believed this. The Germans desired peace and therefore welcomed friendly relations between the Reich and the Soviet Union.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER interrupted here to say that it was certainly true that the German people desired peace, but, on the other hand, indignation against Poland was so great that every single man was ready to fight. The German people would no longer put up with Polish provocation.
8) Toasts:
In the course of the conversation, HERR STALIN spontaneously proposed a toast to the Führer, as follows:
"I know how much the German nation loves its Führer; I should therefore like to drink to his health."
HERR MOLOTOV drank to the health of the Reich Foreign Minister and of the Ambassador, Count von der Schulenburg.
HERR MOLOTOV raised his glass to Stalin, remarking that it had been Stalin who-through his speech of March of this year, which had been well understood in Germany-had brought about the reversal in political relations.
HERREN MOLOTOV and STALIN drank repeatedly to the Non-aggression Pact, the new era of German-Russian relations, and to the German nation.
The REICH FOREIGN MINISTER in turn proposed a toast to Herr Stalin, toasts to the Soviet Government, and to a favorable development of relations between Germany and the Soviet Union.
9) When they took their leave, HERR STALIN addressed to the Reich Foreign Minister words to this effect:
The Soviet Government takes the new Pact very seriously. He could guarantee on his word of honor that the Soviet Union would not betray its partner.
HENCKE
Moscow, August 24, 1939.
Questions:
What did both sides think of the military Power of Great Britain?
What did both sides think of the military power of France?
Where did Stalin suspect the Italians might go next after their conquest of Albania? Did the Reich Foreign Minister (RFM) say anything to lessen Stalin’s fears? Explain.
What was Stalin’s attitude toward Japan? What did the RFM offer to do?
What do you think the RFM was trying to do by either encouraging or downplaying Stalin’s fears of Germany’s allies? What advantage could Germany gain from this?
Although the RFM said that “the German people desired peace”, he made it clear that they had grown impatient with one nation and were more than willing to make war on it. What nation was that? Did the RFM offer any reason for this?
Both sides in this discussion appeared to be united in their opposition to Great Britain. What particular charges did they make against British international goals and methods of achieving those goals? What groups within Britain did they see as responsible in part for Britain’s foreign policy?
What did the RFM and Stalin say about the attitude of the German people toward the USSR and toward the just-signed German-Russian Non-Aggression Pact? How did the RFM explain earlier tensions between Germany and the USSR?
Do you think that the RFM and the Soviets were being honest with one another? Explain your reasons. Why might it be in the interests of both sides to be either honest or dishonest in these negotiations?
Speech of Polish President Kaczynski
Speech of Polish president Kaczynski ,Tuesday, 1 September 2009
Two generations have passed but the Second World War still requires reflection
Dear Prime Minister, Chancellor, Prime Ministers, Presidents, Marshals, Ladies and Gentlemen!
Today we commemorate the 70th anniversary of the outbreak of the most horrible war - the Second World War. We are at Westerplatte, a symbol of heroic resistance against a stronger enemy. Several hundred kilometres from here lies Wieluń, a city where the first bombs were dropped and where more than a thousand people died. This is the second symbol – a symbol of the totalitarian nature of this war.
Two generations have passed but the Second World War still requires reflection. A question arises about the causes of the Second World War. Certainly these were totalitarianism and nationalism or, in fact, it was (one could say) chauvinism. I am as certain of this statement as I am of the statement that the order established in Europe after the First World War, the order established by the Treaty of Versailles, was the first attempt at maintaining peace both on our continent and in the world, even though it proved to be unstable. The Treaty of Versailles confirmed the independence of my country, but it is worth reminding that not only my country, but also Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and eventually Slovenia and Croatia – as a part of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, and later on of Yugoslavia. The Treaty acknowledged the rule of independence of nations as well as explicitly acknowledged the rights of minorities. The order established by the Treaty proved to be transitory for numerous complex reasons. The first reason was the emergence of totalitarian political systems and, most importantly, the rise of the Third Reich which propagated an aggressive and vengeful ideology, opposing the achievements of European civilisation with its Nazism.
For several years, between 1933 and 1938, there were attempts, on the part of Western states such as France and Great Britain, at parleying with this totalitarian state. Poland proposed, as early as in autumn 1933, that a preventive war be started but this was to no avail. The situation being as it was, we concluded a non-aggression pact with Germany, we had also previously concluded such a pact with the USSR. A non-aggression pact was a necessity then and it is by no means comparable to the Russian-German Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact signed six years later. A policy of concession eventually led to the Anschluss and then to the Munich Agreement. This was an agreement that requires a moment of thought. Winston Churchill was right in saying that a choice was made in Munich between honour and shame; shame was chosen but there was war anyway. A question of the role of our country arises here. We were not present in Munich. We were not present in Munich, but the Agreement resulted in violating the territorial integrity of Czechoslovakia. A violation of territorial integrity, which is always evil.
This is not a problem stemming only from totalitarianism, the problem lies in all imperialistic and neo-imperialistic tendencies. We have learnt that last year. Taking part in the partition of Czechoslovakia, in reducing its territory, was not only a mistake, it was a sin. We, Poles, can admit that and we seek no excuses to justify it. Seek no excuses even if there were any to be found. We have to draw conclusions from the Munich Agreement and apply them to the present, we must not yield to imperialism. We must not yield to imperialism, nor even neo-imperial tendencies. Such behaviour does not always bring such quick and tragic results as in the case of Munich. But it always brings similar results. This is a great lesson for the whole of modern Europe, for the whole world. A year after the Munich Agreement the war broke out preceded by the pact of 23rd August 1939 called the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. It was not only a non-aggression pact, but also a pact for division of influences in a major part of Europe.
What was the situation in our country at that time? I would like to repeat once again what I said this morning: Poland was proposed to sign the Anti-Comintern Pact, we were also suggested or even convinced to march to the East, but we rejected it. We rejected it explicitly and we met our allied commitments. We know what the course of the war in 1939, in September and October 1939, was, we commented on that this morning. The war finished for our country with a defeat as it had to finish like that. Then, years of occupation, very tragic years, not only in Poland, began. Five and a half million Polish and Jewish people, even up to 5 million 800 thousand, perished in my motherland during the war. They were only a part of the 50 million victims of the war worldwide. Holocaust crimes were committed, but there were also other crimes committed before the war between Russia and Germany began.
We must devote a moment of reflection to Katyń not only because of the facts, with which we are familiar today, but also because of the causes. Why did over twenty thousand Polish police, army and border guard officers suffer such a fate? It was because of revenge, yes, this was a revenge for the year 1920, for the fact that Poland managed to repulse the aggression then. One might say – this is communism. No, it was not communism but chauvinism. Chauvinism was an integral feature of this political system at that time. The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was not a pact signed in good faith. One party tried to outwit the other party. Stalin thought that the Germans would bleed to death in the war with France and Great Britain and would fall prey to them easily. On the other hand, Hitler believed that he would defeat the West and be free for an offensive to the East. But both of them were wrong. A terrible war broke out, a terrible war where Nazi Germany was defeated. Several million soldiers serving in the Soviet Army died in the war, I have already talked about it today: Russians, Ukrainians, Byelorussians, Georgians, Azerbaijanis and representatives of other nations. We should pay tribute to them as they constantly proved their extraordinary bravery. The Nazi regime was defeated, but Poland did not regain full sovereignty.
Europe was divided by the Iron Curtain. On the other side of the Iron Curtain, not the one our country was behind, a period of reflection, a fruitful reflection started. As a result of this reflection the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was created – the pact that during 60 years of existence has become an exporter of stabilisation, freedom and at least, in most cases, democracy. It has been one of the most successful experiments. Yet, we must remember that the alliance obliges. Today, both Poland and Germany are parts of the alliance and both of the countries are obliged to respect their elementary interests. The alliance was necessary; it is and will be necessary, it is even very important. But the fathers of the unifying Europe have not limited their actions to the concept of a defence pact. They have also laid down foundations of what is today called the European Union. This is, indeed, maybe an even more interesting experiment in the history of humankind. And so far it has been successful as well.
As a part of this community, the principle of balance of power has been substituted, at least to some extent, by a principle of cooperation. What were the conditions of this success? The first condition was a community of values (at least relative) such as freedom, democracy and pluralism. The second condition was resignation from imperial dreams, at least partial resignation from the rule of influence zones. We would not have a unified Europe without this as well. That is why we have an absolutely new quality in the form of the 27 countries of unified Europe, and I think that in the future there will be even more of them. This quality should be available also for other countries; however, under one condition – acceptance of a new system of values. A system where there is no place for dreaming of the past and where the thinking process is based on the principle of equality. A cooperating Europe does not require scaffolding based on two countries, but it requires broad, multilateral cooperation. And it requires democracy not only at the level country- citizen, but also in the relations between particular countries. If this is what happens in the future, we can say that we have fully succeeded in drawing conclusions from the unimaginable tragedy, unimaginable crime of the years 1939-45.
However, there is still a long way ahead to achieve it. Yet, today, I would like to express my hopes that we will manage to achieve our goal on the basis of the world of values, on the basis of truth. A truth, which is often painful, must be revealed both by the winners and the defeated. We cannot agree that those who were defeated must talk about issues most painful for them and those who won – do not have to. There is only one truth. According to us, Christians, even the worst truth releases from captivity, liberates and not humiliates, provided that it relates to all of us.
We, Poles, have the right to know the truth, to know the truth about tragic issues for our nation and we cannot ever resign from it. I am deeply convinced that Europe, the whole of Europe, is moving in this direction - towards pluralism, freedom and democracy and towards the truth even when it is very tough. Because we can admit our mistakes, as I have already said. We should also be able to confess our sins and never put the decision of murdering 30 thousand people on par with a typhoid epidemic or another disease. This is not the right track to reconciliation. Reconciliation which is necessary not only for my country, but also for the whole of Europe. Thank you very much.
Two generations have passed but the Second World War still requires reflection
Dear Prime Minister, Chancellor, Prime Ministers, Presidents, Marshals, Ladies and Gentlemen!
Today we commemorate the 70th anniversary of the outbreak of the most horrible war - the Second World War. We are at Westerplatte, a symbol of heroic resistance against a stronger enemy. Several hundred kilometres from here lies Wieluń, a city where the first bombs were dropped and where more than a thousand people died. This is the second symbol – a symbol of the totalitarian nature of this war.
Two generations have passed but the Second World War still requires reflection. A question arises about the causes of the Second World War. Certainly these were totalitarianism and nationalism or, in fact, it was (one could say) chauvinism. I am as certain of this statement as I am of the statement that the order established in Europe after the First World War, the order established by the Treaty of Versailles, was the first attempt at maintaining peace both on our continent and in the world, even though it proved to be unstable. The Treaty of Versailles confirmed the independence of my country, but it is worth reminding that not only my country, but also Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and eventually Slovenia and Croatia – as a part of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, and later on of Yugoslavia. The Treaty acknowledged the rule of independence of nations as well as explicitly acknowledged the rights of minorities. The order established by the Treaty proved to be transitory for numerous complex reasons. The first reason was the emergence of totalitarian political systems and, most importantly, the rise of the Third Reich which propagated an aggressive and vengeful ideology, opposing the achievements of European civilisation with its Nazism.
For several years, between 1933 and 1938, there were attempts, on the part of Western states such as France and Great Britain, at parleying with this totalitarian state. Poland proposed, as early as in autumn 1933, that a preventive war be started but this was to no avail. The situation being as it was, we concluded a non-aggression pact with Germany, we had also previously concluded such a pact with the USSR. A non-aggression pact was a necessity then and it is by no means comparable to the Russian-German Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact signed six years later. A policy of concession eventually led to the Anschluss and then to the Munich Agreement. This was an agreement that requires a moment of thought. Winston Churchill was right in saying that a choice was made in Munich between honour and shame; shame was chosen but there was war anyway. A question of the role of our country arises here. We were not present in Munich. We were not present in Munich, but the Agreement resulted in violating the territorial integrity of Czechoslovakia. A violation of territorial integrity, which is always evil.
This is not a problem stemming only from totalitarianism, the problem lies in all imperialistic and neo-imperialistic tendencies. We have learnt that last year. Taking part in the partition of Czechoslovakia, in reducing its territory, was not only a mistake, it was a sin. We, Poles, can admit that and we seek no excuses to justify it. Seek no excuses even if there were any to be found. We have to draw conclusions from the Munich Agreement and apply them to the present, we must not yield to imperialism. We must not yield to imperialism, nor even neo-imperial tendencies. Such behaviour does not always bring such quick and tragic results as in the case of Munich. But it always brings similar results. This is a great lesson for the whole of modern Europe, for the whole world. A year after the Munich Agreement the war broke out preceded by the pact of 23rd August 1939 called the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. It was not only a non-aggression pact, but also a pact for division of influences in a major part of Europe.
What was the situation in our country at that time? I would like to repeat once again what I said this morning: Poland was proposed to sign the Anti-Comintern Pact, we were also suggested or even convinced to march to the East, but we rejected it. We rejected it explicitly and we met our allied commitments. We know what the course of the war in 1939, in September and October 1939, was, we commented on that this morning. The war finished for our country with a defeat as it had to finish like that. Then, years of occupation, very tragic years, not only in Poland, began. Five and a half million Polish and Jewish people, even up to 5 million 800 thousand, perished in my motherland during the war. They were only a part of the 50 million victims of the war worldwide. Holocaust crimes were committed, but there were also other crimes committed before the war between Russia and Germany began.
We must devote a moment of reflection to Katyń not only because of the facts, with which we are familiar today, but also because of the causes. Why did over twenty thousand Polish police, army and border guard officers suffer such a fate? It was because of revenge, yes, this was a revenge for the year 1920, for the fact that Poland managed to repulse the aggression then. One might say – this is communism. No, it was not communism but chauvinism. Chauvinism was an integral feature of this political system at that time. The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was not a pact signed in good faith. One party tried to outwit the other party. Stalin thought that the Germans would bleed to death in the war with France and Great Britain and would fall prey to them easily. On the other hand, Hitler believed that he would defeat the West and be free for an offensive to the East. But both of them were wrong. A terrible war broke out, a terrible war where Nazi Germany was defeated. Several million soldiers serving in the Soviet Army died in the war, I have already talked about it today: Russians, Ukrainians, Byelorussians, Georgians, Azerbaijanis and representatives of other nations. We should pay tribute to them as they constantly proved their extraordinary bravery. The Nazi regime was defeated, but Poland did not regain full sovereignty.
Europe was divided by the Iron Curtain. On the other side of the Iron Curtain, not the one our country was behind, a period of reflection, a fruitful reflection started. As a result of this reflection the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was created – the pact that during 60 years of existence has become an exporter of stabilisation, freedom and at least, in most cases, democracy. It has been one of the most successful experiments. Yet, we must remember that the alliance obliges. Today, both Poland and Germany are parts of the alliance and both of the countries are obliged to respect their elementary interests. The alliance was necessary; it is and will be necessary, it is even very important. But the fathers of the unifying Europe have not limited their actions to the concept of a defence pact. They have also laid down foundations of what is today called the European Union. This is, indeed, maybe an even more interesting experiment in the history of humankind. And so far it has been successful as well.
As a part of this community, the principle of balance of power has been substituted, at least to some extent, by a principle of cooperation. What were the conditions of this success? The first condition was a community of values (at least relative) such as freedom, democracy and pluralism. The second condition was resignation from imperial dreams, at least partial resignation from the rule of influence zones. We would not have a unified Europe without this as well. That is why we have an absolutely new quality in the form of the 27 countries of unified Europe, and I think that in the future there will be even more of them. This quality should be available also for other countries; however, under one condition – acceptance of a new system of values. A system where there is no place for dreaming of the past and where the thinking process is based on the principle of equality. A cooperating Europe does not require scaffolding based on two countries, but it requires broad, multilateral cooperation. And it requires democracy not only at the level country- citizen, but also in the relations between particular countries. If this is what happens in the future, we can say that we have fully succeeded in drawing conclusions from the unimaginable tragedy, unimaginable crime of the years 1939-45.
However, there is still a long way ahead to achieve it. Yet, today, I would like to express my hopes that we will manage to achieve our goal on the basis of the world of values, on the basis of truth. A truth, which is often painful, must be revealed both by the winners and the defeated. We cannot agree that those who were defeated must talk about issues most painful for them and those who won – do not have to. There is only one truth. According to us, Christians, even the worst truth releases from captivity, liberates and not humiliates, provided that it relates to all of us.
We, Poles, have the right to know the truth, to know the truth about tragic issues for our nation and we cannot ever resign from it. I am deeply convinced that Europe, the whole of Europe, is moving in this direction - towards pluralism, freedom and democracy and towards the truth even when it is very tough. Because we can admit our mistakes, as I have already said. We should also be able to confess our sins and never put the decision of murdering 30 thousand people on par with a typhoid epidemic or another disease. This is not the right track to reconciliation. Reconciliation which is necessary not only for my country, but also for the whole of Europe. Thank you very much.
Speech of Vladimir Putin
Vladimir Putin's address:
Mr President of the Polish Republic, Mr Prime Minister, ladies sand gentlemen, colleagues and friends.
We, the representatives of different countries, have gathered here today in Gdansk, where the first shots of the bloodiest, most cruel and horrible war in the history of mankind were fired. We have gathered to pay tribute to the heroic deeds of the victors and to bow our heads in memory of the tens of millions of victims. The Allied soldiers and officers, the partisans and Resistance fighters. Civilians - women, children, old people - who died in bombing raids and at the hands of the invaders, and who succumbed to torture in concentration camps. People of different faiths and nationalities, political persuasions and views. People who could not escape this catastrophe.
Victory over Nazism came at a huge price and at the cost of irreparable losses. More than 53,000 Red Army soldiers and officers died liberating Gdansk alone. Buried in Poland are 600,000 of my fellow countrymen who contributed to the victory over Nazism. Six hundred thousand! All in all, half of the 55 million who died in the Second World War were citizens of the USSR. Think about these terrible figures.
It is our moral duty, the duty of all peoples to cherish the memory of the enduring importance of the Great Victory, and the genuine allied effort that took place over the dramatic events in our common history.
When recalling the first day of the war, we should of course think about what pushed the world to that fateful brink, and about the consequences of political cowardice, appeasing the potential aggressor, and attempts to ensure one's own security at the expense of that of others, above all our neighbours, and about what behind-the-scenes plots and agreements lead to.
The Second World War did not just happen. Its sources lie - and I agree with those who have made this point today - in the dire legacy of the Versailles Treaty, which did not only document the defeat of Germany after the First World War, but humiliated it, a fact that the Nazis took advantage of in order to seize power in the mid-1930s. It should be noted that no reliable collective security system had been created at the time.
When analysing the dramatic events leading up to the Second World War, it is incumbent upon us to draw lessons from them. To do so it is necessary to cast aside the political stereotypes of the past, the clichés and distortions of history, and the blatant suppression of certain facts.
It is important to understand that any collaboration with extremists, which in the Second World War meant Nazism and its underlings, leads to tragedy, whatever the motives for such collaboration. In effect it is not collaboration, but collusion aimed at furthering one's ends at the expense of others.
Therefore, it has to be admitted that all the attempts made between 1934 and 1939 to appease the Nazis with various agreements and pacts were morally unacceptable and practically meaningless, as well as harmful and dangerous. It was the combination of all these actions that led to this tragedy, to the start of World War II.
Of course, mistakes have to be admitted. Our country has done so. The State Duma of the Russian Federation, our country's Parliament, has condemned the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. We are entitled to expect the same from other countries that had made a deal with the Nazis, and not at the level of statements by political leaders, but at the level of political decisions.
We must, of course, think about the victims. Without a profound understanding of what has happened, we will be unable to build a truly secure world, eradicate the legacy of the Cold War, and remove the artificial dividing lines. I would like to note that my country does not only recognize the mistakes and tragedies of the past, but is making a practical contribution to building a new world based on new principles.
It is due to the position of my country that the virtual and real Berlin Wall was brought down, and prerequisites were established for the building of a new Europe without dividing lines.
We should cure society of the pestilence of xenophobia, racial hatred, and mutual mistrust built on cynical distortion or crude falsification of history.
Modern civilized policy should be based on shared moral and common legal principles. I am confident that only then can we turn the tragic page of the history on the Second World War - in memory of the fallen and for the sake of a peaceful future for our children.
An example of how old wounds can be healed - I am confident of this today - is the relationship of true partnership between the Federal Republic of Germany and the new Russia that has taken shape in recent years. Our two nations' reconciliation and magnanimity have risen above the settling of historical scores.
It is our genuine wish to see a relationship between Russia and Poland free from the ghosts of the past, and to develop in the spirit of neighbourly cooperation in order to do justice to the two great European nations.
In conclusion I would like to address the main participants in today's ceremony, the comrades-in-arms of those who defended Westerplatte and Stalingrad, landed in Italy and Normandy, and liberated Warsaw, Paris, Prague and Berlin.
Your feat is immortal. It will remain forever in our hearts as a true measure of fortitude, courage, valour and honour.
Thank you for your attention.
Mr President of the Polish Republic, Mr Prime Minister, ladies sand gentlemen, colleagues and friends.
We, the representatives of different countries, have gathered here today in Gdansk, where the first shots of the bloodiest, most cruel and horrible war in the history of mankind were fired. We have gathered to pay tribute to the heroic deeds of the victors and to bow our heads in memory of the tens of millions of victims. The Allied soldiers and officers, the partisans and Resistance fighters. Civilians - women, children, old people - who died in bombing raids and at the hands of the invaders, and who succumbed to torture in concentration camps. People of different faiths and nationalities, political persuasions and views. People who could not escape this catastrophe.
Victory over Nazism came at a huge price and at the cost of irreparable losses. More than 53,000 Red Army soldiers and officers died liberating Gdansk alone. Buried in Poland are 600,000 of my fellow countrymen who contributed to the victory over Nazism. Six hundred thousand! All in all, half of the 55 million who died in the Second World War were citizens of the USSR. Think about these terrible figures.
It is our moral duty, the duty of all peoples to cherish the memory of the enduring importance of the Great Victory, and the genuine allied effort that took place over the dramatic events in our common history.
When recalling the first day of the war, we should of course think about what pushed the world to that fateful brink, and about the consequences of political cowardice, appeasing the potential aggressor, and attempts to ensure one's own security at the expense of that of others, above all our neighbours, and about what behind-the-scenes plots and agreements lead to.
The Second World War did not just happen. Its sources lie - and I agree with those who have made this point today - in the dire legacy of the Versailles Treaty, which did not only document the defeat of Germany after the First World War, but humiliated it, a fact that the Nazis took advantage of in order to seize power in the mid-1930s. It should be noted that no reliable collective security system had been created at the time.
When analysing the dramatic events leading up to the Second World War, it is incumbent upon us to draw lessons from them. To do so it is necessary to cast aside the political stereotypes of the past, the clichés and distortions of history, and the blatant suppression of certain facts.
It is important to understand that any collaboration with extremists, which in the Second World War meant Nazism and its underlings, leads to tragedy, whatever the motives for such collaboration. In effect it is not collaboration, but collusion aimed at furthering one's ends at the expense of others.
Therefore, it has to be admitted that all the attempts made between 1934 and 1939 to appease the Nazis with various agreements and pacts were morally unacceptable and practically meaningless, as well as harmful and dangerous. It was the combination of all these actions that led to this tragedy, to the start of World War II.
Of course, mistakes have to be admitted. Our country has done so. The State Duma of the Russian Federation, our country's Parliament, has condemned the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. We are entitled to expect the same from other countries that had made a deal with the Nazis, and not at the level of statements by political leaders, but at the level of political decisions.
We must, of course, think about the victims. Without a profound understanding of what has happened, we will be unable to build a truly secure world, eradicate the legacy of the Cold War, and remove the artificial dividing lines. I would like to note that my country does not only recognize the mistakes and tragedies of the past, but is making a practical contribution to building a new world based on new principles.
It is due to the position of my country that the virtual and real Berlin Wall was brought down, and prerequisites were established for the building of a new Europe without dividing lines.
We should cure society of the pestilence of xenophobia, racial hatred, and mutual mistrust built on cynical distortion or crude falsification of history.
Modern civilized policy should be based on shared moral and common legal principles. I am confident that only then can we turn the tragic page of the history on the Second World War - in memory of the fallen and for the sake of a peaceful future for our children.
An example of how old wounds can be healed - I am confident of this today - is the relationship of true partnership between the Federal Republic of Germany and the new Russia that has taken shape in recent years. Our two nations' reconciliation and magnanimity have risen above the settling of historical scores.
It is our genuine wish to see a relationship between Russia and Poland free from the ghosts of the past, and to develop in the spirit of neighbourly cooperation in order to do justice to the two great European nations.
In conclusion I would like to address the main participants in today's ceremony, the comrades-in-arms of those who defended Westerplatte and Stalingrad, landed in Italy and Normandy, and liberated Warsaw, Paris, Prague and Berlin.
Your feat is immortal. It will remain forever in our hearts as a true measure of fortitude, courage, valour and honour.
Thank you for your attention.
Poland has been holding a day of commemorations to mark the 70th anniversary of the outbreak of World War II.
Leaders from 20 countries laid candles during a ceremony near Gdansk.
Earlier, Polish President Lech Kaczynski criticised the former Soviet Union over responsibility for the war.
His words added to an ongoing row with Moscow, although Russian PM Vladimir Putin said he hoped the two countries could settle their differences.
Mr Kaczynski said Poland had received a "stab in the back" from the former Soviet Union when it invaded and occupied the east of the country as the German army was advancing westwards.
He again criticised the non-aggression pact between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany in the early years of the conflict, saying it was about dividing Europe.
Mr Kaczynski recalled the Katyn massacre in which 20,000 Polish officers were killed by Soviet forces, saying it was an act of chauvinism and in revenge for Polish independence.
But he also praised the Soviet Union's sacrifice against Nazi Germany.
Speaking at the ceremony on Westerplatte peninsula, Mr Putin highlighted that nearly half of the estimated 50 million people who died during the war were from the Soviet Union.
The Russian prime minister said all pacts that European states agreed with Nazi Germany were "morally unacceptable", including the 1939 Soviet accord.
He added that Russia accepted its mistakes of the past.
Occupation
Differing historical interpretations of events at the start of the war though have caused a strain in relations between Poland and Russia.
Turning his attention to that controversy, Mr Putin said: "We seriously hope that Russian and Polish relationships will rid themselves of the layers of the past."
Earlier, a dawn ceremony had marked the time when a German battleship fired the first shots on a Polish fort in 1939.
The day began with Mr Kaczynski and his Prime Minister Donald Tusk joining war veterans beside a monument to the heroes of Westerplatte at 0445 (0245 GMT).
The ceremony marked the exact time on 1 September 1939 when the German battleship Schleswig-Holstein opened fire at point-blank range on the fort.
At the same time, the German Wehrmacht invaded Poland from east, west and south. The attacks triggered Britain and France's declaration of war against Germany two days later.
Just two weeks later, in mid-September 1939, the Soviet armies occupied eastern Poland.
Speaking at the dawn ceremony, Mr Kaczynski said: "On 17 September... Poland received a stab in the back... This blow came from Bolshevik Russia."
He added: "Glory to the heroes of Westerplatte, glory to all of the soldiers who fought in World War II against German Nazism, and against Bolshevik totalitarianism."
In his address, Mr Tusk said the lessons of history should not be forgotten.
"We remember because we know well that he who forgets, or he who falsifies history, and has power or will assume power will bring unhappiness again like 70 years ago," he said.
At the time of the attack by the Schleswig-Holstein - which was moored in the Polish harbour on a friendship visit - Gdansk was known as the free city of Danzig.
The 182 Polish troops defending the Polish fort were expected to resist for about 12 hours. Despite coming under fire from the air, sea and land, they held out against a force of more than 3,000 Germans for seven days.
According to a survey published on Monday, Westerplatte is the most important symbol of Polish resistance in the whole of the war.
Two weeks after the German invasion, the Red Army invaded and annexed eastern Poland under terms agreed in the secret protocol of a Nazi-Soviet pact.
In early 1940, the Soviet secret services murdered more than 20,000 Polish officers in the forests around Katyn. For 50 years Moscow blamed the Nazis and only admitted responsibility for the crime in 1990.
Russian courts have ruled that Katyn cannot be considered a war crime and Moscow is still refusing to declassify documents about the massacre.
The temperature was raised further this week with accusations broadcast on Russian state TV which implied the USSR was justified in its invasion of Poland because Warsaw had been conspiring with Hitler against Moscow.
Speech of Angela Merkel at Wetserplatte, 1.09.09
The German attack on Poland seventy years ago today marked the beginning of the most tragic chapter in European history. The war Germany unleashed brought immeasurable suffering to many peoples – years of oppression, humiliation, and destruction.
No country has ever suffered as much suffering in its history as Poland under German occupation.
Particularly in this dark time, which we are talking about today, the country was laid waste. Towns and villages were destroyed. After the crushing of the uprising of 1944, no stone was left standing in the capital. Random cruelty and violence permeated everyday life. Scarcely a single Polish family remained untouched by it.
Here at the Westerplatte, as the Chancellor of Germany, I commemorate all Poles who were subjected to unspeakable suffering due to the crimes of the German occupiers.
The horrors of the twentieth century culminated in the Holocaust, the systematic persecution and murder of the European Jews.
I commemorate the six million Jews and all others who suffered a cruel death in German concentration and extermination camps.
I commemorate the many millions of people who lost their lives in battle and in the resistance struggle against Germany.
I commemorate all those who died in innocence as the result of hunger, cold, illness, the violence of war, and its consequences.
I commemorate the sixty million people who lost their lives because of this war that was unleashed by Germany.
There are no words that could even come close to describing the suffering of this war and the Holocaust.
I bow my head before the victims.
We know that we cannot undo the atrocities of the Second World War. The scars will remain forever visible. But we have our own task: to shape the future in the consciousness of our enduring responsibility.
In this spirit, Europe has transformed itself from a continent of horror and violence into a continent of freedom and peace. That this has been possible is nothing more nor less than a miracle.
In the process, we Germans have never forgotten this: That Germany’s partners in the East and West have smoothed this path through a willingness for reconciliation. They have extended the hand of reconciliation to us Germans. We have clasped it in gratitude.
Yes, it is a miracle that in this year we need not only think back to the abysses of European history seventy years ago. It is a miracle that we can also think of the happy days that led to the fall of the Berlin Wall, the reunification of Germany, and the unity of Europe twenty years ago. After all, Europe’s path to freedom was only made complete with the fall of the Iron Curtain.
Back then, in the tradition of Solidarnosc in Poland, people everywhere courageously pushed open the gate to freedom. We Germans will never forget
* the role played by our friends in Poland, Hungary, and former Czechoslovakia,
* the role played by Mikhail Gorbachev and our Western partners and allies,
* and the role of the moral power of truth that no one embodied more convincingly and credibly than Pope John Paul II.
It was thus also an issue of Germany’s special responsibility to smooth the path of Poland and the other countries of Central and Eastern Europe into the European Union and NATO, and to stand alongside them.
Yes, it is a miracle, it is a blessing, that we Europeans can today live in freedom and peace. Nothing symbolizes the difference to 1939 better than the close, trusting cooperation between Germany and Poland and the multitude of friendly relations between our two countries.
The unity of Europe and Germany’s friendship with its neighbors owes its strength to the fact that we face our history. The chairmen of the German and Polish Bishops Conferences summed this up in their recently published statement on today’s anniversary. I quote:
”Together we must look to the future, which we would like to approach without ignoring or playing down the historical truth in all its aspects.”
When, in my country, we today also recall the fate of the Germans who lost their home regions as a result of the war, then we always do so in the spirit described by the bishops. We do it in awareness of Germany’s responsibility, with which everything began. We do it without trying to rewrite anything in Germany’s enduring historical responsibility. This will never happen.
And it is precisely in this awareness that today – seventy years later – I have come to Gdansk. To this once sorely afflicted, but now gloriously restored city.
Mr. President, Mr. Minister President, your invitation to me to attend today’s commemoration as Germany’s Federal Chancellor touches me deeply.
I understand this as a sign of our trusting neighborliness, our close partnership, and the true friendship between our two countries, between the people of Germany and Poland. I would like to express my profound thanks!
Earlier, Polish President Lech Kaczynski criticised the former Soviet Union over responsibility for the war.
His words added to an ongoing row with Moscow, although Russian PM Vladimir Putin said he hoped the two countries could settle their differences.
Mr Kaczynski said Poland had received a "stab in the back" from the former Soviet Union when it invaded and occupied the east of the country as the German army was advancing westwards.
He again criticised the non-aggression pact between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany in the early years of the conflict, saying it was about dividing Europe.
Mr Kaczynski recalled the Katyn massacre in which 20,000 Polish officers were killed by Soviet forces, saying it was an act of chauvinism and in revenge for Polish independence.
But he also praised the Soviet Union's sacrifice against Nazi Germany.
Speaking at the ceremony on Westerplatte peninsula, Mr Putin highlighted that nearly half of the estimated 50 million people who died during the war were from the Soviet Union.
The Russian prime minister said all pacts that European states agreed with Nazi Germany were "morally unacceptable", including the 1939 Soviet accord.
He added that Russia accepted its mistakes of the past.
Occupation
Differing historical interpretations of events at the start of the war though have caused a strain in relations between Poland and Russia.
Turning his attention to that controversy, Mr Putin said: "We seriously hope that Russian and Polish relationships will rid themselves of the layers of the past."
Earlier, a dawn ceremony had marked the time when a German battleship fired the first shots on a Polish fort in 1939.
The day began with Mr Kaczynski and his Prime Minister Donald Tusk joining war veterans beside a monument to the heroes of Westerplatte at 0445 (0245 GMT).
The ceremony marked the exact time on 1 September 1939 when the German battleship Schleswig-Holstein opened fire at point-blank range on the fort.
At the same time, the German Wehrmacht invaded Poland from east, west and south. The attacks triggered Britain and France's declaration of war against Germany two days later.
Just two weeks later, in mid-September 1939, the Soviet armies occupied eastern Poland.
Speaking at the dawn ceremony, Mr Kaczynski said: "On 17 September... Poland received a stab in the back... This blow came from Bolshevik Russia."
He added: "Glory to the heroes of Westerplatte, glory to all of the soldiers who fought in World War II against German Nazism, and against Bolshevik totalitarianism."
In his address, Mr Tusk said the lessons of history should not be forgotten.
"We remember because we know well that he who forgets, or he who falsifies history, and has power or will assume power will bring unhappiness again like 70 years ago," he said.
At the time of the attack by the Schleswig-Holstein - which was moored in the Polish harbour on a friendship visit - Gdansk was known as the free city of Danzig.
The 182 Polish troops defending the Polish fort were expected to resist for about 12 hours. Despite coming under fire from the air, sea and land, they held out against a force of more than 3,000 Germans for seven days.
According to a survey published on Monday, Westerplatte is the most important symbol of Polish resistance in the whole of the war.
Two weeks after the German invasion, the Red Army invaded and annexed eastern Poland under terms agreed in the secret protocol of a Nazi-Soviet pact.
In early 1940, the Soviet secret services murdered more than 20,000 Polish officers in the forests around Katyn. For 50 years Moscow blamed the Nazis and only admitted responsibility for the crime in 1990.
Russian courts have ruled that Katyn cannot be considered a war crime and Moscow is still refusing to declassify documents about the massacre.
The temperature was raised further this week with accusations broadcast on Russian state TV which implied the USSR was justified in its invasion of Poland because Warsaw had been conspiring with Hitler against Moscow.
Speech of Angela Merkel at Wetserplatte, 1.09.09
The German attack on Poland seventy years ago today marked the beginning of the most tragic chapter in European history. The war Germany unleashed brought immeasurable suffering to many peoples – years of oppression, humiliation, and destruction.
No country has ever suffered as much suffering in its history as Poland under German occupation.
Particularly in this dark time, which we are talking about today, the country was laid waste. Towns and villages were destroyed. After the crushing of the uprising of 1944, no stone was left standing in the capital. Random cruelty and violence permeated everyday life. Scarcely a single Polish family remained untouched by it.
Here at the Westerplatte, as the Chancellor of Germany, I commemorate all Poles who were subjected to unspeakable suffering due to the crimes of the German occupiers.
The horrors of the twentieth century culminated in the Holocaust, the systematic persecution and murder of the European Jews.
I commemorate the six million Jews and all others who suffered a cruel death in German concentration and extermination camps.
I commemorate the many millions of people who lost their lives in battle and in the resistance struggle against Germany.
I commemorate all those who died in innocence as the result of hunger, cold, illness, the violence of war, and its consequences.
I commemorate the sixty million people who lost their lives because of this war that was unleashed by Germany.
There are no words that could even come close to describing the suffering of this war and the Holocaust.
I bow my head before the victims.
We know that we cannot undo the atrocities of the Second World War. The scars will remain forever visible. But we have our own task: to shape the future in the consciousness of our enduring responsibility.
In this spirit, Europe has transformed itself from a continent of horror and violence into a continent of freedom and peace. That this has been possible is nothing more nor less than a miracle.
In the process, we Germans have never forgotten this: That Germany’s partners in the East and West have smoothed this path through a willingness for reconciliation. They have extended the hand of reconciliation to us Germans. We have clasped it in gratitude.
Yes, it is a miracle that in this year we need not only think back to the abysses of European history seventy years ago. It is a miracle that we can also think of the happy days that led to the fall of the Berlin Wall, the reunification of Germany, and the unity of Europe twenty years ago. After all, Europe’s path to freedom was only made complete with the fall of the Iron Curtain.
Back then, in the tradition of Solidarnosc in Poland, people everywhere courageously pushed open the gate to freedom. We Germans will never forget
* the role played by our friends in Poland, Hungary, and former Czechoslovakia,
* the role played by Mikhail Gorbachev and our Western partners and allies,
* and the role of the moral power of truth that no one embodied more convincingly and credibly than Pope John Paul II.
It was thus also an issue of Germany’s special responsibility to smooth the path of Poland and the other countries of Central and Eastern Europe into the European Union and NATO, and to stand alongside them.
Yes, it is a miracle, it is a blessing, that we Europeans can today live in freedom and peace. Nothing symbolizes the difference to 1939 better than the close, trusting cooperation between Germany and Poland and the multitude of friendly relations between our two countries.
The unity of Europe and Germany’s friendship with its neighbors owes its strength to the fact that we face our history. The chairmen of the German and Polish Bishops Conferences summed this up in their recently published statement on today’s anniversary. I quote:
”Together we must look to the future, which we would like to approach without ignoring or playing down the historical truth in all its aspects.”
When, in my country, we today also recall the fate of the Germans who lost their home regions as a result of the war, then we always do so in the spirit described by the bishops. We do it in awareness of Germany’s responsibility, with which everything began. We do it without trying to rewrite anything in Germany’s enduring historical responsibility. This will never happen.
And it is precisely in this awareness that today – seventy years later – I have come to Gdansk. To this once sorely afflicted, but now gloriously restored city.
Mr. President, Mr. Minister President, your invitation to me to attend today’s commemoration as Germany’s Federal Chancellor touches me deeply.
I understand this as a sign of our trusting neighborliness, our close partnership, and the true friendship between our two countries, between the people of Germany and Poland. I would like to express my profound thanks!
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Comments on 1939-2009: 70 years beginning of World War II
Hallo People,
thanks again for your participation in the seminar on 4.-11. August, if you like we can continue the discussion on this blog.
Greetings
Alex
Fundacja Rodowo
Rodowo 2
11-731 Sorkwity/Polska
thanks again for your participation in the seminar on 4.-11. August, if you like we can continue the discussion on this blog.
Greetings
Alex
Fundacja Rodowo
Rodowo 2
11-731 Sorkwity/Polska
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
And go with the second day....
Today first off all we played another funny integration game. We act the fruits, everyone very enjoy it. We got a lot of good energy at beggining of the day. After that we got shared on some groups. It was an international groups. Three off them were making timeline of the most important events of history of theirs country between 1918 to 1939 and than we made an one timeline for all tree countries. Rest two groups were searching for the couses of II World War which we discuse. Next of this Luca made a quiz with presentation "Foreign Policy Germany".It was very interesting because we needed to think how to make a strong country. Then he show us an another presentation about politic of apeasament in western countries to III Reich. We had three task to do after the presentation 1)Define apeasament 2)Lendamrks of apeasament 3)Pros and cons of apeasament. After we came back from lunch Alexander prepared for us three documents all of them was Hitler-Stalin Pacts which we discuse. We spoke a lot about the German and USSR politic in last day before war and after conquering Poland. Then we was watching presentation "First days of the War". It was made by three off us. When we ended watch presentation we have to start preparation of the trip to the Danzing. We especially need to develop questions to ours interviews. At the end of the day we were watching film "The Pianist" directed by Roman Polański. Its about famous pianist who was a juifsand he leave in getto. I think its all tooday...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)