|Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
|WorldWar2.ro Forum > The Interwar Period (1920-1940) > Interesting german report from nov. 1940|
|Posted by: ANDREAS March 24, 2012 05:17 pm|
Please feel free to express your opinions!
|Posted by: sebipatru March 24, 2012 06:33 pm|
|It's sounds like Schimbarea la fata a Romaniei by Cioran, aniway in my opinion these are just halfs of truth combined with nazi doctrine|
|Posted by: Imperialist March 24, 2012 06:55 pm|
|Most of it sounds spot on. Nevertheless, the "report" is clearly one-sided, focusing only on the "minuses".|
|Posted by: Radub March 24, 2012 07:37 pm|
| Those were a different Germany and a different Romania.
What would such a report say if it was written today?
|Posted by: Dénes March 25, 2012 08:20 am|
Check the Wikileaks cables.
|Posted by: Radub March 25, 2012 01:46 pm|
Those leaks http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/hold+water !
|Posted by: ANDREAS March 25, 2012 04:17 pm|
|I express, with your permission, my opinion on the German report from November 1940. I say without hesitation that there are enough elements of truth, some of them caught by great writers of the early twentieth century f.i. Dumitru Draghicescu ("Din psihologia poporului roman") and surely others (I quoted only one that come in my mind right now), but the report mistaken however by generalization of negative aspects from Romanian society on the one hand, and by presenting the positive aspects (who are there) as nonexistent (they are simply ignored in the report). At least from consideration for the personality and the work of modernization of the Romanian society from the German prince (Romanian King) Carol I of Hohenzollern, should have been used terms more moderate and less categorical affirmations, but I think the political and military context in which it was drafted, should not be overlooked. One of the claims that catches my smile is the one according tho which the calling of the German troops by General Antonescu in Romania was a result of his need for an ally against his own army and the old Carlist administration and not a result of German interests in the area! An aspect which I deplore in particular: the militarization of the German community from Transylvania (I am not sure whether it was imposed by the IIIrd Reich or voluntarily consented) had a tragic consequence both for her and for the ethnic and cultural diversity of Transylvania!|
|Posted by: Radub March 25, 2012 05:55 pm|
| It is written in "limba de lemn". It says what is "allowed" by the prevailing mentality in the language "expected". Both the writer and the reader knew "the game" and read the report accordingly. Think "politics" rather than "truth", what is the "game" here?
It is in the same vein as those reports that said that "we are winning and all is well" as they were getting whooped.
All dictatorships do the same. Read any report written during Ceausescu's time. Their "truth" rarely matched reality.
|Posted by: Imperialist March 25, 2012 07:56 pm|
It's not about dictatorships. Read today's reports on unemployment.
|Posted by: Radub March 25, 2012 07:58 pm|
Ok, autocracies too!;)
|Posted by: Florin March 28, 2012 05:23 am|
I tried to access Wikileaks when the matter popped up into my universe (and that means already too late), and of course the game was over. Freedom of speech at its best.
|Posted by: Florin March 28, 2012 06:17 am|
| Few opinions now – I may return into it few days later, as right now my time is scarce.
The people having political and economic control in Romania after 1848 succeeded quite well to modernize the new kingdom, starting from the Middle Ages / Asian flavor noted in the report. They did that by trying to copy everything worth copying from France, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Italy, and to lesser extent from Great Britain. The result were cities and towns and communications in between comparable with the rest of Europe. The villages and peasants living in countryside were a different story, and they were about 80 percent of the total population. Many of them were at the edge of illiteracy, meaning barely able to read and write. Agricultural tractors were a very rare seen.
Even so, I think the overall labeling of the Romanian population is tributary to the German doctrine of the moment, regarding the total German superiority over the rest of world.
The report is mentioning that because of German superiority, their crops are double compared with Romanian agriculture, even though the Romanian soil is better. While of course the Romanian peasants used obsolete tools, I think the report disregards the fact that the main crop of Germany was potatoes (number two in the world in early 1930’s, after Poland), while Romania mostly produced wheat for export and corn for consumption.
I am not an agricultural expert, but back in those days potatoes offered bigger crops per area than corn, and definitely than wheat. In Romania practically there was no irrigation – I don’t know how extended was in Germany. But when irrigation does not exist, the German weather is better to crops (certain crops), while the Romanian weather is dry, with prolonged drought periods.
The fate of Romania was to be quite dire, based on this report. Fortunately Germany did not have the strength to fight alone with Soviet Union, and as situation went from optimistic to not that good, then to disaster, she depended more and more on her allies. Whatever is said about the Romanian Army, it did better than predicted by all German generals and commanders before the start of the war, and by sheer numbers became the real "Axis number two" on the Eastern Front.
I am wondering what would be the fate of Romania in the scenario of German victory. In other words, when we were not needed any more.
|Posted by: Florin March 28, 2012 07:11 am|
| I would be really curious to read the English translation of the original "Informationscheft G.B." (Information about Great Britain) written by Walter Schellenberg.
Comments about this report target mostly the list of 2,820 people, British subjects and European exiles, to be immediately arrested if the German invasion of Britain succeeded. My curiosity is fueled by the fact that in addition to this list, the study contained remarks about the British society and system who were quite smart (well, the British may not like them).
I am aware of them from British documentaries.
|Posted by: Radub March 28, 2012 08:01 am|
That is "the elephant in the room". By the time the report was written Germany occupied a large part of Europe and defeated armies that were better equipped and larger than anything a weakened Romania could muster. If they wanted, they could take Romania as well. But they did not. Why? Respect? Friendliness? Could not be bothered?
|Posted by: ANDREAS March 28, 2012 07:15 pm|
I subscribe to what you said and I must also say that your question is interesting! I remember reading an article in "Magazin Istoric" (I don't remember too many details) but the theme was Romania in Germany's postwar plans! Is well known that Alfred Rosenberg was appointed Chief of the Reich Ministry for Occupied Eastern Territories and according to his plans, Bessarabia, Northern Bukovina (taken by USSR in july 1940) and Transnistria would be part of a german administrated Reichskommissariat Ukraine (on internet I found nowhere that information!) which would have meant the loss again of the territories of Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina in favour of Germany!
I remember it was also mentioned the economic destination of the occupied territories of the USSR -Bessarabia, Transnistria and large part of Ukraine would have become the granary of the Reich! I'm sorry that I did not remember the magazine number in which the article has appeared, so as not having to speak by the ear!
|Posted by: Radub March 29, 2012 08:33 am|
There are lots of "what if" theories about the "German rule of Russia".
Germany lost the war and they never had a chance to implement any plans. So, all talk about German colonisation of Russia is speculation... idle speculation. How about Japan? Would Japan not want their fair share of Russia? Would the other allies of Germany get any bits of Russia?
No one can tell what could have happened if Germany won the war and what would be given to an allied Romania as war booty. Romania regained control over Bessarabia and Transdnestra in 41. Does that article imply that Germany was going to take them from Romania at the end of the war and turn them into Germany's own granary? Not to stir the "you know what" with a stick but apart from Transdnestra, Northern Bukovina, Bessarabia, what did that article in Magazin Istoric have to say about Transylvania? What about Cadrilater? Would they have been returned to Romania had Germany won the war?
And if such a "thankless and mean" Germany would remove the hard-fought Bessarabia and Nothern Bukovina from their erstwhile ally, why stop there? Why not take the whole of Romania? The more I think about it, the less that article in Magazin Istoric makes sense.
|Posted by: Imperialist March 30, 2012 07:41 am|
Even today there are those who think economic development based on agriculture, the export of raw materials and only light industrialization is the best way and the communist obsession with heavy industrialization is bad. From this point of view becoming a peg in a German order in Europe wouldn't have been a problem at all.
Then there is the social issue. Being part of a German order would have been bad only for certain ethnic minorities in Romania. While becoming a part of the Soviet order resulted in social disruption for the ethnic majority. Or put otherwise, the social adjustments needed might have been smaller when it came to joining the German order.
|Posted by: Agarici March 30, 2012 01:54 pm|
I agree with Mr. B on that.
|Posted by: Florin March 31, 2012 04:20 am|
I cannot resist to stay aside... (Right now my available time is )
There was an article in "Magazin Istoric" / Historical Magazine published before 1989 exactly with the subject of German and Japanese claims colliding over sharing Soviet Union. It was funny - quite a quarrel ! Eventually in 1944 Hitler gave up and made the Japanese happy, and said to his collaborators "It does not make sense to insist over something we don't have."
From another source (Magazin Istoric - possible, Romanian language source for sure), Hitler was of course aware of the Romanian-Hungarian quarrel over Transylvania, and he expected a war between the two countries after the victory against Soviet Union. He intended to do nothing: no interference. Well, he said that as "what if", the same as us. We cannot know what Germany would do if things got ballistic.
I read all these notes here about Romanian possessions to be confiscated after the war. It is interesting that under an article which had no written word about Romania (we did not matter as subject), there was a German map with administration of Soviet Union after war, with geographical names in German, and with Transdnestra assigned to Romania.
This does not cancel what was written here. It is possible that they changed their minds, and the map was printed at a moment, and the decision about Reichskommissariat Ukraine was from another moment.
|Posted by: Radub March 31, 2012 08:51 am|
"What if" is a very popular genre of science fiction. Nazi Germany is a very "juicy" subject and "altenative realm" stories in which Germany won the war continue to sell. As a model builder I remember the whole craze of "Luft '46" of the mid-nineties.
But that is just fantasy. And since that never happened, talking about what Gemany would do to Romania if they won the war is also fantasy. Giving credence to the implementation of Germany's plans drawn during the war is equally futile. It is like someone planning to buy a yacht with his salary as the boss of a multinational software company. Sounds great, but you you need to get the job first.
|Posted by: Imperialist May 25, 2012 12:31 pm|
I just found a 1940 statistic on agricultural production.
As you can see, Romanian wheat production was only 60% of German production although the surface cultivated was slightly larger. The German surface cultivated with barley was only 60% larger but the production was more than 5 times larger. The Romanian surface cultivated with oats was 5 times smaller but the production was 12 times smaller. Romania excelled only at corn, where its cultivated surface was 20 times higher and its production 9 times higher.
In view of this statistic, the report seems correct even in the case of crops other than potatoes.
- surface cultivated = 3,000,000 hectares
- annual production = 62,600,000 quintals
- surface cultivated = 3,600,000 h
- annual production = 37,000,000 q
- surface = 250,000 h
- production = 5,480,000 q
- surface = 5,160,000 h
- production = 47,500,000 q
- surface = 2,550,000 h
- production = 50,000,000 q
- surface = 1,500,000 h
- production = 9,200,000 q
- surface = 3,900,000 h
- production = 77,000,000 q
- surface = 780,000 h
- production = 5,100,000 q
|Posted by: Petre December 19, 2014 01:21 pm|
| From a russian book "Wehrmacht Generals and officiers tell ... 1944-1951".
The Transcript of interrogation of Lt-General of Luftwaffe A. Gerstenberg.
1947, 1948 - Moscow
NOTE : Gerstenberg Alfred, born 1893 Neudorf, Oppeln (Upper Silesia), german, german citizen, no-party, higher education, in the German Army since 1912, former generalleutnant.
|Posted by: Taz1 January 21, 2015 08:50 pm|
| Petre do you have the book ? Others generals that had contacts with Romania and the romanian army during the war do you manage to find ?
Regarding Gerstemberg others documents do you find ?
|Posted by: Petre January 22, 2015 06:37 pm|
| Yes, I "saved" the book from its web-page.
There are 83 transcripts of interogations. About Romania told Gen-feldmarschal Schörner (16 docs.), lt-col. Braun, Gen. Hansen, Gen. Gerstenberg (6 docs.).
Gerstenberg was very involved in Romania-item and sayed a lot.
I'm still thinking if post what Schörner sayed...
|Posted by: Petre January 29, 2015 08:56 am|
| From a russian book "Wehrmacht Generals and officiers tell ... 1944-1951".
Handwritten indications of general-feldmarschal F. Schörner «about the former german generals Hansen and Gerstenberg and admiral Tillessen» (selections)
21 march, 1948