Mideast Echoes Of 1938, Washington Post

Fifth Way

Jedi Council Member
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/21/AR2006082101143.html
Yes a parallel is there but curious how all the players have been intentionally mixed up.

On Tuesday said:
Mideast Echoes Of 1938

In his upcoming book about the horrors of the 20th century, "The War of the World," the British historian Niall Ferguson has a chapter called "The Pity of Peace." It is about 1938, when World War II loomed, and Britain -- especially and importantly Britain -- did precious little to stop it. The warnings of Churchill -- "believe me, it may be the last chance . . ." -- were ignored, and the government under Neville Chamberlain obstinately pursued a policy that forever after made the word appeasement one of the most odious in history. Somehow, though, it looks like 1938 all over again.

The events in the Middle East are often compared to 1914 and the start of World War I. That war -- the Great War, the war to end all wars -- is actually the all-purpose war. It not only began for what seemed like a trivial reason (the assassination of someone who wasn't a head of state) but it was fought with tenacity and brutality for what now seems no reason at all. In the end, millions died and the world was utterly changed. Why?

But when it comes to the Middle East, 1938 is also a pretty instructive year. At the moment, the United Nations has committed itself to maintaining peace in Lebanon. It has done so by saying it will interpose an armed force between Israel on the one hand and Hezbollah on the other. At the same time, the Lebanese army will -- as it has already started to do -- invade its own country (gasp!), securing the south for the first time in decades.

A critical part of that plan is the establishment of the international peacekeeping force. It is supposed to have 15,000 troops, who will join 15,000 Lebanese troops to ensure that Hezbollah is not rearmed with Iranian and Syrian missiles and that Israel not only pulls out of Lebanon but stays out. The backbone of the international force is supposed to come from Europe, particularly France. It was France, in fact, that was most insistent on the establishment of the force.

Now France is having second thoughts . . . or cold feet . . . or mere questions. If it is the last, that's understandable. The French military is said to worry about the command structure, since this was a problem with the U.N. force in Bosnia in the 1990s. Command structure, though, was not nearly the whole problem in the Balkans. After all, Dutch soldiers were on the spot when Bosnian troops massacred Muslim men and boys at Srebrenica. It is hard to this day to account for what happened.

If only questions about the command structure vexed the French, there would be little cause for worry. But there are ample signs that more is at work here than a table of organization. Maybe the French and other Europeans have just plain lost the political will. The upshot is that now there is no international force worth its name in Lebanon -- certainly not one willing and able to shoot.

This inability of Europe to get its act together is what suggests 1938. Back then, Winston Churchill was hardly the only one who thought Hitler was intent on war. After all, the German leader was an ideological zealot and a murderer to boot. Still, England did little. Similarly, you don't have to have Churchillian prescience to see that what happened once in Lebanon can happen again. Hezbollah's avowed aim is to eradicate Israel. Listen to what it says. Pay attention. It will renew its attacks the first chance it gets. This is why it exists.

When George Bush used the term "Islamic fascists," he had a point. But it's futile to use colorful language when, in reality, you're out of the conversation altogether. This is another baleful consequence of the Iraq war. The United States is not only preoccupied, it is loathed. The leadership it once was able to exert -- especially in the Middle East -- is a thing of the past. If its credibility is to be restored, another president will have to do so. In the meantime, as we always learn, Europe without American leadership is a mere tourist destination.

What's striking about Ferguson's account of 1938 is the almost total absence of Franklin D. Roosevelt. The American president is almost never mentioned -- sidelined by the Great Depression and, more important, American isolationism. That year, too, Europe was left on its own, and England, pathetically, was not up to the job. Now, by default, the leadership of Europe has slipped to France. We can all sense war coming and a kind of crazy chronology forming like storm clouds for all to see -- 1938 becoming 1914.

Oui ?

cohenr@washpost.com
 
If cyclical time is anything to go by, then 1933 was Reichstag fire and 5 yrs later is 1938. If 2001 was "911 reichstag fire" then 2006 is also 5 yrs later. So does that mean we have 1-2 yrs before all hell breaks lose? Not that it's not crazy enough already..

And I guess back then from the "German" perspective, it's the world that was the enemy, Hitler was just trying to protect them from the evil terrorists. So it's only to be expected that the completely opposite perspective of reality will be "dominant" in US today. But maybe one difference is that a lot of people are increasingly dissatisfied, and only a minority still worship Bush. However, could it be that the same was true in Germany but most simply were too scared to speak out? I wonder what the objective popularity of Hitler was during the late 1930's, and how much of it was just pomp and propaganda? So really by "dominant" I mean dominant in the media, and your article being example of the perspective the media is trying to pass off as "dominant" and "normal".
 
SAO said:
wonder what the objective popularity of Hitler was during the late 1930's, and how much of it was just pomp and propaganda?
As a German that is precisely what I always ask myself. Keep in mind that the NSDAP=National-Socialist-Party/their members owned basically Germany's entire media. Back then it was not so easy to get some "alternative" news.
I don't want to excuse, I want to understand. As I live in NYC now, the more I wake up the more I seem to understand about own my nation's past.
 
Here's a possible timeline and some parralels I just threw together. If this is indeed a repeating cycle, then 2007 is not gonna be pretty :|

Last Cycle:
1933 - Feb 27 - Reichstag Burns
1936 - March 7 - German troops occupy the Rhineland.
1936 - Aug 1 - Olympics in Berlin
1938 - Aug 12 - German military mobilizes.
1938 - Oct 15 - German troops occupy the Sudetenland
1938 - Nov 9/10 - Kristallnacht - The Night of Broken Glass.
1939 - Jan 30 - Hitler threatens Jews during Reichstag speech.
1939 - March 15 - Nazis take Czechoslovakia.
1939 - Sept 1 - Nazis invade Poland.
1939 - Sept 3 - Britain, France, Australia and New Zealand declare war on Germany.
1939 - Sept 4 - British Royal Air Force attacks the German Navy.
1939 - Sept 5 - United States proclaims neutrality; German troops cross the Vistula River in Poland.
1939 - Sept 10 - Canada declares war on Germany; Battle of the Atlantic begins.
1939 - Sept 17 - Soviets invade Poland.
1939 - Sept 27 - Warsaw surrenders to Nazis

Current Cycle:
2001 - September 11 - WTC Burns
2004 - March 20 - US troops occupy Iraq
2004 - August 13 - Olympics in Greece
2006 - July 12 - Israeli military mobilizes, attacks Lebanon. (Sudetenland/Kristallnacht?)
2007: January 30/31 - State of the Union....
2007 - ?
 
Back
Top Bottom