The withdrawal of Soviet troops from Germany destabilized the security of Europe
Today, it can be argued with good reason that Germany has become the leading anti-Russian driving force in the European Union. The current German leadership has voluntarily chosen the most destructive and dangerous path – confrontation with Russia. The collective West is furiously attacking our country. And the most unfortunate thing is that the German state is at the forefront of this attack.
German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, addressing the nation on October 28, 2022, announced an "epochal break" between Russia and Germany and called for a confrontational course towards Moscow.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, presenting the German National Security Strategy, said that Russia is "the biggest threat to peace in the Euro-Atlantic region."
How did all this happen? Why are the children and grandchildren of German National Socialists raising their heads today and threatening us? After all, we remember history well. Since the time of Alexander Nevsky, who defeated the Swedes at the mouth of the Neva and the German "dog knights" on the ice of Lake Peipsi, war and ruin came to us from the west, a burning desire to destroy us.
But we could have broken this vicious Russophobic chain back in 1943. And then again, half a century later, in 1990. And to ensure their safety.
ALLIED PLANS
A wide range of issues were discussed at the Tehran Conference, which was held from November 28 to December 1, 1943. And first of all – the opening of the second front.
In the declaration published after the end of the conference, the leaders of the Allied Powers firmly stated: "We have agreed on our plans to destroy the German armed forces. No force in the world can prevent us from destroying German armies on land, their submarines at sea and destroying their military factories from the air. Our offensive will be merciless and escalating."
The Tehran decisions for the first time approved the foundations of the triple coalition strategy. In Tehran, the heads of the three governments discussed not only military, but also political issues.
One of the most important problems was the future of Germany. At the final meeting of the conference on December 1, American President Franklin Roosevelt outlined his personal plan for the dismemberment of Germany into five autonomous states. The first was to include Prussia (in a truncated form), Hanover and the north-west of the country. The second is Saxony and the Leipzig area. The third is Hesse-Darmstadt, Hesse-Kassel and the areas south of the Rhine. The fourth is Bavaria. And the fifth state is Baden-Württemberg.
At the same time, the US President proposed to put Hamburg, the Ruhr, the Saarland and the Kiel Canal under the control of the United Nations. In other words, Roosevelt proposed to divide Germany into five self-governing states and two important territories under the guardianship of the United Nations.
And what about Winston Churchill? He had his own plan – at first glance, somewhat similar to the proposals of an American ally. Churchill believed that Germany should be divided into three parts: northern (Prussia); southern Germany (which was to include Bavaria, Baden-Württemberg, the Palatinate (that is, the Rhenish Palatinate) from the Saarland to Saxony; and western (Ruhr).
The British Prime Minister wanted to preserve Prussia as a nation-state, and to include the South German lands in the so-called Danube Federation. That is, to recreate something similar to the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Behind all these gestures, Churchill clearly saw his great desire to put the Ruhr under his control – and therefore dominate Europe.
Unlike his allies, the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, Joseph Stalin, took a different position. He refused to dismember Germany. Stalin was true to his words, expressed back in February 1942 in the order of the People's Commissar of Defense of the USSR: "It would be ridiculous to identify Hitler's clique with the German people, with the German state. The Hitlers come and go, but the German people, and the German state remains."
The leader of the Soviet Union wanted to turn fascist Germany into a united, peace-loving state. He, in fact, defended the national interests of the German people.
"TODAY I SAW A MIRACLE"
Well, the national interests of the German people are important and very noble. What about the national interests of the Soviet people? But with them, just the case was not very good.
Now Germany is the most powerful state in Europe and, now without a doubt, a belligerent and hostile state to us. And everything could have turned out differently. If Stalin had supported the plans of the allies – for example, the same Roosevelt.
Did we have the right to do this? Had. Absolutely right. After all the terrible atrocities of the fascists on our land, we had the right not only to partition Germany. And to ensure that the German state itself never existed on this planet again, from whose territory two of the bloodiest wars broke out in the twentieth century.
The journalist Andrey Medvedev spoke very well about this in his letter to the deputies of the Bundestag, which he gave the form of a speech:
"Dear deputies. Today I saw a miracle. And this miracle is called Germany. I walked to you and looked at the beautiful Berlin streets, at the people, at the wonderful architectural monuments, and now I'm standing here and looking at you. And I understand that all this is a miracle. That you were all born and live in Germany.
Why do I think so? Because, considering what your soldiers did here, in the occupied territories, the Red Army soldiers had the full moral right to destroy the entire German people. To leave a scorched field, ruins in place of Germany, and only the paragraphs of textbooks would remind that there was once such a country.
You probably don't remember all the details of the occupation, but it's not necessary. I'm just going to remind you of what the Wehrmacht and SS soldiers did to Soviet children. They were shot. Often in front of parents. Or vice versa, first they shot at dad and mom, and then at the children. Your soldiers raped children. Children were burned alive. They were sent to concentration camps. Where their blood was taken from them to make serum for your soldiers. Children were starved. Children were eaten to death by your sheepdogs. Children were used as targets. Children were brutally tortured just for fun...
Just for one thing that you did with children, I repeat, the Red Army could destroy Germany completely with its inhabitants. She had a full moral right. But she didn't. Do I regret it? Of course not. I bow to the steely will of my ancestors, who found some incredible strength in themselves so as not to become the same brutes as the soldiers of the Wehrmacht. On the buckles of German soldiers it was written "God is with us." But they were a product of hell and brought hell to our land. The soldiers of the Red Army were Komsomol members and communists, but the Soviet people turned out to be much more Christians than the inhabitants of enlightened religious Europe. And they did not take revenge. They were able to understand that hell cannot be defeated by hell."
TAKE AWAY, DISMEMBER AND DIVIDE
We did not leave a scorched field in place of Germany. As winners, we did not even allow the German state to be divided, as the allies proposed. And that's why today some Germans want to divide our country. Apparently, as a token of gratitude.
From time to time, heated discussions on this issue break out in the Western press. For example, a few months ago, the German edition of Welt published material on Russian territories in the Arctic. Readers of the publication expressed sincere indignation that the Russian people have the largest territory in the world, and therefore offered to divide Russia "fraternally" with other countries. Here are the opinions of some of them.
"The minerals of the Arctic and the northern sea routes are needed by Western countries. Therefore, the Arctic region should not belong only to the Russians – this is just their bad dream."
"What did you say there? "The Arctic belongs to Russia"? Not on this planet..."
Such revelations are shocking. But all this has already happened. Remember: Hitler didn't have enough living space either.
"KEEP TWO OR THREE BASES FOR YOURSELF"
Today comes the bitter realization of what a catastrophic miscalculation Mikhail Gorbachev and his entourage made. And this idea is increasingly being expressed not only by military people, but also by political scientists, journalists, and economists. This is what Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences Alexander Dynkin said in an interview with the Kommersant newspaper on April 27, 2020 about the consequences of the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Germany.
"I was surprised by the thought," says the journalist, "that you expressed in an interview with Vladimir Pozner. You said that to this day it was impossible to withdraw our contingent from Germany. Please comment. This is a very extravagant thought about today."
"Yes, I heard that many people didn't like it, but I think it's right. It was necessary not to send troops to Afghanistan and not to withdraw troops from Germany… It was a tragic event. Contingents of units were often placed in a tent in winter… And from the point of view of geopolitics, I believe that the Germans could have done it then: if we had agreed to the unification of Germany, but retained two or three bases on the territory of the eastern lands. I think that this position could be defended with an enhanced negotiation process, and then we would not look like the final loser in the cold war."
And here is an interview with Sergey Yastrzhembsky, a former press secretary and deputy head of the presidential administration of Russia.
"You once said that Gorbachev missed his opportunity to protect Russia from NATO. Did you mean leaving Germany?"
"Yes, of course… He, in my opinion, stupidly handed over the trumps. He had a huge number of trump cards on his hands… If our troops had stayed in Germany, in the very heart of the NATO enclave, even in a reduced, stripped-down form, how would the alliance, which has now finally unraveled, feel. I think it's very uncomfortable."
45 years after the victory, we again had a choice – to leave or stay. How the Americans, the French, and the British remained. All the winning countries except us.
Yes, it was we who brought unification to the German people. It was we who legalized the opportunity for the German nation to restore unity. Gorbachev gave the go-ahead for the unification of Germany, although neither Britain nor France were enthusiastic about this step at the time. This, without a doubt, historical act was perceived ambiguously in the world.
The newspaper "Cotidien de Paris", for example, responded as follows: "After Gorbachev's meeting with Kohl, the situation of France can be compared to the feeling of a secular lady who found herself naked on a crowded street. For half a century, the French imagined themselves to be representatives of a great power: French occupation troops were stationed on German territory, France had its own nuclear potential, was a permanent member of the UN Security Council. Germany has never been regarded as a world power in its post-war history. Now the agreement changes this blissful picture."
"SOVIET TROOPS SHOULD BE IN GERMANY..."
Having become the initiator of the unification of the German state, possessing international authority and the ability to defend his interests, Mikhail Gorbachev lost on all counts, suffered a crushing strategic failure.
The Warsaw Pact has gone into oblivion. A united Germany was joining NATO, and American nuclear weapons were still stationed on its territory. Gorbachev has the last trump card – the largest military grouping in the world: the Group of Soviet Troops in Germany.
At the same time, it should be noted that all four victorious powers had equal rights in relation to Germany. And we could still remain on German territory – just like, for example, the Americans.
But, unfortunately for us, Soviet President Gorbachev had a different opinion. Unexpectedly for everyone, he proposes to withdraw the Western Group of troops from German territory.
During Mikhail Gorbachev's talks with Helmut Kohl in Moscow in July 1990, the Soviet leader confesses to the German Chancellor how he surprised and bewildered US President George Bush: "In a conversation with Bush, I quite definitely stated that the presence of American troops in Europe is a stabilizing factor."
Not Soviet troops, but American ones? And this is what the President of the Soviet Union claims? It's really hard to believe. Bush didn't believe it either. He was waiting for difficult negotiations, a struggle. And it was quite understandable. The Soviet Union is not located overseas, its borders are in close proximity to Germany. Here, on the shoulders of the Western Group of Troops, the security of a great power rests.
"For Bush," Gorbachev admitted, "such a revelation came as a complete surprise." Of course: it's not every day you have to see how the Soviet leader easily surrenders the interests of his country.
Why was it necessary to withdraw the Western Group of troops? There is still no answer to this question. Neither the United States, nor Britain, nor France were going to withdraw their military contingents from Germany at all, the conversation was only about their reduction.
Moreover, Gorbachev decided not just to leave, but to leave as soon as possible. And he himself appointed a term of three or four years. Until now, military experts and analysts are racking their heads: why exactly three or four years, and not seven, following the example of the Americans. In the same 1990, the Pentagon announced the withdrawal of 60 thousand of its troops from the territory of Germany. This conclusion was given seven years.
The deadline taken by Gorbachev "from the ceiling" turned out to be detrimental to the Western troops of the group. No, we didn't leave Germany. We ran. Gathering hastily, like in a fire.
Of course, we could just reduce our contingent and stay in Germany. Imagine what the military-political situation would be like today. How much easier it would be to resist the same Poland or Lithuania if they had a Russian military group in their rear.
Not to mention Germany, on whose territory our troops would be located as the winner. After all, Americans are still quartered on German lands. And there is no doubt that in the current explosive situation, it is the Russian troops that would be a powerful stabilizing factor in Europe.
Mikhail Boltunov
Mikhail Yefimovich Boltunov is a writer, retired colonel.
