Showing posts with label France. Show all posts
Showing posts with label France. Show all posts

Sunday, July 30, 2017

ADSS 1.277 Notes of Giovanni Montini, Secretariat of State: news from France

 ADSS 1.277 Giovanni Montini, Secretariat of State, notes.

Reference: AES 3316/40

Location and date: Vatican, 08.04.1940

Summary statement: French Ambassador, Charles-Roux (1), has given assurance of the good intentions of the French government to the Holy See; but he has noticed a change in the Italian attitude; France prepared to negotiate.  Internal situation in France.

Language: Italian

Text:

His Excellency Charles-Roux, French Ambassador to the Holy See, returning to Rome after a short stay in Paris, says that he has see the Prime Minister, M Reynaud (2), who had assured him about the keeping of good relations with the Holy See and about ecclesiastical affairs.


He brings news about Cardinal Verdier who has had an operation and must shortly have a second one.  His condition however is good and there is no cause for alarm (3).

Regarding the political situation he also noticed a stiffening of tone in the Italian
Press; and he mentions particularly, the Regime Fascista which published a violent leader against France (02.04.1940) and the Popolo d’Italia, no less insulting but with more authority (05.04.1940).  He states that France is still ready to negotiate and to make a distinction between Fascism and Nazism, while Italy seems hostile to any discussion: Italy must already be planning to obtain from a vanquished or exhausted France those advantages which it is unable to obtain now through negotiations.  To my remark that the proofs of the good intentions of France towards Italy are not well know to Italian public opinion, the Ambassador agrees that France would do well to clarify these good intentions.

On the Government position: the Radicals are convinced that they have made a mistake in overthrowing their leader, Daladier.  It would be more logical, in fact, for the Socialists to join forces now with the other parties in an effort to get rid of Communism.  He believes that the Socialists will be more loyal to the nation’s interests than to the interest of their Party (5).


Notes:
(1) Francois Charles-Roux (1879-1961), French Ambassador to the Holy See 1932-40.
(2) Paul Reynaud (1878-1966), French Prime Minister, March-June 1940.
(3) Jean Verdier (1864-1940), Cardinal Archbishop of Paris 1929-40.  Verdier died the following day, 09.04.1940.
(4) Edouard Daladier (1884-1970), French Prime Minister and Foreign Minister 1938-40.

(5) Compare this with the message of Raffaele Guariglia (1889-1970) Italian Ambassador in Paris 1937-40. See DDI, Series 9, Volume 4, n47, pp 33-34.

ADSS 1.276 Notes of the Secretariat of State on the meeting between Hitler and Mussolini March 1940

 ADSS 1.276 Secretariat of State Office, notes (1).

Reference: AES 2892/40

Location and date: Vatican, 04.04.1940

Summary statement: Information about the 18.03.1940 meeting between Mussolini and Hitler.  Hitler asked Mussolini to send 60 divisions to the French border.  Mussolini agreed to enter the war in August.  Italian government is divided.  Ciano defends neutrality but his position is difficult.

Language: Italian

Text:

There are two minutes on the Brenner meeting, one in Italian and the other in German, and they report the entire discussions with the exception of the conversation between Mussolini and Hitler which tool place without witnesses (2).

M[ussolini] repeated three times: “We are ready to march with you”.  The first time H[itler] did not understand.  (M speaks German, but the bodyguard interpreter whom H always takes along with him and whose name the writer does not remember, was also present) (3).

H proposed that Italy should send 60 divisions to the French frontier, not to fight, but only to force France to shift part of their forces and in this way to weaken their defences.  According to this plan the offensive would start on the Dutch frontier on 15 April.

M did not agree (it is possible however, that the German may go it alone).

Nevertheless M and H have agreed that Italy should enter the war by the beginning of August.  Italy is short of many things, for example anti-aircraft guns, but in Munich 100 batteries are being assembled, ready to be sent to Italy and already 20 have arrived.

The tightening of the British blockade at this moment could hasten Italy’s entry into the war, perhaps by June.  The blockade is a measure which M cannot tolerate.

Ciano has called the members of his Cabinet and told them that he no longer controls the course of events.  On the other hand the position of Ciano could be shaken any moment, if M felt that is carrying out a personal policy.

M would appoint him Minister of the Interior, to take him away from the Foreign Office.

At the beginning of the war M had a crisis of depression lasting a few months, as at the time of the Matteotti affair, but he has now regained full activity (4).

Some are afraid that with C[iano] as Chief of Police there is a danger of a revolt in Italy, as the people are against war.  M, however, does not worry about the internal situation.

Anfuso (5) will be sent as Ambassador to Berlin.  Magistrati has quarrelled with C on private matters; for this reason he has been sent to Sofia (6).

M told H: “Do not become more involved with Russia because Italy wants nothing to do with Communism; and this could engager German Italian union”.

On M’s side are: Buffarini, Renato Ricci, Starace (7): all the others, and in particular the Service Ministers, stand by C – Cavagnari was with C in China when he was Charge d’Affaires (8).

A month ago C was candidate for M’s succession, and this could have happened at any moment.  In those days Prince Umberto came to Rome and for a week he dined with C.  The King sent Acquarone around the various Ministries to obtain information, and sent the same Acquarone (9) to C to tell him “it was not ripe” (this phrase has never been explained).

But now M has regained strength and controls decisions.

Alfieri is not regarded as much of an Ambassador; he does not send reports, while Pignatti (10) sent at least a short telegram a day to give information about the Vatican’s mood.  Alfieri sent a report on his audience with the Holy Father after R[ibbentrop]’s visit.  Among other things he wrote he said: The Holy Father told me that having asked R about some political matters he replied that he did not know very much about them, because the affairs of state are personally directed by H (11).

C has a personal liking for the Russian Charge d’Affaires and although he is no longer received at the Palazzo Chigi they still meet on the golf course.  This man has large sums of money at his disposal and gets all he wants in the Ministries, and is very well informed. He has been occupying this position since the time when the Ambassador, owing to hostile demonstrations at the time of the attack on Finland, left in a great hurry, without even calling on the King, with whom he had an appointment (12).  On that occasion, though very few people knew about it, there was even demonstrations of sympathy in front of the Finnish Legation and the Minister carried around in triumph.

M did not trust Welles because he had the impression that Welles came here for personal reasons, that is, to become Foreign Minister, after the next presidential election.


Notes:
(1) Domenico Tardini wrote at the top of the Note: “Give to me by His Eminence on 03.03.1941”.  It is reasonable to assume the note had originally been sent to Maglione who passed it to Tardini, even though there is nearly a year between the composition of the Note and its arrival on Tardini’s desk.
(2) Compare this with ADSS 1.272 n2.  There are major differences.
(3) Possibly Eugen Dollmann (1900-1985) who had worked as a translator for different Nazi leaders from 1934.  He held the SS rank of Obersturmbannfuhrer.
(4) Giacomo Matteotti (1885-1924) was an outspoken anti-fascist.  He was murdered on 10.06.1924 after publishing The Fascists Exposed and publically denouncing electoral fraud in the Italian parliament. Mussolini was widely presumed to have had some involvement whoever peripheral, but there was insufficient evidence to prove it.
(5) Filippo Anfuso (1901-1963), Foreign Ministry Chief of Staff 1938-42. He was not sent to Berlin.
(6) Massimo Magistrati (1899-1971) Counsellor at the Italian Embassy Berlin 1933-40; transferred to Sofia 1940-43. He married Ciano’s sister Maria in 1930 (died 1939).
(7) Guido Buffarini (1895-1945) Italian Minister of the Interior 1940-43; Renato Ricci (1896-1956) Italian Minister of Corporations 1939-43; Achille Starace (1889-1945) former Fascist Party Secretary 1931-39, Chief of Staff for the Blackshirts 1940-43.
(8) Service Ministers most likely refers to the chiefs of Italy’s armed forces. Domenico Cavagnari (1876-1966), Chief of Staff of the Regia Marina (Italian Royal Navy) 1934-40.
(9) Pietro d’Acquarone (1890-1948), Duke and Master of the Royal House 1934-1944. He often acted as an intermediary for King Vittorio Emanuele and was known to be sympathetic to anti-Fascists.  He later played a role in the dismissal of Mussolini in 1943.
(10) Dino Alfieri (1886-1966), Italian Ambassador to the Holy See 1939-40; Bonafacio Pignatti (1877-1957), Italian Ambassador to the Holy See 1935-39.
(11) See DDI, Series 9, Volume 3, n536, p467.  According to Alfieri, Ribbentrop replied that he did not know anything and that he was not competent, but not that it was Hitler who directed all the affairs of State.
(12) Leon Helfand (1900-1961), Soviet Charge d’Affaires in Rome 1935-40 (he defected to the United States a few months later where he became Leon Moore); Boris Shtein (1892-1961), Soviet Ambassador to Italy 1935-39.


Sunday, February 19, 2017

ADSS 1.263 Valeri to Maglione: Ribbentrop's visit to Holy See; end of war in Finland


ADSS 1.263 Valerio Valeri, France, to Luigi Maglione, Sec State.

Reference: Report number 1059/509 (AES 3112/40)

Location and date: Paris, 14.03.1940

Summary statement: Ribbentrop’s visit to the Vatican came as a great surprise.  Some see it as a peace plan devised by Hitler.  Peace imposed on Finland has disappointed public opinion; criticism of Allied inactivity.

Language: Italian

Text:

The journey of the Reich Foreign Minister, von Ribbentrop, to Rome has not failed, as Your Eminence knows, to give rise here in France to a great deal of comment.  His visit to the Vatican has caused great surprise and amazement.  The newspapers, however – excluding a few of clearly anti-Catholic tendency and a few more who do not have a large distribution such as the Petit Bleu which covers the interest of certain financial groups – have abstained from openly criticising the affirmative reply of the Holy See to the request of the Reich Foreign Minister to be received by the Holy Father.  On the other hand various hypotheses have been expressed as to the aims of this visit and the bitter sweet tone of the Press lets one feel that some displeasure has been created by this action which could be interpreted as a success for German diplomacy.

The Press, however, instead of criticising has tried to explain with more or less credible reports, that the visit of von Ribbentrop to the Vatican will not bring Nazism the advantages, which were anticipated.  Nor could it be otherwise, because the Hoy See could not support Hitler’s plans in favour of peace, if this peace is not founded on justice and the wrongs committed by the Reich against the conquered nations are not put right.  The newspapers have delved particularly into these points and some of them, like Populaire yesterday morning have again quoted the Christmas address of the Holy Father on the peace conditions.

People here think in fact that one of the principal aims of Ribbentrop’s visit to Rome was that of preparing a new German peace offensive which could be harmful to the Allies, by influencing public opinion in the neutral countries and in particular that of the United States of America and Mr Roosevelt’s decisions, while his representative is going to meet Signor Mussolini again in a few days (1).

I must add furthermore that the peace which Finland was forced to sign the day before yesterday with the Soviets, has been a blow to French public opinion, and they ask what the Allied Governments are doing (2).  M Daladier was obliged to answer a question in Parliament on this point during Tuesday’s session.  Parliament is in a bad mood regarding the trend that international political and diplomatic events are taking.  A rumour is going around that new ministerial changes will take place.

On the whole the situation is rather confused especially because France cannot break away form the decisions and dispositions of Great Britain.


Notes: 
(1) Reference to Benjamin Sumner Welles visit to Rome, Berlin and London in March and April 1940.
-->
(2) The Russo-Finnish war (13.11.1939-13.03.1940) ended with Finland signing the Treaty of Moscow.  Finland had held the Red Army at bay for over three months.  Britain and France pledged to send troops to Finland via Scandanavia.  Part of the Allied plan was to secure Swedish iron ore deposits and Norwegian coastal ports, especially Narvik, and deny them to Germany.  This would effectively end Swedish neutrality and Norway’s ambition to stay out of the war.  However, Norway, Denmark and Sweden announced in February 1940 that they would not give permission for Allied troops to pass through their territory.  The USSR took 11% of Finnish land space and about 30% of Finnish economic power.

Friday, December 23, 2016

ADSS 1.251 Borgongini Duca to Maglione: Ciano believes Germany will invade France


ADSS 1.251 Francesco Borgongini Duca, Italy, to Luigi Maglione, Sec State.

Reference: Report Number 7624 (AES 1967/40)

Location and date: Rome, 02.03.1940

Summary statement: Ciano believes Germany will invade France in the near future and will ask for Italian assistance.

Language: Italian

Text:

In compliance with your instructions I am marking this sheet  as “very confidential”.

On 29 February at the end of a long conversation with Minister Ciano, I talked about the political situation and he told me verbally: “I have the feeling that a great offensive will be launched by the Germans on the main front (French) very soon, and I foresee, regarding this offensive, that Germany will make the utmost effort to carry us into the war.  I am fighting to avoid this happening but there are many strong currents in Italy in favour of Germany.” (1)

I endeavoured to get him to come down a little more to details on this particular allusion tho the trend of events, but I was not able to obtain a single word more.

I also mentioned the recent publication of Hermann Rauschning’s Hitler m’a dit (Paris Cooperation) to him, in which the author gave such a true portrait of Hitler that it seems that the importation of the book into Italy has been forbidden, although it is a great subject of conversation in political circles on account of the personality of the author, who is the official Danzig representative. (2)

Ciano knew the book.

I then mentioned the news given to me verbally by Your Eminence regarding Bolshevik propaganda in Bulgaria and he replied that he was well informed about it and added” The day in which communications between Bulgaria and Russia were opened, in the Sophia University, 1200 people subscribed to Pravda which, with Izvestia, is one of the most important Russian newspapers.


Notes: 
(1) This declaration by Ciano to the nuncio is also reported in Charles-Roux Huit ans au Vatican, p373.

(2) Hermann Rauschning (1887-1982), was a former Nazi who broke with Hitler and the party in 1934 before emigrating to Poland in 1936 and finally ending up in the USA in 1941.  His book Gesprache mit Hitler (Hitler Speaks) was published to great acclaim. Most historians place little credence in the authenticity of the text today regarding it as largely the work of Rauschning’s imagination.