Sunday, June 28, 2015

ADSS 1.49 Cicognani (USA) to Maglione: US Press


1.49 Amleto Cicognani, Ap Del USA to Luigi Maglione, Sec State

Reference: Telegram 277 (AES 2734/39)

Location and date: Washington DC, 19.05.1939.

Summary statement: US press and papal initiative.

Language: Italian

Text:

I have carried out the instructions included in telegram 143. (1)

With reference to this subject I transmit the following: American Press receives news from Rome that Holy See has informed through this Delegation United States Government regarding international peace Conference.

Washington Foreign Minister and Apostolic Delegation replied that they were unaware of this step.

Notes: 

(1) ADSS 1.38

Friday, June 26, 2015

ADSS 1.48 Godfrey to Maglione: call for prayer


1.48 William Godfrey, Ap Del UK to Luigi Maglione, Sec State

Reference: Report 85/39 (AES 2919/39)

Location and date: London, 18.05.1939

Summary statement: Call for Prayer at Pentecost by Archbishop of Canterbury.

Language: Italian

Text:

I hasten to bring to the knowledge of your Eminence the text of a Call to Prayers for Peace, issued by the Heads of the separated brethren of Great Britain. (Enclosure 1) (1)

The appeal is due to the initiative of the Archbishop of Canterbury (2) and is signed also buy the Archbishop of Upsala (3), by the Moderator of the Presbyterian Church (4) and by the President of the Free Church. (5)

It is symptomatic that the promoters of the appeal state that, acknowledging the fatherly invitation of the Holy Father, they wish to associate themselves with it.

The Press has not given great prominence to this action: only The Times devoted a leader to it. (Encl. 2) (6)

The Archbishop of Canterbury felt the need to explain the reasons for this appeal in an open letter to The Times, recapitulating its history. (7)

He seems to complain about the delay with which the Vatican replied to his approach through Cardinal Hinsley.  It is however, interesting to read how he defends the call to prayer against those who would like to see “spectacular actions” on the part of the Church.


Notes: 
(1) Text of the appeal was published in The Times, 17.05.1939. “Call to prayer at Whitsuntide. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Archbishop Germanos, the Archbishop of Upsala [sic] and the Moderators of the Scottish General Assembly and the Free Church council have signed a Call to prayer at Whitsuntide”.  The text followed.
(2) William Cosmo Gordon Lang (1864-1945) Archbishop of Canterbury 1928-42.
(3) Erling Eidem (1880-1972) Archbishop of Uppsala 1931-50.
(4) Archibald Main (1876-1947) Moderator of the Church of Scotland 1939.
(5) Unknown at time of writing.
(6) The Times, 17.05.1939
(7) Letter of the Archbishop of Canterbury to the Editor of The Times 17.05.1939.



ADSS 1.47 Orsenigo to Maglione: meeting with Ribbentrop


ADSS 1.47 Cesare Orsenigo, Germany, to Luigi Maglione, Sec State

Reference: Report 27,333 (AES 2703/39)

Location and date: Berlin, 17.05.1939

Summary statement: Nuncio’s conversation with Ribbentrop. Discussion of papal proposal; in the event of war Poland will be crushed; possible accommodation with USSR; nuncio still hopes for a peaceful solution.

Language: Italian

Text:

Following my coded telegram 323 of 12.05.1939 and the subsequent report 27.282 (1) of the following day regarding the proposal put forward by the Holy Father on behalf of peace, I am today able to report:

His Excellency von Ribbentrop (2) unexpectedly invited me to tell me what the Secretary of State had already mentioned to me. (3) In a long conversation, which lasted three-quarters of an hour, he said:

“In the meeting I had in Milan with Minister Ciano, who had been instructed to inform me of the Duce’s views on the Holy Father’s initiative, while I conveyed to him the Führer’s thoughts, Italy and Germany seemed to be in perfect agreement on all subjects, so much so that I am able to convey to you, also on behalf of the Führer, Mussolini and Hitler’s thoughts as follows:

1. The Führer as well as Mussolini are very grateful to the Holy Father for his benevolent intervention on behalf of universal peace.

2. However, considering all circumstances, they think that the moment is not yet ripe for a conference which has as its object the outstanding issues between Italy and and France and Between Germany and Poland;

3.  Also they are afraid that such a noble initiative, in the present circumstances, could fail; and in consideration of the high office invested in the Holy Father, they would not like to see him exposed to such a chance.

These feelings – he concluded – I think have already been conveyed by Mussolini to the Holy See.” (4)

After having thanked the Minister and promised him that I would faithfully report the present communication, I chanced to put forward a question to probe more deeply, if possible, into the Government’s mind, especially as the echo of the tension between Germany and Poland still persisted in the German newspapers, and asked his opinion on the international situation and if he was aware that the peoples of the so-called democratic nations were determined to go to war and were impatient to start it, so strong was the aversion towards Germany.

At this point Ribbentrop, with the intonation of one who feels certain of his superiority, replied:

“We do not want war, but we are not afraid of it for many reasons, which are also known to Great Britain.  There reasons are:

1. France and England will never cross our defence lines in the West; they are too strong and would exact one million victims.  In attacking them the French would be meet with another Sedan, from which they would hardly recover.

2. If war really broke out, Italy, Spain, Japan would rally to our side immediately. (I do not remember if he also mentioned Hungary; certainly he did no mention Yugoslavia; although the visit to Berlin of the Regent of Yugoslavia, Prince Paul, and of his Foreign Minister has been announced for 2 June);

3. Poland, if she judged badly enough to provoke a war, will be crushed in less time than it takes to say it.  Poland, in fact, although it has 34 million inhabitants, for its war effort can only count on 18 million people because 8 million Ukrainians will not lift a finger to help Poland; meanwhile the 4 million Jews will certainly do their utmost to excite and to help the others who fight against Germany, but they, the 4 million of them, will not fight because the Jew is selfish and does not like fighting … not even to bring Germany down.  There are also quite a sizeable number of Germans and Russians in Poland to account for.  Therefore only 18 million of true Polish citizens remain prepared to fight.  The Polish army is composed of a few very good divisions, but the others have only a façade. In any case in a war against a country like ours, with 85 million people, armed to the teeth, Poland will have only very few days to fight; it will be immediately annihilated because it will be attacked from ten different points at the same time.” (5)

The Minister’s mention of the British inability to cross the Western fortifications prompted my question: “and the British Navy?”

The Minister replied:

“What can the Navy do?  What can ships do against our submarines? No British ship will ever be able to carry out a landing on German soil.”

The mention of the Russian minority in Poland gave me courage to ask the Minister if it was possible to know Russia’s mind in case of a European conflagration.  He replied – and this is, I think, the more important and the less prudent part of his speech.

“Russia is not prepared to pull England’s chestnuts our of the fire.  Britain’s game is to set themselves up menacingly against Germany, but to send others to fight and keep a small door always open to be able afterwards in case of defeat, to say that they were not really responsible for what had happened; this game, I say, has not pleased Stalin, and even Litvinoff had to go. (6) The situation is such now that we can almost hope for a change of mind in Russia.  We have no quarrel with Russia except about Bolshevism, in other words we do not want its perfidious propaganda for a world revolution; against this we have the ‘anti-Comintern’ pact, but should Russia drop this propaganda nothing prevents us from drawing closer together.”

Amongst the European diplomats the conviction is growing that war will not break out for at least some months; and they give the credit for this to the Holy Father’s initiative.  All of them report, however, that their people think war inevitable, as it will be the only way to escape from this universal decline.  Unfortunately this war psychosis is obsessing the people and the fear that Germany might strike another coup, bloodless but fatal, like the one which brought about the disappearance of two nations, creates a state of uneasiness which hinders their normal life and commercial relations.

In Germany, however, I do not know whether as a reaction or in ostentation, there is a semblance of normal life; the people, although they have to abstain from certain foodstuffs, are not worried about war.  For this reason one is led to hope that if Poland avoids taking imprudent steps it would be possible, little by little, to reach a certain tranquillity, sufficient to allow negotiations between Germany and Poland; negotiations that certainly will be hard, but could lead to a bloodless solution.

The Führer is always boasting of carrying out his plans without shedding blood and maybe this boast will exert some restraint on his actions lest he should sully his crown of a bloodless conqueror; I must add, however, that he loves to conquer and to enter the chosen nations in triumph and this inclination of his fans the suspicion that he is preparing one of his clever snare where guile, interlaced with force and unclean diplomatic actions supported by an Army, powerful but inert, leads almost inexorably to victory.

Notes: 
(1) See ADSS 1.40, 42.
(2) Joachim Ribbentrop (1893-1946) German Foreign Minister 1938-45.
(3) Ernst Weizsäcker (1882-1951) German Secretary of State, Foreign Office 1938-43.
(4) See ADSS 1.36 n2 on the minutes of the Milan meeting and the reply of the two Ministers regarding the Pope’s initiative.
(5) Hitler had ordered planning for the invasion of Poland on 03.04.1939.  By mid-May the Wehrmacht had the general plans ready for “Case White” to be launched in the summer.  Ribbentrop would have had some knowledge of the planning which makes his comments to Orsenigo even more cynical.

(6) Maxim Litvinoff (1876-1951) Soviet Union People’s Commissar for Foreign Affairs 1930-39.  Litvinoff was Jewish and in his preparation for a deal with Germany, Stalin had him removed on 03.05.1939 and replaced by Vyacheslav Molotov.  Litivinoff’s dismissal was interpreted by some French and British diplomats as a sign that the USSR was coming to an “understanding” with Germany.  After the German invasion in June 1941 Litvinoff was appointed Soviet Ambassador to the USA.

ADSS 1.46 Valeri to Maglione: meeting with Bonnet


ADSS 1.46 Valerio Valeri, France, to Luigi Maglione, Sec State

Reference: Report number 8238 (AES 2607/39)

Location and date: Paris, 16.05.1939

Summary statement: Valeri reports on meeting with Georges Bonnet, French Foreign Minister: divided opinions in France over papal initiative; international situation; problems with French press.

Language: Italian

Text:

As mentioned to your Eminence in my report number 8209 of 11 May (1) I had abstained from calling again on M. Bonnet (2) to avoid comments of the Press.  Yesterday, however, I met him at a dinner given by the President of the Municipal Council (3) in honour of Cardinal Verdier. (4) I took the opportunity of expressing to him my surprise on seeing that the newspapers had given publicity to an initiative, which should be protected by diplomatic secrecy.  M. Bonnet replied that public opinion had been struck by the unexpected journey of the Berlin Nuncio to Berchtesgaden (5) and that, anyway, the first and real indiscretions had appeared in the Daily Mail of London.  He added: “I have spoken about this matter only with the President and at a meeting of the Council of Ministers, and I do not believe that the indiscretions appearing in the French Press originate form those sources.”

I think, instead, that, at least form a certain point of view M. Bonnet was mistaken because shortly before seeing him I had been visited by M. Paul Lesourd (6) of the Figaro who came to tell me in confidence that certain newspapers had received directives form the Quai d’Orsay to write against the Pope’s proposal.  However, according to M. Lucien Romier (7) of the same Figaro, and as your Excellency knows, the directives apparently came from M. Leger’s office and not from M. Bonnet. (8) But it is practically the same thing.

For this reason I pressed my point, mentioning to M. Bonnet that such Press campaigns, even when faintly sketched, could only turn to the detriment of the interests of the Holy See and of France and, what is more important, of peace.

It is true that there is a current of opinion not in favour of agreements, probably shared by some of the Minsters.  In fact, it has been reported to me that one of them, M. Campinchi (9), has been putting it about that Mussolini had suggested the Holy See’s proposal.  I do not know if this rumour, accepted as truth in certain circles, originated form the fact that a year ago, according to what was said to me the other day by M. de Chambrun, late Ambassador to Rome (10), the Italian Government had proposed to the French Government a Five Power conference.

As it is, it cannot be denied that the first and real indiscretions on the proposal, mentioning in detail a Conference between France, Great Britain, Poland, Germany and Italy, came from London.  It is strange, in fact, to note that a newspaper of that great city, affirmed that British statesmen were not obliged to keep the secret because the approach of an Apostolic Delegate cannot be considered to be at diplomatic level!  I am rather inclined to think that some Protestants would not like to see an increase of the Holy See’s prestige, which would certainly take place if the Holy see were able to guide Europe towards a new era of collaboration and peace.

 At the end of the short conversation M. Bonnet, who is a nice person, expressed again, with his regrets about what I had told him, his confidence and his hopes that the Holy See could at the proper moment and if the situation deteriorated, carry out its task of peacemaker successfully. (11)


Notes: 
(1) See ADSS 1.39.
(2) Georges Bonnet (1889-1957), French Foreign Minister 1938-39.
(3) Gaston le Provost de Launay (1874-1957), President of the Municipal Council 1938-July1939
(4) Jean Verdier (1864-1940), Archbishop of Paris 1929-40.
(5) See ADSS 1.29.
(6) Paul Lesourd (1897-1981), journalist with Figaro, wrote sympathetic articles about the Holy See.
(7) Lucien Romier (1885-1944), editor of Figaro 1925-27, 1934-42. Member of Vichy government 1942-43.  Died of a heart attack while being arrested by the Gestapo.
(8) Alexis Leger (1887-1975), Secretary General of the Foreign Office 1932-40.
(9) Cesar Campinchi (1882-1941), Minister of the Navy 1938-40.
(10) Charles Pineton de Chambrun (1875-1952), French Ambassador to Italy 1933-35.

(11) See ADSS 1.40, 42.