scientific journal

< Issue No 3 from 2005 yr. >

To discover itself the present day Russia needs a unifying idea, an «assembly point». The author think that Russia’a victory in the WWII can serve as such «assembly point» because understanding of that war essence is not just tribute of its memory. The 60th anniversary of the Victory may and ought to become for everybody at least an attempt to gain the point of assembly. However we see that nowadays attempts are undertaken to draw a line under the War which has the eternal, ontological meaning and to misrepresent its essence. WWII is an enormous battle in which Communism saved the world from Nazism, the battle of the modern and the counter-modern. Equalization of Communism and Nazism as two expressions of totalitarianism is absolutely inadmissible for these phenomena are antipodes, foci of two antagonistic mega-systems. The principal aim for Nazism was to overcome the modern completely. In terms of geopolitics that meant destruction of the USSR and the USA. In terms of philosophy of history that meant complete destruction of Liberalism and Communism. During the cold war the West used Nazis, having integrated them in its elite. In result of that incorporation the West became the murderer of its own modern. Now the humankind can be saved only by the «living meaning» of the renovated modern.

How Jews fought according to Solzhenitsyn and in reality

А.I.Solzhenitsyn has marred his long and glorious pilgrimage in the literature and public life by massive (about one thousand pages) two volume pseudo-historical treatise «Two hundred years together». The book deals with the common living of Russians and Jews in single Russian state. People of wit immediately invented another title to the book: «Two hundred years apart». This ironic title in the best possible way passes the spirit and content of the Nobel prize winner’s swan song. Solzhenitsyn has exceptionally vividly expressed the old, inherited from the Black Hundred idea that Jews are not just a foreign body in Russia but that they, by every their action, have promoted collapse of the Russian statehood, spirituality and culture. Even participation of Jews in the Great Patriotic War Solzhenitsyn contrived to present in such way that, according to him, Jews preferred to hole up in the rear and if by a chance got to the frontline then, most often, found positions in some safe and comfortable places and services and did their best to avoid real fighting. Even if both volumes of «Two hundred years together» are full of lies and falsified from first to last «During the war with Germany» chapter stinks of anti-Semitism for, as it proved to be, Solzhenitsyn is impregnated to the marrow of his bones.
The author highlights the complicated and painful topic of evolution which the national memory about the Russian history greatest event (victory over Hitlerite Germany) undergoes. As 60th anniversary of the victory has demonstrated, an enormous part of our society is not just losing the tie with meanings of the victory but is ceasing to get interest in these meanings. At the same time events and personalities of that epoch, by virtue of their immensity that nobody can annul, still keep to be a matter of political and psychological maneuvers that are very dangerous for Russia as well as for the world at large. We are drawing up nearer and yet nearer to the line beyond which the final and ultimate revision of WWII results and re-coding of its meanings become possible. Some facts indicate to possible revaluation of roles performed in that war by Germany and the USSR-Russia. Aftermath of such revision may prove to be really tragic for Russia. Meanwhile the destructive work the principal tool of which is manipulation with the public conscience aimed at elimination of the very ability to perceive the heroic and the sacred in history goes on unabated. Thereby a path to revenge of the innermost occult Nazi idea is opened and paved. This idea asserts that access to the heroic is the privilege conferred to supermen. Therefore opposition to this work means inheritance of anti-Nazism traditions to the same extent as this work continuation means acceptance of the Third Reich traditions.

May 5–9, 1945: Liberation of Prague revisited

Relief of Prague from German Nazi occupation was the final major battle of WWII in Europe. German group of armies «Center» under command of Field Marshal Shoerner and SS detachments that had been ordered to fight against the Red Army to the last cartridge and then surrender to Americans who were approaching from the West were concentrated in the city and its vicinity. Several forces took part in liberation of Prague: inhabitants of the city who rose in revolt against Germans, servicemen from a division of so called Russian liberation army under General Vlasov, units of the First, the Second and the Fourth Ukrainian fronts of the Red Army. In the course of four days, from May 5 to May 9, the control over the city or its parts several times changed hands. In accordance with understanding with the Soviet high command the American forces that were 60 km off Prague did not develop the offence towards the city, even though they could liberate it easily, the more so because Wermacht units did not offer any resistance to them. Prague was liberated finally and completely on May 9 in result of successful Prague operation carried out by the Red Army. The author shows who events developed in Prague on May 5−9, 1945, what forces took part in liberation of the city and what were relations among these forces.

True Picture of the Beginning of the World War II

The article, based on contemporary press analysis together with the two attached original documents from American manuscripts collections, tackles some fundamental questions related to the breakdown of the old world order, the Versailles system in the «Era of Munich». As the title indicates the author chooses to focus on the explanation for the collapse of fragile, shaky peace in September 1939 by presenting the testimony of the first-class witnesses whose worldviews and capacity to evaluate the great powers' performance in the prewar crisis situation and over the first stage of the Second World War nobody could call preconceived or unreliable. The essay gives the picture of the pre-WWII international structure in the process of disintegration and disarray through the eyes of the most experienced observers from the New York Times staff and long-standing expert on Russian foreign and domestic affairs Professor Samuel Harper from Chicago University. Since the spring 1917 professor Harper was assigned to a special mission — to provide the American policy makers with advanced analyses of «Russian phenomenon» with the goal of culling lessons and meeting challengers. For many years he was an unofficial adviser to the US State Department in the field of soviet-american relations. Harper was very successful in communicating the main features and peculiarities of Stalinist modernization of Russia. He was also acknowledged as a leading authority on post-Versailles Europe, gliding down to the greatest catastrophe in its history, which culminated in Nazi invasion against Poland, the capitulation of France and the demise of the balance of powers in Europe. The basic thesis of the article is that in the face of Hitler’s aggression the Western democracies (including the USA) by neglecting or underrating the new global role of the Soviet Union endangered not only the interests of their own but the world peace as a major priority. It took almost two years for London and Washington to recognize the Soviet Union’s potentially crucial role in the fight against fascism in cooperation with Hitler’s foes. But it was done reluctantly only after the collapse of France on June 1940 and coming up to a clear comprehension what was at stake.

The Landscape after the Battle

What the World War II and the Great Patriotic War was about? Who was its main instigator and the source of danger? Which side was the truth on? These questions, which seemed to have been resolved once and for all, are being raised again by journalists, historians and politicians who try to replace labels of good and evil from some countries to other. That is why it may be instructive to go back to how the essence of this great struggle was perceived by its immediate participants in 1945. The most convincing evidence of Western allies' true feelings by the end of the war are American intelligence and diplomatic reports on a situation in a liberated Germany, discovered by the author in the U.S.National Archives. Of special interest are reports of summer 1945 interrogation of the top Nazi leaders which American high command never shared with its Soviet ally.