Luftwaffe Myths

[Jan Gazda]

Franek,

may I ask you what is the source for those 40 billions or at least whether it should represent a damage assessment in today’s prices or in current prices of 1945? The reason I am asking is that this number does not sound very realistic when compared to the 13 billion dollars that Marshall Plan brought to Western Europe. Those $13 billion managed to reconstruct large portion of the damaged western economies.

However, your statement that the Germans were the ones that were better off at the end of the war is absolutely wrong. When compared to 1938 the German GDP fell most distinctively from all West-European countries. Furthermore, Germans got less than one third of the financial means of Marshal Plan. The reason for the German economic resurrection after WW2 lies mainly in the superior economic policy introduced by Erhard and his team.

Jan

[Nick Beale]

And let us not forget the stripping out of goods, machinery and other resources by the Soviet Union from the areas it occupied to rebuild its own economy. As far as I know, this happened right across Eastern Europe a well as Eastern Germany.

[Michal]

Nich, you have right. There were many confiscation not only on territory Bohemia, Moravia, Slovakia, Silesia... Numbers of confiscated Machinery by Soviet depend only on fact how long Soviet stood in those areas. There are plenty of diplomatic memorandas from side for example Czechoslovak Government to avoid such "stealings"...

[Franek Grabowski]

Originally Posted by Jan Gazda

Franek,
may I ask you what is the source for those 40 billions or at least whether it should represent a damage assessment in today’s prices or in current prices of 1945? The reason I am asking is that this number does not sound very realistic when compared to the 13 billion dollars that Marshall Plan brought to Western Europe. Those $13 billion managed to reconstruct large portion of the damaged western economies.

In the current currency, as it was calculated a few years ago. This was a response to recent German claims for reparations(!), and results were published in a special report, giving a detailed study of methodology. Report is online, though I am afraid available only in Polish. I agree that it is a lot of money, and this should give an idea about the tremendous Polish losses in the war.

However, your statement that the Germans were the ones that were better off at the end of the war is absolutely wrong. When compared to 1938 the German GDP fell most distinctively from all West-European countries. Furthermore, Germans got less than one third of the financial means of Marshal Plan. The reason for the German economic resurrection after WW2 lies mainly in the superior economic policy introduced by Erhard and his team.

Please, do you really expect a German miracle in 1945? It is obvious they were in a sorry state after the lost war, but Erhard would do nothing without any foundations. German industry, even if hampered by the war, was largely developed due to free forced labour and resources robbed from occupied countries. Those were never compensated, and I doubt if Germany would have been what it is, if forced to pay for everything they did.

Nick and Michal
I have already mentioned that. Anyway have in mind that Czechoslovakia was not Germany, and still most of industry was left in site, as testified by production of many German designs (Ar 96, Me 109, Si 204 or Sd Kfz 251 for example) for own purposes. Definetelly, in the Soviet robbing, the most suffering country was Poland, which even paid reparations to Soviet Union. Then it was Eastern Germany, but contrary to Poland, Soviets quickly changed their mind, and did not devastate the country to such an extent, which was then supported by the whole eastern block.

[Jan Gazda]

Franek,

maybe it’s just me but I can’t get rid off the impression that the bottom line of this one and some other posts of you is the feeling that the Germans were not punished hard enough for the evils of WW2. These are fully legitimate sentiments given the horrible suffering your country went through during the war (although some could consider it little immature given the time that has passed since then) but still from purely economist’s point of view there is compelling evidence that post-war economic development of European countries isn’t correlated to their 1945´s economic situation. The German economic miracle would have happened anyway with reparations or without them. For closer examination of post-war economic resurgence see s Europe’s Postwar Growth by Ch. Kindleberger or Quantitative Aspect of Post-war European Growth by van Ark and Crafts ( much too technical in terms of statistics I am afraid).


Jan

[Franek Grabowski]

Jan
I have used the sample to show that extent of damage made to the whole region is just unbelieveable, and astronomical in financial terms. Personally, I am more disgusted and tired of new myths portraying Germans as victims of the war, and few blond knights fighting hordes of non-fair fighting enemies. The reality is a bit more complicated and much less glamorous.
In regard of economists, I have seen many discussions among them if to increase or to lower taxes, so I am not sure if they are competent. Anyway, any economical growth is based on material foundations like resources, factories, technologies, cadres. Despite war damages, Germany still kept lots of those, and when political decisions were made (on both sides of the Iron Curtain) in the late 1940s/1950s to loosen ties wrapping the country (both sides feared their zones turn to other occupants), the economy went into the rapid growth. Another important issue was a stable political situation, this due to support to the people of the old regime, thus allowing to limit communistic influences. No other European country was in such a comfortable position.

[Ruy Horta]

[edwest]

Originally Posted by Franek Grabowski

Jan
I have used the sample to show that extent of damage made to the whole region is just unbelieveable, and astronomical in financial terms. Personally, I am more disgusted and tired of new myths portraying Germans as victims of the war, and few blond knights fighting hordes of non-fair fighting enemies. The reality is a bit more complicated and much less glamorous.
In regard of economists, I have seen many discussions among them if to increase or to lower taxes, so I am not sure if they are competent. Anyway, any economical growth is based on material foundations like resources, factories, technologies, cadres. Despite war damages, Germany still kept lots of those, and when political decisions were made (on both sides of the Iron Curtain) in the late 1940s/1950s to loosen ties wrapping the country (both sides feared their zones turn to other occupants), the economy went into the rapid growth. Another important issue was a stable political situation, this due to support to the people of the old regime, thus allowing to limit communistic influences. No other European country was in such a comfortable position.

They kept these things only because they were allowed to by the Americans who were already fighting the Soviets before the last bullets were fired. I'm Polish and we stayed in touch with our family in Russian Occupied Poland. What did the Russians take from Poland? Farms? Laborers, yes, but there was little industry in Poland before or after the war.

The political decisions included accepting Reinhard Gehlen into the OSS soon to be the CIA, because the struggle, and fear, of the greatest military force on the continent - the Russians - was the first problem after the defeat of Germany. Even Winston Churchill ordered a study titled Operation Unthinkable to determine what could be done if the Russians decided to sweep across Western Europe. The conclusion was simple: the Americans were withdrawing, the British and French couldn't do much, so it became clear that parts of the former German Army, including the Waffen SS, would have to be reactivated. Germany, and shortly after, Austria, which was also divided like Germany, became our Allies in the early days of the Cold War. General Patton was silenced because of his desire to fight the Russians after he saw what became of Eastern Europe.



Regards,
Ed

[Franek Grabowski]

Ruy, it is nice!

Ed
I agree with most of you have written. I would say that the history of the conflict with the Soviet Union predates 1945, and deserves at least a book. It is overall too complicated to discuss it in the thread.

Originally Posted by edwest

They kept these things only because they were allowed to by the Americans who were already fighting the Soviets before the last bullets were fired.

It does not matter the reason, the fact is that they kept this stuff.

What did the Russians take from Poland? Farms? Laborers, yes, but there was little industry in Poland before or after the war.

Little does not mean not at all, and there were several quite modern factories in Poland, many of them built just before the war. When Germans overrun them, they continued production, and modernised them, as well as build new ones. When forced to retreat, sometimes they were able to evacuate, but quite often everything was left behind, just to be looted by Soviets. This way eg. whole, complete Focke Wulf factory at Kreising (Poznań Krzesiny) disappeared. This was the fate of factories, power stations, harbours, but also mines and other resources of raw materials, living stocks, wood, valuables, etc. I do not mention qualified work force, be it labourers or engineers, who were not best treated by new occupants either.

The political decisions included accepting Reinhard Gehlen into the OSS soon to be the CIA, because the struggle, and fear, of the greatest military force on the continent - the Russians - was the first problem after the defeat of Germany.

Gehlen did not go to OSS, as this was disbanded due to weird actions of FDR (this included a leak into American media in regard of possible future tasks of OSS), also the latter was not allowed even to gather intelligence on the Soviet Union. The organisation which employed Gehlen was OPC, another structure formed by former OSS agent at Rumania, Frank Whisner. This was later merged with the CIA. I think most important here is not of employment of Gehlen, but the people the latter employed, and those included eg. Klaus Barbie. Gehlen later formed secret services of Western Germany called BND. Similar approach was undertaken in several areas of German state, and while brass was condemned, the backbone was most often based on 'old good men'. I think only media had a good share of ex-expatriate leftists of Jewish origin, who were implemented by Americans in 1945 to form the core of 'Germany's new press'.

Even Winston Churchill ordered a study titled Operation Unthinkable to determine what could be done if the Russians decided to sweep across Western Europe.

I do not understand the word 'even'. Churchill was never a Russian lover and Britain was rather anti-Soviet, as British (but communists) generally were.

The conclusion was simple: the Americans were withdrawing, the British and French couldn't do much,

Even worse, France and Italy were quite close to become communistic states! FDR and then Truman administration was desperately pro-Soviet, and worked even better than plenty of Soviet agents there. Only in 1948/49 the approach changed slightly.

so it became clear that parts of the former German Army, including the Waffen SS, would have to be reactivated. Germany, and shortly after, Austria, which was also divided like Germany, became our Allies in the early days of the Cold War.

Actually, they were already considered possible Allies just after the war, look for the story of Doenitz's government, which was not disbanded on 9 May 1945!

General Patton was silenced because of his desire to fight the Russians after he saw what became of Eastern Europe.

I am not sure if it was the reason, I have heard a theory, that Patton knew too much on German banks' gold robbed by some major figures of US Army, but perhaps it was both? Doubtless Patton could have been the leader of anti-Soviet US Army and a possible replacement for Eisenhower, who interestingly was the man behind the plot to remove McCarthy, when the latter was to check US Army for Soviet spies there. Yes, quite complicated and confusing.

[edwest]

Franek,


I will only add this. See the book: Partners at the Creation - The Men Behind Postwar Germany's Defense and Intelligence Establishments by James H. Critchfield (known only as Mr. Marshall during the period). Among those on the cover is Allen Dulles.



Ed