World War II started in September 1939 and a number of significant events took place that month. A series of lies have been disseminated about the beginning of World War II to camouflage the real players and the real goals of the start of that war. A part of that propaganda and lie arsenal is used in the case of another war, that of aggression that was started by the Russian Federation against Ukraine on February 24, 2022. The experts invited to IPN’s public debate “Truth and lie about beginning of World War II” discussed the similarities and dissimilarities in the start of these two wars.
The permanent expert of IPN’s project Igor Boțan said the ‘world war’ term is used to refer to two worldwide armed conflicts that had a huge number of victims – 10 million and, respectively, 70 million. They took place in the first half of the 20th century. World War I lasted from July 28, 1914 until November 11, 1918, while World War II – from September 1, 1939 until September 2, 1945.
“These two wars affected most of the states of the world, including all the great powers, and covered all the five continents. A typical feature of a world war is that the peace treaty signed at the end of this war becomes the basis, the foundation of the global international relations in the postwar period, as it happened in the case of the Treaty of Versailles after World War I and the Yalta and Potsdam agreements related to World War II,” explained the expert.
Igor Boțan said that in the case of World War II, historians have identified five phases of this. The first phase is September 1, 1939 – June 22, 1941. The war started in a week of the signing of the Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact. Nazi Germany and the USSR were actually partners. They together occupied and parted Poland. Later, Russia occupied states and regions of the so-called sphere of influence of the USSR. On November 30, 1939, Finland was invaded. The Baltic States and Bessarabia were occupied later. For its part, Germany occupied France, the Netherlands, etc.
“The second phase started on June 22, 1941 and lasted almost throughout the year 1942. It started with Nazi Germany’s aggression against its partner, the USSR. The Atlantic Charter was published in that period, on august 14, 1941,” said Igor Boțan. In December, Japan attacked Pearl Harbor and the U.S. had to renounce its isolationist policy and entered the war.
According to the expert, the third phase, 1942 - 1943, took place after the Battle of Stalingrad, the meeting of Teheran, while the fourth phase stated in 1944 and lasted up to May 8, 1945. The second front in Europe was opened and the Yalta Conference was held. This phase ended with the surrender of Germany. The fifth phase covers the period between May 9 and September 2, 1945. After the Potsdam Conference, Japan also surrendered.
“When they speak about the Patriotic War for the USSR, they mean only three phases – the second, the third and the fourth – as, from propagandistic viewpoint, it wasn’t very suitable in the Soviet Union to speak about the first phase, when the USSR and Nazi Germany divided the spheres of influence in Europe, triggering actually the war. Evidently, the fifth stage is also ignored as the Soviet troops that reached Berlin didn’t withdraw from some of the countries until after the Communist regime collapsed,” stated Igor Boțan.
Pavel Moraru, doctor habilitate of history, said World War I should be regarded as a continuation of the wars that occurred in Europe in the 18th-19th centuries. But a new war that turned global started in Europe at the beginning of the 20th century. “Mankind witnessed a premiere, a world war that went beyond the borders of Europe. World War I began in 1914. I want to draw attention to the changes caused by World War I at international level, the long-term impact, as there is a close connection between World War I and World War II,” stated the historian.
According to him, 1917 was a very important year for the whole mankind. In that year, the U.S. entered the war, but not as part of the alliance, but as an associate country of the Triple Entente. This fact shows the U.S. didn’t want to renounce its isolationist policy. But the Americans had to enter World War I so as to destroy the old European system. The Americans realized that if they didn’t intervene, the wars in Europe would generate instability worldwide. “The year 1917 is also important because in that year, the involved nations started to get tired and government instability grew, poverty, misery grew primarily in the countries involved in the war – Germany, the Russian Empire. A proof is the fact that that two revolutions occurred in Russia in 1917... The war ended in 1918 with rather important consequences,” stated Pavel Moraru.
The doctor habilitate of history noted that World War I offered the occasion of putting into practice all those projects referring to international justice, including the creation of an international Parliament, etc. This way, the Americans tried to democratize the international relations. Namely the League of Nations was that organization, that rostrum that offered all the nations the possibility of stating their viewpoint.
At the same time, an atypical, minority Bolshevik regime was established in Russia and this aimed to fundamentally destroy the existing social, economic, political system. That internal and external policy pursued by the Bolsheviks should be taken into account – of hatred towards the rest of the world, towards other social classes, etc. It goes to the territorial and ideological expansionist policy of the Soviet state.
“The 1920s after World War I saw intensive diplomatic activity. It was a decade of diplomacy, negotiations when the countries tried to maintain peace through collective efforts. The phrase “collective security” which was promoted by the League of Nations derived from here. This collective security was also transposed by the signing of a series of non-aggression pacts. But the big world economic crisis came at the end of the 1920s and marked that turning point. From the diplomacy and negotiations of the 1920s, when the strategic situation was controlled by the countries that won World War I, the wining countries towards the 1930s lost this strategic initiative to the revisionist forces that were ascending,” explained the historian.
Pavel Moraru said that the 1930s represented a period when the situation went out of the control of the winning powers, including Romania, which promoted the collective security concept. Many historians consider the great world crisis was a prelude to World War II.
Doctor of history Mihai Țurcanu, of the Institute of History of the Moldova State University, said the number of victims is not the main feature of a world war. There were civil conflicts, such as the Chinese civil wars of the 17th century, the 19th century, which had numerous victims, but weren’t world wars.
“What defines a world war is actually the fact that it represents the result of an attempt to change the system. The main characteristic of a world war is the fact that it is a systemic conflict, an attempt to modify the rules of the game. It happened so in both of the world wars and that’s why they ultimately ended with new types of security guarantees, with new treaties that set down new bases of international order,” he stated.
According to the historian, the fact that they ended with the defeat of those who tried to change the international system is an interesting feature of World War I and World War II. The current international system has its own theoretical basis, which means international order – the same as that of the end of the 18th century.
“In principle, the system is based on the same view on the world, the same method of thinking, market economy, liberal values. Liberal values in the 18th century meant slightly something else than today, but the essence of things and the approaches were the same,” noted Mihai Țurcanu.
He also said that those wars ended with the integration into the system of those who generated those challenges to international order. “What happens today is not so different from what happened then as we today also see a systemic challenge. I’m sure that the ongoing war in Ukraine will have to end with new types of security guarantees and new international treaties that will create another international order or will confirm the one that exists today,” said the doctor of history.
The public debate entitled “Truth and lie about beginning of World War II” was the 18th installment of IPN’s project “Impact of the Past on Confidence and Peace Building Processes” that is supported by the Hanns Seidel Foundation of Germany.
Impactul trecutului
See related articles:
- 100 years under sign of MASSR. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Oppressive regime in Transnistrian region speculates on historical factors
- Alexandru Postica: Language problems and economic interests are persistent challenges in Transnistrian region
- Anatol Țăranu: Vulgar Moldovenism born in MASSR continues to live in Moldova’s realities
- Anneli Ute Gabanyi: Moldova has always been of great geostrategic importance for Russia
- Igor Boțan: Moldova’s biggest threat comes from disinformation campaigns
- Ion Valer Xenofontov: Ideas from secret protocol to Soviet-Nazi pact still used today
- Moldova from Ribbentrop-Molotov to Independence. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Soviet’s actions in relation to the Bessarabians in 1940 are ‘occupation” not “liberation”
- Historian Dumitru Lisnic: Soviets brought their own people to Bessarabia for administrative positions
- Anatol Petrencu: Soviets imposed their way of thinking and way of life in MSSR
- Ex-history teacher from Șerpeni: Village in 1944 was completely destroyed
- Effects of Iasi-Chisinau Operation 80 years later. IPN Debate
- Igor Boțan: Soviets’ 1940 actions in relation to Bessarabians were not “liberation”
- Anatol Țăranu: Annexation of Bessarabia on June 28, 1940 was an agreement between two dictators
- Day of June 28, 1940 between celebration and catastrophe. IPN Debate
- Andrei Curăraru: Deportations were aimed at creating society without values
- Lidia Pădureac: Soviet state committed crimes against humanity
- Alecu Reniță: Deportations must keep us vigilant and as far away as possible from Russia - a struggling monster
- Decapitation and uprooting of nation through deportations. IPN Debate
- Igor Boțan: Propaganda must be combated by imbedding critical thinking
- Nicolae Mihai: In totalitarian regimes, citizens no longer enjoy rights and freedoms
- Festive practices and identity engineering in (post)totalitarian regimes. IPN debate
- Virgiliu Bîrlădeanu: In Russia there is an authoritarian regime with totalitarian tendencies
- Igor Boțan: All legislatures in Moldova were pro-European or had periods when they promoted accession
- EU enlargement after collapse of USSR: causes and effects. Moldova’s lesson. IPN debate
- Andrei Curăraru: EU’s ambition is to become an important political center
- Anatol Petrencu: Collapse of Soviet Union was a triumph for countries annexed by force
- Cristian Manolachi: We must discern in avalanche of political messages. 2024 is a complicated election year
- Political mythologies in history and in actuality. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Political mythology in Ukraine war has been exploited to the maximum
- Virgiliu Bîrlădeanu: Authoritarian regimes are effective in disseminating propaganda
- Valentin Constantinov: Today we speak Romanian due to verticality of population of Bessarabia in 1812
- Igor Boțan: Literary language and official language are brought to highest level that unites us all
- Vasile Șoimaru: We are Romanians on both banks of the Prut
- Long path home of the Romanian language. IPN debate
- Statements about Russia terrorist attack: Terror breeds only terror
- Igor Boțan: Moldovan authorities must ensure communication with citizens from left bank of the Nistru
- Alexandru Cerbu about war of 1992: Bodies were lying on the streets in Tighina as in Bucha
- Victor Juc: The Nistru armed conflict was caused deliberately
- 32 years of an unfinished war. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Danger of repeat of horrors that society experienced under communist regime still exists
- Virgiliu Bîrlădeanu: We must detach ourselves from Soviet past and build a European society
- History, an international antidote to political repression. IPN debate
- Flori Bălănescu: In the absence of a Nuremberg-type trial, we cannot talk about condemnation of communism
- Alexandru Postica: Victims of political repression receive far too small recompence against terror they went through
- Role of history in forming person and modernizing society. IPN debate
- Igor Botan: You cannot build a future if you don’t know your past
- Ana Bîtcă: By informing students about political repression, we want to avoid repeat of past mistakes
- Igor Boțan: The Gulag was Bolsheviks’ solution for controlling population’s protest movement
- Ludmila Cojocaru: Soviet system meant repression, extermination, enslavement of population
- Lidia Pădureac: The Gulag was used to destroy people’s uprightness
- GULAG phenomenon: genesis, manifestation, lessons. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Budapest Memorandum would have been very important if those who signed it had considered it binding
- Radu Burduja: Ukraine must draw conclusions after signing Budapest Memorandum
- Ion Negrei: Russia no longer enjoys credibility internationally
- Failure of Budapest Memorandum. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Ukraine is key to final Transnistrian conflict settlement
- Natalia Albu: Frozen conflicts mean also a low level of quality of human life
- Octavian Țîcu: Moscow wants Moldova to be Transnistrized
- Frozen conflicts: genesis, dangers, settlement. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Phenomena that occurred in USSR before World War II were typical also for MASSR
- Virgiliu Bîrlădeanu: Thousands of people were executed only because they were regarded as a possible source of opposition
- Stalinist repression in MASSR and memory of victims of totalitarian communist regime. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: To better understand how Union of 1918 occurred, we should analyze circumstances in which this occurred
- Alexandru Arseni: Governments in Chisinau and in Bucharest should recognize Union of 1918
- Ion Varta: After Russian Empire collapsed, Romanian national movement evolved into national liberation movement
- Great Union of 1918: lessons for past, present and future. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: When we speak about collapse of Constituent Assembly, we should consider consequences of this for Bessarabia
- Nicolae Enciu: Soviet society was constituted as an antipode of Western society
- Collapse of Constituent Assembly and of chance to democratize Soviet Russia. Effects on country and world. IPN debate
- Anatol Petrencu: In current Russia, there is no democracy
- Igor Boțan: Romania is also obliged to make effort for Moldova to manage to integrate into EU
- Alecu Reniță: Russia is a threat not only to ex-Soviet states, but also to whole Europe
- Igor Șarov: A continuous struggle is led to secure European integration desideratum
- European genealogy tree of Moldova. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Cold War ended because everyone realized what Soviet power actually was
- Ion Valer Xenofontov: Cold War lesson - to win with modesty and to lose with grace
- Anneli Ute Gabanyi: USSR wanted to impose same thinking system on people
- Lessons of Cold War. IPN debate
- Vitalie Stoian: Warsaw Part always intervened inside its borders, not outside them
- Anatol Țăranu: Warsaw Treaty was nothing else but “collective policeman”
- Igor Boțan: Warsaw Pact was a reply to reply
- Warsaw Pact: History without propaganda. IPN debate
- Radu Burduja: NATO was and will remain a successful alliance
- Igor Boțan: Soviet Union became totalitarian and wanted to conquer whole world
- Victor Juc: NATO enlargement occurs at request of states that consider themselves vulnerable
- NATO: History without propaganda. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Russians’ rhetoric on use of nuclear weapons shows that things go bad
- Pavel Moraru: Signing of Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact led to start of World War II
- Mihai Țurcanu: Russia wants to change international order by force
- Virgiliu Pâslariuc: European development model is a security and prosperity guarantee
- Price and effects of Independence. Comparative study (1877 vs. 1991. IPN debate
- Ion Varta: Russian factor was every time fateful for our national interest
- Igor Boțan: Role of intellectuality in obtaining Independence was prolific
- Ion Negrei: Putsch of October 1917 didn’t enjoy support among population of Bessarabia
- Igor Boțan: We are witnessing third stage of dismemberment of Soviet Union
- Marin Gherman: Communism was a catastrophe for previous century
- USSR: Born and Destroyed by Putsches. IPN debate
- Stalinization and de-Stalinization of Moldovan society. IPN debate
- Ludmila Cojocaru: Keeping memory of Stalinist crimes necessitates effort from state and society
- Igor Boțan: After Stalin’s death, Stalinization is only a kind of phantom
- Florin Abraham: Historical memory cannot be built without state support
- Igor Boțan: Stalinist elites devour each other, this being an essential quality of Stalinism
- Octavian Țîcu: Stalinization – imbedding of a series of features typical of Soviet Union
- Stalinization and de-Stalinization in European context. IPN debate
- Florin-Răzvan Mihai: Putinism poses a big threat
- Ion Manole: Passivity of international community to crimes of communism generated Ukraine war
- Kakhovka Dam: Why are laws and customs of war powerless? IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Possession of nuclear weapon makes Russia ignore international law norms
- Anatol Petrencu: Some nations fight without scruple
- Igor Boțan: Those who took part in deportation of people from Bessarabia were ideologically indoctrinated
- Viorica Olaru: The Kremlin administration is similar to the KGB
- “Stalinist deportations: echo of the past, for present and future”. IPN debate
- Alexandru Postica: Deportations should be treated in a broader context
- Mihail Druță: It is justified to celebrate Europe Day on May 9
- Anatol Țăranu: Moldova cannot become European state by keeping Soviet symbols
- Igor Boțan: It is a big mistake to reveal World War II events that suit only a particular side
- Victory Day: between reconciliation, antagonization and destabilization? IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Acknowledging organized famine is important for learning lessons
- Museographer of Avdarma: 800 people died from hunger in this village in 1946-1947
- Famine of 1946-1947. Vasile Șoimaru: People were dispossessed of everything and were murdered
- Lidia Pădureac: While Moldovan SSR was dying from starvation, Soviet Union was exporting grain
- Organized famine of 1946-1947: victims, murderers, memory. IPN debate
- Igor Boțan: Fascism, in its milder version, and Bolshevism were heresies of socialism
- Virgiliu Bîrlădeanu: Society should be attentive so as not to allow authoritarian-totalitarian deviations
- Alexandru Cosmescu: Fascism, Stalinism and Nazism created external enemies in order to achieve their goals
- What do Fascism, Nazism and Stalinism have in common? IPN debate
- Alecu Reniță on 1903 pogrom: Authorities failed to stop bloodshed
- Pogrom of 1903: executioners, victims and lessons. IPN debate
- Andrei Kushko: Not Moldovans, but imperial functionaries triggered Chisinau program
- Igor Boțan: Chisinau program was an outburst of anti-Semitism in Russian Empire
- Igor Boțan: Accession to EU is alternative to Russian world for Moldova
- Ion Negrei: Moldova should connect to European space for good
- Anatol Țăranu: There are affinities between aggressive policy of Russian empire and current regime of Putin
- Fate of peripheries of empires. Quo vadis, Moldova? IPN debate
- Mihai Țurcanu: “Stockholm syndrome” replaced feeling of national identity in many compatriots
- Igor Boțan: Putin’s drama is that he does not have ideology or economic force or army
- Maria Pilchin: Putin teaches his people to die because he was unable to teach them to live
- What did we celebrate and why did we celebrate on February 23? IPN debate