The Nazis' Hossbach Memorandum of 1937

Consideration of the Hossbach Memorandum has played a significant role in deciding the question of Hitler’s intention to wage war in Europe. Hitler, Goering, and a number of other high-ranking military Germans met at the Chancellery in Berlin on 5^th November 1937 and Hitler outlined a number of his ideas as to where he saw things heading over the next few years. Count Friedrich Hossbach (the central figure in the above photo) was the staff officer who took the minutes of the meeting, which is why his name is attached to the document.

Hitler was clearly obsessed with the concept of “Lebensraum”, by which was meant “living space” for racially pure Germans. This concept was not new, in that it was not invented by the Nazis, but Hitler gave it the formulation of expansion eastwards into lands occupied by racially inferior people (in his eyes) such as the Slavs and the Poles.

At the “Hossbach” meeting, Hitler made clear that such moves would inevitably be opposed by France and Britain, so care would be needed to ensure that these powers would not cause trouble when the time came. The first move would be to absorb Austria and Czechoslovakia into the Reich.

Hitler believed that France would eventually fall into internal turmoil, at which point a move against the Czechs would be advisable. He also thought that Britain would soon be at war with Italy, and not in a position to wage war with Germany. Likewise, Russia was too preoccupied with events to the east, concerning Japan, to be an obstacle to Germany in the west.

However, Hitler said nothing about making war on his neighbours at an early date. He clearly believed that Germany would need to act before around 1943 or 1945, but that was six years ahead at the earliest.

As we all know, events moved faster than envisaged at the Hossbach meeting, with the “Anschluss” of Austria occurring in March 1938 (only four months after the meeting) and the annexation of the Sudeten region of Czechoslovakia in September/October.

After Germany’s final defeat in 1945, the prosecutors at the Nuremberg tribunals produced the Hossbach Memorandum as evidence that Goering and others on trial had planned the war as far back as 1937. However, the British historian A J P Taylor, who was certainly no friend of Germany, took the view that the Memorandum proved nothing of the sort and could not be used as documentary evidence that Hitler was hell-bent on war at this time.

In Taylor’s opinion, all the Memorandum revealed was a vague rant on the part of Hitler concerning the possibility of a somewhat limited war at an indeterminate time several years in the future. To quote Taylor, “A racing tipster who only reached Hitler’s level of accuracy would not do well for his clients”.

Taylor’s words did not please those who wanted to prove intent on the part of Hitler, and he was accused by some of being an apologist for the Nazis. However, Taylor had shown that Hitler, not for the first or the last time, was able to combine aggressive talk with an inability to translate intention into plans for action. 

Historians have continued to argue ever since about whether the Hossbach meeting marked a turning point in the events leading to World War II, or whether it is wrong to see the Memorandum in this light. As with many incidents in history, it is always difficult to view an event in isolation from the events that followed it. 

© John Welford

The Reichstag fire, 1933

On 27^th February 1933 a young Dutch bricklayer with a grudge against the government set fire to the Reichstag (the Parliament building) in Berlin and inadvertently helped Adolf Hitler and the Nazis to take complete control in Germany.

Marinus van der Lubbe had been a Communist at some stage in his life but had no formal link with the German Communist Party at the time of his action, although he was motivated by a general loathing for capitalism, the workings of which he blamed for Germany’s woes including rampant inflation and mass unemployment.

However, the knowledge that van der Lubbe had been a Communist was enough to prompt the Nazis to launch a crackdown on the opposition. Hitler had been Germany’s Chancellor for a month before the Reichstag fire, and elections were due to be held that the Nazis hoped would give them a clear majority, although this was by no means certain. The destruction of the Reichstag was all they needed as an excuse to demonstrate the dangers that Germany faced from Bolshevism unless the Nazis took complete control.

Van der Lubbe never denied his part in the Reichstag fire, but always claimed that he acted alone. The Nazis thought differently and immediately passed laws that were aimed at all Communists and parties of the Left. The right to peaceful assembly and free speech was withdrawn, press censorship was introduced, and Nazis thugs targeted trade unionists and intellectuals for beatings-up and torture.

Van der Lubbe was tried alongside the head of the Communist Party and three other party members, all of whom were accused of having conspired to torch the Reichstag. However, much to Hitler’s disgust, the court could find no evidence to convict anyone except van der Lubbe, who was duly convicted and later executed.

There has been considerable speculation over the origins of the Reichstag fire, including the theory that van der Lubbe was duped into his action by the Nazis themselves. In the end, the fire was just what Hitler needed to unite public opinion in a fervour of anti-Communism, so it is not inconceivable that this idea has some merit. If van der Lubbe did indeed act alone, as still seems probable, his actions cannot have had anything like the result he intended.

© John Welford