Was wir Stalingrad schuldig sind

Oct 25, 2012 J. Bradford DeLong

BERKELEY – Wir sind keine neu erschaffenen, unschuldigen, rationalen und vernünftigen Wesen. Wir wurden nicht frisch geboren in einem unbefleckten Paradies unter einer neuen Sonne. Statt dessen sind wir das Ergebnis von hunderten Millionen Jahren kurzsichtiger Evolution und tausenden von Jahren zunächst ungeschriebener und dann aufgezeichneter Geschichte. Durch unsere Vergangenheit haben wir Schichten über Schichten von Instinkten, Neigungen, gedanklichen Gewohnheiten, Interaktionsmustern und materiellen Ressourcen angehäuft.

Auf dieser historischen Grundlage haben wir unsere Zivilisation erbaut. Ohne unsere Geschichte wäre unsere Arbeit nicht nur sinnlos, sondern gar unmöglich.

Und dann sind da die Verbrechen der Menschheitsgeschichte. Die furchtbaren Verbrechen. Die unglaublichen Verbrechen. Unsere Geschichte hat uns im Griff wie ein Alptraum, da die Verbrechen der Vergangenheit Narben in der Gegenwart hinterlassen und zu immer weiteren Verbrechen in der Zukunft führen.

We hope you're enjoying Project Syndicate.

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Already have an account? Log in

Support High-Quality Commentary

For more than 25 years, Project Syndicate has been guided by a simple credo: All people deserve access to a broad range of views by the world's foremost leaders and thinkers on the issues, events, and forces shaping their lives. At a time of unprecedented uncertainty, that mission is more important than ever – and we remain committed to fulfilling it.

But there is no doubt that we, like so many other media organizations nowadays, are under growing strain. If you are in a position to support us, please subscribe now.

As a subscriber, you will enjoy unlimited access to our On Point suite of long reads and book reviews, Say More contributor interviews, The Year Ahead magazine, the full PS archive, and much more. You will also directly support our mission of delivering the highest-quality commentary on the world's most pressing issues to as wide an audience as possible.

By helping us to build a truly open world of ideas, every PS subscriber makes a real difference. Thank you.

Subscribe Now

J. Bradford DeLong

Writing for PS since 2002
220 Commentaries

J. Bradford DeLong is Professor of Economics at the University of California at Berkeley and a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research. He was Deputy Assistant US Treasury Secretary during the Clinton Administration, where he was heavily involved in budget and trade negotiations. His role in designing the bailout of Mexico during the 1994 peso crisis placed him at the forefront of Latin America’s transformation into a region of open economies, and cemented his stature as a leading voice in economic-policy debates.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 27 in all 27 Comments on this article

Lawrence Marshall Dec 2, 2012

It is perhaps one of the greatest ironies of recorded history that Stalinist Russia saved western society from domination by a nation lead by a madman bent on world domination and genocide. We do indeed owe our former "enemies" an enormous debt of gratitude.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Riccardo Mario Corato Nov 9, 2012

Thank you Professor Bradford.

Thank you for your intellectual honesty.

I know that the Battle of Stalingrad is not exactly the most loved subject in your country, so I particularly appreciated your courage and sensibility.

I would remember to your (very few detractors) that "Historia Magistra Vitae".

Congratulations from Italy.

Riccardo Mario Corato
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Marten Klein Nov 4, 2012

@James No, I didn't, you said.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Carol Maczinsky Nov 3, 2012

Head to table: Stalin!! Stalin who wasted the lives of his soldiers to win an insignificant city: Stalingrad. Hard to believe there are still Stalinists around. From a military perspective Stalingrad was Soviet madness, the worst "won" battle ever, an inhumane slaughtering of his own people, that is what Communism is about. Sacrificing the people for the higher selfish good of a dictator.
- J. Bradford DeLong Feb 27, 2013
  
  You will note that--deliberately--the word "Stalin" does not appear in my column, and that Stalin-the-man is referred to only as a criminal. So why do you read something different from what I wrote?
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
James Corr Nov 2, 2012

Thanks for being bold enough to step outside the confines of your "natural" discipline and write so eloquently with such a rare combination of heart and intelligence.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Ian Kane Nov 2, 2012

I am immensely heartened to find such an intelligent and humane contribution to public discourse - I commend especially the introductory first four paragraphs but it is all essential reading.

The Soviet-Nazi war of 1941-45 was without question the major and most appalling theatre of WW2 in Europe between two despotic titans of psychopathic brutality and viciousness. The heroism, endurance and suffering of the people fated to participate were monumental and horrific.

It is not something to dwell on for too long because it can brutalise and coarsen those that behold it but neither must it be forgotten.

Apologies for the portentous language but anything less would be inappropriate.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Alexandros Liakopoulos Oct 29, 2012

After quite some decades, you brought sanity back in the historical process and its writings. Once, the rule used to be that "the winner writes the History". This "warrior's attitude" comes from ancient times, when oral history and victory myths got mixed in a very human-friendly, God-imposed manner; it is that same rule that applies till today, proving that when it comes to History, as it is subsequent to Politics and its agenda, academic excellence and scientific process never come first! They always get "influenced", if not altered from political incentives. The excellent work of Keegan, on the History of War is very indicative of the way People tend to remember and/or repeat their past stories.
Exactly cause of all the above, the Cold War brought a very opportunistic "Historical Remembering" of the facts of WW II to the whole of the West, with the main center being based on the "west of the west", the US coast. As Soviets became the "eternal enemy", they should be deprived from their glorious past and their great successes. And they were, despite their concrete sacrifices, which - with any kind of measurement - are much more significant for the West, than West's own sacrifices against Nazism.

Your article brings forward Historical Justice! I congratulate you, Sir! As far as the Knowledge is not forgotten, Truth may Prevail, after all! This is a hope, within a very hopeless environment, as far as we get your indicative "lesson" and start learning from History, after we clean it off the Propaganda materials that were incorporated to its corps. You made an excellent work in that sense! Therefore, I feel much obliged to you, even if I am not Russian, for one more specific reason: you bring the question of "proportionate thinking" back to the center of the discussion, something very vital in the New Era of the Extremes (or the Extremists?) that has just begun! Stalingrad should serve as a symbol against Nazism, but the History of Stalingrad and its recollection should also serve as a bad example of Western Thinking, till today! History should be subsequent to facts and Humankind should be as brave as to recognize even his current enemies sacrifices: after all, as History keeps teaching us if we read it without prejudice and dogmatic approaches, today's enemies are tomorrow's allies! So, "altering" History, may - after all - alter the very future itself, as future allies are always subsequent to today's history! Right?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
J. Bradford DeLong Oct 29, 2012

Re: Theodore Schrader: Yes Timothy Snyder's "Bloodlands" is superb...

Brad DeLong
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Theodore Schrader Oct 28, 2012

For those interested (and don't know about it already) there is this wonderful, moving book by a historian, Timothy Snyder, Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin. It is not about the Battle of Stalingrad, but it does capture the scale of the tradegy in the East that I think those who have never lived there can hardly imagine, and its focus is that collision between the Soviet state and Hitler's Nazi regime.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Vitalii Moshnikov Oct 27, 2012

So much thank You for the article! Their feat of arms and their sacrifice I hope will live in centures and it wouldnt be forgotten.
"We are the heirs to their accomplishments. We are their debtors. And we cannot repay what we owe to them. We can only remember it" - brilliant and so true words!!!
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Paul A. Myers Oct 27, 2012

Stalin and Hitler were both awful, but I would say an important test would be postwar behavior. If Hitler had won, he would have continued his genocides (plural because he was eliminating a lot of different peoples). In contrast, Stalin seems to have gone back to the quiescence of running a "normal" police state of using some terror and brutality to suppress political dissent and dissidence. Not nice, but a situation that permits time to eventually bring about its changes.

So Western leaders correctly made the cold decision to side with the enemy of their enemy.

I have read several accounts of Stalingrad and the efforts of the Russian soldiers deserve a very respectful look back at their bravery and tenacity. (I was trained as an infantryman for Vietnam but was assigned to a headquarters; it's that last mile that can kill you.)
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Jerry Fields Oct 26, 2012

Let's not miss DeLongs' point here. It is not that without Stalingrad the world would be different-- of course it would, which is true of all counter-factual conditionals. It is not that crimes committed by the Soviets, and by many people of the old USSR are offset. It is that there are heroes which the West does not acknowledge. I, for one, believe that the courage of the people at Leningrad and Stalingrad rank among the most noble of human achievements.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Thomas Haynie Oct 26, 2012

I've been to the WWII memorials there and it is quite moving. The numbers of lives lost in once conflict are breath taking.

I havent read all remarks above. I'm almost afraid to. I only hope your sharp audiences can decouple from Soviet Criticism" enough to appreciate what was done then despite the political differences that would later emerge.

True death tolls were only known somewhat recently as I understand and estimates at that.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Christian Thwaites Oct 26, 2012

"How little we know..." No, I think from Clark's work on the subject is extremely well known and Hastings covered it again in "All h#** broke loose".
Also, remember these poor soldiers had the NKVD at their back and the casualties from killing their own were pretty horrific.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Procyon Mukherjee Oct 26, 2012

Brad,

Such an excellent article on great sacrifice and human endurance, the likes of which is never so easily visible in the current times, cannot be lost in the tirades of old fashioned soviet-bashing, which has long lost its use in the currency of politics of our times, but it still shows the latent potency of the wrath that existed some decades back on the dehumanization pogroms of all kind.

What your lucid writing portrays is that there were times when men and families stood for their Fatherland, staking their lives in the process, and they must be remembered if not for their sacrifice but for their service to humanity; their ordained destiny led Europe and the larger humanity to better times and instead of doubting their allegiance and sincerity pay homage that we never create such appalling conditions where such sacrifice becomes necessary.

Procyon Mukherjee
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Harold Bridges Oct 26, 2012

Disagree that the Allies would have won without Stalingrad and the Red Army. The US and UK would have come to terms with a Germany that had defeated the Soviets. Culture concerns aside, the economic interests of the US lay in the Pacific, not Europe. That's why the US announced a Europe First strategy and then proceeded to launch its opening offensive in the Pacific more than a year before Sicily.

And for the abbreviation minded, here's the shortest history of WWII in Europe you will ever read: The only two European countries that had positive GDP growth in the 30's, Germany and the USSR, had a war. The US waited on the sidelines until the eleventh hour and then seized the prize, the Mideast oil.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
John Doe Oct 26, 2012

Brad,

What to me is interesting about Stalingrad is how little we know about what happened given its importance.

Take just Nikta Kruscheva. He was there but what was his role? And draw a straight line from Stalingrad to the fascinating photo in Roosevelt and Hopkins to the Secret Speech.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
J. Bradford DeLong Oct 25, 2012

Tom W: Touché. I do think that halving the death toll cost of defeating Hitler and also giving an opening to keep western Europe from becoming a radioactive abattoir was a service greater than the crimes of the Soviet Union--albeit a service for different people than those the crimes were committed against. If not--well, then, we were on the wrong side in World War II, weren't we? And I don't believe that.

I do now wish that instead of writing "The soldiers of the Red Army, and the workers and peasants of the Soviet Union who armed and fed them, allowed their dictatorial masters to commit crimes – and committed crimes themselves. But these crimes fall short by an order of magnitude of the great service to humanity..." I had written "The soldiers of the Red Army, and the workers and peasants of the Soviet Union who armed and fed them, allowed their dictatorial masters to commit crimes – and committed crimes themselves. But these crimes of the soldiers, workers, and peasants fall short by an order of magnitude of their great service to humanity..." I would rather leave the crimes of the CPSU to the side, for discussion and thought another day. Today is for the soldiers commanded by Chuikov, Rokossovsky, Vatutin, and Yeremenko...
- Tom W Oct 26, 2012
  
  Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I don't doubt the heroism of those Russian (and other) soldiers of the Red Army. Even those of us who strongly criticize the Soviet empire, both in its action and philosophy, should feel a debt of gratitude and humbly thank them for their WWII sacrifice. The world should know of it.
  
  But perhaps a (so-so) analogy would work to express my view better. Let's say I live with my family on the first floor of a 3 story apartment building. I'm friendly with some neighbors, less with others. Next door is a madman. One day the madman tries to burn down the building starting with my unit and ones adjacent. The crazed man tries to throw gasoline on me and my family. He means to torture, subdue and kill us. I and my family make desperate efforts to subdue the madman and contain the fire in order to escape. We suffer injuries and a child and my brother die protecting ourselves and fighting our way out. This buys time for the fire department to come, which limits the extent of the fire and damage and certainly saves several lives of those living above. During my escape and later while the building is cordoned off I and some family members return to steal various objects from neighbors' homes. We also abuse many of them and when people move back in we take control of the ground floor mafia-style and also threaten the upstairs neighbors. My heroic deeds in *protecting myself and my family* outweigh these later dastardly acts because in protecting myself I helped some of those other people as an unintended consequence. Were it not for my acts of self preservation perhaps the whole building would have burned.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Tom W Oct 25, 2012

So... the Soviet regime's "crimes fall short by an order of magnitude of the great service to humanity". I'd ask Brad to show us his model. What measurements is he using to make such a bold order of magnitude claim?

Note that he does NOT seem to be saying that the Soviet empire's crimes were less than those of the Nazis. He seems to be saying that were it not for the heroic efforts of the Soviet Army and people the terrible results of Nazi victory would have dwarfed the actual Nazi record. Even if we concede this, we have to ask ourselves whether the monstrous Soviet empire was necessary to effect these heroic deeds? I think not.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Boris Krumov Oct 25, 2012

"May there never be another such battle. May we never need another one." !
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
sam smith Oct 25, 2012

The killing was worse under Stalin in Ukraine, Belarus and Poland within the USSR, than even the Germans could inflict in or outside their borders....
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Marten Klein Oct 25, 2012

More soldiers flew into the pocket than out of it. The German military was beaten by General Winter. Of the 110000 captured axis soldiers only 5000 survived Stalin's camps. Only after the war the US became aware that it was a huge mistake to side with Comrade Stalin.
- James DeLorey Oct 27, 2012
  
  MK
  
  So you're saying we should've sided with Herr Hitler?
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Stefan Siewert Oct 26, 2012
  
  Brad,
  
  great and timely article. Russian-bashing and selective knowledge of history is quite often a projections of the West's shortcomings. It is easier to speak about shortcomings and atrocities at your neighbour than about yourself and your history some years ago. The riches teaches the poor, but, quite often, the rich (West) and the poor (East) are two sides of one coin. But, indeed, one reason for hate and selective perception ist that the Soviet Union tried to be an alternative system to capitalism and played this role for almost 72 years, but failed to deliver, contributing to the "trial-and-error" phase of humankind in the 20th century in regard to market institutions, democracy and the rule of law. Hopefully, history will give way to a more appropriate understanding of the shortcomings and achievements of the Soviet Empire.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.