Hacker News Reader

Comment by ufocia | Hacker News Reader

You're whitewashing at least the WWII era. The Czecho-Slovak government capitulated pretty quickly after Germany's demands, ..., and the country was used to support Germany's was efforts. TBH, they did not receive a whole lot of support from their prior allies, to say the least, ahead of the capitulation.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Czechoslovak_Republic

As an aside, hopefully the relative lack of support for Ukraine does not have similar outcomes. There are some significant similarities between the two.

View on HN

That's no whitewashing. Not sure where you got this idea from but if you read the link to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_Agreement you'd realize that what you wrote is completely incorrect and almost a lie. Czechia was not invited to that meeting and European superpowers decided that it should cede to Germany. Plus Germany invaded Czechia in 1939. Czechs would go to war and lost it in days (just look at the size and position) and would be a pariah in Europe if they didn't listen.

"The Czechoslovak capitulation precipitated an outburst of national indignation. In demonstrations and rallies, Czechs and Slovaks called for a strong military government to defend the integrity of the state. A new cabinet, under General Jan Syrový, was installed, and on 23 September 1938, a decree of general mobilization was issued. The Czechoslovak Army was modern, had an excellent system of frontier fortifications and was prepared to fight. The Soviet Union announced its willingness to come to Czechoslovakia's assistance. Beneš, however, refused to go to war without the support of the Western powers."

There's no citation for this in Wiki and Soviet Union and Germany signed Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact not that long after. So this quote (and Soviet Union/Russia in general as it's obvious why they would "help") is really not trustworthy and not based on evidence.

The Ribbentrop-Molotov agreement was secret, so I'm doubtful that the Czechoslovak government was aware of the machinations until long after it was signed.

Here's another quote restating the same info followed by a citation to Haslam, Jonathan (1983). Soviet Foreign Policy, 1930–33. The Impact of the Depression. New York: St. Martin's Press.:

"A new Czechoslovak cabinet, under General Jan Syrový, was installed and on 23 September a decree of general mobilization was issued which was accepted by the public with a strong enthusiasm – within 24 hours, one million men joined the army to defend the country. The Czechoslovak Army, modern, experienced and possessing an excellent system of frontier fortifications, was prepared to fight. The Soviet Union announced its willingness to come to Czechoslovakia's assistance"

Oh, and it was Czechoslovakia not Czechia. I'm curious why you're revising history yourself while questioning my sources.

This does not seem like a fair criticism or framing of the situation. Every country Germany occupied was used to support Germany's war efforts. The country had little choice but to surrender, they were hung out to dry by their allies.

Despite this, they still resisted at great personal cost. Heydrich was assassinated in Prague by Czech resistance fighters. The reprisals were brutal, with thousands killed in response. My grandmother who is still alive lived through this time. Every day at school they announced the names of those executed by the Natzis in order to intimidate the populace.

In my criticism I made a conscious effort to single out the Czechoslovak government (I should've probably narrowed it down to Beneš and Hácha in particular), as opposed to the citizenry. Perhaps surprisingly, after the outbreak of WWII, Beneš went on to be a leader of the resistance, though from exile.

The Hácha story may be a bit more complicated that it may seem at first. Not sure whether you're a Czech speaker, if so, check this out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBPXsaTgHGQ

Thanks. The clip appears to discuss the history of scouts and their participation in the resistance. Is there a segment that is particularly relevant?

The whole Central European story is complicated. The countries were hashed and rehashed on fairly regular bases. Allegiances changed a lot. Leaders made serious mistakes. People were multidimensional.

> TBH, they did not receive a whole lot of support from their prior allies, to say the least, ahead of the capitulation.

The "support" Czechoslovakia received from the western allies was an order to capitulate to German demands.

As a reminder, this was the situation in 1938: https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/u314/erding/Cz_map_15...

The situation was much more hopeless than e.g. Ukraine was/is in. The Czech part was almost completely surrounded by Germany (controlling Austria and Silesia). Slovak part had a long border with Nazi-allied Hungary. Poland was not friendly at the time (taking part in the partition). The only kinda friendly neighbor was the tiny sliver of border in the east with Romania.

If the Czechoslovakia decided to fight, it would be accused of aggression by the western powers (who basically declared Germany is in the right in Munich).

The claim of "participation" in the so called partition is inflammatory. You make it sound like Poland was a party to some kind of an agreement to dissolve Czechoslovakia, when there is no evidence of that, especially in retrospect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish%E2%80%93Czechoslovak_bo...

I agree that the Czechoslovakian situation was less hopeful than that of Ukraine, at least for the moment.

I think it’s pretty clear the comment was referring to the partition of the sudetenland, which Poland was absolutely a (albeit minor) participant in. But thank you for linking the article. I’ve always kinda assumed that Poland was given the territories by the Nazis as a way to spread the blame. Turns out they demanded it themselves outside of the Munich conference.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com