One of the great parade pieces from the arsenal of Bolshevist propaganda is the claim for the abolition of the army, the demand for “all-round and complete” disarmament. The K.P.D. (German Communist Party), under the slogans “No more War,” “Forward with the fight against armament,” for instance, demanded a plebiscite on the following proposition:
“The construction of dreadnoughts and cruisers of all kinds is forbidden.” And in February, 1932, the Jew, Finkelstein-Litwinoff, took occasion, at one of the innumerable Geneva Conferences, to champion before the world the principle of “complete disarmament.” Up to the present no change has taken place in these methods of deception. This statement is corroborated by the declaration which the same Litwinoff made last July, when he said that “complete disarmament” was a “maximal guarantee” of peace.
That’s Bolshevist propaganda.
And what is the reality? The peace strength of the Red Army amounts to two million, by reason of the lowering of the age limit of those liable for military service. But to this we must add the trained reserves, which number from nine to ten million. In case of war therefore they could mobilise eleven million; and, within a practical period of time, even fourteen million.
Should war break out, the Red Army would be able to issue marching orders to Red soldiers of between 160 and 180 infantry divisions and 25 cavalry divisions. Recently the increase in the tank forces was declared by the Red, Marshal Tuchatschewski, as 2,475 percent. The strength of the Red Air Force amounts to 6,000 planes. The planes of the First Line are divided into 3,100 heavy and light bombers and scout planes and 1,500 chasers. The bombing weapon prevails over all others and proves that the Red Air Force is preeminently a weapon of attack. The idea is that in case of war the bombing planes should be able to make a surprise attack before the attacked country will have had time to organise its defence.
The view of the Soviet strategists is that the next war will be begun without any introductory declaration of war. And it is not generally known that the Soviets possess the greatest submarine force in the world.
The aggressive character of the Red Army is testified by the aggressive strategy of its leaders. One of the great paragons of efficiency in the Soviet regime is that of the “obvious justice” of the victorious Bolshevic revolution on a world extension, according to Tuchatschewski, who said: “Bolshevism will strive with elementary force to embrace the whole world by direct influence. Its most important means will be its military power.”
And now the most incredible thing of alclass="underline" in spite of this very obvious imperialistic kind of armament, Bolshevic propaganda insists even today that Moscow adheres to a “policy of peace.” “The Soviet Union does not wish to expand its territory. It is always there when peace is to be defended and maintained”—that is the kind of lies that Mr. Litwinoff casts into the face of the world. And the French Communist leader, Thorez, declares in Humanité: “We have shown that the aim of peace is inseparable from the policy of the Soviet Union.”
In glaring contrast to this systematic campaign of falsehoods, we have the political offensive of the military pacts. Under the slogan of “collective security” these were established between Moscow and Paris on Ma y 2, 1935, and between Moscow and Prague on May 16, 1935.
A little while ago the Mayor of St. Denis, Jacques Doriot, formerly a Communist and now a leader of the “Parti Populaire Français” described the purpose of the Franco-Bolshevic military pact in the following words: “And when they have formulated it in true earnest, when Cachin is President of the Republic and Thorez is Prime Minister and Péri is Foreign Minister, under orders from Moscow they will unleash the dogs of war against Germany and thus secure freedom for the Soviet Union on their Western front…”
And the case is not otherwise with the military pact between Moscow and Prague. On December 15, 1935, a Soviet airman and member of the Communist Party made the following declarations on that point to a representative of the French paper Gringoire: “The erection of air stations in the neighbourhood of Prague and in the hinterland would be an ideal move for us. From these points only half the aeroplanes are necessary and only half the fuel is needed. Hence it would be possible for us to carry an extra three tons of explosives.” Meanwhile great numbers of these Red air stations have been erected in Czechoslovakian territory. Recently they were increased to thirty-six.” Slovensky Dennik—which is a newspaper published at Pressburg and controlled by the Prime Minister—made the astonishing admission: “If the air stations are intended for the defence of the State, then assuredly no geese will be found grazing on them. They will be a refuge for those friends of ours who may find them adapted for use and protection.” In other words, these thirty-six air stations are meant to be the starting points from which the Red bombers will attack Europe. This is an acute danger. That is proved by the fact that the Red bombers could thus reach the most important strategic points in Western Europe within less than an hour and could destroy these. From the air bases of the Red Army within Czechoslovakian territory, Dresden, for example, could be reached within twenty minutes, Chemnitz within eleven minutes, the Silesian industrial district within nine minutes, Berlin within forty-two minutes, Vienna within nine minutes, the munition works in Steier within seventeen minutes and the manufacturing district of the Steiermark within twenty-seven minutes. The Red planes could reach Budapest within about six minutes and make it a heap of dust and ashes.
That is the story of the Bolshevist “peace policy.” On this spot last year I gave an exact account of how many clergymen had been murdered in Russia and pointed to the danger of such a procedure being repeated in other countries. But even ecclesiastical circles in outside countries poo-poohed this warning. They expressed the naive view that Bolshevism had changed and that in future it would guarantee freedom of worship to religious denominations. Meanwhile events in Spain have shown only too clearly that I was right. “In all districts in which the Madrid Government rules there is no longer a church that is open.” So writes the Diario de la marina. And the Catholic Church has even officially announced that in Barcelona alone, 250 priests have been murdered and several churches demolished. That is the kind of religious freedom which one enjoys under Bolshevist rule.
In order to appear harmless and bourgeois in the eyes of Western Democracy, the Bolshevist “diplomats” have even copied habits and behaviour of respectable persons, although the change must cost them an effort. But to us who know the Bolshevist tactics, it causes only amusement to see how so many statesmen in Western Europe, who otherwise seem so intelligent, believe that Bolshevism has abandoned its plan of World Revolution because its diplomatic representatives now appear in tailcoats and white collars.
And yet this varnishing does not seem adequate for the Jewish killers in the Soviet Union. In order to give a final proof of its impeccability, Bolshevism has furnished itself with a “Constitution.” In this Constitution the “right of education” is laid down, having regard to the 40 percent of the population which cannot read or write. And in the same Constitution “freedom of speech and of the press” is mentioned, in a country where everything that departs from the line of opinion laid down by the Jewish dictators is punished by death, as we have just experienced in the trial of the Trotzkyists. This system speaks of the “inviolability of the person and his home and the right of unopened postal correspondence” although day after day the Tscheka gathers in thousands of unsuspecting persons and shoots them or deports them.