In its comments on this vast increase in military expenditure, Pravda (May 27) was full of the usual bluster:
This figure of 40,885 million roubles means new guns, fast new planes, powerful new tanks... With such a mighty Red Army we can calmly look into the future, knowing
that no provocation by our foreign enemies can catch us unawares. We can calmly
go ahead with our third Five-Year-Plan... Provided with the most perfect equipment in the world, our Red Army will smash any enemy or any enemies, no matter where
they come from.
This was clearly intended as a warning to both Japan and Germany.
One of the most important landmarks during that grim summer was Molotov's survey of
the international situation before the Supreme Soviet on May 31.
He was highly critical of Britain and France, but the speech was, above all, an attack on Germany. After recalling the disasters that the Munich policy had already brought on Europe, Molotov said:
The aggressive powers today are becoming more and more arrogant. On the other
hand, the representatives of the democratic countries, having turned their backs on collective security, and having adopted a policy of non-resistance to aggression, are now trying to minimise the grave deterioration of the international situation.
Until very recently, Molotov continued, the responsible leaders of France and Britain were happily contemplating the success of the ill-fated Munich settlement.
But what was the result? Germany wasn't satisfied with getting the Sudeten
country, and simply proceeded to liquidate one of the Slav countries,
Czechoslovakia... This just shows what non-interference produces... And, after that, the aggressor nations continued as before; in April, Germany grabbed Memel from
Lithuania, and Italy finished off Albania. Things went from bad to worse: in April, too, the head of the German State destroyed the Anglo-German naval agreement
and the Polish-German non-aggression pact... Such was Germany's answer to the
proposal of President Roosevelt, a proposal imbued with the spirit of peace.
He then referred to the new political and military treaty between Germany and Italy
which, he said, was "aggressive by its very nature".
In the past, these two countries pretended to be concerned with their joint battle against communism. Hence all the fuss about the Anti-Comintern Pact. Now the
camouflage has been dropped... Both the leaders and the press of the two countries openly talk about the new treaty being directed against the main European
democracies...
Although there were now some signs that the non-aggressive countries were at last
beginning to favour a front against aggression, it still remained to be seen how serious this change of heart really was. "It may well be that these countries may like to stop aggression in some areas, but will not interfere with aggression in other areas." And Molotov brought in that Stalin quote about the "chestnuts" and about the need to beware of provocateurs who might try to drag the Soviet Union into war.
He, clearly, continued to be very hostile to Germany, but was also extremely distrustful of Britain and France; but even so, he said, "There are some signs that the democratic countries have become aware of the utter collapse of their non-intervention policy, and of the need of creating a single front of the peaceful powers against aggression. The British-Polish Pact is a new element in Europe, all the more so as Germany has torn up her pact with Poland... And there is also a tendency among the non-aggressive European powers to seek the collaboration of the USSR in organising resistance to aggression." That was why, he said, the Soviet Government had accepted the proposal of Britain and France to open negotiations for the purpose of strengthening the relations between these three countries, and for organising a peace front against any further development of aggression.
"We entered into these negotiations with France and Britain in mid-April. These talks have not yet been concluded. But from the outset we realised that if there is really a desire to create an effective front of peace-loving countries against aggression, then the minimum conditions to be fulfilled are these:
1) There must be a purely defensive, but effective mutual assistance pact between Britain, France and the Soviet Union;
2) There must be guarantees by all three Powers to the countries bordering on the Soviet Union, and to other countries in Central and Eastern Europe;
3) There must be concrete agreements between the three about the immediate and
effective aid to be rendered in the event of aggression against either of them or against the countries guaranteed by them."
Having elaborated at some length on the perplexities of pact-making for the protection of the many frontiers so precariously maintained between the Baltic and the Black Sea and between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, Molotov introduced another motif into his discourse which was like an echo of Stalin's speech of March 10.
Such are our talks with Britain and France. That does not mean that we intend to
break off business relations with countries like Germany and Italy. At the beginning of 1938 Germany offered us a new credit of 200 million marks; but since no
agreement followed, the question of this credit was dropped. However, at the end of 1938 the German Government again raised the question of economic talks, and of
the 200 million marks credit. The Germans were ready to make certain concessions, and their Foreign Trade Ministry said that Herr Schnurre would come to Moscow.
But instead it. was decided that Ambassador Schulenburg would conduct the talks.
Since there were some disagreements, the talks broke down. But now there are signs that the talks may be resumed. We also signed recently a profitable trade agreement with Italy...
In conclusion, Molotov said that relations with Poland had "improved"; that relations with Turkey were "good", and that he had recently warned the Japanese Ambassador that the Soviet Union would defend both her own frontiers and those of the Mongolian
People's Republic against any Japanese-Manchurian aggression.
The Soviet Union is not what it was, say in 1921, though even some of our
neighbours seem to have forgotten it. Nor is the Soviet Union what it was ten, or even five years ago; its strength is far greater. In spite of delays and hesitations, some democracies are becoming conscious of this simple truth; yet in any front of the peaceful powers resisting aggression the Soviet Union cannot but hold a place in the front rank.
What Molotov had said about trade talks with Germany did not, on the face of it, amount to much; it might have been meant as a mild warning to the West, where some of
Chamberlain's close associates still considered "trade talks" with Germany to be their best hope of resuming an appeasement policy. Molotov was, of course, aware of the long-standing tug-of-war going on in Britain, below and above the surface, inside and outside the Tory Party, between the advocates and the opponents of a pact with the Soviet Union.
Until further notice the Soviet press maintained a fairly consistent anti-Nazi line, playing the "Western" card. On June 9 Tass reported from London Chamberlain's statement in the House of Commons on the Franco-British-Soviet talks; there was, Chamberlain had said, a common point of view about the main features of the intended agreement, and to speed up the talks H.M. Government had decided to send to Moscow a representative of the