be a significant shift in policy. Chamberlain now fully realized the extent to which he had been duped; how the Munich Agreement, which he regarded as his own achievement, had been no more than a major deception. A balanced assessment of Chamberlain’s attempts to appease then deter Hitler in 1938–9 can be found in R. A. C. Parker,
137. Domarus, 1128–9. The communique of the meeting between Chamberlain and Beck on 5 April 1939 is in
138. Gisevius,
139. Goebbels anticipated Hitler’s response: ‘So Beck has fallen after all into the Lords’ trap. Poland will perhaps some day have to pay a high price for that.’ —
140. See Dirks/Jan?en, 83–4.
141. Domarus, 1119–27, especially 1120, 1125. The speech was not allowed to be transmitted live, presumably to allow the text to be edited if need be (which it was not). The orders, allegedly from Hitler himself, preventing a live broadcast were issued at such short notice that they came through to William Shirer only after Hitler had already begun to speak. The abrupt end to the broadcast of the speech, and its replacement by music, led to immediate queries from New York about whether Hitler had been assassinated (Shirer, 130).
142. Walter Warlimont,
143. Domarus, 1130; Below, 159.
144.
145.
146. Hoffmann, 122.
147. Though Poland was aiming to modernize its armed forces, its defence budget in the years 1935–9 amounted to no more than 10 per cent of that of the Luftwaffe alone for the single year of 1939. Andrzej Suchcitz, ‘Poland’s Defence Preparations in 1939’, in Peter D. Stachura (ed.),
148. Christian Hartmann and Sergej Slutsch, ‘Franz Halder und die Kriegsvorbereitungen im Fruhjahr 1939. Eine Ansprache des Generalstabschefs des Heeres’,
CHAPTER 5: GOING FOR BROKE
1. Speer, 163–4; Domarus, 1144;
2. Domarus, 1146. Henderson, 214, for his recall (and 220 for his return on 25 April).
3.
4. Fritz Terveen, ‘Der Filmbericht uber Hitlers 50. Geburtstag. Ein Beispiel nationalsozialistischer Selbstdarstellung und Propaganda’,
5.
6.
7. Ilse McKee,
8. See Kershaw,
9. Domarus, 1178; see also Sebastian Haffner,
10.
11.
12. GStA, Reichsstatthalter 563, ‘Die Lage der bayerischen Landwirtschaft im Fruhjahr 1939’, Fol. 13; see Kershaw,
13.
14.
15. BA/MA, RW19/68, ‘Zusammenfassender Uberblick’, 31 January 1939, Fol.119.
16. BA/MA, RW19/56, Wehrwirtschaftsinspektion VI, June 1939.
17. BA/MA, RW19/56, Wehrwirtschaftsinspektion VI, July 1939.
18. See the references in Ch.5 n. 41. Though it never posed any serious danger to the regime, the illegal oppositional activity of the Left, especially the Communists, never ceased and appears to have intensified in the years immediately before the war. See Klaus Mammach, ‘Widerstandsaktionen und oppositionelles Verhalten’, in Eichholtz and Patzold, 403–34.
19. BA, R43II/194, Fol.103.
20. IfZ, Doc. NG-5428.
21. BA, R43II/528. Lammers also regularly brought the reports of the Reich Labour Minister to Hitler’s attention in the years 1935–7, but ceased to do so after 5 January 1938 (R43II/533).
22. BA, R43II/195,Fol.182.
23. See Speer, 229.
24. See Mason,
25. Treue, ‘Hitlers Rede vor der deutschen Presse’, 188–9.
26. Wiedemann, 90.
27. Domarus, 1317.
28. See Below, 162.
29. Schneider, 24 October 1952, 8.
30. See Thies,
31. See Martin Broszat and Klaus Schwabe (eds.),
32. See Fritsch’s remark to von Hassell in December 1938: ‘This man — Hitler — is Germany’s fate for better or worse. If it is now into the abyss,’ which Fritsch thought likely, ‘he will drag us all down with him. There’s nothing to be done’ (Hassell, 71). The remarks betray little recognition of the part Fritsch and those like him had played in placing Hitler in such a position.
33. CD 78, for the length of the speech.
34. Domarus, 1137–8.
35. Below, 161.
36. Domarus, 1173.